Two-dimensional Yukawa interaction driven by a nonlocal-Proca quantum electrodynamics

Van S´ergioAlves1, Tommaso Macr`ı2,3,4, Gabriel C. Magalh˜aes1, E. C. Marino5, Leandro O. Nascimento3,6 1 Faculdade de F´ısica, Universidade Federal do Par´a, Av. Augusto Correa 01, Bel´emPA, 66075-110, Brazil 2 Departamento de F´ısica Te´orica e Experimental, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal-RN, Brazil 3 International Institute of Physics, Campus Universit´arioLagoa Nova, C.P. 1613, Natal RN, 59078-970, Brazil 4 Dipartimento di Scienze Fisiche e Chimiche, Universit`adell’Aquila, via Vetoio, I-67010 Coppito-L’Aquila, Italy 5 Instituto de F´ısica, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, C.P. 68528, Rio de Janeiro RJ, 21941-972, Brazil 6 Faculdade de CiˆenciasNaturais, Universidade Federal do Par´a,C.P. 68800-000, Breves, PA, Brazil (Dated: December 19, 2017) We derive two versions of an effective model to describe dynamical effects of the Yukawa interaction among Dirac electrons in the plane. Such short-range interaction is obtained by introducing a mass term for the intermediate particle, which may be either scalar or an abelian gauge field, both of them in (3+1) dimensions. Thereafter, we consider that the matter field propagates only in (2+1) dimensions, whereas the bosonic field is free to propagate out of the plane. Within these assumptions, we apply a mechanism for dimensional reduction, which yields an effective model in (2+1) dimensions. In particular, for the gauge-field case, we use the Stueckelberg mechanism in order to preserve gauge invariance. We refer to this version as nonlocal-Proca quantum electrodynamics (NPQED). For both scalar and gauge cases, the effective models reproduce the usual e−mr/r Yukawa interaction in the static limit. By means of perturbation theory at one loop, we calculate the mass renormalization of the Dirac field. Our model is a generalization of Pseudoquantum electrodynamics (PQED), which is a gauge-field model that provides a Coulomb interaction for two-dimensional electrons. Possibilities of application to Fermi-Bose mixtures in mixed dimensions, using cold atoms, are briefly discussed.

Subject Areas: Gauge field theories, Other nonperturbative techniques

PACS numbers: 11.15.-q, 11.15.Tk

I. INTRODUCTION dynamics of ultracold atoms [9]. Recently the experi- mental demonstration of a digital quantum simulation of the paradigmatic Schwinger model, a U(1)-Wilson lattice In the last decades, the interest of studying planar the- gauge theory [10] was shown. ories has increased in theoretical physics, mainly because of the discovery of new quantum effects, such as high- Among two-dimensional models, Pseudo quantum Tc superconductivity, quantum Hall effect, and topolog- electrodynamics (PQED) [11, 12] (or Reduced quantum ical phase transitions [1]. Furthermore, the emergence electrodynamics [13]) has attracted some attention. This of both massless and massive Dirac excitations in two- model describes the electromagnetic interaction in a sys- dimensional materials, such as graphene [2] and silicene tem where electrons are confined to the plane, but pho- [3], has built a bridge between high-energy and con- tons (or the intermediating particle) may propagate out densed matter physics. For instance, well-known effects of the plane. Despite its nonlocal nature, PQED is still arXiv:1712.06401v1 [hep-th] 18 Dec 2017 have been experimentally verified, or proposed in reach- unitary [14]. Indeed, its main striking feature is that the able energy scales, see [4] for an experimental realization effective action, for the matter field, remains the very of Klein paradox in graphene. On the other hand, for same as the one provided by quantum electrodynamics quantum chromodynamics the interest relies on the pos- in 3+1 dimensions, hence, unitarity is respected. In the sibility of studying confinement in simplest models [5]. static limit, it yields a Coulomb potential, which renor- More recently, ultracold atomic gases offered a clean and malizes the Fermi velocity in graphene [15], as it has been highly controllable platform for the quantum simulation verified by experimental findings [16]. In the dynamical of bosonic and fermionic systems [6]. Within such sys- description, it is expected to generate a set of quantized- tems, static as well as dynamical properties of models in energy levels in graphene as well as an interaction driven trapped geometries with short or long-range interactions quantum valley Hall effect [17] at low enough tempera- [7] can be probed, for example via their collective dynam- tures. Furthermore, chiral-symmetry breaking has been ics, or via density or momentum correlations [8]. Impor- shown to take place for both zero and finite temperatures tantly, prototypical high energy physics models can be [18, 19]. It also occurs in the presence of a Gross-Neveu mapped into the low-energy, non-relativistic, many-body interaction, whose main effect is to decrease the critical 2 coupling constant, yielding a better scenario for dynam- Euclidean action in (3+1) dimensions, given by ical mass generation [20]. Lower dimensional versions of 1 µ 1 2 2 PQED have been investigated in Ref. [21], aiming for ap- 4D = ∂µϕ∂ ϕ + m ϕ + gϕψψ¯ + ψ¯(i∂/ M0)ψ, (1) plications in cold atoms and in Ref. [22] for applications L 2 2 − in the realm of topological insulators. All of these works where g is a dimensionless coupling constant, ϕ is a real rely on the fact that PQED generates a long-range inter- and massive Klein-Gordon field, and ψ is the Dirac field. action in the static limit, namely, the Coulomb potential First, we calculate the effective action for the matter V (r) 1/r. field eff [ψ]. In order to do so, we define the generating C ∝ L In the meson theory of Yukawa, the so-called Yukawa function Z mr potential V (r) e− /r is a static solution of the motion Z 2∝ 2 Z = DϕDψDψ¯ exp S[ψ, ϕ] equation ( +m )V (r) = δ(r), where δ(r) is the Dirac {− } delta function−∇ [23]. Within the quantum-field-theory in- Z R 4 2 ¯ ¯ d x[ ϕ( +m )ϕ/2 gϕψψ+O[ψ]] terpretation, we may claim that the mediating field has = DψDψDϕe − − − a mass term. Motivated by this well-known result, we Z shall use the paradigm of including a mass term, for = DψDψ¯ exp Seff . (2) the intermediate particle, in order to generate a short- {− } range interaction, i.e, the Yukawa potential in the plane. Integrating out ϕ in Eq. (2) yields This potential has been applied to describe bound states 2 Z [24, 25], electron-ion interactions in a crystal [26], and g 4 4 eff [ψ] = d xd y(ψψ¯ )(x)∆ϕ(x y)(ψψ¯ )(y), (3) interactions between dark energy and dark matter [27] L − 2 − among others. Nevertheless, a planar quantum-field the- where ory accounting for this interaction, for both static and Z 4 ik(x y) dynamical regime, has not been derived yet. 2 1 d k e− − (  + m )− ∆ϕ(x y) = (4) In this paper, we show how one may include an interac- − ≡ − (2π)4 k2 + m2 tion length in PQED, yielding a short-range and nonlocal is the free scalar-field propagator, which yields the inter- theory. The simplest method is to generate a mass term action between the matter field. The static interaction for the mediating particle. Hence, we consider both the V (r) is provided by the Fourier transform of Eq. (4) at massive Klein-Gordon field as well as the massive Stueck- k0 = 0 (no time dependence), namely, elberg model. For both cases, we have a Yukawa poten- tial between static charges. Thereafter, we calculate the Z d3k e ik.r e mr V (r) = − = − . (5) mass renormalization at one loop in the small-coupling (2π)3 k2 + m2 4πr limit. Eq. (5) is the well-known Yukawa potential, where the The outline of this paper is the following: in Sec. II, inverse of m is the interaction length of the model. This we consider a Dirac field coupled to a scalar field, whose is just the consequence of the coupling gϕψψ¯ in (3+1)D. dynamics is given by the massive Klein Gordon model. Next, we show how to generalize Eq. (3) and Eq. (5) In Sec. III, we introduce the gauge field model. Since a for 2+1 dimensions. Here, the main purpose is to keep naive addition of a mass for the gauge field would break the Yukawa potential between the matter field. In other gauge invariance, we consider the well known Stueckel- words, we say that the fermionic field is confined to the berg action. This model is a generalized version of Proca plane, but the bosonic field is not. This is a roughly quantum electrodynamics, on which we perform the di- approximation of the derivation of PQED [11]. In order mensional reduction. In Sec. IV, we compute the asymp- to do so, we assume that matter field is confined to the totic behavior of the boson propagator at both small and plane, i.e, large distances. In Sec. V, we show that, by tuning the mass of the intermediate field, one may control the sign ψψ¯ (x) = ψψ¯ (x0, x1, x2)δ(x3). (6) of the quantum correction, generated by the electron-self energy. We also include one appendix, where we present Using Eq. (6) in Eq. (3), we obtain the details about the electron-self energy. g2 Z = d3xd3y(ψψ¯ )(x)G (x y)(ψψ¯ )(y), (7) Leff − 2 ϕ −

II. THE SCALAR CASE where Gϕ(x y) = ∆ϕ(x y, x3 = 0, y3 = 0) is the ef- fective scalar-field− propagator− in (2+1) dimensions, given by In this section, we perform a dimensional reduction of Z 3 Z the Yukawa action in 3+1 dimensions. To generate an d k ik(x y) dkz 1 Gϕ(x y) = 3 e− − 2 2 2 . interaction length, we assume that the mediating parti- − (2π) (2π) k + kz + m cle is a massive real scalar field. Let us start with the (8) 3

Integrating over kz above, we find under Aµ Aµ + ∂µB/m. Indeed, gauge invariance is explicitly broken.→ Z 3 ik(x y) d k e− − Next, we introduce a scalar-field B(x) (the Stueckel- Gϕ(x y) = . (9) − (2π)3 2√k2 + m2 berg field) in Eq. (13), hence,

In the static limit, Eq. (9) yields the Yukawa potential. 1 m2  ∂ B 2 = F F µν + A µ + eAµj Indeed, L4D 4 µν 2 µ − m µ Z 2 ik.r mr λ d k e− e− µ 2 (∂µA ) + ψ¯(i∂/ M0)ψ. (15) V (r) = 2 p = , (10) − 2 − (2π) 2 k2 + m2 4πr Eq. (15) is known as Stueckelberg action. Despite the as expected from our dimensional reduction. mass for the gauge field, it is invariant under gauge trans- We may go beyond the static approximation by con- formation, namely, Aµ Aµ + ∂µΛ, B B mΛ, and sidering a nonlocal model with a propagator equal to ψ exp( ieΛ)ψ [29]. Furthermore,→ it still→ produces− the Eq. (9). This is given by Yukawa→ interaction− between static charges. From Eq. (15), we may find 1 µ 1 2 2 ¯ ¯ 3D = ∂ ϕK[]∂µϕ + m ϕ + gϕψψ + ψ(i∂/ M0)ψ, L 2 2 − 2 2 1 µν m µ (∂µB) µ (11) 4D = Fµν F + AµA + + mAµ∂ B with L 4 2 2 λ + eAµj (∂ Aµ)2 + ψ¯(i∂/ M )ψ. (16) 2√ + m2 Z d3k 2√k2 + m2 µ − 2 µ − 0 K[ ] − eikx . (12)  ≡ ≡ (2π)3 k2 − We shall use Eq. (16) to compute the effective action From Eq. (11), it is straightforward that the scalar- among the matter current jµ. The generating functional is field propagator is Gϕ and the effective action for the matter field are the very same as in Eq. (9) and Eq. (7), Z Z = DψDψDA¯ DB exp S[ψ, A ,B] . (17) respectively. µ {− µ } Integration over B yields III-THE GAUGE-FIELD CASE 1 m2 λ eff = F F µν + A Aµ +  (∂ Aµ)2 L4D 4 µν 2 µ 2 µ In this section, we consider that the matter field is µ + eA jµ + ψ¯(i∂/ M0)ψ, (18) coupled to a gauge field Aµ, through a minimal coupling − µ A jµ. The main steps are the same as in the previous where 2 µ calculation. Nevertheless, a massive term as m AµA 2 1 breaks gauge invariance. Hence, we must be careful λ = λ + m − . (19)  −  about how to introduce the mass, i.e, the length scale for Now, for the sake of simplicity, we isolate the quadratic interactions. For the sake of simplicty, we consider an term in Aµ, hence, abelian field Aµ, for which we may use the Stueckelberg mechanism. This is a mechanism for generating mass eff 1 µ  2  ν 4D = A (  + m )δµν + λ ∂µ∂ν A for Aµ without breaking gauge invariance [29]. Before L 2 −  we perform the dimensional reduction, let us summarize µ + eA jµ + ψ¯(i∂/ M0)ψ. (20) this method. − First, we introduce a mass term into (3+1) QED, yield- Integrating out Aµ, we get our desired effective action ing the so-called Proca quantum electrodynamics, whose e2 action is given by eff [j] = jµ(x)∆ jν (y) + ψ¯(i∂/ M )ψ, (21) L4D − 2 µν − 0 1 m2 = F F µν + A Aµ + eAµj where L4D 4 µν 2 µ µ 1  λ  λ µ 2 ¯ ∆ = δ  ∂ ∂ . (22) (∂µA ) + ψ(i∂/ M0)ψ, (13) µν + m2 µν − + m2 λ µ ν − 2 − − − −  where e is the electric charge, jµ = ψγ¯ µψ is the matter Using Eq. (22) in Eq. (21) with charge conservation 2 µ current, m is a massive parameter for the gauge field, ∂µj = 0, we may conclude that, for a correct descrip- and λ is a gauge-fixing parameter. As expected, tion, the gauge-field propagator is

2 2 Z 4 m m 1 d k ik(x y) δµν A Aµ A Aµ + mAµ∂ B + (∂ B)2 (14) ∆µν (x y) = e− − . (23) 2 µ → 2 µ µ 2 µ − (2π)4 k2 + m2 4

In this way, all the gauge-dependence vanishes in the ef- Next, after solving the µ-integral (see Ref. [28]), we fective action. have In order to obtain the projected theory in (2+1) di- m mensions, we consider that the current matter only prop- Gϕ(x y; m) = K1(m x y ), (30) − 4π2 x y | − | agates in the plane, therefore, | − |

 µ where K1 is a modified Bessel function of the second kind. µ j (x0, x1, x2)δ(x3), µ = 0, 1, 2, j (x) = (24) In the short-range limit m x y 1, it yields 0, µ = 3. | − |  Similarly to the previous case, this shall lead to 1 Gϕ(x y; m) , (31) Z 3 − ≈ 4π2 x y 2 d k ik(x y) δµν G0,µν = e− − , (25) | − | 3 √ 2 2 (2π) 2 k + m whereas in the long-range limit m x y 1, we find which is the effective propagator in (2+1) dimensions. | − |  r m x y Our main goal is to find the corresponding theory mπ e− | − | G (x y; m) . (32) in (2+1) dimensions with the same effective action in ϕ − ≈ 2 4π2 x y 3/2 Eq. (21). This model reads | − | The gauge-field propagator may be calculated by follow- 1 µν µ ν µ 3D = Fµν K[]F + λA ∂µK[]∂ν A + eA jµ ing the very same steps. L 2 We have described some general features of NPQED, + ψ¯(i∂/ M )ψ, (26) − 0 in particular, its derivation, two-point functions, and in- where λ is a gauge-fixing parameter. It is straightforward teractions. Next, we shall explore quantum corrections to show that, after integrating out Aµ in Eq. (26), we by using perturbation theory. obtain the same effective action as in Eq. (21) with the constraint in Eq. (24). For an arbitrary λ, the free gauge- field propagator reads V- PERTURBATION THEORY RESULTS   1 (1 λ) kµkν G0,µν (k) = δµν + − . (27) In this section, we calculate the renormalized electron 2√k2 + m2 λ k2 mass mR of the model in Eq. (26) at one-loop approxi- There are two main features of Eq. (26): (a) The mas- mation. The details about the calculation are shown in sive parameter m is no longer a pole of the gauge-field Appendix A. In particular, we would like to obtain its de- propagator, hence, it can not be thought as a mass and pendence on m, the mass term of the gauge field. Note (b) Gauge-invariance is explicitly respected, i.e, there is that in our 3D model, this parameter must to be un- no need to deal with Stueckelberg fields. Indeed, we could derstood as the inverse of the interaction length. This, set B = 0 from the very beginning, which means start- nevertheless, is the mass of the intermediate field that ing with Proca quantum electrodynamics and, therefore, propagates in 4D. Thereafter a standard calculation, we breaking of gauge invariance. Then, after dimensional obtain reduction, the corresponding 3D theory is still the same α as in Eq. (26) and that it is gauge invariant. zR = 1 + f(z), (33) 2π

where zR mR/M0, z m/M0, and IV- ASYMPTOTIC BEHAVIOR OF BOTH ≡ ≡ SCALAR AND GAUGE-FIELD PROPAGATORS 1 Z 2 + x hp i f(z) = dx ln (1 x)(z2 x) + x . (34) 0 √1 x − − In this section, we calculate the asymptotic expressions − of G (x y; m) and δµν G (x y; m), i.e, propagators in From Eq. (34), it is clear that f(z) = f( z), therefore, ϕ − 0µν − the space-time coordinates. We use the integral version the corrections are only dependent on the− modulus of m. in Eq. (8), which has an extra kz-integral. Hence, From now on, we assume α = 1/137. Next, we would Z 3 Z + like to address the effects of the m parameter on zR. d k ik(x y) ∞ dµ 1 G (x y; m) = e− − . Surprisingly, for z z 1.2, the quantum correction ϕ − (2π)3 (2π) k2 + µ2 + m2 c αf(z)/2π is negative,| | ≤ while≈ for z z , they become −∞ (28) c positive and cross the free-energy| level| ≥ M , see Fig.1. Note that we have replaced k by µ, since µ is just a 0 z Let us calculate the energy gap of the renormalized parametric variable. Thereafter, we use Eq. (5) for solv- + state δRE = ER ER− = M0 + M0αfx(z)/2π ( M0 ing the k-sphere integral, therefore, − −+ − − M0αf(z)/2π) = 2M0 + M0αf(z)/π., where E > 0 and Z + R ∞ 2 2 dµ 1 √(µ +m ) x y ER− < 0 are the positive and negative energies, see Ap- Gϕ(x y; m) = e− | − |. − (2π) 4π x y pendix A. Since f(z) may be negative for z zc 1.2, −∞ | − | | | ≤ ≈ (29) we have that δRE lies inside the energy gap 2M0. The 5

3 10 2 ⇥ cold-atom system made of fermions in two-dimensions with bosons in three-dimensions. This has been called 1 Fermi-Bose mixture in mixed dimensions. Accordingly ) to their theoretical model, the static interaction between z (

f 0 the fermionic particles is given by the Yukawa potential. ⇡

↵ Although, in their approach, retardation effects are ne- 2 glected, we may make use of NPQED for investigating -1

1= these new regime. Indeed, besides anomalies [17], it has

been shown that a full dynamical description provides

R -2

z new results for PQED in application to exciton spectrum in transition-metal dichalcogenides [32]. -3 We finally discuss the importance of the order in which -4 the following two operations are implemented, namely: -2 -1 0 1 2 a) the mass generation for the gauge field; b) the dimen- z sional reduction. Interestingly, the result is sensitive to FIG. 1: Quantum correction for the electron mass. We plot the order in which the inclusion of a mass and the di- the quantity αf(z)/2π in Eq. (33), where z is the ratio be- mensional reduction are performed. As a matter of fact, tween the inverse of interaction length m and the bare electron by doing “a” before “b”, we have shown that the Yukawa mr mass M0. For |z| ≤ zc ≈ 1.2, we have f(z) < 0, therefore, the potential V (r) = e− /4πr is obtained from the static renormalized energy gap δRE is less than the bare energy gap limit of the gauge-field propagator, given by Eq. (27). p 2M0. On the other hand, |z| ≥ zc yields f(z) > 0 (shaded This is proportional to 1/(2 p2 + m2). area), i.e, the renormalized energy gap is larger than the bare energy gap. Finally, for |z| = zc, we find f(zc) = 0 and the Conversely, let us start with a massless gauge field, renormalized energy gap is equal to 2M0. hence, by applying the dimensional reduction, we arrive at the PQED model [11], whose propagator is propor- p tional to 1/(2 p2). Suppose we now couple the PQED case z zc resembles the quantized energy levels cal- model, to a Higgs field in the broken phase, such that ≤ culated in Ref. [17] or Ref. [20], because that renormal- a massive term is generated to the gauge field. This p p ized states are closer to the zero-energy level. Neverthe- changes the propagator from 1/(2 p2) to 1/(2 p2 +m), less, because we are in the small coupling limit, hence, which clearly shows that we shall obtain a different model we do not generate dynamical symmetry breaking, since from the one associated to Eq. (26). The potential is now zR 0 when M0 0. given by a combination of Coulomb and Keldysh [31] po- → → tentials, i.e, V (r) 1/r m [H (mr) Y (mr)], where ∝ − 0 − 0 H0(mr) and Y0(mr) are Struve and Bessel functions, re- VII. DISCUSSION spectively. This potential does not decay exponentially at large distances as the Yukawa potential, rather, it has PQED has been applied to describe the interactions of a power-law decay. We conclude, therefore, that we must two-dimensional electrons, in particular, graphene in the to be careful about how one wishes to use quantum elec- strong-coupling regime. The main results rely on the fact trodynamics in applications for lower-dimensional sys- that electrons do interact trough the Coulomb potential, tems, because of this sensitive relation between the di- which has an infinite range. Here, nevertheless, we con- mensional reduction and phenomenological parameters, sider a scenario where interactions have a finite range. such as a mass for the gauge field. We have applied the very same procedure for deriving PQED [11], but considering a massive photon in (3+1) dimensions. Our main result is that, after performing the dimensional reduction, one obtains that the matter ACKNOWLEDGMENTS field interacts through a Yukawa potential in the static limit. Similar to PQED, it yields a nonlocal theory in both space and time. Since the matter field is not rel- We are grateful to Rodrigo Pereira for very interesting evant for the dimensional reduction, this model may be and stimulating discussions. V. S. A. and G. C. M. ac- generalized to describe the Yukawa interaction between knowledges CAPES for financial support. T. M. acknowl- other kind of particles. Although our derivation follows edges CNPq for support through Bolsa de produtividade standard steps of QED literature, we believe that they em Pesquisa n. 311079/2015-6. L. O. N. acknowledges shall be relevant, in particular, for applications in con- the financial support from MEC/UFRN. E.C.M. is par- densed matter physics and cold-atom systems. tially supported by CNPq and FAPERJ. In Ref. [30], the authors proposed a realization of a 6

APPENDIX A: ELECTRON-SELF ENERGY: with ISOTROPIC CASE q ∆ = p2x(1 x) + M 2x + m2(1 x). (43) − 0 − In this Appendix, we show some details about the electron-self energy. First, let us write the Feynman Eq. (40) has both finite and a regulator-dependent rules of Eq. (26) in Euclidean space. The free electron- terms, which must be eliminated by some renormaliza- propagator reads tion scheme. For the sake of simplicity, we choose the minimal subtraction procedure, which essentially avoid 1 (p/ + M0) the poles by introducing counter-terms in the original − S0F = = 2 2 , (35) p/ M0 p + M action. Hence, − 0 the gauge-field propagator (in the Feynman gauge λ = 1) ΣR(p) = lim (Σ(p, µ, ) CT ) = A(p)p/ + B(p), (44) µ, 0 − is → where CT stands for counter-terms, δµν G0,µν (p) = p , (36) 2 p2 + m2 Z 1 (x 1) ∆ A(p) = 2C dx − ln , (45) µ µ √1 x M0 and the vertex interaction is Γ = γ e. The Euclidean 0 − matrices satisfy γµ, γν = 2δµν . From Eq. (35), we and have that the pole{ of the} free Dirac− electron is p2 = M 2, E 0 Z 1 2 − 3M0 ∆ where pE is the Euclidean momentum. For calculating B(p) = 2C dx ln . (46) the physical mass, one must to return to the Minkowski 0 √1 x M0 2 2 2 2 − space, using pE pM , such that pM = M0 are the physical poles. → − Using Eq. (44) in Eq. (38), we find The corrected electron propagator SF is 1 S− (p) = [(1 A(p))p/ (M0 + B(p))]. (47) F − − SF = S0F + S0F (Σ)S0F + ... (37) Multiplying Eq. (47) by (1 + A(p)), we have therefore, 1 (1+A(p))S− (p) = i[p/ (M0 +B(p))(1+A(p))]. (48) F − − 1 1 S− = S− Σ(p). (38) F 0F − Next, we define the renormalized matter field ψR, The electron-self energy reads namely, 1/2 p Z 3 ψR = Z ψ = 1 A(p)ψ. (49) 2 d k µ ν ψ − Σ(p) = e 3 Γ S0F (k)Γ G0,µν (p k). (39) (2π) − Therefore, The physical propagator reads Eq. (39) has a linear divergence, therefore, we need 1 1 [p/ + M(p)] to use a regularization scheme. We choose to use the S− = = − , (50) RF p/ M(p) p2 + M 2(p) usual dimensional regularization  = 3 D, where D is − − an arbitrary dimension, which we shall consider D 3 with in the very end of the calculation. After application→ of standard methods, we find M(p) = M0 + B(p) + M0A(p). (51)     µ 1 2p/ Using Eqs. (41), (46), (45) in Eq. (51), we find Σ(p) = 2CI + 2C ln + 6M0 , (40) M0  3 − α Z 1 (2 + x) ∆ where µ is an arbitrary massive parameter, generated by M(p) = M0 + M0 dx ln . (52) 2π √1 x M0 the prescription e eµ, with  = D 3, where D is the 0 − → − dimension of the space-time. This is a standard step in Eq. (51) yields the so-called mass function M(p), which the dimensional regularization. The constant C is given is, essentially, the momentum-dependent part of the by electron-self energy that renormalizes the electron mass [33]. In Fig.2, we show that by using different values of e2 C = (41) m/M0, we may generate quantum corrections that either 16π2 increase or decrease the renormalized mass in comparison and the parametric integral reads with the bare value M0. To clarify this result, we shall calculate the renormalized mass mR. 1 Z p/(x 1) + 3M0 ∆ The pole of Eq. (50) is given by the solution of I = dx − ln , (42) 2 2 2 √1 x M0 pE = M (pE), which, in the Minkowski space, yields 0 − − 7

1.1 ral Tunnelling and the Klein Paradox in Graphene, Nat. Phys. 2, 620-625 (2006). [5] T. Appelquist, M. J. Bowick, E. Cohler, & L. C. R. Wi- 1.05 jewardhana, Chiral-symmetry Breaking in 2+1 Dimen- sions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 1715 (1985); C. D. Roberts & A. G. Williams, Dyson-Schwinger Equations and their

) Application to Hadronic Physics, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. p

( 1 33, 477 (1994); P. Maris, Influence of the Full Vertex

M and Vacuum Polarization on the Fermion Propagator in (2+1)-dimensional QED, Phys. Rev. D 54, 4049 (1996). 0.95 [6] I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and W. Zwerger, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 885 (2008). [7] F. Dalfovo, S. Giorgini, LP. Pitaevskii, S. Stringari Re- views of Modern Physics 71, 463 (1999); S. Giorgini, L. 0.9 0 2 4 6 8 10 P. Pitaevskii, S. Stringari Reviews of Modern Physics p 80, 1215 (2008). For a detailed account of long-range interactions with ultracold atoms, polar molecules and FIG. 2: Mass function M(p) in Eq. (51). For this plot we set dipolar gases: M.A. Baranov, M. Dalmonte, G. Pupillo, P. Zoller, Chemical reviews 112, 5012-5061 (2012); M. M0 = 1 and α = 1/137. Dashed line: m/M0 = 1.5, full line: Saffman, T. G. Walker, K. Mølmer, Reviews of Modern m/M0 = 0.5. Note that M(p = 0) > M0 for the dashed line, Physics 82 2313 (2010); See also for more recent results but M(p = 0) < M0 for the full line. on long-range hoppings as well as multi-body interac- tions: G. Gori, T. Macr`ıand A. Trombettoni, Phys. Rev. E 87, 032905 (2013); D. Laghi, T. Macr`ı,A. Trombet- m2 = M 2( m2 ), where m2 is the renormalized mass. R − R R toni, Physical Review A 96, 043605 (2017). Note that we have applied p2 m2 for calculat- [8] L. Pitaevskii and S. Stringari, Bose-Einstein conden- E → − R ing the pole in the Minkowski space. Furthermore, be- sation and superfluidity Oxford Science Publications cause we are at one-loop approximation, we may use (2016); G. de Rosi and S. Stringari, Phys. Rev. A 92, 2 2 053617 (2015); M.Khoon Tey et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, M( mR) = M( M0 ). Therefore, the renormalized − − + 055303 (2013); S. Chiacchiera, T. Macr`ı,A. Trombettoni, masses are m = M( m ) = E±, where E = R ± − R R R Physical Review A 81, 033624 (2010). + M( m ) and E− = M( m ) are positive and | − R | R −| − R | [9] E. Zohar, J.I. Cirac and B. Reznik, Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, negative solutions, respectively. Using Eq. (51) with 014401 (2016). 2 2 2 mR = M( M0 ) and e = 4πα, we find [10] E. A. Martinez et al. Nature 534, 516-519 (2016). − [11] E. C. Marino, Quantum Electrodynamics of Particles on "s # m α Z 1 2 + x  m2  a Plane and the Chern-Simons Theory, Nucl. Phys. B R 408, 551-564 (1993). | | = 1+ dx ln (1 x) 2 x + x . M0 2π √1 x − M − 0 − 0 [12] A. Kovner & B. Rosenstein, Kosterlitz-Thouless Mecha- (53) nism of Two-Dimensional Superconductivity, Phys. Rev. B 42, 4748 (1990); N. Dorey and N. E. Mavromatos, Considering zR mR/M0 and z m/M0, we have Eq. (33) and Eq.≡ (34). In the scalar-field≡ case, given QED3 and Two-Dimensional Superconductivity Without Parity Violation, Nucl. Phys. B 386, 614 (1992). by Eq. (11), the critical point z is the same. This is not c [13] S. Teber, Electromagnetic Current Correlations in Re- surprising because of the similarities of the electron-self duced Quantum Electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 86, energy and the bosonic propagators. 025005 (2012); S. Teber, Two-Loop Fermion Self-Energy and Propagator in Reduced QED3,2, Phys. Rev. D 89, 067702 (2014); A. V. Kotikov & S. Teber, Two-Loop Fermion Self-Energy in Reduced Quantum Electrody- namics and Application to the Ultrarelativistic Limit of [1] B. A. Bernevig with T. Hughes, Topological Insulators Graphene, Phys. Rev. D 89, 065038 (2014); S. Teber & and Topological Superconductors. Princeton University A. V. Kotikov, Interaction Corrections to the Minimal Press, (2013); S.-Q. Shen, Topological Insulators Dirac Conductivity of Graphene via Dimensional Regulariza- Equation in Condensed Matter, Spring Series in Solid- tion, European Phys. Lett. 107, 57001 (2014). State Sciences, (2012); M. Z. Hasan and C. L. Kane, [14] E. C. Marino, Leandro O. Nascimento, Van S´ergioAlves Colloquium: Topological Insulators, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, and C. Morais Smith, Unitarity of Theories Containing 3045, (2010). Fractional Powers of the d’Alembertian Operator, Phys. [2] K. S. Novoselov, A. K. Geim, S. V. Morozov, D. Jiang, Y. Rev. D 90, 105003 (2014). Zhang, S. V. Dubong, I. V. Grigorieva, & A. A. Firsov, [15] M. A. H. Vozmediano and F. Guinea, Effect of Coulomb Electric Field Effect in Atomically Thin Carbon Films, Interactions on the Physical Observables of Graphene, Science 306, 666, (2004). Phys. Scr. T146, 014015 (2012); F. de Juan, A. G. [3] B. Lalmi, H. Oughaddou, H. Enriquez, A. Kara, S. Grushin, and M. A. H. Vozmediano, Renormalization of Vizzini, B. Ealet, & B. Aufray, Epitaxial growth of a sil- Coulomb Interaction in Graphene: Determining Observ- icene sheet, Appl. Phys. Lett. 97, 223109 (2010). able Quantities, Phys. Rev. B 82, 125409 (2010). [4] M. I. Katsnelson, K. S. Novoselov, and A. K. Geim, Chi- [16] D. C. Elias, R. V. Gorbachev, A. S. Mayorov, S. V. Mo- 8

rozov, A. A. Zhukov, P. Blake, L. A. Ponomarenko, I. Axel Weber, The Yukawa potential: ground state energy V. Grigorieva, K. S. Novoselov, F. Guinea, and A. K. and critical screening, arxiv: 1706.0.9979. (2017). Geim, Dirac Cones Reshaped by Interaction Effects in [25] H. S. Bennett, Upper Limits for the Number of Bound Suspended Graphene, Nat. Phys. 7, 701-704 (2011). States Associated with the Yukawa Potential, J. R. N. B. [17] E. C. Marino, L. O. Nascimento, V. S. Alves, & C. M. S. 86, 5, (1981). Smith, Interaction Induced Quantum Valley Hall Effect [26] B. Ya. Yavidov, Sh. S. Djumanov, & S. Dzhumanov, Mass in Graphene, Phys. Rev. X 5, 011040 (2015). of a lattice polaron from an extended Holstein model using [18] V. S. Alves, W. S. Elias, L. O. Nascimento, V. Juriˇci´c the Yukawa potential, Phys. Lett. A 374, 2772 (2010). and F. Pe˜na, Chiral Symmetry Breaking in the Pseudo- [27] A. A. Costa, L. C. Olivari, & E. Abdalla, Quintessence Quantum Electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 87, 125002 with Yukawa interaction, Phys. Rev. D 92, 103501 (2013). (2015). [19] L. O. Nascimento, V. S. Alves, F. Pe˜na,C. M. Smith, & [28] I. S. Gradstheyn and I. M.Ryzhik. Table of Integrals, E. C. Marino, Chiral-symmetry breaking in pseudoquan- Series and Products. Seventh Edition, Academic Press, tum electrodynamics at finite temperature, Phys. Rev. D, (2007). 92, 025018 (2015). [29] H. Ruegg & M. R.-Altaba, The Stueckelberg Field, Int. J. [20] V. S. Alves, R. O. C. Junior, E. C. Marino, and L. Mod. Phys. A 19, 3265 (2004). O. Nascimento, Dynamical Mass Generation in Pseudo [30] M. A. Caracanhas, F. Schreck, & C. M. Smith, Fermi- Quantum Electrodynamics with Four-Fermion Interac- Bose Mixture in Mixed Dimensions, arxiv:1701.04702v3 tions, Phys. Rev. D 96, 034005 (2017). (2017). [21] J. C. Pinto Barros, M. Dalmonte, A. Trombettoni ,Long- [31] L. V. Keldysh, Coulomb Interaction in Thin Semiconduc- range interactions from U(1) gauge fields via dimensional tors and Semimetal Films, JETP Lett. 29, 716 (1979). mismatch, arxiv: 1708.06585 (2017). [32] E. C. Marino, Leandro O. Nascimento, Van S´ergioAlves, [22] N. Menezes, G. Palumbo, & C. M. Smith, Conformal N. Menezes, C. Morais Smith, Quantum-electrodynamical QED in Two-dimensional Topological Insulators, Scien- approach to the exciton spectrum in Transition-Metal tific Reports 7, 14175 (2017); L. O. Nascimento, Intro- Dichalcogenides, arxiv:1710.08960v1 (2017). duction to Topological Phases and Electronic Interactions [33] T. Appelquist, M. J. Bowick, E. Cohler, & L. C. R. Wije- in (2+1) Dimensions, Braz. J. Phys., (2017). wardhana, Chiral-Symmetry Breaking 2 + 1 dimensions, [23] L. M. Brown, Hideki Yukawa and the Meson Theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 1715 (1985). Physics Today 39, 12, 55, (1986). [24] J. P. Edwards, U. Gerber, C. Schubert, M. A. Trejo, and