1: \documentclass[12pt]{JHEP3}
2:
3: \usepackage{graphicx}
4: \usepackage{graphics}
5: \usepackage{epsfig}
6: \usepackage{ulem}
7: \usepackage{cite}
8: \newcommand{\hf}{\mbox{$\frac12$}}
9:
10:
11:
12: \title{The resummation of inter-jet energy flow for gaps-between-jets processes at HERA}
13:
14: \author{R.~B.~Appleby and M.~H.~Seymour \\ Theory Group, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Schuster Laboratory,
15: \\ University of Manchester, Manchester, UK, M13 9PL \\
16: E-mail: \email{robert@theory.ph.man.ac.uk}, \email{seymour@theory.ph.man.ac.uk}}
17:
18: \preprint{hep-ph/0308086\\MC-TH-2003-8}
19:
20: \keywords{qcd, jet, hac}
21:
22: \abstract{We calculate resummed perturbative predictions for gaps-between-jets processes and compare
23: to HERA data. Our calculation of this non-global observable
24: needs to include the effects of primary gluon emission (global logarithms) and secondary gluon emission (non-global
25: logarithms) to be correct at the leading logarithm (LL) level. We include primary emission by calculating anomalous dimension matrices
26: for the geometry of the specific event definitions and estimate the effect of non-global logarithms in the
27: large $N_c$ limit. The resulting predictions
28: for energy flow observables are consistent with experimental data.}
29:
30:
31:
32: \begin{document}
33:
34:
35: \section{Introduction}
36:
37: \label{secintro}
38:
39: The subject of interjet energy flow \cite{Marchesini:1988} has attracted considerable interest ever since
40: it was proposed \cite{dokshitzer,Bjorken:1992er} as a way to study
41: rapidity gap processes using the tools of perturbation theory. Rapidity gap processes are defined as processes
42: containing two high $p_t$ jets with the region of rapidity between the jets containing nothing more than soft
43: radiation. This region is known generically as the gap. The presence of a range of scales offers a chance to study
44: the interface between the soft, non-perturbative scales and the hard, perturbative scales of
45: QCD.
46:
47: In this paper we will calculate the perturbative contribution to gaps-between-jets cross sections in photoproduction
48: at HERA, which have
49: been measured by the ZEUS \cite{Derrick:1995pb,zeus:2003} and H1
50: \cite{Adloff:2002em}
51: collaborations. A feature of the recent analyses is the use of a clustering algorithm to define the hadronic final state
52: and hence the gap.
53: The restriction of transverse radiation in a region of phase space, defined as $\Omega$ and directed away
54: from the observed jets and the beam directions, produces logarithms at each order of QCD perturbation theory of
55: the interjet energy flow, $Q_{\Omega}$, over some hard scale, $Q$. The precise definition of the restricted
56: region, or gap, is totally free and in this work we are interested in the gap region defined by experimental
57: rapidity gap analyses. The source of the large logarithms is twofold. The so-called
58: primary (or global) logarithms arise from radiation emitted directly into $\Omega$; these wide-angle gluons decouple
59: from the dynamics of the colour-singlet jets and are described by an effective, eikonal theory
60: \cite{Berger:2001ns,Oderda:1998en,Oderda:1999kr,Kidonakis:1998nf,Kidonakis:1998bk}.
61: The second source of leading
62: logarithms arise from gluons emitted outside of the gap region, an area of phase space generically denoted
63: as $\bar{\Omega}$, which subsequently radiate into $\Omega$. These terms are known as non-global (secondary)
64: logarithms, or NGLs \cite{Dasgupta:2001sh,Dasgupta:2002bw,Appleby:2002ke,Appleby:2003ai}.
65:
66: The primary logarithms are resummed using the formalism of Collins, Soper and Sterman (CSS)
67: \cite{Collins:ig,Sotiropoulos:1993rd,Contopanagos:1996nh,Kidonakis:1998bk}. In this method
68: the cross section is factorised into a soft
69: part describing the emission of soft, wide angle gluons up to scale $Q_{\Omega}$ and a hard part,
70: describing harder quanta.
71: A unique feature of QCD
72: is that the soft and the hard functions are expressed as matrices in the space of possible colour flow of the system.
73: The scale invariance and factorisation
74: properties of the cross section are then exploited to resum primary logarithms of $Q_{\Omega}/Q$.
75: This resummation is driven by the ultraviolet pole parts of eikonal Feynman graphs and we write the resummed cross section
76: in terms of the eigenvalues
77: of $\Omega$-dependent soft anomalous dimension matrices. These matrices are known for gap definitions based on the
78: cone definition of the final state \cite{Oderda:1998en,Oderda:1999kr} and for a gap defined as a square patch in
79: rapidity and azimuthal angle
80: \cite{Berger:2001ns};
81: here we are interested in gaps defined in terms of the clustering algorithms employed in the recent
82: analyses. Hence we are
83: required to calculate the corresponding anomalous dimension matrices.
84:
85: The NGLs \cite{Dasgupta:2002bw,Dasgupta:2001sh} are unable to be incorporated into the resummation of the
86: primary logarithms, because the gluon
87: emission patterns that produce the NGLs are sensitive to underlying colour flows not included in the formalism.
88: The effect of NGLs, which is a suppressive effect, on energy flow processes has been studied using numerical methods
89: in the large~$N_c$ limit and overall factors describing their effect have been extracted for a two jet system, both
90: without \cite{Dasgupta:2002bw} and with \cite{Appleby:2002ke} clustering. This factor is not directly applicable to the 4 jet systems\footnote{Note that for a two-to-two process the incoming and outgoing partons radiate, so we
91: consider the process to be of ``four jet'' type, although only two jets are seen in the final state.} relevant in the
92: photoproduction of jets but, in the lack of a four jet formalism, we nevertheless use the two-jet factor in our predictions.
93:
94: Our aim is to derive LL resummed predictions for the gap cross section, with primary logarithms correct
95: to all orders and secondary logarithms correct in the large~$N_c$ limit. The gap cross section will follow the HERA
96: analyses and demand two hard jets, defined using the kt clustering algorithm
97: \cite{Catani:1993hr,Ellis:tq,Butterworth:2002xg}, and we will closely follow the
98: H1 and ZEUS gap definition. The technical aspects of soft gluon resummation
99: give a strong dependence on the gluon emission phase space, and hence a considerable part of our work will be
100: concerned with the
101: calculation of soft gluon effects for the specific detector geometry of the H1 and ZEUS experiments.
102:
103: The organisation of this paper is as follows. Section \ref{sechera} describes, in detail,
104: the energy flow analyses of H1 and ZEUS. We
105: describe the experimental cuts employed and the range of measured observables. We also discuss the theoretical
106: implementation of the inclusive kt algorithm employed to define the hadronic final state and the impact
107: on soft gluon resummation. Section \ref{secfact} describes the theoretical definition of our cross section and we employ the
108: standard QCD factorisation theorems to write it as the convolution of non-perturbative parton distributions and
109: a short-distance hard scattering function. We then proceed to refactorise the hard scattering function and exploit this
110: factorisation to resum the large interjet logarithms. Section \ref{seckt} then derives the
111: soft anomalous dimension matrices
112: for the kt defined final state and in section \ref{secresults} we present detailed predictions of
113: rapidity gap processes and compare
114: to the H1 data. Finally we draw our conclusion in section \ref{secconc}.
115: We find that our description of the data is good, although the approximate treatment of NGLs results in a
116: relatively large normalisation uncertainty.
117:
118:
119: \section{The HERA energy flow analyses}
120:
121: \label{sechera}
122:
123: In this section we will outline the experimental analyses of the photoproduction of gaps-between-jets processes and
124: discuss the experimental cuts and rapidity gap observables. We will also describe the clustering algorithm used
125: to define the final hadronic state in the more recent ZEUS \cite{zeus:2003} and H1 \cite{Adloff:2002em} analyses.
126:
127: The data for these events were collected when HERA collided $27.6$~GeV positrons\footnote{The positron energy
128: varied a negligible amount between the two sets of analyses.} with $820$~GeV protons, giving
129: a centre of mass energy of $\sqrt{s}\simeq 300$~GeV. Following the jet-finding phase, which we will comment on
130: later, the total transverse energy flow between the two highest $E_T$ jets, denoted $E_T^{\mathrm{GAP}}$, is calculated
131: by summing the transverse energy of all particles that are not part of the dijets in the pseudorapidity region between
132: the two highest jets. An event is then defined as a gap event if the energy is less than some energy cut
133: $E_T^{\mathrm{CUT}}\equiv Q_{\Omega}$. A gap fraction is then calculated by dividing the cross section at fixed
134: $E_T^{\mathrm{CUT}}$ by
135: the inclusive cross section. The ZEUS collaboration performed a rapidity gap analysis
136: several years ago~\cite{Derrick:1995pb} using the
137: cone algorithm for the jet definition and presented the gap fraction at $Q_{\Omega}=0.3$~GeV. We consider this
138: value of $Q_{\Omega}$ as being too small for our perturbative analysis and will not make any predictions for this
139: data set.
140: The more recent H1 and ZEUS analyses used the kt definition of the
141: final state and both collaborations presented the gap fraction at four different values of $Q_{\Omega}$, as shown in
142: table \ref{heracuts}. We will make predictions and compare to data for the H1 data sets and, due
143: to the fact that the ZEUS data is still preliminary, confine ourselves to making predictions for
144: the ZEUS analysis. We have summarised the cuts used in table \ref{heracuts}.
145:
146: \TABLE{
147: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
148: \hline
149: & H1 & ZEUS \\ \hline \hline
150: $E_T^{\mathrm{jet1}}$ & $>6.0$~GeV & $>6.0$~GeV \\ \hline
151: $E_T^{\mathrm{jet2}}$ & $> 5.0$~GeV & $> 5.0$~GeV \\ \hline
152: $\eta^{\mathrm{jet1}}$ & $< 2.65$ & $< 2.4$\\ \hline
153: $\eta^{\mathrm{jet2}}$ & $< 2.65$ & $< 2.4$\\ \hline
154: $\Delta\eta$ & $ 2.5 < \Delta\eta < 4$ & $2 < \Delta\eta <4$\\ \hline
155: $\eta_{\mathrm{jj}}$ & N/A & $< 0.75$ \\ \hline
156: $y$ & $0.3 < y < 0.6$ & $0.2 < y < 0.85$ \\ \hline
157: $Q^2$ & $< 0.01$~GeV$^2$ & $< 1$~GeV$^2$ \\ \hline
158: jet def. & kt & kt \\ \hline
159: gap def. & $\Delta y=\Delta\eta$ & $\Delta y=\Delta\eta$ \\ \hline
160: $R$ & $1.0$ & $1.0$ \\ \hline
161: $Q_{\Omega}$ & $0.5,1.0,1.5,2.0$~GeV & $0.5,1.0,1.5,2.0$~GeV \\ \hline
162: \end{tabular}
163: \caption{The experimental cuts used for the HERA analyses.}
164: \label{heracuts}
165: }
166:
167:
168:
169: \subsection{The \boldmath{kt} algorithm}
170:
171: Of special interest to those going about soft gluon calculations is the method used to define the hadronic final state,
172: the reason being that this jet-finding process determines the phase space
173: for soft gluon emission; the method used in the H1 and ZEUS data sets
174: is the inclusive kt algorithm \cite{Catani:1993hr,Ellis:tq,Butterworth:2002xg}.
175: In this algorithm the final state is represented by a set of ``protojets'' $i$ with momenta $p_i^{\mu}$
176: and works in an
177: iterative way, grouping pairs of protojets together to form new ones. The aim is to group almost-parallel protojets together
178: so that they are part of the same protojet. Once certain criteria are met, a protojet is considered a jet and is not considered
179: further. Here we follow the so-called inclusive scheme used at H1 and ZEUS which depends on the parameter R, normally set to unity. If we assume that any radiation into the gap is much softer than any parent radiation, then this radiation
180: with $E_T < E_T^{\mathrm{jet}}$ will be merged into the jet (with kinematical variables
181: $(\eta_{\mathrm{jet}},\phi_{\mathrm{jet}})$) if it
182: satisfies
183: \begin{equation}
184: (\eta_r-\eta_{\mathrm{jet}})^2+
185: (\phi_r-\phi_{\mathrm{jet}})^2
186: < R^2,
187: \end{equation}
188: where we denote the kinematical variables of the radiated gluon by $(\eta_r,\phi_r)$.
189: Once merged, a gluon will be pulled out of the gap and can no longer produce a primary or secondary logarithm.
190: The gap is defined as the interjet region minus the
191: region of clustered radiation around the jets and may contain soft protojets. The gap transverse energy is then
192: defined by the (scalar) sum of the protojets within the gap region, $\eta_1 < \eta < \eta_2$.
193:
194: The kt gap definition can be contrasted to the older ZEUS analysis \cite{Derrick:1995pb}, which used the well known
195: cone definition of the
196: final state with $R=1.0$. The gap transverse energy is then defined as the scalar sum of the hadrons within it,
197: $\eta_1+R < \eta < \eta_2-R$.
198:
199: \section{Factorisation, refactorisation and resummation of the cross section}
200:
201: \label{secfact}
202:
203: In this section we will exploit the standard factorisation theorems of QCD to write down the dijet production
204: cross section from the interaction of a proton and a positron. We will then refactorise the hard scattering function
205: into the product of two matrices in the space of possible hard scattering colour flow, one matrix describing
206: soft gluons radiated into the gap region and the other a hard scattering matrix. The renormalisation properties of the
207: cross section are then used to resum primary interjet logarithms, and write the result in terms of the
208: eigenvalues of the matrix of counterterms used to renormalise the soft function. In the following section we will
209: calculate these matrices and their eigenvalues.
210:
211: \subsection{Photoproduction cross sections}
212:
213: The scattering of positrons and protons at HERA proceeds predominantly through the exchange of photons with
214: very small virtuality and produces a large subset of events with jets of high transverse momentum, $E_T$.
215: The presence of this large scale allows the
216: application of the perturbative methods of QCD to predict the cross section for multiple jet production.
217: This process is otherwise
218: known as jet photoproduction.
219:
220: The leading order (LO) QCD contribution can be divided into two types \cite{Oderda:1998en}. The first is
221: the direct process in which the photon
222: interacts directly with a parton from the proton and proceeds through either the Compton process, $\gamma q \rightarrow gq$, or the photon-gluon fusion process, $\gamma g \rightarrow q\bar{q}$. The second contribution is the resolved contribution, in which
223: the virtual photon fluctuates into a hadronic state that acts as a source of partons, which then scatter off the partonic content of the proton. Therefore
224: the reaction proceeds through standard QCD $2\rightarrow2$ parton scattering processes. Note that the
225: precise determination of the partonic content of the photon is a very open question and there is a
226: relatively large error associated with the photonic parton densities.
227: The spectrum of virtual
228: photons is approximated by the Weiz\"{a}cker--Williams \cite{williams:1934} formula,
229: \begin{equation}
230: F_{\gamma/e}(y)=\frac{\alpha}{2\pi}\frac{(1+(1-y)^2)}{y}\log\left( \frac{Q^2_{\mathrm{max}}(1-y)}{m_e^2 y^2}\right),
231: \end{equation}
232: where $m_e$ is the electron mass, $y$ is the fraction of the positron's energy that is transfered to the photon, and $Q^2_{\mathrm{max}}$ is the maximum
233: virtuality of the photon, which is determined by the experimental cuts employed in the analyses.
234: Then, by using the equivalent photon approximation, the cross section for the process $e^+p\rightarrow e^{+}X$ is given by
235: the convolution
236: \begin{equation}
237: \mathrm{d}\sigma(e^+p\rightarrow e^{+}X) =\int_{y_{min}}^{y_{max}} \mathrm{d}y\,F_{\gamma/e}(y)
238: \,\mathrm{d}\sigma(\gamma p \rightarrow X),
239: \end{equation}
240: where we write $\mathrm{d}\sigma(\gamma p \rightarrow X)$ for the cross section of $\gamma p \rightarrow X$. The
241: centre of mass energy squared for the photon-proton system is $W^2=ys$, where $s$ is the centre of mass energy squared for the positron-proton system. At HERA,
242: $s\simeq 90,000$~GeV$^2$ and the values for $y_{\mathrm{min}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{max}}$ are
243: determined by the experimental analyses.
244: We can now write down the specific expression for the production of two high $E_T$ jets from the photon-proton system, which is written as a sum
245: of the direct and resolved contributions,
246: \begin{eqnarray}
247: d\sigma_{e^+p}(s,\hat{t},\Delta\eta,\alpha_s(\mu_r),Q_{\Omega})
248: =&& \int_{y_{min}}^{y_{max}} \mathrm{d}y\,F_{\gamma/e}(y) \bigg(
249: \mathrm{d}\sigma_{\gamma p}^{\mathrm{dir}}
250: (s_{\gamma p},\hat{t},\Delta\eta,\alpha_s(\mu_r),Q_{\Omega}) \nonumber \\
251: &&+ \mathrm{d}\sigma_{\gamma p}^{\mathrm{res}}
252: (s_{\gamma p},\hat{t},\Delta\eta,\alpha_s(\mu_r),Q_{\Omega})\bigg),
253: \end{eqnarray}
254: where we denote the 4-momentum transfer squared in the hard scattering as~$\hat{t}$.
255: We define the rapidity separation and difference of the two hard jets by
256: \begin{eqnarray}
257: \Delta\eta&=&|\eta_1-\eta_2|, \nonumber \\
258: \eta_{JJ}&=&\frac{1}{2}(\eta_1+\eta_2).
259: \end{eqnarray}
260: At this point we can appeal to the collinear factorisation theorems of QCD and, by working in the $\gamma p$ frame,
261: write down factorised forms for the direct and
262: resolved cross sections. The factorised direct cross section is
263: \begin{eqnarray}
264: \frac{\mathrm{d}\sigma_{\gamma p}^{\mathrm{dir}}}{\mathrm{d}\hat{\eta}}
265: (s_{\gamma p},\hat{t},\Delta\eta,\alpha_s(\mu_r),Q_{\Omega})=&&
266: \sum_{f_p,f_1,f_2}
267: \int_{\mathrm{R_d}} \mathrm{d}x_p \, \phi_{f_p/p}(x_p,\mu_f) \nonumber \\
268: &&\times \frac{\mathrm{d}\hat{\sigma}^{(\gamma f)}}{\mathrm{d}\hat{\eta}}
269: (\hat{s},\hat{t},\Delta\eta,\alpha_s(\mu_r),Q_{\Omega},\mu_f),
270: \end{eqnarray}
271: and the factorised resolved cross section is
272: \begin{eqnarray}
273: \frac{\mathrm{d}\sigma_{\gamma p}^{\mathrm{res}}}{\mathrm{d}\hat{\eta}}
274: (s_{\gamma p},\hat{t},\Delta\eta,\alpha_s(\mu_r),Q_{\Omega})=&&
275: \sum_{f_{\gamma},f_p,f_1,f_2} \int_{\mathrm{R_r}} \mathrm{d}x_{\gamma}\,\mathrm{d}x_p
276: \, \phi_{f_{\gamma}/\gamma}(x_{\gamma},\mu_f) \phi_{f_p/p}(x_p,\mu_f) \nonumber \\
277: &&\times \frac{\mathrm{d}\hat{\sigma}^{(f)}}{\mathrm{d}\hat{\eta}}
278: (\hat{s},\hat{t},\Delta\eta,\alpha_s(\mu_r),Q_{\Omega},\mu_f),
279: \end{eqnarray}
280: which are written in terms of the jet rapidity, $\hat{\eta}$, in the partonic centre-of-mass frame, and we write the
281: factorisation scale and the renormalisation scale as $\mu_f$ and $\mu_r$ respectively. Note that
282: $\hat{\eta}=\Delta\eta/2$, $\hat{s}=x_p W^2$ for the direct case and $\hat{s}=x_{\gamma}x_p W^2$
283: for the resolved case.
284: In these equations we denote the integration regions of the direct and resolved convolutions, which are defined by
285: the experimental cuts, by ${\mathrm{R_d}}$ and~${\mathrm{R_r}}$. The parton distribution for a parton of flavour $f$
286: in the photon and the proton are denoted
287: by $\phi_{f/\gamma}(x_{\gamma},\mu_f)$ and $\phi_{f/p}(x_p,\mu_f)$ respectively and finally
288: $\frac{\mathrm{d}\hat{\sigma}^{(\gamma f)}}{\mathrm{d}\hat{\eta}}$ and
289: $\frac{\mathrm{d}\hat{\sigma}^{(f)}}{\mathrm{d}\hat{\eta}}$ are the hard scattering functions which, at lowest order, start
290: from the Born cross sections. These are the functions that will contain the logarithmic enhancements of~$Q_{\Omega}/Q$,
291: and hence depend on the definition of the gap~$\Omega$ and the gap energy flow~$Q_{\Omega}$. We
292: assume that~$Q_{\Omega}$ is sufficiently soft that we can ignore the effects of emission on the parent jet, known as
293: recoil, but large enough that~$Q_{\Omega}^2 \gg \Lambda_{QCD}^2$.
294: The index~$f$ denotes the process~$f_{\gamma}+f_p \rightarrow f_1 + f_2$ and the index~$f\gamma$ denotes the
295: process~$\gamma+f_p \rightarrow f_1 + f_2$. Since the aim of this paper is to calculate ratios of cross sections and
296: compare with data, we
297: will take the renormalisation scale to equal the factorisation scale and set~$\mu_f=\mu_r=p_t$, where $p_t$ is the
298: transverse momentum of the produced jets.
299:
300:
301: \subsection{Refactorisation}
302:
303: Following \cite{Berger:2001ns,Kidonakis:1998bk} we now refactorise the $2\rightarrow 2$ hard scattering
304: function into a hard matrix and a soft matrix,
305: \begin{eqnarray}
306: \frac{d\hat{\sigma}^{(f)}}{d\hat{\eta}}(\hat{s},\hat{t},\Delta\eta,\alpha_s(\mu_r),Q_{\Omega},\mu_f)=
307: && \sum_{L,I} H^{(f)}_{IL}(\hat{s},\hat{t},\Delta\eta,\alpha_s(\mu_r),\mu_f,\mu) \nonumber \\
308: && \times S^{(f)}_{LI}(Q_{\Omega},\alpha_s(\mu_r),\mu).
309: \end{eqnarray}
310: We introduce a factorisation scale~$\mu$, separate to the parton distribution factorisation scale~$\mu_f$, and all dynamics
311: at scales less than~$\mu$ are factored into~$S_{LI}$. Therefore $H_{IL}$ is~$Q_{\Omega}$ independent, and all
312: the~$Q_{\Omega}$ dependence is included in~$S_{LI}$. This latter function describes the soft gluon dynamics.
313: The proof of this statement follows standard factorisation arguments~\cite{Kidonakis:1998bk}.
314: The indices~$I$ and~$L$ label the basis of colour tensors which describe the possible colour exchange in the hard
315: scattering, over which the hard and soft matrices are expressed.
316: Soft, wide angle
317: radiation decouples from the
318: dynamics of the hard scattering and can be approximated by an effective cross section and in this effective theory
319: the partons are treated as recoilless sources of gluonic radiation and replaced by eikonal lines, or path ordered
320: exponentials of the gluon field~\cite{Kidonakis:1998nf}. The soft radiation pattern of this effective eikonal theory
321: then mimics the radiation
322: pattern of the partons participating in the hard event, or in other words the effective eikonal theory will
323: contain the same logarithms of the soft scale as the full theory. The hard scattering function will begin at order
324: $\alpha_s^2$ for the resolved process and order $\alpha\alpha_s$ for the direct process, and the soft function will
325: begin at zeroth order. The lowest order soft function, denoted
326: $S^{0}_{LI}$, reduces to a set of colour traces. Note that the definition of the gap, and hence the soft function, depends
327: on the jet separation $\Delta\eta$ but we have suppressed this argument of the soft function for clarity.
328:
329: The construction of the soft function, and in particular its
330: renormalisation properties, have been extensively studied
331: elsewhere \cite{Kidonakis:1998nf,Kidonakis:1998bk}. A non-local operator is constructed from a product of Wilson lines, which ties four lines (representing
332: the four jet process) together with a colour tensor. This operator, which contains ultraviolet divergences and hence
333: requires renormalisation, is used to construct a so-called eikonal cross section, which serves as an effective theory
334: for the soft emission. By summing over intermediate states the eikonal cross section is free of potential collinear singularities.
335: It is the ultraviolet renormalisation of the eikonal operator that allows colour mixing and the resummation of soft
336: interjet logarithms.
337:
338:
339:
340: \subsection{Factorisation leads to resummation of soft logarithms}
341:
342: The partonic cross section, which has been factorised into a hard and a soft function, should not depend
343: on the choice of the factorisation scale $\mu$. This leads to the soft function obeying
344: \begin{equation}
345: \left( \mu \frac{\partial}{\partial\mu} + \beta(g_s) \frac{\partial}{\partial g_s} \right)
346: \uuline{S}=
347: -\uuline{\Gamma_s}^{\dagger}(\hat{\eta},\Omega) \uuline{S}-\uuline{S}\uuline{\Gamma_s}(\hat{\eta},\Omega).
348: \label{rge}
349: \end{equation}
350: It is important to point out that we have deliberately ignored the complications of terms in this equation arising from
351: radiation into~$\bar{\Omega}$~\cite{Berger:2001ns}, and only include radiation emitted by the soft function directly
352: into~$\Omega$.
353: The implication of ignoring these non-global terms is discussed in section~\ref{secngl}, where we also describe how
354: to include their effect in a different way. Therefore we have never included the, technically correct,~$\bar{\Omega}$
355: argument of the soft function. The matrices~$\Gamma_s(\hat{\eta},\Omega)$ are process-dependent
356: soft anomalous dimension matrices that depend on the details of the gap definition and the hard scattering.
357: This equation is solved by transforming to a basis in which these matrices are
358: diagonal and hence we require a knowledge of the eigenvectors and eigenvalues of the soft anomalous dimension matrices.
359: We obtain the entries for~$\Gamma_s(\hat{\eta},\Omega)$ from the coefficients of the ultraviolet poles in the matrix of
360: counterterms which
361: renormalise the soft function; we can write this quantity as a sum over terms from different eikonal lines each with the
362: form of a colour factor
363: multiplied by a scaleless integral:
364: \begin{equation}
365: (Z_S)_{LI}=\sum_{i,j}(Z_S^{(ij)})_{LI}=\sum_{i,j}\mathcal{C}_{LI}^{(ij)} \omega^{(ij)}.
366: \end{equation}
367: The eikonal momentum integrals are process independent, and only depend on $i$ and $j$, the eikonal lines that are
368: connected by the virtual gluon. The colour factor is found
369: from consideration of the colour flow for a given process and the basis over which the colour flow is to be decomposed.
370: The result is a basis- and process-dependent set of colour mixing matrices, which we have listed in
371: appendix \ref{appdecomp},
372: together with our choice of bases in appendix \ref{appbases}.
373: The colour mixing matrices have been obtained in \cite{Berger:2001ns,Kidonakis:2000gi,Berger:2003zh}
374: for all relevant subprocesses, and involves using SU(3)
375: colour identities like
376: \begin{equation}
377: t^a_{ij}t^a_{kl}=\frac12\delta_{il}\delta_{kj}-\frac{1}{2N_c}\delta_{ij}\delta_{kl}
378: \end{equation}
379: for quark processes and
380: \begin{eqnarray}
381: d_{abc}&=&2\left[ \mathrm{Tr}\left(t^a t^c t^b\right)+\mathrm{Tr}\left(t^a t^b t^c\right)\right], \\
382: f_{abc}&=&-2i\left[ \mathrm{Tr}\left(t^a t^b t^c\right)-\mathrm{Tr}\left(t^a t^c t^b\right)\right],
383: \end{eqnarray}
384: for gluon processes, to decompose one-loop graphs over a colour basis. We use the fact that the colour
385: flow for a real graph is the same as the corresponding virtual graph, valid for primary emission.
386:
387: Therefore we need to calculate the ultraviolet divergent contribution to the momentum function $\omega^{(ij)}$ from
388: all contributing eikonal graphs. Working in the Feynman gauge there are two possible sources of divergence. The first
389: is one loop eikonal graphs with a virtual gluon connecting eikonal lines $i$ and $j$. From the eikonal Feynman rules
390: listed in the appendix, these graphs will give a real and an imaginary contribution to~$\Gamma_s$. Note that as
391: we are working in the Feynman gauge the self energy diagrams~($\omega^{(ii)}$) give no contribution. The second source
392: of ultraviolet divergences are the real emission diagrams, when the emitted gluon is directed out of the gap. This can
393: produce an ultraviolet divergence in the eikonal graph as we only measure energy flow into the gap and are fully inclusive
394: out of the gap. Hence the virtual graphs will only depend on the relative direction of the two eikonal lines and the
395: real graphs will give a gap (and hence a jet algorithm) dependence. This sum over real and virtual eikonal graphs
396: ensures that the soft function remains free of collinear divergences.
397: The imaginary (and geometry independent) part of all
398: our anomalous dimension matrices can be extracted
399: from~\cite{Berger:2001ns,Oderda:1999kr,Kidonakis:1998nf,Kidonakis:2000gi}, and the
400: calculation for a cone-algorithm defined
401: final state has been done in \cite{Oderda:1999kr}. For the latter case,
402: we have re-expressed their results in accordance with our notation in appendix \ref{appcone}.
403:
404:
405: By performing the energy integral of the virtual graphs, we can combine the result with the
406: corresponding real graph at the integrand level and obtain a partial cancellation. We can then write the total momentum
407: part as an integral over the vetoed gap region and arrive at
408: \begin{eqnarray}
409: \omega^{(ij)}&=&I_{r}^{(ij)}+I_{v}^{(ij)}\nonumber \\
410: &=& -g_s^2 \Delta_i \Delta_k \beta_i\cdot \beta_j \int \frac{d^{d-1}k}{2|\vec{k}|(2\pi)^{d-1}} \theta(\vec{k})
411: \frac{1}{(\delta_i\beta_i\cdot k)(\delta_j\beta_j\cdot k)} \nonumber \\ &+&
412: \delta_i \delta_j \Delta_i \Delta_j \frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi}\frac{i\pi}{2\epsilon}(1-\delta_i \delta_j),
413: \end{eqnarray}
414: where we integrate over the gap region allowed by the kt algorithm. The notation~$\delta_i=+1(-1)$ means that the
415: gluon momentum, denoted~$k$, flows in the same(opposite) direction as the momentum of eikonal line~$i$, and $\Delta_i=+1$
416: if the eikonal line is a quark, or it is a gluon and the soft gluon is above it in the Feynman diagram, or~$-1$
417: if the eikonal line is an antiquark, or it is a gluon and the soft gluon is below it.~
418: $\beta_i$ denotes the 4-velocity of eikonal line~$i$, the function~$\theta(\vec{k})=1$ when
419: the vector~$\vec{k}$ is directed into the gap and in
420: this paper we will use the dimensional regularisation convention~$d=4-2\epsilon$.
421: The finite remainder is a result of the energy veto into the gap
422: spoiling the real/virtual cancellation. Once we have obtained the momentum integrals for the kt defined
423: final state we can construct the anomalous dimension matrices using the colour mixing matrices in the appendix.
424: Consideration of the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of these matrices, together with the process-dependent hard and
425: soft matrices (the full set of hard and soft matrices is shown in appendix~\ref{apphardsoft})
426: allows the resummed cross section to be written down,
427: \begin{equation}
428: \frac{d\hat{\sigma}^{(f)}}{d\hat{\eta}}=
429: \sum_{L,I} \bar{H}^{0,(f)}_{IL}\bar{S}^{0,(f)}_{LI}
430: \exp\left\{ \frac{1}{\beta_0}(\hat{\lambda}_L^*(\hat{\eta},\Omega)+\hat{\lambda}_I(\hat{\eta},\Omega))
431: \int_{p_t}^{Q_{\Omega}}
432: \frac{d\mu}{\mu}\beta_0\alpha_s(\mu)\right\},
433: \label{eqresum}
434: \end{equation}
435: which follows from the diagonalisation of the soft RG equation \ref{rge}. We denote matrices in the diagonal basis by barred
436: matrices, the eigenvalues of the anomalous dimension matrices by $\lambda_i=\alpha_s\hat{\lambda}_i$
437: and we write the lowest-order piece of the QCD beta function as $\beta_0=(11N_c-2n_f)/(6\pi)$. We will observe that, in
438: agreement with \cite{Oderda:1999kr}, $\mathrm{Re}(\lambda)>0$ for all physical channels
439: and hence the resummed cross sections are suppressed relative to the
440: fully inclusive cross section.
441:
442: \subsection{Non-global effects}
443:
444: \label{secngl}
445:
446: As we have discussed in the last section, we have deliberately ignored terms arising from secondary radiation into
447: $\Omega$, or non-global logarithms (NGLs) \cite{Appleby:2003ai,Appleby:2002ke,Dasgupta:2002bw,Dasgupta:2001sh}. Such
448: terms arise from radiation at some intermediate scale,~$M$, being emitted outside of~$\Omega$, i.e.~into $\bar{\Omega}$,
449: and then subsequently radiating into $\Omega$. In energy flow observables such effects give rise to leading
450: logarithms. Inclusion of NGLs in the formalism of the last section would result in an explicit $M$ dependence of the
451: soft function and a sensitivity to more complicated, $2\rightarrow n$, colour flows for all $n>2$. For further details
452: see \cite{Berger:2001ns}. NG effects have been studied for a two-jet system by Dasgupta and Salam
453: \cite{Dasgupta:2002bw,Dasgupta:2001sh} and by the current authors with the complication of clustering
454: \cite{Appleby:2002ke}, and in the context of energy flow/event shape correlations by Dokshitzer and Marchesini
455: \cite{Dokshitzer:2003uw} and Berger, K\'ucs and Sterman \cite{Berger:2003iw}.
456:
457: The effect of NGLs for four-jet kinematics has not been explicitly calculated to date. The best that has been managed
458: is a two-jet calculation in the large-$N_c$ limit. The NG contributions to the gap cross section factorize into an
459: overall suppression factor $S^{NG}$, making it smaller than would be predicted by the resummation of primary logarithms
460: alone. In the absence of a complete calculation, we include the NGLs approximately, by using our all-order results in
461: the large-$N_c$ limit for $S^{NG}$ in a two-jet system \cite{Appleby:2002ke}. Since four-jet configurations are
462: dominated, in the large-$N_c$ limit and for large $\Delta\eta$, by colour flows in which two colour dipoles stretch
463: across the gap region, we approximate the four-jet NG suppression factor by the square of the two-jet one.
464:
465: We have reperformed our previous calculation for the kinematic range relevant to HERA and find that the variation of
466: $S^{NG}$ with $\Delta\eta$ is very weak, so we neglect it. The variation with $Q_\Omega$ is very strong on the other
467: hand. $S^{NG}$~is a function of $t$,
468: \begin{equation}
469: t=\frac{1}{2\pi \beta_0}\log\left(\frac{\alpha_s(Q_{\Omega})}{\alpha_s(Q)}\right),
470: \end{equation}
471: where $\beta_0=(11 C_A-2 n_f)/(6\pi)$, and is well-approximated by a Gaussian in $t$. Thus if $Q_\Omega$ is too close
472: to $\Lambda_{QCD}$, $t$ varies rapidly with it and $S^{NG}$ varies very rapidly.
473:
474: \TABLE{
475: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|}
476: \hline
477: $Q_{\Omega}$ [GeV] & $S^{NG}(t)^2$ \\ \hline\hline
478: 0.5 & 0.10$^{+0.30}_{-0.10}$ \\ \hline
479: 1.0 & 0.47$^{+0.16}_{-0.22}$ \\ \hline
480: 1.5 & 0.65$^{+0.10}_{-0.13}$ \\ \hline
481: 2.0 & 0.74$^{+0.07}_{-0.08}$ \\ \hline
482: \end{tabular}
483: \caption{The non-global emission suppression factors for the 4-jet system, obtained from an all-orders
484: calculation for $Q=6$~GeV.}
485: \label{nglsupp}
486: }
487: It is impossible to quantify the uncertainties in this approximation, without a more detailed understanding of the
488: underlying physics. To get an idea however, we estimate the possible size of higher order corrections, by varying the
489: hard scale at which $\alpha_s$ is evaluated. To leading logarithmic accuracy, this is equivalent to varying the value
490: of $\alpha_s(Q)$ by an amount proportional to its value. We therefore evaluate $t$, and hence $S^{NG}(t)^2$, using our
491: central value of $\alpha_s(M_z)=0.116$, which implies $\alpha_s(Q=\mbox{6~GeV})=0.196$, and with raised and lowered
492: values $\alpha_s^{\mathrm{up}}(\mbox{6~GeV})=0.234$ and $\alpha_s^{\mathrm{down}}(\mbox{6~GeV})=0.158$. For
493: $Q_\Omega=1.0$~GeV, for example, these values result in $t=0.097^{+0.056}_{-0.032}$ and hence
494: $S^{NG}(t)^2=0.47^{+0.16}_{-0.22}$. We show the results for all relevant values of $Q_\Omega$ in table \ref{nglsupp}.
495: Note that $Q_\Omega=0.5$~GeV is so low that the range of uncertainty in $t$ extends beyond $\Lambda_{QCD}$ and hence the
496: estimate of $S^{NG}$ extends to zero. We have not shown any results for the 1995 cone-based ZEUS energy flow analysis
497: \cite{Derrick:1995pb} because the low value of $Q_{\Omega}=0.3$~GeV means that the central value of the NG suppression
498: is already zero, indicating a breakdown of our perturbative approach.
499:
500: The uncertainty on the secondary emission probability estimated in this way should be added to that on the primary
501: emission probability, described in section \ref{secresults}. However, we will find that the secondary uncertainty
502: generally dominates the two. This is therefore clearly an area that needs more work if more precise quantitative
503: predictions are to be made.
504:
505: \section{Soft gluon dynamics for a \boldmath{kt} defined final state}
506:
507: \label{seckt}
508:
509: We now evaluate the momentum integral, $\omega^{(ij)}$, over the gap region $\Omega$.
510: The region of integration is determined by the experimental geometry, in which the final state is defined
511: by the kt algorithm, and we shall work with the quantity
512: \begin{equation}
513: \Omega_{kt}^{(ij)}=\int_{kt} d\eta \int_{kt} \frac{d\phi}{2\pi}
514: \frac{\beta_i\cdot \beta_j}{(\beta_i\cdot \bar{k})(\beta_j\cdot \bar{k})},
515: \end{equation}
516: where we define $\bar{k}=k/k_t$. Therefore
517: \begin{equation}
518: \omega^{(ij)}=-\frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi} \Delta_i \Delta_j \delta_i \delta_j \frac{1}{2\epsilon}\Omega_{kt}^{(ij)}+I.P..
519: \end{equation}
520: We denote the geometry independent imaginary part by $I.P.$, and we define the finite piece $\Gamma^{(ij)}$ by
521: \begin{equation}
522: \omega^{(ij)}=-\mathcal{S}_{ij}\frac{\Gamma^{(ij)}}{2\epsilon}.
523: \end{equation}
524: We have extracted the sign function from $\Gamma^{(ij)}$,
525: \begin{equation}
526: \mathcal{S}_{ij}=\Delta_i \Delta_j \delta_i \delta_j,
527: \label{eqsign}
528: \end{equation}
529: so that
530: \begin{equation}
531: \Gamma^{(ij)}=\frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi}\Omega^{(ij)}_{kt}+I.P..
532: \end{equation}
533: In this work we denote the rapidity separation of the jets by
534: $\Delta\eta$ and the width of an azimuthally symmetric rapidity gap by $\Delta y$ ($<\Delta\eta$). Therefore the available
535: phase space for soft gluon emission for a kt defined final state is given by
536: \begin{equation}
537: \Omega_{kt}^{(ij)}=\lim_{\Delta y \rightarrow \Delta\eta} \left(
538: \Omega^{(ij)}_f(\Delta y,\Delta\eta) - \Omega^{(ij)}_1(\Delta y,\Delta\eta,R) -
539: \Omega^{(ij)}_2(\Delta y,\Delta\eta,R)\right),
540: \end{equation}
541: where the first term arises from an azimuthally symmetric gap of width $\Delta y$, and we subtract the region around
542: each jet which is vetoed by the kt algorithm. The regions of this equation are shown in figure \ref{ktphasespace}.
543: \FIGURE{
544: \begin{minipage}{0.9\textwidth}
545: \begin{center}
546: \includegraphics*[width=7cm,height=6cm]{kt.eps}
547: \end{center}
548: \end{minipage}
549: \caption{The phase space regions for a kt defined final state. The shading denotes the regions
550: vetoed by the algorithm, which are subtracted from the $\Omega_f$ piece. Note that we have dropped
551: the ${(ij)}$ superscripts in this figure.}
552: \label{ktphasespace}}
553: In these regions any soft radiation is clustered into the jet, and cannot
554: form part of $\Omega$. In the first term we take~$\Delta y$ approaching~$\Delta\eta$,
555: and hence it contains
556: a collinear divergence when the emitted gluon is collinear to one of the jets. The two subtracted pieces then
557: remove the regions of phase space defined by
558: \begin{equation}
559: (\eta_k-\eta_i)^2+(\phi_k-\phi_i)^2<R^2,
560: \end{equation}
561: where the index $i$ labels final state jets and $k$ labels the emitted gluon.
562: The collinear divergences in the subtracted pieces exactly match the
563: divergences in the first piece and hence the function $\Omega^{(ij)}_{kt}(\Delta\eta)$ is
564: collinear safe. Explicit definitions of the $\Omega$ functions are
565: \begin{eqnarray}
566: \Omega^{(ij)}_f&=&\int_{-\Delta y/2}^{+\Delta_y/2}d\eta \int_0^{2\pi} \frac{d\phi}{2\pi}
567: \frac{\beta_i\cdot \beta_j}{(\beta_i\cdot \bar{k})(\beta_j\cdot \bar{k})}, \nonumber \\
568: \Omega^{(ij)}_1&=&\int_{\Delta\eta/2-R}^{+\Delta y/2}d\eta
569: \int_{-\phi_{\mathrm{lim}}}^{+\phi_{\mathrm{lim}}} d\phi
570: \frac{\beta_i\cdot \beta_j}{(\beta_i\cdot \bar{k})(\beta_j\cdot \bar{k})},
571: \end{eqnarray}
572: where we write $\phi_{\mathrm{lim}}=\sqrt{R^2-(\eta-\Delta\eta/2)^2}$ and obtain $\Omega^{(ij)}_2$ by
573: the symmetry $\Omega^{(ij)}_2 = \Omega^{(\bar\imath\bar\jmath)}_1$, where the mapping $i\to\bar\imath$
574: is given by $\{a,b,1,2\}\to\{b,a,2,1\}$. If we define the following combinations of momentum integrals,
575: \begin{eqnarray}
576: \alpha&=&\mathcal{S}_{ab}\Gamma^{(ab)}+\mathcal{S}_{12}\Gamma^{(12)}, \nonumber \\
577: \beta&=&\mathcal{S}_{a1}\Gamma^{(a1)}+\mathcal{S}_{b2}\Gamma^{(b2)}, \nonumber \\
578: \gamma&=&\mathcal{S}_{b1}\Gamma^{(b1)}+\mathcal{S}_{a2}\Gamma^{(a2)},
579: \end{eqnarray}
580: where we have combined classes of diagram with the same colour structure, we obtain the following closed form
581: for the positive gap contributions, in the limit $\Delta y \rightarrow \Delta\eta$,
582: \begin{eqnarray}
583: \alpha &=&
584: \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\Bigl(\phantom{-}2\Delta\eta+
585: \log\bigl(1-e^{-2\Delta\eta}\bigr)+\log\frac1{\Delta\eta-\Delta y}
586: -2i\pi\Bigr), \phantom{(10)} \label{eqalpha} \\
587: \beta &=&
588: \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\Bigl(\phantom{-2\Delta\eta+{}}
589: \log\bigl(1-e^{-2\Delta\eta}\bigr)+\log\frac1{\Delta\eta-\Delta y}
590: \Bigr), \\
591: \gamma &=&
592: \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\Bigl(-2\Delta\eta-
593: \log\bigl(1-e^{-2\Delta\eta}\bigr)-\log\frac1{\Delta\eta-\Delta y}
594: \Bigr).
595: \label{eqgamma}
596: \end{eqnarray}
597: The subtraction pieces are straightforward to
598: express as power series in $R$ and $e^{-\Delta\eta}$ and we shall illustrate the calculation of the momentum
599: integrals with an example.
600:
601: \subsection{Calculation of \boldmath{$\Omega_{kt}^{(a1)}$}}
602:
603: We can write the matrix element in terms of the rapidity of the emitted gluon and obtain the
604: following matrix element
605: \begin{equation}
606: \frac{\beta_i\cdot \beta_j}{(\beta_i\cdot \bar{k})(\beta_j\cdot \bar{k})}=
607: \frac{e^{-\Delta\eta/2}}{e^{-\eta}(\cosh(\Delta\eta/2-\eta)-\cos\phi)}.
608: \end{equation}
609: The integrations for the function $\Omega_f^{(a1)}$ are straightforward, and we obtain
610: \begin{equation}
611: \Omega_f^{(a1)}=-\Delta y + \log\left(\frac{\sinh(\Delta\eta/2+\Delta y/2)}{\sinh(\Delta\eta/2-\Delta y/2)}\right).
612: \end{equation}
613: The expression for $\Omega_1^{(a1)}$ is
614: \begin{eqnarray}
615: \Omega^{(a1)}_1&=&\int_{\Delta\eta/2-R}^{+\Delta y/2}d\eta
616: \int_{-\phi_{\mathrm{lim}}}^{+\phi_{\mathrm{lim}}} \frac{d\phi}{2\pi}
617: \frac{e^{-\Delta\eta/2}}{e^{-\eta}(\cosh(\Delta\eta/2-\eta)-\cos\phi)}, \nonumber \\
618: &=&\int_{\Delta\eta/2-R}^{+\Delta y/2}d\eta \, f(\eta,\Delta\eta,R), \nonumber \\
619: &=&\int_{\Delta\eta/2-\Delta y/2}^{R}d\eta' \, f(\eta',\Delta\eta,R),
620: \end{eqnarray}
621: where $\phi_{\mathrm{lim}}$ is defined in the previous section, we have performed the azimuthal
622: integration in the second step and changed variable to $\eta'=\Delta\eta/2-\eta$ in the third step.
623: The function $f$ can be easily obtained, but it is rather lengthy so we do not reproduce it here.
624: We now note that this expression for $\Omega^{(ij)}_1$ only involves jet 1 and hence, by Lorentz
625: invariance, cannot depend on the other jet and so may not be a function of the jet separation
626: $\Delta\eta$. Therefore we write
627: \begin{equation}
628: \Omega^{(a1)}_1=\int_{\Delta\eta/2-\Delta y/2}^{R}d\eta' \, f(\eta',R).
629: \end{equation}
630: This function $f(\eta',R)$ has a divergence as $\eta'\rightarrow 0$, so we add and subtract this
631: divergence to obtain
632: \begin{equation}
633: \Omega^{(a1)}_1=\int_{\Delta\eta/2-\Delta y/2}^R d\eta' \left(f(\eta',R)-\frac{1}{\eta'}\right)
634: + \int_{\Delta\eta/2-\Delta y/2}^R \frac{d\eta'}{\eta'}.
635: \end{equation}
636: We can rewrite the lower limit of the first, divergence free, integral as 0, and the collinear
637: divergence is now contained in the second term. Therefore we have used $\Delta y$ as a cut-off for
638: the divergence, and we can write
639: \begin{equation}
640: \Omega^{(a1)}_1=\bar{\Omega}^{ij}_1+\log{2R}-\log(\Delta\eta-\Delta y).
641: \end{equation}
642: We will always denote the divergence free angular integration, which always results
643: from such a subtraction, as a barred quantity. We can now rescale the $\bar{\Omega}^{(a1)}_1$ integral,
644: using $\bar{\eta}=\eta'/R$, to obtain
645: \begin{equation}
646: \bar{\Omega}^{(a1)}_1=\int_0^1 d\bar{\eta} \left(R\cdot g(\bar{\eta},R)-\frac{1}{\bar{\eta}}\right).
647: \end{equation}
648: This quantity, which is only a function of $R$, can now be expressed as a power series in $R$ and the
649: integrals done on a term-by-term basis. Doing this we obtain the rapidly converging series,
650: \begin{equation}
651: \bar{\Omega}^{(a1)}_1=-\log(2)-\frac{2R}{\pi}+\frac{R^2}{8}-\frac{R^3}{18\pi}+\frac{R^4}{576}
652: -\frac{R^5}{5400\pi}-\frac{R^7}{529200\pi}+\frac{R^8}{4147200}+\dots.
653: \end{equation}
654: To calculate $\Omega^{(a1)}_2$ we use the parity symmetry and obtain the expression,
655: \begin{eqnarray}
656: \Omega^{(a1)}_2&=&\Omega^{(b2)}_1 \nonumber \\
657: &=&\int_{\Delta\eta/2-R}^{+\Delta y/2}d\eta
658: \int_{-\phi_{\mathrm{lim}}}^{+\phi_{\mathrm{lim}}} \frac{d\phi}{2\pi}
659: \frac{e^{-\Delta\eta/2}}{e^{\eta}(\cosh(\Delta\eta/2+\eta)+\cos\phi)}.
660: \end{eqnarray}
661: We now perform similar manipulations to the case of $\Omega^{(a1)}_1$. However, as $\Omega^{(a1)}_2$
662: is a function of both final state jets, the resulting expression must be a function of $\Delta\eta$ and
663: we also note that $\Omega^{(a1)}_2$ is not divergent. We hence obtain the expression
664: \begin{equation}
665: \bar{\Omega}_2^{(a1)}=\int_0^1 d\bar{\eta}\left(
666: R\cdot f(\bar{\eta},\Delta\eta,R)\right),
667: \end{equation}
668: which we can expand as a power series in the variables $R$ and $z=\exp(-\Delta\eta)$, and perform
669: the remaining integrations term-by-term.
670:
671: The pole arising in the subtraction term $\Omega_1^{(a1)}$ now cancels against an equivalent pole
672: in the function $\Omega_f^{(a1)}$, when we expand the latter in $\Delta y$ around the point $\Delta\eta$,
673: \begin{equation}
674: \lim_{\Delta y\rightarrow \Delta\eta}\Omega_f^{(a1)}
675: \sim-\Delta \eta -\log(\Delta\eta-\Delta y) + \log(2\sinh\Delta\eta).
676: \end{equation}
677: Therefore we find the final, divergence free, form of $\Omega_{kt}^{(a1)}$ as
678: \begin{equation}
679: \Omega_{kt}^{(a1)}=-\Delta\eta+\log(2\sinh\Delta\eta)-\log(2R)-\bar{\Omega}_1^{(a1)}-\bar{\Omega}_2^{(a1)}.
680: \end{equation}
681: We have presented the full set of series expansions in appendix \ref{appgamma} and these, together with
682: equations \ref{eqalpha}--\ref{eqgamma}, are sufficient to compute the set of kt defined momentum integrals and hence the
683: corresponding anomalous dimension matrix.
684: It is worth noting that, although the off-diagonal terms for the kt anomalous dimension matrices are no longer
685: pure imaginary as in the cone case, their real parts still vanish for large~$\Delta\eta$.
686: Indeed for~$\Delta\eta=2$, the real part is more than two orders
687: of magnitude smaller than the imaginary part. We have listed the
688: closed-form momentum integrals for the cone defined final state using our notation
689: in appendix~\ref{appcone}.
690:
691: \section{Results}
692:
693: \label{secresults}
694:
695: We now have the tools we need to calculate resummed cross sections at HERA, which correctly include primary emission
696: to all orders and secondary emission approximately in the large $N_c$ limit. The colour bases
697: used for the contributing partonic cross sections are presented in the appendix, along with
698: the decomposed hard and soft matrices. We also present the complete colour mixing matrices and the correct
699: sign structure for the three classes of diagram. Therefore we can use the eigenvectors and eigenvalues
700: of the soft anomalous dimension matrices, together with the hard and soft matrices, to calculate the primary
701: resummed cross section using equation~\ref{eqresum}, for either a kt or a cone defined final state.
702: The differential cross section, in~$\Delta\eta$,
703: can then be computed using the cuts given in section \ref{sechera}, both for the totally inclusive cross section
704: (no gap) and for the gap cross section at fixed $Q_{\Omega}$. The gap fraction is then found by dividing the latter
705: quantity by the former. All our results are computed using GRV photon parton densities \cite{Gluck:1991jc} and
706: the MRST proton parton densities \cite{Martin:1998np}. We have included an
707: estimate of the theoretical
708: uncertainty in the primary resummation by varying the hard scale in the evaluation of $\alpha_s$, while keeping the
709: ratio of the hard and soft scales fixed.
710:
711: \subsection{Totally inclusive \boldmath{ep} cross section and the gap cross section}
712:
713: \FIGURE{\\
714: \begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
715: \includegraphics*[width=7cm,height=6cm]{h1gq1.0.eps}
716: \end{minipage}
717: \hfill
718: \begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
719: \includegraphics*[width=7cm,height=6cm]{z2gq1.0.eps}
720: \end{minipage}
721: \label{figgap}
722: \caption{The cross sections for the H1 data (left) and the ZEUS data (right), which was defined using the kt
723: algorithm with $R=1.0$. On both plots the solid line is the total
724: inclusive cross section, the dashed line is the gap cross section
725: for $Q_{\Omega}=1$~GeV with only primary emission included, and the dotted lines indicate the range of
726: theoretical uncertainty in the prediction.}}
727:
728:
729: \FIGURE{\\
730: \begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
731: \includegraphics*[width=7cm,height=6cm]{h1fq0.5.eps}
732: \end{minipage}
733: \hfill
734: \begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
735: \includegraphics*[width=7cm,height=6cm]{h1fq1.0.eps}
736: \end{minipage}\\
737: \begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
738: \includegraphics*[width=7cm,height=6cm]{h1fq1.5.eps}
739: \end{minipage}
740: \hfill
741: \begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
742: \includegraphics*[width=7cm,height=6cm]{h1fq2.0.eps}
743: \end{minipage}\\
744: \caption{The gap fractions for the H1 analysis with a kt defined final state ($R=1.0$),
745: at varying $Q_{\Omega}$. $Q_{\Omega}=0.5,\,1.0,\,1.5,\,2.0$~GeV for plots (a), (b), (c) and (d) respectively.
746: The H1 data is also shown. The solid line includes the effects of primary emission and
747: the secondary emission suppression factor. The overall theoretical
748: uncertainty, including the primary uncertainty and the secondary uncertainty, is shown by the
749: dotted lines. The dashed line indicates the gap fraction obtained by including only primary emission.}
750: \label{figh1frac}}
751:
752: \FIGURE{\\
753: \begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
754: \includegraphics*[width=7cm,height=6cm]{z2fq0.5.eps}
755: \end{minipage}
756: \hfill
757: \begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
758: \includegraphics*[width=7cm,height=6cm]{z2fq1.0.eps}
759: \end{minipage}\\
760: \begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
761: \includegraphics*[width=7cm,height=6cm]{z2fq1.5.eps}
762: \end{minipage}
763: \hfill
764: \begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
765: \includegraphics*[width=7cm,height=6cm]{z2fq2.0.eps}
766: \end{minipage}\\
767: \caption{The gap fractions for the ZEUS analysis with a kt defined final state ($R=1.0$),
768: at varying $Q_{\Omega}$. $Q_{\Omega}=0.5,\,1.0,\,1.5,\,2.0$~GeV for plots (a), (b), (c) and (d) respectively.
769: The solid line includes the effects of primary emission and the secondary emission suppression factor.
770: The overall theoretical
771: uncertainty, including the primary uncertainty and the secondary uncertainty, is shown by the
772: dotted lines. The dashed line indicates the gap fraction obtained by including only primary emission.}
773: \label{figz2frac}}
774: The left hand side of figure \ref{figgap} shows the totally inclusive dijet cross section for the H1 analysis and the
775: gap cross section
776: for $Q_{\Omega}=1.0$~GeV. We have not shown further values of $Q_{\Omega}$ as all the plots show qualitatively the same
777: behaviour.
778: We have cross-checked our total inclusive cross section against the Monte Carlo event generator HERWIG
779: \cite{Corcella:2000bw,Corcella:2002jc} and we
780: obtained complete agreement for the H1 and both the ZEUS sets of cuts.
781: In figure \ref{figgap} the solid curve is
782: the total inclusive cross section, the dashed line is the cross section with the primary interjet logarithms resummed
783: and the
784: dotted lines show the theoretical uncertainty of the primary resummation, estimated by varying $\alpha_s$ as described
785: above. The inclusion of the primary gap
786: logarithms gives a substantial suppression of the cross section; our analysis confirms simple ``area of phase space''
787: arguments which say that the kt defined final state will have greater soft gluon suppression than a cone defined
788: final state due to the increased gap area in the $(\eta,\phi)$ plane. This plot for the ZEUS analysis is shown
789: in the right hand side of figure \ref{figgap}.
790:
791:
792: \subsection{Gap fractions}
793:
794: The gap fraction is defined as the gap cross section, at fixed $Q_{\Omega}$, divided by the total inclusive cross section.
795: Figure \ref{figh1frac} shows the gap fraction for the H1 cuts at the four experimentally measured values of
796: $Q_{\Omega}$ and figure \ref{figz2frac} shows the gap fractions for the ZEUS analysis.
797: The solid line is the gap fraction curve obtained by including the primary emission and the
798: NG suppression factors of table~\ref{nglsupp} in the prediction for the gap cross section. The dotted lines show
799: the theoretical uncertainty of both the primary and secondary emission probabilities, and the dashed line shows the
800: gap fraction obtained by including only the primary emission contribution.
801: We find that our gap fraction is consistent with the H1 values for the
802: measured $Q_{\Omega}$. The large uncertainty in the gap fraction predictions comes from an approximate
803: treatment of the NG suppression and from using perturbation theory at $\sim$1 GeV. Nonetheless, this uncertainty is
804: principally in the normalisation of the curves and we expect our resummation to accurately describe
805: the shape of the gap fraction curves.
806:
807: \section{Conclusions}
808:
809: \label{secconc}
810:
811: In this paper we have computed resummed predictions for rapidity gap processes at HERA. We include primary logarithms
812: using the soft gluon techniques of CSS, and include the effects of NGLs using an overall
813: suppression factor computed from an extension of our earlier work. The kt definition of a hadronic final state
814: determines the
815: phase space available for soft primary emission and we have computed a set of anomalous dimension matrices specific
816: to the geometry of the H1 and ZEUS analyses. Of course this method can be used for any definition of the gap,
817: provided $\Omega$ is directed away
818: from all hard jets.
819: We then compared our predictions with gaps-between-jets data from the H1 collaboration and found a
820: consistent agreement. The theoretical uncertainty of our predictions is relatively large, and
821: generally dominated by the secondary emission
822: uncertainty. However our resummed predictions correctly predict the shape of the H1 data, and the normalisation
823: agrees within errors. There is a suggestion that the $Q_{\Omega}$ dependence is not quite right, with our central
824: $Q_{\Omega}=0.5$~GeV prediction below data and our central $Q_{\Omega}=2.0$~GeV prediction above data, although all
825: are within our uncertainty. It is possible that a more complete treatment of the perturbative/non-perturbative interface
826: would improve this. We expect that calculation of primary emission will be correct if $Q_{\Omega}$ is not too large, so that we
827: can neglect jet recoil. However our
828: calculation is of sufficient accuracy in the region of phase space probed at HERA.
829:
830: Our treatment of the NGLs is very approximate. For a fuller treatment, it is necessary to extend the
831: extraction of the suppression factor to beyond the large $N_c$ limit and overcome the inherent disadvantages of
832: the numerical methods used. For the current application, consideration of the four jet system is also necessary. We reserve
833: the latter extension, in the large $N_c$ limit, for future work.
834: Our calculation has not included power corrections \cite{Korchemsky:1999kt}. The inclusion of such
835: non-perturbative effects is required for a full and correct comparison to the experimental data. Again, we reserve
836: this for future work.
837:
838: Our calculation involves a numerical integration over all kinematic variables, so it would be straightforward
839: to calculate the dependence of the gap fraction on, for example, the fraction of the photon's momentum
840: participating in the hard process,~$x_{\gamma}$. This code is available from the authors.
841:
842: In conclusion, we have shown that the calculation of primary and secondary emission patterns can give a good description
843: of rapidity gap data at HERA. A fuller treatment would refine our approximation of NGLs and include power corrections.
844:
845: \section*{Acknowledgements}
846: We are grateful to George Sterman and Carola Berger for useful communications and
847: RBA would like to acknowledge the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council for
848: financial support.
849:
850: \begin{appendix}
851:
852: \section{Colour bases}
853:
854: \label{appbases}
855:
856: In this section we present the colour bases used in this work. All the bases in this section have appeared
857: elsewhere \cite{Oderda:1999kr,Berger:2001ns,Kidonakis:2000gi,Berger:2003zh}, but we show them here for completeness.
858:
859: \subsection*{The process \boldmath{$q\bar{q}\rightarrow q\bar{q}$}}
860: \begin{eqnarray}
861: c_1&=&\delta_{a1}\delta_{b2}, \nonumber \\
862: c_2&=&-\frac{1}{2N_c}\delta_{a1}\delta_{b2}+\frac12\delta_{ab}\delta_{12}.
863: \label{qqbarbasis}
864: \end{eqnarray}
865:
866: \subsection*{The process \boldmath{$qq\rightarrow qq$}}
867: \begin{eqnarray}
868: c_1&=&\delta_{a1}\delta_{b2}, \nonumber \\
869: c_2&=&-\frac{1}{2N_c}\delta_{a1}\delta_{b2}+\frac12\delta_{a2}\delta_{b1}.
870: \label{qqbasis}
871: \end{eqnarray}
872:
873: \subsection*{The process \boldmath{$qg\rightarrow qg$}}
874: \begin{eqnarray}
875: c_1&=&\delta_{a1}\delta_{b2}, \nonumber \\
876: c_2&=&d_{b2c}(T_F^c)_{1a}, \nonumber \\
877: c_3&=&if_{b2c}(T^c_F)_{1a}.
878: \label{qgbasis}
879: \end{eqnarray}
880:
881: \subsection*{The processes \boldmath{$q\bar{q}\rightarrow gg$} and \boldmath{$gg\rightarrow q\bar{q}$}}
882: The process $gg\rightarrow q\bar{q}$ has the basis,
883: \begin{eqnarray}
884: c_1&=&\delta_{ab}\delta_{12}, \nonumber \\
885: c_2&=&d_{abc}(T_F^c)_{12}, \nonumber \\
886: c_3&=&if_{abc}(T_F^c)_{12}.
887: \label{qqbarggbasis}
888: \end{eqnarray}
889: To find the basis for $q\bar{q}\rightarrow gg$, we interchange $a\leftrightarrow 2$ and $b\leftrightarrow 1$.
890:
891: \subsection*{The process \boldmath{$gg\rightarrow gg$}}
892: The complete basis is
893: \begin{equation}
894: \left\{
895: c_1,c_2,c_3,P_1,P_{8_S},P_{8_A},P_{10\bigoplus \overline{10}},P_{27}\right\},
896: \label{ggbasis}
897: \end{equation}
898: where
899: \begin{eqnarray}
900: c_1&=&\frac{i}{4}\left[f_{abc}d_{12c}-d_{abc}f_{12c}\right], \nonumber \\
901: c_2&=&\frac{i}{4}\left[f_{abc}d_{12c}+d_{abc}f_{12c}\right], \nonumber \\
902: c_3&=&\frac{i}{4}\left[f_{a1c}d_{b2c}+d_{a1c}f_{b2c}\right], \nonumber \\
903: P_1&=&\frac{1}{8}\delta_{a1}\delta_{b2}, \nonumber \\
904: P_{8_S}&=&\frac{3}{5}d_{a1c}d_{b2c}, \nonumber \\
905: P_{8_A}&=&\frac{1}{3}f_{a1c}f_{b2c}, \nonumber \\
906: P_{10\bigoplus\overline{10}}&=&\frac12\left(\delta_{ab}\delta_{12}-\delta_{a2}\delta_{b1}\right)-
907: \frac13 f_{a1c}f_{b2c}, \nonumber \\
908: P_{27}&=&\frac12 \left(\delta_{ab}\delta_{12}+\delta_{a2}\delta_{b1}\right)-\frac18\delta_{a1}\delta_{b2}
909: -\frac35 d_{a1c} d_{b2c}.
910: \end{eqnarray}
911:
912: \subsection*{The direct processes}
913:
914: Since there is only one colour structure, these are basis independent.
915:
916:
917: \section{The hard and soft matrices}
918:
919: \label{apphardsoft}
920:
921: We now show the complete set of hard and soft matrices used in this work. These matrices have appeared
922: in a variety of forms in \cite{Oderda:1999kr,Berger:2001ns,Kidonakis:2000gi,Berger:2003zh}. In all these equations we
923: have set $N_c=3$ and have written the coupling scale as $\mu$. Note that all our hard matrices differ from
924: the normalisation used in~\cite{Oderda:1999kr,Kidonakis:2000gi} by
925: a factor of~$\pi/(2\hat{s})\,4\hat{t}\hat{u}/\hat{s}^2$, while
926: they agree with that used in~\cite{Berger:2001ns}.
927:
928: \subsection*{The process \boldmath{$q\bar{q}\rightarrow q\bar{q}$}}
929:
930: The hard matrix has, in the basis \ref{qqbarbasis}, the form
931: \begin{equation}
932: H^{(1)}=\frac{1}{9}\frac{\alpha_s^2(\mu)\pi}{\hat{s}}
933: \;\frac{4\hat{t}\hat{u}}{\hat{s}^2}
934: \left(\begin{array}[c]{cc}
935: \frac{16}{81} \chi_1 & \frac{4}{27}\chi_2 \\
936: \frac{4}{27} \chi_2 & \chi_3
937: \end{array}\right),
938: \end{equation}
939: where we define
940: \begin{eqnarray}
941: \chi_1&=&\frac{\hat{t}^2+\hat{u}^2}{\hat{s}^2}, \nonumber \\
942: \chi_2&=&3\frac{\hat{u}^2}{\hat{s}\hat{t}}-\frac{\hat{t}^2+\hat{u}^2}{\hat{s}^2}, \nonumber \\
943: \chi_3&=&\frac{\hat{s}^2+\hat{u}^2}{\hat{t}^2}+\frac19\frac{\hat{t}^2+\hat{u}^2}{\hat{s}^2}-\frac23\frac{\hat{u}^2}
944: {\hat{s}\hat{t}}.
945: \end{eqnarray}
946: The unequal flavour process $q\bar{q}'\rightarrow q\bar{q}'$ is found by dropping the $s$-channel terms from
947: these equations, and the unequal flavour process $q\bar{q}\rightarrow q'\bar{q}'$ is found by dropping the
948: $t$-channel terms. The hard matrix for $q\bar{q}\rightarrow \bar{q}q$ is found using the
949: transformation $\hat{t} \leftrightarrow \hat{u}$.
950: The corresponding soft matrix for all these processes is
951: \begin{equation}
952: S^{(0)}=
953: \left(\begin{array}[c]{cc}
954: N_c^2 & 0 \\
955: 0 & \frac{1}{4}(N_c^2-1)
956: \end{array}\right).
957: \end{equation}
958:
959: \subsection*{The process \boldmath{$qq\rightarrow qq$}}
960:
961: The hard matrix has, in the basis \ref{qqbasis}, the form
962: \begin{equation}
963: H^{(1)}=\frac{1}{9}\frac{\alpha_s^2(\mu)\pi}{\hat{s}}
964: \;\frac{4\hat{t}\hat{u}}{\hat{s}^2}
965: \left(\begin{array}[c]{cc}
966: \frac{16}{81} \chi_1 & \frac{4}{27}\chi_2 \\
967: \frac{4}{27} \chi_2 & \chi_3
968: \end{array}\right),
969: \end{equation}
970: where we define
971: \begin{eqnarray}
972: \chi_1&=&\frac{\hat{t}^2+\hat{s}^2}{\hat{u}^2}, \nonumber \\
973: \chi_2&=&3\frac{\hat{s}^2}{\hat{u}\hat{t}}-\frac{\hat{t}^2+\hat{s}^2}{\hat{u}^2}, \nonumber \\
974: \chi_3&=&\frac{\hat{u}^2+\hat{s}^2}{\hat{t}^2}+\frac19\frac{\hat{t}^2+\hat{s}^2}{\hat{u}^2}-\frac23\frac{\hat{s}^2}
975: {\hat{u}\hat{t}}.
976: \end{eqnarray}
977: For the process $qq'\rightarrow qq'$ only keep the $t$-channel terms.
978: The corresponding soft matrix is
979: \begin{equation}
980: S^{(0)}=
981: \left(\begin{array}[c]{cc}
982: N_c^2 & 0 \\
983: 0 & \frac{1}{4}(N_c^2-1)
984: \end{array}\right).
985: \end{equation}
986:
987:
988: \subsection*{The process \boldmath{$qg\rightarrow qg$}}
989:
990: The hard matrix has, in the basis \ref{qgbasis}, the form
991: \begin{equation}
992: H^{(1)}=\frac{1}{24}\frac{\alpha_s^2(\mu)\pi}{2\hat{s}}
993: \;\frac{4\hat{t}\hat{u}}{\hat{s}^2}
994: \left(\begin{array}[c]{ccc}
995: \frac{1}{18} \chi_1 & \frac{1}{6}\chi_1 & \frac13\chi_2 \\
996: \frac{1}{6} \chi_1 & \frac12\chi_1 & \chi_2 \\
997: \frac13\chi_2 & \chi_2 & \chi_3
998: \end{array}\right),
999: \end{equation}
1000: where we define
1001: \begin{eqnarray}
1002: \chi_1&=&2-\frac{\hat{t}^2}{\hat{s}\hat{u}}, \nonumber \\
1003: \chi_2&=&1-\frac12 \frac{\hat{t}^2}{\hat{s}\hat{u}}-\frac{\hat{u}^2}{\hat{s}\hat{t}}-\frac{\hat{s}}{\hat{t}}, \nonumber \\
1004: \chi_3&=&3-4\frac{\hat{s}\hat{u}}{\hat{t}^2}-\frac12 \frac{\hat{t}^2}{\hat{s}\hat{u}}.
1005: \end{eqnarray}
1006: The hard matrix for the process $qg\rightarrow gq$ is found by the transformation $\hat{t}\leftrightarrow \hat{u}$.
1007: The corresponding soft matrix is
1008: \begin{equation}
1009: S^{(0)}=
1010: \left(\begin{array}[c]{ccc}
1011: N_c(N_c^2-1) & 0 & 0\\
1012: 0 & \frac{1}{2N_c}(N_c^2-4)(N_c^2-1) & 0 \\
1013: 0 & 0 & \frac12 N_c (N_c^2-1)
1014: \end{array}\right).
1015: \end{equation}
1016:
1017: \subsection*{The processes \boldmath{$q\bar{q}\rightarrow gg$} and \boldmath{$gg\rightarrow q\bar{q}$}}
1018: In the basis \ref{qqbarggbasis} the hard matrix for these processes has the form
1019: \begin{equation}
1020: H^{(1)}=\frac{1}{\Delta}\frac{\alpha_s^2(\mu)\pi}{2\hat{s}}
1021: \;\frac{4\hat{t}\hat{u}}{\hat{s}^2}
1022: \left(\begin{array}[c]{ccc}
1023: \frac{1}{18} \chi_1 & \frac{1}{6}\chi_1 & \frac16\chi_2 \\
1024: \frac{1}{6} \chi_1 & \frac12\chi_1 & \frac12\chi_2 \\
1025: \frac16\chi_2 & \frac12\chi_2 & \frac12\chi_3
1026: \end{array}\right),
1027: \end{equation}
1028: where we define
1029: \begin{eqnarray}
1030: \chi_1&=&\frac{\hat{t}^2+\hat{u}^2}{\hat{t}\hat{u}}, \nonumber \\
1031: \chi_2&=&\left(1+\frac{2\hat{t}}{\hat{s}}\right)\chi_1, \nonumber \\
1032: \chi_3&=&\left(1-\frac{4\hat{t}\hat{u}}{\hat{s}^2}\right)\chi_1.
1033: \end{eqnarray}
1034: The constant $\Delta=9$ for the process $q\bar{q}\rightarrow gg$ and
1035: $\Delta=64$ for the process $gg\rightarrow q\bar{q}$. The matrix for the process
1036: $gg\rightarrow \bar{q}q$ is found from the transformation $\hat{t}\leftrightarrow \hat{u}$.
1037: The soft matrix is
1038: \begin{equation}
1039: S^{(0)}=\frac{N_c^2-1}{2N_c}
1040: \left(\begin{array}[c]{ccc}
1041: 2N_c^2 & 0 & 0 \\
1042: 0 & N_c^2-4 & 0 \\
1043: 0 & 0 & N_c^2
1044: \end{array}\right).
1045: \end{equation}
1046:
1047:
1048: \subsection*{The process \boldmath{$gg \rightarrow gg$}}
1049: The hard matrix, in the basis \ref{ggbasis} has the block-diagonal form
1050: \begin{equation}
1051: H^{(1)}=
1052: \left(\begin{array}[c]{cc}
1053: 0_{3\times3} & 0_{3\times5} \\
1054: 0_{5\times3} & H^{(1)}_{5\times5}
1055: \end{array}\right),
1056: \end{equation}
1057: where the matrix $H^{(1)}_{5\times5}$ has the form
1058: \begin{equation}
1059: H^{(1)}_{5\times5}=\frac{1}{16}\frac{\alpha_s^2(\mu)\pi}{2\hat{s}}
1060: \;\frac{4\hat{t}\hat{u}}{\hat{s}^2}
1061: \left(\begin{array}[c]{ccccc}
1062: 9\chi_1 & \frac92\chi_1 & \frac92\chi_2 & 0 & -3\chi_1 \\
1063: \frac92\chi_1 & \frac94\chi_1 & \frac94 \chi_2 & 0 & -\frac32\chi_1 \\
1064: \frac92\chi_2 & \frac94\chi_2 & \chi_3 & 0 & -\frac32\chi_2 \\
1065: 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
1066: -3\chi_1 & -\frac32\chi_1 & -\frac32\chi_2 & 0 & \chi_1
1067: \end{array}\right),
1068: \end{equation}
1069: and we write
1070: \begin{eqnarray}
1071: \chi_1&=&1-\frac{\hat{t}\hat{u}}{\hat{s}^2}-\frac{\hat{s}\hat{t}}{\hat{u}^2}+\frac{\hat{t}^2}{\hat{s}\hat{u}}, \nonumber \\
1072: \chi_2&=&\frac{\hat{s}\hat{t}}{\hat{u}^2}-\frac{\hat{t}\hat{u}}{\hat{s}^2}+\frac{\hat{u}^2}{\hat{s}\hat{t}}
1073: -\frac{\hat{s}^2}{\hat{t}\hat{u}}, \nonumber \\
1074: \chi_3&=&\frac{27}{4}
1075: -9\left(\frac{\hat{s}\hat{u}}{\hat{t}^2}+\frac14\frac{\hat{t}\hat{u}}{\hat{s}^2}+
1076: \frac14\frac{\hat{s}\hat{t}}{\hat{u}^2}\right)
1077: +\frac92\left(\frac{\hat{u}^2}{\hat{s}\hat{t}}+\frac{\hat{s}^2}{\hat{t}\hat{u}}-
1078: \frac12\frac{\hat{t}^2}{\hat{s}\hat{u}}\right).
1079: \end{eqnarray}
1080: For this process the soft matrix is
1081: \begin{equation}
1082: S^{(0)}=
1083: \left(\begin{array}[c]{cccccccc}
1084: 5 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
1085: 0 & 5 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
1086: 0 & 0 & 5 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
1087: 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
1088: 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 8 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
1089: 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 8 & 0 & 0 \\
1090: 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 20 & 0 \\
1091: 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 27
1092: \end{array}\right).
1093: \end{equation}
1094:
1095: \subsection*{The direct processes}
1096: For both these processes the zeroth order soft factor is unity and the
1097: hard functions are
1098: \begin{eqnarray}
1099: H^{(1)}(\gamma g \rightarrow q\bar{q})&=&
1100: \Bigl(\sum_qe_q^2\Bigr)
1101: \frac{\alpha_s \alpha_{\mathrm{em}}\pi}{2\hat{s}}
1102: \;\frac{4\hat{t}\hat{u}}{\hat{s}^2}
1103: \left(\frac{\hat{u}}{\hat{t}}+\frac{\hat{t}}{\hat{u}}\right), \nonumber \\
1104: H^{(1)}(\gamma q(\bar{q}) \rightarrow g q(\bar{q}))&=&\frac83e_q^2\frac{\alpha_s\alpha_{\mathrm{em}}\pi}{2\hat{s}}
1105: \;\frac{4\hat{t}\hat{u}}{\hat{s}^2}
1106: \left(\frac{-\hat{u}}{\hat{s}}+\frac{\hat{s}}{-\hat{u}}\right),
1107: \end{eqnarray}
1108: where $e_q$ is the electric charge of quark flavour $q$, in units of the electron charge. Note that if the
1109: sum for $\gamma g \rightarrow q\bar{q}$ is taken to be over four flavours, then this gives a factor of~$10/9$.
1110:
1111: \section{Colour decomposition matrices}
1112:
1113: \label{appdecomp}
1114:
1115: We now give the full set of colour decomposition matrices, and the
1116: sign function $\mathcal{S}$, defined by equation \ref{eqsign}, for $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$, defined
1117: by
1118: \begin{eqnarray}
1119: \alpha&=&\mathcal{S}_{ab}\Gamma^{(ab)}+\mathcal{S}_{12}\Gamma^{(12)}, \nonumber \\
1120: \beta&=&\mathcal{S}_{a1}\Gamma^{(a1)}+\mathcal{S}_{b2}\Gamma^{(b2)}, \nonumber \\
1121: \gamma&=&\mathcal{S}_{b1}\Gamma^{(b1)}+\mathcal{S}_{a2}\Gamma^{(a2)}.
1122: \end{eqnarray}
1123: \subsection*{The process \boldmath{$q\bar{q}\rightarrow q\bar{q}$}}
1124: \begin{equation}
1125: \mathcal{C}^{q\bar{q}\rightarrow q\bar{q}}=
1126: \left(\begin{array}[c]{cc}
1127: C_F \beta \,\,\,& \frac{C_F}{2N_c}(\alpha+\gamma) \\
1128: \alpha+\gamma \,\,\,& C_F\alpha-\frac{1}{2N_c}(\alpha+\beta+2\gamma)
1129: \end{array}\right).
1130: \end{equation}
1131: The signs are
1132: \begin{eqnarray}
1133: \mathcal{S}_\alpha&=&+1, \\
1134: \mathcal{S}_\beta&=&+1, \\
1135: \mathcal{S}_\gamma&=&-1.
1136: \end{eqnarray}
1137:
1138:
1139:
1140: \subsection*{The process \boldmath{$qq\rightarrow qq$}}
1141: \begin{equation}
1142: \mathcal{C}^{qq\rightarrow qq}=
1143: \left(\begin{array}[c]{cc}
1144: C_F \beta \,\,\,& \frac{C_F}{2N_c}(\alpha+\gamma) \\
1145: \alpha+\gamma \,\,\,& C_F\gamma-\frac{1}{2N_c}(2\alpha+\beta+\gamma)
1146: \end{array}\right).
1147: \end{equation}
1148: The signs are
1149: \begin{eqnarray}
1150: \mathcal{S}_\alpha&=&-1, \\
1151: \mathcal{S}_\beta&=&+1, \\
1152: \mathcal{S}_\gamma&=&+1.
1153: \end{eqnarray}
1154:
1155:
1156: \subsection*{The process \boldmath{$qg\rightarrow qg$}}
1157: \begin{equation}
1158: \mathcal{C}^{qg\rightarrow qg}=
1159: \left(\begin{array}[c]{ccc}
1160: C_F \Gamma^{(a1)}+C_A\Gamma^{(b2)} & 0 & -\frac12(\alpha+\gamma) \\
1161: 0 & \chi & -\frac{N_c}{4}(\alpha+\gamma) \\
1162: -(\alpha+\gamma) & -\frac{N_c^2-4}{4N_c}(\alpha+\gamma) & \chi
1163: \end{array}\right).
1164: \end{equation}
1165: The signs are
1166: \begin{eqnarray}
1167: \mathcal{S}_\alpha&=&+1, \\
1168: \mathcal{S}_\beta&=&+1, \\
1169: \mathcal{S}_\gamma&=&-1,
1170: \end{eqnarray}
1171: and we define
1172: \begin{equation}
1173: \chi=\frac{N_c}{4}(\alpha-\gamma)-\frac{1}{2N_c}\Gamma^{(a1)}+\frac{N_c}{2}\Gamma^{(b2)}.
1174: \end{equation}
1175:
1176: \subsection*{The processes \boldmath{$q\bar{q}\rightarrow gg$} and \boldmath{$gg \rightarrow q\bar{q}$}}
1177:
1178: For $q\bar{q}\rightarrow gg$ we have
1179: \begin{equation}
1180: \mathcal{C}^{q\bar{q}\rightarrow gg}=
1181: \left(\begin{array}[c]{ccc}
1182: C_F \Gamma^{(ab)}+C_A\Gamma^{(12)} & 0 & \frac12(\beta+\gamma) \\
1183: 0 & \chi' & \frac{N_c}{4}(\beta+\gamma) \\
1184: (\beta+\gamma) & \frac{N_c^2-4}{4N_c}(\beta+\gamma) & \chi'
1185: \end{array}\right).
1186: \end{equation}
1187: The signs are
1188: \begin{eqnarray}
1189: \mathcal{S}_\alpha&=&+1, \\
1190: \mathcal{S}_\beta&=&+1, \\
1191: \mathcal{S}_\gamma&=&-1,
1192: \end{eqnarray}
1193: and we define
1194: \begin{equation}
1195: \chi'=\frac{N_c}{4}(\beta-\gamma)-\frac{1}{2N_c}\Gamma^{(ab)}+\frac{N_c}{2}\Gamma^{(12)}.
1196: \end{equation}
1197:
1198: For $gg\rightarrow q\bar{q}$ we have
1199: \begin{equation}
1200: \mathcal{C}^{gg\rightarrow q\bar{q}}=
1201: \left(\begin{array}[c]{ccc}
1202: C_F \Gamma^{(12)}+C_A\Gamma^{(ab)} & 0 & \frac12(\beta+\gamma) \\
1203: 0 & \chi'' & \frac{N_c}{4}(\beta+\gamma) \\
1204: (\beta+\gamma) & \frac{N_c^2-4}{4N_c}(\beta+\gamma) & \chi''
1205: \end{array}\right).
1206: \end{equation}
1207: The signs are
1208: \begin{eqnarray}
1209: \mathcal{S}_\alpha&=&+1, \\
1210: \mathcal{S}_\beta&=&+1, \\
1211: \mathcal{S}_\gamma&=&-1,
1212: \end{eqnarray}
1213: and we define
1214: \begin{equation}
1215: \chi''=\frac{N_c}{4}(\beta-\gamma)-\frac{1}{2N_c}\Gamma^{(12)}+\frac{N_c}{2}\Gamma^{(ab)}.
1216: \end{equation}
1217:
1218:
1219: \subsection*{The process \boldmath{$gg\rightarrow gg$}}
1220: \begin{equation}
1221: \mathcal{C}^{gg\rightarrow gg}=
1222: \left(\begin{array}[c]{cc}
1223: \mathcal{M}_{3\times3} & 0_{3\times5} \\
1224: 0_{5\times3} & \mathcal{M}_{5\times5}
1225: \end{array}\right),
1226: \end{equation}
1227: where the matrix $\mathcal{M}_{3\times3}$ is
1228: \begin{equation}
1229: \mathcal{M}_{3\times3}=
1230: \left(\begin{array}[c]{ccc}
1231: \frac{N_c}{2}(\alpha+\beta) & 0 & 0 \\
1232: 0 & \frac{N_c}{2}(\alpha-\gamma) & 0 \\
1233: 0 & 0 & \frac{N_c}{2}(\beta-\gamma),
1234: \end{array}\right)
1235: \end{equation}
1236: and the matrix $\mathcal{M}_{5\times5}$ is
1237: \begin{equation}
1238: \mathcal{M}_{5\times5}=
1239: \left(\begin{array}[c]{ccccc}
1240: 3\beta & 0 & 3(\alpha+\gamma) & 0 & 0 \\
1241: 0 & \frac{3}{4}(\alpha+2\beta-\gamma) & \frac{3}{4}(\alpha+\gamma) & \frac{3}{2}(\alpha+\gamma) & 0 \\
1242: \frac{3}{8}(\alpha+\gamma)&\frac{3}{4}(\alpha+\gamma)&\frac{3}{4}(\alpha+2\beta-\gamma) & 0 & \frac{9}{8}(\alpha+\gamma) \\
1243: 0 & \frac{3}{5}(\alpha+\gamma) & 0 & \frac{3}{2}(\alpha-\gamma) & \frac{9}{10}(\alpha+\gamma) \\
1244: 0 & 0 & \frac{1}{3}(\alpha+\gamma) & \frac{2}{3}(\alpha+\gamma) & 2\alpha-\beta-2\gamma
1245: \end{array}\right),
1246: \end{equation}
1247: for $N_c=3$.
1248: The signs are
1249: \begin{eqnarray}
1250: \mathcal{S}_\alpha&=&+1, \\
1251: \mathcal{S}_\beta&=&+1, \\
1252: \mathcal{S}_\gamma&=&-1.
1253: \end{eqnarray}
1254:
1255: \subsection*{The direct processes}
1256: This processes has no matrix structure.
1257: \begin{eqnarray}
1258: \mathcal{C}^{\gamma g \rightarrow q\bar{q}}&=&
1259: -\frac{1}{2N_c}\Gamma^{(12)}+\frac{N_c}{2}\left(\Gamma^{(b1)}+\Gamma^{(b2)}\right), \nonumber \\
1260: \mathcal{C}^{\gamma q \rightarrow gq}&=&
1261: -\frac{1}{2N_c}\Gamma^{(b2)}+\frac{N_c}{2}\left(\Gamma^{(b2)}+\Gamma^{(12)}\right).
1262: \end{eqnarray}
1263:
1264:
1265: \section{The \boldmath{$\Gamma^{(ij)}$} series expansions}
1266:
1267: \label{appgamma}
1268:
1269: We have not found a closed form for these integrals, but they are
1270: straightforward to express as power series in $R$ and $e^{-\Delta\eta}$
1271: (by Lorentz invariance, only the contributions from dipoles containing
1272: jet 2 are $\Delta\eta$-dependent),
1273: \begin{eqnarray}
1274: \Omega^{(ab)}_1 &=& \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\Bigl(
1275: \frac14R^2\Bigr), \\
1276: \Omega^{(12)}_1 &=& \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\Bigl(
1277: \frac12\log R+\frac12\log\frac1{\Delta\eta-\Delta y}+
1278: \\&&
1279: (+ 0.31831\,R + 0.06250\,R^2 + 0.00884\,R^3 + 0.00087\,R^4 +
1280: 0.00003\,R^5)+
1281: \hspace*{-1cm}\nonumber\\&&
1282: (- 0.08616\,R - 0.03383\,R^2 -
1283: 0.01197\,R^3 - 0.00282\,R^4
1284: \nonumber\\&&
1285: - 0.00039\,R^5 +
1286: 0.00001\,R^7)e^{-(\Delta\eta-2)}+
1287: \nonumber\\&&
1288: (+ 0.01166\,R + 0.00916\,R^2 +
1289: 0.00551\,R^3 + 0.00305\,R^4
1290: \nonumber\\&&
1291: + 0.00122\,R^5 +
1292: 0.00038\,R^6 + 0.00011\,R^7 + 0.00003\,R^8)e^{-2(\Delta\eta-2)}+
1293: \nonumber\\&&
1294: (- 0.00158\,R - 0.00186\,R^2 - 0.00162\,R^3 -
1295: 0.00139\,R^4
1296: \nonumber\\&&
1297: - 0.00088\,R^5 - 0.00041\,R^6 -
1298: 0.00017\,R^7 - 0.00007\,R^8 - 0.00002\,R^9)e^{-3(\Delta\eta-2)}+
1299: \hspace*{-3cm}\nonumber\\&&
1300: (+ 0.00021\,R +
1301: 0.00034\,R^2 + 0.00039\,R^3 + 0.00045\,R^4
1302: \nonumber\\&&
1303: + 0.00039\,R^5 + 0.00024\,R^6 + 0.00013\,R^7 +
1304: 0.00007\,R^8
1305: \nonumber\\&&
1306: + 0.00003\,R^9 +
1307: 0.00001\,R^{10})e^{-4(\Delta\eta-2)}+
1308: \nonumber\\&&
1309: (- 0.00003\,R -
1310: 0.00006\,R^2 - 0.00008\,R^3 - 0.00012\,R^4
1311: \nonumber\\&&
1312: - 0.00013\,R^5 - 0.00010\,R^6 - 0.00007\,R^7 -
1313: 0.00004\,R^8
1314: \nonumber\\&&
1315: - 0.00003\,R^9 -
1316: 0.00001\,R^{10})e^{-5(\Delta\eta-2)}+
1317: \nonumber\\&&
1318: (+ 0.00001\,R^2 + 0.00002\,R^3 +
1319: 0.00003\,R^4 + 0.00004\,R^5
1320: \nonumber\\&&
1321: + 0.00003\,R^6 +
1322: 0.00003\,R^7 + 0.00002\,R^8 + 0.00001\,R^9)e^{-6(\Delta\eta-2)}
1323: \Bigr),
1324: \nonumber\\
1325: \Omega^{(a1)}_1 &=& \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\Bigl(
1326: \frac12\log R+\frac12\log\frac1{\Delta\eta-\Delta y}
1327: \\&&{}
1328: - 0.31831\,R + 0.06250\,R^2 - 0.00884\,R^3 + 0.00087\,R^4 -
1329: 0.00003\,R^5
1330: \Bigr),
1331: \hspace*{-1cm}
1332: \nonumber\\
1333: \Omega^{(b2)}_1 &=& \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\Bigl(
1334: \\&&{}
1335: (+ 0.00458\,R^2 + 0.00389\,R^3 + 0.00229\,R^4 +
1336: 0.00104\,R^5
1337: \nonumber\\&&
1338: + 0.00038\,R^6 + 0.00012\,R^7 +
1339: 0.00003\,R^8)e^{-2(\Delta\eta-2)}+
1340: \nonumber\\&&
1341: (- 0.00124\,R^2 -
1342: 0.00158\,R^3 - 0.00124\,R^4 - 0.00079\,R^5
1343: \nonumber\\&&
1344: - 0.00041\,R^6 - 0.00018\,R^7 - 0.00007\,R^8 -
1345: 0.00002\,R^9)e^{-3(\Delta\eta-2)}+
1346: \nonumber\\&&
1347: (+ 0.00025\,R^2 + 0.00043\,R^3 + 0.00042\,R^4 +
1348: 0.00034\,R^5
1349: \nonumber\\&&
1350: + 0.00024\,R^6 + 0.00014\,R^7 +
1351: 0.00007\,R^8 + 0.00003\,R^9 +
1352: 0.00001\,R^{10})e^{-4(\Delta\eta-2)}+
1353: \hspace*{-3cm}\nonumber\\&&
1354: (- 0.00005\,R^2 -
1355: 0.00010\,R^3 - 0.00011\,R^4 - 0.00011\,R^5
1356: \nonumber\\&&
1357: - 0.00010\,R^6 - 0.00007\,R^7 - 0.00004\,R^8 -
1358: 0.00002\,R^9 - 0.00001\,R^{10})e^{-5(\Delta\eta-2)}+
1359: \hspace*{-3cm}\nonumber\\&&
1360: (+ 0.00002\,R^3 +
1361: 0.00003\,R^4 + 0.00003\,R^5 + 0.00003\,R^6
1362: \nonumber\\&&
1363: + 0.00003\,R^7 + 0.00002\,R^8 + 0.00001\,R^9)e^{-6(\Delta\eta-2)}
1364: \Bigr),
1365: \nonumber\\
1366: \Omega^{(a2)}_1 &=& \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\Bigl(
1367: -\frac14R^2+
1368: \\&&{}
1369: (+ 0.06767\,R^2 + 0.02872\,R^3 - 0.00096\,R^5 +
1370: 0.00002\,R^7)e^{-(\Delta\eta-2)}+
1371: \nonumber\\&&
1372: (- 0.01374\,R^2 -
1373: 0.01166\,R^3 - 0.00229\,R^4 - 0.00038\,R^6
1374: \nonumber\\&&
1375: - 0.00021\,R^7 - 0.00003\,R^8)e^{-2(\Delta\eta-2)}+
1376: \nonumber\\&&
1377: (+ 0.00248\,R^2 + 0.00316\,R^3 + 0.00124\,R^4 +
1378: 0.00032\,R^5
1379: \nonumber\\&&
1380: + 0.00041\,R^6 + 0.00027\,R^7 +
1381: 0.00007\,R^8 + 0.00001\,R^9)e^{-3(\Delta\eta-2)}+
1382: \nonumber\\&&
1383: (- 0.00042\,R^2 -
1384: 0.00071\,R^3 - 0.00042\,R^4 - 0.00019\,R^5
1385: \nonumber\\&&
1386: - 0.00024\,R^6 - 0.00019\,R^7 - 0.00007\,R^8 -
1387: 0.00002\,R^9 - 0.00001\,R^{10})e^{-4(\Delta\eta-2)}+
1388: \hspace*{-3cm}\nonumber\\&&
1389: (+ 0.00007\,R^2 + 0.00014\,R^3 + 0.00011\,R^4 +
1390: 0.00007\,R^5
1391: \nonumber\\&&
1392: + 0.00010\,R^6 + 0.00009\,R^7 +
1393: 0.00004\,R^8 + 0.00002\,R^9 +
1394: 0.00001\,R^{10})e^{-5(\Delta\eta-2)}+
1395: \hspace*{-3cm}\nonumber\\&&
1396: (- 0.00001\,R^2 -
1397: 0.00003\,R^3 - 0.00003\,R^4 - 0.00002\,R^5
1398: \nonumber\\&&
1399: - 0.00003\,R^6 - 0.00004\,R^7 - 0.00002\,R^8 -
1400: 0.00001\,R^9)e^{-6(\Delta\eta-2)}
1401: \Bigr),
1402: \nonumber\\
1403: \Omega^{(b1)}_1 &=& \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\Bigl(
1404: -\frac12\log R-\frac12\log\frac1{\Delta\eta-\Delta y}
1405: \\&&{}
1406: - 0.31831\,R - 0.06250\,R^2 - 0.00884\,R^3 - 0.00087\,R^4 -
1407: 0.00003\,R^5
1408: \Bigr),
1409: \hspace*{-1cm}
1410: \nonumber
1411: \end{eqnarray}
1412: where all coefficients larger than $10^{-5}$ are shown (recall that we
1413: are mainly interested in the case $R=1$, $\Delta\eta>2$). By symmetry, we have $\Omega^{(ij)}_2 =
1414: \Omega^{(\bar\imath\bar\jmath)}_1$, where the mapping $i\to\bar\imath$
1415: is given by $\{a,b,1,2\}\to\{b,a,2,1\}$.
1416:
1417:
1418: \section{The \boldmath{$\Omega_f^{(ij)}$} angular integrals for a cone geometry}
1419: \label{appcone}
1420: We present these results as they have not appeared previously in this form.
1421: They have the expression,
1422: \begin{equation}
1423: \Omega^{(ij)}_f=\int_{-\Delta y/2}^{+\Delta_y/2}d\eta \int_0^{2\pi} \frac{d\phi}{2\pi}
1424: \frac{\beta_i\cdot \beta_j}{(\beta_i\cdot \bar{k})(\beta_j\cdot \bar{k})},
1425: \end{equation}
1426: where the integrand is found from the appropriate 4-momenta, and the phase space is taken to
1427: be of width $\Delta y$ and azimuthally symmetric. Note that these expressions do not include
1428: the sign factors. We obtain
1429: \begin{eqnarray}
1430: \Omega_f^{(ab)}&=&2\Delta y, \nonumber \\
1431: \Omega_f^{(12)}&=&2\log\left(\frac{\sinh(\Delta\eta/2+\Delta y/2)}{\sinh(\Delta\eta/2-\Delta y/2)}\right), \nonumber \\
1432: \Omega_f^{(a1)}&=&-\Delta y+
1433: \log\left(\frac{\sinh(\Delta\eta/2+\Delta y/2)}{\sinh(\Delta\eta/2-\Delta y/2)}\right), \nonumber \\
1434: \Omega_f^{(b2)}&=&-\Delta y+
1435: \log\left(\frac{\sinh(\Delta\eta/2+\Delta y/2)}{\sinh(\Delta\eta/2-\Delta y/2)}\right), \nonumber \\
1436: \Omega_f^{(a2)}&=&\Delta y+
1437: \log\left(\frac{\sinh(\Delta\eta/2+\Delta y/2)}{\sinh(\Delta\eta/2-\Delta y/2)}\right), \nonumber \\
1438: \Omega_f^{(b1)}&=&\Delta y+
1439: \log\left(\frac{\sinh(\Delta\eta/2+\Delta y/2)}{\sinh(\Delta\eta/2-\Delta y/2)}\right).
1440: \end{eqnarray}
1441:
1442:
1443: \end{appendix}
1444:
1445:
1446: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1447:
1448: %\cite{Marchesini:1988}
1449: \bibitem{Marchesini:1988}
1450: G.~Marchesini and B.R.~Webber,
1451: %``Associated transverse energy in hadronic jet production,''
1452: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 38} (1988) 3419
1453:
1454: %\cite{dokshitzer}
1455: \bibitem{dokshitzer}
1456: Yu.L.~Dokshitzer, V.~Khoze and S.~Troyan, in {\it Physics in Collision VI}, Proceedings of the
1457: International Conference, Chicago, Illinois, 1986, edited by M.~Derrick (World Scientific, Singapore,
1458: 1987), p.~365.
1459:
1460:
1461: %\cite{Bjorken:1992er}
1462: \bibitem{Bjorken:1992er}
1463: J.~D.~Bjorken,
1464: %``Rapidity gaps and jets as a new physics signature in very high-energy hadron hadron collisions,''
1465: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 47} (1993) 101.
1466: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D47,101;%%
1467:
1468:
1469:
1470:
1471: %\cite{Derrick:1995pb}
1472: \bibitem{Derrick:1995pb}
1473: M.~Derrick {\it et al.} [ZEUS Collaboration],
1474: %``Rapidity Gaps between Jets in Photoproduction at HERA,''
1475: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 369} (1996) 55
1476: [arXiv:hep-ex/9510012].
1477: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9510012;%%
1478:
1479:
1480: %\cite{zeus:2003}
1481: \bibitem{zeus:2003}
1482: ZEUS Collaboration,
1483: %``Rapidity Gaps between Jets in Photoproduction at HERA,''
1484: The XXXIth International Conference on High Energy Physics, Amsterdam, July 2002
1485: Abstract number 852.
1486:
1487:
1488: %\cite{Adloff:2002em}
1489: \bibitem{Adloff:2002em}
1490: C.~Adloff {\it et al.} [H1 Collaboration],
1491: %``Energy flow and rapidity gaps between jets in photoproduction at HERA,''
1492: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 24} (2002) 517
1493: [arXiv:hep-ex/0203011].
1494: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0203011;%%
1495:
1496:
1497:
1498:
1499:
1500:
1501: %\cite{Kidonakis:1998bk}
1502: \bibitem{Kidonakis:1998bk}
1503: N.~Kidonakis, G.~Oderda and G.~Sterman,
1504: %``Threshold resummation for dijet cross sections,''
1505: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 525} (1998) 299
1506: [arXiv:hep-ph/9801268].
1507: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9801268;%%
1508:
1509: %\cite{Kidonakis:1998nf}
1510: \bibitem{Kidonakis:1998nf}
1511: N.~Kidonakis, G.~Oderda and G.~Sterman,
1512: %``Evolution of color exchange in {QCD} hard scattering,''
1513: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 531} (1998) 365
1514: [arXiv:hep-ph/9803241].
1515: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9803241;%%
1516:
1517:
1518: %\cite{Oderda:1998en}
1519: \bibitem{Oderda:1998en}
1520: G.~Oderda and G.~Sterman,
1521: %``Energy and color flow in dijet rapidity gaps,''
1522: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 81} (1998) 3591
1523: [arXiv:hep-ph/9806530].
1524: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9806530;%%
1525:
1526: %\cite{Oderda:1999kr}
1527: \bibitem{Oderda:1999kr}
1528: G.~Oderda,
1529: %``Dijet rapidity gaps in photoproduction from perturbative {QCD},''
1530: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 61} (2000) 014004
1531: [arXiv:hep-ph/9903240].
1532: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9903240;%%
1533:
1534:
1535: %\cite{Berger:2001ns}
1536: \bibitem{Berger:2001ns}
1537: C.~F.~Berger, T.~K\'ucs and G.~Sterman,
1538: %``Energy flow in interjet radiation,''
1539: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65} (2002) 094031
1540: [arXiv:hep-ph/0110004].
1541: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0110004;%%
1542:
1543:
1544:
1545: %\cite{Dasgupta:2001sh}
1546: \bibitem{Dasgupta:2001sh}
1547: M.~Dasgupta and G.~P.~Salam,
1548: %``Resummation of non-global QCD observables,''
1549: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 512} (2001) 323
1550: [arXiv:hep-ph/0104277].
1551: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0104277;%%
1552:
1553: %\cite{Dasgupta:2002bw}
1554: \bibitem{Dasgupta:2002bw}
1555: M.~Dasgupta and G.~P.~Salam,
1556: %``Accounting for coherence in interjet E(t) flow: A case study,''
1557: JHEP {\bf 0203} (2002) 017
1558: [arXiv:hep-ph/0203009].
1559: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0203009;%%
1560:
1561:
1562: %\cite{Appleby:2002ke}
1563: \bibitem{Appleby:2002ke}
1564: R.~B.~Appleby and M.~H.~Seymour,
1565: %``Non-global logarithms in inter-jet energy flow with kt clustering requirement,''
1566: JHEP {\bf 0212} (2002) 063
1567: [arXiv:hep-ph/0211426].
1568: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0211426;%%
1569:
1570: %\cite{Appleby:2003ai}
1571: \bibitem{Appleby:2003ai}
1572: R.~B.~Appleby and G.~P.~Salam,
1573: %``Theory and phenomenology of non-global logarithms,''
1574: arXiv:hep-ph/0305232, presented at 38th Rencontres de Moriond on QCD and High-Energy Hadronic Interactions,
1575: Les Arcs, France, 22--29 March 2003.
1576: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0305232;%%
1577:
1578: %\cite{Collins:ig}
1579: \bibitem{Collins:ig}
1580: J.~C.~Collins, D.~E.~Soper and G.~Sterman,
1581: %``Soft Gluons And Factorization,''
1582: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 308} (1988) 833.
1583: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B308,833;%%
1584:
1585: %\cite{Sotiropoulos:1993rd}
1586: \bibitem{Sotiropoulos:1993rd}
1587: M.~G.~Sotiropoulos and G.~Sterman,
1588: %``Color exchange in near forward hard elastic scattering,''
1589: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 419} (1994) 59
1590: [arXiv:hep-ph/9310279].
1591: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9310279;%%
1592:
1593:
1594: %\cite{Contopanagos:1996nh}
1595: \bibitem{Contopanagos:1996nh}
1596: H.~Contopanagos, E.~Laenen and G.~Sterman,
1597: %``Sudakov factorization and resummation,''
1598: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 484} (1997) 303
1599: [arXiv:hep-ph/9604313].
1600: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9604313;%%
1601:
1602:
1603:
1604:
1605: %\cite{Catani:1993hr}
1606: \bibitem{Catani:1993hr}
1607: S.~Catani, Yu.~L.~Dokshitzer, M.~H.~Seymour and B.~R.~Webber,
1608: %``Longitudinally invariant K(t) clustering algorithms for hadron hadron collisions,''
1609: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 406} (1993) 187.
1610: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B406,187;%%
1611:
1612:
1613: %\cite{Ellis:tq}
1614: \bibitem{Ellis:tq}
1615: S.~D.~Ellis and D.~E.~Soper,
1616: %``Successive Combination Jet Algorithm For Hadron Collisions,''
1617: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 48} (1993) 3160
1618: [arXiv:hep-ph/9305266].
1619: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9305266;%%
1620:
1621: %\cite{Butterworth:2002xg}
1622: \bibitem{Butterworth:2002xg}
1623: J.~M.~Butterworth, J.~P.~Couchman, B.~E.~Cox and B.~M.~Waugh,
1624: %``KtJet: A C++ implementation of the K(T) clustering algorithm,''
1625: Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\ {\bf 153} (2003) 85
1626: [arXiv:hep-ph/0210022].
1627: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0210022;%%
1628:
1629: % WW formula
1630: \bibitem{williams:1934}
1631: C.~F.~Weisz\"{a}cker, Z. Phys. 88 (1934) 612 ; E.~J.~Williams, Phys. Rev. {\bf 45} (1934) 729
1632:
1633:
1634: %\cite{Kidonakis:2000gi}
1635: \bibitem{Kidonakis:2000gi}
1636: N.~Kidonakis and J.~F.~Owens,
1637: %``Effects of higher-order threshold corrections in high-E(T) jet production,''
1638: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63} (2001) 054019
1639: [arXiv:hep-ph/0007268].
1640: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0007268;%%
1641:
1642:
1643: %\cite{Berger:2003zh}
1644: \bibitem{Berger:2003zh}
1645: C.~F.~Berger, SUNY PhD thesis,
1646: %``Soft gluon exponentiation and resummation,''
1647: arXiv:hep-ph/0305076.
1648: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0305076;%%
1649:
1650:
1651: %\cite{Dokshitzer:2003uw}
1652: \bibitem{Dokshitzer:2003uw}
1653: Yu.~L.~Dokshitzer and G.~Marchesini,
1654: %``On large angle multiple gluon radiation,''
1655: JHEP {\bf 0303} (2003) 040
1656: [arXiv:hep-ph/0303101].
1657: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0303101;%%
1658:
1659:
1660: %\cite{Berger:2003iw}
1661: \bibitem{Berger:2003iw}
1662: C.~F.~Berger, T.~K\'ucs and G.~Sterman,
1663: %``Event shape / energy flow correlations,''
1664: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68} (2003) 014012
1665: [arXiv:hep-ph/0303051].
1666: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0303051;%%
1667:
1668: %\cite{Gluck:1991jc}
1669: \bibitem{Gluck:1991jc}
1670: M.~Gluck, E.~Reya and A.~Vogt,
1671: %``Photonic parton distributions,''
1672: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 46} (1992) 1973.
1673: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D46,1973;%%
1674:
1675: %\cite{Martin:1998np}
1676: \bibitem{Martin:1998np}
1677: A.~D.~Martin, R.~G.~Roberts, W.~J.~Stirling and R.~S.~Thorne,
1678: %``Scheme dependence, leading order and higher twist studies of MRST partons,''
1679: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 443} (1998) 301
1680: [arXiv:hep-ph/9808371].
1681: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9808371;%%
1682:
1683:
1684:
1685:
1686:
1687: %\cite{Corcella:2000bw}
1688: \bibitem{Corcella:2000bw}
1689: G.~Corcella {\it et al.},
1690: %``HERWIG 6: An event generator for hadron emission reactions with interfering gluons (including supersymmetric processes),''
1691: JHEP {\bf 0101} (2001) 010
1692: [arXiv:hep-ph/0011363].
1693: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0011363;%%
1694:
1695: %\cite{Corcella:2002jc}
1696: \bibitem{Corcella:2002jc}
1697: G.~Corcella {\it et al.},
1698: ``HERWIG 6.5 release note'',
1699: arXiv:hep-ph/0210213.
1700: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0210213;%%
1701:
1702:
1703:
1704: %\cite{Korchemsky:1999kt}
1705: \bibitem{Korchemsky:1999kt}
1706: G.~P.~Korchemsky and G.~Sterman,
1707: %``Power corrections to event shapes and factorization,''
1708: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 555} (1999) 335
1709: [arXiv:hep-ph/9902341].
1710: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9902341;%%
1711:
1712:
1713:
1714:
1715:
1716:
1717: \end{thebibliography}
1718:
1719:
1720:
1721: \end{document}
1722: