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[10pt,aps,prd,groupedaddress,showpacs]{revtex4}%
25: %% ,draft,showpacs,showkeys]{revtex4}
26: %\documentclass[preprint,tightenlines,aps,prd,groupedaddress,showpacs]
27: %\documentclass[preprint,aps,prl,groupedaddress,showpacs]
28: \documentclass[twocolumn,aps,prl,groupedaddress,showpacs]
29: {revtex4}%
30: \usepackage{graphicx}
31: \usepackage{amsmath}
32: \usepackage{bm}
33: %
34: % Packages to make BaBar symbol
35: \usepackage{relsize}
36: \RequirePackage{xspace}
37: %
38: %\documentclass[aps,prl,preprint,superscriptaddress]{revtex4}
39: %\documentclass[aps,prl,twocolumn,groupedaddress]{revtex4}
40: % You should use BibTeX and apsrev.bst for references
41: % Choosing a journal automatically selects the correct APS
42: % BibTeX style file (bst file), so only uncomment the line
43: % below if necessary.
44: %
45: %%%Definitions%%%
46: %
47: \newcommand{\babar}{\mbox{\slshape B\kern-0.1em{\smaller A}\kern-0.1em %
48: B\kern-0.1em{\smaller A\kern-0.2em R}}\xspace}
49: %%%%%%\bibliographystyle{apsrev}
50:
51: \begin{document}
52:
53: % Use the \preprint command to place your local institutional report
54: % number in the upper righthand corner of the title page in preprint mode.
55: % Multiple \preprint commands are allowed.
56: % Use the 'preprintnumbers' class option to override journal defaults
57: % to display numbers if necessary
58: %\preprint{\begin{tabular}{l}
59: % FERMILAB-PUB-02/332-T\\
60: % ANL-HEP-PR-02-110\end{tabular}}
61: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
62: %Title of paper
63: \title{\mbox{}\\[10pt]
64: Inclusive Production of Four Charm Hadrons \\
65: in $\bm{e^+ e^-}$ Annihilation at $\bm{B}$ Factories}
66: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
67: % repeat the \author .. \affiliation etc. as needed
68: % \email, \thanks, \homepage, \altaffiliation all apply to the current
69: % author. Explanatory text should go in the []'s, actual e-mail
70: % address or url should go in the {}'s for \email and \homepage.
71: % Please use the appropriate macro foreach each type of information
72: % \affiliation command applies to all authors since the last
73: % \affiliation command. The \affiliation command should follow the
74: % other information
75: % \affiliation can be followed by \email, \homepage, \thanks as well.
76: % \altaffiliation{}
77:
78: \author{Daekyoung Kang, Jong-Wan Lee, and Jungil Lee}
79: \affiliation{
80: Department of Physics, Korea University, Seoul 136-701, Korea}
81:
82: \author{Taewon Kim and Pyungwon Ko}
83: \affiliation{
84: Department of Physics, KAIST, Daejon 305-701, Korea}
85:
86: %\email[]{Your e-mail address}
87: %\homepage[]{Your web page}
88: %\thanks{}
89: %\altaffiliation{}
90:
91: %Collaboration name if desired (requires use of superscriptaddress
92: %option in \documentclass). \noaffiliation is required (may also be
93: %used with the \author command).
94: %\collaboration can be followed by \email, \homepage, \thanks as well.
95: %\collaboration{}
96: %\noaffiliation
97:
98: \date{\today}
99: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
100: \begin{abstract}
101: % insert abstract here
102: Measurements by the Belle Collaboration of the
103: exclusive production of two charmonia in $e^+ e^-$ annihilation
104: differ substantially from theoretical predictions.
105: Till now,
106: no conclusive explanation for this remarkable discrepancy has been
107: provided. Even the origin of the discrepancy is not identified, yet.
108: We suggest that the measurement of four-charm events in Belle
109: data must provide a strong constraint in identifying the origin of
110: this large discrepancy.
111: Our prediction of the cross section for $e^+e^-\to c\bar{c}c\bar{c}$,
112: in lowest order in strong coupling constant,
113: at $\sqrt{s}=10.6$~GeV is about $0.1$~pb.
114: If measured four-charm cross section is compatible
115: with the prediction based on perturbative QCD, it is very likely that
116: factorization of hadronization process from perturbative part may be
117: significantly violated or there exists a new production mechanism.
118: If the cross section for the four-charm event
119: is also larger than the prediction like that for the exclusive
120: $J/\psi+\eta_c$ production, perturbative QCD expansion itself will be proved
121: to be unreliable and loses predictive power.
122:
123: \end{abstract}
124:
125: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
126: % insert suggested PACS numbers in braces on next line
127: \pacs{13.66.Bc, 12.38.Bx, 14.40.Gx}
128: % 13.66.Bc Hadron production in e-e+ interactions
129: % 12.38.Bx Perturbative calculations
130: % 14.40.Gx Mesons with S=C=B=0, mass > 2.5 GeV (including quarkonia)
131: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
132: % insert suggested keywords - APS authors don't need to do this
133: %\keywords{}
134:
135: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
136: %\maketitle must follow title, authors, abstract, \pacs, and \keywords
137: \maketitle
138:
139: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
140: % body of paper here - Use proper section commands
141: % References should be done using the \cite, \ref, and \label commands
142: The Belle Collaboration has measured the cross section for
143: $J/\psi + \eta_c$ by observing a peak in the momentum spectrum of the
144: $J/\psi$ that corresponds to the 2-body final state $J/\psi + \eta_c$
145: \cite{Abe:2002rb}. The measured cross section is
146: %--------------
147: \begin{eqnarray}
148: %--------------
149: \sigma[J/\psi+\eta_c] \times B^{\eta_c}[\ge 4]
150: = \left( 33^{+7}_{-6} \pm 9 \right) \; {\rm fb},
151: %--------------
152: \label{Belle}
153: \end{eqnarray}
154: %--------------
155: where $B^{\eta_c}[\ge 4]$ is the branching fraction for the $\eta_c$ to decay
156: into at least 4 charged particles. Since $B^{\eta_c}[\ge 4]<1$,
157: the right side
158: of Eq.~(\ref{Belle}) is a lower bound on the cross section to produce
159: $J/\psi + \eta_c$. This lower bound is about an order of magnitude
160: larger than the predictions by Braaten and Lee~\cite{Braaten:2002fi},
161: and by Liu, He, and Chao~\cite{Liu:2002wq}
162: of nonrelativistic QCD(NRQCD)~\cite{BBL} in the nonrelativistic limit.
163: The cross section was calculated previously by Brodsky and
164: Ji~\cite{Brodsky:1985cr} using perturbative-QCD factorization
165: formalism~\cite{Brodsky:1981kj}. But they did not give an
166: analytic expression for the cross section. Recently, Brodsky, Ji, and
167: Lee redid~\cite{pQCD} the calculation
168: given in Ref.~\cite{Brodsky:1985cr}. They
169: found exact agreement~\cite{pQCD} with the result
170: based on NRQCD~\cite{Braaten:2002fi,Liu:2002wq}.
171: Currently, the cross section for the process $e^+e^-\to J/\psi+\eta_c$
172: shows the largest discrepancy between theory and data available
173: within standard model.
174: This presents a challenge to our current understanding
175: of charmonium production based on perturbative QCD framework.
176:
177: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
178: % Surround figure environment with turnpage environment for landscape
179: % figure
180: % \begin{turnpage}
181: %\begin{widetext}
182: %\begin{center}
183: \begin{figure*}
184: \includegraphics[width=11.5cm]{fig1.ps}
185: \caption{\label{fig1}
186: Two of the 8 topologically distinct
187: Feynman diagrams for
188: $e^-(k_1) e^+ (k_2)\to c(p_1) \bar{c}(p_2) c(p_3) \bar{c}(p_4)$.
189: }
190: \end{figure*}
191: %\end{center}
192: %\end{widetext}
193: % \end{turnpage}
194: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
195:
196:
197: A few theoretical studies have been carried out in order to explain
198: the large discrepancy. Bodwin, Braaten, and Lee
199: proposed~\cite{Bodwin:2002fk,Bodwin:2002kk} that the Belle
200: data for $J/\psi + \eta_c$ may include the $J/\psi+J/\psi$ events
201: because the width of the $\eta_c$ peak
202: in the recoil mass distribution for inclusive $J/\psi$ production
203: measured by the Belle Collaboration
204: is wide enough to accommodate $J/\psi$ events.
205: The large enhancement from photon fragmentation in the two-photon mediated
206: process $e^+e^-\to J/\psi+J/\psi$
207: overcomes the suppression factor $\alpha^2/\alpha_s^2$
208: in couplings compared to the
209: $e^+e^-\to J/\psi + \eta_c$~\cite{Bodwin:2002fk,Bodwin:2002kk}.
210: Brodsky, Goldhaber, and Lee introduced an exotic scenario that
211: the Belle $J/\psi+\eta_c$ signal may include the associate
212: production of $J/\psi$
213: and spin-$J$ glueball $\mathcal{G}_J$, $J=0,$ 2~\cite{Brodsky:2003hv}.
214: The Belle Collaboration carried out an updated analysis~\cite{Abe:2004ww}
215: motivated by these proposals. According to the Belle analysis, no
216: events for $J/\psi+J/\psi$ have been detected and the upper limit for
217: $\sigma(e^+e^-\to J/\psi+ J/\psi)\times B^{J/\psi}[>2]$ is
218: $9.1$~fb at the 90\% C.L., which is consistent with the prediction given
219: in Refs.~\cite{Bodwin:2002fk,Bodwin:2002kk}.
220: Here $B^{J/\psi}[> 2]$ is the branching fraction for the $J/\psi$ to decay
221: into more than 2 charged particles.
222: The measured cross section for $e^+e^-\to J/\psi +J/\psi$,
223: however, does not explain the large fraction of the $J/\psi + \eta_c$
224: signals. The Belle Collaboration also analyzed the angular distribution
225: of $J/\psi$ in order to identify if the data include the
226: associated $J/\psi+\mathcal{G}_0$ signals. The predicted angular
227: distributions are proportional to $\cos^2\theta$ for
228: $J/\psi+\eta_c$~\cite{Braaten:2002fi} and
229: $J/\psi+\mathcal{G}_2$~\cite{Brodsky:2003hv},
230: and $\sin^2\theta$ for $J/\psi+\mathcal{G}_0$~\cite{Brodsky:2003hv},
231: where $\theta$ is the scattering angle of the $J/\psi$ in the
232: $e^+e^-$ c.m. frame. The updated analysis show the measured distribution
233: is proportional to $\cos^2\theta$, which ruled out the spin-0 glueball
234: scenario~\cite{Abe:2004ww}.
235: Since the angular distribution for $J/\psi+\mathcal{G}_2$
236: has the same form as that for $J/\psi+\eta_c$, spin-2 glueball has not
237: been ruled out, yet.
238:
239: Another scenario is that higher-order corrections in strong coupling
240: $\alpha_s$ may be huge~\cite{Hagiwara:2003cw}. If it is true,
241: perturbative expansion is not a proper method to predict the cross section.
242: If it is not, it is probable that the factorization of long-distance
243: factor involving hadronization is seriously violated or there exists
244: a unknown production mechanism which we do not understand, yet.
245: Once we can estimate the size of the perturbative QCD corrections to
246: this process, it might be easier for us to identify the origin of
247: this large discrepancy. Unfortunately, the next-to-leading-order
248: corrections to the cross section of exclusive $J/\psi+\eta_c$ process
249: is not available. A comprehensive review on recent developments in
250: quarkonium physics can be found in Ref.~\cite{Brambilla:2004wf}.
251:
252: In this paper, we introduce an economical method
253: to check if the perturbative QCD corrections to the cross section
254: is indeed large enough to explain the discrepancy.
255: If we consider inclusive four-charm-hadron production, the prediction
256: for the cross section can be expressed as inclusive $c\bar{c}c\bar{c}$
257: production rate $\sigma(e^+e^-\to c\bar{c}c\bar{c}+X)$.
258: This is analogous to estimating $\sigma(e^+e^-\to \textrm{hadrons})$
259: by $\sum_{q}\sigma(e^+e^-\to q\bar{q}+X)$.
260: We expect $\sigma(e^+e^-\to c\bar{c}c\bar{c}+X)\approx%
261: \sigma(e^+e^-\to c\bar{c}c\bar{c})$ is a good approximation
262: at $\sqrt{s}=10.6~$GeV. Unlike the prediction for $J/\psi+\eta_c$
263: cross section, the prediction for the inclusive four-charm-hadron
264: production rate purely consists of short-distance factor. Corresponding
265: long-distance factor for hadronization is of order 1. Since this process
266: involves the same Feynman diagrams for exclusive $J/\psi+\eta_c$
267: production, the measurement of the cross section for four-charm-hadron
268: production will provide an important information in estimating the size
269: of the short-distance coefficient for $J/\psi+\eta_c$ cross section.
270: We present our prediction for inclusive four-charm-hadron production
271: by calculating $\sigma(e^+e^-\to c\bar{c}c\bar{c}+X)$ in order
272: $\alpha^2\alpha_s^2$, which is leading order in strong coupling constant.
273: If our leading-order prediction is comparable to the measured value,
274: it is very probable that the QCD higher-order corrections to the
275: $J/\psi+\eta_c$ cross section is small. Then the large discrepancy in
276: $J/\psi+\eta_c$ cross section may be due to the violation of factorization
277: or existence of new production mechanism. If the measured cross section
278: for the four-charm-hadron inclusive production is much larger than
279: our prediction like the case of $J/\psi+\eta_c$, it is very likely that
280: perturbative QCD corrections to $J/\psi+\eta_c$ cross section is
281: large enough to explain the discrepancy, which leads to the failure
282: of reliability in perturbative expansion.
283:
284: In leading order in strong coupling $\alpha_s$,
285: $c\bar{c}c\bar{c}$ can be produced at order $\alpha^2\alpha_s^2$.
286: There are two topologically distinct Feynman diagrams generating two pairs of
287: $c\bar{c}$, which are shown as $\mathcal{M}_1$ and $\mathcal{M}_2$
288: in Fig.~\ref{fig1}(a) and \ref{fig1}(b), respectively.
289: Momenta for the involving particles are assigned as
290: $e^-(k_1) e^+ (k_2)\to c(p_1) \bar{c}(p_2) c(p_3) \bar{c}(p_4)$.
291: The amplitude for the two diagrams shown in Fig.~\ref{fig1} are
292: %--------------
293: \begin{eqnarray}
294: %--------------
295: -i\mathcal{M}_i&=&
296: i\frac{(4\pi)^2 e_c\alpha \alpha_s}{s(p_2+p_3)^2}
297: \bar{v}_e(k_2)\gamma_\alpha u_e(k_1)
298: \nonumber\\&\times&
299: \bar{u}(p_3)T^a\gamma_\beta v(p_2)
300: \,\bar{u}(p_1)T^a H_i^{\alpha\beta}v(p_4),
301: \label{eq:amp}
302: %--------------
303: \end{eqnarray}
304: %--------------
305: where $s=(k_1+k_2)^2$,
306: $e_c=\frac{2}{3}$ is the fractional electric charge of the
307: charm quark, and $a$ is the SU(3) color index for the virtual gluon.
308: The vector indices $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are for the virtual photon
309: and gluon, respectively.
310: We suppress the spin and color indices of
311: the charm quarks in Eq.~(\ref{eq:amp}).
312: For $i=1$ or 2 the tensors ${H}_i^{\alpha\beta}$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:amp}),
313: which are matrices in spinor space, are defined by
314: %--------------
315: \begin{subequations}
316: \begin{eqnarray}
317: %--------------
318: H_1^{\alpha\beta}&=&\gamma^\beta\Lambda(p_1+p_2+p_3)\gamma^\alpha,
319: \\
320: H_2^{\alpha\beta}&=&\gamma^\alpha\Lambda(-p_2-p_3-p_4)\gamma^\beta,
321: %--------------
322: \end{eqnarray}
323: \end{subequations}
324: %--------------
325: where $\Lambda(p)=(\,/\!\!\!p+m_c)/(p^2-m_c^2)$.
326:
327: There are 6 more Feynman diagrams that can be obtained from
328: the two amplitudes $\mathcal{M}_1$ and $\mathcal{M}_2$
329: by exchanging two charm quarks and two antiquarks, respectively, as
330: %--------------
331: \begin{equation}
332: %--------------
333: \begin{array}{ll}
334: \mathcal{M}_3=-P_{1\leftrightarrow 3}\mathcal{M}_1,
335: &\mathcal{M}_4=-P_{1\leftrightarrow 3}\mathcal{M}_2,
336: \\
337: \mathcal{M}_5=-P_{2\leftrightarrow 4}\mathcal{M}_1,
338: &\mathcal{M}_6=-P_{2\leftrightarrow 4}\mathcal{M}_2,
339: \\
340: \mathcal{M}_7=+P_{1\leftrightarrow 3}P_{2\leftrightarrow 4} \mathcal{M}_1,
341: &\mathcal{M}_8=+P_{1\leftrightarrow 3}P_{2\leftrightarrow 4} \mathcal{M}_2.
342: \end{array}
343: \label{eq:amp3-8}
344: %--------------
345: \end{equation}
346: %--------------
347: where $P_{i\leftrightarrow j}$ is the operator exchanging two particles
348: with momentum indices $p_i$ and $p_j$ shown in Fig.~\ref{fig1}.
349: The signs of $\mathcal{M}_3$ through $\mathcal{M}_8$ in
350: Eq.~(\ref{eq:amp3-8}) are determined by the antisymmetricity
351: of Fermi statistics in exchanging identical fermions among
352: the final-state particles.
353:
354: The total cross section for the process is expressed as
355: %--------------
356: \begin{equation}
357: %--------------
358: d\sigma=\frac{1}{2s} \overline{\sum}\left|\mathcal{M}\right|^2
359: \frac{d\Phi_4}{(2!)^2},
360: \label{eq:sig}
361: %--------------
362: \end{equation}
363: %--------------
364: where $\mathcal{M}=\sum_{i=1}^8 \mathcal{M}_i$, and
365: the factor $(2!)^2$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:sig}) is divided in order
366: to avoid double-counting of identical final-state particles.
367: The summation notation $\overline{\sum}$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:sig}) stands for
368: averaging over initial spin states and summation over
369: final color and spin states.
370: The four-body phase-space element $d\Phi_4$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:sig})
371: can be parametrized by
372: %--------------
373: \begin{equation}
374: %--------------
375: d\Phi_4=\frac{dm^2_{13} dm^2_{24}}{(2\pi)^8}
376: \cdot
377: \frac{|\bm{P}|d\Omega}{4\sqrt{s}}
378: \cdot
379: \frac{|\bm{p}_1^*|d\Omega^*_{13}}{4m_{13}}
380: \cdot
381: \frac{|\bm{p}_2^*|d\Omega^*_{24}}{4m_{24}},
382: \label{eq:ps}
383: %--------------
384: \end{equation}
385: %--------------
386: where $m_{ij}$ is the invariant mass of $p_i+p_j$ and $d\Omega^*_{ij}$
387: is the solid angle element of $p_i+p_j$ in the rest frame of $p_i+p_j$.
388: Their physical regions are
389: $2m_c<m_{13}<\sqrt{s}-2m_c$ and $2m_c<m_{24}<\sqrt{s}-m_{13}$.
390: The three-momenta $\bm{p}_1^*$ of $p_1$
391: and $\bm{p}_2^*$ of $p_2$ are defined in $p_1+p_3$ and $p_2+p_4$ rest
392: frames, respectively. The three-momentum $\bm{P}$ and
393: solid angle element $d\Omega$ are for $p_1+p_2$
394: in the $e^+e^-$ c.m. frame.
395: Integrating the differential cross section (\ref{eq:sig})
396: over the phase space (\ref{eq:ps}),
397: we get the total cross section for $e^+e^-\to c\bar{c}c\bar{c}$.
398: We compute the
399: $\overline{\sum}|\mathcal{M}|^2$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:sig})
400: using REDUCE~\cite{reduce}
401: and carry out the phase-space integral in Eq.~(\ref{eq:sig})
402: making use of the adaptive Monte Carlo routine VEGAS~\cite{vegas}.
403: As a check, we carry out the same calculation using
404: CompHEP~\cite{Boos:2004kh}.
405: Our analytic result for $\overline{\sum}|\mathcal{M}|^2$ and
406: numerical values for the total cross section agree with
407: those obtained by using CompHEP.
408:
409: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
410: % Surround figure environment with turnpage environment for landscape
411: % figure
412: % \begin{turnpage}
413: \begin{figure}
414: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig2.ps}
415: \caption{\label{fig2}
416: Total cross section $\sigma(e^+ e^-\to c\bar{c}c\bar{c})$
417: at $\sqrt{s}=10.6$~GeV in pb as a function of $m_c$,
418: where $\alpha=1/137$ and $\alpha_s=0.2$.
419: }
420: \end{figure}
421: % \end{turnpage}
422: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
423: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
424: % Surround figure environment with turnpage environment for landscape
425: % figure
426: % \begin{turnpage}
427: \begin{figure}
428: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig3.ps}
429: \caption{\label{fig3}
430: Differential cross section $d\sigma/dm_{cc}$ in fb/GeV with respect to
431: the invariant mass $m_{cc}=m_{13}$
432: of $cc$ for $e^+ e^-$ annihilation into $c\bar{c}c\bar{c}$,
433: where $m_c=1.5$~GeV, $\alpha=1/137$, and $\alpha_s=0.2$.
434: Physical range of the $m_{cc}$ is from
435: $2m_c$ to $\sqrt{s}-2m_c$. The area under the curve is
436: the integrated cross section 97~fb.
437: }
438: \end{figure}
439: % \end{turnpage}
440: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
441:
442:
443: Our predictions for the inclusive four-charm-hadron cross sections
444: in $e^+e^-$ annihilation at $\sqrt{s}=$10.6~GeV depending on the
445: charm-quark mass $m_c$ is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig2}.
446: The cross section for
447: $e^+e^-\to c\bar{c}c\bar{c}$ is very sensitive to the value of
448: $m_c$. For $\alpha=1/137$, $\alpha_s=0.2$, $m_c=$1.5~GeV
449: $\sigma(e^+e^-\to c\bar{c}c\bar{c})=$97~fb.
450: The cross section varies from
451: $0.31$~pb at $m_c=$1.2~GeV to $24$~fb at $m_c=$1.8~GeV.
452: The cross section decreases as $m_c$ increases mainly because
453: available phase space shrinks. If one can increase the c.m. energy
454: of the $e^+e^-$,
455: the $m_c$ dependence will decrease.
456: In previous analyses for exclusive two-charmonium production cross
457: sections, the next-to-leading order pole mass $m_c=1.4\pm 0.2$~GeV has
458: been used for the $m_c$~\cite{Braaten:2002fi,Bodwin:2002fk,Bodwin:2002kk}.
459: However, the cross section for $e^+e^-\to c\bar{c}$ is
460: not sensitive to the charm-quark mass $m_c$.
461: The lowest-order cross section of order $\alpha^2$ is
462: $\sigma(e^+e^-\to c\bar{c})=1.0$~nb with relative errors of
463: $3\times 10^{-3}$ for $m_c=1.5\pm 0.3$~GeV at
464: $\sqrt{s}=10.6$~GeV.
465: In Ref.~\cite{Berezhnoy:2003hz}
466: the total cross section for $e^+e^-\to c\bar{c}c\bar{c}$
467: at $\sqrt{s}=10.6$~GeV is predicted. If we use
468: the input parameters $\alpha_s=0.24$ and $m_c=1.4$~GeV
469: given in Ref.~\cite{Berezhnoy:2003hz}, we get
470: 0.210~pb, which is different from
471: the prediction $0.237$~pb given in Ref.~\cite{Berezhnoy:2003hz} by
472: about 13\%.
473:
474: In Fig.~\ref{fig3} we show the differential cross section with respect
475: to the invariant mass of $cc$. This is the prediction for
476: $d\sigma(e^+e^-\to cc+X)/dm_{cc}$ in leading order in $\alpha_s$.
477: Experimentally, this differential cross section can be compared with
478: the $\sum_{H,H'}d\sigma(e^+e^-\to HH'+X)/dm_{HH'}$, where $H$ and $H'$
479: are charm hadrons, which do not include anticharm.
480:
481: Finally, we estimate the number of four-charm-hadron events that could be
482: detected by the Belle Collaboration.
483: Production
484: rate for baryonic states such as $\Lambda_c$ will be small and we do not
485: include the contribution in the following rough estimate.
486: Based on heavy-quark spin symmetry, the relative rates for
487: a $c$ quark fragmenting into the charm mesons are
488: $D^+:D^0:D^{+*}:D^{0*}= 1:1:3:3$. Because the two spin-triplet states decay
489: into spin-singlet states by 100\% with branching fractions
490: Br[$D^{+*}\to D^0 \pi^+$]=70\%,
491: Br[$D^{+*}\to D^+ \pi^0$]=30\%,
492: Br[$D^{0*}\to D^0 \pi^0$]=62\%, and
493: Br[$D^{0*}\to D^0 \gamma$]=38\%,
494: we may only consider charm meson pairs made of either $D^+$ or $D^0$.
495: Resulting fragmentation probabilities are approximately
496: $P[c\to D^++X]\approx\frac{1}{4}$ and
497: $P[c\to D^0+X]\approx\frac{3}{4}$, respectively.
498: Therefore,
499: $\sigma[e^+e^-\to D^+D^++X]\approx\frac{1}{16}\sigma[e^+e^-\to cc+X]$,
500: $\sigma[e^+e^-\to D^+D^0+X]\approx\frac{6}{16}\sigma[e^+e^-\to cc+X]$, and
501: $\sigma[e^+e^-\to D^0D^0+X]\approx\frac{9}{16}\sigma[e^+e^-\to cc+X]$.
502: The detection rate will suffer losses from branching fractions
503: Br$[D^+ \to K^- \pi^+ \pi^+]=9.2$\% and
504: Br$[D^0 \to K^- \pi^+ ]=3.8$\%,
505: and detection acceptance/efficiency $\approx 80$\%
506: for each charged particle in the decay products of $D^+$ or $D^0$.
507: With $\sigma[e^+e^-\to cc+X]\approx 0.1$~pb and
508: current integrated luminosity $\mathcal{L}\approx 300$~fb$^{-1}$
509: we expect roughly 30 events will be detected by the Belle detector.
510: Even if we consider the uncertainties from
511: $\alpha_s$ and $m_c$ in our prediction,
512: we expect at least about 10 events will be detected by the Belle Collaboration.
513: If there is a large QCD corrections, the number of events will be increased
514: into several hundreds.
515:
516: In summary, we have calculated the cross section for $e^+ e^-$
517: annihilation into $c\bar{c}c\bar{c}$. Assuming quark-hadron duality,
518: the cross section for the inclusive four charm hadrons is predicted
519: to be about $0.1$~pb. The comparison of this prediction with the
520: measured cross section for the four charm hadrons
521: at $B$-factories will provide a strong constraint in determining
522: the origin of the large discrepancy between prediction and Belle data
523: for exclusive $J/\psi+\eta_c$ production in $e^+e^-$ annihilation at
524: $\sqrt{s}=10.6$~GeV. The measurement will also provide a useful information
525: in explaining large cross section for $J/\psi+c\bar{c}+X$
526: measured by the Belle Collaboration~\cite{Abe:2002rb}
527: compared to the NRQCD predictions~\cite{Jpsi-X}.
528: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
529: % If in two-column mode, this environment will change to single-column
530: % format so that long equations can be displayed. Use
531: % sparingly.
532: %\begin{widetext}
533: % put long equation here
534: %\end{widetext}
535: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
536:
537: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
538: % Surround figure environment with turnpage environment for landscape
539: % figure
540: % \begin{turnpage}
541: % \begin{figure}
542: % \includegraphics{}%
543: % \caption{\label{}}
544: % \end{figure}
545: % \end{turnpage}
546: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
547:
548: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
549: % tables should appear as floats within the text
550: % Here is an example of the general form of a table:
551: % Fill in the caption in the braces of the \caption{} command. Put the label
552: % that you will use with \ref{} command in the braces of the \label{} command.
553: % Insert the column specifiers (l, r, c, d, etc.) in the empty braces of the
554: % \begin{tabular}{} command.
555: % The ruledtabular enviroment adds doubled rules to table and sets a
556: % reasonable default table settings.
557: % Use the table* environment to get a full-width table in two-column
558: % Add \usepackage{longtable} and the longtable (or longtable*}
559: % environment for nicely formatted long tables. Or use the the [H]
560: % placement option to break a long table (with less control than
561: % in longtable).
562: % \begin{table}%[H] add [H] placement to break table across pages
563: % \caption{\label{}}
564: % \begin{ruledtabular}
565: % \begin{tabular}{}
566: % Lines of table here ending with \\
567: % \end{tabular}
568: % \end{ruledtabular}
569: % \end{table}
570: % Surround table environment with turnpage environment for landscape
571: % table
572: % \begin{turnpage}
573: % \begin{table}
574: % \caption{\label{}}
575: % \begin{ruledtabular}
576: % \begin{tabular}{}
577: % \end{tabular}
578: % \end{ruledtabular}
579: % \end{table}
580: % \end{turnpage}
581: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
582:
583: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
584: % Specify following sections are appendices. Use \appendix* if there
585: % only one appendix.
586: %\appendix
587: %\section{}
588: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
589:
590: \begin{acknowledgments}
591: We would like to thank Eric Braaten and Geoff Bodwin for valuable
592: suggestions in improving this manuscript.
593: We also thank Hongjoo Kim, Shinwoo Nam, and Eunil Won for providing us with
594: useful experimental information.
595: PK is supported in part by BK21 Haeksim Program, by
596: KOSEF through CHEP at Kyungpook National University.
597: JL is supported by a Korea Research Foundation Grant(KRF-2004-015-C00092).
598: \end{acknowledgments}
599:
600: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
601: % Create the reference section using BibTeX:
602:
603: \begin{thebibliography}{}
604:
605: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
606: %\cite{Abe:2002rb}
607: \bibitem{Abe:2002rb}
608: K.~Abe {\it et al.} [BELLE Collaboration],
609: %``Observation of double c anti-c production in e+ e- annihilation
610: % at s**(1/2) approx. 10.6-GeV,''
611: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 89}, 142001 (2002).
612: % [arXiv:hep-ex/0205104].
613: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0205104;%%
614:
615: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
616: %\cite{Braaten:2002fi}
617: \bibitem{Braaten:2002fi}
618: E.~Braaten and J.~Lee,
619: %``Exclusive double-charmonium production from e+ e- annihilation
620: % into a virtual photon,''
621: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 054007 (2003)
622: [arXiv:hep-ph/0211085].
623: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0211085;%%
624:
625: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
626: %\cite{Liu:2002wq}
627: \bibitem{Liu:2002wq}
628: K.~Y.~Liu, Z.~G.~He and K.~T.~Chao,
629: %``Problems of double charm production in e+ e- annihilation at s**(1/2) =
630: %10.6-GeV. ((V)),''
631: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 557}, 45 (2003)
632: [arXiv:hep-ph/0211181].
633: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0211181;%%
634:
635:
636: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
637: %\cite{BBL}
638: \bibitem{BBL}
639: G.~T.~Bodwin, E.~Braaten, and G.~P.~Lepage,
640: %``Rigorous QCD analysis of inclusive annihilation and production
641: % of heavy quarkonium,''
642: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 51}, 1125 (1995);
643: {\bf 55}, 5853(E) (1997).
644: % [arXiv:hep-ph/9407339].
645:
646: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
647: %\cite{Brodsky:1985cr}
648: \bibitem{Brodsky:1985cr}
649: S.~J.~Brodsky and C.-R.~Ji,
650: %``Exclusive Production Of Higher Generation Hadrons And Form-Factor Zeros
651: % In Quantum Chromodynamics,''
652: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 55}, 2257 (1985).
653:
654:
655: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
656: %\cite{Brodsky:1981kj}
657: \bibitem{Brodsky:1981kj}
658: S.~J.~Brodsky and G.~P.~Lepage,
659: %``Helicity Selection Rules And Tests Of Gluon Spin
660: % In Exclusive QCD Processes,''
661: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 24}, 2848 (1981).
662:
663: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
664: \bibitem{pQCD}
665: S.~J.~Brodsky, C.~-R.~Ji, and J.~Lee,
666: in preparation.
667:
668: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
669: %\cite{Bodwin:2002kk}
670: \bibitem{Bodwin:2002fk}
671: G.~T.~Bodwin, J.~Lee and E.~Braaten,
672: %``e+ e- annihilation into J/psi + J/psi,''
673: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 90}, 162001 (2003)
674: [arXiv:hep-ph/0212181].
675: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0212181;%%
676:
677: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
678: \bibitem{Bodwin:2002kk}
679: G.~T.~Bodwin, J.~Lee, and E.~Braaten,
680: %``Exclusive double-charmonium production from e+ e- annihilation into
681: % two virtual photons,''
682: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 054023 (2003)
683: [arXiv:hep-ph/0212352].
684: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0212352;%%
685:
686: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
687: %\cite{Brodsky:2003hv}
688: \bibitem{Brodsky:2003hv}
689: S.~J.~Brodsky, A.~S.~Goldhaber and J.~Lee,
690: %``Hunting for glueballs in electron positron annihilation,''
691: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 91}, 112001 (2003)
692: [arXiv:hep-ph/0305269].
693: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0305269;%%
694:
695: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
696: \bibitem{Abe:2004ww}
697: K.~Abe {\it et al.} [Belle Collaboration],
698: %``Study of double charmonium production in e+ e- annihilation at s**(1/2)
699: %approx. 10.6-GeV,''
700: arXiv:hep-ex/0407009.
701: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0407009;%%
702:
703: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
704: %\cite{Hagiwara:2003cw}
705: \bibitem{Hagiwara:2003cw}
706: K.~Hagiwara, E.~Kou and C.~F.~Qiao,
707: %``Exclusive J/psi productions at e+ e- colliders,''
708: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 570}, 39 (2003)
709: [arXiv:hep-ph/0305102].
710: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0305102;%%
711:
712: %---------------------------------------------------------------------
713: %\cite{Brambilla:2004wf}
714: \bibitem{Brambilla:2004wf}
715: N.~Brambilla {\it et al.},
716: %``Heavy Quarkonium Physics,''
717: arXiv:hep-ph/0412158.
718: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0412158;%%
719:
720: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
721: \bibitem{reduce}
722: A.~C.~Hearn, \textit{REDUCE User's Manual} v. 3.7 (The RAND Corporation,
723: Santa Monica, 1999) (Email:reduce@rand.org).
724: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
725: \bibitem{vegas}
726: G.~P.~Lepage, J. Comput. Phys. \textbf{27}, 192 (1978).
727: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
728: \bibitem{Boos:2004kh}
729: E.~Boos {\it et al.} [CompHEP Collaboration],
730: %``CompHEP 4.4: Automatic computations from Lagrangians to events,''
731: Nucl.\ Instrum.\ Meth.\ A {\bf 534}, 250 (2004)
732: [arXiv:hep-ph/0403113].
733: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0403113;%%
734:
735: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
736: %\cite{Berezhnoy:2003hz}
737: \bibitem{Berezhnoy:2003hz}
738: A.~V.~Berezhnoy and A.~K.~Likhoded,
739: %``Processes e+ e- $\to$ c anti-c c anti-c and e+ e- $\to$ J/psi + g g at
740: %s**(1/2) = 10.59-GeV,''
741: Phys.\ Atom.\ Nucl.\ {\bf 67}, 757 (2004)
742: [Yad.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 67}, 778 (2004)]
743: [arXiv:hep-ph/0303145].
744: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0303145;%%
745:
746: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
747: \bibitem{Jpsi-X}
748: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
749: P.~Cho and A.~K.~Leibovich,
750: %``Color-singlet psi(Q) production at e+ e- colliders,''
751: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 54}, 6690 (1996);
752: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9606229];
753: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
754: F.~Yuan, C.-F.~Qiao, and K.-T.~Chao,
755: %``Determination of color-octet matrix elements from e+ e- process at
756: %low energies,''
757: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 56}, 1663 (1997);
758: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9701361];
759: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
760: %F.~Yuan, C.~F.~Qiao and K.~T.~Chao,
761: %``Prompt J/psi production at e+ e- colliders,''
762: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 56}, 321 (1997);
763: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9703438];
764: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
765: S.~Baek, P.~Ko, J.~Lee, and H.~S.~Song,
766: %``Polarized J/psi production at CLEO,''
767: J.\ Korean Phys.\ Soc.\ {\bf 33}, 97 (1998)
768: [arXiv:hep-ph/9804455];
769: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
770: G.~A.~Schuler,
771: %``Testing factorization of charmonium production,''
772: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 8}, 273 (1999).
773: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9804349].
774:
775: \end{thebibliography}
776: \end{document}
777: