Arxiv:2008.06772V1 [Hep-Th]

Home , Beta function (physics)

arXiv:2008.06772v1 [hep-th] 15 Aug 2020 int epyial disbewsgvni 7 ] and 8], [7, in transforma- given was scheme admissible a physically for be conditions to necessary tion of set A oetrsa oporder re- loop that at transformations terms scheme move construct and function to [7]- scheme beta these of a Refs. used of effect coefficients the the scheme. for on a Hooft transformations formulas Such ’t explicit the calculated [6]. called [10] terms been two-loop beta and has a one- scheme yields only and trans- with terms scheme a function these the out eliminates carry in that to formation possible as be coupling, would chromodynamics it quantum small (QCD), of limit sufficiently (UV) for ultraviolat deep least at that, 3 ] ncnrs,tehge-opcoefficients higher-loop the contrast, In ℓ 4]. [3, sdfrrglrzto,ad(o mass-independent coefficient, two-loop (for the for and true also is regularization, this schemes) for used h n-opcoefficient, one-loop The of R)bt ucino h theory, the of function beta (RG) where ceto h ui neato.Qatmcretosren- corrections Quantum der interaction. cubic the of ficient scale in interaction cubic where etmitgasi opdiagrams: loop in integrals mentum r o-bla ag hoyin theory gauge non-Abelian a are dt iesos ihsm e ffilsadadimensionless a and fields of coupling set interaction some with dimensions, qiaetbt ucinis function beta equivalent S ffc fShm rnfrain naBt ucinwt Vani with Function Beta a on Transformations Scheme of Effect d ≥ e scnie unu edter in theory field quantum a consider us Let = g 2 = g r ceedpnet[] twstu expected thus was It [5]. scheme-dependent are 3 d on µ eedn pnteEcienenergy/momentum Euclidean the upon dependent g ln a hr ti measured: is it where π stegueculn,adasaa hoywt a with theory scalar a and coupling, gauge the is µ µ = d/ 1.Ti ucinhstesre expansion series the has function This [1]. 2 sdtrie yterenormalization-group the by determined is c / eea,psil ntestainweeabt ucini n is co function zero beta of a vicinity where the situation term. in the one-loop least in defi at to possible terms, possible general, these is remove it to scheme-dependent, used are higher and loops d Γ( g b .N agIsiuefrTertclPyisadDepartm and Physics Theoretical for Institute Yang N. C. (b) ti omnysae htbcuetrsi h eafunction beta the in terms because that stated commonly is It 2 d/ .INTRODUCTION I. β 2 and [2] a ) o e.g., so, 2), d = β g iesos where dimensions, 6 = g w ae fpriua interest particular of cases Two . da dt = b c g 2 = 1 d ℓ sidpneto h scheme the of independent is , X ℓ ∞ safco rsn rmmo- from arising factor a is =1 ≥ tn ro nvriy tn ro,NwYr 19,USA 11794, York New Brook, Stony University, Brook Stony a g rmtebt function. beta the from 3 X b ℓ c ∞ =1 = ℓ 4 a ℓ g 1 = b ( ℓ , µ a β c hmsA Ryttov A. Thomas d ℓ .Tedependence The ). g d / . (16 dimensions, 4 = = apse 5 dne emr and Denmark Odense, 55, Campusvej = S π dg/dt d otenDnakUniversity, Denmark Southern 2 g / d ,ec An etc. ), (2 stecoef- the is spacetime π where , b ) ℓ a CP (a) d (1.2) (1.1) with with b 2 a 3 n oetShrock Robert and -Origins a eafnto wihi o dnial eo with zero) identically not is coefficient, (which one-loop function vanishing beta a has large- pl ceetasomto,ee ntevcnt of vicinity and the construct in to even possible origin, transformation, general, the scheme in a not, is apply it case this n(xcl ovd xml faUF cusi the in occurs UVFP a of while example O( [12], solved) fermions (exactly massless the- IRFP an many gauge an sufficiently non-Abelian of with free example ory asymptotically An an RG. ultraviolet in the an occurs of be an (UVFP) would in point zero while fixed a fixed group, such infrared renormalization theory, an the infrared-free be of would asymptot- zero (IRFP) an a point In such origin. theory, the free of from ically zero away application a function the investigating beta on the when constraint transformations, sati- significant scheme automatically a of are not and are fied, they quantum [11], ap- perturbative in chromodynamics in as schemes space, optimized constant the to coupling in plications in easily transformation origin scheme can the a of conditions applies vicinity one these if although satisfied that be shown was it terms mlctosfrtesuyo eo ftebt function beta the theory. of of zeros type of this study in the for implications eddhr.Oemydfieashm transformation scheme be a relating define will mapping may a that as One transformations here. scheme needed on methodology h hoyi re hnispoete utrmi the remain must so properties transformation, function scheme its a then under free, same is theory the where nti okw osdrtestaini hc theory a which in situation the consider we work this In nti eto egv re eiwo relevant of review brief a give we section this In N nonlinear ) N b f I CEETRANSFORMATIONS SCHEME II. ℓ eshm rnfrain htcnbe can that transformations scheme ne tietclyzr u a vanishing a has but zero identically ot ( ii [13]. limit f a with pig epoeta hsi o,in not, is this that prove We upling. ( ′ steshm rnfrainfnto.If function. transformation scheme the is ) a a ′ stknt aetepwrsre expansion series power the have to taken is ) n fPyisadAstronomy, and Physics of ent fater ttelvlof level the at theory a of ,ta eoe h scheme-dependent the removes that 0, = ℓ f σ ≥ ( a b oe in model ′ ntebt ucin ediscuss We function. beta the in 3 + 1 = ) a a = and a hn n-opTerm One-Loop shing ′ s f X s d max a =1 ( ′ a + 2 = b ′ ie by given 1 ) k s .W rv htin that prove We 0. = , ( a ′ ǫ ) s iesosi the in dimensions ℓ , ≥ f 3 0 .The 1. = (0) (2.1) (2.2) 2 where smax may be finite or infinite. The corresponding • C4: The existence of an IR or UV zero of β has Jacobian J = da/da′ has the series expansion physical significance and must therefore be scheme- independent. Hence, a scheme transformation must smax ′ s satisfy the condition that βa has a zero away from J =1+ (s + 1)ks(a ) . (2.3) the origin if and only if βa′ has a corresponding Xs=1 zero away from the origin. The beta function in the transformed scheme is Clearly, these conditions apply both for a given scheme ′ ′ transformation and its inverse. da da da −1 β ′ ≡ = = J β . (2.4) a dt da dt a Although b1 is nonzero in QCD, there are theories in which b1 may be zero (without the beta function being This beta function has the series expansion identically zero). One example of a theory in which b1 can

∞ vanish is a vectorial non-Abelian gauge theory with gauge ′ ′ ′ ℓ group G and Nf Dirac fermions transforming according β ′ =2a b (a ) (2.5) a ℓ to a representation R of G. The one-loop coefficient of Xℓ=1 the beta function is [14] with a new set of coefficients b′ . As noted above, the ℓ 1 one-loop and two-loop coefficients are left invariant by b1 = − (11CA − 4Nf Tf ) , (2.8) ′ ′ 3 this scheme transformation, i.e., b1 = b1 and b2 = b2 ′ [3, 4]. Ref. [7] presented explicit expressions for the bℓ in and the two-loop coefficient is [15] terms of the bℓ and ks for loop order 3 ≤ ℓ ≤ 5 and Ref. ′ ′ [8] extended these up to ℓ = 8 inclusive. For b3 and b4 1 2 b2 = − 34CA − 4(5CA +3Cf )Nf Tf , (2.9) these expressions are [7] 3h i ′ 2 b3 = b3 + k1b2 + (k1 − k2)b1 (2.6) where CA and Cf = C2(R) are the quadratic Casimir invariants of the adjoint representation and the fermion and representation R, respectively, and Tf = T (R) is the trace invariant of R [16]. The coefficient b1 vanishes if ′ 2 3 b4 = b4 +2k1b3 + k1b2 + (−2k1 +4k1k2 − 2k3)b1 . (2.7) Nf = Nf,b1z, where

For the reader’s convenience, we list some of these ex- 11CA pressions for b′ with higher ℓ in Appendix A, from Refs. Nf,b1z = . (2.10) ℓ 4Tf [7, 8]. As noted above, one important application of the study If Nf = Nf,b1z, then b2 = CA(7CA + 11Cf ), which is of schemes and scheme transformations is to calculations positive, so the theory with Nf = Nf,b1z is IR-free. As of higher-order corrections in perturbative QCD scatter- an explicit example, one could take G = SU(2) and R ing processes at high energies. In this application, one equal to the fundamental representation, so that Nf,b1z = is interested in choosing a scheme such that higher-order 11. That is, an SU(2) gauge theory with these 11 Dirac terms are small, so that one can achieve as accurate as fermions has b1 = 0. Examples can also be given of chiral possible a description of experimental data at a given gauge theories in which, for a special choice of gauge order in perturbation theory. A different type of applica- group and fermion content, b1 = 0. In all of these cases, tion is to the investigation of a possible zero of the beta the choice of parameters that renders b1 = 0 leaves a function away from the origin in coupling constant space. nonzero b2. As specified in [7, 8], in order for a scheme transfor- Moreover, the vanishing of b1 can occur in scalar field mation to be physically acceptable, it must satisfy the theories; a recent example is a scalar theory with a cubic following necessary conditions: self-interaction in d = 6 dimensions in which the scalar transforms as a bi-adjoint representation of a global • C1: the scheme transformation must map a real SU(N) ⊗ SU(N) symmetry group [17]. In this theory, positive a to a real positive a′, since a map taking the first nonzero term in the beta function is b2, which is a> 0 to a′ = 0 would be singular, and a map taking ′ negative. A study of a possible IRFP in this theory was a> 0 to a negative or complex a would violate the carried out in [18]. unitarity of the theory. A different type of situation occurs in an N = 2 super-

• C2: the scheme transformation should not map a symmetric gauge theory with gauge group SU(Nc) and value of a for which perturbation theory may be Nf matter hypermultiplets. A closed form expression for reliable, to a value of a′ that is so large that per- the beta function was calculated in [19] (see also [20]). turbation theory is unreliable. This beta function has the property that bn = 0 if n ≥ 2. By choosing Nf appropriately, one can make b1 = 0, so ′ • C3: J should not vanish in the region of a and a of that the beta function vanishes identically. In contrast, interest, or else there would be a pole in Eq. (2.4). here we discuss theories in which b1 = 0 (either because 3 of a special choice of parameters, as in Eq. (2.10), or gauge theory with sufficiently many fermions via series identically, as in [17, 18]), but the beta function is not expansions in powers of ∆f . These have the advantage identically zero. that they are manifestly scheme-independent. This pro- 3 gram has been carried out up to the O((∆f ) ) level in 4 [26, 27] and up to the O((∆f ) ) level in [28, 29], the latter III. SCHEMES TO REMOVE TERMS IN BETA using the five-loop beta function [30, 31]. FUNCTION OF ORDER THREE LOOPS AND To set the stage for our new results, we briefly recall

HIGHER the procedure for the construction of the SR,m,k1 scheme transformation in [10]. The first step is to use Eq. (2.6) ′ An important application of scheme transformations and solve the equation b3 = 0 for k2. This yields the is to the analysis of possible zero(s) of the beta function result away from the origin. The beta function of an asymptot- b3 b2 2 ically free non-Abelian gauge theory has an ultraviolet k2 = + k1 + k1 for SR,m,k1 with m ≥ 2 . (3.1) b1 b1 zero at a = α/(4π) = 0, which is a UVFP. If the theory contains sufficiently many massless fermions, the (per- This suffices for SR,2,k1 . The reason that we solve for turbatively calculated) beta function may also have an k2 instead of k1 is that this involves the solution of a ′ infrared zero at a nonzero value of the gauge coupling. linear equation for k1, whereas the equation b3 = 0 is a The theory is weakly coupled at this IRFP if the number quadratic equation in k1, so one would have to choose of fermions is close to the upper limit allowed by asymp- which of the two solutions of this quadratic would be totic freedom, namely Nf,b1z in a theory with fermions used. in a single representation R, and hence is amenable to To obtain SR,m,k1 with m ≥ 3, removing the ℓ =3, 4 a perturbative treatment using series expansions in the terms in βa′ , one substitutes the solution for k2 from Eq. ′ variable ∆f = Nu − Nf [12]. (3.1) into Eq. (2.7) and solves the equation b4 = 0 for k3. Since the terms of loop order ℓ ≥ 3 in the beta function Again, this is a linear equation, with a unique solution, are scheme-dependent, so is the value of the IR zero when which is calculated to three-loop or higher-loop order. In order to b4 3b3 5b2 2 3 understand the physical implications of this IR zero, it k3 = + k1 + k1 +k1 for SR,m,k1 with m ≥ 3 . is necessary to assess the effect of scheme dependence on 2b1 b1 2b1 its value. A study of this dependence was carried out (3.2) in [8, 9] using several scheme transformations. Related One continues in this manner to determine the ks with studies were performed in [21]-[23]. s ≥ 4 such as to remove the terms in the beta function up to successively higher loop orders. One type of procedure that would be natural for a This procedure requires b1 to be nonzero, since other- quantitative study of scheme-dependence of a zero of the wise various multiplicative factors involving 1/b1 in the beta function would be to construct and apply a scheme k with s ≥ 2 and higher powers of 1/b1 in the k with transformation that would remove successively higher- s s s ≥ 4 would be singular. Here we investigate the situa- loop terms in the beta function and, at each stage, de- tion where b1 = 0. termine how this removal shifted the position of the IR zero. Extending the results of [8], Ref. [9] constructed a set of scheme transformations SR,m with m ≥ 2 with IV. IMPOSSIBILITY OF REMOVING ALL k1 = 0 in Eq. (2.2) that remove the terms in the beta HIGHER-LOOP TERMS WITH ℓ ≥ 3 IF b1 = 0: function at loop order ℓ = 3 to ℓ = m + 1, inclusive CASE WHERE b2 =6 0 and determined the range of α over which SR,2 and SR,3 could be applied to study the IR zero of the beta function In this and the next section we show that if the one- of an asymptotically free gauge theory while satisfying loop term in the beta function is zero, i.e., if b1 = 0, the criteria to avoid introducing unphysical pathologies. then it is, in general, not possible to apply Eqs. (2.1) Ref. [10] presented a generalized one-parameter class of and (2.2) to transform to a scheme in which all of the scheme transformation, denoted S with m ≥ 2, de- R,m,k1 scheme-dependent ℓ-loop coefficients with ℓ ≥ 3 are zero. pending on k1, with the property that an SR,m,k1 scheme We begin in this section with the case where b1 = 0 and transformation eliminates the ℓ-loop terms in the beta b2 6= 0. If b2 > 0, then this theory is IR-free, while if function of a quantum field theory from loop order ℓ =3 b2 < 0, the theory is UV-free (i.e., asymptotically free). to order ℓ = m + 1, inclusive. A transformation in this We proceed to analyze scheme transformations in- class reduces to S if k1 = 0. These types of scheme R,m tended to try to set higher-loop coefficients equal to zero. transformations have also been used in the analysis of a ′ From Eq. (2.6), it follows that in order to have b = 0, possible ultraviolet zero in the beta functions of a U(1) 3 ~ 4 the unique solution for k1 in the scheme transformation gauge theory [24] and an O(N) λ|φ| theory [25]. (2.1)-(2.2) is Although our focus here is on scheme transformations, we note that one can also analyze properties of (physical, b3 k1 = − . (4.1) gauge-invariant) operators at the IRFP in a non-Abelian b2 4

′ Substituting this in Eq. (2.7) for b4, we obtain Next, we consider the case b2 > 0, where the theory ′ is IR-free. Here the condition that az > 0 is that b4 − 2 2 ′ b3 (b3/b2) < 0, i.e., b4 = b4 − . (4.2) b2 2 b3 b4 < for UVFP if b1 = 0 and b2 > 0 . (4.8) In general, this is nonzero. This proves that if b1 = 0, b2 then there is, in general, no scheme transformation of the ′ form (2.1) with (2.2) that can be used to render b4 zero, Again, this is a necessary but not suﬃcient condition ′ and hence, a fortiori, it is not possible to remove all of for the theory to a physical UVFP at az; the scheme the scheme-dependent terms in the beta function. transformation must also satisfy conditions C1 - C4. For completeness, we comment on the extent to which one can remove higher-loop terms with ℓ ≥ 5 in this case. Substituting the value of k1 from (4.1) in Eq. (A1) for V. IMPOSSIBILITY OF REMOVING ALL ′ 1 b5, we obtain HIGHER-LOOP TERMS WITH ℓ ≥ 3 IF b = 0: CASE WHERE b2 = 0 3 ′ 3b3b4 3b3 b5 = b5 − + 2 − 2k2b3 − k3b2 . (4.3) b2 b2 Next, we consider the case in which both b1 = 0 and b2 = 0, i.e., the maximal scheme-independent part of the ′ It is always possible to render this b5 = 0 by setting beta function is zero. Here, Eq. (2.6) reduces to

3 ′ b5 3b3b4 3b3 2k2b3 b3 = b3 . (5.1) k3 = − 2 + 3 − . (4.4) b2 b2 b2 b2 In the generic situation in which b3 6= 0, this immediately As is evident from Eq. (4.4), there is thus an infinite set proves that if b1 = b2 = 0, then there is, in general, no ′ scheme transformation that one can use to remove all of pairs (k2, k3) that render b5 = 0. Note that in the special case where b3 = 0, k3 takes on the unique value higher-loop terms with ℓ ≥ 3 in the beta function. Here we assume that b3 6= 0 and comment on the special case k3 = b5/b2 while k2 is undetermined. Examining Eq. b3 = 0 below. We remark on specific results for other (A2), we see that with k3 given by Eq. (4.4), one can ′ ′ higher-loop coefficients. The condition that b4 = 0 can solve the equation b6 = 0 (as a linear equation in k4) for be satisfied by choosing a value of k4. Similarly, with these ks values chosen, one ′ can solve b7 = 0 (as a linear equation in k5) for k5, and ′ b4 so forth for higher bℓ. k1 = − . (5.2) Thus, in the transformed scheme, 2b3

′ 3 ′ ′ 2 Substituting this into Eq. (A1), we see that it is possible βa′ = 2(a ) [b2 + b4(a ) ] ′ to render b5 = 0 with the choice 2 ′ 3 b3 ′ 2 2 = 2(a ) b2 + b4 − (a ) . (4.5) b5 b4 h b2 i k2 = − + 2 . (5.3) b3 b3 The function βa′ has a formal zero away from the origin Substituting these values of k1 and k2 into the expression at a = az, where (A2), we obtain 1/2 ′ b2 3 4 5 az = − 2 . (4.6) ′ 2b b b4 b3 b6 = b6 − + . (5.4) b4 − 2 b2 b3 b3

This is physical if the expression in the square root is This does not contain dependence on any other ks that positive. There are two cases with nonzero b2 to consider, can be chosen to make it zero, and, in general, it is namely b2 < 0 and b2 > 0. Let us first consider the case nonzero. With k1 and k2 set equal to their values in Eqs. b2 < 0, where the theory is UV-free. Then the condition (5.2) and (5.3), there is an infinite number of values of the ′ 2 ′ that az is physical is that that b4 − (b3/b2) > 0, i.e., pair (k3, k4) that can be used to render b7 = 0. Having ′ done this, one can choose k5 to make b8 = 0. Higher-loop 2 b3 coefficients can be analyzed in a similar manner. b4 > − for IRFP if b1 = 0 and b2 < 0 . (4.7) |b2| We next consider the hypothetical case in which not only b1 = 0 and b2 = 0, but also one starts in a scheme This is a necessary condition for the theory to have a in which some finite number of higher-loop coefficients bℓ ′ physical IRFP at az, but is not sufficient; the scheme with 3 ≤ ℓ ≤ p are zero. As before, we find that it is not, transformation to the primed scheme must also satisfy in general, possible to construct a scheme transformation the conditions C1 - C4 from [7, 8] listed above, that renders all of the bℓ with ℓ ≥ p + 1 zero. This is 5 simply proved by noting that our general results in Refs. est physical interest, namely where b1 = 0 and b2 6= 0, [7, 8] have the form we have also discussed resultant necessary (but not suf-

′ ficient) conditions for the existence of a zero in the beta bℓ = bℓ + (ℓ − 2)k1bℓ−1 + ... for ℓ ≥ 3, (5.5) function away from the origin. where the ... in Eq. (5.5) denote a sum of ks-dependent coefficients times the coefficients bk with 1 ≤ k ≤ ℓ − 2. ′ Acknowledgments Hence, if bℓ =0 for 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ p, then bp+1 = bp+1. Since, ′ by assumption, bp+1 is nonzero, so is bp+1, which proves our claim. We thank J. Gracey for valuable discussions in con- nection with [17] and collaboration on [18]. This research was supported in part by the U.S. National Science Foun- VI. CONCLUSIONS dation Grant NSF-PHY-1915093 (R.S.).

In conclusion, in this work we have proved that if the beta function of a theory is not identically zero and if the one-loop term in this beta function is zero, then, in general, it is not possible to transform to a scheme where Appendix A: Expressions for the Beta Function ′ ′ Coefficients bℓ all of the scheme-dependent coefficients bℓ with ℓ ≥ 3 are zero. We have given explicit results for several specific cases, including the case in which b1 = 0 but b2 6= 0 For reference, we list some of the higher-loop coeffi- ′ and the case where b1 = b2 = 0. In the case of great- cients bℓ with ℓ ≥ 5 from Refs. [7, 8].

′ 2 3 4 2 2 b5 = b5 +3k1b4 + (2k1 + k2)b3 + (−k1 +3k1k2 − k3)b2 + (4k1 − 11k1k2 +6k1k3 +4k2 − 3k4)b1 (A1)

′ 2 4 2 2 b6 = b6 +4k1b5 + (4k1 +2k2)b4 +4k1k2b3 + (2k1 − 6k1k2 +4k1k3 +3k2 − 2k4)b2

5 3 2 2 + (−8k1 + 28k1k2 − 16k1k3 − 20k1k2 +8k1k4 + 12k2k3 − 4k5)b1 (A2) and

′ 2 3 4 2 2 b7 = b7 +5k1b6 + (7k1 +3k2)b5 + (2k1 +7k1k2 + k3)b4 + (k1 − 2k1k2 +4k1k3 +3k2 − k4)b3

5 3 2 2 + (−4k1 + 15k1k2 − 9k1k3 − 12k1k2 +9k2k3 +5k1k4 − 3k5)b2

6 4 3 2 2 2 3 2 + (16k1 − 68k1k2 + 40k1k3 − 21k1k4 + 73k1k2 − 58k1k2k3 + 10k1k5 + 16k2k4 − 12k2 +9k3 − 5k6)b1 .

(A3)

[1] C. G. Callan, Phys. Rev. D 2, 1541 (1970); K. Symanzik, Amsterdam, 1976), p. 141. Commun. Math. Phys. 18, 227 (1970). [5] A commonly used scheme is the MS scheme, presented in [2] For a scalar theory in d = 4 dimensions with a λφ4 W. A. Bardeen, A. J. Buras, D. W. Duke, and T. Muta, ∞ ℓ interaction, Eq. (1.1) would be βλ = λ Pℓ=1 bℓa with Phys. Rev. D 18, 3998 (1978). See also G. ’t Hooft, Nucl. a = λ/(16π2). Our conclusions apply to all of these the- Phys. B 61, 455 (1973). ories, but we use notation speciﬁc to the d = 4 gauge [6] G. ’t Hooft, in The Whys of Subnuclear Physics, Proc. theory and d = 6 cubic scalar theory. 1977 Erice Summer School, ed. A. Zichichi (Plenum, New [3] E. Br´ezin, J. Le Guillou, and J. Zinn-Justin, Phys. Rev. York, 1979), p. 943. D 9, 1121 (1974). [7] T. A. Ryttov and R. Shrock, Phys. Rev. D 86, 065032 [4] D. J. Gross, in Methods in Field Theory, Les Houches (2012). 1975, eds. R. Balian and J. Zinn-Justin (North Holland, [8] T. A. Ryttov and R. Shrock, Phys. Rev. D 86, 085005 6

(2012). [17] J. A. Gracey, Phys. Rev. D 101, 125022 (2020). [9] R. Shrock, Phys. Rev. D 88, 036003 (2013). [18] J. A. Gracey, T. A. Ryttov, and R. Shrock, Phys. Rev. [10] R. Shrock, Phys. Rev. D 90, 045011 (2014). D, in press [arXiv:2007.12234]. [11] See S. J. Brodsky and X.-G. Wu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, [19] V. A. Novikov, M. A. Shifman, A. J. Vainshtein, and V. 042002 (2012); M. Mojaza, S. J. Brodsky, and X.-G. I. Zakharov, Nucl. Phys. B 229, 381 (1983). Wu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 192001 (2013) and references [20] See also M. A. Shifman and K. V. Stepanyantz, Phys. therein to earlier work. Rev. D 91, 105008 (2015) and references therein. [12] T. Banks and A. Zaks, Nucl. Phys. B 196, 189 (1982). [21] T. Ryttov, Phys. Rev. 89, 016013 (2014); Phys. Rev. 89, [13] W. A. Bardeen, B. W. Lee, and R. E. Shrock, Phys. Rev. 056001 (2014); Phys. Rev. 90, 056007 (2014). D14, 985 (1976); E. Brézin and J. Zinn-Justin, Phys. [22] G. Choi and R. Shrock, Phys. Rev. D 90, 125029 (2014). Rev. B14, 3110 (1976); see also A. Polyakov, Phys. Lett. [23] J. A. Gracey and R. M. Simms, Phys. Rev. D 91, 085037 B. 59, 79 (1975). (2015). [14] D. J. Gross and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 30, 1343 [24] R. Shrock, Phys. Rev. D 90, 065023 (2014). (1973); H. D. Politzer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 30, 1346 (1973); [25] R. Shrock, Phys. Rev. D 90, 065023 (2014). G. ’t Hooft, unpublished. [26] T. A. Ryttov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 071601 (2016). [15] W. E. Caswell, Phys. Rev. Lett. 33, 244 (1974); D. R. T. [27] T. A. Ryttov and R. Shrock, Phys. Rev. D 94, 125005 Jones, Nucl. Phys. B 75, 531 (1974). (2016). [16] We recall the general definitions of these group invariants. [28] T. A. Ryttov and R. Shrock, Phys. Rev. D 94, 105014 Denote TR as a generator of the Lie algebra of a group (2016). G in the representation R. Then the quadratic Casimir [29] T. A. Ryttov and R. Shrock, Phys. Rev. D 95, 105004 a a invariant C2(R) is defined by TRTR = C2(R)I, where (2017); Phys. Rev. D 96, 105015 (2017); Phys. Rev. D I is the dR × dR identity matrix, and the trace invari- 97, 025004 (2018). a b ab ant T (R) is defined by TrR(TRTR) = T (R)δ , where [30] P. A. Baikov, K. G. Chetyrkin, and J. H. Kühn, Phys. 1 ≤ a ≤ o(G), with o(G) the order of the group. We Rev. Lett. 118, 082002 (2017). write CA = C2(Adj) and Cf = C2(Rf ). For SU(Nc), [31] F. Herzog, B. Ruijl, T. Ueda, J. A. M. Vermaseren, and C2(Adj) = T (Adj)= Nc and for the fundamental repre- A. Vogt, JHEP 02 (2017) 090. 2 sentation, Cf =(Nc − 1)/(2Nc) and Tf = 1/2.