1: \documentclass[11pt]{article}

2: \usepackage{axodraw}

3: \usepackage{epsfig}

4: \usepackage{amsfonts}

5:  \hoffset=-1.5cm

6:  \voffset=-0.6cm

7:  \textwidth=15.5cm

8:  \textheight=21cm

9: 

10: % table parameters

11: \setlength{\tabcolsep}{0.3cm}

12: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.1}

13: 

14: % allow a lot of figures and so on

15: \renewcommand{\topfraction}{1.0}

16: \renewcommand{\bottomfraction}{1.0}

17: \renewcommand{\textfraction}{0.0}

18: \setcounter{topnumber}{4}

19: \setcounter{bottomnumber}{4}

20: \setcounter{totalnumber}{6}

21: \parindent=1em

22: \baselineskip.4cm

23: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.1}

24: 

25: \newcommand{\Tint}[1]{{\hbox{$\sum$}\!\!\!\!\!\!\int}_{\!\!\!\!#1}}

26: \newcommand{\D}{{\cal D}}

27: \newcommand{\la}[1]{\label{#1}}

28: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}

29: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}

30: \newcommand{\ba}{\begin{eqnarray}}

31: \newcommand{\ea}{\end{eqnarray}}

32: \newcommand{\bi}{\begin{itemize}}

33: \newcommand{\ei}{\end{itemize}}

34: \newcommand{\rmi}[1]{{\mbox{\scriptsize #1}}}

35: \newcommand{\nr}[1]{(\ref{#1})}

36: \newcommand{\tr}{{\rm Tr\,}}

37: \newcommand{\re}{\mathop{\rm Re}}

38: \newcommand{\Hc}{{\rm H.c.\ }}

39: \newcommand{\im}{\mathop{\rm Im}}

40: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber \\}

41: \newcommand{\fr}[2]{{\frac{#1}{#2}}}

42: \newcommand{\msbar}{\overline{\mbox{\rm MS}}}

43: \newcommand{\bfp}{{\bf p}}

44: \newcommand{\bfx}{{\bf x}}

45: \newcommand{\bfi}{{\bf i}}

46: \newcommand{\<}{\langle} %{\left\langle}

47: \renewcommand{\>}{\rangle}  %{\right\rangle}

48: \renewcommand{\vec}[1]{{\bf #1}}

49: \newcommand{\pint}{\int\! dp}

50: \newcommand{\pslash}{\slash\!\!\! p}

51: \newcommand{\e}{\epsilon}

52: \newcommand{\bmu}{\bar\mu}

53: \newcommand{\trp}{{\rm Tr}_{\rm v}\,}

54: \newcommand{\str}{{\rm Str\,}}

55: \newcommand{\Nf}{N_{\rm f}}

56: \newcommand{\Nv}{N_{\rm v}}

57: \newcommand{\Pv}{P_{\rm v}}

58: \newcommand{\Nc}{N_{\rm c}}

59: \newcommand{\rmO}{{\rm O}}

60: \newcommand{\xpt}{$\chi$PT\ } % {ChPT}

61: \newcommand{\zz}%

62:  {{\mathbb{Z}}^4}

63:  % {\mbox{\raisebox{-0.2ex}{$\scriptstyle\mathsf{Z\hspace*{-1.3mm}Z}^4$}}}

64: %% indexing

65: % su4

66: \renewcommand{\a}{r}    %{\alpha}

67: \renewcommand{\b}{s}    %{\beta}

68: \renewcommand{\c}{u}    %{\gamma}

69: \renewcommand{\d}{v}    %{\delta}

70: \renewcommand{\k}{k}    %{\kappa}

71: \renewcommand{\l}{l}    %{\lambda}

72: \newcommand{\ta}{\tilde r}     %{\tilde{\a}}

73: \newcommand{\tb}{\tilde s}     %{\tilde{\b}}

74: \newcommand{\tc}{\tilde u}     %{\tilde{\c}}

75: \newcommand{\td}{\tilde v}     %{\tilde{\d}}

76: %

77: \newcommand{\1}{d} 

78: \newcommand{\2}{u} 

79: \newcommand{\3}{s} 

80: \newcommand{\4}{c} 

81: %

82: \newcommand{\gvec}[1]{\bar{#1}}

83: \newcommand{\ga}{\gvec{\a}}

84: \newcommand{\gb}{\gvec{\b}}

85: \newcommand{\gc}{\gvec{\c}}

86: \newcommand{\gd}{\gvec{\d}}

87: \newcommand{\gk}{\gvec{\k}}

88: \newcommand{\gl}{\gvec{\l}}

89: %

90: \newcommand{\hvec}[1]{\hat{#1}}

91: \newcommand{\ha}{\hvec{\a}}

92: \newcommand{\hb}{\hvec{\b}}

93: \newcommand{\hc}{\hvec{\c}}

94: \newcommand{\hd}{\hvec{\d}}

95: \newcommand{\hk}{\hvec{\k}}

96: \newcommand{\hl}{\hvec{\l}}

97: %

98: \newcommand{\mS}{\mathcal{S}}

99: \newcommand{\mP}{\mathcal{P}}

100: \newcommand{\mL}{\mathcal{L}}

101: \newcommand{\mW}{\mathcal{W}}

102: %

103: \newcommand{\RR}{{\rm I\kern -.2em  R}}

104: \newcommand{\eq}{Eq.~}

105: \newcommand{\eqs}{Eqs.~}

106: \newcommand{\fig}{Fig.~}

107: \newcommand{\figs}{Figs.~}

108: \newcommand{\se}{Sec.~}

109: \newcommand{\half}{{1\over2}}

110: \newcommand{\quarter}{{1\over4}}

111: 

112: \def\lsi{\raise0.3ex\hbox{$<$\kern-0.75em\raise-1.1ex\hbox{$\sim$}}}

113: \def\gsi{\raise0.3ex\hbox{$>$\kern-0.75em\raise-1.1ex\hbox{$\sim$}}}

114: \newcommand{\lsim}{\mathop{\lsi}}

115: \newcommand{\gsim}{\mathop{\gsi}}

116: 

117: %-----------------------------------------------------------------------

118: % The lines below are necessary in order to enumerate the equations

119: % according to the sections where they are.

120: \makeatletter \@addtoreset{equation}{section} \makeatother

121: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\arabic{section}.\arabic{equation}}

122: %-----------------------------------------------------------------------

123: % Small modifications of the basic style (for section headers). 

124: \makeatletter

125: \renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}%

126:                                    {-5.5ex \@plus -1ex \@minus -.2ex}% bfr-skip

127:                                    {2.3ex \@plus.2ex}%

128:                                    {\normalfont\large\bfseries}}

129: \renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}%

130:                                      {-3.25ex\@plus -1ex \@minus -.2ex}%

131:                                      {1.5ex \@plus .2ex}%

132:                                      {\normalfont\normalsize\bfseries}}

133: \renewcommand\thesection {\@arabic\c@section}

134: \renewcommand\thesubsection   {\thesection.\@arabic\c@subsection}

135: \renewcommand{\@seccntformat}[1]{%

136: \csname the#1\endcsname.\hspace{1.0em}}

137: \makeatother

138: %-----------------------------------------------------------------------

139: 

140: \input pix.sty

141: 

142: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% TEXT %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

143: 

144: \begin{document}

145: 

146: \begin{titlepage}

147: \begin{flushright}

148: BI-TP 2006/26 \\

149: FTUV-06-0720 \\

150: IFIC/06-18 \\

151: hep-lat/0607027\\

152: \end{flushright}

153: \begin{centering}

154: \vfill

155: 

156: \mbox{\Large\bf Probing the chiral weak Hamiltonian at finite volumes}

157: 

158: \vspace*{0.8cm}

159: 

160: P.~Hern\'andez$^{\rm a,}$\footnote{pilar.hernandez@ific.uv.es}

161: %

162: and 

163: %

164: M.~Laine$^{\rm b,}$\footnote{laine@physik.uni-bielefeld.de}

165: 

166: \vspace*{0.8cm}

167: 

168: {\em $^{\rm a}$%

169: Dpto.\ F\'{\i}sica Te\'orica and IFIC, Edificio Institutos Investigaci\'on, \\

170: Apt.\ 22085, E-46071 Valencia, Spain\\}

171: 

172: \vspace{0.3cm}

173: 

174: {\em $^{\rm b}$%

175: Faculty of Physics, University of Bielefeld, 

176: D-33501 Bielefeld, Germany\\}

177: 

178: \vspace*{0.8cm}

179: 

180: {\bf Abstract}

181:  

182: \end{centering}

183:  

184: \vspace*{0.4cm}

185: 

186: \noindent

187: %%

188: Non-leptonic kaon decays are often described through 

189: an effective chiral weak Hamiltonian, whose couplings 

190: (``low-energy constants'') encode all non-perturbative QCD physics. 

191: It has recently been suggested that these low-energy

192: constants could be determined at finite volumes by matching the 

193: non-perturbatively measured three-point correlation 

194: functions between the weak Hamiltonian and two left-handed flavour currents, 

195: to analytic predictions following from chiral perturbation theory. Here we 

196: complete the analytic side in

197: two respects: by inspecting how small (``$\epsilon$-regime'') and intermediate 

198: or large (``$p$-regime'') quark masses connect to each other, and by 

199: including in the discussion the two leading $\Delta I = 1/2$ operators. 

200: We show that the $\epsilon$-regime offers a straightforward strategy for 

201: disentangling the coefficients of the $\Delta I = 1/2$ operators, 

202: and that in the $p$-regime finite-volume effects are significant

203: in these observables once the pseudoscalar mass $M$ and the box length 

204: $L$ are in the regime $ML \lsim 5.0$.

205: %% \vfill

206: 

207: %\noindent

208: %PACS numbers: 

209: 

210: %11.15.Ha, %        Lattice gauge theory

211: %11.30.Hv, %        Flavour symmetries

212: %11.30.Rd, %        Chiral symmetries

213: %12.38.Gc, %        Lattice QCD calculations

214: %12.39.Fe, %        Chiral Lagrangians

215: %\\

216: %Keywords:

217: 

218: \vspace*{1cm}

219:  

220: \noindent

221: %July 2006  %% \today

222: September 2006

223: 

224: \vfill

225:  

226: \end{titlepage}

227: 

228: 

229: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

230: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

231: 

232: \section{Introduction}

233: 

234: Understanding why the $\Delta I = 1/2$ amplitudes for non-leptonic 

235: kaon decays are so much larger than the $\Delta I = 3/2$ amplitudes, 

236: is a long-standing problem for QCD phenomenology. It has been known 

237: since the early 70s that the bulk of the enhancement must be due to 

238: strong interactions at low energies~\cite{mk}. Therefore a reliable 

239: explanation must eventually be based on systematic non-perturbative 

240: methods, in particular on lattice QCD~\cite{lat,b}. 

241: 

242: It was realized long ago that instead of computing directly the 

243: decay amplitudes with lattice QCD, a simpler alternative is to use lattice 

244: simulations to determine the relevant low-energy constants (LECs) 

245: of the effective chiral weak Hamiltonian that describes kaon decays \cite{b}, 

246: and then use chiral perturbation theory to compute the physical 

247: amplitudes~\cite{b}--\cite{pp}.  

248: The determination of the LECs can be achieved by matching certain 

249: observables computed in lattice QCD and in chiral perturbation 

250: theory  ($\chi$PT), as close as 

251: possible to the chiral limit. In this respect it is advantageous 

252: to approach the chiral limit by first 

253: extrapolating to small or zero 

254: quark masses, and increase the volume only afterwards. 

255: This setup corresponds to the so-called 

256: $\epsilon$-regime of $\chi$PT ~\cite{GL} (see also Ref.~\cite{N}). 

257: The power-counting rules in this regime~\cite{GL}

258: guarantee that the contamination from higher order LECs 

259: is reduced very significantly. In other words, 

260: the number of LECs that appear at  

261: the  next-to-leading order (NLO) in the $\epsilon$-regime of $\chi$PT 

262: is typically much smaller than that at the 

263: next-to-leading  order in the standard $p$-regime, 

264: where the infrared cutoff is provided by the pion mass rather than the volume. 

265: 

266: The matching of lattice QCD and the chiral effective theory in the

267: $\epsilon$-regime has recently been considered in order to extract 

268: the strong interaction LECs \cite{qcd}--\cite{qcd3}.  

269: Subsequently, it has been pursued for the

270: determination of the weak LECs

271: that we are interested in~\cite{methods,weak,strategy}, as well

272: as for the study of baryon properties \cite{baryons}. This progress has been

273: possible thanks to the advent of Ginsparg-Wilson formulations of

274: lattice fermions~\cite{gw}--\cite{kn}, which possess an exact chiral

275: symmetry in the limit of vanishing quark masses. Simulations in this

276: regime are however challenging on the numerical side, and

277: Refs.~\cite{methods,current} introduced several important technical

278: advances in order to make them possible.

279: 

280: In Ref.~\cite{strategy}, a strategy based on these methods has been

281: proposed to reveal the role that the charm quark mass plays in the $\Delta

282: I=1/2$ rule. In particular, following the suggestion of

283: Ref.~\cite{methods}, the observables that are considered 

284: are three-point correlation functions of two left-handed 

285: flavour currents and the weak operators. The

286: first step is the matching of these observables, 

287: to extract the LECs of the weak chiral

288: effective Hamiltonian, in a theory with a light charm quark, that is in

289: a four-flavour theory with an exact SU(4) symmetry in the valence

290: sector. The results of this computation can be found

291: in Ref.~\cite{prl}. The next step of the strategy is to increase 

292: the charm quark mass and

293: monitor the LECs as we move towards a theory with an SU(3) flavour

294: symmetry~\cite{strategy,largemc}.

295: 

296: In a previous paper~\cite{weak}, we have already

297: computed the NLO $\epsilon$-regime predictions 

298: for the correlators of left-handed flavour currents and the

299: $\Delta I = 3/2$ weak operator, whose coefficient determines 

300: the kaon mixing parameter $\hat B_K$ in the chiral limit. 

301: The purpose of the present paper is to extend the results

302: of Ref.~\cite{weak} in two ways. First of all, we compute

303: the same observables as before, but also at larger 

304: quark masses, corresponding to the $p$-regime of 

305: chiral perturbation theory. The goal is to obtain a better understanding 

306: of the regions of validity of the $\epsilon$ and $p$-regimes. 

307: Second, we include the $\Delta I = 1/2$ weak operators in the analysis. 

308: 

309: We find that the $\epsilon$-regime does offer a clean 

310: way of disentangling the coefficients of the two

311: leading-order $\Delta I = 1/2$ operators. 

312: 

313: It is well known that the description of quenched simulations, which

314: still are widely in use today, through a quenched version of chiral

315: perturbation theory, is rather problematic. In particular the

316: $p$-regime is strongly affected by quenched ambiguities that increase

317: significantly the number of LECs \cite{gp}, making it difficult to

318: identify those that should be closest to the ones in the full

319: theory. We have studied the effect of these ambiguities also in the

320: $\epsilon$-regime at NLO, and find that they are significantly less

321: severe in this case.

322: 

323: In most of our analysis we will concentrate, 

324: however, on the full physical theory. The

325: most immediate applications might then follow through the use of mixed

326: fermion frameworks~\cite{pq}, though progress towards dynamical

327: Ginsparg-Wilson fermions is also taking place~\cite{fp}.

328: 

329: It should be made clear from the onset that

330: choosing to consider correlators 

331: involving left-handed flavour currents in this paper,

332: is not meant to indicate that they would necessarily be 

333: the ultimate way for determining the weak LECs. For instance, 

334: employing the zero-mode wave functions of the massless Dirac operator 

335: might also lead to a useful probe, even though for

336: the pion decay constant they seem to be slightly disfavoured 

337: in comparison with the left-handed flavour currents~\cite{zeromode}. 

338: 

339: Other methods to obtain the weak LECs have also been 

340: considered in the literature. For lattice approaches without 

341: an exact chiral invariance see, e.g., 

342: the recent work in Refs.~\cite{twm}.

343: For models inspired by the large-$\Nc$ expansion see, e.g., 

344: Refs.~\cite{bbg,hpr}. 

345: 

346: This paper is organised as follows. 

347: We formulate the problem in \se\ref{se:formulation}, 

348: discuss the various regimes of chiral perturbation theory 

349: in \se\ref{se:xpt}, address the $\Delta I = 3/2$ operators

350: in \se\ref{se:32}, and the $\Delta I = 1/2$ operators

351: in \se\ref{se:12}. We conclude in \se\ref{se:conclusions}.

352: 

353: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

354: %

355: \section{Formulation of the problem}

356: \la{se:formulation}

357: 

358: We start by considering QCD with $4$ flavours.

359: The quark part of the Euclidean continuum Lagrangian reads 

360: \be

361:  {L}_E = \sum_{r = 1}^{4} \bar \psi_r (\gamma_\mu D_\mu + m_r)\psi_r

362:  \;, 

363: \ee

364: where $r$ is a flavour index;

365: the Dirac matrices $\gamma_\mu$ are assumed normalised 

366: such that $\gamma_\mu^\dagger = \gamma_\mu$, 

367: $\{\gamma_\mu,\gamma_\nu\} = 2 \delta_{\mu\nu}$; 

368: $D_\mu$ is the covariant derivative; $m_r$ is the quark mass; 

369: colour and spinor indices are assumed contracted; and repeated indices 

370: are summed over, even when no summation symbol is shown explicitly. 

371: In the following we will consider the three lightest quarks as  

372: degenerate in mass, $m_u = m_d = m_s \equiv m$, while the charm 

373: quark is heavier, $m_c \gg m$. 

374: 

375: After an operator product expansion in the inverse W boson mass, weak 

376: interactions can be described with the Fermi theory involving four-quark

377: operators. 

378: In the CP conserving case of two generations, the effective 

379: weak Hamiltonian is then~\cite{mk} (for reviews see, e.g.,~\cite{hg,revs}) 

380: \be

381:  H_w = 

382:  2 \sqrt{2} G_F V_{ud} V^*_{us} 

383:  \biggl\{

384:  \sum_{\sigma = \pm 1}

385:  h_w^\sigma 

386:  \Bigl( [{O_{w}}]^\sigma_{suud} - [{O_{w}}]^\sigma_{sccd}\Bigr) 

387:  + h_m 

388:  [{O_{m}}]_{sd} \biggr\}

389:  + \Hc \;, \la{Hw}

390: \ee

391: where $h_{w}^\pm, h_{m}$ are scheme-dependent

392: dimensionless Wilson coefficients, with leading order 

393: values $h_{w}^\pm = 1, h_{m}=0$. 

394: The coefficients $h_{w}^\pm$ are known to two loops 

395: in perturbation theory \cite{wilson}, while $h_{m}$ remains undetermined. 

396: In \eq\nr{Hw} we have introduced the notation 

397: \ba

398:  [ O_{w} ]^\sigma_{\a\b\c\d} & \equiv & 

399:  \fr12 

400:  \Bigl( [ O_{w} ]_{\a\b\c\d} + 

401:  \sigma [ O_{w} ]_{\a\b\d\c} \Bigr)\;, \la{Owplus} \\[2mm]

402:  {[ O_{w} ]}_{\a\b\c\d} & \equiv & 

403:  (\bar\psi_{\a} \gamma_\mu P_{-} \psi_{\c}) 

404:  (\bar\psi_{\b} \gamma_\mu P_{-} \psi_{\d}) \;,  

405:  \la{O_QCD} \\[2mm]

406:  {[ O_{m} ]}_{sd} ~~ & \equiv & 

407:  (m_c^2 - m_u^2) \{ m_s (\bar\psi_{\3} P_- \psi_{\1}) + 

408:  m_d (\bar\psi_{\3} P_+ \psi_{\1}) \} \;.

409:  \la{Lw_QCD_general} \la{O2_QCD}

410: \ea

411: Here $r,s,u,v$ are generic flavour indices, 

412: while $u,d,s,c$ denote the physical flavours.

413: The chiral projection operators 

414: $P_\pm$ read $P_\pm \equiv (1\pm\gamma_5)/2$, 

415: where $\gamma_5 = \gamma_0 \gamma_1 \gamma_2 \gamma_3$.

416: The colour and spinor indices are assumed to be contracted 

417: within the parentheses.

418: 

419: 

420: In order to match the Hamiltonian

421: of~\eq\nr{Hw} to the one in the SU(3) chiral theory, 

422: the first step is to decompose it into irreducible representations of 

423: the SU(3)$_L\times$SU(3)$_R$ flavour group, 

424: present at low energies. The weak operators 

425: are singlets under SU(3)$_R$, and projecting them 

426: onto irreducible representations

427: of SU(3)$_L$, the weak Hamiltonian can be rewritten as 

428: \ba

429:  {H}_w & = &   

430:   2 \sqrt{2} G_F V_{ud} V^*_{us} 

431:  \biggl\{

432:   h_w^+ [{\hat {O}_w}]^+_{\3\2\2\1} 

433:   + \fr15 h_w^+ [R_w]^+_{\3\1} - h_w^- [R_w]^-_{\3\1} - \nn

434:   & - & \fr12 (h_w^+ + h_w^-) [O_w]_{\3\4\4\1} 

435:   - \fr12 (h_w^+ - h_w^-) [O_w]_{\3\4\1\4} 

436:   + h_m [O_m]_{\3\1}

437:  \biggr\} + \Hc \;, 

438:  \la{Lw_QCD_su3}

439: \ea

440: where 

441: \ba

442:  [\hat {O}_w]^+_{\3\2\2\1} & \equiv & 

443:  \frac{1}{2} \Bigl\{ [O_w]_{\3\2\2\1} + [O_w]_{\3\2\1\2} 

444:  - \fr15 \sum_{k=u,d,s}

445:  \Bigl( [O_w]_{\3\k\1\k} + [O_w]_{\3\k\k\1}  \Bigr)\Bigr\} \;, 

446:  \la{preO27} \\

447:  {[R_w]}_{\3\1}^{\pm} & \equiv & 

448:  \fr12 \sum_{k=u,d,s} \Bigl( [O_w]_{\3\k\1\k} \pm [O_w]_{\3\k\k\1} \Bigr) \;.

449:  \la{preO8}

450: \ea

451: The first operator in \eq\nr{Lw_QCD_su3} transforms

452: under the 27-plet of the SU(3)$_L$ subgroup: it is symmetric under 

453: the interchange of quark or antiquark indices, and traceless. 

454: The remaining ones, transforming as ${\bf 3^* \otimes 3}$

455: and being traceless, belong to irreducible representations 

456: of dimension 8. 

457: 

458: If, as the next step, the charm quark is also integrated out, 

459: then the operators in \eq\nr{Lw_QCD_su3} go over into the 

460: standard ones, commonly denoted by $Q_i$, $i = 1,...,6$~\cite{itep,giwi}

461: (of which five are independent). It is probably safer to 

462: keep the charm quark in the simulations, though, since integrating 

463: it out perturbatively is not guaranteed to be a safe procedure. 

464: Moreover, the quenched three-flavour theory contains spurious 

465: operators~\cite{gp}.

466: For these reasons, we prefer to consider the four-flavour theory of

467: \eq\nr{Lw_QCD_su3} to be the QCD-side

468: of our problem. 

469: 

470: Now, at large distances, the physics of QCD can be reproduced by 

471: chiral perturbation theory. For 

472: a degenerate quark mass matrix, the leading order chiral Lagrangian reads

473: \ba

474:  \mathcal{L}_\rmi{$\chi$PT} \!\! & = & \!\! \frac{F^2}{4} \tr 

475:  \Bigl[ \partial_\mu U \partial_\mu U^{\dagger} \Bigr] 

476:  - {m \Sigma \over 2} \tr

477:  \! \Bigl[ e^{i\theta/\Nf} U + U^{\dagger} e^{-i\theta/\Nf}\Bigr] 

478:  \;,

479:  \la{XPT} \la{LE}

480: \ea

481: where $U \in $ SU($\Nf$), $\Nf \equiv 3$,

482: and $\theta$ is the vacuum angle. Apart from $\theta$,   

483: this Lagrangian contains two parameters, 

484: the pseudoscalar decay constant $F_{}$ and the 

485: chiral condensate $\Sigma$. 

486: At the next-to-leading order 

487: in the momentum expansion, additional operators

488: appear in the chiral Lagrangian, 

489: with the associated low-energy constants 

490: $L_1,L_2,...$~\cite{gl2}.

491: 

492: Obviously the chiral model can be extended to include 

493: a weak Hamiltonian~\cite{cronin}. We denote the 

494: chiral analogue of $H_w$ in~\eq\nr{Lw_QCD_su3} by ${\cal H}_w$.

495: To again define dimensionless coefficients, 

496: we write ${\cal H}_w$ in the form~\cite{b,lo} 

497: \be

498:   {\cal H}_w \equiv  2 \sqrt{2} G_F V_{ud} V^*_{us}

499:   \biggl\{ 

500:   \fr53 g_{27} {\cal O}_{27} 

501:   + 2 g_8 {\cal O}_8

502:   + 2 g_8'{\cal O}'_8

503:   \biggr\} + \Hc  \;,

504:  \la{Lw_XPT}

505: \ee

506: where $g_{27}, g_8$ and $g_8'$ are the low-energy 

507: constants we are interested in. The operators read

508: \ba

509:  {\cal O}_{27} & \equiv & 

510:  {[\; \hat {\! {\cal O}}_{w}]}^+_{\3\2\2\1} = 

511:  \fr35\Bigl(  

512:  {[ {\cal O}_{w} ]}_{\3\2\1\2} + 

513:  \fr23 {[  {\cal O}_{w} ]}_{\3\2\2\1}

514:  \Bigr)

515:  \;, \la{formofO} \\   

516:  {[{\cal O}_{w}]}_{\a\b\c\d} & \equiv &  

517:  \frac{F^4}{4} 

518:  \Bigl(\partial_\mu U U^\dagger\Bigr)_{\c\a}

519:  \Bigl(\partial_\mu U U^\dagger\Bigr)_{\d\b}

520:  \;, \la{O_XPT} \\

521:  {\cal O}_{8} & \equiv & 

522:  {[ {\cal R}_{w} ]}_{\3\1}^+ =  \fr12 \sum_{k=u,d,s}

523:  {[ {\cal O}_{w} ]}_{\3\k\k\1}

524:  \;, \la{formofR} \\

525:  {\cal O}'_{8} & \equiv & 

526:   \frac{F^2}{2} m {\Sigma}

527:   \Bigl( e^{i\theta/\Nf}U 

528:    + U^\dagger e^{-i\theta/\Nf} \Bigr)_{\1\3} 

529:    \;, \la{formofO8p}

530: \ea

531: where we have made use of $\tr[\partial_\mu U U^\dagger] = 0$

532: to simplify the chiral versions of~\eqs\nr{preO27}, \nr{preO8}.

533: 

534: In the following, we will find it useful to 

535: generalize the notation somewhat from

536: the standard SU(3) case introduced above. 

537: Let $\Nv \equiv 3$ be the number of valence

538: flavours, and $\Nf$ the number of degenerate sea flavours in the 

539: chiral Lagrangian. The standard case corresponds to $\Nf = \Nv$, 

540: but one can also envisage other interesting situations, 

541: for instance $\Nf = 4$~\cite{strategy}, or $\Nf \to 0$. 

542: We note that the simplified forms in \eqs\nr{formofO}, \nr{formofR}  

543: only apply for $\Nf = \Nv$; 

544: in general, the combinations 

545: in \eqs\nr{preO27}, \nr{preO8} 

546: need to be employed (the generalizations of these combinations

547: to arbitrary $\Nv,\Nf$ are summarised in Appendix A).

548: In the remainder of this Section we have in mind the 

549: case $\Nf = \Nv$ but the formulae are written in a way 

550: which will be useful in Appendix C, where

551: we analyse the situation $\Nf \neq \Nv$.

552: 

553: The principal strategy now is to construct three-point functions

554: by correlating $H_w$ with two left-handed flavour currents

555: on the QCD side, and to match

556: to predictions from \xpt for the same objects. In QCD, 

557: the left-handed flavour current can formally be defined as

558: \be

559:  J^a_\mu \equiv \bar\psi T^a \gamma_\mu P_- \psi 

560:  \;, \la{Jamu}

561: \ee

562: where $T^a$ is a traceless generator of the valence group SU($\Nv$), and

563: all colour, flavour, and spinor indices are assumed contracted. 

564: Note that $J^a_\mu$ defined this way

565: is formally purely imaginary.\footnote{%

566:  The convention in \eq\nr{Jamu} differs by a factor $i$ 

567:  from that in Ref.~\cite{weak}, but agrees with 

568:  the convention of Refs.~\cite{current,strategy}. We use 

569:  this ``unphysical'' convention since it removes a number of 

570:  unnecessary overall minus signs from the \xpt predictions. 

571:  } 

572: 

573: The two and three-point correlation functions between 

574: the left-handed currents and the weak operators, averaged over

575: the spatial volume, now read~\cite{methods}: 

576: \ba

577:   \tr[T^aT^b]{C}(x_0) & \equiv & 

578:  \int \! {\rm d}^3 x\, 

579:  \Bigl\langle {J}^a_0(x) {J}^b_0(0) \Bigr\rangle

580:  \;, \la{Cqcd} \\

581:  {[{C}_\rmi{R}]}^{ab} (x_0,y_0) & \equiv & 

582:  \int \! {\rm d}^3 x \int \! {\rm d}^3 y\, 

583:  \Bigl\langle {J}^a_0(x) 

584:  {O}_\rmi{R} (0) {J}^b_0(y) \Bigr\rangle

585:  \;,   \la{C1qcd} 

586: \ea

587: where the index $R$ refers to the representation. 

588: 

589: On the \xpt side, the operator

590: corresponding to~\eq\nr{Jamu} becomes, 

591: at leading order in the momentum expansion, 

592: \be

593:  \mathcal{J}^a_\mu = 

594:  \frac{F^2}{2} \tr \Bigl[ T^a U \partial_\mu U^\dagger \Bigr] 

595:  \;.

596: \ee

597: The two-point correlation function $\mathcal{C}(x_0)$ is defined

598: (apart from contact terms) by

599: \be

600:  \tr [T^a T^b] \, \mathcal{C}(x_0) = 

601:  \int \! {\rm d}^3 x \,  \Bigl\langle

602:  \mathcal{J}^a_0(x) \mathcal{J}^b_0(0) \Bigr\rangle

603:  \;, \la{Cxpt}

604: \ee

605: and the three-point correlation function we are interested in, reads

606: (again apart from contact terms)

607: \be

608:  {[\mathcal{C}_\rmi{R}]}^{ab} (x_0,y_0) \equiv  

609:  \int\! {\rm d}^3x

610:  \int\! {\rm d}^3y\, \Bigl\langle \mathcal{J}^a_0(x) 

611:  \mathcal{O}_\rmi{R}(0) \mathcal{J}^b_0(y) 

612:  \Bigr \rangle 

613:  \;. \la{C1xpt}

614: \ee

615: Our task is to compute the objects in \eqs\nr{Cxpt}, \nr{C1xpt} 

616: under certain circumstances, to be specified in the next Section.  

617: 

618: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

619: %

620: \section{Regimes of chiral perturbation theory}

621: \la{se:xpt}

622: 

623: 

624: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

625: \begin{figure}[t]

626: 

627: %\vspace*{-3cm}

628: 

629: \centerline{%

630: \epsfysize=7.0cm\epsfbox{regimes.eps}%

631: }

632: 

633: \caption[a]{\small The different regimes of chiral perturbation

634: theory, given a fixed spatial extent $L$ of the box, according 

635: to Ref.~\cite{delta}. Here $T$ is the

636: temporal extent of the box and $M$ the pseudoscalar mass.

637: It is assumed that $L \gg 1/F$.} 

638: \la{fig:regimes}

639: \end{figure}

640: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

641: 

642: Given a fixed spatial extent $L\gg 1/F$ of the box, several different 

643: kinematical regimes can be identified in $\chi$PT, 

644: leading to various computational

645: procedures~\cite{delta}. The situation is summarised

646: in \fig\ref{fig:regimes}. We will here be interested in the $p$- 

647: and $\epsilon$-regimes; the $\delta$-regime (corresponding

648: to small but elongated boxes) is also relevant in principle, 

649: but quite tedious to handle in practice~\cite{delta}, 

650: and thus preferably avoided.  

651: 

652: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SUBSECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

653: %

654: \subsection{$p$-regime}

655: 

656: 

657: In the $p$-regime, the quark mass is large enough to ensure that

658: \be

659:  m \Sigma V \gg 1

660:  \;. 

661: \ee

662: It follows from this condition that the Goldstone field 

663: $\xi$, defined through $U = \exp(2 i \xi/F)$,    

664: behaves effectively as a small quantity, and can be expanded in.

665: Chiral corrections are obtained as an expansion in $\left(M/F\right)^2$ and 

666: $1/(F L)^2$, where $M^2 \equiv 2 m \Sigma/F^2$.

667: The power-counting rules in this regime count both of these

668: expansion parameters at the same order:

669: \be

670:  M \sim p 

671:  \;, \quad

672:  L \sim \frac{1}{p}

673:  \;,

674: \ee

675: where $p$ is assumed small, $p \ll F$.

676: The temporal extent $T$ can in principle be small or large, 

677: as long as $T\gsim 1/p$. Of course, it is also possible to send 

678: $L\to\infty$ in the $p$-regime expressions. 

679: The situation is illustrated in \fig\ref{fig:regimes}.

680: 

681: Inserting the Taylor-series 

682: of $U$ into \eq\nr{LE}, the propagator becomes 

683: \be

684:  \Bigl\langle \xi_{\c\a}(x) \, \xi_{\d\b}(y) \Bigr\rangle  = 

685:  \fr12 \Bigl[\delta_{\c\b} \delta_{\d\a} G(x-y;M^2) - 

686:  \delta_{\c\a} \delta_{\d\b} E(x-y;M^2) \Bigr]\;, \la{gen_prop}

687: \ee

688: where 

689: \be

690:  G(x;M^2) = \frac{1}{V} 

691:  \sum_{n \in \zz} 

692:  \frac{e^{i p \cdot x}}{p^2+M^2}

693:  \;, \quad

694:  p \equiv (p_0,\vec{p}) 

695:  \equiv 2\pi\Bigl( \frac{n_0}{T}, \frac{\vec{n}}{L} \Bigr)

696:  \;,

697: \ee

698: and $V \equiv T L^3$ is the volume. Here we have also 

699: set $\theta = 0$, as is usually done in the $p$-regime. 

700: In the unquenched case, $E(x;M^2) = G(x;M^2)/\Nf$, but 

701: we keep everywhere $E(x;M^2)$ completely general. The reason is that then the 

702: form of~\eq\nr{gen_prop} is general enough to contain also the propagator of 

703: the replica formulation of quenched chiral perturbation theory~\cite{ds,ddhj}. 

704: 

705: For future reference and 

706: as an example of a NLO result in the $p$-regime, 

707: we consider

708: the two-point correlation function in \eq\nr{Cxpt}.

709: The result can be written as 

710: \ba

711:  \mathcal{C}(x_0) & = & \fr{F^2}2 \biggl\{ \biggl[ 

712:  1 - \frac{\Nf G(0;M^2)}{F^2} + \frac{8 M^2}{F^2} 

713:  (\Nf L_4 + L_5) \biggr] M^2 P(x_0)

714:  - \frac{\Nf}{F^2} \frac{{\rm d} G(0;M^2)}{{\rm d} T} \hspace*{1cm}

715:  \nn & + &  

716:  \biggl[ 

717:  \frac{E(0;M^2)}{F^2} - \frac{8 M^2}{F^2} 

718:  (\Nf L_4 + L_5 - 2 \Nf L_6 - 2 L_8)

719:  \biggr] M^2 \frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d} M^2} \Bigl[ M^2 P(x_0) \Bigr]

720:  \biggr\}

721:  \;, \la{Ct_p}

722: \ea

723: where (for $|x_0| \le T$)

724: \ba

725:   P(x_0) & \equiv & \int \! {\rm d}^3 \vec{x} \, G(x;M^2) = 

726:  \frac{1}{T} \sum_{p_0} \frac{e^{i p_0 x_0 }}{ p_0^2 + M^2 }

727:  =  \frac{\cosh[M(T/2 - |x_0|)]}{ {2 M} \sinh[MT/2]}

728:  \;, 

729: \ea

730: while

731: \be

732:  G(0;M^2) \equiv G_\infty(M^2) + G_V(M^2)

733:  \;,

734: \ee

735: where $G_\infty(M^2)$ is the infinite-volume value,\footnote{%

736:   The divergence of $G_{\infty}(M^2)$ for $d\approx 4$ cancels 

737:   against those in the $L_i$'s~\cite{gl2}, 

738:   cf.\ \eqs\nr{divL4}, \nr{divL6}.}

739: \be

740:  G_{\infty}(M^2) \equiv \int \! \frac{{\rm d}^d p}{(2\pi)^d} 

741:  \frac{1}{p^2 + M^2}

742:  \;,  

743: \ee

744: and the (finite) function $G_V(M^2)$ incorporates all the volume

745: dependence~\cite{hal},\footnote{%

746:   In Ref.~\cite{hal} the function $G_V$ was denoted by $g_1$. 

747:   }

748: \be

749:  G_V(M^2) = 

750:  \frac{1}{(4\pi)^2} 

751:  \int_0^\infty \frac{{\rm d}\lambda}{\lambda^2} e^{-\lambda M^2}

752:  %% \sum_{n \neq 0}

753:  \sum_{n \in \zz} 

754:  \Bigl(1 - \delta^{(4)}_{n,0} \Bigr)

755:  \exp \Bigl[

756:  -\frac{1}{4\lambda} \Bigl( 

757:  T^2 n_0^2 + L^2 

758:  % \sum_{i = 1}^3 n_i^2 

759:  |\mathbf{n}|^2

760:  \Bigr) 

761:  \Bigr]

762:  \;.

763:  \la{GV}

764: \ee

765: For $M V^{\fr14} \gg 1$, the finite-volume effects

766: are exponentially small, and we can set $G_V = 0$.

767: 

768: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SUBSECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

769: %

770: \subsection{$\epsilon$-regime}

771: 

772: In the $\epsilon$-regime, the natural dimensionless 

773: variable is $\mu \equiv m \Sigma V$.

774: The power counting rules are now

775: \be

776:  m\Sigma \sim \epsilon^4

777:  \;, \quad

778:  L \sim \frac{1}{\epsilon}

779:  \;, \quad

780:  T \sim \frac{1}{\epsilon}

781:  \;, \la{epsexp}

782: \ee

783: where $\epsilon$ is assumed small, $\epsilon\ll F$.

784: Of course, it is also possible to send $m\to 0$

785: in the $\epsilon$-regime expressions.

786: Hence the parameter $\mu$ is 

787: parametrically of up to order unity.

788: In this regime, the Goldstone boson zero-mode $U_0$, 

789: defined by writing $U = \exp(2 i \bar\xi/F)U_0$, where $\bar\xi$

790: has non-zero momenta only,  

791: dominates the dynamics, and needs to be treated non-perturbatively.  

792: Consequently, gauge field topology plays an important role~\cite{ls}, 

793: and it is useful to give 

794: the predictions in sectors of a fixed topological charge $\nu$.

795: 

796: As an example, the two-point correlation function

797: $\mathcal{C}(x_0)$ of \eq\nr{Cxpt} becomes~\cite{h,currents,weak} 

798: \be

799:  \mathcal{C}(x_0) 

800:  = \frac{F^2}{2 T}

801:  \biggl[

802:  1 + \frac{\Nf}{F^2}\biggl(

803:  \frac{\beta_1}{\sqrt{V}} - \frac{T^2 k_{00}}{V} \biggr)

804:  + \frac{2 T^2 \mu}{F^2 V} \sigma_\nu(\mu) h_1(\hat x_0 ) 

805:  \biggr] 

806:  \;, \la{Ct_eps}

807: \ee

808: where $\hat x_0 \equiv x_0/T$, 

809: and the constants $\beta_1$ and $k_{00}$ are related to 

810: the (dimensionally regularised) value of 

811: \be

812:  \bar G(x) \equiv \frac{1}{V} 

813:  \sum_{n \in \zz }

814:  \Bigl(1 - \delta^{(4)}_{n,0} \Bigr) \frac{e^{i p\cdot x}}{p^2} 

815:  \;, 

816:  \la{Gx}

817: \ee

818: by

819: \be

820:  \bar G(0) \equiv -\frac{\beta_1}{\sqrt{V}} \;, \quad

821:  T \frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d} T} \bar G(0) \equiv \frac{T^2 k_{00}}{V} 

822:  \;. \la{beta1}

823: \ee

824: Introducing $\rho \equiv T/L$ and 

825: \ba

826:  \hat \alpha_p(l_0,l_i) & \equiv & 

827:  \int_0^1 \! {\rm d} t\, 

828:  t^{p-1} 

829:  \Bigl[

830:  S\Bigl( {l_0^2} / {t} \Bigr) 

831:  S^3\Bigl( {l_i^2} / {t} \Bigr) - 1 

832:  \Bigr] 

833:  \;, \la{alphap}

834: \ea

835: where $S(x)$ is an elliptic theta-function, 

836: $S(x) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty} \exp(-\pi x n^2)

837: = \vartheta_3(0,\exp(-\pi x))$, 

838: a numerical evaluation of these coefficients

839: is possible through (see, e.g., Refs.~\cite{hal,h})

840: \ba

841:  \beta_1 & = & 

842:  \frac{1}{4\pi}

843:  \Bigl[ 2 - 

844:  \hat\alpha_{-1}\Bigl( 

845:  \rho^{\fr34},\rho^{-\fr14}

846:  \Bigr)

847:  -

848:  \hat\alpha_{-1}\Bigl( 

849:  \rho^{-\fr34},\rho^{\fr14}

850:  \Bigr)

851:  \Bigr]

852:  \;, \\

853:  k_{00}  & = &  

854:  \fr1{12} - \fr14\sum_{\vec{n}\neq \vec{0}}

855:  \frac{1}{\sinh^2(\pi \rho |\vec{n}|)}

856:  \;.

857: \ea

858: Furthermore, 

859: $\sigma_\nu(\mu) \equiv {\Nf}^{-1}  {\rm d}\{ \ln \det[I_{\nu+j-i}(\mu)] \} / 

860: {\rm d} \mu$, 

861: where the determinant is taken over an $\Nf \times \Nf$ matrix, whose 

862: matrix element $(i,j)$ is the modified 

863: Bessel function $I_{\nu+j-i}$~\cite{brower,ls}.

864: %% \footnote{% 

865: %%   In Ref.~\cite{weak}, the function $\sigma_\nu$ was denoted 

866: %%   by $\Sigma_\nu$.

867: %%   }

868: The function $h_1(\tau)$ appearing in~\eq\nr{Ct_eps} 

869: reads (for $|\tau|\le 1$)

870: \ba

871:  h_1(\tau) & \equiv & \frac{1}{2}  

872:  \left[\left(|\tau| - {1 \over 2}\right)^2 - {1 \over 12}\right]

873:  \;. \la{ph1} 

874: \ea

875: 

876: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SUBSECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

877: %

878: \subsection{Further remarks}

879: 

880: In the following, we carry out computations according to the 

881: $p$ and $\epsilon$-countings as outlined above. Other recent

882: work for related observables has made use of the $p$-regime, 

883: with $T\gg L$~\cite{sm,bv,cdh}. There have also been extensive

884: NLO computations at infinite volume~\cite{laso}, which is 

885: a special limit of the $p$-regime.

886: 

887: Note that if $1/FL \ll 1$ as our power-counting 

888: rules assume, and we consider an observable 

889: that is independent of the topological charge $\nu$, 

890: then the $\epsilon$ and $p$-regimes should in principle 

891: be continuously connected to each other (cf.\ \fig\ref{fig:regimes}). 

892: Concretely, for $M L\ll 1$ and $T\sim L$, 

893: \eq\nr{Ct_p} goes over into~\eq\nr{Ct_eps} with $\mu \gg 1$, 

894: in which limit the dependence of \eq\nr{Ct_eps} on $\nu$

895: disappears. Whether such a crossover takes place in practice remains

896: to be inspected for each observable separately, and gives 

897: some feeling concerning the convergence of the \xpt computation, 

898: i.e.,\ whether $1/FL \ll 1$ is satisfied.

899: 

900: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

901: %

902: \section{The $\Delta I = 3/2$ operator}

903: \la{se:32}

904: 

905: We now address the determination of $g_{27}$, 

906: considered previously in the $\epsilon$-regime~\cite{weak}.

907: 

908: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SUBSECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

909: %

910: \subsection{$p$-regime}

911: 

912: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

913: \begin{figure}[t]

914: 

915: \def\TopoLaction(#1,#2,#3){\piccc{#1(0,15)(16,15) #2(24,15)(40,15)% 

916: #3(40,15)(80,15) %

917: \SetWidth{1.0} \Line(16,15)(20,19) \Line(20,19)(24,15)%

918:      \Line(24,15)(20,11) \Line(20,11)(16,15) \SetWidth{1.0}%

919: \GBoxc(0,15)(5,5){1} \GBoxc(80,15)(5,5){1} \GCirc(40,15){3}{1} }}

920: %

921: \def\TopoLcurrent(#1,#2){\piccc{#1(0,15)(40,15)% 

922: #2(40,15)(80,15) %

923: \GBoxc(0,15)(7.5,7.5){1} \GBoxc(80,15)(5,5){1} \GCirc(40,15){3}{1}%

924: \SetWidth{1.0} \Line(-3.5,15)(0,18.5) \Line(0,18.5)(3.5,15)%

925:      \Line(3.5,15)(0,11.5) \Line(0,11.5)(-3.5,15) \SetWidth{1.0}%

926: }}

927: %

928: \def\TopoLoperator(#1,#2){\piccc{#1(0,15)(40,15)% 

929: #2(40,15)(80,15) %

930: \GBoxc(0,15)(5,5){1} \GBoxc(80,15)(5,5){1} \GCirc(40,15){5}{1}%

931: \SetWidth{1.0} \Line(36,15)(40,19) \Line(40,19)(44,15)%

932:      \Line(44,15)(40,11) \Line(40,11)(36,15) \SetWidth{1.0}%

933:  }}

934: %

935: 

936: \begin{eqnarray*}

937: & &

938: \Topoin(\TLsc,\TLsc,\TLsc,\TAsc) \quad

939: \Topomassin(\TLsc,\TLsc,\TLsc,\TAsc) \quad

940: \Topoinop(\TLsc,\TLsc,\TAsc) \\

941: & & 

942: \Topocu(\TAsc,\TLsc,\TLsc) \quad

943: \Topoop(\TAsc,\TLsc,\TLsc) \quad

944: \Topomassinop(\TLsc,\TLsc,\TAsc) \\

945: & & 

946: \Topocuop(\TAsc,\TAsc,\TLsc) \quad

947: \Topocucuop(\TAsc,\TAsc,\TAsc) \quad

948: \Topocucu(\TAsc,\TLsc,\TLsc) \\

949: & & 

950: \TopoLaction(\TLsc,\TLsc,\TLsc) \quad

951: \TopoLcurrent(\TLsc,\TLsc) \quad

952: \TopoLoperator(\TLsc,\TLsc)

953: \end{eqnarray*}

954: 

955: \caption[a]{\small The NLO

956: graphs for $\mathcal{C}_{27}$ in the $p$-regime. 

957: Lines denote meson propagators, 

958: an open square the left-handed current, 

959: an open circle the weak operator,

960: and four-point interactions with no symbol and 

961: with a closed circle the ``kinetic'' and ``mass'' terms 

962: in the chiral Lagrangian, respectively. Diamonds indicate

963: QCD and weak interaction $\rmO(p^4)$ low-energy constants.}

964: \la{fig:graphs}

965: \end{figure}

966: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

967: 

968: The graphs entering the computation of~\eq\nr{C1xpt} at  

969: next-to-leading relative order in the $p$-regime are shown 

970: in~\fig\ref{fig:graphs}, 

971: with the weak operator $\mathcal{O}_{27}$ to be taken from \eq\nr{formofO}. 

972: The result can be written in the form 

973: \be

974:   {[\mathcal{C}_{27}]}^{ab}(x_0,y_0) = 

975: %  \Bigl[

976:    \Delta_{27}^{ab} \, \Bigl[ \mathcal{C}(x_0) \mathcal{C}(y_0) 

977:  +  \mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0)  \Bigr]

978: %  \Bigr]

979:  \;, \la{c1}

980: \ee

981: where (for $\Nv = 3$)

982: \be

983:  \Delta_{27}^{ab} = 

984:  \fr35 T^{\{a}_{ds} T^{b\}}_{uu}

985:  + \fr25 T^{\{a}_{us} T^{b\}}_{du} 

986: %

987: % \frac{\Nv + 3}{2(\Nv + 2)} T^{\{a}_{ds} T^{b\}}_{uu}

988: % + 

989: % \frac{\Nv + 1}{2(\Nv + 2)} T^{\{a}_{us} T^{b\}}_{du}

990:  \;. \la{flavproj}

991: \ee

992: As an example, 

993: choosing kaon and pion type currents, we could take 

994: \ba

995:  & &  T^a_{ij} \equiv \delta_{iu} \delta_{js} 

996:  \,\, \Leftrightarrow \,\, J^a_0 = \bar u \gamma_0 P_- s

997:  \;, \la{phys1} \\

998:  & &  T^b_{ij} \equiv \delta_{id} \delta_{ju} 

999:  \,\, \Leftrightarrow \,\, J^b_0 = \bar d \gamma_0 P_- u

1000:  \;, \la{phys3}

1001: \ea

1002: and then 

1003: \be 

1004:  \Delta_{27}^{ab} = \fr25 

1005:  \;. \la{ix27}

1006: \ee

1007: 

1008: Given the result

1009: for $\mathcal{C}(x_0)$ in~\eq\nr{Ct_p}, 

1010: the only further missing ingredient

1011: in \eq\nr{c1} is $\mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0)$. 

1012: We obtain

1013: \ba

1014:  \mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0) & = & 

1015:  -\frac{F^2}{4} 

1016:  \biggl\{

1017:  \frac{M^2}{T} 

1018:  \frac{{\rm d}^2 G(0;M^2)}{{\rm d} M^2 {\rm d} T}

1019:  + M^2 \frac{{\rm d} G(0;M^2)}{{\rm d} T} 

1020:  \Bigl[

1021:  P(x_0) + P(y_0) 

1022:  \Bigr] 

1023:  + \nn  & & 

1024:  + 2 M^4 G(0;M^2) P(x_0) P(y_0)

1025:  -\fr12 M^4 P(x_0 - y_0)

1026:  \Bigl[

1027:  B(x_0) + B(y_0) 

1028:  \Bigr] 

1029:  + \nn & & 

1030:  + M^4 \int_0^T \! {\rm d}  \tau \, 

1031:  P'(\tau - x_0) P'(\tau - y_0) B(\tau) 

1032:  \biggr\} 

1033:  \;, \la{calD}

1034: \ea

1035: where the new object $B(x_0)$ is defined as (for $|x_0| < T$) 

1036: \ba

1037:  B(x_0) &  = &  \int \! {\rm d}^3 \vec{x} \, \Bigl[ G(x;M^2) \Bigr]^2 = 

1038:  \frac{1}{L^3} \sum_{\vec{p}} 

1039:  \left.

1040:  \biggl[ 

1041:  \frac{\cosh[E(T/2 - |x_0|)]}{ {2 E} \sinh[ET/2]} 

1042:  \biggr]^2 

1043:  \right|_{E \equiv\sqrt{M^2 + \vec{p}^2}}

1044:  \;. \la{Bx0}

1045: \ea

1046: 

1047: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1048: \begin{figure}[t]

1049: 

1050: %\vspace*{-3cm}

1051: 

1052: \centerline{%

1053: \epsfysize=7.0cm\epsfbox{O27_y.eps}%

1054: }

1055: 

1056: \caption[a]{\small 

1057: The function ${[\mathcal{C}_{27}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(-T/3,y_0)$. 

1058: The parameters are: $\Nf = 3$, $F = 93$~MeV, 

1059: $L = 2$~fm, $T/L = 2$, 

1060: $\Lambda = 1000$~MeV.

1061: } 

1062: \la{fig:O27y}

1063: \end{figure}

1064: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1065: 

1066: 

1067: The expression in \eq\nr{calD} is, as such, ultraviolet divergent: 

1068: in dimensional regularization in $d = 4 - 2\epsilon$ dimensions, 

1069: the third and the last terms on the right-hand side

1070: contain poles in $\epsilon$. Denoting $\lambda \equiv -1/32\pi^2\epsilon$, 

1071: we can write 

1072: \be

1073:  \mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0) =  \mathcal{D}_{27}^r(x_0,y_0)

1074:  + F^2 \lambda

1075:  \Bigl[ 

1076:    \fr12 M^4 P'(x_0) P'(y_0) - M^6 P(x_0) P(y_0) 

1077:  \Bigr]

1078:  \;, \la{divD27}

1079: \ee

1080: where $\mathcal{D}_{27}^r(x_0,y_0)$ is finite. 

1081: The divergences get cancelled against the $\rmO(p^4)$ low-energy constants 

1082: related to weak interactions, as shown in Appendix~B. As there are 

1083: a large number of them, however, it is sufficient for our purposes here

1084: to note that 

1085: the $\rmO(p^4)$ low-energy constants amount to cancelling the 

1086: $1/\epsilon$-divergences in the result and replacing the

1087: corresponding $\msbar$ scheme scale parameter $\bmu$ by two

1088: different physical scales,  

1089: $\Lambda$ for the coefficient of $P(x_0)P(y_0)$

1090: and $\Lambda'$ for the coefficient of $P'(x_0) P'(y_0)$. 

1091: 

1092: For practical applications, it is convenient to normalise the 

1093: three-point correlator by dividing with two two-point correlators: 

1094: \be

1095:  {[\mathcal{C}_{27}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0) \equiv

1096:  \frac{{[\mathcal{C}_{27}]}^{ab}(x_0,y_0)}

1097:  {\mathcal{C}(x_0) \mathcal{C}(y_0) } = 

1098:  \Delta_{27}^{ab} \Bigl[1 + 

1099:  \frac{\mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0)}{\mathcal{C}(x_0) \mathcal{C}(y_0)} \Bigr]

1100:  \equiv

1101:  \Delta_{27}^{ab} \Bigl[1  + 

1102:  \mathcal{R}_{27}(x_0,y_0) \Bigr]

1103:  \;. \la{ratiodef}

1104: \ee

1105: The function $\mathcal{R}_{27}(x_0,y_0)$ is then trivially obtained 

1106: from \eqs\nr{calD} and \nr{Ct_p}; in \eq\nr{Ct_p},

1107: it is even enough to keep the leading order contribution only, 

1108: since $\mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0)$ gets generated only at NLO.

1109: 

1110: 

1111: 

1112: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1113: \begin{figure}[t]

1114: 

1115: %\vspace*{-3cm}

1116: 

1117: \centerline{%

1118: \epsfysize=7.0cm\epsfbox{O27_all.eps}%

1119: ~~\epsfysize=7.0cm\epsfbox{O27_all_4fm.eps}%

1120: }

1121: 

1122: \caption[a]{\small

1123: The values of 

1124: $[\mathcal{C}_{27}]^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(-T/3,T/3)$.

1125: The parameters are: $\Nf = 3$, $F = 93$~MeV, 

1126: $L = 2$~fm (left), 

1127: $L = 4$~fm (right), 

1128: $T/L = 2$, $\Lambda = (500 - 2000)$~MeV.

1129: } 

1130: \la{fig:O27ML}

1131: \end{figure}

1132: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1133: 

1134: As an example, 

1135: the function ${[\mathcal{C}_{27}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(-T/3,y_0)$ is plotted

1136: in \fig\ref{fig:O27y} as a function of $y_0$, for the index choice in 

1137: \eq\nr{ix27} (solid line). The values of 

1138: ${[\mathcal{C}_{27}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(-T/3,T/3)$ are shown in

1139: \fig\ref{fig:O27ML}, as a function of $ML$ 

1140: (the region bounded by solid lines). 

1141: In these plots, the effects of 

1142: the weak LECs have been collected to a single scale 

1143: $\Lambda = \Lambda'$ appearing inside the logarithms, and the scale 

1144: has been varied in a wide range, to indicate the size of 

1145: the uncertainty related to the unknown higher order LECs. 

1146: 

1147: We would like to stress at this point  

1148: that the $p$-regime results are 

1149: parametrically valid only in the range $ML \gsim 1/FL$: 

1150: for generic observables, the contributions of the Goldstone

1151: zero-modes become dominant if this inequality is not satisfied, 

1152: and need to be resummed, leading to the rules of the $\epsilon$-regime. 

1153: It turns out~\cite{strategy}, however, that in 

1154: the normalised observable ${[\mathcal{C}_{27}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0)$ 

1155: that we have 

1156: considered here, the contributions from the Goldstone zero-modes 

1157: cancel out at this order. 

1158: Therefore the result can in fact formally be expanded 

1159: as a Taylor-series in $(ML)^2$, with the zeroth order term 

1160: agreeing with the result of the $\epsilon$-regime (see below). Still, one has 

1161: to keep in mind that the Taylor-expanded result only needs to reproduce 

1162: the correct mass dependence in the range  $ML \gsim 1/FL$. 

1163: 

1164: Let us finally briefly touch the conventional limit of large 

1165: volumes. We assume  $x_0 = -|x_0|, y_0 = |y_0|$, such that 

1166: the charges are on opposite sides of the operator. 

1167: Then $P(x_0) = \exp(-M |x_0|)/2 M$ 

1168: and $P'(x_0)P'(y_0) = - M^2 P(x_0)P(y_0)$.

1169: In other words, 

1170: the distinction  disappears between the two structures getting 

1171: contributions from the higher order LECs (cf. \eq\nr{divD27}), 

1172: just as would happen if a partial integration could be carried out 

1173: with respect to the position of the weak operator. Consequently, 

1174: only a single combination of LECs appears, and the corresponding

1175: effects can be collected into a single scale $\Lambda$.

1176: We obtain 

1177: \be

1178:  \mathcal{R}_{27}(x_0,y_0) = 

1179:  \frac{M^2}{(4\pi F)^2}

1180:  \biggl[ 

1181:  3 \ln\frac{\Lambda^2}{M^2} + 2 - 

1182:  e^{-2 M |x_0|}\phi(2 M |x_0|) -  

1183:  e^{-2 M |y_0|}\phi(2 M |y_0|) 

1184:  \biggr] 

1185:  \;, \la{Rinfvol}

1186: \ee

1187: where 

1188: \ba

1189:  \phi(x) & \equiv & 

1190:  \int_0^\infty \! {\rm d} z \, z^{\fr12} e^{-x z}

1191:  \frac{\sqrt{2+z}}{1+z}

1192:  \biggl[ 

1193:  \frac{1}{2+z} + \frac{1}{1+z} - 2

1194:  \biggr]

1195:  \;. \la{phidef}

1196: \ea

1197: The $x_0$ and $y_0$-dependences in \eq\nr{Rinfvol}

1198: are very small in practice.  

1199: As seen in \fig\ref{fig:O27ML} (dotted line), one needs to 

1200: go to volumes as large as $ML \gsim 5$ in order for the simple 

1201: infinite-volume approximation to be accurate for this 

1202: observable.\footnote{%

1203:  Note that finite-volume corrections depend on the observable

1204:  in question; in particular, the finite-volume effects that we find 

1205:  are much larger than those in typical two-point correlation functions.}

1206: % 

1207: 

1208: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SUBSECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1209: %

1210: \subsection{$\epsilon$-regime}

1211: 

1212: The $\epsilon$-regime results 

1213: for $\mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0)$

1214: were derived in Ref.~\cite{weak} but, 

1215: for completeness and future reference, 

1216: we briefly reinstate them here. For $\mathcal{D}_{27}$ in \eq\nr{c1}

1217: one obtains 

1218: \ba

1219:  \mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0) & = & 

1220:  -\frac{F^2}{2 T^2}

1221:  \biggl(1 + T \frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d} T} \biggr)

1222:  {\bar G}(0)

1223:  \;, \la{calD0} 

1224: \ea

1225: and, using \eq\nr{beta1} as well as the leading-order part

1226: of \eq\nr{Ct_eps}, the ratio in \eq\nr{ratiodef} becomes

1227: \ba

1228:  \mathcal{R}_{27}(x_0,y_0) & = & 

1229:  \frac{2}{(FL)^2}

1230:  \Bigl[ \rho^{-\fr12} {\beta_1}  - \rho\, k_{00} 

1231:  \Bigr]

1232:  \;, \la{calR0}

1233: \ea

1234: where $\rho = T/L$. Note that this result is independent of 

1235: the topological charge $\nu$, 

1236: although computed in a fixed topological sector.

1237: 

1238: The $\epsilon$-regime prediction for

1239: the function ${[\mathcal{C}_{27}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(-T/3,y_0)$ is plotted

1240: in \fig\ref{fig:O27y} as a function of $y_0$, for the index choice 

1241: in \eq\nr{ix27} (dashed line). The values of 

1242: ${[\mathcal{C}_{27}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(-T/3,T/3)$ are shown in

1243: \fig\ref{fig:O27ML}, as a function of $\mu$ (dashed line). 

1244: 

1245: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SUBSECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1246: %

1247: \subsection{Further remarks}

1248: \la{se:rem1}

1249: 

1250: Let us inspect \fig\ref{fig:O27ML}(left), 

1251: around the region $ML \sim 1.5$, or $\mu \sim 2.0$. Moving 

1252: to smaller values of $\mu$, the $\epsilon$-regime becomes 

1253: more accurate, while at larger $ML$, the $p$-regime should

1254: be the correct procedure. But which result represents better

1255: the truth at this intermediate point, where both countings

1256: are in principle parametrically applicable?

1257: 

1258: Let us note that 

1259: for the semi-realistic parameters used in \fig\ref{fig:O27ML}(left), 

1260: $1/FL \approx 1.1$.

1261: Therefore, the parametric rules we have assumed are at best satisfied

1262: by a narrow margin. Consequently, higher order corrections in \xpt can 

1263: be important. In the absence of an explicit computation thereof, 

1264: it remains to be inspected phenomenologically

1265: which of the predictions reproduces better the volume and mass 

1266: dependences of the simulation results in this regime.

1267: 

1268: We end with a small remark on quenching. 

1269: Employing the replica formulation~\cite{ds,ddhj}

1270: of quenched chiral perturbation theory~\cite{BG,S}, 

1271: the only changes with respect to the unquenched situation are

1272: that we need to replace the propagator of~\eq\nr{gen_prop} through

1273: \ba

1274:  E(x;M^2) 

1275:  & \equiv & \frac{\alpha}{2 \Nc} G(x;M^2) + \frac{m_0^2 - \alpha M^2}{2 \Nc} 

1276:  H(x;M^2)

1277:  \;,  \label{qprop}

1278:  \\

1279:  H(x;M^2) & \equiv & \frac{1}{V}

1280:  \sum_{n \in \zz} 

1281:  \frac{e^{i p \cdot x}}{(p^2+M^2)^2}

1282:  \;, 

1283: \ea

1284: where new parameters related to axial singlet field, 

1285: $m_0^2/2 N_c,\alpha/2 N_c$, have been introduced; 

1286: and take $\Nf\to 0$ at the end of the computation. Given that our 

1287: results for ${[\mathcal{C}_{27}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0)$

1288: are completely independent of $\Nf$ and of the function $E(x;M^2)$, 

1289: however, there is no change with respect to the unquenched 

1290: theory for this observable~\cite{weak}.

1291: 

1292: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1293: %

1294: \section{The $\Delta I = 1/2$ operators}

1295: \la{se:12}

1296: 

1297: In the case of the $\Delta I = 1/2$ transitions, 

1298: two operators with the right symmetries appear in \eq\nr{Lw_XPT}.

1299: This means that if we have measured some correlation function 

1300: on the QCD side, with an operator $O_8$ transforming 

1301: in the octet representation, then this is to be matched to a linear 

1302: combination of correlation functions on the \xpt side: 

1303: \be

1304:  \int \! {\rm d}^3 x \int \! {\rm d}^3 y\, 

1305:  \Bigl\langle {J}^a_0(x) 

1306:  \, h_8\, {O}_8 (0) \, {J}^b_0(y) \Bigl\rangle \equiv

1307:  g_8 \, {[\mathcal{C}_8]}^{ab}(x_0,y_0) 

1308:  + g_8' \, {[\mathcal{C}_8']}^{ab}(x_0,y_0) 

1309:  \;, \la{match}

1310: \ee

1311: where $h_8$ is the Wilson coefficient, and 

1312: $g_8, g_8'$ are the partial contributions from 

1313: $h_8\, O_8$ to the corresponding LECs. 

1314: We thus have to consider two

1315: different classes of correlators on the \xpt side, in order to be able 

1316: to disentangle the coefficients of these operators. 

1317: 

1318: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SUBSECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1319: %

1320: \subsection{$p$-regime}

1321: 

1322: 

1323: For the operator $\mathcal{O}_8$ of \eq\nr{formofR}, 

1324: the graphs entering the computation

1325: of the correlation function in \eq\nr{C1xpt} are the same as 

1326: in~\fig\ref{fig:graphs}, and the correlation function 

1327: has the same form as in \eq\nr{c1}: 

1328: \be

1329:   {[ \mathcal{C}_{8} ]}^{ab}(x_0,y_0) \equiv 

1330:    \Delta_{8}^{ab}\,\Bigl[ \mathcal{C}(x_0)\, \mathcal{C}(y_0) 

1331:  + \mathcal{D}_{8}(x_0,y_0) \Bigr]  

1332:  \;, \la{c8}

1333: \ee

1334: where 

1335: \be

1336:  \Delta_{8}^{ab} = \fr12 \{T^a,T^b \}_{ds} 

1337:  \;, \la{Theta}

1338: \ee

1339: and the function $\mathcal{C}(x_0)$ 

1340: is still given by \eq\nr{Ct_p}.

1341: For the matrices $T^a,T^b$ in \eqs\nr{phys1}, \nr{phys3},

1342: the group theory factor evaluates to 

1343: \be 

1344:  \Delta_{8}^{ab} = \fr12 

1345:  \;. 

1346: \ee

1347: %

1348: The function $\mathcal{D}_{8}(x_0,y_0)$ reads

1349: \ba

1350:  \mathcal{D}_8(x_0,y_0) & = & -\frac{\Nv}{2} \mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0) 

1351:  + \nn & + & 

1352:  F^2 M^2 \frac{\Nv + 2}{8} \biggl\{

1353:   \Bigl[ G(0;M^2) - 2 E(0;M^2) \Bigr] P'(x_0) P'(y_0)

1354:  + \nn & & \hspace*{0.0cm} +

1355:    M^2 P(x_0 - y_0)

1356:   \Bigl[

1357:    \tilde B(x_0) + \tilde B(y_0) 

1358:    -\fr12 B(x_0) -\fr12 B(y_0) 

1359:   \Bigr] 

1360:  + \nn & & \hspace*{0.0cm} +

1361:    P'(x_0 - y_0)

1362:    \Bigl[

1363:     \tilde B'(y_0) + \tilde B_0(y_0) + 

1364:     \fr12 B'(x_0) -

1365:     \tilde B'(x_0) - \tilde B_0(x_0) 

1366:     - \fr12 B'(y_0) 

1367:    \Bigr] 

1368:  + \nn & & \hspace*{0.0cm} +

1369:  M^2 \int_0^T \! {\rm d}  \tau \,

1370:  \Bigl[ M^2 B(\tau) - 2 M^2 \tilde B(\tau) - \tilde B_{00}(\tau) \Bigr] 

1371:  P(\tau - x_0) P(\tau - y_0)  

1372:  \biggr\} \;. \la{D8}

1373: \ea

1374: The new objects appearing here are defined as 

1375: \ba

1376:  \tilde B(x_0) & \equiv & \int \! {\rm d}^3 \vec{x} \, G(x;M^2) E(x;M^2)

1377:  \;, \\  

1378:  \tilde B_0(x_0) & \equiv & \int \! {\rm d}^3 \vec{x} \, 

1379:   \Bigl[ \partial_0 G(x;M^2) E(x;M^2) - G(x;M^2) \partial_0 E(x;M^2) \Bigr]

1380:  \;, \\

1381:  \tilde B_{00}(x_0) & \equiv & \int \! {\rm d}^3 \vec{x} \, 

1382:   \Bigl[ \partial_0^2 G(x;M^2) E(x;M^2) - G(x;M^2) \partial_0^2 E(x;M^2) \Bigr]

1383:  \;. 

1384: \ea

1385: We recall that in the unquenched theory, $E(x;M^2) = G(x;M^2)/\Nf$, 

1386: and $\tilde B(x_0)$ thus 

1387: agrees with $B(x_0)/\Nf$ as defined through \eq\nr{Bx0}, 

1388: while $\tilde B_{0}(x_0)$, $\tilde B_{00}(x_0)$ vanish.

1389: 

1390: \eq\nr{D8} again contains divergences: 

1391: in the unquenched theory, 

1392: \ba

1393:  \mathcal{D}_{8}(x_0,y_0) & = &  \mathcal{D}_{8}^r(x_0,y_0)

1394:  + F^2 \lambda

1395:  \Bigl[ \Bigl( \fr12 - \frac{\Nv + 2}{2 \Nf} \Bigr)

1396:    M^4 P'(x_0) P'(y_0) +

1397:  \nn & & \hphantom{\mathcal{D}_{8}^r(x_0,y_0)

1398:  + F^2 \lambda} 

1399:    + \Bigl( \frac{\Nv-2}{4} + \frac{\Nv + 2}{2\Nf} \Bigr)

1400:    M^6 P(x_0) P(y_0) 

1401:  \Bigr]

1402:  \;, \la{divD8}

1403: \ea

1404: where $\lambda \equiv -1/32\pi^2\epsilon$, and 

1405: $\mathcal{D}_{8}^r(x_0,y_0)$ is finite. The cancellation of 

1406: these divergences against 

1407: the $\rmO(p^4)$ LECs is demonstrated in Appendix~B.

1408: 

1409: Following \eq\nr{ratiodef}, it is convenient to define

1410: a normalised correlation function by dividing with two current-current

1411: correlators, and we thus obtain 

1412: \be

1413:   {[\mathcal{C}_{8}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0) \equiv

1414:  \frac{{[ \mathcal{C}_{8} ]}^{ab}(x_0,y_0)}

1415:  {\mathcal{C}(x_0) \; \mathcal{C}(y_0) } = 

1416:  \Delta_8^{ab}\Bigl[ 1 + 

1417:  \mathcal{R}_{8}(x_0,y_0) \Bigr]

1418:  \;. \la{ratio8}

1419: \ee

1420: Again, it is enough to use the leading order forms for the 

1421: functions $\mathcal{C}(x_0)$, $\mathcal{C}(y_0)$ in the 

1422: definition of $\mathcal{R}_{8}(x_0,y_0)$, since 

1423: $\mathcal{D}_{8}(x_0,y_0)$ gets generated only at NLO.

1424: 

1425: In the infinite-volume limit, the distinction between the various 

1426: types of divergences in \eq\nr{divD8}

1427: disappears, as before. Collecting the corresponding LECs

1428: to a single scale $\Lambda$, we obtain (in the unquenched case)

1429: \ba

1430:  \mathcal{R}_8(x_0,y_0) & = & -\frac{\Nv}{2} \mathcal{R}_{27}(x_0,y_0) 

1431:  + 

1432:  %% \nn & + &

1433:  \frac{\Nv + 2}{2}\biggl( 1 - \frac{2}{\Nf} \biggr)

1434:  \frac{M^2}{(4\pi F)^2}

1435:  \biggl[

1436:    2 \ln \frac{\Lambda^2}{M^2} + 1 

1437:  + \nonumber \\[2mm] & & \hspace*{3cm} + 

1438:     e^{-2 M |x_0|}\Xi(2 M |x_0|) + 

1439:     e^{-2 M |y_0|}\Xi(2 M |y_0|)  

1440:  \biggr] \;,

1441: \ea

1442: where $\mathcal{R}_{27}(x_0,y_0)$ is from \eq\nr{Rinfvol}, and

1443: \ba

1444:  \Xi(x) & \equiv & 

1445:  \int_0^\infty \! {\rm d} z \, z^{\fr12} e^{-x z}

1446:  \frac{\sqrt{2+z}}{1+z}

1447:  \biggl[ 

1448:  \frac{1}{2+z} - \frac{1}{1+z} + 2 + 4 z

1449:  \biggr]

1450:  \;. \la{Xidef}

1451: \ea

1452: 

1453: 

1454: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1455: \begin{figure}[t]

1456: 

1457: %\vspace*{-3cm}

1458: 

1459: \centerline{%

1460: \epsfysize=7.0cm\epsfbox{O8_y.eps}%

1461: ~~\epsfysize=7.0cm\epsfbox{O8p_y.eps}%

1462: }

1463: 

1464: \caption[a]{\small

1465: Left: the function ${[\mathcal{C}_{8}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(-T/3,y_0)$. 

1466: Right: the function ${[\mathcal{C}_{8}']}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(-T/3,y_0)$. 

1467: The parameters are: $\Nf = 3$, $F = 93$~MeV, 

1468: $L = 2$~fm, $T/L = 2$, 

1469: $\Lambda = 1000$~MeV.

1470: } 

1471: \la{fig:O8y}

1472: \end{figure}

1473: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1474: 

1475: For the correlator $\mathcal{C}_8'$ the graphs are the same as  

1476: in \fig\ref{fig:graphs} except that, for a vacuum angle $\theta = 0$, 

1477: the weak operator $\mathcal{O}_8'$ only couples to an even number

1478: of Goldstone modes.  The result is now of the form 

1479: \be

1480:  {[\mathcal{C}_{8}']}^{ab}(x_0,y_0) \equiv 

1481:  \Delta_{8}^{ab}\, 

1482:  \mathcal{D}_{8}'(x_0,y_0)

1483:  \;, 

1484: \ee

1485: where

1486: \ba

1487:  \mathcal{D}_{8}'(x_0,y_0) & = & 

1488:  \frac{F^4}{2}\biggl\{ 

1489:  \biggl[ 1 - \frac{\Nf G(0;M^2)}{F^2} + \frac{E(0;M^2)}{F^2} 

1490:  M^2 \frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d} M^2}

1491:  \biggr] \Bigl[ M^2 P'(x_0) P'(y_0) \Bigr] + 

1492:  \nn & & 

1493:  + \frac{\Nf M^4}{2 F^2}

1494:  \int_0^T \! {\rm d}  \tau \, 

1495:  \Bigl[  P'(\tau - x_0) P'(\tau - y_0) + 

1496:        M^2 P(\tau - x_0) P(\tau - y_0) \Bigr] B(\tau) - 

1497:  \nn & & 

1498:  - \frac{2 M^4}{F^2}

1499:  \int_0^T \! {\rm d}  \tau \, 

1500:  P'(\tau - x_0) P'(\tau - y_0) \tilde B(\tau)

1501:  - \frac{\Nf}{2 F^2}\frac{M^2}{T} 

1502:  \frac{{\rm d} G(0;M^2)}{{\rm d} M^2 {\rm d} T}

1503:  \biggr\} 

1504:  \;. \la{calDp}

1505: \ea

1506: Separating the divergent parts, we get (in the unquenched case)

1507: \ba

1508:  \mathcal{D}_{8}'(x_0,y_0) & = &  \mathcal{D}_{8}'^r(x_0,y_0)

1509:  + F^2 \lambda

1510:  \Bigl[ 

1511:    \Bigl( -\frac{3\Nf}{2} + \frac{3}{\Nf} \Bigr) M^4 P'(x_0) P'(y_0) 

1512:    - \frac{\Nf}{2} M^6 P(x_0) P(y_0)  + 

1513:  \nn 

1514:  & &  \hphantom{\mathcal{D}_{8}^r(x_0,y_0)

1515:  + F^2 \lambda}

1516:  + \frac{1}{\Nf} 

1517:   M^6 \frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d} M^2} \Bigl( P'(x_0) P'(y_0) \Bigr) 

1518:  \Bigr]

1519:  \;, \la{divD8p}

1520: \ea

1521: where $\mathcal{D}_{8}'^r(x_0,y_0)$ is finite. The cancellation

1522: of divergences is demonstrated in Appendix~B.

1523: 

1524: 

1525: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1526: \begin{figure}[t]

1527: 

1528: %\vspace*{-3cm}

1529: 

1530: \centerline{%

1531: \epsfysize=7.0cm\epsfbox{O8_all.eps}%

1532: ~~\epsfysize=7.0cm\epsfbox{O8_all_4fm.eps}%

1533: }

1534: 

1535: \caption[a]{\small

1536: The function ${[\mathcal{C}_{8}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(-T/3,T/3)$. 

1537: The parameters are: $\Nf = 3$, $F = 93$~MeV, 

1538: $L = 2$~fm (left), 

1539: $L = 4$~fm (right), 

1540: $T/L = 2$, $\Lambda = (500 - 2000)$~MeV.

1541: } 

1542: \la{fig:O8ML}

1543: \end{figure}

1544: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1545: 

1546: If we want to disentangle the dependences following from 

1547: the operators $\mathcal{O}_8$ and $\mathcal{O}_8'$ in a given 

1548: lattice measurement, we are lead to compare the contributions

1549: from $\mathcal{O}_8'$ with the normalised correlation function 

1550: in~\eq\nr{ratio8}. Therefore, we define 

1551: \be 

1552:   {[\mathcal{C}_{8}']}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0) \equiv

1553:  \frac{{[ \mathcal{C}_{8} ']}^{ab}(x_0,y_0)}

1554:  {\mathcal{C}(x_0) \; \mathcal{C}(y_0) }

1555:  \;.

1556: \ee

1557: Treating UV-divergences and higher order LECs as before, 

1558: the correlation functions \linebreak

1559: ${[\mathcal{C}_{8}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(-T/3,y_0)$

1560: and

1561: ${[\mathcal{C}_{8}']}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(-T/3,y_0)$ 

1562: are plotted in \fig\ref{fig:O8y}

1563: as a function of $y_0$ (solid lines). The two 

1564: correlators are observed to have a rather different 

1565: dependence on $y_0$, so it is in principle possible to disentangle their 

1566: contributions in a given lattice measurement.

1567: The values of 

1568: ${[\mathcal{C}_{8}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(-T/3,T/3)$

1569: and

1570: ${[\mathcal{C}_{8}']}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(-T/3,T/3)$

1571: as a function of $ML$ are illustrated in 

1572: \figs\ref{fig:O8ML}, \ref{fig:O8pML}, respectively

1573: (regions bounded by solid lines).

1574: 

1575: 

1576: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1577: \begin{figure}[t]

1578: 

1579: %\vspace*{-3cm}

1580: 

1581: \centerline{%

1582: \epsfysize=7.0cm\epsfbox{O8p_all.eps}%

1583: ~~\epsfysize=7.0cm\epsfbox{O8p_all_4fm.eps}%

1584: }

1585: 

1586: \caption[a]{\small

1587: The function ${[\mathcal{C}_{8}']}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(-T/3,T/3)$.

1588: The parameters are: $\Nf = 3$, $F = 93$~MeV, 

1589: $L = 2$~fm (left), 

1590: $L = 4$~fm (right), 

1591: $T/L = 2$, $\Lambda = (500 - 2000)$~MeV.

1592: } 

1593: \la{fig:O8pML}

1594: \end{figure}

1595: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1596: 

1597: It is important to stress that, for $ML \to 0$, the 

1598: correction of relative order $1/F^2$ in \eq\nr{calDp} diverges 

1599: as $\sim 1/F^2M^2 V$. This indicates in a concrete way that 

1600: the $p$-regime computation is no longer reliable for $ML \ll 1/FL$, and we 

1601: need to turn to the $\epsilon$-regime. 

1602:  

1603: Let us again end by commenting on the conventional limit of large 

1604: volumes. Assuming $x_0 = -|x_0|, y_0 = |y_0|$, and inserting the unquenched 

1605: value of $E(x;M^2)$, we obtain for the normalised case 

1606: \ba

1607:  [\mathcal{C}_8']^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0) & =&  

1608:  - \{ T^a,T^b \}_{ds} 

1609:  \biggl\{ 1 + 

1610:  \frac{M^2}{(4\pi F)^2}

1611:  \biggl[ 

1612:   -\Nf \biggl( 1 + \ln\frac{\Lambda^2}{M^2} \biggr) - 

1613:  \frac{2}{\Nf} \ln \frac{\Lambda^2}{M^2} 

1614:  - 

1615:  \nn & & \hspace*{1cm} 

1616:  - 

1617:  \frac{\Nf}{2} 

1618:  \Bigl\{ 

1619:  e^{-2 M |x_0|}\Delta(2 M |x_0|) +   

1620:  e^{-2 M |y_0|}\Delta(2 M |y_0|) 

1621:  \Bigr\} 

1622:  + 

1623:  \nn & & \hspace*{1cm} 

1624:  + 

1625:  \frac{2}{\Nf} 

1626:  \Bigl\{ 

1627:  e^{-2 M |x_0|}\Upsilon(2 M |x_0|) +   

1628:  e^{-2 M |y_0|}\Upsilon(2 M |y_0|) 

1629:  \Bigr\} 

1630:  \biggr] \biggr\}

1631:  \;, \la{Rpinfvol}

1632: \ea

1633: where 

1634: \ba

1635:  \Delta(x) & \equiv & 

1636:  \int_0^\infty \! {\rm d} z \, z^{\fr12} e^{-x z}

1637:  \frac{\sqrt{2+z}}{1+z}

1638:  \biggl[ 

1639:  \frac{2}{2+z} 

1640:  \biggr]

1641:  \;, \la{deltadef} \\

1642:  \Upsilon(x) & \equiv & 

1643:  \int_0^\infty \! {\rm d} z \, z^{\fr12} e^{-x z}

1644:  \frac{\sqrt{2+z}}{1+z}

1645:  \biggl[ 

1646:  \frac{1}{2+z} + \frac{1}{1+z}

1647:  \biggr]

1648:  \;. \la{gammadef}

1649: \ea

1650: This result is plotted in \fig\ref{fig:O8pML} with dotted 

1651: lines.  We observe again how only values $ML \gsim 5.0$ guarantee 

1652: that finite-volume effects are small 

1653: for our three-point observables.

1654: 

1655: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SUBSECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1656: %

1657: \subsection{$\epsilon$-regime}

1658: \la{ss:o8eps}

1659: 

1660: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1661: \begin{figure}[t]

1662: 

1663: \begin{eqnarray*}

1664: & &

1665: \Topotree(\TLsc,\TLsc) \quad

1666: \Topotreep(\TAsc,\TLsc) \quad 

1667: \Topotreepp(\TAsc) \\

1668: \end{eqnarray*}

1669: 

1670: \caption[a]{\small The leading-order graphs 

1671: for ${[\mathcal{C}_{8}']}^{ab}(x_0,y_0)$ 

1672: in the $\epsilon$-regime. An open square denotes

1673: the left-handed current,  

1674: an open circle the weak operator, 

1675: and a filled circle a mass insertion.}

1676: \la{fig:C8p}

1677: \end{figure}

1678: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1679: 

1680: We finally move to the $\epsilon$-regime.

1681: For $\mathcal{C}_8$ the graphs are the same as for $\mathcal{C}_{27}$, 

1682: as depicted in Fig.~3 of Ref.~\cite{weak}. The correlator retains the

1683: form in \eq\nr{c8}, with $\Delta_{8}^{ab}$ from \eq\nr{Theta}, 

1684: $\mathcal{C}(x_0)$ from \eq\nr{Ct_eps}, and 

1685: $\mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0)$, appearing as in \eq\nr{D8}, from \eq\nr{calD0}. 

1686: The order of magnitude of the leading 

1687: term in ${[\mathcal{C}_8]}^{ab}(x_0,y_0)$ is $\rmO(\epsilon^2)$, and  

1688: the NLO term is $\rmO(\epsilon^4)$, while the terms beyond  

1689: $\mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0)$ in \eq\nr{D8} are formally $\rmO(\epsilon^6)$,

1690: so that the corresponding graph (the sixth in \fig\ref{fig:graphs}) 

1691: can be ignored in the $\epsilon$-regime. Therefore, all information

1692: is in the $\epsilon$-regime version of $\mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0)$.

1693: To be explicit, 

1694: the normalised form of \eq\nr{ratio8} becomes

1695: \be

1696:  {[\mathcal{C}_{8}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0) =

1697:  \Delta^{ab}_8\biggl[ 1 -  

1698:  \frac{\Nv}{(FL)^2}

1699:  \Bigl( \rho^{-\fr12} {\beta_1}  - \rho\, k_{00} 

1700:  \Bigr)

1701:  \biggr]

1702:  \;. 

1703:  \la{C8_norm_eps}

1704: \ee

1705: Let us stress, in particular, 

1706: that ${[\mathcal{C}_{8}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0)$ is independent

1707: of topology and quenching at this order, just like 

1708: ${[\mathcal{C}_{27}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0)$.

1709: (However, as discussed at the end of Appendix~C, quenching does lead 

1710: to the appearance of additional LECs~\cite{gp} that need to be disentangled.)

1711: 

1712: Let us then address $\mathcal{C}_8'$. Given that 

1713: the $\epsilon$-regime computation is to be carried out at fixed topology, 

1714: the operator $\mathcal{O}_8'$ needs now to be considered in the 

1715: full generality of \eq\nr{formofO8p}, i.e., with a non-vanishing 

1716: vacuum angle $\theta$, unlike in the $p$-regime. Therefore 

1717: $\mathcal{O}_8'$ can also couple to an odd number of Goldstone 

1718: fields. On the other hand, it is easy to see that the tree-level

1719: graphs (cf.\ \fig\ref{fig:C8p}) are already of order $\rmO(\epsilon^4)$.

1720: Comparing with $\mathcal{C}_8$, 

1721: it is therefore enough to restrict to the leading order.

1722: We find

1723: \ba

1724:  {[\mathcal{C}_8']}^{ab}(x_0,y_0) & = & 

1725:  \frac{\mu F^2}{2 V} \biggl\{  \{ T^a.T^b \}_{ds}\;

1726:  \biggl[

1727:    \sigma_\nu(\mu) h_1'(\hat x_0) h_1'(\hat y_0) 

1728:   + 

1729:  \nn & & 

1730:   + 

1731:  % \{ T^a.T^b \}_{ds}\; 

1732:   \frac{\mu}{1-\Nf^2}

1733:   \biggl\{

1734:   \sigma_\nu'(\mu) 

1735:   + \Nf \sigma_\nu^2(\mu) 

1736:   + \Nf^2 \frac{\sigma_\nu(\mu)}{\mu}

1737:   - \Nf \biggl( 

1738:    1 + \frac{\nu^2}{\mu^2}

1739:    \biggr)

1740:   \biggr\} h_1(\hat x_0 - \hat y_0) \biggr]

1741:   + 

1742:  \nn & &  

1743: % \hspace*{1cm} 

1744:   +

1745:  [ T^a,T^b ]_{ds} \frac{\nu}{\mu} 

1746:  \Bigr\{ 

1747:   h_1'(\hat x_0 - \hat y_0) 

1748:   [h_1'(\hat x_0) + h_1'(\hat y_0) ] + 

1749:   h_1(\hat y_0) - h_1(\hat x_0) 

1750:  \Bigr\}  

1751:  \biggr\}

1752:  \;, \hspace*{0.6cm} \la{C8p}

1753: \ea

1754: where $h_1$ is from \eq\nr{ph1}.

1755: The corresponding normalised form reads

1756: \ba

1757:  {[\mathcal{C}_8']}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0) & = & 

1758:  \frac{4 T^2}{F^4}

1759:   {[\mathcal{C}_8']}^{ab}(x_0,y_0)

1760:  \;. \la{C8pnorm} \hspace*{1cm}

1761: \ea

1762: This result is to be used in combination with \eq\nr{C8_norm_eps}, 

1763: in order to disentangle the two terms on the right-hand 

1764: side of \eq\nr{match}.

1765: 

1766: Unlike \eq\nr{C8_norm_eps}, 

1767: the expressions in \eqs\nr{C8p}, \nr{C8pnorm} 

1768: get modified in the quenched theory, 

1769: because they contain Goldstone zero-mode integrals. 

1770: Proceeding as in Ref.~\cite{zeromode}, we find 

1771: \ba

1772:  {[\mathcal{C}_8']}^{ab}_\rmi{q}(x_0,y_0) & = & 

1773:  \frac{\mu F^2}{2 V} \biggl\{  \{ T^a.T^b \}_{ds}\;

1774:  \Bigl[

1775:    \sigma_{\rmi{q}\nu}(\mu) h_1'(\hat x_0) h_1'(\hat y_0) 

1776:   + 

1777:  % \nn & & 

1778:  % + 

1779:  % \{ T^a.T^b \}_{ds}\; 

1780:   \mu

1781:   \sigma_{\rmi{q}\nu}'(\mu) 

1782:   h_1(\hat x_0 - \hat y_0) \Bigr]

1783:   + 

1784:  \nn & &  

1785: % \hspace*{1cm} 

1786:   +

1787:  [ T^a,T^b ]_{ds} \frac{\nu}{\mu} 

1788:  \Bigr\{ 

1789:   h_1'(\hat x_0 - \hat y_0) 

1790:   [h_1'(\hat x_0) + h_1'(\hat y_0) ] + 

1791:   h_1(\hat y_0) - h_1(\hat x_0) 

1792:  \Bigr\}  

1793:  \biggr\}

1794:  \;, \hspace*{0.6cm} \la{qC8p}

1795: \ea

1796: where the subscript q refers to the quenched theory, and~\cite{dotv}

1797: \be

1798:  \sigma_{\rmi{q}\nu}(\mu) \equiv 

1799:  \mu \Bigl[ I_\nu (\mu) K_\nu (\mu) + I_{\nu +1} (\mu)

1800:  K_{\nu -1}(\mu) \Bigr] +{\nu \over \mu}

1801:  \;, 

1802:  \la{zerocon} 

1803: \ee

1804: where $I_\nu, K_\nu$ are modified Bessel functions. 

1805: Note that \eq\nr{qC8p} could also be obtained from \eq\nr{C8p}

1806: by just naively setting $\Nf\to 0$ and replacing 

1807: $\sigma_{\nu} \to \sigma_{\rmi{q}\nu}$.

1808: 

1809: Since the functions

1810: ${[\mathcal{C}_8]}^{ab}(x_0,y_0)$ and ${[\mathcal{C}_8']}^{ab}(x_0,y_0)$

1811: are not identical, a precise measurement of the time-dependence

1812: of the correlation

1813: function of the left-hand side of \eq\nr{match} would in principle 

1814: make it possible to disentangle the contributions to $g_8, g_8'$. 

1815: In particular, as shown in~\fig\ref{fig:O8y}, any dependence of 

1816: the correlation functions on $\nu$ arises at this order

1817: through the operator $\mathcal{O}_8'$.

1818: In practice, however, the problem emerges that it may not be easy

1819: to obtain such a high accuracy that the two LECs could reliably be

1820: determined from a single observable. Therefore, it may be beneficial to 

1821: define another probe as well, such that the LECs can be disentangled

1822: with better confidence.  

1823: We now show how this can be done. 

1824: 

1825: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1826: %

1827: \subsection{Direct determination of $g_8'$}

1828: \la{ss:direct}

1829: 

1830: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1831: \begin{figure}[t]

1832: 

1833: \begin{eqnarray*}

1834: \rmO(\epsilon^4): 

1835: & & \!\!\!

1836: \KTopotree(\TLsc)

1837: \\ 

1838: \rmO(\epsilon^6): 

1839: & & \!\!\!

1840: \KTopomeas(\TLsc,\TLsc) %\: %\quad

1841: \KTopomass(\TLsc,\TLsc) %\: %\quad 

1842: \KTopoin(\TLsc,\TLsc,\TAsc) %\: %\quad

1843: %\\

1844: %& & 

1845: \KTopocucu(\TAsc,\TAsc) %\: %\quad

1846: \KTopocu(\TAsc,\TLsc) %\: %\quad

1847: \KTopoop(\TAsc,\TLsc) 

1848: \end{eqnarray*}

1849: 

1850: \caption[a]{\small The graphs contributing to 

1851: ${[\mathcal{K}_{8}']}^a(x_0)$. The notation is as in Fig.~\ref{fig:C8p}, 

1852: with additionally a cross denoting a ``measure term''~(cf.~Ref.~\cite{GL}).}

1853: \la{fig:K8p}

1854: \end{figure}

1855: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1856: 

1857: In order to determine $g_8'$, we consider the correlator 

1858: \be

1859:  {[K_\rmi{R}]}^a (x_0) \equiv

1860:  \int \! {\rm d}^3 x\, 

1861:  \Bigl\langle {J}^a_0(x) 

1862:  {O}_\rmi{R} (0) \Bigr\rangle 

1863:  \;, 

1864: \ee

1865: on the side of QCD, 

1866: and correspondingly 

1867: \be

1868:  {[\mathcal{K}_\rmi{R}]}^a (x_0) \equiv

1869:  \int \! {\rm d}^3 x\, 

1870:  \Bigl\langle \mathcal{J}^a_0(x) 

1871:  \mathcal{O}_\rmi{R} (0) \Bigr\rangle 

1872: \ee

1873: on the \xpt side.

1874: Note that this correlation function is not available in the conventional 

1875: $p$-regime setup (i.e. with $\theta = 0$), 

1876: because it is odd in charge conjugation.

1877: 

1878: We have computed both ${[ \mathcal{K}_{8} ]}^a(x_0)$ 

1879: and ${[ \mathcal{K}_{8}' ]}^a(x_0)$ at NLO in the $\epsilon$-regime.

1880: Parametrically, the orders of magnitude of the LO and the NLO

1881: graphs are $\rmO(\epsilon^4)$ and $\rmO(\epsilon^6)$, 

1882: respectively. We find, however, that 

1883: at this order ${[ \mathcal{K}_{8} ]}^a(x_0)$ vanishes exactly, 

1884: like in the $p$-regime. 

1885: 

1886: 

1887: 

1888: On the other hand, ${[ \mathcal{K}_{8}' ]}^a(x_0)$ does not vanish.

1889: The graphs are shown in \fig\ref{fig:K8p}. 

1890: We find 

1891: \be

1892:  {[ \mathcal{K}_8' ]}^a(x_0)  = - T^a_{ds} \frac{\nu F^2}{V}

1893:  \biggl\{ h_1'(\hat x_0)

1894:  \biggl[

1895:  1 + \biggl( \frac{1}{\Nf} -  \Nf

1896:  \biggr) \frac{\bar G(0)}{F^2} % + \frac{\bar E(0)}{F^2} 

1897:  \biggr] 

1898: % + 

1899: % \nn & & \hspace*{1.7cm}

1900:  + h_2'(\hat x_0)  

1901:  \frac{2 T^2}{F^2 V} 

1902:  \Bigl[ \mu \sigma_\nu(\mu) + \frac{1}{\Nf} 

1903:  \Bigr]

1904:  \biggr\} 

1905:  \;, \la{K8p} \hspace*{1cm}

1906: \ee 

1907: where $\bar G(x)$ is from \eq\nr{Gx}, and (for $|\tau| \le 1$)

1908: \ba

1909:   h_2(\tau) & \equiv & \frac{1}{24} 

1910:  \left[\tau^2 \left(|\tau| - 1\right)^2 - {1 \over 30}\right] 

1911:  \;. \la{h2} 

1912: \ea

1913: The result is illustrated in \fig\ref{fig:K8pplot}, after 

1914: normalisation through 

1915: \be

1916:  \frac{L^3 {[ \mathcal{K}_8' ]}^a(x_0)}{\mathcal{C}(x_0)}

1917:  \equiv

1918:  T^a_{ds} 

1919:  {[ \mathcal{K}_8' ]}_\rmi{norm} (x_0) 

1920:  \;.

1921: \ee

1922: 

1923: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FIGURE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1924: \begin{figure}[t]

1925: 

1926: %\vspace*{7cm}

1927: 

1928: \centerline{%

1929: \epsfysize=7.0cm \epsfbox{K8p_y.eps}%

1930: }

1931: 

1932: \caption[a]{\small

1933: The function ${[\mathcal{K}_{8}']}_\rmi{norm}(x_0)$

1934: as a function of $x_0$ and $\nu$.

1935: The other parameters are: $\Nf = 3$, $F = 93$~MeV, 

1936: $\mu = 2.0$, $L = 2$~fm, $T/L = 2$.

1937: } 

1938: \la{fig:K8pplot}

1939: \end{figure}

1940: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1941: 

1942: Repeating the same steps in the quenched theory, we find

1943: \ba

1944:  {[ \mathcal{K}_8' ]}^a_\rmi{q}(x_0)  & = & - T^a_{ds} \frac{\nu F^2}{V}

1945:  \biggl\{ h_1'(\hat x_0)

1946:  \biggl[

1947:  1 + \frac{\alpha}{2\Nc} 

1948:  \frac{\bar G(0)}{F^2} + 

1949:  \frac{m_0^2}{2\Nc} \frac{\bar H(0)}{F^2} 

1950:  \biggr] 

1951:  + 

1952:  \nn & & \hspace*{1.7cm}

1953:  + \frac{2 T^2}{F^2 V} \biggl[ 

1954:  \Bigl( \mu \sigma_{\rmi{q}\nu}(\mu) + \frac{\alpha}{2\Nc} 

1955:  \Bigr)  h_2'(\hat x_0)  

1956:  - \frac{m_0^2 T^2 }{2\Nc}

1957:  h_3'(\hat x_0)

1958:  \biggr\} 

1959:  \;, \la{qK8p} \hspace*{1cm}

1960: \ea 

1961: where $\bar H(x)$ and $h_3(\tau)$ (for $|\tau| \le 1$)

1962: are defined through

1963: \ba

1964:  \bar H(x) & \equiv & \frac{1}{V} 

1965:  \sum_{n \in \zz }

1966:  \Bigl(1 - \delta^{(4)}_{n,0} \Bigr) \frac{e^{i p\cdot x}}{(p^2)^2} 

1967:  \;, \\

1968:  h_3(\tau) & \equiv & \frac{1}{720} 

1969:  \left[ \tau^2 \left(|\tau| - 1\right)^2 

1970:  \left(\tau^2- |\tau| - {1 \over 2}\right) + {1 \over 42}\right] 

1971:  \;. \la{h3} 

1972: \ea

1973: The value of $\bar H(0)$ is given by~\cite{hal}

1974: \ba

1975:  {\bar H}(0) & = & 

1976:  \beta_2 + \frac{\mu^{-2\epsilon}}{(4\pi)^2}

1977:  \biggl[

1978:   \frac{1}{\epsilon} + \ln\Bigl( {\bmu^2} V^{1/2} \Bigr) + 1 + 

1979:   \rmO(\epsilon)

1980:  \biggr] 

1981:  \;, \la{barH}

1982: \ea

1983: where $\ln\bmu^2 \equiv \ln\mu^2 + \ln 4\pi - \gamma_E$, and 

1984: (with $\hat\alpha$ from \eq\nr{alphap})

1985: \ba

1986:  \beta_2 & = & 

1987:  \frac{1}{(4\pi)^2}

1988:  \Bigl[  

1989:  \hat \alpha_0 \Bigl( 

1990:  \rho^{\fr34},\rho^{-\fr14}

1991:  \Bigr) 

1992:  +  

1993:  \hat\alpha_{-2}\Bigl( 

1994:  \rho^{-\fr34},\rho^{\fr14}

1995:  \Bigr) 

1996:  - \fr32 -\ln(4\pi) + \gamma_E

1997:  \Bigr]

1998:  \;. 

1999: \ea

2000: The UV-divergence in \eq\nr{barH} is cancelled by 

2001: $\Sigma$ (cf.\ \eq\nr{formofO8p}), which is to be 

2002: treated as a bare parameter in the quenched theory~\cite{cp}.

2003: 

2004: To summarise, we now have a method to disentangle the two contributions

2005: related to the LECs $g_8, g_8'$: 

2006: by considering ${[K_8']}_\rmi{norm}(x_0)$, we can 

2007: first match for $g_8'$. Then the corresponding term can be subtracted

2008: from the right-hand side of \eq\nr{match}, and we are able to determine $g_8$.

2009: As illustrated in \fig\ref{fig:O8y}, a cross-check is that the 

2010: dependence on $\nu$ should have disappeared. 

2011: 

2012: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SUBSECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2013: %

2014: \subsection{Further remarks}

2015: 

2016: The remarks that can be made on the convergence of the 

2017: $\epsilon$ and $p$-regime computations of $\mathcal{C}_8$ 

2018: and $\mathcal{C}_8'$ are largely the same as for 

2019: $\mathcal{C}_{27}$ in \se\ref{se:rem1}. Indeed, 

2020: for $1/FL \ll 1$, there could be a non-vanishing 

2021: overlap, i.e. a regime where both the $p$-regime and 

2022: the $\epsilon$-regime expressions are valid. For 

2023: the more realistic case $1/FL \sim 1$, on the other

2024: hand, this is unlikely to happen. It would be tempting 

2025: to read from \fig\ref{fig:O8pML} that the $p$-regime

2026: expression works in the range $ML \gsim 2.0$, and 

2027: the $\epsilon$-regime expression in the range $\mu \lsim 2.0$, 

2028: but whether this is really the case remains to be seen once

2029: a comparison with lattice simulation results is available.

2030: 

2031: Concerning quenching, let us stress that 

2032: the correlation 

2033: function ${[\mathcal{C}_8]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0)$ 

2034: is determined in the $\epsilon$-regime

2035: by the same function $\mathcal{R}_{27}(x_0,y_0)$ as 

2036: ${[\mathcal{C}_{27}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0)$, and 

2037: is thus insensitive to quenching at the 

2038: present order. At the same time, the correlation functions 

2039: ${[\mathcal{C}_8']}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0)$ and

2040: ${[\mathcal{K}_8']}^{a}_\rmi{norm}(x_0)$ do get modified.

2041: 

2042: An important point however is the different relevance of the quenched

2043: ambiguities of Ref.~\cite{gp} in the two regimes.\footnote{%

2044:  We refer here to the ambiguities at the level of the chiral Lagrangian. 

2045:  We assume always that the weak effective Hamiltonian at the quark level 

2046:  contains an active charm so that no ``unphysical'' operators appear in 

2047:  the Operator Product Expansion at the order in the Fermi constant

2048:  at which we are working.} 

2049: In general the

2050: quenched theory contains spurious operators with new LECs. Some of

2051: these originate from the fact that $\Nf \neq \Nv$, a case that is

2052: considered in detail in Appendix~C, while others are related to the

2053: couplings of the axial singlet field that cannot be integrated out in

2054: the quenched limit. The latter modify the terms that in the full

2055: theory would be divergent in the limit $\Nf \rightarrow 0$. We indeed

2056: confirm a rather messy situation in the $p$-regime, where many new

2057: couplings enter; thus we have not carried out a systematic study of all

2058: quenching effects in our observables in this regime. On the other

2059: hand, the quenching ambiguities are reduced to a minimum  

2060: at the NLO in the $\epsilon$-regime, with apparently

2061: only one spurious octet LEC contributing to 

2062: ${[\mathcal{C}_8]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0)$.  

2063: Therefore certain octet couplings {\em can} 

2064: be determined by matching the lattice simulation results 

2065: to ${[\mathcal{C}_8]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0)$. 

2066: We elaborate on this issue in more detail in Appendix~C, 

2067: particularly around \eq\nr{O8quench}.

2068: 

2069: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2070: %

2071: \section{Conclusions}

2072: \la{se:conclusions}

2073: 

2074: We have addressed in this paper the determination of

2075: the $\rmO(p^2)$ LECs of the chiral weak Hamiltonian. As probes we 

2076: have used the three-point correlation functions between 

2077: the weak operators and left-handed flavour currents.  

2078: We have computed the three-point correlation functions

2079: up to next-to-leading order in chiral perturbation theory, 

2080: both in the $\epsilon$ and in the $p$-regimes, for all 

2081: three operators that appear in the SU(3) chiral weak

2082: Hamiltonian. 

2083: 

2084: While the determination of the LEC $g_{27}$, 

2085: which fixes the $\Delta I = 3/2$ amplitude

2086: of the weak decays $K\to \pi\pi$ as well as the kaon mixing

2087: parameter $\hat B_K$ in the chiral limit, appears straightforward, 

2088: the determination of the LECs fixing the $\Delta I = 1/2$ amplitudes

2089: is more demanding in several respects. Even restricting to the idealised

2090: case of full QCD at large volumes, there are two operators 

2091: with the same flavour symmetry, while only the coefficient of

2092: one of them, $g_8$, contributes to the physical 

2093: kaon decays~\cite{b,rc}. Therefore it is important

2094: to come up with a setup which makes it possible to remove the 

2095: contamination from the other operator in a lattice measurement 

2096: of the type that we have considered. 

2097: 

2098: We have shown here that this challenge can be met 

2099: by going to the $\epsilon$-regime. The two operators contribute

2100: in very different ways to a given three-point correlation function, 

2101: one leading to a topology-dependent and the other to a topology-independent

2102: result. Moreover, we have found a two-point correlator that is only sensitive

2103: to the ``unphysical'' LEC and can be used to fix it. Therefore, it seems

2104: possible in principle to disentangle the physical 

2105: coefficient $g_8$ from lattice measurements in the $\epsilon$-regime.  

2106: 

2107: By comparing the $\epsilon$-regime results with $p$-regime results

2108: in a finite volume, we have also speculated on the regimes

2109: of validity of the two approaches. It appears that for semi-realistic

2110: lattices with a spatial extent of about 2~fm, the $\epsilon$-regime

2111: approach might be applicable for $\mu = m \Sigma V \lsim 2.0$ 

2112: and the $p$-regime for $ML \gsim 2.0$. In any case, 

2113: the conventional infinite-volume formulae

2114: are accurate (with errors below 10 -- 20\%) only at $ML \gsim 5.0$.

2115: 

2116: Finally, we have briefly addressed the effect of quenching on 

2117: the determination of the $\Delta I = 1/2$ observables. 

2118: New unphysical couplings are in general expected in the effective 

2119: chiral theory with respect to the unquenched situation. 

2120: In the $\epsilon$-regime we find, however, that the contamination from 

2121: these new couplings is minimal at NLO: only one additional coupling 

2122: enters our predictions, and we have shown that it is in principle possible 

2123: to determine the quenched $g_8$ in spite of these quenching artifacts.

2124: 

2125: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2126: \section*{Acknowledgements}

2127: 

2128: This work is part of a bigger effort  whose goal

2129: is to extract low-energy constants of QCD from numerical 

2130: simulations with Ginsparg-Wilson fermions. 

2131: We are indebted to our collaborators on this,  

2132: L.~Giusti, C.~Pena, J.~Wennekers and H.~Wittig, for useful comments. 

2133: The basic ideas of the general approach were developed 

2134: in collaboration with M. L\"uscher and P.~Weisz; we would like to 

2135: thank them for their input and for many valuable suggestions. 

2136: P.~H.\ was supported in part by the Spanish CICYT 

2137: (Project No.\ FPA2004-00996 and FPA2005-01678) and  

2138: by the Generalitat Valenciana (Project No.\ GVA05/164). 

2139: 

2140: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% APPENDIX %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2141: 

2142: \appendix

2143: \renewcommand{\thesection}{Appendix~\Alph{section}}

2144: \renewcommand{\thesubsection}{\Alph{section}.\arabic{subsection}}

2145: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\Alph{section}.\arabic{equation}}

2146: 

2147: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2148: 

2149: \newpage

2150: 

2151: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2152: %

2153: \section{Irreducible representations of the valence group}

2154: \la{app:projections}

2155: 

2156: For completeness, we reiterate in this Appendix the main formulae

2157: related to irreducible representations of the valence group SU($\Nv)$, 

2158: relevant for the operators appearing in the weak Hamiltonian. 

2159: We follow the tensor method discussed, e.g., in Ref.~\cite{hg2}. 

2160: 

2161: Like in the main body of the text, we make a distinction 

2162: between the valence group SU($\Nv)$, used to classify the weak 

2163: operators, and the full flavour symmetry SU($\Nf)$.

2164: The indices $\ga,\gb,\gc,\gd,\ta,\tb,\tc,\td,\ha,\hb,\hc,\hd$ are assumed to 

2165: take values in the valence subgroup only. We denote by

2166: $O_{\ga\gb\gc\gd}$ a generic operator transforming under 

2167: ${\bf \Nv^*} \otimes {\bf \Nv^*} \otimes {\bf \Nv} \otimes {\bf \Nv}$

2168: of SU($\Nv)$, and by $O_{\ta\tc}'$ one transforming under 

2169: ${\bf \Nv^*} \otimes {\bf \Nv}$.  

2170: 

2171: We define the projection operators 

2172: \ba

2173:  & & (P_1^\sigma)_{\ga\gb\gc\gd ; \ta\tb\tc\td} \equiv 

2174:  \fr14 (\delta_{\ga\ta} \delta_{\gb\tb} + 

2175:  \sigma \delta_{\ga\tb}\delta_{\gb\ta})

2176:  (\delta_{\gc\tc} \delta_{\gd\td} + 

2177:  \sigma \delta_{\gc\td} \delta_{\gd\tc})

2178:  \;, \la{P1} \\

2179:  & &  (P_2^\sigma)_{\ga\gb\gc\gd;\ta\tb\tc\td} \equiv  

2180:  \delta_{\ga\ta} \delta_{\gb\tb} \delta_{\gc\tc} \delta_{\gd\td} 

2181:  + \frac{1}{(\Nv + 2\sigma)(\Nv + \sigma)}

2182:  ( 

2183:  \delta_{\ga\gc} \delta_{\gb\gd} + \sigma

2184:  \delta_{\ga\gd} \delta_{\gb\gc}) \delta_{\ta\tc} \delta_{\tb\td}

2185:  \nn

2186:  & & ~~~~~~~~ - \frac{1}{\Nv + 2\sigma}

2187:  (

2188:  \delta_{\ga\gc} \delta_{\gb\tb}  \delta_{\gd\td} \delta_{\ta\tc}+

2189:  \delta_{\gb\gd} \delta_{\ga\ta} \delta_{\gc\tc} \delta_{\tb\td}+

2190:  \sigma \delta_{\ga\gd} \delta_{\gb\tb} \delta_{\gc\td} \delta_{\ta\tc}+

2191:  \sigma \delta_{\gb\gc} \delta_{\ga\ta} \delta_{\gd\tc} \delta_{\tb\td}

2192:  )\;, \hspace*{1.0cm} \la{P2} \\

2193:  & & (P_3)_{\ga\gc;\ta\tc} \equiv

2194:  \delta_{\ga\ta}\delta_{\gc\tc} - 

2195:  \frac{1}{\Nv} \delta_{\ga\gc}\delta_{\ta\tc} 

2196:  \la{P3} \;.

2197: \ea

2198: In addition, $\Pv$ is defined to project from SU($\Nf$) to SU($\Nv$).

2199: The operators denoted by $O_{27}$, $O_8$ and $O_{8}'$ 

2200: can now be defined as

2201: \ba

2202:  {[O_{27}]}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & \equiv & 

2203:  (P_2^+ P_1^+)_{\ga\gb\gc\gd;\ta\tb\tc\td}\, O_{\ta\tb\tc\td}^{\mbox{ }}

2204:  \;, \la{o27proj} \\ 

2205:  {[O_{8}^\pm]}_{\ga\gc} & \equiv &

2206:  {(P_3)}_{\ga\gc;\ha\hc} 

2207:  {(P_1^\pm)}_{\ha\hb\hc\hb ; \ta\tb\tc\td}\, O_{\ta\tb\tc\td}^{\mbox{ }}

2208:  \;, \la{o8proj} \\

2209:  {[O_{8}']}_{\ga\gc} & \equiv & 

2210:  {(P_3)}_{\ga\gc;\ta\tc}\, O_{\ta\tc}'

2211:  \;.

2212: \ea

2213: Note that the contraction over $\hb$ in \eq\nr{o8proj}

2214: goes over valence flavours only, and that 

2215: additional octet operators ($O_8^-$) can appear already 

2216: at the leading order when $\Nv\neq\Nf$.

2217: 

2218: 

2219: Instead of a generic operator $O_{\ga\gb\gc\gd}$, practical

2220: computations of the type in Ref.~\cite{p4} 

2221: involve certain factorised forms, like

2222: \ba

2223:  {[O_1]}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & \equiv & (Q)_{\gc\ga} (R)_{\gd\gb}

2224:  \;, \\

2225:  {[O_2]}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & \equiv & (Q)_{\gc\gb} (R)_{\gd\ga}

2226:  \;, \\

2227:  {[O_3]}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & \equiv & \delta_{\gc\ga} (R)_{\gd\gb}

2228:  \;, \\

2229:  {[O_4]}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & \equiv & \delta_{\gc\gb} (R)_{\gd\ga}

2230:  \;, \\

2231:  {[O_5]}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & \equiv & \delta_{\gc\ga} \delta_{\gd\gb}

2232:  \;, \\

2233:  {[O_6]}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & \equiv & \delta_{\gc\gb} \delta_{\gd\ga}

2234:  \;.

2235: \ea

2236: Then projections of the types in \eqs\nr{o27proj}, \nr{o8proj} produce

2237: \be

2238:  \begin{array}{cclcccl}

2239:  {[ P_2^\sigma P_1^\sigma O_1^{\mbox{ }}]}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & = & 

2240:  S^\sigma_{\ga\gb\gc\gd}(Q,R)

2241:  \;, & \hspace*{1cm} &

2242:  {[ P^{\mbox{ }}_3 P_1^\sigma O^{\mbox{ }}_1]}_{\ga\gc} & = & 

2243:  T^\sigma_{\ga\gc}(Q,R)

2244:  \;, \\

2245:  {[ P_2^\sigma P_1^\sigma O_2^{\mbox{ }}]}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & = & 

2246:  \sigma S^\sigma_{\ga\gb\gc\gd}(Q,R)

2247:  \;, & \hspace*{1cm} &

2248:  {[ P^{\mbox{ }}_3 P_1^\sigma O^{\mbox{ }}_2]}_{\ga\gc} & = & 

2249:  \sigma T^\sigma_{\ga\gc}(Q,R)

2250:  \;, \\

2251:  {[ P_2^\sigma P_1^\sigma O_3^{\mbox{ }}]}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & = & 

2252:  0

2253:  \;, & \hspace*{1cm} &

2254:  {[ P^{\mbox{ }}_3 P_1^\sigma O^{\mbox{ }}_3]}_{\ga\gc} & = & 

2255:  U^\sigma_{\ga\gc}(R)

2256:  \;, \\

2257:  {[ P_2^\sigma P_1^\sigma O_4^{\mbox{ }}]}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & = & 

2258:  0

2259:  \;, & \hspace*{1cm} &

2260:  {[ P^{\mbox{ }}_3 P_1^\sigma O^{\mbox{ }}_4]}_{\ga\gc} & = & 

2261:  \sigma U^\sigma_{\ga\gc}(R)

2262:  \;, \\

2263:  {[ P_2^\sigma P_1^\sigma O_5^{\mbox{ }}]}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & = & 

2264:  0

2265:  \;, & \hspace*{1cm} &

2266:  {[ P^{\mbox{ }}_3 P_1^\sigma O^{\mbox{ }}_5]}_{\ga\gc} & = & 

2267:  0

2268:  \;, \\

2269:  {[ P_2^\sigma P_1^\sigma O_6^{\mbox{ }}]}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & = & 

2270:  0

2271:  \;, & \hspace*{1cm} &

2272:  {[ P^{\mbox{ }}_3 P_1^\sigma O^{\mbox{ }}_6]}_{\ga\gc} & = & 

2273:  0

2274:  \;,

2275:  \end{array}

2276: \ee

2277: where

2278: (introducing the notation $\trp(...) \equiv \tr(\Pv\, ...)$)

2279: \ba

2280:  S^\sigma_{\ga\gb\gc\gd}(Q,R) & = &

2281:  \fr14

2282:  \biggl\{

2283:    Q_{\gc\ga}^{\mbox{ }} R_{\gd\gb}^{\mbox{ }} + 

2284:    R_{\gc\ga}^{\mbox{ }} Q_{\gd\gb}^{\mbox{ }} + 

2285:    \sigma ( 

2286:    Q_{\gc\gb}^{\mbox{ }} R_{\gd\ga}^{\mbox{ }} + 

2287:    R_{\gc\gb}^{\mbox{ }} Q_{\gd\ga}^{\mbox{ }}  

2288:    )

2289:  - \nn & & - 

2290:  \frac{\delta^{\mbox{ }}_{\gd\ga}}{\Nv + 2 \sigma}

2291:  \Bigl[

2292:   (Q\Pv R + R \Pv Q)_{\gc\gb} + 

2293:   \sigma 

2294:   \Bigl(

2295:      Q_{\gc\gb}^{\mbox{ }} \trp(R) + R_{\gc\gb}^{\mbox{ }} \trp(Q)

2296:   \Bigr) \Bigr]

2297:  - \nn & & - 

2298:  \frac{\delta^{\mbox{ }}_{\gc\gb}}{\Nv + 2 \sigma}

2299:  \Bigl[ 

2300:   (Q\Pv R + R \Pv Q)_{\gd\ga} + 

2301:   \sigma  

2302:   \Bigl(

2303:      Q_{\gd\ga}^{\mbox{ }} \trp(R) + R_{\gd\ga}^{\mbox{ }} \trp(Q)

2304:   \Bigr)

2305:   \Bigr] 

2306:  - \nn & & - 

2307:  \frac{\sigma\delta^{\mbox{ }}_{\gc\ga}}{\Nv + 2 \sigma}

2308:  \Bigl[ 

2309:   (Q\Pv R + R \Pv Q)_{\gd\gb} + 

2310:   \sigma

2311:   \Bigl(

2312:      Q_{\gd\gb}^{\mbox{ }} \trp(R) + R_{\gd\gb}^{\mbox{ }} \trp(Q)

2313:   \Bigr)

2314:   \Bigr]

2315:  - \nn & & - 

2316:  \frac{\sigma\delta^{\mbox{ }}_{\gd\gb}}{\Nv + 2 \sigma}

2317:   \Bigl[

2318:   (Q\Pv R + R \Pv Q)_{\gc\ga}  +

2319:   \sigma

2320:   \Bigl(

2321:      Q_{\gc\ga}^{\mbox{ }} \trp(R) + R_{\gc\ga}^{\mbox{ }} \trp(Q)

2322:   \Bigr)

2323:   \Bigr] 

2324:  + \nn & & + 

2325:  \frac{2(\delta^{\mbox{ }}_{\gc\gb} \delta^{\mbox{ }}_{\gd\ga} + 

2326:          \delta^{\mbox{ }}_{\gc\ga} \delta^{\mbox{ }}_{\gd\gb})

2327:    }{(\Nv + \sigma)(\Nv + 2 \sigma)}

2328:  \Bigl[

2329:   \trp(Q \Pv R) + \sigma \trp(Q) \trp(R) 

2330:  \Bigr]

2331:  \biggr\}

2332:  \;, \la{Ssigma} \\ 

2333:  T^\sigma_{\ga\gc}(Q,R) & = & 

2334:  \fr14 

2335:  \Bigl[

2336:   \sigma(Q \Pv R + R \Pv Q)_{\gc\ga} 

2337:  + Q_{\gc\ga}^{\mbox{ }} \trp(R) + R_{\gc\ga}^{\mbox{ }} \trp(Q) 

2338:  \Bigr] - \nn

2339:  & & - \frac{\delta_{\gc\ga}}{2\Nv}

2340:  \Bigl[ 

2341:   \trp(Q) \trp(R) + \sigma \trp(Q \Pv R)

2342:  \Bigr] 

2343:  \;, \\  

2344:  U^\sigma_{\ga\gc}(R) & = & 

2345:  \fr14 (\Nv + 2 \sigma) 

2346:  \Bigl[  R_{\gc\ga}^{\mbox{ }}  -

2347:  \frac{\delta_{\gc\ga}}{\Nv} 

2348:  \trp(R)  

2349:  \Bigr]

2350:  \;. 

2351: \ea

2352: Considering, in particular, the operators

2353: \ba

2354:  \Delta^{(1)}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & = & 

2355:  T^{\{a}_{\gc\ga} T^{b\}}_{\gd\gb}

2356:  \;, \\ 

2357:  \Delta^{(2)}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & = & 

2358:  T^{\{a}_{\gc\gb} T^{b\}}_{\gd\ga} - \fr12

2359:  \Bigl( 

2360:    \delta^{\mbox{ }}_{\gc\gb} \{ T^a,T^b \}_{\gd\ga} + 

2361:    \delta^{\mbox{ }}_{\gd\ga} \{ T^a,T^b \}_{\gc\gb}    

2362:  \Bigr)

2363:  \;, \\ 

2364:  \Delta^{(3)}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & = & 

2365:  T^{\{a}_{\gc\gb} T^{b\}}_{\gd\ga} + 

2366:    \delta^{\mbox{ }}_{\gc\gb} \{ T^a,T^b \}_{\gd\ga} + 

2367:    \delta^{\mbox{ }}_{\gd\ga} \{ T^a,T^b \}_{\gc\gb}    

2368:  \;, \\ 

2369:  \Delta^{(4)}_{\ga\gb\gc\gd} & = & 

2370:    \delta^{\mbox{ }}_{\gc\ga} \{ T^a,T^b \}_{\gd\gb} + 

2371:    \delta^{\mbox{ }}_{\gd\gb} \{ T^a,T^b \}_{\gc\ga}    

2372:   \;,

2373: \ea

2374: which appear in the computations of \fig\ref{fig:graphs}, and choosing

2375: the indices that appear in the physical 

2376: operators $O_{27}$ and $O_{8}$, we obtain

2377: \be

2378:  \begin{array}{cclcccl}

2379:  {[ P_2^+ P_1^+ \Delta^{(1)}]}_{suud} & = & 

2380:  2 S^+_{suud}(T^a,T^b)

2381:  \;, & \hspace*{0.5cm} &

2382:  {[ P^{\mbox{ }}_3 P_1^{\sigma} \Delta^{(1)}]}_{sd} & = & 

2383:  \fr12\{T^a,T^b\}_{ds} \, \sigma

2384:  \;, \\

2385:  {[ P_2^+ P_1^+ \Delta^{(2)}]}_{suud} & = & 

2386:  2 S^+_{suud}(T^a,T^b) 

2387:  \;, & \hspace*{0.5cm} &

2388:  {[ P^{\mbox{ }}_3 P_1^{\sigma} \Delta^{(2)}]}_{sd} & = & 

2389:  \fr12\{T^a,T^b\}_{ds} \Bigl( - \frac{\sigma}{2} \Nv \Bigr) 

2390:  \;, \\

2391:  {[ P_2^+ P_1^+ \Delta^{(3)}]}_{suud} & = & 

2392:  2 S^+_{suud}(T^a,T^b)

2393:  \;, & \hspace*{0.5cm} &

2394:  {[ P^{\mbox{ }}_3 P_1^{\sigma} \Delta^{(3)}]}_{sd} & = & 

2395:  \fr12\{T^a,T^b\}_{ds} (\sigma \Nv + 3 )

2396:  \;, \\

2397:  {[ P_2^+ P_1^+ \Delta^{(4)}]}_{suud} & = & 

2398:  0

2399:  \;, & \hspace*{0.5cm} &

2400:  {[ P^{\mbox{ }}_3 P_1^{\sigma} \Delta^{(4)}]}_{sd} & = & 

2401:  \fr12\{T^a,T^b\}_{ds} ( \Nv + 2 \sigma )

2402:  \;.

2403:  \end{array} \la{Tproj}

2404: \ee

2405: For $\Nv = 3$, 

2406: the function $\Delta^{ab}_{27}\equiv 2 S^+_{suud}(T^a,T^b)$ 

2407: is shown explicitly in \eq\nr{flavproj}.

2408: 

2409: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2410: %

2411: \section{Ultraviolet divergences and $\rmO(p^4)$ operators}

2412: 

2413: Once we go beyond the order $\rmO(p^2)$ in \xpt, 

2414: the number of operators that enter \eq\nr{Lw_XPT} increases

2415: dramatically. At the order $\rmO(p^4)$, we rewrite the  

2416: weak Hamiltonian as

2417: \be

2418:   {\cal H}_w \equiv  2 \sqrt{2} G_F V_{ud} V^*_{us}

2419:   \biggl\{ 

2420:   \fr53 \Bigl[ g_{27} {\cal O}_{27} 

2421:   + \sum_i D_i \bar\mathcal{O}_{27}^{(i)} \Bigr]

2422:   + 2 \Bigl[ g_8 {\cal O}_8

2423:   + g_8'{\cal O}'_8

2424:   + \sum_i E_i \bar\mathcal{O}_8^{(i)} \Bigr]

2425:   \biggr\} + \Hc  \,,

2426:  \la{Lw_XPT_full}

2427: \ee

2428: where $\bar\mathcal{O}_{27}^{(i)}$, $\bar\mathcal{O}_{8}^{(i)}$

2429: are the new operators. 

2430: For $\Nf = \Nv = 3$, (over)complete sets for 

2431: $\bar\mathcal{O}_{27}^{(i)}$, $\bar\mathcal{O}_{8}^{(i)}$ have

2432: been listed in Ref.~\cite{p4}. 

2433: The use of partial integration 

2434: identities makes it possible to reduce the number of operators drastically, 

2435: leading to the lists commonly used in phenomenology~\cite{p4reduced};

2436: in our case, however, the use of partial integration identities 

2437: is not possible, since we consider local operator insertions

2438: (i.e. $\mathcal{H}_w$ is not integrated over spacetime). 

2439: 

2440: Generalizing \eq\nr{C1xpt}, we define the correlation functions

2441: now with the LECs added, 

2442: \ba

2443:  {[\mathcal{C}_{27}]}^{ab} (x_0,y_0) & \equiv &   

2444:  \int\! {\rm d}^3x

2445:  \int\! {\rm d}^3y\, \Bigl\langle \mathcal{J}^a_0(x) 

2446:  \Bigl[ g_{27} {\cal O}_{27}(0)  

2447:   + \sum_i D_i \bar\mathcal{O}_{27}^{(i)}(0) \Bigr]

2448:  \mathcal{J}^b_0(y) 

2449:  \Bigr \rangle 

2450:  \;, \\

2451:  {[\mathcal{C}_{8}]}^{ab} (x_0,y_0) & \equiv &   

2452:  \int\! {\rm d}^3x

2453:  \int\! {\rm d}^3y\, \Bigl\langle \mathcal{J}^a_0(x) 

2454:  \Bigl[ 

2455:     g_8 {\cal O}_8(0)

2456:   + g_8'{\cal O}'_8(0)

2457:   + \sum_i E_i \bar\mathcal{O}_8^{(i)} (0)

2458:  \Bigr]

2459:  \mathcal{J}^b_0(y) 

2460:  \Bigr \rangle 

2461:  \;. \la{C1xpt_full} \hspace*{1.0cm}

2462: \ea

2463: The results can be written in the forms 

2464: \ba

2465:   {[

2466:   \mathcal{C}_{27}

2467:   ]}^{ab}(x_0,y_0) 

2468:  \!\! & = & \!\!  

2469:  \Delta^{ab}_{27}

2470:  % \biggl[ \fr35 T^{\{a}_{ds} T^{b\}}_{uu}

2471:  % + \fr25 T^{\{a}_{us} T^{b\}}_{du} \biggr]

2472:  \biggl\{ g_{27} \Bigl[  \mathcal{C}(x_0) \mathcal{C}(y_0) 

2473:  +  \mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0)  \Bigr] 

2474:  +  \mathcal{E}_{27} (x_0,y_0)

2475:  \biggr\} 

2476:  \;, \la{C27}  \\

2477:   {[

2478:   \mathcal{C}_{8}

2479:   ]}^{ab}(x_0,y_0)

2480:  \!\! & = & \!\!  

2481:   \Delta^{ab}_8 \biggl\{ g_8 

2482:  \Bigl[ \mathcal{C}(x_0) \mathcal{C}(y_0) 

2483:  + \mathcal{D}_{8}(x_0,y_0)  \Bigr]  + 

2484:  g_8' \mathcal{D}'_{8}(x_0,y_0)

2485:  + \mathcal{E}_{8} (x_0,y_0)

2486:  \biggr\}

2487:  \;, \la{C8} \hspace*{0.5cm}

2488: \ea

2489: where $ \Delta^{ab}_{27}=

2490: 2 S^+_{suud}(T^a,T^b)$ in the notation

2491: of \eq\nr{Tproj}, and $\Delta^{ab}_{8} = \{T^a,T^b \}_{ds}/2$. 

2492: 

2493: 

2494: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% 27 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2495: %

2496: The 

2497: list of operators from Ref.~\cite{p4} (modulo certain minus-signs) 

2498: that can contribute to $\mathcal{C}_{27}$ at NLO  is  constituted

2499: by the properly projected (cf.\ Appendix A) versions of:

2500: \ba

2501: % {\mathcal O}_1 &=& - \mS_{\gc\ga} \mS_{\gd\gb}

2502: % \;, \\ % \nonumber\\

2503:  {\bar{\mathcal O}}_{27}^{(2)} 

2504:   &=& - (\mP)_{\gc\ga} (\mP)_{\gd\gb} 

2505:  \;, \la{o27_2} \\ %\nonumber\\

2506:  {\bar {\mathcal O}}_{27}^{(4)} 

2507:  &=& \left(\mL_\mu\right)_{\gc\ga}

2508:  \left\{\mL_\mu,  \mS\right\}_{\gd\gb}

2509:  \;, \\ % \nonumber\\

2510:  {\bar{\mathcal O}}_{27}^{(7)} 

2511:  &=& \left(\mL_\mu\right)_{\gc\ga}

2512:  \left(\mL_\mu \right)_{\gd\gb} \tr\left(\mS\right)

2513:  \;, \\ % \nonumber\\

2514:  {\bar{\mathcal O}}_{27}^{(19)}

2515:   &=& i\left(\mW_{\mu\mu}\right)_{\gc\ga} (\mP)_{\gd\gb}

2516:  \;, \\ % \nonumber\\

2517:  {\bar{\mathcal O}}_{27}^{(20)} 

2518:  &=& - \left(\mL_\mu\right)_{\gc\ga}

2519:  \left(\partial_\nu \mW_{\mu\nu} \right)_{\gd\gb} 

2520:  \;, \\ % \nonumber\\

2521:  {\bar{\mathcal O}}_{27}^{(21)}

2522:   &=& - \left(\mL_\mu\right)_{\gc\ga}

2523:  \left(\partial_\mu \mW_{\nu\nu} \right)_{\gd\gb} 

2524:  \;, \\ % \nonumber\\

2525:  {\bar{\mathcal O}}_{27}^{(24)} 

2526:  &=& - \left(\mW_{\mu\nu}\right)_{\gc\ga}

2527:  \left(\mW_{\mu\nu} \right)_{\gd\gb} 

2528:  \;, \\ %\nonumber\\

2529:  {\bar{\mathcal O}}_{27}^{(25)}

2530:   &=& - \left(\mW_{\mu\mu}\right)_{\gc\ga}

2531:  \left(\mW_{\nu\nu} \right)_{\gd\gb}\;. 

2532:  \la{o27_25} % \nonumber\\

2533: \ea

2534: Here we utilize the notation 

2535: \ba

2536:  \mS\!\!&\equiv   U \chi^\dagger +  \chi U^\dagger \;, \;\;\;\;\;

2537:  \mP\!\!&\equiv  i\left( U \chi^\dagger -  \chi U^\dagger\right)

2538: \;, \la{ops1} \\ % \nonumber\\

2539:  \mL_\mu \!\!\!\! &\equiv U  \partial_\mu U^\dagger 

2540: \;, \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; 

2541:  \mW_{\mu\nu}\!\!\!\! &\equiv 2

2542:  \left( \partial_\mu \mL_\nu + \partial_\nu \mL_\mu \right) 

2543:  \;, \la{ops2} % \nonumber

2544: \ea

2545: where $\chi\equiv {2 m \Sigma }/{ F^2} = M^2$. 

2546: As stressed in Ref.~\cite{p4}, not all of these operators are 

2547: independent, however: equations of motion can be used to eliminate 

2548: 19, 21, and 25, for instance.

2549: In the following, we keep for generality 

2550: all the operators.

2551: 

2552: The contribution from the $\rmO(p^4)$-constants to \eq\nr{C27} reads

2553: \ba

2554:  {\mathcal E}_{27}(x_0,y_0) &=& 4 M^4  P'(x_0) P'(y_0) 

2555:  \left[D_2  +2 D_{19} 

2556:  - 4 D_{24} - 4 D_{25} \right]  + \nonumber\\

2557:  &+& 4 M^6 P(x_0) P(y_0)

2558:  \left[D_4  + {\Nf\over 2} D_{7} - D_{20} - 

2559:  {D_{21}} - F^2 (\Nf L_4 +L_5) \right] 

2560:  \;. \hspace*{1cm}

2561:  % \nonumber\\

2562:  \label{eq:p4}

2563: \ea

2564: Taking into account that $\mathcal{C}(x_0)$ is finite; 

2565: that $\mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0)$ contains the divergences

2566: specified in \eq\nr{divD27}; 

2567: that the QCD $\rmO(p^4)$ constants contain the divergence

2568: ($\lambda \equiv -1/32\pi^2\epsilon$)

2569: \be

2570:  \Nf L_4 + L_5 = \Nf L_4^r + L_5^r + \frac{\Nf}{4} \lambda 

2571:  \;, \la{divL4}

2572: \ee

2573: where $L_4^r$, $L_5^r$ are finite; 

2574: and that the $\rmO(p^4)$ constants contain the divergences

2575: \ba

2576: %D_1 &=& {D_1^r} + g_{27} \, F^2 \lambda {\Nf-4 \over 8 \Nf}  \nonumber\\

2577:  D_4 &=& {D_4^r} + g_{27} \, F^2 \lambda  

2578:  \Bigl( {\Nf+ 3 \over 8} \Bigr)

2579:  \;, \nonumber\\ 

2580:  D_7 &=& {D_7^r} + g_{27} \, F^2 \lambda 

2581:  \Bigl( {1 \over 4} \Bigr)

2582:  \;, \nonumber\\ 

2583:  D_{20} &=& {D_{20}^r}  + g_{27} \, F^2 \lambda

2584:  \Bigl( {1 \over 8} \Bigr)

2585:  \;, \nonumber\\ 

2586:  D_{24} &=& {D_{24}^r}  + g_{27} \, F^2 \lambda 

2587:  \Bigl({1 \over 32} \Bigr) 

2588: \;, \la{eq:duv}

2589: \ea

2590: the correlation function $\mathcal{C}_{27}$ in \eq\nr{C27}

2591: can be seen to be finite.

2592: 

2593: 

2594: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% 8,8' %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2595: %

2596: As far as the octet correlation functions are concerned, 

2597: it is the following types 

2598: among the operators listed in Ref.~\cite{p4}

2599: that contribute to the correlation function

2600: $\mathcal{C}_8$ at the order we are considering:   

2601: \ba

2602:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(1)} & \equiv & -( \mS \mS )_{ds} 

2603:  \;, \la{bO81} \\ 

2604:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(2)} & \equiv & -(\mS)_{ds} \tr(\mS)

2605:  \;, \la{bO82} \\ 

2606:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(3)} & \equiv & -(\mP \mP)_{ds}

2607:  \;, \\ 

2608:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(10)} & \equiv & \{\mS,\mL_\mu \mL_\mu\}_{ds}

2609:  \;, \\ 

2610:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(11)} & \equiv & (\mL_\mu \mS \mL_\mu)_{ds}

2611:  \;, \\ 

2612:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(14)} & \equiv & (\mL_\mu \mL_\mu)_{ds} \tr(\mS)

2613:  \;, \\ 

2614:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(33)} & \equiv & i\{\mW_{\mu\mu},\mP\}_{ds}

2615:  \;, \\ 

2616:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(35)} & \equiv & -\{\mL_\mu,

2617:                                             \partial_\nu\mW_{\mu\nu}\}_{ds}

2618:  \;, \\ 

2619:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(36)} & \equiv & -\{\mL_\mu,

2620:                                             \partial_\mu\mW_{\nu\nu}\}_{ds}

2621:  \;, \\ 

2622:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(39)} & \equiv & -(\mW_{\mu\nu} \mW_{\mu\nu})_{ds}

2623:  \;, \\ 

2624:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(40)} & \equiv & -(\mW_{\mu\mu} \mW_{\nu\nu})_{ds}

2625:  \;. \la{bO840}

2626: \ea

2627: Again, there are relations between these operators: 

2628: equations of motion can be used to eliminate 33, 36 and 40~\cite{p4}.

2629: For $\Nf=\Nv$ the contributions from the QCD and weak 

2630: $\rmO(p^4)$-constants to \eq\nr{C8} read

2631: \ba

2632:  %% && \hspace*{-1cm} 

2633:  {\mathcal E}_{8}(x_0,y_0) 

2634:  %% \nn

2635:  \!\!\! &=& \!\!\! 8 M^4 P'(x_0) P'(y_0)

2636: \Bigl[

2637:  -E_1 -\frac{\Nf}{2} E_2 + E_3 

2638: % + \nn

2639: % && \hphantom{ 4 M^4 P'(x_0) P'(y_0) }

2640:  + 4 E_{33} - 4 E_{39} - 4 E_{40}

2641:  \Bigr]\! +  \nonumber\\

2642:  &+& \!\!\! 8 M^6 P(x_0) P(y_0)

2643: \Bigl[ 

2644:  E_{10} + \fr12 E_{11} 

2645: % \nn 

2646: % && \hphantom{ 4 M^6 P(x_0) P(y_0) }

2647:  + \frac{\Nf}{2} E_{14}  

2648:   - 2 E_{35} - 2 E_{36}

2649:  \Bigr] + 

2650:  \nonumber\\[2mm]

2651:  &+& \!\!\! 4 M^6 P(x_0) P(y_0)

2652:  g_8 F^2 \left[ 

2653:   -  \Nf L_4 - L_5 \right] + 

2654:  \nonumber\\[2mm] 

2655:  &+& \!\!\!

2656:  4  M^6 \frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d} M^2} \Bigl[ P'(x_0) P'(y_0) \Bigr] 

2657:  g_8' F^2 \Bigl[ -\Nf L_4 - L_5 + 2 (\Nf L_6 + L_8 )\Bigr]

2658:  \;.  \la{eq:ep4}

2659: \ea

2660: The results for the divergent parts of $E_i$ 

2661: can be found in Ref.~\cite{p4} for $\Nf=3$ 

2662: and will be given below for general $\Nf$.

2663: Taking into account that (in the unquenched case)

2664: \ba

2665:  \Nf L_4 + L_5 - 2 (\Nf L_6 + L_8 ) & = & 

2666:  \Nf L_4^r + L_5^r - 2 (\Nf L_6^r + L_8^r ) + \frac{\lambda}{4\Nf}

2667:  \;, \la{divL6}

2668: \ea

2669: where $L_6^r$, $L_8^r$ are finite, and summing together with 

2670: the divergences shown in \eqs\nr{divD8} and \nr{divD8p}, 

2671: it can be verified that $\mathcal{C}_8$ is finite. 

2672: 

2673: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2674: %

2675: \section{The case $\Nf\neq \Nv$}

2676:  

2677: For $\Nf \neq \Nv$, the set of possible operators is in general 

2678: larger than for $\Nf = \Nv$: 

2679: the only restrictions are that the operators be singlets

2680: in the full group SU($\Nf)_R$, and have the correct transformation 

2681: properties in the subgroup SU($\Nv)_L$. 

2682: At $\rmO(p^2)$ this does not change the situation for the 27-plet, 

2683: but it increases the amount of octets to four in total. 

2684: Besides $\mathcal{O}_{8}$ defined by \eqs\nr{formofR}, 

2685: \nr{O_XPT}, \nr{preO8}, 

2686: {\it viz.}

2687: \ba

2688:  \mathcal{O}_8 & = & \frac{F^4}{8}

2689:  \Bigl[ 

2690:    \left(\mL_\mu \Pv \mL_\mu\right)_{ds} 

2691:  + \left(\mL_\mu\right)_{ds}  \tr (\Pv \mL_\mu)

2692:  \Bigr] 

2693:  \;, 

2694: \ea

2695: and $\mathcal{O}'_{8}$ defined by \eq\nr{formofO8p}, 

2696: there are two additional octets, which we choose to define 

2697: such that they vanish in the limit $\Nf\rightarrow \Nv$:

2698: \ba

2699:  \hat{\mathcal{O}}_8 & \equiv & \frac{F^4}{8}

2700:  \bigl[  

2701:    \mL_\mu  \left( 1 - \Pv \right) \mL_\mu\bigr]_{ds} 

2702:  \;,  \\

2703:  \check{\mathcal{O}}_8 & \equiv & \frac{F^4}{8}

2704:  \left(\mL_\mu\right)_{ds} 

2705:  \tr \bigl[  

2706:    \left( 1 - \Pv \right) \mL_\mu\bigr]  

2707:  \;.

2708: \ea

2709: It should also be noted that these operators only 

2710: contribute starting at the NLO, since at tree-level

2711: they do not couple to two valence-flavoured mesons.

2712: Since for $\mathcal{C}_{27}$ nothing changes with respect to Appendix~B, 

2713: we concentrate on the octets in the following. 

2714: 

2715: The three-point octet correlation function is now of the form

2716: \ba

2717:  {[\mathcal{C}_{8}]}^{ab}  \!\! & \equiv & \!\!   

2718:  \int\! {\rm d}^3x \!

2719:  \int\! {\rm d}^3y\, \Bigl\langle \mathcal{J}^a_0(x) 

2720:  \Bigl[ 

2721:     g_8 {\cal O}_8

2722:   + g_8'{\cal O}'_8

2723:   + \hat{g}_8 \hat{\cal O}_8

2724:   + \check{g}_8\check{\cal O}_8

2725:   + \sum_i E_i \bar\mathcal{O}_8^{(i)} 

2726:  \Bigr](0)

2727:  \mathcal{J}^b_0(y) 

2728:  \Bigr \rangle 

2729:  \hspace*{1.0cm} \\ 

2730:  & = & \!\!

2731:   \Delta^{ab}_8 \biggl\{ g_8 

2732:  \Bigl[ \mathcal{C}(x_0) \mathcal{C}(y_0) 

2733:  + \mathcal{D}_{8}(x_0,y_0)  \Bigr]  

2734:  + g_8' \mathcal{D}'_{8}

2735:  + \hat{g}_8 \hat{\mathcal{D}}_{8}

2736:  + \check{g}_8 \check{\mathcal{D}}_{8}

2737:  + \mathcal{E}_{8} 

2738:  \biggr\}

2739:  \;, \la{C8nv} \hspace*{0.5cm}

2740: \ea

2741: where $\mathcal{D}_8$ can be found in \eq\nr{D8} 

2742: and $\mathcal{D}_8'$ in \eq\nr{calDp}. The new functions read

2743: \ba

2744:  \hat{\mathcal{D}}_8(x_0,y_0) & = & 

2745:  (\Nf - \Nv)

2746:  \Bigl[

2747:   -\fr12 \mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0) + \frac{F^2 M^2}{8} 

2748:   \mathcal{I}_A(x_0,y_0) 

2749:  \Bigr]

2750:  \;, \la{D8pp} \\

2751:  \check{\mathcal{D}}_8(x_0,y_0) & = & 

2752:  \frac{F^2 M^2}{4}

2753:  \Bigl[

2754:   \Nv \mathcal{I}_B (x_0,y_0) - \mathcal{I}_A(x_0,y_0) 

2755:  \Bigr]

2756:  \;, \la{D8ppp} 

2757: \ea

2758: where we have defined 

2759: \ba

2760:  \mathcal{I}_A(x_0,y_0) & \equiv & 

2761:  G(0;M^2) P'(x_0) P'(y_0) 

2762:  - \nn & & \hspace*{0.0cm} -

2763:  \frac{M^2}{2} P(x_0 - y_0)

2764:   \Bigl[

2765:    B(x_0) + B(y_0) 

2766:   \Bigr] 

2767:  + \nn & & \hspace*{0.0cm} 

2768:   + \fr12 P'(x_0 - y_0)

2769:    \Bigl[ B'(x_0) - B'(y_0) 

2770:    \Bigr] 

2771:  + \nn & & \hspace*{0.0cm} 

2772:  + M^4 \int_0^T \! {\rm d}  \tau \,

2773:  B(\tau) P(\tau - x_0) P(\tau - y_0)  

2774:   \;, \la{IA} \\  

2775:  \mathcal{I}_B(x_0,y_0) & \equiv &

2776:  E(0;M^2) P'(x_0) P'(y_0) 

2777:  - \nn & & \hspace*{0.0cm} -

2778:    \frac{M^2}{2} P(x_0 - y_0)

2779:   \Bigl[

2780:    \tilde B(x_0) + \tilde B(y_0) 

2781:   \Bigr] 

2782:  + \nn & & \hspace*{0.0cm} 

2783:    + \fr12 P'(x_0 - y_0)

2784:    \Bigl[

2785:     \tilde B'(x_0) + \tilde B_0(x_0)  

2786:     - \tilde B'(y_0) - \tilde B_0(y_0) \Bigr] 

2787:  + \nn & & \hspace*{0.0cm} +

2788:   M^2 \int_0^T \! {\rm d}  \tau \,

2789:  \Bigl[ M^2 \tilde B(\tau) +\fr12 \tilde B_{00}(\tau) \Bigr] 

2790:  P(\tau - x_0) P(\tau - y_0)

2791:  \;, \la{IB}

2792: \ea

2793: and the notation follows that in \eq\nr{D8}.

2794: The divergent parts read (in the unquenched case) 

2795: \ba

2796:  \hat{\mathcal{D}}_{8}(x_0,y_0) & = &  \hat{\mathcal{D}}_{8}^r(x_0,y_0)

2797:  + \frac{F^2 \lambda}{4} (\Nf - \Nv)

2798:  \Bigl[ M^6 P(x_0) P(y_0)

2799:  \Bigr]

2800:  \;, \la{divD8pp} \\

2801:  \check{\mathcal{D}}_{8}(x_0,y_0) & = &  \check{\mathcal{D}}_{8}^r(x_0,y_0)

2802:  + \frac{F^2 \lambda}{2} \Bigl( 1 - \frac{\Nv}{\Nf} \Bigr)

2803:  \Bigl[  M^6 P(x_0) P(y_0)  -  

2804:   M^4 P'(x_0) P'(y_0)

2805:  \Bigr]

2806:  \;, \hspace*{0.9cm} \la{divD8ppp} 

2807: \ea

2808: where $\hat{\mathcal{D}}_{8}^r$, $\check{\mathcal{D}}_{8}^r$ are 

2809: finite. 

2810: 

2811: The list of operators contributing to $\mathcal{E}_8$ 

2812: for $\Nf\neq\Nv$ is also much longer. 

2813: We will not provide any systematic classification of all the 

2814: possibilities, but only list the additional operators that are needed for 

2815: cancelling the ultraviolet divergences at NLO. Using the same notation

2816: as in Appendix A [$\trp(...) \equiv \tr(\Pv\, ...)$], we need 

2817: \ba

2818:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(1')} & \equiv & -( \mS \Pv \mS )_{ds} 

2819:  \;, \\ 

2820:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(2')} & \equiv & -(\mS)_{ds} \trp(\mS)

2821:  \;, \\ 

2822:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(10')} & \equiv & \{\mS,\mL_\mu \Pv \mL_\mu\}_{ds}

2823:  \;, \\ 

2824:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(10'')} & \equiv & 

2825:     (\mS \Pv \mL_\mu \mL_\mu + \mL_\mu \mL_\mu \Pv \mS )_{ds}

2826:  \;, \\ 

2827:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(11')} & \equiv & 

2828:  \fr12 (\mL_\mu \{\Pv, \mS\} \mL_\mu)_{ds}

2829:  \;, \\ 

2830:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(14')} & \equiv & (\mL_\mu \Pv \mL_\mu)_{ds} \tr(\mS)

2831:  \;, \\ 

2832:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(14'')} & \equiv & (\mL_\mu \mL_\mu)_{ds} \trp(\mS)

2833:  \;, \\ 

2834:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(35')} & \equiv & 

2835:   -(\mL_\mu \Pv \partial_\nu\mW_{\mu\nu} + 

2836:      \partial_\nu\mW_{\mu\nu} \Pv \mL_\mu )_{ds}

2837:  \;, \\ 

2838:  \bar{\mathcal{O}}_{8}^{(39')} & \equiv & -(\mW_{\mu\nu} \Pv \mW_{\mu\nu})_{ds}

2839:  \;. 

2840: \ea

2841: With these definitions, we get:

2842: \ba

2843:  %% && \hspace*{-1cm} 

2844:  {\mathcal E}_{8}(x_0,y_0) 

2845:  %% \nn

2846:  \!\!\! &=& \!\!\! 8 M^4 P'(x_0) P'(y_0)

2847: \Bigl[

2848:  -E^{}_1 -E^{}_{1'} -\frac{\Nf}{2} E^{}_2 -\frac{\Nv}{2} E^{}_{2'} + E^{}_3 

2849:  + \nn

2850:  && \hphantom{ 4 M^4 P'(x_0) P'(y_0) }

2851:  + 4 E^{}_{33} - 4 (E^{}_{39} + E^{}_{39'}) - 4 E^{}_{40}

2852:  \Bigr]\! +  \nonumber\\

2853:  &+& \!\!\! 8 M^6 P(x_0) P(y_0)

2854: \Bigl[ 

2855:  E^{}_{10} + E^{}_{10'} + E^{}_{10''} +  

2856:  \fr12 (E^{}_{11} + E^{}_{11'}) 

2857:  + 

2858:  \nn 

2859:  && \hphantom{ 4 M^6 P(x_0) P(y_0) }

2860:  + \frac{\Nf}{2} (E^{}_{14} + E^{}_{14'} ) + 

2861:  \frac{\Nv}{2} E^{}_{14''}

2862:   - 2 (E^{}_{35} + E^{}_{35'} ) - 2 E^{}_{36}

2863:  \Bigr] + 

2864:  \nonumber\\[2mm]

2865:  &+&  \!\!\! 4 M^6 P(x_0) P(y_0)

2866:  g^{}_8 F^2 \left[ 

2867:   -  \Nf L_4 - L_5 \right]  + 

2868:   \nonumber\\[2mm] 

2869:   &+& \!\!\!

2870:   4  M^6 \frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d} M^2} \Bigl[ P'(x_0) P'(y_0) \Bigr] 

2871:   g_8' F^2 \Bigl[ -\Nf L_4 - L_5 + 2 (\Nf L_6 + L_8 )\Bigr]

2872:   \;.  \la{eq:ep4nv}

2873: \ea

2874: 

2875: Like for $\mathcal{C}_{27}$, 

2876: the part $\mathcal{C}(x_0)\mathcal{C}(y_0)$ 

2877: in \eq\nr{C8nv} is finite, while the other parts

2878: contain divergences. More precisely,  

2879: $\mathcal{D}_8$, $\mathcal{D}_8'$, 

2880: $\hat{\mathcal{D}}_8$, $\check{\mathcal{D}}_8$ are of the forms

2881: shown in \eqs\nr{divD8}, \nr{divD8p}, \nr{divD8pp}, \nr{divD8ppp},  

2882: the combination

2883: $\Nf L_4 + L_5$ of the form in \eq\nr{divL4}, 

2884: while the combination on the last line of \eq\nr{eq:ep4nv}

2885: is of the form in \eq\nr{divL6}.

2886: Moreover, writing

2887: \be

2888:  E_i = E_i^r 

2889:  + \frac{F^2 \lambda}{2} 

2890:  \Bigl( g_8 \eta_i 

2891:   + g_8' \eta'_i

2892:   + \hat{g}_8 \hat{\eta}_i

2893:   + \check{g}_8 \check{\eta}_i \Bigr)

2894:  \la{Edivs}

2895: \ee

2896: where $E_i^r$ are finite, 

2897: the coefficients $\eta_i$, $\eta'_i$, $\hat{\eta}_i$, $\check{\eta}_i$ 

2898: can be derived with the 

2899: method of Ref.~\cite{p4}; they are listed in Table 1. 

2900: Summing together, all the divergences cancel

2901: in $\mathcal{C}_8$, as they should.

2902: 

2903: 

2904: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% TABLE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2905: \begin{table}[ht]

2906: 

2907: \begin{center}

2908: \begin{tabular}{lllll}

2909: \hline\hline

2910:  $i$ & $\eta_i$ & $\eta'_i$ & $\hat{\eta}_i$ & $\check{\eta}_i$ \\

2911: \hline\hline

2912:  ${1}$ &  

2913:  $(\Nv + 2) \Bigl( \frac{1}{16} - \frac{1}{4\Nf} \Bigr)$ & 

2914:  $ -\frac{\Nf}{4} + \frac{1}{\Nf}$ & 

2915:  $ \frac{\Nf - \Nv}{16} - \frac{1}{4\Nf}$ & 

2916:  $-\fr18 + \frac{\Nv}{4\Nf}$ \\

2917: %

2918:  ${1'}$ & 

2919:  $\frac{1}{8} - \frac{1}{4\Nf}$ & 

2920:  $0$ & 

2921:  $\frac{1}{4\Nf}$ & 

2922:  $-\fr18$ \\

2923: %

2924:  ${2}$ &

2925:  $(\Nv + 2) \frac{1}{4\Nf^2}$ & 

2926:  $-\frac{1}{4} - \frac{1}{2 \Nf^2}$ & 

2927:  $\fr18$ & 

2928:  $-\frac{\Nv}{4\Nf^2}$ \\

2929: %

2930:  ${2'}$ & 

2931:  $\frac{1}{8} - \frac{1}{4\Nf}$ & 

2932:  $0$ & 

2933:  $-\fr18$ & 

2934:  $\frac{1}{4\Nf}$ \\

2935: %

2936:  ${3}$ & 

2937:  $0$ & 

2938:  $0$ & 

2939:  $0$ & 

2940:  $0$ \\

2941: %

2942:  ${10}$ &

2943:  $(\Nv + 2) \Bigl( - \frac{1}{32} + \frac{1}{16\Nf} \Bigr)$ & 

2944:  $\frac{\Nf}{8}$ & 

2945:  $\frac{\Nf + \Nv}{32}$ & 

2946:  $\frac{1}{16}\Bigl( 1 - \frac{\Nv}{\Nf} \Bigr)$ \\

2947: % 

2948:  ${10'}$ & 

2949:  $\frac{3}{16} + \frac{\Nf}{16}$ & 

2950:  $0$ & 

2951:  $-\frac{\Nf}{16}$ & 

2952:  $-\frac{3}{16}$ \\

2953: %

2954:  ${10''}$ & 

2955:  $-\frac{3}{16}$ & 

2956:  $0$ & 

2957:  $0$ & 

2958:  $\frac{3}{16}$ \\

2959: %

2960:  ${11}$ &

2961:  $(\Nv + 2) \Bigl( - \frac{3}{8\Nf}  \Bigr)$ & 

2962:  $0$ & 

2963:  $\frac{\Nf}{8}$ & 

2964:  $\frac{3\Nv}{8\Nf}$ \\

2965: %

2966:  ${11'}$ & 

2967:  $\frac{3}{8} + \frac{\Nf}{8}$ &

2968:  $0$ & 

2969:  $-\frac{\Nf}{8}$ & 

2970:  $-\fr38$ \\

2971: %

2972:  ${14}$ & 

2973:  $0$ & 

2974:  $0$ & 

2975:  $\frac{1}{16}$ & 

2976:  $0$ \\

2977: %

2978:  ${14'}$ &

2979:  $\frac{1}{4}$ & 

2980:  $0$ & 

2981:  $-\fr14$ & 

2982:  $0$ \\

2983: %

2984:  ${14''}$ &

2985:  $-\frac{3}{16}$ &

2986:  $0$ & 

2987:  $\frac{3}{16}$ &

2988:  $0$ \\

2989: %

2990:  ${33}$ & 

2991:  $(\Nv + 2) \Bigl( \frac{1}{64} - \frac{1}{32\Nf}  \Bigr)$ &  

2992:  $0$ & 

2993:  $\frac{\Nf - \Nv}{64}$ & 

2994:  $-\frac{1}{32}\Bigl( 1 - \frac{\Nv}{\Nf}\Bigr)$ \\

2995: %

2996:  ${35}$ & 

2997:  $(\Nv + 2) \Bigl( - \frac{1}{32}\Bigr)$ & 

2998:  $0$ & 

2999:  $\frac{\Nv - \Nf}{32}$ & 

3000:  $\frac{1}{16}$ \\

3001: %

3002:  ${35'}$ & 

3003:  $\frac{1}{16}$ & 

3004:  $0$ & 

3005:  $0$ & 

3006:  $-\frac{1}{16}$ \\

3007: %

3008:  ${36}$ & 

3009:  $0$ & 

3010:  $0$ & 

3011:  $0$ & 

3012:  $0$ \\

3013: % 

3014:  ${39}$ & 

3015:  $(\Nv + 2) \Bigl( - \frac{1}{64} \Bigr)$ & 

3016:  $0$ & 

3017:  $\frac{\Nv - \Nf}{64}$ & 

3018:  $\frac{1}{32}$ \\

3019: %

3020:  ${39'}$ &

3021:  $\frac{1}{32}$ & 

3022:  $0$ & 

3023:  $0$ & 

3024:  $-\frac{1}{32}$ \\

3025: %

3026:  ${40}$ &

3027:  $0$ & 

3028:  $0$ & 

3029:  $0$ & 

3030:  $0$ \\

3031: \hline\hline

3032: \end{tabular}

3033: \end{center}

3034: 

3035: \caption[a]{\small The coefficients that appear in \eq\nr{Edivs}, 

3036: in the unquenched case.}

3037: 

3038: \end{table}

3039: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

3040: 

3041: The results for $E_i$ that need to be used for the case $\Nf =\Nv$ 

3042: can be obtained from Table~1 by summing together the 

3043: coefficients with the same ``numerical'' index that 

3044: then correspond to the coefficients of 

3045: the operators in \eqs\nr{bO81}--\nr{bO840}:

3046: $(E_{1}+E_{1'})_{\Nf = \Nv}$ for \eq\nr{bO81}, 

3047: $(E_{2}+E_{2'})_{\Nf = \Nv}$ for \eq\nr{bO82}, etc.

3048: It can immediately be seen that the divergent parts proportional to 

3049: $\hat{g}_8$ and $\check{g}_8$ cancel in these sums, as has to be the case. 

3050: 

3051: We finally comment on the quenched limit, 

3052: corresponding formally to $\Nf\to 0$ but $\Nv$ fixed.

3053: We have seen that for $\Nf\neq\Nv$ additional operators 

3054: in general appear, as elaborated in Ref.~\cite{gp}. 

3055: However, it is easy to see that 

3056: the functions $\mathcal{I}_A$, $\mathcal{I}_B$

3057: that appear in \eqs\nr{D8pp}, \nr{D8ppp}, 

3058: vanish in the $\epsilon$-regime. Therefore the coefficient

3059: $\check{g}_8$ does not contribute in \eq\nr{C8nv} in the $\epsilon$-regime. 

3060: Moreover, $\hat{\mathcal{D}}_8$ is determined by the same 

3061: function $\mathcal{D}_{27}$ that appears in 

3062: $\mathcal{D}_8$ (cf.\ \eqs\nr{D8}, \nr{D8pp}). 

3063: In particular, the normalised 

3064: three-point function defined in analogy

3065: with \eq\nr{ratio8} obtains for $\Nf\to 0$ the form

3066: \be

3067: % {[\mathcal{C}_{8}]}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0) =

3068:  \Delta^{ab}_8\biggl[ g_8 - (g_8 - \hat{g}_8) 

3069:  \frac{\Nv}{(FL)^2}

3070:  \Bigl( \rho^{-\fr12} {\beta_1}  - \rho\, k_{00} 

3071:  \Bigr)

3072:  \biggr]

3073:  + g_8' {[\mathcal{C}_{8}']}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0)

3074:  \;.  \la{O8quench}

3075: \ee

3076: We observe that quenched functional behaviour 

3077: only appears in the part ${[\mathcal{C}_{8}']}^{ab}_\rmi{norm}(x_0,y_0)$ 

3078: (cf.\ \eq\nr{qC8p}), and can thus

3079: be eliminated by disentangling the contributions related to $g_8'$, 

3080: just like in Sec.~\ref{ss:o8eps}. Moreover, it can be verified

3081: that at the NLO in the $\epsilon$-regime, 

3082: the coefficients $\hat{g}_8$, $\check{g}_8$ do not contribute

3083: to the correlation function considered in Sec.~\ref{ss:direct},

3084: such that $g_8'$ can be separately determined just like there. 

3085: The remaining terms in~\eq\nr{O8quench}

3086: can be disentangled in principle by monitoring the volume 

3087: dependence, from which it should be possible to determine

3088: the ``physical'' coefficient $g_8$.

3089: 

3090: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SECTION %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

3091: %

3092: \section{Correlation functions for $\Nv = 4$}

3093: 

3094: It has been argued recently that many of the mysteries related

3095: to the $\Delta I = 1/2$ rule can be studied particularly cleanly

3096: [both from the conceptual and from the practical point of view] 

3097: by considering the SU(4) symmetric situation, 

3098: i.e. $\Nv = \Nf = 4$~\cite{strategy}.

3099: We discuss here how our predictions can be converted to apply

3100: to that situation. 

3101: 

3102: Rather than 27, 8, the dimensions of the relevant irreducible 

3103: representations are 84, 20 for $\Nv = 4$. The corresponding 

3104: operators are obtained like the 27 for $\Nv = 3$, but by using

3105: the projection operators $P_2^\sigma P_1^\sigma$ in \eq\nr{o27proj},

3106: with $\sigma = +1$ for the 84 and $\sigma = -1$ for the 20.

3107: Following the notation in Ref.~\cite{strategy}, 

3108: the corresponding operators are denoted by 

3109: $[\hat \mathcal{O}_{1}]_{\a\b\c\d}^\sigma$.

3110: 

3111: The three-point correlation function we are interested in now 

3112: takes the form 

3113: \be

3114:  {[\hat \mathcal{C}_{1}]}^{ab,\sigma}_{\a\b\c\d}(x_0,y_0) \equiv  

3115:  \int\! {\rm d}^3x\, 

3116:  \int\! {\rm d}^3y\, \Bigl\langle \mathcal{J}^a_0(x) 

3117:  \Bigl\{

3118:     g_1^{\sigma} [\hat\mathcal{O}_{1}]_{\a\b\c\d}^\sigma(0) 

3119:  + \sum_i D^\sigma_i [\hat{\bar\mathcal{O}}_{i}]_{\a\b\c\d}^\sigma(0)  

3120:  \Bigr\}

3121:  \mathcal{J}^b_0(y) 

3122:  \Bigr \rangle 

3123:  \;. \la{C1xpt_su4}

3124: \ee

3125: The $\rmO(p^4)$ weak operators $\hat{\bar\mathcal{O}}_{i}$ here 

3126: have the same chiral structures as the 27-plets of Ref.~\cite{p4},

3127: listed in \eqs\nr{o27_2}--\nr{o27_25} of Appendix~B,  

3128: but each of them comes in two variants after the valence 

3129: flavour projection, corresponding to $\sigma=\pm$. 

3130: The result can be written in the form 

3131: \be

3132:   {[\hat \mathcal{C}_{1}]}^{ab,\sigma}_{\a\b\c\d}(x_0,y_0) = 

3133:   \hat \Delta^{ab,\sigma}_{\a\b\c\d} \biggl\{ 

3134:   g_1^{\sigma} \Bigl[  \mathcal{C}(x_0) \mathcal{C}(y_0) 

3135:  +  \sigma \mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0)  \Bigr]

3136:  +  \mathcal{E}^\sigma (x_0,y_0)

3137:  \biggr\} 

3138:  \;, \la{Cpm} 

3139: \ee

3140: where $\hat \Delta^{ab,\sigma}_{\a\b\c\d}

3141: \equiv 2 S^\sigma_{\a\b\c\d}(T^a,T^b)$, with the function 

3142: $S^\sigma_{\a\b\c\d}(T^a,T^b)$ given in \eq\nr{Ssigma}.

3143: The function $\mathcal{D}_{27}(x_0,y_0)$ 

3144: is identical to the one for the 27-plet in \eq\nr{calD}.

3145: 

3146: The functions $\mathcal{E}^{\sigma}(x_0,y_0)$  in \eq\nr{Cpm}

3147: contain the contributions of the $\rmO(p^4)$ low-energy constants, 

3148: beyond those already contained in the factorized 

3149: term $\mathcal{C}(x_0) \mathcal{C}(y_0)$:

3150: \ba

3151:  {\mathcal E}^\sigma(x_0,y_0) &=& 4 M^4 P'(x_0) P'(y_0) 

3152:  \left[D^\sigma_2  +2 D^\sigma_{19} 

3153:  - 4 D^\sigma_{24} - 4 D^\sigma_{25} \right] 

3154:  + \nonumber\\

3155:  &+& 4  M^6 P(x_0) P(y_0)

3156:  \left[D^\sigma_4  + {\Nf\over 2} D^\sigma_{7} - D^\sigma_{20} - 

3157:  {D^\sigma_{21}} - F^2 (\Nf L_4 +L_5) \right] 

3158:  \;. \hspace*{1cm}

3159:  % \nonumber\\

3160:  \label{eq:p4_su4}

3161: \ea

3162: Taking into account that $\mathcal{C}(x_0)$ is finite, 

3163: that the $\mathcal{D}_{27}$ contains the divergences

3164: in \eq\nr{divD27}, 

3165: that the QCD $\rmO(p^4)$ constants contain the divergence

3166: in \eq\nr{divL4}, 

3167: and that the weak $\rmO(p^4)$ constants contain the divergences

3168: \ba

3169:  D_4^\sigma &=& {D_4^{\sigma r}} + 

3170:  g_1^{\sigma} \, F^2\lambda 

3171:  \Bigl( 

3172:  {\Nf+ 3\sigma \over 8} 

3173:  \Bigr)

3174:  \;, \\

3175:  D_7^\sigma &=& {D_7^{\sigma r}} + 

3176:  g_1^{\sigma} \, F^2\lambda 

3177:  \Bigl( 

3178:  {1 \over 4} 

3179:  \Bigr)

3180:  \;, \\

3181:  D_{20}^\sigma &=& {D_{20}^{\sigma r}} +  

3182:  g_1^{\sigma} \, F^2\lambda 

3183:  \Bigl( 

3184:  {\sigma \over 8} 

3185:  \Bigr)

3186:  \;, \\

3187:  D_{24}^\sigma &=& {D_{24}^{\sigma r}} +  

3188:  g_1^{\sigma} \, F^2\lambda 

3189:  \Bigl( 

3190:  {\sigma \over 32} 

3191:  \Bigr)

3192:  \;, \la{eq:duv_su4}

3193: \ea

3194: the correlation function $\hat\mathcal{C}_{1}$ in \eq\nr{Cpm}

3195: can be seen to be finite.

3196: 

3197: 

3198: 

3199: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% BIBLIOGRAPHY %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

3200: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% REFERENCES %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

3201: 

3202: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

3203: 

3204: \bibitem{mk}

3205: M.K.~Gaillard and B.W.~Lee,

3206: %``Delta I = 1/2 Rule For Nonleptonic Decays

3207: % In Asymptotically Free Field Theories,''

3208: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {33} (1974) 108;

3209: %%CITATION = PRLTA,33,108;%%

3210: %

3211: G.~Altarelli and L.~Maiani,

3212: %``Octet Enhancement Of Nonleptonic Weak Interactions

3213: % In Asymptotically Free Gauge Theories,''

3214: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {52} (1974) 351.

3215: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B52,351;%%

3216: 

3217: \bibitem{lat}

3218: N.~Cabibbo, G.~Martinelli and R.~Petronzio,

3219: %``Weak Interactions On The Lattice,''

3220: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {244} (1984) 381;

3221: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B244,381;%%

3222: %

3223: R.C.~Brower, G.~Maturana, M.B.~Gavela and R.~Gupta,

3224: %``Calculation Of Weak Transitions In Lattice QCD,''

3225: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {53} (1984) 1318.

3226: %%CITATION = PRLTA,53,1318;%%

3227: 

3228: \bibitem{b}

3229: C.W.~Bernard, T.~Draper, A.~Soni, H.D.~Politzer and M.B.~Wise,

3230: %``Application Of Chiral Perturbation Theory To K $\to$ 2 Pi Decays,''

3231: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {32} (1985) 2343.

3232: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D32,2343;%%

3233: 

3234: %% no contr from O_m

3235: \bibitem{rc}

3236: R.J.~Crewther,

3237: %``Chiral Reduction Of K $\to$ 2 Pi Amplitudes,''

3238: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {264} (1986) 277.

3239: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B264,277;%%

3240: 

3241: %% tree-level

3242: \bibitem{lo}

3243: A.~Pich, B.~Guberina and E.~de Rafael,

3244: %``Problem With The Delta I = 1/2 Rule In The Standard Model,''

3245: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {277} (1986) 197;

3246: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B277,197;%%

3247: %

3248: A.~Pich and E.~de Rafael,

3249: %``Four Quark Operators And Nonleptonic Weak Transitions,''

3250: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {358} (1991) 311.

3251: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B358,311;%%

3252: 

3253: %% phases

3254: \bibitem{gm}

3255: J.~Gasser and U.G.~Meissner,

3256: %``On The Phase Of Epsilon-Prime,''

3257: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {258} (1991) 219.

3258: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B258,219;%%

3259: 

3260: %% 1-loop

3261: \bibitem{1loop}

3262: J.~Kambor, J.~Missimer and D.~Wyler,

3263: %``K $\to$ 2 Pi And K $\to$ 3 Pi Decays

3264: % In Next-To-Leading Order Chiral Perturbation Theory,''

3265: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {261} (1991) 496;

3266: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B261,496;%%

3267: %

3268: J.~Kambor, J.F.~Donoghue, B.R.~Holstein, J.~Missimer and D.~Wyler,

3269: %``Chiral Symmetry Tests In Nonleptonic K Decay,''

3270: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {68} (1992) 1818;

3271: %%CITATION = PRLTA,68,1818;%%

3272: %

3273: J.~Bijnens, E.~Pallante and J.~Prades,

3274: %``Obtaining K $\to$ pi pi from off-shell K $\to$ pi amplitudes,''

3275: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {521} (1998) 305

3276: [hep-ph/9801326];

3277: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9801326;%%

3278: %

3279: E.~Pallante,

3280: %``The generating functional for hadronic weak

3281: % interactions and its  quenched approximation,''

3282: JHEP {01} (1999) 012

3283: [hep-lat/9808018].

3284: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9808018;%%

3285: 

3286: \bibitem{pp}

3287: E.~Pallante and A.~Pich,

3288: %``Strong enhancement of epsilon'/epsilon through final state  interactions,''

3289: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {84} (2000) 2568

3290: [hep-ph/9911233];

3291: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9911233;%%

3292: %

3293: %``Final state interactions in kaon decays,''

3294: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {592} (2001) 294

3295: [hep-ph/0007208].

3296: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0007208;%%

3297: 

3298: 

3299: \bibitem{GL}

3300: J.~Gasser and H.~Leutwyler,

3301: %``Thermodynamics Of Chiral Symmetry,''

3302: Phys.\ Lett.\ B { 188} (1987) 477;

3303: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B188,477;%%

3304: %

3305: %J.~Gasser and H.~Leutwyler,

3306: %``Spontaneously Broken Symmetries: Effective Lagrangians At Finite Volume,''

3307: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B { 307} (1988) 763.

3308: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B307,763;%%

3309: 

3310: \bibitem{N}

3311: H.~Neuberger,

3312: %``A Better Way To Measure F(Pi) In The Linear Sigma Model,''

3313: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {60} (1988) 889;

3314: %%CITATION = PRLTA,60,889;%%

3315: %

3316: %``Soft Pions In Large Boxes,''

3317: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {300} (1988) 180.

3318: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B300,180;%%

3319: 

3320: \bibitem{qcd}

3321: P.H.~Damgaard, R.G.~Edwards, U.M.~Heller and R.~Narayanan,

3322: %``Universal scaling of the chiral condensate

3323: % in finite-volume gauge  theories,''

3324: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {61} (2000) 094503

3325: [hep-lat/9907016];

3326: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9907016;%%

3327: %

3328: P.~Hern\'andez, K.~Jansen and L.~Lellouch,

3329: %``Finite-size scaling of the quark condensate in quenched lattice QCD,''

3330: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {469} (1999) 198

3331: [hep-lat/9907022];

3332: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9907022;%%

3333: %

3334: P.~Hern\'andez, K.~Jansen, L.~Lellouch and H.~Wittig,

3335: %``Non-perturbative renormalization of the quark 

3336: %condensate in  Ginsparg-Wilson regularizations,''

3337: JHEP {07} (2001) 018

3338: [hep-lat/0106011];

3339: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0106011;%%

3340: %

3341: T.~DeGrand  [MILC Collaboration],

3342: %``Another determination of the quark condensate from an overlap action,''

3343: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {64} (2001) 117501

3344: [hep-lat/0107014];

3345: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0107014;%%

3346: %

3347: P.~Hasenfratz, S.~Hauswirth, K.~Holland, T.~J\"org and F.~Niedermayer,

3348: %``Chiral measurements with the fixed-point 

3349: %Dirac operator and  construction of chiral currents,''

3350: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B (Proc.\ Suppl.)\  {106} (2002) 751

3351: [hep-lat/0109007].

3352: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0109007;%%

3353: 

3354: 

3355: \bibitem{qcd2} 

3356: S.~Prelovsek and K.~Orginos  [RBC Collaboration],

3357: %``Quenched scalar meson correlator with domain wall fermions,''

3358: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B (Proc.\ Suppl.)\  {119} (2003) 822

3359: [hep-lat/0209132];

3360: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0209132;%%

3361: %

3362: W.~Bietenholz, K.~Jansen and S.~Shcheredin,

3363: %``Spectral properties of the overlap Dirac operator in QCD,''

3364: JHEP {07} (2003) 033

3365: [hep-lat/0306022];

3366: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0306022;%%

3367: %

3368: L.~Del Debbio and C.~Pica,

3369: %``Topological susceptibility from the overlap,''

3370: JHEP {02} (2004) 003

3371: [hep-lat/0309145];

3372: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0309145;%%

3373: %

3374: L.~Giusti, M.~L\"uscher, P.~Weisz and H.~Wittig,

3375: %``Lattice QCD in the epsilon-regime and random matrix theory,''

3376: JHEP {11} (2003) 023

3377: [hep-lat/0309189];

3378: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0309189;%%

3379: %

3380: W.~Bietenholz, T.~Chiarappa, K.~Jansen, K.I.~Nagai and S.~Shcheredin,

3381: %``Axial correlation functions in the epsilon-regime: A numerical study  with

3382: %overlap fermions,''

3383: JHEP {02} (2004) 023

3384: [hep-lat/0311012].

3385: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0311012;%%

3386: 

3387: \bibitem{ddhj}

3388: P.H.~Damgaard, M.C.~Diamantini, P.~Hern\'andez and K.~Jansen,

3389: %``Finite-size scaling of meson propagators,''

3390: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {629} (2002) 445

3391: [hep-lat/0112016].

3392: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0112016;%%

3393: 

3394: \bibitem{currents}

3395: P.H.~Damgaard, P.~Hern\'andez, K.~Jansen, M.~Laine and L.~Lellouch, 

3396: %``Finite-Size Scaling of Vector and Axial Current Correlators,''

3397: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B { 656} (2003) 226

3398: [hep-lat/0211020].

3399: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0211020;%%

3400: 

3401: \bibitem{methods}

3402: L.~Giusti, C.~Hoelbling, M.~L\"uscher and H.~Wittig,

3403: %``Numerical techniques for lattice QCD in the epsilon-regime,''

3404: Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\  {153} (2003) 31

3405: [hep-lat/0212012].

3406: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0212012;%%

3407: 

3408: \bibitem{zeromode}

3409: L.~Giusti, P.~Hern\'andez, M.~Laine, P.~Weisz and H.~Wittig,

3410: %``Low-energy couplings of QCD from topological zero-mode wave functions,''

3411: JHEP {01} (2004) 003

3412: [hep-lat/0312012].

3413: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0312012;%%

3414: 

3415: \bibitem{current}

3416: L.~Giusti, P.~Hern\'andez, M.~Laine, P.~Weisz and H.~Wittig,

3417: %``Low-energy couplings 

3418: % of QCD from current correlators near the chiral limit,''

3419: JHEP {04} (2004) 013

3420: [hep-lat/0402002].

3421: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0402002;%%

3422: 

3423: \bibitem{qcd3}

3424: L.~Del Debbio, L.~Giusti and C.~Pica,

3425: %``Topological susceptibility in the SU(3) gauge theory,''

3426: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {94} (2005) 032003

3427: [hep-th/0407052];

3428: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0407052;%%

3429: %

3430: H.~Fukaya, S.~Hashimoto and K.~Ogawa,

3431: %``Low-lying mode contribution to the quenched meson correlators in the

3432: %epsilon-regime,''

3433: Prog.\ Theor.\ Phys.\  {114} (2005) 451

3434: [hep-lat/0504018];

3435: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0504018;%%

3436: %

3437: T.~Mehen and B.C.~Tiburzi,

3438: %``Quarks with twisted boundary conditions in the epsilon regime,''

3439: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {72} (2005) 014501

3440: [hep-lat/0505014];

3441: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0505014;%%

3442: %

3443: K.~Ogawa and S.~Hashimoto,

3444: %``Effect of low-lying fermion modes in the epsilon-regime of QCD,''

3445: Prog.\ Theor.\ Phys.\  {114} (2005) 609

3446: [hep-lat/0505017];

3447: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0505017;%%

3448: %

3449: P.H.~Damgaard, U.M.~Heller, K.~Splittorff and B.~Svetitsky,

3450:   %``A new method for determining F(pi) on the lattice,''

3451:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {72} (2005) 091501

3452:   [hep-lat/0508029];

3453:   %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0508029;%%

3454: %

3455: P.H.~Damgaard, U.M.~Heller, K.~Splittorff, B.~Svetitsky and D.~Toublan,

3456:   %``Extracting F(pi) from small lattices: Unquenched results,''

3457:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {73} (2006) 074023

3458:   [hep-lat/0602030];

3459:   %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0602030;%%

3460: %

3461:   W.~Bietenholz and S.~Shcheredin,

3462:   %``Overlap hypercube fermions in QCD simulations near the chiral limit,''

3463:   hep-lat/0605013;

3464:   %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0605013;%%

3465: %

3466:   M.~Luz,

3467:   %``Determining F_pi from spectral sum rules,''

3468:   hep-lat/0607022.

3469:   %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0607022;%%

3470: 

3471: \bibitem{weak}

3472: P.~Hern\'andez and M.~Laine,

3473:  %``Correlators of left charges and weak operators in finite volume chiral

3474: %perturbation theory,''

3475: JHEP {01} (2003) 063

3476: [hep-lat/0212014].

3477: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0212014;%%

3478: 

3479: \bibitem{strategy}

3480: L.~Giusti, P.~Hern\'andez, M.~Laine, P.~Weisz and H.~Wittig,

3481: %``A strategy to study the role of the charm quark in explaining the 

3482: % Delta(I) = 1/2 rule,''

3483: JHEP {11} (2004)  016

3484: [hep-lat/0407007].

3485: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0407007;%%

3486: 

3487: 

3488: \bibitem{baryons}

3489: W.~Detmold and M.J.~Savage,

3490: %``Nucleon properties at finite volume: The epsilon'-regime,''

3491: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {599} (2004) 32

3492: [hep-lat/0407008];

3493: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0407008;%%

3494: %

3495: P.F.~Bedaque, H.W.~Griesshammer and G.~Rupak,

3496: %``A nucleon in a tiny box,''

3497: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {71} (2005) 054015

3498: [hep-lat/0407009];

3499: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0407009.%%

3500: %

3501: W.~Detmold and C.-J.D.~Lin,

3502: %``Twist-two matrix elements at finite and infinite volume,''

3503: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {71} (2005) 054510

3504: [hep-lat/0501007].

3505: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0501007;%%

3506: 

3507: 

3508: \bibitem{gw} 

3509: P.H.~Ginsparg and K.G.~Wilson,

3510: %``A Remnant Of Chiral Symmetry On The Lattice,''

3511: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {25} (1982) 2649.

3512: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D25,2649;%%

3513: 

3514: \bibitem{dw} 

3515: D.B.~Kaplan,

3516: %``A Method for simulating chiral fermions on the lattice,''

3517: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {288} (1992) 342

3518: [hep-lat/9206013].

3519: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9206013;%%

3520: 

3521: \bibitem{sh}

3522: Y.~Shamir, 

3523: %``Chiral fermions from lattice boundaries,''

3524: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {406} (1993) 90

3525: [hep-lat/9303005];

3526: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9303005;%%

3527: %

3528: V.~Furman and Y.~Shamir,

3529: %``Axial Symmetries In Lattice QCD With Kaplan Fermions,''

3530: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {439} (1995) 54

3531: [hep-lat/9405004].

3532: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9405004;%%

3533: 

3534: \bibitem{mm}

3535: R.~Narayanan and H.~Neuberger,

3536: %``Chiral Determinant As An Overlap Of Two Vacua,''

3537: Nucl. \ Phys. \ B {412} (1994) 574

3538: [hep-lat/9307006];

3539: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9307006;%%

3540: %

3541: %``A Construction of lattice chiral gauge theories,''

3542: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {443} (1995) 305

3543: [hep-th/9411108].

3544: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9411108;%%

3545: 

3546: \bibitem{hn}

3547: H.~Neuberger, 

3548: %``Exactly massless quarks on the lattice,''

3549: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {417} (1998) 141

3550: [hep-lat/9707022];

3551: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9707022;%%

3552: %

3553: %``More about exactly massless quarks on the lattice,''

3554: {\em ibid.}\ {427} (1998) 353

3555: [hep-lat/9801031];

3556: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9801031;%%

3557: %

3558: %``Vector like gauge theories with almost massless fermions on the  lattice,''

3559: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {57} (1998) 5417

3560: [hep-lat/9710089].

3561: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9710089;%%

3562: 

3563: \bibitem{ha}

3564: P.~Hasenfratz,

3565: %``Lattice QCD without tuning, mixing and current renormalization,''

3566: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {525} (1998) 401

3567: [hep-lat/9802007].

3568: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9802007;%%

3569: 

3570: \bibitem{lu}

3571: M.~L\"uscher, 

3572: %``Exact chiral symmetry on the lattice and the Ginsparg-Wilson relation,''

3573: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {428} (1998) 342

3574: [hep-lat/9802011].

3575: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9802011;%%

3576: 

3577: \bibitem{kn}

3578: Y.~Kikukawa and T.~Noguchi,

3579: %``Low energy effective action of domain-wall fermion

3580: % and the  Ginsparg-Wilson relation,''

3581: hep-lat/9902022.

3582: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9902022;%%

3583: 

3584: 

3585: \bibitem{prl}

3586: L.~Giusti, P.~Hern\'andez, M.~Laine, C.~Pena, 

3587: J.~Wennekers and H.~Wittig,

3588: %``On $K\to\pi\pi$ amplitudes with a light charm quark''

3589: hep-ph/0607220.

3590: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0607220;%%

3591: 

3592: \bibitem{largemc}

3593: P.~Hern\'andez and M.~Laine,

3594:   %``Charm mass dependence of the weak Hamiltonian in chiral perturbation

3595:   %theory,''

3596:   JHEP {09} (2004) 018

3597:   [hep-ph/0407086].

3598:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0407086;%%

3599: 

3600: \bibitem{gp}

3601: M.~Golterman and E.~Pallante,

3602: %``Effects of quenching and partial quenching on penguin matrix elements,''

3603: JHEP {10} (2001) 037

3604: [hep-lat/0108010]; 

3605: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0108010;%%

3606: %

3607: %``On the effects of (partial) quenching

3608: % on penguin contributions to K-> pi pi'', 

3609: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {69} (2004) 074503

3610: [hep-lat/0212008];

3611: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0212008;%%

3612: %

3613:  %``Quenched penguins and the Delta I=1/2 rule,''

3614:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {74} (2006) 014509

3615:   [hep-lat/0602025].

3616:   %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0602025;%%

3617: 

3618: \bibitem{pq}

3619: O.~B\"ar, G.~Rupak and N.~Shoresh,

3620: %``Simulations with different lattice Dirac operators for valence and sea

3621: %quarks,''

3622: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {67} (2003) 114505

3623: [hep-lat/0210050];

3624: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0210050;%%

3625: %

3626: M.~Golterman, T.~Izubuchi and Y.~Shamir,

3627: %``The role of the double pole in lattice QCD with mixed actions,''

3628: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {71} (2005) 114508

3629: [hep-lat/0504013].

3630: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0504013;%%

3631: 

3632: \bibitem{fp}

3633:   A.~Hasenfratz, P.~Hasenfratz and F.~Niedermayer,

3634:   %``Simulating full QCD with the fixed point action,''

3635:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {72} (2005) 114508

3636:   [hep-lat/0506024];

3637:   %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0506024;%%

3638: %

3639:   T.~DeGrand and S.~Schaefer,

3640:   %``Simulating an arbitrary number of flavors of dynamical overlap fermions,''

3641:   JHEP {07} (2006) 020

3642:   [hep-lat/0604015];

3643:   %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0604015;%%

3644: %

3645:   H.~Fukaya, S.~Hashimoto, K.I.~Ishikawa, 

3646:   T.~Kaneko, H.~Matsufuru, T.~Onogi and N.~Yamada

3647:   [JLQCD Collaboration],

3648:   %``Lattice gauge action suppressing near-zero modes of H_W,''

3649:   hep-lat/0607020.

3650:   %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0607020;%%

3651: 

3652: \bibitem{twm}

3653: C.~Pena, S.~Sint and A.~Vladikas,

3654: %``Twisted mass QCD and lattice approaches to the Delta(I) = 1/2 rule,''

3655: JHEP {09} (2004) 069

3656: [hep-lat/0405028];

3657: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0405028;%%

3658: %

3659: R.~Frezzotti and G.C.~Rossi,

3660: %``Chirally improving Wilson fermions. II: Four-quark operators,''

3661: JHEP {10} (2004) 070

3662: [hep-lat/0407002];

3663: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0407002;%%

3664: %

3665:   P.~Boucaud, V.~Gim\'enez, C.-J.D.~Lin, V.~Lubicz, 

3666:   G.~Martinelli, M.~Papinutto and C.T.~Sachrajda,

3667:   % ``An Exploratory Lattice Study Of Delta(I) = 3/2 K $\to$ Pi Pi Decays At

3668:   %Next-To-Leading Order In The Chiral Expansion,''

3669:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {721} (2005) 175

3670:   [hep-lat/0412029];

3671:   %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0412029;%%

3672: %

3673:   P.~Dimopoulos, J.~Heitger, F.~Palombi, C.~Pena, S.~Sint and A.~Vladikas

3674:                   [ALPHA Collaboration],

3675:   %``A precise determination of B(K) in quenched QCD,''

3676:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {749} (2006) 69

3677:   [hep-ph/0601002].

3678:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0601002;%%

3679: 

3680: 

3681: 

3682: 

3683: \bibitem{bbg}

3684: W.A.~Bardeen, A.J.~Buras and J.-M.~G\'erard,

3685: %``The Delta I = 1/2 Rule In The Large N Limit,''

3686: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {180} (1986) 133;

3687: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B180,133;%%

3688: %

3689: %``The K $\to$ Pi Pi Decays In The Large N Limit: Quark Evolution,''

3690: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {293} (1987) 787;

3691: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B293,787;%%

3692: %

3693: %``A Consistent Analysis Of The Delta I = 1/2 Rule For K Decays,''

3694: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {192} (1987) 138.

3695: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B192,138;%%

3696: 

3697: \bibitem{hpr}

3698: T.~Hambye, S.~Peris and E.~de Rafael,

3699: %``Delta(I) = 1/2 and epsilon'/epsilon in large-N(c) QCD,''

3700: JHEP {05} (2003) 027

3701: [hep-ph/0305104];

3702: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0305104;%%

3703: %

3704:   J.M.~G\'erard, C.~Smith and S.~Trine,

3705:   % ``Radiative kaon decays and the penguin contribution

3706:   % to the Delta(I) = 1/2 rule,''

3707:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {730} (2005) 1

3708:   [hep-ph/0508189];

3709:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0508189;%%

3710: %

3711:  J.~Bijnens, E.~Gamiz and J.~Prades,

3712:   %``The B(K) kaon parameter in the chiral limit,''

3713:   JHEP {03} (2006) 048

3714:   [hep-ph/0601197].

3715:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0601197;%%

3716:  

3717: 

3718: \bibitem{hg} 

3719: H.~Georgi,  

3720: {\em Weak Interactions and Modern Particle Theory}

3721: (Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park, California, 1984);

3722: %%CITATION = NONE;%%

3723: %

3724: J.F.~Donoghue, E.~Golowich and B.R.~Holstein,

3725: {\em Dynamics of the Standard Model}

3726: (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992).

3727: %%CITATION = NONE;%%

3728: 

3729: \bibitem{revs}

3730: A.~Pich,

3731: %``Chiral perturbation theory,''

3732: Rept.\ Prog.\ Phys.\  {58} (1995) 563

3733: [hep-ph/9502366];

3734: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9502366;%%

3735: %

3736: G.~Ecker,

3737: %``Low-energy QCD,''

3738: Prog.\ Part.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\  {36} (1996) 71

3739: [hep-ph/9511412].

3740: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9511412;%%

3741: 

3742: %% Wilson coefficients

3743: \bibitem{wilson}

3744: %

3745: G.~Altarelli, G.~Curci, G.~Martinelli and S.~Petrarca,

3746: %``QCD Nonleading Corrections To Weak Decays As

3747: % An Application Of Regularization By Dimensional Reduction,''

3748: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {187} (1981) 461;

3749: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B187,461;%%

3750: %

3751: A.J.~Buras and P.H.~Weisz,

3752: %``QCD Nonleading Corrections To Weak Decays

3753: % In Dimensional Regularization And 'T Hooft-Veltman Schemes,''

3754: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {333} (1990) 66.

3755: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B333,66;%%

3756: 

3757: \bibitem{itep}

3758: A.I.~Vainshtein, V.I.~Zakharov and M.A.~Shifman,

3759: %``A Possible Mechanism For The Delta T = 1/2 Rule In Nonleptonic Decays Of

3760: %Strange Particles,''

3761: JETP Lett.\  {22} (1975) 55;

3762: %[Pisma Zh.\ Eksp.\ Teor.\ Fiz.\  {22} (1975) 123];

3763: %%CITATION = JTPLA,22,55;%%

3764: %

3765: M.A.~Shifman, A.I.~Vainshtein and V.I.~Zakharov,

3766: %``Light Quarks And The Origin Of The Delta I = 1/2 Rule In The Nonleptonic

3767: %Decays Of Strange Particles,''

3768: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {120} (1977) 316.

3769: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B120,316;%%

3770: 

3771: \bibitem{giwi}

3772: F.J.~Gilman and M.B.~Wise,

3773: %``Effective Hamiltonian For Delta S = 1 Weak Nonleptonic Decays In The Six

3774: %Quark Model,''

3775: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {20} (1979) 2392.

3776: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D20,2392;%%

3777: 

3778: \bibitem{gl2} 

3779: J.~Gasser and H.~Leutwyler,

3780: %``Chiral Perturbation Theory To One Loop,''

3781: Annals Phys.\  {158} (1984) 142;

3782: %%CITATION = APNYA,158,142;%%

3783: %

3784: %``Chiral Perturbation Theory: Expansions In The Mass Of The Strange Quark,''

3785: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {250} (1985) 465.

3786: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B250,465;%%

3787: 

3788: \bibitem{cronin}

3789: J.A.~Cronin,

3790: %``Phenomenological Model Of Strong And

3791: % Weak Interactions In Chiral U(3) X U(3),''

3792: Phys.\ Rev.\  {161} (1967) 1483.

3793: %%CITATION = PHRVA,161,1483;%%

3794: 

3795: \bibitem{delta}

3796: H.~Leutwyler,

3797: %``Energy Levels Of Light Quarks Confined To A Box,''

3798: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {189} (1987) 197.

3799: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B189,197;%%

3800: 

3801: \bibitem{ds}

3802: P.H.~Damgaard and K.~Splittorff,

3803: %``Partially quenched chiral perturbation theory and the replica method,''

3804: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {62} (2000) 054509

3805: [hep-lat/0003017].

3806: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0003017;%%

3807: 

3808: \bibitem{hal}

3809: P.~Hasenfratz and H.~Leutwyler,

3810: %``Goldstone Boson Related Finite Size Effects In Field Theory

3811: % And Critical Phenomena With O(N) Symmetry,''

3812: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {343} (1990) 241.

3813: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B343,241;%%

3814: 

3815: \bibitem{ls}

3816: H.~Leutwyler and A.~Smilga,

3817: %``Spectrum of Dirac operator and role of winding number in QCD,''

3818: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {46} (1992) 5607.

3819: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D46,5607;%%

3820: 

3821: \bibitem{h}

3822: F.C.~Hansen,

3823: %``Finite Size Effects In Spontaneously Broken SU(N) X SU(N) Theories,''

3824: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {345} (1990) 685;

3825: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B345,685;%%

3826: %

3827: F.C.~Hansen and H.~Leutwyler,

3828: %``Charge Correlations And Topological Susceptibility In QCD,''

3829: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {350} (1991) 201.

3830: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B350,201;%%

3831: 

3832: 

3833: \bibitem{brower}

3834: R.~Brower, P.~Rossi and C.I.~Tan,

3835: %``The External Field Problem For QCD,''

3836: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {190} (1981) 699.

3837: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B190,699;%%

3838: 

3839: \bibitem{sm}

3840: M.F.L.~Golterman and K.C.~Leung,

3841: %``Chiral perturbation theory for K+ $\to$ pi+ pi0 decay in the continuum  and

3842: %on the lattice,''

3843: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {56} (1997) 2950

3844: [hep-lat/9702015];

3845: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9702015;%%

3846: %

3847: C.-J.D.~Lin, G.~Martinelli, E.~Pallante, C.T.~Sachrajda and G.~Villadoro,

3848: %``K+ $\to$ pi+ pi0 decays on finite volumes and at next-to-leading order in

3849: %the chiral expansion,''

3850: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {650} (2003) 301

3851: [hep-lat/0208007].

3852: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0208007;%%

3853: 

3854: \bibitem{bv}

3855: D.~Be\'cirevic and G.~Villadoro,

3856: %``Impact of the finite volume effects on the chiral behavior of f(K) and

3857: %B(K),''

3858: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {69} (2004) 054010

3859: [hep-lat/0311028].

3860: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0311028;%%

3861: 

3862: \bibitem{cdh}

3863: G.~Colangelo and C.~Haefeli,

3864: %``An asymptotic formula for the pion decay constant in a large volume,''

3865: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {590} (2004) 258

3866: [hep-lat/0403025];

3867: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0403025;%%

3868: %

3869: G.~Colangelo, S.~D\"urr and C.~Haefeli,

3870: %``Finite volume effects for meson masses and decay constants,''

3871: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {721} (2005) 136

3872: [hep-lat/0503014].

3873: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0503014;%%

3874: 

3875: \bibitem{laso}

3876: J.~Laiho and A.~Soni,

3877: %``On lattice extraction of K $\to$ pi pi amplitudes to O(p**4) in chiral

3878: %perturbation theory,''

3879: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {65} (2002)  114020

3880: [hep-ph/0203106];

3881: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0203106;%%

3882: %

3883: %``Lattice extraction of K $\to$ pi pi amplitudes to NLO in partially

3884: %quenched and in full chiral perturbation theory,''

3885: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {71} (2005)  014021

3886: [hep-lat/0306035].

3887: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0306035;%%

3888: 

3889: \bibitem{BG}

3890: C.W.~Bernard and M.F.L.~Golterman,

3891: %``Chiral perturbation theory for the quenched approximation of QCD,''

3892: Phys.\ Rev.\ D { 46} (1992) 853

3893: [hep-lat/9204007].

3894: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9204007;%%

3895: 

3896: \bibitem{S}

3897: S.R.~Sharpe,

3898: %``Quenched chiral logarithms,''

3899: Phys.\ Rev.\ D { 46} (1992) 3146

3900: [hep-lat/9205020].

3901: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9205020;%%

3902: 

3903: \bibitem{dotv}

3904: J.C.~Osborn, D.~Toublan and J.J.~Verbaarschot,

3905: %``From chiral random matrix theory to chiral perturbation theory,''

3906: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B { 540} (1999) 317

3907: [hep-th/9806110];

3908: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9806110;%%

3909: % 

3910: P.H.~Damgaard, J.C.~Osborn, D.~Toublan and J.J.~Verbaarschot,

3911: %``The microscopic spectral density of the {QCD} Dirac operator,''

3912: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B { 547} (1999) 305

3913: [hep-th/9811212].

3914: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9811212;%%

3915: 

3916: \bibitem{cp}

3917:   G.~Colangelo and E.~Pallante,

3918:   %``Quenched chiral perturbation theory to one loop,''

3919:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {520} (1998) 433

3920:   [hep-lat/9708005].

3921:   %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9708005;%%

3922: 

3923: \bibitem{hg2}

3924: H.~Georgi, 

3925: {\em Lie Algebras in Particle Physics} 

3926: %% {}From Isospin to Unified Theories}

3927: (Benjamin/Cummings, Reading, Massachusetts, 1982).

3928: %Front.\ Phys.\  {\bf 54} (1982) 1.

3929: %%CITATION = FRPHA,54,1;%%

3930: 

3931: \bibitem{p4}

3932: J.~Kambor, J.~Missimer and D.~Wyler,

3933: %``The Chiral Loop Expansion Of The Nonleptonic Weak Interactions Of Mesons,''

3934: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {346} (1990) 17.

3935: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B346,17;%%

3936: 

3937: \bibitem{p4reduced}

3938:   G.~Esposito-Far\`ese,

3939:   %``Right Invariant Metrics On SU(3) And One Loop Divergences In Chiral

3940:   %Perturbation Theory,''

3941:   Z.\ Phys.\ C {50} (1991) 255;

3942:   %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C50,255;%%

3943: %

3944:   G.~Ecker, J.~Kambor and D.~Wyler,

3945:   %``Resonances in the weak chiral Lagrangian,''

3946:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {394} (1993) 101.

3947:   %%CITATION = NUPHA,B394,101;%%

3948: 

3949: 

3950: \end{thebibliography}

3951: 

3952: \end{document} 

3953: 

3954: 

3955: