1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: %%
3: %% ws-ijmpa.tex : 22-05-2001
4: %% TeX file (sample coded file) to use with ws-ijmpa.cls for journal IJMPA
5: %% (size 9.75'' x 6.5'') to be published by World Scientific Publishing Co.
6: %% written in Latex2e by R. Sankaran & S. Sundaresan
7: %%
8: %% Suggestion/comments to:
9: %% ykoh@wspc.com.sg, ssundar@wspc.com.sg
10: %%
11: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
12: %%
13: %%
14:
15: %%International Journal of Modern Physics A --- IJMPA %%%%%
16:
17:
18:
19: \documentclass{ws-ijmpa}
20:
21:
22: \begin{document}
23:
24:
25: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% To switch off trimmarks %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
26: %
27:
28: \def\nocropmarks{\vskip5pt\phantom{cropmarks}}
29:
30: \let\trimmarks\nocropmarks %%% Pls. remove the comment sign (%) to switch off the trimmarks
31:
32: %
33: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
34:
35:
36:
37: %\markboth{Elvio Di Salvo}
38: %{Double spin Asymmetry in SIDIS}
39:
40: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Publisher's Area please ignore %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
41: %
42: %\catchline{}{}{}
43: %
44: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
45:
46: %\setcounter{page}{}
47:
48:
49: \title{DOUBLE SPIN ASYMMETRY IN SEMI-INCLUSIVE\\
50: DEEP INELASTIC SCATTERING\footnote{Talk given at the $3^{rd}$ Circum
51: Pan-Pacific Symposium on High Energy Spin Physics, Beijing, China, Oct., 8-13,
52: 2001}}
53:
54: \author{\footnotesize ELVIO DI SALVO}
55:
56: \address{Dipartimento di Fisica and I.N.F.N. - Sez. Genova, Via Dodecaneso,
57: 33 \\
58: 16146 Genova, Italy\\}
59:
60: \maketitle
61:
62: %\pub{Received (received date)}{Revised (revised date)}
63:
64: \begin{abstract}
65: We shortly review the various methods suggested for determining the
66: transversity function. Among such methods, we consider especially those
67: based on semi-inclusive deep inelastic scattering. In the framework of this kind
68: of reactions, we propose to measure a double spin asymmetry, using a
69: transversely polarized proton target and a longitudinally polarized lepton
70: beam, and fixing the direction of the final pion. Under particular
71: conditions, the asymmetry is sensitive to the transversity function.
72: \end{abstract}
73:
74: \section{Introduction}
75: $~~~~$ The transversity function, $h_1$, may yield nontrivial information on
76: the nucleon structure. However, such a distribution is quite difficult to
77: determine experimentally. In fact, in the last years, the problem has been
78: debated at length\cite{ja01,ja1,ja2,ji,jj2,ba,dis,ef,ar};
79: moreover, the data analysis of the recent
80: HERMES experiment\cite{her} has met serious difficulties. In this situation any
81: observable sensitive to $h_1$ should be taken into account. The aim of the
82: present talk is to illustrate one such observable, consisting of a double
83: spin asymmetry in Semi-Inclusive Deep Inelastic Scattering (SIDIS), using a
84: transversely
85: polarized proton and a longitudinally polarized charged lepton. We shall also
86: review the various methods proposed in the literature for determining $h_1$,
87: referring in particular to SIDIS, which
88: presents some advantages over the other kinds of reactions.
89:
90: In sect. 2 we recall the definition of $h_1$ and illustrate the kind of
91: information we may extract from this function. In sect. 3 we show the
92: difficulties concerning the measurement of the transversity function. Moreover
93: we give a short review of the various methods suggested in the literature,
94: referring, in particular, to the SIDIS single spin asymmetry measured in the
95: HERMES experiment\cite{her}. As an alternative, in sect. 4, we examine the
96: possibility of a SIDIS double spin asymmetry. We consider
97: two different cases, according as to whether the direction of the
98: final hadron is fixed or not. We treat in detail the former case,
99: suggesting an alternative experiment for extracting $h_1$.
100: Lastly in sect. 5 we present numerical estimates of the asymmetry illustrated
101: in sect. 4 and give a short summary.
102:
103: \section{Definition of the transversity function}
104:
105: The transversity function\cite{rs} is defined (see {\it e. g.}, Jaffe and
106: Ji\cite{jj}) in
107: terms of the tensor Dirac operator $\sigma_{\mu\nu}$. In order to understand
108: the physical meaning of this distribution function, it is convenient to
109: decompose the quark field into terms of given transversity. In a reference
110: frame where the proton has a very large momentum directed perpendicularly
111: to its polarization, it results that, for a given flavor $f$ and longitudinal
112: fractional momentum $x$, $h^f_1 (x)$ is the difference between the number
113: density of quarks with spin aligned along the proton spin and the number
114: density of quarks with
115: opposite spin. Using different projection operators\cite{jj}, we can establish
116: two important properties of the transversity function, {\it i. e.}, that
117:
118: (i) $h_1^f(x)$ is a twist-two distribution function, which amounts to saying
119: that it survives in the scaling limit;
120:
121: (ii) $h_1^f(x)$ is chiral-odd, which makes it difficult to determine
122: experimentally this function, as we shall see in the next section.
123:
124: This distribution is different from the helicity distribution $\Delta q^f(x)$,
125: for which one has to consider a proton travelling in the direction of its spin.
126: The reason is that generally a Lorentz boost does not commute with a rotation.
127: This would be the case, and the two distributions $h_1$ = $\sum_f e_f^2 h_1^f$
128: and $g_1$ = $\sum_f e_f^2 \Delta q^f$ (where $e_f$ is the fractional charge
129: of the quark) would
130: coincide, if the dynamics of the quarks inside the proton were
131: non-relativistic. But we know that it is not so, because of the quark
132: confinement
133: and of the Heisenbrg principle; furthermore some predictions of the
134: non-relativistic quark model fail, like the value of the axial charge.
135: Therefore we may really expect nontrivial information on the nucleon structure
136: from the determination of $h_1$.
137: Indeed, some authors\cite{ss,ma} have stressed the importance of
138: transverse momentum
139: in the difference between $h_1$ and $g_1$. They have shown, in the framework of
140: the constituent quark model, that the quark tranverse momentum induces
141: nontrivial
142: Melosh-Wigner rotations, owing to the boost from the proton rest frame to the
143: infinite momentum frame. This causes a spin dilution both in $g_1$ and in
144: $h_1$. This dilution, in turn, may explain\cite{ma2}, at least partially, the
145: so-called spin crisis, consisting of a surprisingly small value, found by the
146: EMC collaboration in 1987\cite{emc}, of the first moment of $g_1$. But according
147: to the model the dilution is less marked in $h_1$ than in $g_1$.
148: Therefore the determination of $h_1$, compared with $g_1$,
149: may shed indirectly some light on the spin crisis.
150:
151: Furthermore, this determination could allow an important test for a QCD
152: prediction on the $Q^2$ dependence of the two distribution functions. Indeed,
153: while the QCD evolution of the singlet part of $g_1$ is coupled to the gluon
154: polarization, which may produce sensible scaling violations, such an effect
155: should be absent in $h_1$.
156:
157: \section{Difficulties in determining $h_1$}
158:
159: The difficulties in determining the transversity function are connected with
160: its chiral-odd character. Indeed a massless quark conserves its chirality under
161: any type of interactions, either electroweak or strong. It follows that, if a
162: given asymmetry is sensitive to this function, it must depend on the product of
163: $h_1$ by another chiral-odd function. Therefore we have to consider reactions
164: in which two hadrons are involved, either in the initial or in the final state.
165: Totally inclusive Deep Inelastic Scattering (DIS) is by no means suitable for
166: determining $h_1$.
167:
168: The double spin asymmetry in Drell-Yan (DY), with
169: two transversely polarized proton beams, results to be
170: proportional to\cite{ba} $\sum_f e_f^2 h^f_1(x_a) h^{\bar f}_1(x_b)$,
171: where $x_a$ and $x_b$ are the longitudinal fractional momenta of, respectively,
172: the active quark and antiquark that annihilate into a timelike photon. Here
173: the drawback is that this asymmetry is quite small (1-2 \% at most\cite{ba}),
174: moreover, presumably, $|h^{\bar f}_1|$ $<<$ $|h^f_1|$, since the antiquark
175: necessarily belongs to the sea. Something we could gain using a polarized
176: antiproton beam\cite{ba} instead of one of the two proton beams, but for the
177: moment this kind of experiment looks quite unrealistic.
178:
179: More promising look asymmetry experiments based on SIDIS, that is, on
180: reactions of the type
181: \begin{equation}
182: \ell ~~ p \longrightarrow \ell' ~~ h ~~ X, \label{reaz}
183: \end{equation}
184: where $\ell$ is a charged lepton and $h$ a hadron. The proton target is
185: polarized, which yields information on the polarization of the
186: initial active quark. If also the lepton beam is polarized\cite{jj2},
187: or if the final hadron is a spinning, unstable particle, whose decay may be
188: detected\cite{ma3}, we are faced with a double spin asymmetry. This allows to
189: get information on the final quark polarization and, in principle,
190: to extract $h_1$. But even a single spin asymmetry, {\it i. e.}, with an
191: unpolarized lepton beam, may be sensitive to the the final quark polarization,
192: provided we are able to exploit the so-called Collins effect\cite{coll} in the
193: angular distribution of $h$.
194:
195: A single spin asymmetry is proportional to a
196: mixed product of the type ${\bf S}\times {\bf p}_a\cdot {\bf p}_b$, where
197: ${\bf S}$ is the proton spin and ${\bf p}_a$ and ${\bf p}_b$ are any two (non
198: collinear) momenta of the particles involved in the reaction. This object is
199: invariant under parity inversion, but changes sign under time reversal. In
200: other words, the cross section contains a $T$-odd term. This can only come from
201: the interference between two amplitudes with different phases. In reaction
202: (\ref{reaz}), this interference is produced by the final-state interaction
203: between $h$ and other hadrons in the final state. Therefore in this
204: case it is the fragmentation function of $h$ that has a $T$-odd
205: part, sensitive to the polarization of the fragmenting quark, as
206: follows from the above mixed product. Here we identify ${\bf p}_a$ and
207: ${\bf p}_b$ with the momenta, respectively, of the final quark and of
208: $h$, and approximate the quark momentum by the momentum ${\bf
209: q}$ of the virtual photon. Then the problem amounts to determining the
210: $T$-odd part of the fragmentation function.
211:
212: To this end, consider the transverse momentum dependent (t.m.d.) fragmentation
213: function of the final hadron, $\varphi^f (z, {\bf P}_{\perp})$, where $z$ and
214: ${\bf P}_{\perp}$ are, respectively, the longitudinal fractional momentum and
215: the transverse momentum of the pion with respect to the fragmenting quark.
216: While the usual
217: fragmentation function, $D^f(z)$, is obtained simply by integrating $\varphi^f$
218: over the tranverse momentum, the $T$-odd part can be extracted by weighing
219: $\varphi^f$ with the above mixed product, that is,
220: \begin{equation}
221: D^f_{odd} (z) = \int d^2 P_{\perp}\varphi^f (z, {\bf P}_{\perp}) sin\Phi, \
222: ~~~~~~~ \ \ ~~~~~~~ \ sin\Phi = \frac{{\bf S}\times {\bf q}\cdot {\bf p}_h}
223: {|{\bf S}\times {\bf q}| |{\bf p}_h|}.
224: \end{equation}
225: Here ${\bf p}_h$ is the momentum of the hadron $h$. Moreover $\Phi$, the
226: so-called Collins angle, is defined as the azimuthal angle between the (${\bf
227: q}, {\bf S}$) plane and the (${\bf p}_h, {\bf S}$) plane. Notice that the
228: $T$-odd fragmentation function is also chiral-odd. The Collins effect has been
229: exploited in the recently realized HERMES experiment\cite{her}, where a
230: longitudinally polarized
231: proton has been used, and it is also invoked for the planned HERMES
232: experiment\cite{he2} with a transversely polarized target. The asymmetries,
233: respectively twist-3 and twist-2, are both sensitive to the product
234: $h_1^f(x) D^f_{odd}(z)$. Therefore the transversity function may be determined,
235: provided we are able to extract the Collins fragmentation function from an
236: independent experiment. In any case, a confirmation of the effect predicted by
237: Collins comes both from HERMES data on the SIDIS single spin
238: asymmetry\cite{her} and from $Z^0$ decay into two jets\cite{cern}.
239:
240: Variants of the Collins effect are the jet transversity determination\cite{ef}
241: in DIS and the two-pion interference method\cite{ja1}, applicable both to
242: SIDIS and to proton - proton collisions.
243:
244: \section{Double spin asymmetry in SIDIS}
245:
246: Alternatively we can, in principle, extract $h_1$ from a SIDIS double spin
247: asymmetry experiment, employing a transversely polarized proton target and a
248: longitudinally polarized lepton beam, and detecting a pion in the final state.
249: The asymmetry is defined as
250: \begin{equation}
251: A = \frac{d\sigma_{\uparrow\rightarrow}-d\sigma_{\uparrow\leftarrow}}
252: {d\sigma_{\uparrow\rightarrow}+d\sigma_{\uparrow\leftarrow}}, \label{as0}
253: \end{equation}
254: where the arrows denote the the proton and lepton polarizations. Two kinds of
255: experiments are possible, that is, fixing the final pion direction, or
256: integrating the cross section over the pion transverse momentum with respect to
257: the fragmenting quark. The latter possibility has
258: been considered by Jaffe and Ji\cite{jj2} (JJ). The asymmetry they calculate
259: contains twist 3 and twist 4 terms, the latters including the product
260: $h^f_1(x)\hat{e}^f_{\pi}(z)$; here $\hat{e}^f_{\pi}(z)$ is the twist-3
261: fragmentation function of the pion, a chiral-odd function. Therefore, again,
262: the determination of $h_1$ is subordinated to the knowledge, from an
263: independent experiment, of another nonperturbative (and rather unusual)
264: function.
265:
266: If we keep the final pion direction fixed, the asymmetry contains one more
267: twist 3 term, which disappears upon integration over the pion transverse
268: momentum. This term survives for ${\bf S}\cdot{\bf q}$ = 0, where the other
269: terms - corresponding to the JJ asymmetry - vanish. Moreover, under this
270: condition, such a term is sensitive to the
271: t.m.d. transversity function, $\delta q^f (x, {\bf p}_{\perp})$. This can be
272: intuitively seen by observing that, in this case, owing to the transverse
273: momentum of the parton inside the hadron, the transverse polarization of the
274: proton induces a longitudinal polarization in the active quark, which may be
275: related to $\delta q^f (x, {\bf p}_{\perp})$. In principle there could be
276: cancellations
277: due to symmetries ({\it e. g.}, under rotation, parity inversion, etc.), but
278: under the conditions we shall impose this does not occur. The situation is
279: quite analogous to the one described in ref.\cite{dis}. There we considered a
280: DY reaction of the type
281: \begin{equation}
282: p ~ p^{\uparrow} \longrightarrow \mu^+ {\vec \mu^-} ~ X,
283: \end{equation}
284: where we assumed to have one transversely polarized proton beam and to detect
285: the longitudinal polarization of one final muon. In that case the asymmetry -
286: which turns out to be the polarization of one of the muons - is non-zero,
287: provided we consider nonvanishing, fixed values of the transverse momentum of
288: the virtual photon with respect to the proton beams in the laboratory frame.
289: Since a SIDIS reaction is kinematically isomorphic to DY, a similar effect
290: occurs in the case considered, as we are going to show.
291:
292: To this end we calculate the double spin asymmetry (\ref{as0}), taking
293: ${\bf S}\cdot{\bf q}$ = 0. In
294: one-photon exchange approximation the differential cross section is of the type
295: \begin{equation}
296: d\sigma \propto L_{\mu\nu} H^{\mu\nu},
297: \label{dsg}
298: \end{equation}
299: where $L_{\mu\nu}$ and $H_{\mu\nu}$ are the leptonic and the
300: hadronic tensor respectively.
301: The leptonic tensor reads, in the massless approximation,
302: \begin{equation}
303: L_{\mu\nu} = k_{\mu} k'_{\nu} + k'_{\mu} k_{\nu} - g_{\mu\nu} k \cdot k' +
304: i \lambda_{\ell}\varepsilon_{\alpha\mu\beta\nu} k^{\alpha} k^{'\beta}.
305: \label{lept1}
306: \end{equation}
307: Here $k$ and $\lambda_{\ell}$ are respectively the four-momentum and the
308: helicity of the initial lepton, $k'$ = $k-q$ the four-momentum of the final
309: lepton and $q$ the four-momentum of the virtual photon.
310:
311: As regards the hadronic tensor, we use a QCD-improved parton model\cite{si}.
312: The generalized factorization theorem\cite{qi1,bo2} in the covariant
313: formalism\cite{land} yields, at zero order in the QCD coupling constant,
314: \begin{equation}
315: H_{\mu\nu} \propto \sum_f e_f^2 \int d^2 p_{\perp} \sum_T
316: q^{f}_{T} (x, {\bf p}_{\perp})
317: \varphi^{f} (z, {\bf P}^{2}_{\perp}) Tr (\rho^T \gamma_{\mu}\rho'
318: \gamma_{\nu}). \label{hadt}
319: \end{equation}
320: Here $q^f_T$ is the probability density function of finding a quark or an
321: antiquark in a pure spin state, whose third component along the
322: proton spin is $T$. Moreover the $\rho$'s are
323: the spin density matrices of the initial and final active parton,
324: {\it i. e.},\cite{dis}
325: \begin{equation}
326: \rho^T = {1 \over 2} \rlap/p [1 + 2 T \gamma_5 (\eta_{\parallel} +
327: \rlap/\eta_{\perp})], \ ~~~~~ \ ~~~ \rho' = {1 \over 2} \rlap/p'.
328: \label{dens}
329: \end{equation}
330: $p$ and $p'$ = $p+q$ are, respectively, the four-momenta of the initial and
331: final parton; moreover $2T\eta_{\parallel}$ is component of the parton
332: polarization along its momentum and $2T\eta_{\perp}$ the quark transverse
333: Pauli-Lubanski four-vector. $\eta_{\parallel}$ is a Lorentz scalar, such that
334: $|\eta_{\parallel}|$ $\leq$ 1. It is immediate to check that eqs. (\ref{dens})
335: are consistent with the Politzer theorem\cite{po} in parton model
336: apporoximation. Moreover we have
337: \begin{equation}
338: {\bf P}_{\perp} = {\bf \Pi}_{\perp}-z{\bf p}_{\perp},
339: \label{rel002}
340: \end{equation}
341: where ${\bf \Pi}_{\perp}$ is the transverse momentum of the pion with respect
342: to the photon momentum. We keep ${\bf \Pi}_{\perp}$ fixed, therefore
343: ${\bf P}_{\perp}$ is a function of ${\bf p}_{\perp}$. Furthermore we
344: set $|{\bf \Pi}_{\perp}|$ $\leq$ 1 $GeV$, which is
345: the condition for the factorization theorem to hold true\cite{coll,bo2}.
346:
347: To calculate the asymmetry (\ref{as0}), we substitute eqs. (\ref{dsg}) to
348: (\ref{dens}) into that expression, resulting in\cite{dis3}
349: \begin{equation}
350: A(Q, x; y; z,{\bf \Pi}_{\perp}) = {\cal F}
351: \frac{\sum_{f=1}^3 e_f^2(\delta Q^f +\delta \bar{Q}^f)}
352: {\sum_{f=1}^3 e_f^2(Q^f +\bar{Q}^f)},
353: ~~~~ \ ~~~~ {\cal F} = \frac{y(2-y)}{1+(1-y)^2}. \label{assidis}
354: \end{equation}
355: Here we have set $y = 1-E'/E$, where $E$ and $E'$ are, respectively, the
356: initial and final energy of the lepton. Moreover we have introduced the
357: quantities
358: \begin{eqnarray}
359: Q^f &=& \int d^2 p_{\perp} q^f(x,
360: {\bf p}_{\perp}^2) \varphi^f (z, {\bf P}^{2}_{\perp}),
361: \label{qf}
362: \\
363: \delta Q^f &=& 2 Q^{-1} \int d^2 p_{\perp} {\bf p}_{\perp}\cdot{\bf S}
364: \delta q^f (x, {\bf p}_{\perp}) \varphi^f (z, {\bf P}^{2}_{\perp}), \label{dqf}
365: \end{eqnarray}
366: \begin{equation}
367: q^f = \sum_{T = -1/2}^{1/2} q^f_T, \ ~~~~~ \ ~~~~~ \ ~~~~~~ \
368: \delta q^f = \sum_{T = -1/2}^{1/2} 2T q^f_T \label{distr}.
369: \label{quef}
370: \end{equation}
371: $q^f$ is the t.m.d. unpolarized quark distribution.
372: We have slightly changed our notation, considering separately, for each
373: flavor, the quark ($Q^f$, $\delta Q^f$) and antiquark ($\bar{Q}^f$,
374: $\delta \bar{Q}^f$) contribution, the barred quantities being defined
375: analogously to eqs. (\ref{qf}) and (\ref{dqf}). Some remarks are in order.
376:
377: (i) Invariance of strong interactions under parity, time reversal and
378: rotations (in particular rotations of $\pi$ around the proton momentum) implies
379: \begin{equation}
380: \delta q^f (x, {\bf p}_{\perp}) = \delta q^f (x, -{\bf p}_{\perp}).
381: \label{symde}
382: \end{equation}
383: This relation has two important consequences.
384: First of all the integral at the r. h. s. of eq. (\ref{dqf})
385: vanishes for ${\bf \Pi}_{\perp}$ = 0, therefore $\delta Q^f$ is proportional to
386: the the scalar product ${\bf \Pi}_{\perp}\cdot{\bf S}$.
387: Secondly, if we consider totally inclusive DIS - which amounts to
388: replacing $\varphi^f$ $\rightarrow$ 1 -, the integral (\ref{dqf})
389: is washed out by integration over transverse momentum.
390:
391: (ii) It is worth observing that, owing to the non-collinearity of the quark with
392: respect to the proton, the t.m.d. transversity function includes, unlike $h_1$,
393: a chiral-even term, which
394: can be calculated by changing the quantization axis from the proton
395: momentum to the quark momentum.
396: It is just such a chiral-even function that appears in formula
397: (\ref{dqf}); this is why our asymmetry formula (\ref{assidis}), unlike the
398: other asymmetries considered in the literature, does not contain any chiral-odd
399: distribution or fragmentation functions.
400:
401: (iii) Gauge invariance implies that QCD first order corrections, in particular
402: graphs with one gluon exchange\cite{qi1}, contribute to the above mentioned
403: asymmetry. However a calculation in the light cone gauge\cite{dis} assures that
404: such contributions are about $10\%$ of the zero order terms.
405:
406: (iv) Lastly the twist-3 character of the asymmetry (\ref{assidis}) - which can
407: be immediately checked from eq. (\ref{dqf}) - forces us to pick up not too large
408: values of $Q^2$ ($\leq$ 10 $GeV^2$). However this is not a serious limitation
409: with respect to the twist-2 azimuthal asymmetries, which are plagued
410: by a strong Sudakov suppression\cite{bo2} at large $Q^2$.
411:
412: \section{Numerical results and summary}
413:
414: Here we calculate the order of magnitude of the asymmetry (\ref{assidis}). To
415: this end we assume\cite{bo2} $q^f$, $\delta q^f$ and $\varphi^f$ to have a
416: gaussian transverse momentum dependence, with the same width parameter. Then
417: eq. (\ref{assidis}) results in
418: \begin{equation}
419: A(Q, x; y; z, {\bf \Pi}_{\perp}) = \frac{{\bf S}\cdot{\bf \Pi}_{\perp}}{Q}
420: \frac{2z{\cal F}}{1+z^2}
421: \frac{\sum_f e^2_f\left[h_1^f(x)D^f(z)+\bar{h}_1^f(x)\bar{D}^f(z)\right]}
422: {\sum_f e^2_f\left[q^f(x)D^f(z)+\bar{q}^f(x)\bar{D}^f(z)\right]}.\label{formu}
423: \end{equation}
424: Taking into account eq. (\ref{formu}) and the second eq. (\ref{assidis}), we
425: see that the optimal conditions for measuring the asymmetry are (i) $y$ and $z$
426: as close to 1 as possible and (ii) the pion transverse momentum relative to the
427: photon parallel to the proton polarization. Under such conditions, and taking
428: $|{\bf \Pi}_{\perp}|\simeq 1$ $GeV$ and
429: $Q$ = 2.5 $GeV$, we have $A \sim 0.4 R$, where
430: $R = h_1^f(x)/q^f(x)$ has been determined by HERMES\cite{her}, $|R| = (50\pm
431: 30)\%$.
432:
433: To summarize, first of all, we have shortly reviewed the methods proposed in
434: the literature for determining $h_1$. Then we have suggested a SIDIS
435: experiment, with a
436: longitudinally polarized lepton and a transversely polarized proton, detecting
437: a pion in the final state. We demand to pick up events such that the lepton
438: scattering plane is orthogonal to the proton polarization; moreover we select
439: pions produced in a fixed direction and at not too large angles with respect
440: to the virtual photon momentum. The relative asymmetry is sensitive to the
441: t.m.d. transversity function, but, unlike the other methods proposed in the
442: literature, it does not involve any other unknown
443: functions. The t.m.d. functions $q^f$ and $\varphi^f$ involved in asymmetry
444: (\ref{assidis}) can be parametrized in a well determined way.
445: This asymmetry is estimated to be, for not too large
446: values of $Q^2$ and under favourable kinematic conditions, at least
447: $\sim 10\%$. The experiment could be performed at some
448: facilities, like CERN (COMPASS coll.), DESY (HERMES coll.) or Jefferson
449: Laboratory, where similar asymmetry measurements have been realized or planned.
450:
451: \vskip 0.40in
452:
453: \begin{thebibliography}{0}
454:
455: \bibitem{ja01} R.L. Jaffe: Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. A {\bf 359} (2001) 391
456:
457: \bibitem{ja1} R.L. Jaffe, X. Jin and J. Tang: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 80} (1998)
458: 1166; Phys. Rev. D {\bf 57} (1998) 5920
459:
460: \bibitem{ja2} R.L Jaffe: "2nd Topical Workshop on Deep Inelastic Scattering off
461: polarized targets: Theory meets Experiment (Spin 97)", Proceedings eds. J.
462: Bl\"umlein, A. De Roeck, T. Gehrmann and W.-D. Nowak. Zeuten, DESY, (1997)
463: p.167
464:
465: \bibitem{ji} X. Ji: Phys Lett. B {\bf 284} (1992) 137
466:
467: \bibitem{jj2} R.L. Jaffe and X. Ji: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 71} (1993) 2547
468:
469: \bibitem{ba} V. Barone, T. Calarco and A. Drago: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 56} (1997)
470: 527
471:
472: \bibitem{dis} E. Di Salvo: Eur. Phys. J. C {\bf 19} (2001) 503
473:
474: \bibitem{ef} A. V. Efremov: hep-ph/0001214 and hep-ph/0101057, to appear on
475: Czech. J. Phys. Suppl.
476:
477: \bibitem{ar} X. Artru: 10th Int. Symp. on High Energy Spin Physics, Nagoya,
478: Nov. 9-14, 1992, p.605
479:
480: \bibitem{her} HERMES coll., Airapetian et al.: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 84} (2000)
481: 4047
482:
483: \bibitem{rs} J. Ralston and D.E. Soper: Nucl. Phys B {\bf 152} (1979) 109
484:
485: \bibitem{jj} R.L. Jaffe and X. Ji: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 67} (1991) 552; Nucl.
486: Phys. B {\bf 375} (1992) 527
487:
488: %\bibitem{am} X. Artru and M. Mekhfi: Z. Phys. C - Particles and Fields {\bf 45}
489: %(1990) 669
490: %\bibitem{cpr} J. Cortes, B. Pire and J. Ralston: Z. Phys. C - Particles and
491: %Fields {\bf 55} (1992) 409
492:
493: \bibitem{ss} I. Schmidt and J. Soffer: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 407} (1997) 331
494:
495: \bibitem{ma} B.-Q. Ma, I. Schmidt and J. Soffer: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 441} (1998)
496: 461
497:
498: \bibitem{ma2} B.-Q. Ma: J. Phys. G, Part. Phys. {\bf 17} (1991) L53; Z. Phys. A
499: {\bf 345} (1993) 321
500:
501: \bibitem{emc} E.M.C. Coll.: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 206} (1988) 364
502:
503: \bibitem{ma3} B.-Q. Ma, I. Schmidt, J. Soffer and J.-J. Yang: hep-ph/0103136
504:
505: \bibitem{coll} J. Collins: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 396} (1993) 161
506:
507: \bibitem{he2} HERMES coll., K. Ackerstaff et al.: N.I.M., A {\bf 417} (1998) 230
508:
509: \bibitem{cern} A.V. Efremov, O.G. Smirnova and L.G. Tkachev: Nucl. Phys. Proc.
510: Suppl. {\bf 74} (1999) 49
511:
512: \bibitem{si} D. Sivers: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 41} (1990) 83; D {\bf 43} (1991) 261
513:
514: \bibitem{qi1} J. Qiu and G. Sterman: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 67} (1991) 2264;
515: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 378} (1992) 52
516:
517: \bibitem{bo2} D. Boer: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 62} (2000) 094029
518:
519: \bibitem{land} P. V. Landshoff and J. C. Polkinghorne: Phys. Rep. {\bf 5}
520: (1972) 1; see also J. D. Jackson, G. G. Ross and R. G. Roberts: Phys. Lett.
521: B {\bf 226} (1989) 159
522:
523: \bibitem{po} H. D. Politzer: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 172} (1980) 349
524:
525: \bibitem{dis3} E. Di Salvo: in progress
526:
527: %\bibitem{la} L. Landau and E. Lifchitz: "Th\'eorie Quantique Relativiste", ed.
528: %MIR, Moscou, 1972; pag. 39
529:
530: %\bibitem{cm} P. D. B. Collins and A. D. Martin: "Hadron Interactions", Adam
531: %Hilger Ltd, 1984; pag. 43
532:
533: \end{thebibliography}
534: \end{document}
535: