1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2: %

3: % May 29, 2003

4: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

5: 

6: \documentclass[10pt,draft]{dis03}

7: \usepackage{epsf,amsmath}

8: 

9: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.15}

10: \textwidth 12cm \textheight 17cm

11: \pagestyle{myheadings}

12: 

13: 

14: \begin{document}

15: 

16: \title{THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE RELATIONS BETWEEN \\

17: NON-SINGLET CONTRIBUTIONS TO $g_1^N$ AND $F_1^N$ \\

18: STRUCTURE FUNCTIONS WITHIN INFRARED RENORMALON MODEL

19: \thanks{This work is

20: supported by the RFBR Grants Nos.02-01-00601,03-02-17047

21:  and 03-02-17177}}

22: 

23: \author{A.~L.~KATAEV \\

24: Institute for  Nuclear Research

25: of the Academy of Sciences of Russia \\

26: Moscow 117312, Russia\\

27: E-mail: kataev@ms2.inr.ac.ru }

28: 

29: \maketitle

30: 

31: \begin{abstract}

32: \noindent 

33: We report on the following consequences of the relations between non-singlet 

34: contributions to $g_1^N$ and $F_1^N$ structure functions found  within 

35: infrared renormalon model:  the discovery of 

36: new  next-to-leading order inequalities between non-singlet 

37: polarized and unpolarized parton densities,  and the existence 

38: of the effects of similarity between non-perturbative and perturbative 

39: contributions to the unpolarized and polarized Bjorken sum rules. 

40: \end{abstract}

41: 

42: \section{Introduction}          

43: The infrared renormalon approach is the popular model for simulating the 

44: behavior of the high-twist corrections in the 

45: $\overline{MS}$-scheme  (see the reviews of 

46: Refs.\cite{Beneke:1998ui,Beneke:2000kc} an the recent application of 

47: Ref.\cite{Broadhurst:2000yc}). In particular, in Ref.\cite{Dasgupta:1996hh}

48: the prediction for the $x$-shape of the twist-4 contributions to the

49: non-singlet 

50: (NS) structure function (SF)  $xF_3$ and the  NS parts of SFs 

51: $g_1^N$ and $F_1^N$ 

52: were obtained. It should be stressed, 

53: that the qualitative validity of the IRR 

54: model for twist-4 term of $xF_3$ SF from Ref. \cite{Dasgupta:1996hh}

55: was confirmed  during the NLO fits 

56: of Refs.\cite{Kataev:1997nc} (for the brief discussions see the talks of 

57: Ref.\cite{Kataev:2002rj}). In this report we will use the machinery of the 

58: IRR model to find definite relations, induced by the IRR model predictions 

59: of Ref.\cite{Dasgupta:1996hh} for the $1/Q^2$ corrections to 

60: the  NS parts of $g_1^N$ and $F_1^N$ SFs

61: (see Ref.\cite{Kataev:2003jv}) and for the  Bjorken sum rules (both 

62: polarized  and unpolarized \cite{Broadhurst:2002bi}).  

63:   

64: \section{The bounds on the NS polarized parton densities}

65: Let us consider the expression for the asymmetry of photon-nucleon

66: polarized DIS, which in general has the following form

67: \begin{equation}

68: A_1^N(x,Q^2)=(1+\gamma^2)\frac{g_1^N(x,Q^2)}{F_1^N(x,Q^2)}+

69: \frac{h^{A_1}(x)}{Q^2}

70: \end{equation}

71: where $\gamma=4M_N^2x^2/Q^2$ and the second term in the r.h.s. of Eq. (1) 

72: is the dynamical $1/Q^2$ correction. It should be stressed, that 

73: the recent results of the fits to combined CERN, DESY and SLAC polarized DIS 

74: data in the kinematic region $0.005\leq x\leq 0.75$ and $1~{\rm GeV}^2\leq 

75: 58~{\rm GeV^2}$ demonstrated, that the $x$-shape of $h^{A_1}(x)$ is consistent

76: with zero \cite{Leader:2001kh}. This effect is leading to the conclusion that 

77: \begin{equation}

78: \frac{h^{g_1}(x)}{Q^2g_1^N(x,Q^2)}\approx \frac{h^{F_1}(x)}{Q^2F_1^N(x,Q^2)}~~.

79: \end{equation}

80: Using now the well-known inequality 

81: \begin{equation}

82: |g_1^N(x,Q^2)|\leq F_1^N(x,Q^2)

83: \end{equation}

84: we get \cite{Kataev:2003jv}, that 

85: \begin{equation}

86: |h^{g_1}(x)|\leq |h^{F_1}(x)|~~~~.

87: \end{equation}

88: It should be stressed that the IRR model considerations 

89: of Ref.\cite{Dasgupta:1996hh} predict that in the NS approximation $h^{F_1}(x)$

90: and $h^{F_3}(x)$ have the same form, namely 

91: \begin{equation}

92: \label{F_1}

93: h^{F_1}(x,\mu^2)=h^{F_3}(x,\mu^2)=A_2^{'}\int_x^1\frac{dz}{z}C_1(z)

94: q^{NS}(x/z,\mu^2)

95: \end{equation}

96: where $C_1(z)=-4/(1+x)_{+}+2(2+x+2x^2)-5\delta(x)-\delta^{'}(1-x)$ is the 

97: calculated in Ref.\cite{Dasgupta:1996hh} IRR model coefficient function

98: and 

99: \begin{equation}

100: q^{NS}(x,\mu^2)=\sum_{i=1}^{n_f}\bigg(e_i^2-\frac{1}{n_f}\sum_{k=1}^{n_f}e_k^2\bigg)

101: (q_i(x,\mu^2)+\overline{q}(x,\mu^2))

102: \end{equation}

103: are the NS parton densities, $\mu^2$ is the normalization point of order 

104: $1~{\rm GeV}^2$ and $A_2^{'}$ is the IRR model parameter, which should be 

105: extracted from the fits of concrete data. 

106: It should be noted that the identity of Eq. (\ref{F_1}) does not contradict 

107: point of view that to study the $Q^2$ behavior of $A_1(Q^2)$ in the NS 

108: approximation it might be convenient to use the concrete $xF_3$ data instead 

109: of theoretical expression for $F_1^N$ \cite{Kotikov:1998ew}. 

110: 

111: In the case of NS approximation for the $g_1^N$ SF the IRR result of 

112: Ref.\cite{Dasgupta:1996hh} has the following form   

113: \begin{equation}

114: h^{g_1}(x,\mu^2)=A_2\int_x^1\frac{dz}{z}C_1(z)\Delta^{NS}(x/z,\mu^2)

115: \end{equation}

116: where the IRR model coefficient function has the same expression as in the 

117: case of the IRR model predictions for $h^{F_1}(x,\mu^2)$ and 

118: \begin{equation}

119: \Delta^{NS}(x,\mu^2)=\sum_{i=1}^{n_f}\bigg(e_i^2-\frac{1}{n_f}\sum_{k=1}^{n_f}

120: e_k^2

121: \bigg)

122: (\Delta q_i(x,\mu^2)+\Delta\overline{q}_i(x,\mu^2))

123: \end{equation} 

124: are the NS polarized parton densities. Combining now the NS  expressions for 

125: $h^{F_1}(x,\mu^2)$ and $h^{g_1}(x,\mu^2)$ we arrive to the main result 

126: of the work of Ref.\cite{Kataev:2003jv}, namely 

127: \begin{equation}

128: |A_2\Delta^{NS}(x,\mu^2)|\leq| A_2^{'}q^{NS}(x,\mu^2)|

129: \end{equation}

130: which is valid both at the LO and NLO. In the case of $|A_2|\sim |A_2^{,}|$

131: assumed in Ref.\cite{Dasgupta:1996hh}, this inequality is similar to the LO 

132: bound of Ref. \cite{Altarelli:1998gn},

133: namely 

134: \begin{equation}

135: |\Delta(x,Q^2)|\leq q(x,Q^2)

136: \end{equation}

137: 

138: \section{The relations between renormalon contributions 

139: to unpolarized and polarized Bjorken sum rules}

140: It should be stressed that the relations between renormalon contributions 

141: to NS parts of $g_1^N$ and $F_1^N$ SFs are also  manifesting themselves 

142: in the case of consideration of theoretical predictions for the 

143: unpolarized Bjorken sum rule 

144: \begin{equation}

145: C_{Bjunp}=\int_0^1dx\bigg[F_1^{\nu p}(x,Q^2)-F_1^{\nu n}(x,Q^2)\bigg]

146: \end{equation}

147: and polarized Bjorken sum rule 

148: \begin{equation}

149: \int_0^1dx\bigg[g_1^p(x,Q^2)-g_1^n(x,Q^2)\bigg]=\frac{1}{3}|\frac{g_A}{g_V}|

150: C_{Bjp}(Q^2)

151: \end{equation}

152: which were calculated in the large $N_F$-limit in Ref.\cite{Broadhurst:2002bi}

153: and in Ref. \cite{Broadhurst:1993ru} correspondingly.

154: Indeed, the large $N_F$-limit of the perturbative part of unpolarized 

155: Bjorken sum rule has the following form \cite{Broadhurst:2002bi}

156: \begin{eqnarray}

157: C_{Bjunp}&=&1+\frac{C_F}{T_FN_F}\sum_n^{\infty}U_n

158: \bigg(T_FN_F\overline{a}_s\bigg)^n+O(1/N_F^2) \\ \nonumber 

159: U_n&=&lim_{\delta\rightarrow 0}\bigg(-\frac{4}{3}\frac{d}{d\delta}\bigg)^{n-1}

160: U(\delta) \\ \nonumber

161: U(\delta)&=&-\frac{2exp(5\delta/3)}{(1-\delta)(1-\delta^2/4)}

162: \end{eqnarray}

163: The large $N_F$-expression for the Bjorken polarized sum rule can be obtained 

164: from the following equations  \cite{Broadhurst:1993ru}:

165: \begin{eqnarray}

166: C_{Bjp}&=&1+\frac{C_F}{T_FN_F}\sum_n^{\infty}K_n

167: \bigg(T_FN_F\overline{a}_s\bigg)^n+O(1/N_F^2) \\ \nonumber 

168: K_n&=&lim_{\delta\rightarrow 0}\bigg(-\frac{4}{3}\frac{d}{d\delta}\bigg)^{n-1}

169: K(\delta) \\ \nonumber

170: K(\delta)&=&-\frac{(3+\delta)exp(5\delta/3)}{(1-\delta^2)(1-\delta^2/4)}~~.

171: \end{eqnarray}

172: Notice that like in the case discussed in the previous 

173: Section, the renormalon contributions to unpolarized and polarized 

174: Bjorken sum rules are related as 

175: \begin{equation}

176: K(\delta)=\bigg(\frac{3+\delta}{2(1+\delta)}\bigg)U(\delta)~~~.

177: \end{equation}

178: This, in turn, results in the similarity  between twist-4 contributions 

179: to both sum rules and explains the similarity between perturbative 

180: theory predictions to both sum rules, observed in Ref. \cite{Gardi:1998rf}.

181: More detailed studies of the consequences of the results of this Section 

182: are on the agenda.

183: 

184: 

185: 

186: 

187: 

188: 

189: \begin{thebibliography}{0}

190: 

191: %\cite{Beneke:1998ui}

192: \bibitem{Beneke:1998ui}

193: M.~Beneke,

194: %``Renormalons,''

195: Phys.\ Rept.\  {\bf 317} (1999) 1

196: [hep-ph/9807443].

197: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9807443;%%

198: %\cite{Beneke:2000kc}

199: \bibitem{Beneke:2000kc}

200: M.~Beneke and V.~M.~Braun,

201: %``Renormalons and power corrections,''

202: hep-ph/0010208.

203: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0010208;%%

204: %\cite{Broadhurst:2000yc}

205: \bibitem{Broadhurst:2000yc}

206: D.~J.~Broadhurst, A.~L.~Kataev and C.~J.~Maxwell,

207: %``Renormalons and multiloop estimates in scalar correlators, Higgs decay  and quark-mass sum rule,''

208: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 592} (2001) 247

209: [hep-ph/0007152].

210: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0007152;%%

211: %\cite{Dasgupta:1996hh}

212: \bibitem{Dasgupta:1996hh}

213: M.~Dasgupta and B.~R.~Webber,

214: %``Power Corrections and Renormalons in Deep Inelastic Structure Functions,''

215: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 382} (1996) 273

216: [hep-ph/9604388].

217: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9604388;%%

218: %\cite{Kataev:1997nc}

219: \bibitem{Kataev:1997nc}

220: A.~L.~Kataev, A.~V.~Kotikov, G.~Parente and A.~V.~Sidorov,

221: %``Next-to-next-to-leading order QCD analysis of the revised CCFR data for  xF3 structure function,''

222: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 417} (1998) 374

223: [hep-ph/9706534];\\

224: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9706534;%%

225: S.~I.~Alekhin and A.~L.~Kataev,

226: %``The NLO DGLAP extraction of alpha(s) and higher twist terms from CCFR  xF3 and F2 structure functions data for nu N DIS,''

227: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 452} (1999) 402

228: [hep-ph/9812348];\\

229: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9812348;%%

230: A.~L.~Kataev, G.~Parente and A.~V.~Sidorov,

231: %``Higher twists and alpha(s)(M(Z)) extractions from the NNLO {QCD} analysis  of the CCFR data for the xF3 structure function,''

232: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 573} (2000) 405

233: [hep-ph/9905310];\\

234: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9905310;%%

235: A.~L.~Kataev, G.~Parente and A.~V.~Sidorov,

236: %``Fixation of theoretical ambiguities in the improved fits to the xF3  CCFR data at the next-to-next-to-leading order and beyond,''

237: Phys.\ Part.\ Nucl.\  {\bf 34} (2003) 20

238: [Fiz.\ Elem.\ Chast.\ Atom.\ Yadra {\bf 34} (2003) 43]

239: [hep-ph/0106221].

240: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0106221;%%

241: %\cite{Kataev:2002rj}

242: \bibitem{Kataev:2002rj}

243: A.~L.~Kataev, G.~Parente and A.~V.~Sidorov,

244: %``N**3LO fits to xF3 data: alpha(s) vs 1/Q**2 contributions,''

245: Nucl.\ Phys.\ Proc.\ Suppl.\  {\bf 116} (2003) 105

246: [hep-ph/0211151];\\

247: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0211151;%%

248: A.~L.~Kataev, G.~Parente and A.~V.~Sidorov,

249: %``Next-to-next-to-leading order fits to CCFR'97 xF3 data and infrared  renormalons,''

250: J. \ Phys. {\bf G} (2003) (in press),

251: hep-ph/0209024.

252: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0209024;%%

253: %\cite{Kataev:2003jv}

254: \bibitem{Kataev:2003jv}

255: A.~L.~Kataev,

256: JETP \ Lett. {\bf 77} (2003) 458,

257: %``The constraints on the non-singlet polarized parton densities from the  infrared-renormalon model,''

258: [hep-ph/0302101].

259: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0302101;%%

260: %\cite{Broadhurst:2002bi}

261: \bibitem{Broadhurst:2002bi}

262: D.~J.~Broadhurst and A.~L.~Kataev,

263: %``Bjorken unpolarized and polarized sum rules: Comparative analysis of  large-N(F) expansions,''

264: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 544} (2002) 154

265: [hep-ph/0207261].

266: %\cite{Leader:2001kh}

267: \bibitem{Leader:2001kh}

268: E.~Leader, A.~V.~Sidorov and D.~B.~Stamenov,

269: %``A new evaluation of polarized parton densities in the nucleon,''

270: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 23} (2002) 479

271: [arXiv:hep-ph/0111267];\\

272: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0111267;%%

273: %\cite{Leader:2002ni}

274: %\bibitem{Leader:2002ni}

275: E.~Leader, A.~V.~Sidorov and D.~B.~Stamenov,

276: %``On the role of higher twist in polarized deep inelastic scattering,''

277: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67} (2003) 074017

278: [hep-ph/0212085].

279: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0212085;%%

280: %\cite{Kotikov:1998ew}

281: \bibitem{Kotikov:1998ew}

282: A.~V.~Kotikov and D.~V.~Peshekhonov,

283: %``The Q**2 dependence of the measured asymmetry A(1) from the similarity  of g1(x,Q**2) and F3(x,Q**2) structure functions,''

284: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 9} (1999) 55

285: [hep-ph/9810224].

286: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9810224;%%

287: %\cite{Altarelli:1998gn}

288: \bibitem{Altarelli:1998gn}

289: G.~Altarelli, S.~Forte and G.~Ridolfi,

290: %``On positivity of parton distributions,''

291: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 534} (1998) 277

292: [hep-ph/9806345].

293: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9806345;%%

294: %\cite{Broadhurst:1993ru}

295: \bibitem{Broadhurst:1993ru}

296: D.~J.~Broadhurst and A.~L.~Kataev,

297: %``Connections between deep inelastic and annihilation processes at next to next-to-leading order and beyond,''

298: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 315} (1993) 179

299: [hep-ph/9308274].

300: %\cite{Gardi:1998rf}

301: \bibitem{Gardi:1998rf}

302: E.~Gardi and M.~Karliner,

303: %``Relations between observables and the infrared fixed-point in {QCD},''

304: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 529} (1998) 383

305: [hep-ph/9802218].

306: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9802218;%%

307: 

308: \end{thebibliography}

309: \end{document}