1: \documentclass{wqcd03} % twocolumn proceedings style
2: \def\nslash{\rlap{\hspace{0.02cm}/}{n}}
3: \def\dslash{\rlap{\hspace{0.08cm}/}{D}}
4: \def\beq{\begin{eqnarray}}
5: \def\eeq{\end {eqnarray}}
6: \def\P{{\cal P}}
7: \def\pr{^{\prime}}
8: \def\GeV{{\rm GeV} }
9: \def\ln{{\rm ln}}
10: \def\non{\nonumber}
11: \def\dirac#1{#1\llap{/}}
12: \def\as{\alpha_s}
13: \def\pv#1{\vec{#1}_\perp}
14: \def\lqcd{\Lambda_{\rm QCD}}
15:
16: \newcommand\epjc{Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C }
17: \newcommand\jhep{J.\ High Ener.\ Phys.\ }
18: \newcommand\npb{Nucl.\ Phys.\ B }
19: \newcommand\npps{Nucl.\ Phys.\ B (Proc.\ Suppl.) }
20: \newcommand\plb{Phys.\ Lett.\ B }
21: \newcommand\zpc{Z.\ Phys.\ C }
22: \newcommand\prd{Phys.\ Rev.\ D }
23: \newcommand\prep{Phys.\ Rep. }
24: \newcommand\prl{Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett. }
25:
26:
27: %\usepackage{txfonts} % if you have it, to get Times family
28: %\renewcommand{\ttdefault}{cmtt} % but keep CM typewriter
29: % or
30: %\usepackage{mathptmx} % use the mathptmx package
31: %\renewcommand{\sfdefault}{phv} % and set this
32: % or use neither and get CM fonts
33: %% Conference Name
34: %\confname{QCD@Work 2003 - International Workshop on QCD,
35: % Conversano, Italy, 14--18 June 2003}
36:
37: \title{The factorization in exclusive B decays: a critical look}
38:
39: \author{Zheng-Tao Wei }
40:
41: \address {Departamento de F\'{\i}sica Te\'orica, Universidad
42: de Valencia, \\ E-46100, Burjassot, Valencia, Spain}
43:
44: \begin{document}
45:
46: \begin{abstract}
47:
48: I review the theoretical ideas and concepts along the line of
49: factorization in the exclusive B decays. In order to understand
50: the naive factorization, the effective field theories and the
51: perturbative method of QCD are introduced and developed. We focus
52: our discussions on the large energy effective theory, the QCD
53: factorization approach and the soft-collinear effective theory.
54:
55: \end{abstract}
56:
57: \maketitle
58:
59:
60: \section{Introduction}
61:
62: The exploration of CP violation and determination of the
63: Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) matrix elements motivate extensive
64: interests of B meson decay. From another point of view, B decays
65: provide a good place to study the fruitful dynamics of QCD. Up to
66: now, we have not a truly successful method to calculate the
67: non-perturbative QCD and the mechanism of quark confinement is
68: still unknown. The study of exclusive B decays is usually
69: difficult because of the complicate QCD dynamics. However, the
70: experiments from the Belle and Babar collaborations have
71: accumulated and will continue to accumulate a large amount of data
72: of B decays. The large theoretical uncertainties cannot compete
73: with the more precise experimental data. We come to one stage that
74: experiment goes ahead of theory. The theorists in B physics have
75: to meet great challenge from the experiment.
76:
77: The problem of exclusive B decays lies in a very large number of
78: degrees of freedom. The experiment observes the hadron states such
79: as B meson and pion, kaon etc. In the QCD Lagrangian, only quark
80: and gluon degrees of freedom appear. We don't know accurately how
81: the hadron are formed by quarks and gluons. From the energy scale
82: standpoint, the B decays usually contain many scales: the weak
83: interaction scale $m_W$, the $b$ quark mass $m_b$, the QCD scale
84: $\lqcd$ and possible intermediate scales due to the soft spectator
85: quark in B meson. The momenta of quarks or gluons are not
86: restricted. They can be highly virtual, very soft or highly
87: energetic but collinear to the fast moving pion. The fact that we
88: have to treat all the degrees of freedom in one process if we
89: think QCD is the correct theory of strong interaction leads to
90: great theoretical complications.
91:
92:
93: One method to treat the multi-scales problem is factorization. The
94: factorization is a key ingredient of perturbative QCD (pQCD)
95: \cite{CSS,BL}. Its basic idea is to separate the short-distant
96: dynamics from the long-distance physics. It has been widely used
97: in the hard QCD processes where the large momentum transfer $Q\gg
98: \lqcd$ is involved. Another method is the effective field theory.
99: It is a useful toll to study the process with several separate
100: scales. The heavy quark effective theory (HQET) \cite{Georgi} is a
101: low energy effective theory. It allows model-independent
102: predictions in some cases of the heavy meson system, such as $B\to
103: D$ form factor at zero recoil. The developments of the two methods
104: are nearly independent although some ideas in them are related. As
105: we will show that these two lines of thought converge in the study
106: of exclusive B decays,.
107:
108:
109: The factorization had been introduced in exclusive B decays for a
110: long time. The old form which we call the naive factorization
111: approach is to divide a hadronic matrix element into the
112: multiplication of a form factor and hadron decay constant. This
113: idea influences B physics for more than 30 years. Much efforts
114: were done to interpret and generalize it. Now, the idea of
115: factorization has been developed as a central idea of B physics.
116: In this talk, we will discuss the theoretical struggle of studying
117: the exclusive B decays along the line of factorization. The
118: success and limitations of each theoretical approach will be
119: analyzed. We are focus on the conceptual developments from the
120: naive factorization approach to the QCD factorization approach. We
121: will show how the effective field theory enters into B physics and
122: modifies our view.
123:
124:
125: \section{The naive factorization approach and the large energy
126: effective theory}
127:
128: The first thing to do in B decays is to integrate out the heavy
129: degrees of freedom of W, Z bosons and top quark in the standard
130: model. The method is to construct an effective theory where the
131: above heavy particles do not appear. The theoretical technic is
132: mature now. It uses the operator product expansion (OPE) and
133: renormalization group equation (RGE). For non-leptonic B decays,
134: the
135: relevant effective weak Hamiltonian is %
136: \beq %
137: {\cal H}_{eff}=\frac{G_F}{\sqrt 2}\sum_i V^i_{\rm CKM}C_i(\mu)Q_i.
138: \eeq %
139: where $G_F$ is the Fermi constant and $Q_i$ are current-current
140: operators. The scale $\mu$ is chosen of order of $m_b$. The
141: amplitude of $B\to M_1M_2$ decay is%
142: \beq %
143: A(B\to M_1M_2)=\frac{G_F}{\sqrt 2}\sum_i V^i_{\rm CKM} \non \\
144: \times C_i(\mu)\langle M_1M_2|Q_i|B\rangle(\mu).
145: \eeq %
146: where $\langle M_1M_2|Q_i|B\rangle$ are hadronic matrix elements.
147: The remained work is to calculate the hadronic matrix element.
148:
149: \subsection{The naive factorization approach}
150:
151: The introduction of factorization to simplify the the hadronic
152: matrix element may be firstly given in \cite{HS} up to knowledge
153: of the author. I cannot trace out this history but refer to
154: \cite{BSW} as our start of discussion. Bauer, Stech and Wirbel
155: consider the non-leptonic two meson decays where the final mesons
156: are energetic. They made assumptions that only the asymptotic part
157: of the hadron field is effective and the current are proportional
158: the hadron field. All the initial state interaction and final
159: state interactions are neglected. Based on the above assumptions,
160: one hadron and its associated current are separated out. The
161: hadronic matrix element is factorized into a multiplication of
162: decay constant and the form factor which represented by the matrix
163: element of the other current. Take $\bar B^0\to \pi^+\pi^-$ decay
164: as an example, %
165: \beq %
166: \langle \pi^+\pi^-|(\bar u b)_{\rm V-A}(\bar d u)_{\rm V-A}|
167: \bar B^0 \rangle = ~~~~~~~~\non \\ ~~~~~~~~
168: \langle \pi^-|(\bar d u)_{\rm V-A}|0\rangle
169: \langle \pi^+|(\bar u b)_{\rm V-A}|\bar B^0\rangle.
170: \eeq %
171: The idea of the above factorization is simple but it has a deep
172: influence. The application of the above naive factorization
173: approach into the non-leptonic two body B decays is successful in
174: early days of B physics when the experimental data are rare. For a
175: long time, this approach is nearly the only method to give a
176: theoretical prediction of exclusive non-leptonic B decays although
177: the accuracy is at the qualitative level for many processes.
178:
179: The factorization approach plays a similar role as the Feynman's
180: parton model in DIS, we can call this naive approach as the parton
181: model in B physics. One might expect that the factorization is a
182: limit case of a more general theory. The understanding of the
183: factorization from field theory of QCD is a long way. The first
184: step comes from Bjorken's intuitive space-time picture
185: \cite{Bjorken}. It is Bjorken who proposed the famous scaling in
186: DIS which lead to the rise of QCD. For $\bar B^0\to \pi^+\pi^-$
187: decay, the quark level decay is $b\to u+\bar u d$. In order to
188: form the final energetic hadron, the quark pair $\bar u d$ has to
189: choose a nearly collinear configuration. Because the pions move
190: fast, the formation time of $\pi^-$ will be long because of the
191: relativistic time-dilation. The dilation ratio is
192: $m_b/\lqcd\approx 20$. That means the hadronization occurs $20$ fm
193: away from the remained system. Before the hadronization, the $\bar
194: u d$ quark pair produced from the pointlike, color-singlet weak
195: interaction is a a small color dipole. The small color dipole has
196: little interaction with the other quarks. The above consideration
197: is usually called ``color transparency argument". From the above
198: argument, one may guess that the factorization approach is the
199: leading order contribution of heavy quark limit where $m_b\gg
200: \lqcd$ and the non-factorizable corrections come from the
201: interactions of small color dipole with the remained quarks at
202: short distance.
203:
204: What is color transparency? It is a concept outside of B physics.
205: According to the discussions in \cite{BBGG}, the color
206: transparency is a phenomenon of pQCD \cite{BL}. It says that a
207: small color-singlet object can pass freely through nucleon target
208: as if the target is transparent. The large target acts as a filter
209: which removes the large transverse separation component of the
210: hadron. The $\bar B^0\to D^+\pi^-$ decay provides a similar
211: environment. $B\to D$ transition is at long distance. The
212: energetic $\pi^-$ selects the $\bar u d$ quark pair at small
213: transverse separations. The long distance processes caused by
214: emitting or absorbing soft gluons have destructive effects and
215: cancel.
216:
217: In \cite{PW}, Politzer and Wise apply the pQCD method into the
218: exclusive processes in $\bar B^0\to D^+\pi^-$ decay. They proposed
219: a factorization formula that the hadronic matrix element can be
220: written as the product of a matrix element of $B$ and $D$ mesons
221: in HQET and a convolution by a hard scattering amplitude T and the
222: pion distribution amplitude $\phi_{\pi}(x)$ as %
223: \beq \label{eq:PW}%
224: \langle D^+\pi^-|(\bar c b)_{\rm V-A}(\bar d u)_{\rm V-A}|
225: \bar B^0 \rangle=
226: \langle D^+|(\bar c_v b_{v'})_{\rm V-A}|\bar B^0\rangle \non \\
227: \times \int_0^1 dx~ T(x, m_c/m_b, \mu)\phi_{\pi}(x, \mu).s
228: \eeq %
229: where $c_v, b_{v'}$ are effective fields for heavy quarks in HQET.
230: They point out the above factorization formulae is the leading
231: order result in $\lqcd/m_b$. One loop calculate is done and the
232: result show $\alpha_s$ correction to leading contribution is
233: small. However, they don't give proof of the factorization.
234:
235:
236: \subsection{The large energy effective theory}
237:
238: The success of HQET motivates theorists to use effective field
239: theory into wider range of application. Dugan and Grinstein had a
240: new idea to establish a foundation for factorization on the
241: effective field theory. They use the effective field theory to
242: replace the intuitive ``color transparency argument". In
243: \cite{DG}, Dugan and Grinstein proposed a large energy effective
244: theory (LEET) to describe the interaction of the energetic
245: collinear quark with soft gluons. They consider one kinematic case
246: that the energy of the collinear quark is much lager than the
247: momentum of soft gluon, i.e., $E\gg \lqcd$. The central idea in
248: LEET is that the energy of the collinear quark is unchanged which
249: is analogous to the velocity superselection rule
250: in HQET. The LEET is very similar to the HQET. The LEET Lagrangian is %
251: \beq \label{eq:LEET}%
252: {\cal L}_{LEET}=\psi^{\dagger}in\cdot D\psi.
253: \eeq %
254: where $n$ is a light-like vector which the direction is along the
255: motion of the collinear quark and the collinear field $\psi$
256: satisfies $\nslash \psi=0$.
257:
258: If we choose the light-cone gauge $n\cdot A=0$, the soft gluons
259: decouple from the collinear and factorization is a trivial result.
260: From this point of view, the color transparency is explained by
261: that only the longitudinal gluons couple to the collinear quark
262: and thus decouple. Although the proof of factorization in this way
263: is too simple to be correct, the LEET is very impressive. It
264: provide a new view of factorization. In pQCD, the diagrammatic
265: analysis \cite{CSS} is the most familiar method to prove
266: factorization. The LEET provide an operator description and the
267: result is automatical to all orders. The proposal of an effective
268: Lagrangian permits us to use gauge symmetry at the Lagrangian
269: level. The proof of factorization can be easily done in a gauge
270: invariant way, i.e., we need not have to choose the light-cone
271: gauge $n\cdot A=0$. As we will show, the LEET is one part of the
272: soft-collinear effective theory. The LEET Lagrangian given in Eq.
273: (\ref{eq:LEET}) is just the leading order result.
274:
275: The biggest problem of the LEET is that it cannot reproduce the
276: long-distance physics of QCD. The reason is simple because it
277: misses the collinear gluon degrees of freedom. Without collinear
278: gluon, the collinear quark pair $\bar u d$ can not form the
279: energetic bound state $\pi^-$. The neglect of collinear gluon is
280: pointed out in \cite{AC}. Aglietti and Corb\'{o} point out one
281: problem of LEET and modify the LEET by including the transverse
282: degrees of freedom \cite{AC}. The improved LEET Lagrangian is
283: given by %
284: \beq \label{eq:LEET2}%
285: {\cal L}=\psi^{\dagger}\left(in\cdot D
286: +\frac{D_T^2}{2E}\right)\psi.
287: \eeq %
288: where $E$ is the energy of the collinear quark. In this modified
289: version, the collinear gluon is still missing. The effective
290: theory which includes the collinear gluon is more complicated than
291: Eq. (\ref{eq:LEET2}) because the energy $E$ is not conserved.
292: Except the missing of the collinear gluon degrees of freedom, both
293: the LEET and its modified version have the problem that there is
294: no systematic power counting to support them. They have to wait
295: for the next step development.
296:
297:
298: \section{The QCD factorization approach and the soft-collinear
299: effective theory}
300:
301: The application of the pQCD method in \cite{BL} into the exclusive
302: B decays had been explored by many theorists. There are several
303: different perturbative approaches appeared in the literatures. Due
304: to the scope of this review, we focus our discussions on the
305: recently proposed QCD factorization approach in
306: \cite{BBNS1,BBNS2}.
307:
308: \subsection{The QCD factorization approach}
309:
310: Beneke, Buchalla, Neubert and Sachrajda want to establish a
311: rigorous framework for the exclusive non-leptonic B decays. The
312: basic idea of the QCD factorization approach is that in the heavy
313: quark limit the naive factorization is the lowest order
314: approximation and the corrections to the naive factorization can
315: be formulated as a factorization form up to corrections of order
316: $\lqcd/m_b$. The heavy quark limit $m_b\gg \lqcd$ is the kinematic
317: foundation of the QCD factorization approach. For $\bar B^0\to
318: \pi\pi$ decay,
319: the factorization formula is %
320: \beq \label{eq:QFA}%
321: \langle \pi\pi|Q_i|\bar B^0\rangle=F^{B\pi}(0)\int_0^1 dx~T^I_i(x)
322: \phi_{\pi}(x)~~~~~~~~~~\non \\
323: +\int_0^1 d\xi dxdy~T^{II}_i(\xi,x,y)
324: \phi_B(\xi)\phi_{\pi}(x)\phi_{\pi}(y).
325: \eeq %
326: where $F^{B\pi}$ is a $B\to \pi$ form factor at $q^2=0$,
327: $\phi_{\pi(B)}$ are light-cone distribution amplitudes of the pion
328: and B meson. The $T_i^{I(II)}$ are perturbatively calculable hard
329: scattering kernels. Compared to Eq. (\ref{eq:PW}), the difference
330: lies in the second term due to the hard spectator correction.
331:
332: Ref. \cite{BBNS2} can be considered as a systematic introduction
333: of the pQCD method into B physics for the first time. In
334: \cite{BBNS2}, a power counting is used to argue the validity of
335: the QCD factorization approach. This power counting largely uses
336: the endpoint behavior of the distribution amplitudes of mesons.
337: Annihilation diagrams and higher Fock states of the mesons are
338: proved to be power suppressed. The hard spectator interaction in
339: $\bar B^0\to D^+\pi^-$ decay is suppressed if one assumes $c$
340: quark is heavy.
341:
342: The validity of factorization can not be based on the intuitive
343: arguments only. It should be proved to all orders that all the
344: soft and collinear divergences cancel or can be absorbed into the
345: universal non-perturbative functions and the hard scattering
346: kernels are infrared insensitive. For $B\to \pi\pi$ decays, the
347: factorization is proved to hold in $\alpha_s$ order. But it is not
348: sufficient to guarantee the validity of factorization because all
349: the soft and collinear divergences cancel is not general. The
350: general case is that the infrared divergences may not cancel but
351: they can be separated out and absorbed into the definition of the
352: non-perturbative functions. Up to now, the factorization beyond
353: $\alpha_s$ order in $B\to \pi\pi$ decays has not been truly
354: proved.
355:
356: In \cite{BBNS2}, the factorization proof for $B\to D\pi$ decays at
357: two-loop order is given. Two-loop order is equivalent to
358: $\alpha_s^2$ order because the hard spectator interaction is power
359: suppressed for the heavy-light final states. The authors consider
360: 62 ``non-factorizable" diagrams at two loop order. Maybe their two
361: loop order proof of factorization is the most detailed analysis in
362: the literatures up to my knowledge. The eikonal approximation and
363: the Ward identity are used implicitly. At two-loop order, the
364: infrared divergences in the soft-soft, soft-collinear and
365: collinear-collinear momentum regions cancel. The hard-collinear
366: and hard-soft contributions contain non-cancelling infrared
367: divergences. They can be factorizaed out and absorbed into the
368: definition of distribution amplitude and form factor respectively.
369: The proof of factorization in the diagrammatic analysis is
370: intuitive, but it is impossible to go to all orders. A
371: factorization proof of all orders is necessary.
372:
373: \subsection{The soft-collinear effective theory}
374:
375: From the LEET, we know that the effective field theory can
376: simplify the analysis of the infrared physics and the
377: factorization in it is automatic to all orders. One natural idea
378: is: can we construct an effective field theory for the soft and
379: collinear particles which reproduce all the infrared physics of
380: QCD and can simplify the factorization proof?
381:
382: Bauer el al. aim at developing a soft-collinear effective theory
383: by generalizing the idea of LEET. They start from the study of
384: summing Sudakov double logarithms in inclusive $B\to X_s\gamma$
385: decay. For $B\to X_s\gamma$ decay near the endpoint of the photon
386: spectrum, it contains energetic light particle. The Sudakov double
387: logarithms will appear in one loop order due to the
388: non-cancellation of the soft and collinear divergences. The large
389: double logarithms make the perturbation expansion ill-behaved and
390: need to be resumed to all orders. The Sudakov resummation is
391: usually considered as an important but difficult part in the
392: conventional pQCD method. By matching the full theory to a new
393: effective theory, the large logarithms cancel and the Sudakov
394: doule logarithms are summed by using the renormalization group
395: equations \cite{B1}. One important thing is that Sudakov
396: resummation in the effective theory is simpler than that in the
397: full theory.
398:
399: The analysis in \cite{B1} also shows another important thing that
400: the effective field theory can be used in the case where the
401: Wilson's short-distance operator product expansion (OPE) is not
402: applicable. The idea is matching the full theory onto the
403: effective theory where the effective operators provide the
404: long-distance information of QCD. To this externt, the effective
405: field theory develops the idea of OPE.
406:
407: The formalism of the soft-collinear effective theory is provide in
408: \cite{B2}. At this stage, only the ultrasoft gluons are included.
409: The lowest order effective Lagrangian is written by %
410: \beq %
411: {\cal L}_{eff}=\bar \xi_{n_-,p\pr} \left [ ~in_-\cdot D
412: +i\dslash_{c\bot}\frac{1}{~in_+\cdot D_c}~ i\dslash_{c\bot}
413: \right ] \\
414: \times\frac{\nslash_+}{2}~\xi_{n_-,p}~.\non
415: \eeq %
416: where $in_-\cdot D=in_-\cdot \partial+gn_-\cdot(A_c+A_{us})$,
417: $in_+\cdot D_c=\bar{\cal P}+gn_+\cdot A_c$, $i\dslash_{c\bot}=\bar
418: {\cal P}_{\bot}+gA_{c\bot}$ and $n_-, n_+$ are two light-like
419: vectors. Because the formulation is given in a hybrid
420: position-momentum space. A momentum label operator ${\cal P}$ has
421: to be introduced because the large momentum is not conserved.
422: Beneke, Chapovsky, Diehl and Feldmann developed a position space
423: formalism in order to avoid the complicate momentum label operator
424: in \cite{BCDF}.
425:
426: In \cite{Wei}, I propose a soft-collinear effective theory which
427: includes the soft gluons in the position space. The final SCET
428: Languagian is%
429: \beq \label{eq:SCET}%
430: {\cal L}_{SCET}=\bar{\xi}\left [ ~in_-\cdot D
431: +i\dslash_{\bot}\frac{1}{~in_+\cdot D}~ i\dslash_{\bot}
432: \right ]\frac{\nslash_+}{2}~\xi.
433: \eeq %
434: where the covariant derivative is defined by
435: $D=\partial-igA_c-igA_{(u)s}$.
436:
437: From the above effective Lagrangian, it is easy to obtain the
438: (ultra)soft and collinear Wilson lines. The SCET has rich symmetry
439: structures. The Lorentz and gauge invariance are interesting in
440: SCET. There is a new symmetry, scale symmetry. This symmetry
441: provide an interpretation of the Bjorken's scaling and the scaling
442: law in high energy scattering.
443:
444: The application of SCET to prove the factorization in $B\to D\pi$
445: decays is given in \cite{B3,B4}. I give a factorization proof in
446: DIS in \cite{Wei} and SCET can also be applied into multi-body B
447: decays, such as $B\to DKK$ decays \cite{DKK}.
448:
449:
450: \section{The questions about the QCD factorization approach}
451:
452: Although SCET provides a new theoretical framework, the practical
453: calculations of exclusive B decays still rely on some
454: factorization formulae, such as the QCD factorization approach. By
455: use of this opportunity, I want to express my personal opinions on
456: the QCD factorization approach. I will ask some conceptual
457: questions about it.
458:
459: I. Is the factorization in $B\to \pi\pi$ decays proved?
460:
461: ~~~~As we have discussed above, the factorization in $B\to \pi\pi$
462: decays is given only at $\alpha_s$ order. This is not sufficient
463: for the validity of factorization. We can say that the QCD
464: factorization approach has not been proved as a ``theory''. Even
465: for $B\to D\pi$ decays, the factorization are based on some
466: kinematical assumptions, such as $m_b\sim m_c\to \infty$ or the
467: ratio $m_b/m_c$ is fixed. The real world is: $m_b\approx 4.5\GeV$,
468: $m_c\approx 1.5\GeV \sim\sqrt{m_b\lqcd}$. Although one can assume
469: a limit case for the theoretical purpose, the relation between the
470: ideal world and the real world needs to be explored.
471:
472:
473: II. Is the QCD factorization approach correct in the $m_b\to
474: \infty$ limit?
475:
476: ~~~~This question is related to the first question. This time we
477: will not concern the technical complications about the
478: factorization proof but the general argument of factorization. The
479: argument is Bjorken's ``color transparency". One strange thing
480: for me is why the color transparency can be applied for one pion
481: but not for another pion in $B\to \pi\pi$ decays. The two pions
482: are both energetic and have the same momentum in the rest frame of
483: B meson, but they are treated unequally. The factorization formula
484: in Eq. (\ref{eq:QFA}) contains two terms, one is related to the
485: naive factorization approach, the other likes the hard scattering
486: approach. The two different terms make the factorization formula
487: un-natural. One associated problem is: the renormalization scale
488: $\mu$ in first term is at order of $m_b$, while in the next term
489: $\mu\sim \sqrt{m_b\lqcd}$. There are two large scales in
490: $B\to\pi\pi$ decays. So it is a multi-scales problem. My oppinion
491: is that we should be more serious about his problem.
492:
493:
494: III. Is $B\to\pi$ form factor baisc?
495:
496:
497: This is a very controversial topic. In the QCD factorization
498: approach, it is assumed as a basic function. But this function is
499: different from other fundamental non-perturbative QCD fucntions
500: such as the Isgur-Wise function, pion distribution amplitudes etc.
501: $B\to\pi$ form factor is not and can not be represented as a
502: dimensionless function. From the soft-collinear effective theory
503: which is scale invariant, the basic non-perturbative functions
504: should be dimensionaless except the dependence on the
505: renormalization $\mu$. The $B\to\pi$ form factor does not satisfy
506: this criterion. In fact, $B\to\pi$ form factor contains very
507: complicate QCD dynamics which includes scales of $m_b,
508: \sqrt{m_b\lqcd}$ and scales between $\sqrt{m_b\lqcd}$ and $\lqcd$.
509: From this point of view, the QCD factorization seems more like a
510: phenomenological ``approach" rather than a ``theory".
511:
512:
513: \section{Conclusions}
514:
515: We have reviewed the theoretical developments from the naive
516: factorization approach to the soft-collinear effective theory. In
517: order to understand the factorization in exclusive B decays, new
518: ideas and new theories or approaches are produced. The
519: soft-collinear effective theory is a rigorous theory. It provides
520: a theoretical foundation of the factorization theorem in pQCD and
521: a unified framework to study the inclusive and exclusive hard QCD
522: processes. The soft-collinear effective theory is the second
523: theoretical contribution of B physics to QCD. The first is HQET.
524:
525: The QCD factorization approach can not solve the full
526: complications of exclusive B decays. The application of the
527: soft-collinear effective in B decays is still limited because the
528: momentum of quarks in hadrons depend on the non-perturbative
529: dynamics for exclusive processes. The final solution of B decays
530: must rely on the solution on the quark confinement and
531: non-perturbative problems. If these fundamental problems of the
532: strong interaction were solved by the theorists in B physics, it
533: will not be a miracle. This is the great challenge of B physics.
534:
535:
536: \section*{Acknowledgments}
537:
538: The author acknowledges a postdoc fellowship of the Spanish
539: Ministry of Education. This research is supported by Grant
540: FPA/2002-0612 of the Ministry of Science and Technology.
541:
542:
543:
544: \begin{thebibliography}{9}
545:
546: \bibitem{CSS} J.C. Collins, D.E. Soper and G. Sterman, in
547: $Perturbative$ $Quantum$ $Chromodynamics$, ed. A.H. Mueller (World
548: Scientific, Singapore, 1989), p1-91, and the references therein.
549:
550: \bibitem{BL} S.J. Brodsky and G.P. Lepage, in
551: $Perturbative$ $Quantum$ $Chromodynamics$, ed. A.H. Mueller (World
552: Scientific, Singapore, 1989), p93-240, and the references therein.
553:
554: \bibitem{Georgi} H. Georgi, \plb {\bf 240}, 447 (1990).
555:
556: \bibitem{HS} O. Haan and B. Stech, \npb {\bf 22}, 448 (1970).
557:
558: \bibitem{BSW} M. Bauer, B. Stech and M. Wirbel,
559: \zpc {\bf 34}, 103 (1987).
560:
561: \bibitem{Bjorken} J.D. Bjorken, \npps {\bf 11}, 325 (1989).
562:
563: \bibitem{BBGG} G. Bertsch, S.J. Brodsky, A.S. Goldhaber and
564: J.F. Gunion, \prl {\bf 47}, 297 (1981).
565:
566: \bibitem{PW} H.D. Politzer and M.B. Wise, \plb {\bf 257}, 399
567: (1991).
568:
569: \bibitem{DG} M.J. Dugan and B. Grinstein, \plb {\bf 255}, 583
570: (1991).
571:
572: \bibitem{AC} U. Aglietti and G. Corb\'{o}, \plb {\bf 431}, 166 (1998).
573:
574: \bibitem{BBNS1} M. Beneke, G. Buchalla, M. Neubert and C.T.
575: Sachrajda, \prl {\bf 83}, 1914 (1999).
576:
577: \bibitem{BBNS2} M. Beneke, G. Buchalla, M. Neubert and C.T.
578: Sachrajda, \npb {\bf 591}, 313 (2000).
579:
580: \bibitem{B1} C.W. Bauer, S. Fleming and M.E. Luke, \prd {\bf 63},
581: 014006 (2001).
582:
583: \bibitem{B2} C.W. Bauer, S. Fleming, D. Pirjol and I.W. Stewart,
584: \prd {\bf 63}, 114020 (2001).
585:
586: \bibitem{B3} C.W. Bauer and I.W. Stewart \plb {\bf 516}, 134
587: (2001).
588:
589: \bibitem{B4} C.W Bauer, D. Pirjol and I.W. Stewart,
590: \prl {\bf 87}, 201806 (2001).
591:
592: \bibitem{BCDF} M. Beneke, A.P. Chapovsky, M. Diehl and T. Feldmann,
593: \npb {\bf 643}, 431 (2002).
594:
595: \bibitem{Wei} Z. Wei, hep-ph/0310143.
596:
597: \bibitem{DKK} Z. Wei, hep-ph/0301174.
598:
599: \end{thebibliography}
600:
601: \end{document}
602: