supersymmetric theories possess remarkable properties on the quantum level .
these properties are provided by non - renormalization theorems according to which supersymmetric theories have a much better ultraviolet behavior than the non - supersymmetric ones .
the most famous example is , certainly , the @xmath5 , @xmath6 supersymmetric yang  mills ( sym ) theory , which is finite conformal invariant quantum field theory model @xcite .
perturbative quantum corrections in @xmath5 , @xmath0 sym theories are finite starting from the two - loop approximation @xcite .
@xmath5 , @xmath7 supersymmetric theories have less number of independent renormalization constants in comparison with the non - supersymmetric ones and the superpotential has no quantum corrections @xcite .
moreover , it is possible to find an expression for a @xmath2-function of @xmath1 supersymmetric theories , which is exact in all orders @xcite .
( for theories containing chiral matter superfields this expression relates the @xmath2-function with the anomalous dimension of the matter superfields . )
this expression for the @xmath2-function is called the exact novikov , shifman , vainshtein , and zakharov ( nsvz ) @xmath2-function .
the most elegant approach to the non - renormalization theorems is obtained in the framework of the superfield formulation of supersymmetric theories . in this case , the proof of the non - renormalization theorems is based on three points : ( i ) superspace structure of superpropagators , containing the delta - functions of anticommuting variables that allow to shrink the loops into dots in @xmath8 space , ( ii ) the superfield background field method for supersymmetric gauge theories , and ( iii ) an assumption about existence of a regularization manifestly preserving the supersymmetry ( see e.g. @xcite ) .
first two points are realized in the explicit form . as to the last one
, it is not very clear from the beginning , how to construct a regularization which preserves the supersymmetry and which will be convenient for practical computations of supergraphs ( see e.g. @xcite ) . therefore , a part of the proofs of the non - renormalization theorems based on the above assumption needs an additional justification .
it is known that the usually used dimensional regularization @xcite , explicitly breaks the supersymmetry ( see e.g. @xcite ) , because numbers of bosonic and fermionic degrees of freedom differently depend on the space - time dimension .
most calculations of quantum corrections in supersymmetric theories are done using the regularization by the dimensional reduction @xcite , which is a special modification of the dimensional regularization , and the @xmath9-scheme . using @xmath9-scheme the finiteness of the @xmath6 sym theory
was verified by explicit calculations in one- @xcite , two- @xcite , three- @xcite , and four - loop @xcite approximations .
vanishing of two- and three - loop contributions to the @xmath2-function of the @xmath10 sym theory was explicitly demonstrated in @xcite .
the @xmath2-function for a general @xmath7 sym theory was calculated in one- @xcite , two- @xcite , three- @xcite , and four - loop @xcite approximations .
( the result agrees with the exact nsvz @xmath2-function only in the one- and two - loop approximations , where a @xmath2-function is scheme - independent . in the higher orders the nsvz @xmath2-function can be obtained only after a specially constructed finite renormalization @xcite . )
however , it is known that the dimensional reduction is not consistent from the mathematical point of view @xcite . due to this inconsistency
any @xmath11 supersymmetry can be broken by quantum corrections in higher loops @xcite .
this means that the non - renormalization theorems are not completely justified in framework of dimensional reduction and the problem of their justification is in general open .
other methods can be also used @xcite for calculations of quantum corrections . in principle , it is possible even to use non - invariant regularizations , if a subtraction scheme is tuned in such a way that the slavnov
taylor identities are valid for the renormalized effective action @xcite . however , for practical purposes it is much better to use an invariant regularization .
moreover , the existence of a regularization which preserves supersymmetries of a theory is a key step for proving the non - renormalization theorems . in order to construct an invariant regularization
it is convenient to formulate a theory in terms of @xmath1 superfields , because in this case @xmath1 supersymmetry is a manifest symmetry .
a mathematically consistent invariant regularization , which does not break @xmath1 supersymmetry , is the higher covariant derivative regularization @xcite . in the supersymmetric case it can be formulated in terms of @xmath7
superfields @xcite and , therefore , does not break @xmath1 supersymmetry .
in addition to the supersymmetric regularization , manifestly supersymmetric quantization of a theory also requires supersymmetric gauge fixing procedure . in the case of @xmath1 supersymmetric theories structure of divergences
can be studied either using the component fields in the wess  zumino gauge , or using the superfield formulation . in the latter case
the gauge can be fixed without breaking @xmath1 supersymmetry @xcite and the quantum corrections are calculated in a manifestly @xmath1 supersymmetric way that makes this procedure very convenient .
application of the higher covariant derivative regularization ( complemented by a supersymmetric gauge condition ) to calculation of quantum corrections for @xmath1 supersymmetric theories allows to explain naturally the origin of the exact nsvz @xmath2-function .
loop integrals for the @xmath2-function appear to be integrals of total derivatives @xcite and even integrals of double total derivatives @xcite
. a qualitative explanation of this fact can be given by analyzing feynman rules @xcite using a method proposed in @xcite . because the integrands in integrals which determine a @xmath2-function are total derivatives , at least one of the loop integrals can be calculated analytically .
this gives the nsvz relation between the @xmath2-function and the anomalous dimension which are defined in terms of the bare coupling constant @xcite .
for the @xmath1 supersymmetric electrodynamics this was proved in all orders @xcite . as a consequence , in the abelian case
the nsvz @xmath2-function was obtained exactly in all orders of the perturbation theory for the renormalization group functions defined in terms of the bare coupling constant .
if the renormalization group functions are defined in terms of the renormalized coupling constant , the nsvz @xmath2-function is obtained in a special subtraction scheme , which can be naturally constructed if the theory is regularized by higher covariant derivatives @xcite .
this ( nsvz ) scheme is obtained by imposing the boundary conditions ( [ nsvz_scheme ] ) on the renormalization constants .
however , so far there is no proof that in non - abelian theories the exact nsvz @xmath2-function is obtained with the higher covariant derivative regularization in all orders .
nevertheless , arguments based on anomalies @xcite and explicit calculations in the lowest loops @xcite allow to suggest this .
therefore , using the invariant regularization for @xmath1 supersymmetric theories it is possible to make general conclusions concerning the structure of divergences .
existence of an invariant regularization is also needed for proving that the @xmath2-function of @xmath0 sym theories vanishes beyond the one - loop approximation @xcite .
the higher covariant derivative regularization is formulated in terms of @xmath1 superfields .
certainly , @xmath0 sym theories can be written in terms of @xmath1 superfields ( see e.g. @xcite ) . however , in this case only @xmath1 supersymmetry is manifest , the second supersymmetry being hidden and on - shell .
versions of the higher covariant derivative regularization so far used for explicit calculations preserve only @xmath1 supersymmetry .
( a version of the higher derivative regularization for @xmath0 supersymmetric theories was constructed in @xcite , but the higher derivative term , which is invariant under both supersymmetries , was not presented . ) therefore , the @xmath1 higher derivative regularization being applied to @xmath11 extended supersymmetric theories can only state that @xmath1 supersymmetry is preserved .
it does not guarantee that total @xmath0 supersymmetry is not broken by quantum corrections .
therefore , the effective action is invariant only under the manifest supersymmetry , and it is not clear , whether it is invariant under the second ( hidden ) supersymmetry .    in this paper , using the formulation of @xmath0 sym theories in terms of @xmath1 superfields , we construct a manifestly @xmath1 supersymmetric higher covariant derivative regularization , which is also invariant under the hidden supersymmetry .
this regularization guarantees that all loop quantum corrections are automatically manifestly @xmath1 supersymmetric , and invariance under the hidden supersymmetry can be broken only by the gauge fixing procedure .
( this situation is similar to the using of the wess - zumino gauge in @xmath1 supersymmetric theories : supersymmetry is also broken only by the gauge fixing procedure . )
we find that if the effective action is invariant under the background gauge transformations and background @xmath0 supersymmetry , then all anomalous dimensions of the chiral superfields vanish .
staring from the exact nsvz @xmath2-function we prove that beyond one loop the divergences are completely determined by the anomalous dimension @xmath12 of the chiral superfield @xmath3 ( which forms the @xmath0 vector supermultiplet together with the gauge superfield @xmath4 ) . as a result , vanishing the @xmath2-function beyond the one - loop approximation depends on whether the this anomalous dimension vanishes or not .
this paper is organized as follows : in sect .
[ section_regularization ] we construct the higher derivative regularization for @xmath0 supersymmetric theories which is manifestly @xmath1 supersymmetric and also possesses the additional hidden supersymmetry .
a higher derivative term and the pauli  villars determinants proposed in this section are invariant under both supersymmetries .
( a derivation of the @xmath0 supersymmetric higher derivative term by the noether method is described in appendix [ appendix_noether ] . )
however , the second supersymmetry is broken by the gauge fixing procedure .
the renormalization of the considered model is discussed in sect .
[ section_renormalization ] . in sect .
[ section_invariance ] we prove that if the effective action is invariant under the background @xmath0 supersymmetry , then the anomalous dimension @xmath13 vanishes . in sect .
[ section_finiteness_and_nsvz ] starting from the exact nsvz @xmath2-function we derive a relation between @xmath2-function and the function @xmath13 . according to this relation , the nsvz @xmath2-function gets no corrections beyond one - loop if @xmath13 vanishes
. one - loop calculation of quantum corrections with the constructed regularization is presented in sect .
[ section_one - loop ] .
the results are briefly discussed in the conclusion .
[ section_regularization ]    in this paper we consider the @xmath0 sym theory with matter .
it is convenient to describe this theory in terms of @xmath1 superfields @xcite . using this notation
the action can be written as    @xmath14    where @xmath15 is a bare coupling constant , and the real superfield @xmath4 contains the gauge field @xmath16 as a component .
a superfield strength of the gauge superfield @xmath4 is defined by    @xmath17    ( in our notation indices of right spinors are denoted by the latin letters , and indices of left spinors are denoted by latin letters with dots .
vector indices are denoted by greek letters . )
the chiral superfield @xmath3 belongs to the adjoint representation of the gauge group .
together with the superfield @xmath4 it forms the multiplet of the @xmath0 sym theory .
the chiral superfields @xmath18 and @xmath19 form an @xmath10 hypermultiplet .
the superfield @xmath18 lies in a representation @xmath20 , which can be , in general , reducible .
the superfield @xmath19 lies in the conjugated representation @xmath21 . for simplicity
the action is written for a theory with a single coupling constant ( i.e. the gauge group is simple ) and a single mass @xmath22 ( this corresponds to the irreducible representation @xmath20 ) .
the results described below can be easily generalized to more complicated cases .
the theory ( [ n=2_action ] ) is invariant under the supersymmetric gauge transformations    @xmath23    where the parameter @xmath24 is an arbitrary chiral scalar superfield which takes values in the lie algebra of the gauge group .
( in the second string @xmath24 should be certainly presented as @xmath25 matrix . ) also the theory ( [ n=2_action ] ) is invariant under two supersymmetries .
the first supersymmetry is a manifest symmetry , because the action is written in terms of the @xmath1 superfields .
the transformations of this supersymmetry can be also written in terms of the @xmath1 superfields @xcite .
for this purpose it is convenient to present the exponent of the gauge superfield as    @xmath26    and define the right and left spinor gauge covariant derivatives    @xmath27    respectively .
then the transformations of the manifest supersymmetry in terms of the @xmath1 superfields can be written as    @xmath28;\vphantom{\frac{1}{2}}\nonumber\\ & & \delta\phi = i \bar d^2\big(e^{-2v } d^a \xi\ , d_a(e^{2v}\phi ) + \frac{1}{2 } d^2\xi \phi\big);\nonumber\\ & & \delta\widetilde \phi = i \bar d^2\big(e^{2v^t } d^a \xi\ , d_a(e^{-2v^t}\widetilde \phi ) + \frac{1}{2 } d^2\xi \widetilde \phi\big),\end{aligned}\ ] ]    where @xmath29 is a real scalar superfield which does not depend on the space - time coordinates .
this superfield is a parameter of the transformations of the manifest supersymmetry .
the action ( [ n=2_action ] ) is also invariant under the transformations of the second on - shell supersymmetry . in terms of the @xmath1
superfields these transformations have the form    @xmath30    where @xmath31 is a chiral superfield independent of the space - time coordinates .    in order to regularize the theory ( [ n=2_action ] )
we add to its action a term @xmath32 with higher covariant derivatives .
certainly , this term is not uniquely defined , because a number of derivatives can be arbitrary . in this paper
we construct the simplest variant of this term , which is proportional to @xmath33 , where @xmath34 is a dimensionful parameter with the dimension of a mass . in appendix [ appendix_noether ] using the noether method we construct an expression for the action @xmath32 invariant under @xmath0 supersymmetry .
it can be written in the following form :    @xmath35 \vphantom{\frac{1}{2}}\nonumber\\ & & + 4(e^{-\omega^+ } \bar w^{\dot a } e^{\omega^+ } ) \big[(e^\omega \phi e^{-\omega}),\bar\nabla_{\dot a}(e^{-\omega^+ } \phi^+ e^{\omega^+})\big ] -8 \big [ ( e^\omega \phi e^{-\omega } ) , ( e^{-\omega^+ } \phi^+ e^{\omega^+})\big]^2 \bigg)\bigg\}.\end{aligned}\ ] ]    it is easy to see that after adding this term the divergences remain only in one - loop supergraphs , which is a typical feature of the higher derivative regularization @xcite .
therefore , it is necessary to regularize the remaining one - loop divergences .
usually for this purpose the pauli  villars determinants should be inserted into the generating functional @xcite . however , in the considered case it is necessary to do this very carefully , because this procedure should not break @xmath0 supersymmetry .
it is necessary to introduce two different sets of the pauli  villars fields : the first set cancels one - loop divergences originated by the @xmath10 gauge supermultiplet and the second one cancels one - loop divergences originated by the hypermultiplet . taking into account absence of quadratic divergences for the @xmath0 sym theory , in order to cancel one - loop divergences of the gauge supermultiplet ( and ghosts ) , it is sufficient to use a single pauli
villars determinant    @xmath36    where the action for the pauli  villars fields @xmath37 and @xmath38 ( in the adjoint representation of the gauge group ) is given by    @xmath39 + m_0 \widetilde\varphi \varphi\big ) + \mbox{c.c . }
\big).\end{aligned}\ ] ]    we choose the mass @xmath40 of these pauli  villars fields proportional to the dimensionful parameter @xmath34 in the higher derivative term :    @xmath41    where the finite constant @xmath42 does not depend on the bare coupling constant . introducing the pauli  villars fields @xmath37 and @xmath38 is motivated by the analogy with the @xmath6 sym theory .
really , in the @xmath6 sym theory 3 chiral superfields in the adjoint representation of the gauge group compensate divergences from the gauge supermultiplet and ghosts .
this allows to guess that two pauli  villars fields @xmath37 and @xmath38 compensate at least a one - loop divergence originated by the gauge supermultiplet and one chiral superfield @xmath3 in the adjoint representation ( including one - loop divergences of the ghost loop ) .
this statement is verified by the explicit calculation made in sect .
[ section_one - loop ] .
moreover , the action ( [ pv_action ] ) is evidently invariant under both supersymmetries , because it coincides with the action of the massive @xmath0 hypermultiplet in the adjoint representation of the gauge group .
also we insert in the generating functional the pauli  villars determinants which cancel one - loop divergences originated by the hypermultiplet :    @xmath43    where the coefficients @xmath44 satisfy the conditions    @xmath45    again , it is convenient to present the pauli  villars determinants in the form    @xmath46    where @xmath47 lies in the same representation @xmath20 as the fields @xmath18 ,    @xmath48    and the masses are proportional to the parameter @xmath34 :    @xmath49    @xmath50 being independent of @xmath15 . both pauli  villars actions are invariant under the transformations of @xmath0 supersymmetry , because they coincide with the actions for the massive @xmath0 hypermultiplets . therefore , the regularization procedure is also invariant under both supersymmetries .
the next step is gauge fixing .
we will do this in the framework of the @xmath1 superfield background field method @xcite , which allows to get a manifestly @xmath1 supersymmetric effective action preserving the classical gauge invariance .
the gauge superfield @xmath4 is split into the background field and the quantum field by making the substitution    @xmath51    then the background superfield @xmath52 and the quantum superfield @xmath4 are defined by    @xmath53    the background - quantum splitting for the chiral superfield @xmath3 is trivial :    @xmath54    where in the right hand side @xmath55 is the background superfield and @xmath3 is the quantum superfield .
the gauge fixing term used in this paper does not include the superfields @xmath3 and @xmath55 . as a consequence ,
the effective action depends only on the sum @xmath56 .
this can be easily verified by making the linear substitution @xmath57 in the generating functional .
due to the same reason we do not use the background field method for the other chiral matter superfields .
it is convenient to fix a gauge without breaking the background gauge invariance    @xmath58    where @xmath59 is an arbitrary real scalar superfield and @xmath24 is an arbitrary chiral superfield .
for this purpose we use the background covariant derivatives which are defined by    @xmath60    note that the theory is also invariant under the quantum gauge transformations    @xmath61    where @xmath62 and @xmath63 are arbitrary background-(anti)chiral superfields :    @xmath64    the generating functional can be formally written as    @xmath65    where the action @xmath66 and the pauli
villars determinants are invariant under @xmath0 supersymmetry by construction . then according to standard procedure @xcite we insert into the generating functional    @xmath67\cdot \int d\mbox{\boldmath$a$ } d\mbox{\boldmath$a$}^+ \delta(\mbox{\boldmath$\bar \nabla$}^2 v^{(\mbox{\scriptsize \boldmath$a$ } ) } - \mbox{\boldmath$f$ } ) \delta(\mbox{\boldmath$\nabla$}^2 v^{(\mbox{\scriptsize \boldmath$a$ } ) } - \mbox{\boldmath$f$}^+ ) , \ ] ]    where @xmath68 and @xmath69 are background-(anti)chiral superfields which satisfy the conditions    @xmath70    the quantum gauge superfield transformed under the infinitesimal quantum gauge transformations is denoted by    @xmath71    the generating functional obtained after this insertion of @xmath72 is defined by @xmath73 $ ] .
it is evidently equal to the original generating functional .
then we perform the integration    @xmath74 \to \int d\mbox{\boldmath$f$ } d\mbox{\boldmath$f$}^+ d\mbox{\boldmath$c$ } d\mbox{\boldmath$c$}^+\ , z[j,\mbox{\boldmath$f$}]\ , \exp\big(-\frac{i}{16 e_0 ^ 2 } \mbox{tr } \int d^4x\,d^4\theta\ , \mbox{\boldmath$f$}^+ \big(1-\frac{\mbox{\boldmath$\bar \nabla$}^2\mbox{\boldmath$\nabla$}^2}{16\lambda^2}\big ) \mbox{\boldmath$f$ } \big)\nonumber\\ & & \times \exp\big(-\frac{i}{16 e_0 ^ 2}\mbox{tr}\int d^4x\,d^4\theta\,\mbox{\boldmath$c$}^+ \big(1-\frac{\mbox{\boldmath$\bar \nabla$}^2\mbox{\boldmath$\nabla$}^2}{16\lambda^2}\big ) \mbox{\boldmath$c$ } \big).\qquad\end{aligned}\ ] ]    the anticommuting background ( anti)chiral nielsen  kallosh ghosts @xmath75 and @xmath76 ( in the adjoint representation of the gauge group ) can be expressed in terms of the ( anti)chiral superfields @xmath77 and @xmath78 as    @xmath79    the integration over @xmath77 and @xmath78 cancels the determinant appearing after the integration over the fields @xmath80 and @xmath81 , which are defined using equations similar to ( [ background_chiral_fields ] ) .
it is convenient to present the corresponding contribution in the form    @xmath82    where    @xmath83    is the action for the nielsen  kallosh ghosts .
( it is assumed that the fields @xmath75 and @xmath76 are expressed in terms of @xmath77 and @xmath78 using eq .
( [ background_chiral_fields ] ) . )    substituting the explicit expression for the functional @xmath73 $ ] and taking the integrals over @xmath68 and @xmath69 we obtain that the gauge fixing term    @xmath84    is effectively added to the classical action ( [ n=2_action ] ) . as usually , @xmath85 $ ] is presented as an integral over the faddeev  popov ghost fields and gives the ghost action :    @xmath86 = \int d\bar c\ , dc\ , d\bar c^+ dc^+ \exp\left(is_{\mbox{\scriptsize ghost}}\right)\ ] ]    where    @xmath87\ ] ]    with    @xmath88 + f_2 [ v , [ v , x ] ] + \ldots\ ] ]    the ghost @xmath89 and the antighost @xmath90 are background - chiral ; the ghost @xmath91 and the antighost @xmath92 are background - antichiral .
the ghost fields can be expressed in terms of the ( anti)chiral fields @xmath93 , @xmath94 , @xmath95 , and @xmath96 using equations similar to ( [ background_chiral_fields ] ) .
thus , the generating functional can be written as    @xmath97    where @xmath98 denotes the integration measure , @xmath99 is the original action of a @xmath0 supersymmetric theory ( which can also contain hypermultiplet superfields ) , @xmath32 is the regularizing action constructed in this paper , and @xmath100 is the action for the sources .
the higher derivative term @xmath32 and the pauli
villars determinants are invariant under the transformations of both supersymmetries
. however , the gauge fixing term and the ghost action are invariant only under the transformations of the manifest supersymmetry .
therefore , @xmath0 supersymmetry is broken only by the gauge fixing procedure .
[ section_renormalization ]    the results of the previous section show that all ingredients for proving the @xmath1 non - renormalization theorem take place in the considered theory .
the theory is renormalizable and renormalization preserves the manifest @xmath1 supersymmetry .
therefore , the divergences can be absorbed into the redefinitions of the coupling constant , fields , and masses :    @xmath101    here we took into account that ( as we already mentioned above ) the effective action depends only on @xmath102 , and , therefore , it is not necessary to introduce two different renormalization constants for the background and quantum parts of this field .    according to the standard prescription , the renormalization constants @xmath103 should be constructed so that to cancel the divergences , appearing in loop integrals .
@xmath104 can be defined by the equation    @xmath105    it is important that in eqs .
( [ renormalization ] ) and ( [ quantum_field_renormalization ] ) @xmath4 denotes the _ quantum _ gauge superfield .
the _ background _ gauge superfield @xmath52 is not renormalized due to the unbroken background gauge invariance ( [ background_gauge_transformations ] ) . therefore ,
after the renormalization the total gauge superfield is renormalized as    @xmath106    in our notation the renormalized fields in the adjoint representation are presented in the form    @xmath107    where @xmath108 is the renormalized coupling constant , and @xmath109 denotes the generators of the fundamental representation , which are normalized by the condition    @xmath110    the similar equations for the bare superfields have the form    @xmath111    where @xmath15 is the bare coupling constant .
therefore , in components    @xmath112    where we have introduced the notation    @xmath113    after substitution ( [ renormalization ] )    @xmath114    where @xmath115 is constructed from the total gauge superfield @xmath116 given by eq .
( [ total_gauge_superfield ] ) .
the quantum gauge superfield is present in the action only in the combination @xmath117 .
this quantum gauge superfield should be substituted by    @xmath118    the ghost lagrangian is renormalized as    @xmath119,\ ] ]    where @xmath4 should be also substituted by @xmath120 according to eq .
( [ renormalized_v ] ) .    using the @xmath1 nonrenormalization theorem
@xcite according to which the superpotential    @xmath121    is not renormalized , from eq .
( [ renormalized_n=2_action ] ) we immediately obtain    @xmath122    certainly , finite renormalizations are possible , but in this paper we assume that for finite terms the renormalization constants are chosen equal to 1 .
[ section_invariance ]    naively , it is possible to suggest that due to existence of the second supersymmetry two first terms in eq .
( [ n=2_action ] ) are renormalized in the same way . as a consequence ,
the second supersymmetry would lead to some restrictions to the renormalization constants .
however , this question is rather subtle . really , the regularized action proposed in this paper is invariant under both supersymmetries of the @xmath0 supersymmetric theory , but the gauge fixing term and the ghost actions are invariant only under the manifest supersymmetry .
it is known @xcite that any symmetry of the classical action corresponds to a symmetry of the renormalized action and the renormalized effective action .
nevertheless , we can not state that in the case under consideration the invariance corresponding to the second supersymmetry automatically fixes the renormalization constant @xmath123 .
however , here we try to understand what is needed for fixing the renormalization constant @xmath123 .    using the background field method we rewrite the transformations ( [ second_susy ] ) making the background
quantum splitting for the gauge superfield and the chiral superfield @xmath3 :    @xmath124    where @xmath116 is given by eq .
( [ total_gauge_superfield ] ) and    @xmath125    these transformations can be obtained if we set    @xmath126    for the background superfields and    @xmath127    for the quantum superfields .
we will show that if the effective action is invariant under the hidden supersymmetry transformations ( [ second_susy_with_background1 ] ) , then    @xmath128    actually , this is a manifestation of the general statement that a symmetry can impose restrictions on the renormalization constants . in this sense eq .
( [ z_phi ] ) is similar , for example , to the equation @xmath129 which follows from the symmetry under transformations of the conformal group , see e.g. @xcite .
note that the regularization proposed in this paper is important , because it ensures the invariance of the regularized action under the brst and @xmath0 supersymmetry transformations .
now let us prove eq .
( [ z_phi ] ) assuming the invariance of the effective action under the transformations ( [ second_susy_with_background1 ] ) .
if the sources for the hypermultiplet and quantum fields are set to 0 , then the invariance of the effective action under the transformations ( [ second_susy_with_background1 ] ) can be expressed by the equation    @xmath130    where @xmath131 is obtained from the equation    @xmath132    which follows from eq .
( [ second_susy_with_background1 ] ) . as a consequence ,    @xmath133
let us differentiate eq .
( [ st_identity_final ] ) with respect to @xmath134 and @xmath135 , where the subscripts denote points in the superspace .
then , after setting all ( background ) fields to 0 we obtain    @xmath136    because the effective action satisfies this relation , it is possible to choose such a subtraction scheme in which this relation is also valid for the renormalized action @xmath137 :    @xmath138    where @xmath137 is constructed from the classical action by substituting the bare fields by the renormalized ones . in particular ,
a part of the renormalized action @xmath137 corresponding to the two - point functions of the background fields has the form    @xmath139    where @xmath140 is the supersymmetric projection operator and @xmath141 denotes a matrix inverse to @xmath142 . substituting this expression into eq .
( [ two_point_functions ] ) we obtain    @xmath143    integrating @xmath144 by parts and taking into account that the supersymmetry transformation parameter @xmath31 is a space - time constant , after some simple transformations involving the algebra of the covariant derivatives the integral in the right hand side of this equation can be rewritten as    @xmath145    therefore , the renormalization constants @xmath146 and @xmath142 are related by the equation    @xmath147    comparing this result with eq .
( [ zab ] ) , we see that the superfield @xmath55 is not renormalized , @xmath148 , and we prove eq .
( [ z_phi ] ) . as a result
we get the criterium whether the effective action is invariant under the background hidden supersymmetry .
this criterium is given by eq .
( [ z_phi ] ) .
it means , in particular , that under this condition the renormalization group function @xmath149
[ section_finiteness_and_nsvz ]    due to @xmath1 supersymmetry a @xmath2-function of sym theories is related with the anomalous dimension of the matter superfields by the nsvz relation @xcite . for our purposes
it is convenient to write it in the following form @xcite :    @xmath150    where    @xmath151    is a bare coupling constant , @xmath152 is the anomalous dimension of the matter superfields , and the following notation is used :    @xmath153    the renormalization group functions in eq .
( [ nsvz_general_beta ] ) are expressed in terms of the bare coupling constant @xmath154 .
these functions are defined according to the following prescription :    @xmath155    where @xmath156 denotes the renormalized coupling constant @xmath157 .
the matter is that these are the functions for that the nsvz relation is obtained at least in the abelian case if the theory is regularized by higher derivatives @xcite . )
are scheme - independent , see e.g. @xcite .
] usually the renormalization group functions are defined by a different way , in terms of the renormalized coupling constant :    @xmath158    it is well - known that the @xmath2-function and the anomalous dimension defined according to this prescription are scheme - dependent .
however @xcite , if the boundary conditions    @xmath159    are imposed on the renormalization constants in an arbitrary ( but fixed ) point @xmath160 , ) looks similar to the condition @xmath161 , which can be imposed for obtaining the conformal symmetry limit of a theory @xcite , there is a very important difference : in eq .
( [ nsvz_scheme ] ) @xmath129 only in a single ( but arbitrary ) point @xmath162 , while the conformal symmetry limit is obtained if @xmath129 for arbitrary values of @xmath163 . ]
then the renormalization group functions ( [ rg_functions_renormalized ] ) coincide with the renormalization group functions ( [ rg_functions_bare ] ) :
@xmath164    this implies that the boundary conditions ( [ nsvz_scheme ] ) at least in the abelian case give the nsvz scheme in all orders of the perturbation theory if the theory is regularized by higher derivatives .
this statement was verified by the explicit three - loop calculations in refs .
@xcite .
all features of the higher covariant derivative regularization , in particular , factorization of integrals into integrals of ( double ) total derivatives @xcite , which gives the nsvz relation for the renormalization group functions ( [ rg_functions_bare ] ) in the abelian case , in the lowest loops also take place in the non - abelian case @xcite .
although the all - loop derivation of the nsvz relation is not so far completed for sym theories , it seems reasonable to suggest that in the non - abelian case the nsvz relation is also obtained for the renormalization group functions defined in terms of the bare coupling constant with the higher covariant derivative regularization . in this section
we prove that under this assumption the finiteness of @xmath0 sym theories beyond the one - loop approximation can be very easily derived from the nsvz relation if the effective action is invariant under the transformations ( [ second_susy_with_background1 ] ) .
thus , the regularization proposed in this paper possibly allows not only to justify the non - renormalization theorems , but also to derive one of them in the easiest way .
the main observation is that @xmath0 sym theories can be considered as a special case of @xmath1 supersymmetric yang
mills theories , the representation @xmath165 for the matter superfield being reducible and equal to the direct sum    @xmath166    here @xmath167 denotes the adjoint representation of the gauge group corresponding to the superfield @xmath3 .
( this superfield together with the gauge superfield @xmath4 forms the @xmath10 gauge supermultiplet . ) the fields in the representations @xmath20 and @xmath21 ( @xmath18 and @xmath19 , respectively ) form the hypermultiplet .
let us find the constants @xmath168 and @xmath169 for the reducible representation ( [ r ] ) .
for this purpose we note that the generators of the considered representation can be written in the form    @xmath170    it is easy to see that for the adjoint representation @xmath171 .
therefore ,    @xmath172    also we obtain    @xmath173    we will prove that if the supersymmetric higher covariant derivative regularization is used , the anomalous dimension of the superfield @xmath174 ( defined in terms of the bare coupling constant ) is related with a @xmath2-function . this anomalous dimension is calculated according to the following prescription :    @xmath175    where @xmath176 and the limit @xmath177 is assumed . then using eq .
( [ zab ] ) we obtain @xmath103 in eq .
( [ rg_functions_bare ] ) corresponds to @xmath178 . as a consequence
, we obtain the factor @xmath179 in eq .
( [ gamma_for_phi ] ) . ]    @xmath180    where    @xmath181    is the anomalous dimension of the superfield @xmath3 defined in terms of the bare coupling constant .
the anomalous dimension of the hypermultplet can be expressed through @xmath12 using eqs .
( [ z_hypermultiplet ] ) :    @xmath182    therefore , the anomalous dimension can be written as    @xmath183    substituting the expressions for @xmath169 , @xmath168 , and @xmath184 in eq .
( [ nsvz_general_beta ] ) we obtain    @xmath185    solving this equation for @xmath186 , after some simple transformations we find that a @xmath2-function of the considered theory is    @xmath187    thus , we see that in the theory under consideration the higher loop structure of the nsvz @xmath2-function is determined by the function @xmath188 . if @xmath189 , the expression ( [ exact_beta_for_n=2 ] ) contains only @xmath190 .
therefore , the nsvz @xmath2-function for an arbitrary renormalizable @xmath0 supersymmetric yang  mills theory does not vanish only in the one - loop approximation and coincides with conventional one - loop @xmath2-function :    @xmath191    as the result , we can conclude that the @xmath0 non - renormalization theorem is equivalent to the statement @xmath192 .
the equality @xmath189 follows from the invariance of the renormalized action under the background transformations of the hidden supersymmetry ( see section 4 ) .
it is evident that this invariance takes place if both a regularization and a gauge fixing procedure are invariant under the complete @xmath0 supersymmetry .
however , the considered gauge fixing term is invariant only under the manifest supersymmetry .
nevertheless , we can present here some indirect arguments in favor of this equality .
it is known that the @xmath2-function is gauge independent if the minimal substraction scheme is used for renormalization ( see e.g. @xcite ) .
therefore , if there exists a completely @xmath0 supersymmetric gauge , then the regularized effective action will be invariant under the same amount of supersymmetries as the classical action and according to ( [ z_phi ] ) one gets @xmath189 and the @xmath2-function vanishes beyond one - loop .
since the @xmath2-function is gauge invariant , the same result will be valid in any gauge , in particular in the gauge used in this paper .
but the completely @xmath0 invariant gauge does actually exist @xcite .
however , the @xmath0 supersymmetric gauge used for derivation of eq .
( [ z_phi ] ) was formulated in terms of @xmath0 superfields while the proposed regularization is formulated in terms of @xmath1 superfields and it is unclear whether these gauge and regularization are consistent one with another .
thus , if we accept that @xmath189 , then up to a possibility of making finite renormalizations we obtain the following values of the renormalization constants ( exactly in all orders ) :    @xmath193    where @xmath194 is a renormalization parameter .
values of @xmath195 , @xmath196 and @xmath197 are not so far defined . in the next section
we describe the one - loop calculation , which allows to find values of these renormalization constants in the one - loop approximation .
[ section_one - loop ]    in this section we calculate one - loop divergences using the version of the higher covariant derivative regularization constructed in this paper .
( 0,2 ) ( 4,0 ) ( 6.3,-0.1)@xmath4 ( 3.5,0.9)@xmath18  or  @xmath19 ( 8,0 ) ( 10.3,-0.1)@xmath3    in the one - loop approximation the point green function of the hypermultiplet , @xmath198 , defined by the equation    @xmath199    can be obtained by calculating two diagrams presented in fig .
[ figure_hypermultiplet renormalization ] .
it is easy to see that these diagrams cancel each other :    @xmath200    this result is in a complete agreement with eq .
( [ renormalization_constants ] ) .
( for finite terms we always choose the renormalization constants equal to 1 . ) using exactly the same arguments we prove that the pauli  villars fields @xmath37 , @xmath38 , @xmath47 , and @xmath201 are not renormalized in the one - loop approximation .
( 0,2.0 ) ( 1,0 ) in the one - loop approximation.,title="fig : " ] ( 1,0.9)@xmath3 ( 3.2,-0.2)@xmath4 ( 5,0.05 ) in the one - loop approximation.,title="fig : " ] ( 5.4,1.6)@xmath202 ( 9.4,0 ) in the one - loop approximation.,title="fig : " ] ( 9.6,1.6)@xmath3 ( 12.4,0 ) in the one - loop approximation.,title="fig : " ] ( 12.6,1.6)@xmath4    the two - point green function of the superfield @xmath3 in the one - loop approximation is determined by diagrams presented in fig .
[ figure_phi renormalization ] . calculating these diagrams
we obtain the function @xmath203 defined by the equation    @xmath204    where @xmath205 and , for simplicity , we assume that the gauge group is simple .
( the background superfield @xmath55 is omitted , because the effective action depends only on @xmath56 . )
we are interested in the divergent part of the function @xmath203 .
taking into account that in the one - loop approximation logarithmically divergent terms are proportional to @xmath206 , it can be found by differentiating the result for the function @xmath207 ( in the one - loop approximation this is equivalent to differentiating the function @xmath203 ) with respect to @xmath206 in the limit of the vanishing external momentum :    @xmath208    here the first term ( proportional to @xmath209 ) is a contribution of the hypermultiplet and the corresponding pauli
villars fields ( the second diagram in fig .
[ figure_phi renormalization ] ) .
the second term consists of the contributions of the first diagram in fig .
[ figure_phi renormalization ] and the pauli  villars fields @xmath37 and @xmath38 ( the second diagram in fig .
[ figure_phi renormalization ] ) .
the third and the fourth terms correspond to the third and the fourth diagrams in fig .
[ figure_phi renormalization ] , respectively , and cancel each other .
thus , we see that this expression is finite and can be easily calculated .. in eq .
( [ g_with_p=0 ] ) it is possible to take the limit @xmath210 due to the derivative with respect to @xmath206 . ] in order to do this we note that eq .
( [ g_with_p=0 ] ) can be rewritten as an integral over a double total derivative :    @xmath211    taking into account that the pauli  villars masses @xmath212 and @xmath40 are proportional to the parameter @xmath34 , we easily obtain ( setting @xmath213 )    @xmath214    as a consequence ,    @xmath215    evidently , the nielsen  kallosh ghosts are not renormalized , because they interact only with the background gauge superfield . the one - loop renormalization of the faddeev
popov ghosts can be found by calculating a diagram presented in fig .
[ figure_ghost_renormalization ] .
( 0,2 ) ( 6.3,0.2 ) ( 6.2,1.1)@xmath216 ( 7.8,-0.3)@xmath4 ( 9.4,1.1)@xmath94    it is easy to see that contributions of the various ghosts fields cancel each other and this diagram is convergent and gives the vanishing contribution .
therefore , in the one - loop approximation it is possible to choose @xmath217 .
( 0,4.5 ) ( 0.3,2.7 ) in the one - loop approximation .
these diagrams without the ones with a loop of the nielsen  kallosh ghosts @xmath77 also give a one - loop renormalization of the quantum gauge field.,title="fig : " ] ( -0.3,3.6 )  or  @xmath4 ( 1.8,2.1)@xmath4 ( 4.3,2.7 ) in the one - loop approximation .
these diagrams without the ones with a loop of the nielsen  kallosh ghosts @xmath77 also give a one - loop renormalization of the quantum gauge field.,title="fig : " ] ( 5.9,2.1)@xmath3 ( 8.3,2.7 ) in the one - loop approximation .
these diagrams without the ones with a loop of the nielsen  kallosh ghosts @xmath77 also give a one - loop renormalization of the quantum gauge field.,title="fig : " ] ( 9.5,2.1)@xmath218 ( 12.3,2.7 ) in the one - loop approximation .
these diagrams without the ones with a loop of the nielsen  kallosh ghosts @xmath77 also give a one - loop renormalization of the quantum gauge field.,title="fig : " ] ( 12.8,2.1)@xmath202 ( 0.7,0 ) in the one - loop approximation .
these diagrams without the ones with a loop of the nielsen  kallosh ghosts @xmath77 also give a one - loop renormalization of the quantum gauge field.,title="fig : " ] ( 0.0,0.3 )  or  @xmath4 ( 4.7,0 ) in the one - loop approximation .
these diagrams without the ones with a loop of the nielsen  kallosh ghosts @xmath77 also give a one - loop renormalization of the quantum gauge field.,title="fig : " ] ( 8.7,0 ) in the one - loop approximation .
these diagrams without the ones with a loop of the nielsen  kallosh ghosts @xmath77 also give a one - loop renormalization of the quantum gauge field.,title="fig : " ] ( 12.7,0 ) in the one - loop approximation .
these diagrams without the ones with a loop of the nielsen  kallosh ghosts @xmath77 also give a one - loop renormalization of the quantum gauge field.,title="fig : " ]    renormalization of the coupling constant can be investigated by calculating the two - point green function of the background gauge superfield . due to the slavnov
taylor identity @xcite this green function is transversal :    @xmath219    in the one - loop approximation the function @xmath220 can be obtained by calculating the diagrams presented in fig .
[ figure_alpha_renormalization ] .
the result has the following form :    @xmath221    the diagrams containing an internal loop of the quantum gauge superfield @xmath4 ( the first column in fig .
[ figure_alpha_renormalization ] ) give a vanishing contribution in the limit @xmath210 . the diagrams with an internal loop of @xmath3 ( the second column in fig .
[ figure_alpha_renormalization ] ) give the first term in eq .
( [ d-1_derivative ] ) .
this term is exactly canceled by a contribution of the diagrams containing a loop of the nielsen  kallosh ghosts @xmath77 , which is given by the second term in eq .
( [ d-1_derivative ] ) . the third term in eq .
( [ d-1_derivative ] ) corresponds to the contribution of the hypermultiplet @xmath222 and its pauli  villars fields @xmath223 ( the fourth column in fig .
[ figure_alpha_renormalization ] ) . the last term in eq .
( [ d-1_derivative ] ) consists of the faddeev  popov ghosts ( @xmath224 ) contribution and the contribution of the pauli  villars fields @xmath225 .    taking into account that
@xmath226    we obtain that a @xmath2-function of the considered theory is given by integrals of double total derivatives :    @xmath227    in the considered approximation this result agrees with the exact expression ( [ exact_beta_for_n=2 ] ) .
comparing it with eq .
( [ phi_anomalous_dimension ] ) we verify eq .
( [ exact_gamma ] ) in the considered ( one - loop ) approximation .    due to the slavnov
taylor identity the two - point green function of the quantum gauge superfield is also transversal :    @xmath228    the function @xmath229 can be also found by calculating the diagrams presented in fig .
[ figure_alpha_renormalization ] .
the only difference is that the nielsen  kallosh ghosts @xmath77 do no contribute to the renormalization of the quantum gauge superfield .
the result has the following form :    @xmath230    the expression in the right hand side of this equation is finite at finite values of @xmath34 and coincides with the corresponding expression in eq .
( [ d-1_derivative ] ) .
the contributions of the superfield @xmath3 , the hypermultiplet ( with the corresponding pauli  villars fields ) , and the pauli  villars fields @xmath37 and @xmath38 are calculated exactly as earlier .
however , contributions of the quantum gauge superfield and ghosts are different , if the external lines correspond to the quantum gauge superfield @xmath4 .
as we have already mentioned above , the nielsen  kallosh ghosts do not contribute to the renormalization of the quantum gauge superfield , because their action depends only on the background gauge superfield .
the faddeev
popov ghosts give only noninvariant terms proportional to @xmath231 , which exactly cancel similar terms coming from the diagrams with a loop of the quantum gauge superfield .
the diagrams with a loop of the quantum gauge superfield also give invariant contribution , which is given by the second term in eq .
( [ dq-1_derivative ] ) .
it is also expedient to compare eqs .
( [ g_derivative ] ) , ( [ d-1_derivative ] ) , and ( [ dq-1_derivative ] ) . for this purpose
we write the one - loop divergences of the considered two point functions in the following form ( taking into account that the effective action depends on the superfield @xmath232 ) :    @xmath233    from this equation we see that the regularization constructed in this paper in the considered approximation allows to obtain the manifestly @xmath0 supersymmetric effective action , although the gauge fixing procedure is not @xmath0 supersymmetric . from eq .
( [ divergences ] ) we also conclude that the superfield @xmath3 is not renormalized , @xmath234 , because all divergences are absorbed into the coupling constant renormalization .
this completely agrees with eq .
( [ z_phi ] ) .
certainly , it is possible to make a finite renormalization of the superfield @xmath3 .
however , such a finite renormalization destroys @xmath0 supersymmetry and we will not make it .
moreover , we see that the quantum field @xmath4 is not renormalized in the one - loop approximation , so that it is possible to choose @xmath235 .
thus , we have verified that the proposed regularization does regularize the one - loop divergences and gives the correct values of the renormalization group functions in the one - loop approximation . in particular , we confirm eq .
( [ renormalization_constants ] ) by the explicit calculation in the one - loop approximation and also obtain    @xmath236
we have proposed a new version of the higher covariant derivative regularization for general @xmath0 sym theories formulated in terms of @xmath1 superfields . at the classical level
such theories are manifestly invariant under @xmath1 supersymmetry by construction , but these theories are also invariant under additional hidden on - shell supersymmetry .    for calculation of quantum corrections
it is convenient to define the effective action in the framework of the background field method and fix a gauge without breaking the background gauge invariance . in order to regularize the theory by higher covariant derivatives
, we constructed the gauge invariant higher derivative functional which is invariant under the same amount of supersymmetries as the classical action . adding this functional to the classical action we regularize all divergences beyond the one - loop approximation in the gauge invariant and @xmath0 supersymmetric way .
the remaining one - loop divergences are regularized by inserting appropriate pauli
villars determinants into the generating functional .
we show that these determinants preserve all supersymmetries of the classical action by construction . as a result
, the hidden supersymmetry is broken only by the gauge fixing procedure . in this paper
we have found that if the effective action is invariant under the background transformation of the hidden supersymmetry , the renormalization of the coupling constant is related with the renormalization of the superfields @xmath174 ( or , equivalently , the superfield @xmath237 is unrenormalized , @xmath234 ) . the exact nsvz @xmath2-function is naturally obtained with help of the higher derivative regularization .
thus , it is possible to use the relation ( [ exact_beta_for_n=2 ] ) , which follows from the exact nsvz @xmath2-function .
this , in turn , implies that the higher loop structure of exact nsvz @xmath2-function is determined by the anomalous dimension @xmath188 .
if the function @xmath13 vanishes , the nsvz @xmath2-function is reduced to a purely one - loop expression .
therefore , the equality @xmath192 discussed above can be considered as the exact criterium of finiteness of @xmath0 sym theories with matter beyond the one - loop approximation .
we want to emphasize once more , that all previous proofs of the @xmath0 non - renormalization theorem were based on the assumption of existence of a regularization preserving all symmetries of the classical action in an arbitrary loop . however
, all known regularizations do not satisfy this assumption . in this paper
we actually presented such a regularization and showed how it works .
also , we would like to point out that a completely off - shell @xmath0 supersymmetric regularization can in principle be developed within the harmonic superfield approach to @xmath0 supersymmetric theories @xcite .
this approach allows to formulate @xmath0 sym theories in terms of off - shell @xmath0 superfields .
moreover , the background field formalism and off - shell @xmath0 supersymmetric gauge fixing procedure are developed in the harmonic superfield approach @xcite .
therefore , for constructing a manifestly @xmath0 supersymmetric regularization it is necessary to construct an appropriate gauge invariant higher derivative functional in terms of harmonic superfields .
we plan to study this problem in a forthcoming work
.    * acknowledgements . *
the authors are very grateful to a.l .
kataev , a.a.slavnov , and i.v.tyutin for valuable discussions .
the work of i.l.b was partially supported by rfbr grant , project no 12 - 02 - 00121 , rfbr - dfg grant , project no 13 - 02 - 91330 , grant for lrss , project no 88.2012.2 and grant of russian ministry of education and science , project tspu-122 . the work of k.v.s was supported by rfbr grant , project no 14 - 01 - 00695 .
* appendix *
[ appendix_noether ]    in order to construct the action @xmath32 , given by eq .
( [ higher_derivative_term ] ) , it is convenient to use the noether method @xcite writing the supersymmetry transformations in terms of @xmath1 superfields @xcite . as a starting point
we consider the action      where @xmath34 is a regularization parameter .
( its dimension is equal to the dimension of a mass . ) in order to construct an action invariant under the transformations ( [ second_susy ] ) by the noether method , at the first step we calculate the variation of the action @xmath239 .
the result is given by the following ( non - vanishing ) expression :    @xmath240\nonumber\\ & & - 4\eta^ * \bar\nabla^2(e^{-\omega^+ } \bar w^{\dot a } e^{\omega^+ } ) \big [ e^{-\omega^+ } \bar w_{\dot a } e^{\omega^+ } , e^{\omega}\phi e^{-\omega}\big ] + \eta^ * e^{-\omega^+}\phi^+ e^{\omega^+ } \big[e^{\omega}\phi e^{-\omega } , \bar\nabla^2 \nabla^2 ( e^{\omega}\phi e^{-\omega})\big]\vphantom{\bigg(}\nonumber\\ & &   - \eta^ * e^{-\omega^+}\phi^+ e^{\omega^+ } \bar\nabla^2 \big[e^{\omega}\phi e^{-\omega } , \nabla^2 ( e^{\omega}\phi e^{-\omega})\big ] + \eta e^{-\omega^+}\phi^+ e^{\omega^+ } \bar\nabla^2 \big[e^{-\omega^+}\phi^+ e^{\omega^+ } , \nabla^2(e^{\omega}\phi e^{-\omega})\big]\vphantom{\bigg(}\nonumber\\ & &   - \eta e^{-\omega^+}\phi^+ e^{\omega^+ } \bar\nabla^2 \nabla^2 \big[e^{-\omega^+}\phi^+ e^{\omega^+ } , e^{\omega}\phi e^{-\omega}\big ] \bigg\}.\end{aligned}\ ] ]      @xmath241 \vphantom{\frac{1}{2}}\nonumber\\ & & + ( e^{-\omega^+ } \bar w^{\dot a } e^{\omega^+ } ) \big[(e^\omega \phi e^{-\omega}),\bar\nabla_{\dot a}(e^{-\omega^+ } \phi^+ e^{\omega^+})\big ] \bigg)\end{aligned}\ ] ]      @xmath243\nonumber\\ & & + \bar d_{\dot a } \eta^+ \big[e^{-\omega^+}\bar w^{\dot a } e^{\omega^+ } , e^\omega\phi e^{-\omega}\big]\bigg ) \big [ ( e^\omega \phi e^{-\omega } ) , ( e^{-\omega^+ } \phi^+ e^{\omega^+})\big].\end{aligned}\ ] ]                m.  t.  grisaru and w.  siegel , nucl .
b * 201 * ( 1982 ) 292 [ erratum - ibid .
b * 206 * ( 1982 ) 496 ] .
s.  mandelstam , nucl .
b * 213 * ( 1983 ) 149 .
l.  brink , o.  lindgren and b.  e.  w.  nilsson , nucl .
b * 212 * ( 1983 ) 401 .
p.  s.  howe , k.  s.  stelle and p.  k.  townsend , nucl .
b * 236 * ( 1984 ) 125 .
p.  s.  howe , k.  s.  stelle and p.  c.  west , phys .
b * 124 * ( 1983 ) 55 .
m.  t.  grisaru , w.  siegel and m.  rocek , nucl .
b * 159 * ( 1979 ) 429 .
v.  a.  novikov , m.  a.  shifman , a.  i.  vainshtein and v.  i.  zakharov , nucl .
b * 229 * ( 1983 ) 381 .
d.  r.  t.  jones , phys .
b * 123 * ( 1983 ) 45 .
v.  a.  novikov , m.  a.  shifman , a.  i.  vainshtein and v.  i.  zakharov , phys .
b * 166 * ( 1986 ) 329 ; sov .
j.  nucl .
* 43 * ( 1986 ) 294 ; [ yad .  fiz .
* 43 * ( 1986 ) 459 . ]
m.  a.  shifman and a.  i.  vainshtein , nucl .
b * 277 * ( 1986 ) 456 ; sov .
jetp * 64 * ( 1986 ) 428 ; [ zh .
.  teor .
* 91 * ( 1986 ) 723 . ]
a.  i.  vainshtein , v.  i.  zakharov and m.  a.  shifman , jetp lett .
* 42 * ( 1985 ) 224 [ pisma zh .
fiz .   * 42 * ( 1985 ) 182 ]
. m.  a.  shifman , a.  i.  vainshtein and v.  i.  zakharov , phys .
b * 166 * ( 1986 ) 334 .
s.  j.  gates , m.  t.  grisaru , m.  rocek and w.  siegel , `` superspace or one thousand and one lessons in supersymmetry , '' front .
* 58 * ( 1983 ) 1 .
p.  c.  west , `` introduction to supersymmetry and supergravity , '' singapore , singapore : world scientific ( 1990 ) 425 p.      i.  jack and d.  r.  t.  jones , `` regularization of supersymmetric theories , '' in * kane , g.l .
( ed . ) : perspectives on supersymmetry ii * 494 - 513 [ hep - ph/9707278 ] .
g.  t hooft and m.  j.  g.  veltman , nucl .
b * 44 * ( 1972 ) 189 . c.  g.  bollini and j.  j.  giambiagi , nuovo cim .
b * 12 * ( 1972 ) 20 .
j.  f.  ashmore , lett .
nuovo cim .
* 4 * ( 1972 ) 289 .
g.  m.  cicuta and e.  montaldi , lett .
nuovo cim .
* 4 * ( 1972 ) 329 .
r.  delbourgo and v.  b.  prasad , j.  phys .
g * 1 * ( 1975 ) 377 .
w.  siegel , phys .
b * 84 * ( 1979 ) 193 .
s.  ferrara and b.  zumino , nucl .
b * 79 * ( 1974 ) 413 .
d.  r.  t.  jones , phys .
b * 72 * ( 1977 ) 199 .
e.  c.  poggio and h.  n.  pendleton , phys .
b * 72 * ( 1977 ) 200 .
l.  v.  avdeev , o.  v.  tarasov and a.  a.  vladimirov , phys .
b * 96 * ( 1980 ) 94 .
m.  t.  grisaru , m.  rocek and w.  siegel , phys .
* 45 * ( 1980 ) 1063 .
w.  e.  caswell and d.  zanon , nucl .
b * 182 * ( 1981 ) 125 .
v.  n.  velizhanin , phys .
b * 696 * ( 2011 ) 560 .
l.  v.  avdeev and o.  v.  tarasov , phys .
b * 112 * ( 1982 ) 356 .
i.  jack , d.  r.  t.  jones and c.  g.  north , phys .
b * 386 * ( 1996 ) 138 .
d.  r.  t.  jones , nucl .
b * 87 * ( 1975 ) 127 .
i.  jack , d.  r.  t.  jones and c.  g.  north , nucl .
b * 486 * ( 1997 ) 479 .
r.  v.  harlander , d.  r.  t.  jones , p.  kant , l.  mihaila and m.  steinhauser , jhep * 0612 * ( 2006 ) 024
. w.  siegel , phys .
b * 94 * ( 1980 ) 37 .
l.  v.  avdeev , phys .
b * 117 * ( 1982 ) 317 .
l.  v.  avdeev and a.  a.  vladimirov , nucl .
b * 219 * ( 1983 ) 262 .
m.  a.  shifman and a.  i.  vainshtein , sov .
j.  nucl .
* 44 * ( 1986 )
321 [ yad .  fiz .
* 44 * ( 1986 ) 498 ] .
j.  mas , m.  perez - victoria and c.  seijas , jhep * 0203 * ( 2002 ) 049 .
j.  c.  collins , `` renormalization .
an introduction to renormalization , the renormalization group , and the operator product expansion , '' cambridge , uk : univ .
( 1984 ) 380p    a.  a.  slavnov , phys .
b * 518 * ( 2001 ) 195 .
a.  a.  slavnov , theor .
* 130 * ( 2002 ) 1 [ teor
.  mat .
* 130 * ( 2002 ) 3 ] .
a.  a.  slavnov and k.  v.  stepanyantz , theor .
* 135 * ( 2003 ) 673 [ teor
.  mat .
* 135 * ( 2003 ) 265 ] .
a.  a.  slavnov and k.  v.  stepanyantz , theor .
* 139 * ( 2004 ) 599 [ teor .  mat .
* 139 * ( 2004 ) 179 ] .
a.  a.  slavnov , nucl .
b * 31 * ( 1971 ) 301 .
a.  a.  slavnov , theor.math.phys .
* 13 * ( 1972 ) 1064 [ teor .  mat .
* 13 * ( 1972 ) 174 ] .
v.  k.  krivoshchekov , theor .
* 36 * ( 1978 ) 745 [ teor .  mat .
fiz .   * 36 * ( 1978 ) 291 ] .
p.  c.  west , nucl .
b * 268 * ( 1986 ) 113 .
a.  a.  slavnov , theor .
* 23 * ( 1976 ) 305 .
a.  a.  soloshenko and k.  v.  stepanyantz , theor .  math .
* 140 * ( 2004 ) 1264 [ teor
.  mat .
* 140 * ( 2004 ) 430 ] .
a.  b.  pimenov , e.  s.  shevtsova and k.  v.  stepanyantz , phys .
b * 686 * ( 2010 ) 293 .
k.  v.  stepanyantz , phys .  part .
* 8 * ( 2011 ) 321 .
a.  v.  smilga and a.  vainshtein , nucl .
b * 704 * ( 2005 ) 445 .
k.  v.  stepanyantz , `` factorization of integrals defining the two - loop @xmath2-function for the general renormalizable n=1 sym theory , regularized by the higher covariant derivatives , into integrals of double total derivatives , '' arxiv:1108.1491 [ hep - th ] .
k.  v.  stepanyantz , j.  phys .
* 343 * ( 2012 ) 012115 .
k.  v.  stepanyantz , j.  phys .
* 368 * ( 2012 ) 012052 .
k.  v.  stepanyantz , nucl .
b * 852 * ( 2011 ) 71 .
k.  v.  stepanyantz , int .
j.  theor .  phys .
* 51 * ( 2012 ) 276 .
k.  stepanyantz , theor .
* 146 * ( 2006 ) 321 [ teor
.  mat .
* 146 * ( 2006 ) 385 ] .
a.  l.  kataev and k.  v.  stepanyantz , nucl .
b * 875 * ( 2013 ) 459 .
a.  l.  kataev and k.  v.  stepanyantz , phys .
b * 730 * ( 2014 ) 184 .
v.  k.  krivoshchekov , phys .
b * 149 * ( 1984 ) 128 .
l.  d.  faddeev and a.  a.  slavnov , `` gauge fields .
introduction to quantum theory , '' nauka , moscow , 1978 and front .
* 50 * ( 1980 ) 1 [ front .
phys .   * 83 * ( 1990 ) 1 ] .
a.  a.  slavnov , theor .
phys .  * 33 * ( 1977 ) 977 [ teor .  mat .
fiz .   * 33 * ( 1977 ) 210 ]
. j.  c.  taylor , nucl .  phys .
b * 33 * ( 1971 ) 436 .
a.  a.  slavnov , theor .
* 10 * ( 1972 ) 99 [ teor .  mat .
* 10 * ( 1972 ) 153 ] .
grigorian and i.  v.  tyutin , theor .
* 64 * ( 1985 ) 915 [ teor .  mat .
fiz .   * 64 * ( 1985 ) 400 ] .
a.  l.  kataev , jhep * 1402 * ( 2014 ) 092 .
b.  l.  voronov and i.  v.  tyutin , yad .
* 36 * ( 1982 ) 1041 . a.  s.  galperin , e.  a.  ivanov , v.  i.  ogievetsky , e.  a.  sokatchev , `` harmonic superspace , '' cambridge university press ( 2001 ) 306 p.