Hodge gauge fixing in three dimensions
James E. Hetrick (University of Arizona)

TL;DR
This paper discusses a gauge fixing method for three-dimensional lattice gauge theories, focusing on diagonalizing SU(N) operators and addressing issues like monopoles and zero modes.
Contribution
It presents an implementation and analysis of a gauge fixing algorithm based on diagonalizing SU(N) operators and separating physical and gauge parts of the link fields.
Findings
Successful gauge fixing in three dimensions with addressed monopole issues
Separation of physical gauge fields from pure gauge and lattice artifacts
Insights into zero mode handling in lattice gauge fixing
Abstract
A progress report on experiences with a gauge fixing method proposed in LATTICE 94 is presented. In this algorithm, an SU(N) operator is diagonalized at each site, followed by gauge fixing the diagonal (Cartan) part of the links to Coulomb gauge using the residual abelian freedom. The Cartan sector of the link field is separated into the physical gauge field responsible for producing , the pure gauge part, lattice artifacts, and zero modes. The gauge transformation to the physical gauge field is then constructed and performed. Compactness of the lattice fields entails issues related to monopoles and zero modes which are addressed.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Hodge gauge fixing in three dimensions
J. E. Hetrick
Physics Department, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721
Abstract
A progress report on experiences with a gauge fixing method proposed in LATTICE 94 is presented. In this algorithm, an SU(N) operator is diagonalized at each site, followed by gauge fixing the diagonal (Cartan) part of the links to Coulomb gauge using the residual abelian freedom. The Cartan sector of the link field is separated into the physical gauge field responsible for producing , the pure gauge part, lattice artifacts, and zero modes. The gauge transformation to the physical gauge field is then constructed and performed. Compactness of the fields entails issues related to monopoles and zero modes which are addressed.
AZPH-TH/96-18
1 The Method
While gauge fixing is a central tool of lattice simulations, the effect of lattice artifact “Gribov copies” remains a delicate issue, particularly in chiral fermion models which often rely on gauge fixing essentially.
In [1] we proposed a method of gauge fixing to an t’Hooft like gauge which was called Gauge fixing by Hodge decomposition. We work here on a spatial torus in 3-dimensions, thus this presentation is for Coulomb gauge (the algorithm is done in parallel on each time slice). Landau gauge generalizes similarly. The method is as follows.
- •
Diagonalize some operator which transforms adjointly, , at each site. (The operator used here is the spatial sum of plaquette clovers and their adjoints at each site.)
- •
Define an Abelian field from the links.
- •
Decompose , and solve for the physical field which minimally produces the plaquettes and open (monopole) strings .
- •
Add the continuum zero-mode: .
- •
Construct and perform the gauge transformation which moves the links from to .
1.1 Diagonalization of
An iterative method can be used in which the operator is hit with successive subgroup gauge transformations that each minimize the modulus of resulting off-diagonal terms. If
[TABLE]
then minimizes . In the two cases:
** case:**
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
** case:**
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
For or , only one of each gauge transformation is required. For operators, about 10 iterations are required to get .
1.2 The Residual Abelian Fields
We must define residual fields, which represent the part of in the Cartan subgroup in the continuum limit. For we use:
[TABLE]
where .
For SU(3) where a link has diagonal elements , the angles
[TABLE]
are suitable Cartan fields.
2 Hodge Decomposition of
Any lattice vector field can be uniquely decomposed into:
[TABLE]
where () is the lattice forward (backward) derivative
- •
is the physical part of the field and soley responsible for producing
. Conveniently, also naturally satisfies the Landau gauge condition: .
- •
is the pure gauge part.
- •
is the lattice harmonic part responsible for Dirac string loops (and is the major source of Gribov copies).
- •
is the continuum harmonic part for a torus, ie. a constant.
The decomposition is formal at this stage, but we remark that much of the work in solving for the lattice is in identifying the neccessary parts of which must be kept.
2.1 Solving for
is determined (up to zero-modes) by
[TABLE]
or
[TABLE]
in Fourier space. is the lattice momentum: . It is thus very easy to find from by FFT; however we must build the correct in stages.
Since we want to minimally reproduce the plaquette angles :
We first set .
3 Monopoles
For compact gauge fields, must also the reproduce gauge invariant monopoles which are the ends of open lengths of Dirac string; thus we need to find all monopole sites on the dual lattice. Since the Dirac strings connecting these monopoles are gauge variant, we define a monopole-antimonopole pairing which minimizes the string length between pairs. This can be done by simulated annealing for instance, but since this pairing is not unique, this step is a source of Gribov ambiguity. We could also connect pairs in order of finding them (violating rotational invariance), which is however fast and unique. Then,
We next add to
in otherwords, for each plaquette pierced by a Dirac string (as given by our minimal monopole pairing), we add to .
3.1 Zero-modes of : globally wrapping string
Due to compactness again, may have a zero-mode. This zero-mode can be viewed as a length of non-contractable Dirac string, ie. one that stretches across the torus.
[TABLE]
() indicates the occurance of global non-contractable Dirac strings in the -direction in the initial configuration which must be added to .
We are at liberty to place these strings wherever we like, either randomly for pseudo translational invariance, or along some particular axis so that we know where they are. Along these strings we add to the perpendicular to the path so that
We are now ready to solve eq. 15, which will give the minimal that reproduces the plaquette angles, monopole, and global strings, and which is in Landau gauge:
[TABLE]
3.2 One more zero-mode
There is one more zero mode that is undetermined by eq. 15 which is responsible for producing the correct Wilson loops. After solving for we must add to it the correct constant
[TABLE]
in order that Wilson loops are preserved mod().
This is the zero-mode of the original field, and does not contribute to .
4 The Gauge Transformation
Because of the zero-modes, the only way to find the gauge transformation taking us from is by constructing a tree, or in otherwords integrating the equation
[TABLE]
5 Tests
Figure 2 shows three extremization gauge fixed copies derived from the initial configuration in figure 1. In figure 3, the only two copies obtained by the Hodge method are displayed. The starting configuration is relatively smooth though, generated at , followed by a random gauge transformations.
6 Conclusions
- •
The method seems to work resonably well; it returns a uniquely gauge fixed configuration, up to the connectivity of monopole pairs. However, the Cartan sector of fields at typical values is fairly rough, and thus the monopole density is also relatively high.
- •
Closed (contractable) loops of Dirac string are removed, which are a primary source of Gribov copies in extremization methods.
- •
For high monopole densities, simulated annealing seems to give poorer connectivity for the large number of monopole pairs than extremization, ie. extremization uses less string to connect monopoles.
- •
For rough fields, can occasionally be larger than . This means that the physical (non-compact) field is “clipped” by compactness, resulting in a site with .
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Ph. de Forcrand and J.E. Hetrick, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 42 (1995) 861
