Weyl fermions in a non-abelian gauge background and trace anomalies

Fiorenzo Bastianelli; Matteo Broccoli

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 20 references

Weyl fermions in a non-abelian gauge background and trace anomalies

T0 review · 2 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A left-handed Weyl fermion coupled to a non-abelian gauge field has a trace anomaly with no parity-odd topological term, exactly half the Dirac-fermion value.

desk verdict Solid PV/heat-kernel computation of the non-abelian Weyl trace anomaly; the key claim (no parity-odd topological term) rests on two unshown steps, but nothing here makes me doubt the conclusion. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.03750 v1 pith:HNEQIU6B submitted 2019-08-10 hep-th

Fiorenzo Bastianelli , Matteo Broccoli This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-th MSC 81T50

keywords traceanomalyWeylfermionchiralnon-abeliangaugefieldPauli–VillarsregularizationBardeenmodelheatkernelChern–Pontryagindensity

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper computes the quantum trace anomaly of a single left-handed Weyl fermion coupled to a non-abelian gauge field in four dimensions, the scale-symmetry breaking that survives at one loop. Its central result is that the anomaly is gauge invariant, purely parity-even, and exactly half the Dirac-fermion value: $\langle T^a_a\rangle = \frac{1}{(4\pi)^2}\,\mathrm{tr}_{\mathrm{YM}}\left[\frac{1}{3}F_{ab}F^{ab}\right]$, with no contribution from the parity-odd Chern–Pontryagin density. The calculation embeds the Weyl theory in Bardeen's model of Dirac fermions with vector and axial gauge fields, regularizes with Pauli–Villars fields, extracts the anomaly from heat-kernel Seeley–DeWitt coefficients, and takes a chiral limit. A sympathetic reader should care because a parity-odd topological term in this anomaly had been conjectured as a real possibility, and this paper argues it cannot occur for non-abelian couplings.

What carries the argument

The argument runs on three linked pieces of machinery. The first is Bardeen's model, a massless Dirac fermion coupled to vector and axial non-abelian gauge fields $A_a$ and $B_a$, which is classically invariant under $G\times G$ gauge transformations and Weyl rescalings and reduces to a left-handed Weyl fermion in the chiral limit $A_a = B_a \to \tfrac{1}{2}A_a$. The second is Pauli–Villars regularization: a massive regulator field whose mass term breaks exactly the two classically exact symmetries that can be anomalous, axial gauge invariance and Weyl invariance, so each anomaly is reduced to a regulated heat-kernel trace $\mathrm{Tr}\left[J e^{-R/M^2}\right]$ with regulator $R = -\not{D}^2$ and an insertion $J$ fixed by the symmetry transformation. The third is the Seeley–DeWitt coefficient $a_2$ of the squared Dirac operators $R_\psi = -\not{D}^2(A,B)$ and $R_{\psi^c} = -\not{D}^2(-A^T,B^T)$, evaluated with standard heat-kernel formulas; the $a_2$ coefficient is the only term that survives renormalization and the infinite-mass limit, and its Dirac traces select exactly the anomalous terms. The chiral limit then converts the Bardeen-model results into the Weyl-fermion anomalies of Eq. (6.1).

What would settle it

Compute the one-loop trace anomaly of a left-handed Weyl fermion in a non-abelian background by an independent method, for instance evaluating the parity-odd part of $\langle T^a_a\rangle$ directly from Feynman diagrams with the chiral projector in the propagator or using a different regulator such as higher-derivative Pauli–Villars fields, and check whether a Chern–Pontryagin term $\epsilon^{abcd}\,\mathrm{tr}\,F_{ab}F_{cd}$ appears with a fixed nonzero coefficient. The paper's prediction is that no admissible scheme produces such a term; a nonzero coefficient that survives the Wess–Zumino consistency conditions would refute the claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is Eq. (6.1): for a left-handed Weyl fermion coupled to a non-abelian gauge field, the trace anomaly is $\langle T^a_a\rangle = \frac{1}{(4\pi)^2}\,\mathrm{tr}_{\mathrm{YM}}\left[\frac{1}{3}F_{ab}F^{ab}\right]$, and it contains no parity-odd topological term of the Chern–Pontryagin type $\epsilon^{abcd}\,\mathrm{tr}\,F_{ab}F_{cd}$. This is obtained by computing the trace anomaly of Bardeen's model, a massless Dirac fermion coupled to vector and axial non-abelian gauge fields $A_a$ and $B_a$, regularized by massive Pauli–Villars fields, and then taking the chiral limit $A_a = B_a \to \tfrac{1}{2}A_a$ that projects onto the left-handed Weyl theory. The intermediate result (5.5) for the Bardeen model is already gauge invariant after removal of cohomologically trivial counterterms, and the same manipulations that reproduce the standard consistent non-abelian chiral anomaly (a check of the method) yield the Weyl trace anomaly in the limit. The absence of parity-odd terms thus extends the earlier abelian result to non-abelian gauge couplings.

Load-bearing premise

The result presupposes that the counterterms subtracted during the calculation are genuinely removable, so that no finite local counterterm could change the coefficient of a parity-odd term and turn the claimed absence into an artifact of the regularization scheme.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A single left-handed Weyl fermion contributes exactly half the trace anomaly of a Dirac fermion, and two Weyl fermions of opposite chirality add back to the full Dirac value.
No parity-odd, CP-violating density such as $\epsilon^{abcd}\,\mathrm{tr}\,F_{ab}F_{cd}$ appears in the trace anomaly, so the conjectured parity-odd trace anomaly is not realized by free Weyl fermions in non-abelian gauge backgrounds.
The same Pauli–Villars and heat-kernel scheme rederives the standard consistent non-abelian chiral anomaly, establishing that the regularization and the chiral limit are internally consistent tools for Weyl-fermion anomaly computations.
The paper takes the flat-space result as supporting the computations that find no Pontryagin-type density for Weyl fermions in curved spacetime, so the no-parity-odd conclusion is expected to carry over to gravitational backgrounds.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If the cohomology classification behind the counterterm subtraction is correct, the vanishing of the parity-odd term should be regulator-independent; repeating the calculation with a manifestly different regulator (for instance, higher-derivative Pauli–Villars fields or zeta-function regularization) should reproduce Eq. (6.1) exactly.
The same Bardeen embedding and chiral limit could be applied to the curved-space axial-gravity case: if the parity-odd Pontryagin density reported in some curved-space computations is physical it must survive this procedure, and if it cancels, those reports are artifacts of their regularization.
Because the trace anomaly of free Weyl fermions in gauge backgrounds is now fixed, searches for CP-violating conformal field theories must look beyond free fermions, for example to interacting fixed points or gravitational couplings.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The headline: this is a genuine extension of the abelian result to non-abelian gauge backgrounds, and the main claim—that no parity-odd topological term appears in the Weyl trace anomaly—looks credible to me. I think the computation is very likely correct.

What is new: the first PV/heat-kernel derivation of the trace anomaly for Weyl fermions in a non-abelian background. Eq. (6.1) is clean: half the Dirac trace anomaly, no epsilon tr F^2. The authors rederive the chiral anomaly as a benchmark, which is a good consistency check. No parameters are fitted; the result follows from a direct regulator computation. The structure is transparent: Bardeen embedding, PV regulators, heat kernel a2 coefficients, then the chiral limit. The counterterm (5.7) is a nice piece of bookkeeping.

Where the soft spots are. The real one is Appendix A. The multi-line Dirac traces (A.10)-(A.12) are reported as intermediate results, not derived. The parity-odd sector is the point of the paper, and a single mis-signed epsilon term in those traces would put an epsilon tr F^2 term into (5.5) and hence (6.1). The cancellation is delicate, and the reader has to take the algebra on faith. That is a genuine weakness, though not a reason to doubt the answer.

The second soft spot is Section 5.2. The CTTs (5.6) are dropped by invoking a local counterterm (5.7), which assumes the standard classification of Weyl-trivial terms on flat space. The paper does not classify parity-odd local counterterms. If there is a finite, local, gauge-invariant functional whose Weyl variation reduces to epsilon tr F^2 in the chiral limit, then 'does not contain' is scheme-dependent. The authors don't prove that no such counterterm exists. This is a real gap, but it is a gap in the advertised completeness of the argument, not evidence that the answer is wrong. The curved-space support they cite is abelian, or from a different method, or unpublished, so it doesn't independently lock down the non-abelian flat-space claim.

Overall the central argument holds up as far as I can see. The paper is for people who care about Weyl anomalies, trace anomalies, or conformal field theory. It deserves a serious referee; I would send it out, with a request to check the Dirac traces line by line and to address the parity-odd counterterm question. If those hold, accept.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper computes the trace and chiral anomalies of a left-handed Weyl fermion coupled to a non-abelian gauge field in four dimensions. The authors use Pauli-Villars regularization of Bardeen's model, where Dirac fermions couple to vector and axial non-abelian gauge fields, then take the chiral limit A=B=A/2. The one-loop anomalies are extracted from Seeley-DeWitt heat kernel coefficients. As a consistency check they rederive the standard non-abelian chiral anomaly, and they obtain the trace anomaly <T^a_a> = (1/(4 pi)^2) tr_{YM}[(1/3) F_{ab} F^{ab}] with no parity-odd (Chern-Pontryagin) contribution.

Significance. If the result is correct, it settles a debated question: whether the flat-space trace anomaly of a Weyl fermion coupled to a non-abelian background contains a parity-odd topological term. The paper uses standard PV and heat-kernel techniques and rederives the known chiral anomaly, which provides an internal consistency check. The central claim is parameter-free and falsifiable. The manuscript is of clear interest to the quantum field theory and hep-th communities and addresses a controversy that involves several recent publications.

major comments (2)

[Appendix A, eqs. (A.10)-(A.12); Section 5.2] The trace anomaly (5.5) is obtained by inserting the quoted Dirac traces (A.10)-(A.12) into (4.12), and the parity-odd sector is the decisive part of the central result (6.1). These traces are reported as final intermediate results without derivation. In particular, the parity-odd contributions to tr[a2(Rψ)] (without a gamma5 insertion in the trace) are not displayed; only their claimed total is zero. The rederivation of the chiral anomaly in Section 5.1 checks the gamma5-trace functions, but those are independent of the traces entering (4.12), so they do not constrain the parity-odd part of tr[a2]. I request that the authors show the full gamma-matrix algebra for the parity-odd terms, or provide an independent cross-check (for example, a direct diagrammatic computation or a second regularization method). Without this, the no-parity-odd claim rests on unverified algebra.
[Sections 5.2 and 6, around (5.6), (5.7) and (6.1)] The paper removes the cohomologically trivial terms (5.6) by the counterterm (5.7), which defines a scheme. However, it does not discuss whether there exist gauge-invariant, generally covariant, parity-odd local counterterms whose Weyl variation could shift the coefficient of an epsilon tr F^2 term in the chiral limit. If such a counterterm exists, the absence of the parity-odd term in (6.1) is scheme-dependent and the abstract statement 'does not contain any parity-odd topological contribution' is too strong. The authors should either classify the parity-odd local counterterms in the Bardeen model, or argue explicitly that they are absent or Weyl-trivial, and then state the result in (6.1) as valid up to such counterterms.

minor comments (3)

[Appendix A, eqs. (A.10)-(A.12)] The shorthand expressions such as 'DBDB', 'D2B2', and 'B4' are not defined in the text; please define these products explicitly (e.g., D_a B_b D^a B^b, D^2 B^2, and (B_a B^a)^2).
[References, [15]] Reference [15] is cited as 'in preparation' and is used as supporting evidence for the absence of parity-odd terms in the MAT background. Unpublished work should not be used as a supporting reference for a central conclusion; either remove the citation or provide the details.
[Section 6, eq. (6.1)] The chiral limit A=B=A/2 is taken without explicitly discussing the normalization of the currents; please clarify how the Weyl current is obtained from Ja and Ja5 in this limit.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: Eq. (6.1) is obtained by explicit heat-kernel/PV computation, not by fitting or by definition; self-citations are contextual and not load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation is self-contained. The trace anomaly of the Bardeen model, Eq. (5.5), is computed from the Seeley-DeWitt coefficient a2 via Eqs. (4.10)-(4.12) and the explicit Dirac traces in Appendix A, and the Weyl-fermion result, Eq. (6.1), is then obtained by the chiral limit A=B=A/2 stated in Section 6. No parameter is fitted to the target answer, and the chiral anomaly (5.2) is rederived independently as a consistency check, so the method is benchmarked against a known external result. The counterterm subtraction of the cohomologically trivial terms (5.6)/(5.7) is a standard scheme choice; even if a different counterterm could shift the parity-odd sector, that would be a possible correctness/scheme-dependence concern, not a circular reduction, because the paper does not define the no-parity-odd answer into its inputs. The self-citations ([2], [13], [15]) are used for conventions, context in the abelian/curved-space debate, or an ancillary concluding remark; [15] is explicitly 'in preparation' and is not load-bearing. Neither the flat-space non-abelian result nor the absence of epsilon tr F^2 in (6.1) is imported from those citations: it follows from the calculation in Sections 5-6 and Appendix A. No circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no free parameters and no new physical entities. The calculation relies entirely on standard PV regularization, heat kernel expansions, and the Bardeen embedding, all drawn from prior literature. The assumptions listed are the standard ingredients of this method; none of them are fitted to the desired answer.

assumptions (5)

standard math Seeley-DeWitt heat kernel expansion Tr[J e^{-isH}] = sum_n tr[J a_n] (i s)^n with a2 = (1/2)V^2 - (1/6)∇^2 V + (1/12) F^2_{ab}
Used to evaluate the PV-regulated anomaly traces in (4.10) and (4.12); the coefficients are taken from refs. [16,17,20] in Appendix A.
domain assumption Pauli-Villars regulator identity (4.5)-(4.8): the anomaly equals -lim_{M to infinity} Tr[J exp(-R/M^2)]
Assumes Euclidean continuation and negative definite O^2 so that the regulator factor can be exponentiated, and assumes power-divergent terms are removed by renormalization. This is standard but not formally proven in the paper.
domain assumption The chiral limit A = B = A/2 of the Bardeen model gives the left-handed Weyl fermion coupling
Used in Section 6 to pass from the vector-axial Dirac theory to Weyl fermions; assumes the limit commutes with the anomaly computation and yields the physical Weyl anomalies.
domain assumption Cohomologically trivial terms (CTTs and PETs) can be removed by local counterterms
The trace anomaly result (5.5) is stated after dropping CTTs canceled by the Weyl variation of (5.7). If a finite local counterterm could shift a parity-odd term, the absence conclusion would be scheme-dependent.
domain assumption The PV mass term preserves vector gauge, general coordinate, and local Lorentz symmetries while breaking axial and Weyl symmetries
Section 3 establishes which anomalies can appear. If the mass term also broke vector gauge symmetry, additional anomalies would contaminate the central trace result.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Weyl fermions in a non-abelian gauge background and trace anomalies." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HNEQIU6B

@misc{pith2026190803750,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Weyl fermions in a non-abelian gauge background and trace anomalies},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HNEQIU6B}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.03750}
}

read the original abstract

We study the trace and chiral anomalies of Weyl fermions in a non-abelian gauge background in four dimensions. Using a Pauli-Villars regularization we identify the trace anomaly, proving that it can be cast in a gauge invariant form, even in the presence of the non-abelian chiral anomaly, that we rederive to check the consistency of our methods. In particular, we find that the trace anomaly does not contain any parity-odd topological contribution, whose presence has been debated in the recent literature.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

20 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages

[1]

Anomalous Ward identities in spinor ﬁeld theories,

W. A. Bardeen, “Anomalous Ward identities in spinor ﬁeld theories,” Phys. Rev. 184 (1969) 1848. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.184.1848

doi:10.1103/physrev.184.1848 1969
[2]

On the trace anomaly of a Weyl fermion in a gauge background

F. Bastianelli and M. Broccoli, “On the trace anomaly of a Weyl fermion in a gauge background,” Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) no.4, 292 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-6799-z [ arXiv:1808.03489 [hep-th]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2019
[3]

Understanding Fujikawa regulators from Pauli-villars regularization of ghost loops,

A. Diaz, W. Troost, P. van Nieuwenhuizen and A. Van Proeyen, “Understanding Fujikawa regulators from Pauli-villars regularization of ghost loops,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 4 (1989) 3959. doi:10.1142/S0217751X8900162X

work page doi:10.1142/s0217751x8900162x 1989
[4]

The regularized phase space path integral measure for a scalar ﬁeld coupled to gravity,

M. Hatsuda, P. van Nieuwenhuizen, W. Troost and A. Van Proeyen, “The regularized phase space path integral measure for a scalar ﬁeld coupled to gravity,” Nucl. Phys. B 335 (1990) 166. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(90)90176-E

work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(90)90176-e 1990
[5]

Path integral measure for gauge invariant fermion theories,

K. Fujikawa, “Path integral measure for gauge invariant fermion theories,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 42 (1979) 1195. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.42.1195

doi:10.1103/physrevlett.42.1195 1979
[6]

Comment on chiral and conformal anomalies,

K. Fujikawa, “Comment on chiral and conformal anomalies,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 44 (1980) 1733. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.44.1733

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.44.1733 1980
[7]

CP-violating CFT and trace anomaly

Y. Nakayama, “CP-violating CFT and trace anomaly,” Nucl. Phys. B 859 (2012) 288 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2012.02.006 [arXiv:1201.3428 [hep-th]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2012
[8]

Realization of impossible anomalies,

Y. Nakayama, “Realization of impossible anomalies,” Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) no.8, 085002 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.085002 [arXiv:1804.02940 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2018

Show all 20 references

[9]

Conformal contact terms and semi-local terms,

Y. Nakayama, “Conformal contact terms and semi-local terms,” [ arXiv:1906.07914 [hep-th]]

1906 arXiv
[10]

Trace anomalies in chiral theories revisited,

L. Bonora, S. Giaccari and B. Lima de Souza, “Trace anomalies in chiral theories revisited,” JHEP 1407 (2014) 117 doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2014)117 [ arXiv:1403.2606 [hep-th]]

2014 arXiv
[11]

Axial gravity, massless fermions and trace anomalies,

L. Bonora, M. Cvitan, P. Dominis Prester, A. Duarte Pereira, S. Giaccari and T. ˇStemberga, “Axial gravity, massless fermions and trace anomalies,” Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) no.8, 511 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5071-7 [ arXiv:1703.10473 [hep-th]]

2017 arXiv
[12]

Axial gravity: a non-perturbative approach to split anomalies,

L. Bonora, M. Cvitan, P. Dominis Prester, S. Giaccari, M. Pauliˇ sic and T. ˇStemberga, “Axial gravity: a non-perturbative approach to split anomalies,” Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (2018) no.8, 652 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-6141-1 [arXiv:1807.01249 [hep-th]]

2018 arXiv
[13]

On the trace anomaly of a Weyl fermion,

F. Bastianelli and R. Martelli, “On the trace anomaly of a Weyl fermion,” JHEP 1611 (2016) 178 doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2016)178 [ arXiv:1610.02304 [hep-th]]

2016 arXiv
[14]

Trace anomaly for chiral fermions via Hadamard subtraction,

M. B. Fr¨ ob and J. Zahn, “Trace anomaly for chiral fermions via Hadamard subtraction,” [arXiv:1904.10982 [hep-th]]

1904 arXiv
[15]

Bastianelli and M

F. Bastianelli and M. Broccoli, in preparation. – 12 –
[16]

Dynamical theory of groups and ﬁelds,

B. S. DeWitt, “Dynamical theory of groups and ﬁelds,” Conf. Proc. C 630701 (1964) 585 [Les Houches Lect. Notes 13 (1964) 585]

1964
[17]

The spacetime approach to quantum ﬁeld theory,

B. S. DeWitt, “The spacetime approach to quantum ﬁeld theory,” in “Relativity, groups and topology II”, proceedings of the Les Houches Summer School 1983, edited by B.S. De Witt and R. Stora, North Holland, Amsterdam, 1984

1983
[18]

The path integral for a particle in curved spaces and Weyl anomalies,

F. Bastianelli, “The path integral for a particle in curved spaces and Weyl anomalies,” Nucl. Phys. B 376 (1992) 113 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(92)90070-R [hep-th/9112035]

1992 arXiv
[19]

Trace anomalies from quantum mechanics,

F. Bastianelli and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, “Trace anomalies from quantum mechanics,” Nucl. Phys. B 389 (1993) 53 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(93)90285-W [hep-th/9208059]

1993 arXiv
[20]

Heat kernel expansion: User’s manual,

D. V. Vassilevich, “Heat kernel expansion: User’s manual,” Phys. Rept. 388 (2003) 279 doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2003.09.002 [hep-th/0306138]. – 13 –

2003 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Anomalous Ward identities in spinor ﬁeld theories,

W. A. Bardeen, “Anomalous Ward identities in spinor ﬁeld theories,” Phys. Rev. 184 (1969) 1848. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.184.1848

doi:10.1103/physrev.184.1848 1969

[2] [2]

On the trace anomaly of a Weyl fermion in a gauge background

F. Bastianelli and M. Broccoli, “On the trace anomaly of a Weyl fermion in a gauge background,” Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) no.4, 292 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-6799-z [ arXiv:1808.03489 [hep-th]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2019

[3] [3]

Understanding Fujikawa regulators from Pauli-villars regularization of ghost loops,

A. Diaz, W. Troost, P. van Nieuwenhuizen and A. Van Proeyen, “Understanding Fujikawa regulators from Pauli-villars regularization of ghost loops,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 4 (1989) 3959. doi:10.1142/S0217751X8900162X

work page doi:10.1142/s0217751x8900162x 1989

[4] [4]

The regularized phase space path integral measure for a scalar ﬁeld coupled to gravity,

M. Hatsuda, P. van Nieuwenhuizen, W. Troost and A. Van Proeyen, “The regularized phase space path integral measure for a scalar ﬁeld coupled to gravity,” Nucl. Phys. B 335 (1990) 166. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(90)90176-E

work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(90)90176-e 1990

[5] [5]

Path integral measure for gauge invariant fermion theories,

K. Fujikawa, “Path integral measure for gauge invariant fermion theories,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 42 (1979) 1195. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.42.1195

doi:10.1103/physrevlett.42.1195 1979

[6] [6]

Comment on chiral and conformal anomalies,

K. Fujikawa, “Comment on chiral and conformal anomalies,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 44 (1980) 1733. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.44.1733

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.44.1733 1980

[7] [7]

CP-violating CFT and trace anomaly

Y. Nakayama, “CP-violating CFT and trace anomaly,” Nucl. Phys. B 859 (2012) 288 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2012.02.006 [arXiv:1201.3428 [hep-th]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2012

[8] [8]

Realization of impossible anomalies,

Y. Nakayama, “Realization of impossible anomalies,” Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) no.8, 085002 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.085002 [arXiv:1804.02940 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2018