1: % I include the TEX-file with some modifications:
2: % i) after discussion with Andrei I add few words in footnote 7
3: % ii) I had corrected the eq(25) and discussion around (25)
4: % (the last version is different from that in my previous
5: % e-mail but it is the final true result)
6: % Note that in the numerics I had used the Complete formulae
7: % from the Appendix. Thus all the numerics is OK and we do not
8: % need to change/correct the Figures
9: % iii) at the end of sect.2 in the expression for $A_g$
10: % I^g_{0000}(s) is replaced by I^g_{0000}(s,t}
11: % (as in Appendix)
12: % iv) In Appendix I deleted I^q_{1000} which was not
13: % used in A_q
14: %
15: % Hope this is the final version.
16: %
17: % Best wishes, Misha
18: % ----------------------------------------------
19:
20: \documentclass[12pt,epsfig]{article}
21: %21 May 2008
22: \usepackage{graphicx}
23: %\usepackage{feynarts}
24: \def\lesim{ \;\raisebox{-.7ex}{$\stackrel{\textstyle <}{\sim}$}\; }
25: \def\be{\begin{equation}}
26: \def\ee{\end{equation}}
27: \def\slash#1{#1 \hskip-0.45em /}
28:
29: \begin{document}
30: \begin{flushright}
31: IPPP/08/42 \\
32: DCPT/08/84 \\
33: 9th June 2008 \\
34:
35: \end{flushright}
36: %\begin{center}
37:
38: %{\bf One-loop $gg\to b\bar b$ contribution - the main irreducible background to
39: %exclusive $H\to b \bar b$ production at the LHC)\\
40: \vspace*{3cm}
41:
42: \begin{center}
43: %
44: {\Large \bf One-loop $gg\to b\bar b$ effects in the main \\[2mm]
45: irreducible background to exclusive $H\to b \bar b$ \\[4mm]
46: production at the LHC }
47:
48: \vspace*{1cm} \textsc{A.~G.~Shuvaev$^{a}$, V.A.~Khoze$^{a,b}$, A.~D.~Martin$^{b}$ and M.~G.~Ryskin$^{a,b}$}\\
49:
50: \vspace*{0.5cm}$^a$ Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Gatchina,
51: St.~Petersburg, 188300, Russia \\[0.5ex]
52: $^b$ Department of Physics and Institute for
53: Particle Physics Phenomenology, \\
54: Durham University, DH1 3LE, UK \\%
55:
56: %\end{center}
57:
58: \vspace*{1cm}
59:
60:
61: \end{center}
62:
63: {\bf Abstract:} We calculate the amplitude of $gg\to b\bar b$
64: production for the colour singlet, $J_z=0$ di-gluon state at
65: ${\cal O}(\alpha_S^2)$ order. We consider the cancellation, and a realistic
66: cutoff, of the infrared divergent terms. We show that the one-loop radiative QCD contributions effectively {\it reduce} the Born level result for the central exclusive $b\bar b$ cross section
67: at the LHC. This process is essentially the only irreducible QCD background to the exclusive $H\to b \bar b$ signal. \\
68: %in comparison
69: %with the central exclusive $b\bar b$ cross section, calculated in
70: %Born approximation, the one-loop radiative QCD correction
71: %strongly
72: %suppresses the irreducible $b\bar b$ background to the central
73: %exclusive diffractive Higgs boson production at the LHC.
74:
75: %to the Born
76: %central exclusive $b\bar b$ production.
77:
78:
79: \vspace{1cm}
80: \section{Introduction}
81:
82: The search for, and identification of,
83: the Higgs boson(s) is one of the main goals of the LHC. Once the Higgs
84: boson is discovered, it will be of primary interest to determine its
85: spin and parity, and to measure precisely its mass and couplings, in
86: particular the $Hb\bar {b}$ Yukawa coupling.
87: % the coupling of Higgs boson to the $b$-quark.
88: %
89: An important contribution to the comprehensive study of the Higgs sector
90: can be provided by central exclusive diffractive (CED) Higgs boson production,
91: \be
92: pp\to p \oplus H \oplus p,
93: \ee
94: where the
95: $\oplus$ signs denote the presence of the large rapidity
96: gaps (LRG); see, for example \cite{KMR}-\cite{jf}. The process is sketched in Fig.~\ref{fig:pHp}. In such an exclusive process there is no hadronic
97: activity between the outgoing protons and the decay products of the
98: central (Higgs) system.
99: %
100: The $b \bar b$ decay mode of the Higgs is especially attractive, since its observation would allow
101: a detailed study of the MSSM Higgs sector \cite{KKMRext}-\cite{clp}. Indeed, for certain BSM scenarios, it may
102: become {\it the} Higgs discovery channel \cite{KKMRext,fghpp}.
103: The experimental study of central exclusive Higgs production is
104: one of the key theoretical motivations behind the
105: FP420 project \cite{LOI,cox} which proposes to complement the
106: CMS and ATLAS experiments at the LHC
107: by installing additional
108: forward proton detectors 420 m away from the interaction region.
109: \begin{figure}
110: \begin{center}
111: \includegraphics[height=4cm]{pHp.eps}
112: \caption{\sf The mechanism for central exclusive Higgs production, $pp\to p \oplus H \oplus p$. The Higgs is produced by the fusion of two so-called active gluons. The screening gluon on the left is required to ensure a colour neutral system across the rapidity gaps. We do not show the additional screening corrections which must be included to ensure the survival of the rapidity gaps from population from secondaries resulting from soft rescattering.}
113: \label{fig:pHp}
114: \end{center}
115: \end{figure}
116:
117: To avoid the production of new secondaries
118: % by the colour flow
119: across the LRG,
120: the colour flow caused by the active gluons (which participate in
121: the $gg\to H$ fusion) must be screened by another, more soft,
122: gluon, see Fig.~\ref{fig:pHp}. Thus, in the exclusive process the central system
123: (the Higgs boson) is actually generated
124: by a specific $gg^{PP}$ gluon state, where the $PP$ superscript is to indicate that
125: that each hard (active) gluon
126: comes from colour-singlet $t$-channel (Pomeron) exchange.
127: % the hard gluons, which interact to form
128: %he central system, originate within the overall colourless (Pomeron)
129: %t-channel exchanges.}.
130: Moreover, the presence of the second $t$-channel screening gluon leads to an additional loop integration.
131: The integration over the transverse momentum in this loop results
132: in a $J_z=0$, CP-even selection
133: rule~\cite{Liverpool, KMRJz}. Here $J_z$ is the projection of the total angular momentum
134: along the proton beam axis.
135:
136:
137: The $J_z=0$ selection rule is one
138: of the major reasons why central exclusive production is so
139: attractive for Higgs studies. First, it readily permits a clean determination
140: of the quantum numbers of the observed new resonance, which
141: will be dominantly produced in a scalar state.
142: A second direct consequence of this rule is the unique possibility to study directly the $Hb\bar {b}$
143: Yukawa coupling of
144: the Higgs-like bosons in central exclusive processes. The potentially copious $b$-jet (QCD) background is controlled by
145: a combination of the $J_z=0$
146: selection rule \cite{Liverpool,KMRJz} (which
147: strongly suppresses the leading-order QCD $b \bar b$ production), the colour and spin factors and, finally, the
148: excellent resolution of the missing mass to the measured outgoing protons\footnote{Current studies \cite{LOI} show that the missing-mass
149: resolution $\sigma$ will be of the order 1\% for a 140~GeV Higgs
150: assuming that both protons are detected at 420 m from the interaction point. The equality of the accurate missing-mass measurement of $M_H$ with its mass determined from its decay products allows the background to be considerably suppressed.}.
151: %from the forward proton detectors.
152: It is the possibility to observe directly the dominant $b \bar b$ decay mode
153: of the SM Higgs with $M_H\lesim 140$~GeV that
154: first attracted attention to exclusive production at the LHC.
155: As is well known,
156: the direct determination of the $Hb\bar {b}$ coupling
157: appears to be very difficult for other search channels at the LHC.
158:
159:
160:
161: We emphasize, that for forward going protons at the LHC,
162: the Higgs signal is produced by gluons
163: in a $J_z=0$ state whereas the LO QCD backgrounds are primarily initiated by initial states with $|J_z|=2$. The $J_z=0$ background contribution is suppressed for
164: large angles by a factor $m_b^2/E_T^2$, where $E_T$ is the
165: transverse energy of the $b$ and $\bar{b}$ jets,
166: see for example \cite{FKM,krs}.
167: As discussed in \cite{BKSO,krs},
168: the physical origin of this suppression is
169: related to the symmetry properties of the Born helicity amplitudes
170: $M_{\lambda_1,
171: \lambda_2}^{\lambda_q,\lambda_{\bar q}}$ describing the binary background process
172: \begin{equation}
173: g(\lambda_1, p_A) \: + \: g (\lambda_2, p_B) \;
174: \rightarrow \; q
175: (\lambda_q, p_1) \: + \: \overline{q} (\lambda_{\bar q}, p_2) \/ .
176: \label{eq:a1}
177: \end{equation}
178: Here, the $\lambda_i$ label the helicities of the incoming gluons, and
179: $\lambda_q$ and $\lambda_{\bar q}$ are the (doubled) helicities of the
180: produced quark
181: and antiquark. The $p$'s denote the particle
182: four-momenta ($p_A^2=p_B^2=0$, $p_{1,2}^2=m^2$), with
183: $p_A+p_B=p_1+p_2$ and $s=(p_A+p_B)^2$.
184: %
185: It was shown in \cite{FKM} that for a colour-singlet, $J_z = 0$, initial state,
186: $(\lambda_1=\lambda_2\equiv \lambda)$
187: the Born quark-helicity-conserving (QHC) amplitude
188: with $\lambda_{\bar q} = -\lambda_q$ vanishes\footnote{It is worth noting that in the massless limit
189: Eq.~(\ref{eq:a2}) holds for any colour state of initial gluons.
190: This is a consequence of the general property, that the non-zero massless tree-level
191: amplitudes should contain at least two positive or two negative helicity
192: states, see for example \cite{mhv1}. It is an example of the more general Maximally-Helicity-Violating
193: amplitude (MHV) rule, reviewed for example in \cite{MP}.}
194: \begin{equation}
195: M_{\lambda, \lambda}^{\lambda_q, -\lambda_q} \; = \; 0.
196: \label{eq:a2}
197: \end{equation}
198: For the quark-helicity-non-conserving (QHNC) amplitude for
199: large angle
200: production we have
201: \begin{equation}
202: M_{\lambda, \lambda}^{\lambda_q, \lambda_q} \; \sim \; {\cal O} \left (
203: \frac{m_q}{\sqrt{s}}
204: \right ) \: M_{\lambda, - \lambda}^{\lambda_q, -\lambda_q},
205: \label{eq:a3}
206: \end{equation}
207: where the amplitude on the right-hand-side displays the dominant
208: helicity configuration of the LO background process.
209:
210: %As we already mentioned, the $m_b^2/s$ suppression is especially critical in controlling the
211: %two-jet $b \bar b$ background.
212: The main sources of background to the exclusive $H\to b \bar b$ production at the LHC
213: were discussed in detail in \cite{DKMOR,krs,hkrstw,insight}.
214: It was shown that all backgrounds are strongly suppressed and controllable and,
215: in principle, can be
216: further reduced by the appropriate optimized cuts on the final state particle
217: configurations in such a way that the signal-to-background ratio $S/B$ is
218: of order 1
219: (or may be even better for MSSM Higgs \cite{KKMRext,hkrstw,clp}).
220:
221: Among all the QCD backgrounds, the $m_b^2/E_T^2$-suppressed di-jet $ b \bar b$ production
222: is especially critical, since it is practically the only one irreducible
223: background source which cannot be decreased, either by improving the hardware
224: (as in the case, when the prolific
225: $gg^{PP}\to gg$ subprocess mimics $ b \bar b$
226: production, and the outgoing gluons are misidentified as
227: $b$ and $\bar{b}$ jets \cite {DKMOR})
228: or, for example, by cuts on the three-jet event topology
229: (as in the case of large-angle gluon radiation in the process
230: $gg (J_z=0)\to q\bar q g$, discussed in \cite{krs}).
231: Therefore, the precise calculation of the QHNC background
232: contribution becomes of primary importance for quantifying the signal-to-background ratio, and the accurate evaluation of the statistical
233: significance of the $H\to b \bar b$ signal.
234: In \cite{DKMOR,hkrstw} it was estimated that the contribution from this source was $B/S \sim 0.4$, when the Born formula for the binary cross section was used. The same LO result for the background subprocess
235: was used for the evaluation
236: of a statistical significance of the MSSM Higgs boson signal
237: in \cite{hkrstw,clp}. However, it is known (\cite{FKM,krs}) that higher-order QCD effects may strongly
238: affect the LO result.
239:
240: {\it First}, there is a reduction coming from
241: the self-energy insertions in the $b$-quark propagator, that is
242: from running of $b$-quark mass from $\overline{m}_b
243: (\overline{m}_b)$ to its
244: value, $\overline{m}_b (M_H)< \overline{m}_b
245: (\overline{m}_b)$, at the Higgs scale. Here
246: $\overline{m}_b (\mu)$
247: is the running $b$-quark mass in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme
248: \cite{BBDM}.
249: %It is known that in the $H\to b
250: %\bar b$ decay width these single logarithmic (SL)
251: % ($ \alpha_S \ln \frac{M_H}{m_b}$) effects
252: %diminish the corresponding Born result by a factor of approximately two
253: %\cite{BL}.
254: %
255: %It is quite important that in central exclusive production a good
256: %signal-to-background ratio is achievable in the main Higgs decay
257: %($H\to b\bar b$) mode, where in conventional inclusive Higgs
258: %production the QCD background is huge. The point is that,
259: %specifically, for a $J_z=0$ initial state the Born quark helicity
260: %conserving (QHC) amplitude vanishes(see for example \cite{FKM})
261: %while the quark helicity non-conserving (QHNC) amplitude for large
262: %angle production is suppressed by the ratio,
263: %$m_q/E_T$, of the quark mass $m_q$ to the quark jet transverse energy
264: %$E_T$. This $m^2_b/E^2_T$ suppression of the QCD background cross
265: %section is critical in controlling the $b\bar b$ background.\\
266: %
267: %However the lowest $\alpha_S$ order Born cross section is strongly
268: %affected by the higher order corrections. First there is a reduction
269: %coming from the self-energy insertion into the $b$-quark propagator,
270: %that is from the running of the $b$-quark mass from ${\overline
271: %m}_b(m_b)$ to its value ${\overline m}_b(M_H)<
272: %{\overline m}_b(m_b)$ at the Higgs scale. Here
273: %${\overline m}_b(\mu)$ is the running mass in the $\overline{MS}$
274: %scheme.
275: {\it Secondly}, in our case, where $m_b \ll M_H$, double-logarithmic corrections of
276: the form $(\alpha_S/\pi)\ln^2(M_H/m_b)$ are potentially very important.
277: These are related to the so-called non-Sudakov form factor, $F_q$, in the
278: cross section which arises from the virtual diagrams with
279: gluon exchange,
280: see~\cite{FKM,JT,MS,MSK}.\\
281: For the case of the $\gamma\gamma (J_z=0)\to b\bar b$
282: process the complete one-loop result was first calculated in
283: \cite{JT}. For the photon-photon reaction,
284: the double-logarithmic (DL) asymptotics for $F_q$
285: %( the $J_z=0$ QHNC case)
286: has the form
287: \begin{equation}
288: F_q(L_m)\ =\ \sum_n c_n\left(\frac{\alpha_S}{\pi}L^2_m \right)^n
289: \label{eq:FLm}
290: \end{equation}
291: with $L_m \equiv \ln(M_H/m_b)$, $c_0=1$ and $c_1=-8$~\cite{FKM,JT}.
292: %
293: The second
294: (negative) term in (\ref{eq:FLm}) is anomalously large, and dominates the
295: Born term for $M_H>100$ GeV. Clearly, this dominance undermines the results
296: of any analysis based on the Born approximation\footnote{For $gg^{PP}$ fusion, rather than $\gamma\gamma$ fusion, we might, a priori, anticipate that colour factors could make the coefficient $c_1$ even larger.}.
297: The physical origin of this non-Sudakov form factor was elucidated
298: in~\cite{FKM}, where the explicit DL calculation at the two-loop level
299: was performed. It was also shown that the two-loop calculation should be sufficient for a reliable evaluation of the DL effects. This
300: was confirmed by a more comprehensive all-orders study~\cite{MS,MSK}.
301:
302: Recall that in the photon-photon case, the two-loop expression for the
303: $F_q$ is \cite{FKM}
304: \begin{equation}
305: F_q(L_m)\ =\ (1-3{\cal F})^2+\frac{{\cal F}^2}3
306: \left(1+\frac{C_A}{C_F}\right)\ ,
307: \end{equation}
308: with
309: \begin{equation}
310: {\cal F}\ =\ \frac{\alpha_S}{\pi}C_FL^2_m,
311: \end{equation}
312: where $C_F=(N^2_c-1)/2N_c$, $C_A=N_c$ and $N_c=3$ is the number of
313: colours.
314: %
315: %
316: The non-Sudakov logarithms come from kinematical regions
317: %diagrams
318: where one of the
319: {\it quark} propagators is soft. As well known, there are other DL
320: effects (the well known Sudakov
321: logarithms~\cite{Sud}) which arise from virtual soft {\it gluon}
322: exchange. As discussed in~\cite{FKM}, in the case of quasi-two-jet
323: configurations, the Sudakov and non-Sudakov effects can be factorized to good
324: accuracy, since they correspond to very different
325: virtualities of the internal quark and gluon lines. For final
326: state radiation, the Sudakov effects can be implemented in parton
327: shower Monte Carlo models in the standard way. For the $gg^{PP}$ initial
328: state, the Sudakov factors are explicitly incorporated in the
329: unintegrated gluon densities, see~\cite{KMR,KMRpr}.
330:
331:
332: Unfortunately, from a phenomenological perspective, it is
333: dangerous to rely on the DL results, since experience shows that
334: formally subleading (SL) corrections may be numerically important.
335: That is why an accurate evaluation of
336: the QCD $b \bar b$ background to the central exclusive process
337: \be
338: pp\to p\oplus(H\to b\bar b)\oplus p
339: \ee
340: requires, first of all, the
341: calculation of
342: the exact one-loop correction to the Born
343: $gg^{PP}\to b\bar b$ amplitude, that is to the hard
344: subprocess $gg\to b\bar b$ in a colour-singlet $J_z=0$ initial
345: state.
346:
347: The calculation is described in Section 2, where the result is
348: presented as the sum of standard integrals corresponding to the
349: box, triangle and self-energy Feynman diagrams with the scalar
350: propagators. In Section 3 the infrared divergencies of the virtual loop
351: amplitude are discussed. These divergences are cancelled either by
352: real gluon emission or by the diagrams where an additional virtual
353: gluon is emitted off the second $t$-channel (screening) gluon in the
354: whole $pp\to p\oplus b\bar b\oplus p$ amplitude. Numerical
355: estimates are illustrated in Section 4.
356:
357:
358:
359:
360:
361:
362:
363:
364:
365:
366: \section{Calculation of the $gg\to b\bar b$ amplitude}
367:
368: %We will throughout denote the incoming gluons' momenta as
369: %$p_A$ and $p_B$, $p_A^2=p_B^2=0$
370: %and quark and antiquark ones as $p_{1,2}$, $p_{1,2}^2=m^2$,
371: %p_A+p_B=p_1+p_2$.
372:
373: Here, and in what follows, we consider the amplitude, defined as
374: \begin{equation}
375: T_{gg\to b\bar b}=\sum_{a,b}\sum_{\epsilon_1,\epsilon_2}
376: M_{ab}^{\epsilon_1,\epsilon_2}\delta_{ab}\delta_{\epsilon_1\epsilon_2},
377: \end{equation}
378: where $a$ and $b$ are the colour indices ($a,b=1,2,...,N_c^2-1$)
379: and $\epsilon_{1,2}$ are the transverse polarization vectors of the
380: incoming gluons. Introducing the outgoing quark spinors, the amplitude can
381: be written as
382: \begin{equation}
383: T_{gg\to b\bar b}\,=\,\overline u(p_1)T(\slash p)v(p_2),
384: \end{equation}
385: where the matrix $T$ is built from the 4-momenta $p$ involved in the reaction, $\slash p \equiv p_\mu
386: \gamma^\mu$. There are three independent 4-momenta, which we take to be $p_1$,
387: $p_2$ of $b$ and $\bar b$, and the difference of the incoming gluon momenta, $p_A-p_B$. The matrix $\slash p_1$ can be moved to the left,
388: and $\slash p_2$ to the right, until they disappear upon acting on the spinor,
389: \be
390: \overline u(p_1)\slash p_1=m\overline u(p_1),~~~~~~~\slash p_2 v(p_2)=-mv(p_2),
391: \ee
392: where $m \equiv m_b$.
393: This rearrangement reduces the amplitude to two spinor structures, corresponding to
394: the following helicity-violating and helicity-conserving terms\footnote{In principle, there are two other possible structures
395: related to the fourth vector $e_\mu \sim
396: \varepsilon_{\mu\nu\lambda\sigma}p_1^\nu(p_A-p_B)^\lambda p_2^\sigma$
397: namely, $u(p_1)\gamma^5v(p_2)$ and
398: $\overline u(p_1)(\slash p_A-\slash p_B)\gamma^5 v(p_2)$,
399: but they do not appear for our subprocess.}
400: \begin{equation}
401: T_{gg\to b\bar b}\,=\,\overline u(p_1)v(p_2)\,T_1\,
402: +\,\overline u(p_1)(\slash p_A-\slash p_B)v(p_2)\,T_2~.
403: \label{eq:T1T2}
404: \end{equation}
405: The scalar coefficients $T_{1,2}$ depend on the invariants
406: \be
407: s=(p_1+p_2)^2,~~~~~t=(p_A-p_1)^2~~~~~u=(p_A-p_2)^2.
408: \ee
409: The function
410: $T_1$ is symmetric with respect to the $t$-$u$ interchange, while $T_2$ is antisymmetric.
411: Their calculation requires an evaluation of the spinor traces, which
412: can easily be carried out with the help of an analytical program.
413:
414:
415:
416:
417:
418:
419: \subsection{The Born contribution}
420: As discussed above,
421: only the helicity-violating piece
422: contributes at the Born level to the $J_z=0$ amplitude, that is the sum $(++)\ +\ (--)$ of the helicities of the incoming gluons,
423: \begin{equation}
424: T_1^{\rm Born}\,=\,4\pi\alpha_S\,C_F\,2m\left[\frac{1}{m^2-t}
425: +\frac{1}{m^2-u}\right],\qquad
426: T_2^{\rm Born}\,=\,0.
427: \end{equation}
428: The loop integration is reduced to master scalar integrals,
429: and the final result is written in terms of the set of these integrals.
430: %through the set of which the final result is expressed.
431: The Feynman gauge is used in the
432: $\overline{\rm MS}$-scheme with the dimensional parameter of order
433: of
434: %% incoming gluon virtuality
435: the characteristic virtualities of the process,
436: % relevant for the process,
437: $4\pi\mu^2=-k^2=s/4$.
438: The ultraviolet (UV) divergencies are renormalized, to first
439: order in $\alpha_S$, by the gluon and quark $Z$-factors, mass and charge
440: renormalization in the Born term.
441:
442: For central exclusive
443: production, the effective luminosity of the incoming active gluons,
444: \begin{equation}
445: \frac{M^2\partial{\cal L}(gg^{PP})}{\partial y\partial M^2}\,=\, \hat
446: S^2 L^{\rm excl},
447: \label{eq:lump}
448: \end{equation}
449: is given by the integral expression \cite{KMRpr}
450: \begin{equation}
451: L^{\rm excl}\,=\,\left(\frac \pi{(N^2_c-1)b}\int\frac{dQ^2_t}{Q^4_t}
452: f_g(x^+_1,x'^+_1,Q^2_t,\mu^2)f_g(x^-_2,x'^-_2,Q^2_t,\mu^2)\right)^2,
453: \label{eq:lum}
454: \end{equation}
455: where the integration is over the transverse momentum of the gluon loop in Fig.~\ref{fig:pHp}.
456: Here $b$ is the $t$-slope, corresponding to the momentum transfer
457: distributions of the colliding protons, and $x_{1,2}$ are the light-cone
458: momentum fractions carried by the active gluons\footnote{
459: The superscript $+$ ($-$) is to indicate the light-cone momentum
460: fraction of the momentum $q_1,~(q_2)$ of the first (second) colliding proton, that is $Q_\mu=x'^+_1q_{1\mu}+x'^-_2q_{2\mu}+Q_{t\mu}$.}.
461: The colour flow due to the active gluons is screened by the second $t$-channel
462: gluon, which carries the momentum fractions $x'^+_1$ and $x'^-_2$. The gap
463: survival factor $\hat S^2$ accounts for the soft rescattering effect, that is $\hat S^2$ is the probability that the rapidity gaps are not populated by secondaries produced in possible soft rescattering, see \cite{KMR,KMRpr,soft}.
464: The integral over the gluon transverse momentum $Q_t$ is convergent, in
465: both the ultraviolet and infrared regions. The conribution of the low $Q_t$
466: domain is suppressed by Sudakov-like form factors
467: incorporated in the unintegrated gluon densities $f_g$.
468:
469: Due to the presence of the second $t$-channel (screening)
470: gluon, there is no infrared divergency
471: in the matrix element of the `hard' $gg(J_z=0)\to b\bar b$ subprocess.
472: This opens up the possibility to regularize the infrared (IR)
473: divergences by
474: % the introduction of
475: a fictitious gluon mass $m_g$.
476: In order to preserve gauge invariance, the mass $m_g$ can be formally introduced
477: via the Higgs mechanism\footnote{This way of introducing the
478: infrared cutoff $m_g$ was used, for example,
479: in the original BFKL calculations, see \cite{klf}.}.
480: Of course, this will generate additional diagrams
481: with Higgs boson exchange or production. Such Higgs boson exchange will provide `cross-talk' between the `hard' matrix element and the
482: second $t$-channel (screening) gluon. As a result, we set $m_g=Q_t$, that is,
483: introduce a physical infrared cutoff in the exclusive $b\bar b$
484: production. After this, the contribution of the ``artifical'' Higgs boson diagrams can
485: be eliminated by choosing the mass of the ``Higgs'' boson to be
486: very large, $M^2_H \gg s$. Since there is no need to regularize the integral (\ref{eq:lum}),
487: here we will work in the $D=4$ world, so the polarizations of our gluons are
488: constrained to $D=4$ space.
489:
490:
491:
492:
493:
494:
495:
496: \subsection{One-loop effects}
497:
498: Both the structures $T_{1,2}$ in (\ref{eq:T1T2}) can contribute to the one-loop correction. We
499: begin with the helicity-conserving part
500: $$
501: T_2(s,t,u)\,=\,A_2(s,t,u)-A_2(s,u,t).
502: $$
503: We retain only the quark mass $m=0$ contribution. The function $A_2(s,t,u)$ is given by the set of Feynman diagrams
504: shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ggqq}. The second term in the expression for $T_2(s,t,u)$
505: \begin{figure}
506: \begin{center}
507: \includegraphics[height=10cm]{ggqq.eps}
508: \caption{\sf One-loop diagrams contributing
509: to the $gg\to b\bar b$ process }
510: \label{fig:ggqq}
511: \end{center}
512: \end{figure}
513: takes care of $t \leftrightarrow u$ interchange.
514: When performed naively, a straightforward calculation results in a complete cancellation between the
515: two terms. So we have $T_2(s,t,u)=0$ at the one-loop level,
516: similar to the Born term\footnote{At first sight, it appears that the zero value of $T_2$ is in
517: contradiction with \cite{adr,ng}, which lead to a non-zero result for the one-loop
518: (cut-non-reconstructible) QHC amplitude $gg(J_z=0)\to b \bar b $
519: in dimensional regularization, assuming that the incomimg gluons
520: are on-mass-shell. This non-zero cut-non-reconstructible contribution
521: comes from a ratio of the form $\epsilon/\epsilon=const$, where the
522: denominator (that is, the factor $1/\epsilon$) is of infrared origin.
523: However, in our case, due to the presence
524: of the screening gluon, the (transverse) size of the interaction region is
525: limited by a value of order of $\sim 1/Q_t$. This generates a dynamical
526: infrared cut-off at a scale $\sim Q_t^2$, which, in our
527: calculation, is taken care of by introducing an effective gluon mass $m_g=Q_t$.
528: As a result, the infrared singularities are absorbed in
529: the unintegrated gluon structure functions.
530: The factor $1/\epsilon$ is replaced by $\ln(\mu/m_g)$, and as
531: $\epsilon\to 0$ we obtain $T_2=0$. Thus
532: our procedure is quite different from the on-mass-shell calculations.
533: %---- %The %non-zero amplitude $T_2$ in \cite{adr,ng} was obtained for
534: %$gg(J_z=0)\to b \bar b $ %process at ${\cal O}(\alpha_S$) order after
535: %dimensional regularisation. There the non-zero cut-nonreconstructible
536: %contribution comes from a ratio of the form $\epsilon/\epsilon=const$,
537: %where the $\epsilon$ in the numerator corresponds to the additional
538: %polarisations of the gluon (lying in %$\epsilon$ space) while the
539: %denominator %(i.e. the factor $1/\epsilon$) is of infrared origin.
540: %There is no such contribution %in our case since the size of the
541: %interaction region %($\sim 1/Q_t$) is limited by the presence of the
542: %second, screening, %$t$-channel gluon
543: %(with momentum fractions $x'_1,\ x'_2$) and, therefore,
544: %all integrals have no IR divergency.}.
545: %-------
546: }.
547:
548: The QHNC part of the amplitude is given by the
549: two terms,
550: \be
551: T_1(s,t,u)\,=\,A_1(s,t,u)\,+\,A_1(s,u,t),
552: \ee
553: where the second term, as in the previous case, comes from the $u$-channel crossing.
554: Recall that the amplitude $T_1$ is symmetric with respect to the $t$-$u$
555: interchange. As in the Born term, the one-loop
556: amplitude vanishes if we set $m=0$. Here we present an expression for the amplitude to
557: lowest order in mass, that is
558: \be
559: A_1\,=\,4\pi\alpha_S\,\frac
560: {\alpha_S}{4\pi}\,m\, \bigl[A_0\,+\,A_q\,+\,A_g\,+\,A_{qg}\bigr],
561: \label{eq:A1T1}
562: \ee
563: where $m$ is the quark pole mass, $m=\overline{m}_b(\overline{m}_b)$, and the running
564: coupling constant is taken at the scale $\mu$, $\alpha_S=\alpha_S(\mu^2)$. The function $A_0$ is made up of pieces coming from the logarithmically divergent
565: scalar master integrals with two propagators. The $1/\epsilon$ terms,
566: appearing in dimensional regularization, are subtracted by the counterterms coming
567: from the field $Z$-factors, quark mass and coupling constant renormalization
568: in the Born term. To be precise, $A_0$ collects what is not
569: included in the functions $I$, which result from the master integrals. It depends on
570: which form has been assumed for the gluon polarizations in dimensional regularization. That is, whether the transverse tensor lies exactly in two-dimensional space $D-2=2$, or whether it has an admixture
571: of the extra dimension, $D-2=2+2\epsilon$.
572: As we discussed, in central diffractive production the active incoming gluons are screened
573: (in the whole amplitude of {the \it exclusive} process) by a
574: second $t$-channel gluon, see Fig.~\ref{fig:pHp}.
575: % which was needed to compensate the colour flow across the gap.
576: In this external loop we have neither infrared
577: nor UV divergencies. Thus the polarisations of incoming gluons lie in
578: two-dimensional $D-2=2$ space. Moreover, when using the unintegrated gluons
579: obtained via the KMR prescription \cite{KMRMR}, from the integrated
580: $\overline{\rm MS}$ gluon given by the global parton analyses, we have to account
581: for the fact that the whole gluon renormalisation factor $Z_3$ is
582: already included in the incoming parton distribution. So the matrix element
583: of the `hard' subprocess must be calculated with the $Z$ factors equal to 1
584: for all `external' lines (just as is the case when the external lines
585: are on-mass-shell). In other words, here we present the result of the
586: calculation\footnote{The renormalisation factor, $Z_2$, of the $b$-quark
587: is included in the evolution which describes the fragmentation of the $b$-quark jet.} with $Z_3=Z_2=1$.
588:
589:
590: The result obtained for $Z_2=1$, $Z_3=1$, with the infinite parts subtracted, has the form,
591: \be
592: A_0^{D-2=2}\,=\,\frac 1t\left[-4C_FN_c\ln\frac{m^2}{m_g^2}\,
593: +\,C_F\,\frac{5N_c^2-1}{N_c}\ln\frac{m^2}{4\pi\mu^2}\,-\,24C_F^2
594: \right].
595: \ee
596: The other functions in (\ref{eq:A1T1}) are given by the finite parts of the individual Feynman diagrams
597: shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ggqq} with the colour coefficients $c_i$,
598:
599: \begin{eqnarray}
600: c_1\,=\,c_4\,&=&\,C_F^2\,=\,\left[\frac{N_c^2-1}{2N_c}\right]^2 \nonumber \\
601: c_2\,=\,c_3\,&=&\,-\frac1{2N_c}C_F\, =\, -\frac1{2N_c}\frac{N_c^2-1}{2N_c}
602: \nonumber \\
603: c_5\,& =&\,N_c\,C_F\, =\,N_c\frac{N_c^2-1}{2N_c}
604: \nonumber \\
605: c_6\,& =&\,N_c^2-1\nonumber \\
606: \nonumber
607: c_7\,=\,c_9\,& =&\, -\frac12 N_c\,C_F\, =\, -\frac12 N_c\frac{N_c^2-1}{2N_c}
608: \nonumber \\
609: c_8\,=\,c_{10}\,& =&\, -\frac12 N_c\,C_F\, =\,
610: -\frac12 N_c\frac{N_c^2-1}{2N_c}.
611: \nonumber
612: \end{eqnarray}
613: The master integrals, $I^q_{0000}(s,t)$ etc, appearing in the expressions
614: below, are given in the Appendix A. We have
615: \begin{eqnarray}
616: A_q\,&=& \,4\,c_1I^q_{0000}(s,t)s
617: +\,I^q_{0101}(t)\frac{2[(2s + t)(c_2+c_3) + 2(2s - t)\,c_1 - 2\,c_4s]}
618: {s\,t},\nonumber \\
619: && \nonumber \\
620: && \nonumber \\
621: A_g\,&=&\, 4I^g_{0000}(s,t)c_5s
622: +\,3I^g_{1000}(s)[c_6 - 2c_5]
623: -\,4\,c_5I^g_{0100}(t) \nonumber \\
624: &&+\,I^g_{1010}(s)\frac{4[-(3s + 2t)c_5 + c_6s]}{s^2}
625: +\,I^g_{0101}(t)\frac{4(2s + t)c_5}{s\,t}, \nonumber \\
626: && \nonumber \\
627: && \nonumber \\
628: A_{qg}\,&=&\,I^{qg}_{0000}(u,t)\frac{ - [2s^2 + 3st + 3t^2](c_7+c_9)}{s}
629: \,+\,I^{qg}_{1000}(u)\frac{3(s + t)(c_7+c_9)}{s} \nonumber \\
630: &&+I^{qg}_{1000}(t)\frac{ - 3\,(c_7+c_9)\,t}{s}
631: \,+ I^{qg}_{0010}(u)\frac{\,(c_7+c_9)(2s+3t)}{s} \nonumber \\
632: &&-\,I^{qg}_{0010}(t)\frac{\,(c_7+c_9)(s+3t)+2(c_8+c_{10})s\,}{s}
633: \,+\,I^{qg}_{1010}(u)\frac{ - 4(c_7+c_9)}{s + t} \nonumber \\
634: &&+\,2I^{qg}_{1010}(t)\frac{[(c_8+c_{10})(t-2s) + 2(c_7+c_9)s]}{st}.
635: \nonumber
636: \end{eqnarray}
637:
638:
639:
640:
641:
642:
643:
644:
645: \section{The infrared contribution}
646: The amplitude $T_1$ contains logarithmic infrared (IR) divergences
647: which in the formulae presented above are regularized
648: by the effective gluon mass $m_g$ cut-off.
649: %cutted off in our formulae by the effective gluon mass $m_g$.
650: These IR divergent terms are essentially the usual Sudakov form
651: factors, that is the probability not to emit additional gluons in the
652: {\it exclusive} process $pp\to p\oplus b\bar b\oplus p$.
653:
654: The Sudakov-like form factor, due to emission from the initial active gluons, is equal to
655: \begin{equation}
656: S(Q_t,\mu)=exp\left(-\int^{\mu^2}_{Q^2_t}\frac{\alpha_S}{2\pi}
657: \frac{dk^2_t}{k^2_t}\int_0^{1-\Delta}zP_{gg}(z)dz\right)
658: \label{sudg}
659: \end{equation}
660: with $P_{gg}(z)$ being the gluon-gluon Altarelli-Parisi LO splitting
661: function corresponding to real gluon emission,
662: and $\Delta=k_t/(\mu+k_t)$. It was already included in the
663: effective gluon-gluon luminosity ${\cal L}(gg^{PP})$ used to calculate
664: the exclusive cross section \cite{KMRpr}. Therefore, we have to subtract the
665: term
666: \begin{equation}
667: T^{\rm Born}_1\left(-\int^{\mu^2}_{Q^2_t}\frac{\alpha_S}{2\pi}
668: \frac{dk^2_t}{k^2_t}\int_0^{1-\Delta}zP_{gg}(z)dz\right)
669: \label{eq:sg}
670: \end{equation}
671: from the amplitude $T$.
672:
673: As discussed above, because of the presence of a screening gluon,
674: the infrared cut-off is given by the
675: transverse momentum (virtuality) of the incoming active gluon,
676: and in the expressions for the amplitudes $A_g$ and $A_{qg}$,
677: where the `internal' gluon is radiated from a gluon line,
678: we replace $m_g$ by $Q_t$.
679: %Since the physical infrared cut-off is
680: %provided by the presence of the screening gluon, that is
681: %the infrared cut-off is given by the
682: %transverse momentum (virtuality) of the incoming active gluon,
683: %we put in the expressions for the amplitudes $A_g$ and $A_{qg}$,
684: %where the 'internal' gluon was emitted off the gluon line,
685: This cancels the main ($\propto\ln^2(m^2_g)$) part
686: of the IR divergency
687: \be
688: T_1\simeq 2m(4\pi\alpha_S)N_cC_F\frac{\alpha_S}{\pi}\left(\frac{1}{t}+\frac{1}{u}\right)\ln^2(s/m_g^2).
689: \ee
690: The logarithmic IR divergency in the amplitude $A_q$ is
691: cancelled after accounting for the real soft gluon emission in the $b$-quark
692: jet. Usually, in Monte Carlo simulations and/or jet searching algorithms, such
693: emission is described by LO quark evolution. So we have to
694: subtract the term
695: \begin{equation}
696: T^{\rm Born}_1\left(-\int^{\mu^2}_{k^2_{t0}}\frac{\alpha_S}{2\pi}
697: \frac{dk^2_t}{k^2_t}\int_0^{1-\Delta_q}P_{qq}(z)dz\right),
698: \label{eq:sq}
699: \end{equation}
700: where now $P_{qq}(z)$ is the quark-quark splitting function;
701: the lower limit $k_{t0}$ is fixed by the experimental conditions -- gluons with transerse momenta with respect to $b$-jet axis
702: $k_t<k_{t0}$ are included in the definition of the jet. The kinematic
703: limit is $\Delta_q=2k_{t0}/\sqrt s$.
704: As a result, we put $m_g=k_{t0}$ in the expression\footnote{There still remains a contribution proportional to
705: the first power of $\ln(m_g)$, which is not cancelled by the subtractions
706: (\ref{eq:sg},\ref{eq:sq}). This contribution arises from large-angle
707: soft-gluon emission, when we cannot neglect the interference between the
708: emission from the gluon and from the quark lines. Such interference,
709: hidden in the amplitude $A_{qg}$, is not included, either in the
710: definition of the jet or in the effective $gg^{PP}$ luminosity. The
711: corresponding IR divergency is cut off by the presence of the
712: screening gluon in the effective $gg^{PP}$ luminosity, that is by the
713: gluon transverse momentum $Q_t$; to mimic this fact we set
714: $m_g=Q_t$, as before.} for $A_q$.
715:
716:
717:
718:
719:
720:
721:
722:
723: \section{The double-logarithmic contributions}
724: As was discussed in the Introduction, large double-logarithmic terms
725: can be of Sudakov or non-Sudakov origin. The Sudakov contributions
726: reflect the possibility to emit additional soft gluons. They are
727: absorbed (and subtracted) in the definitions of the $gg^{PP}$ luminosity
728: and in the prescription for the quark jet search. The non-Sudakov
729: logarithms come from the kinematical domain in which one of the quark propagators
730: in the diagram is soft. In the case of the $\gamma\gamma\to b\bar b$
731: process this contribution was numerically quite large
732: \be
733: T_1^{\rm non-Sud}(\gamma\gamma\to b\bar b)~\simeq~ T_1^{\rm Born}\cdot 3C_F\frac{\alpha_S}{4\pi}\ln^2(s/m^2_b),
734: \ee
735: see (\ref{eq:FLm}). In our case, with a larger number of diagrams and
736: larger colour coefficients in the one-loop $gg\to b\bar b$ Feynman
737: graphs, there is a danger that we could find an even larger non-Sudakov DL correction.
738: However, the situation appears to be different.
739: %is not the fact.
740: Contributions which correspond to
741: diagrams with 3 gluons in the loop and to diagrams with 2 gluons have
742: different signs. This is analogous to the destructive interference between
743: the emission of a photon from the incoming and the outgoing electron for small angle scattering.
744: Unlike the $\gamma\gamma\to b\bar b$ case, here we have additional
745: double-logarithm contributions coming from $A_g,\ A_{qg}$, such that the
746: final result does not contain a large numerical coefficient
747: \be
748: T_1^{\rm non-Sud}(gg\to b\bar b)~\simeq~ T_1^{\rm Born}\cdot
749: (3C_F-N_c)\frac{\alpha_S}{4\pi}
750: \ln^2(s/m^2_b).
751: \ee
752: We see that, instead of the naively expected factor $3N_c$ (which
753: indeed comes from the first term of $A_g$, that is from the integral
754: $I^g_{0000}$), the coefficient in the sum of the $A_g$ and $A_{qg}$
755: amplitudes in front of the non-Sudakov
756: double-logarithm
757: %(in the sum of the $A_g$ and $A_{qg}$ amplitudes)
758: is proportional to $3N_c-4N_c=-N_c$.
759:
760:
761:
762: \section{Discussion}
763:
764: To evaluate the role of the one-loop correction numerically, we first calculate the cross section
765: \begin{equation}
766: \frac{d\sigma^{(0)+(1)}}{d\cos\theta}\,=\,\frac 1{32\pi s}\left(\frac
767: 1{2(N_c^2-1)}(T^{\rm Born}_1+T_1)\right)^2 \,,
768: \label{eq:cros}
769: \end{equation}
770: that must be multiplied by the
771: effective gluon-gluon luminosity (\ref{eq:lump}) \cite{KMRpr}.
772: The results are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ggbc} for different
773: values of the infrared cutoffs $Q_t$ and $k_{t0}$. The scale is taken to be
774: $4\pi\mu^2=s/4$.
775: \begin{figure}
776: %[t]
777: \begin{center}
778: \includegraphics[height=10cm]{ggbc.eps}
779: \caption{\sf Angular dependence of the exclusive $b\bar b$ cross section for different choices of the infrared cutoffs. For comparison, we also show the Born result for two choices of the running $b$-quark mass.}
780: \label{fig:ggbc}
781: \end{center}
782: \end{figure}
783:
784: The value $Q_t=2$ GeV corresponds to the maximum of the integrand
785: in (\ref{eq:lum}) for the exclusive production of a Higgs boson of mass $M_H=120$ GeV at the LHC. The choice $k_{t0}=5$ GeV appears to be reasonable for the standard $b$-quark-jet searching; the gluons with transverse momentum (with respect to $b$-jet axis) of $k_t>5$ GeV can be
786: considered as separate jets. To demonstrate the dependence
787: of the cross section $\sigma^{(0)+(1)}$ on the values of $Q_t$ and $k_{t0}$
788: we also show the predictions for $Q_t=6$ GeV and $k_{t0}=2$ GeV.
789: We use a $b$-quark pole mass $\overline{m}_b(\overline{m}_b)=4.2$ GeV and take
790: $\alpha_S(M_Z)=0.118$.
791: For lower infrared cutoffs the probability not to emit an additional gluon decreases, and the cross section is smaller.
792:
793:
794: For comparison, we also show in Fig.~\ref{fig:ggbc} cross sections calculated
795: in the Born approximation with the same renormalisation scale
796: ($s/4$) for the QCD $\alpha_S$ coupling and the $b$-quark pole mass
797: ${\overline m_b}$ taken at the same scale ${\overline m_b}(\overline{m}_b)$ (upper curve). In addition we plot the Born result for a $b$-quark mass taken at the scale $\sqrt{s}/2$ (lower curve); this shows that a large part of the one-loop suppression of the cross section comes from the running of the $b$-quark mass. However, note that for large-angle
798: scattering we observe a
799: stronger suppression of the cross section due to other radiative
800: corrections.
801:
802: \begin{figure}
803: %[t]
804: \begin{center}
805: \includegraphics[height=10cm]{ggbs.eps}
806: \caption{\sf The scale dependence of the ratio of the NLO exclusive
807: $b\bar b$ cross section to that calculated in Born approximation.}
808: \label{fig:ggbs}
809: \end{center}
810: \end{figure}
811: In Fig.~\ref{fig:ggbs} we show the scale dependence of the ratio
812: $\sigma^{(0)+(1)}/\sigma^{(0)}$
813: of the whole one-loop cross section, integrated over the region
814: $60^o<\theta<120^o$ (that is $|\cos\theta|<1/2$),
815: to that calculated in Born
816: approximation with the pole mass ${\overline m_b(\overline{m}_b)}$ of $b$-quark. The result is
817: shown for two different masses of $b\bar b$ system, namely $M_{bb}=\sqrt s =120$
818: and 200 GeV. Here we put $Q_t=2$ GeV and $k_{t0}=5$ GeV. It is seen
819: that the scale dependence in the region of $4\pi\mu^2\sim s/4$ is
820: rather flat.
821:
822:
823: Finally, in Fig.~\ref{fig:ggbm}, we present the analogous ratio,
824: $\sigma^{(0)+(1)}/\sigma^{(0)}$, of the CED cross sections, integrated over
825: the region of $|\cos\theta|<1/2$, expected at the LHC for exclusive
826: $b\bar b$ production in the central region (with the rapidity of the
827: $b\bar b$-pair $y=0$). In this case the
828: $gg^{PP}\to b\bar b$ amplitudes $T^{\rm Born}_1$ and $T_1$, which enter the
829: cross section (\ref{eq:cros}), were convoluted with the luminosity
830: amplitude
831: (the integrand of (\ref{eq:lum})) following the
832: $Q_t$ factorisation prescription; that is the amplitude $T_1(Q_t)$ was
833: included inside the $Q_t$ integral in (\ref{eq:lum}).
834: Again we show the results for two values of the infrared cutoff in the $b$-jet
835: definition -- $k_{t0}=5$ GeV and $k_{t0}=2$ GeV -- as the function of the
836: mass $M_{bb}$ of the $b\bar b$ pair for the scale equal to
837: $M_{bb}/2$.
838: \begin{figure}
839: %[t]
840: \begin{center}
841: \includegraphics[height=10cm]{ggbm.eps}
842: \caption{\sf The mass dependence of the ration of the NLO exclusive
843: $b\bar b$ cross section to that calculated in Born approximation.}
844: \label{fig:ggbm}
845: \end{center}
846: \end{figure}
847: Of course, for the smaller value, $k_{t0}=2$ GeV, we have a stronger suppression, but
848: this does not mean that by selecting narrower $b$-jets (with a smaller
849: cone size $\Delta R$ or a smaller $k_{t0})$ we can improve the Higgs signal-to-background ratio. The signal is diminished in the same way as the background when we
850: suppress the emission of an additional gluon in the $H\to b\bar b$ decay;
851: both the exclusive $b\bar b$ cross section and the $H\to b\bar b$ signal
852: have the same Sudakov suppression.
853: Thus, in order not to lose statistics, it is better not to take the value of $k_{t0}$ to be too small. On the other hand, $k_{t0}$ should not be too large.
854: Otherwise, we will not sufficiently suppress the three-particle, $gg^{PP}\to b\bar b+g$,
855: background \cite{krs}. From this viewpoint the predictions corresponding to $k_{t0}=5$ GeV
856: look appropriate.
857:
858:
859: In conclusion, the good news is that the radiative
860: QCD (one-loop) corrections {\it suppress the exclusive
861: $b\bar b$ background} (by a factor about 2,
862: or more for larger $b\bar b$-masses) for central exclusive diffractive (CED)
863: Higgs production,
864: in comparison with that calculated using the Born $gg^{PP}\to b\bar b$
865: amplitude. As discussed in \cite{KMRJz,DKMOR}, $b\bar b$
866: production in the $|J_z|=2$ state is
867: another background, which cannot be
868: distinguished from the $H\to b\bar b$ decay. However, this contribution can be
869: suppressed by selecting events with smaller transverse momenta of
870: the forward outgoing protons \cite{KMRJz}. Therefore, the exclusive gluon-gluon dijet production becomes the most
871: important background for the CED Higgs process, see \cite{DKMOR, hkrstw} for a detailed discussion. In order to
872: suppress further this QCD background we need better experimental discrimination between
873: $b$-quark and gluon jets; that is, to achieve a lower probability
874: $P_{g/b}$ for misidentifying a gluon as a $b$-jet.
875:
876: \section*{Acknowledgements}
877: We thank Nigel Glover, Kemal Ozeren, Sven Moch, James Stirling, Robert Thorne, and especially
878: Adrian Signer, for useful discussions.
879: MGR thanks the IPPP at the University of
880: Durham for hospitality, and VAK is grateful to the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics for hospitality during the completion of this work.
881: The work was supported by INTAS grant 05-103-7515, by grant RFBR 07-02-00023 and by the Russian State grant RSGSS-5788.2006.02.
882:
883:
884:
885: \section*{Appendix A: Master integrals}
886:
887: We present below the scalar master integrals needed to compute the one-loop effects shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ggqq}. The results contain the functions
888: $$
889: F(\xi)\,\equiv\,\int_0^\xi dx\,\frac{\ln(1+x)}{x}\,=\,-Li_2(-\xi),
890: $$
891: $$
892: \rho\,\equiv\,\sqrt{s(s-4m^2)},
893: $$
894: $$
895: C_\epsilon\,\equiv \, -\frac 1\epsilon\,-\,\ln\frac{m^2}{4\pi \mu^2},
896: $$
897: where we work in $D=4+2\epsilon$ dimensions.
898:
899:
900: \subsection*{Extra gluon between quark lines}
901: Here, we give the integrals for diagrams 1-4 of Fig.~\ref{fig:ggqq}, which involve the virtualities
902: $$
903: a\equiv k^2-m^2,~~~ b\equiv (k-p_B)^2-m^2,~~~ c\equiv (k+p_A-p_1)^2-m_g^2,~~~ d\equiv (k+p_A)^2-m^2.
904: $$
905: $$
906: I^q_{0000}(s,t)~\equiv ~\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac
907: 1{abcd}\,=
908: $$
909: $$
910: =\,\frac 1{m^2-t}\,
911: \frac1{\rho}\,2\,\left[\,\ln\frac{\rho-s}{\rho+s}\,
912: \left(\ln\biggl(1-\frac t{m^2}\biggr)\,-\,
913: \frac 12\ln\frac{m_g^2}{m^2}\right)\,+\,
914: F\biggl(\frac s\rho\biggr)\,-\,F\biggl(-\frac s\rho\biggr)\right],
915: $$
916: $$
917: I^q_{0001}(t)~\equiv ~\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac
918: 1{abc}\,=\frac1{m^2-t}\,
919: \left[\,F\biggl(-\frac{t}{m^2}\biggr)+\frac{\pi^2}{6}\right],
920: $$
921: $$
922: I^q_{0010}(s)~\equiv ~\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac
923: 1{abd}\,=\,\frac 1{2s}\,
924: \ln^2\biggl(-\frac{s+\rho}{s-\rho}\biggr),
925: $$
926:
927: %$$
928: %I^q_{1000}(s)~\equiv ~\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac
929: %1{bcd}\,=\,-\frac1{\rho}\,
930: %\left[\,\ln\frac{m^2}{m_g^2}\,\ln\frac{\rho-s}{\rho+s}
931: %\,+\,2F\biggl(-\frac{\rho- s}{2\rho}\biggr)\, \right.
932: %$$
933: $$
934: \,\left. -\,2F\biggl(-\frac{\rho+ s}{2\rho}\biggr)-\,F\biggl(-\frac
935: {s+\rho}{s-\rho}\biggr)\,+\,F\biggl(-\frac{\rho-s}{s+\rho}\biggr)\right],
936: $$
937: $$
938: I^q_{1010}(s)+C_\epsilon~\equiv ~\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{bd}\,=\,
939: \left[\frac{\rho}{s}\,\ln\biggl(-\frac{s-\rho}{s+\rho}\biggr)+2\right]+C_\epsilon,
940: $$
941: $$
942: I^q_{0101}(t)+C_\epsilon~\equiv ~\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{ac}\,=\,
943: \left[2\,-\,\biggl(1-\frac{m^2}{t}\biggr)\ln\biggl(1-\frac{t}{m^2}\biggr)\right]+C_\epsilon,
944: $$
945: $$
946: \int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{cd}\,=\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{bc}\,=~~C_\epsilon+2,
947: $$
948: $$
949: \int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{ad}\,=\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{ab}\,=~~C_\epsilon.
950: $$
951:
952: \subsection*{Extra gluon coupling to gluons}
953: Here, we give the integrals for diagrams 5 and 6 of Fig.~\ref{fig:ggqq}, which involve the virtualities
954: $$
955: a'\equiv k^2-m_g^2,~~~ b'\equiv (k-p_B)^2-m_g^2,~~~ c'\equiv (k+p_A-p_1)^2-m^2,~~~ d'\equiv (k+p_A)^2-m_g^2.
956: $$
957: $$
958: I^g_{0000}(s,t)~\equiv ~\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{a'b'c'd'}\,=\,-\,\frac 1{s}\,\frac
959: 1{m^2-t}\,\left[2\,\ln\frac{-s}{m_g^2}\,\ln\frac{m^2-t}{m\,m_g}\,
960: -\,\frac{\,\pi^2}{2}\right],
961: $$
962: $$
963: I^g_{1000}(s)~\equiv ~\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{b'c'd'}\,=\,\frac1{\rho}\,
964: \left[\,\ln\frac{-s}{m^2}\,\ln\biggl(-\frac{s+\rho}{s-\rho}\biggr)\,
965: +\,\frac
966: 12\,\ln^2\!\biggl(-\frac{s+\rho}{s-\rho}\biggr)\,
967: \right.
968: $$
969: $$
970: +\,\ln^2\!\biggl(-\frac{2s}{\rho-s}\biggr)\,\left.-\,2\,F\biggl(-\frac{s+\rho}{s-\rho}\biggr)-2\,F\biggl(-\frac{s+\rho}{2s}\biggr)\,
971: -\,2\,F\biggl(\frac{2s}{\rho-s}\biggr)\,-\,\pi^2\,\right],
972: $$
973: $$
974: I^g_{0100}(t)~\equiv ~\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{a'c'd'}\,=\,\frac1{t-m^2}\,
975: \left[\,F\biggl(\frac{t}{m^2-t}\biggr)\, +\,\frac
976: 12\,\ln^2\biggl(\frac{m^2-t}{m^2}\biggr)\,\right.
977: $$
978: $$
979: -\,\ln\frac{m_g^2}{m^2}\,
980: \ln\biggl(\frac{m^2-t}{m^2}\biggr)+\,\left.\frac 14\,\ln^2\frac{m_g^2}{m^2}\,+\,\frac{\pi^2}{12}\,\right],
981: $$
982: $$
983: I^g_{1010}(s)+C_\epsilon~\equiv ~\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{b'd'}\,=\,\left[2+\ln\frac{m^2}{-s}\right]+C_\epsilon,
984: $$
985: $$
986: I^g_{0101}(t)+C_\epsilon~\equiv ~\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{a'c'}\,=\,
987: \left[2\,-\,\biggl(1-\frac{m^2}{t}\biggr)
988: \ln\biggl(1-\frac{t}{m^2}\biggr)\right]+C_\epsilon,
989: $$
990: $$
991: \int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{c'd'}\,=\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{b'c'}\,=~~C_\epsilon+2,
992: $$
993: $$
994: \int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{a'd'}\,=~~C_\epsilon+ \ln\frac{m^2}{m_g^2}.
995: $$
996:
997:
998: \subsection*{Extra gluon between a quark and a gluon line}
999: Here, we give the integrals for diagrams 7-10 of Fig.~\ref{fig:ggqq}, which involve the virtualities
1000: $$
1001: \tilde{a}\equiv k^2-m_g^2, ~~~~\tilde{b}\equiv (k+p_B)^2-m_g^2,~~~~\tilde{c}\equiv (k+p_1-p_A)^2-m^2,~~~~\tilde{d}\equiv (k+p_1)^2-m^2,
1002: $$
1003: $$
1004: \tilde{e}\equiv (k-p_A)^2-m_g^2, ~~~~\tilde{f}\equiv (k-p_2)^2-m^2,
1005: $$
1006: $$
1007: I^{qg}_{0000}(u,t)\,=\,\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{\tilde{a}\tilde{b}\tilde{c}\tilde{d}}\,=\,\frac 1{m^2-u}\,\frac
1008: 1{m^2-t}\,2\left[\,
1009: \ln\frac{m^2-u}{m\,m_g}\,\ln\frac{m^2-t}{m\,m_g}\,
1010: +\,\frac{\pi^2}{12} \right],
1011: $$
1012: $$
1013: I^{qg}_{1000}(u)\,=\,\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{\tilde{b}\tilde{c}\tilde{d}}\,=\,\frac1{u-m^2}\,
1014: \left[F\biggl(-\frac{u}{m^2}\biggr)\,+\,\frac{\pi^2}{6}\right],
1015: $$
1016: $$
1017: I^{qg}_{0010}(u)=\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{\tilde{a}\tilde{e}\tilde{f}}=\frac 1{u-m^2}
1018: \left[F\biggl(\frac{u}{\,m^2-u}\biggr)
1019: +\frac 12\ln^{2}\frac{\,m^2-u}{m_g^2}\,
1020: \right.
1021: $$
1022: $$
1023: \left.- \,\frac 14\ln^2\frac{m^2}{m_g^2}\,+\,\frac{\pi^2}{12}\,\right],
1024: $$
1025: $$
1026: I^{qg}_{1010}(u)+C_\epsilon~=~\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{\tilde{e}\tilde{f}}~=\,\left[2\,-\,\biggl(1-\frac{m^2}{u}\biggr)
1027: \ln\biggl(1-\frac{u}{m^2}\biggr)\right]+C_\epsilon,
1028: $$
1029: $$
1030: \int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{\tilde{c}\tilde{f}}~=~C_\epsilon,~~~~~~~~\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{\tilde{a}\tilde{e}}~=~C_\epsilon+ \ln\frac{m^2}{m_g^2},
1031: $$
1032: $$
1033: \int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{\tilde{c}\tilde{e}}~=~\int \frac{d^4k}{i\pi^2}\,\frac1{\tilde{a}\tilde{f}}~=~C_\epsilon+2.
1034: $$
1035:
1036:
1037:
1038:
1039:
1040:
1041:
1042:
1043:
1044: \section*{Appendix B: $\overline{\rm MS}$ renormalization}
1045:
1046: It is useful to recall the well known one-loop renormalization
1047: in the $\overline{\rm MS}$-scheme.
1048: The bare quark mass $m_0$ and coupling constant $\alpha_0$
1049: are expressed through their renormalized values $m$
1050: and $\alpha_S$ in the renormalized amplitude $T^R$ . In addition,
1051: the renormalization of the quark and gluon wavefunctions
1052: has to be taken into account, which results in factors $Z_2$ and $Z_3$.
1053: The relation between the bare and physical coupling
1054: at one-loop order reads
1055: $$
1056: \alpha_0\,=\,\alpha\,\left[\,1\,+\,\frac 1{\epsilon}\,
1057: \beta_{\,0}\,\alpha\,+\,
1058: {\cal O}(\alpha^2)\,\right]\,\equiv \,
1059: \alpha\,+\,\alpha_0^{(1)}(\alpha),
1060: $$
1061: $$
1062: \beta_0\,=\,\frac{11}{3}N_c\,-\,\frac 23 n_f.
1063: $$
1064: %For adjoint quarks $\beta_0=7/3N_c$.
1065: Similarly
1066: $$
1067: Z_{2,3}\,=\,1\,+\,Z_{2,3}^{(1)},
1068: $$
1069: where $Z_{2,3}^{(1)}$ are given by the first-order
1070: corrections to the quark and gluon propagators.
1071: The correction to the bare quark mass,
1072: $$
1073: m_0(m)\,=\,m\,+\,m_0^{(1)}(m)\,=\,m\,+\,\Sigma(m),
1074: $$
1075: is determined by the first-order quark self energy $\Sigma(\slash p)$.
1076: With these factors included, the first-order amplitude
1077: takes the form
1078: $$
1079: T^R\,=\,T^{\rm one-loop}(\alpha_0,m_0)\,
1080: +\,\bigl[Z_2^{(1)}+Z_3^{(1)}+m_0^{(1)}(m)
1081: +\alpha_0^{(1)}(\alpha)\bigr]\,T^{\rm Born}.
1082: $$
1083:
1084: The quark one-loop self energy reads
1085: $$
1086: \Sigma(\hat p)\,=\,-\,\frac {\alpha_S}{4\pi}\,\Gamma\biggl(2-\frac D2\biggr)
1087: \int_0^1dx\,\bigl[Dm\,+\,\overline x(2-D)\slash p\,\bigr]
1088: \left(\frac{-x\overline x p^2+x m^2+\overline x m_g^2}{4\pi \mu^2 e^\gamma}
1089: \right)^{\frac D2-2},
1090: $$
1091: where $\overline x \equiv 1-x$ and $\gamma$ is
1092: Euler constant. As a result
1093: $$
1094: \Sigma(m)\,=\,-\frac {\alpha_S}{4\pi}\,m\,C_F\,\bigl(3C_\epsilon+4\bigr)
1095: +{\cal O}(\epsilon),
1096: $$
1097: $$
1098: Z_2^{(1)}\,=\,-\left.\frac{\partial\Sigma}{\partial p}\right|_{p=m}\,=\,
1099: -\frac
1100: {\alpha_S}{4\pi}\,C_F\,\bigl(C_\epsilon+4-2\ln\frac{m^2}{m_g^2}\bigr)
1101: +{\cal O}(\epsilon).
1102: $$
1103:
1104: The gluon polarization operator in Feynman gauge,
1105: $$
1106: \Pi^{\mu \nu}(p)\,=\,
1107: \bigl(g^{\mu \nu}p^2-p^\mu p^\nu\bigr)\,\pi(p^2),
1108: $$
1109: reads to one-loop order
1110: % $$
1111: % \pi(p^2)\,=\,\frac{\alpha_S}{4\pi}N_c\,\frac{(3D-2)}{2(D-1)}
1112: % \frac{\Gamma^2(\frac D2-1)}{\Gamma(D-2)}
1113: % \Gamma(2-\frac D2)\left(-\frac{p^2}{4\pi \mu^2 e^\gamma}
1114: % \right)^{\frac D2 -2},
1115: % $$
1116: $$
1117: \pi(p^2)\,=\,\frac{\alpha_S}{4\pi}\,
1118: \frac{\Gamma^2(\frac D2-1)}{\Gamma(D-2)}
1119: \Gamma(2-\frac D2)\left(-\frac{p^2}{4\pi \mu^2 e^\gamma}
1120: \right)^{\frac D2 -2}
1121: \left[N_c\frac{3D-2}{2(D-1)}-n_f\frac{(D-2)}{D-1}\right].
1122: $$
1123: With $D=4+2\epsilon$, one gets
1124: $$
1125: Z_3^{(1)}\,=\,\pi(p^2)\,=\,\frac{\alpha_S}{4\pi}\,
1126: \biggl[N_c\,\left(\frac 53 C_\epsilon+
1127: \frac 53\ln\frac{m^2}{-p^2}+\frac {31}{9}\right)
1128: \,\biggr.
1129: $$
1130: $$
1131: -\biggl.\,\frac 12 n_f\,\left(\frac 43 C_\epsilon+\frac 43\ln\frac{m^2}{-p^2}
1132: + \frac{20}{9}\right)\,+\,{\cal O}(\epsilon)\biggr].
1133: $$
1134:
1135:
1136: \thebibliography{99}
1137:
1138: \bibitem{KMR} V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin,
1139: Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C14} (2000) 525.
1140: \bibitem{KMRpr} V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Eur. Phys. J.
1141: {\bf C23} (2002) 311.
1142: \bibitem{DKMOR} A.~De~Roeck, V.A.~Khoze, A.D.~Martin, R.~Orava and
1143: M.G.~Ryskin, Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C25} (2002) 391.
1144: %\bibitem{KMRpl} V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin, M.G. Ryskin,
1145: % Phys. Lett. B401 (1997) 330;
1146: %Eur. Phys. J. C14 (2000) 525,\\
1147: \bibitem{jf}for recent reviews see J.R.~Forshaw,
1148: PoS {\bf DIFF2006} (2006) 055
1149: [arXiv:hep-ph/0611274]; \\
1150: V.A.~Khoze, M.G.~Ryskin and A.D.~Martin,
1151: %``Insight into new physics with tagged forward protons at the LHC,''
1152: %\href{http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?irn=7738005}{SPIRES entry}
1153: {\it in} Hamburg 2007, Blois07, Forward physics and QCD, p.452; arXiv:0705.2314[hep-ph]; \\
1154: C. Royon, arXiv:0805.0261[hep-ph]; and references therein.
1155: \bibitem{KKMRext} A.B.~Kaidalov, V.A.~Khoze, A.D.~Martin and M.G.~Ryskin,
1156: Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C33} (2004) 261.
1157: \bibitem{hkrstw}S.~Heinemeyer et al.,
1158: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ {\bf C53} (2008) 231.
1159: \bibitem{clp} B.~Cox, F.~Loebinger and A.~Pilkington,
1160: %``Detecting Higgs bosons in the bb decay channel using forward proton tagging
1161: %at the LHC,''
1162: JHEP {\bf 0710} (2007) 090.
1163: \bibitem{fghpp}J.R.~Forshaw, J.F.~Gunion, L.~Hodgkinson, A.~Papaefstathiou and A.D.~Pilkington,
1164: %``Reinstating the 'no-lose' theorem for NMSSM Higgs discovery at the LHC,''
1165: arXiv:0712.3510 [hep-ph].
1166: \bibitem{LOI} M.~Albrow et al.,
1167: CERN-LHCC-2005-025; arXiv:0806.0302[hep-ex].
1168: \bibitem{cox} B.E.~Cox,
1169: arXiv:hep-ph/0609209.
1170: \bibitem{Liverpool} V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin,
1171: arXiv:hep-ph/0006005, {\it in} Proc. of 8th Int. Workshop on Deep
1172: Inelastic Scattering and QCD (DIS2000), Liverpool, ed. by J.Gracey,
1173: T.Greenshaw (World Scientific, 2001), p.592.
1174: \bibitem{KMRJz}V.A. Khoze, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin,
1175: Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C19} (2001) 477;
1176: ibid {\bf C20} (2001) 599 (Erratum).
1177: \bibitem{FKM} V.S. Fadin, V.A. Khoze and A.D. Martin, Phys. Rev.
1178: {\bf D56} (1997) 484.
1179:
1180: \bibitem{krs}V.A.~Khoze, M.G.~Ryskin and W.J.~Stirling,
1181: %``On radiative QCD backgrounds to exclusive H --> b anti-b production at the
1182: %LHC and a photon collider,''
1183: Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C48} (2006) 477 [arXiv:hep-ph/0607134].
1184: \bibitem{BKSO}D.L.~Borden, V.A.~Khoze, W.J.~Stirling and J.~Ohnemus,
1185: %``Three Jet Final States And Measuring The Gamma Gamma Width Of The Higgs At
1186: %A Photon Linear Collider,''
1187: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D50}, 4499 (1994)
1188:
1189: \bibitem{mhv1} S.J.~Parke and T.R.~Taylor,
1190: %``An Amplitude For N Gluon Scattering,''
1191: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 56} (1986) 2459.\\
1192: F.A.~Berends and W.T.~Giele,
1193: %``Recursive Calculations For Processes With N Gluons,''
1194: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B306} (1988) 759.
1195:
1196: \bibitem{MP}
1197: M.L.~Mangano and S.J.~Parke,
1198: %``Multiparton Amplitudes In Gauge Theories,''
1199: Phys.\ Rept.\ {\bf 200} (1991) 301.
1200:
1201: \bibitem{insight} V.A.~Khoze, A.D.~Martin and M.G.~Ryskin,
1202: %``Insight into double-pomeron-exchange Higgs production and backgrounds,''
1203: Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B650}, 41 (2007).
1204: \bibitem{BBDM} W.A.~Bardeen, A.J.~Buras, D.W.~Duke and T.~Muta, Phys.\
1205: Rev. {\bf D18} (1978) 3998.
1206:
1207: \bibitem{JT} G. Jikia and A. Tkabladze, Phys. Rev. {\bf D54}
1208: (1996) 2030
1209:
1210: \bibitem{MS} M. Melles and W.J. Stirling, Phys. Rev. {\bf D59}
1211: (1999) 094009; Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C9} (1999) 101; Nucl. Phys. {\bf B564} (2000)
1212: 325.
1213:
1214: \bibitem{MSK} M. Melles, W.J. Stirling and V.A. Khoze, Phys. Rev.
1215: {\bf D61} (2000) 054015.
1216: %
1217: %
1218: \bibitem{Sud} V.V. Sudakov, Sov. Phys. JETP {\bf 3}
1219: (1956) 65.
1220: \bibitem{soft} V.A.~Khoze, A.D.~Martin and M.G.~Ryskin,
1221: %``Soft diffraction and the elastic slope at Tevatron and LHC energies: A
1222: %multi-pomeron approach,''
1223: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ {\bf C18} (2000) 167;\\
1224: M.G.~Ryskin, A.D.~Martin and V.A.~Khoze,
1225: %``Soft diffraction at the LHC: a partonic interpretation,''
1226: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 54} (2008) 199.
1227:
1228: \bibitem{klf} E.A.~Kuraev, L.N.~Lipatov and V.S.~Fadin,
1229: %``On The Pomeranchuk Singularity In Asymptotically Free Theories,''
1230: Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B60} (1975) 50;\\
1231: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B60,50;%%
1232: %\bibitem{adrian} Adrian $T_2$ = non-zero\\
1233: %Z.Bern, L.J.Dixon, D.C.Dunbar, D.A.Kosower, Nucl. Phys. B435 (1995)
1234: %59,\\
1235: %A.Brandhuber, S.McNamara, B.J.Spence, G.Travaglini, JHEP 0510 (2005)
1236: %011.
1237: I.I.~Balitsky, L.N.~Lipatov and V.S.~Fadin,
1238: %``Regge Processes In Nonabelian Gauge Theories. (In Russian),''
1239: %\href{http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?irn=645265}{SPIRES entry}
1240: {\it in} Proceedings, Physics of Elementary Particles, Leningrad 1979, p.109.
1241:
1242: \bibitem {adr} Z.~Kunszt, A.~Signer and Z.~Trocsanyi,
1243: %``One loop helicity amplitudes for all 2 $\to$ 2 processes in QCD and N=1
1244: %supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory,''
1245: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B411} (1994) 397.
1246: \bibitem{ng}C. Anastasiou, E.W.N. Glover, C. Oleari, M.E. Tejeda-Yeomans,
1247: % TWO LOOP QCD CORRECTIONS TO MASSLESS QUARK
1248: %GLUON SCATTERING.
1249: Nucl. Phys. {\bf B605} (2001) 486;\\
1250: C.~Anastasiou, E.W.N.~Glover, M.E.~Tejeda-Yeomans,
1251: % TWO LOOP QED AND QCD CORRECTIONS TO MASSLESS FERMION BOSON
1252: % SCATTERING.
1253: Nucl. Phys. {\bf B629} (2002) 255.
1254:
1255: \bibitem{KMRMR} M.A. Kimber, A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Phys. Rev. {\bf D63} (2001) 144027,\\
1256: A.D. Martin and M.G. Ryskin, Phys. Rev. {\bf D64} (2001) 094017.
1257:
1258: %\bibitem{Way} A.De Roeck, V.A.Khoze, A.D.Martin, R.Orava, M.G.Ryskin,
1259: %Eur. Phys. J. C25 (2002) 391.
1260:
1261: \end{document}
1262:
1263:
1264: --------------010600030601060507020609--
1265:
1266:
1267:
1268:
1269:
1270:
1271: