1: \documentclass[12pt]{iopart}
2:
3: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{0.4cm}
4: \setlength{\evensidemargin}{0.4cm}
5: \setlength{\topmargin}{-1.45cm}
6:
7: \usepackage{bm,amssymb}
8: \usepackage{graphicx}
9: \usepackage{cite}
10: \usepackage{slashed}
11:
12:
13: \begin{document}
14:
15: \title{$R_{\rm pA}$ ratio: total shadowing due to running coupling}
16:
17: \author{E.~Iancu$^1$
18: %\footnote{Membre du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), %France.}
19: and D.N.~Triantafyllopoulos$^2$}
20:
21: \address{$^1$ Service de Physique Th\'eorique de Saclay,
22: F-91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France}%\ead{edmond.iancu@cea.fr}
23:
24: \address{$^2$ ECT$^*$, Villa Tambosi, Strada delle Tabarelle 286,
25: I-38050 Villazzano (TN), Italy}%\ead{dionysis@ect.it}
26:
27: \begin{abstract}
28: We predict that the $R_{\rm pA}$ ratio at the most forward rapidities to
29: be measured at LHC should be strongly suppressed, close to ``total
30: shadowing'' ($R_{\rm pA}\simeq A^{-1/3}$), as a consequence of running
31: coupling effects in the nonlinear QCD evolution.
32:
33: \end{abstract}
34:
35:
36: %\vspace{0.5cm}
37:
38: \noindent We present predictions for the nuclear modification factor, or
39: ``$R_{\rm pA}$ ratio'', at forward pseudorapidities ($\eta>0$) and
40: relatively large transverse momenta ($p_{\perp}$) for the produced
41: particles, in the kinematical range to be accessible at LHC. These
42: predictions are based on a previous, systematic, study of the $R_{\rm
43: pA}$ ratio within the Color Glass Condensate formalism with running
44: coupling \cite{Iancu:2004bx}. The ratio can be approximated by
45: \begin{eqnarray}\label{rpadef}
46: R_{\rm pA} \simeq \frac{1}{A^{1/3}} \frac{\Phi_{\rm A}(Y,p_{\perp})}{\Phi_{\rm p}(Y,p_{\perp})},
47: \end{eqnarray}
48: where $Y=\eta + \ln\sqrt{s}/p_{\perp}$ and $\Phi(Y,p_{\perp})$ is the
49: unintegrated gluon distribution of the corresponding target hadron at
50: fixed impact parameter. When the energy increases one expects more and
51: more momentum modes of this distribution to saturate to a value of order
52: $1/\alpha_s$, and the corresponding saturation momentum reads
53: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Qsat}
54: Q_s^2(Y) = \Lambda^2
55: \exp{\sqrt{B (Y-Y_0) + \ln^2\frac{Q_s^2(Y_0)}{\Lambda^2}}},
56: \end{eqnarray}
57: with $\Lambda=0.2 {\rm GeV}$, $B=2.25$ and $Y_0=4$. The initial condition
58: for the nucleus and the proton are taken as $Q_s^2(A,Y_0) = 1.5 {\rm
59: GeV}^2$ and $Q_s^2(p,Y_0) = 0.25 {\rm GeV}^2$ respectively, so that
60: $Q_s^2(A,Y_0) = A^{1/3} Q_s^2(p,Y_0)$ for $A=208$. The functional form of
61: this expression is motivated by the solution to the nonlinear QCD
62: evolution equations with running coupling
63: \cite{Mueller:2002zm,Mueller:2003bz}, while the actual values of the
64: numbers $B$ and $Y_0$ have been chosen in such a way to agree with the
65: HERA/RHIC phenomenology. As shown in Fig.~1, with increasing $Y$ the two
66: saturation momenta approach to each other and clearly for sufficiently
67: large $Y$, a nucleus will not be more dense than a proton
68: \cite{Mueller:2003bz}.
69:
70: \begin{figure}[ht]\label{Fig1}
71: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{figure1.eps}\hspace{0.5cm}
72: \includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{figure2.eps}}
73: \caption{Left: The ratio of the saturation momenta.
74: ($Y=12$ corresponds to a pseudorapidity
75: $\eta=6$ for the produced particles). Right: Geometric scaling windows.}
76: \vspace{-0.5cm}
77: \end{figure}
78:
79: For momenta $p_{\perp}$ larger than $Q_s$, the gluon distribution
80: satisfies geometrical scaling \cite{Iancu:2002tr,Mueller:2002zm}, i.e.~it
81: is a function of only the combined variable $p_{\perp}/Q_s(Y)$ :
82: \begin{eqnarray}\label{phi}
83: \Phi(p_{\bot},Y) \propto \left[\frac{Q_s^2(Y)}{p_{\bot}^2}
84: \right]^{\gamma} \left( \ln\frac{p_{\bot}^2}{Q_s^2(Y)} + c \right),
85: \end{eqnarray}
86: with $\gamma=0.63$ and $c=\mathcal{O}(1)$. This holds within the scaling
87: window $Q_s \lesssim p_{\perp} \lesssim Q_g$, where $\ln
88: Q_g^2(Y)/Q_s^2(Y) \sim [\ln Q_s^2(Y)/\Lambda^2]^{1/3}$ and for large $Y$
89: this is proportional to $Y^{1/6}$. The geometrical scaling lines for a
90: proton and a nucleus are shown in Fig.~1. Note that, since $Q_g$ is
91: increasing much faster than $Q_s$, a {\em common scaling window} exists,
92: at $Q_s(A,Y) \lesssim p_{\perp} \lesssim Q_g(p,Y)$ (and for sufficiently
93: large $Y$), where the gluon distributions for both the nucleus and the
94: proton are described by Eq.~(\ref{phi}).
95:
96: Within this window, it is straightforward to calculate the $R_{\rm pA}$
97: ratio. This is shown in Fig.~2 for two values of pseudorapidity. The
98: upper, dotted, line is the asymptotic prediction of a fixed-coupling
99: scenario, in which the ratio ${Q_s^2(A,Y)}/{Q_s^2(p,Y)}={\rm const.}=
100: A^{1/3}$, while the lowest, straight, curve is the line of total
101: shadowing $R_{\rm pA}=1/A^{1/3}$. Our prediction with running coupling is
102: the line in between and it is very close to total shadowing. This is
103: clearly a consequence of the fact that the proton and the nuclear
104: saturation momenta approach each other with increasing energy.
105:
106:
107: \begin{figure}[ht]\label{Fig2}
108: \centerline{\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{figure3.eps}\hspace{0.5cm}
109: \includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{figure4.eps}}
110: \caption{The ratio $R_{\rm pA}$ as a function of $p_{\perp}^2$ at $\sqrt{s}=8.8\,$TeV.}
111: \vspace{-0.4cm}
112: \end{figure}
113:
114:
115: %\noindent
116: Note finally that in the present analysis we have neglected the effects
117: of particle number fluctuations (or ``Pomeron loops''). This is
118: appropriate since Pomeron loops effects are suppressed by the running of
119: the coupling \cite{Dumitru:2007ew}, and thus can be indeed ignored at all
120: energies of phenomenological interest (in particular, at LHC).
121:
122:
123: \vspace{0.2cm}
124:
125: \begin{thebibliography}{10}
126:
127: \bibitem{Iancu:2004bx} E.~Iancu, K.~Itakura, and D.N.~Triantafyllopoulos,
128: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 742} (2004) 182.
129:
130: \bibitem{Mueller:2002zm} A.H.~Mueller and D.N.~Triantafyllopoulos, Nucl.\
131: Phys.\ B {\bf 640} (2002) 331.
132:
133: \bibitem{Mueller:2003bz} A.H.~Mueller, Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 724} (2003)
134: 223.
135:
136: \bibitem{Iancu:2002tr} E.~Iancu, K.~Itakura, and L.~McLerran, Nucl.\
137: Phys.\ A {\bf 708} (2002) 327.
138:
139: \bibitem{Dumitru:2007ew}
140: A.~Dumitru, E.~Iancu, L.~Portugal, G.~Soyez,
141: D.N.~Triantafyllopoulos,
142: arXiv:0706.2540.
143:
144: \end{thebibliography}
145:
146:
147: \end{document}
148: