1: \documentclass[fleqn,twoside]{article}
2: \usepackage{espcrc2}
3:
4: \usepackage{graphicx}
5:
6: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}
7: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
8: %
9: \title{The strangeness content of the nucleon }
10:
11: \author{UKQCD Collaboration,
12: C.~Michael\address{
13: Theoretical Physics Division, Dept. of Math. Sci., \\
14: University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK},
15: C. McNeile\addressmark and
16: D. Hepburn\address{
17: Dept. of Physics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3JZ, UK}%
18: }
19:
20: \begin{document}
21: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
22: \begin{abstract}
23: We evaluate the matrix element of $\bar{q} q$ in hadron states on a
24: lattice. We find substantial mixing of the connected and disconnected
25: contributions so that the lattice result that the disconnected
26: contribution to the nucleon is large does not imply that the $\bar{s} s$
27: content is large. This has implications for dark matter searches.
28: \vspace{1pc}
29: \end{abstract}
30: %
31: \maketitle
32:
33: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
34:
35: \section{INTRODUCTION}
36:
37:
38: An important challenge in physics and cosmology is to understand the
39: nature of dark matter. One plausible candidate is for this dark matter
40: to be the lightest supersymmetric particle: the neutralino. In this
41: case the dark matter can be detected by scattering from nuclear targets,
42: and experimental explorations are currently under way. To extract a
43: physical flux from such experiments, one needs the appropriate cross
44: section for scattering of a neutralino off a nucleon. This has been
45: evaluated~\cite{Bottino:1999ei} and depends on MSSM parameters and on
46: the QCD matrix elements of the scalar quark current: $ \langle N |
47: \bar{q} q | N \rangle$.
48: The Higgs exchange terms are dominant and hence the scalar current
49: enters multiplied by the relevant quark mass. For this reason, the
50: strange quark contribution is expected to be especially important.
51: Moreover the $u$ and $d$ quark contributions are related to the $\pi N$
52: $\sigma$ term and are relatively well known whereas the strange
53: contribution is unknown phenomenologically to within a factor of 3.
54:
55: The usual way to parametrise the contribution of the strange quark is by
56: \be
57: y = {2 \langle N | \bar{s} s | N \rangle \over
58: \langle N | \bar{u} u + \bar{d} d | N \rangle }
59: \ee
60: Estimates~\cite{Borasoy:1996zx} using chiral perturbation theory
61: suggest $y = 0.2(2) $.
62:
63:
64: This ratio of quark matrix elements can be calculated in principle
65: using lattice methods (see~\cite{Gusken:1999te} for a review). The
66: required correlations are illustrated in fig.~1. The disconnected
67: contribution $D_3$ (numerator of $y$) can either be calculated by
68: evaluating the three-point correlator with a disconnected loop or using
69: the lattice equivalent of the Feynman-Hellman theorem to relate it to
70: the derivative of the nucleon mass with respect to the sea-quark
71: hopping parameter (see ref.~\cite{Foster:1998vw} for a discussion of
72: this). Likewise the connected contribution $C_3$ can be evaluated
73: either as a three-point correlation or as a derivative of the nucleon
74: mass with respect to the valence-quark hopping parameter.
75: Then, in this approach we expect $y = D_3/(C_3+D_3)$.
76:
77:
78:
79: \begin{figure}[htb]
80: %\vspace{-0.7cm}
81: %\epsfxsize=7.5cm\epsfbox{c2.ps}
82: \includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{c2.ps}
83: %\vspace{-1cm}
84: \caption{Connected and disconnected diagrams}
85: \label{fif.c2}
86: \end{figure}
87: %\vspace{-0.3cm}
88:
89:
90: Using $N_f=2$ flavours of sea-quark, SESAM~\cite{Gusken:1998wy} obtain
91: $y=0.59(13)$ and, using the same method, we would obtain a similar
92: result. Using the three-point correlator approach, it is possible to
93: estimate $y$ in quenched studies and results of around 0.6 were
94: obtained~\cite{Fukugita:1995ba} although the Kentucky group
95: argued~\cite{Dong:1996ec} that renormalisation effects should reduce
96: this to around 0.36(3) (but see criticism of this approach in
97: ref~\cite{Gusken:1998wy}).
98:
99:
100: This large value of $y$ obtained from lattice studies is surprising
101: and it also has major implications for the analysis of dark matter
102: scattering experiments. Here we discuss the status of these lattice
103: determinations critically and we conclude that $y$ is consistent with
104: zero.
105:
106:
107:
108: \section{LATTICE ANALYSIS}
109:
110:
111:
112:
113: The Feynman-Hellman theorem relates matrix elements of scalar quark
114: currents in a nucleon to derivatives of the nucleon mass with respect
115: to the quark mass. These identities can be derived both in the continuum
116: and on the lattice. Here we consider Wilson-like
117: lattice fermion formulations.
118: The lattice equivalent of the Feynman-Hellman theorem is
119: that~\cite{Foster:1998vw} the following lattice observables (here we
120: define $m^b \equiv 1/(2 \kappa)$) are related:
121:
122: \begin{equation}
123: \frac{ \partial (aM_N)} { \partial m_{val}^b }
124: =
125: \lim_{ t_1 , (t-t_1) \rightarrow \infty}
126: \frac{ C_3(t_1,t) }{ C(t) }
127: \end{equation}
128:
129: \begin{equation}
130: \frac{ \partial (aM_N)} { \partial m_{sea}^b }
131: = - N_f
132: \lim_{ t_1 , (t-t_1) \rightarrow \infty}
133: \frac{ D_3(t_1,t) }{ C(t) }
134: \end{equation}
135:
136:
137:
138:
139: The input quark mass parameters can be written in terms of the
140: physical bare quark masses, with an additive mass renormalisation
141: ($m_A$).
142:
143: \be
144: m_{val}^{b} = m_{A} + a m_{val} \label{eq.val}
145: \ee
146: \be
147: m_{sea}^{b} = m_{A} + a m_{sea} \label{eq.sea}
148: \ee
149:
150: Now $m_A$ may be determined by varying the valence quark mass
151: and determining the critical hopping parameter at which the pion mass
152: (and hence $a m_{val}$) becomes zero, or equivalently by finding the
153: critical valence hopping parameter at which the PCAC mass becomes zero.
154: These extrapolations to determine $m_A$ are at fixed
155: $m_{sea}^b$ and hence $m_A$ will depend on $m_{sea}^b$.
156: The lattice spacing $a$ also depends on the bare sea-quark
157: mass parameter $m_{sea}^b$.
158: These effects can be summarised by the following derivatives
159: \be
160: X={d m_A \over d m_{sea}^b}
161: {\rm \ \ \ \ and \ \ \ \ \ }
162: B = {d \log a \over d m_{sea}^b}
163: \ee
164:
165:
166:
167: We are interested in the disconnected scalar matrix element which is
168: related in the continuum to the derivative with respect to the sea
169: quark mass. On a lattice this disconnected scalar matrix element is
170: related to the derivative of the nucleon mass with respect to the
171: sea-quark mass parameter at fixed valence-quark hopping parameter and
172: fixed $\beta$ by eq.~\ref{eq.sea}. The key observation is then that as
173: the sea-quark hopping parameter is varied on the lattice, both the
174: valence quark mass and the lattice spacing also change. Thus one needs
175: to correct for these changes to obtain the derivative of the nucleon
176: mass at fixed valence-quark mass which is required.
177:
178:
179:
180: For the valence dependence, the required derivative is
181: directly given by the lattice observable
182: \be
183: \frac{ \partial M_N} { \partial m_{val} }
184: =\frac{ \partial (aM_N)} { \partial m_{val}^b }
185: \ee
186: For the sea-quark derivative, however, there will be several other
187: factors involved as discussed above:
188: \begin{eqnarray}
189: \frac{ \partial M_N} { \partial m_{sea} } (1- a m_{sea} B - X)
190: = \ \ \ \ \ \ & & \nonumber \\
191: \frac{ \partial (aM_N)} { \partial m_{sea}^b }
192: + ( a m_{val} B + X)\frac{ \partial (aM_N)} { \partial m_{val}^b }
193: - M_N B & &
194: \label{eq.full}
195: \end{eqnarray}
196:
197: This shows that the lattice connected and disconnected contributions
198: are mixed when related to the more physical derivatives at fixed bare
199: quark mass and fixed scale $a$. There will also be additional
200: perturbative matching contributions to take into account to have a
201: precise link between lattice observables and the continuum expressions.,
202: but we do not discuss these further here.
203:
204:
205: We evaluate the above expressions using UKQCD
206: data~\cite{Allton:1998gi,Allton:2001sk}. We mainly use data from
207: $\beta=5.2$ on $16^3 32$ lattices with $N_f=2$ flavours of sea quark
208: with $\kappa=0.1355$ or $0.1350$ and using a NP-clover formalism with
209: $C_{SW}=2.0171$. These hopping parameter values correspond to quark masses
210: around the strange quark (since the $\pi / \rho$ ratio is 0.58 and
211: 0.70 respectively). From the $r_0$ values~\cite{Allton:2001sk}, we obtain
212: $B=4.4(8)$ while from extrapolating the PCAC masses to obtain the
213: critical hopping parameters at these two sea quark masses we obtain
214: $X=-0.66(4)$. This implies that there will be substantial mixing of the
215: lattice disconnected and connected contributions in evaluating the
216: derivative with respect to the sea-quark mass.
217:
218: Setting $B=X=0$ in eq.~\ref{eq.full} gives the naive lattice ratio of
219: $y=0.53(12)$ while including the full mixing gives $y=-0.28(33)$.
220:
221:
222: Since we are using finite differences to evaluate the derivatives in
223: eq.~\ref{eq.full}, we may instead use the value of the nucleon mass in
224: physical units for the four cases ($\kappa_{sea}=0.1355,\ 0.1350$;
225: $\kappa_{val}=0.1355,\ 0.1350$) and evaluate the quark mass in each case
226: from the bare quark mass (eqs.~{\ref{eq.val},\ref{eq.sea}). We prefer
227: to use the bare quark mass here because of the lattice Feynman-Hellman
228: theorem, but it would be possible to use the lattice PCAC quark mass,
229: extrapolate to the continuum and then use the Feynman-Hellman relation in
230: the continuum. The four combinations of sea and valence quark mass will
231: then not lie at the corners of a rectangle, but at corners of some
232: quadrilateral. We can then use the nucleon masses at these four values
233: to evaluate the required derivatives with respect to the sea quark mass
234: at constant valence mass and vice versa. The result from this approach
235: is $y=-0.30(34)$ which is consistent with the value quoted above.
236:
237: Note that $y$ is expected to be positive, so the negative value
238: obtained is just a reflection of the large statistical error. We have
239: also attempted to measure the disconnected lattice correlator using a
240: three point function approach. The result was compatible with using
241: derivatives of the nucleon mass but the statistical errors were larger.
242:
243: \section{DISCUSSION}
244:
245: To obtain a reliable lattice determination of $y$, one should use
246: $N_f=2$ flavours of light sea quark plus a heavier (strange mass) sea
247: quark. Then the required disconnected diagram can be obtained either as
248: a derivative of the nucleon mass with respect to the strange sea quark
249: mass or by evaluating the $D_3$ diagram with strange quarks in the
250: disconnected loop. In practice one will need to extrapolate the sea and
251: valence masses to to the physical $u$ and $d$ masses. This
252: extrapolation is known to be non-trivial for the extraction of the $\pi
253: N$ sigma term~\cite{Leinweber:2000sa}. A continuum limit of the lattice
254: observables should also be taken as well as building in perturbative
255: matching.
256:
257:
258:
259: Instead we use $N_f=2$ flavours of sea-quark which should be a good
260: approximation for the sea. Extracting the disconnected diagram as a
261: derivative is only possible if the quarks considered in the disconnected
262: loop are the sea-quarks. It is possible to go beyond this by explicitly
263: evaluating $D_3$ with different mass quarks in the disconnected loop
264: and this is in progress. We are also exploring ways to reduce the
265: large statistical errors we find.
266:
267:
268: Our main conclusion is that the current lattice data are unable to
269: give a determination with any precision of $y$, but that the naive
270: lattice ratio of $y \approx 0.6$ is not appropriate and the lattice
271: result is indeed compatible with $y=0$. That $y$ is compatible with
272: zero implies that there is no evidence for any dependence of the
273: nucleon mass on the sea quark mass and this conclusion was also
274: reached in an earlier lattice study~\cite{Foster:1998vw} of the sea
275: quark dependence of the meson (pseudoscalar and vector) masses.
276:
277:
278:
279:
280: % mod for spires tags, hep-lat etc
281:
282: %%\bibliographystyle{h-elsevier2}
283: %%\bibliography{conferences,wimp}
284: \begin{thebibliography}{10}
285:
286: \bibitem{Bottino:1999ei}
287: A. Bottino et~al.,
288: \newblock Astropart. Phys. 13 (2000) 215, hep-ph/9909228,
289: \newblock %%CITATION = APHYE,13,215;%%.
290:
291: \bibitem{Borasoy:1996zx}
292: B. Borasoy and U.G. Meissner,
293: \newblock Phys. Lett. B365 (1996) 285, hep-ph/9508354,
294: \newblock %%CITATION = PHLTA,B365,285;%%.
295:
296: \bibitem{Gusken:1999te}
297: S. Gusken,
298: \newblock Flavor singlet phenomena in lattice qcd,
299: \newblock hep-lat/9906034.
300:
301: \bibitem{Foster:1998vw}
302: UKQCD, M. Foster and C. Michael,
303: \newblock Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) 074503, hep-lat/9810021,
304: \newblock %%CITATION = PHRVA,D59,074503;%%.
305:
306: \bibitem{Gusken:1998wy}
307: SESAM, S. Gusken et~al.,
308: \newblock Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) 054504, hep-lat/9809066,
309: \newblock %%CITATION = PHRVA,D59,054504;%%.
310:
311: \bibitem{Fukugita:1995ba}
312: M. Fukugita et~al.,
313: \newblock Phys. Rev. D51 (1995) 5319, hep-lat/9408002,
314: \newblock %%CITATION = PHRVA,D51,5319;%%.
315:
316: \bibitem{Dong:1996ec}
317: S.J. Dong, J.F. Lagae and K.F. Liu,
318: \newblock Phys. Rev. D54 (1996) 5496, hep-ph/9602259,
319: \newblock %%CITATION = PHRVA,D54,5496;%%.
320:
321: \bibitem{Allton:1998gi}
322: UKQCD, C.R. Allton et~al.,
323: \newblock Phys. Rev. D60 (1999) 034507, hep-lat/9808016,
324: \newblock %%CITATION = PHRVA,D60,034507;%%.
325:
326: \bibitem{Allton:2001sk}
327: UKQCD, C.R. Allton et~al.,
328: %%\newblock Effects of non-perturbatively improved dynamical fermions in qcd at
329: %% fixed lattice spacing,
330: \newblock hep-lat/0107021.
331:
332: \bibitem{Leinweber:2000sa}
333: D.B. Leinweber, A.W. Thomas and S.V. Wright,
334: \newblock Phys. Lett. B482 (2000) 109, hep-lat/0001007,
335: \newblock %%CITATION = PHLTA,B482,109;%%.
336:
337: \end{thebibliography}
338:
339:
340:
341: \end{document}
342:
343: