1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: \usepackage{epsfig,latexsym,amsmath,amssymb,bm,cite}
3: \usepackage{graphicx}
4: \usepackage{color}
5: %\usepackage{pifont}
6: %\usepackage{amsmath}
7: %\usepackage{slashed}
8: %\usepackage{showkeys}
9: \textwidth 17cm
10: \textheight 23cm
11: \voffset=-2cm
12: \hoffset=-1.7cm
13: %\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{0.9}
14: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}}
15:
16: % marginal note
17: \newcommand{\NB}[1]{\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{0.5}
18: \marginpar{{\small #1 }}}
19: %\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{0.9}}
20:
21:
22: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}
23: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
24: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
25: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
26: \newcommand{\bem}{\begin{multline}}
27: \newcommand{\eem}{\end{multline}}
28: \newcommand{\beg}{\begin{gather}}
29: \newcommand{\eeg}{\end{gather}}
30: \newcommand{\noi}{\noindent}
31: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}
32: \newcommand{\dgg}{^{\dagger}}
33: \newcommand{\uk}{\underline{k}}
34: \newcommand{\ux}{\underline{x}}
35: \newcommand{\uy}{\underline{y}}
36: \newcommand{\uz}{\underline{z}}
37: \newcommand{\ub}{\underline{b}}
38: \newcommand{\s}{\slashed}
39: \newcommand{\lt}{<}
40: \newcommand{\gt}{>}
41: \def\ud{\underline}
42: %\newcommand{\y}{Y}
43: %\newcommand{\rr}{{\color{red}{\bm r}}}
44: %\newcommand{\dl}{{\color{red}{\bm r}_1}}
45: %\newcommand{\dr}{{\color{red}{\bm r}_2}}
46:
47:
48: \newcommand{\dlq}{\lq\lq}
49: \newcommand{\stackeven}[2]{{{}_{\displaystyle{#1}}\atop\displaystyle{#2}}}
50: \newcommand{\lsim}{\stackeven{<}{\sim}}
51: \newcommand{\gsim}{\stackeven{>}{\sim}}
52: \newcommand{\as}{\alpha_s}
53: \newcommand{\tas}{{\tilde\alpha}_s}
54: \newcommand{\bas}{{\bar\alpha}_s}
55: \def\eq#1{{Eq.~(\ref{#1})}}
56: \def\fig#1{{Fig.~\ref{#1}}}
57: \newcommand{\ben}{\begin{eqnarray*}}
58: \newcommand{\een}{\end{eqnarray*}}
59: \newcommand{\un}[1]{\underline{#1}}
60: \newcommand{\am}{\alpha_\mu}
61: \newcommand{\tr}{\text{tr}}
62: \newcommand{\oone}{
63: \begin{picture}(10,8)
64: \put(5,5){\circle{8}}
65: \put(2.9,2.5){{\scriptsize 1}}
66: \end{picture}
67: }
68: \newcommand{\otwo}{
69: \begin{picture}(10,8)
70: \put(5,5){\circle{8}}
71: \put(2.9,2.5){{\scriptsize 2}}
72: \end{picture}
73: }
74:
75: \begin{document}
76: \title{{\bf Triumvirate of Running Couplings \\[.5cm] in Small-$x$ Evolution
77: \\[1.5cm] }}
78: \author{
79: {\bf Yuri V.\ Kovchegov and Heribert Weigert}
80: \\[1cm] {\it\small Department of Physics, The Ohio State University}\\
81: {\it\small Columbus, OH 43210,USA}\\[5mm]}
82:
83: \date{September 2006}
84:
85: \maketitle
86:
87: \thispagestyle{empty}
88:
89: \begin{abstract}
90: We study the inclusion of running coupling corrections into the
91: non-linear small-$x$ JIMWLK and BK evolution equations by resumming
92: all powers of $\as N_f$ in the evolution kernels. We demonstrate
93: that the running coupling corrections are included in the JIMWLK/BK
94: evolution kernel by replacing the fixed coupling constant $\as$ in
95: it with $\frac{\as (1/r_1^2) \, \as (1/r_2^2)}{\as (1/R^2)}$, where
96: $r_1$ and $r_2$ are transverse distances between the emitted gluon
97: and the harder gluon (or quark) off of which it was emitted to the
98: left and to the right of the interaction with the target. In the
99: formalism of Mueller's dipole model $r_1$ and $r_2$ are the
100: transverse sizes of ``daughter'' dipoles produced in one step of the
101: dipole evolution. The scale $R$ is a function of two-dimensional
102: vectors ${\bf r}_1$ and ${\bf r}_2$, the exact form of which is
103: scheme-dependent. We propose using a particular scheme which gives
104: us $R$ as an explicit function of $r_1$ and $r_2$.
105: \end{abstract}
106:
107:
108: \thispagestyle{empty}
109:
110: \newpage
111:
112: \setcounter{page}{1}
113:
114:
115: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
116:
117: \section{Introduction}
118:
119:
120: In the recent years there has been a lot of progress in small-$x$ physics due
121: to developments in the area of parton saturation and Color Glass Condensate
122: (CGC) \cite{Gribov:1981ac,Mueller:1986wy,McLerran:1994vd,McLerran:1994ka,
123: McLerran:1994ni,Kovchegov:1996ty,Kovchegov:1997pc,Jalilian-Marian:1997xn,
124: Jalilian-Marian:1997jx, Jalilian-Marian:1997gr, Jalilian-Marian:1997dw,
125: Jalilian-Marian:1998cb, Kovner:2000pt, Weigert:2000gi,
126: Iancu:2000hn,Ferreiro:2001qy,Kovchegov:1999yj, Kovchegov:1999ua,
127: Balitsky:1996ub, Balitsky:1997mk, Balitsky:1998ya}. Among other things the
128: CGC led to a new way of calculating the hadronic and nuclear structure
129: functions and total cross sections in deep inelastic scattering (DIS) at small
130: values of Bjorken $x$ variable. According to the CGC approach to high energy
131: processes, one first has to calculate an observable in question in the
132: quasi-classical limit of the McLerran-Venugopalan model
133: \cite{McLerran:1994vd,McLerran:1994ka, McLerran:1994ni} which resums all
134: multiple rescatterings in the target hadron or nucleus. After that one has to
135: include the quantum evolution corrections resumming all powers of $\as \, \ln
136: 1/x_{Bj}$ along with all the multiple rescatterings. Such corrections are
137: included in the general case of a large target by the
138: Jalilian-Marian--Iancu--McLerran--Weigert--Leonidov--Kovner (JIMWLK)
139: functional integro-differential equation \cite{Jalilian-Marian:1997jx,
140: Jalilian-Marian:1997gr, Jalilian-Marian:1997dw, Jalilian-Marian:1998cb,
141: Kovner:2000pt, Weigert:2000gi, Iancu:2000hn,Ferreiro:2001qy}, or, if the
142: large-$N_c$ limit is imposed, by the Balitsky-Kovchegov (BK)
143: integro-differential evolution equation \cite{Balitsky:1996ub,
144: Balitsky:1997mk, Balitsky:1998ya,Kovchegov:1999yj, Kovchegov:1999ua} based
145: on Mueller's dipole model
146: \cite{Mueller:1994rr,Mueller:1994jq,Mueller:1995gb,Chen:1995pa}. The JIMWLK
147: and BK evolution equations unitarize the Balitsky-Fadin-Kuraev-Lipatov (BFKL)
148: linear evolution equation \cite{Kuraev:1977fs,Bal-Lip}. For detailed reviews
149: of the physics of the Color Glass Condensate we refer the reader to
150: \cite{Iancu:2003xm,Weigert:2005us,Jalilian-Marian:2005jf}.
151:
152: Both the JIMWLK and BK evolution equations resum leading logarithmic
153: $\as \, \ln 1/x_{Bj}$ corrections with $\as$ the coupling constant. At
154: this leading order the running coupling corrections to the JIMWLK and
155: BK evolution kernels are negligible next-to-leading order (NLO)
156: corrections. A running coupling correction would bring in powers of,
157: for instance, $\as^2 \, \ln 1/x_{Bj}$, which are not leading
158: logarithms anymore. Hence both JIMWLK and BK evolution equations do
159: not include any running coupling corrections in their kernels. The
160: drawback of this lack of running coupling corrections is that the
161: scale of the coupling constant to be used in solving these evolution
162: equations is not known. Indeed, as was argued originally by McLerran
163: and Venugopalan \cite{McLerran:1994vd,McLerran:1994ka,
164: McLerran:1994ni} and confirmed by the numerical solutions of JIMWLK
165: and BK equations
166: \cite{Braun:2000wr,Golec-Biernat:2003ym,Rummukainen:2003ns,Lublinsky:2001bc},
167: the high parton density in the small-$x$ hadronic and nuclear wave
168: functions gives rise to a hard momentum scale --- the saturation scale
169: $Q_s$. For small enough $x$ and for large enough nuclei this scale
170: becomes much larger than the QCD confinement scale, $Q_s \gg
171: \Lambda_{\text{QCD}}$. The existence of a large intrinsic momentum
172: scale leads to the expectation that this scale would enter in the
173: argument of the running coupling constant making it small and allowing
174: for a perturbative description of the relevant physical processes.
175: However, until now this expectation has never been confirmed by
176: explicit calculations.
177:
178: In the past there have been several good guesses of the scale of the
179: running coupling in the JIMWLK and BK kernels in the literature
180: \cite{Albacete:2004gw,Rummukainen:2003ns}. A resummation of all-order
181: running coupling corrections for the linear BFKL equation in momentum
182: space was first performed by Levin in~\cite{Levin:1994di} by imposing
183: the conformal bootstrap condition. There it was first observed that to
184: set the scale of the running coupling constant in the BFKL kernel one
185: has to replace a single factor of $\as$ by the ``triumvirate'' of
186: couplings $\as \, \as / \as$ with each coupling having a different
187: argument~\cite{Levin:1994di}.
188:
189: In this paper we calculate the scale of the running coupling in the
190: JIMWLK and BK evolution kernels. Our strategy is similar to
191: \cite{Gardi:2006}: we note however, that \cite{Gardi:2006} relies on
192: the dispersive method to determine the running coupling corrections,
193: while below we use a purely diagrammatic approach. We concentrate on
194: corrections due to fermion (quark) bubble diagrams, which bring in
195: factors of $\as \, N_f$. Indeed some factors of $N_f$ may come from
196: the QCD beta-function (see \eq{beta} below), while other factors of
197: $N_f$ may come in from conformal (non-running coupling) NLO (and
198: higher order) corrections
199: \cite{Fadin:1998py,Ciafaloni:1998gs,Brodsky:1998kn}. While we do not
200: know how to separate the two contributions uniquely, we propose a way
201: of distinguishing them guided by UV divergences. This leaves us with
202: an uncertainty with respect to finite contributions in separating the
203: conformal and the running coupling factors of $\as \, N_f$ that
204: influence the scale of the obtained running coupling constant in a way
205: reminiscent of the scheme dependence. Once we pick a certain way of
206: singling out the factors of $\as \, N_f$ coming from the QCD
207: beta-function, we replace $N_f \rightarrow - \, 6 \, \pi\, \beta_2$
208: (``completing'' $N_f$ to the full beta-function) and obtain all the
209: running coupling corrections to the JIMWLK and BK kernels at the
210: one-loop beta-function level.
211:
212: The paper is structured as follows. We begin in Section \ref{LObb} by
213: calculating the lowest order fermion bubble correction to the JIMWLK
214: and BK kernels, as shown in Figs. \ref{fig:NLO1} and
215: \ref{fig:NLO1_inst}, in the framework of the light cone perturbation
216: theory (LCPT) \cite{Lepage:1980fj,Brodsky:1997de}. We note that the
217: diagrams in Figs. \ref{fig:NLO1}A and \ref{fig:NLO1_inst}A$^\prime$
218: give a new kind of evolution kernel, which does not look like a higher
219: order correction to the LO JIMWLK or BK kernels. We analyze the
220: problem in Section \ref{Subtr}, where we propose a subtraction
221: procedure to single out the part of these diagrams' contribution
222: giving the running coupling correction. There we show that this
223: subtraction procedure is not unique and introduces a scheme dependence
224: into the scale of the running coupling.
225:
226: In Section \ref{all_orders} we resum fermion bubble corrections to all orders,
227: and, after the $N_f \rightarrow - 6 \, \, \pi\, \beta_2$ replacement obtain
228: the JIMWLK evolution kernel with the running coupling correction given by
229: \eq{Kall} in transverse momentum space as a double Fourier transform. The
230: corresponding BK kernel is obtained from \eq{Kall} using \eq{KrcBK}. Notice
231: that the running coupling comes in as a ``triumvirate'' originally derived by
232: Levin for the BFKL evolution equation~\cite{Levin:1994di}.
233: Fourier-transforming the running couplings into transverse coordinate space is
234: more involved since one encounters integration over Landau pole leading to
235: power corrections. A careful treatment of the uncertainties associated with
236: power corrections in small-$x$ evolution was performed in~\cite{Gardi:2006}.
237: Here we calculate the Fourier transforms by simply ignoring those corrections
238: and by using the Brodsky-Lepage-Mackenzie (BLM) method \cite{BLM} to set the
239: scale of the running coupling. The JIMWLK kernel with the running coupling
240: corrections in the transverse coordinate space is given in \eq{Krc}.
241:
242: We conclude in Section \ref{conc} by explicitly writing down the full
243: JIMWLK Hamiltonian with the running coupling corrections in
244: \eq{JIMWLKrc} and the full BK evolution equation with the running
245: coupling corrections in \eq{eqNrc} and by discussing various limits of
246: the obtained result.
247:
248: We note that our analysis is complimentary to \cite{Gardi:2006}, where
249: the running coupling correction to the JIMWLK and BK kernels was
250: determined using the dispersive method. Our result for the all-order
251: series of $\as \, N_f$-terms is the same as in \cite{Gardi:2006}.
252: However, using the diagrammatic approach, we have been able to
253: identify the structure of that series as coming from a ``triumvirate''
254: of the coupling constants in \eq{Krc}, which is an exact result in the
255: transverse momentum space and a better approximation of the full
256: answer in the transverse coordinate space.
257:
258:
259:
260: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
261:
262: \section{Leading Order Fermion Bubbles}
263: \label{LObb}
264:
265: Our goal in this work is to resum all $\as N_f$ corrections to the
266: leading logarithmic non-linear JIMWLK and BK small-$x$ evolution
267: equations \cite{Kovchegov:1999yj, Kovchegov:1999ua, Balitsky:1996ub,
268: Balitsky:1997mk, Balitsky:1998ya,Jalilian-Marian:1997xn,
269: Jalilian-Marian:1997jx, Jalilian-Marian:1997gr,
270: Jalilian-Marian:1997dw, Jalilian-Marian:1998cb, Kovner:2000pt,
271: Weigert:2000gi, Iancu:2000hn,Ferreiro:2001qy} (for review
272: see~\cite{Iancu:2002xk, Iancu:2003xm, Weigert:2005us,
273: Jalilian-Marian:2005jf}). After extracting the running coupling $\as
274: N_f$-corrections out of all possible $\as N_f$ terms, the complete
275: running coupling correction to the JIMWLK and BK evolution kernels
276: would then be easy to obtain by replacing
277: \begin{align}\label{repl}
278: N_f \rightarrow - 6 \, \pi \, \beta_2
279: \end{align}
280: in the former, where
281: \begin{align}\label{beta}
282: \beta_2 = \frac{11 N_c - 2 N_f}{12 \, \pi}.
283: \end{align}
284:
285:
286: \begin{figure}[htbp]
287: \centering
288: \begin{minipage}{5.2cm}
289: \centering
290: \includegraphics[width=5.2cm]{LoopInt-quarks-1-firsto-labelled}\\
291: A
292: \end{minipage}
293: \begin{minipage}{5.2cm}
294: \centering
295: \includegraphics[width=5.2cm]{LoopInt-glue-1-firsto-left-labelled}
296: \\ B
297: \end{minipage}
298: \begin{minipage}{5.2cm}
299: \centering
300: % \includegraphics[width=5.2cm]{LoopNonInt-up-firsto-labelled}
301: \includegraphics[width=5.2cm]{LoopNonInt-up-to-1-firsto-labelled}
302: \\ C
303: \end{minipage}
304: \caption{\em Diagrams giving the leading $\as N_f$ correction
305: to the kernels of JIMWLK and BK small-$x$ evolution equations. The
306: thick dots on gluon and quark lines denote interactions with the
307: target.}
308: \label{fig:NLO1}
309: \end{figure}
310:
311: \begin{figure}[htbp]
312: \centering
313: \begin{minipage}{5.2cm}
314: \centering
315: \includegraphics[width=5.2cm]{LoopInt-quarks-inst-1-firsto}\\
316: A$^\prime$
317: \end{minipage}
318: \hspace{5.2cm}
319: \begin{minipage}{5.2cm}
320: \centering
321: \includegraphics[width=5.2cm]{LoopNonInt-up-to-inst-1-firsto}
322: \\ C$^\prime$
323: \end{minipage}
324: \caption{\em Diagrams with instantaneous parts of gluon propagators
325: giving the leading $\as N_f$ correction to the kernels of JIMWLK
326: and BK small-$x$ evolution equations. There is no analog of
327: Fig.~\ref{fig:NLO1} B. All the lines are implied to
328: be labeled in the same way as in \fig{fig:NLO1}.}
329: \label{fig:NLO1_inst}
330: \end{figure}
331:
332: To resum $\as N_f$ corrections we begin by considering the lowest order
333: diagrams for one step of small-$x$ evolution containing a single quark bubble.
334: These diagrams give the lowest order $\as N_f$ correction to the JIMWLK and/or
335: BK evolution kernels and are shown in~\fig{fig:NLO1}. The diagrams are
336: time-ordered as they are drawn according to the rules of LCPT
337: \cite{Lepage:1980fj,Brodsky:1997de}. Gluon lines in Figs.~\ref{fig:NLO1} A
338: and C also have instantaneous/longitudinal
339: counterparts~\cite{Lepage:1980fj,Brodsky:1997de}, shown in diagrams A$^\prime$
340: and C$^\prime$ in \fig{fig:NLO1_inst}. (The virtual gluon on the left side of
341: \fig{fig:NLO1}B can not be instantaneous, since the produced gluon on the
342: right of \fig{fig:NLO1}B can only be transverse and a longitudinal gluon can
343: not interfere with a transverse gluon, as will be seen in the calculations
344: done below.)
345:
346: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
347:
348: \subsection{Diagrams A and A$^\prime$}
349:
350:
351: To calculate the forward scattering amplitude in Figs. \ref{fig:NLO1}A and
352: \ref{fig:NLO1_inst}A$^\prime$ we first need to calculate the wave function of
353: a dipole emitting a gluon which then, in turn, splits into a quark--anti-quark
354: pair, i.e., the part of the diagrams A and A$^\prime$ located on one side of
355: the interaction with the target. The calculation is similar to what is
356: presented in~\cite{Kovchegov:2006qn}. We will work in the $A_+ =0$ light cone
357: gauge in the framework of the light cone perturbation theory
358: \cite{Lepage:1980fj,Brodsky:1997de,Perry:1992sw,Mustaki:1990im}. The momentum
359: space wave function of a dipole (or a single (anti-)quark) splitting into a
360: gluon which in turn splits into a $q\bar q$ pair with the transverse momenta
361: ${\bm k}_1$ and ${\bm k}_2$ of the quark and the anti-quark with the quark
362: carrying a fraction $\alpha$ of the gluon's longitudinal (``plus'') momentum
363: is \cite{Kovchegov:2006qn}
364: \begin{align}\label{eq:psi_1k}
365: \Psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2} (\bm k_1, \bm k_2, \alpha) \, =
366: \, [t^a]_{\text{em}}\otimes [t^a]_{\text{f}} \,
367: \psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2} (\bm k_1, \bm k_2, \alpha) = - 2
368: \, g^2 [t^a]_{\text{em}}\otimes [t^a]_{\text{f}}
369: \sum\limits_{\lambda = \pm 1} \frac{{\bm
370: \epsilon}^{*\lambda}\cdot({\bm k}_1+{\bm k}_2)}{
371: ({\bm k}_1+{\bm k}_2)^2} \nonumber \\
372: \times \, \frac{{\bm \epsilon}^{\lambda}\cdot [{\bm
373: k}_1(1-\alpha)-{\bm k}_2\alpha] (1-2\alpha+\lambda\sigma_1) \,
374: \delta_{\sigma_1\sigma_2}}{ {\bm k}_1^2(1-\alpha)+{\bm
375: k}_2^2\alpha} - 4 \, g^2 [t^a]_{\text{em}}\otimes
376: [t^a]_{\text{f}} \, \frac{\alpha \, (1-\alpha) \,
377: \delta_{\sigma_1\sigma_2}}{ {\bm k}_1^2(1-\alpha)+{\bm
378: k}_2^2\alpha}.
379: \end{align}
380: Here $\lambda = \pm 1$ is the internal gluon's polarization: the gluon
381: polarization vector for transverse gluons is given by
382: $\epsilon_\mu^\lambda = (0,0, {\bm \epsilon}^\lambda)$ with $\bm
383: \epsilon^\lambda = (1 + i \, \lambda) / \sqrt{2}$. The instantaneous
384: diagram from \fig{fig:NLO1_inst}A$^\prime$ gives the second term on
385: the right hand side of \eq{eq:psi_1k}. The produced quark and
386: anti-quark are massless, which is sufficient for our purposes of
387: determining the scale of the running coupling. $\sigma_1 = \pm 1$ and
388: $\sigma_2 = \pm1$ are quark and anti-quark helicities correspondingly
389: (defined as in \cite{Kovchegov:2006qn}). The fraction the of gluon's
390: ``plus'' momentum carried by the quark is denoted by $\alpha \equiv
391: k_{1+} / (k_{1+} + k_{2+})$. The wave function also contains a color
392: factor $[t^a]_{\text{em}}\otimes [t^a]_{\text{f}}$ consisting of two
393: color matrices originating in the quark-gluon vertices at the points
394: of emission of the gluon and its splitting into a $q\bar q$ pair.
395:
396: It is convenient to rewrite \eq{eq:psi_1k} in terms of a different set
397: of transverse momenta. Defining the momentum of the gluon ${\bm q} =
398: {\bm k}_1+{\bm k}_2$ and ${\bm k}={\bm k}_1(1-\alpha)-{\bm
399: k}_2\alpha$, and noting that ${\bm k}_1^2(1-\alpha)+ {\bm
400: k}_2^2\alpha={\bm k}^2+{\bm q}^2\alpha(1-\alpha)$, we write
401: \begin{align}\label{eq:psi_1kq}
402: \psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2} (\bm k, \bm q, \alpha) = - 2 \,
403: g^2 \, \sum\limits_{\lambda = \pm 1} \frac{{\bm
404: \epsilon}^{*\lambda}\cdot{\bm q}}{ {\bm q}^2} \frac{{\bm
405: \epsilon}^{\lambda}\cdot{\bm k}\, (1-2\alpha+\lambda\sigma_1) \,
406: \delta_{\sigma_1\sigma_2}}{{\bm k}^2+{\bm q}^2\alpha(1-\alpha)} -
407: 4 \, g^2 \, \frac{\alpha \, (1-\alpha) \,
408: \delta_{\sigma_1\sigma_2}}{ {\bm k}^2+{\bm q}^2\alpha(1-\alpha)}.
409: \end{align}
410: Performing the summation over gluon polarizations $\lambda$ yields
411: \begin{align}\label{eq:psi_1kq2}
412: \psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2} (\bm k, \bm q, \alpha) = - 2 \,
413: g^2 \, \frac{{\bm q}_i}{ {\bm q}^2} \, \left[(1-2\alpha)\delta_{i j}
414: +i \sigma_1 \epsilon_{i j}\right] \, \delta_{\sigma_1\sigma_2} \,
415: \frac{{\bm k}_j}{{\bm k}^2+{\bm q}^2\alpha(1-\alpha)} - 4 \, g^2 \,
416: \frac{\alpha \, (1-\alpha) \, \delta_{\sigma_1\sigma_2}}{ {\bm
417: k}^2+{\bm q}^2\alpha(1-\alpha)}
418: \end{align}
419: where $q_i$ denotes the $i$th component of vector $\bm q$ and the sum
420: over repeated indices $i,j = 1,2$ is implied. Here $\epsilon_{12} = 1
421: = - \epsilon_{21}$, $\epsilon_{11} = \epsilon_{22} = 0$, and, assuming
422: summation over repeating indices, $\epsilon_{ij} \, q_i \, k_j = q_x
423: \, k_y - q_y \, k_x$.
424:
425: To find the contribution of the diagrams in Figs. \ref{fig:NLO1}A and
426: \ref{fig:NLO1_inst}A$^\prime$ to the next-to-leading order (NLO)
427: evolution kernel we first have to transform the wave function from
428: \eq{eq:psi_1kq2} into transverse coordinate space
429: \begin{align}\label{ft}
430: \psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2} ({\bm z}_1 - {\bm x}_m, {\bm z}_2
431: - {\bm x}_m, \alpha) \, = \, \int \frac{d^2 k_1}{(2 \, \pi)^2} \,
432: \frac{d^2 k_2}{(2 \, \pi)^2} \, e^{- i {\bm k}_1 \cdot ({\bm z}_1 -
433: {\bm x}_m) - i {\bm k}_2 \cdot ({\bm z}_2 - {\bm x}_m)} \,
434: \psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2} (\bm k_1, \bm k_2, \alpha).
435: \end{align}
436: Here the transverse coordinates of the quark and the anti-quark are
437: taken to be ${\bm z}_1$ and ${\bm z}_2$ correspondingly. The gluon in
438: \fig{fig:NLO1} can be emitted either off the quark or off the
439: anti-quark in the incoming ``parent'' dipole. The transverse
440: coordinates of the quark and the anti-quark in the ``parent'' dipole
441: are ${\bm x}_0$ and ${\bm x}_1$. In \eq{ft} we labeled them ${\bm
442: x}_m$ with $m = 0,1$ depending on whether the gluon was emitted off
443: the quark or off the anti-quark.
444:
445: In terms of transverse momenta $\bm k$ and $\bm q$ \eq{ft} can be
446: written as
447: \begin{align}\label{ft_kq}
448: \psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2} ({\bm z}_1 - {\bm x}_m, {\bm z}_2
449: - {\bm x}_m, \alpha) \, = \, \int \frac{d^2 k}{(2 \, \pi)^2} \,
450: \frac{d^2 q}{(2 \, \pi)^2} \, e^{- i {\bm k} \cdot {\bm z}_{12} - i
451: {\bm q} \cdot ({\bm z} - {\bm x}_m)} \, \psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \,
452: \sigma_2} (\bm k, \bm q, \alpha),
453: \end{align}
454: where
455: \begin{align}\label{z12}
456: {\bm z}_{12} = {\bm z}_1 -{\bm z}_2
457: \end{align}
458: and
459: \begin{align}\label{z}
460: {\bm z} = \alpha \, {\bm z}_1+(1-\alpha) \, {\bm z}_2
461: \end{align}
462: is the transverse position of the gluon.
463:
464: Substituting the wave function from \eq{eq:psi_1kq2} into \eq{ft_kq}
465: and performing the integrations over $\bm k$ and $\bm q$ yields
466: \begin{align}\label{psi1_xy}
467: \psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2} ({\bm z}_1 - {\bm x}_m, {\bm z}_2
468: - {\bm x}_m, \alpha) \, = \, 2 \, g^2 \, \frac{1}{(2 \pi)^2} \,
469: \frac{({\bm z} - {\bm x}_m)_i }{ ({\bm z} - {\bm x}_m)^2 + \alpha \,
470: (1-\alpha) \,
471: z_{12}^2} \nonumber \\
472: \times \, \left[(1-2\alpha)\delta_{i j} +i \sigma_1 \epsilon_{i
473: j}\right] \, \delta_{\sigma_1\sigma_2} \, \frac{({\bm
474: z}_{12})_j}{{\bm z}_{12}^2} - 4 \, g^2 \, \frac{1}{(2 \pi)^2} \,
475: \frac{\alpha \, (1-\alpha) \, \delta_{\sigma_1\sigma_2}}{ ({\bm z} -
476: {\bm x}_m)^2 + \alpha \, (1-\alpha) \, z_{12}^2}.
477: \end{align}
478:
479: To calculate the diagram in Figs. \ref{fig:NLO1}A and
480: \ref{fig:NLO1_inst}A$^\prime$ using the wave function from
481: \eq{psi1_xy} in a general case we have to include the interaction with
482: the target by defining path-ordered exponential factors in the
483: fundamental representation
484: \begin{align}\label{U}
485: U_{\bm x} \, = \, {\sf P} \exp \left[ - i g
486: \int\limits_{-\infty}^\infty \, d x_+ \, A_- (x_+, x_- =0, {\bm
487: x}) \right].
488: \end{align}
489: With the help of \eq{U} we can write down
490: \begin{align}\label{diag_1}
491: \parbox{2.3cm}{\includegraphics[width=2.3cm]{LoopInt-quarks-1-firsto}}
492: +
493: \parbox{2.3cm}{\includegraphics[width=2.3cm]{LoopInt-quarks-inst-1-firsto}}
494: \, = & \notag \\ = \, \int d^2z_1 d^2z_2 \, & \am^2\, {\cal
495: K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}_1, {\bm z}_2) \,
496: U_{{\bm x}_0}t^a \otimes U_{{\bm x}_1}^\dagger t^b \ 2 \, \text{tr}(
497: t^b U_{{\bm z}_1} t^a U_{{\bm z}_2}^\dagger) \,
498: \ln(1/x_{\text{Bj}}),
499: \end{align}
500: where $x_{Bj}$ is the Bjorken $x$ variable. In arriving at \eq{diag_1}
501: we have defined the NLO contribution to the JIMWLK kernel coming from
502: the diagrams in Figs. \ref{fig:NLO1}A and
503: \ref{fig:NLO1_inst}A$^\prime$, labeled ${\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}}$, by
504: multiplying the wave function in \eq{psi1_xy} by its complex
505: conjugate, summing the obtained expression over the helicities of the
506: quark and the anti-quark in the produced pair and over $N_f$ quark
507: flavors, and integrating over $\alpha$:
508: \begin{align}\label{K1JIMWLKdef}
509: \am^2\,{\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}_1,
510: {\bm z}_2) \, =& \, \frac{N_f}{2 \, (4 \, \pi)^2} \, \int\limits_0^1 d
511: \alpha \sum_{\sigma_1, \sigma_2 =-1}^1 \nonumber \\
512: & \times \, \psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2} ({\bm z}_1
513: - {\bm x}_0, {\bm z}_2 - {\bm x}_0, \alpha) \,
514: \psi^{(1)*}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2} ({\bm z}_1 - {\bm x}_1, {\bm
515: z}_2 - {\bm x}_1, \alpha).
516: \end{align}
517: In this definition of ${\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}}$ we use the wave function
518: $\psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2}$, which is different from the full
519: wave function $\Psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2}$ from \eq{eq:psi_1k}
520: by the fact that the color matrices are included in
521: $\Psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2}$ and are not included in
522: $\psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2}$. We have used
523: $\psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2}$ to define the JIMWLK kernel
524: ${\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}}$ because the color matrices were already included in
525: the forward amplitude in \eq{diag_1}. A factor of $1/2$ was inserted
526: in \eq{K1JIMWLKdef} to account for the factor of $2$ introduced in the
527: definition of ${\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}}$ in \eq{diag_1}.
528:
529:
530: Substituting $\psi^{(1)}$ from \eq{psi1_xy} into \eq{K1JIMWLKdef} and
531: summing over quark helicities yields
532: \begin{align}\label{K1JIMWLK}
533: {\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}} & ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}_1, {\bm
534: z}_2) \, = \, \frac{N_f}{4 \, \pi^4} \, \int\limits_0^1 d \alpha \notag \\
535: & \times \, \Bigg[ \frac{(1- 2 \alpha)^2 {\bm z}_{12} \cdot ({\bm z}
536: - {\bm x}_0) \ {\bm z}_{12} \cdot ({\bm z} - {\bm x}_1) +
537: \epsilon_{ij} ({\bm z} - {\bm x}_0)_i ({\bm z}_{12})_j \,
538: \epsilon_{kl} ({\bm z} - {\bm x}_1)_k ({\bm z}_{12})_l}{({\bm
539: z}_{12}^2)^2 \, [({\bm z} - {\bm x}_0)^2 + \alpha \, (1-\alpha)
540: \, z_{12}^2] \, [({\bm z} - {\bm x}_1)^2 + \alpha \, (1-\alpha) \,
541: z_{12}^2]} \notag \\ & - 2 \, \alpha \, (1-\alpha) \, (1- 2
542: \alpha) \, \frac{{\bm z}_{12} \cdot ({\bm z} - {\bm x}_0) + {\bm
543: z}_{12} \cdot ({\bm z} - {\bm x}_1)}{{\bm z}_{12}^2 \, [({\bm z}
544: - {\bm x}_0)^2 + \alpha \, (1-\alpha) \, z_{12}^2] \, [({\bm z} -
545: {\bm x}_1)^2 + \alpha \, (1-\alpha) \, z_{12}^2]} \notag \\ & +
546: \frac{4 \, \alpha^2 \, (1-\alpha)^2}{ [({\bm z} - {\bm x}_0)^2 +
547: \alpha \, (1-\alpha) \, z_{12}^2] \, [({\bm z} - {\bm x}_1)^2 +
548: \alpha \, (1-\alpha) \, z_{12}^2]} \Bigg].
549: \end{align}
550: The integral over longitudinal momentum fraction $\alpha$, while
551: straightforward to perform, would not make the above expression any
552: more transparent. When squaring $\psi^{(1)}$ from \eq{psi1_xy} one
553: gets a cross-product between the first and the second terms on the
554: right hand side of \eq{psi1_xy}, given by the second term in the
555: square brackets of \eq{K1JIMWLK}. Terms like that are also present in
556: other physical quantities, such as the $q\bar q$ production cross
557: section calculated in \cite{Kovchegov:2006qn}.
558:
559: To obtain the contribution of the diagrams in Figs. \ref{fig:NLO1}A
560: and \ref{fig:NLO1_inst}A$^\prime$ to the BK evolution kernel
561: $K_1^{\text{NLO}} $ we have to sum the wave function
562: $\Psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2}$ over all possible emissions of
563: the gluon off the quark and off the anti-quark, multiply the result by
564: its complex conjugate, sum over quark and anti-quark helicities and
565: $N_f$ quark flavors, take a trace over color indices averaging over
566: $N_c$ colors of the incoming dipole and integrate over $\alpha$
567: \begin{align}\label{K1BKdef}
568: \am^2 \, K_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}_1, {\bm
569: z}_2) \, = & \, \frac{N_f}{(4 \, \pi)^2} \, \int\limits_0^1 d
570: \alpha \sum_{\sigma_1, \sigma_2 =-1}^1 \sum_{m,n = 0}^1 \,
571: (-1)^{m+n} \notag \\ \times \, & \frac{1}{N_c} \, \ \text{tr} \left[
572: \Psi^{(1)}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2} ({\bm z}_1 - {\bm x}_0, {\bm
573: z}_2 - {\bm x}_0, \alpha) \, \Psi^{(1)*}_{\sigma_1, \, \sigma_2}
574: ({\bm z}_1 - {\bm x}_1, {\bm z}_2 - {\bm x}_1, \alpha) \right].
575: \end{align}
576: (Note that the capital $K$ denotes the kernel of the BK evolution
577: equation, while the calligraphic $\cal K$ is reserved for the JIMWLK
578: evolution kernel.) Using the first line of \eq{eq:psi_1k} along with
579: \eq{K1JIMWLKdef} in \eq{K1BKdef} one can show that
580: \begin{align}\label{K1BK}
581: K_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}_1, {\bm z}_2) \, = \,
582: C_F \, \sum_{m,n = 0}^1 \, (-1)^{m+n} \, {\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}}
583: & ({\bm x}_m, {\bm x}_n ; {\bm z}_1, {\bm z}_2).
584: \end{align}
585:
586:
587: For the reasons which will become apparent momentarily, it is more
588: convenient to leave ${\cal K}^{\text{NLO}}_1$ written in terms of integrals
589: in transverse momentum space. Using Eqs. (\ref{eq:psi_1kq2}),
590: (\ref{ft_kq}) in \eq{K1JIMWLKdef} and summing over quark helicities
591: yields
592: \begin{align}\label{K1JIMWLKmom}
593: {\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}_1, {\bm z}_2) \,
594: = & \, 4 \, %\am^2 \,
595: N_f \, \int\limits_0^1 d \alpha \, \int \frac{d^2
596: k}{(2\pi)^2}\frac{d^2 k'}{(2\pi)^2}\frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2}
597: \frac{d^2 q'}{(2\pi)^2} \ e^{ -i {\bm q}\cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_0) +i
598: {\bm q}' \cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_1) -i({\bm k}-{\bm k}') \cdot {\bm
599: z}_{12}} \notag \\ & \times \left[ \frac{1}{{\bm q}^2{\bm
600: q}'^{2}} \frac{(1-2\alpha)^2 {\bm q}\cdot{\bm k}\ {\bm k}'
601: \cdot {\bm q}' + {\bm q} \cdot {\bm q}' \ {\bm k}\cdot{\bm k}' -
602: {\bm q}\cdot{\bm k}' \ {\bm k}\cdot{\bm q}'}{\Big[{\bm k}^2+{\bm
603: q}^2\alpha(1-\alpha)\Big]\Big[{\bm k}'^2+{\bm
604: q}'^2\alpha(1-\alpha)\Big]} \right. \notag \\ & + \frac{2 \,
605: \alpha \, (1-\alpha) \, (1-2 \alpha)}{\Big[{\bm k}^2+{\bm
606: q}^2\alpha(1-\alpha)\Big]\Big[{\bm k}'^2+{\bm
607: q}'^2\alpha(1-\alpha)\Big]} \, \left( \frac{{\bm k} \cdot {\bm
608: q}}{{\bm q}^2} + \frac{{\bm k}' \cdot {\bm q}'}{{\bm q}'^2}
609: \right)\notag \\ & \left. + \, \frac{4 \, \alpha^2 \,
610: (1-\alpha)^2}{\Big[{\bm k}^2+{\bm
611: q}^2\alpha(1-\alpha)\Big]\Big[{\bm k}'^2+{\bm
612: q}'^2\alpha(1-\alpha)\Big]} \right],
613: \end{align}
614: where we have used the identity
615: \begin{align}
616: \epsilon_{i j} \, {\bm q}_i \, {\bm k}_j \ \epsilon_{kl} \, {\bm
617: q}'_k \, {\bm k}'_l = {\bm q}\cdot{\bm q}' \ {\bm k}\cdot{\bm
618: k}' - {\bm q}\cdot{\bm k}' \ {\bm k}\cdot{\bm q}'.
619: \end{align}
620:
621:
622:
623: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
624:
625: \subsection{Diagram B}
626:
627: Unlike the diagram A, the diagram B in \fig{fig:NLO1} looks more like
628: a ``typical'' running coupling correction to the leading order
629: JIMWLK/BK kernels. The contribution of the diagram B along with its
630: mirror-reflection with respect to the line denoting the interaction
631: with the target can be written as
632: \begin{align}\label{diag_2}
633: \parbox{2.3cm}{\includegraphics[width=2.3cm]{LoopInt-glue-1-firsto-left}}
634: +
635: \parbox{2.3cm}{\includegraphics[width=2.3cm]{LoopInt-glue-1-firsto-right}}
636: \, = \, \int d^2z \ \am^2\, {\cal K}_2^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1
637: ; {\bm z}) \ U_{{\bm x}_0}t^a \otimes U_{{\bm
638: x}_1}^\dagger t^b \ U^{ab}_{\bm z} \ \ln(1/x_{\text{Bj}})
639: \end{align}
640: with the corresponding NLO contribution ${\cal K}_2^{\text{NLO}}$ to the
641: JIMWLK kernel calculated using the rules of the light-cone
642: perturbation theory \cite{Lepage:1980fj,Brodsky:1997de}. We first
643: decompose the kernel ${\cal K}_2^{\text{NLO}}$ into a sum of the
644: contributions of the diagram \fig{fig:NLO1}B (denoted ${\cal K}_{2\,
645: \text{left}}^{\text{NLO}}$) and its mirror-image (denoted ${\cal K}_{2\,
646: \text{right}}^{\text{NLO}}$):
647: \begin{align}\label{K2dec}
648: {\cal K}_2^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \, {\cal
649: K}_{2 \, \text{left}}^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) + {\cal
650: K}_{2 \, \text{right}}^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}).
651: \end{align}
652: Below we will only calculate ${\cal K}_{2\, \text{left}}^{\text{NLO}}$: to
653: construct ${\cal K}_{2\, \text{right}}^{\text{NLO}}$ one only has to replace
654: ${\bm x}_0 \leftrightarrow {\bm x}_1$ in its argument. A simple calculation
655: along the same lines as the calculation of the diagram A done above yields
656: \begin{align}\label{K21}
657: \am^2 \, {\cal K}_{2 \, \text{left}}^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm
658: x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \, \frac{N_f}{(4 \, \pi)^2} \, 2 \, g^4 \,
659: \int\limits_0^1 \frac{d \alpha}{\alpha (1 - \alpha)} \, \int
660: \frac{d^2 k}{(2\pi)^2}\frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{d^2 q'}{(2\pi)^2}
661: \ e^{ -i {\bm q}\cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_0) +i {\bm q}' \cdot ({\bm
662: z}-{\bm x}_1)} \notag \\ \sum_{\sigma_1, \sigma_2 =-1}^1 \,
663: \sum_{\lambda, \lambda' =-1}^1 \, \frac{{\bm
664: \epsilon}^{*\lambda}\cdot{\bm q}}{ {\bm q}^2} \frac{{\bm
665: \epsilon}^{\lambda}\cdot{\bm k}\, (1-2\alpha+\lambda\sigma_1)
666: \delta_{\sigma_1\sigma_2}}{{\bm k}^2+{\bm q}^2\alpha(1-\alpha)} \,
667: \frac{{\bm \epsilon}^{*\lambda'}\cdot{\bm k}\, (1-2\alpha+\lambda'
668: \sigma_1)}{{\bm q}^2} \, \frac{{\bm \epsilon}^{\lambda'}\cdot{\bm
669: q}'}{ {\bm q}'^2}
670: \end{align}
671: with all the notation being the same as in the case of the diagram
672: \ref{fig:NLO1}A and $\lambda' = \pm 1$ the polarization of the gluon
673: interacting with the target. Different from ${\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}}$,
674: the kernel ${\cal K}_{2 \, \text{left}}^{\text{NLO}}$ in \eq{K21} has
675: a part of the color factor included in it: it includes of $1/2$ coming
676: from the color trace of the quark loop, which is required by the
677: definition of ${\cal K}_2^{\text{NLO}}$ in \eq{diag_2}. Similar to the
678: above, to obtain the corresponding correction to the BK evolution
679: kernel, we use
680: \begin{align}\label{K2BK}
681: K_2^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \, C_F \, \sum_{m,n
682: = 0}^1 \, (-1)^{m+n} \, {\cal K}_2^{\text{NLO}} & ({\bm x}_m, {\bm x}_n ;
683: {\bm z})
684: \end{align} [Similar relationships holds for for both ${\cal K}_{2\,
685: \text{left}}^{\text{NLO}}$ and ${\cal K}_{2\, \text{right}}^{\text{NLO}}$
686: separately.]
687:
688:
689: We can simplify \eq{K21}. First we sum over the quark helicities and
690: gluon polarizations to obtain
691: \begin{align}\label{K22}
692: {\cal K}_{2 \, \text{left}}^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \,
693: 4 \, N_f \, %\alpha^2_\mu \,
694: \int\limits_0^1 \frac{d \alpha}{\alpha
695: (1 - \alpha)} \, \int \frac{d^d k}{(2\pi)^d}\frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2}
696: \frac{d^2 q'}{(2\pi)^2} \ e^{ -i {\bm q}\cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_0) +i
697: {\bm q}' \cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_1)} \notag \\ \times \,
698: \frac{(1-2\alpha)^2 {\bm q}\cdot{\bm k}\ {\bm k} \cdot {\bm q}' +
699: {\bm q} \cdot {\bm q}' \ {\bm k}^2 - {\bm q}\cdot{\bm k} \ {\bm
700: k}\cdot{\bm q}'}{({\bm q}^2)^2 \, {\bm q}'^2 \, \Big[{\bm
701: k}^2+{\bm q}^2\alpha(1-\alpha)\Big]}.
702: \end{align}
703: The integral over $\bm k$ is UV-divergent, as expected. We will
704: regularize it by using dimensional regularization, for which purpose
705: we have replaced $d^2 k /(2 \pi)^2 \rightarrow d^d k /(2 \pi)^d$ in
706: \eq{K2BK} with $d$ the number of dimensions. Anticipating the
707: integration over the angles of the vector $\bm k$ we also replace
708: \begin{align}\label{angles}
709: {\bm k}_i \, {\bm k}_j \, \rightarrow \, \frac{{\bm k}^2}{d} \,
710: \delta_{ij}
711: \end{align}
712: in \eq{K22}, obtaining
713: \begin{align}\label{K23}
714: {\cal K}_{2 \, \text{left}}^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ;
715: {\bm z}) \, = \,
716: 4 \, N_f \, %\alpha^2_\mu \,
717: \int\limits_0^1 \frac{d \alpha}{\alpha
718: (1 - \alpha)} \, \int \frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{d^2
719: q'}{(2\pi)^2} \ e^{ -i {\bm q}\cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_0) +i {\bm
720: q}' \cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_1)} \,
721: \frac{{\bm q} \cdot {\bm q}'}{({\bm q}^2)^2 \, {\bm q}'^2} \notag \\
722: \times \, \frac{1}{d} \, \int \frac{d^d k}{(2\pi)^d} \frac{{\bm
723: k}^2}{{\bm k}^2+{\bm q}^2\alpha(1-\alpha)} \, \left[
724: (1-2\alpha)^2 + d - 1\right].
725: \end{align}
726: Now the $\bm k$-integral is easily doable (see, e.g.,
727: \cite{Peskin:1995ev}) yielding
728: \begin{align}\label{K24}
729: {\cal K}_{2 \, \text{left}}^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ;
730: {\bm z}) \, = \, 4 \, N_f
731: \, %\alpha^2_\mu \,
732: \int\limits_0^1 \frac{d \alpha}{\alpha (1 -
733: \alpha)} \, \int \frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{d^2 q'}{(2\pi)^2} \
734: e^{ -i {\bm q}\cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_0) +i {\bm q}' \cdot ({\bm
735: z}-{\bm x}_1)} \,
736: \frac{{\bm q} \cdot {\bm q}'}{({\bm q}^2)^2 \, {\bm q}'^2} \notag \\
737: \times \, \frac{1}{2 \, (4 \pi)^{d/2}} \, \Gamma \left( -
738: \frac{d}{2} \right) \, \left[ {\bm q}^2\alpha(1-\alpha)
739: \right]^{d/2} \, \left[ (1-2\alpha)^2 + d - 1\right].
740: \end{align}
741: Writing $d = 2 - \epsilon$ and expanding around $\epsilon =0$ we get
742: \begin{align}\label{K25}
743: {\cal K}_{2 \, \text{left}}^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \,
744: \frac{N_f}{2 \, \pi} \,
745: %N_f \, \frac{\alpha^2_\mu}{2 \, \pi} \,
746: \int\limits_0^1 d \alpha \, \int
747: \frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{d^2 q'}{(2\pi)^2} \ e^{ -i {\bm q}\cdot
748: ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_0) +i {\bm q}' \cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_1)} \,
749: \frac{{\bm q} \cdot {\bm q}'}{{\bm q}^2 \, {\bm q}'^2} \notag \\
750: \times \, \left\{ \left[ (1-2\alpha)^2 + 1 \right] \, \left[ \ln
751: \frac{{\bm q}^2 \, \alpha \, (1-\alpha)}{\mu_{{\text{MS}}}^2} + \gamma -
752: \ln 4 \pi - 1 \right] + 2 \right\},
753: \end{align}
754: where we replaced $1/\epsilon$ with $\ln \mu_{{\text{MS}}}$. Integrating over
755: $\alpha$ we obtain
756: \begin{align}\label{K26}
757: {\cal K}_{2 \, \text{left}}^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \,
758: %\frac{2 \, N_f}{3} \, \frac{\alpha^2_\mu}{\pi} \,
759: \frac{2 \, N_f}{3\, \pi} \,
760: \int \frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2}
761: \frac{d^2 q'}{(2\pi)^2} \ e^{ -i {\bm q}\cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_0) +i
762: {\bm q}' \cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_1)} \, \frac{{\bm q} \cdot {\bm
763: q}'}{{\bm q}^2 \, {\bm q}'^2} \, \left\{ \ln \frac{{\bm
764: q}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} - \frac{5}{3} \right\}
765: \end{align}
766: with $\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2 =\mu_{{\text{MS}}}^2 \, 4 \pi \, e^{-\gamma}$.
767:
768: While \eq{K26} is sufficiently simple for our later purposes, we can
769: further simplify it by Fourier-transforming it into transverse
770: coordinate space. A straightforward integration yields the NLO
771: contribution to the JIMWLK kernel coming from the diagram B
772: \begin{align}\label{K27}
773: {\cal K}_{2 \, \text{left}}^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \,
774: \frac{%\alpha^2_\mu \,
775: N_f}{6 \, \pi^3} \, \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm
776: x}_0}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2} \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm
777: x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \, \left\{ \ln \frac{4}{|{\bm
778: z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} - \frac{5}{3}
779: %+ 2\ln 2
780: - 2 \gamma \right\}.
781: \end{align}
782: Similarly one can show that
783: \begin{align}\label{K28}
784: {\cal K}_{2 \, \text{right}}^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \,
785: \frac{%\alpha^2_\mu \,
786: N_f}{6 \, \pi^3} \, \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm
787: x}_0}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2} \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm
788: x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \, \left\{ \ln \frac{4}{|{\bm
789: z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} - \frac{5}{3}
790: %+ 2\ln 2
791: - 2 \gamma \right\}
792: \end{align}
793: and
794: \begin{align}\label{K29}
795: {\cal K}_2^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, =& \, {\cal
796: K}_{2 \, \text{left}}^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) + {\cal
797: K}_{2 \, \text{right}}^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \nonumber
798: \\ \, =& \, \frac{%\alpha^2_\mu \,
799: N_f}{6 \, \pi^3} \, \frac{{\bm
800: z}-{\bm x}_0}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2} \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm
801: x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \, \left\{ \ln \frac{4 \,
802: e^{-\frac{5}{3} - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \,
803: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} + \ln \frac{4 \, e^{-\frac{5}{3} - 2
804: \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
805: \right\}.
806: \end{align}
807: The corresponding contribution to the NLO BK kernel can be easily
808: obtained from \eq{K29} using \eq{K2BK}.
809:
810: Recalling that the leading order (LO) JIMWLK kernel is given by
811: \begin{align}\label{eq:LO-JIMWLK-kernel}
812: {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \,
813: \frac{1%\alpha_\mu
814: }{\pi^2} \, \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0}{|{\bm z}-{\bm
815: x}_0|^2} \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2}
816: \end{align}
817: we immediately see that adding ${\cal K}_{2}^{\text{NLO}}$ from \eq{K29} to
818: it yields
819: \begin{align}\label{LO+NLO21}
820: \am \, {\cal K}^{LO} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) + \am^2\,
821: {\cal K}_2^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \,
822: \frac{\alpha_\mu}{\pi^2} \, \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0}{|{\bm z}-{\bm
823: x}_0|^2} \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2}
824: \notag \\ \times \, \left\{ 1 + \frac{\alpha_\mu \, N_f}{6 \, \pi}
825: \, \left[ \ln \frac{4 \, e^{-\frac{5}{3} - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm
826: z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} + \ln \frac{4 \,
827: e^{-\frac{5}{3} - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \,
828: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right] \right\}.
829: \end{align}
830: Anticipating the appearance of the full QCD beta-function we perform
831: the replacement of \eq{repl} in \eq{LO+NLO21} to obtain
832: \begin{align}\label{LO+NLO22}
833: \am\, {\cal K}^{LO} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z})
834: + \am^2\, {\cal K}_2^{\text{NLO}}
835: ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \, \frac{\alpha_\mu}{\pi^2} \,
836: \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2} \cdot \frac{{\bm
837: z}-{\bm x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \notag \\ \times \, \left\{
838: 1 - \alpha_\mu \, \beta_2 \, \left[ \ln \frac{4 \, e^{-\frac{5}{3}
839: - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
840: + \ln \frac{4 \, e^{-\frac{5}{3} - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm
841: x}_1|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right] \right\}.
842: \end{align}
843: Now one can readily see that the diagram B in \fig{fig:NLO1} gives a
844: contribution to the one-loop running coupling correction to the LO
845: JIMWLK and BK kernels, as expected.
846:
847:
848: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
849:
850: \subsection{Diagrams C and C$^\prime$}
851: \label{sec:diagram-c}
852:
853: The contribution of the diagrams in Figs. \ref{fig:NLO1}C and
854: \ref{fig:NLO1_inst}C$^\prime$ along with their mirror-reflections can
855: be written as
856: \begin{align}\label{diag_3}
857: \parbox{2.3cm}{\includegraphics[width=2.3cm]{LoopNonInt-up-to-1-firsto}}
858: +
859: \parbox{2.3cm}{\includegraphics[width=2.3cm]{LoopNonInt-down-to-1-firsto}}
860: +
861: \parbox{2.3cm}{\includegraphics[width=2.3cm]{LoopNonInt-up-to-inst-1-firsto}}
862: +
863: \parbox{2.3cm}{\includegraphics[width=2.3cm]{LoopNonInt-down-to-inst-1-firsto}}
864: \, = \notag \\ = \, \int d^2z \ \am^2\, {\cal K}_3^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
865: z}) \ U_{{\bm x}_0}t^a \otimes U_{{\bm x}_1}^\dagger t^a \
866: \ln(1/x_{\text{Bj}})
867: \end{align}
868: where $\bm z$ is still the gluon's transverse coordinate which we
869: choose to keep explicitly even though, since both gluon lines are now
870: completely virtual, they do not interact with the target. Instead of
871: calculating the NLO correction to the JIMWLK kernel ${\cal
872: K}_3^{\text{NLO}}$ coming from the diagrams C and C$^\prime$
873: explicitly we will use the conservation of probability condition,
874: which states that, in the absence of interaction with the target, the
875: sum of all three diagrams in \fig{fig:NLO1} (along with the mirror
876: images of the diagrams B and C reflected with respect to the line
877: representing the interaction with the target) gives zero. Intuitively
878: this condition is clear: in the absence of interactions there will be
879: no contribution to the evolution kernel. In the diagrammatic sense,
880: adding up all the graphs in \fig{fig:NLO1} corresponds to summing over
881: all the cuts for the diagram of the gluon emission with a quark bubble
882: correction. Similarly, if the interactions are absent, the sum of the
883: diagrams in \fig{fig:NLO1_inst} along with the mirror-reflection of
884: the diagram C$^\prime$ also gives zero. This probability conservation
885: condition was originally used by Mueller to calculate the virtual
886: correction to the leading order gluon emission in the dipole evolution
887: kernel in \cite{Mueller:1994rr}. In our case it formally reads
888: \begin{align}\label{prob}
889: \int d^2z_1 d^2 z_2 \ {\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
890: z}_1, {\bm z}_2) + \int d^2z \ {\cal K}_2^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm
891: x}_1 ; {\bm z}) + \int d^2z \ {\cal K}_3^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm
892: x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \, 0.
893: \end{align}
894: Noting that
895: \begin{align}
896: d^2 z_1 \, d^2 z_2 \, = \, d^2 z \, d^2 z_{12}
897: \end{align}
898: with ${\bm z}_{12}$ and $\bm z$ defined in Eqs. (\ref{z12}) and
899: (\ref{z}) above, an explicit diagram calculation (keeping all the
900: transverse momenta fixed in momentum space) yields an even stronger
901: identity than \eq{prob}:
902: \begin{align}\label{prob2}
903: {\cal K}_3^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \, - \int d^2
904: z_{12} \ {\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}_1, {\bm
905: z}_2) - \ {\cal K}_2^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}).
906: \end{align}
907:
908: ${\cal K}_2^{\text{NLO}}$ in \eq{prob2} is given explicitly in
909: \eq{K29}. Using the momentum-space expression (\ref{K1JIMWLKmom}) for
910: ${\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}}$ we get
911: \begin{align}\label{K1int1}
912: \int d^2 z_{12} \, {\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
913: z}_1, {\bm z}_2) \, = & \, 4 \,
914: N_f \, \int\limits_0^1 d \alpha \, \int \frac{d^d
915: k}{(2\pi)^d}\frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{d^2 q'}{(2\pi)^2} \ e^{
916: -i {\bm q}\cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_0) +i {\bm q}' \cdot ({\bm
917: z}-{\bm x}_1) } \notag \\ & \times \left[ \frac{1}{{\bm q}^2{\bm
918: q}'^{2}} \frac{(1-2\alpha)^2 {\bm q}\cdot{\bm k}\ {\bm k}
919: \cdot {\bm q}' + {\bm q} \cdot {\bm q}' \ {\bm k}^2 - {\bm
920: q}\cdot{\bm k} \ {\bm k}\cdot{\bm q}'}{\Big[{\bm k}^2+{\bm
921: q}^2\alpha(1-\alpha)\Big]\Big[{\bm k}^2+{\bm
922: q}'^2\alpha(1-\alpha)\Big]} \right. \notag \\ & + \,
923: \left.\frac{4 \, \alpha^2 \, (1-\alpha)^2}{\Big[{\bm k}^2+{\bm
924: q}^2\alpha(1-\alpha)\Big]\Big[{\bm k}^2+{\bm
925: q}'^2\alpha(1-\alpha)\Big]} \right],
926: \end{align}
927: where the $\bm k$-integral is UV-divergent, which we regularize using
928: dimensional regularization. With the help of \eq{angles} we rewrite
929: \eq{K1int1} as
930: \begin{align}\label{K1int2}
931: \int d^2 z_{12} \, {\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ;
932: {\bm z}_1, {\bm z}_2) \, = \, 4 \, N_f \, \int\limits_0^1 d \alpha
933: \, \int \frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{d^2 q'}{(2\pi)^2} \ e^{ -i {\bm
934: q}\cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_0) +i {\bm q}' \cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm
935: x}_1) } \notag \\ \times \, \Bigg\{ \frac{{\bm q} \cdot {\bm
936: q}'}{{\bm q}^2{\bm q}'^{2}} \, \frac{1}{d} \, \int \frac{d^d
937: k}{(2\pi)^d} \, \frac{{\bm k}^2}{\Big[{\bm k}^2+{\bm
938: q}^2\alpha(1-\alpha)\Big]\Big[{\bm k}^2+{\bm
939: q}'^2\alpha(1-\alpha)\Big]} \, \left[ (1-2\alpha)^2 + d -
940: 1\right] \notag \\ + \, 4 \, \alpha^2 \, (1-\alpha)^2 \, \int
941: \frac{d^2 k}{(2\pi)^2} \, \frac{1}{\Big[{\bm k}^2+{\bm
942: q}^2\alpha(1-\alpha)\Big]\Big[{\bm k}^2+{\bm
943: q}'^2\alpha(1-\alpha)\Big]} \Bigg\},
944: \end{align}
945: where we put $d=2$ in the second term in the curly brackets since the
946: integral in that term is not divergent. Performing the $\bm
947: k$-integrals yields
948: \begin{align}\label{K1int3}
949: \int d^2 z_{12} \, {\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
950: z}_1, {\bm z}_2) \, = \, 4 \, %\am^2 \,
951: N_f \, \int\limits_0^1 d \alpha \, \int \frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2}
952: \frac{d^2 q'}{(2\pi)^2} \ e^{ -i {\bm q}\cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_0) +i
953: {\bm q}' \cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_1) } \notag \\ \times \, \Bigg\{
954: \frac{{\bm q} \cdot {\bm q}'}{{\bm q}^2{\bm q}'^{2}} \frac{1}{d} \,
955: \frac{1}{(4 \, \pi)^{d/2}} \, \Gamma \left( 1 - \frac{d}{2} \right)
956: \, [\alpha \, (1 - \alpha)]^{\frac{d}{2} -1} \, \left[(1-2\alpha)^2
957: + d - 1\right] \, \frac{[{\bm q}^2]^{d/2} - [{\bm
958: q}'^2]^{d/2}}{{\bm q}^{2} - {\bm q}'^{2}} \notag \\ + \,
959: \frac{1}{\pi} \, \alpha \, (1 - \alpha) \, \frac{\ln ({\bm
960: q}^{2}/{\bm q}'^{2})}{{\bm q}^{2} - {\bm q}'^{2}} \Bigg\}.
961: \end{align}
962: Writing $d = 2 - \epsilon$, expanding around $\epsilon =0$, replacing
963: $1/\epsilon$ with $\ln \mu_{{\text{MS}}}$ and integrating over $\alpha$ we
964: obtain
965: \begin{align}\label{K1int4}
966: \int d^2 z_{12} \, {\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ;
967: {\bm z}_1, {\bm z}_2) \, = \,- \frac{2 \, N_f}{3 \, \pi} \, \int
968: \frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{d^2 q'}{(2\pi)^2} \ e^{ -i {\bm q}\cdot
969: ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_0) +i {\bm q}' \cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_1) } \notag
970: \\ \times \, \Bigg\{ \frac{{\bm q} \cdot {\bm q}'}{{\bm q}^2{\bm
971: q}'^{2}} \, \frac{{\bm q}^{2} \, \left( \ln \frac{{\bm
972: q}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} - \frac{5}{3} \right) - {\bm
973: q}'^{2} \, \left( \ln \frac{{\bm q}'^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} -
974: \frac{5}{3} \right) }{{\bm q}^{2} - {\bm q}'^{2}} - \frac{\ln
975: ({\bm q}^{2}/{\bm q}'^{2})}{{\bm q}^{2} - {\bm q}'^{2}} \Bigg\}.
976: \end{align}
977: The details of integrations over $\bm q$ and ${\bm q}'$ are shown in
978: Appendix \ref{K1FT}. The result reads
979: \begin{align}\label{K1int5}
980: \int d^2 z_{12} \, {\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ;
981: {\bm z}_1, {\bm z}_2) \, = \,- \frac{ N_f}{6 \, \pi^3} \, \frac{{\bm
982: z}-{\bm x}_0}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2} \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm
983: x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \, \ln \frac{4 \, e^{-\frac{5}{3}
984: -2 \gamma}}{R^2 ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \,
985: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2},
986: \end{align}
987: where we have defined a transverse coordinate scale $R ({\bm x}_0,
988: {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z})$ such that
989: \begin{align}\label{Rln}
990: \ln R^2 ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \,
991: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2 \, \equiv \, \frac{|{\bm z} -{\bm
992: x}_0|^2 \, \ln \left[ |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \,
993: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2 \right] - |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2
994: \, \ln \left[ |{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 \,
995: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2
996: \right]}{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 - |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \notag \\
997: + \, \frac{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2}{({\bm
998: z}-{\bm x}_0) \cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_1)} \, \frac{\ln (|{\bm z}
999: -{\bm x}_0|^2 / |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2)}{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 -
1000: |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2}
1001: \end{align}
1002: or, equivalently,
1003: \begin{align}\label{Rexp}
1004: R^2 ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \, |{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0| \,
1005: |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1| \, \left( \frac{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|}{|{\bm z}
1006: -{\bm x}_0|} \right)^{\frac{({\bm z} -{\bm x}_0)^2 + ({\bm
1007: z}-{\bm x}_1)^2}{({\bm z} - {\bm x}_0)^2 - ({\bm z}-{\bm
1008: x}_1)^2} - 2 \, \frac{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \, |{\bm z}-{\bm
1009: x}_1|^2}{({\bm z}-{\bm x}_0) \cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_1)} \,
1010: \frac{1}{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 - |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2}}.
1011: \end{align}
1012:
1013: Employing Eqs. (\ref{K1int5}) and (\ref{K29}) in \eq{prob2} we obtain
1014: \begin{align}\label{K3}
1015: {\cal K}_3^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) & \, = \,
1016: \frac{%\am^2 \,
1017: N_f}{6 \, \pi^3} \, \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0}{|{\bm z}-{\bm
1018: x}_0|^2} \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2}
1019: \notag \\ & \times \, \left\{ \ln \frac{4 \, e^{-\frac{5}{3} -2
1020: \gamma}}{R^2 ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \,
1021: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} - \ln \frac{4 \, e^{-\frac{5}{3}
1022: - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \,
1023: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} - \ln \frac{4 \, e^{-\frac{5}{3}
1024: - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \,
1025: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right\}.
1026: \end{align}
1027: This is the contribution of the diagrams C in \fig{fig:NLO1} and
1028: C$^\prime$ in \fig{fig:NLO1_inst} (along with their mirror
1029: reflections) to the NLO JIMWLK kernel. To obtain the corresponding
1030: contribution to the NLO BK kernel one again should use the following
1031: formula
1032: \begin{align}\label{K3BK}
1033: K_3^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \, C_F \, \sum_{m,n
1034: = 0}^1 \, (-1)^{m+n} \, {\cal K}_3^{\text{NLO}} & ({\bm x}_m, {\bm x}_n ;
1035: {\bm z}).
1036: \end{align}
1037:
1038: Finally one may substitute the scale $R ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
1039: z})$ from \eq{Rln} explicitly into \eq{K3} to obtain
1040: \begin{align}\label{K3old}
1041: {\cal K}_3^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \, -
1042: \frac{ N_f}{6 \, \pi^3} \, \Bigg[ \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0}{|{\bm
1043: z}-{\bm x}_0|^2} \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm
1044: x}_1|^2} & \notag \\ \times \, \frac{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 \,
1045: \ln \frac{4 \, e^{-\frac{5}{3} -2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2
1046: \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} - |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \, \ln \frac{4
1047: \, e^{-\frac{5}{3} -2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \,
1048: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}}{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 - |{\bm z}-{\bm
1049: x}_1|^2} - & \frac{\ln (|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 / |{\bm z}-{\bm
1050: x}_1|^2)}{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 - |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2}
1051: \Bigg].
1052: \end{align}
1053: The result in \eq{K3old} agrees with the NLO correction extracted from the
1054: calculation performed in~\cite{Gardi:2006} where the dispersion method was
1055: used in calculating the virtual part of the evolution kernel to determine the
1056: scale of the running coupling for small-$x$ evolution.
1057:
1058: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1059:
1060: \section{Ultraviolet Subtraction and Scheme Dependence}
1061: \label{Subtr}
1062:
1063: \subsection{Subtraction for the JIMWLK Equation}
1064: \label{sec:subtr-JIMWLK}
1065:
1066: To understand how the diagrams calculated above translate into
1067: corrections to the JIMWLK equation, let us recall how the JIMWLK
1068: Hamiltonian relates to the leading order diagrams.
1069:
1070: The leading order JIMWLK Hamiltonian is a sum of real and virtual
1071: contributions defined by
1072: \begin{equation}
1073: \label{eq:JIMWLK-Hamiltonian-LO-0}
1074: \begin{split}
1075: {\cal H}^{\text{LO}}[U] = & {\cal H}^{\text{LO}}_{\text{real}}[U] + {\cal
1076: H}^{\text{LO}}_{\text{virtual}}[U]
1077: \\
1078: {\cal H}^{\text{LO}}_{\text{real}}[U] := & \frac{\am}{2} \int d^2x\, d^2y\, d^2z\
1079: {\cal K}^{\text{LO}}({\bm x},{\bm y};{\bm z})\
1080: U_{\bm z}^{a b}(i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x}i\nabla^b_{\bm y}
1081: +i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^b_{\bm y})
1082: \\
1083: {\cal H}^{\text{LO}}_{\text{virtual}}[U] := &
1084: \frac{\am}{2}
1085: \int d^2x\, d^2y\, d^2z\
1086: {\cal K}^{\text{LO}}({\bm x},{\bm y};{\bm z})\
1087: ( i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\nabla^a_{\bm y}+i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm y})
1088: \ .
1089: \end{split}
1090: \end{equation}
1091: Alternatively we will employ a notation in which an integration convention
1092: over repeated transverse coordinates is implied and write more compactly
1093: \begin{align}
1094: \label{eq:JIMWLK-Hamiltonian-LO}
1095: {\cal H}^{\text{LO}}[U] =\frac{\am}{2}
1096: {\cal K}^{\text{LO}}_{{\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z}}
1097: \left[
1098: U_{\bm z}^{a b}(i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x}i\nabla^b_{\bm y}
1099: +i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^b_{\bm y})
1100: +
1101: ( i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\nabla^a_{\bm y}+i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm y})
1102: \right].
1103: \end{align}
1104: Integration conventions will be implied throughout when we employ
1105: subscripts to list the transverse arguments of the kernels.
1106:
1107: In the above, $\nabla^a_{\bm x}$ and $\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x}$ are
1108: functional derivatives with respect to the path ordered exponentials
1109: (corresponding to the left and right-invariant vector fields on the
1110: $SU(N_c)$ group) defined operationally via
1111: \begin{subequations}
1112: \label{Lie-der}
1113: \begin{align}
1114: i\nabla^a_{\bm{x}} U_{\bm{y}} := &
1115: -U_{\bm{x}} t^a \delta^{(2)}_{\bm{x y}}
1116: \ ,
1117: \hspace{1cm}
1118: i\nabla^a_{\bm{x}} U^\dagger_{\bm{y}} :=
1119: t^a U^\dagger_{\bm{x}} \delta^{(2)}_{\bm{x y}} \
1120: \intertext{and}
1121: i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm{x}} U_{\bm{y}} := &
1122: t^a U_{\bm{x}} \delta^{(2)}_{\bm{x y}}
1123: \ ,
1124: \hspace{1cm}
1125: i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm{x}} U^\dagger_{\bm{y}} :=
1126: - U^\dagger_{\bm{x}} t^a \delta^{(2)}_{\bm{x y}}
1127: \ .
1128: \end{align}
1129: \end{subequations}
1130: ${\cal K}^{\text{LO}}$ was already given in~(\ref{eq:LO-JIMWLK-kernel}).
1131: Our notation here is somewhat different from the usual in that we absorb a
1132: factor $1/\pi^2$ into the leading oder kernel.
1133:
1134: The JIMWLK Hamiltonian determines the $Y$ dependence of expectation values
1135: of arbitrary functionals $O[U]$ of Wilson lines $U_{\bm x}$
1136: \begin{equation}
1137: \label{eq:corrs}
1138: \langle O[U] \rangle(Y) := \int\! \Hat{D}[U] O[U] Z_Y[U]
1139: \end{equation}
1140: via the $Y$ dependence of the functional weight $Z_Y[U]$. The evolution
1141: equation for $Z_Y[U]$ is known as the JIMWLK equation:
1142: \begin{equation}
1143: \label{eq:JIMWLK-eq}
1144: \partial_Y \ \Hat Z_Y[U]=
1145: - {\cal H}^{\text{LO}}[U]\
1146: Z_Y[U]
1147: \ .
1148: \end{equation}
1149:
1150: The leading order JIMWLK Hamiltonian in \eq{eq:JIMWLK-Hamiltonian-LO} is {\em
1151: constructed} such that it adds the leading order real and virtual
1152: corrections to, say, an interacting $q\Bar q$ pair, represented by its Wilson
1153: line bilinear $U_{{\bm x}_0}\otimes U_{{\bm x}_1}^\dagger$:
1154: \begin{align}
1155: \label{eq:JIMWLK-LO-diagram-cont}
1156: \ln(1/x_{\text{Bj}})\,
1157: {\cal H}^{\text{LO}}[U] \ U_{{\bm x}_0}\otimes U_{{\bm x}_1}^\dagger = &
1158: \parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{chiqqb-t1}}
1159: +
1160: \parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{chiqqb-t2}}
1161: +%\parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{chiqqb-tup}}
1162: \parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{chiqqb-up-to-1}}
1163: +\parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{chiqqb-up-to-2}}
1164: \notag \\ & \phantom{+}\hspace{4cm}
1165: +%\parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{chiqqb-tdown}}
1166: \parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{chiqqb-down-to-1}}
1167: +\parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{chiqqb-down-to-2}}
1168: \notag \\ &
1169: +\text{real and virtual self-energy-like terms.}
1170: \end{align}
1171: Taking a trace of \eq{eq:JIMWLK-LO-diagram-cont} and normalizing by the number
1172: of colors turns the above into the (unfactorized) right hand side of the BK
1173: equation for $S ({{\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1},Y):=\left< \frac{\tr U_{{\bm x}_0}
1174: U_{{\bm x}_1}^\dagger}{N_c}\right> (Y)$ shown in \eq{eqS} below.
1175: $\frac{\tr U_{{\bm x}_0} U_{{\bm x}_1}^\dagger}{N_c}$ is but the most generic
1176: of the operators $O[U]$ referred to in~\eqref{eq:corrs}.
1177:
1178: As in the BK case, real-virtual cancellation and thus UV finiteness
1179: follow from the appearance of the same kernel ${\cal K}^{\text{LO}}$
1180: in both real and virtual contributions. This ensures that the limits
1181: ${\bm z}\to {\bm x}$ and ${\bm z}\to {\bm y}$ cancel between the two
1182: terms under the integral. Probability conservation at leading order
1183: manifests itself more globally in the absence of interaction with the
1184: target, i.e., in the limit $U\to 1$: There~\eqref{Lie-der} ensures
1185: that ${\cal H}^{\text{LO}}_{\text{virtual}}\to -{\cal
1186: H}^{\text{LO}}_{\text{real}}$ so that there is no evolution without
1187: interaction with the target.
1188:
1189:
1190: ${\cal H}^{\text{LO}}$ may in fact be used to act on any tensor
1191: product of quarks, antiquarks and gluons in a projectile's
1192: wavefunction that interact with the target via corresponding Wilson
1193: lines to produce a sum of leading order $\alpha_s
1194: \ln(1/x_{\text{Bj}})$ corrections to this eikonal interaction. This is
1195: the technical mechanism by which the JIMWLK equation translates into
1196: the Balitsky hierarchy.
1197:
1198: Note the efficiency with which the JIMWLK Hamiltonian encodes the
1199: contributions: due to the symmetry properties of the kernels, the
1200: self-energy-like diagrams arise from the same terms that create the
1201: exchange diagrams. The only distinctions left in the Hamiltonian are:
1202: \begin{itemize}
1203: \item The order of the vertices w.r.t. the target interaction, i.e. the Wilson
1204: lines. This is encoded in the use of the $\nabla$ and $\Bar\nabla$.
1205: \item The interaction (or lack thereof) encoded in presence or absence
1206: of an adjoint Wilson line at the transverse position at which the
1207: newly created gluon interacts with the target, as shown in the
1208: second and third lines of \eq{eq:JIMWLK-Hamiltonian-LO-0}.
1209: \end{itemize}
1210:
1211: This pattern extends itself to the NLO contributions studied here.
1212: Only the variants of diagram A differ slightly in structure from the
1213: contributions already encountered at leading order: they depend on two
1214: new transverse coordinates and contain a factor $2 \text{tr}( t^b
1215: U_{{\bm z}_1} t^a U_{{\bm z}_2}^\dagger)$ instead of the $U^{a b}_{\bm
1216: z}$ of the real emissions at leading order. This leads to the
1217: following correspondence of diagrams and terms in the NLO corrections
1218: in the Hamiltonian
1219: \begin{subequations}
1220: \label{eq:JIMWLK-NLO-terms-from-diags}
1221: \begin{align}
1222: \label{eq:JIMWLK-NLO-from-A}
1223: \ln(1/x_{\text{Bj}}) &\, {\cal H}^{\text{NLO}}_1
1224: \hspace{.2cm} U_{{\bm x}_0}\otimes U_{{\bm x}_1}^\dagger =
1225: \am\, \ln(1/x_{\text{Bj}})
1226: \int d^2x d^2y d^2z_1 d^2z_2 \, {\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}, {\bm y}
1227: ; {\bm z}_1, {\bm z}_2) \,
1228: \notag \\ & \times 2 \text{tr}( t^b U_{{\bm z}_1} t^a U_{{\bm
1229: z}_2}^\dagger) \, (i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x}i\nabla^b_{\bm y}
1230: +i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^b_{\bm y})
1231: \hspace{.2cm} U_{{\bm x}_0}\otimes U_{{\bm x}_1}^\dagger
1232: = \parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{LoopInt-quarks-1-firsto}}
1233: + \parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{LoopInt-quarks-inst-1-firsto}} + \ldots \ .
1234: \intertext{All other corrections have the same $U$ structure already
1235: encountered at the leading order. We have corrections to real emission}
1236: \label{eq:JIMWLK-NLO-from-B}
1237: \ln(1/x_{\text{Bj}}) & \, {\cal H}^{\text{NLO}}_2
1238: \hspace{.2cm} U_{{\bm x}_0}\otimes U_{{\bm x}_1}^\dagger =
1239: \am\, \ln(1/x_{\text{Bj}})
1240: \int d^2x d^2y d^2z \ {\cal K}_2^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}, {\bm y}
1241: ; {\bm z}) \
1242: \notag \\ & \times U^{ab}_{\bm z} \, (i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x}i\nabla^b_{\bm y}
1243: +i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^b_{\bm y})
1244: \hspace{.2cm} U_{{\bm x}_0}\otimes U_{{\bm x}_1}^\dagger
1245: %\notag \\ = &
1246: =
1247: \parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{LoopInt-glue-1-firsto-left}}
1248: +
1249: \parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{LoopInt-glue-1-firsto-right}}
1250: +\ldots
1251: \intertext{and virtual terms}
1252: \label{eq:JIMWLK-NLO-from-C}
1253: \ln(1/x_{\text{Bj}}) &\, {\cal H}^{\text{NLO}}_3
1254: \hspace{.2cm} U_{{\bm x}_0}\otimes U_{{\bm x}_1}^\dagger =
1255: -\am\, \ln(1/x_{\text{Bj}})
1256: \int d^2x d^2 y d^2z \ {\cal K}_3^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm
1257: z})
1258: \notag \\ & \hspace{5cm} \times
1259: ( i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\nabla^a_{\bm y}+i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x}
1260: i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm y})
1261: \hspace{.2cm} U_{{\bm x}_0}\otimes U_{{\bm x}_1}^\dagger
1262: \notag \\ &
1263: =
1264: \parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{LoopNonInt-up-to-1-firsto}}
1265: +
1266: \parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{LoopNonInt-down-to-1-firsto}}
1267: +
1268: \parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{LoopNonInt-up-to-inst-1-firsto}}
1269: +
1270: \parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{LoopNonInt-down-to-inst-1-firsto}}
1271: + \ldots \ .
1272: \end{align}
1273: \end{subequations}
1274: The minus sign in the last term is due to the different $\nabla$
1275: structures in real and virtual terms and is important for the
1276: real-virtual cancellations. The dots represent both symmetrization in
1277: external coordinates ${\bm x}_0$ and ${\bm x}_1$ as well as the
1278: inclusion of ``self energy like diagrams'' in which the gluon line
1279: connects back to the quark (or antiquark) it originates from.
1280:
1281: We group the contributions accordingly (again
1282: employing an integration convention for all repeated transverse
1283: coordinates ${\bm x}, {\bm y}, {\bm z}, {\bm z}_i$)
1284: \begin{align}
1285: \label{eq:JIMWLK-Nfcontribs}
1286: \text{new:} & & {\cal H}^{\text{NLO}}_1 = &
1287: %\int d^2x d^2y d^2z_1 d^2z_2
1288: \ \frac{\am^2}2 \
1289: {\cal K}^{\text{NLO}}_{1\ {\bm x}, {\bm y} ; {\bm z}_1, {\bm z}_2} \
1290: 2\, \text{tr}( t^b U_{{\bm z}_1} t^a U_{{\bm
1291: z}_2}^\dagger) \,
1292: (i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x}i\nabla^b_{\bm y}
1293: +i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^b_{\bm y})
1294: %(i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x}i\nabla^b_{\bm y}
1295: % +i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^b_{\bm y})
1296: \\
1297: \label{eq:JIMWLK-unsubtr-real}
1298: \text{real:} & &
1299: {\cal H}^{\text{LO}}_{\text{real}} + {\cal H}^{\text{NLO}}_2
1300: = &\ \frac12 \left(\am\,{\cal K}^{\text{LO}}_{{\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z}}
1301: +\am^2\, {\cal K}^{\text{NLO}}_{2\ {\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z}}\right)
1302: \ U^{ab}_{\bm z} \,
1303: (i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x}i\nabla^b_{\bm y}
1304: +i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^b_{\bm y})
1305: %(i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x}i\nabla^b_{\bm y}
1306: % +i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^b_{\bm y})
1307: \\
1308: \text{virtual:} & &
1309: {\cal H}^{\text{LO}}_{\text{virtual}} + {\cal H}^{\text{NLO}}_3 = &
1310: \ \frac12\left(\am\,{\cal K}^{\text{LO}}_{{\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z}} -
1311: \am^2{\cal K}^{\text{NLO}}_{3\ {\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z}}\right)
1312: ( i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\nabla^a_{\bm y}
1313: +i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm y})
1314: \end{align}
1315: and observe also at this order, that, due to probability conservation as
1316: expressed by Eq.~\eqref{prob}, the limit $U\to 1$ leads to a cancellation of
1317: the sum of {\em all} these contributions. We note: probability
1318: conservation connects all of the above contributions.
1319:
1320: The above separation of terms is quite unsatisfactory also if we wish to
1321: extract the running coupling contributions to the leading order
1322: Hamiltonian. Two complementary issues emerge:
1323: \begin{enumerate}
1324: \item Any running coupling correction should come as a uniform modification in
1325: both real and virtual terms of the leading order kernel, i.e. as a
1326: replacement
1327: \begin{align}
1328: \label{eq:running-coupling-replacement-NLO}
1329: \am {\cal K}^{\text{LO}}({\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z}) \to &\,
1330: \am {\cal K}^{\text{LO}}({\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z}) +\am^2 {\cal
1331: K}^{\text{NLO}}({\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z})
1332: \intertext{with a yet unspecified NLO kernel. This is required if
1333: an all orders resummation of quark bubbles is to take the form}
1334: \label{eq:eq:running-coupling-replacement-resummed}
1335: \am {\cal K}^{\text{LO}}({\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z}) \to &\,
1336: \alpha_s(f({\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z})) {\cal K}^{\text{LO}}({\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z})
1337: \end{align}
1338: inside the coordinate integrals of the JIMWLK Hamiltonian and if the pattern
1339: of real virtual cancellation (and thus probability conservation) be
1340: maintained beyond the leading order. The sum of real and virtual
1341: contributions in the above is not of this form; there is no common NLO
1342: kernel in both terms. Not even the divergent contributions (traceable by the
1343: $\mu$-dependence of the transverse logarithms) in Eqs.~\eqref{K29}
1344: and~\eqref{K3old} coincide. This is related to the second issue:
1345: \item The new term, Eq.~(\ref{eq:JIMWLK-NLO-from-A}), contains UV
1346: divergent contributions where $|{\bm z}_{12}|$, the separation of
1347: quark and antiquark, reaches the UV cutoff. To extract the UV
1348: divergence, which is driven by scales much larger than the
1349: saturation scale $Q_s$, the $U$-dependent part of the quark loop,
1350: the factor $2\,\text{tr}( t^b U_{{\bm z}_1} t^a U_{{\bm
1351: z}_2}^\dagger)$, may be expanded in ${\bm z}_{12}$ around some
1352: fixed base point $\Bar{\bm z}$
1353: \begin{align}
1354: \label{eq:quarkloop-local-expansion}
1355: 2\, \text{tr}( t^b & U_{{\bm z}_1} t^a U_{{\bm
1356: z}_2}^\dagger) = U^{a b}_{\Bar{\bm z}}
1357: \notag \\ &\, +
1358: \left[(\Bar{\bm z}-{\bm z}_1)
1359: \partial_{{\bm z}_1}+(\Bar{\bm z}-{\bm z}_2)
1360: \partial_{{\bm z}_2}\right]
1361: 2\, \text{tr}( t^b U_{{\bm z}_1} t^a U_{{\bm z}_2}^\dagger)\Big\vert_{{\bm
1362: z}_{1,2}
1363: =\Bar{\bm z}}
1364: + \ldots
1365: \end{align}
1366: so that to leading order in this expansion (i.e., keeping the $U^{a
1367: b}_{\Bar{\bm z}}$ term only) the resulting $U$-dependence
1368: of~(\ref{eq:JIMWLK-NLO-from-A}) takes a form similar to that
1369: in~(\ref{eq:JIMWLK-unsubtr-real}). The integral over ${\bm z}_{12}$
1370: may then be carried out and its divergence exposed as illustrated in
1371: Fig.~\ref{fig:finite-div-separation}.
1372: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1373: \begin{figure}[ht]
1374: \centering
1375: \begin{equation*}
1376: \parbox{3cm}{\includegraphics[width=3cm]{LoopInt-quarks-1-firsto}}
1377: =
1378: \underbrace{
1379: \left[
1380: \parbox{3cm}{\includegraphics[width=3cm]{LoopInt-quarks-1-firsto}}-
1381: \parbox{3cm}{\includegraphics[width=3cm]{LoopInt-quarks-1-firsto-subtr}}
1382: \right]}_{\text{UV-finite}}
1383: +\underbrace{
1384: \parbox{3cm}{\includegraphics[width=3cm]{LoopInt-quarks-1-firsto-subtr}}
1385: }_{\text{UV-divergent}}
1386: \end{equation*}
1387: \caption{\em Separating UV-finite and UV-divergent parts of
1388: Fig.~\ref{fig:NLO1}A}
1389: \label{fig:finite-div-separation}
1390: \end{figure}
1391: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1392: [For this to be sufficient it is of course mandatory that only the
1393: leading order in this Taylor expansion contains a UV divergence.]
1394: This divergent contribution must patch up the mismatch between the
1395: real and virtual terms discussed previously. While the divergence is
1396: independent of the choice of base point, the finite terms associated with
1397: the separation shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:finite-div-separation} will
1398: depend on this choice. This will lead to a scheme dependence to be
1399: discussed below.
1400: \end{enumerate}
1401: For the JIMWLK Hamiltonian, we are thus led to consider a term of the form
1402: \begin{align}
1403: \label{eq:JIMWLK-subtraction}
1404: \am^2 \ln(1/x_{\text{Bj}}) \int d^2z_\xi\, d^2z_{12}\ &
1405: {\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}, {\bm y}
1406: ; {\bm z}_1, {\bm z}_2) \ U^{ab}_{\Bar{\bm z}} \,
1407: (i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x}i\nabla^b_{\bm y}
1408: +i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^b_{\bm y})
1409: \hspace{.2cm} U_{{\bm x}_0} \otimes U_{{\bm x}_1}^\dagger
1410: \notag \\ = &
1411: \parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{LoopInt-quarks-1-firsto-subtr}}
1412: + \parbox{2cm}{\includegraphics[width=2cm]{LoopInt-quarks-inst-1-firsto-subtr}}
1413: + \ldots
1414: % = \int d^2z_\xi\, d^2z_{12}\, {\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}, {\bm y}
1415: % ; {\bm z}_1, {\bm z}_2)
1416: % U_{{\bm x}_0}t^a \otimes U_{{\bm
1417: % x}_1}^\dagger t^b \ U^{a b}_{\Bar{\bm z}} \, \ln(1/x_{\text{Bj}}),
1418: \end{align}
1419: which carries the UV divergence of~(\ref{eq:JIMWLK-NLO-from-A}).
1420:
1421: By subtracting this contribution from (\ref{eq:JIMWLK-Nfcontribs}) and
1422: adding it to (\ref{eq:JIMWLK-unsubtr-real}), we shift the UV
1423: divergence from a genuinely and physically new contribution in which a
1424: distinguishable, well separated $q\Bar q$ pair interacts with the
1425: target, to the contribution that is not distinguishable from the
1426: single interacting gluon already present at leading order. While the
1427: logarithmically UV divergent term is uniquely defined, the finite
1428: scale dependent terms under the logarithm are not constrained. This is
1429: the origin of our scheme dependence.
1430:
1431: To be explicit, we make use of~(\ref{prob2}) for our choice of
1432: $\Bar{\bm z}$ and define what we will call the subtraction term in the
1433: gluon scheme\footnote{The concept of an explicit UV subtraction was first
1434: introduced by Balitsky in the calculation of transverse coordinate
1435: space version of NLO BFKL in \cite{Bal:2006}. We thank Ian Balitsky
1436: for communicating it to us in private.}
1437: \begin{align}
1438: \label{eq:H-subtr}
1439: & \Tilde {\cal H}_1^{\text{NLO}} =
1440: \frac{\am^2}{2} \
1441: \Tilde {\cal K}^{\text{NLO}}_{1\ {\bm x}, {\bm y} ; {\bm z}} \
1442: U^{ab}_{{\bm z}} \,
1443: (i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x}i\nabla^b_{\bm y}
1444: +i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^b_{\bm y})
1445: \intertext{where the kernel in the subtraction is calculated with $\Bar{\bm
1446: z}$ placed at the gluon position ${\bm z}$:}
1447: & \Tilde {\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}}({\bm x}, {\bm y}
1448: ; {\bm z}) = \int d^2z_{12}\, {\cal K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}, {\bm y}
1449: ; {\bm z}_1, {\bm z}_2).\label{K1K}
1450: \end{align}
1451: The explicit form of the right hand side of \eq{K1K} was already
1452: obtained in our calculation of the fully virtual corrections in
1453: Sect.~\ref{sec:diagram-c} with the answer given by Eq.~\eqref{K1int5}.
1454: We use it first to define a genuinely UV finite $q\Bar q$ contribution
1455: of the form
1456: \begin{align}
1457: \label{eq:qqbar-subtr-JIMWLK}
1458: % {\cal H}^{\text{NLO}}_{q\Bar q} :=
1459: % {\cal H}_1^{\text{NLO}}-\Tilde {\cal H}_1^{\text{NLO}}
1460: \frac{\am^2}{2}
1461: {\cal K}^{\text{NLO}}_{1\ {\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z}_1, {\bm z}_2}
1462: \ 2\, \tr(t^a U_{{\bm z}_1} t^bU_{{\bm z}_1}^\dagger)
1463: (i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x}i\nabla^b_{\bm y}
1464: +i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^b_{\bm y})
1465: - \frac{\am^2}{2}
1466: \Tilde {\cal K}^{\text{NLO}}_{1\ {\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z}}
1467: \ U_{\bm z}^{a b}
1468: (i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x}i\nabla^b_{\bm y}
1469: +i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^b_{\bm y})\, .
1470: \end{align}
1471: This contribution only is of interest if we wish to go beyond the inclusion of
1472: running coupling corrections to include genuine NLO contributions. While such
1473: a calculation would be interesting and important, it remains beyond the scope
1474: of this paper. Here we note that the term in \eq{eq:qqbar-subtr-JIMWLK} is
1475: UV-finite and vanishes {\em by itself} in the no-interaction limit of $U \to
1476: 1$: This term no longer mixes with the remaining contributions under
1477: probability conservation and --contrary to the unsubtracted contributions-- we
1478: may neglect if we are only interested in the the scale of the running
1479: coupling.
1480:
1481: The remaining contributions now assemble directly into a form that
1482: fulfills all requirements of a running coupling contribution.
1483: Using~\eqref{prob2}, we find that adding~\eqref{eq:H-subtr}
1484: to~\eqref{eq:JIMWLK-unsubtr-real} leaves us with identical kernels
1485: both for real and virtual contributions
1486: \begin{align}
1487: \label{eq:NLO-JIMWLK-kernel}
1488: \am\, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}}({\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z})
1489: -\am^2\,{\cal K}^{\text{NLO}}_3({\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z})
1490: =
1491: \am\, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}}({\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z})
1492: +\am^2\,\left(\Tilde {\cal K}^{\text{NLO}}_1({\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z})
1493: + {\cal K}^{\text{LO}}_2({\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z})\right).
1494: \end{align}
1495: The leading $N_f$ contributions to the running coupling corrections for the
1496: JIMWLK Hamiltonian take a from analogous to~\eqref{eq:JIMWLK-Hamiltonian-LO}
1497: \begin{align}
1498: \label{eq:JIMWLK-Hamiltonian-running-NLO}
1499: \frac{\am}{2}
1500: \left[{\cal K}^{\text{LO}}_{{\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z}}
1501: +\am\left(\Tilde {\cal K}^{\text{LO}}_{1\ {\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z}}
1502: +{\cal K}^{\text{LO}}_{2\ {\bm x}, {\bm y}; {\bm z}}\right)\right]
1503: \left[
1504: \Tilde U_z^{a b}(i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x}i\nabla^b_{\bm y}
1505: +i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^b_{\bm y})
1506: +
1507: ( i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\nabla^a_{\bm y}+i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm y})
1508: \right]
1509: \, .
1510: \end{align}
1511: The equations in the Balitsky hierarchy created with this operator are
1512: finite and unitary for fixed projectile configurations. The
1513: subtraction fully decouples conformal
1514: contributions~\eqref{eq:qqbar-subtr-JIMWLK} and non-conformal
1515: contributions~\eqref{eq:JIMWLK-Hamiltonian-running-NLO} up to the
1516: order $\am^2$ making it feasible to discuss running coupling
1517: corrections independently of the conformal contributions.
1518:
1519:
1520: \subsection{Subtraction for the BK Equation}
1521: \label{sec:subtr-BK}
1522:
1523: The UV subtraction described above for JIMWLK evolution equation can be
1524: translated to the BK framework~\cite{Balitsky:1996ub, Kovchegov:1999yj,
1525: Kovchegov:1999ua} simply by repeating the steps that allow to identify BK as
1526: a limiting case of JIMWLK at the leading order. Here we will instead formulate
1527: the argument again entirely within the BK framework to provide a self contained
1528: discussion. We begin by writing the standard LO BK evolution equation for the
1529: forward amplitude of a quark dipole scattering on a nucleus
1530: \begin{align}\label{N}
1531: N ({\bm x}_0,{\bm x}_1, Y) \, \equiv \, 1 - \frac{1}{N_c} \, \left<
1532: \tr{ \, \left[ U_{{\bm x}_0} \, U_{{\bm x}_1}^\dagger \right]}
1533: \right> (Y),
1534: \end{align}
1535: where $U$'s are from \eq{U}, the transverse coordinates of the quark
1536: and the anti-quark are ${\bm x}_0$ and ${\bm x}_1$, and the dipole's
1537: rapidity is $Y$. The LO BK equation reads
1538: \begin{align}\label{eqN}
1539: \frac{\partial N ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y)}{\partial Y} \, = \,
1540: \frac{\am \, C_F}{\pi^2} \, \int d^2 x_2 \, \frac{x_{01}^2}{x_{20}^2
1541: \, x_{21}^2} \, \left[ N ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_2, Y) + N ({\bm
1542: x}_{2}, {\bm x}_1, Y) - N ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y) \right.
1543: \notag \\ \left. - N ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_2, Y) \, N ({\bm x}_{2},
1544: {\bm x}_1, Y) \right],
1545: \end{align}
1546: where $x_{mn} = |{\bm x}_m - {\bm x}_n|$ and the large-$N_c$ limit is
1547: assumed. Using the LO JIMWLK kernel from \eq{eq:LO-JIMWLK-kernel} we
1548: can define the LO dipole kernel by
1549: \begin{align}\label{KLOBK}
1550: K^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \, C_F \, \sum_{m,n
1551: = 0}^1 \, (-1)^{m+n} \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} & ({\bm x}_m, {\bm x}_n ;
1552: {\bm z}).
1553: \end{align}
1554: The dipole kernel (\ref{KLOBK}) sums up the same diagrams as shown in
1555: \eq{eq:JIMWLK-LO-diagram-cont} for the LO JIMWLK Hamiltonian
1556: \cite{Mueller:1994rr}. Using \eq{KLOBK} we rewrite \eq{eqN} as
1557: \begin{align}\label{eqN2}
1558: \frac{\partial N ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y)}{\partial Y} \, = \,
1559: \am \, \int d^2 x_2 \, K^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
1560: x}_2) \, \left[ N ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_2, Y) + N ({\bm x}_{2},
1561: {\bm x}_1, Y) - N ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y) \right. \notag \\
1562: \left. - N ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_2, Y) \, N ({\bm x}_{2}, {\bm x}_1,
1563: Y) \right].
1564: \end{align}
1565: For the purpose of performing the UV subtraction, it is more
1566: convenient to rewrite \eq{eqN2} in terms of the $S$-matrix
1567: \begin{align}\label{S}
1568: S ({\bm x}_0,{\bm x}_1, Y) \, \equiv \, \frac{1}{N_c} \, \left< \tr{
1569: \, \left[ U_{{\bm x}_0} \, U_{{\bm x}_1}^\dagger \right]}
1570: \right> (Y) \, = \, 1 - N ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y)
1571: \end{align}
1572: obtaining
1573: \begin{align}\label{eqS}
1574: \frac{\partial S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y)}{\partial Y} \, = \,
1575: \am \, \int d^2 x_2 \, K^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
1576: x}_2) \, \left[ S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_2, Y) \, S ({\bm x}_{2},
1577: {\bm x}_1, Y) - S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y) \right].
1578: \end{align}
1579:
1580: Now we are ready to include the NLO corrections calculated in Section
1581: \ref{LObb}. Adding the diagrams in Figs. \ref{fig:NLO1} and
1582: \ref{fig:NLO1_inst} to the LO dipole kernel yields the following
1583: evolution equation
1584: \begin{align}\label{eqS_NLO}
1585: \frac{\partial S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y)}{\partial Y} \, = \,
1586: \am \, \int d^2 x_2 \, K^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
1587: x}_2) \, \left[ S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_2, Y) \, S ({\bm x}_{2},
1588: {\bm x}_1, Y) - S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y) \right] \notag \\ +
1589: \am^2 \, \int d^2 z_1 \, d^2 z_2 \, K_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0,
1590: {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}_1, {\bm z}_2) \, S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm z}_1, Y)
1591: \, S ({\bm z}_{2}, {\bm x}_1, Y) \notag \\ + \, \am^2 \, \int d^2
1592: x_2 \, K_2^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm x}_2) \, S
1593: ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_2, Y) \, S ({\bm x}_{2}, {\bm x}_1, Y) \notag
1594: \\ + \, \am^2 \, \int d^2 x_2 \, K_3^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm
1595: x}_1 ; {\bm x}_2) \, S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y).
1596: \end{align}
1597: Similar to the JIMWLK case we notice that while kernels
1598: $K_2^{\text{NLO}}$ and $K_3^{\text{NLO}}$ appear as higher order
1599: corrections to the leading order BK kernel $K^{\text{LO}}$ having the
1600: same transverse coordinate dependence, the kernel $K_1^{\text{NLO}}$
1601: stands out. It includes integrals over two transverse vectors, ${\bm
1602: z}_1$ and ${\bm z}_2$, instead of one. Since the shape of the
1603: leading kernel $K^{\text{LO}}$ in not preserved in $K_1^{\text{NLO}}$
1604: and as we are looking for running coupling corrections to
1605: $K^{\text{LO}}$, one may naively discard $K_1^{\text{NLO}}$ as not
1606: giving any running coupling contribution. However, before we embark on
1607: extracting the running coupling corrections, let us formulate general
1608: rules for such corrections. Similar to the JIMWLK case we require the
1609: following:
1610: \begin{itemize}
1611: \item {\sl Unitarity}: as \eq{eqS} gives an explicitly unitary
1612: solution for $S$, i.e., as rapidity $Y \rightarrow \infty$ then $S
1613: \rightarrow 0$, we require the running coupling corrections to
1614: preserve this unitarity property. This requirement is satisfied as
1615: long as the right hand side of the evolution equation has only terms
1616: containing powers of $S$.
1617:
1618: \item {\sl No interaction --- no evolution condition}: we require that
1619: in the absence of interaction the right hand side of the resulting
1620: evolution equation should become $0$ when $S=1$ is inserted there.
1621: This condition is easily satisfied in the standard Feynman
1622: perturbation theory where the non-interacting graphs are zero. In
1623: the light cone perturbation theory (LCPT) the non-interacting
1624: diagrams are not zero, which allows us to define and calculate light
1625: cone wave functions. Because of that it is a little harder to show
1626: in LCPT that in the absence of interactions all diagrams for the
1627: amplitude (not to be confused with the wave function) cancel. For
1628: instance, the {\sl no interaction --- no evolution} condition is
1629: satisfied by \eq{eqS_NLO}: if we put $S=1$ on its right hand side we
1630: will get zero due to the condition in \eq{prob2}. We want this
1631: property to be preserved after running coupling corrections are
1632: included.
1633: \end{itemize}
1634:
1635: From the above conditions one can see that simply discarding
1636: $K_1^{\text{NLO}}$ from the right hand side of \eq{eqS_NLO} would not
1637: work: while the equation obtained this way would satisfy the unitarity
1638: condition, it would not satisfy the second condition stated above,
1639: since, for $S=1$ we will not get zero on the right hand side anymore.
1640: What strengthens the case for keeping a part of $K_1^{\text{NLO}}$ is
1641: that it contains a UV divergence, as can be seen from \eq{K1int5},
1642: which may contribute to the running of the coupling constant. Kernels
1643: $K_2^{\text{NLO}}$ and $K_3^{\text{NLO}}$ also contain UV divergences,
1644: which need to be canceled by the divergence in $K_1^{\text{NLO}}$ as
1645: follows from \eq{prob2}. Without $K_1^{\text{NLO}}$ the right hand
1646: side of \eq{eqS_NLO} would become infinite. Therefore, to keep the
1647: right hand side of the resulting evolution equation finite, and in
1648: order to satisfy the second one of the above conditions, we propose
1649: the subtraction illustrated in \fig{fig:BKsubtr}.
1650: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1651: \begin{figure}[ht]
1652: \centering
1653: \begin{equation*}
1654: \parbox{3cm}{\includegraphics[width=3cm]{LoopInt-quarks-1-dipole}}
1655: =
1656: \underbrace{
1657: \left[
1658: \parbox{3cm}{\includegraphics[width=3cm]{LoopInt-quarks-1-dipole}}-
1659: \parbox{3cm}{\includegraphics[width=3cm]{LoopInt-quarks-1-dipole-subtr}}
1660: \right]}_{\text{UV-finite}}
1661: +\underbrace{
1662: \parbox{3cm}{\includegraphics[width=3cm]{LoopInt-quarks-1-dipole-subtr}}
1663: }_{\text{UV-divergent}}
1664: \end{equation*}
1665: \caption{\em Separating UV-finite and UV-divergent parts of
1666: the kernel $K_1^{\text{NLO}}$ in the NLO BK evolution. The ovals
1667: denote color dipoles. }
1668: \label{fig:BKsubtr}
1669: \end{figure}
1670: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1671:
1672: Formally we write
1673: \begin{align}\label{K1subtr}
1674: \int d^2 z_1 \, d^2 z_2 \, K_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ;
1675: {\bm z}_1, {\bm z}_2) \, S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm z}_1, Y) \, S ({\bm
1676: z}_{2}, {\bm x}_1, Y) \notag \\ \, = \, \int d^2 z \, d^2 z_{12}
1677: \, K_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}_{1}, {\bm z}_2)
1678: \, \left[ S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm z}_1, Y) \, S ({\bm z}_{2}, {\bm
1679: x}_1, Y) - S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm z}, Y) \, S ({\bm z}, {\bm x}_1,
1680: Y) \right. \notag \\ + \, \left. S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm z}, Y) \, S
1681: ({\bm z}, {\bm x}_1, Y) \right],
1682: \end{align}
1683: where $\bm z$ is the position of the virtual gluon in \fig{fig:NLO1}A
1684: defined in \eq{z}.\footnote{Indeed as $\bm z$ from \eq{z} depends on
1685: the longitudinal momentum fraction of the quark $\alpha$, switching
1686: from ${\bm z}_1$ and ${\bm z}_2$ to ${\bm z}_{12}$ and $\bm z$
1687: implies a change in the $\alpha$-integral in $K_1^{\text{NLO}}$.
1688: However, since above we have used ${\bm z}_{12}$ and $\bm z$ vectors
1689: everywhere, no changes apply to our earlier results.} Now the first
1690: two terms in the square brackets on the right hand side of
1691: \eq{K1subtr} give a UV-finite result, as shown in \fig{fig:BKsubtr},
1692: which goes to zero both for $S=0$ and $S=1$. These terms combined do
1693: not have a UV-divergence and do not contribute to the running coupling
1694: constant. They give a non-running coupling NLO BK evolution piece and
1695: we will discard them here. The last term on the right hand side of
1696: \eq{K1subtr} we will keep. Similar to the JIMWLK case we define the
1697: subtraction kernel by
1698: \begin{align}\label{K1sub}
1699: {\tilde K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, \equiv
1700: \, \int d^2 z_{12} \, K_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
1701: z}_{1}, {\bm z}_2).
1702: \end{align}
1703: An explicit form of ${\tilde K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ;
1704: {\bm z})$ can be found using Eqs. (\ref{K1int5}) and (\ref{K1BK}).
1705: With the help of the definition in \eq{K1sub} we rewrite the last term
1706: in \eq{K1subtr} as
1707: \begin{align}
1708: \int d^2 x_2 \, {\tilde K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ;
1709: {\bm x}_2) \, S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_2, Y) \, S ({\bm x}_{2}, {\bm
1710: x}_1, Y).
1711: \end{align}
1712: Keeping only this term in kernel $K_1^{\text{NLO}}$ modifies
1713: \eq{eqS_NLO} to give
1714: \begin{align}\label{eqS_NLO_sub1}
1715: \frac{\partial S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y)}{\partial Y} \, = \,
1716: \am \, \int d^2 x_2 \, K^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
1717: x}_2) \, \left[ S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_2, Y) \, S ({\bm x}_{2},
1718: {\bm x}_1, Y) - S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y) \right] %\displaybreak[0]
1719: \notag \\ +
1720: \am^2 \, \int d^2 x_2 \, {\tilde K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0,
1721: {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm x}_2) \, S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_2, Y)
1722: \, S ({\bm x}_{2}, {\bm x}_1, Y) \notag \\ + \, \am^2 \, \int d^2
1723: x_2 \, K_2^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm x}_2) \, S
1724: ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_2, Y) \, S ({\bm x}_{2}, {\bm x}_1, Y) \notag
1725: \\ + \, \am^2 \, \int d^2 x_2 \, K_3^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm
1726: x}_1 ; {\bm x}_2) \, S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y).
1727: \end{align}
1728: Using \eq{prob2} we rewrite \eq{eqS_NLO_sub1} as
1729: \begin{align}\label{eqS_NLO_sub}
1730: \frac{\partial S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y)}{\partial Y} \, = \,
1731: \int d^2 x_2 \, \left[ \am \, K^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ;
1732: {\bm x}_2) + \am^2 \, {\tilde K}_1^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm
1733: x}_1 ; {\bm x}_2) + \am^2 \, K_2^{\text{NLO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm
1734: x}_1 ; {\bm x}_2) \right] \notag \\ \times \, \left[ S ({\bm
1735: x}_{0}, {\bm x}_2, Y) \, S ({\bm x}_{2}, {\bm x}_1, Y) - S ({\bm
1736: x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y) \right].
1737: \end{align}
1738: \eq{eqS_NLO_sub} obeys both of the conditions stated above: its right
1739: hand side is zero at both $S=0$ and $S=1$. Moreover the right hand
1740: side of \eq{eqS_NLO_sub} is UV finite, which is essential for
1741: obtaining a meaningful result. The kernels ${\tilde K}_1^{\text{NLO}}$
1742: and $K_2^{\text{NLO}}$ both look like corrections to the LO kernel. In
1743: the following, when we study fermion bubble insertions to all orders,
1744: we will use the format of \eq{eqS_NLO_sub} to systematically include
1745: their contributions into the running of the coupling constant.
1746:
1747: The choice of subtracting and adding $S ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm z}, Y) \, S
1748: ({\bm z}, {\bm x}_1, Y)$ depending on gluon's position $\bm z$ in
1749: \eq{K1subtr} is indeed quite arbitrary. For instance, one can use
1750: ${\bm z}_1$ or ${\bm z}_2$ (or any other linear combination of the two
1751: vectors ${\bm z}_1$ and ${\bm z}_2$) in place of ${\bm
1752: z}$.\footnote{We thank Ian Balitsky for helping us to reach this
1753: conclusion.} We can not find any argument or criterion which would
1754: prefer one choice of the ``subtraction point'' over the other. We
1755: choose $\bm z$ as our ``subtraction point'' since it appears to be
1756: convenient and goes along the lines of calculating $K_3^{\text{NLO}}$
1757: in \eq{K1int5}. This choice appears to also be preferred by the
1758: dispersive method of calculating the running coupling correction to
1759: small-$x$ evolution used in \cite{Gardi:2006}. Indeed the uncertainty
1760: in selecting the ``subtraction point'' does not affect our ability to
1761: extract the UV divergent part of $K_1^{\text{NLO}}$. However, it may
1762: change the scale $R$ under the logarithm in \eq{K1int5}, resulting in
1763: a different scale for the running coupling constant. We believe that
1764: the modification of the running coupling scale due to varying the
1765: ``subtraction point'' will be numerically insignificant: however, a
1766: detailed study of this question is left for further investigations.
1767: Here we will refer to this dependence of the running coupling scale on
1768: the ``subtraction point'' as of some sort of a scheme dependence for
1769: the running coupling constant.
1770:
1771: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1772:
1773:
1774: %\subsection{Scheme Dependence due to Subtractions}
1775:
1776:
1777: %Unitarity for fixed configurations manifests itself in the limit of
1778: %vanishing correlators $\langle U^{(\dagger)}_{{\bm x}_1} \otimes
1779: %\cdots \otimes U^{(\dagger)}_{{\bm x}_n}\rangle\to 0$ as the
1780: %requirement that also there evolution ceases and the r.h.s. of the
1781: %evolution equation for any correlator vanishes. {\bf does not seem to
1782: % pose any restriction on the S level -- this should be an argument on
1783: % the N-level. What did I have there earlier?}
1784:
1785:
1786: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1787:
1788: \newpage
1789:
1790: \section{Resummation of Bubbles to All Orders: Setting the Scale for the
1791: Running Coupling Constant}
1792: \label{all_orders}
1793:
1794: Now we are ready to resum all powers of $\as \, N_f$ corrections in
1795: the JIMWLK and BK evolution kernels. To accomplish that one has to
1796: insert infinite chains of gluon bubbles onto the gluon lines in Figs.
1797: \ref{fig:NLO1} and \ref{fig:NLO1_inst}. An example of corresponding
1798: higher-order diagrams is shown in Figs. \ref{fig:NLO_all} and
1799: \ref{fig:NLO_inst}.
1800:
1801: \begin{figure}[htbp]
1802: \centering
1803: \begin{minipage}{5.2cm}
1804: \centering
1805: \includegraphics[width=5.2cm]{LoopInt-quarks-1-special-color}\\
1806: A
1807: \end{minipage}
1808: \begin{minipage}{5.2cm}
1809: \centering
1810: \includegraphics[width=5.2cm]{LoopInt-glue-1}
1811: \\ B
1812: \end{minipage}
1813: \begin{minipage}{5.2cm}
1814: \centering
1815: \includegraphics[width=5.2cm]{LoopNonInt-up-to-1}
1816: \\ C
1817: \end{minipage}
1818: \caption{\em Diagrams giving the higher order $\as N_f$ corrections
1819: to the kernels of JIMWLK and BK small-$x$ evolution equations. To
1820: get the all-order $\as N_f$ contribution one has to sum an
1821: infinite series of quark bubble insertions. }
1822: \label{fig:NLO_all}
1823: \end{figure}
1824:
1825: \begin{figure}[htbp]
1826: \centering
1827: \begin{minipage}{5.2cm}
1828: \centering
1829: \includegraphics[width=5.2cm]{LoopInt-quarks-inst-1}\\
1830: A$^\prime$
1831: \end{minipage}
1832: \hspace{5.2cm}
1833: \begin{minipage}{5.2cm}
1834: \centering
1835: \includegraphics[width=5.2cm]{LoopNonInt-up-to-inst-1}
1836: \\ C$^\prime$
1837: \end{minipage}
1838: \caption{\em Diagrams giving the higher order $\as N_f$ corrections
1839: to the kernels of JIMWLK and BK small-$x$ evolution equations
1840: containing instantaneous gluon lines. Again, to get the all-order
1841: $\as N_f$ contribution one has to sum an infinite series of quark
1842: bubble insertions. }
1843: \label{fig:NLO_inst}
1844: \end{figure}
1845:
1846: An explicit calculation using the rules of light-cone perturbation
1847: theory \cite{Lepage:1980fj,Brodsky:1997de} shows that inserting
1848: all-order quark bubbles on the gluon lines generates geometric series
1849: in momentum space. Before calculating the diagrams in Figs.
1850: \ref{fig:NLO_all} and \ref{fig:NLO_inst} we remember that, as was
1851: discussed above, in order to find the running coupling correction,
1852: instead of the diagram in Figs. \ref{fig:NLO_all}A and
1853: \ref{fig:NLO_inst}A$^\prime$ we should consider the ``subtraction''
1854: diagrams A and A$^\prime$ shown in \fig{fig:NLO_A}.
1855:
1856: \begin{figure}[htbp]
1857: \centering
1858: \begin{minipage}{5.2cm}
1859: \centering
1860: \includegraphics[width=5.2cm]{LoopInt-quarks-1-subtr} \\
1861: A
1862: \end{minipage}
1863: \hspace{3cm}
1864: \begin{minipage}{5.2cm}
1865: \centering
1866: \includegraphics[width=5.2cm]{LoopInt-quarks-inst-1-subtr} \\
1867: A$^\prime$
1868: \end{minipage}
1869: \caption{\em The ``subtraction'' diagrams which should be considered
1870: in place of the diagrams in Figs. \ref{fig:NLO_all} A and
1871: \ref{fig:NLO_inst} A$^\prime$ for the running coupling scale
1872: calculations.}
1873: \label{fig:NLO_A}
1874: \end{figure}
1875:
1876: By an explicit calculation, similar to the calculation of a single
1877: bubble insertion which led to \eq{K26}, one can show that the
1878: contribution of the ``dressed'' subtraction diagrams A and A$^\prime$
1879: in \fig{fig:NLO_A} to the JIMWLK kernel reads
1880: \begin{align}\label{K1sdr}
1881: \am^2 \, {\tilde {\cal K}}_{\oone} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z})
1882: \, = \, 4 \, \am^2 \, \beta_2 \, \int \frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2}
1883: \frac{d^2 q'}{(2\pi)^2} \ e^{ -i {\bm q}\cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_0) +i
1884: {\bm q}' \cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_1) } \notag \\ \times \, \Bigg\{
1885: \frac{{\bm q} \cdot {\bm q}'}{{\bm q}^2{\bm q}'^{2}} \, \frac{{\bm
1886: q}^{2} \, \ln \frac{{\bm q}^2 \,
1887: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} - {\bm q}'^{2} \, \ln
1888: \frac{{\bm q}'^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} }{{\bm q}^{2}
1889: - {\bm q}'^{2}} - \frac{\ln ({\bm q}^{2}/{\bm q}'^{2})}{{\bm
1890: q}^{2} - {\bm q}'^{2}} \Bigg\} \notag \\ \times \,
1891: \frac{1}{\left( 1 + \am \beta_2 \ln \frac{{\bm q}^2 \,
1892: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) \, \left( 1 + \am
1893: \beta_2 \ln \frac{{\bm q}'^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
1894: \right)},
1895: \end{align}
1896: where we have also replaced all factors of $N_f$ by $- 6 \, \pi \,
1897: \beta_2$. Similarly, the contribution of the ``dressed'' diagram in
1898: \fig{fig:NLO_all} B is obtained by iterating the quark bubbles from
1899: \eq{K26} on both sides of the cut. The series of bubbles on each side
1900: of the cut generates a geometric series. The zeroth-order term in this
1901: series is the leading order JIMWLK kernel. The first-order term in the
1902: series is given by $K_2^{\text{NLO}}$ in \eq{K29}. It is therefore
1903: more convenient to write down the {\sl sum} of the LO JIMWLK kernel
1904: and the contribution of the diagram in \fig{fig:NLO_all} B. The result
1905: is
1906: \begin{align}\label{K2dr}
1907: \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) + \am^2
1908: \, {\cal K}_{\otwo} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ;
1909: {\bm z}) \, = \, 4 \, \am \, \int \frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{d^2
1910: q'}{(2\pi)^2} \ e^{ -i {\bm q}\cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_0) +i {\bm
1911: q}' \cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_1) } \,
1912: \frac{{\bm q} \cdot {\bm q}'}{{\bm q}^2{\bm q}'^{2}} \notag \\
1913: \times \, \frac{1}{\left( 1 + \am \beta_2 \ln \frac{{\bm q}^2 \,
1914: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) \, \left( 1 + \am
1915: \beta_2 \ln \frac{{\bm q}'^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
1916: \right)}.
1917: \end{align}
1918: The contribution to the virtual part of the JIMWLK or BK kernels is
1919: given by the diagrams in Figs. \ref{fig:NLO_all}C and
1920: \ref{fig:NLO_inst}C$^\prime$. It can be easily extracted from Eqs.
1921: (\ref{K1sdr}) and (\ref{K2dr}) using the condition (\ref{prob}) which
1922: holds to all orders in quark bubbles. The resulting virtual kernel
1923: would be equal to the real kernel as was explained above and shown in
1924: Eqs. (\ref{eq:JIMWLK-Hamiltonian-running-NLO}) and
1925: (\ref{eqS_NLO_sub}). The dispersive method of \cite{Gardi:2006}, which
1926: was used there to calculate Figs. \ref{fig:NLO_all}C and
1927: \ref{fig:NLO_inst}C$^\prime$, can also be used to obtain \eq{K2dr},
1928: and, by employing the probability conservation condition
1929: (\ref{prob2}), to recover \eq{K1sdr} as well.
1930:
1931:
1932: Before proceeding to evaluate the kernels in Eqs. (\ref{K1sdr}) and
1933: (\ref{K2dr}) let us first analyze their dependence on the UV cutoff
1934: $\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}$. This is instructive because the cutoff is
1935: indeed a constant and therefore $\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}$-dependence does
1936: not get modified by the Fourier transform. Hence the
1937: $\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}$-dependence of the kernel is the same in
1938: transverse coordinate and momentum spaces. Keeping only $\am$,
1939: $\beta_2$ and $\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}$ we thus write
1940: \begin{align}\label{K1simpl}
1941: \am^2 \, {\tilde {\cal K}}_{\oone} \, \propto \, \frac{-
1942: \am^2 \, \beta_2 \, \ln \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}{ (1 - \am \beta_2
1943: \ln {\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2})^2}
1944: \end{align}
1945: and
1946: \begin{align}\label{K2simpl}
1947: \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} + \am^2 \, {\cal K}_{\otwo} \,
1948: \propto \, \frac{\am}{ (1 - \am \beta_2 \ln
1949: {\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2})^2}.
1950: \end{align}
1951: From \eq{K2simpl} we immediately see that the sum of the LO kernel and
1952: the diagram in \fig{fig:NLO_all}B does not give us a renormalizable
1953: quantity, as it can not be expressed in terms of the renormalized
1954: coupling constant. It lacks a power of $\am$ to give us a square of
1955: the physical coupling $\as^2$. Now the need of extracting the UV
1956: divergence from the graph in \fig{fig:NLO_all}A becomes manifest.
1957: Adding the ``subtraction'' term (\ref{K1simpl}) to
1958: (\ref{K2simpl}) yields
1959: \begin{align}\label{Ksimpl}
1960: \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} + \am^2 \, {\cal K}_{\otwo} +
1961: \am^2 \, {\tilde {\cal K}}_{\oone}\, \propto \, \frac{\am \,
1962: (1 - \am \beta_2 \ln {\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2})}{ (1 - \am \beta_2
1963: \ln {\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2})^2} \, \propto \, \frac{\as \,
1964: \as}{\as} ,
1965: \end{align}
1966: which is indeed renormalizable as it can be expressed in terms of the
1967: physical coupling $\as$. (We have left a factor of $\as$ both in the
1968: numerator and in the denominator of \eq{Ksimpl} on purpose to
1969: underline the fact that the arguments of all three couplings, which we
1970: did not keep, may be different, which would prohibit the
1971: cancellation.)
1972:
1973: The sum of the kernels in Eqs. (\ref{K1sdr}) and (\ref{K2dr}) gives
1974: the all-order in $\as \, N_f$ (or $\as \, \beta_2$) contribution to
1975: the running-coupling part of the real JIMWLK kernel:
1976: \begin{align}\label{Kall1}
1977: \am \, & {\cal K}_{\text{rc}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \,
1978: \equiv \, \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
1979: z}) + \am^2 \, {\cal K}_{\bigcirc \hspace{-2.2mm} 2} ({\bm x}_0,
1980: {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z})+ \am^2 \, {\tilde {\cal K}}_{\bigcirc
1981: \hspace{-2.2mm} 1} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \notag \\
1982: & = \, 4 \, \int \frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{d^2 q'}{(2\pi)^2} \
1983: e^{ -i {\bm q}\cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_0) +i {\bm q}' \cdot ({\bm
1984: z}-{\bm x}_1) } \, \frac{{\bm q} \cdot {\bm q}'}{{\bm q}^2 \,
1985: {\bm q}'^{2}} \, \frac{ \am \, \left( 1 + \am \beta_2 \, \ln
1986: \frac{Q^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}\right)}{ \left( 1
1987: + \am \beta_2 \ln \frac{{\bm q}^2 \,
1988: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) \, \left( 1 + \am
1989: \beta_2 \ln \frac{{\bm q}'^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
1990: \right)}
1991: \end{align}
1992: where we have defined a momentum scale $Q$ by
1993: \begin{align}\label{Q}
1994: \ln \frac{Q^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \, \equiv \,
1995: \frac{{\bm q}^{2} \, \ln \frac{{\bm q}^2 \,
1996: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} - {\bm q}'^{2} \, \ln
1997: \frac{{\bm q}'^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} }{{\bm q}^{2}
1998: - {\bm q}'^{2}} - \frac{{\bm q}^2 \, {\bm q}'^{2}}{{\bm q} \cdot
1999: {\bm q}'} \, \frac{\ln ({\bm q}^{2}/{\bm q}'^{2})}{{\bm q}^{2} -
2000: {\bm q}'^{2}}.
2001: \end{align}
2002: (Indeed $Q^2$ is independent of $\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}$ as can be easily
2003: seen from \eq{Q}.) As the one-loop running coupling constant is
2004: defined in the $\overline{{\text{MS}}}$ scheme by
2005: \begin{align}
2006: \as (Q^2) \, = \, \frac{\am}{ 1 + \am \beta_2 \, \ln
2007: \frac{Q^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}}
2008: \end{align}
2009: \eq{Kall1} can be rewritten as
2010: \begin{align}\label{Kall}
2011: \am \, & {\cal K}_{\text{rc}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \,
2012: \equiv \, \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
2013: z}) + \am^2 \, {\cal K}_{\bigcirc \hspace{-2.2mm} 2} ({\bm x}_0,
2014: {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z})+ \am^2 \, {\tilde {\cal K}}_{\bigcirc
2015: \hspace{-2.2mm} 1} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \notag \\
2016: & = \, 4 \, \int \frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{d^2 q'}{(2\pi)^2} \
2017: e^{ -i {\bm q}\cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_0) +i {\bm q}' \cdot ({\bm
2018: z}-{\bm x}_1) } \, \frac{{\bm q} \cdot {\bm q}'}{{\bm q}^2 \,
2019: {\bm q}'^{2}} \, \frac{ \as
2020: \left({\bm q}^2 \, e^{-5/3} \right) \, \as \left({\bm q}'^2 \,
2021: e^{-5/3} \right)}{ \as \left(Q^2 \, e^{-5/3} \right)}
2022: \ .
2023: \end{align}
2024: \eq{Kall} is {\sl the first of the two main results of our paper}. It
2025: gives the JIMWLK kernel with the running coupling corrections included
2026: in transverse momentum space. Remarkably, the corrections come in as a
2027: ``triumvirate'' of the couplings,\footnote{We note that a similar
2028: structure containing three coupling constants has been obtained
2029: independently by Balitsky~\cite{Bal:2006}. Our difference
2030: from~\cite{Bal:2006} appears to be due to %(i)
2031: a different choice of the ``subtraction point''.
2032: %and (ii) a different interpretation of
2033: % what constitutes a running coupling correction: here the running
2034: % coupling corrections multiply the LO JIMWLK kernel, while
2035: % in~\cite{Bal:2006} they are defined as multiplying the LO BK kernel.
2036: } instead of a single coupling constant with some momentum scale!
2037: Despite the surprising form this result is in full agreement with the
2038: expressions found in\cite{Gardi:2006}. To facilitate comparison, we
2039: give a detailed translation in
2040: appendix.~\ref{sec:comparison-with-dispersive}
2041:
2042: This provides for an interesting mechanism to reduce the above result to a
2043: simpler underlying structure expected for the purely virtual contributions of
2044: diagrams Fig.~\ref{fig:NLO_all} C and~\ref{fig:NLO_inst} C': There the $z$
2045: integral may be performed and, in the absence of interaction with the target,
2046: this sets ${\bm q}'={\bm q}$. Then the {\em sum} of the integrands of
2047: transverse and longitudinal contributions reduces to
2048: \begin{align}
2049: \label{eq:mom-sum-trans-long-virt}
2050: \am\, \frac{\frac1{\bm q^2}\left\{1
2051: +\am \beta_2\, \left[
2052: 1+\ln\left(\frac{{\bm q}^2\,e^{-\frac53}}{\mu^2_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}}
2053: \right)\right]\right\}
2054: % \right]
2055: -\frac1{\bm q^2} \am \beta_2
2056: }{
2057: \left(1+\beta_2\am\,
2058: \ln\left(\frac{{\bm q}^2\,e^{-\frac53}}{\mu^2_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}}
2059: \right)\right)^2
2060: }
2061: =\frac1{\bm q^2}\ \alpha_s\left({\bm q}^2\,e^{-\frac53}\right)
2062: \end{align}
2063: which clearly corresponds to the exchange of a dressed noninteracting gluon.
2064: This is the counterpart of a cancellation that appears in~\cite{Gardi:2006}
2065: under the same premise. Note that due to the virtual nature of the diagrams in
2066: Figs.~\ref{fig:NLO_all} C and~\ref{fig:NLO_inst} C' the running coupling
2067: corrections can enter only with the sole available transverse momentum scale
2068: ${\bm q}^2$ in its argument, as shown in \eq{eq:mom-sum-trans-long-virt}.
2069: Therefore, while different subtraction procedures may yield different
2070: expressions for the scale $Q$, as compared to \eq{Q}, all of these
2071: alternatives must lead to expressions for $Q^2$ that approach ${\bm q}^2$ in
2072: the limit when ${\bm q}'={\bm q}$. This would reduce the ``triumvirate'' of
2073: couplings from \eq{Kall} to the single coupling shown in
2074: \eq{eq:mom-sum-trans-long-virt}, as expected for virtual diagrams here.
2075:
2076:
2077: The most intriguing property, however, is that the
2078: ``triumvirate'' structure of~(\ref{Kall}) solves the puzzle of how to
2079: successfully perform a BLM scale setting: In~\cite{Gardi:2006} it was observed
2080: that an attempt to perform a BLM scale setting in a perturbative formulation
2081: with a single Borel parameter (corresponding to an approximation in terms of a
2082: single geometric series in our present language) would not lead to a successful
2083: resummation of the dominant contribution. From the present perspective this
2084: would correspond to the attempt to use the joint leading order expansion of
2085: all three couplings in~(\ref{Kall}) to determine a {\em single} scale (instead
2086: of the three separate ones of~(\ref{Kall})) that would give a good
2087: approximation to the triumvirate in terms of a {\em single} geometric series.
2088: Any such attempt would necessarily entail an artificial all orders iteration
2089: of the ``numerator logarithms'' encoded in the ``denominator coupling''
2090: $\alpha_s(Q^2 e^{-\frac53})$ that is clearly absent in the underlying
2091: expression. This is the source of the spurious and divergent higher inverse
2092: powers of ${\bm q}\cdot{\bm q}'$ or $(\bm x_0-\bm z)\cdot(\bm x_1-\bm z)$
2093: encountered in a naive attempt of deriving a BLM approximation
2094: in~\cite{Gardi:2006}. The ``triumvirate'' structure will allow for a
2095: successful and transparent BLM approximation of the full coordinate result
2096: given in~\cite{Gardi:2006}.
2097:
2098:
2099: \eq{Kall} allows one to find the
2100: corresponding BK evolution kernel with the running coupling
2101: corrections included by using
2102: \begin{align}\label{KrcBK}
2103: K_{\text{rc}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \, C_F \,
2104: \sum_{m,n = 0}^1 \, (-1)^{m+n} \, {\cal K}_\text{rc} & ({\bm x}_m,
2105: {\bm x}_n ; {\bm z}).
2106: \end{align}
2107:
2108: To determine the scales of the three physical couplings in \eq{Kall} in
2109: transverse coordinate space we have to evaluate the integrations in the
2110: kernels from Eqs. (\ref{K1sdr}) and (\ref{K2dr}). In transverse momentum
2111: space each chain of bubbles generates a geometric series, as shown in
2112: \eq{Kall1}. However, a Fourier-transform of these series is dangerous for
2113: several reasons. First and foremost the integrals over ${\bm q}$ and ${\bm
2114: q}'$ in Eqs. (\ref{K1sdr}) and (\ref{K2dr}) include contributions from the
2115: Landau poles leading to power corrections which are not under perturbative
2116: control. The uncertainties due to power corrections are estimated in
2117: \cite{Gardi:2006} using renormalon techniques
2118: \cite{Beneke:1998ui,Mueller:1992xz}. Our strategy here is to ignore these
2119: contributions concentrating on setting the scale of the running coupling in
2120: transverse coordinate space. Even then our goal is difficult, since, even
2121: though leading powers of $\ln \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2$ terms generate a
2122: geometric series in transverse coordinate space just like in the momentum
2123: space, it is not clear whether the transverse coordinate scale under the
2124: logarithm stays the same in all the terms in the series. In that sense,
2125: setting the running coupling scale in transverse coordinate space will only be
2126: an approximation of the more exact \eq{Kall} in the sense of a BLM scale
2127: setting.
2128:
2129: To study running coupling corrections in transverse coordinate space
2130: we begin by evaluating the Fourier transforms in \eq{K2dr}. Similar to
2131: Appendix \ref{K1FT} we perform the angular integrals first to write
2132: \begin{align}\label{K2dr2}
2133: \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) + \am^2
2134: \, {\cal K}_{\otwo} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \,
2135: \frac{\am}{\pi^2} \, \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|}
2136: \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|} \notag \\
2137: \times \, \int\limits_0^\infty dq \, dq' \, J_1 (q \, |{\bm z}-{\bm
2138: x}_0|) \, J_1 (q' \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|) \, \frac{1}{\left( 1 +
2139: \am \beta_2 \ln \frac{q^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2140: \right) \, \left( 1 + \am \beta_2 \ln \frac{q'^2 \,
2141: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right)}
2142: \end{align}
2143: with $q = |{\bm q}|$ and $q' = |{\bm q}'|$. Since our goal is to find
2144: the scale of the strong coupling constant ignoring the power
2145: corrections we can expand the denominators of \eq{K2dr2} into
2146: geometric series obtaining
2147: \begin{align}\label{K2dr3}
2148: \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) + \am^2
2149: \, {\cal K}_{\otwo} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \,
2150: \frac{\am}{\pi^2} \, \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|}
2151: \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|} \,
2152: \sum\limits_{n,m=0}^\infty \, (- \am \beta_2)^{n+m} \notag \\
2153: \times \, \int\limits_0^\infty dq \, dq' \, J_1 (q \, |{\bm z}-{\bm
2154: x}_0|) \, J_1 (q' \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|) \ln^n \frac{q^2 \,
2155: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \, \ln^m \frac{q'^2 \,
2156: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}.
2157: \end{align}
2158: Rewriting the powers of the logarithms in \eq{K2dr3} in terms of
2159: derivatives yields
2160: \begin{align}\label{K2dr4}
2161: \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) + \am^2
2162: \, {\cal K}_{\otwo} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = \,
2163: \frac{\am}{\pi^2} \, \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|}
2164: \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|} \,
2165: \sum\limits_{n,m=0}^\infty \, (- \am \beta_2)^{n+m} \notag \\
2166: \times \, \frac{d^n}{d \lambda^n} \, \frac{d^m}{d \lambda'^m} \,
2167: \int\limits_0^\infty dq \, dq' \, J_1 (q \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|) \,
2168: J_1 (q' \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|) \left( \frac{q^2 \,
2169: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right)^\lambda \, \left(
2170: \frac{q'^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right)^{\lambda'}
2171: \Bigg|_{\lambda, \lambda' =0}.
2172: \end{align}
2173: Performing the $q$- and $q'$-integrals gives
2174: \begin{align}\label{K2dr5}
2175: \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) + \am^2
2176: \, {\cal K}_{\otwo} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = &
2177: \, \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \,
2178: \sum\limits_{n,m=0}^\infty \, (- \am \beta_2)^{n+m} \notag \\
2179: \times \left\{ \frac{d^n}{d \lambda^n} \left[ \left( \frac{4 \,
2180: e^{-5/3}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2181: \right)^\lambda \frac{\Gamma (1+\lambda)}{\Gamma (1 - \lambda)}
2182: \right] \right\} \Bigg|_{\lambda =0} & \left\{ \frac{d^m}{d
2183: \lambda^m} \left[ \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm
2184: x}_1|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right)^{\lambda'}
2185: \frac{\Gamma (1+\lambda')}{\Gamma (1 - \lambda')} \right]
2186: \right\} \Bigg|_{\lambda' =0}.
2187: \end{align}
2188: Differentiating with respect to $\lambda$ and $\lambda'$ we write out
2189: the first few terms in the resulting series
2190: \begin{align}\label{K2dr6}
2191: \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) + \am^2
2192: \, {\cal K}_{\otwo} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, = &
2193: \,
2194: \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \notag \\
2195: \times \, \Bigg\{ 1 - \am \beta_2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 -
2196: 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2197: \right) + & (\am \beta_2 )^2 \, \ln^2 \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2
2198: \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) \notag \\
2199: - (\am \beta_2 )^3 \, & \left[ \ln^3 \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2
2200: \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2201: \right) - 4 \, \zeta (3) \right] + \ldots \Bigg\} \, \notag \\
2202: \times \, \Bigg\{ 1 - \am \beta_2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 -
2203: 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2204: \right) + & (\am \beta_2 )^2 \, \ln^2 \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2
2205: \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) \notag \\
2206: - (\am \beta_2 )^3 \, & \left[ \ln^3 \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2
2207: \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2208: \right) - 4 \, \zeta (3) \right] + \ldots \Bigg\}.
2209: \end{align}
2210: One can see that the geometric series structure appears to hold up to
2211: the cubic terms in either one of the logarithms. In the sense of a
2212: BLM-type approach \cite{BLM} we approximate the expressions in each of
2213: the curly brackets by a geometric series, obtaining
2214: \begin{align}\label{K2dr7}
2215: \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) + &
2216: \am^2 \, {\cal K}_{\otwo} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \,
2217: \approx \,
2218: {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \notag \\
2219: \times & \, \frac{\am}{ \left[ 1 + \am \beta_2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \,
2220: e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \,
2221: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) \right] \, \left[ 1 + \am
2222: \beta_2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm
2223: z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) \right] }.
2224: \end{align}
2225:
2226: Evaluation of the Fourier transforms in \eq{K1sdr} is performed along
2227: similar lines in Appendix \ref{K1dressed}. The result reads
2228: \begin{align}\label{K1sdr1}
2229: \am^2 \, {\tilde {\cal K}}_{\oone} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z})
2230: \, \approx \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z})
2231: \, \am \beta_2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-\frac{5}{3} -2
2232: \gamma}}{R^2 ({\bm x}_0, {\bm
2233: x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) \notag \\
2234: \times \, \frac{\am}{ \left[ 1 + \am \beta_2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4
2235: \, e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \,
2236: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) \right] \, \left[ 1
2237: + \am \beta_2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2
2238: \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \,
2239: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) \right] },
2240: \end{align}
2241: with the scale $R$ given by \eq{Rexp}.
2242:
2243: Finally, adding Eqs. (\ref{K2dr7}) and (\ref{K1sdr1}) yields
2244: \begin{align}\label{Krc}
2245: \am \, & {\cal K}_{\text{rc}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \,
2246: \approx \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \,
2247: \frac{\as \left(\frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm
2248: x}_0|^2}\right) \ \as \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2
2249: \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \right)}{ \as \left( \frac{4
2250: \, e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{R^2 ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z})}
2251: \right)}
2252: \end{align}
2253: with the scale $R ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z})$ given by \eq{Rexp}
2254: and the couplings calculated in the $\overline{{\text{MS}}}$ scheme.
2255: \eq{Krc} is {\sl the second of the two main results of our paper}. It
2256: gives the JIMWLK kernel with the running coupling constant. It is
2257: very interesting that the running coupling corrections come in {\sl
2258: not} through a scale of a single running coupling $\as$ as one would
2259: naively expect, but in the form of a {\sl ``triumvirate''} of the
2260: running couplings shown in \eq{Krc}! \eq{Krc} can be used to
2261: construct BK kernel with the running coupling constant by employing
2262: \eq{KrcBK}.
2263:
2264:
2265:
2266:
2267:
2268: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2269:
2270: \section{Conclusions}
2271: \label{conc}
2272:
2273: To conclude let us state the main results of this work once again. By tracking
2274: the powers of $\as \, N_f$ we have included running coupling corrections into
2275: the JIMWLK and BK evolution equations. Our all orders result agrees with the
2276: expressions derived with the dispersive method in~\cite{Gardi:2006}, but
2277: renders the result in terms of a ``triumvirate'' of couplings already in the
2278: momentum space expressions~(\ref{Kall}). This allows us to give a concise,
2279: accurate BLM approximation of the perturbative sum in coordinate space in terms
2280: of a corresponding coordinate space ``triumvirate'' shown in \eq{Krc}.
2281: % Interestingly enough the running coupling enters those equations in
2282: % the form of a ``triumvirate'' shown in \eq{Krc}.
2283: Our procedure includes one uncertainty, related to choosing the ``subtraction
2284: point'', as was discussed in Sect.~\ref{Subtr}. This ambiguity is akin to
2285: scheme-dependence of the running coupling constant and we believe that the
2286: final result does not depend on the choice of the ``subtraction point'' in a
2287: very crucial way. We picked the subtraction point to be at the transverse
2288: coordinate of the virtual gluon in \fig{fig:NLO1}A.
2289:
2290:
2291:
2292: Our result for the JIMWLK Hamiltonian with the running coupling
2293: constant is
2294: \begin{align}\label{JIMWLKrc}
2295: {\cal H}^{\text{rc}} =\frac{1}{2} \, \frac{\as \left(\frac{4 \,
2296: e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}|^2}\right) \, \as \left(
2297: \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm y}|^2} \right)}{
2298: \as \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{R^2 ({\bm x}, {\bm y};
2299: {\bm z})} \right)} \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}}_{{\bm x}, {\bm y};
2300: {\bm z}} \left[ U_{\bm z}^{a b}(i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm
2301: x}i\nabla^b_{\bm y} +i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\Bar\nabla^b_{\bm y}) +
2302: ( i\nabla^a_{\bm x} i\nabla^a_{\bm y}+i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm x}
2303: i\Bar\nabla^a_{\bm y}) \right]
2304: \end{align}
2305: with integrations over $\bm x$, $\bm y$ and $\bm z$ implied. All the
2306: running couplings should be calculated in the $\overline{{\text{MS}}}$ scheme.
2307:
2308: To obtain the BK evolution equation with the running coupling constant
2309: one needs to sum the kernel in \eq{Krc} over all possible connections
2310: of the gluon to the quark and the anti-quark lines, as formally shown
2311: in \eq{KrcBK}. (Alternatively to derive the BK equation one can apply
2312: the JIMWLK Hamiltonian from \eq{JIMWLKrc} to a correlator of two
2313: Wilson lines and take the large-$N_c$ limit.) A straightforward
2314: calculation shows that
2315: \begin{align}
2316: \lim_{{\bm x}_1 \rightarrow {\bm x}_0} R^2 ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1;
2317: {\bm z}) \, = \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \hspace{1cm} \text{and}
2318: \hspace{1cm} \lim_{{\bm x}_0 \rightarrow {\bm x}_1} R^2 ({\bm x}_0,
2319: {\bm x}_1; {\bm z}) \, = \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2,
2320: \end{align}
2321: such that the BK evolution equation with the running coupling
2322: corrections is
2323: \begin{align}\label{eqNrc}
2324: &\frac{\partial N ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y)}{\partial Y} \, = \,
2325: \frac{C_F}{\pi^2} \, \int d^2 x_2 \notag \\ &\times \, \left[ \as
2326: \left(\frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{x_{20}^2}\right) \,
2327: \frac{1}{x_{20}^2} - 2 \, \frac{\as \left(\frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2
2328: \gamma}}{x_{20}^2}\right) \ \as \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3
2329: - 2 \gamma}}{x_{21}^2} \right)}{ \as \left( \frac{4 \,
2330: e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{R^2 ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1; \, {\bm
2331: x}_2)} \right)} \, \frac{{\bm x}_{20} \cdot {\bm
2332: x}_{21}}{x_{20}^2 \, x_{21}^2} + \as \left(\frac{4 \, e^{-5/3
2333: - 2 \gamma}}{x_{21}^2}\right) \, \frac{1}{x_{21}^2}
2334: \right] \notag \\
2335: &\times \, \left[ N ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_2, Y) + N ({\bm x}_{2},
2336: {\bm x}_1, Y) - N ({\bm x}_{0}, {\bm x}_1, Y) - N ({\bm x}_{0},
2337: {\bm x}_2, Y) \, N ({\bm x}_{2}, {\bm x}_1, Y) \right],
2338: \end{align}
2339: where $R^2$ is given by \eq{Rexp}.
2340:
2341: It is interesting to explore the limits of \eq{eqNrc}. We will refer
2342: to the original dipole $01$ as the ``parent'' dipole, while the
2343: dipoles $20$ and $21$ generated in one step of the evolution will be
2344: called ``daughter'' dipoles. First of all, when both produced dipoles
2345: are comparable and much larger than the ``parent'' dipole, $x_{20}
2346: \sim x_{21} \gg x_{01}$, the argument of the coupling constant in all
2347: three terms in \eq{eqNrc} would be given by the ``daughter'' dipole
2348: sizes $x_{20} \sim x_{21}$. However, such large dipole sizes should be
2349: cut off by the inverse saturation scale $1/Q_s$, which implies that
2350: the scale for the coupling constant in the IR region of phase space
2351: would be given by $Q_s$ keeping the coupling small and the physics
2352: perturbative. In the other interesting limit when one of the
2353: ``daughter'' dipoles is much smaller than the other one, $x_{20} \ll
2354: x_{21} \sim x_{01}$, a simple calculation shows that $R^2 ({\bm x}_0,
2355: {\bm x}_1; \, {\bm x}_2) \approx x_{20}^2$ and the BK kernel in
2356: \eq{eqNrc} becomes
2357: \begin{align}\label{dla}
2358: \as \left(\frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{x_{20}^2}\right) \,
2359: \frac{1}{x_{20}^2} - 2 \, \as \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2
2360: \gamma}}{x_{21}^2} \right) \, \frac{{\bm x}_{20} \cdot {\bm
2361: x}_{21}}{x_{20}^2 \, x_{21}^2} + \as \left(\frac{4 \, e^{-5/3
2362: - 2 \gamma}}{x_{21}^2}\right) \, \frac{1}{x_{21}^2}.
2363: \end{align}
2364: Two out of three terms in the kernel have the scale of the coupling
2365: given by the larger dipole size, naively making the evolution ``less
2366: perturbative''. However, in the $x_{20} \ll x_{21}$ limit it is the
2367: first term which dominates \eq{dla}: that term has the running
2368: coupling scale given by the size of the {\sl smaller} dipole, making
2369: the physics perturbative!
2370:
2371: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2372:
2373: \section*{Acknowledgments}
2374:
2375: We are greatly indebted to Ian Balitsky for a very useful exchange of
2376: ideas when this work was in progress. We would like to thank Javier
2377: Albacete, Eric Braaten, Ulrich Heinz, and Robert Perry for many
2378: informative discussions. This work is supported in part by the U.S.
2379: Department of Energy under Grant No. DE-FG02-05ER41377.
2380:
2381:
2382:
2383:
2384: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2385:
2386: \appendix
2387:
2388: \renewcommand{\theequation}{A\arabic{equation}}
2389: \setcounter{equation}{0}
2390: \section{Evaluating the Fourier transforms in \eq{K1int4}}
2391: \label{K1FT}
2392:
2393: Here we first calculate the following integral coming from the first
2394: (transverse) term in \eq{K1int4}
2395: \begin{align}\label{A1}
2396: I_T ({\bm z}, {\bm z}') \, = \, \int \frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{d^2
2397: q'}{(2\pi)^2} \ e^{ -i {\bm q}\cdot {\bm z} +i {\bm q}' \cdot {\bm
2398: z}'} \, \frac{{\bm q} \cdot {\bm q}'}{{\bm q}^2{\bm q}'^{2}} \,
2399: \frac{{\bm q}^{2} \, \left( \ln \frac{{\bm
2400: q}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} - \frac{5}{3} \right) - {\bm
2401: q}'^{2} \, \left( \ln \frac{{\bm q}'^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} -
2402: \frac{5}{3} \right) }{{\bm q}^{2} - {\bm q}'^{2}},
2403: \end{align}
2404: where ${\bm z}$ and ${\bm z}'$ are some transverse coordinate vectors.
2405: Replacing ${\bm q} \rightarrow i \, {\bm \partial}_z$ and ${\bm q}'
2406: \rightarrow - i \, {\bm \partial}_{z'}$ in the numerator of the first
2407: ratio in the integrand we can integrate over the angles of ${\bm q}$
2408: and ${\bm q}'$ obtaining
2409: \begin{align}\label{A2}
2410: I_T ({\bm z}, {\bm z}') \, = \, \frac{1}{(2\pi)^2} \, {\bm
2411: \partial}_z \cdot {\bm \partial}_{z'} \, \int\limits_0^\infty
2412: \frac{d q}{q} \, \frac{dq'}{q'} \, J_0 (q \, z) \, J_0 (q' \, z') \,
2413: \frac{{\bm q}^{2} \, \left( \ln \frac{{\bm
2414: q}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} - \frac{5}{3} \right)
2415: - {\bm q}'^{2} \, \left( \ln \frac{{\bm
2416: q}'^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} - \frac{5}{3} \right)
2417: }{{\bm q}^{2} - {\bm q}'^{2}}
2418: \end{align}
2419: with $q = |{\bm q}|$, $q' = |{\bm q}'|$, $z = |{\bm z}|$ and $z' =
2420: |{\bm z}'|$. Bringing the transverse gradients back into the
2421: integrand yields
2422: \begin{align}\label{A3}
2423: I_T ({\bm z}, {\bm z}') \, = \, \frac{1}{(2\pi)^2} \, \frac{{\bm z}
2424: \cdot {\bm z}'}{z \, z'} \, \int\limits_0^\infty dq \, dq' \, J_1
2425: (q \, z) \, J_1 (q' \, z') \, \frac{{\bm q}^{2} \, \ln \frac{{\bm
2426: q}^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} - {\bm q}'^{2} \, \ln
2427: \frac{{\bm q}'^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} }{{\bm q}^{2}
2428: - {\bm q}'^{2}}.
2429: \end{align}
2430: To perform $q$ and $q'$ integrations we first rewrite the fraction in
2431: the integrand of (\ref{A3}) as
2432: \begin{align}\label{intgrnd}
2433: \frac{{\bm q}^{2} \, \ln \frac{{\bm q}^2 \,
2434: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} - {\bm q}'^{2} \, \ln
2435: \frac{{\bm q}'^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} }{{\bm q}^{2}
2436: - {\bm q}'^{2}} \, = \, \ln \frac{{\bm q}^2 \,
2437: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} + {\bm q}'^{2} \, \frac{\ln
2438: \frac{{\bm q}^{2}}{{\bm q}'^{2}}}{{\bm q}^{2} - {\bm q}'^{2}}
2439: \end{align}
2440: and then use the following integral identity
2441: \begin{align}\label{trick}
2442: \int\limits_0^1 d \beta \, \frac{1}{{\bm q}^{2} (1-\beta) +
2443: {\bm q}'^{2} \beta} \, = \, \frac{\ln
2444: \frac{{\bm q}^{2}}{{\bm q}'^{2}}}{{\bm q}^{2} - {\bm q}'^{2}}
2445: \end{align}
2446: to replace the last term in \eq{intgrnd}.\footnote{We thank Ian
2447: Balitsky for pointing out to us the usefulness of this
2448: substitution.} \eq{A3} becomes
2449: \begin{align}\label{A4}
2450: I_T ({\bm z}, {\bm z}') \, = \, \frac{1}{(2\pi)^2} \, \frac{{\bm z}
2451: \cdot {\bm z}'}{z \, z'} \, \int\limits_0^\infty dq \, dq' \, J_1
2452: (q \, z) \, J_1 (q' \, z') \, \left\{ \ln \frac{{\bm q}^2 \,
2453: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} + {\bm q}'^{2} \,
2454: \int\limits_0^1 d \beta \, \frac{1}{{\bm q}^{2} (1-\beta) + {\bm
2455: q}'^{2} \beta} \right\}.
2456: \end{align}
2457: Now the $q$ and $q'$ integrations can be performed using standard
2458: formulas for the integrals of Bessel functions yielding
2459: \begin{align}\label{A5}
2460: I_T ({\bm z}, {\bm z}') \, = \, \frac{1}{(2\pi)^2} \, \frac{{\bm z}
2461: \cdot {\bm z}'}{{\bm z}^2 \, {\bm z}'^2} \, \left\{ \ln \frac{4 \,
2462: e^{- \frac{5}{3} -2 \gamma}}{{\bm z}^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2463: + {\bm z}^{2} \, \int\limits_0^1 d \beta \, \frac{1}{{\bm z}^{2}
2464: (1-\beta) + {\bm z}'^{2} \beta} \right\}.
2465: \end{align}
2466: Finally the $\beta$-integral in \eq{A5} can be done using \eq{trick}
2467: giving
2468: \begin{align}\label{A6}
2469: I_T ({\bm z}, {\bm z}') \, = \, \frac{1}{(2\pi)^2} \, \frac{{\bm z}
2470: \cdot {\bm z}'}{{\bm z}^2 \, {\bm z}'^2} \, \frac{{\bm z}^2 \, \ln
2471: \frac{4 \, e^{- \frac{5}{3} -2 \gamma}}{{\bm z}'^2 \,
2472: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} - {\bm z}'^2 \, \ln \frac{4 \, e^{-
2473: \frac{5}{3} -2 \gamma}}{{\bm z}^2 \,
2474: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}}{{\bm z}^2 - {\bm z}'^2}.
2475: \end{align}
2476: Now let us use the same technique to perform Fourier transforms
2477: in the second (longitudinal) term in \eq{K1int4}. We want to evaluate
2478: \begin{align}\label{A21}
2479: I_L ({\bm z}, {\bm z}') \, = \, \int \frac{d^2 q}{(2\pi)^2}
2480: \frac{d^2 q'}{(2\pi)^2} \ e^{ -i {\bm q}\cdot {\bm z} +i {\bm q}'
2481: \cdot {\bm z}'} \, \frac{\ln ({\bm q}^{2}/{\bm q}'^{2})}{{\bm
2482: q}^{2} - {\bm q}'^{2}}.
2483: \end{align}
2484: First we integrate over the angles of $\bm q$ and ${\bm q}'$
2485: \begin{align}\label{A22}
2486: I_L ({\bm z}, {\bm z}') \, = \, \frac{1}{(2\pi)^2} \,
2487: \int\limits_0^\infty d q \, d q' \, q \, q' \, J_0 (q \, z) \, J_0
2488: (q' \, z') \, \frac{\ln ({\bm q}^{2}/{\bm q}'^{2})}{{\bm q}^{2} -
2489: {\bm q}'^{2}}.
2490: \end{align}
2491: Now we can use \eq{trick} to integrate over $q$ and $q'$ obtaining
2492: \begin{align}\label{A23}
2493: I_L ({\bm z}, {\bm z}') \, = \, \frac{1}{(2\pi)^2} \,
2494: \int\limits_0^1 \, d \beta \, \frac{1}{z^2 \beta + z'^2 (1-\beta)},
2495: \end{align}
2496: which, using \eq{trick} again we can write as
2497: \begin{align}\label{A24}
2498: I_L ({\bm z}, {\bm z}') \, = \, \frac{1}{(2\pi)^2} \, \frac{\ln (z^2
2499: / z'^2)}{z^2 - z'^2}.
2500: \end{align}
2501:
2502:
2503:
2504: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2505:
2506: \renewcommand{\theequation}{B\arabic{equation}}
2507: \setcounter{equation}{0}
2508: \section{Evaluating the Fourier transforms in~\eq{K1sdr}}
2509: \label{K1dressed}
2510:
2511: Here we will try to perform the Fourier transforms in \eq{K1sdr}. We
2512: begin by analyzing the transverse part of the kernel, given by the
2513: first term in the curly brackets in \eq{K1sdr}. We start by
2514: performing the angular integrations over the angles of $\bm q$ and
2515: ${\bm q}'$, which, similar to the way we arrived at \eq{A3}, yield
2516: \begin{align}\label{B1}
2517: \am^2 \, {\tilde {\cal K}}_{\oone}^T ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ;
2518: {\bm z}) \, = \, \frac{\am^2 \, \beta_2}{\pi^2} \, \frac{{\bm
2519: z}-{\bm x}_0}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|} \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm
2520: x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|} \, \int\limits_0^\infty dq \, dq' \,
2521: J_1 (q \, |{\bm z}-{\bm
2522: x}_0|) \, J_1 (q' \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|) \notag \\
2523: \times \, \frac{q^{2} \, \ln \frac{q^2 \,
2524: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} - q'^{2} \, \ln \frac{q'^2 \,
2525: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} }{q^{2} - q'^{2}} \,
2526: \frac{1}{\left( 1 + \am \beta_2 \ln \frac{q^2 \,
2527: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) \, \left( 1 + \am
2528: \beta_2 \ln \frac{q'^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2529: \right)}
2530: \end{align}
2531: with ${\tilde {\cal K}}_{\oone}^T$ denoting the transverse part of the
2532: kernel. Since our intent is to extract the scale of the running
2533: coupling in transverse coordinate space ignoring power corrections, we
2534: expand the denominators in \eq{B1} into geometric series and repeat
2535: the steps which led from \eq{A3} to \eq{A4} writing
2536: \begin{align}\label{B2}
2537: \am^2 \, & {\tilde {\cal K}}_{\oone}^T ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
2538: z}) \, = \, \frac{\am^2 \, \beta_2}{\pi^2} \, \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm
2539: x}_0}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|} \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1}{|{\bm
2540: z}-{\bm x}_1|} \, \sum\limits_{n,m=0}^\infty \, (- \am
2541: \beta_2)^{n+m} \, \int\limits_0^\infty dq \, dq' \, J_1 (q \, |{\bm
2542: z}-{\bm
2543: x}_0|) \notag \\
2544: & \times \, J_1 (q' \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|) \, \left\{ \ln
2545: \frac{{\bm q}^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} + {\bm q}'^{2}
2546: \, \int\limits_0^1 d \beta \, \frac{1}{{\bm q}^{2} (1-\beta) +
2547: {\bm q}'^{2} \beta} \right\} \, \ln^n \frac{q^2 \,
2548: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \, \ln^m \frac{q'^2 \,
2549: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}.
2550: \end{align}
2551: It is hard to perform $q$ and $q'$ integrations for a general term in
2552: the series characterized by some values of $n$ and $m$. However, we
2553: can try estimating the first correction, i.e., the $n=1, m=0$ term:
2554: \begin{align}\label{B3}
2555: \frac{\am^2 \, \beta_2}{\pi^2} \, \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0}{|{\bm
2556: z}-{\bm x}_0|} \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm
2557: x}_1|} \, (- \am \beta_2) \, \int\limits_0^\infty dq \, dq' \,
2558: J_1 (q \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|) J_1 (q' \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|)
2559: \notag \\ \times \, \left\{ \ln \frac{{\bm q}^2 \,
2560: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} + {\bm q}'^{2} \,
2561: \int\limits_0^1 d \beta \, \frac{1}{{\bm q}^{2} (1-\beta) + {\bm
2562: q}'^{2} \beta} \right\} \, \ln \frac{q^2 \,
2563: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} .
2564: \end{align}
2565: (The $n=0, m=1$ term will be constructed by replacing ${\bm x}_0
2566: \leftrightarrow {\bm x}_1$ in the result of evaluating (\ref{B3}).)
2567: The $q'$-integral can be easily done in \eq{B3}, along with the
2568: $q$-integral in the first term in the brackets, yielding
2569: \begin{align}\label{B4}
2570: \frac{\am^2 \, \beta_2}{\pi^2} \, \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0}{|{\bm
2571: z}-{\bm x}_0|^2} \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm
2572: x}_1|^2} \, (- \am \beta_2) \, \Bigg\{ \ln^2 \left( \frac{4 \,
2573: e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \,
2574: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) + |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0| \, |{\bm
2575: z}-{\bm x}_1| \notag \\ \times \, \int\limits_0^1 d \beta \,
2576: \frac{1}{\beta} \, \sqrt{\frac{1-\beta}{\beta}} \,
2577: \int\limits_0^\infty dq \, q \, J_1 (q \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|) \,
2578: K_1 \left( \sqrt{\frac{1-\beta}{\beta}} \, q \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|
2579: \right) \, \ln \frac{q^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2580: \Bigg\}.
2581: \end{align}
2582: To perform the $q$-integral we first re-write the remaining logarithm
2583: as a derivative
2584: \begin{align}\label{B5}
2585: \frac{\am^2 \, \beta_2}{\pi^2} \, \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0}{|{\bm
2586: z}-{\bm x}_0|^2} \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm
2587: x}_1|^2} \, (- \am \beta_2) \, \Bigg\{ \ln^2 \left( \frac{4 \,
2588: e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \,
2589: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) + |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0| \, |{\bm
2590: z}-{\bm x}_1| \notag \\ \times \, \int\limits_0^1 d \beta \,
2591: \frac{1}{\beta} \, \sqrt{\frac{1-\beta}{\beta}} \, \frac{d}{d
2592: \lambda} \left[ \int\limits_0^\infty dq \, q \, J_1 (q \, |{\bm
2593: z}-{\bm x}_0|) \, K_1 \left( \sqrt{\frac{1-\beta}{\beta}} \, q
2594: \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1| \right) \, \left( \frac{q^2 \,
2595: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right)^\lambda
2596: \right]\Bigg|_{\lambda =0} \Bigg\}.
2597: \end{align}
2598: Performing the $q$-integration yields
2599: \begin{align}\label{B6}
2600: \frac{\am^2 \, \beta_2}{\pi^2} \, \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0}{|{\bm
2601: z}-{\bm x}_0|^2} \cdot \frac{{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm
2602: x}_1|^2} \, (- \am \beta_2) \, \Bigg\{ \ln^2 \left( \frac{4 \,
2603: e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \,
2604: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) + \frac{|{\bm z}-{\bm
2605: x}_0|^2}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \notag \\ \times \,
2606: \int\limits_0^1 d \beta \, \frac{1}{1-\beta} \, \frac{d}{d
2607: \lambda} \Bigg[ \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2
2608: \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \, \frac{\beta}{1-\beta}
2609: \right)^\lambda \, \Gamma (1+\lambda) \, \Gamma (2+\lambda) \notag
2610: \\ \times \, F \left( 1+\lambda, 2+\lambda; 2; - \frac{\beta \,|{\bm
2611: z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 }{(1-\beta) \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \right)
2612: \Bigg]\Bigg|_{\lambda =0} \Bigg\}.
2613: \end{align}
2614: Using the definition of hypergeometric functions we write
2615: \begin{align}\label{B7}
2616: F \left( 1+\lambda, 2+\lambda; 2; z \right) \, = \,
2617: \frac{1}{1-z} - \lambda \, \frac{1}{1-z} \, \left[ 1 + \ln (1-z) +
2618: \frac{1}{z} \, \ln (1-z) \right] + o(\lambda^2).
2619: \end{align}
2620: With the help of \eq{B7} the differentiation with respect to $\lambda$
2621: can be easily carried out in \eq{B6}. After integrating over $\beta$
2622: we obtain
2623: \begin{align}\label{B8}
2624: & - \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \,
2625: (\am \beta_2)^2 \, \Bigg\{ \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2
2626: \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2627: \right) \notag \\ & \times \, \frac{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \ln
2628: \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \,
2629: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) - |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \, \ln
2630: \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \,
2631: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2632: \right)}{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 - |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \notag \\
2633: & + \, \frac{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_1|^2 \, \left[ \text{Li}_2 \left( 1 -
2634: \frac{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \right) -
2635: \text{Li}_2 (1) \right]- |{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \left[
2636: \text{Li}_2 \left( 1 - \frac{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_1|^2}{|{\bm
2637: z}-{\bm x}_0|^2} \right) - \text{Li}_2 (1) \right]}{|{\bm
2638: z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 - |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \Bigg\}.
2639: \end{align}
2640: With the help of ``transverse'' part of \eq{K1int5}, in which we
2641: replace $N_f \rightarrow - 6 \pi \beta_2$, we derive the following
2642: expansion:
2643: \begin{align}\label{B9}
2644: & \am^2 \, {\tilde {\cal K}}_{\oone}^T ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
2645: z}) \, = \, \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ;
2646: {\bm z}) \notag \\ & \times \, \Bigg\{ \am \beta_2 \, \frac{|{\bm z}
2647: -{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm
2648: z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) - |{\bm
2649: z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2
2650: \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2651: \right)}{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 - |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \notag \\
2652: & - \, (\am \beta_2)^2 \, \Bigg[ \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2
2653: \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2654: \right) \, \frac{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \,
2655: e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \,
2656: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) - |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \, \ln
2657: \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \,
2658: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right)}{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 - |{\bm
2659: z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \notag \\ & + \frac{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_1|^2 \,
2660: \left[ \text{Li}_2 \left( 1 - \frac{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2}{|{\bm
2661: z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \right) - \text{Li}_2 (1) \right]- |{\bm
2662: z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \left[ \text{Li}_2 \left( 1 - \frac{|{\bm z}
2663: -{\bm x}_1|^2}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2} \right) - \text{Li}_2
2664: (1) \right]}{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 - |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2}
2665: \Bigg] + \ldots \Bigg\}.
2666: \end{align}
2667: Here the ellipsis include not only the higher order terms in $\am
2668: \beta_2$, but also the term quadratic in $\am \beta_2$ with the ${\bm
2669: x}_0 \leftrightarrow {\bm x}_1$ replacement. It can be shown that
2670: the term in the last line of \eq{B9} is numerically small compared to
2671: the other terms in the series. Dropping that term yields
2672: \begin{align}\label{B10}
2673: & \am^2 \, {\tilde {\cal K}}_{\oone}^T ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
2674: z}) \, \approx \, \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm
2675: x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \notag \\ & \times \, \am \beta_2 \, \frac{|{\bm z}
2676: -{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm
2677: z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) - |{\bm
2678: z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2
2679: \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2680: \right)}{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_0|^2 - |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \notag \\
2681: & \times \, \Bigg[ 1 - \am \beta_2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 -
2682: 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2683: \right) + \ldots \Bigg] \, \Bigg[ 1 - \am \beta_2 \, \ln \left(
2684: \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \,
2685: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) + \ldots \Bigg].
2686: \end{align}
2687: It appears likely that the higher order corrections would continue the
2688: geometric series in \eq{B10} with the same constants under the
2689: logarithms. Resummation of such series yields the ``transverse'' part
2690: of \eq{K1sdr1}.
2691:
2692: Now we have to evaluate the longitudinal (instantaneous) part of
2693: \eq{K1sdr}, given by the last term in the curly brackets in that
2694: equation:
2695: \begin{align}\label{B21}
2696: \am^2 \, {\tilde {\cal K}}_{\oone}^L ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
2697: z}) \, = \, - \, 4 \, \am^2 \, \beta_2 \, \int \frac{d^2
2698: q}{(2\pi)^2} \frac{d^2 q'}{(2\pi)^2} \ e^{ -i {\bm q}\cdot ({\bm
2699: z}-{\bm x}_0) +i {\bm q}' \cdot ({\bm z}-{\bm x}_1) } \notag \\
2700: \times \, \frac{\ln ({\bm q}^{2}/{\bm q}'^{2})}{{\bm q}^{2} - {\bm
2701: q}'^{2}} \, \frac{1}{\left( 1 + \am \beta_2 \ln \frac{{\bm q}^2
2702: \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) \, \left( 1 + \am
2703: \beta_2 \ln \frac{{\bm q}'^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2704: \right)}.
2705: \end{align}
2706: Integrating over the angles gives
2707: \begin{align}\label{B22}
2708: \am^2 \, {\tilde {\cal K}}_{\oone}^L ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
2709: z}) \, = \, - \, \frac{\am^2 \, \beta_2}{\pi^2} \,
2710: \int\limits_0^\infty dq \, dq' \, q \, q' \, J_0 (q \, |{\bm z}-{\bm
2711: x}_0|) \, J_0 (q' \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|) \notag \\
2712: \times \, \frac{\ln ({q}^{2}/{q}'^{2})}{{q}^{2} - {q}'^{2}} \,
2713: \frac{1}{\left( 1 + \am \beta_2 \ln \frac{{q}^2 \,
2714: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) \, \left( 1 + \am
2715: \beta_2 \ln \frac{{q}'^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2716: \right)}.
2717: \end{align}
2718: Again the exact integration does not appear possible. Instead we will
2719: expand the running coupling denominators to the linear order in the
2720: logarithms and evaluate the following term
2721: \begin{align}\label{B23}
2722: \frac{\am^2 \, \beta_2}{\pi^2} \, \int\limits_0^\infty dq \, dq'
2723: \, q \, q' \, J_0 (q \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|) \, J_0 (q' \, |{\bm
2724: z}-{\bm x}_1|) \, \frac{\ln ({q}^{2}/{q}'^{2})}{{q}^{2} -
2725: {q}'^{2}} \, \am \beta_2 \ln \frac{{q}^2 \,
2726: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2},
2727: \end{align}
2728: which we rewrite using \eq{trick} as
2729: \begin{align}\label{B24}
2730: \frac{\am^2 \, \beta_2}{\pi^2} \, \am \beta_2 \, \int\limits_0^1
2731: d \beta \, \int\limits_0^\infty dq \, dq' \, q \, q' \, J_0 (q \,
2732: |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|) \, J_0 (q' \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|) \,
2733: \frac{1}{{q}^{2} (1-\beta) + {q}'^{2} \beta} \, \ln \frac{{q}^2 \,
2734: e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}.
2735: \end{align}
2736: Performing the $q'$-integral first yields
2737: \begin{align}\label{B25}
2738: \frac{\am^3 \, \beta_2^2}{\pi^2} \, \int\limits_0^1 \frac{d
2739: \beta}{\beta} \, \frac{d}{d \lambda} \, \int\limits_0^\infty dq \,
2740: q \, J_0 (q \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|) \, K_0 \left(
2741: \sqrt{\frac{1-\beta}{\beta}} \, q \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1| \right)
2742: \, \left( \frac{{q}^2 \, e^{-5/3}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2743: \right)^\lambda \, \Bigg|_{\lambda =0},
2744: \end{align}
2745: where we have again replaced the logarithm by a derivative of a power.
2746: Integrating over $q$ we obtain
2747: \begin{align}\label{B26}
2748: \frac{\am^3 \, \beta_2^2}{\pi^2} \, \int\limits_0^1 \frac{d
2749: \beta}{1 - \beta} \, \frac{1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \, \frac{d}{d
2750: \lambda} \, \left[ \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm
2751: x}_1|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \, \frac{\beta}{1 - \beta}
2752: \right)^\lambda \, \Gamma^2 (1+\lambda) \right. \notag \\ \times
2753: \, \left. F \left( 1+\lambda, 1+\lambda; 1; - \frac{\beta \,|{\bm
2754: z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 }{(1-\beta) \, |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2}
2755: \right) \right] \Bigg|_{\lambda =0}.
2756: \end{align}\label{B27}
2757: Using the expansion of the hypergeometric function
2758: \begin{align}
2759: F \left( 1+\lambda, 1+\lambda; 1; z \right) \, = \, \frac{1}{1-z} -
2760: \lambda \, \frac{2}{1-z} \, \ln \left( 1-z \right) + o(\lambda^2)
2761: \end{align}
2762: we can perform the differentiation with respect to $\lambda$ in
2763: \eq{B26} and integrate over $\beta$ to get
2764: \begin{align}\label{B28}
2765: \frac{\am^3 \, \beta_2^2}{\pi^2} \, \frac{1}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 -
2766: |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \, \Bigg\{ \ln \frac{|{\bm z}-{\bm
2767: x}_0|^2}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3
2768: - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2769: \right) \notag \\ + \, \text{Li}_2 \left( 1 - \frac{|{\bm z} -{\bm
2770: x}_0|^2}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \right) - \text{Li}_2 \left( 1
2771: - \frac{|{\bm z} -{\bm x}_1|^2}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2} \right)
2772: \Bigg\}.
2773: \end{align}
2774: Similar to the above one can show that the dilogarithms in \eq{B28}
2775: are numerically small and can be neglected compared to the rest of the
2776: expression. The Fourier transforms in the leading term in the
2777: expansion of running coupling corrections in \eq{B21} was performed in
2778: obtaining \eq{K1int5} (see also the derivation of \eq{A24}). That
2779: result, combined with \eq{B28}, allows us to write
2780: \begin{align}\label{B29}
2781: & \am^2 \, {\tilde {\cal K}}_{\oone}^L ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm
2782: z}) \, = \, - \, \frac{\am^2 \, \beta_2}{\pi^2} \, \frac{\ln
2783: \frac{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm
2784: x}_0|^2 - |{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2} \notag \\ & \times \, \Bigg[ 1
2785: - \am \beta_2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm
2786: z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) + \ldots
2787: \Bigg] \, \Bigg[ 1 - \am \beta_2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 -
2788: 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}
2789: \right) + \ldots \Bigg].
2790: \end{align}
2791: This expansion again demonstrates the emerging geometric series when
2792: higher order fermion loops are included in ${\tilde {\cal
2793: K}}_1^{\text{NLO}}$. Resumming those series to all orders we
2794: obtain the ``longitudinal'' part of \eq{K1sdr1}.
2795:
2796: Finally, adding \eq{B10} and \eq{B29} together yields
2797: \begin{align}\label{B30}
2798: \am^2 \, {\tilde {\cal K}}_{\oone} ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z})
2799: \, =& \, \am^2 \, {\tilde {\cal K}}_{\oone}^T ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1
2800: ; {\bm z}) + \am^2 \, {\tilde {\cal K}}_{\oone}^L ({\bm x}_0, {\bm
2801: x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \notag \\ \approx & \, \am \, {\cal K}^{\text{LO}}
2802: ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ; {\bm z}) \, \am \beta_2 \, \ln \left(
2803: \frac{4 \, e^{-\frac{5}{3} -2 \gamma}}{R^2 ({\bm x}_0, {\bm x}_1 ;
2804: {\bm z}) \, \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) \notag \\
2805: \times \, \Bigg[ 1 - \am \beta_2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 -
2806: 2 \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_0|^2 \,
2807: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) & + \ldots \Bigg] \,
2808: \Bigg[ 1 - \am \beta_2 \, \ln \left( \frac{4 \, e^{-5/3 - 2
2809: \gamma}}{|{\bm z}-{\bm x}_1|^2 \,
2810: \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2} \right) + \ldots \Bigg],
2811: \end{align}
2812: which, after resumming the geometric series gives \eq{K1sdr1}, as
2813: desired.
2814:
2815: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2816: \renewcommand{\theequation}{C\arabic{equation}}
2817: \setcounter{equation}{0}
2818: \section{Comparison with dispersive calculation of~\cite{Gardi:2006}}
2819: \label{sec:comparison-with-dispersive}
2820:
2821: Here we demonstrate explicitly that our all orders expression in
2822: Sect.~\ref{all_orders}, Eqs.~(\ref{Kall1}) to~(\ref{Kall}), agree with the
2823: results found in~\cite{Gardi:2006}. In~\cite{Gardi:2006} the running coupling
2824: effects were presented in terms of transverse and longitudinal Borel functions
2825: $B^T$ and $B^L$ with Borel parameter $u$. With our convention for the kernel
2826: and the shorthand notation ${\bm r}_1=\bm x_0-\bm z$, ${\bm r}_2=\bm x_1-\bm z$ and the
2827: replacement ${\bm p}\to{\bm q}$, $\bm q\to\bm q'$ to match notations in this
2828: paper, we quote the expressions of~\cite{Gardi:2006} as
2829: \begin{subequations}
2830: \label{eq:mom-space-Borels}
2831: \begin{align}
2832: \label{eq:mom-space-trans-res}
2833: {\cal K}_{\bm x,\bm y;\bm z}\, B^T(u,{\bm r}_1\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}},{\bm r}_2\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}) = &\,
2834: e^{\frac53 u} \int \frac{d^2p\,d^2q}{(2\pi)^2}\
2835: e^{i{\bm q}\cdot{\bm r}_1}\ e^{-i{{\bm q}'}\cdot{\bm r}_2} \
2836: \frac{{\bm q}\cdot{{\bm q}'}}{{\bm q}^2\, {{\bm q}'}^2}\
2837: \frac{{{\bm q}'}^2\left(\frac{{\bm q}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}\right)^{-u}
2838: -{\bm q}^2\left(\frac{{{\bm q}'}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}\right)^{-u}}{{{\bm q}'}^2-{\bm q}^2}
2839: \\
2840: {\cal K}_{\bm x,\bm y;\bm z}\, B^L(u,{\bm r}_1\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}},{\bm r}_2\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}) = &\,
2841: e^{\frac53 u} \int \frac{d^2p\,d^2q}{(2\pi)^2}\
2842: e^{i{\bm q}\cdot{\bm r}_1} \ e^{-i{{\bm q}'}\cdot{\bm r}_2} \
2843: \frac{ \left(\frac{{\bm q}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}\right)^{-u}
2844: - \left(\frac{{{\bm q}'}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}\right)^{-u} }{
2845: {\bm q}^2-{{\bm q}'}^2}
2846: \ .
2847: \end{align}
2848: \end{subequations}
2849: Everything else follows from the definitions for the Borel representation of
2850: what is called the coupling function $R({\bm r}_1 \Lambda,{\bm r}_2 \Lambda)$
2851: in~\cite{Gardi:2006} (expressed in terms of the QCD scale $\Lambda$) which
2852: takes the form of a sum of transverse and longitudinal contributions
2853: \begin{align}
2854: \label{eq:Rdef}
2855: R({\bm r}_1 \Lambda,{\bm r}_2 \Lambda) =
2856: \frac{1}{\beta_0}
2857: \int_0^{\infty}du & \ T(u)
2858: \left(\frac{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}{\Lambda^2}\right)^{-u}
2859: \Big(B^T(u,{\bm r}_1 \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}},{\bm r}_2 \mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}})
2860: +B^L(u,{\bm r}_1\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}},{\bm r}_2\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}})\Big)
2861: \end{align}
2862: where for one-loop running as employed in this paper $T(u)$ is to be set to
2863: one. The notation for the $\beta$-function coefficients is such that
2864: $\beta_2=\beta_0/\pi$. All that is left to do to
2865: compare~\eqref{eq:mom-space-Borels} to our present results is to perform the
2866: Borel integral. Up to an overall factor of
2867: $\am/\pi$, this amounts to replacing the
2868: Borel powers $\left(\frac{{\bm
2869: a}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}\right)^{-u}$ by the corresponding
2870: geometric series
2871: $\frac1{1+\frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi}\ln\left(\frac{{\bm
2872: a}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)}$ for both
2873: ${\bm a}={\bm q}$ and ${\bm a}={\bm q}'$. All that
2874: is left to do is to factor out a common denominator $\frac1{
2875: \left(1+\frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi} \ln\left(\frac{{\bm q}^2\,e^{-\frac53}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}\right)\right)
2876: \left(1+\frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi} \ln\left(\frac{{{\bm
2877: q}'}^2\,e^{-\frac53}}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2}\right)\right)
2878: }$. One finds
2879: \begin{subequations}
2880: \label{eq:mom-diagrammatic}
2881: \begin{align}
2882: \label{eq:mom-diagrammatic-transv}
2883: {\cal K}_{\bm x,\bm y;\bm z}\,
2884: R^T(u,{\bm r}_1\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}},{\bm r}_2\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}) = &\,
2885: \frac{\am}{\pi}\int \frac{d^2q\,d^2q'}{(2\pi)^2}
2886: \ e^{i{\bm q}\cdot{\bm r}_1}\ e^{-i{{\bm q}'}\cdot{\bm r}_2}
2887: \notag \\ & \times
2888: \frac{{\bm q}\cdot{{\bm q}'}}{{\bm q}^2\, {{\bm q}'}^2}\
2889: \frac{
2890: \frac{{{\bm
2891: q}'}^2\left(1+\frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi}
2892: \ln\left(\frac{{{\bm q}'}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)
2893: \right)
2894: -{\bm q}^2\left(1+\frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi}\ln\left(\frac{{\bm q}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)
2895: \right)}{{{\bm q}'}^2-{\bm q}^2}
2896: }{
2897: \left(1+\frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi}
2898: \ln\left(\frac{{\bm q}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)\right)
2899: \left(1+\frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi}
2900: \ln\left(\frac{{{\bm q}'}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)\right)
2901: }
2902: \displaybreak[0]
2903: \notag \\ = \,
2904: \frac{\am}{\pi}\int \frac{d^2q\,d^2q'}{(2\pi)^2}
2905: \ e^{i{\bm q}\cdot{\bm r}_1}\ e^{-i{{\bm q}'}\cdot{\bm r}_2} & \,
2906: %\notag \\ & \times
2907: \frac{{\bm q}\cdot{{\bm q}'}}{{\bm q}^2\, {{\bm q}'}^2}\
2908: \frac{
2909: 1+
2910: \frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi}
2911: \frac{{{\bm q}'}^2
2912: \ln\left(\frac{{{\bm q}'}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)
2913: -{\bm q}^2
2914: \ln\left(\frac{{\bm q}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)}{{{\bm q}'}^2-{\bm q}^2}
2915: }{
2916: \left(1+\frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi}
2917: \ln\left(\frac{{\bm q}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)\right)
2918: \left(1+\frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi}
2919: \ln\left(\frac{{{\bm q}'}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)\right)
2920: }
2921: \intertext{ and}
2922: {\cal K}_{\bm x,\bm y;\bm z}\,
2923: R^L(u,{\bm r}_1\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}},{\bm r}_2\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}) = &
2924: \frac{\am}{\pi}\int \frac{d^2q\,d^2q'}{(2\pi)^2}
2925: \ e^{i{\bm q}\cdot{\bm r}_1}\ e^{-i{{\bm q}'}\cdot{\bm r}_2}
2926: \notag \\ & \times
2927: \frac{
2928: \frac{
2929: \left(1+\frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi}
2930: \ln\left(\frac{{{\bm q}'}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)
2931: \right)
2932: -\left(1+\frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi}
2933: \ln\left(\frac{{\bm q}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)
2934: \right)}{{\bm q}^2-{{\bm q}'}^2}
2935: }{
2936: \left(1+\frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi}
2937: \ln\left(\frac{{\bm q}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)\right)
2938: \left(1+\frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi}
2939: \ln\left(\frac{{{\bm q}'}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)\right)
2940: }
2941: \notag \\ = \,
2942: \frac{\am}{\pi}\int \frac{d^2q\,d^2q'}{(2\pi)^2}
2943: \ e^{i{\bm q}\cdot{\bm r}_1}\ e^{-i{{\bm q}'}\cdot{\bm r}_2} & \,
2944: \frac{\frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi}
2945: \frac{
2946: \ln\left(\frac{{{\bm q}'}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)
2947: -\ln\left(\frac{{\bm
2948: q}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)
2949: }{{\bm q}^2-{{\bm q}'}^2}}{
2950: \left(1+\frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi}
2951: \ln\left(\frac{{\bm q}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)\right)
2952: \left(1+\frac{\beta_0\am}{\pi}
2953: \ln\left(\frac{{{\bm q}'}^2}{\mu_{\overline{{\text{MS}}}}^2\,e^{\frac53}}\right)\right)
2954: }
2955: \ .
2956: \end{align}
2957: \end{subequations}
2958: The sum of these contributions is in full agreement with~(\ref{Kall1}) as
2959: advertised.
2960:
2961:
2962: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2963:
2964: %\bibliography{newletter,rc} %<-----------BIBLIOGRAPHIE
2965: %\bibliographystyle{JHEP}
2966:
2967:
2968: \providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}\begingroup\raggedright\begin{thebibliography}{10}
2969:
2970: \bibitem{Gribov:1981ac}
2971: L.~V. Gribov, E.~M. Levin, and M.~G. Ryskin, {\it Singlet structure function at
2972: small x: Unitarization of gluon ladders}, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B188}
2973: (1981) 555--576.
2974:
2975: \bibitem{Mueller:1986wy}
2976: A.~H. Mueller and J.-w. Qiu, {\it Gluon recombination and shadowing at small
2977: values of x}, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B268} (1986) 427.
2978:
2979: \bibitem{McLerran:1994vd}
2980: L.~D. McLerran and R.~Venugopalan, {\it Green's functions in the color field of
2981: a large nucleus}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D50} (1994) 2225--2233,
2982: [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9402335}{{\tt hep-ph/9402335}}].
2983:
2984: \bibitem{McLerran:1994ka}
2985: L.~D. McLerran and R.~Venugopalan, {\it Gluon distribution functions for very
2986: large nuclei at small transverse momentum}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D49}
2987: (1994) 3352--3355, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9311205}{{\tt
2988: hep-ph/9311205}}].
2989:
2990: \bibitem{McLerran:1994ni}
2991: L.~D. McLerran and R.~Venugopalan, {\it Computing quark and gluon distribution
2992: functions for very large nuclei}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D49} (1994)
2993: 2233--2241, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9309289}{{\tt
2994: hep-ph/9309289}}].
2995:
2996: \bibitem{Kovchegov:1996ty}
2997: Y.~V. Kovchegov, {\it Non-abelian {Weizsaecker-Williams} field and a two-
2998: dimensional effective color charge density for a very large nucleus}, {\em
2999: Phys. Rev.} {\bf D54} (1996) 5463--5469,
3000: [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9605446}{{\tt hep-ph/9605446}}].
3001:
3002: \bibitem{Kovchegov:1997pc}
3003: Y.~V. Kovchegov, {\it Quantum structure of the non-abelian
3004: {Weizsaecker-Williams} field for a very large nucleus}, {\em Phys. Rev.}
3005: {\bf D55} (1997) 5445--5455,
3006: [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9701229}{{\tt hep-ph/9701229}}].
3007:
3008: \bibitem{Jalilian-Marian:1997xn}
3009: J.~Jalilian-Marian, A.~Kovner, L.~D. McLerran, and H.~Weigert, {\it The
3010: intrinsic glue distribution at very small x}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D55}
3011: (1997) 5414--5428, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9606337}{{\tt
3012: hep-ph/9606337}}].
3013:
3014: \bibitem{Jalilian-Marian:1997jx}
3015: J.~Jalilian-Marian, A.~Kovner, A.~Leonidov, and H.~Weigert, {\it The {BFKL}
3016: equation from the {Wilson} renormalization group}, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf
3017: B504} (1997) 415--431, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9701284}{{\tt
3018: hep-ph/9701284}}].
3019:
3020: \bibitem{Jalilian-Marian:1997gr}
3021: J.~Jalilian-Marian, A.~Kovner, A.~Leonidov, and H.~Weigert, {\it The {Wilson}
3022: renormalization group for low x physics: Towards the high density regime},
3023: {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D59} (1999) 014014,
3024: [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9706377}{{\tt hep-ph/9706377}}].
3025:
3026: \bibitem{Jalilian-Marian:1997dw}
3027: J.~Jalilian-Marian, A.~Kovner, and H.~Weigert, {\it The {Wilson}
3028: renormalization group for low x physics: Gluon evolution at finite parton
3029: density}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D59} (1999) 014015,
3030: [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9709432}{{\tt hep-ph/9709432}}].
3031:
3032: \bibitem{Jalilian-Marian:1998cb}
3033: J.~Jalilian-Marian, A.~Kovner, A.~Leonidov, and H.~Weigert, {\it Unitarization
3034: of gluon distribution in the doubly logarithmic regime at high density},
3035: {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D59} (1999) 034007,
3036: [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9807462}{{\tt hep-ph/9807462}}].
3037:
3038: \bibitem{Kovner:2000pt}
3039: A.~Kovner, J.~G. Milhano, and H.~Weigert, {\it Relating different approaches to
3040: nonlinear {QCD} evolution at finite gluon density}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf
3041: D62} (2000) 114005, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0004014}{{\tt
3042: hep-ph/0004014}}].
3043:
3044: \bibitem{Weigert:2000gi}
3045: H.~Weigert, {\it Unitarity at small {B}jorken x}, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf A703}
3046: (2002) 823--860, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0004044}{{\tt
3047: hep-ph/0004044}}].
3048:
3049: \bibitem{Iancu:2000hn}
3050: E.~Iancu, A.~Leonidov, and L.~D. McLerran, {\it Nonlinear gluon evolution in
3051: the color glass condensate. {I}}, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf A692} (2001)
3052: 583--645, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0011241}{{\tt
3053: hep-ph/0011241}}].
3054:
3055: \bibitem{Ferreiro:2001qy}
3056: E.~Ferreiro, E.~Iancu, A.~Leonidov, and L.~McLerran, {\it Nonlinear gluon
3057: evolution in the color glass condensate. {II}}, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf A703}
3058: (2002) 489--538, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0109115}{{\tt
3059: hep-ph/0109115}}].
3060:
3061: \bibitem{Kovchegov:1999yj}
3062: Y.~V. Kovchegov, {\it Small-x {$F_2$} structure function of a nucleus including
3063: multiple pomeron exchanges}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D60} (1999) 034008,
3064: [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9901281}{{\tt hep-ph/9901281}}].
3065:
3066: \bibitem{Kovchegov:1999ua}
3067: Y.~V. Kovchegov, {\it Unitarization of the {BFKL} pomeron on a nucleus}, {\em
3068: Phys. Rev.} {\bf D61} (2000) 074018,
3069: [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9905214}{{\tt hep-ph/9905214}}].
3070:
3071: \bibitem{Balitsky:1996ub}
3072: I.~Balitsky, {\it Operator expansion for high-energy scattering}, {\em Nucl.
3073: Phys.} {\bf B463} (1996) 99--160,
3074: [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9509348}{{\tt hep-ph/9509348}}].
3075:
3076: \bibitem{Balitsky:1997mk}
3077: I.~Balitsky, {\it Operator expansion for diffractive high-energy scattering},
3078: \href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9706411}{{\tt hep-ph/9706411}}.
3079:
3080: \bibitem{Balitsky:1998ya}
3081: I.~Balitsky, {\it Factorization and high-energy effective action}, {\em Phys.
3082: Rev.} {\bf D60} (1999) 014020,
3083: [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9812311}{{\tt hep-ph/9812311}}].
3084:
3085: \bibitem{Mueller:1994rr}
3086: A.~H. Mueller, {\it Soft gluons in the infinite momentum wave function and the
3087: {BFKL} pomeron}, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B415} (1994) 373--385.
3088:
3089: \bibitem{Mueller:1994jq}
3090: A.~H. Mueller and B.~Patel, {\it Single and double {BFKL} pomeron exchange and
3091: a dipole picture of high-energy hard processes}, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf
3092: B425} (1994) 471--488, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9403256}{{\tt
3093: hep-ph/9403256}}].
3094:
3095: \bibitem{Mueller:1995gb}
3096: A.~H. Mueller, {\it Unitarity and the {BFKL} pomeron}, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf
3097: B437} (1995) 107--126, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9408245}{{\tt
3098: hep-ph/9408245}}].
3099:
3100: \bibitem{Chen:1995pa}
3101: Z.~Chen and A.~H. Mueller, {\it {The dipole picture of high-energy scattering,
3102: the BFKL equation and many gluon compound states}}, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf
3103: B451} (1995) 579--604.
3104:
3105: \bibitem{Kuraev:1977fs}
3106: E.~A. Kuraev, L.~N. Lipatov, and V.~S. Fadin, {\it {The Pomeranchuk
3107: singularity in non-Abelian gauge theories}}, {\em Sov. Phys. JETP} {\bf 45}
3108: (1977) 199--204.
3109:
3110: \bibitem{Bal-Lip}
3111: Y.~Y. Balitsky and L.~N. Lipatov {\em Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.} {\bf 28} (1978) 822.
3112:
3113: \bibitem{Iancu:2003xm}
3114: E.~Iancu and R.~Venugopalan, {\it The color glass condensate and high energy
3115: scattering in {QCD}}, \href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0303204}{{\tt
3116: hep-ph/0303204}}.
3117:
3118: \bibitem{Weigert:2005us}
3119: H.~Weigert, {\it Evolution at small {$x_{\text{bj}}$: The Color Glass
3120: Condensate}}, {\em Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.} {\bf 55} (2005) 461--565,
3121: [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0501087}{{\tt hep-ph/0501087}}].
3122:
3123: \bibitem{Jalilian-Marian:2005jf}
3124: J.~Jalilian-Marian and Y.~V. Kovchegov, {\it Saturation physics and deuteron
3125: gold collisions at RHIC}, {\em Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.} {\bf 56} (2006)
3126: 104--231, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0505052}{{\tt
3127: hep-ph/0505052}}].
3128:
3129: \bibitem{Braun:2000wr}
3130: M.~Braun, {\it Structure function of the nucleus in the perturbative {QCD} with
3131: ${N}_c \to \infty$ ({BFKL} pomeron fan diagrams)}, {\em Eur. Phys. J.} {\bf
3132: C16} (2000) 337--347, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0001268}{{\tt
3133: hep-ph/0001268}}].
3134:
3135: \bibitem{Golec-Biernat:2003ym}
3136: K.~Golec-Biernat and A.~M. Stasto, {\it On solutions of the
3137: {Balitsky-Kovchegov} equation with impact parameter}, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf
3138: B668} (2003) 345--363, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0306279}{{\tt
3139: hep-ph/0306279}}].
3140:
3141: \bibitem{Rummukainen:2003ns}
3142: K.~Rummukainen and H.~Weigert, {\it Universal features of {JIMWLK} and {BK}
3143: evolution at small $x$}, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf A739} (2004) 183--226,
3144: [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0309306}{{\tt hep-ph/0309306}}].
3145:
3146: \bibitem{Lublinsky:2001bc}
3147: M.~Lublinsky, {\it Scaling phenomena from non-linear evolution in high energy
3148: {DIS}}, {\em Eur. Phys. J.} {\bf C21} (2001) 513--519,
3149: [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0106112}{{\tt hep-ph/0106112}}].
3150:
3151: \bibitem{Albacete:2004gw}
3152: J.~L. Albacete, N.~Armesto, J.~G. Milhano, C.~A. Salgado, and U.~A. Wiedemann,
3153: {\it {Numerical analysis of the Balitsky-Kovchegov equation with running
3154: coupling: Dependence of the saturation scale on nuclear size and rapidity}},
3155: \href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0408216}{{\tt hep-ph/0408216}}.
3156:
3157: \bibitem{Levin:1994di}
3158: E.~Levin, {\it Renormalons at low x}, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B453} (1995)
3159: 303--333, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9412345}{{\tt
3160: hep-ph/9412345}}].
3161:
3162: \bibitem{Gardi:2006} E.~Gardi, K.~Rummukainen, J.~Kuokkanen, and
3163: H.~Weigert, {\it Running coupling and power corrections in nonlinear
3164: evolution at the high--energy limit}, {\em In preparation}.
3165:
3166: \bibitem{Fadin:1998py}
3167: V.~S. Fadin and L.~N. Lipatov, {\it {BFKL} pomeron in the next-to-leading
3168: approximation}, {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf B429} (1998) 127--134,
3169: [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9802290}{{\tt hep-ph/9802290}}].
3170:
3171: \bibitem{Ciafaloni:1998gs}
3172: M.~Ciafaloni and G.~Camici, {\it {Energy scale(s) and next-to-leading BFKL
3173: equation}}, {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf B430} (1998) 349--354,
3174: [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9803389}{{\tt hep-ph/9803389}}].
3175:
3176: \bibitem{Brodsky:1998kn}
3177: S.~J. Brodsky, V.~S. Fadin, V.~T. Kim, L.~N. Lipatov, and G.~B. Pivovarov, {\it
3178: The {QCD} pomeron with optimal renormalization}, {\em JETP Lett.} {\bf 70}
3179: (1999) 155--160, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9901229}{{\tt
3180: hep-ph/9901229}}].
3181:
3182: \bibitem{Lepage:1980fj}
3183: G.~P. Lepage and S.~J. Brodsky, {\it Exclusive processes in perturbative
3184: quantum chromodynamics}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D22} (1980) 2157.
3185:
3186: \bibitem{Brodsky:1997de}
3187: S.~J. Brodsky, H.-C. Pauli, and S.~S. Pinsky, {\it Quantum chromodynamics and
3188: other field theories on the light cone}, {\em Phys. Rept.} {\bf 301} (1998)
3189: 299--486, [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9705477}{{\tt
3190: hep-ph/9705477}}].
3191:
3192: \bibitem{BLM}
3193: S.~J. Brodsky, G.~P. Lepage, and P.~B. Mackenzie, {\it On the elimination of
3194: scale ambiguities in perturbative quantum chromodynamics}, {\em Phys. Rev.}
3195: {\bf D28} (1983) 228.
3196:
3197: \bibitem{Iancu:2002xk}
3198: E.~Iancu, A.~Leonidov, and L.~McLerran, {\it The colour glass condensate: An
3199: introduction}, \href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0202270}{{\tt
3200: hep-ph/0202270}}.
3201:
3202: \bibitem{Kovchegov:2006qn}
3203: Y.~V. Kovchegov and K.~Tuchin, {\it Production of q anti-q pairs in proton
3204: nucleus collisions at high energies},
3205: \href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0603055}{{\tt hep-ph/0603055}}.
3206:
3207: \bibitem{Perry:1992sw}
3208: R.~J. Perry, A.~Harindranath, and W.-M. Zhang, {\it Asymptotic freedom in
3209: hamiltonian light front quantum chromodynamics}, {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf
3210: B300} (1993) 8--13.
3211:
3212: \bibitem{Mustaki:1990im}
3213: D.~Mustaki, S.~Pinsky, J.~Shigemitsu, and K.~Wilson, {\it Perturbative
3214: renormalization of null plane QED}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D43} (1991)
3215: 3411--3427.
3216:
3217: \bibitem{Peskin:1995ev}
3218: M.~E. Peskin and D.~V. Schroeder, {\em An Introduction to quantum field
3219: theory}.
3220: \newblock Addison-Wesley, Reading, USA, 1995.
3221:
3222: \bibitem{Bal:2006}
3223: I.~I. Balitsky, {\it {Quark Contribution to the Small-$x$ Evolution of Color
3224: Dipole}}, {\em In preparation}.
3225:
3226: \bibitem{Beneke:1998ui}
3227: M.~Beneke, {\it Renormalons}, {\em Phys. Rept.} {\bf 317} (1999) 1--142,
3228: [\href{http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9807443}{{\tt hep-ph/9807443}}].
3229:
3230: \bibitem{Mueller:1992xz}
3231: A.~H. Mueller, {\it {The QCD perturbation series}}, in {\em QCD: 20 Years
3232: Later, Aachen, Germany, 9-13 June 1992}.
3233:
3234: \end{thebibliography}\endgroup
3235:
3236:
3237: \end{document}
3238: