1: %% ****** Start of file template.aps ****** %
2: %%
3: %%
4: %% This file is part of the APS files in the REVTeX 4 distribution.
5: %% Version 4.0 of REVTeX, August 2001
6: %%
7: %%
8: %% Copyright (c) 2001 The American Physical Society.
9: %%
10: %% See the REVTeX 4 README file for restrictions and more information.
11: %%
12: %
13: % This is a template for producing manuscripts for use with REVTEX 4.0
14: % Copy this file to another name and then work on that file.
15: % That way, you always have this original template file to use.
16: %
17: % Group addresses by affiliation; use superscriptaddress for long
18: % author lists, or if there are many overlapping affiliations.
19: % For Phys. Rev. appearance, change preprint to twocolumn.
20: % Choose pra, prb, prc, prd, pre, prl, prstab, or rmp for journal
21: % Add 'draft' option to mark overfull boxes with black boxes
22: % Add 'showpacs' option to make PACS codes appear
23: % Add 'showkeys' option to make keywords appear
24: %\documentclass[aps,prl,preprint,groupedaddress]{revtex4}
25: %\documentclass[aps,prl,preprint,superscriptaddress]{revtex4}
26: \documentclass[aps,prl,twocolumn,groupedaddress]{revtex4}
27:
28: % You should use BibTeX and apsrev.bst for references
29: % Choosing a journal automatically selects the correct APS
30: % BibTeX style file (bst file), so only uncomment the line
31: % below if necessary.
32: %\bibliographystyle{apsrev}
33:
34: \usepackage{graphicx,psfrag}
35:
36: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
37: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
38: \newcommand \bra[1]{\left< {#1} \,\right\vert}
39: \newcommand \ket[1]{\left\vert\, {#1} \, \right>}
40:
41: \begin{document}
42:
43: % Use the \preprint command to place your local institutional report
44: % number in the upper righthand corner of the title page in preprint mode.
45: % Multiple \preprint commands are allowed.
46: % Use the 'preprintnumbers' class option to override journal defaults
47: % to display numbers if necessary
48: %\preprint{}
49:
50: \preprint{TU--713}
51: \preprint{Mar.\ 2004}
52:
53: %Title of paper
54: \title{``Coulomb+linear'' form of the static QCD potential
55: in operator-product-expansion}
56:
57: % repeat the \author .. \affiliation etc. as needed
58: % \email, \thanks, \homepage, \altaffiliation all apply to the current
59: % author. Explanatory text should go in the []'s, actual e-mail
60: % address or url should go in the {}'s for \email and \homepage.
61: % Please use the appropriate macro foreach each type of information
62:
63: % \affiliation command applies to all authors since the last
64: % \affiliation command. The \affiliation command should follow the
65: % other information
66: % \affiliation can be followed by \email, \homepage, \thanks as well.
67: \author{Y. Sumino}
68: %\email[]{Your e-mail address}
69: %\homepage[]{Your web page}
70: %\thanks{}
71: %\altaffiliation{}
72: \affiliation{Department of Physics, Tohoku University, Sendai, 980-8578 Japan }
73:
74: %Collaboration name if desired (requires use of superscriptaddress
75: %option in \documentclass). \noaffiliation is required (may also be
76: %used with the \author command).
77: %\collaboration can be followed by \email, \homepage, \thanks as well.
78: %\collaboration{}
79: %\noaffiliation
80:
81: \date{\today}
82:
83: \begin{abstract}
84: The static QCD potential is analyzed in operator-product-expansion
85: within potential-NRQCD framework
86: when $r \ll \Lambda_{\rm QCD}^{-1}$.
87: We show that the leading short-distance contribution
88: to the potential, defined as a perturbatively computable
89: Wilson coefficient, can be expressed, up to ${\cal O}(r^2)$,
90: as a ``Coulomb+linear'' potential.
91: It coincides with the ``Coulomb+linear'' potential
92: obtained previously from renormalon-dominance
93: hypothesis.
94: Non-perturbative contributions are ${\cal O}(r^2)$
95: and subleading.
96: \end{abstract}
97:
98: % insert suggested PACS numbers in braces on next line
99: \pacs{11.10.Gh,12.38.Aw,12.39.St}
100: % insert suggested keywords - APS authors don't need to do this
101: %\keywords{}
102:
103: %\maketitle must follow title, authors, abstract, \pacs, and \keywords
104: \maketitle
105:
106: For decades, the static QCD potential $V_{\rm QCD}(r)$
107: has been widely studied
108: for the purpose of elucidating the nature of the interaction between heavy
109: quark and antiquark.
110: It is
111: defined from an expectation value of the Wilson loop as
112: \bea
113: V_{\rm QCD}(r)
114: =
115: - \! \lim_{T \to \infty} \frac{1}{iT} \,
116: \ln \frac{\bra{0} {\rm{Tr\, P}}
117: e^{ i g \oint_{\cal P} dx^\mu A_\mu }
118: \ket{0}}
119: {\bra{0} {\rm Tr} \, {\bf 1} \ket{0}}
120: ,
121: \eea
122: where ${\cal P}$ is a rectangular loop of spatial extent $r$ and
123: time extent $T$.
124: Generally, $V_{\rm QCD}(r)$ at short-distances can be computed accurately
125: by perturbative QCD.
126: On the other hand,
127: the potential shape at long-distances should be determined by
128: non-perturbative methods, such as
129: lattice simulations or phenomenological potential-model analyses
130: where phenomenological potentials are extracted
131: from the experimental data for the heavy quarkonium spectra.
132: Empirically it has been known that phenomenological potentials
133: and lattice computations of $V_{\rm QCD}(r)$ are both
134: approximated well by the sum of a Coulomb potential and a linear
135: potential in the intermediate-distance range.
136:
137: Since the discovery \cite{Hoang:1998nz} of the
138: cancellation of ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$
139: renormalons in the total energy of a static quark-antiquark pair
140: $E_{\rm tot}(r) \equiv V_{\rm QCD}(r) + 2m_{\rm pole}$,
141: convergence of the perturbative series for $E_{\rm tot}(r)$
142: improved drastically and
143: much more accurate perturbative predictions
144: for the potential shape became available.
145: It was understood that a large uncertainty originating from
146: the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$
147: renormalon in $V_{\rm QCD}(r)$ can be absorbed into
148: twice of the quark pole mass $2m_{\rm pole}$.
149: Once this is achieved, a perturbative
150: uncertainty of $E_{\rm tot}(r)$ is
151: estimated to be
152: ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD}^3 r^2)$
153: at $r \ll \Lambda_{\rm QCD}^{-1}$ \cite{Aglietti:1995tg},
154: based on the renormalon-dominance hypothesis.
155:
156: An operator-product-expansion (OPE)
157: of $V_{\rm QCD}(r)$ was developed \cite{Brambilla:1999qa} within an
158: effective field theory (EFT)
159: ``potential non-relativistic QCD'' (pNRQCD)
160: \cite{Pineda:1997bj}.
161: The idea of OPE is to factorize short-distance contributions
162: into Wilson coefficients (perturbatively computable)
163: and non-perturbative contributions into matrix elements of operators,
164: when the following hierarchy of scales exists:
165: \bea
166: \Lambda_{\rm QCD} \ll \mu_f \ll 1/r .
167: \label{hierarchy}
168: \eea
169: Here, $\mu_f$ denotes the factorization scale.
170: In this framework, residual renormalons, starting from
171: ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD}^3 r^2)$,
172: are absorbed into
173: the matrix elements of non-local operators
174: (non-local gluon condensates).
175: Then, in the multipole expansion at $r \ll \Lambda_{\rm QCD}^{-1}$,
176: the leading non-perturbative
177: contribution to the potential
178: becomes ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD}^3 r^2)$ \cite{Brambilla:1999qa}.
179:
180: Subsequently, several studies
181: \cite{Sumino:2001eh,Recksiegel:2001xq}
182: showed that perturbative
183: predictions for $V_{\rm QCD}(r)$ agree well
184: with phonomenological potentials
185: and lattice calculations of $V_{\rm QCD}(r)$,
186: once the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon contained
187: in $V_{\rm QCD}(r)$ is cancelled.
188: Ref.\ \cite{Lee:2002sn} showed that
189: a Borel resummation of the perturbative series gives a potential shape
190: which agrees with lattice results, if the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$
191: renormalon is properly taken into account.
192: In fact these agreements hold within
193: the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD}^3 r^2)$ uncertainty.
194: These observations support the validity of renormalon dominance
195: and of OPE for $V_{\rm QCD}(r)$.
196:
197: Once the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon is cancelled,
198: the perturbative QCD potential becomes steeper than
199: the Coulomb potential as $r$ increases.
200: This feature is understood, within perturbative QCD,
201: as an effect of the {\it running} of the strong coupling constant
202: \cite{Brambilla:2001fw,Sumino:2001eh}.
203:
204: Moreover,
205: using a scale-fixing prescription based on renormalon dominance hypothesis,
206: it was shown analytically \cite{Sumino:2003yp} that the
207: perturbative QCD potential approaches a ``Coulomb+linear''
208: form at large orders, up to an ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD}^3 r^2)$ uncertainty.
209: The ``Coulomb+linear'' potential can be computed systematically
210: as more terms of perturbative series are included
211: via renormalization-group (RG); up to the next-to-next-to-leading
212: logarithmic order (NNLL),
213: it shows a convergence towards lattice results.
214:
215: In this paper, we analyze the QCD potential using OPE developed
216: in \cite{Brambilla:1999qa} and compare the leading
217: Wilson coefficient (singlet potential)
218: with the ``Coulomb+linear'' potential obtained
219: in \cite{Sumino:2003yp}.
220:
221: The
222: $V$-scheme coupling in momentum space $\alpha_V(q)$ is defined as
223: \bea
224: V_{\rm QCD}(r) &=&
225: \int \frac{d^3\vec{q}}{(2\pi)^3} \, e^{i \vec{q} \cdot \vec{r}}
226: \, \biggl[
227: -4 \pi C_F \, \frac{\alpha_V(q)}{q^2}
228: \biggr]
229: \\
230: &=&
231: - \frac{2C_F}{\pi}
232: \int_0^\infty dq \, \frac{\sin (qr)}{qr} \, \alpha_V(q) ,
233: \label{one-param-int}
234: \eea
235: where $q=|\vec{q}|$;
236: $C_F$ is the second Casimir operator of the fundamental
237: representation.
238: In perturbative QCD, $\alpha_V(q)$ is calculable in a series
239: expansion of the strong coupling constant:
240: \bea
241: \alpha_V^{\rm PT}(q)
242: &=& \alpha_S \, \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} P_n(\ln (\mu/q) ) \,
243: \biggl( \frac{\alpha_S}{4\pi} \biggr)^n
244: %\nonumber
245: \\
246: &=&
247: \alpha_S(q) \, \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} a_n \,
248: \biggl( \frac{\alpha_S(q)}{4\pi} \biggr)^n
249: ,
250: \label{alfV}
251: \eea
252: where,
253: $P_n(\ell)$ denotes an $n$-th-degree polynomial of $\ell$
254: and $a_n = P_n(0) $.
255: In this paper, unless the argument is specified explicitly,
256: $\alpha_S \equiv \alpha_S(\mu)$ denotes the strong coupling constant
257: renormalized at the renormalization scale $\mu$,
258: defined in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme.
259: Here and hereafter,
260: $\alpha_V^{\rm PT}(q)$ represents a perturbative evaluation of
261: $\alpha_V(q)$ supplemented by RG evolution of $\alpha_S(q)$.
262: For instance, by $\alpha_V^{\rm PT}(q)$
263: up to NNLL, we mean that in (\ref{alfV}) the sum is taken for
264: $n \leq 2$ and the three-loop running coupling is used for $\alpha_S(q)$.
265:
266: The ``Coulomb+linear'' potential $V_{\rm C+L}(r)$
267: obtained in \cite{Sumino:2003yp}, up to NNLL, is given by
268: \bea
269: &&
270: V_{\rm C+L}(r) = V_{\rm C}(r) + \sigma \, r,
271: \label{CplusLpot}
272: \\
273: &&
274: V_{\rm C}(r) = - \frac{4\pi C_F}{\beta_0 r}
275: - \frac{2C_F}{\pi} \, {\rm Im}
276: \int_{C_1}\! dq \, \frac{e^{iqr}}{qr} \, \alpha_V^{\rm PT}(q)
277: ,
278: \label{Vc}
279: \\ &&
280: {\sigma} = \frac{C_F}{2\pi i} \int_{C_2}\! dq \, q \, \alpha_V^{\rm PT}(q) ,
281: \label{sigma}
282: \eea
283: where $\beta_n$ represents the $(n+1)$-loop coefficient of the
284: beta function; e.g.\ in $SU(3)$ Yang-Mills theory,
285: $\beta_0=11$, $\beta_1=102, ~\cdots$.
286: The integral paths $C_1$ and $C_2$ are displayed
287: in Fig.~2 of \cite{Sumino:2003yp}.
288: The coefficient of the linear potential $\sigma$
289: can be expressed
290: analytically in terms of the Lambda parameter in the
291: $\overline{\rm MS}$-scheme
292: $\Lambda_{\overline{\rm MS}}$.
293: The ``Coulomb'' potential has a short-distance
294: asymptotic behavior consistent with RG,
295: $V_{\rm C}(r) \sim -2\pi C_F (\beta_0r)^{-1} \Bigl[
296: \ln\Bigl(\frac{1}{r \Lambda_{\overline{\rm MS}}}\Bigr) +
297: \frac{\beta_1}{2\beta_0^2}\ln\ln\Bigl(\frac{1}{ r \Lambda_{\overline{\rm MS}}}
298: \Bigr)\Bigr]^{-1}$,
299: whereas its long-distance behavior is given by
300: $V_{\rm C}(r) \sim -4\pi C_F /(\beta_0r)$;
301: in the intermediate region both asymptotic forms are smoothly
302: interpolated.
303:
304: Let us first present an intuitive argument.
305: In fact, it already embraces an essential part of our discussion.
306: We separate the integral (\ref{one-param-int}) into the
307: regions $q>\mu_f$ and $q<\mu_f$.
308: In the former region,
309: $\alpha_V(q)$ can be approximated well by $\alpha_V^{\rm PT}(q)$, hence
310: we define
311: \bea
312: V_{\rm UV}(r;\mu_f) = - \frac{2C_F}{\pi}
313: \int_{\mu_f}^\infty dq \, \frac{\sin (qr)}{qr} \, \alpha_V^{\rm PT}(q) .
314: \eea
315: Since $\mu_f \gg \Lambda_{\rm QCD}$,
316: we expect that an accurate perturbative prediction for $V_{\rm UV}(r;\mu_f)$
317: can be made.
318: In the region $q<\mu_f$,
319: $\alpha_V(q)$ cannot be evaluated reliably in perturbation theory;
320: rather it should be determined
321: non-perturbatively.
322: On the other hand, we may expand in $r$ since $\mu_f r \ll 1$
323: by eq.\,(\ref{hierarchy}):
324: \bea
325: V_{\rm IR}(r;\mu_f) &=& - \frac{2C_F}{\pi}
326: \int_0^{\mu_f}\!\! dq \, \biggl[ \, 1 - \frac{q^2r^2}{6} + \dots
327: \biggr] \, \alpha_V(q)
328: \nonumber \\
329: &=&
330: {\rm const.} + {\cal O}(\mu_f^3r^2) .
331: \label{VIR}
332: \eea
333: We can show that
334: \bea
335: V_{\rm UV}(r;\mu_f) - V_{\rm C+L}(r) =
336: {\rm const.} + {\cal O}(\mu_f^3r^2) .
337: \label{essence}
338: \eea
339: Eqs.\,(\ref{VIR}) and (\ref{essence}) imply that the
340: ``Coulomb+linear'' part of the QCD potential is determined by
341: the short-distance contributions ($q>\mu_f$), hence it is predictable
342: in perturbative QCD,
343: while the non-perturbative contributions are of order
344: $\mu_f^3r^2$ and subleading at $r \ll \mu_f^{-1}$.
345: [Throughout this paper, we are not concerned about
346: the constant part of $V_{\rm QCD}(r)$, keeping in mind
347: that it can always be absorbed into $2m_{\rm pole}$ in the
348: total energy $E_{\rm tot}(r)$.]
349:
350: Eq.~(\ref{essence}) can be shown as follows.
351: According to (\ref{Vc}),
352: \bea
353: &&
354: V_{\rm UV}(r;\mu_f) - V_{\rm C+L}(r)
355: \nonumber\\
356: &&
357: =
358: \frac{4\pi C_F}{\beta_0 r} + \frac{2C_F}{\pi} \, {\rm Im}
359: \int_{C_3}\! dq \, \frac{e^{iqr}}{qr} \, \alpha_V^{\rm PT}(q)
360: -\sigma r ,
361: \label{proof}
362: \eea
363: where the integral path $C_3$ is shown in Fig.~\ref{path}.
364: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
365: \begin{figure}
366: \psfrag{C3}{$C_3$}
367: \psfrag{q}{$q$}
368: \psfrag{muf}{$\mu_f$}
369: \psfrag{q*}{$q_*$}
370: \psfrag{0}{\hspace{-1mm}\raise-1mm\hbox{$0$}}
371: \includegraphics[width=4.5cm]{pathC3.eps}
372: \caption{
373: Integral path $C_3$ in the complex $q$-plane.
374: $q_*$ denotes the IR singularity of $\alpha_S(q)$.
375: For 1-loop running, $q_*$ is a pole; beyond 1-loop running,
376: $q_*$ is a branch point.
377: In the latter case, branch cut is on the real axis starting from $q_*$
378: to $-\infty$.
379: \label{path}}
380: \end{figure}
381: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
382: Since $\mu_f r \ll 1$, we may expand the Fourier factor as
383: $e^{iqr} = 1 + iqr - \frac{1}{2}(qr)^2 + \dots$
384: in the above integral.
385: Then one can show by suitable change of variables
386: that the $r^{-1}$ term
387: \bea
388: \frac{2C_F}{\pi} \, {\rm Im}
389: \int_{C_3}\! dq \, \frac{\alpha_V^{\rm PT}(q) }{qr}
390: = - \frac{C_F}{\pi i}
391: \int_{C_2}\! dq \, \frac{\alpha_V^{\rm PT}(q) }{qr}
392: \eea
393: equals $-4\pi C_F/ (\beta_0r)$ (at least) up to
394: NNLL.
395: Similarly, one can show for the $r^{1}$ term
396: \bea
397: \frac{2C_F}{\pi} \, {\rm Im}
398: \int_{C_3}\! dq \, \Bigl( -\frac{1}{2} {qr} \Bigr) \, {\alpha_V^{\rm PT}(q) }
399: = \sigma \, r .
400: \label{proof3}
401: \eea
402: Therefore, only remaining terms on the right-hand-side of
403: (\ref{proof}) are
404: ${\rm const.} + {\cal O}(\mu_f^3r^2) $.
405:
406: Being intuitive, the above argument is subject to some flaws:
407: (i) A factorization of scales is introduced only in the
408: integral over $q$, whereas in a consistent OPE one should
409: factorize scales in all quantum effects, namely in the computation
410: of $\alpha_V(q)$ as well.
411: (ii) It is known that $a_n$ ($n\geq 3$) in
412: $\alpha_V^{\rm PT}(q)$ includes
413: IR divergences \cite{Appelquist:tw},
414: so that $V_{\rm UV}(r;\mu_f)$
415: is not well-defined beyond NNLL.
416: (iii) The perturbative series of $V_{\rm UV}(r;\mu_f)$ may still be an
417: asymptotic series, hence one should clarify
418: how to define $V_{\rm UV}(r;\mu_f)$.
419: All these points (i)--(iii) are remedied in a consistent framework
420: of OPE, in dimensional regularization and with appropriate
421: renormalization procedure.
422:
423: An OPE of $V_{\rm QCD}(r)$ was developed in \cite{Brambilla:1999qa}.
424: In this and the next paragraph, we review the content of
425: that paper relevant to our analysis.
426: Within this framework, short-distance contributions are contained
427: in the potentials, which are in fact the Wilson coefficients,
428: while non-perturbative contributions are contained in the
429: matrix elements that are organized
430: in multipole expansion in $\vec{r}$ at $r \ll \Lambda_{\rm QCD}^{-1}$.
431: The following relation was derived:
432: \bea
433: &&
434: V_{\rm QCD}(r) = V_S(r) + \delta E_{\rm US}(r),
435: \label{OPE}
436: \\&&
437: \delta E_{\rm US}=
438: - i g^2 \frac{T_F}{N_C}
439: \int_0^\infty \! \! dt \, e^{-i \, \Delta V(r)\, t}
440: \nonumber\\&&
441: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
442: \times
443: \langle \vec{r}\cdot\vec{E}^a(t) \varphi_{\rm adj}(t,0)^{ab}
444: \vec{r}\cdot\vec{E}^b(0) \rangle
445: \nonumber\\&&
446: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
447: +{\cal O}(r^3) .
448: \label{deltaEUS}
449: \eea
450: $V_S(r)$ denotes the singlet potential.
451: $\delta E_{\rm US}(r)$ denotes the non-perturbative
452: contribution to the QCD potential, which starts at
453: ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD}^3 r^2)$ in the multipole expansion.
454: $\Delta V(r) = V_O(r) - V_S(r)$ denotes the
455: difference between the octet and singlet potentials;
456: see \cite{Brambilla:1999qa} for details.
457: Intuitively $V_S(r)$ corresponds to $V_{\rm UV}(r;\mu_f)$
458: and $\delta E_{\rm US}(r)$ to $V_{\rm IR}(r;\mu_f)$.
459: We adopt dimensional regularization in our analysis;
460: we also refer to hard cutoff schemes when discussing conceptual aspects.
461:
462: In perturbative expansion in $\alpha_S$, the QCD potential
463: $V_{\rm QCD}(r)$ coincides
464: with the singlet potential $V_S(r)$, i.e.\ $\delta E_{\rm US}=0$.
465: As already mentioned, perturbative expansion of
466: $V_{\rm QCD}(r)$ in $\alpha_S$
467: includes IR divergences beyond ${\cal O}(\alpha_S^3)$, hence
468: $V_S(r)$ also includes IR divergences in dimensional regularization.
469: $\delta E_{\rm US}(r)$ is expected to be non-zero beyond perturbation
470: theory.
471: In fact, if we do not expand $\Delta V(r)$ in $\alpha_S$ in
472: (\ref{deltaEUS}) \footnote{
473: This is consistent with the concept of the EFT, since this theory is
474: assumed to correctly describe physics at scales much below $1/r$.
475: In this case $\Delta V(r)$ ($ \ll 1/r$) should be kept in the denominator
476: of the propagator $[E-\Delta V(r)]^{-1}$.
477: }
478: (but expand all other factors), $\delta E_{\rm US}(r)$ becomes non-zero
479: since $\Delta V(r)$ acts as an IR regulator.
480: In this case, $\delta E_{\rm US}(r)$ contains
481: UV divergences, given as poles in $\epsilon$, which exactly cancel
482: the poles corresponding to the IR divergences in $V_S(r)$.
483: Consequently, in the sum (\ref{OPE}), $V_{\rm QCD}(r)$ becomes
484: finite as $\epsilon \to 0$.
485: These divergences in $V_S(r)$ and $\delta E_{\rm US}(r)$, respectively,
486: can be regarded as artefacts of dimensional regularization, where the
487: integral regions of virtual momenta extend from 0 to $\infty$.
488: If we introduce a hard cutoff to each momentum integration, corresponding
489: to the factorization scale $\mu_f$,
490: $V_S(r)$ ($q>\mu_f$) and $\delta E_{\rm US}(r)$ ($q<\mu_f$),
491: respectively, would become finite and dependent on $\mu_f$.
492: In dimensional regularization,
493: $V_S(r)$ can be made finite
494: by multiplicative renormalization,
495: i.e.\ by adding
496: a counter term $(Z_S-1) V_S(r)$.
497:
498: With respect to the spirit of factorization in OPE,
499: it is natural to subtract IR renormalons from $V_S(r)$ in a similar manner.
500: In \cite{Pineda:2001zq}, this was advocated and
501: in practice subtraction of the
502: ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD})$ renormalon was carried out explicitly.
503: The known IR renormalons of $V_S(r)$
504: [$=$perturbative expansion of $V_{\rm QCD}(r)$]
505: are contained in the integral
506: \cite{Beneke:1998ui}\footnote{
507: Here, we neglect the contributions of the instanton-induced singularities
508: \cite{Beneke:1998ui}
509: on the positive real axis in the Borel
510: plane.
511: These contributions are known to be rather small in any case.
512: }
513: \bea
514: &&
515: \int_0^{\mu_f} \! dq \, \frac{\sin (qr)}{qr} \, \alpha_V^{\rm PT}(q)
516: =
517: \int_0^{\mu_f} \! dq \,
518: \biggl( { 1 \! - \! \frac{q^2r^2}{6} \!+\! \cdots} \biggr)
519: \nonumber\\
520: &&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
521: \times
522: \biggl[ \alpha_S(q) + a_1 \Bigl( \frac{\alpha_S(q)}{4\pi} \Bigr)^2
523: + \cdots \biggr]
524: .
525: \label{int-renormalon}
526: \eea
527: In a hard cutoff scheme, it was shown \cite{Brambilla:1999qa} that the
528: ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD}^3r^2)$ IR renormalon of $V_S(r)$
529: can be absorbed into $\delta E_{\rm US}(r)$.
530: In dimensional regularization ($D = 4-2\epsilon$),
531: one may compute, for instance,
532: $\delta E_{\rm US}(r)$ at ${\cal O}(r^2)$
533: in the large-$\beta_0$ approximation \cite{Beneke:1994qe}, correponding to the
534: graph in Fig.~\ref{large-beta0}.
535: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
536: \begin{figure}
537: \psfrag{singlet}{singlet}
538: \psfrag{k}{$k$}
539: \psfrag{octet}{octet}
540: \includegraphics[width=4.5cm]{USgluon.eps}
541: \caption{
542: Graph for $\delta E_{\rm US}(r)$ at ${\cal O}(r^2)$
543: in the large-$\beta_0$ approximation.
544: Bubble chain represents the renormalized
545: gluon propagator in the large-$\beta_0$ approximation,
546: $\displaystyle
547: \frac{i}{k^2 [1-\Pi(k^2)]}$ with
548: $\displaystyle
549: \Pi (k^2) = \frac{\beta_0\alpha_S}{4\pi}
550: \biggl[ \Bigl(\frac{e^{\gamma_E}\mu^2}{-k^2}\Bigr)^\epsilon
551: \times
552: \frac{6\Gamma(\epsilon)\Gamma(2-\epsilon)^2}{\Gamma(4-2\epsilon)}
553: -\frac{1}{\epsilon} \biggr]
554: $.
555: \label{large-beta0}}
556: \end{figure}
557: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
558: It is given by
559: \bea
560: &&
561: \delta E_{\rm US}(r)\Bigr|_{\mbox{\scriptsize{large-}}\beta_0}
562: = \frac{C_F\alpha_S}{4\pi} \times
563: 8 r^2 \Delta V(r)^3
564: \nonumber\\
565: &&
566: ~~~~~~~~~~
567: \times \sum_{n=0}^\infty
568: \biggl( \frac{\beta_0\alpha_S}{4\pi} \biggr)^n
569: \biggl[ \, n! \, G_{n+1} + \frac{1}{\epsilon^{n+1}}\frac{(-1)^n}{n+1}
570: g(\epsilon)
571: \biggr]
572: \nonumber
573: \\ &&
574: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
575: + {\cal O}(\epsilon , \, r^3) ,
576: \\ &&
577: G(u) \equiv \sum_{j=0}^\infty G_j \, u^j
578: \nonumber\\
579: &&
580: ~~~~~~
581: =
582: \Biggl[
583: \frac{\mu \, e^{5/6}}{2\,\Delta V(r)} \Biggr]^{2u}
584: \frac{2\, \Gamma (2-u) \Gamma (2u-3)}{\Gamma (u-1)} ,
585: \\ &&
586: g(\epsilon) = \frac{\Gamma (4-2\epsilon)}{36\,
587: \Gamma (1+\epsilon) \Gamma(2-\epsilon)^2 \Gamma(1-\epsilon)} .
588: \eea
589: We note that the renormalon contribution ($n! \, G_{n+1}$)
590: and the
591: UV divergences (multiple poles in $\epsilon$)
592: are included in separate parts in this approximation.
593: One can check explicitly that
594: the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD}^3r^2)$ UV renormalon, corresponding to the
595: pole at $u=3/2$ of $G(u)$, cancels the ${\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD}^3r^2)$
596: IR renormalon in $V_S(r)$
597: \cite{Aglietti:1995tg} in the large-$\beta_0$ approximation.
598: Therefore, in dimensional regularization,
599: it is appropriate to subtract from $V_S(r)$ the IR renormalons,
600: e.g.\ in the form of
601: (\ref{int-renormalon}).
602:
603: We define a renormalized singlet potential (in dimensional regularization),
604: in a scheme where the IR divergences and IR renormalons are subtracted, as
605: \bea
606: V_S^{({\rm R})}\!(r;\mu_f\!) =
607: - \frac{2C_F}{\pi} \!\!
608: \int_{\mu_f}^\infty \!\!\!\! dq \, \frac{\sin (qr)}{qr} \,
609: [ \alpha_V^{\rm PT}\! (q) + \delta\alpha_V\! (q) ] .
610: \label{VSR}
611: \eea
612: $\delta\alpha_V(q)$ is the counter term which subtracts the
613: IR divergences, given as multiple poles in $\epsilon$,
614: e.g.\ in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme.\footnote{
615: In principle, one should compute $D$-dimensional Fourier integral of
616: $\alpha_V(q)$ defined in $D$ dimensions,
617: subtract the IR divergences, and then take the limit $\epsilon \to 0$.
618: In our case, it coincides with the naive expression (\ref{VSR}).
619: }
620: The dependence on $\mu_f$ is introduced through
621: subtraction of the IR divergences and IR renormalons.
622: Then, we can apply our argument given through
623: eqs.~(\ref{proof})--(\ref{proof3}) to show that
624: \bea
625: V_S^{({\rm R})}(r;\mu_f) - V_{\rm C+L}(r) =
626: {\rm const.} + {\cal O}(\mu_f^3r^2) ,
627: \label{result}
628: \eea
629: up to NNLL (since $\delta\alpha_V(q)$ can be taken as zero
630: up to this order).
631: Moreover, beyond NNLL, this relation
632: still holds after a simple replacement
633: $\alpha_V^{\rm PT}(q) \to \alpha_V^{\rm PT}(q) + \delta\alpha_V(q)$
634: in the definition of $V_{\rm C+L}(r)$, (\ref{Vc}) and (\ref{sigma}).
635:
636: One may think that subtracting the integral
637: (\ref{int-renormalon}) is not sufficient for
638: subtracting all the IR renormalons.
639: Our result (\ref{result}) is unchanged, even
640: if one subtracts the IR renormalon contributions
641: using whatever other sophisticated method for estimating them.
642: This is because the IR renormalons in $V_S(r)$ take the form
643: ${\rm const.} + {\cal O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD}^3r^2)$.
644:
645: The perturbative expansion of $V_S^{({\rm R})}(r;\mu_f)$
646: may still be an asymptotic series.
647: Since the IR renormalons have been subtracted and the factorization
648: scale is set as $\mu_f \gg \Lambda_{\rm QCD}$, we may expect that
649: $V_S^{({\rm R})}(r;\mu_f)$ is Borel summable.\footnote{
650: This is up to the uncertainties caused by the instanton-induced singularities
651: \cite{Beneke:1998ui} in the Borel plane.
652: }
653: (At least, the Borel integral is convergent
654: in the large-$\beta_0$ approximation.)
655: Then, we may define $V_S^{({\rm R})}(r)$ from the perturbative series
656: either by Borel summation or according to the prescription of
657: \cite{Beneke:1992ea};
658: both prescriptions lead to the same result when the series is Borel summable.
659:
660: Our result (\ref{result}) shows that the renormalized singlet
661: potential $V_S^{({\rm R})}(r)$ can be expressed as a
662: ``Coulomb+linear'' potential $V_{\rm C+L}(r)$,
663: up to ${\cal O}(\mu_f^3r^2)$, at short distances.
664: We re-emphasize that there is no
665: freedom to add a linear potential to $V_{\rm C+L}(r)$
666: in (\ref{result}) \cite{Brambilla:1999qa}.
667:
668: On the other hand, there is an arbitrariness
669: in how to separate $V_{\rm C+L}(r)$
670: into ``Coulomb'' and linear parts, as discussed in \cite{Sumino:2003yp}.
671: Stating more accurately, as yet
672: we do not know any mathematically well-defined principle
673: to separate $V_{\rm C+L}(r)$ into Coulombic and linear parts
674: about $r \sim 0$, because of
675: $1/\ln r$ dependence in $V_{\rm C+L}(r)$.
676: Nonetheless, we consider
677: the present separation (\ref{CplusLpot})--(\ref{sigma})
678: a natural one according to its construction, and also because
679: it is demonstrated
680: that the perturbative prediction of
681: $V_{\rm QCD}(r)$ up to ${\cal O}(\alpha_S^N)$ is
682: approximated well by this ``Coulomb+linear'' form
683: for a fairly wide range of $r$ and $N$ \cite{Sumino:2003yp}.
684:
685: % If in two-column mode, this environment will change to single-column
686: % format so that long equations can be displayed. Use
687: % sparingly.
688: %\begin{widetext}
689: % put long equation here
690: %\end{widetext}
691:
692: % figures should be put into the text as floats.
693: % Use the graphics or graphicx packages (distributed with LaTeX2e)
694: % and the \includegraphics macro defined in those packages.
695: % See the LaTeX Graphics Companion by Michel Goosens, Sebastian Rahtz,
696: % and Frank Mittelbach for instance.
697: %
698: % Here is an example of the general form of a figure:
699: % Fill in the caption in the braces of the \caption{} command. Put the label
700: % that you will use with \ref{} command in the braces of the \label{} command.
701: % Use the figure* environment if the figure should span across the
702: % entire page. There is no need to do explicit centering.
703:
704: % \begin{figure}
705: % \includegraphics{}%
706: % \caption{\label{}}
707: % \end{figure}
708:
709: % Surround figure environment with turnpage environment for landscape
710: % figure
711: % \begin{turnpage}
712: % \begin{figure}
713: % \includegraphics{}%
714: % \caption{\label{}}
715: % \end{figure}
716: % \end{turnpage}
717:
718: % tables should appear as floats within the text
719: %
720: % Here is an example of the general form of a table:
721: % Fill in the caption in the braces of the \caption{} command. Put the label
722: % that you will use with \ref{} command in the braces of the \label{} command.
723: % Insert the column specifiers (l, r, c, d, etc.) in the empty braces of the
724: % \begin{tabular}{} command.
725: % The ruledtabular enviroment adds doubled rules to table and sets a
726: % reasonable default table settings.
727: % Use the table* environment to get a full-width table in two-column
728: % Add \usepackage{longtable} and the longtable (or longtable*}
729: % environment for nicely formatted long tables. Or use the the [H]
730: % placement option to break a long table (with less control than
731: % in longtable).
732: % \begin{table}%[H] add [H] placement to break table across pages
733: % \caption{\label{}}
734: % \begin{ruledtabular}
735: % \begin{tabular}{}
736: % Lines of table here ending with \\
737: % \end{tabular}
738: % \end{ruledtabular}
739: % \end{table}
740:
741: % Surround table environment with turnpage environment for landscape
742: % table
743: % \begin{turnpage}
744: % \begin{table}
745: % \caption{\label{}}
746: % \begin{ruledtabular}
747: % \begin{tabular}{}
748: % \end{tabular}
749: % \end{ruledtabular}
750: % \end{table}
751: % \end{turnpage}
752:
753: % Specify following sections are appendices. Use \appendix* if there
754: % only one appendix.
755: %\appendix
756: %\section{}
757:
758: % If you have acknowledgments, this puts in the proper section head.
759: \begin{acknowledgments}
760: The author is grateful to A.~Pineda and M.~Tanabashi
761: for enlightening discussion.
762: \end{acknowledgments}
763:
764: % Create the reference section using BibTeX:
765: %\bibliography{basename of .bib file}
766:
767: \begin{thebibliography}{0}
768:
769: %\cite{Hoang:1998nz}
770: \bibitem{Hoang:1998nz}
771: %\cite{Pineda:id}
772: %\bibitem{Pineda:id}
773: A.~Pineda, Ph.D. Thesis;
774: %``Heavy Quarkonium And Nonrelativistic Effective Field Theories,''
775: %\href{http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?irn=5399084}{SPIRES entry}
776: A.~H.~Hoang, M.~C.~Smith, T.~Stelzer and S.~Willenbrock,
777: %``Quarkonia and the pole mass,''
778: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59}, 114014 (1999);
779: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9804227].
780: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9804227;%%
781: %\cite{Beneke:1998rk}
782: %\bibitem{Beneke:1998rk}
783: M.~Beneke,
784: %``A quark mass definition adequate for threshold problems,''
785: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 434}, 115 (1998).
786: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9804241].
787: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9804241;%%
788:
789: %\cite{Aglietti:1995tg}
790: \bibitem{Aglietti:1995tg}
791: U.~Aglietti and Z.~Ligeti,
792: %``Renormalons and confinement,''
793: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 364}, 75 (1995).
794: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9503209].
795: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9503209;%%
796:
797: %\cite{Brambilla:1999qa}
798: \bibitem{Brambilla:1999qa}
799: N.~Brambilla, A.~Pineda, J.~Soto and A.~Vairo,
800: %``The infrared behaviour of the static potential in perturbative {QCD},''
801: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60}, 091502 (1999);
802: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9903355].
803: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9903355;%%
804: %\cite{Brambilla:1999xf}
805: %\bibitem{Brambilla:1999xf}
806: %N.~Brambilla, A.~Pineda, J.~Soto and A.~Vairo,
807: %``Potential NRQCD: An effective theory for heavy quarkonium,''
808: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 566}, 275 (2000).
809: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9907240].
810: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9907240;%%
811:
812: %\cite{Pineda:1997bj}
813: \bibitem{Pineda:1997bj}
814: A.~Pineda and J.~Soto,
815: %``Effective field theory for ultrasoft momenta in NRQCD and NRQED,''
816: Nucl.\ Phys.\ Proc.\ Suppl.\ {\bf 64}, 428 (1998).
817: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9707481].
818: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9707481;%%
819:
820: %\cite{Sumino:2001eh}
821: \bibitem{Sumino:2001eh}
822: Y.~Sumino,
823: %``A connection between the perturbative QCD potential and phenomenological
824: %potentials,''
825: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65}, 054003 (2002);
826: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0104259].
827: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0104259;%%
828: %\cite{Necco:2001gh}
829: %\bibitem{Necco:2001gh}
830: S.~Necco and R.~Sommer,
831: %``Testing perturbation theory on the N(f) = 0 static quark potential,''
832: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 523}, 135 (2001).
833: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0109093].
834: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0109093;%%
835:
836: %\cite{Recksiegel:2001xq}
837: \bibitem{Recksiegel:2001xq}
838: S.~Recksiegel and Y.~Sumino,
839: %``Perturbative QCD potential, renormalon cancellation and phenomenological
840: %potentials,''
841: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65}, 054018 (2002);
842: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0109122].
843: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0109122;%%
844: %\cite{Pineda:2002se}
845: %\bibitem{Pineda:2002se}
846: A.~Pineda,
847: %``The static potential: Lattice versus perturbation theory in a
848: %renormalon-based approach,''
849: J.\ Phys.\ G {\bf 29}, 371 (2003);
850: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0208031].
851: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0208031;%%
852: %\cite{Recksiegel:2002um}
853: %\bibitem{Recksiegel:2002um}
854: S.~Recksiegel and Y.~Sumino,
855: %``Comparing the QCD potential in perturbative QCD and lattice QCD at large
856: %distances,''
857: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 31}, 187 (2003).
858: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0212389].
859: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0212389;%%
860:
861: %\cite{Lee:2002sn}
862: \bibitem{Lee:2002sn}
863: T.~Lee,
864: %``Surviving the renormalon in heavy quark potential,''
865: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 014020 (2003).
866: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0210032].
867: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0210032;%%
868:
869: %\cite{Brambilla:2001fw}
870: \bibitem{Brambilla:2001fw}
871: N.~Brambilla, Y.~Sumino and A.~Vairo,
872: %``Quarkonium spectroscopy and perturbative QCD: A new perspective,''
873: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 513}, 381 (2001).
874: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0101305].
875: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0101305;%%
876:
877: %\cite{Sumino:2003yp}
878: \bibitem{Sumino:2003yp}
879: Y.~Sumino,
880: %``QCD potential as a 'Coulomb-plus-linear' potential,''
881: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 571}, 173 (2003);
882: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0303120].
883: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0303120;%%
884: %\cite{Sumino:2003vk}
885: %\bibitem{Sumino:2003vk}
886: %Y.~Sumino,
887: %``Renormalon cancellation and perturbative QCD potential as a Coulomb+linear
888: %potential,''
889: arXiv:hep-ph/0310093.
890: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0310093;%%
891:
892: %\cite{Appelquist:tw}
893: \bibitem{Appelquist:tw}
894: T.~Appelquist, M.~Dine and I.~J.~Muzinich,
895: %``The Static Potential In Quantum Chromodynamics,''
896: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 69}, 231 (1977);
897: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B69,231;%%
898: %\cite{Appelquist:es}
899: %\bibitem{Appelquist:es}
900: %T.~Appelquist, M.~Dine and I.~J.~Muzinich,
901: %``The Static Limit Of Quantum Chromodynamics,''
902: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 17}, 2074 (1978).
903: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D17,2074;%%
904:
905: %\cite{Pineda:2001zq}
906: \bibitem{Pineda:2001zq}
907: A.~Pineda,
908: %``Determination of the bottom quark mass from the Upsilon(1S) system,''
909: JHEP {\bf 0106}, 022 (2001).
910: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0105008].
911: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0105008;%%
912:
913: %\cite{Beneke:1998ui}
914: \bibitem{Beneke:1998ui}
915: M.~Beneke,
916: %``Renormalons,''
917: Phys.\ Rept.\ {\bf 317}, 1 (1999).
918: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9807443].
919: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9807443;%%
920:
921: %\cite{Beneke:1994qe}
922: \bibitem{Beneke:1994qe}
923: M.~Beneke and V.~M.~Braun,
924: %``Naive nonAbelianization and resummation of fermion bubble chains,''
925: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 348}, 513 (1995).
926: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9411229].
927: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9411229;%%
928:
929: %\cite{Beneke:1992ea}
930: \bibitem{Beneke:1992ea}
931: M.~Beneke and V.~I.~Zakharov,
932: %``Improving large order perturbative expansions in quantum chromodynamics,''
933: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 69}, 2472 (1992);
934: %%CITATION = PRLTA,69,2472;%%
935: %\cite{VanAcoleyen:2003gc}
936: %\bibitem{VanAcoleyen:2003gc}
937: K.~Van Acoleyen and H.~Verschelde,
938: %``QCD perturbation theory at large orders with large renormalization scales in
939: %the large beta(0) limit,''
940: arXiv:hep-ph/0307070.
941: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0307070;%%
942:
943:
944: \end{thebibliography}
945:
946: \end{document}
947: %
948: % ****** End of file template.aps ******
949:
950: