1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: %\documentclass[aps,amsmath,amssymb,12pt]{revtex4}
3: %\documentstyle[12pt,graphicx,epsf]{article}
4: \usepackage{graphicx,epsf}
5: %\usepackage{showkeys}
6: \textwidth 16.4cm
7: \oddsidemargin 2.5cm
8: \advance\oddsidemargin by -1in
9: \evensidemargin 0.0cm
10: \advance\evensidemargin
11: by -1in
12: \marginparwidth 1.9cm
13: \marginparsep
14: 0.4cm
15: \marginparpush 0.4cm
16: \topmargin -0.5cm
17: \advance\topmargin by
18: -0.0in
19: \textheight 22.5cm
20: \makeindex
21: \renewcommand{\topfraction} {0.8}
22: \renewcommand{\bottomfraction} {1}
23: \renewcommand{\textfraction} {0}
24: \renewcommand{\floatsep} {-3cm}
25: \renewcommand{\floatpagefraction} {1}
26: \pagestyle{plain}
27: \newcommand\noi{\noindent}
28: \newcommand\beq{\begin{equation}}
29: \newcommand\eeq{\end{equation}}
30: \newcommand\beqn{\begin{eqnarray}}
31: \newcommand\eeqn{\end{eqnarray}}
32: \newcommand{\la}{\langle}
33: \newcommand{\ra}{\rangle}
34: \newcommand{\ga}{\gamma^*}
35: \def\Re{\,\mbox{Re}\,}
36: \def\Im{\,\mbox{Im}\,}
37: \def\mb{\,\mbox{mb}}
38: \def\fm{\,\mbox{fm}}
39: \def\GeV{\,\mbox{GeV}}
40: \def\GeV/c{\,\mbox{GeV/c}}
41: \def\MeV{\,\mbox{MeV}}
42: \def\MeV/c{\,\mbox{MeV/c}}
43: \def\lsim{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
44: \raise1pt\hbox{$<$}}}
45: \def\gsim{\mathrel{\rlap{\lower4pt\hbox{\hskip1pt$\sim$}}
46: \raise1pt\hbox{$>$}}}
47:
48: \def\sel{\sigma_{el}^{VN}}
49: \def\inf{\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}}
50: \def\mb{\,\mbox{mb}}
51: \def\fm{\,\mbox{fm}}
52: \def\GeV{\,\mbox{GeV}}
53:
54: \begin{document}
55:
56: \title
57: {\bf Time Evolution of Hadronization\\
58: and Grey Tracks in DIS off Nuclei}
59: \author{\large C. Ciofi degli Atti$^a$ and B.Z.
60: Kopeliovich$^{b,c}$}
61: \maketitle
62:
63: \begin{center}
64: {$^a$ Department of Physics, University of Perugia, and
65: \\ INFN, Sezione di Perugia, via A. Pascoli, Perugia, I-06100, Italy\\
66: $^b$Max-Planck-Institut f\"ur Kernphysik, Postfach 103980, 69029
67: Heidelberg, Germany\\
68: $^{c}$Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
69: }
70: \end{center}
71:
72:
73: \begin{abstract}
74:
75: The analysis of the grey tracks produced in Deep Inelastic Scattering
76: (DIS) off nuclei provides important information on the space-time
77: development of hadronization in nuclear medium. This method is
78: complementary to the measurement of nuclear attenuation of leading
79: inclusive hadrons. While the latter is focused on the hadronization
80: dynamics for the quite rare process of leading hadrons production, the
81: former covers the main bulk of inelastic events, and its $Q^2$ dependence
82: is a very sensitive tool to discriminate between different models of
83: hadronization. Employing the model of perturbative hadronization
84: developed earlier, we calculate the $Q^2$ and $x_{Bj}$ dependences of the
85: number of collisions and relate it to the mean number of grey tracks,
86: using an empirical relation obtained from the analysis of data from the
87: Fermilab E665 experiment on DIS of muons off the $Xe$ nucleus. We found
88: the number of grey tracks to rise steeply with $Q^2$ in good agreement
89: with the experimental data.
90:
91: \end{abstract}
92:
93:
94: %\pacs{13.40.-f, 21.60.-n, 24.85.+p, 25.60.Gc}
95:
96: \newpage
97:
98: Nuclear targets serve as a natural and unique analyzer of the space-time
99: development of strong interactions at high energies \cite{knp,knph}. Due
100: to Lorentz time dilation, the projectile partons may keep their coherence
101: for some time, but once they become incoherent, the cross section of the
102: final state interaction (FSI) increases and the nucleus may act as a
103: filter of hadronization mechanisms, provided quantities which are
104: sensitive to the nuclear modifications of FSI are measured.
105:
106: One way for experimental testing of various theoretical models which have
107: been proposed to investigate the space-time evolution of hadronization,
108: is the measurement of the nuclear modification factor in inclusive
109: production of leading hadrons \cite{emc,slac,hermes}. Recent experimental
110: data from the HERMES experiment at HERA \cite{hermes} have confirmed the
111: predictions made in \cite{knp}, based on the perturbative gluon radiation
112: approach. Attenuation of the leading hadron is partially ascribed to the
113: FSI of the pre-hadron (a colorless $\bar q q$ dipole prior formation of
114: the hadronic wave function) produced in the color neutralization of the
115: radiating quark which was created in the hard ${\gamma^*}$-nucleon
116: interaction. However, other approaches for in-medium hadronization have
117: recently been employed, which are also able to provide a reasonable
118: explanation of the HERMES data. We mean, in particular, the approach of
119: Ref.~\cite{ww}, in which nuclear attenuation is explained in terms of the
120: induced energy loss scenario, in which the hit parton loses energy by
121: hard multiple scattering with other nucleon's partons, and the approaches
122: of Ref. \cite{amp,giessen,ako}, based upon the color string model. Thus
123: it appears that other, more selective phenomena which could discriminate
124: various models of hadronization are required. In this respect, the
125: investigation of the $Q^2$ dependence of nuclear effects would probably
126: be one of the best candidates \footnote{In this note $Q^2=-q^2={\bf q}^2
127: - \nu^2$ denotes the squared four-momentum transfer}. As a matter of
128: fact, recent data from HERMES are in a good agreement with calculations
129: performed in \cite{knph}, but in strict contradiction with the $Q^2$
130: dependence predicted in \cite{ww}. Unfortunately the HERMES data exhibit
131: only a mild $Q^2$ dependence and therefore could not be very selective
132: for other hadronization models.
133:
134: Note that production of leading hadrons with large fraction $z_h$ of the
135: initial parton momentum is a rare, nearly exclusive process, which has
136: quite a specific time development. In the main bulk of events, the jet
137: energy is shared by many hadrons and therefore in this case it is a
138: difficult task to find observables which are sensitive to the time
139: development of hadronization. In Ref.~\cite{ck} it has been proposed as a
140: possible candidate the DIS exclusive process $A(e,e'B)X$, where $B$ is a
141: detected recoil nucleus with a less number of nucleons than the target one
142: \cite{cks}, and $X$, as usual, denotes the unobserved jets of hadrons
143: resulting from hadronization. It has indeed been shown \cite{ck} that the
144: survival probability of the recoil nucleus $B$ in such a process is rather
145: sensitive to the time evolution of hadronization and, particularly, to its
146: $Q^2$ dependence. This quantity, which is quite difficult to access
147: experimentally in case of heavy nuclei, could be investigate using
148: few-body nuclei. Indeed, first experimental data were recently obtained at
149: Jefferson Lab \cite{khun} for a deuteron target, i.e. by measuring the
150: recoiling protons in the DIS process $D(e,e'p)X$ in a wide range of
151: kinematics. Preliminary results of calculations \cite{ckk} show a good
152: agreement with the predictions of the hadronization model of
153: Ref.~\cite{ck}.
154:
155: It should however be pointed out that the dominant channels of DIS are
156: associated with events where the recoil nucleus $B$ does not survive, but
157: breaks apart to fragments, whose distribution in $Q^2$ and other
158: kinematic variables could also shed light on the time evolution of the
159: jet in the nuclear matter. A typical process of this type is the
160: production of the so called "grey tracks" (GT) in DIS semi-inclusive
161: processes. GT are those hadrons, predominantly protons, whose momenta are
162: in a few hundred $\MeV/c$ range. They have been observed in various DIS
163: processes induced by different projectiles; in this note we will consider
164: the GT production in the Fermilab $E665$ experiment \cite{e665} on
165: $\mu-Xe$ and $\mu-D$ processes at $490\GeV$ beam energy; in this
166: experiment the GT have been associated to protons with momentum in the
167: interval $200-600\MeV/c$.
168:
169: The investigation of the $Q^2$-dependence of the GT production may bring
170: forth precious information about multiple FSI of the jet originated from
171: the DIS in the nuclear medium. The mean number of GT, to be denoted
172: henceforth as $\la n_{gr}\ra$, correlates with the intensity of the FSI:
173: this is why the production of GT has been traditionally used as a probe
174: for the dynamics of the interaction and the centrality of collisions. The
175: latter is usually characterized by the mean number of collisions,
176: $\la\nu_c\ra$, i.e. by the number of bound nucleons which took part in
177: the interaction \footnote{Note that this number is different from the
178: expansion parameter, $\sigma_{in}T_A(b)$ in the Glauber formula which is
179: also frequently called number of collisions (see the discussion in
180: \cite{mine})}.
181:
182: The dependence of $\la n_{gr}\ra$ upon $Q^2$, $\nu$ and $x_{Bj}$ has been
183: measured in the E665 experiment and it is the aim of this note to present
184: a theoretical interpretation of such a dependence resulting from a
185: specific model of hadronization. To this end we will proceed in the
186: following way: our hadronization model allows one to calculate the average
187: number of collisions $\la\nu_c\ra$ which is related to $\la n_{gr}\ra$.
188: The relation between the observed $\la n_{gr}\ra$ and models for
189: $\la\nu_c\ra$ can be obtained with various Monte-Carlo generators for
190: hadron cascading in nuclei. The results of these calculations however do
191: not seem to be very accurate and a more reliable and model independent
192: approach has been adopted in \cite{e665}, where the following relation has
193: been found,
194: \beq
195: \la\nu_c\ra = (2.08\pm0.13) +(3.72\pm0.14)\,\la n_{gr}\ra
196: \ ,
197: \label{10}
198: \eeq
199: basing on the measured average total hadronic net charge and its relation
200: to $\la\nu_c\ra$.
201:
202: We have used the same relation Eq.~(\ref{10}) to obtain $\la n_{gr}\ra$,
203: after calculating the average number of collisions $\la\nu_c\ra$ occurring
204: during the evolution of a jet produced in DIS and propagating through
205: nuclear matter. For minimum bias DIS events we obtain,
206: \beq
207: \la\nu_c\ra = \int d^2b\,
208: \int\limits_{-\infty}^\infty dz\,\rho_A({\bf b},z)
209: \int\limits_z^\infty dz'\,\rho_A({\bf b},z')\,
210: \sigma_{eff}(z-z')\,+\,1\ .
211: \label{20}
212: \eeq
213: This equation results from the following description of the DIS process:
214: the hard interaction of the lepton takes place on a bound nucleon at
215: impact parameter ${\bf b}$ and longitudinal coordinate $z$; then the
216: knocked out quark hadronizes and initiates a jet which propagates through
217: the nucleus interacting with other bound nucleons with the effective cross
218: section $\sigma_{eff}(z-z')$ depending on the distance (or time, provided
219: that the quark propagates with the speed of light). The first term in
220: Eq.~(\ref{20}) gives the amount of new nucleons involved in the process,
221: i.e. the number of collisions, whereas the second term represents the
222: contribution from the recoil nucleon formed in the initial, hard collision
223: between ${\gamma^*}$ and one of the bound nucleons.
224:
225: Evaluation of Eq.~(\ref{20}) requires an explicit form for the
226: time-dependent effective cross section $\sigma_{eff}$, which can only be
227: obtained within a model for hadronization. To this end, we employ the
228: model suggested in \cite{ck}: it combines the soft part of the
229: hadronization dynamics, described in terms of the string model, with the
230: hard part, described within perturbative QCD. There are many experimental
231: evidences showing that gluons are located within small clouds around the
232: valence quarks \cite{kst2,kp} . Therefore, if $Q$ is less than the
233: mass scale $\lambda=0.65\,GeV$ controlling the transverse quark-gluon
234: separation, they can hardly be shaken off; in this case the string model
235: is a proper description of hadronization. If, however, $Q>\lambda$,
236: perturbative gluon radiation should be taken into account. Employing
237: $\lambda$ as the bottom limit for the integration over the gluon
238: transverse momenta (see below), double counting is excluded when the
239: string and pQCD contributions are added to describe hadron production.
240: This model of hadronization is close to the one used in \cite{knp,knph},
241: where the string contribution was mocked up by the soft part of gluon
242: spectrum, and the predictions of the two versions of the model are
243: rather similar.
244:
245: It was found in \cite{ck} that the multiplicity of the produced
246: hadrons, or better to say the pre-hadrons which are colorless dipoles,
247: rises with time as
248: \beq
249: \la n_h(t)\ra = n_M(t) + n_G(t)\ ,
250: \label{40}
251: \eeq
252: where $n_M$ is the amount of the pre-hadrons produced due to decays of
253: the string, and $n_G(t)$ the one produced by gluon radiation.
254:
255: The string contribution to $\la n_h(t)\ra$ has been found in \cite{ck}
256: employing the standard dynamics of string decay \cite{cnn,k-pl}. The
257: pre-hadron multiplicity as function of time, $n_{M}(t)$, was found in the
258: following form \cite{ck},
259: \beq
260: n_{M}(t)=
261: \frac{{\rm ln}(1+t/\Delta t)}
262: {{\rm ln}2}.
263: \label{50}
264: \eeq
265: Here the time scale $\Delta t$ is related to the probability $w$ of a
266: $\bar qq$ pair creation in the color field of the string, per unit of time
267: and per unit of string length. This parameter evaluated either in the
268: Schwinger model or from the phenomenology turns out to be $w\approx
269: 2\fm^{-2}$. Correspondingly, $\Delta t=\sqrt{2/w}=1\fm$.
270:
271: Note that the logarithmic dependence on time in Eq.~(\ref{50}) is rather
272: obvious. It is related to the fact that hadrons produced via string decays
273: build a plateau in rapidity. Since the momenta acquired by pre-hadrons are
274: proportional to the time taken by the string decay, the number of decays
275: rises linear in the $\ln(t)$ scale.
276:
277: Concerning the gluon contribution to the hadron multiplicity
278: Eq.~(\ref{40}), we employ the large $N_c$ approximation and replace each
279: radiated gluon by a color octet $\bar qq$ pair, and then combine the
280: quarks and antiquarks into colorless dipoles (pre-hadrons). This is the
281: origin of the second term $n_G(t)$ in (\ref{40}).
282:
283: It is well known that radiation does not happen instantaneously, but takes
284: time called coherence time, $t_c=2\omega/k_T^2$, where $\omega$ and $k_T$
285: are the energy and transverse momentum of the radiated gluon. At shorter
286: times the quark-gluon system is still in coherence with the initial quark.
287: Integrating the perturbative gluon radiation spectrum over $\omega$ and
288: $k_T$ with a weight factor $\Theta(t-t_c)$ one gets the amount of gluons
289: which lost coherence, i.e. were radiated over time interval $t$ after the
290: DIS interaction. The time dependence of the gluon radiation was found in
291: \cite{ck} to be controlled by the parameter $t_0=(m_N\,x_{Bj})^{-1} =
292: 0.2\fm/x_{Bj}$, and the number of perturbatively radiated gluons was
293: evaluated in the following form
294: \beq
295: n_G(t) = \frac{16}{27}\,\left\{
296: {\rm ln}\left(\frac{Q}{\lambda}\right)\,+\,
297: {\rm ln}\left(\frac{t\,\Lambda_{QCD}}{2}
298: \right)\,{\rm ln}\left[\frac{{\rm ln}(Q/\Lambda_{QCD})}
299: {{\rm ln}(\lambda/\Lambda_{QCD}}\right]\right\}\ ,
300: \label{60}
301: \eeq
302: for $t < t_0$. At longer times,
303: $t > t_0$, the $t$-dependence starts leveling off,
304: \beqn
305: n_G(t) &=& \frac{16}{27}\,\left\{
306: {\rm ln}\left(\frac{Q}{\lambda}
307: \,\frac{t_0}{t}\right)\,+\,
308: {\rm ln}\left(\frac{t\,\Lambda_{QCD}}{2}
309: \right)\,{\rm ln}\left[\frac{{\rm ln}(Q/\Lambda_{QCD}
310: \sqrt{t_0/t})}
311: {{\rm ln}(\lambda/\Lambda_{QCD})}\right]
312: \right.\nonumber\\ &+& \left.
313: {\rm ln}\left(\frac{Q^2\,t_0}{2\,\Lambda_{QCD}}
314: \right)\,{\rm ln}\left[\frac{{\rm ln}(Q/\Lambda_{QCD})}
315: {{\rm ln}(Q/\Lambda_{QCD}\,\sqrt{t_0/t})}\right]\right\}
316: \ ,
317: \label{70}
318: \eeqn
319: and saturates at $t > t_0\,Q^2/\lambda^2 = 2\nu/\lambda^2$, which is a
320: very long time interval, substantially exceeding the nuclear size for the
321: energies $\nu=50-400\GeV$ covered in the E665 experiment.
322:
323: Having obtained the explicit forms of the string and perturbative
324: radiation contributions in Eq. (\ref{40}), let us now discuss the
325: interaction cross section of the produced colorless dipoles. These, as we
326: mentioned, should be treated as pre-hadrons, until they form hadronic wave
327: functions and get definite masses. As for their interaction cross section,
328: what matters is their transverse size, rather than their mass. Since the
329: decay of a string is a soft process, it is natural to assume that the
330: decay products have a size of the order of the hadronic size and therefore
331: interact with about the same cross section.
332:
333: Less obvious is the situation with pre-hadrons produced from perturbative
334: gluons. Since the mean transverse momenta of the gluons follow the photon
335: virtuality $Q^2$, the initial size of the produced pre-hadrons should be
336: small, of the order of $1/Q$. Then one may expect the color transparency
337: effect to be at work \cite{zkl,bm}. Indeed, this happens for leading
338: hadrons, and the evolution of the pre-hadron size has a strong impact on
339: nuclear transparency \cite{knp,knph}. In the present case, however, we
340: deal with the slowest part of the hadron spectrum which is independent of
341: the photon energy $\nu$, provided that it is sufficiently high. Only
342: those pre-hadrons are produced within the nuclear volume whose energy
343: does not exceed $E_h \lsim R_A\,(Q^2-\lambda^2)/2\ln(Q^2/\lambda^2)$. The
344: size of such a pre-hadron evolves so fast that the largest part of the
345: effect of color transparency is washed out. Even for the most energetic
346: exclusively produced hadrons in the E665 experiment, the effect of color
347: transparency is rather moderate \cite{e665-ct,knnz}; it is much weaker
348: and hardly detectable at lower energies \cite{knst}. Therefore, we
349: neglect these corrections and assume that pre-hadrons interact with the
350: hadronic cross sections.
351:
352: Eventually, we are in the position to evaluate the time dependent
353: effective absorption cross section in (\ref{20}), to be used in the
354: description of GT production; by treating all the ${\bar qq}$ colorless
355: dipoles as mesons (M), we obtain
356: \beq
357: \sigma_{eff}(t)=
358: \sigma^{MN}_{in}\Bigl[n_M(t) +
359: n_G(t)\Bigr]\ ,
360: \label{80}
361: \eeq
362:
363: Note that this expression is different from the one used in \cite{ck}.
364: Firstly, we excluded the term $\sigma^{NN}_{tot}$ corresponding to
365: interaction of the nucleon originated from the first DIS event, since we
366: treat this nucleon as a participant giving rise to the last term in
367: (\ref{20}). Secondly, we replaced the total meson-nucleon (MN) cross
368: section by the inelastic one. This is because most of recoiling protons
369: in elastic and diffractive scattering have too small momenta to
370: contribute to the production of GT. Therefore, we use $\sigma^{MN}_{in} =
371: \sigma^{\pi N}_{tot} - \sigma^{\pi N}_{el} - \sigma^{\pi N}_{sd} =
372: 17.7\mb$.
373:
374:
375: Before illustrating the calculation of the $Q^2$ dependence of the mean
376: number of GT $n_{gr}(Q^2)$, let us briefly discuss the expected
377: dependence of $n_{gr}$ upon the energy transfer $\nu$. Both the string
378: model and perturbative radiation lead to the mean multiplicity which
379: rises logarithmically with energy. Naively, one may conclude that the
380: amount of GT follows the multiplicity and should rise with energy as
381: well. However, as already discussed, it takes time to produce hadrons.
382: The observed multiplicity does not emerge in an instantaneous
383: explosion-like particle production, but is a result of time development
384: of the hadronization process. The full time of jet production is
385: proportional to its energy and exceeds the nuclear size at the E665
386: energies. However, only those gluons which are radiated inside the
387: nucleus can contribute to the production of GT. With the condition
388: $t_c<R_A$ one should integrate the radiation spectrum from
389: $\omega_{min}=k_T$ up to $\omega_{max}=k_T^2 R_A$. The result is
390: independent of the jet energy. Indeed, this is confirmed by the results
391: of the E665 experiment (see Figs.~2, 17 in \cite{e665}).
392:
393: At the same time, one should expect a $Q^2$ dependence of the mean number
394: of GT. Indeed, the stronger kick gets the quark, the more gluons it shakes
395: off. The mean transverse momentum of radiated gluons follows $Q^2$ which
396: plays the role of the upper cut-off for the integration $d^2k_T/k_T^2$.
397: Correspondingly, the multiplicity of the radiated gluons rises
398: logarithmically with $Q^2$.
399:
400: Let us now quantitatively analyze the behavior of $\la n_{gr}(Q^2)\ra$.
401: To this end we have calculated the mean number of collisions by using
402: Eqs.~(\ref{20}) and (\ref{80}). Then, applying (\ref{10}), we have
403: obtained the number of GT, $\la n_{gr}(Q^2)\ra$. We fixed $x_{Bj}$ at the
404: mean value $\la x_{Bj}\ra=0.068$ \cite{e665}. The result shown by dashed
405: curve is compared with the experimental data from the E665 experiment
406: \cite{e665} in Fig.~\ref{gt}.
407: \begin{figure}[tbh]
408: \special{psfile=e665.ps
409: angle=0. voffset=-340. hoffset=40.
410: hscale=60. vscale=60.}
411: \begin{center}
412: \vspace{9.5cm}
413: \parbox{13cm}
414: {\caption[Delta]
415: {The mean number of grey tracks $\la n_{gr}\ra$ produced in the $\mu Xe$
416: DIS as function of $Q^2$. The theoretical predictions based upon
417: Eqs.~(\ref{10}), (\ref{20}) and (\ref{80}), are compared with the
418: experimental data from Ref. \cite{e665}, which correspond to non-shadowing
419: ($x_{Bj}>0.02$) region. The dashed curve corresponds to fixed $x_{Bj}=\la
420: x_{Bj}\ra = 0.068$. The solid curve includes the correlation between $Q^2$
421: and $x_{Bj}$ (see text).}
422: \label{gt}}
423: \end{center}
424: \end{figure}
425:
426: If the time interval $t_0$ is of the order or smaller than the nuclear
427: size, the chosen value of $x_{Bj}$ affects hadronization and is
428: important. The E665 data are subject to quite a strong correlation
429: between $Q^2$ and $x_{Bj}$, which may change the results depicted in
430: Fig.~\ref{gt}. We parametrize this correlation as $Q^2=A+B\,x_{Bj}$,
431: where the parameters $A=2.2\GeV^2$ and $B=178\GeV^2$ are found using the
432: values of $\la Q^2\ra$ and $\la x_{Bj}\ra$ for two regions called in
433: \cite{e665} "shadowing" and "non-shadowing". At very small $x_{Bj}<0.01$
434: we introduce an additional $x_{Bj}$ dependence of parameter $A$ which is,
435: however, unimportant for the kinematic region under discussion. Our
436: results corrected for the $Q^2-x_{Bj}$ correlation are depicted by the
437: solid curve in Fig.~\ref{gt}. In spite of the difference between the two
438: curves, both agree with the data.
439:
440: In order to see the dependence of $\la n_{gr}\ra$ on $x_{Bj}$ explicitly
441: we calculated it either fixing $Q^2$ at the mean value $\la
442: Q^2\ra=14.3\GeV^2$, or applying the $Q^2-x_{Bj}$ correlation introduced
443: above. The results are depicted in Fig.~\ref{xbj} by the dashed and solid
444: curves, respectively.
445: \begin{figure}[tbh]
446: \special{psfile=xbj.ps
447: angle=0. voffset=-340. hoffset=40.
448: hscale=60. vscale=60.}
449: \begin{center}
450: \vspace{9.5cm}
451: \parbox{13cm}
452: {\caption[Delta]
453: {The mean number of grey tracks $\la n_{gr}\ra$ produced in the $\mu Xe$
454: DIS as function of $x_{Bj}$. The experimental data are from Ref.
455: \cite{e665}. The dashed and solid curves show the results of calculations
456: with fixed $Q^2=14.3\GeV^2$ and corrected for the $Q^2-x_{Bj}$ correlation
457: respectively.}
458: \label{xbj}}
459: \end{center}
460: \end{figure}
461: Although both curves slightly overestimate the data, the solid one
462: better reproduces the measured slope.
463:
464: In closing, the following comments are in order:
465: \begin{itemize}
466: \item
467: In our calculations we employed the same hadronization model as in
468: \cite{knp,knph,ck} with no readjustment of the parameters, and the
469: empirical relation between the number of grey tracks and the number of
470: collisions given by Eq.(\ref{10}). The model successfully passed the new
471: test;
472: \item
473: the results of calculations may be subject to further corrections. In
474: particular, we neglected resonance decays, which is justified by their
475: rather high energies. On the other hand, the formation time of hadronic
476: wave function is much shorter than the resonance life time and is rather
477: short for pre-hadrons produced within the nucleus. This is the reason why
478: we neglected the effects of color transparency which are important for
479: leading hadrons \cite{knp,knph}. This may explain why our results
480: exhibited in Fig.~\ref{gt} somewhat overestimate the data;
481: \item
482: the $Q^2$ dependence of the mean number of grey tracks serves as a
483: sensitive tool for testing theoretical models of hadronization. It can be
484: seen that the amount of grey tracks doubles within the range of $Q^2$
485: covered by the kinematics of the E665 experiment, and our calculations
486: well reproduce such a steep variation of $\la n_{gr}(Q^2)\ra$;
487: \item
488: whereas nuclear attenuation of leading hadrons carries information of
489: space-time development of hadronization in rather rare events, grey tracks
490: provide precious information about hadronization dynamics for the main
491: bulk of DIS events;
492: \item
493: We found a rather flat dependence of $\la n_{gr}\ra$ on $x_Bj$ at fixed
494: $Q^2$. However, the $Q^2 - x_{Bj}$ correlation existing in the E665
495: experiment leads to a growth of the number of GT with $x_{Bj}$. Our
496: calculations corrected for this effect well describe the measured
497: $x_{Bj}$ dependence of GT;
498: \item
499: in our calculations we assumed that the value of Bjorken scaling
500: variable $x_{Bj}$ is sufficiently large to neglect the sea, and this is
501: the reason why we compared our results with the E665 data at large values
502: of $x_{Bj}$. At small values of $x_{Bj}$ one should take into account the
503: production of two jets with different momenta, with only one of them
504: producing a grey track corresponding to the target nucleon on which the
505: DIS process occurred. On the other hand, the E665 experiment detected no
506: substantial change in behavior of different observables in the shadowed
507: compared to the nonshadowed regions. This was explained by a large
508: contribution from diffraction \cite{e665}.
509: \end{itemize}
510:
511: \bigskip
512: {\bf Acknowledgments:} One of us (C.C.d.A) is grateful for hospitality
513: and support to the Max-Planck-Institut f\"ur Kernphysik, Heidelberg, where
514: this paper was initiated, whereas the other (B.Z.K.) is grateful to the
515: RIKEN BNL Research Center for hospitality during the workshop "Theory
516: Summer Program on RHIC Physics" when the paper was completed.
517:
518: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
519: \hsize 130mm
520:
521: \bibitem{knp} B.Z.~Kopeliovich, J.~Nemchik and E.~Predazzi, in
522: {\it Future Physics at HERA}, Proceedings of the Workshop 1995/96,
523: edited by G. Ingelman, A. De Roeck and R. Klanner, DESY,
524: 1995/1996, vol.2, p. 1038 (nucl-th/9607036);\\ in Proceedings of the
525: {\it ELFE Summer School on Confinement Physics}, edited by
526: S.D.~Bass and P.A.M.~Guichon, Editions Frontieres, 1995, p. 391,
527: Gif-sur-Yvette (hep-ph/9511214).
528:
529: \bibitem{knph} B.Z.~Kopeliovich, J.~Nemchik and E.~Predazzi,
530: A.~Hayashigaki, Nucl. Phys. {\bf A740} (2004) 211.
531:
532: \bibitem{emc} EMC Collaboration, J.~Ashman et al., Z. Phys. {\bf
533: C52} (1991) 1.
534:
535: \bibitem{slac} L.S.~Osborne et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 40}
536: (1978) 1624.
537:
538: \bibitem{hermes} HERMES Collaboration, A. Airapetian et al., Eur.
539: Phys. J. {\bf C20} (2001) 479; Phys. Lett. {\bf B577} (2003) 37.
540:
541: \bibitem{ww} E.~Wang and X.-N.~Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 89}
542: (2002) 162301.
543:
544: \bibitem{amp} A.~Accardi, V.~Muccifora and H.J.~Pirner, Nucl. Phys. {\bf
545: A720} (2003) 131.
546:
547: \bibitem{giessen} T.~Falter, W.~Cassing, K.~Gallmeister, U.~Mosel,
548: nucl-th/0303011; nucl-th/0406023.
549:
550: \bibitem{ako} N. Z. ~Akopov, G. M. ~Elbakian and L. A. ~Grigorian,
551: hep-ph/0205123.
552:
553: \bibitem{ck} C.~Ciofi degli Atti and B.Z.~Kopeliovich, Eur. Phys. J. {\bf
554: A17} (2003) 133.
555:
556: \bibitem{cks} C.~Ciofi degli Atti, S.~Scopetta and L. P.~Kaptari, Eur.
557: Phys. J. {\bf A5} (1999) 191.
558:
559: \bibitem{khun} C. Keppel, S. Kuhn, and W. Melnitchouk, spokespersons {\it
560: The structure of the free neutron via spectator tagging}, TJNAF BoNuS
561: Collaboration, E03-012.\\ S. Kuhn, Private Communication
562:
563: \bibitem{ckk} C.~Ciofi degli Atti, L.P.~Kaptari, and
564: B.Z.~Kopeliovich, Eur. Phys. J. {\bf A19} (2004) 145; and
565: in preparation.
566:
567: \bibitem{e665} E665 Collaboration, M.R.~Adams et al., Z. Phys. {\bf
568: C65} (1995) 225.
569:
570: \bibitem{mine} B.Z.~Kopeliovich, Phys. Rev. {\bf C68} (2003)
571: 044906.
572:
573: \bibitem{gb} J.F.~Gunion and G.~Bertsch, Phys. Rev. {\bf D25}
574: (1982) 746.
575:
576: \bibitem{kst2} B.Z.~Kopeliovich, A.~Sch\"afer and A.V.~Tarasov,
577: Phys. Rev. {\bf D62} (2000) 054022 (hep-ph/9908245).
578:
579: \bibitem{kp} B.Z.~Kopeliovich and B.~Povh, J. Phys. {\bf G30} (2004) S999.
580:
581: \bibitem{cnn} A.~Casher, H.~Neubereger and S.~Nussinov, Phys. Rev.
582: {\bf D20} (1979) 179.
583:
584: \bibitem{k-pl} B.Z.~Kopeliovich, Phys. Lett. {\bf B243} (1990) 141.
585:
586: \bibitem{zkl} A.B.~Zamolodchikov, B.Z.~Kopeliovich and L.I.~Lapidus,
587: Sov. Phys. JETP Lett. {\bf 33} (1981) 612.
588:
589: \bibitem{bm} S.J.~Brodsky and A.~Mueller, Phys. Lett. {\bf B206} (1988)
590: 685.
591:
592: \bibitem{e665-ct} E665 Collaboration, M.R.~Adams et al.,
593: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 74} (1995) 1525.
594:
595: \bibitem{knnz} B.Z.~Kopeliovich, J.~Nemchik, N.N.~Nikolaev, and
596: B.G. Zakharov, Phys. Lett. {\bf B324} (1994) 469.
597:
598: \bibitem{knst} B.Z.~Kopeliovich, J.~Nemchik, A.~Sch\"afer, A.~Tarasov,
599: Phys. Rev. {\bf C65} (2002) 035201.
600:
601:
602: \end{thebibliography}
603:
604: \end{document}
605: