Shift Symmetries For P-Forms and Mixed Symmetry Fields On (A) DS
Shift Symmetries For P-Forms and Mixed Symmetry Fields On (A) DS
Shift Symmetries For P-Forms and Mixed Symmetry Fields On (A) DS
Kurt Hinterbichler 1
Abstract
Massive fields on (anti) de Sitter space realize extended shift symmetries at par-
ticular values of their masses. We find these symmetries for all bosonic p-forms and
mixed symmetry fields, in arbitrary spacetime dimension. These shift symmetric fields
correspond to the missing longitudinal modes of mixed symmetry partially massless
fields where the top row of the Young tableau is activated.
1
E-mail: kurt.hinterbichler@case.edu
Contents
1 Introduction 1
References 20
1 Introduction
In [1], shift symmetries acting on massive symmetric tensor fields on (anti)-de Sitter space
((A)dS) were found, generalizing the extended shift symmetries of the galileon [2, 3] and
special galileon [4–7] on flat space. We refer to the introduction of [1] for more extensive
background and motivation.
A summary of the results of [1] is as follows. A massive spin s field on AdSD of radius
L, carried by a symmetric tensor field φµ1 ···µs , satisfies on shell the Klein-Gordon equation,
(∇2 − m2 ) φ = 0 , s = 0,
(1.1)
∇2 + 1 [s + D − 2 − (s − 1)(s + D − 4)] − m2 φ
L2 µ1 ···µs = 0 , s ≥ 1 ,
along with transversality in all indices and full tracelessness. (Here the mass squared m2
for s ≥ 1 is chosen so that m2 = 0 corresponds to the massless point, i.e. the point with
the largest gauge symmetry.) The shift symmetries of interest occur at the following special
mass values,
m2 2
= k(k + D − 1),
[0],k L s = 0,
k = 0, 1, 2, . . . . (1.2)
m2 L2 = (k + 2)(k + D − 3 + 2s), s ≥ 1 ,
[s],k
As explained in [1], the k-th shift symmetric spin s field can be thought of as the missing
longitudinal mode of a partially massless (PM) spin s + k + 1 field of depth s (i.e. it has
a rank s gauge parameter). There is a symmetric traceless ‘field strength’ with the same
indices as this partially massless field, made from k + 1 derivatives of the shift symmetric
field in a way that mirrors the PM gauge transformation,
This field strength is invariant under the shift symmetries (1.3) and gives the basic on-shell
non-trivial shift-invariant operator in the theory.
Here, we will extend the results of [1] by finding the analogs of the above shift sym-
metries for all the remaining bosonic fields, the anti-symmetric p-form fields and the mixed
symmetry fields. In the process, we will also see that there are no further shift symmetries
of this type beyond those we find, and none further for the symmetric tensors beyond those
in (1.2).
We will find these shift invariant fields as longitudinal modes of various mixed symmetry
fields as they approach PM points. In what follows, we will therefore make frequent use of
the classification of PM points for general mixed symmetry fields [8–15]. A short summary
is as follows. Consider a general massive field with the symmetries of a p row Young tableau
with row lengths [s1 , s2 , . . . , sp ], which on-shell is traceless and divergenceless in all indices
and is annihilated by the Klein-Gordon operator ∇2 − m̃2 . This field has dual conformal
field theory (CFT) dimensions ∆± found from the mass m̃2 by finding the greater and lesser
roots of p
X
2 2
m̃ L = ∆(∆ − d) − si . (1.6)
i=1
The partially massless points occur when squares in the tableau from a row which is longer
than the row below it are ‘activated’. If it is the q-th row that is being activated, then the
number of squares that can be activated ranges from 1, 2, . . . , sq − sq+1 . We assign a depth
2
t = 0, 1, · · · , sq − sq+1 − 1, which indicates that sq − sq+1 − t of the squares in the q-th row
are activated. By removing the activated squares, we get the Young tableau of the gauge
parameter, and each activated square becomes a derivative in the gauge transformation law.
These PM points occur at integer values of the dual CFT dimension given by
∆+ = d − q + sq+1 + t . (1.7)
Conventions: The spacetime dimension is D, with indices µ, ν, . . .. The dual CFT dimen-
sion is d ≡ D − 1, with indices i, j, . . .. We use the mostly plus metric signature. We denote
the AdSD radius by L, so that the Ricci scalar is R = −D(D − 1)/L2 < 0. Though we write
everything in terms of AdS, our results also apply to dS with the replacement L2 → −1/H 2
with H the dS Hubble scale. X A denotes the embedding of AdSD into flat spacetime of
dimension D + 1, with indices A, B, . . . (see appendix A of [1] for details and conventions of
the embedding formalism).
Tensors are symmetrized and antisymmetrized with unit weight, e.g. t[µν] = 21 (tµν − tνµ ),
and (· · · )T means the symmetric fully traceless part of the enclosed indices. Young tableaux
are denoted [s1 , s2 , . . . , sp ] where si is the number of boxes in the i-th row, and are deployed
in the manifestly anti-symmetric convention. We sometimes use the shorthand of using an
exponent to denote multiple rows of the same length, e.g. [4, 23 , 1] ≡ [4, 2, 2, 2, 1]. We denote
the corresponding Young projectors by Y[s1 ,s2 ,...,sp ] . The notation T on a tableau or projector
indicates that it is fully traceless.
Masses for mixed symmetry fields are denoted by m̃2 , which are the “bare masses”
that appear in the Klein-Gordon equation satisfied by the transverse and traceless field:
∇2 − m̃2 = 0. For symmetric tensors and p-forms, there is a traditional notion of “massless,”
which is the partially massless point with the largest depth (the only partially massless point
in the p-form case), so in these cases we use this more traditional m2 which is shifted relative
to m̃2 so that m2 = 0 corresponds to this massless point.
3
2 Shift symmetries for 2-forms
We start by illustrating the general pattern with the simplest case not covered by [1], the
massive 2-form field. We will do the simplest instance of this case fully off-shell at the
Lagrangian level, then proceed to more on-shell methods as we go on to more general cases.
Consider the Lagrangian for a 2-form field Bµν of mass m on AdSD ,
1 1 1
√ L[1,1],m2 (B) = − (dB)2µνρ − m2 Bµν
2
, Bµν ∈ , (2.1)
−g 12 4
where (dB)µνρ = 3∇[µ Bνρ] is the field strength. The equations of motion can be cast in the
form
2 2(D − 2) 2
∇ + − m Bµν = 0, ∇ν Bνµ = 0. (2.2)
L2
The mass is defined such that when m2 = 0 we get the usual massless 2-form gauge symmetry.
There are no other points of enhanced gauge symmetry besides this.
As we will see, the massive 2-form theory (2.1) gets an enhanced shift symmetry when
2
m is set to the following values,
m2[1,1],k L2 = (k + 3) (k + D − 2) , k = 0, 1, 2, . . . . (2.3)
∂X A1 ∂X A2
δBµν = SB1 ...Bk+1 ,A1 ,A2 X B1 · · · X Bk+1 , (2.4)
∂xµ ∂xν
where SB1 ...Bk+1 ,A1 ,A2 is a constant, fully traceless mixed symmetry embedding space tensor
of type
SB1 ...Bk+1 ,A1 ,A2 ∈ k+1 , (2.5)
We will find these shift symmetries by considering partially massless limits of appro-
priate mixed symmetry fields. For k = 0 the appropriate field is a massive [2, 1] hook field
4
(also known as a Curtright field [16, 17]). The Lagrangian for a massive [2, 1] hook field on
AdSD is [18, 19],
1 3
√ L[2,1],m̃2 (f ) = − ∇[µ fνρ]σ ∇[µ f νρ]σ − 3∇[µ fνρ] ρ ∇[µ f νσ] σ
−g 4
1 2D − 3 2 µνρ ν µρ
fµνρ ∈ µ ρ .
− + m̃ f µνρ f − 2f µν f ρ ,
4 L2 ν
(2.7)
so the field on shell is fully traceless, fully divergenceless and satisfies a Klein Gordon equation
with the bare mass m̃2 .
The theory (2.7) has two mass values at which partially massless gauge symmetries
arise [20]:
• The first is where the top block is activated, giving an antisymmetric tensor gauge
symmetry,
This gauge symmetry has no gauge-for-gauge reducibilities. This mass value is unitary
on AdS and non-unitary on dS.
• The second is where the bottom block is activated, giving a symmetric tensor gauge
symmetry,
5
Consider first the decoupling limit where we approach the first partially massless value (2.9)
from above,
3
2
m̃2 = −
+ 2 , → 0. (2.12)
L
To preserve the degrees of freedom in this limit we introduce a 2-form Stückelberg field Bµν
and make the Stückelberg replacement
1
fµνρ → fµνρ + ∇[µ Bν]ρ − ∇ρ Bµν , Bµν ∈ , (2.13)
where we have inserted the factor of 1/ so that Bµν will come out canonically normalized
up to numerical factors. This replacement introduces a Stückelberg gauge symmetry under
which the Stückelberg field shifts,
δfµνρ = ∇[µ Λν]ρ − ∇ρ Λµν , δBµν = − Λµν . (2.14)
In the limit (2.12), the Lagrangian (2.7) splits up into a partially massless hook (2.9) and a
correct-sign massive 2-form with mass m2 L2 = 3 (D − 2),
3
L[2,1],m̃2 (f ) → L[2,1],− 3 (f ) + L 3(D−2) (B). (2.15)
m̃2 →− 32
L
L2 2 [1,1], L2
∂X A1 ∂X A2
Λµν = SB1 A1 A2 X B1 . (2.16)
∂xµ ∂xν
1
This is also known as a rank 2 Killing-Yano tensor and appears in generalized symmetries for linearized
gravity [27–34].
6
This implies that there is a one-derivative ‘field strength’ with the same symmetries as
the parent PM field fµνρ ,
Fµνρ ≡ ∇[µ Bν]ρ − ∇ρ Bµν , (2.17)
which is invariant under the k = 0 shift symmetry (2.4). The trace of this field strength
is proportional to ∇ν Bµν and so vanishes on-shell. The traceless part is the basic on-shell
non-trivial shift invariant operator in the theory, and is the k = 0 case of (2.6).
We can also consider a decoupling limit where we approach the second partially massless
point (2.10),
2D − 3
m̃2 = − + 2 , → 0. (2.18)
L2
In this case we introduce a symmetric Stückelberg field
1
fµνρ → fµνρ + ∇[µ Hν]ρ , Hµν ∈ . (2.19)
In the limit (2.18), the Lagrangian (2.7) splits up into a partially massless hook and a massive
spin-2,
1
L[2,1],m̃2 (f ) → L[2,1],− 2D−3 (f ) + L D−2 (H) , (2.20)
m̃2 →− 2D−3
L2
L2 4 [2],− L2
where L[2],m2 is the Fierz-Pauli action for a massive spin-2 field on AdSD (as written in e.g.
(5.2) of [35]). This massive spin-2 that we get is not a new shift-symmetric field, rather its
mass m2 L2 = −(D − 2) is that of the partially massless graviton [36, 37]. This is because of
the gauge-for-gauge reducibility (2.11), which shows up in the decoupling limit as a partially
massless gauge symmetry for the longitudinal field Hµν .
This illustrates a general point: the shift symmetric fields can come only from the
missing longitudinal modes of PM fields with irreducible gauge symmetries, i.e. those in
which the first row is activated. PM field with gauge-for-gauge reducibilities, i.e. those where
a row below the first is activated, instead spin off longitudinal modes which are themselves
PM fields, and thus do not give new shift fields. The gauge-for-gauge parameter χ in (2.11)
represents the longitudinal mode of the PM spin-2 field, so this is the k = 1 shift symmetric
scalar. This illustrates another general point: the endpoint of gauge-for-gauge reducibility
chains of partially massless fields is always a shift symmetric field. But these do not give
new shift symmetric fields because they are already accounted for by the longitudinal modes
of irreducible PM fields.
7
We can see all of the above from the dual CFT perspective [38, 39]. The massive [2, 1]
field has a dual [2, 1] traceless primary state
|fijk i∆ ∈ i k , (2.21)
j
where the mass and conformal scaling dimension are related by
Denoting the larger and smaller roots of this as ∆± , the PM point of interest (2.9) gives
∆+ = d . (2.23)
At this value, a [2, 1] state of type (2.21) saturates its unitary bound and develops null
states in its Verma module, leading to a shortening condition. In general, the level at which
this shortening occurs is equal to the number of derivative in the PM gauge transformation
law. Since the gauge symmetry (2.9) has one derivative, the CFT state gets a conservation-
type shortening condition at level one in the Verma module: P k |fijk id = 0. This is a null
state of spin [1, 1] and dimension d + 1 which spans its own sub-module. As the PM value
is approached, the AdSD representation (∆, [2, 1]) spanned by the primary |fijk i∆ and its
descendants splits according to the branching rule
m2 L2 = (∆ − 2)(∆ − d + 2) , (2.25)
and using this we see that the representation (d + 1, [1, 1]) is precisely the ∆+ value of a
k = 0 shift symmetric 2-form with mass as written in (2.3). The expression (2.24) is the
group theoretical version of the Lagrangian expression (2.15).
If we consider the lesser root ∆− = −1 for the shift field, we get the non-unitary
representation (−1, [1, 1]), spanned by the primary |bij i−1 . This representation is finite
dimensional once the null states are factored out; the only non-null states are
d−4 2
|bij i−1 ∈ , P j |bij i−1 ∈ , P[k |bij] i−1 ∈ , P[i P k |bj]k i−1 + P |bij i−1 ∈ .
d−1
(2.26)
8
These states join together into a [1, 1, 1] in d + 2 dimensions, so this is the finite dimensional
[1, 1, 1] representation of the AdSD isometry algebra so(2, D−1), precisely the anti-symmetric
tensor in (2.16) which parametrizes the shift symmetries.
To get the higher values of k for the shift-symmetric 2 form, we start with a massive
[k + 2, 1] tableau field,
∆+ = d . (2.31)
Since the gauge transformation (2.28) has k + 1 derivatives, the dual state at the value (2.31)
is a kind of multiply-conserved current [40] which gets a shortening condition at level k + 1
9
in the Verma module, P l1 · · · P lk+1 |fij l1 ...lk+1 i∆ = 0. This is a null state of spin [1, 1] and
dimension d + k + 1 which spans its own sub-module. As the PM value is approached, the
AdSD representation (∆, [k +2, 1]) spanned by the primary |fi1 i2 j1 ...jk+1 i∆ and its descendants
splits according to the branching rule
Using (2.25), we see that the representation (d + k + 1, [1, 1]) is precisely the ∆+ value
of a level k shift symmetric 2-form as written in (2.3). The negative root ∆− gives the
representation (−k − 1, [1, 1]) whose non-null states span the finite dimensional, non-unitary
representation [k + 1, 1, 1] of the AdSD isometry group so(2, D − 1), and these are precisely
the shift symmetry parameters (2.5).
The PM point where the bottom block is activated,
k+1 (2.33)
∆
has a gauge-for-gauge reducibility, and the longitudinal mode will be a depth t = 0 partially
massless spin k + 2 field, so this gives no new shift symmetric fields.
The PM points where fewer than the maximal number of top blocks are activated
will have gauge parameters which are again mixed symmetry tensors, and since these gauge
transformations are irreducible, these will give rise to shift-symmetric points for these mixed
symmetry tensors. We will return to this more general case in section 4, after discussing the
higher p-forms in the next section.
We can ask if there are other possible shift-symmetric mass values for the 2-form besides
those in (2.3), perhaps coming from PM limits of more complicated mixed symmetry tensors.
The answer is no for the following reason. As we have seen, to get a shift-symmetric field for
the longitudinal mode the PM gauge symmetry must be irreducible, otherwise the gauge-for-
gauge reducibility parameters will become gauge symmetries of the longitudinal mode and
we will get other PM fields rather than shift fields. The depth of gauge-for-gauge redundancy
in a PM field is equal to the row number which is activated [13]. The PM symmetry must
therefore come from a PM tableau where only the top row is activated, so that the gauge
symmetry is irreducible. To get a shift-symmetric 2-form, we need a PM tableau whose first
row is activated and whose gauge parameter is a 2-form. The only such tableaux are those
in (2.28). The same reasoning shows that the shift symmetric points (1.2) for symmetric
10
tensor fields, and the shift symmetric points for more general fields that we find below, are
the only ones.
The mass is defined such that at m2 = 0 we get the usual massless p-form gauge symmetry.
There are no other points of enhanced gauge symmetry besides this.
The massive p-forms (3.1) get an enhanced shift symmetry at the following mass values
k+1
T
Fν1 ...νk+1 µ1 ,...,µp = Y[k+2,1p−1 ] ∇ν1 · · · ∇νk+1 Bµ1 ...µp ∈ . (3.5)
p
These shift fields come from the longitudinal modes of mixed symmetry PM fields of
the form [k + 2, 1p−1 ],
k+1
∇2 − m̃2 fν1 ...νk+1 µ1 ,...,µp = 0 ,
fν1 ...νk+1 µ1 ,...,µp ∈ , (3.6)
p
11
in which all the possible blocks in the upper row are activated,
k+1
z }| {
∇ ∇ ··· ∇ p+k+1
m̃2PM = − :
p L2
T
δfν1 ...νk+1 µ1 ,...,µp = Y[k+2,1 p−1 ] ∇ν1 · · · ∇νk+1 Λµ1 ...µp , Λµ1 ...µp ∈ p . (3.7)
The shift symmetries (3.3) are the reducibility parameters of this PM transformation.
A massive [k + 2, 1p−1 ] field has a dual primary operator with conformal scaling dimen-
sion related to the mass by
∆+ = d . (3.9)
At this value, since the gauge symmetry has k + 1 derivatives the dual operator gets a
conservation-type shortening condition at level k + 1, giving a null state of spin [1p ] and
dimension
∆+ = d + k + 1. (3.10)
As the PM value (3.7) is approached, the AdSD representation (∆, [k + 2, 1p−1 ]) splits ac-
cording to the branching rule
The relation between the mass and dual CFT scaling dimension of a p-form field is given by
Using this, we see that the representation (d + k + 1, [1p ]) is precisely the ∆+ value of a level
k shift symmetric p-form with mass value as written in (3.2). These values are all above the
unitarity bound ∆ ≥ d − p for a p-form, indicating that the shift fields are unitary on AdS,
and irreducible with no further null states. The negative root ∆− gives the representation
12
(−k − 1, [1p ]) whose non-null states span the finite dimensional, non-unitary representation
[k+1, 1p ] of the AdSD isometry group so(2, D−1), and these are precisely the shift symmetry
parameters (3.4).
The shift symmetric p-form values are summarized in figure 1.
and in addition is also fully traceless and fully divergenceless. This field has a dual conformal
dimension related to the mass m̃2 by
p
X
2 2
m̃ L = ∆(∆ − d) − si . (4.2)
i=1
We find the shift symmetry values by considering the PM fields of type [s1 + k +
1, s2 , . . . , sp ] where k + 1 boxes in the top row are activated (depth t = s1 − s2 ),
, k = 0, 1, 2, . . . , (4.3)
since these are the only PM fields with irreducible gauge symmetries whose gauge parameter
is of type [s1 , s2 , . . . , sp ]. These partially massless points occur at the mass values
p
X
m̃2PM L2 = (s1 + D − 2)(s1 − 1) − k − 1 − si . (4.4)
i=1
13
Figure 1: p form fields in the conformal dimension ∆ vs. p plane, for the values ∆+ . The masses
are given by m2 L2 = (∆ − p)(∆ − d + p). Blue dots are the massless points, black dots are shift
symmetric points. For each p the unitarity bound coincides with the massless point.
14
At these values, the dual CFT conformal dimension is
∆+ = d − 1 + s1 . (4.5)
Since the gauge symmetry has k + 1 derivatives the dual operator gets a conservation-type
shortening condition at level k + 1, giving a null state of spin [s1 , s2 , . . . , sp ] and dimension
∆+ = d + k + s1 . (4.6)
The form of the shift symmetry is given by a constant fully traceless embedding space
tensor of type [s1 + k, s1 , s2 , . . . , sp ], where the indices of the top row are contracted with X A
and the rest are projected down,
A1 ∂X B1 ∂X Bs1
δφµ1 ...µs1 ,... = SA1 ...As1 +k ,B1 ...Bs1 ,... X · · · X As1 +k ··· ··· , (4.9)
∂xµ1 ∂xµs1
The embedding space tensor SA1 ...As1 +k ,B1 ...Bs1 ,... X A1 . . . X As1 +k that projects to (4.9) is trans-
verse to X A due to the mixed symmetry of the coefficients (4.10), satisfies the ambient
massless Klein-Gordon equation (D+1) = 0 due to the tracelessness of the coefficients
(4.10), and has homogeneity degree w = s1 + k in the X A . The ambient Klein-Gordon
15
operator acting on a degree w tensor of type [s1 , . . . , sp ] reduces to the AdSD surface as
(D+1) → ∇2 − L12 (w(D + w − 1) − pi=1 si ). Using w = s1 + k this reproduces the masses
P
(4.8). We can think of the right hand side of (4.9) as the most general kind of Killing-Yano-
like object, or spherical harmonic, on AdSD .
The negative root ∆− = −k − s1 of the shift field gives the representation (−k −
s1 , [s1 , s2 , . . . , sp ]) whose non-null states span the finite dimensional, non-unitary representa-
tion [s1 + k, s1 , s2 , . . . , sp ] of the AdSD isometry group so(2, D − 1), and these are precisely
the shift symmetry parameters (4.10).
There is a k + 1 derivative ‘field strength’ with the symmetries [s1 + k + 1, s2 , · · · , sp ]
of the parent PM field which is invariant under the shifts (4.9),
h i
T
Fµ1 ···µs1 +k+1 ,··· = Y[s1 +k+1,s2 ,··· ,sp ] ∇µs1 +1 · · · ∇µs1 +k+1 φµ1 ···µs1 ,··· . (4.11)
This is the basic local operator which captures the on-shell non-trivial shift invariant infor-
mation in the theory.
As an illustrative example, let us return to the PM [s1 , 1] fields studied in Section 2,
and consider the PM points not used there, the ones where not all of the top blocks are
activated. The t = s − 1 first row partially massless point of a [s + k + 1, 1] field,
k+1
z }| {
s ∇ ∇ ··· ∇ , k = 0, 1, 2, . . . , (4.12)
will give the shift symmetric [s, 1] fields. We summarize these partially massless and shift
symmetric values in figure 2. As a final illustrative example, the fields of type [s, 3, 2] are
shown in figure 3.
16
Figure 2: Fields of symmetry type [s, 1] in the conformal dimension ∆ vs. s plane, for the values of
the positive root ∆+ . The masses are given by m̃2 L2 = ∆(∆ − d) − s − 1. Blue dots are PM points,
black dots are shift symmetric points. The shift symmetric points are the longitudinal modes of
the PM points where the upper row is activated. The shift point field corresponding to a given
such PM point is found by reflecting about the line ∆ = s + d − 1, as illustrated by the curved
arrow. The AdS unitarity bound for each s coincides with the uppermost PM point.
17
Figure 3: Fields of symmetry type [s, 3, 2] in the conformal dimension ∆ vs. s plane, for the values
∆+ . The masses are given by m̃2 L2 = ∆(∆ − d) − s − 5. Blue dots are PM points, black dots are
shift symmetric points. The shift symmetric points are the longitudinal modes of the PM points
where the upper row is activated. The shift point corresponding to a given such PM point is found
by reflecting about the line ∆ = s + d − 1, as illustrated by the curved arrow. The AdS unitarity
bound for each s coincides with the uppermost PM point.
18
symmetry is irreducible. They also appear, though not as dynamical longitudinal modes, as
the endpoints of gauge-for-gauge reducibility chains of reducible PM points.
The shift symmetric fields occur at certain integer values of the dual conformal dimen-
sion given by (4.6). These values are all above the unitarity bound ∆ ≥ d + s1 − h1 − 1 for
a mixed symmetry state [9, 20, 41], where h1 is the height of the top “block” of the tableau,
i.e. the number of rows of length s1 . This indicates that the shift fields, in the ordinary
quantization, are all unitary on AdS and irreducible with no further null states.
On dS, the shift symmetric fields correspond to shortened irreducible representations
of the de Sitter algebra (of type V, in the notation of [42]) but they generally lie beyond the
complementary series and do not correspond to any discrete series points [15,43], so they are
non-unitary. A notable exception is the shift symmetric scalars [44–48], which are unitary in
dSD and correspond to scalar exceptional series representations [42, 49–51]. There are some
other lower dimensional exceptions as well, related to the scalars by duality. For example in
D = 3 the level k shift symmetric 2 form is dual to the level k + 1 shift symmetric scalar (as
can be seen from the fact that their masses are equal) so the 2-form shift fields are unitary
in dS3 .
In fact, all the discussions in this paper must be understood modulo these massive
dualities. For example, the construction in Section 2 of the shift symmetric 2-forms as
longitudinal modes of a hook field fails in D = 3 since hook fields are non-dynamical for
D < 4. But nothing is missed in this case because the shift symmetric 2-form fields are dual
to shift symmetric scalars, and these can be constructed as longitudinal modes of massive
symmetric tensor fields which are dynamical in D = 3. More generally, for low enough
dimension where the parent PM field is non-dynamical but the shift symmetric field is, the
construction of the shift field as a longitudinal mode fails and the shift field will typically be
equivalent by duality to a different shift field whose parent PM field is dynamical. But this
is not always the case, for example in D = 2 the shift symmetric scalars for k ≥ 1 cannot be
constructed as longitudinal modes of any dynamical massive field.
A natural question is whether non-trivial shift symmetric interactions can be found
for the more general representations studied here. Interactions can always be written us-
ing powers of the shift invariant field strength (4.11), so here ‘non-trivial’ means that the
interactions are not simply powers of the field strength. The k = 1, 2 scalars can be given
19
non-trivial self-interactions [1,52–54], as can the k = 0 vector [26,55], but no other examples
are currently known.
Whether interactions are non-trivial in the sense mentioned above is also tied to
whether there are there are non-trivial algebras that could underlie the symmetries [56, 57].
A trivial interaction will not deform the abelian algebra of shift symmetries present in the
linear theory, whereas a non-trivial interaction should deform the algebra into a non-abelian
algebra. It would be interesting to know if there are finite algebras of the type studied
in [58] (which are finite subalgebras of higher spin algebras underlying PM Vasiliev theo-
ries [58–62]), that could be candidates to underly non-trivially interacting shift symmetric
p-form or mixed symmetry theories.
Non-trivial theories would also presumably have a flat space limit which gives interact-
ing p-form or mixed symmetry theories in flat space. From the point of view of the S-matrix,
the non-trivial effective field theories on flat space should be theories with enhanced soft lim-
its that allow for a recursive reconstruction of the amplitudes [4, 6, 63, 64], so it would be
interesting to study if there are such possibilities for fields in these other representations. In
flat space, interactions for p-form galileons are known [65–67], though these are presumably
Wess-Zumino-like [68] interactions that do not deform the basic underlying shift symme-
tries. It would be interesting to see whether these interactions could be extended to (A)dS
and/or deformed into non-trivial interactions, or whether they can harbor hidden special
galileon-like non-trivial enhancements.
Acknowledgments: The author would like to thank James Bonifacio and Austin Joyce
for comments on the draft, and acknowledges support from DOE grant DE-SC0009946 and
Simons Foundation Award Number 658908.
References
[1] J. Bonifacio, K. Hinterbichler, A. Joyce, and R. A. Rosen, “Shift Symmetries in (Anti)
de Sitter Space,” JHEP 02 (2019) 178, arXiv:1812.08167 [hep-th].
[2] M. A. Luty, M. Porrati, and R. Rattazzi, “Strong interactions and stability in the
DGP model,” JHEP 09 (2003) 029, arXiv:hep-th/0303116.
20
[3] A. Nicolis, R. Rattazzi, and E. Trincherini, “The Galileon as a local modification of
gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 064036, arXiv:0811.2197 [hep-th].
[4] C. Cheung, K. Kampf, J. Novotny, and J. Trnka, “Effective Field Theories from Soft
Limits of Scattering Amplitudes,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 no. 22, (2015) 221602,
arXiv:1412.4095 [hep-th].
[5] K. Hinterbichler and A. Joyce, “Hidden symmetry of the Galileon,” Phys. Rev. D 92
no. 2, (2015) 023503, arXiv:1501.07600 [hep-th].
[6] C. Cheung, K. Kampf, J. Novotny, C.-H. Shen, and J. Trnka, “A Periodic Table of
Effective Field Theories,” JHEP 02 (2017) 020, arXiv:1611.03137 [hep-th].
[7] J. Novotny, “Geometry of special Galileons,” Phys. Rev. D 95 no. 6, (2017) 065019,
arXiv:1612.01738 [hep-th].
[8] R. R. Metsaev, “Massless mixed symmetry bosonic free fields in d-dimensional anti-de
Sitter space-time,” Phys. Lett. B 354 (1995) 78–84.
[9] R. R. Metsaev, “Arbitrary spin massless bosonic fields in d-dimensional anti-de Sitter
space,” Lect. Notes Phys. 524 (1999) 331–340, arXiv:hep-th/9810231.
[10] K. B. Alkalaev, O. V. Shaynkman, and M. A. Vasiliev, “On the frame - like
formulation of mixed symmetry massless fields in (A)dS(d),” Nucl. Phys. B 692
(2004) 363–393, arXiv:hep-th/0311164.
[11] N. Boulanger, C. Iazeolla, and P. Sundell, “Unfolding Mixed-Symmetry Fields in AdS
and the BMV Conjecture: I. General Formalism,” JHEP 07 (2009) 013,
arXiv:0812.3615 [hep-th].
[12] N. Boulanger, C. Iazeolla, and P. Sundell, “Unfolding Mixed-Symmetry Fields in AdS
and the BMV Conjecture. II. Oscillator Realization,” JHEP 07 (2009) 014,
arXiv:0812.4438 [hep-th].
[13] E. D. Skvortsov, “Gauge fields in (A)dS(d) and Connections of its symmetry algebra,”
J. Phys. A 42 (2009) 385401, arXiv:0904.2919 [hep-th].
[14] E. D. Skvortsov, “Gauge fields in (A)dS(d) within the unfolded approach: algebraic
aspects,” JHEP 01 (2010) 106, arXiv:0910.3334 [hep-th].
[15] T. Basile, X. Bekaert, and N. Boulanger, “Mixed-symmetry fields in de Sitter space: a
21
group theoretical glance,” JHEP 05 (2017) 081, arXiv:1612.08166 [hep-th].
[16] T. Curtright, “Generalized Gauge Fields,” Phys. Lett. B 165 (1985) 304–308.
[17] T. L. Curtright and P. G. O. Freund, “Massive Dual Fields,” Nucl. Phys. B 172
(1980) 413–424.
[18] Y. M. Zinoviev, “On massive mixed symmetry tensor fields in Minkowski space and
(A)dS,” arXiv:hep-th/0211233.
[19] E. Joung and K. Mkrtchyan, “Weyl Action of Two-Column Mixed-Symmetry Field
and Its Factorization Around (A)dS Space,” JHEP 06 (2016) 135, arXiv:1604.05330
[hep-th].
[20] L. Brink, R. R. Metsaev, and M. A. Vasiliev, “How massless are massless fields in
AdS(d),” Nucl. Phys. B 586 (2000) 183–205, arXiv:hep-th/0005136.
[21] Y. M. Zinoviev, “On massive high spin particles in AdS,” arXiv:hep-th/0108192.
[22] Y. M. Zinoviev, “First order formalism for massive mixed symmetry tensor fields in
Minkowski and (A)dS spaces,” arXiv:hep-th/0306292.
[23] Y. M. Zinoviev, “Frame-like gauge invariant formulation for massive high spin
particles,” Nucl. Phys. B 808 (2009) 185–204, arXiv:0808.1778 [hep-th].
[24] Y. M. Zinoviev, “Toward frame-like gauge invariant formulation for massive mixed
symmetry bosonic fields,” Nucl. Phys. B 812 (2009) 46–63, arXiv:0809.3287
[hep-th].
[25] Y. M. Zinoviev, “Towards frame-like gauge invariant formulation for massive mixed
symmetry bosonic fields. II. General Young tableau with two rows,” Nucl. Phys. B
826 (2010) 490–510, arXiv:0907.2140 [hep-th].
[26] C. De Rham, K. Hinterbichler, and L. A. Johnson, “On the (A)dS Decoupling Limits
of Massive Gravity,” JHEP 09 (2018) 154, arXiv:1807.08754 [hep-th].
[27] R. Penrose and W. Rindler, Spinors and Space-Time. Vol. 2. Cambridge Monographs
on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, 4, 1988.
[28] J. Jezierski, “CYK tensors, Maxwell field and conserved quantities for the spin-2
field,” Class. Quant. Grav. 19 (2002) 4405–4429, arXiv:gr-qc/0211039.
[29] D. Kastor and J. Traschen, “Conserved gravitational charges from Yano tensors,”
22
JHEP 08 (2004) 045, arXiv:hep-th/0406052.
[30] J. Jezierski and S. Migacz, “The 3 + 1 decomposition of conformal Yano-Killing
tensors and ’momentary charges for the spin-2 field,” Class. Quant. Grav. 32 no. 3,
(2015) 035016, arXiv:1404.6629 [gr-qc].
[31] J. Jezierski and S. Migacz, “Charges of the gravitational field and (3+1)
decomposition of CYK tensors part 2,” arXiv:1903.06907 [gr-qc].
[32] V. Benedetti, H. Casini, and J. M. Magan, “Generalized symmetries of the graviton,”
JHEP 05 (2022) 045, arXiv:2111.12089 [hep-th].
[33] V. Benedetti, H. Casini, and J. M. Magan, “Generalized symmetries and Noether’s
theorem in QFT,” arXiv:2205.03412 [hep-th].
[34] K. Hinterbichler, D. M. Hofman, A. Joyce, and G. Mathys, “Gravity as a gapless
phase and biform symmetries,” arXiv:2205.12272 [hep-th].
[35] K. Hinterbichler, “Theoretical Aspects of Massive Gravity,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 84
(2012) 671–710, arXiv:1105.3735 [hep-th].
[36] S. Deser and R. I. Nepomechie, “Anomalous Propagation of Gauge Fields in
Conformally Flat Spaces,” Phys. Lett. B 132 (1983) 321–324.
[37] C. de Rham, K. Hinterbichler, R. A. Rosen, and A. J. Tolley, “Evidence for and
obstructions to nonlinear partially massless gravity,” Phys. Rev. D 88 no. 2, (2013)
024003, arXiv:1302.0025 [hep-th].
[38] K. Alkalaev, “Massless hook field in AdS(d+1) from the holographic perspective,”
JHEP 01 (2013) 018, arXiv:1210.0217 [hep-th].
[39] K. Alkalaev, “Mixed-symmetry tensor conserved currents and AdS/CFT
correspondence,” J. Phys. A 46 (2013) 214007, arXiv:1207.1079 [hep-th].
[40] C. Brust and K. Hinterbichler, “Free k scalar conformal field theory,” JHEP 02
(2017) 066, arXiv:1607.07439 [hep-th].
[41] M. S. Costa and T. Hansen, “Conformal correlators of mixed-symmetry tensors,”
JHEP 02 (2015) 151, arXiv:1411.7351 [hep-th].
[42] Z. Sun, “A note on the representations of SO(1, d + 1),” arXiv:2111.04591 [hep-th].
[43] F. Schwarz, “Unitary irreducible representations of the groups so0(n, 1),” Journal of
23
Mathematical Physics 12 no. 1, (1971) 131–139,
https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1665471. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1665471.
[44] A. Folacci, “BRST quantization of the massless minimally coupled scalar field in de
Sitter space: Zero modes, euclideanization and quantization,” Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992)
2553–2559, arXiv:0911.2064 [gr-qc].
[45] O. V. Shaynkman and M. A. Vasiliev, “Scalar field in any dimension from the higher
spin gauge theory perspective,” Theor. Math. Phys. 123 (2000) 683–700,
arXiv:hep-th/0003123.
[46] J. Bros, H. Epstein, and U. Moschella, “Scalar tachyons in the de Sitter universe,”
Lett. Math. Phys. 93 (2010) 203–211, arXiv:1003.1396 [hep-th].
[47] H. Epstein and U. Moschella, “de Sitter tachyons and related topics,” Commun. Math.
Phys. 336 no. 1, (2015) 381–430, arXiv:1403.3319 [hep-th].
[48] A. Chekmenev and M. Grigoriev, “Boundary values of mixed-symmetry massless fields
in AdS space,” Nucl. Phys. B 913 (2016) 769–791, arXiv:1512.06443 [hep-th].
[49] N. Vilenkin, Special Functions and the Theory of Group Representations. Translations
of mathematical monographs. American Mathematical Soc., 1978.
https://books.google.com/books?id=08hPoGgSQFIC.
[50] E. Joung, J. Mourad, and R. Parentani, “Group theoretical approach to quantum
fields in de Sitter space. II. The complementary and discrete series,” JHEP 09 (2007)
030, arXiv:0707.2907 [hep-th].
[51] J.-P. Gazeau, P. Siegl, and A. Youssef, “Krein Spaces in de Sitter Quantum Theories,”
SIGMA 6 (2010) 011, arXiv:1001.4810 [hep-th].
[52] G. Goon, K. Hinterbichler, and M. Trodden, “Symmetries for Galileons and DBI
scalars on curved space,” JCAP 07 (2011) 017, arXiv:1103.5745 [hep-th].
[53] G. Goon, K. Hinterbichler, and M. Trodden, “A New Class of Effective Field Theories
from Embedded Branes,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011) 231102, arXiv:1103.6029
[hep-th].
[54] J. Bonifacio, K. Hinterbichler, A. Joyce, and D. Roest, “Exceptional scalar theories in
de Sitter space,” JHEP 04 (2022) 128, arXiv:2112.12151 [hep-th].
24
[55] J. Bonifacio, K. Hinterbichler, L. A. Johnson, and A. Joyce, “Shift-Symmetric Spin-1
Theories,” JHEP 09 (2019) 029, arXiv:1906.10692 [hep-th].
[56] M. P. Bogers and T. Brauner, “Lie-algebraic classification of effective theories with
enhanced soft limits,” JHEP 05 (2018) 076, arXiv:1803.05359 [hep-th].
[57] D. Roest, D. Stefanyszyn, and P. Werkman, “An Algebraic Classification of
Exceptional EFTs,” JHEP 08 (2019) 081, arXiv:1903.08222 [hep-th].
[58] E. Joung and K. Mkrtchyan, “Partially-massless higher-spin algebras and their
finite-dimensional truncations,” JHEP 01 (2016) 003, arXiv:1508.07332 [hep-th].
[59] X. Bekaert and M. Grigoriev, “Higher order singletons, partially massless fields and
their boundary values in the ambient approach,” Nucl. Phys. B 876 (2013) 667–714,
arXiv:1305.0162 [hep-th].
[60] T. Basile, X. Bekaert, and N. Boulanger, “Flato-Fronsdal theorem for higher-order
singletons,” JHEP 11 (2014) 131, arXiv:1410.7668 [hep-th].
[61] K. B. Alkalaev, M. Grigoriev, and E. D. Skvortsov, “Uniformizing higher-spin
equations,” J. Phys. A 48 no. 1, (2015) 015401, arXiv:1409.6507 [hep-th].
[62] C. Brust and K. Hinterbichler, “Partially Massless Higher-Spin Theory,” JHEP 02
(2017) 086, arXiv:1610.08510 [hep-th].
[63] C. Cheung, K. Kampf, J. Novotny, C.-H. Shen, and J. Trnka, “On-Shell Recursion
Relations for Effective Field Theories,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 no. 4, (2016) 041601,
arXiv:1509.03309 [hep-th].
[64] A. Padilla, D. Stefanyszyn, and T. Wilson, “Probing Scalar Effective Field Theories
with the Soft Limits of Scattering Amplitudes,” JHEP 04 (2017) 015,
arXiv:1612.04283 [hep-th].
[65] C. Deffayet, S. Deser, and G. Esposito-Farese, “Arbitrary p-form Galileons,” Phys.
Rev. D 82 (2010) 061501, arXiv:1007.5278 [gr-qc].
[66] C. Deffayet, S. Mukohyama, and V. Sivanesan, “On p-form theories with gauge
invariant second order field equations,” Phys. Rev. D 93 no. 8, (2016) 085027,
arXiv:1601.01287 [hep-th].
[67] C. Deffayet, S. Garcia-Saenz, S. Mukohyama, and V. Sivanesan, “Classifying Galileon
25
p-form theories,” Phys. Rev. D 96 no. 4, (2017) 045014, arXiv:1704.02980 [hep-th].
[68] G. Goon, K. Hinterbichler, A. Joyce, and M. Trodden, “Galileons as Wess-Zumino
Terms,” JHEP 06 (2012) 004, arXiv:1203.3191 [hep-th].
26