1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}

2: \usepackage{epsfig}

3: \usepackage{cite}

4: \usepackage{bm}

5: \usepackage{amsmath}

6: \usepackage{graphics}

7: 

8: %\usepackage[pdftex]{color}

9: \usepackage[english]{babel}

10: \frenchspacing

11: 

12: \addtolength{\textwidth}{3.5cm}

13: \addtolength{\textheight}{3cm}

14: \setlength{\marginparwidth}{1cm}

15: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-0.5cm}

16: \setlength{\topmargin}{0cm}

17: \setlength{\voffset}{-1cm}

18: 

19: %\usepackage[pdftex]{hyperref}

20: 

21: \begin{document}

22: 

23: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

24: 

25: \vspace{1cm}

26: \title{\textbf{Transverse Momentum in Semi-inclusive \\ 

27: Deep Inelastic Scattering}}

28: \author{

29: \vspace{0.5cm}\\

30: \textbf{Federico Alberto Ceccopieri}

31: \vspace{0.3cm}\\

32: \textsl{Dipartimento di Fisica, Universit\'a di Parma,}\\

33: \textsl{Viale delle Scienze, Campus Sud, 43100 Parma, Italy}

34: \vspace{1cm}\\

35: \textbf{Luca Trentadue}

36: \vspace{0.3cm}\\

37: \textsl{Dipartimento di Fisica, Universit\'a di Parma,}\\

38: \textsl{INFN Gruppo Collegato di Parma,}\\

39: \textsl{Viale delle Scienze, Campus Sud, 43100 Parma, Italy}}

40: \date{}

41: 

42: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

43: \maketitle

44: \thispagestyle{empty}

45: \vspace{0.5cm}

46: \begin{center}

47: \large

48: Abstract

49: \vspace{0.5cm}\\

50: \end{center}

51: \normalsize

52: Within the framework of perturbative Quantum Chromodynamics

53: we derive transverse momentum dependent distributions describing   

54: both current and target fragmentation in semi-inclusive Deep Inelastic

55: Scattering. We present, to leading logarithmic accuracy,  the corresponding cross-sections

56: describing final state hadrons on the whole phase space.

57: Phenomenological implications and further developments are briefly discussed. 

58: 

59: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

60: 

61: \newpage

62: 

63: \begin{center}

64: \large{\bf{I. Introduction}}

65: \end{center}

66: 

67: The predictivity of perturbative Quantum Chromodynamics (pQCD) relies upon the factorization 

68: of hadronic cross-sections into perturbative process dependent coefficient functions, 

69: universal perturbative evolution equations and non-perturbative process 

70: independent densities\cite{fproof}. 

71: In presence of a hard scale, which justifies the perturbative approach due to asympotic freedom, 

72: the scale dependence of densities is predicted through 

73: renormalization group equations, \textsl{i.e.} Altarelli-Parisi (AP) evolution equations\cite{DGLAP}.

74: Inclusive deep inelastic lepton-hadron scattering (DIS) has been investigated since a long time

75: and in great detail.  

76: The evaluations of the splitting functions has been recently performed up to 

77: $\mathcal{O}(\alpha_s^3)$ in perturbation theory\cite{VVM}, further constraining 

78: non-perturbative dynamics. 

79: The evolution of initial state partons in terms  of longitudinal and transverse

80: momenta has been also considered within pQCD 

81: in Refs.\cite{kimber2,kimber,kwiechinski}. 

82: In semi-inclusive Deep Inelastic Scattering (SIDIS) processes, at variance with inclusive DIS, 

83: one hadron is detected in the final state, \textrm{$l+P\rightarrow l+h+X$}.

84: In this case, on the contrary, an equally 

85: accurate theoretical description has not yet been developed.

86: The additional hadronic degrees of freedom require a more detailed description of 

87: parton dynamics. 

88: Within the usual pQCD-improved parton model approach to SIDIS\cite{SIDIS_start,SIDIS_Cij},

89: one deals only with current fragmented hadrons.

90: However another distinct issue enters the perturbative description.

91: Both the struck parton and spectators do evolve according to the

92: hard scale governing the process\cite{Trentadue_Veneziano}. As a result also target

93: fragmentation has to be included to describe final state hadrons.

94: Evolution is predictable in terms of new functions dubbed \textsl{fracture functions},

95: whose factorization can been proven in Ref.\cite{Fact_M}.

96: An explicit evalution of the single-particle cross section at one loop  

97: has been given in Ref.\cite{Graudenz}.

98: 

99: In the pQCD-improved parton model detected hadrons are espected

100: to have a sizeable transverse momentum $\bm{P_{h \perp}}$, 

101: as a result of perturbative evolution in terms of hard partons emission. 

102: We will show that it is possible to reformulate evolution equations in order

103: to include transverse degrees of freedom since such a dependence is fully predictable within pQCD. 

104:  

105: The aim of this work is twofold. First we derive transverse momentum dependent (TMD)

106: evolution equations which enter SIDIS cross-sections in the current fragmentation region. 

107: We then extend this treatment to distributions in the target fragmentation region via fracture functions. 

108: As a result of these generalization, the combined  SIDIS cross section is presented 

109: descibing  hadron production on the whole phase space. 

110: 

111: 

112: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

113: 

114: \vspace{0.5cm}

115: \begin{center}

116: \large{\bf{II. Transverse evolution equations and kinematics}}

117: \end{center}

118: 

119: Evolution equations to leading logarithmic accuracy (LLA) resum contributions due

120: to collinear partons emission. In the time-like case the evolution equation is:

121: \begin{equation}

122: \label{dglap}

123: Q^2 \frac{\partial \mathcal{D}_{i}^{h}(z_h,Q^2)}{\partial Q^2}=\frac{\alpha_s(Q^2)}{2\pi}\int_{z_h}^1 

124: \frac{du}{u} \,P_{ij}(u,\alpha_s(Q^2)) \,\mathcal{D}_{j}^{h}\Big(\frac{z_h}{u},Q^2\Big),

125: \end{equation}

126: where the fragmentation function $\mathcal{D}_{i}^{h}(z_h)$ represents the probability 

127: to find, at a scale $Q^2$, a given hadron $h$ with momentum fraction $z_h$ of its parent parton $i$.

128: $P(u)$ are the time-like splitting functions which give the probabilities

129: to find a parton of type $j$ inside a parton of type $i$ and can be 

130: expressed as a power series in the  strong running coupling $\alpha_s(Q^2)$ .

131: Ordinary evolution equations, eq.(\ref{dglap}), contain only longitudinal 

132: degrees of freedom of partons inside hadrons although,  

133: at each branching, the emitting parton acquires a transverse momentum 

134: relative to its initial direction. 

135: Transverse momentum dependent (TMD) evolution equations were 

136: first derived in Ref.\cite{BCM} for fragmentation functions in the time-like region:

137: \begin{eqnarray}

138: \label{dglap_TMD_time}

139: Q^2 \frac{\partial \mathcal{D}_{i}^{h}(z_h,Q^2,\boldsymbol{p_{\perp}})}{\partial Q^2}&=&

140: \frac{\alpha_s(Q^2)}{2\pi}\int_{z_h}^1 \frac{du}{u} 

141: P_{ij}(u,\alpha_s(Q^2))\cdot\nonumber\\

142: &&\cdot \frac{d^2 \boldsymbol{q_{\perp}}}{\pi}\,\delta(\,u(1-u)Q^2-q^2_{\perp})\,

143: \mathcal{D}_{j}^{h}\Big(\frac{z_h}{u},Q^2,\boldsymbol{p_{\perp}}-\frac{z_h}{u} \bm{q_{\perp}} \Big).

144: \end{eqnarray}

145: Single particle distributions $\mathcal{D}_{i}^{h}(z_h)$ in eq.(\ref{dglap_TMD_time}) give

146: the probability to find, at a given scale $Q^2$, the hadron $h$ in the parent parton $i$

147: with longitudinal momentum fraction $z_h$ and transverse momentum $\bm{p}_{\perp}$ with respect to it. 

148: The $P(u)$ splitting functions are the ordinary splitting functions

149: as in eq.(\ref{dglap}) and flavour indices are understood as in the inclusive case. 

150: \begin{figure}[h]

151: \begin{center}

152: \epsfig{file=fs_art_3.eps,width=6cm,height=3.5cm,angle=0}

153: \caption{\small{a parton with momentum $k$ emerges from a hard process with virtual mass $k^2=Q^2>0$ 

154: and then evolves into a quasi-real parton with transverse momentum $\bm{p}_{\perp}$. 

155: The vertex is associated with the time-like splitting functions $P(u)$.

156: The small blob symbolizes resummation of ladder diagrams in LLA. }}

157: \end{center}

158: \label{fig:tmdtime}

159: \end{figure}

160: \normalsize

161: Let us discuss the kinematics structure of eq.(\ref{dglap_TMD_time})\,.

162: Consider an outgoing parton $k$ emerging from an hard collision with 

163: virtuality  $k^2=Q^2>0$, assigned to have zero transverse momentum ($\bm{k}_{\perp}=\bm{0}_{\perp}$) and 

164: unitary longitudinal momentum fraction, as displayed in Fig.(1)\,. 

165: It subsequently branches, with probability $P(u)$, into a couple of partons,

166: $q$ and $q'$, with a fractional momentum $u$ and $1-u$ of $k$ respectively and 

167: transverse momentum $\bm{q}_{\perp}=-\bm{q'}_{\perp}$ relative to $\bm{k}$. 

168: The parton $q$ then non-perturbatively hadronizes generating the final hadron $h$ 

169: with a fractional momentum $z_h$ and transverse momentum $\bm{p}_{\perp}$ and $\bm{\widetilde{p}}_{\perp}$

170: relative to $\bm{k}$ and $\bm{q}$ respectively.  

171: We thus derive the following constraints:

172: \begin{eqnarray}

173: \label{boost+flow}

174: \tilde{\bm{p}}_{\perp}&=&\bm{p}_{\perp}-\frac{z_h}{u}\,\bm{q}_{\perp} \, , \\

175: q^2_{\perp}&=&u\,(1-u)\,Q^2 \,. 

176: \end{eqnarray}

177: Eq.(\ref{boost+flow}) takes into account the Lorentz boost of transverse momenta $\widetilde{\bm{p}}_{\perp}$

178: from the $q$-frame to the $p$-frame. The second equation follows by 

179: imposing the virtuality flow of time-like branching. 

180: These relations directly enter eq.(\ref{dglap_TMD_time}), respectively as argument of the 

181: distribution $\mathcal{D}_{j}^{h}$ and of the invariant-mass conserving $\delta$-function.  

182: The unintegrated densities fulfil the normalization:

183: \begin{equation}

184: \label{timelike_norm}

185: \int d^2 \bm{p}_{\perp} \mathcal{D}_{i}^{h}(z_h,Q^2,\bm{p}_{\perp})=\mathcal{D}_{i}^{h}(z_h,Q^2)\,,

186: \end{equation}

187: since the boost in eq.(\ref{boost+flow}) is linear in the transverse variables, \textsl{i.e.}

188: the Jacobian is:

189: \begin{equation}

190: \label{jacobian}

191: \det \Big( \frac{d^2 \bm{p}_{\perp}}{d^2 \widetilde{\bm{p}}_{\perp}} \Big)=1\,.

192: \end{equation} 

193: This property garantees that we can recover inclusive distributions, eq.(\ref{dglap}), starting 

194: from less inclusive ones. The opposite statement is not valid since eq.(\ref{dglap_TMD_time}) 

195: contains new physical information. 

196: 

197: In order to obtain a complete description of semi-inclusive cross-sections 

198: we need the space-like version of eq.(\ref{dglap_TMD_time}). On a general ground

199: we may expect that the infrared structure of space-like evolution equations 

200: is the same as the time-like one since it depends only upon the dynamics of the underlying gauge

201: theory, the only changes being in the kinematics.

202: In analogy to the time-like case we consider now a initial state parton $p$

203: in a incoming proton $P$ which undergoes a hard collision, 

204: the reference frame being aligned along the incoming proton axis, as in Fig.(2).

205: \begin{figure}

206: \begin{center}

207: \label{fig_tmd_space}

208: \epsfig{file=is_art_3.eps,width=6cm,height=4cm,angle=0}

209: \caption{\small{a quasi-real parton with momentum $p$ perturbatively evolves towards the hard vertex

210: acquiring a virtual mass $p^2=Q^2<0$.  

211: The vertex is associated with the space-like splitting functions $P(u)$.

212: The small blob symbolizes resummation of ladder diagrams in LLA. }}

213: \end{center}

214: \end{figure}

215: \normalsize

216: The boost of transverse momentum and the invariant mass-conserving constraint are in this case:

217: \begin{eqnarray}

218: \label{boost+flow2}

219: \tilde{\bm{k}}_{\perp}&=&\frac{\bm{k}_{\perp}-\bm{q}_{\perp}}{u}, \\

220: q^2_{\perp}&=&(1-u)\,Q^2 \,. 

221: \end{eqnarray}

222: We thus generalize eq.(\ref{dglap_TMD_time}) to the space-like case:

223: \begin{eqnarray}

224: \label{dglap_TMD_space}

225: Q^2 \frac{\partial \mathcal{F}_{P}^{i}(x_B,Q^2,\boldsymbol{k_{\perp}})}{\partial Q^2}

226: &=&\frac{\alpha_s(Q^2)}{2\pi}\int_{x_B}^1 \frac{du}{u^3} 

227: P^{i}_{j}(u,\alpha_s(Q^2))\cdot\nonumber\\

228: &&\cdot \frac{d^2 \boldsymbol{q_{\perp}}}{\pi}\,\delta(\,(1-u)Q^2-q^2_{\perp})

229: \,\mathcal{F}_{P}^{j}\Big(\frac{x_B}{u},Q^2, \frac{\bm{k}_{\perp}-\bm{q}_{\perp}}{u} \Big)\,.

230: \end{eqnarray}

231: The \textsl{constructive} proof of eq.(\ref{dglap_TMD_space}) will be given elsewhere\cite{newpaper}.

232: The unintegrated distributions fulfil a condition

233: analogous to the one in eq.(\ref{timelike_norm}), \textsl{i.e.} :

234: \begin{equation}

235: \label{spacelike_norm}

236: \int d^2 \bm{k}_{\perp} \mathcal{F}_{P}^{i}(x_B,Q^2,\bm{k}_{\perp})=\mathcal{F}_{P}^{i}(x_B,Q^2)\,.

237: \end{equation}

238: We note that the inclusion of transverse momenta do not affect longitudinal degrees of freedom since partons 

239: always degrade their fractional momenta in the perturbative branching processes.

240: The different Lorentz structure in the transverse arguments of the

241: parton distribution functions $\mathcal{F}_ {P}^{i}$ arises from the different structure of the 

242: Bethe-Salpeter ladder used to derive the evolution equations\cite{newpaper}.

243: 

244: \vspace{0.5cm}

245: \begin{center}

246: \large{\bf{III. Transverse momenta in target fragmentation region}}

247: \end{center}

248: 

249: Current and target hadron production mechanisms cannot be separated since 

250: hadrons produced by current fragmentation may go in to the target remnant direction and \textsl{vice versa}.

251: In these configurations new infrared singularities appear 

252: which cannot be reabsorbed through the standard renormalization procedure into parton distribution functions and 

253: fragmentation functions. It has been shown\cite{Trentadue_Veneziano,Fact_M,Graudenz}

254: that the cross-section can be renormalized by introducing new non-perturbative 

255: objects, fracture functions indicated by $\mathcal{M}^{i}_{P,h}(x,z,Q^2)$. 

256: These functions express the conditional probability 

257: of finding, at a scale $Q^2$, a parton $i$ with momentum fraction $x$ in a proton $P$

258: while a hadron $h$ with momentum fraction $z$ is detected. 

259: Fracture functions obey non-homogeneous evolution equations\cite{Trentadue_Veneziano}: 

260: \begin{eqnarray}

261: \label{M-evo_long}

262: Q^2 \frac{\partial \mathcal{M}^{i}_{P,h}(x,z,Q^2)}{\partial Q^2}=

263: \frac{\alpha_s(Q^2)}{2\pi}\int_{\frac{x}{1-z}}^{1}

264: \frac{du}{u}\,P^{i}_{j}(u)\mathcal{M}^{j}_{P,h}\Big(\frac{x}{u},z,Q^2\Big)+&&\nonumber\\

265: + \frac{\alpha_s(Q^2)}{2\pi}

266: \int_{x}^{\frac{x}{x+z}}\frac{du}{x(1-u)} \hat{P}^{i,l}_{j}(u)

267: \mathcal{F}_{P}^{j}\Big( \frac{x}{u},Q^2\Big)

268: \mathcal{D}_{l}^{h} \Big( \frac{zu}{x(1-u)} ,Q^2 \Big).&&

269: \end{eqnarray}

270: The first term in the above equation (see Fig.(3a)) describes the evolution of the active parton $j$ while 

271: the hadron $h$ is detected. The second term (see Fig.(3b)) takes into account the

272: production of a hadron $h$ by a time-like cascade initiated by the active parton $j$.

273: The $\hat{P}^{i,l}_{j}(u)$ represent the unsubtracted Altarelli-Parisi splitting functions\cite{unregAP}.

274: Since perturbative evolution is at work even in target fragmentation region, we 

275: expect that a non negligible amount of transverse momentum is produced there. 

276: We thus generalize these distributions to contain also transverse degrees of freedom. The fracture functions 

277: $\mathcal{M}^{i}_{P,h} (x,\bm{k}_{\perp},z,\bm{p}_{\perp},Q^2)$ give the conditional probability 

278: to find in a proton $P$, at a scale $Q^2$, a parton with momentum fraction $x$ and transverse momentum 

279: $\bm{k}_{\perp}$ while a hadron $h$, with momentum fraction $z$ 

280: and transverse momentum $\bm{p}_{\perp}$, is detected. 

281: Under these assumptions the following evolution equations can thus be derived\cite{newpaper}:

282: \begin{eqnarray}

283: \label{M-evo_long+tra}

284: &&Q^2\frac{\partial \mathcal{M}^{i}_{P,h}

285: (x,\bm{k}_{\perp},z,\bm{p}_{\perp},Q^2)}{\partial Q^2}=

286: \frac{\alpha_s(Q^2)}{2\pi} \Bigg\{ \int_{\frac{x}{1-z}}^{1} \frac{du}{u^3} \,P^{i}_{j}(u)\, 

287: \int\frac{d^2 \bm{q}_{\perp}}{\pi}\, \delta(\,(1-u)Q^2-q_{\perp}^2)\cdot\nonumber\\

288: &&\cdot\mathcal{M}^{j}_{P,h}\Big(Q^2,\frac{x}{u},\frac{\bm{k}_{\perp}-\bm{q}_{\perp}}{u},

289: z,\bm{p}_{\perp} \Big)+ \int_{x}^{\frac{x}{x+z}} \frac{du}{x(1-u)u^2} \hat{P}^{i,l}_{j}(u)

290: \frac{d^2 \bm{q}_{\perp}}{\pi}\,\delta(\,(1-u)Q^2-q_{\perp}^2) \cdot \nonumber\\

291: && \cdot \mathcal{F}_{P}^{j} 

292: \Big(\frac{x}{u},\frac{\bm{k}_{\perp}-\bm{q}_{\perp}}{u},Q^2 \Big)\,

293: \mathcal{D}_{l}^{h}\Big(\frac{zu}{x(1-u)},\bm{p}_{\perp}-\frac{zu}{x(1-u)}\,

294: \bm{q}_{\perp},Q^2 \Big)\Bigg\} \,. 

295: \end{eqnarray}  

296: As in the longitudinal case two terms contribute to the evolution of

297: TMD fracture functions as displayed in Fig.(3). The homogeneous one has a pure non-perturbative 

298: nature since involves the fragmentation of the proton remnants into the hadron $h$. 

299: The inhomogeneous one takes into account the production of the hadron $h$ from a time-like cascade of 

300: parton $j$ and thus is dubbed \textsl{perturbative}.

301: \begin{figure}[h]

302: \begin{center}

303: \label{TMD_fracture_evo}

304: \epsfig{file=TMD_fracture_evo.eps,width=11cm,height=5cm,angle=0}

305: \caption{\small{ Evolution of fracture functions $M$:   

306: a) homogeneous term; b) inhomogeneous one.}}

307: \end{center}

308: \end{figure}

309: \normalsize

310: The TMD fracture functions fulfil the normalization condition:

311: \begin{equation}

312: \label{M_norm}

313: \int d^2 \bm{k}_{\perp}\int d^2 \bm{p}_{\perp} \mathcal{M}^{i}_{P,h}

314: (x,\bm{k}_{\perp},z,\bm{p}_{\perp},Q^2) =  \mathcal{M}^{i}_{P,h}

315: (x,z,Q^2) \,,

316: \end{equation}

317: as direct consequence of the kinematics of both terms in the evolution equations, eq.(\ref{M-evo_long+tra}).

318: The proof of factorization, \textsl{i.e.} that all singularities 

319: occuring in the target remnant direction can be properly renormalized by 

320: the less inclusive TMD quantity  $\mathcal{M}^{i}_{P,h}

321: (x,\bm{k}_{\perp},z,\bm{p}_{\perp},Q^2)$, is still lacking at present.

322: In the following we assume such a factorization to hold. 

323: 

324: %\newpage

325: \vspace{0.5cm}

326: \begin{center}

327: \large{\bf{IV. Solutions}}

328: \end{center}

329: 

330: TMD evolution equations (\ref{dglap_TMD_time}) and (\ref{dglap_TMD_space})  

331: can only be approximately diagonalized by the joint Fourier-Mellin transform

332: \begin{equation}

333: \label{Fourier-Mellin}

334: \mathcal{D}_n(\bm{b},Q^2)=\int d^2 \bm{p}_{\perp}\int_0^1 \makebox{e}^{\frac{-i\,\bm{b}\cdot\,\bm{p}_{\perp}}{z}}

335: dz \; z^n \,\mathcal{D}(z,Q^2,\bm{p}_{\perp}) \, , 

336: \end{equation}

337: where $\bm{b}$ is the transverse momentum Fourier-coniugated variable\cite{PP}. 

338: An exact diagonalization is prevented by the kinematics structure 

339: of the distribution under integral in eq.(\ref{dglap_TMD_time})

340: since it combines longitudinal momentum fractions with transverse momenta. 

341: Such an exact diagonalization can be however obtained in the soft limit,

342: \textsl{i.e.} when the variables $x$ or $z$ approach the edge of phase space. 

343: In this case for the non-singlet time-like unintegrated fragmentation functions

344: the solution reads\cite{BCM} :

345: \begin{equation}

346: \label{soft_solution}

347: \mathcal{D}(z,Q^2,\bm{p}_{\perp})=\mathcal{D}(z,Q^2)\;\mathcal{G}(Q_0^2,Q^2,z,\bm{p}_{\perp})\,,

348: \end{equation}

349: where  the scale $Q_0^2$ sets the upper limit of the non-perturbative regime.

350: We recall that in this limit the convergence of the perturbative 

351: series can be further improved by taking into account soft gluon radiation enhancements. 

352: The form factor $\mathcal{G}$ can therefore be computed to leading logarithmic accuracy\cite{CG,ABCMV,PP}

353: by simply demanding that $\alpha_s(Q^2)\rightarrow\alpha_s(\bm{p}_{\perp}^2)$. 

354: The expression to next-to-leading logarithmic accuracy has been given in Ref.\cite{kodaira}. 

355: These issues have been recently specialized to the case of SIDIS

356: processes in the current fragmentation region in Ref.\cite{resummation_low_pt}. 

357: Away from the soft limit, the factorized structure of the solution, eq.(\ref{soft_solution}), 

358: is not automatically preserved. In this case numerical methods have shown to be 

359: useful in order to solve the equations in the $x,z \in \mathcal{O}(1)$ range\cite{Jones,newpaper}

360: and to extend the solutions to be valid in the flavour mixing sector.

361: As in the longitudinal case, distributions at a

362: scale $Q^2>Q_0^2$ are known if we provide a non-perturbative input density at some arbitrary scale $Q_0^2$.

363: We assume as initial condition the usual longitudinal fragmentation

364: distribution times a $z$-independent, flavour independent factor:

365: \begin{equation}

366: \label{ansatz}

367: \mathcal{D}^{h}_{i}(z,Q_0^2,\bm{p}_{\perp})= \mathcal{D}^{h}_{i}(z,Q_0^2)

368: \;\frac{\makebox{e}^{-\bm{p}_{\perp}^2/<\bm{p}_{\perp}^2>}}{\pi<\bm{p}_{\perp}^2>} \,.

369: \end{equation}

370: The gaussian $\bm{p}_{\perp}$-distribution

371: is used to model partons intrinsic momenta inside hadrons\cite{Cahn}.

372: This issue has also been considered in Refs.\cite{Chay,anselmino}.  

373: \begin{figure}[h]

374: \begin{center}

375: \label{H2def}

376: \epsfig{file=zhadron_art.eps,width=9cm,height=4cm,angle=0}

377: \caption{\small{a) semi-inclusive DIS \textrm{$l+P\rightarrow l+h+X$} process; b) 

378: kinematics of the reaction in the photon-proton center of mass frame.}}

379: \end{center}

380: \end{figure}

381: \normalsize

382: We now discuss  the phenomenological implications of these results. 

383: According to Ref.\cite{h2_mulders}, 

384: single hadron cross-sections are usually 

385: parametrized in terms of four independent structure functions 

386: $H_{i=1,..,4}(x_B,z_h,Q^2,\bm{P}_{h\perp})$.

387: The hadronic invariants of SIDIS processes are constructed by using 

388: external particles four-momenta, as displayed in Fig.(4a), and therefore 

389: the structure functions $H_{i}$ are supposed to 

390: describe both current and target hadron fragmentation mechanisms. 

391: 

392: Once TMD evolution equations are solved,

393: these predictions can be compared with semi-inclusive DIS data, as for the longitudinal case, provided that 

394: a factorization theorem holds even for TMD distributions. 

395: Such a theorem has been shown to hold in the current fragmentation

396: region for the structure function $H_2$ in Ref.\cite{Ji} : 

397: \begin{eqnarray} 

398: \label{kt_sidis_fact}

399: &&H_2(x_B,z_h,\bm{P}_{h\perp},Q^2)=\sum_{i=q,\,\bar{q}}

400: e_q^2\int d^2\bm{k}_{\perp} d^2\bm{p}_{\perp} \delta^{(2)} 

401: (z_h \bm{k}_{\perp}+\bm{p}_{\perp} - \bm{P}_{h\perp})\cdot\nonumber\\

402: &&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad

403: \cdot\;\mathcal{F}_{P}^{i}(x_B,\mu^2_F,\bm{k}_{\perp},) \; \mathcal{D}^{h}_{i}(z_h,\mu^2_D,\bm{p}_{\perp}) 

404: \; C(Q^2,\mu^2_F,\mu^2_D) \,,

405: \end{eqnarray}

406: where the standard SIDIS variables are defined as:

407: \begin{equation}

408: z_h=\frac{P\cdot P_h}{P\cdot q}, \; \; \; x_B=\frac{Q^2}{2 P \cdot q} \,,

409: \end{equation}

410: and $\mu^2_{F}$ and  $\mu^2_{D}$ are the factorization scales.  

411: The above results are accurate up to powers in $(P_{h\perp}^2/Q^2)^n$ for soft 

412: transverse momenta $P_{h\perp}\simeq\Lambda_{QCD}$.

413: Evolution equations for $\mathcal{F}$ and $\mathcal{D}$ are given in 

414: eqs.(\ref{dglap_TMD_time}) and (\ref{dglap_TMD_space}).

415: The factor $C$ is the process-dependent hard

416: coefficient function computable in perturbative QCD and to LLA we can set $\makebox{C=1}$.

417: Provided that factorization holds for the TMD fracture functions,  

418: we may add, according to eq.(\ref{M-evo_long+tra}), their contributions to $H_2$:

419: \begin{eqnarray}

420: \label{SIDIS_cross_section}

421: &&H_2(x_B,z_h,\bm{P}_{h\perp},Q^2)=\sum_{i=q,\bar{q}}

422: e_q^2\int d^2\bm{k}_{\perp} d^2\bm{p}_{\perp} \Big\{\delta^2 

423: (z_h \bm{k}_{\perp}+\bm{p}_{\perp} - \bm{P}_{h\perp})\cdot\\

424: &&\cdot\mathcal{F}_{P}^{i}(x_B,Q^2,\bm{k}_{\perp}) \, 

425: \mathcal{D}_{i}^{h}(z_h,Q^2,\bm{p}_{\perp})A(0)

426: +(1-x_B) \mathcal{M}^{i}_{P,h} (x_B,\bm{k}_{\perp},z,\bm{p}_{\perp},Q^2)

427: \,\delta^2 (\bm{p}_{\perp} - \bm{P}_{h\perp})A(1)\Big\}\nonumber

428: \end{eqnarray} 

429: where we have identified all the three factorization scales with the hard scale,  

430: $Q^2=\mu^2_F=\mu^2_D=\mu^2_M$.

431: Although formally the two contributions are simply added in eq.(\ref{SIDIS_cross_section}), 

432: at LLA and in photon-proton center of mass frame, 

433: the produced hadrons are mainly distributed in two opposite emispheres. 

434: Target fragmentated hadrons are produced mainly in the $\theta=\pi$ direction 

435: while current fragmented hadrons mainly along $\theta=0$ direction. 

436: Here $\theta$ is the angle of the produced hadron $h$ with respect to the photon direction,

437: as shown in Fig.(4b).

438: In order to keep track of the emission angle of the detected hadron $h$, we supplement 

439: current and target framentation terms in

440: eq.(\ref{SIDIS_cross_section}) with an angular distribution $A(v)$\cite{Graudenz}.

441: The angular and energy variables $v$ and $z$ are defined as: 

442: \begin{equation}

443: \label{z_def_cms}

444: z=\frac{E_h}{E_p(1-x_B)}, \quad \quad v=\frac{1-\cos\theta}{2},  \quad

445: \quad z_h= z\,v\,. 

446: \end{equation}

447: In eq.(\ref{z_def_cms}), $E_h$ and $E_p$ denote respectively 

448: the energies of the detected hadron and of the incoming proton 

449: in the photon-proton center of mass frame. The variables $z$ and $v$ are a useful frame-dependent 

450: representation for the hadronic invariant $z_h$ in two respects: $z$

451: reduces to $z_h$ in the current fragmentation region so that we recover the standard definitions, 

452: while for low $z_h$-values we can distinguish soft hadrons ($z\rightarrow 0$) from the ones

453: produced in the target remnant direction ($\theta\rightarrow \pi$).

454: Since to LLA all sources of transverse momenta contributing to

455: $\bm{P}_{h\perp}$ have been taken into account we may 

456: pictorially represent eq.(\ref{SIDIS_cross_section}) as in Fig.(5).             

457: \begin{figure}[ht]

458: \begin{center}

459: \label{kt_sources_target}

460: \epsfig{file=H2pictorial.eps,width=10cm,height=4cm,angle=0}

461: \caption{\small{ Sources of transverse momentum 

462: in the current (left) and in the target (right) fragmentation region

463: in SIDIS. Dark blobs symbolize hard partons emission.

464: Transverse momentum $\bm{P}_{h\perp}$ of the detected hadron $h$ is

465: also indicated.

466: $F$, $D$ and $M$ represent parton distribution, fragmentation and fracture functions respectively.}}

467: \end{center}

468: \end{figure}

469: \normalsize

470: 

471: \vspace{0.5cm}

472: \begin{center}

473: \large{\bf{V. Conclusions and perspectives}}

474: \end{center}

475: In this work we have extended ordinary distributions to

476: include transverse degrees of freedom both in the current and in the target 

477: fragmentation region of semi-inclusive DIS. 

478: As long as a factorization theorem holds for transverse  momentum dependent fracture functions,

479: the semi-inclusive cross-sections are thus predictable on the whole phase space of the detected hadrons. 

480: Although this extension may have its own theoretical relevance, on the 

481: phenomenological side it also improves our knowledge of both

482: the perturbative and non-perturbative dynamics of partons.

483: Evolution equations (\ref{dglap_TMD_time}), (\ref{dglap_TMD_space}) and (\ref{M-evo_long+tra}) 

484: can be straightforwardly extended also to the polarized case. In the target 

485: fragmentation region the evolution equations for longitudinal polarized fracture

486: functions have been derived in Ref.\cite{sassot_polarized}.

487: We stress that the accuracy of

488: eqs.(\ref{dglap_TMD_time}), (\ref{dglap_TMD_space}) and (\ref{M-evo_long+tra}) 

489: is set by the accuracy of the Altarelli-Parisi splitting functions. Splitting functions for partons 

490: and fragmentation functions are well known.

491: They have been recently calculated in the target region at two loop level in

492: Ref.\cite{sassot_2loop}. Therefore the evolution equations in the current and in the

493: target fragmentation region can be set as to allow the analysis of the semi-inclusive cross sections

494: to the same level of accuracy. Detailed derivation of the results presented in this work and of the phenomenological 

495: implications are postponed to a forthcoming paper\cite{newpaper}.

496: 

497: \vspace{0.5cm}

498: \begin{center}

499: \large{\bf{VI. Acknowledgments}}

500: \end{center}

501: 

502: We would like to thank Mikhail Osipenko for fruitful discussions on

503: the role of transverse momentum distributions in the data analysis of SIDIS processes.

504: One of us, F.A.C, thanks the Dipartimento di Fisica dell' Universit\'a di Parma for the ospitality 

505: given to him.  

506: 

507: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

508: \newpage

509: \begin{center}

510: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

511: 

512: \bibitem{fproof}R.K. Ellis, H. Georgi, M. Machacek, H.D. Politzer, G. G. Ross,\\

513: \textsl{Nucl.Phys.} \textbf{B152}, 285 (1979); \textsl{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{B78}, 281 (1978).\\ 

514: D. Amati, R. Petronzio, G. Veneziano, \textsl{Nucl.Phys.}

515: \textbf{B146}, 29 (1978);\\ \textsl{Nucl.Phys.} \textbf{B140}, 54 (1978).

516: 

517: \bibitem{DGLAP}L.N. Lipatov, \textsl{Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.} 20, 95 (1975);\\

518: V.N. Gribov and L.N. Lipatov, \textsl{Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.} 15, 438 (1972);\\

519: G. Altarelli and G. Parisi, \textsl{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{B126}, 298 (1977);\\

520: Yu.L. Dokshitzer \textsl{Sov. Phys. JETP} \textbf{46}, 641 (1977).

521: 

522: \bibitem{VVM} S. Moch, J.A.M. Vermaseren, A. Vogt, 

523: \textsl{Nucl.Phys.} \textbf{B688}, 101 (2004) and references therein.

524: 

525: \bibitem{kimber2}M.A. Kimber, J. Kwiecinski, A. D. Martin, A.M. Stasto,  

526: \textsl{Phys.Rev.} \textbf{D62}, 094006 (2000).

527: 

528: \bibitem{kimber} M.A. Kimber, Alan D. Martin, M.G. Ryskin \textsl{Phys.Rev.} 

529: \textbf{D63}, 114027 (2001).

530: 

531: \bibitem{kwiechinski}  J. Kwiecinski, \textsl{Acta Phys.Polon.}

532:   \textbf{B33}, 1809 (2002). 

533: 

534: \bibitem{SIDIS_start}  H. Georgi, H.D. Politzer,

535: \textsl{Phys.Rev.Lett.} \textbf{40}, 3 (1978);\\

536: G. Altarelli, G. Martinelli, \textsl{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{76B}, 89  (1978);\\

537: H. Georgi, J. Sheiman, \textsl{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{D20}, 111 (1979).\\

538: 

539: \bibitem{SIDIS_Cij} G. Altarelli, R.K. Ellis, G. Martinelli, So-Young Pi,

540: \textsl{Nucl.Phys.} \textbf{B160}, 301 (1979).

541: 

542: \bibitem{Trentadue_Veneziano} L. Trentadue, G. Veneziano,

543: \textsl{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{B323}, 201 (1994).

544: 

545: \bibitem{Fact_M} M. Grazzini, L. Trentadue, G. Veneziano, \textsl{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{B519},

546: 394 (1998);\\

547: J.C. Collins, \textsl{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{D57}, 3051 (1998).

548: 

549: \bibitem{Graudenz} D. Graudenz, \textsl{Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{B432}, 351 (1994).

550: 

551: \bibitem{BCM} A. Bassetto, M. Ciafaloni, G. Marchesini, \textsl{Nucl.Phys.} \textbf{B163}, 477 (1980).

552: 

553: \bibitem{CG} G. Curci, M. Greco, Y. Srivastava, \textsl{Phys.Rev.Lett.} \textbf{43}, 834  (1979);\\

554: 

555: \bibitem{ABCMV} D. Amati, A. Bassetto, M. Ciafaloni, G. Marchesini,

556:  G. Veneziano,

557:  \textsl{Nucl.Phys.} \textbf{B173}, 429 (1980);\\

558: 

559: \bibitem{PP}G. Parisi, R. Petronzio, \textsl{Nucl.Phys.}  \textbf{B154}, 427 (1979).

560: 

561: \bibitem{Ji}X. Ji, J. Ma, F. Yuan,  \textsl{Phys.Rev.} \textbf{D71}, 034005 (2005).

562: 

563: \bibitem{Jones} L.M. Jones, R. Migneron, \textsl{Phys.Rev.} \textbf{D30}, 560 (1984);\\

564: L.M. Jones, Sagalovsky and R. Migneron, \textsl{Phys.Rev.} \textbf{D33}, 1328 (1986). 

565: 

566: \bibitem{h2_mulders} J. Levelt, P.J. Mulders, \textsl{Phys.Rev.} \textbf{D49}, 96 (1994). 

567: 

568: \bibitem{kodaira}J.Kodaira, L.Trentadue, \textsl{Phys. Lett.} \textbf{B123}, 335 (1983).

569: 

570: \bibitem{resummation_low_pt} P. Nadolsky, D.R. Stump, C.P. Yuan \\

571: \textsl{Phys.Rev.} \textbf{D61}, 014003 (2000); erratum-ibid. \textbf{D64}, 059903 (2001).

572: 

573: \bibitem{Cahn} R.N. Cahn, \textsl{Phys.Lett.} \textbf{78B}, 269 (1978);

574: \textsl{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{D40}, 3107 (1989).

575: 

576: \bibitem{Chay}J. Chay, S.D. Ellis, W.J. Stirling, \textsl{Phys. Rev.}  \textbf{D45}, 46 (1992).

577: 

578: \bibitem{anselmino} M. Anselmino, M. Boglione, U. D'Alesio, A. Kotzinian, F. Murgia, A. Prokudin, \\   

579: \textsl{Phys.Rev.} \textbf{D71}, 074006 (2005). 

580: 

581: \bibitem{unregAP} K. Konishi, A. Ukawa, G.Veneziano, \textsl{Phys. Lett.}

582: \textbf{78B}, 243 (1978).

583: 

584: \bibitem{sassot_polarized}D. de Florian, C.A. Garcia Canal, R. Sassot,   

585: \textsl{Nucl.Phys.} \textbf{B470}, 195 (1996).

586: 

587: \bibitem{sassot_2loop} A. Daleo, C.A. Garcia Canal, R. Sassot, 

588: \textsl{Nucl.Phys.} \textbf{B662}, 334 (2003);\\

589: A. Daleo, R. Sassot, \textsl{Nucl.Phys.} \textbf{B673}, 357 (2003). 

590: 

591: \bibitem{newpaper} F.A. Ceccopieri and L. Trentadue, \textsl{in preparation}.

592:  

593: \end{thebibliography}

594: \end{center}

595: \end{document}

596: 

597: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

598: