1: \documentclass{article}

2: \usepackage{epsfig} 

3: %\usepackage{showkeys}  

4: \usepackage{cite}  

5: \topmargin -1cm 

6: \textwidth 16cm 

7: \textheight 22.25cm 

8: \oddsidemargin 0cm 

9: \evensidemargin 0cm 

10: 

11: \def\e{\epsilon}

12: \def\d{\hbox{d}} 

13: \def\dd{\partial} 

14: \def\ln{\hbox{ln}} 

15: \def\ie{i.e.} 

16: \def\iep{i\epsilon} 

17: \def\nn{\nonumber}

18: \def\lapprox{\lower .7ex\hbox{$\;\stackrel{\textstyle <}{\sim}\;$}}

19: \def\gapprox{\lower .7ex\hbox{$\;\stackrel{\textstyle >}{\sim}\;$}}

20: \renewcommand{\topfraction}{1.0}

21: \renewcommand{\bottomfraction}{1.0}

22: \renewcommand{\textfraction}{0.0}

23: 

24: 

25: 

26: \begin{document} 

27: \unitlength1cm 

28: \begin{titlepage} 

29: \vspace*{-1cm} 

30: \begin{flushright} 

31: ZU-TH 09/06\\

32: hep-ph/0604030\\

33: April 2006\\

34: \end{flushright} 

35: \vskip 2.5cm 

36: 

37: 

38: 

39: \begin{center} 

40: {\Large\bf Measuring the Photon Fragmentation Function at HERA}

41: \vskip 1.cm 

42: {\large  A.~Gehrmann--De Ridder}$^{a}$, {\large  T.~Gehrmann}$^{b}$ 

43: and {\large E.~Poulsen}$^{b}$ 

44: \vskip .7cm 

45: {\it $^a$ Institute for Theoretical Physics, ETH, CH-8093 Z\"urich,

46: Switzerland} 

47: \vskip .4cm 

48: {\it $^b$ Institut f\"ur Theoretische Physik, Universit\"at Z\"urich,

49: Winterthurerstrasse 190,\\ CH-8057 Z\"urich, Switzerland} 

50: \end{center} 

51: \vskip 2.6cm 

52: 

53: \begin{abstract} 

54: The production of final state photons in deep inelastic scattering 

55: originates from photon radiation off leptons or quarks involved in the 

56: scattering process. Photon radiation off quarks involves a contribution 

57: from the quark-to-photon fragmentation function, corresponding to 

58: the non-perturbative transition of a hadronic jet into a single, highly 

59: energetic photon accompanied by some limited hadronic activity. Up to now,

60: this fragmentation function was measured only in electron-positron

61: annihilation at LEP. We demonstrate by a dedicated parton-level calculation 

62: that a competitive measurement 

63: of the quark-to-photon fragmentation function can be obtained in deep 

64: inelastic scattering 

65: at HERA. Such a measurement can be obtained  

66: by studying the photon energy spectra in 

67: $\gamma + (0+1)$-jet events, where

68:  $\gamma$ denotes a hadronic jet containing a highly energetic photon

69: (the photon jet). 

70: Isolated photons are  then defined from the photon jet by imposing a minimal 

71: photon energy fraction. For this so-called democratic clustering approach,

72: we study the cross sections for isolated 

73: $\gamma + (0+1)$-jet and  $\gamma + (1+1)$-jet production as well as 

74: for the inclusive isolated photon production in deep inelastic scattering.

75: \end{abstract} 

76: \vfill 

77: 

78: \end{titlepage} 

79: 

80: \newpage 

81: 

82: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\mbox{\arabic{section}.\arabic{equation}}} 

83: 

84: 

85: 

86: \section{Introduction}

87: \setcounter{equation}{0}

88: The production of final state photons at large transverse momenta in high

89: energy processes provides an important testing ground for QCD.

90: A good understanding of the Standard Model predictions for 

91: photon production is essential for new physics searches at future

92: colliders. In high energy collisions, the produced 

93: primary partons, quarks or gluons, subsequently fragment 

94: into clusters of comoving hadrons, the hadronic jets. 

95: In events where a photon is produced in addition to the jets, this photon can

96: have two possible origins: the direct radiation of a photon off a primary

97: quark or antiquark (or, if leptons are also involved in the process, 

98: off a charged lepton)

99: and the fragmentation of a hadronic jet into a 

100: photon carrying a large fraction of the jet energy.

101: While the former direct process takes place  

102: at an early stage in the process of hadronisation and can be calculated 

103: in perturbative QCD, the

104: fragmentation contribution is primarily due to a long distance process 

105: which cannot be calculated within perturbative method. The latter is described

106: by the process-independent quark-, anti-quark- or gluon-to-photon 

107: fragmentation 

108: functions \cite{koller} which must be determined by experimental data.

109: Their evolution with the factorisation scale $\mu_{F,\gamma}$ can however be

110: calculated perturbatively. 

111: Furthermore, when the photon is radiated somewhat later during the

112: hadronisation process, in addition to this genuinely non-perturbative 

113: fragmentation process, the emission of a photon collinear to the primary 

114: quarks can also take place and has to be taken into account.

115: As physical cross sections are necessarily finite these collinear 

116: divergences will get factorised into the fragmentation functions. 

117: The factorisation procedure of these final state collinear singularities 

118: in fragmentation functions used here is 

119: of the same type as the procedure used to absorb initial state collinear 

120: singularities~\cite{AP} into the parton distribution functions.

121:  

122: Directly produced photons are usually well separated from the hadronic jets

123: produced in the event, while photons originating from the fragmentation

124: process and collinear quark-photon emission are primarily found 

125: inside hadronic jets.   

126: Consequently, it was thought that by imposing some isolation criterion 

127: one could eliminate the fragmentation process and define isolated photon

128: events in this way. However this is not the case: one can at most suppress 

129: the fragmentation and collinear contributions. In most theoretical 

130: observables involving final state photons, those contributions are 

131: indeed present.  

132: 

133: So far, only a limited number of measurements of single photon production

134: exists through which direct information on the quark-to-photon fragmentation

135: function (denoted by FF) can be obtained. A possible way is the measurement 

136: of inclusive photon cross sections in different experimental environments.

137: The OPAL Collaboration measured the inclusive photon rate \cite{opal} in 

138: $e^+e^-$ annihilation for $0.2<x_{\gamma}<1.0$ where in terms of the beam 

139: energy $x_{\gamma}=2E_{\gamma}/M_{Z}$ is the photon energy fraction.

140: The results were in reasonable agreement with predictions 

141: obtained using various model estimates of photon fragmentation functions 

142: for which the factorisation scale $\mu_{F,\gamma}$ was chosen to be equal 

143: to $M_{Z}$ \cite{duke,grv,bfg}.

144: The experimental precision was however 

145: not sufficiently high to discriminate between 

146:  different theoretical predictions.

147: 

148: An alternative way to determine the process-independent

149: photon fragmentation function is to measure the production of

150: photons accompanied by a definite number of hadronic jets.

151: It should be

152: noted that the quark-to-photon fragmentation function determined via

153: the measurement of inclusive or jet-like observables is the same in both

154: cases as it is process-independent. Indeed the fragmentation process

155: and the collinear quark-photon emission are found inside the hadron jets

156: and those contributions are the same whether one analyses

157: inclusive or jet-like  observables.

158: 

159: In processes involving hadronic jets and a photon in the final state, 

160: the outgoing photon is treated like any other hadron by the jet algorithm. 

161: It is clustered simultaneously with the other hadrons

162: into jets, within the so-called democratic procedure

163: \cite{glover-morgan,aleph}.

164: One of the jets will contain a photon and will be called photon-jet

165: if the fraction of energy carried by the photon $z$ inside the jet

166: is sufficiently large, i.e.

167: \begin{equation}

168:  z=\frac{E_{\gamma}}{E_{\gamma}+E_{had}} > z_{cut}\;,

169: \end{equation}

170: with $z_{cut}$ fixed experimentally.

171: $z$ can also be defined with respect to the transverse energies 

172: instead of the energies.

173: 

174: Following this line, the ALEPH Collaboration \cite{aleph} has analysed

175: events produced on  the $Z$-resonance in $e^+e^-$ collisions which contained

176: one hadron jet and one photon jet, where the photon carried

177: at least $70\%$ of the jet energy.

178: A comparison between the measured rate

179: and a leading order (LO), ${\cal O}(\alpha)$,

180:  calculation \cite{glover-morgan}

181: yielded a first determination of the quark-to-photon fragmentation function

182: in observables related to jets. It is worth noting that in this observable,

183: called the $\gamma +1$-jet rate, the quark-to-photon

184: fragmentation function appears already at the lowest order.

185: This observable is therefore highly sensitive on the quark-to-photon

186: fragmentation function and particularly suited to determine it.

187: The calculation of the $\gamma$+1-jet rate was furthermore extended

188: to next-to-leading order (NLO), i.e.\ up to (${\cal O}(\alpha \alpha_{s})$)

189: in \cite{agg} and a NLO fragmentation function

190: was obtained~\cite{ggg} by comparison with the ALEPH data.

191: Computing the inclusive photon rate in the same fixed-order framework 

192: with the LO and NLO fragmentation functions obtained from the ALEPH data,

193: one finds~\cite{gggopalaleph} that the 

194: results are in good agreement with the OPAL measurement~\cite{opal}. 

195: 

196: 

197: To define isolated photons produced in a hadronic environment, 

198: a minimal amount of hadronic activity close to the photon must be admitted 

199: to ensure the infrared finiteness of the observable.

200: In the approach followed by ALEPH, 

201: the isolated photon rate 

202: is defined as the $\gamma$+1-jet rate where the photon carries 95 \% 

203: of the photon-jet energy. The amount of energy required for a photon 

204: inside the photon-jet to be called  ``isolated''  was fixed by 

205: analysing the data on the $\gamma$+1-jet rate for $0.7<z<1$.

206: The amount fixed depends on the experimental context.

207: %Different experimental environments may lead to an other amount of energy 

208: %required to define an isolated photon.  

209: In \cite{aleph}, the calculated and measured isolated rates 

210: were compared while varying the jet clustering parameter $y_{cut}$.

211: The theoretical prediction for the isolated rate defined as the 

212: $\gamma$+1-jet rate for $z>0.95$ using the measured photon 

213: fragmentation function at a given value of $y_{cut}$  were found 

214: in agreement with the measured isolated rate over 

215: the whole range of $y_{cut}$.

216: The inclusion of the NLO corrections in the theoretical prediction

217: improved the agreement.

218: 

219: Photon isolation from hadrons has been discussed intensively in the 

220: literature~\cite{frixione}, and  up to now 

221: the most common procedure  

222: uses a cone-based isolation criterion following the Snowmass convention 

223: \cite{snowmass}.

224: Recently, the ZEUS collaboration \cite{zeus} performed a measurement of

225: the inclusive isolated photon production cross section in electron-proton

226: deep inelastic scattering (DIS) 

227: at HERA using a cone-based isolation procedure. 

228: In this cross section, the photon carried $90\%$

229: of the energy inside a cone defined

230: in rapidity and azimuthal angle around the photon.

231: In \cite{zeus}, this measurement was compared to predictions

232: obtained with the Monte Carlo parton shower 

233: event generator programs PYTHIA~\cite{pythia}

234: and HERWIG \cite{herwig}, which do not include

235: photon fragmentation. ZEUS observed a noticeable excess

236: of the measurement compared to the predictions. Moreover, 

237: even after rescaling the normalisation of the cross section, none of the 

238: programs was able to describe all kinematical distributions 

239: of the experimental data in a satisfactory manner.

240: 

241: It was suggested in \cite{pisano}

242: that the isolated photon production cross section in 

243: DIS could be used to determine the photon distribution 

244: in the proton, 

245: assuming that all observed  isolated photons are radiated

246: from the lepton only. This photon distribution inside the proton 

247: is an important ingredient to 

248: electroweak corrections to cross sections at hadron 

249: colliders~\cite{phodist}.

250:  Although the observed total cross section 

251: seemed to be in agreement with model estimates based on QED-generated 

252: photon distributions in the proton~\cite{mrst}, it was recently 

253: demonstrated~\cite{saxon} that the kinematical distribution of photons

254:  inside the proton  can not be described in this approach. 

255: 

256: In \cite{zeusnew}, we performed a dedicated parton-level calculation

257: of the observable measured by ZEUS, using the same cone-based isolation

258: criterion as the ZEUS collaboration to define the isolated photon 

259: cross section. 

260: This parton-level calculation naturally includes two aspects which are 

261: neglected in the event generators: 

262: quark-to-photon fragmentation 

263: and large angle radiation of the photon from the lepton or from the quark.

264: Our results were found in good agreement with all aspects of the 

265: experimental measurement. 

266: 

267: In addition to measuring the inclusive isolated photon 

268: cross section,

269: the ZEUS collaboration also analysed~\cite{zeus} the production 

270: of prompt photons in association with hadronic jets. 

271: This measured cross section

272: was then compared with the NLO 

273: calculation \cite{herajet} of the $\gamma +(1+1)$-jet cross section: 

274: the cross section for the production of a photon-jet and one additional 

275: hadron-jet in the final state

276: ($n$-jet observables in DIS are usually denoted by $(n+1)$-jet

277:   observables where the $+1$ stands for the unobserved jet coming from the 

278: proton remnant).

279: Data and theory were found in good agreement. 

280: 

281: For this observable however, the quark-to-photon fragmentation 

282: function enters only at the next-to-leading order. 

283: Indeed, the ZEUS Collaboration did not analyse their data in view of a

284: determination of the quark-to-photon fragmentation function but 

285: just compared data and theory for the $\gamma +(1+1)$-jet cross section. 

286: 

287: To measure the quark-to-photon fragmentation function at HERA in DIS, 

288: it seems best to

289: consider the analogue to the $\gamma +1$-jet rate at LEP, thus 

290: the $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet cross section. For this observable, besides 

291: the photon jet, no further hadronic jet activity is present in the final state

292: except the proton remnant jet, of course.

293: Moreover, the quark-to-photon fragmentation function enters at the 

294: lowest order.

295: It is the principal goal of this paper to advocate a measurement 

296: of the quark-to-photon fragmentation function utilising HERA data    

297: on $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet events in DIS.

298: 

299: More precisely, the plan of the paper is as  follows.

300: In section~\ref{sec:calc},

301:  we present the calculation of the 

302:  $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet cross section which consists of the hard photon emission

303:  and the fragmentation process and we discuss how these two contributions 

304: are combined and implemented 

305: into a parton-level Monte Carlo program.

306: Section~\ref{sec:frag} contains our predictions for the 

307:  $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet cross section 

308: differential in $z$  ($0.7 <z<1$) using a given jet algorithm to build 

309: $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet final states, evaluated for different

310: quark-to-photon fragmentation functions. We illustrate how a 

311: measurement of this differential 

312: cross section can be used to 

313: extract the  quark-to-photon fragmentation function.

314: Defining isolated photons in deep inelastic scattering by considering 

315: photon jets with $z>0.9$, in section~\ref{sec:isol},

316: we present our results for the 

317: isolated $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet cross section and 

318: the isolated inclusive photon cross section,  

319: differential in rapidity ($\eta_{\gamma}$)  and transverse energy 

320: ($E_{T, \gamma}$). These are studied for different jet algorithms.

321: Finally, section~\ref{sec:conc} contains the conclusions and an outlook. 

322: 

323: \section{Parton-level calculation}

324: \setcounter{equation}{0}

325: \label{sec:calc}

326: We consider the production of $\gamma +(0+1)$ jets in DIS. 

327: $\gamma +(0+1)$ jets

328: are understood as a final state containing a highly energetic photon,

329:  which can be part of a hadronic jet (called the photon-jet and 

330: abbreviated by ``$\gamma$'' ), 

331: no further jet (``$+0$'') except the remnant jet (``$+1$'').

332: At leading order, the photon production process in DIS is  

333: ${\cal O}(\alpha^{3})$ which is to be compared with ${\cal O}(\alpha^{2})$

334: for the inclusive deep-inelastic process. 

335: At this order, two different partonic processes yield $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet 

336: final states:

337: (a) $l q \to l q \gamma$, where the photon and the quark are either clustered 

338: together into a single jet ($z<1$) or the quark is well separated 

339: from the photon, but is at too low transverse momentum or at too large 

340: rapidity to be identified as a jet ($z=1$).

341: (b) $l q\to lq$ where the quark jet fragments into a highly energetic 

342: photon carrying a large fraction $z$ of the jet energy.

343: Both processes will be discussed in detail in  

344: the following subsections. Following those,

345: we  will describe how the two

346: contributions are combined and implemented in a numerical parton-level 

347: Monte Carlo program. 

348: 

349: \subsection{Kinematical definition of the observable}

350: To select  $\gamma +(0+1)$ jets in DIS, 

351: several criteria must be fulfilled by the 

352: final state particles:

353: deep inelastic scattering events (as opposed to 

354: photoproduction,~\cite{phoprodth,phoprodexp}) are 

355: selected by requiring the final state electron to be observed in the 

356: detector. The final state electron carries an energy $E_e$ and is observed 

357: at a scattering angle $\Theta_e$ (measured with respect to the incoming proton

358: direction). These variables  determine the common DIS variables 

359: $y$ and $Q^2$. The kinematics of the final state photon are characterised 

360: by its transverse energy $E_{T,\gamma}$ and its rapidity $\eta_\gamma$ 

361: (which may be inferred respectively from the transverse energy 

362: and the rapidity of the photon jet, defined by a jet algorithm). Finally, 

363: to avoid contributions from elastic Compton scattering $e p \to e p \gamma$, 

364: several hadronic tracks  are required in the detector. 

365: 

366: To define the $\gamma +(0+1)$ jet cross section in DIS, numerous cuts on the

367: kinematical variables for the final state electron and photon momenta are 

368: applied to preselect 

369: candidate events. In the following, we denote these cuts collectively by 

370: $\Theta(p_e,p_\gamma)$. The selected events are then subjected to a jet 

371: algorithm, 

372: which combines $n-1$ observed particle momenta, including the photon, 

373: and the proton remnant, (whose momentum

374: $p_n$ is inferred from momentum conservation),

375: into a 

376: $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet final state. We denote the action of this jet 

377: algorithm onto the $n$ final state momenta symbolically by a jet function

378: $J^{(n)}_{\gamma+(0+1)}(p_1,\ldots,p_n)$. 

379: 

380: \subsection{Hard photon emission processes}

381: \label{sec:a}

382: At leading order, ${\cal O}(\alpha^{3})$,  

383: the cross section for the production of hard photons  

384: in DIS

385: is described by the quark (antiquark) process 

386: \begin{displaymath}

387: l(p_1) + q(p_2) \rightarrow \gamma(p_3) + l(p_4) + q(p_5) 

388: \label{loprocess}

389: \end{displaymath}

390: with the particle momenta given in parentheses. $l$  denotes a lepton

391: or anti-lepton, and $q$ a quark or an anti-quark.

392: The momentum of the

393: incoming quark is a fraction $\xi$ of the proton momentum $P$, $p_2 =

394: \xi P$ and the proton remnant $r$ carries the momentum $p_r = (1 - \xi) P$. 

395: The latter hadronises into the remnant jet independently of the other 

396: final state particles.

397: The contribution of this process to the $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet cross section 

398: is given by

399: the integral over the three-parton final state phase space, weighted by 

400: the jet definition and the cuts:

401: \begin{equation}

402: \int {\rm d}PS_{3} \;|M|^2_{lq \rightarrow \gamma lq}

403:  \,J^{(3)}_{\gamma + (0+1)}(p_3,p_5,p_r) \, \Theta(p_3,p_4) \;.

404: \label{eq:m2three}

405: \end{equation}

406: 

407: \begin{figure}[t]

408: \begin{center}

409: \epsfig{file=feyn1.ps,width=7cm}

410: \epsfig{file=feyn4.ps,width=7cm}\\

411: \epsfig{file=feyn3.ps,width=7cm}

412: \epsfig{file=feyn2.ps,width=7cm}

413: \end{center}

414: \caption{Leading order Feynman amplitudes for hard photon production in

415: DIS. The $QQ$-contribution is obtained by squaring the 

416: sum of the upper two amplitudes, the $LL$-contribution 

417: from the square of the lower

418: two amplitudes, and $QL$-contribution from their interference.}

419: \label{fig:3p}

420: \end{figure}

421: Both leptons and quarks emit photons.

422: In the scattering amplitudes for this hard photon production process, depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:3p},

423: the lepton-quark interaction 

424: is mediated by the exchange of a virtual photon. The final state photon 

425: can be emitted off the lepton or off the quark. Consequently, one finds three

426: contributions to the cross section, coming from the squared amplitudes 

427: for radiation off the quark ($QQ$) or the lepton ($LL$), as well as the

428: interference of these amplitudes ($QL$). These contributions were computed 

429: originally as part

430: of the QED radiative corrections to DIS~\cite{riemann},

431: where the final state photon remains unobserved.  

432: The $QL$ contribution is odd under charge exchange, such that it contributes

433: with opposite sign to the cross sections with $l=e^-$ and $l=e^+$. 

434: 

435: In the $LL$ subprocess

436: the final state photon is radiated off the lepton. Since the 

437: cuts ensure that photon and electron are experimentally 

438: separated, this subprocess 

439: is free of a collinear electron-photon singularity. 

440: As the photon is radiated off the lepton, 

441: the momentum of the final state lepton can not be used to

442: determine the invariant four-momentum transfer between the lepton and 

443: the quark, which is in this subprocess given by 

444: $Q_{LL}^2= -(p_5-p_1)^2$, with $Q_{LL}^2 < Q^2 = Q^2_{QQ}

445: = -(p_4-p_2)^2$. 

446: In principle, $Q_{LL}^2$ is unconstrained by the kinematical cuts, and the 

447: squared matrix element for the $LL$

448:  subprocess contains an explicit $1/Q^2_{LL}$. 

449: 

450: In this process, the requirement of observing hadronic tracks comes into 

451: play, since the limit $Q^2_{LL}\to 0$ corresponds to photon radiation in 

452: elastic electron-proton scattering (also called Compton scattering),

453: $ep \to ep\gamma$. To translate the track requirement into parton-level 

454: variables, we proceed as discussed in~\cite{zeusnew}.  

455: The central tracking detectors of the HERA experiments cover 

456: in the forward region rapidities of $\eta < 2$. Requiring tracks in 

457: this region amounts to the current jet being at least partially contained 

458: in it. Assuming a current jet radius of one unit in rapidity, this amounts to 

459: a cut on the outgoing quark rapidity $\eta_q<3$, which we apply here.  

460: Varying this cut results only in small variations of the resulting cross 

461: sections. The cut on the 

462: outgoing quark rapidity enforces a minimum for $Q^2_{LL}$, thus it avoids a 

463: singularity in this subprocess cross section $\hat{\sigma}_{LL}$. 

464: 

465: Some care has to be taken 

466: in the choice of the factorisation scale for  the quark distribution 

467: function inside the proton, $\mu_F^2$, in the LL subprocess. 

468: In a leading order parton model

469: calculation, $\mu_F^2$ should ideally be taken to be 

470: the invariant four-momentum transfer to the quark, i.e.\ $Q_{LL}^2$ for the 

471: $LL$ subprocess. Even applying the quark rapidity cut, 

472: $Q^2_{LL}$ can assume low values, $Q^2_{LL}\sim \Lambda_{QCD}^2$, where the 

473: parton model description loses its meaning. Because of the cuts,

474: this kinematical region yields however only a small contribution 

475: to the cross section. 

476: To account for it in the parton model framework, we introduce a minimal 

477: factorisation scale $\mu_{F,{\rm min}} = 1$~GeV, and 

478: choose for the $LL$

479: subprocess $\mu_F$ = max($\mu_{F,{\rm min}}$,$Q_{LL}$), and for the 

480: $QL$ interference contribution $\mu_F$ = 

481: max($\mu_{F,{\rm min}}$,$(Q_{LL}+Q_{QQ})/2$).  

482: This fixed factorisation scale is 

483: an approximation to more elaborate procedures to extend the parton model 

484: to low virtualities~\cite{bk}, but sufficient in the present context.

485: 

486: This procedure for the scale setting in the 

487: $LL$ and $QL$ subprocesses is similar to what is done in the related

488: process of 

489: electroweak gauge boson production in electron-proton

490: collisions~\cite{bvz}. The major difference to~\cite{bvz} is that 

491: the cross section for isolated photon production in DIS vanishes for 

492: $Q^2_{QQ,LL} \to 0$, while being non-vanishing for vector boson production.

493: Consequently, in~\cite{bvz} the calculation of deep inelastic gauge 

494: boson production had to be supplemented by photoproduction of gauge 

495: bosons at $Q^2=0$, with a proper matching of both contributions at a

496: low scale. This is not necessary in our case. 

497: 

498: In the $QQ$ contribution, the photon radiated from the quark can have been 

499: radiated at two different stages of the hadronisation process.

500: The quark and the photon are usually well separated  

501: from each other if the radiation took place at an early stage, 

502: a process we shall name real hard emission.

503: When the photon is radiated somewhat later during the

504: hadronisation process, the emission of a photon collinear to the primary

505: quarks can take place which 

506: gives rise to a collinear singularity in the calculation.

507: Both contributions, hard and collinear emission processes, can be 

508: calculated within perturbative QCD as will be described below.

509: 

510: As physical cross sections are necessarily finite, the collinear

511: singularity appearing in the collinear emission process 

512: gets factorised into the fragmentation function defined at 

513: some factorisation scale $\mu_{F,\gamma}$.

514: The fragmentation process will be discussed in the next subsection.

515: 

516: In the real emission processes, the final state partons are 

517: experimentally unresolved, as quark and photon get clustered in one jet. 

518: Those partons  can be theoretically 

519: resolved, well separated from each other (real hard radiation)

520: or they can be theoretically 

521: unresolved. In the latter case the quark and the photon are collinear

522: (real collinear radiation).

523: The calculation of these two contributions is performed using the 

524: the phase space slicing method \cite{slicing}. 

525: By introducing a parameter $y_{min}$, one is able to separate 

526: the divergent, quark-photon collinear contribution from the 

527: finite contribution where the quark and the photon are theoretically separated.

528:  

529: The collinear contribution corresponds to 

530: the collinear limit of the matrix element integrated over the 

531: phase space region relevant to the collinear limit. This phase space region is

532: defined 

533: by $y_{q \gamma} <y_{min}$, where $y_{q\gamma} = s_{35}/s_{12}$ 

534: is the dimensionless invariant mass of the quark-photon system. 

535: Due to collinear factorisation of the phase space and the matrix element,

536: the collinear contribution yields a universal collinear factor 

537: multiplied by the 

538: hard $2\to 2$ cross section ($\hat{\sigma}_{e q \to e q}$).

539: This  divergent collinear factor is calculated analytically and absorbed into 

540: the quark-to photon fragmentation function as we will discuss in 

541: section \ref{sec:b}. Once this divergent part is factorised, 

542: the remaining two-parton process $e q \rightarrow e q$  

543: is evaluated numerically and  this collinear contribution 

544: yields always a $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet final state.

545: In obtaining the collinear factor, terms of order ${\cal O}(y_{min})$ 

546: have been neglected so that 

547: to obtain reliable results, $y_{min}$ is chosen to be small enough.

548: For our numerical results below, we shall use $y_{min}=10^{-7}$.

549: 

550: The finite contribution, where the quark and the photon are 

551: theoretically separated

552: is a three-parton process and  

553: is evaluated numerically for the three-parton phase space restricted by 

554: $y_{q\gamma} > y_{min}$. The jet algorithm is then applied to retain only 

555: $\gamma +(0+1)$ jet final states.

556: The $y_{min}$-dependence in the finite and collinear contributions 

557: cancels numerically when those are added together, 

558: such that the total $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet cross section is independent of this 

559: slicing parameter $y_{min}$. This independence yields an important 

560: check on the correctness of our calculation. 

561: 

562: 

563: \subsection{Fragmentation contributions}

564: \label{sec:b}

565: In addition to the production of hard photons in the final state,

566: photons can also be produced through the fragmentation of a

567: hadronic quark jet into a single photon carrying a large fraction $z$ 

568: of the jet energy \cite{koller}. 

569: This fragmentation process is described in terms

570: of the quark-to-photon fragmentation function, $D_{q\to \gamma}$, 

571: which is convoluted with the cross section for the electron-quark 

572: scattering process

573: \begin{displaymath}

574: l(p_1) + q(p_2) \rightarrow l(p_4) + q(p_{35}) \;,

575: \end{displaymath}

576: such that the final state photon and quark momenta are given by 

577: $p_3 = z p_{35}$ and $p_5 = (1-z) p_{35}$. 

578: 

579: The fragmentation contribution to the $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet cross section 

580: associated with this fragmentation process

581: is displayed in Figure~\ref{fig:2p}. It  takes formally the following 

582: factorised form, 

583: \begin{equation}

584: \int {\rm d}PS_{2} \;|M|^2_{lq \rightarrow lq} 

585:  D_{q\to \gamma}(z) \,J^{(2)}_{\gamma+(0+1)} (p_{35},p_r)\, \Theta (p_3,p_4)\;.

586: \label{eq:m2frag}

587: \end{equation}

588: Here $J^{(2)}_{\gamma+(0+1)}$, 

589: the jet function defining how to obtain $\gamma+(0+1)$

590: jets out of one parton and the proton remnant, is simply $\Theta(z>z_{cut})$,

591: and thus independent of the jet recombination procedure. 

592: 

593: \begin{figure}[t]

594: \begin{center}

595: \epsfig{file=feyn5.ps,width=8cm}

596: \end{center}

597: \caption{Leading order Feynman amplitude for the quark-to-photon 

598: fragmentation process in deep inelastic scattering.}

599: \label{fig:2p}

600: \end{figure}

601: Like the hard photon contribution related to 

602: the parton process $l q \rightarrow l q \gamma$,

603: this fragmentation contribution is of order $\alpha^{3}$: 

604: The process $e q \rightarrow e q$ is of order $\alpha^2$ while the 

605: quark-to-photon fragmentation function $D_{q\to \gamma}$ is of 

606: order $\alpha$. The latter is given by,

607: \begin{equation}

608: D_{q \rightarrow \gamma}(z)= D_{q \to \gamma}(z,\mu_{F,\gamma}) + 

609: \frac{\alpha e_q^2}{2\pi}

610:  \left(P^{(0)}_{q\gamma}(z)\ln\frac{z(1-z)y_{min}s_{lq}}{\mu_{F,\gamma}^2} 

611:          + z\right)\, .

612: \label{eq:dqg}  

613: \end{equation} 

614: Here $D_{q\rightarrow \gamma}(z,\mu_{F,\gamma})$  stands for the

615: non-perturbative quark-to-photon fragmentation function describing 

616: the transition $q \rightarrow \gamma$ at

617: the factorisation scale $\mu_{F,\gamma}$. Parametrizations for this function

618:  will be specified below.

619: The second term in (\ref{eq:dqg}), if substituted in

620: (\ref{eq:m2frag}), represents the finite part obtained after absorption of 

621: the collinear quark-photon factor described in section~\ref{sec:a}

622: into the bare fragmentation function as explained in \cite{glover-morgan}.

623: 

624: 

625: In (\ref{eq:dqg}), $P_{q\gamma}^{(0)}$ is the LO quark-to-photon splitting

626: function

627: \begin{equation}

628: P_{q\gamma}^{(0)}(z) = \frac{1 + (1-z)^2}{z}

629: \label{pqgamma}

630: \end{equation}

631: and $e_q$ is the electric charge of the quark $q$. The variable $z$ denotes

632: the fraction of the quark energy carried away by the photon, while $s_{lq}$ 

633: is the lepton-quark squared centre-of-mass energy.

634: 

635: In order to turn the expression (\ref{eq:m2frag}) 

636: into a cross section,

637: one needs to know the non-perturbative quark-to-photon fragmentation function 

638: at the factorisation scale $\mu_{F,\gamma}$, 

639: $D_{q \to \gamma}(z,\mu_{F,\gamma})$.

640: This function satisfies an evolution equation 

641: which determines its variation with respect to the factorisation scale 

642: $\mu_{F,\gamma}$ to all orders in $\alpha_{s}$. 

643: Restricting ourselves to the zeroth order in $\alpha_{s}$,

644: at order $\alpha$, this fragmentation function obeys the leading order 

645: evolution equation, 

646: \begin{equation}

647: \frac{{\rm d}D_{q \to \gamma}(z,\mu_{F,\gamma})}{{\rm d}\ln \mu_{F,\gamma}^2}

648: =\frac{\alpha e_{q}^2}{2 \pi}P_{q\gamma}^{(0)}(z).

649: \label{evolution}

650: \end{equation} 

651: The fixed-order exact solution at ${\cal O}(\alpha)$ then reads,

652: \begin{equation}

653:  D_{q \to \gamma}(z,\mu_{F,\gamma})=\frac{\alpha e_{q}^2}{2 \pi} 

654: \,P_{q\gamma}^{(0)}(z)

655: \ln \left(\frac{\mu_{F,\gamma}^2}{\mu_{0}^2}\right) + D_{q \to \gamma}(z,\mu_{0})

656: \label{eq:npFF}

657: \end{equation}

658: $D_{q \to \gamma}(z,\mu_{0})$ is the quark-to-photon fragmentation function 

659: at some initial scale $\mu_{0}$. This function and the initial scale $\mu_0$ 

660: cannot be calculated and have to be determined from experimental data. 

661: First indications for a non-vanishing $D_{q \to \gamma}(z,\mu_{0})$

662: could be obtained by the EMC collaboration~\cite{emc} from the 

663: study of photon spectra in deep inelastic scattering, which were however 

664: insufficient for a detailed measurement. The first determination of 

665: $D_{q \to \gamma}(z,\mu_{0})$ was performed

666: by the ALEPH collaboration~\cite{aleph}. 

667: From their fit to the $e^+e^- \to \gamma +1$-jet 

668: data they obtained

669: \begin{equation}

670: D_{q \to \gamma}(z,\mu_{0})= \frac{\alpha e_{q}^2}{2 \pi} 

671: \left ( -P_{q\gamma}^{(0)}(z)\;\ln(1-z)^2 -13.26  \right ),

672: \label{eq:fit}

673: \end{equation}

674: with $\mu_{0}=0.14$ GeV. 

675: We note that (\ref{eq:npFF}) is an exact solution of (\ref{evolution}) 

676: at ${\cal O}(\alpha)$.

677: Furthermore when we substitute the solution (\ref{eq:npFF}) 

678:  into (\ref{eq:dqg}) the cross section 

679: becomes independent of the 

680: factorisation scale $\mu_{F,\gamma}$. 

681: This means that for the cancellation of the $\mu_{F,\gamma}$ dependence 

682: only the LO photon FF is needed.

683: Nonetheless, in order to see the influence of the NLO corrections to 

684: $D_{q \rightarrow \gamma}(z,\mu_{F,\gamma})$, we shall also evaluate 

685: the $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet 

686: cross section in DIS with the inclusion of the NLO photon FF. 

687: 

688: Similar to (\ref{eq:npFF}) the NLO fragmentation function 

689:  $D_{q \rightarrow \gamma}(z,\mu_{F,\gamma})$ is obtained as the solution 

690: of the evolution equation, but now with

691: O($\alpha \alpha_s$) terms added on the right-hand side of

692: (\ref{evolution}):

693: \begin{equation}

694: \frac{{\rm d}D_{q \to \gamma}(z,\mu_{F,\gamma})}{{\rm d}\ln \mu_{F,\gamma}^2}

695: =\frac{\alpha e_q^2}{2\pi}

696: \left[P^{(0)}_{q\gamma}(z)+

697:       \frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi} C_F P^{(1)}_{q\gamma}(z)\right]

698: + \frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi} C_F P^{(0)}_{qq}(z)\otimes 

699: D_{q \rightarrow \gamma}(z,\mu_{F,\gamma}).

700: \end{equation}

701: The resulting quark-to-photon FF at scale $\mu_{F,\gamma}$ is 

702: \begin{equation}

703: \begin{array}{l} \displaystyle

704: D_{q \rightarrow \gamma}(z,\mu_{F,\gamma}) = \frac{\alpha e_q^2}{2\pi}

705: \left[P^{(0)}_{q\gamma}(z)+

706:       \frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi} C_F P^{(1)}_{q\gamma}(z)\right]

707: \ln\left(\frac{\mu_{F,\gamma}^2} {\mu_0^2}\right) 

708: \\ \displaystyle

709:  + \frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi} C_F P^{(0)}_{qq}(z)

710: \ln\left(\frac{\mu_{F,\gamma}^2}{\mu_0^2}\right) 

711: \otimes \left[\frac{\alpha e_q^2}{2\pi}

712: \frac{1}{2}P^{(0)}_{q\gamma}(z)

713: \ln \left(\frac{\mu_{F,\gamma}^2}{\mu_0^2}\right) +

714: D_{q \rightarrow \gamma}(z,\mu_0) \right] 

715:    + D_{q \rightarrow \gamma}(z,\mu_0).

716: \end{array}

717: \label{dqg-solu2}

718: \end{equation}

719: $P^{(1)}_{q\gamma}(z)$ is the next-to-leading order

720: quark-to-photon splitting function \cite{curci} and $P^{(0)}_{qq}(z)$ is

721: the  LO $qq$ splitting function~\cite{AP}. $D_{q \rightarrow

722:   \gamma}(z,\mu_0)$ is the initial value of the NLO FF, which contains

723: all unknown long-distance contributions. The result in (\ref{dqg-solu2})

724: is an exact solution of the evolution equation up to O($\alpha

725: \alpha_s$). The NLO photon FF has equally

726: been determined \cite{ggg} using the ALEPH $e^+e^- \to \gamma+1$-jet 

727: data\cite{aleph}. A three parameter fit with $\alpha_s(M_{Z}^2)=0.124$ 

728: yielded

729: \begin{equation}

730: D^{NLO}_{q \rightarrow \gamma}(z,\mu_{0})=\frac{\alpha e_q^2}{2\pi} \left(

731: -P^{(0)}_{q\gamma}(z) \ln(1-z)^2 + 20.8(1-z) - 11.07 \right)

732: \label{dqg-NLO}

733: \end{equation}

734: with $\mu_0 = 0.64$ GeV. Inside the experimental errors this fit for the

735: photon FF at $\mu_{0}$ describes~\cite{ggg} the ALEPH data at least as good as the LO fit

736: (\ref{eq:fit}). 

737: 

738: It should be noted that the above LO and NLO quark-to-photon 

739: FF do not take into account the resummation of

740: powers of $\ln (\mu_{F,\gamma}^2/\mu_0^2)$ as conventionally implemented, e.g.\ via the

741: Altarelli-Parisi evolution equations~\cite{AP}. Such resummations are only

742: unambiguous if the resummed logarithm is the only large logarithm in the

743: kinematical region under consideration. If logarithms of different

744: arguments can become simultaneously large, the resummation of one of

745: these logarithms at a given order implies that all other potentially

746: large logarithms are shifted into a higher order of the perturbative

747: expansion, i.e.\ are neglected. In the evaluation of the $\gamma+1$-jet

748: rate at ${\cal O}(\alpha)$ \cite{aleph} and ${\cal O}(\alpha \alpha_{s})$ 

749: \cite{agg} at

750: LEP for $0.7 < z < 1$, one encounters at least two different potentially

751: large logarithms, $\ln \mu^2_{F,\gamma}$  and $\ln (1-z)$. In the high-$z$

752: region, where the photon is isolated or almost isolated, it is

753: by far not clear that $\ln \mu^2_{F,\gamma}$ 

754: is the largest logarithm. Choosing 

755: not to resum the logarithms of $\ln \mu^2_{F,\gamma}$ is therefore equally

756: justified for the case of large $z$, $z \rightarrow 1$.

757: 

758: In the conventional approach, powers of $\ln (\mu_{F,\gamma}^2/\mu_0^2)$

759: are resummed. The parton-to-photon FF's $D_{i

760:  \rightarrow \gamma}(z,\mu_{F,\gamma})$ then satisfy a system of inhomogeneous

761: evolution equations \cite{AP}. 

762: The solution of these equations resums all leading logarithms of the type 

763: $\alpha_s^n \ln^{n+1}\mu_{F,\gamma}^2$. Including ${\cal O}(\alpha_{s})$ 

764: corrections to the splitting functions yields resummation of 

765: subleading logarithms of the type $\alpha_s^n \ln^n\mu_{F,\gamma}^2$. Several 

766: parametrisations of the photon FF are available in this approach.

767: These use some model assumptions to describe the 

768: initial FF at some low scale $\mu_0$.

769: The most recent parametrisation of the photon FF in this 

770: approach are the BFG 

771: fragmentation functions \cite{bfg}. This parametrisation has been compared 

772: to the ALEPH $\gamma$ +1-jet cross section which is sensitive

773:  to the large $z$ region ($0.7<z<1$) and found in agreement with the data

774: \cite{gggopalaleph}. 

775: Previous parametrisations were proposed in \cite{duke,grv}.

776: Those tend to predict the 

777: $\gamma +1$-jet cross section in excess compared 

778: to the ALEPH data and will not be considered in the remainder of this paper.

779: 

780: 

781: As already mentioned, the inclusion of the NLO quark-to-photon

782: fragmentation function in our evaluation of the $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet 

783: cross section is not required to cancel the 

784: factorisation scale dependence of the cross section. There,

785: only the leading order (LO) fragmentation function is required.

786: However,  

787: the NLO quark-to-photon fragmentation function corresponds 

788: to an expansion in $\alpha_{s}$ of the resummed quark-to-photon 

789: fragmentation function derived in a conventional approach 

790: \cite{gggopalaleph}, 

791: neglecting the initial fragmentation function  $D_{q \to \gamma}(z,\mu_{0})$.

792: It is therefore instructive to implement the 

793: NLO quark-to-photon fragmentation function

794: in the evaluation of the observable.   

795: Doing so will enable us to compare the results obtained 

796: in different approaches.

797: 

798: Thus we have three different quark-to-photon FF at our

799: disposal which have been compared and found in agreement with the ALEPH data: 

800: the fixed order LO 

801: parametrisation, using the ALEPH data directly to determine the

802: initial distribution given in (\ref{eq:npFF}) and (\ref{eq:fit}), a NLO  

803: determined function given by 

804: (\ref{dqg-solu2}) and (\ref{dqg-NLO}) directly fitted to the ALEPH data,

805: and the NLO parametrisation of BFG. 

806: A detailed comparison of the two approaches (fixed order and conventional) 

807: is given in \cite{gggopalaleph}. Results for the $\gamma +1$-jet rate for LEP 

808: as measured by ALEPH  with these different parametrizations of the photon FF 

809: are also shown in \cite{gggopalaleph}. 

810: Furthermore, results for the theoretical calculation of the 

811: $\gamma +(1+1)$-jet cross sections in DIS

812: using those various fragmentation functions are discussed in \cite{photonfrag}.

813: 

814: In the remainder of this paper, we shall use these three

815: parametrisations of the photon FF to predict differential $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet 

816: cross sections in DIS. Finally, for the numerical results presented in the 

817: following, we shall always use $\mu_{F,\gamma}^2 = Q^2$.

818: 

819: 

820: \subsection{Numerical implementation}

821: The  $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet cross section involves two partonic contributions:

822: the hard-photon production and quark-to-photon fragmentation processes. 

823: Consequently, the cross section which is evaluated numerically 

824: in the form of a parton-level Monte Carlo generator 

825: contains a three-parton channel and a two-parton channel. 

826: The three-parton channel 

827: is evaluated  with the restriction that the quark and the photon 

828: are theoretically resolved, i.e.\ not collinear, 

829: defined by  $y_{q \gamma} > y_{min}$. 

830: A recombination algorithm yielding a  $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet final state 

831: is then applied to the partons present in the final state  

832: and a $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet event  

833: is obtained as an event with a photon-jet and the proton remnant jet.

834: The two-parton channel is proportional 

835: to the quark-to-photon fragmentation function and contains the 

836: contribution from collinear quark-photon 

837: radiation, in the region $y_{q \gamma}\leq y_{min}$.

838: In this case, the final state partons always build a $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet event.

839: The partonic cross section for $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet production reads,

840: \begin{eqnarray}

841: \hat{\sigma} &=&\int_{y_{q \gamma}>y_{min}}{\rm d}PS_{3}\,

842: |M|^2_{l q \rightarrow lq \gamma}\;

843: J^{(3)}_{\gamma+(0+1)}(p_3,p_5,p_r) \, \Theta(p_3,p_4) 

844:  \nonumber \\

845:  &+ & \int {\rm d}PS_{2}\,

846: |M|^2_{l q \rightarrow lq}\; D_{q \to \gamma}(z)

847: \,J^{(2)}_{\gamma+(0+1)} (p_{35},p_r)\, \Theta (p_3,p_4)\;.

848: \label{sigma2}

849: \end{eqnarray}

850: %Here, $J_{(i)}^{(j)}$ is the jet-function which ensures that only 

851: %events with a $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet topology are taken into account to evaluate 

852: %the cross section. 

853: Contributions where the photon builds a jet on his own are 

854: also included in the first term of the above equation. These contributions 

855: are obtained if the quark is combined with the remnant or is at too low 

856: transverse momentum or at too large rapidity to be identified as a jet. 

857: The application of kinematical cuts on the outgoing electron and photon 

858: is formally given  

859: by $\Theta(p_{3},p_{4})$.

860: Details concerning the jet function and the kinematical cuts 

861: will be given in section \ref{sec:frag}. 

862: 

863: Finally, the cross section $\sigma$ for deep inelastic electron-proton 

864: scattering is obtained by a convolution between the parton-level 

865: cross section $\hat \sigma$ for a given quark flavour (\ref{sigma2}) 

866: with the corresponding parton distribution function

867: summed over all quark and anti-quark flavours.

868: For this, we use the the CTEQ6L \cite{cteq6l} leading order parametrisation 

869: of parton distributions. 

870: 

871: 

872: \section{The $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet cross section}

873: \label{sec:frag}

874: \setcounter{equation}{0}

875: In this section, we present our predictions for the $\gamma +(0+1)$ jet

876: cross section in DIS at leading order,

877: i.e.\ to  ${\cal O}(\alpha^3)$. We focus in particular on the photon 

878: energy distribution of the photon jet by studying differential 

879: distributions in the photon energy fraction $z$. An experimental 

880: photon identification appears to be realistic only for large $z$: $0.7<z<1$. 

881: By comparing the predictions obtained with different 

882: parametrisations of the quark-to-photon 

883: fragmentation function, we will demonstrate the 

884: sensitivity of this observable on the photon FF.

885: From the measured differential cross section, these predictions 

886: could lead to a new determination of the quark-to-photon fragmentation 

887: function in DIS. 

888: 

889: We recall that a measurement of the 

890: photon FF in DIS from the $z$-distribution of the 

891:  $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet cross

892: section was suggested  in~\cite{photonfrag}. Compared to this, 

893: the measurement from the $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet cross section discussed here

894: has an important advantage. 

895: The photon fragmentation function enters here 

896: already at the leading order, while it enters as a higher-order correction 

897: to the $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet cross section. Consequently, the ratio of the 

898: $z>0.9$ contribution to the $0.7<z<0.9$ contributions is considerably 

899: larger in  $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet final states than in 

900:  $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet final states, which in turn renders the experimental 

901: separation of the different bins more difficult. 

902: 

903: 

904: Before we present our results, we specify the kinematical 

905: selection criteria appropriate for the HERA experimental environment 

906: and give a brief description of the different jet algorithms used in our 

907: study.  

908: 

909: 

910: \subsection{Kinematical selection criteria}  

911: \label{sec:kinfrag}

912: The results for the differential cross sections for the $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet 

913: cross section

914:  are obtained for energies and kinematical cuts appropriate for the 

915: HERA experiments \cite{carsten}. A combined data sample of incoming positrons 

916: and 

917: electrons is considered here, with a positron fraction of $85.6\%$.

918: The energies of the incoming electron

919: (or positron) and proton are $E_e = 27.5$ GeV and $E_p = 920$ GeV,

920: respectively. The cuts on the DIS variables are chosen as follows:

921: \begin{equation}

922: E_{e}> 10~{\rm GeV}\,, \quad  151^{\circ}< \Theta_{e}< 177^{\circ}\,,\quad

923:    Q^2 > 4~{\rm GeV}^2\, \quad \mbox{and} \quad y > 0.15   

924: \;. 

925: \label{cuts1}

926: \end{equation}

927: The cuts on the electron energy and the scattering angle are due to  experimental 

928: requirements for the unambiguous identification of the electron, 

929: reflecting the geometry of the H1 detector. The 

930: cut on $Q^2$ is intended to ensure deep inelastic scattering events, as 

931: opposed to photoproduction. As discussed earlier, this cut is effective on the

932: parton level only for the $QQ$ subprocess, while the $LL$ subprocess 

933: can involve much lower virtualities of the exchanged photon. 

934: Deep inelastic scattering kinematics in the $LL$ process are ensured 

935: experimentally by requiring multiple hadronic tracks in the final state, 

936: which we implemented by requiring a maximum rapidity of the outgoing quark 

937: $\eta_{q} <3$.

938: Finally, a 

939: cut on the energy transfer variable $y$ is part of the preselection of 

940: deep inelastic events, intended to minimise effects of 

941: electromagnetic radiative corrections. 

942: In our study, we choose the minimal value of $y$ considerably 

943: larger than in typical analyses in DIS: for the 

944:  $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet final states this large minimum value of $y$ enhances 

945: the importance of the fragmentation contribution relative to the hard 

946: photon radiation. 

947: 

948: Final states are classified as $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet events 

949: after a jet algorithm has been applied to the momenta of the final state 

950: hadrons and the photon. 

951: The photon is treated like the quark during the jet

952: formation according to 

953: the  so-called democratic procedure~\cite{glover-morgan}.

954: If a jet is formed,

955: it is called ``photon-jet'' if the photon carries a large fraction 

956: of the jet energy (or jet transverse energy) $z > z_{{\rm cut}}$.

957: 

958: For this observable, it is crucial to apply the 

959: jet algorithm in the HERA laboratory frame. This situation is 

960: different from most 

961: studies of $(n+1)$-jet production in DIS ($n\geq 2$), which  

962: are preferably performed in the $\gamma^*$-proton centre-of-mass frame. 

963: In these studies, the positive $z$-axis is chosen to be the proton direction,

964: proton and virtual photon are back-to-back and the produced hard jets

965: are also back-to-back in transverse momentum.

966: This is also the situation one faces when examining the production of    

967: $\gamma +(1+1)$ jets as described in \cite{photonfrag}. 

968: In this case, the transverse energy of the photon-jet is balanced 

969: against the transverse energy of the other hard jet in the final state.

970: 

971: However in the evaluation of the $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet production 

972: at leading order, there is no hard 

973: jet to be back-to-back to the photon-jet.

974: Indeed, if one views this observable in the 

975: $\gamma^*$-proton centre-of-mass frame, 

976: the quark-photon system  

977: is back-scattered in the negative $z$-direction. 

978:  Final state photon and quark are therefore

979: at vanishing transverse momentum, and a photon jet can not be defined in a 

980: sensible manner in this frame. 

981: 

982: In the HERA laboratory frame on the other hand, 

983: incoming proton and electron as well as the proton remnant move along the 

984: $z$-axis (with positive $z$-direction defined by the incoming proton).

985: The photon-jet has a transverse momentum  with respect to this axis,

986: which is counter-balanced by the transverse momentum of the outgoing 

987: electron. In this frame, jets are constructed using one of the jet 

988: algorithms explained below and described by their rapidity $\eta_j$ 

989: and transverse energy $E_{T,j}$ in the HERA frame. The rapidity of the photon 

990: jet $\eta_{\gamma-jet}$

991: is also called photon rapidity $\eta_\gamma$. 

992: One defines the photon energy fraction inside the photon-jet by

993: \begin{equation}

994: z=\frac{E_{T,\gamma}}{E_{T,\gamma-{\rm jet}}}\;. 

995: \end{equation}

996: On the level of the theoretical calculation an analoguous jet algorithm is applied   

997: to cluster the final state quark, photon and proton remnant 

998: into $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet final states. If photon and 

999: quark are clustered together to form the photon jet, we have the 

1000: corresponding theoretical expression for the photon energy fraction 

1001: inside the photon-quark cluster given by, 

1002: \begin{equation}

1003: z=\frac{E_{T,\gamma}}{E_{T,\gamma}+E_{T,q}}\;.

1004: \end{equation}

1005: While for photon and quark not being merged in the same jet, we always find 

1006: $z=1$.

1007: 

1008: For our predictions we use $z_{cut}=0.7$ to identify a jet as photon jet. 

1009: %The value of this cut is usually fixed in agreement with the experimental 

1010: %conditions. 

1011: Furthermore, cuts are imposed on the photon-jet itself.

1012: The photon-jet is required to have a minimum transverse energy in the HERA 

1013: frame, 

1014: $E_{T,\gamma-jet}>3$~GeV and its rapidity is restricted to be 

1015: $-1.2<\eta_{\gamma-jet}<1.8$. If photon and quark are not combined into a 

1016: single jet, and the quark is also not combined with the proton remnant, 

1017: we expect to have a $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet final state. However, this final 

1018: state is observed only if the quark jet can be identified, i.e.\ has 

1019: sufficient transverse energy $E_{T,q} > 2.5$~GeV and is inside the 

1020: detector coverage ($-2.1 < \eta_q < 2.1$). If the quark is forming a 

1021: jet on its own outside these quark jet cuts, one  still observes 

1022: $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet final states. 

1023: 

1024: \subsection{Jet algorithms}

1025: 

1026: Concerning the jet formation itself, 

1027: two kinds of jet algorithms are commonly 

1028: used to study jet production in 

1029: DIS~\cite{disjet1,disjet2}: 

1030: the hadronic $k_{T}$-algorithm \cite{ellis-soper}, 

1031: which was developed originally for 

1032: hadron colliders, and a modified version of the 

1033: Durham $k_{T}$-algorithm~\cite{durhamkt}, adapted for deep inelastic 

1034: scattering~\cite{ktdis}. We briefly describe each algorithm in this section.

1035: 

1036: In the hadronic 

1037: $k_{T}$-algorithm, which is applied here in the HERA laboratory frame, 

1038: one computes for each particle $i$ and for each pair of particles 

1039: $i,j$ the

1040: quantities 

1041: \begin{equation}

1042: d_i = E_{T,i}^2\,, \quad d_{ij} = {\rm min} (E_{T,i}^2,E_{T,j}^2) 

1043: \left((\eta_{i} -\eta_{j})^2 +(\phi_{i}-\phi_{j})^2\right)  /R^2 \;,

1044: \end{equation}

1045: where $\eta_i$ is the rapidity of particle $i$ and $\phi_i$ is its polar angle 

1046: in the plane perpendicular to the incoming beam direction. $R$ is the

1047: jet resolution parameter in this algorithm. One then searches the smallest of 

1048: all $d_i$ and $d_{ij}$, which is labeled $d_{min}$. If $d_{min}$ is a 

1049: $d_i$, then particle $i$ is identified as a jet and removed from the

1050: clustering procedure. If $d_{min}$ is a $d_{ij}$, particles $i,j$ are merged 

1051: into a new particle (proto-jet) with

1052: \begin{equation}

1053: E_{T,ij} = E_{T,i} + E_{T,j}\,,\quad

1054: \eta_{ij} =  \frac{E_{T,i} \eta_i + E_{T,j}\eta_j}

1055: {E_{T,ij}}\,,\quad

1056: \phi_{ij} =  \frac{E_{T,i} \phi_i + E_{T,j}\phi_j}

1057: {E_{T,ij}}\;.

1058: \end{equation}

1059: The algorithm is repeated until all remaining particles or proto-jets 

1060: are identified as 

1061: jets. Experimentally observable jets are then required to have some minimal 

1062: amount of transverse energy $E_{T,min}$. All jets below $E_{T,min}$ are 

1063: unobservable (and can thus be considered part of the proton remnant); the 

1064: resolution parameter $R$ does therefore control how likely a low energy 

1065: particle is clustered into the harder jets or into the remnant. 

1066: 

1067: Applied on the parton level, one computes 

1068: \begin{equation}

1069: d_{\gamma q}={\rm min}(E^2_{T,\gamma},E_{T,q}^2)\;

1070: \left((\eta_{\gamma} -\eta_{q})^2 +(\phi_{\gamma}-\phi_{q})^2\right)  /R^2 

1071: \end{equation}

1072: and recombines photon and quark if 

1073: \begin{equation}

1074: d_{\gamma q} <  {\rm min}(E^2_{T,\gamma},E_{T,q}^2)\;.

1075: \label{eq:ktcone}

1076: \end{equation}

1077: This condition can be expressed purely in terms of the angular distance of 

1078: photon and quark:

1079: \begin{equation}

1080: (\eta_{\gamma} -\eta_{q})^2 +(\phi_{\gamma}-\phi_{q})^2  < R^2 \,.

1081: \label{eq:cone}

1082: \end{equation}

1083: It should be noted that this simplified condition is valid only at the 

1084: leading order, where the hadronic $k_T$-algorithm is applied only to two 

1085: partons (quark and photon) and thus performs only a single iteration. As soon 

1086: as more than two partons are present (at higher orders), the algorithm

1087: iterates over all possible pairs of partons. It is noteworthy that 

1088: (\ref{eq:cone}) is identical to the 

1089: recombination condition  which is used in the cone algorithm~\cite{snowmass}

1090:  in jet studies at hadron colliders and also in cone-based 

1091: definitions of isolated photons. In these, the resolution parameter $R$ 

1092: is the cone size. A detailed comparison of the hadronic $k_T$-algorithm 

1093: and the cone algorithm can be found in~\cite{ellis-soper}.

1094: 

1095: If condition (\ref{eq:ktcone}) is fulfilled, quark and photon are 

1096: recombined into a single photon jet at parton level, which has:

1097: \begin{equation}

1098: E_{T,\gamma-jet} = E_{T,\gamma} + E_{T,q}\,,\qquad

1099: \eta_{\gamma-jet} =  \frac{E_{T,\gamma} \eta_\gamma + E_{T,q}\eta_q}

1100: {E_{T,\gamma-jet}}\;.

1101: \end{equation}

1102: 

1103: 

1104: The modified Durham $k_{T}$-algorithm~\cite{ktdis}, 

1105: also applied in the HERA laboratory frame and  

1106: adapted to the application in DIS features an important difference to the 

1107: original formulation for $e^+e^-$ annihilation: 

1108: the proton remnant is taken into account in the jet 

1109: formation. For this algorithm, we 

1110: consider the exclusive and inclusive 

1111: formulation: the inclusive $k_{T}$-algorithm clusters until only the 

1112: desired $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet final state is left, while the 

1113: exclusive $k_{T}$-algorithm stops the recombination of particles 

1114: according to a jet resolution parameter. 

1115: A detailed discussion of both options for jet production in DIS can

1116: be found in~\cite{disjet1,disjet2}.

1117: 

1118: 

1119: 

1120: Both inclusive and exclusive $k_T$-algorithms applied in the HERA laboratory

1121:  frame 

1122: calculate the quantity 

1123: \begin{equation}

1124: E^2_{T,ij}=2\,{\rm min}(E^2_{T,i},E^2_{T,j})(1-\cos \theta_{ij})

1125: \label{eq:ktdur}

1126: \end{equation}

1127: for each pair $i,j$  of particles. The pair with the lowest 

1128: $E^2_{T,ij}$ is then combined into a new particle by adding the momenta 

1129: of $i$ and $j$. For the inclusive $k_{T}$-algorithm, this procedure is 

1130: repeated until only a $\gamma+(0+1)$~jet final state is left, while for 

1131: the exclusive $k_{T}$-algorithm, the procedure stops as soon as the 

1132: pair with the lowest $E^2_{T,ij}$ has $E^2_{T,ij}/W^2 <y_{cut}$, where 

1133: $W^2$ is the total invariant mass of the hadronic final state including the 

1134: photon.  $y_{cut}$ is the experimental jet resolution 

1135: parameter, it determines the broadness of the jet. It has in fact a similar 

1136: role as $R$, the resolution parameter of the hadronic $k_T$-algorithm, or 

1137: the radius of the cone in the cone algorithm. 

1138: 

1139: On the parton level, we compute (\ref{eq:ktdur}) for $i,j$ 

1140: being each pair of two of the three partons: photon, quark and proton remnant.

1141: The jet algorithm then selects the minimum of these three quantities.

1142: In the inclusive case, the pair $i,j$ of partons with the minimal value of 

1143: $E^2_{T,ij}$ is always combined, while for the exclusive case

1144: this pair is combined only if 

1145: $E^2_{T,ij}/W^2 <y_{cut}$ 

1146: with $W^2$ being the squared invariant  mass of photon, quark and proton

1147:  remnant.

1148: 

1149: Quark and photon build one jet if the minimal value of  $E^2_{T,ij}$ 

1150: is given by 

1151: $E^2_{T,\gamma q}$ (in the exclusive case, $E^2_{T,\gamma q}

1152: /W^2 <y_{cut}$ has to be fulfilled as well). 

1153: If photon and remnant are combined, the event is 

1154: always discarded, while it is always accepted if quark and remnant 

1155: are combined. In this case, the photon forms a jet on its own. In the 

1156: exclusive case, we can have photon, quark and remnant forming each a 

1157: jet on their own, i.e.\ yielding a $\gamma +(1+1)$-jet final state.

1158: As we will see, for large values of $y_{cut}$ (above $y_{cut}=0.1$) 

1159: both inclusive and exclusive jet algorithms lead to very similar predictions 

1160: for the $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet cross section.

1161: 

1162: If photon and quark are combined, we compute for the photon jet

1163: \begin{equation}

1164: E_{T,\gamma-jet} = E_{T,\gamma} + E_{T,q}\,,\qquad

1165: \eta_{\gamma-jet} = \frac{1}{2} \log 

1166: \frac{E_\gamma + E_q + p_{z,\gamma}+ p_{z,q}}

1167: {E_\gamma + E_q - p_{z,\gamma}- p_{z,q}} \;.

1168: \end{equation}

1169: 

1170: We finally 

1171: recall that applying any of the 

1172: jet  algorithms on the parton level will classify two types of 

1173: partonic contributions 

1174: as  $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet final states. Events where the 

1175: quark and photon are recombined into a 

1176: jet will have $z<1$. 

1177: On the other hand events where the photon forms a jet on its own 

1178: while the quark is combined with the remnant or is produced at 

1179: too low transverse energy or too large rapidity to be observed as 

1180: a jet are also identified as $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet, with $z=1$. 

1181: 

1182: 

1183: \subsection{Measuring the quark-to-photon fragmentation function}

1184: Predictions for the $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet cross section differential in $z$, 

1185: obtained using the kinematical cuts specified in 

1186: section~\ref{sec:kinfrag} and defined using the jet algorithms  

1187: in the laboratory frame, are displayed in 

1188: Figure~\ref{fig:z}. We use the three different parametrisations of the

1189: photon fragmentation functions discussed in section~\ref{sec:b}

1190: and apply either the inclusive or exclusive 

1191: $k_T$-algorithm for different values of the resolution parameter 

1192: $y_{cut}$. Results are given as bin-integrated cross sections for three 

1193: bins, as anticipated~\cite{carsten} for the experimental 

1194: measurement.

1195: \begin{figure}[t]

1196: \begin{center}

1197: \epsfig{file=z1.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm} 

1198: \hspace{-1.5cm} \epsfig{file=z2.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm}

1199: \\[1cm]

1200: \epsfig{file=z5.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm} 

1201: \hspace{-1.5cm} \epsfig{file=z4.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm}

1202: \end{center}

1203: \caption{Photon energy distribution inside the photon jet 

1204: of $\gamma + (0+1)$-jet events. Jets are defined using the inclusive 

1205: and exclusive $k_T$-algorithm. In the latter case the jet resolution parmeter 

1206: $y_{cut}$ is taken equal to 0.1,0.004 and 0.001 respectively}

1207: \label{fig:z}

1208: \end{figure}

1209: 

1210: Concerning the variation with the jet resolution parameter, we 

1211: observe that the inclusive $k_T$-algorithm and the exclusive $k_T$-algorithm

1212: for large $y_{cut} = 0.1$ and above 

1213: yield very similar results, indicating that for 

1214: large $y_{cut}$, practically all events are classified as 

1215: $\gamma +(0+1)$ jet. A visible variation of the cross section is 

1216: observed only at much lower $y_{cut}$, $y_{cut}\ll 0.01$. 

1217: For $y_{cut} = 0.004$ and even more for $y_{cut} = 0.001$, 

1218: we observe that the $z>0.9$ contribution 

1219: decreases considerably, while the contributions for lower $z$ remain 

1220: largely unmodified. This can be understood from the fact that with 

1221: decreasing $y_{cut}$, particles are less likely to be recombined into jets. 

1222: In our case, especially quark and remnant are combined less often, 

1223: such that more events at $z=1$

1224: are classified as $\gamma +(1+1)$-jet events, resulting in a decrease of the 

1225: $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet cross section in the last bin in $z$.  

1226: 

1227: 

1228: 

1229: 

1230: If we compare our results for the various photon FFs in Fig.\

1231: \ref{fig:z},  we observe that the predictions

1232: agree approximately within $5\%$ in the large $z$

1233: region, i.e.\ for $z>0.9$. 

1234: However,

1235: near the minimum of the cross section, i.e.\ in the region

1236: $0.7<z<0.9$, the results differ considerably by up to a factor 

1237: 2 in $0.7<z<0.8$ and up to a factor 5 in $0.8<z<0.9$. The

1238: largest differences occur between the predictions obtained with the

1239: LO ALEPH photon fragmentation function on the one hand and the BFG

1240: parametrisation on the other hand. This discrepancy comes mainly from

1241: the fact that different evolution approaches are used. Whereas for 

1242: BFG the FF at $\mu_{F,\gamma}^2=Q^2$ is obtained from the conventional

1243: evolution resumming the leading and subleading logarithms of $\mu_{F,\gamma}$, 

1244: the ALEPH photon FFs are evolved only to the respective finite

1245: order in $\alpha_{s}$ as given in (\ref{eq:npFF}) and

1246: (\ref{dqg-solu2}). Therefore, if we calculated  

1247: the $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet cross section 

1248: at the large scale $\mu_{F,\gamma}^2=M_Z^2$ 

1249: the cross sections obtained for BFG and ALEPH would come out quite

1250: similar over the whole $z$-range inside a $20\%$ margin. Only

1251: when we go to the scale $\mu_{F,\gamma}^2=Q^2$, which is much

1252: smaller than $M_Z^2$, 

1253: we observe that the cross section obtained using the BFG photon

1254: fragmentation function is much larger than the ALEPH cross section in

1255: the region $0.7 < z <0.9$. This was already observed 

1256: in \cite{photonfrag} when comparing the predictions obtained for the 

1257: $\gamma + (1+1)$-jet cross section in DIS.

1258: 

1259: Since the non-perturbative input distributions and 

1260: higher order splitting functions contain explicit $\log(1-z)$ terms, 

1261: it is however not clear if the resummed fragmentation functions can be 

1262: considered to be reliable for $z>0.95$~\cite{gggopalaleph}. 

1263: Provided the resummed solution of the evolution equation is 

1264: accurate over the whole $z$ 

1265: range under

1266: consideration, i.e.\ for $0.7<z_{\gamma}<1$,

1267: the approach using this

1268: solution represents the theoretically preferred one as it is the

1269: most complete. The fixed order

1270:  approach using an expanded and therefore approximated

1271: photon FF has on the other hand 

1272: also important advantages. As already mentioned, its

1273: use leads to factorisation scale independent results for the cross

1274: section evaluated at a given fixed order in $\alpha_{s}$. Moreover it

1275: enables an analytic determination of the photon FF. 

1276: 

1277: As the predictions for the $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet cross section

1278: obtained using different parametrisations differ considerably, this observable 

1279: is highly sensitive on the photon FF and would be an appropriate 

1280: observable to measure in view of extracting

1281: the quark-to-photon fragmentation function in DIS. 

1282: Such a measurement could also be used to test the existing approaches to the 

1283: FF discussed in section~\ref{sec:b}.

1284: 

1285: 

1286: Finally, using the hadronic $k_T$-algorithm, the fraction of 

1287: events where photon and quark are clustered together is considerably 

1288: smaller than the one obtained using the exlusive (or inclusive)  

1289: $k_T$-algorithm in the laboratory frame. As a 

1290: consequence, more events are in the last bin $z>0.9$, and the fraction of 

1291: events in the two other bins becomes negligible. Using either 

1292: fragmentation function, one observes  that,

1293: for the hadronic $k_T$-algorithm with 

1294: separation parameters $R\leq 1$, negative contributions are predicted for 

1295: the bins $0.7<z<0.8$ and $0.8<z<0.9$ for all fragmentation functions 

1296: considered in this paper. These unphysical predictions 

1297: can be understood as follows: one 

1298: observes two types of logarithms in the 

1299: $z$-distribution of the $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet cross section:

1300:  $\ln(E^2_{T,\gamma}/Q^2)$ 

1301: and $\ln(k^2_{T,\gamma-q}/Q^2)$, where $k_{T,\gamma-q}$ is the 

1302: maximum

1303: transverse momentum of the quark and the photon with respect 

1304: to the photon jet direction allowed by the jet algorithm. 

1305: While the former logarithms do not become 

1306: large, since $E^2_{T,\gamma}$ and $Q^2$ are typically of the same magnitude, 

1307: the latter logarithms can become large, if the jet algorithm is 

1308: too restrictive in recombining quark and photon. In the case of the 

1309: hadronic $k_T$-algorithm, $k^2_{T,\gamma-q}$ becomes much smaller 

1310: than typical hadronisation scales for large $z$, and either approach 

1311: (fixed order or resummed) to the photon fragmentation function loses 

1312: its applicability. For the ALEPH NLO and BFG parametrisations, this effect 

1313: may be accounted for in part by lowering the factorisation scale 

1314: $\mu_{F,\gamma}$ associated with the photon fragmentation process,

1315: but for large $z$, $k^2_{T,\gamma-q}$ in the hadronic $k_T$-algorithm

1316: is too low to be taken as $\mu_{F,\gamma}$. Therefore, a measurement 

1317: of the photon fragmentation function from the

1318: $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet cross section should be based on the HERA-frame 

1319: exclusive (or inclusive) $k_T$-algorithm, 

1320: which admits larger values of $k^2_{T,\gamma-q}$, thus 

1321: avoiding the appearance of the above-mentioned large logarithmic corrections.

1322: 

1323: 

1324: \section{The isolated $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet and inclusive $\gamma$  

1325: cross sections} 

1326: \label{sec:isol}

1327: \setcounter{equation}{0}

1328: 

1329: Production of isolated photons in association with hadrons

1330: has been widely studied in different 

1331: collider environments. The measured isolated photon cross sections were 

1332: used as tests of the hard interaction dynamics, or to measure 

1333: auxiliary quantities such as parton distributions. 

1334:  A very sensitive issue is the 

1335: definition of isolated photons produced in association with hadrons, since 

1336: a completely isolated photon is not an infrared safe observable in 

1337: quantum chromodynamics (QCD). At present, this isolation is 

1338: usually accomplished experimentally 

1339: by admitting a limited amount of hadronic energy inside a cone 

1340: around the photon direction. 

1341: 

1342: The ZEUS study of isolated photon production in deep inelastic 

1343: scattering~\cite{zeus} 

1344: was carried out using such 

1345: a cone-based isolation 

1346: criterion, requiring the photon to carry at least 90\% of the 

1347: energy inside a cone of unit radius in rapidity and polar angle, thus 

1348: admitting 10\% of hadronic energy. We showed in~\cite{zeusnew} that the 

1349: ZEUS measurement could be well reproduced in all its aspects

1350: by a parton-level calculation, 

1351: closely related to the calculation of the 

1352: $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet cross section described above. In fact, the isolated 

1353: photon cross section can be obtained from (\ref{sigma2}) by replacing

1354: the $n$-particle jet functions $J^{(n)}_{\gamma+(0+1)}(p_3,p_5,p_r)$ 

1355: by a photon isolation definition $I^{(n)}_{\gamma}(p_3,p_5)$. The 

1356: cone-based isolation definition $I^{(3)}_{\gamma}(p_3,p_5)$

1357: checks if the quark momentum $p_5$ 

1358: is inside the cone defined by the photon momentum $p_3$, 

1359: and subsequently applies a cut on the photon energy fraction $z>z_{cut}$. 

1360: Since in the two-parton contribution, quark and photon momenta are 

1361: always collinear, $I^{(2)}_{\gamma}(p_3,p_5)$ amounts simply to a cut 

1362: on the photon energy fraction $z>z_{cut}$. The cross section for isolated 

1363: photon production is thus also dependent on the photon fragmentation function.

1364: As demonstrated in~\cite{zeusnew}, its prediction is however only marginally 

1365: sensitive on the parametrisation used for the photon fragmentation function. 

1366: In the following, we will therefore compute all predictions using just the 

1367: ALEPH LO fragmentation function.

1368: 

1369: The cone-based isolation criterion has several conceptual drawbacks. The cone 

1370: size can not be chosen much smaller than unity~\cite{Catani-Fontannaz}, 

1371: as often required for new particle searches, since a small cone size would 

1372: spoil the convergence of the perturbative expansion for the isolated photon 

1373: cross section. The interplay of the isolation cone with other kinematical 

1374: cuts can also sometimes lead to a discontinuous behaviour of the cross

1375: section~\cite{binoth}.

1376: Also, when studying the production of photons in 

1377: association with hadronic jets, the application of the cone-based 

1378: photon isolation could become ambiguous, since is is not 

1379: clear how to attribute the hadronic activity in the photon isolation cone 

1380: to the jets. 

1381: 

1382: To circumvent the problems of the cone-based photon isolation,

1383: several alternative photon isolation criteria 

1384: were proposed in the literature. A dynamic cone-based isolation~\cite{frixione}

1385: could in principle allow to eliminate the dependence on the photon 

1386: fragmentation function; this was however not accomplished in an experimental 

1387: measurement up to now. In the democratic clustering procedure proposed 

1388: in~\cite{glover-morgan}, isolated photon cross sections are 

1389: directly derived from jet cross sections. In this approach, which was 

1390: already used to define the $\gamma +(0+1)$-jet cross section in 

1391: section~\ref{sec:frag},

1392: the jet algorithm treats the photon like any other hadron, resulting 

1393: it to be clustered into one of the final state jets, which is then

1394: called the photon jet. An isolated photon in this approach is a 

1395: photon jet where the photon carries more than a certain fraction of the 

1396: jet energy. Using this democratic clustering approach, the ALEPH 

1397: collaboration measured the isolated $\gamma+1$-jet rate~\cite{aleph} for the 

1398: $k_T$-algorithm~\cite{durhamkt},

1399: using $z_{cut}=0.95$ to define isolated photons. 

1400: Using the fragmentation function previously determined from the photon energy

1401: spectra of the $\gamma+1$-jet rate~\cite{aleph}, good agreement between 

1402: experimental data and theory was found for a wide range of jet resolution 

1403: parameters. This agreement improved considerably by including NLO 

1404: corrections~\cite{agg,ggg}.

1405: 

1406: In this section, we study isolated photon cross sections in DIS, 

1407: obtained using different jet algorithms. In contrast to the 

1408: discussion of the previous section, where we aimed to maximise the sensitivity 

1409: of our observable on the photon fragmentation function by restrictive cuts and 

1410: by choosing a specific jet algorithm, here we choose a less restraint 

1411: event selection. As before, we assume a combined data sample 

1412: of incoming positrons and 

1413: electrons, with a positron fraction of $85.6\%$, with 

1414:  $E_e = 27.5$ GeV and $E_p = 920$ GeV.

1415: Our choice of cuts is again motivated by the 

1416: coverage of the H1 detector~\cite{carsten}.

1417: In particular, we apply the following cuts 

1418: on the DIS variables

1419: \begin{equation}

1420: E_{e}> 10~{\rm GeV}\,, \quad  151^{\circ}< \Theta_{e}< 177^{\circ}\,,\quad

1421:    Q^2 > 4~{\rm GeV}^2\, \quad \mbox{and} \quad y > 0.05   

1422: \;. 

1423: \label{cuts2}

1424: \end{equation}

1425: Events selected using these criteria and containing a photon candidate 

1426: are then processed using a jet algorithm. We have seen in the previous 

1427: section that the difference between the inclusive and 

1428: exclusive laboratory frame $k_T$-algorithm is only marginal, except for 

1429: very small jet resolution parameters $y_{cut}$. For our studies here, we 

1430: do therefore use only the exclusive laboratory frame $k_T$-algorithm

1431: with $y_{cut} = 0.1$

1432: and the hadronic $k_T$-algorithm with jet resolution parameter 

1433: $R=1$. Both jet algorithms result in final states

1434: containing a number of hard jets, with one of the jets containing 

1435: the photon candidate. If the photon carries more than 90\% 

1436: of the transverse energy of this photon jet ($z_{cut}=0.9$), 

1437: it is called isolated. 

1438: We then apply cuts on the photon transverse energy $E_{T,\gamma}$ and 

1439: the photon rapidity $\eta_\gamma$:

1440: \begin{equation}

1441: E_{T,\gamma} > 3~\mbox{GeV}\;, \qquad -1.2< \eta_\gamma < 1.8\,.

1442: \end{equation}

1443: \begin{figure}[t]

1444: \begin{center}

1445: \epsfig{file=etae1.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm} 

1446: \hspace{-1.5cm} \epsfig{file=etae2.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm}

1447: \\[1cm]

1448: \epsfig{file=etae3.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm} 

1449: \hspace{-1.5cm} \epsfig{file=eta.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm}

1450: \end{center}

1451: \caption{Rapidity distributions of isolated photons in $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet 

1452: events, in different bins 

1453: in $E_{T,\gamma}$. The last plot shows the sum over 

1454: all bins. Isolated photons are 

1455: defined here 

1456: using the exclusive $k_T$-algorithm ($y_{cut} = 0.1$) in the HERA frame, 

1457: requiring $z>0.9$. $LL$ and 

1458: $QQ$ subprocess contributions are indicated as dashed and dotted lines.}

1459: \label{fig:etain}

1460: \end{figure}

1461: 

1462: Applying the jet algorithm,

1463: one obtains either $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet or $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet final states,

1464: with the quark forming a jet on its own in  the latter case. 

1465: As before, these 

1466: are identified as 

1467: $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet events only if the quark jet can be seen inside the 

1468: detector coverage, i.e.\ if

1469: \begin{equation}

1470: E_{T,q} > 2.5~\mbox{GeV}\, , \qquad -2.1<\eta_q<2.1\;.

1471: \end{equation}

1472: Using these cuts, we can define two different isolated photon cross sections:

1473: the isolated $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet cross section, which contains only events 

1474: where no quark jet is observed, and the inclusive isolated 

1475:  $\gamma$ cross section, where no restrictions are applied on the quark jet. 

1476: Note that for the inclusive HERA-frame $k_T$-algorithm, 

1477: these two cross sections would coincide exactly. 

1478: As seen in the previous section, 

1479: results obtained using the inclusive HERA-frame

1480:  $k_T$-algorithm are almost identical to 

1481: results obtained from the exclusive algorithm

1482: for $y_{cut}=0.1$, as applied here. Therefore, there is only very 

1483: little difference between the  isolated $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet cross section

1484: and the isolated  inclusive $\gamma$ cross section for this algorithm. 

1485: 

1486: 

1487: \begin{figure}[t]

1488: \begin{center}

1489: \epsfig{file=etw1.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm} 

1490: \hspace{-1.5cm} \epsfig{file=etw2.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm}

1491: \\[1cm]

1492: \epsfig{file=etw3.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm} 

1493: \hspace{-1.5cm} \epsfig{file=etw4.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm}

1494: \\[1cm]

1495: \epsfig{file=etw5.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm} 

1496: \hspace{-1.5cm} \epsfig{file=et.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm}

1497: \end{center}

1498: \caption{Transverse energy 

1499:  distributions of isolated photons in $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet 

1500: events, in different bins 

1501: in $\eta_{\gamma}$. The last plot shows the sum over 

1502: all bins. Isolated photons are 

1503: defined using the exclusive $k_T$-algorithm ($y_{cut} = 0.1$)

1504: in the HERA frame, 

1505: requiring $z>0.9$. $LL$ and 

1506: $QQ$ subprocess contributions are indicated as dashed and dotted lines.}

1507: \label{fig:etin}

1508: \end{figure}

1509: Figures~\ref{fig:etain} and~\ref{fig:etin} 

1510: display the rapidity and 

1511: transverse energy distributions of isolated photons in 

1512: $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet 

1513: events using the exclusive $k_T$-algorithm in the HERA frame. 

1514: $QQ$ and $LL$ contributions to these distributions are indicated separately, 

1515: and the total is obtained by summing $QQ$, $LL$ and $QL$ contributions. 

1516: The total 

1517: $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet 

1518: cross section with this jet algorithm and the above-mentioned cuts

1519: is 19.9~pb.

1520: For the rapidity distributions, we consider three different bins in 

1521: transverse energy, displayed in Figure~\ref{fig:etain}. The rapidity 

1522: distribution of photons 

1523: in $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet production

1524: shows features similar to the rapidity distribution of 

1525: inclusive isolated photons, discussed in~\cite{zeusnew}. 

1526: The distributions resemble each other in all bins 

1527: in $E_{T,\gamma}$, and fall towards increasing 

1528: $\eta_\gamma$. The contributions of the $QQ$ and $LL$ subprocesses are 

1529: of comparable magnitude, but have considerably different shapes in 

1530: $\eta_\gamma$: the $LL$ process is largest in the backward direction

1531: (i.e.\ in the direction of the outgoing electron) and falls rapidly 

1532: towards positive $\eta_{\gamma}$, becoming negligible above $\eta_\gamma

1533: \gapprox 0.5$. The shape of the $LL$ process on one hand, differs very little 

1534: for the different bins. 

1535: The $QQ$ process, on the other hand, is most pronounced at 

1536: mid-rapidity, with a maximum around $\eta_\gamma

1537: \approx 0.5$ for the sum of all  $E_{T,\gamma}$-bins. The position of 

1538: this $\eta_\gamma$-maximum  of the $QQ$ process shifts from lower 

1539: $\eta_\gamma$ in the lowest $E_{T,\gamma}$-bin (where it is around 

1540: $\eta_\gamma\approx 0$)

1541: to higher $\eta_\gamma$ in the highest  $E_{T,\gamma}$-bin 

1542: (maximum around $\eta_\gamma\approx 1$). The three different 

1543: bins are of increasing size, and contribute about equal amounts to the 

1544: total $\eta_\gamma$-distribution. 

1545: 

1546: \begin{figure}[t]

1547: \begin{center}

1548: \epsfig{file=etae1cone.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm} 

1549: \hspace{-1.5cm} \epsfig{file=etae2cone.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm}

1550: \\[1cm]

1551: \epsfig{file=etae3cone.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm} 

1552: \hspace{-1.5cm} \epsfig{file=etacone.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm}

1553: \end{center}

1554: \caption{Rapidity distributions of isolated photons in $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet 

1555: events, in different bins 

1556: in $E_{T,\gamma}$. The last plot shows the sum over 

1557: all bins. Isolated photons are 

1558: defined here using the hadronic $k_T$-algorithm

1559: ($R=1$), requiring $z>0.9$. $LL$ and 

1560: $QQ$ subprocess contributions are indicated as dashed and dotted lines.}

1561: \label{fig:etacone}

1562: \end{figure}

1563: The transverse energy distributions, Figure~\ref{fig:etin},

1564:  are considered in five different 

1565: bins in $\eta_\gamma$, corresponding to five different wheels of the 

1566: electromagnetic calorimeter of the H1 detector~\cite{carsten}.

1567: The numbering of the wheels 

1568: is from the backward towards the forward direction. 

1569: In the first wheel ($-1.2<\eta_\gamma<-0.6$), 

1570: the cross section is completely dominated by the $LL$-process, and 

1571: falls monotonously with $E_{T,\gamma}$. Already in the second wheel

1572: ($-0.6<\eta_\gamma<0.2$), $QQ$ and $LL$ processes are of similar magnitude, 

1573: and also of rather similar shape in  $E_{T,\gamma}$. In the third 

1574: wheel ($0.2<\eta_\gamma<0.9$) and beyond, the contribution 

1575: from the $LL$-process is negligible. Like in the first two wheels, 

1576: the $E_{T,\gamma}$-distribution falls monotonously in the 

1577: third wheel. In the fourth ($0.9<\eta_\gamma<1.4$) and fifth 

1578: ($1.4<\eta_\gamma<1.8$) wheels, the  $E_{T,\gamma}$-distribution is 

1579: peaked around $E_{T,\gamma}\approx 5.5$~GeV. This feature is a consequence 

1580: of the exclusive HERA-frame $k_T$-algorithm used here: photons produced 

1581: at low transverse energy in the forward region are recombined 

1582: with the proton remnant, and do therefore not contribute to the 

1583: measured cross section. The total transverse energy distribution (summed 

1584: over all wheels in rapidity) is dominated by  the first 

1585: three wheels, and thus receives similar contributions from the $QQ$ and 

1586: $LL$ processes; as always the $QL$ process is of negligible magnitude. 

1587: \begin{figure}[t]

1588: \begin{center}

1589: \epsfig{file=etw1cone.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm} 

1590: \hspace{-1.5cm} \epsfig{file=etw2cone.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm}

1591: \\[1cm]

1592: \epsfig{file=etw3cone.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm} 

1593: \hspace{-1.5cm} \epsfig{file=etw4cone.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm}

1594: \\[1cm]

1595: \epsfig{file=etw5cone.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm} 

1596: \hspace{-1.5cm} \epsfig{file=etcone.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm}

1597: \end{center}

1598: \caption{Transverse energy 

1599:  distributions of isolated photons in $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet 

1600: events, in different bins 

1601: in $\eta_{\gamma}$. The last plot shows the sum over 

1602: all bins. Isolated photons are 

1603: defined here using the hadronic $k_T$-algorithm ($R=1$), 

1604: requiring $z>0.9$. $LL$ and 

1605: $QQ$ subprocess contributions are indicated as dashed and dotted lines.}

1606: \label{fig:etcone}

1607: \end{figure}

1608: 

1609: In Figures~\ref{fig:etacone} and~\ref{fig:etcone} 

1610: we show the rapidity and 

1611: transverse energy distributions of isolated photons in 

1612: $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet 

1613: events using the hadronic $k_T$-algorithm ($R=1$). 

1614: As for the HERA-frame exclusive $k_T$-algorithm, 

1615: $QQ$ and $LL$ contributions  are indicated separately, 

1616: and the total is obtained by summing $QQ$, $LL$ and $QL$ contributions. 

1617: We also use the same bins as before. The total  $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet 

1618: cross section with the hadronic $k_T$-algorithm is 19.1~pb, which is 

1619: very similar to the total cross section in the HERA-frame 

1620: exclusive $k_T$-algorithm. Many features of the distributions are 

1621: similar to what we observed above. In the discussion of these figures,

1622: we therefore only focus on differences 

1623: arising from the use of the two different algorithms. 

1624: 

1625: In the rapidity distributions, Figure~\ref{fig:etacone}, we 

1626: observe that the shape of the $LL$ contribution is similar for both 

1627: jet algorithms, while the $QQ$ contribution looks considerably different.

1628: As opposed to Figure~\ref{fig:etain}, we see that the $QQ$ subprocess 

1629: remains sizable also in the backward rapidity region, especially at low 

1630: $E_{T,\gamma}$. 

1631: 

1632: The difference between the two jet algorithms is more pronounced in the 

1633: transverse energy distribution, Figure~\ref{fig:etcone}. With 

1634: increasing $E_{T,\gamma}$, this distribution falls more steeply

1635: for the hadronic $k_T$-algorithm than for the HERA-frame exclusive 

1636: $k_T$-algorithm. Also, one observes in the forward region 

1637: (the fourth and fifth wheel) that photons at low transverse energy are 

1638: not disfavoured as in Figure~\ref{fig:etin}, where they 

1639: were combined with the proton remnant in a sizable fraction of the events. 

1640: As a consequence, the total transverse energy distribution falls 

1641: more steeply than for the HERA-frame exclusive 

1642: $k_T$-algorithm.

1643: 

1644: \begin{figure}[t]

1645: \begin{center}

1646: \epsfig{file=etaconenew.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm} 

1647: \hspace{-1.5cm} \epsfig{file=etconenew.ps,angle=-90,width=8cm}

1648: \end{center}

1649: \caption{Comparison of isolated 

1650: $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet, $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet

1651: and inclusive isolated $\gamma$ cross sections using the hadronic 

1652: $k_T$-algorithm ($R=1$), requiring $z>0.9$.}

1653: \label{fig:incljet}

1654: \end{figure}

1655: As explained above, the exclusive $k_T$-algorithm in the HERA frame 

1656: almost 

1657: always yields $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet final states, such that in this algorithm 

1658: the isolated $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet cross section nearly coincides with the 

1659: inclusive isolated $\gamma$ cross section. In contrast, 

1660: application of the hadronic 

1661: $k_T$-algorithm results in $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet  and 

1662: $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet final states. At the leading order in perturbation theory 

1663: used here, the inclusive  isolated $\gamma$ cross section in 

1664: this algorithm is the sum of the $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet and 

1665: $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet cross sections. 

1666: The inclusive isolated $\gamma$ cross section 

1667: and its decomposition into $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet  and 

1668: $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet final states is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:incljet}. For the 

1669: integrated cross sections, we obtain 19.1~pb for $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet,

1670: 27.6~pb for $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet and thus 46.7~pb for the inclusive 

1671: cross section. This cross section is thus considerably larger than the 

1672: inclusive isolated $\gamma$ cross section obtained with the 

1673: exclusive HERA-frame $k_T$-algorithm. As already discussed in 

1674: section~\ref{sec:frag}, the latter algorithm is more likely to

1675: cluster photon and quark together into

1676: a single jet. Consequently, many final state configurations that were

1677: identified as photon jets with 

1678: $z=1$ by the hadronic $k_T$-algorithm yield  photon jets with $z<1$ 

1679: with the exclusive HERA-frame $k_T$-algorithm. If these photon jets have 

1680: $z<0.9$, they do no longer contribute to the isolated photon cross section.

1681: 

1682: We observe that the  $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet distributions fall less steeply 

1683: than the $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet distributions, both in rapidity and in transverse 

1684: energy. This feature can be understood from the fact that at large forward 

1685: rapidity or at large transverse energy, it is kinematically preferred that the 

1686: transverse energy of the photon is balanced by both the electron and the 

1687: hard jet. Also, the $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet cross section exceeds the 

1688: $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet everywhere in phase space. This might appear 

1689: counter-intuitive at first sight, but may be understood from the fact that 

1690: both cross sections start at the same order in perturbation theory,

1691: namely ${\cal O}(\alpha^3)$. The admixture of  

1692: $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet and $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet events in the inclusive 

1693: sample is highly dependent on the cuts applied to the quark jet, especially 

1694: on its transverse energy cut, which is chosen here to be even lower than 

1695: the cut on the transverse energy of the photon. 

1696: 

1697: As a final point, we note that the measurement of the ZEUS 

1698: collaboration~\cite{zeusnew}, based on a cone-based photon isolation,

1699:  yielded an inclusive isolated photon production cross section 

1700: considerably larger than the 

1701:  $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet cross section. This behaviour is due to the 

1702: more restrictive cuts on the hadronic jet applied by ZEUS

1703: to select  $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet final states. 

1704:  Both ZEUS measurements are in good agreement 

1705: with the theoretical approach advocated here: we compared the inclusive 

1706: isolated photon cross section with the ZEUS measurement in~\cite{zeusnew},

1707: and ZEUS compared~\cite{zeus} their measurement of the 

1708:  $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet cross section to an earlier NLO calculation~\cite{herajet},

1709: based on the same approach which we used here at leading order. 

1710: 

1711: \section{Conclusions and Outlook}

1712: \setcounter{equation}{0}

1713: \label{sec:conc}

1714: 

1715: In this paper, we studied the production of final state photons in 

1716: deep inelastic scattering at leading order in perturbation 

1717: theory, ${\cal O}(\alpha^3)$. Already at this 

1718: leading order, the corresponding 

1719: parton-level cross section contains a collinear quark-photon divergence, 

1720: which is absorbed into the quark-to-photon fragmentation function.

1721: Our calculation of final state photon production contains therefore 

1722: both contributions from hard parton-level  photon radiation and 

1723: from photon fragmentation. 

1724: 

1725: Besides a perturbatively generated component, the quark-to-photon 

1726: fragmentation function contains a genuinely non-perturbative component, 

1727: which forms the boundary condition to its perturbative evolution equation. 

1728: Experimental measurements of this photon fragmentation function 

1729: were made up to now only in electron-positron annihilation at 

1730: LEP~\cite{aleph,opal}.

1731: 

1732: In the democratic clustering procedure~\cite{glover-morgan} for 

1733: photon cross sections, the photon candidate is clustered by the jet algorithm 

1734: like any hadron in the event. As a result, one of the final state 

1735: jets contains a highly energetic photon, and is called photon jet, 

1736: abbreviated by $\gamma$. Using this procedure, we studied the  

1737:  $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet production cross section

1738: in deep inelastic scattering at HERA, and demonstrated that the energy 

1739: distribution of photons inside the photon jet in these events is 

1740: highly sensitive on the quark-to-photon fragmentation function, and 

1741: can be used to discriminate different available parametrisations of it. 

1742: We could show that such a measurement is best carried out using a

1743: particular variant of the $k_T$-algorithm, which enhances the importance 

1744: of fragmentation contributions relative to the hard radiation. 

1745: 

1746: Isolated photons are usually defined at high energy experiments by

1747: allowing them to be accompanied by some amount of hadronic energy, since 

1748: a perfectly isolated photon is not infrared safe in perturbation theory. 

1749: The democratic clustering procedure allows a natural definition of isolated 

1750: photons by identifying the photon jet as isolated photon if the 

1751: fraction of its energy carried by the photon candidate exceeds some 

1752: value defined by the experimental environment. At HERA, photons are 

1753: called isolated if they carry more than 90\% of the transverse energy of 

1754: the photon jet. 

1755: 

1756: Using this definition, we studied isolated photon cross sections for 

1757:  $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet, $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet and inclusive $\gamma$ final states

1758: for different jet algorithms. We found that particular features of 

1759: the parton-level processes and of the jet algorithm can be related to

1760: aspects of the rapidity and transverse energy 

1761: distributions of the photons. 

1762: 

1763: As in our previous study of isolated inclusive photon production 

1764: in deep inelastic scattering~\cite{zeusnew}, based on a cone-based 

1765: isolated criterion used in the corresponding experimental 

1766: measurement~\cite{zeus}, we found that photon radiation off the lepton and 

1767: off the quark are of comparable  importance, although either of them 

1768: dominates in a different region in photon rapidity. This has important 

1769: implications for the use of inclusive photon cross sections to measure 

1770: the photon distribution in the proton~\cite{pisano,mrst}, as needed for 

1771: electroweak corrections to hadron collider observables~\cite{phodist}. 

1772: In particular, 

1773: it invalidates the assumption~\cite{mrst} that the bulk of 

1774: the isolated inclusive 

1775: photon cross section in DIS arises only 

1776: from photon radiation off 

1777: the lepton, as already pointed out in~\cite{saxon,zeusnew}. If possible at 

1778: all, an extraction of the photon distribution in the proton would have to

1779: be restricted to kinematical regions where radiation off the lepton is 

1780: indeed dominant. 

1781: 

1782: NLO corrections, ${\cal O}(\alpha^3\alpha_s)$, are known to the 

1783: $\gamma+(1+1)$-jet cross section in deep inelastic scattering~\cite{herajet}

1784: for some time already; this calculation was found in good agreement 

1785: with experimental data recently~\cite{zeus}. The derivation of NLO 

1786: corrections to the $\gamma+(0+1)$-jet cross section and the 

1787: inclusive photon cross section in deep inelastic scattering is 

1788: however considerably 

1789: more involved. Owing to the appearance of the collinear quark-photon 

1790: singularity in these observables already at leading order, an NLO calculation 

1791: will encounter double unresolved partonic configurations, which are otherwise

1792: expected only at NNLO. In this sense, such a calculation would 

1793: have similar features as the calculation of the NLO corrections 

1794: to the $\gamma+1$-jet rate at LEP~\cite{agg}, 

1795: where first developments towards double unresolved real radiation were made. 

1796: 

1797: 

1798: \section*{Acknowledgements} 

1799: We would like to thank Katharina M\"uller, Carsten Schmitz, 

1800:  Ulrich Straumann and David Saxon

1801: for many useful and clarifying discussions. 

1802: This work was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation 

1803: (SNF) under contract PMPD2-106101.

1804: 

1805: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

1806:  

1807: \bibitem{koller}  

1808:   K.~Koller, T.F.~Walsh and P.M.~Zerwas,

1809:   %``Testing QCD: Direct Photons In E+ E- Collisions,''

1810:   Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 2} (1979) 197.

1811:   %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C2,197;%%

1812: 

1813: \bibitem{AP}

1814:   G.~Altarelli and G.~Parisi,

1815:   %``Asymptotic Freedom In Parton Language,''

1816:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 126}, 298 (1977).

1817:   %%CITATION = NUPHA,B126,298;%%

1818: 

1819: \bibitem{opal}

1820:  K.~Ackerstaff {\it et al.}  [OPAL Collaboration],

1821:   %``Measurement of the quark to photon fragmentation function through  the

1822:   %inclusive production of prompt photons in hadronic Z0 decays,''

1823:   Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 2} (1998) 39

1824:   [hep-ex/9708020].

1825:   %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9708020;%%

1826: 

1827: \bibitem{duke}

1828:   D.W.~Duke and J.F.~Owens,

1829:   %``Quantum Chromodynamics Corrections To Deep Inelastic Compton Scattering,''

1830:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 26} (1982) 1600.

1831:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D26,1600;%%

1832: 

1833: 

1834: \bibitem{grv}

1835:   M.~Gl\"uck, E.~Reya and A.~Vogt,

1836:   %``Parton fragmentation into photons beyond the leading order,''

1837:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 48} (1993) 116

1838:   [Erratum-ibid.\ D {\bf 51} (1995) 1427].

1839:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D48,116;%%

1840: 

1841: \bibitem{bfg} 

1842:   L.~Bourhis, M.~Fontannaz and J.P.~Guillet,

1843:   %``Quark and gluon fragmentation functions into photons,''

1844:   Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 2} (1998) 529

1845:   [hep-ph/9704447].

1846:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9704447;%%

1847: 

1848: \bibitem{glover-morgan} 

1849:   E.W.N.~Glover and A.G.~Morgan,

1850:   %``Measuring the photon fragmentation function at LEP,''

1851:   Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 62} (1994) 311.

1852:   %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C62,311;%%

1853: 

1854: 

1855: \bibitem{aleph}

1856:   D.~Buskulic {\it et al.}  [ALEPH Collaboration],

1857:   %``First measurement of the quark to photon fragmentation function,''

1858:   Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 69} (1996) 365.

1859:   %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C69,365;%%

1860: 

1861: 

1862: \bibitem{agg}

1863:   A.~Gehrmann-De Ridder and E.W.N.~Glover,

1864:   %``A complete O(alpha alpha(s)) calculation of the photon + 1jet rate in  e+

1865:   %e- annihilation,''

1866:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 517} (1998) 269

1867:   [hep-ph/9707224].

1868:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9707224;%%

1869: 

1870: 

1871: \bibitem{ggg}

1872:   A.~Gehrmann-De Ridder, T.~Gehrmann and E.W.N.~Glover,

1873:   %``Radiative corrections to the photon + 1jet rate at LEP,''

1874:   Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 414} (1997) 354

1875:   [hep-ph/9705305].

1876:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9705305;%%

1877: 

1878: 

1879: \bibitem{gggopalaleph}

1880:   A.~Gehrmann-De Ridder and E.W.N.~Glover,

1881:   %``Final state photon production at LEP,''

1882:   Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 7} (1999) 29

1883:   [hep-ph/9806316].

1884:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9806316;%%

1885: 

1886: \bibitem{frixione}

1887:   S.~Frixione,

1888:   %``Isolated photons in perturbative {QCD},''

1889:   Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 429} (1998) 369

1890:   [hep-ph/9801442].

1891:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9801442;%%

1892: 

1893: \bibitem{snowmass} J.E.\ Huth et al., Proceedings of  {\it Summer Study on High

1894:              Energy Physics, Research Directions for the Decade}, Snowmass,

1895:              1990; \\

1896:   F.~Abe {\it et al.}  [CDF Collaboration],

1897:   %``The Topology of three jet events in anti-p p collisions at S**(1/2) =

1898:   %1.8-TeV,''

1899:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 45} (1992) 1448;\\

1900:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D45,1448;%%

1901: M.\ Seymour, 

1902:   %``Searches for new particles using cone and cluster jet algorithms: A

1903:   %Comparative study,''

1904:   Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 62} (1994) 127.

1905:   %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C62,127;%% 

1906: 

1907: 

1908: \bibitem{zeus}

1909:   S.~Chekanov {\it et al.}  [ZEUS Collaboration],

1910:   %``Observation of isolated high-E(T) photons in deep inelastic scattering,''

1911:   Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 595} (2004) 86

1912:   [hep-ex/0402019].

1913:   %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0402019;%%

1914: 

1915: \bibitem{pythia}

1916:   T.~Sj\"ostrand, P.~Ed\'{e}n, C.~Friberg, 

1917: L.~L\"onnblad, G.~Miu, S.~Mrenna and E.~Norrbin,

1918:   %``High-energy-physics event generation with PYTHIA 6.1,''

1919:   Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\  {\bf 135} (2001) 238

1920:   [hep-ph/0010017].

1921:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0010017;%%

1922: 

1923: \bibitem{herwig}

1924:   G.~Marchesini, B.R.~Webber, G.~Abbiendi, 

1925: I.G.~Knowles, M.H.~Seymour and L.~Stanco,

1926:   %``HERWIG: A Monte Carlo event generator for simulating hadron emission

1927:   %reactions with interfering gluons. Version 5.1 - April 1991,''

1928:   Comput.\ Phys.\ Commun.\  {\bf 67} (1992) 465.

1929:   %%CITATION = CPHCB,67,465;%%

1930: 

1931: 

1932: \bibitem{pisano}

1933:  M.~Gl\"uck, C.~Pisano, E.~Reya and I.~Schienbein,

1934:   %``Delineating the polarized and unpolarized photon distributions of the

1935:   %nucleon in e N collisions,''

1936:   Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 27} (2003) 427

1937:   [hep-ph/0209335];\\

1938:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0209335;%%

1939:   C.~Pisano, doctoral thesis, Universit\"at Dortmund (2005)

1940:   %``The polarized and unpolarized photon content of the nucleon,''

1941:   [hep-ph/0512306].

1942:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0512306;%%

1943: 

1944: 

1945: \bibitem{phodist}

1946:   H.~Spiesberger,

1947:   %``QED radiative corrections for parton distributions,''

1948:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 52} (1995) 4936

1949:   [hep-ph/9412286];\\

1950:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9412286;%%

1951:   M.~Roth and S.~Weinzierl,

1952:   %``QED corrections to the evolution of parton distributions,''

1953:   Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 590} (2004) 190

1954:   [hep-ph/0403200].

1955:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0403200;%%

1956: 

1957: 

1958: \bibitem{mrst}

1959:   A.D.~Martin, R.G.~Roberts, W.J.~Stirling and R.S.~Thorne,

1960:   %``Parton distributions incorporating QED contributions,''

1961:   Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 39} (2005) 155

1962:   [hep-ph/0411040].

1963:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0411040;%%

1964: 

1965: \bibitem{saxon}

1966:   D.H.~Saxon, Proceedings of Ringberg Workshop {\it New Trends in HERA 

1967: Physics 2005},

1968: eds.\ 

1969: G.\ Grindhammer, B.\ Kniehl, G.\ Kramer and W.\ Ochs, World Scientific

1970: (Singapore, 2006), p.177

1971:   %``Particle production and fragmentation at HERA,''

1972:   [hep-ex/0601013].

1973:   %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0601013;%%

1974: 

1975:  

1976: \bibitem{zeusnew} 

1977:   A.~Gehrmann-De Ridder, T.~Gehrmann and E.~Poulsen,

1978:   %``Isolated photons in deep inelastic scattering,'' 

1979: Phys.\ Rev.\ 

1980: Lett.\ (in press)

1981:   [hep-ph/0601073].

1982:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0601073;%%

1983: 

1984: 

1985: \bibitem{herajet}

1986:   A.~Gehrmann-De Ridder, G.~Kramer and H.~Spiesberger,

1987:   %``Photon plus jet production in large {$Q^2$} e p collisions at

1988:   %next-to-leading order {QCD},''

1989:   Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 459} (1999) 271

1990:   [hep-ph/9903377];

1991:   %``Photon plus jet cross sections in deep inelastic e p collisions at  order

1992:   %O(alpha**2 alpha(s)),''

1993:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 578} (2000) 326

1994:   [hep-ph/0003082].

1995: 

1996: 

1997: \bibitem{phoprodth}

1998:   L.E.~Gordon and W.~Vogelsang,

1999:   %``Isolated prompt photon production at HERA,''

2000:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 52} (1995) 58;\\

2001:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D52,58;%%

2002:   M.~Krawczyk and A.~Zembrzuski,

2003:   %``Photoproduction of the isolated photon at DESY HERA in next-to-leading

2004:   %order QCD,''

2005:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64} (2001) 114017

2006:   [hep-ph/0105166];\\

2007:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0105166;%%

2008:  M.~Fontannaz, J.P.~Guillet and G.~Heinrich,

2009:   %``Isolated prompt photon photoproduction at NLO,''

2010:   Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 21} (2001) 303

2011:   [hep-ph/0105121];

2012:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0105121;%%

2013:   %``A NLO calculation of the hadron-jet cross section in photoproduction

2014:   %reactions,''

2015:   Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 26} (2002) 209

2016:   [hep-ph/0206202].

2017:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0206202;%%

2018: 

2019: 

2020: \bibitem{phoprodexp}

2021:  J.~Breitweg {\it et al.}  [ZEUS Collaboration],

2022:   %``Measurement of inclusive prompt photon photoproduction at HERA,''

2023:   Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 472} (2000) 175

2024:   [hep-ex/9910045];\\

2025:   %%CITATION = HEP-EX 9910045;%%

2026:  A.~Aktas {\it et al.}  [H1 Collaboration],

2027:   %``Measurement of prompt photon cross sections in photoproduction at HERA,''

2028:   Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 38} (2005) 437 [hep-ex/0407018].

2029:   %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0407018;%%

2030: 

2031: \bibitem{riemann}

2032:   D.Y.~Bardin, C.~Burdik, P.C.~Khristova and T.~Riemann,

2033:   %``Electroweak Radiative Corrections To Deep Inelastic Scattering At Hera.

2034:   %Neutral Current Scattering,''

2035:   Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 42} (1989) 679.

2036:   %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C42,679;%%

2037: 

2038: \bibitem{slicing} 

2039:   W.T.~Giele and E.W.N.~Glover,

2040:   %``Higher order corrections to jet cross-sections in e+ e- annihilation,''

2041:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 46} (1992) 1980.

2042:   %%CITATION = PHRVA,D46,1980;%%

2043: 

2044: \bibitem{bk}

2045:   B.~Badelek and J.~Kwieci\'{n}ski,

2046:   Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 295} (1992) 263;

2047:   %%CITATION = PHLTA,B295,263;%%

2048:   Rev.\ Mod.\ Phys.\  {\bf 68} (1996) 445

2049:   [hep-ph/9408318].

2050:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9408318;%%

2051: 

2052: 

2053: \bibitem{bvz}

2054:  U.~Baur, J.A.M.~Vermaseren and D.~Zeppenfeld,

2055:   %``Electroweak vector boson production in high-energy e p collisions,''

2056:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 375} (1992) 3.

2057:   %%CITATION = NUPHA,B375,3;%%

2058: 

2059: 

2060: \bibitem{emc}

2061:   J.J.~Aubert {\it et al.}  [European Muon Collaboration],

2062:   %``Evidence For Anomalous Prompt Photons In Deep Inelastic Muon Scattering At

2063:   %200-Gev,''

2064:   Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 218} (1989) 248.

2065:   %%CITATION = PHLTA,B218,248;%%

2066: 

2067: 

2068: 

2069: \bibitem{curci} 

2070:   G.~Curci, W.~Furmanski and R.~Petronzio,

2071:   %``Evolution Of Parton Densities Beyond Leading Order: The Nonsinglet Case,''

2072:   Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 175} (1980) 27;\\

2073: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B175,27;%%

2074:     W.~Furmanski and R.~Petronzio,

2075:   %``Singlet Parton Densities Beyond Leading Order,''

2076:   Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 97} (1980) 437,

2077:   %%CITATION = PHLTA,B97,437;%%

2078:   %``Lepton - Hadron Processes Beyond Leading Order In Quantum Chromodynamics,''

2079:   Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 11} (1982) 293.

2080:   %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C11,293;%%

2081: 

2082: \bibitem{photonfrag}

2083:   A.~Gehrmann-De Ridder, G.~Kramer and H.~Spiesberger,

2084:   %``Photon fragmentation in large-Q**2 e p collisions at 

2085:   % next-to-leading  order QCD,''

2086:   Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 11} (1999) 137

2087:   [hep-ph/9907511].

2088:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9907511;%%

2089: 

2090: \bibitem{cteq6l}

2091:    J.~Pumplin, D.R.~Stump, J.~Huston, H.L.~Lai, P.~Nadolsky and W.K.~Tung,

2092:   %``New generation of parton distributions with uncertainties from global  QCD

2093:   %analysis,''

2094:   JHEP {\bf 0207} (2002) 012

2095:   [hep-ph/0201195].

2096:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0201195;%%

2097: 

2098: 

2099: 

2100: 

2101: \bibitem{carsten}

2102: C.\ Schmitz, private communication.

2103: 

2104: \bibitem{disjet1}

2105:   C.~Adloff {\it et al.}  [H1 Collaboration],

2106:   %``Measurement and QCD analysis of jet cross sections in deep-inelastic

2107:   %positron proton collisions at s**(1/2) of 300-GeV,''

2108:   Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 19} (2001) 289

2109:   [hep-ex/0010054].

2110:   %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0010054;%%

2111: 

2112: \bibitem{disjet2}

2113:   C.~Adloff {\it et al.}  [H1 Collaboration],

2114:   %``Dijet production in charged and neutral current e+ p interactions at  high

2115:   %Q**2,''

2116:   Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 19} (2001) 429

2117:   [hep-ex/0010016].

2118:   %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0010016;%%

2119: 

2120: \bibitem{ellis-soper}

2121:   S.D.~Ellis and D.E.~Soper,

2122:   %``Successive combination jet algorithm for hadron collisions,''

2123:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 48} (1993) 3160

2124:   [hep-ph/9305266].

2125:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9305266;%%

2126: 

2127: \bibitem{durhamkt}

2128:   S.~Catani, Y.L.~Dokshitzer, M.~Olsson, G.~Turnock and B.R.~Webber,

2129:   %``New clustering algorithm for multi - jet cross-sections in e+ e-

2130:   %annihilation,''

2131:   Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 269} (1991) 432.

2132:   %%CITATION = PHLTA,B269,432;%%

2133: 

2134: \bibitem{ktdis}

2135:   S.~Catani, Y.L.~Dokshitzer and B.R.~Webber,

2136:   %``The K-perpendicular clustering algorithm for jets in deep inelastic

2137:   %scattering and hadron collisions,''

2138:   Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 285} (1992) 291.

2139:   %%CITATION = PHLTA,B285,291;%%

2140: 

2141: \bibitem{Catani-Fontannaz}

2142:   S.~Catani, M.~Fontannaz, J.P.~Guillet and E.~Pilon,

2143:   %``Cross section of isolated prompt photons in hadron hadron collisions,''

2144:   JHEP {\bf 0205} (2002) 028

2145:   [hep-ph/0204023].

2146:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0204023;%%

2147: 

2148: \bibitem{binoth}

2149:   T.~Binoth, J.P.~Guillet, E.~Pilon and M.~Werlen,

2150:   %``Beyond leading order effects in photon pair production at the Tevatron,''

2151:   Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63} (2001) 114016

2152:   [hep-ph/0012191].

2153:   %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0012191;%%

2154: 

2155: 

2156: \end{thebibliography}

2157: \end{document}