1: \documentclass[aps,prd,preprint,showpacs,nofootinbib]{revtex4}
2: \usepackage{epsfig}
3: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% TITLE PAGE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
4: \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}}
5: \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}}
6: \begin{document}
7: \title{Soft Gluon Resummation Effects in Single Graviton Production
8: at the CERN Large Hadron Collider in the Randall-Sundrum Model}
9: \author{\center{Qiang Li\footnote{\hspace{-0.1cm}
10: Electronics address: qliphy@pku.edu.cn}, Chong Sheng
11: Li\footnote{\hspace{-0.1cm} Electronics address: csli@pku.edu.cn},
12: and Li Lin Yang\footnote{\hspace{-0.1cm} Electronics address:
13: llyang@pku.edu.cn}}} \affiliation{\small Department of Physics,
14: Peking University, Beijing 100871, China}
15:
16:
17: \begin{abstract}
18: We study QCD effects in single graviton production at the CERN
19: Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in the Randall-Sundrum (RS) Model. We
20: present in detail the complete next-to-leading order (NLO) QCD
21: corrections to the inclusive total cross sections. The NLO QCD
22: corrections enhance significantly the total cross sections and
23: decrease efficiently the dependence of the total cross sections on
24: the factorization and renormalization scales. We also examine the
25: uncertainty of the total cross sections due to the parton
26: distribution function (PDF) uncertainties. For the differential
27: cross sections on the transverse momentum ($q_T$) of the graviton,
28: within the CSS resummation formalism, we resum the
29: logarithmically-enhanced terms at small $q_T$ to all orders up to
30: NLO logatithmic accuracy. Combined with the fixed order
31: calculations, we give consistent predictions for both small $q_T$
32: and large $q_T$.
33: \end{abstract}
34:
35: \pacs{11.10.Kk, 12.38.-t, 12.38.Bx, 13.85.Qk}
36:
37: \maketitle
38: \section{Introduction}
39: Now search for extra dimensions has been one of the major objects at
40: the LHC, since its physical effects can appear at the TeV energy
41: scale. The idea of extra dimensions was revived in the
42: 1990's\cite{ADD,RS,lyk,witt,hora,anto}, which can bring new
43: solutions to the gauge hierarchy problem and be used to resolve some
44: problems of the SM such as the origin of the fermion masses and
45: their hierarchy.
46:
47: So far, there have been various extra dimension models, which can
48: be divided into two major classes according to the geometry of the
49: background space-time manifold. The first one includes the ADD
50: model\cite{ADD} and its variants, which extend the dimension of
51: the totoal space-time to $D=4+\delta$, propose a factorizable
52: metric, and get large size of the extra dimensions ($\gg 1/M_{\rm
53: p}$). In the ADD model, the SM particles live in the usual
54: $4-$dimensional space-time, while gravity can propagate in the
55: additional $\delta$-dimensional space, which is assumed for
56: simplicity to be compactified on the $\delta$-dimensional torus
57: $T^\delta$ with a common radius R. Then the 4-dimensional Planck
58: scale $M_{\rm{p}}$ is related to the fundamental scale $M_s$ as
59: follows\cite{ADD,csaki}:
60: \begin{eqnarray}\label{scale}
61: M^2_{{\rm p}}=M^{\delta+2}_s(2\pi R)^\delta,
62: \end{eqnarray}
63: where $M_s\sim {\rm TeV}$. According to Eq.~(\ref{scale}),
64: deviations from the usual Newtonian gravitational force law can be
65: expected at distances smaller than $R\sim
66: 2\times10^{-17}\times10^{\frac{32}{\delta}}{\rm cm}$\cite{csaki}.
67: For $\delta\geq 2$, ADD is consistent with the current
68: experiments\cite{grav} since gravitational forces are not yet well
69: probed at distances less than about a millimeter. However for
70: $\delta=2$, there are constraints arising from, e.g., supernova
71: cooling, which require $M_s\geq 10-100 {\rm TeV}$ if $\delta=2$
72: \cite{csaki}.
73:
74: The second one includes the 5-dimensional RS model\cite{RS} and its
75: variants, in which a warped metric is introduced and the size of the
76: extra dimension needs not to be too large compared with the Planck
77: length. In the RS model, the extra dimension is assumed to be an
78: $S_1/Z_2$ orbifold, which has two fixed points, $\theta=0$ and
79: $\theta=\pi$. At each fixed point, there is a 3-brane, and the brane
80: at $\theta=\pi$ corresponds to the brane we live on, while the one
81: at $\theta=0$ is the high energy brane. Between the two 3-branes is
82: a slice of AdS space, where only the graviton can propagate into.
83: Moreover, the 4-dimensional metric is the function of the coordinate
84: of the 5th dimension, i.e.
85: \begin{equation}\label{rsm}
86: ds^2=e^{-2kr_c|\phi|}(\eta_{\mu\nu}+\frac{2}{M_*^{3/2}}h_{\mu\nu})dx^\mu
87: dx^\nu-r^2_cd\phi^2,\,\, 0\leq|\phi|\leq \pi, \end{equation} where
88: $k$ is a scale of order of the Planck scale and relates the
89: 5-dimensional Planck scale $M_*$ to the cosmological constant, $r_c$
90: is the compactification radius, and $h_{\mu\nu}$ is the graviton.
91:
92: After solving the 5-dimensional Einstein equation, we can get the
93: tensions of the two branes\cite{csaki}
94: \begin{equation}
95: V_0=-V_\pi=12 k M_*^3,
96: \end{equation}
97: and from Eq.(\ref{rsm}), we can get the relation between $M_*$ and
98: 4-dimensional reduced Planck scale $\overline{M}_{P}$\cite{RS}
99: \begin{eqnarray}
100: \overline{M}_{P}^2=\frac{M_*^3}{k} (1-e^{-2kr_c\pi}),
101: \end{eqnarray}
102: from which we can see that for moderately large values of the
103: compactification scale $r_c$, the relation between $M_*$ and
104: $\overline{M}_{P}$ almost does not depend on $r_c$, and it is
105: completely different from the results in the ADD model. Compared
106: with the ADD model, the RS model present a different solution to the
107: gauge Hierarchy problem: the physical mass $m$ of a field on the
108: brane where our world live on, is related to the fundamental mass
109: parameter $m_0$ as following
110: \begin{equation} m=e^{-kr_c\pi}m_0,
111: \end{equation}
112: thus the hierarchy problem can be solved if $kr_c\sim 12$.
113:
114: In the RS model, there also exist KK towers of massive spin-2
115: gravitons which can interact with the SM fields, and we have the
116: following 4-dimensional effective Lagrangian\cite{Hewett1,9909255}:
117: \begin{equation} {\cal L} = - {1\over
118: \overline{M}_P}T^{\alpha\beta}(x)h^{(0)}_{\alpha\beta}(x)-
119: {1\over\Lambda_\pi}T^{\alpha\beta}(x)\sum_{n=1}^\infty
120: h^{(n)}_{\alpha\beta}(x)\, \label{effL} \end{equation}
121: where
122: \begin{equation}\label{lambdpi}
123: \Lambda_\pi=e^{-kr_c\pi}\overline{M}_P=\frac{m_1\overline{M}_P}{x_1k},
124: \end{equation}
125: and is at the electroweak scale. Thus the coupling of the massless
126: graviton $h^{(0)}$ is suppressed by the Planck scale, and the ones
127: of the massive graviton $h^{(n)}$ by $\Lambda_\pi$, but which is
128: only TeV. The masses of the $n$th graviton KK excitation modes are
129: also at the electroweak scale, which are given by
130: \begin{eqnarray}\label{RSMass} m_n=kx_ne^{-kr_c\pi}=m_1\frac{x_n}{x_1},
131: \end{eqnarray}
132: where the $x_n$'s are the $n$th roots of the first order Bessel
133: function.
134:
135: From Eqs.(\ref{lambdpi}) and (\ref{RSMass}), the graviton sector of
136: the RS model is completely determined by the two parameters $m_1$
137: and $k/\overline{M}_P$. Current
138: constraints\cite{9909255,0205106,0506158} for the parameters of the
139: RS model are from the theoretical requirement, the low energy
140: precise measurement and also the data from Tevatron, from which we
141: expect $0.01\leq k/\overline{M}_P<0.1$ and $\Lambda_\pi\leq
142: 10$\,TeV.
143:
144: There are two classes of effects that can be used to probe extra
145: dimension in the RS model at high energy colliders: real graviton
146: emission and virtual KK tower exchange. In the RS model, the
147: lightest massive graviton can have a mass of several hundred GeV,
148: and may be produced copiously at the LHC. More importantly, it has
149: much larger couplings to the SM particles than the ones in the ADD
150: model, thus it may decay into observable particles and hence be
151: detected. And there have been detailed analysis\cite{0211205}
152: which demonstrate that using channels $pp\rightarrow
153: h^{(n)}\rightarrow e^+e^-,\gamma\gamma$..., we can probe the
154: massive graviton in the RS model with masses up to several TeV.
155: However, those analysis\cite{0211205} are based on the LO results,
156: in order to improve the precision of the theoretical predictions,
157: the higher order QCD effects are necessary. In the ADD model and
158: the RS model, the NLO QCD corrections to the virtual graviton
159: production at the LHC have been discussed in Ref.\cite{0506158},
160: however, the K factors contributed from different parts, the scale
161: dependence and the PDF uncertainty for above processes needs
162: further studies. Moreover, they also did not consider the
163: kinematic distribution of the events, which is very important in
164: designing the strategy of discovery. In this paper, we study the
165: transverse momentum distribution of the massive graviton at NLO in
166: QCD, and all order soft gluon resummation effects on the
167: distribution to give reasonable predictions.
168:
169: The arrangement of this paper is as follows. In Sect.~II, we show
170: the LO results and define the notations. In Sect.~III, we present
171: the details of the calculations of both the virtual and real parts
172: of the NLO QCD corrections. In Sect.~IV, we give the transverse
173: momentum distribution. In Sect.~V, we present the detailed
174: numerical results for the total cross sections and also the
175: transverse momentum distribution. Sec.~VI contains a brief
176: conclusion.
177:
178: \section{Leading order calculations }
179: \begin{figure}[ht!]
180: \vspace{1.0cm} \centerline{\epsfig{file=LO.eps, width=240pt}}
181: \caption[]{Leading order Feynman diagrams for $pp\rightarrow
182: h^{(n)}_{\mu\nu}$.}\label{9f1}
183: \end{figure}
184: The related Feynman diagrams which contribute to the LO amplitude of
185: the partonic process $g^a_\rho(p_1)g^b_\sigma(p_2)$,
186: $q_r(p_1)\bar{q}_s(p_2)\rightarrow$ $h^{(n)}_{\mu\nu}$ are shown in
187: Fig.~\ref{9f1}. The relevant Feynman rules can be read easily from
188: the ones in the ADD model presented in Ref.\cite{0506158,Hant}, from
189: which we can get the LO amplitude in $n=4-2\epsilon$ dimensions as
190: following
191: \begin{eqnarray}
192: &&\hspace{-.6cm}M^{(0)}_{gg}=-\frac{i\delta_{ab}\mu_r^{4-n}}{\Lambda_\pi}\times\nonumber
193: \\&&\hspace{0.3cm}
194: \bigg[p_1\cdot p_2C_{\mu\nu,\rho\sigma}+D_{\mu\nu,\rho\sigma}
195: +E_{\mu\nu,\rho\sigma}(p_1,p_2)\bigg]\epsilon^a_\rho(p_1)\epsilon^b_\sigma(p_2)\epsilon^{s*}_{\mu\nu}(p_1+p_2),
196: \\
197: &&\hspace{-.6cm}M^{(0)}_{q\bar{q}}=-\frac{i\delta_{rs}\mu_r^{4-n}}{4\Lambda_\pi}\times\nonumber
198: \\&&\hspace{-0.2cm}\bar{v}(p_2)
199: \bigg[\gamma_\mu(p_{1\nu}-p_{2\nu})+\gamma_\nu(p_{1\mu}-p_{2\mu})-2\eta_{\mu\nu}(\not{\!p}_1-\not{\!p}_2-2m_q)\bigg]
200: u(p_1)\epsilon^{s*}_{\mu\nu}(p_1+p_2),
201: \end{eqnarray}
202: where $\delta_{ab}$ and $\delta_{rs}$ are color tensors ($a, b$
203: are the color indices of the initial state gluons, and $r,s$ are
204: the color indices of the initial state quarks),
205: $C_{\mu\nu,\rho\sigma}$, $D_{\mu\nu,\rho\sigma}$ and
206: $E_{\mu\nu,\rho\sigma}(p_1,p_2)$ are the coefficients in the
207: couplings between the graviton and gluons, which can be found in
208: Ref.\cite{Hant}, $\mu_r$ is a mass parameter introduced to keep
209: the couplings dimensionless.
210:
211: For the polarization sum of the massive graviton, we
212: have\cite{0506158,Hant}
213: \begin{eqnarray}
214: \sum_{s=1}^5\epsilon^{s}_{\mu\nu}(k)\epsilon^{s*}_{\alpha\beta}(k)=P_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta},
215: \end{eqnarray}
216: where
217: \bea P_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta} = \frac{1}{2}\left(
218: \eta_{\mu\alpha}\eta_{\nu\beta} +\eta_{\mu\beta}\eta_{\nu\alpha}
219: -\frac{2}{n-1}\eta_{\mu\nu}\eta_{\alpha\beta}\right)+\dots,
220: \eea
221: the dots represent terms proportional to the graviton momentum
222: $k_{\mu}$, and since $k^{\mu}T_{\mu\nu}=0$, give a vanishing
223: contribution to the amplitude. For convenience, below we define \bea
224: \chi\equiv\frac{2}{n-1}=\frac{2}{3-2\epsilon}.\eea
225:
226: Moreover, in order to avoid introducing external ghost lines while
227: summing over the gluon helicities, we limit ourselves to the sum
228: over the physical polarizations of the gluons \cite{beenakker1},
229: i.e.
230: \begin{eqnarray}
231: P_i^{\mu\nu}=\sum_{T} \epsilon_T^\mu(k_i) \epsilon_T^\nu(k_i)=
232: -g^{\mu\nu} +\frac{n_i^\mu k_i^\nu +k_i^\mu n_i^\nu}{n_i\cdot k_i}
233: -\frac{n_i^2 k_i^\mu k_i^\nu}{(n_i\cdot k_i)^2},
234: \end{eqnarray}
235: where the index $i$ (=1,2) labels the two external gluons, and
236: $n_i\neq k_i$ is an arbitrary vector. This polarization sum obeys
237: the transversality relations
238: \begin{eqnarray}
239: k_{i\mu}P^{\mu\nu}=P^{\mu\nu} k_{i\nu}=
240: n_{i\mu}P^{\mu\nu}=P^{\mu\nu} n_{i\nu}=0.
241: \end{eqnarray}
242:
243: Thus we can get the relevant partonic cross sections as following:
244: \begin{eqnarray}
245: \hat{\sigma}^{(LO)}_{gg}=\frac{1}{2s}2\pi\delta(s-m^2_n)
246: \overline{|M^{(0)}_{gg}|}^2=\frac{(2-\epsilon)\pi}{32\Lambda^2_\pi}\delta(1-\hat{\tau}),
247: \end{eqnarray}
248: \begin{eqnarray}
249: \hat{\sigma}^{(LO)}_{q\bar{q}}=\frac{1}{2s}2\pi\delta(s-m^2_n)\overline{|M^{(0)}_{q\bar{q}}|}^2=
250: \frac{(1-\epsilon)\pi}{24\Lambda^2_\pi}\delta(1-\hat{\tau}),
251: \end{eqnarray}
252: where $s\equiv(p_1+p_2)^2$ and $\hat{\tau}\equiv m^2_n/s$.
253:
254: The LO total cross sections at the LHC are obtained by convoluting
255: the partonic cross sections with the parton distribution functions
256: (PDFs) $G_{q,\bar{q},g/p}$ in the proton:
257: \begin{eqnarray}
258: &&\hspace{-1.5cm}\sigma^{(LO)}\equiv\sigma^{(LO)}_{gg}+\sigma^{(LO)}_{q\bar{q}},\nonumber\vspace{0.7cm}\\
259: &&\hspace{-1.5cm}\sigma^{(LO)}_{gg}=
260: \int_{\tau_0}^1dx_1\int_{\tau_0/x_1}^1dx_2\frac{1}{2}\bigg[G_{g/p}(x_1,\mu_f)G_{g/p}(x_2,\mu_f)
261: +G_{g/p}(x_2,\mu_f)G_{g/p}(x_1,\mu_f)\bigg]\hat{\sigma}^{(LO)}_{gg},\vspace{0.5cm}\\
262: &&\hspace{-1.5cm}\sigma^{(LO)}_{q\bar{q}}=
263: \int_{\tau_0}^1dx_1\int_{\tau_0/x_1}^1dx_2\bigg[G_{q/p}(x_1,\mu_f)G_{\bar{q}/p}(x_2,\mu_f)
264: +G_{q/p}(x_2,\mu_f)G_{\bar{q}/p}(x_1,\mu_f)\bigg]\hat{\sigma}^{(0)}_{q\bar{q}},\end{eqnarray}
265: where $\tau_0\equiv m^2_n/S_0$, $S_0=(14{\rm TeV})^2$ and $\mu_F$ is
266: the factorization scale.
267:
268:
269: \section{Next-to-Leading order calculations}
270:
271: The NLO QCD corrections consist of the following contributions:
272: the virtual corrections arising from loop diagrams of colored
273: particles, the real contributions arising from the radiation of a
274: real gluon or a massless (anti)quark, and the contributions of
275: mass factorization. In the following, we will calculate these
276: contributions separately. We use dimensional regularization
277: (DREG)\cite{DREG} in $d=4-2\epsilon$ dimensions to regulate the
278: ultraviolet (UV) and infrared (IR) divergences.
279:
280:
281: For the partonic cross section, the total virtual corrections can
282: be written as
283: \begin{eqnarray}
284: \hat{\sigma}^{V}_{gg,q\bar{q}}=\hat{\sigma}^{unren}_{gg,q\bar{q}}+\hat{\sigma}^{con}_{gg,q\bar{q}},\label{9rn}
285: \end{eqnarray}
286: where the first part in the right hand contains the radiative
287: corrections from the one-loop vertex diagrams, and the second part
288: is the contributions from the counterterms involving only the the
289: wavefunction renormalization constant for the external fields.
290:
291: The ${\cal O} (\alpha_s)$ virtual corrections to the partonic cross
292: section can be expressed as
293: \begin{eqnarray}
294: &&\hat{\sigma}^{V}_{gg}=2C_\epsilon\frac{g^2_s(2-\epsilon)}{32\pi\Lambda^2_\pi}\delta(1-\hat{\tau})\nonumber\\
295: &&\hspace{2.cm}\times
296: \bigg(\frac{-3}{8}\frac{1}{\epsilon^2_{IR}}-\frac{33}{48}\frac{1}{\epsilon_{IR}}+\frac{n_f}{24}\frac{1}{\epsilon_{IR}}
297: +\frac{1}{8}\pi^2-\frac{203}{96}+\frac{35n_f}{288}\bigg),\\
298: &&\hat{\sigma}^{V}_{q\bar{q}}=2C_\epsilon\frac{g^2_s(1-\epsilon)}{24\pi\Lambda^2_\pi}\delta(1-\hat{\tau})\times
299: \bigg(\frac{-1}{6}\frac{1}{\epsilon^2_{IR}}-\frac{1}{3}\frac{1}{\epsilon_{IR}}
300: +\frac{1}{18}\pi^2-\frac{5}{6}\bigg), \end{eqnarray} with
301: $C_\epsilon\equiv\frac{\Gamma(1-\epsilon)}{\Gamma(1-2\epsilon)}\bigg(\frac{4\pi\mu^2_r}
302: {m^2_n}\bigg)^\epsilon$, which are UV finite, but still contain the
303: IR divergences. Here, the IR divergences include the soft
304: divergences and the collinear divergences. The soft divergences are
305: canceled after adding the real emission corrections, and the
306: remaining collinear divergences can be absorbed into the
307: redefinition of PDF \cite{altarelli}, which will be discussed in the
308: following subsections.
309:
310: The real corrections consist of the contributions from the radiation
311: of a real gluon or a massless (anti)quark. The Feynman diagrams for
312: the real gluon emission sub-process $gg,q\bar{q}\rightarrow
313: h^{(n)}_{\mu\nu}$ are shown in Figs.~\ref{9f4} and Fig.~\ref{9f5},
314: respectively. The Feynman diagrams for massless (anti)quark emission
315: (the diagrams for the antiquark emission sub-processes are similar
316: and omitted here) are shown in Fig.~\ref{9f6}
317: \begin{figure}[ht!]
318: \vspace{1.0cm} \centerline{\epsfig{file=ggreal.eps, width=240pt}}
319: \caption[]{Feynman diagrams of real gluon emission sub-processes
320: $gg\rightarrow h^{(n)}_{\mu\nu}+g$.}\label{9f4}
321: \end{figure}
322:
323: \begin{figure}[ht!]
324: \vspace{1.0cm} \centerline{\epsfig{file=qqreal.eps, width=240pt}}
325: \caption[]{Feynman diagrams of real gluon emission sub-processes
326: $q\bar{q}\rightarrow h^{(n)}_{\mu\nu}+g$.}\label{9f5}
327: \end{figure}
328:
329: \begin{figure}[ht!]
330: \vspace{1.0cm} \centerline{\epsfig{file=gqreal.eps, width=240pt}}
331: \caption[]{Feynman diagrams of real quark emission sub-processes
332: $gq\rightarrow h^{(n)}_{\mu\nu}+q$.}\label{9f6}
333: \end{figure}
334:
335: For the real gluon emission sub-processes $g(p_1)g(p_2),\,\,
336: q(p_1)\bar{q}(p_2)\rightarrow g(p_3)h^{(n)}_{\mu\nu}$, the partonic
337: cross sections is£º
338: \begin{eqnarray}
339: \hat{\sigma}_{gg,q\bar{q}}^{real}=\frac{1}{2s}\int
340: {\overline{|M^{real}_{gg,q\bar{q}}|}}^2d\Gamma_2,
341: \end{eqnarray}
342: with
343: \begin{eqnarray}\label{rg1}&&\hspace{-0.5cm}{\overline{|M^{real}_{gg}|}}^2=\frac{3\times
344: 8}{8\times
345: 8}\frac{1}{4(1-\epsilon)^2}\frac{4g_s^2}{\Lambda^2_\pi}\frac{1}{tu}\times
346: \bigg\{ \epsilon
347: t^2u[26-9(4-2\epsilon)-2(-5+2(4-2\epsilon))\epsilon\chi]\nonumber\\
348: &&+\epsilon^2\chi tu^2[26-9(4-2\epsilon)-2(-5+2(4-2\epsilon))]
349: -\frac{(1-\epsilon)}{4}s^3[16-6(4-2\epsilon)+4\epsilon^2\chi]\nonumber\\
350: &&-\frac{(1-\epsilon)}{2}t^3[16-6(4-2\epsilon)+4\epsilon^2\chi]
351: -\frac{(1-\epsilon)}{2}s^2(t+u)[16-
352: 6(4-2\epsilon)+4\epsilon^2\chi]\nonumber\\
353: &&-\frac{(1-\epsilon)}{2}u^3[16-6(4-2\epsilon)+4\epsilon^2\chi]
354: -\frac{(1-\epsilon)}{4s}(t^2+tu+u^2)^2[16-6(4-2\epsilon)+4\epsilon^2\chi]\nonumber\\
355: &&+\frac{s}{2}[2\epsilon tu(26-9(4-2\epsilon)-6\epsilon\chi)
356: -\frac{3}{2}(1-\epsilon)(t^2+u^2)[16-6(4-2\epsilon)+4\epsilon^2\chi]\bigg\},
357: \end{eqnarray}
358: \begin{eqnarray}\label{rg2}{\overline{|M^{real}_{q\bar{q}}|}}^2&=&\frac{4}{3\times
359: 3}\frac{1}{2\times
360: 2}\frac{-g_s^2}{\Lambda^2_\pi}\frac{1}{stu}\times
361: \bigg\{2(\epsilon-1)s^4+4(\epsilon-1)(t+u)s^3\nonumber\\
362: &&
363: -(\epsilon-3)[(\epsilon-1)t^2+2(3\epsilon-2)ut+(\epsilon-1)u^2]s^2
364: \nonumber\\
365: &&
366: -(t+u)[(\epsilon-1)^2t^2+(6\epsilon(\epsilon-3)+8)ut+(\epsilon-1)^2u^2]s\nonumber\\
367: && -2tu[(\epsilon-1)t^2+2\epsilon
368: ut+(\epsilon-1)u^2][\epsilon(\epsilon\chi+3)-2]\bigg\},
369: \end{eqnarray}
370: where ${\overline{|M^{real}_{gg,q\bar{q}}|}}^2$ is the squared
371: matrix of the real gluon emission sub-processes, in which the
372: colors and spins of the outgoing particles have been summed, and
373: the colors and spins of the incoming ones have been averaged over,
374: and the final state 2-body phase space is
375: \begin{eqnarray}
376: d\Gamma_2=\frac{1}{8\pi\Gamma(1-\epsilon)}\bigg(\frac{4\pi\mu^2_r}{m^2_n}\bigg)^\epsilon
377: (\hat{\tau})^\epsilon(1-\hat{\tau})^\epsilon\times v^{-\epsilon}
378: (1-v)^{-\epsilon}dv,
379: \end{eqnarray}
380: where \begin{eqnarray} &&v\equiv \frac{1}{2}(1+\cos\theta),\\
381: &&t\equiv(p_1-p_3)^2=-s(1-\hat{\tau})(1-v),\\
382: &&u\equiv(p_2-p_3)^2=-s(1-\hat{\tau})v,
383: \end{eqnarray}
384: and $\theta$ is the the angle between the incoming gluon and the
385: outgoing gluon.
386:
387: Combining the contributions of the virtual corrections and the
388: real gluon emission, we still have the collinear divergences,
389: which can be absorbed into the redefinition of the PDF at NLO, in
390: general called mass factorization \cite{altarelli}. This procedure
391: in practice means that first we convolute the partonic cross
392: section with the bare PDF $G_{\alpha/p}(x)$, and then rewrite
393: $G_{\alpha/p}(x)$ in terms of the renormalized PDF
394: $G_{\alpha/p}(x,\mu_f)$in the numerical calculations. In the
395: $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme, the scale dependent PDF
396: $G_{\alpha/p}(x,\mu_f)$ is given by\cite{cutoff}
397: \begin{eqnarray}
398: G_{\alpha/p}(x,\mu_f)= G_{\alpha/p}(x)+
399: \sum_{\beta}(-\frac{1}{\epsilon})\bigg [\frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi}
400: \frac{\Gamma(1 -\epsilon)}{\Gamma(1 -2\epsilon)} \bigg(\frac{4\pi
401: \mu_r^2}{\mu_f^2}\bigg)^\epsilon\bigg] \int_x^1 \frac{dz}{z}
402: P_{\alpha\beta} (z) G_{\beta/p}(x/z),
403: \end{eqnarray}
404: where $P_{\alpha\beta}(z)$ are the leading order Altarelli-Parisi
405: splitting functions \cite{alpha}.
406:
407: Here, for the real gluon emission sub-processes $gg\rightarrow
408: h^{(n)}_{\mu\nu}$ and $q\bar{q}\rightarrow h^{(n)}_{\mu\nu}$, we
409: first consider only the contributions from $p_{gg}$ and $p_{qq}$,
410: and we can get the relevant counterterm arising from the PDF
411: redefinition as following:
412: \begin{eqnarray}
413: \hspace{-1.4cm}\delta\hat{\sigma}_{gg}
414: =2\times\frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi}C'_\epsilon\frac{(2-\epsilon)}{32\Lambda^2_\pi}zP^{(0)}_{gg}(z)
415: ,\end{eqnarray}
416: \begin{eqnarray}
417: \hspace{-1.4cm}\delta\hat{\sigma}_{q\bar{q}}
418: =2\times\frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi}C'_\epsilon\frac{(1-\epsilon)}{24\Lambda^2_\pi}zP^{(0)}_{qq}(z)
419: ,\end{eqnarray} where
420: $C'_\epsilon\equiv\frac{\Gamma(1-\epsilon)}{\Gamma(1-2\epsilon)}\bigg(\frac{4\pi\mu^2_r}
421: {\mu^2_f}\bigg)^\epsilon$ and $z\equiv
422: m^2_n/(x_1x_2S)=\hat{\tau}$.
423:
424: Summing up the virtual, real emission and PDF redefinition
425: contributions, we have the IR finite results
426: \begin{eqnarray}\label{77gg}
427: &&\hspace{-1.1cm}\hat{\sigma}_{gg}^{NLO}=\hat{\sigma}_{gg}^{real}+\hat{\sigma}_{gg}^{V}+\delta\hat{\sigma}_{gg}
428: =\frac{(2-\epsilon)\alpha_s}{32\Lambda^2_\pi}C_\epsilon\frac{m^2_n}{s}\times
429: \nonumber\\
430: &&\bigg\{
431: 6\ln\bigg(\frac{m^2_n}{\mu^2_f}\bigg)[\frac{\hat{\tau}}{(1-\hat{\tau})_+}+\frac{1-\hat{\tau}}{\hat{\tau}}
432: +\hat{\tau}(1-\hat{\tau})]+\ln\bigg(\frac{m^2_n}{\mu^2_f}\bigg)(\frac{11}{2}-\frac{n_f}{3})\delta(1-\hat{\tau})
433: \nonumber\\
434: &&
435: +(\pi^2-\frac{203}{12}+\frac{35n_f}{36})\delta(1-\hat{\tau})+12\bigg(\frac{\ln(1-\hat{\tau})}{1-\hat{\tau}}\bigg)_+
436: \nonumber\\
437: &&+6[-1+\frac{1-\hat{\tau}}{\hat{\tau}}
438: +\hat{\tau}(1-\hat{\tau})]\ln\bigg(\frac{(1-\hat{\tau})^2}{\hat{\tau}}\bigg)-6\frac{\ln\hat{\tau}}{1-\hat{\tau}}
439: -\frac{3}{2}-\frac{11}{2\hat{\tau}}+\frac{3}{2}\hat{\tau}+\frac{11\hat{\tau}^2}{2}\bigg\},
440: \\
441: &&\hspace{-1.1cm}\hat{\sigma}_{q\bar{q}}^{NLO}=\hat{\sigma}_{q\bar{q}}^{real}+\hat{\sigma}_{q\bar{q}}^{V}
442: +\delta\hat{\sigma}_{q\bar{q}}
443: =\frac{(1-\epsilon)\alpha_s}{24\Lambda^2_\pi}C_\epsilon\frac{m^2_n}{s}\nonumber\\
444: &&\times\bigg\{
445: \frac{4}{3}\ln\bigg(\frac{m^2_n}{\mu^2_f}\bigg)[\frac{1+\hat{\tau}^2}{(1-\hat{\tau})_+}+\frac{3}{2}\delta(1-\hat{\tau})]
446: +\frac{4}{3}(-5+\frac{\pi^2}{3})\delta(1-\hat{\tau})
447: +\frac{16}{3}\bigg(\frac{\ln(1-\hat{\tau})}{1-\hat{\tau}}\bigg)_+\nonumber\\
448: &&-\frac{4}{3}(1+\hat{\tau})\ln\frac{(1-\hat{\tau})^2}{\hat{\tau}}
449: -\frac{8}{3}\frac{\ln\hat{\tau}}{1-\hat{\tau}}+\frac{16}{9\hat{\tau}}
450: -\frac{16\hat{\tau}^2}{9}\bigg\}.\nonumber
451: \end{eqnarray}
452:
453: For the real (anti-)quark emission sub-processes
454: $gq(\bar{q})\rightarrow q(\bar{q})h^{(n)}_{\mu\nu}$, the relevant
455: results can can be got in the similar way as above. First, the
456: partonic cross sections is£º
457: \begin{eqnarray}
458: \hat{\sigma}_{gq,g\bar{q}}^{real}=\frac{1}{2s}\int
459: {\overline{|M^{real}_{gq,g\bar{q}}|}}^2d\Gamma_2,
460: \end{eqnarray}
461: with
462: \begin{eqnarray}\label{rg3}
463: &&{\overline{|M^{real}_{gq}|}}^2=-\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}{\overline{|M^{real}_{q\bar{q}}|}}^2
464: (s\leftrightarrow
465: t),\\
466: &&{\overline{|M^{real}_{g\bar{q}}|}}^2=
467: -\frac{1}{1-\epsilon}{\overline{|M^{real}_{q\bar{q}}|}}^2(s\leftrightarrow
468: u),
469: \end{eqnarray}
470: where ${\overline{|M^{real}_{gq,g\bar{q}}|}}^2$ is the squared
471: matrix of the real (anti-)quark emission sub-processes, in which
472: the colors and spins of the outgoing particles have been summed,
473: and the colors and spins of the incoming ones have been averaged
474: over.
475:
476: Secondly, the relevant counterterm arising from the PDF redefinition
477: for real (anti-)quark emission sub-processes are shown as following,
478: where we consider only the contributions from $p_{gq}$ and $p_{qg}$:
479: \begin{eqnarray} \hspace{-1.4cm}\delta\hat{\sigma}_{gq}
480: =\frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi}C'_\epsilon\frac{(1-\epsilon)}{24\Lambda^2_\pi}zP^{(0)}_{qg}(z)
481: +2\times\frac{1}{2}\frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi}C'_\epsilon\frac{(2-\epsilon)}{32\Lambda^2_\pi}zP^{(0)}_{gq}(z).
482: \end{eqnarray}
483:
484: Summing up the virtual, real emission and PDF redefinition
485: contributions, again we get the IR finite results for real
486: (anti-)quark emission sub-processes,
487:
488: \begin{eqnarray}\label{77gq}
489: &&\hspace{-1.3cm}\hat{\sigma}_{gq}^{NLO}(=\hat{\sigma}_{g\bar{q}}^{NLO})
490: =\hat{\sigma}_{gq}^{real} +\delta\hat{\sigma}_{gq}
491: =\frac{\alpha_s}{96\Lambda^2_\pi}C_\epsilon\frac{m^2_n}{s}\nonumber\\
492: &&\hspace{-0.9cm}\times\bigg\{[4\frac{1+(1-{\hat\tau})^2}{\hat{\tau}}+((1-\hat{\tau})^2+\hat{\tau}^2)]\ln\bigg(\frac{m^2_n}{\mu^2_f}\bigg)
493: \nonumber\\
494: &&\hspace{-0.9cm}+[4\frac{1+(1-\hat{\tau})^2}{\hat{\tau}}+((1-\hat{\tau})^2+\hat{\tau}^2)]\ln\bigg(\frac{(1-\hat{\tau})^2}{\hat{\tau}}\bigg)
495: +\frac{9}{2}-\frac{6}{\hat{\tau}}+9\hat{\tau}-\frac{7\hat{\tau}^2}{2}\bigg\}.
496: \end{eqnarray}
497:
498: The NLO total cross section for $pp\rightarrow h^{(n)}$ in the
499: $\overline{MS}$ factorization scheme is obtained by summing up the
500: Born, virtual, real emission and PDF redefinition contributions.
501: In terms of the above notations, we have
502: \begin{eqnarray}
503: &&\hspace{-0.4cm}\sigma^{(NLO)}=\sigma^{(LO)}_{gg}+\sigma^{(LO)}_{q\bar{q}}
504: +\sigma^{(NLO)}_{gg}+\sigma^{(NLO)}_{q\bar{q}}
505: +\sigma^{(NLO)}_{gq}+\sigma^{(NLO)}_{g\bar{q}}\nonumber \\ &&
506: \hspace{0.9cm}=\sigma^{(LO)}_{gg}+\sigma^{(LO)}_{q\bar{q}}\nonumber \\
507: &&\hspace{0.7cm}
508: +\int_{\tau_0}^1dx_1\int_{\tau_0/x_1}^1dx_2\frac{1}{2}\bigg[G_{g/p}(x_1,\mu_f)G_{g/p}(x_2,\mu_f)
509: +G_{g/p}(x_2,\mu_f)G_{g/p}(x_1,\mu_f)\bigg]\hat{\sigma}^{(NLO)}_{gg}\nonumber
510: \\ &&\hspace{0.7cm}+
511: \int_{\tau_0}^1dx_1\int_{\tau_0/x_1}^1dx_2\bigg[G_{q/p}(x_1,\mu_f)G_{\bar{q}/p}(x_2,\mu_f)
512: +G_{q/p}(x_2,\mu_f)G_{\bar{q}/p}(x_1,\mu_f)\bigg]\hat{\sigma}^{(NLO)}_{q\bar{q}}
513: \nonumber \\ &&\hspace{0.7cm}
514: +\int_{\tau_0}^1dx_1\int_{\tau_0/x_1}^1dx_2\bigg[G_{q/p}(x_1,\mu_f)G_{g/p}(x_2,\mu_f)
515: +G_{q/p}(x_2,\mu_f)G_{g/p}(x_1,\mu_f)\bigg]\hat{\sigma}^{(NLO)}_{gq}
516: \nonumber \\ &&\hspace{0.7cm}
517: +\int_{\tau_0}^1dx_1\int_{\tau_0/x_1}^1dx_2\bigg[G_{g/p}(x_1,\mu_f)G_{\bar{q}/p}(x_2,\mu_f)
518: +G_{g/p}(x_2,\mu_f)G_{\bar{q}/p}(x_1,\mu_f)\bigg]\hat{\sigma}^{(NLO)}_{g\bar{q}}.
519: \end{eqnarray}
520:
521: Finally, we note that our NLO results in Eqs.(\ref{77gg}) and
522: (\ref{77gq}) are the same as the ones in Eq.(3.38) of the second
523: paper in Ref.\cite{0506158}, except the differences by overall
524: factors.
525:
526: \section{Transverse momentum distribution}
527:
528: In this section we investigate the transverse momentum distribution
529: of the massive graviton. At LO the graviton is kept at zero $q_T$
530: due to momentum conservation and the distribution is proportional to
531: $\delta^2(\vec{q}_T)$. Thus the LO distribution at non-zero $q_T$
532: belongs to $\mathcal{O}(\alpha_s)$, where momentum conservation is
533: retained by the additional parton emitted. The distribution can be
534: obtained from the squared amplitudes of the real emission processes,
535: i.e. Eqs.~(\ref{rg1}), (\ref{rg2}) and (\ref{rg3}). However, the
536: corresponding fixed order result of the transverse momentum
537: distribution is only valid when $q_T$ is not too small compared with
538: the mass of the massive graviton $m_n$. If $q_T \ll m_n$, the
539: corresponding parton emitted would be either soft or collinear to
540: one of the initial partons. Thus, large logarithms like
541: $\ln(m_n^2/q_T^2)$ will appear and will dominate over the cross
542: section for sufficiently small $q_T$. In general, there should be
543: double logarithms for each gluon attached to the initial quarks due
544: to the overlap of soft region and collinear region. As a result, the
545: perturbative expansion would be controlled by
546: $\alpha_s\ln^2(m_n^2/q_T^2)$ rather than $\alpha_s$. The convergence
547: of the perturbation series will be spoiled if
548: $\alpha_s\ln^2(m_n^2/q_T^2)$ approaches unity. In order to make use
549: of the perturbation theory with the existence of large logarithms at
550: each order, one must reorganize the perturbative expansion to resum
551: the large terms. In this paper, we use the Collins-Soper-Sterman
552: (CSS) resummation formalism\cite{Nucl.Phys.B250.199} to calculate
553: all order soft gluon effects on the transverse momentum
554: distribution.
555:
556: In the CSS formalism, the differential cross section we are
557: considering can be written as
558: \begin{equation}
559: \label{eq:total00}
560: \frac{d\sigma}{dq_T^2dy}({\rm total}) = \frac{d\sigma}{dq_T^2dy}
561: ({\rm resum}) + Y(q_T,m,x_1^0,x_2^0),
562: \end{equation}
563: where \begin{eqnarray}
564: \label{eq:total11}
565: \frac{d\sigma}{dq_T^2dy}
566: ({\rm resum}) = \sum_{\alpha,\beta}\frac{d\sigma_{\alpha\beta}}{dq_T^2dy}
567: ({\rm resum})\\ \label{eq:total12}
568: Y(q_T,m,x_1^0,x_2^0)=\sum_{ab}Y_{ab}(q_T,m,x_1^0,x_2^0),
569: \end{eqnarray}
570: and the resummed part can be expressed as an inverse Fourier transformation
571: \begin{eqnarray}
572: \label{eq:resum}
573: \frac{d\sigma_{\alpha\beta}}{dq_T^2dy} ({\rm resum}) &=&
574: \frac{1}{2} \sigma^0_{\alpha\beta} \frac{1}{2\pi} \int d^2\vec{b} \exp \left( i\vec{b} \cdot
575: \vec{q}_T \right) W_{\alpha\beta}(b,m,x_1^0,x_2^0)\nonumber
576: \\
577: &&= \sum_{\alpha,\beta} \frac{1}{2} \sigma^0_{\alpha\beta} \int_0^\infty b db J_0(b q_T)
578: W_{\alpha\beta}(b,m,x_1^0,x_2^0),
579: \end{eqnarray}
580: with
581: \begin{eqnarray}\label{opos}
582: \hspace{-0.8cm} W_{\alpha\beta}(b,m,x_1^0,x_2^0) &=& \tilde{f}_{\alpha/A}(x_1^0,C_3/b)
583: \tilde{f}_{\beta/B}(x_2^0,C_3/b) \nonumber
584: \\
585: \hspace{-0.8cm} \qquad \times &\exp &\left\{ - \int_{C_1^2/b^2}^{C_2^2m^2}
586: \frac{d\bar{\mu}^2}{\bar{\mu}^2} \left[ \ln\frac{C_2^2m^2}{\bar{\mu}^2}
587: A(\alpha_s(\bar{\mu})) + B(\alpha_s(\bar{\mu})) \right]
588: \right\},
589: \end{eqnarray}
590: where $\alpha\beta=gg,q\bar{q}$, $ab=gg,q\bar{q},q(\bar{q})g$,
591: $\vec{b}$ is the impact parameter conjugating to $\vec{q}_T$, $J_0$
592: is zero order Bessel function of the first kind, and
593: $x^0_1=e^ym_n/\sqrt{s}$, $x^0_2=e^{-y}m_n/\sqrt{s}$. Here $C_i
594: (i=1,2,3)$ are constants of order 1 which are by convention
595: \cite{Nucl.Phys.B250.199} chosen to be
596: \begin{equation}
597: C_1 = C_3 = 2 e^{-\gamma_E} \equiv b_0, \, C_2 = 1,
598: \end{equation}
599: and $\tilde{f}$ is the convolution of the PDFs and the coefficient
600: functions $C$
601: \begin{equation}
602: \tilde{f}_{\alpha/h}(x,\mu) = \sum_{\gamma} \int_x^1 \frac{dz}{z}
603: C_{\alpha\gamma}(z,\alpha_s(\mu)) f_{\gamma/h}(x,\mu),
604: \end{equation}
605: and the coefficients $A$, $B$ and $C$ can be expanded to series in
606: $\alpha_s$
607: \begin{eqnarray}
608: A(\alpha_s) &=& \sum_{n=1}^\infty A^{(n)} \left( \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi}
609: \right)^n,
610: \\
611: B(\alpha_s) &=& \sum_{n=1}^\infty B^{(n)} \left( \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi} \right)^n,
612: \\
613: C_{\alpha\beta}(z,\alpha_s) &=& \sum_{n=0}^\infty C_{\alpha\beta}^{(n)}(z) \left(
614: \frac{\alpha_s}{\pi} \right)^n,
615: \end{eqnarray}
616: and they can be calculated order by order in perturbative theory.
617: In our case, since the massive graviton is colorless, thus the
618: lowest order coefficients is the same as the ones in the case of
619: $gg\rightarrow H^0$\cite{hhgres} and Drell-Yan\cite{dygres}. For
620: the $gg$ channel, we have
621: \begin{eqnarray}
622: && A^{(1)} = 2N_c = 6 , \qquad B^{(1)} = -2\beta_0 =(33-2n_f)/6,\nonumber
623: \\
624: && C_{\alpha\beta}^{(0)}(z) = \delta_{\alpha\beta}
625: \delta(1-z),
626: \end{eqnarray}
627: and for the $q\bar{q}$ channel, we have
628: \begin{eqnarray}
629: && A^{(1)} = C_F = \frac{4}{3} , \qquad B^{(1)} = - \frac{3}{2} C_F = -2 ,
630: \\
631: && C_{\alpha\beta}^{(0)}(z) = \delta_{\alpha\beta} \delta(1-z).
632: \end{eqnarray}
633: With these coefficients, we can actually sum up all terms like
634: $\alpha_s^nL^{2n-1}$ and $\alpha_s^nL^{2n-2}$.
635:
636: However, the resummed part is still not able to be calculated
637: perturbatively. The reason is that in Eq.~(\ref{eq:resum}), the
638: integral over the impact parameter $b$ extends to infinity, while
639: the integrand involves the strong coupling constant $\alpha_s$ and
640: the PDFs at scale $b_0/b$, where they are not well defined if $b$ is
641: large enough so that $b_0/b$ enters non-perturbative region.
642: Collins, Soper and Sterman, in their original paper
643: \cite{Nucl.Phys.B250.199}, suggested that one can use a cut-off
644: $b_{\text{max}}$ and regard the effects from $b>b_{\text{max}}$ as
645: non-perturbative input. Practically, they replaced $W(b)$ in
646: Eq.~(\ref{eq:resum}) by
647: \begin{equation}
648: \widetilde{W}(b) = W(b_*) F_{\text{NP}}(b),
649: \end{equation}
650: where
651: \begin{equation}
652: b_* = \frac{b}{\sqrt{1+(b/b_{\text{max}})^2}},
653: \end{equation}
654: and $F_{\text{NP}}(b)$ parameterizes the non-perturbative effects.
655: Since $b_*$ never exceeds $b_{\text{max}}$, $W(b_*)$ can be
656: calculated perturbatively, and the theoretical uncertainty mainly
657: relies on the function $F_{\text{NP}}$. Recently, Landry, Brock,
658: Nadolsky and Yuan (BLNY) \cite{Phys.Rev.D67.073016} proposed the
659: form
660: \begin{equation}
661: F_{{\rm NP}} = \exp \left\{ - b^2 \left[ g_1 + g_2 \ln\frac{m}{2Q_0} +
662: g_1g_3\ln(100x_1^0x_2^0) \right] \right\},\nonumber
663: \end{equation}
664: They take $b_{\text{max}} = 0.5 \text{GeV}^{-1}$, $Q_0 = 1.6
665: \text{GeV}$ and the parameters $g_i (i=1,2,3)$ are fitted to the
666: available Drell-Yan data, which are given by
667: \begin{equation}
668: g_1 = 0.21, \qquad g_2 = 0.68, \qquad g_3 = -0.60.
669: \end{equation}
670:
671: The another term in Eq.~(\ref{eq:total11}), the $Y$ term, is the
672: remaining contributions which are not resummed. Since it contains
673: no large logarithms, it can be reliably computed by fixed order
674: truncation of the perturbative series
675: \begin{equation}\label{asyys}
676: Y_{ab} = \frac{d\sigma_{ab}}{dq_T^2dy} ({\rm pert}) -
677: \frac{d\sigma_{ab}}{dq_T^2dy} ({\rm asym}),
678: \end{equation}
679: where the first term in the right hand is the fixed-order
680: perturbative results, and the second term is the asymptotic part
681: of the differential cross section, defined as the terms which are
682: at least as singular as $1/q_T^2$ when $q_T \to 0$, which can be
683: got by expanding the resummed part, i.e. Eq.(\ref{eq:resum}). In
684: our case, we have
685: \begin{eqnarray}
686: \label{eq:asym1}
687: && \frac{d\sigma_{gg}}{dq^2_Tdy}({\rm asym}) = \frac{1}{2}
688: \sigma^0_{gg}
689: \frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi} \frac{\tau_0}{q^2_T} \biggl\{ f_{g/P}(x_1^0,\mu_f)
690: f_{g/P}(x_2^0,\mu_f) \left( 2N_c \ln\frac{m^2}{q_T^2} - 2\beta_0 \right) \biggr.
691: \nonumber \\
692: &&\qquad + \biggl. (P_{gg}\circ{f})_{g/P}(x_1^0,\mu_f) f_{g/P}(x_2^0,\mu_f) +
693: f_{g/P}(x_1^0,\mu_f) (P_{gg}\circ{f})_{g/P}(x_2^0,\mu_f)\nonumber \\
694: &&\qquad +(x_1^0\leftrightarrow x_2^0) \biggr\},
695: \end{eqnarray}
696: \begin{eqnarray}
697: \label{eq:asym2}
698: && \frac{d\sigma_{q\bar{q}}}{dq^2_Tdy}({\rm asym}) =
699: \sigma^0_{q\bar{q}}
700: \frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi} \frac{\tau_0}{q^2_T} \biggl\{ f_{q/P}(x_1^0,\mu_f)
701: f_{\bar{q}/P}(x_2^0,\mu_f) \left( 2C_F \ln\frac{m^2}{q_T^2} - 3C_F \right) \biggr.
702: \nonumber \\
703: &&\qquad + \biggl. (P_{qq}\circ{f})_{\bar{q}/P}(x_2^0,\mu_f) f_{q/P}(x_1^0,\mu_f) +
704: f_{\bar{q}/P}(x_2^0,\mu_f) (P_{qq}\circ{f})_{q/P}(x_1^0,\mu_f)\nonumber \\
705: &&\qquad +(x_1^0\leftrightarrow x_2^0) \biggr\},
706: \end{eqnarray}
707: \begin{eqnarray}
708: \label{eq:asym3}
709: && \frac{d\sigma_{qg}}{dq^2_Tdy}({\rm asym}) = \sigma^0_{q\bar{q}}
710: \frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi} \frac{\tau_0}{q^2_T} \bigg[
711: f_{q/P}(x_1^0,\mu_f) (P_{qg}\circ{f})_{g/P}(x_2^0,\mu_f)\bigg]\nonumber \\
712: &&\hspace{1.4cm}+\frac{1}{2}\sigma^0_{gg}
713: \frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi} \frac{\tau_0}{q^2_T} \bigg[
714: f_{g/P}(x_1^0,\mu_f) (P_{gq}\circ{f})_{q/P}(x_2^0,\mu_f)\bigg]+(x_1^0\leftrightarrow x_2^0),
715: \end{eqnarray}
716: where $\sigma^0_{gg}\equiv\frac{\pi}{16\Lambda^2_\pi}$ and
717: $\sigma^0_{q\bar{q}}\equiv\frac{\pi}{24\Lambda^2_\pi}$. The result
718: of $\frac{d\sigma_{\bar{q}g}}{dq^2_Tdy}(asym)$ is similar to the
719: one of $\frac{d\sigma_{qg}}{dq^2_Tdy}(asym)$, and thus omitted
720: here.
721:
722: \section{Numerical Results}
723:
724: As mentioned in Section I, there are two additional free inputs in
725: the RS model: $m_1$ and $k/\overline{M}_P$, which have the following
726: constraints: $0.01\leq k/\overline{M}_P<0.1$ and
727: $\Lambda_\pi=\frac{m_1\overline{M}_P}{x_1k}\leq 10$\,TeV. In our
728: numerical calculations, for convenience, we choose the input
729: parameters as $\Lambda_\pi$ and $m_1$. For $\Lambda_\pi=4\,(8)TeV$,
730: from current constraints, we have $150\,{\rm GeV}<m_1<1.5\,{\rm
731: TeV}$ ($300\,{\rm GeV}<m_1<3\,{\rm TeV}$).
732:
733: Moreover, for the NLO total cross sections $\sigma^{(NLO)}$ and the
734: contributions from different parts (including $\sigma_{gg}^{(NLO)}$,
735: $\sigma_{q\bar{q}}^{(NLO)}$ and
736: $\sigma_{gq}^{(NLO)}+\sigma_{g\bar{q}}^{(NLO)}$), the NLO
737: ($\overline{\text{MS}}$) PDFs \cite{CTEQ} is used throughout this
738: paper. For the LO results, we define two cross sections as
739: following:
740: \begin{eqnarray}
741: \sigma^{\mathrm{(LO1)}}: &\quad \text{LO partonic cross section convoluted with NLO
742: ($\overline{\text{MS}}$) PDFs};
743: \\
744: \sigma^{\mathrm{(LO2)}}: &\quad \text{LO partonic cross section convoluted with LO PDFs},
745: \end{eqnarray}
746: and correspondingly two $K$ factors:
747: \begin{equation}
748: K_1 = \frac{\sigma^{\mathrm{(NLO)}}}{\sigma^{\mathrm{(LO1)}}}, \qquad
749: K_2 = \frac{\sigma^{\mathrm{(NLO)}}}{\sigma^{\mathrm{(LO2)}}}.
750: \end{equation}
751: As the above definitions, $K_1$ measures only the size of the NLO
752: QCD corrections to the cross sections, while $K_2$ accounts for the
753: effects of changing parton distribution functions additionally. As
754: for the renormalization and factorization scales, we always choose
755: $\mu_r=\mu_f=m_n$, unless otherwise specified.
756:
757:
758: In Fig.~\ref{9f7}, we show the dependence of the total cross
759: sections of $pp\rightarrow h^{(1)}_{\mu\nu}$ at the LHC as functions
760: of $m_1$, assuming $\Lambda_\pi=4$\,TeV. The NLO and LO total cross
761: sections decrease when $m_1$ increases. The LO total cross sections
762: are in general over several pb, and reach 100 pb when
763: $m_1=500$\,GeV. Moreover, the figure also shows that the NLO QCD
764: corrections enhance significantly the LO total cross sections, which
765: are in general several tens percent.
766:
767: Fig.~\ref{9f8} shows the dependence of the K factors on $m_1$, based
768: on the results in Fig.~\ref{9f7}. When $m_1$ varies from 500\,GeV to
769: 1.5\,TeV, the $K_1$ factor ranges from 1.46 to 1.44, and the $K_2$
770: factor ranges from 1.61 to 1.71. In addition, we give the different
771: parts of the $K_1$ factor, which show that the contributions from
772: $\sigma_{gg}^{(NLO)}$ ranges from 0.51 to 0.44, the contributions
773: from $\sigma_{q\bar{q}}^{(NLO)}$ range from 0.03 to 0.14, and the
774: contributions from $\sigma_{gq}^{(NLO)}+\sigma_{g\bar{q}}^{(NLO)}$
775: range from -0.08 to -0.14, respectively.
776:
777: Fig.~\ref{9f9} shows the dependence of the total cross sections of
778: $pp\rightarrow h^{(1)}_{\mu\nu}$ at the LHC on the renormalization
779: scale ($\mu_r$) and the factorization scale ($\mu_f$), assuming
780: $\mu_r=\mu_f$, $\Lambda_\pi=4$\,TeV and $m_1=1$\,TeV. The scale
781: dependence of the NLO total cross section is much smaller than
782: that of the LO cross section. For example, the LO cross sections
783: $\sigma^{(LO1)}$ ($\sigma^{(LO2)}$) vary by $\sim\pm 17.8\%$
784: ($\sim\pm 17.3\%$), when $\mu_r=\mu_f$ ranges between $500$\,GeV
785: and $4$\,TeV, while the NLO ones vary by $\sim \pm 9.3\%$.
786: Moreover, we also give the scale dependence of the different parts
787: in $\sigma^{(NLO)}$, for example, when $\mu_r(=\mu_f)$ ranges
788: between $500$\,GeV and $4$\,TeV, $\sigma_{gg}^{(NLO)}$ varies from
789: 6.9pb to 10.4pb, $\sigma_{q\bar{q}}^{(NLO)}$ varies from 0.56pb to
790: 0.93pb, and $\sigma_{gq}^{(NLO)}+\sigma_{g\bar{q}}^{(NLO)}$ varies
791: from -0.5pb to -3.5pb, respectively.
792:
793: To estimate the uncertainties in the total cross sections due to the
794: uncertainty of PDFs, we take the 41 sets of CTEQ6.1 PDFs to
795: calculate the LO and NLO rates~\cite{61cteq}. Fig.~\ref{9f10} shows
796: the PDF uncertainties (defined here as the Eq.~(3) in
797: Ref.~\cite{PDFUU}) in the LO and NLO total cross sections for
798: $pp\rightarrow h^{(1)}_{\mu\nu}$ production at the LHC, as functions
799: of $m_1$, assuming $\Lambda_\pi=8$\,TeV. It turns out that the PDF
800: uncertainties in the LO and NLO total cross sections increases as
801: $m_1$ increases. Moreover, when $m_1$ is small ($<1.5$\,TeV), the
802: PDF uncertainties in the LO and NLO total cross sections are about
803: the same, while when $m_1$ becomes large ($>1.5$\,TeV), the NLO rate
804: has a larger uncertainty than the LO rate due to the PDF
805: uncertainties, especially at large $m_1$.
806:
807: Figs.~\ref{9f11} and \ref{tot2000} gives the transverse momentum
808: distribution of $h^{(1)}_{\mu\nu}$ from $pp\rightarrow
809: h^{(1)}_{\mu\nu}$ process at the LHC, assuming
810: $\Lambda_\pi=4$\,TeV, for $m_1=1$\,TeV and $2$\,TeV, respectively.
811: The peaks of the distribution appear at about $18$\,GeV and
812: $13$\,GeV. The differential cross sections decrease sharply with
813: the increase of $q_T$, which indicates that most events will
814: happen in the relatively low $q_T$ region, where the resummation
815: effects are essential. Moreover, we also plot the various parts of
816: the differential cross sections in Eq.(\ref{eq:total00}). The
817: perturbative and the asymptotic cross sections agree very well at
818: small transverse momentum. On the other hand, the resummed and the
819: asymptotic part are not canceled completely at high $q_T$ due to
820: the higher order effects included in the resummed one, so that the
821: total one and the perturbative one will differ at large $q_T$.
822: This can be considered as the theoretical uncertainties. In
823: principle, one can return to the perturbative result for
824: $q_T>q_T^{\text{cut}}$, where $q_T^{\text{cut}}$ is arbitrarily
825: chosen in the intermediate $q_T$ region. However, in order to
826: make the transition smooth, one must introduce some kinds of
827: matching procedure which could also lead to uncertainties. In our
828: work, as shown by Eq.~(\ref{asyys}), we subtract from the Y term
829: the expansion of the resummed part of the same perturbative order,
830: and this matching procedure between small $q_T$ and large $q_T$
831: region prevents double-counting of perturbative results and also
832: guarantees a uniform theoretical accuracy over the entire $q_T$
833: region\cite{Klasen}.
834:
835: From Eqs.~(\ref{eq:total11}), (\ref{eq:total12}) and
836: (\ref{asyys}), we know that the transverse momentum distribution
837: can be divided into three parts, i.e. the contributions from $gg$,
838: $q\bar{q}$ and $gq+g\bar{q}$ channels:
839: \begin{eqnarray}
840: \frac{d\sigma}{dq_T^2dy}({\rm total})= \frac{d\sigma_{gg}}{dq_T^2dy}({\rm total})+
841: \frac{d\sigma_{q\bar{q}}}{dq_T^2dy}({\rm total})+\frac{d\sigma_{gq+g\bar{q}}}{dq_T^2dy}({\rm total})
842: \end{eqnarray}
843: where
844: \begin{eqnarray} &&
845: \frac{d\sigma_{gg}}{dq_T^2dy}({\rm
846: total})\equiv\frac{d\sigma_{gg}}{dq_T^2dy}
847: ({\rm resum})+\frac{d\sigma_{gg}}{dq_T^2dy} ({\rm pert}) -
848: \frac{d\sigma_{gg}}{dq_T^2dy} ({\rm asym}) \\
849: && \frac{d\sigma_{q\bar{q}}}{dq_T^2dy}({\rm
850: total})\equiv\frac{d\sigma_{q\bar{q}}}{dq_T^2dy}
851: ({\rm resum})+\frac{d\sigma_{q\bar{q}}}{dq_T^2dy} ({\rm pert}) -
852: \frac{d\sigma_{q\bar{q}}}{dq_T^2dy} ({\rm asym})\\
853: &&\frac{d\sigma_{gq+g\bar{q}}}{dq_T^2dy}({\rm total})\equiv
854: \frac{d\sigma_{g\bar{q}}}{dq_T^2dy} ({\rm pert})+\frac{d\sigma_{gq}}{dq_T^2dy} ({\rm pert})\nonumber\\
855: &&\hspace{3.1cm} -
856: \frac{d\sigma_{g\bar{q}}}{dq_T^2dy} ({\rm asym})- \frac{d\sigma_{gq}}{dq_T^2dy} ({\rm asym})
857: \end{eqnarray}
858: In Figs.\ref{9f12}, \ref{9f13} and \ref{9f14}, we thus plot these
859: three contributions to the the transverse momentum distribution of
860: $h^{(1)}_{\mu\nu}$ based on the results in Figs.\ref{9f11},
861: respectively. We can see that for all these three parts, the
862: perturbative and the asymptotic cross sections agree very well at
863: small transverse momentum.
864:
865:
866: \section{Conclusions}
867: In summary, we have calculated the next-to-leading order total cross
868: section and transverse momentum distribution of single massive
869: graviton production at the LHC in the RS model, including all-order
870: soft gluon resummation effects. Our results show that the LO total
871: cross sections are in general over several pb in most of the
872: parameter space, and can reach 100 pb when $m_1=500$\,GeV. The NLO
873: corrections enhance significantly the total cross sections, which is
874: in general several tens percent, and reduce efficiently the
875: dependence of the total cross sections on the
876: renormalization/factorization scale. We have also examined the
877: uncertainty in total cross sections due to the PDF uncertainties,
878: and found that the uncertainty in NLO cross sections is slightly
879: larger than that in LO ones, especially at large $m_1$. For the
880: transverse momentum distribution, within the CSS resummation
881: formalism, we resum the logarithmically-enhanced terms at small
882: $q_T$ to all orders up to NLO logarithmic accuracy. Combined with
883: the fixed order calculations, we give consistent predictions for
884: both small $q_T$ and large $q_T$. Our results can be useful to the
885: simulation of the events in the future collider experiments.
886:
887: \begin{acknowledgments}
888: We thank Yang Gao for useful discussion. This work was supported
889: in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China,
890: under grants No.~10421503 and No.~10575001, the Key Grant Project of Chinese Ministry
891: of Education under grant No.~305001.
892: \end{acknowledgments}
893:
894:
895: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
896: \bibitem{ADD} N. Arkani-Hamed et al.,
897: Phys. Lett. {\bf B429}, 263 (1998); N. Arkani-Hamed et al., Phys.
898: Rev. {\bf D59}, 086004 (1999); N. Arkani-Hamed et al., Phys. Lett.
899: {\bf B436}, 257 (1998).
900: \bibitem{RS} L. Randall, R.Sundrum, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 83}, 3370 (1999);
901: L. Randall, R.Sundrum, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 83}, 4690 (1999).
902: \bibitem{lyk} J. Lykken, Phys. ReV. {\bf D54}, R3693 (1996).
903: \bibitem{witt} E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B471}, 135 (1996).
904: \bibitem{hora} P. Horava and E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B460}, 506 (1996);
905: Nucl. Phys. {\bf B475} (1996) 94.
906: \bibitem{anto} I. Antoniadis, Phys. Lett. {\bf B246}, 377 (1990).
907: \bibitem{csaki}C. Csaki, TASI Lectures on Extra Dimensions and
908: Branes, hep-ph/0404096.
909: \bibitem{grav} E. G. Adelberger [Eot-Wash Group Collaboration] hep-ex/0202008.
910: \bibitem{Hewett1} J.L. Hewett, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 82} 4765 (1999).
911: \bibitem{9909255}H. Davoudiasl, et al., Phys.Rev.Lett. {\bf 84}, 2080 (2000).
912: \bibitem{0205106}JoAnne Hewett, Maria Spiropulu, Ann.Rev.Nucl.Part.Sci. {\bf52}, 397 (2002).
913: \bibitem{0506158} Prakash Mathews et al., JHEP {\bf0510}, 031 (2005);
914: Prakash Mathews et al., Nucl.Phys. {\bf B713}, 333 (2005); Prakash
915: Mathews, V. Ravindran, hep-ph/0507250; M. C. Kumar et al.,
916: hep-ph/0604135.
917: \bibitem{0211205} B. C. Allanach, et al., JHEP {\bf
918: 0212}, 039 (2002).
919: \bibitem{Hant}
920: T. Han et al., Phys. Rev. {\bf D59}, 105006 (1999).
921: \bibitem{beenakker1} W. Beenakker et al., Phys. Rev. {\bf D40}, 54 (1989).
922: \bibitem{DREG} G.~'t Hooft, M.~J.~G.~Veltman, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B44}, 189 (1972).
923: \bibitem{altarelli} G.~Altarelli et al.,
924: Nucl. Phys. {\bf B157}, 461 (1979); J.~C.~Collins et al., in:
925: Perturbative Quantum Chromodynamics, ed. A.~H.~Mueller (World
926: Scientific, 1989).
927: \bibitem{cutoff} B.~W.~Harris, J.~F.~Owens, Phys. Rev. {\bf D65}, 094032 (2002).
928: \bibitem{alpha}
929: G.~Altarelli, G.~Parisi, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B126}, 298 (1977).
930: \bibitem{Nucl.Phys.B250.199}
931: J.~C.~Collins, D.~E.~Soper and G.~Sterman,
932: Nucl. Phys. {\bf B250}, 199 (1985).
933: \bibitem{hhgres}R.P. Kauffman, Phys. Rev. {\bf D44}, 1415 (1991).
934: \bibitem{dygres}P.B. Arnold, R.P. Kauffman, Nucl. Phys.
935: {\bf B349}, 381 (1991); C. Bal{\'{a}}zs et al., Phys. Lett. {\bf
936: B355}, 548 (1995).
937: \bibitem{Phys.Rev.D67.073016}
938: F.~Landry et al.,
939: Phys. Rev. {\bf D67}, 073016 (2003).
940: \bibitem{CTEQ} J.~Pumplin et al., JHEP {\bf 0207}, 012 (2002).
941: \bibitem{61cteq} D.~Stump et al., JHEP {\bf 0310}, 046 (2003).
942: \bibitem{PDFUU} J. Pumplin et al., JHEP 0207, 012(2002).
943: \bibitem{Klasen} G. Bozzi, B. Fuks and M.
944: Klasen, Phys. Rev.{\bf D74}, 015001 (2006).
945: \end{thebibliography}
946:
947:
948: \newpage
949:
950: \begin{figure}[ht!] \vspace{1.0cm}
951: \centerline{\epsfig{file=total2.eps, width=400pt}}
952: \caption[]{Dependence of the total cross sections for the first KK
953: graviton excitation mode direct production at the LHC on
954: $m_1$.}\label{9f7} \end{figure}
955: \begin{figure}[ht!] \vspace{1.0cm} \centerline{\epsfig{file=kf.eps,
956: width=400pt}} \caption[]{Dependence of the $K$-factor on $m_1$,
957: based on the results in Fig.\ref{9f7}.}\label{9f8} \end{figure}
958: \begin{figure}[ht!] \vspace{1.0cm}
959: \centerline{\epsfig{file=hscale2.eps, width=400pt}}
960: \caption[]{Dependence of the total cross sections for the first KK
961: graviton excitation mode direct production at the LHC on
962: $\mu_r=\mu_f$.}\label{9f9} \end{figure}
963: \begin{figure}[ht!] \vspace{1.0cm}
964: \centerline{\epsfig{file=PDFU.eps, width=400pt}} \caption[]{The
965: PDF dependence of the total cross sections for the first KK
966: graviton excitation mode direct production at the LHC, as
967: functions of $m_1$.}\label{9f10}
968: \end{figure}
969:
970:
971: \begin{figure}[ht!] \vspace{1.0cm} \centerline{\epsfig{file=tot.eps,
972: width=300pt}} \caption[]{The transverse momentum distribution of
973: the first KK graviton excitation mode from $pp\rightarrow
974: h^{(1)}_{\mu\nu}$ process at the LHC, assuming
975: $\Lambda_\pi=4$\,TeV and $m_1=1$\,TeV.}\label{9f11}
976: \end{figure}
977:
978: \begin{figure}[ht!] \vspace{1.0cm} \centerline{\epsfig{file=tot2000.eps,
979: width=300pt}} \caption[]{The transverse momentum distribution of
980: the first KK graviton excitation mode from $pp\rightarrow
981: h^{(1)}_{\mu\nu}$ process at the LHC, assuming
982: $\Lambda_\pi=4$\,TeV and $m_1=2$\,TeV.}\label{tot2000}
983: \end{figure}
984:
985: \begin{figure}[ht!] \vspace{1.0cm}
986: \centerline{\epsfig{file=ggresum.eps, width=300pt}} \caption[]{The
987: $gg$ part of the transverse momentum distribution of the first KK
988: graviton excitation mode, assuming $\Lambda_\pi=4$\,TeV and
989: $m_1=1$\,TeV. }\label{9f12}
990: \end{figure}
991:
992: \begin{figure}[ht!] \vspace{1.0cm}
993: \centerline{\epsfig{file=qqresum.eps, width=300pt}} \caption[]{The
994: $q\bar{q}$ part of the transverse momentum distribution of the
995: first KK graviton excitation mode, assuming $\Lambda_\pi=4$\,TeV
996: and $m_1=1$\,TeV. }\label{9f13}
997: \end{figure}
998:
999: \begin{figure}[ht!] \vspace{1.0cm}
1000: \centerline{\epsfig{file=gqresum.eps, width=300pt}} \caption[]{The
1001: $gq$ and $g\bar{q}$ part of the transverse momentum distribution
1002: of the first KK graviton excitation mode, assuming
1003: $\Lambda_\pi=4$\,TeV and $m_1=1$\,TeV. }\label{9f14}
1004: \end{figure}
1005:
1006:
1007: \end{document}
1008: