Relevance of operators in 4d N=1 theories

+ 3 like - 0 dislike
100 views

I have a conceptual question about how to judge a given operator, $\mathcal{O}$, in 4d $\mathcal{N}=1$ theories is relevant or not.

In the literature, the criterion is given by $R(\mathcal{O}) \leqslant 2$.  i.e., the operator is relevant or marginal if $R(\mathcal{O}) \leqslant 2$. However, as I understand, an acceptable operator deformation for the theory must have $R(\mathcal{O}) = 2$ so that $R$-symmetry is not broken.

How to understand why the $R$-charge, not the dimension of the operator, tells us that the operator is relevant, marginal or irrelevant? Are there any relations when the theory is in UV? How to resolve the "contradiction" that the $R$-charge for the superpotential should always be such that $R=2$?

 Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead. To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL. Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post. This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button. Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview Your name to display (optional): Email me at this address if my answer is selected or commented on: Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications. Anti-spam verification: If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:p$\hbar$ysicsOverfl$\varnothing$wThen drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds). To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.