1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: \usepackage{a4wide,epsfig}
3: %\usepackage{amsmath}
4: \usepackage{latexsym}
5: %\documentstyle[12pt,epsf,a4]{article}
6: \voffset0cm
7: \hoffset0cm
8: \oddsidemargin0cm
9: %\oddsidemargin-1cm
10: \evensidemargin0cm
11: \topmargin0cm
12: \textwidth16cm
13: \textheight22cm
14:
15: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}}
16: \setcounter{footnote}{2}
17:
18: \renewcommand {\theequation}{\arabic{section}.\arabic{equation}}
19: \renewcommand {\thefigure}{\arabic{section}.\arabic{figure}}
20: \renewcommand {\thetable}{\arabic{section}.\arabic{table}}
21: \setcounter{equation}{0}
22: \setcounter{figure}{0}
23: \setcounter{table}{0}
24:
25: % Only possible if 'amsmath' is used; but then pagebreak more ``complicated''
26: %\numberwithin{equation}{section}
27: %\numberwithin{figure}{section}
28: %\numberwithin{table}{section}
29:
30: \renewcommand{\textfraction}{0}
31: \renewcommand{\topfraction}{1}
32: \renewcommand{\bottomfraction}{1}
33:
34: \newcommand{\note}[1]{{\tiny (note)}\marginpar {\scriptsize #1}}
35:
36: \newcommand{\li}{\mathop{{\mbox{Li}}_4}\nolimits}
37:
38: \newcommand{\gsim}{\;\rlap{\lower 3.5 pt \hbox{$\mathchar \sim$}} \raise 1pt
39: \hbox {$>$}\;}
40: \newcommand{\lsim}{\;\rlap{\lower 3.5 pt \hbox{$\mathchar \sim$}} \raise 1pt
41: \hbox {$<$}\;}
42:
43: \newcommand{\qsla}{q\hspace{-.5em}/\hspace{.2em}}
44: \newcommand{\psla}{p\hspace{-.5em}/\hspace{.2em}}
45: \newcommand{\lnmum}{l_{\mu M}}
46: \newcommand{\lmM}{l_{\mu M}}
47:
48: \newcommand{\smM}{\mbox{\small{\it M}}}
49:
50: \newcommand{\logqmms}{l_{qm}}
51: \newcommand{\logqmos}{L_m}
52: \newcommand{\logmsms}{l_{ms}}
53: \newcommand{\lMs}{L_{ms}}
54: \newcommand{\logmsos}{L_{ms}}
55: \newcommand{\logmusos}{L_{s\mu}}
56: \newcommand{\logqmums}{l_{q\mu}}
57: \newcommand{\logmum}{l_{\mu m}}
58: \newcommand{\Lw}{L_\omega}
59:
60:
61: \sloppy
62:
63: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
64: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
65:
66: \begin{document}
67:
68: \title{\vskip-3cm{\baselineskip14pt
69: \centerline{\normalsize\hfill DESY 02--004}
70: \centerline{\normalsize\hfill hep-ph/0201075}
71: }
72: \vskip.7cm
73: Results and Techniques of Multi-Loop Calculations
74: \vskip2em
75: }
76: \author{
77: {Matthias Steinhauser}
78: \\[3em]
79: { II. Institut f\"ur Theoretische Physik,}\\
80: { Universit\"at Hamburg, D-22761 Hamburg, Germany}
81: }
82: \date{}
83: \maketitle
84:
85: \begin{abstract}
86: \noindent
87: In this review some recent multi-loop results obtained in the
88: framework of perturbative Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) and
89: Quantum Electrodynamics (QED) are discussed.
90: After reviewing the most advanced techniques used for the computation
91: of renormalization group functions, we consider the decoupling of heavy
92: quarks. In particular, an effective method for
93: the evaluation of the decoupling constants is presented and explicit
94: results are given.
95: Furthermore the connection to observables involving a scalar Higgs boson is
96: worked out in detail. An all-order low energy theorem is derived which
97: establishes a relation between the coefficient functions in the hadronic
98: Higgs decay and the decoupling constants. We review the radiative
99: corrections of a Higgs boson into gluons and quarks and present
100: explicit results up to order $\alpha_s^4$ and $\alpha_s^3$,
101: respectively.
102: In this review special emphasis is put on the applications of asymptotic
103: expansions. A method is described which combines expansion terms of
104: different kinematical regions with the help of conformal mapping and
105: Pad\'e approximation.
106: This method allows us to proceed beyond the present scope of exact
107: multi-loop calculations.
108: As far as physical processes are concerned, we review the computation of
109: three-loop current correlators in QCD taking into account
110: the full mass-dependence. In particular, we concentrate on the evaluation
111: of the total cross section for the production of hadrons in $e^+e^-$
112: annihilation. The knowledge of the complete mass dependence at order
113: $\alpha_s^2$ has triggered a bunch of theory-driven analyses of the
114: hadronic contribution to the electromagnetic coupling evaluated at
115: high energy scales. The status is summarized in this review.
116: In a further application four-loop diagrams are considered which
117: contribute to the order $\alpha^2$ QED corrections to the $\mu$ decay.
118: Its relevance for the determination of the
119: Fermi constant $G_F$ is discussed. Finally the
120: calculation of the three-loop relation between the
121: $\overline{\rm MS}$ and on-shell quark mass definitions is presented
122: and physical applications are given.
123: To complete the presentation, some technical details are presented in
124: the Appendix, where also explicit analytical results are listed.
125: \end{abstract}
126:
127: \vspace{2em}
128:
129: \centerline{(To appear in Physics Reports)}
130:
131: \thispagestyle{empty}
132: \newpage
133:
134: \setcounter{page}{1}
135:
136: \tableofcontents
137:
138: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\arabic{footnote}}
139: \setcounter{footnote}{0}
140:
141: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
142:
143: \section{Introduction}
144: \setcounter{equation}{0}
145: \setcounter{figure}{0}
146: \setcounter{table}{0}
147:
148: Nowadays the Standard Model (SM) of elementary particle physics is
149: well established. Some parts of it (e.g. the properties of the $Z$
150: boson) have been tested to an accuracy
151: far below the percent level --- mostly at the CERN Large-Electron-Positron
152: collider (LEP, Geneva), at the SLAC Linear Collider (SLC,
153: Stanford) and at the Fermilab TEVATRON (Chicago). Up to now
154: no significant
155: deviation between theory and experiment has been found.
156: For other parts of the SM, related to CP violation and quark mixing, the
157: $B$ factories like BaBar at SLAC, Belle at KEK (Tsukuba) or HERA-B at DESY
158: (Hamburg) will provide deeper insight, and significant improvements in
159: the determination of the corresponding parameters will be obtained.
160: Currently mainly the scalar sector of the SM
161: eludes from direct experimental observation. This affects
162: both the generation of the particle masses and the existence of the
163: Higgs boson itself.
164: Probably
165: Run II of the TEVATRON and certainly the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at
166: CERN will provide more sureness --- not only in connection to the
167: Higgs sector but also to possible extensions of the SM.
168: Once the Higgs boson would be discovered it immediately would become
169: subject to precision measurements. In particular at a future $e^+e^-$
170: linear collider such as DESY TESLA,
171: a precise study of its properties would be possible.
172:
173:
174: In the recent years there has been an enormous development in the
175: evaluation of radiative corrections.
176: It is fair to say that the major part of it was initiated by the
177: fundamental works of 't~Hooft and Veltman in
178: 1972~\cite{'tHooft:1972fi,'tHooft:1972ue,'tHooft:1979xw}
179: where dimensional regularization
180: (see also~\cite{BolGia72})
181: was established as a powerful tool in
182: the evaluation of multi-loop
183: diagrams\footnote{Dimensional regularization
184: applied to infra-red divergences and mass singularities has first
185: been considered in~\cite{DRirmass}.}.
186: Since that time a whole industry has been formed to develop techniques
187: for the computation of complicated Feynman integrals.
188: At one-loop order the procedure of the computation has been
189: systematically studied quite some time
190: ago~\cite{Sirlin:1980nh,Passarino:1979jh,Hollik:1990ii,Denner:1993kt}.
191: Nevertheless also nowadays it is not completely
192: straightforward to evaluate an
193: arbitrary one-loop diagram --- in particular if many legs and
194: complicated momentum configurations are involved.
195: One can easily imagine that at two and more loops one arrives quite
196: soon at the limit where the occuring mathematical expressions
197: can not be solved.
198: At two-loop order certain classes of diagrams can still be treated
199: by either
200: using a combination of analytical simplifications and fast numerical
201: routines, like in the case of two-point function with several non-zero
202: masses~\cite{Weiglein:1994hd},
203: or applying purely analytical methods,
204: like in the case of massless digrams with four external
205: legs~\cite{Gehrmann:2001ih}.
206: However, at three-loop order it is essentially only
207: possible to solve one-scale integrals.
208: A systematic study at four or more loops is still missing.
209:
210: QCD, the field theoretical realization of the strong interaction,
211: constitutes an important part of the SM and also of most of its
212: extensions. At low energies the coupling
213: constant of QCD, $\alpha_s$, is large and perturbative calculations
214: are not possible. However, due to the phenomenon of asymptotic freedom
215: the value of $\alpha_s$ gets smaller with raising energy and
216: perturbation theory is an appropriate tool to evaluate radiative
217: corrections.
218:
219: Up to now the vast majority of the multi-loop calculations have been
220: performed in the framework of QED and QCD.
221: One reason is certainly that the calculations are simpler as compared
222: to the full SM since there are less
223: parameters. Furthermore, there is a strong hierarchy both in the
224: quark and lepton masses which also simplifies the calculations.
225: On the other hand, the higher-order corrections are indeed necessary.
226: In QED there exist precise experiments which require
227: high theoretical precision and although the coupling constant is quite
228: small sometimes high loop orders are necessary.
229: For example, in the case of the anomalous
230: magnetic moment of the electron, four-loop corrections are needed to
231: match the experimental precision.
232: In QCD the coupling is roughly a factor of ten bigger. Nevertheless it
233: is often still small enough to perform a perturbative expansion.
234: However,
235: the higher order terms are significant and can not be neglected
236: in the cases where high precision is required.
237:
238: In this work some recent developments in the calculation of multi-loop
239: diagrams are reviewed.
240: Thereby we will mention the most important methods which
241: have been used in the computation of higher order quantum corrections
242: and explain a few selected ones in greater detail. At the same time, we
243: discuss the present theoretical status of important physical
244: quantities. In particular, the renormalization group functions in the
245: modified minimal subtraction scheme~\cite{tHo73,BarBurDukMut78}
246: ($\overline{\rm MS}$) are provided up to the four-loop order. As
247: is well-known, four loop running must be accompanied by three-loop
248: matching at quark thresholds. The corresponding decoupling relations
249: are presented in Section~\ref{sec:dec}.
250:
251: The hadronic Higgs decay is closely connected to the decoupling
252: relations as we will show is Section~\ref{sec:dim4}.
253: Parts of the quantum corrections can be computed in the
254: framework of an effective Lagrangian where the coefficients can be
255: determined from the decoupling relations. The origin of this
256: miraculous connection lies in the use of the dimension-four operators,
257: which constitute an important ingredient of the effective
258: Lagrangian. Another application of the dimension-four operators are the
259: quartic mass corrections to the cross section
260: $\sigma(e^+e^-\to\mbox{hadrons})$, which is also discussed in
261: Section~\ref{sec:dim4}.
262:
263: The last issue is again picked up in Section~\ref{sec:pade}, where also
264: QCD corrections to the production of hadrons in $e^+e^-$ annihilation
265: are computed. Putting together all terms one arrives at a complete
266: picture up to the quartic mass corrections of order $\alpha_s^3$. The
267: main purposes of Section~\ref{sec:pade} are practical applications of
268: asymptotic expansions\footnote{See Appendix~\ref{sub:ae} for details.}.
269: Besides the diagonal correlators also the
270: non-diagonal ones are considered.
271:
272: The Fermi constant, $G_F$, the mass of the $Z$ boson, $M_Z$, and the
273: electromagnetic coupling constant, $\alpha$, are the best known
274: parameters of the SM. $M_Z$ has been measured at LEP with an accuracy
275: of a few per mille to be $M_Z=91.1876\pm0.0021$~GeV. In this review we
276: want to discuss quantum corrections to the other two parameters.
277: An essential ingredient to the running of the electromagnetic coupling
278: from $q^2=0$ to $q^2=M_Z^2$ is provided by the cross section
279: $\sigma(e^+e^-\to\mbox{hadrons})$. The correction terms
280: discussed earlier have been used to obtain so-called theory-driven
281: results. The different approaches are discussed.
282: As further applications we present the status of the QED corrections
283: to the muon decay and the relation between the $\overline{\rm MS}$ and
284: the on-shell quark mass.
285: Let us in the following discuss the individual issues in more detail.
286:
287: As far as radiative corrections are concerned,
288: a crucial role is played by the renormalization group functions.
289: In particular the functions $\beta(\alpha_s)$ and $\gamma_m(\alpha_s)$
290: governing the running of the coupling and the quark masses
291: comprise a significant part of the higher quantum corrections.
292: They are in particular very important to re-sum large
293: logarithms to all orders in perturbation theory.
294: Only a few years ago the four-loop terms of order $\alpha_s^4$ have
295: been evaluated for $\beta(\alpha_s)$~\cite{RitVerLar97_bet} and
296: $\gamma_m(\alpha_s)$~\cite{Che97_gam,LarRitVer97_gam}. The latter
297: has been computed by two groups using completely independent methods.
298: Both methods are based on the fact that the pole part of a
299: logarithmically divergent diagram is independent of the masses or
300: momenta. In~\cite{Che97_gam} this is exploited together with the
301: technique of infra-red re-arrangement (IRR) in order to obtain a
302: factorization of the four-loop integrals into massless three-loop and
303: massive one-loop ones. In Refs.~\cite{RitVerLar97_bet,LarRitVer97_gam}
304: all lines were assigned to the same mass, and all external momenta were
305: set to zero, which leads to a special class of bubble diagrams. From
306: them only the pole parts have to be computed.
307: In Section~\ref{sec:rge} we want to review both methods and
308: explicitly demonstrate the way they work.
309:
310: In this review
311: special emphasis is put on the construction of effective theories
312: in the framework of QCD.
313: In Section~\ref{sec:dec} an effective QCD Lagrangian is constructed for
314: the case where one of the quarks is much heavier than the others.
315: The construction is made explicit by specifying the relations between
316: the parameters in the full and effective theories.
317: These relations provide at the same time the well-known decoupling
318: constants which have to be applied in QCD every time a particle
319: threshold is crossed. The most prominent example for their necessity
320: is probably the computation of $\alpha_s(M_\tau)$ from
321: $\alpha_s(M_Z)$ or vice versa. In the latter case five quarks are
322: active whereas in the former one only three quarks are
323: present in the effective QCD Lagrangian.
324:
325: In Section~\ref{sec:dim4} a slightly different point of view is adopted.
326: Here the scalar operators of dimension four are considered
327: in QCD. In a first step they are used to construct an effective Lagrangian
328: describing the coupling of an intermediate-mass
329: Higgs boson to quarks and gluons.
330: The top quark is considered as heavy and manifests itself in the
331: coefficient functions of the effective Lagrangian. Once the latter has
332: been found, the imaginary part of the Higgs boson correlator in the
333: effective theory leads to the total decay rate. As a central result of
334: Section~\ref{sec:dim4} we derive a low-energy theorem which
335: considerably simplifies the computation of the coefficient functions
336: as they are related to the decoupling constants of QCD evaluated in
337: Section~\ref{sec:dec}.
338: In Section~\ref{sub:hggbfm} the background field method is
339: introduced as a convenient tool for the computation of higher-order
340: corrections. As an example, the coefficient functions describing
341: the decay of the Higgs boson into gluons is also computed in this
342: framework.
343:
344: In the second part of Section~\ref{sec:dim4} another important
345: application of the scalar dimension four operators is discussed,
346: namely the quartic mass corrections to the cross section
347: $\sigma(e^+e^-\to\mbox{hadrons})$.
348: Mass corrections of order $(m^2/s)^0$ and $(m^2/s)^1$ are obtained
349: relatively easy
350: as in QCD there are no non-trivial operators of dimension less than
351: four.
352: However, the quartic corrections require the
353: inclusion of the dimension-four operators with all their
354: renormalization and mixing properties. We will explain the techniques
355: and present results obtained recently at order $\alpha_s^3$.
356:
357: The last part of this review, Section~\ref{sec:pade}, is devoted to the
358: discussion of some results obtained with the help of asymptotic
359: expansion accompanied with conformal mapping and Pad\'e
360: approximation.
361: This method has been developed in the recent years and has been applied
362: successfully to a number of important processes.
363: The underlying idea is the following:
364: only in rare cases it is possible to compute three-loop diagrams
365: involving more than one scale. However, if a certain hierarchy exists
366: between the scales it is promising to apply an asymptotic expansion.
367: This effectively reduces the number of scales present in the integrals
368: which are subsequently significantly simplified.
369:
370: In particular we will discuss the corrections of order $\alpha_s^2$
371: to the photon polarization function. Its imaginary part is directly
372: connected to the physical quantity
373: $R(s)\equiv\sigma(e^+e^-\to\mbox{hadrons})/\sigma(e^+e^-\to\mu^+\mu^-)$.
374: The application of our method leads to the full mass dependence.
375: Combining the results with the quartic corrections given in
376: Section~\ref{sub:as3m4}, one obtains a prediction for $R(s)$ up to
377: and including ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3 m^4/s^2)$.
378: Only recently also the non-diagonal current correlator formed by a
379: massive and a massless quark has been computed. In this application
380: special emphasis lies on the extraction of information about the
381: threshold behaviour which has some relevance in the framework of
382: heavy-quark effective QCD.
383:
384: As an application of the knowledge of $R(s)$ to high perturbative
385: order, we discuss the evaluation of $\alpha(M_Z^2)$.
386: The electromagnetic coupling is defined at vanishing momentum
387: transfer. However, its evolution to high energies constitutes the
388: dominant part of the radiative corrections to electroweak
389: observables.
390: The accurate determination of $\alpha(M_Z^2)$ is
391: thus essential for any precise test of the theory. At the same time the
392: indirect determination of the masses of heavy, hitherto unobserved
393: particles, e.g.~the Higgs boson or supersymmertic
394: particles, depends critically on
395: this parameter. Of particular importance in this context is the hadronic
396: vacuum polarization. It is nearly as large as the leptonic contribution,
397: but cannot yet be computed perturbatively. However, it may be
398: related through dispersion relations to the cross
399: section for hadron production in electron-positron annihilation.
400: The integrand can thus be
401: obtained from data, phenomenological models and/or perturbative QCD,
402: whenever applicable.
403: In Section~\ref{subsub:delal} we will discuss the developments in the
404: evaluation of $\alpha(M_Z^2)$ which took place in the recent two to
405: three years due to the knowledge of the complete mass dependence
406: of $R(s)$ at order $\alpha_s^2$ (cf. Section~\ref{subsub:R}).
407:
408: $G_F$ is defined through the muon lifetime, and the decay
409: of the muon, as a purely leptonic process, is rather clean --- both
410: experimentally and theoretically. The one-loop corrections of order $\alpha$
411: were computed more than 40 years ago~\cite{KinSir59Ber58}, whereas only
412: recently the two-loop corrections of order $\alpha^2$ have been
413: evaluated~\cite{RitStu99,SeiSte99}.
414: The large gap in time shows that this calculation
415: is highly non-trivial. The inclusion of the two-loop terms greatly
416: reduced the relative
417: theoretical error of $1.5\times 10^{-5}$ which was an estimate of the size of
418: the missing corrections. The remaining error on $G_F$ now reads
419: $0.9\times 10^{-5}$ and is of pure experimental nature. Upcoming experiments
420: will further improve the accuracy of the muon lifetime measurement and
421: therefore
422: the ${\cal O}(\alpha^2)$ corrections to the muon decay are very important and
423: constitute a crucial ingredient from the theoretical side.
424: In Section~\ref{sub:mudec} we discuss the results obtained with the
425: help of asymptotic expansion.
426:
427: In the SM the quark masses have still relatively big uncertainties.
428: This is mainly due to the confinement property of QCD which
429: prevents the production of free quarks.
430: It is also important to have a convenient definition of the quark
431: mass in order to perform a comparison between theory and experiment.
432: Recently there has been quite some activity connected to
433: the precise determination of the bottom- and top-quark masses.
434: The bottom-quark mass is determined with the help of
435: QCD sum rules where a proper mass definition helps to reduce the error.
436: In the case of the top quark, studies have been performed for
437: an $e^+e^-$ collider with a center-of-mass energy in the
438: threshold region of top-quark-pair production. An energy scan which
439: provides the measurement of the total production cross section
440: would provide an error of about 100~MeV in the top-quark mass.
441: Also here a special mass definition has to be employed.
442: In both cases the three-loop on-shell--$\overline{\rm MS}$ conversion
443: formula is needed in order to obtain the
444: corresponding $\overline{\rm MS}$ quark mass. The latter is
445: important for processes not connected to the threshold.
446: In Section~\ref{sub:msos} these issues are discussed in detail.
447:
448: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
449: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
450:
451: \section{\label{sec:rge}Renormalization group functions in QCD}
452: \setcounter{equation}{0}
453: \setcounter{figure}{0}
454: \setcounter{table}{0}
455:
456: In perturbative QCD
457: the renormalization group functions play
458: a very important role.
459: In particular the $\beta$ and
460: $\gamma_m$ functions governing the running of the strong coupling and
461: the quark masses, respectively, are indispensable when evaluating
462: physical observables.
463: For this reason we decided to discuss the techniques used for the
464: computation of the four-loop contributions
465: to $\beta$~\cite{RitVerLar97_bet} and
466: $\gamma_m$~\cite{Che97_gam,LarRitVer97_gam} in more detail.
467:
468: In the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme the knowledge of the renormalization
469: group functions is equivalent to the knowledge of the corresponding
470: renormalization constant. Thus, in order to compute a renormalization
471: constant at $n$-loop order it is sufficient to evaluate the
472: ultra-violet (UV) poles of $n$-loop diagrams.
473: Nevertheless it is often also quite useful to have also a handle
474: on the infra-red (IR) poles.
475: More details on the UV and IR structure of Feynman diagrams are given in
476: Section~\ref{sub:UVIR}. Afterwards, in Sections~\ref{sub:IRR}
477: and~\ref{sub:massint}, two practical methods are described
478: which have been applied at the four-loop level.
479:
480: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
481:
482: \subsection{\label{sub:UVIR}Ultra-violet and infra-red counterterms}
483:
484: Before we want to consider explicit examples in the next two sections
485: the theoretical background needed for the higher-loop calculation of
486: renormalization group functions is introduced in this Subsection.
487: In particular we want to demonstrate the interplay between UV and IR
488: divergences in dimensional regularization
489: and show their connection to asymptotic expansions.
490: We refrain from presenting the material in a mathematical rigorous
491: framework, for which we refer to the original literature,
492: but exemplify the important points at explicit diagrams.
493:
494: As the properties discussed in this section are independent of the
495: particle type we consider only scalar propagators
496: of the form
497: \begin{eqnarray}
498: \frac{1}{M^2 - p^2}
499: \,,
500: \end{eqnarray}
501: where also $M=0$ is allowed.
502: We furthermore assume that the integration momenta are denoted by
503: $k_1, k_2, \ldots$ and introduce the abbreviation
504: $\int_i\equiv\mu^{4-D}\int {\rm d}^D k_i/(2\pi)^D$.
505:
506: In order to remove the UV divergences the
507: so-called $R$ operation has been introduced~\cite{BogPar57,Hep66}.
508: It is a recursive subtraction scheme where the UV divergences are
509: removed from the Feynman integrals in a way compatible to adding local
510: counterterms to the Lagrangian.
511: Formally, the $R$ operation can be written as a sum where each term is
512: a product of operators acting on subsets of disjoint
513: one-particle-irreducible subgraphs. In this way counterterms are
514: generated. They have to be inserted into the vertices of the diagrams
515: which remain after shrinking the corresponding subgraphs to a point.
516: Non-trivial diagrammatic examples can, e.g., be found in the text
517: books~\cite{Collins,Muta}.
518: The $R$ operation applied to a one-loop propagator-type integral
519: with external momentum $q$ leads to the equation
520: \begin{eqnarray}
521: R\left[\int_1 \frac{1}{[M^2-k_1^2][M^2-(k_1+q)^2]} \right]
522: &=&
523: \int_1\frac{1}{[M^2-k_1^2][M^2-(k_1+q)^2]} + Z^{(1)}
524: \nonumber\\
525: &=& \mbox{finite}
526: \,,
527: \label{eq:Z1}
528: \end{eqnarray}
529: from which the renormalization constant $Z^{(1)}$ is determined.
530: In the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme it reads
531: \begin{eqnarray}
532: Z^{(1)} &=& \frac{1}{16\pi^2} \left( - \frac{1}{\varepsilon} \right)
533: \,.
534: \label{eq:Z1_2}
535: \end{eqnarray}
536: Once $Z^{(1)}$ is known one can turn to the two-loop order. The
537: application of the $R$ operation to the diagram shown in
538: Fig.~\ref{fig:Rex} leads to
539: \begin{eqnarray}
540: \lefteqn{
541: R\left[ \int_1\int_2
542: \frac{1}{[M^2-(k_1-k_2)^2][M^2-(k_1+q)^2][m^2-k_2^2]^2} \right]
543: }
544: \nonumber\\&=&\mbox{}
545: \int_1\int_2
546: \frac{1}{[M^2-(k_1-k_2)^2][M^2-(k_1+q)^2][m^2-k_2^2]^2}
547: + Z^{(1)} \int_2\frac{1}{[m^2-k_2^2]^2}
548: + Z^{(2)}
549: \nonumber\\
550: &=& \mbox{finite}
551: \,,
552: \label{eq:Z2}
553: \end{eqnarray}
554: which fixes $Z^{(2)}$ to
555: \begin{eqnarray}
556: Z^{(2)} &=& \left(\frac{1}{16\pi^2}\right)^2
557: \left[ \frac{1}{2\varepsilon^2} - \frac{1}{2\varepsilon} \right]
558: \,.
559: \label{eq:Z2_2}
560: \end{eqnarray}
561: A formal definition of the $R$ operation can, e.g., be found
562: in~\cite{Che91}.
563:
564:
565: \begin{figure}[t]
566: \begin{center}
567: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
568: \leavevmode
569: \epsfxsize=5.cm
570: \epsffile[165 300 447 513]{figs/Rex1.ps}
571: \end{tabular}
572: \end{center}
573: \caption{\label{fig:Rex}
574: Scalar two-loop diagram.
575: }
576: \end{figure}
577:
578:
579:
580: There are two special features of dimensional regularization which
581: prove to be a powerful tool, especially in the evaluation of
582: renormalization group functions.
583: The first one is that dimensional regularization is able
584: to regularize simultaneously both UV and IR divergences.
585: Furthermore, as was
586: realized in~\cite{Col75}, in renormalization schemes based on minimal
587: subtraction all UV counterterms are polynomial in the
588: momenta\footnote{This has to be the case for each meaningful renormalization
589: prescription.}
590: and masses.
591: This means that the divergence of
592: logarithmically divergent Feynman integrals are polynomial in
593: $1/\varepsilon$ and there is no dependence on a dimensionful scale.
594: As a consequence, in the computation of the corresponding coefficients
595: one is free to make arbitrary re-arrangements of
596: masses and external momenta --- provided no IR divergences are introduced.
597: This was for the first time observed in Ref.~\cite{Vla80}
598: (see also~\cite{CheKatTka80,CasKen82,Che91}).
599:
600: In the example of Eqs.~(\ref{eq:Z1}) and~(\ref{eq:Z2})
601: this means that the masses $M$ could be set to zero without changing
602: the results for $Z^{(1)}$ and $Z^{(2)}$.
603:
604: This procedure is often referred to as infra-red re-arrangement
605: (IRR)~\cite{CheKatTka80}. One
606: has in mind a transformation of the IR structure of a diagram
607: in such a way that its UV divergent part can be easily computed.
608: Next to nullifying masses or momenta, also differentiations
609: with respect to masses are allowed in order to achieve the simplifications.
610:
611: The requirement that no IR divergences may be introduced is quite
612: restrictive and makes the application of the IRR very tedious.
613: Often one has to remain with Feynman integrals which are not
614: as simple as one would like to have them.
615: To overcome this disadvantage the $R$ operation has been
616: generalized and the so-called $R^\star$ operations has been
617: developed~\cite{CheTka82,CheSmi84}
618: in order to deal not only with the UV but also with the IR
619: divergences. Thus arbitrary re-arrangements of masses and momenta are
620: allowed as the $R^\star$ operation takes care of all occuring IR
621: divergences.
622:
623: The $R^\star$ operation can be written as
624: $R^\star = R \tilde{R} = \tilde{R} R$,
625: where $R$ is responsible for the UV divergences and $\tilde R$
626: subtracts the IR ones.
627: For $\tilde{R}$ there exists a recursive definition which is in
628: close analogy to the one of the $R$ operation.
629: The precise definition and the criterion for the subgraphs, which have
630: to be considered while applying $\tilde{R}$, is quite involved and
631: requires the introduction of a lot of mathematical
632: terminology~\cite{CheSmi84}.
633: The way $\tilde{Z}$ --- the renormalization constant generated by
634: $\tilde{R}$ --- is computed in practice
635: can best be seen by looking at the
636: examples discussed below.
637: At this point we only want to mention that a renormalization constant
638: $\tilde{Z}$ for the whole diagram only appears for scaleless
639: integrals. As a consequence, the $\tilde{R}$ operation does not
640: commute with the limit of masses or external momenta going to zero
641: (cf. Eqs.~(\ref{eq:ir1}) and~(\ref{eq:tilZ2}) below).
642:
643: The $R^\star$ operation is essential to prove the following
644: theorem~\cite{CheSmi84}:
645: \begin{center}
646: \begin{minipage}{14cm}
647: {\em
648: Any UV counterterm of a $(l+1)$-loop Feynman integral can be written
649: in terms of the poles and finite parts of appropriately constructed
650: $l$-loop massless propagator-type integrals.
651: }
652: \end{minipage}
653: \end{center}
654: This theorem is very powerful. It states that --- at least in
655: principle --- all renormalization group functions at four-loop order
656: can be computed from the knowledge of massless three-loop two-point
657: functions. The latter are, e.g., provided by the package {\tt
658: MINCER}~\cite{mincer}.
659: In practice there are problems connected to the (in general) large
660: number of contributing diagrams as the prescriptions
661: for the $R^\star$ operation given
662: in~\cite{CheTka82,CheSmi84} have to be applied individually to each of
663: them. Thus, for practical applications further improvements are
664: necessary.
665: We will come back to this point later.
666:
667: Let us consider the one-loop integral of Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z1})
668: with $M=0$ and $q=0$. By definition the resulting massless tadpole integral
669: is set to zero in dimensional regularization.
670: On the other hand, the application
671: of the $R^\star$ operation gives
672: \begin{eqnarray}
673: 0 &=& R^\star\left[ \int_1 \frac{1}{[-k_1^2][-k_1^2]} \right]
674: \nonumber \\
675: &=& \tilde{R} \left[ \int_1 \frac{1}{[-k_1^2][-k_1^2]} + Z^{(1)} \right]
676: \nonumber \\
677: &=& \int_1 \frac{1}{[-k_1^2][-k_1^2]} + \tilde{Z}^{(1)} + Z^{(1)}
678: \nonumber \\
679: &=& \tilde{Z}^{(1)} + Z^{(1)}
680: \,.
681: \label{eq:Z1Z1til}
682: \end{eqnarray}
683: In the first step the $R$ operation is applied resulting in the
684: diagram itself and the counterterm $Z^{(1)}$ rendering the expression
685: in the square brackets of the second line UV finite.
686: The subsequent application of $\tilde{R}$ generates the counterterm
687: $\tilde{Z}^{(1)}$ which corresponds to the IR divergence of
688: one-loop integral. Once the application of $R^\star$ is resolved
689: scaleless integrals are set to zero which leads to the last line of
690: Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z1Z1til}).
691: Using Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z1Z1til}) in combination with
692: Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z1_2}), one obtains for the IR
693: renormalization constant of the one-loop two-point function
694: \begin{eqnarray}
695: \tilde{Z}^{(1)} &=& \frac{1}{16\pi^2} \frac{1}{\varepsilon}
696: \,.
697: \label{eq:tilZ1_2}
698: \end{eqnarray}
699: In analogy, applying the $R^\star$ operation to the diagram of
700: Fig.~\ref{fig:Rex} with all masses and external momenta set to zero
701: leads to
702: \begin{eqnarray}
703: 0 &=& R^\star\left[\int_1\int_2
704: \frac{1}{[-k_1^2][-k_2^2]^2[-(k_1-k_2)^2]}\right]
705: \nonumber\\
706: &=& \tilde{R}\left[\int_1\int_2
707: \frac{1}{[-k_1^2][-k_2^2]^2[-(k_1-k_2)^2]}
708: + Z^{(1)}\int_2\frac{1}{[-k_2^2]^2}
709: + Z^{(2)}\right]
710: \nonumber\\
711: &=& \tilde{Z}^{(2)} + Z^{(1)} \tilde{Z}^{(1)} + Z^{(2)}
712: \,.
713: \label{eq:ir1}
714: \end{eqnarray}
715: This equation defines the IR renormalization constant $\tilde{Z}^{(2)}$.
716:
717: Let us come back to the two-loop diagram of
718: Fig.~\ref{fig:Rex} with $m=0$. In this limit the diagram contains both
719: an IR and UV divergent subdiagram.
720: The application of $R^\star$ generates the following terms
721: \begin{eqnarray}
722: \lefteqn{
723: R^\star\left[\int_1\int_2
724: \frac{1}{[M^2-(k_1-k_2)^2][M^2-(k_1+q)^2][-k_2^2]^2} \right]
725: }
726: \nonumber\\&=&\mbox{}
727: \tilde{R}\left[
728: \int_1\int_2
729: \frac{1}{[M^2-(k_1-k_2)^2][M^2-(k_1+q)^2][-k_2^2]^2}
730: + Z^{(1)} \int_2\frac{1}{[-k_2^2]^2}
731: + Z^{(2)}
732: \right]
733: \nonumber\\&=&\mbox{}
734: \int_1\int_2
735: \frac{1}{[M^2-(k_1-k_2)^2][M^2-(k_1+q)^2][-k_2^2]^2}
736: + \tilde{Z}^{(1)} \int_1\frac{1}{[M^2-k_1^2][M^2-(k_1+q)^2]}
737: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
738: + Z^{(1)} \tilde{Z}^{(1)}
739: + Z^{(2)}
740: \nonumber\\
741: &=&
742: \left(\frac{1}{16\pi^2}\right)^2
743: \Bigg\{
744: \left[ -\frac{1}{2\varepsilon^2}
745: -\frac{1}{2\varepsilon}\left(-1+2\ln\frac{\mu^2}{M^2}\right)
746: \right]
747: +%\left[
748: \frac{1}{\varepsilon}
749: \left(\frac{1}{\varepsilon}+\ln\frac{\mu^2}{M^2}\right)
750: %\right]
751: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
752: +%\left[
753: \left(-\frac{1}{\varepsilon}\right)
754: \frac{1}{\varepsilon}
755: %\right]
756: +\left[
757: \frac{1}{2\varepsilon^2}
758: - \frac{1}{2\varepsilon}
759: \right]
760: + \mbox{finite terms}
761: \Bigg\}
762: \nonumber\\
763: &=& \mbox{finite}
764: \,,
765: \label{eq:tilZ2}
766: \end{eqnarray}
767: where $\tilde{R}$ after the second equal sign acts on the IR divergent
768: integral $\int_2 1/[-k_2^2]^2$ and generates the factors
769: $\tilde{Z}^{(1)}$. Note that no term $\tilde{Z}^{(2)}$ appears as the
770: original integral involves the scales $M$ and $q$.
771: After the third equal sign the results of
772: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:Z1_2}),~(\ref{eq:Z2_2}),~(\ref{eq:tilZ1_2})
773: and of the Appendix (\ref{eq:Pab})
774: have been used in order to explicitly show the finiteness.
775: In general the logic is the other way around: one chooses the masses
776: and external momenta in such a way that the very diagram, i.e. the first
777: term in the second line of
778: Eq.~(\ref{eq:tilZ2}), can easily be evaluated and uses
779: Eq.~(\ref{eq:tilZ2}) in order to determine $Z^{(2)}$.
780:
781: At the end of this Subsection we want to work out the connection of
782: the $R^\star$ operation to the asymptotic expansion with respect to
783: large masses.
784: The hard-mass procedure provides a prescription on how to
785: evaluate Feynman integrals where one of the internal masses is much
786: larger than the others (cf. Appendix~\ref{sub:ae}).
787: Thus one can adopt the point-of-view to
788: introduce light masses which regularize all IR divergences
789: and apply the hard-mass procedure.
790: For illustration let us consider the diagram in Fig.~\ref{fig:Rex}
791: with one of the propagators carrying mass $M$ doubled in order to
792: avoid UV divergences which keeps the formula more transparent.
793: For $m\not=0$ the diagram is also IR finite.
794: Applying the hard-mass procedure in the limit
795: $M^2\gg m^2,q^2$ and keeping only the leading terms in $m^2/M^2$ and
796: $q^2/M^2$ leads to
797: \begin{eqnarray}
798: \lefteqn{
799: \int_1\int_2
800: \frac{1}{[M^2-(k_1-k_2)^2][M^2-(k_1+q)^2]^2[m^2-k_2^2]^2}
801: }
802: \nonumber\\&=&\mbox{}
803: \int_1\int_2
804: \frac{1}{[M^2-(k_1-k_2)^2][M^2-k_1^2]^2[-k_2^2]^2}
805: +\int_1\frac{1}{[M^2-k_1^2]^3}
806: \int_2\frac{1}{[m^2-k_2^2]^2}
807: +\ldots
808: \,,
809: \nonumber\\
810: \label{eq:Z2hmp_1}
811: \end{eqnarray}
812: where the ellipses represent terms of order $q^2/M^2$ and $m^2/M^2$.
813: The general rules and explicit examples for the hard-mass procedure are
814: discussed in Appendix~\ref{sub:ae}. The application of
815: Eq.~(\ref{eqasexp}) to the two-loop diagram at hand leads to the two
816: contributions which are listed in the second line of
817: Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2hmp_1}). The first term corresponds to the
818: whole diagram which according to the rules of the hard-mass procedure
819: has to be expanded in the small quantities $q$ and $m$. To our
820: approximation this means to simply nullify both $q$ and $m$. In the
821: second contribution the hard subgraph consists of the one-loop
822: subdiagram where all lines carry the heavy mass $M$. The expansion in
823: the external momenta leads to $\int_1 1/[M^2-k_1^2]^3$ which finally
824: leads to the second term on the right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2hmp_1}).
825: Note that the first integral is IR divergent whereas the second one is
826: UV divergent. Their connection to the $R$ and $\tilde{R}$ operation
827: becomes clear after adding and subtracting the term
828: $Z^{(1)}\int_1 1/[M^2-k_1^2]^3$
829: \begin{eqnarray}
830: \mbox{Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2hmp_1})}
831: &=&
832: \int_1\int_2
833: \frac{1}{[M^2-(k_1-k_2)^2][M^2-k_1^2]^2[-k_2^2]^2}
834: -\int_1\frac{1}{[M^2-k_1^2]^3}Z^{(1)}
835: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
836: +\int_1\frac{1}{[M^2-k_1^2]^3}
837: \left(\int_2\frac{1}{[m^2-k_2^2]^2}+Z^{(1)}\right)
838: +\ldots
839: \nonumber\\
840: &=&
841: \tilde{R}\left[
842: \int_1\int_2
843: \frac{1}{[M^2-(k_1-k_2)^2][M^2-k_1^2]^2[-k_2^2]^2}
844: \right]
845: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
846: +\int_1\frac{1}{[M^2-k_1^2]^3}
847: R\left[ \int_2\frac{1}{[m^2-k_2^2]^2} \right]
848: +\ldots
849: \,,
850: \label{eq:Z2hmp}
851: \end{eqnarray}
852: where in the last step Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z1Z1til}) has been used.
853: In Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2hmp}) the correspondence between the IR and UV
854: divergences,
855: which are introduced through the hard-mass procedure,
856: can nicely be observed.
857: Furthermore, it can be seen how they have to be combined in order to
858: arrive at the final form which contains the application of the $R$ and
859: $\tilde{R}$ operations.
860:
861: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
862:
863: \subsection{\label{sub:IRR}Global infra-red re-arrangement
864: and the quark anomalous dimension}
865:
866: In the previous Subsection it has been demonstrated that the
867: IRR in connection with the $R^\star$ operation provides a very
868: powerful tool for the computation of renormalization group functions
869: at higher orders. In this Subsection we want to discuss its
870: practical application in the case of the
871: quark anomalous dimension $\gamma_m$.
872:
873: In the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme the running of the quark masses is governed
874: by the function $\gamma_{m}(\alpha_s)$
875: \begin{eqnarray}
876: \mu^2\,\frac{d}{d\mu^2}m^{(n_f)}(\mu)
877: &=&
878: m^{(n_f)}(\mu)\,\gamma_m^{(n_f)}\left(\alpha_s^{(n_f)}\right)
879: \,\,=\,\,
880: -m^{(n_f)}(\mu)\,\sum_{i\ge0} \gamma_{m,i}^{(n_f)}
881: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^{i+1}
882: \,,
883: \nonumber\\
884: \label{eq:defgamma}
885: \end{eqnarray}
886: where the coefficients $\gamma_{m,i}$ are known up to the four-loop
887: order~\cite{Tar81,Tar82,Larin:massQCD,Che97_gam,LarRitVer97_gam}
888: \begin{eqnarray}
889: \gamma_{m,0}^{(n_f)} &=& 1\,,
890: \nonumber\\
891: \gamma_{m,1}^{(n_f)} &=& \frac{1}{16}\left[ \frac{202}{3}
892: - \frac{20}{9} n_f \right]\,,
893: \nonumber \\
894: \gamma_{m,2}^{(n_f)} &=& \frac{1}{64} \left[1249+\left( - \frac{2216}{27}
895: - \frac{160}{3}\zeta_3 \right)n_f
896: - \frac{140}{81} n_f^2 \right]\,,
897: \nonumber \\
898: \gamma_{m,3}^{(n_f)} &=& \frac{1}{256} \left[
899: \frac{4603055}{162} + \frac{135680}{27}\zeta_3 - 8800\zeta_5
900: +\left(- \frac{91723}{27} - \frac{34192}{9}\zeta_3
901: + 880\zeta_4
902: \right.\right.
903: \nonumber \\
904: &&{}+ \left.\left.
905: \frac{18400}{9}\zeta_5 \right) n_f
906: +\left( \frac{5242}{243} + \frac{800}{9}\zeta_3
907: - \frac{160}{3}\zeta_4 \right) n_f^2
908: \right.
909: \nonumber \\&& \left.\mbox{}
910: +\left(- \frac{332}{243} + \frac{64}{27}\zeta_3 \right) n_f^3 \right]
911: \,,
912: \end{eqnarray}
913: with $\zeta_3\approx1.202\,057$,
914: $\zeta_4=\pi^4/90$ and $\zeta_5\approx1.036\,928$.
915: The superscript $n_f$ indicates the dependence on the number of quarks.
916:
917: For the computation of $\gamma_m$ one has to know the quark mass
918: renormalization constant in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme,
919: $Z_m$, which relates the bare mass, $m^0$, to
920: the renormalized one through
921: \begin{eqnarray}
922: m^0 &=& Z_m m
923: \,.
924: \label{eq:Zmdef}
925: \end{eqnarray}
926: $Z_m$ can be obtained form the vector and scalar parts of the quark
927: propagator. Its inverse reads in bare form
928: \begin{eqnarray}
929: \left( S_F^0(q) \right)^{-1} &=&
930: i \left[ m^0 - \qsla - \Sigma^0(q) \right]
931: \nonumber\\
932: &=&
933: i \left[ m^0 \left( 1 - \Sigma_S^0 \right)
934: - \qsla \left( 1 + \Sigma_V^0 \right)\right]
935: \label{eq:sfinv0}
936: \,,
937: \end{eqnarray}
938: where the functions $\Sigma_S^0$ and $\Sigma_V^0$
939: depend on the external momentum $q$, the bare mass $m^0$ and on the bare
940: strong coupling constant $\alpha_s^0$.
941: From the requirement that the renormalized quark propagator is finite
942: one gets in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme
943: the following two equations
944: \begin{eqnarray}
945: Z_2 &=& 1 - K_\varepsilon\left[ Z_2 \Sigma_V^0 \right]
946: \,,
947: \nonumber\\
948: Z_2Z_m &=& 1 + K_\varepsilon\left[ Z_2 Z_m \Sigma_S^0 \right]
949: \,,
950: \label{eq:Z2Zm}
951: \end{eqnarray}
952: where $Z_2$ is the wave function renormalization of the quark.
953: The operator $K_\varepsilon$ extracts the poles in $1/\varepsilon$.
954: The Eqs.~(\ref{eq:Z2Zm}) are solved recursively for $Z_2$ and $Z_m$,
955: and $\gamma_m$ is computed from Eq.~(\ref{eq:defgamma}) using
956: (\ref{eq:Zmdef}) and the fact that $\mu^2 {\rm d} m_0/{\rm d}\mu^2 = 0$.
957: This leads to
958: \begin{eqnarray}
959: \gamma_m &=& - \mu^2 \frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d}\mu^2} \ln Z_m
960: \nonumber\\
961: &=& -\beta^\varepsilon(\alpha_s)
962: \pi\frac{\partial}{\partial\alpha_s} \ln Z_m
963: \,,
964: \end{eqnarray}
965: where $\beta^\varepsilon(\alpha_s)=-\varepsilon+\beta(\alpha_s)$
966: is the $D$-dimensional $\beta$ function and $\beta(\alpha_s)$ is defined
967: below in Eq.~(\ref{eq:defbeta}).
968:
969: \begin{figure}[t]
970: \begin{center}
971: \begin{tabular}{c}
972: \leavevmode
973: \epsfxsize=14.cm
974: \epsffile[57 425 530 740]{figs/fp_fig.ps}
975: \end{tabular}
976: \end{center}
977: \caption{\label{fig:fpdiags}
978: Sample diagrams contributing to the fermion propagator.
979: }
980: \end{figure}
981:
982: For the computation in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme
983: one has to evaluate the pole part
984: of the fermion propagator. Some sample diagrams
985: contributing at one, two, three and four loops
986: are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:fpdiags}.
987: As the diagrams contributing to
988: $\Sigma_S^0$ and $\Sigma_V^0$ are logarithmically divergent
989: the computation can be performed by setting all internal
990: masses to zero and keeping the external momentum finite.
991: This leads to massless $l$-loop propagator-type integrals for the
992: evaluation of $\gamma_{m,l-1}$. All occuring integrals
993: are free from IR divergences.
994: At one-, two- and three-loop order the
995: package {\tt MINCER}~\cite{mincer} can be used in order to perform the
996: computation. However, this method fails to be practical
997: for the computation of
998: $\gamma_{m,3}$ as currently massless four-loop integrals are not
999: available.
1000: Alternatively one could set the external momentum to zero but keep the
1001: quark mass finite. Again the technology is available to perform the
1002: three-loop calculation~\cite{matad}, however, the corresponding
1003: four-loop vacuum diagrams are currently again out of range.
1004:
1005: A tempting approach for the computation of $\gamma_{m,3}$,
1006: which actually was considered in~\cite{Che97_gam} (see also~\cite{Che96}),
1007: is the following: due to the properties of the IRR~\cite{Vla80}
1008: one can set to zero the external momentum and choose
1009: an arbitrary subset of the
1010: internal lines to have a non-zero mass.
1011: A clever choice is to allow only the quark propagator which is
1012: attached to the left vertex a non-zero mass $M$.
1013: This has the advantage that the $l$-loop integrals
1014: can be solved by iterating a massive one-loop vacuum
1015: and a $(l-1)$-loop massless propagator-type integral where the
1016: external momentum of the latter exactly corresponds to the
1017: loop momentum of the former. Thus, even at four-loop order
1018: at most massless three-loop two-point integrals have to be
1019: evaluated. It is sufficient to compute their finite parts,
1020: as only the $1/\varepsilon$ poles of the $l$-loop integral are needed.
1021: However, there are two subtleties connected to this choice of
1022: IR structure. The first one is connected to the asymmetry one
1023: introduces due to the choice of the massive line.
1024: As a consequence the ``left'' vertex has to be renormalized
1025: differently from the ``right'' one. This we will explicitly see
1026: in the formulae we derive below.
1027:
1028: The second disadvantage is the occurrence of IR divergences.
1029: At this point the idea is to use the $R^\star$ operation
1030: in order to subtract them. However, an effective evaluation of the
1031: roughly 6000 diagrams is only possible if the computation of the IR
1032: renormalization constant can be performed in a global way.
1033: This was achieved in Ref.~\cite{Che97_gam} and will be described in the
1034: following.
1035:
1036: As the explicit formulae for $Z_2$ and $Z_m$ are not yet available in the
1037: literature and as they will be published elsewhere~\cite{Che:priv}
1038: we present the derivation of a formula for the renormalization constant
1039: of the vector current correlator, $Z^{\rm em}$, which is quite similar
1040: to the one of $Z_2$ and $Z_m$.
1041: $Z^{\rm em}$ evaluated at four-loop order
1042: immediately leads to corrections of order $\alpha_s^3$ to
1043: the cross section $\sigma(e^+e^-\to \mbox{hadrons})$~\cite{Che97_R}.
1044:
1045: Our starting point for the computation of $Z^{\rm em}$
1046: is the renormalized vector current polarization
1047: function\footnote{For a precise definition see Eq.~(\ref{eqpivadef}).}
1048: which can be cast in the form
1049: \begin{eqnarray}
1050: \Pi^{\mu\nu}(q) &=& \left(\frac{Z_V}{Z_2}\right)^2 \Pi^{0,\mu\nu}(q)
1051: + Z^{\rm em}\left(-q^2 g^{\mu\nu}+ q^\mu q^\nu\right)
1052: \,.
1053: \label{eq:pimunu}
1054: \end{eqnarray}
1055: $\Pi^{0,\mu\nu}(q)$ is the bare correlator as indicated by the
1056: index ``0''.
1057: $Z_2$ corresponds to the wave function renormalization constant
1058: and $Z_V$ is the renormalization constant for the vector current
1059: $j^v=\bar{\psi}\gamma^\mu\psi$ defined through
1060: \begin{eqnarray}
1061: \left(j^{v}\right)\Bigg|_{\rm ren.} &=&
1062: \frac{Z_V}{Z_2} \left( j^{v} \right)\Bigg|_{\rm bare}
1063: \,.
1064: \end{eqnarray}
1065: Note that $Z^{\rm em}$ as defined in
1066: Eq.~(\ref{eq:pimunu}) receives contributions starting from one-loop order.
1067:
1068: In order to derive a formula for the computation of $Z^{\rm em}$
1069: we use for $\Pi^{0,\mu\nu}(q)$
1070: a Dyson-Schwinger-type representation containing
1071: the full fermion propagator, $G^0$,
1072: and the proper photon-quark vertex function, $\Gamma^{0,\mu}$,
1073: leaving out one integration over the final loop momentum which we call
1074: $p$.
1075: The resulting diagrammatic representation
1076: is visualized in Fig.~\ref{fig:fpropZ2}(a).
1077: After contraction with $g_{\mu\nu}$ one obtains
1078: \begin{eqnarray}
1079: \Pi^{\mu}_{\mu}(q) &=&
1080: - \left(\frac{Z_V}{Z_2}\right)^2
1081: \mbox{Tr}\left[
1082: \int\frac{{\rm d}^D p}{(2\pi)^D}
1083: i \gamma_\mu
1084: G^0(p,\alpha_s^0)
1085: \Gamma^{0,\mu}(p,q,\alpha_s^0)
1086: G^0(p+q,\alpha_s^0)
1087: \right]
1088: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
1089: + Z^{\rm em} q^2 \left(1-D\right)
1090: \,,
1091: \label{eq:Zem_a}
1092: \end{eqnarray}
1093: where the minus sign in front of the first term on the right hand side
1094: accounts for the closed fermion loop corresponding to the $p$ integration.
1095: In Eq.~(\ref{eq:Zem_a}) all colour indices have been suppressed and
1096: the dependence of $G^0$ and $\Gamma^{0,\mu}$ on the bare coupling
1097: $\alpha_s^0$ is made explicit.
1098:
1099:
1100: \begin{figure}[ht]
1101: \begin{center}
1102: \begin{tabular}{cc}
1103: \leavevmode
1104: \epsfxsize=7.cm
1105: \epsffile[70 118 530 450]{figs/phprop.ps}
1106: &
1107: \leavevmode
1108: \epsfxsize=7.0cm
1109: \epsffile[72 180 540 436]{figs/fpropZ2.ps}
1110: \\
1111: (a) & (b)
1112: \end{tabular}
1113: \caption{\label{fig:fpropZ2}(a) Graphical representation of
1114: Eq.~(\ref{eq:Zem_a}). In the case of the fermion propagator the
1115: analogous diagram looks like the one in (b).
1116: In both cases an artificial mass is introduced in the propagator of
1117: the fermion line attached to the left vertex.
1118: }
1119: \end{center}
1120: \end{figure}
1121:
1122: Next we exploit the finiteness of $\Pi^\mu_\mu$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:pimunu})
1123: and the fact that $Z^{\rm em}$ only contains poles in
1124: $1/\varepsilon$.
1125: This leads to an explicit formula for $Z^{\rm em}$ which reads
1126: \begin{eqnarray}
1127: Z^{\rm em}\left(D-1\right)
1128: &=& - K_\varepsilon\Bigg\{
1129: \left(\frac{Z_V}{Z_2}\right)^2
1130: \frac{\Box_q}{2D}\mbox{Tr}\Bigg[
1131: \int\frac{{\rm d}^D p}{(2\pi)^D}
1132: i \gamma_\mu
1133: \nonumber\\&&\qquad\qquad\qquad\mbox{}
1134: G^0(p,\alpha_s^0)
1135: \Gamma^{0,\mu}(p,q,\alpha_s^0)
1136: G^0(p+q,\alpha_s^0)
1137: \Bigg]\Bigg|_{q\to0}
1138: \Bigg\}
1139: \label{eq:Z2_1}
1140: \,.
1141: \end{eqnarray}
1142: In this equation we consider the limit $q\to0$ on the right-hand
1143: side. This is possible as in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme
1144: $Z^{\rm em}$ does not depend on any dimensional scale.
1145: In order to evaluate the four-loop contribution to the polarization
1146: function $G^0$ and $\Gamma^{0,\mu}$ have to be inserted at
1147: tree-level and at one-, two- and three-loop order.
1148:
1149: Let us next have a closer look to the renormalization constant $Z_V$.
1150: For the ``right'' vertex we have $Z_V=Z_2$. However,
1151: due to the artificial mass which we want to introduce in the fermion
1152: line connected to the ``left'' vertex
1153: the equation $Z_V=Z_2$ can not be applied immediately.
1154: Instead we write for the ``left'' vertex $Z_V=1+\delta Z_V$ and thus
1155: obtain from Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2_1})
1156: \begin{eqnarray}
1157: Z^{\rm em}\left(D-1\right)
1158: &=& - K_\varepsilon\Bigg\{
1159: \frac{1}{Z_2}
1160: \frac{\Box_q}{2D}\mbox{Tr}\Bigg[
1161: \int\frac{{\rm d}^D p}{(2\pi)^D}
1162: i \gamma_\mu
1163: \frac{p^2}{p^2-M^2}
1164: \nonumber\\&&\qquad\qquad\qquad\mbox{}
1165: G^0(p,\alpha_s^0)
1166: \Gamma^{0,\mu}(p,q,\alpha_s^0)
1167: G^0(p+q,\alpha_s^0)
1168: \Bigg]\Bigg|_{q\to0}
1169: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
1170: + \frac{\delta Z_V}{Z_2}
1171: \frac{\Box_q}{2D}\mbox{Tr}\Bigg[
1172: \int\frac{{\rm d}^D p}{(2\pi)^D}
1173: i \gamma_\mu
1174: %\right.\right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\left.\mbox{}
1175: G^0(p,\alpha_s^0)
1176: \Gamma^{0,\mu}(p,q,\alpha_s^0)
1177: G^0(p+q,\alpha_s^0)
1178: \Bigg]\Bigg|_{q\to0}
1179: \Bigg\}
1180: \,.
1181: \nonumber\\
1182: \label{eq:Z2_2a}
1183: \end{eqnarray}
1184: In the first line the presence of the artificial mass is
1185: made explicit in the factor $p^2/(p^2-M^2)$ which effectively replaces
1186: the massless propagator by a massive one. On the other hand, in the
1187: second equation $M$ can be set to zero, as $\delta Z_V$ already
1188: contains the effect of $M$.
1189: In a next step we want to perform the limit $q\to0$.
1190: In particular, we use $M^2\gg q^2$ and apply the hard-mass procedure
1191: to the first term in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2_2a}) which transforms it to
1192: \begin{eqnarray}
1193: Z^{\rm em}\left(D-1\right)
1194: &=& - K_\varepsilon\Bigg\{
1195: \frac{1}{Z_2}
1196: \frac{\Box_q}{2D}\mbox{Tr}\Bigg[
1197: \int\frac{{\rm d}^D p}{(2\pi)^D}
1198: i \gamma_\mu
1199: \frac{p^2}{p^2-M^2}
1200: \nonumber\\&&\qquad\qquad\qquad\mbox{}
1201: G^0(p,\alpha_s^0)
1202: \Gamma^{0,\mu}(p,q,\alpha_s^0)
1203: G^0(p+q,\alpha_s^0)
1204: \Bigg]\Bigg|_{q=0}
1205: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
1206: +
1207: \frac{1}{Z_2}\tilde{R}\Bigg[\Gamma_{f\bar{f}\gamma}(0,0)
1208: \frac{\Box_q}{2D}\mbox{Tr}\Bigg[
1209: \int\frac{{\rm d}^D p}{(2\pi)^D}
1210: i \gamma_\mu
1211: \nonumber\\&&\qquad\qquad\qquad\mbox{}
1212: G^0(p,\alpha_s^0)
1213: \Gamma^{0,\mu}(p,q,\alpha_s^0)
1214: G^0(p+q,\alpha_s^0)
1215: \Bigg]\Bigg|_{q=0}\Bigg]
1216: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
1217: + \frac{\delta Z_V}{Z_2}\tilde{R}\Bigg[
1218: \frac{\Box_q}{2D}\mbox{Tr}\Bigg[
1219: \int\frac{{\rm d}^D p}{(2\pi)^D}
1220: i \gamma_\mu
1221: \nonumber\\&&\qquad\qquad\qquad\mbox{}
1222: G^0(p,\alpha_s^0)
1223: \Gamma^{0,\mu}(p,q,\alpha_s^0)
1224: G^0(p+q,\alpha_s^0)
1225: \Bigg]\Bigg|_{q=0}\Bigg]
1226: \Bigg\}
1227: \,.
1228: \nonumber\\
1229: \label{eq:Z2_3}
1230: \end{eqnarray}
1231: where $\gamma^\mu \delta\Gamma_{f\bar{f}\gamma}(0,0)$
1232: represents the sum of all one-particle-irreducible (1PI)
1233: hard subgraphs containing the mass $M$.
1234: It gets contributions starting from one-loop order.
1235: In Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2_3}) we introduced the $\tilde{R}$ operation in
1236: order to treat the IR divergences of those terms which lead to
1237: massless tadpoles for $q\to0$. Note that in general also the first
1238: term in (\ref{eq:Z2_3}) contains IR divergences. However, they
1239: originate from the hard-mass procedure and are correlated to the UV
1240: poles of the second term in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2_3})
1241: (cf. the discussion around Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2hmp})).
1242:
1243: The IR divergences which occur in the last two terms of
1244: Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2_3}) for $q=0$
1245: are taken care by introducing appropriate
1246: renormalization constants. They can be determined in a global manner
1247: by setting $q=0$
1248: in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2_1}) and applying the $\tilde{R}$ operation.
1249: As the left-hand side is unaffected we have
1250:
1251: \begin{eqnarray}
1252: Z^{\rm em}\left(D-1\right)
1253: &=& - K_\varepsilon\Bigg\{
1254: %\nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
1255: \tilde{R}\Bigg[
1256: \frac{\Box_q}{2D}\mbox{Tr}\Bigg[
1257: \int\frac{{\rm d}^D p}{(2\pi)^D}
1258: i \gamma_\mu
1259: \nonumber\\&&\qquad\qquad\qquad\mbox{}
1260: G^0(p,\alpha_s^0)
1261: \Gamma^{0,\mu}(p,q,\alpha_s^0)
1262: G^0(p+q,\alpha_s^0)
1263: \Bigg]\Bigg|_{q=0}
1264: \Bigg]
1265: \Bigg\}
1266: \,.
1267: % \nonumber\\
1268: \label{eq:Z2_4}
1269: \end{eqnarray}
1270: The application of $\tilde{R}$ generates only one term, namely the
1271: IR counterterm, as we set massless tadpoles to zero.
1272: This counterterm is a global one as it treats the IR divergences of
1273: the sum of all diagrams. We want to mention that this convenient
1274: aspect is new as compared to older calculations where the
1275: $\tilde{R}$ operator has been used. In
1276: Ref.~\cite{GorKatLar91SurSam91}, e.g., the $\tilde{R}$ operator has
1277: been applied to each diagram individually which in practice is quite
1278: tedious.
1279:
1280: Inserting Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2_4}) into~(\ref{eq:Z2_3}) finally leads to
1281: \begin{eqnarray}
1282: Z^{\rm em}\left(D-1\right)
1283: &=& - K_\varepsilon\Bigg\{
1284: \frac{1}{Z_2}
1285: \frac{\Box_q}{2D}\mbox{Tr}\Bigg[
1286: \int\frac{{\rm d}^D p}{(2\pi)^D}
1287: i \gamma_\mu
1288: \frac{p^2}{p^2-M^2}
1289: \nonumber\\&&\qquad\qquad\qquad\mbox{}
1290: G^0(p,\alpha_s^0)
1291: \Gamma^{0,\mu}(p,q,\alpha_s^0)
1292: G^0(p+q,\alpha_s^0)
1293: \Bigg]\Bigg|_{q=0}
1294: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
1295: +\frac{(1-D)Z^{\rm em}}{Z_2}
1296: \left(\delta\Gamma_{f\bar{f}\gamma}(0,0) + \delta Z_V \right)
1297: \Bigg\}
1298: \,.
1299: \label{eq:Z2_5}
1300: \end{eqnarray}
1301: Note that at this point the relation $\delta Z_V=Z_2-1$ can be
1302: used.
1303:
1304: At one-loop order only the first line of Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2_5})
1305: contributes where all renormalization constants can be set to one.
1306: Furthermore the functions $G^0$ and $\Gamma^{0,\mu}$ take their
1307: tree-level values and only the one-loop diagram shown in
1308: Fig.~\ref{fig:photonprop} has to be evaluated for external momentum zero
1309: and finite quark mass in one of the fermion lines.
1310: In this case no IR divergences occur.
1311:
1312: \begin{figure}[ht]
1313: \leavevmode
1314: \begin{center}
1315: \begin{tabular}{cccc}
1316: \epsfxsize=3cm
1317: \epsffile[140 270 470 540]{figs/diarho1l.ps}
1318: &
1319: \epsfxsize=3cm
1320: \epsffile[140 270 470 540]{figs/diarho2l1.ps}
1321: &
1322: \epsfxsize=3cm
1323: \epsffile[140 270 470 540]{figs/diarho2l2.ps}
1324: &
1325: \epsfxsize=3cm
1326: \epsffile[140 270 470 540]{figs/diarho2l3.ps}
1327: \end{tabular}
1328: \caption{\label{fig:photonprop}One- and two-loop diagrams contributing
1329: the vector current correlator.}
1330: \end{center}
1331: \end{figure}
1332:
1333: A non-trivial contribution from the terms in the second line of
1334: Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2_5}) occurs for the first time at two-loop order.
1335: In particular, for $\delta\Gamma_{f\bar{f}\gamma}$ the one-loop
1336: photon-fermion vertex corrections
1337: have to be evaluated where one of the quarks carries mass
1338: $M$ and the other one is massless. All external momenta equal to zero.
1339: In the three two-loop diagrams (see Fig.~\ref{fig:photonprop})
1340: contributing to the first line
1341: we consequently assign a mass $M$ to the fermion
1342: (not the anti-fermion)
1343: line attached to the ``left''
1344: vertex and set the masses in all other propagators to zero.
1345: For vanishing external momentum in each diagram a massless one-loop
1346: two-point function can be identified which can be solved with the help
1347: of Eq.~(\ref{eq:Pab}) in Appendix~\ref{sub:single}.
1348: The external momentum coincides with the loop momentum of the remaining
1349: one-loop vacuum integral which is also expressible in terms of
1350: $\Gamma$ functions (cf. Eq.~(\ref{eq:Va})).
1351:
1352: In general,
1353: for a $l$-loop calculation the renormalization constants occuring in
1354: Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2_5}) are only needed at loop order $(l-1)$.
1355: The loop integrals which are necessary to compute the first
1356: expression in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2_5}) are
1357: massless $(l-1)$-loop two-point functions and one-loop vacuum integrals.
1358: For the evaluation of $\delta\Gamma_{f\bar{f}\gamma}$, $(l-1)$-loop
1359: vacuum integral are needed. In particular,
1360: for $l=4$ the occuring integrals are very well studied
1361: (cf. Refs.~\cite{mincer,matad}).
1362:
1363: In the above equations the bare coupling constant is used
1364: as a parameter. It has to be expressed through the renormalized version
1365: using the $(l-1)$-loop formula for the renormalization constant
1366: $Z_g$ (cf. Eq.~(\ref{eq:renconst})).
1367: We want to note that in our case the mass $M$
1368: needs not to be renormalized as in the diagrams no subdivergence
1369: is present which could induce a corresponding counterterm.
1370:
1371: Besides the application to
1372: the vector current correlator, which leads to corrections of order
1373: $\alpha_s^3$ to $R(s)$~\cite{Che97_R}, the
1374: method described in this Subsection has successfully been applied to
1375: the four-loop fermion propagator and
1376: the correlator of scalar
1377: currents in order to evaluate the
1378: the four-loop contribution to $\gamma_m$~\cite{Che97_gam}
1379: and corrections of order $\alpha_s^3$ to
1380: the decay of a scalar Higgs boson~\cite{Che97_Higgs}, respectively.
1381:
1382: Due to the large number of genuine four-loop diagrams an automation of
1383: the computation is mandatory.
1384: The four-loop calculations of~\cite{Che97_R,Che97_Higgs,Che97_gam}
1385: have been performed with the help of the package {\tt
1386: GEFICOM}~\cite{geficom}. Within this framework the computation of
1387: $\delta\Gamma_{f\bar{f}\gamma}$
1388: is straightforward as one- two- and three-loop
1389: vacuum integrals are directly accessible.
1390: For the four-loop contributions, like in the first line of
1391: Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z2_5}), some tricks are necessary.
1392: In particular completely massless four-loop diagrams are generated.
1393: In a next step a {\tt Mathematica}~\cite{math} program is used to
1394: identify the ``left'' vertex and to introduce the mass $M$. At this
1395: point the topology of the massless three-loop diagram is fixed and the
1396: mapping of the momenta according to the notation of {\tt
1397: MINCER}~\cite{mincer} can be performed.
1398: One has to exploit that the whole diagram is logarithmically divergent
1399: and the mass dimension is given by the artificial mass $M$.
1400: Then the massless integration and at the end also the one-loop massive
1401: one can be performed.
1402:
1403:
1404:
1405: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1406:
1407: \subsection{\label{sub:massint}Massive
1408: vacuum integrals and the $\beta$ function}
1409:
1410: A different approach has been employed
1411: in~\cite{RitVerLar97_bet,LarRitVer97_gam}
1412: in order to compute the four-loop contribution
1413: to the $\beta$ and $\gamma_m$ functions.
1414: Also here the basic property of the IRR has been exploited and the
1415: integrals have been simplified by modifying the IR behaviour of the
1416: Feynman diagrams.
1417: This time, however, a different attitude has been adopted than in the
1418: previous section:
1419: in all denominators, also the ones of the gluons and ghosts,
1420: a common mass parameter, $M$, has been introduced (see
1421: also~\cite{Chetyrkin:1998fm}).
1422: This avoids completely the IR divergences.
1423: On the other side, however, both gauge invariance and useful Ward
1424: identities are broken by this method.
1425: Moreover, multiplicative renormalization, which is very convenient in
1426: practical renormalization is lost. Nevertheless the $R$ operation
1427: applied to the individual diagrams still works and in principle it can
1428: be used to compute the overall renormalization constant.
1429: However, this is not at all practical, especially as in the case of
1430: the $\beta$ function roughly $50\,000$ diagrams have to be
1431: considered~\cite{RitVerLar97_bet} and an automatic treatment is
1432: absolutely mandatory. This is achieved by introducing effective
1433: vertices and propagators which incorporate all lower-order
1434: renormalization constants~\cite{RitVerLar97_bet}. Furthermore
1435: counterterms have to be introduced which correspond to a
1436: renormalization of the gluon and ghost mass and an overall
1437: renormalization constant for the gluon propagator.
1438:
1439: In the following we want to illustrate this method by considering
1440: two-loop QCD corrections to the photon propagator and evaluate the
1441: corrections to the wave function renormalization defined through
1442: \begin{eqnarray}
1443: A^{0,\mu} &=& \sqrt{Z_3^\gamma} A^{\mu}
1444: \,,
1445: \end{eqnarray}
1446: where $A^\mu$ is the photon field.
1447: For convenience we also introduce the renormalization constants
1448: $Z_1^\gamma$ and $Z_2^\gamma$ via
1449: \begin{eqnarray}
1450: \psi^0 &=& \sqrt{Z_2^\gamma} \psi
1451: \nonumber\\
1452: e^0 \bar{\psi^0}\gamma^\mu\psi^0 A_\mu^0 &=&
1453: Z_1^\gamma e \bar{\psi}\gamma^\mu\psi A_\mu
1454: \,,
1455: \end{eqnarray}
1456: where $e$ is the electromagnetic charge and $\psi$ is the fermion field.
1457: The corrections up to order $\alpha\alpha_s$ to
1458: $Z_3^\gamma$ are obtained from the diagrams of
1459: Fig.~\ref{fig:photonprop} which contribute to the photon polarization
1460: function.
1461: The latter can be written in the form
1462: \begin{eqnarray}
1463: \Pi^{\mu\nu}(q) &=& \left(-g^{\mu\nu}+\frac{q^\mu q^\nu}{q^2}\right)
1464: \Sigma_T(q^2)
1465: + \frac{q^\mu q^\nu}{q^2} \Sigma_L(q^2)
1466: \,.
1467: \end{eqnarray}
1468:
1469: The canonical way to compute $Z_3^\gamma$ would be to consider all
1470: particles as massless and evaluate the occuring massless two-point
1471: function in dimensional regularization.
1472: In this case $\Sigma_T(q^2)$ is proportional to $q^2$ and
1473: $\Sigma_L(q^2)\equiv 0$ which is due to gauge invariance.
1474: One observes that the sum of the bare two-loop diagrams only contains
1475: a simple pole in $\varepsilon$ and that it is independent
1476: of the QCD gauge parameter, $\xi$. Furthermore, due to the Ward identity
1477: connecting the photon-quark vertex to the quark self energy no
1478: renormalization is necessary and the bare diagrams of
1479: Fig.~\ref{fig:photonprop} already lead to the final answer
1480: where the formula
1481: \begin{eqnarray}
1482: Z_3^\gamma &=&
1483: 1 - K_\varepsilon\left(\frac{\Sigma_T(q^2)}{q^2}Z_3^\gamma\right)
1484: \,,
1485: \end{eqnarray}
1486: can be used.
1487:
1488: In the method proposed
1489: in~\cite{RitVerLar97_bet,LarRitVer97_gam,Chetyrkin:1998fm}
1490: a common mass $M$ is introduced in all lines
1491: for the computation of the renormalization group functions.
1492: As a consequence gauge invariance is broken and
1493: $\Sigma_L(q^2)$ is not zero any more. Furthermore, both
1494: $\Sigma_T(q^2)$ and $\Sigma_L(q^2)$ contain terms proportional to $M^2$.
1495: One also observes that the sum of the bare
1496: diagrams contains a pole of the form $\xi/\varepsilon$.
1497: Clearly the $R$ operation applied to the individual diagrams would
1498: still lead to the correct answer. However, we want to ``immitate''
1499: multiplicative renormalization as close as possible and introduce
1500: effective vertices and propagators.
1501: In the case of the photon-quark vertex we write
1502: \begin{eqnarray}
1503: \gamma^\mu \longrightarrow \gamma^\mu Z_1^\gamma
1504: \,\,=\,\, \gamma^\mu (1+\delta Z_1^\gamma)
1505: \,.
1506: \label{eq:effver}
1507: \end{eqnarray}
1508: which actually corresponds to multiplicative renormalization.
1509: The quark propagator is modified to
1510: \begin{eqnarray}
1511: \frac{\psla}{p^2-M^2} \longrightarrow
1512: \frac{\psla}{p^2-M^2} \left(1-\psla \delta Z_2^\gamma\frac{
1513: \psla}{p^2-M^2}\right)
1514: \,.
1515: \label{eq:effprop}
1516: \end{eqnarray}
1517: Note that for $M=0$ the terms proportional to
1518: $\delta Z_1^\gamma$ and $\delta Z_2^\gamma$ are proportional to the
1519: Born diagram and a cancellation takes place due to the Ward identity
1520: $Z_1^\gamma=Z_2^\gamma$.
1521: For $M\not=0$, $Z_1^\gamma$ and $Z_2^\gamma$ have to be determined form
1522: the vertex correction and quark self-energy, respectively.
1523: To our approximation they take the same values as for $M=0$, namely
1524: \begin{eqnarray}
1525: Z_1^\gamma &=& Z_2^\gamma \,\,=\,\,
1526: 1 + \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi} \frac{C_F}{\varepsilon}
1527: \left(\frac{1}{4}\xi-\frac{1}{4}\right)
1528: \,,
1529: \end{eqnarray}
1530: where $\xi$ is the gauge parameter defined in Eq.~(\ref{eq:gluprop}).
1531:
1532: The use of Eqs.~(\ref{eq:effver}) and~(\ref{eq:effprop}) for the
1533: computation of the one-loop diagram of Fig.~\ref{fig:photonprop}
1534: induces terms of order $\alpha\alpha_s$ which render the pole part
1535: independent of $\xi$.
1536: However, $\Pi^{\mu\nu}$ still contains terms proportional to
1537: $g^{\mu\nu} M^2$. They are removed by introducing a local
1538: mass counterterm for the photon
1539: of the form $M^2 A_\mu A^\mu$.
1540: Also for the gluon field a similar counterterm has to be introduced.
1541: It is contained in the effective gluon propagator as it
1542: is needed for the cancellation of subdivergences.
1543:
1544: Finally one arrives at
1545: \begin{eqnarray}
1546: Z_3^\gamma &=& 1 - \frac{\alpha}{\pi}\left(
1547: \frac{1}{3\varepsilon}
1548: + \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi} C_F \frac{1}{8\varepsilon}
1549: \right)
1550: \,.
1551: \end{eqnarray}
1552:
1553: In Ref.~\cite{RitVerLar97_bet} this method has been applied to obtain
1554: the four-loop contribution of the QCD $\beta$ function.
1555: It has been applied to the ghost-gluon vertex, the gluon propagator
1556: and the ghost propagator in order to obtain the corresponding
1557: renormalization constants $\tilde{Z}_1$, $Z_3$ and $\tilde{Z}_3$
1558: (cf. Eq.~(\ref{eq:renconst}))
1559: and finally the one for $\alpha_s$ via
1560: \begin{eqnarray}
1561: Z_g &=& \frac{\tilde{Z}_1}{\tilde{Z}_3\sqrt{Z_3}}
1562: \,.
1563: \end{eqnarray}
1564: The $\beta$ function is defined through
1565: \begin{eqnarray}
1566: \mu^2\frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d}\mu^2}
1567: \frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}
1568: &=&
1569: \beta^{(n_f)}\left(\alpha_s^{(n_f)}\right)
1570: \,\,=\,\,
1571: - \sum_{i\ge0}
1572: \beta_i^{(n_f)}\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^{i+2}
1573: \,,
1574: \label{eq:defbeta}
1575: \end{eqnarray}
1576: where $n_f$ is the number of active flavours.
1577: For completeness we want to list the results for the
1578: coefficients which are given by~\cite{gro,jon,tar,RitVerLar97_bet}
1579: \begin{eqnarray}
1580: \beta_0^{(n_f)} &=&\frac{1}{4}\left[ 11 - \frac{2}{3} n_f\right]
1581: \,,
1582: \nonumber\\
1583: \beta_1^{(n_f)} &=&\frac{1}{16}\left[ 102 - \frac{38}{3} n_f\right]
1584: \,,
1585: \nonumber \\
1586: \beta_2^{(n_f)} &=&\frac{1}{64}\left[\frac{2857}{2} - \frac{5033}{18} n_f
1587: + \frac{325}{54} n_f^2\right]
1588: \,,
1589: \nonumber \\
1590: \beta_3^{(n_f)} &=&\frac{1}{256}\left[ \frac{149753}{6} + 3564 \zeta_3
1591: + \left(- \frac{1078361}{162} - \frac{6508}{27} \zeta_3 \right) n_f
1592: \right.\nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
1593: + \left( \frac{50065}{162} + \frac{6472}{81} \zeta_3 \right) n_f^2
1594: +\left. \frac{1093}{729} n_f^3\right]
1595: \,.
1596: \label{eq:betafct}
1597: \end{eqnarray}
1598: $\zeta$ is Riemann's zeta function, with values $\zeta_2=\pi^2/6$
1599: and $\zeta_3\approx1.202\,057$.
1600:
1601: One of the main new achivements of Ref.~\cite{RitVerLar97_bet} is the
1602: treatment of the four-loop vacuum diagrams. The task is simplified due
1603: to the fact that only the divergent parts in $\varepsilon$ are needed.
1604: The method of integration-by-parts~\cite{CheTka81}
1605: has been used to derive recurrence relations which reduce a general
1606: four-loop integral to a linear combination of simple integrals and
1607: two (difficult) master integrals.
1608:
1609:
1610: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1611: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1612:
1613: \section{\label{sec:dec}Decoupling of heavy particles}
1614: \setcounter{equation}{0}
1615: \setcounter{figure}{0}
1616: \setcounter{table}{0}
1617:
1618: Quantum corrections to processes involving only light degrees of
1619: freedom contain in general the whole particle spectrum. In particular
1620: also heavy particles with masses much larger than the
1621: energy scale of the considered process contribute.
1622: It is highly desirable
1623: that in the limit where the heavy mass, $M$, goes to infinity
1624: its contribution to the light-particle Green function must tend to
1625: zero like $\mu/M$ where $\mu$ is a typical scale of the process.
1626: This is exactly the content of the so-called decoupling theorem
1627: which is proven in~\cite{AppCar75}.
1628:
1629: To be more precise let us consider an example, namely the
1630: production of heavy quarks in $e^+e^-$ annihilation.
1631: Due to the hierarchy in the quark masses there is a
1632: clear separation into light and heavy.
1633: For center-of-mass energies, $\sqrt{s}$,
1634: of about 40~GeV we are well below the production threshold of top quarks and
1635: thus we expect their influence to be suppressed by $\sqrt{s}/M_t$.
1636: Analogously the contribution of bottom quarks to the
1637: production of charm quarks close to the
1638: threshold must be proportional to
1639: $\sqrt{s}/M_b$.
1640: In our example the heavy quarks enter the first time at order
1641: $\alpha_s^2$ via the diagram pictured in Fig.~\ref{fig:eeqqheavy}.
1642: If the contribution of this diagram is computed in a
1643: momentum-subtraction scheme one indeed observes this
1644: behaviour\footnote{Actually the proof of the decoupling theorem
1645: in~\cite{AppCar75} is performed for a momentum-subtraction scheme.}.
1646: However, in this example, and also in most other QCD processes it is
1647: much more convenient to use a mass-independent renormalization prescription,
1648: like the MS~\cite{tHo73} or its popular modification, the
1649: $\overline{\rm MS}$~\cite{BarBurDukMut78} scheme.
1650: These schemes are characterized through the fact that their
1651: renormalization group functions are mass-independent which makes
1652: renormalization group improvements much more transparent.
1653: It also has the advantage that the computation of the renormalization group
1654: functions themselves is significantly simplified
1655: (cf. Section~\ref{sec:rge}).
1656: On the other hand there is the big drawback that the decoupling
1657: theorem of Appelquist and Carazzone~\cite{AppCar75}
1658: does not hold in mass-independent schemes.
1659: This is due to the mass-independence of the
1660: renormalization group functions which implies
1661: that, e.g. in case of QCD,
1662: the top quark and the down quark have identical contributions.
1663:
1664: \begin{figure}[ht]
1665: \begin{center}
1666: \epsfxsize=10.0cm
1667: \epsffile[25 208 587 584]{figs/eefftop.ps}
1668: \caption{\label{fig:eeqqheavy}Feynman diagram contribution to the
1669: process $e^+e^-\to b\bar{b}$ which gives rise to top-quark-dependent
1670: terms.
1671: }
1672: \end{center}
1673: \end{figure}
1674:
1675: Note that in the broad classes of momentum subtraction schemes
1676: the decoupling theorem is valid. However, the calculations are much
1677: more complicated and in general a coupled system of differential
1678: equations involving also the quark masses and the gauge parameter
1679: has to be solved in order to obtain the running of the couplings.
1680:
1681: Coming back to our example this means that the cross section
1682: $\sigma(e^+ e^-\to b\bar{b}+{\rm gluons})$
1683: evaluated in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme
1684: with $\sqrt{s}=40$~GeV does not
1685: behave like $\sqrt{s}/M_t$ but still contains logarithms of the form
1686: $\ln(s/M_t^2)$, which arise at order $\alpha_s^2$ from
1687: the diagram in Fig.~\ref{fig:eeqqheavy}.
1688:
1689: Clearly, both from the theoretical and practical point of view this is
1690: not acceptable. The way out is the explicit construction of an
1691: effective Lagrangian where the heavy particles are integrated out.
1692: This means that the dynamical degree of freedom of
1693: the heavy quark is removed,
1694: which manifestly leads to power-suppressed contributions of the latter.
1695: This will be performed in Section~\ref{sub:effL} for the case of QCD.
1696: The effective Lagrangian only depends on light degrees of
1697: freedom where the couplings\footnote{Here we mean ``normal''
1698: coupling constants, but also masses, gauge parameters, etc..}
1699: are multiplicatively re-scaled by the so-called decoupling
1700: constants. These constants are universal and have been computed in the
1701: case of QCD up to order $\alpha_s^3$~\cite{CheKniSte98}.
1702:
1703: Concerning the practical consequences we again want to consider the
1704: example of $e^+e^-$ annihilation.
1705: For a calculation at order $\alpha_s^2$ one computes all relevant
1706: diagrams including the one of Fig.~\ref{fig:eeqqheavy}.
1707: As mentioned above the result diverges proportional to the logarithm of
1708: the heavy quark mass.
1709: Now one has to remember that the coupling\footnote{Note, that,
1710: in the case where the light quark masses are neglected, only
1711: $\alpha_s$ remains as a parameter.}
1712: has to be changed according to the known rules
1713: which describe the transition to the effective Lagrangian.
1714: Thus one arrives at a physical observable expressed in terms of
1715: parameters of the effective Lagrangian and it can be explicitly checked
1716: that the dependence on the heavy quark mass, $M_t$, is
1717: power-suppressed --- in the case at hand it goes like $s/M_t^2$.
1718:
1719: Pioneering work in the computation of the decoupling constants has
1720: been done in~\cite{Wei80}. In Ref.~\cite{BerWet82Ber83} the decoupling
1721: constant for $\alpha_s$ has been computed at the two-loop order.
1722: The crucial idea of the method is based on the fact that the
1723: decoupling theorem~\cite{AppCar75} works in momentum subtraction
1724: schemes. Thus after relating the corresponding coupling constant to
1725: $\alpha_s$ defined in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme both in the full and
1726: the effective theory, it is possible to derive differential equations
1727: for the decoupling constant. They can easily be solved.
1728: For the corresponding integration constant a two-loop calculation is needed.
1729:
1730: Thirteen years later the authors of~\cite{LarvRiVer95} evaluated the
1731: corrections of order $\alpha_s^3$
1732: to the total decay rate of the $Z$ boson
1733: induced by a heavy top quark.
1734: In order to make the decoupling explicit the two-loop result
1735: of~\cite{BerWet82Ber83} is needed.
1736: However, it turned out that after expressing the decay rate in terms
1737: of effective parameters the top quark did not decouple.
1738: Thus in~\cite{LarvRiVer95} a second evaluation of
1739: the decoupling constant for $\alpha_s$ has been performed
1740: with a different result as in~\cite{BerWet82Ber83}. The result
1741: of~\cite{LarvRiVer95} was confirmed in~\cite{CheKniSte98}.
1742: In the meantime, the authors of Ref.~\cite{BerWet82Ber83}
1743: have revised \cite{Ber97}
1744: their original analysis and have found agreement with Ref.~\cite{LarvRiVer95}.
1745:
1746: The method of Ref.~\cite{LarvRiVer95} for the computation of the
1747: decoupling relations is based on the evaluation of a top quark
1748: contribution to a physical quantity. In particular the authors
1749: of~\cite{LarvRiVer95} considered corrections to the massless quark
1750: propagator with an additional zero momentum operator insertion.
1751: In order to obtain the decoupling relations to order $\alpha_s^2$ a
1752: three-loop calculation corresponding to the order $\alpha_s^3$
1753: corrections is necessary.
1754: Correspondingly, the decoupling relation to order $\alpha_s^3$ would
1755: require a four-loop calculation. In our method, which is described
1756: below, only the computation of
1757: three-loop vacuum diagrams are necessary.
1758:
1759: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1760:
1761: \subsection{\label{sub:effL}Construction of an effective Lagrangian in QCD}
1762:
1763: The main idea of effective theories is that the dynamics at low
1764: energies does not depend on the details of the dynamics of high
1765: energies.
1766: Thus the low-energy physics can be described using an effective
1767: Lagrangian which does not depend on the additional degrees of freedom
1768: present at high energies. The only effect of the high-energy
1769: parameters are modified couplings of the effective Lagrangian
1770: with respect to the full one.
1771:
1772: In the following we want to describe the construction of the
1773: effective Lagrangian in QCD with one heavy quark of mass $m_h$
1774: and $n_l$ light quarks.
1775:
1776: Our starting point is the full QCD Lagrangian which reads
1777: \begin{eqnarray}
1778: {\cal L}^{\rm QCD} &=&
1779: - \frac{1}{4} G^{a,\mu\nu} G^a_{\mu\nu}
1780: + \sum_{f=1}^{n_f}
1781: \bar{\psi}_f \left( i\,\,/\hspace{-.7em}D - m_f \right) \psi_f
1782: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
1783: - \frac{1}{2(1-\xi)} \left(\partial^\mu G_\mu^a\right)^2
1784: + \partial^\mu \bar{c}^a
1785: \left(\partial_\mu c^a-g_s f^{abc} c^b G_\mu^c\right)
1786: \,,
1787: \label{eq:L_QCD}
1788: \end{eqnarray}
1789: where the field strength tensor is defined through
1790: $G^{a,\mu\nu}=\partial^\mu G^{a,\nu} - \partial^\nu G^{a,\mu}
1791: + g_s f^{abc} G^{b,\mu}G^{c,\nu}$.
1792: $f^{abc}$ are the structure constants of the QCD gauge group,
1793: $g_s=\sqrt{4\pi\alpha_s}$ is the QCD gauge coupling,
1794: $\psi_f$ is a quark field with mass $m_f$,
1795: $G^{a,\mu}$ is the gluon field,
1796: $c^a$ is the Faddeev-Popov-ghost field, and
1797: $n_f=n_l+1$ is the total number of quark flavours.
1798: $D_\mu=\partial_\mu-ig_s (\lambda^a/2) G_\mu^a$ is the covariant
1799: derivative in the fundamental representation
1800: and $\lambda^a$ are the Gell-Mann matrices.
1801: For convenience we list the gluon propagator resulting
1802: from~(\ref{eq:L_QCD})
1803: \begin{eqnarray}
1804: D_g(q) &=&
1805: \frac{i}{q^2+i\epsilon}\left(-g^{\mu\nu}+\xi\frac{q^\mu q^\nu}{q^2}\right)
1806: \label{eq:gluprop}
1807: \,.
1808: \end{eqnarray}
1809: In this convention $\xi=0$ corresponds to Feynman gauge and $\xi=1$ to
1810: Landau gauge.
1811:
1812: For later use we define the renormalization constants connecting the
1813: bare and renormalized quantities in
1814: Eq.~(\ref{eq:L_QCD}):
1815: \begin{eqnarray}
1816: g_s^0\,\,=\,\,\mu^{\varepsilon}Z_gg_s\,,\qquad
1817: &
1818: m_q^0\,\,=\,\,Z_mm_q\,,\qquad
1819: &
1820: \xi^0-1\,\,=\,\,Z_3(\xi-1)\,,
1821: \nonumber\\
1822: \psi_q^0\,\,=\,\,\sqrt{Z_2}\psi_q\,,\qquad
1823: &
1824: G_\mu^{0,a}\,\,=\,\, \sqrt{Z_3} G_\mu^a\,,\qquad
1825: &
1826: c^{0,a}\,\,=\,\,\sqrt{\tilde{Z}_3}c^a\,.
1827: \label{eq:renconst}
1828: \end{eqnarray}
1829: In addition one introduces the renormalization constants
1830: of the quark-gluon, three-gluon, four-gluon and gluon-ghost vertex
1831: which are denoted by
1832: $Z_{1F}$, $Z_1$, $Z_4$ and $\tilde{Z}_1$.
1833: The Slavnov-Taylor identities connecting the different
1834: renormalization constants can, e.g., be found in~\cite{Muta}.
1835:
1836: It is clear that in the effective Lagrangian ${\cal L}^{\rm QCD}_{\rm eff}$
1837: all explicit trace to the heavy quark must have disappeared. However,
1838: the mathematical structure must be identical to the one of
1839: ${\cal L}^{\rm QCD}$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:L_QCD}).
1840: This is because ${\cal L}^{\rm QCD}$ represents
1841: the most general Lagrangian
1842: describing the interaction of quarks and gluons and respecting the
1843: symmetry properties imposed by the Becchi-Rouet-Stora-Tyutin
1844: invariance~\cite{BRST}.
1845: Of course, this also has to be respected by a $n_l$-flavour theory
1846: described by ${\cal L}^{\rm QCD}_{\rm eff}$.
1847: Nevertheless the parameters and fields of ${\cal L}^{\rm QCD}_{\rm
1848: eff}$ are different from the ones of the full theory. It is convenient
1849: to define the corresponding relations in analogy to the
1850: renormalization constants of Eq.~(\ref{eq:renconst}) and introduce
1851: multiplicative factors --- the so-called decoupling constants $\zeta_i^0$.
1852: Thereby it is advantageous to consider the decoupling relations
1853: in the bare theory
1854: which is indicated by the superscript zero.
1855: The renormalization is performed afterwards.
1856: Thus we define
1857: \begin{eqnarray}
1858: \begin{array}{lll}
1859: g_s^{0,\prime} = \zeta_g^0 g_s^0\,,\qquad
1860: &
1861: m_q^{0,\prime} = \zeta_m^0m_q^0\,,\qquad
1862: &
1863: \xi^{0,\prime}-1 = \zeta_3^0(\xi^0-1)\,,
1864: \\ \\
1865: \psi_q^{0,\prime} = \sqrt{\zeta_2^0}\psi_q^0\,,\qquad
1866: &
1867: G_\mu^{0,\prime,a} = \sqrt{\zeta_3^0}G_\mu^{0,a}\,,\qquad
1868: &
1869: c^{0,\prime,a} = \sqrt{\tilde\zeta_3^0}c^{0,a}
1870: \,,
1871: \end{array}
1872: \label{eq:decconst}
1873: \end{eqnarray}
1874: where the primes mark the quantities of the effective $n_l$-flavour theory.
1875:
1876: Taking into account these considerations we can
1877: write down a defining equation for the bare
1878: effective Lagrangian in terms of the full Lagrangian with re-scaled
1879: parameters:
1880: \begin{eqnarray}
1881: {\cal L}^{\rm QCD}_{\rm eff}(g_s^0,m_q^0,\xi^0;
1882: \psi^0_q,G^{0,a}_\mu,c^{0,a};
1883: \zeta_i^0)
1884: &=& {\cal L}^{\rm QCD}(g_s^{0,\prime},m_q^{0,\prime},\xi^{0,\prime};
1885: \psi^{0,\prime}_q,G^{0,\prime,a}_\mu,c^{0,\prime,a})
1886: \,,
1887: \label{eq:L_QCD_eff}
1888: \end{eqnarray}
1889: where
1890: ${\cal L}^{\rm QCD}$ is given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:L_QCD}),
1891: $q$ represents the $n_l$ light-quark flavours and $\zeta_i^0$
1892: collectively denotes all bare decoupling constants of
1893: Eq.~(\ref{eq:decconst}).
1894: Once they are explicitly computed the effective Lagrangian is
1895: completely determined.
1896: Green functions of light fields obtained from ${\cal L}^{\rm QCD}$
1897: agree with the ones of ${\cal L}^{\rm QCD}_{\rm eff}$ up to terms
1898: suppressed by inverse powers of the heavy quark mass.
1899:
1900: In the language of effective theories the computation of the
1901: decoupling constants is referred to as matching
1902: calculation. It can be performed in a more or less complicated way.
1903: As it is even nowadays highly non-trivial to apply the methods
1904: of~\cite{BerWet82Ber83} and~\cite{LarvRiVer95} at order $\alpha_s^3$,
1905: we developed a procedure which relates the $n$-loop decoupling
1906: constants of Eq.~(\ref{eq:decconst}) to $n$-loop massive one-scale
1907: integrals. It will be described in the next Subsection.
1908:
1909: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1910:
1911: \subsection{Computation of the decoupling constants}
1912:
1913: In order to compute the decoupling constants of Eq.~(\ref{eq:decconst})
1914: we have to find convenient Green functions which have to be considered
1915: both in the effective and full theory.
1916: For this reason we define the bare two-point functions for quarks,
1917: gluons and ghosts as follows:
1918: \begin{eqnarray}
1919: \frac{1}{m-\psla-\Sigma^0(p)}
1920: &=&
1921: i\int {\rm d}^4x\, e^{ipx} \langle T\psi_q^0(x)\bar{\psi}_q^0(0)
1922: \rangle
1923: \,,
1924: \nonumber\\
1925: \frac{\delta^{ab}\left(-g_{\mu\nu}+\frac{p^\mu p^\nu}{p^2}\right)}
1926: {-p^2\left(1+\Pi^0_G(p^2)\right)}
1927: + \ldots
1928: &=&
1929: i\int {\rm d}^4x\, e^{ipx} \langle T G^{0,a}_\mu(x) G^{0,b}_\nu(0)\rangle
1930: \,,
1931: \nonumber\\
1932: \frac{\delta^{ab}}{-p^2\left(1+\Pi^0_c(p^2)\right)}
1933: &=&
1934: i\int {\rm d}^4x\, e^{ipx} \langle T c^{0,a}(x)\bar{c}^{0,b}(0)\rangle
1935: \label{eq:2pfunc}
1936: \,.
1937: \end{eqnarray}
1938: The ellipses
1939: in the case of the gluon propagator
1940: indicate the longitudinal part which we are not interested in.
1941:
1942: From the two-point functions of Eqs.~(\ref{eq:2pfunc}) we will be able
1943: to obtain $\zeta_2^0$, $\zeta_m^0$, $\zeta_3^0$ and
1944: $\tilde{\zeta}_3^0$. In order to get a relation involving $\zeta_g^0$
1945: one has at least to consider three-point functions where the coupling $g_s$
1946: already appears at Born level.
1947: As the vertex between the gluon and ghost is the least complex one we
1948: will take it for the computation.
1949: In amputated form it is defined through
1950: \begin{eqnarray}
1951: %%% \lefteqn{
1952: p^\mu g_s^0\left\{-if^{abc}\left[1+\Gamma_{G\bar cc}^0(p,k)\right]
1953: \right\}
1954: %%% }
1955: + \ldots
1956: %%% \nonumber\\
1957: &=&i^2\int {\rm d}x{\rm d}y\,{\rm e}^{i(p\cdot x+k\cdot y)}
1958: \left\langle Tc^{0,a}(x)\bar c^{0,b}(0)G^{0,c,\mu}(y)\right\rangle^{\rm
1959: 1PI}
1960: \,,
1961: \nonumber\\
1962: \label{eq:Gccdef}
1963: \end{eqnarray}
1964: where $p$ and $k$ are the outgoing four-momenta of $c$ and $G$,
1965: respectively.
1966: The ellipses indicate other colour structures we are not interested
1967: in. Note that we pull out a factor $g_s^0$ on the left-hand side of
1968: Eq.~(\ref{eq:Gccdef}) as it is already present at Born level.
1969:
1970: Let us start with the decoupling constant for the gluon field. It is
1971: obvious that the gluon propagator constitutes a good candidate to
1972: compute $\zeta_3^0$. Up to terms of order $1/m_h$ we have the
1973: following chain of equations
1974: \begin{eqnarray}
1975: \frac{\delta^{ab}\left(-g_{\mu\nu}+\frac{p^\mu p^\nu}{p^2}\right)}
1976: {-p^2\left(1+\Pi_G^0(p^2)\right)}
1977: &=&
1978: i\int {\rm d}^4x e^{ipx} \langle T G^{0,a}_\mu(x) G^{0,b}_\nu(0)\rangle
1979: \nonumber\\
1980: &=&
1981: \frac{1}{\zeta_3^0}
1982: i\int {\rm d}^4x e^{ipx}
1983: \langle T G^{0,\prime,a}_\mu(x) G^{0,\prime,b}_\nu(0)\rangle
1984: \nonumber\\
1985: &=&
1986: \frac{1}{\zeta_3^0}\,\,
1987: \frac{\delta^{ab}\left(-g_{\mu\nu}+\frac{p^\mu p^\nu}{p^2}\right)}
1988: {-p^2\left(1+\Pi_G^{0\prime}(p^2)\right)}
1989: \,.
1990: \label{eq:decglu}
1991: \end{eqnarray}
1992: where in the second step Eqs.~(\ref{eq:decconst}) has been used. Note
1993: that $\Pi_G^{0\prime}(p^2)$ only contains light degrees of freedom
1994: whereas $\Pi_G^{0}(p^2)$ also receives virtual contributions from the heavy
1995: quark $h$.
1996: Eq.~(\ref{eq:decglu}) provides a formulae for $\zeta_3^0$
1997: \begin{eqnarray}
1998: \zeta_3^0 &=& \frac{1+\Pi_G^0(p^2)}{1+\Pi_G^{0\prime}(p^2)}
1999: \label{eq:decglu2}
2000: \,.
2001: \end{eqnarray}
2002: From the construction of the effective theory it is clear that the
2003: decoupling constants do not depend on the momentum transfer. Thus also
2004: the right-hand side
2005: of~(\ref{eq:decglu2}) has to be independent of the external
2006: momentum $p$. This means that we can choose any convenient momentum
2007: for the computation. In particular it is possible to choose $p=0$.
2008: This has the advantage that only vacuum diagrams have to be
2009: considered. Since we work in the framework of dimensional
2010: regularization all scaleless integrals can be set to zero. As a
2011: consequence we have $\Pi_G^{0\prime}(0)=0$
2012: and the contribution to $\Pi_G^{0}$
2013: is given by the diagrams containing at least
2014: one heavy quark line. In the following we attach to
2015: the corresponding contributions
2016: an additional index ``h'' and refer to it as the ``hard part''.
2017: Finally we arrive at the compact formula
2018: \begin{eqnarray}
2019: \zeta_3^0 &=& 1 + \Pi_G^{0,h}(0)
2020: \label{eq:zeta30}
2021: \,.
2022: \end{eqnarray}
2023: The $n$-loop contribution to $\zeta_3^0$ is related to the
2024: $n$-loop vacuum diagrams where the scale is given by the mass of
2025: the heavy quark.
2026: At one-loop order only one diagram contributes to $\zeta_3^0$. At two
2027: loops there are already three diagrams and at three-loop order
2028: altogether 189 diagrams have to be taken into account. A typical
2029: example is pictured in Fig.~\ref{fig:zetag}.
2030: We want to mention that the bare decoupling constants
2031: may contain non-local terms like
2032: $\ln(\mu^2/m_h^2)/\varepsilon$, which is
2033: in contrast to the renormalization constants.
2034:
2035: After the computation of the bare diagrams the parameters (in our case
2036: $\alpha_s$, $\xi$ and the heavy quark mass, $m_h$) have to be expressed in
2037: terms of their renormalized counterparts. The finite decoupling
2038: constant is obtained from Eq.~(\ref{eq:decconst}) after expressing the bare
2039: fields in terms of the renormalized ones via Eq.~(\ref{eq:renconst})
2040: \begin{eqnarray}
2041: G_\mu^\prime &=& \sqrt{\frac{Z_3\zeta_3^0}{Z_3^\prime}} G_\mu
2042: \,\,=\,\, \sqrt{\zeta_3} G_\mu
2043: \label{eq:zeta3}
2044: \,.
2045: \end{eqnarray}
2046: Note that $Z_3^\prime$ depends on $\alpha_s^\prime$ and $\xi^\prime$.
2047: They have to be transformed to $\alpha_s$ and $\xi$ with the help of
2048: $\zeta_g$ and $\zeta_3$, respectively, which are
2049: needed up to $(l-1)$-loop accuracy
2050: if Eq.~(\ref{eq:zeta3}) is considered at $l$-loop order.
2051:
2052: The ghost propagator can be treated in complete analogy and one
2053: arrives at the following formula for the bare decoupling constant for the
2054: ghost field
2055: \begin{eqnarray}
2056: \tilde{\zeta}_3^0 &=& 1 + \Pi_c^{0,h}(0)
2057: \label{eq:tilzeta30}
2058: \,.
2059: \end{eqnarray}
2060: There is no diagram which contributes at one-loop order and one at
2061: order $\alpha_s^2$. Also at three-loop order the number of diagrams is
2062: moderate and amounts to 25.
2063:
2064: The renormalized version of Eq.~(\ref{eq:tilzeta30}) reads
2065: \begin{eqnarray}
2066: \tilde{\zeta}_3 &=& \frac{\tilde{Z}_3\tilde{\zeta}_3^0}{\tilde{Z}_3^\prime}
2067: \label{eq:tilzeta3}
2068: \,.
2069: \end{eqnarray}
2070:
2071: In order to obtain expressions for $\zeta_2$ and $\zeta_m$ one
2072: considers the light-quark
2073: propagator which leads to the following chain of
2074: relations:
2075: \begin{eqnarray}
2076: \frac{1}{m-\,\,/\hspace{-.5em}p-\Sigma(p)}
2077: &=&
2078: \frac{1}
2079: {m\left(1-\Sigma_S^0(p^2)\right)
2080: -\,\,/\hspace{-.5em}p\left(1+\Sigma_V^0(p^2)\right)}
2081: \nonumber\\
2082: &=&
2083: \frac{1}
2084: {\zeta_2^0\zeta_m^0m\left(1-\Sigma_S^{0\prime}(p^2)\right)
2085: -\zeta_2^0\,\,/\hspace{-.5em}p\left(1+\Sigma_V^{0\prime}(p^2)\right)}
2086: \,.
2087: \end{eqnarray}
2088: Nullifying the external momentum $p$ in the self energies leads to
2089: \begin{eqnarray}
2090: \zeta_2^0 &=& 1+\Sigma_V^{0,h}(0)
2091: \label{eq:zeta20}
2092: \,,
2093: \\
2094: \zeta_m^0 &=& \frac{1-\Sigma_S^{0,h}(0)}{1+\Sigma_V^{0,h}(0)}
2095: \label{eq:zetam0}
2096: \,,
2097: \end{eqnarray}
2098: and the finite expressions are obtained
2099: from\footnote{Note that the same symbol is also used for Riemann's
2100: zeta function $\zeta_2=\pi^2/6$. However, as they appear in
2101: a completely different context confusion is not possible.}
2102: \begin{eqnarray}
2103: \zeta_2 &=& \frac{Z_2\zeta_2^0}{Z_2^\prime}
2104: \label{eq:zeta2}
2105: \,,
2106: \\
2107: \zeta_m &=& \frac{Z_m\zeta_m^0}{Z_m^\prime}
2108: \label{eq:zetam}
2109: \,.
2110: \end{eqnarray}
2111: Similarly to $\Pi_c^{0,h}(0)$
2112: there are no one-loop diagrams contributing to $\Sigma_V^{0,h}(0)$ and
2113: $\Sigma_S^{0,h}(0)$ and at two- and three-loop order again
2114: one and 25 diagrams, respectively, have to be considered.
2115: Typical specimen are depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:sigh}.
2116: Actually, through three loops, Eq.~(\ref{eq:zetam}) simplifies to
2117: $\zeta_m^0=1-\Sigma_V^{0,h}(0)-\Sigma_S^{0,h}(0)$.
2118: It should be noted that the vector and scalar parts separately still depend on
2119: the QCD gauge parameter $\xi$, but $\xi$ drops out in their sum, which is a
2120: useful check for our calculation.
2121:
2122: \begin{figure}[ht]
2123: \begin{center}
2124: \epsfxsize=15cm
2125: \epsffile[74 624 569 725]{figs/decfig.ps}
2126: \caption{\label{fig:sigh}Typical three-loop diagrams
2127: pertinent to $\Sigma_V^{0,h}(0)$ and
2128: $\Sigma_S^{0,h}(0)$.
2129: Solid, bold-faced, and loopy lines represent massless quarks $q$,
2130: heavy quarks $h$, and gluons $G$, respectively.}
2131: \end{center}
2132: \end{figure}
2133:
2134:
2135: The derivation of a formula for $\zeta_g^0$ is slightly more
2136: involved. As a starting point we choose the full, i.e. non-amputated
2137: gluon-ghost Green function and get (using Eqs.~(\ref{eq:decconst}))
2138: the following equations
2139: \begin{eqnarray}
2140: g_s^0 G^{\mu,abc}_{G\bar{c}c}(p,k)
2141: &=& i^2\int {\rm d}x{\rm d}y\,{\rm e}^{i(p\cdot x+k\cdot y)}
2142: \left\langle Tc^{0,a}(x)\bar c^{0,b}(0)G^{0,c,\mu}(y)\right\rangle
2143: \nonumber\\
2144: &=& \frac{1}{\tilde{\zeta}_3^0\sqrt{\zeta_3^0}}
2145: \,\,
2146: i^2\int {\rm d}x{\rm d}y\,{\rm e}^{i(p\cdot x+k\cdot y)}
2147: \left\langle Tc^{0,a}(x)\bar c^{0,b}(0)G^{0,c,\mu}(y)\right\rangle^\prime
2148: \nonumber\\
2149: &=& \frac{1}{\tilde{\zeta}_3^0\sqrt{\zeta_3^0}}
2150: g_s^{0,\prime} G^{\mu,abc,\prime}_{G\bar{c}c}(p,k)
2151: \nonumber\\
2152: &=& \frac{\zeta_g^0}{\tilde{\zeta}_3^0\sqrt{\zeta_3^0}}
2153: g_s^{0} G^{\mu,abc,\prime}_{G\bar{c}c}(p,k)
2154: \label{eq:Gcc}
2155: \end{eqnarray}
2156: where $p$ and $k$ are the outgoing four-momenta of $c$ and $G$,
2157: respectively.
2158: At this point we should amputate the Green functions by multiplying
2159: with the inverse propagators of the external gluon and ghost
2160: fields in the full theory.
2161: From the decoupling relations derived above we get
2162: an additional factor $(\tilde\zeta_3^0)^2\zeta_3^0$ on
2163: the right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{eq:Gcc}) which leads to
2164: \begin{eqnarray}
2165: \left[1+\Gamma_{G\bar cc}^0(p,k)\right]
2166: &=&
2167: \zeta_g^0\tilde\zeta_3^0\sqrt{\zeta_3^0}
2168: \left[1+\Gamma_{G\bar cc}^{0\prime}(p,k)\right]
2169: \,.
2170: \end{eqnarray}
2171: Here, $\Gamma_{G\bar cc}^0(p,k)$ is defined through the
2172: 1PI part of the amputated
2173: gluon-ghost Green function as introduced in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Gccdef}).
2174: Setting to zero the external momenta we obtain
2175: \begin{eqnarray}
2176: \zeta_g^0&=&\frac{\tilde\zeta_1^0}{\tilde\zeta_3^0\sqrt{\zeta_3^0}}
2177: \,,
2178: \label{eq:zetag0}
2179: \end{eqnarray}
2180: where
2181: \begin{eqnarray}
2182: \tilde\zeta_1^0&=&1+\Gamma_{G\bar cc}^{0,h}(0,0)
2183: \,,
2184: \end{eqnarray}
2185: is the decoupling constant belonging to the gluon-ghost vertex.
2186: Again, the renormalized version of the decoupling constant is
2187: obtained with the help of the renormalization constants in the full
2188: and effective theory as
2189: \begin{eqnarray}
2190: \zeta_g &=& \frac{Z_g\zeta_g^0}{Z_g^\prime}
2191: \,.
2192: \end{eqnarray}
2193: Thus, in order to compute $\zeta_g$ one has to evaluate the decoupling
2194: constant for the gluon propagator, the ghost propagator and the
2195: gluon-ghost vertex. We could have chosen also another vertex
2196: involving the strong coupling, e.g. the quark-gluon or the three-gluon
2197: vertex, and would have arrived at a similar expression as in
2198: Eq.~(\ref{eq:zetag0}).
2199: This is in complete analogy to the renormalization constants
2200: where due to Slavnov-Taylor identities
2201: the various renormalization constants are related to each other
2202: (see, e.g., Ref.~\cite{Muta}).
2203:
2204: We should mention that
2205: $\Gamma_{G\bar cc}^{0,h}(0,0)$ has no one-loop contribution and
2206: there are five diagrams at two loops, which, however, add up to zero.
2207: A non-zero contribution is obtained at order $\alpha_s^3$ where 228
2208: diagrams contribute. A typical representative is shown
2209: in Fig.~\ref{fig:zetag}.
2210:
2211: At order $\alpha_s^2$
2212: the three contributions to $\zeta_g^0$ are still separately
2213: independent of the gauge parameter $\xi$, so that the $\xi$
2214: independence of their combination
2215: does not provide a meaningful check for our calculation.
2216: The situation changes at ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$, where all three parts
2217: separately depend on $\xi$ and only their proper combination is $\xi$
2218: independent as is required for a physical quantity.
2219: In the calculation this has been used as a check.
2220:
2221:
2222: \begin{figure}[ht]
2223: \begin{center}
2224: \epsfxsize=15cm
2225: \epsffile[136 634 470 722]{figs/alphasfig.ps}
2226: \caption{\label{fig:zetag}
2227: Typical three-loop diagrams pertinent to $\Pi_G^{0,h}(0)$,
2228: $\Pi_c^{0,h}(0)$, and $\Gamma_{G\bar cc}^{0,h}(0,0)$.
2229: Bold-faced, loopy, and dashed lines represent heavy quarks $h$,
2230: gluons $G$,
2231: and Faddeev-Popov ghosts $c$, respectively.}
2232: \end{center}
2233: \end{figure}
2234:
2235: In Eqs.~(\ref{eq:zeta30}),~(\ref{eq:tilzeta30}),~(\ref{eq:zeta20}),
2236: (\ref{eq:zetam0}) and~(\ref{eq:zetag0}) the bare decoupling constants
2237: $\zeta_3^0$, $\tilde{\zeta}_3^0$, $\zeta_2^0$, $\zeta_m^0$ and
2238: $\zeta_g^0$ are expressed in terms of vacuum diagrams. Thus, if the
2239: former are to be computed at order $\alpha_s^3$ the latter need to be
2240: known at three-loop order. In the recent years three-loop vacuum
2241: diagrams have been studied extensively and a {\tt FORM}~\cite{form}
2242: package, {\tt MATAD}~\cite{matad},
2243: has been written which allows for an automated computation.
2244:
2245: At this point we would like to make a comment on the different kind of
2246: poles which appear in the calculation. If we choose zero external
2247: momentum there are in general both UV and IR
2248: poles in the individual diagrams. However, the renormalization
2249: constants in Eq.~(\ref{eq:renconst}) only contain UV divergences.
2250: Thus the two
2251: different kind of poles have to be identified in order to arrive at a
2252: finite expression for the decoupling constants.
2253: This is a special feature of dimensional regularization which
2254: allows to treat simultaneously UV and IR divergences and
2255: to set to zero scaleless integrals.
2256: More details to this context can be found in Ref.~\cite{GorLar87}
2257: and references cited therein.
2258:
2259: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2260:
2261: \subsection{Results}
2262:
2263: In the following we list the analytical results for the renormalized
2264: decoupling constants $\zeta_g$ and $\zeta_m$,
2265: which relate the physical parameters
2266: in the full theory to their counterparts
2267: in the effective theory.
2268: In Appendix~\ref{app:decconst} we also provide the (gauge parameter
2269: dependent) results for $\zeta_2$ and $\zeta_3$.
2270:
2271: As already mentioned above, the computation can be reduced to one-scale
2272: vacuum integrals (see also Appendix~\ref{sub:single}). However, the
2273: large number of diagrams requires the automation of the
2274: computation. Actually the computation of $\zeta_g$ was one of the
2275: first application of the package {\tt GEFICOM}~\cite{geficom}
2276: (cf. Appendix~\ref{sub:aut}), which combines several
2277: stand-alone program packages in order to automate the computation from the
2278: generation of the diagrams to the summation of the individual results.
2279: For the evaluation of the decoupling constants
2280: all diagrams have been generated automatically with the {\tt Fortran}
2281: program {\tt QGRAF}~\cite{qgraf} and the integrations have been
2282: performed using the {\tt FORM}~\cite{form} package {\tt MATAD}~\cite{matad}.
2283:
2284: Note, that in
2285: contrast to the renormalization constants $Z_i$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:renconst}),
2286: the decoupling constants $\zeta_i^0$ also receive contributions from the
2287: finite parts of the loop integrals.
2288: Thus, at ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$, we are led to evaluate three-loop tadpole
2289: integrals also retaining their finite parts.
2290:
2291: For illustration of the formalism derived in the previous Subsection
2292: we want to compute the lowest-order contribution to $\zeta_2$ which is
2293: of ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$ and comes from the first diagram in
2294: Fig.~\ref{fig:sigh}.
2295: According to Eq.~(\ref{eq:zeta20}) the vector part has to be evaluated
2296: for zero external momentum. This is conveniently done with the help of
2297: \begin{eqnarray}
2298: \Sigma_V^{0,h}(0) &=&
2299: \frac{1}{4p^2}\mbox{Tr}\left[\psla\Sigma^{0,h}(p)\right]\Big|_{p=0}
2300: \,,
2301: \end{eqnarray}
2302: where a simple Taylor expansion up to linear order has to be performed
2303: for $\Sigma^{0,h}(p)$.
2304: As only vacuum integrals are involved in the computation one can
2305: easily perform the tensor reduction in the numerator
2306: and then use Eq.~(\ref{eq:Vabc})
2307: in order to arrive at the result for the bare decoupling constant
2308: \begin{eqnarray}
2309: \zeta_2^0 &=& 1 + \left(\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\right)^2 C_F T \left[
2310: -\frac{1}{16\varepsilon} +\frac{5}{96}
2311: - \frac{1}{8}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
2312: + {\cal O}\left(\varepsilon\right)
2313: \right]
2314: \,.
2315: \label{eq:zeta202l}
2316: \end{eqnarray}
2317: Now Eq.~(\ref{eq:zeta2}) can be used to get a finite result.
2318: Therefore the ratio $Z_2/Z_2^\prime$ is needed to order $\alpha_s^2$
2319: where the parameters $\alpha_s^\prime$ and $\xi^\prime$ in
2320: $Z_2^\prime$ have to be expressed in terms of $\alpha_s$ and $\xi$.
2321: with the help of Eqs.~(\ref{eq:decconst}). Actually, to our order
2322: the contributions from $\zeta_g$ and $\zeta_3$ exactly cancel and
2323: we are left with
2324: \begin{eqnarray}
2325: \frac{Z_2}{Z_2^\prime} &=& 1 +
2326: \left(\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\right)^2 \frac{C_F T}{16\varepsilon}
2327: \,.
2328: \label{eq:Z2Z2p}
2329: \end{eqnarray}
2330: Inserting Eqs.~(\ref{eq:zeta202l}) and~(\ref{eq:Z2Z2p})
2331: in~(\ref{eq:zeta2}) finally leads to
2332: \begin{eqnarray}
2333: \zeta_2^{\rm MS} &=& 1 + \left(\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\right)^2 C_F T \left[
2334: \frac{5}{96} - \frac{1}{8}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
2335: \right]
2336: \,,
2337: \end{eqnarray}
2338: which agrees with Eq.~(\ref{eq:zeta2res}).
2339:
2340: In the same way also the scalar part of the quark self energy can be
2341: treated in order to obain with the help of
2342: Eq.~(\ref{eq:zetam0}) a result for $\zeta_m$. Taking also the
2343: three-loop diagrams into account we obtain
2344: \begin{eqnarray}
2345: \zeta_m^{\rm OS}&=&1
2346: +\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2
2347: \left(\frac{89}{432}
2348: -\frac{5}{36}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
2349: +\frac{1}{12}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
2350: \right)
2351: +\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^3
2352: \left[
2353: \frac{1871}{2916}
2354: \right.
2355: \nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
2356: - \frac{407}{864}\zeta_3
2357: +\frac{5}{4}\zeta_4
2358: - \frac{1}{36}B_4
2359: +\left(\frac{121}{2592}
2360: - \frac{5}{6}\zeta_3\right)\ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
2361: + \frac{319}{432}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
2362: \right.
2363: \nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
2364: + \frac{29}{216}\ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
2365: + n_l\left(
2366: \frac{1327}{11664}
2367: - \frac{2}{27}\zeta_3
2368: - \frac{53}{432}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
2369: - \frac{1}{108}\ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
2370: \right)
2371: \right]
2372: \nonumber\\
2373: &\approx&1
2374: +0.2060\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(M_h)}{\pi}\right)^2
2375: +\left(1.4773+0.0247\,n_l\right)
2376: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(M_h)}{\pi}\right)^3.
2377: \label{eq:zetamOS}
2378: \end{eqnarray}
2379: where $\zeta_3\approx1.202\,057$ and
2380: \begin{eqnarray}
2381: B_4&=&16\li\left({1\over2}\right)-{13\over2}\zeta_4-4\zeta_2\ln^22
2382: +{2\over3}\ln^42
2383: \nonumber\\
2384: &\approx&-1.762\,800
2385: \,,
2386: \end{eqnarray}
2387: with $\li{}$ being the quadrilogarithm, is a constant typical for three-loop
2388: vacuum diagrams~\cite{Bro92}.
2389: $n_l=n_f-1$ is the number of light-quark flavours, and
2390: $M_h$ is the on-shell mass of the heavy quark $h$.
2391: For the numerical evaluation in the last line of Eq.~(\ref{eq:zetamOS}),
2392: we have chosen $\mu=M_h$.
2393: The ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$ term of Eq.~(\ref{eq:zetamOS}) is computed in
2394: Ref.~\cite{BerWet82Ber83} and the ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$ term
2395: can be found in~\cite{CheKniSte98}.
2396:
2397: The proper combination of the
2398: three ingredients entering the calculation of $\zeta_g^0$, namely
2399: the hard parts of the gluon and ghost propagators and the
2400: gluon-ghost vertex correction, lead to
2401: \begin{eqnarray}
2402: \left(\zeta_g^{\rm OS}\right)^2&=&1
2403: +\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}
2404: \left(
2405: -\frac{1}{6}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
2406: \right)
2407: +\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2
2408: \left(
2409: -\frac{7}{24}
2410: -\frac{19}{24}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
2411: +\frac{1}{36}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
2412: \right)
2413: \nonumber\\
2414: &&\mbox{}+\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^3
2415: \left[
2416: -\frac{58933}{124416}
2417: -\frac{2}{3}\zeta_2\left(1+\frac{1}{3}\ln2\right)
2418: -\frac{80507}{27648}\zeta_3
2419: -\frac{8521}{1728}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
2420: \right.\nonumber\\
2421: &&\left.\mbox{}-
2422: \frac{131}{576}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
2423: -\frac{1}{216}\ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
2424: +n_l\left(
2425: \frac{2479}{31104}
2426: +\frac{\zeta_2}{9}
2427: +\frac{409}{1728}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
2428: \right)
2429: \right]
2430: \nonumber\\
2431: &\approx&1
2432: -0.2917\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(M_h)}{\pi}\right)^2
2433: +\left(-5.3239+0.2625\,n_l\right)
2434: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(M_h)}{\pi}\right)^3
2435: \,.
2436: \label{eq:zetagOS}
2437: \end{eqnarray}
2438: The ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$ term in Eq.~(\ref{eq:zetagOS}) is
2439: published~\cite{CheKniSte98}.
2440: Leaving aside this term, the results in
2441: Eq.~(\ref{eq:zetagOS}) can be found in
2442: Refs.~\cite{BerWet82Ber83,LarvRiVer95,Ber97}.
2443:
2444: Notice that the ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$ terms of $\zeta_m$ and $\zeta_g$ depend
2445: on the number $n_l$ of light (massless) quark flavours.
2446: However, this dependence is feeble.
2447:
2448: The generalization of Eqs.~(\ref{eq:zetamOS}) and~(\ref{eq:zetagOS}),
2449: appropriate for the gauge group SU($N_c$), is listed in
2450: Appendix~\ref{app:decconst}.
2451: There, also the results expressed in terms of the
2452: $\overline{\rm MS}$ quark mass can be found.
2453: In Ref.~\cite{Ste98_higgs} the leading Yukawa corrections proportional
2454: to $G_F M_t^2$ have been computed for $\zeta_m$ and $\zeta_g$.
2455: In Appendix~\ref{app:decconst} also these results are listed.
2456:
2457: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2458:
2459: \subsection{Applications}
2460:
2461: \subsubsection*{Cross section \boldmath{$\sigma(e^+e^-\to b\bar{b})$}}
2462:
2463: At this point we would like to pick up the example mentioned at
2464: the beginning of this section, namely the ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$
2465: corrections to the cross section $e^+e^-\to b\bar{b}$. If we
2466: consider center-of-mass energies where the first five quarks can be
2467: neglected one obtains\footnote{Note that this result can immediately
2468: be obtained from the example considered in Appendix~\ref{sub:ae},
2469: Eq.~(\ref{eq:dbhmpres}).}
2470: \begin{eqnarray}
2471: R(s) &=& 3 Q_b^2\, \Bigg\{1+\frac{\alpha_s^{(6)}(\mu)}{\pi}
2472: + \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(6)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2\left[
2473: c_2 -\frac{1}{6} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_t^2}
2474: + \frac{s}{4M_t^2}\left(
2475: \frac{176}{675}-\frac{8}{135}\ln\frac{s}{M_t^2}
2476: \right)
2477: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
2478: + {\cal O}\left(\frac{s^2}{M_t^4}\right)
2479: \right]
2480: \Bigg\}
2481: + {\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)
2482: \,,
2483: \label{eq:Rsas2}
2484: \end{eqnarray}
2485: where $N_c=3$ has been chosen and
2486: at order $\alpha_s^2$ only the contribution from
2487: the diagram in Fig.~\ref{fig:eeqqheavy} is displayed explicitly. All other
2488: diagrams are summed in the constant
2489: $c_2$~\cite{CheKatTka79DinSap79CelGon80}.
2490: In Eq.~(\ref{eq:Rsas2}) the definition of the coupling constant
2491: still includes the top quark as indicated by the superscript ``(6)''.
2492: Otherwise the computation of the diagram in Fig.~\ref{fig:eeqqheavy}
2493: would hardly be possible. One recognizes that for $M_t\to\infty$
2494: the contribution from the top quark raises logarithmically.
2495: Note that the choice $\mu=M_t$ does not help as it introduces
2496: $\ln M_t$ terms in $c_2$.
2497: At this point Eqs.~(\ref{eq:decconst}) and~(\ref{eq:zetagOS})
2498: can be used to replace
2499: $\alpha_s^{(6)}$ in favour of $\alpha_s^{(5)}$ which leads to
2500: \begin{eqnarray}
2501: R(s) &=& 3 Q_b^2\, \Bigg\{1+\frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}(\mu)}{\pi}
2502: + \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2\left[
2503: c_2
2504: + \frac{s}{4M_t^2}\left(
2505: \frac{176}{675}-\frac{8}{135}\ln\frac{s}{M_t^2}
2506: \right)
2507: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
2508: + {\cal O}\left(\frac{s^2}{M_t^4}\right)
2509: \right]
2510: \Bigg\}
2511: + {\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)
2512: \,.
2513: \label{eq:Rsas2dec}
2514: \end{eqnarray}
2515: Now the top quark is decoupled, i.e. its contribution goes to zero for
2516: $M_t\to \infty$
2517: as $R(s)$ is expressed in terms of $\alpha_s^{(5)}$ which is
2518: the parameter of the effective theory.
2519:
2520:
2521: \subsubsection*{Determination of $\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_Z)$ and
2522: $m_q^{(5)}(M_Z)$ from measurements at the $\tau$ mass scale}
2523:
2524: In the previous example the decoupling relation was only needed to
2525: one-loop order. However, the three-loop terms
2526: will be indispensable in order to relate the QCD predictions for
2527: different observables at next-to-next-to-next-to-leading order.
2528: Meaningful estimates of such corrections already
2529: exist~\cite{Sam95,CheKniSir97}.
2530:
2531: Once the corrections of order $\alpha_s^4$ for $R(s)$
2532: are known they can be used to
2533: determine $\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_Z)$ from the knowledge of
2534: $\alpha_s^{(4)}(M_\tau)$ and compare it with other measurements.
2535: One would use $R(s)$ to extract\footnote{The described procedure can
2536: also be applied to $\alpha_s^{(3)}(M_\tau)$. Only for simplicity and
2537: transparency we have chosen $\alpha_s^{(4)}(M_\tau)$.}
2538: $\alpha_s^{(4)}(M_\tau)$ with an
2539: accuracy of order $\alpha_s^4$ from the data. Then one would use the
2540: four-loop $\beta$ function~\cite{RitVerLar97_bet}
2541: in order to perform the running to the bottom-quark threshold.
2542: There the three-loop matching relations would be necessary for a
2543: consistent decoupling. Using again four-loop running finally leads to
2544: $\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_Z)$.
2545: In the following we will illustrate
2546: this procedure. However, instead of determining $\alpha_s^{(4)}(M_\tau)$
2547: via $R(s)$ we directly assume a value for
2548: $\alpha_s^{(4)}(M_\tau)$
2549: and evaluate $\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_Z)$ for different choices of the
2550: matching scale $\mu^{(5)}$.
2551: For the three-loop evolution in
2552: connection with two-loop matching this has been done in Ref.~\cite{Rod93}.
2553: We are in a position to explore the situation at
2554: the next order. It is instructive to include in the analysis also the
2555: tree-level and one-loop matching.
2556:
2557: Going to higher orders, one expects, on general grounds, that the relation
2558: between $\alpha_s^{(n_f-1)}(\mu^\prime)$ and $\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)$, where
2559: $\mu^\prime\ll\mu^{(n_f)}\ll\mu$, becomes insensitive to the choice of the
2560: matching scale, $\mu^{(n_f)}$, as long as $\mu^{(n_f)}={\cal O}(m_h)$.
2561: In the above-mentioned situation
2562: we consider the crossing of the bottom-quark threshold.
2563: In particular, we study how the $\mu^{(5)}$ dependence of the relation
2564: between $\alpha_s^{(4)}(M_\tau)$ and $\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_Z)$ is reduced as we
2565: implement four-loop evolution with three-loop matching.
2566: Our procedure is as follows.
2567: We first calculate $\alpha_s^{(4)}(\mu^{(5)})$ by exactly integrating
2568: Eq.~(\ref{eq:defbeta}) with the initial condition
2569: $\alpha_s^{(4)}(M_\tau)=0.36$,
2570: then obtain $\alpha_s^{(5)}(\mu^{(5)})$ from Eqs.~(\ref{eq:decconst})
2571: and (\ref{eq:zetagOS}) with $M_b=4.7$~GeV, and finally compute
2572: $\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_Z)$ with Eq.~(\ref{eq:defbeta}).
2573: For consistency, $N$-loop evolution must be accompanied by $(N-1)$-loop
2574: matching, i.e.\ if we omit terms of ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^{N+2})$ on the
2575: right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{eq:defbeta}), we need to discard those of
2576: ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^N)$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:zetagOS}) at the same time.
2577: In Fig.~\ref{fig:alsmz},
2578: the variation of $\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_Z)$ with $\mu^{(5)}/M_b$
2579: is displayed for the various levels of accuracy, ranging from one-loop to
2580: four-loop evolution.
2581: For illustration, $\mu^{(5)}$ is varied rather extremely, by almost two orders
2582: of magnitude.
2583: While the leading-order result exhibits a strong logarithmic behaviour, the
2584: analysis is gradually getting more stable as we go to higher orders.
2585: The four-loop curve is almost flat for $\mu^{(5)}\gsim1$~GeV.
2586: Besides the $\mu^{(5)}$ dependence of $\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_Z)$, also its absolute
2587: normalization is significantly affected by the higher orders.
2588: At the central matching scale $\mu^{(5)}=M_b$, we encounter a rapid, monotonic
2589: convergence behaviour.
2590:
2591: \begin{figure}[t]
2592: \begin{center}
2593: \epsfxsize=\textwidth
2594: \epsffile[90 275 463 579]{figs/alsmzex.ps}
2595: \caption{\label{fig:alsmz}
2596: $\mu^{(5)}$ dependence of $\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_Z)$ calculated from
2597: $\alpha_s^{(4)}(M_\tau)=0.36$ and $M_b=4.7$~GeV using
2598: Eq.~(\ref{eq:defbeta}) at
2599: one (dotted), two (dashed), three (dot-dashed), and four (solid) loops in
2600: connection with Eqs.~(\ref{eq:decconst}) and
2601: (\ref{eq:zetagOS}) at the respective
2602: orders.}
2603: \end{center}
2604: \end{figure}
2605:
2606: Similar analyses may be performed for the light-quark masses as well.
2607: For illustration, let us investigate how the $\mu^{(5)}$ dependence of the
2608: relation between $\mu_c=m_c^{(4)}(\mu_c)$ and $m_c^{(5)}(M_Z)$ changes under
2609: the inclusion of higher orders in evolution and matching.
2610: As typical input parameters, we choose $\mu_c=1.2$~GeV, $M_b=4.7$~GeV, and
2611: $\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_Z)=0.118$.
2612: We first evolve $m_c^{(4)}(\mu)$ from $\mu=\mu_c$ to $\mu=\mu^{(5)}$
2613: with the help of
2614: Eq.~(\ref{eq:defgamma}), then obtain $m_c^{(5)}(\mu^{(5)})$
2615: from Eqs.~(\ref{eq:decconst})
2616: and (\ref{eq:zetamOS}), and finally evolve $m_c^{(5)}(\mu)$ from
2617: $\mu=\mu^{(5)}$ to $\mu=M_Z$ using Eq.~(\ref{eq:defgamma}).
2618: In all steps, $\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)$ is evaluated with the same values of
2619: $n_f$ and $\mu$ as $m_c^{(n_f)}(\mu)$.
2620: In Fig.~\ref{fig:mcmz}, we show the resulting values of $m_c^{(5)}(M_Z)$
2621: corresponding to $N$-loop evolution with $(N-1)$-loop matching for
2622: $N=1,\ldots,4$.
2623: Similarly to Fig.~\ref{fig:alsmz}, we observe a rapid, monotonic convergence
2624: behaviour at the central matching scale $\mu^{(5)}=M_b$.
2625: Again, the prediction for $N=4$ is remarkably stable under the variation of
2626: $\mu^{(5)}$ as long as $\mu^{(5)}\gsim1$~GeV.
2627:
2628: \begin{figure}[t]
2629: \begin{center}
2630: \epsfxsize=\textwidth
2631: \epsffile[99 275 463 562]{figs/mcmzex.ps}
2632: \caption{\label{fig:mcmz}
2633: $\mu^{(5)}$ dependence of $m_c^{(5)}(M_Z)$ calculated from
2634: $\mu_c=m_c^{(4)}(\mu_c)=1.2$~GeV, $M_b=4.7$~GeV, and
2635: $\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_Z)=0.118$ using Eq.~(\ref{eq:defgamma})
2636: at one (dotted), two
2637: (dashed), three (dot-dashed), and four (solid) loops in connection with
2638: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:decconst}) and (\ref{eq:zetamOS}) at the respective orders.}
2639: \end{center}
2640: \end{figure}
2641:
2642: The various formulae describing
2643: the running and the decoupling of $\alpha_s$ and the quark masses
2644: are implemented in the program package {\tt RunDec}~\cite{rundec}.
2645: It is realized in {\tt Mathematica} and
2646: provides a convenient possibility to check, e.g., the figures of this
2647: Subsection and eventually update the numerical input values.
2648: In particular,
2649: Fig.~\ref{fig:alsmz} can easily
2650: be reproduced with the help of the procedure {\tt AlL2AlH[]}.
2651: After loading {\tt RunDec} the command
2652: \verb|AlL2AlH[0.36,1.777,{{5,4.7,mu5}},91.187,l]|
2653: provides the result for $\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_Z)$ where the matching has
2654: been performed at the scale \verb|mu5|.
2655: $l=1,2,3,4$ corresponds to the number of loops
2656: used for the evolution and
2657: the values $\alpha_s^{(4)}(M_\tau)=0.36$, $M_\tau=1.777$~GeV,
2658: $M_b=4.7$~GeV and $M_Z=91.187$~GeV have been adopted.
2659:
2660:
2661: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2662: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2663:
2664: \section{\label{sec:dim4}Scalar dimension-four operators in QCD}
2665: \setcounter{equation}{0}
2666: \setcounter{figure}{0}
2667: \setcounter{table}{0}
2668:
2669: In the last section we constructed an effective QCD Lagrangian which
2670: results from integrating out a heavy quark. From the knowledge of
2671: its structure we determined the coefficient functions (i.e. the
2672: decoupling constants) by computing bare Green functions in the full
2673: and effective theory.
2674:
2675: A different point of view is adopted for the
2676: construction of the so-called non-relativistic QCD
2677: (NRQCD)~\cite{Bodwin:1995jh}.
2678: It has been developed in the context of heavy quarkonium physics in order to
2679: separate the relativistic scales associated with the mass of the heavy
2680: quark, $M$, from the non-relativistic ones which are of the order
2681: $Mv$, where $v$ is the velocity of the quark.
2682: As a result one obtains an effective Lagrangian
2683: which is ordered in inverse powers of $M$. More recently a further
2684: step has
2685: been undertaken and potential NRQCD (pNRQCD) has been introduced in
2686: order to account for the separation of the scales $Mv$ and $Mv^2$. For
2687: recent overviews we refer to~\cite{Brambilla:2000cs,Pen01}.
2688:
2689: In this section a different approach is considered.
2690: It is based
2691: on Wilson's operator product expansion (OPE)~\cite{Wil69}
2692: which is a powerful method for the construction of effective theories.
2693: The basic idea is to introduce local operators ${\cal O}_i$ of
2694: appropriate dimension. They are formed by the light degrees of
2695: freedom and parameterize the long-distance behaviour.
2696: The operators are accompanied by coefficient functions which contain
2697: the remnant of the large parameters of the theory.
2698:
2699: As a simple example of the OPE one can consider the decay amplitude of
2700: the muon in the SM. Due to the fact that the momentum transfer is
2701: much smaller than the mass of the $W$ boson, $M_W$, the former can be
2702: neglected with respect to the latter. This leads to the famous
2703: four-fermion interaction which is generated from dimension-six
2704: operators. Thus, for dimensional reasons the coefficient functions
2705: contain a factor $1/M_W^2$.
2706:
2707: In QCD the scalar operators of dimension four have been studied in great
2708: detail~\cite{Klu75,Nie75,Spi84}.
2709: A comprehensive survey concerning their renormalization
2710: properties and mixings is performed in~\cite{Spi84}.
2711: In particular, all renormalization constants of the operators have
2712: been expressed in terms of renormalization constants which already
2713: appear in the QCD Lagrangian (cf. Eq.~(\ref{eq:renconst})).
2714:
2715: In this Section we want to discuss two applications of the
2716: scalar dimension-four operators. In the first one we consider
2717: the decay of an intermediate-mass Higgs boson
2718: with $M_W\lsim M_H\lsim 2M_W$
2719: into quarks or gluons. Here the top
2720: quark is considered to be heavy and thus it will only
2721: contribute to the
2722: coefficient functions. On the other hand, the scale in the operators is
2723: given by the mass of the Higgs boson.
2724: A somehow complementary situation is considered in the second example:
2725: the quartic quark mass corrections to the vector current correlators.
2726: Here the mass of the quark sets the scale in the operators. It is
2727: considered to be small as compared to the external momentum which
2728: manifests itself in the coefficient functions.
2729:
2730: For definiteness we want to list the operators of dimension four
2731: in this introductory part and briefly discuss their renormalization.
2732: In~\cite{Spi84} the operators are classified into gauge-invariant and
2733: non-gauge-invariant ones. Furthermore a distinction is made whether the
2734: operators vanish or not by virtue of the equation of motion.
2735: The gauge-invariant operators
2736: read\footnote{For consistency, the operators should also have a
2737: prime as a superscript as they are built by quantities of the
2738: effective theory. However, we refrain from introducing this
2739: additional index.}
2740: \begin{eqnarray}
2741: {\cal O}^{0}_1&=&\left(G^{0,\prime,a}_{\mu\nu}\right)^2 \,,
2742: \nonumber\\
2743: {\cal O}^{0}_2 &=&
2744: m_q^{0,\prime}\bar\psi_{q}^{0,\prime}\psi_{q}^{0,\prime} \,,
2745: \nonumber\\
2746: {\cal O}^{0}_3&=&
2747: \bar\psi_{q}^{0,\prime}
2748: \left(i\not\!\!D^{0,\prime}-m_{q}^{0,\prime}\right)
2749: \psi_{q}^{0,\prime}
2750: \,,
2751: \nonumber\\
2752: {\cal O}_6^{0} &=& \left(m_q^{0,\prime}\right)^4
2753: \,,
2754: \label{eq:op1}
2755: \end{eqnarray}
2756: where $G^{0,a}_{\mu\nu}$ and $D_\mu$ are defined after Eq.~(\ref{eq:L_QCD}).
2757: Note that ${\cal O}^{0}_3$ vanishes after the application of
2758: the equation of motion.
2759:
2760: In order to obtain a closed system two more
2761: operators have to be considered
2762: \begin{eqnarray}
2763: {\cal O}^{0}_4&=&G_\nu^{0,\prime,a}
2764: \left(\nabla^{ab}_\mu G^{0,\prime,b\mu\nu}
2765: +g_s^{0,\prime}\sum_{i=1}^{n_l}\bar\psi_{q_i}^{0,\prime}
2766: \frac{\lambda^a}{2}\gamma^\nu\psi_{q_i}^{0,\prime}\right)
2767: -\partial_\mu \bar{c}^{0,\prime,a}\partial^\mu c^{0,\prime,a}
2768: \,,
2769: \nonumber\\
2770: {\cal O}^{0}_5&=&
2771: (\nabla^{ab}_\mu \partial^\mu \bar{c}^{0,\prime,b}) c^{0,\prime,a}
2772: \,,
2773: \label{eq:op3}
2774: \end{eqnarray}
2775: where
2776: $\nabla_\mu^{ab}=\delta^{ab}\partial_\mu-g_sf^{abc}G_\mu^c$
2777: is the covariant derivative acting on the gluon and ghost fields.
2778: The operators in Eq.~(\ref{eq:op3})
2779: are not gauge-invariant and thus do not contribute to physical
2780: observables.
2781:
2782: From the practical point of view the operators
2783: of Eqs.~(\ref{eq:op1}) and~(\ref{eq:op3})
2784: define new Feynman rules which can be read off from
2785: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:op1}) and~(\ref{eq:op3}). E.g., in
2786: Section~\ref{sub:hadrHiggs} we have to compute the correlator
2787: $\langle {\cal O}_1 {\cal O}_1 \rangle$ up to three-loop order.
2788: This makes it necessary to extract the Feynman rules for the
2789: coupling of ${\cal O}_1$ to one-, two-, three- and four gluons
2790: from Eq.~(\ref{eq:op1}).
2791: We refrain from listing them explicitly but consider as illustrative
2792: examples the coupling of ${\cal O}_1^0$ and ${\cal O}_4^0$ to two
2793: gluons. This will be useful further below in
2794: Section~\ref{sub:higgs} in order to demonstrate the evaluation of
2795: the corresponding coefficient functions.
2796:
2797: The coupling to two gluons is obtained from those terms of
2798: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:op1}) and~(\ref{eq:op3}) containing two
2799: gluon fields. In the case of ${\cal O}_1^0$ and ${\cal O}_4^0$
2800: they read
2801: \begin{eqnarray}
2802: {\cal O}_1^0\Big|_{\mbox{\tiny two gluons}}
2803: &=& 2\left(\partial_\mu G_\nu^{0,\prime,a} \partial^\mu G^{\nu,0,\prime,b}
2804: -\partial_\mu G_\nu^{0,\prime,a} \partial^\nu G^{\mu,0,\prime,b}
2805: \right)
2806: \,,
2807: \nonumber\\
2808: {\cal O}_4^0\Big|_{\mbox{\tiny two gluons}}
2809: &=& G_\nu^{0,\prime,a} \Box G^{\nu,0,\prime,b}
2810: - G_\nu^{0,\prime,a} \partial^\nu \partial_\mu G^{\mu,0,\prime,b}
2811: \,.
2812: \end{eqnarray}
2813: If we adopt the momenta flow as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:O1O4FR} this
2814: results in the following Feynman rules for the vertices
2815: \begin{eqnarray}
2816: V_{gg{\cal O}_1}^{\mu\nu,ab}(p_1,p_2) &=&
2817: i \delta^{ab} 4 \left[ - g^{\mu\nu} p_1\cdot p_2 + p_1^\nu p_2^\mu \right]
2818: \,,
2819: \nonumber\\
2820: V_{gg{\cal O}_4}^{\mu\nu,ab}(p_1,p_2) &=&
2821: i \delta^{ab}
2822: \left[ -g^{\mu\nu} \left( p_1\cdot p_1 + p_2\cdot p_2 \right)
2823: + p_2^\mu p_2^\nu + p_1^\mu p_1^\nu \right]
2824: \,.
2825: \label{eq:O1O4FR}
2826: \end{eqnarray}
2827:
2828: \begin{figure}[ht]
2829: \leavevmode
2830: \begin{center}
2831: \epsfxsize=5cm
2832: \epsffile[145 345 455 435]{figs/Ogg.ps}
2833: \caption{\label{fig:O1O4FR}Coupling to two gluons. The solid circle
2834: either represents ${\cal O}_1^0$ or ${\cal O}_4^0$ and
2835: $a$ and $b$ are the colour indices of the gluons. The momenta $p_1$
2836: and $p_2$ are incoming.
2837: }
2838: \end{center}
2839: \end{figure}
2840:
2841:
2842:
2843: In the applications we discuss below the
2844: operators ${\cal O}_3$, ${\cal O}_4$ and ${\cal O}_5$ and
2845: the corresponding coefficient functions only appear in bare
2846: form.
2847: Thus we will not specify their renormalization, which can be
2848: found in~\cite{Spi84}, and concentrate in the following
2849: on ${\cal O}_1$, ${\cal O}_2$ and ${\cal O}_6$. The relation between
2850: the bare and the renormalized operators reads
2851: \begin{eqnarray}
2852: {\cal O}_n &=& \sum_m Z_{nm} {\cal O}_m^0
2853: \,,
2854: \end{eqnarray}
2855: where the indices $n$ and $m$ adopt the values 1, 2 and 6.
2856: Due to the equality
2857: \begin{eqnarray}
2858: \sum_n C_n^0 {\cal O}_n^0 &=& \sum_n C_n {\cal O}_n
2859: \,,
2860: \end{eqnarray}
2861: we obtain the renormalization prescription for the coefficient
2862: functions as
2863: \begin{eqnarray}
2864: C_n &=& \sum_m \left(Z^{-1}\right)_{mn} C_m^0
2865: \,.
2866: \end{eqnarray}
2867: The anomalous dimension matrix pertaining to $Z_{nm}$ is defined
2868: through
2869: \begin{eqnarray}
2870: \mu^2 \frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d}\mu^2} {\cal O}_n
2871: &=& \sum_m \gamma_{mn} {\cal O}_m
2872: \,.
2873: \end{eqnarray}
2874: It is connected to the renormalization matrix through
2875: \begin{eqnarray}
2876: \gamma_{nm} &=&
2877: \sum_k \left(\mu^2 \frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d}\mu^2}Z_{mk}\right)
2878: \left(Z^{-1}\right)_{kn}
2879: \,,
2880: \end{eqnarray}
2881: and reads in explicit form~\cite{Klu75,Nie75,Spi84}
2882: \begin{eqnarray}
2883: \gamma &=&
2884: \left(
2885: \begin{array}{ccc}
2886: -\alpha_s\pi\frac{\partial}{\partial\alpha_s}\frac{\beta}{\alpha_s}
2887: &
2888: 4\alpha_s\frac{\partial}{\partial\alpha_s}\gamma_m
2889: &
2890: 4\alpha_s\frac{\partial}{\partial\alpha_s}\gamma_0
2891: \\
2892: 0 & 0 & - 4 \gamma_0
2893: \\
2894: 0 & 0 & 4 \gamma_m
2895: \end{array}
2896: \right)
2897: \,.
2898: \label{eq:gam_mn}
2899: \end{eqnarray}
2900: Thus $\gamma_{nm}$ can be expressed in terms of the functions
2901: $\beta(\alpha_s)$ (see Eq.~(\ref{eq:defbeta})),
2902: $\gamma_m(\alpha_s)$ (see Eq.~(\ref{eq:defgamma}))
2903: and the anomalous dimension of the vacuum energy $\gamma_0$
2904: which is given by~\cite{CheSpi87,CheKue94,Che:priv}
2905: \begin{eqnarray}
2906: \gamma_0 &=& -\frac{3}{16\pi^2}\Bigg\{1
2907: + \frac{4}{3}\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}
2908: + \left(\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\right)^2
2909: \left[ \frac{313}{72}
2910: -\frac{2}{3}\zeta_3
2911: -\frac{5}{12}n_f
2912: \right]
2913: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
2914: + \left(\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\right)^3
2915: \left[ \frac{14251}{1296}
2916: -\frac{77}{2}\zeta_3
2917: +\frac{19}{6}\zeta_4
2918: +\frac{1975}{54}\zeta_5
2919: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
2920: +n_f\left(
2921: -\frac{4109}{1944}
2922: -\frac{35}{54}\zeta_3
2923: -\frac{16}{9}\zeta_4
2924: \right)
2925: +n_f^2\left(
2926: -\frac{341}{1458}
2927: +\frac{2}{9}\zeta_3
2928: \right)
2929: \right]
2930: \,,
2931: \label{eq:gamma0}
2932: \end{eqnarray}
2933: where $n_f$ is the number of active quark flavours.
2934:
2935: In the formalism presented above it is assumed that there are only
2936: currents coupling to quarks of the same flavour which is sufficient
2937: for the purpose discussed below. The more general case involving also
2938: non-diagonal terms can be found in Ref.~\cite{Har:diss}.
2939:
2940:
2941: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2942:
2943: \subsection{\label{sub:higgs}Hadronic Higgs decay}
2944:
2945: The coupling of a scalar CP-even Higgs boson to quarks has a very simple
2946: structure as no $\gamma$ matrix is involved.
2947: It essentially consists of a factor containing the mass of
2948: the quarks and the coupling constant.
2949: This fact makes it very simple to construct an effective
2950: Lagrangian and to derive powerful low-energy theorems as we will see in
2951: this Subsection.
2952:
2953: We want to consider QCD corrections to the hadronic decay of a
2954: Higgs boson in the so-called intermediate mass range,
2955: that is we compute the partial decay widths into quarks and gluons
2956: assuming that the top quark is much heavier than all other scales
2957: involved in the process.
2958: Although we have in mind the top quark as the heavy particle we will
2959: in the following consider a generic heavy quark with mass $m_h$.
2960:
2961: To lowest order in the inverse heavy quark mass
2962: the effective Lagrangian is constructed by the
2963: operators of dimension four which are discussed above.
2964: As we consider light quark mass effects at most in leading order
2965: (which corresponds to an overall quadratic factor in the case $H\to
2966: q\bar{q}$ and to quark mass zero in the gluonic case)
2967: there is no contribution from the operator ${\cal O}_6$ and
2968: thus the anomalous dimension matrix becomes two dimensional.
2969:
2970: We consider a theory where we have in addition to the QCD Lagrangian
2971: of Eq.~(\ref{eq:L_QCD}) a
2972: scalar particle, $H$, which couples to fermions via
2973: \begin{eqnarray}
2974: {\cal L}_Y &=& -\frac{H^0}{v^0}
2975: \sum_{q}m_{q}^0\bar\psi_{q}^0\psi_{q}^0\,,
2976: \label{eq:yuk}
2977: \end{eqnarray}
2978: where the sum runs over all quark flavours. In the limit $m_h\to\infty$
2979: Eq.~(\ref{eq:yuk}) can be written as a sum over the operators given
2980: in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:op1}) and~(\ref{eq:op3})
2981: accompanied by coefficient functions containing the residual dependence
2982: on the top quark:
2983: \begin{eqnarray}
2984: {\cal L}_{Y,\rm eff} &=& -\frac{H^0}{v^0}\sum_{i=1}^5C_i^0{\cal O}_i^0
2985: \,.
2986: \label{eq:eff}
2987: \end{eqnarray}
2988: %There is no contribution from ${\cal O}_6$ as this would lead to
2989: %quartic quark mass corrections which we neglect.
2990: The relation of the bare coefficient functions and the operators to
2991: their renormalized counterparts can be extracted form the anomalous
2992: dimension matrix given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:gam_mn}). One obtains
2993: for the renormalized operators
2994: \begin{eqnarray}
2995: {\cal O}_1 &=&
2996: \left[1+2\left(\frac{\alpha_s^\prime\partial}{\partial\alpha_s^\prime}
2997: \ln Z_g^\prime\right)\right]{\cal O}_1^0
2998: -4\left(\frac{\alpha_s^\prime\partial}{\partial\alpha_s^\prime}
2999: \ln Z_m^\prime\right){\cal O}_2^0
3000: \,,
3001: \nonumber\\
3002: {\cal O}_2 &=& {\cal O}_2^0
3003: \,,
3004: \end{eqnarray}
3005: and accordingly for the coefficient functions
3006: \begin{eqnarray}
3007: C_1&=&\frac{1}{1+2(\alpha_s^\prime\partial/\partial\alpha_s^\prime)
3008: \ln Z_g^\prime}C_1^0
3009: \,,
3010: \nonumber\\
3011: C_2&=&\frac{4(\alpha_s^\prime\partial/\partial\alpha_s^\prime)
3012: \ln Z_m^\prime}
3013: {1+2(\alpha_s^\prime\partial/\partial\alpha_s^\prime)\ln Z_g^\prime}C_1^0
3014: +C_2^0
3015: \,.
3016: \label{eq:c1ren}
3017: \end{eqnarray}
3018: Consequently, the physical part of ${\cal L}_{Y,\rm eff}$
3019: takes the form
3020: \begin{eqnarray}
3021: {\cal L}_{Y,\rm eff}^{\rm phys} &=& - \frac{H^0}{v^0}
3022: \left(C_1 {\cal O}_1 + C_2 {\cal O}_2\right)
3023: \,.
3024: \label{eq:leff}
3025: \end{eqnarray}
3026: $\alpha_s^\prime$, $Z_g^\prime$ and $Z_m^\prime$ are defined in the
3027: effective theory which is indicated by the prime.
3028: $C_i$ and ${\cal O}_i$ $(i=1,2)$ are individually finite,
3029: but, with the exception of $\left[{\cal O}_2^\prime\right]$, they are not
3030: separately renormalization-group (RG) invariant.
3031: In Ref.~\cite{CheKniSte97hbb},
3032: a RG-improved version of Eq.~(\ref{eq:leff}) has
3033: been constructed by exploiting the RG-invariance of the trace of the
3034: energy-momentum tensor.
3035: The ratio $H^0/v^0$ receives a finite renormalization factor, which is of
3036: ${\cal O}(G_FM_t^2)$.
3037: Its two- and three-loop QCD corrections have been found in Refs.~\cite{Kni94}
3038: and \cite{KniSte95}, respectively.
3039:
3040: A closer look to the operators in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:op1})
3041: and~(\ref{eq:op3}) and the effective
3042: Lagrangian in Eq.~(\ref{eq:eff}) suggests that there should be a
3043: connection between the coefficient functions on one side and the
3044: decoupling constants as introduced in Eq.~(\ref{eq:decconst})
3045: on the other side. Actually it turns out that $C_1$ and $C_2$ are
3046: obtained from derivatives of $\ln\zeta_g$ and $\ln\zeta_m$,
3047: respectively. This nice feature allows for the computation of $C_1$
3048: and $C_2$ to order $\alpha_s^n$ from the knowledge of
3049: $\zeta_g$ and $\zeta_m$ to order $\alpha_s^{n-1}$~\cite{CheKniSte98}
3050: as we will see below.
3051:
3052: The coefficient functions contain the remnants of the heavy
3053: quark. It is thus quite plausible that their computation can be
3054: reduced to Feynman diagrams where the only scale is given by $m_h$.
3055: Actually, the philosophy for
3056: the derivation of formulae for $C_1^0,\ldots, C_5^0$
3057: is very similar to the case of the decoupling relations.
3058: One again considers Green functions in the full and effective theories
3059: and exploits the fact
3060: that the coefficient functions do not depend on the
3061: momentum configuration.
3062: We will see that for a certain Green function in general several
3063: coefficient functions are involved. Thus we will obtain five equations
3064: which can be solved for $C_1^0,\ldots, C_5^0$.
3065:
3066: From
3067: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:op1}) and~(\ref{eq:op3})
3068: one learns that the Green function
3069: involving one gluon, two ghosts and a zero-momentum insertion of the
3070: operator ${\cal O}_h=m_h^0\bar{h}^0h^0$, which mediates the
3071: coupling to the Higgs boson, only gets contributions
3072: from ${\cal O}_5^0$. We define the
3073: bare 1PI Green function in analogy to
3074: Eq.~(\ref{eq:Gccdef})
3075: \begin{eqnarray}
3076: \lefteqn{p^\mu g_s^0\left\{-if^{abc}
3077: \left[\Gamma_{G\bar cc{\cal O}_h}^0(p,k,0)\right]
3078: + \ldots \right\} }
3079: \nonumber\\
3080: &=&
3081: i^2\int {\rm d}x{\rm d}y\,e^{i(p\cdot x+k\cdot y)}
3082: \left\langle Tc^{0,a}(x)\bar
3083: c^{0,b}(0)G^{0,c\mu}(y) {\cal O}_h(0) \right\rangle^{\rm 1PI}
3084: \label{eq:ccGO}
3085: \,,
3086: \end{eqnarray}
3087: where
3088: the ellipses again represent other colour structures and $p$ and $k$
3089: are the outgoing momenta of the $c$ and $G$, respectively. The third
3090: argument of $\Gamma_{G\bar cc{\cal O}_h}^0$ indicates the zero
3091: momentum of the operator ${\cal O}_h$.
3092:
3093: In a next step we express ${\cal O}_h$ in terms of the operators given
3094: in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:op1}) and~(\ref{eq:op3}).
3095: Only ${\cal O}_5^0$ has to be taken into account
3096: as only this operator contains the coupling of a gluon
3097: to two ghost fields. In
3098: the transitition to the effective theory also Eq.~(\ref{eq:decconst})
3099: has to be considered which leads to a factor
3100: $\zeta_g^0/(\tilde{\zeta_3}^0\sqrt{\zeta_3^0})$.
3101: Note that in Eq.~(\ref{eq:ccGO}) we are dealing with amputated Green
3102: functions. Thus from the external propagators a factor
3103: $(\tilde{\zeta}_3^0)^2\zeta_3^0$ arise. Finally we arrive at
3104: \begin{eqnarray}
3105: p^\mu g_s^0 (-if^{abc}) \Gamma_{G\bar{c}c{\cal O}_h}(p,k,0) +
3106: \ldots
3107: &=&
3108: p^\mu g_s^0 (-if^{abc})
3109: \zeta_g^0\tilde{\zeta}_3^0\sqrt{\zeta_3^0} C_5^0 + \ldots
3110: \nonumber\\
3111: &=&
3112: p^\mu g_s^0 (-if^{abc}) \tilde{\zeta}_1^0 C_5^0 + \ldots
3113: \,,
3114: \label{eq:ccGO_2}
3115: \end{eqnarray}
3116: where the ellipses represent other colour structures
3117: and terms suppressed by the inverse heavy quark mass.
3118: On the right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{eq:ccGO_2})
3119: we also avoided to write down explicitly
3120: the contributions beyond tree-level as they vanish for $p,k\to0$
3121: within dimensional regularization.
3122: In this limit only the diagrams involving the heavy quark survive on the
3123: left-hand side and we are left with the formula
3124: \begin{eqnarray}
3125: \tilde{\zeta}_1^0 C_5^0 &=& \Gamma_{G\bar{c}c{\cal O}_h}^{0,h}(0,0,0)
3126: \,.
3127: \end{eqnarray}
3128:
3129: In order to reduce the number of contributing diagrams and also to
3130: simplify their complexity we exploit that the coupling of the Higgs
3131: boson is proportional to $m_h$. Thus it can simply be generated by
3132: differentiation with respect to $m_h$. With the definition
3133: \begin{eqnarray}
3134: \partial^0_h &=& \frac{(m_h^0)^2\partial}{\partial(m_h^0)^2}
3135: \,,
3136: \label{eq:partial}
3137: \end{eqnarray}
3138: we finally obtain\footnote{We want to mention that in Ref.~\cite{CheKniSte98}
3139: there are misprints in the corresponding formulae: erroneously
3140: they contain a factor ``$1/2$'' instead of ``2''. However, the
3141: initial equations and the final results are correct
3142: in~\cite{CheKniSte98}.}
3143: \begin{eqnarray}
3144: \tilde{\zeta}_1^0 C_5^0 &=& 2 \partial_h^0
3145: \Gamma^{0,h}_{G\bar{c}c}(0,0)
3146: \,.
3147: \label{eq:cfs1}
3148: \end{eqnarray}
3149:
3150: As another example,
3151: let us consider the derivation of a formula involving $C_1^0$
3152: and $C_4^0$.
3153: The starting point is the 1PI Green function of two gluons which contains a
3154: zero-momentum insertion of the composite operator
3155: ${\cal O}_h$.
3156: In momentum space, it reads in bare form
3157: \begin{eqnarray}
3158: \delta^{ab}\Gamma_{GG{\cal O}_h}^{0,\mu\nu}(p,-p)
3159: &=&i^2\int {\rm d} x {\rm d} y\,e^{ip\cdot(x-y)}
3160: \left\langle TG^{0,a,\mu}(x)G^{0,b,\nu}(y){\cal O}_h(0)
3161: \right\rangle^{\rm1PI}
3162: \nonumber\\
3163: &=&\delta^{ab}\left[-g^{\mu\nu}p^2\Gamma_{GG{\cal O}_h}^0(p^2)
3164: +\mbox{terms proportional to $p^\mu p^\nu$}\right]
3165: \,,
3166: \label{eq:ggo1}
3167: \end{eqnarray}
3168: where $p$ denotes the four-momentum flowing along the gluon line.
3169: In the limit $m_h\to\infty$, ${\cal O}_h$ may be written as a linear
3170: combination of the effective operators given in
3171: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:op1}) and~(\ref{eq:op3}),
3172: so that
3173: \begin{eqnarray}
3174: \Gamma_{GG{\cal O}_h}^{0,\mu\nu}(p,-p)
3175: &=&-g^{\mu\nu}p^2 \Gamma_{GG{\cal O}_h}^{0}(p,-p) + \ldots
3176: \nonumber\\
3177: &=&\frac{i^2}{8}\int {\rm d} x {\rm d} y\,e^{ip\cdot(x-y)}
3178: \left\langle TG^{0,a,\mu}(x)G^{0,a,\nu}(y)
3179: \left(C_1^0{\cal O}^0_1 + C_4^0{\cal O}^0_4\right)
3180: \right\rangle^{\rm1PI}+\ldots
3181: \nonumber\\
3182: &=&
3183: \frac{i^2}{8}\zeta_3^0
3184: \int {\rm d} x {\rm d} y\,e^{ip\cdot(x-y)}
3185: \left\langle TG^{0\prime,a,\mu}(x)G^{0\prime,a,\nu}(y)
3186: \left(C_1^0{\cal O}_1^0 + C_4^0{\cal O}_4^0\right)
3187: \right\rangle^{\rm1PI}+\ldots
3188: \nonumber\\
3189: &=&
3190: -g^{\mu\nu}p^2\zeta_3^0(-4 C_1^0 + 2 C_4^0)
3191: \left(1+\mbox{higher orders}\right)+\ldots
3192: \,,
3193: \label{eq:ggoh}
3194: \end{eqnarray}
3195: where the ellipses indicate terms of ${\cal O}(1/m_h)$ and terms proportional
3196: to $p^\mu p^\nu$.
3197: The factor $1/8$ results for the summation over the colour indices.
3198: In the second step, we have used Eq.~(\ref{eq:decconst})
3199: together with the fact that
3200: $\Gamma_{GG{\cal O}_h}^{0,\mu\nu}(p,-p)$ represents an amputated Green
3201: function.
3202: If we consider the coefficients of the transversal part in the limit $p\to0$,
3203: we observe that the contributions due to the higher-order QCD
3204: corrections on the right-hand side
3205: of Eq.~(\ref{eq:ggoh}) vanish, as massless tadpoles are set to zero
3206: in dimensional regularization.
3207: In principle also the other operators contribute via loop diagrams.
3208: However, also these contributions lead to massless tadpoles
3209: and are thus zero.
3210: The relative weight between $C_1^0$ and $C_4^0$ and the prefactor in
3211: the last line of Eq.~(\ref{eq:ggoh}) follow immediately from the
3212: Feynman rules given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:O1O4FR}).
3213: On the left-hand side, only those diagrams survive which contain at least one
3214: heavy-quark line.
3215: Consequently, the hard part of the amputated Green function is given by
3216: \begin{eqnarray}
3217: \Gamma_{GG{\cal O}_h}^{0,h}(0,0)&=&\zeta_3^0\left(-4C_1^0+2C_4^0\right)
3218: \,.
3219: \label{eq:amput}
3220: \end{eqnarray}
3221: Using Eq.~(\ref{eq:partial}) we finally arrive at
3222: \begin{eqnarray}
3223: \zeta_3^0(-4C_1^0+2C_4^0) &=& -2\partial_h^0 \Pi_G^{0,h}(0)
3224: \,.
3225: \label{eq:cfs0}
3226: \end{eqnarray}
3227:
3228: In a similar way, we obtain three more relationships, namely
3229: \begin{eqnarray}
3230: \zeta_2^0C_3^0&=& -2\partial_h^0\Sigma_V^{0,h}(0)\,,
3231: \nonumber\\
3232: \zeta_m^0\zeta_2^0(C_2^0-C_3^0)&=&
3233: 1-\Sigma_S^{0,h}(0)-2\partial_h^0\Sigma_S^{0,h}(0)\,,
3234: \nonumber\\
3235: \tilde\zeta_3^0(C_4^0+C_5^0)&=&2\partial_h^0\Pi_c^{0,h}(0)
3236: \,.
3237: \label{eq:cfs}
3238: \end{eqnarray}
3239: The Eqs.~(\ref{eq:cfs1}),~(\ref{eq:cfs0}) and~(\ref{eq:cfs})
3240: may now be solved for the coefficient functions $C_i^0$ $(i=1,\ldots,5)$.
3241: They are expressed in terms of vacuum integrals with only one mass
3242: scale, namely the heavy quark mass. This is also the case for the
3243: decoupling constants occuring in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:cfs1}),~(\ref{eq:cfs0})
3244: and~(\ref{eq:cfs}) as discussed in Section~\ref{sec:dec}.
3245:
3246: As a simple example let us consider the computation of $C_1$ at
3247: lowest order. Here only one diagram contributes to $\Pi_G^{0,h}(0)$,
3248: namely the one where the gluon splits into two virtual heavy quarks.
3249: It can be evaluated with the help of Eq.~(\ref{eq:Va}). Expanded up to
3250: finite order in $\varepsilon$ it reads
3251: \begin{eqnarray}
3252: \Pi_G^{0,h}(0) &=& \frac{\alpha_s^0}{\pi} T \left(
3253: \frac{1}{3\varepsilon}
3254: + \frac{1}{3} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{(m_h^0)^2}
3255: \right)
3256: \,.
3257: \end{eqnarray}
3258: Differentiating with respect to $m_h^0$ leads to
3259: \begin{eqnarray}
3260: C_1 &=& -\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi} \frac{T}{6}
3261: \,.
3262: \end{eqnarray}
3263: Note, that at this order no renormalization is needed and thus the bare
3264: and renormalized quantities coincide. Furthermore, there is no
3265: contribution from $\zeta_3^0$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:cfs0}) and $C_4^0$
3266: contributes for the first time at order $\alpha_s^2$ as can be seen
3267: from Eqs.~(\ref{eq:cfs}).
3268:
3269:
3270: In the next three Subsections we will describe different methods to
3271: compute the coefficient functions. Finally in
3272: Section~\ref{sub:hadrHiggs} we will review the state-of-the-art
3273: corrections to the hadronic decay width of the Higgs boson.
3274:
3275: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
3276:
3277: \subsubsection{\label{sub:dir}Direct
3278: calculation of the coefficient functions}
3279:
3280: There is the possibility to avoid the occurrence of the
3281: non-physical operators and their coefficient functions
3282: in the computation of $C_1^0$ and $C_2^0$.
3283: For demonstration let us consider the case of $C_1^0$.
3284:
3285: From the definition of the operators in
3286: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:op1}) and~(\ref{eq:op3})
3287: and the Feynman rules given in~(\ref{eq:O1O4FR})
3288: one can read off that the 1PI Green function
3289: $\Gamma^{0,\mu\nu}_{GG{\cal O}_h}(p_1,p_2)$,
3290: where $p_1$ and $p_2$ denote the incoming momenta of the gluons,
3291: only receives contributions from $C_1^0{\cal O}_1^0$
3292: if $p_1\not=-p_2$.
3293: In analogy to Eq.(\ref{eq:ggo1}) we can write
3294: \begin{eqnarray}
3295: \Gamma^{0,\mu\nu}_{GG{\cal O}_h}(p_1,p_2)
3296: &=&
3297: \left(g^{\mu\nu} p_1\cdot p_2 - p_1^\nu p_2^\mu\right)
3298: \Gamma^0_{GG{\cal O}_h}(p_1,p_2)
3299: \nonumber\\
3300: &=&
3301: \left(g^{\mu\nu} p_1\cdot p_2 - p_1^\nu p_2^\mu\right)
3302: \zeta_3^0\left(-4C_1^0\right)\left(1 + \ldots\right)
3303: \,,
3304: \end{eqnarray}
3305: where the ellipses denote terms of order $1/m_h$, possible
3306: other Lorentz structures and higher order loop corrections. The latter
3307: vanish in the limit $p_1,p_2\to0$ and we are left with
3308: \begin{eqnarray}
3309: \zeta_3^0 C_1^0 &=& -\frac{1}{4} \Gamma^{0,h}_{GG{\cal O}_h}(0,0)
3310: \nonumber\\
3311: &=& -\frac{1}{4} \left(
3312: \frac{g_{\mu\nu}p_1\cdot p_2 -p_{1,\nu}p_{2,\mu}
3313: -p_{1,\mu}p_{2,\nu}}{(D-2)(p_1\cdot p_2)^2}
3314: \Gamma^{0,h,\mu\nu}_{GG{\cal O}_h}(p_1,p_2)
3315: \right)\Bigg|_{p_1=p_2=0}
3316: \,,
3317: \label{eq:C1dir}
3318: \end{eqnarray}
3319: where the on-shell conditions $p_1^2=p_2^2=0$ have been used.
3320: This equation relates the coefficient function $C_1^0$
3321: directly to a physical amplitude and no Green functions involving
3322: ghost fields have to be considered.
3323: The price one has to pay is that the momenta $p_1$ and $p_2$
3324: can only be set to zero after the projection in Eq.~(\ref{eq:C1dir})
3325: has been applied. This complicates the expressions of the
3326: individual diagrams. Furthermore it is not possible to use derivatives
3327: with respect to $m_h^0$ in order to generate the
3328: coupling to the Higgs boson as initially the momentum of the Higgs
3329: boson is not zero. Thus altogether 657 vertex diagrams like the first
3330: one in Fig.~\ref{fig:aggfig} have to be considered.
3331:
3332: \begin{figure}[ht]
3333: \leavevmode
3334: \begin{center}
3335: \epsfxsize=\textwidth
3336: \epsffile[76 635 552 724]{figs/agg1fig.ps}
3337: \caption{Typical Feynman diagrams contributing to the coefficients
3338: $C_1^0$ and $C_2^0$.
3339: Looped, bold-faced, and dashed lines represent gluons,
3340: heavy quarks, and Higgs
3341: bosons, respectively.}
3342: \label{fig:aggfig}
3343: \end{center}
3344: \end{figure}
3345:
3346: In analogy to the gluon-gluon-Higgs boson
3347: three-point function one could also choose the part of the operator
3348: ${\cal O}_1$ involving three or even four gluons. This would lead to
3349: 7362 four- and 95004 five-point functions at three-loop level,
3350: where one and no gluon momentum, respectively,
3351: has to be kept different from zero until the projection is finished.
3352: Sample diagrams are pictured in Fig.~\ref{fig:aggfig}.
3353: In Ref.~\cite{Chetyrkin:1998mw}, where the decay of a pseudo-scalar
3354: Higgs boson has been considered, the 7362 three-loop four-point functions
3355: have been evaluated in order to check the calculation of the
3356: three-point function.
3357: For completeness we want to mention that
3358: the last diagram in Fig.~\ref{fig:aggfig} is the lowest-order graph
3359: contributing to $C_2$.
3360:
3361: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
3362:
3363: \subsubsection{\label{sub:let}Low-energy theorem}
3364:
3365: It is tempting to re-express the Green functions on the right-hand side
3366: of Eqs.~(\ref{eq:cfs1}),~(\ref{eq:cfs0}) and~(\ref{eq:cfs})
3367: in terms of the decoupling constants which were considered in
3368: Section~\ref{sec:dec}. This leads to a straight relation
3369: between the coefficient functions and the decoupling constants.
3370:
3371: For the equations involving $C_1^0$, $C_4^0$ and $C_5^0$ one
3372: successively obtains
3373: \begin{eqnarray}
3374: C_5^0 &=& 2\frac{\partial_h^0\tilde{\zeta}_1^0}{\tilde{\zeta}_1^0}
3375: \,,
3376: \nonumber\\
3377: C_4^0 &=& 2\left(
3378: \frac{\partial_h^0\tilde{\zeta}_3^0}{\tilde{\zeta}_3^0}
3379: - \frac{\partial_h^0\tilde{\zeta}_1^0}{\tilde{\zeta}_1^0}
3380: \right)
3381: \,,
3382: \nonumber\\
3383: C_1^0 &=& \frac{1}{2}
3384: \frac{\partial_h^0\zeta_3^0}{\zeta_3^0}
3385: + \frac{\partial_h^0\tilde{\zeta}_3^0}{\tilde{\zeta}_3^0}
3386: - \frac{\partial_h^0\tilde{\zeta}_1^0}{\tilde{\zeta}_1^0}
3387: \nonumber\\
3388: &=& -\partial_h^0
3389: \ln\frac{\tilde{\zeta}_1^0}{\tilde{\zeta}_3^0\sqrt{\zeta_3^0}}
3390: \nonumber\\
3391: &=& -\partial_h^0 \ln\zeta_g^0
3392: \,,
3393: \label{eq:C1C4C5}
3394: \end{eqnarray}
3395: Next, we express $\zeta_g^0$ through renormalized quantities.
3396: Using $\partial_h^0=\partial_h$, we find
3397: \begin{eqnarray}
3398: -2C_1^0&=&\partial_h\ln(\zeta_g^0)^2
3399: \nonumber\\
3400: &=&\partial_h\ln\frac{\alpha_s^{0\prime}}{\alpha_s^0}
3401: \nonumber\\
3402: &=&\partial_h\ln(Z_g^\prime)^2+\partial_h\ln\alpha_s^\prime
3403: \nonumber\\
3404: &=&\left[1+\frac{\alpha_s^\prime\partial}{\partial\alpha_s^\prime}
3405: \ln\left(Z_g^\prime\right)^2\right]\partial_h\ln\alpha_s^\prime\,.
3406: \end{eqnarray}
3407: Identifying the renormalization factor of Eq.~(\ref{eq:c1ren}), we obtain the
3408: amazingly simple relation
3409: \begin{eqnarray}
3410: -2C_1&=&\partial_h\ln\alpha_s^\prime
3411: \nonumber\\
3412: &=&\partial_h\ln\zeta_g^2
3413: \,.
3414: \label{eq:c1let1}
3415: \end{eqnarray}
3416: This relation opens the possibility to compute $C_1$ through
3417: ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$, since one only needs to know the logarithmic
3418: contributions of
3419: $\zeta_g$ in this order, which may be reconstructed from its lower-order terms
3420: in combination with the four-loop
3421: $\beta$~\cite{RitVerLar97_bet} and
3422: $\gamma_m$~\cite{Che97_gam,LarRitVer97_gam}
3423: functions.
3424:
3425: It is furthermore
3426: possible to directly relate $C_1$ to the $\beta$ and $\gamma_m$
3427: functions of the full and effective theories.
3428: Exploiting the relation
3429: \begin{eqnarray}
3430: \beta^\prime(\alpha_s^\prime)
3431: &=&\frac{\mu^2d}{d\mu^2}\,\frac{\alpha_s^\prime}{\pi}
3432: \nonumber\\
3433: &=&\left[\frac{\mu^2\partial}{\partial\mu^2}
3434: +\beta(\alpha_s)\frac{\partial}{\partial\alpha_s}
3435: +\gamma_m(\alpha_s)\frac{m_h\partial}{\partial m_h}
3436: \right]\frac{\alpha_s^\prime}{\pi}\,,
3437: \end{eqnarray}
3438: where $\alpha_s^\prime=\alpha_s^\prime(\mu,\alpha_s,m_h)$, we find
3439: \begin{eqnarray}
3440: C_1&=&\frac{\pi}{2\alpha_s^\prime\left[1-2\gamma_m(\alpha_s)\right]}
3441: \left[\beta^\prime(\alpha_s^\prime)
3442: -\beta(\alpha_s)\frac{\partial\alpha_s^\prime}{\partial\alpha_s}\right]
3443: \,.
3444: \label{eq:c1let}
3445: \end{eqnarray}
3446: In the case of $C_2$, we may proceed along the same lines to obtain
3447: \begin{eqnarray}
3448: C_2&=&1+2\partial_h\ln\zeta_m
3449: \nonumber\\
3450: &=&1-\frac{2}{1-2\gamma_m(\alpha_s)}
3451: \left[\gamma_m^\prime(\alpha_s^\prime)-\gamma_m(\alpha_s)
3452: -\beta(\alpha_s)\frac{1}{m_q^\prime}\,
3453: \frac{\partial m_q^\prime}{\partial\alpha_s}\right]
3454: \,,
3455: \label{eq:c2let}
3456: \end{eqnarray}
3457: where $m_q^\prime=m_q^\prime(\mu,\alpha_s,m_h)$.
3458: It should be stressed that Eqs.~(\ref{eq:c1let}) and (\ref{eq:c2let})
3459: are valid to all orders in $\alpha_s$.
3460:
3461: Fully exploiting present knowledge of the $\beta$ \cite{RitVerLar97_bet} and
3462: $\gamma_m$ \cite{Che97_gam,LarRitVer97_gam}
3463: functions, we may evaluate $C_1$ and $C_2$
3464: through ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^4)$ via Eqs.~(\ref{eq:c1let}) and (\ref{eq:c2let}).
3465: In the pure $\overline{\mbox{MS}}$ scheme,
3466: we find~\cite{CheKniSte97,CheKniSte98}
3467: \begin{eqnarray}
3468: C_1^{\rm MS}&=&
3469: -\frac{1}{12}\,\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}
3470: \Bigg\{
3471: 1
3472: + \frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}
3473: \Bigg(
3474: \frac{11}{4}
3475: - \frac{1}{6} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3476: \Bigg)
3477: \nonumber\\
3478: &&{}+ \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2
3479: \Bigg[
3480: \frac{2821}{288}
3481: - \frac{3}{16} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3482: + \frac{1}{36} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3483: + n_l\left(
3484: -\frac{67}{96}
3485: + \frac{1}{3} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3486: \right)
3487: \Bigg]
3488: \nonumber\\
3489: &&{}+ \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^3
3490: \Bigg[
3491: -\frac{4004351}{62208}
3492: + \frac{1305893}{13824}\zeta_3
3493: - \frac{859}{288} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3494: + \frac{431}{144} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3495: \nonumber\\
3496: &&{}
3497: - \frac{1}{216} \ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3498: + n_l \left(
3499: \frac{115607}{62208}
3500: - \frac{110779}{13824}\zeta_3
3501: + \frac{641}{432} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3502: + \frac{151}{288} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3503: \right)
3504: \nonumber\\
3505: &&{}+ n_l^2 \left(
3506: - \frac{6865}{31104}
3507: + \frac{77}{1728} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3508: - \frac{1}{18} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3509: \right)
3510: \Bigg]
3511: \Bigg\}
3512: \nonumber\\
3513: &\approx&
3514: -\frac{1}{12}\,\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu_h)}{\pi}
3515: \Bigg[1
3516: + 2.7500
3517: \frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu_h)}{\pi}
3518: + \left(9.7951 - 0.6979\,n_l\right)
3519: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu_h)}{\pi}\right)^2
3520: \nonumber\\
3521: &&
3522: + \left(49.1827 - 7.7743\,n_l - 0.2207\,n_l^2 \right)
3523: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu_h)}{\pi}\right)^3\Bigg]
3524: \,,
3525: \label{eq:c1}\\
3526: C_2^{\rm MS} &=&
3527: 1
3528: + \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2 \Bigg(
3529: \frac{5}{18}
3530: - \frac{1}{3} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3531: \Bigg)
3532: \nonumber\\
3533: &&{}+ \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^3 \Bigg[
3534: \frac{311}{1296}
3535: + \frac{5}{3}\zeta_3
3536: - \frac{175}{108} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3537: - \frac{29}{36} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3538: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
3539: + n_l\left(
3540: \frac{53}{216}
3541: + \frac{1}{18} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3542: \right)
3543: \Bigg]
3544: \nonumber\\
3545: &&{}+ \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^4 \Bigg[
3546: \frac{2800175}{186624}
3547: + \frac{373261}{13824}\zeta_3
3548: - \frac{155}{6}\zeta_4
3549: - \frac{575}{36}\zeta_5
3550: + \frac{31}{72}B_4
3551: \nonumber\\
3552: &&{}+ \left(
3553: -\frac{50885}{2592}
3554: + \frac{155}{12}\zeta_3
3555: \right) \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3556: - \frac{1219}{216} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3557: - \frac{301}{144} \ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3558: \nonumber\\
3559: &&{}+ n_l \left(
3560: - \frac{16669}{15552}
3561: - \frac{221}{288}\zeta_3
3562: + \frac{25}{12}\zeta_4
3563: - \frac{1}{36} B_4
3564: + \frac{7825}{2592} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3565: + \frac{23}{48} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3566: \right.
3567: \nonumber\\
3568: &&
3569: \left.\mbox{}
3570: + \frac{5}{18} \ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3571: \right)
3572: {}+ n_l^2 \left(
3573: \frac{3401}{23328}
3574: - \frac{7}{54}\zeta_3
3575: - \frac{31}{324} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3576: - \frac{1}{108} \ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
3577: \right)
3578: \Bigg]
3579: \nonumber\\
3580: &\approx&
3581: 1
3582: + 0.2778
3583: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu_h)}{\pi}\right)^2
3584: + \left(2.2434 + 0.2454\,n_l\right)
3585: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu_h)}{\pi}\right)^3
3586: \nonumber\\
3587: &&
3588: + \left(2.1800 + 0.3096\,n_l - 0.0100\,n_l^2 \right)
3589: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu_h)}{\pi}\right)^4
3590: \,,
3591: \label{eq:c2}
3592: \end{eqnarray}
3593: where, for simplicity, we have chosen $\mu=\mu_h\equiv m_h(\mu_h)$
3594: in the approximate
3595: expressions.
3596: The corresponding results expressed in terms of
3597: the pole mass $M_h$ read
3598: \begin{eqnarray}
3599: C_1^{\rm OS}&=&
3600: -\frac{1}{12}\,\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}
3601: \Bigg\{1
3602: + \frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}
3603: \Bigg(
3604: \frac{11}{4}
3605: - \frac{1}{6} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3606: \Bigg)
3607: \nonumber\\
3608: &&{}+ \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2
3609: \Bigg[
3610: \frac{2693}{288}
3611: - \frac{25}{48} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3612: + \frac{1}{36} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3613: + n_l\left(
3614: -\frac{67}{96}
3615: + \frac{1}{3} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3616: \right)
3617: \Bigg]
3618: \nonumber\\
3619: &&{}+ \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^3
3620: \Bigg[
3621: -\frac{4271255}{62208}
3622: -\frac{2}{3}\zeta_2\left(1+\frac{\ln2}{3}\right)
3623: + \frac{1306661}{13824}\zeta_3
3624: \nonumber\\
3625: &&{}- \frac{4937}{864} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3626: + \frac{385}{144} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3627: - \frac{1}{216} \ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3628: \nonumber\\
3629: &&{}+ n_l \left(
3630: \frac{181127}{62208}
3631: + \frac{1}{9}\zeta_2
3632: - \frac{110779}{13824}\zeta_3
3633: + \frac{109}{48} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3634: + \frac{53}{96} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3635: \right)
3636: \nonumber\\
3637: &&{}+ n_l^2 \left(
3638: - \frac{6865}{31104}
3639: + \frac{77}{1728} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3640: - \frac{1}{18} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3641: \right)
3642: \Bigg]
3643: \Bigg\}
3644: \nonumber\\
3645: &\approx&
3646: -\frac{1}{12}\,\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(M_h)}{\pi}
3647: \Bigg[1
3648: + 2.7500
3649: \frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(M_h)}{\pi}
3650: + \left(9.3507 - 0.6979\,n_l\right)
3651: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(M_h)}{\pi}\right)^2
3652: \nonumber\\
3653: &&
3654: + \left(43.6090 - 6.5383\,n_l - 0.2207\,n_l^2 \right)
3655: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(M_h)}{\pi}\right)^3\Bigg]
3656: \,,
3657: \label{eq:c1os}\\
3658: C_2^{\rm OS}&=&1
3659: + \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2 \Bigg(
3660: \frac{5}{18}
3661: - \frac{1}{3} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3662: \Bigg)
3663: \nonumber\\
3664: &&{}
3665: +\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^3 \Bigg[
3666: - \frac{841}{1296}
3667: + \frac{5}{3}\zeta_3
3668: - \frac{247}{108} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3669: - \frac{29}{36} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3670: \nonumber\\
3671: &&{}
3672: + n_l\left(
3673: \frac{53}{216}
3674: + \frac{1}{18} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3675: \right)
3676: \Bigg]
3677: \nonumber\\
3678: &&{}+ \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^4 \Bigg[
3679: \frac{578975}{186624}
3680: - \frac{4}{3}\zeta_2\left(1+\frac{\ln2}{3}\right)
3681: + \frac{374797}{13824}\zeta_3
3682: - \frac{155}{6}\zeta_4
3683: \nonumber\\
3684: &&{}
3685: - \frac{575}{36}\zeta_5
3686: + \frac{31}{72} B_4
3687: + \left(
3688: -\frac{83405}{2592}
3689: + \frac{155}{12} \zeta_3
3690: \right) \ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3691: - \frac{2101}{216} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3692: \nonumber\\
3693: &&{}
3694: - \frac{301}{144} \ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3695: + n_l \left(
3696: - \frac{11557}{15552}
3697: + \frac{2}{9}\zeta_2
3698: - \frac{221}{288}\zeta_3
3699: + \frac{25}{12}\zeta_4
3700: - \frac{1}{36} B_4
3701: \right.\nonumber\\
3702: &&{}+\left.
3703: \frac{9217}{2592} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3704: + \frac{109}{144} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3705: + \frac{5}{18} \ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3706: \right)
3707: \nonumber\\
3708: &&{}+ n_l^2 \left(
3709: \frac{3401}{23328}
3710: - \frac{7}{54}\zeta_3
3711: - \frac{31}{324} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3712: - \frac{1}{108} \ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3713: \right)
3714: \Bigg]
3715: \nonumber\\
3716: &\approx&1
3717: + 0.2778
3718: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(M_h)}{\pi}\right)^2
3719: + \left(1.3545 + 0.2454\,n_l \right)
3720: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(M_h)}{\pi}\right)^3
3721: \nonumber\\
3722: &&
3723: + \left(-12.2884 + 1.0038\,n_l - 0.0100\,n_l^2 \right)
3724: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(M_h)}{\pi}\right)^4
3725: \,,
3726: \label{eq:c2os}
3727: \end{eqnarray}
3728: where we have put $\mu=M_h$ in the numerical evaluations.
3729: In~\cite{Ste98_higgs} the leading Yukawa corrections of
3730: ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^n G_F m_t^2)$ $(n=0,1,2)$ to the coefficient
3731: functions have been evaluated in the SM. The analytical results are
3732: listed in Appendix~\ref{app:decconst}.
3733:
3734: With the knowledge of $C_1$ and $C_2$ the construction of the
3735: effective Lagrangian is completed. In Section~\ref{sub:hadrHiggs}
3736: it will be used in order to compute the hadronic decay rate of the
3737: Higgs boson.
3738:
3739: Recently the effective Lagrangian has been used in order to consider
3740: the Higgs boson production process via gluon fusion.
3741: In Refs.~\cite{Harlander:2000mg,Harlander:2001is,Catani:2001ic}
3742: a first step to the
3743: next-to-next-to-leading order QCD corrections has been done.
3744: At this accuracy it is necessary to compute
3745: two-loop virtual corrections~\cite{Harlander:2000mg} to the process $gg\to H$
3746: using the effective $ggH$ vertex of Eq.~(\ref{eq:leff}).
3747: Thus the coefficient function $C_1$ enters as a multiplicative constant.
3748:
3749: For completeness we want to mention that the
3750: low-energy theorem derived in this section has also been specified to
3751: the $\gamma\gamma H$ coupling. The analytical expressions can be found
3752: in Ref.~\cite{CheKniSte98}.
3753:
3754: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
3755:
3756: \subsubsection{\label{sub:hggbfm}$H\to gg$ in the background field method}
3757:
3758: An interesting alternative to the considerations
3759: of the Sections~\ref{sub:dir} and~\ref{sub:let}
3760: is based on the Background Field Method
3761: (BFM)~\cite{BFM,Klu75,Abb81,DenWeiDit94,Gra99}.
3762: In this framework the gluon field is decomposed into
3763: a quantum and a background part where the former only
3764: appears as a virtual particle inside the loops.
3765: On the contrary, the background field serves as an external field
3766: in the Green functions.
3767: In the BFM the gauge invariance is maintained while quantizing the theory.
3768: This was one of the main motivations for its development.
3769:
3770: A comprehensive discussion for the case of QCD and the computation of
3771: the two-loop $\beta$ function as a practical
3772: application of the BFM can be found in~\cite{Abb81}.
3773: In particular, it is shown, that the relation between the charge
3774: renormalization constant, $Z_g$, (cf. Eq.~(\ref{eq:renconst})) and the
3775: wave function renormalization constant of the background
3776: gluon, $Z_3^B$, reads
3777: \begin{eqnarray}
3778: Z_3^B &=& \frac{1}{Z_g^2}
3779: \,.
3780: \label{eq:Z3B}
3781: \end{eqnarray}
3782: Thus, only the background gluon self energy has to be computed in order
3783: to obtain the $\beta$ function whereas in the conventional approach
3784: also vertex functions have to be considered. E.g., next to the gluon
3785: propagator also the ghost two-point function and the gluon-ghost vertex
3786: have to be computed.
3787: The price one has to pay for these kind of simplifications
3788: are more complicated Feynman rules for those vertices involving the
3789: background gluon~\cite{Abb81}. In particular, there are three- and four-gluon
3790: vertices which contain additional
3791: terms proportional to $1/(1-\xi)$ where $\xi$ is the
3792: gauge parameter defined in Eq.~(\ref{eq:gluprop}).
3793: As a consequence, it is not possible to choose Landau gauge, which corresponds
3794: to $\xi=1$ and which would avoid the renormalization of $\xi$,
3795: from the very beginning of the calculation. Rather one has to perform the
3796: calculation using a general gauge parameter and either adopt Landau gauge at
3797: the end of the calculation or renormalize the gauge parameter.
3798:
3799: Concerning the decoupling properties of the background field we can
3800: essentially take over the discussion of Section~\ref{sec:dec}.
3801: In analogy to Eq.~(\ref{eq:zeta30}) one obtains for the decoupling constant of
3802: the background gluon field
3803: \begin{eqnarray}
3804: \zeta_3^{B0} &=& 1 + \Pi_{G^B}^{0,h}(0)
3805: \,,
3806: \end{eqnarray}
3807: where $\Pi_{G^B}^{0,h}$ is the hard contribution
3808: of the transversal part of the bare background gluon polarization function.
3809: $\zeta_3^{B0}$ coincides with $\zeta_3^{0}$ at one-loop order
3810: as only the diagram with a heavy quark loop contributes and
3811: the coupling of fermions to background gluons is identical
3812: to the one of quantum gluons.
3813: Starting from two loops, however, virtual quantum gluons
3814: appear inside the Feynman diagrams and the analytical
3815: expressions are different.
3816: In Fig.~\ref{fig:gBgB} some typical one-, two- and three-loop diagrams
3817: contributing to $\Pi_{G^B}^{0,h}(0)$ are shown.
3818: One arrives at a finite expression for the decoupling constant
3819: with the help of
3820: \begin{eqnarray}
3821: \zeta_3^B &=& \frac{Z_3^B \zeta_3^{B0}}{Z_3^{B\prime}}
3822: \,.
3823: \end{eqnarray}
3824:
3825: \begin{figure}[ht]
3826: \leavevmode
3827: \begin{center}
3828: \epsfxsize=\textwidth
3829: \epsffile[90 580 530 730]{figs/gBgB_fig.ps}
3830: \caption{\label{fig:gBgB}Typical Feynman diagrams contributing
3831: to the two-point function with external background gluons.
3832: Looped, solid, and dashed lines represent gluons, heavy quarks, and
3833: ghosts, respectively.}
3834: \end{center}
3835: \end{figure}
3836:
3837:
3838: It is not surprising that one has the
3839: following connection between $\zeta_3^B$ and $\zeta_g$
3840: \begin{eqnarray}
3841: \zeta_3^B &=& \frac{1}{\zeta_g^2}
3842: \,,
3843: \label{eq:zeta3B}
3844: \end{eqnarray}
3845: which is in analogy to Eq.~(\ref{eq:Z3B}).
3846: We explicitly checked this relation and computed $\Pi_{G^B}^{0,h}(0)$ at
3847: three-loop order using a general gauge parameter. After renormalization one
3848: obtains
3849: \begin{eqnarray}
3850: \zeta_3^{B,{\rm OS}} &=&
3851: 1 +
3852: \frac{\alpha_s^{(n_l)}(\mu)}{\pi}
3853: \left(
3854: \frac{1}{6}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3855: \right)
3856: +\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_l)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2
3857: \left(
3858: \frac{7}{24}
3859: +\frac{19}{24}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3860: +\frac{1}{36}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3861: \right)
3862: \nonumber\\
3863: &&{}+\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_l)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^3
3864: \left[
3865: \frac{58933}{124416}
3866: +\frac{2}{3}\zeta_2\left(1+\frac{1}{3}\ln2\right)
3867: +\frac{80507}{27648}\zeta_3
3868: +\frac{8941}{1728}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3869: \right.\nonumber\\
3870: &&{}+\left.
3871: \frac{511}{576}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3872: +\frac{1}{216}\ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3873: +n_l\left(
3874: -\frac{2479}{31104}
3875: -\frac{\zeta_2}{9}
3876: -\frac{409}{1728}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_h^2}
3877: \right)
3878: \right]
3879: \,,
3880: \label{eq:invzetagOS}
3881: \end{eqnarray}
3882: which is in agreement with Eq.~(\ref{eq:zetagOS}).
3883: The $219$ diagrams contributing to $\Pi_{G^B}^{0,h}(0)$
3884: have to be compared with the $189+25+228=442$ diagrams
3885: which are necessary in order to obtain the result of Eq.~(\ref{eq:zetagOS}).
3886:
3887: Eq.~(\ref{eq:zeta3B}) also significantly simplifies the computation of the
3888: coefficient function $C_1$. Due to Eq.~(\ref{eq:c1let1}) it is simply obtained
3889: via
3890: \begin{eqnarray}
3891: C_1 &=& 2 \partial_h\ln\zeta_3^B
3892: \,.
3893: \label{eq:c1let1_bfm}
3894: \end{eqnarray}
3895: This coincides with the naive expectation that the effective coupling of the
3896: Higgs boson is generated by taking derivatives of the gluon polarization
3897: function with respect to the heavy quark mass.
3898: Furthermore Eq.~(\ref{eq:c1let1_bfm}) agrees with the
3899: low-energy theorem for the photon-Higgs interaction as derived
3900: in~\cite{CheKniSte98}.
3901: In this sense we could claim that
3902: the background gluon is ``more physical'' than the gluon in
3903: the conventional approach.
3904:
3905: In this context we want to refer to~\cite{Kniehl:1995tn}
3906: where low-energy theorems in Higgs physics have been considered at
3907: one- and two-loop order. In particular it was realized that the
3908: decay rate of a scalar Higgs boson into two photons can be obtained
3909: by naive differentiation of the photon self energy if the latter is computed in
3910: the framework of the pinch technique.
3911:
3912:
3913: As a further check on the result for $C_1$ we also perform the direct
3914: calculation by considering the quantity
3915: $\Gamma^{\mu\nu}_{G^BG^B{\cal O}_h}(p_1,p_2)$
3916: which is defined in analogy to Eq.~(\ref{eq:ggo1}):
3917: \begin{eqnarray}
3918: \delta^{ab}\Gamma_{G^BG^B{\cal O}_h}^{0,\mu\nu}(p_1,p_2)
3919: &=&i^2\int {\rm d} x {\rm d} y\,e^{i(p_1\cdot x + p_2\cdot y)}
3920: \left\langle TG^{B,0,a\mu}(x)G^{B,0,b\nu}(y){\cal O}_h(0)
3921: \right\rangle^{\rm1PI}
3922: \!\!\!.
3923: \label{eq:ggo1B}
3924: \end{eqnarray}
3925: The only difference is the presence of external background (instead of
3926: quantum) fields.
3927: We evaluated the 732 vertex diagrams in the spirit of Eq.~(\ref{eq:C1dir})
3928: and could confirm
3929: the order $\alpha_s^3$ terms in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:c1}) and~(\ref{eq:c1os}).
3930:
3931: Due to the fact that there are no diagrams involving external ghost
3932: fields contributing to Eq.~(\ref{eq:c1let1_bfm})
3933: there is no admixture from ${\cal O}_4^0$ while matching
3934: $\Gamma^{\mu\nu}_{G^BG^B{\cal O}_h}(p_1,p_2)$ with the effective
3935: theory even for the choice $p_1=-p_2$.
3936: Thus we can immediately set $p_1=-p_2=p$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:ggo1B})
3937: and consider the limit $p\to0$.
3938: No complicated projector like in Eq.~(\ref{eq:C1dir}) is necessary
3939: which simplifies the evaluation of the diagrams with external
3940: background gluons.
3941:
3942: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
3943:
3944: \subsubsection{\label{sub:hadrHiggs}Hadronic decay rate of the SM
3945: Higgs boson}
3946:
3947: In the following we present the current status of the total decay rate
3948: of the SM Higgs boson\footnote{For review articles we
3949: refer to~\cite{Kniehl:1994ay,Spira:1998dg}.}
3950: in the intermediate mass range. This is done on the
3951: basis of the effective Lagrangian Eq.~(\ref{eq:leff}), where
3952: the top quark takes over the role of the heavy quark $h$.
3953:
3954: The total decay rate into hadrons can be cast in the
3955: form\footnote{The additional index ``q'' for the coefficient function
3956: $C_2$ indicates that there might be an explicit dependence on the
3957: flavour through elektroweak corrections.}
3958: \begin{eqnarray}
3959: \Gamma\left(H\to \mbox{hadrons}\right)
3960: &=&
3961: \left(1+\delta_u\right)^2
3962: \bigg\{
3963: \sum_q
3964: A_{q\bar q}
3965: \left[
3966: \left(1+\Delta^q_{22} \right)\left(C_{2q}\right)^2
3967: +\Delta^q_{12}\,C_1C_{2q}
3968: \right]
3969: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
3970: % \qquad
3971: +A_{gg}
3972: \,\Delta_{11}\,\left(C_1\right)^2
3973: +A_{gg}
3974: \,\Delta^{\rm hdo}_g
3975: +\sum_q
3976: A_{q\bar q}
3977: \left[
3978: \Delta^{\rm hdo}_q
3979: + \Delta^{\rm weak}_q\Big|_{x_t=0}
3980: \right]
3981: \bigg\}
3982: \,,
3983: \nonumber\\
3984: \label{eq:gamhad}
3985: \end{eqnarray}
3986: with
3987: $A_{q\bar q}=3G_FM_Hm_q^2/(4\pi\sqrt2)$
3988: and
3989: $A_{gg}=4G_FM_H^3/(\pi\sqrt{2})$.
3990: The terms in the first line and the first term
3991: in the second line proportional to $A_{gg}$ have their origin in
3992: Eq.~(\ref{eq:leff}). In particular,
3993: the universal corrections $\delta_u$ arise from the renormalization
3994: of the factor $H^0/v^0$ and are known to order
3995: $\alpha_s^2 G_F m_t^2$~\cite{KniSte95}.
3996: The factors $\Delta_{ij}$ contain the QED and QCD
3997: corrections from the light degrees of freedom only, while
3998: the terms
3999: $\Delta^{\rm hdo}$ summarize the corrections coming from
4000: higher dimensional operators.
4001: They are at least suppressed by a factor
4002: $\alpha_s^2 M_H^2/M_t^2$.
4003: In Eq.~(\ref{eq:gamhad}) we separately display the weak contribution
4004: where the leading term of order $G_Fm_t^2$ is stripped off. It is denoted
4005: by\footnote{For the definition of $x_t$ see
4006: Eq.~(\ref{eq:xt})} $\Delta^{\rm weak}_q\Big|_{x_t=0}$.
4007:
4008: \begin{figure}[ht]
4009: \begin{center}
4010: \leavevmode
4011: \epsfxsize=14.0cm
4012: \epsffile[125 640 500 730]{figs/fighqq.ps}
4013: \end{center}
4014: \caption{\label{fig:del22}
4015: Typical Feynman diagrams contributing to $\Delta_{22}^q$.
4016: The solid circles represent the operator
4017: ${\cal O}_{2}$.}
4018: \end{figure}
4019:
4020: Typical diagrams contributing to the QCD corrections of
4021: $\Delta_{22}^q$ are pictured in Fig.~\ref{fig:del22}.
4022: At one-loop order they have been evaluated
4023: in~\cite{Braaten:1980yq,Drees:1990dq} keeping the
4024: full dependence of the quark mass.
4025: The dominant corrections at order ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$,
4026: i.e. those obtained
4027: keeping only the factor $m_q^2$ from the Yukawa coupling,
4028: have been evaluated in~\cite{GorKatLarSur90}.
4029: The calculation has later on been improved and the correction
4030: terms proportional to
4031: $m_q^2/M_H^2$ became available~\cite{Sur94,CheKwi96}.
4032: A naive expansion in $m_q$ is sufficient for their computation.
4033: Beyond the quadratic term, however, one either has to adopt the method
4034: discussed in Section~\ref{sub:as3m4} or apply the large-momentum
4035: expansion. The latter has been performed in~\cite{Harlander:1997xa}
4036: and mass correction terms up to order $(m_b^2/M_H^2)^8$
4037: have been evaluated.
4038: For a Higgs boson in the intermediate-mass
4039: range considered in this Subsection the corrections
4040: beyond the quadratic term are quite small and can safely be neglected.
4041: In~\cite{Harlander:1997xa} the higher order terms
4042: have been considered in the context of a heavy Higgs boson which can
4043: also decay into top quarks. In this case it turned out that even the
4044: quartic terms are important and only
4045: an expansion up to order $(m_t^2/M_H^2)^8$ gives satisfactory results.
4046: In Section~\ref{sub:veccor} we review the calculation and
4047: numerical results are presented in Tab.~\ref{tab:Higgs}.
4048: For completeness we want to mention that
4049: the imaginary part of the correlator
4050: $\langle {\cal O}_2 {\cal O}_2 \rangle$
4051: has even been evaluated at four-loop order
4052: using the technique described in Section~\ref{sub:IRR}.
4053: This leads to corrections of order $\alpha_s^3$~\cite{Che97_Higgs}.
4054:
4055: Next to the pure QCD corrections there are also the contributions
4056: of order $\alpha$ and the mixed QED/QCD terms of order
4057: $\alpha\alpha_s$~\cite{Kataev:1992fe,Kataev:1997cq} which can easily
4058: be extracted form the QCD results.
4059: In summary, the numerical result for the discussed terms read
4060: \begin{eqnarray}
4061: \Delta_{22}^{q}(M_H) &=&
4062: \frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_H)}{\pi}
4063: \left[
4064: 5.66667
4065: + \left(35.9400 - 1.3587 n_l\right)
4066: \frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_H)}{\pi}
4067: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
4068: + \left(164.1392 - 25.7712 n_l + 0.2590 n_l^2\right)
4069: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_H)}{\pi}\right)^2
4070: \right]
4071: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
4072: + \frac{\bar{\alpha}(M_H)}{\pi}
4073: Q_q^2\,
4074: \left(
4075: 4.2500
4076: + 11.7097 \frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_H)}{\pi}
4077: \right)
4078: \,,
4079: \end{eqnarray}
4080: where $n_l$ is the number of light quarks.
4081:
4082: \begin{figure}[ht]
4083: \begin{center}
4084: \leavevmode
4085: \epsfxsize=15.0cm
4086: \epsffile[70 630 570 720]{figs/hqqmixfig.ps}
4087: \end{center}
4088: \caption{\label{fig:del12}Two- and some of the
4089: three-loop diagrams contributing
4090: to $\Delta_{12}^q$.
4091: The solid circles represent the operators
4092: ${\cal O}_1$ and ${\cal O}_{2}$, respectively.
4093: }
4094: \end{figure}
4095:
4096: The imaginary part of the mixed correlator
4097: $\langle {\cal O}_1 {\cal O}_2 \rangle$ is denoted by $\Delta_{12}^q$.
4098: Next to contributions to the partial width into quarks it
4099: also involves purely gluonic final states as can be seen
4100: from the diagrams shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:del12}.
4101: The contributions at two- and three-loop order have been computed
4102: in~\cite{CheKwi96,LarRitVer95_2,CheKniSte97hbb} and~\cite{CheSte97},
4103: respectively. In numerical form $\Delta^q_{12}$ is given by
4104: \begin{eqnarray}
4105: \Delta_{12}^q(M_H) &=&
4106: \frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_H)}{\pi}
4107: \left[
4108: -30.667
4109: + \left(-524.853 + 20.647\,n_l \right)
4110: \frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_H)}{\pi}
4111: \right]
4112: \,.
4113: \label{eq:del12}
4114: \end{eqnarray}
4115: In case one is only interested in final states involving quarks the
4116: purely gluonic cuts have to be subtracted.
4117: Currently they are only known at order $\alpha_s$. To this order the
4118: subtracted result reads~\cite{CheKniSte97hbb}
4119: \begin{eqnarray}
4120: \Delta_{12}^{q\prime}(M_H) &=&
4121: \frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_H)}{\pi}
4122: \left[
4123: -\frac{76}{3} + 8\zeta_2
4124: -\frac{4}{3} \ln^2\frac{m_q^2}{M_H^2}
4125: - 8 \ln\frac{\mu^2}{M_H^2}
4126: \right]
4127: + \ldots
4128: \,,
4129: \label{eq:del12_2}
4130: \end{eqnarray}
4131: where the ellipses indicate terms of order $\alpha_s^2$.
4132: Note the logarithmic singularity in the light-quark mass
4133: which arises from the fact that
4134: only parts of the final state are contained in Eq.~(\ref{eq:del12_2}).
4135:
4136:
4137: \begin{figure}[ht]
4138: \leavevmode
4139: \begin{center}
4140: \epsfxsize=\textwidth
4141: \epsffile[118 552 478 731]{figs/agg2fig.ps}
4142: \caption{Typical Feynman diagrams contributing to the correlator
4143: $\langle {\cal O}_1 {\cal O}_1\rangle$.
4144: Looped, solid, and dashed lines represent gluons, light quarks, and
4145: Higgs bosons, respectively.
4146: Solid circles represent insertions of ${\cal O}_1$.}
4147: \label{fig:O1O1}
4148: \end{center}
4149: \end{figure}
4150:
4151: The correlator formed by the operator ${\cal O}_1$ mainly contains
4152: cuts arising from gluons. However, starting from two loops there are
4153: also contributions from light quarks and at order $\alpha_s^2$ there
4154: are even cuts involving no gluons at all (cf. second diagram in the
4155: lower row of Fig.~\ref{fig:O1O1}).
4156: In Fig.~\ref{fig:O1O1} some typical diagrams are pictured.
4157: In particular, the combination $(C_1)^2 \Delta_{11}$ contains the
4158: contribution from all the diagrams pictured in Figure~\ref{fig:hggfig}.
4159: The two-loop contribution has been evaluated
4160: in~\cite{Inami:1983xt,Djouadi:1991tk} and the order $\alpha_s^2$ terms
4161: can be found if~\cite{CheKniSte97}.
4162: If we set $\mu^2=M_H^2$ and evaluate the correlator for $q^2=M_H^2$ we
4163: obtain
4164: \begin{eqnarray}
4165: \Delta_{11}(M_H^2) &=&
4166: 1
4167: + \frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_H)}{\pi} \left( 18.250 - 1.167 n_l \right)
4168: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
4169: + \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_H)}{\pi}\right)^2
4170: \left(242.973 - 39.374\, n_l + 0.902\, n_l^2 \right)
4171: \,.
4172: \label{eq:del11}
4173: \end{eqnarray}
4174:
4175: \begin{figure}[ht]
4176: \leavevmode
4177: \begin{center}
4178: \epsfxsize=\textwidth
4179: \epsffile[70 530 540 710]{figs/hggfig.ps}
4180: \caption{Typical diagrams generating ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$
4181: corrections to $\Gamma(H\to gg)$.
4182: Bold-faced (dashed) lines represent the top quark (Higgs boson).}
4183: \label{fig:hggfig}
4184: \end{center}
4185: \end{figure}
4186:
4187:
4188: The contributions to $\Delta^{\rm hdo}$ are not covered by
4189: Eq.~(\ref{eq:leff}).
4190: In the language of the effective Lagrangian
4191: it would require to deal with operators of dimension six and higher.
4192: However, up to now they have not been studied in detail.
4193: The approach adopted in Refs.~\cite{CheKwi96,LarRitVer95_2} is based
4194: on asymptotic expansion which is applied to the propagator-type
4195: diagrams involving a top-quark loop.
4196: At order $\alpha_s^2$ there are two classes of such diagrams
4197: contributing to $\Delta^{\rm hdo}_q$, namely the
4198: double-triangle (or singlet) and the double bubble diagrams.
4199: The exact result for the imaginary part of the latter
4200: with massless external quark lines and heavy virtual top quark
4201: can be found in~\cite{Kni95}.
4202: The leading term contribution to $\Delta^{\rm hdo}_q$ reads
4203: \begin{eqnarray}
4204: \Delta^{\rm hdo}_q
4205: &=&
4206: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}}{\pi}\right)^2 \frac{M_H^2}{M_t^2}
4207: \left( \frac{5863}{24300} - \frac{113}{1620} \ln\frac{M_H^2}{M_t^2}
4208: \right)
4209: \nonumber\\
4210: &=&
4211: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}}{\pi}\right)^2 \frac{M_H^2}{M_t^2}
4212: \left(0.241-0.070 \ln\frac{M_H^2}{M_t^2} \right)
4213: \,.
4214: \label{eq:hdoq}
4215: \end{eqnarray}
4216: The higher order contributions in $M_H^2/M_t^2$ are very
4217: small and can safely be neglected --- even for $M_H=M_t$.
4218: For $\Delta^{\rm hdo}_g$ one obtains~\cite{LarRitVer95_2}
4219: \begin{eqnarray}
4220: \Delta^{\rm hdo}_g
4221: &=&
4222: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}}{\pi}\right)^2 \frac{M_H^2}{M_t^2}
4223: \,\frac{7}{60}
4224: +
4225: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}}{\pi}\right)^3 \frac{M_H^2}{M_t^2}
4226: \left( \frac{2249}{1080} - \frac{7}{30} \ln\frac{M_H^2}{M_t^2}
4227: \right)
4228: \nonumber\\
4229: &=&
4230: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}}{\pi}\right)^2 \frac{M_H^2}{M_t^2}
4231: \, 0.11667
4232: +
4233: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}}{\pi}\right)^3 \frac{M_H^2}{M_t^2}
4234: \left( 2.0824 - 0.23333 \ln\frac{M_H^2}{M_t^2}
4235: \right)
4236: \,,
4237: \label{eq:hdog}
4238: \end{eqnarray}
4239: where again the higher order terms in $M_H^2/M_t^2$ are much smaller.
4240: The contribution to $\Delta^{\rm hdo}_g$ is obtained from the
4241: application of the hard-mass procedure to the propagator-type diagrams
4242: where the external Higgs bosons are attached to
4243: top quarks and they subsequently couple to gluons. To leading order in
4244: the expansion for large $m_t$ one obtains the one- and two-loop
4245: diagrams of Fig.~\ref{fig:O1O1}.
4246: The comparison of Eq.~(\ref{eq:hdog})
4247: with Eq.~(\ref{eq:del11}) shows that also in this case
4248: the contributions from the higher dimensional operators are small.
4249: We want to mention
4250: that for $H\to gg$ a numerical calculation of order
4251: $\alpha_s^2$ exists which takes the complete mass
4252: dependence into account \cite{Djouadi:1991tk}.
4253:
4254: At one-loop the complete weak corrections have been computed in
4255: analytical from~\cite{DabHol92,Kni92}.
4256: If we put $m_q=0$ and consider the limit $M_H\ll 2M_W$,
4257: $\Delta_q^{\rm weak}|_{x_t=0}$ takes the form~\cite{Kni92}
4258: \begin{eqnarray}
4259: \Delta_q^{\rm weak}|_{x_t=0} &=&
4260: \frac{G_FM_Z^2}{8\pi^2\sqrt2}
4261: \left[\frac{1}{2}-3\left(1-4s_w^2|Q_q|\right)^2
4262: +c_w^2\left(\frac{3}{s_w^2}\ln c_w^2-5\right)\right]
4263: \,.
4264: \end{eqnarray}
4265: The leading $m_t^2$ term is stripped off as it is already contained in
4266: the universal factor $\delta_u$.
4267: Expressed in terms of the $\overline{\rm MS}$ top quark mass
4268: the latter reads in numerical form~\cite{KwiSte94KniSpi94,KniSte95}
4269: \begin{eqnarray}
4270: \delta_u &=&
4271: {7\over6}N_cx_t\left[1+
4272: \frac{\alpha_s^{(6)}(\mu)}{\pi}
4273: (2\,\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}+0.869\,561)
4274: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
4275: +\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(6)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2
4276: \left(3.750\,000\,\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
4277: +6.010\,856\,\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
4278: -2.742\,226\right)\right]
4279: \,.
4280: \end{eqnarray}
4281:
4282: We want to mention that also
4283: non-universal radiative corrections to $C_1$ and $C_{2q}$,
4284: which are enhanced by a factor $G_Fm_t^2$,
4285: are available up to the three-loop
4286: order~\cite{KniSte95,CheKniSte97hbb,Ste98_higgs}.
4287: They will be listed below
4288: in comparison with the terms of ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$.
4289:
4290: At this point we want to compare the relative size of the individual
4291: terms. In particular we have in mind terms of order
4292: ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$,
4293: $\alpha_s^2m_b^2/M_H^2$,
4294: $\alpha\alpha_s$,
4295: $\alpha_s^2X_t$
4296: and
4297: $\alpha_s^2M_H^2/M_t^2$.
4298: For this purpose we will consider all quarks with mass lighter than
4299: $m_b$ as massless. This means that the sum in
4300: Eq.~(\ref{eq:gamhad}) reduces to $q=b$
4301: which is conveniently written in the form
4302: \begin{eqnarray}
4303: \Gamma(H\to\mbox{hadrons}) &=&
4304: A_{b\bar{b}}\left(
4305: 1+\Delta^b_l+\Delta_t
4306: \right)
4307: +
4308: %\left(1+\delta_u\right)^2
4309: \frac{A_{gg}}{144}
4310: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(5)}}{\pi}\right)^2
4311: %\,\Delta_{11}\,\left(C_1\right)^2,
4312: \,\Delta_g
4313: \,,
4314: \end{eqnarray}
4315: where $\Delta_l^b$ contains only corrections from light
4316: degrees of freedom. All top-induced terms proportional to
4317: $A_{b\bar{b}}$ from
4318: Eq.~(\ref{eq:gamhad}) are contained in $\Delta_t$,
4319: which we express in terms of $\alpha_s^{(5)}(\mu)$.
4320: $\Delta_g$ contains the corrections from the gluonic final state.
4321: Choosing $\mu^2=M_H^2$ and $n_l=5$ we find
4322: \begin{eqnarray}
4323: \Delta_l^b &=&
4324: - 6 \frac{(m_b^{(5)})^2}{M_H^2}
4325: + 0.472 \,\frac{\bar\alpha(M_H)}{\pi}
4326: + 1.301 \,\frac{\bar\alpha(M_H)}{\pi}a_H^{(5)}
4327: + a_H^{(5)}\left(
4328: 5.667
4329: - 40.000\frac{(m_b^{(5)})^2}{M_H^2}
4330: \right)
4331: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
4332: +\left(a_H^{(5)}\right)^2\left(
4333: 29.147
4334: - 87.725 \frac{(m_b^{(5)})^2}{M_H^2}
4335: \right)
4336: + 41.758 \left(a_H^{(5)}\right)^3,
4337: \label{eqdell}
4338: \\
4339: \Delta_t &=&
4340: \left(a_H^{(5)}\right)^2
4341: \left[
4342: 3.111
4343: -0.667\,L_t
4344: +\frac{(m_b^{(5)})^2}{M_H^2}
4345: \left(
4346: -10
4347: +4\,L_t
4348: +\frac{4}{3}\ln\frac{(m_b^{(5)})^2}{M_H^2}
4349: \right)
4350: \right]
4351: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
4352: +\left(a_H^{(5)}\right)^3
4353: \left(
4354: 50.474
4355: -8.167\,L_t
4356: -1.278\,L_t^2
4357: \right)
4358: + \left(a_H^{(5)}\right)^2\frac{M_H^2}{M_t^2}
4359: \left(
4360: 0.241
4361: - 0.070\, L_t
4362: \right)
4363: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
4364: +X_t\left[1
4365: - 4.913 a_H^{(5)}
4366: + \left(a_H^{(5)}\right)^2
4367: \left(
4368: -72.117
4369: -20.945\,L_t
4370: \right)
4371: \right]
4372: \,,
4373: \label{eqdelt}
4374: \\
4375: \Delta_g &=&
4376: 1
4377: + X_t
4378: + a_H^{(5)}
4379: \left[
4380: 17.917
4381: + 30.3369 \, X_t
4382: \right]
4383: %%%%%\nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
4384: + \left(a_H^{(5)}\right)^2\left[
4385: 156.808
4386: + 5.708 \ln\frac{M_H^2}{m_t^2}
4387: \right]
4388: \,,
4389: \label{eq:delg}
4390: \end{eqnarray}
4391: with $a_H^{(5)}=\alpha_s^{(5)}(M_H)/\pi$, $L_t=\ln M_H^2/M_t^2$,
4392: and $X_t = G_F M_t^2/(8\pi^2\sqrt{2})$.
4393: In Eqs.~(\ref{eqdell}) and~(\ref{eqdelt}) also the quadratic mass
4394: correction terms are listed.
4395: In $\Delta_l$ they are obtained from the naive expansion of the diagrams.
4396: The $(m_b^{(5)})^2/M_H^2$ corrections in $\Delta_t$ arise from
4397: the singlet diagram with one top and one bottom quark triangle.
4398: In this case a naive expansion fails as can be seen by the logarithmic
4399: term in Eq.~(\ref{eqdelt}).
4400: Instead the asymptotic expansion has to be applied~\cite{CheKwi96}.
4401: Both for $\Delta_l$ and $\Delta_t$
4402: one observes that the ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$ term
4403: proves to be numerically more important than the power suppressed
4404: contribution of ${\cal O}(\alpha^2_s m_b^2/M_H^2)$.
4405: Note, that Eq.~(\ref{eqdelt}) contains
4406: contributions with pure gluonic final states
4407: which is due to diagrams of the type in Fig.~\ref{fig:del12}.
4408:
4409: In the approximation considered here we have
4410: $-2\lsim L_t<0$. This means that the logarithm needs not
4411: necessarily to be re-summed as in addition the coefficients
4412: in front of $L_t$ are much smaller than the constant term.
4413:
4414: A comparison of Eqs.~(\ref{eqdell}) and~(\ref{eqdelt}) shows
4415: that the top-induced corrections in $\Delta_t$ of
4416: ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$ are numerically of the same size as
4417: the ones arising from ``pure'' QCD.
4418: Furthermore one should mention that the coefficient of the
4419: $M_t$-suppressed terms are tiny and, as
4420: $\alpha_s/X_t\approx30$, also the $\alpha_s^2X_t$ enhanced terms
4421: are less important than the cubic QCD corrections.
4422: This is also the case for Eq.~(\ref{eq:delg}).
4423: For comparison in Eq.~(\ref{eqdell}) also the two-loop
4424: corrections of order $\alpha\alpha_s$ are listed.
4425: In principle also higher order mass corrections are available
4426: \cite{Harlander:1997xa}. However, in the case of bottom quarks
4427: it turns out that they are tiny.
4428:
4429: In summary, we have shown that for an intermediate-mass Higgs boson
4430: the application of the effective Lagrangian
4431: (cf. Eq.~(\ref{eq:eff})) is quite successful and enables the
4432: computation of the hadronic Higgs decay up to orders $\alpha_s^3$
4433: and $\alpha_s^4$ for the quark and gluon final states, respectively.
4434: The smallness of the higher dimensional operators
4435: (cf. Eq.~(\ref{eq:hdoq}) and~(\ref{eq:hdog})) justifies
4436: this approach.
4437: In conclusion we can state that the perturbative expansion
4438: of the hadronic width of the Higgs boson is well under control.
4439:
4440: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
4441:
4442: \subsection{\label{sub:as3m4}Quartic
4443: mass corrections to $\sigma(e^+e^-\to\mbox{hadrons})$}
4444:
4445: The total cross section for hadron production in
4446: electron-positron annihilation, $\sigma(e^+e^-\to\mbox{hadrons})$,
4447: is one of the most fundamental
4448: observables in particle physics (for a review see~\cite{ckk96}).
4449: For energies sufficiently far above
4450: threshold it can be predicted by perturbative QCD, and it is well
4451: accessible experimentally from threshold up to the high energies of
4452: LEP and a future linear collider. It allows for a precise determination
4453: of the strong coupling $\alpha_s$ and, once precision measurements at
4454: different energies are available, for a test of its evolution dictated
4455: by the renormalization group equation.
4456:
4457: Often the center-of-mass energy is much larger than the quark masses
4458: which then can safely be neglected. However, there are also many
4459: situations where it is important to take into account the
4460: effect of finite quark masses~\cite{CheKueKwiPR}.
4461: E.g., one can think of charm or bottom quark production
4462: not far above their production thresholds~\cite{CheKue95,CheKueTeu97},
4463: or of top quark production at a future linear collider~\cite{HarSte98}.
4464:
4465: The complete mass-dependence at order $\alpha_s$ to
4466: $R(s)\equiv\sigma(e^+e^-\to\mbox{hadrons})/\sigma(e^+e^-\to\mu^+\mu^-)$
4467: has been evaluated quite
4468: some time ago in analytical form~\cite{KalSab55} in the context of QED.
4469: At order $\alpha_s^2$ this task
4470: already becomes much less trivial.
4471: The massless approximation became available quite some time
4472: ago~\cite{CheKatTka79DinSap79CelGon80}.
4473: However, only for a certain
4474: class of diagrams --- the ones containing a second massless quark pair ---
4475: the full quark mass dependence could be obtained in analytical form
4476: using conventional methods~\cite{HoaKueTeu951}.
4477: For all other contributions different methods have to be applied
4478: which are discussed in detail in Section~\ref{sec:pade}.
4479: Here, we only want to mention that a crucial ingredient is
4480: the application of the large-momentum procedure which provides
4481: an expansion in $m^2/s$.
4482: At order $\alpha_s^3$ also this method fails
4483: as it would be necessary to evaluate massless
4484: four-loop propagator-type diagrams. At the moment this is not
4485: possible.
4486: Thus a different strategy has to be employed which we will describe below.
4487:
4488: In addition to the
4489: massless result, which has been obtained
4490: in~\cite{GorKatLar91SurSam91,Che97_R},
4491: the $m^2/s$ terms of
4492: ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$ have been calculated
4493: in~\cite{CheKue90}. They were obtained by reconstructing the
4494: logarithmic $\alpha_s^3m^2/s$ terms for the polarization function
4495: $\Pi(q^2)$ from the knowledge of the full three loop
4496: ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2m^2/s)$ result of~\cite{GorKatLar86} with the
4497: help of the renormalization group equations. These are sufficient to
4498: calculate the $m^2/s$ terms of the imaginary part in the time-like
4499: region.
4500: A generalization of this
4501: approach has been formulated for the quartic mass terms
4502: in~\cite{CheSpi87,CheKue94}
4503: and was originally adopted for the calculation
4504: of $\alpha_s^2 m^4/s^2$ terms~\cite{CheKue94}.
4505:
4506:
4507: The basic ingredients are the OPE~\cite{Wil69} and
4508: the renormalization group equations (RGE).
4509: The idea is to apply the OPE to the correlator of two currents and
4510: compute its imaginary part which immediately leads to
4511: corrections for $R(s)$.
4512: The current correlator is expressed as a sum over
4513: local operators multiplied by coefficient functions which represent
4514: the short distance part of the process.
4515: Afterwards one exploits the RGEs in order to relate different pieces in
4516: the sum and to construct the logarithmic terms of the polarization
4517: function.
4518: In addition to the anomalous mass dimension and the $\beta$-function, the
4519: anomalous dimensions of the operators of dimension four are required in
4520: appropriate order.
4521:
4522:
4523: Let us be more specific and consider the time-ordered product of two
4524: currents. The application of the OPE leads to
4525: \begin{eqnarray}
4526: T^j(q) &=& i\int{\rm d}^4 x e^{iqx} {\rm T}\,j(x)j(0)
4527: \,\,\stackrel{-q^2\to\infty}{\sim}\,\,\sum_n C_n(q) {\cal O}_n
4528: \,,
4529: \label{eq:ope}
4530: \end{eqnarray}
4531: where the dependence of the coefficient functions $C_n(q)$ on the
4532: large scale $q$ is made explicit. In Eq.~(\ref{eq:ope})
4533: we have to consider all operators ${\cal O}_n$ of dimension four
4534: as exactly those contribute to the quartic mass corrections.
4535: They can be found in
4536: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:op1}) and~(\ref{eq:op3}).
4537:
4538: Actually the contributing operators essentially coincide with the ones
4539: of Section~\ref{sub:higgs}.
4540: There, however, the top quark
4541: mass took over the role of the large scale and the external momentum was
4542: supposed to be much smaller. As a consequence the coefficient
4543: functions depend on $M_t$ and are computed with the help of vacuum
4544: integrals. On the contrary, we will see below that the coefficient
4545: functions of Eq.~(\ref{eq:ope}) are expressed through massless
4546: propagator-type integrals.
4547:
4548: The virtue of Eq.~(\ref{eq:ope}) becomes obvious if one takes the
4549: vacuum expectation value.
4550: Then the left-hand side turns into the polarization
4551: function which in the following we generically call $\Pi(q^2)$.
4552: On the right-hand side we obtain a sum of vacuum expectation values
4553: of the local operators multiplied by the coefficient functions.
4554: As already mentioned, the latter only depend on $q$ whereas the scale
4555: of the vacuum expectation values is given by the quark mass. This
4556: strongly resembles the large-momentum procedure. Also there a
4557: factorization of the scales is achieved.
4558: In fact, it can be shown that for a certain choice of the operator
4559: basis an identification of the $C_n(q)$ with the hard subgraphs
4560: and of the vacuum expectation values with the co-subgraphs is
4561: possible.
4562:
4563: \begin{figure}[t]
4564: \begin{center}
4565: % \parbox{\captionwidth}{
4566: \leavevmode
4567: \epsfxsize=2.5cm
4568: \epsffile[150 260 420 450]{figs/d1q.ps}\hspace{1em}
4569: \raisebox{2.1em}
4570: {\Large $= \ \ 1\ \star\,\, $}
4571: \epsfxsize=2.5cm
4572: \epsffile[150 260 420 450]{figs/d1q.ps}\hspace{1em}
4573: \raisebox{2.1em}
4574: {\Large $+ \ \ 2\times \!\!\!\!$}
4575: \epsfxsize=2cm
4576: \raisebox{.5em}{\epsffile[150 260 420 450]{figs/d1q_2c.ps}}\hspace{-.5em}
4577: \raisebox{2.1em}{\Large $\star\,\,$}
4578: \epsfxsize=2.5cm
4579: \epsffile[150 260 420 450]{figs/d1q_2.ps}\hspace{1em}
4580: %}
4581: % \begin{center}
4582: % \parbox{\captionwidth}{
4583: \caption[]{\label{fig:lmp1l}\sloppy
4584: Large-momentum procedure for the one-loop photon polarization
4585: function. The quark lines carry the mass $m$.
4586: }
4587: %}
4588: \end{center}
4589: \end{figure}
4590:
4591: For illustration we consider the correlator of two vector currents at
4592: one-loop order. The application of the large-momentum procedure is
4593: visualized in Fig.~\ref{fig:lmp1l}.
4594: The prescription tells us that the first term on the right-hand side of
4595: the equation has to be expanded in the quark mass, $m$, leading to
4596: massless integrals. Also the subdiagram on the very right
4597: in the second term
4598: has to be expanded in $m$ and then has to be inserted in the blob of the
4599: loop-diagram. Thus one ends up with a vacuum integral.
4600: Taking into account terms up to quartic order one
4601: gets\footnote{For a precise definition of the polarization function
4602: see Eqs.~(\ref{eqpivadef}) and~(\ref{eqpi2}) in Section~\ref{sec:pade}.}
4603: (see, e.g., Ref.~\cite{Har:9910496,Harlander:1999dq})
4604: \begin{eqnarray}
4605: \Pi^{(0)}_{\rm bare}(q^2)
4606: &\stackrel{q^2\gg m^2}{=}&
4607: {3\over 16\pi^2}\,\Bigg\{
4608: {4\over 3\varepsilon}
4609: + {20\over 9} - {4\over 3}\,\logqmums
4610: + 8 {m^2\over q^2}
4611: + \left({m^2\over q^2}\right)^2\,\bigg(
4612: 4
4613: + 8\,\logqmms
4614: \bigg)
4615: +\ldots
4616: \Bigg\}\,,
4617: \nonumber\\
4618: \label{eq:lmp1l}
4619: \end{eqnarray}
4620: with $\logqmums=\ln(-q^2/\mu^2)$ and $\logqmms=\ln(-q^2/m^2)$.
4621: The ellipses in Eq.~(\ref{eq:lmp1l}) denote
4622: higher order mass correction terms.
4623: On dimensional reasons it is clear that the $m^0$ and $m^2$ term only
4624: comes from the first diagram on the right-hand side of
4625: Fig.~\ref{fig:lmp1l}. Also the $m^4 \ln(-q^2)$ term can only arise
4626: from this diagram. On the other hand, the massive logarithm,
4627: $m^4 \ln m^2$, originates from the vacuum integral of Fig.~\ref{fig:lmp1l}.
4628:
4629: Let us now look at the result provided by the OPE.
4630: At lowest order in $\alpha_s$ only the two operators
4631: ${\cal O}_2$ and ${\cal O}_6$ of
4632: Eq.~(\ref{eq:op1}) contribute.
4633: The product of the corresponding vacuum expectation values and the
4634: coefficient functions reads (see, e.g., Ref.~\cite{Har:9910496,Har:diss})
4635: \begin{eqnarray}
4636: C_2^0 \langle {\cal O}_2^0 \rangle &=&
4637: \frac{3}{16\pi^2} \left(\frac{m^2}{q^2}\right)^2
4638: \left(\frac{8}{\varepsilon}+12+8\logmum\right)
4639: \,,
4640: \nonumber\\
4641: C_6^0 \langle {\cal O}_6^0 \rangle &=&
4642: \frac{3}{16\pi^2} \left(\frac{m^2}{q^2}\right)^2
4643: \left(-\frac{8}{\varepsilon}-8+8\logqmums\right)
4644: \,.
4645: \label{eq:C2C6}
4646: \end{eqnarray}
4647: Thus, $C_6^0\langle {\cal O}_6^0 \rangle$ exactly repoduces the
4648: $m^4\ln(-q^2)$ of the massless diagram of Fig.~\ref{fig:lmp1l},
4649: whereas $\langle {\cal O}_2^0 \rangle$ provides the massive logarithm.
4650: The sum of the two contributions in Eq.(\ref{eq:C2C6})
4651: reproduces the $m^4$ terms of Eq.~(\ref{eq:lmp1l}).
4652:
4653: Note that in the above consideration no normal-ordering prescription
4654: has been used. Otherwise the vacuum expectation value of the operator
4655: ${\cal O}_2$ would be zero. Furthermore, the coefficient function
4656: $C_6$ would necessarily contain $\ln m^2$ terms in order to reproduce
4657: the quartic terms of Eq.~(\ref{eq:lmp1l}).
4658: Thus, in case the normal-ordering prescription is applied, there is no
4659: separation of the two scales $q$ and $m$.
4660:
4661: This example, in particular Eq.~(\ref{eq:C2C6}) and
4662: Fig.~\ref{fig:lmp1l}, shows that
4663: in principle one could still use the large-momentum procedure for the
4664: practical computation of $C_n(q)$ and $\langle{\cal
4665: O}_n(0)\rangle$. However, in practice it turns out that this is
4666: quite tedious.
4667:
4668: The aim of the calculation is to obtain $R(s)$ up to
4669: order $m^4 \alpha_s^3$, which means that due to the equation
4670: \begin{eqnarray}
4671: R(s)\Big|_{m^4} &=& 12 \pi \, {\rm Im} \Pi(q^2=s+i\epsilon)\Big|_{m^4}
4672: \nonumber\\
4673: &\sim& {\rm Im} \left[
4674: C_1 \langle {\cal O}_1 \rangle
4675: +C_2 \langle {\cal O}_2 \rangle
4676: +C_6 \langle {\cal O}_6 \rangle
4677: \right]
4678: \,,
4679: \end{eqnarray}
4680: one has to evaluate the coefficient functions and vacuum expectation
4681: values up to sufficiently high order.
4682: The imaginary parts can only arise from the coefficient functions as
4683: by construction only they can develop logarithms of the form
4684: $\ln(-s-i\epsilon)$. Note further that the information about the
4685: considered current only enters into the coefficient functions; the
4686: matrix elements of the operators are universal.
4687: For the vector current correlator it turns out that $C_1$
4688: develops an imaginary part starting from ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$. As
4689: $\langle {\cal O}_1 \rangle$ is proportional to $\alpha_s$
4690: there is no contribution to order $\alpha_s^3$ from this term.
4691: The lowest order of $\langle {\cal O}_2 \rangle$ is $\alpha_s^0$
4692: and the imaginary part for $C_2$ starts at order $\alpha_s^2$.
4693: This implies that $C_2$ is needed up to order $\alpha_s^3$ (three loops)
4694: and $\langle {\cal O}_2 \rangle$ up to order $\alpha_s$ (two loops).
4695: So far the occuring integrals are all available in the literature.
4696: However, in the case of $C_6$ the logarithmic
4697: terms up to ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$ are needed, which would require a
4698: four-loop calculation. This can be avoided as we will see
4699: in the following~\cite{CheKue94}.
4700:
4701: We consider the renormalization
4702: group properties of the polarization function.
4703: In general $\Pi(q^2)$ is not renormalization group invariant. Considering,
4704: however, only the quartic mass terms we have
4705: \begin{eqnarray}
4706: 0&=&\mu^2\frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d}\mu^2} \Pi(q^2)\Bigg|_{m^4 {\rm terms}}
4707: \nonumber\\
4708: &=&\mu^2\frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d}\mu^2}
4709: \left(
4710: C_1 \left\langle {\cal O}_1 \right\rangle
4711: + C_2 \left\langle {\cal O}_2 \right\rangle
4712: + C_6 \left\langle {\cal O}_6 \right\rangle
4713: \right)
4714: \,,
4715: \end{eqnarray}
4716: as non-zero contributions may at most have mass dimension two.
4717: Using Eq.~(\ref{eq:gam_mn}) and
4718: \begin{eqnarray}
4719: \mu^2\frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d}\mu^2} C_6 &=&
4720: \left(\mu^2 \frac{\partial}{\partial\mu^2}
4721: +\beta \pi \frac{\partial}{\partial\alpha_s}\right)C_6
4722: \end{eqnarray}
4723: one obtains
4724: \begin{eqnarray}
4725: \frac{\partial}{\partial L}
4726: C_6 \left\langle {\cal O}_6 \right\rangle &=&
4727: - 4\gamma_m C_6 \left\langle {\cal O}_6 \right\rangle
4728: - \beta \pi\frac{\partial}{\partial\alpha_s}
4729: C_6 \left\langle {\cal O}_6 \right\rangle
4730: - C_1 4m^4\alpha_s \frac{\partial}{\partial\alpha_s} \gamma_0
4731: + C_2 4m^4\gamma_0
4732: \,,
4733: \nonumber\\
4734: \label{eq:c6comp}
4735: \end{eqnarray}
4736: with $L=\ln(\mu^2/(-q^2))$. With the help of this equation the
4737: logarithmic terms of $C_6$ at order $\alpha_s^3$ can be obtained
4738: through two- and three-loop calculations. In particular $C_6$ itself
4739: appears on the right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{eq:c6comp}), however, only
4740: at order $\alpha_s^2$ which corresponds to massless three-loop integrals.
4741:
4742: As a simple example
4743: let us evaluate the order $\alpha_s^0$ term of Eq.~(\ref{eq:c6comp}).
4744: In this limit there is only a contribution from
4745: the last term.
4746: With the help of Eq.~(\ref{eq:gamma0}) and $C_2=2/q^4$ we obtain
4747: \begin{eqnarray}
4748: \frac{\partial}{\partial L} C_6 \left\langle {\cal O}_6 \right\rangle
4749: &=&
4750: \frac{3}{16\pi^2} \left(\frac{m^2}{q^2}\right)^2 \left(-8\right)
4751: \,,
4752: \end{eqnarray}
4753: which after integration reproduces the logarithmic terms of the
4754: renormalized version of
4755: Eq.~(\ref{eq:C2C6}):
4756: \begin{eqnarray}
4757: C_6 \langle {\cal O}_6 \rangle &=&
4758: \frac{3}{16\pi^2} \left(\frac{m^2}{q^2}\right)^2
4759: \left(-4+8\logqmums\right)
4760: \,.
4761: \end{eqnarray}
4762:
4763: At this point it is instructive to make again a comparison with the
4764: large-momentum procedure.
4765: Applied to the polarization function there is always one term where
4766: the hard subgraph constitutes the complete diagram Taylor
4767: expanded in the masses (cf. Appendix~\ref{sub:ae}).
4768: At $n$-loop order, i.e. considering QCD
4769: corrections to order $\alpha_s^{n-1}$, this means that
4770: $n$-loop massless propagrator-type integrals have to be solved.
4771: Actually, as we are only interested in the imaginary part of the
4772: polarization function only the logarithmic parts of
4773: the integrals is needed.
4774: This part exactly constitutes the left-hand side of
4775: Eq.~(\ref{eq:c6comp}).
4776: The right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{eq:c6comp}) contains
4777: lower-order terms of
4778: $C_6$\footnote{Note that $\gamma_m$ and $\beta$
4779: start at ${\cal O}(\alpha_s)$ and ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$, respectively.}
4780: and contributions of $(n-1)$-loop diagrams.
4781: Thus the price one has to pay in order to avoid the computation of the
4782: (imaginary part) of the $n$-loop diagrams is the construction of
4783: appropriate operators, the computation of their anomalous dimension and
4784: their coefficient functions.
4785:
4786: For the practical computation of the coefficient functions the
4787: so-called ``method of projectors''~\cite{GorLarTka83,GorLar87} is used.
4788: For the projectors, $\pi_n$,
4789: an appropriate combination of initial and final
4790: states, $|i\rangle$ and $|f\rangle$,
4791: and derivatives with respect to masses and momenta is chosen
4792: in such a way that one has
4793: \begin{eqnarray}
4794: \pi_n\left[{\cal O}^0_m\right] = \delta_{nm}
4795: \,.
4796: \label{eq:pro1}
4797: \end{eqnarray}
4798: Here ${\cal O}^0_n$ is one of the operators defined in
4799: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:op1}) and~(\ref{eq:op3})
4800: and $\pi_n$ has the form
4801: \begin{eqnarray}
4802: \pi_n\left[X\right] &=& \sum_k P_k
4803: \left(
4804: \frac{\partial}{\partial p},\frac{\partial}{\partial m}
4805: \right)
4806: \left\langle f_k \left|X\right|i_k \right\rangle\Bigg|_{p=m=0}
4807: \,.
4808: \end{eqnarray}
4809: It is understood that the nullification of $p$ and $m$ happens before
4810: the loop integrals are performed. Thus, in Eq.~(\ref{eq:pro1})
4811: there is only the tree-level contribution; all loop corrections become
4812: massless tadpoles which are set to zero in dimensional regularization.
4813: The application of the projectors to Eq.~(\ref{eq:ope}) immediately
4814: leads to
4815: \begin{eqnarray}
4816: C_n^0(q) &=& \pi_n\left[T^j(q)\right]
4817: \,,
4818: \end{eqnarray}
4819: which relates the bare coefficient function $C_n^0$ to massless
4820: two-point functions.
4821: For $C_6^0$, e.g., the projector is quite simple. It essentially
4822: consists of four derivatives
4823: of the polarization function with respect to $m$.
4824: From the structure of the operators it is clear that the projectors for
4825: $C_1^0$ and $C_2^0$ are more complicated, as the corresponding diagrams
4826: also involve external gluons and quarks,
4827: respectively~\cite{SurTka90,Har:diss}.
4828:
4829: There is quite some similarity between
4830: the ``method of projectors''
4831: and the procedure we have used for the
4832: computation of the decoupling constants in Section~\ref{sec:dec}.
4833: In fact, if one tries to construct a projector for $C_1^0$
4834: one arrives at a similar system of equations as in
4835: Eq.~(\ref{eq:C1C4C5})~\cite{SurTka90,Har:diss}.
4836:
4837: As already mentioned, the computation of the vacuum expectation values
4838: reduces to the evaluation of vacuum integrals
4839: which have been calculated up to three-loop
4840: order~\cite{Bro81,CheSpi87,BraNarPic92,CheKue94,Har:diss}.
4841:
4842: We refrain from listing the individual results for the coefficient
4843: functions and the vacuum expectation values of the operators but provide
4844: directly the results for $R(s)$.
4845: Thereby we want to list the results of those terms which
4846: contribute to the production of the heavy quark pair $Q\bar{Q}$
4847: via the exchange of a photon
4848: which will be denoted by $R_Q(s)$.
4849: In this Subsection we want to list $R_Q(s)$ up to order
4850: $\alpha_s^3 m^4/s^2$ and postpone the discussion of the remaining
4851: terms (in particular the full mass dependence at order $\alpha_s^2$) to
4852: Section~\ref{subsub:R}.
4853:
4854: It is convenient to decompose the contributions to $R_Q(s)$ into three
4855: parts
4856: \begin{eqnarray}
4857: R_Q(s) &=& 3 \left( Q_Q^2 r_Q + \sum_q Q_q^2 r_{qQ}
4858: + r_{Q,\rm sing} \right)
4859: \,,
4860: \label{eq:RQ}
4861: \end{eqnarray}
4862: where the sum runs over all massless quark flavours $q$ and
4863: $Q_q$ denotes the charge of quark $q$.
4864: In Eq.~(\ref{eq:RQ}) we distinguish the contributions
4865: where the massive quark $Q$ directly couples to photon ($r_Q$)
4866: from the ones where in a first step a massless quark is produced
4867: which subsequently splits into the massive quark $Q$.
4868: Furthermore, the singlet contributions are displayed separately.
4869: They arise from diagrams where the external current couples to a
4870: closed quark line which is different from the one involving the
4871: final-state quarks.
4872: In the following $r_{Q,\rm sing}$ will not be considered.
4873: Its contribution is numerically small and can, e.g., be found
4874: in~\cite{CheHarKue00}.
4875:
4876: Both $r_Q$ and $r_{qQ}$ are expanded in $m_q^2/s$
4877: and can be written as
4878: \begin{eqnarray}
4879: r_Q &=& r_0 + r_{Q,2} + r_{Q,4} + \ldots
4880: \,,
4881: \nonumber\\
4882: r_{qQ} &=& r_0 + r_{qQ,2} + r_{qQ,4} + \ldots
4883: \,,
4884: \label{eq:RQ2}
4885: \end{eqnarray}
4886: where $r_0$ belongs to the massless approximation, while
4887: $r_{Q,n}$ and $r_{qQ,n}$ contain the mass terms of order $m_Q^n$.
4888: A look to the contributing diagrams shows that
4889: the contributions to $r_{qQ,2}$ and $r_{qQ,4}$
4890: arise for the first time at order $\alpha_s^2$.
4891: However, it can be inferred from general renormalization group
4892: considerations that the corresponding coefficient of $r_{qQ,2}$ has to
4893: be zero~\cite{CheKue90,CheKue97},
4894: which means that it starts out only at order $\alpha_s^3$.
4895:
4896: The numerical result for the massless approximation
4897: reads~\cite{CheKatTka79DinSap79CelGon80,GorKatLar91SurSam91,Che97_R}
4898: \begin{eqnarray}
4899: r_0 &=&
4900: 1
4901: + {\alpha_s\over \pi}
4902: + \left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^2\,\Big(
4903: 1.98571 - 0.115295\,n_f \Big)
4904: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
4905: + \left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^3\,\Big(
4906: -6.63694 - 1.20013\,n_f - 0.00517836\,n_f^2\Big)
4907: + \ldots
4908: \,,
4909: \label{eq:r0}
4910: \end{eqnarray}
4911: where the ellipses indicate higher orders in $\alpha_s$.
4912: $n_f$ is the number of active quark flavours.
4913: The quadratic mass corrections are given by~\cite{GorKatLar86,CheKue90}
4914: \begin{eqnarray}
4915: r_{Q,2} &=&
4916: {m_Q^2\over s}\,{\alpha_s\over \pi}\,\bigg[
4917: 12 + {\alpha_s\over \pi}\,\Big(
4918: 126.5 - 4.33333\,n_f\Big)
4919: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
4920: + \left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^2\,\Big(
4921: 1032.14 - 104.167\,n_f + 1.21819\,n_f^2\Big)
4922: \bigg]\,,
4923: \nonumber\\
4924: r_{qQ,2} &=&
4925: {m_Q^2\over s}\,\left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^3\,
4926: \bigg[-7.87659 + 0.35007\, n_f\bigg]
4927: + \ldots
4928: \,,
4929: \label{eq:r2MS}
4930: \end{eqnarray}
4931: and, finally, for the quartic terms we
4932: have~\cite{CheKue94,Har:diss,CheHarKue00}
4933: \begin{eqnarray}
4934: r_{Q,4} &=&
4935: \left({m_Q^2\over s}\right)^2\,\bigg[-6 - 22\,{\alpha_s\over \pi}
4936: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{\hspace{0em}}
4937: + \left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^2\,(
4938: 148.218
4939: - 6.5\,\logmsms
4940: + (-1.84078 + 0.333333\,\logmsms)\,n_f
4941: )
4942: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{\hspace{0em}}
4943: + \left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^3\,(
4944: 4800.95
4945: - 244.612\,\logmsms + 13\,\logmsms^2
4946: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{\hspace{1em}}
4947: + (-275.898
4948: + 18.1861\,\logmsms
4949: - 0.666667\,\logmsms^2 )\,n_f
4950: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{\hspace{1em}}
4951: + (4.97396
4952: - 0.185185\,\logmsms)\,n_f^2
4953: ) + \ldots
4954: \bigg]\,,
4955: \nonumber\\
4956: r_{qQ,4} &=&
4957: \left({m_Q^2\over s}\right)^2\,
4958: \left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^2\,\bigg[
4959: -0.474894
4960: - \logmsms
4961: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{\hspace{1em}}
4962: + {\alpha_s\over \pi}\,\Big(
4963: 4.59784
4964: - 22.8619\,\logmsms
4965: + 2\,\logmsms^2
4966: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{\hspace{2em}}
4967: + (0.196497 + 0.88052\,\logmsms)\,n_f
4968: \Big)
4969: + \ldots
4970: \bigg]\,,
4971: \label{eq:r4MS}
4972: \end{eqnarray}
4973: with $\logmsms=\ln m_Q^2/s$.
4974:
4975: In Eqs.~(\ref{eq:r2MS}) and~(\ref{eq:r4MS})
4976: the $\overline{\rm MS}$ quark mass has been
4977: chosen as a parameter. This is inherent to the method used for
4978: the computation. Actually also the mass which is present in the
4979: renormalized operators ${\cal O}_2$ and ${\cal O}_6$ is
4980: defined in the modified minimal subtraction scheme.
4981: In order to transform the expressions into the
4982: on-shell scheme the
4983: two-~\cite{GraBroGraSch90} and
4984: three-loop~\cite{CheSte99,CheSte00,MelRit99} (see also
4985: Section~\ref{sub:msos}) relation between the masses is
4986: necessary\footnote{Due to the absence of a Born term
4987: in Eq.~(\ref{eq:r2MS}) the two-loop relation between the
4988: $\overline{\rm MS}$ and on-shell quark mass is sufficient in this case.}.
4989: We obtain for the quadratic terms (see also
4990: Ref.~\cite{CheHoaKueSteTeu97})
4991: \begin{eqnarray}
4992: r_{Q,2}^{\rm OS} &=&
4993: {M_Q^2\over s}\,{\alpha_s\over \pi}\,\bigg[
4994: 12 + {\alpha_s\over \pi}
4995: \left(94.5000 + 24\lMs - 4.33333 n_f\right)
4996: + \left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^2\,\left(
4997: 347.168
4998: + 378\lMs
4999: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
5000: - 9\lMs^2
5001: + n_f\left(
5002: -67.6190 - 17.3333 \lMs + 2 \lMs^2
5003: \right)
5004: + 1.21819 \, n_f^2
5005: \right)
5006: +\ldots
5007: \bigg]
5008: \,,
5009: \nonumber\\
5010: r_{qQ,2}^{\rm OS} &=&
5011: {M_Q^2\over s}\,\left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^3\,
5012: \bigg[-7.87659 + 0.35007\, n_f\bigg]
5013: + \ldots
5014: \,,
5015: \label{eq:r2OS}
5016: \end{eqnarray}
5017: where $\lMs=\ln (M_Q^2/s)$.
5018: Note the presence of mass logarithms which are introduced via
5019: the transition to the on-shell scheme.
5020:
5021: The quartic terms read in the on-shell scheme
5022: \begin{eqnarray}
5023: r_{Q,4}^{\rm OS} &=&
5024: \left({M_Q^2\over s}\right)^2\,\bigg[
5025: -6
5026: + {\alpha_s\over \pi}\left(
5027: 10 - 24\lMs
5028: \right)
5029: + \left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^2\left(
5030: 570.519
5031: - 155.5\lMs
5032: - 15 \lMs^2
5033: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
5034: + n_f\left(-26.8336
5035: + 9 \lMs
5036: - 2 \lMs^2
5037: \right)
5038: \right)
5039: + \left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^3\left(
5040: 9157.82
5041: - 444.899 \lMs
5042: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
5043: - 147.750 \lMs^2
5044: + 7.50000 \lMs^3
5045: + n_f\left(-936.140
5046: + 243.009 \lMs
5047: - 26.1667 \lMs^2
5048: \right.\right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\left.\mbox{}
5049: - 0.666667 \lMs^3
5050: \right)
5051: + n_f^2\left(
5052: 20.6385
5053: - 7.86797 \lMs
5054: + 1.44444 \lMs^2
5055: \right.\right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\left.\mbox{}
5056: - 0.222222 \lMs^3
5057: \right)
5058: \right)
5059: \ldots
5060: \bigg]
5061: \,,
5062: \nonumber\\
5063: r_{qQ,4}^{\rm OS} &=&
5064: \left({M_Q^2\over s}\right)^2\,
5065: \left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^2\,\bigg[
5066: -0.474894 - \lMs
5067: + {\alpha_s\over \pi}\left(
5068: 9.79728
5069: - 21.4282 \lMs
5070: - 2\lMs^2
5071: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
5072: + n_f\left(
5073: 0.196497
5074: + 0.880520 \lMs
5075: \right)
5076: \right)
5077: \ldots
5078: \bigg]
5079: \,.
5080: \label{eq:Rm4OS}
5081: \end{eqnarray}
5082: Note that in this case the transition to the on-shell scheme
5083: even introduces cubic mass-logarithms.
5084:
5085: In Fig.~\ref{fig:rQ4} $r_{c,4}$, $r_{b,4}$ and $r_{t,4}$
5086: are shown as a function of
5087: the center-of-mass energy, $\sqrt{s}$, where successively higher
5088: orders in $\alpha_s$ are taken into account.
5089: It can be seen that the major part of the result is given by the Born
5090: approximation. The correction terms of order
5091: $\alpha_s$, $\alpha_s^2$ and $\alpha_s^3$
5092: are significantly smaller than the leading terms.
5093: However, it can be observed that with increasing order
5094: they remain roughly comparable in magnitude which could indicate a bad
5095: behaviour of the perturbative expansion.
5096: Nevertheless, the higher orders are small compared to the $m_Q^4/s^2$ Born
5097: terms. It was shown in~\cite{CheHarKue00} that the overall prediction for
5098: $R(s)$ is stable and a variation of $\mu$ between $\sqrt{s}/2$ and
5099: $2\sqrt{s}$ for $r_{c,4}$ at $6$~GeV varies by $\pm 0.0005$ and
5100: for $r_{b,4}$ at $14$~GeV by $\pm 0.0016$.
5101: In the case of $r_{t,4}$ the variation is negligible.
5102:
5103: Thus a prediction for $R_Q(s)$ up to order $\alpha_s^3$ is available.
5104: It includes mass terms in an expansion up to the quartic order.
5105:
5106:
5107: \begin{figure}[ht]
5108: \begin{center}
5109: \leavevmode
5110: \begin{tabular}{cc}
5111: (a) & (b) \\[-.5em]
5112: \epsfxsize=18em
5113: \epsffile[110 265 465 560]{figs/cv_mus_4.ps} &
5114: \epsfxsize=18em
5115: \epsffile[110 265 465 560]{figs/bv_mus_4.ps} \\[.5em]
5116: \multicolumn{2}{c}{(c)} \\[-.5em]
5117: \multicolumn{2}{c}{
5118: \epsfxsize=18em
5119: \epsffile[110 265 465 560]{figs/tv_mus_4.ps}
5120: }
5121: \end{tabular}
5122: \caption[]{\label{fig:rQ4}
5123: Quartic mass corrections ($\propto m^4$) to the non-singlet
5124: contribution of $r_c$ (a), $r_b$ (b), and
5125: $r_t$ (c) arising from diagrams where
5126: the external current couples directly to the massive quark.
5127: }
5128: \end{center}
5129: \end{figure}
5130:
5131: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
5132: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
5133:
5134: \section{\label{sec:pade}Asymptotic expansion and Pad\'e approximation}
5135: \setcounter{equation}{0}
5136: \setcounter{figure}{0}
5137: \setcounter{table}{0}
5138:
5139: Using the techniques currently available, diagrams beyond two loops
5140: can only be computed for special cases.
5141: In particular, only diagrams depending on one scale, like an external
5142: momentum or an internal mass, have been studied systematically.
5143: This section is devoted to a method
5144: which allows for the numerical reconstruction of a function
5145: depending on two dimensionful parameters like
5146: an external momentum $q$ and a mass $M$.
5147: It constitutes a powerful combination of asymptotic expansion and
5148: the analytic structure of the function to be approximated.
5149:
5150: The basic idea is as follows.
5151: Let us consider a Feynman diagram depending on an external momentum $q$
5152: and one mass parameter, $M$, which can occur in some of the internal lines.
5153: Then the final result is a function of $M^2/q^2$, which in general
5154: is quite involved and at three-loop order --- at least with the current
5155: techniques --- not computable in an analytical form.
5156: On the other hand, it is
5157: straightforward\footnote{With ``straightforward'' we mean that program
5158: packages exist which allow the computation
5159: of the corresponding expressions with the help of computers.
5160: In this context see also the
5161: Appendices~\ref{sub:single} and~\ref{sub:aut}.}
5162: to evaluate the diagram in the limits $q^2\ll M^2$ and $q^2\gg M^2$.
5163: The information from the different kinematical regions
5164: is combined and
5165: a semi-numerical function of $M^2/q^2$ is constructed. Below we will
5166: demonstrate on typical examples that it
5167: provides a very good approximation to the exact result.
5168:
5169: In Subsection~\ref{sub:method}
5170: we start with a detailed description of the method
5171: and present explicit results for a two-loop example.
5172: The physical processes discussed afterwards
5173: in Sections~\ref{sub:veccor},~\ref{sub:mudec} and~\ref{sub:msos}
5174: point out different aspects and fields of application.
5175: In the first application we consider current correlators at three
5176: loops both for a diagonal and a non-diagonal coupling to quarks.
5177: In the latter case we assume that one of the quarks is massless.
5178: The correlators depend on the external momentum $q$ and the quark mass
5179: $M$. The main interest is in the imaginary part which represents a
5180: physical observable.
5181:
5182: Also the two-point function considered in Subsection~\ref{sub:msos}
5183: --- proper combinations of the quark selfenergy ---
5184: depends on an external momentum and one mass parameter. However,
5185: the main interest is not on the functional behaviour but on the value
5186: at threshold, i.e. $q^2=M^2$.
5187: The successful application of our method in that case is
5188: not obvious, especially as only the information for $q^2\ll M^2$ and
5189: $M^2\ll q^2$ are incorporated.
5190:
5191: In Subsection~\ref{sub:mudec} four-loop integrals are computed in
5192: order to obtain the order $\alpha^2$ QED corrections to the muon decay.
5193: As we are only interested in the imaginary part they can be reduced to
5194: three-loop integrals using asymptotic expansions.
5195: From the technical point of view we want to obtain the value of a
5196: function for $q^2=M^2$ using only expansion terms for $q^2\ll M^2$.
5197: Also here the Pad\'e approximation turns out to be quite successful.
5198: We want to mention already here that the example of the muon decay
5199: does not fit completely into the philosophy which is developed in
5200: Section~\ref{sub:method} as no high-energy
5201: information can be incorporated. This leads to worse approximations.
5202: Furthermore, in a first step the imaginary part is taken and
5203: afterwards the Pad\'e approximation is applied.
5204:
5205:
5206: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
5207:
5208: \subsection{\label{sub:method}The Method}
5209:
5210: The basic ingredients and tools
5211: of our method are moments of the function to be considered,
5212: conformal mapping and Pad\'e approximation.
5213: In this Section we will explain the role of each of them.
5214:
5215: The aim is to obtain
5216: an approximation to the function $f(z)$
5217: which can not be computed directly.
5218: The analytical properties of $f(z)$ are exploited
5219: and expansions of $f(z)$ for small and large argument are used
5220: in combination with a conformal mapping and
5221: Pad\'e approximation.
5222: In what follows we have in mind the computation of approximations to a
5223: physical function, like a vector boson self energy,
5224: at a given loop-order\footnote{This is in contrast to the
5225: considerations of Ref.~\cite{padeals} where the Pad\'e approximation
5226: has been performed in the coupling constant in order to
5227: estimate higher order terms in $\alpha_s$.}.
5228: In particular, we assume that $f(z)$
5229: is analytical for $z\to0$. However, in the limit $1/z\to0$ we allow
5230: for a non-analytical behaviour.
5231:
5232: In general a Pad\'e approximation of a function $f(z)$ is defined
5233: through
5234: \begin{eqnarray}
5235: [n/m](z) &=& \frac{a_0 + a_1 z + \ldots a_n z^n}
5236: {1 + b_1 z + \ldots b_m z^m}
5237: \,,
5238: \label{eq:PAdef}
5239: \end{eqnarray}
5240: where the coefficients $a_i$ and $b_j$ are determined from the
5241: requirement that the Taylor expansion of Eq.~(\ref{eq:PAdef})
5242: coincides with the first $n+m+1$ terms of the
5243: Taylor expansion of $f(z)$
5244: around\footnote{In general also Taylor expansion around $z_0\not=0$
5245: can be considered. However, for our purpose the choice $z_0=0$
5246: is sufficient.}
5247: $z=0$.
5248: Thus, in case the Taylor expansion is known up to terms of order $z^k$
5249: Pad\'e approximations $[n/m]$ fulfilling
5250: the condition
5251: \begin{eqnarray}
5252: k - 1 &\ge& n+m
5253: \,,
5254: \end{eqnarray}
5255: can be computed.
5256:
5257: In the approach discussed in the remaining part of this Section
5258: the considerations of the previous paragraph are improved with respect
5259: to two points. First, we perform the Pad\'e approximation not only in $z$
5260: but also in a new variable which is confined to the interior of the unit
5261: circle and thus provides better convergence properties.
5262: Second, we want to include in the approximation for $f(z)$
5263: not only Taylor coefficients around $z=0$ but also information from
5264: other kinematical regions, in particular from $z\to\infty$.
5265:
5266: Our procedure is restricted to the approximation of functions which
5267: depend on one dimensionless variable, $z$.
5268: Concerning the physical
5269: applications we have in mind two-point functions where $z$
5270: is given by the ratio of the squared external momentum and the square
5271: of an internal mass. This motivates the following
5272: form of $f(z)$ for small and large
5273: argument\footnote{It is advantageous to consider the space-like region
5274: of $z$ where no imaginary part occurs.}
5275: \begin{eqnarray}
5276: f(z) &=& \left\{
5277: \begin{array}{ll}
5278: \displaystyle
5279: \sum_{k=1}^{n_{sma}} c_k z^k
5280: & \mbox{for $z\to0$}
5281: \\
5282: \displaystyle
5283: \sum_{k=0}^{n_{lar}} \sum_{i\ge0} d_{k,i} \left[\ln (-z)\right]^i z^{-k}
5284: & \mbox{for $z\to-\infty$}
5285: \end{array}
5286: \right.
5287: \,,
5288: \label{eq:deff}
5289: \end{eqnarray}
5290: where the normalization $f(0)=0$ has been chosen.
5291: As we will see below, in the computation of
5292: the coefficients $c_k$ and $d_{k,i}$
5293: --- in the following also refered to as moments ---
5294: one of the scales drops out and the integrals to be evaluated are much
5295: simpler.
5296: The moments $c_k$ and $d_{k,i}$ will serve as input for our procedure.
5297: In addition we also admit information
5298: about the behaviour at the physical threshold, which we choose to be at
5299: $z=1$, as input.
5300:
5301: In order to obtain a semi-numerical approximation of the function $f(z)$
5302: the following steps have to be performed:
5303:
5304: \begin{enumerate}
5305: \item
5306: Compute as many moments as possible for small and large $z$.
5307: As we require analyticity for $z\to0$ one gets in this limit
5308: a simple Taylor
5309: series of the Feynman diagrams in the external momentum.
5310: The expansion in $q$ can be performed before the momentum integrations
5311: are performed.
5312: As a result the external momentum no longer appears
5313: in the integrand and one ends up with vacuum diagrams. They are
5314: analytically known up to three-loop order in case of one internal mass
5315: parameter (cf. Appendix~\ref{sub:single}).
5316:
5317: However, for $z\to-\infty$ the rules of asymptotic
5318: expansion~\cite{Smi91} have to be applied.
5319: As a consequence the number of individual terms to be considered
5320: in the practical computation is larger.
5321: However, also here the number of scales in the individual
5322: diagrams is reduced. One ends up with
5323: either vacuum integrals or massless two-point functions.
5324: The latter are responsible for the logarithmic terms in $z$.
5325:
5326: \item
5327: \label{item:thr}
5328: Incorporate the information for $z\to1$ which we denote as $f^{thr}(z)$.
5329: In the physical examples considered below
5330: this information is either logarithmical, i.e. of the form
5331: $\ln(1-z)$, or proportional to $1/\sqrt{1-z}$.
5332: The latter occurs, for instance, in the abelian contribution to the
5333: vector current correlator (cf. Section~\ref{sub:veccor})
5334: and corresponds to the Coulomb singularity.
5335: The further steps slightly depend on which case is present.
5336:
5337: In case the leading threshold behaviour is logarithmic
5338: one constructs $f^{thr}(z)$ in such a way that
5339: the singularity is reproduced for $z\to1$.
5340: One has to take care that $f^{thr}(z)$ does not destroy the
5341: behaviour of $f(z)$ for small and large $z$. In particular,
5342: the expansion of $f^{thr}(z)$ has to be analytical for $z\to0$.
5343: By construction the difference $f(z)-f^{thr}(z)$
5344: is regular for $z\to1$ and has the same limiting behaviour as the one
5345: required in Eq.~(\ref{eq:deff}).
5346: We should mention already here that
5347: due to the construction of the Pad\'e method the resulting function
5348: has a vanishing imaginary part at
5349: $z=1$. Thus it is crucial to implement the
5350: leading threshold behaviour in this way.
5351:
5352: Threshold singularities of the form $1/\sqrt{1-z}$ are not taken into
5353: account at this step, i.e. formally $f^{thr}(z)=0$ is chosen.
5354: They are treated below. In contrast
5355: to the logarithmic singularities they are removed
5356: via multiplication and not by subtractions.
5357:
5358: \item
5359: \label{item:log}
5360: Construct a function $f^{log}(z)$ in such a way that the
5361: combination
5362: \begin{eqnarray}
5363: \tilde{f}(z) &\equiv& f(z) - f^{thr}(z) - f^{log}(z)
5364: \,,
5365: \label{eq:ftilde}
5366: \end{eqnarray}
5367: is polynomial both in $z$ and $1/z$, i.e. in the small- and
5368: high-energy region. Furthermore no logarithmic singularities may be
5369: introduced for $z\to1$.
5370:
5371: In this step a large part of information (e.g., the large high-energy
5372: logarithms) which is known analytically is extracted and only a small
5373: remainder
5374: $\tilde{f}(z)$ is left. It parameterizes the unknown part of $f(z)$.
5375:
5376: \item
5377: Perform a conformal mapping. The change of
5378: variables~\cite{Fleischer:1994ef}
5379: \begin{eqnarray}
5380: z &=& {4\omega\over (1+\omega)^2}
5381: \,,
5382: \label{eq:confmap}
5383: \end{eqnarray}
5384: maps the $z$ plane into the interior of the unit circle of the $\omega$
5385: plane. Thereby the cut $[1,\infty)$ is mapped to the perimeter.
5386: The conformal mapping is visualized in Fig.~\ref{fig:trafo}.
5387:
5388: \begin{figure}[ht]
5389: \begin{center}
5390: \epsfxsize=12.0cm
5391: \leavevmode
5392: \epsffile[83 290 529 502]{figs/trafo.ps}
5393: \caption[]{\label{fig:trafo}
5394: The conformal mapping (\ref{eq:confmap}) maps the $z$ plane into
5395: the interior of the unit circle in the $\omega$ plane.
5396: }
5397: \end{center}
5398: \end{figure}
5399:
5400: \item
5401: In a next step a function is defined for which finally the Pad\'e
5402: approximation is performed. Due to the discussion in the context of
5403: Eq.~(\ref{eq:PAdef}) we are interested to shift the information
5404: available for $\omega\to-1$
5405: to $\omega\to0$. Furthermore we have to take care of possible
5406: power-like threshold singularities.
5407:
5408: Following Ref.~\cite{CheHarSte98} we define
5409: \begin{eqnarray}
5410: P_{n_{lar}}(\omega) &=&
5411: {p^{thr}(\omega)(4\omega)^{n_{lar}-1}\over (1+\omega)^{2n_{lar}}}\left(
5412: \tilde f(z) -
5413: \sum_{j=0}^{n_{lar}-1}{1\over j!}\left(
5414: {d^j\over d(1/z)^j}\tilde f(z)\bigg|_{z =
5415: -\infty}\right) {(1+\omega)^{2j}\over (4\omega)^j}\right)
5416: \,,
5417: \nonumber\\
5418: \label{eq:Pnlar}
5419: \end{eqnarray}
5420: where for $\tilde{f}$ the moments up to order $1/z^{n_{lar}}$ must be known.
5421: The function $p^{thr}(\omega)$ is equal to $1$ in case
5422: $f(z)$ has logarithmic divergences at threshold
5423: and $p^{thr}(\omega)=(1-\omega)$ if $f(z)$ is proportional to
5424: $1/\sqrt{1-z}$ for $z\to1$.
5425: The available information from the moments transforms into
5426: $P_{n_{lar}}(-1)$ and $P_{n_{lar}}^{(k)}(0)$,
5427: $(k = 0,1,\ldots,n_{lar}+n_{sma}-1)$,
5428: where $n_{sma}$ is the number of moments for $z\to0$.
5429: Whereas for a logarithmic threshold behaviour the corresponding
5430: information is already
5431: taken into account in step~\ref{item:thr}, the
5432: $1/\sqrt{1-z}$ behaviour is treated with the factor $p^{thr}(\omega)$
5433: and in addition $P_{n_{lar}}(\omega)$ is known for $\omega=1$.
5434:
5435: \item
5436: In the last step a Pad\'e approximation is performed
5437: for the function $P_{n_{lar}}(\omega)$. This means that
5438: $P_{n_{lar}}(\omega)$ is identified with a function
5439: $[n/m](\omega)$ as defined in Eq.~(\ref{eq:PAdef}), where
5440: the number of coefficients on the right-hand side depends on the amount of
5441: information available for $P_{n_{lar}}(\omega)$.
5442: In particular, one has $n+m = n_{lar}+n_{sma}+1$ if $P_{n_{lar}}(1)$
5443: is available and otherwise $n+m = n_{lar}+n_{sma}$.
5444: This leads to a system of (non-linear) equations which can be solved for
5445: the coefficients $a_i$ and $b_j$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:PAdef}).
5446: For large values of $n+m$ the analytical solution becomes quite
5447: lengthy and time consuming. Thus it is preferable to solve the
5448: equations numerically (using high precision).
5449:
5450: \item
5451: Finally, Eq.~(\ref{eq:Pnlar}) has to be solved for $\tilde{f}(z)$ and
5452: from Eq.~(\ref{eq:ftilde}) an approximation for the function
5453: $f(z)$ is obtained.
5454:
5455: \end{enumerate}
5456:
5457: Due to the structure of Eq.~(\ref{eq:PAdef})
5458: some Pad\'e approximants develop poles inside the unit circle
5459: ($|\omega|\le1$). In general we will
5460: discard such results as they would induce unphysical
5461: poles in the $z$-plane.
5462: In some cases, however, a
5463: pole coincides with a zero of the numerator up to several digits
5464: accuracy. These Pad\'e approximations
5465: will be taken into account in constructing our results.
5466: If not stated otherwise we will, in addition
5467: to the Pad\'e results without any poles inside the unit circle,
5468: also use the ones where the poles are accompanied by zeros within a
5469: circle of radius 0.01, and the distance between the pole and the
5470: physically relevant point $q^2/M^2=1$ is larger than $0.1$.
5471:
5472: There are situations where the information for $z\to-\infty$
5473: can not be used as this would lead to physically
5474: not allowed scenarios (cf. Subsection~\ref{sub:mudec}).
5475: In this case it is not necessary (and even not possible) to
5476: define the function $P_{n_{lar}}(\omega)$.
5477: Instead one can directly perform
5478: a Pad\'e approximation either in $z$ or in $\omega$.
5479:
5480: At this point we should spend some words on the estimation of the
5481: errors to be assigned to the final results. It is difficult to provide
5482: general rules for their determination as it very much depends on the problem
5483: under consideration. Experience on the estimation of the error can be
5484: gained from the comparison with known results at lower order or
5485: for other colour structures. A reasonable choice for the
5486: systematic error due to the used method is to take the
5487: spread of the individual Pad\'e results.
5488:
5489: Concerning the above list some comments to point~\ref{item:log} are in
5490: order. In principle there are many ways to subtract the high-energy
5491: logarithms.
5492: However, one has to keep in mind that the subtraction
5493: must not spoil
5494: the polynomial behaviour for small $z$.
5495: Furthermore, no divergences may be introduced. In particular,
5496: $f^{log}(z)$ has to be regular for $z=1$.
5497:
5498: For the construction of $f^{log}(z)$ it is convenient to use the
5499: function
5500: \begin{eqnarray}
5501: G(z) &=&
5502: \frac{2u\ln u}{u^2-1}
5503: \,,
5504: \end{eqnarray}
5505: with
5506: \begin{eqnarray}
5507: u &=& \frac{\sqrt{1-\frac{1}{z}}-1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{1}{z}}+1}
5508: \,,
5509: \end{eqnarray}
5510: which naturally occurs in the result of the one-loop photon
5511: polarization function, as a building block.
5512: That this is possible in a systematic way can best be seen
5513: by looking at the expansion of $G(z)$ in the different kinematical
5514: regions
5515: \begin{eqnarray}
5516: G(z) &=& \left\{
5517: \begin{array}{ll}
5518: \displaystyle
5519: 1+\frac{2}{3}z+\frac{8}{15}z^2 + {\cal O}\left(z^3\right)
5520: &
5521: \displaystyle
5522: z\to0
5523: \,,
5524: \\
5525: \displaystyle
5526: \frac{1}{2z}\ln(-1/4z) + \frac{1}{4z^2}\left(1+\ln(-1/4z)\right)
5527: + {\cal O}\left(\frac{1}{z^3}\right)
5528: &
5529: \displaystyle
5530: z\to-\infty
5531: \,,
5532: \\
5533: \displaystyle
5534: \frac{\pi}{2\sqrt{1-z}} - 1 + {\cal O}\left(\sqrt{1-z}\right)
5535: &
5536: \displaystyle
5537: z\to1
5538: \,.
5539: \end{array}
5540: \right.
5541: \end{eqnarray}
5542: From this equation one can see that
5543: $f^{log}(z)$ can be chosen as a linear combination of terms
5544: $(1/z)^j(1-z)^l z^m (G(z))^n$ ($j,l,m,n\ge0$)
5545: where the corresponding coefficients
5546: are determined as follows:
5547: \begin{itemize}
5548: \item
5549: Consider the term in the second equality of Eq.~(\ref{eq:deff})
5550: which has the lowest value of $k$ and the highest value
5551: of $i\not=0$ and fix the index $n$
5552: such that the powers of the logarithms coincide.
5553: \item
5554: Determine $l$ in such a way that there is no singular behaviour
5555: for $z\to1$.
5556: \item
5557: As $G(z)$ starts with order $1/z$ for $z\to-\infty$ one eventually
5558: has to correct for it with the help of the index $m$.
5559: \item
5560: In a similar way the index $j$ is used in order to subtract the
5561: logarithms suppressed by higher powers in $1/z$.
5562: \item
5563: Finally, terms involving $l=m=n=0$ and $j\ge0$ are added
5564: in order to restore the behaviour for $z\to0$.
5565: \item
5566: Repeat the procedure with the next values of $k$ and $i$, i.e. lower
5567: $i$ by one unit until $i=0$ is reached; then increase $k$ by one unit.
5568: \end{itemize}
5569: By construction this algorithm terminates once the linear
5570: logarithm of the largest high-energy moment is treated.
5571:
5572: To our knowledge a simple version of
5573: the method was first applied in~\cite{BaiBro95}
5574: for the evaluation of certain four-loop contributions
5575: to the anomalous magnetic
5576: moment of the muon. It was obtained by a convolution over the photon
5577: polarization function. For the latter an approximation formulae
5578: was obtained with the help of the Pad\'e-method. One should stress
5579: that for this application only the integral over the space-like
5580: momenta of the approximation was used. In the applications which
5581: are discussed in this review the approximated function itself and in
5582: particular its analyticity properties are of interest.
5583: A brief introduction to the Pad\'e-method
5584: and the discussion of some results
5585: can also be found in~\cite{Harlander:2001sa}.
5586:
5587: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
5588:
5589: \subsubsection{Explicit example at two loops}
5590:
5591: For clarity let us present an example where
5592: in all steps explicit results are given.
5593: We consider two-loop QCD corrections to the correlator
5594: of two vector currents
5595: (for a precise definition see Eq.~(\ref{eqpivadef}) below).
5596:
5597: \begin{enumerate}
5598: \item
5599: The expansion of the diagrams for small external momentum leads to
5600: two-loop vacuum integrals which, e.g., can be computed with the help
5601: of {\tt MATAD}~\cite{matad}.
5602: After renormalizing the quark mass in the on-shell scheme and
5603: subtracting the constant, the result
5604: for the first three expansion terms reads
5605: \begin{eqnarray}
5606: \Pi^{(1),v}(q^2) = \frac{3}{16\pi^2}\left(
5607: \frac{328}{81}z
5608: + \frac{1796}{675} z^2
5609: + \frac{999664}{496125} z^3
5610: + \ldots
5611: \right)
5612: \,.
5613: \end{eqnarray}
5614: In the high-energy region we restrict ourselves to the
5615: first two terms which can be obtained by solving
5616: massless integrals with the help of {\tt MINCER}~\cite{mincer}.
5617: Using again the on-shell quark mass definition and
5618: taking into account the condition $\Pi(0)=0$
5619: gives
5620: \begin{eqnarray}
5621: \Pi^{(1),v}(z) &=& \frac{3}{16\pi^2}\left(
5622: \frac{5}{6}
5623: - 4\zeta_3
5624: - \ln(-4z)
5625: - \frac{3}{z} \ln(-4z)
5626: + \ldots
5627: \right)
5628: \,.
5629: \end{eqnarray}
5630:
5631: \item
5632: At threshold $\Pi(z)$ has a logarithmic singularity
5633: which can be cast in the form
5634: \begin{eqnarray}
5635: \Pi^{(1),v,thr}(z) &=& \frac{3}{16} \ln\left(\frac{1}{1-z}\right)
5636: \,.
5637: \end{eqnarray}
5638: Thus, the combination $\Pi(z)-\Pi^{thr}(z)$ is constant for $z=1$, has
5639: a polynomial behaviour for $z\to0$ and at most logarithmic
5640: singularities for $z\to-\infty$.
5641:
5642:
5643: \item
5644: The high-energy logarithms are subtracted with the help of the
5645: function
5646: \begin{eqnarray}
5647: \Pi^{(1),v,log}(z) &=&
5648: \frac{3}{16\pi^2}
5649: \frac{1}{3z}\Bigg[
5650: - 21 + z + \pi^2(3 + 5z)
5651: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
5652: + 3(-1 + z)\left(-7 - 2z + \pi^2(1 + 2z)\right) G(z)
5653: \Bigg]
5654: % \frac{1}{z^2\sqrt{\frac{z-1}{z}}}
5655: % \left[
5656: % \frac{z}{3} \left( 21 - z - \pi^2 ( 3 + 5z) \right) \sqrt{\frac{z-1}{z}}
5657: % \right.\nonumber\\&&\mbox{}\left.
5658: % + \frac{1}{2}(1 - z)(-7 - 2 z + \pi^2 (1 + 2 z))
5659: % \ln\left( \frac{\sqrt{\frac{z-1}{z}} - 1}
5660: % {\sqrt{\frac{z-1}{z}} + 1}
5661: % \right)
5662: % \right]
5663: \,,
5664: \end{eqnarray}
5665: which is constructed using the algorithm outlined above.
5666: The resulting function
5667: $\tilde{\Pi}^{(1),v}(z)=\Pi^{(1),v}(z)-\Pi^{(1),v,thr}(z)-\Pi^{(1),v,log}(z)$
5668: is analytical for $z\to0$ and free of logarithms in the
5669: first two high-energy terms.
5670: \end{enumerate}
5671:
5672: After the conformal mapping (cf. Eq.~(\ref{eq:confmap})) and the $[2/2]$
5673: Pad\'e approximation in $\omega$
5674: are performed one obtains for $\tilde{\Pi}^{(1),v}(z)$
5675: \begin{eqnarray}
5676: \tilde{\Pi}^{(1),v}(z) &=&
5677: -0.874397 +
5678: \frac{(0.874397 + 0.905702\, \omega + 0.165184\, \omega^2 ) (1+\omega)^2}
5679: { 1 + 0.860764\, \omega + 0.069525\, \omega^2 }
5680: \,,
5681: \label{eq:pi2pade}
5682: \end{eqnarray}
5683: which finally
5684: leads to $\Pi^{(1),v}_{appr}(z) = \tilde{\Pi}^{(1),v}(z)
5685: + \Pi^{(1),v,thr}(z) + \Pi^{(1),v,log}(z)$.
5686: In Eq.~(\ref{eq:pi2pade}) the numbers are truncated. Usually
5687: high numerical precision is needed in order not to loose
5688: significant digits in the final result.
5689:
5690: By construction, $\Pi^{(1),v}_{appr}(z)$
5691: has the same analyticity properties as the
5692: exact function. As in this case the latter is known one can also
5693: check the quality of the approximation.
5694: It turns out that even for the relatively small amount of input used here
5695: there is a perfect agreement between $\Pi^{(1),v}_{appr}(z)$ and
5696: $\Pi^{(1),v}(z)$. E.g., it is not possible to
5697: distinguish the imaginary parts plotted in the range
5698: $0 < 2m/\sqrt{s} < 1$~\cite{CheKueSte96,CheKueSte97}.
5699:
5700: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
5701:
5702: \subsection{\label{sub:veccor}Current correlators in QCD}
5703:
5704: A variety of important observables can be described by the correlators
5705: of two currents. If the
5706: coupling of the currents to quarks is diagonal quantities like
5707: $e^+ e^-$ annihilation into hadrons and the decay of the $Z$ boson are
5708: covered by the vector and axial-vector current correlators.
5709: Total decay rates of CP even or CP odd Higgs bosons can be obtained by
5710: the scalar and pseudo-scalar current densities, respectively.
5711: For these cases the full mass dependence at order $\alpha_s^2$ has
5712: been computed in~\cite{CheKueSte96} for the non-singlet and
5713: in~\cite{CheHarSte98} for the singlet correlators.
5714: In Subsection~\ref{subsub:R} these results will be briefly reviewed.
5715:
5716: On the other hand the correlators involving different quarks describe,
5717: e.g., properties of a charged gauge or Higgs boson.
5718: In particular a
5719: certain (gauge invariant) class of corrections to the
5720: single-top-quark
5721: production via the process $q\bar{q}\to t\bar{b}$ becomes available.
5722: As an application of the (pseudo-)scalar current correlator we want to
5723: mention the decay of a charged Higgs boson, which occurs in extensions
5724: of the SM, into a massive and a massless quark.
5725: Another important application of the non-diagonal current correlator
5726: is connected to the meson decay constant.
5727: Within the heavy quark effective QCD it is related
5728: to the spectral density, evaluated near threshold.
5729: The latter can be obtained from the correlator of the
5730: full theory which is considered below.
5731:
5732: Let us in a first step introduce the polarization functions for the four
5733: cases of interest.
5734: The vector and axial-vector ($\delta=v,a$) correlators are defined as
5735: \begin{eqnarray}
5736: \left(-q^2g_{\mu\nu}+q_\mu q_\nu\right)\,\Pi^\delta(q^2)
5737: +q_\mu q_\nu\,\Pi^\delta_L(q^2)
5738: &=&
5739: i\int {\rm d}x\,{\rm e}^{iqx}
5740: \langle 0|Tj^\delta_\mu(x) j^{\delta\dagger}_\nu(0)|0 \rangle
5741: \,,
5742: \label{eqpivadef}
5743: \end{eqnarray}
5744: and the scalar and pseudo-scalar ones ($\delta=s,p$) read
5745: \begin{eqnarray}
5746: q^2\,\Pi^\delta(q^2)
5747: &=&
5748: i\int {\rm d}x\,{\rm e}^{iqx}
5749: \langle 0|Tj^\delta(x)j^{\delta\dagger}(0)|0 \rangle
5750: \,.
5751: \label{eqpispdef}
5752: \end{eqnarray}
5753: The currents are given by
5754: \begin{eqnarray}
5755: j_\mu^v = \bar{\psi}_1\gamma_\mu \psi_2,\qquad
5756: j_\mu^a = \bar{\psi}_1\gamma_\mu\gamma_5 \psi_2,\qquad
5757: j^s = \frac{m(\mu)}{M} \bar{\psi}_1\psi_2,\qquad
5758: j^p = i \frac{m(\mu)}{M} \bar{\psi}_1\gamma_5 \psi_2
5759: \,.
5760: \label{eq:currents}
5761: \end{eqnarray}
5762: Here $m$ is the $\overline{\rm MS}$ and $M$ the on-shell quark mass.
5763: In Eqs.~(\ref{eqpivadef}) and (\ref{eqpispdef}) two powers
5764: of $q$ are factored out in order to end up with dimensionless
5765: quantities $\Pi^\delta(q^2)$.
5766: As we are mainly interested in the imaginary part, the overall
5767: renormalization can be performed in such a way that this is
5768: possible.
5769: Furthermore it is advantageous to adopt the QED-like
5770: renormalization $\Pi^\delta(0)=0$.
5771:
5772: The physical observable $R(s)$ is related to $\Pi(q^2)$ by
5773: \begin{eqnarray}
5774: R^\delta (s)&=&12\pi\,\mbox{Im}\,\Pi^\delta(q^2=s+i\epsilon)
5775: \qquad\qquad \mbox{for } \delta=v,a\,,
5776: %%%\label{eqrtopiva}
5777: \\
5778: R^\delta (s)&=&8\pi\,\,\,\,\mbox{Im}\,\Pi^\delta(q^2=s+i\epsilon)
5779: \qquad\qquad \mbox{for } \delta=s,p\,.
5780: \label{eq:rtopisp}
5781: \end{eqnarray}
5782: It is convenient to define
5783: \begin{eqnarray}
5784: \Pi^\delta(q^2) &=& \Pi^{(0),\delta}(q^2)
5785: + \frac{\alpha_s(\mu^2)}{\pi} C_F \Pi^{(1),\delta}(q^2)
5786: + \left(\frac{\alpha_s(\mu^2)}{\pi}\right)^2\Pi^{(2),\delta}(q^2)
5787: + \ldots\,,
5788: \nonumber
5789: \\
5790: \Pi^{(2),\delta} &=&
5791: C_F^2 \Pi_A^{(2),\delta}
5792: + C_A C_F \Pi_{\it NA}^{(2),\delta}
5793: + C_F T n_l \Pi_l^{(2),\delta}
5794: + C_F T \Pi_F^{(2),\delta}
5795: + C_F T \Pi_S^{(2),\delta}\,,
5796: \label{eqpi2}
5797: \end{eqnarray}
5798: and similarly for $R^\delta(s)$.
5799: The abelian contribution $\Pi_A^{(2),\delta}$ is already present in
5800: (quenched) QED and $\Pi_{NA}^{(2),\delta}$ originates from the
5801: non-abelian structure
5802: specific for QCD. The polarization functions containing a second
5803: massless or massive quark loop are denoted
5804: by $\Pi_l^{(2),\delta}$ and $\Pi_F^{(2),\delta}$, respectively.
5805: $\Pi_S^{(2),\delta}$ represents the double-triangle contribution.
5806:
5807: Actually, we are mainly interested in the imaginary part $R^\delta(s)$
5808: which in principle could be obtained from tree diagrams with five
5809: external legs, from one-loop four-point integrals and from
5810: two-loop three-point integrals.
5811: However, in particular the latter can not be evaluated analytically
5812: using current methods.
5813: Also numerically the treatment of these integrals is inconvenient.
5814: On the other hand, if one has to rely on approximations
5815: like small or large external momenta it is much more advantageous
5816: to stick to two-point functions simply because the resulting
5817: integrals are easier to solve and the corresponding techniques are
5818: much more advanced.
5819:
5820: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
5821:
5822: \subsubsection{\label{subsub:R}Diagonal current correlators}
5823:
5824: The diagonal correlators with all their applications
5825: have extensively been discussed in the
5826: literature.
5827: Therefore we will be brief in this subsection and mainly
5828: refer to the original literature where in most cases also the
5829: analytical results can be found.
5830:
5831: It is useful to define dimensionless variables
5832: \begin{eqnarray}
5833: z\,\,=\,\,\frac{q^2}{4m^2},
5834: &&
5835: x\,\,=\,\,\frac{2m}{\sqrt{s}},
5836: \end{eqnarray}
5837: where $q$ is the external momentum of the polarization function
5838: and $s$ corresponds to the center-of-mass energy in the
5839: process $e^+e^-\to\mbox{hadrons}$ or the mass of the boson in case
5840: decay processes are considered.
5841: Then the velocity, $v$, of one of the produced quarks reads
5842: \begin{eqnarray}
5843: v&=&\sqrt{1-x^2}.
5844: \end{eqnarray}
5845: Every time the generic index $\delta$ appears without further explanation
5846: it is understood that
5847: $\delta$ represents one of the letters $a,v,s$ or $p$.
5848:
5849:
5850: {\bf Vector and axial-vector correlators.}
5851: The vector correlator certainly plays the most important role,
5852: mostly because it covers the processes induced by the photon.
5853: Already in 1979 the massless $\alpha_s^2$ corrections have been
5854: evaluated~\cite{CheKatTka79DinSap79CelGon80} and roughly ten years
5855: later even the order~$\alpha_s^3$ corrections became
5856: available~\cite{GorKatLar91SurSam91,Che97_R}.
5857: However, due to the impressive experimental precision
5858: the massless approximations are not sufficient for a reliable
5859: comparison as we will see below in the case of the hadronic
5860: contribution of $\Delta\alpha$ (cf. Section~\ref{subsub:delal}).
5861: However,
5862: a complete analytical computation of $\Pi^v(q^2)$
5863: at three-loop order is currently not feasible.
5864: In Ref.~\cite{CheKueSte96,CheKueSte97}
5865: the Pad\'e method described above has been
5866: applied and semi-numerical results have been obtained.
5867: At that time only the mass corrections of order
5868: $m^2/q^2$~\cite{GorKatLar86}, for which no asymptotic expansion
5869: has to be applied, have been
5870: available in the high-energy region.
5871: They have been combined with the
5872: terms up to order $(q^2/m^2)^8$~\cite{CheKueSte97}
5873: in the small-$q^2$ expansion
5874: in order to get semi-analytical results for the individual colour
5875: structures.
5876:
5877: As the main interest is in the imaginary part, one could also adopt the
5878: attitude to compute as many terms in the high-energy expansion as
5879: possible. Going, however, beyond the $m^2$ terms a naive expansion
5880: fails and the large-momentum
5881: procedure has to be applied. The calculation becomes very cumbersome
5882: if it has to be applied by hand.
5883: For this reason the large-momentum procedure has been automated
5884: and the program ${\tt lmp}$~\cite{Har:diss} has been developed.
5885: As a first application correction terms up to order $(m^2/q^2)^6$
5886: have been evaluated~\cite{CheHarKueSte96,CheHarKueSte97}
5887: for the vector correlator.
5888: In Fig.~\ref{fig:rvlar} the comparison of the individual expansion
5889: terms with the Pad\'e result from Ref.~\cite{CheKueSte96} is shown.
5890:
5891: \begin{figure}[ht]
5892: \begin{center}
5893: \begin{tabular}{cc}
5894: \leavevmode
5895: \epsfxsize=5.5cm
5896: \epsffile[110 265 465 560]{figs/ravx.ps}&
5897: \epsfxsize=5.5cm
5898: \epsffile[110 265 465 560]{figs/rnavx.ps}\\
5899: \epsfxsize=5.5cm
5900: \epsffile[110 265 465 560]{figs/rlvx.ps}&
5901: \epsfxsize=5.5cm
5902: \epsffile[110 265 465 560]{figs/rfvx.ps}
5903: \end{tabular}
5904: %\parbox{14.cm}{\small\bf
5905: \caption[]{\label{fig:rvlar}\sloppy\rm
5906: The abelian contribution $R_A^{(2),v}$,
5907: the non-abelian piece $R_{\it NA}^{(2),v}$,
5908: the contribution from light internal quark loops $R_l^{(2),v}$
5909: and the contribution $R_F^{(2),v}$ from the double-bubble diagram
5910: with the heavy fermion in both the inner and outer loop
5911: as functions of $x = 2m/\sqrt{s}$.
5912: Wide dots: no mass terms;
5913: dashed lines: including mass terms $(m^2/s)^n$ up to $n=5$;
5914: solid line: including mass terms up to $(m^2/s)^6$;
5915: narrow dots: semi-analytical result (except for $R_F^{(2),v}$). The
5916: scale $\mu^2 = m^2$ has been adopted.
5917: }
5918: %}
5919: \end{center}
5920: \end{figure}
5921:
5922: For all three functions $R^{(2),v}_{A}$, $R^{(2),v}_{\it NA}$ and
5923: $R^{(2),v}_l$
5924: and values between
5925: $x=0$ and $x=0.6$ ($x=2m/\sqrt{s}$)
5926: the expansions including terms of order $(m^2/s)^3$ (or
5927: more) are in perfect agreement with the semi-analytical Pad\'e result.
5928: Conversely this provides a completely independent test of the method of
5929: \cite{CheKueSte96} which did rely mainly on low energy information. Including
5930: more terms in the expansion, one obtains an improved
5931: approximation even in the low energy region. However, the quality of the
5932: ``convergence'' is significantly better for $R^{(2),v}_l$ and
5933: $R^{(2),v}_{\it NA}$
5934: than for $R^{(2),v}_A$. Two reasons may be responsible for this difference:
5935: {\rm (i)} In a high energy expansion it is presumably more difficult to
5936: approximate the $1/v$ Coulomb singularity in $R^{(2),v}_A$ than the mild $\ln
5937: v$ singularity in $R^{(2),v}_{\it NA}$ and $R^{(2),v}_l$.
5938: {\rm (ii)} The function $R^{(2),v}_l$ can be approximated in the whole
5939: energy region
5940: $2m<\sqrt{s}<\infty$ by an increasing number of terms with arbitrary
5941: accuracy. This is evident from the known analytical form of
5942: $R^{(2),v}_l$~\cite{HoaKueTeu951}, a
5943: consequence of the absence of thresholds above $2m$ in this piece. In
5944: contrast the functions $R^{(2),v}_A$, $R^{(2),v}_{\it NA}$
5945: and $R^{(2),v}_F$ exhibit a four particle
5946: threshold at $\sqrt{s} = 4m$. The high energy expansion is, therefore,
5947: not expected to converge to the correct answer in the interval between
5948: $2m$ and $4m$.
5949: In particular, in the case of $R^{(2),v}_F$ it can be seen that for $x>0.5$
5950: no convergence is observed.
5951:
5952: \begin{figure}[ht]
5953: \begin{center}
5954: \begin{tabular}{cc}
5955: \leavevmode
5956: \epsfxsize=5.5cm
5957: \epsffile[110 265 465 560]{figs/paderan12.ps}&
5958: \epsfxsize=5.5cm
5959: \epsffile[110 265 465 560]{figs/paderan17.ps}\\
5960: (a) & (b) \\
5961: \epsfxsize=5.5cm
5962: \epsffile[110 265 465 560]{figs/padera41n.ps}&
5963: \epsfxsize=5.5cm
5964: \epsffile[110 265 465 560]{figs/padera81n.ps}\\
5965: (c) & (d)
5966: \end{tabular}
5967: \caption[]{\label{fig:padehigh1}Abelian part of the vector
5968: correlator as a function of $v$. The leading threshold term is
5969: subtracted as described in the text. In (a) and (b) the number
5970: of low-energy moments are varied and the high-energy terms are
5971: fixed to two and seven, respectively. In (c) and (d) the
5972: low-energy moments are fixed to four and eight, respectively, and
5973: the high-energy terms are varied. The notation $(l1k)[i/j]$
5974: means that terms up to order $z^l$ and $1/z^{k-1}$ are taken
5975: into account in order to construct the Pad\'e approximation $[i/j]$.
5976: }
5977: \end{center}
5978: \end{figure}
5979:
5980:
5981: At this point it is tempting to combine both approaches
5982: --- asymptotic expansion in the high-energy region and the Pad\'e
5983: method --- and evaluate high-order Pad\'e approximants.
5984: A detailed study in the case of the vector correlator can be found
5985: in~\cite{Har:diss} from which Fig.~\ref{fig:padehigh1}
5986: is taken. In Fig.~\ref{fig:padehigh1}
5987: the influence of the number of
5988: low- and high-energy input data is studied.
5989: In all four plots the quantity
5990: $\delta R_A^{(2)}=R_A^{(2),v}-3(\pi^4/(8v)-3\pi^2)$
5991: is shown, i.e. the leading threshold term is subtracted. Otherwise it
5992: would not be possible to detect any difference between the individual
5993: Pad\'e results.
5994: Moreover, the abscissa only extends to $v=0.2$ as for $v\gsim0.5$
5995: all curves coincide.
5996: In Figs.~\ref{fig:padehigh1}(a) and~\ref{fig:padehigh1}(b)
5997: the higher-energy terms are fixed to two and seven, respectively,
5998: whereas an increasing number of low-energy moments are considered.
5999: On the other hand, on the plots in the lower row the number of moments
6000: is fixed to four and eight, respectively, with varying high-energy input.
6001:
6002: From Figs.~\ref{fig:padehigh1}(a) and~\ref{fig:padehigh1}(c)
6003: a clear stablilization of the results
6004: can be observed with increasing degree of the
6005: Pad\'e approximation.
6006: The same is true for Figs.~\ref{fig:padehigh1}(b)
6007: and~\ref{fig:padehigh1}(d): although the degree of the Pad\'e
6008: approximants is higher from the very beginning a further stabilization
6009: is visible.
6010:
6011: From these considerations one can conclude that both the small- and
6012: high-energy expansion terms are crucial as input for the Pad\'e
6013: procedure. A significant stabilization of $R(s)$ in the
6014: threshold region is observed
6015: if more terms are taken into account.
6016: However, for practical purposes it is probably more than enough
6017: to consider, e.g., only the quadratic terms in the high-energy region.
6018: The reason for this is that also the leading threshold behaviour is
6019: incorporated into the analysis.
6020: The situation is different in those cases where no information about
6021: the threshold is available or one even wants to determine the
6022: value of the (real part of the) considered function for $z=1$.
6023: We will come back to this point in Section~\ref{sub:msos}.
6024:
6025: At this point we refrain from listing the results of the individual
6026: terms contributing to $R(s)$ as all of them are available in the
6027: literature. In particular we want to refer to the Appendix of
6028: Ref.~\cite{CheKueKwiPR} where detailed results
6029: up to order $\alpha_s^2 m^4/s^2$ and $\alpha_s^3 m^2/s$ are listed.
6030: Concerning the full mass dependence at order $\alpha_s^2$
6031: a complete discussion and a detailed
6032: compilation of the individual terms in the on-shell scheme
6033: can be found in Ref.~\cite{CheHoaKueSteTeu97} (see
6034: also~\cite{Chetyrkin:1996yp}).
6035: Together with the quartic on-shell terms at order $\alpha_s^3$
6036: given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Rm4OS})
6037: this constitutes the current state-of-the-art radiative corrections
6038: for $R(s)$.
6039:
6040: In~\cite{CheKueSte97} next to the vector case also the axial-vector,
6041: scalar and pseudo-scalar correlators have been considered.
6042: Moments up to order $(q^2)^8$ have been combined with quadratic mass
6043: terms and the leading threshold behaviour in order to obtain
6044: semi-numerical approximations for the correlators.
6045:
6046: \begin{figure}[ht]
6047: \begin{center}
6048: \begin{tabular}{cc}
6049: \leavevmode
6050: \epsfxsize=6.5cm
6051: \epsffile[110 270 480 560]{figs/raax.ps}
6052: &
6053: \epsfxsize=6.5cm
6054: \epsffile[110 270 480 560]{figs/rnaax.ps}
6055: \\
6056: \epsfxsize=6.5cm
6057: \epsffile[110 270 480 560]{figs/rlax.ps}
6058: &
6059: \epsfxsize=6.5cm
6060: \epsffile[110 270 480 560]{figs/rfax.ps}
6061: \\
6062: \epsfxsize=6.5cm
6063: \epsffile[110 270 480 560]{figs/rsax.ps}
6064: &
6065: \epsfxsize=6.5cm
6066: \epsffile[110 270 480 560]{figs/rsb.ps}
6067: \end{tabular}
6068: \caption{\label{fig:ra}
6069: $R^{(2),a}_i$, $i={\it A, NA, l, F, S, Sb}$ as functions of $x =
6070: 2M_t/\protect\sqrt{s}$ at $\mu^2 = M_t^2$. Successively higher order
6071: terms in $(M_t^2/s)^n$ are included:
6072: Dotted: $n=0$; dashed: $n=1,\ldots,5$; solid:
6073: $n=6$. Narrow dots: exact result ($R_l^{(2),a}$, $R_{Sb}^{(2),a}$) or
6074: semi-analytical results ($R_A^{(2),a}$, $R_{NA}^{(2),a}$).
6075: In the case of the top-bottom doublet $R_{Sb}$ contains only the
6076: imaginary parts of the singlet diagrams which arise from the gluon
6077: and bottom quark cuts (see also Fig.~\ref{fig:pademxfig}).}
6078: \end{center}
6079: \end{figure}
6080:
6081:
6082: QCD corrections to the axial-vector correlator have also been
6083: evaluated in~\cite{HarSte98}. In the limit
6084: $q^2\gg M^2$ the first seven terms could be evaluated using automated
6085: asymptotic expansion. In Fig.~\ref{fig:ra} the
6086: expansion terms are compared with the Pad\'e results~\cite{CheKueSte97}
6087: for the individual colour factors.
6088: Again perfect agreement is found in the region where the
6089: asymptotic expansion is expected to converge to the exact result.
6090:
6091: In~\cite{HarSte98}
6092: the results have been used in order to obtain in combination with
6093: the vector correlator, order $\alpha_s^2$
6094: corrections to the top quark production in $e^+ e^-$ annihilation
6095: above the threshold. The results for the
6096: cross section are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ewqcdalone}
6097: where also the electro-weak corrections have been
6098: included~\cite{KueHahHar99}.
6099:
6100: \begin{figure}[ht]
6101: \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/ewqcdalone.eps}
6102: \caption{\label{fig:ewqcdalone}The electroweak (a) and QCD (b)
6103: corrections to $e^+e^-\to t\bar{t}$.
6104: In this Figure the normalized cross section $R_t=\sigma(e^+e^-\to
6105: t\bar{t})/\sigma_{pt}$ is shown. $\sigma_{pt}=4\pi\alpha^2/3s$.}
6106: \end{figure}
6107:
6108: {\bf Scalar and Pseudo-scalar correlators.}
6109: For completeness we want to mention that
6110: the high-energy expansions
6111: of the scalar and pseudo-scalar correlators have been
6112: considered in~\cite{Harlander:1997xa}. The results have been applied to
6113: the decay of a scalar and pseudo-scalar Higgs boson into top quarks
6114: where higher order mass effects are important. This can be seen in
6115: Tab.~\ref{tab:Higgs}
6116: where a (pseudo-)scalar Higgs boson mass of $450$~GeV has been
6117: considerd.
6118: Both the results for the individual mass-correction terms
6119: $(M_t^2/M_H^2)^i$ ($i=0,\ldots,4$) and their
6120: proper sum is listed up to order $\alpha_s^2$.
6121:
6122: \begin{table}[th]
6123: {\footnotesize
6124: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.4}
6125: \begin{center}
6126: %%%%
6127: \begin{tabular}{|l||r|r|r|r|r||l||l|}
6128: \hline
6129: \mbox{} & ${(M_t^2)^0}$ & ${(M_t^2)^1}$ &
6130: ${(M_t^2)^2}$ & ${(M_t^2)^3}$ &
6131: ${(M_t^2)^4}$ & $\Sigma$ & exact \\
6132: \hline \hline
6133: \mbox{} & \multicolumn{5}{|c||}{scalar, on-shell} & & \\
6134: \hline
6135: $R^{(0),s}/3$ & $
6136: 1.000$ & $
6137: -0.907$ & $
6138: 0.137$ & $
6139: 0.014$ & $
6140: 0.003$ & $
6141: 0.247$ & $ 0.248$ \\
6142: \hline
6143: $C_FR^{(1),s}/3$ & $
6144: -0.778$ & $
6145: 5.646$ & $
6146: -3.080$ & $
6147: 0.010$ & $
6148: 0.004$ & $
6149: 1.802$ & $ 1.802$ \\
6150: \hline
6151: $R^{(2),s}/3$ & $
6152: -35.803$ & $
6153: 77.056$ & $
6154: -17.792$ & $
6155: -5.347$ & $
6156: -0.680$ & $
6157: 17.435$ & $-$ \\
6158: \hline
6159: $\Sigma_i (\alpha_s/\pi)^i$
6160: &$ 0.943$
6161: &$ -0.663$
6162: &$ 0.026$
6163: &$ 0.009$
6164: &$ 0.003$
6165: &$ 0.318$ & \mbox{}\\ \hline \hline
6166: \mbox{} & \multicolumn{5}{|c||}{scalar, $\overline{\rm MS}$} & & \\
6167: \hline
6168: $\frac{m_t^2}{M_t^2}\bar{R}^{(0),s}/3$ & $
6169: 0.784$
6170: &$ -0.558$
6171: &$ 0.066$
6172: &$ 0.005$
6173: &$ 0.001$
6174: &$ 0.298$
6175: &$ 0.299 $
6176: \\
6177: \hline
6178: $\frac{m_t^2}{M_t^2}C_F\bar{R}^{(1),s}/3$ & $
6179: 4.445$
6180: &$ -3.723$
6181: &$ -0.238$
6182: &$ 0.143$
6183: &$ 0.032$
6184: &$ 0.659$
6185: &$ 0.673 $
6186: \\
6187: \hline
6188: $\frac{m_t^2}{M_t^2}\bar{R}^{(2),s}/3$ & $
6189: 21.799$
6190: &$ -7.606$
6191: &$-15.334$
6192: &$ 0.680$
6193: &$ 0.546$
6194: &$ 0.086$
6195: &$ - $
6196: \\
6197: \hline
6198: $\Sigma_i (\alpha_s/\pi)^i$
6199: &$ 0.941$
6200: &$ -0.679$
6201: &$ 0.045$
6202: &$ 0.010$
6203: &$ 0.002$
6204: &$ 0.319$
6205: & \mbox{}\\ \hline \hline
6206: \mbox{} & \multicolumn{5}{|c||}{pseudo-scalar, on-shell} & & \\
6207: \hline
6208: $R^{(0),p}/3$ & $
6209: 1.000$ & $
6210: -0.302$ & $
6211: -0.046$ & $
6212: -0.014$ & $
6213: -0.005$ & $
6214: 0.633$ & $ 0.629$ \\
6215: \hline
6216: $C_FR^{(1),p}/3$ & $
6217: -0.778$ & $
6218: 3.495$ & $
6219: 0.417$ & $
6220: 0.047$ & $
6221: 0.027$ & $
6222: 3.208$ & $ 3.238$ \\
6223: \hline
6224: $R^{(2),p}/3$ & $
6225: -35.803$ & $
6226: 25.024$ & $
6227: 12.173$ & $
6228: 3.780$ & $
6229: 1.293$ & $
6230: 6.467$ & $-$ \\
6231: \hline
6232: $\Sigma_i (\alpha_s/\pi)^i$
6233: &$ 0.943$
6234: &$ -0.172$
6235: &$ -0.022$
6236: &$ -0.009$
6237: &$ -0.003$
6238: &$ 0.737$ & \mbox{}\\ \hline \hline
6239: \mbox{} & \multicolumn{5}{|c||}{pseudo-scalar, $\overline{\rm MS}$} & & \\
6240: \hline
6241: $\frac{m_t^2}{M_t^2}\bar{R}^{(0),p}/3$ & $
6242: 0.784$
6243: &$ -0.186$
6244: &$ -0.022$
6245: &$ -0.005$
6246: &$ -0.002$
6247: &$ 0.569$
6248: &$ 0.569 $
6249: \\
6250: \hline
6251: $\frac{m_t^2}{M_t^2}C_F\bar{R}^{(1),p}/3$ & $
6252: 4.445$
6253: &$ -0.248$
6254: &$ -0.215$
6255: &$ -0.119$
6256: &$ -0.043$
6257: &$ 3.821$
6258: &$ 3.791 $
6259: \\
6260: \hline
6261: $\frac{m_t^2}{M_t^2}\bar{R}^{(2),p}/3$ & $
6262: 21.799$
6263: &$ 9.854$
6264: &$ 2.455$
6265: &$ -0.781$
6266: &$ -0.520$
6267: &$ 32.807$
6268: &$ - $
6269: \\
6270: \hline
6271: $\Sigma_i (\alpha_s/\pi)^i$
6272: &$ 0.941$
6273: &$ -0.185$
6274: &$ -0.026$
6275: &$ -0.010$
6276: &$ -0.003$
6277: &$ 0.717$
6278: &\mbox{}\\\hline
6279: \end{tabular}
6280: %%%%
6281: \end{center}
6282: }
6283: \caption{\label{tab:Higgs}
6284: Numerical results for $R^s$ and $R^p$ both in the on-shell and
6285: $\overline{\mbox{MS}}$ schemes. The contributions from the mass terms
6286: $(M_t^2)^i$, their sum ($\Sigma$) and, where available, the exact
6287: results are shown. $\Sigma_i(\alpha_s/\pi)^i$ is the sum of the 1-,
6288: 2- and 3-loop terms. The numbers correspond to $M_t=175$~GeV and
6289: $M_{H/A}=450$~GeV. The renormalization scale $\mu^2$ is set to
6290: $s=M_{H/A}^2$. }
6291: \end{table}
6292:
6293:
6294:
6295: {\bf Singlet contribution.}
6296: A special feature of the diagonal current correlator is the
6297: occurence of so-called singlet diagrams as pictured in
6298: Fig.~\ref{fig:diasing}. They are often also
6299: referred to as double-triangle diagrams as the external currents are not
6300: connected through the same fermion line.
6301: Note that for the vector correlator there are no singlet diagrams
6302: at three-loop level according to Furry's theorem~\cite{Fur37}.
6303: In case of axial-vector couplings one has to take both members
6304: of a weak isospin doublet into account
6305: in order for the axial anomaly to cancel.
6306: It is therefore convenient to
6307: replace the current $j^a_\mu$ in Eq.~(\ref{eqpivadef}) by
6308: $
6309: j_{S,\mu}^a = \bar{\psi}\gamma_\mu\gamma_5 \psi -
6310: \bar{\chi}\gamma_\mu\gamma_5 \chi ,
6311: $
6312: where $\psi$ and $\chi$ are isospin partners.
6313: The diagrams contributing to the singlet part, $\Pi^{(2),a}_S(q^2)$, are
6314: depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:diasing}
6315: where in the fermion triangles either $\psi$ or $\chi$ may be present.
6316: Note that for a degenerate quark doublet $\Pi_S^{(2),a}(q^2)$ vanishes.
6317: Having furthermore in mind the physical case $(\psi,\chi) = (t,b)$,
6318: it is justified to set $m_\psi = M$ and $m_{\chi} = 0$.
6319: In the case of the scalar and pseudo-scalar currents
6320: there is no anomaly. Furthermore,
6321: as the coupling is proportional to the quark mass,
6322: only one diagram
6323: has to be considered, namely the one where in both quark lines the same
6324: heavy quark flavour is present.
6325:
6326: \begin{figure}[t]
6327: \begin{center}
6328: \begin{tabular}{cc}
6329: \leavevmode
6330: \epsfxsize=6.5cm
6331: \epsffile[131 314 481 478]{figs/diasing1.ps}
6332: &
6333: \epsfxsize=6.5cm
6334: \epsffile[131 314 481 478]{figs/diasing2.ps}
6335: \end{tabular}
6336: \caption{\label{fig:diasing}Singlet or double-triangle diagrams.
6337: In the fermion lines either the quark $\psi$ or its isospin partner
6338: $\chi$ may be present.}
6339: \end{center}
6340: \end{figure}
6341:
6342:
6343: As mentioned in Section~\ref{sub:method} it is essential that the
6344: expansion for $q^2\to0$ is analytical.
6345: However, in the case of the singlet diagrams this is not fulfilled
6346: as there exist massless cuts containing gluons and light fermions.
6347: Thus the method of Section~\ref{sub:method} cannot directly be applied
6348: to $\Pi_S^{(2),\delta}(q^2)$. Rather it is applied to
6349: \begin{eqnarray}
6350: \Pi_{S,mod}^{(2),a}(q^2) &=& \Pi_S^{(2),a}(q^2) -
6351: {1\over 12\pi^2}\int_0^1 {\rm d} r {R_{Sb}^{(2),a}(s)\over
6352: r-z}
6353: \,,
6354: \nonumber\\
6355: \Pi_{S,mod}^{(2),\kappa}(q^2) &=& \Pi_S^{(2),\kappa}(q^2) -
6356: {1\over 8\pi^2}\int_0^1 {\rm d} r {R_{gg}^{(2),\kappa}(s)\over
6357: r-z}
6358: \,,\,\,\,\,\kappa=s,p
6359: \,,
6360: \label{eq:piamod}
6361: \end{eqnarray}
6362: where $R_{Sb}^{(2),a}$ and $R_{gg}^{(2),\kappa}$ denote
6363: the contribution of these massless cuts to $R_S^{(2),a}$ and
6364: $R_S^{(2),\kappa}$, respectively.
6365: Thus by definition, $\Pi_{S,mod}^{(2),\delta}(q^2)$
6366: has the same analytical
6367: properties as the non-singlet polarization functions.
6368: The notation already suggests that in the scalar and pseudo-scalar
6369: case there is only the cut through the two gluons. On the contrary,
6370: this cut is zero in the axial-vector case
6371: according to the Landau-Yang-Theorem~\cite{LanYan} and only cuts
6372: involving the massless quark contribute.
6373: The analytical expressions for $R^{(2),a}_{Sb}$
6374: and $R^{(2),\kappa}_{gg}$ can be
6375: found in~\cite{KniKue89} and~\cite{CheHarSte98}, respectively.
6376: Expansions of the former are also listed
6377: in~\cite{CheHarSte98}.
6378:
6379:
6380: In~\cite{CheHarSte98} the asymptotic expansion has been applied to
6381: the singlet diagrams and terms up to $(M^2/q^2)^6$ in the high-energy
6382: region have been evaluated.
6383: For small external momentum moments up to order
6384: $z^7$ (axial-vector) and $z^8$ (scalar and pseudo-scalar) are
6385: available.
6386: This input was used to compute roughly 30 Pad\'e approximants for each
6387: correlator.
6388: In Fig.~\ref{fig:pademxfig}~(a)--(c) the results for the imaginary part of
6389: $\Pi_{S}^{(2),a}$, $\Pi_{S}^{(2),s}$ and $\Pi_{S}^{(2),p}$ (solid
6390: lines), together with the first seven terms of the high energy expansion
6391: (dashed and dotted lines) are shown as functions of $x=2m/\sqrt s$.
6392: Note, that in the displayed region, $0<x<1$, ${\rm Im}\Pi_{S}^{(2)} =
6393: {\rm Im}\Pi_{S,mod}^{(2)}$. Therefore, if one is interested, e.g., in
6394: (inclusive) production of the heavy quarks only, the corresponding
6395: massless cuts (depicted as dash-dotted lines)
6396: have to be subtracted.
6397: The resulting curves are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:pademxfig}~(d).
6398:
6399: \begin{figure}[ht]
6400: \begin{center}
6401: \begin{tabular}{cc}
6402: \small (a) & \small (b) \\[-2ex]
6403: \leavevmode
6404: \epsfxsize=6.5cm
6405: \epsffile[110 270 480 560]{figs/padersax.ps}
6406: &
6407: \epsfxsize=6.5cm
6408: \epsffile[110 270 480 560]{figs/paderssx.ps}
6409: \\
6410: \small (c) & \small (d)\\[-2ex]
6411: \epsfxsize=6.5cm
6412: \epsffile[110 270 480 560]{figs/paderspx.ps}
6413: &
6414: \epsfxsize=6.5cm
6415: \epsffile[110 270 480 560]{figs/pttx.ps}
6416: \end{tabular}
6417: \caption{\label{fig:pademxfig} The imaginary parts $R_S^{(2),a}$,
6418: $R_S^{(2),s}$ and $R_S^{(2),p}$ of (a) the axial-vector, (b)
6419: scalar and (c) pseudo-scalar singlet diagrams, respectively.
6420: For the abscissa the variable $x=2m/\sqrt s$ is chosen.
6421: Solid line: Pad\'e result; wide dots, dashes and narrow dots:
6422: $(m^2/q^2)^n$-expansion for $n=0$, $n=1,\ldots,5$ and $n=6$,
6423: respectively; dash-dotted line: purely massless cuts $R_{Sb}^{(2),a}$,
6424: $R_{gg}^{(2),s}$ and $R_{gg}^{(2),p}$. Fig.~(d) shows the difference
6425: between the solid and the dash-dotted line (i.e., the contribution
6426: of the massive quarks) of Figs.~(a), (b) and (c) as
6427: solid, dashed and dotted line, respectively.
6428: The curves in (a) can also be found in the last row of Fig.~\ref{fig:ra}.}
6429: \end{center}
6430: \end{figure}
6431:
6432: The requirement that no logarithmic terms may appear in the expansion
6433: for $z\to0$ (cf. Eq.~(\ref{eq:deff})) seems to be quite
6434: restrictive. However, the example of the singlet diagrams shows that
6435: also problems which at first sight do not
6436: match the definition of $f(z)$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:deff}) can be treated.
6437:
6438: \vspace{1em}
6439:
6440: From the systematic evaluation of the polarization function at low and
6441: high energies and the information about the leading threshold
6442: behaviour it is possible to construct --- with the help of Pad\'e
6443: approximation and conformal mapping --- an approximation to $\Pi(z)$
6444: taking into account the complete quark mass dependence. The imaginary
6445: part immediately leads to important physical quantities like $R(s)$,
6446: top quark pair production above threshold and the total decay rate of
6447: scalar and pseudo-scalar Higgs bosons.
6448:
6449: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
6450:
6451: \subsubsection{\label{subsub:delal}An
6452: application of $R(s)$: $\Delta\alpha_{\rm had}(M_Z)$}
6453:
6454: An important application of the vector current correlator,
6455: as discussed in Sections~\ref{sub:as3m4} and~\ref{subsub:R},
6456: is the evaluation of the fine-structure constant at
6457: the scale of the $Z$ boson, $\alpha(M_Z^2)$.
6458: It plays a crucial role in the indirect determination of the
6459: Higgs boson mass which constitutes one of the most important
6460: goals of precision experiments.
6461: In particular, the error on $\alpha(M_Z^2)$ induces one of the largest
6462: uncertainties.
6463:
6464: In Ref.~\cite{EidJeg95} a conservative analysis has been performed
6465: which exclusively
6466: relies on data below a center-of-mass energy, $\sqrt{s}$, of 40~GeV.
6467: Consequently it suffers from sizable experimental errors.
6468: Only for $\sqrt{s}\ge40$~GeV perturbative QCD has been used.
6469: Recently several suggestions
6470: have been made, which significantly reduce the uncertainties
6471: in $\alpha(M_Z^2)$.
6472: Most of them were actually triggered from the knowledge of the
6473: complete mass dependence at order
6474: $\alpha_s^2$ (see Section~\ref{sub:veccor}).
6475: There is a number of
6476: so-called theory-driven
6477: analyses~\cite{DavHoe98_1,KueSte98,
6478: GroKoeSchNas98,Erl98,DavHoe98_2,JegRADCOR98,MarOutRys00}
6479: which replace to smaller and larger extent unprecise data by
6480: the results of perturbative QCD (pQCD). They will be discussed below.
6481:
6482:
6483: Let us start with some basic definitions.
6484: Re-summation of the leading logarithms leads to
6485: \begin{eqnarray}
6486: \alpha(s) &=& \frac{\alpha(0)}
6487: {1-\Delta\alpha_{\rm lep}(s)
6488: -\Delta\alpha^{(5)}_{\rm had}(s)
6489: -\Delta\alpha_{\rm top}(s)}
6490: \,,
6491: \label{eq:delaldef}
6492: \end{eqnarray}
6493: with $\alpha=\alpha(0)=1/137.0359895$.
6494: $\Delta\alpha_{\rm lep}$ denotes the leptonic contribution and is
6495: known up to the three-loop order~\cite{Ste98}
6496: \begin{eqnarray}
6497: \Delta\alpha_{\rm lep}(M_Z^2) &=& 314.97686 \times 10^{-4}
6498: \,.
6499: \label{eq:delallep}
6500: \end{eqnarray}
6501: Perturbation theory is also applicable to treat the contribution arising from
6502: the top quark. Including three-loop QCD corrections one gets~\cite{KueSte98}
6503: \begin{eqnarray}
6504: \Delta\alpha_{\rm top}(M_Z^2) &=& (-0.70 \pm 0.05) \times 10^{-4}
6505: \,.
6506: \label{eq:delaltop}
6507: \end{eqnarray}
6508: The contribution from the remaining five quarks has to be taken into account
6509: using the dispersion integral
6510: \begin{eqnarray}
6511: \Delta\alpha_{\rm had}^{(5)}(M_Z^2)
6512: &=&
6513: -\frac{\alpha M_Z^2}{3\pi}\,\mbox{Re}\,
6514: \int_{4m_\pi^2}^\infty\,{\rm d}
6515: s\,\frac{R(s)}{s\left(s-M_Z^2-i\epsilon\right)}
6516: \,,
6517: \label{eq:delaldisp}
6518: \end{eqnarray}
6519: with
6520: $R(s)=\sigma(e^+e^-\to\mbox{hadrons})/\sigma(e^+e^-\to\mu^+\mu^-)$
6521: (cf. Eq.~(\ref{eq:rtopisp})).
6522: It is not possible to use perturbation theory for $R(s)$ in the whole energy
6523: region. Thus one has to rely to some extent on
6524: experimental results.
6525: The results of the recent evaluations can be found in
6526: Tab.~\ref{tab:cmp}
6527: where also the resulting values for $\alpha^{-1}(M_Z^2)$ are listed. The
6528: latter has been obtained with the help of
6529: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:delaldef}),~(\ref{eq:delallep}) and~(\ref{eq:delaltop}).
6530: In the fourth column of Tab.~\ref{tab:cmp} some keywords are given
6531: which shall indicate the method used for the analysis. In the
6532: following we briefly describe the abbreviations. For more details we
6533: refer to the original papers.
6534:
6535: \begin{table}[t]
6536: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.3}
6537: \begin{center}
6538: {\small
6539: \begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|}
6540: \hline\hline
6541: $\Delta\alpha^{(5)}_{\rm had}(M_Z^2)$ &
6542: $\alpha^{-1}(M_Z)$ & Reference
6543: & comment \\
6544: $\times 10^4$ &&&\\
6545: \hline
6546: $273.2(4.2)$ &128.985(58)& \cite{MarZep95}, Martin et al. `95
6547: & (low-order) pQCD \\
6548: $280(7)$ &128.892(95)& \cite{EidJeg95}, Eidelman et al. `95
6549: & data \\
6550: $280(7)$ &128.892(95)& \cite{BurPie95}, Burkhardt et al. `95
6551: & data \\
6552: $275.2(4.6)$ &128.958(63)& \cite{Swa95}, Swartz `96
6553: & --- \\
6554: $281.7(6.2)$ &128.869(85)& \cite{AleDavHoe97}, Alemany et al. `97
6555: & $\tau$ data\\
6556: $278.4(2.6)^*$ &128.914(35)& \cite{DavHoe98_1}, Davier et al. `97
6557: & + pQCD \\
6558: $277.5(1.7)$ &128.927(23)& \cite{KueSte98}, K\"uhn et al. `98
6559: & + CT \\
6560: $277.6(4.1)$ &128.925(56)& \cite{GroKoeSchNas98}, Groote et al. `98
6561: & SR (pQCD) \\
6562: $277.3(2.0)^{**}$ &128.929(27)& \cite{Erl98}, Erler `98
6563: & $\tau$ data + UDR \\
6564: $277.0(1.6)^*$ &128.933(22)& \cite{DavHoe98_2}, Davier et al. `98
6565: & $\tau$ data + pQCD + SR\\
6566: $277.8(2.5)$ &128.922(34)& \cite{JegRADCOR98}, Jegerlehner `99
6567: & pQCD (ER)\\
6568: $274.3(1.9)$ &128.970(26)& \cite{MarOutRys00}, Martin et al. `00
6569: & new data + pQCD (ER)\\
6570: $276.1(3.6)$ &128.946(49)& \cite{BurPie01}, Burkhardt et al. `01
6571: & new data \\
6572: $277.3(2.1)$ &128.930(29)& \cite{Jeg01}, Jegerlehner `01
6573: & pQCD (ER) + new data \\
6574: \hline\hline
6575: \end{tabular}
6576: }
6577: \caption{\label{tab:cmp}
6578: Comparison of the different evaluations of
6579: $\Delta\alpha^{(5)}_{\rm had}(M_Z^2)$.
6580: The column ``comment'' reminds on the different methods used in the
6581: analysis as described in the text.
6582: (${}^*\Delta\alpha_{\rm top}(M_Z^2)$ subtracted;
6583: ${}^{**}$ value corresponding to $\alpha_s(M_Z^2)=0.118$ adopted.)
6584: }
6585: \end{center}
6586: \end{table}
6587:
6588: {\bf $\tau$ data}~\cite{AleDavHoe97}.
6589: $\tau$ data from ALEPH have been used in order to
6590: get more information about $R(s)$ for energies below roughly 1.8~GeV.
6591: The hypothesis of conserved vector current (CVC) in combination with isospin
6592: invariance relates, e.g., the vector part of the two-pion $\tau$ spectral
6593: function to the corresponding part of the isovector $e^+e^-$ cross section
6594: through the following relation
6595: \begin{eqnarray}
6596: \sigma^{I=1}\left(e^+e^-\to\pi^+\pi^-\right) &=&
6597: \frac{4\pi\alpha^2(0)}{s}v_{J=1}\left(\tau\to\pi\pi^0\nu_\tau\right)
6598: \,.
6599: \end{eqnarray}
6600: A similar equation holds for the four-pion final state.
6601: Their incorporation into the analysis has been performed
6602: in~\cite{AleDavHoe97} leading to a slight reduction of the error on
6603: $\Delta\alpha^{(5)}_{\rm had}$\footnote{On the contrary, the inclusion
6604: of the $\tau$ data leads to a
6605: significant reduction of the error of the anomalous magnetic moment
6606: of the muon as it is more sensitive to the low-energy region.}.
6607:
6608:
6609: {\bf Perturbative QCD (pQCD)}.
6610: The first attempt to replace unprecise data by pQCD can be found
6611: in~\cite{MarZep95}. At that time, however, mass effects were barely
6612: known. Thus pQCD could only be applied far above the particle thresholds.
6613: Meanwhile $R(s)$ can be calculated in the framework of
6614: pQCD up to order $\alpha_s^3$
6615: if quark masses are neglected~\cite{GorKatLar91SurSam91,Che97_R} and up to
6616: ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$ with full quark mass
6617: dependence~\cite{HoaKueTeu951,CheKueSte96,CheKueSte97,CheHoaKueSteTeu97}.
6618: In~\cite{DavHoe98_1,KueSte98} pQCD has been used down to an energy scale of
6619: $\sqrt{s}=1.8$~GeV and it has been shown that the non perturbative
6620: contributions are small. This leads to a further reduction of the error of
6621: about a factor two. For convenience we list in Tab.~\ref{tab:pert}
6622: the perturbative hadronic contributions for a variety of energy intervals.
6623: As our default values we adopt $\mu^2 = s$,
6624: $\alpha^{(5)}_s(M_Z^2)=0.118$~\cite{Kniehl:2000cr},
6625: $M_c=1.6$~GeV and $M_b=4.7$~GeV. In separate columns we list the
6626: variations with a change in the renormalization scale, the strong
6627: coupling constant and the quark masses:
6628: \begin{eqnarray}
6629: \delta\alpha_s\,\,=\,\,\pm0.003,\quad
6630: \delta M_c\,\,=\,\,\pm0.2~{\mbox GeV},\quad
6631: \delta M_b\,\,=\,\,\pm0.3~{\mbox GeV}.\quad
6632: \label{eqdelta}
6633: \end{eqnarray}
6634:
6635: \begin{table}[t]
6636: %\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.3}
6637: \begin{center}
6638: {\small
6639: \begin{tabular}{|l|r|r|r|r|r|}
6640: \hline\hline
6641: Energy range (GeV) & central value &$\delta\mu$ &
6642: $\delta\alpha_s$ & $\delta M_c$ & $\delta M_b$\\ \hline
6643: $ 1.800- 2.125$&$ 5.67$&$ 0.22$&$ 0.04$&$ 0.00$&$ 0.00$\\
6644: $ 2.125- 3.000$&$ 11.66$&$ 0.21$&$ 0.06$&$ 0.01$&$ 0.00$\\
6645: $ 3.000- 3.700$&$ 7.03$&$ 0.06$&$ 0.03$&$ 0.00$&$ 0.00$\\
6646: $ 1.800- 3.700$&$ 24.36$&$ 0.48$&$ 0.13$&$ 0.01$&$ 0.01$\\
6647: \hline
6648: $ 5.000- 5.500$&$ 5.44$&$ 0.03$&$ 0.03$&$ 0.06$&$ 0.00$\\
6649: $ 5.500- 6.000$&$ 4.93$&$ 0.03$&$ 0.02$&$ 0.04$&$ 0.00$\\
6650: $ 6.000- 9.460$&$ 25.45$&$ 0.11$&$ 0.08$&$ 0.10$&$ 0.00$\\
6651: $ 9.460- 10.520$&$ 5.90$&$ 0.02$&$ 0.01$&$ 0.01$&$ 0.00$\\
6652: $ 10.520- 11.200$&$ 3.48$&$ 0.01$&$ 0.01$&$ 0.00$&$ 0.00$\\
6653: $ 5.000- 11.200$&$ 45.20$&$ 0.19$&$ 0.15$&$ 0.21$&$ 0.01$\\
6654: (without $b\bar{b}$) &&&&&\\
6655: \hline
6656: $ 11.200- 11.500$&$ 1.63$&$ 0.00$&$ 0.01$&$ 0.00$&$ 0.00$\\
6657: $ 11.500- 12.000$&$ 2.62$&$ 0.00$&$ 0.01$&$ 0.00$&$ 0.00$\\
6658: $ 12.000- 13.000$&$ 4.93$&$ 0.01$&$ 0.01$&$ 0.00$&$ 0.00$\\
6659: $ 13.000- 40.000$&$ 72.92$&$ 0.08$&$ 0.12$&$ 0.02$&$ 0.02$\\
6660: $ 12.000- 40.000$&$ 77.85$&$ 0.09$&$ 0.14$&$ 0.02$&$ 0.02$\\
6661: $ 40.000-\infty$&$ 42.67$&$ 0.03$&$ 0.06$&$ 0.00$&$ 0.00$\\
6662: $ 11.200-\infty$&$ 124.77$&$ 0.12$&$ 0.21$&$ 0.03$&$ 0.02$\\
6663: \hline
6664: $1.8-\infty$ (pQCD) & $ 194.33$&$ 0.79$&$ 0.49$&$ 0.24$&$ 0.03$\\
6665: \hline
6666: QED & $ 0.11$ & -- & -- & -- & -- \\
6667: \hline\hline
6668: %%%(without $b\bar{b}$) &&&&&\\
6669: \end{tabular}
6670: }
6671: %\parbox{14.cm}{\small
6672: \caption{\label{tab:pert}
6673: Contributions to $\Delta\alpha^{(5)}_{\rm had}(M_Z^2)$
6674: (in units of $10^{-4}$) from the energy
6675: regions where pQCD is used (adopted from~\protect\cite{CheHoaKueSteTeu97}).
6676: For the QED corrections the same intervals
6677: have been chosen. For the variation of $\alpha_s(M_Z^2)$, $M_c$ and $M_b$
6678: (cf. Eqs.~(\ref{eqdelta})) have been used. $\mu$ has been varied between
6679: $\protect\sqrt{s}/2$ and $2\protect\sqrt{s}$.
6680: %}
6681: }
6682: \end{center}
6683: \end{table}
6684:
6685:
6686: The typical contributions which have to be taken into account
6687: look as follows~\cite{KueSte98}.
6688: In the perturbative regions one receives contributions from light ($u$,
6689: $d$ and $s$) quarks whose masses are neglected throughout, and from
6690: massive quarks which demand a more refined treatment. Below the charm
6691: threshold the light quark contributions are evaluated in order
6692: $\alpha_s^3$ plus terms of order
6693: $\alpha_s^2\, s/(4M^2_c)$
6694: from virtual massive quark loops. Above $5$~GeV the full $M_c$ dependence is
6695: taken into account up to order $\alpha^2_s$, and in addition the
6696: dominant cubic terms in the strong coupling are incorporated, as well as
6697: the corrections from virtual bottom quark loops of order
6698: $\alpha_s^2\, s/(4M^2_b)$. Above $11.2$~GeV the same formalism
6699: is applied to the massive bottom quarks and charm quark mass effects are
6700: taken into account through their leading contributions in an $M^2_c/s$
6701: expansion.
6702: All formulae are available for arbitrary renormalization scale $\mu$
6703: which allows to test the scale dependence of the final answer. This
6704: was used to estimate the theoretical uncertainties
6705: from uncalculated higher orders. Matching of $\alpha_s$
6706: between the treatment with
6707: $n_f=3$, $4$ and $5$ flavours is performed at the respective threshold
6708: values (cf. Section~\ref{sec:dec}).
6709: The influence of
6710: the small ${\cal O}(\alpha^3_s)$ singlet piece which prevents a
6711: clear separation of contributions from different quark species can safely be
6712: ignored for the present purpose.
6713:
6714: {\bf Charm threshold region (CT)}~\cite{KueSte98}.
6715: Perturbative QCD is clearly inapplicable in the charm
6716: threshold region
6717: between $3.7$ and $5$~GeV
6718: where rapid variations of the cross section are
6719: observed. Data have been taken more than $15$ years ago by the
6720: PLUTO~\cite{PLUTO},
6721: DASP~\cite{DASP}, and MARK~I collaborations~\cite{MARK1}.
6722: The systematic errors of $10$ to
6723: $20$~\% exceed the statistical errors significantly and are reflected in a
6724: sizeable spread of the experimental results.
6725: In~\cite{KueSte98} the experimental data are normalized to match the
6726: predictions of perturbative QCD both below $3.7$ and above $5.0$~GeV.
6727: Two models have been constructed which describe the differences of the
6728: normalization factors below and above the considered energy interval.
6729:
6730: Recently, the BES collaboration has measured $R(s)$ in the energy
6731: range between 2 and 5~GeV with substantially improved
6732: precision~\cite{Bai:2000pk}.
6733: We applied the method of~\cite{KueSte98} and obtained perfect
6734: agreement with the results of PLUTO, DASP and MARK~I.
6735:
6736:
6737: {\bf QCD sum rules (SR)}~\cite{GroKoeSchNas98,DavHoe98_2}.
6738: Global parton-hadron duality is used in order to reduce the influence of
6739: the data in the different intervals.
6740: This is achieved by choosing a proper polynomial, $Q_N(s)$,
6741: which is supposed to
6742: approximate the weight function $M_Z^2/s(s-M_Z^2)$
6743: in Eq.~(\ref{eq:delaldisp}) as good as possible.
6744: Adding and subtracting $Q_N(s)$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:delaldisp})
6745: and exploiting the analycity of the
6746: subtracted term leads to
6747: \begin{eqnarray}
6748: \int_{s_0}^{s_1}\,{\rm d}s\,
6749: \frac{R(s)\,M_Z^2}{s\left(s-M_Z^2\right)}
6750: &=&
6751: \int_{s_0}^{s_1}\,{\rm d}s\,R(s)
6752: \left(
6753: \frac{M_Z^2}{s\left(s-M_Z^2\right)} - Q_N(s)
6754: \right)
6755: \nonumber\\&&\qquad\qquad\qquad
6756: +
6757: 6\pi i\oint_{|s|=s_1} \,{\rm d}s\, \Pi^{\rm QCD}(s) Q_N(s)
6758: \,.
6759: \label{eq:delalsub}
6760: \end{eqnarray}
6761: Thus the influence of the experimental data is significantly reduced in the
6762: first term of the right-hand side and pQCD only has to be used for
6763: $|s|=s_1$ which is indicated by the superscript QCD.
6764:
6765:
6766: {\bf Unsubtracted dispersion relations (UDR)}~\cite{Erl98}.
6767: They are used in order to evaluate the electromagnetic coupling in the
6768: $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme. Four-loop running is
6769: accompanied by three-loop matching in order to arrive at $\bar\alpha(M_Z^2)$,
6770: which subsequently has to be transformed to the on-shell quantity
6771: $\alpha(M_Z^2)$. Via this method no complications in connection with the
6772: $J/\Psi$ or $\Upsilon$ resonances occur. However, one encounters a much
6773: stronger dependence on the quark masses.
6774:
6775:
6776: {\bf Perturbative QCD in Euclidian region
6777: (ER)}~\cite{JegRADCOR98,MarOutRys00,Jeg01}.
6778: The authors of Ref.~\cite{EidJeg95} also re-evaluated
6779: $\Delta\alpha^{(5)}_{\rm had}(M_Z)$ using pQCD.
6780: In a first step $\Delta\alpha^{(5)}_{\rm had}$ was calculated at the
6781: large negative scale $s=-M_Z^2$ and then analytically continued
6782: to $s=M_Z^2$. Thus pQCD has only been applied in the Eulidian region
6783: where it
6784: is supposed to work best as one is far from resonances and thresholds.
6785: Furthermore pQCD has been used down to $-(2.5~\mbox{GeV})^2$.
6786:
6787:
6788: {\bf New data in the low-energy region.}
6789: In the meantime new experimental data for $R(s)$ in the low-energy region have
6790: become available.
6791: Besides improvements in the energy interval below 1.4~GeV by the
6792: CMD-2 detector at the VEPP-2M collider in Novosibirsk a
6793: measurement of $R(s)$ in the range
6794: $2~\mbox{GeV}<\sqrt{s}<5$~GeV has been performed by the experiment BES~II
6795: at Beijing. In Ref.~\cite{MarOutRys00} these data have been
6796: incorporated and accompanied with pQCD in the regions
6797: $3~\mbox{GeV}<\sqrt{s}<3.74$~GeV
6798: and $\sqrt{s}>5$~GeV in order to evaluate
6799: $\Delta\alpha^{(5)}_{\rm had}(M_Z)$. The result shown in
6800: Tab.~\ref{tab:cmp} has been obtained using only inclusive measurements of
6801: $R(s)$ for $\sqrt{s}\lsim1.9$~GeV.
6802: Based on the comparision of time-like and space-like (i.e. in
6803: the Euclidian region) evaluations of $\Delta\alpha^{(5)}_{\rm had}(M_Z)$
6804: it has been argued in~\cite{MarOutRys00}
6805: that this is preferred to the exclusive measurements of $R(s)$.
6806:
6807: More recently the data-based analysis of~\cite{BurPie95} has been
6808: updated~\cite{BurPie01} using pQCD only above $\sqrt{s}=12$~GeV.
6809: The main improvements are due to the new BES measurements.
6810:
6811: \vspace{1em}
6812:
6813: Tab.~\ref{tab:cmp} shows that the inclusion of pQCD leads to
6814: a significant reduction of the error
6815: in $\Delta\alpha^{(5)}_{\rm had}(M_Z^2)$.
6816: The new analyses (with the exception
6817: of~\cite{MarOutRys00}\footnote{Actually, in~\cite{MarOutRys00} also a
6818: result based on exclusive data is given
6819: ($\Delta\alpha^{(5)}_{\rm had}(M_Z^2)=(276.49\pm2.14)\times10^{-4}$)
6820: which is in better agreement with the other values.})
6821: agree well both in
6822: their central values and in their quoted errors.
6823: These promising developments suggest to use
6824: the new values in the interpretation of the electroweak measurements.
6825: Once more precise experimental results on $R$ are
6826: available it can replace the corresponding parts in the
6827: theory-motivated analyses.
6828: Certainly these measurements would be extremely valuable for a cross check of
6829: the theory-driven results.
6830:
6831: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
6832:
6833: \subsubsection{\label{subsub:nondiag}Heavy-light
6834: current correlators}
6835:
6836: The method of Section~\ref{sub:method} has also been applied to the
6837: non-diagonal correlators where one of the quark fields in
6838: Eq.~(\ref{eq:currents}) has mass $M$
6839: and the other one is massless.
6840: In this limit the vector (scalar) and
6841: axial-vector (pseudo-scalar) correlators coincide.
6842: Furthermore
6843: it is convenient to work with the variables
6844: \begin{eqnarray}
6845: z\,\,=\,\,\frac{q^2}{M^2}\,,\qquad
6846: x\,\,=\,\,\frac{M}{\sqrt{s}}\,,\qquad
6847: v\,\,=\,\, \frac{1-x^2}{1+x^2}\,.
6848: \end{eqnarray}
6849:
6850: For the application of the Pad\'e method
6851: the polarization function $\Pi^\delta(z)$ has to be considered in the
6852: different kinematical regions.
6853: In~\cite{CheSte01,CheSte01_2} seven terms for small and eight terms
6854: for large external momentum have been computed
6855: both for the vector and scalar correlators
6856: of Eqs.~(\ref{eqpivadef}) and~(\ref{eqpispdef}), respectively.
6857: This means expansion coefficients up to order $z^6$, respectively, $1/z^7$
6858: are available for the Pad\'e procedure.
6859:
6860: The threshold behaviour constitutes the main difference as compared to
6861: the diagonal correlator discussed in the Section~\ref{subsub:R}.
6862: The Born result for $R^\delta$
6863: of the diagonal vector and pseudo-scalar correlators
6864: are proportional to $v$ for small velocities.
6865: At order $\alpha_s$ $R^{(1),\delta}$ approaches a constant and at order
6866: $\alpha_s^2$ one either has a $1/v$ or a $\ln v$ behaviour ---
6867: depending on the colour structures~\cite{CheKueSte96,CheKueSte97}.
6868: The axial-vetor and scalar correlators show the same pattern with a
6869: additional factor $v^2$ at each order.
6870:
6871: On the contrary the imaginary part of the non-diagonal correlators are
6872: proportional to $v^2$ (possibly accompanied with $\ln v$ terms)
6873: independent of the order in $\alpha_s$ and of the colour structure.
6874: This is valid in every order in $\alpha_s$
6875: as follows from Heavy Quark Effective Theory (HQET)~\cite{HQET}.
6876: Actually the latter can be used
6877: to obtain the leading threshold behaviour of $R^v(s)$
6878: and $R^s(s)$ at ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$
6879: from the corresponding correlators in HQET. In
6880: particular, the renormalization group equation in the effective theory
6881: is used to get the leading logarithmic behaviour at order
6882: $\alpha_s^2$~\cite{CheSte01_2}. Afterwards the decoupling
6883: relation between the currents in the full
6884: and effective theory~\cite{JiMus91,BroGro95,Gro98} is exploited
6885: to get the information about $R^v(s)$ and $R^s(s)$~\cite{CheSte01,CheSte01_2}.
6886: It turns out that linear and quadratic logarithms occur.
6887: This translates into quadratic and cubic logarithms of the
6888: corresponding polarization function which are incorporated into the
6889: Pad\'e method as descibed in step~\ref{item:log} of
6890: Section~\ref{sub:method}.
6891:
6892: Before discussing the results in the full theory we want to spend time
6893: on the spectral function in HQET.
6894: In numerical form it reads~\cite{CheSte01_2}
6895: \begin{eqnarray}
6896: \tilde{R}^\prime(\omega) &=& N_c \omega^2
6897: \Bigg[ 1 + \frac{\alpha_s^{(n_l)}(\mu)}{\pi}\left(8.667 +
6898: \Lw\right)
6899: + \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_l)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2
6900: \left(
6901: \tilde{c}_{n_l} + 35.54 \Lw
6902: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
6903: + 1.875 \Lw^2
6904: +n_l\left( - 1.583 \Lw - 0.08333 \Lw^2\right)
6905: \right)
6906: \Bigg]
6907: \,,
6908: \label{eq:rtilfin}
6909: \end{eqnarray}
6910: where $\omega=\sqrt{s}-M$ is the only dimensionful quantity in the effective
6911: theory and $\Lw=\ln(\mu^2/\omega^2)$.
6912: The tilde and the prime remind
6913: that the quantity on the left-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{eq:rtilfin})
6914: is defined in the effective theory
6915: where the heavy quark is decoupled~\cite{BroGro95,Gro98}.
6916: In Eq.~(\ref{eq:rtilfin})
6917: the corrections of order $\alpha_s$ are known since quite some
6918: time~\cite{BroGro92} whereas
6919: the constant $\tilde{c}_{n_l}$, which is not accessible using renormalization
6920: group techniques, has been determined in~\cite{CheSte01_2}
6921: with the help of the Pad\'e results in the full theory.
6922: Its dependence on the number of massless quarks is given
6923: by
6924: \begin{eqnarray}
6925: \tilde{c}_{n_l} &=& 46(15) - 1.2(4) \, n_l
6926: \,.
6927: \label{eq:ctilnl}
6928: \end{eqnarray}
6929: In the meantime the coefficient $\tilde{c}_{n_l}$ has been computed
6930: analytically~\cite{CzaMel01}
6931: with the result $\tilde{c}_{n_l} = 58 - 1.7 \,n_l$.
6932: Agreement with Eq.~(\ref{eq:ctilnl}) can be observed for
6933: all physically reasonable values of $n_l$.
6934:
6935: We want to mention that $\tilde{R}^\prime$ enters as a building block
6936: into the sum rules which are used to determine the meson decay
6937: constants like, e.g., $f_B$ (see, e.g., Ref.~\cite{BroGro92}).
6938: The typical scale where Eq.~(\ref{eq:rtilfin}) has to be evaluated
6939: is 1~GeV. Thus the first order QCD corrections amount to
6940: about 100\% and the terms of order $\alpha_s^2$ contribute
6941: with additional 60(20)\%
6942: where the sign is the same as for the LO correction.
6943:
6944:
6945: In Figs.~\ref{fig:Rvx} and~\ref{fig:Rsx}
6946: the imaginary parts of the individual three-loop colour structures
6947: for the vector and scalar correlators
6948: are plotted as a function of the variable $x$.
6949: Each solid line contains of the order of 15 Pad\'e approximants
6950: which show perfect agreement among each other.
6951: For comparison also the high-energy expansion terms including order
6952: $1/z^7$ are shown as dashed curves.
6953: Excellent agreement with the
6954: semi-numerical Pad\'e results is observed up to
6955: $x\approx 0.5$ which corresponds to $v\approx 0.60$.
6956: Some colour structures
6957: ($R^{(2),v}_l(s)$,
6958: $R^{(2),s}_A(s)$, $R^{(2),s}_{NA}(s)$, $R^{(2),s}_l(s)$)
6959: show even an agreement up to $x\approx 0.7$ ($v\approx 0.34$)
6960: which is already fairly close to threshold.
6961: We want to remind that the functions which exhibit next to the
6962: cut at $\sqrt{s}=m$ also a cut at $\sqrt{s}=3m$
6963: are not expected to converge to the correct answer
6964: in the interval between $m$ and $3m$. This explains the somewhat crazy
6965: behaviour of $R^{(2),s}_F(s)$ for larger values of $x$.
6966:
6967: \begin{figure}[t]
6968: \begin{center}
6969: \begin{tabular}{cc}
6970: \leavevmode
6971: \epsfxsize=7.cm
6972: \epsffile[110 280 460 560]{figs/piv3lffx_2.ps}
6973: &
6974: \epsfxsize=7.cm
6975: \epsffile[110 280 460 560]{figs/piv3lfax_2.ps}
6976: \\
6977: \epsfxsize=7.cm
6978: \epsffile[110 280 460 560]{figs/piv3lflx_2.ps}
6979: &
6980: \epsfxsize=7.cm
6981: \epsffile[110 280 460 560]{figs/piv3lfhx_2.ps}
6982: \end{tabular}
6983: \end{center}
6984: \caption{\label{fig:Rvx}$R^{(2),v}_A(s)$, $R^{(2),v}_{NA}(s)$,
6985: $R^{(2),v}_l(s)$ and $R^{(2),v}_F(s)$ as a
6986: function of $x$. The dashed curves correspond to the analytical
6987: expressions obtained via asymptotic expansion containing
6988: the terms up to order $1/z^7$.
6989: }
6990: \end{figure}
6991:
6992: \begin{figure}[t]
6993: \begin{center}
6994: \begin{tabular}{cc}
6995: \leavevmode
6996: \epsfxsize=7.cm
6997: \epsffile[110 280 460 560]{figs/pis3lffx_2.ps}
6998: &
6999: \epsfxsize=7.cm
7000: \epsffile[110 280 460 560]{figs/pis3lfax_2.ps}
7001: \\
7002: \epsfxsize=7.cm
7003: \epsffile[110 280 460 560]{figs/pis3lflx_2.ps}
7004: &
7005: \epsfxsize=7.cm
7006: \epsffile[110 280 460 560]{figs/pis3lfhx_2.ps}
7007: \end{tabular}
7008: \end{center}
7009: \caption{\label{fig:Rsx}$R^{(2),s}_A(s)$, $R^{(2),s}_{NA}(s)$,
7010: $R^{(2),s}_l(s)$ and $R^{(2),s}_F(s)$ as a
7011: function of $x$. The dashed curves correspond to the analytical
7012: expressions obtained via asymptotic expansion containing
7013: the terms up to order $1/z^7$.
7014: }
7015: \end{figure}
7016:
7017: The non-diagonal correlators describe properties connected to
7018: the $W$ boson. In particular,
7019: a certain (gauge invariant) class of corrections to the Drell-Yan
7020: process, i.e. to
7021: the production of a quark pair through the decay of a virtual $W$
7022: boson generated in $p\bar{p}$ collisions,
7023: are covered by the vector and axial-vector correlator.
7024: The absorptive part
7025: is directly related to the decay width of the (highly virtual)
7026: $W$ bosons into quark pairs and gluons.
7027: Of particular interest in this connection is the single-top-quark
7028: production via the process $q\bar{q}\to t\bar{b}$. The imaginary part
7029: of the transversal $W$ boson polarization function constitutes a
7030: finite and gauge invariant contribution of ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$.
7031:
7032: The corrections of order $\alpha_s$ to the (total) single-top-quark
7033: production rate are quite large. They amount to
7034: about 54\% and 50\% for Tevatron and LHC energies,
7035: respectively~\cite{SmithWillen96}, where 18\%, respectively, 17\% arise
7036: from the final state corrections.
7037: This calls for a complete ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$ calculation.
7038:
7039: If one considers the leading term of the large-$N_c$ limit
7040: it is possible to use the results for $R^v$
7041: to perform a theoretical analysis of
7042: order $\alpha_s^2$ to the single-top-quark production.
7043: The production cross-section of the virtual $W^*$ boson is identical to
7044: that of the Drell-Yan process $q\bar{q}\to e\bar{\nu}_e$.
7045: The latter is known to
7046: ${\cal{O}}(\alpha^2_s)$ from Ref.~\cite{Drell_Yan}.
7047: Thus we can take proper ratios to make predictions
7048: in the large-$N_c$ limit
7049: at NNLO free from any dependence on parton distribution functions.
7050: As an example, we consider
7051: \begin{eqnarray}
7052: \frac{\frac{{\rm d}\sigma}{{\rm d}q^2}\left(pp\to W^*\to tb\right)}
7053: {\frac{{\rm d}\sigma}{{\rm d}q^2}\left(pp\to W^*\to
7054: e\nu_e\right)}
7055: &=& \frac{\mbox{Im}\left[\Pi_{tb}(q^2)\right]}
7056: {\mbox{Im}\left[\Pi_{e\nu}(q^2)\right]}
7057: \nonumber\\
7058: &=& N_c |V_{tb}|^2 R^v(s)
7059: \,.
7060: \label{eq:ratio}
7061: \end{eqnarray}
7062:
7063: The numerical significance of the order $\alpha_s^2$ corrections
7064: is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:dsigma_qqtb} where the LO, NLO and NNLO result
7065: of $R^v(s)$ is plotted in the range $\sqrt{s} = 200 \ldots 400$ GeV.
7066: For the numerical values $M_t=175$~GeV and
7067: $\alpha_s(M_Z)=0.118$ has been chosen.
7068: Whereas the ${\cal O}(\alpha_s)$ corrections are significant
7069: there is only a moderate contribution from the order $\alpha_s^2$
7070: terms. In the range in $q^2$ shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:dsigma_qqtb} they are
7071: below 1\% of the Born result.
7072: Note that (at least for $\mu^2=M_Z^2$)
7073: the NNLO corrections to the Drell-Yan process are also
7074: small and amount to at most a few percent (see e.g.~\cite{Mar00}).
7075:
7076: \begin{figure}[t]
7077: \begin{center}
7078: \begin{tabular}{c}
7079: \leavevmode
7080: \epsfxsize=14.cm
7081: \epsffile[110 280 470 560]{figs/rv012l.ps}
7082: \end{tabular}
7083: \end{center}
7084: \caption{\label{fig:dsigma_qqtb}LO (dotted),
7085: NLO (dashed) and NNLO (solid) results of $R^v(s)$.
7086: }
7087: \end{figure}
7088:
7089: As an application of the scalar and pseudo-scalar
7090: current correlator we want to
7091: mention the decay of a charged Higgs boson which occurs in extensions
7092: of the Standard Model. The corrections to $R^s$
7093: describe the total decay rate into a massive and a massless quark.
7094: To be more precise, the hadronic decay rate of the charged Higgs boson
7095: takes the form
7096: \begin{eqnarray}
7097: \Gamma(H^+ \to U \bar{D})
7098: & = &\frac{\sqrt{2}G_F}{8\pi}M_{H^+} (a^2+b^2) R^s(M_{H^+}^2)
7099: \,,
7100: \end{eqnarray}
7101: where $a$ and $b$ parametrize the coupling of the Higgs boson to the
7102: massive quark $U$ and the massless quark $D$
7103: \begin{eqnarray}
7104: J_{H^+} &=&
7105: \frac{m_U}{\sqrt{2}} \,
7106: \bar{U} \left[ a \, (1-\gamma_5) + b \, (1+\gamma_5) \right] D
7107: \label{eq:Higgs_current}
7108: \,.
7109: \end{eqnarray}
7110:
7111: In Fig.~\ref{fig:higgs} $R^s(s)$ is
7112: plotted at LO, NLO and NNLO~\cite{CheSte01,CheSte01_2}.
7113: Again it turns out that the radiative corrections are well under
7114: control as order $\alpha_s^2$ terms contribute at most of the order of 1\%.
7115:
7116: \begin{figure}[t]
7117: \begin{center}
7118: \begin{tabular}{c}
7119: \leavevmode
7120: \epsfxsize=14.cm
7121: \epsffile[110 280 470 560]{figs/rs012l.ps}
7122: \end{tabular}
7123: \end{center}
7124: \caption{\label{fig:higgs}LO (dotted),
7125: NLO (dashed) and NNLO (solid) results of $R^s(s)$, $M=M_t=175$~GeV.
7126: }
7127: \end{figure}
7128:
7129:
7130:
7131:
7132: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
7133:
7134: \subsection{\label{sub:mudec}QED corrections to muon decay}
7135:
7136: The Fermi coupling constant, $G_F$, constitutes together with
7137: the electromagnetic coupling constant and the mass of the $Z$ boson
7138: the most precise input parameters of the SM of elementary
7139: particle physics.
7140: $G_F$ is defined through the muon lifetime
7141: which in turn is obtained from the decay rate.
7142: The one-loop corrections of order $\alpha$ have been evaluated more
7143: than 40 years ago in~\cite{KinSir59Ber58}.
7144: Only recently the two-loop corrections of order $\alpha^2$ have been
7145: computed by two independent groups~\cite{RitStu99,SeiSte99}.
7146: The inclusion of the new terms leads to the following value for the
7147: Fermi coupling constant~\cite{Gro00}
7148: \begin{eqnarray}
7149: G_F &=& 1.16639(1) \times 10^{-5}~\mbox{GeV}^{-2}
7150: \,,
7151: \end{eqnarray}
7152: where the error is reduced by a factor two. It is now entirely
7153: experimental.
7154: In this Subsection we want to concentrate on the method used
7155: in~\cite{SeiSte99} which is based on Pad\'e approximation and
7156: conformal mapping.
7157: We also want to mention that
7158: in Ref.~\cite{FerOssSir99} optimization methods have been used in order to
7159: estimate the coefficient of order $\alpha^3$.
7160:
7161: It is common to both calculations of the order $\alpha^2$ corrections
7162: that the muon propagator is considered in the framework
7163: of the effective theory where the $W$
7164: boson is integrated out. The QED corrections to the resulting Fermi contact
7165: interaction were shown to be finite to all orders~\cite{BerSir62}. It is quite
7166: advantageous to perform a Fierz transformation which for a pure $V-A$ theory
7167: has the consequence that afterwards the two neutrino lines appear in the same
7168: fermion trace. Thus the QED corrections only affect the fermion trace
7169: involving
7170: the muon and the electron. This also provides some simplifications in the
7171: treatment of $\gamma_5$ since in the case of vanishing electron mass a fully
7172: anticommuting prescription can be used.
7173:
7174: The decay rate can be written in the
7175: form\footnote{Some discussion of Eq.~(\ref{eq:gam}) --- in particular
7176: the additional factor $z$ in front of $S_V^{\rm OS}$ --- can be found
7177: in~\cite{CheHarSeiSte99}.}
7178: \begin{eqnarray}
7179: \Gamma &=&
7180: 2 M \, \mbox{Im} \left[ z \, S_V^{\rm OS} - S_S^{\rm OS}
7181: \right]\bigg|_{z=1},
7182: \label{eq:gam}
7183: \end{eqnarray}
7184: where
7185: \begin{eqnarray}
7186: S_S^{\rm OS}
7187: \,\,=\,\, Z_2^{\rm OS} Z_m^{\rm OS} \left( 1 - \Sigma_S^0 \right)
7188: \,,&&
7189: \qquad
7190: \label{eq:sssv}
7191: S_V^{\rm OS} \,\,=\,\, Z_2^{\rm OS}\left(1+\Sigma_V^0\right)
7192: \,,
7193: \end{eqnarray}
7194: are functions of the variable
7195: \begin{equation}
7196: z = {q^2\over M_\mu^2}\,.
7197: \end{equation}
7198: $\Sigma_S^0$ and $\Sigma_V^0$ represent the scalar and vector part of the
7199: muon propagator. They are functions of the
7200: external momentum $q$ and the bare mass $m^0$.
7201: In our case they further depend on the bare electromagnetic
7202: coupling $\alpha^0$
7203: and are proportional to the square of the Fermi coupling
7204: constant, $G_F^2$.
7205: Typical diagrams contributing to $\Sigma_S^0$ and $\Sigma_V^0$
7206: are depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:bdec}.
7207: $Z_2^{\rm OS}$ and $Z_m^{\rm OS}$ represent the wave function and mass
7208: renormalization in the on-shell scheme.
7209:
7210: \begin{figure}[t]
7211: \begin{center}
7212: \leavevmode
7213: \epsfxsize=\textwidth
7214: \epsffile[70 700 510 740]{figs/mu_prop.ps}
7215: %%%\epsfig{bbllx=108,bblly=594,bburx=508,bbury=663,file=figs/mudec.ps}
7216: \end{center}
7217: \caption{\label{fig:bdec}Sample diagrams for the muon (thick line)
7218: self energy. Two of the thin
7219: lines represent the electron and the corresponding neutrino
7220: and the third one the muon neutrino. All
7221: (one-particle-irreducible) diagrams involving the coupling of the
7222: photon (wavy lines) to the muon and electron have to be taken into
7223: account.
7224: }
7225: \end{figure}
7226:
7227: It is convenient to parameterize the QED corrections for the
7228: muon decay in the following form
7229: \begin{eqnarray}
7230: \Gamma(\mu\to \nu_\mu e \bar{\nu}_e) &=& \Gamma^0_\mu\left[
7231: A_\mu^{(0)}
7232: +\frac{\bar\alpha}{\pi} A_\mu^{(1)}
7233: +\left(\frac{\bar\alpha}{\pi}\right)^2
7234: \left( A_\mu^{(2)} + A_{\mu,\tau}^{(2)}
7235: + A_{\mu,{\rm had}}^{(2)} \right)
7236: +\ldots
7237: \right]
7238: \,,
7239: \label{eq:gamparmu}
7240: \end{eqnarray}
7241: with $\Gamma^0_\mu=G_F^2 M_\mu^5 /(192\pi^3)$.
7242: $\bar{\alpha}=\bar{\alpha}(\mu)$ represents the electromagnetic coupling in
7243: the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme
7244: and $A_{\mu,\tau}^{(2)}$ corresponds to the
7245: contribution involving a virtual $\tau$ loop.
7246: It is suppressed by $M_\mu^2/M_\tau^2$ and
7247: almost four orders of magnitudes smaller than the other
7248: terms~\cite{RitStu98}.
7249: The hadronic contribution is denoted by
7250: $A_{\mu,{\rm had}}^{(2)}$~\cite{RitStu98}.
7251:
7252: To lowest order the result is known for finite electron mass, $M_e$
7253: \begin{eqnarray}
7254: A_\mu^{(0)} &=& 1 - 8 \, \frac{M_e^2}{M_\mu^2}
7255: - 12 \, \frac{M_e^4}{M_\mu^4} \, \ln \frac{M_e^2}{M_\mu^2}
7256: + 8 \, \frac{M_e^6}{M_\mu^6} - \frac{M_e^8}{M_\mu^8}
7257: \,,
7258: \end{eqnarray}
7259: and in the limit $M_e=0$ we obtain for the one-loop corrections
7260: \begin{eqnarray}
7261: A_\mu^{(1)} &=& \frac{25}{8}-\frac{\pi^2}{2} \,\,\approx\,\,-1.810
7262: \,.
7263: \end{eqnarray}
7264: The approach chosen in~\cite{RitStu99} to evaluate $A_\mu^{(2)}$
7265: has some similarity to the computation of the four-loop contribution to the
7266: $\beta$ function~\cite{RitVerLar97_bet} (see also
7267: Section~\ref{sub:massint}). In fact, since only the imaginary part
7268: has to be calculated one is only interested in the pole part
7269: like in the case of a $\overline{\rm MS}$ renormalization constant.
7270: However, only the pole part arising from the
7271: cuts through the electron and neutrino lines have to be taken into
7272: account and not the ones through the muon
7273: line. This is ensured by considering the on-shell muon propagator
7274: which requires the evaluation of (the imaginary part of)
7275: four-loop on-shell integrals with external momentum $q^2=M_\mu^2$.
7276: Integration-by-parts relations~\cite{CheTka81} are applied to reduce
7277: the number of occuring integrals to a small set of so-called master
7278: integrals. Only for the latter a hard calculation is necessary.
7279: Usually a large number of terms is generated in intermediate steps
7280: while using integration-by-parts relations. However,
7281: those four-loop integrals that have no imaginary part can immediately
7282: be discarded. This includes four-loop vacuum graphs and diagrams
7283: with a through-going on-shell line.
7284: A comprehensive discussion and lots of intermediate results can be
7285: found in Ref.~\cite{RitStu99}.
7286:
7287: The approach of~\cite{SeiSte99} used
7288: for the computation of the QED corrections of order
7289: $\alpha^2$ is based on an expansion of
7290: the full fermion propagator in the limit
7291: $M_\mu^2 \gg q^2$,
7292: where $q$ is the external momentum and $M_\mu$ is the on-shell
7293: propagator mass of the muon. The on-shell
7294: limit $q^2 \to M^2$ will be performed afterwards with the help of Pad\'e
7295: approximations. This, of course, only provides an approximation to the exact
7296: result. However, the integrals to be evaluated are simplified
7297: considerably.
7298: Furthermore, the accuracy obtained with this method is sufficient to
7299: check the result of~\cite{RitStu99}
7300: and enables the same reduction of the theoretical
7301: error on $G_F$.
7302: Good convergence to the exact result is also expected from the
7303: analysis performed in~\cite{FleSmiTar97} where the hard-mass procedure
7304: has been applied to scalar two-loop integrals involving massless
7305: thresholds.
7306:
7307: Due to the Fierz transformation the loop integration connected to
7308: the two neutrino lines can be performed immediately as it constitutes a
7309: massless two-point function. This is also the case after allowing for
7310: additional photonic corrections. As a result one encounters in the resulting
7311: diagram a propagator with one of the momenta raised to power $\varepsilon$
7312: where $D=4-2\varepsilon$ is the space-time dimension. This slightly increases
7313: the difficulty of the computation of the resulting
7314: diagrams. Especially for the
7315: order $\alpha^2$ corrections, where the original four-loop diagrams
7316: are reduced
7317: to three-loop ones with non-integer powers of denominators, it is a priori not
7318: clear that these integrals can be solved analytically. However, it turns out
7319: that for the topologies needed in our case this is indeed possible. For the
7320: computation of the massless two-point functions we have used the package
7321: {\tt MINCER}~\cite{mincer}. Only slight modifications are necessary in
7322: order to use
7323: this package also for the computation of the new type of integrals.
7324:
7325: In contrast to the current correlators considered in
7326: Section~\ref{sub:veccor}
7327: the expansion terms for $z\to-\infty$ can not be used as they
7328: describe the unphysical process $\mu\to\mu+\gamma$.
7329: Another difference is the
7330: presence of massless cuts in the limit $q^2\to0$.
7331: Thus a naive expansion is not possible and rather the asymptotic
7332: expansion has to be applied, which generates
7333: from the 44 contributing four-loop diagrams 72 sub- and
7334: cosub-diagrams that have to be evaluated.
7335: The analytical results are rather lengthly and cannot be listed.
7336: Instead the results are presented in numerical form~\cite{SeiSte99}.
7337:
7338: In order to get reliable results it is necessary to compute as many terms as
7339: possible in the expansion parameter $z$. Subsequently a Pad\'e approximation
7340: is applied as described in Section~\ref{sub:method}. We want
7341: to recall that before the Pad\'e procedure a conformal mapping can be used
7342: which maps the complex $z$-plane into the interiour of the unit circle.
7343: Following Ref.~\cite{CheHarSeiSte99} we denote those results by
7344: $\omega$-Pad\'es and the ones obtained without conformal mapping by
7345: $z$-Pad\'es.
7346:
7347: The calculation is performed with the help of the package
7348: {\tt GEFICOM}~\cite{geficom}. It uses {\tt QGRAF}~\cite{qgraf} for the
7349: generation of the diagrams and {\tt EXP}~\cite{Sei:dipl} for the
7350: application of
7351: the asymptotic expansion procedures.
7352:
7353: \begin{table}[t]
7354: \begin{center}
7355: \begin{tabular}{|l|l||c|c|}
7356: \hline
7357: input & P.A. & $z$ & $\omega$ \\
7358: \hline
7359: 6 & [3/2] & 5.836 & 7.249 \\
7360: 6 & [2/3] & 5.836 & 7.057 \\
7361: \hline
7362: 7 & [4/2] & 5.935 & 7.040 \\
7363: 7 & [3/3] & 5.833 & 7.076 \\
7364: 7 & [2/4] & 5.938 & 7.080 \\
7365: \hline
7366: 8 & [4/3] & 6.110 & 6.873 \\
7367: 8 & [3/4] & 6.113 & 7.060 \\
7368: \hline
7369: \multicolumn{2}{|c||}{exact:} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{6.743} \\
7370: \hline
7371: \end{tabular}
7372: \end{center}
7373: \caption{\label{tab:Oal2_2}Pad\'e results for the corrections of ${\cal
7374: O}(\alpha^2)$ to the muon decay, $A^{(2)}_\mu$.
7375: The first row indicates the order in $z$ which has been
7376: used to construct the Pad\'e approximations.}
7377: \end{table}
7378:
7379: The method has been successfully tested at Born level and
7380: at order $\alpha$ where a large number of moments
7381: can be evaluated.
7382: This gives a hint on
7383: how of many terms are necessary at ${\cal O}(\alpha^2)$ in order to obtain a
7384: reliable answer.
7385: The results for $A_\mu^{(2)}$ of the individual Pad\'e approximations
7386: are shown in Tab.~\ref{tab:Oal2_2}.
7387: It leads to the final answer~\cite{SeiSte99}
7388: \begin{eqnarray}
7389: A_\mu^{(2)} &=& 6.5(7) \,,
7390: \end{eqnarray}
7391: where the
7392: deviation of the central value from the exact result of 6.743 is less
7393: than 3\% and well covered by the extracted error of roughly 10\%. Thus
7394: the sole
7395: knowledge of our results would also reduce the theoretical error on
7396: $G_F$.
7397: Finally, the total decay rate of the muon takes the form
7398: \begin{eqnarray}
7399: \Gamma(\mu\to \nu_\mu e \bar{\nu}_e) &=& \Gamma^0_\mu\left[
7400: 0.9998
7401: - 1.810 \frac{\bar\alpha(M_\mu)}{\pi}
7402: + 6.700(2) \left(\frac{\bar\alpha(M_\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2
7403: +\ldots
7404: \right]
7405: \,,
7406: \label{eq:gammu}
7407: \end{eqnarray}
7408: where $A_{\mu,{\rm had}}^{(2)}=-0.042(2)$~\cite{RitStu98} and
7409: $A_{\mu,\tau}^{(2)}=-0.00058$~\cite{RitStu98} has been used. Furthermore
7410: $\mu^2=M_\mu^2$ has been adopted.
7411:
7412: As already noted in~\cite{FerOssSir99} the numerical coefficient in front of
7413: the second order corrections becomes very
7414: small\footnote{Instead of ``6.7'' one has ``0.27'' in Eq.~(\ref{eq:gammu}).}
7415: if one uses the on-shell
7416: scheme for the definition of the coupling constant
7417: $\alpha$. Then the
7418: $\overline{\mbox{MS}}$ coupling is given by
7419: $\bar\alpha(M_\mu)=\alpha(1+\alpha/(3\pi) \ln(M_\mu^2/M_e^2))$ and
7420: there is an accidental cancellation between the constant and the
7421: logarithm in the second order corrections.
7422:
7423: A similar kinematical situation as in the $\mu$ decay is also given
7424: for the semileptonic decay of a bottom quark, $b\to ue\nu_e$.
7425: From the technical point of view the difference is only due to the
7426: non-abelian structure of QCD. The two methods described above have
7427: been applied to the total rate
7428: \begin{eqnarray}
7429: \Gamma(b\to ue\bar{\nu}_e) &=& \Gamma^0_b\left[
7430: 1
7431: - 2.413 \frac{\alpha_s(M_b)}{\pi}
7432: + A_b^{(2)} \left(\frac{\alpha_s(M_b)}{\pi}\right)^2
7433: +\ldots
7434: \right]
7435: \,,
7436: \end{eqnarray}
7437: where $\Gamma^0_b=G_F^2 M_b^5 |V_{ub}|^2/(192\pi^3)$.
7438: The order $\alpha_s^2$ results read
7439: $A_b^{(2)}=-21.296$~\cite{Rit99}
7440: and
7441: $A_b^{(2)}=-21.1(6)$~\cite{SeiSte99}.
7442: Again perfect agreement between the two methods is observed.
7443:
7444: At the end of this Subsection we want to mention that similar methods
7445: have been used to compute the decay rate of a top quark into a $W$
7446: boson and a bottom quark~\cite{CheHarSeiSte99}.
7447: Contrary to the case of the muon the $W$
7448: boson is not integrated out from the Lagrangian. Thus, at order
7449: $\alpha_s^2$ three-loop diagrams contributing to the top quark
7450: propagator have to be considered.
7451: In~\cite{CheHarSeiSte99} a double expansion in $q^2/M_t^2$ and
7452: $M_W^2/M_t^2$ has been performed, where $q$ is the external momentum
7453: of the top quark propagator, which leads to a reliable prediction for
7454: $\Gamma(t\to Wb)$ including finite $W$-mass effects.
7455:
7456:
7457: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
7458:
7459: \subsection{\label{sub:msos}The
7460: relation between the $\overline{\rm MS}$ and on-shell quark mass}
7461:
7462: In this Subsection we consider the relation between the
7463: on-shell and the $\overline{\rm MS}$ quark mass at three-loop order in QCD.
7464: The result has been obtained for the first time
7465: with the help of the Pad\'e method~\cite{CheSte99}
7466: and has been confirmed half a year later by a completely
7467: independent calculation~\cite{MelRit99}.
7468:
7469: Here, we want to describe the approach of~\cite{CheSte99}
7470: as it constitutes an other facet of applications of the
7471: method as described in Section~\ref{sub:method}.
7472: In contrast to the examples described before one is
7473: directly interested in the real part of the considered function.
7474: Furthermore, in the relation between the $\overline{\rm MS}$ and
7475: the on-shell value of the masses we want to know
7476: the function $f(z)$ as defined in~(\ref{eq:deff})
7477: for $z=1$, whereas it is only available for small and large values of $z$.
7478: Nevertheless, the method is powerful enough to get the
7479: value for $f(1)$ with an error of $2-3\%$ (see below).
7480:
7481: The basic object entering the mass relation is the fermion
7482: propagator, $\Sigma(q)$. However, the Pad\'e method cannot be applied
7483: directly to $\Sigma(q)$ as it contains (unknown) singularities
7484: at threshold. Thus, proper combinations have to be considered which
7485: are regular for $z=1$. They are obtained from the requirement that
7486: the inverse fermion propagator has a zero at the position of the
7487: on-shell mass.
7488:
7489: In the following three different types of masses will appear:
7490: the bare mass, $m_0$, the $\overline{\rm MS}$, $m(\mu)$ and the
7491: on-shell mass $M$. The relation between them is given by
7492: \begin{eqnarray}
7493: m(\mu) &=& Z_m m^0 \,\,=\,\,z_m(\mu) M
7494: \,,
7495: \label{eq:mmsos}
7496: \end{eqnarray}
7497: where $z_m$ is finite and has an explicit dependence on the
7498: renormalization scale $\mu$. It is the purpose of this Section to
7499: describe its calculation at order $\alpha_s^3$.
7500:
7501: As already mention above, in order to obtain the mass relation we have
7502: to consider the fermion propagator as shown in Eq.~(\ref{eq:sfinv0}).
7503: The renormalized version can be cast in the form
7504: \begin{eqnarray}
7505: \left(S_F(q)\right)^{-1} &=& i \left[
7506: \left(M-\qsla\right) S_V(z) + M \left(z_m(\mu) S_S(z) -S_V(z) \right)
7507: \right]
7508: \,,
7509: \label{eq:sfinv}
7510: \end{eqnarray}
7511: with\footnote{Note that in contrast to the quantities defined
7512: in Eq.~(\ref{eq:sssv}) (see also Ref.~\cite{CheHarSeiSte99})
7513: the wave function renormalization for functions $S_{S/V}$
7514: is still defined in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme.}
7515: \begin{eqnarray}
7516: S_V(z) &=& Z_2(1+\Sigma^0_V)
7517: \,,
7518: \nonumber\\
7519: S_S(z) &=& Z_2Z_m(1-\Sigma^0_S)
7520: \,.
7521: \label{eq:SvSs}
7522: \end{eqnarray}
7523: $Z_2$ denotes the wave function renormalization in the $\overline{\rm MS}$
7524: scheme which is sufficient for our considerations.
7525: Note that the functions $S_S$ and $S_V$ are $\overline{\rm MS}$ quantities
7526: which later on are expressed in terms of the on-shell mass.
7527: The two-loop relation between $m$ and $M$ is enough to
7528: do this at order $\alpha_s^3$.
7529: It is convenient to write the functions $S_{S/V}$ in the following way
7530: \begin{eqnarray}
7531: S_{S/V} = 1
7532: + \sum_{n\ge1} S_{S/V}^{(n)} \left(\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\right)^n
7533: \label{eq:decas}
7534: \,,
7535: \end{eqnarray}
7536: where the quantities $S_{S/V}^{(n)}$ exhibit the following colour
7537: structures
7538: (the indices $S$ and $V$ are omitted in the following):
7539: \begin{eqnarray}
7540: S^{(1)} &=& C_F S_F
7541: \,,
7542: \nonumber\\
7543: S^{(2)} &=& C_F^2 S_{FF} + C_FC_A S_{FA} + C_FTn_l S_{FL} + C_FT S_{FH}
7544: \,,
7545: \nonumber\\
7546: S^{(3)} &=& C_F^3 S_{FFF} + C_F^2C_A S_{FFA} + C_FC_A^2 S_{FAA}
7547: + C_F^2Tn_l S_{FFL} + C_F^2T S_{FFH}
7548: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
7549: + C_FC_ATn_l S_{FAL} + C_FC_AT S_{FAH}
7550: + C_FT^2n_l^2 S_{FLL} + C_FT^2n_l S_{FLH}
7551: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
7552: + C_FT^2 S_{FHH}
7553: \,.
7554: \label{eq:deccf}
7555: \end{eqnarray}
7556: The same decomposition also holds for the function $z_m$.
7557: In~(\ref{eq:deccf}) $n_l$ represents the number of light (massless) quark
7558: flavours. $C_F$ and $C_A$ are the Casimir operators of the fundamental and
7559: adjoint representation. In the case of $SU(N_c)$ they are given by
7560: $C_F=(N_c^2-1)/(2N_c)$ and $C_A=N_c$. The trace normalization of the
7561: fundamental representation is $T=1/2$.
7562: The subscripts $F$, $A$ and $L$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:deccf})
7563: shall remind us on the colour factors $C_F$,
7564: $C_A$ and $Tn_l$, respectively. $H$ simply stands for the
7565: colour factor $T$.
7566:
7567: A formula which allows for the computation
7568: of the $\overline{\rm MS}$--on-shell relation for the quark
7569: mass is obtained from the requirement that the inverse fermion propagator has
7570: a zero at the position of the on-shell mass:
7571: \begin{eqnarray}
7572: \left(S_F(q)\right)^{-1}\bigg|_{q^2=M^2} &=& 0
7573: \,.
7574: \label{eq:oscond}
7575: \end{eqnarray}
7576: In the literature there are two different approaches to compute the
7577: occuring Feynman diagrams. In the first evaluation of the three-loop
7578: $\overline{\rm MS}$--on-shell relation the method of
7579: Section~\ref{sub:method} has been applied which we will discuss
7580: below.
7581: On the contrary, a subsequent analysis~\cite{MelRit99}
7582: has chosen $q^2=M^2$ from the
7583: very beginning which makes it necessary to solve three-loop on-shell
7584: integrals. This can effectively be done using the
7585: integration-by-parts method within dimensional
7586: regularization~\cite{CheTka81}. It enables the derivation of
7587: recurrence relations which express complicated integrals in terms of
7588: simpler ones. At the end one arrives at a small set of integrals ---
7589: so-called master integrals --- which
7590: actually have to be evaluated.
7591: In~\cite{MelRit99,Melnikov:2000zc}
7592: the considerations of~\cite{LapRem96} have been
7593: extended and the missing master integrals have been evaluated.
7594: The technique used for the computation is based on
7595: the hard-mass procedure for large $M$
7596: which represents the on-shell integrals in terms
7597: of a power series in $q^2/M^2$.
7598: The coefficients contain nested harmonic sums which in the on-shell
7599: limit, i.e. for $q^2=M^2$,
7600: can be reduced to known mathematical constants.
7601: For explicit examples we refer to~\cite{Melnikov:2000zc}.
7602: At the end of this section we will list the analytical result
7603: for $z_m(\mu)$ obtained in~\cite{MelRit99}.
7604:
7605: The starting point for the approach of~\cite{CheSte99,CheSte00}
7606: is Eq.~(\ref{eq:oscond}).
7607: Applying it to Eq.~(\ref{eq:sfinv}) leads to the
7608: condition
7609: \begin{eqnarray}
7610: h(z) &\equiv& z_m(\mu)\,S_S(z) - S_V(z) \,\,=\,\, 0 \qquad \mbox{for}
7611: \qquad z=1
7612: \,.
7613: \label{eq:f}
7614: \end{eqnarray}
7615: At a given loop-order $L$, Eqs.~(\ref{eq:SvSs})
7616: are inserted and the resulting equation is solved for $z_m^{(L)}$.
7617: Thus Eq.~(\ref{eq:f}) can be cast in the form
7618: \begin{eqnarray}
7619: h(z) &=& f(z) + z_m^{(L)} \left(\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\right)^L
7620: \,.
7621: \label{eq:f2}
7622: \end{eqnarray}
7623: Our aim is the computation of $f(1)$.
7624: Note that the individual self energies $\Sigma_S$ and $\Sigma_V$
7625: develop infra-red singularities when they are evaluated on-shell.
7626: The proper combination which leads to the relation between the
7627: $\overline{\rm MS}$ and on-shell mass is, however, free of infra-red
7628: problems.
7629:
7630: The explained procedure has been applied to each colour structure occuring
7631: in $f(z)$ separately as outlined in~\cite{CheSte00}.
7632: E.g., collecting all terms proportional to $C_F^3$ in
7633: Eq.~(\ref{eq:f2}) leads to
7634: \begin{eqnarray}
7635: f_{FFF}(z) &=& S_{S,FFF}(z) - S_{V,FFF}(z)
7636: + z_m^F S_{S,FF} + z_m^{FF}S_{S,F}
7637: \,,
7638: \label{eq:gFFF}
7639: \end{eqnarray}
7640: which has to be evaluated for $z=1$.
7641: The individual terms on the right-hand side
7642: develop a (unknown) singular behaviour
7643: which is encoded in the corresponding moments.
7644: In case the Pad\'e method is (naively) perfomed with the individual pieces,
7645: the Pad\'e approximants try to imitate the threshold singularity.
7646: However, due to the very construction of the method
7647: the analytical structure of the Pad\'e result is polynomial for
7648: $z\to1$ and the typical threshold logarithms can not be reproduced.
7649: Thus, the results show instabilities in the vicinity of $z=1$.
7650: On the contrary, the proper combination as given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:gFFF})
7651: has to be regular for $z\to1$, as the on-shell mass does not contain
7652: any infra-red singularity~\cite{Kro98,Gambino:2000ai}. The corresponding
7653: Pad\'e results demonstrate great stability.
7654:
7655: To summarize, although superficially
7656: only information about small and large momenta enter the
7657: Pad\'e procedure, it is sensitive to the analytical structure
7658: at threshold
7659: as the information about the singularity is,
7660: to some extend, also contained in the moments of the analytical
7661: function $f(z)$.
7662:
7663: At this place we will refrain from the discussion of the individual
7664: colour structures which can be found in~\cite{CheSte00}
7665: but only present the results for the sum where the numerical values
7666: for $C_A$, $C_F$, $T$ and $n_l$ have been inserted.
7667: Still care has to be taken because of the diagrams involving a closed
7668: heavy quark loop.
7669:
7670: It was already realized in~\cite{CheKueSte96} that the Pad\'e procedure
7671: shows less stability as soon as diagrams are involved which
7672: exhibit more than one particle threshold. In our case the interest is
7673: in the lowest particle cut which happens to be for $q^2=M^2$.
7674: The Pad\'e method heavily relies on the combination of expansions in the small
7675: and large momentum region. The large momentum expansion, however, is
7676: essentially sensitive to the highest particle threshold. Thus, if this
7677: threshold numerically dominates the lower-lying ones it
7678: cannot be expected that the Pad\'e approximation leads to stable results.
7679: In such cases a promising alternative to the above method is the one where
7680: only the expansion terms for $q^2\to0$ are taken into account in order to
7681: obtain a numerical value at $q^2=M^2$.
7682: This significantly reduces the calculational effort as
7683: the construction of the Pad\'e approximation from low-energy moments alone is
7684: much simpler.
7685: In practice this approach will be applied if the Pad\'e results involving
7686: also the high-energy data look ill-behaved.
7687:
7688: In the present analysis diagrams with other cuts than for $q^2=M^2$
7689: are already present at the two-loop level (see Fig.~\ref{fig:fpdiags})
7690: which allows us to test these ideas.
7691: Indeed, taking into account terms up to order $z^5$ and performing
7692: a Pad\'e approximation there is an agreement of four digits with the
7693: exact result~\cite{CheSte00}.
7694: Also at three-loop order either $q^2=M^2$ or $q^2=9M^2$ cuts
7695: appear. Cuts involving five or more fermion lines are first possible starting
7696: from four-loop order. Note that cuts involving an even number of fermions
7697: cannot occur.
7698:
7699: Concerning the colour structures introduced in Eq.~(\ref{eq:deccf})
7700: we use for the sum of the structures
7701: $FFF$, $FFA$, $FFL$, $FAA$, $FAL$ and $FLL$
7702: both the low- and high-energy moments whereas for the sum of the structures
7703: $FFH$, $FAH$, $FLH$ and $FHH$
7704: only the expansion for $z\to0$ is used.
7705: In Tabs.~\ref{tab:TOTL} and~\ref{tab:TOTH}
7706: the results for different Pad\'e approximations
7707: are listed. $n$ indicates the number of low-energy moments involved in the
7708: analysis, i.e. $n=6$ implies the inclusion of terms of ${\cal O}(z^6)$.
7709: The number of high-energy terms can be obtained in combination with
7710: the order of the Pad\'e approximant ($[x/y]$) and is given by
7711: $x+y+1-n$.
7712:
7713: \begin{table}[t]
7714: {\footnotesize
7715: \begin{center}
7716: \begin{tabular}{|l|l||r|r|r|r|r|r|}
7717: \hline
7718: $n$ & P.A.& $ n_l=0 $& $ n_l=1 $& $ n_l=2 $& $ n_l=3 $& $ n_l=4 $& $ n_l=5 $\\
7719: \hline
7720: $5$ & $[4/5]$ & $-200.2787$ & $-173.6663$ & $-148.3787$ & $-124.4156$ & $-101.7771$ & $-80.4628$ \\
7721: $5$ & $[4/6]$ & $-201.6419$ & $-174.8844$ & $-149.4553$ & $-125.3553$ & $-102.5862$ & $-81.1625$ \\
7722: $5$ & $[5/4]$ & $-203.9394$ & $-176.7290$ & $-150.8970$ & $-126.4411$ & $-103.3591$ & $-81.6482$ \\
7723: $5$ & $[5/5]$ & $-201.4721$ & $-174.7445$ & $-149.3422$ & $-125.2644$ & $-102.5104$ & $-81.0786$ \\
7724: $5$ & $[5/6]$ & $-198.7799$ & $-172.8884$ & $-148.2001$ & --- & $-102.2739$ & $-81.0336$ \\
7725: $5$ & $[6/4]$ & $-202.8435$ & $-175.8651$ & $-150.2298$ & $-125.9387$ & $-102.9929$ & $-81.3939$ \\
7726: \hline
7727: $6$ & $[4/6]$ & $-201.0906$ & $-174.3880$ & $-149.0165$ & $-124.9749$ & $-102.2619$ & $-80.8758$ \\
7728: $6$ & $[5/5]$ & $-200.9265$ & $-174.2458$ & $-148.8927$ & $-124.8668$ & $-102.1673$ & $-80.7929$ \\
7729: $6$ & $[5/6]$ & $-200.4927$ & $-173.9600$ & $-148.7433$ &
7730: $-124.8358$ & $-102.2290$ & $-80.9131$ \\
7731: $6$ & $[5/7]$ & $-200.3603$ & $-173.7018$ & $-148.3764$ & $-124.3940$ & $-101.7753$ & $-80.5533$ \\
7732: $6$ & $[6/4]$ & $-201.6970$ & $-174.9293$ & $-149.4861$ & $-125.3673$ & $-102.5725$ & $-81.1016$ \\
7733: $6$ & $[6/6]$ & $-200.3195$ & $-173.6857$ & $-148.3751$ & $-124.3879$ & $-101.7244$ & $-80.3848$ \\
7734: $6$ & $[7/5]$ & $-202.1300$ & $-175.2569$ & $-149.7173$ & $-125.5125$ & $-102.6443$ & $-81.1143$ \\
7735: \hline
7736: \end{tabular}
7737: \caption{\label{tab:TOTL}
7738: Pad\'e results for the sum of those contributions which don't have a closed
7739: heavy fermion loop. $n_l$ has been varied from 0 to 5.
7740: }
7741: \end{center}
7742: }
7743: \end{table}
7744:
7745:
7746: \begin{table}[t]
7747: {\footnotesize
7748: \begin{center}
7749: \begin{tabular}{|l|l||r|r|r|r|r|r|}
7750: \hline
7751: $n$ & P.A.&$n_l=0 $& $n_l=1 $& $n_l=2 $& $n_l=3 $& $n_l=4 $& $n_l=5 $\\
7752: \hline
7753: $4$ & $[1/3]$ & $-0.9345$ & $-0.9572$ & $-0.9798$ & $-1.0024$ & $-1.0249$ & $-1.0475$ \\
7754: $4$ & $[2/2]$ & $-0.9321$ & $-0.9546$ & $-0.9770$ & $-0.9995$ & $-1.0218$ & $-1.0442$ \\
7755: $4$ & $[3/1]$ & $-0.9324$ & $-0.9551$ & $-0.9777$ & $-1.0003$ & $-1.0229$ & $-1.0455$ \\
7756: $4$ & $[4/0]$ & $-0.9604$ & $-0.9828$ & $-1.0053$ & $-1.0277$ & $-1.0501$ & $-1.0725$ \\
7757: \hline
7758: $5$ & $[1/4]$ & $-0.9271$ & $-0.9495$ & $-0.9720$ & $-0.9944$ & $-1.0169$ & $-1.0393$ \\
7759: $5$ & $[2/3]$ & $-0.9219$ & $-0.9440$ & $-0.9661$ & $-0.9882$ & $-1.0103$ & $-1.0324$ \\
7760: $5$ & $[3/2]$ & $-0.9086$ & $-0.9347$ & $-0.9591$ & $-0.9827$ & $-1.0060$ & $-1.0290$ \\
7761: $5$ & $[4/1]$ & $-0.9254$ & $-0.9478$ & $-0.9703$ & $-0.9927$ & $-1.0151$ & $-1.0375$ \\
7762: $5$ & $[5/0]$ & $-0.9495$ & $-0.9719$ & $-0.9942$ & $-1.0166$ & $-1.0389$ & $-1.0613$ \\
7763: \hline
7764: $6$ & $[1/5]$ & $-0.9217$ & $-0.9441$ & $-0.9665$ & $-0.9888$ & $-1.0112$ & $-1.0336$ \\
7765: $6$ & $[2/4]$ & $-0.9140$ & $-0.9364$ & $-0.9589$ & $-0.9813$ & $-1.0037$ & $-1.0261$ \\
7766: $6$ & $[3/3]$ & $-0.9125$ & $-0.9352$ & $-0.9578$ & $-0.9803$ & $-1.0028$ & $-1.0252$ \\
7767: $6$ & $[4/2]$ & $-0.9126$ & $-0.9352$ & $-0.9578$ & $-0.9803$ & $-1.0028$ & $-1.0253$ \\
7768: $6$ & $[5/1]$ & $-0.9202$ & $-0.9425$ & $-0.9649$ & $-0.9872$ & $-1.0096$ & $-1.0319$ \\
7769: $6$ & $[6/0]$ & $-0.9416$ & $-0.9639$ & $-0.9862$ & $-1.0085$ & $-1.0308$ & $-1.0532$ \\
7770: \hline
7771: \end{tabular}
7772: \caption{\label{tab:TOTH}
7773: Pad\'e approximations performed in the variable $z$. No high-energy results
7774: have been used. Again $n_l$ has been varied from 0 to 5, the dependence,
7775: however, is very weak.
7776: }
7777: \end{center}
7778: }
7779: \end{table}
7780:
7781:
7782: The final result of~\cite{CheSte99,CheSte00}
7783: for the mass relation can be found in
7784: Tab.~\ref{tab:nl} where a comparison with the results of~\cite{MelRit99}
7785: is performed.
7786: Note that there is perfect agreement for all values of $n_l$.
7787: At this point we want to mention that the result
7788: of~\cite{CheSte99,CheSte00} is more general as the function $f(z)$ in
7789: Eq.~(\ref{eq:f2}) has been computed for all values of $z$ and not only
7790: for the special point $z=1$.
7791: This opens the possibility to obtain the fermion propagator in QCD at
7792: three-loop order for arbitrary external momentum extending the
7793: considerations of~\cite{FleJegTarVer99} by one more loop.
7794:
7795: %%%{\tiny
7796: \begin{table}[t]
7797: {\tiny
7798: \begin{center}
7799: \begin{tabular}{|l||r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|r|}
7800: \hline
7801: & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{$z_m(M)=m(M)/M$}
7802: & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{$z_m^{SI}(M)=\mu_m/M$}
7803: & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{$z_m^{inv}(m)=M/\mu_m$}
7804: \\
7805: \hline
7806: $n_l$
7807: & ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$
7808: & ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$~\cite{CheSte99}
7809: & ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$~\cite{MelRit99}
7810: & ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$
7811: & ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$~\cite{CheSte99}
7812: & ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$~\cite{MelRit99}
7813: & ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$
7814: & ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$~\cite{CheSte99}
7815: & ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$~\cite{MelRit99}
7816: \\
7817: \hline
7818: $0$ &
7819: $ -14.33$ & $ -202(5)$ & $-198.7$ &
7820: $ -11.67$ & $ -170(5)$ & $-166.3$ &
7821: $ 13.44$ & $ 194(5)$ & $190.6$ \\
7822: $1$ &
7823: $ -13.29$ & $ -176(4)$ & $-172.4$ &
7824: $ -10.62$ & $ -146(4)$ & $-142.5$ &
7825: $ 12.40$ & $ 168(4)$ & $164.6$ \\
7826: $2$ &
7827: $ -12.25$ & $ -150(3)$ & $-147.5$ &
7828: $ -9.58$ & $ -123(3)$ & $-120.0$ &
7829: $ 11.36$ & $ 143(3)$ & $139.9$ \\
7830: $3$ &
7831: $ -11.21$ & $ -126(3)$ & $-123.8$ &
7832: $ -8.54$ & $ -101(3)$ & $-98.76$ &
7833: $ 10.32$ & $ 119(3)$ & $116.5$ \\
7834: $4$ &
7835: $ -10.17$ & $ -103(2)$ & $-101.5$ &
7836: $ -7.50$ & $ -81(2)$ & $-78.86$ &
7837: $ 9.28$ & $ 96(2)$ & $94.42$ \\
7838: $5$ &
7839: $ -9.13$ & $ -82(2)$ & $-80.40$ &
7840: $ -6.46$ & $ -62(2)$ & $-60.27$ &
7841: $ 8.24$ & $ 75(2)$ & $73.64$ \\
7842: \hline
7843: \end{tabular}
7844: \caption{\label{tab:nl}
7845: Two- and three-loop coefficients of the relation between on-shell and
7846: $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass.
7847: The choice $\mu^2=M^2$, respectively, $\mu^2=m^2$
7848: has been adopted.
7849: }
7850: \end{center}
7851: }
7852: \end{table}
7853: %%% }
7854:
7855: For the relation between the $\overline{\rm MS}$ and on-shell quark
7856: mass one finds up to three
7857: loops~\cite{Tar81,GraBroGraSch90,CheSte99,CheSte00,MelRit99}
7858: \begin{eqnarray}
7859: \frac{m(\mu)}{M} &=&
7860: 1
7861: + \frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}
7862: \left[-\frac{4}{3}-\lmM\right]
7863: + \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2
7864: \Bigg[
7865: -\frac{3019}{288}
7866: - 2\zeta_2
7867: - \frac{2}{3}\zeta_2\ln2
7868: + \frac{1}{6}\zeta_3
7869: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
7870: - \frac{445}{72}\lmM
7871: - \frac{19}{24}\lmM^2
7872: + \left(\frac{71}{144}
7873: + \frac{1}{3}\zeta_2
7874: + \frac{13}{36}\lmM
7875: + \frac{1}{12}\lmM^2
7876: \right)n_l
7877: - \frac{4}{3}\sum_{1\le i\le n_l} \Delta\left(\frac{\smM_i}{M}\right)
7878: \Bigg]
7879: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
7880: + \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^3
7881: \Bigg[z_m^{(3)}(M)
7882: + \left(
7883: -\frac{165635}{2592}
7884: - \frac{25}{3}\zeta_2
7885: - \frac{25}{9}\zeta_2\ln2
7886: + \frac{55}{36}\zeta_3
7887: \right) \lmM
7888: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
7889: -\frac{11779}{864}\lmM^2
7890: -\frac{475}{432}\lmM^3
7891: + n_l\left(
7892: \left(
7893: \frac{10051}{1296}
7894: + \frac{37}{18}\zeta_2
7895: + \frac{2}{9}\zeta_2\ln2
7896: + \frac{7}{9}\zeta_3
7897: \right)\lmM
7898: +\frac{911}{432}\lmM^2
7899: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
7900: +\frac{11}{54}\lmM^3
7901: \right)
7902: + n_l^2\left(
7903: \left(
7904: -\frac{89}{648}
7905: -\frac{1}{9}\zeta_2
7906: \right)\lmM^2
7907: -\frac{13}{216}\lmM^2
7908: -\frac{1}{108}\lmM^3
7909: \right)
7910: \Bigg]
7911: \,,
7912: \label{eq:zmlog}
7913: \end{eqnarray}
7914: where $\zeta_2=\pi^2/6$ and $\lmM=\ln\mu^2/M^2$.
7915: The constant $z_m^{(3)}(M)$ is given by~\cite{MelRit99}
7916: \begin{eqnarray}
7917: z_m^{(3)}(M) &=&
7918: - \frac {9478333}{93312}
7919: + \frac {55}{162}\ln^4 2
7920: +\left( - \frac {644201}{6480}
7921: + \frac {587}{27}\ln 2
7922: + \frac {44}{27} \ln^2 2
7923: \right)\zeta_2
7924: - \frac {61}{27}\zeta_3
7925: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
7926: + \frac {3475}{432} \zeta_4
7927: + \frac {1439}{72}\zeta_2\zeta_3
7928: - \frac {1975}{216}\zeta_5
7929: + \frac {220}{27} a_4
7930: + n_l \left[ \frac {246643}{23328}
7931: - \frac {1}{81}\ln^4 2
7932: \nonumber\right.\\&&\left.\mbox{}
7933: +\left(
7934: \frac {967}{108}
7935: + \frac {22}{27}\ln 2
7936: - \frac {4}{27} \ln^2 2
7937: \right)\zeta_2
7938: + \frac {241}{72}\zeta_3
7939: - \frac {305}{108}\zeta_4
7940: - \frac {8}{27}a_4
7941: \right]
7942: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
7943: + n_l^2 \left[ - \frac {2353}{23328}
7944: - \frac {13}{54}\zeta_2
7945: - \frac {7}{54}\zeta_3
7946: \right]
7947: \,,
7948: \label{eq:zm3}
7949: \end{eqnarray}
7950: where $a_4=\mbox{Li}_4(1/2)\approx 0.517\,479$.
7951:
7952: The function $\Delta(r)$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:zmlog})
7953: takes into account the effects
7954: of secondary light quarks.
7955: If $0 \le r \le 1$ then the function
7956: $\Delta(r)$ may be conveniently approximated as
7957: follows~\cite{GraBroGraSch90}
7958: \begin{equation}
7959: \Delta(r) = \frac{\pi^2}{8}~r - 0.597~r^2 + 0.230~r^3
7960: \,,
7961: \label{eq:K-appr}
7962: \end{equation}
7963: which is accurate to $1$\%.
7964: Up to now there is no calculation available
7965: taking into account the complete mass dependence of the light quarks
7966: at order $\alpha_s^3$.
7967: The subclass of diagrams containing a one-loop light quark vacuum
7968: polarization insertion has been considered in~\cite{Hoang:2000fm},
7969: where it was observed that the dominant contribution is provided by
7970: the linear mass corrections as at order $\alpha_s^2$
7971: (cf. Eq.~(\ref{eq:K-appr})).
7972:
7973:
7974: At this point it is worthwhile to compare the results
7975: of~\cite{CheSte99,CheSte00,MelRit99} with
7976: estimations for the ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^3)$ terms obtained with the
7977: help of different optimization procedures.
7978: In~\cite{CheKniSir97} the fastest apparent convergence (FAC)~\cite{FAC}
7979: and the principle of minimal sensitivity (PMS)~\cite{PMS}
7980: have been used in order to predict the three-loop coefficient of
7981: $M/m(m)$. For $n_l=2$ one observes a discrepancy of 9\%.
7982: It even reduces to below 1\%
7983: for $n_l=5$, i.e. in the case of the top quark.
7984: The results obtained in the large
7985: $\beta_0$-limit~\cite{BenBra95},
7986: where $\beta_0$ is the first coefficient of the QCD $\beta$ function,
7987: agree to 2\% for $n_l=3$,
7988: roughly 8\% for $n_l=4$ and 17\% for $n_l=5$.
7989:
7990: Among the various applications of the order $\alpha_s^3$ term in the
7991: $\overline{\rm MS}$--on-shell relation we only want to mention the
7992: improvement in the determination of the top quark mass
7993: to be measured at a future $e^+e^-$ linear collider.
7994: To be specific, let us consider the production of top quarks in
7995: $e^+e^-$ collisions.
7996: The corresponding physical observables
7997: expressed in terms of $M_t$ show in general a bad
7998: convergence behaviour. In the case of the total cross section, e.g., the
7999: next-to-next-to-leading order corrections partly exceed the next-to-leading
8000: ones. Furthermore the peak position which is the most striking feature of the
8001: total cross section and from which finally the mass value
8002: can be extracted depends very much on the number of terms one includes into
8003: the analysis.
8004: The commonly accepted explanation for this is that
8005: the pole mass is sensitive to long-distance effects which result in
8006: intrinsic uncertainties of order $\Lambda_{QCD}$~\cite{BenBra94,Big94}.
8007: In other words, it is not possible to determine the pole mass from the
8008: analysis of the cross section at threshold with an accuracy better than
8009: $\Lambda_{QCD}$.
8010:
8011: Several strategies have been proposed to circumvent this
8012: problem~\cite{Ben98,HoaSmiSteWil98,HoaTeu99}.
8013: They are based on the observation that
8014: the same kind of ambiguities also appear in the static quark
8015: potential, $V(r)$. In the combination $2M_t + V(r)$, however, the
8016: infra-red sensitivity drops out. Thus a definition of a short-distance
8017: mass extracted from threshold quantities should be possible.
8018: The relation of the new mass parameter
8019: to the pole mass is used in order to re-parameterize the threshold phenomena.
8020: On the other hand a relation of the new quark mass to the $\overline{\rm MS}$
8021: mass must be established as
8022: it is commonly used for the parameterization of those quantities which are not
8023: related to the threshold.
8024: In order to do this consistently
8025: the three-loop relation between the
8026: $\overline{\rm MS}$ and the on-shell mass is needed.
8027:
8028: In~\cite{Ben98} the concept of the so-called potential mass, $m_{t,PS}$, has
8029: been introduced.
8030: Its relation to the $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass, $m_t(m_t)$, reads
8031: \begin{eqnarray}
8032: m_{t,PS}(20~{\rm GeV}) &=& \left( 165.0 + 6.7 + 1.2 + 0.28
8033: \right)~\mbox{GeV}
8034: \,,
8035: \label{eq:mtPSmtmt}
8036: \end{eqnarray}
8037: where the different terms represent the contributions from order $\alpha_s^0$
8038: to $\alpha_s^3$. For the numerical values
8039: $m_t(m_t)=165.0$~GeV and $\alpha_s^{(6)}(m_t(m_t))=0.1085$
8040: have been used.
8041: The comparison of Eq.~(\ref{eq:mtPSmtmt}) with the analogous expansion
8042: for $M_t$,
8043: \begin{eqnarray}
8044: M_t &=& ( 165.0 + 7.6 + 1.6 + 0.51 )\mbox{~GeV}
8045: \,,
8046: \end{eqnarray}
8047: shows that the potential mass can be
8048: more accurately related to the $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass than $M_t$.
8049:
8050: Further details and more examples can be found in~\cite{CheSte00}.
8051:
8052: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
8053: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
8054:
8055: \section*{Acknowledgments}
8056:
8057: I would like to thank S.~Casalbuoni, K.G.~Chetyrkin, R.~Harlander and
8058: B.A.~Kniehl for carefully reading the manuscript and
8059: for valuable suggestions and discussions.
8060: Furthermore I would like to thank J.H.~K\"uhn and B.A.~Kniehl
8061: for encouraging me to complete this work.
8062:
8063: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
8064: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
8065:
8066: \begin{appendix}
8067: \renewcommand {\theequation}{\Alph{section}.\arabic{equation}}
8068: \renewcommand {\thefigure}{\Alph{section}.\arabic{figure}}
8069: \renewcommand {\thetable}{\Alph{section}.\arabic{table}}
8070:
8071: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
8072: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
8073:
8074: \section{Technical remarks}
8075: \setcounter{equation}{0}
8076: \setcounter{figure}{0}
8077: \setcounter{table}{0}
8078:
8079: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
8080:
8081: \subsection{\label{sub:ae}Asymptotic expansion}
8082:
8083: A promising approach to compute --- at least in certain kinematical
8084: limits --- multi-loop diagrams is
8085: based on asymptotic expansion.
8086: An asymptotic expansion can be considered as a generalization of a
8087: Taylor expansion. In both cases one obtains an expansion in powers of
8088: a small quantity. However, in case of the asympotitic expansion the
8089: corresponding coefficients are not constant but contain non-analytical
8090: functions of the small parameter. As a simple example let us consider
8091: the function $f(x)=\mbox{Li}_2(1-x)$ for which the Taylor expansion
8092: for $x\to0$ does not exist beyond the leading order. Nevertheless
8093: there is an asymptotic expansion which reads
8094: \begin{eqnarray}
8095: f(x) &=& \frac{\pi^2}{6} + x\left(\ln x-1\right)
8096: + {\cal O}\left(x^2\ln x\right)
8097: \,,
8098: \end{eqnarray}
8099: with the non-analytic (for $x\to0$)
8100: function $\ln x$ in the coefficient of the
8101: linear term in $x$.
8102:
8103: In the case of Feynman diagrams the situation is similar.
8104: Systematic procedures have been developed in the case of
8105: a large external mometum (``large-momentum
8106: procedure'') and a large internal mass (``hard-mass
8107: procedure'')~\cite{Smi91}.
8108: Both procedures apply to problems which can be formulated in
8109: Euclidean space. This is the case for all calculations presented in
8110: this review. In contrast to that there are also phenomena which are
8111: tightly connected to the Minkowskian space-time. Also in such cases
8112: rules for an asymptotic expansion have been developed. In particular,
8113: two-loop on-shell two-point diagrams~\cite{CzaSmi97}
8114: and two-loop vertex diagrams in the Sudakov limit~\cite{Smi97}
8115: have been considered. Also the threshold expansion~\cite{Beneke:1998zp}
8116: belongs to this class of phenomena.
8117:
8118: One may treat the large-momentum and hard-mass procedures on the same
8119: footing. Thus, in what follows we only present the general formulae in
8120: the case of large external momenta --- the transition to the hard-mass
8121: procedure is straightforward. The prescription for the large-momentum
8122: procedure is summarized by the following
8123: formula\footnote{In the case of the hard-mass procedure one
8124: essentially has to replace $Q$ by the large mass $M$.}:
8125: \begin{eqnarray}
8126: \Gamma(Q,m,q) & \stackrel{Q\to \infty}{\simeq} &
8127: \sum_\gamma \Gamma/\gamma(q,m)
8128: \,\,\star\,\,
8129: T_{\{q_\gamma,m_\gamma\}}\gamma(Q,m_\gamma,q_\gamma)
8130: \,.
8131: \label{eqasexp}
8132: \end{eqnarray}
8133: Here, $\Gamma$ is the Feynman diagram under consideration, $\{Q\}$
8134: ($\{m,q\}$) is the collection of the large (small) parameters, and the
8135: sum goes over all subgraphs $\gamma$ of $\Gamma$ with masses $m_\gamma$
8136: and external momenta $q_\gamma$, subject to certain conditions to be
8137: described below. $T_{\{q,m\}}$ is an operator performing a Taylor
8138: expansion in $\{q,m\}$ {\em before} any integration is carried out. The
8139: notation $\Gamma/\gamma\star T_{\{q,m\}}\gamma$ indicates that the
8140: subgraph $\gamma$ of $\Gamma$ is replaced by its Taylor expansion which
8141: should be performed in all masses and external momenta of $\gamma$ that
8142: do not belong to the set $\{Q\}$. In particular, also those external
8143: momenta of $\gamma$ that appear to be integration momenta in $\Gamma$
8144: have to be considered as small. Only after the Taylor expansions have
8145: been carried out, the loop integrations are performed. In the following
8146: we will refer to the set $\{\gamma\}$ as {\em hard subgraphs} or simply {\em
8147: subgraphs} and to $\{\Gamma/\gamma\}$ as {\em co-subgraphs}.
8148:
8149: The conditions for the subgraphs $\gamma$ are different for
8150: the hard-mass and large-momentum procedures\footnote{
8151: Actually they are very similar and it is certainly possible to merge
8152: them into one condition using a more abstract language. For our
8153: purpose, however, it is more convenient to distinguish the two procedures.}.
8154: For the large-momentum procedure, $\gamma$ must
8155: \begin{itemize}
8156: \item contain all vertices where a large momentum enters or leaves the
8157: graph
8158: \item be one-particle irreducible after identifying these
8159: vertices.
8160: \end{itemize}
8161: From these requirements it is clear that the hard subgraphs become
8162: massless integrals where the scales are given by the large momenta. In
8163: the simplest case of one large momentum one ends up with propagator-type
8164: integrals. The co-subgraph, on the other hand, may still contain small
8165: external momenta and masses. However, the resulting integrals are
8166: typically much simpler than the original one.
8167:
8168: In the case of hard-mass procedure, $\gamma$ has to
8169: \begin{itemize}
8170: \item contain all the propagators carrying a large mass
8171: \item be one-particle irreducible in its connected parts after
8172: contracting the heavy lines.
8173: \end{itemize}
8174: Here, the hard subgraphs reduce to tadpole integrals with the large masses
8175: setting the scales. The co-subgraphs are again simpler to
8176: evaluate than the initial diagram.
8177:
8178: \begin{figure}[t]
8179: \begin{center}
8180: \begin{tabular}{ccc}
8181: \leavevmode
8182: \epsfxsize=5.0cm
8183: \epsffile[142 267 470 525]{figs/diacc1.ps}
8184: &\hspace{2em}&
8185: \leavevmode
8186: \epsfxsize=5.0cm
8187: \epsffile[142 267 470 525]{figs/diacc2.ps} \\
8188: (a) &\hspace{2cm}& (b)
8189: \end{tabular}
8190: %\parbox{\captionwidth}{\sloppy
8191: \caption[]{\label{fig:db}
8192: Fermionic double-bubble diagrams with generic masses $m_1$ and $m_2$.
8193: }
8194: %}
8195: \end{center}
8196: \end{figure}
8197:
8198: An example demonstrating the practical application of the
8199: large-momentum expansion was already presented in
8200: Section~\ref{sec:dim4} (cf. Fig.~\ref{fig:lmp1l};
8201: see also~\cite{Harlander:1999dq}).
8202: As an application of the hard-mass procedure let us consider
8203: the double-bubble diagram of Fig.~\ref{fig:db}
8204: with the hierarchy
8205: $m_1^2\ll q^2\ll m_2^2$. The imaginary part leads to contributions
8206: for the total cross section $\sigma(e^+e^-\to\mbox{hadrons})$.
8207: One may think of charm quark production ($m_1=M_c$)
8208: in the presence of a virtual bottom quark ($m_2=M_b$). It turns out that
8209: already the first term provides a very good approximation almost up
8210: to the threshold $\sqrt{s}=2M_b$~\cite{Che93,HoaJezKueTeu94,Teu:diss}.
8211: For simplicity we set $m_1=0$ and $m_2=m$ in the following.
8212:
8213: \begin{figure}[t]
8214: \begin{center}
8215: \leavevmode
8216: \epsfxsize=3cm
8217: \epsffile[150 260 420 450]{figs/db.ps}\hspace{1em}
8218: \raisebox{2.8em}
8219: {\Large $=$}
8220: \epsfxsize=2.cm
8221: \raisebox{1.em}{\epsffile[150 260 420 450]{figs/born.ps}}\hspace{-1em}
8222: \raisebox{2.8em}{\Large $\ \ \star \!\!$}
8223: \epsfxsize=3.cm
8224: \epsffile[150 260 420 450]{figs/hmp0.ps}\hspace{0em}\\[1em]
8225: \mbox{\hspace{1em}}
8226: \raisebox{2.8em}
8227: {\Large $+ \ \ 2\times \ $}
8228: \epsfxsize=2.cm
8229: \raisebox{1.em}{\epsffile[150 260 420 450]{figs/hmpcs1.ps}}\hspace{0em}
8230: \raisebox{2.8em}{\Large $\ \ \star \!\!$}
8231: \epsfxsize=3.cm
8232: \epsffile[150 260 420 450]{figs/hmp1.ps}
8233: \raisebox{2.8em}
8234: {\Large $\!\!\!\!+\ \ $}
8235: \epsfxsize=3cm
8236: \raisebox{0em}{\epsffile[150 260 420 450]{figs/hmpcs2.ps}}
8237: \epsfxsize=3.cm
8238: \raisebox{2.8em}{\Large $\ \ \star \!\!\!\!\!\!$}
8239: \epsffile[150 260 420 450]{figs/hmp2.ps}\hspace{0em}
8240: % \begin{center}
8241: % \parbox{\captionwidth}{
8242: \caption[]{\label{fig:dbhmp}\sloppy
8243: Hard-mass procedure for the double-bubble diagram. The
8244: hierarchy $q^2 \ll m^2$ is considered where $m$ is the mass of the
8245: inner line. The hard subdiagrams (right of ``$\star$'') are to be
8246: expanded in all external momenta including $q$ and reinserted into
8247: the fat vertex dots of the co-subgraphs (left of~``$\star$'').}
8248: %}
8249: \end{center}
8250: \end{figure}
8251:
8252: The corresponding diagrammatic representation
8253: is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:dbhmp}. There are three subdiagrams, where one
8254: again corresponds to the naive Taylor expansion of the integrand
8255: in the external momentum $q$.
8256: After Taylor expansion, the subdiagrams are reduced to tadpole
8257: integrals with mass scale $m$. The scale of the co-subgraphs is given
8258: by $q$, thus leading to massless propagator-type integrals.
8259: The result for the first three terms
8260: reads~\cite{Ste:diss,Harlander:1999dq}
8261: \begin{eqnarray}
8262: \bar{\Pi}_{gs}(q^2) &\stackrel{q^2\ll m^2}{=}&
8263: \frac{3}{16\pi^2}
8264: \left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^2\,C_{\rm F}\,T\,\Bigg[
8265: \frac{295}{648}
8266: + \frac{11}{6}\logqmums
8267: - \frac{1}{6}\logqmums^2
8268: - \frac{11}{6}\logqmms
8269: + \frac{1}{6}\logqmms^2
8270: \nonumber\\
8271: &&\mbox{}
8272: - \frac{4}{3}\zeta_3\logqmums
8273: + \frac{4}{3}\zeta_3\logqmms
8274: %\nonumber\\
8275: %&&
8276: + \frac{q^2}{m^2}\left(
8277: \frac{3503}{10125}
8278: - \frac{88}{675}\logqmms
8279: + \frac{2}{135}\logqmms^2
8280: \right)
8281: \nonumber\\
8282: &&
8283: + \left(\frac{q^2}{m^2}\right)^2\left(
8284: - \frac{2047}{514500}
8285: + \frac{1303}{529200}\logqmms
8286: - \frac{1}{2520}\logqmms^2
8287: \right)
8288: \Bigg] + \cdots\,,
8289: \label{eq:dbhmpres}
8290: \end{eqnarray}
8291: with $\logqmums=\ln(-q^2/\mu^2)$ and $\logqmms=\ln(-q^2/m^2)$.
8292:
8293: We want to stress that the main simplification, which
8294: is common to all kinds of asymtotic expansions, comes from the fact
8295: that the expansions in the small parameters are done before any momentum
8296: integration is performed.
8297: The proof that this leads to correct results is based on the
8298: so-called strategy of regions~\cite{Smirnov:1999bz}.
8299: There different regions of each loop momentum are selected and in each
8300: of them Taylor expansions with respect to the small parameters are
8301: performed.
8302: In the limits of the hard-mass and large-momentum procedures
8303: an interpretation of the different regions in terms
8304: subgraphs and cosub-graphs is possible (see above).
8305: This is different in the case of the threshold
8306: expansion~\cite{Beneke:1998zp} where a graphical representation
8307: becomes much less transparent. However, the application of the
8308: strategy of regions~\cite{Smirnov:1999bz} leads to correct results.
8309:
8310: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
8311:
8312: \subsection{\label{sub:single}Single-scale Feynman diagrams up to
8313: three loops}
8314:
8315: The problem of evaluating one-loop Feynman diagrams is --- at least in
8316: principle --- solved (see, e.g.,
8317: Refs.~\cite{'tHooft:1979xw,Passarino:1979jh,
8318: vanOldenborgh:1990wn,Denner:1993kt}).
8319: However, in case many
8320: legs and lots of different masses appear also one-loop computations can
8321: become very tedious, in particular if degenerate momentum configurations
8322: are involved.
8323:
8324: At two-loop order the class of Feynman diagrams which have been
8325: studied in detail is much more restricted.
8326: There is a good understanding of two-point
8327: functions (see, e.g.,~\cite{Weiglein:1994hd})
8328: which also has found important physical applications~\cite{Weiglein:2001ci}.
8329: Concerning three- and four-point functions one is essentially
8330: restricted to the massless case.
8331: In this context we want to draw the attention to
8332: the recent activity in the computation of
8333: the two-loop box diagrams (for a brief overview
8334: see~\cite{Gehrmann:2001ih}).
8335: Within the last two years the basis has been established to compute
8336: two-loop virtual corrections to the four-point Feynman amplitudes
8337: where all internal lines are massless and at most one external leg is
8338: off-shell.
8339: This opens the door to investigate next-to-next-to-leading order
8340: processes like the two-jet
8341: production at hadron colliders or three-jet production
8342: in $e^+e^-$ annihilation.
8343:
8344: It is obvious that the complexity of the computation
8345: of a Feynman diagram strongly depends on the number of different
8346: scales involved.
8347: There is one class of diagrams which is studied in great detail up to
8348: three loops, namely diagrams which only depend on one dimensionful
8349: scale.
8350: Next to massless propagator-type diagrams with one external momentum,
8351: $q$, we have in mind vacuum
8352: integrals with one non-zero mass, $M$ and so-called on-shell integrals
8353: for which the condition $q^2=M^2$ is fulfilled.
8354:
8355: The basic idea for the computation of the integrals is
8356: common to all three types: after the numerator is decomposed in terms
8357: of the denominator recurrence relations are applied which express the
8358: diagram as a linear combination of so-called master integrals.
8359: Only for the latter a hard computation is necessary. However, since in
8360: the case of single-scale diagrams the master integrals are essentially
8361: pure numbers it is also possible to use high-precision numerical
8362: methods in case an analytical calculation is not possible.
8363: We want to mention that for the massless propagator-type and
8364: the massive vacuum integrals two and nine
8365: master integrals are needed, respectively.
8366: In the case of the three-loop on-shell integrals a list
8367: of all master integrals can be found in the Appendix of
8368: Ref.~\cite{Melnikov:2000zc}.
8369: Counting also those integrals which are composed of products of
8370: lower-order diagrams they amount to 18.
8371:
8372: For convenience we want to provide the analytical results for
8373: the massless
8374: one-loop two-point functions, $P_{ab}(Q)$,
8375: the on-shell two-point functions, $O_{ab}(Q)$,
8376: and
8377: the one- ($V_a$) and two-loop ($V_{abc}$) vacuum integrals
8378: in Euclidian space.
8379: \begin{eqnarray}
8380: P_{ab}(Q) &=& \int\frac{{\rm d}^Dp}{\left(2\pi\right)^D}
8381: \frac{1}{p^{2a}\left(p+Q\right)^{2b}}
8382: \nonumber\\
8383: &=&
8384: %\,\,=\,\,
8385: \frac{\left(Q^2\right)^{D/2-a-b}}{\left(4\pi\right)^{D/2}}
8386: \frac{
8387: \Gamma(a+b-D/2)
8388: \Gamma(D/2-a)
8389: \Gamma(D/2-b)
8390: }{
8391: \Gamma(a)
8392: \Gamma(b)
8393: \Gamma(D-a-b)
8394: }
8395: \,,
8396: \label{eq:Pab}
8397: \\
8398: O_{ab}(Q) &=& \int\frac{{\rm d}^Dp}{\left(2\pi\right)^D}
8399: \frac{1}{p^{2a}\left(p^2+2p\cdot Q\right)^{b}}
8400: \nonumber\\
8401: &=&
8402: %\,\,=\,\,
8403: \frac{\left(Q^2\right)^{D/2-a-b}}{\left(4\pi\right)^{D/2}}
8404: \frac{
8405: \Gamma(a+b-D/2)
8406: \Gamma(D-2a-b)
8407: }{
8408: \Gamma(b)
8409: \Gamma(D-a-b)
8410: }
8411: \,,
8412: \label{eq:Oab}
8413: \\
8414: V_{a}&=& \int\frac{{\rm d}^Dp}{\left(2\pi\right)^D}
8415: \frac{1}{\left(p^2+M^2\right)^{a}}
8416: %\nonumber\\
8417: % &=&
8418: \,\,=\,\,
8419: \frac{\left(M^2\right)^{D/2-a}}{\left(4\pi\right)^{D/2}}
8420: \frac{
8421: \Gamma(a-D/2)
8422: }{
8423: \Gamma(a)
8424: }
8425: \,,
8426: \label{eq:Va}
8427: \\
8428: V_{abc} &=&
8429: \int\frac{{\rm d}^D p}{(2\pi)^D}\frac{{\rm d}^D k}{(2\pi)^D}
8430: \frac{1}{(p^2+M^2)^{a}(k^2+M^2)^{b}(\left(p+k\right)^2)^{c}}
8431: \nonumber\\
8432: &=&
8433: \frac{\left(M^2\right)^{D-a-b-c}}{\left(4\pi\right)^{D}}
8434: \frac{
8435: \Gamma(a+b+c-D)
8436: \Gamma(a+c-D/2)
8437: \Gamma(b+c-D/2)
8438: \Gamma(D/2-c)
8439: }{
8440: \Gamma(a)
8441: \Gamma(b)
8442: \Gamma(a+b+2c-D)
8443: \Gamma(D/2)
8444: }
8445: \,.
8446: \nonumber\\
8447: \label{eq:Vabc}
8448: \end{eqnarray}
8449:
8450: The results of a general three-loop diagram can not be expressed in
8451: terms of $\Gamma$ functions. Moreover,
8452: due to the large number of contributing diagrams and the
8453: complexity of intermediate expressions it is absolutely
8454: necessary to use computer algebra programs for the computation of
8455: multi-loop diagrams.
8456: It is thus also hardly possible to provide intermediate results which
8457: eventually could be used in other calculations.
8458: Therefore, on one side one is left with the description of the method
8459: used for the evaluation of the diagrams.
8460: On the other hand it is possible to provide the program
8461: code which was used for
8462: the computation. Thus everybody can repeat the calculation
8463: or apply it to own problems.
8464:
8465: Both for the massless propagator-type integrals and the massive vacuum
8466: integrals {\tt FORM}~\cite{form} packages have been published:
8467: massless integrals up to three loops can be computed using
8468: {\tt MINCER}~\cite{mincer}; the package for the
8469: massive integrals is called {\tt MATAD}~\cite{matad}.
8470: In the following we will present an example which demonstrates the use
8471: of {\tt MATAD}.
8472: The use of {\tt MINCER} is very similar.
8473: Actually, in the package {\tt GEFICOM}~\cite{geficom} {\tt MATAD} and
8474: {\tt MINCER} are used in parallel using the same notation
8475: for the input.
8476:
8477: Let us consider the triangle diagram as pictured in Fig.~\ref{fig:hgg}.
8478: It is one of the 657 diagrams which contribute to the coefficient
8479: function $C_1^0$ appearing in the effective Lagrangian of
8480: Eq.~(\ref{eq:eff}).
8481: According to the Lorentz structure the result can be written as
8482: \begin{eqnarray}
8483: K(M_t) \, \left( q_1^\nu q_2^\mu - q_1 q_2 g^{\mu\nu} \right)
8484: \,,
8485: \label{eq:k1}
8486: \end{eqnarray}
8487: where $q_1$ and $q_2$ are the momenta of the gluons with polarization
8488: vectors $\epsilon^\mu(q_1)$ and $\epsilon^\nu(q_2)$.
8489: Thus the vertex diagrams have to be expanded up to linear order both
8490: in $q_1$ and $q_2$, and an appropriate projector has to be applied
8491: in order to get $K(M_t)$.
8492:
8493: \begin{figure}[ht]
8494: \begin{center}
8495: \leavevmode
8496: \epsfxsize=5cm
8497: \epsffile[189 314 481 478]{figs/hgg.ps}\\
8498: \caption[]{\label{fig:hgg}Sample diagram contributing to the
8499: decay of the Higgs boson. Solid and looped lines represent quarks
8500: and gluons, respectively.
8501: }
8502: \end{center}
8503: \end{figure}
8504:
8505: {\tt MATAD} requires one file containing the diagrams and the
8506: projectors which have to be applied.
8507: In our case it could look as follows
8508:
8509: {\footnotesize
8510: \begin{verbatim}
8511: *--#[ TREAT0:
8512: multiply, (
8513: a*deno(2,-2)*(q1.q2*d_(mu,nu)-q2(nu)*q1(mu)-q2(mu)*q1(nu))
8514: +b*deno(2,-2)*(-q1.q2*d_(mu,nu)+(3-2*ep)*q2(nu)*q1(mu)+q2(mu)*q1(nu))
8515: );
8516: .sort
8517: *--#] TREAT0:
8518:
8519: *--#[ TREAT1:
8520: *--#] TREAT1:
8521:
8522: *--#[ TREAT2:
8523: *--#] TREAT2:
8524:
8525: *--#[ TREATMAIN:
8526: *--#] TREATMAIN:
8527:
8528: *--#[ d3l335:
8529: ((-1)
8530: *M
8531: *Dg(nu1,nu2,p1)
8532: *Dg(nu7,nu8,-p4)
8533: *Dg(nu3,nu4,q1,-p1)
8534: *Dg(nu5,nu6,q2,p1)
8535: *S(-q1,-p3m,nu7,-q1,p5m,nu4,-p2m,nu6,q2,p5m,nu8,q2,-p3m)
8536: *V3g(mu,q1,nu1,-p1,nu3,p1-q1)
8537: *V3g(nu,q2,nu2,p1,nu5,-p1-q2)
8538: *1);
8539:
8540: #define TOPOLOGY "O4"
8541: *--#] d3l335:
8542: \end{verbatim}}
8543:
8544: \noindent
8545: where the diagram {\tt d3l335} corresponds to the one shown in
8546: Fig.~\ref{fig:hgg} (for details concerning the nomenclature of the
8547: momenta see~\cite{matad}).
8548: The fold {\tt TREAT0} contains (up to an overall factor
8549: $(q_1\cdot q_2)^{-2}$) the projector on the coefficients in front of
8550: the structures $g^{\mu\nu}$ and $q^\nu_1 q^\mu_2$ of Eq.~(\ref{eq:k1}).
8551: They are marked by
8552: the symbols \verb|a| and \verb|b|, respectively.
8553: Thus the transversality of Eq.~(\ref{eq:k1}) can be explicitly checked
8554: in the sum of all contributing diagrams (the result of a single
8555: diagram does in general not have a transverse structure).
8556:
8557: A second file which is required, the so-called {\tt main}-file,
8558: reads
8559:
8560: {\footnotesize
8561: \begin{verbatim}
8562: #define PRB "hgg"
8563: #define PROBLEM0 "1"
8564: #define DALA12 "1"
8565: #define GAUGE "0"
8566: #define POWER "2"
8567: #define CUT "0"
8568: #define FOLDER "hgg"
8569: #define DIAGRAM "d3l335"
8570: #-
8571: #include main.gen
8572: \end{verbatim}}
8573:
8574: \noindent
8575: The fifth line
8576: ensures that an expansion of the integrand up to the second order in the
8577: external momenta is performed and the third line sets
8578: $q_1^2$ and $q_2^2$ to zero and factors out
8579: the scalar product $q_1\cdot q_2$.
8580: \verb|#define CUT "0"| sets $\varepsilon$ to zero in the final result.
8581: In this example we choose Feynman gauge which is achieved with
8582: \verb|#define GAUGE "0"|.
8583:
8584: After calling {\tt MATAD} it takes of the order of a minute
8585: to obtain the result:
8586:
8587: {\footnotesize
8588: \begin{verbatim}
8589: d3l335 =
8590: + ep^-2 * ( 40*Q1.Q2*M^2*a + 344/9*Q1.Q2^2*a - 232/9*Q1.Q2^2*b )
8591:
8592: + ep^-1 * ( - 308/3*Q1.Q2*M^2*a - 3530/27*Q1.Q2^2*a + 1786/27*Q1.Q2^2*
8593: b )
8594:
8595: + 60*Q1.Q2*M^2*z2*a + 734/3*Q1.Q2*M^2*a - 1936/9*Q1.Q2^2*z3*a + 1136/9*
8596: Q1.Q2^2*z3*b + 172/3*Q1.Q2^2*z2*a - 116/3*Q1.Q2^2*z2*b + 46817/81*
8597: Q1.Q2^2*a - 26239/81*Q1.Q2^2*b;
8598: \end{verbatim}}
8599:
8600: \noindent
8601: Note that the terms proportional to \verb|Q1.Q2*M^2| cancel after
8602: adding all contributing diagrams.
8603:
8604: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
8605:
8606: \subsection{\label{sub:aut}Automation of Feynman diagram computation}
8607:
8608: In this section we briefly want to mention the program packages which
8609: have been used to obtain most of the results discussed in this review.
8610: For a general overview concerning the automation of Feynman diagram
8611: computation we refer to~\cite{Harlander:1999dq}.
8612:
8613: The large number of diagrams which occurs in particular if one
8614: considers higher loop orders makes it necessary to generate the diagrams
8615: automatically. The {\tt Fortran} program {\tt QGRAF}~\cite{qgraf}
8616: provides the possiblility to implement own models in a simple
8617: way. Furthermore it is quite fast and generates several thousand diagrams in
8618: a few seconds. One of the disadvantages of {\tt QGRAF} is that the
8619: user has to put the Feynman rules himself. On the other hand, this
8620: provides quite some flexibility in the choices of the vertices.
8621: E.g., it is straightforward to implement the vertex involving the
8622: coupling of the operator
8623: ${\cal O}_1$ to four gluons (cf. Eq.~(\ref{eq:op1})).
8624:
8625: In general,
8626: the application of asymptotic expansions, in particular if serveral of
8627: them are applied successively, generates many subdiagram which have
8628: to be expanded in several small quantities. Even for a single
8629: multi-loop diagram this becomes very tedious if it has to be performed
8630: by hand. For this reason the programs {\tt LMP}~\cite{Har:diss}
8631: and {\tt EXP}~\cite{Sei:dipl} have been developed.
8632: {\tt LMP} was especially developed in order to apply the
8633: large-momentum procedure to the diagonal current
8634: correlators~\cite{CheHarKueSte96,CheHarKueSte97,Harlander:1997xa,HarSte98}.
8635: In some sense
8636: {\tt EXP} can be considered as the successor of {\tt LMP}. Next to the
8637: hard-mass procedure also the succesive application of
8638: large-mometum and/or hard-mass procedure is possible.
8639: This broadens the area of applications. Here we just want to mention
8640: as examples
8641: the correction of ${\cal O}(\alpha\alpha_s)$ to the $Z$ boson
8642: decay~\cite{Harlander:1998zb}, ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$ corrections to
8643: the top quark decay~\cite{CheHarSeiSte99} or two-loop QED corrections
8644: to the muon decay~\cite{SeiSte99} (cf. Section~\ref{sub:mudec}).
8645:
8646: The very computation of the integrals is performed with the program
8647: packages {\tt MINCER}~\cite{mincer} and
8648: {\tt MATAD}~\cite{matad} (see Appendix~\ref{sub:single}).
8649: The former deals with massless propagator-type integrals up to three
8650: loops and {\tt MATAD} was written to deal with vacuum diagrams
8651: at one-, two- and three-loop order where several of the internal lines
8652: may have a common mass. The area of application for each of the
8653: individual packages seems to be quite restrictive. However, in
8654: particular the combined application offers a quite flexible use.
8655:
8656: In order to handle problems where a large number of diagrams are
8657: involved and where eventually an asymptotic expansion has to be
8658: applied in a convenient way the program package {\tt GEFICOM} has been
8659: written. A very limited number of small input files allows the user to
8660: rule the flow of the computation.
8661: {\tt Qgraf} is called to generate the diagrams. A {\tt
8662: Mathematica}~\cite{math} script determines the toplogy of each
8663: individual diagram and provides input which either can be directly
8664: read from {\tt MINCER} and/or {\tt MATAD} or can be passed to {\tt
8665: EXP} or {\tt LMP}.
8666: At the end the results of the individual diagrams are summed and the
8667: bare result is stored.
8668: Moreover a convenient environment is provided which, e.g., makes
8669: sure that all result files are up-to-date.
8670: Thus, processes involving a large number of (sub-)diagrams
8671: can be treated without taking care of each individual result.
8672:
8673: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
8674: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
8675:
8676: \section{\label{app:decconst}Decoupling constants and coefficient
8677: functions}
8678: \setcounter{equation}{0}
8679: \setcounter{figure}{0}
8680: \setcounter{table}{0}
8681:
8682: Transforming the decoupling constants of Eqs.~(\ref{eq:zetamOS})
8683: and~(\ref{eq:zetagOS}) to the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme one obtains
8684: \begin{eqnarray}
8685: \zeta_m^{\rm MS}&=&1
8686: +\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2
8687: \left(\frac{89}{432}
8688: -\frac{5}{36}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8689: +\frac{1}{12}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}\right)
8690: +\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^3
8691: \left[\frac{2951}{2916}
8692: \right.
8693: \nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
8694: -\frac{407}{864}\zeta_3
8695: +\frac{5}{4}\zeta_4
8696: -\frac{1}{36}B_4
8697: +\left(-\frac{311}{2592}
8698: -\frac{5}{6}\zeta_3\right)\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8699: +\frac{175}{432}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8700: \right.
8701: \nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
8702: +\frac{29}{216}\ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8703: +n_l\left(
8704: \frac{1327}{11664}
8705: -\frac{2}{27}\zeta_3
8706: -\frac{53}{432}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8707: -\frac{1}{108}\ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}\right)\right]
8708: \nonumber\\
8709: &\approx&1
8710: +0.2060\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu_h)}{\pi}\right)^2
8711: +\left(1.8476+0.0247\,n_l\right)
8712: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu_h)}{\pi}\right)^3,
8713: \label{eq:zetamMS}
8714: \end{eqnarray}
8715: \begin{eqnarray}
8716: \left(\zeta_g^{\rm MS}\right)^2&=&1
8717: +\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}
8718: \left(
8719: -\frac{1}{6}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8720: \right)
8721: +\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2
8722: \left(
8723: \frac{11}{72}
8724: -\frac{11}{24}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8725: +\frac{1}{36}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8726: \right)
8727: \nonumber\\
8728: &&\mbox{}+\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^3
8729: \left[
8730: \frac{564731}{124416}
8731: -\frac{82043}{27648}\zeta_3
8732: -\frac{955}{576}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8733: +\frac{53}{576}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8734: \right.
8735: \nonumber\\
8736: &&\left.\mbox{}
8737: -\frac{1}{216}\ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8738: +n_l\left(
8739: -\frac{2633}{31104}
8740: +\frac{67}{576}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8741: -\frac{1}{36}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8742: \right)
8743: \right]
8744: \nonumber\\
8745: &\approx&1
8746: +0.1528\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu_h)}{\pi}\right)^2
8747: +\left(0.9721-0.0847\,n_l\right)
8748: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu_h)}{\pi}\right)^3
8749: \,.
8750: \label{eq:zetagMS}
8751: \end{eqnarray}
8752:
8753:
8754:
8755: In the following, we list the decoupling constants $\zeta_m$ and $\zeta_g$
8756: appropriate for the general gauge group SU($N_c$).
8757: The results read
8758: \begin{eqnarray}
8759: \zeta_m^{\rm MS} &=&1
8760: +\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2\left(\frac{1}{N_c}-N_c\right)
8761: \left(-\frac{89}{1152}+\frac{5}{96}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8762: -\frac{1}{32}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}\right)
8763: \nonumber\\
8764: &&\mbox{}
8765: +\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^3
8766: \Bigg\{
8767: \frac{1}{N_c^2}\left(
8768: -\frac{683}{4608}
8769: +\frac{57}{256}\zeta_3
8770: -\frac{9}{64}\zeta_4
8771: +\frac{1}{32}B_4\right)
8772: \nonumber\\
8773: &&\mbox{}
8774: +\frac{1}{N_c}\left(
8775: \frac{1685}{62208}
8776: -\frac{7}{144}\zeta_3\right)
8777: +\frac{907}{31104}
8778: -\frac{397}{2304}\zeta_3
8779: -\frac{1}{32}B_4
8780: \nonumber\\
8781: &&\mbox{}
8782: +N_c\left(
8783: -\frac{1685}{62208}
8784: +\frac{7}{144}\zeta_3\right)
8785: +N_c^2\left(
8786: \frac{14813}{124416}
8787: -\frac{29}{576}\zeta_3
8788: +\frac{9}{64}\zeta_4\right)
8789: \nonumber\\
8790: &&\mbox{}
8791: +\left[\frac{1}{N_c^2}\left(
8792: -\frac{13}{512}
8793: +\frac{3}{32}\zeta_3\right)
8794: +\frac{31}{864N_c}
8795: +\frac{1}{32}
8796: -\frac{31}{864}N_c
8797: -N_c^2\left(
8798: \frac{3}{512}
8799: \right.\right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\left.\mbox{}
8800: +\frac{3}{32}\zeta_3\right)
8801: \right]\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8802: +\left(-\frac{1}{32N_c^2}
8803: -\frac{5}{576N_c}
8804: -\frac{5}{384}
8805: +\frac{5}{576}N_c
8806: +\frac{17}{384}N_c^2\right)
8807: \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8808: \nonumber\\
8809: &&\mbox{}
8810: +\left(\frac{1}{144N_c}
8811: -\frac{11}{576}
8812: -\frac{1}{144}N_c
8813: +\frac{11}{576}N_c^2\right)
8814: \ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8815: \nonumber\\
8816: &&\mbox{}
8817: +n_l\left(\frac{1}{N_c}-N_c\right)\left(
8818: -\frac{1327}{31104}
8819: +\frac{1}{36}\zeta_3
8820: +\frac{53}{1152}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8821: +\frac{1}{288}\ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}\right)
8822: \Bigg\}
8823: \,,
8824: \label{eq:zetamMSnc}
8825: \end{eqnarray}
8826:
8827: \begin{eqnarray}
8828: \left(\zeta_g^{\rm MS}\right)^2&=&1
8829: +\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}
8830: \left(-\frac{1}{6}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}\right)
8831: \nonumber\\
8832: &&\mbox{}
8833: +\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2
8834: \left[
8835: \frac{13}{192N_c}
8836: +\frac{25}{576}N_c
8837: -\left(\frac{1}{16N_c}
8838: +\frac{7}{48}N_c\right)
8839: \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8840: +\frac{1}{36}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}\right]
8841: \nonumber\\
8842: &&\mbox{}
8843: +\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^3
8844: \Bigg\{
8845: \frac{1}{N_c^2}\left(
8846: -\frac{97}{2304}
8847: +\frac{95}{1536}\zeta_3\right)
8848: +\frac{1}{N_c}\left(
8849: -\frac{103}{10368}
8850: +\frac{7}{512}\zeta_3\right)
8851: \nonumber\\
8852: &&\mbox{}
8853: -\frac{1063}{5184}
8854: +\frac{893}{3072}\zeta_3
8855: +N_c\left(
8856: \frac{451}{20736}
8857: -\frac{7}{256}\zeta_3\right)
8858: +N_c^2\left(
8859: \frac{7199}{13824}
8860: -\frac{17}{48}\zeta_3
8861: \right)
8862: \nonumber\\
8863: &&\mbox{}
8864: +\left(-\frac{9}{256N_c^2}
8865: -\frac{5}{192N_c}
8866: -\frac{119}{1152}
8867: -\frac{23}{3456}N_c
8868: -\frac{1169}{6912}N_c^2\right)
8869: \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8870: \nonumber\\
8871: &&\mbox{}
8872: +\left(\frac{5}{192N_c}
8873: -\frac{11}{384}
8874: +\frac{35}{576}N_c
8875: -\frac{1}{128}N_c^2\right)
8876: \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8877: -\frac{1}{216}\ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8878: \nonumber\\
8879: &&\mbox{}
8880: +n_l\Bigg[
8881: \frac{41}{1296N_c}
8882: -\frac{329}{10368}N_c
8883: +\left(-\frac{5}{384N_c}
8884: +\frac{139}{3456}N_c\right)
8885: \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8886: \nonumber\\
8887: &&\mbox{}
8888: +\left(\frac{1}{96N_c}
8889: -\frac{1}{96}N_c\right)
8890: \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}\Bigg]\Bigg\}
8891: \,.
8892: \label{eq:zetagMSnc}
8893: \end{eqnarray}
8894: For $N_c=3$, we recover Eqs.~(\ref{eq:zetamMS}) and (\ref{eq:zetagMS}).
8895:
8896: The renormalized
8897: decoupling constants $\zeta_2$ and $\zeta_3$ for the quark and gluon fields,
8898: respectively, arise from
8899: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:zeta20}) and~(\ref{eq:zeta30}).
8900: Of course, $\zeta_2$ and $\zeta_3$ are both gauge dependent.
8901: Restricting ourselves to the case $N_c=3$, we find in the covariant
8902: gauge~(\ref{eq:gluprop})
8903: \begin{eqnarray}
8904: \zeta_2^{\rm MS}&=&1
8905: +\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2
8906: \Bigg({5\over 144}
8907: -{1\over 12}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}\Bigg)
8908: +\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^3\Bigg[
8909: {42811\over 62208}
8910: +{1\over 18}\zeta_3
8911: \nonumber\\
8912: &&\mbox{}
8913: -{155\over 192}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8914: +{49\over 576}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8915: -{1\over 96}\ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8916: +n_l\Bigg(
8917: {35\over 3888}
8918: +{5\over 432}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}\Bigg)
8919: \nonumber\\
8920: &&\mbox{}
8921: +\xi\Bigg(
8922: -{2387\over 6912}
8923: +{1\over 12}\zeta_3
8924: +{121\over 576}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8925: -{13\over 192}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8926: +{1\over 96}\ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}\Bigg)\Bigg]
8927: \,,
8928: \label{eq:zeta2res}
8929: %%%\nonumber
8930: \\
8931: \zeta_3^{\rm MS}&=&1
8932: +\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\Bigg(
8933: {1\over 6}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}\Bigg)
8934: + \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2\Bigg(
8935: {91\over 1152}
8936: +{29\over 96}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8937: +{3\over 32}\ln^{2}\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}\Bigg)
8938: \nonumber\\
8939: &&\mbox{}
8940: +\left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(n_f)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^3\Bigg[
8941: -{284023\over 62208}
8942: +{86183\over 27648}\zeta_3
8943: +{99\over 128}\zeta_4
8944: -{1\over 32}B_4
8945: \nonumber\\
8946: &&\mbox{}
8947: +\left({52433\over 27648}
8948: -{33\over 64}\zeta_3\right)\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8949: +{383\over 2304}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8950: +{119\over 768}\ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8951: \nonumber\\
8952: &&\mbox{}
8953: +n_l\Bigg(
8954: {3307\over 15552}
8955: -{1\over 12}\zeta_3
8956: -{293\over 1152}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8957: +{1\over 36}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8958: -{1\over 96}\ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}\Bigg)
8959: \nonumber\\
8960: &&\mbox{}
8961: +\xi\Bigg(
8962: -{677\over 1536}
8963: +{3\over 32}\zeta_3
8964: +{233\over 1024}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8965: -{3\over 32}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}
8966: +{3\over 256}\ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_h^2}\Bigg)\Bigg]
8967: \,.
8968: \end{eqnarray}
8969:
8970: In Ref.~\cite{Ste98_higgs} the Yukawa corrections to $\zeta_m$ and
8971: $\zeta_g$ enhanced by the top quark mass have been
8972: evaluated. They are conveniently expressed in terms of the variable
8973: \begin{eqnarray}
8974: x_t &=& \frac{G_F m_t^2}{8\pi^2\sqrt{2}}\,,
8975: \label{eq:xt}
8976: \end{eqnarray}
8977: where $m_t$ is the top quark mass
8978: defined in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme.
8979: Corrections proportional to $x_t$ arise if in addition to the pure QCD
8980: Lagrangian also the couplings of the Higgs boson ($h$) and
8981: the neutral ($\chi$)
8982: and charged ($\phi^\pm$) Goldstone boson to the top
8983: quark are considered.
8984: Sample diagrams contributing to $\zeta_m$ and $\zeta_g$
8985: are shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:sig} and~\ref{fig:Z3}, respectively.
8986:
8987: \begin{figure}[t]
8988: \begin{center}
8989: \begin{tabular}{c}
8990: \leavevmode
8991: \epsfxsize=14cm
8992: \epsffile[77 570 560 780]{figs/figsig.ps}
8993: \end{tabular}
8994: \caption{\label{fig:sig}
8995: Feynman diagrams contribution to $Z_{2}$, $Z_{m}$ and
8996: $\zeta_{m_q}^0$. The
8997: dashed line either represents the Higgs boson ($h$) or the neutral ($\chi$)
8998: or charged ($\phi^\pm$) Goldstone boson.
8999: }
9000: \end{center}
9001: \end{figure}
9002:
9003:
9004: \begin{figure}[t]
9005: \begin{center}
9006: \begin{tabular}{c}
9007: \leavevmode
9008: \epsfxsize=14cm
9009: \epsffile[110 640 490 730]{figs/figZ3.ps}
9010: \end{tabular}
9011: \caption{\label{fig:Z3}
9012: Feynman diagrams contribution to $Z_3$ and
9013: $\zeta_g^0$. The
9014: dashed line either represents the Higgs boson ($h$) or the neutral
9015: ($\chi$) or
9016: charged ($\phi^\pm$) Goldstone boson.
9017: }
9018: \end{center}
9019: \end{figure}
9020:
9021: The decoupling constant for the $u, d, s$ and $c$ quark mass
9022: reads\footnote{For convenience, the corrections of order $\alpha_s^2$
9023: are repeated from Eq.~(\ref{eq:zetamMS}).}
9024: \begin{eqnarray}
9025: \zeta_{m_l}^{{\rm MS},x_t} &=& 1
9026: +
9027: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(6)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2\Bigg\{
9028: \frac{89}{432}
9029: - \frac{5}{36}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9030: + \frac{1}{12}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9031: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
9032: + x_t\left[
9033: \frac{101}{144}
9034: - \frac{5}{12}\zeta_2
9035: + \frac{73}{12}\zeta_3
9036: - 9\zeta_4
9037: - \frac{7}{6}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9038: + 6\zeta_3\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9039: \right.\nonumber\\&&\mbox{}\left.
9040: + 2I_{3l}\left(
9041: - \frac{37}{18}
9042: - \frac{19}{3}\zeta_3
9043: + 9\zeta_4
9044: - \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9045: - 6\zeta_3\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9046: \right)
9047: \right]
9048: \Bigg\}
9049: \,,
9050: \label{eq:zetaml}
9051: \end{eqnarray}
9052: where $I_{3l}$ is the third component of the weak isospin, i.e. $I_{3l}=+1/2$
9053: for up-type quarks and $I_{3l}=-1/2$ for down-type quark flavours.
9054: For the bottom quark one receives
9055: \begin{eqnarray}
9056: \zeta_{m_b}^{{\rm MS},x_t} &=& \zeta_{m_d} + x_t\Bigg\{
9057: \frac{5}{4}
9058: + \frac{3}{2}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9059: +
9060: \frac{\alpha_s^{(6)}(\mu)}{\pi} \left[
9061: \frac{16}{3}
9062: - 4\zeta_2
9063: + \frac{7}{2}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9064: + \frac{3}{2}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9065: \right]
9066: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
9067: +
9068: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(6)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2 \left[
9069: \frac{472933}{12096}
9070: - \frac{6133}{168}\zeta_2
9071: + \frac{905}{72}\zeta_3
9072: + \frac{383}{18}\zeta_4
9073: + \frac{1251}{112}S_2
9074: + \frac{19}{72}D_3
9075: \right.\nonumber\\&&\mbox{}\left.
9076: - \frac{7}{9}B_4
9077: + \left(
9078: \frac{763}{18}
9079: - \frac{55}{3}\zeta_2
9080: - \frac{43}{4}\zeta_3
9081: \right)\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9082: + \frac{529}{48}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9083: + \frac{29}{12}\ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9084: \right.\nonumber\\&&\mbox{}\left.
9085: + n_l\left(
9086: - \frac{23}{24}
9087: + \frac{31}{36}\zeta_2
9088: - 2\zeta_3
9089: + \left(
9090: - \frac{241}{144}
9091: + \frac{2}{3}\zeta_2
9092: \right)\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9093: - \frac{1}{2}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9094: \right.\right.\nonumber\\&&\mbox{}\left.\left.
9095: - \frac{1}{12}\ln^3\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9096: \right)
9097: \right]
9098: \Bigg\}
9099: \,,
9100: \label{eq:zetamb}
9101: \end{eqnarray}
9102: where we have used $C_F=4/3$, $C_A=3$ and $T=1/2$.
9103: The constants
9104: \begin{eqnarray}
9105: S_2&=&{4\over9\sqrt3}\mbox{Cl}_2\left({\pi\over3}\right)
9106: \,\,\approx\,\,0.260\,434
9107: \,,
9108: \nonumber\\
9109: D_3&=&6\zeta_3-\frac{15}{4}\zeta_4
9110: -6\left(\mbox{Cl}_2\left({\pi\over3}\right)\right)^2
9111: \,\,\approx\,\,-3.027\,009
9112: \,,
9113: \nonumber\\
9114: B_4&=&16\li\left({1\over2}\right)-{13\over2}\zeta_4-4\zeta_2\ln^22
9115: +{2\over3}\ln^42
9116: \,\,\approx\,\,-1.762\,800
9117: \,,
9118: \end{eqnarray}
9119: where $\zeta_4=\pi^4/90$, $\mbox{Cl}_2$ is Clausen's function and
9120: $\mbox{Li}_4$ is the quadrilogarithm,
9121: occur in the evaluation of the three-loop master
9122: diagrams~\cite{Bro92,Avdrho,CheKueSte95rho,Bro98}.
9123:
9124: Finally, for $\zeta_g$ we obtain the following result:
9125: \begin{eqnarray}
9126: \left(\zeta_g^{{\rm MS},x_t}\right)^2 &=& 1 +
9127: \frac{\alpha_s^{(6)}(\mu)}{\pi}\,T\,\Bigg\{
9128: - \frac{1}{3} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9129: +
9130: \frac{\alpha_s^{(6)}(\mu)}{\pi} \left[
9131: C_F\,\left(
9132: - \frac{13}{48}
9133: + \frac{1}{4} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9134: \right)
9135: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
9136: +C_A\,\left(
9137: \frac{2}{9}
9138: - \frac{5}{12} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9139: \right)
9140: + T\,\frac{1}{9} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9141: \right]
9142: + x_t\Bigg\{
9143: - \frac{2}{3}
9144: + \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9145: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
9146: +
9147: \frac{\alpha_s^{(6)}(\mu)}{\pi} \left[
9148: C_F\,\left(
9149: - \frac{17}{16}
9150: + \frac{5}{4}\zeta_2
9151: + \frac{25}{8}\zeta_3
9152: - 3 \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9153: + \frac{3}{4} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9154: \right)
9155: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
9156: +C_A\,\left(
9157: - \frac{5}{4}
9158: + \frac{3}{8}\zeta_2
9159: - \frac{95}{64}\zeta_3
9160: + \frac{7}{4} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9161: \right)
9162: +T\,\left(
9163: \frac{5}{4}
9164: + \frac{7}{8}\zeta_3
9165: + \frac{4}{9} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9166: \right.\right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\left.\mbox{}
9167: - \frac{2}{3} \ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9168: \right)
9169: - \frac{7}{2}\zeta_3 T
9170: \right]
9171: \Bigg\}
9172: \Bigg\}
9173: \label{eq:zetag}
9174: \,,
9175: \end{eqnarray}
9176: where the contribution of the diagrams in
9177: Fig.~\ref{fig:Z3}(c) corresponds to the last entry
9178: in the last line of Eq.~(\ref{eq:zetag}).
9179: For convenience also the pure QCD result of ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$
9180: is listed. The corresponding three-loop terms can be found
9181: in~\cite{CheKniSte98}.
9182:
9183: In the remainder of this Appendix we want to provide the analytical
9184: results for the $x_t$-enhanced corrections of order $G_Fm_t^2$ to the
9185: coefficient functions $C_1$ and $C_2$~\cite{Ste98_higgs}.
9186: For $C_1$ we have
9187: \begin{eqnarray}
9188: C_1 &=& -\frac{1}{6}\,T\,\frac{\alpha_s^{(6)}(\mu)}{\pi}\Bigg\{
9189: 1
9190: - 3 x_t
9191: + \frac{\alpha_s^{(6)}(\mu)}{\pi}\left[
9192: - C_F\,\frac{3}{4}
9193: + C_A\,\frac{5}{4}
9194: - T\,\frac{1}{3} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9195: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
9196: + x_t\left(
9197: C_F\,\left(
9198: 9
9199: - \frac{9}{2} \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9200: \right)
9201: - C_A\,\frac{21}{4}
9202: +T\,\left(
9203: - \frac{2}{3}
9204: + 2 \ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9205: \right)
9206: \right)
9207: \right]
9208: \Bigg\}
9209: \,,
9210: \label{eqC1}
9211: \end{eqnarray}
9212: where $m_t$ is the $\overline{\rm MS}$ top quark.
9213: The ${\cal O}(\alpha_sx_t)$ terms can be found
9214: in~\cite{DjoGam94,CheKniSte97hbb} and the
9215: ${\cal O}(\alpha_s^2)$ results were
9216: computed in~\cite{Inami:1983xt,Djouadi:1991tk}
9217: The corrections of ${\cal O}(\alpha_sx_t^2)$ are taken
9218: from~\cite{Ste98_higgs}.
9219:
9220: For the light quarks we get for $C_2$
9221: \begin{eqnarray}
9222: C_{2l} &=& 1+
9223: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(6)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2 \left[
9224: \frac{5}{18}
9225: - \frac{1}{3}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9226: + x_t \left( \frac{7}{3}
9227: - 12\zeta_3
9228: + 2I_{3l}\left(
9229: 2
9230: + 12\zeta_3
9231: \right)
9232: \right)
9233: \right]
9234: \,,
9235: \nonumber\\
9236: \end{eqnarray}
9237: and in the case of the bottom quark the coefficient function reads:
9238: \begin{eqnarray}
9239: C_{2b} &=& C_{2d} + x_t\Bigg\{
9240: - 3
9241: +
9242: \frac{\alpha_s^{(6)}(\mu)}{\pi} \left[
9243: - 7
9244: - 6\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9245: \right]
9246: +
9247: \left(\frac{\alpha_s^{(6)}(\mu)}{\pi}\right)^2 \left[
9248: - \frac{12169}{144}
9249: + \frac{110}{3}\zeta_2
9250: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
9251: + \frac{43}{2}\zeta_3
9252: - \frac{89}{2}\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9253: - \frac{55}{4}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9254: + n_l\left(
9255: \frac{241}{72}
9256: - \frac{4}{3}\zeta_2
9257: + 2\ln\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9258: \right.\right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\left.\mbox{}
9259: + \frac{1}{2}\ln^2\frac{\mu^2}{m_t^2}
9260: \right)
9261: \right]
9262: \Bigg\}
9263: \,.
9264: \end{eqnarray}
9265: In~\cite{CheKniSte97hbb} $C_{2l}$ and $C_{2b}$ are listed for general
9266: gauge group $SU(N_c)$.
9267:
9268:
9269:
9270: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
9271:
9272: \section{\label{app:as4m4}Analytical results for $R(s)$}
9273: \setcounter{equation}{0}
9274: \setcounter{figure}{0}
9275: \setcounter{table}{0}
9276:
9277: As in the literature the quadratic and quartic correction terms to
9278: $R(s)$ are not yet available in analytic form we want to provide the
9279: corresponding results
9280: using the notation introduced in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:RQ}) and~(\ref{eq:RQ2}).
9281: For completeness also the massless approximation is given. Of course,
9282: it is the same in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ and on-shell schemes
9283: \begin{eqnarray}
9284: r_0 &=& 1 + {\alpha_s\over \pi} + \left({\alpha_s\over
9285: \pi}\right)^2\,\bigg[ {365\over 24} - 11\,\zeta_3 + n_f\,\bigg(
9286: -{11\over 12} + {2\over 3}\,\zeta_3 \bigg) \bigg]
9287: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
9288: + \left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^3\,\bigg[
9289: {87029\over 288}
9290: - {121\over 8}\,\zeta_2
9291: - {1103\over 4}\,\zeta_3
9292: + {275\over 6}\,\zeta_5
9293: + n_f\,\bigg(
9294: -{7847\over 216}
9295: + {11\over 6}\,\zeta_2
9296: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
9297: + {262\over 9}\,\zeta_3
9298: - {25\over 9}\,\zeta_5
9299: \bigg)
9300: + n_f^2\,\bigg(
9301: {151\over 162}
9302: - {1\over 18}\,\zeta_2
9303: - {19\over 27}\,\zeta_3
9304: \bigg)
9305: \bigg]
9306: \,,
9307: \end{eqnarray}
9308:
9309: \begin{eqnarray}
9310: r_{Q,2}^{\rm OS} &=&
9311: {M_Q^2\over s}\,{\alpha_s\over \pi}\,\bigg[
9312: 12 + {\alpha_s\over \pi}\,\left(
9313: \frac{189}{2} + 24\lMs - \frac{13}{3} n_f
9314: \right)
9315: + \left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^2\,\left(
9316: \frac{22351}{12}
9317: - \frac{967}{2}\zeta_2
9318: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
9319: - 16\zeta_2\ln2
9320: + \frac{502}{3}\zeta_3
9321: - \frac{5225}{6}\zeta_5
9322: + 378\lMs
9323: - 9\lMs^2
9324: + n_f\left(
9325: -\frac{8429}{54}
9326: + 42\zeta_2
9327: \right.\right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\left.\mbox{}
9328: - \frac{466}{27}\zeta_3
9329: + \frac{1045}{27}\zeta_5
9330: - \frac{52}{3}\lMs
9331: + 2\lMs^2
9332: \right)
9333: + n_f^2\left(\frac{125}{54} - \frac{2}{3}\zeta_2 \right)
9334: \right)
9335: \bigg]
9336: \,,
9337: \nonumber\\
9338: r_{qQ,2}^{\rm OS} &=&
9339: {M_Q^2\over s}\,\left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^3\,
9340: \bigg[ -80 +60\zeta_3 + n_f\left(\frac{32}{9}-\frac{8}{3}\zeta_3\right)
9341: \bigg]
9342: \,,
9343: \end{eqnarray}
9344: where $\lMs=\ln M_Q^2/s$.
9345: \begin{eqnarray}
9346: r_{Q,4}^{\rm OS} &=&
9347: \left({M_Q^2\over s}\right)^2\,\bigg[
9348: -6
9349: + {\alpha_s\over \pi}\left(
9350: 10 - 24\lMs
9351: \right)
9352: + \left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^2\left(
9353: \frac{206}{3}
9354: + 218\zeta_2
9355: + 16\zeta_2\ln2
9356: + 104\zeta_3
9357: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
9358: - \frac{311}{2}\lMs
9359: - 15\lMs^2
9360: + n_f\left(
9361: -\frac{35}{9}
9362: - 12\zeta_2
9363: - \frac{8}{3}\zeta_3
9364: + 9\lMs
9365: - 2\lMs^2
9366: \right)
9367: \right)
9368: \nonumber\\&&\mbox{}
9369: + \left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^3\left(
9370: \frac{91015}{108}
9371: - \frac{76}{9}\ln^4 2
9372: + \frac{2564287}{540}\zeta_2
9373: - \frac{4568}{9}\zeta_2\ln 2
9374: - \frac{128}{3}\zeta_2\ln^2 2
9375: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
9376: + \frac{56257}{18}\zeta_3
9377: - \frac{1439}{3}\zeta_2\zeta_3
9378: - \frac{1565}{6}\zeta_4
9379: - \frac{3770}{3}\zeta_5
9380: - \frac{608}{3}a_4
9381: + \lMs \left(-\frac{5536}{3}
9382: + 564\zeta_2
9383: \right.\right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\left.\mbox{}
9384: - 24\zeta_2\ln 2
9385: + 416\zeta_3
9386: \right)
9387: - \frac{591}{4}\lMs^2
9388: + \frac{15}{2}\lMs^3
9389: + n_f\left(
9390: - \frac{21011}{216}
9391: + \frac{8}{27}\ln^4 2
9392: - \frac{3544}{9}\zeta_2
9393: \right.\right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\left.\mbox{}
9394: - \frac{176}{9}\zeta_2\ln 2
9395: + \frac{32}{9}\zeta_2\ln^2 2
9396: - \frac{2323}{9}\zeta_3
9397: + \frac{700}{9}\zeta_4
9398: + \frac{440}{9}\zeta_5
9399: + \frac{64}{9} a_4
9400: + \lMs\left(
9401: \frac{2419}{12}
9402: \right.\right.\right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\left.\left.\mbox{}
9403: + \frac{44}{3}\zeta_2
9404: + \frac{16}{3}\zeta_2 \ln2
9405: + \frac{28}{3}\zeta_3
9406: \right)
9407: - \frac{157}{6}\lMs^2
9408: - \frac{2}{3}\lMs^3
9409: \right)
9410: + n_f^2\left(
9411: \frac{35}{18}
9412: + \frac{25}{3}\zeta_2
9413: + \frac{112}{27}\zeta_3
9414: \right.\right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\left.\mbox{}
9415: + \lMs\left(
9416: - \frac{94}{27}
9417: - \frac{8}{3}\zeta_2
9418: \right)
9419: + \frac{13}{9}\lMs^2
9420: - \frac{2}{9}\lMs^3
9421: \right)
9422: \right)
9423: \bigg]
9424: \,,
9425: \nonumber\\
9426: r_{qQ,4}^{\rm OS} &=&
9427: \left({M_Q^2\over s}\right)^2\,
9428: \left({\alpha_s\over \pi}\right)^2\,\bigg[
9429: \frac{13}{3} - 4\zeta_3 - \lMs
9430: + {\alpha_s\over \pi} \, \left(
9431: - \frac{4217}{48}
9432: + 15\zeta_2
9433: + \frac{139}{3}\zeta_3
9434: + \frac{50}{3}\zeta_5
9435: \right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\mbox{}
9436: + \lMs\left(\frac{97}{4} - 38\zeta_3\right)
9437: - 2\lMs^2
9438: + n_f\left(
9439: \frac{457}{108}
9440: - \frac{2}{3}\zeta_2
9441: - \frac{22}{9}\zeta_3
9442: \right.\right.\nonumber\\&&\left.\left.\mbox{}
9443: + \lMs\left(
9444: - \frac{13}{18}
9445: + \frac{4}{3}\zeta_3
9446: \right)
9447: \right)
9448: \right)
9449: \bigg]
9450: \,,
9451: \end{eqnarray}
9452: with $a_4=\mbox{Li}_4(1/2)\approx 0.517\,479$.
9453:
9454:
9455: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
9456:
9457: \end{appendix}
9458:
9459: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
9460: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
9461:
9462: \vspace{1em}
9463:
9464: \noindent
9465: {\bf Note added:}\\
9466: In the meantime a third independent
9467: evaluation of the order $\alpha^2$ QED corrections to the
9468: muon decay became available \cite{CzaMel01_2}.
9469:
9470: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
9471: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
9472:
9473: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
9474:
9475: \def\ap#1#2#3{ {Ann.\ Phys.\ B }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9476: \def\app#1#2#3{ {Act.\ Phys.\ Pol.\ B }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9477: \def\cpc#1#2#3{ {Comp.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9478: \def\cmp#1#2#3{ {Comm.\ Math.\ Phys.\ }{\bf#1} (#2) #3}
9479: \def\epjc#1#2#3{ {Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9480: \def\fortp#1#2#3{{Fortschr.\ Phys.\ }{\bf#1} (#2) #3}
9481: \def\jcp#1#2#3{ {J.\ Comp.\ Phys.\ }{\bf#1} (#2) #3}
9482: \def\nima#1#2#3{ {Nucl.\ Inst.\ Meth.\ A }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9483: \def\npb#1#2#3{ {Nucl.\ Phys.\ B }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9484: \def\nca#1#2#3{ {Nuovo Cim.\ A }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9485: \def\plb#1#2#3{ {Phys.\ Lett.\ B }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9486: \def\prc#1#2#3{ {Phys.\ Reports }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9487: \def\prd#1#2#3{ {Phys.\ Rev.\ D }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9488: \def\pR#1#2#3{ {Phys.\ Rev.\ }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9489: \def\prl#1#2#3{ {Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9490: \def\pr#1#2#3{ {Phys.\ Reports }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9491: \def\ppnp#1#2#3{ {Prog.\ Part.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\ }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9492: \def\sovnp#1#2#3{{Sov.\ J.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\ }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9493: \def\tmf#1#2#3{ {Teor.\ Mat.\ Fiz.\ }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9494: \def\yadfiz#1#2#3{{Yad.\ Fiz.\ }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9495: \def\zpc#1#2#3{ {Z.\ Phys.\ C }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9496: \def\ibid#1#2#3{ {ibid.\ }{\bf #1} (#2) #3}
9497:
9498: \bibitem{'tHooft:1972fi}
9499: G.~'t Hooft and M.~Veltman,
9500: %``Regularization And Renormalization Of Gauge Fields,''
9501: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 44} (1972) 189.
9502: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B44,189;%%
9503:
9504: \bibitem{'tHooft:1972ue}
9505: G.~'t Hooft and M.~Veltman,
9506: %``Combinatorics Of Gauge Fields,''
9507: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 50} (1972) 318.
9508: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B50,318;%%
9509:
9510: \bibitem{'tHooft:1979xw}
9511: G.~'t Hooft and M.~Veltman,
9512: %``Scalar One Loop Integrals,''
9513: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 153} (1979) 365.
9514: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B153,365;%%
9515:
9516: \bibitem{BolGia72}
9517: C.G.~Bollini and J.J.~Giambiagi,
9518: %``Lowest Order Divergent Graphs In Nu-Dimensional Space,''
9519: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 40} (1972) 566;
9520: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B40,566;%%
9521: %%%%%C.~G.~Bollini and J.~J.~Giambiagi,
9522: %``Dimensional Renormalization: The Number Of Dimensions As A Regularizing Parameter,''
9523: Nuovo Cim.\ B {\bf 12} (1972) 20.
9524: %%CITATION = NUCIA,B12,20;%%
9525:
9526: \bibitem{DRirmass}
9527: R.~Gastmans and R.~Meuldermans,
9528: %``Dimensional Regularization Of The Infrared Problem,''
9529: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 63} (1973) 277;\\
9530: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B63,277;%%
9531: W.~J.~Marciano and A.~Sirlin,
9532: %``Dimensional Regularization Of Infrared Divergences,''
9533: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 88}, 86 (1975);\\
9534: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B88,86;%%
9535: W.~J.~Marciano,
9536: %``Dimensional Regularization And Mass Singularities,''
9537: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 12}, 3861 (1975).
9538: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D12,3861;%%
9539:
9540: \bibitem{Sirlin:1980nh}
9541: A.~Sirlin,
9542: %``Radiative Corrections In The SU(2)-L X U(1) Theory: A Simple Renormalization Framework,''
9543: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 22} (1980) 971.
9544: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D22,971;%%
9545:
9546: \bibitem{Passarino:1979jh}
9547: G.~Passarino and M.~Veltman,
9548: %``One Loop Corrections For E+ E- Annihilation Into Mu+ Mu- In The Weinberg Model,''
9549: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 160} (1979) 151.
9550: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B160,151;%%
9551:
9552: \bibitem{Hollik:1990ii}
9553: W.~F.~Hollik,
9554: %``Radiative Corrections In The Standard Model And Their Role For Precision Tests Of The Electroweak Theory,''
9555: Fortsch.\ Phys.\ {\bf 38} (1990) 165.
9556: %%CITATION = FPYKA,38,165;%%
9557:
9558: \bibitem{Denner:1993kt}
9559: A.~Denner,
9560: %``Techniques for calculation of electroweak radiative corrections at the one loop level and results for W physics at LEP200,''
9561: Fortsch.\ Phys.\ {\bf 41} (1993) 307.
9562: %%CITATION = FPYKA,41,307;%%
9563:
9564: \bibitem{Weiglein:1994hd}
9565: G.~Weiglein, R.~Scharf, and M.~B\"ohm,
9566: %``Reduction of general two loop selfenergies to standard scalar integrals,''
9567: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 416} (1994) 606;\\
9568: %%%%%[hep-ph/9310358].
9569: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9310358;%%
9570: S.~Bauberger, F.A.~Berends, M.~B\"ohm and M.~Buza,
9571: %``Analytical and numerical methods for massive two loop selfenergy diagrams,''
9572: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 434} (1995) 383.
9573: %%%%%[arXiv:hep-ph/9409388].
9574: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9409388;%%
9575:
9576: \bibitem{Gehrmann:2001ih}
9577: T.~Gehrmann and E.~Remiddi,
9578: %``Progress on two-loop non-propagator integrals,''
9579: Report No.: hep-ph/0101147;\\
9580: and references therein.
9581: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0101147;%%
9582:
9583: \bibitem{tHo73}
9584: G. 't~Hooft, \npb{61}{1973}{455}.
9585:
9586: \bibitem{BarBurDukMut78}
9587: W.A. Bardeen, A.J. Buras, D.W. Duke, and T. Muta,
9588: \prd{18}{1978}{3998}.
9589:
9590: \bibitem{RitVerLar97_bet}
9591: T. van Ritbergen, J.A.M. Vermaseren, and S.A. Larin \plb{400}{1997}{379}.
9592:
9593: \bibitem{Che97_gam}
9594: K.G. Chetyrkin, \plb{404}{1997}{161}.
9595:
9596: \bibitem{LarRitVer97_gam}
9597: S.A. Larin, T. van Ritbergen, and J.A.M. Vermaseren, \plb{405}{1997}{327}.
9598:
9599: \bibitem{KinSir59Ber58}
9600: T. Kinoshita and A. Sirlin, \pR{113}{1959}{1652};\\
9601: S.M. Berman, \pR{112}{1958}{267}.
9602:
9603: \bibitem{RitStu99}
9604: T. van Ritbergen and R. Stuart, \prl{82}{1999}{488};
9605: \npb{564}{2000}{343}.
9606:
9607: \bibitem{SeiSte99} T. Seidensticker and M. Steinhauser,
9608: \plb{467}{1999}{271}.
9609:
9610: \bibitem{BogPar57}
9611: N.N. Bogoliubov and O.S. Parasiuk, Acta.\ Math.\ {\bf 97} (1957)
9612: 227;\\
9613: O.S. Parasiuk, Ukr.\ Math.\ Z.\ {\bf 12} (1960) 287.
9614:
9615: \bibitem{Hep66}
9616: K. Hepp, {Comm. Math. Phys.} {\bf 2} (1966) 301.
9617:
9618: \bibitem{Collins}
9619: J.C. Collins, {\it Renormalization} (Cambridge University Press, 1995).
9620:
9621: \bibitem{Muta}
9622: T. Muta, {\it Foundations of Quantum Chromodynamics} (World Scientific,
9623: Singapore, 1987).
9624:
9625: \bibitem{Che91}
9626: K.G. Chetyrkin, Report No.: MPI-Ph/PTh 13/91.
9627:
9628: \bibitem{Col75}
9629: J.C. Collins, \npb{92}{1975}{477}.
9630:
9631: \bibitem{Vla80}
9632: A.A. Vladimirov, \tmf{43}{1980}{210}.
9633:
9634: \bibitem{CheKatTka80}
9635: K.G. Chetyrkin, A.L. Kataev, and F.V. Tkachov, \npb{174}{1980}{345}.
9636:
9637: \bibitem{CasKen82}
9638: W.A. Caswell and A.D. Kennedy, \prd{25}{1982}{392}.
9639:
9640: \bibitem{CheTka82}
9641: K.G. Chetyrkin and F.V. Tkachov, \plb{114}{82}{340}.
9642:
9643: %K.G.~Chetyrkin, A.L.~Kataev and F.V.~Tkachov,
9644: %%``New Approach To Evaluation Of Multiloop Feynman Integrals: The
9645: %%Gegenbauer Polynomial X Space Technique,''
9646: %Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 174} (1980) 345.
9647: %%%CITATION = NUPHA,B174,345;%%
9648:
9649: \bibitem{CheSmi84}
9650: K.G. Chetyrkin and V.A. Smirnov, \plb{144}{84}{419}.
9651:
9652: \bibitem{mincer}
9653: S.A. Larin, F.V. Tkachov, and J.A.M. Vermaseren,
9654: Rep.~No.~NIKHEF-H/91-18 (Amsterdam, 1991).
9655:
9656: \bibitem{Tar81}
9657: R. Tarrach, \npb{183}{1981}{384}.
9658:
9659: \bibitem{Tar82}
9660: O.V. Tarasov, Report No.: preprint JINR P2-82-900 (1982).
9661:
9662: \bibitem{Larin:massQCD}
9663: S.A. Larin, Report Nos.: Preprint NIKHEF-H/92-18 (1992),
9664: hep-ph/9302240;
9665: In Proc. of the
9666: Int. Baksan School ``Particles and Cosmology'' (April 22-27, 1993,
9667: Kabardino-Balkaria, Russia), eds. E.N. Alexeev, V.A. Matveev,
9668: Kh.S. Nirov, V.A. Rubakov (World Scientific, Singapore, 1994).
9669:
9670: \bibitem{matad}
9671: M. Steinhauser, \cpc{134}{2001}{335}.
9672:
9673: \bibitem{Che96}
9674: K.G.~Chetyrkin,
9675: %``Four and three loop calculations in QCD: Theory and applications,''
9676: Acta Phys.\ Polon.\ B {\bf 28} (1997) 725.
9677: %%%[hep-ph/9610531].
9678: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9610531;%%
9679:
9680:
9681: \bibitem{Che:priv}
9682: K.G. Chetyrkin, private communication and in preparation.
9683:
9684: \bibitem{Che97_R}
9685: K.G. Chetyrkin, \plb{391}{1997}{402}.
9686:
9687: \bibitem{GorKatLar91SurSam91}
9688: L.R. Surguladze and M.A. Samuel, \prl{66}{1991}{560}; (E) ibid., 2416;\\
9689: S.G. Gorishny, A.L. Kataev, and S.A. Larin, \plb{259}{1991}{144}.
9690:
9691: \bibitem{Che97_Higgs}
9692: K.G. Chetyrkin, \plb{390}{1997}{309}.
9693:
9694: \bibitem{geficom}
9695: K.G. Chetyrkin and M. Steinhauser, unpublished;\\
9696: M.~Steinhauser,
9697: %``Completely automated calculations of multi-loop diagrams,''
9698: published in the proceedings of
9699: {\it 4$^{\rm th}$ International Symposium on
9700: Radiative Corrections (RADCOR 98): Applications of Quantum Field
9701: Theory to Phenomenology}, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain, 8-12 Sep 1998.
9702: Report No.: hep-ph/9811342.
9703: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9811342;%%
9704:
9705: \bibitem{math}
9706: S. Wolfram, {\it Mathematica --- a system for doing mathematics by computer}
9707: (Addison-Wesley, New York, 1988).
9708: \bibitem{Chetyrkin:1998fm}
9709: K.G.~Chetyrkin, M.~Misiak, and M.~M\"unz,
9710: %``Beta functions and anomalous dimensions up to three loops,''
9711: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 518} (1998) 473.
9712: %%%%%[hep-ph/9711266].
9713: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9711266;%%
9714:
9715: \bibitem{gro}
9716: D.J. Gross and F. Wilczek, \prl{30}{1973}{1343}; \prd{8}{1973}{3633};\\
9717: H.D. Politzer, \prl{30}{1973}{1346}.
9718:
9719: \bibitem{jon}
9720: D.R.T. Jones, \npb{75}{1974}{531};\\
9721: W.E. Caswell, \prl{33}{1974}{244};\\
9722: \'E.Sh.\ Egoryan and O.V. Tarasov,
9723: Teor.\ Mat.\ Fiz.\ {\bf41} (1979) 26;
9724: Theor.\ Math.\ Phys.\ {\bf41} (1979) 863.
9725:
9726: \bibitem{tar}
9727: O.V. Tarasov, A.A. Vladimirov, and A.Yu.\ Zharkov,
9728: \plb{93}{1980}{429};\\
9729: S.A. Larin and J.A.M. Vermaseren, \plb{303}{1993}{334}.
9730:
9731: \bibitem{CheTka81}
9732: F.V. Tkachov, \plb{100}{1981}{65};\\
9733: K.G. Chetyrkin and F.V. Tkachov, \npb{192}{1981}{159}.
9734:
9735: \bibitem{AppCar75}
9736: T. Appelquist and J. Carazzone, \prd{11}{1975}{2856}.
9737:
9738: \bibitem{CheKniSte98}
9739: K.G. Chetyrkin, B.A. Kniehl, and M. Steinhauser, \npb{510}{1998}{61}.
9740:
9741: \bibitem{Wei80}
9742: S. Weinberg, \plb{91}{1980}{51};\\
9743: B.A. Ovrut and H.J. Schnitzer, \plb{100}{1981}{403}.
9744:
9745: \bibitem{BerWet82Ber83}
9746: W. Wetzel, \npb{196}{1982}{259};\\
9747: W. Bernreuther and W. Wetzel, \npb{197}{1982}{228};
9748: (E) \ibid{513}{1998}{758};\\
9749: W. Bernreuther, Ann.\ Phys.\ {\bf 151} (1983) 127;
9750: \zpc{20}{1983}{331}.
9751:
9752: \bibitem{LarvRiVer95}
9753: S.A. Larin, T. van Ritbergen, and J.A.M. Vermaseren,
9754: \npb{438}{1995}{278}.
9755:
9756: \bibitem{Ber97}
9757: W. Bernreuther, private communication; see also footnote 2 in
9758: Ref.~\cite{Spira:1998dg}.
9759:
9760: \bibitem{BRST}
9761: C. Becchi, A. Rouet, and R. Stora, \cmp{42}{1975}{127};
9762: \ap{98}{1976}{287};\\
9763: I.V. Tyutin, Lebeev Institute preprint N39 (1975).
9764:
9765: \bibitem{form}
9766: J.A.M. Vermaseren, {\it Symbolic Manipulation with FORM},
9767: (Computer Algebra Ne\-ther\-lands, Amsterdam, 1991).
9768:
9769: \bibitem{GorLar87}
9770: S.G. Gorishny and S.A. Larin, \npb{283}{1987}{452}.
9771:
9772: \bibitem{qgraf}
9773: P. Nogueira, \jcp{105}{1993}{279}.
9774:
9775: \bibitem{Bro92}
9776: D.J. Broadhurst, \zpc{54}{1992}{599}.
9777:
9778: \bibitem{Ste98_higgs}
9779: M. Steinhauser, \prd{49}{1999}{054005}.
9780:
9781: \bibitem{CheKatTka79DinSap79CelGon80}
9782: K.G. Chetyrkin, A.L. Kataev, and F.V. Tkachov, \plb{85}{1979}{277};\\
9783: M. Dine and J. Sapirstein, \prl{43}{1979}{668};\\
9784: W. Celmaster and R.J. Gonsalves, \prl{44}{1980}{560}.
9785:
9786: \bibitem{Sam95}
9787: A.L. Kataev and V.V. Starshenko,
9788: Mod.\ Phys.\ Lett.\ A {\bf 10} (1995) 235;
9789: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 52} (1995) 402;\\
9790: M.A. Samuel, J. Ellis, and M. Karliner, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ 74 (1995) 4380;\\
9791: P.A. R\c aczka and A. Szymacha, Z. Phys.\ C {\bf 70} (1996) 125;
9792: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 54} (1996) 3073;\\
9793: J. Ellis, E. Gardi, M. Karliner, and M.A. Samuel,
9794: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 366} (1996) 268; Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 54} (1996) 6986;\\
9795: S. Groote, J.G. K\"orner, A.A. Pivovarov, and K. Schilcher,
9796: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 79} (1997) 2763;\\
9797: S. Groote, J.G. K\"orner, and A.A. Pivovarov,
9798: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 407} (1997) 66.
9799:
9800: \bibitem{CheKniSir97}
9801: K.G. Chetyrkin, B.A. Kniehl, and A. Sirlin, \plb{402}{1997}{359}.
9802:
9803: \bibitem{Rod93}
9804: G. Rodrigo and A. Santamaria, \plb{313}{1993}{441}.
9805:
9806: \bibitem{rundec}
9807: K.G. Chetyrkin, J.H. K\"uhn, and M. Steinhauser, \cpc{133}{2000}{43}.
9808:
9809: \bibitem{Bodwin:1995jh}
9810: G.T.~Bodwin, E.~Braaten, and G.P.~Lepage,
9811: %``Rigorous QCD analysis of inclusive annihilation and production of heavy quarkonium,''
9812: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 51} (1995) 1125; (E) \ibid{55}{1997}{5853}.
9813: %%%%%[hep-ph/9407339].
9814: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9407339;%%
9815:
9816: \bibitem{Brambilla:2000cs}
9817: N.~Brambilla, Report No.:
9818: %``A short introduction to non-relativistic effective field theories,''
9819: hep-ph/0012026.
9820: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0012026;%%
9821:
9822: \bibitem{Pen01}
9823: A.A.~Penin,
9824: %``Heavy quarkonium physics beyond the next-to-next-to-leading order of NRQCD,''
9825: Nucl.\ Phys.\ Proc.\ Suppl.\ {\bf 96} (2001) 418.
9826: %%%%%[hep-ph/0009324].
9827: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0009324;%%
9828:
9829: \bibitem{Wil69}
9830: K.G. Wilson, \pr{179}{1969}{1499}.
9831:
9832: \bibitem{Klu75}
9833: H. Kluberg-Stern and J.B. Zuber, \prd{12}{1975}{467}.
9834:
9835: \bibitem{Nie75}
9836: N.K. Nielsen, \npb{97}{1975}{527}; \npb{120}{1977}{212}.
9837:
9838: \bibitem{Spi84}
9839: V.P. Spiridonov, Rep.~No.~INR~P--0378 (Moscow, 1984).
9840:
9841: \bibitem{CheSpi87}
9842: K.G. Chetyrkin and V.P. Spiridonov, \yadfiz{47}{1988}{818}
9843: (\sovnp{47}{1988}{522}).
9844:
9845: \bibitem{CheKue94}
9846: K.G. Chetyrkin and J.H. K\"uhn, \npb{432}{1994}{337}.
9847:
9848: \bibitem{Har:diss}
9849: R. Harlander, Ph.~D.~thesis, University of Karlsruhe
9850: (Shaker Verlag, Aachen, 1998).
9851:
9852: \bibitem{CheKniSte97hbb}
9853: K.G. Chetyrkin, B.A. Kniehl, and M. Steinhauser,
9854: \prl{78}{1997}{594}; \npb{490}{1997}{19}.
9855:
9856: \bibitem{Kni94}
9857: B.A. Kniehl and A. Sirlin, \plb{318}{1993}{367};\\
9858: B.A. Kniehl, \prd{50}{1994}{3314};\\
9859: A. Djouadi and P. Gambino, \prd{51}{1995}{218}.
9860:
9861: \bibitem{KniSte95}
9862: B.A. Kniehl and M. Steinhauser, \npb{454}{1995}{485};
9863: \plb{365}{1996}{297}.
9864:
9865: \bibitem{Chetyrkin:1998mw}
9866: K.G.~Chetyrkin, B.A.~Kniehl, M.~Steinhauser, and W.A.~Bardeen,
9867: %``Effective {QCD} interactions of CP-odd Higgs bosons at three loops,''
9868: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 535} (1998) 3.
9869: %%%%%[hep-ph/9807241].
9870: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9807241;%%
9871: %%% P.A. and A.E.
9872:
9873: \bibitem{CheKniSte97}
9874: K.G. Chetyrkin, B.A. Kniehl, and M. Steinhauser, \prl{79}{1997}{2184}.
9875:
9876: \bibitem{Harlander:2000mg}
9877: R.V.~Harlander,
9878: %``Virtual corrections to g g --> H to two loops in the heavy top limit,''
9879: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 492} (2000) 74.
9880: %%%%%[hep-ph/0007289].
9881: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0007289;%%
9882:
9883: \bibitem{Harlander:2001is}
9884: R.V.~Harlander and W.B.~Kilgore,
9885: %``Soft and virtual corrections to p p --> H + X at NNLO,''
9886: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64} (2001) 013015.
9887: %%%%%Report No.: hep-ph/0102241.
9888: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0102241;%%
9889:
9890: \bibitem{Catani:2001ic}
9891: S.~Catani, D.~de Florian and M.~Grazzini,
9892: %``Higgs production in hadron collisions: Soft and virtual QCD corrections at NNLO,''
9893: JHEP {\bf 0105} (2001) 025.
9894: %%%%%Report No.: hep-ph/0102227.
9895: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0102227;%%
9896:
9897: \bibitem{BFM}
9898: B.S. DeWitt, Phys. Rev. {\bf 162} (1967) 1195;\\
9899: G.~'t Hooft,
9900: %``The Background Field Method In Gauge Field Theories,''
9901: in {\it Karpacz 1975, Proceedings, Acta Universitatis
9902: Wratislaviensis No.368, Vol.1}, Wroclaw 1976, 345-369;\\
9903: H.~Kluberg-Stern and J.B.~Zuber, \prd{12}{1975}{482};\prd{12}{1975}{3159};\\
9904: S.~Ichinose and M.~Omote, \npb{203}{1982}{221};\\
9905: D.M.~Capper and A.~MacLean, \npb{203}{1982}{413};\\
9906: D.G.~Boulware, \prd{23}{1981}{389}.
9907:
9908: \bibitem{Abb81}
9909: L.F.~Abbott, \npb{185}{1981}{189}.
9910:
9911: \bibitem{DenWeiDit94}
9912: A.~Denner, G.~Weiglein, and S.~Dittmaier, \plb{333}{1994}{420};
9913: \npb{440}{1995}{95}.
9914:
9915: \bibitem{Gra99}
9916: P.A.~Grassi, \npb{462}{1996}{524}; \npb{537}{1999}{527};
9917: \npb{560}{1999}{499}.
9918:
9919: \bibitem{Kniehl:1995tn}
9920: B.A.~Kniehl and M.~Spira,
9921: %``Low-energy theorems in Higgs physics,''
9922: Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 69} (1995) 77.
9923: %%%%%[hep-ph/9505225].
9924: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9505225;%%
9925:
9926: \bibitem{Kniehl:1994ay}
9927: B.A.~Kniehl,
9928: %``Higgs phenomenology at one loop in the standard model,''
9929: Phys.\ Rept.\ {\bf 240} (1994) 211.
9930: %%CITATION = PRPLC,240,211;%%
9931:
9932: \bibitem{Spira:1998dg}
9933: M.~Spira,
9934: %``QCD effects in Higgs physics,''
9935: Fortsch.\ Phys.\ {\bf 46} (1998) 203.
9936: %%%%%[hep-ph/9705337].
9937: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9705337;%%
9938:
9939: \bibitem{Braaten:1980yq}
9940: E.~Braaten and J.P.~Leveille,
9941: %``Higgs Boson Decay And The Running Mass,''
9942: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 22} (1980) 715.
9943: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D22,715;%%
9944:
9945: \bibitem{Drees:1990dq}
9946: M.~Drees and K.~Hikasa,
9947: %``Note On QCD Corrections To Hadronic Higgs Decay,''
9948: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 240} (1990) 455.
9949: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B240,455;%%
9950: (E) ibid. B {\bf 262} (1991) 497.
9951:
9952: \bibitem{GorKatLarSur90}
9953: S.G. Gorishny, A.L. Kataev, S.A. Larin, and L.R. Surguladze
9954: {Mod. Phys. Lett. A} {\bf 5} (1990) 2703;
9955: {Phys. Rev. D} {\bf 43} (1991) 1633.
9956:
9957: \bibitem{Sur94}
9958: L.R. Surguladze, \plb{341}{1994}{60}.
9959:
9960: \bibitem{CheKwi96}
9961: K.G. Chetyrkin and A. Kwiatkowski, \npb{461}{1996}{3}.
9962:
9963: \bibitem{Harlander:1997xa}
9964: R.~Harlander and M.~Steinhauser,
9965: %``Higgs decay to top quarks at O(alpha(s)**2),''
9966: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 56} (1997) 3980.
9967: %%%%%[hep-ph/9704436].
9968: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9704436;%%
9969:
9970: \bibitem{Kataev:1992fe}
9971: A.L.~Kataev and V.T.~Kim,
9972: %``The Effects of the massless O(alpha-s**2), O(alpha alpha-s), O(alpha**2) QCD and QED corrections and of the massive contributions to Gamma (H0$\to$ b anti-b,''
9973: Report No.: hep-ph/9304282.
9974: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9304282;%%
9975:
9976: \bibitem{Kataev:1997cq}
9977: A.L.~Kataev,
9978: %``The order O(alpha-bar alpha(s)-bar) and O(alpha-bar**2) corrections to the decay width of the neutral Higgs boson to the anti-b b pair,''
9979: JETP Lett.\ {\bf 66} (1997) 327.
9980: %%%%%[hep-ph/9708292].
9981: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9708292;%%
9982:
9983: \bibitem{LarRitVer95_2}
9984: S.A. Larin, T. van Ritbergen, and J.A.M. Vermaseren,
9985: \plb{362}{1995}{134}.
9986:
9987: \bibitem{CheSte97}
9988: K.G. Chetyrkin and M. Steinhauser, \plb{408}{1997}{320}.
9989:
9990: \bibitem{Inami:1983xt}
9991: T.~Inami, T.~Kubota, and Y.~Okada,
9992: %``Effective Gauge Theory And The Effect Of Heavy Quarks In Higgs Boson Decays,''
9993: Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 18} (1983) 69.
9994: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C18,69;%%
9995:
9996: \bibitem{Djouadi:1991tk}
9997: A.~Djouadi, M.~Spira, and P.M.~Zerwas,
9998: %``Production of Higgs bosons in proton colliders: QCD corrections,''
9999: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 264} (1991) 440;\\
10000: M. Spira, A. Djouadi, D. Graudenz, and P.M. Zerwas,
10001: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 453} (1995) 17.
10002:
10003: \bibitem{Kni95}
10004: B.A. Kniehl, \plb{343}{1995}{299}.
10005:
10006: \bibitem{DabHol92}
10007: A. Dabelstein and W. Hollik, \zpc{53}{1992}{507}.
10008:
10009: \bibitem{Kni92}
10010: B.A. Kniehl, \npb{376}{1992}{3}.
10011:
10012: \bibitem{KwiSte94KniSpi94}
10013: A. Kwiatkowski and M. Steinhauser,
10014: Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B 338} (1994) 66; {\bf B 342} (1995) 455 (E);\\
10015: B.A. Kniehl and M. Spira,
10016: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B 432} (1994) 39.
10017:
10018: \bibitem{ckk96}
10019: K.G. Chetyrkin, J.H. K\"uhn, and A. Kwiatkowski, \prc{277}{1996}{189}.
10020:
10021: \bibitem{CheKueKwiPR} K.G. Chetyrkin, J.H. K\"uhn, and A. Kwiatkowski,
10022: \pr{277}{1997}{189}.
10023:
10024: \bibitem{CheKue95}
10025: K.G. Chetyrkin and J.H. K\"uhn, \plb{342}{1995}{356}.
10026:
10027: \bibitem{CheKueTeu97}
10028: K.G. Chetyrkin, J.H. K\"uhn, and T. Teubner, \prd{56}{1997}{3011}.
10029:
10030: \bibitem{HarSte98}
10031: R. Harlander and M. Steinhauser, \epjc{2}{1998}{151}.
10032:
10033: \bibitem{KalSab55} G. K\"allen and A. Sabry,
10034: K. Dan. Videnk. Selsk. Mat.-Fys. Medd. {\bf 29} (1955) No.~17;\\
10035: see also:
10036: J. Schwinger, {\it Particles, Sources and Fields}, Vol.~II,
10037: (Addison-Wesley, New York, 1973).
10038:
10039: \bibitem{HoaKueTeu951}
10040: A.H. Hoang, J.H. K\"uhn, and T. Teubner, \npb{452}{1995}{173}.
10041:
10042: \bibitem{CheKue90}
10043: K.G. Chetyrkin and J.H. K\"uhn, \plb{248}{1990}{359}.
10044:
10045: \bibitem{GorKatLar86}
10046: S.G. Gorishny, A.L. Kataev, and S.A. Larin, \nca{92}{1986}{119}.
10047:
10048: \bibitem{Har:9910496}
10049: R.~Harlander,
10050: %``Asymptotic expansions: Methods and applications,''
10051: Acta Phys.\ Polon.\ B {\bf 30} (1999) 3443.
10052: %%%%%[hep-ph/9910496].
10053: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9910496;%%
10054:
10055: \bibitem{Harlander:1999dq}
10056: R.~Harlander and M.~Steinhauser,
10057: %``Automatic computation of Feynman diagrams,''
10058: Prog.\ Part.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf 43} (1999) 167.
10059: %%%%%[hep-ph/9812357].
10060: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9812357;%%
10061:
10062: \bibitem{GorLarTka83}
10063: S.G. Gorishny, S.A. Larin, and F.V. Tkachov, \plb{124}{1983}{217}.
10064:
10065: \bibitem{SurTka90}
10066: L.R. Surguladze and F.V. Tkachov, \npb{331}{1990}{35}.
10067:
10068: \bibitem{Bro81}
10069: D.J. Broadhurst, \plb{101}{1981}{423}.
10070:
10071: \bibitem{BraNarPic92}
10072: E. Braaten, S. Narison, and A. Pich, \npb{373}{1992}{581}.
10073:
10074: \bibitem{CheHarKue00}
10075: K.G.~Chetyrkin, R.V.~Harlander, and J.H.~K\"uhn,
10076: %``Quartic mass corrections to R(had) at O(alpha(s)**3),''
10077: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 586} (2000) 56, and private communication.
10078: %%%%%[hep-ph/0005139].
10079: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0005139;%%
10080:
10081: \bibitem{CheKue97}
10082: K.G. Chetyrkin and J.H. K\"uhn, \plb{406}{1997}{102}.
10083:
10084: \bibitem{GraBroGraSch90}
10085: N. Gray, D.J. Broadhurst, W. Grafe, and K. Schilcher,
10086: \zpc{48}{1990}{673}.
10087:
10088: \bibitem{CheSte99}
10089: K.G. Chetyrkin and M. Steinhauser, \prl{83}{1999}{4001}.
10090:
10091: \bibitem{CheSte00}
10092: K.G. Chetyrkin and M. Steinhauser, \npb{573}{2000}{617}.
10093:
10094: \bibitem{MelRit99}
10095: K. Melnikov and T. van Ritbergen, \plb{482}{2000}{99}.
10096:
10097: \bibitem{CheHoaKueSteTeu97}
10098: K.G. Chetyrkin, A.H. Hoang, J.H. K\"uhn, M. Steinhauser, and T. Teubner,
10099: \epjc{2}{1998}{137}.
10100:
10101: \bibitem{padeals}
10102: See, e.g.,\\
10103: J.~Ellis, I.~Jack, D.R.~Jones, M.~Karliner, and M.A.~Samuel,
10104: %``Asymptotic Pade approximant predictions: Up to five loops in QCD and SQCD,''
10105: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 57} (1998) 2665;\\
10106: %[hep-ph/9710302].
10107: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9710302;%%
10108: V.~Elias, F.A.~Chishtie, and T.G.~Steele,
10109: %``Pade-improvement of hadronic Higgs decays,''
10110: J.\ Phys.\ G {\bf 26} (2000) 1239.
10111: %%%[hep-ph/0004140].
10112: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0004140;%%
10113:
10114: \bibitem{Smi91} V.A.~Smirnov, {\it Renormalization and Asymptotic
10115: Expansion} (Birkh\"auser, Basel, 1991);\\
10116: V.A.~Smirnov,
10117: %``Asymptotic expansions in momenta and masses and calculation of Feynman diagrams,''
10118: Mod.\ Phys.\ Lett.\ A {\bf 10} (1995) 1485
10119: ;\\
10120: %%%[hep-th/9412063].
10121: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9412063;%%
10122: and references therein.
10123:
10124: \bibitem{Fleischer:1994ef}
10125: J.~Fleischer and O.V.~Tarasov,
10126: %``Calculation of Feynman diagrams from their small momentum expansion,''
10127: Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 64} (1994) 413
10128: %%%%%[hep-ph/9403230].
10129: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9403230;%%
10130:
10131: \bibitem{CheHarSte98} K.G. Chetyrkin, R. Harlander, and M. Steinhauser,
10132: \prd{58}{1998}{014012}.
10133:
10134: \bibitem{BaiBro95}
10135: P.A. Baikov and D.J. Broadhurst,
10136: {\it 4th International Workshop on Software Engineering and
10137: Artificial Intelligence for High Energy and Nuclear Physics (AIHENP95)},
10138: Pisa, Italy, 3-8 April 1995.
10139: Published in Pisa AIHENP (1995) 167.
10140:
10141: \bibitem{Harlander:2001sa}
10142: R.V.~Harlander,
10143: %``Pade approximation to fixed order QCD calculations,''
10144: Report No.: hep-ph/0102266.
10145: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0102266;%%
10146:
10147: \bibitem{CheKueSte96}
10148: K.G. Chetyrkin, J.H. K\"uhn, and M. Steinhauser, \plb{371}{1996}{93};
10149: \npb{482}{1996}{213}.
10150:
10151: \bibitem{CheKueSte97}
10152: K.G. Chetyrkin, J.H. K\"uhn, and M. Steinhauser,
10153: \npb{505}{1997}{40}.
10154:
10155: \bibitem{CheHarKueSte96}
10156: K.G. Chetyrkin, R. Harlander, J.H. K\"uhn, and
10157: M. Steinhauser, \nima{389}{1997}{354}.
10158:
10159: \bibitem{CheHarKueSte97}
10160: K.G. Chetyrkin, R. Harlander, J.H. K\"uhn, and M. Steinhauser,
10161: \npb{503}{1997}{339}.
10162:
10163: \bibitem{Chetyrkin:1996yp}
10164: K.G.~Chetyrkin, A.H.~Hoang, J.H.~K\"uhn, M.~Steinhauser, and T.~Teubner,
10165: %``Double Bubble Corrections to Heavy Quark Production,''
10166: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 384} (1996) 233.
10167: %%%%%[hep-ph/9603313].
10168: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9603313;%%
10169:
10170: \bibitem{KueHahHar99}
10171: J.H. K\"uhn, T. Hahn, and R. Harlander, Report Nos.:
10172: TTP99-50,KA-TP-26-1999, BNL-HET-99/42 and hep-ph/9912262.
10173:
10174: \bibitem{Fur37}
10175: W.H. Furry, Phys. Rev. {\bf 51} (1937) 125.
10176:
10177: \bibitem{LanYan}
10178: L.D. Landau, Docl.\ Akad.\ Nauk USSR {\bf 60} (1948) 207;\\
10179: C.N. Yang, Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf 77} (1950) 242.
10180:
10181: \bibitem{KniKue89}
10182: B.A. Kniehl and J.H. K\"uhn,
10183: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 224} (1989) 229;
10184: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 329} (1990) 547.
10185:
10186: \bibitem{EidJeg95}
10187: S. Eidelman and F. Jegerlehner, \zpc{67}{1995}{585}.
10188:
10189: \bibitem{DavHoe98_1}
10190: M. Davier and A. H\"ocker, \plb{419}{1998}{419}.
10191:
10192: \bibitem{KueSte98}
10193: J.H. K\"uhn and M. Steinhauser, \plb{437}{1998}{425}.
10194:
10195: \bibitem{GroKoeSchNas98}
10196: S. Groote, J.G. K\"orner, K. Schilcher, and N.F. Nasrallah,
10197: \plb{440}{1998}{375}.
10198:
10199: \bibitem{Erl98}
10200: J. Erler, \prd{59}{1999}{054008}.
10201:
10202: \bibitem{DavHoe98_2}
10203: M. Davier and A. H\"ocker, \plb{435}{1998}{427}.
10204:
10205: \bibitem{JegRADCOR98}
10206: F. Jegerlehner, Proceedings of the {\it IVth
10207: International Symposium on Radiative Corrections
10208: (RADCOR 98): Applications of Quantum Field Theory to Phenomenology},
10209: Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain, Sept.~8-12, 1998,
10210: Report No.: hep-ph/9901386.
10211:
10212: \bibitem{MarOutRys00}
10213: A.D. Martin, J. Outhwaite, and M.G. Ryskin,
10214: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 19} (2001) 681.
10215: %%%%%Report Nos.: DTP/00/84, IPPP/00/15 and hep-ph/0012231.
10216:
10217: \bibitem{Ste98}
10218: M. Steinhauser, \plb{429}{158}{1998}.
10219:
10220: \bibitem{MarZep95}
10221: A.D. Martin and D. Zeppenfeld, \plb{345}{1995}{558}.
10222:
10223: \bibitem{BurPie95}
10224: H. Burkhardt and B. Pietrzyk, \plb{356}{1995}{389}.
10225:
10226: \bibitem{Swa95}
10227: M.L. Swartz, \prd{53}{1996}{5268}.
10228:
10229: \bibitem{AleDavHoe97}
10230: R. Alemany, M. Davier, and A. H\"ocker,
10231: \epjc{2}{1998}{123}.
10232:
10233: \bibitem{BurPie01}
10234: H. Burkhardt and B. Pietrzyk, Report No.: LAPP-EXP 2001-03.
10235:
10236: \bibitem{Jeg01}
10237: F.~Jegerlehner,
10238: %``The effective fine structure constant at TESLA energies,''
10239: Report No.: hep-ph/0105283.
10240: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0105283;%%
10241:
10242: \bibitem{Kniehl:2000cr}
10243: B.A.~Kniehl, G.~Kramer, and B.~P\"otter,
10244: %``Strong coupling constant from scaling violations in fragmentation functions,''
10245: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 85} (2000) 5288.
10246: %%%%%[hep-ph/0003297].
10247: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0003297;%%
10248:
10249: \bibitem{PLUTO}
10250: J. Burmester et al. (PLUTO Coll.), \plb{66}{1977}{395};\\
10251: L. Criegee and G. Knies, \prc{83}{1982}{151}.
10252:
10253: \bibitem{DASP}
10254: R. Brandelik et al. (DASP Coll.), Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 76} (1978) 361;\\
10255: A. Petersen, Ph.D. thesis, University of Hamburg, (1978).
10256:
10257: \bibitem{MARK1}
10258: J.L. Siegrist et al. (MARK~I Coll.), \prd{26}{1982}{969}.
10259:
10260: \bibitem{Bai:2000pk}
10261: J.Z.~Bai {\it et al.} [BES Collaboration],
10262: %``Measurement of the total cross section for the hadronic production by e+ e- annihilation at energies between 2.6-GeV and 5-GeV,''
10263: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 84} (2000) 594;
10264: %%%%%[hep-ex/9908046].
10265: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9908046;%%
10266: %
10267: %J.Z.~Bai {\it et al.} [BES Collaboration],
10268: %``Measurements of the cross section for e+ e --> hadrons at center-of-mass energies from 2-GeV to 5-GeV,''
10269: hep-ex/0102003.
10270: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0102003;%%
10271:
10272: \bibitem{CheSte01}
10273: K.G.~Chetyrkin and M.~Steinhauser,
10274: %``Three-loop non-diagonal current correlators in QCD and NLO corrections to single-top-quark production,''
10275: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 502} (2001) 104.
10276: %%%%%[hep-ph/0012002].
10277: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0012002;%%
10278:
10279: \bibitem{CheSte01_2}
10280: K.G.~Chetyrkin and M.~Steinhauser,
10281: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 21} (2001) 319.
10282:
10283: \bibitem{HQET} See, e.g.,\\
10284: A.G.~Grozin,
10285: \textit{Lectures on perturbative HQET 1}, Report No.:
10286: hep-ph/0008300; \\
10287: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0008300;%%
10288: A.V.~Manohar and M.B.~Wise,
10289: \textit{Heavy quark physics},
10290: Cambridge University Press (2000).
10291:
10292: \bibitem{JiMus91}
10293: X. Ji and M.J. Musolf, \plb{257}{1991}{409};\\
10294: D.J. Broadhurst and A.G. Grozin, \plb{267}{1991}{105};\\
10295: V. Gim\'enez, \npb{375}{1992}{582}.
10296:
10297: \bibitem{BroGro95}
10298: D.J. Broadhurst and A.G. Grozin, \prd{52}{1995}{4082}.
10299:
10300: \bibitem{Gro98}
10301: A.G. Grozin, \plb{445}{1998}{165}.
10302:
10303: \bibitem{BroGro92}
10304: D.J. Broadhurst and A.G. Grozin, \plb{274}{1992}{421}.
10305:
10306: \bibitem{CzaMel01}
10307: A. Czarnecki and K. Melnikov, Report No.: hep-ph/0110028.
10308:
10309: \bibitem{SmithWillen96} M.C.~Smith and S. Willenbrock,
10310: \prd{D54}{1996}{6696}.
10311:
10312: \bibitem{Drell_Yan} R.~Hamberg, W. van Neerven, and T. Matsuura,
10313: \npb{359}{1991}{343};\\
10314: W. van Neerven and E.~Zijlstra, \npb{382}{1992}{11}.
10315:
10316: \bibitem{Mar00}
10317: A.D.~Martin, R.G.~Roberts, W.J.~Stirling, and R.S.~Thorne,
10318: %``Estimating the effect of NNLO contributions on global parton analyses,''
10319: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 18} (2000) 117.
10320: %%%%%[hep-ph/0007099].
10321: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0007099;%%
10322:
10323: \bibitem{Gro00}
10324: D.E. Groom et al., \epjc{15}{2000}{1}.
10325:
10326: \bibitem{FerOssSir99}
10327: A. Ferroglia, G. Ossola, and A. Sirlin,
10328: \npb{560}{1999}{23}.
10329:
10330: \bibitem{BerSir62}
10331: S.M. Berman and A. Sirlin, Ann.\ Phys.\ {\bf 20} (1962) 20.
10332:
10333: \bibitem{CheHarSeiSte99}
10334: K.G. Chetyrkin, R. Harlander, T. Seidensticker, and M. Steinhauser,
10335: \prd{60}{1990}{114015}.
10336:
10337: \bibitem{RitStu98}
10338: T. van Ritbergen and R. Stuart, \plb{437}{1998}{201}.
10339:
10340: \bibitem{FleSmiTar97}
10341: J.~Fleischer, V.A.~Smirnov, and O.V. Tarasov,
10342: Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 74} (1997) 379.
10343:
10344: \bibitem{Sei:dipl} T. Seidensticker, Diploma thesis (University of
10345: Karlsruhe, 1998), unpublished.
10346:
10347: \bibitem{Rit99}
10348: T. van Ritbergen, \plb{454}{1999}{353}.
10349:
10350: \bibitem{Melnikov:2000zc}
10351: K.~Melnikov and T.~van Ritbergen,
10352: %``The three-loop on-shell renormalization of QCD and QED,''
10353: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 591} (2000) 515.
10354: %%%%%[hep-ph/0005131].
10355: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0005131;%%
10356:
10357: \bibitem{LapRem96}
10358: S. Laporta and E. Remiddi, \plb{379}{1996}{283}.
10359:
10360: \bibitem{Kro98}
10361: A.S. Kronfeld, \prd{58}{1998}{051501}.
10362:
10363: \bibitem{Gambino:2000ai}
10364: P.~Gambino and P.A.~Grassi,
10365: %``The Nielsen identities of the SM and the definition of mass,''
10366: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 62} (2000) 076002.
10367: %%%%%[hep-ph/9907254].
10368: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9907254;%%
10369:
10370: \bibitem{FleJegTarVer99}
10371: J. Fleischer, F. Jegerlehner, O.V. Tarasov, and O.L. Veretin,
10372: \npb{539}{1999}{671}, (E) \ibid{B 571}{2000}{511}.
10373:
10374: \bibitem{Hoang:2000fm}
10375: A.H.~Hoang,
10376: %``Bottom quark mass from Upsilon mesons: Charm mass effects,''
10377: Report No.: hep-ph/0008102.
10378: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0008102;%%
10379:
10380: \bibitem{FAC}
10381: G. Grunberg, \plb{95}{1980}{70}, \plb{110}{1982}{501},
10382: \prd{29}{1984}{2315}.
10383:
10384: \bibitem{PMS}
10385: P.M. Stevenson, \prd{23}{1981}{1916}, \plb{100}{1981}{61},
10386: \npb{203}{1982}{472}, \plb{231}{1984}{65}.
10387:
10388: \bibitem{BenBra95}
10389: M. Beneke and V.M. Braun, \plb{348}{1995}{513}.
10390:
10391: \bibitem{BenBra94}
10392: M. Beneke and V.M. Braun, \npb{426}{1994}{301}.
10393:
10394: \bibitem{Big94}
10395: I.I. Bigi, M.A. Shifman, N.G. Uraltsev, and A.I. Vainshtein,
10396: \prd{50}{1994}{2234}
10397:
10398: \bibitem{Ben98}
10399: M. Beneke, \plb{434}{1998}{115}.
10400:
10401: \bibitem{HoaSmiSteWil98}
10402: A.H. Hoang, M.C. Smith, T. Stelzer, and S. Willenbrock,
10403: \prd{59}{1999}{114014}.
10404:
10405: \bibitem{HoaTeu99}
10406: A.H. Hoang and T. Teubner, \prd{60}{1999}{114027}.
10407:
10408: \bibitem{CzaSmi97}
10409: V.A. Smirnov,
10410: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 394} (1997) 205;\\
10411: A. Czarnecki and V.~A. Smirnov,
10412: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 394} (1997) 211.
10413:
10414: \bibitem{Smi97}
10415: V.A. Smirnov,
10416: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 404} (1997) 101.
10417:
10418:
10419: \bibitem{Beneke:1998zp}
10420: M.~Beneke and V.A.~Smirnov,
10421: %``Asymptotic expansion of Feynman integrals near threshold,''
10422: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 522} (1998) 321.
10423: %%%%%[hep-ph/9711391].
10424: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9711391;%%
10425:
10426: \bibitem{Che93}
10427: K.G. Chetyrkin, \plb{307}{1993}{169}.
10428:
10429: \bibitem{HoaJezKueTeu94}
10430: A.H. Hoang, M. Je\.zabek, J.H. K\"uhn, and T. Teubner,
10431: \plb{338}{1994}{330}.
10432:
10433: \bibitem{Teu:diss} T. Teubner, Ph.~D.~thesis, University of Karlsruhe
10434: (Shaker Verlag, Aachen, 1996).
10435:
10436: \bibitem{Ste:diss}
10437: M. Steinhauser, Ph.~D.~thesis, University of Karlsruhe
10438: (Shaker Verlag, Aachen, 1996).
10439:
10440: \bibitem{Smirnov:1999bz}
10441: V.A.~Smirnov,
10442: %``Problems of the strategy of regions,''
10443: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 465} (1999) 226.
10444: %%%%%[hep-ph/9907471].
10445: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9907471;%%
10446:
10447: \bibitem{vanOldenborgh:1990wn}
10448: G.J.~van Oldenborgh and J.A.~Vermaseren,
10449: %``New Algorithms For One Loop Integrals,''
10450: Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 46} (1990) 425.
10451: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C46,425;%%
10452:
10453: \bibitem{Weiglein:2001ci}
10454: G.~Weiglein,
10455: %``Feynman-diagram evaluation in the electroweak theory with computer algebra,''
10456: Report No.: hep-ph/0109237;\\
10457: and references therein.
10458: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0109237;%%
10459:
10460: \bibitem{Harlander:1998zb}
10461: R.~Harlander, T.~Seidensticker, and M.~Steinhauser,
10462: %``Complete corrections of O(alpha alpha(s)) to the decay of the Z boson into bottom quarks,''
10463: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 426} (1998) 125.
10464: %%%%%[hep-ph/9712228].
10465: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9712228;%%
10466:
10467: \bibitem{Avdrho}
10468: L. Avdeev, J. Fleischer, S. Mikhailov, and O. Tarasov,
10469: \plb{336}{1994}{560}; (E) \ibid{B 349}{1995}{597}.
10470:
10471: \bibitem{CheKueSte95rho}
10472: K.G. Chetyrkin, J.H. K\"uhn, and M. Steinhauser,
10473: \plb{351}{1995}{331}.
10474:
10475: \bibitem{Bro98}
10476: D.J. Broadhurst, \epjc{8}{1999}{311}.
10477:
10478: \bibitem{DjoGam94}
10479: A. Djouadi and P. Gambino, \prl{73}{1994}{2528}.
10480:
10481: \bibitem{CzaMel01_2}
10482: A. Czarnecki and K. Melnikov, Report No.: hep-ph/0112264.
10483:
10484:
10485:
10486: \end{thebibliography}
10487:
10488: \end{document}
10489: