I am currently trying to understand the BV-formalism, which makes heavy use of the functional derivative.


Let us consider the *functional derivative*, as defined in for example [its Wikipedia article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_derivative).
Let $F$ be a functional, i.e., a map from, say, $C^\infty(\mathbb{R})$ to $\mathbb{R}$, and suppose it may be written as $F[\phi] = \int f\big(x,\phi(x),\phi'(x),\dots,\phi^{(n)}(x)\big)dx$ for some function $f$ which depends on the derivatives of $\phi$ up to order $n$. Then the functional derivative of $F$ is $\displaystyle \frac{\delta F}{\delta \phi} = \sum\_{i=1}^n(-1)^i\frac{d^i}{dx^i}\frac{\partial f}{\partial \phi^{(i)}}$.


Now, my background is that of differential equations and differential geometry, i.e., jet spaces and variational calculus and the like. In that area, the latter operator $\sum\_{i}(-1)^i\frac{d^i}{dx^i}\frac{\partial}{\partial \phi^{(i)}}$ is well known; it is called the *variational derivative*. Summarizing, then, we seem to have that the *functional* derivative of a functional is the *variational* derivative of (one of its) densities.


Since the variational derivative involves lots of derivatives, it certainly does not satisfy the Leibniz rule, i.e., it is not a derivation. In various places, however, I've come across the statement that the functional derivative *does* satisfy the Leibniz rule. (That already seems unexpected to me: how can an operator which is so intimately connected to a decidedly non-derivation be a derivation?) There are various ways to prove it, but I would like to understand this fact in terms of the variational derivative, if possible. So: how can the Leibniz rule of the *functional* derivative related to *variational* derivative; can the former be expressed somehow in terms of the latter?



Functional/variational derivative and the Leibniz rule
Connection of functional derivative with variational derivative: $\frac{\delta}{\delta\phi(x)} F[\phi] = \frac{\delta F[\phi]}{\delta\phi}(x)$. Note that the variational derivative carries an extra coordinate variable dependence. It helps to make it explicit when there is similar confusion.


Functional derivative Leibniz rule: $\frac{\delta}{\delta\phi(x)} F[\phi] G[\phi] = \frac{\delta F[\phi]}{\delta\phi}(x) G[\phi] + F[\phi] \frac{\delta G[\phi]}{\delta\phi}(x)$.


Special case: $F\_x[\phi] = \phi(x)$, $G\_{i,y}[\phi] = (\partial\_i\phi)(y)$, and $$\frac{\delta}{\delta\phi(z)} F\_x[\phi] G\_{i,y}[\phi] = \delta(x-z) (\partial\_i\phi)(y) - \phi(x) \frac{d}{dz\_i}\delta(y-z)$$.


Notice the distributional coefficients in the derivatives. There is no way to get away from them if you wish to consider $\phi(x)$ and such as functionals in their own right.


If you are interested in the BV formalism in the physics formalism, where the distinction between the functional and variational derivatives is barely remarked, I recommend the reviews by Henneaux and by Gomis, París and Samuel: [doi:10.1016/0920-5632(90)90647-D](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0920-5632%2890%2990647-D), [doi:10.1016/0370-1573(94)00112-G](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0370-1573%2894%2900112-G). If you are interested in the BV formalism purely from the point of view of jets, without bringing functionals into the picture, other than peripherally, I recommend the early paper of McCloud and this sequence of papers by Barnich, Brandt and Henneaux: [arXiv:hep-th/9307022](http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9307022), [arXiv:hep-th/9405109](http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9405109), [arXiv:hep-th/9405194](http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9405194), [arXiv:hep-th/0002245](http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0002245). If you are more interested in the BV formalism more from the functional point of view, with the appropriate level of functional analysis included, and with jets appearing only peripherally, I recommend the papers by Fredenhagen and Rejzner, as well as Rejzner's thesis: [arXiv:1101.5112](http://arxiv.org/abs/1101.5112), [arXiv:1110.5232](http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.5232), [arXiv:1111.5130](http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5130).


