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: \begin{document}
22:
23: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% To switch off trimmarks %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
24: %
25:
26: \def\nocropmarks{\vskip5pt\phantom{cropmarks}}
27:
28: \let\trimmarks\nocropmarks %%% Pls. remove the comment sign (%) to switch off the trimmarks
29:
30: %
31: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
32:
33:
34:
35: %\markboth{Authors' Names}
36: %{Instructions for Typing Manuscripts (Paper's Title)}
37:
38: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Publisher's Area please ignore %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
39: %
40: \catchline{}{}{}
41: %
42: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
43:
44: \setcounter{page}{1}
45:
46:
47: \title{SPIN EFFECTS IN HIGH ENERGY FRAGMENTATION PROCESSES}
48:
49: \author{LIANG Zuo-tang}
50:
51: \address{Department of physics, Shandong University,
52: Jinan, Shandong 250100, China}
53:
54: \maketitle
55: %\pub{Received (received date)}{Revised (revised date)}
56:
57: \begin{abstract}
58: Recent measurements, in particular those on
59: $\Lambda$ polarization and spin alignment of vector mesons in
60: $e^+e^-$ annihilation at LEP, and those on the
61: azimuthal asymmetry at HERA, have attracted
62: much attention on the spin effects
63: in high energy fragmentation processes.
64: In this talk, we make a brief introduction
65: to the different topics studied in this connection
66: and a short summary of the available data.
67: After that, we present a short summary of
68: the main theoretical results that
69: we obtained in studying these different topics.
70: The talk was mainly
71: based on the publications [5-9] which have
72: been finished in collaboration with C.Boros,
73: Liu Chun-xiu and Xu Qing-hua.
74: \end{abstract}
75:
76: \section{Introduction}
77:
78: Spin effect is a powerful tool to study the properties of
79: the hadronic interactions and hadron structures.
80: Since the deep understanding of different aspects in
81: spin physics of strong interaction almost always involves hadron
82: production, spin effects in high energy fragmentation
83: processes have attracted much attention recently,
84: both experimentally and theoretically
85: (see e.g.Refs.[1-14] and the references given there).
86: There are two main aspects in this connection, i.e.,
87: the dependence of the polarization and
88: the momentum distribution of the
89: produced hadron on the spin of the fragmenting quark.
90: The former is usually referred as the spin transfer
91: in the fragmentation process.
92: For the latter, if the fragmenting quark is transversely
93: polarized, we study the azimuthal angle dependence
94: of the produced hadrons,
95: and if the fragmenting quark is longitudinally polarized,
96: we study a quantity which is called ``jet handedness''.
97: The first two problems are closely related to the
98: studies of the hyperon polarization in unpolarized
99: hadron-hadron collisions and the left-right
100: asymmetries in singly polarized hadron-hadron collisions\cite{LB2000}.
101: I will concentrate on these two problems in my talk.
102:
103: \section{Spin transfer in high energy fragmentation processes}
104:
105: Spin transfer in high energy fragmentation process
106: is defined as the probability for
107: the polarization of the fragmenting quark to be transferred
108: to the produced hadron.
109: Here, we consider $q_0\to h(q_0...)+X$.
110: We suppose that the $q_0$ was polarized
111: before the fragmentation, and ask the following questions:
112: (1) Will the $q_0$ keep its polarization?
113: (2) How is the relation between
114: the polarization of $q_0$ and that of the
115: produced $h$ which contains the $q_0$?
116: Clearly, the answers to these questions
117: depend on the hadronization mechanism
118: and on the spin structure of hadrons.
119: The study can provide useful information for both aspects.
120: In particular, there exist now two distinctively different
121: pictures for the spin contents of the baryons:
122: the static quark model
123: using the SU(6) symmetric wave function
124: [referred as the SU(6) picture],
125: and the picture drawn from the data for polarized deeply inelastic
126: lepton-nucleon scattering (DIS)
127: and SU(3) flavor symmetry in hyperon decay
128: [referred as the DIS picture].
129: It is natural to ask which picture
130: is suitable to describe the question (2) mentioned above.
131: Obviously, the answers to these questions
132: are also essential in the description of the
133: puzzling hyperon transverse polarization
134: observed already in the 1970s in unpolarized
135: hadron-hadron reactions.
136:
137: \subsection{Hyperon polarization in high energy reactions as a tool to study the
138: spin transfer in fragmentation processes}
139:
140: It has been pointed out that\cite{BL98,LL2000}
141: measurements of the longitudinal $\Lambda$ polarization
142: in $e^+e^-$ annihilations at the $Z^0$ pole
143: provide a very special check to the
144: validity of the SU(6) picture in connecting
145: the spin of the constituent to the polarization of
146: the hadron produced in the fragmentation processes.
147: This is because the $\Lambda$ polarization in this reaction
148: obtained from the SU(6) picture should be
149: the maximum among different models.
150: Data are now available\cite{LamPol}
151: from both ALEPH and OPAL Collaborations.
152: The results show that the SU(6) picture seems
153: to agree better with the data\cite{LamPol}
154: compared with the DIS picture. (See Fig.1).
155: This is rather surprising: the energy at LEP
156: is very high hence the initial
157: quarks and anti-quarks produced
158: at the $e^+e^-$ annihilation vertices
159: are certainly current quarks and current anti-quarks.
160: They cannot be the constituent quarks used
161: in describing the static properties of hadrons
162: using SU(6) symmetric wave functions.
163: It is thus interesting and instructive to
164: have further checks by making complementary measurements.
165:
166: \begin{figure}[htbp]
167: \psfig{file=liaf1.eps,height=6.8cm}
168: \caption{Longitudinal $\Lambda$ polarization $P_\Lambda$ in
169: $e^+e^-\to\Lambda X$ at LEP I and LEP II energies.}
170: \end{figure}
171:
172: We note that, to study the spin transfer in
173: fragmentation, we need to
174: know the polarization of $q_0$
175: and measure the polarization of the produced $h$.
176: Hence, hyperon productions in lepton-induced reactions
177: are ideal to study this problem.
178: Here, the polarization of quark can easily be calculated
179: using the standard model for electroweak interaction
180: and the hyperon polarization can easily be determined by measuring
181: the angular distribution of its decay products.
182: We have thus made a systematic study\cite{BL98}$^-$\cite{LXL2001}
183: of hyperon polarizations in different lepton-induced reactions.
184: The obtained results can be used as further
185: checks of the different pictures.
186: Now we give a brief summary of the
187: calculation method and the obtained results.
188:
189:
190: \subsubsection{The calculation mehod}
191:
192: The calculation method has been formulated in different
193: literature. Here, we summarize the main points in order
194: to show the different inputs we need
195: and what kinds of uncertaintities we
196: may have in the calculations.
197:
198: We consider $q^0_f\to H_i+X$ and divide
199: the produced $H_i$'s
200: into the following groups:
201: (a) directly produced
202: and contain the $q_f^0$'s;
203: (b) decay products of heavier
204: hyperons which were polarized before their decays;
205: (c) directly produced but
206: do not contain the $q_f^0$;
207: (d) decay products of heavier hyperons
208: which were unpolarized before their decays.
209: Obviously, hyperons from (a) and (b)
210: can be polarized while those from (c) and (d) are not.
211: We obtain,
212: \begin{equation}
213: P_{H_i}={ {\sum\limits_f t^F_{H_i,f} P_f \langle n^a_{H_i,f}\rangle
214: +\sum\limits_{j} t^D_{H_i, H_j} P_{H_j} \langle n^b_{H_i, H_j}\rangle}
215: \over
216: {\langle n^a_{H_i}\rangle +\langle n^b_{H_i}\rangle +
217: \langle n^c_{H_i}\rangle +\langle n^d_{H_i}\rangle} }.
218: \end{equation}
219: The different quantities here are defined
220: and obtained in the following way:
221:
222: (i) $P_f$ is the polarization of $q_f^0$
223: which is determined by the electroweak vertex.
224:
225: (ii) $\langle n^a_{H_i,f}\rangle$ is the average number of
226: $H_i$'s which are directly produced and contain
227: $q_f^0$ of flavor $f$, and
228: $\langle n^b_{H_i,H_j}\rangle$ is that
229: from the decay of $H_j$'s which were polarized;
230: $P_{H_j}$ is the polarization of $H_j$;
231: $\langle n^a_{H_i}\rangle$,
232: $\langle n^b_{H_i}\rangle$,
233: $\langle n^c_{H_i}\rangle$ and $\langle n^d_{H_i}\rangle$
234: are average numbers of $H_i$'s in group (a), (b), (c)
235: and (d) respectively.
236: These average numbers of the hyperons of different
237: origins are determined
238: by the hadronization mechanisms and should be
239: independent of the polarization of the initial quarks.
240: Hence, we can calculate them using a hadronization
241: model which give a good description of the unpolarized data.
242: We used Lund model implemented by JETSET or LEPTO in our calculations.
243:
244:
245: (iii) $t^F_{H_i,f}$ is the probability for
246: the polarization of $q_f^0$ to be transferred
247: to $H_i$ in group (a) and
248: is called the polarization transfer factor,
249: where the superscript $F$ stands for fragmentation.
250: It equals to the fraction of
251: spin carried by the $f$-flavor-quark
252: divided by the average number of quark of flavor $f$
253: in $H_i$, which is different in the SU(6)
254: or the DIS picture\cite{BL98,LL2000}.
255:
256: (iv) $t^D_{H_i,H_j}$ is the probability for
257: the polarization of $H_j$ to be transferred to
258: $H_i$ in the decay process $H_j\to H_i+X$ and
259: is called decay polarization transfer factor,
260: where the superscript $D$ stands for decay.
261: It is determined by the decay process and is independent
262: of the process in which $H_j$ is produced.
263: For the octet hyperon decays, they are
264: extracted from the materials in Review of Particle Properties.
265: But for the decuplet hyperons, we have to use an estimation
266: based on the static quark model.
267: This is a major source of the theoretical uncertainties
268: in our calculations of
269: the final $P_{Hi}$'s in different reactions.
270:
271: We applied\cite{BL98}$^-$\cite{XL2001}
272: the method to $e^+e^-\to H_iX$, $\mu^-p\to \mu^-H_iX$ and
273: $\nu_\mu p\to\mu^-H_iX$ at high energies and
274: calculated the polarization of different octet hyperons
275: in these reactions.
276: We now summarize the main results as follows.
277:
278:
279: \subsubsection{The results for $e^+e^-$ annihilation}
280:
281: For $e^+e^-\to H_iX$,
282: we made the calculations at LEP I and LEP II energies.
283: The results show that, all the octet hyperons should be
284: significantly polarized
285: and the polarizations are different in the SU(6) or the DIS picture.
286: We also tried to make flavor separation.
287: We found that it is impossible to separate
288: only contribution from $u$ or $d$ to $\Lambda$.
289: But we can enhance the contribution from $s$ fragmentation
290: by giving some criteria to the selected events.
291: For details, see Ref.[6].
292:
293: \subsubsection{The results for deeply inelastic scattering at high energies}
294:
295: In deeply inelastic lepton-nucleon scatterings,
296: at sufficiently high $Q^2$ and hadronic energy $W$,
297: hadrons in the current fragmentation region
298: can be considered as the pure results of
299: the fragmentation of the struck quarks.
300: There are two advantages to study hyperon polarization
301: in $\mu^-p\to\mu^-H_iX$:
302: Here, flavor separation
303: can be achieved by selecting events in certain kinematic regions;
304: and we can study the spin transfer both in longitudinally
305: and in transversely polarized cases.
306: We made the calculations for different combinations
307: of beam and target polarizations.
308: The results show the following characteristics:
309:
310: (A) hyperons are polarized quite significantly
311: if the beam is polarized but $\Lambda$ polarization
312: is quite small in the case of unpolarized beam and polarized target.
313:
314: (B) there is significant contribution
315: from heavier hyperon decay to $\Lambda$,
316: it is even higher than the
317: directly produced in most kinematic regions.
318:
319: (C) for $\Sigma^+$, the decay contribution is very small
320: and the polarization is higher than that for $\Lambda$
321: and the differences from the different pictures are also larger.
322:
323: (D) the transverse polarization of the outgoing struck quark
324: is obtained only in the case of using transversely polarized target.
325: But the resulted $\Lambda$ transverse polarization is very small
326: and the decay influence is large.
327: In contrast, the $\Sigma^+$ polarization
328: is larger and there is almost no decay contribution.
329:
330: We made similar calculations for $\nu_\mu p\to\mu^-H_iX$.
331: We found that there is a complete flavor separation for
332: $\Sigma^+$ production.
333: It comes almost completely from $u$ quark fragmentation.
334: This leads to a quite high $\Sigma^+$ polarization.
335: (See Fig.2.)
336: However, for $\Lambda$ production,
337: contribution from charmed baryon decay is very significant.
338: It can completely destroy even the qualitative feature
339: of the $\Lambda$ polarization.
340: We thus reached the conclusion that,
341: in deeply inelastic lepton-nucleon scattering,
342: $\Sigma^+$ production is much more suitable to study
343: the spin transfer in fragmentation processes.
344: For details, see Ref.[7].
345:
346: \begin{figure}[htbp]
347: \psfig{file=liaf2.eps,height=5cm}
348: \caption{$\Sigma^+$ polarization in $\nu_\mu p$
349: $\to\mu^-\Sigma^+ X$ at high energies.
350: Here the solid and dashed lines
351: are respectively the results obtained
352: using the SU(6) and the DIS pictures.}
353: \end{figure}
354:
355: \subsubsection{Hyperon plarization in $\nu_\mu\to\mu^-HX$
356: at the NOMAD energies}
357:
358: We note that there are also measurements\cite{NOMAD}
359: on $\Lambda$ polarization in $\nu_\mu N\to \mu^-\Lambda X$ by
360: NOMAD collaboration at CERN.
361: Compared the NOMAD data (See Fig.3)
362: with the above-mentioned
363: theoretical results, we see a distinct difference:
364: While the theoretical results go to zero
365: when $x_F$ goes to zero, the data show that
366: $|P_\Lambda|$ rises monotonically when $x_F$
367: decreases from positive $x_F$ to negative $x_F$.
368: It does not go to zero when $x_F$ goes to zero.
369: Does this imply that none of the pictures
370: discussed above is suitable for $\nu_\mu N\to \mu^-\Lambda X$?
371:
372: A more detailed analysis shows
373: that the answer to the question should be ``No!''
374: This is because, in the above mentioned calculations,
375: we took only the struck quark fragmentation into account
376: and neglected the influence from the remnant of the scattered nucleon.
377: This is a good approximation only at high energies,
378: or more precisely, at high $Q^2$ and $W$.
379: But, in the NOMAD experiments,
380: the incident energies of the $\nu_\mu$ is $10\sim 50$ GeV and
381: $W$ is only of several GeV.
382: In this case, no separation between the fragmentation products of the
383: struck quark and those of the nucleon remnant is possible.
384: In particular, in the region of $x_F$ around zero,
385: the contributions from the nucleon remnant can be very important.
386: We studied this problem numerically
387: using the event generator LEPTO.
388: The results show that the contributions
389: from the nucleon remnant indeed play an
390: important role even at $x_F\sim 0.5$.
391: We have to take it into account in such energy regions.
392:
393: Using a valence quark model
394: to calculate the polarization of the nucleon remnant,
395: we made a very rough estimation
396: of $P_\Lambda$ in $\nu_\mu N\to \mu^-\Lambda X$
397: at the NOMAD energies by taking both the fragmentation
398: of the struck quark and that of the nucleon remnant into account.
399: A qualitative agreement with the data\cite{NOMAD} is obtained
400: (See Fig.3 or Ref.[7] for details).
401:
402: \begin{figure}[htbp]
403: \psfig{file=liaf3.eps,height=5cm}
404: \caption{$\Lambda$ polarization in $\nu_\mu N\to
405: \mu^-\Lambda X$ at the NOMAD energies.
406: Here, the upper and lower solid curves are respectively the
407: results obtained using the SU(6) picture when the fragmentation of
408: the nucleon remnant is neglected or taken into account.
409: Those dotted lines are the corresponding results
410: using the DIS picture.}
411: \end{figure}
412:
413:
414: \subsubsection{Longitudinal hyperon polarization in
415: high $p_\perp$ jets in polarized $pp$ collisions}
416:
417: Last but not least, we emphasize that the
418: spin effects in fragmentation processes
419: can also be studied in polarized $pp$ collisions
420: (e.g. at RHIC) by measuring the hadrons
421: in high $p_\perp$ jets.
422: Here, it is envisaged that these hadrons are
423: pure products of the fragmentation of the scattered
424: quak (antiquark or gluon).
425: Since we have many different hard subprocesses
426: (e.g. $qq\to qq$, $qg\to qg$, or $gg\to gg$)
427: which contribute to high $p_\perp$ jets,
428: the situation here is much more complicated
429: than that in the lepton induced reactions discussed above.
430: We have in particular the contribution from gluon fragmentation.
431: This, on the one hand, make the study more difficult since
432: we know much less about gluon polarization and fragmentation.
433: On the other, it makes the study also more interesting since
434: we can use it to study not only quark but also gluon fragmentation.
435:
436: \nopagebreak
437:
438: A simple Monte-Carlo study\cite{XLL2001} shows that,
439: for moderately high $p_\perp$ (e.g. $3\sim 5$ GeV),
440: gluon fragmentation dominates. This is a
441: kinematic region which is suitable for
442: studying gluon fragmentation.
443: But, for very high $p_\perp$ and large $\eta$,
444: quark fragmentation dominates.
445: Here, we can apply the above-mentioned
446: the method to calculate the longitudinal hyperon polarizations.
447: Such calculations have also been carried out\cite{XLL2001}.
448: An example of the obtained results is given in Fig.4.
449:
450: \begin{figure}[htbp]
451: \psfig{file=liaf4.eps,height=4.5cm}
452: \caption{$\Sigma^+$ polarization in high $p_\perp$
453: jets in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=500$GeV
454: and $p_\perp >13$GeV.}
455: \end{figure}
456:
457:
458: \subsection{Spin alignment of vector mesons in high energy reactions}
459:
460: Another aspect which is related to the
461: problem of spin transfer in fragmentation is the
462: spin alignment of vector meson in high energy reactions.
463: It is clear that the polarization of the
464: fragmenting quark can also be transferred to the vector meson $V$.
465: This effect can be studied by measuring $\rho_{00}^V$,
466: the $00$ component of the helicity density matrix of $V$,
467: which is just the probability for $V$ to be in the helicity zero state.
468: Data are available\cite{VecPol} for $e^+e^-$
469: annihilation at the $Z^0$-pole at LEP.
470: It shows that,
471: for vector mesons with high momentum fraction,
472: $\rho_{00}^V$ is much larger than $1/3$,
473: the result expected in the unpolarized case.
474:
475: A simple calculation shows that\cite{XLL2001}
476: these data\cite{VecPol} imply
477: a significant polarization of the $\bar q$ that is
478: created in the fragmentation and combines
479: with the polarized $q_f^0$ to form the vector meson.
480: The polarization has a simple relation to that of the $q_f^0$,
481: i.e., $P(\bar q)=-\alpha P(q_f^0)$,
482: where $\alpha\approx 0.5$ is a constant.
483: Using this we got a good fit to the data\cite{VecPol}.
484: It should be interesting to see whether this relation
485: is also true in other processes where polarized $q_f^0$ is produced.
486: We thus apply it to other reactions and made predictions
487: for the spin alignments of vector mesons in these processes.
488: They can be checked by future experiments.
489: For details, see Ref.[8].
490:
491: \nopagebreak
492:
493: \section{Azimuthal asymmetry in the fragmentation of a transversely polarized quark}
494:
495: In the fragmentation of a transversely polarized quark,
496: the products can have an azimuthal asymmetry.
497: The first measurement in this connection
498: has been carried out by HERMES\cite{AziAsy},
499: and the results show
500: that such an effect indeed exists at that energy.
501: What we would like to point out here is the following:
502: The existence of such an azimuthal asymmetry
503: is a direct consequence of Lund string fragmentation model due to
504: conservation of energy-momentum and angular momentum.
505: The model was first used\cite{AGI79} to spin effects
506: in 1979 to explain the unexpected
507: $\Lambda$ polarization in unpolarzed pp collisions.
508: By applying\cite{LB2000} it to the fragmentation of
509: a transversely polarized quark,
510: we obtain a significant azimuthal asymmetry.
511: We are now working on the numerical calculations
512: along this line in collaboration with the Lund group.
513: Predictions for semi-inclusive deeply inelastic lepton-nucleon
514: scattering and hadrons in high $p_\perp$ jets in transversely
515: polarized $pp$ collisions will be available soon.
516:
517: \section*{Acknowledgements}
518:
519: It is a great pleasure for me to thank the organizer
520: for inviting me to give the talk.
521: This work was supported in part by the Natural National Science Foundation
522: (NSFC) and the Education Ministry of China.
523:
524: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
525: \bibitem{LamPol} ALEPH Collab., D.~Buskulic et al., Phys. Lett.
526: B{\bf 374},319 (1996);\\
527: OPAL Collab., K. Ackerstaff et al.,
528: Euro. Phys. J. C{\bf 2}, 49 (1998).
529: \bibitem{VecPol} OPAL Collab., K. Ackerstaff {\it et al.},
530: Phys.Lett. B{\bf 412}, 210 (1997).
531: \bibitem{NOMAD} NOMAD Collab.,P. Astier {\it et al.,}
532: Nucl. Phys. B{\bf 558}, 3(2000).
533: \bibitem{AziAsy} HERMES Collab., A. Airapetian {\it et al.,}
534: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 84}, 4047 (2000);
535: Phys. Rev. D{\bf 64}, 097101 (2001).
536: \bibitem{BL98} C. Boros, and Liang Zuo-tang,
537: Phys. Rev. D{\bf 57}, 4491 (1998).
538: \bibitem{LL2000} Liu Chun-xiu and Liang Zuo-tang, Phys. Rev
539: D{\bf 62}, 094001 (2000).
540: \bibitem{LXL2001} Liu Chun-xiu, Xu Qing-hua and Liang Zuo-tang,
541: Phys. Rev. D{\bf 64}, 073004 (2001);
542: talk by Liu in this conference and paper in preparation.
543: \bibitem{XLL2001} Xu Qing-hua, Liu Chun-xiu and Liang Zuo-tang,
544: Phys. Rev. D{\bf 63}, 111301(R) (2001);
545: talk by Xu in this conference and paper in preparation.
546: \bibitem{XL2001} Xu Qing-hua and Liang Zuo-tang,
547: Chin. Phys. Lett.{\bf 18}, 1021 (2001).
548: \bibitem{Jaffe91} R.L. Jaffe, and Ji Xiangdong,
549: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 67 }, 552 (1991);
550: Nucl. Phys. {\bf B 375}, 527 (1992);
551: and talks in this conference.
552: \bibitem{GH93} G. Gustafson and J. H\"akkinen,
553: Phys. Lett. B{\bf 303}, 350 (1993).
554: \bibitem{Kotz98} A. Kotzinian, A. Bravar, D. Harrach,
555: Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C2}, 329 (1998).
556: \bibitem{Ma2000} B.Q. Ma, I. Schmidt, and J.J. Yang,
557: Phys. Rev. D{\bf 61}, 034017 (2000);
558: B.Q. Ma, I. Schmidt, J. Soffer, and J.J. Yang,
559: Phys. Rev. D{\bf 62}, 114009 (2000); {\bf 63}, 037501 (2001);
560: talks by Ma and Soffer in the conferences
561: and references given there.
562: \bibitem{ABM00} M. Anselmino, M. Boglione, F. Murgia,
563: Phys. Lett. B{\bf 481}, 253 (2000);
564: M. Anselmino, D. Boer, U. D'Alesio, F. Murgia,
565: Euro. Phys. J. C{\bf 21}, 501 (2001); hep-ph/0109186;
566: and talks by Anselmino and D'Alesio in this conference.
567: \bibitem{MA2001} Ma Jian-ping, hep-ph/0111237 and talk in this conference.
568: \bibitem{LB2000} For a review dedicated to this topic,
569: see e.g., Liang Zuo-tang and C. Boros,
570: Inter. J. Mod. Phys. A{\bf 15}, 927 (2000).
571: \bibitem{AGI79} B.Andersson, G.Gustafon, G.Ingelman,
572: Phys. Lett. B{\bf 85}, 417 (1979).
573: \end{thebibliography}
574:
575: \end{document}
576:
577:
578: