1: \documentclass[11pt,final]{article}
2: \pagestyle{headings}
3:
4: \usepackage{amsmath, amssymb, amsthm}
5: \usepackage{subfigure}
6: \usepackage{graphicx}
7:
8: \title{Small-$Q^2$ extension of DGLAP-constrained Regge residues}
9: \author{G. Soyez\footnote{e-mail: g.soyez@ulg.ac.be}}
10:
11: \newcommand{\xgrv}{x_{\text{Regge}}}
12: \newcommand{\qmin}{Q^2_0}
13:
14: \begin{document}
15:
16: \maketitle
17:
18: \begin{abstract}
19: In a previous paper, we have shown that it was possible to use the DGLAP evolution equation to constrain the high-$Q^2$ ($Q^2 \ge 10$ GeV$^2$) behaviour of the residues of a high-energy Regge model, and we applied the developed method to the triple-pole pomeron model. We show here that one can obtain a description of the low-$Q^2$ $\gamma^{(*)} p$ data matching the high-$Q^2$ results at $Q^2 = 10$ GeV$^2$.
20: \end{abstract}
21:
22: We know that one can use Regge theory \cite{books} to describe high-energy hadronic interactions. Particularly, using a triple-pole pomeron model \cite{Cudell:2001ii,Desgrolard:2001bu,Cudell:2002xe}, one can reproduce the hadronic total cross-sections, the $\gamma p$ and $\gamma\gamma$ cross-sections, and also the proton and photon structure functions $F_2^p$ and $F_2^\gamma$. In the latter case, one must point out that Regge theory is applied at all values of $Q^2$.
23:
24: On the other hand, it is well known that the high-$Q^2$ behaviour of the proton structure function can be reproduced using the DGLAP evolution equation \cite{DGLAP}. Therefore, we would like to find a model compatible both with Regge theory and with DGLAP evolution at high $Q^2$. We have shown \cite{Soyez:2003sr} that it is possible to extract the behaviour of the triple-pole pomeron residues at high $Q^2$ from DGLAP evolution. In such an analysis, we need information not only on $F_2$ but also on parton distributions. One easily shows that the minimal number of quark distributions needed to reproduce $F_2^p$ is 2: one flavour-non-singlet distribution
25: \[
26: T(x,Q^2) = x\left[(u^++c^++t^+)-(d^++s^++b^+)\right],
27: \]
28: with $q^+ = q+\bar{q}$, evolving alone with $xP_{qq}$ as splitting function, and one flavour-singlet distribution
29: \[
30: \Sigma(x,Q^2) = x\left[(u^++c^++t^+)+(d^++s^++b^+)\right],
31: \]
32: coupled with the gluon distribution $xg(x,Q^2)$ and evolving with the full splitting matrix. Before going into the main subject of this paper, we shall summarise the techniques developed in this previour paper \cite{Soyez:2003sr} and show how we can extend the results down to $Q^2=0$.
33:
34: First of all, given that $F_2$ can be parametrised at small $x$ by a $\log^2(1/x)$ term, we have parametrised the quark content of the proton in the most natural way {\em i.e.} using a triple-pole pomeron term and an $f/a_2$ reggeon terms. After a few manipulations, we end up with the following functions
35: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:initparam}
36: T(x,Q_0^2) & = & d_T^* x^\eta (1-x)^{b_2},\nonumber\\
37: \Sigma(x,Q_0^2) & = & a_\Sigma \log^2(1/x) + b_\Sigma \log(1/x) + c_\Sigma^* (1-x)^{b_1}\nonumber\\
38: & + & d_\Sigma x^\eta(1-x)^{b_2}\nonumber\\
39: xg(x,Q_0^2) & = & a_G \log^2(1/x) + b_G \log(1/x) + c_G^* (1-x)^{b_1}.
40: \end{eqnarray}
41: Since Regge theory does not extend up to $x=1$, we used the GRV parametrisation for $x\ge \xgrv = 0.15$ and imposed that our distributions match GRV's at $x=\xgrv$. This requirement constrains the parameters marked with a superscript $^*$ in eq. \eqref{eq:initparam}. Thus, the 7 parameters $a_\Sigma$, $b_\Sigma$, $d_\Sigma$, $a_G$, $b_G$, $b_1$ and $b_2$ need to be extracted from DGLAP evolution.
42:
43: Since DGLAP evolution generates an essential singularity in the complex-$j$ plane at $j=1$, the only place where we can use the Regge model is in the initial distributions at $Q^2 = Q_0^2$. In such a case, we shall not worry about the presence of an essential singularity for $Q^2\neq Q_0^2$ and consider the result of DGLAP evolution as a numerical approximation to a triple-pole pomeron. One can therefore extract the residues of the Regge model at high $Q^2$ using the following method:
44: \begin{enumerate}
45: \item\label{s21} choose an initial scale $Q_0^2$,
46: \item\label{s22} choose a value for the parameters in the initial distribution,
47: \item\label{s23} compute the parton distributions for $Q_0^2 \le Q^2 \le Q_{\text{max}}^2$ using forward DGLAP evolution and for $Q_{\text{min}}^2 \le Q^2 \le Q_0^2$ using backward DGLAP evolution,
48: \item\label{s24} repeat \ref{s22} and \ref{s23} until the value of the parameters reproducing the $F_2$ data for $Q^2>Q_{\text{min}}^2$ and $x\le \xgrv$ is found.
49: \item This gives the residues at the scale $Q_0^2$ and steps \ref{s21} to \ref{s24} are repeated in order to obtain the residues at all $Q^2$ values.
50: \end{enumerate}
51:
52: We have applied this method to the parametrisation \eqref{eq:initparam} within the domain
53: \begin{equation}\label{eq:domain}
54: \begin{cases}
55: 10 \le Q^2 \le 1000\:\text{GeV}^2, \\
56: \cos(\theta_t) = \frac{\sqrt{Q^2}}{2xm_p} \ge \frac{49\:\text{GeV}^2}{2m_p^2},
57: \end{cases}
58: \end{equation}
59: ensuring that both Regge theory and DGLAP evolution can be applied, and required\footnote{This limit is only effective at large $Q^2$.} $x<0.15$. Using the residues of the triple-pole pomeron obtained in this way, we have a description of $F_2^p$ for $Q^2\ge 10$ GeV$^2$ with a $\chi^2/nop$ of 1.02 for 560 experimental points.
60:
61: Since the method explained here gives us the Regge residues at large scales, one may ask if it is possible to extend the results down to $Q^2=0$. The main problem here is that, instead of using $x$ and $Q^2$, we must use $\nu$ and $Q^2$ if we want to obtain a relevant expression for the total cross section. Of course, we shall only extend the $F_2^p$ predictions instead of the parton distributions $T$ and $\Sigma$.
62:
63: As a starting point, we shall not consider the powers of $(1-x)$ since, at low $Q^2$, there are no point inside the Regge domain beyond $x=0.003$, which means that it is just a correction of a few percents. At low $Q^2$, we require that $F_2$ has the same form as used in \cite{Cudell:2001ii}
64: \begin{equation}
65: F_2(\nu, Q^2) = \frac{Q^2}{4\pi^2\alpha_e} \left\{A(Q^2)\left[\log(2\nu)-B(Q^2)\right]^2+C(Q^2)+D(Q^2)(2\nu)^{-\eta}\right\}.
66: \end{equation}
67: The total $\gamma p$ cross-section is then
68: \begin{equation}
69: \sigma_{\gamma p} = A(0)\left[\log(s)-B(0)\right]^2+C(0)+D(0)s^{-\eta}.
70: \end{equation}
71: At $Q^2=Q_0^2$, the form factors $A$, $B$, $C$ and $D$ are related to the parametrisation \eqref{eq:initparam} by the relations
72: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:link}
73: A(\qmin) & = & \frac{4\pi^2\alpha_e}{\qmin}a_0,\nonumber \\
74: B(\qmin) & = & \log(\qmin)-\frac{b_0}{2a_0},\nonumber\\[-3mm]
75: &&\\[-3mm]
76: C(\qmin) & = & \frac{4\pi^2\alpha_e}{\qmin}\left(c_0-\frac{b_0^2}{4a_0}\right),\nonumber\\
77: D(\qmin) & = & \frac{4\pi^2\alpha_e}{\qmin}d_0 (\qmin)^\eta.\nonumber
78: \end{eqnarray}
79: where the subscript $_0$ to refer to the form factors obtained at $Q^2=Q_0^2$ from DGLAP evolution.
80:
81: At small $Q^2$, the unknown functions $A$, $B$, $C$ and $D(Q^2)$ are parametrised in the same way as in \cite{Cudell:2001ii}
82: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:param}
83: A(Q^2) & = & A_a\left(\frac{Q_a^2}{Q^2+Q_a^2}\right)^{\varepsilon_a},\nonumber\\
84: B(Q^2) & = & A_b\left(\frac{Q^2}{Q^2+Q_b^2}\right)^{\varepsilon_b}+A_b',\nonumber\\[-3mm]
85: &&\\[-3mm]
86: C(Q^2) & = & A_c\left(\frac{Q_c^2}{Q^2+Q_c^2}\right)^{\varepsilon_c},\nonumber\\
87: D(Q^2) & = & A_d\left(\frac{Q_d^2}{Q^2+Q_d^2}\right)^{\varepsilon_d}.\nonumber
88: \end{eqnarray}
89:
90: If we use the relations \eqref{eq:link} to fix the parameters $A_a$, $A_b'$, $A_c$ and $A_d$ in \eqref{eq:param}, we find the final form of the small-$Q^2$ form factors:
91: \begin{eqnarray}
92: A(Q^2) & = & \frac{4\pi^2\alpha_e}{\qmin} a_0 \left(\frac{\qmin+Q^2}{Q_a^2+Q^2}\right)^{\varepsilon_a},\nonumber\\
93: B(Q^2) & = & \log(\qmin) -\frac{b_0}{2a_0}+A_b\left\lbrack\left(\frac{Q^2}{Q_b^2+Q^2}\right)^{\varepsilon_b}-\left(\frac{\qmin}{Q_b^2+\qmin}\right)^{\varepsilon_b}\right\rbrack,\nonumber\\[-3mm]
94: &&\\[-3mm]
95: C(Q^2) & = & \frac{4\pi^2\alpha_e}{\qmin} \left(c_0-\frac{b_0^2}{4a_0}\right) \left(\frac{\qmin+Q^2}{Q_c^2+Q^2}\right)^{\varepsilon_c},\nonumber\\
96: D(Q^2) & = & \frac{4\pi^2\alpha_e}{\qmin} d_0 (\qmin)^\eta \left(\frac{\qmin+Q^2}{Q_d^2+Q^2}\right)^{\varepsilon_d}.\nonumber
97: \end{eqnarray}
98:
99: \begin{table}
100: \begin{center}
101: \begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|}
102: \hline
103: Parameter & value & error \\
104: \hline
105: \hline
106: $A_b$ & 69.151 & 0.055 \\
107: \hline
108: $Q^2_a$ & 25.099 & 0.088 \\
109: \hline
110: $Q^2_b$ & 4.943 & 0.086 \\
111: \hline
112: $Q^2_c$ & 0.002468 & 0.000042 \\
113: \hline
114: $Q^2_d$ & 0.01292 & 0.00074 \\
115: \hline
116: $\varepsilon_a$ & 1.5745 & 0.0046 \\
117: \hline
118: $\varepsilon_b$ & 0.08370 & 0.00052 \\
119: \hline
120: $\varepsilon_c$ & 0.92266 & 0.00019 \\
121: \hline
122: $\varepsilon_d$ & 0.3336 & 0.0029 \\
123: \hline
124: \end{tabular}
125: \end{center}
126: \caption{Values of the parameters for the low-$Q^2$ fit ($0\le Q^2\le \qmin$).}\label{tab:toq0}
127: \end{table}
128:
129: If we now want to reinsert the large-$x$ corrections, we need to multiply $c$ and $d$ by some power of $(1-x)$. This gives
130: \begin{eqnarray*}
131: \frac{4\pi^2\alpha_e}{Q^2} F_2(x, Q^2)
132: & = & A(Q^2)\log(1/x)\left\{\log(1/x)+2\left[\log(Q^2)-B(Q^2)\right]\right\}\\
133: & + & \left\{A(Q^2)\left[\log(Q^2)-B(Q^2)\right]^2+C(Q^2) \right\}(1-x)^{b_1}\\
134: & + & D(Q^2) \left(\frac{Q^2}{x}\right)^{-\eta}(1-x)^{b_2}.
135: \end{eqnarray*}
136:
137: These large-$x$ corrections do not modify the expression of the total cross section since, when $Q^2\to 0$
138: \[
139: 1-x = 1-\frac{2\nu}{Q^2} \to 1.
140: \]
141: Moreover, since the large-$x$ corrections are only a few percents effects, we shall keep the exponents $b_1$ and $b_2$ constant and equal to their value at $Q^2=Q_0^2$.
142:
143: \begin{figure}[!ht]
144: \begin{center}
145: \subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{form-a.eps}}
146: \subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{form-b.eps}}
147: \subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{form-c.eps}}
148: \subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{form-d.eps}}
149: \end{center}
150: \caption{Regge theory predictions for the form factors at small values of $Q^2$. The lines show the analytical curve for $0\le Q^2\le 10$ GeV$^2$ and the points are the results obtained in \cite{Soyez:2003sr} from DGLAP evolution.}\label{fig:toq0-form}
151: \end{figure}
152:
153: \begin{table}
154: \begin{center}
155: \begin{tabular}{|l||c|c|c|}
156: \hline
157: Experiment & $n$ & $\chi^2$ & $\chi^2/n$ \\
158: \hline
159: \hline
160: E665 & 69 & 59.811 & 0.867 \\
161: \hline
162: H1 & 99 & 104.924 & 1.060 \\
163: \hline
164: NMC & 37 & 28.392 & 0.767 \\
165: \hline
166: ZEUS & 216 & 201.790 & 0.934 \\
167: \hline
168: \hline
169: $F_2^p$ & 421 & 394.916 & 0.938 \\
170: \hline
171: $\sigma_
172: {\gamma p}$& 30 & 17.171 & 0.572 \\
173: \hline
174: \hline
175: Total & 451 & 412.086 & 0.914 \\
176: \hline
177: \end{tabular}
178: \end{center}
179: \caption{$\chi^2$ resulting from the small-$Q^2$ Regge fit. The results are given for all $F_2^p$ experiments and for the total cross-section.}\label{tab:toq0-chi2}
180: \end{table}
181:
182: Now, we may adjust the parameters in the form factors by fitting $F_2^p$ in the Regge domain
183: \begin{equation}\label{eq:domain2}
184: \begin{cases}
185: \nu \ge 49\:\text{GeV}^2,\\
186: \cos(\theta_t) = \frac{\sqrt{Q^2}}{2xm_p} \ge \frac{49\:\text{GeV}^2}{2m_p^2},\\
187: Q^2 \le 10\:\text{GeV}^2,
188: \end{cases}
189: \end{equation}
190: together with the total cross-section for $\sqrt{s}\ge 7$ GeV. The resulting parameters are presented in Table \ref{tab:toq0} and the form factor are plotted in Figure \ref{fig:toq0-form}. As we can see from Table \ref{tab:toq0-chi2} and from Figures \ref{fig:toq0-sig} and \ref{fig:toq0-f2}, this gives a very good extension in the soft region (see Table \ref{tab:toq0-chi2}).
191:
192: To conclude, we have seen that, using a triple-pole-pomeron model, one can obtain a description of the $\gamma^{(*)}p$ interactions at all values of $Q^2$ compatible with the DGLAP equation at large $Q^2$. It should be interesting, in the future, to test this method with other Regge models and to see if the results are compatible with the $t$-channel unitarity relations obtained in \cite{Cudell:2002ej} and if they can give useful information on how to link perturbative and non-perturbative QCD.
193:
194: \begin{figure}[ht]
195: \begin{center}
196: \includegraphics{sig.eps}
197: \end{center}
198: \caption{Fit for the total $\gamma p$ cross-section.}\label{fig:toq0-sig}
199: \end{figure}
200:
201: \begin{center}{\bf Acknowledgments}\end{center}
202: I would like to thanks J.-R. Cudell for useful discussions. This work is supported by the National Fund for Scientific Research (FNRS), Belgium.
203:
204: \begin{figure}[ht]
205: %\begin{flushleft}
206: \hspace{-2.0cm}\includegraphics{f2-low.ps}
207: %\end{flushleft}
208: \caption{Fit for the $F_2^p$ at low $Q^2$. Only the most populated $Q^2$ bins are shown.}\label{fig:toq0-f2}
209: \end{figure}
210:
211: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
212: % Regge Theory
213: \bibitem{books} The reader who wants a modern overview of Regge theory and diffraction can
214: read the books by S.~Donnachie, G.~Dosch, P.~Landshoff and O.~Nachtmann, \textit{Pomeron Phy
215: sics and QCD} (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002), and by V.~Barone and E.~Predazzi
216: , \textit{High-Energy Particle Diffraction} (Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 2002).
217: %\cite{Cudell:2001ii}
218: \bibitem{Cudell:2001ii}
219: J.~R.~Cudell and G.~Soyez,
220: %``Does F2 need a hard pomeron?,''
221: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 516} (2001) 77
222: [arXiv:hep-ph/0106307].
223: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0106307;%%
224:
225: %\cite{Desgrolard:2001bu}
226: \bibitem{Desgrolard:2001bu}
227: P.~Desgrolard and E.~Martynov,
228: %``Regge models of the proton structure function with and without hard pomeron: A comparative analysis,''
229: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 22} (2001) 479
230: [arXiv:hep-ph/0105277].
231: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0105277;%%
232:
233: %\cite{Cudell:2002xe}
234: \bibitem{Cudell:2002xe}
235: J.~R.~Cudell {\it et al.} [COMPETE Collaboration],
236: %``Benchmarks for the forward observables at RHIC, the Tevatron-run II and the LHC,''
237: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 89} (2002) 201801
238: [arXiv:hep-ph/0206172].
239: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0206172;%%
240:
241: \bibitem{DGLAP} V.N. Gribov and L.N. Lipatov, \textit{Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{15} (1972) 438.
242: G. Altarelli and G. Parisi, \textit{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{B126} (1977) 298.
243: Yu.L. Dokshitzer, \textit{Sov. Phys. JETP} \textbf{46} (1977) 641.
244:
245: %\cite{Soyez:2003sr}
246: \bibitem{Soyez:2003sr}
247: G.~Soyez,
248: %``Regge residues from DGLAP evolution,''
249: arXiv:hep-ph/0306113.
250: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0306113;%%
251:
252: %\cite{Cudell:2002ej}
253: \bibitem{Cudell:2002ej}
254: J.~R.~Cudell, E.~Martynov and G.~Soyez,
255: %``t-channel unitarity and photon cross sections,''
256: arXiv:hep-ph/0207196.
257: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0207196;%%
258:
259: \end{thebibliography}
260:
261: \end{document}
262: