## N = 2 higher-spin supercurrents

## Nikita Zaigraev a,b

Bogoliubov Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, JINR,

- a 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
- b Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, 141700 Dolgoprudny, Moscow region, Russia

E-mail:

nikita.zaigraev@phystech.edu

Abstract: We have constructed conserved N = 2 higher-spin supercurrents for an arbitrary integer spin through the unconstrained superfield formulation of 4 D, N = 2 massless higher-spin theories in the harmonic superspace. The obtained supercurrents are gauge-invariant and determine consistent cubic interactions in the gauge superfield × supercurrent form for massless spin s 1 and two massless spin s 2 N = 2 supermultiplets. Such interactions and N = 2 supercurrents exist only for s 1 ≥ 2 s 2 . These supercurrents are the N = 2 supersymmetric extension of Berends-Burgers-van Dam higher-spin currents and generalize the linearized Bel-Robinson tensor. The relevant N = 2 supercurrents can be considered as the descendants of the N = 2 principle supercurrent, which has a simple universal structure. An important feature of our outcomes is that, ultimately, all N = 2 supercurrents are built from the N = 2 superfield strengths, which are constructed from the unconstrained analytical higher-spin prepotentials.

## Contents

## 1 Introduction

1

- 2 N = 2
- massless higher-spin theories in harmonic superspace 2
- 3 N = 2 higher spin Mezincescu prepotentials

4

- 4
- Higher spin supercurrents: conservation equations 6
- 5
- Gauge-invariant higher spin supercurrents 7
- 6 Discussion

8

## 1 Introduction

Supercurrent [1, 2] is the fundamental object in the supersymmetric theories. The supercurrent multiplet contains the energy-momentum tensor and conserved currents corresponding to supersymmetric invariance and acts as the source for supergravity. N = 2 supercurrents for the hypermultiplet and N = 2 vector multiplet are given [3-5] by

$$\mathcal { J } _ { h y p } = q ^ { + a } \mathcal$$

and satisfy the on-shell conservation equations 1 in the harmonic superspace using notations of [6]:

$$\cos \theta \cos \varphi \cos \theta \sin \theta \cos$$

Higher-spin gauge-invariant 2 conserved currents exist for s 1 ≥ 2 s 2 [8] and can be represented as 3 :

$$\begin{array} {$$

where we used notation for the higher-spin generalization of the Weyl tensor:

$$C _ { ( \alpha _ { 1 } \dots \alpha _ { 2 s } ) }$$

In the s = 1 case, this tensor corresponds to the self-dual part of the electromagnetic tensor, and in the s = 2 case, to the linearized Weyl tensor's self-dual part. Higher-spin currents (1.3) satisfy the on-shell conservation equation:

$$\partial ^ { \alpha \dot { \alpha } } J _ { \alpha ( s _ {$$

These conserved currents are higher-spin generalizations of the linearized gravitational Bel-Robinson tensor [9], which is the well-known spin 4 conserved current in general relativity.

1 Here and in the following, we use the 'weak equality' symbol ≈ to denote equations satisfied on the equations of motion.

2 For the discussion of gauge non-invariant higher-spin currents, see, e.g., [7].

3 We use shortened notation for symmetrized product of derivatives ∂ p := ∂ p α p α p ( ) ˙ ( ) = ∂ ( α 1 ( ˙ α 1 . . . ∂ α p ) ˙ α p ) and assume symmetrization over all doted and undoted indices.

Using conserved higher-spin currents (1.3), one can construct the consistent cubic ( s , s 1 2 , s 2 ) vertex [8, 10, 11] for s 1 ≥ 2 s 2

$$\mathcal { L } _ { i n t } ^ { ( s _ { 1 }, s$$

In this article, we consider the problem of the construction of N = 2 higher-spin supercurrents for an arbitrary integer higher spin 4 and the corresponding Abelian cubic interactions. The basis for our construction is the harmonic superspace formulation [6, 14] of the N = 2 theory of higher spins [15] in terms of unconstrained analytical prepotentials. Based on these results, it was shown that off-shell higher-spin hypermultiplet cubic vertices and corresponding hypermultiplet N = 2 supercurrents have an elegant structure [16-18]; see also reviews [19, 20]. However, more general higher-spin Abelian vertices and N = 2 supercurrents were never considered. Some general properties of N = 2 supercurrents were analyzed by Kuzenko and Raptakis in [21], settled on their earlier paper on the N -extended superconformal multiplets. [22]. In particular, the authors established that on-shell the analytical hypermultiplet higher-spin N = 2 supercurrents can be considered as the descendants of the N = 2 superconformal primary supercurrent and also constructed N = 2 primary higher-spin supercurrents for the N = 2 vector multiplet 5 .

Our goal is to continue the analysis of N = 2 supercurrents based on the harmonic superspace approach and explicitly construct gauge-invariant N = 2 higher-spin supercurrents in terms of analytical prepotentials for an arbitrary integer spin. For the construction of gauge-invariant N = 2 higher-spin supercurrents, the main objects are higher-spin superfield strengths; those provide the manifest gauge invariance. In the recent paper [23], the N = 2 super-Weyl tensor in terms of the N = 2 Einstein supergravity analytic prepotentials was obtained. In this work, we intend to generalize the N = 2 super-Weyl tensor to the higher spins and then use it to construct conserved N = 2 higher-spin supercurrents for an arbitrary integer spin.

## 2 N = 2 massless higher-spin theories in harmonic superspace

The massless off-shell N = 2 spin s ≥ 2 supermultiplet is described by the set of unconstrained analytic prepotentials [15]:

$$h ^ { + + \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { a } ( s - 1 )$$

The gauge transformations of the analytic prepotentials are the following:

$$\begin{array} {$$

4 The N = 1 supersymmetric extension of gauge-invariant higher-spin currents (1.3) and the corresponding cubic vertices were constructed in [12]. Another remarkable class of conserved N = 1 supercurrents and corresponding consistent non-minimal cubic interactions were considered in the paper [13].

5 At the final stage of preparation for this work, the preprint by Kuzenko and Raptakis [28] appeared, where authors constructed N = 2 primary higher-spin supercurrents for the off-shell hypermultiplet.

The realization of rigid N = 2 supersymmetry transformations on analytic higher-spin prepotentials is given by equations

$$\delta _ { \epsilon } h ^ { + + \alpha ( s - 1 )$$

where we have used the notations ϵ ± α := ϵ αi u ± i and ¯ ϵ ± ˙ α := ¯ ϵ ˙ αi u ± i .

N = 2 supersymmetry invariant superfields are defined by relations:

$$\mathcal { N } = 2 \, \text{supersymmetry invariant superneids$$

Bosonic G ++ ... potentials are not analytical but supersymmetry-invariant. Through the use of the zero-curvature conditions 6

$$\mathcal { D } ^ { + + } G ^ { - - \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) M } & = \mathcal { D } ^ { - - } G ^ { + + \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) M } \,, \\ \mathcal { D } ^ { + + } G ^ { - - \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) \hat { \beta } - } & + G ^ { - - \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) \hat { \beta } + } & = 0,$$

one can construct supersymmetry-invariant negatively charged potentials G --... , which play an important role in the harmonic superfield formulation of N = 2 theories.

Gauge invariant N = 2 supersymmetric action has the universal form for all spin s supermultiplets [15]:

$$S _ { ( s ) } = ( - 1 ) ^ { s + 1 } \int d ^ { 4 } x d ^ { 8 } \theta d u \left \{ & G ^ { + + \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) } G ^ { - - } _ { \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) } \\ & + 4 G ^ { + + \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } G ^ { - - } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } \right \}.$$

By varying this action with respect to the analytic prepotentials, one can derive superfield equations of motion [17]

$$\cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot ( \bar { \mathcal { D } } ^ { + } ) ^ { 2 } \mathcal { D } ^ { + \alpha _ { s - 1 } } G _ { \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) } ^ { - - } - 4 ( \mathcal { D } ^ { + } ) ^ { 2 } \bar { \mathcal { D } } _ { ( \dot { \alpha } } ^ { + } G _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) ) } ^ { - - } \approx 0.$$

In components, these equations lead to the free equations for physical gauge fields. Auxiliary fields are equal to zero on-shell (for s ≥ 3 ).

The gauge-invariant N = 2 spin s superfield strength is defined as

$$\mathcal { W } _ { \alpha ( 2 s - 2 ) } \coloneqq & \left ( \bar { D } ^ { + } \right ) ^ { 2 } \partial _ { ( \alpha _ { 1 } } ^ { \dot { \beta } _ { 1 } } \dots \partial _ { \alpha _ { s - 2 } } ^ { \dot { \beta } _ { s - 2 } } \left \{ \mathcal { D } _ { \alpha _ { s - 1 } } ^ { + } G _ { \alpha _ { s } \dots \alpha _ { 2 s - 2 } ) ( \dot { \beta } _ { 1 } \dots \dot { \beta } _ { s - 2 } ) } ^ { - - - } \\ & + \mathcal { D } _ { \alpha _ { s - 1 } } ^ { - } G _ { \alpha _ { s } \dots \alpha _ { 2 s - 2 } ) ( \dot { \beta } _ { 1 } \dots \dot { \beta } _ { s - 2 } ) } ^ { - - + } - \partial _ { \alpha _ { s - 1 } } ^ { \dot { \beta } _ { s - 1 } } G _ { \alpha _ { s } \dots \alpha _ { 2 s - 2 } ) ( \dot { \beta } _ { 1 } \dots \dot { \beta } _ { s - 1 } ) } ^ { - - } \right \}.$$

This is the generalization of the spin 2 super-Weyl tensor, introduced in the harmonic superspace in recent work [23]. Analogously, one can define conjugated superfield strength ¯ W ˙ (2 α s -2) := ˜ W α (2 s -2) .

6 We use notations for indices M = { αα,α,α, ˙ ˙ 5 } and ˆ = α { α, α ˙ } . We also omit the index 5, so h ++ ( α s -2) ˙ ( α s -2)5 = h ++ ( α s -2) ˙ ( α s -2) .

The superstrength W α (2 s -2) is the chiral N = 2 superfield, i.e., ¯ D W ± ˙ β α (2 s -2) = 0 and the tilde conjugated strength ¯ W ˙ (2 α s -2) is the anti-chiral superfield, i.e., D W ± β ¯ ˙ (2 α s -2) = 0 . Moreover, W α (2 s -2) and ¯ W ˙ (2 α s -2) are covariantly harmonic-independent and satisfy the following equations

$$\mathcal { D } ^ { \pm \pm } \mathcal { W } _ { \alpha ( 2 s - 2 ) } = 0, \quad \mathcal { D } ^ { \pm \pm } \bar { \mathcal { W } } _ { \dot { \alpha } ( 2 s - 2 ) } = 0,$$

while on-shell superfield strengths satisfy

$$\mathcal { D } ^ { \pm \alpha } \mathcal { W } _ { \alpha ( 2 s - 2 ) } \approx 0, \quad \bar { \mathcal { D } } ^ { \pm \dot { \alpha } } \bar { \mathcal { W } } _ { \dot { \alpha } ( 2 s - 2 ) } \approx 0, \quad \partial _ { \dot { \beta } } ^ { \alpha } \mathcal { W } _ { \alpha ( 2 s - 2 ) } \approx 0, \quad \partial _ { \dot { \beta } } ^ { \dot { \alpha } } \bar { \mathcal { W } } _ { \dot { \alpha } ( 2 s - 2 ) } \approx 0. \quad ( 2. 1 0 )$$

These equations follow from the component composition of the superfield strengths. Actually, since the superfield strengths are gauge-invariant, they contain higher-spin bosonic and fermionic Weyl tensors in their component decomposition, which leads to the equations above. In particular, in components superfield strengths contain the Weyl-like higher spin tensor (1.4)

$$\mathcal { W } _ { \alpha ( 2 s - 2 ) } \sim \theta ^ { + \beta } \theta ^ { - \gamma } C _ { ( \alpha ( 2 s - 2 ) \beta \gamma ) } + \dots$$

Thus, one can consider this N = 2 superfield strength as the natural higher spin generalization of the linearized N = 2 super-Weyl tensor.

The N = 2 vector multiplet can be considered as the limiting case of N = 2 higher spins. The off-shell N = 2 vector multiplet is described by the unconstrained analytic superfield V ++ with the gauge freedom

$$\delta _ { \lambda } V ^ { + + } = \mathcal { D } ^ { + + } \lambda.$$

Gauge-invariant superfield action is given by:

$$S _ { ( s = 1 ) } = \int d ^ { 4 } x d ^ { 8 } \theta d u \, V ^ { + + } V ^ { - - } ;$$

here we define V --as the solution of zero curvature equation D ++ V --= D --V ++ . The dynamical equations of motion can be derived from action (2.13)

$$( \mathcal { D } ^ { + } ) ^ { 4 } V ^ { - - } \approx 0.$$

Gauge-invariant superfield strengths for the N = 2 vector multiplet are defined as follows:

$$\mathcal { W } \coloneqq ( \bar { \mathcal { D } } ^ { + } ) ^ { 2 } V ^ { - - }, \quad \bar { \mathcal { W } } \coloneqq ( \mathcal { D } ^ { + } ) ^ { 2 } V ^ { - - },$$

and, as their higher-spin counterparts, satisfy harmonic independence and chirality/antichirality conditions correspondingly. On-shell W and ¯ W satisfy useful equations

$$\left ( \mathcal { D } ^ { + } \right ) ^ { 2 } \mathcal { W } \approx 0, \quad \left ( \bar { \mathcal { D } } ^ { + } \right ) ^ { 2 } \bar { \mathcal { W } } \approx 0, \quad \partial _ { \dot { \alpha } } ^ { \alpha } \mathcal { D } _ { \alpha } ^ { \pm } \mathcal { W } \approx 0, \quad \partial _ { \dot { \alpha } } ^ { \dot { \alpha } } \bar { \mathcal { D } } _ { \dot { \alpha } } ^ { \pm } \bar { \mathcal { W } } \approx 0. \quad \left ( 2. 1 6 \right )$$

## 3 N = 2 higher spin Mezincescu prepotentials

An alternative representation of N = 2 higher-spin prepotentials is given by the Mezincescu-type higher-spin non-analytic prepotentials, introduced in [17]. These prepotentials are natural harmonic superspace higher-spin generalizations of spin 1 Mezincescu prepotential [24] and spin 2 Gates-Siegel prepotential [25]. The most straightforward way to introduce Mezincescu-type prepotentials is to use the supersymmetry-invariant analytical differential operator [16, 17]

$$\hat { \mathcal { H } } _ { ( s ) } ^ { + + } \coloneqq h ^ { + + \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) M } \partial _ { M } \partial _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } ^ { s - 2 },$$

and represent it in the manifestly analytial form 7

$$\hat { \mathcal { H } } _ { ( s ) } ^ { + + } = ( \mathcal { D } ^ { + } ) ^ { 4 } \left [ \Psi ^ { - \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } \mathcal { D } _ { \alpha } ^ { - } + \bar { \Psi } ^ { - \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) } \bar { \mathcal { D } } _ { \dot { \alpha } } ^ { - } \right ] \partial _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } ^ { s - 2 },$$

where the unconstrained superfields Ψ -α s ( -1) ˙ ( α s -2) and ¯ Ψ -α s ( -2) ˙ ( α s -1) are spin s Mezincescu-type prepotentials. Since the operator ˆ H ++ ( s ) is supersymmetry-invariant δ ϵ ˆ H ++ ( s ) = 0 , under N = 2 supersymmetry we have

$$\delta _ { \epsilon } \Psi ^ { - \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } = 0, \quad \delta _ { \epsilon } \bar { \Psi } ^ { - \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) } = 0.$$

Equation (3.2) defines an unambiguous relation of Ψ -... and ¯ Ψ -... with the analytical prepotentials (2.1). Relying on representation (3.1), one can deduce the relation of the Mezincescu-type prepotential to the covariant G ++ ( α s -2) ˙ ( α s -2) M superfields (2.4) as follows:

$$\text{prepotential to the covariant } G ^ { \top \top } + \lambda ^ { \infty } - \varepsilon ^ { \prime \prime } \lambda ^ { \infty } \text{ superhelds } ( 2. 4 ) & \text{ as follows: } \\ G ^ { + + \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { a } ( s - 1 ) } & = \frac { i } { 2 } \left ( \left ( \mathcal { D } ^ { + } \right ) ^ { 2 } \bar { \mathcal { D } } ^ { + ( \dot { \alpha } } \Psi ^ { - \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { a } ( s - 2 ) ) } + ( \bar { \mathcal { D } } ^ { + } ) ^ { 2 } \mathcal { D } ^ { + ( \alpha } \bar { \Psi } ^ { - \alpha ( s - 2 ) ) \dot { a } ( s - 1 ) } \right ), \\ G ^ { + + \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { a } ( s - 2 ) + } & = \left ( \mathcal { D } ^ { + } \right ) ^ { 4 } \Psi ^ { - \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { a } ( s - 2 ) }, \\ G ^ { + + \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { a } ( s - 1 ) + } & = \left ( \mathcal { D } ^ { + } \right ) ^ { 4 } \bar { \Psi } ^ { - \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { a } ( s - 1 ) }, \\ G ^ { + + \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { a } ( s - 2 ) } & = \frac { i } { 4 } \left ( \bar { \mathcal { D } } ^ { + } \right ) ^ { 2 } \mathcal { D } ^ { + } _ { \alpha } \Psi ^ { - \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { a } ( s - 2 ) } - ( \mathcal { D } ^ { + } \right ) ^ { 2 } \bar { \mathcal { D } } ^ { + } _ { \alpha } \bar { \Psi } ^ { - \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { a } ( s - 1 ) } \right ). \\ \text{This is the higher-spin generalization of alternative representations of } \mathcal { N } = 2 \, \text{ Einstein supergravity}$$

This is the higher-spin generalization of alternative representations of N = 2 Einstein supergravity prepotentials, first introduced by Zupnik [26]. Higher-spin Mezincescu prepotentials are defined up to the gauge freedom (parameters K ) and pre-gauge freedom (parameters B ):

$$\delta _ { \lambda, b } \Psi _ { \alpha ( s - 1 ) \acute { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } ^ { - } & = \mathcal { D } ^ { + + } K _ { \alpha ( s - 1 ) \acute { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } ^ { ( - 3 ) } + \mathcal { D } _ { ( \alpha } ^ { + } B _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) ) \acute { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } ^ { - - } \\ & \quad + \mathcal { D } ^ { + \beta } B _ { ( \alpha ( s - 1 ) \beta ) \acute { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } ^ { - - } + \bar { \mathcal { D } } ^ { + \beta } B _ { \alpha ( s - 1 ) ( \acute { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) \dot { \beta } ) } ^ { - - } \\ & \quad -.$$

D

+ ¯

+

--

( ˙

α

B

α s

(

-

1) ˙ (

α s

-

3))

,

$$\stackrel { \vee \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots \colon \\ \delta _ { \lambda, b } \bar { \Psi } ^ { - } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) } } & = \mathcal { D } ^ { + + } \stackrel { \delta \bar { K } ^ { - 3 ) } { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) } - \bar { \mathcal { D } } ^ { + } _ { ( \dot { \alpha } } B ^ { - - } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) ) } \\ & \quad - \bar { \mathcal { D } } ^ { + \dot { \beta } } \bar { B } ^ { - - } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) ( \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) \dot { \beta } ) } + \mathcal { D } ^ { + \dot { \beta } } B ^ { - - } _ { ( \alpha ( s - 2 ) \beta ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) } \\ & \quad + \mathcal { D } ^ { + } _ { ( \dot { \alpha } } \bar { B } ^ { - - } _ { \alpha ( s - 3 ) ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) }. \\ \text{paramaters $K$ are related to the analytic $\L$-naramotore$ through the relation}.$$

Parameters K are related to the analytic λ -parameters through the relation:

$$\hat { \Lambda } _ { ( s ) } & \coloneqq \lambda ^ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) M } \partial _ { M } \partial _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } ^ { s - 2 } \\ & = ( \mathcal { D } ^ { + } ) ^ { 4 } \left ( K ^ { ( - 3 ) \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } \mathcal { D } _ { \alpha } ^ { - } + \bar { K } ^ { ( - 3 ) \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) } \bar { D } _ { \dot { \alpha } } ^ { - } \right ) \partial _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } ^ { s - 2 }$$

and define the gauge freedom (2.2) of the analytic prepotentials. Pre-gauge freedom, parameters B , do not act on the analytic h ++ -prepotentials and can be used to gauge away all d.o.f. from the Mezincescu-type prepotential with the exception of the analytic prepotentials. All B -parameters are complex, except the parameters B --α s ( -1) ˙ ( α s -1) and B --α s ( -2) ˙ ( α s -2) , which are real with respect to the tilde conjugation 8 , namely,

$$B _ { \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) } ^ { - - } = B _ { \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) } ^ { - - }, \quad B _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } ^ { - - } = B _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } ^ { - - }.$$

Mezincescu-type prepotentials have rather complex non-geometric laws of the gauge transformation (3.5), which makes them less convenient for describing physical degrees of freedom in contrast to analytical prepotentials. Nevertheless, as we will see, they are more convenient for constructing the Abelian higher-spin cubic interactions and to determine equations on the corresponding N = 2 supercurrents.

7 Here we use notations ( D + 4 ) := 1 16 ( D + 2 ) ( ¯ D + 2 ) , D + ˆ α = ∂ + ˆ α , D -α = -∂ -α +4 ¯ iθ -˙ α ∂ αα ˙ , ¯ D -˙ α = -∂ -˙ α -4 iθ -α ∂ αα ˙ 8 Action of the tilde conjugation defined as ˜ x αα ˙ = x αα ˙ , θ ˜ ± α = ¯ θ ± ˙ α , θ ˜ ¯ ± ˙ α = -θ ± α , u ˜ ± i = -u ± i , u ˜ ± i = u ± i ; see [6].

.

## 4 Higher spin supercurrents: conservation equations

Operating with the Mezincescu-type prepotentials Ψ -... and ¯ Ψ -... , one can construct interactions of the following form:

$$S _ { i n t } = \int d ^ { 4 } x d ^ { 8 } \theta d u \, \left ( \Psi ^ { - \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } \mathcal { J } ^ { + } _ { \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } - \bar { \Psi } ^ { - \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) } \bar { \mathcal { J } } ^ { + } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) } \right ). \quad ( 4. 1 )$$

In order for the cubic vertices to be consistent, N = 2 supercurrents must satisfy the on-shell conservation laws. Gauge and pre-gauge transformations (3.5) imply the system of on-shell conservation equations:

$$\begin{cases} \mathcal { D } ^ { + + } \mathcal { J } ^ { + } _ { \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } \approx 0, \\ \mathcal { D } ^ { + \alpha } \mathcal { J } ^ { + } _ { \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } + \bar { D } ^ { + \dot { \alpha } } \bar { \mathcal { J } } ^ { + } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) } \approx 0, \\ \mathcal { D } ^ { + } _ { ( \beta } \mathcal { J } ^ { + } _ { \alpha ( s - 1 ) ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } \approx 0, \\ \bar { \mathcal { D } } ^ { + } _ { ( \dot { \alpha } } \mathcal { J } ^ { + } _ { \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) ) } - \mathcal { D } ^ { + } _ { ( \alpha } \bar { \mathcal { J } } ^ { + } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) } \approx 0, \\ \bar { \mathcal { D } } ^ { + \dot { \alpha } } \mathcal { J } ^ { + } _ { \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } \approx 0. \end{cases}$$

Since we are constructing cubic vertices, these equalities must be fulfilled on the free equations of motion, presented in Section 3.

Before proceeding to the solution of the system of equations (4.2), it is important to note that the structure of these equations implies that the solution has the special form

$$\begin{cases} \mathcal { J } _ { ( \alpha _ { 1 } \dots \alpha _ { s - 1 } ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } ^ { + } = \mathcal { D } _ { ( \alpha _ { 1 } } ^ { + } \mathcal { J } _ { \alpha _ { 2 } \dots \alpha _ { s - 1 } ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) }, \\ \bar { \mathcal { J } } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) ( \dot { \alpha } _ { 1 } \dots \dot { \alpha } _ { s - 1 } ) } ^ { + } = - \bar { \mathcal { D } } _ { ( \dot { \alpha } _ { 1 } } ^ { + } \mathcal { J } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } _ { 2 } \dots \dot { \alpha } _ { s - 1 } ) } ; \end{cases}$$

where we introduced the real principle N = 2 supercurrent J α s ( -2) ˙ ( α s -2) , which satisfies the system of equations:

$$\begin{cases} \widetilde { \mathcal { J } } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } = \mathcal { J } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) }, \\ \mathcal { D } ^ { + + } \mathcal { J } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } \approx 0, \\ \mathcal { D } ^ { + \beta } \mathcal { J } _ { ( \beta \alpha _ { 2 } \alpha _ { s - 2 } ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } \approx 0, \\ \bar { \mathcal { D } } ^ { + \dot { \beta } } \mathcal { J } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) ( \dot { \beta } \dot { \alpha } _ { 2 } \dots \alpha _ { s - 2 } ) } \approx 0. \end{cases} \\ \text{rmally coincide with the definition of the } M = 2 \text{ minimum enumeration } \mathbb { m } \mathbb { m }. \, \text{see}$$

These conditions formally coincide with the definition of the N = 2 primary supercurrent [22]; see also [3], written in the harmonic superspace. However, since we are working with a non-conformal multiplets, the N = 2 superconformal properties that entail the laws of conservation in the article [22] are not fulfilled in our case. So these supercurrents are not consistent with conformal symmetry and we use alternative terminology. In the case of s = 2 , one needs to replace the third and fourth equations by ( D + 2 ) J ≈ 0 and ( ¯ D + 2 ) J ≈ 0 , and it corresponds to the N = 2 supergravity supercurrent [4, 5].

One can directly verify that supercurents (4.3) satisfy the system of equations (4.2) due to equations (4.4). Hereby, equation (4.3) implies that J + α s ( -1) ˙ ( α s -2) , ¯ J + α s ( -2) ˙ ( α s -1) supercurrents can be considered as the descendants of the principle N = 2 supercurrent J α s ( -2) ˙ ( α s -2) . In terms of the principle N = 2 supercurrent, the cubic vertex (4.1) has the form

$$S _ { i n t } = \int d ^ { 4 } x d ^ { 8 } \theta d u \, \left ( \Psi ^ { - \alpha ( s - 1 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } \mathcal { D } _ { \alpha } ^ { + } + \bar { \Psi } ^ { - \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 1 ) } \bar { \mathcal { D } } _ { \dot { \alpha } } ^ { + } \right ) \mathcal { J } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) }. \quad ( 4. 5 )$$

Let us note that the principle N = 2 higher-spin supercurrents, as the consequence of (4.4), satisfy the conservation equation (for s ≥ 3 ):

$$\partial ^ { \beta \dot { \beta } } \mathcal { J } _ { ( \alpha ( s - 3 ) \beta ) ( \dot { \alpha } ( s - 3 ) \dot { \beta } ) } \approx 0.$$

Thus, all components of the principle N = 2 higher-spin supercurrent are conserved currents.

## 5 Gauge-invariant higher spin supercurrents

The general gauge-invariant anzatz for the principle spin s 1 N = 2 higher-spin supercurrent, constructed from spin s 2 superfields, has the form 9 :

$$\text{$v$} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \\ \mathcal { J } _ { \alpha ( s _ { 1 } - 2 ) \dot { a } ( s _ { 1 } - 2 ) } = \sum _ { p = 0 } ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } } \alpha _ { p } \, \theta ^ { p } \mathcal { W } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } \theta ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p } \bar { \mathcal { W } } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } \\ & + \sum _ { p = 0 } ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - 1 } \beta _ { p } \, \theta ^ { p } \mathcal { D } _ { \alpha } ^ { - } \mathcal { W } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } \theta ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p - 1 } \bar { \mathcal { D } } _ { \alpha } ^ { + } \mathcal { W } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } } ( 5. 1 ) \\ & - \sum _ { p = 0 } ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p - 1 } \beta _ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p - 1 } \, \theta ^ { p } \mathcal { D } _ { \alpha } ^ { + } \mathcal { W } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } \theta ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p - 1 } \bar { \mathcal { D } } _ { \alpha } ^ { - } \bar { \mathcal { W } } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } } \\ & + \sum _ { p = 0 } ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 } \gamma _ { p } \, \theta ^ { p } \mathcal { D } _ { \alpha } ^ { + } \mathcal { D } _ { \alpha } ^ { - } \mathcal { W } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } \theta ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p - 2 } \bar { \mathcal { D } } _ { \alpha } ^ { + } \bar { \mathcal { D } } _ { \alpha } ^ { - } \bar { \mathcal { W } } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } }. \\ \text{Here} \, \alpha _ { p }, \, \beta _ { p }, \, \text{and} \, \gamma _ { p } \, \text{ are arbitrary complex constants, which can be determined from the system} \\ \text{$v$} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \text{sums} \colon$$

Here α p , β p , and γ p are arbitrary complex constants, which can be determined from the system of equations (4.4). Bilinear supercurrents constructed from spin s 2 superstrenghts minimally have 2 s 2 -2 doted and 2 s 2 -2 undoted indices and, therefore, can be coupled only to the spin s 1 ≥ 2 s 2 supermultiplets.

Reality condition leads to the following constraints:

$$\tilde { \mathcal { J } } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } = \mathcal { J } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } \quad \Rightarrow \quad \begin{cases} \alpha _ { p } = \alpha _ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p } ^ { * }, \\ \gamma _ { p } = \gamma _ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p - 2 } ^ { * }, \end{cases}$$

whereas the harmonic independence condition gives the constraints to β p coefficients:

$$\mathcal { D } ^ { + + } \mathcal { J } _ { \alpha ( s - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s - 2 ) } = 0 \ \Rightarrow \ \beta _ { p } = \beta _ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p - 1 } ^ { * },$$

while the conservation equation relates α p , β p , and γ p coefficients:

$$\mathcal { D } ^ { + \beta } \mathcal { J } _ { \beta \alpha ( s - 3 ) \dot { a } ( s - 2 ) } \approx 0 \quad \Rightarrow \quad \begin{cases} \alpha _ { p } ( s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p ) + 4 i \beta _ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p - 1 } ^ { * } ( 2 s _ { 2 } + p - 1 ) = 0, \\ \beta _ { p } ( s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p - 1 ) - 4 i \gamma _ { p } ( 2 s _ { 2 } + p ) = 0. \end{cases} \quad ( 5. 4 )$$

All of them fix uniquely the coefficients α p , β p , and γ p

$$\alpha _ { p } = c \, ( i ) ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } } ( - 1 ) ^ { p } \frac { \binom { s _ { 1 } - 2 } { 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 + p } \binom { s _ { 1 } - 2 } { p } } { \binom { s _ { 1 } - 2 } { 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 } }, \quad \ \ \ p = 0, 1, 2 \dots, s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 }, \quad \ \ ( 5. 5 )$$

$$\beta _ { p } = c \, ( i ) ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } } ( - 1 ) ^ { p + 1 } \frac { 1 } { 4 i } \frac { \binom { m \nu } { s _ { 1 } - 2 } } { \binom { s _ { 2 } - 1 + p } { 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 } } \binom { s _ { 1 } - 2 } { p }, \quad p = 0, 1, 2 \dots, s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - 1, \quad ( 5. 6 )$$

$$\gamma _ { p } = c \, ( i ) ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } } ( - 1 ) ^ { p } \frac { 1 } { 1 6 } \frac { \binom { s _ { 1 } - 2 } { 2 s _ { 2 } + p } \binom { s _ { 1 } - 2 } { p } } { \binom { s _ { 1 } - 2 } { 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 } }, \quad \ \ p = 0, 1, 2 \dots, s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 \quad \ \ ( 5. 7 )$$

up to the real constant c .

Let us comment on the obtained result. We know the structure of N = 2 superfield strengths only for the N = 2 higher-spin multiplets with integer highest spins (2.8). However, the answer remains true for the half-integer supermultiplets if we assume that the corresponding N = 2 superfield strengths W α (2 s 2 -1) are known. In the limiting case s 2 = 1 , the resulting N = 2 principle supercurrent coincides with the N = 2 vector multiplet higher-spin primary supercurrent, previously obtained in [21]. At the component level, the resulting N = 2 supercurrents are reduced to higher-spin currents of the form (1.3), and N = 2 higher-spin superfield vertex (4.5) contains the cubic vertex (1.6).

9 We use only N = 2 Weyl-like higher-spin tensor, because other N = 2 higher-spin supercurvatures [23] are zero on-shell and lead to "fake interactions".

## 6 Discussion

In this article we have constructed a new class of the consistent cubic interactions for N = 2 higherspin gauge supermultiplets. It was shown, that N = 2 cubic vertex ( s 1 , s 2 , s 2 ) for s 1 ≥ 2 s 2 has the universal structure:

$$S _ { i n t } = \int d ^ { 4 } x d ^ { 8 } \theta d u \, \left ( \Psi ^ { - \alpha ( s _ { 1 } - 1 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s _ { 1 } - 2 ) } \mathcal { D } _ { \alpha } ^ { + } + \bar { \Psi } ^ { - \alpha ( s _ { 1 } - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s _ { 1 } - 1 ) } \bar { \mathcal { D } } _ { \dot { \alpha } } ^ { + } \right ) \mathcal { J } _ { \alpha ( s _ { 1 } - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s _ { 1 } - 2 ) }, \quad \, ( 6. 1 )$$

where Ψ -α s ( 1 -1) ˙ ( α s 1 -2) , ¯ Ψ -α s ( 1 -2) ˙ ( α s 1 -1) are the Mezincescu-type higher-spin prepotentials defined by (3.2), and J α s ( 1 -2) ˙ ( α s 1 -2) are the principle gauge-invariant N = 2 supercurrents, which satisfy reality and harmonic independence conditions and the conservation equations D + α J α s ( 1 -2) ˙ ( α s 1 -2) ≈ 0 . We also explicitly constructed spin s 1 ( s 1 ≥ 2 s 2 ) N = 2 higher-spin principle supercurrent for an arbitrary N = 2 off-shell gauge spin s 2 supermultiplet

$$& \text{an arbitrary } \mathcal { N } = 2 \text{ off-shell gauge spin } s _ { 2 } \supremultiplier \\ & \mathcal { J } _ { \alpha ( s _ { 1 } - 2 ) \dot { \alpha } ( s _ { 1 } - 2 ) } = \ ( i ) ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } } \sum _ { p = 0 } ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } } ( - 1 ) ^ { \binom { s _ { 1 } - 2 } { 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 + p } } \binom { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p } { 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 } \partial ^ { p } \mathcal { W } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } \partial ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p } \bar { \mathcal { W } } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } \\ & - ( i ) ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } } \sum _ { p = 0 } ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - 1 } \frac { ( - 1 ) ^ { p } } { 4 i } \frac { \binom { s _ { 1 } - 2 } { 2 s _ { 2 } - 1 + p } } { \binom { s _ { 1 } - 2 } { 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 } } \partial ^ { p } \mathcal { D } _ { \alpha } ^ { - } \mathcal { W } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } \partial ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p - 1 } \bar { \mathcal { D } } _ { \alpha } ^ { + } \bar { \mathcal { W } } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } \\ & + ( i ) ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } } \sum _ { p = 0 } ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - 1 } \frac { ( - 1 ) ^ { p } } { 4 i } \frac { \binom { s _ { 1 } - 2 } { 2 s _ { 2 } - 1 + p } } { \binom { s _ { 1 } - 2 } { 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 } } \partial ^ { p } \mathcal { D } _ { \alpha } ^ { + } \mathcal { W } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } \partial ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p - 1 } \bar { \mathcal { D } } _ { \alpha } ^ { - } \bar { \mathcal { W } } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } \\ & + ( i ) ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } } \sum _ { p = 0 } ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 } \frac { ( - 1 ) ^ { p } } { 1 6 } \frac { \binom { s _ { 1 } - 2 } { 2 s _ { 2 } + p } } { \binom { s _ { 1 } - 2 } { 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 } } \partial ^ { p } \mathcal { D } _ { \alpha } ^ { + } \mathcal { D } _ { \alpha } ^ { - } \mathcal { W } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } \partial ^ { s _ { 1 } - 2 s _ { 2 } - p - 2 } \bar { \mathcal { D } } _ { \alpha } ^ { + } \bar { \mathcal { D } } _ { \alpha } ^ { - } \bar { \mathcal { W } } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } \\ \\ & \text{in terms of the gauge-invariant } \mathcal { N } = 2 \text{ superfield strengths } \mathcal { W } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) } \text{ and } \bar { \mathcal { W } _ { \alpha ( 2 s _ { 2 } - 2 ) }, \text{ which are}$$

in terms of the gauge-invariant N = 2 superfield strengths W α (2 s 2 -2) and ¯ W ˙ (2 α s 2 -2) , which are expressed in terms of the analytic prepotentials, according to (2.8).

To construct vertices we used two types of N = 2 higher-spin prepotentials: non-analytical Mezincescu-type and analytic prepotentials. Mezincescu-type prepotentials are connected to analytic prepotentials by the equations (2.4) and (3.4). The need to use non-analytical prepotentials is motivated by the non-analyticity of gauge-invariant N = 2 superstrengths. In contrast to hypermultiplet higher-spin interactions in [16, 17], the straightforward construction of analytical gaugeinvariant N = 2 supercurrents and corresponding couplings as integral over analytic superspace is not allowed. Perhaps analytical interactions can be constructed, e.g., by requiring the analyticity of supercurrents only on the equations of motion. We hope to explore this issue further.

The obtained construction of the N = 2 higher-spin supercurrents opens up a number of interesting questions. The most natural of which are the construction of the higher-spin global and gauge transformations of the N = 2 actions (2.6) and (2.13) corresponding to the constructed N = 2 supercurrents. These outcomes, the component analysis of the N = 2 supercurrents verticies, as well as the construction of the corresponding analytical N = 2 higher-spin supercurrents, will be presented in the separate paper [27].

## Acknowledgments

The author is indebted to Evgeny Ivanov for interest and valuable discussions. The author thanks Emmanouil Raptakis and Konstantinos Koutrolikos for useful correspondence. The author is especially grateful to Polina Petriakova for her help in the text preparation. Work was partially supported by the grant 22-1-1-42-2 from the Foundation for the Advancement of Theoretical Physics and Mathematics 'BASIS'.

## References

- [1] S. Ferrara and B. Zumino, Transformation Properties of the Supercurrent , Nucl. Phys. B 87 (1975), 207.
- [2] V. Ogievetsky and E. Sokatchev, On Vector Superfield Generated by Supercurrent , Nucl. Phys. B 124 (1977), 309-316.
- [3] P. S. Howe, K. S. Stelle and P. K. Townsend, Supercurrents , Nucl. Phys. B 192 (1981), 332-352.
- [4] S. M. Kuzenko and S. Theisen, Correlation functions of conserved currents in N = 2 superconformal theory , Class. Quant. Grav. 17 (2000), 665-696 [arXiv:hep-th/9907107 [hep-th]].
- [5] D. Butter and S. M. Kuzenko, N = 2 supergravity and supercurrents , JHEP 12 (2010), 080 [arXiv:1011.0339 [hep-th]].
- [6] A. S. Galperin, E. A. Ivanov, V. I. Ogievetsky, E. S. Sokatchev, Harmonic superspace , Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics, Cambridge University Press, 2001, 306 p.
- [7] P. A. Smirnov and M. A. Vasiliev, Gauge-noninvariant higher-spin currents in four-dimensional Minkowski space , Theor. Math. Phys. 181 (2014) no.3, 1509-1521 [arXiv:1312.6638 [hep-th]].
- [8] F. A. Berends, G. J. H. Burgers and H. van Dam, Explicit Construction of Conserved Currents for Massless Fields of Arbitrary Spin , Nucl. Phys. B 271 (1986), 429-441.
- [9] L. Bel, Introduction d'un tenseur du quatri'eme ordre , Acad. Sci. Paris, Comptes Rend. 248, 1297 (1959).
- [10] S. Deser and Z. Yang, Inconsistency of Spin 4 - Spin-2 Gauge Field Couplings , Class. Quant. Grav. 7 (1990), 1491-1498.
- [11] R. Manvelyan, K. Mkrtchyan and W. Ruhl, Off-shell construction of some trilinear higher spin gauge field interactions , Nucl. Phys. B 826 (2010), 1-17 [arXiv:0903.0243 [hep-th]].
- [12] I. L. Buchbinder, S. J. Gates and K. Koutrolikos, Conserved higher spin supercurrents for arbitrary spin massless supermultiplets and higher spin superfield cubic interactions , JHEP 08 (2018), 055 [arXiv:1805.04413 [hep-th]].
- [13] S. J. Gates and K. Koutrolikos, Progress on cubic interactions of arbitrary superspin supermultiplets via gauge invariant supercurrents , Phys. Lett. B 797 (2019), 134868 [arXiv:1904.13336 [hep-th]].
- [14] A. Galperin, E. Ivanov, S. Kalitzin, V. Ogievetsky and E. Sokatchev, Unconstrained N = 2 Matter, Yang-Mills and Supergravity Theories in Harmonic Superspace , Class. Quant. Grav. 1 (1984), 469-498 [erratum: Class. Quant. Grav. 2 (1985), 127].
- [15] I. Buchbinder, E. Ivanov and N. Zaigraev, Unconstrained off-shell superfield formulation of 4D, N = 2 supersymmetric higher spins , JHEP 12 (2021), 016 [arXiv:2109.07639 [hep-th]].
- [16] I. Buchbinder, E. Ivanov and N. Zaigraev, Off-shell cubic hypermultiplet couplings to N = 2 higher spin gauge superfields , JHEP 05 (2022), 104 [arXiv:2202.08196 [hep-th]].
- [17] I. Buchbinder, E. Ivanov and N. Zaigraev, N = 2 higher spins: superfield equations of motion, the hypermultiplet supercurrents, and the component structure , JHEP 03 (2023), 036 [arXiv:2212.14114 [hep-th]].
- [18] I. Buchbinder, E. Ivanov and N. Zaigraev, N = 2 superconformal higher-spin multiplets and their hypermultiplet couplings , JHEP 08 (2024), 120 [arXiv:2404.19016 [hep-th]].
- [19] N. Zaigraev, N = 2 Higher Spin Theory in Harmonic Superspace , Phys. Part. Nucl. 54 (2023) no.6, 1084-1088.
- [20] N. Zaigraev, I. Buchbinder and E. Ivanov, N = 2 higher spin theories and harmonic superspace , PoS ICPPCRubakov2023 (2024), 048 [arXiv:2402.05704 [hep-th]].
- [21] S. M. Kuzenko and E. S. N. Raptakis, On higher-spin N = 2 supercurrent multiplets , JHEP 05 (2023), 056 [arXiv:2301.09386 [hep-th]].

- [22] S. M. Kuzenko and E. S. N. Raptakis, Extended superconformal higher-spin gauge theories in four dimensions , JHEP 12 (2021), 210 [arXiv:2104.10416 [hep-th]].
- [23] E. Ivanov and N. Zaigraev, Off-shell invariants of linearized 4 D , N = 2 supergravity in the harmonic approach , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) no.6, 066020 [arXiv:2407.08524 [hep-th]].
- [24] L. Mezincescu, On the superfield formulation of O(2) supersymmetry , Dubna preprint JINR-P2-12572 (June, 1979).
- [25] S. J. Gates, Jr. and W. Siegel, Linearized N = 2 superfield supergravity , Nucl. Phys. B 195 (1982), 39-60.
- [26] B. M. Zupnik, Background harmonic superfields in N = 2 supergravity , Theor. Math. Phys. 116 (1998), 964-977 [arXiv:hep-th/9803202 [hep-th]].
- [27] E. Ivanov and N. Zaigraev, work in progress .
- [28] S. M. Kuzenko and E. S. N. Raptakis, Towards N = 2 superconformal higher-spin theory , [arXiv:2407.21573 [hep-th]].
Nikita Zaigraev
$\mathcal{N}=2$ higher-spin supercurrents
We have constructed conserved $\mathcal{N}=2$ higher-spin supercurrents for
an arbitrary integer spin through the unconstrained superfield formulation of
$4D,\, \mathcal{N}=2$ massless higher-spin theories in the harmonic superspace.
The obtained supercurrents are gauge-invariant and determine consistent cubic
interactions in the \textit{gauge superfield} $\times$ \textit{supercurrent}
form for massless spin $\mathbf{s_1}$ and two massless spin $\mathbf{s_2}$
$\mathcal{N}=2$ supermultiplets. Such interactions and $\mathcal{N}=2$
supercurrents exist only for $\mathbf{s_1}\geq 2 \mathbf{s_2}$. These
supercurrents are the $\mathcal{N}=2$ supersymmetric extension of
Berends-Burgers-van Dam higher-spin currents and generalize the linearized
Bel-Robinson tensor. The relevant $\mathcal{N}=2$ supercurrents can be
considered as the descendants of the $\mathcal{N}=2$ principle supercurrent,
which has a simple universal structure. An important feature of our outcomes is
that, ultimately, all $\mathcal{N}=2$ supercurrents are built from the
$\mathcal{N}=2$ superfield strengths, which are constructed from the
unconstrained analytical higher-spin prepotentials.