1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: \usepackage{epsfig}
3:
4: \bibliographystyle{unsrt} % for BibTeX - sorted numerical labels by order of
5:
6: \tolerance=10000
7: \pagenumbering{arabic}
8: \textheight 22.cm
9: \textwidth 16.2 cm
10: \oddsidemargin 0.5cm
11: \evensidemargin 0.5cm
12: %\topmargin=-1.cm
13: \hoffset -0.5cm
14:
15:
16:
17: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{eqnarray}}
18: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{eqnarray}}
19:
20: \begin{document}
21:
22: \bibliographystyle{unsrt}
23: \footskip 1.0cm
24:
25: %\pagestyle{empty} % no page number at all
26: \thispagestyle{empty}
27:
28: \begin{flushright}
29: INT--PUB--05--32
30: \end{flushright}
31: \vspace{0.6in}
32:
33: \begin{center}
34: \large {\bf {Ultra-High Energy Neutrino-Nucleon Scattering \\
35: and \\
36: Parton Distributions at Small $x$}}\\
37:
38:
39:
40: \vspace{1.1in}
41:
42: Ernest M. Henley$^{a,b}$ and Jamal Jalilian-Marian$^{b}$\\
43: \vspace{0.2in}
44:
45: {\small \em $^a$Department of Physics, University of Washington,
46: Seattle, WA 98195-1560\\
47: $^b$ Institute for Nuclear Theory, University of Washington,
48: Seattle, WA 98195-1550
49: }
50: \medskip
51:
52: %\normalsize
53: \bigskip
54: \begin{abstract}
55:
56: \noindent
57: The cross section for ultra-high energy neutrino-nucleon scattering
58: is very sensitive to the parton distributions at very small values of
59: Bjorken x ($x \leq 10^{-4})$. We numerically investigate the effects
60: of modifying the behavior of the gluon distribution function at very
61: small $x$ in the DGLAP evolution equation. We then use the Color Glass
62: Condensate formalism to calculate the neutrino-nucleon cross section
63: at ultra-high energies and compare the result with those based on
64: modification of DGLAP evolution equation.
65:
66: \end{abstract}
67: \end{center}
68: \medskip
69:
70: \newpage
71:
72:
73: \section {Introduction}
74:
75: Neutrinos of ultra-high energies ($E_\nu \geq 10^{7} GeV$) have been a puzzle for some time.
76: One of the prime questions is where they come from, especially those above the GZK limit
77: \cite {GZK}. Possible sources include decays of super massive particles (dark matter?),
78: acceleration in active galactic nuclei, and supernovae explosions \cite {2}. Another
79: question of interest is the cross section for the scattering of these ultra-high energy
80: neutrinos with nucleons. Here, part of the interest stems from the fact that if the cross
81: section increases sufficiently rapidly, then the unitarity limit may be reached \cite {reno}.
82: Another interest is what one can learn about the very small x parton distributions, since
83: the energy dependence of the inclusive cross section is very sensitive to them.
84:
85: The cross sections for scattering of neutrinos on nucleons at ultra-high energies are
86: dominated by the gluons in the nucleon while the contribution of sea quarks
87: is suppressed by $\alpha_s$ since they come from gluon splitting via
88: $g \rightarrow q \bar{q}$. For $ x \leq 10^{-2}$ the gluon distribution function of a
89: nucleon is known to grow fast
90: \cite{HERA} with increasing $Q^2$ (virtuality of the gauge boson exchanged) and
91: decreasing $x$ as $(1/x)^\beta $, with beta less than 1. This implies
92: that the structure functions, e.g., $F_2$, in deep inelastic scattering will also
93: increase, which would in turn mean a fast increase of the neutrino-nucleon total cross
94: section. This fast growth of the total cross section can not continue indefinitely since
95: it would violate unitarity (the Froissart bound). The parton (gluon) phase space density
96: (number of partons per unit area and rapidity) is expected to be very high at very small
97: Bjorken $x$ which would lead to an overlap in transverse space and recombination of gluons
98: which in turn could lead to saturation (a slow down of the growth of the structure
99: functions) and the unitarization of the cross section.
100:
101: At very small $x$, the nucleon is a very dense system of gluons and can be
102: described via the Color Glass Condensate formalism \cite{mv} which resums
103: large logs of energy as well as the large gluon density effects. It reduces
104: to the BFKL formalism \cite{bfkl} in the limit that the gluon density in a
105: nucleon is small. The Color Glass Condensate is an all twist formalism and
106: as such extends the domain of applicability of pQCD to high gluon density
107: environments.
108:
109: In this work, we consider different approaches to calculating the neutrino-nucleon total
110: cross section at ultra-high energies. First, we show the results from standard pQCD
111: (DGLAP) \cite{dglap}
112: approach as well as the results from a unified DGLAP/BFKL approach, available in the
113: literature \cite{kk}. We then consider the neutrino-nucleon cross section using
114: the Color Glass Condensate formalism and gluon saturation based approaches. This involves
115: modeling the quark-anti quark dipole cross section which is the basic ingredient in the
116: structure functions. We compare the resulting neutrino-nucleon cross sections from
117: different approaches and comment on the possibility of using future neutrino observatories
118: to constrain the ultra-high energy neutrino-nucleon cross sections.
119:
120: \section{Neutrino-Nucleon Total Cross Section}
121: \subsection{Leading Twist pQCD}
122:
123: In perturbative QCD (pQCD), the cross section for the neutrino nucleon cross section
124: can be written as
125: \be
126: \sigma_{total}^{\nu N}(s)=\int_0^1 dx \int_0^{xs} dQ^2
127: {d^2 \sigma^{\nu N} \over dxdQ^2}\, ,
128: \label{eq:stcs}
129: \ee
130: where the differential cross section is given in terms of the quark and anti-quark
131: distribution functions
132: \be
133: {d^2 \sigma^{\nu N} \over dxdQ^2}={G_F^2 \over \pi}
134: \bigg({M^2_{W,Z} \over Q^2 + M^2_{W,Z}}\bigg)^2
135: \bigg[q(x,Q^2) + (1- Q^2/xs)^2 {\bar q}(x,Q^2)\bigg].
136: \label{eq:difcs}
137: \ee
138: Here $G_F$ is the Fermi constant and $M_{W,Z}$ refer to the $W$ or $Z$ boson masses
139: while $s$ is the neutrino-nucleon center of mass energy. The total cross section
140: is finite (unlike the photon exchange process) and is dominated by scales
141: $Q \sim M_{W,Z}$. In what follows, we will restrict ourselves to charged current
142: exchanges, but the extension of work to the case of neutral current is
143: trivial and we expect our results for the charged current exchange to hold equally
144: well for the neutral current exchange.
145:
146: In the standard Leading Twist
147: (LT) pQCD approach, one parameterizes the $x$ dependence of quark and anti-quark
148: distribution functions $q(x,Q^2), \bar{q}(x,Q^2)$ at some initial scale $Q_0$,
149: typically taken
150: to be of order of a GeV or so. The distribution functions are then given by DGLAP
151: evolution equations at any other $x$ and $Q > Q_0$. The parameterizations are fit to
152: the available data on DIS, for example, at HERA. There are
153: various parameterizations of parton distribution functions satisfying the DGLAP
154: evolution equations, for example CTEQ, MRST and GRV which differ in the choice of
155: initial conditions and the degree of sophistication.
156:
157: If the neutrino-nucleon center of mass energy is much higher than the exchanged
158: momentum scale such that $\alpha_s \, \ln s/M_W^2 \sim 1$, it is more appropriate
159: to use the BFKL formalism which resums these large logs rather than the DGLAP
160: formalism. It is also possible to combine the two approaches in a phenomenological
161: way such that both DGLAP and BFKL resummations are included \cite{kk}. In
162: Fig. (\ref{fig:kk_gqrs}) we show
163: the results of a DGLAP based calculation of the neutrino-nucleon total cross section,
164: via charged current exchange due to Gandhi et al. \cite{reno}, denoted GQRS,
165: as well as a calculation due to Kutak et al., denoted KK (unified), which uses a
166: unified DGLAP and BFKL approach (shown here without gluon saturation effects).
167: The cross section grows with the center of mass
168: energy which can be parameterized in terms of the incident neutrino energy (in
169: the range shown in Fig. \ref{fig:kk_gqrs}) as $\sigma \sim (E_{\nu}/ 1 GeV)^{0.402}$.
170: It can be shown that this increase in the cross section is due to the growth of the
171: parton distribution functions with decreasing Bjorken $x$ \cite{dkrs}. While at the lowest energy
172: the two results are identical, which shows small $x$ effects resummed by BFKL are
173: negligible, at higher neutrino energy the two results can differ by a factor of two
174: or larger. This signifies the fact that it is essential to include the contribution
175: of small $x$ partons properly at ultra-high energies.
176:
177: \vspace{0.3in}
178: \begin{figure}[htp]
179: \centering
180: \setlength{\epsfxsize=10cm}
181: \centerline{\epsffile{cs_en_kk_gqrs.eps}}
182: \caption{The neutrino-nucleon cross section in Leading Twist pQCD via charged current
183: exchange \cite{reno,kk}.}
184: \label{fig:kk_gqrs}
185: \end{figure}
186: It is important to realize that the HERA data on DIS covers a limited kinematic
187: region and that ultra-high energy neutrino-nucleon cross sections are dominated
188: by gluons at very small $x$ and high $Q^2$ where there is no data. In the standard
189: approach, one extrapolates the solution of the DGLAP evolution equations for parton
190: distribution functions to smaller $x$, as needed. However, this requires making
191: assumptions (or rather educated guesses) about the behavior of the distribution
192: functions at small $x$. As we will show below, making rather plausible assumptions
193: about the behavior of the parton distribution functions at small $x$, leads to
194: large variations of the cross section at ultra-high energies.
195:
196:
197: \subsection{Gluon Saturation}
198:
199: At very small Bjorken $x$, the gluon distribution function is expected to saturate,
200: which would lead to a slow down of the growth of the neutrino-nucleon total cross
201: section with energy. This is accomplished in the Color Glass Condensate (CGC) formalism
202: which is an effective theory of QCD at high energy.
203: The differential neutrino-nucleon cross
204: section can be written in terms of the structure functions $F_1$ and $F_2$ ($F_3$ does not
205: contribute at small x),
206: \be
207: \frac{d^2\sigma}{dx dQ^2} = \frac{1}{2\pi} \frac{G_F^2}{(1+ Q^2/M_W^2)^2}
208: [(1-y) F_2 (x,Q^2) + y^2 x F_1 (x,Q^2)]
209: \label{eq:diff_cs}
210: \ee
211: with
212: \be
213: F_2 &=& \frac{N_c Q^2}{4\pi^3}\int_0^1 dz \int dr_t^2 \sigma_d (x,r_t)
214: \{
215: 4z^2(1-z)^2Q^2 K_0^2(ar_t) + a^2[z^2 + (1-z)^2]K_1^2(ar_t)
216: \}\nonumber \\
217: F_1 &=&\frac{1}{2x} \frac{N_c Q^2}{4 \pi^3} \int_0^1 dz \int dr_t^2 \sigma_d (x,r_t)
218: {a^2[z^2 + (1-z)^2]K_1^2(ar_t)}
219: \label{eq:f2_f1}
220: \ee
221: where $a^2 = z(1-z)Q^2$ and $K_0$ and $K_1$ are modified Bessel functions,
222: $r_t$ is the size of the dipole and $z$ is the fraction of the photon energy carried
223: by the quark. The total
224: cross section is the integral of (\ref{eq:diff_cs}) over $x$, from $x_{min} = Q^2/s$
225: to 1 and over $Q$, where we choose $Q_{min}$ to be $10 GeV$. The total cross section
226: does not receive any appreciable contribution from scales below $Q_{min}$. The
227: essential ingredient in saturation based approaches is the dipole cross section
228: which is the imaginary part of the forward scattering amplitude (hence the name dipole
229: cross section) of a quark anti-quark dipole on the nucleon. The dipole cross section
230: $\sigma_d (x,r_t)$ satisfies the JIMWLK evolution equation \cite{jimwlk} which is the all twist
231: generalization of the BFKL evolution equation. In practice since the JIMWLK evolution
232: equation is a highly non-linear equation, it is easier to parameterize the
233: dipole cross section, in analogy to parameterizations of the standard parton distribution
234: functions. The parameterizations of the dipole cross section are then used to
235: calculate the structure functions in (\ref{eq:f2_f1}) and checked against available data
236: in DIS \cite{gbw,bgbk,iim,lub}. The Color Glass Condensate formalism has also been successfully
237: applied to particle production data in dA collisions at RHIC \cite{kkt,aaj} (for a
238: review see \cite{iv}). The
239: dipole cross section depends sensitively on the value of the saturation scale $Q_s$
240: and its energy dependence. While the overall magnitude of the saturation scale can not
241: be determined from CGC itself, its energy ($x$) dependence is computed from CGC
242: itself \cite{dino} and is in good agreement with the value extracted from HERA
243: phenomenology which has been parameterized \cite{gbw} as
244: \be
245: Q_s^2(x) = (1 GeV^2) (3 \times 10^{-4}/x)^{.28} \;.
246: \label{eq:sat_scale}
247: \ee
248:
249: The value of the saturation scale $Q_s$ compared to $M_W$ determines whether one
250: is in the saturation region ($Q_s \ge M_W$), in the so called geometric scaling
251: \cite{geo_sca}
252: region ($Q_s \le M_W \le Q_s^2/\Lambda_{QCD}$) or in the DGLAP region
253: ($ Q_s^2/\Lambda_{QCD} \le M_W$). It is ideal to have a unified formalism which
254: can address all three regions; however, such a formalism does not exist
255: currently. One can either use the DGLAP evolution equation and modify it to
256: include gluon saturation effects as in \cite{kk} or use the CGC formalism
257: and add the contributions of the DGLAP region by using the standard pQCD
258: expressions. We choose the later approach since we are mainly interested in
259: the ultra-high energy neutrino cross sections where the main contribution
260: to the cross section comes from the very small $x$ region. To do this, we introduce
261: a cutoff $x_0$ below which we use the CGC expressions (\ref{eq:f2_f1}) while for
262: $x > x_0$ we use (\ref{eq:difcs}) where the quark and anti-quark distributions are
263: taken from CTEQ parameterization.
264:
265: One of the earlier parameterizations of the dipole cross section is due to
266: Bartels et al. \cite{bgbk} which has been used to fit the HERA data. It is given by
267: \be
268: \sigma_d (x, r_t) = \sigma_0
269: [1 - exp(\pi^2 r_t^2 \alpha_s(\mu^2) xg(x, \mu^2)/(3 \sigma_0))]
270: \label{eq:cs_bgbk}
271: \ee
272: with $\mu^2 = .26/r_t^2 + 0.52$ and the gluon distribution function $xg$ satisfies
273: the DGLAP evolution equation. The overal constant $\sigma_0$ is the nucleon size and taken to be
274: $\sigma_0=23 mb$. This parameterization includes higher twist effects but does not have
275: the BFKL anomalous dimension. Another parameterization is due to Kharzeev et al. \cite{kkt}
276: and has been used to fit the RHIC data on deuteron-nucleus collisions \cite{kkt,aaj}.
277: The dipole cross section in this parameterization is given by
278: \be
279: \sigma_d (r_t, y) = \sigma_0 \, \left (\exp\left[ - \frac{1}{4} [r_t^2
280: Q_s^2(y)]^{\gamma(y,r_t)}\right] -1 \right )
281: \label{eq:cs_kkt}
282: \ee
283: where the saturation scale is given by $Q_s(y) = Q_0 \exp [\lambda (y-y_0)/2] $
284: with $y = \ln 1/x$ and $y_0=0.6, \, \lambda = 0.3$. The anomalous dimension $\gamma$ is
285: \be
286: \gamma(y,r_t) = \frac{1}{2}\left(1+
287: \frac{\xi(y,r_t)}{\xi(y,r_t)+\sqrt{2\xi(y,r_t)}+28\zeta(3)}
288: \right)
289: \label{eq:ano_kkt}
290: \ee
291: where
292: \be
293: \xi (y,r_t) = \frac{\log 1/r_t^2 Q_0^2}{(\lambda/2)(y-y_0)}~.
294: \ee
295: This parameterization has the advantage that, unlike the one in (\ref{eq:cs_bgbk}),
296: it has the BFKL anomalous dimension built in which seems to be essential in describing
297: the forward rapidity deuteron-gold data at RHIC. Using these two
298: parameterizations of the dipole cross section, we calculate the neutrino-nucleon
299: total cross section. We assume that quark (anti-quark) distributions are known well
300: for $x \geq x_0$ and use (\ref{eq:difcs}) to calculate the cross section for $x \geq x_0$.
301: For $x \leq x_0$, we use the saturation approach and calculate the cross section
302: using (\ref{eq:diff_cs}) with the structure functions given by (\ref{eq:f2_f1}), using the
303: two different parameterizations of the dipole cross
304: section given in (\ref{eq:cs_bgbk}, \ref{eq:cs_kkt}), denoted BGBK and KKT dipoles respectively.
305: To check the sensitivity of our results to the choice of $x_0$, we try two different values of
306: $x_0$, first $x_0 = 10^{-4}$ and then $x_0 = 10^{-6}$.
307: In case of BGBK dipoles, since gluon distribution function $xg (x, \mu^2)$ is not known
308: well below $x \leq 10^{-5}$,
309: we consider three wildly different scenarios; (i) a continually growing
310: distributions for $x \leq 10^{-5}$, (ii) a flat distribution for $x \leq 10^{-5}$,
311: and (iii) a distribution which falls by one order of magnitude for every decade of
312: decreasing x for $x\leq 10^{-5}$. A measurement of the neutrino-nucleon cross sections
313: at ultra high energies would thus go a long way toward understanding the very small x
314: parton distributions.
315:
316:
317: \section{Results and Discussion}
318:
319: In Fig. (\ref{fig:cs_4}) we show our results for the neutrino-nucleon total cross section
320: (via charged current exchange) for different neutrino energies for the case where
321: $x_0=10^{-4}$ and BGBK denotes the Bartels et al. model of the dipole cross section
322: given by (\ref{eq:cs_bgbk}) and KKT denotes the Kharzeev et al. parameterization
323: given in (\ref{eq:cs_kkt}). The subscript $I$ refers to the case where the gluon
324: distribution function $xg (x, \mu^2)$ in (\ref{eq:cs_bgbk}) , taken from CTEQ6,
325: keeps growing with $x$ below $x= 10^{-5}$
326: while $II$ refers to the case where the gluon distribution function below $x=10^{-5}$
327: is flat and finally, case $III$ corresponds to the case where the gluon distribution
328: function below $x=10^{-5}$ falls like a power.
329:
330: \vspace{0.3in}
331: \begin{figure}[htp]
332: \centering
333: \setlength{\epsfxsize=10cm}
334: \centerline{\epsffile{cs_4.eps}}
335: \caption{The neutrino-nucleon cross section with $x_0=10^{-4}$, details are given in the text.}
336: \label{fig:cs_4}
337: \end{figure}
338:
339: For neutrino energies less than $10^8$ GeV, the cross section does not receive significant
340: contributions from the region where $x < 10^{-5}$. This shows in Fig. (\ref{fig:cs_4}) as
341: the three cases $I, II, III$ (Bartels et al. dipole, denoted BGBK, with different gluon
342: behavior at small $x$)
343: being almost identical for $E_{\nu} < 10^8$ GeV while the cross section calculated using
344: the KKT parameterization of the dipole profile starts out below the other dipole models
345: until about neutrino energy of $10^8 - 10^9$ GeV after which it passes the BGBK $II,III$
346: dipoles, due to the constancy or drop off of the BGBK gluon distribution function below
347: $x=10^{-5}$.
348: \vspace{0.3in}
349:
350: \begin{figure}[hbp]
351: \centering
352: \setlength{\epsfxsize=10cm}
353: \centerline{\epsffile{cs_6.eps}}
354: \caption{The same as in Fig. (\ref{fig:cs_4}) but with $x_0=10^{-6}$.}
355: \label{fig:cs_6}
356: \end{figure}
357: To see the sensitivity of our results to the choice of cutoff $x_0$, we show the
358: neutrino-nucleon cross section in Fig. (\ref{fig:cs_6}) with the cutoff $x_0$
359: now taken to be $10^{-6}$. Again, for $x > x_0$, we use the quark and anti-quark distribution
360: functions in (\ref{eq:difcs}) to calculate the cross section while for the region $x < x_0$
361: we use the saturation approach. While the BGBK $I$ does not change as it must not, the case where
362: we have the gluon distribution function falling off (BGBK $III$) is severely affected,
363: by as much as a factor of $4$ at the highest energy shown. On the other hand, the cross section
364: using the KKT parametrization is rather robust, a change in $x_0$ from $10^{-4}$ to $10^{-6}$
365: changes the cross section by about $20 \%$ at $E_{\nu} = 10^{10}$ and $10 \%$ at
366: $E_{\nu} = 10^{13}$.
367: Depending on $x_0$, the cross section given by Gandhi et al. \cite{reno} is about
368: $1.65 -2.0$ times bigger than the KKT cross section at $E_{\nu} = 10^{12}$.
369: It is clear that the assumptions made on the behavior of the gluon distribution function at very
370: small $x$ will determine the outcome of the calculated cross sections at high energy.
371: \vspace{0.3in}
372:
373: \begin{figure}[hbp]
374: \centering
375: \setlength{\epsfxsize=10cm}
376: \centerline{\epsffile{r_kkt-kk_s.eps}}
377: \caption{Ratio of KKT and KK (screened) cross sections .}
378: \label{fig:r_kkt-kk_s}
379: \end{figure}
380: To compare our results to other saturation motivated studies, we show the ratio of our
381: results for the neutrino-nucleon cross section using the KKT paraneterization, denoted KKT
382: and the results of (screened) Kutak and Kwiecinski \cite{kk}, denoted KK for the two choices of the
383: parameter $x_0$ in Fig. (\ref{fig:r_kkt-kk_s}). Since the numerical integrations involved
384: are quite time consuming, we have have taken rather large increments in the integration
385: rountines which
386: leads to about $10\%$ error on the KKT cross sections. This is the origin of the error bars
387: shown in the figure. For neutrino energies more than $10^8 - 10^9$, the two approaches are in
388: exccelent agreement for $x_0=10^{-4}$ and within $20 \%$ for $x=10^{-6}$. The agreement is rather
389: remarkable since the KK approach involves solving a phenomenologically unified DGLAP/BFK
390: equation with a non-linear term motivated by the saturation physics while the results denoted
391: KKT are based on a parameterization of the dipole profile which is motivated by the RHIC data
392: on deuteron-gold collisions \cite{iv}. This is most likely due to the similar growth of the
393: saturaion scale in both cases since this growth is measures at HERA. It is also calculated
394: very reliabely in the Color Glass Condensate formalism \cite{dino} and is in excellent
395: agreement with
396: the measured value at HERA. The fact that the two rather different approaches give
397: quite similar results for neutrino-nucleon cross section at high energies is very reassuring
398: and gives us confidence that if and when the ultra high energy neutrino-nucleon cross sections
399: are measured, one can have quite stringent constraints on saturation based calculations of the
400: neutrino-nucleon cross section.
401:
402:
403: \section{Acknowledgments}
404: The authors thank Mary Alberg and William Detmold for some computing help and
405: W-Y. P. Hwang for earlier collaboration on this work. E. H. is supported in part
406: by the U.S. \ Department of Energy under Grant No.\ DE-FG03-97ER4014.
407: J. J-M. is supported in part by the U.S. \ Department of Energy under
408: Grant No.\ DE-FG02-00ER41132.
409:
410:
411: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
412:
413: \bibitem{GZK} K. Greisen, Phys. Rev. Lett.{\bf{16}}, 748 (1966); G.T. Zatsepin and
414: V.A. Kuzmin, JETP Lett. {\bf{4}},78 (1966).
415:
416: \bibitem {2} See e..g., P. Bhattacharjee and G. Sigl, Phys. Rept. {\bf{327}},109
417: (2000), \emph{Physics and Astrophysics of Ultra High Energy Cosmic Rays},
418: Lecture Notes in Physics {\bf{576}}, eds. M. Lemoine and G. Sigl, Springer Verlag NY, 2001.
419:
420: \bibitem{reno}
421: R.~Gandhi, C.~Quigg, M.~H.~Reno and I.~Sarcevic,
422: %``Neutrino interactions at ultrahigh energies,''
423: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58}, 093009 (1998)
424: [arXiv:hep-ph/9807264];
425: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9807264;%%
426: M.~V.~T.~Machado,
427: %``Ultrahigh energy neutrinos and non-linear QCD dynamics,''
428: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 053008 (2004)
429: [arXiv:hep-ph/0311281].
430: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0311281;%%
431: J.~Jalilian-Marian,
432: %``Enhancement and suppression of the neutrino nucleon total cross section at
433: %ultra-high energies,''
434: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68}, 054005 (2003)
435: [Erratum-ibid.\ D {\bf 70}, 079903 (2004)]
436: [arXiv:hep-ph/0301238];
437: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0301238;%%
438: R.~Fiore, L.~L.~Jenkovszky, A.~V.~Kotikov, F.~Paccanoni, A.~Papa and E.~Predazzi,
439: %``Analytical evolution of nucleon structure functions with power corrections
440: %at twist-4 and predictions for ultra-high energy neutrino nucleon cross
441: %section,''
442: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 71}, 033002 (2005)
443: [arXiv:hep-ph/0412003];
444: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0412003;%%
445: A.~M.~Stasto,
446: %``Physics of ultrahigh energy neutrinos,''
447: Int.\ J.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 19}, 317 (2004)
448: [arXiv:astro-ph/0310636].
449: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0310636;%%
450:
451: \bibitem{HERA} ZEUS Collaboration, J. Breitweg et al., Phys. Lett. {\bf{B487}},53
452: (2000); S. Chekanov et al. , DESY-01-064; H1 Collaboration, C. Adloff et al.,
453: Eur. Phys. J.{\bf{C 21}},33 (2001).
454:
455: %\cite{McLerran:1993ni}
456: \bibitem{mv}
457: L.~D.~McLerran and R.~Venugopalan,
458: %``Computing quark and gluon distribution functions for very large nuclei,''
459: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 49}, 2233 (1994)
460: [arXiv:hep-ph/9309289],
461: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9309289;%%
462: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59}, 094002 (1999)
463: [arXiv:hep-ph/9809427];
464: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9809427;%%
465: %\cite{Jalilian-Marian:1996xn}
466: J.~Jalilian-Marian, A.~Kovner, L.~D.~McLerran and H.~Weigert,
467: %``The intrinsic glue distribution at very small x,''
468: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 55}, 5414 (1997)
469: [arXiv:hep-ph/9606337];
470: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9606337;%%
471: Y.~V.~Kovchegov,
472: %``Non-Abelian Weizsaecker-Williams field and a two-dimensional effective
473: %color charge density for a very large nucleus,''
474: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 54}, 5463 (1996)
475: [arXiv:hep-ph/9605446],
476: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9605446;%%
477: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 55}, 5445 (1997)
478: [arXiv:hep-ph/9701229].
479: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9701229;%%
480:
481: \bibitem{bfkl}
482: E.~A.~Kuraev, L.~N.~Lipatov and V.~S.~Fadin,
483: %``The Pomeranchuk Singularity In Nonabelian Gauge Theories,''
484: Sov.\ Phys.\ JETP {\bf 45}, 199 (1977)
485: [Zh.\ Eksp.\ Teor.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 72}, 377 (1977)];
486: %%CITATION = SPHJA,45,199;%%
487: I.~I.~Balitsky and L.~N.~Lipatov,
488: %``The Pomeranchuk Singularity In Quantum Chromodynamics,''
489: Sov.\ J.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf 28}, 822 (1978)
490: [Yad.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 28}, 1597 (1978)].
491: %%CITATION = SJNCA,28,822;%%
492:
493: \bibitem {dglap} V.N. Gribov and L.N. Lipatov, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys {\bf{15}},438
494: (1972); G.Altarelli and G.Parisi, Nuc. Phys. {\bf{B126}},298 (1977); Yu. L Dokshitzer,
495: Sov. Phys. JETP {\bf{46}}, 641 (1977).
496:
497: %\cite{Kutak:2003bd}
498: \bibitem{kk}
499: K.~Kutak and J.~Kwiecinski,
500: %``Screening effects in the ultrahigh energy neutrino interactions,''
501: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 29}, 521 (2003)
502: [arXiv:hep-ph/0303209].
503: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0303209;%%
504:
505: %\cite{Dicus:2001kb}
506: \bibitem{dkrs}
507: D.~A.~Dicus, S.~Kretzer, W.~W.~Repko and C.~Schmidt,
508: %``Ultrahigh-energy neutrino nucleon cross-sections and perturbative
509: %unitarity,''
510: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 514}, 103 (2001)
511: [arXiv:hep-ph/0103207].
512: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0103207;%%
513:
514: \bibitem{jimwlk}
515: I.~Balitsky, Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 463}, 99 (1996),
516: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9509348;%%
517: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 518}, 235 (2001);
518: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0105334;%%
519: J.~Jalilian-Marian, A.~Kovner, A.~Leonidov and H.~Weigert,
520: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 504}, 415 (1997),
521: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9701284;%%
522: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59}, 014014 (1999);
523: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9706377;%%
524: E.~Iancu, A.~Leonidov and L.~D.~McLerran,
525: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 510}, 133 (2001),
526: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0102009;%%
527: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 692}, 583 (2001);
528: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0011241;%%
529: Y.~V.~Kovchegov,
530: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60}, 034008 (1999),
531: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9901281;%%
532: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 61}, 074018 (2000).
533: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9905214;%%
534:
535: %\cite{Golec-Biernat:1998js}
536: \bibitem{gbw}
537: K.~Golec-Biernat and M.~Wusthoff,
538: %``Saturation effects in deep inelastic scattering at low Q**2 and its
539: %implications on diffraction,''
540: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59}, 014017 (1999)
541: [arXiv:hep-ph/9807513].
542: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9807513;%%
543:
544:
545: %\cite{Bartels:2002cj}
546: \bibitem{bgbk}
547: J.~Bartels, K.~Golec-Biernat and H.~Kowalski,
548: %``A modification of the saturation model: DGLAP evolution,''
549: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 014001 (2002)
550: [arXiv:hep-ph/0203258].
551: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0203258;%%
552:
553: %\cite{Iancu:2003ge}
554: \bibitem{iim}
555: E.~Iancu, K.~Itakura and S.~Munier,
556: %``Saturation and BFKL dynamics in the HERA data at small x,''
557: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 590}, 199 (2004)
558: [arXiv:hep-ph/0310338].
559: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0310338;%%
560:
561: %\cite{Gotsman:2002yy}
562: \bibitem{lub}
563: E.~Gotsman, E.~Levin, M.~Lublinsky and U.~Maor,
564: %``Towards a new global QCD analysis: Low x DIS data from non-linear
565: %evolution,''
566: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 27}, 411 (2003)
567: [arXiv:hep-ph/0209074].
568: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0209074;%%
569:
570: %\cite{Kharzeev:2004yx}
571: \bibitem{kkt}
572: D.~Kharzeev, Y.~V.~Kovchegov and K.~Tuchin,
573: %``Nuclear modification factor in d + Au collisions: Onset of suppression in
574: %the color glass condensate,''
575: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 599}, 23 (2004)
576: [arXiv:hep-ph/0405045].
577: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0405045;%%
578:
579: %\cite{Dumitru:2005gt}
580: \bibitem{aaj}
581: A.~Dumitru, A.~Hayashigaki and J.~Jalilian-Marian,
582: %``The color glass condensate and hadron production in the forward region,''
583: arXiv:hep-ph/0506308;
584: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0506308;%%
585: %\cite{Jalilian-Marian:2004xm}
586: J.~Jalilian-Marian,
587: %``Forward rapidity hadron production in deuteron gold collisions from
588: %valence quarks,''
589: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 748}, 664 (2005)
590: [arXiv:nucl-th/0402080].
591: %%CITATION = NUCL-TH 0402080;%%
592:
593: %\cite{Iancu:2003xm}
594: \bibitem{iv}
595: E.~Iancu and R.~Venugopalan,
596: %``The color glass condensate and high energy scattering in QCD,''
597: arXiv:hep-ph/0303204;
598: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0303204;%%
599: J.~Jalilian-Marian and Y.~V.~Kovchegov,
600: %``Saturation physics and deuteron gold collisions at RHIC,''
601: Prog.\ Part.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf 56}, 104 (2006)
602: [arXiv:hep-ph/0505052].
603: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0505052;%%
604:
605: %\cite{Triantafyllopoulos:2002nz}
606: \bibitem{dino}
607: D.~N.~Triantafyllopoulos,
608: %``The energy dependence of the saturation momentum from RG improved BFKL
609: %evolution,''
610: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 648}, 293 (2003)
611: [arXiv:hep-ph/0209121].
612: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0209121;%%
613:
614: %\cite{Stasto:2000er}
615: \bibitem{geo_sca}
616: A.~M.~Stasto, K.~Golec-Biernat and J.~Kwiecinski,
617: %``Geometric scaling for the total gamma* p cross-section in the low x
618: %region,''
619: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 86}, 596 (2001)
620: [arXiv:hep-ph/0007192];
621: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0007192;%%
622: %\cite{Iancu:2002tr}
623: E.~Iancu, K.~Itakura and L.~McLerran,
624: %``Geometric scaling above the saturation scale,''
625: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 708}, 327 (2002)
626: [arXiv:hep-ph/0203137].
627: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0203137;%%
628:
629:
630:
631:
632: \end{thebibliography} .
633:
634:
635:
636:
637: \end{document}
638:
639:
640: