1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2:
3: \usepackage{array,dsfont}
4: \usepackage{epsfig}
5: \usepackage{amssymb}
6: \usepackage{amsmath} % roman hinzugefuegt
7: \usepackage{graphics,graphpap}
8:
9: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{0cm}
10: \setlength{\textwidth}{16.2cm}
11: \setlength{\topmargin}{-0.6in}
12: \setlength{\textheight}{24cm}
13: \setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}
14:
15: \addtolength{\jot}{10pt}
16: \addtolength{\arraycolsep}{-3pt}
17: \renewcommand{\textfraction}{0}
18: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}}
19: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.1}
20:
21: \newcommand{\qz}{(q z)}
22: \newcommand{\ub}{\bar u}
23: \newcommand{\quark}{\langle \bar q q\rangle}
24: \newcommand{\mixed}{\langle \bar q \sigma gG q\rangle}
25: \newcommand{\squark}{\langle \bar s s\rangle}
26: \newcommand{\smixed}{\langle \bar s \sigma gG s\rangle}
27: \newcommand{\gluon}{\left\langle \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\,G^2\right\rangle}
28:
29: \begin{document}
30:
31: %%%%%%%%%% Title page
32: \begin{titlepage}
33: \begin{flushright}\begin{tabular}{l}
34: IPPP/05/76\\
35: DCPT/05/152
36: \end{tabular}
37: \end{flushright}
38: \vskip1.5cm
39: \begin{center}
40: {\Large \bf \boldmath Operator Relations for SU(3) Breaking\\[5pt]
41: Contributions to K and K$^*$ Distribution Amplitudes}
42: \vskip1.3cm {\sc
43: Patricia Ball\footnote{Patricia.Ball@durham.ac.uk} and Roman
44: Zwicky\footnote{Roman.Zwicky@durham.ac.uk}
45: \vskip0.5cm
46: {\em IPPP, Department of Physics,
47: University of Durham, Durham DH1 3LE, UK}} \\
48: \vskip2.5cm
49:
50: %{\em Version of \today}
51:
52: \vskip3cm
53:
54: {\large\bf Abstract:\\[10pt]} \parbox[t]{\textwidth}{
55: We derive constraints on the asymmetry $a_1$ of the momentum fractions
56: carried by quark and antiquark in $K$
57: and $K^*$ mesons in leading twist. These constraints follow from
58: exact operator identities and relate $a_1$ to SU(3) breaking
59: quark-antiquark-gluon matrix elements which we determine from QCD sum
60: rules. Comparing our results to determinations of $a_1$ from QCD sum
61: rules based on correlation functions of quark currents, we find that,
62: for $a_1^\parallel(K^*)$ the central values agree well and come with
63: moderate errors, whereas for $a_1(K)$ and $a_1^\perp(K^*)$ the results
64: from operator relations are consistent with those from quark current
65: sum rules, but come with larger uncertainties. The consistency of
66: results confirms that the QCD sum rule method is indeed suitable for the
67: calculation of $a_1$. We conclude that
68: the presently most accurate predictions for $a_1$ come from the direct
69: determination from QCD sum rules based on correlation functions of
70: quark currents and are given by:
71: $$
72: a_1(K) = 0.06\pm 0.03, \quad a_1^\parallel(K^*) = 0.03\pm 0.02,\quad
73: a_1^\perp(K^*) = 0.04\pm 0.03.
74: $$
75: }
76:
77: \vfill
78:
79: %{\em submitted to Physics Letters B}
80: \end{center}
81: \end{titlepage}
82:
83: \setcounter{footnote}{0}
84: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\arabic{footnote}}
85:
86: \newpage
87:
88: \section{Introduction}\label{sec:1}
89:
90: Hadronic light-cone distribution amplitudes (DAs) of
91: leading twist have been attracting considerable interest in the
92: context of B physics. They enter the amplitudes of QCD processes
93: that can be described in collinear factorisation, which include,
94: to leading order in an expansion in $1/m_b$, a large class
95: of nonleptonic B decays \cite{BBNS}, such as $B\to\pi\pi,KK$.
96: DAs are also an essential ingredient in the calculation of weak decay
97: form factors such as $B\to\pi,\rho,K,K^*$ from QCD sum rules on the
98: light-cone \cite{FFs}.
99: These decays, and their CP asymmetries, are currently being studied at
100: the B factories
101: BaBar and Belle and are expected to yield essential information about the
102: pattern of CP violation and potential sources of flavour violation
103: beyond the SM.
104:
105: One particular problem in this context is the size of SU(3) breaking
106: corrections to $K$ and $K^*$ DAs, which has been studied in a number
107: of recent papers \cite{elena,alex,lenz,BZ}.
108: %The most relevant SU(3)
109: %breaking quantity is $a_1 = \frac{5}{3}\,\langle u_s-u_q\rangle$, that
110: %is the average asymmetry of the momentum fractions $u_s$ and $u_q$
111: %carried by, respectively, the $s$ quark and the light antiquark $\bar
112: %q$ in the meson. All existing calculations rely on QCD sum rules
113: The DAs themselves are defined as matrix elements of
114: quark-antiquark gauge-invariant nonlocal operators on the light-cone.
115: To leading-twist accuracy, there are three such DAs for $K$ and $K^*$
116: ($z^2=0$):
117: \begin{eqnarray}
118: \langle 0 |\bar q(z)\slash\!\!\! z \gamma_5 [z,-z]s(-z)
119: |K(q)\rangle &=& i f_K \qz
120: \int_0^1 du\, e^{i\xi\qz} \phi_K(u)\,,\nonumber\\
121: \langle 0 |\bar q(z)\slash\!\!\! z [z,-z] s(-z)
122: |K^{*}(q,\lambda)\rangle &=& (e^{(\lambda)} z)
123: f_K^\parallel m_{K^*}\int_0^1 du\, e^{i\xi\qz}
124: \phi_K^\parallel(u),\nonumber\\
125: \langle 0 |\bar q(z)\sigma_{\mu\nu}[z,-z]s(-z)
126: |K^{*}(q,\lambda)\rangle & = &
127: i(e^{(\lambda)}_\mu q_\nu -e^{(\lambda)}_\nu q_\mu)
128: f_K^\perp(\mu) \int_0^1 du\, e^{i\xi\qz} \phi_K^\perp(u),
129: \label{eq:defDAs}
130: \end{eqnarray}
131: with the Wilson-line
132: $$
133: [z,-z] = \mbox{Pexp}\,\left[ig\int_{-1}^1 d\alpha\, z^\mu A_\mu(\alpha
134: z)\right]
135: $$
136: inserted between quark fields to render the matrix elements
137: gauge-invariant.
138: In the above definitions, $e^{(\lambda)}_\nu$ is the
139: polarisation vector of a vector meson with polarisation
140: $\lambda$; there are two leading-twist
141: DAs for vector mesons, $\phi_K^\parallel$
142: and $\phi_K^\perp$, corresponding to
143: longitudinal and transverse polarisation, respectively.
144: The integration variable $u$ is the (longitudinal)
145: meson momentum fraction carried by the quark, $\ub \equiv 1-u$ the
146: momentum fraction carried by the antiquark and $\xi = u-\ub$.
147: The decay constants
148: $f_K^{(\parallel,\perp)}$ are defined in the usual way by the local limit of
149: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:defDAs}) and chosen in such a way that
150: \begin{equation}\label{eq:norm} \int_0^1 du\, \phi(u)=1.\end{equation}
151: All three distributions $\phi_K,
152: \phi_K^\parallel , \phi_K^\perp$ can be expanded in Gegenbauer
153: polynomials $C_n^{3/2}$,
154: \begin{equation}
155: \phi(u) = 6u\bar u\left(1 + \sum_{n \geq 1} a_n C_n^{3/2}(2u-1)\right)\,,
156: \end{equation}
157: where the $a_n$ are hadronic parameters, the so-called Gegenbauer moments.
158:
159: The most relevant quantities characterising SU(3) breaking of these
160: DAs are the
161: decay constants $f_K$ and $f_{K}^{\perp,\parallel}$, and $a_1(K)$ and
162: $a_1^{\perp,\parallel}(K^*)$, which can be expressed in terms of the
163: DAs as
164: \begin{equation}
165: a_1(K) = \frac{5}{3}\, \int_0^1 du\,
166: (u-\bar u)\phi_K(u)
167: \end{equation}
168: and correspondingly for $a_1^{\parallel,\perp}(K^*)$.
169: $a_1$ describes the
170: difference of the average longitudinal momenta of the quark and
171: antiquark in the two-particle Fock-state component of the meson, a quantity
172: that vanishes for particles with equal-mass quarks (particles with
173: definite G-parity). The decay constants $f_K$ and
174: $f_{K}^\parallel$ can be extracted from experiment;
175: $f_{K}^\perp$ has been calculated from both lattice \cite{lattbec}
176: and QCD sum rules, e.g.\ Ref.~\cite{BZ}.
177: In this paper we focus on the determination of $a_1$: no lattice
178: calculation of this quantity has been attempted yet, so essentially
179: all available information on $a_1$ comes from QCD sum rule
180: calculations. $a_1$ can be calculated either directly from the
181: correlation function of two quark currents
182: \cite{elena,alex,BZ,Russians,CZreport} or from operator
183: identities relating it to certain quark-quark-gluon matrix elements,
184: denoted $\kappa_4$, which
185: are calculated from QCD sum rules themselves \cite{lenz}. In a
186: previous paper, Ref.~\cite{BZ}, we have obtained the following results
187: from the first method, at the scale of 1~GeV:
188: \begin{equation}
189: a_1(K)^{\rm BZ} = 0.050\pm 0.025,\quad a_1^\parallel(K^*)^{\rm BZ} = 0.025\pm
190: 0.015,\quad a_1^\perp(K^*)^{\rm BZ} = 0.04\pm 0.03,
191: \end{equation}
192: whereas Braun and Lenz found the following results from
193: operator identities \cite{lenz}:
194: \begin{equation}\label{reslenz}
195: a_1(K)^{\rm BL} = 0.10\pm 0.12,\qquad a_1^\parallel(K^*)^{\rm BL} =
196: 0.10\pm 0.07.
197: \end{equation}
198: These results were obtained to first order in $m_s$ and neglecting
199: explicit terms in $m_s^2$ and $m_q$ in the operator identities.
200: Numerically, however, these terms are not negligible: the
201: $O(m_s^2)$ correction shifts $a_1(K)$ by $+0.17$ and
202: $a_1^\parallel(K^*)$ by $+0.08$ for our central value of
203: $m_s$. Corrections in $m_q$ are small for $a_1^\parallel(K^*)$, but
204: chirally enhanced for $a_1(K)$ and shift $a_1(K)$ by $+0.04$ for our
205: central value of $m_q$. A consistent inclusion of $O(m_{q,s})$ effects
206: requires the calculation of these terms also for $\kappa_4$. In the
207: present paper, we present such a calculation and improve the sum
208: rules for $\kappa_4$ derived in Ref.~\cite{lenz}
209: by the inclusion of all dominant terms to $O(m_q^2)$ and $O(m_s^2)$,
210: which include in particular
211: two-loop perturbative and gluon-condensate
212: contributions. The
213: perturbative contributions come with large
214: coefficients and prove to be very relevant numerically. We then
215: construct several sum rules for $\kappa_4$ which differ
216: by the chirality structure of the involved currents and the
217: spin-parity assignment of the hadronic states coupling to them.
218: We provide criteria that allow one to identify the sum rules most
219: suitable for the calculation of $\kappa_4$ and obtain the
220: corresponding numerical results, including a careful
221: analysis of the theoretical uncertainty of $\kappa_4$ and the
222: corresponding values of $a_1$. One important finding of our paper is
223: that the results of these calculations agree, within errors, with
224: those from the quark current sum rules, which shows
225: that the application of the QCD sum rule method to the calcualation of
226: $a_1$ yields mutual consistent results. It is this consistency that
227: strengthens our confidence in the validity of the results for $a_1$.
228:
229: Our paper is organised as follows: in Sec.~\ref{sec:2} we derive
230: the operator relations for $a_1$, in Sec.~\ref{sec:3} we obtain numerical
231: results for the corresponding matrix elements and compare with the
232: results of Ref.~\cite{BZ}. In Sec.~\ref{sec:4}
233: we summarise and conclude. The paper also contains two appendices
234: giving explicit expressions
235: for all relevant correlation functions and Borel transforms.
236:
237: \section{\boldmath Exact Identities for
238: $a_1$}\label{sec:2}
239:
240: In Ref.~\cite{lenz}, the following relations were obtained for $a_1(K)$
241: and $a_1^\parallel(K^*)$:
242: \begin{eqnarray}
243: \frac{9}{5}\, a_1(K) & = & -\frac{m_s-m_q}{m_s+m_q} +
244: 4\,\frac{m_s^2-m_q^2}{m_{K}^2} - 8 \kappa_{4}(K)\,,\label{a1K}\\
245: \frac{3}{5}\,a_1^\parallel(K^*) &=&
246: -\frac{f_K^\perp}{f_K^\parallel}\,\frac{m_s-m_q}{m_{K^*}} + 2
247: \,\frac{m_s^2-m_q^2}{m_{K^*}^2} - 4 \kappa_{4}^\parallel(K^*),\label{a1Kpar}
248: \end{eqnarray}
249: where $\kappa_4(K)$ and $\kappa_4^\parallel(K^*)$ are twist-4
250: quark-quark-gluon matrix elements defined by
251: \begin{eqnarray}
252: \label{k4}
253: \langle 0 | \bar q (g G_{\alpha\mu})
254: i\gamma^\mu\gamma_5 s|K(q)\rangle &=& i q_\alpha f_{K} m_K^2 \kappa_{4}(K),\\
255: \label{k4L}
256: \langle 0 | \bar q (g G_{\alpha\mu}) i\gamma^\mu s | K^*(q,\lambda) \rangle
257: &=& e^{(\lambda)}_\alpha f_K^\parallel m_{K^*}^3 \kappa^\parallel_{4}(K^*).
258: \end{eqnarray}
259: {$\kappa_4(K)$ and $\kappa_4^\parallel(K^*)$
260: vanish for $m_s\to m_q$ due to G-parity.
261: The special structure of (\ref{a1K}) allows one to
262: determine the value of $\kappa_4(K)$ to leading order in $m_s$ for
263: $m_q\to 0$ \cite{lenz},
264: \begin{equation}\label{10}
265: \kappa_4(K) = -\frac{1}{8},
266: \end{equation}
267: which is a consequence of the conservation of the axial current in the
268: chiral limit.
269:
270: The above relations were derived from the analysis of matrix elements
271: of the local operators
272: ($\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{D} = \stackrel{\rightarrow}{D} -
273: \stackrel{\leftarrow}{D}$)
274: \begin{equation}
275: O_{\mu\nu}^{(5)} = \frac{1}{2}\,\bar q \gamma_\mu(\gamma_5) i
276: \stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{D}_\nu s + \frac{1}{2}\,\bar q
277: \gamma_\nu(\gamma_5) i
278: \stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{D}_\mu s -
279: \frac{1}{4}\,g_{\mu\nu} \bar q i(\gamma_5)
280: \stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\slash\!\!\!\! D} s,
281: \end{equation}
282: whose divergence can be expressed in terms of bilinear quark
283: operators. In this section, we rederive these relations in a different
284: way and obtain a new relation for $a_1^\perp(K^*)$.
285:
286: The starting point for our analysis are the exact nonlocal operator
287: relations \cite{BB98,PB98}
288: \begin{eqnarray}
289: \frac{\partial}{\partial x_\mu}\, \bar q(x)\gamma_\mu (\gamma_5) s(-x)
290: & = &{} - i \int_{-1}^1 dv\, v \bar q (x) x_\alpha
291: gG^{\alpha\mu}(vx) \gamma_\mu(\gamma_5) s(-x)\nonumber\\
292: &&{} - (m_s\pm m_q) \bar
293: q(x)i(\gamma_5) s(-x),\label{I}\\
294: \partial^\mu \{\bar q(x)\gamma_\mu(\gamma_5) s(-x)\}
295: & = & {}\! - i\!\int_{-1}^1 dv\, \bar q(x) x_\alpha
296: G^{\alpha\mu}(vx) \gamma_\mu(\gamma_5) s(-x)\nonumber\\
297: &&{}- (m_q\mp m_s) \bar
298: q(x)i(\gamma_5) s(-x),\label{II}
299: \end{eqnarray}
300: where the total translation $\partial_\mu$ is defined as
301: \begin{equation}
302: \partial_\mu \left\{ \bar q(x)\Gamma s(-x)\right\} \equiv
303: \left.\frac{\partial}{\partial y_\mu}\,\left\{ \bar q(x+y) [x+y,-x+y]
304: \Gamma s(-x+y)\right\}\right|_{y\to 0}.
305: \end{equation}
306: The corresponding nonlocal matrix elements are, for $K$ and
307: $K^*_\parallel$ ($x^2\neq 0$):
308: \begin{eqnarray}
309: \langle 0 | \bar q(x)\gamma_\mu\gamma_5 s(-x)|K(q)\rangle\
310: & = & i f_K q_\mu \int_0^1 du \, e^{i\xi qx} \left[ \phi_K(u) +
311: O(x^2)\right]\nonumber\\
312: &&{} + \frac{i}{2}\,f_K m_K^2\,
313: \frac{1}{qx}\, x_\mu \int_0^1 du \, e^{i\xi qx}\,
314: \left[g_K(u)-\phi_K(u) + O(x^2)\right]\!,\label{12}\\
315: \langle 0 | \bar q(x)i\gamma_5 s(-x)|K(q)\rangle\
316: & = & \frac{f_K m_K^2}{m_s+m_q}\,\int_0^1 du \, e^{i\xi
317: qx}\,\left(\phi_K^p(u)+O(x^2)\right),\label{13}\\
318: \langle 0|\bar q(x) \gamma_\mu s(-x)|K^*(q,\lambda)\rangle
319: &=& f_K^\parallel m_{K^*} \Bigg\{
320: \frac{e^{(\lambda)}x}{qx}\, q_\mu \int_0^1 du \,e^{i\xi qx}
321: \Big[\phi_K^\parallel(u)+O(x^2)\Big]\nonumber\\
322: &&{}+\left(e^{(\lambda)}_\mu-q_\mu\frac{e^{(\lambda)}x}{qx}\right)
323: \int_0^1 du\, e^{i\xi qx} \left(g_K^v(u)+O(x^2)\right)
324: \nonumber\\&&{}\hspace*{-2cm}
325: -\frac{1}{2}x_\mu \frac{e^{(\lambda)}x}{(qx)^2} m^2_{K^*}\!\! \int_0^1
326: \! du
327: \, e^{i\xi qx} \left[g_{K}^{(3)}(u)+\phi_K^\parallel(u)-2 g_K^v(u)+
328: O(x^2)\right]\!
329: \!\Bigg\}.\hspace*{15pt}\label{14}
330: \end{eqnarray}
331: In the above definitions, $\phi_K$ and
332: $\phi_K^\parallel$ are the leading-twist DAs of $K$ and
333: $K_\parallel^*$, respectively; all other functions are
334: higher-twist DAs and have been extensively discussed in
335: Refs.~\cite{BB98,PB98,BBKT,prep}.
336:
337: $a_1(K)$, the quantity we are interested in, is related to the first
338: moment of $\phi_K$:
339: $$a_1(K)=\frac{5}{3}M_1^{\phi_K}$$
340: with $M_1^f \equiv \int_0^1 du\, (u-\bar u) f(u)$
341: being the first moment of the DA $f(u)$.
342: Taking the matrix elements of (\ref{I}) and (\ref{II}) for $K$ and
343: expanding to leading order in $x^2$ and next-to-leading order in $qx$,
344: one obtains the exact relations
345: \begin{eqnarray}
346: M_1^{\phi_K} - 2 M_1^{g_K} & = &
347: -\frac{m_s-m_q}{m_s+m_q},\nonumber\\
348: \frac{1}{2}\,\left( M_1^{\phi_K} + M_1^{g_K}\right)& = &
349: -2 \kappa_4(K) + M_1^{\phi_K^p},\label{sysK}
350: \end{eqnarray}
351: from which one can determine $M_1^{\phi_K}$ once either
352: $M_1^{\phi_K^p}$ or $M_1^{g_K}$ are known. $g_K$ is a twist-4 DA and
353: $ M_1^{g_K}$ contains quark-quark-gluon matrix elements itself, cf.\
354: Refs.~\cite{PB98,prep}, whereas $\phi_K^p$ is twist-3 and
355: $M_1^{\phi_K^p}$ is
356: completely determined in terms of the twist-2 DA $\phi_K$ and mass
357: corrections. $M_1^{\phi_K^p}$ can be obtained from a second set of
358: nonlocal operator relations involving tensor currents $\bar q(x)\sigma_{\mu\nu}
359: \gamma_5s(-x)$ or, equivalently,
360: from the recursion relations for the moments of $\phi_K^p$
361: given in Ref.~\cite{prep}:
362: $$M_1^{\phi_K^p} = \frac{m_s^2-m_q^2}{m_K^2}.$$
363: Solving (\ref{sysK}) for $a_1(K)$, we then rederive
364: \begin{equation}
365: \frac{9}{5}\, a_1(K) = -\frac{m_s-m_q}{m_s+m_q} +
366: 4\,\frac{m_s^2-m_q^2}{m_{K}^2} - 8 \kappa_{4}(K)\,,
367: \end{equation}
368: which confirms the result obtained in Ref.~\cite{lenz}. Note that the
369: first term on the right-hand side is rather sensitive to the value
370: of $m_q$ and the second one to that of $m_s$.
371:
372: For $K^*_\parallel$, the same method yields the equations
373: \begin{eqnarray}
374: M_1^{\phi_K^\parallel} + M_1^{g_K^{(3)}} & = &2 M_1^{g_K^v},\nonumber\\
375: M_1^{\phi_K^\parallel} - M_1^{g_K^{(3)}} & = & -2\,
376: \frac{f_K^\perp}{f_K^\parallel}\,\frac{m_s-m_q}{m_{K^*}} + 2\,
377: \frac{m_s^2-m_q^2}{m_{K^*}^2} - 4 \kappa_4^\parallel(K^*).\label{syspar}
378: \end{eqnarray}
379: Again, $g_K^{(3)}$ is a twist-4 DA whose first moment is not known from
380: any independent analysis, whereas
381: $M_1^{g_K^v}$, the first moment of the twist-3 DA $g_K^v$,
382: can be read off Eq.~(4.6) in Ref.~\cite{BBKT}:
383: \begin{equation}\label{gv}
384: 2 M_1^{g_K^v} = M_1^{\phi_K^\parallel} +
385: \frac{f_K^\perp}{f_K^\parallel}\, \frac{m_s-m_q}{m_{K^*}}.
386: \end{equation}
387: We can then solve (\ref{syspar}) for
388: $a_1^\parallel(K^*)$ and obtain
389: \begin{equation}\label{rela1par}
390: \frac{3}{5}\,a_1^\parallel(K^*) =
391: -\frac{f_K^\perp}{f_K^\parallel}\,\frac{m_s-m_q}{m_{K^*}} + 2
392: \,\frac{m_s^2-m_q^2}{m_{K^*}^2} - 4 \kappa_4^\parallel(K^*),
393: \end{equation}
394: which agrees with Eq.~(\ref{a1Kpar}), the result obtained in Ref.~\cite{lenz}.
395:
396: Let us now apply the same method to chiral-odd operators, with the aim
397: of obtaining an analogous new expression for $a_1^\perp(K^*)$. The
398: relevant nonlocal operator relations are
399: \begin{eqnarray}
400: \lefteqn{\frac{\partial}{\partial x_\mu} \bar q(x) \sigma_{\mu\nu} s(-x)
401: = -i \partial_\nu \bar q(x) s(-x)
402: + (m_s-m_q) \bar q(x) \gamma_\nu s(-x)}\hspace*{2cm}\nonumber\\
403: &&{}+\int_{-1}^1 dv \bar q(x) g x_\alpha
404: G^{\alpha}_{\phantom{\alpha}\nu}(vx) s(-x) - i
405: \int_{-1}^1 dv v \bar q(x) g x_\alpha G^{\alpha\mu}(vx)\sigma_{\mu\nu}
406: s(-x),\nonumber
407: \end{eqnarray}
408: \begin{eqnarray}
409: \partial^\mu \{ \bar q(x) \sigma_{\mu\nu} s(-x) \} & = &
410: -i\frac{\partial}{\partial x_\nu}\, \bar q(x) s(-x) -
411: (m_s+m_q) \bar q(x) \gamma_\nu s(-x)\nonumber\\
412: &&\hspace*{-10pt}{}+\int_{-1}^1 dv v \bar q(x) g x_\alpha
413: G^{\alpha}_{\phantom{\alpha}\nu}(vx) s(-x) - i
414: \int_{-1}^1 dv \bar q(x) g x_\alpha G^{\alpha\mu}(vx)\sigma_{\mu\nu}
415: s(-x).\nonumber\\[-20pt]\label{eq:OPrel}
416: \end{eqnarray}
417: These relations were first derived, without the terms in $m_s\pm
418: m_q$, in Ref.~\cite{BB98}; the terms in the quark masses are new.
419:
420: The relevant $K^*$ matrix elements are given by \cite{BB98}:
421: $$
422: \langle 0|\bar q(x) \sigma_{\mu \nu}
423: s(-x)|K^*(q,\lambda)\rangle =
424: i f_K^\perp \left[ (e^{(\lambda)}_{\mu}q_\nu -
425: e^{(\lambda)}_{\nu}q_\mu )
426: \int_{0}^{1} \!du\, e^{i \xi q x}
427: \Bigg[\phi_K^{\perp}(u) + O(x^2)\Bigg] \right.
428: $$
429: \begin{eqnarray}
430: & &{}+ (q_\mu x_\nu - q_\nu x_\mu )
431: \frac{e^{(\lambda)} x}{(q x)^{2}}m_{K^*}^{2}
432: \int_{0}^{1} \!du\, e^{i \xi q x} \left[ h_K^t(u) -
433: \frac{1}{2}\,\phi_K^\perp(u) - \frac{1}{2}\,h_K^{(3)}(u) + O(x^2)\right]
434: \nonumber \\
435: & & \left.{}+ \frac{1}{2}
436: (e^{(\lambda)}_{ \mu} x_\nu -e^{(\lambda)}_{ \nu} x_\mu)
437: \frac{m_{K^*}^{2}}{q x}
438: \int_{0}^{1} \!du\, e^{i \xi q x} \left( h_K^{(3)}(u)-
439: \phi_K^\perp(u) + O(x^2)\right) \right],
440: \label{eq:OPE2}
441: \end{eqnarray}
442: \begin{eqnarray}
443: \lefteqn{\langle 0 | \bar q(x) s(-x) | K^*(q,\lambda)\rangle
444: =}\hspace*{2cm}\nonumber\\&&{}= -i
445: \left(f_K^\perp - f_K^\parallel\,\frac{m_s+m_q}{m_{K^*}}\right)
446: \left(e^{(\lambda)} x\right) m_{K^*}^2 \int_0^1 du\, e^{i\xi qx}
447: \left(h_K^s(u) + O(x^2)\right),
448: \end{eqnarray}
449: where, again, $\phi_K^\perp$ is the leading-twist DA of the
450: transversely polarised $K^*$ and $h_K^{s,t}$
451: and $h_K^{(3)}$ are higher-twist DAs.
452: In addition, we also need the following quark-quark-gluon matrix element:
453: \begin{eqnarray}
454: \langle 0 | \bar q (g G_{\alpha}^{\phantom{\alpha}\mu})
455: \lefteqn{\sigma_{\beta\mu}s|K^*(q,\lambda)\rangle =}\nonumber\\
456: & = & f_K^\perp m_{K^*}^2 \!\left\{\frac{1}{2}\,\kappa_3^\perp(K^*)
457: (e^{(\lambda)}_\alpha q_\beta + e^{(\lambda)}_\beta q_\alpha) +
458: \kappa_4^\perp(K^*)
459: (e^{(\lambda)}_\alpha q_\beta - e^{(\lambda)}_\beta q_\alpha)\right\}.
460: \label{def:T1T2}
461: \end{eqnarray}
462: Here $\kappa_3^\perp(K^*)$ is a twist-3 matrix element,
463: $\kappa_4^\perp(K^*)$ is twist-4; both are $O(m_s-m_q)$ due to
464: G-parity.\footnote{The normalisation of $\kappa_3^\perp(K^*)$ is chosen
465: in such a way that
466: $\int{\cal D}\underline{\alpha} {\cal T}(\underline{\alpha})=
467: \kappa_3^\perp(K^*)$ for the twist-3 DA ${\cal
468: T}(\underline{\alpha})$ defined in Ref.~\cite{BBKT}.}
469: Taking matrix elements of (\ref{eq:OPrel}), one obtains expressions in
470: $q_\nu$, $e^{(\lambda)}_\nu$ and $x_\nu$. To twist-4 accuracy only the
471: former two are relevant and yield a set of four linear
472: equations for the four first moments of $g_K^v$,
473: $h_K^s$, $h_K^t$ and $h_K^{(3)}$:
474: \begin{eqnarray}
475: -(\kappa_3^\perp(K^*)-2\kappa_4^\perp(K^*))
476: + \delta_+ M_1^{g_K^v} + M_1^{h_K^s} & = & \frac{1}{2}\,M_1^{h_K^{(3)}} +
477: \frac{1}{2} \, M_1^{\phi_K^\perp}\,,\nonumber\\
478: \kappa_3^\perp(K^*)+ 2\kappa_4^\perp(K^*) +
479: \delta_+ M_1^{g_K^v} - M_1^{h_K^s} - \delta_+
480: M_1^{\phi_K^\parallel} & = &
481: \frac{1}{2}\, M_1^{h_K^{(3)}} - M_1^{h_K^t} + \frac{1}{2}\,
482: M_1^{\phi_K^\perp}\,,\nonumber\\
483: 3\, M_1^{h_K^{(3)}} - \,M_1^{\phi_K^\perp} & = &
484: 2 \delta_-\,,\nonumber\\
485: M_1^{h_K^3} - 2 M_1^{h_K^t} + M_1^{\phi_K^\perp} & = & 0
486: \end{eqnarray}
487: with $\delta_\pm = \frac{f_K^\parallel}{f_K^\perp}\,\frac{m_s\pm m_q}{m_K^*}$.
488: The solution of that system implies
489: $$
490: \delta_+ M_1^{g_K^v} = \frac{1}{6}\,\delta_- + \frac{1}{2}\,
491: \delta_+ M_1^{\phi_K^\parallel}
492: + \frac{1}{3}\, M_1^{\phi_K^\perp} - 2\kappa_4^\perp(K^*),
493: $$
494: which must agree with $M_1^{g_K^v}$ as given in Eq.~(\ref{gv}).
495: Solving for $a_1^{\perp}(K^*)$, one finds
496: \begin{equation}\label{eq:perp}
497: \frac{3}{5}\, a_1^\perp(K^*) =
498: -\frac{f_K^\parallel}{f_K^\perp}\,\frac{m_s-m_q}{2m_{K^*}} +
499: \frac{3}{2}\,\frac{m_s^2-m_q^2}{m_{K^*}^2} + 6 \kappa_4^\perp(K^*),
500: \end{equation}
501: which is the wanted new relation for $a_1^\perp(K^*)$. Note that in all
502: three relations (\ref{a1K}), (\ref{a1Kpar}) and (\ref{eq:perp})
503: $\kappa_4$ enters multiplied with a large numerical factor which
504: implies that the theoretical uncertainty of the resulting values of
505: $a_1$ will be much larger than that of $\kappa_4$ itself.
506:
507: \section{\boldmath QCD Sum Rules for $\kappa_4$, $\kappa_4^\parallel$
508: and $\kappa_4^\perp$}\label{sec:3}
509:
510: In order to obtain numerical predictions for $a_1$ from the
511: relations derived in the last section, one needs to know the values of
512: the $\kappa_4$ matrix elements.
513: $\kappa_4(K)$ and $\kappa_4^\parallel(K^*)$ have been calculated in
514: Ref.~\cite{lenz} from QCD sum rules to leading order in SU(3)
515: breaking parameters with the following results:
516: \begin{equation}\label{28}
517: \kappa_4(K)^{\rm BL}= -0.11\pm 0.03,\qquad \kappa_4^\parallel(K^*)^{\rm BL} =
518: -0.050\pm 0.010,
519: \end{equation}
520: which, using the relations (\ref{a1K}) and (\ref{a1Kpar}), letting
521: $m_q=0$ and neglecting the terms in $m_s^2$
522: translates into \cite{lenz}
523: \begin{equation}\label{29}
524: a_1(K)^{\rm BL} = 0.10 \pm 0.12, \qquad a_1^\parallel(K^*)^{\rm BL} =
525: 0.10\pm 0.07.
526: \end{equation}
527: All these results refer to a renormalisation scale of 1~GeV.
528:
529: \begin{table}[bt]
530: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.3}
531: \addtolength{\arraycolsep}{3pt}
532: $$
533: \begin{array}{|r@{\:=\:}l||r@{\:=\:}l|}
534: \hline
535: \quark & (-0.24\pm0.01)^3\,\mbox{GeV}^3 & \squark & (1-\delta_3)\,\quark\\
536: \mixed & m_0^2\,\quark & \smixed & (1-\delta_5)\mixed\\[6pt]
537: \displaystyle \gluon & (0.012\pm 0.003)\,
538: {\rm GeV}^4 & \multicolumn{2}{l|}{}\\[6pt]\hline
539: \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{m_0^2 = (0.8\pm 0.1)\,{\rm GeV}^2,\quad \delta_3
540: = 0.2\pm 0.2, \quad \delta_5 = 0.2\pm 0.2}\\\hline
541: \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{\overline{m}_s(2\,\mbox{GeV}) = (100\pm
542: 20)\,\mbox{MeV}~~~\longleftrightarrow~~~ \overline{m}_s(1\,\mbox{GeV})
543: = (137\pm 27)\,\mbox{MeV}}\\
544: \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{\overline{m}_q(\mu) = \overline{m}_s(\mu)/R,
545: \quad R = 24.4\pm 1.5}\\\hline
546: \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{\alpha_s(m_Z) = 0.1187\pm 0.002 ~\longleftrightarrow~
547: \alpha_s(1\,\mbox{GeV}) = 0.534^{+0.064}_{-0.052}}\\\hline
548: \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{f_K = (0.160\pm 0.002)\,{\rm GeV},\qquad f_K^\parallel =
549: (0.217\pm 0.005)\,{\rm GeV}}\\
550: \multicolumn{4}{|c|}{ f_K^\perp = (0.185\pm0.010)\,{\rm
551: GeV}}\\\hline
552: \end{array}
553: $$
554: \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1}
555: \addtolength{\arraycolsep}{-3pt}
556: \vskip-10pt
557: \caption[]{Input parameters for sum rules at the
558: renormalisation scale $\mu=1\,$GeV. The value of $m_s$ is obtained
559: from
560: unquenched lattice calculations with $n_f=2$ flavours
561: as summarised in \cite{mslatt}, which agrees with the results from QCD
562: sum rule calculations \cite{jamin}. $\overline{m}_q$ is taken from
563: chiral perturbation theory \cite{chPT}.\footnotemark[2]
564: $\alpha_s(m_Z)$ is the PDG
565: average \cite{PDG}, $f_K$ and $f_K^\parallel$ are
566: known from experiment and $f_K^\perp$ has been determined in
567: Refs.~\cite{BZ,lattbec}. The errors of quark masses and condensates
568: are treated as correlated, see text.}\label{tab:1}
569: \end{table}
570:
571: \footnotetext[2]{ $m_q$ has also been
572: determined from lattice calculations. The most recent papers on this
573: topic are Refs.~\cite{mqlatt}. The central value of $m_s/m_q$
574: determined in the first of these papers with $n_f=2$ running
575: flavours and nonperturbative renormalisation agrees with the result
576: from chiral perturbation theory, whereas the result of the second,
577: obtained with $n_f=3$ and perturbative (two-loop) renormalisation,
578: is a bit lower. As the field appears to develop rapidly, we
579: refrain from taking either side and stay with the
580: result from chiral perturbation theory.}\addtocounter{footnote}{1}
581:
582: In this section we present QCD sum rules for $\kappa_4(K)$ and
583: $\kappa_4^\parallel(K^*)$ which
584: are accurate to NLO in SU(3) breaking and also a new sum rule for
585: $\kappa_4^\perp(K^*)$ to the same accuracy. For all sum rules we
586: include $O(m_q)$ effects.
587: The sum rules are of the generic form
588: \begin{equation}\label{generic}
589: \kappa_4(K) f_K^2 m_K^n e^{-m_K^2/M^2} + \mbox{contribution from
590: higher mass states} = {\cal B}_{M^2}\Pi_G,
591: \end{equation}
592: and correspondingly for $K^*$. $\Pi_G$ are correlation functions of type
593: $$
594: \Pi_G(q) = i\int d^4y e^{iqy} \langle 0 | T [\bar q (g
595: G_{\alpha\mu})\Gamma_1^\mu s](y)
596: [\bar s \Gamma_2 q](0)|0\rangle
597: $$
598: with suitably chosen Dirac structures $\Gamma_1^\mu$ and $\Gamma_2$;
599: explicit expressions for all relevant $\Pi_G$ are given in App.~\ref{appA}.
600: ${\cal B}_{M^2}\Pi_G$ is the Borel transform of $\Pi_G$, $M^2$ the Borel
601: parameter and $n$ is either 2 or 4. In order to separate the ground
602: state from higher mass contributions, one usually models the latter,
603: using global quark hadron duality,
604: by an integral over the perturbative spectral density:
605: \begin{equation}\label{contmodel}
606: \mbox{contribution from
607: higher mass states} \approx \int_{s_0}^\infty e^{-s/M^2}
608: \,\frac{1}{\pi} \,{\rm Im}\,\Pi_G(s);
609: \end{equation}
610: the parameter $s_0$ is called continuum threshold. The input
611: parameters for the QCD sum rules are collected in Tab.~\ref{tab:1}.
612: %As $\kappa_4$ are SU(3) breaking parameters, we expect them to be
613: %sensitive to SU(3) breaking in QCD sum rules, in particular the
614: %parameters $\delta_3$ and $\delta_5$,
615: %which come with a rather large uncertainty. In addition, as
616: %$\kappa_4$ are quark-quark-gluon matrix elements, we also expect them
617: %to be sensitive to $\alpha_s$ at the hadronic scale $\sim\,$1~GeV. This
618: %implies that our final results for $\kappa_4$ will come with
619: %nonnegligible uncertainty and induce even larger uncertainties for
620: %$a_1$.
621:
622: All $\kappa_4$ parameters can actually be determined from more than one sum
623: rule derived from various $\Pi_G$ which
624: can be characterised by the following features:
625: \begin{itemize}
626: \item the currents can have the same or different chirality, which
627: results in chiral-even and chiral-odd sum rules, respectively;
628: \item the hadronic states saturating $\Pi_G$ can have unique spin-parity
629: or come with different parity (e.g.\ $0^-$ and $1^+$),
630: which results in pure-parity and mixed-parity sum rules, respectively.
631: \end{itemize}
632: Note that all chiral-odd sum rules are also pure-parity.
633:
634: In chiral-odd sum rules the quark condensates always appear in the
635: combination $\quark-\squark = \delta_3\quark$ and $\mixed-\smixed =
636: \delta_5 \mixed$, which induces a large dependence on the only
637: poorly constrained parameters $\delta_{3,5}$
638: and also increases the impact of the
639: gluon condensate contribution which is equally poorly known. We
640: therefore decide to drop all chiral-odd sum rules and only use
641: chiral-even ones.
642:
643: As for mixed and pure-parity sum rules, they come with different mass
644: dimensions: $n=2$ in (\ref{generic}) for mixed-parity
645: vs.\ $n=4$ for pure-parity sum rules.
646: It is an important result of this paper that the continuum
647: contributions to the mixed-parity sum rules,
648: for typical Borel parameters $M^2$ around $1.7\, {\rm GeV^2}$, are
649: small and below 10\% for all three $\kappa_4$. Pure-parity sum
650: rules, on the other hand, have a large continuum contribution around
651: 30\%. There are two reasons for this result: first, the additional power
652: of $m_K^2$ in pure-parity sum rules counteracts the exponential suppression
653: of the continuum contribution. Second, the contributions of particles
654: with different parity have different sign: it was already found in
655: Ref.~\cite{lenz}
656: that $\kappa_4(K)$ and $\kappa_4^\parallel(K_1)$ have
657: opposite sign; we find that the same applies to
658: $\kappa_4^\parallel(K^*)$ and the
659: corresponding $\kappa_4(K^*_0)$ of the lowest scalar resonance, and
660: ditto to $\kappa_4^\perp(K^*)$ and the coupling
661: $\kappa_4^\perp(K_1)$ of the axial vector $K_1$ meson.
662: These results suggest that the $\kappa_4$
663: matrix elements of opposite-parity mesons have
664: generically different signs and tend to cancel each other in mixed-parity sum
665: rules, which results in a small continuum contribution. From a more
666: formal point of view it is rather obvious from the definitions
667: Eqs.~(\ref{k4}), (\ref{k4L}) and (\ref{def:T1T2}) that the sign of
668: $\kappa_4$ changes under a parity transformation,\footnote{In QCD parity
669: is not a symmetry of the hadronic spectrum because the
670: $U(1)_{\rm A}$-symmetry is broken.}
671: which is in line with our findings.
672:
673: The mixed-parity sum rules for $K$ and $K^*$ do involve the three
674: spin-parity systems $(0^-,1^+)$, $(1^-,0^+)$ and $(1^-,1^+)$. Note
675: that for all of them the ``wrong''-parity ground state (e.g.\ the scalar
676: $K^*_0(1430)$) and the first
677: orbital excitation of the ``right''-parity state (e.g.\ the vector
678: $K^*(1410)$) have nearly equal mass, which makes the cancellation very
679: effective.
680: We conclude that mixed-parity sum rules are more
681: reliable than pure-parity ones and, as a consequence,
682: will not consider the latter in this
683: paper. In view of the cancellation of contributions of different sign
684: we also decide to include explicitly only the lowest-mass
685: ground state in the mixed-parity sum rules, which differs from the
686: procedure adopted by the authors of Ref.~\cite{lenz}.
687:
688: Let us now turn to the question how to choose the
689: Borel parameter $M^2$ and the
690: continuum threshold $s_0$, the internal sum rule parameters.
691: As mentioned before, the dependence of the sum rules on $s_0$ is weak
692: and so we simply use the same values of $s_0$ as for the quark
693: current sum rules, i.e.\
694: $s_0(K) = (1.1\pm 0.3)\,{\rm GeV}^2$, $s_0^\parallel(K^*) =
695: (1.7\pm 0.3)\,{\rm GeV}^2$ and $s_0^\perp(K^*) = (1.3\pm 0.3)\,
696: {\rm GeV}^2$ \cite{BZ}. The small dependence on $s_0$ also allows one to
697: use slightly higher values of $M^2$ than the usual 1 to $2\,{\rm GeV}^2$,
698: which improves the convergence of the operator product expansion of
699: the correlation functions and reduces the variation of the sum rule
700: with $M^2$. We choose $M^2 = (1.6 \pm 0.4)\, {\rm
701: GeV^2}$ for $K$ and $M^2 = (1.8
702: \pm 0.4)\, {\rm GeV^2}$ for $K^*$.
703:
704: After this general discussion of the choice of sum rules and
705: parameters let us now turn to the three $\kappa_4$ parameters in turn.
706:
707: \subsection{\boldmath $\kappa_4(K)$}
708:
709: The mixed-parity sum rule for $\kappa_4(K)$ is obtained from the
710: correlation function $\Pi^{(a)}_{G,2}$ in App.~\ref{appA},
711: Eq.~(\ref{piga}), and given by
712: \begin{eqnarray}
713: \lefteqn{f_K^2 m_K^2 \kappa_4(K)\, e^{-m^2_K/M^2}
714: %+ (f_{K_1}^\parallel)^2 m_{K_1}^2 \kappa_4^\parallel(K_1) e^{-m^2_{K_1}/M^2}
715: = \frac{\alpha_s}{72 \pi^3}\,(m_s^2-m_q^2)\int_0^{s_0}ds\, e^{-s/M^2}\left(10
716: \ln\frac{s}{\mu^2} -25 \right)}\hspace*{2cm}\nonumber\\
717: &&{}+\frac{2}{9}\,\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}
718: \left(m_s\quark-m_q\squark\right) \left\{ -\frac{1}{3} + \gamma_E
719: -\ln\frac{M^2}{\mu^2}+ \int_{s_0}^\infty
720: \frac{ds}{s}\,e^{-s/M^2}\right\} \nonumber\\
721: &&{} + \frac{10}{9}\,\frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\left(m_s\squark -m_q\quark\right)
722: +\frac{1}{6M^2}\left(m_s \smixed -m_q\mixed\right)\nonumber\\
723: &&{}+
724: \frac{m_s^2-m_q^2}{6M^2}\gluon\left\{1-
725: \frac{1}{2}\left(\ln\frac{M^2}{\mu^2}-\gamma_E+1\right)
726: -M^2\int_{s_0}^\infty \frac{ds}{2 s^2}\,e^{-s/M^2}\right\}\nonumber\\
727: &&{} +\frac{8\pi\alpha_s}{27 M^2}\,[\quark^2-\squark^2]\,.\label{SRk4K}
728: \end{eqnarray}
729: This sum rule includes all relevant contributions up to dimension six.
730: Numerically, all dominant contributions have the same sign, with the
731: largest one from $\squark$, followed by the ones from $\smixed$ and
732: perturbation theory which are roughly of the same size.
733:
734: In Fig.~\ref{fig:1} we plot the resulting values for $\kappa_4(K)$
735: and, via (\ref{a1K}), $a_1(K)$, displaying, for illustration,
736: explicitly the dependence on
737: $\alpha_s$ and $\delta_{3,5}$. It is evident that the dependence of both
738: quantities on $\delta_3$ and $\delta_5$ is nonnegligible; at the same
739: time, the comparison with $a_1(K)$ obtained in Ref.~\cite{BZ}
740: from a QCD sum rule for quark currents shows that both
741: sum rules agree within errors.\footnote{The results from the quark
742: current sum rules quoted in this paper are slightly larger than
743: the ones given in Ref.~\cite{BZ}. This is due to the fact that
744: we have included infrared sensitive terms of type
745: $m_s^2\ln(M^2/m_s^2)$ in the
746: contribution of the gluon condensate in the
747: mixed quark-quark-gluon condensate rather than in the
748: Wilson-coefficient of the gluon condensate, cf.\ the discussion in
749: App.~\ref{appA} and Ref.~\cite{logms}.} Note that the inclusion of the
750: perturbative contribution is crucial: without it, we would have
751: obtained a {\em negative} result for $a_1(K)$. The impact of nonzero
752: $m_q$ is also relevant and shifts the central value of $a_1(K)$ by
753: $+0.025$.
754:
755: \begin{figure}[tb]
756: $$\epsfxsize=0.47\textwidth\epsffile{fig1a.eps}\quad
757: \epsfxsize=0.47\textwidth\epsffile{fig1b.eps}$$
758: \vspace*{-30pt}
759: \caption[]{(Colour online)
760: Left panel: $\kappa_4(K)$ from (\ref{SRk4K}) as function
761: of the Borel parameter $M^2$. Parameters: renormalisation scale
762: $\mu=1\,$GeV, $s_0 = 1.1\,{\rm GeV}^2$.
763: Solid line: central value of input parameters; dashed lines: red:
764: $\delta_3=0,0.4$, green: $\delta_5=0,0.4$, blue:
765: $\alpha_s(m_Z) = 0.1167,0.1207$. Right panel: $a_1(K)$ as function of $M^2$
766: from the operator relation
767: (\ref{a1K}) (colour-coded as in the left panel) and the value of $a_1(K)$
768: determined in Ref.~\cite{BZ} (purple lines).}\label{fig:1}
769: $$\epsfxsize=0.47\textwidth\epsffile{fig2.eps}$$
770: \vspace*{-30pt}
771: \caption[]{Dependence of the central value of $a_1(K)$ from
772: (\ref{a1K}) on $\overline{m}_s(2\,{\rm GeV})$. Solid line:
773: $\overline{m}_q(2\,{\rm GeV}) = 4\,$MeV, dashed line:
774: $\overline{m}_q(2\,{\rm GeV}) = 0\,$MeV.}\label{fig:2}
775: \end{figure}
776:
777: As for the theoretical uncertainties of $\kappa_4(K)$ and $a_1(K)$ we
778: note that they arise first from the QCD sum rule parameters and second
779: from the uncertainties of the hadronic parameters given in
780: Tab.~\ref{tab:1}. As for the former, as already stated above, we
781: choose $M^2 = (1.6\pm 0.4)\,{\rm GeV}^2$ and $s_0 = (1.1\pm 0.3)\,{\rm
782: GeV}^2$ and add the corresponding uncertainties in quadrature.
783: As for the latter, we treat $m_q$, $m_s$, $\quark$, $\mixed$,
784: $\delta_3$ and $\delta_5$ as
785: parameters with correlated errors. Chiral
786: perturbation theory helps to unravel some of these correlations:
787: for instance, one has $(m_s+m_q)/(2m_q) = m_K^2/m_\pi^2$ and
788: $m_K^2 = -2(m_s+m_q)\quark/f_\pi^2$
789: in LO chiral perturbation theory \cite{chPT}.
790: The dependence of $\delta_{3,5}$ on
791: $m_s$ is unfortunately unknown (and indeed would deserve further
792: study). In order to estimate the uncertainty
793: of $\kappa_4(K)$ and $a_1(K)$, we hence eliminate, using the above
794: relations, $m_q$ and $\quark$ as independent parameters in favour of $m_s$,
795: but keep $m_0^2=\mixed/\quark$ and $\delta_{3,5}$. This procedure is likely to
796: overestimate the uncertainties induced by $\squark$ and $\smixed$,
797: but it is difficult to do better at present.
798: Varying all remaining independent input parameters within their respective
799: ranges given in Tab.~\ref{tab:1}, we obtain the
800: following results:
801: \begin{eqnarray}
802: \kappa_4(K) & = & -0.09\pm 0.01 \pm 0.01\pm 0.01\pm 0.02\pm 0.01\pm
803: 0.00 = -0.09\pm 0.01\pm 0.02,\nonumber\\
804: a_1(K) & = & \phantom{-}0.07 \pm 0.04 \pm 0.03 \pm 0.11 \pm 0.07 \pm 0.03 \pm
805: 0.01 =\phantom{-} 0.07 \pm 0.04\pm0.14,\label{36a}
806: \end{eqnarray}
807: where the first uncertainty comes from the variation of the sum rule
808: specific parameters $M^2$ and $s_0$, the second one from $\alpha_s$,
809: the 3rd from $m_s$,
810: the 4th from $\delta_3$, the 5th from $\delta_5$
811: and the 6th from $m_0^2 = \mixed/\quark$. For the total
812: uncertainty we give two terms: the first comes from the sum rule
813: parameters and the second is obtained by adding all hadronic
814: uncertainties in quadrature. As mentioned before, any
815: uncertainty of $\kappa_4(K)$ induces a corresponding uncertainty in
816: $a_1(K)$ that is about four times larger, except for the strange quark
817: masses whose uncertainty also plays in the second term on the
818: right-hand side of (\ref{a1K}). The dependence of $a_1(K)$ on $m_s$ is
819: shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:2}. The effect of nonzero $m_q$ in the first term
820: on the right-hand side of (\ref{a1K}) is a shift by $+0.04$, which is
821: partially, but not completely, compensated by the
822: $m_q$-dependent contributions to $\kappa_4(K)$.
823: Comparing with the value of $a_1(K)$
824: quoted in Ref.~\cite{lenz}, Eq.~(\ref{reslenz}), we see that the
825: central value in (\ref{36a})
826: is smaller and also the total uncertainty is larger.
827: The larger error is due
828: to the fact that we have chosen slightly larger errors for $m_s$ and
829: also have included the uncertainty induced by $\alpha_s$.
830:
831: Let us now
832: compare the result (\ref{36a}) with the one obtained from quark
833: current sum rules \cite{BZ}, with the same sequence of errors as in
834: (\ref{36a}):
835: \begin{equation}
836: a_1(K)^{\rm BZ} = 0.06\pm 0.01\pm0.00\pm0.01\pm0.01\pm0.01\pm0.00 =
837: 0.06\pm 0.01\pm 0.02\,.
838: \end{equation}
839: This number is slightly larger than the one quoted in Ref.~\cite{BZ},
840: cf.\ footnote~2. Although the central values of $a_1(K)$ agree very
841: well and hence confirm the consistency of the sum rule results,
842: it is obvious that the operator relation (\ref{a1K}) cannot
843: match the accuracy of the quark current sum rule and is hence not very
844: useful for constraining $a_1(K)$.
845:
846: \subsection{\boldmath $\kappa_4^\parallel(K^*)$}
847:
848: Let us now turn to $\kappa_4^\parallel(K^*)$. The mixed-parity sum
849: rule is derived from the correlation function $\Pi_{G,2}^{(v)}$ in
850: App.~\ref{appA}, Eq.~(\ref{pigv}), and reads
851: $$
852: \kappa_4^\parallel(K^*) (f^\parallel_K)^2 m_{K^*}^2
853: e^{-m^2_{K^*}/M^2} =
854: (m_s^2-m_q^2)\,\frac{\alpha_s}{72 \pi^3}\,\int_0^{s_0}ds\, e^{-s/M^2}\left(10
855: \ln\frac{s}{\mu^2} -25 \right)
856: $$
857: \begin{eqnarray}
858: &&{}-\frac{2\alpha_s}{9 \pi}\,(m_s\quark-m_q\squark)
859: \left\{ -\frac{1}{3} + \gamma_E
860: -\ln\frac{M^2}{\mu^2}+ \int_{s_0}^\infty
861: \frac{ds}{s}\,e^{-s/M^2}\right\}\nonumber\\
862: &&{} +
863: \frac{10\alpha_s}{9 \pi}\,(m_s\squark-m_q\quark)
864: +\frac{1}{6M^2}\,(m_s \smixed -m_q\mixed)\nonumber\\
865: &&{}+\frac{m_s^2-m_q^2}{6M^2}\gluon\left\{1-
866: \frac{1}{2}\left(\ln\frac{M^2}{\mu^2}-\gamma_E+1\right)
867: -M^2\int_{s_0}^\infty \frac{ds}{2 s^2}\,e^{-s/M^2}\right\}\nonumber\\
868: &&{} +\frac{8\pi\alpha_s}{27 M^2}[\quark^2-\squark^2]\,.\label{36}
869: \end{eqnarray}
870: The resulting values of $\kappa_4^\parallel(K^*)$ and
871: $a_1^\parallel(K^*)$ are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:3}.
872: \begin{figure}
873: $$\epsfxsize=0.47\textwidth\epsffile{fig3a.eps}\quad
874: \epsfxsize=0.47\textwidth\epsffile{fig3b.eps}$$
875: \vspace*{-30pt}
876: \caption[]{Left panel: $\kappa_4^\parallel(K^*)$ from (\ref{36}) as function
877: of the Borel parameter $M^2$. Parameters: renormalisation scale
878: $\mu=1\,$GeV, $s_0 = 1.7\,{\rm GeV}^2$. Solid black line: central
879: values of parameters; the coloured lines have the same meaning as in
880: Fig.~\ref{fig:1}. Right panel:
881: $a_1^\parallel(K^*)$ as function of $M^2$ from the operator relation
882: (\ref{a1Kpar}) and the sum rule for $a_1^\parallel(K^*)$
883: calculated in Ref.~\cite{BZ} (purple lines). }\label{fig:3}
884: \end{figure}
885: Again,
886: the contribution from perturbation theory is crucial numerically:
887: without it, the resulting values of $a_1^\parallel(K^*)$ would have
888: been negative. Our final results are:
889: \begin{eqnarray}
890: \kappa_4^\parallel(K^*) & = & -0.022\pm 0.003\pm 0.001\pm 0.003\pm
891: 0.004 \pm 0.001\pm 0.001\nonumber\\
892: & = &-0.022\pm 0.003\pm0.005,\nonumber\\
893: a_1^\parallel(K^*) & = & \phantom{-}0.01\pm 0.02 \pm 0.01 \pm 0.01 \pm
894: 0.02 \pm 0.01 \pm 0.00\nonumber\\
895: & = & \phantom{-}0.01 \pm 0.02\pm 0.03\label{41a}
896: \end{eqnarray}
897: with the same assignment and treatment of uncertainties as in (\ref{36a}); the
898: uncertainty coming from $f_K^\perp$ is included in that from
899: $m_s$. In contrast to the pseudoscalar case, the translation of
900: $\kappa_4^\parallel(K^*)$ into $a_1^\parallel(K^*)$ does not increase
901: the uncertainty from $m_{s}$ any more than the other uncertainties,
902: so that the total error of $a_1^\parallel(K^*)$ is smaller than
903: that of $a_1(K)$. The impact of $m_q$-dependent terms in negligible.
904: The results (\ref{41a}) differ from those of
905: Ref.~\cite{lenz}, (\ref{28}) and (\ref{29}), where the pure-parity sum
906: rule has been used instead.
907: The result from the quark current sum rule is
908: \begin{equation}
909: a_1^\parallel(K^*)^{\rm BZ}= 0.03\pm 0.02.
910: \end{equation}
911: Again we
912: find agreement between the results for $a_1$ from the sum rules for
913: $\kappa_4$ and the quark current sum rules, but at the same time the
914: uncertainty of the former is larger than that of the latter.
915:
916: \subsection{\boldmath $\kappa_4^\perp(K^*)$}
917:
918: The last parameter left to be determined is
919: $\kappa_4^\perp(K^*)$. Its mixed-parity sum rule is derived from the
920: correlation function $\Pi_{G,4}$, Eq.~(\ref{pig4}), and reads
921: \begin{eqnarray}
922: \lefteqn{\kappa_4^\perp(K^*)(f_{K}^\perp)^2 m_{K^*}^2
923: e^{-m_{K^*}^2/M^2} = (m_s^2-m_q^2)\,\frac{\alpha_s}{72 \pi^3} \int_0^{s_0}
924: ds\,e^{-s/M^2} \left(-6 \ln\frac{s}{\mu^2} + 14 \right)}\nonumber\\
925: &&{}+\frac{m_s \alpha_s}{3 \pi}\! \left\{ \frac{1}{3}\,\quark - 2
926: \squark\right\} - \frac{m_q \alpha_s}{3 \pi}\! \left\{ \frac{1}{3}\,\squark - 2
927: \quark\right\}+\frac{1}{6 M^2}\left(m_q\mixed - m_s\smixed\right)\nonumber\\
928: &&{}+\frac{m_s^2-m_q^2}{12M^2}\gluon\left\{-2 +
929: \left((\ln\frac{M^2}{\mu^2}-\gamma_E+1\right)
930: + M^2\!\int_{s_0}^\infty
931: \frac{ds}{s^2}\,e^{-s/M^2}\right\}.\label{43a}
932: \end{eqnarray}
933: The results for $\kappa_4^\perp(K^*)$ and $a_1^\perp(K^*)$ are shown
934: in Fig.~\ref{fig:4};
935: \begin{figure}
936: $$\epsfxsize=0.45\textwidth\epsffile{fig4a.eps}\quad
937: \epsfxsize=0.45\textwidth\epsffile{fig4b.eps}$$
938: \vspace*{-20pt}
939: \caption[]{Left panel: $\kappa_4^\perp(K^*)$ from (\ref{43a}) as function
940: of the Borel parameter $M^2$. Parameters: renormalisation scale
941: $\mu=1\,$GeV, $s_0 = 1.3\,{\rm GeV}^2$. Solid black line: central
942: values of parameters; the coloured lines have the same meaning as in
943: Fig.~\ref{fig:1}. Right panel: $a_1^\perp(K^*)$ as function of $M^2$
944: from the operator relation
945: (\ref{eq:perp}) and the sum rule for $a_1^\perp(K^*)$
946: calculated in Ref.~\cite{BZ} (purple lines).}\label{fig:4}
947: \end{figure}
948: including uncertainties, we find
949: \begin{eqnarray}
950: \kappa_4^\perp(K^*) & = & 0.018\pm 0.004\pm 0.001\pm 0.002\pm 0.002
951: \pm 0.002 \pm 0.001\nonumber\\
952: & = &0.018\pm 0.004\pm 0.004\,,\nonumber\\
953: a_1^\perp(K^*) & = & 0.09\pm 0.04 \pm 0.01\pm 0.01\pm 0.02\pm 0.02\pm
954: 0.01\nonumber\\
955: &=& 0.09\pm 0.04\pm 0.03\,.\label{43}
956: \end{eqnarray}
957: Note that the ``enhancement'' factor of uncertainties of
958: $a_1^\perp(K^*)$ due to
959: $\kappa_4^\perp(K^*)$ is 10, which is the reason for the large total
960: uncertainty in (\ref{43}). The impact of $m_q$-dependent terms is
961: again negligible. The quark current sum rule yields \cite{BZ}
962: \begin{equation}
963: a_1^\perp(K^*)^{\rm BZ} = 0.04\pm 0.01 \pm 0.01\pm 0.01 \pm 0.01 \pm 0.00 \pm
964: 0.00 = 0.04\pm 0.01 \pm 0.02.
965: \end{equation}
966: Hence, also for $a_1^\perp(K^*)$ do the results of the two approaches
967: agree within errors, with the quark current sum rule being more accurate.
968:
969: \section{Summary and Conclusions}\label{sec:4}
970:
971: In this paper, we have obtained the following relations for the first
972: Gegenbauer
973: moments of the leading-twist distribution amplitudes of $K$ and $K^*$ mesons:
974: \begin{eqnarray}
975: \frac{9}{5}\, a_1(K) &=& -\frac{m_s-m_q}{m_s+m_q} +
976: 4\,\frac{m_s^2-m_q^2}{m_{K}^2} - 8 \kappa_{4}(K),\nonumber\\
977: \frac{3}{5}\,a_1^\parallel(K^*) &=&
978: -\frac{f_K^\perp}{f_K^\parallel}\,\frac{m_s-m_q}{m_{K^*}} + 2
979: \,\frac{m_s^2-m_q^2}{m_{K^*}^2} - 4 \kappa^{\parallel}_{4}(K^*),\nonumber\\
980: \frac{3}{5}\, a_{1}^\perp(K^*) &=&
981: -\frac{f_K^\parallel}{f_K^\perp}\,\frac{m_s-m_q}{2m_{K^*}} +
982: \frac{3}{2}\,\frac{m_s^2-m_q^2}{m_{K^*}^2} + 6 \kappa^{\perp}_4(K^*),
983: \label{40}
984: \end{eqnarray}
985: where the $\kappa_4$ matrix elements are defined as
986: \begin{eqnarray*}
987: \langle 0 | \bar q
988: (g G_{\alpha\mu})
989: i\gamma^\mu\gamma_5 s|K(q)\rangle &=& i q_\alpha f_{K} m_K^2
990: \kappa_{4}(K)\,,\\
991: \langle 0 | \bar q (g G_{\alpha\mu}) i\gamma^\mu s | K^*(q,\lambda) \rangle
992: &=& e^{(\lambda)}_\alpha f_K^\parallel m_{K^*}^3
993: \kappa^{\parallel}_{4}(K^*)\,,\nonumber\\[-40pt]
994: \end{eqnarray*}
995: \begin{eqnarray*}
996: \lefteqn{
997: \langle 0 | \bar q (g G_{\alpha}^{\phantom{\alpha}\mu}) \sigma_{\beta\mu} s |
998: K^*(q,\lambda)\rangle=}\hspace*{1.5cm}\nonumber\\
999: &=& f_K^\perp m_{K^*}^2 \left\{ \frac{1}{2}\,
1000: \kappa^\perp_3(K^*) (e^{(\lambda)}_\alpha q_\beta +
1001: e^{(\lambda)}_\beta q_\alpha) + \kappa_4^{\perp}(K^*)
1002: (e^{(\lambda)}_\alpha q_\beta - e^{(\lambda)}_\beta q_\alpha)\right\} .
1003: \end{eqnarray*}
1004: The first two relations in (\ref{40}) were already derived in
1005: Ref.~\cite{lenz}, the third is new. We have interpreted these
1006: relations as constraints on $a_1$ and calculated the three $\kappa_4$
1007: parameters
1008: from QCD sum rules. We have improved the sum rules given in
1009: Ref.~\cite{lenz} for $\kappa_4(K)$ and $\kappa_4^\parallel(K^*)$ by including
1010: two-loop perturbative contributions, the gluon condensate
1011: contribution and terms in $m_q$;
1012: the former proved to be very relevant numerically,
1013: the terms in $m_q$ are relevant for $a_1(K)$.
1014: We have also derived a new sum rule for $\kappa_4^\perp(K^*)$ to the same
1015: accuracy. All these sum rules exhibit only a small continuum
1016: contribution and all relevant contributions come with equal sign.
1017: The results for $a_1$ obtained from the relations (\ref{40}) agree,
1018: within errors, with those obtained in Ref.~\cite{BZ} from quark
1019: current sum rules which is an important confirmation of the
1020: consistency of QCD sum rule calculations of these quantities and
1021: strengthens our confidence in the results. From a phenomenological
1022: point of view, however, the operator
1023: relations (\ref{40}) are, at least at present,
1024: less useful than the quark current sum rules for $a_1$, as the
1025: uncertainties of the $\kappa_4$ parameters are too large to allow an
1026: accurate determination of $a_1$. The uncertainties of $\kappa_4$
1027: arise from (a) the dependence of the sum rule on the sum rule internal
1028: parameters $M^2$ and $s_0$, (b) the uncertainties of $\alpha_s$ at the
1029: hadronic scale
1030: $\sim\,$1~GeV and (c) the uncertainties of $m_s$ and the SU(3) breaking
1031: of quark and mixed condensates parametrised by $\delta_{3,5}$.
1032: All these uncertainties
1033: enter $a_1$ multiplied by large factors 5 to 10, Eqs.~(\ref{40}). In
1034: contrast, the quark current sum rules for $a_1$ studied in
1035: Refs.~\cite{alex,BZ} are not very sensitive to these effects and come
1036: with smaller uncertainties. We hence suggest that the
1037: relations (\ref{40}) be interpreted as constraints on $\kappa_4$ rather than
1038: $a_1$. Using the updated values of $a_1$ from quark current sum rules
1039: quoted in Sec.~\ref{sec:3}, adding the errors linearly,
1040: \begin{equation}\label{xyz}
1041: a_1(K)^{\rm BZ} = 0.06\pm 0.03, \quad a_1^\parallel(K^*)^{\rm BZ} =
1042: 0.03\pm 0.02\quad
1043: a_1^\perp(K^*)^{\rm BZ} = 0.04\pm 0.03,
1044: \end{equation}
1045: we find by solving (\ref{40}) for $\kappa_4$:
1046: \begin{eqnarray*}
1047: \kappa_4(K) & = & -\frac{1}{8}\,\frac{m_s-m_q}{m_s+m_q} -
1048: \frac{9}{40}\,a_1(K) + \frac{m_s^2-m_q^2}{2m_K^2} = -0.09\pm 0.02,\nonumber\\
1049: \kappa^\parallel_4(K^*) & = &
1050: -\frac{f_K^\perp}{f_K^\parallel}\,\frac{m_s-m_q}{4 m_{K^*}} -
1051: \frac{3}{20}\,a_1^\parallel(K^*) + \frac{m_s^2-m_q^2}{2 m_{K^*}^2}
1052: = -0.024 \pm 0.003,\nonumber\\
1053: \kappa^\perp_4(K^*) & = &
1054: \frac{f_K^\parallel}{f_K^\perp}\,\frac{m_s-m_q}{12 m_{K^*}} +
1055: \frac{1}{10}\,a_1^\perp(K^*) - \frac{m_s^2-m_q^2}{4 m_{K^*}^2}
1056: = 0.012\pm 0.004.
1057: \end{eqnarray*}
1058: For $\kappa_4(K)$ and $\kappa_4^\parallel(K^*)$
1059: the central value agrees well with the results from the direct calculation, for
1060: $\kappa_4^{\perp}(K^*)$
1061: there is agreement within errors.
1062: How can these results be improved? The quark
1063: current results for
1064: $a_1$ would profit from a calculation of perturbative radiative
1065: corrections $\sim m_s^2\alpha_s$, which is technically feasible, but
1066: beyond the scope of this paper. Both $a_1$ and $\kappa_4$ would benefit
1067: from a reduction of the errors of $m_s$.
1068:
1069: In summary, we hope that the present paper helps to settle the
1070: controversy about $a_1$ which started from the observation that
1071: the original calculation of Ref.~\cite{Russians} suffers from a
1072: sign-mistake of the perturbative contribution, which was corrected in
1073: Ref.~\cite{elena}. Unfortunately, the chiral-odd sum rules used in
1074: Ref.~\cite{elena} come with large
1075: cancellations of the dominant contributions and are hence not very
1076: useful for precise calculations of $a_1$. In Ref.~\cite{alex},
1077: $a_1(K)$ was then determined from chiral-even quark current sum rules and
1078: in Ref.~\cite{BZ} also $a_1^{(\perp,\parallel)}(K^*)$ was calculated
1079: using that method. These sum rules do not exhibit any cancellations of
1080: large contributions and are stable under the variation of all
1081: input parameters. As we have shown in this paper, these results agree with
1082: those from the operator relations
1083: (\ref{40}) within errors, but are
1084: more accurate. We conclude that the quark current sum rule results (\ref{xyz})
1085: present the presently best determination of $a_1$. Given the
1086: phenomenological importance of $a_1$, an independent calculation on
1087: the lattice would be both timely and useful and we would like to appeal
1088: to the lattice community to take up the challenge.
1089:
1090: \subsection*{Acknowledgements}
1091: R.Z.\ is supported in part by the EU-RTN Programme, Contract No.\
1092: HPEN-CT-2002-00311, ``EURIDICE''.
1093:
1094: \appendix
1095: \setcounter{equation}{0}
1096: \renewcommand{\theequation}{A.\arabic{equation}}
1097:
1098: \section{Correlation Functions}\label{appA}
1099:
1100: In this appendix we give the relevant formulas for the correlation
1101: functions from which the QCD sum rules given in Sec.~\ref{sec:3} are obtained.
1102: The correlation functions are of the generic form
1103: \begin{equation}
1104: \label{eq:master}
1105: \Pi_{\alpha\dots}(q) =
1106: i\int d^4y e^{iqy} \langle 0 | T [\bar q (g
1107: G_{\alpha\mu})\Gamma_1^\mu s](y)
1108: [\bar s \Gamma_2 q](0)|0\rangle\,,
1109: \end{equation}
1110: where $\Gamma_1^\mu$ and $\Gamma_2$ are suitably chosen Dirac
1111: structures. The dots stand for additional indices from
1112: $\Gamma_2$.
1113:
1114: \subsection{\boldmath $\kappa_4(K)$}
1115:
1116: $\kappa_4(K)$ can be extracted from either a pure-partity sum rule, to
1117: which only pseudoscalar states contribute, or a mixed-parity sum rule
1118: which also contains contributions from axialvector mesons.
1119: As for pure-parity sum rules,
1120: one possible choice of the Dirac structures is $\Gamma_1^\mu
1121: = i\gamma^\mu\gamma_5$ and $\Gamma_2=i\gamma_5$, which results in the
1122: correlation function
1123: \begin{equation}
1124: \Pi_\alpha(q) = i q_\alpha \Pi_G^{(p)}(q^2).
1125: \end{equation}
1126: Another choice is $\Gamma_1^\mu
1127: = i\gamma^\mu\gamma_5$ as before and $\Gamma_2=\gamma_\beta\gamma_5$,
1128: with the correlation function
1129: \begin{equation}
1130: \Pi_{\alpha\beta}(q) = g_{\alpha\beta} \Pi^{(a)}_{G,1}(q^2) +
1131: q_\alpha q_\beta \Pi^{(a)}_{G,2}(q^2),
1132: \end{equation}
1133: where $\Pi^{(a)}_{G,1}$ receives contributions from $1^+$ intermediate
1134: states only, whereas $\Pi^{(a)}_{G,2}$ is a mixed-parity correlation
1135: function with contributions from both $0^-$ and $1^+$ states.
1136:
1137: These three correlation functions are not independent of each other,
1138: but related by $\partial^\beta \bar s \gamma_\beta\gamma_5 q = (m_s+m_q)
1139: \bar s i\gamma_5 q$, so that
1140: \begin{equation}\label{scalarEOM}
1141: \Pi^{(a)}_{G,1}(q^2) + q^2 \Pi^{(a)}_{G,2}(q^2)
1142: = (m_s+m_q)\Pi_G^{(p)} + \mbox{ contact terms},
1143: \end{equation}
1144: where the contact terms are independent of $q^2$.
1145: As terms in $m_q$ are numerically relevant in the operator relation
1146: (\ref{a1K}), we calculate the correlation functions to $O(m_q)$ and find
1147: \begin{eqnarray}
1148: %
1149: \Pi_{G}^{(p)}(q^2) &=&
1150: -(m_s-m_q)\,\frac{\alpha_s}{48\pi^3} q^2\left[\ln^2\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}-
1151: \ln\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}\right]
1152: -\frac{1}{4q^2}\left[\mixed -\smixed\right]
1153: \nonumber\\&&{}
1154: -\frac{\alpha_s }{3\pi} \left[ \quark - \squark \right]
1155: \ln\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}\nonumber\\
1156: &&{} +\frac{1}{8 q^2} \gluon
1157: \left[ m_s \left(1-\ln \frac{-q^2}{m_s^2}\right) -
1158: m_q \left(1-\ln\frac{-q^2}{m_q^2}\right)\right],\nonumber\\
1159: \Pi_{G,1}^{(a)}(q^2) &=&
1160: (m_s^2-m_q^2)\,\frac{\alpha_s}{144\pi^3} q^2\left[7\ln^2\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}-
1161: 47\ln\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}\right]\nonumber\\
1162: &&-\frac{m_s\alpha_s}{3\pi}
1163: \left[ \frac{5}{3} \quark - \squark \right]\ln\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}
1164: + \frac{m_q\alpha_s}{3\pi}
1165: \left[ \frac{5}{3} \squark - \quark
1166: \right]\ln\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}\nonumber\\
1167: && - \left(\frac{m_q}{12} + \frac{m_s}{4}\right)
1168: \frac{\mixed}{q^2}
1169: + \left(\frac{m_s}{12}+\frac{m_q}{4}\right)\frac{\smixed}{q^2}
1170: + \frac{m_q m_s}{8q^2}\,\gluon\,\ln\frac{m_s^2}{m_q^2}\nonumber
1171: \end{eqnarray}
1172: \begin{eqnarray}
1173: &&{}-\frac{m_s^2}{24 q^2} \gluon
1174: \left[ 1 + \ln\frac{-q^2}{m_s^2}
1175: \right] +\frac{m_q^2}{24 q^2} \gluon
1176: \left[ 1 + \ln\frac{-q^2}{m_q^2}\right]\nonumber\\
1177: &&{}-\frac{8\pi\alpha_s}{27 q^2}\big[\quark^2 -\squark^2\big],
1178: \end{eqnarray}
1179: \begin{eqnarray}
1180: \Pi_{G,2}^{(a)}(q^2) &=&
1181: (m_s^2-m_q^2)\,\frac{\alpha_s}{72\pi^3} \left[-5\ln^2\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}+
1182: 25\ln\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}\right]\nonumber\\
1183: &&{}+\frac{2m_s\alpha_s}{9\pi q^2}\quark
1184: \left[\frac{1}{3} + \ln\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}\right]
1185: -\frac{10m_s\alpha_s}{9\pi q^2}\squark
1186: \nonumber\\&&{}
1187: -\frac{2m_q\alpha_s}{9\pi q^2}\squark
1188: \left[\frac{1}{3} + \ln\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}\right]
1189: +\frac{10m_q\alpha_s}{9\pi q^2}\quark
1190: + \frac{m_s}{6q^4} \smixed - \frac{m_q}{6q^4} \mixed\nonumber\\
1191: &&{} +\frac{m_s^2}{6 q^4} \gluon
1192: \left[ 1 -\frac{1}{2}\, \ln\frac{-q^2}{m_s^2} \right]-
1193: \frac{m_q^2}{6 q^4} \gluon
1194: \left[ 1 -\frac{1}{2}\, \ln\frac{-q^2}{m_q^2} \right]
1195: \nonumber\\&&{}
1196: +\frac{8\pi\alpha_s}{27 q^4}\big[\quark^2 -\squark^2\big].
1197: \label{piga}
1198: \end{eqnarray}
1199: The expression for $\Pi_{G}^{(p)}$ has already been given in
1200: Ref.~\cite{lenz}, together with $\Pi_{G,(1,2)}^{(a)}$, to leading
1201: order in SU(3) breaking. The terms in $m_s^2$ and $m_q$ are new. The above
1202: expressions fulfill the relation (\ref{scalarEOM}).
1203:
1204: At this point a few comments are in order concerning the structure of
1205: these formulas. The reader may have noticed that the Wilson
1206: coefficient of the gluon condensate contributions to the above
1207: correlation functions contain infrared sensitive terms $\sim\ln
1208: (-q^2/m_{q,s}^2)$. These terms appear to violate the structure of the
1209: operator product expansion which stipulates that long- and
1210: short-distance contributions be properly factorised and all long-distance
1211: contributions be absorbed into the condensates, leaving purely
1212: short-distance Wilson coefficients which must be analytic
1213: in $m_{q,s}$. As discussed in Ref.~\cite{logms}, the appearance of terms
1214: logarithmic in $m_{q,s}$ is due to the fact that the above expressions are
1215: obtained using Wick's theorem to calculate the condensate
1216: contributions, which implies that the condensates are normal-ordered:
1217: $\langle O
1218: \rangle = \langle 0 |\!:\!O\!:\! |0\rangle$. Recasting the OPE in terms of
1219: non-normal-ordered operators, all infrared sensitive terms can be
1220: absorbed into the corresponding condensates. Indeed, using \cite{logms}
1221: $$
1222: \langle 0 | \bar s g G s | 0 \rangle = \langle 0| \!:\!\bar s g G
1223: s\!:\!| 0 \rangle +
1224: \frac{m_s}{2}\, \log\,\frac{m_s^2}{\mu^2} \,\langle 0 |\! :\!
1225: \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}\, G^2\!:\!| 0\rangle,
1226: $$
1227: and the corresponding formula for $q$ quarks,
1228: all terms $\sim \ln m_{q,s}^2$ can be absorbed into the mixed
1229: quark-quark-gluon condensate and the resulting Wilson-coefficients
1230: can be expanded in powers of $m_{q,s}^2$. In calculating the sum rules, we
1231: hence will use
1232: $$
1233: \ln\,\frac{-q^2}{m_{q,s}^2}\to \ln \frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}\,.
1234: $$
1235: As for the structure of the ultraviolet logarithms $\sim\ln
1236: (-q^2/\mu^2)$, they follow from the mixing of the gluonic operator
1237: $\bar q (g G_{\alpha\mu}) i \gamma^\mu\gamma_5 s$ with various
1238: quark-bilinear operators as given in Eq.~(20) in Ref.~\cite{lenz}.
1239:
1240:
1241: \subsection{\boldmath $\kappa_4^\parallel(K^*)$}
1242:
1243: The correlation functions used to determine $\kappa_4^\parallel(K^*)$
1244: are very similar to those in the previous subsection. We choose
1245: $\Gamma_1^\mu = i\gamma^\mu$ and $\Gamma_2 = \sigma_{\beta\gamma}$ to
1246: obtain the pure-parity correlation function
1247: \begin{equation}
1248: \Pi_{\alpha\beta\gamma}(q) =
1249: i(g_{\alpha\beta}q_\gamma-g_{\alpha\gamma}q_\beta)\Pi^{(\sigma)}_{G}(q^2)
1250: \end{equation}
1251: and $\Gamma_2 = \gamma_\beta$ which yields
1252: \begin{equation}
1253: \Pi_{\alpha\beta}(q) = g_{\alpha\beta} \Pi^{(v)}_{G,1}(q^2) +
1254: q_\alpha q_\beta \Pi^{(v)}_{G,2}(q^2).
1255: \end{equation}
1256: $\Pi^{(\sigma)}_{G}$ and $\Pi^{(v)}_{G,1}$ receive
1257: contributions from $1^-$ states only
1258: and $\Pi^{(v)}_{G,2}$ from both $1^-$ and $0^+$ states.
1259: Another possible choice is $\Gamma_2 = {\mathds
1260: 1}$ which yields the pure-parity correlation function
1261: \begin{equation}
1262: \Pi_\alpha(q) = q_\alpha \Pi_G^{(s)}(q^2)
1263: \end{equation}
1264: with contributions from only $0^+$ states. $\Pi_G^{(s)}$ and $
1265: \Pi^{(v)}_{G,1(2)}$ are related by the equation of motion for the
1266: vector current:
1267: \begin{equation}
1268: \Pi^{(v)}_{G,1}(q^2) + q^2 \Pi^{(v)}_{G,2}(q^2)
1269: = (m_s-m_q)\Pi_G^{(s)} + \mbox{ contact terms}.
1270: \end{equation}
1271: The expression for $\Pi^{(\sigma)}_{G}$ was given in
1272: Ref.~\cite{lenz}, the other correlation functions are obtained by the
1273: simple replacements
1274: \begin{eqnarray}
1275: \Pi_{G,1(2)}^{(v)}(q^2) &=&
1276: \left.\Pi_{G,1(2)}^{(a)}(q^2)\right|_{m_q\to -m_q,\,\quark \to
1277: -\quark,\,\mixed\to-\mixed} \label{pigv} \\
1278: \Pi_{G}^{(s)}(q^2) &=& \left.\Pi_{G}^{(p)}(q^2)\right|_{m_q\to -m_q,\,
1279: \quark \to -\quark,\,\mixed\to-\mixed}
1280: \end{eqnarray}
1281: which follows from the chiral structure of the correlation functions.
1282:
1283: \subsection{\boldmath $\kappa_4^\perp(K^*)$}
1284:
1285: For $\kappa_4^\perp(K^*)$, $\Gamma_1^\mu$ is given by
1286: $\sigma^{\beta\mu}$ and for $\Gamma_2$ we choose
1287: $\sigma_{\gamma\delta}$. The
1288: resulting correlation function has contributions from both $1^-$
1289: and $1^+$ states and can be written as
1290: \begin{equation}
1291: \Pi_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}(q) =
1292: i \Pi^{1^-}_{G,4}(q^2) P^{1^-}_{4,\alpha\beta\gamma\delta} +
1293: i \Pi^{1^-}_{G,3}(q^2) P^{1^-}_{3,\alpha\beta\gamma\delta} +
1294: i \Pi^{1^+}_{G,4}(q^2)P^{1^+}_{4,\alpha\beta\gamma\delta},
1295: \end{equation}
1296: where the projectors $P^{1^\pm}$ are given by
1297: \begin{eqnarray*}
1298: P^{1^-}_{4,\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}&=&
1299: \frac{1}{q^2}\,\left[(g_{\alpha\gamma} q_\beta q_\delta - \{ \alpha
1300: \leftrightarrow \beta \}) -
1301: \left(\{ \gamma \leftrightarrow \delta \} \right)\right], \nonumber\\
1302: P^{1^-}_{3,\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}&=& \frac{1}{q^2}\,\left[
1303: (g_{\alpha\gamma} q_\beta
1304: q_\delta + \{ \alpha \leftrightarrow \beta \}) -
1305: \left(\{ \gamma \leftrightarrow \delta \}\right)\right],\nonumber\\
1306: P^{1^+}_{4,\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}&=&
1307: \frac{1}{q^2}\,\left[
1308: P^{1^-}_{4,\alpha\beta\gamma\delta} + q^2g_{\beta\gamma} g_{\alpha\delta}
1309: - q^2g_{\alpha\gamma} g_{\beta\delta}\right]\,.\nonumber
1310: \end{eqnarray*}
1311: $P^{1^-}_3$ projects onto the twist-3 matrix element
1312: $\kappa_3^\perp(K^*)$, $P^{1^-}_4$ onto $\kappa_4^\perp(K^*)$ and
1313: $P^{1^+}_4$ onto the contribution from $1^+$ intermediate states. As
1314: usual, $\Pi_{\alpha\beta\gamma\delta}$ must not have a singularity at $q^2=0$
1315: which implies
1316: $$\Pi^{1^-}_{G,4}(0) + \Pi^{1^+}_{G,4}(0)=0.$$
1317: That means that one can construct a mixed-parity sum rule from
1318: $\Pi_{G,4} \equiv
1319: (\Pi^{1^-}_{G,4}(q^2) + \Pi^{1^+}_{G,4}(q^2))/q^2$ which has lower
1320: dimension than the pure-parity sum rule obtained from $\Pi^{1^-}_{G,4}$ alone.
1321: We find\footnote{We also give $q^2$-independent terms in the quark
1322: condensate contribution to $\Pi_{G,4}^{1^\pm}$ because they are
1323: needed for calculating $\Pi_{G,4}$. Note that for
1324: $\Pi_{G,4}^{1^\pm}$ these terms are affected by finite counterterms as
1325: discussed in Ref.~\cite{BZ}, which however cancel in
1326: the sum $\Pi_{G,4}^{1^-}+\Pi_{G,4}^{1^+}$.}
1327: \begin{eqnarray}
1328: \lefteqn{\Pi^{1^-}_{G,4}(q^2) =
1329: (m_s^2-m_q^2)\,\frac{\alpha_s}{144\pi^3}\,q^2\left[3\ln^2\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}-
1330: 11\ln\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}\right]}\hspace*{1cm}\nonumber\\
1331: &&{} + \frac{\alpha_s m_s}{3\pi}\left[
1332: \frac{5}{6}\,\squark+\left(\ln\,\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2} -
1333: \frac{5}{3}\right)\quark\right] - \frac{\alpha_s m_q}{3\pi}\left[
1334: \frac{5}{6}\,\quark+\left(\ln\,\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2} -
1335: \frac{5}{3}\right)\squark\right]
1336: \nonumber \\
1337: &&{}+ \frac{1}{12q^2}\,\mixed (2m_s+m_q)- \frac{1}{12
1338: q^2}\,\smixed(m_s+2 m_q)\nonumber\\
1339: &&{}+\frac{1}{24 q^2} \gluon\left\{ -m_s^2\left[ 2 -
1340: \ln\frac{-q^2}{m_s^2} \right]+m_q^2 \left[ 2 -
1341: \ln\frac{-q^2}{m_q^2} \right] + 2m_q m_s\ln\frac{m_q^2}{m_s^2}\right\}
1342: \nonumber\\
1343: &&{}+0\cdot (\langle \bar q q\rangle^2 - \langle \bar s s
1344: \rangle^2),\label{pi1minus}
1345: \end{eqnarray}
1346: \begin{eqnarray}
1347: \lefteqn{\Pi^{1^+}_{G,4}(q^2) =
1348: (m_s^2-m_q^2)\,\frac{\alpha_s}{144\pi^3}\,q^2\left[3\ln^2\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}-
1349: 17\ln\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}\right]}\hspace*{0.8cm}\nonumber\\
1350: &&{} + \frac{\alpha_s m_s}{3\pi}\left[
1351: \frac{7}{6}\,\squark+\left(-\ln\,\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2} +
1352: \frac{4}{3}\right)\quark\right] - \frac{\alpha_s m_q}{3\pi}\left[
1353: \frac{7}{6}\,\quark+\left(-\ln\,\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2} +
1354: \frac{4}{3}\right)\squark\right]\nonumber\\
1355: &&{}+ \frac{1}{12q^2}\,\mixed (2m_s-m_q)- \frac{1}{12
1356: q^2}\,\smixed(m_s-2 m_q)\nonumber\\
1357: &&{}+\frac{1}{24 q^2} \gluon\left\{ -m_s^2\left[ 2 -
1358: \ln\frac{-q^2}{m_s^2} \right]+m_q^2 \left[ 2 -
1359: \ln\frac{-q^2}{m_q^2} \right] - 2m_q m_s\ln\frac{m_q^2}{m_s^2}\right\}
1360: \nonumber\\
1361: &&{}+0\cdot (\langle \bar q q\rangle^2 - \langle \bar s s
1362: \rangle^2),\label{pi1plus}
1363: \end{eqnarray}
1364: \begin{eqnarray}
1365: \Pi_{G,4}(q^2) &=&
1366: (m_s^2-m_q^2)\,\frac{\alpha_s}{72\pi^3} \left[3\ln^2\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}-
1367: 14\ln\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2}\right]\hspace*{6.5cm}\nonumber\\
1368: &&{} +
1369: \frac{\alpha_s m_s}{9\pi q^2}\left[ 6 \squark-\quark\right] -
1370: \frac{\alpha_s m_q}{9\pi q^2}\left[ 6 \quark-\squark\right]\nonumber\\
1371: &&{}+\frac{1}{6 q^4}\left(m_q\mixed-m_s\smixed\right)\nonumber
1372: \end{eqnarray}
1373: \begin{eqnarray}
1374: &&{}+\frac{1}{12 q^4} \gluon \left\{ -m_s^2\left[ 2-
1375: \ln\frac{-q^2}{m_s^2} \right]+m_q^2 \left[ 2 -
1376: \ln\frac{-q^2}{m_q^2} \right]\right\}.
1377: \label{pig4}
1378: \end{eqnarray}
1379:
1380: \section{Borel Transforms}
1381:
1382: QCD sum rules are obtained from the Borel transforms of the
1383: correlation functions listed in the previous section. Most of the
1384: transforms are straightforward, except for those of expressions of
1385: type $1/(q^2)^n \ln (-q^2/\mu^2)$, which can, however, be conveniently
1386: calculated using the formula
1387: $$
1388: \frac{1}{\pi}\,{\rm Im}(-q^2-i0)^\alpha =
1389: \frac{s^\alpha}{\Gamma(-\alpha)\Gamma(1+\alpha)}\,\Theta(s)
1390: $$
1391: with $s=-q^2$. We then obtain, including continuum subtraction of
1392: contributions from $s>s_0$,
1393: \begin{eqnarray*}
1394: {\cal B}^{\rm sub}_{M^2} \,\frac{1}{q^2}\,\ln\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2} &=&
1395: \gamma_E -\ln\frac{M^2}{\mu^2} + \int_{s_0}^\infty
1396: \frac{ds}{s}\,e^{-s/M^2},\\
1397: {\cal B}^{\rm sub}_{M^2} \,\frac{1}{(q^2)^2}\,\ln\frac{-q^2}{\mu^2} &=&
1398: \frac{1}{M^2}\left(1-\gamma_E +\ln\frac{M^2}{\mu^2} + M^2\int_{s_0}^\infty
1399: \frac{ds}{s^2}\,e^{-s/M^2}\right).
1400: \end{eqnarray*}
1401:
1402:
1403: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1404:
1405: \bibitem{BBNS}
1406: M. Beneke {\em et al.},
1407: %``{QCD} factorization for B $\to$ pi pi decays: Strong phases and CP
1408: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 83} (1999) 1914
1409: [arXiv:hep-ph/9905312].
1410: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9905312;%%
1411:
1412: \bibitem{FFs}
1413: E.~Bagan, P.~Ball and V.~M.~Braun,
1414: %``Radiative corrections to the decay B $\to$ pi e nu and the heavy quark
1415: %limit,''
1416: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 417} (1998) 154
1417: [arXiv:hep-ph/9709243];\\
1418: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9709243;%%
1419: P.~Ball,
1420: %``B $\to$ pi and B $\to$ K transitions from {QCD} sum rules on the light-cone
1421: JHEP {\bf 9809} (1998) 005
1422: [arXiv:hep-ph/9802394];\\
1423: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9802394;%%
1424: P.~Ball and V.~M.~Braun,
1425: %``Exclusive semileptonic and rare B meson decays in {QCD},''
1426: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58} (1998) 094016
1427: [arXiv:hep-ph/9805422];\\
1428: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9805422;%%
1429: P.~Ball and R.~Zwicky,
1430: %``Improved analysis of B $\to$ pi e nu from QCD sum rules on the
1431: %light-cone,''
1432: JHEP {\bf 0110} (2001) 019
1433: [arXiv:hep-ph/0110115];
1434: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0110115;%%
1435: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 71} (2005) 014015
1436: [arXiv:hep-ph/0406232];
1437: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0406232;%%
1438: %``B/(d,s) $\to$ rho, omega, K*, Phi decay form factors from light-cone sum
1439: %rules revisited,''
1440: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 71} (2005) 014029
1441: [arXiv:hep-ph/0412079];
1442: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0412079;%%
1443: %``$|$V(ub)$|$ and constraints on the leading-twist pion distribution amplitude
1444: %from B $\to$ pi l nu,''
1445: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 625}, 225 (2005)
1446: [arXiv:hep-ph/0507076].
1447: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0507076;%%
1448: \bibitem{elena} P.~Ball and M.~Boglione,
1449: %``SU(3) breaking in K and K* distribution amplitudes,''
1450: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68}, 094006 (2003)
1451: [arXiv:hep-ph/0307337].
1452: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0307337;%%
1453:
1454: \bibitem{alex} A.~Khodjamirian, T.~Mannel and M.~Melcher,
1455: %``Kaon distribution amplitude from QCD sum rules,''
1456: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70} (2004) 094002
1457: [arXiv:hep-ph/0407226].
1458: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0407226;%%
1459:
1460: \bibitem{lenz} V.~M.~Braun and A.~Lenz,
1461: %``On the SU(3) symmetry-breaking corrections to meson distribution
1462: %amplitudes,''
1463: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 074020 (2004)
1464: [arXiv:hep-ph/0407282].
1465: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0407282;%%
1466:
1467: \bibitem{BZ}
1468: P.~Ball and R.~Zwicky,
1469: %``SU(3) breaking of leading-twist K and K* distribution amplitudes: A
1470: %reprise,''
1471: Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B} {\em in press} [arXiv:hep-ph/0510338].
1472: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0510338;%%
1473:
1474: \bibitem{lattbec} D.~Becirevic {\it et al.},
1475: %``Coupling of the light vector meson to the vector and to the tensor
1476: %current,''
1477: JHEP {\bf 0305}, 007 (2003)
1478: [arXiv:hep-lat/0301020];\\
1479: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0301020;%%
1480: V.~M.~Braun {\it et al.},
1481: %``A lattice calculation of vector meson couplings to the vector and tensor
1482: %currents using chirally improved fermions,''
1483: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68} (2003) 054501
1484: [arXiv:hep-lat/0306006].
1485: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0306006;%%
1486:
1487: \bibitem{Russians}
1488: V.~L.~Chernyak, A.~R.~Zhitnitsky and I.~R.~Zhitnitsky,
1489: %``Meson Wave Functions And SU(3) Symmetry Breaking,''
1490: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 204} (1982) 477
1491: [Erratum-ibid.\ B {\bf 214} (1983) 547];
1492: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B204,477;%%
1493: %``Wave Functions Of The Mesons Containing S, C, B Quarks,''
1494: Sov.\ J.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf 38} (1983) 775
1495: [Yad.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 38} (1983) 1277].
1496: %%CITATION = SJNCA,38,775;%%
1497:
1498: \bibitem{CZreport}
1499: V.~L.~Chernyak and A.~R.~Zhitnitsky,
1500: %``Asymptotic Behavior Of Exclusive Processes In QCD,''
1501: Phys.\ Rept.\ {\bf 112} (1984) 173.
1502: %%CITATION = PRPLC,112,173;%%
1503:
1504: \bibitem{BB98}
1505: P.~Ball and V.~M.~Braun,
1506: %``Higher twist distribution amplitudes of vector mesons in {QCD}: Twist-4
1507: %distributions and meson mass corrections,''
1508: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 543} (1999) 201
1509: [arXiv:hep-ph/9810475].
1510: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9810475;%%
1511:
1512: \bibitem{PB98}
1513: P.~Ball,
1514: %``Theoretical update of pseudoscalar meson distribution amplitudes of higher
1515: %twist: The nonsinglet case,''
1516: JHEP {\bf 9901}, 010 (1999)
1517: [arXiv:hep-ph/9812375].
1518: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9812375;%%
1519:
1520: \bibitem{BBKT}
1521: P. Ball {\it et al.},
1522: %``Higher twist distribution amplitudes of vector mesons in {QCD}: Formalism
1523: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 529} (1998) 323
1524: [arXiv:hep-ph/9802299].
1525: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9802299;%%
1526:
1527: \bibitem{prep} P. Ball, V.M.~Braun and A. Lenz, {\it in preparation}.
1528:
1529: \bibitem{mslatt}
1530: F.~Knechtli,
1531: %``Lattice computation of the strange quark mass in QCD,''
1532: arXiv:hep-ph/0511033.
1533: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0511033;%%
1534:
1535: \bibitem{jamin}
1536: E.~Gamiz {\it et al.},
1537: %``V(us) and m(s) from hadronic tau decays,''
1538: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 94} (2005) 011803
1539: [arXiv:hep-ph/0408044];\\
1540: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0408044;%%
1541: S.~Narison,
1542: %``Strange quark mass from e+ e- revisited and present status of light quark
1543: %masses,''
1544: arXiv:hep-ph/0510108.
1545: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0510108;%%
1546:
1547: \bibitem{chPT}
1548: H.~Leutwyler,
1549: %``The ratios of the light quark masses,''
1550: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 378} (1996) 313
1551: [arXiv:hep-ph/9602366].
1552: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9602366;%%
1553:
1554: \bibitem{mqlatt}
1555: D.~Becirevic {\it et al.},
1556: %``Non-perturbatively renormalised light quark masses from a lattice simulation
1557: %with N(f) = 2,''
1558: arXiv:hep-lat/0510014;\\
1559: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0510014;%%
1560: Q.~Mason {\it et al.} [HPQCD Collaboration],
1561: %``High-precision determination of the light-quark masses from
1562: %realistic lattice%QCD,''
1563: arXiv:hep-ph/0511160.
1564: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0511160;%%
1565:
1566: \bibitem{PDG}
1567: S.~Eidelman {\it et al.} [Particle Data Group Collaboration],
1568: %``Review of particle physics,''
1569: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 592} (2004) 1.
1570: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B592,1;%%
1571:
1572: \bibitem{logms}
1573: S.~C.~Generalis and D.~J.~Broadhurst,
1574: %``The Heavy Quark Expansion And QCD Sum Rules For Light Quarks,''
1575: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 139} (1984) 85;\\
1576: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B139,85;%%
1577: V.~P.~Spiridonov and K.~G.~Chetyrkin,
1578: %``Nonleading Mass Corrections And Renormalization Of The Operators M Psi-Bar
1579: %Psi And G**2(Mu Nu),''
1580: Sov.\ J.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf 47} (1988) 522
1581: [Yad.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 47} (1988) 818];\\
1582: %%CITATION = SJNCA,47,522;%%
1583: M.~Jamin and M.~M\"{u}nz,
1584: %``Current correlators to all orders in the quark masses,''
1585: Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 60} (1993) 569
1586: [arXiv:hep-ph/9208201].
1587: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9208201;%%
1588:
1589: \end{thebibliography}
1590:
1591: \end{document}
1592: