text:
# Lie algebra and invariant tensor technology for 𝑔₂

## 1 Introduction

This paper is devoted to the detailed study of such aspects of

a) the Lie algebra $`g_2`$ with generators $`X_i`$,

b) the matrices $`x_i`$ of its defining $`7\times 7`$ representation $`\gamma :X_ix_i`$,

c) the $`L`$-operator $`L=x_iX_i`$,

d) the $`g_2`$ invariant tensors that arise in the product laws associated with the $`x_i`$,

as are expected to be useful in the study of integrable systems for which $`g_2`$ is an invariance algebra.

We begin by giving references that have been found useful for general background information on Lie algebras , and for detailed information  on the exceptional Lie algabra $`g_2`$. For some indication of the programme we are aiming to follow for $`g_2`$, we cite  a study of some integrable systems with the invariance algebra $`c_n=sp(2n,R)`$. A $`g_2`$ application resembling the work  might usefully be undertaken.

Our approach is based on the fact that $`g_2`$ is a non-symmetric subalgebra of $`b_3=so(7)`$, which is a symmetric subalgebra of $`a_6=su(7)`$, the defining representation of all three being of dimension seven. To explain the distinction made here, let $`𝔤`$ be a Lie algebra and $`𝔥`$ a Lie subalgebra so that as vector spaces $`𝔤=𝔥+𝔨`$. Then in addition to

$$[𝔥,𝔥]𝔥,[𝔥,𝔨]𝔨\text{ },$$
(1)
we have closure of $`[𝔨,𝔨]`$ on $`𝔥`$ iff $`𝔥`$ is a symmetric subalgebra of $`𝔤`$, but a more general result

$$[𝔨,𝔨]𝔥+𝔨\text{ },$$
(2)
for non-symmetric cases like $`g_2=𝔥𝔤=b_3`$.

Our notation uses indices

$`i,j,k\mathrm{}`$ $``$ $`\{1,2\mathrm{},14\}`$
$`a,b,c\mathrm{}`$ $``$ $`\{1,2\mathrm{},7\}`$
$`\lambda ,\mu ,\nu \mathrm{}`$ $``$ $`\{1,2\mathrm{},21\}`$
$`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma \mathrm{}`$ $``$ $`\{1,2\mathrm{},27\}`$
$`A,B,C\mathrm{}`$ $``$ $`\{1,2\mathrm{},48\}\text{ }.`$ (3)
Thus $`X_i,X_a,X_\mu ,X_\alpha ,X_A`$ respectively denote generators of $`g_2`$, generators of $`b_3`$ which lie outside its $`g_2`$ subalgebra, generators of $`b_3`$, generators of $`a_6`$ which lie outside its $`b_3`$ subalgebra, and generators of $`a_6`$. Occasionally also we use $`A,B,C`$ to denote the generators of an arbitrary simple Lie algebra.

We begin by presenting $`b_3`$ in Cartan-Weyl form, and $`g_2`$ as a subalgebra of it also in such a form. In the spirt of , we encapsulate the information this entails in terms of the $`L`$-operators of $`b_3`$ and exhibiting all the matrices of the defining representations $`\mathrm{\Gamma }:X_\mu x_\mu `$ of $`b_3`$, and $`\gamma :X_ix_i`$ of $`g_2`$, simultaneously in each case, in a single $`7\times 7`$ array. These arrays a) allow convenient checking of claimed properties like Lie algebra relations, and b) are valuable artifacts, well-suited for use, cf. , in the solution of Yang-Baxter equations of $`b_3`$ and $`g_2`$. Likewise matrices such as $`A=A_ix_i`$, where $`A_iR`$ allow easy check of trace and other properties of the $`x_i`$.

To exploit the value of the $`L`$-operators fully, one needs not only the matrices $`x_i`$ of $`g_2`$, and the $`7\times 7`$ matrices $`z_a`$ of the defining representation of $`b_3`$ which lie outside $`g_2`$, but also the matrices $`y_\alpha `$, which along with the $`x_i`$ and the $`z_a`$ span the vector space in which the $`7\times 7`$ defining representation of $`a_6`$ acts. Detailed information about all these matrices and about the various $`g_2`$ invariant tensors that enter various product laws (see Sec. 3) must be assembled. To obtain it, it is worthwhile to pass by similarity transformation

$$x_iH_i,z_aC_a,y_\alpha Y_\alpha \text{ },$$
(4)
from the matrix representions that our Cartan-Weyl starting point naturally leads us to, to an equivalent representation in which the matrices enjoy the simple transposition properties

$$(H_i)^T=H_i,(C_a)^T=C_a,(Y_\alpha )^T=+Y_\alpha ,\text{ }.$$
(5)
The invariant tensors that occur in the product laws are of course unaffected by a similarity transformation, and their properties are more easily derived. We should remark however that we keep the original matrices in practical uses of our $`L`$-operators. One feature of the discussion deserves emphasis. Our product laws in either of their equivalent forms

$`[z_a,z_b]`$ $`=`$ $`ic_{abc}z_c+ih_{iab}x_i`$ (6)
$`[C_a,C_b]`$ $`=`$ $`ic_{abc}C_c+ih_{iab}H_i\text{ },`$ (7)
reflect by their first non-trivial first terms the fact that $`g_2`$ is not a symmetric subalgebra of $`b_3`$, and feature the totally antisymmetric third rank quantity $`\psi _{abc}`$ that occurs in the multiplication law of octonions in two roles. These correspond to

$$c_{abc}=\sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}\psi _{abc}\text{ },\text{ }(C_a)_{bc}=ic_{abc}\text{ }.$$
(8)
We discuss identities including trace and completeness properties of matrices, contraction formulas and identities of first class for the invariant tensors. By first class identities we mean those that stem from identities of Jacobi type, ones which apply uniformly throughout say the $`a_n`$ family, as opposed to the second class identities that involve the use in some way of characteristic equations and are specific to each Lie algebra . To access identities of the second class, we consider characteristic polynomials, which also give us a lot of important information about Casimir operators. Our approach follows a general method described in generality elsewhere  and depends on the algebra of the projectors for the reduction of the representation $`adad`$, where $`ad`$ stands for adjoint, of $`g_2`$. Many results emerge like the fact  that the quartic Casimir of $`g_2`$ is not primitive, and also formulas for the traces of symmetrised products of adjoint matrices of $`g_2`$. Similar formulas for the traces of symmetrised products of matrices $`x_i`$ can likewise be derived from the study of the characteristic equation of $`A=A_ix_i`$. Finally the construction, cf. , of $`g_2`$-vectors and $`g_2`$-invariants out of the components $`A_i`$ of a single adjoint $`g_2`$ vector is undertaken. We thereby find formulas expressing naturally occurring non-primitive scalars in terms of suitably constructed primitive scalars, there being one such of each of the orders $`2`$ and $`6`$ and no others.

There is of course a very large body of work on $`g_2`$ already in the literature. Our citations have mainly concentrated on works that are directly to studies and purposes like our own. However some things may be given a brief mention to place our work in a wider context.

We point out that $`g_2`$ has received attention in theoretical physics in several apparently very different contexts. One was motivated by the search in progress some forty years ago for the flavour symmetry group of the hadrons. This search studied $`g_2`$ and its representations using roots and weights within the Cartan-Weyl description of Lie algebras. The papers   are still excellent accounts of this work. Many physicist at this time relied on  for their understanding of Lie algebra theory.

A second definition of $`g_2`$ is to be found in the work of Racah  (see also ) on nuclear spectroscopy. This is couched in terms of $`su(2)`$ unit tensors of ranks $`1,3`$ and $`5`$ with $`3,7`$ and $`11`$ components. Their commutation relations are determined by Racah coefficients (or Wigner $`6j`$ symbols). Not only does the algebra of tensor components close on $`b_7=so(7)`$, but also, because the Racah coefficient $`W(\mathrm{3\hspace{0.17em}5\hspace{0.17em}3\hspace{0.17em}5};\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3\hspace{0.17em}3})`$ vanishes (accidentally ?), the set of $`14`$ components of the rank one and five unit tensors close on a subalgebra of $`b_3`$, namely $`g_2`$. The thesis  contains a clear account of this. The vanishing of the Racah coefficient is obviously not accidental, since an analogous view of other exceptional Lie algebras and superalgebras exists, accessible from . See also .

A third definition of $`g_2`$ realises it as the subgroup of $`b_3=so(7)`$ that leaves an eight-component $`so(7)`$ spinor invariant. This is explained in  and in many other places; the discussion in  contains relevant detail but does not stress it in the $`g_2`$ context.

A fourth approach to $`g_2`$ is that of , which expresses the Lie bracket relations elegantly in terms of generators which transform according to the octet, triplet and antitriplet representations of its $`su(3)`$ subalgebra.

Other matters not considered here (because we deal mainly with certain low dimensional ones) include the state labelling problem, important for discussing the general representation of $`g_2`$. See e.g. , where matrix representations are constructed. The problem is also fully analysed in .

While  discusses the construction of Casimir operators for Lie algebras in terms of Lie algebra generators, for $`g_2`$ an explicit formula for the sixth order Casimir is not displayed, although probably accessible. See however  which describes an explicit construction of the sixth order Casimir, and a formula for its eigenvalues in a given representation in terms of the Dynkin indices of that representation.

See also  (as well as ) for information about $`g_2`$ characters and branching rules.

Finally we cite some interesting work on non-compact realisations of $`G_2`$ .

## 2 Cartan-Weyl form of the Lie algebras $`b_3`$ and $`g_2`$

### 2.1 General relations

Let the compact real simple Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ with generators $`X_A`$ and totally antisymmetric structure constants be defined by

$$[X_A,X_B]=ic_{ABC}X_C.$$
(9)
Let $`𝒱`$ denote the defining representation of $`𝔤`$ with matrices $`x_A`$ given by $`X_A\gamma x_A`$, where $`\gamma =1`$ for all series of simple Lie algebras except $`a_n=su(n+1)`$, for which $`\gamma =\frac{1}{2}`$ and $`x_A=\lambda _A`$ are a set of Gell-Mann matrices . We chose the basis so that

$$x_{A}^{}{}_{}{}^{}=x_A,\mathrm{tr}x_A=0,\mathrm{tr}x_Ax_B=2\delta _{AB}.$$
(10)
We define also the $`L`$-matrix by

$$L=x_AX_Ax_AX_A$$
(11)
acting on $`𝒱`$ where $`𝒱`$ is the defining representation of $`𝔤`$ and $``$ any other representation. It is to be noted that $`L`$ is not only a quantity of central importance in the study of integrable systems with invariance algebra $`𝔤`$, but that it also encapsulates in a very concise and useful manner many properties of $`𝔤`$ and its defining representation $`𝒱`$.

We present the Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ of rank $`n`$ and $`dim𝔤`$ in Cartan-Weyl form with generators $`𝐇=(H_1,\mathrm{},H_n)`$ of its Cartan subalgebra, positive roots $`𝐫_\alpha `$, and raising and lowering operators $`E_{\pm \alpha }`$, $`\alpha \{1,2,\mathrm{},\frac{1}{2}(dim𝔤n)\}`$. Then we have

$$[𝐇,E_{\pm \alpha }]=\pm 𝐫_\alpha E_{\pm \alpha },[E_\alpha ,E_\alpha ]=𝐫_\alpha 𝐇,$$
(12)
together with well-known non-trivial expressions for $`[E_{+\alpha },E_{\pm \beta }]`$ whenever $`𝐫_\alpha \pm 𝐫_\beta `$ is a non-zero root of $`𝔤`$. The $`X_A`$ of (9) are related to the Cartan-Weyl generators according to

$$\{X_A:A\{1,\mathrm{},dim𝔤\}\}=\{\begin{array}{c}H_r:r\{1,\mathrm{},n\}\hfill \\ U_\alpha ,V_\alpha :\alpha \{1,\mathrm{},\frac{1}{2}(dim𝔤n)\}\hfill \end{array}.,$$
(13)
where $`\sqrt{2}E_{\pm \alpha }=U_\alpha \pm iV_\alpha `$. For the defining representation $`𝒱`$ of $`𝔤`$, we have $`X_Ax_A`$, except, as noted, in the case of $`a_n`$. Ignoring this case, we employ the notation

$$𝐇𝐡,E_{\pm \alpha }e_{\pm \alpha },\sqrt{2}e_{\pm \alpha }=u_\alpha \pm iv_\alpha ,$$
(14)
so that also

$$\{x_A:A\{1,\mathrm{},dim𝔤\}\}=\{\begin{array}{c}h_r:r\{1,\mathrm{},n\}\hfill \\ u_\alpha ,v_\alpha :\alpha \{1,\mathrm{},\frac{1}{2}(dim𝔤n)\}\hfill \end{array}..$$
(15)
General references for background on Lie algebras and their representations have been noted  as well as the source  of valuable information.

### 2.2 The Lie algebra $`b_3`$

We turn now to the cases on which the present work focusses. Thus we start with the Lie algebra of $`b_3so(7)`$, because we intend to realise the Lie algebra of $`g_2`$ as a subalgebra of $`b_3`$ that is not symmetric. To distinguish between quantities referring to $`b_3`$ and their counterparts for $`g_2`$, we shall, for $`b_3`$, use $`𝐑_\alpha `$ for its roots, $`,`$ for its generators, and $`k`$ and $`ϵ`$ for the matrices of the defining representation $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

For $`b_3`$, the simple roots are

$$𝐑_1=(1,1,0),𝐑_2=(0,1,1),𝐑_3=(0,0,1),$$
(16)
and the remaining positive roots are given by

$`𝐑_{12}=𝐑_1+𝐑_2`$ $`=`$ $`(1,0,1),`$
$`𝐑_{23}=𝐑_2+𝐑_3`$ $`=`$ $`(0,1,0),`$
$`𝐑_{123}=𝐑_{12}+𝐑_3=𝐑_1+𝐑_2+𝐑_3`$ $`=`$ $`(1,0,0),`$
$`𝐑_{233}=𝐑_{23}+𝐑_3=𝐑_2+2𝐑_3`$ $`=`$ $`(0,1,1),`$
$`𝐑_{1233}=𝐑_{123}+𝐑_3=𝐑_1+𝐑_2+2𝐑_3`$ $`=`$ $`(1,0,1),`$
$`𝐑_{12233}=𝐑_{1233}+𝐑_2=𝐑_1+2𝐑_2+2𝐑_3`$ $`=`$ $`(1,1,0).`$ (17)
Of these, only $`𝐑_3,𝐑_{23}`$ and $`𝐑_{123}`$ are short.

For $`b_3`$ and $`g_2`$ it is convenient to denote by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\gamma `$ their $`7\times 7`$ defining representations $`𝒱`$. We build the matrix

$$=_1k_1+_2k_2+_3k_3+\underset{\alpha 0}{}(_\alpha ϵ_\alpha +_\alpha ϵ_\alpha ),$$
(18)
explicitly in the form

$$L=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccc}_1& & & & & & \\ _1& _2& & & & & \\ _{12}& _2& _3& & & & \\ _{123}& _{23}& _3& 0& & & \\ _{1233}& _{233}& 0& _3& _3& & \\ _{12233}& 0& _{233}& _{23}& _2& _2& \\ 0& _{12233}& _{1233}& _{123}& _{12}& _1& _1\end{array}\right).$$
(19)
Here and in all such cases below, the upper triangular part of $`L`$ has been suppressed for ease of reading but it can easily be supplied with the aid of hermiticity properties. One may read off (19) the explicit forms of the matrices $`k_1,k_2,k_3`$ and $`ϵ_{\pm \alpha }`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and verify that they obey the Cartan-Weyl Lie algebra relations of $`b_3`$ that follow from (12) when the choice (16) and (2.2) of roots is made. One may write $`=𝒩_+++𝒩_{}`$ to expose the parts of $``$ upper-triangular, diagonal and lower-triangular, which corresponds to writing $`b_3=n_++h+n_{}`$, where $`n_\pm `$ is the span of the $`ϵ_{\pm \alpha }`$ and $`h`$ refers to the Cartan sub-algebra. Then calculation of $`[,𝒩_\pm ]`$ and $`[𝒩_+,𝒩_{}]`$ is easily done in each case at a single (MAPLE) stroke.

The matrix $``$ has many features of interest. In the main diagonal, and the first superdiagonal above it, one sees the non-zero entries of the matrices of the Cartan subalgebra and of those of the lowering operators that belong to the simple roots of $`b_3`$. The matrices $`ϵ_\alpha `$ for roots of heights greater than one are then found by looking at the other superdiagonals successively, all the way up $`ϵ_{12233}`$ corresponding to the highest root $`𝐑_{12233}`$ of height five. One sees how the expansion of any root of $`b_3`$ in terms of simple roots is reflected in $``$. For example, there is an entry to $`ϵ_{1233}`$ in position $`(15)`$, since $`_{1233}`$ is associated with the root $`𝐑_{1233}=𝐑_1+𝐑_2+𝐑_3+𝐑_3`$ whose summands are similarly related to the entries in places $`(12),(23),(34),(45)`$, and so on. Another point is worth emphasising because it facilitates the writing down of the matrix $`L`$ for $`g_2`$ below: all the entries of the $`p`$-th subdiagonal of (19) refer to roots of heights $`p,p\{1,\mathrm{},5\}`$, with $`p=1`$ for the simple roots.

It was emphasised in  that such a construction as we have just described is available not only for $`b_n`$ for all $`n`$, but also for the other classical families of Lie algebra. It was also mentioned there that an analogous result can be obtained for $`g_2`$ – a matter to which we turn below.

It may also be verified explicitly that the matrices $`x_\mu `$ of the defining representation $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=𝒱`$ of $`b_3`$, namely

$$x_\mu =\{k_1,k_2,k_3,u_\alpha ,v_\alpha ,\alpha =1,\mathrm{},9\},$$
(20)
where $`\sqrt{2}ϵ_{\pm \alpha }=u_\alpha \pm iv_\alpha `$, and $`\alpha =1,\mathrm{},9`$ corresponds to the index set

$$\{1,2,3,12,23,123,233,1233,12233\},$$
(21)
possess the properties (10). In addition they satisfy the antisymmetry properties

$$x_\mu {}_{}{}^{T}=Mx_\mu M^1\text{ },$$
(22)
where the matrix $`M=M^T=M^1`$ has ones down its main antidagonal and zeros elsewhere.

### 2.3 The Lie algebra $`g_2`$

In discussing the Lie algebra of $`g_2`$, we employ the standard notation. We thus employ for $`g_2`$ the simple roots

$$𝐫_1=(\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}},\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}),𝐫_2=(0,\sqrt{2}),$$
(23)
so that the other four positive roots may be taken to be

$$𝐫_{12}=𝐫_1+𝐫_2,𝐫_{112}=2𝐫_1+𝐫_2,𝐫_{1112}=3𝐫_1+𝐫_2,𝐫_{11122}=3𝐫_1+2𝐫_2.$$
(24)
We see that $`𝐫_\alpha `$ for $`\alpha =1,12,112`$ are short roots with norm-squared $`\frac{2}{3}`$ while the others are long with norm-squared equal to two. Then the Lie algebra relations for $`g_2`$ follow from (12) supplemented by the relations

$`[E_1,E_2]`$ $`=`$ $`E_{12}`$
$`[E_{12},E_1]`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{2}{\sqrt{3}}E_{112}`$
$`[E_1,E_{122}]`$ $`=`$ $`E_{1112}`$
$`[E_2,E_{1112}]`$ $`=`$ $`E_{11122}`$
$`[E_{112},E_{12}]`$ $`=`$ $`E_{11122}.`$ (25)
One can give the embedding of this realisation of $`g_2`$ in the realisation of $`b_3`$ presented in Sec. 2.2 explicitly:

$`H_1`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}(2_1+_2+_3)`$
$`H_2`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}}(_2_3)`$
$`E_1`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}_1+\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}_3`$
$`E_2`$ $`=`$ $`_2`$
$`E_{12}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}_{12}\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}_{23}`$
$`E_{112}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}_{123}+\sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}_{233}`$
$`E_{1112}`$ $`=`$ $`_{1233}`$
$`E_{11122}`$ $`=`$ $`_{12233}\text{ }.`$ (26)
Again we note the agreement of the heights of the roots on the two sides of each of last six equations.

Turning to the construction of the matrices $`x_i`$ of the defining representation $`\gamma `$ of $`g_2`$, we know that it corresponds to the span of a subset of $`14`$ of the $`21`$ matrices taken above for the defining representation $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of $`b_3`$. We also know the wieght diagram of the $`7\times 7`$ representation $`\gamma `$ of $`g_2`$, which gives us the matrices of the Cartan sub-algebra. We expect an expression like that of (18) to have the same characteristics for $`g_2`$ as (18) itself did for $`b_3`$. Thus one is lead with very liitle difficulty to the result for $`g_2`$

$$L=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccc}cH_1& & & & & & \\ sE_1& J_1& & & & & \\ sE_{12}& E_2& J_2& & & & \\ cE_{112}& cE_{12}& cE_1& 0& & & \\ E_{1112}& sE_{112}& 0& cE_1& J_2& & \\ E_{11122}& 0& sE_{112}& cE_{12}& E_2& J_1& \\ 0& E_{11122}& E_{1112}& cE_{112}& sE_{12}& sE_1& cH_1\end{array}\right).$$
(27)
Here we have used the abbreviations

$`J_1=(\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}H_1+\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}H_2)`$ , $`\text{ }J_2=(\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}H_1\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}H_2)`$
$`c\mathrm{cos}\theta =\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}`$ , $`s\mathrm{sin}\theta =\sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}\text{ }.`$ (28)
There is little difficulty because $`g_2`$ has exactly one positive root of each height $`p=2,3,4,5`$. Thus working downwards from the highest root, we get the placing of $`E_{11122}`$ and $`E_{1112}`$ directly. For $`E_{112}`$ we place down the third sub-diagonal the entries $`(c_1,s_1,s_1,c_1)`$, with values of $`c_1`$ and $`s_1`$ to be fixed. Here $`c_1=\mathrm{cos}\theta _1`$. The entries for $`E_{12}`$ and $`E_1`$ likewsie involve further angles $`\theta _2`$ and $`\theta _3`$, but the entries for $`E_2`$ are written down directly. One reads the implied matrices for the $`e_{\pm \alpha }`$ off the display for $`L`$ partially thereby obtained. Then it is easy to see the assignmnents represent (25) correctly for the values presented in (27) and (28). The assignments could also have been inferred in agreement with this using the defining representation matrices of (26).

Some of the useful features of (27) can be seen more clearly when we present in more schematic form with signs and constants supressed

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccccccc}x& & & & & & \\ 1& x& & & & & \\ 12& 2& x& & & & \\ 112& 12& 1& x& & & \\ 1112& 112& 0& 1& x& & \\ 11122& 0& 112& 12& 2& x& \\ 0& 11122& 1112& 112& 12& 1& x\end{array}\right).$$
(29)
The pattern of the places associated with the non-simple roots relative to the simple ones here, despite its non-trivial nature, conforms very closely to that found for the $`c_n`$ and $`b_n`$ families. See  and cf. (19).

We may read explicit expressions for the matrices $`h_1,h_2`$ and $`e_{\pm \alpha }`$ from (27) and (28), and check that they obey exactly the same Lie algebra relations as do the abstract generators. Because the $`x_i`$ for $`g_2`$ are a subset of those given above for $`b_3`$, they share the same properties, namely (10) and (22).

### 2.4 $`g_2`$ as a Lie subalgebra of $`b_3`$

We have seen that the $`14`$ matrices $`x_i`$ of the defining representation $`\gamma `$ of $`g_2`$ share the same properties as the $`21`$ matrices of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ for $`b_3`$. The explicit definitions show the former to be simple linear combinations of the latter. It is natural to want to define the $`7`$ linear combinations of the $`b_3`$ matrices that lie outside $`g_2`$, but which share the properties (10) and (22). To do so at a single stroke we define

$$K=H_3h_3+\underset{\beta =1}{\overset{3}{}}(E^{}{}_{\beta }{}^{}e_{}^{}{}_{\beta }{}^{}+E^{}{}_{\beta }{}^{}e_{}^{}{}_{\beta }{}^{}),$$
(30)
explicitly in the form

$$K=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccc}sH_3& & & & & & \\ cE^{}_1& sH_3& & & & & \\ cE^{}_2& 0& sH_3& & & & \\ sE^{}_3& sE^{}_2& sE^{}_1& 0& & & \\ 0& cE^{}_3& 0& sE^{}_1& sH_3& & \\ 0& 0& cE^{}_3& sE^{}_2& 0& sH_3& \\ 0& 0& 0& sE^{}_3& cE^{}_2& cE^{}_1& sH_3\end{array}\right),$$
(31)
where $`c`$ and $`s`$ are as given in (28). This implies

$$z_4=h_3=s\mathrm{diag}(1,1,1,0,1,1,1)\text{ },$$
(32)
and we define the other $`z_a,a\{1,\mathrm{},\}`$ by means of

$`\sqrt{2}e_{\pm 1}`$ $`=`$ $`z_7\pm iz_1`$
$`\sqrt{2}e_{\pm 2}`$ $`=`$ $`z_6\pm iz_2`$
$`\sqrt{2}e_{\pm 3}`$ $`=`$ $`z_5\pm iz_3\text{ }.`$ (33)
The reason for the arrangement of detail here is provided in Sec. 3.

The display (31) thus yields explicitly the matrices $`z_a,a\{1,\mathrm{},7\}`$ which span the $`b_3g_2`$ part of the vector space of the representation $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of $`b_3`$. The following properties may be checked

$$\mathrm{tr}z_a=0,\mathrm{tr}(z_az_b)=\delta _{ab},\mathrm{tr}(z_ax_i)=0,z_a{}_{}{}^{T}=Mz_aM^1\text{ }.$$
(34)
It is to be noted that $`K`$ simply uses those linear combinations of $`b_3`$ matrices that are excluded from (27).

### 2.5 The matrices $`y_\alpha `$

To complete the basis we need for $`7\times 7`$ traceless hermitian matrices, we define a set of $`27`$ linearly independent matrices $`y_\alpha `$ which enjoy the properties

$$y_\alpha {}_{}{}^{}=y_\alpha ,\mathrm{tr}y_\alpha =0,y_\alpha {}_{}{}^{T}=+My_\alpha M^1,\alpha \{1,\mathrm{},27\}\text{ },$$
(35)
and

$$\mathrm{tr}(y_\alpha y_\beta )=2\delta _{\alpha \beta },\mathrm{tr}(x_iy_\alpha )=0,i\{1,\mathrm{},14\},\mathrm{tr}(z_ay_\alpha )=0,a\{1,\mathrm{},7\}.$$
(36)
By referring to the diagonal matrices of $`\gamma `$ and to the diagonal matrix $`z_4=h_3`$ given by (32) we chose the three diagonal matrices $`y_\alpha `$ to be

$`y_1`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\mathrm{diag}(2,1,1,0,1,1,2)`$
$`y_2`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\mathrm{diag}(0,1,1,0,1,1,0)`$
$`y_3`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{21}}\mathrm{diag}(1,1,1,6,1,1,1).`$ (37)
This completes the choice of a set of six diagonal traceless hermitian matrices tracewise mutually orthogonal and also orthogonal to the matrix $`\mathrm{diag}(1,1,1,1,1,1,1)`$. The other $`24`$ matrices $`y_\alpha `$ are easy to specify using the operator matrix

$$\underset{n=1}{\overset{12}{}}(\rho _nR_n+\rho _nR_n)=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccc}x& & & & & & \\ R_1& x& & & & & \\ R_4& R_2& x& & & & \\ R_6& R_5& R_3& x& & & \\ R_8& R_7& \sqrt{2}R_{12}& R_3& x& & \\ R_9& \sqrt{2}R_{11}& R_7& R_5& R_2& x& \\ \sqrt{2}R_{10}& R_9& R_8& R_6& R_4& R_1& x\end{array}\right)\text{ }.$$
(38)
The diagonal elements $`x`$ here can be inferred from (37). Then setting

$$\sqrt{2}\rho _{\pm n}=y_{2n+2}\pm iy_{2n+3}\text{ },\text{ }n=1,\mathrm{},12\text{ },$$
(39)
completes the definition of the $`y_\alpha ,\alpha \{1,\mathrm{},27\}`$. Our display of an explicit choice of matrices $`x_i,z_a,y_\alpha `$ is motivated by the need to perform/check our matrix, and later, tensorial manipulations by MAPLE.

## 3 Properties of the $`7\times 7`$ matrices of $`g_2,b_3`$ and $`a_6`$

We have defined the traceless hermitian $`7\times 7`$ matrices of $`x_i,i\{1,\mathrm{},14\}`$ of $`g_2`$, $`z_a,a\{1,\mathrm{},7\}`$ of $`b_3g_2`$, and $`y_\alpha ,\alpha \{1,\mathrm{},27\}`$ of $`a_6b_3`$. All are normalised so that the trace of their square is $`2`$, and they are tracewise mutually orthogonal. They have the symmetry properties

$$x_i{}_{}{}^{T}=Mx_iM^1,z_a{}_{}{}^{T}=Mz_aM^1,y_\alpha {}_{}{}^{T}=My_\alpha M^1\text{ }.$$
(40)
It is possible to view the set of $`48`$ matrices $`x_i,z_a,y_\alpha `$ as a set of lambda matrices of $`a_6`$. Their single multiplication rule here is replaced by the following

$`x_ix_j`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{2}{7}\delta _{ij}+\frac{1}{2}ic_{ijk}x_k+\frac{1}{2}d_{ij\alpha }y_\alpha `$ (41)
$`z_az_b`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{2}{7}\delta _{ab}+\frac{1}{2}ic_{abc}z_c+\frac{1}{2}ih_{iab}x_i+\frac{1}{2}d_{ab\gamma }y_\gamma `$ (42)
$`y_\alpha y_\beta `$ $`=`$ $`\frac{2}{7}\delta _{\alpha \beta }+\frac{1}{2}i\varphi _{i\alpha \beta }x_i+\frac{1}{2}it_{a\alpha \beta }z_a+\frac{1}{2}d_{\alpha \beta \gamma }y_\gamma `$ (43)
$`x_iz_a`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}ih_{iab}z_b+\frac{1}{2}d_{ia\alpha }y_\alpha `$ (44)
$`x_iy_\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}i\varphi _{i\alpha \beta }y_\beta +\frac{1}{2}d_{ij\alpha }x_j+\frac{1}{2}d_{ia\alpha }z_a`$ (45)
$`z_ay_\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}it_{a\alpha \beta }y_\beta +\frac{1}{2}d_{ab\alpha }z_b+\frac{1}{2}d_{ia\alpha }x_i\text{ }.`$ (46)
First we note that since all tensors here are real, hermitian conjugation of (41) – (43) implies certain evident symmetry and antisymmetry properties. Second we note that behaviour under conjugation with $`M`$ is what determines which terms are allowed on the right hand sides. Third we note the tracelessness of symmetric tensors occurring in (41) – (43)

$$d_{ii\alpha }=0,d_{ab\alpha }=0,d_{\alpha \alpha \gamma }=0\text{ }.$$
(47)
Fourth we note the absence from (41) of a term in $`z_a`$. This simply reflects the closure property of the Lie algebra $`g_2`$:

$$[x_i,x_j]=ic_{ijk}x_k.$$
(48)
Fifth (41) and (43) imply

$`[z_a,z_b]`$ $`=`$ $`ic_{abc}z_c+ih_{iab}x_i`$ (49)
$`[x_i,z_a]`$ $`=`$ $`ih_{iab}z_b\text{ }.`$ (50)
Eqs. (48), (49) and (50) represent the Lie algebra relations of $`b_3`$ as generated by $`x_i`$ and $`z_a`$. The presence of the $`x_i`$ term in $`[z_a,z_b]`$ shows that $`g_2`$ is not a symmetric subalgebra of $`b_3`$ merely a reductive one. Sixth we note that, in the use of eqs. (41) to (46) to define the various ($`g_2`$) invariant tensors there are repetitions. This follows from easy trace considerations. The latter also imply the total antisymmetry of $`c_{ijk}`$ and $`c_{abc}`$ and the total symmetry of $`d_{\alpha \beta \gamma }`$.

The totally antisymmetric $`b_3`$ structure constants $`c_{abc}`$ occurring in (49) are particularly interesting quantities, because, with due arrangement of the details, they are constant multiples of the totally antisymmetric tensors that enter the multplication law of octonions. This should not be entirely surprising in view of the well-known occurrence of octonions in connection with $`g_2`$ featured in  and in the other main $`g_2`$ sources cited.

It is easy to see this explicitly, and appreciate the arrangement of detail in (33), by showing by direct calculation that

$$c_{abc}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\psi _{abc},a,b,c\{1,\mathrm{},7\}\text{ },$$
(51)
where the totally antisymmetric octonionic tensor $`\psi _{abc}`$ has the value one for these ordered triples

$$(123),(147),(165),(246),(257),(354),(367)\text{ },$$
(52)
and no other non-zero components except for those implied by antisymmetry. This is already a striking result, but it will be further embellished in Sec. 4.1 below. One consequence of (51) is that it greatly helps in the search for identities involving invariant tensors just defined, because the many known identities involving the $`\psi _{abc}`$, see especially , give us good control of the $`c_{abc}`$. Octonionic tensor identities are reviewed in Sec. 3.1.

### 3.1 Identities for the octonionic tensor $`\psi _{abc}`$

The triples for which the totally antisymmetric third rank tensor $`\psi _{abc}`$ takes non-zero values appear in (52). We note the following identities which it satisfies

$$\psi _{abc}\psi _{abd}=6\delta _{cd}\text{ }.$$
(53)
$$\psi _{abc}=\frac{1}{4!}\epsilon _{abcdefg}\psi _{deh}\psi _{fgh}\text{ }.$$
(54)
Here we see the totally antisymmetric seventh rank epsilon tensor. It is easy to confirm the truth of these results directly, and to see that they imply the key result

$$\psi _{deh}\psi _{fgh}=\delta _{df}\delta _{eg}\delta _{dg}\delta _{ef}\frac{1}{6}\epsilon _{defgabc}\psi _{abc}\text{ },$$
(55)
whence we can obtain the results

$`\psi _{fag}\psi _{gbe}\psi _{ecf}`$ $`=`$ $`3\psi _{abc}`$ (56)
$`\psi _{h[de}\psi _{f]gh}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{6}\epsilon _{abcdefg}\psi _{abc}`$ (57)
$`\psi _{deh}\psi _{fgh}+\psi _{feh}\psi _{dgh}`$ $`=`$ $`2\delta _{df}\delta _{eg}\delta _{dg}\delta _{ef}\delta _{fg}\delta _{ed}\text{ }.`$ (58)
The identity (55) is a very simple and convenient product law, but it involves the seventh rank epsilon tensor. If one wants a product law that does not then one must have recourse to the remarkable result – derived without use of (55) – from

$$\psi _{abd}\psi _{deh}\psi _{hfg}=3\delta _{a[e}\psi _{fg]b}3\delta _{b[e}\psi _{fg]a}\delta _{ef}\psi _{gab}+\delta _{eg}\psi _{fab}\text{ }.$$
(59)
To establish this ,here on the basis of (55), we multiply (55) by $`\psi _{abd}`$, and use a simple argument to treat the $`ϵ\delta \delta `$ term that arises.

The result (51) relates the octonionic tensor $`\psi _{abc}`$ to structure constants $`c_{abc}`$ of $`b_3`$. However (57) proves that the $`c_{abc}`$ by themselves do not constitute the full set of structure constants of any Lie algebra, since they do not satisfy a Jacobi identity. The latter result itself is of course well-known.

We draw attention also to , which derives identities for the torsion tensor that parallelises the sphere $`S^7`$, this tensor being a constant multiple of the one that specifies the octonionic product law. In particular, one of these identities is equivalent to (55).

## 4 An equivalent $`7\times 7`$ matrix representation

### 4.1 The matrices $`H_i`$ and $`C_a`$

The representation of the matrices $`x_i,z_a`$ and $`y_\alpha `$ that we have been lead to above is the one that emerges naturally from the Cartan-Weyl representation of $`g_2`$ as a subalgebra of $`b_3`$. This enabled the definition (41) – (46) of $`g_2`$ invariant tensors. In virtue of the conjugation properties (40) the representation is probably not the most convenient one to use in deriving the identities involving these tensors. Thus we wish to pass to an equivalent basis in which the $`x_i`$ and $`z_a`$ are replaced by antisymmetric matrices, and the $`y_\alpha `$ by symmetric ones. In fact the required basis is already to hand.

To see this we note first that the Lie bracket relation of (50) provides us with a set of $`14`$ hermitian antisymmetric matrices $`H_i`$ for the $`7\times 7`$ representation $`\gamma `$ of $`g_2`$ via the definition

$$(H_i)_{ab}=ih_{iab}\text{ },$$
(60)
since the Jacobi identity for $`x_i,x_k,z_a`$ translates directly into the result

$$[H_i,H_k]=ic_{ikl}H_l\text{ }.$$
(61)
There is clearly an equivalence relation of the form

$$x_i=SH_iS^1\text{ },\text{ }detS0\text{ },$$
(62)
so that we get

$$\mathrm{tr}H_i=0\text{ },\text{ }\mathrm{tr}(H_iH_j)=\delta _{ij}\text{ }.$$
(63)
This last result translates into the identity

$$h_{iab}h_{jab}=2\delta _{ab}\text{ }.$$
(64)
Next we examine the Jacobi identity for $`x_i,z_a,z_b`$. Using the two relations (49) and (50), we are lead by linear dependence to two relations, one of which reproduces (61). The other gives

$$[H_i,C_a]=ih_{iab}C_b\text{ },$$
(65)
where we have defined a set of $`7\times 7`$ antisymmetric matrices $`C`$ via

$$(C_a)_{bc}=+\eta ic_{abc}\text{ },$$
(66)
where $`\eta `$ is a constant that remains to be determined. If we normalise $`C_a`$ so that

$$\mathrm{tr}(C_aC_b)=2\delta _{ab}\text{ },$$
(67)
then (51) and (53) give $`\eta ^2=1`$, and it turns out below that $`\eta =1`$. Eq. (65) implies that the $`C_a`$ transform according to the $`7`$ dimensional representation of $`g_2`$. Further conjugation by $`S`$ of the Lie algebra relation of (50) for gives rise to (65) with the identification

$$z_a=SC_aS^1\text{ }.$$
(68)
In other words conjugation with $`S`$ carries the basis $`x_i,z_a`$ of $`b_3`$ into equivalence with the basis of antisymmetric matrices $`H_i,C_a`$.

Returning to a topic broached at the end of Sec. 3, we recall that the $`c_{abc}`$ are proportional to the third rank antisymmetric tensor of the multiplication law of octonions. They have entered first as the structure constants that reflect the non-symmetric nature of $`g_2`$ as a subalgebra of $`b_3`$. Second they determine the elements of the matrices $`C`$ which enter the version

$$[C_a,C_b]=ih_{iab}H_i+ic_{abc}C_c\text{ },$$
(69)
of the previous statement, i.e. (49), which arises by conjugation of it by $`S`$. Use of (69) and (67) shows that

$$\mathrm{tr}(C_aC_bC_c)=ic_{abc}\text{ },$$
(70)
and comparison of this with (56) requires the choice $`\eta =1`$ noted above. Also (67) now translates into the identity

$$c_{aef}c_{bef}=2\delta _{ab}\text{ }.$$
(71)
### 4.2 The matrices $`Y_\alpha `$

To get at the matrices generated by conjugation with $`S`$ of the matrices $`y_\alpha `$ we set out from the consequence of (45)

$$[x_i,y_\alpha ]=i\varphi _{i\alpha \beta }y_{\alpha \beta }\text{ }.$$
(72)
obtaining

$$[H_i,Y_\alpha ]=i\varphi _{i\alpha \beta }Y_\beta \text{ },$$
(73)
where

$$Y_\alpha =S(Y_\alpha )S^1\text{ }.$$
(74)
Also the Jacobi identity containing $`[\{z_a,z_b\},y_\alpha ]`$ leads to two relations. The one we want, from the $`x_i`$ term, is of the expected form (73) if we set

$$(Y_\alpha )_{ab}=ϵd_{ab\alpha }\text{ },$$
(75)
where $`ϵ`$ is a constant. To determine $`ϵ`$, we use (42), the equivalence relations (62) and (68), and (51) to obtain

$$d_{ab\alpha }=\mathrm{tr}(z_az_by_\alpha )=\mathrm{tr}(C_aC_bY_\alpha )=\frac{1}{3}\psi _{aef}\psi _{fbg}ϵd_{ge\alpha }\text{ }.$$
(76)
Since $`Y_\alpha `$ is traceless and symmetric, only one term of (55) contributes to (76). Hence we find

$$(Y_\alpha )_{ab}=3d_{ab\alpha }\text{ }.$$
(77)
We also, from equivalence, have

$$\mathrm{tr}(Y_\alpha Y_\beta )=2\delta _{\alpha \beta }\text{ },$$
(78)
and hence

$$d_{ab\alpha }d_{ab\beta }=\frac{2}{9}\delta _{\alpha \beta }\text{ }.$$
(79)
### 4.3 Completeness considerations

We are in a position to use as a set of $`48`$ lambda matrices of $`a_6=su(7)`$ the matrices

$$\lambda _A=\{H_i,i\{1,\mathrm{},14\};C_a,a\{1,\mathrm{},7\};Y_\alpha ,,\alpha \{1,\mathrm{},27\}\text{ }.$$
(80)
They are linearly independent, hermitian and traceless, and have been normalised in agreement with

$$\mathrm{tr}(\lambda _A\lambda _B)=2\delta _{AB}\text{ }.$$
(81)
In addition, we have the symmety properties

$$H_i=H_i{}_{}{}^{T}\text{ },\text{ }C_a=C_a{}_{}{}^{T}\text{ },\text{ }Y_\alpha =+Y_\alpha ^T\text{ }.$$
(82)
The completeness identities for $`b_3`$ and $`a_6`$ can be written down directly. For $`b_3`$ we have

$$(H_i)_{ab}(H_i)_{cd}+(C_e)_{ab}(C_e)_{cd}=\delta _{ad}\delta _{bc}\delta _{ac}\delta _{bd}\text{ },$$
(83)
and, with the aid of the well-known completeness result for $`a_6,`$ we obtain

$$(Y_\alpha )_{ab}(Y_\alpha )_{cd}=\frac{2}{7}\delta _{ab}\delta _{cd}+\delta _{ad}\delta _{bc}+\delta _{ac}\delta _{bd}\text{ }.$$
(84)
Also (83) may be arranged as a completeness result for $`g_2`$ because of (51). This gives

$$(H_i)_{ab}(H_i)_{cd}=\delta _{ad}\delta _{bc}\delta _{ac}\delta _{bd}+\frac{1}{3}\psi _{eab}\psi _{ecd}\text{ }.$$
(85)
Finally by conjugating with $`S`$ the completeness result for the basis $`x_\mu =\{x_i,z_a\}`$ for $`b_3`$, namely

$$(x_i)_{ab}(x_i)_{cd}+(z_e)_{ab}(z_e)_{cd}=\delta _{ad}\delta _{bc}M_{ac}M_{bd}\text{ },$$
(86)
and comparing with (82), one may use Schur’s lemma to deduce

$$S^TMS=fI\text{ },$$
(87)
where $`f`$ is a constant that has not been determined.

## 5 Bilinear tensor identities

We begin with a listing of the most important of these ‘two-tensor’ identities

$`c_{ijk}c_{ijl}`$ $`=`$ $`8\delta _{kl}`$ (88)
$`h_{iab}h_{jab}`$ $`=`$ $`2\delta _{ij}`$ (89)
$`h_{iab}h_{iac}`$ $`=`$ $`4\delta _{bc}`$ (90)
$`d_{ij\alpha }d_{ij\beta }`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{32}{9}\delta _{\alpha \beta }`$ (91)
$`d_{ij\alpha }d_{ik\alpha }`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{48}{7}\delta _{jk}`$ (92)
$`c_{abc}c_{abd}`$ $`=`$ $`2\delta _{cd}`$ (93)
$`d_{ab\alpha }d_{ab\beta }`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{2}{9}\delta _{\alpha \beta }`$ (94)
$`d_{ab\alpha }d_{ac\alpha }`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{6}{7}\delta _{bc}`$ (95)
$`\varphi _{i\alpha \beta }\varphi _{j\alpha \beta }`$ $`=`$ $`18\delta _{ij}`$ (96)
$`\varphi _{i\alpha \beta }\varphi _{i\gamma \beta }`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{28}{3}\delta _{\alpha \gamma }`$ (97)
$`d_{\alpha \beta \gamma }d_{\alpha \beta \delta }`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{110}{7}\delta _{\gamma \delta }`$ (98)
$`d_{ia\alpha }d_{ia\beta }`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{28}{9}\delta _{\alpha \beta }\text{ }.`$ (99)
There are various ways of establishing these results, most of which have been confirmed using MAPLE. A systematic approach based on definition of tensors as traces, followed by use of completeness, is illustrated below after the collection of a few lemmas. We have, of course, found (89), (93) and (94) already. Also, it is obvious that (90), (92), (95) and (97), are easy consequences of their predecessors; (99) likewise implies two further related results.

Recalling the definitions

$`(ad_i)_{jk}`$ $`=`$ $`ic_{ijk}`$ (100)
$`(H_i)_{ab}`$ $`=`$ $`ih_{iab}`$ (101)
$`(C_a)_{bc}`$ $`=`$ $`ic_{abc}`$ (102)
$`(\mathrm{\Phi }_i)_{a\alpha \beta }`$ $`=`$ $`i\varphi _{i\alpha \beta }`$ (103)
$`(Y_\alpha )_{ab}`$ $`=`$ $`3d_{ab\alpha }\text{ },`$ (104)
we see that the above results can be recast in the useful forms (see Sec. 6.1)

$`(ad_i)(ad_i)`$ $`=`$ $`8`$ (105)
$`(H_i)(H_i)=x_ix_i`$ $`=`$ $`4`$ (106)
$`(C_a)(C_a)=z_az_a`$ $`=`$ $`2`$ (107)
$`(\mathrm{\Phi }_i)(\mathrm{\Phi }_i)`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{28}{3}`$ (108)
$`(Y_\alpha )(Y_\alpha )=(y_\alpha )(y_\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{54}{7}\text{ }.`$ (109)
### 5.1 Some lemmas involving the matrices $`H_i,C_a`$ and $`Y_\alpha `$

We begin with a listing

$`H_iH_jH_i`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (110)
$`H_iC_aH_i`$ $`=`$ $`2C_a`$ (111)
$`H_iY_\alpha H_i`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{2}{3}Y_\alpha `$ (112)
$`C_aH_iC_a`$ $`=`$ $`H_i`$ (113)
$`C_aC_bC_a`$ $`=`$ $`C_b`$ (114)
$`C_aY_\alpha C_a`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{3}Y_\alpha `$ (115)
$`Y_\alpha Y_\beta Y_\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`\frac{5}{7}Y_\beta `$ (116)
$`Y_\alpha H_iY_\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`\frac{9}{7}H_i`$ (117)
$`Y_\alpha C_bY_\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`\frac{9}{7}C_b\text{ }.`$ (118)
To prove these we first write down these consequences of the completeness relation (83)

$`H_iH_kH_i+C_eH_kC_e`$ $`=`$ $`H_k`$ (119)
$`H_iC_aH_i+C_eC_aC_e`$ $`=`$ $`C_a`$ (120)
$`H_iY_\alpha H_i+C_eY_\alpha C_e`$ $`=`$ $`Y_\alpha \text{ }.`$ (121)
Also the total antisymmetry of the $`c_{abc}`$ allows us to make these rearrangements

$`(C_eH_kC_e)_{cd}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{tr}(C_dC_cH_k)=(H_k)_{cd}`$
$`(C_eC_aC_e)_{cd}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{tr}(C_dC_aC_c)=(C_a)_{cd}`$
$`(C_eY_\alpha C_e)_{cd}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{tr}(C_dC_cY_\alpha )=\frac{1}{3}(Y_\alpha )_{cd}\text{ }.`$ (122)
Hence all the first six results listed follow. The last three are easy consequences of (84).

### 5.2 Completion of the proofs of bilinear identities

To prove (91), we set out from

$$d_{ij\alpha }d_{ij\beta }=\mathrm{tr}(H_iH_jY_\alpha )\mathrm{tr}(H_iH_jY_\beta )\text{ },$$
(123)
and use completeness relation (84), followed by the results (106) and (110). This gives (91). Eqs. (97) and (98) follow similarly, and indeed (95), and hence (94) can be confirmed.

Turning finally to (88), we use the completeness relation (83) to derive

$$c_{ijk}c_{ijl}=\mathrm{tr}(H_iH_jH_k)\mathrm{tr}(H_iH_jH_l)=\mathrm{tr}\left(H_jH_kH_jH_l+H_jH_kH_lH_j\right)\text{ }.$$
(124)
Here the $`CC`$ term of (83) has not given any contribution because $`\mathrm{tr}(C_eH_jH_k)=0`$, a result which reflects the closure properties of the $`g_2`$ matrices $`H_i`$. The results (106) and (110) now lead to (88).

## 6 Casimir operators, projectors and characteristic equations

### 6.1 The quadratic Casimir operator

The irreducible representation of $`g_2`$ of highest weight $`(\lambda ,\mu )`$ is well known , e.g. , to have dimension given by

$$120dim(\lambda ,\mu )=(\lambda +1)(\mu +1)(\lambda +\mu +2)(2\lambda +\mu +3)(3\lambda +\mu +4)(3\lambda +2\mu +5)\text{ }.$$
(125)
If $`X_iD_i`$, where these the matrices of $`(\lambda ,\mu )`$, then the quadratic Casimir operator

$$𝒞^{(2)}=X_iX_iD_iD_i\text{ },$$
(126)
of $`g_2`$ has the eigenvalue

$$c^{(2)}(\lambda ,\mu )=\lambda ^2+\frac{1}{3}\mu ^2+\lambda \mu +3\lambda +\frac{5}{3}\mu \text{ },$$
(127)
for $`(\lambda ,\mu )`$. To within an overall normalisation constant fixed by reference to the defining representation of $`g_2`$, this agrees with the result of . See also , especially the striking and amusing section III.

In our work so far the representations

$`(0,1)`$ $`=`$ $`7,X_ix_i\text{ }\mathrm{or}\text{ }X_iH_i`$
$`(1,0)`$ $`=`$ $`14=ad,X_i(ad_i)\text{ },\text{ }(ad_i)_{jk}=ic_{ijk}`$
$`(0,2)`$ $`=`$ $`27,X_i\mathrm{\Phi }_i\text{ },(\mathrm{\Phi }_i)_{\alpha \beta }=i\varphi _{i\alpha \beta }\text{ }.`$ (128)
have occurred. For these (127) requires the eigenvalues $`4,8`$ and $`\frac{28}{3}`$ respectively, and we can see that (105) – (108) are in agreement with this.

### 6.2 Projectors

We consider first the Clebsch-Gordan series

$`\begin{array}{ccccc}77& & (1+27)& +& (7+14)\\ (0,1)(0,1)& & \underset{S}{\underset{}{(0,0)+(0,2)}}& +& \underset{A}{\underset{}{(0,1)+(1,0}})\end{array}\text{ }.`$ (131)
Suppose $`A_a,B_a,\text{ }a\{1,\mathrm{},7\}`$ transform according to the defining representation $`\gamma =7=(0,1)`$ of $`g_2`$. The tensors which transform according to the symmetric part of $`77`$ are given by

$`T^{(1)}_{ab}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{7}\delta _{ab}A_cB_c`$ (132)
$`=`$ $`\frac{1}{7}\delta _{ab}\delta _{cd}A_cB_d`$
$`T^{(27)}_{ab}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}(A_aB_b+A_bB_a)\frac{1}{7}\delta _{ab}A_cB_c`$ (133)
$`=`$ $`\left[\frac{1}{2}(\delta _{ac}\delta _{bd}+\delta _{ad}\delta _{bc})\frac{1}{7}\delta _{ab}\delta _{cd}\right]A_cB_d\text{ }.`$
Similarly for the antisymmetric part, we have

$`T^{(7)}_{ab}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}c_{abe}c_{cde}A_cB_d`$ (134)
$`T^{(14)}_{ab}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}(A_aB_bA_bB_a)\frac{1}{2}c_{abe}c_{cde}A_cB_d`$ (135)
$`=`$ $`\left[\frac{1}{2}(\delta _{ac}\delta _{bd}\delta _{ad}\delta _{bc})\frac{1}{2}c_{abe}c_{cde}\right]A_cB_d\text{ }.`$ (136)
Now

$$T^{(R)}{}_{ab}{}^{}=P^{(R)}{}_{ab,cd}{}^{}A_{c}^{}B_d\text{ },$$
(137)
defines a set of orthogonal projectors onto the representations of $`g_2`$ contained in the reduction (131) of $`77`$.

The above used the result (93). Also we see that (84) implies

$$(Y_\alpha Y_\alpha ){}_{ac,bd}{}^{}=(Y_\alpha ){}_{ab}{}^{}(Y_\alpha ){}_{cd}{}^{}=2P^{(27)}{}_{ab,cd}{}^{}\text{ }.$$
(138)
Also

$$(H_i){}_{ab}{}^{}(H_i){}_{cd}{}^{}+(C_e){}_{ab}{}^{}(C_e){}_{cd}{}^{}=2P^{(A)}{}_{ab,cd}{}^{}=(\delta _{ac}\delta _{bd}\delta _{ad}\delta _{bc})\text{ },$$
(139)
where $`P^{(A)}=P^{(7)}+P^{(14)}`$ is the projector onto the antisymmetric tensor subspace. In fact, more explicitly

$`(C_e){}_{ab}{}^{}(C_e)_{cd}`$ $`=`$ $`c_{eab}c_{ecd}=2P^{(7)}_{ab,cd}`$ (140)
$`(H_i){}_{ab}{}^{}(H_i)_{cd}`$ $`=`$ $`(\delta _{ac}\delta _{bd}\delta _{ad}\delta _{bc})c_{eab}c_{ecd}=2P^{(14)}{}_{ab,cd}{}^{}\text{ }.`$ (141)
We consider next the Clebsch-Gordan series

$`\begin{array}{ccccc}1414& & (1+27+77)& +& (14+77^{})\\ (1,0)(1,0)& & \underset{S}{\underset{}{(0,0)+(0,2)+(2,0)}}& +& \underset{A}{\underset{}{(1,0)+(0,3}})\end{array}\text{ }.`$ (144)
Suppose $`A_i,B_i,\text{ }i\{1,\mathrm{},14\}`$ transform according to the adjoint representation $`ad=14=(1,0)`$ of $`g_2`$. The tensors which transform according to the symmetric part of $`1414`$ are given by

$`T^{(1)}_{ij}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{14}\delta _{ij}\delta _{kl}A_kB_l`$ (145)
$`T^{(27)}_{ij}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{9}{32}d_{ij\alpha }d_{kl\alpha }A_kB_l`$ (146)
$`T^{(77)}_{ij}`$ $`=`$ $`\left[\frac{1}{2}(\delta _{ik}\delta _{jl}+\delta _{il}\delta _{jk})\frac{1}{14}\delta _{ij}\delta _{kl}\frac{9}{32}d_{ij\alpha }d_{kl\alpha }\right]A_kB_l\text{ }.`$ (147)
The result (91) has been used here. Similarly, with the aid of (88), we get, for the antisymmetric part,

$`T^{(14)}_{ij}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{8}c_{ijp}c_{klp}A_kB_l`$ (148)
$`T^{(77^{})}_{ij}`$ $`=`$ $`\left[\frac{1}{2}(\delta _{ik}\delta _{jl}\delta _{il}\delta _{jk})\frac{1}{8}c_{ijp}c_{klp}\right]A_kB_l\text{ }.`$ (149)
Now

$$T^{(R)}{}_{ij}{}^{}=P^{(R)}{}_{ij,kl}{}^{}A_{k}^{}B_l\text{ },$$
(150)
defines a set of orthogonal projectors onto the representations of $`g_2`$ contained in the reduction (144) of $`1414`$.

One aspect of (144) is worth clarifying. How did we assign $`77=(2,0)`$ to the symmetric part of $`14\times 14`$, and $`77^{}=(0,3)`$ to the antisymmetric part? One way, which follows a general argument given on P3196 of , is indicated at the end of Sec. 6.3.

There is a very interesting discussion of projectors for $`g_2`$ in .

### 6.3 Characteristic equations

As indicated a long time ago for $`su(n)`$ , and emphasised in , there are two classes of basic identities for the invariant tensors of any Lie algebra – first class identities that stem directly from Jacobi identities, and those of the second class. The latter depend on the use of the characteristic equation of the Lie algebra usually for the defining representation $`𝒱`$. The difficulty of finding them increases with the dimension of the Lie algebra or of $`𝒱`$.  presents a systematic account with lots of results including many for $`g_2`$. It is useful to present a slightly modified version of the latter discussion. Some of the intermediate equations of the discussion may here appear slightly different from their counterparts in , because normalisations used there were fixed in a way that allowed uniform programming for all Lie algebras, whereas here we do what seems most convenient for $`g_2`$ itself.

Let $`ad_1`$ and $`ad_2`$ denote adjoint representations of $`g_2`$ acting in vector spaces $`𝒱_1`$ and $`𝒱_2`$, of dimension $`14`$. The Clebsch-Gordan series for $`1414`$ is displayed as (144). Let $`X_i=X_{i1}+X_{i2}`$ denote the ‘total’ $`g_2`$ generators, acting in $`𝒱_1𝒱_2`$. Then

$$X_iX_i=X_{i1}X_{i1}+X_{i2}X_{i2}+2\mathrm{\Lambda }\text{ },\text{ }\mathrm{\Lambda }=X_{i1}X_{i2}\text{ },$$
(151)
implies that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ has the same eigenspaces as does $`X_iX_i`$, and eigenvalues $`8,\frac{10}{3},2,4,0`$ for the representations $`1,27,77,14,77^{}`$ respectively. To use this information, we begin by recalling a well-known formula

If a hermitian operator $`A`$ has eigenvalues and eigenvectors given by

$$A|a_i=a_i|a_i,\text{ }a\{1,\mathrm{},p\}\text{ },$$
(152)
then the projector onto its $`i`$-th eigenspace is

$$P_i=\underset{ki}{}\frac{Aa_kI}{a_ia_k}\text{ },$$
(153)
where $`I`$ is the unit operator in the vector space spanned by the $`|a_i`$. Clearly

$$(Aa_iI)P_i=0\text{ },$$
(154)
with no sum on $`i`$ implied, is, for each $`i`$, a, possibly reduced, version of the characterictic equation sought. Now we know that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a linear combination of the projectors onto the eigenspaces of $`X_iX_i`$. Further $`\mathrm{\Lambda }I_S`$, where $`(I_S)_{ij,kl}=\frac{1}{2}(\delta _{ik}\delta _{jl}+\delta _{il}\delta _{jk})`$ is the unit of the symmetric subspace, is a linear combination of the symmetric projectors for the representations $`1,27,77`$. For these, (154) implies

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }+8)I_SP^{(1)}`$ (155)
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }+\frac{10}{3})I_SP^{(27)}`$ (156)
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }2)I_SP^{(77)}\text{ }.`$ (157)
We could well have left out $`I_S`$ from these equations. Since

$$P^{(1)}+P^{(27)}+P^{(77)}=I_S\text{ },$$
(158)
the last four equations lead easily to

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Lambda }I_S+8P^{(1)}+\frac{10}{3}P^{(27)}2P^{(77)}`$
$`0`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Lambda }I_S+10P^{(1)}+\frac{16}{3}P^{(27)}2I_S\text{ }.`$ (159)
Since

$$(\mathrm{\Lambda })_{rs,ij}=c_{pri}c_{psj}\text{ },$$
(160)
and since we get the explicit expressions for the projectors from (145) and (146), we are directly lead to the important result

$$3d_{rs\alpha }d_{kl\alpha }=c_{prk}c_{psl}+c_{prl}c_{psk}+2(\delta _{rk}\delta _{sl}+\delta _{rl}\delta _{sk})\frac{10}{7}\delta _{rs}\delta _{kl}\text{ }.$$
(161)
This is a second class result because its derivation employs a characteristic equation. It is also an analogue of eq. (2.23) of , and is found in  as eq. (4.32b) of that paper. We note some immediate consequences. With the aid of the ordinary Jacobi identity, applied twice, once to treat each of the first two terms of the right side of (161), we deduce a further important result

$$d_{(ij}{}_{}{}^{\alpha }d_{k)l\alpha }^{}=\frac{6}{7}\delta _{(ij}\delta _{k)l}\text{ }.$$
(162)
Here the round brackets indicate symmetrisation of unit weight over the indices enclosed; sometimes indices are raised in a manner with no metric significance in order to exempt them from symmetrisation. The same comment will later apply to antisymmetrisation and square brackets. Also, we may apply $`d_{is\beta }`$ to (161) and deduce the identity

$$c_{pri}c_{psj}d_{ij\alpha }=\frac{10}{3}d_{rs\alpha }\text{ }.$$
(163)
Because it leads us to important results, we consider the what the above analysis can tell us if we wish to avoid any mention of the tensors $`d_{ij\alpha }`$. As in , we apply $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ to (159), and then use this equation again to eliminate $`P^{(27)}`$. Hence we find

$$0=\mathrm{\Lambda }^2I_S+\frac{4}{3}\mathrm{\Lambda }I_S\frac{140}{3}P^{(1)}\frac{20}{3}I_S\text{ }.$$
(164)
It is convenient to add to this the equation

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }^2I_A+4\mathrm{\Lambda }I_A=0\text{ }.$$
(165)
To establish (165), we make use of

$$(\mathrm{\Lambda }+4)I_AP^{(14)}=0\text{ },$$
(166)
which follows from (154), and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }I_A+4P^{(14)}=0\text{ },$$
(167)
which coincides with the Jacobi identity of $`g_2`$. This leads us to (165) and to the desired formula

$$0=\mathrm{\Lambda }^2+\frac{4}{3}\mathrm{\Lambda }I_S+4\mathrm{\Lambda }I_A\frac{140}{3}P^{(1)}\frac{20}{3}I_S\text{ },$$
(168)
and hence to

$$3c_{jmr}c_{knr}c_{mps}c_{nqs}=10(\delta _{jp}\delta _{kq}+\delta _{jq}\delta _{kp}+\delta _{jk}\delta _{pq})+8c_{jpr}c_{kqr}4c_{jqr}c_{kpr}\text{ }.$$
(169)
This can be written out as a formula for $`\mathrm{tr}ad_jad_kad_pad_q`$, and implies

$$\mathrm{tr}ad_{(j}ad_kad_pad_{q)}=10\delta _{(jk}\delta _{pq)}\text{ }.$$
(170)
As a further consequence of (165), we note $`\mathrm{\Lambda }I_A`$ has eigenvalues $`4`$ and $`0`$, corresponding to the representations $`14=(1,0)`$ and $`77^{}=(0,3)`$, thereby confirming that $`(0,3)`$ rather than $`77=(2,0)`$ is a constituent of the antisymmetric part of $`1414`$.

### 6.4 On the non-primitive quartic Casimir operator

First we quote the evaluation of a trace

$$\mathrm{tr}x_{(i}x_jx_kx_{l)}\mathrm{tr}H_{(i}H_jH_kH_{l)}=\delta _{(ij}\delta _{kl)}\text{ }.$$
(171)
Proof: A routine calculation based on two uses of (41) and evaluation of elementary traces yields the answer

$$\frac{4}{7}\delta _{(ij}\delta _{kl)}+\frac{1}{2}d_{(ij}{}_{\alpha }{}^{}d_{k)l\alpha }^{}\text{ },$$
(172)
and then (162) is used.

Second we define $`A=A_ix_i`$, $`A_iR`$, and show that

$$\mathrm{tr}A^4=(\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}A^2)^2\text{ }.$$
(173)
This trivial consequence of (171) indicates the absence (see  for an early proof) of a primitive quartic Casimir operator for $`g_2`$. It reflects the well-known fact that there are just two primitive Casimir operators of $`g_2`$, which have orders $`2`$ and $`6`$.

Third, we shall prove a stronger result regarding the non-primitive nature of the quartic Casimir of $`g_2`$. We introduce $`X=x_iX_i`$ where the $`x_i`$ are the matrices of the $`7\times 7`$ defining representation, and the $`X_i`$ are the abstract generators. Then define the quartic Casimir operator of $`g_2`$ by means of

$$𝒞^{(4)}=\mathrm{tr}X^4=\mathrm{tr}(x_ix_jx_kx_l)X_iX_jX_kX_l\text{ }.$$
(174)
To evaluate this correctly requires taking full account of the Lie algebra relations

$$[X_i,X_j]=ic_{ijk}X_k\text{ }.$$
(175)
It is routine to obtain

$$\mathrm{tr}(x_ix_jx_kx_l)=\mathrm{tr}(x_{(i}x_jx_kx_{l)})\frac{1}{3}(c_{klt}c_{ijt}c_{ilt}c_{jkt})\text{ }.$$
(176)
Using this result and (171) enables the contribution from the first term of (176) to (174) to be evaluated. The contribution from the other terms depends only on the use of (175), and of the identity (88). One is lead then to the answer

$$𝒞^{(4)}=(𝒞^{(2)}){}_{}{}^{2}+\frac{28}{3}𝒞^{(2)}\text{ }.$$
(177)
Again this result agrees with that given in . Okubo did not give details of his proof, indicating just that it was ‘involved’. The present proof depends on the introduction of a full range of invariant tensors and on gaining full control of their properties.

## 7 Trilinear tensor identities

We first remark that the product laws (41) – (46) give rise easily to one family of ‘three-tensor’ identities. For example

$$c_{ijk}=i\mathrm{tr}x_ix_jx_k=i\mathrm{tr}H_iH_jH_k=h_{iab}h_{jbc}h_{kca}\text{ }$$
(178)
upon use also of (62) and 60). Such expressions also, as noted, account for the appearance in later product laws of tensors defined in earlier ones. We quote two more results from this family

$`c_{abc}`$ $`=`$ $`c_{eaf}c_{fbg}c_{gce}`$ (179)
$`d_{\alpha \beta \gamma }`$ $`=`$ $`27d_{ab\alpha }d_{bc\beta }d_{ca\gamma }\text{ }.`$ (180)
Eq. (179) coincides with (114).

Next we give a listing of three tensor identities that do not arise in the same way as those just noted.

$`c_{piq}c_{qjr}c_{rkp}`$ $`=`$ $`4c_{ijk}`$ (181)
$`d_{jk\alpha }d_{li\alpha }c_{jlq}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{20}{7}c_{kiq}`$ (182)
$`c_{pri}c_{psj}d_{ij\alpha }`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{10}{3}d_{rs\alpha }`$ (183)
$`d_{ij\alpha }d_{jk\beta }d_{\alpha \beta \gamma }`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{22}{21}d_{ik\gamma }`$ (184)
$`d_{pq\alpha }d_{pi\beta }d_{qj\beta }`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{58}{63}d_{ij\alpha }`$ (185)
$`d_{\lambda \mu \alpha }d_{\mu \nu \beta }d_{\nu \lambda \gamma }`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{53}{7}d_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\text{ }.`$ (186)
We turn to the proof of these results. All have been confirmed using MAPLE. By a method that applies to any Lie algebra, we see that (181) follows directly from the Jacobi identity for $`g_2`$, upon use of (88). To prove (182), we reduce

$$[[x_i,x_j],x_k]=\{\{x_j,x_k\},x_i\}\{\{x_k,x_i\},x_j\}\text{ },$$
(187)
and reach an identity of the first class

$$c_{ijp}c_{klp}=\frac{8}{7}(\delta _{ik}\delta _{jl}\delta _{jk}\delta _{il})+(d_{ik\alpha }d_{jl\alpha }d_{jk\alpha }d_{il\alpha })\text{ }.$$
(188)
Now apply $`c_{jlq}`$ to (188). The result simplifies, with the aid of (181) and (88) to yield (182).

We have obtained (183) already as (163). Next we apply $`d_{ik\beta }`$ to (188) getting

$$c_{pri}c_{psj}d_{ij\beta }+d_{pq\beta }d_{pr\alpha }d_{qs\alpha }=\frac{152}{63}d_{rs\beta }\text{ }.$$
(189)
Now (183) implies (185).

The results (184) and (186) are easy to prove because the simple completeness relation (84) can be used. For example

$$d_{ij\alpha }d_{jk\beta }d_{\alpha \beta \gamma }=(H_iH_j)_{ba}(H_jH_k)_{dc}(Y_\alpha ){}_{ab}{}^{}(Y_\beta ){}_{cd}{}^{}(Y_\alpha ){}_{ef}{}^{}(Y_\beta ){}_{fg}{}^{}(Y_\gamma ){}_{ge}{}^{}\text{ }.$$
(190)
Two applications of (84) now allow the proof of (184) to be completed. The results (63), (106), (88), (84) and $`d_{ij\alpha }=\mathrm{tr}H_iH_jY_\alpha `$ are all used in the process.

Finally we note the absence of any simple result like those just proved for the quantity

$$d_{ij\alpha }d_{jk\beta }d_{ki\gamma }\text{ }.$$
(191)
It would be wrong to suppose this is a constant multiple of $`d_{\alpha \beta \gamma }`$. No such result exists, and MAPLE rejects such a conjecture. The vector space of third rank tensors totally symmetric in $`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma `$ has been analysed fully but we have no good reason to record the details.

## 8 Adjoint vectors and invariants

### 8.1 Results

Let the vector $`A_i,i\{1,\mathrm{},14\}`$ transform under the action of $`g_2`$ according to its adjoint representation. Then the vector

$$d_{ij}{}_{}{}^{\alpha }d_{kl\alpha }^{}A_jA_kA_l=\frac{6}{7}(A_pA_p)A_i\text{ },$$
(192)
is seen not to be linearly independent of $`A_i`$. Eq. (192) holds because we can freely put round symmetrisation brackets round the set of indices $`j,k,l`$, and employ the identity (159). The result is tantamount to the fact that the quartic Casimir of $`g_2`$ is not primitive. It suggests  that there should be a second adjoint vector, whose components are quintic in those of $`A_i`$, since we know a primitive sixth order invariant exists. In fact, the required vector $`C_i`$ is given by

$$C_i=d_{\alpha \beta \gamma }d_{ij}{}_{}{}^{\alpha }d_{kl}^{}{}_{}{}^{\beta }d_{pq\gamma }^{}A_jA_kA_lA_pA_q\text{ }.$$
(193)
Here we can use the $`A_r`$ factors to justify putting round brackets around the index set $`jklpq`$, and then see that $`i`$ can also be accommodated correctly within them because of the symmetry of the tensorial factors. Thus we write

$$C_i=T_{ijklpq}A_jA_kA_lA_pA_q\text{ },.$$
(194)
where the totally symmetric sixth rank tensor is given by

$$T_{ijklpq}=d_{\alpha \beta \gamma }d_{(ij}{}_{}{}^{\alpha }d_{kl}^{}{}_{}{}^{\beta }d_{pq)\gamma }^{}\text{ }.$$
(195)
Turning next to the construction of invariants or scalars out of the components of $`A_i`$, we see that there are quadratic and sixth order invariants

$$A_iA_i,A_iC_i\text{ },$$
(196)
as expected. However there are others. One is $`C_iC_i`$. Others use the $`27`$-component quantities

$$B_\alpha =d_{ij\alpha }A_iA_j\text{ },\text{ }D_\alpha =d_{\alpha \beta \gamma }B_\beta B_\gamma \text{ },$$
(197)
to build other scalars

$$B_\alpha B_\alpha ,B_\alpha D_\alpha ,D_\alpha D_\alpha \text{ }.$$
(198)
None of the additional scalars are primitive. Indeed easily we can see

$$B_\alpha D_\alpha =A_iC_i,B_\alpha B_\alpha =\frac{6}{7}A_iA_iA_jA_j\text{ },$$
(199)
leaving $`C_iC_i`$ and $`D_\alpha D_\alpha `$ to be given explicitly in terms of primitive invariants.

Also, the tensor $`T_{ijklpq}`$, while totally symmetric, is not traceless. For the optimal construction a sixth order scalar, we should construct    the traceless totally symmetric tensor

$$S_{ijklpq}=T_{ijklpq}\frac{88}{441}\delta _{(ij}\delta _{kl}\delta _{pq)}\text{ }.$$
(200)
such that

$$S_{iiklpq}=0\text{ }.$$
(201)
To establish (201), we need to open out the round brackets of the definition (195). Upon putting $`j=i`$, some terms vanish because of $`d_{ii\delta }=0`$. In fact this applies to $`3`$ out of $`15`$ distinct terms. The remainder are all equivalent, and such that (184) can be applied. This means that

$$T_{iiklpq}=\frac{4}{5}\frac{22}{21}\frac{6}{7}\delta _{(kl}\delta _{pq)}\text{ },$$
(202)
in which, at the very end, (162) has been used. Since putting $`j=i`$ in the $`\delta \delta \delta `$ term gives the same result, the proof is done.

### 8.2 On the sixth order invariant and non-primitive invariants

To get some measure of control of the sixth order Casimir operator, and to treat explicitly the non-primitivity of scalars such as $`C_iC_i`$ and $`D_\alpha D_\alpha `$ of orders $`10`$ and $`8`$, we use a basis in which $`A_i`$ has the components $`(a,b,0,\mathrm{},0)`$ so that $`A=A_ix_i`$ is diagonal

$$A=\mathrm{diag}(\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}a,\sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}a+\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}}b,\sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}a\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}}b,0,\sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}a+\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}}b,\sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}a\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}}b,\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}a)\text{ }.$$
(203)
From this we find

$$𝒞^{(2)}=A_iA_i=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}A^2=(a^2+b^2).$$
(204)
It is easy to evaluate explicitly the few tensor components needed to show that

$`B_\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`(\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}(a^2b^2),\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}2ab,\sqrt{\frac{4}{21}}(a^2+b^2),0,\mathrm{},0)`$ (205)
$`D_\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`(\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}(\frac{22}{21}a^44a^2b^2+\frac{2}{7}b^4,\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}(\frac{40}{21}a^3b+\frac{24}{7}ab^3),\frac{4}{7}(\sqrt{\frac{1}{21}}(a^2+b^2)^2,0,\mathrm{},0),`$
where the components $`\alpha =1,2,3`$ correspond to the ordering of (37) and (39). This enables us to verify easily the second result in (199), and to use the first one to deduce

$$𝒞^{(6)}=A_iC_i=\frac{88}{441}𝒞^{(2)}{}_{}{}^{3}+\frac{4}{9}(a^2b^2)(a^414a^2b^2+b^4).$$
(206)
The fraction in the first term is the same one as we found by independent calculations in (200). Thus if we define the optimal sixth order invariant $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}^{(6)}`$ that can be built using six copies of the vector $`A_i`$ as

$$\stackrel{~}{𝒞}{}_{}{}^{(6)}=S_{ijklpq}A_iA_jA_kA_lA_pA_q\text{ },$$
(207)
then its value in terms of $`a,b`$ is

$$\stackrel{~}{𝒞}{}_{}{}^{(6)}=\frac{4}{9}(a^2b^2)(a^24ab+b^2)(a^2+4ab+b^2)\text{ }.$$
(208)
The data accumulated in this section enables us to show

$$D_\alpha D_\alpha =\frac{16}{21}𝒞^{(2)}𝒞^{(6)}+\frac{88}{343}𝒞^{(2)}{}_{}{}^{4}\text{ }.$$
(209)
To treat $`C_iC_i`$, we note that

$$C_i=d_{ij\alpha }a_jD_\alpha \text{ }.$$
(210)
All the information is therefore at hand to allow us to obtain the result

$$C_iC_i=\frac{16}{147}𝒞^{(2)}{}_{}{}^{2}(\frac{11}{3}𝒞^{(6)}+\frac{71}{49}𝒞^{(2)}{}_{}{}^{3})\text{ },$$
(211)
it being easy to see how the factor $`𝒞^{(2)}^2`$ arises. MAPLE confirms the above results.

### 8.3 Further use of characteristic equations

Setting $`A=A_ix_i`$, we use the (easily programmable ) methods of Sec. 8.2 to find

$$\mathrm{tr}A^4=\frac{1}{4}(\mathrm{tr}A^2){}_{}{}^{2}\text{ },$$
(212)
the characteristic polynomial of $`A`$

$$\chi _A(t)=t^7\frac{1}{2}(\mathrm{tr}A^2)t^5+\frac{1}{16}(\mathrm{tr}A^2)^2t^3+\left(\frac{1}{96}(\mathrm{tr}A^2)^3\frac{1}{6}(\mathrm{tr}A^6)\right)t\text{ },$$
(213)
and hence

$`(\mathrm{tr}A^8)`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{5}{192}(\mathrm{tr}A^2)^4+\frac{2}{3}(\mathrm{tr}A^2)(\mathrm{tr}A^6)`$ (214)
$`(\mathrm{tr}A^{10})`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{64}(\mathrm{tr}A^2)^5+\frac{5}{16}(\mathrm{tr}A^2)^2(\mathrm{tr}A^6)\text{ },`$ (215)
which agrees with results established in  using a different method. From these results we can deduce the trace formulas

$`\mathrm{tr}\left(x_{(i_1}x_{i_2}\mathrm{}x_{i_4)}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _{(i_1i_2}\delta _{i_3i_4)}`$ (216)
$`\mathrm{tr}\left(x_{(i_1}x_{i_2}\mathrm{}x_{i_8)}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`=\frac{5}{12}\delta _{(i_1i_2}\mathrm{}\delta _{i_7i_8)}+\frac{4}{3}\delta _{(i_1i_2}\mathrm{tr}\left(x_{i_3}x_{i_4}\mathrm{}x_{i_8)}\right)`$ (217)
$`\mathrm{tr}\left(x_{(i_1}x_{i_2}\mathrm{}x_{i_{10)}}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\delta _{(i_1i_2}\mathrm{}\delta _{i_9i_{10})}+\frac{5}{4}\delta _{(i_1i_2}\delta _{i_3i_4}\mathrm{tr}\left(x_{i_5}x_{i_6}\mathrm{}x_{i_{10})}\right)\text{ },`$ (218)
given in terms of the two independent primitive traces

$$\mathrm{tr}(x_{(i_1}x_{i_2)})=2\delta _{i_1i_2}\text{ },\text{ }\mathrm{tr}\left(x_{(i_1}x_{i_2}\mathrm{}x_{i_6)}\right)\text{ }.$$
(219)
We can relate the latter trace to the tensors used in Sec. 8.1 to define the sixth order Casimir operator of $`g_2`$. With the help of (41) and (195), we find

$$\mathrm{tr}\left(x_{(i_1}x_{i_2}\mathrm{}x_{i_6)}\right)=\mathrm{tr}\left(x_{((i_1}x_{i_2)}x_{(i_3}x_{i_4)}x_{(i_5}x_{i_6))}\right)=\frac{26}{49}\delta _{(i_1i_2}\delta _{i_3i_4}\delta _{i_5i_6)}+\frac{1}{8}T_{i_i\mathrm{}i_6}\text{ }.$$
(220)
Turning next to the characteristic equation of the adjoint matrix $`B=A_iad_i`$, where $`(ad_i)_{jk}=ic_{ijk}`$, we quote from  the results

$`\mathrm{tr}B^2`$ $`=`$ $`4(\mathrm{tr}A^2)=8A_iA_i`$ (221)
$`\mathrm{tr}B^4`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{5}{2}(\mathrm{tr}A^2)^2`$ (222)
$`\mathrm{tr}B^6`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{15}{4}(\mathrm{tr}A^2)^326(\mathrm{tr}A^6)`$ (223)
$`\mathrm{tr}B^8`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{515}{96}(\mathrm{tr}A^2)^4\frac{160}{3}(\mathrm{tr}A^2)(\mathrm{tr}A^6)`$ (224)
$`\mathrm{tr}B^{10}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{431}{64}(\mathrm{tr}A^2)^5\frac{605}{8}(\mathrm{tr}A^2)^2(\mathrm{tr}A^6)\text{ },`$ (225)
noting that the characteristic equation,  eq. (A44), allows higher traces to be computed. Eq. (222) is equivalent to (170). From (223), we get

$$\mathrm{tr}(ad_{(i_1}\mathrm{}ad_{i_6)}=\frac{794}{49}\delta _{(i_1i_2}\delta _{i_3i_4}\delta _{i_5i_6)}\frac{13}{4}T_{i_i\mathrm{}i_6}\text{ },$$
(226)
and so on.


format: text

text:
# DFPD-01/TH/08 IPN-DR/01/005 𝜂' Mass and Chiral Symmetry Breaking at Large 𝑁_𝑐 and 𝑁_𝑓

## Abstract

We propose a method for implementing the large-$`N_c`$, large-$`N_f`$ limit of QCD at the effective Lagrangian level. Depending on the value of the ratio $`N_f/N_c`$, different patterns of chiral symmetry breaking can arise, leading in particular to different behaviors of the $`\eta ^{}`$-mass in the combined large-$`N`$ limit.

1. Large-$`N_c`$ considerations successfully explain many non-perturbative aspects of confining gauge theories . However, there are at least two exceptions -both related to a strong OZI rule violation- in which the $`1/N_c`$ expansion apparently fails: $`(i)`$ In the scalar channel the spectrum is not dominated by a nonet of ideally mixed states and chiral symmetry breaking exhibits an important dependence on the number $`N_f`$ of light quark flavors ; $`(ii)`$ At large $`N_c`$, the $`\eta ^{}`$-field becomes massless due to its relation to the U(1) anomaly while Nature realizes it like a heavy state. In this note we reconsider these problems in the limit in which both $`N_f`$ and $`N_c`$ tend to infinity with fixed ratio . Since, at least at lowest orders of perturbation theory, the (rescaled) QCD $`\beta `$-function (with $`g^2N_c`$ const.) only depends on the ratio $`N_f/N_c`$, we might expect that the hadronic spectrum resembles the physical one, in particular with chiral symmetry breakdown and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_H1`$ GeV. On the other hand, several hints (e.g. from the study of the conformal window, in QCD and its supersymmetric version), suggest a non trivial phase structure of the theory as a function of $`N_f`$ and $`N_c`$. One can in principle distinguish three different phases, characterized by different symmetries of the vacuum, depending on the ratio $`N_f`$/$`N_c`$: $`(a)`$ for low $`N_f`$/$`N_c`$ only the SUV($`N_f`$) remains unbroken; $`(b)`$ for higher $`N_f`$/$`N_c`$ the vacuum is invariant under a larger group, SUV($`N_f`$) $`\times `$ Zchiral($`N_f`$), where Zchiral($`N_f`$) is the center of the chiral symmetry group SUL($`N_f`$)$`\times `$SUR($`N_f`$) ; $`(c)`$ for high $`N_f`$/$`N_c`$ no spontaneous symmetry breaking takes place (and hence no confinement) and the symmetry of the vacuum is the whole SUL($`N_f`$)$`\times `$SUR($`N_f`$). Notice that case $`(b)`$ corresponds to the maximal possible symmetry of the vacuum in a confining vector-like theory. The existence of this phase is an assumption related to the issue of the non-perturbative renormalization of the bare Weingarten’s inequalities comparing axial-axial and pseudoscalar-pseudoscalar two point functions . We model the combined large-$`N_f`$, large-$`N_c`$ limit by adding to the usual light flavors $`q=(u,d,s)`$, a set of $`N`$ auxiliary flavors $`Q=(Q_1,\mathrm{},Q_N)`$ of common mass $`Mm_q`$, but still $`M\mathrm{\Lambda }_H`$. This mass $`M`$ should be considered sufficiently small so that a power series expansion makes sense, but simultaneously much larger than any of the light quark masses $`m_q`$, thus the auxiliary fields can be integrated out at sufficiently low-energy. We then formally deal with $`N_f=N+3n\mathrm{}`$ flavors, but only the three lightest ones are physical. The rôle of these auxiliary flavors should be analogous to the one of the strange quark, when one considers the SU(2)$`\times `$SU(2) chiral dynamics of $`u`$ and $`d`$ quarks.

2. Let $`N_f`$/$`N_c`$ be subcritical, so that we are in the Z$`{}_{\mathrm{chiral}}{}^{}(n)`$-asymmetric phase. The $`n^21`$ (pseudo) Goldstone bosons (GB) can be collected in a matrix $`\widehat{U}(x)`$SU($`n`$), (hereafter $`n\times n`$ matrices will be denoted by a hat) and their low-energy dynamics can be described by the effective Lagrangian

$$_{\text{sub}}=\frac{F^2}{4}\left\{D_\mu \widehat{U}D^\mu \widehat{U}^{}+2B_0\widehat{U}^{}\widehat{\chi }+\widehat{\chi }^{}\widehat{U}\right\}.$$
(1)
where $`\widehat{\chi }`$ is the scalar-pseudoscalar source,

$$_{\widehat{\chi }}^{\mathrm{QCD}}=\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_L\widehat{\chi }\mathrm{\Psi }_R\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_R\widehat{\chi }^{}\mathrm{\Psi }_L,\mathrm{\Psi }=\left(\begin{array}{c}q\\ Q\end{array}\right),$$
(2)
and $`\mathrm{}`$ denotes flavor trace. The $`n\times n`$ source matrix will be chosen as

$$\widehat{\chi }=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\chi & \mathrm{𝟎}\\ \mathrm{𝟎}& M\mathrm{e}^{i\theta /N}\mathrm{𝟏}_{N\times N}\end{array}\right),$$
(3)
where $`\chi `$ is the $`3\times 3`$ light quark source (mass term), $`\theta `$ is the vacuum angle and $`M`$ is real and positive. Notice that there are no sources attached to the $`N`$ auxiliary flavors and the corresponding GB degrees of freedom are frozen: in the tree approximation the $`n\times n`$ GB field matrix becomes

$$\widehat{U}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}U\mathrm{e}^{i\phi /3}& \mathrm{𝟎}\\ \mathrm{𝟎}& \mathrm{e}^{i\phi /N}\mathrm{𝟏}_{N\times N}\end{array}\right)\mathrm{SU}(n),$$
(4)
where $`U`$ SU(3) collects the eight physical GB fields. The remaining U(1) field $`\phi `$ will be interpreted as the $`\eta ^{}`$-field: for $`\chi =m\mathrm{𝟏}_{3\times 3}`$ (no mixing),

$$\eta ^{}=F\sqrt{\frac{n}{6N}}\phi $$
(5)
and the corresponding mass, for $`m=0`$ is

$$M_\eta ^{}^2=\frac{6B_0M}{n}0,$$
(6)
which vanishes in the (combined) large-$`N`$ limit. Hence, in this phase, $`\eta ^{}`$-mass behaves as in the standard $`N_c\mathrm{}`$, $`N_f`$-fixed limit.

3. For higher $`N_f`$/$`N_c`$ we expect the Zchiral($`n`$)-symmetric phase to occur: the vacuum is symmetric under

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{L,R}\mathrm{e}^{2\pi i\frac{k_{L,R}}{n}}\mathrm{\Psi }_{L,R},k_{L,R}=1,\mathrm{},n1,$$
(7)
in addition to the usual SUV($`n`$). Notice that this Zchiral($`n`$) is also a subgroup of the (anomalous) UL(1)$`\times `$UR(1). This additional symmetry of the vacuum finds its natural interpretation within the effective theory described by the Lagrangian $`(\widehat{U},\widehat{\chi },\theta )`$. The GB field $`\widehat{U}(x)`$ SU($`n`$) is usually understood as simply connected to $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$: $`\widehat{U}(x)=\mathrm{𝟏}+i\phi _a(x)T^a+\mathrm{}`$ and, in the corresponding effective theory, the integration measure $`𝒟\widehat{U}`$ is treated accordingly. However SU($`n`$) is not simply connected. We are free to choose an integration measure treating all sectors of SU($`n`$) alike:

$$𝒟\widehat{U}\mathrm{e}^{i{\scriptscriptstyle 𝑑x(\widehat{U},\widehat{\chi },\theta )}}𝒟\widehat{U}\underset{k=0}{\overset{n1}{}}\mathrm{e}^{i{\scriptscriptstyle 𝑑x(\widehat{U}\mathrm{e}^{2\pi ik/n},\widehat{\chi },\theta )}},$$
(8)
where $`\widehat{U}`$ and $`𝒟\widehat{U}`$ again concern the connected vicinity of $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$. This freedom derives from the fact that an effective theory is merely constrained by Ward identities (WI), which fix its local but not its global aspects. In particular the usual solution of the anomalous U(1) WI only guarantees $`(\widehat{U},\widehat{\chi },\theta )=(\widehat{U},\widehat{\chi }\mathrm{e}^{i\theta /n})`$ for $`\theta 0`$. However, under the Zchiral($`n`$) transformation one has

$$(\widehat{U}\mathrm{e}^{\frac{2\pi ik}{n}},\widehat{\chi }\mathrm{e}^{i\theta /n})=(\widehat{U},\widehat{\chi }\mathrm{e}^{i\frac{\theta +2\pi k}{n}}),$$
(9)
i.e. the above prescription (8) restores the $`2\pi `$-periodicity in the vacuum angle . The Zchiral($`n`$)-symmetry of the vacuum expressed in terms of a local Lagrangian amounts to the constraint

$$(\widehat{U}\mathrm{e}^{\frac{2\pi ik}{n}},\widehat{\chi },\theta )=(\widehat{U},\widehat{\chi },\theta )=(\widehat{U},\widehat{\chi }\mathrm{e}^{i\frac{\theta +2\pi k}{n}}),$$
(10)
which is not necessarily true in general and it will be taken as a *definition* of the Zchiral($`n`$)-symmetric phase. The effective Lagrangian exhibiting Zchiral($`n`$)-symmetry consists of two parts, $`=_1+_2`$. $`_1`$ has the whole continuous UA(1) symmetry, $`\widehat{\chi }\mathrm{e}^{i\alpha }\widehat{\chi }`$, i.e. it is independent of the $`\theta `$ angle,

$$_1=\frac{F^2}{4}\left\{D_\mu \widehat{U}D^\mu \widehat{U}^{}+Z\widehat{U}^{}\widehat{\chi }\widehat{\chi }^{}\widehat{U}+\mathrm{}\right\},$$
(11)
where dots stand for pure source and higher orders terms. $`_2`$ consists of terms which break UA(1) down to Zchiral($`n`$). The lowest order term with this property reads

$`_2={\displaystyle \underset{k}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\{j_1\mathrm{}j_k\}}{}}A_{\{j_1\mathrm{}j_k\}}^{(k)}\left(\widehat{U}^{}\widehat{\chi }\right)^{j_1}\mathrm{}\left(\widehat{U}^{}\widehat{\chi }\right)^{j_k}+\text{h.c},`$ (12)
$`\text{where}j_1,\mathrm{},j_k=1,\mathrm{},n,j_1+\mathrm{}+j_k=n.`$ (13)
Despite the fact that the Lagrangians (11) and (12) are of different orders in $`\widehat{\chi }`$ they can coexist, since they describe two independent sectors of the effective theory: Eq. (12) is holomorphic and is not renormalized by loops arising from the U(1)-invariant sector as represented by Eq. (11). Eq. (12) becomes more transparent using Eqs. (3)-(4) and expanding in powers of the light quark masses $`\chi `$. Denoting by $`W`$ the $`3\times 3`$ matrix and by $`\zeta `$ the phase factor,

$$W=U^{}\chi \mathrm{e}^{i\frac{\phi }{3}},\zeta =\mathrm{e}^{i\frac{\theta +\phi }{N}},$$
(14)
Eq. (12) can be rewritten as

$`_2=a_n(M\zeta )^n+b_nW(M\zeta )^{n1}+c_nW^2(M\zeta )^{n2}`$ (15)
$`+d_nW^2(M\zeta )^{n2}+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.+𝒪(W^3).`$ (16)
Similarly, the reduction SU($`n`$)$``$SU(3)$`\times `$U(1) of the component $`_1`$ can be expressed in terms of the variables (14) as

$`_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F^2}{4}}\{D_\mu U^{}D^\mu U+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{3N}}_\mu \phi ^\mu \phi `$ (18)
$`+MNZW\zeta ^{}+W^{}\zeta +ZW^{}W\}+\mathrm{}.`$
In the tree approximation the $`\eta ^{}`$-mass merely arises from the holomorphic part $`_2`$, ($`m_u=m_d=m_s=0`$),

$$M_\eta ^{}^2=\frac{12N}{n}\frac{1}{F^2}a_nM^n.$$
(19)
In contrast to the Zchiral($`n`$)-asymmetric phase, \[cf. Eq. (1)\], which contains a genuine condensate term $`B_0`$, such a term is absent in the Zchiral($`n`$)-symmetric phase. However, in the reduction (3)-(4), an induced condensate appears through the OZI violation terms \[see Fig. (1)\] (the Zchiral($`n`$)-symmetry is explicitly broken by the $`Q`$-mass term),

$$F^2B_{\mathrm{induced}}=\frac{1}{2}F^2MNZ+2b_nM^{n1},$$
(20)
where the first term on the r.h.s. arises from $`_1`$, whereas the second term comes from the holomorphic Lagrangian. The quadratic terms in $`W`$ of Eq. (15) contribute to the subleading low-energy constants $`L_6`$, $`L_7`$, $`L_8`$ , denoted by hat

$$\begin{array}{ccc}B_{\mathrm{induced}}^2(\widehat{L}_6\widehat{L}_7)\hfill & =& \frac{1}{32}F^2Z,\hfill \\ B_{\mathrm{induced}}^2\widehat{L}_8\hfill & =& \frac{1}{4}c_nM^{n2},\hfill \\ B_{\mathrm{induced}}^2(\widehat{L}_6+\widehat{L}_7)\hfill & =& \frac{1}{4}d_nM^{n2}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(21)
4. We now turn to the leading behavior of all these induced low-energy constants in the combined large-$`N`$ limit. We consider (connected) correlators of quark bilinears $`\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Psi }`$. Usual large-$`N_c`$ counting rules are maintained. In addition, every quark loop gives rise to a flavor trace involving all flavor matrices contained in that loop. Consequently, each internal (“sea”) quark loop will be enhanced by a factor $`N_f=n`$ and suppressed (as usual) by a factor $`1/N_c`$. (However, if a quark loop is valence, i.e. attached to an external flavor source, it will not lead to a flavor-enhancement factor.) In particular, the constants $`F^2`$ and $`Z`$ in Eq. (11) behave as $`F^2N`$ and $`Z1/N`$. The contribution to the fermionic determinant can be formally written (in a large Euclidean box) like

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{exp}\underset{k}{}\mathrm{log}(1+\frac{\lambda _k^2\omega _k^2}{\omega _k^2+M^2})^n,$$
(22)
where $`\lambda _k`$ are Dirac operator eigenvalues and $`\omega _k`$ the corresponding eigenvalues in the absence of interactions. Hence at large-$`N_c`$ one expects $`\lambda _k^2\omega _k^2𝒪(g^2)𝒪(1/N_c)`$. This illustrates the mechanism by which the fermionic determinant stays non trivial and finite in the combined large-$`N`$ limit, merely depending on the ratio $`N_f`$/$`N_c`$. The large-$`N`$ counting of the holomorphic part is more subtle: we deal with a large-$`N_f`$, large-$`N_c`$ behavior of a large-$`N`$-point function. In the tree approximation, the holomorphic part of the Lagrangian (at $`\widehat{U}=\mathrm{𝟏}`$) is connected with a QCD correlation function in a Euclidean finite volume $`V`$

$`_2(\mathrm{𝟏},\widehat{\chi })`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k}{\overset{n1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\{j_1\mathrm{}j_k\}}{}}A_{\{j_1\mathrm{}j_k\}}^{(k)}\widehat{\chi }^{j_1}\mathrm{}\widehat{\chi }^{j_k}`$ (23)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n!}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{V}}\left[{\displaystyle 𝑑x\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_L\widehat{\chi }\mathrm{\Psi }_R(x)}\right]^n_{\mathrm{con}}.`$ (24)
The average on r.h.s. of Eq. (23) can be evaluated at non zero masses $`m`$ and $`M`$. The other chirality part $`\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_R\mathrm{\Psi }_L`$ will contribute but not to the lowest order $`\widehat{\chi }^n`$ of the holomorphic part of the Lagrangian. Let us introduce the notation

$$\begin{array}{c}K=𝑑x_{i=1}^N\overline{Q}_L^i(x)Q_R^i(x),\hfill \\ k_i=𝑑x\overline{q}_{iL}(x)q_{iR}(x),i=1,2,3.\hfill \end{array}$$
(25)
Choosing in Eq. (23) $`\widehat{\chi }=\text{diag}(m_1,m_2,m_3,M,\mathrm{},M)`$, and combining it with Eq. (15) one gets

$`\{a_nM^n+b_nM^{n1}(m_1+m_2+m_3)`$ (26)
$`+\left[c_n(m_1^2+m_2^2+m_3^2)+d_n(m_1+m_2+m_3)^2\right]M^{n2}`$ (27)
$`+\mathrm{}\}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{n!}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{V}}(MK+m_1k_1+m_2k_2+m_3k_3)^n_{\mathrm{con}}.`$ (28)
Comparing the coefficients of $`M^n`$

$$a_nM^n=\frac{1}{n!}M^n\frac{1}{V}K^n_{\mathrm{con}}.$$
(29)
The single quark loop contribution to Eq. (29) reads

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{V}}K^n=(n1)!{\displaystyle \frac{1}{V}}{\displaystyle }dx_1\mathrm{}dx_n\mathrm{Tr}\{S^{RL}(x_1,x_2)`$ (30)
$`S^{RL}(x_2,x_3)\mathrm{}S^{RL}(x_n,x_1)\}\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{𝟏}_{N\times N}),`$ (31)
where $`S^{RL}(x,y)`$ denotes the chiral part of the fermion propagator

$`S^{RL}(x,y)=\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+\gamma _5}{\sqrt{2}}}\right){\displaystyle \underset{\lambda _k0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{M}{M^2+\lambda _k^2}}\phi _k(x)\phi _k^{}(y)\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+\gamma _5}{\sqrt{2}}}\right)`$

in terms of the orthonormal Fujikawa chiral basis  ($`\phi _k`$ is the Dirac eigenvector belonging to the eigenvalue $`\lambda _k`$) and $`\mathrm{}`$ stands for the average over gluon configurations with insertion of fermionic determinant. The factor $`(n1)!`$ in Eq. (30) counts the different ways of connecting $`n`$ points by a single one quark loop. In fact a closer examination of the combinatorics of multiloop diagrams’ contributions to $`K^n`$ in Eq. (30) reveals that none of them is more important that the one with the least number of quark loops. The integrals in Eq. (30) can be performed with the result

$$a_nM^n\underset{\stackrel{V\mathrm{}}{n\mathrm{}}}{lim}\frac{1}{V}\underset{\lambda _k0}{}\left(1+\frac{\lambda _k^2}{M^2}\right)^n.$$
(32)
Even if we do not consider here the chiral limit $`M0`$, the behavior of Eq. (32) is merely controlled by the average density of small Dirac eigenvalues. Indeed, for any fixed $`M`$ and (arbitrary small) $`ϵ`$ the eigenvalues $`\lambda _k^2ϵ`$ do not contribute to the large-$`N`$ limit of Eq. (32). The latter should be of the order of the average number of states $`𝒩_ϵ`$ with $`\lambda _k^2ϵ`$. On general grounds one expects $`𝒩_ϵVN_c`$ . (The density of states should grow proportionally with $`N_c`$.) Hence, in the combined large-$`N`$ limit $`a_nM^n𝒪(N_c)`$ and according to Eq. (19)

$$M_\eta ^{}^2\mathrm{const},$$
(33)
thus not suppressed anymore. Similar conclusions have been reached also in different contexts . The remaining coefficients in Eq. (26) can be found similarly:

$`b_nM^{n1}{\displaystyle \frac{M^{n1}}{(n1)!}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{V}}K^{n1}k_1_{\mathrm{con}},`$ (34)
$`(c_n+d_n)M^{n2}{\displaystyle \frac{M^{n2}}{(n2)!}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{V}}K^{n2}k_1^2_{\mathrm{con}},`$ (35)
receiving leading contribution from at least two quark loops and consequently suppressed by $`1/N_c`$ relative to Eq. (32). Finally

$$d_nM^{n2}\frac{M^{n2}}{(n2)!}\frac{1}{V}K^{n2}k_1k_2_{\mathrm{con}},$$
(36)
which involves at least three quark loops. This leads to the final estimate

$$b_nM^{n1}c_nM^{n2}𝒪(1),d_nM^{n2}𝒪(1/N_c).$$
(37)
As a consequence, the holomorphic contribution to the induced condensate, Eq. (20), is suppressed relative to the non-holomorphic one. The latter is given by the OZI rule violating constant $`Z`$ which is suppressed by 1/$`N_c`$ but this suppression is compensated by a flavor enhancement factor $`N=n3`$. As a result

$$F^2B_{\mathrm{induced}}𝒪(N)+𝒪(1),$$
(38)
where the first term is the non-holomorphic and the second one the holomorphic contribution. For the tree contribution quoted in Eq. (21) the large-$`N`$ counting reads

$`B_{\mathrm{induced}}^2(\widehat{L}_6\widehat{L}_7)B_{\mathrm{induced}}^2\widehat{L}_8𝒪(1),`$ (40)
$`B_{\mathrm{induced}}^2(\widehat{L}_6+\widehat{L}_7)𝒪(1/N).`$
5. More comments on the large-$`N`$ behavior of the $`\eta ^{}`$-mass are in order. The usual argument for finding the behavior of the $`\eta ^{}`$-mass  derives from the necessity to cancel the $`\theta `$-dependence of the pure gluodynamics when massless quarks are added. This is only possible when the 1/$`N_c`$ suppression of the internal quark loops is compensated by the $`\eta ^{}`$-pole contribution $`M_\eta ^{}^2`$. This leads to the Veneziano-Witten’s formula and the vanishing of $`M_\eta ^{}^2`$ as 1/$`N_c`$. On the other hand, in the combined large-$`N`$ limit internal quark loops are not suppressed, and it is not possible to isolate pure glue contributions by large-$`N`$ arguments. As a consequence the $`\eta ^{}`$-mass does not vanish anymore and its relation to the topological susceptibility is lost. We may as well consider the $`\eta ^{}`$-field as heavy and integrate it out. At tree level this amounts to the shift in the constant $`L_7`$

$$L_7=\widehat{L}_7\frac{F^2}{48M_\eta ^{}^2},L_i=\widehat{L}_i,(i7),$$
(41)
as it is seen by evaluating the singlet minus octet pseudoscalar two-point function .

6. Let us summarize the results of this work. We have asked whether the combined large-$`N`$ limit (as defined in this paper) helps understanding the peculiar properties of QCD in the vacuum and $`\eta ^{}`$-channels. $`(i)`$ In the scalar channel, this limit suggests a flavor enhancement of the OZI rule violation, leading in particular to the emergence of an *induced quark condensate* \[Eq. (20)\] on top of the genuine condensate $`B_0`$ \[c.f. Eq. (1)\]. In the large $`N_f`$/$`N_c`$ phase in which the genuine condensate is forbidden due to the Zchiral($`n`$)-symmetry, the induced condensate plays the rôle of $`B_0`$ in describing chiral symmetry breaking. An induced condensate would manifest itself by an important flavor dependence \[as in Eq. (20)\] and it could be, in principle, disentangled from $`B_0`$ in this way . $`(ii)`$ A distinctive feature of the Zchiral($`n`$)-symmetric phase is the non-vanishing $`\eta ^{}`$-mass in the combined large-$`N`$ limit. (Since this phase is expected for large $`N_f`$/$`N_c`$, the usual large-$`N_c`$, fixed-$`N_f`$ arguments do not apply.) In particular, the relation of the $`M_\eta ^{}`$ to the axial anomaly and to the topological susceptibility of the pure YM theory are now modified. $`(iii)`$ The place of the scale $`M`$ in building $`\eta ^{}`$-mass, induced condensate and the low-energy constants $`L_6,L_7`$ and $`L_8`$ is important and not entirely understood. Special attention should be payed to the rôle of $`M`$ in the low-energy expansion and in the renormalization of the whole effective theory. We have calculated the one-loop contribution to all the above mentioned quantities. Qualitatively, they do not modify any of our conclusions.

Acknowledgments This work was supported in part by EC-Contract No. ERBFMRX-CT980169 (EURODA$`\mathrm{\Phi }`$NE).