1: \documentclass[11pt]{article}
2: \usepackage{a4wide}
3: \usepackage{cite}
4: %\documentclass[aps,prl,twocolumn,showpacs,groupedaddress]{revtex4}
5:
6: \usepackage{amssymb}
7: \usepackage{amsmath}
8: \usepackage{epsfig}
9: \usepackage{xspace}
10: %\usepackage{showkeys}
11:
12:
13: \newcommand{\LettTitle}{%
14: The gluon splitting function at moderately small $\boldsymbol{x}$
15: }
16:
17: %%%% PLAIN TEXT ABSTRACT %%%%
18: % It is widely believed that at small x, the BFKL resummed gluon
19: % splitting function should grow as a power of 1/x. But in several
20: % recent calculations it has been found to decrease for moderately
21: % small-x before eventually rising. We show that this `dip' structure
22: % is a rigorous feature of the P_gg splitting function for sufficiently
23: % small alpha_s, the minimum occurring formally at ln 1/x of order
24: % 1/sqrt(alpha_s). We calculate the properties of the dip, including
25: % corrections of relative order sqrt(alpha_s), and discuss how this
26: % expansion in powers of sqrt(alpha_s) switches to a fully resummed
27: % series for realistic values of alpha_s. Finally, we note that the dip
28: % position, as a function of alpha_s, provides a lower bound in x below
29: % which the NNLO fixed-order expansion of the splitting function breaks
30: % down and the resummation of small-x terms is mandatory.
31:
32: \newcommand{\LettAbstract}{
33: It is widely believed that at small $x$, the BFKL resummed gluon
34: splitting function should grow as a power of $1/x$. But in several
35: recent calculations it has been found to \emph{decrease} for
36: moderately small-$x$ before eventually rising. We show that this
37: `dip' structure is a rigorous feature of the $P_{gg}$ splitting
38: function for sufficiently small $\as$, the minimum occurring
39: formally at $\ln 1/x \sim 1/\sqrt{\as}$. We calculate the
40: properties of the dip, including corrections of relative order
41: $\sqrt{\as}$, and discuss how this expansion in powers of
42: $\sqrt{\as}$, which is poorly convergent, can be qualitatively
43: matched to the fully resummed result of a recent calculation, for
44: realistic values of $\as$. Finally, we note that the dip position,
45: as a function of $\as$, provides a lower bound in $x$ below which
46: the NNLO fixed-order expansion of the splitting function breaks down
47: and the resummation of small-$x$ terms is mandatory. }
48:
49: % new defs
50: \newcommand{\comment}[1]{\textbf{[#1]}}
51: \newcommand{\LLx}{LL$x$\xspace}
52: \newcommand{\NLLx}{NLL$x$\xspace}
53:
54: % old defs we may want to keep
55: \newcommand{\ie}{i.e.\xspace}
56: \newcommand{\eg}{e.g.\xspace}
57: \newcommand{\GeV}{\,\,\mathrm{GeV}}
58: \newcommand{\NLLB}{NLL$_\mathrm{B}$\xspace}
59: \newcommand{\as}{\alpha_s} % coupling constant
60: \newcommand{\asb}{\bar{\alpha}_s} % alpha_s bar
61: \renewcommand{\ln}{\log}
62: \newcommand{\order}[1]{\mathcal{O}\left(#1\right)}
63: \newcommand{\eff}{{\mathrm{eff}}}
64: \newcommand{\om}{\omega}
65: \newcommand{\omc}{\omega_c}
66: \newcommand{\oms}{\omega_s}
67: \newcommand{\nf}{n_f}
68: \newcommand{\NC}{N_c}
69: \newcommand{\MSbar}{\overline{\mbox{\scriptsize MS}}}
70:
71:
72: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
73: \begin{document}
74:
75: \titlepage
76: \begin{flushright}
77: DESY 03--185 \\ DFF 409/11/03\\ LPTHE--03--34 \\ hep-ph/0311325 \\
78: November 2003%\\
79: %Draft $Revision: 1.24 $
80: \end{flushright}
81:
82: \vspace*{1.0in}
83: \begin{center}
84: {\Large \bf
85: \LettTitle
86: }\\
87: \vspace*{0.4in}
88: M.~Ciafaloni$^{(a)}$,
89: D.~Colferai$^{(a)}$,
90: G.P.~Salam$^{(b)}$
91: and A.M.~Sta\'sto$^{(c)}$ \\
92: {\small
93: \vspace*{0.5cm}
94: $^{(a)}$ {\it Dipartimento di Fisica, Universit\`a di Firenze,
95: 50019 Sesto Fiorentino (FI), Italy}; \\
96: \vskip 2mm
97: {\it INFN Sezione di Firenze, 50019 Sesto Fiorentino (FI), Italy}\\
98: \vskip 2mm
99: $^{(b)}$ {\it LPTHE, Universities of Paris VI \& VII and CNRS,
100: 75252 Paris 75005, France}\\
101: \vskip 2mm
102: $^{(c)}$ {\it Theory Division, DESY, D22603 Hamburg};\\
103: \vskip 2mm
104: {\it H.~Niewodnicza\'nski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Krak\'ow, Poland}\\
105: \vskip 2mm}
106: \end{center}
107: %\vspace*{1cm}
108: %\centerline{(\today)}
109:
110: \vskip1cm
111: \begin{abstract}
112: \LettAbstract
113: \end{abstract}
114: \newpage
115: %\vspace*{0.2in}
116:
117:
118: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
119: \section{Introduction}
120:
121:
122: A major effort is currently under way to push the precision of
123: DGLAP~\cite{DGLAP,NLODGLAP1,NLODGLAP2} splitting functions to
124: next-next-to-leading order (NNLO) accuracy~\cite{NS3loop}. One of the
125: main applications of such an effort could be to improve the
126: description of the small-$x$ parton distributions, which with the
127: current NLO evolution suffer from pathologies such as negative gluon
128: distributions and predictions of a negative
129: $F_L$~\cite{MRSTNLO,CTEQNLO}. Furthermore a good knowledge of
130: small-$x$ parton distributions will be ever-more relevant as collider
131: energies are increased, for example at the LHC or a possible VLHC,
132: which will be able to probe small-$x$ kinematic regions unexplored
133: even at HERA.
134:
135: However a question that remains to be understood is that of the domain in
136: which fixed order expansions are sufficiently convergent as to be
137: reliable. Indeed it is known that at small $x$, there are large
138: logarithmic enhancements of the splitting function at all
139: orders~\cite{BFKL,JKCOL}, leading formally to the breakdown of the
140: convergence of the series for $\as \ln 1/x \sim1$ and it has been
141: argued~\cite{MRSTNNLOUncert} that there is evidence in the
142: data~\cite{HERA} for the presence of some such terms.
143:
144: Much effort has been devoted in recent years to resumming these
145: logarithmically enhanced terms, which are expected to lead to a rise
146: at small $x$, as a power of $x$, for the gluon-gluon splitting
147: function, $xP_{gg}(x)$. It turns out however that the \LLx summation,
148: $\as^n \ln^{n-1}1/x$ rises much too steeply~\cite{EHW,BF95} to be
149: compatible with the more gentle rise of the $F_2$ data~\cite{HERA}.
150: On the other hand, the inclusion of the \NLLx terms
151: $\as^n\ln^{n-2}1/x$ --- extracted from the \NLLx kernel
152: eigenvalue~\cite{NLLFL,NLLCC} and based on several Regge-gluon
153: vertices~\cite{RGvert} and on the $q \bar{q}$ cluster
154: ~\cite{QQvertCC,QQvertFFFK} --- leads at moderately small $x$ to a
155: negative splitting function~\cite{BLUMVOGT,ROSS98}. Since that
156: discovery, there has been investigation of the origin of these
157: problems, and various approaches have been proposed to estimate yet
158: higher
159: orders~\cite{Salam1998,CC,CCS1,CCSSkernel,SCHMIDT,FRSV,THORNE,ABF2000,ABF2001,ABF2003,ABFcomparison},
160: the most successful of them being based on a simultaneous treatment of
161: small-$x$ and collinear logarithms.
162:
163: A surprising observation, common to all these approaches, is that in
164: the phenomenologically relevant, moderately small-$x$ region, the
165: splitting function actually \emph{decreases}, while the power-like
166: rise is delayed to somewhat smaller values of $x$ (resummed curve of
167: figure~\ref{fig:pgg}~\cite{CCSSkernel}, which has been found to be
168: rather close to a splitting function fitted to the $F_2$ data
169: \cite{ABF2000,ABFcomparison}). The question arises therefore of
170: whether the resulting `dip' structure is a well-defined property of
171: the gluon splitting function, or instead perhaps an artefact of the
172: particular schemes used to `improve' the small-$x$ hierarchy. The
173: purpose of this letter is to show that the dip has a simple origin,
174: specifically in the structure of the first few terms of the
175: perturbative series, possibly matched to a resummed behaviour at
176: smaller $x$ values.
177:
178: More precisely (Sec.~\ref{sec:loworders}), in the formal
179: limit of small $\as$, the dip is a consequence of an interplay between
180: different fixed orders, and one finds that the simple fixed-order
181: hierarchy breaks down not for $\as \ln 1/x \sim 1$ as widely expected,
182: but rather for $\as \ln^2 1/x \sim1$. The result is that the
183: properties of the dip can be described in terms of a series in powers
184: of $\sqrt{\as}$. For phenomenologically relevant values of $\as$
185: though, this series in $\sqrt{\as}$ turns out to be very poorly
186: convergent. Instead we find that quite simple resummation arguments,
187: presented in section~\ref{sec:resummation}, still enable us to gain
188: some quantitative understanding of the dip properties.
189:
190: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
191: \section{Low perturbative orders and $\boldsymbol{\sqrt{\as}}$-expansion}
192: \label{sec:loworders}
193:
194: Let us start by recalling the structure of the \LLx terms of the
195: $xP_{gg}(x)$ splitting function,
196: \begin{equation}
197: A_{n,n-1} \,\asb^{n}\, \ln^{n-1} \frac1x\,,\qquad\quad (n\ge 1)\,,
198: \end{equation}
199: where $\asb = \as \NC/\pi$. A number of the lower order terms in the
200: series are absent, $A_{21} = A_{32} = A_{54} = 0$, while
201: \begin{equation}
202: \label{eq:Acoeffs}
203: A_{10} = 1\,,\qquad A_{43} = \frac{\zeta(3)}{3}\,,\qquad A_{65}
204: =\frac{\zeta(5)}{60}\,,\qquad
205: \ldots
206: \end{equation}
207: Since these and all further terms are positive, the \LLx splitting
208: function grows monotonically as $x$ decreases. The \NLLx terms can be
209: written as
210: \begin{equation}
211: A_{n,n-2} \,\asb^{n}\, \ln^{n-2} \frac1x\,,\qquad\quad (n\ge 2)\,,
212: \end{equation}
213: where the first few coefficients are~\cite{NLLFL,NLLCC}
214: \begin{subequations}
215: \label{eq:Bcoeffs}
216: \begin{align}
217: A_{20} &= -\frac{\nf}{6\NC}\left(\frac53 + \frac{13}{6\NC^2}\right)
218: \,,\\
219: A_{31} &= -\frac{395}{108} + \frac{\zeta(3)}{2} + \frac{11\pi^2}{72} -
220: \frac{\nf}{4\NC^3} \left(\frac{71}{27} - \frac{\pi^2}{9}\right)
221: \simeq -1.548 - 0.014\nf
222: \,,\\
223: A_{42} &= -4.054 - 6.010\,b - 0.030 \nf = -9.563 + 0.303 \nf\,, \qquad \ldots
224: \end{align}
225: \end{subequations}
226: and $b = \frac{11}{12} - \frac{\nf}{6\NC}$ is the first beta-function
227: coefficient. These coefficients are given in the $Q_0$
228: scheme~\cite{Q0} and for renormalisation scale $\mu=Q$.
229: They come from a simple expansion of the \NLLx kernel eigenvalue, and ---
230: notably $A_{31}$ and $A_{42}$ --- can be traced back to early calculations of
231: \NLLx gluon vertices~\cite{RGvert} and of the $q \bar{q}$
232: cluster~\cite{QQvertCC,QQvertFFFK}. They include --- in particular $A_{42}$ ---
233: the running coupling effects, which are part of the \NLLx corrections. In the
234: $\MSbar$ scheme only the $\nf$ parts of $A_{20}$ and $A_{31}$ will differ, while
235: from $A_{42}$ onward the $\nf$ independent part will differ as well. Because of
236: the zeroes in the LL coefficients, $A_{31}$ and $A_{42}$ are independent of the
237: choice of $\mu$.
238:
239: \begin{figure}[tb]
240: \centering
241: \includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{pgg-NNL-lk1.5.eps}
242: \caption{The $x P_{gg}(x)$ splitting function. The resummed (\NLLB)
243: curve corresponds to scheme B of~\cite{CCSSkernel}.}
244: \label{fig:pgg}
245: \end{figure}
246:
247: The resummation hierarchy as written above in terms of \LLx and \NLLx
248: terms is intended to be applied when $\as \ln 1/x$ is of order $1$,
249: while $\as \ll 1$ and $\ln1/x \gg1$. Let us however examine an
250: intermediate small-$x$ limit in which $\ln 1/x \gg 1$ but $\as \ln 1/x
251: \ll 1$ (the precise region will be better specified shortly).
252:
253: Because the \LLx coefficients $A_{21}$ and $A_{32}$ are zero, the
254: lowest order term with $\ln 1/x$ enhancement is the \NLLx term $A_{31}
255: \as^3 \ln 1/x$, which is NNLO in the usual DGLAP perturbative
256: expansion. Since $A_{31}$ is negative it will lead to an initial
257: \emph{decrease} of the splitting function and at some sufficiently
258: small value of $x$ the NNLO gluon splitting function~\cite{vNV} will
259: become negative, as shown in figure~\ref{fig:pgg}, where we have
260: included the small-$x$ part of the NNLO $xP_{gg}(x)$, $A_{10}\asb +
261: A_{31} \asb^3 \ln1/x$ ($A_{20}=0$ in the particular scheme used in the
262: figure~\cite{CCSSkernel}).
263:
264: At N$^3$LO, order $\as^4$, both \LLx and \NLLx terms are present.
265: Since we are in the regime of $\ln 1/x \gg1$, the \LLx $\as^4 \ln^3
266: 1/x$ term will clearly dominate over the \NLLx $\as^4 \ln^2 1/x$
267: term. What is interesting however is the interplay between the
268: negative \NLLx $\as^3 \ln 1/x$ term and the positive \LLx $\as^4 \ln^3
269: 1/x$:
270: \begin{equation}
271: \label{eq:firstterms}
272: x P_{gg}(x) = \mathrm{const.} + A_{31}\, \asb^3 \ln
273: \frac1x + A_{43}\, \asb^4 \ln^3\frac1x + \cdots\,,
274: \end{equation}
275: where the constant term includes $A_{10}\asb$ and $A_{20}\asb^2$
276: contributions, and at each order in $\as$ we have written only the
277: term with the strongest $\ln 1/x$ dependence. Since $A_{43}$ is
278: positive and has stronger $\ln x$ dependence than the negative
279: $A_{31}$ term, the splitting function as written in
280: \eqref{eq:firstterms} will eventually start rising. The $A_{31}$ and
281: $A_{43}$ terms will be of the same order when $\as \ln^2 1/x \sim 1$,
282: and the splitting function of eq.~\eqref{eq:firstterms}
283: will have a minimum at
284: \begin{equation}
285: \label{eq:min0}
286: \ln \frac1{x_{\min}} = \sqrt{-\frac{A_{31}}{3A_{43}}\frac1{\asb}}\,.
287: \end{equation}
288: The appearance of this minimum for $\as \ln^2 1/x \sim 1$ suggests
289: that it may be of use to examine an alternative classification of the
290: series, in which we consider all terms that are of similar magnitude
291: when $\as \ln^21/x$ is of order one,\footnote{This is a
292: double-logarithmic classification, however one should bear in mind
293: that the perturbative series itself contains at most single
294: logarithms --- our study of powers of $\as \ln^21/x$ therefore just
295: represents a particular way of reclassifying terms in the
296: single-logarithmic perturbative expansion.}
297: \begin{equation}
298: \label{eq:DLclass}
299: A_{k,2k-5}\, \asb^k \ln^{2k-5} \frac1x\,,\qquad\quad (3\le k\le 4)\,.
300: \end{equation}
301: One finds that there are only terms with $k=3,4$, since lower values
302: of $k$ would be associated with negative powers of $\ln 1/x$, while
303: higher values of $k$ would be super-leading in the usual \LLx
304: classification. In other words the two terms, $\as^3 \ln 1/x$ and
305: $\as^4 \ln^3 1/x$, that we have examined so far provide the full
306: leading contribution for $\as \ln^21/x \sim1$.
307:
308: This is illustrated in figure~\ref{fig:table}, which shows various
309: possible classifications of logarithmically enhanced terms. Rows
310: correspond to a given power of $\as$; columns to a given
311: single-logarithmic order (\LLx, \NLLx, and so on); terms on a same
312: downward going diagonal line (reading from left to right) all have
313: the same power of $\ln x$.
314:
315: \begin{figure}[htbp]
316: \centering
317: \includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{table.eps}
318: \caption{Representation of different classifications of
319: logarithmically enhanced terms. Symbols `\textsf{x}' indicate
320: terms that are present; `$0$' indicates terms that could have been
321: present but are zero; `$\nf$' indicates a term whose only
322: non-vanishing part is proportional to $\nf$; a dash indicates
323: terms which do not exist by definition.}
324: \label{fig:table}
325: \end{figure}
326:
327: Terms on upward going diagonal lines in figure~\ref{fig:table} are of
328: the same order for $\as \ln^21/x\sim1$. On any given such diagonal,
329: the number of terms is always finite, due to the fact that the natural
330: hierarchy is single logarithmic. The leading terms in this
331: regime, discussed above in eq.~(\ref{eq:DLclass}), are highlighted by
332: the upper (upward-going diagonal) ellipse. The lower ellipse contains
333: terms suppressed insofar as they have one less power of $\ln 1/x$,
334: \begin{equation}
335: \label{eq:NDLclass}
336: A_{k,2k-6}\, \asb^k \ln^{2k-6} \frac1x\,,\qquad\quad (3\le k\le 5)\,.
337: \end{equation}
338: Equivalently, since we are interested in the region where $\ln 1/x \sim
339: 1/\sqrt{\as}$, these terms are suppressed by a power of $\sqrt{\as}$.
340: Adding the terms of the lower ellipse to eq.~(\ref{eq:firstterms}) one
341: obtains
342: \begin{equation}
343: \label{eq:PggwithA42}
344: x P_{gg}(x) = \mathrm{const.} + A_{31}\, \asb^3 \ln
345: \frac1x + A_{43}\, \asb^4 \ln^3\frac1x + A_{42}\,\asb^4
346: \ln^2\frac1x + \order{\asb^k\ln^{2k-7}\frac1x}\,,
347: \end{equation}
348: where we have exploited the fact that $A_{54}=0$ and that the $A_{30}$
349: contribution can be absorbed into the constant piece. Solving for the
350: minimum of eq.~(\ref{eq:PggwithA42}) gives
351: \begin{align}
352: \ln \frac1{x_{\min}}
353: % &=
354: % \frac{-A_{42}\asb + \sqrt{A_{42}^2 \asb^2 -
355: % 3A_{31}A_{43}\asb}}{3A_{43}\asb}\,
356: % \\
357: % &=
358: % \frac{\sqrt{A_{42}^2 -
359: % 3A_{31}A_{43}\asb^{-1}} - A_{42} }{3A_{43}}\,
360: % \\
361: \label{eq:xminSLN}
362: &=
363: \sqrt{-\frac{A_{31}}{3A_{43}\asb} + \frac{A_{42}^2}{9A_{43}^2}} -
364: \frac{A_{42}}{3A_{43}}
365: \\
366: \label{eq:xminNL}
367: &= \sqrt{-\frac{A_{31}}{3A_{43}}\frac1{\asb}}
368: - \frac{A_{42}}{3A_{43}} + \order{\sqrt{\as}}
369: \simeq \frac{1.156}{\sqrt{\asb}} + 6.947 + \order{\sqrt{\asb}}
370: \,,
371: \end{align}
372: where the numerical values have been given for $\nf=4$.
373: We see that the effect of the subleading $A_{42}$ term is to shift
374: $\ln 1/x_{\min}$ by a (rather large) constant.
375:
376: As well as considering the position of the dip, it is interesting to
377: study also its depth, $d$. Substituting $\ln 1/x \sim \asb^{-1/2}$
378: into eq.~(\ref{eq:firstterms}) one immediately sees that the dip's
379: depth is of order $\asb^{5/2}$. Including the subleading terms (lower
380: ellipse of figure~\ref{fig:table}) gives the following result
381: \begin{equation}
382: \label{eq:Pggdepth}
383: % D = A_{20} \asb^2 + \frac{2}{9}
384: % \sqrt{\frac{-3A_{31}^3}{A_{43}}}\asb^{5/2} -
385: % \left(\frac13
386: % \frac{A_{31}A_{42}}{A_{43}} + A_{30}\right)\asb^3 + \order{\asb^{7/2}}\,.
387: -d = \frac{2A_{31}}{9}
388: \sqrt{\frac{-3A_{31}}{A_{43}}}\asb^{5/2} -
389: \frac13
390: \frac{A_{31}A_{42}}{A_{43}} \asb^3 + \order{\asb^{7/2}}
391: \simeq -1.237\asb^{5/2} - 11.15\asb^3 + \order{\asb^{7/2}}\,.
392: \end{equation}
393: The depth has been defined with respect to the $x=1$ limit of
394: eq.~(\ref{eq:PggwithA42}), which includes the usual $\asb$ constant
395: term, but also $A_{20} \asb^2$ term and the unknown N\NLLx term
396: $A_{30} \asb^3$. The full $P_{gg}$ splitting function has of course a
397: $1/(1-x)_+$ divergence so its $x=1$ value can not actually be used as
398: a reference point for defining the depth. So one may choose to define
399: it alternatively with respect to the value of the $x\to0$ LO splitting
400: function, $A_{10}\asb$. This introduces extra terms $A_{20} \asb^2 +
401: A_{30}\asb^3$ in the expression, eq.~(\ref{eq:Pggdepth}), for $-d$.
402:
403: \begin{figure}[tb]
404: \centering
405: \includegraphics[width=0.472\textwidth]{NLLB_ydip.eps}
406: \hfill
407: \includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{NLLB_ydip_depth.eps}
408: \caption{Properties of the dip in the \NLLB model of~\cite{CCSSkernel}
409: compared to our analytical predictions. See
410: text for details.}
411: \label{fig:dipprop}
412: \end{figure}
413:
414: The dip position and depth, as a function of $\asb$, are shown
415: respectively in figures~\ref{fig:dipprop}a and \ref{fig:dipprop}b. In
416: each case the solid line represents the dip properties as `measured'
417: from the \NLLB scheme\footnote{We note that since the \NLLB scheme
418: accounts only partially for the $\nf$ dependence (that associated
419: with running of the coupling), the resulting \NLLx $A_{n,n-2}$
420: coefficients differ slightly from those shown in
421: eq.~(\ref{eq:Bcoeffs}), with $A_{20}$, $A_{31}$ and $A_{42}$
422: corresponding to the $\nf=0$ results of eq.~(\ref{eq:Bcoeffs}) (in
423: $A_{42}$ the $\nf$-part in the $b$-dependent term is retained, hence
424: the coefficient of $\nf$ in $A_{42}$ is $0.334$). The reason for the
425: only partial inclusion of the $\nf$ dependence is that the \NLLB
426: scheme is based on a single-channel, purely gluonic approach,
427: whereas full account of $\nf$ dependence would require a
428: two-channel, quark-gluon formulation.}
429: %
430: of~\cite{CCSSkernel}, which was shown also in figure~\ref{fig:pgg}.
431: The shaded band represents the spread of the predictions based on
432: eqs.~(\ref{eq:PggwithA42})--(\ref{eq:Pggdepth}). The upper edge of
433: the bands, labelled `Quadratic solution' corresponds to the use of
434: eq.~(\ref{eq:xminSLN}) and its direct substitution into
435: eq.~(\ref{eq:PggwithA42}); the lower edge corresponds to
436: eqs.~(\ref{eq:xminNL}) and (\ref{eq:Pggdepth}). For small values of
437: $\as$, there is rather good agreement between the expanded forms of
438: our predictions and the dip properties as measured from the full
439: resummation: the dip position is within the uncertainty band,
440: typically close to the expanded solution; the depth is just outside
441: the uncertainty band (again closer to the expanded solution), though
442: this may be because we have measured the depth with respect to the
443: $A_{10} \as$ reference level and have not included the resulting
444: additional unknown N\NLLx $A_{30}$ contribution to the depth.
445: Instead, including the $A_{30}$ as it appears in the \NLLB model,
446: lowers the band so that it overlaps with the measured depth. Leaving
447: aside these details, for both the position and depth of the dip, the
448: scaling with $\as$ is clearly reproduced, providing strong evidence
449: that the dip truly is a consequence of the low-order behaviour of the
450: perturbation series.
451:
452: We note though that the spread of predictions, based on
453: eqs.~(\ref{eq:xminSLN}) and (\ref{eq:xminNL}), is quite significant.
454: This is essentially due to the large value of the $A_{42}$
455: coefficient, which means that the series in $\sqrt{\as}$ in
456: eqs.~(\ref{eq:xminNL}) and (\ref{eq:Pggdepth}) is very poorly
457: convergent --- the leading and subleading corrections are of the same
458: order when $\as \sim 0.01$--$0.02$.
459:
460: In practice our low-order arguments seem to extend somewhat further,
461: providing a reasonable description of the dip, within the large
462: uncertainties, up to $\as \sim 0.05 - 0.1$. However beyond this point
463: the prediction fails quite dramatically, with the height of the
464: predicted dip minimum becoming for example negative ($A_{10}\asb - d
465: <0$), in contradiction with the full resummed results. Furthermore
466: there is a clear change in the $\as$ dependence for both the measured
467: position and depth of the dip. This suggests that for $\as \gtrsim
468: 0.05$ the dip description can no-longer be founded on low-order
469: perturbation theory alone.
470:
471:
472: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
473: \section{Resummation and cut-representation argument}
474: \label{sec:resummation}
475:
476: On the other hand we know that when $\as$ is moderate and $\ln 1/x$ is
477: sizeable we enter the usual regime of resummation of terms $(\as \ln
478: 1/x)^n$~\cite{BFKL}, together with its subleading
479: corrections~\cite{NLLFL,CC}. Though the strict \LLx, \NLLx hierarchy
480: is
481: ill-behaved, the inclusion of renormalisation group effects tends to
482: stabilise this hierarchy (e.g.~\cite{CCSSkernel,ABF2003}). As a
483: result one obtains the usual, expected behaviour of a splitting
484: function that increases as a power of $x$ at small $x$.
485:
486: A simple estimate of the $x$ value for which this increase occurs can
487: be obtained in the approximation of a frozen coupling using the
488: quadratic expansion of the effective BFKL characteristic function
489: \begin{equation}
490: \label{eq:quadchi}
491: \asb \chi_{\eff}(\gamma,\asb) = \oms(\asb)(1 + D(\asb)(\gamma -
492: \gamma_m)^2)\,,
493: \end{equation}
494: where $\oms(\as)$ is the value of $\as\chi$ at its minimum, $\gamma =
495: \gamma_m$, and $D(\as)$ is related to the second derivative of $\chi$
496: (see figures~1 and 3 of~\cite{CCSSkernel}).
497:
498: This leads to the well-known square-root branch-point for the
499: anomalous dimension,
500: \begin{equation}
501: \label{eq:branchpoint}
502: \gamma = \gamma_m + \sqrt{\frac{\om - \oms}{D\oms}}\,,
503: \end{equation}
504: and to the representation
505: \begin{equation}
506: \label{eq:branchrep}
507: xP_{gg}(x) \simeq \int^{\oms(\asb)} \frac{d\om}{\pi} \sqrt{\frac{\oms
508: - \om}{D\oms}} x^{-\om} \simeq \frac{x^{-\oms}}{
509: 2\sqrt{\pi \oms D}\, \ln^{3/2} 1/x}\,,
510: \end{equation}
511: for the splitting function.
512:
513: It is amusing to note that the above estimate shows a dip at
514: \begin{equation}
515: \label{eq:omsdip}
516: \oms(\asb) \ln \frac1x = \frac{3}{2}\,,
517: \end{equation}
518: due to the logarithmic prefactor. Of course the actual cut structure
519: of the anomalous dimension is much more complicated, showing a variety
520: of subleading branch cuts, generally at complex $\om$
521: values~\cite{EHW,BLUMVOGT}, which are needed to match the small-$x$
522: representation (\ref{eq:branchrep}) to perturbation theory for small
523: $\as \ln 1/x$. For this reason the dip structure (\ref{eq:omsdip}),
524: based on the moderate-$x$ behaviour of (\ref{eq:branchrep}) is not
525: always to be taken seriously.\footnote{For example, as we have
526: mentioned earlier, the fixed-coupling \LLx splitting function has no
527: dip at all. It is interesting also to note that LL evolution with
528: (subleading)
529: running coupling corrections does have a dip \cite{THORNE,CCS00} --- its
530: small-$\as$ properties are different from those of the full \NLLx
531: dip, because it is due to an interplay between terms $\as^4\ln^n1/x$
532: ($1\le n\le3$) and so, in the limit of small $\as$ occurs for $\ln
533: 1/x$ of order $1$.
534: %
535: A related running-coupling LLx dip has been obtained in
536: \cite{ABF2001,ABF2003}, though the different scale of the running
537: coupling and the use of the Airy extrapolation mean that it has
538: different formal small-$\asb$ properties from \cite{THORNE,CCS00}.}
539: %
540:
541: However, in our resummed calculation, the existence of the dip relies
542: on the negative $\ln 1/x$-slope of the splitting function which is
543: pretty well represented by the $\sqrt{\as}$-expansion, as noticed
544: before. Furthermore, for $\oms \ln 1/x \gtrsim 3/2$,
545: eq.~(\ref{eq:branchrep}) is a reasonable representation of the
546: splitting function and in cases --- as ours --- in which there is a
547: dip, we can take eq.~(\ref{eq:omsdip}) as an
548: \emph{upper bound} on its position.
549:
550:
551: In the running-coupling case it is to be kept in mind that the cut is
552: actually broken up into a series of poles, the leading one being at a
553: position $\omc(\as)$ which lies somewhat below $\oms(\as)$ (see figure
554: 18 of~\cite{CCSSkernel}) because of running coupling effects.
555: Nevertheless, as long as $x$ is not too
556: small, the inverse Mellin transform (\ref{eq:branchrep}) does not
557: resolve the difference between a cut and series of poles.
558:
559: Therefore, by joining the $\sqrt{\as}$-expansion with the
560: cut-representation arguments, we are led to believe that the
561: perturbative and resummed regions can be matched by the inequality
562: \begin{equation}
563: \label{eq:ineq}
564: \ln \frac1{x_{\min}} \simeq \frac{c_1}{\sqrt{\asb}} + c_2 \;\lesssim\;
565: \frac{3}{2\omc(\asb)}\,,
566: \end{equation}
567: where $c_1$ and $c_2$ are provided by eq.~(\ref{eq:xminNL}), and we
568: have replaced $\oms$ with $\omc \lesssim \oms$.
569: %
570: Since the right-hand expression goes
571: as $1/\asb$, this equation provides a transition point in $\asb$, below
572: which one should use the perturbative (double-logarithmic)
573: representation described before, and above which one should use the
574: full resummed behaviour.
575:
576: This is confirmed by the moderate $\asb$ region of
577: figure~\ref{fig:dipprop}a, where one sees a clear bend in the
578: behaviour of $\ln 1/x_{\min}$ when $3/2\omc$
579: becomes of the same order
580: as the perturbative representation, eq.~(\ref{eq:xminNL}), with the
581: measured $\ln 1/x_{\min}$ remaining consistently below $3/2\omc$.
582:
583:
584: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
585: \section{Conclusions}
586: \label{sec:conclusion}
587:
588: The arguments provided in this letter go some way towards explaining
589: the features of the dip for a range of $\as$ values, both in terms of
590: a perturbative series in powers of $\sqrt{\as}$ for small $\as$, and
591: in terms of a resummed upper bound of the dip position, $\sim
592: 3/(2\omc)$, for moderate values of $\as$.
593:
594: It is the moderate-$\as$ region that remains the least well
595: understood, the matching of the small-$x$ increase to the initial
596: decrease being a quite non-trivial problem. For example the simple
597: resummed treatment given above is subject to additional
598: running-coupling effects (e.g.\ difference between $\omc$ and $\oms$)
599: which may contribute further displacement of the dip and which have
600: not been considered here. Nevertheless, the arguments given so far
601: show that the dip does exist, as a moderately small-$x$ phenomenon,
602: under the simple condition that the small-$x$ part of $xP_{gg}(x)$ has
603: initially a negative $\ln 1/x$ slope, as is the case starting at NNLO.
604:
605: An important phenomenological point that remains to be made concerns
606: the validity of fixed-order expansions of the splitting functions.
607: From our analysis of the dip properties, it is clear that for $\as
608: \gtrsim 0.05$ one starts to see a breakdown of the perturbative
609: expansion. Despite this fact one notes a remarkable property of
610: figure~\ref{fig:pgg}, namely that the pure NNLO expansion of the
611: splitting function coincides rather well with the resummed result up
612: to the position of the dip minimum --- considerably beyond the point
613: in $x$ where one would have naively expected the $\as^4$ DGLAP terms to
614: completely change the behaviour of the splitting function. This holds
615: for a wide range of $\as$.
616:
617: We cannot claim to have fully understood
618: this observation, however it does suggest that it may in general be
619: safe to use the fixed order, NNLO, $P_{gg}(x)$ splitting function down
620: to $x$ values corresponding to the dip position, and only beyond this
621: point will small-$x$ resummation be strictly necessary. Thus one can
622: use the `measured' dip position, the solid curve of
623: figure~\ref{fig:dipprop}a, as an estimate of the limit of validity
624: of the NNLO expansion at small $x$. Considering this in the context
625: of the available $F_2$ data, one sees that the limit cuts through the
626: HERA kinematical range, suggesting that while much of the data will be
627: in the region that is `safe' for an NNLO analysis, there is also a
628: substantial region at lower $x$ and $Q^2$ in which resummation will be
629: needed.
630:
631:
632: \section*{Acknowledgments}
633:
634: We wish to thank Guido Altarelli and Stefano Forte for several
635: stimulating discussions on the subject of small-$x$ splitting
636: functions.
637:
638: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
639: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
640:
641: \bibitem{DGLAP}
642: V.N.~Gribov and L.N.~Lipatov, Sov.\ J.\ Nucl.\ Phys. {\bf 15} (1972) 438;\\
643: %``Deep Inelastic E P Scattering In Perturbation Theory,''
644: %[Sov.\ J.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf 15} (1972) 438].
645: %%CITATION = YAFIA,15,781;%%
646: G.~Altarelli and G.~Parisi, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 126} (1977) 298;\\
647: %``Asymptotic Freedom In Parton Language,''
648: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B126,298;%%
649: Yu.L.~Dokshitzer, Sov.\ Phys.\ JETP {\bf 46} (1977) 641.
650: %``Calculation Of The Structure Functions For Deep Inelastic Scattering And E+ E- Annihilation By Perturbation Theory In Quantum Chromodynamics.
651: %[Zh.\ Eksp.\ Teor.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 73} (1977) 1216].
652: %%CITATION = SPHJA,46,641;%%
653:
654: \bibitem{NLODGLAP1}
655: G.~Curci, W.~Furmanski and R.~Petronzio,
656: %``Evolution Of Parton Densities Beyond Leading Order: The Nonsinglet Case,''
657: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 175} (1980) 27;\\
658: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B175,27;%%
659: W.~Furmanski and R.~Petronzio,
660: %``Singlet Parton Densities Beyond Leading Order,''
661: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 97} (1980) 437.
662: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B97,437;%%
663:
664: \bibitem{NLODGLAP2}
665: E.~G.~Floratos, D.~A.~Ross and C.~T.~Sachrajda,
666: %``Higher Order Effects In Asymptotically Free Gauge Theories: The Anomalous Dimensions Of Wilson Operators,''
667: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 129} (1977) 66
668: [Erratum-ibid.\ B {\bf 139} (1978) 545];\\
669: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B129,66;%%
670: E.~G.~Floratos, D.~A.~Ross and C.~T.~Sachrajda,
671: %``Higher Order Effects In Asymptotically Free Gauge Theories. 2. Flavor Singlet Wilson Operators And Coefficient Functions,''
672: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 152} (1979) 493;\\
673: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B152,493;%%
674: A.~Gonzalez-Arroyo, C.~Lopez and F.~J.~Yndurain,
675: %``Second Order Contributions To The Structure Functions In Deep Inelastic Scattering. I. Theoretical Calculations,''
676: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 153} (1979) 161;\\
677: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B153,161;%%
678: E.~G.~Floratos, C.~Kounnas and R.~Lacaze,
679: %``Higher Order QCD Effects In Inclusive Annihilation And Deep Inelastic Scattering,''
680: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 192} (1981) 417.
681: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B192,417;%%
682:
683: \bibitem{NS3loop}
684: S.~Moch, J.~A.~M.~Vermaseren and A.~Vogt,
685: %``Non-singlet structure functions at three loops: Fermionic contributions,''
686: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 646} (2002) 181.
687: %[hep-ph/0209100].
688: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0209100;%%
689:
690: \bibitem{MRSTNLO}
691: A.~D.~Martin, R.~G.~Roberts, W.~J.~Stirling and R.~S.~Thorne,
692: %``MRST2001: Partons and alpha(s) from precise deep inelastic scattering and Tevatron jet data,''
693: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 23} (2002) 73.
694: %[hep-ph/0110215].
695: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0110215;%%
696:
697: \bibitem{CTEQNLO}
698: J.~Pumplin, D.~R.~Stump, J.~Huston, H.~L.~Lai, P.~Nadolsky and W.~K.~Tung,
699: %``New generation of parton distributions with uncertainties from global QCD analysis,''
700: JHEP {\bf 0207} (2002) 012.
701: %[hep-ph/0201195].
702: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0201195;%%
703:
704: \bibitem{BFKL}
705: L.N.~Lipatov, Sov.\ J.\ Nucl.\ Phys. {\bf 23} (1976) 338;\\
706: %``Reggeization Of The Vector Meson And The Vacuum Singularity In Nonabelian Gauge Theories,''
707: %[Yad.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 23} (1976) 642].
708: %%CITATION = SJNCA,23,338;%%
709: E.A.~Kuraev, L.N.~Lipatov and V.S.~Fadin, Sov.\ Phys.\ JETP {\bf 45} (1977) 199;\\
710: %``The Pomeranchuk Singularity In Nonabelian Gauge Theories,''
711: %[Zh.\ Eksp.\ Teor.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 72} (1977) 377].
712: %%CITATION = SPHJA,45,199;%%
713: I.I.~Balitsky and L.N.~Lipatov, Sov.\ J.\ Nucl.\ Phys. {\bf 28} (1978) 822;\\
714: %``The Pomeranchuk Singularity In Quantum Chromodynamics,''
715: %[Yad.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 28} (1978) 1597].
716: %%CITATION = SJNCA,28,822;%%
717: L.N.~Lipatov, Sov.\ Phys.\ JETP {\bf 63} (1986) 904.
718: %``The Bare Pomeron In Quantum Chromodynamics,''
719: %[Zh.\ Eksp.\ Teor.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 90} (1986) 1536].
720: %%CITATION = SPHJA,63,904;%%
721:
722: \bibitem{JKCOL} J.~Kwieci\'nski, Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 29} (1985) 561;\\
723: %``The Gluon Distributions In The Small X Region Beyond The Leading Order,''
724: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C29,561;%%
725: J.C.~Collins and J.~Kwieci\'nski Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 316} (1989) 307.
726: %``Bare Pomeron In Perturbative QCD And Small X Behavior Of Gluon Distributions,''
727: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B316,307;%%
728:
729: \bibitem{MRSTNNLOUncert}
730: A.~D.~Martin, R.~G.~Roberts, W.~J.~Stirling and R.~S.~Thorne,
731: %``Uncertainties of predictions from parton distributions. II: Theoretical errors,''
732: hep-ph/0308087.
733: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0308087;%%
734:
735: \bibitem{HERA}
736: ZEUS Collab., S.~Chekanov et al., Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 21} (2001) 443;\\
737: %``Measurement of the neutral current cross section and F2 structure function for deep inelastic e+ p scattering at HERA,''
738: %[arXiv:hep-ex/0105090].
739: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0105090;%%
740: H1 Collab., C.~Adloff et al., Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 21} (2001) 33.
741: %``Deep-inelastic inclusive e p scattering at low x and a determination of alpha(s),''
742: %[arXiv:hep-ex/0012053].
743: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0012053;%%
744:
745: % ZEUS Collab., M.~Derrick et al., Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 316} (1993) 412;\\
746: %``Measurement of the proton structure function F2 in e p scattering at HERA,''
747: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B316,412;%%
748: % ZEUS Collab., M.~Derrick et al., Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 65} (1995) 379;\\
749: %``Measurement of the proton structure function F2 from the 1993 HERA data,''
750: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C65,379;%%
751: % ZEUS Collab., M.~Derrick et al., Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 72} (1996) 399;\\
752: %``Measurement of the F2 structure function in deep inelastic e+ p scattering using 1994 data from the ZEUS detector at HERA,''
753: %[arXiv:hep-ex/9607002].
754: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9607002;%%
755: % H1 Collab., I.~Abt et al., Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 407} (1993) 515;\\
756: %``Measurement of the proton structure function F2 (x, Q**2) in the low x region at HERA,''
757: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B407,515;%%
758: % H1 Collab., S.~Aid et al., Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 470} (1996) 3;\\
759: %``A Measurement and QCD Analysis of the Proton Structure Function $F_2(x,Q~2)$ at HERA,''
760: %[arXiv:hep-ex/9603004].
761: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9603004;%%
762: % H1 Collab., C.~Adloff et al., Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 497} (1997) 3;\\
763: %``A measurement of the proton structure function F2(x,Q**2) at low x and low Q**2 at HERA,''
764: %[arXiv:hep-ex/9703012].
765: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9703012;%%
766: % H1 Collab., C.~Adloff et al., Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 13} (2000) 609;\\
767: %``Measurement of neutral and charged current cross-sections in positron proton collisions at large momentum transfer,''
768: %[arXiv:hep-ex/9908059].
769: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9908059;%%
770:
771: \bibitem{EHW}
772: R.~K.~Ellis, F.~Hautmann and B.~R.~Webber,
773: %``QCD scaling violation at small x,''
774: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 348} (1995) 582.
775: %[hep-ph/9501307].
776: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9501307;%%
777:
778: \bibitem{BF95}
779: R.~D.~Ball and S.~Forte,
780: %``Summation of leading logarithms at small x,''
781: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 351} (1995) 313.
782: %[hep-ph/9501231].
783: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9501231;%%
784:
785: \bibitem{NLLFL}
786: V.S.~Fadin and L.N.~Lipatov, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 429} (1998) 127.
787: %``BFKL pomeron in the next-to-leading approximation,''
788: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9802290].
789: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9802290;%%
790:
791: \bibitem{NLLCC}
792: G.~Camici and M.~Ciafaloni, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 412} (1997) 396,
793: [Erratum-ibid.\ B {\bf 417} (1997) 390];
794: %``Irreducible part of the next-to-leading BFKL kernel,''
795: %[Erratum-ibid.\ B {\bf 417} (1998) 390]
796: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9707390].
797: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9707390;%%
798: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 430} (1998) 349.
799: %``Energy scale(s) and next-to-leading BFKL equation,''
800: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9803389].
801: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9803389;%%
802:
803: \bibitem{RGvert}
804: V.~S.~Fadin and L.~N.~Lipatov,
805: JETP Lett.\ {\bf 49} (1989) 352
806: [Yad.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 50} (1989\ SJNCA,50,712.1989) 1141];
807: %``High-Energy Production Of Gluons In A Quasimultiregge Kinematics,''
808: %%CITATION = JTPLA,49,352;%%
809: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 406} (1993) 259;
810: %``Radiative corrections to QCD scattering amplitudes in a multi - Regge
811: %kinematics,''
812: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B406,259;%%
813: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 477} (1996) 767.\\
814: %``Next-to-leading Corrections to the BFKL Equation From the Gluon and Quark
815: %Production,''
816: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9602287].
817: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9602287;%%
818: V.~S.~Fadin, R.~Fiore and A.~Quartarolo,
819: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 50} (1994) 2265;
820: %``Radiative corrections to quark quark reggeon vertex in QCD,''
821: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9310252];
822: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9310252;%%
823: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 50} (1994) 5893.\\
824: %``Quark contribution to the reggeon - reggeon - gluon vertex in QCD,''
825: %[arXiv:hep-th/9405127].
826: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9405127;%%
827: V.~S.~Fadin, R.~Fiore and M.~I.~Kotsky,
828: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 359} (1995) 181;
829: %``Gluon Reggeization In QCD In The Next-To-Leading Order,''
830: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B359,181;%%
831: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 387} (1996) 593;
832: %``Gluon Regge trajectory in the two-loop approximation,''
833: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9605357];
834: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9605357;%%
835: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 389} (1996) 737.\\
836: %``Gribov's theorem on soft emission and the Reggeon-Reggeon-gluon vertex at
837: %small transverse momentum,''
838: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9608229].
839: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9608229;%%
840: V.~S.~Fadin, M.~I.~Kotsky and L.~N.~Lipatov,
841: BUDKER-INP-1996-92, hep-ph/9704267.\\
842: %``Gluon pair production in the quasi-multi-Regge kinematics,''
843: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9704267;%%
844: V.~Del Duca,
845: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 54} (1996) 989;
846: %``Real next-to-leading corrections to the multigluon amplitudes in the
847: %helicity formalism,''
848: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9601211];
849: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9601211;%%
850: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 54} (1996) 4474.
851: %``Quark-antiquark contribution to the multigluon amplitudes in the helicity
852: %formalism,''
853: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9604250].
854: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9604250;%%
855:
856: \bibitem{QQvertCC}
857: S.~Catani, M.~Ciafaloni and F.~Hautmann,
858: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 242} (1990) 97;
859: %``Gluon Contributions To Small X Heavy Flavor Production,''
860: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B242,97;%%
861: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 366} (1991) 135.\\
862: %``High-Energy Factorization And Small X Heavy Flavor Production,''
863: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B366,135;%%
864: G.~Camici and M.~Ciafaloni, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 386} (1996) 341;
865: %``Non-abelian q anti-q contributions to small-x anomalous dimensions,''
866: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9606427].
867: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9606427;%%
868: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 496} (1997) 305
869: [Erratum-ibid.\ B {\bf 607} (2001) 431].
870: %``k-factorization and small-x anomalous dimensions,''
871: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9701303].
872: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9701303;%%
873:
874: \bibitem{QQvertFFFK}
875: V.S.~Fadin, R.~Fiore, A.~Flachi and M.I.~Kotsky,
876: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 422} (1998) 287.
877: %``Quark-antiquark contribution to the BFKL kernel,''
878: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9711427].
879: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9711427;%%
880:
881: \bibitem{BLUMVOGT}
882: J.~Bl\"umlein and A.~Vogt, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 57} (1998) 1;
883: %``The evolution of unpolarized singlet structure functions at small x,''
884: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9712546].
885: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9712546;%%
886: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58} (1998) 014020;\\
887: %``The resummed gluon anomalous dimension and structure functions at small x,''
888: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9707488].
889: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9707488;%%
890: J.~Bl\"umlein, V.~Ravindran and W.L.~van Neerven, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58} (1998) 091502.
891: %``On the gluon Regge trajectory in O(alpha(s)**2),''
892: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9806357].
893: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9806357;%%
894:
895: \bibitem{ROSS98} D.A.~Ross, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 431} (1998) 161.
896: %``The effect of higher order corrections to the BFKL equation on the perturbative pomeron,''
897: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9804332].
898: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9804332;%%
899:
900: \bibitem{Salam1998} G.P.~Salam, JHEP {\bf 9807} (1998) 019.
901: %``A resummation of large sub-leading corrections at small x,''
902: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9806482].
903: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9806482;%%
904:
905: \bibitem{CC} M.~Ciafaloni and D.~Colferai, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 452} (1999) 372.
906: %``The BFKL equation at next-to-leading level and beyond,''
907: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9812366].
908: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9812366;%%
909:
910: \bibitem{CCS1} M.~Ciafaloni, D.~Colferai and G.P.~Salam,
911: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60} (1999) 114036.
912: %``Renormalization group improved small-x equation,''
913: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9905566].
914: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9905566;%%
915:
916: \bibitem{CCSSkernel}
917: M.~Ciafaloni, D.~Colferai, G.P.~Salam and A.M.~Sta\'sto,
918: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 576} (2003) 143;
919: % [hep-ph/0305254].
920: %``Extending QCD perturbation theory to higher energies,''
921: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0305254;%%
922: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68} (2003) 114003.
923: %``Renormalisation group improved small-x Green's function,''
924: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0307188].
925: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0307188;%%
926:
927: \bibitem{SCHMIDT}
928: C.R.~Schmidt, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60} (1999) 074003; MSUHEP-90416,
929: hep-ph/9904368.
930: %``Rapidity-separation dependence and the large next-to-leading corrections to the BFKL equation,''
931: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9901397].
932: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9901397;%%
933: %``Status of the BFKL resummation program,''
934: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9904368;%%
935:
936: \bibitem{FRSV}
937: J.~R.~Forshaw, D.~A.~Ross and A.~Sabio Vera,
938: %``Rapidity veto effects in the NLO BFKL equation,''
939: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 455} (1999) 273.
940: %[hep-ph/9903390].
941: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9903390;%%
942:
943: \bibitem{THORNE} R.S.~Thorne, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64} (2001) 074005; Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 474} (2000) 372.
944: %``The running coupling BFKL anomalous dimensions and splitting functions,''
945: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0103210].
946: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0103210;%%
947: %``Explicit calculation of the running coupling BFKL anomalous dimension,''
948: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9912284].
949: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9912284;%%
950:
951: \bibitem{ABF2000}
952: G.~Altarelli, R.D.~Ball and S.~Forte, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 575} (2000) 313;
953: %``Resummation of singlet parton evolution at small x,''
954: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9911273].
955: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9911273;%%
956: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 599} (2001) 383.
957: %``Small-x resummation and HERA structure function data,''
958: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0011270].
959: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0011270;%%
960:
961: \bibitem{ABF2001} G.~Altarelli, R.D.~Ball and S.~Forte,
962: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 621} (2002) 359.
963: %``Factorization and resummation of small x scaling violations with running coupling,''
964: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0109178].
965: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0109178;%%
966:
967: \bibitem{ABF2003}
968: G.~Altarelli, R.~D.~Ball and S.~Forte,
969: %``An anomalous dimension for small x evolution,''
970: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 674} (2003) 459
971: %hep-ph/0306156.
972: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0306156;%%
973:
974: \bibitem{ABFcomparison}
975: G.~Altarelli, R.~D.~Ball and S.~Forte,
976: %``An improved splitting function for small x evolution,''
977: hep-ph/0310016.
978: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0310016;%%
979:
980: \bibitem{Q0}
981: S.~Catani, M.~Ciafaloni and F.~Hautmann,
982: %``High-energy factorization in QCD and minimal subtraction scheme,''
983: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 307} (1993) 147;\\
984: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B307,147;%%
985: M.~Ciafaloni, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 356} (1995) 74;\\
986: %``k(T) factorization versus renormalization group: A Small x consistency argument,''
987: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9507307].
988: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9507307;%%
989: %k_t factorization versus renormalization group: a small x consistency argument
990: %hep-ph/9507307
991: G.~Camici and M.~Ciafaloni, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 496} (1997) 305;
992: %``k-factorization and small-x anomalous dimensions,''
993: %[Erratum-ibid.\ B {\bf 607} (2001) 431]
994: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9701303].
995: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9701303;%%
996: Erratum-ibid.\ B {\bf 607} (2001) 431.
997:
998: \bibitem{vNV}
999: W.~L.~van Neerven and A.~Vogt,
1000: %``Improved approximations for the three-loop splitting functions in QCD,''
1001: %Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 490} (2000) 111
1002: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 490} (2000) 111;
1003: %``Improved approximations for the three-loop splitting functions in QCD,''
1004: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0007362].
1005: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0007362;%%
1006: %[hep-ph/0007362].
1007: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0007362;%%
1008: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 588} (2000) 345.
1009: %``NNLO evolution of deep-inelastic structure functions: The singlet case,''
1010: %[hep-ph/0006154].
1011: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0006154;%%
1012:
1013: \bibitem{CCS00}
1014: M.~Ciafaloni, D.~Colferai and G.~P.~Salam,
1015: %``On factorization at small x,''
1016: JHEP {\bf 0007} (2000) 054.
1017: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0007240].
1018: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0007240;%%
1019:
1020: \end{thebibliography}
1021:
1022: \end{document}
1023:
1024: