1: \documentclass[aps,twocolumn,showpacs]{revtex4}

2: \usepackage{psfig}

3: 

4: \def\ep{\epsilon}

5: \def\order#1{{\cal O}\left(#1\right)}

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

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

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

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

10: \def\eq#1{(\ref{#1})}

11: 

12: 

13: \begin{document}

14: 

15: \title{

16: %

17: %preprint number:

18: %

19: \[ \vspace{-2cm} \]

20: \noindent\hfill\hbox{\rm  } \vskip 1pt

21: \noindent\hfill\hbox{\rm Alberta Thy 15-01} \vskip 1pt

22: \noindent\hfill\hbox{\rm SLAC-PUB-9013} \vskip 1pt

23: \noindent\hfill\hbox{\rm hep-ph/0110028} \vskip 10pt

24: %

25: Threshold expansion for heavy-light systems \\

26: and flavor off-diagonal current-current correlators

27: }

28: 

29: \author{Andrzej Czarnecki}

30: \affiliation{

31: Department of Physics, University of Alberta\\

32: Edmonton, AB\ \  T6G 2J1, Canada\\

33: E-mail:  czar@phys.ualberta.ca}

34: 

35: \author{Kirill Melnikov}

36: \affiliation{

37: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center\\

38: Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94309\\

39: E-mail: melnikov@slac.stanford.edu}

40: 

41: 

42: 

43: \begin{abstract}

44: An expansion scheme is developed for Feynman diagrams describing the

45: production of one massive and one massless particle near the

46: threshold.  As an example application, we compute the correlators of

47: heavy-light quark currents, $\bar b \gamma_\mu u$, $\bar b \gamma_5

48: u$, through ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$.

49: \end{abstract}

50: 

51: \pacs{12.38.Bx,13.20.He,14.40.Nd}

52: 

53: \maketitle

54: 

55: 

56: Processes mediated by $W$-bosons often involve production or

57: annihilation of two fermions with very different masses.  Examples of

58: present interest include the $B$-meson decay constant $f_B$ and the single

59: top-quark production.  The basic ingredient in the analysis of such

60: processes are correlators of heavy-light currents.   For example,

61: $f_B$ can be determined by relating such correlators to  

62: the measured spectrum of $B$ mesons, with help of the QCD sum rules

63: \cite{Khodjamirian:2001bj}.

64: 

65: 

66: In another important application one can use such correlators,

67: computed perturbatively in the continuum, as an input for lattice

68: calculations, in particular for the matching of the lattice and

69: continuum currents.  The perturbative production cross section

70: computed close to the threshold (related to the imaginary part of the

71: current correlators) is a convenient physical observable to 

72: perform the matching \cite{lepage}.

73: 

74: 

75: \begin{figure}[htb]

76: \hspace*{-38mm}

77: \begin{minipage}{16.cm}

78: \begin{tabular}{ccc}

79: \psfig{figure=correlat1.ps,width=27mm}

80: &\hspace*{0mm}

81: \psfig{figure=correlat2.ps,width=27mm}

82: &\hspace*{0mm}

83: \psfig{figure=correlat3.ps,width=27mm}

84: \end{tabular}

85: \end{minipage}

86: %\vspace*{10mm}

87: \caption{Examples of diagrams contributing to the current correlators

88: at $\order{\alpha_s^2}$.}

89: \label{fig:cor}

90: \end{figure}

91: 

92: Even if the light fermion mass is neglected, a correlator still

93: involves two mass scales (see Fig.~\ref{fig:cor}), 

94: the invariant mass of the pair $\sqrt{q^2}$

95: and the mass of the heavy fermion $m$, which hampers the evaluation of

96: the higher-order quantum effects.  It is helpful to develop a

97: computational scheme which allows to expand the Feynman diagrams

98: around the threshold, $q^2=m^2$.  In the past, various expansion

99: schemes were constructed for other kinematical situations

100: \cite{Chetyrkin91,Tkachev:1994gz,Smirnov:1995tg,%

101: Smirnov:1997gx,CzSmir,Beneke:1998zp,Czarnecki:2000fv}.

102: They facilitated many studies of

103: higher-order radiative corrections to a variety of processes of

104: experimental importance, such as the $Z$-boson decays, heavy quark

105: production and decays, electromagnetic properties of particles, etc.

106: In the present paper we present an expansion scheme for the case

107: depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:cor}, for $q^2\simeq m^2$, and apply it to compute

108: $\order{\alpha_s^2}$ corrections to the imaginary part of the

109: heavy-light correlators of (axial)vector as well as (pseudo)scalar

110: currents.  The real part can be obtained, if need arises, along the same

111: lines.

112: 

113: 

114: Recently, numerical values of those corrections were estimated

115: \cite{Chetyrkin:2000mq,Chetyrkin:2001je} using Pad\'e approximants to

116: describe the 

117: correlator as a function of $q^2$.  The approximants were obtained

118: from several terms in the expansion of the correlator for large ($q^2

119: \gg m^2$) and small ($q^2 \ll m^2$) values of the total energy.

120: This approach is accurate for $q^2$ sufficiently far from the

121: production threshold $q^2=m^2$. However, for practical applications

122: related to  heavy quark physics, one needs the

123: correlators quite close to the threshold where, for kinematic reasons,

124: their imaginary part vanishes as $(q^2-m^2)^2$.  Because of this

125: suppression, $\order{\alpha_s^2}$ terms obtained from the Pad\'e

126: approximants are rather uncertain near the

127: threshold, with an error estimated to be about

128: $30\%$ \cite{Chetyrkin:2001je}.

129: 

130: The approach presented in this Letter enables an analytic calculation

131: of those terms.  We introduce the parameter $\delta = 1-m^2/q^2$ which

132: is small in the kinematic region close to threshold.  We will show

133: that an expansion in $\delta$ can be constructed applying the

134: reasoning familiar from HQET directly to the Feynman diagrams.  The

135: only new ingredient necessary for a calculation of the ${\cal

136: O}(\alpha_s^2)$ corrections to the correlators are certain three-loop

137: HQET diagrams whose calculation we will describe.

138: 

139: We consider the following correlator,

140: \ba

141: %&&

142: \lefteqn{ \left (-q^2g_{\mu\nu}+q_\mu q_\nu \right ) 

143: \Pi^{v}(q^2) +q_\mu q_\nu \Pi_L^{v}(q^2) }

144: \nonumber \\

145: &&= i \int {\rm d}xe^{iqx} \langle 0| Tj_\mu^v(x)j_\nu^v(0)|0\rangle ,

146: \ea

147: with $j_\mu^v = \bar \psi_1 \gamma_\mu \psi_2$ and $\psi_{1,2}$

148: denoting the Dirac spinors for the massless and massive quarks,

149: respectively. This correlator is an analytic function of $q^2$ with a

150: cut starting at $q^2=m^2$, corresponding to $\delta=0$.  Since

151: $\delta$ is proportional to the phase space available for the

152: production of heavy and light quarks, for small $\delta$ the heavy

153: quark is non-relativistic and always close to its mass shell.  On the

154: contrary, the massless quark is always ultrarelativistic, but its

155: energy is small if $\delta$ is small.  The HQET is designed to study

156: exactly this kind of situation and the calculation of the relevant

157: Feynman diagrams can be simplified if one follows its pattern.

158: 

159: We have to consider two different scales of the momentum $k$

160: flowing along a given line in a Feynman diagram: hard $k \sim m$

161: or soft $k \sim m \delta$.  Consider the heavy quark propagator

162: $\sim 1/(k^2 + 2qk + q^2 \delta)$. If $k$ is hard,  the propagator

163: can be expanded in a Taylor series in $\delta$ yielding the on-shell

164: heavy quark propagator $ \sim 1/(k^2 + 2qk)$. On the other hand, if

165: $k$ is soft, the propagator can be expanded in $k^2$  resulting

166: in the static heavy quark propagator $\sim 1/(2qk + q^2

167: \delta)$, familiar from HQET.  

168: 

169: For each diagram, one has to consider all possible momentum routings

170: and find all contributing subgraphs. Among them, there are two which

171: can be easily described. First there is the situation when all lines

172: are soft so that all heavy quark propagators become static and the

173: diagram becomes what is usually referred to as a HQET matrix

174: element. In our case, these subgraphs require three-loop calculations

175: in HQET and we will explain below how we solve this problem.

176: 

177: The second type of subgraphs arises in the situation when all momenta

178: are hard.  In this case all heavy quark propagators are Taylor

179: expanded in $\delta$; the resulting Feynman diagrams are of the

180: on-shell three-loop propagator type, studied in

181: \cite{Laporta:1993pa,Melnikov:2000zc}, and their evaluation is

182: possible. However, since these contributions are polynomials in

183: $\delta$, they do not contribute to the imaginary part of the

184: correlator and we do not consider them here.

185: 

186: In between the two extreme cases discussed above, there are situations

187: where, in a given diagram, some of the lines are soft and some are

188: hard. Using the HQET language, these correspond to the HQET matrix

189: elements with insertions of higher dimensional operators of the HQET

190: Lagrangian or to the HQET matrix elements computed with leading order

191: operators (HQET currents) corrected for the higher order Wilson

192: coefficients. Since the Wilson coefficients are computed at the hard

193: scale, such contributions factorize into products of simple subgraphs

194: and can be easily computed.

195: 

196: Therefore, the main challenge are the three-loop HQET diagrams. There

197: are two ways to compute them and we have taken both to have a cross

198: check. Recently, the three-loop HQET diagrams have been analyzed in

199: \cite{Grozin:2000jv,Grozin:2001fw} and a computer algebra program has

200: been published, capable of computing all three-loop HQET propagator

201: type diagrams.  We have used that software to calculate the required

202: HQET matrix elements.  For the purpose of the cross check, we have

203: written (in FORM \cite{form3}), in a completely independent way, a

204: similar program solving the three-loop recurrence relations for HQET

205: propagator-type integrals, restricting ourselves to topologies needed

206: for the current calculation.

207: 

208: In both approaches, every Feynman diagram is expressed in terms of a

209: few master integrals.  The majority of them is known

210: \cite{Grozin:2000jv,Grozin:2001fw,Beneke:1994sw}. However, one 

211: of the master integrals has not been evaluated to sufficient accuracy

212: in the existing literature and we have to compute it. It turns

213: out that one can use a trick  to this end.  The Euclidean 

214: integral we need is ($p^2 = -1$, $d=4-2\epsilon$):

215: \ba

216: I &=& \int 

217: \frac{{\rm d}^d k_1 {\rm d}^d k_2 {\rm d}^d k_3 }{k_1^2 k_3^2 (k_1 -

218: k_2)^2 (k_3 - k_2)^2}

219: \nonumber \\

220: &&  \times  \frac{1}{ (2pk_1 + 1) (2 pk_2 + 1)  (2 p k_3 + 1)}.

221: \ea

222: To compute it, consider a similar integral,

223: \ba

224: I_1 &=& \int 

225: \frac{{\rm d}^d k_1 {\rm d}^d k_2 {\rm d}^d k_3 }{k_1^2 k_2^2 k_3^2

226: (k_1 - k_2)^2 (k_3 - k_2)^2} 

227: \nonumber \\

228: && \times  \frac{1}{ (2pk_1 + 1) (2 pk_2 + 1) (2 p k_3 + 1)},

229: \label{eq3}

230: \ea

231: related to $I$ by integration-by-parts \cite{che81} identities.  We 

232: perform  

233: a transformation $|k_i| \to 1/|k_i|$ for $i=1,2,3$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq3}).

234: The integral $I_1$ transforms to

235: \ba

236: I_1 &=& \int 

237: \frac{{\rm d}^d k_1 {\rm d}^d k_2 {\rm d}^d k_3 }{k_1^{2d-6}

238: k_2^{2d-8} k_3^{2d-6} (k_1 - k_2)^2 (k_3 - k_2)^2} 

239: \nonumber \\

240: && \times \frac{1}{ (2pk_1 + k_1^2) (2 pk_2 + k_2^2) (2 p k_3 + k_3^2)}.

241: \ea

242: In the next step we notice that $I_1$ is finite in four dimensions, 

243: so that the limit $d \to 4$ can be taken; after that

244: $I_1$ becomes equal to one of the on-shell three-loop master integrals

245: computed in \cite{Melnikov:2000zc}. We therefore find:

246: \be

247: I_1 = C(\ep) \left [ 2\pi^2 \zeta_3 - 5 \zeta_5 \right ] +{\cal O}(\ep),

248: \ee 

249: with $C(\ep) = [\pi^{2-\ep}\Gamma(1+\ep)]^3$.

250: We now use recurrence relations to obtain $I$ from $I_1$ and derive:

251: \ba

252: I &=& C(\ep) \left [ -\frac{\pi^2}{18\ep^2}

253:   + \frac{1}{\ep} \left (-\frac{4\pi^2}{9}+\frac{1}{3}\zeta_3 \right )

254: \right. \nonumber \\

255: && \left.  

256: + \left ( \frac{8}{3}\zeta_3- \frac{26\pi^2}{9}-\frac{17\pi^4}{540} \right )

257:  + \ep \left (-\frac{4\pi^2}{9}\zeta_3 

258: \right. \right.

259: \nonumber \\

260: && \left. \left.

261: + \frac{52}{3}\zeta_3

262:  -\frac{160\pi^2}{9}- \frac{34 \pi^4}{135}- \frac{83}{3}\zeta_5 \right )

263: +{\cal O}(\ep^2)

264: \right ].

265: \ea

266: With this integral at hand, all the three-loop HQET master integrals

267: are available to sufficiently high power in their expansion in $\ep$ and 

268: we can proceed with the computation of the correlators.

269: 

270: \begin{figure}[htb]

271: \hspace*{-38mm}

272: \begin{minipage}{16.cm}

273: \begin{picture}(100,0)

274: \put (23,-30) {$\Delta^v_{\rm A}$}

275: \put (150,-30) {$\Delta^v_{\rm NA}$}

276: \put (23,-120) {$\Delta^v_{\rm L}$}

277: \put (150,-120) {$\Delta^v_{\rm H}$}

278: \end{picture}

279: 

280: \begin{tabular}{cc}

281: \psfig{figure=pa.ps,width=40mm}

282: &\hspace*{4mm}

283: \psfig{figure=pna.ps,width=40mm}

284: \\[1mm]

285: \psfig{figure=pl.ps,width=40mm} 

286: &\hspace*{4mm}

287: \psfig{figure=ph.ps,width=40mm}

288: \\[1mm]

289: \end{tabular}

290: \end{minipage}

291: %\vspace*{10mm}

292: \caption{$N_c \delta^2 \Delta^v_{\rm A,NA,L,H}$

293: plotted as a function of $v = \delta/(2-\delta)$.

294: } 

295: \label{fig:vector}

296: \end{figure}

297: 

298: We introduce the dimensionless quantity

299: \be

300: R^{v}(q^2) \equiv{\Gamma(W^\star \to b\bar u) \over |V_{bu}|^2

301:  \Gamma(W^\star \to e\bar \nu)}

302:   = 12 \pi {\rm Im} \left [ \Pi^{v}(q^2+i\delta) \right ],

303: \ee

304: and expand it in a series in the strong coupling constant (we use the

305: $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme and denote $a \equiv  \alpha_s(M)/\pi$)

306: \be

307: R^{v} \simeq N_c \left ( R_0^v 

308: + C_F a R_1^v 

309: + C_F a^2 R_2^v  \right ),

310: \ee

311: We find (an exact formula for $R^{(1),v}\equiv N_c R_1^{v}$ can be found 

312: in \cite{Chetyrkin:2001je}, eq.~(9)):

313: \ba

314: R_0^v &=& \frac{\delta^2 (3 - \delta)}{2}

315: \nonumber \\

316: R_1^v &=&\frac{3\delta^2}{4} \left [ \left ( \frac{9}{2} - 3\ln \delta 

317: + \frac{2}{3} \pi^2 \right ) 

318: \right. \nonumber \\

319: && \left. + \delta \left (\frac{-139}{18} 

320: + \frac{11}{3} \ln \delta -\frac{2}{9} \pi^2 \right ) \right ]

321: + {\cal O}(\delta^4),

322: \nonumber \\

323:  R_2^v &=& \delta^2 \left ( 

324: C_F \Delta_A^v + C_A \Delta_{NA}^v + T_R N_L \Delta_L^v 

325: + T_R \Delta_H^v 

326: \right ). 

327: \ea

328: For the individual color structures we obtain:

329: \ba

330: \lefteqn{

331:  \Delta_A^v = 

332:  \frac{523}{64} - \frac{39}{8}\zeta_3 + \frac{7\pi^2}{4} \ln 2 

333:   + \frac{5\pi^2}{12} + \frac{\pi^4}{60}}

334: \nonumber \\

335: && 

336: - \left( \frac{5\pi^2}{4} + \frac{147}{32} \right )L_\delta

337:      + \frac{27}{16} L_\delta^2 

338: \nonumber \\

339: &&+ \delta \left [ 

340:  - \frac{10079}{576} + \frac{39}{8}\zeta_3 - \frac{19\pi^2}{12}\ln 2

341:      - \frac{575 \pi^2}{432} - \frac{\pi^4}{180}

342: \right. 

343: \nonumber \\

344: && \left.      

345: + \left ( \frac{53\pi^2}{36}

346:           + \frac{1339}{96} \right )L_\delta

347: - \frac{57}{16}L_\delta^2 \right ] 

348: + \delta^2 \left [ 

349: \frac{1819}{144}  

350: \right . \nonumber \\

351: && \left. 

352: - \frac{5\pi^2}{24}\ln 2 

353: + \frac{421 \pi^2}{1728}

354:   + \left ( \frac{\pi^2}{72} - \frac{395}{48} \right ) L_\delta 

355:     + \frac{17}{16} L_\delta^2 \right ],

356: \nonumber \\ 

357: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

358: \lefteqn{ \Delta_{NA}^v = 

359: \frac{1103}{64} - \frac{129}{16}\zeta_3 - \frac{7\pi^2}{8}\ln 2 + 

360:          \frac{427}{288}\pi^2 - \frac{\pi^4}{60} 

361: }

362: \nonumber \\

363: && 

364: - \left ( \frac{19\pi^2}{24} + \frac{423}{32} \right )L_\delta 

365: + \frac{33}{16} L_\delta^2  

366: \nonumber \\

367: &&

368: + \delta \left [ 

369: - \frac{42655}{1728}  

370:  + \frac{33}{16}\zeta_3 

371:  + \frac{19\pi^2}{24}\ln 2 - \frac{\pi^2}{9} + \frac{\pi^4}{180}

372: \right.

373: \nonumber \\

374: && \left.

375:  - \left (\frac{\pi^2}{24}

376:           - \frac{4685}{288} \right ) L_\delta 

377: - \frac{115}{48}L_\delta^2  \right ]

378: + \delta^2 \left [ 

379: \frac{7931}{3456} - \frac{\zeta_3}{16}

380: \right.

381: \nonumber \\

382: && \left. 

383:  + \frac{5}{48}\pi^2\ln 2 - \frac{115}{1152}\pi^2

384:  - \left ( \frac{\pi^2}{48} - \frac{305}{576} \right ) L_\delta 

385:  - \frac{17}{48}L_\delta^2  

386: \right ],

387: \nonumber \\ 

388: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

389: \lefteqn{ \Delta_{L}^v =

390:   - \frac{117}{16} + 3\zeta_3 - \frac{7\pi^2}{36} 

391: + \left ( \frac{\pi^2}{3} + \frac{39}{8} \right ) L_\delta 

392:  - \frac{3}{4} L_\delta^2

393: }

394: \nonumber \\

395: && +\delta

396: \left[ \frac{3671}{432}  - \zeta_3 - \frac{5\pi^2}{108} 

397: - \left (\frac{\pi^2}{9} + \frac{397}{72} \right )L_\delta

398:  + \frac{11}{12} L_\delta^2  

399: \right]

400: \nonumber \\

401: && +\delta^2 \left (  - \frac{721}{864} + \frac{1}{18}L_\delta 

402: + \frac{1}{12}L_\delta^2 \right ),

403: \nonumber \\

404: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

405: \lefteqn{ \Delta_{H}^v = 

406:     {133\over 32} - {5\pi^2 \over 12}

407:        + \delta  \left(  - {1997\over 864} + {\pi^2\over 4}\right)

408: }

409: \nonumber \\

410: && 

411:        + \delta^2  \left( {2473\over 10800} - {1\over 20}L_\delta 

412:  - {\pi^2\over72} \right).

413: \label{eq:v}

414: \ea

415: We denoted $L_{\delta} = \ln \delta$ and the zeta function

416: $\zeta_3\simeq 1.202$. We do not display higher order terms in

417: the  expansion in $\delta$, but they can be easily obtained as well.

418: 

419: For completeness, we also give the results for ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$ 

420: correction to the correlator of two scalar currents. Let us define

421: \ba

422: q^2\Pi^{s}(q^2)

423: = i \int {\rm d}xe^{iqx} \langle 0| Tj^s(x)j^s(0)|0\rangle,

424: \ea

425: where $j_s = Z_{\rm m} \bar \psi_1 \psi_2$ and, again, $\psi_{1,2}$ 

426: denote the Dirac spinors for the massless and massive quarks 

427: and $Z_{\rm m}$ is the on-shell  mass renormalization constant for 

428: the massive quark. We define

429: \ba

430: R^{s}(q^2) &=& 8 \pi {\rm Im} \left [ \Pi^{s}(q^2+i\delta) \right ],

431: \nonumber \\

432:  &\simeq & N_c \left ( R_0^s 

433: + C_F a R_1^s 

434: + C_F a^2 R_2^s  \right ).

435: \ea

436: We then find (for an exact formula for $R_1^{s}$ see

437: \cite{Chetyrkin:2001je}) 

438: \ba

439: R_0^s &=& \delta^2,

440: \nonumber \\

441: R_1^s &=&\delta^2 \left [ \left ( \frac{13}{4} - \frac{3}{2}L_\delta 

442: + \frac{1}{3} \pi^2 \right ) 

443: -3 \delta \right ]

444: + {\cal O}(\delta^4),

445: \nonumber \\

446:  R_2^s &=& \delta^2 \left ( 

447: C_F \Delta_A^s + C_A \Delta_{NA}^s + T_R N_L \Delta_L^s 

448:  + T_R \Delta_H^s 

449: \right ). 

450: \nonumber \\

451: \ea

452: For the individual color structures we obtain:

453: \ba

454: \lefteqn{\Delta_{A}^s = 

455:  {229 \over 32} 

456:  + {\pi^2 \over 2} \ln 2 + {3 \over 2} \pi^2

457:  + {\pi^4 \over 90}  - {9 \over 4} \zeta_3 }

458: \nonumber \\ 

459: &&

460:  - \left({5 \over 6} \pi^2 + {73 \over 16}\right)L_\delta

461:  + {9 \over 8} L_\delta^2

462: \nonumber \\ 

463: && 

464:  + \delta   \left[  - {493 \over 48}

465: - {115 \over 72} \pi^2  - {3 \over 2} \zeta_3  

466:   +\left( 4-{\pi^2\over 3} \right) L_\delta

467:  \right] 

468: \nonumber \\

469: &&

470:  + \delta^2   \left[  - {4325 \over 864}  - {\pi^2 \over 4} \ln 2 -

471: {671 \over 864} \pi^2+ {1 \over 2} \zeta_3

472:   \right.

473: \nonumber \\ &&

474: \left.\qquad

475: + \left({245\over 36} + {7 \over 36} \pi^2\right)L_\delta

476:           - {29 \over 24} L_\delta^2

477:  \right]

478: %

479: \nonumber \\

480: \lefteqn{\Delta_{NA}^s = 

481:          {4361 \over 288} - {\pi^2 \over 4} \ln 2 + {283 \over

482: 432} \pi^2 - {\pi^4 \over 90}  - {47 \over 8}  

483:          \zeta_3 }

484: \nonumber \\

485: && \qquad

486:  - \left({19 \over 36} \pi^2 + {141 \over

487: 16}\right)L_\delta +  

488:          {11 \over 8} L_\delta^2

489: \nonumber \\

490: &&

491:  + \delta \left[ -{949\over 72} - {31 \over 432} \pi^2 - {\zeta_3 \over 4}

492:  + \left( {11 \over 3} - {\pi^2 \over 18} \right)L_\delta 

493:        - {1 \over 4} L_\delta^2

494: \right]

495: \nonumber \\

496: &&       + \delta^2 \left[  - {4651 \over 864} + {\pi^2 \over 8} \ln 2 

497:          + {179 \over 1728} \pi^2   -  

498:          {1 \over 4} \zeta_3

499:   \right.

500: \nonumber \\ &&

501: \left.\qquad

502:  + \left( {283 \over 96} - {7 \over 72}\pi^2 \right)L_\delta 

503:           - {5 \over 12} L_\delta^2

504:  \right]

505: %

506: \nonumber \\

507: \lefteqn{\Delta_{L}^s = 

508:  - {427 \over 72} - {7 \over 54}\pi^2 + 2 \zeta_3 

509:  + \left({2 \over 9} \pi^2

510:  + {13 \over 4}\right)L_\delta - {1 \over 2} L_\delta^2} 

511: \nonumber \\

512: &&       + \delta 

513: \left( {163 \over 36} + {2 \over 9} \pi^2 - {4 \over 3} L_\delta \right)

514:  + \delta^2 \left( {623 \over 432} - {19 \over 18}L_\delta +{1 \over 6} 

515:          L_\delta^2 \right)

516: %

517: \nonumber \\

518: \lefteqn{\Delta_{H}^s =  {727 \over 144} - {\pi^2 \over 2} 

519:        + {2 \over 9}\delta

520: + \delta^2 \left( {1 \over 36} \pi^2 -{67 \over 2700} - {1 \over 30} L_\delta

521:         \right) }.

522: \nonumber \\

523: \ea

524: 

525: The results for the pseudo-scalar and axial-vector currents are the

526: same as for the scalar and vector currents because the presence of

527: massless fermion line permits one to cancel the Dirac $\gamma_5$

528: matrices.

529: 

530: It is interesting to compare our results with the numbers obtained in

531: \cite{Chetyrkin:2001je}.  We have plotted our results for the

532: independent color structures as functions of the velocity $v =

533: \delta/(2-\delta)$ using our results for $R_2^{v}$, including terms

534: $\order{\delta^5}$ which we do not display in \eq{eq:v}.  Comparing

535: these results with Fig.~4 of \cite{Chetyrkin:2001je}, we find very

536: good agreement for $v \le 0.6$ \cite{KGNumbers}; for larger values

537: of $v$ our truncated series is not accurate (as can be expected from

538: the very nature of expansion) and more terms in the expansion are

539: needed.  We have also verified the relations between the scalar and

540: vector correlators given in eqs. (32-33) in \cite{Chetyrkin:2001je}.

541: 

542: 

543: In \cite{Chetyrkin:2001je},  the values of the ${\cal O}(\delta^2 \ln^{0}

544: \delta)$ terms were estimated 

545: by fitting numerical solutions.  Our formulas provide analytic results

546: for these coefficients.  In the notation of eq.~(45) of

547: \cite{Chetyrkin:2001je}, we find

548: \ba

549: \tilde c_{FF} &=& \frac{1173}{128} + \frac{103\,{\pi }^2}{48} + 

550:   \frac{{\pi }^4}{90} -

551: \left( \frac{97}{16} +   \frac{5\,\pi^2}{6} \right)\ln 2

552: \nonumber \\

553: &&

554: + \frac{9}{8}\ln^2 2 - \frac{\zeta_3}{2} \simeq 21.46,

555: \nonumber \\

556: \tilde c_{FA} &=& \frac{20057}{1152} + \frac{119\,{\pi }^2}{216} - 

557:   \frac{{\pi }^4}{90} 

558: -\left( \frac{141}{16} +

559:   \frac{19\,\pi^2}{36}\right) \ln 2 

560: \nonumber \\ &&

561: + 

562:   \frac{11}{8} \ln^2 2 - 

563:   \frac{13\,\zeta_3}{2} \simeq 4.894,

564: \nonumber \\

565: \tilde c_{FL} &=&

566: - \frac{1849}{288}   - 

567:   \frac{23\,{\pi }^2}{108} + \left(\frac{13}{4} + 

568:   \frac{2\,{\pi }^2}{9}\right) \ln 2

569: \nonumber \\ &&

570:  - \frac{{\ln ^2 2}}{2} + 

571:   2\,\zeta_3

572: \simeq -2.585.

573: \ea

574: These results agree well with the estimates of \cite{Chetyrkin:2001je}

575: for the the abelian $\tilde c_{FF}=21(6)$ and the light quark $\tilde

576: c_{FL}=-2.3(7)$ contributions.  The non-abelian part found in

577: \cite{Chetyrkin:2001je}, $\tilde c_{FA}=1.2(4)$, differs by about 9

578: sigma from our result, 4.894.  Since the production threshold is the

579: most difficult place for the Pad\'e approximants

580: it is very likely \cite{KG} that the accuracy of this

581: particular result was overestimated in \cite{Chetyrkin:2001je}. 

582: 

583: The expansion around the heavy-light threshold presented here extends

584: the class of Feynman diagrams which can be evaluated analytically.

585: Our approach can be summarized as applying the HQET directly to

586: Feynman diagrams.  As an example application, we computed the

587: imaginary part of flavor off-diagonal current correlators to ${\cal

588: O}(\alpha_s^2)$ useful as an input for both $f_B$ determination from

589: QCD sum rules and also for matching of the lattice and continuum

590: currents.  Similar techniques can be used to study second order QCD

591: corrections to differential distributions in heavy to light

592: semileptonic decays.  Work on this is in progress.

593: 

594: We are grateful to G. P. Lepage for a conversation which stimulated

595: this study. This research was supported in part by the

596: Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and by the

597: DOE under grant number DE-AC03-76SF00515.

598: 

599: %\bibliographystyle{$HOME/pro/tex/prsty}

600: %\bibliography{$HOME/pro/tex/phd}

601: 

602: \begin{thebibliography}{18}

603: \expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi

604: \expandafter\ifx\csname bibnamefont\endcsname\relax

605:   \def\bibnamefont#1{#1}\fi

606: \expandafter\ifx\csname bibfnamefont\endcsname\relax

607:   \def\bibfnamefont#1{#1}\fi

608: \expandafter\ifx\csname citenamefont\endcsname\relax

609:   \def\citenamefont#1{#1}\fi

610: \expandafter\ifx\csname url\endcsname\relax

611:   \def\url#1{\texttt{#1}}\fi

612: \expandafter\ifx\csname urlprefix\endcsname\relax\def\urlprefix{URL }\fi

613: \providecommand{\bibinfo}[2]{#2}

614: \providecommand{\eprint}[2][]{\url{#2}}

615: 

616: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Khodjamirian}(2001)}]{Khodjamirian:2001bj}

617: For a recent review  and references to original papers see 

618: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.}~\bibnamefont{Khodjamirian}}

619:   (\bibinfo{year}{2001}), \eprint{hep-ph/0108205}.

620: 

621: \bibitem[{lep()}]{lepage}

622: \bibinfo{note}{We are indebted to G. P. Lepage for a discussion of this point.}

623: 

624: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Chetyrkin}(1991)}]{Chetyrkin91}

625: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{K.~G.} \bibnamefont{Chetyrkin}}

626:   (\bibinfo{year}{1991}), \bibinfo{note}{preprint MPI-Ph/PTh 13/91}.

627: 

628: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Tkachev}(1994)}]{Tkachev:1994gz}

629: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{F.~V.} \bibnamefont{Tkachev}},

630:   \bibinfo{journal}{Sov. J. Part. Nucl.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{25}},

631:   \bibinfo{pages}{649} (\bibinfo{year}{1994}), \eprint{hep-ph/9701272}.

632: 

633: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Smirnov}(1995)}]{Smirnov:1995tg}

634: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{V.~A.} \bibnamefont{Smirnov}},

635:   \bibinfo{journal}{Mod. Phys. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{A10}},

636:   \bibinfo{pages}{1485} (\bibinfo{year}{1995}), \eprint{hep-th/9412063}.

637: 

638: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Smirnov}(1997)}]{Smirnov:1997gx}

639: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{V.~A.} \bibnamefont{Smirnov}},

640:   \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B404}},

641:   \bibinfo{pages}{101} (\bibinfo{year}{1997}), \eprint{hep-ph/9703357}.

642: 

643: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Czarnecki and Smirnov}(1997)}]{CzSmir}

644: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.}~\bibnamefont{Czarnecki}} \bibnamefont{and}

645:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{V.}~\bibnamefont{Smirnov}},

646:   \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B394}},

647:   \bibinfo{pages}{211} (\bibinfo{year}{1997}), \eprint{hep-ph/9608407}.

648: 

649: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Czarnecki and Melnikov}(2001)}]{Czarnecki:2000fv}

650: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.}~\bibnamefont{Czarnecki}} \bibnamefont{and}

651:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{K.}~\bibnamefont{Melnikov}},

652:   \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{87}},

653:   \bibinfo{pages}{013001} (\bibinfo{year}{2001}), \eprint{hep-ph/0012053}.

654: 

655: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Beneke and Smirnov}(1998)}]{Beneke:1998zp}

656: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Beneke}} \bibnamefont{and}

657:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{V.~A.} \bibnamefont{Smirnov}},

658:   \bibinfo{journal}{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B522}},

659:   \bibinfo{pages}{321} (\bibinfo{year}{1998}), \eprint{hep-ph/9711391}.

660: 

661: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Chetyrkin and

662:   Steinhauser}(2001{\natexlab{a}})}]{Chetyrkin:2000mq}

663: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{K.~G.} \bibnamefont{Chetyrkin}}

664:   \bibnamefont{and}

665:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Steinhauser}},

666:   \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B502}},

667:   \bibinfo{pages}{104} (\bibinfo{year}{2001}{\natexlab{a}}),

668:   \eprint{hep-ph/0012002}.

669: 

670: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Chetyrkin and

671:   Steinhauser}(2001{\natexlab{b}})}]{Chetyrkin:2001je}

672: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{K.~G.} \bibnamefont{Chetyrkin}}

673:   \bibnamefont{and}

674:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Steinhauser}},

675:   \bibinfo{journal}{Eur. Phys. J.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{C21}},

676:   \bibinfo{pages}{319} (\bibinfo{year}{2001}{\natexlab{b}}),

677:   \eprint{hep-ph/0108017}.

678: 

679: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Laporta and Remiddi}(1993)}]{Laporta:1993pa}

680: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{S.}~\bibnamefont{Laporta}} \bibnamefont{and}

681:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{E.}~\bibnamefont{Remiddi}},

682:   \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B301}},

683:   \bibinfo{pages}{440} (\bibinfo{year}{1993}).

684: 

685: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Melnikov and van Ritbergen}(2000)}]{Melnikov:2000zc}

686: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{K.}~\bibnamefont{Melnikov}} \bibnamefont{and}

687:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{T.}~\bibnamefont{van Ritbergen}},

688:   \bibinfo{journal}{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B591}},

689:   \bibinfo{pages}{515} (\bibinfo{year}{2000}), \eprint{hep-ph/0005131}.

690: 

691: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Grozin}(2000)}]{Grozin:2000jv}

692: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~G.} \bibnamefont{Grozin}},

693:   \bibinfo{journal}{JHEP} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{03}}, \bibinfo{pages}{013}

694:   (\bibinfo{year}{2000}), \eprint{hep-ph/0002266}.

695: 

696: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Grozin}(2001)}]{Grozin:2001fw}

697: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~G.} \bibnamefont{Grozin}}

698:   (\bibinfo{year}{2001}), \eprint{hep-ph/0107248}.

699: 

700: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Vermaseren}()}]{form3}

701: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.~A.~M.} \bibnamefont{Vermaseren}},

702:   \bibinfo{note}{math-ph/0010025}.

703: 

704: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Beneke and Braun}(1994)}]{Beneke:1994sw}

705: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Beneke}} \bibnamefont{and}

706:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{V.~M.} \bibnamefont{Braun}},

707:   \bibinfo{journal}{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B426}},

708:   \bibinfo{pages}{301} (\bibinfo{year}{1994}), \eprint{hep-ph/9402364}.

709: 

710: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Chetyrkin and Tkachev}(1981)}]{che81}

711: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{K.~G.} \bibnamefont{Chetyrkin}}

712:   \bibnamefont{and} \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{F.~V.}

713:   \bibnamefont{Tkachev}}, \bibinfo{journal}{Nucl. Phys.}

714:   \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{B192}}, \bibinfo{pages}{159}

715:   (\bibinfo{year}{1981}). 

716: 

717: 

718: 

719: \bibitem{KGNumbers} We are grateful to K. G. Chetyrkin for providing

720: sample numerical values for comparisons. 

721: 

722: \bibitem{KG} K. G. Chetyrkin, private communication.

723: 

724: \end{thebibliography}

725: 

726: 

727: \end{document}

728: 

729: