1: \documentclass{elsart}
2:
3: \setlength{\textwidth}{16cm}
4: \setlength{\textheight}{22.9cm}
5: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{0.26cm}
6: \setlength{\evensidemargin}{0.26cm}
7: \setlength{\topmargin}{-0.04cm}
8:
9: \usepackage{latexsym,bm,amsmath,amssymb,amsfonts}
10: \usepackage{epsfig,graphics,graphicx}
11: \usepackage{makeidx}
12: \usepackage{citesort}
13: % \usepackage[notref,notcite]{showkeys}
14:
15: \newcommand{\dif}{{\rm d}}
16: \newcommand{\abar}{\bar{\alpha}_s}
17: \newcommand{\del}{\partial}
18: \newcommand{\jk}[3]{\frac{(\bm{#1}-\bm{#3}) \!\cdot\!
19: (\bm{#2}-\bm{#3})}{(\bm{#1}-\bm{#3})^2(\bm{#2}-\bm{#3})^2}}
20: \newcommand{\dA}{\delta\!A}
21: \newcommand{\wt}[1]{\widetilde{#1}}
22: \newcommand{\atpi}{\frac{\abar}{2\pi}}
23:
24: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}
25:
26: \long\def\comment#1{ }
27: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.0}
28: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber\\ }
29: \newcommand{\beq}{\begin{eqnarray}}
30: \newcommand{\eeq}{\end{eqnarray}}
31: \newcommand{\be}{\vspace{-.4cm}\begin{eqnarray}}
32: \newcommand{\ee}{\vspace{-.5cm}\end{eqnarray}}
33: \newcommand{\E}{Eq.~(\ref}
34: \newcommand{\eq}{Eq.~}
35: \newcommand{\Es}{Eqs.~(\ref}
36: \newcommand{\Lam}{\Lambda_{{\rm QCD}}}
37:
38: \def\labe{\label}
39: \newcommand{\lan}{\langle}
40: \newcommand{\ran}{\rangle}
41: \def\grad{\nabla}
42: \def\del{\partial}
43:
44: \newcommand{\cal}{\mathcal} %ELS%
45: \newcommand{\rmd}{{\rm d}} %ELS%
46: \newcommand{\rme}{{\rm e}}
47: \newcommand{\tr}{{\rm tr}}
48: \newcommand{\Tr}{{\rm Tr}}
49: \newcommand{\Path}{{\rm P}\,}
50:
51:
52: \newcommand{\BQ}{\begin{equation}}
53: \newcommand{\EQ}{\end{equation}}
54: \newcommand{\BQA}{\begin{eqnarray}}
55: \newcommand{\EQA}{\end{eqnarray}}
56:
57: \newcommand{\NN}{\nonumber \\}
58:
59:
60: \def\simge{\mathrel{%
61: \rlap{\raise 0.511ex \hbox{$>$}}{\lower 0.511ex \hbox{$\sim$}}}}
62: \def\simle{\mathrel{
63: \rlap{\raise 0.511ex \hbox{$<$}}{\lower 0.511ex \hbox{$\sim$}}}}
64:
65: \newcommand{\V}{\widetilde V}
66: \newcommand{\U}{\widetilde U}
67: \newcommand{\x}{x_\perp}
68: \newcommand{\y}{y_\perp}
69: \newcommand{\vv}{v_\perp}
70: \newcommand{\z}{z_\perp}
71:
72: \begin{document}
73:
74:
75: \begin{flushright}
76: ~\vspace{-1.25cm}\\
77: SACLAY-T07/014\\
78: CU--TP--1176
79: \end{flushright}
80: \vspace{2.cm}
81:
82:
83: \begin{frontmatter}
84:
85: \parbox[]{16.0cm}{ \begin{center}
86: \title{Correlation of small--x gluons \\ in impact parameter space}
87:
88: \author{Y.~Hatta$^{\rm a}$ and A.~H.~Mueller$^{\rm b}$ }
89:
90:
91: \address{$^{\rm a}$ Service de Physique Th\'eorique,
92: CEA/Saclay,
93: \\ 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex,
94: France }
95:
96: \address{$^{\rm b}$ Department of Physics, Columbia University
97: \\ New York, NY 10027, USA }
98:
99:
100: %\date{\today}
101:
102: \begin{abstract}
103: In the framework of the QCD dipole model at high energy, we
104: present an analytic evaluation of the dipole pair density in two
105: limits in which the parent dipole is much larger/smaller than the
106: distance between the two child dipoles. Due to conformal symmetry,
107: the two limits give an identical result. The power--law
108: correlation between dipoles explicitly breaks the factorization of
109: target--averaged
110: scattering amplitudes.
111: \end{abstract}
112: \end{center}}
113:
114: \end{frontmatter}
115:
116: \section{Introduction}
117: A hadron in the infinite momentum frame is a complicated system of
118: small--x gluons. While the energy evolution of the average
119: gluon number
120: can be described by the
121: Balitsky--Fadin--Kuraev--Lipatov (BFKL)
122: equation \cite{bfkl}, the wavefunction of a hadron
123: contains more information than just the average number.
124: For example, the fluctuation of the gluon number plays a crucial role
125: in the evolution of scattering amplitudes towards the unitarity limit, and has
126: recently attracted considerable
127: interest
128: \cite{salam,IM,imm,shoshi,edmond,golec,diff,liouville}
129: in the context of saturation physics \cite{sat,qiu,larry}.
130:
131:
132: Another important characteristic of the hadron
133: wavefunction is the correlation of gluons in the
134: impact parameter space. In the dilute, non--saturated regime,
135: soft gluons are necessarily correlated because they originate from
136: a common ancestor via gluon splitting. The process can be most
137: easily described in the QCD dipole model formulated in the large
138: $N_c$ approximation \cite{al1,patel,al}. In this approach, the
139: evolution of the `parent' dipole (a quark--antiquark pair)
140: proceeds via dipole splitting with certain probability computed in
141: perturbation theory (Fig.~\ref{fig1}). Since the probability
142: depends nontrivially on transverse coordinates, `child' dipoles
143: will be distributed in the transverse plane with characteristic
144: correlations between them. Although this dynamics is built--in in
145: the numerical Monte--Carlo simulation of this model
146: \cite{salam,av}, so far there have been only few analytical
147: insights \cite{patel,al,1,bialas}. (See, also, \cite{tre}.) In
148: this paper we evaluate the \emph{dipole pair density} in certain
149: limits and find the power--law correlation between dipoles at
150: large distances with the power determined by the conformal weights
151: of the BFKL eigenfunction \cite{lev}. As an immediate consequence
152: of our result, we shall show in Eqs.~(\ref{ka}) and (\ref{kkk})
153: that the factorization of dipole scattering
154: amplitudes is explicitly violated by a position--dependent
155: multiplicative factor \begin{align} \langle T_1T_2 \rangle \approx
156: c_{12}\langle T_1\rangle \langle T_2 \rangle \qquad c_{12}\gg 1,
157: \label{100}
158: \end{align} where $T$ is the single dipole scattering amplitude
159: and $\langle...\rangle$ denotes the averaging over the target
160: wavefunction. Eq.~(\ref{100}) should be contrasted with the fact
161: that
162: scattering amplitudes computed in the BK--JIMWLK framework
163: \cite{B} essentially factorize
164: \begin{align} \langle T_1T_2\rangle \approx \langle T_1 \rangle \langle
165: T_2 \rangle + {\cal O}\left(\frac{1}{N_c^2}\right). \label{1000}
166: \end{align}
167: The gluon splitting diagrams which lead to Eq.~(\ref{100}) are not included
168: in the BK--JIMWLK equation which rather sums gluon recombination
169: diagrams. Thus it is not surprising that the
170: factorization in Eq.~(\ref{1000}) does not hold for a more
171: general evolution.
172: While Eq.~(\ref{1000}) may be valid if one starts with a
173: large nucleus with totally
174: uncorrelated partons \cite{larry} and follows the BK--JIMWLK
175: evolution up to not so high energies, it is likely that the
176: correlation in the transverse plane developed in the dilute regime significantly
177: affects
178: the nonlinear evolution of hadrons as in the
179: case of the gluon number fluctuation \cite{IM,imm,shoshi,edmond,golec,diff}.
180:
181:
182:
183: \begin{figure}
184: \begin{center}
185: \centerline{\epsfig{file=split.eps,height=6.cm,width=13.cm}}
186: \caption{\sl
187: A cascade of dipole splitting. Thin lines represent child dipoles
188: produced by the parent dipole $(x_0,x_1)$.
189: \label{fig1}}
190: \end{center}
191: \end{figure}
192:
193: \section{Single dipole density}
194:
195: \setcounter{equation}{0} In this section, we review the properties
196: of the single dipole distribution. The techniques used here
197: can be directly applied to the analysis of the dipole pair density in the next section.
198: The single dipole density evolved up to rapidity $Y$ is given by
199: \begin{align} n_Y(x_{01},x) = 2\frac{x_{01}^2}{x^2}\int
200: \frac{d\gamma}{2\pi i}
201: e^{\chi(\gamma)Y-\gamma\ln\frac{x_{01}^2}{x^2}},
202: \label{single}\end{align}
203: $x_{01}=x_0-x_1$ and $x\equiv x_{23}=x_2-x_3$ denote
204: the coordinates of the parent dipole and the child dipole,
205: respectively. We shall use the letter
206: $x$ for two--dimensional real vectors and $z$ for corresponding complex
207: coordinates. By slight abuse of notation, we use $x$ also for the
208: magnitude of two dimensional vectors. $\chi$ is the usual BFKL
209: eigenvalue \begin{align} \chi(\gamma)=2\bar{\alpha}_s
210: \mbox{Re} \{\psi(1)-\psi(\gamma)\}. \end{align} The saddle point of the
211: $\gamma$--integral is given by
212: \begin{align} \chi'(\gamma)Y=\ln \frac{x_{01}^2}{x^2} \end{align}
213: When $x_{01}> x$, the saddle point is in the region
214: $1>\gamma>\frac{1}{2}$, and
215: \begin{align} n_Y(x_{01},x) \sim
216: e^{\chi(\gamma)Y}\left(\frac{x_{01}^2}{x^2}\right)^{1-\gamma}.\label{bindep}
217: \end{align}
218: $n$ is proportional to the scattering amplitude between dipoles
219: of sizes $x_{01}$ and $x$.
220: \begin{align} \label{jim} T_Y(x_{01},x)=\frac{\pi \alpha_s^2 x^2}
221: {2\gamma^2 (1-\gamma)^2} n_Y(x_{01},x) \end{align}
222: Eq.~(\ref{single}) is integrated over the impact parameter
223: $b\equiv \frac{x_2+x_3}{2}-\frac{x_0+x_1}{2}$ between the parent and child dipoles .
224: The $b$--dependent distribution is
225: \begin{align} &n_Y(x_{01},x,b)=\frac{16}{x^2} \sum_n \int
226: \frac{d\nu}{(2\pi)^3}
227: (\nu^2+\frac{n^2}{4})\, e^{\chi(n,\nu)Y}
228: \nonumber \\ & \quad \times \int d^2\omega
229: E^{1-h,1-\bar{h}}(b+\frac{x}{2}-\omega,b-\frac{x}{2}-\omega)
230: E^{h,\bar{h}}(\frac{x_{01}}{2}-\omega, -\frac{x_{01}}{2}-\omega).
231: \label{bdep}
232: \end{align} $E$ is the eigenfunction of the SL(2,C) group \begin{align}
233: &E^{h,\bar{h}}(x_{0\gamma},x_{1\gamma})=(-1)^n
234: \left(\frac{z_{01}}{z_{0\gamma}z_{1\gamma}}\right)^h
235: \left(\frac{\bar{z}_{01}}{\bar{z}_{0\gamma}\bar{z}_{1\gamma}}\right)^{\bar{h}},
236: \nonumber \\
237: &E^{h,\bar{h}*}(x_{0\gamma},x_{1\gamma})=
238: E^{1-h,1-\bar{h}}(x_{0\gamma},x_{1\gamma})
239: \end{align} with
240: $h=\frac{1-n}{2}+i\nu$, $\bar{h}=\frac{1+n}{2}+i\nu=1-h^*$.
241: Eq.~(\ref{single})
242: is obtained from Eq.~(\ref{bdep}) by integrating over $b$
243: \begin{align}
244: n_Y(x_{01},x) =\int d^2b \ n_Y(x_{01},x,b), \label{bint}
245: \end{align} keeping only the $n=0$ term and identifying
246: $h=\frac{1}{2}+i\nu \equiv \gamma$. The $w$--integral in
247: Eq.~(\ref{bdep}) has been carried out in \cite{lip,robi2}. Due to
248: global conformal symmetry, the result depends only on the
249: anharmonic ratio
250: \begin{align} \rho\equiv
251: \frac{z_{01}z}{z_{02}z_{13}}, \end{align} The $n=0$ term gives,
252: \begin{align}
253: n_{0\nu}(x_{01},x,b)\equiv \frac{2\nu^2}{x^2\pi^4}\Bigl(b_{0,\nu}|\rho|^{2(1-\gamma)}
254: F(1-\gamma,1-\gamma,
255: 2(1-\gamma);\rho)F(1-\gamma,1-\gamma,2(1-\gamma);\bar{\rho})\nonumber \\
256: +b^*_{0,\nu}|\rho|^{2\gamma}
257: F(\gamma,\gamma,
258: 2\gamma;\rho)F(\gamma,\gamma,2\gamma;\bar{\rho})\Bigr), \label{lev} \end{align}
259: where $F$ is the hypergeometric function and \begin{align}
260: b_{0,\nu}=\pi^3
261: \frac{2^{4i\nu}}{i\nu}\frac{\Gamma(\frac{1}{2}-i\nu)\Gamma(1+i\nu)}
262: {\Gamma(\frac{1}{2}+i\nu)\Gamma(1-i\nu)}.
263: \end{align}
264: Consider the case $x_{01}\gg x$ and look at the region
265: of small impact parameters $x_{01}\gg b$. In this region,
266: \begin{align} \rho \approx \frac{-4z}{z_{01}}, \qquad |\rho|\ll 1,\end{align} and one may approximate
267: $F(...;\rho) \approx 1$. We obtain\footnote{Ref.~\cite{wallon} uses the
268: following approximation
269: \begin{align} b_{0,\nu}
270: \approx \pi^3 \frac{16^{2i\nu}}{i\nu}. \end{align} This is valid as long as $\nu$ is close to zero and
271: leads to a factor $\left(\frac{ 16 x^2_{01}}{x^2}\right)^{1-\gamma}$.
272: However, in our case the
273: saddle point for $\nu$ is not assumed to be small, but rather determined from
274: external parameters (dipole sizes).}
275: \begin{align} n_Y(x_{01},x,b)=\int
276: \frac{d\nu}{2\pi}n_{0,\nu}(x_{01},x,b)e^{\chi(0,\nu)Y}\approx
277: \frac{1}{ x_{01}^2}\int d\nu e^{\chi(0,\nu) Y}
278: \frac{16^{\gamma}\nu^2b_{0,\nu}^{*}}{\pi^5}\left(\frac{
279: x^2_{01}}{x^2}\right)^{1-\gamma}+c.c. \label{double}
280: \end{align}
281: Comparing Eq.~(\ref{single}) and Eq.~(\ref{double}), one sees
282: that in the saddle point approximation,
283: \begin{align} n_Y(x_{01},x)\sim x_{01}^2
284: \, n_Y(x_{01},x,b\ll x_{01}). \label{point} \end{align}
285: Therefore, roughly child
286: dipoles are uniformly distributed inside the area
287: $x_{01}^2$ (c.f., Eq.~(\ref{bint})).
288: On the other hand, the dipole density at large impact parameters $b \gg x_{01}$ are
289: suppressed. Indeed, in this region,
290: $\rho \approx \frac{z_{01}z}{b^2}$, and
291: \begin{align} n_Y(x_{01},x,b) \approx
292: \frac{1}{x^2}\int d\nu
293: \frac{\nu^2b_{0,\nu}^*}{\pi^5}\left(\frac{x_{01}^2x^2}{b^4}
294: \right)^{\gamma} e^{\chi(0,\nu) Y}+c.c.. \label{b}
295: \end{align} At the saddle point, $n(b)\sim 1/b^{4\gamma}$ where
296: $\gamma$ is determined from
297: $\chi'(\gamma)Y=\ln\frac{b^4}{x_{01}^2x^2}$.
298:
299:
300: Let us compare this $b$--dependence with that of the saturation momentum.
301: The dipole--dipole scattering amplitude at a fixed
302: impact parameter $b$ is \begin{align} T_Y(x_{01},x,b)=\int
303: d^2b'\frac{d^2x'}{2\pi
304: x'^2}A_0(x,x',b-b')n_Y(x_{01},x',b'), \end{align} where $A_0$ is the
305: dipole--dipole scattering amplitude in the two--gluon exchange approximation. Since
306: $A_0(b-b')$ decays like $1/(b-b')^4$, one may approximate
307: \begin{align}T_Y(x_{01},x,b)\approx \int
308: d^2b'A_0(x,x',b-b') \int \frac{d^2x'}{2\pi
309: x'^2}n_Y(x_{01},x',b)\nonumber \\
310: =\pi \alpha_s^2\int \frac{d^2x'}{2\pi
311: x'^2}r^2_<(1+\ln \frac{r_>}{r_<})n_Y(x_{01},x',b) \label{approximation} \end{align}
312: where $r_<=\mbox{min}\{x,x'\}$ and $r_>=\mbox{max}\{x,x'\}$. Using the large $b$ form of $n$, Eq.~(\ref{b}), one
313: obtains \footnote{ Compare with Eq.~(\ref{jim}). The factor 2 difference in the
314: denominator
315: is due to the definition \begin{align}
316: \frac{T_Y(t=0)}{2}=\int d^2bT_Y(b).\end{align}}
317: \begin{align}
318: &T_Y(x_{01},x,b)\approx \frac{\pi \alpha_s^2 x^2}{4\gamma^2(1-\gamma)^2}
319: n_Y(x_{01},x,b). \end{align}
320:
321: The local ($b$--dependent) saturation momentum can be determined
322: by the constancy of the
323: exponential factor of $T$ in the integral representation along
324: the line $x=1/Q_s(b,Y)$ \cite{geom,dio},
325: and reads \begin{align} Q^2_s(b,Y)\sim \frac{x^2_{01}}{ b^4}e^{\frac{\chi(\gamma_s)}
326: {\gamma_s}Y}, \label{iij}\end{align} where $\gamma_s\approx 0.628$ solves $\chi'(\gamma_s)=\frac{\chi(\gamma_s)}{\gamma_s}$.
327: Repeating the same procedure for $x_{01}\gg b$, we get \begin{align}
328: Q^2_s(b,Y)\sim \frac{1}{ x_{01}^2}e^{\frac{\chi(\gamma_s)}
329: {\gamma_s}Y}. \label{qsat} \end{align}
330:
331: If we take $x$ to be close to the saturation
332: line $\sim 1/Q_s(b,Y)$,
333: $\gamma\approx \gamma_s$, and the geometric scaling
334: \cite{geom,dio,traveling}
335: holds locally in the two
336: ($b\gg x_{01}$, $b\ll x_{01}$) regimes \cite{mun}
337: \begin{align} T_Y(x_{01},x,b)\sim x^2 n_Y(x_{01},x,b) \sim
338: (x^2Q_s^2(b,Y))^{\gamma_s}.
339: \label{liou} \end{align}
340:
341:
342: \section{Dipole pair density}
343: \setcounter{equation}{0}
344:
345: In this and the next section, we analyze the dipole pair density
346: $n^{(2)}$ in two different ways. We start with the exact
347: expression for the pair density as derived in \cite{1} (see, also,
348: \cite{vacca}).
349: \begin{align}
350: &n^{(2)}_Y(x_{01},x_{a_0a_1},x_{b_0b_1})=\int dh dh_a dh_b
351: \frac{1}{2x^2_{a_0a_1}x_{b_0b_1}^2}\int_0^{Y} dy\
352: e^{\chi(h)y+(\chi(h_a)+\chi(h_b))(Y-y)}
353: \nonumber \\ &\times \int d^2x_\alpha d^2x_\beta
354: d^2x_\gamma
355: E^{h,\bar{h}}(x_{0\gamma},x_{1\gamma})E^{h_a,\bar{h}_a}
356: (x_{a_0\alpha},x_{a_1\alpha})
357: E^{h_b,\bar{h}_b}(x_{b_0\beta},x_{b_1\beta}) \nonumber \\
358: &\times \int \frac{d^2x_2 d^2x_3 d^2
359: x_4}{x_{23}^2x_{34}^2x_{42}^2} E^{h,\bar{h}*}(x_{2 \gamma},x_{3
360: \gamma})E^{h_a,\bar{h}_a*} (x_{2\alpha},x_{4\alpha})
361: E^{h_b,\bar{h}_b*}(x_{3\beta},x_{4\beta}), \label{im}
362: \end{align}
363: where
364: $(x_{a_0},x_{a_1})$ and $(x_{b_0},x_{b_1})$ are coordinates of
365: the child dipoles of interest. We introduced a compact notation \begin{align} \int dh \equiv \sum_n \int d\nu
366: \frac{2\nu^2+n^2/2}{\pi^4}. \end{align}
367: A graphical representation of the coordinate integrals is shown in
368: Fig.~\ref{fig2}.
369: \begin{figure}
370: \begin{center}
371: \centerline{\epsfig{file=tri.eps,height=8.cm,width=10cm}}
372: \caption{\sl Graphical representation of Eq.~(\ref{im}).
373: \label{fig2}}
374: \end{center}
375: \end{figure}
376: We will be interested in configurations where the two child
377: dipoles are small (typically of the order of the inverse
378: saturation scale $\sim 1/Q_s$) and far away from each other,
379: \begin{align} x_{ab}=x_a-x_b\equiv
380: \frac{x_{a_0}+x_{a_1}}{2}-\frac{x_{b_0}+x_{b_1}}{2} \gg
381: x_{a_0a_1}, \, x_{b_0b_1}, \end{align}
382: and try to extract the leading $x_{ab}$ dependence of $n^{(2)}$.
383: This leaves us with two interesting (and in fact, tractable) situations (see, Fig.~\ref{fig3}):
384: (A) The parent
385: dipole is also small $x_{01}\sim x_{a_0a_1},x_{b_0b_1} \ll x_{ab}$. (B) The
386: parent dipole is large $x_{01}\gg x_{ab}\gg x_{a_0a_1},x_{b_0b_1}$.
387:
388:
389: \begin{figure}
390: \begin{center}
391: \centerline{\epsfig{file=2cases.eps,height=7.cm,width=13cm}}
392: \caption{\sl Case (A): All dipoles are small compared with their
393: mutual separations. Case (B): Child dipoles are deep inside the
394: large parent dipole.
395: \label{fig3}}
396: \end{center}
397: \end{figure}
398:
399:
400:
401: Let us first consider the case A. In the next section we will discuss both cases
402: in a unified way.
403: The last line in Eq.~(\ref{im}) is the triple pomeron vertex in
404: perturbative QCD \cite{bar} at large $N_c$. It has the form
405: \begin{align}
406: f(\bar{h},\bar{h}_a,\bar{h}_b)\frac{1}{(z_{\alpha}-z_\beta)^{1+h-h_a-h_b}
407: (z_\beta-z_\gamma)^{1+h_a-h_b-h}(z_\gamma
408: -z_\alpha)^{1+h_b-h-h_a}}\nonumber
409: \\ \times \frac{1}{(\bar{z}_{\alpha}-\bar{z}_\beta)^{1+
410: \bar{h}-\bar{h}_a-\bar{h}_b}
411: (\bar{z}_\beta-\bar{z}_\gamma)^{1+\bar{h}_a-\bar{h}_b-\bar{h}}(\bar{z}_\gamma
412: -\bar{z}_\alpha)^{1+\bar{h}_b-\bar{h}-\bar{h}_a}}. \label{wi}
413: \end{align} This structure follows immediately by noting that the
414: last line of Eq.~(\ref{im}) and Eq.~(\ref{wi}) transform in the
415: same way under the SL(2,C) transformations of $z_\alpha, \
416: z_\beta, \ z_\gamma$
417: \begin{align} z\to \frac{\alpha z+\beta}{\gamma z+\delta} \qquad (\alpha\delta-\beta\gamma=1).
418: \end{align}
419: The function $f(h,h_a,h_b)$ can be found in \cite{bia,kor}. Next
420: we turn to the remaining integrals $d^2x_\alpha d^2x_\beta
421: d^2x_\gamma$ in (\ref{im}). Since all dipoles (parent, children)
422: are assumed to be very small, typically $x_{0a},\, x_{0b},\,
423: x_{ab} \gg x_{01},\, x_{a_0a_1},\, x_{b_0b_1}$ and we may make
424: approximations
425: \begin{align} \left(\frac{z_{01}}{z_{0\gamma}z_{1\gamma}}\right)^h
426: \approx \left(\frac{z_{01}}{z^2_{0\gamma}}\right)^h, \ \
427: \left(\frac{z_{a_0a_1}}{z_{a_0\alpha}z_{a_1\alpha}}\right)^h
428: \approx \left(\frac{z_{a_0a_1}}{z^2_{a\alpha}}\right)^h, \ \
429: \left(\frac{z_{b_0b_1}}{z_{b_0\beta}z_{b_1\beta}}\right)^h \approx
430: \left(\frac{z_{b_0b_1}}{z^2_{b\beta}}\right)^h.
431: \label{appro}\end{align} We will see later that with this
432: replacement one makes a mistake in the overall factor of $n^{(2)}$
433: by 8. After this approximation, we are left with the integral
434: \begin{align} \int d^2x_\alpha d^2x_\beta
435: d^2x_\gamma
436: \frac{1}{z^{2h}_{0\gamma}z^{2h_a}_{a\alpha}z^{2h_b}_{b\beta}}\frac{1}
437: {z_{\alpha\beta}^{1+h-h_a-h_b}
438: z_{\beta\gamma}^{1+h_a-h_b-h}z_{\gamma\alpha}
439: ^{1+h_b-h-h_a}}\nonumber
440: \\ \times \frac{1}{\bar{z}^{2\bar{h}}_{0\gamma}\bar{z}^{2\bar{h}_a}_{a\alpha}
441: \bar{z}^{2\bar{h}_b}_{b\beta}}\frac{1}{\bar{z}_{\alpha\beta}^{
442: 1+\bar{h}-\bar{h}_a-\bar{h}_b}
443: \bar{z}_{\beta\gamma}^{1+\bar{h}_a-\bar{h}_b-\bar{h}}\bar{z}_{\gamma\alpha}
444: ^{\bar{h}_b-\bar{h}-\bar{h}_a}}. \label{long}
445: \end{align} One can check that this integral transforms in the
446: same way under the SL(2,C) transformation of $z_0,\ z_a,\ z_b$ as
447: \begin{align}
448: \frac{1}{z_{0a}^{h+h_a-h_b}z_{0b}^{h+h_b-h_a}z_{ab}^{h_a+h_b-h}}
449: \frac{1}{\bar{z}_{0a}^{\bar{h}+\bar{h}_a-\bar{h}_b}\bar{z}_{0b}^{\bar{h}+
450: \bar{h}_b-\bar{h}_a}\bar{z}_{ab}^{\bar{h}_a+\bar{h}_b-\bar{h}}}.
451: \label{imp}
452: \end{align}
453:
454: The coefficient can be easily obtained. In the dominant case of
455: $n=n_a=n_b=0$ where $h=\bar{h}=\frac{1}{2}+i\nu \equiv \gamma$,
456: $h_{a}=\bar{h}_a\equiv \gamma_a$, $h_b=\bar{h}_b\equiv \gamma_b$,
457: (Generalization to the case $h\neq \bar{h}$ is straightforward.)
458:
459: \begin{align}
460: \int d^2x_\alpha d^2x_\beta d^2x_\gamma
461: \frac{1}{|z_{0\gamma}|^{4\gamma}|z_{a\alpha}|^{4\gamma_a}|z_{b\beta}|^{4\gamma_b}}
462: \frac{1} {|z_{\alpha\beta}|^{2(\gamma-\gamma_a-\gamma_b+1)}
463: |z_{\beta\gamma}|^{2(\gamma_a-\gamma_b-\gamma+1)}|z_{\gamma\alpha}|^{2(\gamma_b-
464: \gamma-\gamma_a+1)}} \nonumber \\
465: =\frac{g(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_b)}{|z_{0a}|^{2(\gamma+\gamma_a-\gamma_b)}
466: |z_{0b}|^{2(\gamma+\gamma_b-\gamma_a)}|z_{ab}|^{2(\gamma_a+\gamma_b-\gamma)}}
467: \end{align} When $\gamma>1/2$, a pole at $z_\gamma=z_0$ is not integrable. The
468: following result should be regarded as analytic continuation from
469: convergent values of $\gamma$'s. Using a conformal transformation,
470: one can set $z_a=0$, $z_b=1$, $z_0=\infty$.
471: \begin{align}
472: g(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_b)= \int d^2x_\alpha d^2x_\beta d^2x_\gamma
473: \frac{1}{|z_{\alpha}|^{4\gamma_a}|1-z_{\beta}|^{4\gamma_b}}\frac{1}
474: {|z_{\alpha\beta}|^{2(\gamma-\gamma_a-\gamma_b+1)}
475: |z_{\beta\gamma}|^{2(\gamma_a-\gamma_b-\gamma+1)}
476: |z_{\gamma\alpha}|^{2(\gamma_b-\gamma-\gamma_a+1)}}
477: \end{align} Evaluating the integrals in the order of $d^2x_\gamma$,
478: $d^2x_\beta$ and $d^2x_\alpha$,
479: one obtains
480: \begin{align} &g(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_b)
481: =\pi^3\frac{\Gamma(1-2\gamma)\Gamma(1-2\gamma_a)\Gamma(1-2\gamma_b)\Gamma(\gamma+\gamma_a+\gamma_b-1)
482: }
483: {\Gamma(2\gamma)\Gamma(2\gamma_a)\Gamma(2\gamma_b)\Gamma(2-\gamma-\gamma_a-\gamma_b)
484: }\nonumber \\
485: &\times
486: \frac{\Gamma(\gamma+\gamma_a-\gamma_b)\Gamma(\gamma+\gamma_b-\gamma_a)
487: \Gamma(\gamma_a+\gamma_b-\gamma)}
488: {\Gamma(1+\gamma_b-\gamma_a-\gamma)\Gamma(1+\gamma_a-\gamma_b-\gamma)
489: \Gamma(1+\gamma-\gamma_a-\gamma_b)},
490: \end{align}
491: and therefore, \begin{align} & n^{(2)} =\int d\gamma d\gamma_a d\gamma_b
492: \frac{1}{2x_{a_0a_1}^2x_{b_0b_1}^2}g(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_b)f(\bar{\gamma},\bar{\gamma}_a,\bar{\gamma}_b)\int_0^{Y}
493: dy \frac{x_{01}^{2\gamma}
494: x_{a_0a_1}^{2\gamma_a}x_{b_0b_1}^{2\gamma_b}\, e^{\chi(\gamma)y+(\chi(\gamma_a)+\chi(\gamma_b))(Y-y)}}{x_{0a}^{2(\gamma+\gamma_a-\gamma_b)}x_{0b}^{2(\gamma+\gamma_b-\gamma_a)}
495: x_{ab}^{2(\gamma_a+\gamma_b-\gamma)}} \nonumber \\ & =\int d\gamma
496: d\gamma_a d\gamma_b
497: \frac{1}{2x_{a_0a_1}^2x_{b_0b_1}^2}g(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_b)
498: f(\bar{\gamma},\bar{\gamma_a},\bar{\gamma_b})\int_0^{Y}
499: dy \, \nonumber \\
500: & \times
501: \exp\left(\chi(\gamma)y+(\chi(\gamma_a)+\chi(\gamma_b))(Y-y)-\gamma\ln
502: \left(\frac{x_{0a}^2 x_{0b}^2}{x_{01}^2x_{ab}^2}\right) - \gamma_a
503: \ln \left( \frac{x_{0a}^2x_{ab}^2}{x^2_{a_0a_1}x_{0b}^2}\right) -
504: \gamma_b \ln
505: \left(\frac{x_{0b}^2x_{ab}^2}{x^2_{b_0b_1}x_{0a}^2}\right) \right). \label{!} \nonumber \\
506: \end{align}
507:
508:
509:
510: The remaining integrals may be evaluated in the
511: saddle point approximation.
512: The saddle points for $y,\ \gamma, \ \gamma_{a,b}$ are given by
513: the solution to
514: \begin{align}
515: \chi(\gamma)=\chi(\gamma_a)+\chi(\gamma_b), \label{min}\\
516: \chi'(\gamma_a)(Y-y)=\ln \frac{x_{0a}^2x_{ab}^2}{x_{0b}^2x^2_{a_0a_1}} \gg 1, \label{as}\\
517: \chi'(\gamma_b)(Y-y)=\ln \frac{x_{0b}^2x_{ab}^2}{x_{0a}^2x^2_{b_0b_1}} \gg 1, \\
518: \chi'(\gamma)y=\ln \frac{x_{0a}^2x_{0b}^2}{x_{ab}^2x_{10}^2} \gg 1, \label{nao}\end{align}
519: and the dipole pair density behaves like
520: \begin{align}
521: n^{(2)}_Y(x_{01},x_{a_0a_1},x_{b_0b_1})\sim
522: \frac{e^{(\chi(\gamma_a)+\chi(\gamma_b))Y}}
523: {x_{a_0a_1}^2x_{b_0b_1}^2}
524: \frac{x_{01}^{2\gamma}
525: x_{a_0a_1}^{2\gamma_a}x_{b_0b_1}^{2\gamma_b}}{x_{0a}^{2(\gamma+\gamma_a-\gamma_b)}x_{0b}^{2(\gamma+\gamma_b-\gamma_a)}
526: x_{ab}^{2(\gamma_a+\gamma_b-\gamma)}}.
527: \label{222}
528: \end{align} The $x_{01}^{2\gamma}$ behavior of $n^{(2)}$ was pointed out
529: in \cite{al}. (See, Eq.~(A.2) of \cite{al}.) From Eq.~(\ref{nao})
530: we see that $\frac{1}{2} < \gamma <1$,
531: and this justifies the conjecture below Eq.~(A.7) of \cite{al}.
532: The factor $1/x_{0a}^{2\gamma}$ (with $\gamma_a=\gamma_b=\frac{1}{2}$) was
533: found in \cite{bialas} in the context of dipole production at large
534: transverse distances.
535:
536: The factor $x_{ab}^{-2(\gamma_a+\gamma_b-\gamma)}$ characterizes the correlation
537: of dipoles in impact parameter space. To see the
538: significance of this factor, consider
539: scattering of two
540: dipoles $x_{a_0a_1},x_{b_0b_1}$ on a target dipole $x_{01}$ at large impact
541: parameter. The scattering amplitude is given by
542: \begin{align} & T_Y(x_{01};x_{a_0a_1},x_{b_0b_1})=\int \frac{d^2x}{2\pi
543: x^2}\frac{d^2x'}{2\pi x'^2} \int d^2b d^2b' n^{(2)}_Y(x_{01},
544: xb,x'b') \nonumber \\ & \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \times
545: A(x_{a_0a_1}x,x_{a}-\frac{x_0+x_1}{2}-b)A(x_{b_0b_1}x',x_{b}-\frac{x_0+x_1}{2}-b')\nonumber \\
546: & \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \approx
547: \frac{ \pi^2 \alpha_s^4x_{a_0a_1}^2x_{b_0b_1}^2}{16\gamma_a^2(1-\gamma_a)^2
548: \gamma_b^2(1-\gamma_b)^2} n^{(2)}_Y(x_{01},
549: x_{a_0a_1},x_{b_0b_1})\nonumber \\
550: & \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \sim
551: T_Y(x_{01},x_{a_0a_1},x_{0a})T_Y(x_{01},x_{b_0b_1},x_{0b})
552: \left(\frac{x_{0a}x_{0b}}{x_{01}x_{ab}}\right)^{2(\gamma_a+\gamma_b-\gamma)}.
553: \label{ka} \end{align}
554: In the second line, we have used the same approximation as in
555: Eq.~(\ref{approximation}). The last line should be taken with care
556: since $\gamma_a$ as determined from Eq.~(\ref{as}) does not
557: coincide with the anomalous dimension of
558: $T(x_{01},x_{a_0a_1},x_{0a})$, the latter being determined from
559: $\chi'(\gamma_a)Y=\ln \frac{x_{0a}^4}{x_{a_0a_1}^2x_{01}^2}$
560: (c.f., Eqs.~(\ref{as}), (\ref{nao}) and note that $\gamma\neq
561: \gamma_a$). Even if we neglect this difference, we see from
562: Eq.~(\ref{ka}) that the factorization of two--dipole amplitude is
563: explicitly violated by a nontrivial position--dependent
564: factor.\footnote{ We note that the two--dipole scattering
565: amplitude that appears on the right hand side of the BK--JIMWLK
566: equation \cite{B} is for \emph{contiguous} dipoles,
567: $x_{a_1}=x_{b_0}$. Our present approach does not apply to this
568: interesting case since we assumed $x_{ab}\gg
569: x_{a_0a_1},x_{b_0b_1}$.}
570: \begin{align}
571: \left(\frac{x_{0a}x_{0b}}{x_{01}x_{ab}}\right)^{2(\gamma_a+\gamma_b-\gamma)}
572: \gg 1.
573: \end{align}
574:
575:
576:
577:
578:
579:
580:
581:
582: \section{Improved calculation}
583: \setcounter{equation}{0}
584:
585: Let us return to the integral appearing in Eq.~(\ref{im}).
586: \begin{align} & I= \int d^2x_\alpha d^2x_\beta d^2x_\gamma
587: E^{h,\bar{h}}(x_{0\gamma},x_{1\gamma})E^{h_a,\bar{h}_a}
588: (x_{a_0\alpha},x_{a_1\alpha})
589: E^{h_b,\bar{h}_b}(x_{b_0\beta},x_{b_1\beta}) \nonumber \\
590: &\times \int \frac{d^2x_2d^2x_3d^2x_4}{x_{23}^2x_{34}^2x_{42}^2}
591: E^{h,\bar{h}*}(x_{2 \gamma},x_{3 \gamma})E^{h_a,\bar{h}_a*}
592: (x_{2\alpha},x_{4\alpha})
593: E^{h_b,\bar{h}_b*}(x_{3\beta},x_{4\beta}).
594: \end{align} Instead of first integrating over $x_{2,3,4}$ (`reggeon coordinates')
595: as we did before, now we
596: integrate over $x_{\alpha,\beta,\gamma}$
597: (`Pomeron coordinates', see, Fig.~\ref{fig2}) first.
598: \begin{align}
599: I=\frac{1}{(2\pi^2)^3} \int \frac{d^2x_2d^2x_3d^2x_4}{x_{23}^2x_{34}^2x_{42}^2}
600: \Bigl(b^*_{0,\nu}|\rho|^{2\gamma}
601: F(\gamma,\gamma,
602: 2\gamma;\rho)F(\gamma,\gamma,2\gamma;\bar{\rho})+c.c.\Bigr)
603: \nonumber \\ \times
604: \Bigl(b^*_{0,\nu_a}|\rho_a|^{2\gamma_a}
605: F(\gamma_a,\gamma_a,
606: 2\gamma_a;\rho_a)F(\gamma_a,\gamma_a,2\gamma_a;\bar{\rho}_a)+c.c.\Bigr)
607: \nonumber \\\times \Bigl(b^*_{0,\nu_b}|\rho_b|^{2\gamma_b}
608: F(\gamma_b,\gamma_b,
609: 2\gamma_b;\rho_b)F(\gamma_b,\gamma_b,2\gamma_b;\bar{\rho}_b)+c.c.\Bigr),
610: \label{label}
611: \end{align}
612: where \begin{align} \rho\equiv
613: \frac{z_{01}z_{23}}{z_{02}z_{13}},\ \ \rho_a\equiv
614: \frac{z_{a_0a_1}z_{24}}{z_{a_02}z_{a_14}}, \ \ \rho_b\equiv
615: \frac{z_{b_0b_1}z_{34}}{z_{b_03}z_{b_14}},\end{align} are anharmonic ratios. By assumption,
616: $\rho_a$ and $\rho_b$ are small, and one may approximate
617: $F(...;\rho_{a,b})\approx 1$. A remarkable point is that $\rho$
618: is small \emph{both} in the limits of $x_{01}\to\infty$ and $x_{01}\to
619: 0$ and one may approximate $F(...;\rho)\approx 1.$ Expanding the brackets,
620: we get eight terms. The first
621: term reads \begin{align} I_1=\frac{1}{8\pi^6} b^*_{0,\nu}b^*_{0,\nu_a}b^*_{0,\nu_b}
622: \int \frac{d^2x_2d^2x_3d^2x_4}{x_{23}^2x_{34}^2x_{42}^2} \left(\frac{x_{01}x_{23}}{x_{02}x_{13}}\right)^{2\gamma}
623: \left(\frac{x_{a_0a_1}x_{24}}{x_{a2}x_{a4}}\right)^{2\gamma_a}
624: \left(\frac{x_{b_0b_1}x_{34}}{x_{b3}x_{b4}}\right)^{2\gamma_b}
625: \label{ui}
626: \end{align}
627: If we take the limit $x_{01}\to 0$, this is the same
628: integral which gives the triple Pomeron vertex $f(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_b)$.
629: \begin{align} &\int \frac{d^2x_2d^2x_3d^2x_4}{x_{23}^2x_{34}^2x_{42}^2} \left(\frac{x_{01}x_{23}}{x_{02}x_{13}}\right)^{2\gamma}
630: \left(\frac{x_{a_0a_1}x_{24}}{x_{a2}x_{a4}}\right)^{2\gamma_a}
631: \left(\frac{x_{b_0b_1}x_{34}}{x_{b3}x_{b4}}\right)^{2\gamma_b}
632: \nonumber \\ &\approx x_{01}^{2\gamma}x_{a_0a_1}^{2\gamma_a}
633: x_{b_0b_1}^{2\gamma_b}\int
634: \frac{d^2x_2d^2x_3d^2x_4}{x_{23}^2x_{34}^2x_{42}^2}
635: \left(\frac{x_{23}}{x_{02}x_{03}}\right)^{2\gamma}
636: \left(\frac{x_{24}}{x_{a2}x_{a4}}\right)^{2\gamma_a}
637: \left(\frac{x_{34}}{x_{b3}x_{b4}}\right)^{2\gamma_b} \nonumber \\
638: &=x_{01}^{2\gamma}x_{a_0a_1}^{2\gamma_a}
639: x_{b_0b_1}^{2\gamma_b}\frac{f(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_b)}{x_{0a}^{2(\gamma+\gamma_a-\gamma_b)}
640: x_{0b}^{2(\gamma+\gamma_b-\gamma_a)}x_{ab}^{2(\gamma_a+\gamma_b-\gamma)}}.
641: \label{limit}
642: \end{align}
643: For a later use, we note that when $\gamma_a=\gamma_b$,
644: \begin{align}
645: I_1=\frac{1}{8\pi^6} b^*_{0,\nu}b^{*2}_{0,\nu_a}
646: f(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_a)\left(\frac{x_{a_0a_1}x_{b_0b_1}}{x_{ab}^2}\right)^{2\gamma_a}
647: \left(\frac{x_{01}x_{ab}}{x_{0a}x_{0b}}\right)^{2\gamma}, \quad
648: (x_{01}\to 0).
649: \label{later}
650: \end{align}
651: Eq.~(\ref{limit}) should coincide with our previous
652: result Eq.~(\ref{!}), so we obtain an identity \begin{align}
653: g(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_b)f(\bar{\gamma},\bar{\gamma}_a,\bar{\gamma}_b)
654: =\frac{1}{8\pi^6}b^*_{0,\nu}b^*_{0,\nu_a}b^*_{0,\nu_b}f(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_b).
655: \label{kor} \end{align} Eq.~(\ref{kor}) is a straightforward generalization of
656: the relation between $f(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_b)$ and $f(\bar{\gamma},\gamma_a,\gamma_b)$
657: derived in \cite{kor}.
658: We also see that the
659: previous approximation Eq.~(\ref{appro}) misses
660: the seven other terms in Eq.~(\ref{label}) which contribute
661: equally to $n^{(2)}$ due to the symmetry $\gamma \leftrightarrow 1-\gamma$ of
662: the integrals $\int d\gamma
663: d\gamma_a d\gamma_b$. We take this into account by multiplying Eq.~(\ref{ui})
664: by 8. \begin{align} I\to \frac{1}{\pi^6} b^*_{0,\nu}b^*_{0,\nu_a}b^*_{0,\nu_b}
665: \int \frac{d^2x_2d^2x_3d^2x_4}{x_{23}^2x_{34}^2x_{42}^2}\left(\frac{x_{01}x_{23}}{x_{02}x_{13}}\right)^{2\gamma}
666: \left(\frac{x_{a_0a_1}x_{24}}{x_{a2}x_{a4}}\right)^{2\gamma_a}
667: \left(\frac{x_{b_0b_1}x_{34}}{x_{b3}x_{b4}}\right)^{2\gamma_b}
668: \label{li}
669: \end{align}
670: Now we would like to evaluate this for $x_{01}\to \infty$. In the following,
671: we assume that $\gamma_a=\gamma_b$, which will be approximately
672: valid at the saddle point when $x_{a_0a_1}\sim x_{b_0b_1}$.
673: Then
674: Eq.~(\ref{li}) takes the form \begin{align} I=\frac{1}{\pi^6}
675: b^*_{0,\nu}b^{*2}_{0,\nu_a}\left(\frac{x_{a_0a_1}x_{b_0b_1}}{x^2_{ab}}\right)^{2\gamma_a}
676: \int \frac{d^2x_2d^2x_3d^2x_4}{x_{23}^2x_{34}^2x_{42}^2}
677: \left(\frac{x_{01}x_{23}}{x_{02}x_{13}}\right)^{2\gamma}
678: \left(\frac{x_{24}x_{34}x_{ab}^2}{x_{a2}x_{a4}x_{b3}x_{b4}}\right)^{2\gamma_a}.
679: \end{align}
680: It is easy to see from the SL(2,C) invariance that the result of
681: the integration must have the structure [In fact, this property
682: holds only for $\gamma_a=\gamma_b$.] \begin{align}
683: I=\frac{1}{\pi^6}
684: b^*_{0,\nu}b^{*2}_{0,\nu_a}\left(\frac{x_{a_0a_1}x_{b_0b_1}}{x^2_{ab}}\right)^{2\gamma_a}
685: h\left(\rho', \bar{\rho}'\right), \end{align} where
686: \begin{align} \rho'= \frac{z_{01}z_{ab}}{z_{0a}z_{1b}},
687: \end{align} is the anharmonic ratio of the external points.
688: In the limit $x_{01}\to 0$, $\rho' \to 0$ and $h$
689: should reproduce Eq.~(\ref{later}). \begin{align}
690: h(\rho',\bar{\rho}')\approx
691: f(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_a)|\rho'|^{2\gamma}, \qquad (\rho' \to 0). \end{align}
692: Our observation is that the limit $x_{01} \to \infty$ also leads
693: to $\rho'\to 0$. Therefore, when $x_{01} \to \infty$,
694: \begin{align} I\approx \frac{1}{\pi^6}
695: b^{*}_{0,\nu}b^{*2}_{0,\nu_a}
696: f(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_a)\left(\frac{x_{a_0a_1}x_{b_0b_1}}{x^2_{ab}}\right)^{2\gamma_a}\left(
697: \frac{x_{01}x_{ab}}{x_{0a}x_{1b}}\right)^{2\gamma}\nonumber \\
698: =8g(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_a)f(\bar{\gamma},\bar{\gamma}_a,\bar{\gamma}_a)
699: \left(\frac{x_{a_0a_1}x_{b_0b_1}}{x^2_{ab}}\right)^{2\gamma_a}\left(
700: \frac{x_{01}x_{ab}}{x_{0a}x_{1b}}\right)^{2\gamma},
701: \end{align} and we obtain the behavior of $n^{(2)}$ at the saddle
702: point
703: \begin{align}
704: n^{(2)}_Y(x_{0}x_1;x_{a_0}x_{a_1},x_{b_0}x_{b_1})\sim
705: \frac{1}{x^2_{a_0a_1}x_{b_0b_1}^2}
706: e^{2\chi(\gamma_a)Y}b^{*}_{0,\nu}b^{*2}_{0,\nu_a}
707: f(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_a)
708: \left(\frac{x_{a_0a_1}x_{b_0b_1}}{x^2_{ab}}\right)^{2\gamma_a}\left(
709: \frac{x_{01}x_{ab}}{x_{0a}x_{1b}}\right)^{2\gamma}, \label{val}
710: \end{align}
711: with $\gamma$ and $\gamma_a$ (and also $y$) determined
712: from the saddle point equations
713: \begin{align}
714: & \chi(\gamma)=2\chi(\gamma_a), \label{15} \\
715: & \chi'(\gamma)y=\ln \frac{x_{0a}^2x_{1b}^2}{x_{01}^2x_{ab}^2} \gg 1,\\
716: & \chi'(\gamma_a)(Y-y)=\ln \frac{x_{ab}^2}{x_{a_0a_1}^2} \gg 1.
717: \label{17} \end{align} Note that $\frac{1}{2} < \gamma_a < \gamma
718: < 1$.
719:
720: Eq.~(\ref{val}) is valid \emph{both }for $x_{01} \ll x_{ab}$ and
721: $x_{01} \gg x_{ab}$. Due to conformal symmetry, the two cases of Fig.~\ref{fig3}
722: are mathematically identical. In the latter case, if the dipole $x_{ab}$ is deeply inside
723: the parent dipole $x_{01}$, one can make an approximation
724: \begin{align}
725: \left(\frac{x_{01}x_{ab}}{x_{0a}x_{1b}}\right)^{2\gamma}\approx
726: \left( \frac{x_{ab}}{x_{01}}\right)^{2\gamma}.
727: \end{align}
728: It is interesting to note that in the same limit we may rewrite $n^{(2)}$ as
729: \begin{align} n^{(2)}_Y \approx \frac{f(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_a)}
730: {x_{a_0a_1}^2x_{b_0b_1}^2}\int^Y_0 dy \frac{x_{ab}^2}{x_{01}^2}
731: n_y(x_{01},x_{ab}) \frac{ x_{a_0a_1}^2}{x_{ab}^2}
732: n_{Y-y}(x_{ab},x_{a_0a_1}) \frac{x_{b_0b_1}^2}{x_{ab}^2}
733: n_{Y-y}(x_{ab},x_{b_0b_1}). \label{www}
734: \end{align}
735: Eq.~(\ref{www}) provides an intuitive understanding of the
736: result. The parent dipole $x_{01}$ emits a child dipole $x_{ab}$ inside
737: the area $x_{01}^2$ with uniform probability (c.f., Eq.~(\ref{point})).
738: The geometrical factor $x_{ab}^2/x_{01}^2 $ specifies the
739: location of the dipole $x_{ab}$.
740: Then the dipole $x_{ab}$ splits into two
741: dipoles of similar size $\sim x_{ab}$ through the triple Pomeron vertex,
742: $f(\gamma,\gamma_a,\gamma_a)$. Finally, each of the two dipoles emits
743: a child dipole of size $x_{a_0a_1}$ (or $x_{b_0b_1}$)
744: inside the area $\sim x_{ab}^2$ again with uniform probability, and the
745: two child dipoles $x_{a_0a_1}$ and $x_{b_0b_1}$ roughly fall within a distance $x_{ab}$
746: (see, Fig.~\ref{fig3}B). Another representation of
747: $n^{(2)}$ is (c.f., Eq.~(\ref{jim})) \begin{align} n^{(2)}_Y \propto \int^Y_0 dy
748: T_y(x_{01},x_{ab}) T_{Y-y}(x_{ab},x_{a_0a_1})
749: T_{Y-y}(x_{ab},x_{b_0b_1}),
750: \end{align} which may be a useful form to include effects beyond
751: the BFKL evolution.
752:
753:
754: Finally, we consider how the approach to saturation is modified in
755: the presence of power--law correlations in the target.
756: The scattering amplitude of two dipoles off a large onium of size $x_{01}$ at
757: small impact parameter can be computed similarly
758: as before \begin{align}& T_Y^{(2)}(x_{01};x_{a_0a_1},x_{b_0b_1})
759: \sim
760: \alpha_s^4 x_{a_0a_1}^2x_{b_0b_1}^2n_Y(x_{01};x_{a_0a_1},x_{b_0b_1}) \nonumber \\
761: & \qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad \sim T_Y(x_{01},x_{a_0a_1},b\approx 0)
762: T_Y(x_{01},x_{b_0b_1},b\approx 0)
763: \left(\frac{x_{01}}{x_{ab}}\right)^{2(2\gamma_a-\gamma)}.
764: \label{kkk} \end{align}
765: The power law correlation Eq.~(\ref{kkk}) is remarkable in view of the fact that
766: the single dipole distribution has essentially no $b$--dependence
767: deep inside the dipole $x_{01}$. Due to the enhancement factor,
768: $\left(\frac{x_{01}}{x_{ab}}\right)^{2(2\gamma_a-\gamma)} \gg 1$, the problem
769: of unitarity for $T^{(2)}$ is severer than that for $T$. The condition
770: $T^{(2)}\le 1$ is roughly equivalent to requiring that the
771: exponential factor of $n^{(2)}$ vanishes along the saturation line
772: $ x_{a_0a_1}=x_{b_0b_1}=1/Q_{pairsat}$ \begin{align} 2\chi(\gamma_a)Y-\gamma \ln
773: \frac{x_{01}^2}{x_{ab}^2}-2\gamma_a \ln
774: (x_{ab}^2 Q_{pairsat}^2)=0.
775: \end{align} Solving this equation with the conditions
776: Eqs.~(\ref{15})-(\ref{17}), one finds that \begin{align}
777: Q^2_{pairsat}=\frac{1}{x_{01}^2}e^{\frac{\chi(\gamma_a)}{\gamma_a}Y}
778: \left(\frac{x_{01}^2}{x_{ab}^2}\right)^{1-\frac{\gamma}{2\gamma_a}}
779: =\frac{1}{x_{ab}^2}\exp
780: \left(\frac{ \chi'(\gamma)-\frac{\chi(\gamma)}{\gamma}}
781: {\frac{\chi'(\gamma)}{\chi'(\gamma_a)}
782: -\frac{2\gamma_a}{\gamma}}Y\right). \label{last} \end{align} Since $\gamma$ and $\gamma_a$ depend
783: on coordinates, there is not a unique way of writing $Q_{pairsat}$. The first
784: expression shows that, when $\gamma_a \approx \gamma_s$,
785: the onset of unitarity corrections is much earlier than the
786: single dipole scattering case, $Q_{pairsat}\gg Q_s$ (c.f., Eq.~(\ref{qsat})).
787: This is quite a contrast to the result $Q_s\approx Q_{pairsat}$
788: which would follow from the
789: assumption of factorization $T^{(2)}\approx T^2$.
790: The second expression of Eq.~(\ref{last}) emphasizes\footnote{The
791: factor in the exponential
792: can be shown to be positive for $\gamma_a\ge \gamma_s$.} that $Q_{pairsat}$ is not an
793: intrinsic quantity of the target, but
794: depends rather sensitively on the configuration of the projectile.
795:
796:
797:
798:
799: \section*{Acknowledgments}
800: We are grateful to Edmond Iancu and Gregory Soyez for
801: many discussions. Y.~H. thanks Lev Lipatov for helpful conversations.
802: We thank the Galileo Galilei Institute for
803: Theoretical Physics for the hospitality and the INFN for partial
804: support during the completion of this work. The work of A.~M. is
805: supported in part by the U.S. Department of Energy.
806:
807: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
808:
809: \bibitem{bfkl} E.~A.~Kuraev, L.~N.~Lipatov and V.~S.~Fadin,
810: %``The Pomeranchuk Singularity In Nonabelian Gauge Theories,''
811: Sov.\ Phys.\ JETP {\bf 45} (1977) 199; I.~I.~Balitsky and L.~N.~Lipatov,
812: %``The Pomeranchuk Singularity In Quantum Chromodynamics,''
813: Sov.\ J.\ Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf 28} (1978) 822.
814:
815:
816: \bibitem{salam}
817: G.~P.~Salam,
818: %``Multiplicity distribution of color dipoles at small x,''
819: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 449} (1995) 589;
820: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 461} (1996) 512; A.~H.~Mueller and G.~P.~Salam,
821: %``Large multiplicity fluctuations and saturation effects in onium
822: %collisions,''
823: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 475} (1996) 293.
824:
825: \bibitem{IM} E.~Iancu and A.~H.~Mueller,
826: %``Rare fluctuations and the high-energy limit of the S-matrix in QCD,''
827: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 730} (2004) 494; M.~Kozlov and E.~Levin,
828: %``The Iancu-Mueller factorization and high energy asymptotic behaviour,''
829: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 739} (2004) 291.
830:
831:
832:
833:
834:
835:
836: \bibitem{imm} E.~Iancu, A.~H.~Mueller and S.~Munier,
837: %``Universal behavior of QCD amplitudes at high energy from general tools of
838: %statistical physics,''
839: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 606} (2005) 342.
840:
841:
842: \bibitem{shoshi}
843: A.~H.~Mueller and A.~I.~Shoshi,
844: %``Small-x physics beyond the Kovchegov equation,''
845: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 692} (2004) 175.
846:
847: \bibitem{edmond}
848: E.~Iancu and D.N.~Triantafyllopoulos,
849: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 756} (2005) 419;
850: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 610} (2005) 253;
851: A.~H.~Mueller, A.~I.~Shoshi and S.~M.~H.~Wong,
852: %``Extension of the JIMWLK equation in the low gluon density region,''
853: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 715} (2005) 440; A.~Kovner and M.~Lublinsky,
854: Phys.~Rev.~{\bf D71} (2005) 085004.
855:
856:
857:
858: \bibitem{golec} G.~Soyez,
859: %``Fluctuations effects in high-energy evolution of QCD,''
860: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 72} (2005) 016007; R.~Enberg, K.~Golec-Biernat and S.~Munier,
861: %``The high energy asymptotics of scattering processes in QCD,''
862: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 72} (2005) 074021; N.~Armesto and J.~G.~Milhano,
863: %``On correlations and discreteness in non-linear QCD evolution,''
864: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 73} (2006) 114003.
865:
866: \bibitem{diff} Y.~Hatta, E.~Iancu, C.~Marquet, G.~Soyez and
867: D.~N.~Triantafyllopoulos,
868: %``Diffusive scaling and the high-energy limit of deep inelastic scattering in
869: %QCD at large N(c),''
870: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 773} (2006) 95; E.~Iancu, C.~Marquet and G.~Soyez,
871: %``Forward gluon production in hadron hadron scattering with Pomeron loops,''
872: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 780} (2006) 52; M.~Kozlov, A.~I.~Shoshi and B.~W.~Xiao,
873: %``Total gluon shadowing due to fluctuation effects,''
874: arXiv:hep-ph/0612053.
875:
876: \bibitem{liouville} E.~Iancu and L.~McLerran,
877: %``Liouville field theory for gluon saturation in QCD at high energy,''
878: arXiv:hep-ph/0701276.
879:
880: \bibitem{sat}
881: L.~V.~Gribov, E.~M.~Levin and M.~G.~Ryskin,
882: %``Semihard Processes In QCD,''
883: Phys.\ Rept.\ {\bf 100} (1983) 1.
884:
885: \bibitem{qiu} A.~H.~Mueller and J.~w.~Qiu,
886: %``Gluon Recombination And Shadowing At Small Values Of X,''
887: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 268} (1986) 427.
888:
889: \bibitem{larry}
890: L.~McLerran and R.~Venugopalan, Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D49} (1994)
891: 2233.
892:
893:
894: \bibitem{B}
895: I.~Balitsky, Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B463} (1996) 99; Y.~V.~Kovchegov,
896: %``Small-x F2 structure function of a nucleus including multiple pomeron
897: %exchanges,''
898: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60} (1999) 034008;
899: J.~Jalilian-Marian, A.~Kovner, A.~Leonidov and H.~Weigert, Phys.\
900: Rev.\ {\bf D59} (1999)
901: 014014; J.~Jalilian-Marian, A.~Kovner and H.~Weigert,
902: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D59} (1999) 014015; E.~Iancu, A.~Leonidov and L.~McLerran, Nucl. Phys.~{\bf A692}
903: (2001) 583; E.~Ferreiro, E.~Iancu, A.~Leonidov
904: and L.~McLerran, Nucl. Phys. {\bf A703} (2002) 489.
905:
906: \bibitem{al1}
907: A.~H.~Mueller,
908: %``Soft Gluons In The Infinite Momentum Wave Function And The Bfkl Pomeron,''
909: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 415} (1994) 373.
910:
911: \bibitem{patel}
912: A.~H.~Mueller and B.~Patel,
913: %``Single And Double Bfkl Pomeron Exchange And A Dipole Picture Of High-Energy
914: %Hard Processes,''
915: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 425} (1994) 471.
916:
917: \bibitem{al} A.~H.~Mueller,
918: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 437} (1995) 107.
919:
920:
921:
922:
923:
924: \bibitem{av} E.~Avsar, G.~Gustafson and L.~Lonnblad,
925: %``Small-x dipole evolution beyond the large-N(c) limit,''
926: arXiv:hep-ph/0610157.
927:
928:
929:
930: \bibitem{1} R.~Peschanski,
931: %``Dual Shapiro-Virasoro amplitudes in the QCD dipole picture,''
932: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 409} (1997) 491.
933:
934: \bibitem{bialas} A.~Bialas and R.~Peschanski,
935: %``Initial state color dipole emission associated with QCD pomeron exchange,''
936: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 355} (1995) 301.
937: \bibitem{tre} M.~Braun and D.~Treleani,
938: %``The double parton distributions in the hard pomeron model,''
939: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 18} (2001) 511.
940: \bibitem{lev}
941: L.~N.~Lipatov,
942: %``The Bare Pomeron In Quantum Chromodynamics,''
943: Sov.\ Phys.\ JETP {\bf 63} (1986) 904.
944:
945:
946:
947:
948:
949:
950: \bibitem{lip} L.~N.~Lipatov,
951: %``Small-x physics in perturbative QCD,''
952: Phys.\ Rept.\ {\bf 286} (1997) 131.
953: \bibitem{robi2} H.~Navelet and R.~Peschanski, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf
954: 507}
955: (1997) 353.
956:
957: \bibitem{wallon} H.~Navelet and S.~Wallon,
958: %``Onium onium scattering at fixed impact parameter: Exact equivalence
959: %between the color dipole model and the BFKL pomeron,''
960: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 522} (1998) 237.
961:
962: \bibitem{geom}
963: E.~Iancu, K.~Itakura and L.~McLerran,
964: %``Geometric scaling above the saturation scale,''
965: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 708} (2002) 327.
966: \bibitem{dio} A.~H.~Mueller and D.~N.~Triantafyllopoulos,
967: %``The energy dependence of the saturation momentum,''
968: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 640} (2002) 331.
969:
970: \bibitem{traveling} S.~Munier and R.~Peschanski,
971: %``Geometric scaling as traveling waves,''
972: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 91} (2003) 232001.
973:
974: \bibitem{mun} S.~Munier and S.~Wallon,
975: %``Geometric scaling in exclusive processes,''
976: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 30} (2003) 359; C.~Marquet, R.~Peschanski and G.~Soyez,
977: %``Traveling waves and geometric scaling at non-zero momentum transfer,''
978: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 756} (2005) 399.
979:
980:
981:
982:
983:
984:
985: \bibitem{vacca} M.~A.~Braun and G.~P.~Vacca,
986: %``Triple pomeron vertex in the limit N(c) --> infinity,''
987: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 6} (1999) 147.
988:
989:
990:
991: \bibitem{bar} J.~Bartels and M.~Wusthoff,
992: %``The Triple Regge limit of diffractive dissociation in deep inelastic
993: %scattering,''
994: Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 66} (1995) 157; J.~Bartels, L.~N.~Lipatov and M.~Wusthoff,
995: %``Conformal Invariance of the Transition Vertex $2 \to 4$ gluons,''
996: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 464} (1996) 298.
997:
998:
999: \bibitem{bia}
1000: A.~Bialas, H.~Navelet and R.~Peschanski,
1001: %``The QCD triple pomeron coupling from string amplitudes,''
1002: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 57} (1998) 6585.
1003: \bibitem{kor}
1004: G.~P.~Korchemsky,
1005: %``Conformal bootstrap for the BFKL pomeron,''
1006: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 550} (1999) 397.
1007:
1008:
1009:
1010: \end{thebibliography}
1011:
1012:
1013:
1014:
1015: \end{document}
1016: