Paper detail

Symmetry improvement of 3PI effective actions for O(N) scalar field theory

[Abridged] n-Particle Irreducible Effective Actions ($n$PIEA) are a powerful tool for extracting non-perturbative and non-equilibrium physics from quantum field theories. Unfortunately, practical truncations of $n$PIEA can unphysically violate symmetries. Pilaftsis and Teresi (PT) addressed this by introducing a "symmetry improvement" scheme in the context of the 2PIEA for an O(2) scalar theory, ensuring that the Goldstone boson is massless in the broken symmetry phase [A. Pilaftsis and D. Teresi, Nuc.Phys. B 874, 2 (2013), pp. 594--619]. We extend this by introducing a symmetry improved 3PIEA for O(N) theories, for which the basic variables are the 1-, 2- and 3-point correlation functions. This requires the imposition of a Ward identity involving the 3-point function. The method leads to an infinity of physically distinct schemes, though an analogue of d'Alembert's principle is used to single out a unique scheme. The standard equivalence hierarchy of $n$PIEA no longer holds with symmetry improvement and we investigate the difference between the symmetry improved 3PIEA and 2PIEA. We present renormalized equations of motion and counter-terms for 2 and 3 loop truncations of the effective action, leaving their numerical solution to future work. We solve the Hartree-Fock approximation and find that our method achieves a middle ground between the unimproved 2PIEA and PT methods. The phase transition predicted by our method is weakly first order and the Goldstone theorem is satisfied. We also show that, in contrast to PT, the symmetry improved 3PIEA at 2 loops does not predict the correct Higgs decay rate, but does at 3 loops. These results suggest that symmetry improvement should not be applied to $n$PIEA truncated to $<n$ loops. We also show that symmetry improvement is compatible with the Coleman-Mermin-Wagner theorem, a check on the consistency of the formalism.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.