Goal-level research audits quantum consistency in effective-field theory, implying stronger theoretical foundations.
This goal-level research bundle completes a narrowly defined quantum-consistency audit for derivative-on-S operator families in the SM-G02 effective-field-theory program. It preserves eleven linked records, GCFT-0490 through GCFT-0500, beginning with the natural-channel admission of the D06/D07 seeds, continuing through the full-SM classical reductions and action-normalized projectors, and ending with the fixed-order measure, source-Ward, and formal fermion-phase quotient audit.The central result is positive but deliberately bounded. The minimal D06 transformation is a Higgs-only scalar reparametrization at one retained dimension-six insertion. Its functional derivative is block triangular and the opposite scalar phase blocks cancel, so the scalar functional-measure Jacobian is one. No chiral fermion is rotated in that minimal map. The associated hypercharge EOM direction is independently anomaly-null. The previously demonstrated pure-D06 descendant signature \((-1,+1,+1)\) therefore remains nonzero after this quantum qualification.The package also makes the larger optional fermion-phase quotient honest. Individual chiral fermion phase rows carry formal local Wess–Zumino images, retained as ghost-number-zero reparametrization/source-Ward bookkeeping rather than silently discarded through a classical chiral rephase. The Standard-Model gauge Slavnov–Taylor identity remains unbroken; the Wess–Zumino functional is BRST closed and is not misrepresented as a gauge anomaly.This is not a loop-mixing or RGE calculation. It supplies no UV pole, anomalous dimension, finite counterterm, gamma-five trace, curved-space result, CP-odd retained-action extension, C1/C3 fit, or empirical confirmation. Its contribution is a measure-safe, source-aware classification that protects the nonzero D06 descendant family from a concrete quantum anomaly objection while preserving explicit boundaries for the future calculation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nicky Joseph Hubertus Catharina Hacquier (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: