1: \documentclass[aps,prd,preprint,showpacs,nofootinbib]{revtex4}
2: \usepackage{graphicx}
3: \usepackage{color}
4:
5: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% TITLE PAGE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
6: \begin{document}
7: \title{ Transverse momentum resummation in soft-collinear effective theory}
8: \author{\center{Yang Gao, Chong Sheng Li\footnote{\hspace{-0.1cm}Electronics address: csli@pku.edu.cn},
9: and Jian Jun Liu \footnote{\hspace{-0.1cm}Present address:
10: Department of Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084,
11: China}}} \affiliation{\small Department of Physics, Peking
12: University, Beijing 100871, China}
13: %\date{\today}
14:
15: \begin{abstract}
16: We present a universal formalism for transverse momentum
17: resummation in the view of soft-collinear effective theory (SCET),
18: and establish the relation between our SCET formula and the well
19: known Collins-Soper-Sterman's pQCD formula at the next-to-leading
20: logarithmic order (NLLO). We also briefly discuss the
21: reformulation of joint resummation in SCET.
22: \end{abstract}
23:
24: \pacs{12.38.-t, 11.10.Lm, 11.15.Bt, 13.60.Hb} \maketitle
25:
26: \section{Introduction}
27:
28: Recently, the soft-collinear effective theory (SCET) has made
29: great simplifications on the proof of factorization in B meson
30: decays \cite{bsr} and high energy hard scattering processes
31: \cite{ee,hsf}, including resummation of large logarithms in
32: certain regions of phase space, for example, $e^{+}e^{-}$
33: annihilation into two jets of thrust $T\rightarrow1$ \cite{ee},
34: the deep inelastic scattering (DIS) in the threshold region
35: $x\rightarrow1$ \cite{dis} and Drell-Yan (DY) process in the case
36: of $z\rightarrow1$ \cite{dy}. The reason for these facts is that
37: SCET can be viewed as an operator realization of the pQCD analysis
38: when the modes participating the interactions of interest are soft
39: and collinear, just like chiral dynamics vs QCD at low energy
40: region. This effective field theory (EFT) provides a simple and
41: systematic method for factorization of hard, collinear and usoft
42: or soft degrees of freedom at operator level, especially usoft
43: modes can be decoupled from collinear modes in the Lagrangian at
44: leading order by making a field redefinition, and the large double
45: logarithms such as
46: $(\alpha_s\log^{2}\frac{Q^2}{\Lambda^{2}})^{n}$, where $Q,\Lambda$
47: are two typical scales that characterize a process, can be
48: resummed naturally through the running of renormalization group
49: equation (RGE).
50:
51: However, all the above works have not discussed the transverse
52: momentum ($Q_T$) distributions of high energy hard scattering
53: processes. In this paper, we will investigate the resummed $Q_T$
54: distributions \cite{abc}, taking the Higgs-boson production via
55: gluon fusion in small $Q_T$ region \cite{kt,pt} as an example,
56: within the framework of SCET. It can be seen that in SCET the
57: $Q_T$ resummation formula automatically separates the
58: process-dependent Wilson coefficient and universal anomalous
59: dimension of the effective operator in a process, which once has
60: been studied by the authors of \cite{upt} within the
61: Collins-Soper-Sterman (CSS) frame.
62:
63: The paper is organized as follows. In section II we start by
64: reviewing the basic steps for factorization and resummation in
65: SCET. In section III we apply it to derive the $Q_T$ distribution
66: at small $Q_T$ region directly, which confirms the CSS formula. In
67: section IV, we also discuss a similar formula for joint
68: resummation. Section V contains our concluding remarks. The
69: details of calculation are given in Appendix.
70:
71: \section{Preliminaries}
72:
73: SCET is appropriate for the kinematic regions of collinear and
74: usoft (soft) modes with momenta scaling:
75: $p_{c}=(p^{+},p^{-},p_{\perp})=(n\cdot p,\bar{n}\cdot
76: p,p_{\perp})\sim Q(\lambda^{2},1,\lambda)$ and $p_{us}\sim
77: Q(\lambda^{2},\lambda^{2},\lambda^{2})$ or $p_{s}\sim
78: Q(\lambda,\lambda,\lambda)$, where $\lambda \ll 1$ is the scaling
79: parameter, and the light-like vectors $n=(1,0,0,1)$,
80: $\bar{n}=(1,0,0,-1)$ satisfy $n\cdot\bar{n}=2$, and the
81: perpendicular components of any four vector $V$ are defined by
82: $V_{\perp}^{\mu}=V^{\mu}-(n\cdot
83: V){\bar{n}^{\mu}}/{2}-(\bar{n}\cdot V){n^{\mu}}/{2}$.
84:
85: In constructing SCET, one should first identify the scaling of all
86: possible modes of initial and final states with soft and collinear
87: degrees of freedom, then integrate other degrees of freedom, and
88: the remaining modes must reproduce all the infrared physics of the
89: full theory in the region where SCET is valid, which is ensured by
90: the method of regions for Feynman integrals with massless quarks
91: and gluons\footnote{In the presence of masses, the regions
92: analysis is very complicated, and we only discuss the massless
93: case. } \cite{sr}. The EFT describing the usoft(soft) and
94: collinear modes is known as SCET$_{\mathrm{I}(\mathrm{II})}$, and
95: to distinguish the two theories, the scaling parameter
96: corresponding to SCET$_{\mathrm{II}}$ is denoted by $\eta\sim
97: \lambda^{2}$, i.e., $p_{c}\sim Q(\eta^{2},1,\eta)$ and $p_{s}\sim
98: Q(\eta,\eta,\eta)$.
99:
100: The elements of SCET$_{\mathrm{I}}$ consist of usoft sectors
101: \{$q_{us},A_{us}$\} and collinear sectors \{$\xi_{n},A_{n}$\}
102: moving in the $n$-direction, which are expanded as
103: \begin{eqnarray}
104: \phi_{n}(x)&=&\sum_{\tilde{p}}e^{-i\tilde{p}\cdot
105: x}\phi_{n,p}(x),\qquad\ p=\tilde{p}+k,
106: \end{eqnarray}
107: where $k\sim Q\lambda^{2}$ resides in the space-time dependence of
108: $\phi_{n,p}(x)$, i.e., $\partial\phi_{n,p}(x)\sim
109: (Q\lambda^{2})\phi_{n,p}(x)$, and $\tilde{p}\sim Q(0,1,\lambda)$
110: is called label momentum, and the label operators
111: $\bar\mathcal{{P}}$, $\mathcal{P}_{\perp}$ are defined by picking
112: out $\tilde{p}^{-}$, $\tilde{p}_{\perp}$ momenta for collinear
113: fields $\phi_{n}(x)$\footnote{The convention
114: $\phi_{n}(x)=\phi_{n,p}(x)$ for collinear fields will be used for
115: convenience.}, respectively. The Wilson line for $n$-collinear
116: fields has the form of
117: $$W_{n}(x) = \bigg[\sum_{\mathrm{perms}}\exp \bigg(\frac{-g}
118: {\bar\mathcal{{P}}}\bar{n}\cdot A_{n}(x) \bigg)\bigg],$$ which is
119: required to ensure collinear gauge invariance. The Lagrangian of
120: collinear sectors, which is invariant under the usoft and
121: collinear gauge transformation, at leading order\footnote{We'll
122: restrict our discussion only at this order through the paper.}
123: (LO) in $\lambda$ is \cite{bsr},
124: \begin{eqnarray}
125: \nonumber \mathcal{L}_{c}&=& \mathcal{L}_{cg}+\mathcal{L}_{cq}, \nonumber\\
126: \mathcal{L}_{cg}&=&
127: \frac{1}{2g^2}\mathrm{Tr}\{[i\mathcal{D}^{\mu}+gA_{n}^{\mu},i\mathcal{D}^{\nu}
128: +gA_{n}^{\nu}]\}^2 \nonumber \\
129: &&+2\mathrm{Tr}\{\bar{c}_{n}[i\mathcal{D}_{\mu},[i\mathcal{D}^{\mu}+
130: A^{\mu}_{n},c_{n}]]\}+\frac{1}{\alpha}
131: \mathrm{Tr}\{[i\mathcal{D}_{\mu},A_{n}^{\mu}]\}^2,\\
132: \mathcal{L}_{cq}&=&\bar{\xi}_{n}[in\cdot
133: D+i\not\!\!{D}_{\perp}^c\frac{1}{i\bar{n}\cdot
134: D^c}i\not\!\!{D}_{\perp}^c] \frac{\not\!{\bar{n}}}{2}\xi_{n}.
135: \end{eqnarray}
136: Here the third line are the gauge fixing terms with parameter
137: $\alpha$ and $c_{n}$ denotes collinear ghost field, and
138: \begin{eqnarray}
139: \nonumber i\mathcal{D}^{\mu}&=&\bar\mathcal{P}\frac{n^\mu}{2}+
140: \mathcal{P}_{\bot}^\mu+(in\cdot\partial+gn\cdot A_{us})
141: \frac{\bar{n}^\mu}{2}, \nonumber\\
142: in\cdot D &=& in\cdot D_{us}+ g n\cdot A_n, \qquad\
143: iD_{us}=i\partial+gA_{us}, \nonumber\\
144: i\bar{n}\cdot D^c &=& \bar\mathcal{{P}}+g\bar{n}\cdot A_n, \qquad\
145: iD_{\perp}^c=\mathcal{P}_{\bot}+gA_n^\perp.
146: \end{eqnarray}The Lagrangian of soft sectors in SCET is identical to that of
147: QCD.
148:
149: As for SCET$_\mathrm{II}$, it was emphasized that it can also be
150: viewed as the EFT of SCET$_\mathrm{I}$, and is the final theory
151: \cite{rpi}. This suggests a short path to go into
152: SCET$_\mathrm{II}$ from SCET$_\mathrm{I}$, if the following
153: matching and running steps are taken \cite{rpi}:\\
154: (1) Matching QCD onto SCET$_{\mathrm{I}}$ at a scale $\mu^{2}\sim
155: Q^{2}$ with $p_{c}^{2}\sim Q^{2}\lambda^{2}$;\\
156: (2) Decoupling the usoft-collinear interactions with the field
157: redefinitions, $\xi_{n}=Y_{n}^{\dagger}\xi_{n}^{(0)}$ and
158: $A_{n}=Y_{n}^{\dag}A_{n}^{(0)}Y_{n}$. Here
159: $Y_{n}(x)=\mathrm{P}\exp(ig\int dsn\cdot A_{us}(ns+x))$ is the
160: usoft Wilson line of usoft gluons in $n$ direction from $s=0$ to
161: $s=\infty$ for final state particles, and $\mathrm{P}$ means
162: path-ordered product, while for initial state particles, $Y_{n}$
163: is from $s=-\infty$ to $s=0$ and the daggers are reversed. This
164: step leads to $\mathcal{L}_{c}(\xi_{n},A_n,n\cdot A_{us})
165: =\mathcal{L}_{c}(\xi_{n}^{(0)},A_n^{(0)},0)$;\\
166: (3) Matching SCET$_{\mathrm{I}}$ onto SCET$_{\mathrm{II}}$ at a
167: scale $\mu^{2}\sim Q^{2}\lambda^{2}$ with $p_{c}^{2}\sim
168: Q^{2}\eta^{2}$. Thus, the soft and collinear modes are decoupled
169: in the Lagrangian of SCET$_{\mathrm{II}}$.
170:
171: Next, we extend SCET to include the possibility of collinear
172: fields moving in different light-cone directions
173: $n_1,n_2,n_3,...$. These directions defined by $n_{i}$ and $n_{j}$
174: satisfy $n_{i}\cdot n_{j}\gg\lambda^{2} $ for $i\neq j$. For
175: simplicity we will only consider the case of head-on jets
176: corresponding to collinear particles moving in the $n$ and
177: $\bar{n}$ directions. Since the effective theory only takes
178: account the interactions of the modes in the local way, the
179: Lagrangian of the effective theory contains no direct coupling of
180: collinear particles moving in the two separate directions, however
181: the usoft gluons can mediate between them in SCET$_\mathrm{I}$.
182: Hence the Lagrangian in this case can be written by
183: $$\mathcal{L}^{c}_{\{n,\bar{n}\}}=\mathcal{L}^{c}_{n}+\mathcal{L}^{c}_{\overline{n}},$$
184: and the soft parts are unchanged, so the decoupling
185: transformations are also valid here.
186:
187: To illustrate the application of SCET and warm up, we consider the
188: Sudakov effect of quark electromagnetic form factor in QCD
189: \cite{onfsf}, i.e., the double logarithmic asymptotic of
190: conservative current $j^{\mu}=\bar{\psi}\gamma^{\mu}\psi$ in the
191: following kinematics:\\
192: (a) nearly on-shell case
193: \begin{eqnarray}
194: && Q^{2}=-(p_{1}-p_{2})^{2}\gg -p_{1}^{2}=-p_{2}^{2} \sim
195: \Lambda_{QCD}^{2},\nonumber \\
196: && p_{1}\sim Q(\eta^{2},1,\eta), \qquad\ p_{2}\sim
197: Q(1,\eta^{2},\eta), \qquad\ \eta\sim \Lambda_{QCD}/Q;\nonumber
198: \end{eqnarray}
199: (b) off-shell case
200: \begin{eqnarray}
201: && Q^{2}=-(p_{1}-p_{2})^{2}\gg -p_{1}^{2}=-p_{2}^{2}\sim
202: Q\Lambda_{QCD},\nonumber \\
203: && p_{1}\sim Q(\lambda^{2},1,\lambda), \qquad\ p_{2}\sim
204: Q(1,\lambda^{2},\lambda), \qquad\ \lambda\sim
205: \sqrt{\Lambda_{QCD}/Q}.\nonumber
206: \end{eqnarray} Here $p_{1},p_{2}$ are the
207: momenta of the initial and final quarks. In the above two cases we
208: have omitted quark mass effects.
209:
210: Following the treatment of heavy-to-collinear current discussed in
211: \cite{rpi,hl} for case (a), we first match the full current onto
212: the corresponding operator in SCET$_{\mathrm{I}}$. At LO in
213: $\lambda$, it gives \cite{ee}
214: \begin{equation}
215: \label{m} j^{\mu}=[\bar{\xi}_{\bar{n}}W_{\bar{n}}]\gamma^{\mu}
216: C_{q}(\mathcal{P}^\dagger,\bar\mathcal{{P}},\mu^{2})[W_{n}^{\dagger}\xi_{n}].
217: \end{equation}
218: By the requirement of collinear and usoft gauge invariance, the LO
219: effective operator is determined uniquely, and the
220: re-parameterization invariance(RPI) \cite{rpi} implies that the
221: Wilson coefficient satisfies
222: $C_{q}(\mathcal{P}^\dagger,\bar\mathcal{{P}},\mu^{2})
223: =C_{q}(\mathcal{P}^\dagger\cdot\bar\mathcal{{P}},\mu^{2}).$
224:
225: Obviously, the tree level matching condition for $j^{\mu}$ leads
226: to $C_{q}(Q^{2},\mu^{2})=1+\mathcal{O}(\alpha_{s})$. We certainly
227: can determine $\mathcal{O}(\alpha_{s})$ correction by adopting
228: dimensional regularization\footnote{The $\overline{\mathrm{MS}}$
229: scheme, i.e., $d=4-2\epsilon$ and $\mu^2\rightarrow
230: \mu^2e^{\gamma_E}/4\pi$ is used through this paper, where
231: $\gamma_{E}$ is Euler's constant.} (DR) to regulate UV and IR
232: divergences to compute on-shell matrix elements on both sides of
233: Eq.(\ref{m}), for which is valid at the operator level and the
234: matching calculation is independent of regularization method. With
235: this choice, the fact
236: $\mathrm{IR}_{\mathrm{\mathrm{QCD}}}=\mathrm{IR}_{\mathrm{SCET}}$
237: provides us a direct matching calculation to read off the Wilson
238: coefficients and anomalous dimensions of the operators in SCET. As
239: all the on-shell loop integrals in SCET are scaleless and vanish,
240: $\mathrm{IR}_{\mathrm{SCET}} =-\mathrm{UV}_{\mathrm{SCET}}$, and
241: then
242: $\mathrm{IR}_{\mathrm{\mathrm{QCD}}}=-\mathrm{UV}_{\mathrm{SCET}}$.
243: Furthermore, the self energy diagrams in full QCD with massless
244: quarks are also vanish, and all the wave function renormalization
245: constants and the residues of the related propagators are equal to
246: unity, and we also note that the conserved current in full QCD
247: needs not to be renormalized. Thus, what we need to calculate is
248: an one particle irreducible diagram, Fig.\ref{qqr}, in the full
249: theory, which is given by
250: \begin{figure}[t!]
251: \includegraphics{qqr.eps}
252: \caption{\label{qqr} Graphical representation for quark current
253: matching.}
254: \end{figure}
255: \begin{eqnarray}
256: \nonumber \langle p_2|j^{\mu}|p_1 \rangle
257: & = & \langle p_2|j^{\mu}|p_1 \rangle^{tree}+\langle p_2|j^{\mu}|p_1 \rangle^{one-loop} \nonumber \\
258: & = & \bar{u}(p_2)\gamma^{\mu}(1+V_{q})u(p_1),
259: \end{eqnarray}
260: \begin{eqnarray}
261: \label{qq} V_{q} & = & \frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{4\pi}
262: (\frac{\mu^{2}e^{\gamma_{E}}}{Q^{2}})^{\epsilon}
263: \frac{\Gamma(1-\epsilon)}{\Gamma(1-2\epsilon)}
264: (-\frac{2}{\epsilon^{2}}-\frac{3}{\epsilon}
265: -8-\frac{\pi^{2}}{3}) \nonumber \\
266: & = & \frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{4\pi}
267: \bigg[-\frac{2}{\epsilon^{2}}-\frac{1}{\epsilon}
268: (2\log\frac{\mu^2}{Q^2}+3) \nonumber \\
269: && - \log^{2}\frac{\mu^2}{Q^2}-3\log\frac{\mu^2}{Q^2}
270: -8+\frac{\pi^{2}}{6}\bigg].
271: \end{eqnarray}
272: Here $C_F=(N_c^2-1)/2N_c$ for $SU(N_c)$, and $N_c=3$ for QCD. The
273: $\epsilon$-poles in Eq.(\ref{qq}) are of IR character, whose
274: opposition are just the UV poles in SCET. Thus the matching
275: calculation at one-loop level gives
276: \begin{eqnarray}
277: && C_{q}(Q^{2},Q^{2})
278: = 1+\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{4\pi}(-8+\frac{\pi^{2}}{6}),\\
279: \label{uvq} && Z_{V} \equiv \sum_{n}\frac{Z_{V}^{(n)}}{\epsilon^{n}} \nonumber \\
280: && \hspace{0.7cm} = 1+\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{4\pi} \left
281: [\frac{2}{\epsilon^2}+\frac{1}{\epsilon}(2\log\frac{\mu^2}{Q^2}+3)
282: \right ].
283: \end{eqnarray}
284: Here $Z_{V}$ is defined as $\overline{\mathrm{MS}}$
285: renormalization constant of the effective operator, and $\mu$ has
286: been set to $Q$ to minimize the logarithms in the Wilson
287: coefficient. It was pointed out \cite{bsr} that the anomalous
288: dimension of the effective operator is independent of its spin
289: structure, for which can be factorized out from loop integrals.
290: This means the evolution equation in SCET is universal, and only
291: the Wilson coefficient is process-dependent.
292:
293: From Eq.(\ref{uvq}), we obtain the RGE of $C_{q}(Q^{2},\mu^2)$,
294: \begin{eqnarray}
295: && \label{rgq} \frac{d\log C_{q}(Q^{2},\mu^2)}{d\mathrm{log}(\mu)}
296: = \gamma_{1}(\mu) = -g \frac{\partial Z_{V}^{(1)}}{\partial g}, \\
297: && \gamma_{1}(\mu) \equiv \mathbf{A}_{q}(\alpha_{s})\log
298: \frac{Q^{2}}{\mu^{2}}+ \mathbf{B}_{q}(\alpha_{s}) \nonumber \\
299: && \hspace{1.1cm} = -\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{4\pi}
300: (4\log\frac{\mu^2}{Q^2}+6) .
301: \end{eqnarray}
302: Here $\mathbf{A}_{q}^{(1)}=C_F $ and
303: $\mathbf{B}_{q}^{(1)}=-\frac{3}{2}C_F$\footnote{The notion
304: $\mathbf{A}\equiv
305: \sum_{n}({\alpha_{s}}/{\pi})^{n}\mathbf{A}^{(n)},$ we adopt
306: $\{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{B}\}$ to distinguish the well known
307: coefficients $\{A, B\}$ in pQCD.}. With Eq.(\ref{rgq}), we can
308: resum the terms such as double logarithms from the scale $\sim
309: Q^{2}$ down to the scale $\sim Q^{2}\lambda^{2}$, we abbreviate
310: this matching step as a chain $QCD|_{Q^{2}}\longrightarrow
311: SCET_I|_{Q^{2}\lambda^{2}}$.
312:
313: Next, We decouple the usoft and collinear modes by the field
314: redefinitions, which results in
315: \begin{equation}
316: \langle p_2|[\bar{\xi}_{\bar{n}}W_{\bar{n}}]\gamma^{\mu}
317: [W_{n}^{\dagger}\xi_{n}]|p_1\rangle\longrightarrow\langle
318: p_2|[\bar{\xi}_{\bar{n}}^{(0)}W_{\bar{n}}^{(0)}]|\Omega\rangle\gamma^{\mu}
319: \langle\Omega|\mathrm{T}[Y_{\bar{n}}Y_{n}]|\Omega\rangle
320: \langle\Omega|[W_{n}^{(0)\dagger}\xi_{n}^{(0)}]|p_1\rangle,
321: \end{equation}
322: where $\mathrm{T}$ means time ordering operator.
323:
324: For the final step we integrate out all the off-shell modes of
325: order $\sqrt{Q\Lambda_{QCD}}$ and go into SCET$_{\mathrm{II}}$. We
326: can rename the usoft fields as soft fields for the usoft degrees
327: of freedom scaling as soft ones, and then lower the the
328: off-shellness of the collinear fields that would be matched onto
329: SCET$_{\mathrm{II}}$. Since the leading collinear Lagrangians in
330: SCET$_{\mathrm{I}}$ and SCET$_{\mathrm{II}}$ are the same and
331: (u)soft and collinear fields are decoupled at LO in
332: $(\lambda)\eta$, all possible time-ordered products involve
333: collinear fields agree exactly and we can simply replace
334: $\bar{\xi}_{\bar{n}}^{(0)}W_{\bar{n}}^{(0)}\rightarrow
335: \bar{\xi}_{\bar{n}}^{\mathrm{II}}W_{\bar{n}}^{\mathrm{II}}$ and
336: $W_{n}^{(0)\dagger}\xi_{n}^{(0)}\rightarrow
337: W_{n}^{\mathrm{II}\dagger}\xi_{n}^{\mathrm{II}}$, where the
338: superscript II denotes SCET$_{\mathrm{II}}$ will be dropped from
339: now on.
340:
341: \begin{figure}[t!]
342: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
343: \includegraphics{on_shell.eps}\\
344: (a)
345: \end{minipage}
346: \begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
347: \includegraphics{off_shell.eps}\\
348: (b)
349: \end{minipage}
350: \caption{\label{offshell}Factorization of on-shell form factor (a)
351: and off-shell form factor (b) in SCET. In (b), the soft Wilson
352: lines are terminated and the external quarks are amputated,
353: therefore, (b) can be taken as a sub-diagram of (a). Both diagrams
354: are depicted under the gauge $ \bar{n} \cdot A_{n}=n \cdot
355: A_{\bar{n}} = 0 $.}
356: \end{figure}
357: Because $p_1,p_2$ of (a) are described by the collinear modes in
358: SCET$_{\mathrm{II}}$, the general matching structure of
359: SCET$_{\mathrm{II}}$ diagram is shown in Fig.2.(a). The Wilson
360: coefficient at this step is unity and anomalous dimension is the
361: same as the first step, except that it runs from the scale $\sim
362: Q^{2}\lambda^{2}$ to the scale $\sim Q^{2}\eta^{2}$. We abbreviate
363: this step as $SCET_{I}|_{Q^{2}\lambda^{2}}\Rightarrow
364: SCET_{II}|_{Q^{2}\eta^{2}}$. Collecting all the results above, we
365: obtain the known Sudakov form factor
366: $S_{q}^{(a)}(\Lambda_{\mathrm{QCD}},Q)$, leaving other
367: coefficients omitted,
368: \begin{equation}
369: S_{q}^{(a)}(\Lambda_{\mathrm{QCD}},Q)=\exp\bigg(-\int_{\Lambda_{\mathrm{QCD}}}^{Q}
370: \gamma_{1}(\mu)d\log\mu\bigg).
371: \end{equation}
372:
373: For case (b), it can be taken as a sub-diagram of the on-shell
374: case, from kinematical considerations, of which the external legs
375: are amputated. Thus, step (1) is unchanged, and in step (2),
376: $\langle0|\mathrm{T}[Y_{\bar{n}}Y_{n}]|0 \rangle$ changes into
377: \begin{equation}
378: \label{wl} -\int_{0}^{\infty}\int_{0}^{\infty}dsdt
379: e^{iQ\lambda^{2}(s+t)}\langle
380: \Omega|\mathrm{T}[Y_{\bar{n}}(0,\bar{n}s)Y_{n}^{\dagger}(0,-nt)]|\Omega\rangle,
381: \end{equation}
382: where $1/(Q\lambda^{2})$ is the effective contour length
383: \cite{onfsf} and
384: \begin{eqnarray}
385: Y_{\bar{n}}(0,\bar{n}s) &\equiv& \mathrm{P}
386: \exp\bigg(ig\int_{0}^{s}d\beta\bar{n}\cdot A_{us}(\bar{n}\beta)\bigg), \\
387: Y_{n}(0,-nt) &\equiv& \mathrm{P}\exp\bigg(-ig\int_{0}^{t}d\beta
388: n\cdot A_{us}(-n\beta)\bigg).
389: \end{eqnarray}
390: Because of the jets $J_1,J_2$ with fluctuations
391: $-p_{1}^{2}=-p_{2}^{2}=Q\Lambda_{QCD}\gg Q^2\eta^{2}$ in
392: Fig.2.(b), they must be integrated out in SCET$_{\mathrm{II}}$,
393: and only (\ref{wl}) is left over after step (3) associated with
394: renaming the usoft modes in SCET$_{\mathrm{I}}$ as the soft modes
395: in SCET$_{\mathrm{II}}$, of which the running behavior is the same
396: as $F_{IR}$ of \cite{onfsf}. Finally, the Sudakov factor in the
397: off-shell case is
398: \begin{eqnarray}
399: S_{q}^{(b)}(Q\eta,Q)&=&\exp\bigg(-\int_{Q\lambda}^{Q}\gamma_{1}(\mu)d\log\mu-
400: \int_{Q\eta}^{Q\lambda}\gamma_{2}(\mu)d\log\mu\bigg),\\
401: \gamma_{2}(\mu)&=&\frac{\alpha_{s}}{\pi}C_{F}\log
402: \frac{\mu^{2}}{Q^{2}\eta^{2}}+\mathcal{O}(\alpha_{s}^2),
403: \end{eqnarray}
404: where $\gamma_{2}(\mu)$ is the anomalous dimension of (\ref{wl}).
405: We conclude this section with a chain for the off-shell case,
406: $QCD|_{Q^2}\longrightarrow
407: SCET_{I}|_{Q^{2}\lambda^{2}}\longrightarrow
408: SCET_{II}|_{Q^{2}\eta^{2}}$. Now we are ready to turn into the
409: $Q_{T}$ resummation in the following.
410:
411: \section{Method of $Q_T$ resummation in SCET}
412:
413: Since SCET is powerful to disentangle the soft and collinear
414: interaction, and IR power counting \cite{ir} tells that the
415: singular terms of $Q_T$ distribution for DY-like processes in the
416: limit of $Q_T\rightarrow 0$ originate from soft and collinear
417: modes, which are emitted by partons from hadrons $p_1,p_2$, it is
418: not unexpected that SCET can be applied to treat them and to
419: derive the resummed part of full transverse momentum distribution
420: for these semi-inclusive processes, while the remaining regular
421: terms $Y$ \cite{abc,kt,pt} and the prescription of incorporating
422: non-perturbative region ($Q_T \sim \Lambda_{QCD}$) are neglected
423: in this paper.
424:
425: For the sake of simplicity, the process of Higgs-boson production
426: is taken as a demonstration, but the method we used is not
427: confined to this example. The dominant process for Higgs-boson
428: production at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in the Standard
429: Model are gluon fusion through a heavy quark loop, mainly the top
430: quark, $p_1(P_{1})+p_2(P_{2})\rightarrow gg\rightarrow \phi(Q)+X$
431: with $P_{1}=(0,2p,0)$, $P_{2}=(2p,0,0)$ and
432: $S=P_{1}^{-}P_{2}^{+}$. It is convenient to start from the
433: effective Lagrangian for one Higgs-boson and gluons coupling
434: \cite{h},
435: \begin{equation}
436: \mathcal{L}_{\phi gg} =\tau(\alpha_s)\phi
437: G_{\mu\nu}^{a}G_{a}^{\mu\nu},
438: \end{equation}
439: where
440: $\tau(\alpha_{s})=\frac{\alpha_{s}(Q)}{12\pi}(\sqrt{2}G_F)^{1/2}+\mathcal{O}(\alpha_{s}^{2})$
441: and $Q = m_{\phi}$. Therefore, the operator for Higgs-boson
442: production is $\mathcal{H}=G_{\mu\nu}^{a}G_{a}^{\mu\nu}$. Here the
443: coupling $\alpha_{s}$ suffers the QCD correction, which is unlike
444: the case of electro-charge coupling. Furthermore, because the
445: renormalization constant of
446: $\alpha_{s}G_{\mu\nu}^{a}G_{a}^{\mu\nu}$ is unity up to
447: $\mathcal{O}(\alpha_{s})$, the renormalization constant of
448: $\mathcal{H}$ is just $Z_{g}^{-2}$, where $Z_{g}$ is the
449: renormalization constant of gauge coupling-$g$.
450:
451: If we set $\lambda^{2}\sim{Q_T}/{Q}$ with $Q\gg Q_T\gg
452: \Lambda_{QCD}$, the situation is much like that of quark form
453: factor-(a) discussed in last section, and the matching and running
454: procedure can be followed. The operator $\mathcal{H}$ can match at
455: LO in $\lambda$ onto
456: \begin{eqnarray}
457: \mathcal{H}&=&\frac{1}{2}\mathcal{B}_{\bar{n}a}^{\mu}
458: C_{g}(\mathcal{P}^\dagger\cdot\bar\mathcal{P},\mu^{2})
459: \mathcal{B}_{n\mu}^a,\nonumber \\
460: &=&\frac{1}{2} \mathcal{B}_{\bar{n}a}^{\mu} C_{g}(Q^2,\mu^{2})
461: \mathcal{B}_{n\mu}^a,
462: \end{eqnarray}where
463: \begin{eqnarray}
464: \mathcal{B}_{n}^{\mu}&=& \bar{n}_{\nu}\mathcal{G}_{n}^{\nu\mu},\nonumber \\
465: \mathcal{G}_{n}^{\mu\nu}&=&W_{n}^{\dagger}[i\mathcal{D}_{n}^{\mu}+gA_{n}^{\mu},
466: i\mathcal{D}_{n}^{\nu}+gA_{n}^{\nu}]W_{n},
467: \end{eqnarray}
468: and $n\leftrightarrow \bar{n}$ for
469: $\mathcal{G}_{\bar{n}}^{\mu\nu}$.
470:
471: \begin{figure}[t!]
472: \includegraphics{ggh.eps}
473: \caption{\label{ggh} Graphical representation for gluon current
474: matching.}
475: \end{figure}
476: The one loop calculation, Fig.\ref{ggh}, is similar to quark
477: current, except for dividing the final result by $Z_g^{-2}$.
478: Finally,
479: \begin{eqnarray}
480: \nonumber \langle g_{1}|\mathcal{H}|g_{2} \rangle &=& \langle
481: g_{1}|\mathcal{H}|g_{2} \rangle^{tree}+\langle
482: g_{1}|\mathcal{H}|g_{2} \rangle^{one-loop}+c.t. \nonumber \\
483: &=& \langle g_{1}|\mathcal{H}|g_{2} \rangle^{tree}(1+V_{g}),
484: \end{eqnarray}
485: \begin{eqnarray} V_{g} &=&
486: \frac{\alpha_{s}}{4\pi}\left[
487: \frac{\Gamma(1-\epsilon)}{\Gamma(1-2\epsilon)}
488: \left(\frac{\mu^{2}e^{\gamma_{E}}}{Q^{2}}\right)^{\epsilon}
489: \left(-\frac{2C_{A}}{\epsilon^{2}}-\frac{2\beta_{0}}
490: {\epsilon}+\mathcal{A}_{g}^{H}\right)\right] \nonumber \\
491: &=& \frac{\alpha_{s}}{4\pi}
492: \bigg[-\frac{2C_{A}}{\epsilon^{2}}-\frac{1}{\epsilon}
493: (2C_{A}\log\frac{\mu^2}{Q^2}+2\beta_{0}) \nonumber \\
494: && -C_{A}\log^{2}\frac{\mu^2}{Q^2}-2\beta_{0}\log
495: \frac{\mu^2}{Q^2}
496: +\mathcal{A}_{g}^{H}+\frac{C_{A}\pi^{2}}{2}\bigg]
497: \end{eqnarray}is obtained\footnote{Here we have absorbed the scale dependence
498: of $\alpha_s$ into that of $Z_g$.}, from which we read
499: \begin{eqnarray}
500: && C_{g}(Q^2,Q^2) = 1+\frac{\alpha_{s}}{4\pi}
501: (\mathcal{A}_{g}^{H}+\frac{C_A\pi^{2}}{2}),\\
502: && Z_{\mathcal{H}} \equiv
503: \sum_{n}\frac{Z_{\mathcal{H}}^{(n)}}{\epsilon^{n}} =
504: 1+\frac{\alpha_{s}}{4\pi}
505: \bigg[\frac{2C_{A}}{\epsilon^{2}}+\frac{1}{\epsilon}(
506: 2C_{A}\log\frac{\mu^{2}}{Q^{2}}+2\beta_{0})\bigg].
507: \end{eqnarray}
508: Here $C_A=N_c$, $\beta_{0}=\frac{11}{6}C_A-\frac{2}{3}n_fT_R$,
509: $\mathcal{A}_{g}^{H}=11+2\pi^{2}$, $T_R=\frac{1}{2}$ and $n_f=5$
510: is the number of active quark flavors. Then the RGE of
511: $C_g(Q^2,\mu^2)$ is
512: \begin{eqnarray}
513: \label{rgg}&& \frac{d\log C_{g}(Q^2,\mu^{2})}{d\log(\mu)}=
514: \gamma_{1}(\mu) = -g \frac{\partial Z_{\mathcal{H}}^{(1)}}{\partial g},\\
515: && \gamma_{1}(\mu) \equiv \mathbf{A}_{g}(\alpha_{s})\log
516: \frac{Q^{2}}{\mu^{2}}+\mathbf{B}_{g}(\alpha_{s})\nonumber \\
517: && \hspace{1.1cm} = -(\frac{\alpha_{s}}{\pi})
518: (C_{A}\log\frac{\mu^2}{Q^2}+\beta_{0}),
519: \end{eqnarray}
520: with $\mathbf{A}_{g}^{(1)}=C_A $ and
521: $\mathbf{B}_{g}^{(1)}=-\beta_{0}$. Thus the evolution from the
522: scale $\sim Q^{2}$ to the scale $\sim Q^{2}\lambda^{2}$ gives
523: \begin{equation}
524: C_{g}(Q^2,Q^{2}\lambda^{2})=
525: C_{g}(Q^2,Q^2)\exp\bigg(-\int_{Q^{2}\lambda^{2}}^{Q^{2}}
526: \frac{d\mu^{2}}{2\mu^{2}}\gamma_{1}(\mu)\bigg).
527: \end{equation}
528:
529: As shown above, the extraction of $\mathbf{A},\mathbf{B}$ in SCET
530: is different from that of $A,B$ in pQCD, i.e., there is no need to
531: calculate real correction which is more difficult to handle. Using
532: the virtual part of higher order calculation, such as the two loop
533: on-shell quark and gluon form factor \cite{ab2}, we can find the
534: $\mathcal{O}(\alpha_{s}^{2})$ universal anomalous dimension. For
535: example,
536: \begin{eqnarray}
537: \mathbf{A}_{a}^{(2)}&=& \frac{1}{2}C_a K,\qquad\ K=
538: C_A(\frac{67}{18}-\frac{\pi^{2}}{6})-\frac{10}{9}T_{R}n_{f},
539: \end{eqnarray}where $C_q=C_{F}$, $C_g=C_A$.
540:
541: After performing field redefinitions, Eq.(\ref{rgg}) can be
542: directly used to running $\mathcal{H}$ from the scale $\sim Q^{2}$
543: to the scale $\sim Q^{2}\eta^{2}$ without loss of degrees of
544: freedom. So the relevant operator for Higgs-boson production at
545: the scale $\sim Q^{2}\eta^{2}(Q_T^{2})$ is
546: \begin{eqnarray} \mathcal{H}&=&
547: C_{g}(Q^2,Q^2\eta^{2})\mathrm{Tr}
548: \{\mathrm{T}[Y_{n}^{\dagger}Y_{\bar{n}}\mathcal{B}_{\bar{n}}^{\mu}
549: Y_{\bar{n}}^{\dagger}Y_{n}\mathcal{B}_{n\mu}]\} \nonumber \\
550: &=& C_{g}(Q^2,Q^2\eta^{2}) \frac{1}{2}
551: \mathrm{T}[\mathcal{Y}_{\bar{n}}^{ab}\mathcal{Y}_n^{ac}
552: \mathcal{B}_{\bar{n}}^{b\mu}\mathcal{B}_{n\mu}^c]\nonumber \\
553: &\equiv& C_{g}(Q^2,Q^2\eta^{2})\hat{\mathcal{H}}.
554: \end{eqnarray}
555: Here $\mathcal{Y}_{n(\bar{n})}$ is the adjoint soft Wilson line
556: from $-\infty$ to $0$ in $n(\bar{n})$ direction for incoming
557: fields. Now, we have completed the procedures corresponding to
558: step (1), (2) and (3).
559:
560: To obtain the differential cross section, we relate it to the
561: composite operator $\mathcal{H}$ at the renormalization scale
562: $\mu^{2}\sim Q^{2}\eta^{2}$ in SCET$_{\mathrm{II}}$, where the
563: cross section can be written as
564: \begin{equation}
565: \label{q1}\frac{1}{\sigma_{gg}^{(0)}}\frac{{d\sigma}^{\mathrm{resum}}}
566: {dQ^{2}dydQ_{T}^{2}}=\mathbf{H}_{g}^{\phi}(Q)
567: e^{-\mathbf{S}_{g}(\mu,Q)}\sigma_{\mathrm{SCET}}(Q_T,Q,\mu),
568: \end{equation}
569: where $\mathbf{H}_{g}^{\phi}(Q)=|C_g(Q^2,Q^2)|^{2}$ is a function
570: of $\alpha_{s}(Q)$, and
571: \begin{eqnarray}
572: \sigma_{gg}^{(0)}&=&(\sqrt{2}G_{F})\frac{\alpha_{s}^{2}(Q)m_{H}^{2}}
573: {576 S}\delta(Q^{2}-m_{H}^{2}),\\
574: \mathbf{S}_{g}(\mu,Q)&=& \int_{\mu^{2}}^{Q^{2}}
575: \frac{d\mu^{2}}{\mu^{2}}
576: \bigg[\mathbf{A}_{g}(\alpha_{s})\mathrm{log}
577: \frac{Q^{2}}{\mu^{2}}+\mathbf{B}_{g}(\alpha_{s})\bigg],
578: \end{eqnarray}
579: and \begin{eqnarray}\sigma_{\mathrm{SCET}}(Q_T,Q,\mu)
580: =\frac{1}{\sigma_{gg}^{(0)}}\frac{d\sigma^{\mathrm{SCET}}(\mu)}{dQ^{2}dydQ_{T}^{2}}
581: \end{eqnarray}
582: represents the normalized differential cross section calculated in
583: SCET$_{\mathrm{II}}$ with the composite operator
584: $\hat{\mathcal{H}}$. The general structure of relevant diagram is
585: shown in Fig.~\ref{hpt}, where the soft and collinear modes are
586: decoupled and the spin and color are summed over in the matrix
587: element of hadron, from which the SCET cross section can be
588: written in the form of multiple convolution,
589: \begin{eqnarray}
590: \sigma_{\mathrm{SCET}}(Q_T,Q,\mu)&=& \int
591: d^{2}\vec{k}_{T1}d^{2}\vec{k}_{T2}d^{2}\vec{k}_{TS}
592: \delta^{2}(\vec{k}_{T1}+\vec{k}_{T2}+\vec{k}_{TS}-\vec{Q}_T) \nonumber\\
593: && \times
594: J_{p_1}(x_{1},k_{T1},\mu)J_{p_2}(x_{2},k_{T2},\mu)S(k_{TS},\mu),
595: \end{eqnarray}
596: where $x_{1}={Qe^{y}}/ \sqrt{S}$, $x_{2}={Qe^{-y}}/\sqrt{S}$ for
597: $Q_{T}^{2} \ll Q^{2}$, and
598: \begin{eqnarray}
599: J_{p_1}(x_{1},k_{T1},\mu)&=& \frac{2}{x_{1}P^{-}}
600: \frac{1}{(2\pi)^{3}}\int dy^{+}d^{2}\vec{y}_{\perp}
601: e^{-i(x_{1}P^{-}y^{+}-\vec{k}_{T1}\cdot\vec{y}_{\perp})}\nonumber\\
602: &&\times\langle p_1
603: |\mathrm{Tr}[\mathcal{B}_{n}^{\alpha}(y^{+},0,\vec{y}_{\perp})
604: \mathcal{B}_{n\alpha}(0)]| p_1 \rangle,\\
605: J_{p_2}(x_{2},k_{T2},\mu)&=& \frac{2}{x_{2}P^{+}}
606: \frac{1}{(2\pi)^{3}}\int dy^{-}d^{2}\vec{y}_{\perp}
607: e^{-i(x_{2}P^{+}y^{-}-\vec{k}_{T2}\cdot\vec{y}_{\perp})}
608: \nonumber\\
609: &&\times\langle
610: p_2|\mathrm{Tr}[\mathcal{B}_{\bar{n}}^{\alpha}(0,y^{-},\vec{y}_{\perp})
611: \mathcal{B}_{\bar{n}\alpha}(0)]| p_2 \rangle,\\
612: S(k_{TS},\mu)&=& \frac{1}{(2\pi)^{2}}\int
613: d^{2}\vec{y}_{\perp}e^{i\vec{k}_{TS}\cdot\vec{y}_{\perp}}\langle
614: \Omega|\bar{\mathrm{T}}[\mathcal{Y}_n^{\dagger ec}
615: \mathcal{Y}_{\bar{n}}^{\dagger eb}](0,0,\vec{y}_{\perp}) \nonumber\\
616: &&\times\mathrm{T}[\mathcal{Y}_{\bar{n}}^{ab}\mathcal{Y}_n^{ac}](0)|\Omega\rangle,
617: \end{eqnarray}with $\bar{\mathrm{T}}$ denoting the anti-time ordering operator.
618: Obviously, in Eq.(38) the matrix element has been factorized, and
619: the delta function is imposed by momentum conservation.
620: \begin{figure}[t!]
621: \includegraphics{hpt.eps}
622: \caption{\label{hpt}General structure of SCET cross section for
623: Higgs-boson production under the gauge $n\cdot
624: A_{\bar{n}}=\bar{n}\cdot A_n=0$}.
625: \end{figure}
626:
627: Next, to factorize the phase space, the trick of Fourier
628: transforming to impact parameter space is significant \cite{abc},
629: \begin{eqnarray}
630: \int d^{2}\vec{Q}_T e^{i \vec{b}\cdot
631: \vec{Q}_T}\delta^{2}(\sum_{i}\vec{k}_{Ti}-\vec{Q}_T)=\prod_{i}e^{i
632: \vec{b}\cdot\vec{k}_{Ti}}.
633: \end{eqnarray}
634: Then, for each transverse momentum $\vec{k}_{Ti}$, one obtains
635: \begin{eqnarray}
636: \int d^{2}\vec{k}_{Ti} e^{i \vec{b}\cdot
637: \vec{k}_{Ti}}f(\vec{k}_{Ti})=\tilde{f}(b).
638: \end{eqnarray}
639: This produces the simple product
640: \begin{eqnarray}
641: \tilde{\sigma}_{\mathrm{SCET}}(b,Q,\mu)=
642: \tilde{J}_{p_1}(x_{1},b,\mu)\tilde{J}_{p_2}(x_{2},b,\mu)\tilde{S}({b},\mu).
643: \end{eqnarray}
644:
645: Because of KLN theorem, the contributions from the soft modes are
646: free of IR divergences. So only the collinear divergences are
647: survived, therefore after matching the SCET cross section onto a
648: product of two parton distribution functions (PDFs) given by
649: \cite{hsf}, which are equivalent to the conventional PDFs
650: $f_{a/p_i}(x_{i},\mu)$ at LO in $\lambda$, the remaining IR
651: divergences can be absorbed into these nonperturbative inputs, of
652: which the evolutions are controlled by the DGLAP equations. This
653: leads to \cite{abc}
654: \begin{eqnarray}
655: \tilde{J}_{p_{i}}(x_i,b,\mu)&=& \sum_{a}(f_{a/p_{i}}\otimes
656: \mathbf{c}_{ga})(x_{i},b,\mu) \nonumber \\
657: &=& \sum_{a} \int_{x_{i}}^{1}\frac{d\xi}{\xi}
658: f_{a/p_{i}}(\xi,\mu) \mathbf{c}_{ga}(\frac{x_{i}}{\xi},b,\mu), \\
659: \mathbf{c}_{ga}&\equiv& \sum_{n=0}(\frac{\alpha_{s}}{4\pi})^{n}
660: \mathbf{c}_{ga}^{(n)}. \nonumber
661: \end{eqnarray}
662: If we define
663: \begin{eqnarray}
664: \mathbf{C}_{ga}(z,\frac{b_{0}}{b},\mu)
665: =\mathbf{c}_{ga}(z,b,\mu)[\tilde{S}({b},\mu)]^{\frac{1}{2}},
666: \qquad\ b_{0}=2e^{-\gamma_{E}},
667: \end{eqnarray}
668: then
669: \begin{eqnarray}
670: \label{q2}\tilde{\sigma}_{\mathrm{SCET}}(b,Q,\mu) =
671: (f_{a/p_{1}}\otimes
672: \mathbf{C}_{ga})(x_{1},\frac{b_{0}}{b},\mu)(f_{b/p_{2}}\otimes
673: \mathbf{C}_{gb})(x_{2},\frac{b_{0}}{b},\mu).
674: \end{eqnarray}
675: Obviously, $\mathbf{C}_{ga}^{(0)}(z)=\delta_{ga}\delta(1-z)$, and
676: we have derived in Appendix that
677: \begin{eqnarray}
678: \mathbf{C}_{ga}^{(1)}(z)&=&-2P_{ga}^{\epsilon}(z)
679: -C_{A}\frac{\pi^{2}}{6}\delta_{ga}\delta(1-z),
680: \end{eqnarray}
681: where $\mu$ has been set to $b_{0}/b$ to eliminate large constant
682: factors in $\mathbf{C}_{ga}^{(1)}(z,\mu)$, and
683: $P_{ga}^{\epsilon}(z)$ represent the $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon)$ terms
684: of the DGLAP splitting kernels.
685:
686: Combining Eq.(\ref{q1})-(\ref{q2}) and Fourier transforming back
687: to $Q_T$ space, we obtain the resumed formula of transverse
688: momentum distribution for Higgs-boson production in SCET,
689: \begin{eqnarray}
690: \frac{1}{\sigma_{gg}^{(0)}}\frac{{d\sigma}^{\mathrm{resum}}}
691: {dQ^{2}dydQ_{T}^{2}}&=& \mathbf{H}_{g}^{\phi}(Q) \int_{0}^{\infty}
692: \frac{db}{2\pi} bJ_0(bQ_T)\sum_{ab}
693: e^{-\mathbf{S}_{g}(\frac{b_{0}}{b},Q)}\nonumber\\
694: &&\times(f_{a/p_{1}}\otimes
695: \mathbf{C}_{ga})(x_{1},\frac{b_{0}}{b})(f_{b/p_{2}}\otimes
696: \mathbf{C}_{gb})(x_{2},\frac{b_{0}}{b}).
697: \end{eqnarray}
698:
699: The similar reasoning leads to the general form for $Q_T$
700: resummation,
701: \begin{eqnarray}
702: \label{eqt}
703: \frac{1}{\sigma^{(0)}}\frac{{d\sigma}^{\mathrm{resum}}}
704: {dQ^{2}dydQ_{T}^{2}}&=& \mathbf{H}_{c}^{F}(Q) \int_{0}^{\infty}
705: \frac{db}{2\pi} bJ_0(bQ_T)\sum_{ab}
706: e^{-\mathbf{S}_{c}(\frac{b_{0}}{b},Q)}\nonumber\\
707: &&\times (f_{a/p_{1}}\otimes
708: \mathbf{C}_{ca})(x_{1},\frac{b_{0}}{b})(f_{b/p_{2}}\otimes
709: \mathbf{C}_{\bar{c}b})(x_{2},\frac{b_{0}}{b}),
710: \end{eqnarray}where $F$ and $c$ stand for the type
711: of process and of parton participating the elementary sub-process,
712: for example, $F=DY$ and $c=q$ for Drell-Yan process. The formula
713: (\ref{eqt}) is a little different from the known CSS formula
714: \cite{abc},
715: \begin{eqnarray}
716: \label{css}\frac{1}{\sigma^{(0)}}\frac{{d\sigma}^{\mathrm{resum}}}
717: {dQ^{2}dydQ_{T}^{2}}&=& \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{db}{2\pi}
718: bJ_0(bQ_T)\sum_{ab}e^{-S_{c}(\frac{b_{0}}{b},Q)}\nonumber\\
719: &&\times(f_{a/p_{1}}\otimes
720: C_{ca})(x_{1},\frac{b_{0}}{b})(f_{b/p_{2}}\otimes
721: C_{\bar{c}b})(x_{2},\frac{b_{0}}{b}).
722: \end{eqnarray}
723:
724: Transforming Eq.(\ref{eqt}) into the form as Eq.(\ref{css}) by the
725: identity
726: \begin{eqnarray}
727: \mathbf{H}_{c}^{F}(Q)=\exp\left[\int^{Q^2}_{b_{0}^{2}/b^{2}}
728: \frac{d\mu^{2}}{\mu^{2}}\beta(\alpha_{s})\frac{d \log
729: \mathbf{H}_{c}^{F}}{d \log
730: \alpha_{s}}\right]\mathbf{H}_{c}^{F}({b_{0}/b})
731: \end{eqnarray} with $\beta(\alpha_{s})$ denoting the QCD
732: $\beta$-function, one finds
733: \begin{eqnarray}
734: \frac{1}{\sigma^{(0)}}\frac{{d\sigma}^{\mathrm{resum}}}
735: {dQ^{2}dydQ_{T}^{2}}&=& \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{db}{2\pi}
736: bJ_0(bQ_T)\sum_{ab}e^{-\bar{S}_{c}(\frac{b_{0}}{b},Q)}\nonumber\\
737: &&\times(f_{a/p_{1}}\otimes
738: \bar{C}_{ca})(x_{1},\frac{b_{0}}{b})(f_{b/p_{2}}\otimes
739: \bar{C}_{\bar{c}b})(x_{2},\frac{b_{0}}{b}).
740: \end{eqnarray}
741: The corresponding coefficients $\{\bar{A},\bar{B},\bar{C}\}$ are
742: related to $\{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{B},\mathbf{C}\}$ through equation
743: \begin{eqnarray}
744: \nonumber \bar{A}(\alpha_{s}) &=& \mathbf{A}(\alpha_{s}),\nonumber\\
745: \bar{B}(\alpha_{s}) &=&
746: \label{rela}\mathbf{B}(\alpha_{s})-\beta(\alpha_{s})\frac{d \log
747: \mathbf{H}_{c}^{F}}{d \log \alpha_{s}},\\
748: \bar{C}_{ab}(z) &=& \mathbf{C}_{ab}(z)
749: [\mathbf{H}_{a}^{F}(b_{0}/b)]^{\frac{1}{2}},\nonumber
750: \end{eqnarray}
751: Up to next-to-leading-logarithmic-order (NLLO),
752: $\{\mathbf{A}^{(2)},\mathbf{B}^{(1)},\mathbf{C}^{(1)}\}$ and
753: $\{A^{(2)},B^{(1)},C^{(1)}\}$ is compatible with each other, and
754: further calculation and confirmation are required at higher order.
755:
756: It can be seen that SCET provides a natural framework of $Q_T$
757: resummation by conventional RGE in EFT. We have noted that the
758: matched effective operator is determined by collinear and soft
759: gauge invariance and is unique. In addition, the corresponding
760: anomalous dimension is independent of its spin structure and is
761: universal, while the process-dependent quantity resides in the
762: Wilson coefficient. Even more, the coefficients $\mathbf{C}_{ab}$
763: defined in SCET are process-independent too. So the matching and
764: running procedure in EFT naturally separated the process-dependent
765: and universal contributions to a process, i.e.,
766: $\{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{B},\mathbf{C}\}$ are universal and only
767: $\mathbf{H}_{c}^{F}$ is process-dependent. In pQCD, the formula
768: and relation like Eq.(\ref{eqt}) and Eq.(\ref{rela}) have been
769: proposed by the authors of \cite{upt}.
770:
771: Compared with SCET, pQCD analysis invoke gauge invariance and a
772: new evolution equation \cite{abc} which comes from differentiating
773: the jet-function from the factorized cross section with respect to
774: the axial parameter in axial gauge to separate soft and collinear
775: contributions, which is crucial to resum the double logarithms,
776: since RGE in full theory only resums single logarithms between two
777: scales.
778:
779: We conclude this section with a chain for the $Q_T$ resummation in
780: this section,
781: $$QCD|_{Q^{2}}\longrightarrow SCET_{I}|_{Q^{2}\lambda^{2}}\Rightarrow
782: SCET_{II}|_{Q^{2}\eta^{2}}\longleftarrow DGLAP|_{\mu_{0}^{2}},$$
783: where the last arrow indicates that the PDFs used at the scale
784: $Q^{2}\eta^{2}$ can be obtained from those at some fixed scale
785: $\mu_{0}^{2}$ by the evolutions of the DGLAP equations.
786:
787: \section{discussion}
788:
789: (I) Applying the formula (\ref{eqt}) to the production of lepton
790: pair via virtual photon, one can find,
791: \begin{eqnarray}
792: \frac{1}{\sigma_{qq}^{(0)}}\frac{{d\sigma}^{\mathrm{resum}}}
793: {dQ^{2}dydQ_{T}^{2}}&=&\mathbf{H}_{q}^{DY}(Q)\int_{0}^{\infty}
794: \frac{db}{2\pi} bJ_0(bQ_T)\sum_{ab}
795: e^{-\mathbf{S}_{q}(\frac{b_{0}}{b},Q)}\nonumber\\
796: &&\times(f_{a/p_{1}}\otimes
797: \mathbf{C}_{qa})(x_{1},\frac{b_{0}}{b})(f_{b/p_{2}}\otimes
798: \mathbf{C}_{qb})(x_{2},\frac{b_{0}}{b}),
799: \end{eqnarray}
800: where
801: \begin{eqnarray}
802: \nonumber && \sigma_{qq}^{(0)} =
803: e_q^2\frac{4\pi^2\alpha_{em}^2}{9SQ^2},\qquad\
804: \mathbf{H}_{q}^{DY}(Q)=1+\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{2\pi}
805: (-8+\frac{7}{6}\pi^{2}),\nonumber\\
806: && \mathbf{S}_{q}(\frac{b_{0}}{b},Q) =
807: \int_{b_{0}^{2}/{b}^{2}}^{Q^{2}}
808: \frac{d\mu^{2}}{\mu^{2}}\bigg[\mathbf{A}_{q}(\alpha_{s})\mathrm{log}
809: \frac{Q^{2}}{\mu^{2}}+\mathbf{B}_{q}(\alpha_{s})\bigg],\\
810: && \mathbf{C}_{qa}^{(0)} = \delta_{qa}\delta(1-z), \qquad\
811: \mathbf{C}_{qa}^{(1)}=-2P_{qa}^{\epsilon}(z)
812: -C_{F}\frac{\pi^{2}}{6}\delta_{qa} \delta(1-z).\nonumber
813: \end{eqnarray}
814:
815: (II) The reformulation of joint resummation can also be made
816: straightforwardly in SCET. In fact, threshold resummation
817: \cite{dy} under $z=Q^2/S\rightarrow1$ for
818: ${d\sigma^{\mathrm{resum}}}/{dQ^2}$ is performed in moment-$N$
819: space, and the relevant $\lambda^{2}=1/\bar{N}\sim 1-z$ with
820: $\bar{N}=e^{\gamma_{E}}N$. The conclusion of \cite{dy} can be
821: represented by a chain,
822: $$QCD|_{Q^{2}}\longrightarrow SCET_{I}|_{Q^{2}\lambda^{2}}\Rightarrow
823: SCET_{II}|_{Q^{2}\eta^{2}}\longleftarrow DGLAP|_{\mu_{0}^{2}}.$$
824: We observe that the two chains for $Q_T$ and threshold resummation
825: in SCET have identical structure. This suggests that we can do
826: threshold and $Q_T$ resummation for
827: ${d\sigma^{\mathrm{resum}}}/{dQ^2dQ_T^2}$ simultaneously. The
828: relevant $\lambda^{2}\sim 1/\chi(\bar{N},\bar{b})$ with
829: $\bar{b}\equiv bQ /b_{0}$ is an interpolation of $\lambda^{2}\sim
830: 1/\bar{N}$ and $\lambda^{2}\sim 1/\bar{b}$, let us say \cite{jr}
831: \begin{equation}
832: \chi(\bar{N},\bar{b})=\bar{b}+\frac{\bar{N}}{1+\rho\bar{b}/\bar{N}},
833: \qquad\ \rho=\frac{1}{4},
834: \end{equation}
835: which approaches to $\bar{N}$ for $\bar{b} \ll \bar{N}$ and to
836: $\bar{b}$ for $\bar{b}\gg \bar{N}$, respectively. The matching
837: steps for joint resummation then can be written as
838: $$QCD|_{Q^{2}}\longrightarrow SCET_{I}|_{Q^{2}/\chi}\Rightarrow
839: SCET_{II}|_{Q^{2}/\chi^{2}}\longleftarrow DGLAP|_{\mu_{0}^{2}},$$
840: which leads to similar result as Eq.(\ref{eqt}) corresponding to
841: that of \cite{jr}, and the Mellin transformed and jointly resummed
842: cross section follows,
843: \begin{eqnarray}
844: \frac{1}{\sigma^{(0)}}\frac{{d\sigma}^{\mathrm{resum}}(N)}
845: {dQ^{2}dQ_{T}^{2}}&=&\mathbf{H}_{c}^{F}(Q)\int_{0}^{\infty}
846: \frac{db}{2\pi} bJ_0(bQ_T)\sum_{ab}
847: e^{-\mathbf{S}_{c}(Q/\chi,Q)}\nonumber\\
848: &&\times\bigg(\mathbf{C}_{ca}(N)f_{a/p_{1}}(N,Q/\chi)\bigg)
849: \bigg(\mathbf{C}_{\bar{c}b}(N)f_{b/p_{2}}(N,Q/\chi)\bigg),
850: \end{eqnarray}
851: where $\phi(N)\equiv \int_0^1d\xi\xi^{N}\phi(\xi)$ for any
852: function $\phi(\xi)$ with $0\leq\xi\leq1$ is used.
853:
854: \section{conclusion}
855:
856: We have presented the method of $Q_T$ resummation in the framework
857: of SCET and given a simple correspondence between
858: $\{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{B},\mathbf{C}\}$ in SCET and the well known
859: coefficients $\{A,B,C\}$ in pQCD, with which the available
860: information is compatible. The equivalence of the two framework
861: can be confirmed by higher order computation. We have also shown
862: that the reformulation of joint resummation can be performed in
863: SCET directly. So any process, which is confined to the soft and
864: collinear regions by dynamics or kinematics, can be treated in
865: SCET following the steps outlined above.
866:
867:
868: \section*{Acknowledgements}
869: We would like to thank C.W.Bauer for his kind discussion at the
870: Conference of QCD and Hadron Physics held in Peking University,
871: June 2005. We also thank X.D.Ji for useful discussions. This work
872: is supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of
873: China, under grant Nos. 10421003 and 10575001, and the key Grant
874: Project of Chinese Ministry of Education, under the Grant No.
875: 305001.\vspace{.5cm}\\
876: {\it Note added.} -After an expanded version of our manuscript was
877: completed, a new paper \cite{qt} by A. Idilbi, X.D. Ji, and F.
878: Yuan appeared, in which they also discussed the transverse
879: momentum distribution in $b$ space and derived a similar result to
880: ours.
881:
882: \section*{Appendix.A}
883: In this appendix, the details of the calculation to extract
884: $\mathbf{C}^{(1)}$ in SCET are given explicitly.
885:
886: Because $\mathbf{C}^{(1)}$ is related to the emission of a soft or
887: collinear gluon, and the phase space is already factorized in this
888: case, we will exploit a special form at $\mathcal{O}(\alpha_{s})$,
889: for which there is no need to cover the non-perturbative region
890: ($Q_T\sim \Lambda_{QCD}$),
891: \begin{eqnarray}
892: \frac{1}{\sigma^{(0)}}\frac{{d\sigma}^{\mathrm{resum}}}
893: {dQ^{2}dydQ_{T}^{2}}&=& \mathbf{H}_{c}^{F}(Q)\frac{d}{dQ_{T}^{2}}
894: \bigg[e^{-\mathbf{S}_{c}(\mu,Q)}\hat{\sigma}_{\mathrm{SCET}}(Q_T,Q,\mu)\bigg],\\
895: \label{m1}
896: \hat{\sigma}_{\mathrm{SCET}}(Q_T,Q,\mu)&=&\int_{0}^{Q_{T}^{2}}dq_{T}^{2}
897: \frac{1}{\sigma^{(0)}}\frac{d\sigma^{\mathrm{SCET}}
898: (\mu)}{dQ^{2}dydq_{T}^{2}}\nonumber\\
899: &=&J_{p_1}(x_{1},Q_{T},\mu)J_{p_2}(x_{2},Q_{T},\mu)S(Q_{T},\mu).
900: \end{eqnarray}
901: The same reasoning as in section 3 leads to
902: \begin{eqnarray}
903: \label{m2}
904: J_{p_1}(x_{1},Q_{T},\mu)J_{p_2}(x_{2},Q_{T},\mu)S(Q_{T},\mu)&=&\sum_{a,b}
905: (f_{a/p_{1}}\otimes\hat{\mathbf{C}}_{ca})(x_{1},Q_{T},\mu) \nonumber \\
906: &&\times(f_{b/p_{2}}\otimes
907: \hat{\mathbf{C}}_{\bar{c}b})(x_{2},Q_{T},\mu).
908: \end{eqnarray}
909: Then we get the differential form for $Q_{T}$ resummation,
910: \begin{eqnarray}
911: \label{qt}\frac{1}{\sigma^{(0)}}\frac{{d\sigma}^{\mathrm{resum}}}
912: {dQ^{2}dydQ_{T}^{2}}&=&\mathbf{H}_{c}^{F}(Q)\frac{d}{dQ_{T}^{2}}
913: \sum_{ab}
914: e^{-\mathbf{S}_{c}(Q_{T},Q)} \nonumber \\
915: &&\times(f_{a/p_{1}}\otimes
916: \hat{\mathbf{C}}_{ca})(x_{1},Q_{T})(f_{b/p_{2}}\otimes
917: \hat{\mathbf{C}}_{\bar{c}b})(x_{2},Q_{T}).
918: \end{eqnarray}
919: Here $\mu=Q_{T}$ is set to minimize large factor in
920: $\hat{\mathbf{C}}^{(1)}$. Taking the $Q_{T}^{2}$ integral of
921: Eq.(\ref{eqt}) and Eq.(\ref{qt}) from $0$ to $Q_{T}^{2}$ and then
922: expanding them at $\mathcal{O}(\alpha_{s})$, we find
923: ${\mathbf{C}}^{(1)}(z,\frac{b_{0}}{b})=\hat{\mathbf{C}}^{(1)}(z,Q_T)$,
924: thus we will use Eq.(\ref{m1})-(\ref{m2}) to calculate
925: ${\mathbf{C}}^{(1)}$. However, it should be emphasized that this
926: formula is valid only with
927: $\{\mathbf{A}^{(1)},\mathbf{B}^{(1)},\hat{\mathbf{C}}^{(1)}\}$,
928: and the two formulas must be equal at this order, which suggests a
929: way to adjust the parameters in $b^*$ prescription \cite{abc}.
930: Previously, the authors (DDT) of \cite{ddt1} have derived a
931: similar formula, which is corresponding to our result at
932: leading-logarithmic-order (LLO). Later, the extended DDT formula
933: in the CSS frame with $\{A^{(2)},B^{(2)},C^{(1)}\}$ was suggested
934: in \cite{ddt2}, whose coefficients $\{\tilde{A},\tilde{B},C\}$ at
935: $\mathcal{O}(\alpha_{s})$ are just our
936: $\{\mathbf{A}^{(1)},\mathbf{B}^{(1)},\hat{\mathbf{C}}^{(1)}\}$.
937: \begin{figure}[t!]
938: \includegraphics{feyn.eps}
939: \caption{\label{feyn} Feynman rules for $n$-direction collinear
940: particles in Feynman gauge $\alpha=1$ \cite{bsr}. Here the
941: direction of gluon momentum in the Wilson line is along the
942: collinear particle. The rules for soft fields and collinear gluon
943: are the same as that for QCD, and $n\leftrightarrow\bar{n}$ for
944: $\bar{n}$-direction collinear particles.}
945: \end{figure}
946: The real radiative contribution to the differential cross section
947: at the scale $Q_T^2$ is
948: \begin{eqnarray}
949: \nonumber
950: \frac{d\sigma_{r}^{\mathrm{SCET}}(\mu)}{dQ^{2}dydq_{T}^{2}}&=&
951: \frac{1}{\Gamma(1-\epsilon)}(\frac{4\pi}{q_T^2})^\epsilon
952: \int\frac{du}{u}\delta \bigg (\frac{1}{u}(u-u_{min})(u-u_{max}) \bigg )\nonumber\\
953: &&\times\frac{|\mathcal{M}^{(0)}_{ab}(p_1,p_2,k,y)|^{2}}{8s(2\pi)^{2}}.
954: \end{eqnarray}
955: Here $\mathcal{M}^{(0)}_{ab}(p_1,p_2,k,y)$ denotes the
956: corresponding matrix element, and the usual invariants are defined
957: as
958: \begin{eqnarray}
959: \nonumber s&=&(p_1+p_2)^{2}, \qquad\ t=(p_1-k)^{2},\nonumber\\
960: u&=&(p_2-k)^{2}, \qquad\ z=\frac{Q^2}{s},\nonumber\
961: \end{eqnarray}
962: and the two roots of the equation $(p_1+p_2-q)^{2}=0$ are
963: $$u_{min}=Q^2\frac{z-1-\sqrt{(1-z)^2-4zq_T^2/Q^2}}{2z},$$
964: $$u_{max}=Q^2\frac{z-1+\sqrt{(1-z)^2-4zq_T^2/Q^2}}{2z}.$$
965:
966: The expression $|\mathcal{M}^{(0)}_{ab}(p_1,p_2,k,y)|^{2}$ in SCET
967: can be written down by cut diagrams, and the Feynman rules we need
968: are shown in Fig.\ref{feyn}. For example, in Fig.\ref{c}, the real
969: contribution of the collinear gluon in the $n$ direction is
970: \begin{figure}[t!]
971: \includegraphics{c.eps}
972: \caption{\label{c} Cut diagrams for the emission of gluon in
973: $\mathrm{SCET_{II}}$, and the mirror diagrams are not shown}
974: \end{figure}
975: \begin{eqnarray}
976: |\mathcal{M}^{c1(0)}_{qq}(p_1,p_2,k,y)|^{2} &=&
977: -4\pi\alpha_{s}\mu^{2\epsilon} \frac{1}{36} C_F \bigg
978: \{\mathrm{Tr} \bigg [s
979: \gamma_{\mu}\frac{\not{n}}{2}\frac{\bar{n}\cdot
980: (p_1-k)}{(p_1-k)^2}\frac{\not{\bar{n}}}{2} \\
981: && \times \bigg (n_\nu+
982: \frac{(\not{p_1}-\not{k})_{\perp}\not{\gamma}_\nu^{\perp}}{\bar{n}\cdot
983: (p_1-k)}+\frac{\not{\gamma}_\nu^{\perp}\not{p_1}_{\perp}}{\bar{n}\cdot
984: p_1}-\frac{(\not{p_1}-\not{k})_{\perp}\not{p_1}_{\perp}}{\bar{n}\cdot
985: (p_1-k)\bar{n}\cdot p_1}\bar{n}_\nu \bigg )\frac{\not{n}}{2} \nonumber\\
986: &&\times \frac{\not{\bar{n}}}{2} \bigg
987: (n^\nu+\frac{\not{\gamma}_{\perp}^\nu
988: (\not{p_1}-\not{k})_{\perp}}{\bar{n}\cdot
989: p_1-k}+\frac{\not{p_1}_{\perp}\not{\gamma}_{\perp}^\nu}{\bar{n}\cdot
990: p_1}-\frac{(\not{p_1}-\not{k})_{\perp}\not{p_1}_{\perp}}{\bar{n}\cdot
991: (p_1-k)\bar{n}\cdot
992: p_1}\bar{n}^\nu \bigg )\frac{\not{n}}{2} \nonumber\\
993: &&\times \frac{\bar{n}\cdot
994: (p_1-k)}{(p_1-k)^2}\gamma^{\mu}\frac{\not{\bar{n}}}{2} \bigg
995: ]+2\mathrm{Tr} \bigg [s\gamma_{\mu}\frac{\bar{n}_\nu}{\bar{n}\cdot
996: k}\frac{\not{n}}{2}\frac{\not{\bar{n}}}{2}n^\nu\frac{\not{n}}{2}\frac{\bar{n}\cdot
997: (p_1-k)}{(p_1-k)^2}\gamma^{\mu}\frac{\not{n}}{2} \bigg ] \bigg\}\nonumber\\
998: &=& -4\pi\alpha_{s}\mu^{2\epsilon} \frac{1}{36} \mathrm{Tr}[
999: s\gamma_{\mu}\frac{\not{n}}{2}\gamma^{\mu}\frac{\not{\bar{n}}}{2}]
1000: 2C_F \bigg \{(1-\epsilon) \bigg
1001: [2\frac{(p_1-k)_{\perp}\not{p_1}_{\perp}}{\bar{n}\cdot
1002: (p_1-k)\bar{n}\cdot p_1}\nonumber\\
1003: &&-\frac{(p_1-k)_{\perp}^2}{(\bar{n}\cdot
1004: (p_1-k))^2}-\frac{p_{1\perp}^2}{(\bar{n}\cdot p_1)^2} \bigg ]
1005: \bigg [\frac{\bar{n}\cdot(p_1-k)}{(p_1-k)^2} \bigg
1006: ]^{2}+2\frac{\bar{n}\cdot (p_1-k)}{\bar{n}\cdot k (p_1-k)^2} \bigg
1007: \}.\nonumber
1008: \end{eqnarray}
1009: If we drop the common factor
1010: \begin{eqnarray}\mathcal{M} \equiv 4\pi\alpha_{s}\mu^{2\epsilon}
1011: \frac{1}{36}\mathrm{Tr}[Q^{2}\gamma_{\mu}
1012: \frac{\not{n}}{2}\gamma^{\mu}\frac{\not{\bar{n}}}{2}],
1013: \end{eqnarray}
1014: and use the following parametrization for momenta $p_1,p_2,k$,
1015: \begin{eqnarray}
1016: \nonumber p_1 &=& (0,P^-,0), \qquad\ p_2=(P^+,0,0),\nonumber \\
1017: k &=& (\frac{q_T^2}{(1-z_1)P^-},(1-z_1)P^-,-q_T), \\
1018: s &=& P^+P^-, \qquad\ t=\frac{-1}{1-z_1}q_T^2,\nonumber \\
1019: u &=& -(1-z_1)s, \qquad\ tu=sq_T^2,
1020: \end{eqnarray}
1021: the above expression can be simplified to
1022: \begin{eqnarray}
1023: |\mathcal{M}^{c1(0)}_{qq}(p_1,p_2,k,y)|^{2}\rightarrow
1024: \frac{2C_F[(1-\epsilon)(1-z_1)^2+2z_1]}{zq_{T}^{2}}.
1025: \end{eqnarray} The contribution of $\bar{n}$ collinear gluon is
1026: given by $n \leftrightarrow \bar{n}$ and $z_1 \leftrightarrow
1027: z_2$,
1028: \begin{eqnarray}|\mathcal{M}^{c2(0)}_{qq}(p_1,p_2,k,y)|^{2}\rightarrow
1029: \frac{2C_F[(1-\epsilon)(1-z_2)^2+2z_2]}{zq_{T}^{2}},\end{eqnarray}
1030: and the soft gluon contribution is
1031: \begin{eqnarray}|\mathcal{M}^{s(0)}_{qq}(p_1,p_2,k,y)|^{2}
1032: \rightarrow\frac{4C_F}{zq_{T}^{2}}.\end{eqnarray}
1033:
1034: The condition that the emitted gluon is to be collinear is
1035: $(1-z_i)P^- \gg q_T$ or $z_i \rightarrow z$ for $i=1,2$, so only
1036: half of the phase space is covered, i.e., $u=u_{min}$ for
1037: $u=-(1-z_i)s$, under which we could safely make the substitution
1038: $z_i \rightarrow z$. The soft gluon is guaranteed by $(1-z_i)P^-
1039: \sim q_T$ or $z \rightarrow 1$. Note that
1040: $|\mathcal{M}^{ci(0)}|^2\rightarrow |\mathcal{M}^{s(0)}|^2$ when
1041: $z_i\rightarrow z\rightarrow 1$, which results in\footnote{We have
1042: divided soft contribution into two parts.}
1043: \begin{eqnarray}
1044: \nonumber |\mathcal{M}^{i(0)}_{qq}(p_1,p_2,k,y)|^{2} &=&
1045: |\mathcal{M}^{ci(0)}_{qq}(p_1,p_2,k,y)|^{2}_{1-z_i\gg \frac{q_T}{P^-}} \nonumber \\
1046: && +|\mathcal{M}^{s(0)}_{qq}(p_1,p_2,k,y)|^{2}_{1-z_i\sim
1047: \frac{q_T}{P^-}} \nonumber \\
1048: &\rightarrow& \frac{2C_F[(1-\epsilon)(1-z)^{2}+2z]}{zq_{T}^{2}} \nonumber \\
1049: & \equiv & \frac{2(1-z)P_{qq}(z,\epsilon)}{zq_{T}^{2}},
1050: \end{eqnarray}
1051: similarly,
1052: $$|\mathcal{M}^{i(0)}_{ab}(p_1,p_2,k,y)|^{2}\rightarrow \frac{2(1-z)P_{ab}(z,\epsilon)}{zq_{T}^{2}},$$
1053: where
1054: \begin{eqnarray}
1055: P_{qq}(z,\epsilon)&=& C_F\bigg[\frac{1+z^2}{1-z}-\epsilon (1-z)\bigg],\nonumber \\
1056: P_{gq}(z,\epsilon)&=& C_F\bigg[\frac{1+(1-z)^2}{z}-\epsilon z\bigg],\nonumber \\
1057: P_{gg}(z,\epsilon)&=& 2C_A\bigg[\frac{1-z}{z}+\frac{z}{1-z}+z(1-z)\bigg], \\
1058: P_{qg}(z,\epsilon)&=&
1059: T_R\bigg[1-\frac{2z(1-z)}{1-\epsilon}\bigg].\nonumber
1060: \end{eqnarray}
1061: These are the corresponding results of \cite{pt}.
1062:
1063: Next we match the $Q_T$ integral Eq.(\ref{m1}) onto PDFs after
1064: making Mellin transformation,
1065: \begin{eqnarray}
1066: \nonumber && \Sigma_{q\bar{q}}(n) \equiv
1067: \frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi}\Sigma_{q\bar{q}}^{(1)}(n)
1068: =\int_{0}^{1-\frac{2q_T}{Q}}dz z^{n}\frac{1}{\sigma^{(0)}}
1069: \frac{d\sigma_{r}^{\mathrm{SCET}}(\mu)}{dQ^{2}dydq_{T}^{2}}, \nonumber \\
1070: && \Sigma_{q\bar{q}}^{(1)}(n) = \frac{1}{\Gamma(1-\epsilon)}
1071: \frac{1}{q_T^2}(\frac{\mu^2 e^{\gamma_{E}}}{q_T^2})^\epsilon I_n, \\
1072: \label{qti} && I_n = \int_{0}^{1-\frac{2q_T}{Q}}dz
1073: z^{n}\frac{2(1-z)P_{qq}(z,\epsilon)}{\sqrt{(1-z)^2-4z\frac{q_T^2}{Q^2}}},
1074: \end{eqnarray}
1075: where the upper limit $z=1-2q_T/Q$ is to make the integrand
1076: meaningful, and the integral (\ref{qti}) can be evaluated easily
1077: if we retain only the singular terms as $q_T^2\rightarrow 0$,
1078: \begin{eqnarray}
1079: I_n &\rightarrow& \int_{0}^{1-\frac{2q_T}{Q}}dz
1080: \frac{2(1-z)P_{qq}(z,\epsilon)}
1081: {\sqrt{(1-z)^2-4z\frac{q_T^2}{Q^2}}}+\int_{0}^{1}dz(z^n-1)2P_{qq}(z,\epsilon) \nonumber\\
1082: &\rightarrow&
1083: 2C_F\log\frac{Q^{2}}{q_T^2}-3C_F+2\gamma_{qq}(n)+2\epsilon
1084: \gamma_{qq}^{\epsilon}(n),
1085: \end{eqnarray}
1086: where $\gamma_{qq}(n)$ and $\gamma_{qq}^{\epsilon}(n)$ are the
1087: moment of regularized splitting function and of
1088: $P_{qq}^{\epsilon}(z)$. So
1089: \begin{eqnarray}
1090: \nonumber \int_0^{Q_T^2}dq_T^2\Sigma_{q\bar{q}}^{(1)}(n)
1091: &=&\frac{1}{\Gamma(1-\epsilon)}
1092: \int_{0}^{Q_T^2}\frac{dq_T^2}{q_T^2}(\frac{\mu^2
1093: e^{\gamma_{E}}}{q_T^2})^\epsilon
1094: \left[2C_F\log\frac{Q^{2}}{q_T^2}-3C_F+2\gamma_{qq}(n)+2\epsilon
1095: \gamma_{qq}^{\epsilon}(n)\right] \nonumber \\
1096: &=&\frac{2C_{F}}{\epsilon^2}+\frac{1}{\epsilon}(3C_{F}
1097: +2C_{F}\log\frac{\mu^{2}}{Q^{2}})-\frac{2\gamma_{qq}(n)}{\epsilon}
1098: -2\gamma_{qq}^{\epsilon}(n)-\frac{C_{F}\pi^2}{6} \\
1099: && + C_{F}\log^2\frac{\mu^{2}}{Q_T^{2}}
1100: +3C_{F}\log\frac{\mu^{2}}{Q_T^{2}}
1101: -2\gamma_{qq}(n)\log\frac{\mu^{2}}{Q_T^{2}}
1102: -2C_{F}\log\frac{Q^{2}}{Q_T^{2}}\log\frac{\mu^{2}}{Q_T^{2}}.\nonumber
1103: \end{eqnarray}
1104:
1105: The virtual correction comes from the UV renormalization constant,
1106: \begin{eqnarray}
1107: \nonumber 2 \delta Z_V=\frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi}\left[\frac{2C_{F}}
1108: {\epsilon^2}+\frac{1}{\epsilon}(3C_{F}
1109: +2C_{F}\log\frac{\mu^{2}}{Q^{2}})\right],
1110: \end{eqnarray}
1111: which cancels the first two $\epsilon$-poles. The remaining is
1112: cancelled by the renormalization of PDF, i.e.,
1113: \begin{eqnarray}
1114: f_q(n)&=& f_{\bar{q}}(n) = 1+\frac{\alpha_s}{4\pi}
1115: \left[2\gamma_{qq}(n)(\frac{1}{\epsilon_{UV}}
1116: -\frac{1}{\epsilon_{IR}})\right],
1117: \end{eqnarray}
1118: where $\mu=\mu_F$ is implied. Finally, we get
1119: \begin{eqnarray}
1120: \hat{\mathbf{C}}_{qq}^{(1)}(n,Q_T)&=&-2\gamma_{qq}^{\epsilon}(n)-\frac{C_{F}\pi^2}{6},\\
1121: \mathbf{C}^{(1)}_{qq}(z,\frac{b_{0}}{b})&=&-2P_{qq}^{\epsilon}(z)-\frac{C_{F}\pi^2}{6}\delta(1-z),
1122: \end{eqnarray}
1123: Similarly,
1124: \begin{eqnarray}
1125: \mathbf{C}^{(1)}_{ab}(z,\frac{b_{0}}{b})=-2P_{ab}^{\epsilon}(z)-\frac{C_{a}\pi^2}{6}\delta_{ab}\delta(1-z).
1126: \end{eqnarray}
1127:
1128: \begin{thebibliography}{xx}
1129:
1130: \bibitem{bsr}
1131: C.W.Bauer, S. Fleming and M.Luke,Phys.Rev.\textbf{D63},
1132: 014006(2001); C.W.Bauer, D. Pirjol and I.W.Stewart,
1133: \emph{ibid.}\textbf{D65}, 054022(2002).
1134: \bibitem{hsf}
1135: C.W.Bauer, S.Fleming, D.Pirjol, I.Z.Rothstein and I.W.Stewart,\\
1136: Phys.Rev.\textbf{D66}, 014017(2002).
1137: \bibitem{ee}
1138: C.W.Bauer, A.V.Manohar and M.B.Wise, Phys.Rev.Lett.\textbf{91},
1139: 122001(2003); C.W.Bauer, C.Lee, A.V.Manohar and M.B.Wise,
1140: Phys.Rev.\textbf{D70}, 034014(2004).
1141: \bibitem{dis}
1142: A.V.Manohar, Phys.Rev.\textbf{D68}, 114019(2003).
1143: \bibitem{dy}
1144: A.Idilbi and X.D.Ji, Phys.Rev.\textbf{D72}, 054016(2005).
1145: \bibitem{abc}
1146: J.C.Collins and D.E.Soper, Nucl.Phys.\textbf{B193}, 381(1981);
1147: \emph{ibid.}\textbf{B194}, 445(1982); \emph{ibid.}\textbf{B197},
1148: 446(1982); J.C.Collins, D.E.Soper and G.Sterman,
1149: \emph{ibid.}\textbf{B261}, 104(1985).
1150: \bibitem{kt}
1151: R.P.Kauffman, Phys.Rev.\textbf{D44}, 1415(1991);
1152: \emph{ibid.}\textbf{D45}, 1512(1992).
1153: \bibitem{pt}
1154: D.de Florian, M.Grazzini, Phys.Rev.Lett.\textbf{85}, 4678(2000);
1155: Nucl.Phys.\textbf{B616}, 247(2001).
1156: \bibitem{upt}
1157: S.Catani, D.de Florian and M.Grazzini, Nucl.Phys.\textbf{B596},
1158: 299(2001).
1159: \bibitem{sr}
1160: V.A.Smirnov, Phys.Lett.\textbf{B404}, 101(1997); M.Beneke and
1161: V.A.Smirnov, Nucl.Phys.\textbf{B522}, 321(1998); M.Beneke,
1162: A.P.Chapovshy, M.Diehl and T.Feldmann, Nucl.Phys.\textbf{B643},
1163: 431(2002).
1164: \bibitem{rpi}
1165: C.W.Bauer, D.Pirjol and I.W.Stewart, Phys.Rev.\textbf{D68},
1166: 034021(2003).
1167: \bibitem{onfsf}
1168: G.P.Korchemsky, Phys.Lett.\textbf{B217}, 330(1989);
1169: \emph{ibid.}\textbf{B220}, 629(1989); G.P.Korchemsky and
1170: A.V.Radyushkin, \emph{ibid.}\textbf{B279}, 359(1992).
1171: \bibitem{hl}
1172: J.Chay and C.Kim, Nucl.Phys.\textbf{B680}, 302(2004).
1173: \bibitem{ir}
1174: G.Sterman, Phys.Rev.\textbf{D17}, 2773(1978).
1175: \bibitem{h}
1176: M.Spira, A.Djouadi, D.Graudenz, P.M.Zerwas,
1177: Nucl.Phys.\textbf{B281}, 310(1987).
1178: \bibitem{ab2}
1179: V.Ravindran, J.Smith and W.L.Van Neerven, Nucl.Phys.\textbf{B704},
1180: 332(2005);\\ S.Moch, J.A.M.Vermaseren and A.Vogt, JHEP
1181: 08(2005)049., Phys.Lett.\textbf{B625}, 245(2005);\\
1182: T.Gehrmann, T.Huber and D.Maitre, Phys.Lett.\textbf{B622},
1183: 295(2005).
1184: \bibitem{jr}
1185: A.Kulesza, G.Sterman and W.Vogelsang, Phys.Rev.\textbf{D69},
1186: 014012(2004);\\
1187: \emph{ibid.} \textbf{D66}, 014011(2002).
1188: \bibitem{qt}
1189: A.Idilbi, X.D.Ji, and F.Yuan, Phys.Lett.\textbf{B625}, 253(2005).
1190: \bibitem{ddt1}
1191: Yu.L.Dokshizer, D.I.D'Yakanov and S.I.Troyan,
1192: Phys.Lett.\textbf{B78}, 290(1978).
1193: \bibitem{ddt2}
1194: R.K.Ellis and S.Veseli, Nucl.Phys.\textbf{B511}, 649(1998).
1195: \end{thebibliography}
1196:
1197: \end{document}
1198: