1: %%%%%%%%%% espcrc1.tex %%%%%%%%%%
2: %
3: % $Id: espcrc1.tex 1.2 2000/07/24 09:12:51 spepping Exp spepping $
4: %
5: \documentclass[fleqn,12pt,twoside]{article}
6: \usepackage{espcrc1}
7:
8: % change this to the following line for use with LaTeX2.09
9: % \documentstyle[12pt,twoside,fleqn,espcrc1]{article}
10:
11: % if you want to include PostScript figures
12: \usepackage{graphicx}
13: \usepackage{epsfig} %moje
14: % if you have landscape tables
15: \usepackage[figuresright]{rotating}
16:
17: % put your own definitions here:
18: % \newcommand{\cZ}{\cal{Z}}
19: % \newtheorem{def}{Definition}[section]
20: % ...
21: \newcommand{\ttbs}{\char'134}
22: \newcommand{\AmS}{{\protect\the\textfont2
23: A\kern-.1667em\lower.5ex\hbox{M}\kern-.125emS}}
24:
25: \def\funp{{I\!\!P}}
26: \def\xp{x_{{I\!\!P}}}
27: \def\bbo{\mbox{\bf b}}
28:
29: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}
30: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
31: \newcommand{\beeq}{\begin{eqnarray}}
32: \newcommand{\eeeq}{\end{eqnarray}}
33:
34:
35: % add words to TeX's hyphenation exception list
36: \hyphenation{author another created financial paper re-commend-ed Post-Script}
37:
38: % declarations for front matter
39: \title{Theoretical review of diffractive phenomena}
40:
41: \author{K. Golec-Biernat
42: \address{H. Niewodnicza\'nski Institute of Nuclear Physics,
43: Polish Academy of Sciences \\ 31-342 Cracow, Poland}
44: }
45:
46: \begin{document}
47:
48: % typeset front matter
49: \maketitle
50:
51: \begin{abstract}
52: We review QCD based descriptions of diffractive deep inelastic scattering
53: emphasising the role of models with parton saturation.
54: These models provide natural explanation of such experimentally observed facts as the constant
55: ratio of $\sigma^{diff}/\sigma^{tot}$ as a function of the Bjorken variable $x$, and Regge
56: factorization of diffractive parton distributions. The Ingelman-Schlein
57: model and the soft color interaction model are also presented.
58:
59: \end{abstract}
60:
61: \section{Introduction}
62:
63: One of the most important experimental results from the DESY $ep$ collider HERA
64: is the observation of a significant fraction (around $10\%$) of diffractive events
65: in deep inelastic scattering (DIS) with
66: large rapidity gap between the scattered proton, which remains intact,
67: and the rest of the final system \cite{H197,ZEUS99,ZEUS04}.
68: In the standard, QCD description
69: of DIS such events are not expected in such an abundance since large
70: gaps are exponentially suppressed due to color strings formed between
71: the proton remnant and scattered partons. For diffractive events, however,
72: a color neutral cluster of partons fragments independently of the scattered proton.
73: The ratio of diffractive to all DIS events depends weakly on the Bjorken variable $x$
74: and photon virtuality $Q^2$. Thus, DIS diffraction is a leading twist effect with
75: logarithmic scaling violation in $Q^2$. The theoretical description of diffractive events is a
76: real challenge since it must combine perturbative QCD effect of hard scattering with
77: nonperturbative phenomenon of rapidity gap formation. It would be also desirable to
78: apply this description to analogous diffractive phenomena in hadronic collisions
79: with hard jets separated in rapidity from (one or two) unshattered hadrons. Actually,
80: hard diffraction was observed for the first time
81: in $p\bar{p}$ scattering by UA8 collaboration \cite{UA8}.
82:
83: In this presentation we concentrate on the discussion of theory of hard diffraction, when
84: there exists a hard scale, the photon virtuality $Q^2$ or jet transverse momentum, which
85: allows to apply perturbative QCD. Soft diffraction, when such a scale is missing, is outside the scope of our review. The reason being no significant progress in the development of new theoretical ideas concerning soft diffraction since the seventies,
86: in addition to the existing ones based on the Regge pole phenomenology. This phenomenology, however, turns out to be quite useful in the description of a soft part of hard diffraction, responsible for the rapidity gap formation.
87:
88:
89: \section{Diffractive parton distributions}
90:
91: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
92: \begin{figure}[t]
93: \vspace*{-0.5cm}
94: \centerline{
95: \epsfig{figure=d1b.eps,width=5cm}
96: % \hskip 2cm
97: % \epsfig{figure=d1.ps,width=5cm}
98: }
99: \vspace*{-0.5cm}
100: \caption{\it Kinematic invariants in DIS diffraction in electron--proton collision.
101: %(left) and the pomeron exchange interpretation (right).
102: \label{fig:d1}}
103: \end{figure}
104: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
105:
106: Let us start with a brief description of kinematical variables in DIS diffraction,
107: shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:d1}. In addition to the photon virtuality $Q^2$ and
108: total energy of
109: the $\gamma^*p$ system $W$ , there are two additional invariant variables related to the diffractive
110: nature of the process: invariant mass of the diffractive system $M^2$ and the squared momentum
111: transfer $t$. The following dimensionless fractions are built
112: out of these variables:
113: \be
114: \label{xp}
115: \xp \;=\; \frac{Q^2+M^2-t}{Q^2+W^2}\,,
116: \ee
117: which is a fraction of the incident proton momentum transferred into the diffractive system, and
118: \be
119: \label{beta}
120: \beta \;=\; \frac{Q^2}{Q^2+M^2-t}\,,
121: \ee
122: being an analogue of the Bjorken variable $x$ for the diffractive system. Experimentally
123: $|t|\ll Q^2,M^2$, thus $t$ can be neglected in the above formulas.
124: Finally, the Bjorken variable
125: \be
126: \label{x}
127: x\;=\;\frac{Q^2}{Q^2+W^2}\;=\;\beta\,\xp\,.
128: \ee
129: After averaging over the azimuthal angle of the scattered proton, the diffractive cross
130: section is characterized by two dimensionful {\it diffractive structure functions} $F_{2,L}^{D(4)}$
131: \be
132: \label{eq:difsf}
133: \frac{d^4\sigma^D}{dx\, dQ^2\, d\xp\, dt}
134: \,=\,
135: \frac{2\pi \alpha^2_{em}}{x\, Q^4}
136: \left\{
137: \left[1+(1-y)^2\right] F_{2}^{D(4)}
138: -\,{y^2}\,F_{L}^{D(4)}
139: \right\}\,,
140: \ee
141: in a full analogy to inclusive DIS. They depend on four variables:
142: $(x, Q^2; \xp, t)$. After the integration over $t$ (if $t$ is not measured),
143: the dimensionless structure functions are obtained. Due to the kinematical factor
144: in (\ref{eq:difsf}), we neglect the
145: longitudinal structure function $F_{L}^{D(4)}$ in the following.
146:
147: The leading twist description of diffractive DIS is realized using {\it diffractive
148: parton distributions} (DPD) $q^D_i$, where $i$ enumerates quark flavour, in terms of which
149: \be
150: \label{eq:2}
151: F^{D(4)}_{2}=\sum_{i=1}^{N_f}e_i^2\,\beta\,\left\{q^D_i(\xp,t;\beta,Q^2)+
152: \overline{q}^D_i(\xp,t;\beta,Q^2)\right\}\,,
153: \ee
154: in the leading logarithmic approximation. In addition to the quark distributions,
155: the gluon DPD $g(\xp,t;\beta,Q^2)$ is also defined.
156: Eq.~(\ref{eq:2}) is an example of the collinear factorization formula
157: proven for DIS diffraction in \cite{COL98}.
158: In the infinite momentum frame, the DPD have an interpretation
159: of conditional probabilities to find a parton in the proton
160: with the momentum fraction $x=\beta \xp$ under the condition that
161: the incoming proton stays intact and loses
162: the fraction $\xp$ of its momentum.
163: A systematic approach to diffractive parton distributions, based
164: on quark and gluon operators, is given in \cite{BERSOP96,HAUT98}.
165:
166: The $Q^2$-dependence of DPD is governed by the Altarelli-Parisi (DGLAP)
167: evolution equations. In order to find this
168: dependence, initial conditions at some starting scale have to be specified,
169: e.g. from
170: fits to diffractive DIS data in full analogy to the inclusive case
171: \cite{H197,ZEUS99,ZEUS04}.
172: In the evolution equations only $(\beta, Q^2)$ are relevant variables while
173: $(\xp,t)$ play the role of external parameters. Thus, a modelling of the latter dependence for
174: DPD is necessary. This is done using physical ideas about the nature of
175: interactions leading to DIS diffraction.
176:
177: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
178: \begin{figure}[t]
179: \vspace*{-0.5cm}
180: \centerline{
181: \epsfig{figure=d3a.eps,width=4cm}
182: \hskip 2cm
183: \epsfig{figure=d4.eps,width=4cm}
184: }
185: \vspace*{-0.5cm}
186: \caption{\it The pomeron and reggeon contributions to diffractive structure function.
187: \label{fig:dreg}}
188: \end{figure}
189: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
190:
191: Traditionally, diffraction is related to the exchange of a pomeron. This is
192: the dominant at high energy vacuum quantum number exchange,
193: described by a Regge pole with a linear trajectory
194: $\alpha_\funp(t)=\alpha_\funp(0)+\alpha^\prime\, t$ and the intercept
195: $\alpha_\funp(0) \ge 1$. In the Ingelman--Schlein
196: model \cite{IS} of hard diffraction the pomeron exchanged between the proton and diffractive system is supplemented by hard QCD stucture with partons.
197: In this case, the DPD factorize into a pomeron flux
198: \be
199: \label{eq:pomflux}
200: f(\xp,t)\,=\,
201: \frac{B^2(t)}{8\pi^2}\;\xp^{1-2\alpha_\funp(t)}\,,
202: \ee
203: and pomeron parton distributions $q^\funp_i(\beta,Q^2)$:
204: \be
205: \label{eq:Reggefact}
206: q^D_i(\xp,t;\beta,Q^2)=f(\xp,t)\,q^\funp_i(\beta,Q^2)\,.
207: \ee
208: In the above $B(t)$ is the Dirac electromagnetic form factor of the proton \cite{DL84}, and
209: $\beta$ is a fraction of the pomeron momentum carried by a struck quark.
210: Since the pomeron carries the vacuum quantum numbers, the pomeron quark and antiquark distributions are equal: $q^\funp_i=\overline{q}^\funp_i$.
211: The inspired by the Regge theory factorization (\ref{eq:Reggefact})
212: is called {\it Regge factorization}. To good accuracy,
213: this type of factorization was found in the diffractive date at HERA \cite{H197,ZEUS99}.
214:
215: The QCD analysis of the early diffractive data form HERA, using the Ingelman-Schlein model,
216: was done in \cite{GK} with the
217: soft pomeron trajectory $\alpha_\funp(t)=1.1+0.25\cdot t$ and
218: parameters of the pomeron parton distributions determined from analyses of
219: soft hadronic reactions.
220: More recent analyses of inclusive DIS diffraction
221: \cite{H197,ZEUS99,ZEUS04} assume Regge form of DPD (\ref{eq:Reggefact})
222: determined by the DGLAP based fits. In particular, the effective slope $\alpha_\funp(0)=1.16$
223: was found as a result of a fit in the recent analysis \cite{ZEUS04}.
224: In all cases, the fits give large gluon DPD with the relative contribution
225: to the pomeron momentum around $80-90\%$ \cite{H197}.
226:
227:
228: The collinear factorization fails in hadron--hadron hard diffractive scattering
229: due to initial state soft interactions \cite{CFS93,REVWU}. Thus, unlike
230: inclusive scattering, the diffractive parton distributions are no universal
231: quantities. They can be used, however, for different diffractive processes in DIS
232: scattering, e.g. diffractive dijet production, for which the collinear factorization
233: theorem holds.
234:
235:
236: \section{Subleading reggeons}
237:
238: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
239: \begin{figure}[t]
240: \vspace*{-1.0cm}
241: \centerline{
242: \epsfig{figure=ddreg.ps,width=10cm}
243: }
244: \vspace*{-0.5cm}
245: \caption{\it The pomeron (solid) and reggeon (dashed) contributions
246: to diffractive structure function \cite{GBK2}. The data are from \cite{H197}.
247: \label{fig:ddreg}}
248: \end{figure}
249: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
250:
251: The exchange of subleading reggeons can account for the Regge factorization breaking
252: of diffractive structure function
253: for large values of $\xp>0.01$. Strictly speaking, we cannot call such processes diffractive
254: since diffraction is usually associated with the leading pomeron exchange.
255: However, for simplicity we use the same terminology for the non-pomeron exchanges,
256: including the isospin changing process with neutron instead of the proton in the final state.
257: The reggeon contribution is shown in Fig.~2, which illustrates the following extension of the
258: Ingelman-Schlein model \cite{GBK2}
259: \be
260: \label{eq:f2d4r}
261: F_2^{D(4)}(x,Q^2,\xp,t)\;=\;f_\funp(\xp,t)\,F_2^{\funp}(\beta,Q^2)
262: \,+\,
263: \sum_R f_R(\xp,t)\,F_2^{R}(\beta,Q^2)\,,
264: \ee
265: where the non-pomeron terms describe reggeon exchanges, isoscalar $(f_2,\omega)$ and isovector $(a_2,\rho)$, with the trajectory $\alpha_R(t)=0.5475+1 \cdot t$
266: in the reggeon fluxes $f_R(\xp,t)$. $F_2^{R}$ is a reggeon structure function determined in
267: \cite{GBK2}.
268: With such a structure function the Regge factorization is obviously broken for large
269: $\xp$, which is shown in Fig.~3 by dashed lines.
270:
271: \section{Parton saturation and diffraction}
272:
273: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
274: \begin{figure}[t]
275: \vspace*{-1.5cm}
276: \centerline{
277: \epsfig{figure=diag1.ps,width=5.5cm}
278: \epsfig{figure=diag2.ps,width=5.5cm}
279: }
280: \vspace*{-1cm}
281: \caption{\it The $q\bar{q}$ and $q\bar{q}g$ components of the diffractive system.
282: \label{fig:diag1}}
283: \end{figure}
284: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
285:
286: The leading twist DPD lead to
287: good description of data. However, the basic expe\-ri\-men\-tal fact that
288: $\sigma^{diff}/\sigma^{tot}\simeq const$ as a function of energy $W$
289: is not understood in this approach.
290: The understanding is provided in a different theoretical framework of DIS diffraction
291: in which the virtual photon splits into a quark-antiquark pair
292: which subsequently scatters off the target proton through a further quantum fluctuation.
293: This picture is valid in the frame in which the $q\bar{q}$ pair (dipole) carries most of
294: the available rapidity $Y\sim \ln(1/x)$ of the system, and the light-cone photon momentum $q^+>0$.
295: The gluon radiation from the parent dipole can be interpreted in the large $N_c$ limit
296: as a collection of dipoles of different transverse sizes which interact with the proton. If the proton stays intact, the diffractive events with large rapidity gap are formed. In such a case, the diffractive system is given by the color dipoles and the pomeron
297: can be modelled by color singlet gluon exchange between
298: the dipoles and the proton.
299:
300:
301: In the simplest case when only the parent $q\bar{q}$ dipole form a diffractive system,
302: see Fig.~\ref{fig:diag1}, the diffractive cross section at $t=0$ reads \cite{NN}
303: \be
304: \label{eq:5}
305: \frac{d\,\sigma^{diff}}{dt}_{\mid\, t=0}
306: \,=\,
307: \frac{1}{16\,\pi}\,
308: \int d^2 r\, dz\,
309: |\Psi^\gamma(r,z,Q^2)|^2\ \hat\sigma^2(x,r),
310: \ee
311: where $\Psi^\gamma$ is the well known light-cone wave function of the virtual photon,
312: $r$ is the dipole transverse size and $z$ is a fraction of the photon
313: momentum $q^+$ carried by the quark. The {\it dipole cross section} $\hat\sigma(x,r)$ in this formula
314: describes the pomeron interaction, which in the QCD approach is modelled by the exchange of gluons.
315: The simplest, two gluon exchange does not depend on energy and has to be rejected. Since
316: the DIS difraction is a typical high energy (small $x$) phenomenon, it is tempting to apply
317: the BFKL pomeron \cite{BFKL} with two reggeized, interacting gluons. However, the resulting energy dependence is too strong in this case. Thus, more complicated gluon exchanges are necessary.
318:
319: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
320: \begin{figure}[t]
321: \vspace*{-1.0cm}
322: \centerline{
323: \epsfig{figure=dipcs.ps,width=9cm}
324: }
325: \vspace*{-1.0cm}
326: \caption{\it The dipole cross section (\ref{eq:7}).
327: \label{fig:dipcs}}
328: \end{figure}
329: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
330:
331: Particularly important are those \cite{GLR} which do not lead to the violation of the Froissart unitary bound for the total $\gamma^*p$ cross section: $\sigma^{tot}\le c \ln^2 W^2$.
332: Applying the $q\bar{q}$ dipole picture to $\sigma^{tot}$, the following relation holds in the small-$x$ limit \cite{NN}
333: \be
334: \label{eq:6}
335: \sigma^{tot}\,=\,
336: \int d^2 r\, dz\,
337: |\Psi^\gamma(r,z,Q^2)|^2\ \hat\sigma(x,r),
338: \ee
339: with the same dipole cross $\hat\sigma(x,r)$ as in (\ref{eq:5}). In order to fulfil
340: the Froissart bound, the following phenomenological form of
341: the dipole cross section was proposed in \cite{GBW}
342: \be
343: \label{eq:7}
344: \hat{\sigma}(x,r)\,=\,\sigma_0\, \{1-\exp(-r^2 Q^2_s(x))\}\,,
345: \ee
346: where $Q_s(x)=Q_0\,x^{-\lambda}$ is a saturation scale which parameters
347: (together with $\sigma_0$) were found from a fit to all small-$x$ data on
348: $\sigma^{tot}\sim F_2/Q^2$. Having obtained the dipole cross section from the analysis of inclusive data, it can be used to predict diffractive cross sections in DIS. This strategy
349: was sucessfully applied in \cite{GBW2}.
350:
351: Formula (\ref{eq:7}) captures essential features of parton saturation \cite{GLR,SATREV}.
352: For $r\gg 1/Q_s(x)$ the dipole cross section saturates to a constant value $\sigma_0$,
353: which may be regarded as a unitarity bound leading to the behaviour respecting the Froissart condition: $\sigma^{tot}\sim \ln W^2$. For $x\to 0$
354: the dipole cross section saturates for smaller dipoles, thus with increasing energy
355: the proton blacken for the dipole probe of fixed transverse size. An important aspect of the
356: form (\ref{eq:7}), in which $r$ and $x$ are combined
357: into one dimensionless variable $r Q_s(x)$, is
358: geometric scaling, new scaling in inclusive DIS at small $x$ \cite{GSCAL}.
359: Qualitatively, the behaviour (\ref{eq:7}) can be found from an effective theory of dense parton systems with saturation -- the Color Glass Condensate, see \cite{SATREV} and reference therein.
360:
361:
362: The DIS diffraction is an ideal process to study parton saturation since it is
363: especially sensitive to the large dipole contribution, $r>1/Q_s(x)$.
364: Unlike inclusive DIS, the region below is suppressed by an additional power of $1/Q^2$.
365: The dipole cross section with saturation (\ref{eq:7}) leads in a natural way
366: to the constant ratio (up to logarithms) \cite{GBW}
367: \be
368: \label{eq:8}
369: \frac{\sigma^{diff}}{\sigma^{tot}} \sim \frac{1}{\ln(Q^2/Q^2_s(x))}\,.
370: \ee
371:
372: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
373: \begin{figure}[t]
374: \vspace*{-1.0cm}
375: \centerline{
376: \epsfig{figure=fig1.ps,width=9cm}
377: }
378: \vspace*{-1.0cm}
379: \caption{\it The diffractive structue function as a function of $\beta$
380: at fixed $\xp=0.003$. Three components of the diffractive system are shown.
381: \label{fig:ddzeus}}
382: \end{figure}
383: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
384:
385:
386: In the analysis \cite{GBW2} of DIS diffraction, the dipole cross section (\ref{eq:7})
387: was used for the description of the interaction of the diffractive system and
388: the proton. The simplest system, which dominates for diffractive masses $M^2\sim Q^2$, is formed by the $q\bar{q}$ pair. However,
389: for large diffractive masses, $M^2\gg Q^2$, the $q\bar{q}g$ component is more important.
390: In Fig.~\ref{fig:ddzeus} we show the result of the comparison of the saturation model predictions with the ZEUS data \cite{ZEUS99}, indicating three components of the diffractive system:
391: the $q\bar{q}$ state from transverse and longitudinal polarized virtual photon, and $q\bar{q}g$ component. A recent analysis of diffractive data using the same idea but different prescription for the dipole cross section is given in \cite{JEFF}.
392:
393:
394:
395: The high energy formula (\ref{eq:5}) contains all powers of $1/Q^2$
396: (twists). Extracting the leading twist contribution from both the $q\bar{q}$ and $q\bar{q}g$ components,
397: the quark and gluon
398: DPD can be directly computed in the saturation model \cite{GBW3}.
399: An exciting aspect of this calculation is the Regge factorization of the DPD,
400: \be
401: \label{eq:9}
402: \xp\, q^D(\xp,\beta)\,=\, Q^2_s(\xp)\,\bar{q}(\beta)\,\sim\, \xp^{-0.3}\,,
403: \ee
404: due to the form (\ref{eq:7}) with the combined variable $r\, Q_s$. The
405: dependence: $F^D_2\sim \xp^{1-2\alpha_\funp}$ with $\alpha_\funp\approx 1.15$, resulting from (\ref{eq:9}),
406: is in remarkable agreement with the data \cite{H197,ZEUS99,ZEUS04}. Thus the Regge factorization and the dependence on energy of the diffractive DIS data are naturally explained
407: in the parton saturation approach. This fact emphasize importance of unitarity in the QCD description of DIS diffraction.
408:
409: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
410: \section{Soft color interactions}
411:
412: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
413: \begin{figure}[t]
414: \centerline{
415: \epsfig{figure=fig2a.eps,width=4cm}
416: \hskip 2cm
417: \epsfig{figure=fig2b.eps,width=4cm}
418: }
419: \caption{\it Typical string configuration in the Lund string model (left) and
420: confi\-gu\-ra\-tion after the color rearrangement (right).
421: \label{fig:sci1}}
422: \end{figure}
423: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
424:
425:
426:
427: The rapidity gaps in the diffractive interactions are explained in the discussed models by
428: the color singlet, vacuum exchange -- the pomeron, being a complicated gluon exchange interaction. The basic assumption in the soft color interaction model \cite{SCI} is that
429: the underlying hard interaction of a diffractive event is the same as in a typical DIS event.
430: Thus, the flattnes of the ratio $\sigma^{diff}/\sigma^{tot}$ in both $x$ and $Q^2$ is a natural
431: consequence of this model. The color singlet exchange responsible for the rapidity gap is the result of
432: soft interactions which rearrange color of the final state partons without affecting
433: their momenta, see Fig.~\ref{fig:sci1}. This leads to a region in phase space
434: without string in the Lund model of hadronization, which leads to the rapidity gap.
435: Such a reshuffling in color space was implemented in the Monte Carlo event generators, providing good description of the diffractive data in DIS.
436:
437: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
438: \begin{figure}[h]
439: \vspace*{-1.0cm}
440: \centerline{
441: \epsfig{figure=fig3.eps,width=7cm}
442: }
443: \vspace*{-1.0cm}
444: \caption{\it Distribution of events with maximal rapidity gap $\Delta y_{max}$
445: in DIS events (reproduced from \cite{SCI}).
446: \label{fig:sci2}}
447: \end{figure}
448: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
449:
450: In Fig.~\ref{fig:sci2} the distribution of
451: events with maximal rapidity gap $\Delta y_{max}$ is shown, using Monte Carlo models with
452: and without the soft color interactions (SCI). As we see, without SCI large rapidity gaps
453: are exponentially suppressed. This is not the case for SCI.
454: In summary, in the presented approach the rapidity gap formation is a final state soft effect
455: which is not connected to the hard scattering process.
456:
457:
458:
459: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
460: \section{Summary}
461:
462: The unexpectedly large fraction of diffractive DIS events observed at HERA renewed an interest
463: in diffractive phenomena in high energy scattering, now in the context of perturbative QCD.
464: We presented three approaches to the generation of rapidity gaps which are not
465: exponentially suppressed. In the first one, somewhat conventional pomeron mechanism, known from
466: the Regge approach to high energy scattering, was supplemented by hard structure
467: which emerges in the experimentally observed diffractive events. In the second approach,
468: DIS diffraction is strongly related to the necessity to take into account unitarization effects
469: in the QCD description of color singlet gluonic exchanges. In the third approach, the difference
470: between the normal and diffractive DIS events lies in the final state soft interactions which
471: are decoupled from the hard part of the final parton state.
472: All these description could be tested for more exclusive diffractive processes, e.g. in vector meson or large-$p_T$ jet production in DIS and in hadron-hadron collisions.
473: For more details on hard diffraction,
474: we refer to the excellent reviews \cite{REVWU,HEB}.
475:
476:
477:
478: \bigskip\bigskip
479: \centerline{ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS}
480: A partial support of the Polish State Committee for Scientific Research, grant no. \\
481: 1 P03B 028 28, is acknowledged.
482:
483: \begin{thebibliography}{9}
484:
485: \bibitem{H197} H1 Collaboration, C. Adloff {\it et al.},
486: {\it Z. Phys.} {\bf C76} (1997) 613.
487: \bibitem{ZEUS99} ZEUS Collaboration, M. Derrick {\it et al.},
488: {\it Eur. Phys. J.} {\bf C6} (1999) 43.
489: \bibitem{ZEUS04} ZEUS Collaboration, S. Chekanov {\it et al.},
490: {\it Eur. Phys. J.} {\bf C38} (2004) 43.
491: \bibitem{UA8} UA8 Collaboration, R. Bonino {\it et al.},
492: {\it Phys. Lett.} {\bf B211} (1988) 239.
493: \bibitem{COL98} J. C. Collins,
494: {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D57} (1998) 3051,
495: Erratum-{\it ibid.} {\bf D61} (2000) 019902.
496: \bibitem{CFS93} J. C. Collins, L. Frankfurt and M. Strikman
497: {\it Phys. Lett.} {\bf B307} (1993) 161.
498: \bibitem{REVWU} M. W\"usthoff and A. D. Martin,
499: {\it J. Phys.} {\bf G25} (1999) R309.
500: \bibitem{BERSOP96} A. Berera and D.E. Soper,
501: {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D53} (1996) 6162.
502: \bibitem{HAUT98} F.~Hautmann, Z.~Kunszt and D.~E.~Soper,
503: {\it Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.} {\bf 81} (1998) 3333;
504: {\it Nucl.\ Phys.\ Proc.\ Suppl.} {\bf 79} (1999) 260.
505: \bibitem{IS} G. Ingelman and P. Schlein,
506: {\it Phys. Lett.} {\bf B152}, 256 (1985).
507: \bibitem{DL84} A. Donnachie and P. V. Landshoff, {\it
508: Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 231} (1984) 189.
509: \bibitem{GK} K. Golec-Biernat and J. Kwieci\'nski,
510: {\it Phys. Lett.} {\bf B353}, 329 (1995).
511: \bibitem{GBK2} K. Golec-Biernat and J. Kwieci\'nski,
512: {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D55} (1997) 3209;
513: K. Golec--Biernat, J. Kwieci\'nski and A. Szczurek,
514: {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D56} (1997) 3955.
515: \bibitem{NN} N. N. Nikolaev and B. G. Zakharov, {\it Z. Phys.} {\bf C49}
516: (1991) 607; {\it Z. Phys} {\bf C 53} (1992) 331.
517: \bibitem{BFKL} L. N. Lipatov, {\it Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.}
518: {\bf 23} (1976) 338;
519: E. A. Kuraev, L. N. Lipatov and V. S. Fadin,
520: {\it Sov. Phys. JETP} {\bf 44} (1976) 443;
521: {\it ibidem.} {\bf 45} (1977) 199;
522: Ya. Ya. Balitsky and L. N. Lipatov,
523: {\it Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.}
524: {\bf 28} (1978) 338.
525: \bibitem{GLR} L. V. Gribov, E. M. Levin and M. G. Ryskin,
526: {\em Phys. Rep.} {\bf 100} (1983) 1.
527: \bibitem{GBW} K. Golec--Biernat and M. W\"usthoff,
528: {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D59} (1999) 014017;
529: \bibitem{GBW2} K. Golec--Biernat and M. W\"usthoff,
530: {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf D60} (1999) 114023.
531: \bibitem{GSCAL} A. M. Sta\'sto, K. Golec-Biernat and J. Kwieci\'nski,
532: {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 86}, 596 (2001).
533: \bibitem{SATREV} E. Iancu and R. Venugopalan, hep-ph/0303185.
534: \bibitem{JEFF} J.R. Forshaw, R. Sandapen and G. Shaw,
535: {\it Phys. Lett.} {\bf B594} (2004) 283.
536: \bibitem{GBW3} K. Golec--Biernat and M. W\"usthoff,
537: {\it Eur.\ Phys.\ J.} {\bf C20}, 313 (2001).
538: \bibitem{SCI} S. J. Brodsky, R. Enberg, P. Hoyer and G. Ingelman, hep-ph/0409119,
539: and references therein.
540: \bibitem{HEB} A. Hebecker,
541: {\it Phys. Rep.} {\bf 331} (2000) 1;
542: {\it Acta Phys. Polon.} {\bf B30} (1999) 3777.
543:
544:
545:
546: \end{thebibliography}
547: \end{document}
548: