1: \documentclass[superscriptaddress,showpacs,prd,floatfix]{revtex4}
2: \usepackage{times}
3: \usepackage[reqno,tbtags]{amsmath}
4: \usepackage{epsfig}
5: %\usepackage{timestamp}
6: %\usepackage{axodraw}
7: \usepackage{color} %\colorbox{yellow}{So what}
8: %\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
9: %\usepackage[normalem]{ulem} %emphasize weiterhin kursiv
10: %\usepackage {ulem} %\emph{Text}: Text wird unterstrichen \sout{gestrichen}
11: \usepackage{graphicx,psfrag}
12: %\numberwithin{equation}{section}
13: \raggedbottom
14: \allowdisplaybreaks
15: %\setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}
16: %-
17: \textheight=23.5truecm
18: \textwidth=15.5truecm
19: \topmargin -1cm
20: \oddsidemargin -0.0cm % default
21: %
22: \newcommand{\nn}{\noindent}
23: \newcommand{\nl}{\nonumber \\}
24: %
25: \def \litwo {{\rm{Li_2}}}
26: \def \litri {{\rm{Li_3}}}
27: \def \lin {{\rm{Li_n}}}
28:
29: \newcommand{\bq}{\begin{equation}}
30: \newcommand{\eq}{\end{equation}}
31: \newcommand{\ba}{\begin{eqnarray}}
32: \newcommand{\ea}{\end{eqnarray}}
33: \begin{document}
34: %--
35: \vspace{1cm}
36: %--------- above is old -------------------------------%
37: \begin{flushleft}
38: {\tt
39: \noindent
40: DESY 08-101 \hfill % \timestamp
41: \\
42: PITHA 08-18
43: \\
44: }
45: \end{flushleft}
46:
47:
48: \bigskip
49:
50: \title{%
51: Virtual Hadronic and Heavy-Fermion
52: ${\cal O}(\alpha^2)$ Corrections
53: to Bhabha Scattering
54: }
55: \author{Stefano Actis}
56: \affiliation{Institut f\"ur Theoretische Physik E, RWTH Aachen University,
57: D-52056 Aachen, Germany}
58: \email{actis@physik.rwth-aachen.de,mczakon@yahoo.com,gluza@us.edu.pl,Tord.Riemann@desy.de}
59: \author{Micha{\l} Czakon}
60: \affiliation{Institut f\"ur Theoretische Physik und Astrophysik, Universit\"at W\"urzburg,
61: Am Hubland, D-97074 W\"urzburg, Germany}
62: \affiliation{Institute of Physics, University of
63: Silesia, Uniwersytecka 4, PL-40-007 Katowice, Poland }
64: \author{Janusz Gluza}
65: \affiliation{Institute of Physics, University of
66: Silesia, Uniwersytecka 4, PL-40-007 Katowice, Poland }
67: \author{Tord Riemann}
68: \affiliation{DESY, Platanenallee 6, 15738 Zeuthen, Germany}
69: \begin{abstract}
70: Effects of vacuum polarization by hadronic and heavy-fermion insertions were the last unknown two-loop QED
71: corrections to high-energy Bhabha scattering and have been first announced in \cite{Actis:2007fs}.
72: %
73: Here we describe the corrections in detail and explore their numerical influence.
74: The hadronic contributions to the virtual ${\cal O}(\alpha^2)$ QED corrections
75: to the Bhabha-scattering cross-section are evaluated using dispersion
76: relations and computing the convolution of hadronic data with
77: perturbatively calculated kernel functions.
78: %
79: The technique of dispersion integrals is also employed to derive the virtual ${\cal O}(\alpha^2)$ corrections
80: generated by muon-, tau- and top-quark loops in the small
81: electron-mass limit for arbitrary values of the internal-fermion masses.
82: %
83: At a meson factory with 1 GeV center-of-mass energy the complete effect of hadronic and heavy-fermion
84: corrections amounts to less than 0.5 per mille and reaches, at 10 GeV,
85: up to about 2 per mille.
86: At the $Z$ resonance it amounts to 2.3 per mille at 3 degrees; overall, hadronic corrections
87: are less than 4 per mille.
88: For ILC energies (500 GeV or above), the combined effect of hadrons and heavy fermions becomes 6 per mille at
89: 3 degrees; hadrons contribute less than 20 per mille in the whole angular region.
90: \end{abstract}
91:
92: \pacs{11.15.Bt, 12.20.Ds} % General properties of perturbation theory,QED,Specific calculations
93:
94: \maketitle
95: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
96: \section{\label{sec-introduction} INTRODUCTION}
97: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
98: Elastic $e^{+}e^{-}$ scattering, or Bhabha scattering,
99: \begin{equation}\label{bhabhamomenta}
100: e^-\,(p_1) \, + \,
101: e^+\,(p_2) \, \to \,
102: e^-\,(p_3) \, + \, e^+\,(p_4)\,
103: ,
104: %+ \, \gamma\,(k)
105: \end{equation}
106: was one of the first scattering processes that were observed and predicted in quantum mechanics \cite{Bhabha:1936xx}.
107: It has a unique and clean experimental signature.
108: The accuracy of theoretical predictions profits from its purely leptonic external particle content and from the extremely small electron mass.
109: The first complete one-loop prediction in the Standard Model was \cite{Consoli:1979xw},
110: the first $O(\alpha)$ predictions in the Standard Model with account of hard bremsstrahlung were
111: determined in \cite{%
112: Consoli:1982ib,Caffo:1984jb,%
113: Bohm:1984yt,%
114: Tobimatsu:1985pp,Tobimatsu:1985vd,%%
115: Bohm:1986fg%
116: },
117: the effects from hadronic vacuum polarization were first studied in
118: \cite{Berends:1987jm},
119: and the leading NNLO corrections from the top quark in \cite{Bardin:1990xe}.
120: The complete electroweak two-loop corrections are available in form of few form factors \cite{Awramik:2003rn,Awramik:2006uz}, but they are not implemented for Bhabha scattering so far.
121: During the years, a rich literature on the subject arose, both concerning QED Monte Carlo results and virtual electroweak corrections; see
122: \cite{%
123: Berends:1976zn,%
124: Berends:1983fs,%
125: Berends:1984ge,%Bohm:1984yt,%
126: Greco:1986dc,%
127: Kuroda:1987yi,Karlen:1987vk,%
128: %
129: Aversa:1990ek,Fujimoto:1990tb,%
130: %
131: Caffo:1991cg,Cacciari:1991rm,Cacciari:1991qy,Beenakker:1991es,Beenakker:1991mb,Aversa:1991rw,Riemann:1991ga,%
132: %
133: Fadin:1992uem,Bjoerkevoll:1992cu,%
134: Bardin:1992jc,%
135: %
136: Montagna:1993py,Caffo:1993hc,Fujimoto:1993qh,%
137: %
138: Caffo:1994dm,Caffo:1994fy,Fadin:1994xe,%
139: %
140: Bjoerkevoll:1992uu,%
141: %
142: Field:1995dk,%
143: Cacciari:1995fq,%
144: Jadach:1995nk,%
145: Arbuzov:1995qd,Arbuzov:1995vi,Arbuzov:1995vj,Arbuzov:1995ix,%
146: %
147: Caffo:1996vi,Caffo:1996mi,Arbuzov:1996jj,Arbuzov:1996su,Arbuzov:1996qb,Arbuzov:1996zp,%
148: Jadach:1996md,Jadach:1996is,Jadach:1996gu,Jadach:1996hy,%
149: %
150: Beenakker:1997fi,Caffo:1997yy,%
151: Arbuzov:1997pj,Merenkov:1997zm,%
152: %
153: Arbuzov:1998du,%
154: Montagna:1998vb,Arbuzov:1998ax,%
155: %
156: Bardin:1999yd,Arbuzov:1999db,Placzek:1999xc,Jadach:1999tr,%
157: Montagna:1999tf,%
158: CarloniCalame:1999aw,Antonelli:1999pe,%
159: %
160: CarloniCalame:2000pz,%
161: %
162: Battaglia:2001dg,CarloniCalame:2001ny,Karlen:2001hw,%
163: %
164: Ward:2002qq,%
165: %
166: Jadach:2003zr,%
167: %
168: Arbuzov:2004wp,Fleischer:2004ah,Gluza:2004tq,Lorca:2004dk,%
169: %
170: Arbuzov:2005pt,Arbuzov:2005ma,%
171: %
172: Arbuzov:2006mu,Balossini:2006sd,Balossini:2006wc,Fleischer:2006ht%
173: }, and also the references therein.
174:
175: Quite recently, an experimental precision at the per mille level or beyond seems feasible both at meson factories and in the ILC (and GigaZ) project \cite{moenig:sfb2005,denig:sfb2005,trentadue:sfb2005,jadach:sfb2005a,%
176: Balossini:2007zz,Balossini:2008ht}.
177: As a reaction to that, a program of systematic evaluation of the complete next-to-next-to leading order (NNLO) contributions was emerging
178: \cite{Smirnov:2001cm,Bern:2000ie,Glover:2001ev,%
179: Bonciani:2003ai,Bonciani:2003cj,Bonciani:2003te,%
180: Bonciani:2004qt,Czakon:2004tg,Czakon:2004wm,Heinrich:2004iq,%
181: penin:2005kf,Penin:2005eh,%
182: Bonciani:2005im,Czakon:2005gi,%
183: Bonciani:2006qu,Czakon:2006pa,%
184: Mitov:2006xs,Actis:2006dj,%
185: Becher:2007cu,%
186: Actis:2007fs,Actis:2007gi,Actis:2007pn,Actis:2007pn2,Bonciani:2007eh,Fleischer:2007ph,%
187: Bonciani:2008ep%
188: }.
189:
190: In this article, we extensively describe the evaluation of the last building block of QED two-loop corrections, namely the corrections from heavy fermions and hadronic vacuum polarization.
191: Note that the latter result
192: has been confirmed very recently in~\cite{Kuhn:2008zs} (upon using the same parametrisation of
193: the vacuum polarization, the agreement between the two studies is perfect, 5 digits for the ${\cal O}(\alpha^4)$
194: NNLO terms).
195: %\footnote{A short communication of the results was reported in \cite{Actis:2007fs}.}.
196: Both for reasons of completeness and in order to ensure easy comparisons,
197: we will also include in the discussion the $N_f=1$ corrections which consist of purely photonic corrections and electron loop insertions, the soft bremsstrahlung and soft electron pair emission corrections.
198: All the two-loop contributions are calculated in our numerical Fortran package \texttt{bhbhnnlohf.F} and will be made available at the webpage \cite{webPage:2007xx}.
199:
200:
201: The organization of the paper is as follows.
202: In Section~\ref{sec:1} we introduce notations and the Born cross-section.
203: Section~\ref{sec:pi-vac} collects the known facts on pure vacuum-polarization corrections as they will be used,
204: and Section~\ref{sec-vac} the pure self-energy corrections to the cross-section.
205: Section~\ref{sec-irred-vert} contains the irreducible vertex corrections and
206: Section~\ref{sec-IR} the various infrared divergent corrections, including reducible corrections, soft-photon emission and the most complicated ones from the irreducible two-loop box diagrams.
207: The three kernel functions for the latter have been evaluated for the first time.
208: Section~\ref{sec:NumericalResults} contains a discussion of numerical effects at a variety of energies, typical of meson factories, LEP, ILC.
209: In the Summary we will also point to potential further research.
210: Appendices \ref{app:pho} to \ref{app-polylog} are devoted to technical details of fermionic vacuum polarization, one-loop master integrals, soft real bremsstrahlung, real pair emission, the evaluation of the hadronic cross-section ratio $R_{\rm had}$,
211: and on our evaluation of complex polylogarithms.
212: Some Mathematica files of potential public interest and the Fortran package are available at the webpage \cite{webPage:2007xx}.
213: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
214: \section{\label{sec:1}THE BORN CROSS-SECTION}
215: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
216: The QED tree-level differential Bhabha-scattering
217: cross section with respect to the solid angle $\Omega$,
218: %in Born approximation,
219: in the kinematic region $m_e^2 \ll s,|t|,|u|$, is:
220: \begin{eqnarray}\label{born}
221: \frac{d\sigma_0}{d\Omega} &=&
222: \frac{\alpha^2}{2s} \left\lbrace \frac{v_1(s,t)}{s^2} + 2 \frac{v_2(s,t)}{st}+\frac{v_1(t,s)}{t^2}\right\rbrace\nonumber
223: \\
224: &=& \frac{\alpha^2}{s} \left(\frac{s}{t}+1+\frac{t}{s} \right)^2 .% + {\cal O}(m_e^2) + {\cal O}(m_e^2)
225: \end{eqnarray}
226: Here, $\alpha$ is the fine-structure constant~\cite{Eidelman:2004},
227: \begin{eqnarray}
228: \label{alpha}
229: \alpha &=& 1/137.035 999 679(94),
230: \end{eqnarray}
231: and
232: \begin{eqnarray}\label{v1v2}
233: % v_1(x,y,\epsilon) &=&x^2 + 2 y^2 + 2 x y - \epsilon x^2
234: v_1(x,y) &=&x^2 + 2 y^2 + 2 x y ,
235: \\
236: %v_2(x,y,\epsilon) &=&(x + y)^2 - \epsilon (x^2 + y^2 + x y)
237: v_2(x,y) &=&(x + y)^2 .
238: \end{eqnarray}
239: %--
240: The cross-section depends on the Mandelstam invariants $s$, $t$ and $u$, which are related
241: to $E$, the incoming-particle energy in the center-of-mass frame,
242: and $\theta$, the scattering angle:%, and $m_e$, the electron mass, by
243: %--
244: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Mandelstam}
245: s &=& \left( p_1+p_2 \right)^2 =\, 4 \, E^2, \nonumber\\
246: t &=& \left( p_1-p_3 \right)^2 =\, -\,4 \, E^2 %-m_e^2\right)
247: \,\sin^2 \left(\frac{\theta}{2}\right),\nonumber\\
248: u &=& \left( p_1-p_4 \right)^2 =\, -\,4 \, E^2 %-m_e^2\right)
249: \,\cos^2 \left(\frac{\theta}{2}\right),
250: \end{eqnarray}
251: %--
252: where
253: \begin{eqnarray}\label{stu}
254: s\,+\,t\,+\,u\,=\,0. %4\,m_e^2.
255: \end{eqnarray}
256:
257: %In Appendix~\ref{app-ew} we introduce additionally the complete electroweak Born cross-section.
258: %This will be needed only at LEP 1 energies for a proper normalization of the corrections.
259: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
260:
261: %\clearpage
262: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
263: %\section{ELECTROWEAK BORN CROSS-SECTION}
264: %\label{app-ew}
265: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
266: For the numerical estimates at higher energies, it is reasonable to normalize the higher order corrections to the complete electroweak effective Born cross-section:
267: \begin{eqnarray}\label{ewborn}
268: \frac{d \sigma_{ew}}{d \Omega} &=& \frac{\alpha^2}{4s}\left(T_s+T_{st}+T_t \right) ,
269: \end{eqnarray}
270: with
271: \begin{eqnarray}
272: T_s &=& (1+\cos^2\theta ) \left[ 1 + 2 \text{Re} \chi(s) \left( v^2\right) + |\chi(s)|^2\left(1+v^2 \right)^2 \right]
273: + 2 \cos\theta \left[ 2 \text{Re} \chi(s) + |\chi(s)|^2\left(4v^2 \right) \right] ,
274: \\
275: T_{st} &=&
276: -2\frac{(1+\cos\theta)^2}{(1-\cos\theta)} \left\lbrace 1 + [ \chi(t)+ \text{Re}\chi(s)] \left( 1+v^2\right) +
277: \chi(t) \text{Re}\chi(s)\left[(1+v^2)^2+4v^2\right] \right\rbrace ,
278: \\
279: T_t &=& 2~\frac{(1+\cos\theta)^2}{(1-\cos\theta)^2} \left\lbrace 1 + 2 \chi(t) \left( 1+v^2\right) + \chi(t)^2\left[(1+v^2)^2 +4v^2 \right] \right\rbrace
280: \nonumber\\
281: && + ~\frac{8}{(1-\cos\theta)^2} \left[ 1- \chi(t) \left(1-v^2\right)\right]^2 .
282: \end{eqnarray}
283: We choose the following conventions:
284: \begin{eqnarray}
285: v&=& 1-4 s_w^2,
286: \\
287: %a&=&1,
288: %\\
289: \chi(s) &=& \frac{G_{F}}{\sqrt{2}} \frac{M_Z^2}{8\pi \alpha} \frac{s}{s-M_Z^2+i M_Z \Gamma_Z},
290: \\
291: \chi(t) &=& \frac{G_{F}}{\sqrt{2}} \frac{M_Z^2}{8\pi \alpha} \frac{t}{t-M_Z^2}.
292: \end{eqnarray}
293: %(remember that $t<0$)
294: Among the quantities $\alpha, G_{F}, s_w^2, M_Z$ there are only three independent, and $\Gamma_Z$ is predicted by the theory as well.
295: The phrasing \emph{effective Born cross-section} means here that we use, besides $\alpha$ (introduced in (\ref{alpha})), the following input variables:
296: \begin{eqnarray}
297: s_w^2 &=& 0.23,
298: \\
299: M_Z &=& 91.188 \mathrm{~ GeV},
300: \\
301: \Gamma_Z &=& 2.495 \mathrm{~ GeV},
302: \\
303: G_{F} &=& 1.16637 \times 10^{-5} \mathrm{~ GeV}^{-2}.
304: \end{eqnarray}
305: The values are, in a strict sense, related in the Standard Model, and may be determined e.g. by using the package ZFITTER \cite{Bardin:1999yd,Arbuzov:2005ma}.
306: Here, we took them from \cite{Eidelman:2004}.
307:
308: We may now estimate the relevance of the $Z$-boson exchange to Bhabha scattering in different kinematic regions of interest.
309: It is minor at smallest energies where $s,|t|<<M_Z^2$, because there $\chi(x) \sim x/M_Z^2<<1, x=s,t$.
310: The strength of the $Z$ exchange amplitude, relative to the photon exchange, becomes at large $s,|t|$ asymptotically:
311: \begin{eqnarray}
312: \frac{G_{F}}{\sqrt{2}} \frac{M_Z^2}{8\pi \alpha}&=& 0.3739.
313: \end{eqnarray}
314: The other scale of relevance here is the ratio of photon propagators in the $s$- and $t$-channels:
315: \begin{eqnarray}
316: \frac{s}{t} &=& -~\frac{2}{1-\cos\theta}.
317: \end{eqnarray}
318: In fact, at meson factory energies, the electroweak Born cross-section agrees with the QED prediction within few per mille, and at LEP2 or the ILC within better than 50 \%,
319: while at LEP1 or at GigaZ the ratio may become bigger than 25; this happens of course only for large scattering angles.
320: At small angles, the corrections may safely be normalized to the QED Born cross-section everywhere.
321: The gross features are illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:rat-SA2} for large and small angle Bhabha scattering.
322: For large angles, we show the cross-section ratio separately for LEP1/GigaZ and the ILC in Figure~\ref{fig:rat-LA}.
323: We conclude that only for large angles at LEP 1 energies it is better to relate the corrections from higher order contributions to the weak Born prediction, while for all other kinematics one may use the simple QED Born cross-section.
324:
325: \begin{figure}[t]
326: \centering
327: % production of figs see: bhabha-Z-resonance.nb
328: \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{bhabha-Z-resonance-test-Fig2.eps}
329:
330: \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{bhabha-Z-resonance-test-Fig3.eps}
331: \caption[Ratio of electroweak to QED Bhabha scattering cross-section at large
332: and small angles as a function of $\sqrt{s}$.]
333: {\em Ratio of electroweak to QED Bhabha scattering cross-section at large angles (up)
334: and small angles (down) as a function of $\sqrt{s}$.}
335: \label{fig:rat-SA2}
336: \end{figure}
337:
338: % Figures from mathematica file: bhabha-Z-resonance.nb (23 05 2008)
339: \begin{figure}[t]
340: \centering
341: \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{bhabha-Z-resonance-test-Fig1.eps}
342:
343: \includegraphics[scale=0.8]{bhabha-Z-resonance-test-Fig4.eps}
344: \caption[Ratio of electroweak to QED Bhabha scattering cross-section at large angles in the energy ranges of LEP 1 and ILC.]
345: {\em Ratio of electroweak to QED Bhabha scattering cross-section at large angles in the energy ranges of LEP1/GigaZ (up) and ILC (down).}
346: \label{fig:rat-LA}
347: \end{figure}
348:
349: %================================================================================
350: \section{\label{sec:pi-vac}THE VACUUM POLARIZATION}
351: %================================================================================
352: Higher-order fermionic corrections to the Bhabha-scattering cross
353: section can be obtained inserting the renormalized irreducible photon
354: vacuum-polarization function, $\Pi$, in the appropriate virtual-photon propagator,
355: %--
356: \begin{equation}
357: \label{1stReplace}
358: \frac{g_{\mu\nu}}{q^2+i\, \delta} \, \to \,
359: \frac{g_{\mu\alpha}}{q^2+i\, \delta} \,
360: \left( q^2\, g^{\alpha\beta} - q^\alpha\, q^\beta \right) \,\Pi(q^2)\,
361: \frac{g_{\beta\nu}}{q^2+i\, \delta}.
362: \end{equation}
363: %--
364: Here $q$ is the momentum carried by the virtual photon,
365: $\delta\to 0_+$.
366: The vacuum polarization
367: $\Pi$ can be represented by the once-subtracted dispersion integral \cite{Cabibbo:1961sz}:
368: %--
369: \begin{equation}
370: \label{DispInt}
371: \Pi(q^2) =
372: - \frac{q^2}{\pi} \,
373: \int_{4 M^2}^{\infty} \, d z \,
374: \frac{\text{Im} \, \Pi(z)}{z} \,
375: \frac{1}{q^2-z+i\, \delta},
376: \end{equation}
377: %--
378: where the appropriate production threshold for the intermediate state in $\Pi$ is located at $q^2=4M^2$.
379: We leave as understood the subtraction at $q^2=0$ for the renormalized photon
380: self-energy.
381:
382: Contributions to $\Pi$ arising from leptons and the top quark can be
383: computed directly in perturbation theory, setting $M=m_f$
384: in Eq.~\eqref{DispInt}, where $m_f$ is the mass of the fermion
385: appearing in the loop, and inserting the imaginary part of the analytic
386: result for $\Pi$.
387:
388: We have at one-loop accuracy:
389: %--
390: \begin{eqnarray}
391: \label{Im}
392: \text{Im}\, \Pi_f(z) =
393: &&-~ \left(\frac{\alpha}{\pi}\right)\, F_\epsilon\,
394: \left(\frac{m_e^2}{m_f^2}\right)^\epsilon\,Q_f^2\, C_f\,
395: \theta\left( z-4\,m_f^2\right)\,
396: \frac{\pi}{3} \,
397: \Bigl\{\,
398: \frac{\beta_f(z)}{2} \, \Bigl[\,3-\beta_f^2(z)\,\Bigr]
399: \nonumber\\
400: &&+~ \epsilon\,\beta_f(z)\,
401: \Bigl[\, 3
402: + \frac{3}{2}
403: L_{\beta_f}(z)\,
404: - \, \frac{4}{3}\, \beta_f^2(z)
405: - \frac{\beta_f^2(z)}{2}\,
406: L_{\beta_f}(z)\,
407: \Bigr] \, \Bigr\}
408: +{\cal O}(\alpha^2),
409: \end{eqnarray}
410: %--
411: where $Q_f$ is the electric charge, $Q_f=-1$ for leptons,
412: $Q_f= 2\slash 3$ for up-type quarks and $Q_f=-1\slash 3$ for down-type
413: quarks, and $C_f$ is the color factor, $C_f=1$ for
414: leptons and $C_f=3$ for quarks. In addition, we have introduced
415: the $\theta$ function, $\theta(x)=1$ for $x \geq 0$ and $\theta(x)=0$ for $x<0$,
416: and the threshold factor,
417: %--
418: \begin{eqnarray}
419: \beta_f(z)&=&\sqrt{1-4\,\frac{m_f^2}{z}},
420: \\%\qquad
421: L_{\beta_f}(z)&=&\ln\left(\frac{1-\beta_f^2(z)}{4\,\beta_f^2(z)}\right).
422: \end{eqnarray}
423: %--
424: The overall regularization-dependent factor reads as
425: %--
426: \begin{equation}
427: \label{norm}
428: F_\epsilon =
429: \left( \frac{ m_e^2\, \pi\, e^{\gamma_E} }{\mu^2} \right)^{-\epsilon},
430: \end{equation}
431: %--
432: where $\mu$ is the 't Hooft mass unit and $\gamma_E$ is the
433: Euler-Mascheroni constant.
434:
435: The inclusion of the ${\cal O}(\epsilon)$ terms in Eq.~\eqref{Im} deserves a comment.
436: These terms might play a role when combining $\text{Im}\, \Pi_f$ with a pole term of another one-loop insertion in a reducible two-loop Feynman diagram.
437: %In fact, the sum of these terms drops out.
438: The Bhabha-scattering cross section we are going to consider is an
439: infrared-finite quantity, provided one takes into account the real emission of soft photons.
440: Therefore, when summing up all contributions, the result does not
441: show any pole in the $\epsilon$ plane and all radiative corrections,
442: including the one-loop photon self-energy, can be evaluated
443: at ${\cal O}(\epsilon^0)$.
444: However, we retain the higher $\epsilon$ order
445: in Eq.~\eqref{Im} for comparing partial results with those of ~\cite{Actis:2007gi}.
446:
447: In contrast to leptons and the top quark, light-quark contributions get
448: modified by low-energy strong-interaction effects, which cannot be computed using
449: perturbative QCD.
450: However, these contributions can be evaluated
451: using the optical theorem~\cite{Cutkosky:1960sp}.
452: After relating $\text{Im} \, \Pi_{\rm had}$ to the
453: hadronic cross-section ratio $R_{\rm had}$~\cite{Cabibbo:1961sz},
454: %--
455: \begin{eqnarray}
456: \label{Rhad0}
457: \text{Im} \, \Pi_{\rm had}(z)&=&
458: - \frac{\alpha}{3} \, R_{\rm had}(z),
459: \\%\qquad
460: \label{Rhad}
461: R_{\rm had}(z) &=&
462: \frac{\sigma(\{e^+e^-\to\gamma^\star\to \text{hadrons}\};z)}
463: {(4 \pi \alpha^2)\slash (3z)},
464: \end{eqnarray}
465: %--
466: $\text{Im}~\Pi_{\rm had}$ can be obtained from the experimental data for $R_{\rm had}$
467: in the low-energy region and around hadronic resonances, and the perturbative-QCD
468: prediction in the remaining regions.
469: The lower integration boundary is given by $M=m_\pi$, where $m_\pi$ is the pion mass.
470: For self-energy corrections to Bhabha scattering at one-loop order this was first employed in \cite{Berends:1976zn}.
471: Two-loop applications, similar to our study, are the evaluation of the hadronic vertex correction \cite{Kniehl:1988id} and of two-loop hadronic corrections to the lifetime of the muon \cite{vanRitbergen:1998hn}.
472: The latter study faces quite similar technical problems to those met here, like the infrared divergency of single contributions and the existence of several scales.
473:
474: For the fermionic and hadronic corrections to Bhabha scattering at one-loop accuracy, there is only the \emph{self-energy diagram} shown in Fig.~\ref{OneLoop}(c).
475: %At two loop accuracy, there are a lot of \emph{reducible diagrams} composed of the one-loop insertions of Fig.~\ref{OneLoop}(c) and of all the one-loop topologies Fig.~\ref{OneLoop}(a-c).
476: The two-loop
477: \emph{irreducible} self-energy contributions have the topology shown in Fig.~\ref{OneLoop}(c).
478: % For ${\cal O}(\alpha^2)$ corrections, we simply have
479: %to insert the one-loop result for $\Pi$ into a given two-loop diagram.
480: One has additionally the four classes of \emph{two-loop diagrams} shown in Fig.~\ref{fig1}
481: The \emph{reducible} self-energy (Figure~\ref{fig1}(a)) and vertex (Figure~\ref{fig1}(b)) topologies are much easier to evaluate than the \emph{irreducible} vertex (Figure~\ref{fig1}(c)) and box (Figure~\ref{fig1}(d)) topologies.
482: In fact, only the two-loop boxes were unknown until quite recently.
483:
484: The two-loop corrections have to be added with the loop-by-loop contributions (the interferences of the topologies of Fig.~\ref{OneLoop}) and with the soft photon corrections.
485: All these terms will be discussed in the following sections.
486:
487: %--
488: \begin{figure}[bt]
489: \begin{center}
490: \includegraphics[scale=0.65]{OneLoop.eps}
491: \end{center}
492: \caption[The one-loop topologies for Bhabha scattering.]
493: {\em
494: The one-loop topologies for Bhabha scattering.
495: %Representative one-loop diagrams relevant for our computation.
496: The gray circle in (c) denotes the vacuum polarization under consideration, which may be understood to include fermionic and hadronic one- and two-loop irreducible self-energy corrections.}
497: \label{OneLoop}
498: \end{figure}
499:
500: %--
501: \begin{figure}[tbhp]
502: \begin{center}
503: \hfill
504: \includegraphics[scale=0.45]{topologiesA.eps}\hfill
505: \includegraphics[scale=0.45]{topologiesB.eps}\hfill
506: \includegraphics[scale=0.45]{topologiesC.eps}\hfill
507: \includegraphics[scale=0.45]{topologiesD.eps}\hfill
508: \end{center}
509: \caption[Two-loop topologies for Bhabha scattering with vacuum polarization insertions.]
510: {\em
511: %The new grafikks of JG for two-loop topologies for Bhabha scattering.
512: %Representative one-loop diagrams relevant for our computation.
513: Two-loop topologies for Bhabha scattering with vacuum polarization insertions:
514: reducible self-energy (a) and vertex (b) corrections as well as
515: irreducible vertex (c) and box (d) corrections;
516: for the irreducible self-energy corrections see Fig.~\ref{OneLoop}(c).}
517: \label{fig1}
518: \end{figure}
519:
520:
521: To summarize this section,
522: the hadronic and heavy-fermion corrections to the Bhabha-scattering cross section
523: can be obtained by replacing appropriately the photon propagator by a massive
524: propagator, whose effective mass $z$ is subsequently integrated over.
525: Inserting ~\eqref{DispInt} and ~\eqref{Rhad0} in ~\eqref{1stReplace} we get:
526: %--
527: \begin{equation}
528: \label{PropReplace}
529: \frac{g_{\mu\nu}}{q^2+i\, \delta} \,
530: \to\,
531: \frac{\alpha}{3 \pi}\,
532: \int_{4 M^2}^{\infty} \, d z \,
533: \frac{R(z)}{z}\,
534: \frac{1}{q^2-z+i\, \delta}\,
535: \left(\,
536: g_{\mu\nu} - \frac{q_\mu\, q_\nu}{q^2+i\, \delta}\,
537: \right).
538: \end{equation}
539: %--
540: In the following, we will call the massive propagator function in (\ref{PropReplace}) the self-energy kernel function:
541: \begin{eqnarray}\label{kse}
542: K_{\rm SE}(q^2; z) &=& \frac{1}{q^2-z+i\, \delta} .
543: \end{eqnarray}
544: The weight function
545: $R(z)$ is given by the sum of the non-perturbative light-quark component
546: of Eq.~\eqref{Rhad} and the perturbative result of Eq.~\eqref{Im},
547: valid for leptons, $f=e,\mu,\tau$, and the top quark, $f=t$:
548: %--
549: \begin{eqnarray}
550: \label{eq:finalR}
551: R(z)&=& R_{\rm had}^{(5)}(z) - \frac{3}{\alpha}\,\sum_{f=e,\mu,\tau,t} \,\text{Im}\,\Pi_f(z)
552: \nonumber\\
553: &=& R_{\rm had}^{(5)}(z) +\sum_{f=e,\mu,\tau,t}\,R_f(z;m_f),
554: \\
555: \label{rzmf}
556: R_f(z;m_f)&=&
557: Q_f^2\, C_f \,\left(1+2\, \frac{m_f^2}{z}\right)\,
558: \sqrt{1-4\,\frac{m_f^2}{z}}.
559: \end{eqnarray}
560: Compared to (\ref{Im}), we omit here the terms of order $O(\epsilon)$.
561: The function $R_{\rm had}^{(5)}(z)$ will be discussed in Appendix \ref{app:rhad}.
562:
563: Corrections related to electron insertions ($f = e$) will be discussed separately.
564: For pure self-energy insertions (see Appendix \ref{app:pho}), we may consider the electron mass as being small and neglect terms of order $O(m_e^2/x)$, $x=s,|t|,|u|$.
565: At the expense of that, even the three-loop corrections are known \cite{Steinhauser:1998rq}.
566: For two-loop irreducible vertex and box corrections, we may either consider $m_e$ being finite and treat a two-scale problem ($s/m_e^2, t/m_e^2$), or we may assume also here $m_e^2 << s,|t|,|u|$.
567: Instead, for the diagrams with self-energy insertions of other fermions $f$, we will assume $m_e^2 << m_f^2, s,|t|,|u|$, but we will make no additional assumption on $m_f^2$.
568: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
569: \section{\label{sec-vac}PURE SELF-ENERGY CORRECTIONS}
570: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
571: The pure vacuum polarization contributions to Bhabha scattering form a gauge invariant subset of diagrams.
572: So, their numerics may be discussed separately.
573: They can be readily obtained from the
574: tree-level result ~\eqref{born} by introducing appropriately a
575: running fine-structure constant $\alpha(x)$, where $x=s,t$,
576: %--
577: %--
578: \begin{eqnarray}\label{sigalfrun}
579: %--
580: \frac{ d\sigma_{\alpha\, {\rm run.}} }{ d\Omega } &=&
581: \frac{1}{2s}\,
582: \Bigl[\, |\alpha(s)|^2\frac{v_1(s,t)}{s^2}
583: + 2\alpha(t)\,\text{Re}\, \alpha(s) \frac{v_2(s,t)}{s\, t}
584: %\Bigl( \frac{s^2}{2} + t^2 + s \, t \Bigr)
585: +\alpha^2(t) \frac{v_1(t,s)}{t^2}
586: % \Bigl( \frac{t^2}{2} + s^2 + s\, t \Bigr)
587: %\nonumber\\&&+~
588: \Bigr] + {\cal O}(m_e^2),
589: \end{eqnarray}
590: %--
591: and where the running of $\alpha$ is defined as
592: %--
593: \begin{equation}\label{alfar2}
594: \alpha(x)\,=\,
595: \frac{\alpha}{1-\Delta\alpha(x)}.
596: \end{equation}
597: %--
598: Here $\Delta \alpha$ is given by the sum of the non-perturbative
599: light-quark contribution $\Delta \alpha_{\rm had}^{(5)}$~\cite{Eidelman:1995ny}
600: (see Refs.~\cite{Burkhardt:2005se,Jegerlehner:2006ju,Hagiwara:2006jt}
601: and references therein for recent developments),
602: a perturbative electron-loop component evaluated in the small
603: electron-mass limit, $\Pi_e$, and a fermion-loop term computed exactly,
604: $\Pi_f$, with $f=\mu,\tau,t$,
605: %--
606: \begin{eqnarray}
607: \label{dispA}
608: \Delta \alpha(x)&=& \Delta \alpha_{\rm had}^{(5)}(x) + \Pi_e(x) + \sum_{f=\mu,\tau,t} \Pi_f(x),
609: \\
610: %--
611: \label{dispAlpha}
612: \Delta \alpha_{\rm had}^{(5)}(x)\,&=&\, \frac{\alpha}{\pi}\,\frac{x}{3} \, \int_{4 m_\pi^2}^{\infty}\, dz\,
613: \frac{R_{\rm had}^{(5)}(z)}{z}\, %\frac{1}{x-z+i \,\delta}.
614: K_{\rm SE}(x; z) ,
615: \end{eqnarray}
616: %--
617: with the self-energy kernel function $K_{\rm SE}(x; z)$ (\ref{kse}).
618: %--
619:
620: For $x<4 m_\pi^2$, Eq.~\eqref{dispAlpha} is well defined.
621: For $x> 4 m_\pi^2$, the real and imaginary parts are after a subtraction:
622: %--
623: \begin{eqnarray}
624: \label{dispSE}
625: \text{Re} \left[ \Delta \alpha_{\rm had}^{(5)}(x) \right] \,&=&\,
626: \frac{\alpha}{\pi}\,\frac{x}{3} \, \int_{4 m_\pi^2}^{\infty}\, dz\,
627: \frac{\left[ R_{\rm had}^{(5)}(z)-R_{\rm had}^{(5)}(x) \right] }{z \, (x-z)} + \frac{\alpha}{3 \pi}
628: R_{\rm had}^{(5)}(x) \log \left[ \frac{x}{4 m_\pi^2}-1 \right], \\
629: \text{Im} \left[ \Delta \alpha_{\rm had}^{(5)}(x) \right] \,&=&\, -\frac{\alpha}{3}\,R_{\rm had}^{(5)}(x).
630: \end{eqnarray}
631: %--
632: The $\text{Im} \left[ \Delta \alpha_{\rm had}^{(5)}(x) \right]$ coincides with Eq.~\eqref{Rhad0}.
633: Expressions for the perturbative contributions to the photon
634: vacuum-polarization function, $\Pi_f$ and $\Pi_e$, are available in QED exactly up to
635: two loops~\cite{Kallen:1955fb} and in the small electron-mass limit up to
636: three loops~\cite{Steinhauser:1998rq}.
637: For convenience, their explicit expressions are collected in Appendix~\ref{app:pho}.
638: For our analysis, we use the exact results of Eqs.~\eqref{oneloop} and \eqref{twoloops} for
639: fermion loops ($f\neq e$),
640: and the high-energy expressions of Eqs.~\eqref{oneloopE}, \eqref{twoloopsE} and \eqref{threeloopsE}
641: for electron loops.
642:
643: In Tables~\ref{table:dalpha2} and ~\ref{table:dalpha1}
644: we show numerical values for the various
645: components of $\Delta \alpha$ of Eq.~\eqref{dispA} for space-like and time-like values
646: of $x$ ($t$- and $s$-channel).
647: Note that $\Delta \alpha$ develops an
648: imaginary part in the $s$-channel above the two-particle production threshold
649: (see Table~\ref{table:dalpha2}).
650: Besides the Fortran package \texttt{hadr5.f} for hadronic contributions \cite{Jegerlehner-hadr5n:2003aa},
651: we employed the Mathematica package HPL~\cite{Maitre:2005uu,Maitre:2007kp}
652: and, as a cross check, our Fortran routines (see Appendices \ref{app:pho} and \ref{app-polylog}).
653:
654: %\colorbox{green}{follow now tables TABLE 1,2 from Stefano 22 July 2008}
655: %%%%%% TABLE 1 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
656: \begin{table}[ht]\centering
657: \setlength{\arraycolsep}{\tabcolsep}
658: \renewcommand\arraystretch{1.1}
659: \begin{tabular}{|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|}
660: \hline
661: $\sqrt{s}$ [GeV] & 1 & 10 & $M_Z$ & 500 \\
662: \hline
663: \hline
664: 1 loop $e$ & 104.462 -- 24.3245 ~i &
665: 140.119 -- 24.3245 ~i &
666: 174.347 -- 24.3245 ~i &
667: 200.698 -- 24.3245 ~i \\
668: \hline
669: $\mu$ & 21.352 -- 24.3060 ~i &
670: 57.551 -- 24.3245 ~i &
671: 91.784 -- 24.3245 ~i &
672: 118.136 -- 24.3245 ~i \\
673: \hline
674: $\tau$ & -- 0.508 &
675: 12.194 -- 24.1724 ~i &
676: 48.060 -- 24.3245 ~i &
677: 74.429 -- 24.3245 ~i \\
678: \hline
679: $t$ & $<10^{-3}$ &
680: -- 0.007 &
681: -- 0.595 &
682: -- 5.180 -- 29.0633 ~i \\
683: \hline
684: \hline
685: 2 loops $e$ & 0.258 -- 0.0424 ~i &
686: 0.320 -- 0.0424 ~i &
687: 0.380 -- 0.0424 ~i &
688: 0.426 -- 0.0424 ~i \\
689: \hline
690: $\mu$ & 0.123 -- 0.0487 ~i &
691: 0.177 -- 0.0424 ~i &
692: 0.236 -- 0.0424 ~i &
693: 0.282 -- 0.0424 ~i \\
694: \hline
695: $\tau$ & -- 0.005 &
696: 0.118 -- 0.0626 ~i &
697: 0.160 -- 0.0426 ~i &
698: 0.206 -- 0.0424 ~i \\
699: \hline
700: $t$ & $<10^{-3}$ &
701: $<10^{-3}$ &
702: -- 0.002 &
703: 0.061 -- 0.0876 ~i \\
704: \hline
705: \hline
706: 3 loops $e$ & 0.001 -- 0.0005 ~i &
707: 0.002 -- 0.0006 ~i &
708: 0.003 -- 0.0008 ~i &
709: 0.004 -- 0.0009 ~i \\
710: \hline
711: \hline
712: hadrons & -- 74.420 -- 37.9089 ~i&
713: 138.850 -- 97.4106 ~i &
714: 276.213 -- 97.2980 ~i &
715: 370.744 -- 97.2980 ~i \\
716:
717: \hline
718: \hline
719: SUM & 51.263 -- 86.6310~i &
720: 349.324 -- 170.3800~i &
721: 590.586 -- 170.3997~i &
722: 759.806 -- 199.5505~i \\
723: \hline
724: \end{tabular}
725: \caption[]{
726: %\colorbox{green}{22 07 2008 Table 1}
727: Contributions to $\Delta \alpha$ in units of
728: $10^{-4}$ in the $s$-channel (see Eq.~\eqref{dispA}). The real part of the hadronic contributions
729: is obtained with help of the subroutine
730: \texttt{hadr5.f}~\cite{Jegerlehner-hadr5n:2003aa}, the imaginary
731: part follows from the Burkhardt parametrization~\cite{Burkhardt:1981jk}.}
732: \label{table:dalpha2}
733: \end{table}
734: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
735:
736: %%%%%% TABLE 2 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
737: \begin{table}[ht]
738: \centering
739: \setlength{\arraycolsep}{\tabcolsep}
740: \renewcommand\arraystretch{1.1}
741: \begin{tabular}{|r|r|r|r|r|}
742: \hline
743: $\theta$ [$^\circ$] \, $\vert$ \, $\sqrt{s}$ [GeV] & $\theta=20$\, $\vert$ \, 1 & $\theta=20$\, $\vert$ \, 10 &
744: $\theta=3$\, $\vert$ \, $M_Z$ & $\theta=3$\, $\vert$ \, 500 \\
745: \hline
746: \hline
747: %--
748: 1 loop $e$ & 77.3512 & 113.008 & 117.935 & 144.286 \\
749: \hline
750: $\mu$ & 3.3069 & 30.614 & 35.463 & 61.727 \\
751: \hline
752: $\tau$ & 0.0148 & 1.346 & 2.365 & 18.804 \\
753: \hline
754: $t$ & $<10^{-4}$ & $<10^{-3}$ & $<10^{-3}$ & 0.012 \\
755: \hline
756: \hline
757: %--
758: 2 loops $e$ & 0.2109 & 0.273 & 0.282 & 0.327 \\
759: \hline
760: $\mu$ & 0.0260 & 0.126 & 0.136 & 0.184 \\
761: \hline
762: $\tau$ & 0.0001 & 0.011 & 0.019 & 0.097 \\
763: \hline
764: $t$ & $<10^{-4}$ & $<10^{-3}$ & $<10^{-3}$ & $<10^{-3}$ \\
765: \hline
766: \hline
767: %--
768: 3 loops $e$ & 0.0006 & 0.001 & 0.001 & 0.002 \\
769: \hline
770: \hline
771: %--
772: hadrons & 2.6072 & 57.830 & 71.643 & 162.280 \\
773: \hline
774: \hline
775: %--
776: SUM & 83.5177 & 203.209 & 227.844 & 387.719 \\
777: \hline
778: \hline
779: $\theta=90^\circ$\, $\vert$ \, $\sqrt{s}$ [GeV] & 1 & 10 & $M_Z$ & 500 \\
780: \hline
781: \hline
782: %--
783: 1 loop $e$ & 99.0951 & 134.752 & 168.980 & 195.331 \\
784: \hline
785: $\mu$ & 17.4725 & 52.200 & 86.418 & 112.769 \\
786: \hline
787: $\tau$ & 0.2412 & 10.841 & 42.746 & 69.064 \\
788: \hline
789: $t$ & $< 10^{-4}$ & 0.003 & 0.284 & 6.208 \\
790: \hline
791: \hline
792: %--
793: 2 loops $e$ & 0.2487 & 0.311 & 0.370 & 0.416 \\
794: \hline
795: $\mu$ & 0.0924 & 0.167 & 0.227 & 0.273 \\
796: \hline
797: $\tau$ & 0.0021 & 0.068 & 0.150 & 0.196 \\
798: \hline
799: $t$ & $<10^{-4}$ & $< 10^{-3}$ & 0.001 & 0.021 \\
800: \hline
801: \hline
802: %--
803: 3 loops $e$ & 0.0009 & 0.002 & 0.003 & 0.003 \\
804: \hline
805: \hline
806: %--
807: hadrons & 25.0834 & 127.219 & 256.279 & 362.375 \\
808: \hline
809: \hline
810: %--
811: SUM & 142.2363 & 492.396 & 555.458 & 746.656 \\
812: \hline
813: \end{tabular}
814: \caption[]{
815: %\colorbox{green}{22 07 2008 Table 2}
816: Contributions to $\Delta \alpha$ in units of $10^{-4}$ in the
817: $t$-channel for three values of the scattering angle, $\theta=3^\circ$,
818: $\theta=20^\circ$ and $\theta=90^\circ$, $t=-s\, \sin^2(\theta\slash 2)$.
819: See the caption of Tab.~\ref{table:dalpha2} for further details.}
820: \label{table:dalpha1}
821: \end{table}
822: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
823:
824: %--
825: \begin{figure}[tbhp]
826: \begin{center}
827: \includegraphics[scale=0.55]{Vertices2loopsIR.eps}
828: %\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{Vertices2loopsRED.eps}
829: \end{center}
830: \caption[Hadronic and fermionic irreducible vertex diagrams]
831: {\em Hadronic and fermionic irreducible vertex diagrams.
832: The gray circles mark the corresponding one-loop insertions.
833: }
834: \label{Vertices2loopsIR}
835: \end{figure}
836:
837:
838: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
839: \section{\label{sec-irred-vert}IRREDUCIBLE VERTEX CORRECTIONS}
840: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
841: Hadronic and heavy-fermion irreducible vertex corrections are obtained through the
842: interference of the diagrams of Figure~\ref{Vertices2loopsIR} with the
843: tree-level amplitude.
844: The contributions from the irreducible vertices are gauge invariant by themselves.
845: Their contribution to the ${\cal O}(\alpha^2)$ differential
846: cross section is given by
847: %--
848: \begin{eqnarray}\label{sig-irr-vert}
849: % typo corrected tr 30 05 2008
850: \frac{ d\sigma_{\rm vert} }{ d\Omega } \!=\!
851: 4 \left( \frac{\alpha}{\pi} \right)^2
852: \left(\frac{ \, \alpha^2 }{2 s}\right)
853: \Bigl\{\,
854: \frac{v_1(s,t)}{s^2}\, \text{Re} \, V_2(s)
855: \!+\!\frac{v_1(t,s)}{t^2}\, V_2(t)
856: % \nonumber\\&&+~
857: \!+\! \frac{v_2(s,t)}{s\,t} \, \Bigl[\, \text{Re} \, V_2(s) + V_2(t) \,\Bigr]
858: \,\Bigl\} + {\cal O}(m_e^2).
859: \end{eqnarray}
860: %--
861: Here $V_2$ summarizes all two-loop fermionic corrections to the QED Dirac form factor,
862: whose computation can be traced back to the seminal work of
863: Refs.~\cite{Barbieri:1972as} and~\cite{Barbieri:1972hn}.
864: The full result can be organized as
865: %--
866: \begin{eqnarray}
867: \label{fullVertex}
868: V_2(x)&=& V_{2e}(x) + V_{2{\rm rest}}(x),
869: \end{eqnarray}
870: where $V_{2e}$ denotes the electron-loop component.
871: Closed analytical expressions in the case of electron loops at finite $m_e$ can
872: be found in Ref.~\cite{Bonciani:2003ai}.
873: In the high-energy limit,
874: compact expressions are available thanks to Ref.~\cite{Burgers:1985qg}:
875: %--
876: \begin{eqnarray}
877: \label{eq:V2}
878: V_{2e}(x)\!= \!\frac{1}{36} \ln^3\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)
879: + \frac{19}{72}\, \ln^2\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)
880: +\frac{1}{6}\,\left( \frac{265}{36}+\zeta_2 \right)\, \ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr) +~
881: %\nonumber \\ &&
882: % C_2^e + {\cal O}(m_e^2\slash x), \\
883: %&&\nonumber\\
884: %C_2^e&=&
885: \frac{1}{4}\left( \frac{383}{27} - \zeta_2 \right)+{\cal O}(m_e^2).
886: %\\
887: %\label{eq:V3}
888: %C_2^f&=&\frac{1}{6}\left( \frac{3355}{216} +\frac{19}{6}\,\zeta_2 - 2\,\zeta_3 \right)
889: %+{\cal O}(m_e^2\slash m_f^2).
890: \end{eqnarray}
891: %\colorbox{red}{Typographical restyling of unchanged above equation.}\\
892: After a combination with soft real electron pair emission contributions (\ref{sp}), the leading logarithmic
893: contributions $\ln^3(s/m_e^2)$ get cancelled in (\ref{sig-irr-vert}).
894:
895: Heavy-fermion and hadronic contributions, instead, can be evaluated as in
896: Ref.~\cite{Kniehl:1988id} through the dispersion integral
897: %--
898: \begin{equation}
899: \label{eq:dispVer}
900: V_{2{\rm rest}}(x) = \int_{4 M^2}^{\infty} \, dz \, \frac{R(z)}{z} \, K_V(x+i\delta;z),
901: \end{equation}
902: %--
903: where $R$ is given in Eq.~\eqref{eq:finalR} and the two-loop irreducible vertex kernel function $K_V$, in the limit of a vanishing electron mass, reads as
904: %--
905: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:kernelV}
906: K_V(x;z) = \frac{1}{3} \, \Bigl\{\,
907: - \, \frac{7}{8}
908: - \, \frac{z}{2\,x}
909: + \Bigl(\, \frac{3}{4} + \frac{z}{2\,x} \,\Bigr) \,
910: \ln\left(-\frac{x}{z}\right)
911: - \, \frac{1}{2} \, \Bigl(\, 1 + \frac{z}{x}\, \Bigr)^2 \,
912: \Bigl[\, \zeta_2 - \text{Li}_2\,
913: \left( 1 + \frac{x}{z} \right)\, \Bigr]\,
914: \Bigr\}.\nonumber\\
915: \end{eqnarray}
916: %--
917: Here $\text{Li}_2(x)$ is the usual dilogarithm and $\zeta_2=\litwo(1) = \pi^2\slash 6$.
918: The kernel is at the upper integration boundary of the order $O(1/z)$, the integrand of order $O(1/z^2)$
919: so that the dispersion integral is finite there:
920: \begin{eqnarray}\label{vertexbigz}
921: K_V(x;z) & \approx& \frac{1}{3} \, \Bigl\{\,
922: \frac{11}{36} u -\frac{1}{6}u\ln(-u) + \left( -\frac{13}{288} + \frac{1}{24}\ln(-u)\right) u^2
923: \nl
924: &&+~ \left(\frac{47}{3600} -\frac{1}{60}\ln(-u)\right) u^3
925: \Bigr\} \mathrm{~~for~} u=\frac{x}{z}\to 0.
926: \end{eqnarray}
927: At the lower integration bound, the integrand becomes for small $z/x$:
928: \begin{eqnarray}\label{vertexsmz}
929: K_V(x;z) \approx \frac{1}{3} \, \Bigl\{\,
930: -\frac{7}{8} -\zeta(2) +\frac{3}{4} \ln(-u) - \frac{1}{4} \ln^2(-u) - \left[1+2\zeta(2)+\frac{1}{2}\ln^2(-u) \right]\frac{1}{u}
931: \Bigr\} \mathrm{~~for~} u=\frac{x}{z}\to \infty.
932: \nl
933: \end{eqnarray}
934: This asymptotic behavior yields at most terms of the order of $\ln^3(x/M^2)$ if $M^2<<x$.
935:
936: An interesting question is the identification of mass logarithms in case of fermion insertions.
937: Let us rewrite:
938: %
939: \begin{eqnarray}\label{fullVertexrest}
940: V_{2{\rm rest}}(x)&=& V_{2{\rm had}}^{(5)}(x) + \sum_{f=\mu,\tau,t} Q_f^2\, C_f\, V_{2f}(x),
941: \end{eqnarray}
942: %--
943: where
944: $V_{2{\rm had}}^{(5)}$ denotes the non-perturbative light-quark term
945: and $V_{2f}$ the perturbative contribution of a fermion of flavor $f\neq e$.
946: Potentially large logarithms arise from parts of the integrand for the $z$ integration which are singular at the lower integration bound, $z\to 4M^2$, when allowing thereby $M^2$ to become small.
947: %The functions $I_1$ to $I_3$ are free of such terms.
948: For fermions, one has to analyze
949: %\begin{eqnarray}\label{rkv1}
950: $R_f(z) K_V(x;z)/z$
951: %\end{eqnarray}
952: in that limit.
953:
954: The corresponding analytical integrations may be performed easily after applying the transformation
955: \begin{eqnarray}\label{rkv2}
956: z &=& \frac{4m_f^2}{1-u^2},
957: \end{eqnarray}
958: thereby getting rid of the square root function in $R_f(z)$: %\colorbox{red}{new coefficient}
959: \begin{eqnarray}\label{rkv3}
960: R_f(z)&=& C_f Q_f^2 \frac{u}{2}(3-u^2).
961: \end{eqnarray}
962: After that transformation, the dispersion integral becomes: %\colorbox{red}{argument of K changed}
963: \begin{eqnarray}\label{rkv4}
964: V_{2f}(x) %= \int_{4m_f^2}^{\infty} \frac{dz}{z}R_f(z) K_V(x;z)
965: &=& \int_0^1 du \left[-2+u^2+\frac{1}{1-u}
966: +\frac{1}{1+u} \right] K_V\left( x+i \delta; \frac{4m_f^2}{1-u^2}\right).
967: \end{eqnarray}
968: From the vertex kernel function $K_V(x;z)$, we have additionally dependences on
969: %\begin{eqnarray}\nonumber
970: $\ln(-x/z)$ and on $\litwo(1+x/z)$.
971: %\end{eqnarray}
972: Although after the variable change (\ref{rkv2}) the arguments of logarithm and dilogarithm become non-linear, all the integrals may be taken trivially, and we will not go into further details.
973: The result
974: contains $\litri$ and powers of logarithms $\ln^n(x/m_f^2)$ with $n\leq 3$.
975: In fact, one will rediscover in the kinematically interesting ultra-relativistic case the formula known from
976: ~\cite{Burgers:1985qg} and e.g. also from ~\cite{Actis:2007gi}:
977: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:V3}
978: V_{2f}(x) &=&\frac{1}{36}\, \ln^3\Bigl(-\frac{m_f^2}{x}\Bigr)
979: + \frac{19}{72}\, \ln^2\Bigl(-\frac{m_f^2}{x}\Bigr)
980: +\frac{1}{6}\,\left( \frac{265}{36}+\zeta_2 \right)\, \ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_f^2}{x}\Bigr)
981: \nl
982: &&+~
983: %C_2^f&=&
984: \frac{1}{6}\left( \frac{3355}{216} +\frac{19}{6}\,\zeta_2 - 2\,\zeta_3 \right)
985: +{\cal O}(m_f^2).
986: %\nonumber\\
987: \end{eqnarray}
988: The same soft- real pair cancellation mechanism as described for electrons works also for heavy fermions,
989: %After a combination of (\ref{sig-irr-vert}) with real heavy fermion pair emission contributions,
990: and the leading logarithmic powers $\ln^3(s/m_f^2)$ will get cancelled in the cross-section.
991: This is of physical relevance if the soft pair emissions remain unobserved.
992: In our numerical studies, we will, conventionally, include the soft electron pair emission cross-section, but not that for heavy fermions or hadrons.
993: For further details see Section \ref{sec:realpairs}, and some numerical results were presented in
994: \cite{Actis:2008sk}, where we used the parameterization \cite{Burkhardt:1981jk} with flag setting $\texttt{IPAR} =1$.
995:
996: We just mention that the transformation (\ref{rkv2}), when applied to
997: the simple one-loop self-energy kernel (\ref{kse}),
998: \begin{eqnarray}
999: K_{\rm SE}(x;z) &=& \frac{1}{x-z} ~~=~~ \frac{1}{x}\left[ 1+ \frac{4m_f^2/x}{1-u^2-4m_f^2/x}\right] ,
1000: \end{eqnarray}
1001: gives a rational integrand for the $u$-integration, and one gets as a result a function at most linear in $\ln(s/m_f^2)$. For the explicit expressions see Equations (\ref{oneloop}) (constant term in $\epsilon$) and (\ref{oneloopE}).
1002: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
1003: \section{\label{sec-IR}INFRARED-DIVERGENT CORRECTIONS}
1004: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
1005: There are various origins of heavy-fermion or hadronic infrared divergent cross-section contributions of order $O(\alpha^4)$:
1006: \begin{itemize}
1007: \item Factorisable diagrams with one-loop vertex or box insertions
1008: \item Irreducible two-loop box diagrams
1009: \item soft real photon corrections
1010: \end{itemize}
1011: The sum of these corrections is gauge-invariant and infrared finite.
1012:
1013: We will consider five classes of contributions:
1014: \begin{itemize}
1015: \item[(a)]
1016: Interference of Born diagrams with reducible [vertex+self-energy] corrections of Fig.~\ref{Vertices2loopsRED};
1017: \item[(b)] Interference of one-loop vertex and self-energy diagrams, both of Fig.~\ref{OneLoop};
1018: \item[(c)] Interference of one-loop box and self-energy diagrams, both of Fig.~\ref{OneLoop};
1019: \item[(d)] Interference of real soft photon emission diagrams, one of them with a self-energy insertion;
1020: \item[(box)] Interference of Born diagrams with two-loop box diagrams of Figure~\ref{Boxes2loops}.
1021: \end{itemize}
1022: % Vertices2loopsRED.eps
1023:
1024: %--
1025: \begin{figure}[bt]
1026: \begin{center}
1027: \includegraphics[scale=0.55]{Vertices2loopsRED.eps}
1028: %\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{Vertices2loopsRED.eps}
1029: \end{center}
1030: \caption[Hadronic and fermionic reducible vertex diagrams.]
1031: {\em Hadronic and fermionic reducible vertex diagrams.
1032: The gray circles mark the corresponding one-loop insertions.
1033: }
1034: \label{Vertices2loopsRED}
1035: \end{figure}
1036:
1037: For ease of notation, in the following we collect the
1038: overall dependence on $\alpha$ and rewrite the factorizing contributions of
1039: class $i$, $i=a,\ldots,d$:
1040: %--
1041: \begin{equation}
1042: \label{labell}
1043: \frac{ d \sigma_{\rm fact.}^i }{ d\Omega } =
1044: \left( \frac{ \alpha }{ \pi } \right)^2 \,
1045: \frac{ \alpha^2 }{s} \,
1046: \frac{ d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm fact.}^i }{ d\Omega },
1047: \end{equation}
1048: %--
1049: and analogously for the two-loop boxes.
1050: In addition, we define
1051: \begin{eqnarray}
1052: \hat{s}= \frac{s}{m_e^2},
1053: \\
1054: r=-\frac{t}{s},
1055: \end{eqnarray}
1056: and
1057: introduce short-hand notations for those kinematic factors which
1058: appear more than once in the following formulas:
1059: % see nf2-2box-IR-part2.nb
1060: %--
1061: \begin{eqnarray}
1062: A_r&=& -\frac{v_1(s,t)}{s^2}-\frac{v_2(s,t)}{st}
1063: %\nonumber\\ &=& %
1064: ~=~
1065: \frac{1}{r}\Bigl[\left(1-r\right)^3-r^3\Bigr],
1066: \nonumber\\
1067: B_r&=& \frac{v_1(t,s)}{t^2}+\frac{v_2(s,t)}{st}
1068: %\nonumber\\&=& %
1069: ~=~
1070: \frac{1}{r^2}\Bigl[2\,\left(1-r\right)^2+r\,\left(1+r-r^2\right)\Bigr],
1071: \nonumber\\
1072: C_r&=& \frac{v_1(s,t)}{s^2}
1073: %\nonumber\\&=& %
1074: ~=~
1075: \left(1-r\right)^2+r^2,
1076: \nonumber\\
1077: D_r&=& -\frac{v_2(s,t)}{st}
1078: %\nonumber\\&=& %
1079: ~=~
1080: \frac{1}{r} \left(1-r\right)^2,
1081: \nonumber\\
1082: E_r&=& 3 \frac{v_1(t,s)}{t^2}+\frac{v_2(s,t)}{st}
1083: %\nonumber\\&=& %
1084: ~=~
1085: \frac{1}{r^2}\Bigl[ 6\,\left(1-r\right)^2+r\,\left(5-r-r^2\right)\Bigr],
1086: \nonumber\\
1087: F_r&=& \frac{1}{2} \frac{v_1(t,s)}{t^2}+\frac{1}{4}\frac{v_2(s,t)}{st}
1088: %\nonumber\\&=& %
1089: ~=~
1090: \frac{1}{4\,r^2} \Bigl[4\,\left(1-r\right)^2+r\,\left(3-r^2\right)\Bigr],
1091: \nonumber\\
1092: G_r&=& \frac{v_1(t,s)}{t^2}
1093: %\nonumber\\&=&
1094: ~=~\frac{1}{r^2}\left(1+(1-r)^2\right).
1095: \end{eqnarray}
1096: %--
1097:
1098: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
1099: \subsection{\label{sec-fact}Factorisable corrections with vertex or box insertions}
1100: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
1101: The
1102: infrared-divergent factorisable heavy fermion and hadronic corrections for $m_e^2 << M^2,s,|t|,|u|$ can be readily
1103: obtained from Ref.~\cite{Actis:2007gi} by replacing the photon
1104: vacuum-polarization function in the $s$- or $t$-channel with the dispersion integral
1105: %--
1106: \begin{eqnarray}
1107: \label{disppi}
1108: \Pi(x) \,~=~ \Delta\alpha(x) \, &=&\, \frac{\alpha}{\pi} ~I(x),
1109: \\\label{disp}
1110: I(x)\,&=&\, \frac{x}{3} \, \int_{4 M^2}^{\infty}\, \frac{dz}{z}\,
1111: \frac{R(z)}{x-z+i \,\delta},\qquad x=s,t,
1112: \end{eqnarray}
1113: %--
1114: where $\Delta\alpha(x)$ is given in ~\eqref{dispA} and $R$ in ~\eqref{eq:finalR}.
1115:
1116:
1117: We begin with the reducible vertex corrections (a).
1118: From Eq.~(3.8) of Ref.~\cite{Actis:2007gi} we derive:
1119: %--
1120: \begin{eqnarray}
1121: \label{IR1}
1122: \frac{d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm fact.}^a}{d\Omega} &=&
1123: %-- pole
1124: \frac{F_\epsilon}{\epsilon}\, \Bigl\{\,
1125: A_r \, \Bigl[\, \Bigl(1-\ln(\hat{s})\Bigr) \,
1126: \text{Re}\,I(s) - \pi\,\text{Im}\,I(s)\, \Bigr]
1127: + B_r \, \Bigl[\, \ln(\hat{s})
1128: + \ln(r) - 1 \Bigr]\,I(t) \Bigr\}\nonumber\\
1129: %-- Re I(s)
1130: &&+~ \frac{1}{2}\, \Bigl\{ A_r\,
1131: \Bigl[ \ln^2(\hat{s}) - 8\,\zeta_2 \Bigr]
1132: - \Bigl(A_r
1133: - 2\,C_r\Bigr) \, \ln(\hat{s})
1134: + 2\,\Bigl( A_r - C_r\Bigr)\, \Bigr\}\, \text{Re}\,I(s)\nonumber\\
1135: %-- Im I(s)
1136: &&+~ \frac{1}{2}\, \Bigl[
1137: 2\,A_r\, \ln(\hat{s})
1138: - \, A_r + 2\, C_r \Bigr] \,\pi\, \text{Im}\,I(s)
1139: %-- I(t)
1140: - \frac{1}{2}\, \Bigl\{
1141: B_r\,
1142: \Bigl[ \ln^2(\hat{s}) + \ln^2(r)\Bigr]\nonumber\\
1143: &&-~ \Bigl[ E_r
1144: - 2\, B_r\,\ln(r) \Bigr]
1145: \ln(\hat{s}) -
1146: E_r\,\ln(r)
1147: - 2\,B_r\, \zeta_2 + 8\,F_r\,
1148: \Bigr\} \, I(t)
1149: %--
1150: ,
1151: \end{eqnarray}
1152: %--
1153: where the normalization factor $F_\epsilon$ is given in Eq.~\eqref{norm}.
1154: It appears here in the combination
1155: \begin{eqnarray}
1156: \frac{F_\epsilon}{\epsilon} = \frac{1}{\epsilon} - \ln\left(\frac{m_e^2}{\mu^2} \right)
1157: -\ln(\pi) - \gamma_E + \mathcal{O}(\epsilon).
1158: \end{eqnarray}
1159: In strict analogy, the interference of the one-loop vertex diagrams
1160: of Figure~\ref{OneLoop}~(a), with the vacuum-polarization diagrams
1161: of Figure~\ref{OneLoop}~(c) can be extracted from Eq.~(3.26) of
1162: Ref.~\cite{Actis:2007gi}:
1163: %--
1164: \begin{eqnarray}
1165: \label{IR2}
1166: \frac{ d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm fact.}^b }{ d\Omega } &=&
1167: %-- pole
1168: \frac{F_\epsilon}{\epsilon}
1169: \Bigl\{ \Bigl[ A_r\, \Bigl( 1- \ln(\hat{s}) \Bigr)- D_r\, \ln(r) \Bigr]\,
1170: \text{Re}\,I(s)\,
1171: - C_r\, \pi\, \text{Im}\, I(s) \nonumber\\
1172: &&+~ \Bigl[ B_r\, \Bigl(\, \ln(\hat{s}) - 1 \Bigr)
1173: % TR 13 03 2008 introduce a simplification:
1174: % + \frac{1}{r^2}\, \Bigl( 1+r\, D_r\Bigr)\, \ln(r)\Bigr]\, I(t)\, \Bigr\}
1175: + G_r \, \ln(r)\Bigr]\, I(t)\, \Bigr\}
1176: %-- Re I(s)
1177: + \frac{1}{2}\,\Bigl\{
1178: \,A_r\, \ln^2(\hat{s}) \nonumber\\
1179: &&-~ 2\, \Bigl[ \Bigl(1-4\,r\Bigr)\,D_r -4\, r^2 \Bigr]\, \zeta_2
1180: - \Bigl[ A_r - 2\, C_r
1181: - 2\, D_r \ln(r) \Bigr]
1182: \ln(\hat{s}) \nonumber\\
1183: &&+~ D_r\, \ln^2(r)
1184: - \Bigl( D_r-2 \Bigr)\,\ln(r)
1185: + 2\, \Bigl[\Bigl(1-2\,r\Bigr)\,D_r-2\,r^2 \Bigr]
1186: \Bigr\} \, \text{Re}\,I(s)\nonumber\\
1187: %-- Im I(s)
1188: &&+~
1189: \frac{1}{2} \Bigl\{2\, C_r\, \ln(\hat{s})
1190: - \Bigl[C_r - 4\, r\Bigl(1-r\Bigr)\, \Bigr] \Bigr\}
1191: \, \pi\, \text{Im}\,I(s)
1192: %-- I(t)
1193: - \frac{1}{2}
1194: \Bigl\{ B_r\, \ln^2(\hat{s})\nonumber\\
1195: &&-~ \Bigl[ E_r
1196: - \frac{2}{r^2}\, \Bigl( 1+r\,D_r \Bigr)\, \ln(r)\Bigr]\,
1197: \ln(\hat{s})
1198: + \frac{1}{r^2} \Bigl( 1+r\,D_r\Bigr)\,\ln^2(r)
1199: - \frac{1}{r^2}\,\times\nonumber\\
1200: &&\times ~ \Bigl[ 6\,\Bigl(1-r\Bigr)+r^2 \Bigr]\,\ln(r)
1201: - \frac{2}{r^2}\Bigl[ r\,\Bigl(1-4\,r\Bigr)\,D_r +1\Bigr]\, \zeta_2\
1202: + 8\, F_r \Bigr\}\,I(t).\nonumber\\
1203: %--
1204: \end{eqnarray}
1205: %--
1206: Finally, the contributions from
1207: the one-loop box diagrams of Figure~\ref{OneLoop}~(b)
1208: may be derived from Eq.~(3.28) of Ref.~\cite{Actis:2007gi}:
1209: %--
1210: \begin{eqnarray}
1211: \label{IR3}
1212: \frac{d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm fact.}^c}{d\Omega} &=&
1213: %-- pole
1214: \frac{ F_\epsilon }{ \epsilon }\,
1215: \Bigl\{\, \Bigl[\, C_r\,\ln(r) + A_r\,\ln(1-r)\, \Bigr]\,\text{Re}\,I(s)
1216: + D_r\, \pi\,\text{Im}\,I(s)
1217: - \Bigl[\,D_r\,\ln(r)\nonumber\\
1218: & +& B_r\,\ln(1-r)\, \Bigr]\, I(t)\, \Bigr\}
1219: %-- Re I(s)
1220: - \Bigl\{\, \Bigl[\, C_r\,\ln(r) + A_r\,\ln(1-r)\, \Bigr]\, \ln(\hat{s})
1221: + \ln(r) \nonumber\\ &&+~ \frac{1}{2}\,\Bigl(2\, D_r+r\, \Bigr)\,\ln(1-r)
1222: +\frac{3}{4}\,\Bigl( 1-r\Bigr)\,\ln^2(r)
1223: + \frac{1}{4}\,\Bigl( 1-2\,r \Bigr) \,\ln^2(1-r) \nonumber\\
1224: &&+~ D_r\,\ln(r)\,\ln(1-r)\, \Bigr\}\,\text{Re}\, I(s)
1225: %-- Im I(s)
1226: - \Bigl\{
1227: D_r\, \ln(\hat{s})
1228: + \frac{1}{2\,r}\,\Bigl[ D_r\,r\,\Bigl(1-r\Bigr)
1229: +1
1230: -3\, r^3 \Bigr]\,\times \nonumber \\
1231: &&\times ~ \ln(r)
1232: + \frac{1}{2}\Bigl[ 3\, \Bigl(1-2\,r\Bigr)+ 4\,r^2 \Bigr]\ln(1-r)
1233: +\frac{1}{2\,r} \, \Bigl(r\,D_r+1
1234: + 2\,r^2 \Bigr) \Bigr\}\, \pi\, \text{Im}\, I(s)\nonumber\\
1235: %-- I(t)
1236: &&+~ \Bigl\{\, \Bigl[\, D_r\, \ln(r)
1237: + B_r\, \ln(1-r)\,\Bigr]\, \ln(\hat{s})
1238: + \frac{1}{2\,r}\Bigl( C_r+2 \Bigr)\,\ln(r)
1239: - \frac{1}{2\,r}\Bigl[ r\,D_r\nonumber\\
1240: & +&2\,\Bigl(1-r\Bigr)+r^2 \Bigr]\,\ln(1-r)
1241: + \frac{1}{4\,r}\Bigl( 5-4\,r\Bigr)\, \ln^2(r)
1242: + \frac{1}{4\,r} \Bigl( 2-r\Bigr)\, \ln^2(1-r)\nonumber\\
1243: &&+~ \frac{1}{2\,r^2}\Bigl[ 2\,r\,D_r + 2\,\Bigl(1-r\Bigr)+r^2 \Bigr] \ln(r)\ln(1-r)
1244: + \frac{3}{2\,r}\, \Bigl( 2-r\Bigr)\,\zeta_2
1245: \Bigr\}\, I(t)
1246: .\nonumber\\
1247: \end{eqnarray}
1248: %--
1249:
1250: All three types of corrections are infrared divergent.
1251: The vertex diagrams contribute leading electron mass singularities of the order $\ln^2(s/m_e^2)$, while for the factorisable box diagrams the leading order is $\ln(s/m_e^2)$.
1252: In addition, the self-energy insertions $I(x)$ yield a dependence on $\ln(s/m_f^2)$, in case $m_f^2$ is small compared to $s$.
1253: This may be most easily seen from the $\epsilon$-independent terms in (\ref{oneloop}).
1254: So, we collect here at most terms of the order $\ln^2(s/m_e^2) \ln(s/m_f^2)$.
1255: %--------------------------------------------------------------------
1256: \subsection{\label{sec-realsoft}Soft real photon emission}
1257: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
1258: In order to obtain an infrared-finite quantity, we take into
1259: account
1260: the interferences of diagrams with
1261: real emission of soft photons from the external legs, where one of the diagram has a
1262: vacuum-polarization insertion.
1263: The anatomy of these real corrections is exemplified in Appendix~\ref{app-soft}, where the soft photon factor is shown both for non-vanishing electron mass $m_e$ and in the ultra-relativistic approximation.
1264: The result may be also read off
1265: from Eq.~(4.4) of Ref.~\cite{Actis:2007gi} and reads as
1266: %--
1267: \begin{eqnarray}
1268: \label{IR4}
1269: \frac{ d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm fact.}^d}{ d\Omega } &=&
1270: \frac{ d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm fact.}^{d,1} }{ d\Omega }+
1271: \ln\left(\frac{2\,\omega}{\sqrt{s}}\right)\,
1272: \frac{ d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm fact.}^{d,2} }{ d\Omega }
1273: ,
1274: \end{eqnarray}
1275: %--
1276: where $\omega$ is the maximum energy carried by a soft photon in the final state.
1277: We obtain
1278: %--
1279: \begin{eqnarray}
1280: %----- no cut
1281: \frac{ d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm fact.}^{d,1} }{ d\Omega }&=&
1282: \frac{F_\epsilon}{\epsilon}\,2\,
1283: \Bigl[ \ln(\hat{s})+\ln(r)-\ln(1-r)-1\Bigr]\,
1284: \Bigl[ A_r\, \text{Re}\, I(s) - B_r\, I(t)\Bigr] \nonumber\\
1285: &&-~2\, \Bigl\{ \Bigl[
1286: \frac{1}{2}\,\ln^2(\hat{s}) + \ln(\hat{s})\,\Bigl( \ln(r)-\ln(1-r) \Bigr)
1287: +\frac{1}{2}\ln^2(r) - \frac{1}{2}\ln^2(1-r)\nonumber\\
1288: & -&\ln(r)\,\ln(1-r) -2\,\text{Li}_2(r)-\zeta_2
1289: \Bigr]\,\Bigl[A_r\, \text{Re}\, I(s) - B_r\, I(t) \Bigr]\nonumber\\
1290: &&+~D_r\,\Bigl[
1291: \ln(\hat{s})+\ln(r)
1292: - \ln(1-r)-1
1293: \Bigr] \Bigl[ \text{Re}\,I(s)+I(t)\Bigr]
1294: \Bigr\},\\
1295: &&\nonumber\\
1296: %----- cut
1297: \frac{ d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm fact.}^{d,2} }{ d\Omega }&=&
1298: -4\, \Bigl[\ln(\hat{s})+\ln(r)-\ln(1-r)-1 \Bigr]\,
1299: \Bigl[A_r\, \text{Re}\,I(s) -B_r\, I(t)\Bigr].
1300: \end{eqnarray}
1301: %These classes of corrections deserve two comments.
1302: %First of all,
1303: Again, the infra-red divergency is contained in the factor $F_{\epsilon}/\epsilon$,
1304: and the mass singularities are at most of the orders $\ln(x/m_f^2), x=s,t$, and $\ln^2(x/m_e^2)$ for the $\omega$-independent part and $\ln(x/m_e^2)$ for the $\omega$-dependent part.
1305: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
1306: \subsection{\label{sec:3}Two-loop irreducible box corrections}
1307: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
1308: From the technical point of view, the two-loop irreducible box corrections of this section, represented by the three box kernel functions, are the main result of the article.
1309: Their contributions to the Bhabha-scattering cross
1310: section arise from the interference of the diagrams of
1311: Figure~\ref{Boxes2loops} with the tree-level amplitude and can be
1312: written as
1313: %--
1314: \begin{eqnarray}
1315: \label{boxs}
1316: \frac{d\sigma_{\rm box}}{d\Omega}
1317: &=&
1318: \left(\frac{\alpha}{\pi}\right)^2 \, \frac{\alpha^2}{s}\,
1319: \frac{d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm box}}{d\Omega} \nonumber
1320: \\
1321: &=&
1322: \left(\frac{\alpha}{\pi}\right)^2 \, \frac{\alpha^2}{4\,s} \,
1323: % 2\, \left( \frac{m_e^2}{s} \, \text{Re}\, A_s +
1324: % \frac{m_e^2}{t} \, \text{Re}\, A_t \right).
1325: 2\, \left( \frac{\text{Re}\, A_s}{s} +
1326: \frac{\text{Re}\, A_t}{t} \, \right) .
1327: \end{eqnarray}
1328: %--
1329: \begin{figure}[t]
1330: \begin{center}
1331: \includegraphics[scale=0.65]{Boxes2loops.eps}
1332: \end{center}
1333: \caption[Irreducible box diagrams.]
1334: {\em Irreducible box diagrams.
1335: The gray circle denotes the hadronic or fermionic insertions.}
1336: \label{Boxes2loops}
1337: \end{figure}
1338: %--
1339: Here the functions $A_s$ and $A_t$ contain the interferences of box
1340: diagrams with the $s$-channel and $t$-channel tree-level diagrams
1341: and can be represented through three independent form factors,
1342: evaluated with different kinematic arguments:
1343: %--
1344: \begin{eqnarray}
1345: \label{boxes}
1346: A_s &=& B_A(s,t) + B_B(t,s) + B_C(u,t) - B_B(u,s),
1347: \\
1348: A_t &=& B_B(s,t) + B_A(t,s) - B_B(u,t) + B_C(u,s).
1349: \end{eqnarray}
1350: %--
1351: In addition, note that in Eq.~\eqref{boxs} we have collected an overall
1352: factor $1\slash 4$, coming from the sum over the spins, and a factor
1353: $2$, taking into account the fact that the contributions generated by
1354: the diagrams $(1a)$, $(2a)$, $(3a)$ and $(4a)$
1355: are equivalent to those of diagrams $(1b)$, $(2b)$, $(3b)$ and $(4b)$
1356: of Figure~\ref{Boxes2loops}. Finally, the correspondence among the form factors
1357: of Eq.~\eqref{boxes} and the diagrams of Figure~\ref{Boxes2loops} reads as follows:
1358: %--
1359: \begin{eqnarray}\label{boxcombi}
1360: {\rm diag.\, 1}\, &\times&\, {\rm tree_s}\, \Rightarrow\, B_A(s,t),\qquad
1361: {\rm diag.\, 1}\, \times\, {\rm tree_t}\, \Rightarrow\, B_B(s,t),\nonumber\\
1362: {\rm diag.\, 2}\, &\times&\, {\rm tree_s}\, \Rightarrow\, B_B(t,s),\qquad
1363: {\rm diag.\, 2}\, \times\, {\rm tree_t}\, \Rightarrow\, B_A(t,s),\nonumber\\
1364: {\rm diag.\, 3}\, &\times&\, {\rm tree_s}\, \Rightarrow\, B_C(u,t),\qquad
1365: {\rm diag.\, 3}\, \times\, {\rm tree_t}\, \Rightarrow\, -B_B(u,t),\nonumber\\
1366: {\rm diag.\, 4}\, &\times&\, {\rm tree_s}\, \Rightarrow\, -B_B(u,s),\quad
1367: {\rm diag.\, 4}\, \times\, {\rm tree_t}\, \Rightarrow\, B_C(u,s).
1368: \end{eqnarray}
1369: %--
1370:
1371: We evaluate the three form factors $B_i$ using dispersion relations and computing
1372: thereby the convolution of the hadronic or fermionic cross-section ratio $R$ with three
1373: kernel functions $K_i$,
1374: %--
1375: \begin{equation}
1376: \label{Bfc}
1377: B_i(x,y) = \int_{4M^2}^{\infty} \, dz \, \frac{R(z)}{z} \,
1378: K_i(x ,y;z),
1379: \end{equation}
1380: %--
1381: where $R$ has been introduced in Eq.~\eqref{eq:finalR}, and the kernel function are to be calculated.
1382: For positive $x$ or $y$, one has to replace $x \to x+i\delta$ or $y \to y+i\delta$.
1383: %The box kernel functions are obtained from the interference of Born diagrams with the
1384: %QED two-loop box diagrams of Figure~\ref{Boxes2loops}.
1385:
1386: The self-energy insertion is represented by a dispersion relation, thus replacing the one-loop photon propagator by a massive effective propagator as in Eq.~\eqref{PropReplace}.
1387: This procedure reduces the evaluation of the two-loop diagrams to one-loop complexity with a subsequent dispersion integration.
1388: Employing standard techniques, together with the Mathematica packages \texttt{AMBRE} \cite{Gluza:2007rt} and \texttt{MB} \cite{Czakon:2005rk}, for a reduction of one-loop integrals to scalar master integrals, the kernel functions have been finally expressed by eight one-loop master integrals $M^{(j)}(x,y;z)$,
1389: %--
1390: \begin{equation}
1391: \label{deco}
1392: K_i(x,y;z) = F_\epsilon \, \sum_{j=1}^8 \, C_i^{(j)}(x,y;z)\, M^{(j)}(x,y;z),
1393: \end{equation}
1394: %--
1395: where $F_\epsilon$ is the usual normalization factor of
1396: Eq.~\eqref{norm}, and $C_i^{(j)}$ are rational functions of the kinematic
1397: invariants, of the space-time dimension $d$, and of the two masses $m_e, z$.
1398: The master integrals $M^{(j)}$ are shown in Figure \ref{1loopmasters} and analytical expressions for them can be found in Appendix~\ref{app-masters}.
1399: Due to their length, we do not reproduce here the explicit (exact in $m_e$ and $d$ dimensions) right hand side of (\ref{deco}), but refer for them to the Mathematica file %\colorbox{yellow}{\texttt{DispersionBoxKernelMasters.m}, formerly results.m} %results.m
1400: at the webpage \cite{webPage:2007xx}.
1401: % KA[s_,t_,z_] = K_i(x,y;z), i=A
1402: % C_i^j = m_e^2 c_i^j TR 05 06 2008
1403:
1404: \begin{figure}[t]
1405: \begin{center}
1406: \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{1-loop-masters2.eps}
1407: \end{center}
1408: \caption[The one-loop master integrals.]
1409: {\em The one-loop master integrals with an additional mass scale $M=\sqrt{z}$ for the dispersive two-loop box evaluation.}
1410: \label{1loopmasters}
1411: \end{figure}
1412:
1413: In the small electron-mass limit we obtain the two-loop box kernel functions:
1414: %--
1415: \begin{eqnarray}
1416: %------------------------------------------------------------
1417: K_A(x,y;z) &=&
1418: \label{KA}
1419: %------------------------------------------------------------
1420: %\frac{1}{3\,m_e^2\,(y-z)} \Bigl\{
1421: \frac{1}{3\,(y-z)} \Bigl\{
1422: %-- 1/ep
1423: - 2 \frac{F_\epsilon}{\epsilon} \left(x+y\right)^2 \ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)
1424: %-- \zeta_2
1425: + 4\, \zeta_2 \Bigl[ z^2-z\Bigl(\frac{x^2}{y}+y\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1426: &&+~2x\left(x+y\right)+y^2 \Bigr]
1427: %-- Lx
1428: + 2\,\Bigl[z\,\left(x+y\right)+x^2\Bigr] \, \ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)
1429: %-- Lx^2
1430: + \Bigl[z^2+2\,z\,x \nonumber\\
1431: &&-~y\,\left(2\,x+y\right)\Bigr] \, \ln^2\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)
1432: %-- Ly
1433: + \Bigl[ 2\,z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{x}{y}+1\Bigr)
1434: -z\,\Bigl(\frac{x^2}{y}+6\,x+5\,y\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1435: &&+~x\,\left(x+4\,y\right)+3\,y^2 \Bigr] \,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{y}\Bigr)
1436: %-- Ly^2
1437: + \Bigl[ z^2-2\,z\,\Bigl(\frac{x^2}{y}+x+y\Bigr)
1438: \nonumber\\
1439: &&+~2\,x\,\left(x+y\right)+y^2 \Bigr] \, \ln^2\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{y}\Bigr)
1440: %-- Lx Ly
1441: - 2\, \Bigl[ z^2+2\,z\,x+2\,x \, \left(x+y\right) \nonumber\\
1442: &&+~y^2\Bigr] \,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{y}\Bigr)
1443: %-- Lz
1444: + \Bigl[ 2\,z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{x}{y}+1\Bigr)-z\,\Bigl(
1445: \frac{x^2}{y}+4\,x+3\,y\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1446: &&+~ \left(x+y\right)^2 \Bigr] \,
1447: \ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{m_e^2}\Bigr)
1448: %-- Lz^2
1449: + \Bigl[ 2\,z\,\Bigl(\frac{x^2}{y}+2\,x+y\Bigr)
1450: -\left(x+y\right)^2 \Bigr] \,
1451: \ln^2\Bigl(\frac{z}{m_e^2}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1452: %-- Lz Lx
1453: &&-~ 2\,\left(x+y\right)^2\,\ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{m_e^2}\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)
1454: %-- Lz Lsub
1455: + 2\, \Bigl[ z^2-2\,z\,\Bigl(\frac{x^2}{y}+x+y\Bigr)
1456: +2\,x\, (x\nonumber\\
1457: &&+~y )
1458: + y^2 \Bigr] \,
1459: \ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{m_e^2}\Bigr)\,
1460: \ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{y}\Bigr)
1461: %-- Lsub
1462: - \Bigl[ 2\,z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{x}{y}+1\Bigr)-z\,
1463: \Bigl(\frac{x^2}{y}+6\,x+5\,y\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1464: &&-~\frac{y}{z}
1465: \left(x+y\right)^2
1466: +2\,x\,\left(x+3\,y\right)
1467: +4\,y^2\Bigr]\,
1468: \ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{y}\Bigr)
1469: %-- Lsub Lx
1470: + 2 \, \Bigl[z^2+2\,z\,x\nonumber\\
1471: &&+~2\,x (x
1472: + y )+y^2\Bigr]\,
1473: \ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{y}\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)
1474: %-- PolyLog(1)
1475: + 4 \Bigl[ \frac{z^2}{2}-z \Bigl(\frac{x^2}{y}+x+y\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1476: &&+~x\left(x+y\right)
1477: + \frac{y^2}{2} \Bigr]
1478: \text{Li}_2\Bigl(\frac{z}{y}\Bigr)
1479: %-- PolyLog(1+)
1480: + 2 \left(x+z\right)^2 \text{Li}_2\Bigl( 1+\frac{z}{x}\Bigr)
1481: %--
1482: \Bigr\}, \\
1483: && \nonumber \\
1484: %------------------------------------------------------------
1485: K_B(x,y;z) &=&
1486: \label{KB}
1487: %------------------------------------------------------------
1488: %\frac{1}{3\,m_e^2\,\left(y-z\right)} \, \Bigl\{
1489: \frac{1}{3\,\left(y-z\right)} \, \Bigl\{
1490: %-- 1/ep
1491: - 4\, \frac{F_\epsilon}{\epsilon}\,
1492: \Bigl[x\,\left(x+y\right)+\frac{y^2}{2}\Bigr]\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)
1493: %-- \zeta_2
1494: + 4\,\zeta_2\,\Bigl[z^2\nonumber\\
1495: &&-~2\,z\,\Bigl(\frac{x^2}{y}+\frac{y}{2}\Bigr)
1496: +2\,x\,\left(2\,x+y\right) + y^2 \Bigr]
1497: %-- Lx
1498: + 2 \Bigl[z\,\left(x+y\right)-x\,y\Bigr]
1499: \ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1500: %-- Lx^2
1501: &&+~ \Bigl[z^2+2 z\,x-y\left(2\,x+y \right)\Bigr]
1502: \ln^2\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)
1503: %-- Ly
1504: + \Bigl[2\,z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{x}{y}+1\Bigr)-z\,
1505: \Bigl(2\,\frac{x^2}{y}+6\,x\nonumber\\
1506: &&+~5\,y\Bigr)
1507: +y\,
1508: \left(4\,x+3\,y\right)+2x^2\Bigr]\,
1509: \ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{y}\Bigr)
1510: %-- Ly^2
1511: + \Bigl[z^2
1512: -2\, z\, \Bigl(2\, \frac{x^2}{y}
1513: + x+y\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1514: &&+~2\,x\,\left(2\,x + y\right)+y^2 \Bigr]\,
1515: \ln^2\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{y}\Bigr)
1516: %-- Lx Ly
1517: - 2\,\Bigl[z^2+2\,z\,x
1518: + 2\,x\,( 2\,x
1519: +y )
1520: +y^2\Bigr]\,\times \nonumber\\
1521: &&\times ~
1522: \ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{y}\Bigr)
1523: %-- Lz
1524: + \Bigl[2\,z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{x}{y}+1\Bigr)-z\,
1525: \Bigl(2\,\frac{x^2}{y}
1526: +4\,x+3\,y\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1527: &&+~ 2\,x \left(x+y \right)
1528: +y^2\Bigr]\,
1529: \ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{m_e^2}\Bigr)
1530: %-- Lz^2
1531: + 4 \Bigl[z \Bigl( \frac{x^2}{y}+ x+\frac{y}{2}\Bigr)
1532: -\frac{x}{2}\left(x+y\right)
1533: -\frac{y^2}{4} \Bigr]\times\nonumber\\
1534: &&\times ~\ln^2\Bigl(\frac{z}{m_e^2}\Bigr)
1535: %-- Lz Lx
1536: - 4 \Bigl[ x\left(x+y\right)
1537: + \frac{y^2}{2} \Bigr]
1538: \ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{m_e^2}\Bigr) \ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)
1539: %-- Lz Lsub
1540: + 2 \Bigl[z^2
1541: - 4 z \Bigl(\frac{x^2}{y}\nonumber\\
1542: &&+~\frac{x}{2}+\frac{y}{2}\Bigr)
1543: +2 x \left(2 x+y\right)
1544: +y^2\Bigr]
1545: \ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{m_e^2}\Bigr)
1546: \ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{y}\Bigr)
1547: %-- Lsub
1548: - \Bigl[2\,z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{x}{y}+1\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1549: &&-~ 2\,z\,\Bigl(\frac{x^2}{y}+3\,x+\frac{5}{2}\,y\Bigr)
1550: -2\,\frac{y}{z}\,\Bigl(x^2+x\,y+\frac{y^2}{2}\Bigr)
1551: + 2\,(2\,x^2+2\,y^2\nonumber\\
1552: &&+~3\,x\,y )\Bigr]\,
1553: \ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{y}\Bigr)
1554: %-- Lsub Lx
1555: + 2\,\Bigl[z^2
1556: + 2\,z\,x
1557: +2\,x\,\left(2\,x+y\right)
1558: + y^2\Bigr]\,\times\nonumber\\
1559: &&\times ~\ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{y}\Bigr)\,
1560: \ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)
1561: %-- Log(1)
1562: + 2\,\Bigl[z^2-2\,z\,\Bigl(2\,\frac{x^2}{y}+x+y\Bigr)
1563: + 2\,x \, \left(2\,x+y\right)\nonumber\\
1564: &&+~ y^2 \Bigr]\,
1565: \text{Li}_2\Bigl(\frac{z}{y}\Bigr)
1566: %-- Log(1+)
1567: + 2\,\left(z^2+2\,x\,z+2\,x^2\right)\,
1568: \text{Li}_2\Bigl( 1+\frac{z}{x}\Bigr)
1569: %--
1570: \Bigr\},\\
1571: && \nonumber \\
1572: %------------------------------------------------------------
1573: K_C(x,y;z) &=&
1574: \label{KC}
1575: %------------------------------------------------------------
1576: %\frac{1}{3\,m_e^2\,(y-z)} \, \Bigl\{
1577: \frac{1}{3\,(y-z)} \, \Bigl\{
1578: 2\,\frac{F_\epsilon}{\epsilon}\,x^2\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)
1579: %--
1580: + 4\,\zeta_2\,x^2\,\Bigl(\frac{z}{y}-2\Bigr)
1581: %--
1582: - 2\,(x^2+y^2\nonumber\\
1583: &&+~x\,y )\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)
1584: + x^2\,\Bigl(\frac{z}{y}-1\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{y}\Bigr)
1585: %--
1586: + 2\,x^2\,\Bigl(\frac{z}{y}-1\Bigr)\,\ln^2\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{y}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1587: %--
1588: &&+~ 4\,x^2\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{y}\Bigr)
1589: %--
1590: + x^2\,\Bigl(\frac{z}{y}-1\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{m_e^2}\Bigr)
1591: - 2\,x^2\,\Bigl(\frac{z}{y}-\frac{1}{2}\Bigr)\,\times\nonumber\\
1592: &&\times ~ \ln^2\Bigl(\frac{z}{m_e^2}\Bigr)
1593: %--
1594: + 4\,x^2\,\Bigl(\frac{z}{y}-1\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{m_e^2}\Bigr)\,
1595: \ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{y}\Bigr)
1596: + 2\,x^2\,\ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{m_e^2}\Bigr)\,\times\nonumber\\
1597: &&\times ~ \ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)
1598: %--
1599: - x^2\,\Bigl(\frac{z}{y}+\frac{y}{z}-2\Bigr)\,
1600: \ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{y}\Bigr)
1601: %--
1602: - 4\,x^2\,\ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{y}\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{x}\Bigr)
1603: \nonumber\\
1604: &&+~ 4 \,x^2\,\Bigl(\frac{z}{y}-1\Bigr)\,
1605: \text{Li}_2\Bigl(\frac{z}{y}\Bigr)
1606: - 2\,x^2\,\text{Li}_2\Bigl(1+\frac{z}{x}\Bigr)
1607: %--
1608: \Bigr\}.
1609: %------------------------------------------------------------
1610: \end{eqnarray}
1611: %------------------------------------------------------------
1612: These kernel functions are reproduced in Mathematica files at the webpage \cite{webPage:2007xx}
1613: % \colorbox{yellow}{\texttt{KernelFunctions.m}}
1614: as functions $KA, KB, KC$ and
1615: %in \colorbox{yellow}{\texttt{DispersionBoxKernelMasters.m}} as
1616: $KAexp, KBexp, KCexp$.
1617: %In these files, they have the additional normalization $1/m_e^2$
1618: % DispersionBoxKernelMasters.m was the file results.m, created by Stefano (< 06/2008)
1619:
1620: The two-loop box kernel masters (\ref{KA}) to (\ref{KC}) are evaluated in the Feynman gauge; they are infrared divergent and contain collinear singularities in $m_e$.
1621:
1622: After inserting Eq.~\eqref{KA}, Eq.~\eqref{KB} and Eq.~\eqref{KC}
1623: in Eq.~\eqref{Bfc}, we derive the total contribution to the
1624: cross section generated by box diagrams. Collecting powers of $\alpha$,
1625: we write
1626: %--
1627: \begin{eqnarray}
1628: \label{boxAssembl}
1629: \frac{ d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm box} }{ d\Omega }&=&
1630: \int_{4M^2}^{\infty}\, dz\, \frac{R(z)}{z}\, \frac{1}{t-z}\, I_1(z)\nonumber\\
1631: &&+~
1632: \text{Re}\,\int_{4M^2}^{\infty}\, dz\, \frac{R(z)}{z}\, \frac{1}{s-z+i\,\delta}\,
1633: \Bigl[ \,I_2(z)\,+\, I_3(z)\, \ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{s+i\, \delta}\Bigr)\, \Bigr]\nonumber\\
1634: &&+~\pi\, \text{Im}\, \int_{4M^2}^{\infty}\, dz\, \frac{R(z)}{z}\,
1635: \frac{1}{s-z+i\,\delta} \, I_3(z),
1636: \end{eqnarray}
1637: %--
1638: where the integrand functions are given by
1639: %--
1640: \begin{eqnarray}\label{i1z}
1641: I_1(z)&=&\frac{1}{3}\,\Bigl\{
1642: %--
1643: -\Bigl[ \frac{F_\epsilon}{\epsilon}-\ln\Bigl(\frac{s}{m_e^2}\Bigr)+\ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)\Bigr]\,
1644: % tr
1645: \ln\Bigl(-\frac{u}{s}\Bigr)\,
1646: % tr
1647: % \Bigl[ \frac{t^2}{s}+2\,\frac{s^2}{t}+3\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\nonumber\\
1648: \Bigl[ \frac{v_1(t,s)}{t}+ \frac{v_2(s,t)}{s} \Bigr]
1649: \nonumber\\
1650: %--
1651: &&-~\zeta_2\, \Bigl[ 2\,\frac{z^2}{t}
1652: -4\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)-\frac{t^2}{s}
1653: -2\,\frac{s^2}{t}+s-t\Bigr]
1654: %--
1655: -\Bigl[ z\,\frac{s}{t}-\frac{t^2}{s}-2\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,\times\nonumber\\
1656: &&\times ~\ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1657: %--
1658: -\frac{1}{2}\, \Bigl[ \frac{z^2}{t}-2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)
1659: +2\,s+t \Bigr]\,
1660: \ln^2\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1661: %--
1662: +\Bigl[ z^2\,\Bigl( \frac{1}{s}
1663: +2\,\frac{s}{t^2}\nonumber\\
1664: &&+~ \frac{2}{t}\Bigr)
1665: -z\,\Bigl( \frac{t}{s}+2\frac{s}{t}+2 \Bigr)\Bigr]
1666: \ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)
1667: %--
1668: -\Bigl[ z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{s}+\frac{1}{t}\Bigr) +2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)
1669: +s
1670: +2\,\frac{s^2}{t}\Bigr]\,\times\nonumber\\
1671: &&\times ~\ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)\,
1672: \ln\Bigl(1+\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)
1673: %--
1674: + \Bigl[\frac{z^2}{s}
1675: +4\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)-\frac{t^2}{s}-4\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,
1676: \Bigl[ \ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1677: &&+~\frac{1}{2}\,
1678: \ln^2\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\Bigr]
1679: %--
1680: - \Bigl[ z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{s}+2\frac{s}{t^2}+ \frac{2}{t} \Bigr)
1681: -2\, z\,\Bigl(\frac{t}{s}+2\,\frac{s}{t}
1682: +2\Bigr)+\frac{t^2}{s}+2\,\Bigl( s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,\times\nonumber\\
1683: &&\times ~ \Bigl[ \ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr) + \ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\Bigr]
1684: %--
1685: +\Bigl[ \frac{z^2}{t}-2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)+2\,\frac{t^2}{s}
1686: +8\,s
1687: +4\,\frac{s^2}{t}+7\,t \Bigr]\,\times\nonumber\\
1688: &&\times ~ \Bigl[ \ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)
1689: + \ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\Bigr]\,\ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1690: %--
1691: -\Bigl[
1692: z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{s}+\frac{1}{t}\Bigr) +2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1693: &&+~s + 2\,\frac{s^2}{t}
1694: \Bigr]\, \text{Li}_2\,\Bigl(-\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)
1695: %--
1696: + \Bigl[\frac{z^2}{s}+4\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)-\frac{t^2}{s}-4\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,
1697: \text{Li}_2\,\Bigl(\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1698: %--
1699: &&-~ \Bigl[\,\frac{z^2}{t}
1700: -2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)
1701: +\frac{t^2}{s}+5\,s+2\,\frac{s^2}{t}
1702: +4\,t\, \Bigr]\,\text{Li}_2\,\Bigl(1+\frac{z}{u}\Bigr)
1703: \Bigr\},\\
1704: &&\nonumber\\
1705: %--------------------------------
1706: %--------------------------------
1707: I_2(z) &=& \frac{1}{3}\,\Bigl\{
1708: -\Bigl[ \frac{F_\epsilon}{\epsilon} -\ln\Bigl(\frac{s}{m_e^2}\Bigr) + \ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)\Bigr]\,
1709: % tr
1710: % \Bigl[ \ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr) - \ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\Bigr]\,
1711: \ln\Bigl(\frac{u}{t}\Bigr)\,
1712: % tr
1713: % \Bigl[ 2\, \frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{s^2}{t}\nonumber\\
1714: %&&+~3\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]
1715: %-\Bigl[ z\,\frac{t}{s}-\frac{s^2}{t}-2\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,
1716: \Bigl[ \frac{v_1(s,t)}{s} + \frac{v_2(s,t)}{t}
1717: \Bigr]
1718: \nonumber\\
1719: &&-~\Bigl[ z\,\frac{t}{s}-\frac{s^2}{t}-2\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,
1720: \ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1721: - \frac{1}{2}\, \Bigl[\,\frac{z^2}{s}-2\,z\,\Bigl( 1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1722: &&+~s+2\,t \Bigr]\,
1723: \ln^2\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1724: -z\,\Bigl( \frac{t}{s}+\frac{s}{t}+2 \Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1725: +\frac{1}{2}\,\Bigl[z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{s}+\frac{1}{t}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1726: &&+~2\,z\,
1727: \Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1728: -\frac{s^2}{t}-3\,s-2\,t\Bigr]\, \ln^2\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1729: +\Bigl[ z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{t}+\frac{2}{s}+2\,\frac{t}{s^2}\Bigr)
1730: -z\,\Bigl(\frac{s}{t}+2\nonumber\\
1731: &&+~2\,\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\Bigr]\,\ln\Bigl( \frac{z}{s} \Bigr)
1732: -\Bigl[ \frac{z^2}{t}+4\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)-\frac{s^2}{t}-4\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,
1733: \text{Li}_2\,\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1734: &&+~\Bigl[ z^2\Bigl(\frac{1}{s}+\frac{1}{t}\Bigr)
1735: +2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)+2\,\frac{t^2}{s}+t \Bigr]
1736: \text{Li}_2\,\Bigl(1+\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1737: &&-~\Bigl[ \frac{z^2}{s}-2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)+\frac{s^2}{t}
1738: +2\,\frac{t^2}{s}+4\,s
1739: +5\,t\Bigr]\,\text{Li}_2\,\Bigl(1+\frac{z}{u}\Bigr)
1740: \Bigr\},\\
1741: &&\nonumber\\
1742: %--------------------------------
1743: \label{I3}
1744: I_3(z)&=&\frac{1}{3}\,\Bigl\{\,
1745: \Bigl[\, \frac{z^2}{s}-2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)+4\,\frac{t^2}{s}
1746: +2\,\frac{s^2}{t}+7\,s+8\,t\Bigr]\,\ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1747: &&-~\Bigl[ z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{s}+\frac{1}{t}\Bigr) +2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1748: +4\,\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{s^2}{t}+3\,s+4\,t \Bigr]\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1749: &&-~\Bigl[ z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{t}+\frac{2}{s}+2\,\frac{t}{s^2}\Bigr)-2\,z\Bigl(2+\frac{s}{t}
1750: +2\,\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1751: +\frac{s^2}{t}+2\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\,
1752: \Bigr]\,
1753: \Bigr\}.
1754: \end{eqnarray}
1755: %
1756: The functions $I_1(z)$ to $I_3(z)$ are reproduced as functions $I_1, I_2, I_3$ in a Mathematica file %\colorbox{yellow}{\texttt{BoxFunctions.m}}
1757: at the webpage \cite{webPage:2007xx}.
1758:
1759: Note that, after assembling all irreducible box diagrams,
1760: their total contribution is free of collinear divergencies in $m_e$ because $\ln(m_e^2)$ vanishes in
1761: the combination
1762: \begin{eqnarray}\label{me2free}
1763: \frac{F_\epsilon}{\epsilon} -\ln\Bigl(\frac{s}{m_e^2}\Bigr) &=&
1764: \frac{1}{\epsilon} - \gamma_{E} -\ln(\pi) -\ln\Bigl(\frac{s}{\mu^2}\Bigr) + 0(\epsilon).
1765: \end{eqnarray}
1766: This fact might be observed already for any sum of single pairs of direct and their related crossed box diagrams, which is gauge-independent and free of collinear singularities \cite{Frenkel:1976bj}; from (\ref{boxcombi}) and Figure \ref{Boxes2loops} one selects e.g. the following ones:
1767: \begin{eqnarray}\label{me2fre2}
1768: K_B(t,s;z) - K_B(u,s;z),\nonumber
1769: \\
1770: K_A(s,t;z) + K_C(u,t;z).
1771: \end{eqnarray}
1772: In the limit $m_f^2<<s,|t|,|u|$, the $z$-integration over the $I_i(z), i=1,2,$ develops mass singularities from the lower integration bound:
1773: \begin{eqnarray}\label{mf2a2}
1774: \int\limits_{4M^2}^{\infty}dz \frac{R(z)}{z}K_{\rm SE}(y;z) \left[ A(x,y,z) + B(x,y)\ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)\right]
1775: \end{eqnarray}
1776: where $A, B$ are regular for $z\to 0$.
1777: It follows immediately that the irreducible box diagrams yield terms of the order of at most $\ln^2(s/m_f^2)$, because $A$ joins, after integration, terms with a behavior like a one-loop self-energy, and $B$ joins terms with one order more in the logarithmic structure.
1778: This has been discussed already in \cite{Actis:2007gi}.
1779:
1780: The residual infrared-singular part of the box cross-section is:
1781: \begin{eqnarray}\label{i1teps}
1782: \frac{ d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm box}^{IR} }{ d\Omega }&=&
1783: %--
1784: - \left[ \frac{F_\epsilon}{\epsilon}-\ln({\hat s})\right] \!
1785: \left\lbrace
1786: \ln\Bigl(-\frac{u}{s}\Bigr)
1787: \Bigl[ \frac{v_1(t,s)}{t^2}+\frac{v_2(s,t)}{st}\Bigr]
1788: I(t)\right.
1789: %\\ \nonumber&&
1790: + \left.
1791: \ln\Bigl(\frac{u}{t}\Bigr)
1792: \Bigl[ \frac{v_1(s,t)}{s^2}+\frac{v_2(s,t)}{st}\Bigr]
1793: I(s)\!
1794: \right\rbrace \! .
1795: %\\ \nonumber
1796: %+ {\mathcal O}(\epsilon^0) .
1797: \end{eqnarray}
1798: The function $I(t)$ (see Eq.~(\ref{disp})) stems from diagrams with a vacuum polarization insertion in the $t$-channel, and $I(s)$ from insertions in the $s$-channel.
1799: One may wonder which of the other infrared divergent parts are needed to compensate the double-box divergency (in the gauge chosen here).
1800: This may be exemplified by collecting all the IR-divergencies of the diagrams with a vacuum polarization insertion $I(t)$ in the $t$-channel; for the others, quite analogue arguments hold.
1801: From Sections~\ref{sec-fact} and ~\ref{sec-realsoft} we may extract such terms.
1802: There are the following divergencies due to vertex diagrams:
1803: \begin{eqnarray}\label{redateps}
1804: \frac{d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm fact.}^{a,IR}} {d\Omega} &=&
1805: %-- pole
1806: \left[ \frac{F_\epsilon}{\epsilon}-\ln({\hat s})\right]
1807: \left[\ln({\hat s})-1+\ln\left( -\frac{t}{s}\right) \right] \left( \frac{v_1}{t^2}+\frac{v_2}{st}\right) ~I(t) ,
1808: \\\label{redbteps}
1809: \frac{d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm fact.}^{b,IR}} {d\Omega} &=&
1810: %-- pole
1811: \left[ \frac{F_\epsilon}{\epsilon}-\ln({\hat s})\right]
1812: \left\lbrace
1813: \left[\ln({\hat s})-1+\ln\left( -\frac{t}{s}\right) \right] ~ \frac{v_1}{t^2}
1814: + \left[\ln({\hat s})-1 \right] ~\frac{v_2}{st}
1815: \right\rbrace
1816: ~I(t) .
1817: \end{eqnarray}
1818: The reducible box diagrams are (in the curly brackets) free of electron mass singularities, also in the terms not shown here.
1819: They depend also on $u$:
1820: \begin{eqnarray}\label{redcteps}
1821: \frac{d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm fact.}^{c,IR}} {d\Omega} &=&
1822: \left[\frac{F_\epsilon}{\epsilon}-\ln({\hat s})\right]
1823: \left\lbrace
1824: \left[
1825: -\ln\left( -\frac{u}{s}\right) \right] ~ \frac{v_1}{t^2}
1826: +
1827: \left[
1828: -\ln\left( -\frac{u}{s}\right) - \ln\left( -\frac{t}{s}\right)
1829: \right] ~\frac{v_2}{st}
1830: \right\rbrace
1831: ~I(t) .
1832: \end{eqnarray}
1833: For the soft real terms, we refer to Appendix~\ref{app-soft} and may distinguish between initial and final state corrections (which are equal) and the initial-final state interference:
1834: \begin{eqnarray}\label{reddteps}
1835: \frac{d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm fact.}^{d,int,IR}} {d\Omega} &=&
1836: %-- pole
1837: \left[\frac{F_\epsilon}{\epsilon}-\ln({\hat s})\right]
1838: \left[
1839: 2 \ln\left( -\frac{u}{s}\right)
1840: -2\ln\left( -\frac{t}{s}\right)
1841: \right]~
1842: \left( \frac{v_1}{t^2}+\frac{v_2}{st}\right) ~I(t) ,
1843: \\
1844: \frac{d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm fact.}^{d,ini+fin,IR}} {d\Omega} &=&
1845: \left[\frac{F_\epsilon}{\epsilon}-\ln({\hat s})\right]
1846: \left[
1847: -2\ln\left( {\hat s}\right) +2
1848: \right]~
1849: \left( \frac{v_1}{t^2}+\frac{v_2}{st}\right) ~I(t)
1850: .
1851: \end{eqnarray}
1852: It is now easy to see that the IR-divergency of the double box diagrams, , being proportional to $\ln(-u/s)$, gets completely cancelled by the sum of the reducible box diagrams and the interference part of soft bremsstrahlung.
1853: Although, the latter introduce to the sum an IR-divergency with $\ln(-t/s)$, and this gets cancelled the reducible vertex diagrams, thus introducing an IR-divergency with $\ln(s/m_e^2)$, which will be cancelled finally by the initial and final state soft corrections.
1854: The lesson is: a sensible, infrared safe cross-section contains the complete sum of all the single IR-divergent diagrams, or no one of them.
1855:
1856: Despite of that, an isolated treatment of the pure self energies or of the irreducible vertex corrections is possible.
1857: % look at the codes \colorbox{yellow}{box-dispersion-2.nb} and \colorbox{yellow}{Afactors.nb}.\\}
1858:
1859: Finally, we just mention that the analytical integrations over $z$ may be performed
1860: following the hints in Section \ref{sec-irred-vert}.
1861:
1862:
1863: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
1864: \subsection{\label{sec:IR-safeKernels}Kernel functions for the infrared safe sum}
1865: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
1866: We are now in a state to evaluate the net cross-section contribution from the various infrared divergent terms of Sections~\ref{sec-fact} and \ref{sec:3}.
1867: We have seen that they have to be treated together.
1868: The sum of the box contributions of Eq.~\eqref{boxAssembl} with all infrared-divergent
1869: factorisable corrections, given in Eq.~\eqref{IR1}, Eq.~\eqref{IR2},
1870: Eq.~\eqref{IR3} and Eq.~\eqref{IR4}, is infrared-finite and can be cast in the
1871: following form:
1872: %--
1873: \begin{eqnarray}
1874: \label{eqrest}
1875: \frac{ d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm rest} }{ d\Omega }&=&
1876: \frac{ d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm box} }{ d\Omega } +
1877: \sum_{i=a,b,c,d}\frac{ d\overline{\sigma}^i_{\rm fact.} }{ d\Omega } \nonumber \\
1878: &=&
1879: \int_{4M^2}^{\infty}\, dz\, \frac{R(z)}{z}\, \frac{1}{t-z}\, F_1(z)\nonumber\\
1880: &&+~
1881: \text{Re}\,\int_{4M^2}^{\infty}\, dz\, \frac{R(z)}{z}\, \frac{1}{s-z+i\,\delta}\,
1882: \Bigl[ \,F_2(z)\,+\, F_3(z)\, \ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{s+i\, \delta}\Bigr)\, \Bigr]\nonumber\\
1883: &&+~\pi\, \text{Im}\, \int_{4M^2}^{\infty}\, dz\, \frac{R(z)}{z}\,
1884: \frac{1}{s-z+i\,\delta} \, F_4(z).
1885: \end{eqnarray}
1886: %--
1887: The lower bound is $4M^2=4m_{\pi}^2$ for hadrons and $4M^2=4m_{f}^2$ for fermions $f$.
1888: The auxiliary functions $F_i(z)$ are given by
1889: %--
1890: \begin{eqnarray}
1891: %--
1892: F_1(z)&=& \frac{1}{3}\,\Bigl\{\,
1893: %--
1894: \Bigl[\, 3\,\Bigl( \frac{t^2}{s}+2\,\frac{s^2}{t} \Bigr)+9\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,
1895: \ln\Bigl(\frac{s}{m_e^2}\Bigr)
1896: %--
1897: +\Bigl[-z^2\Bigl(\frac{1}{s}+\frac{2}{t}+2\,\frac{s}{t^2}\Bigr) \nonumber\\
1898: &&+~ z\,\Bigl( 4+4\,\frac{s}{t}+2\,\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1899: +\frac{1}{2}\,\frac{t^2}{s}+6\,\frac{s^2}{t}+5\,s+4\,t\Bigr]\,
1900: \ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1901: %--
1902: + s\,\Bigl(-\frac{z}{t}+\frac{3}{2}\Bigr)\,\times\nonumber\\
1903: &&\times ~\ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1904: %--
1905: +\Bigl[\frac{1}{2}\,\frac{z^2}{s}+2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)-\frac{11}{4}\,s-2\,t \Bigr]\,
1906: \ln^2\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1907: %--
1908: -\Bigl[\frac{1}{2}\,\frac{z^2}{t}\nonumber\\
1909: &&-~z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)+\frac{t^2}{s}
1910: +2\,\frac{s^2}{t}+\frac{9}{2}\,s+\frac{15}{4}\,t \Bigr]\,\ln^2\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1911: %--
1912: +\Bigl[\frac{z^2}{t}-2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1913: &&+~2\,\frac{s^2}{t}+5\,s+\frac{5}{2}\,t
1914: \Bigr]\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1915: %--
1916: -4\,\Bigl[\frac{t^2}{s}+2\,\frac{s^2}{t}+3\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr) \Bigr]\,
1917: \Bigl[1\nonumber\\
1918: &&+~\text{Li}_2\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\Bigr]
1919: %--
1920: -\Bigl[ 2\,\frac{z^2}{t}-4\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)
1921: -4\,\frac{t^2}{s}
1922: -2\,\frac{s^2}{t}+s-\frac{11}{2}\,t\Bigr]\,\zeta_2\nonumber\\
1923: %--
1924: &&-~
1925: \Bigl[ \frac{t^2}{s}+2\,\frac{s^2}{t}+3\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,\ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)\,
1926: \ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1927: %--
1928: +\Bigl[ z^2\,\Bigl( \frac{1}{s}
1929: +2\,\frac{s}{t^2}
1930: + \frac{2}{t}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1931: &&-~z\,\Bigl( \frac{t}{s}+2\frac{s}{t}+2 \Bigr)\Bigr]
1932: \ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)
1933: %--
1934: -\Bigl[ z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{s}+\frac{1}{t}\Bigr) +2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)
1935: +s
1936: +2\,\frac{s^2}{t}\Bigr]\,\times\nonumber\\
1937: &&\times ~\ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)\,
1938: \ln\Bigl(1+\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)
1939: %--
1940: + \Bigl[\frac{z^2}{s}
1941: +4\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)-\frac{t^2}{s}-4\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,
1942: \ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1943: %--
1944: &&-~ \Bigl[ z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{s}+2\frac{s}{t^2}+ \frac{2}{t} \Bigr)
1945: -2\, z\,\Bigl(\frac{t}{s}+2\,\frac{s}{t}
1946: +2\Bigr)+\frac{t^2}{s}+2\,\Bigl( s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,
1947: \ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1948: %--
1949: &&+~\Bigl[ \frac{z^2}{t}-2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)+2\,\frac{t^2}{s}
1950: +8\,s
1951: +4\,\frac{s^2}{t}+7\,t \Bigr]\,
1952: \ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1953: %--
1954: &&-~\Bigl[
1955: z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{s}+\frac{1}{t}\Bigr) +2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)
1956: +s + 2\,\frac{s^2}{t}
1957: \Bigr]\, \text{Li}_2\,\Bigl(-\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)
1958: %--
1959: + \Bigl[\frac{z^2}{s}+4\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1960: &&-~\frac{t^2}{s}-4\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,
1961: \text{Li}_2\,\Bigl(\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)
1962: %--
1963: - \Bigl[\,\frac{z^2}{t}
1964: -2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)
1965: +\frac{t^2}{s}+5\,s+2\,\frac{s^2}{t}\nonumber\\
1966: &&+~4\,t\, \Bigr]\,\text{Li}_2\,\Bigl(1+\frac{z}{u}\Bigr)
1967: \Bigr\}
1968: %--
1969: +4\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{3}\,\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{2}{3}\,\frac{s^2}{t}+s+t\Bigr)\,
1970: \ln\Bigl(\frac{2\,\omega}{\sqrt{s}}\Bigr)\,\Bigl[
1971: \ln\Bigl(\frac{s}{m_e^2}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1972: &&+~\ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1973: -\ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)-1\Bigr]
1974: ,\\
1975: &&\nonumber\\
1976: %------------------------------------------
1977: F_2(z)&=& \frac{1}{3}\,\Bigl\{
1978: \,\Bigl[6\,\frac{t^2}{s}+3\,\frac{s^2}{t}+9\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,
1979: \ln\Bigl(\frac{s}{m_e^2}\Bigr)
1980: -\Bigl[z\Bigl(\frac{t}{s}+\frac{s}{t}+2\Bigr)-5 \,
1981: \Bigl( s+\frac{t}{2}\nonumber\\
1982: &&+~\frac{1}{2}\frac{s^2}{t}\Bigr)\Bigr]\,
1983: \ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1984: -t\Bigl( \frac{z}{s}-\frac{3}{2}\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1985: +\Bigl[ \frac{z^2}{2}\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{s}+\frac{1}{t}\Bigr)
1986: +z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
1987: &&+~2\,\frac{t^2}{s}-\frac{s}{4}+\frac{3}{4}t
1988: \Bigr]\,\ln^2\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1989: - \Bigl[ \frac{z^2}{2\,s}-z\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)+2\,\frac{t^2}{s}
1990: +\frac{s^2}{t}+\frac{15}{4}\,s\nonumber\\
1991: &&+~\frac{9}{2}\,t\Bigr]\,
1992: \ln^2\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1993: -\Bigl(4\,\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{s^2}{t}+4\,s+5\,t\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\,
1994: \ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
1995: \nonumber\\
1996: &&-~4\, \Bigl[\, 2\,\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{s^2}{t}+3\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\,\Bigr]\,
1997: \Bigl[ 1+\text{Li}_2\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\,\Bigr]
1998: + \Bigl( 12\,\frac{t^2}{s}+3\,\frac{s^2}{t}+12\,s+15\,t\Bigr)\,\zeta_2\nonumber\\
1999: &&-~ \Bigl[ 2\, \frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{s^2}{t}
2000: +3\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\, \ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)\,
2001: \Bigl[ \ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr) - \ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\Bigr]
2002: +\Bigl[ z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{t}\nonumber\\
2003: &&+~\frac{2}{s}+2\,\frac{t}{s^2}\Bigr)
2004: -z\,\Bigl(\frac{s}{t}+2
2005: +2\,\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\Bigr]\,\ln\Bigl( \frac{z}{s} \Bigr)
2006: -\Bigl[ \frac{z^2}{t}+4\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)-\frac{s^2}{t}\nonumber\\
2007: &&-~4\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,
2008: \text{Li}_2\,\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)
2009: +\Bigl[ z^2\Bigl(\frac{1}{s}+\frac{1}{t}\Bigr)
2010: +2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
2011: +2\,\frac{t^2}{s}
2012: +t \Bigr]\times\nonumber\\
2013: &&\times ~\text{Li}_2\,\Bigl(1+\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)
2014: -\Bigl[ \frac{z^2}{s}-2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)+\frac{s^2}{t}
2015: +2\,\frac{t^2}{s}+4\,s
2016: +5\,t\Bigr]\,\text{Li}_2\,\Bigl(1+\frac{z}{u}\Bigr)
2017: \Bigr\}\nonumber\\
2018: &&+~4\,\Bigl(\frac{2}{3}\,\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{1}{3}\,\frac{s^2}{t}+s+t\Bigr)\,
2019: \ln\Bigl(\frac{2\,\omega}{\sqrt{s}}\Bigr)\,\Bigl[
2020: \ln\Bigl(\frac{s}{m_e^2}\Bigr)
2021: +\ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
2022: -\ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)-1\Bigr]
2023: ,\nonumber\\
2024: &&\\
2025: F_3(z)&=& I_3(z),
2026: \nonumber\\
2027: &&\\
2028: %------------------------------------------
2029: F_4(z)&=& \frac{1}{3}\,\Bigl\{\,
2030: \Bigl[\, \frac{z^2}{s}-2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)+2\,\frac{t^2}{s}
2031: +2\,\frac{s^2}{t}+\frac{11}{2}\,s+5\,t\Bigr]\,\ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
2032: &&-~\Bigl[ z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{s}+\frac{1}{t}\Bigr) +2\,z\,\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
2033: +2\,\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{3}{2}\,s+\frac{5}{2}\,t \Bigr]\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
2034: &&-~\Bigl[ z^2\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{t}+\frac{2}{s}+2\,\frac{t}{s^2}\Bigr)-2\,z\Bigl(2+\frac{s}{t}
2035: +2\,\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
2036: -\frac{1}{2}\,\frac{s^2}{t}-s \,
2037: \Bigr]\,
2038: \Bigr\}.
2039: %--
2040: \end{eqnarray}
2041: %--
2042: The $I_3(z)$ is defined in (\ref{I3}).
2043: For $0<s<4\,M^2$ we can write
2044: %--
2045: \begin{eqnarray}
2046: \frac{ d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm rest} }{ d\Omega }&=&
2047: \int_{4M^2}^{\infty}\, dz\, \frac{R(z)}{z}\, \Bigl\{\,
2048: \frac{1}{t-z}\, F_1(z)
2049: + \frac{1}{s-z}\, \Bigl[F_2(z)+F_3(z)\,\ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{s}-1\Bigr)\Bigr]
2050: \, \Bigr\}.
2051: \end{eqnarray}
2052: %--
2053: For $s>4\,M^2$, we have to perform some subtractions in order to make the formulas explicitly stable around $z = s$, and at the time retain the sufficiently fast vanishing of the integrand at $z\to \infty$:
2054: %--
2055: \begin{eqnarray}
2056: \frac{ d\overline{\sigma}_{\rm rest} }{ d\Omega }&=&
2057: %
2058: \int_{4M^2}^{\infty}\, dz\, \frac{R(z)}{z}\,
2059: \frac{1}{t-z}\, F_1(z)
2060: \\
2061: &&+~
2062: %
2063: \int_{4M^2}^{\infty}\, dz\, \frac{1}{z\,\left(s-z\right)}\,
2064: \Bigl\{
2065: %----------------------------------------
2066: %R(z)\Bigl[F_2(z)
2067: %+~F_3(z)\,\ln \arrowvert 1-\left(z\slash s\right) \arrowvert \Bigr]
2068: %- R(s)\Bigl[F_2(s)+F_3(s)\,\ln \arrowvert 1-\left(z\slash s\right) \arrowvert \Bigr]
2069: R(z)F_2(z)-R(s)F_2(s) + \left[ R(z)F_3(z)-R(s)F_3(s)\right] \ln\left| 1-\frac{z}{s}\right|
2070: %--------------------------------------------------
2071: \Bigr\}
2072: \nonumber\\
2073: &&+~ \frac{R(s)}{s}\Bigl\{
2074: F_2(s)\,\ln\Bigl(\frac{s}{4\,M^2}-1\Bigr)
2075: - 6\, \zeta_2\,F_4(s)
2076: +~F_3(s)\,\Bigl[
2077: 2\,\zeta_2
2078: +~\frac{1}{2}\,\ln^2\Bigl(\frac{s}{4\,M^2}-1\Bigr)
2079: +\text{Li}_2\Bigl(1-\frac{s}{4\,M^2}\Bigr)\,
2080: \Bigr]
2081: \Bigr\}.\nonumber
2082: \end{eqnarray}
2083: %--
2084: In the limit $m_f^2<<s,|t|,|u|$, the $z$-integration over the $F_i(z), i=1,2,$ develops mass singularities from the lower integration bound:
2085: \begin{eqnarray}\label{mf2a}
2086: \int\limits_{4M^2} dz \frac{R(z)}{z}K_{\rm SE}(y;z) \left[ A(x,y,z) + B(x,y)\ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)
2087: + C(x,y)\ln\Bigl(\frac{s}{m_e^2}\Bigr)\right]
2088: \end{eqnarray}
2089: where $A, B, C$ are regular for $z\to 0$.
2090: It follows immediately that the sum of all infrared divergent diagrams yield terms of the order of at most $\ln^2(s/m_f^2)$ and $\ln(s/m_e^2)\ln(s/m_f^2)$, because $A$ joins, after integration, terms with a behavior like a one-loop self-energy, $B$ joins terms with one order more in $\ln(s/m_f^2)$ and $C$
2091: goes together with at most $\ln(s/m_e^2)\ln(s/m_f^2)$; there are no cubic logarithms here.
2092: This has been discussed already in \cite{Actis:2007gi}.
2093:
2094: Further, for the numerical evaluation, the functions $F_1$, $F_2$ and $F_3$ are
2095: replaced for $z\to\infty$ by their asymptotic values:
2096: %--
2097: \begin{eqnarray}
2098: F_1(z)&\sim &
2099: \Bigl[\, \frac{t^2}{s}+2\,\frac{s^2}{t} +3\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\,\Bigr]\,
2100: \ln\Bigl(\frac{s}{m_e^2}\Bigr)
2101: +\Bigl[\, \frac{1}{2}\frac{t^2}{s}+2\,\frac{s^2}{t}+\frac{7}{3}\,s+2\,t\,\Bigr]\,
2102: \ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
2103: &&+~\frac{s}{2}\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{3}-\frac{s}{t}\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
2104: -\frac{1}{2}\,\Bigl(\frac{s}{2}-\frac{1}{3}\,\frac{t^2}{s}\Bigr)\,\ln^2\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
2105: -\frac{1}{3}\,\Bigl( \frac{1}{2}\,\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{s^2}{t}+2\,s\nonumber\\
2106: &&+~\frac{7}{4}\, t\Bigr)\,\ln^2\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
2107: -\Bigl[\frac{2}{3}\Bigl(\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{s^2}{t}\Bigr)+s+\frac{3}{2}\,t\Bigr]\,
2108: \ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
2109: &&-~4\,\Bigl[\frac{1}{3}\Bigl(\frac{t^2}{s}+2\,\frac{s^2}{t}\Bigr)+s+t\Bigr]\,
2110: \text{Li}_2\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
2111: +\Bigl[2\Bigl(\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{s^2}{t}\Bigr) +3\,\Bigl(s+\frac{3}{2}\,t\Bigr) \Bigr]\,\zeta_2\nonumber\\
2112: &&-~\Bigl[\frac{23}{12}\,\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{8}{3}\,\frac{s^2}{t}+\frac{23}{4}\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\,\Bigl]
2113: -\frac{1}{2}\Bigl[\frac{t^2}{s}+3\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,\ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)
2114: +4\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{3}\,\frac{t^2}{s}\nonumber\\
2115: &&+~\frac{2}{3}\,\frac{s^2}{t}+s+t\Bigr)\,
2116: \ln\Bigl(\frac{2\,\omega}{\sqrt{s}}\Bigr)\,\Bigl[
2117: \ln\Bigl(\frac{s}{m_e^2}\Bigr)
2118: +\ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
2119: -\ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)-1\Bigr]+{\cal O}\Bigl(\frac{1}{z}\Bigr)
2120: ,
2121: \\ %==========================
2122: F_s(z) &=& F_2(z)+F_3(z)\,\ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{s}-1\Bigr),
2123: \\
2124: %--
2125: F_s(z)&\sim&
2126: \Bigl[2\,\frac{t^2}{s} + \frac{s^2}{t}+3\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,\ln\Bigl(\frac{s}{m_e^2}\Bigr)
2127: +\Bigl(\frac{1}{2}\,\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{s^2}{t}\nonumber\\
2128: &&+~\frac{5}{2}\,s+2\,t\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
2129: +\frac{t}{2}\,\Bigl(\frac{1}{3}-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
2130: +\frac{1}{3}\,\Bigl[\frac{t^2}{s}-\frac{1}{4}\,\Bigl(s-t\Bigr)\Bigr]\times\nonumber\\
2131: &&\times ~ \ln^2\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
2132: -\frac{1}{3}\,\Bigl(\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{1}{2}\,\frac{s^2}{t}+\frac{7}{4}\,s+2\,t\Bigr)\,
2133: \ln^2\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
2134: -\frac{1}{3}\,\Bigl(4\,\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{s^2}{t}\nonumber\\
2135: &&+~4\,s+5\,t\Bigr)\,
2136: \ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
2137: -4\,\Bigl(\frac{2}{3}\,\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{1}{3}\,\frac{s^2}{t}+s+t\Bigr)\,
2138: \text{Li}_2\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)\nonumber\\
2139: &&+~\Bigl(4\,\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{s^2}{t}+4\,s+5\,t\Bigr)\,\zeta_2
2140: -\Bigl[\frac{8}{3}\,\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{23}{12}\,\frac{s^2}{t}+\frac{23}{4}\,\Bigl(
2141: s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\nonumber\\
2142: &&-~\frac{1}{2}\,\Bigl[\frac{s^2}{t}+3\,\Bigl(s+t\Bigr)\Bigr]\,\ln\Bigl(\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)
2143: +4\,\Bigl(\frac{2}{3}\,\frac{t^2}{s}+\frac{1}{3}\,\frac{s^2}{t}+s+t\Bigr)\,
2144: \ln\Bigl(\frac{2\,\omega}{\sqrt{s}}\Bigr)\,\times\nonumber\\
2145: &&\times ~ \Bigl[
2146: \ln\Bigl(\frac{s}{m_e^2}\Bigr)
2147: +\ln\Bigl(-\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)
2148: -\ln\Bigl(1+\frac{t}{s}\Bigr)-1\Bigr]
2149: +{\cal O}\Bigl(\frac{1}{z}\Bigr).
2150: \end{eqnarray}
2151: %--
2152:
2153: % Evidently, only the functions $F_1(z)$ and $F_2(z)$ contain logarithmic mass dependencies.
2154: % They are linear in $\ln(s/m_e^2)$, arising from the factorizing diagrams.
2155: % A closer look at the $z$ dependence of $F_1(z), F_2(z)$ near the lower integration bound $4M^2$ shows the form:
2156: % \begin{eqnarray}
2157: % F_i(z) = A(z) \ln\frac{s}{m_e^2} + B(z) + C(z) \ln(z),
2158: % \end{eqnarray}
2159: %where $A,B,C$ are power coefficients in $z$ for $4M^2 \leq z/s, z/t, z/u << 1$.
2160: %The self-energy (28) will yield terms at most linear in $\ln(s/M^2)$ (see A3,A8).
2161: %So we may conclude without explicit evaluation that (93), with the additional factor $F_i(z)$ in the integrand,
2162: % will yield terms at most linear in $\ln(s/M^2)$ from $A(z)$ and $B(z)$, and terms of the order $\ln^2(s/M^2)$ from the $\ln(z)$.
2163: %There are no cubic logarithms here, as was already observed in \cite{Actis:2007gi,Becher:2007cu}.
2164: %Since the case with $m_e^2<<M^2<<s,t,u$ is not our focus here, we don't go into further detail.
2165:
2166: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
2167: \section{\label{sec:NumericalResults}NUMERICAL RESULTS AT MESON FACTORIES, LEP/GigaZ, ILC}
2168: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
2169: We begin with
2170: numerical results for Eq.~\eqref{eqrest}, multiplied by
2171: the overall factor $(\alpha \slash \pi)^2\, \alpha^2\slash s$.
2172: The expressions
2173: contain the contribution of irreducible two-loop boxes,
2174: summed up with reducible two-loop vertex and loop-by-loop diagrams, and combined with soft-photon
2175: emission.
2176: They are called here 'rest' from electrons, muons, tau-leptons, and from hadrons.
2177: The top influence was also considered but comes out so marginal that we don't discuss it.
2178: The results are summarized in Table~\ref{nums1} and Table~\ref{nums2}
2179: for small- and large-angle scattering and a variety of energy scales.
2180: We do not discuss the isolated irreducible two-loop boxes because this would become more convention-dependent.
2181: Note further that in these tables the dependence on the maximal energy of the soft photons is switched off by setting $\omega= \sqrt{s}\slash 2$ (an analogous
2182: consideration holds for the soft pairs $e^+e^-$).
2183: For comparison, the tables also contain entries with pure QED Born,
2184: QED Born with running coupling, and effective weak Born cross-sections,
2185: as well as contributions from:
2186: electron vertex insertions and soft $e^+e^-$ pairs (with a quite small sum of them);
2187: the sum of heavy fermion irreducible vertices.
2188: The hadronic results
2189: have been obtained using the parametrization~\cite{Burkhardt:1981jk} with flag setting
2190: $\texttt{IPAR} = 0$ and implementing narrow resonances as described in
2191: Appendix \ref{app:rhad}.
2192:
2193: We see that the two-loop corrections from electron insertions (the so-called $N_f=1$ corrections) are the largest, and the second-largest ones are the hadronic corrections.
2194: The tables also demonstrate that the approximation $m_f^2 << s,|t|,|u|$ as applied in e.g. \cite{Actis:2007gi} works well in the regions where this is expected.
2195:
2196:
2197:
2198: %%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2199: \begin{table}[tb]\centering
2200: \setlength{\arraycolsep}{\tabcolsep}
2201: \renewcommand\arraystretch{1.1}
2202: \begin{tabular}{|l|r|r|r|r|}
2203: \hline
2204: $\theta$ $[^\circ]$\, $\vert$ \,$\sqrt{s}$ [GeV] & $\theta=20$\, $\vert$ \, 1& $\theta=20$\, $\vert$ \, 10&
2205: $\theta=3$\, $\vert$ \, $M_Z$ & $\theta=3$\, $\vert$ \, 500\\
2206: \hline
2207: \hline
2208: {\rm QED Born}
2209: & 214.903 & 2.14903 & 53.0348 & 1.76398 \\
2210: \hline
2211: \hline
2212: {\rm weak Born}
2213: & 214.903 & 2.14930 & 53.0376 & 1.76390 \\
2214: \hline
2215: \hline
2216: {\rm QED Born, running} & 218.559 & 2.23814 & 55.5353 & 1.90910 \\
2217: \hline
2218: \hline
2219: {\rm vertices [$\mu$+$\tau$+hadr.]}
2220: & -0.001086 & -0.00022513 & -0.007982 & -0.00129296 \\
2221: \hline
2222: \hline
2223: {\rm vertices [$e$]}
2224: & -0.102787 & -0.00325449 & -0.092546 & -0.00574577 \\
2225: \hline
2226: {\rm soft pairs $e^+e^-$}
2227: & 0.130264 & 0.00403772 & 0.112763 & 0.00685890 \\
2228: \hline
2229: \hline
2230: {\rm rest:}\qquad\,\, $e$
2231: & 0.235562 & 0.00497834 & 0.135650 &0.00672652 \\
2232: \hline
2233: \qquad\qquad$\mu$ & 0.009518 & 0.00135040 & 0.040792 & 0.00287809 \\
2234: &-- 0.017214 & 0.00134282 & 0.040688 & 0.00287795 \\
2235: \hline
2236: \qquad\qquad$\tau$ & 0.000074 & 0.00005385 & 0.002706 & 0.00087639 \\
2237: & $\times$ & $\times$ &-- 0.009610 & 0.00083969 \\
2238: \hline
2239: \qquad\qquad hadr. & 0.008642 & 0.00269490 & 0.087618 & 0.00810781 \\
2240: \hline
2241: \end{tabular}
2242: \caption[]{Numerical values for the differential cross section
2243: in nanobarns at scattering angles $\theta=20^\circ$ and
2244: $\theta=3^\circ$, in units of $10^2$. Concerning the finite remainder,
2245: containing irreducible box diagrams, we show for each fermion flavor
2246: the result obtained through the dispersion-based approach (first line) and the one
2247: coming from the analytical expansion (second line), neglecting ${\cal O}(m_f^2 \slash x)$,
2248: where $x=s,|t|,|u|$. When $m_f^2>x$, the entry is suppressed.
2249: }
2250: \label{nums1}
2251: \end{table}
2252: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2253:
2254: %%%%%% TABLE 5 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2255: \begin{table}[ht]\centering
2256: \setlength{\arraycolsep}{\tabcolsep}
2257: \renewcommand\arraystretch{1.2}
2258: \begin{tabular}{|l|r|r|r|r|}
2259: \hline
2260: $\sqrt{s}$ [GeV] & 1& 10& $M_Z$& 500\\
2261: \hline
2262: \hline
2263: {\rm QED Born} & 466537 & 4665.37 &56.1067 &1.86615 \\
2264: \hline
2265: \hline
2266: {\rm weak Born} &466526 & 4654.16 & 1238.7500 & 0.92890 \\
2267: \hline
2268: \hline
2269: {\rm QED Born, running} & 480106 & 4984.83 & 62.9027 & 2.17957 \\
2270: \hline
2271: \hline
2272: {\rm vertices [$\mu$+$\tau$+hadr.] } & -16.351 & -2.0437 & -0.125208 & -0.0104275 \\
2273: \hline
2274: \hline
2275: {\rm vertices [e]} & -477.620 & -12.3010 & -0.298589 & -0.0155751 \\
2276: \hline
2277: \hline
2278: {\rm soft pairs $e^+e^-$} & 648.275 & 16.0690 & 0.376531 & 0.0191990 \\
2279: \hline
2280: \hline
2281: {\rm rest:} \qquad\,\, $e$ & 807.476 & 14.5277 & 0.270575 & 0.0119285 \\
2282: \hline
2283: \qquad \qquad $\mu$ & 160.197 & 6.0819 & 0.147046 & 0.0072579 \\
2284: & 152.890 & 6.0809 & 0.147046 & 0.0072579 \\
2285: \hline
2286: \qquad \qquad $\tau$ & 2.383 & 1.3335 & 0.075268 & 0.0045713 \\
2287: & $\times$ & 1.0739 & 0.075214 & 0.0045712 \\
2288: \hline
2289: \qquad \qquad hadr. & 232.674 & 16.0670 & 0.469944 & 0.0246035 \\
2290: \hline
2291: \end{tabular}
2292: \caption[]{Numerical values for the differential cross section
2293: in nanobarns at a scattering angle $\theta=90^\circ$, in units of $10^{-4}$.
2294: See the caption of Table~\ref{nums1} for further details.}
2295: \label{nums2}
2296: \end{table}
2297: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2298:
2299: A more detailed picture of the relevance of the fermionic and hadronic two-loop corrections may be got from figures \ref{PRD1gev_noSE} to \ref{PRD800gev_noSE_ew_hadI}, where we show the cross-section ratios
2300: \begin{eqnarray}
2301: 10^3~~\frac{d\sigma_{\rm NNLO}}{d\sigma_0},
2302: \end{eqnarray}
2303: where $d\sigma_0$ is the effective weak Born cross-section at $\sqrt{s}=M_Z, 500$ and $800$ GeV, and the QED
2304: Born cross-section elsewhere.
2305: So, the figures show just the relative size of the corrections in per mille.
2306: For a comparison, we show also the pure photonic corrections.
2307: The $d\sigma_{\rm NNLO}$ is here the net sum of all the terms discussed arising from a fermion flavor ($e$ or $\mu$) or from the hadrons.
2308: In case of electrons, we add also the real pair correction.
2309: The total non-photonic term includes also the $\tau$ and top quark contributions.
2310: For hadrons, we decided to use the parameterization $R_{\rm had,I}$ as given in \cite{Burkhardt:1981jk}
2311: with parameter $\texttt{IPAR}=1$.
2312: We applied also numerics with a combination $R_{\rm had,II}$ of several adjusted pieces valid at different scales, as explained in Appendix \ref{app:rhad}.
2313: In Figures \ref{PRD1gev_noSE} and \ref{PRDMZgev_noSE} it is seen that the predictions with $R_{\rm had,I}$ and $R_{\rm had,II}$ are quite close to each other.
2314: Because we did not get a stable numerics over all the parameter space with $R_{\rm had,II}$, we decided not to use it for the final determination of the physical results until we have a better understanding of its behaviour.
2315:
2316: At a meson factory with $\sqrt{s} \approx 1$ GeV (Fig.~\ref{PRD1gev_noSE}) the heavy fermion effects are below 0.5 per mille and are thus certainly negligible.
2317: At $\sqrt{s} \approx 10$ GeV (Fig.~\ref{PRD10gev_noSE_hadI}), electron and hadron corrections amount to 2 to 5 per mille and might play some relevance.
2318: At the higher energies, we have to consider small angles and large ones separately.
2319: The hadronic corrections amount to up to 4 per mille at LEP1/GigaZ and 20 per mille at ILC energies at large angles, while at small angles they stay well below 5 per mille.
2320: For $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV this is exemplified in Figure \ref{PRD500gev_noSE_ew_small}, and from the tables one may read exact values at $\theta = 3$ degrees:
2321: for the infrared-finite remainder containing box diagrams, at LEP/GigaZ it is $\frac{d\sigma_{\rm 2}^{\rm had}}{d\sigma_0^{weak}} = 1.65$ per mille, and at $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV the corresponding value becomes 4.6 per mille.
2322: Everywhere, the pure photonic corrections are the largest one, followed by the $N_f=1$ corrections.
2323: This is, of course, due to the small electron mass producing large logarithmic mass effects and is extensively discussed in the literature.
2324:
2325:
2326:
2327:
2328:
2329:
2330:
2331:
2332: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
2333: \section{\label{sec:summa}SUMMARY}
2334: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
2335: The NNLO effects of heavy fermions and hadrons on the Bhabha cross-sections are accurately known now and the determination of QED two-loop corrections is completed.
2336: For each of the corrections there exist several independent calculations.
2337: Quite recently, a second determination of the hadronic corrections in \cite{Kuhn:2008zs} fully confirmed our results as presented in \cite{Actis:2007pn,Actis:2007fs,Actis:2008sk} and at our webpage \cite{webPage:2006xx}.
2338: We indeed checked, when preparing this longer write-up of our results, that, when using the same parameterization \cite{Burkhardt:1981jk}, all the digits shown in our Tables agree with those shown in \cite{Kuhn:2008zs} (see Tabs.~\ref{nums1}
2339: and \ref{nums2}).
2340: The numerical differences which were mentioned in \cite{Kuhn:2008zs} were due to a different choice of the parameter \texttt{IPAR} in \cite{Actis:2007pn} and \cite{Kuhn:2008zs}.
2341:
2342:
2343: Summarizing the numerical discussion, it is quite obvious that for measurements aiming at an accuracy at the per mille level it is crucial to take the heavy fermion and hadron contributions into account.
2344: A detailed conclusion for a specific experiment evidently depends on the experimental set-ups and will deserve the use of a precise Monte-Carlo program.
2345:
2346: Finally, we would like to mention that, in pure QED, not all of the contributions have been determined so far.
2347: It would be quite interesting to know also the influence from the so-called radiative loops.
2348: This problem was treated in \cite{Melles:1996qa}, but so far without account of the radiative loop diagram, which include e.g. radiative boxes with the need of knowledge of five-point functions.
2349: Also here, final conclusion will be made only with a precise Monte-Carlo program.
2350:
2351: As a third field of future improvement we like to mention
2352: the complete treatment of electroweak two-loop corrections to Bhabha scattering.
2353: As already said there exists some literature on that subject.
2354: %The first study was \cite{Consoli:1979xw}, but see also \cite{Bohm:1984yt,Bohm:1986fg,Tobimatsu:1985pp,Bardin:1990xe,Beenakker:1991es,Beenakker:1991mb,Montagna:1993py,Field:1995dk,Beenakker:1997fi,Fleischer:2006ht}.
2355: The leading NNLO weak corrections due to top quarks have been determined long ago in \cite{Bardin:1990xe}.
2356: This was considered as a satisfactory approximation for LEP 1 and implemented e.g. in the packages \texttt{ZFITTER} \cite{Arbuzov:2005ma} and in the program family \texttt{KORALZ} \cite{Jadach:1999tr}, \texttt{KKMC} \cite{Jadach:1999vf,Ward:2002qq}, \texttt{BHLUMI} \cite{Jadach:1996is}, \texttt{BHWIDE} \cite{Jadach:1995nk}; see also the workshop report \cite{Kobel:2000aw}.
2357: An improvement of that might become necessary for large angle scattering at the ILC.
2358: This might be done similarly to the recent implementation of weak two-loop corrections for muon pair production in \texttt{ZFITTER} v.6.42 \cite{Arbuzov:2005ma}, based on original work described in \cite{Awramik:2003rn,Awramik:2006uz} and references therein.
2359:
2360: %--
2361: \begin{figure}[tbh]
2362: \begin{center}
2363: \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{PRD1gev_noSE_corrected.eps}
2364: \end{center}
2365: \caption[]
2366: {\em Two-loop corrections to Bhabha scattering at $\sqrt{s}=1$ GeV, normalized
2367: to the QED tree-level cross section.}
2368: \label{PRD1gev_noSE}
2369: \end{figure}
2370:
2371:
2372: \begin{figure}[tbhp]
2373: \begin{center}
2374: \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{PRD10gev_noSE_hadI_corrected.eps}
2375: \end{center}
2376: \caption[]
2377: {\em Two-loop corrections to Bhabha scattering at $\sqrt{s}=10$ GeV, normalized
2378: to the QED tree-level cross section.}
2379: \label{PRD10gev_noSE_hadI}
2380: \end{figure}
2381:
2382:
2383: \begin{figure}[tbhp]
2384: \begin{center}
2385: \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{PRDMZgev_noSE_ew_corrected.eps}
2386: \end{center}
2387: \caption[]
2388: {\em Two-loop corrections to Bhabha scattering at $\sqrt{s}=M_Z$, normalized
2389: to the effective weak Born cross section.}
2390: \label{PRDMZgev_noSE}
2391: \end{figure}
2392:
2393:
2394: \begin{figure}[tbph]
2395: \begin{center}
2396: \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{PRD500gev_noSE_ew_corrected.eps}
2397: \end{center}
2398: \caption[]
2399: {\em Two-loop corrections to Bhabha scattering at $\sqrt{s}=500$ GeV, normalized
2400: to the effective weak Born cross section.}
2401: \label{PRD500gev_noSE_ewhadI}
2402: \end{figure}
2403:
2404: \begin{figure}[tbph]
2405: \begin{center}
2406: \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{PRD500gev_noSE_ew_corrected_small.eps}
2407: \end{center}
2408: \caption[]
2409: {\em Same as in Fig.~\ref{PRD500gev_noSE_ewhadI}, for small angles.}
2410: \label{PRD500gev_noSE_ew_small}
2411: \end{figure}
2412:
2413:
2414:
2415:
2416: \begin{figure}[tbph]
2417: \begin{center}
2418: \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{PRD800gev_noSE_ew_hadI.eps}
2419: \end{center}
2420: \caption[]
2421: {\em Two-loop corrections to Bhabha scattering at $\sqrt{s}=800$ GeV, normalized
2422: to the effective weak Born cross section.}
2423: \label{PRD800gev_noSE_ew_hadI}
2424: \end{figure}
2425:
2426:
2427: --------------------------------------------------------
2428: %\section*{Acknowledgments}
2429: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
2430: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
2431: %-------------------------------------------------------------------
2432: \begin{acknowledgments}
2433: We would like to thank B.~Kniehl, H.~Burkhardt and T.~Teubner for help concerning
2434: $R_{\mathrm{had}}$ and A. Arbuzov, H. Czyz, S.-O. Moch, and K. M{\"o}nig for
2435: discussions.
2436: Work supported by Sonderforschungsbereich/Transregio
2437: SFB/TRR 9 of DFG ``Computergest\"utzte Theoretische Teilchenphysik", by the Sofja Kovalevskaja Programme of the Alexander von
2438: Humboldt Foundation sponsored by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research,
2439: and by the European Community's Marie-Curie Research Training Networks
2440: MRTN-CT-2006-035505 ``HEPTOOLS'' and MRTN-CT-2006-035482 ``FLAVIAnet''.
2441:
2442: Feynman diagrams have been drawn with the packages
2443: {\sc Axodraw}~\cite{Vermaseren:1994je} and
2444: {\sc Jaxo\-draw}~\cite{Binosi:2003yf}.
2445: \end{acknowledgments}
2446:
2447: %\clearpage
2448:
2449:
2450: \appendix
2451: %\section*{Appendix}
2452: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
2453:
2454: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
2455: \section{\label{app:pho}Analytic Results for the Fermionic Vacuum Polarization}
2456: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
2457: The contribution of a fermion of flavour $f$ to the irreducible
2458: renormalized photon vacuum-polarization function $\Pi$, introduced in
2459: Eq.~\eqref{1stReplace}, can be written in pure QED as
2460: %--
2461: \begin{equation}
2462: \label{Ksum}
2463: \Pi_f(q^2)= \sum_{n=1}^{2}\, \left(\frac{\alpha}{\pi}\right)^n\,
2464: F_\epsilon^n\,\left(\frac{m_e^2}{m_f^2}\right)^{n\epsilon}\,Q_f^{2n}\,C_f\,
2465: \Pi_f^{(n)}(q^2) + {\cal O}(\alpha^3),
2466: \end{equation}
2467: %--
2468: where $Q_f$ is the electric-charge quantum number, $C_f$ is the color factor
2469: and the normalization
2470: factor $F_\epsilon$ is defined in Eq.~\eqref{norm}.
2471:
2472: For our purposes we need both the $n=1$ and $n=2$ terms up to ${\cal O}(\epsilon^0)$.
2473: However, since some components of the infrared-finite differential
2474: cross section show single poles in the $\epsilon$ plane, we find
2475: useful to consider also the ${\cal O}(\epsilon)$ part of the
2476: one-loop photon self-energy for intermediate checks of the results.
2477:
2478: Both expressions can be written in a compact form introducing the variable
2479: %--
2480: \begin{equation}\label{defofx}
2481: x=\frac{\sqrt{-q^2+4\,m_f^2}-\sqrt{-q^2}}{\sqrt{-q^2+4\,m_f^2}+\sqrt{-q^2}}.
2482: \end{equation}
2483: %--
2484: The results can be found in Appendix~A of Ref.~\cite{Bonciani:2004gi}
2485: and at the webpage \cite{webPage:2007xx}.
2486: In the space-like region $-\infty<q^2<0$, it is $0<x<1$, and one gets a real vacuum polarization:
2487: %--
2488: \begin{eqnarray}
2489: \label{oneloop}
2490: \Pi_f^{(1)}(q^2)&=& -\frac{5}{9} +\frac{4}{3}\,\frac{x}{(1-x)^2}
2491: +\frac{1}{3}\,\left[\, \frac{4}{(1-x)^3} - \frac{6}{(1-x)^2}+1\,
2492: \right]\,\ln\left(x\right)\nonumber\\
2493: &&+~\frac{\epsilon}{3}\,\Bigl\{\,
2494: -\frac{28}{9}
2495: +\frac{32}{3}\,\frac{x}{(1-x)^2}
2496: +\frac{1}{3}\,\left[\, \frac{32}{(1-x)^3}-\frac{48}{(1-x)^2}+\frac{6}{1-x}
2497: + 5 \,\right]\,
2498: \ln\left(x\right)\nonumber\\
2499: &&-~ 2\,\left[ \frac{4}{(1-x)^3}
2500: - \frac{6}{(1-x)^2} + 1 \right]\,
2501: \Bigl[\text{Li}_2(-x)+\ln(x)\,\ln(1+x)-\frac{1}{4}\,\ln^2(x)+\frac{\zeta_2}{2} \Bigr]\,
2502: \Bigr\},\nonumber\\
2503: &&\nonumber\\
2504: &&\\
2505: &&\nonumber\\
2506: \label{twoloops}
2507: \Pi_f^{(2)}(q^2)&=& -\frac{1}{6}\,\left[ \frac{5}{4}-13 \, \frac{x}{(1-x)^2} \right]
2508: +\frac{1}{4}\,\left[\frac{12}{(1-x)^3}-\frac{18}{(1-x)^2}+\frac{4}{1-x}+ 1 \right]\,\ln(x)\nonumber\\
2509: &&-~\frac{4}{3}\, \left[\frac{4}{(1-x)^3} -\frac{6}{(1-x)^2}+1\right]\,
2510: \Bigl\{ \text{Li}_2(-x)+\frac{1}{2}\text{Li}_2(x)+\ln(x)\, \Bigl[ \ln(1+x)\nonumber\\
2511: &&+~\frac{1}{2}\,\ln(1-x)\Bigr]\Bigr\}
2512: -\frac{1}{6}\,\left[ \frac{7}{(1-x)^4} - \frac{26}{(1-x)^3} + \frac{23}{(1-x)^2}
2513: +\frac{2}{1-x}
2514: -6\right]\,
2515: \ln^2(x)\nonumber\\
2516: & +&\frac{1}{3}\,\left[\frac{4}{(1-x)^4}-\frac{8}{(1-x)^3}+\frac{4}{(1-x)^2}
2517: -1\right]\,\Bigl\{ \ln^2(x)\Bigl[ \ln(1-x)
2518: +2\,\ln(1+x)\Bigr]\nonumber\\
2519: &&+~4\,\ln(x)\,\Bigl[ \text{Li}_2(x)+2\,\text{Li}_2(-x)\Bigr]
2520: -6\,\Bigl[\text{Li}_3(x)
2521: +2\,\text{Li}_3(-x)\Bigr]-3\,\zeta_3
2522: \Bigr\}.\nonumber\\
2523: \end{eqnarray}
2524: For the time-like region,
2525: we have to perform
2526: an analytical continuation to $q^2>4\,m_f^2$ by setting $q^2\to q^2+i\,\delta$ in Eq. (\ref{defofx}).
2527: Now, the conformal variable $x$ develops a small positive imaginary part and it is
2528: $-1< \text{Re} x <0$.
2529: In order to derive Im\,$\Pi$ of Eq.~\eqref{Im},
2530: we may introduce an auxiliary variable $y$:
2531: %--
2532: \begin{equation}
2533: y=\frac{\sqrt{q^2}-\sqrt{q^2-4\,m_f^2}}{\sqrt{q^2}+\sqrt{q^2-4\,m_f^2}},
2534: \end{equation}
2535: %--
2536: and observe that $x=-y+i\delta$, with $y=0$ for $q^2\to\infty$
2537: and $y=1$ for $q^2=4\,m_f^2$.
2538: With these conventions, it becomes evident for Eqs. (\ref{oneloop}) and (\ref{twoloops}) that $\text{Li}_2(\pm x)$, $\text{Li}_3(\pm x)$, and $\ln(1+x)$
2539: stay well-defined, and one has to take care about $\ln(x)$:
2540: %--
2541: \begin{eqnarray}
2542: %\text{Li}_2(-x)&\to&\text{Li}_2(y),\nonumber\\
2543: %\ln(1+x)&\to&\ln(1-y),\nonumber\\
2544: \ln(x)&\to&\ln(-y+i\,\delta)=\ln(y)+i \pi.
2545: \end{eqnarray}
2546: Of course, one may perform the evaluations with complex variables either.
2547:
2548: The contribution of electron loops to the irreducible
2549: renormalized photon vacuum-polarization function $\Pi$
2550: of Eq.~\eqref{1stReplace} in the small electron-mass limit
2551: is available in pure QED up to three loops,
2552: %--
2553: \begin{equation}
2554: \Pi_e(q^2)= \sum_{n=1}^{3}\, \left(\frac{\alpha}{\pi}\right)^n\,
2555: \Pi_e^{(n)}(q^2) + {\cal O}(\alpha^4).
2556: \end{equation}
2557: %--
2558: The one- and two-loop contributions can be obtained by expanding
2559: Eqs.~\eqref{oneloop} and \eqref{twoloops} and neglecting terms suppressed by
2560: positive powers of the electron mass.
2561: The three-loop component, (we do not include double-bubble diagrams with two different flavours),
2562: can be found in Eqs.~(7) and (9) of Ref.~\cite{Steinhauser:1998rq}.
2563: The results for $q^2<0$ are:
2564: %--
2565: \begin{eqnarray}
2566: \label{oneloopE}
2567: \Pi_e^{(1)}(q^2)&=& -\frac{5}{9}-\frac{1}{3}\,\ln\left(-\frac{m_e^2}{q^2}\right) +{\cal O}(m_e^2),\\
2568: \label{twoloopsE}
2569: \Pi_e^{(2)}(q^2)&=& -\frac{5}{24}+\zeta_3-\frac{1}{4}\,\ln\left(-\frac{m_e^2}{q^2}\right) + {\cal O}(m_e^2),\\
2570: \label{threeloopsE}
2571: \Pi_e^{(3)}(q^2)&=& \frac{121}{192} - \Bigl[2\,\ln(2)-\frac{5}{4}\Bigr]\,\zeta_2 +\frac{99}{64}\,\zeta_3
2572: -\frac{5}{2}\,\zeta_5 + \frac{1}{32}\,\ln\left(-\frac{m_e^2}{q^2}\right)\nonumber\\
2573: &&+~\underbrace{\frac{307}{864} + \frac{2}{3}\,\zeta_2 -\frac{545}{576}\,\zeta_3
2574: +\Bigl( \frac{11}{24}-\frac{\zeta_3}{3}\Bigr)\,\ln\left(-\frac{m_e^2}{q^2}\right)
2575: +\frac{1}{24}\,\ln^2\left(-\frac{m_e^2}{q^2}\right)}_{\rm double\quad electron\quad bubble}+{\cal O}(m_e^2).\nonumber\\
2576: \end{eqnarray}
2577: %--
2578: The continuation to $q^2>0$ is again obtained by the replacement $q^2 \to q^2+i\delta$.
2579:
2580: %\clearpage
2581: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
2582: \section{\label{app-masters}Master Integrals for the Box Kernel Functions}
2583: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
2584: The three kernel functions for irreducible box diagrams of Figure~\ref{Boxes2loops} may be found
2585: at webpage \cite{webPage:2007xx} with their exact dependences on $m_e$ and on $\epsilon$.
2586: They are expressed by eight master integrals, which were evaluated in the limit $m_e^2<<z,s,|t|,|u|$.
2587: The master integrals of Eq.~\eqref{deco}, for $x=s$ and $y=t$, are evaluated to the power in $\epsilon$ needed here:
2588: %--
2589: \begin{eqnarray}\label{master1}%===================================================================
2590: M^{(1)}&=& N
2591: \int \frac{d^D k}{\left( k^2-m_e^2 \right)}
2592: \nonumber \\
2593: &=& m_e^2\, \Bigl[ \,
2594: \frac{1}{\epsilon}+1+\epsilon\,\Bigl(\, 1+\frac{\zeta_2}{2}\, \Bigr)\,\Bigr],
2595: \\\label{master2} %==============================================================================
2596: M^{(2)}&=&N \int \frac{d^D k\,}{
2597: \left( k^2-m_e^2 \right) \,
2598: \left[ \left( k-p_1-p_2 \right)^2-m_e^2 \right] }
2599: \nonumber \\
2600: &=& \frac{1}{\epsilon} + 2 +\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{s}\Bigr) +\epsilon\,
2601: \Bigl[\, 4 -\frac{\zeta_2}{2}+2\, \ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{s}\Bigr)
2602: +\frac{1}{2}\, \ln^2\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{s}\Bigr)\, \Bigr] +{\cal O}(m_e^2),
2603: \\ \label{master3} %===================================================
2604: M^{(3)}&=&N \int \frac{d^D k\,}{
2605: k^2\, \left(k-p_1+p_3\right)^2 }
2606: \nonumber
2607: \\&=& \frac{1}{\epsilon} + 2 +\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{t}\Bigr) ,
2608: \\ \label{master4} %===================================================
2609: M^{(4)}&=&N \int \frac{d^D k}{
2610: \left(k^2-m_e^2\right)\,
2611: \left[\left(k-p_3\right)^2-z\right]},
2612: \nonumber
2613: \\&=& {\cal O}(m_e^0),
2614: \\ \label{master5} %===================================================
2615: M^{(5)}&=&
2616: N \int \frac{d^D k}{
2617: \left(k^2-z\right)\,\left(k-p_1+p_3\right)^2}
2618: \\&=& \frac{1}{\epsilon} + 2 +\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{t}\Bigr)
2619: -\ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)-\frac{z}{t}\,
2620: \Bigl[\, \ln\Bigl(-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr) - \ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)\,\Bigr],
2621: \\ \label{master6} %===================================================
2622: M^{(6)}&=&
2623: N \int \frac{d^D k}{
2624: \left(k^2-z\right) \,
2625: \left[\left(k+p_3\right)^2-m_e^2\right]
2626: \left[\left(k+p_3-p_1-p_2\right)^2-m_e^2\right]}
2627: \nonumber
2628: \\
2629: &=& \frac{1}{s} \Bigl[ \zeta_2 + \frac{1}{2}\,\ln^2\Bigl(-\frac{z}{s}\Bigr) +
2630: \text{Li}_2\Bigl(1+\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)\, \Bigr] + {\cal O}(m_e^2),
2631: \\ \label{master7} %===================================================
2632: M^{(7)}&=&
2633: N \int \frac{d^Dk\,}{\left(k^2-z\right)\,\left[\left(k+p_3\right)^2-m_e^2\right]\,
2634: \left(k+p_3-p_1\right)^2}
2635: \nonumber
2636: \\&=& \frac{1}{t}\,\Bigl\{ \zeta_2+\ln\Bigl(-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)\,
2637: \Bigl[\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{t}\Bigr) - \frac{1}{2}\ln\Bigl(-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)\, \Bigr]
2638: \nonumber
2639: \\
2640: && -~\ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)\,\Bigl[\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{t}\Bigr)
2641: -\ln\Bigl(-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)\,\Bigl] + \,\text{Li}_2\, \Bigl(\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)\, \Bigr\}
2642: +{\cal O}(m_e^2),
2643: \\ \label{master8} %===================================================
2644: M^{(8)}&=&
2645: N \int \frac{d^Dk}
2646: { \left(k^2-z\right)\left[\left(k+p_3\right)^2-m_e^2\right]
2647: \left(k+p_3-p_1\right)^2 \left[\left(k+p_3-p_1-p_2\right)^2-m_e^2\right] }
2648: \nonumber\\
2649: &=&
2650: \frac{1}{s\,\left(t-z\right)}\,
2651: \Bigl\{
2652: \frac{1}{\epsilon}\Bigl[ \ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{t}\Bigr)+\ln\Bigl(-\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)
2653: -\ln\Bigl(-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)\Bigr]-2\,\zeta_2
2654: \nonumber\\
2655: &&+~\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{t}\Bigr)\,\Bigl[
2656: \frac{1}{2}\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{m_e^2}{t}\Bigr)+\ln\Bigl(-\frac{z}{s}\Bigr) + \ln\Bigl(-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)
2657: -2\,\ln\Bigl( 1-\frac{z}{t} \Bigr)\Bigl]
2658: \nonumber\\
2659: &&-~\frac{3}{2}\,\ln^2\Bigl(-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)
2660: +\ln\Bigl(-\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)\,\ln\Bigl(-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)
2661: -2\,\ln\Bigl(1-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)\,\Bigl[\, \ln\Bigl(-\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)-\ln\Bigl(-\frac{z}{t}\Bigr)\,
2662: \Bigr]
2663: \nonumber\\
2664: &&-~\text{Li}_2\,\Bigl(1+\frac{z}{s}\Bigr)\,
2665: \Bigr\} + {\cal O}(m_e^2).
2666: \end{eqnarray}
2667: %--
2668: where $D=4-2\,\epsilon$ and
2669: %--
2670: \begin{equation}
2671: N= m_e^{2\epsilon}\, \frac{e^{\gamma_E\epsilon}}{i \pi^{2-\epsilon}}.
2672: \end{equation}
2673: %--
2674: For $M^{(1)}$ and $M^{(2)}$, results are needed up to ${\cal O}(\epsilon)$,
2675: since, after the reduction procedure, both coefficients $c_i^{(1)}$
2676: and $c_i^{(2)}$, for $i=A,B,C$, include terms ${\cal O}(\epsilon^{-1})$.
2677: For all other basis integrals, ${\cal O}(\epsilon^0)$ results suffice.
2678: %--
2679: Note that for $M^{(1)}$ (tadpole), $M^{(3)}$ and $M^{(5)}$ (no dependence
2680: on $m_e$, apart from the normalization factor $N$) results are exact. In other cases, the order of the
2681: expansion in $m_e$ depends on the coefficients $c_i^{(j)}$.
2682: For example, we have $c_i^{(2)}={\cal O}(m_e^{-2})$, and we compute
2683: $M^{(2)}$ up to ${\cal O}(m_e^0)$ (note the overall factor $m_e^2$
2684: in Eq.~\eqref{boxs}). In contrast, we have $c_i^{(4)}={\cal O}(m_e^{0})$
2685: and we do not need $M^{(4)}$ up to ${\cal O}(m_e^0)$.
2686:
2687:
2688: %\clearpage
2689: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
2690: \section{\label{app-soft}Soft Real Photon Emission}
2691: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
2692: %-----------------------------
2693: The leading order contributions to the soft real photon corrections
2694: \begin{equation}\label{soft1}
2695: e^-\,(p_1) \, + \,
2696: e^+\,(p_2) \, \to \,
2697: e^-\,(p_3) \, + \, e^+\,(p_4)\, + \, \gamma\,(k)
2698: \end{equation}
2699: to the Bhabha cross section (\ref{born})
2700: are
2701: %derived in {\ttfamily bhabha-nf-brems.nb}.
2702: contained in the factor $F_{\rm soft}$:
2703: \begin{equation}\label{npb786eq4.4}
2704: \frac{d\sigma_{\gamma}^{LO}}{d\Omega} = \frac{d\sigma_0}{d\Omega} ~ \frac{\alpha}{\pi} ~ F_{\rm soft}(\omega,s,t,m_e^2),
2705: \end{equation}
2706: with $\omega$ being the upper limit of the energy of the non-observed soft photons:
2707: \begin{equation}
2708: E_{\gamma} \in [0,\omega] .
2709: \end{equation}
2710: The $\omega$ has to be chosen as small as to guaranty that the emitted photon does not change the kinematics of the process (\ref{bhabhamomenta}).
2711: The NLO radiative cross section with ${\cal O}(\alpha)$ vacuum polarization insertions is:
2712: %\colorbox{red}{In the following equation, there is no factor 2 in the denominator,
2713: %because there is the interference one-loop with tree-level giving an overall factor 2
2714: %in the numerator; and the power of alpha is 2, not 1; I changed accordingly.
2715: %I changed also the Re charachters}
2716:
2717: \begin{eqnarray}\label{npb786eq4.5}
2718: \frac{d\sigma_{\gamma}^{NLO}}{d\Omega} &=&
2719: \frac{\alpha^2}{s} \left\lbrace \frac{v_1(s,t)}{s^2} ~\text{Re} \Pi^{(1)}(s)
2720: + \frac{v_2(s,t)}{st} ~\text{Re} \left[ \Pi^{(1)}(s)+ \Pi^{(1)}(t)\right] \right.
2721: \nonumber \\
2722: &&~\left. +\frac{v_1(t,s)}{t^2}~\text{Re} \Pi^{(1)}(t)
2723: \right\rbrace ~\left(\frac{\alpha}{\pi}\right) ~F_{\rm soft}(\omega,s,t,m_e^2).
2724: \end{eqnarray}
2725: The result for the soft photon factor is split into initial and final state radiation and their interference:
2726: \begin{equation}
2727: F_{\rm soft}(\omega,s,t,m_e^2) =
2728: \delta_{\rm ini} + \delta_{\rm int} + \delta_{\rm fin} ,
2729: \end{equation}
2730: where %\colorbox{red}{I took away some useless equality signs}
2731: \begin{eqnarray}\label{delini}
2732: \delta_{\rm ini} &=& (Q_1^2+Q_2^2) F_{11} + Q_1Q_2 F_{12}
2733: \\ \nonumber &=&
2734: ~ ~ 2 F_{11} + F_{12},
2735: \\\label{delint}
2736: \delta_{\rm int} &=& (Q_1Q_3+Q_2Q_4) F_{13} + (Q_1Q_4+Q_2Q_3) F_{14}
2737: \\ \nonumber &=&
2738: ~ ~ 2 F_{13} + 2 F_{14},
2739: \\\label{delfin}
2740: \delta_{\rm fin} &=& (Q_3^2+Q_4^2) F_{33} + Q_3Q_4 F_{34}
2741: \\ \nonumber &=&
2742: ~ ~ 2 F_{33} + F_{34}.
2743: \end{eqnarray}
2744: Each of the terms in Eqns. (\ref{delini}) to (\ref{delfin}) exhibits the radiating particles -- a factor $Q_iQ_j$ marks the emission of the photons from particles with momenta $p_i$ and $p_j$;
2745: %Here we denote with charge $Q_i$ that the particle with momentum $p_i$ has been emitting the soft photon.
2746: %\colorbox{red}{of}
2747: Of course, it is $Q_iQ_j=1$ here. % $Q_i=-1$ for $i=1,\cdots 4$.
2748: Since the initial and final state particles have equal masses, it is additionally:
2749: \begin{eqnarray}
2750: F_{33} &=& F_{11},
2751: \\
2752: F_{34} &=& F_{12}.
2753: \end{eqnarray}
2754: So, it will be:
2755: \begin{equation}
2756: F_{\rm soft}(\omega,s,t,m_e^2) = 4 F_{11} + 2 F_{12} + 2 F_{13} + 2 F_{14}.
2757: \end{equation}
2758: The evaluation of $F_{\rm soft}$ follows standard textbook methods (see e.g. for details in Sec. (4.3) of \cite{Fleischer:2003kk}).
2759: The exact result for the soft radiation functions is, for $d=4-2\epsilon$:
2760: \begin{eqnarray}
2761: F_{11} &=& \Delta_{\epsilon} +\frac{1}{2\beta}\log \left( \frac{1+\beta}{1-\beta}\right) ,
2762: \\
2763: F_{12} &=& \Delta_{\epsilon} \left[ -\frac{2(s-2m^2)}{s\beta}\log \left( \frac{1+\beta}{1-\beta}\right)\right]
2764: \\ \nonumber
2765: &&+~\frac{2(s-2m^2)}{s\beta}\left[\litwo\left( \frac{2\beta}{\beta-1}\right) - \litwo\left(\frac{2\beta}{\beta+1} \right)\right],
2766: \\
2767: F_{13} &=& \Delta_{\epsilon}\left( -\frac{T}{\sqrt{\lambda_T}}\right) \ln\left( \frac{T+\sqrt{\lambda_T}}{T-\sqrt{\lambda_T}} \right) + F_{13}^{\rm fin},
2768: \\
2769: F_{14} &=& - F_{13} \mathrm{~~with~~} (t \leftrightarrow u),
2770: \end{eqnarray}
2771: and
2772: \begin{eqnarray}
2773: F_{13}^{\rm fin} &=& \frac{(t-2m^2)}{t\beta_t}
2774: \left[ \litwo\left( \frac{\beta-1/\beta_t}{1+\beta}\right)
2775: -\litwo\left( \frac{\beta+1/\beta_t}{1+\beta}\right)
2776: -\litwo\left(-\frac{\beta-1/\beta_t}{1-\beta} \right) \right.
2777: \\ \nonumber&&
2778: \left.
2779: +~ \litwo\left(-\frac{\beta+1/\beta_t}{1-\beta} \right)\right] .
2780: \end{eqnarray}
2781: We use the abbreviations:
2782: \begin{eqnarray}
2783: \beta&=&\sqrt{1-4m^2/s},
2784: \\
2785: \beta_t&=& \sqrt{1-4m^2/t},
2786: \\
2787: T &=&2m^2-t,
2788: \\
2789: \sqrt{\lambda_T}&=& \sqrt{T^2-4m^4},
2790: \\
2791: \beta_u&=& \sqrt{1-4m^2/u},
2792: \\
2793: U&=&2m^2-u,
2794: \\
2795: \sqrt{\lambda_U}&=& \sqrt{U^2-4m^4} .
2796: \end{eqnarray}
2797: Our kinematics fulfills here $s+t+u=4m^2$, and it is $T, U >0$.
2798: If necessary, the logarithms and dilogarithms may be analytically continued with the replacement
2799: \begin{eqnarray}
2800: s \to s+i\epsilon,
2801: \end{eqnarray}
2802: e.g.
2803: \begin{eqnarray}
2804: \litwo\left( \frac{2\beta}{\beta-1}\right) &=&
2805: - \litwo\left(\frac{\beta-1}{2\beta}\right) -\litwo\left(1\right)-\frac{1}{2}\ln^2\left(\frac{2\beta}{1-\beta} \right).
2806: \end{eqnarray}
2807: In the limit of small electron mass $m_e$, this simplifies considerably (${\hat s} = s/m_e^2$):
2808: \begin{eqnarray}
2809: F_{11}&=&\Delta_{\epsilon}+\frac{1}{2}\ln\left({\hat s}\right),
2810: \\
2811: F_{12}&=&-2 \Delta_{\epsilon} \ln\left({\hat s}\right) - \frac{1}{2} \ln\left({\hat s}\right)^2 - 2 \zeta_2,
2812: \\
2813: F_{13}&=&- 2 \Delta_{\epsilon} \ln\left(-\frac{t}{m_e^2}\right) -\frac{1}{2} \ln\left({\hat s}\right)^2 - 2 \zeta_2 -
2814: \litwo \left( -\frac{u}{t} \right),
2815: \\
2816: F_{14}&=& 2 \Delta_{\epsilon} \ln\left(-\frac{u}{m_e^2}\right) + \frac{1}{2} \ln\left({\hat s}\right)^2 + 2 \zeta_2 +
2817: \litwo\left( -\frac{t}{u} \right) .
2818: \end{eqnarray}
2819: Finally, the divergent part is:
2820: \begin{eqnarray}
2821: \Delta_{\epsilon} &=& \frac{1}{2}\left[ \frac{F_{\epsilon}}{\epsilon}-\ln\left({\hat s}\right)\right] -\ln\left( \frac{2\omega}{\sqrt{s}}\right) .
2822: \end{eqnarray}
2823: %from Stefano 23072008
2824: %%% This I get using C26-C29; the only difference
2825: %%% is the sign of Log(s)^2 (it is -), and the
2826: %%% coefficient of Log(s) (it is 1, not Log(t/u).
2827: %%% It agrees completely with the NPB paper.
2828: Taking all the terms together, we obtain:
2829: \begin{eqnarray}
2830: F_{\rm soft}(\omega,s,t,m_e^2) &=&
2831: \left[
2832: \frac{F_{\epsilon}}{\epsilon} -\ln\left({\hat s}\right) - 2\ln\left(\dfrac{2\omega}{\sqrt{s}} \right)
2833: \right]
2834: \left[-2\ln\left({\hat s}\right)+2 -2\ln\left( \frac{t}{u} \right) \right] \nonumber
2835: \\
2836: &&-~
2837: \ln\left({\hat s}\right)^2 - 4\zeta_2
2838: + 2 \ln\left({\hat s}\right) +2\litwo\left( -\frac{t}{u}\right) - 2 \litwo\left( -\frac{u}{t}\right) .
2839: \end{eqnarray}
2840: %Taken all the terms together, we obtain:
2841: %\begin{eqnarray}
2842: %F_{\rm soft}(\omega,s,t,m_e^2) &=&
2843: %\left[
2844: %\frac{F_{\epsilon}}{\epsilon} -\ln\left({\hat s}\right) - 2\ln\left(\dfrac{2\omega}{\sqrt{s}} \right)
2845: %\right]
2846: %\left[-2\ln\left({\hat s}\right)+2 -2\ln\left( \frac{t}{u} \right) \right]
2847: %\\\nonumber
2848: %&&+~
2849: %\ln\left({\hat s}\right)^2 - 4\zeta_2
2850: %+ 2 \ln\left({\hat s}\right) \ln\left( \frac{t}{u} \right) +2\litwo\left( -\frac{t}{u}\right) - 2 \litwo\left( -\frac{u}{t}\right) .
2851: %\end{eqnarray}
2852: This expression agrees, of course, with e.g. Eq. (4.5) of \cite{Actis:2007gi}.
2853: %\colorbox{red}{I don't get agreement, see the attached mathematica file
2854: %CheckEqC31.nb}
2855:
2856: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
2857: \section{\label{sec:realpairs}Real Fermion Pair or Hadron Emission}
2858: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
2859: The numerical influence of the virtual corrections gets modified by the non-observed emission of real pairs of electrons or other fermions, or of hadrons:
2860: %\colorbox{red}{cos Omega changed in Omega}
2861: \begin{eqnarray}\label{sp}
2862: % some signs corrected tr 30 05 2008
2863: \frac{d\sigma^{\rm real}}{d\Omega}&=& \frac{d\sigma_0}{d\Omega}
2864: \frac{\alpha^2}{\pi^2} \left[\delta^{e}+ \delta^{f}+\ \delta^{had}\right].
2865: \end{eqnarray}
2866: The real pairs or hadrons give non-singular contributions and depend, in the simplest configuration, on an energetic cut-off $D$ on the invariant mass of the non-observed pair or hadrons $E_{\rm real}$, and of course also on the production threshold $2M$.
2867:
2868: There are two basically different situations.
2869: In case $4M^2 << s,|t|,|u|$, one may additionally choose $ 2M < E_{\rm real} < D E_{\rm beam}<< E_{\rm beam}$ (remember $E_{\rm beam}=\sqrt{s}/2$), and observes a logarithmic dependence of the cross-sections on the two parameters $M, D$.
2870: In the other case, assuming $M>> m_e$ but otherwise arbitrary, as it is done in the present study if not stated differently, the concept of soft pairs becomes senseless and one has to evaluate the pair and hadron emission cross-section numerically with MC methods.
2871:
2872: For completeness and because of the numerical importance, we will include the soft pair emission contributions for electrons, which is by far the biggest one.
2873: For this case, analytical expressions with logarithmic accuracy are known from \cite{Arbuzov:1995vj}:
2874: \begin{eqnarray}
2875: % some signs corrected tr 30 05 2008
2876: % \frac{d\sigma^{sp}}{d\cos \Omega}&=& \frac{d\sigma_0}{d\Omega}
2877: %\frac{\alpha^2}{\pi^2} \left[\delta^{e}+ \delta^{f}+\ \delta^{had}\right],
2878: %\\
2879: \label{spe}
2880: \delta_{\rm soft}^{e}&=& \frac{1}{3}\left[
2881: \frac{1}{3}L_s^3+L_s^2\left(2\ln(D)-\frac{5}{3} \right) +L_s\left(4\ln^2(D)- \frac{20}{3}\ln(D)+A_s\right)
2882: \right. \nonumber \\ &&
2883: +~\frac{1}{3}L_t^3+L_t^2\left(2\ln(D)-\frac{5}{3} \right) +L_t\left(4\ln^2(D)- \frac{20}{3}\ln(D)+A_t\right)
2884: \nonumber \\ &&
2885: \left.
2886: -~\frac{1}{3}L_u^3-L_u^2\left(2\ln(D)-\frac{5}{3} \right) -L_u\left(4\ln^2(D)- \frac{20}{3}\ln(D)+A_u\right)
2887: \right] ,
2888: \end{eqnarray}
2889: where
2890: \begin{eqnarray}\label{spe1}
2891: L_s &=&\ln\left(\frac{s}{m_e^2} \right),
2892: \\\label{spe2}
2893: L_v &=&\ln\left(-\frac{v}{m_e^2} \right), ~~~~v=t,u,
2894: \\ \label{spe3}
2895: A_s&=& \frac{56}{9}-4\zeta_2.
2896: \\\label{spe4}
2897: A_v&=& A_s+2\litwo\left( \frac{1\pm\cos \theta}{2}\right) , ~~~~v=t,u.
2898: \end{eqnarray}
2899: The parameter $D$ has to fulfill:
2900: \ba
2901: 2m_e << D E_{\rm beam} << E_{\rm beam}.
2902: \ea
2903: From the sum of (\ref{sp}) and (\ref{sig-irr-vert}), the compensation of the leading mass singularities (contained here in the $L_s^3, L_t^3, L_u^3$ terms) in the cross-section becomes evident.
2904:
2905: %\colorbox{yellow}{TR 250708: better now?}
2906: %\clearpage
2907:
2908: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
2909: \section{The Cross-Section Ratio $R_{\rm had}$}
2910: \label{app:rhad}
2911: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
2912: The numerical values of the irreducible two-loop corrections depend crucially on $R_{\rm had}(s)$ as defined in (\ref{Rhad}), while the reducible corrections may be evaluated with one of the publicly available parameterizations of $\Pi(q^2)$ (see (\ref{DispInt})).
2913: Unfortunately,
2914: we did not find an actual, publicly available code for $R_{\rm had}(s)$ that
2915: covers the complete integration region from the threshold at $s=4M_{\pi}^2$ to infinity.
2916: In our short communication \cite{Actis:2007fs}, we used the Fortran routine of H. Burkhardt~\cite{Burkhardt:1981jk}.
2917: This parameterization dates back to 1986 and was used for the numerics in \cite{Kniehl:1988id}, and it was available by contacting the author \cite{Burkhardt:1981jk}.
2918: The Fortran file is made available at our website \cite{webPage:2007xx}.
2919: It is to be expected that current hadronic data would not induce changes compared to the parametrization
2920: of~\cite{Burkhardt:1981jk} of more than about 10\%.
2921: This would be tolerable in view of the smallness of the irreducible two-loop contributions in our analysis.
2922: For the numerically much more sensitive reducible contributions, the running coupling $\alpha_{em}$ is needed, and
2923: implementations of that are publicly available, e.g. the Fortran package \texttt{hadr5.f} at \cite{Jegerlehner-hadr5n:2003aa}.
2924:
2925: For the present study, we improved our numerical basis for the evaluation of the irreducible vertex and box contributions by combining packages for the evaluation of $R_{\rm had}(s)$ in different kinematical regions:
2926: %-----------------------------------------------------------------------
2927: \begin{itemize}
2928: \item[(A)] From threshold at $s=4m_\pi^2$ to $s=0.03$ GeV$^2$: We follow Section 8.1 of \cite{Davier:2002dy}:
2929: \begin{eqnarray}
2930: R_{\rm had}(s) = R_{\pi^+ \pi^-}(s) &=& \frac{1}{4}\left( 1-\frac{4m_{\pi}^2}{s}\right)^{3/2} |F_{\pi}(s)|^2,
2931: \\ % 1/6 x 11.274 = 1.879
2932: F_{\pi}(s) &=& 1 + 1.879 \left( \frac{s}{\mathrm{GeV}^2}\right) + 3.3 \left( \frac{s}{\mathrm{GeV}^2}\right)^2 -0.7 \left( \frac{s}{\mathrm{GeV}^2}\right)^3.
2933: \end{eqnarray}
2934: The above is based on a fit to $e^+e^-$ data whose results are shown in Table 3 of \cite{Davier:2002dy}; space-like data \cite{Amendolia:1986wj} are also taken into account.
2935: %
2936: \item[(B)] From $s=0.03$ GeV$^2$ to $s=10000$ GeV$^2$:
2937: Use of
2938: subroutine \cite{rintpl:2008AA}.
2939: %The program is unpublished; it was created and used for the determination of (g-2) of the muon and of $\alpha_{em}(s)$ in references \cite{Hagiwara:2002ma,Hagiwara:2003da,Hagiwara:2006jt}.
2940: % K. Hagiwara, A.D. Martin, Daisuke Nomura and T. Teubner,
2941: % Phys. Lett. B557 (2003) 69, Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 093003, 0209187
2942: % and updated in
2943: % Phys. Lett. B649 (2007) 173. 061110
2944: %
2945: \item[(C)] Above $s=10000$ GeV$^2$:
2946: Use of subroutine \texttt{rhad.f v.1.00}, published in \cite{Harlander:2002ur}.
2947: \end{itemize}
2948: %--------------------------------------------------
2949: In Figure (\ref{fig:update.ps}) we show the $R_{\rm had}$ resulting from our Fortran implementation for the regions (A) to (C) as described above.
2950:
2951: %\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{run.ps}
2952: %\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{fig_rhad_update.eps}
2953: \begin{figure}[tbhp]
2954: \centering
2955: \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{fig_rhad_update.eps}
2956: \caption[he implementation of $R_{\rm had}$ for irreducible two-loop corrections.]
2957: {\em The implementation of $R_{\rm had}$ used for the numerical evaluation of irreducible two-loop corrections.}
2958: \label{fig:update.ps}
2959: \end{figure}
2960:
2961: In Figure (\ref{fig:burk_teub}) we compare the implementation of $R_{\rm had}(s)$ taken from
2962: Burkhardt~\cite{Burkhardt:1981jk} ($R_{\rm had,I}$) and our parametrization based on
2963: \cite{Davier:2002dy}\cite{rintpl:2008AA} \cite{Harlander:2002ur}($R_{\rm had,II}$).
2964: As already stated, the deviations are evidently much smaller than one might expect and may be considered to be irrelevant here.
2965:
2966:
2967: \begin{figure}[tbhp] %rhad_new_old_fig9.eps
2968: \vspace*{1.2cm}
2969: \centering
2970: %\includegraphics[scale=.5]{fig_burk_teub.eps}
2971: \includegraphics[scale=.5]{rhad_new_old_fig9.eps}
2972: \caption[A comparison of \texttt{repi.f} (H. Burkhardt, 1986) and \texttt{r\_intpl.f} (T. Teubner, private communication, 26 April 2008).]
2973: {\em A comparison of the parametrizations from ~\cite{Burkhardt:1981jk} and \cite{rintpl:2008AA}.}
2974: \label{fig:burk_teub}
2975: \end{figure}
2976:
2977: We close this section with a brief discussion of narrow resonances.
2978: Narrow resonances are implemented replacing the rapidly varying
2979: cross section ratio with the parametrization
2980: %%%
2981: \begin{equation}
2982: R_{\rm res}(z)= \frac{9 \pi}{\alpha^2} M_{\rm res} \Gamma^{e^+ e^-}_{\rm res}
2983: \delta(z-M^2_{\rm res}).
2984: \end{equation}
2985: %%%
2986: The integration over $z$ is then carried on analytically leading
2987: to the following result for the IR-finite remainder (including
2988: the irreducible box diagrams) of Eq.~\eqref{eqrest}:
2989: %%%
2990: \begin{equation}
2991: \frac{d \overline{\sigma}_{\rm rest}}{d \Omega}=
2992: \frac{9 \pi}{\alpha^2} \frac{\Gamma^{e^+ e^-}_{\rm res}}{M_{\rm res}}
2993: \left\{
2994: \frac{F_1(M^2_{\rm res})}{t-M^2_{\rm res}}
2995: + \frac{1}{s-M^2_{\rm res}} \left[ F_2(M_{\rm res}^2)
2996: + F_3(M_{\rm res}^2) \ln \left| 1-\frac{M_{\rm res}^2 }{s}\right| \right]
2997: \right\}.
2998: \end{equation}
2999: %%%
3000: For the numerical evaluation of the contribution due to the
3001: narrow resonances, we use the values listed in the Burkhardt's
3002: routine~\cite{Burkhardt:1981jk}, collected in Table~\ref{table:BUR}.
3003:
3004: \begin{table}[ht]\centering
3005: \setlength{\arraycolsep}{\tabcolsep}
3006: \renewcommand\arraystretch{1.1}
3007: \begin{tabular}{|r|r|r|}
3008: \hline
3009: resonance & $M_{\rm res}$ [GeV] & $\Gamma^{e^+ e^-}_{\rm res}$ [keV] \\
3010: \hline
3011: \hline
3012: $\omega$(782) & 0.7826 & 0.66 \\
3013: $\phi$(1020) & 1.0195 & 1.31\\
3014: J$\slash \psi$(1S) & 3.0969 & 4.7\\
3015: $\psi$(2S) & 3.6860 & 2.1\\
3016: $\psi$(3770) & 3.7699 & 0.26\\
3017: $\psi$(4040) & 4.0300 & 0.75\\
3018: $\psi$(4160)& 4.1590 & 0.77\\
3019: $\psi$(4415) & 4.4150 & 0.47\\
3020: $\Upsilon$(1S) & 9.4600 & 1.22\\
3021: $\Upsilon$(2S)& 10.0234 & 0.54\\
3022: $\Upsilon$(3S)& 10.3555 & 0.40\\
3023: $\Upsilon$(4S)& 10.577 & 0.24\\
3024: $\Upsilon$(10860)& 10.865 & 0.31\\
3025: $\Upsilon$(11020)& 11.019 & 0.13\\
3026: \hline
3027: \end{tabular}
3028: \caption[]{Numerical values for the treatment of narrow resonances,
3029: taken directly from~\cite{Burkhardt:1981jk}.}
3030: \label{table:BUR}
3031: \end{table}
3032:
3033:
3034: % \colorbox{yellow}{comment on top treatment. TR 25 07 2008, to be improved of course...:}
3035:
3036: %In the old parameterizations, the top quark was not taken into account.
3037: %We checked explicitely that at energies lower than e.g. 300 GeV there is practically no influence from them on $R_{\rm had}$.
3038: %For this reason, we may use the parameterization of $R_{\rm had}$ from~\cite{rintpl:2008AA} with account of
3039: %five flavors and smoothly combine with the HS parameterization at higher energy.
3040:
3041:
3042: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
3043: \section{\label{app-polylog}Evaluation of Polylogarithms}
3044: %-------------------------------------------------------------------------
3045: %For the numerical evaluations we used the Fortran package bhbhnnlohf.f \cite{bhbhnnlohf:2008AA}.
3046: %\colorbox{red}{\bf SA: this is not ready\\, maybe it is better just a reference to the webpage}
3047: At several instances, dilogarithms $\litwo(z)$ and trilogarithms $\litri(z)$ of complex argument are needed.
3048: A definition of polylogarithms is:
3049: \begin{eqnarray}
3050: \lin(z) &=& S_{n-1,1}(z) ~=~ \frac{(-1)^{n}}{(n-2)!}~\int_{0}^{1} \frac{dt}{t}\ln^{n-2}(t)\ln(1-zt).
3051: \end{eqnarray}
3052: They have the special values $\lin(0)=0 $ and $\lin(1)=\zeta(n)$,
3053: where $\zeta(s)$ is the Riemann $\zeta$-function, $\zeta(2)=\pi^2/6, \zeta(3)=1.2020569031595942854\ldots$
3054: An efficient evaluation transforms the arguments to the region where modulus and real part are bound:
3055: $|z|\leq 1$ and $\Re e(z)<\frac{1}{2}$, using:
3056: \begin{eqnarray}
3057: \litwo(z) &=& - \litwo\left(\frac{1}{z}\right) - \frac{1}{2}\ln^2(-z) - \zeta(2),
3058: \\
3059: \litwo(z) &=& -\litwo(1-z) +\zeta(2) - \ln(z)\ln(1-z),
3060: \end{eqnarray}
3061: and
3062: %For $\litri(z)$ the corresponding transformations may be found e.g. at the webpage \colorbox{yellow}{MathWorld} \cite{mathworld-li3:2008}:
3063: \begin{eqnarray}
3064: \litri(z) &=& \litri\left(\frac{1}{z}\right) - \frac{1}{6}\ln^3(-z) - \zeta(2)\ln(-z),
3065: \\
3066: \litri(z) &=& -\litri\left(1-\frac{1}{z}\right) - \litri(1-z) +\zeta(3) + \frac{1}{6}\ln^3(z) + \zeta(2)\ln(z) -\frac{1}{2}\ln^2(z)\ln(1-z).
3067: \end{eqnarray}
3068: Then, series expansions with Bernoulli numbers ensure rapid convergence.
3069: For $\litwo(z)$ we follow Appendix A of \cite{'tHooft:1979xw}:
3070: \begin{eqnarray}
3071: \litwo(z) &=& \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \frac{B_{j}}{(j+1)!}\left[-\ln(1 - z)\right]^{j+1}
3072: \nonumber \\&=&
3073: -\ln(1 - z) - \frac{1}{4}\ln^2(1 - z)
3074: + 4\pi \sum_{j=1}^{\infty} \zeta(2j)\frac{(-1)^j}{2j+1}\left[\frac{\ln(1 - z)}{2\pi}\right]^{2j+1}.
3075: \end{eqnarray}
3076: The $B_j$ are Bernoulli numbers, $B_0=1$, etc.
3077: %Table[4 Pi* Zeta[2 m] ((-1)^m /(2 m + 1))*(Log[1 - z]/(2 Pi))^(2 m + 1), {m, 1, 4}]
3078: Useful series expansions for $\lin(z)$ are given in Eqns. (48) and (49) of \cite{Vollinga:2004sn}, which we reproduce here for the special case $n=3$:
3079: \begin{eqnarray}
3080: \litri(z) &=& \sum_{j=0}^{\infty} \frac{C_3(j)}{(j+1)!}\left[-\ln(1 - z)\right]^{j+1},
3081: \\
3082: C_3(j)&=& \sum_{k=0}^j
3083: \begin{pmatrix}
3084: j \\
3085: k
3086: \end{pmatrix}
3087: \frac{B_{j-k} B_k}{1+k} ,
3088: \end{eqnarray}
3089: with $C_3(0)=1$ etc.
3090: For $\litwo(z)$ and $\litri(z)$ we observe typically that $n$ summation terms give an $n\pm 1$ digits accuracy.
3091: We just mention that we do not allow to evaluate the logarithms and polylogarithms at their cuts (negative real axis beginning at $z=0$ and positive real axis beginning at $z=1$, respectively).
3092: For other conventions we refer to the corresponding remark at p. 19 of \cite{Vollinga:2004sn}.
3093: Our Fortran code is available as file \texttt{cpolylog.f} at the website \cite{webPage:2007xx}.
3094:
3095: An alternative, efficient algorithm for the evaluation of polylogarithms is described in \cite{Crandall:2006} \footnote{U. Langenfeld, private information.}.
3096:
3097: %\colorbox{red}{There are problems with the bibliography:[27] empty[75-76] are the same[99-100] are the same[60] is the same as [48][102,103,104] are the same}
3098:
3099:
3100:
3101: %-----------------------------
3102: \clearpage
3103:
3104: %\providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}
3105: %======================================================================================
3106: %\bibliographystyle{utphys_spires_tit}
3107: %\bibliographystyle{h-elsevier.bst} %utphys_}
3108: %\bibliography{2loops}
3109: %======================================================================================
3110: \providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}\begingroup\begin{thebibliography}{10}
3111: \bibitem{Actis:2007fs}
3112: S. Actis et~al.,
3113: \newblock Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 (2008) 131602, 0711.3847.
3114:
3115: \bibitem{Bhabha:1936xx}
3116: H. Bhabha,
3117: \newblock Proc. Roy. Soc. A154 (1936) 195.
3118:
3119: \bibitem{Consoli:1979xw}
3120: M. Consoli,
3121: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B160 (1979) 208.
3122:
3123: \bibitem{Consoli:1982ib}
3124: M. Consoli, M. Greco and S. Lo~Presti,
3125: \newblock Phys. Lett. B113 (1982) 415.
3126:
3127: \bibitem{Caffo:1984jb}
3128: M. Caffo, R. Gatto and E. Remiddi,
3129: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B252 (1985) 378.
3130:
3131: \bibitem{Bohm:1984yt}
3132: M. B{\"o}hm et~al.,
3133: \newblock Phys. Lett. B144 (1984) 414.
3134:
3135: \bibitem{Tobimatsu:1985pp}
3136: K. Tobimatsu and Y. Shimizu,
3137: \newblock Prog. Theor. Phys. 75 (1986) 905.
3138:
3139: \bibitem{Tobimatsu:1985vd}
3140: K. Tobimatsu and Y. Shimizu,
3141: \newblock Prog. Theor. Phys. 74 (1985) 567.
3142:
3143: \bibitem{Bohm:1986fg}
3144: M. B{\"o}hm, A. Denner and W. Hollik,
3145: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B304 (1988) 687.
3146:
3147: \bibitem{Berends:1987jm}
3148: F. Berends, R. Kleiss and W. Hollik,
3149: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B304 (1988) 712.
3150:
3151: \bibitem{Bardin:1990xe}
3152: D. Bardin, W. Hollik and T. Riemann,
3153: \newblock Z. Phys. C49 (1991) 485.
3154:
3155: \bibitem{Awramik:2003rn}
3156: M. Awramik et~al.,
3157: \newblock Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 053006, hep-ph/0311148.
3158:
3159: \bibitem{Awramik:2006uz}
3160: M. Awramik, M. Czakon and A. Freitas,
3161: \newblock JHEP 11 (2006) 048, hep-ph/0608099.
3162:
3163: \bibitem{Berends:1976zn}
3164: F. Berends and G. Komen,
3165: \newblock Phys. Lett. B63 (1976) 432.
3166:
3167: \bibitem{Berends:1983fs}
3168: F. Berends and R. Kleiss,
3169: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B228 (1983) 537.
3170:
3171: \bibitem{Berends:1984ge}
3172: F.A. Berends, P.H. Daverveldt and R. Kleiss,
3173: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B253 (1985) 421.
3174:
3175: \bibitem{Greco:1986dc}
3176: M. Greco,
3177: \newblock Phys. Lett. B177 (1986) 97.
3178:
3179: \bibitem{Kuroda:1987yi}
3180: S. Kuroda et~al.,
3181: \newblock Comput. Phys. Commun. 48 (1988) 335.
3182:
3183: \bibitem{Karlen:1987vk}
3184: D. Karlen,
3185: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B289 (1987) 23.
3186:
3187: \bibitem{Aversa:1990ek}
3188: F. Aversa et~al.,
3189: \newblock Phys. Lett. B247 (1990) 93.
3190:
3191: \bibitem{Fujimoto:1990tb}
3192: J. Fujimoto et~al.,
3193: \newblock Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 100 (1990) 1.
3194:
3195: \bibitem{Caffo:1991cg}
3196: M. Caffo, H. Czyz and E. Remiddi,
3197: \newblock Nuovo Cim. A105 (1992) 277.
3198:
3199: \bibitem{Cacciari:1991rm}
3200: M. Cacciari et~al.,
3201: \newblock Phys. Lett. B268 (1991) 441.
3202:
3203: \bibitem{Cacciari:1991qy}
3204: M. Cacciari et~al.,
3205: \newblock Phys. Lett. B271 (1991) 431.
3206:
3207: \bibitem{Beenakker:1991mb}
3208: W. Beenakker, F.A. Berends and S.C. van~der Marck,
3209: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B349 (1991) 323.
3210:
3211: \bibitem{Beenakker:1991es}
3212: W. Beenakker, F.A. Berends and S.C. van~der Marck,
3213: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B355 (1991) 281.
3214:
3215: \bibitem{Aversa:1991rw}
3216: F. Aversa and M. Greco,
3217: \newblock Phys. Lett. B271 (1991) 435.
3218:
3219: \bibitem{Riemann:1991ga}
3220: S. Riemann,
3221: \newblock {A Comparison of programs used in L3 for the analysis of Bhabha
3222: scattering}, 1991, PHE-91-04.
3223:
3224: \bibitem{Fadin:1992uem}
3225: V.S. Fadin et~al.,
3226: \newblock Small angles {Bhabha} scattering: Two loop approximation, 1992,
3227: JINR-E2-92-577.
3228:
3229: \bibitem{Bjoerkevoll:1992uu}
3230: K.S. Bjoerkevoll, P. Osland and G. Faeldt,
3231: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B386 (1992) 280.
3232:
3233: \bibitem{Bjoerkevoll:1992cu}
3234: K.S. Bjoerkevoll, P. Osland and G. Faeldt,
3235: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B386 (1992) 303.
3236:
3237: \bibitem{Bardin:1992jc}
3238: D.Y. Bardin et~al.,
3239: \newblock {ZFITTER}: An analytical program for fermion pair production in $e^+
3240: e^-$ annihilation, 1992, hep-ph/9412201.
3241:
3242: \bibitem{Montagna:1993py}
3243: G. Montagna et~al.,
3244: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B401 (1993) 3.
3245:
3246: \bibitem{Caffo:1993hc}
3247: M. Caffo, E. Remiddi and H. Czyz,
3248: \newblock Int. J. Mod. Phys. C4 (1993) 591.
3249:
3250: \bibitem{Fujimoto:1993qh}
3251: J. Fujimoto, Y. Shimizu and T. Munehisa,
3252: \newblock Prog. Theor. Phys. 91 (1994) 333, hep-ph/9311368.
3253:
3254: \bibitem{Caffo:1994dm}
3255: M. Caffo, H. Czyz and E. Remiddi,
3256: \newblock Phys. Lett. B327 (1994) 369.
3257:
3258: \bibitem{Caffo:1994fy}
3259: M. Caffo, E. Remiddi and H. Czyz,
3260: \newblock {The theoretical precision in small angle {Bhabha} scattering at
3261: {LEP}: Comparisons between different approaches}, CERN 95-03 (1994) 361-368.
3262:
3263: \bibitem{Fadin:1994xe}
3264: V.S. Fadin et~al.,
3265: \newblock Small angle {Bhabha} scattering with a 0.1{\%} accuracy, Proc. 29th
3266: Rencontres de Moriond, 1994, p. 161.
3267:
3268: \bibitem{Arbuzov:1995ix}
3269: A. Arbuzov et~al.,
3270: \newblock {Small angle Bhabha scattering for LEP}, 1995, hep-ph/9506323.
3271:
3272: \bibitem{Cacciari:1995fq}
3273: M. Cacciari et~al.,
3274: \newblock Comput. Phys. Commun. 90 (1995) 301, hep-ph/9507245.
3275:
3276: \bibitem{Field:1995dk}
3277: J.H. Field and T. Riemann,
3278: \newblock Comput. Phys. Commun. 94 (1996) 53, hep-ph/9507401.
3279:
3280:
3281:
3282: \bibitem{Jadach:1995nk}
3283: S. Jadach, W. Placzek and B.F.L. Ward,
3284: \newblock Phys. Lett. B390 (1997) 298, hep-ph/9608412.
3285:
3286: \bibitem{Arbuzov:1995qd}
3287: A. Arbuzov et~al.,
3288: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B485 (1997) 457, hep-ph/9512344.
3289:
3290: \bibitem{Arbuzov:1995vi}
3291: A.B. Arbuzov et~al.,
3292: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B474 (1996) 271.
3293:
3294: \bibitem{Arbuzov:1995vj}
3295: A.B. Arbuzov et~al.,
3296: \newblock Phys. Atom. Nucl. 60 (1997) 591.
3297:
3298:
3299:
3300: \bibitem{Caffo:1996vi}
3301: M. Caffo, H. Czyz and E. Remiddi,
3302: \newblock Phys. Lett. B378 (1996) 357, hep-ph/9603300.
3303:
3304: \bibitem{Caffo:1996mi}
3305: M. Caffo and H. Czyz,
3306: \newblock Comput. Phys. Commun. 100 (1997) 99, hep-ph/9607357.
3307:
3308: \bibitem{Arbuzov:1996jj}
3309: A. Arbuzov et~al.,
3310: \newblock Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 51C (1996) 154, hep-ph/9607228.
3311:
3312: \bibitem{Arbuzov:1996su}
3313: A. Arbuzov et~al.,
3314: \newblock Phys. Lett. B394 (1997) 218, hep-ph/9606425.
3315:
3316: \bibitem{Arbuzov:1996qb}
3317: A.B. Arbuzov et~al.,
3318: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B483 (1997) 83, hep-ph/9610228.
3319:
3320: \bibitem{Arbuzov:1996zp}
3321: A.B. Arbuzov et~al.,
3322: \newblock Phys. Lett. B399 (1997) 312, hep-ph/9612201.
3323:
3324: \bibitem{Jadach:1996md}
3325: S. Jadach et~al.,
3326: \newblock Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 51C (1996) 164, hep-ph/9607358.
3327:
3328: \bibitem{Jadach:1996is}
3329: S. Jadach et~al.,
3330: \newblock Comput. Phys. Commun. 102 (1997) 229.
3331:
3332: \bibitem{Jadach:1996gu}
3333: S. Jadach et~al.,
3334: \newblock Event generators for {Bhabha} scattering, 1996, hep-ph/9602393.
3335:
3336: \bibitem{Jadach:1996hy}
3337: S. Jadach et~al.,
3338: \newblock Phys. Lett. B377 (1996) 168, hep-ph/9603248.
3339:
3340: \bibitem{Beenakker:1997fi}
3341: W. Beenakker and G. Passarino,
3342: \newblock Phys. Lett. B425 (1998) 199, hep-ph/9710376.
3343:
3344: \bibitem{Caffo:1997yy}
3345: M. Caffo, H. Czyz and E. Remiddi,
3346: \newblock Nuovo Cim. A110 (1997) 515, hep-ph/9704443.
3347:
3348: \bibitem{Arbuzov:1997pj}
3349: A. Arbuzov et~al.,
3350: \newblock JHEP 10 (1997) 001, hep-ph/9702262.
3351:
3352: \bibitem{Merenkov:1997zm}
3353: N.P. Merenkov et~al.,
3354: \newblock Acta Phys. Polon. B28 (1997) 491.
3355:
3356: \bibitem{Arbuzov:1998du}
3357: A. Arbuzov, E. Kuraev and B. Shaikhatdenov,
3358: \newblock Mod. Phys. Lett. A13 (1998) 2305, hep-ph/9806215.
3359:
3360: \bibitem{Montagna:1998vb}
3361: G. Montagna et~al.,
3362: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B547 (1999) 39, hep-ph/9811436.
3363:
3364: \bibitem{Arbuzov:1998ax}
3365: A.B. Arbuzov, E.A. Kuraev and B.G. Shaikhatdenov,
3366: \newblock J. Exp. Theor. Phys. 88 (1999) 213, hep-ph/9805308,
3367: \newblock E: JETP 97 (2003) 858.
3368:
3369: \bibitem{Bardin:1999yd}
3370: D. Bardin et~al.,
3371: \newblock Comput. Phys. Commun. 133 (2001) 229, hep-ph/9908433.
3372:
3373: \bibitem{Arbuzov:1999db}
3374: A. Arbuzov,
3375: \newblock {LABSMC}: Monte {Carlo} event generator for large-angle {Bhabha}
3376: scattering, 1999, hep-ph/9907298.
3377:
3378: \bibitem{Placzek:1999xc}
3379: W. Placzek et~al.,
3380: \newblock Precision calculation of {Bhabha} scattering at {LEP}, 1999,
3381: hep-ph/9903381.
3382:
3383: \bibitem{Jadach:1999tr}
3384: S. Jadach, B.F.L. Ward and Z. Was,
3385: \newblock Comput. Phys. Commun. 124 (2000) 233, hep-ph/9905205.
3386:
3387: \bibitem{Montagna:1999tf}
3388: G. Montagna, O. Nicrosini and F. Piccinini,
3389: \newblock Phys. Lett. B460 (1999) 425, hep-ph/9904387.
3390:
3391: \bibitem{CarloniCalame:1999aw}
3392: C.M. Carloni~Calame et~al.,
3393: \newblock Large-angle {Bhabha} scattering and luminosity at {DAPHNE}, 1999,
3394: hep-ph/0001131.
3395:
3396: \bibitem{Antonelli:1999pe}
3397: V. Antonelli, E.A. Kuraev and B.G. Shaikhatdenov,
3398: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B568 (2000) 40, hep-ph/9905331.
3399:
3400: \bibitem{CarloniCalame:2000pz}
3401: C.C. Calame et~al.,
3402: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B584 (2000) 459, hep-ph/0003268.
3403:
3404: \bibitem{Battaglia:2001dg}
3405: M. Battaglia, S. Jadach and D. Bardin,
3406: \newblock eConf C010630 (2001) E3015.
3407:
3408: \bibitem{CarloniCalame:2001ny}
3409: C.M. Carloni~Calame,
3410: \newblock Phys. Lett. B520 (2001) 16, hep-ph/0103117.
3411:
3412: \bibitem{Karlen:2001hw}
3413: D. Karlen and H. Burkhardt,
3414: \newblock Eur. Phys. J. C22 (2001) 39, hep-ex/0105065.
3415:
3416: \bibitem{Ward:2002qq}
3417: B.F.L. Ward, S. Jadach and Z. Was,
3418: \newblock Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 116 (2003) 73, hep-ph/0211132.
3419:
3420: \bibitem{Jadach:2003zr}
3421: S. Jadach,
3422: \newblock Theoretical error of luminosity cross section at {{LEP}}, 2003,
3423: hep-ph/0306083.
3424:
3425: \bibitem{Arbuzov:2004wp}
3426: A. Arbuzov et~al.,
3427: \newblock Eur. Phys. J. C34 (2004) 267, hep-ph/0402211.
3428:
3429: \bibitem{Fleischer:2004ah}
3430: J. Fleischer, A. Lorca and T. Riemann,
3431: \newblock Automatized calculation of 2-fermion production with {DIANA} and
3432: {aiTALC}, in Proc. LCWS, Paris, 2004, hep-ph/0409034.
3433:
3434: \bibitem{Gluza:2004tq}
3435: J. Gluza, A. Lorca and T. Riemann,
3436: \newblock Nucl. Instrum. Meth. 534 (2004) 289, hep-ph/0409011.
3437:
3438: \bibitem{Lorca:2004dk}
3439: A. Lorca and T. Riemann,
3440: \newblock Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 135 (2004) 328, hep-ph/0407149.
3441:
3442: \bibitem{Arbuzov:2005pt}
3443: A.B. Arbuzov et~al.,
3444: \newblock Eur. Phys. J. C46 (2006) 689, hep-ph/0504233.
3445:
3446: \bibitem{Arbuzov:2005ma}
3447: A. Arbuzov et~al.,
3448: \newblock Comput. Phys. Commun. 174 (2006) 728, hep-ph/0507146.
3449:
3450: \bibitem{Arbuzov:2006mu}
3451: A.B. Arbuzov and E.S. Scherbakova,
3452: \newblock JETP Lett. 83 (2006) 427, hep-ph/0602119.
3453:
3454: \bibitem{Balossini:2006sd}
3455: G. Balossini et~al.,
3456: \newblock Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 162 (2006) 59, hep-ph/0610022.
3457:
3458: \bibitem{Balossini:2006wc}
3459: G. Balossini et~al.,
3460: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B758 (2006) 227, hep-ph/0607181.
3461:
3462: \bibitem{Fleischer:2006ht}
3463: J. Fleischer et~al.,
3464: \newblock Eur. J. Phys. 48 (2006) 35, hep-ph/0606210.
3465:
3466: \bibitem{moenig:sfb2005}
3467: K. M{\"o}nig,
3468: \newblock Bhabha scattering at the {ILC},
3469: \newblock talk at Bhabha Workshop, Karlsruhe, April 2005,
3470: http://sfb-tr9.particle.uni-karlsruhe.de/.
3471:
3472: \bibitem{denig:sfb2005}
3473: A. Denig,
3474: \newblock Bhabha scattering at {Dafne}: The {Kloe} luminosity measurement,
3475: \newblock talk at Bhabha Workshop of SFB/TRR 9, Karlsruhe, April 2005,
3476: http://sfb-tr9.particle.uni-karlsruhe.de/veranstaltungen/bhabha-talks/denig.%
3477: pdf.
3478:
3479: \bibitem{trentadue:sfb2005}
3480: L. Trentadue,
3481: \newblock Measurement of $\alpha_{QED}$: An alternative approach,
3482: \newblock talk at Bhabha Workshop of SFB/TRR 9, Karlsruhe, April 2005,
3483: http://sfb-tr9.particle.uni-karlsruhe.de/veranstaltungen/bhabha-talks/trenta%
3484: due.pdf.
3485:
3486: \bibitem{jadach:sfb2005a}
3487: S. Jadach,
3488: \newblock Theoretical calculations for {LEP} luminosity measurements,
3489: \newblock talk at Bhabha Workshop of SFB/TRR 9, Karlsruhe, April 2005,
3490: http://sfb-tr9.particle.uni-karlsruhe.de/veranstaltungen/bhabha-talks/jadach%
3491: .pdf.
3492:
3493: \bibitem{Balossini:2007zz}
3494: G. Balossini et~al.,
3495: \newblock Acta Phys. Polon. B38 (2007) 3441.
3496:
3497: \bibitem{Balossini:2008ht}
3498: G. Balossini et~al.,
3499: \newblock {Mini-review on Monte Carlo programs for Bhabha scattering}, to
3500: appear in Proc. Loops and Legs, Sondershausen, 2008, arXiv:0806.4909
3501: [hep-ph].
3502:
3503: \bibitem{Smirnov:2001cm}
3504: V. Smirnov,
3505: \newblock Phys. Lett. B524 (2002) 129, hep-ph/0111160.
3506:
3507: \bibitem{Bern:2000ie}
3508: Z. Bern, L. Dixon and A. Ghinculov,
3509: \newblock Phys. Rev. D63 (2001) 053007, hep-ph/0010075.
3510:
3511: \bibitem{Glover:2001ev}
3512: N. Glover, B. Tausk and J. van~der Bij,
3513: \newblock Phys. Lett. B516 (2001) 33, hep-ph/0106052.
3514:
3515: \bibitem{Bonciani:2003ai}
3516: R. Bonciani, P. Mastrolia and E. Remiddi,
3517: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B676 (2004) 399, hep-ph/0307295.
3518:
3519: \bibitem{Bonciani:2003cj}
3520: R. Bonciani et~al.,
3521: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B681 (2004) 261, hep-ph/0310333.
3522:
3523: \bibitem{Bonciani:2003te}
3524: R. Bonciani, P. Mastrolia and E. Remiddi,
3525: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B661 (2003) 289, hep-ph/0301170.
3526:
3527: \bibitem{Bonciani:2004qt}
3528: R. Bonciani et~al.,
3529: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B716 (2005) 280, hep-ph/0411321v2.
3530:
3531: \bibitem{Czakon:2004tg}
3532: M. Czakon, J. Gluza and T. Riemann,
3533: \newblock Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 135 (2004) 83, hep-ph/0406203.
3534:
3535: \bibitem{Czakon:2004wm}
3536: M. Czakon, J. Gluza and T. Riemann,
3537: \newblock Phys. Rev. D71 (2005) 073009, hep-ph/0412164.
3538:
3539: \bibitem{Heinrich:2004iq}
3540: G. Heinrich and V. Smirnov,
3541: \newblock Phys. Lett. B598 (2004) 55, hep-ph/0406053.
3542:
3543: \bibitem{penin:2005kf}
3544: A. Penin,
3545: \newblock Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 010408, hep-ph/0501120.
3546:
3547: \bibitem{Penin:2005eh}
3548: A. Penin,
3549: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B734 (2006) 185, hep-ph/0508127.
3550:
3551: \bibitem{Bonciani:2005im}
3552: R. Bonciani and A. Ferroglia,
3553: \newblock Phys. Rev. D72 (2005) 056004, hep-ph/0507047.
3554:
3555: \bibitem{Czakon:2005gi}
3556: M. Czakon, J. Gluza and T. Riemann,
3557: \newblock Acta Phys. Polon. B36 (2005) 3319, hep-ph/0511187.
3558:
3559: \bibitem{Bonciani:2006qu}
3560: R. Bonciani and A. Ferroglia,
3561: \newblock Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 157 (2006) 11, hep-ph/0601246.
3562:
3563: \bibitem{Czakon:2006pa}
3564: M. Czakon, J. Gluza and T. Riemann,
3565: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B751 (2006) 1, hep-ph/0604101.
3566:
3567: \bibitem{Mitov:2006xs}
3568: A. Mitov and S. Moch,
3569: \newblock JHEP 05 (2007) 001, hep-ph/0612149.
3570:
3571: \bibitem{Actis:2006dj}
3572: S. Actis, M. Czakon, J. Gluza, T. Riemann,
3573: \newblock Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 160 (2006) 91, hep-ph/0609051.
3574:
3575: \bibitem{Becher:2007cu}
3576: T. Becher and K. Melnikov,
3577: \newblock JHEP 06 (2007) 084, arXiv:0704.3582 [hep-ph].
3578:
3579: \bibitem{Actis:2007gi}
3580: S. Actis et~al.,
3581: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B786 (2007) 26, arXiv:0704.2400v.2 [hep-ph].
3582:
3583: \bibitem{Actis:2007pn}
3584: S. Actis et~al.,
3585: \newblock Acta Phys. Polon. B38 (2007) 3517, 0710.5111.
3586:
3587: \bibitem{Actis:2007pn2}
3588: S. Actis et~al.,
3589: \newblock Fermionic {NNLO} contributions to {Bhabha} scattering,
3590: \newblock XXXI Conference ``Matter to the Deepest'', Ustro\'n, Poland, 5-11 Sep
3591: 2007, http://prac.us.edu.pl/$\sim$us2007/talks.htm.
3592:
3593: \bibitem{Bonciani:2007eh}
3594: R. Bonciani, A. Ferroglia and A.A. Penin,
3595: \newblock Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 (2008) 131601, 0710.4775.
3596:
3597: \bibitem{Fleischer:2007ph}
3598: J. Fleischer et~al.,
3599: \newblock Acta Phys. Polon. B38 (2007) 3529, arXiv:0710.5100 [hep-ph].
3600:
3601:
3602:
3603: \bibitem{Bonciani:2008ep}
3604: R. Bonciani, A. Ferroglia and A.A. Penin,
3605: \newblock JHEP 02 (2008) 080, 0802.2215.
3606:
3607: \bibitem{webPage:2007xx}
3608: DESY, webpage http://www-zeuthen.desy.de/theory/research/bhabha/bhabha.html.
3609:
3610: \bibitem{Eidelman:2004}
3611: W.-M. Yao et al. [the Particle Data Group],
3612: \newblock{J. Phys. G 33 (2006) 1}.
3613: %S. Eidelman et~al.,
3614: %\newblock Physics Letters B 592 (2004) 1.
3615:
3616: \bibitem{Cabibbo:1961sz}
3617: N. Cabibbo and R. Gatto,
3618: \newblock Phys. Rev. 124 (1961) 1577.
3619:
3620: \bibitem{Cutkosky:1960sp}
3621: R.E. Cutkosky,
3622: \newblock J. Math. Phys. 1 (1960) 429.
3623:
3624: \bibitem{Kniehl:1988id}
3625: B. Kniehl et~al.,
3626: \newblock Phys. Lett. B209 (1988) 337.
3627:
3628: \bibitem{vanRitbergen:1998hn}
3629: T. van Ritbergen and R.G. Stuart,
3630: \newblock Phys. Lett. B437 (1998) 201, hep-ph/9802341.
3631:
3632: \bibitem{Steinhauser:1998rq}
3633: M. Steinhauser,
3634: \newblock Phys. Lett. B429 (1998) 158, hep-ph/9803313.
3635:
3636: \bibitem{Eidelman:1995ny}
3637: S. Eidelman and F. Jegerlehner,
3638: \newblock Z. Phys. C67 (1995) 585, hep-ph/9502298.
3639:
3640: \bibitem{Burkhardt:2005se}
3641: H. Burkhardt and B. Pietrzyk,
3642: \newblock Phys. Rev. D72 (2005) 057501, hep-ph/0506323.
3643:
3644: \bibitem{Jegerlehner:2006ju}
3645: F. Jegerlehner,
3646: \newblock Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 162 (2006) 22, hep-ph/0608329.
3647:
3648: \bibitem{Hagiwara:2006jt}
3649: K. Hagiwara et~al.,
3650: \newblock Phys. Lett. B649 (2007) 173, hep-ph/0611102.
3651:
3652: \bibitem{Kallen:1955fb}
3653: G. Kallen and A. Sabry,
3654: \newblock Kong. Dan. Vid. Sel. Mat. Fys. Med. 29N17 (1955) 1.
3655:
3656: \bibitem{Jegerlehner-hadr5n:2003aa}
3657: F. Jegerlehner, Fortran program \texttt{hadr5.f} (version 02 Nov 2003),
3658: available at http://www-com.physik.hu-berlin.de/~fjeger.
3659:
3660: \bibitem{Maitre:2005uu}
3661: D. Maitre,
3662: \newblock Comput. Phys. Commun. 174 (2006) 222, hep-ph/0507152.
3663:
3664: \bibitem{Maitre:2007kp}
3665: D. Maitre,
3666: \newblock {Extension of HPL to complex arguments}, 2007, hep-ph/0703052.
3667:
3668: \bibitem{Burkhardt:1981jk}
3669: H. Burkhardt,
3670: \newblock New numerical analysis of the hadronic vacuum polarization,
3671: TASSO-NOTE-192 (1981), and Fortran program repi.f (1986).
3672:
3673: \bibitem{Barbieri:1972as}
3674: R. Barbieri, J.A. Mignaco and E. Remiddi,
3675: \newblock Nuovo Cim. A11 (1972) 824.
3676:
3677: \bibitem{Barbieri:1972hn}
3678: R. Barbieri, J.A. Mignaco and E. Remiddi,
3679: \newblock Nuovo Cim. A11 (1972) 865.
3680:
3681: \bibitem{Burgers:1985qg}
3682: G. Burgers,
3683: \newblock Phys. Lett. B164 (1985) 167.
3684:
3685: \bibitem{Actis:2008sk}
3686: S. Actis, J. Gluza and T. Riemann,
3687: \newblock {Virtual Hadronic Corrections to Massive Bhabha Scattering}, 2008,
3688: 0807.0174, contrib. to Loops and Legs 2008, to appear in Nucl. Phys. B (PS).
3689:
3690: \bibitem{Gluza:2007rt}
3691: J. Gluza, K. Kajda and T. Riemann,
3692: \newblock Comput. Phys. Commun. 177 (2007) 879, arXiv:0704.2423 [hep-ph].
3693:
3694: \bibitem{Czakon:2005rk}
3695: M. Czakon,
3696: \newblock Comput. Phys. Commun. 175 (2006) 559, hep-ph/0511200.
3697:
3698: \bibitem{Frenkel:1976bj}
3699: J. Frenkel and J.C. Taylor,
3700: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B116 (1976) 185.
3701:
3702: \bibitem{Kuhn:2008zs}
3703: J.H. Kuhn and S. Uccirati,
3704: \newblock (2008), 0807.1284.
3705:
3706: \bibitem{webPage:2006xx}
3707: {S.~Actis, M.~Czakon, J.~Gluza and T.~Riemann},
3708: \newblock \texttt{\\
3709: http://www-zeuthen.desy.de/theory/research/bhabha/bhabha.html/}.
3710:
3711: \bibitem{Melles:1996qa}
3712: M. Melles,
3713: \newblock Acta Phys. Polon. B28 (1997) 1159, hep-ph/9612348.
3714:
3715: \bibitem{Jadach:1999vf}
3716: S. Jadach, B.F.L. Ward and Z. Was,
3717: \newblock Comput. Phys. Commun. 130 (2000) 260, hep-ph/9912214.
3718:
3719: \bibitem{Kobel:2000aw}
3720: Two Fermion Working Group, M. Kobel et~al.,
3721: \newblock Two-fermion production in electron positron collisions, 2000,
3722: hep-ph/0007180.
3723:
3724: \bibitem{Bonciani:2004gi}
3725: R. Bonciani et~al.,
3726: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B701 (2004) 121, hep-ph/0405275.
3727:
3728: \bibitem{Fleischer:2003kk}
3729: J. Fleischer et~al.,
3730: \newblock Eur. Phys. J. C31 (2003) 37, hep-ph/0302259.
3731:
3732: \bibitem{Davier:2002dy}
3733: M. Davier et~al.,
3734: \newblock Eur. Phys. J. C27 (2003) 497, hep-ph/0208177.
3735:
3736: \bibitem{Amendolia:1986wj}
3737: NA7, S.R. Amendolia et~al.,
3738: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B277 (1986) 168.
3739:
3740: \bibitem{rintpl:2008AA}
3741: Fortran routine,
3742: \newblock private communications with T. Teubner. The Fortran program
3743: is based on the data compilation performed for
3744: \cite{Hagiwara:2003da,Hagiwara:2006jt}. The publication is in preparation.
3745: The routine is available upon request from the authors, E-mails:
3746: dnomura@post.kek.jp, thomas.teubner@liverpool.ac.uk. We used version of
3747: 2008-04-26.
3748:
3749: \bibitem{Harlander:2002ur}
3750: R.V. Harlander and M. Steinhauser,
3751: \newblock Comput. Phys. Commun. 153 (2003) 244, hep-ph/0212294.
3752:
3753: \bibitem{'tHooft:1979xw}
3754: G. 't~Hooft and M. Veltman,
3755: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B153 (1979) 365.
3756:
3757: \bibitem{Vollinga:2004sn}
3758: J. Vollinga and S. Weinzierl,
3759: \newblock Comput. Phys. Commun. 167 (2005) 177, hep-ph/0410259.
3760:
3761: \bibitem{Crandall:2006}
3762: R. Crandall,
3763: \newblock Note on fast polylogarithm computation, 2006,
3764: http://people.reed.edu/$\sim$crandall/papers/Polylog.pdf.
3765:
3766: \bibitem{Hagiwara:2003da}
3767: K. Hagiwara et~al.,
3768: \newblock Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 093003, hep-ph/0312250.
3769:
3770: \bibitem{Vermaseren:1994je}
3771: J.A.M. Vermaseren,
3772: \newblock Comput. Phys. Commun. 83 (1994) 45.
3773: %%CITATION = CPHCB,83,45;%%
3774: %-----
3775: \bibitem{Binosi:2003yf}
3776: D. Binosi and L. Theussl,
3777: \newblock Comput. Phys. Commun. 161 (2004) 76, hep-ph/0309015.
3778: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0309015;%%
3779:
3780: \end{thebibliography}\endgroup
3781: %--
3782: \end{document}
3783: %--
3784:
3785: