1: % latex gns
2: % latex gns
3: % dvips gns
4: % xdvi gns
5: % gs -dNOPAUSE -sDEVICE=ljet4 -sOutputFile=gns.hp4 gns.ps
6:
7: \documentclass{appolb}
8: \usepackage{epsfig}
9: \unitlength1.0mm
10:
11: \title{RESUMMATION OF DOUBLE LOGARITHMIC TERMS $LN^2(1/x)$ IN THE POLARIZED
12: NONSINGLET STRUCTURE FUNCTION $g_1$ AT SMALL $x$ VIA GLAP-LIKE APPROACH.}
13:
14: \author{Dorota Kotlorz $^1$, Andrzej Kotlorz $^2$
15: \address{$^1$Department of Physics Ozimska 75, $^2$Department of
16: Mathematics Luboszycka 3, Technical University of Opole,
17: 45-370 Opole, Poland, e-mail $^1$: {\tt dstrozik@po.opole.pl}}}
18:
19: \begin{document}
20: \pagestyle{plain}
21: \eqsec
22: \maketitle
23:
24: \begin{abstract}
25: An alternative equation, resumming of the $\ln^2 1/x$ terms for the
26: polarized nonsinglet structure function $g_1^{NS}$ at small $x$ is
27: presented. Construction of the GLAP-like formula for the auxiliary function,
28: corresponding to the $g_1^{NS}$ at rescaled $Q^2$ variable is shown.
29: Predictions of this approach for the $g_1^{NS}$ function at small $x$ in
30: a case of a flat as well as a dynamical input are given. The role of the
31: fixed coupling constant and the running one is also discussed.
32: \end{abstract}
33:
34: \PACS{12.38 Bx}
35:
36: \section{Introduction}
37:
38: Our knowledge about the structure functions of the nucleon is still
39: incomplete because of lack of understanding how these structure functions
40: behave in the small Bjorken $x$ region. Neither present experimental data
41: nor the theoretical QCD description give a full and unique picture of an
42: exact shape of the quark and gluon distributions in the nucleon.
43: Perturbative QCD analysis, based on the GLAP evolution equations \cite{b1}
44: is in a good agreement with experimental measurements. This agreement concerns
45: unpolarized \cite{b2}, \cite{b3} and polarized \cite{b4} structure functions of
46: the nucleon within NLO approximation in the large and moderatory small Bjorken
47: $x$ region. Unfortunately, practically lack of experimental data in the small
48: $x$ region ($x<10^{-3}$) makes the satisfactory determination of the Bjorken
49: and Ellis-Jaffe sum rules \cite{b5} impossible. This causes e.g.
50: that the question "how is the spin of the nucleon made of partons?" remains
51: still open. From recent papers \cite{b6}, \cite{b7} we know, that the small $x$
52: behaviour of both unpolarized and polarized structure functions is
53: controlled by the double logarithmic terms $\alpha_s\ln^21/x$. However, this
54: singular behaviour of the structure functions at low $x$ is better visible
55: in the spin dependent case. For the unpolarized, nonsinglet structure
56: function $F_2^{NS}(x,Q^2)=F_2^p(x,Q^2)-F_2^n(x,Q^2)$ the QCD singular
57: behaviour at small $x$ is overridden by the leading Regge contribution
58: \cite{b8}. Next in the unpolarized, singlet case, the structure function at
59: low $x$ is driven by BFKL pomeron \cite{b9} because gluons play the dominant
60: role. Thus the growth of structure functions of the nucleon, governed by
61: leading double logarithmic terms $\alpha_s^n\ln^{2n}(x)$ becomes best
62: visible for spin dependent functions. Therefore the polarized structure
63: functions of the nucleon may be a sensitive test of the perturbative QCD
64: analyses in the small $x$ region. The double logarithmic $\ln^2x$ effects go
65: beyond the standard LO or even NLO QCD evolution of parton distributions and
66: correspond to the ladder diagrams with quark and gluon exchanges along the
67: ladder. One has also to take into account nonladder diagrams but in the
68: nonsinglet case they may be neglected as nonleading \cite{b6}, \cite{b7}. Thus
69: the nonsinglet, polarized structure function
70: $g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)=g_1^{p}(x,Q^2)-g_1^{n}(x,Q^2)$ is a convenient function
71: both for QCD analyses (because of its simplicity) and future experimental
72: tests at HERA \cite{b10} concerning the determination of the Bjorken sum rule.
73: Theoretical predictions for $g_1^{NS}$ at small $x$, incorporating the
74: double $\ln^2x$ effects have been presented in \cite{b7}, \cite{b11},
75: \cite{b12}, \cite{b13}. In these papers the perturbative QCD analysis is based
76: on the unintegrated spin dependent quark distributions $f(x,k^2)$. It means
77: that the sum of double logarithmic $\ln^2x$ terms is represented by a
78: appropriate integral equation for the unintegrated structure function
79: $f(x,k^2)$.
80:
81: In this paper we present an alternative approach of the double $\ln^2x$
82: resummation for $g_1^{NS}$ at small $x$. Our formalism is based on the usual
83: quark distribution functions (and not on $f(x,k^2)$ function) and moreover
84: generates the $\ln^2x$ terms via GLAP-like evolution equation for the
85: rescaled quark transverse momentum squared $\mu^2=k^2/x$. The purpose of
86: this paper is to compare these two methods of the double $\ln^2x$
87: resummation for the polarized nonsinglet structure function $g_1^{NS}$ at
88: low $x$. In the next section we briefly recall the origin of the double
89: logarithmic $\ln^2x$ effects at low $x$, incorporating the evolution
90: equation based on the unintegrated function $f(x,k^2)$. In section 3 we
91: introduce alternative formalism, in which after rescaling the kinematic
92: variable $\mu^2=k^2/x$ we get GLAP-like evolution equation in $\mu^2$. This
93: equation for the polarized quark distributions (and hence for the $g_1^{NS}$
94: function) generates the double logarithmic $\ln^2x$ terms. Section 4
95: contains numerical results for the spin dependent nonsinglet structure
96: function $g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)$ in our approach. We compare the both mentioned
97: above methods and also compare their predictions for $g_1^{NS}$ with SMC
98: 1997 small $x$ data. Finally in section 5 we summarize our results.
99:
100: \section{Double logarithmic $\ln^2x$ resummation for the nonsinglet,
101: polarized structure function $g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)$ using the unintegrated
102: function $f(x,k^2)$.}
103:
104: It has been lately noticed \cite{b6}, \cite{b7} that the spin dependent
105: structure function $g_1$ in the small $x$ region is dominated by $\ln^2(1/x)$
106: terms. This singular behaviour, implied by QCD is for the polarized structure
107: functions the leading one. Comparatively, for unpolarized, nonsinglet structure
108: functions of the nucleon, the QCD evolution behaviour at small $x$ is
109: screened by the leading Regge contribution. The Regge theory \cite{b14}, which
110: concerns the Regge limit: $x\rightarrow 0$ predicts the following behaviour
111: of parton distributions at small $x$ and $Q^2\le 1~{\rm GeV}^2$:
112: \begin{eqnarray}\label{r2.1}
113: x\Sigma&\sim& const~(Pomeron)\nonumber\\
114: q_{NS}&\sim& x^{-0.5}~(Reggeon~A_2:\rho -\omega);\nonumber\\
115: \Delta\Sigma,\Delta q_{NS}&\sim& x^0\div x^{0.5}~(Reggeon~A_1)
116: \end{eqnarray}
117: where $\Sigma$, $q_{NS}$, $\Delta\Sigma$, $\Delta q_{NS}$ denote
118: respectively singlet unpolarized, nonsinglet unpolarized, singlet polarized,
119: nonsinglet polarized quark distributions. The shape of all spin dependent
120: distributions $\Delta\Sigma$, $\Delta q_{NS}$ is mostly governed by QCD
121: evolutions with dominating $\ln^2x$ terms at small $x$. These $\ln^2x$
122: contributions correspond to the ladder diagram with quark and gluon
123: exchanges along the ladder - {\it cf} Fig.1.
124: %***************************Fig.1************************************
125: \begin{figure}[ht]
126: \begin{center}
127: \includegraphics[width=80mm]{fig1.eps}
128: \caption{A ladder diagram generating double logarithmic $\ln^2(1/x)$
129: terms in the nonsinglet spin structure function $g_1$.}
130: \end{center}
131: \end{figure}
132: In contrast to the singlet polarized function, for the nonsinglet one the
133: contribution of nonladder diagrams is negligible. Thus examing the
134: polarized, nonsinglet structure function $g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)$, we should
135: consider only mentioned above ladder diagrams. The nonsinglet part of the
136: spin dependent structure function has a form:
137: \begin{equation}\label{r2.2}
138: g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)=g_1^p(x,Q^2)-g_1^n(x,Q^2)
139: \end{equation}
140: where $g_1^p$ and $g_1^n$ are spin dependent structure functions of
141: proton and neutron respectively. Let us remind the meaning of $g_1$.
142: In the Bjorken limit
143: \begin{equation}\label{r2.3}
144: g_1(x)=\frac12 \sum\limits_{i=u,d,s,..} e_i^2 \Delta q_i(x)
145: \end{equation}
146: \begin{equation}\label{r2.4}
147: \Delta q_i(x)=q_{i+}(x)-q_{i-}(x)
148: \end{equation}
149: where $e_i$ is a charge of the i-flavour quark, $q_{i+}(x)$
150: $(q_{i-}(x))$ is the density distribution function of the
151: i-quark with the spin parallel (antiparallel) to the parent nucleon.
152: Function $g_1(x,Q^2)$ is connected with the helicity of the nucleon
153: ({\it i.e.} spin projection on the momentum direction). Thus the integral
154: \begin{equation}\label{r2.5}
155: \langle\Delta q_i\rangle =\int\limits_0^1 \Delta q_i(x) dx
156: \end{equation}
157: is simply a part of the nucleon helicity, carried by a quark of
158: i-flavour (i=u,d,s,..). Polarized distribution functions of quarks are defined as:
159: \begin{equation}\label{r2.6}
160: \Delta q=\Delta q_{val}+\Delta q_{sea}
161: \end{equation}
162: Finally:
163: \begin{equation}\label{r2.7}
164: g_1^{NS}=\frac16(\Delta u_{val}-\Delta d_{val})=\frac16(\Delta u-\Delta d)
165: \end{equation}
166: Solutions of the equation for the unintegrated polarized nonsinglet structure
167: function $f^{NS}(x,Q^2)$, which gives the $\ln^2x$ resummation are presented
168: in \cite{b7}, \cite{b11}, \cite{b12}, \cite{b13}. $\ln^2x$ as the only
169: contribution at small $x$ behaviour of $g_1^{NS}$ is examined in \cite{b7}
170: while in \cite{b11}, \cite{b12}, \cite{b13} the unified description of
171: $g_1^{NS}$ incorporating both Gribov-Lipatov-Altarelli-Parisi (GLAP) evolution
172: and $\ln^2x$ effects is presented. These all approaches are based on the
173: unintegrated distribution function $f(x,Q^2)$, which is related to the
174: $g_1(x,Q^2)$ via
175: \begin{equation}\label{r2.8}
176: g_1(x,Q^2)=g_1^{(0)}(x)+\int\limits_{k_0^2}^{Q^2(1/x-1)}
177: \frac{dk^2}{k^2}f\left(x(1+\frac{k^2}{Q^2}),k^2\right)
178: \end{equation}
179: where
180: \begin{equation}\label{r2.9}
181: g_1^{(0)}(x)=\int\limits_0^{k_0^2}\frac{dk^2}{k^2}f(x,k^2)
182: \end{equation}
183: Let us recall from \cite{b11} that the resummation of the double logarithmic
184: terms $\ln^2x$ in the limit of a very small $x$ ($x\rightarrow 0$) is given
185: in the case of the polarized, nonsinglet structure function by:
186: \begin{equation}\label{r2.10}
187: f_{NS}(x,k^2)=f_{NS}^{(0)}(x,k^2)+\frac{\alpha_s(k^2)}{2\pi}
188: \int\limits_x^1\frac{dz}{z}\int\limits_{k_0^2}^{k^2/z}
189: \frac{dk'^2}{k'^2}\Delta P_{qq}^{(0)}(z)f_{NS}(\frac{x}{z},k'^2)
190: \end{equation}
191: The source of the double logarithmic terms $\ln^2x$ in $g_1(x,Q^2)$ is
192: the double integration in the formula for function $f(x,k^2)$:
193: \begin{equation}\label{r2.11}
194: f(x,k^2)\sim\frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi}\int\limits_x^1\frac{dz}{z}
195: \int\limits_{k_0^2}^{k^2/z}\frac{dk'^2}{k'^2}
196: \end{equation}
197: where the upper limit in the integral over the transverse momentum
198: $k'^2$ is $z$-dependent ($=k^2/z$). Thus, double logarithmic terms
199: come from the integration over the longitudinal momentum fraction $z$
200: together with the integration over $k'^2$ with $z$-dependent upper
201: limit:
202: \begin{equation}\label{r2.12}
203: f(x,k^2)\sim\ln^2(1/x)=\ln^2x
204: \end{equation}
205: The analytical solution of (\ref{r2.10}) in the case of the fixed
206: coupling constant $\alpha_s$ \cite{b12} shows the singular small $x$
207: behaviour of the polarized, nonsinglet structure function $g_1$ {\it i.e.}:
208: \begin{equation}\label{r2.13}
209: g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)\sim x^{-\lambda_{NS}};
210: \end{equation}
211: \begin{equation}\label{r2.14}
212: \lambda_{NS}=2\sqrt{\frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi}\Delta P_{qq}^{(0)}(x)};
213: \end{equation}
214: where $\Delta P_{qq}^{(0)}(x)$ is the splitting function and in the limit
215: $x\rightarrow 0$ is equal to $4/3$. Hence for the fixed $\alpha_s$=0.18,
216: $\lambda_{NS}=0.39$ and as it has been already mentioned above, the singular
217: small $x$ shape of $g_1^{NS}$, implied by QCD dominates the REGGE behaviour:
218: \begin{equation}\label{r2.15}
219: REGGE:~~~~~g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)\sim x^{-\alpha_{NS}(0)}~~~\alpha_{NS}(0)\le 0
220: \end{equation}
221: \begin{equation}\label{r2.16}
222: QCD:~~~~~g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)\sim x^{-\lambda_{NS}}~~~\lambda_{NS}\sim 0.5
223: \end{equation}
224: In the case of the running coupling constant, numerical results for
225: $g_1^{NS}$, based on the Regge flat input parametrization
226: $g_1^{NS}(x,Q_0^2=1~{\rm GeV}^2)$ are given in \cite{b7}, \cite{b11}, \cite{b12}.
227: In \cite{b13} the same method is used for dynamical input parametrization,
228: where in contrast to Regge flat parametrizations, $g_1^{NS}(x,Q_0^2=1~{\rm GeV}^2)$
229: is singular for small $x$. The generation of the double logarithmic $\ln^2x$
230: terms is also possible via GLAP-like evolution equation for $g_1$ function
231: with the rescaled transverse momentum squared. This alternative method is
232: presented in the next section.
233:
234: \section{GLAP-like evolution equation for $g_1^{NS}$, generating $\ln^2x$
235: terms at low $x$.}
236:
237: We study the origin of the double logarithmic $\ln^2x$ terms in
238: $g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)$ using a simple rescaling of $Q^2$ variable:
239: $Q^2\rightarrow\mu^2=Q^2/x$, what leads to the GLAP-like equation for
240: $g_1^{NS}$ with evolution in a new scale $\mu^2$. We focus on the small $x$
241: region so our initial equation for further investigations is that which
242: contains only dominating $\ln^2x$ part. First let us consider the case with
243: a fixed coupling $\bar{\alpha_s}={\rm const}$, where
244: \begin{equation}\label{r3.1}
245: \bar{\alpha_s}=\frac{2\alpha_s}{3\pi}
246: \end{equation}
247: Thus the starting equation is:
248: \begin{equation}\label{r3.2}
249: f_{NS}(x,k^2)=f_{NS}^{(0)}(x,k^2)+\bar{\alpha_s}
250: \int\limits_x^1\frac{dz}{z}\int\limits_{k_0^2}^{k^2/z}
251: \frac{dk'^2}{k'^2}f_{NS}(\frac{x}{z},k'^2)
252: \end{equation}
253: After a simple substitution:
254: \begin{equation}\label{r3.3}
255: \mu^2=\frac{k^2}{x};~~~~x'=\frac{x}{z};~~~~\mu'^2=\frac{k'^2}{x'}
256: \end{equation}
257: the equation (\ref{r3.2}) takes a form:
258: \begin{equation}\label{r3.4}
259: f_{NS}(x,x\mu^2)=f_{NS}^{(0)}(x,x\mu^2)+\bar{\alpha_s}
260: \int\limits_x^1\frac{dz}{z}\int\limits_{k_0^2\frac{z}{x}}^{\mu^2}
261: \frac{d\mu'^2}{\mu'^2}f_{NS}(\frac{x}{z},\frac{x}{z}\mu'^2)
262: \end{equation}
263: After introduction an auxiliary function $\varphi(x,\mu^2)$:
264: \begin{equation}\label{r3.5}
265: \varphi(x,\mu^2)\equiv f_{NS}(x,x\mu^2)
266: \end{equation}
267: and applying Heaviside's $\Theta$ function:
268: \begin{equation}\label{r3.6}
269: \Theta(t)=\cases{1 & for~~ $t>0$ \cr 0 & for~~ $t\leq 0$ \cr}
270: \end{equation}
271: we get:
272: \begin{equation}\label{r3.7}
273: \varphi(x,\mu^2)=\varphi^{(0)}(x,\mu^2)+\bar{\alpha_s}
274: \int\limits_x^1\frac{dz}{z}\int\limits_{k_0^2}^{\mu^2}\frac{d\mu'^2}{\mu'^2}
275: \Theta(\mu'^2-k_0^2\frac{z}{x})\varphi(\frac{x}{z},\mu'^2)
276: \end{equation}
277: or
278: \begin{equation}\label{r3.8}
279: \varphi_{\Theta}(x,\mu^2)=\varphi_{\Theta}^{(0)}(x,\mu^2)+\bar{\alpha_s}
280: \int\limits_x^1\frac{dz}{z}\int\limits_{k_0^2}^{\mu^2}\frac{d\mu'^2}{\mu'^2}
281: \varphi_{\Theta}(\frac{x}{z},\mu'^2)
282: \end{equation}
283: where
284: \begin{equation}\label{r3.9}
285: \varphi_{\Theta}(x,\mu^2)\equiv
286: \Theta(\mu^2-\frac{k_0^2}{x})\varphi(x,\mu^2)
287: \end{equation}
288: The equation (\ref{r3.8}) has an exact form of the GLAP $Q^2$ evolution
289: formula for the unintegrated distribution function $f(x,Q^2)$. The
290: mentioned GLAP evolution equation for polarized nonsinglet quark
291: distributions $\Delta p$ (and hence for $g_1^{NS}$ function too) in the
292: small $x$ region is given by:
293: \begin{equation}\label{r3.10}
294: \frac{\partial\Delta p(x,Q^2)}{\partial\ln Q^2}=\bar{\alpha_s}
295: \int\limits_x^1\frac{dz}{z}\Delta p(\frac{x}{z},Q^2)
296: \end{equation}
297: Relation between $\Delta p(x,Q^2)$ and the unintegrated distribution
298: $f_p(x,Q^2)$ is as usual:
299: \begin{equation}\label{r3.11}
300: f_p(x,Q^2)=\frac{\partial\Delta p(x,Q^2)}{\partial\ln Q^2}
301: \end{equation}
302: what implies:
303: \begin{equation}\label{r3.12}
304: \Delta p(x,Q^2)=\Delta p_0(x)+
305: \int\limits_{Q_0^2}^{Q^2}\frac{dQ'^2}{Q'^2}f_p(x,Q'^2)
306: \end{equation}
307: where $\Delta p_0(x)$ is a nonperturbative part of $\Delta p$:
308: \begin{equation}\label{r3.13}
309: \Delta p_0(x)=\int\limits_{0}^{Q_0^2}\frac{dQ'^2}{Q'^2}f_p(x,Q'^2)
310: \end{equation}
311: and $Q_0^2=1~{\rm GeV}^2$ is the low scale of perturbative QCD. Hence the
312: evolution equation (\ref{r3.10}) written for the unintegrated distribution
313: function $f_p(x,Q^2)$ takes a form:
314: \begin{equation}\label{r3.14}
315: f_p(x,Q^2)=f_p^{(0)}(x,Q^2)+\bar{\alpha_s}
316: \int\limits_x^1\frac{dz}{z}\int\limits_{Q_0^2}^{Q^2}\frac{dQ'^2}{Q'^2}
317: f_p(\frac{x}{z},Q'^2)
318: \end{equation}
319: and
320: \begin{equation}\label{r3.15}
321: f_p^{(0)}(x,Q^2)=\bar{\alpha_s}\int\limits_x^1\frac{dz}{z}
322: \Delta p_0(\frac{x}{z})
323: \end{equation}
324: One can see from (\ref{r3.8}) and (\ref{r3.14}) that the double $\ln^2x$
325: resummation equation written for $\varphi_{\Theta}(x,\mu^2)$ function is a
326: GLAP $\mu^2$ evolution equation. The auxiliary function
327: $\varphi_{\Theta}(x,\mu^2)$ may be, similarly as in (\ref{r3.11}),
328: represented by an integrated function $u(x,\mu^2)$:
329: \begin{equation}\label{r3.16}
330: \varphi_{\Theta}(x,\mu^2)=
331: \frac{\partial u(x,\mu^2)}{\partial\ln\mu^2}
332: \end{equation}
333: and conversely:
334: \begin{equation}\label{r3.17}
335: u(x,\mu^2)=u_0(x)+\int\limits_{k_0^2}^{\mu^2}\frac{d\mu'^2}{\mu'^2}
336: \varphi_{\Theta}(x,\mu'^2)
337: \end{equation}
338: Thus the equation (\ref{r3.8}), generating double $\ln^2x$ effects can be
339: rewritten as:
340: \begin{equation}\label{r3.18}
341: \frac{\partial u(x,\mu^2)}{\partial\ln\mu^2}=\bar{\alpha_s}
342: \int\limits_x^1\frac{dz}{z} u(\frac{x}{z},\mu^2)
343: \end{equation}
344: Relation between the nonsinglet polarized structure function
345: $g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)$ and the auxiliary function $u(x,\mu^2)$ is as follows:
346: \begin{equation}\label{r3.19}
347: g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2=x\mu^2)=u(x,\mu^2)
348: \end{equation}
349: In this way the problem of producing the $\ln^2x$ terms for
350: $g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)$ in the small $x$ region via equation (\ref{r2.10}) has
351: been reduced to the GLAP evolution to the momentum scale $\mu^2=Q^2/x$. It
352: is not astonishing: appearing of the new evolution scale $Q^2/x$ has its
353: origin in the upper limit $k^2/z$ of the integration over the transverse
354: momentum in (\ref{r2.10}). This logarithmic integration over the transverse
355: momentum up to the $z-$dependent limit $k^2/z$ together with the logarithmic
356: integration over the longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ give double
357: logarithmic $ln^2x$ terms. The mechanism of appearing of the $ln^2x$ effects
358: in $g_1^{NS}$ from GLAP-like equations (\ref{r3.18})-(\ref{r3.19}) is well
359: visible just in a case of the fixed coupling constant
360: $\bar{\alpha_s}={\rm const}$. Then the eq.(\ref{r3.18}) can be solved
361: analytically. Using standard Mellin's method one can get the solution of
362: eq.(\ref{r3.18}) in the form (see Appendix A):
363: \begin{equation}\label{r3.20}
364: u(x,\mu^2)\sim\sum\limits_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{(\bar{\alpha_s}\ln\frac{1}{x}
365: ln\frac{\mu^2}{k_0^2})^k}{k!k!}
366: \end{equation}
367: and hence:
368: \begin{equation}\label{r3.21}
369: g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)=u(x,\frac{Q^2}{x})\sim\sum\limits_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac
370: {[\bar{\alpha_s}\ln\frac{1}{x}(\ln\frac{1}{x}+\ln\frac{Q^2}{k_0^2})]^k}{k!k!}
371: \end{equation}
372: what gives approximately the leading small $x$ behaviour:
373: \begin{equation}\label{r3.22}
374: g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)\sim x^{-2\sqrt{\bar{\alpha_s}}}
375: \end{equation}
376: Taking into account parton interactions through the introduction of the
377: running coupling constant one can get from (\ref{r3.18}) an equation which
378: incorporates the running couplings effects
379: $\bar{\alpha_s}\rightarrow\bar{\alpha_s}(Q^2)$:
380: \begin{equation}\label{r3.23}
381: \frac{\partial u(x,\mu^2)}{\partial\ln\mu^2}=\bar{\alpha_s}(x\mu^2)
382: \int\limits_x^1\frac{dz}{z} u(\frac{x}{z},\mu^2)
383: \end{equation}
384: However more justified theoretically seems the introduction of the running
385: coupling by the substitution $\bar{\alpha_s}\rightarrow\bar{\alpha_s}(Q^2/z)$,
386: what gives:
387: \begin{equation}\label{r3.24}
388: \frac{\partial u(x,\mu^2)}{\partial\ln\mu^2}=\int\limits_x^1\frac{dz}{z}
389: \bar{\alpha_s}(\frac{x\mu^2}{z})u(\frac{x}{z},\mu^2)
390: \end{equation}
391: Our numerical analysis presented in the next section contains the both above
392: "running coupling" prescriptions and the constant $\bar{\alpha_s}$ case as
393: well.
394:
395: \section{Numerical predictions for $g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)$ based on the GLAP-like
396: equation, resumming the $\ln^2x$ terms.}
397:
398: We solve numerically equations (\ref{r3.18}), (\ref{r3.23}) and (\ref{r3.24})
399: which are GLAP $\mu^2$ evolution equations for the auxiliary function
400: $u(x,\mu^2)$. The relation between $u(x,\mu^2)$ and the physical polarized
401: nonsinglet structure function $g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)$ (\ref{r2.7}) is given by
402: (\ref{r3.19}). In this way one can get the small $x$ behaviour of $g_1^{NS}$
403: governed by the double logarithmic $\ln^2x$ effects. Our predictions we
404: compare with those, received in the unintegrated $f(x,Q^2)$ approach
405: (\ref{r2.10}) and described in \cite{b7}. Solving the GLAP equations (\ref{r3.18}),
406: (\ref{r3.23}) and (\ref{r3.24}) one should have an input parametrization of the
407: $u$ function at the low scale $k_0^2$. Because $u(x,Q^2)$ has a meaning of the
408: physical $g_1^{NS}$ function for the rescaled $Q^2$ variable as it is shown
409: in (\ref{r3.19}), one can also write:
410: \begin{equation}\label{r4.1}
411: u(x,k_0^2)=g_1^{NS}(x,xk_0^2)
412: \end{equation}
413: The low scale $k_0^2$ introduced in (\ref{r3.7}) is equal to the usually
414: used QCD cut-off parameter $k_0^2=1~{\rm GeV}^2$. The really dependence on $z/x$
415: of the lower limit in the integration (\ref{r3.4}):
416: \begin{equation}\label{r4.2}
417: Q_0^2=\frac{z}{x}k_0^2
418: \end{equation}
419: became "shifted" to the definition of $\varphi_{\Theta}(x,\mu^2)$ via
420: (\ref{r3.9}). It means that for running coupling cases one should take into
421: account in the evolution equations (\ref{r3.23}) and (\ref{r3.24}) the
422: cut-off factor $\Theta(\mu^2-k_0^2/x)$. Otherwise, the running variable
423: $x\mu^2$ in the coupling $\alpha_s$ becomes less than the low scale of QCD
424: evolution $k_0^2=1~{\rm GeV}^2$ what is definitely incorrect. There is no such a
425: constraint in the fixed coupling constant. Taking into account that for
426: perturbative QCD analysis the low cut-off parameter $k_0^2=1~{\rm GeV}^2$ we put
427: this value for the input scale of the $u$ function too. This implies that
428: for small $x$ the input parametrizations $u(x,k_0^2)$ corresponds to the
429: $g_1^{NS}$ at the very low scale $xk_0^2$. We assume, that below the
430: $k_0^2=1~{\rm GeV}^2$ the behaviour of the quark distributions is the same as at
431: $k_0^2$. Therefore we apply the standard parametrizations of the valence
432: quarks (and hence of $g_1^{NS}$) for the auxiliary function $u$:
433: \begin{equation}\label{r4.3}
434: u(x,k_0^2)=g_1^{NS}(x,k_0^2);~~~~~k_0^2=1~{\rm GeV}^2
435: \end{equation}
436: There are two basic kinds of input parametrizations of $g_1^{NS}(x,k_0^2)$:
437: the Regge one, which is flat at small $x$ and the singular one, which
438: behaves like $x^{-a} (a\sim 0.3)$ at small $x$. In our numerical
439: calculations we use two different input parametrizations: the Regge one,
440: which is given by
441: \begin{equation}\label{r4.4}
442: REGGE:~~~u(x,k_0^2)=\frac23g_A(1-x)^3=0.838(1-x)^3
443: \end{equation}
444: where $g_A=1.257$ is the axial vector coupling and the dynamical input GRSV
445: \cite{b15}:
446: \enlargethispage{0.2cm}
447: \begin{eqnarray}\label{r4.5}
448: GRSV&:&u(x,k_0^2)=0.327x^{-0.267}\nonumber\\
449: &\times&(1-0.583x^{0.175}+1.723x+3.436x^{3/2})(1-x)^{3.486}\nonumber\\
450: &+&0.027x^{-0.624}(1+1.195x^{0.529}+6.164x+2.726x^{3/2})(1-x)^{4.215}
451: \nonumber\\
452: \end{eqnarray}
453: For details about these parametrizations see also \cite{b13}. In all
454: calculations $\Lambda_{QCD} =232~{\rm MeV}$. Our numerical results are presented in
455: Figs.2-5. In Fig.2 the predictions for $g_1^{NS}$ at small $x$, based on the
456: eq. (\ref{r3.18}) for Regge and GRSV inputs respectively are shown. We use
457: two different value of fixed coupling: $\alpha_s=0.18$ and $\alpha_s=0.12$. The
458: input parametrizations are also plotted. In Fig.3 we confront the fixed
459: coupling results of eq.(\ref{r3.18}) for $\alpha_s=0.18$ with those, based
460: on eqs. (\ref{r3.23})-(\ref{r3.24}), taking into account running coupling
461: effects. Two groups of lines correspond to different inputs: Regge and GRSV.
462: The effective slope $\lambda_{NS}$ determined from (\ref{r2.16}) as:
463: \begin{equation}\label{r4.6}
464: \lambda_{NS}\sim\frac{\partial\ln g_1^{NS}}{\partial\ln\frac{1}{x}}
465: \end{equation}
466: for both input parametrizations and all mentioned above $\alpha_s$ cases:
467: $\alpha_s={\rm const}=0.18$, $\alpha_s(Q^2)$, $\alpha_s(Q^2/z)$ is presented in
468: Fig.4. The comparison of small $x$ predictions for $g_1^{NS}$ based on the
469: GLAP-like $\ln^2x$ approach with those based on the unintegrated function
470: $f(x,Q^2)$ and the eq.(\ref{r2.10}) is shown in Fig.5. Both parametrizations
471: are used. The running coupling effects $\alpha_s(Q^2)$ are included. We also
472: plot few small $x$ recent SMC 1997 data \cite{b4}. In all plots $Q^2=10~{\rm GeV}^2$.
473:
474: %\pagebreak
475:
476: %********************FIGURY 2-5****************************************
477: \begin{figure}[hp]
478: \begin{center}
479: \includegraphics[width=90mm]{fig2.eps}
480: \caption{The nonsinglet spin structure function of the proton
481: $g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)$ received from (\ref{r3.18}). Solid lines correspond to
482: Regge input, dashed lines - to GRSV input. In each group of lines (Regge or
483: GRSV) the lowest (for small $x$) line is the input at $k_0^2=1~{\rm GeV}^2$,
484: the middle one concerns the fixed coupling $\alpha_s=0.12$ and the upper one
485: is for $\alpha_s=0.18$. Evolution scale $Q^2=10~{\rm GeV}^2$.}
486: \end{center}
487: \end{figure}
488: \clearpage
489:
490: \begin{figure}[ht]
491: \begin{center}
492: \includegraphics[width=85mm]{fig3.eps}
493: \caption{The nonsinglet spin structure function of the proton
494: $g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2=10~{\rm GeV}^2)$. Solid lines correspond to Regge input,
495: dashed lines - to GRSV input. In each group of plots (Regge or GRSV) the
496: lowest line concerns the running coupling $\alpha_s(Q^2/z)$ case
497: (\ref{r3.24}), the middle one corresponds to $\alpha_s(Q^2)$ case
498: (\ref{r3.23}) while the upper plot is for fixed coupling
499: $\alpha_s={\rm const}=0.18$ (\ref{r3.18}).}
500: \end{center}
501: \end{figure}
502: %\clearpage
503:
504: \begin{figure}[hb]
505: \begin{center}
506: \includegraphics[width=85mm]{fig4.eps}
507: \caption{Slope $\lambda_{NS}$ defined in (\ref{r4.6}) for different inputs
508: (Regge - solid, GRSV - dashed) and different $\alpha_s$. For each group of
509: lines (Regge or GRSV) the upper plot corresponds to fixed $\alpha_s=0.18$,
510: in the middle lies line for the running $\alpha_s(Q^2)$, and the lowest plot
511: is for the "more running" case: $\alpha_s(Q^2/z)$. $Q^2=10~{\rm GeV}^2$.}
512: \end{center}
513: \end{figure}
514: \clearpage
515:
516: \begin{figure}[ht]
517: \begin{center}
518: \includegraphics[width=90mm]{fig5.eps}
519: \caption{Comparison of $g_1^{NS}$ predictions based on GLAP-like eq.
520: (\ref{r3.23}) - solid with that based on $f(x,Q^2)$ approach (\ref{r2.10}) -
521: dashed at $Q^2=10~{\rm GeV}^2$. Triangles show the recent small $x$ SMC
522: data 1997 \cite{b4}.}
523: \end{center}
524: \end{figure}
525: %\clearpage
526:
527: %\pagebreak
528:
529: From Figs.2-5 one can read the following conclusions:
530:
531: 1.The $\ln^2x$ resummation gives steep growth of the structure function in
532: the small $x$ region. It is well known effect \cite{b6}, \cite{b7} that for
533: $x\leq 10^{-2}$ the $\ln^2x$ terms dominate over the LO (or even NLO)
534: evolution.
535:
536: 2.The growth of the structure function in the small $x$ region is of course
537: much steeper for the dynamical parametrization than for the flat one.
538: Singular inputs at $k_0^2$ intensify the QCD evolution effects while in the
539: case of flat parametrizations the singular small $x$ behaviour of structure
540: functions is completely and only generated by QCD evolution.
541:
542: 3.The effective slope $\lambda_{NS}$ (\ref{r4.6}) is contained between
543: 0.14 for the nonsingular input and the running coupling $\alpha_s(Q^2/z)$
544: and 0.6 for the singular input and the fixed coupling $\alpha_s=0.18$. This
545: shows apart from the above conclusion in the point 2 that for the running
546: coupling constant $\alpha_s(Q^2)$, $\lambda_{NS}$ is smaller than for the
547: fixed one. Besides, introduction of the $\alpha_s=\alpha_s(Q^2/z)$ causes
548: the slope $\lambda_{NS}$ still smaller:
549: \begin{equation}\label{r4.7}
550: \lambda_{NS}(\alpha_s=const=0.18)>\lambda_{NS}(\alpha_s=\alpha_s(Q^2))>
551: \lambda_{NS}(\alpha_s=\alpha_s(Q^2/z))
552: \end{equation}
553: For comparison, the Regge theory predicts in the small $x$ region
554: $\alpha_{A_1}(0)\leq 0$ and $g_1^{NS}$ behaves as $x^{-\alpha_{A_1}(0)}\sim
555: {\rm const}$.
556:
557: 4.Comparing our results with those, based on the unintegrated function
558: $f(x,Q^2)$ and the equation (\ref{r2.10}) one can see agreement of these two
559: approaches. It is not astonishing because the both methods concern in
560: fact the same problem: resummation of the double logarithmic terms $ln^2x$
561: for the $g_1^{NS}$ function in the small $x$ region. Our approach based on
562: the GLAP-like equation (\ref{r3.18}) enables to keep the constance upper
563: scale of evolution $\mu^2$ instead of $Q^2/z$ like in (\ref{r2.10}). In this
564: way this approach become similar to the standard GLAP $Q^2$ evolution and we
565: can adopt the methods used in it to get new - $\ln^2x$ effects.
566:
567: 5.SMC recent data \cite{b4} for very small $x$ (3 points shown in Fig.5)
568: confirm the growth of the polarized nonsinglet structure function $g_1^{NS}$
569: in the small $x$ region. It seems that the singular inputs enable the better
570: agreement of theoretical predictions with experimental data.
571:
572: \section{Summary and conclusions}
573:
574: In this paper we have presented the double logarithmic $\ln^2x$ terms
575: resummation for the spin dependent nonsinglet structure function $g_1^{NS}$.
576: In our approach we have solved the GLAP-like equation for the auxiliary function
577: $u(x,\mu^2)$ which corresponds to the physical function
578: $g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2=x\mu^2)$ at the rescaled $\mu^2$ variable. Our calculations
579: have been performed for the simple nonsingular Regge parametrization and for
580: the dynamical one as well. Apart from the fixed coupling constant case, the
581: running coupling effects have been taken into account. Besides the effective
582: slope, controlling the small $x$ behaviour of $g_1^{NS}$ has been estimated.
583: Its value has been found lies between 0.14 for the nonsingular input and the
584: running coupling $\alpha_s(Q^2/z)$ and 0.6 for the singular input and the fixed
585: coupling $\alpha_s=0.18$. We found that the $\ln^2x$ effects govern the
586: small $x$ increase of the structure function $g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)$. This growth
587: is larger in the case of the fixed coupling constant than for the running
588: one and of course for the singular input $g_1^{NS}(x,k_0^2)$ than for the
589: flat (e.g.Regge) one. The equation we have considered is not applicable for
590: the large $x$ ($x>10^{-2}$) region. Our formalism is however correct in the
591: very interesting small $x$ region. Presented results confirm that the
592: $\ln^2x$ effects are very significant for $x\leq 10^{-2}$. The spin
593: dependent structure functions of the nucleon are a sensitive test of the
594: perturbative QCD analyses in the small $x$ region. However practically lack
595: of experimental data in the very low $x$ region ($x\leq 10^{-3}$) causes the
596: satisfactory verification of the theoretical QCD predictions in this region
597: impossible. Also the predictions incorporating the double logarithmic
598: $\ln^2x$ effects in $g_1^{NS}$ are still awaiting for their crucial probe.
599:
600: \section*{Acknowledgements}
601:
602: We are grateful to Jan Kwieci\'nski for help in preparing this paper.
603:
604: \appendix
605: \section{Analytical solution of the GLAP-like evolution equation for
606: $g_1^{NS}$ generating double logarithmic $\ln^2x$ effects at small $x$.}
607:
608: We solve the equation (\ref{r3.18}) with the fixed coupling
609: $\bar{\alpha_s}=0.038$ using the standard Mellin method. The Mellin
610: transformation defines the $n-$ moment of $u(x,\mu^2)$ function by:
611: \begin{equation}\label{rA.1}
612: u^n(\mu^2)\equiv\int\limits_0^1 x^{n-1} u(x,\mu^2) dx
613: \end{equation}
614: Thus in moment space the evolution equation for small $x$ (\ref{r3.18}) is
615: simply given by:
616: \begin{equation}\label{rA.2}
617: \frac{du^n(\mu^2)}{d\ln\mu^2}= \frac{\bar{\alpha_s}}{n} u^n(\mu^2)
618: \end{equation}
619: The solution of (\ref{rA.2}) is straightforward:
620: \begin{equation}\label{rA.3}
621: u^n(\mu^2)=u_0^n \Bigl[\frac{\mu^2}{k_0^2}\Bigr]^{\frac{\bar{\alpha_s}}{n}}
622: \end{equation}
623: where $u_0^n$ is the $n-$ moment of the input $u(x,k_0^2)$ function:
624: \begin{equation}\label{rA.4}
625: u_0^n=\int\limits_0^1 x^{n-1} u(x,k_0^2) dx
626: \end{equation}
627: For the nonsingular input parametrization
628: \begin{equation}\label{rA.5}
629: u(x,k_0^2)\sim const
630: \end{equation}
631: $u_0^n$ has a form:
632: \begin{equation}\label{rA.6}
633: u_0^n = \frac{const}{n}
634: \end{equation}
635: Employing the inverse Mellin transformation:
636: \begin{equation}\label{rA.7}
637: u(x,\mu^2)=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\int\limits_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty} x^{-n}
638: u^n(\mu^2) dn
639: \end{equation}
640: which gives
641: \begin{equation}\label{rA.8}
642: u(x,\mu^2)=\frac{const}{2\pi i}\int\limits_{c-i\infty}^{c+i\infty}
643: \frac{x^{-n}}{n} \Bigl[\frac{\mu^2}{k_0^2}\Bigr]^{\frac{\bar{\alpha_s}}{n}} dn
644: \end{equation}
645: One can get the solution $u(x,\mu^2)$ of the form:
646: \begin{equation}\label{rA.9}
647: u(x,\mu^2)= const \sum\limits_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{(\bar{\alpha_s}\ln\frac{1}{x}
648: ln\frac{\mu^2}{k_0^2})^k}{k!k!}
649: \end{equation}
650: Going back to the function $g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2=x\mu^2)$, one can find from
651: (\ref{rA.9}) through (\ref{r3.19}) the following expression:
652: \begin{equation}\label{rA.10}
653: g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2)\equiv u(x,\frac{Q^2}{x})= const~{\it J_0}(2\sqrt
654: {\bar{\alpha_s}\ln\frac{1}{x}ln\frac{Q^2}{xk_0^2}})
655: \end{equation}
656: where ${\it J_0}(y)$ denotes modified Bessel function:
657: \begin{equation}\label{rA.11}
658: {\it J_0}(y) = \sum\limits_{k=0}^{\infty}\frac{(\frac{y}{2})^{2k}}{k!k!}
659: \end{equation}
660: This $\ln^2x$ terms resummation (\ref{rA.10}) gives in the small $x$ region
661: the effective behaviour of $g_1^{NS}$:
662: \begin{equation}\label{rA.12}
663: g_1^{NS}(x,Q^2) = x^{-\lambda_{NS}}
664: \end{equation}
665: where
666: \begin{equation}\label{rA.13}
667: \lambda_{NS}\sim 2\sqrt{\bar{\alpha_s}}
668: \end{equation}
669: For the fixed $\bar{\alpha_s}=0.038$ the effective slope $\lambda_{NS}$ is
670: equal to 0.39.
671:
672: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
673:
674: \bibitem{b1} V.N.Gribov, L.N.Lipatov, {\it Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.}
675: {\bf 15}, 438 and 675 (1972); Yu.L.Dokshitzer, {\it Sov. Phys. JETP}
676: {\bf 46}, 641 (1977); G.Altarelli, G.Parisi, {\it Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B126}, 298
677: (1977).
678: \bibitem{b2} H1 collaboration: A. de Roeck {\it et al.,} 1995, {\it Proc.
679: Workshop on DIS and QCD (Paris, France, 24-28 April 1995}.
680: \bibitem{b3} ZEUS collaboration: B. Foster 1995, {\it Proc.
681: Workshop on DIS and QCD (Paris, France, 24-28 April 1995} ({\it Z.Phys.}
682: {\bf C69}, 607 1996).
683: \bibitem{b4} SMC, D.Adams {\it et al.,} {\it Phys. Lett.} {\bf B329},
684: 399 (1994); {\bf B336}, 125 (1994); {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D56},
685: 5330 (1997); B.Adeva {\it et al.,} {\it Phys. Lett.} {\bf B412}, 414 (1997);
686: SMC, B.Adeva {\it et al.,} {\it Phys. Lett.} {\bf B302}, 533 (1993);
687: D.Adams et al., {\it Phys. Lett.} {\bf B357}, 248 (1995); {\bf B396},
688: 338 (1997).
689: \bibitem{b5} J.D.Bjorken, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf 148}, 1467 (1966);
690: {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D1}, 1376 (1970); J.Ellis, R.L.Jaffe,
691: {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D9}, 1444 (1974); {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D10},
692: 1669 (1974).
693: \bibitem{b6} J.Bartels, B.I.Ermolaev, M.G.Ryskin, {\it Z. Phys.}
694: {\bf C70}, 273 (1996); J.Bartels, B.I.Ermolaev, M.G.Ryskin,
695: {\it Z. Phys.} {\bf C72}, 627 (1996).
696: \bibitem{b7} J.Kwieci\'nski, {\it Acta Phys. Pol.} {\bf B27}, 893 (1996).
697: \bibitem{b8} A.Donnachie, P.V.Landshoff, {\it Phys. Lett.} {\bf 296B}, 257
698: (1992).
699: \bibitem{b9} E.A.Kuraev, L.N.Lipatov, V.Fadin, {\it Zh. Eksp. Teor.
700: Fiz.} {\bf 72}, 373 (1977) {\it Sov. Phys. JETP} {\bf 45}, 199 (1977));
701: Ya.Ya.Balitzkij, L.N.Lipatov, {\it Yad. Fiz.} {\bf 28}, 1597 (1978)
702: {\it Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.} {\bf 28}, 822 (1978)); L.N.Lipatov, in
703: {\it Perturbative QCD}, edited by A.H.Mueller, World Scientific,
704: Singapore 1989, p.441; J.B.Bronzan, R.L.Sugar, {\it Phys. Rev.}
705: {\bf D17}, 585 (1978); T.Jaroszewicz, {\it Acta Phys. Pol.} {\bf B11},
706: 965 (1980).
707: \bibitem{b10} A.De Roeck {\it et al., Eur. Phys. J.} {\bf C6}, 121 (1999);
708: A.De Roeck, {\it Acta Phys. Pol.} {\bf B29}, 1343 (1998).
709: \bibitem{b11} B.Bade\l{}ek, J.Kwieci\'nski, {\it Phys. Lett.}
710: {\bf B418}, 229 (1998).
711: \bibitem{b12} J.Kwieci\'nski, {\it Acta Phys. Pol.} {\bf B29}, 1201
712: (1998).
713: \bibitem{b13} D.Kotlorz, {\it Acta Phys. Pol.} {\bf B31}, 1721 (2000).
714: \bibitem{b14} P.D.B.Collins, {\it An Introduction to Regge Theory and
715: High Energy Physics}, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1977.
716: \bibitem{b15} M.Gl\"uck, E.Reya, M.Stratmann, W.Vogelsang,
717: {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D53}, 4775 (1996); M.Gl\"uck, E.Reya, A.Vogt,
718: {\it Z. Phys.} {\bf C67}, 433 (1995).
719:
720: \end{thebibliography}
721:
722: \end{document}
723: