1: %&LaTeX
2: \documentclass{article}
3: \usepackage{epsfig}
4:
5:
6: \textwidth 15.5cm
7: \oddsidemargin 12pt
8: \evensidemargin 12pt
9: \textheight 22cm
10: \topmargin -0.5cm
11:
12: \begin{document}
13:
14: %-------------------- Title page ----------------------------------
15: \begin{titlepage}
16: \title{\bf Full $\bf{\it O(\bf \alpha_S)}$ Evaluation of $\;\bf b\rightarrow s \bf \gamma$
17: Transverse Momentum Distribution}
18: \author{Ugo Aglietti
19: \\
20: Dipartimento di Fisica, Universit\'a di Roma "La Sapienza", \\
21: INFN Sezione di Roma,\\ Piazzale A. Moro, Rome, Italy
22: \\
23: \\
24: Roberto Sghedoni
25: \\
26: Dipartimento di Fisica, Universit\'a di Parma,\\
27: INFN Gruppo Collegato di Parma,\\
28: Viale delle Scienze, Campus Sud, 43100 Parma, Italy
29: \\
30: \\
31: Luca Trentadue
32: \\
33: Dipartimento di Fisica, Universit\'a di Parma,\\
34: INFN Gruppo Collegato di Parma,\\
35: Viale delle Scienze, Campus Sud, 43100 Parma, Italy
36: \\
37: and
38: \\
39: Theory Division, CERN, CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland}
40:
41: \date{}
42: \maketitle
43:
44: \vspace*{2.0cm}
45: %\centerline{\tt Abstract}
46: \begin{abstract}
47: {\normalsize \noindent The full $O(\alpha_S)$ transverse momentum
48: distribution for the $b \rightarrow s \gamma$ decay is computed.
49: Results are presented in analytic form.
50: An improved expression for the coefficient function taking
51: into account subleading operators is given and an exact
52: expression for the remainder function associated with the leading
53: operator $\hat{\mathcal{O}}_7$ is also derived.}
54: \end{abstract}
55:
56:
57: \begin{picture}(5,2)(-330,-485)
58: \put(1.0,-5){DFUP-2003-25} \put(1.0,-15.2){CERN-TH/2003-255}
59: \put(1.0,-25.4){Rome1-1361/03}
60: %\put(1.0,-5.2){Th-Div-xxxx}
61: \end{picture}
62: \vfill
63: \vspace{3cm}
64: %\leftline{\hspace{1.2cm} hep-ph/}
65: \leftline{\hspace{1.2cm} October 29th 2003}
66: \thispagestyle{empty}
67:
68:
69: \end{titlepage}
70: %
71: %\setnocounter{page}{1}
72: %
73: %\baselineskip 24pt
74: %\baselineskip 18pt
75: %----------------------- Text -----------------------------------
76:
77: \section{Introduction}
78: \setcounter{page}{1}
79: Perturbation theory, i.e. the expansion in powers of $\alpha_S$,
80: has been applied to describe decays of the beauty quark since its
81: discovery. While the expansion parameter $\alpha_S(m_B)\sim
82: 0.21$, being reasonably small, allows one to have confidence in the
83: computations, it is difficult to directly compare the perturbative
84: approach with the experimental data. As is well known, decay rates do
85: not make good quantities to be compared with the data, because they
86: are proportional to the fifth power of the beauty quark mass, a
87: poorly known parameter,
88: \begin{equation}
89: \Gamma \propto m_b^5
90: \end{equation}
91: and because they involve in principle unknown CKM matrix elements
92: such as $V_{cb},~ V_{ub},~V_{ts},$ etc..
93: By taking ratios of different widths, one can cancel the $m_b^5$ dependence
94: in the observables, and, eventually, also the dependence
95: on the CKM matrix elements.
96: A rather good theoretical quantity is represented, for instance, by the
97: semileptonic branching ratio:
98: \begin{equation}\label{slbf}
99: B_{SL}=\frac{\Gamma_{SL}}{\Gamma_{TOT}},
100: \end{equation}
101: which turns out to be marginally in agreement with
102: present data \cite{altpet}.
103: Inclusive quantities, $B_{inclusive}$, such as (\ref{slbf}), have a
104: perturbative series that involves numerical coefficients $c_n$ of the form:
105: %
106: \begin{equation}
107: B_{inclusive}~=~ \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} c_n~ \alpha_S^n(m_B).
108: \end{equation}
109: %
110: In less inclusive quantities, additional dynamical effects
111: appear, due to the kinematical restrictions on the final particles,
112: and the use of perturbation theory is, in general, less justified.
113: In semi-inclusive quantities, $B_{semi-inclusive}$, such as threshold and transverse momentum $p_t$
114: distributions, the perturbative series contains large infrared
115: lo\-ga\-rithms in addition to the coefficients $c_n$; they may be expanded
116: as a perturbative series of the form:
117: %
118: \begin{equation}
119: B_{semi-inclusive}~=~
120: \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\sum_{k=0}^{2n} c_{n,k} ~\alpha_S^n~ \log^k x,
121: \end{equation}
122: where $x$ represents the characteristic scale of the process
123: as the energy or the transverse momentum.
124: Resummation of such enhanced terms to any order in $\alpha_S$ can be
125: performed in various approximations.
126: \\
127: The simplest one, the leading logarithmic approximation,
128: involves picking up only the terms having two powers
129: of the logarithm for each power of the coupling, i.e. $k=2n$.
130: In the double-logarithmic approximation each parton is dressed
131: with a cloud of soft and collinear gluons. Further, more refined approximations involve
132: smaller numbers of logarithms for each power of $\alpha_S$, i.e. $k=2n-1, 2n-2,\dots$.
133: \\
134: In the last years, considerable effort has been devoted to the
135: study of various spectra in $B$ decays in the endpoint region, in
136: the framework of resummed perturbation theory.
137: \\
138: In order to verify the ability of the resummed perturbation theory
139: to describe $B$ decays in a different dynamical situation, we considered,
140: in a previous note \cite{noi}, $p_t$-distributions
141: describing that of the $s$ quark with respect to the photon direction, in the $b$ rest frame.
142: \\
143: In this work, \cite{noi}, the following issues have been considered:
144: the resummed $p_t$-distribution in the $b \rightarrow
145: s\gamma$ decay is evaluated and both perturbative and
146: non-perturbative sources of transverse momentum contributions
147: discussed. The general theoretical framework for the
148: evaluation of the corresponding matrix element defined
149: and the strategy to evaluate leading and next-to-leading
150: perturbative contributions is outlined, by introducing
151: a method to treat the radiative corrections and their summation in
152: a improved perturbative formula. The comparison of the transverse
153: momentum distribution singularity structure with the more
154: widely-known threshold case is also presented.
155: \\
156: The chosen quantity manifests a clear advantage from a
157: phenomenological point of view since, as discussed in \cite{noi},
158: it depends only on the photon momentum in the process. Thanks to the
159: straightforward and direct kinematics, the transverse momentum turns
160: out to be a particularly simple variable to use to discuss the
161: singularity structure of the perturbative expansion. The case of
162: a possible effective theory within which to factorize these singularities
163: can, for the transverse momentum, be considered as well.
164: \\
165: The general formula representing the
166: complete perturbative expression for a the resummed distribution is
167: given by the formula
168: \begin{equation}
169: D(x) = K(\alpha_S) \Sigma(x;\alpha_S) + R(x;\alpha_S).
170: \end{equation}
171: The results, already presented
172: in \cite{noi}, did concern the universal process-independent function
173: $\Sigma(x;\alpha_S)$, resumming the infrared logarithms in
174: exponentiated form.
175: \\
176: Here the general perturbative expression for the whole distribution
177: will be concisely recalled and
178: the new entries represented by the coefficient function $K(\alpha_S)$ and
179: by the remainder function $R(x)$ will be evaluated. Both $K(\alpha_S)$ and $R(x)$ are process-dependent
180: and require an explicit evaluation of Feynman diagrams.
181: \\
182: Resummation of large infrared logarithms in $b$ decays have been studied
183: in great detail in recent years. This scheme is justified by the fact that
184: the double logarithm appearing to order $\alpha_S$ can become rather large
185: (with respect to 1 coming from the tree level):
186: %
187: \begin{equation}
188: -\frac{\alpha_S C_F}{4\pi} \log^2\frac{p_t^2}{m_b^2} \sim -0.7
189: \end{equation}
190: %
191: if we push the transverse momentum to such small values as
192: $p_t~\sim~\Lambda_{QCD}~=~300$ MeV. The single logarithm can also become
193: rather large, having a large numerical coefficient:
194: %
195: \begin{equation}
196: -\frac{5\alpha_S C_F}{4\pi} \log\frac{p_t^2}{m_b^2} \sim 0.6.
197: \end{equation}
198: The purpose of resumming classes of such terms therefore seems quite justified.
199: If we consider running coupling effects, i.e. if the (frozen) coupling
200: evaluated at the hard scale $Q~=~m_B~=~5.2$ GeV is replaced by the coupling
201: evaluated at the gluon transverse momentum,
202: \begin{equation}
203: \alpha_S(m_b) \rightarrow \alpha_S(p_t)=0.45~~~~~~{\rm{for}}~~~~~p_t~=~1~\rm{GeV},
204: \end{equation}
205: the logarithmic terms have sizes of order:
206: %
207: \begin{equation}
208: -\frac{\alpha_S(p_t) C_F}{4\pi} \log^2\frac{p_t^2}{m_b^2} \sim -0.5
209: \end{equation}
210: %
211: and
212: \begin{equation}
213: -\frac{5\alpha_S C_F}{4\pi} \log\frac{p_t^2}{m_b^2} \sim 0.8.
214: \end{equation}
215: %
216: The main difference with respect to resummation in $Z^0$ decays is
217: a hard scale smaller by over an order of magnitude, i.e. a coupling larger by
218: a factor 2 and infrared logarithms smaller by a factor 3.
219:
220: \section{The effective hamiltonian for the decay $b\rightarrow
221: s\gamma$}\label{sechamiltonian}
222: The decay $b\rightarrow s\gamma$ is
223: loop-mediated in the Standard Model and offers stringent tests
224: of the latter as well as a way to extract CKM matrix elements.
225: The relevant diagrams involve a loop with a virtual
226: $W$ and an up-type quark ($u,c$ or $t$); the external
227: photon can be emitted from the internal lines and from the
228: external lines of the $b$ or $s$ quark (see fig. \ref{vertice}).
229: \begin{figure}[h]
230: \begin{center}
231: \mbox{\epsfig{file=vertice.ps, height=6cm}} \vskip -10mm
232: \caption{\label{vertice}Vertex for $b\rightarrow s\gamma$ in the Standard Model}
233: \end{center}
234: \end{figure}
235: QCD radiative corrections are affected by large logarithms of the form
236: \begin{equation}\label{logrisommati}
237: \alpha_S^n \ \log^k{m_W\over m_b} \ \ \ \ \ {\rm with}~~~0\le k\le n
238: \end{equation}
239: as well as logarithms of $m_t/m_W$. Since the energies involved in the
240: process are much smaller than the $W$ or $t$ mass, it is possible to
241: integrate out these fields by means of an operator product expansion
242: and write an effective low-energy hamiltonian of the form:
243: \begin{equation}\label{hamiltoniana}
244: {\cal H}_{eff}(x) = {G_F \over \sqrt{2}} \ V^*_{ts}V_{tb} \
245: \sum_{j=1}^8 C_j(\mu_b) \ \hat{\cal O}_j(x;\mu_b).
246: \end{equation}
247: With a factorization scale $\mu_b=O(m_b)$,
248: the long-distance effects --- both perturbative and non-perturbative ---
249: are factorized in the matrix elements of the operators $\hat{\cal O}_j$,
250: while the short-distance effects are contained in the
251: coefficient functions $C_j(\mu_b)$, calculable in perturbation theory.
252: In particular, the large logarithms in (\ref{logrisommati})
253: are included into the coefficient functions and can
254: be resummed with standard renormalization group techniques.
255: \\
256: A suitable basis for the operators $\hat{\cal O}_j$ is given by
257: six four-quark operators, $\hat{\cal O}_1$-$\hat{\cal O}_6$ and by
258: the penguin operators $\hat{\cal O}_7$, $\hat{\cal O}_8$
259: \cite{gsw1,gsw2}:
260: \begin{eqnarray}\label{base}
261: \hat{\cal O}_1 &=& (\overline{c}_{L,\beta} \gamma_\mu
262: b_{L,\alpha})(\overline{s}_{L,\alpha} \gamma_\mu
263: c_{L,\beta})\nonumber\\
264: \hat{\cal O}_2 &=& (\overline{c}_{L,\alpha} \gamma_\mu
265: b_{L,\alpha})(\overline{s}_{L,\beta} \gamma_\mu
266: c_{L,\beta})\nonumber\\
267: \hat{\cal O}_3 &=& (\overline{s}_{L,\alpha} \gamma_\mu
268: b_{L,\alpha})(\sum_q \overline{q}_{L,\beta} \gamma_\mu
269: q_{L,\beta})\nonumber\\
270: \hat{\cal O}_4 &=& (\overline{s}_{L,\alpha} \gamma_\mu
271: b_{L,\beta})(\sum_q \overline{q}_{L,\beta} \gamma_\mu
272: q_{L,\alpha})\nonumber\\
273: \hat{\cal O}_5 &=& (\overline{s}_{L,\alpha} \gamma_\mu
274: b_{L,\alpha})(\sum_q \overline{q}_{R,\beta} \gamma_\mu
275: q_{R,\beta})\nonumber\\
276: \hat{\cal O}_6 &=& (\overline{s}_{L,\alpha} \gamma_\mu
277: b_{L,\beta})(\sum_q \overline{q}_{R,\beta} \gamma_\mu
278: q_{R,\alpha})\nonumber\\
279: \hat{\cal O}_7 &=& {e\over 16\pi^2}m_{b,\overline{MS}}(\mu_b)
280: \overline{s}_{L,\alpha}\sigma^{\mu\nu}b_{R,\alpha}F_{\mu\nu}\nonumber\\
281: \hat{\cal O}_8 &=& {g\over 16\pi^2}m_{b,\overline{MS}}(\mu_b)
282: \overline{s}_{L,\alpha}\sigma^{\mu\nu}T^a_{\alpha\beta}b_{R,\alpha}G^a_{\mu\nu},\nonumber\\
283: \end{eqnarray}
284: where $m_{b,\overline{MS}}(\mu_b)$ is the $b$ mass in the $\overline{MS}$ scheme, evaluated at
285: $\mu_b$ and $q=u,d,s,c$ or $b$.
286: \\
287: The dimension of these operators is six: higher-dimension operators
288: have coefficients suppressed by inverse powers of the masses of the integrated
289: particles ($t$ and $W$) and do not contribute in first
290: approximation.
291: \\
292: The calculation of the QCD corrections to the coefficients functions has been carried out in
293: \cite{misiak1} with leading logarithmic accuracy and in
294: \cite{misiak2} at next-to-leading level in the $\overline{MS}$
295: scheme.
296: \\
297: Let us now consider the evaluation of the matrix elements of the effective
298: hamiltonian between quark states.
299: Only the magnetic penguin operator $\hat{\cal O}_7$ contributes in lowest order
300: with a rate:\footnote{
301: $\Gamma_0$ contains in principle
302: $m_{b,\overline{MS}}^{2}\left( \mu_{b}\right)$
303: since $\mu_b$ is the renormalization point of $\hat{\cal O}_7$.
304: As is well known, the renormalization point is arbitrary: we decided to fix it
305: to $m_b$ in the running mass, as usually done in the literature.
306: }
307: \begin{equation}\label{born}
308: \Gamma _0\simeq \frac{\alpha _{em}}{\pi }\frac{G_{F}^2\,m_{b}^{3}m_{b,
309: \overline{MS}}^{2}\left( m_{b}\right) \,|V_{tb}V_{ts}^{\ast
310: }|^{2}}{32\pi ^{3}}C_{7}^{2}\left( \mu_{b}\right),
311: \end{equation}
312: where $m_b$ is the pole mass of the $b$ quark.
313: \\
314: Radiative QCD corrections involve gluon brehmsstrahlung. The
315: operator $\hat{\cal O}_7$ is affected by infrared singularities
316: for the emission of a soft or a collinear gluon; the remaining
317: operators $\hat{\cal O}_1$-$\hat{\cal O}_6$ have infrared-finite
318: matrix elements. This implies that QCD corrections to the operator
319: $\hat{\cal O}_7$ only are logarithmically enhanced for $p_t\ll
320: m_b$ \footnote{ The operator $\hat{\cal O}_8$ is affected by QED
321: infrared divergences which are not relevant to our problem.}. We
322: will then consider at first only the operator $\hat{\cal O}_7$.
323:
324: \section{Transverse momentum distribution in $b\rightarrow
325: s\gamma$}\label{calcolo}
326:
327: The process we are dealing with has a very simple kinematics:
328: in lowest order it is the two-body decay $b \rightarrow
329: s\gamma$. Let us define
330: \begin{equation}\label{variabile}
331: x = {p^2_t \over m^2_b},
332: \end{equation}
333: where $p_t$ is the transverse momentum of the strange quark
334: with respect to the photon direction, fixed as $z$-axis, and $m_b$
335: is the mass of the heavy quark, to be identified with the hard
336: scale of the process\footnote{Let us note that $0\le x\le 1/4$.}.
337: \\
338: In lowest order the transverse momentum distribution then is
339: \begin{equation}
340: {d\Gamma \over dx} \ = \Gamma_0 \ \delta(x),
341: \end{equation}
342: that is the strange quark and the photon are emitted in
343: opposite directions, because of momentum conservation.
344: Acollinearity is generated by gluon emission; in
345: $b\rightarrow s\gamma g$, i.e. at $O(\alpha_S)$, $p_t =
346: -k_t$ while in $b\rightarrow s\gamma g_1\dots
347: g_n$, i.e. in higher orders, $p_t = -k_{t 1} \dots -k_{t n}$.
348: \\
349: Beside the differential distribution the
350: partially integrated distribution\footnote{ Since we divide the
351: spectrum by the lowest-order rate $\Gamma_0$, we have that
352: $D(x=1/4)=\frac{\Gamma_{TOT}}{\Gamma_0}=1+O(\alpha_S)$. }
353: is also of interest
354: %
355: \begin{equation}\label{cumulativa}
356: D(x) = \int_0^x dx^\prime \ {1 \over \Gamma_0} \ {d\Gamma \over
357: dx^\prime}.
358: \end{equation}
359: Even though $\alpha_S(m_B)$ is small enough to justify a
360: perturbative approach, the combination $\alpha_S^n(m_B)\log^k x$,
361: with $0\le k \le 2n$ can be large. A resummation, to any order in $\alpha_S$, of
362: logarithms of the same magnitude is required to obtain
363: sensible physical results.
364: \\
365: A partial resummation of large logarithms with next-to-leading accuracy
366: has been performed in \cite{noi}: here we complete the calculation.
367: \\
368: It is well known, \cite{cttw}, that the resummation of large logarithms is
369: accomplished by an expression of the form:
370: \begin{equation}\label{master}
371: D(x) = K(\alpha_S) \Sigma(x;\alpha_S) + R(x;\alpha_S),
372: \end{equation}
373: where
374: \begin{itemize}
375: \item
376: $\Sigma(x;\alpha_S)$ is a universal, process-independent, function
377: resumming the infrared logarithms in exponentiated form. It can be expanded in a series of functions as:
378: \begin{equation}\label{g}
379: \log \Sigma(x;\alpha_S)= L g_1(\alpha_S L) + g_2 (\alpha_S L)+
380: \alpha_S g_3(\alpha_S L)+\dots \ ,
381: \end{equation}
382: where $L=\log x$ (in general $L$ is a large infrared logarithm).
383: The functions $g_i$ have a power expansion of the form
384: \begin{equation}
385: g_i(z)=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}g_{i,k}~z^k
386: \end{equation}
387: and resum logarithms
388: of the same size: in particular $g_1$ resums leading logarithms
389: of the form $\alpha_S^n~ L^{n+1}$ and $g_2$ the next-to-leading ones
390: $\alpha_S^n ~L^n$. The explicit form of $\Sigma(x;\alpha_S)$ can be found in Ref.\cite{noi};
391: \item
392: $K(\alpha_S)$ is a short-distance coefficient function,
393: a process-dependent function, which can be calculated in perturbation theory:
394: \begin{equation}
395: K(\alpha_S) = 1+\frac{\alpha_S C_F}{\pi} k_1 + O\left(\alpha_S^2\right).
396: \end{equation}
397: \item
398: $R(x;\alpha_S)$ is the remainder function and satisfies
399: the condition
400: \begin{equation}\label{remainder}
401: R(x;\alpha_S) \rightarrow 0 \ \ \ {\rm{for}} \ \ \ x \rightarrow 0.
402: \end{equation}
403: It is process dependent, takes into account hard contributions and is calculable
404: as an ordinary $\alpha_S$ expansion:
405: \begin{equation}
406: R(x;\alpha_S)=\frac{\alpha_S C_F}{\pi} r_1(x)+ O\left(\alpha_S^2\right).
407: \end{equation}
408: \end{itemize}
409: The result is an improved perturbative distribution, reliable in
410: the semi-inclusive region \cite{cttw}, that is for small values of
411: $x$, which can be matched with a fixed-order spectrum, describing the
412: distribution for large values of $x$ \cite{librowebber}.
413: The description of the tools
414: used to perform the resummation of infrared logarithms is far from
415: the purpose of this note, and we refer the reader to the references
416: \cite{pp} -- \cite{cttw}.
417: \\
418: \\
419: In the next sections the full order $\alpha_S$ corrections for the coefficient
420: function $K(\alpha_S)$ and for the remainder function $R(x;\alpha_S)$ will be explicitely
421: calculated.
422:
423: \section{$O(\alpha_S)$ corrections to $p_t$ distribution}
424: In this section radiative corrections to the transverse momentum
425: distribution will be calculated e\-va\-lua\-ting the
426: Feynman diagrams depicted in fig. \ref{reali} for real gluon
427: emissions and in fig. \ref{virtuali} for virtual emissions.
428: \begin{figure}[h]
429: \begin{center}
430: \mbox{\epsfig{file=reali.ps, height=7cm}}
431: \caption{\label{reali}Real diagrams}
432: \end{center}
433: \end{figure}
434: We use the Feynman gauge where the gluon propagator is
435: \begin{equation}\label{feynprop}
436: D_{\mu\nu}(k)=\ -g_{\mu\nu}{i\over k^2 +i\epsilon}.
437: \end{equation}
438: The calculation is performed in dimensional regularization (DR) with
439: the dimension of the space-time
440: $$ n=4+\epsilon.$$ The operator $\hat{{\cal O}}_7$ from the basis
441: (\ref{base}) is inserted in the hard vertex, as discussed in
442: section \ref{sechamiltonian}.
443: Let us now define the kinematical variables: $P^\mu$ is the heavy
444: quark momentum, $p^\mu$ the light quark momentum, $k^\mu$ the
445: gluon momentum and $q^\mu$ the photon momentum: for real diagrams
446: it holds that $k^2=p^2=q^2=0$ and $P^2=m^2_b$, while, for virtual diagrams,
447: $k^2\neq 0$. The calculation is performed in the $b$ rest frame,
448: where
449: \begin{eqnarray}
450: P^\mu&=&(m_b,\vec{0})
451: \nonumber\\
452: q^\mu&=&(E_\gamma,0,0,E_\gamma).
453: \end{eqnarray}
454:
455: \subsection{Real diagrams}
456: A straightforward evaluation of the diagrams in fig. \ref{reali} gives a contribution
457: to the rate:
458: \begin{equation}
459: \frac{d\Gamma}{\Gamma_0}={M(\omega,t;\epsilon)\over
460: \omega^{1-\epsilon}t^{1-\epsilon/2}}\ dt \ d\omega
461: = \left[{A_1(\omega,t;\epsilon)\over\omega^{1-\epsilon}t^{1-\epsilon/2}}+{S_1(t;\epsilon)\over\omega^{1-\epsilon}}+
462: {C_1(\omega;\epsilon)\over
463: t^{1-\epsilon/2}}+F_1(\omega,t;\epsilon)\right]\ dt \ d\omega \,
464: \end{equation}
465: where
466: \begin{eqnarray}\label{matrice}
467: \hskip 2cm A_{1} &\equiv &M(0,0;\epsilon) \nonumber \\
468: S_{1}\left(
469: t\right) &\equiv &\frac{M(0,t;\epsilon)-M(0,0;\epsilon)}{t^{1-\epsilon/2}} \nonumber \\
470: C_{1}\left( \omega \right) &\equiv &\frac{M(\omega
471: ,0;\epsilon)-M(0,0;\epsilon)}{\omega^{1-\epsilon} } \nonumber \\
472: F_{1}\left( \omega ,t;\epsilon\right) &\equiv &\frac{M(\omega
473: ,t;\epsilon)-M(0,t;\epsilon)-M(\omega
474: ,0;\epsilon)+M(0,0;\epsilon)}{\omega^{1-\epsilon}
475: \,t^{1-\epsilon/2}}
476: \end{eqnarray}
477: and
478: $$
479: \omega={2P\cdot k \over m_b^2}=\frac{2E_g}{m_b}, ~~~~~~ t={1-\cos\theta \over 2},
480: $$
481: with $\theta$ the angle between the gluon and the direction
482: $-\hat{z}\;$\footnote{Let us remember that the direction $+\hat{z}$ is fixed by the
483: photon space momentum.}.
484: \\
485: It follows from their definition that the functions
486: $A_1(\omega,t;\epsilon)$, $S_1(\omega;\epsilon)$, $C_1(t;\epsilon)$
487: and $F_1(\omega,t;\epsilon)$ are finite in the soft and the collinear limit,
488: defined respectively as
489: \begin{equation}\label{irlimite}
490: \omega \rightarrow 0 \;\;\;\;\;{\rm and}\;\;\;\; t\rightarrow 0.
491: \end{equation}
492: The rate in eq. (\ref{matrice}) has to be integrated over
493: the whole phase space with the kinematical constraint
494: \begin{equation}\label{vincolo}
495: \delta[x-\omega^2t(1-t)],
496: \end{equation}
497: which selects gluons with transverse momentum $p_t^2=x m_b^2$
498: \footnote{Let us
499: recall that for the single gluon emission
500: $x\equiv p^2_t /m^2_b = k^2_t / m^2_b$.}.
501: The cumulative distribution takes a contribution of the form:
502: \begin{equation}
503: D_R(x)=\int_0^xdx^\prime \int_0^1 d\omega \int_0^1 dt \ {1 \over
504: \Gamma_0} \ {d\Gamma \over dx^\prime}(\omega,t;\epsilon) \
505: \delta[x^\prime-\omega^2t(1-t)].
506: \end{equation}
507: After the integration we expect four kinds of terms:
508: \begin{itemize}
509: \item
510: Poles in the regulator $\epsilon$: they parametrize the infrared
511: singularities and cancel in the sum with virtual diagrams because
512: the distribution we are dealing with is infrared-safe\footnote{
513: A distribution is infrared-safe if it is insensitive to the emission
514: of a soft and a collinear gluon \cite{librowebber}.};
515: \item
516: Logarithmic terms diverging for $x\rightarrow 0$;
517: \item
518: Constant terms: they enter the coefficient function
519: $K(\alpha_S)$;
520: \item
521: Remainder functions: terms that vanish in the limit $x\rightarrow 0$.
522: \end{itemize}
523: Integrating over $x^\prime$ we have:
524: \begin{equation}
525: D_R(x)= \int_0^1 d\omega \int_0^1 dt \ {1 \over
526: \Gamma_0} \ {d\Gamma \over dx^\prime}(\omega,t;\epsilon) \
527: \theta[x-\omega^2t(1-t)].
528: \end{equation}
529: The remaining integrations are non-trivial because of the simultaneous presence of
530: the kinematical constraint and by the dimensional regularization parameter $\epsilon$.
531: By using the identity
532: \begin{equation}
533: \theta[x-\omega^2t(1-t)]~=~1-\theta[\omega^2t(1-t)-x],
534: \end{equation}
535: we separate these two effects and rewrite the
536: distribution $D_R(x)$ as a difference between an
537: integral over the whole phase space
538: and a integral over the complementary region:
539: \begin{equation}
540: D_R(x)=\int_0^1 d\omega \int_0^1 dt{1 \over \Gamma_0} \ {d\Gamma
541: \over dx}(\omega,t;\epsilon) \ - \ \int_0^1 d\omega \int_0^1 dt {1
542: \over \Gamma_0} \ {d\Gamma \over dx}(\omega,t;0) \
543: \theta[\omega^2t(1-t)-x]~+~O(\epsilon).
544: \end{equation}
545: The first integral must be evaluated for $\epsilon\neq 0$ because it contains
546: poles in $\epsilon$, but is done over a very simple domain, independent of $x$.
547: The second integral does not contain any pole in $\epsilon$
548: and therefore one can take the limit $\epsilon\rightarrow 0$ in the integrand.
549: It depends on the kinematics of the
550: process and can be integrated by introducing a suitable basis of
551: harmonic polylogarithms as in \cite{remiddi}. The most convenient
552: basis we found consists of the basic functions
553: \begin{eqnarray}\label{baseint}
554: g[0;y]&\equiv& {1 \over y} \nonumber \\ g[-1;y]&\equiv& {1 \over
555: y+1} \nonumber \\ g[-2;y]&\equiv& {1 \over {\sqrt{y}(1+y)}}\nonumber \\
556: g[-3;y]&\equiv& -{\sqrt{x} \over {2({1-\sqrt{x}\sqrt{y})}\sqrt{y}}}.
557: \end{eqnarray}
558: The harmonic polylogarithms (HPL) of weight 1 are defined as:
559: \begin{eqnarray}
560: J[a;y]&\equiv&\int_0^y dy^\prime \ g(a;y^\prime) \ \ \ \rm{for}\; a \neq 0 \nonumber\\
561: J[0;y]&\equiv& \log y.
562: \end{eqnarray}
563: In terms of usual functions, they read:
564: \begin{eqnarray}
565: J[-1;y]&\equiv& \log (1+y)\nonumber\\
566: J[-2;y]&\equiv& 2\arctan \sqrt y\nonumber\\
567: J[-3;y]&\equiv& \log (1-\sqrt{x} \sqrt{y})
568: \end{eqnarray}
569: The HPL's of weight 2 are defined for $(u,v)\not= (0,0)$ as
570: \begin{equation}
571: J[u,v;y]\equiv \int_0^y dy^\prime \ g[u;y^\prime]\int_0^{y^\prime}
572: dy^{\prime\prime} g[v;y^{\prime\prime}]
573: \end{equation}
574: and $J[0,0;y]=1/2\log^2y$.
575: HPL s of higher weight may be defined in an analogous way. They will not be used here.
576: \\
577: The final result for real diagrams turns out to be
578: \begin{equation}
579: D_R(x)= C_F {\alpha_S \over \pi}\ \left({m^2_b \over
580: 4\pi\mu^2}\right)^{\epsilon/2}\ {1\over \Gamma(1+\epsilon/2)}\ \left[{2\over
581: \epsilon^2} \ - {5 \over 2\epsilon}\ -{1 \over 4} \ \log^2 x - \
582: {5 \over 4} \ \log x + \ {1 \over 4} \ +d(x)\right],
583: \end{equation}
584: where $d(x)$ is a function vanishing for $x\rightarrow 0$.
585: \\
586: The matrix elements of the remaining operators $\hat{\mathcal{O}}_i\; (i\not= 7)$
587: do not contain infrared divergences.
588: Therefore their contributions to $D_R$ do not involve (infrared)
589: poles in $\epsilon$, logarithms of $x$ and constants,
590: but only new functions, which vanish in the limit $x\rightarrow 0$.
591:
592: \subsection{Virtual diagrams}
593: %
594: Virtual corrections to $b\rightarrow s\gamma$ have been calculated
595: in \cite{greubetal,pott} for a massive strange quark; we present
596: here the computation in the massless case.
597: The diagrams consist of self-energy corrections to the heavy and light
598: lines and of vertex corrections to the operator $\hat{\mathcal{O}}_7$
599: (see fig. \ref{virtuali});
600: we compute them in the $\overline{MS}$ scheme so as to be consistent with the (known) coefficient functions $C_i$.
601: The computation can be done with standard Feynman parameter technique
602: or by a reduction using the integration by part identities \cite{chettak}.
603: %
604: \begin{figure}[h]
605: \begin{center}
606: \mbox{\epsfig{file=virtuali.ps, height=7cm}}
607: \caption{\label{virtuali}Virtual diagrams}
608: \end{center}
609: \end{figure}
610: %
611: Let us briefly describe the evaluation of the vertex correction
612: within the latter method. One has to compute the scalar integral:
613: \begin{equation}
614: \mathcal{V}=\int {d^nk \over (2\pi)^n} \ {N(k^2,P\cdot k,
615: p\cdot k;\epsilon)\over k^2 [(k-P)^2-m^2](k-p)^2},
616: \end{equation}
617: where
618: \begin{equation}
619: N(k^2,P\cdot k, p\cdot k;\epsilon) = 32 P\cdot k -32 p\cdot k - 16 m^2_b
620: +\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^2) k^2 +
621: \mathcal{O}(\epsilon^2) P\cdot k p\cdot k +
622: \mathcal{O}(\epsilon^2) {(p\cdot k)}^2 .
623: \end{equation}
624: $\mathcal{V}$ has at most a double pole in $\epsilon$ coming from
625: the product of the soft and the collinear singularities.
626: The terms in the numerator $N$, which vanish in the soft limit
627: $k_{\mu}\rightarrow 0$, do not give rise to soft singularities
628: and therefore produce at most a simple pole
629: coming from the collinear or the ultraviolet region.
630: Therefore the $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^2)$ terms in $N$
631: do not contribute in the limit $\epsilon\rightarrow 0$.
632: \\
633: By expressing the scalar products in the numerator as linear combinations
634: of the denominators as
635: \begin{eqnarray}
636: \label{rotate}
637: k\cdot p &=& \frac{1}{2} \left( k^2 - (k-p)^2 \right),
638: \nonumber \\
639: k\cdot P &=& \frac{1}{2} \left( k^2 - (k-P)^2 + m_b^2\right),
640: \end{eqnarray}
641: we can reduce $\mathcal{V}$ to a superposition
642: of scalar integrals of the form:
643: \begin{equation}
644: {\rm T}[a,b,c]=\int {d^nk \over (2\pi)^n} \ {1 \over [k^2]^a \
645: [(k-P)^2-m_b^2]^b \ [(k-p)^2]^c}
646: \end{equation}
647: with $a,b,c\le 1$.
648: The above amplitudes can be related to each other
649: by identities of the form \cite{chettak}:
650: \begin{equation}
651: \int d^n k \ {\partial \over \partial k^\mu} \ { v^{\mu}
652: \over [k^2]^a [(k-P)^2-m^2]^b[(k-p)^2]^c } =0
653: \end{equation}
654: with $v^{\mu}=k^\mu,p^\mu,P^\mu$.
655: By explicitly evaluating the derivatives and re-expressing the scalar
656: products using eqs. (\ref{rotate}), one obtains relations among amplitudes
657: with shifted indices.
658: \\
659: By solving the above identities, one can reduce all the amplitudes
660: to the tadpole, and one obtains for our integral\footnote
661: {Such a strong reduction of 3-point function to a vacuum amplitude
662: is possible because the only scale in the process is the heavy quark mass $m_b$.
663: Virtual corrections have indeed the lowest-order
664: kinematics $P^2 = m_b^2,~P\cdot p = m_b^2/2,~p^2 = q^2 = 0$.}:
665: \begin{equation}
666: \mathcal{V} = \left(-{16 \over \epsilon} +8-8\epsilon\right) {1\over
667: m^2_b} \ {\rm T}[0,1,0],
668: \end{equation}
669: where
670: \begin{equation}
671: {\rm T}[0,1,0]= C_F{\alpha_S\over 4\pi} \ \left({m^2\over
672: 4\pi\mu^2}\right)^{\epsilon / 2} \ {\Gamma(-\epsilon / 2)\over
673: 1+\epsilon/2} \ m_b^2.
674: \end{equation}
675: Summing self-energies and vertex corrections,
676: and subtracting the $1/\epsilon$ poles according to the $\overline{MS}$ scheme,
677: one obtains for their contribution to the rate $D_V$
678: \footnote{To factorize $\Gamma_0$ one has to replace
679: $m_{b,\overline{MS}}(\mu_b)$ by $m_{b,\overline{MS}}(m_b)$
680: using the formula
681: $m_{b,\overline{MS}}(\mu_b)=m_{b,\overline{MS}}(m_b)
682: ( 1+\frac{3}{2} {C_F\alpha_S\over\pi})$.}:
683: \begin{equation}
684: D_V=C_F{\alpha_S\over\pi} \ \left({m^2_b\over 4\pi\mu^2}\right)^{\epsilon/2}
685: \ \Gamma\left(1-{\epsilon\over 2}\right) \ \left[-{2\over \epsilon^2}+{5 \over
686: 2\epsilon} + 4 \log{m_b\over \mu_b} -3\right].
687: \end{equation}
688: We have kept the factor in front of the square bracket unexpanded
689: to simplify the computation of the total rate.
690: \\
691: The virtual corrections to the remaining operators $\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{i\not= 7}$
692: contain only (simple) ultraviolet poles in $\epsilon$,
693: which are removed by renormalization; their contributions to $D_V$
694: amount only to finite constants and $\log m_b/\mu_b$.
695:
696: \subsection{Final result}
697: Summing real and virtual contributions, the transverse momentum
698: distribution for the decay $b\rightarrow s\gamma$ reads, to
699: $O(\alpha_S)$:
700: \begin{equation}\label{final}
701: D(x)=1~+~C_F{\alpha_S\over\pi}\ \left[-{1 \over 4} \ \log^2 x - \ {5 \over
702: 4} \ \log x + f +\ d(x)\right].
703: \end{equation}
704: As expected, the result contains a double logarithm
705: and a single logarithm of $x$, a finite term $f$ and a function $d(x)$
706: vanishing in the limit $x\rightarrow 0$.
707: \\
708: By expanding the resummed formula to order $\alpha_S$ one obtains:
709: \begin{eqnarray}\label{final2}
710: D(x) &=& \left( 1+\frac{C_F\alpha_S}{\pi} k_1 \right)
711: \left(1-\frac{A_1}{4}\alpha_S \log^2 x + B_1 \alpha_S \log x \right)+
712: \frac{C_F\alpha_S}{\pi} r(x)
713: \nonumber
714: \\
715: &=& 1-\frac{A_1}{4}\alpha_S \log^2 x + B_1 \alpha_S \log x+\frac{C_F\alpha_S}{\pi} k_1
716: +\frac{C_F\alpha_S}{\pi} r(x)+O(\alpha_S^2).
717: \end{eqnarray}
718: By identifying the resummed result expanded to $O(\alpha_S)$ with the fixed-order one
719: --- matching procedure ---
720: we check the
721: values for $A_1$ and $B_1$ evaluated in our previous paper using
722: general properties of QCD radiation \cite{noi}
723: and we extract the value of the coefficient function:
724: \begin{equation}\label{coefficient}
725: k_1~=~f~=~ - \ {11 \over 4}- \ {\pi^2 \over 12} +~ 4\log{m_b\over \mu},
726: \end{equation}
727: as well as the remainder function $r_1(x)=d(x)$.
728: As explained in previous sections,
729: the remaining operators $\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{i\not= 7}$ contribute to $D(x)$ only
730: by finite terms $\tilde{r}_i$ and remainder functions.
731: Since the constants $\tilde{r}_i$ come from virtual diagrams alone, we can quote their
732: result from \cite{greubetal} and present an improved formula for the
733: coefficient function, in analogy with \cite{acg}:
734: \begin{equation}\label{coefcompleto}
735: K(\alpha_S)~=~ 1 + {\alpha_S \over 2\pi}
736: \sum_{i=1}^8 {C^{(0)}_i(\mu_b) \over C^{(0)}_7(\mu_b)}\left(\Re\ \tilde{r}_i +
737: \gamma^{(0)}_{i7}\log{m_b\over \mu_b}\right)+{\alpha_S \over
738: 2\pi}{C^{(1)}_7(\mu_b) \over
739: C^{(0)}_7(\mu_b)}+\mathcal{O}(\alpha_S^2)
740: \end{equation}
741: where
742: \begin{eqnarray}
743: \tilde{r}_{i} &=& r_i ~~~~~ i\not= 7
744: \nonumber \\
745: \tilde{r}_7 &=& \frac{8}{3}\left( f-4\log\frac{m_b}{\mu_b}\right)=
746: -\frac{22}{3}-\frac{2\pi^2}{9}.
747: \end{eqnarray}
748: Let us remark that only the coefficients related to the operators
749: with $i=1,2,7,8$ are
750: relevant, because the others are multiplied by very small
751: coefficient functions and can be neglected:
752: \begin{eqnarray}
753: r_1&=&-{1 \over 6}r_2\nonumber\\
754: \Re \ r_2&=& -4.092-12.78(0.29-m_c/m_b)\nonumber\\
755: r_8&=& {4 \over 27}(33-2\pi^2).
756: \end{eqnarray}
757: The analytic expressions for the coefficient functions as well as a standard
758: numerical evalutation are given in \cite{misiak2}.
759: The anomalous dimension $\gamma^{(0)}_{77}$ is derived from the coefficient
760: of the logarithmic term in $k_1$.
761: The values of $\gamma_{i7}^{(0)}$ are \cite{misiak2}:
762: \begin{equation}
763: \gamma^{(0)}_{i7}=\left(-{208 \over 243}, {416 \over 81}, -{176 \over
764: 81}, -{152 \over 243}, -{6272\over 81}, {4624 \over 243},{32 \over
765: 3},-{32 \over 9}\right).
766: \end{equation}
767: \\
768: Equation(\ref{coefcompleto}) is the main result of our paper and allows a
769: complete resummation to NLO of transverse momentum logarithms.
770: \\
771: The explicit calculation of the remainder function in (\ref{final2}) reads
772: \begin{eqnarray}\label{taudef}
773: &r(\tau)&=\frac{(\tau-1)(49\tau^8+468\tau^7+1797\tau^6+3642\tau^5+4450\tau^4+3642\tau^3+1797\tau^2+468\tau+49)}{12(\tau+1)^5(\tau^2+3\tau+1)^2}
774: \nonumber\\
775: &+&
776: \frac{-5-61\tau-317\tau^2-912\tau^3-1622\tau^4-1934\tau^5-1622\tau^6-912\tau^7-317\tau^8-61\tau^9-5\tau^{10}}{4(\tau+1)^6(\tau^2+3\tau+1)^2}\log\tau
777: \nonumber\\
778: &-&J[0,-3,\tau]+J[0,-3,1/\tau]-2J[0,-1,\tau]+J[-1,0,\tau]+J[-1,-3,\tau]-J[-1,-3,1/\tau]
779: \nonumber\\
780: &-&2\sqrt \tau \arctan(\sqrt\tau)\frac{(\tau+1)(2\tau^2+7\tau+2)}{(\tau^2+3\tau+1)^2}+\frac{\pi}{2}\sqrt
781: \tau\frac{(\tau+1)(2\tau^2+7\tau+2)}{(\tau^2+3\tau+1)^2}+\frac{49}{12}
782: \nonumber\\
783: &+&\frac{5}{4}\log\tau-\frac{5}{2}\log(\tau+1)+\log^2(\tau+1),
784: \end{eqnarray}
785: where
786: \begin{equation} \label{tau}
787: \tau=\frac{1-\sqrt{1-4x}}{1+\sqrt{1-4x}}.
788: \end{equation}
789: Let us notice that $\tau$ behaves as $x$ for small
790: values of the transverse momentum
791: \begin{equation}
792: \tau(x)=x+O(x^2)
793: \end{equation}
794: and it is a unitary variable
795: \begin{eqnarray*}
796: \tau\rightarrow 0 \ \ \ &\rm{for}& \ \ \ x\rightarrow 0\\
797: \tau\rightarrow 1 \ \ \ &\rm{for}& \ \ \ x\rightarrow 1/4.\\
798: \end{eqnarray*}
799: The relation (\ref{tau}) may be inverted as
800: \begin{equation}
801: x=\frac{\tau}{(\tau+1)^2}.
802: \end{equation}
803: One can easily check that $r(\tau)$ vanishes for $\tau\sim
804: x\rightarrow 0$, by using the properties
805: \begin{equation}
806: J[0,-1,0]=J[0,-3,0]=J[-1,0,0]=J[-1,-3,0]=0
807: \end{equation}
808: \begin{equation}
809: \lim_{\tau\to 0}J[0,-3,1/\tau]=\lim_{\tau\to
810: 0}J[-1,-3,1/\tau]=-\frac{\pi^2}{3}.
811: \end{equation}
812:
813: \section{Conclusions}
814: To sum up: eq. (\ref{final}), which contains the final result, represents the full
815: evaluation to $O(\alpha_S)$ of the transverse momentum
816: distribution. It is explicitly given in terms of an analytic expression.
817: \\
818: Contrary to what happens in hard processes at much larger
819: energies, at the energy scales involved here for the $b$ decay the
820: remainder function contribution does play a more important role.
821: \\
822: A straightforward numerical evaluation of the remainder function $r(x)$ of
823: eq. (\ref{final2}) allows us to conclude that its contribution can be
824: safely neglected for small values of $x$, up to $x\simeq 0.1$,
825: where it approaches the zero limit of $x\rightarrow 0$.
826: For larger values of $x$, however, the size of its contribution increases
827: to reach values of the order of the $10$--$15\%$ of the combined
828: leading and next-to-leading logarithmic terms.
829: \\
830: A detailed report describing the calculation giving rise the $O(\alpha_S)$
831: evaluation presented here, together
832: with an analysis of the related phenomenological impact, will be presented in
833: a future article \cite{noi1}.
834:
835: \thebibliography{99}
836:
837: \bibitem{altpet} G.Altarelli and S.Petrarca, Phys. Lett. B261, 303 (1991)
838:
839: \bibitem{noi}U.Aglietti, R.Sghedoni, L.Trentadue, Phys. Lett. B522, 83 (2001)
840:
841: \bibitem{noi1}U.Aglietti, R.Sghedoni, L.Trentadue, \it in preparation\rm
842:
843: \bibitem{gsw1} B.Grinstein, R.Springer, M.Wise, Phys. Lett. B202, 138 (1988)
844:
845: \bibitem{gsw2} B.Grinstein, R.Springer, M.Wise, Nucl. Phys. B339, 269 (1990)
846:
847: \bibitem{misiak1} M.Misiak, Phys. Lett. B269, 161 (1991)
848:
849: \bibitem{misiak2} K.Chetyrkin, M.Misiak, M.Munz, Phys. Lett. B400, 206 (1997),
850: Erratum Phys. Lett. B425, 414 (1998)
851:
852: \bibitem{pp} G. Parisi and R. Petronzio, Nucl. Phys. B154, 427 (1979)
853:
854: \bibitem{abcmv} D.Amati, A.Bassetto, M.Ciafaloni, G.Marchesini,
855: G.Veneziano, Nucl. Phys. B173, 429 (1980)
856:
857: \bibitem{kodairatrentadue} J.Kodaira, L.Trentadue, Phys. Lett. B112, 66 (1982) and SLAC-PUB-2934 (1982); L.Trentadue Phys. Lett. B151, 171 (1985)
858:
859: \bibitem{catanitrentadue} S.Catani, L.Trentadue, Nucl. Phys. B327, 323 (1989); (ibidem) B353, 183 (1991)
860:
861: \bibitem{cttw} S.Catani, L.Trentadue, G.Turnock, B.Webber, Nucl. Phys. B407, 3 (1993)
862:
863: \bibitem{librowebber} R.K.Ellis, W.J.Stirling and B.R.Webber,
864: {\it QCD and Collider Physics}, Cambridge University Press (1996)
865:
866: \bibitem{remiddi} E.Remiddi, J.A.M.Vermaseren, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A15, 725 (2000)
867:
868: \bibitem{greubetal} C.Greub, T.Hurth, D.Wyler, Phys. Lett. B380, 385 (1996) and Phys. Rev. D54, 3350 (1996)
869:
870: \bibitem{acg} U.Aglietti, M.Ciuchini, P.Gambino, Nucl. Phys. B637, 427 (2002)
871:
872: \bibitem{pott} N. Pott, Phys. Rev. D54, 938 (1996)
873:
874: \bibitem{chettak} K.G.Chetyrkin, F.V.Tkachov, Nucl. Phys. B192, 159 (1981)
875:
876: \end{document}
877: