Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Electromagnetic pion and kaon form factors in light-cone resummed perturbative QCD
Udit Raha* and Andreas Aste†
Department of Physics, University of Basel, Switzerland
(Received 11 December 2008; published 18 February 2009)
We analyze the electromagnetic pion and kaon form factor by including radiative and higher-twist
effects within the framework of resummed perturbative QCD in the spacelike region. We focus on the
transition from the perturbative to nonperturbative behavior in the phenomenological intermediate-energy
regime. Using a modified ‘‘kT ’’ factorization scheme with transverse degrees of freedom, we evaluate the
nonperturbative soft contributions as distinct from the hard contributions, ensuring no double counting via
the Ward identity at Q2 ¼ 0. The soft contributions are obtained via local quark-hadron duality, while the
hard contributions rest on the well-known collinear factorization theorem using model wave functions
with modified Brodsky-Huang-Lepage–type ansatz and distribution amplitudes derived from light-cone
QCD sum rules. Our analysis shows that the perturbative hard part prevails for large Q2 beyond
50–100 GeV2 , while for low and moderate momentum transfers below 10–16 GeV2 , the soft contribu-
tions dominate over the hard part. Thus, we demonstrate the importance of including the soft contributions
for explaining the experimental form-factor data.
034015-2
ELECTROMAGNETIC PION AND KAON FORM FACTORS IN . . . PHYSICAL REVIEW D 79, 034015 (2009)
2
The paper is organized as follows: In Sec. II, we briefly of Q . In addition, they also include the nonfactorizable
discuss the idea of factorization and review the basic soft contributions. Formally, the definition of the leading
definitions of the twist-2 and twist-3 pseudoscalar meson twist-2 DA for pseudoscalar mesons (e.g., ) can be
DAs and their renormalization evolutions. Section III deals given in a process- and frame-independent manner
with the theoretical framework involved in calculating the [35,36,71–73] in terms of matrix elements of a nonlocal
spacelike electromagnetic form factor. Here, we recall the light-ray operator along a certain lightlike direction
predictions of classic asymptotic QCD for large Q2 ! 1 z ðz2 ¼ 0Þ:
and how one needs to modify pQCD with collinear as well
as ‘‘kT ’’ factorization schemes, including Sudakov effects h0juðzÞ½z;
z 5 dðzÞj ðPÞi
at intermediate energies. In Sec. IV, we provide the details Z1
¼ iP dxeiðzpÞ 2; ðx; 2F Þ; ¼ 2x 1; (3)
of our numerical results for the pion form factor and 0
compare them with the available experimental data. We
also give a preliminary prediction for the kaon form factor, with the path-ordering (P ) Wilson line in terms of the
despite the lack of available experimental data for com- gluon ‘‘connection’’ along the straight line joining z and
parison in the desired phenomenological regime. Finally, z along the null plane which is given by
Zz
Sec. V contains our summary and conclusions. The appen-
dixes contain a compendium of relevant formulas used in ½z; z ¼ P igs dy A ðyÞ ; (4)
z
our analysis.
where P2 ¼ m2 and p is a lightlike vector,
II. FACTORIZATION AND DISTRIBUTION 1 m2
AMPLITUDES p ¼ P z : (5)
2 Pz
The parton model of describing exclusive processes in
The local limit z ! 0 gives the normalization condition at
QCD inherently rests on the so-called frozen approxima-
an arbitrary scale ,
tion [71–73]. At high energies, exclusive scattering ampli-
tudes are dominated by hadronic Fock states with Z1 f
2; ðx; 2 Þdx ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi (6)
essentially valence quark configurations (qq in mesons). 0 2 2Nc
While the relative velocities of the participating hadrons
are located close to the null plane, the internal hadron ‘‘- with the pion decay constant, f 131 MeV, defined by
quantum-binding’’ processes are highly time-dilated with h0juð0Þ
5 dð0Þj ðPÞi ¼ if P : (7)
respect to the exclusive reaction time scales in the rest
frames of the remaining hadrons. This effectively freezes The leading twist-2 DA 2; ðx; 2 Þ can be expressed as a
the hadronic internal degrees of freedom as seen by the conformal series expansion over Gegenbauer polynomials
other hadrons. This incoherence between the long-distance C3=2
2n :
intrahadronic binding processes and the short-distance in- X1
terhadronic scattering reaction is the very motivation for 3f
2; ðx; 2 Þ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi xð1 xÞ 1 þ a
2n ð2
ÞC 3=2
2n ðÞ ;
the idea of factorization. Thus, the hadrons may be con- 2Nc n¼1
sidered to be consisting of definite valence quark states (8)
denoted by a DA of leading twist . The collinear facto-
rization formula is then used to express exclusive quanti- where
ties like the form factors as a convolution using the DAs: 3f
Z1 ðasÞ
2; ðxÞ ¼ 2; ðx; ! 1Þ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi xð1 xÞ
2
(9)
2Nc
FM ðQ2 Þ ¼ dxdyin ðx; 2F ÞTH ðx; y; Q2 ; 2F ; 2R Þ
0
is generally referred to as the asymptotic DA. The
out ðy; 2F Þ þ ; (2) Gegenbauer moments a 2n represent the nonperturbative
where Q2 ¼ 2Pin Pout . Here, Pin and Pout are, respec- inputs encoding the long-distance dynamics and may be
tively, the ingoing and outgoing hadron momenta, x and y obtained, e.g., via lattice QCD calculations or QCD sum
are the longitudinal momentum fractions of the nearly on- rules. The renormalization group (RG) equation for
shell valence quarks, R is the renormalization scale, and 2; ðx; 2 Þ is known as the Efremov-Radyushkin-
F is the factorization scale which is defined as the scale Brodsky-Lepage (ER-BL) equation [71–73],
below which the QCD dynamics are nonperturbative and d Z1
remain implicitly encoded within the DAs, while the dy- 2 2; ðx; 2Þ ¼ dyVðx; y; s ð2 ÞÞ2; ðy; 2 Þ
d2 0
namics above are perturbative and must be retained in the
(10)
hard kernel TH . The ellipses in the above equation repre-
sent contributions from higher order Fock states and sub- with the integral kernel Vðx; y; s Þ to leading order in s
leading twists which are all suppressed by inverse powers given by
034015-3
UDIT RAHA AND ANDREAS ASTE PHYSICAL REVIEW D 79, 034015 (2009)
s 1 x 1 ), they are defined by [35]
V0 ðx; y; s Þ ¼ CF 1þ ðx yÞ
2 1 y xy Z1
h0juðzÞi
5 dðzÞj ðPÞi ¼ dxeiðzpÞ p3; ðx; 2 Þ;
x 1
þ 1þ ðy xÞ ; (11) 0
y yx þ i
h0juðzÞ
5 dðzÞj ðPÞi ¼ ðP z
P
z Þ
where the ‘‘þ’’ distribution is defined as 3
Z1
Z1 dxeiðzpÞ 3; ðx; 2 Þ
½Vðx; y; s Þþ ¼ Vðx; y; s Þ ðx yÞ dtVðt; y; s Þ: 0
0
(18)
(12)
with ¼ m2 =ðmu þ md Þ and similarly for the charged
Solving the above set of equations yields the multiplicative
kaon (e.g., K ) [38]:
renormalization formula for moments a n to leading-
logarithmic accuracy, Z1
h0juðzÞi dxeiðzpÞ p3;K ðx; 2 Þ;
5 sðzÞjK ðPÞi ¼ K
ð0Þ 0
an ð2 Þ ¼ Ln =
0
an ð20 Þ; (13) i
h0juðzÞ
5 sðzÞjK ðPÞi ¼ K ðP z
P
z Þ
where L ¼ s ð2 Þ=s ð20 Þ and
0 ¼ ð11Nc 2Nf Þ=12, 3
Z1
while the lowest order anomalous dimensions are given by dxeiðzpÞ 3;K ðx; 2 Þ
0
3 1
ð0Þ
n ¼ C F c ðn þ 2Þ þ c ð1Þ (19)
4 2ðn þ 1Þðn þ 2Þ
(14) with K ¼ m2K =ðmu þ ms Þ. Note that the gauge-link fac-
tors [Wilson line (4)] in the matrix elements are to be
with the logarithmic derivative of the Gamma function
implicitly understood. The twist-3 DAs have the following
c ðzÞ ¼ 0 ðzÞ=ðzÞ. Note that for the pion all odd moments
asymptotic forms:
an¼1;3;5 vanish due to isospin symmetry. In contrast, the
kaon DAs have nonzero values for the odd moments, fM 3fM
pðasÞ
3;M ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi; 3;M ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi xð1 xÞ;
ðasÞ
signifying flavor-SU(3) violation effects. Hence, the 4 2Nc 2 2Nc
twist-2 DA for the kaon (e.g., K ) is given by the expan- M ¼ ; K (20)
sion
X1 with the normalization condition
3fK
2;K ðx; 2 Þ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi xð1 xÞ 1 þ aK
n ð2
ÞC3=2
n ðÞ ; Z 1 p; fM
2Nc n¼1 3;M ðx; 2 Þ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi: (21)
0 4 2Nc
(15)
For our analysis, we use the 2-particle twist-3 DAs from
Z1 fK Refs. [36,38] defined at the scale ¼ 1 GeV. As a matter
2;K ðx; 2 Þdx ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi; (16) of bookkeeping, we explicitly provide the relevant formu-
0 2 2Nc
las for the charged pion and kaon DAs in Appendix A.
where the kaon decay constant fK 1:22f [25] is de-
fined by
III. SPACELIKE ELECTROMAGNETIC FORM
h0juð0Þ
5 sð0ÞjK ðPÞi ¼ ifK P : (17) FACTOR
Since the Gegenbauer moments are multiplicatively renor- The electromagnetic form factor is considered an im-
malizable with growing anomalous dimensions, for a suf- portant observable for studying the onset of the perturba-
ficiently large renormalization scale a finite number of tive regime in exclusive processes. For large Q2 , the
moments are relevant, despite the fact that the higher order asymptotic scaling behavior FM ðQ2 Þ 1=Q2 follows
moments have large uncertainties in their present determi- from the well-known dimensional ‘‘quark counting,’’ while
nation. Hence, in all practical calculations, the series ex- for small Q2 , the behavior is well described by the vector
pansions of the DAs are truncated only to the first few meson dominance (VMD) model [43–45] and is given by
moments. In this paper, we have adopted a model for the 1
twist-2 DAs in truncating up to the second moment, as was FM ðQ2 Þ ; Q2 2VDM ; (22)
1þ Q2 =2VDM
done in Refs. [36,38].
For the charged pseudoscalar mesons at the twist-3 level, where VDM 750 MeV is a reasonable cutoff mass
there are two 2-particle DAs and one 3-particle DA. Here, scale, showing no obvious trace of pQCD scaling behavior
we only give the formal definitions of the 2-particle DAs where no high-energy cutoff exists. Hence, a thorough
that we need in our analysis. For the charged pion (e.g., understanding of this transition (from nonperturbative to
034015-4
ELECTROMAGNETIC PION AND KAON FORM FACTORS IN . . . PHYSICAL REVIEW D 79, 034015 (2009)
perturbative) behavior is of crucial importance in QCD for Note that using the asymptotic twist-2 DA ðasÞ2;M ðxÞ, one
understanding the very nature of strong interactions and in obtains the familiar 1=Q2 scaling behavior for Q2 ! 1,
providing a vivid picture of the underlying quark-gluon
substructure of the mesons.
For a charged meson M (e.g., , K ), the form factor is 8s ðQ2 ÞfM
2
hard
FM ðQ2 Þ ¼ : (26)
specified by the following matrix element: Q2
ðP0 þ PÞ FM ðQ2 Þ ¼ hMðP0 ÞjJ ð0ÞjMðPÞi;
X The principal motivation of the modified resummed pQCD
J ¼ ef q f qf ; (23) is the elimination of large logarithms in the hard kernel that
f arise from radiative gluon loop corrections. One way of
where J is the electromagnetic current with quark qf of doing this is by the introduction of intrinsic transverse
flavor f and charge ef . In this paper, we shall only consider momenta dependence of the constituent partons, giving
rise to a Sudakov suppression due to certain partial resum-
spacelike momentum transfers, i.e., q2 ¼ ðP0 PÞ2 ¼
mation of transverse terms, as mentioned earlier in the
Q2 . Neglecting the meson masses, we consider the
Introduction. Including the transverse momenta of the
‘‘brick wall’’ frame where the incoming particle with 4-
two valence quarks within the meson, the tree-level hard
momentum P in the z direction recoils with 4-momentum
kernel TH in momentum space is written as
P0 in the z direction after interacting with the hard
pffiffiffiphoton
‘‘wall.’’ In the light-cone
pffiffiffi formalism, P ¼ ðQ= 2; 0; 0T Þ
0
and P ¼ ð0; Q= 2; 0T Þ. TH ðx; y; Q2 ; k1T ; k2T ; 2 Þ
16CF s ð2 ÞxQ2
A. Hard contributions in pQCD ¼ ; (27)
ðxQ2 þ k21T ÞðxyQ2 þ ðk1T k2T Þ2 Þ
The hard contributions to the form factor are calculated
using the collinear factorization formula, Eq. (2), where the
hard scattering kernel TH at the scale ¼ F ¼ R is where the transverse momentum dependence now sets the
given to the leading order in s by factorization scale. Then the modified factorization for-
mula in the transverse impact parameter representation is
2 1 1 given by
TH ðx; y; Q ; Þ ¼ 16CF s ð Þ
2 2 2 þ
3 xyQ2 3
Z1 Z d2 b1 d2 b2
1
; (24) hard
FM ðQ2 Þ ¼ dxdy P 2;M ðx; b1 ; P; Þ
ð1 xÞð1 yÞQ2 0 ð2Þ2 ð2Þ2
where in QCD the value of the Casimir operator in the T~H ðx; y; Q; b1 ; b2 ; ÞP 2;M ðy; b2 ; P0 ; Þ;
fundamental representation of SU(3) is CF ¼ ðNc2 (28)
1Þ=2Nc ¼ 4=3. The factorization formula then yields the
classic pQCD expression for the meson form factor at
2 ¼ Q2 : where the modified DA P 2;M ðxi ; bi ; Pi ; Þ absorbs the
Z 2 large infrared logarithms into the Sudakov exponent Si
1 2;M ðx; Q2 Þ
16CF s ðQ2 Þ
FM ðQ Þ ¼
hard 2
dx
: (25) [23] (including also the evolution of the DA from the
Q2 0 x factorization scale 1=bi to the scale ):
034015-5
UDIT RAHA AND ANDREAS ASTE PHYSICAL REVIEW D 79, 034015 (2009)
where the MS running coupling to two-loop accuracy in integration then yields the full modified wave function in
standard perturbation theory is given by the impact representation:
s ð2 Þ 1
1 lnðlnð2 =2QCD ÞÞ ~
P 2;M ðxi ; bi ; 1=bi ; Mq Þ ¼ A2;M 2;M ðxi ; 1=bi Þ
¼ (31)
0 lnð =QCD Þ
2 2
30 ln2 ð2 =2QCD Þ
2 M2q
exp 2;M
with
0 ¼ ð11Nc 2Nf Þ=12 ¼ 9=4 and
1 ¼ xi ð1 xi Þ
ð51Nc 19Nf Þ=24 ¼ 4 for Nc ¼ Nf ¼ 3. Note that the
b2i xi ð1 xi Þ
above-modified factorization calls for introducing a scale exp : (37)
4
22;M
hierarchy XQ > 1=bi > QCD [where X ¼ xi ; ð1 xi Þ,
x1 ¼ x, and x2 ¼ y] to separate the distinct contributions
Including the RG evolution equation for the hard kernel,
from the perturbative and nonperturbative kinematic re-
gions without the possibility of ‘‘double counting.’’ Note Zt
d
that there exist other schemes of defining the running T H ðx; y; Q; b1 ; b2 ; Þ ¼ exp 4
~ ð ð ÞÞ
2
q s
coupling involving power corrections, restoring the ex-
plicit Landau singularity and the analyticity at Q2 ¼ 0 T~H ðx; y; Q; b1 ; b2 ; tÞ; (38)
(see, e.g., Refs. [90,91] and also Sec. IV for details).
At low momentum transfers, the modified infrared-free where
DAs are often approximated with constituent quark masses pffiffiffiffiffi
which are different from the actual masses of the current t ¼ maxð xyQ; 1=b1 ; 1=b2 Þ; (39)
quarks and usually chosen close to the intrinsic transverse
scale QCD of the hadron structure, i.e., between 200 and one arrives at the ‘‘double-b’’ factorization formula for the
500 MeV. These quark masses, which effectively parame- meson form factor at the twist-2 level [59]:
trize the QCD vacuum effects, are also used to suppress Z1 Z1
ðt¼2Þ
possible endpoint effects. Hence, we have FM ðQ2 Þ ¼ 16Q2 CF xdxdy b1 db1 b2 db2 s ðtÞ
0 0
~
P 2;M ðxi ; bi ; 1=bi Þ
~ 2;M ðxi ; bi ; 1=bi ; Mq Þ
’P (32) ~ 2;M ðx; b1 ; 1=b1 ; Mq Þ
P
~ 2;M ðy; bi ; 1=b2 ; Mq ÞHðx; y; Q; b1 ; b2 Þ
P
which could be expressed in terms of the full momentum-
space light-cone wave function 2;M (which also includes exp½Sðx; y; b1 ; b2 ; QÞ (40)
the transverse momentum distribution of the constituent
bound state partons): with
~ 2;M ðxi ; bi ; 1=bi ; Mq Þ
P pffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffi
Hðx; y; Q; b1 ; b2 Þ ¼ K0 ð xyQb2 Þ½ðb1 b2 ÞK0 ð xQb1 Þ
Z d2 kiT pffiffiffi pffiffiffi
¼ 2;M ðxi ; kiT ; 1=bi ; Mq Þ: (33) I0 ð xQb2 Þ þ ðb2 b1 ÞK0 ð xQb2 Þ
k2iT
ð1=bi Þ2 16
3 pffiffiffi
I0 ð xQb1 Þ: (41)
To model the intrinsic transverse momentum dependence
of the meson wave functions, we use the Brodsky-Huang- K0 and I0 are modified Bessel functions, and the full
Lepage (BHL) Gaussian prescription [82,88]: Sudakov exponent is given by
034015-6
ELECTROMAGNETIC PION AND KAON FORM FACTORS IN . . . PHYSICAL REVIEW D 79, 034015 (2009)
64CF s ð2 Þx
THðt¼3Þ ðx; y; Q2 ; k1T ; k2T ; 2 Þ ¼ : (43)
ðxQ2 þ k1T ÞðxyQ2 þ ðk1T
2 k2T Þ2 Þ
Applying the momentum projection operator [93,94]
0
p 3;M 3;M @
M
¼ i P
M 6 5 2;M M 5 3;M i n n
þ i P (44)
6 6 @kT
on the bilocal matrix element with quark flavors f1 and f2 (f1;2 ¼ u, d, s),
Z1 Z
p 3;M
h0jq f1 ðzÞqf2 ðzÞjMðPÞi
¼ i dx d kT e
2 iðzpÞ
P6 5 2;M M 5 3;M P z
; (45)
0 6
0
where 3;M ðx;kT ;1=b;Mq Þ ¼ @3;M ðx;kT ;1=b;Mq Þ=@x, n ¼ ð1; 0; 0T Þ is the unit vector in the ‘‘þ’’ direction, n ¼
ð0; 1; 0T Þ is the unit vector in the ‘‘’’ direction, ¼ 2x 1 and M ¼ m2M =ðmqf1 þ mqf2 Þ, one obtains the final formula
for a hard meson form factor up to twist-3 corrections given by [63,65]
ðt¼2Þ ðt¼3Þ
hard
FM ðQ2 Þ ¼ FM ðQ2 Þ þ FM ðQ2 Þ
Z1 Z1
x~ ~ 2;M ðy; b2 ; 1=b2 ; Mq Þ
¼ 32Q2 CF dxdy b1 db1 b2 db2 s ðtÞ P ðx; b1 ; 1=b1 ; Mq ÞP
0 0 2 2;M
2 ~ p ~p ð1 þ xÞ ~ p 0
~ 3;M
þ M2 ðx P 3;M ðx; b1 ; 1=b1 ; Mq ÞP 3;M ðy; b2 ; 1=b2 ; Mq Þ þ P 3;M ðx; b1 ; 1=b1 ; Mq ÞP ðy; b2 ; 1=b2 ; Mq Þ
Q 6
Y2
1 ~p ~
þ P ðx; b 1 ; 1=b 1 ; M q ÞP
3;M ðy; b 2 ; 1=b2 ; M q ÞÞ Hðx; y; Q; b ;
1 2b Þ St ðxi ÞSt ðx i Þ exp½Sðx; y; b1 ; b2 ; QÞ;
2 3;M i¼1
x i ¼ 1 xi : (46)
Here, we have assumed a similar Gaussian ansatz in the for the twist-2 case, but for the twist-3 case, the Sudakov
transverse momentum distribution of the modified twist-3 suppression factor may still not be effective enough in
wave functions: shielding the nonperturbative enhancements due to end-
p point singularities. These are kinematic singularities of the
~
P 3;M ðxi ; bi ; 1=bi ; Mq Þ ¼ Ap3;M p3;M ðxi ; 1=bi Þ scattering amplitude when the longitudinal momentum
ð
p Þ2 M2q fraction x of the valence partons (quarks) goes to 0, 1.
exp 3;M Therefore, in addition there is a need to sum up the col-
xi ð1 xi Þ
linear double logarithms of the type s ln2 x to all orders,
b2i xi ð1 xi Þ which are then collected into these jet functions. The exact
exp ;
4ð
p3;M Þ2 form of St ðxi Þ involves a one-parameter integration, but for
~ 3;M ðxi ; bi ; 1=bi ; Mq Þ ¼ A ðxi ; 1=bi Þ the sake of numerical calculations, it is convenient to take
P 3;M 3;M the simple parametrization, as proposed in Refs. [95,96]:
ð
Þ2 M2q 21þ2c ð3=2 þ cÞ
exp 3;M St ðxi Þ ¼ pffiffiffiffi ½xi ð1 xi Þc ; (48)
xi ð1 xi Þ ð1 þ cÞ
b2 x ð1 x Þ where the parameter c 0:3 for light pseudoscalar mesons
exp i i 2 i :
4ð
3;M Þ like the pion and kaon. The jet functions vanish at the
endpoints and modify the endpoint behavior of the DAs,
The hard kernel H and the Sudakov exponent S are given
providing enough suppression to damp the artificial effect
by Eqs. (41) and (42), respectively. The above formula is
of endpoint singularities.
used to evaluate the pion and kaon hard form factors using
the twist-2 DAs, Eqs. (8) and (15), respectively, and twist-3
DAs provided in Appendix A. The St ðxi Þ are jet functions, B. Soft contributions via local duality
defined as eikonalized matrix elements of quark fields The perturbative predictions for the pion form factor are
attached by a Wilson line, arising from another kinematic known to be relatively small for phenomenological low
resummation scheme called the threshold resummation, as momentum transfers (Q2
10 GeV2 ) [49–
introduced in Refs. [95,96]. The modified treatment of the 51,70,79,84,86], as is also evident from our analysis in
collinear factorization prescription works reasonably well the next section. Clearly, there is the need for including
034015-7
UDIT RAHA AND ANDREAS ASTE PHYSICAL REVIEW D 79, 034015 (2009)
nonfactorizable soft contributions to explain the experi- 2
ðt¼2Þ Q2 ðt¼2Þ
mental data. The factorization ansatz, Eq. (2), holds for FM ðQ2 Þ ! FM ðQ2 Þ: (51)
2s0 ðQ2 Þ þ Q2
large momentum transfers under the assumption that only
the contributions from valence parton states dominate. This However, for the twist-3 case, the ‘‘matching function’’
approximation no longer holds true at small momenta ðzÞ ¼ 1=ð1 þ zÞ2 , with z ¼ Q2 =M02 , is insufficient to
when contributions from higher Fock states with more ensure the Ward identity at Q2 ¼ 0. To correct for the
than valence partons become significant. In addition, there singular ( 1=Q4 ) behavior, we make a similar modifica-
could be nonperturbative enhancements from the so-called tion of the twist-3 part via the replacement
Feynman mechanism, which corresponds to selecting a
ðt¼3Þ M04 M04
hadronic configuration in which one of the valence partons FM ðQ2 Þ ¼ F~ðt¼3Þ
M ðQ Þ
2
! ~ðt¼3Þ
F ðQ2
Þ
carries almost the entire hadron momenta. Unfortunately, Q4 M
M04 þ Q4
due to the complexity of soft QCD processes, there are no (52)
unambiguous ways to calculate these contributions analyti-
cally using the parton picture and Feynman diagrammatics, with the choice of the matching function ðzÞ ~ ¼ 1=ð1 þ
other than using theoretical models for the DAs. In this z Þ . This yields the Ward identity corrected twist-3 part:
2 2
034015-8
ELECTROMAGNETIC PION AND KAON FORM FACTORS IN . . . PHYSICAL REVIEW D 79, 034015 (2009)
pffiffiffi 0.3 0.3
Z1 ðxÞ
2 M2u;d 6 (a) (b)
2 2
16A
dx exp ¼ ;
0 xð1 xÞ xð1 xÞ f
(58) 0.2 0.2
034015-9
UDIT RAHA AND ANDREAS ASTE PHYSICAL REVIEW D 79, 034015 (2009)
TABLE I. Various input hadronic parameters for twist-2 and twist-3 light-cone wave functions
at 0 ¼ 1 GeV.
034015-10
ELECTROMAGNETIC PION AND KAON FORM FACTORS IN . . . PHYSICAL REVIEW D 79, 034015 (2009)
1 1 0.4 0.4
World pion data World pion data
(a) ΛQCD = 0.2 GeV (b) ΛQCD = 0.2 GeV
Q2 Fπ (Q2) [GeV2]
Q2 Fπ (Q2) [GeV2]
0.3 0.3
0.8 0.8
B-H-L B-H-L
0.2 0.2
0.6 0.6
Fπ (Q2)
Fπ (Q2)
0.1 0.1
(a) ΛQCD = 0.2 GeV (b) Λan = 0.4 GeV
0.4 0.4
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
2
Q 2
(GeV ) Q2 (GeV2)
0.2 0.2
1 1
Q2 Fπ (Q2) [GeV2]
Q Fπ (Q2) [GeV2]
0 0
0.8 0.8
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
2 2 2 2 0.6 No B-H-L 0.6 No B-H-L
Q (GeV ) Q (GeV )
0.4 0.4
FIG. 3 (color online). The total electromagnetic pion form
factor at the twist-2 level (soft þ twist-2), denoted by the dashed
2
0.2 0.2
lines, and at the twist-3 level (soft þ twist-2 þ twist-3), denoted
by the solid lines, with (a) the usual QCD running coupling and 0 0
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 0 25 50 75 100 125 150
(b) the analytical QCD running coupling. The world pion data Q2 (GeV2) Q2 (GeV2)
are taken from Refs. [1–8].
FIG. 4 (color online). Twist-2 (long dashed lines) and twist-3
large values although F ðQ2 ¼ 0Þ ¼ 1, satisfying the (solid lines) corrections to the scaled hard pion form factor with
Ward identity. This clearly signals the breakdown of per- the usual QCD running coupling. Plots (a) and (b) are obtained
turbation theory at such small momentum transfers. using BHL ansatz, while (c) and (d) are obtained with P ~ M ðxÞ !
To study the contributions of endpoint effects and to M ðxÞ. Also, plots (a) and (c) do not include threshold resum-
distinguish individual soft and hard contributions, it is mation in the hard contributions, which are included in (b) and
more useful to study the variation of the scaled pion form (d). The soft corrections (short dashed lines) are also shown.
factor Q2 F with Q2 . In Fig. 4, we show the individual
contributions of the twist-2 and twist-3 power corrections provides large damping of the endpoint effects in the twist-
to the scaled hard pion form factor over a wide range of 3 amplitude. The twist-2 part, on the other hand, remains
momentum transfers for the usual QCD coupling. Clearly, mostly unaltered, if not slightly enhanced due to the thresh-
the twist-3 contributions are seen to be significantly larger old resummation, especially in the low-energy region. Note
than the leading twist-2 counterparts at low momentum that in this respect the use of threshold resummation in the
transfers, supporting the claims made in analytic scheme is somewhat redundant and has little effect
[26,28,29,58,63,65]. In fact, it is interesting to see the on both the twist corrections. Finally, as expected, one
endpoint enhancement in the twist-3 amplitudes much observes that the twist-3 corrections fall off rapidly with
more explicitly if one rather considered only the collinear increasing Q2 and, beyond a certain point, fall below the
DAs to calculate the form factors in the usual perturbation twist-2 corrections. At asymptotically large momentum
theory, without considering the full transverse momentum transfers, only the twist-2 contributions are expected to
dependence (e.g., the BHL ansatz) in the meson wave dominate.
functions, as originally done in Ref. [96]. In other words, Our final results for the scaled pion form factor are
one simply makes the replacement P ~ M ðxÞ ! M ðxÞ in summarized in Figs. 5 and 6. We use both the usual and
calculating the hard form factor. The inclusion of the the analytic QCD running couplings and compare our
transverse momenta and constituent quark masses in the results with the available experimental pion data with
wave function provides a natural cutoff for the soft and increasing error bars towards intermediate energies. The
endpoint enhancements. Similar behavior can also be ob- individual soft and hard contributions along with the total
served in the analytic case where the enhancement being contribution are shown. Clearly, contrary to the earlier
less expressed has not been displayed in this work. These claims made in Ref. [59], the twist-2 hard form factor is
facts suggest that the modified collinear factorization far too small in the phenomenologically accessible region
scheme, including explicit transverse degrees of freedom to explain the data. One must therefore look for other
with Sudakov suppression, which works well for the twist- possibilities like nonperturbative higher-twist effects and
2 case is not very effective at the twist-3 level in shielding soft contributions. Interestingly, it is seen that the soft
such artificial nonperturbative enhancements at low mo- dynamics largely dominate the low-energy region below
menta. To improve this situation, especially for the results 10–16 GeV2 but rapidly fall off in the asymptotic region.
obtained in the usual perturbative scheme, we use thresh- The contributions from the twist-3 corrections turn out to
old resummation which, along with Sudakov suppression, be significantly large in the moderate range of energies
034015-11
UDIT RAHA AND ANDREAS ASTE PHYSICAL REVIEW D 79, 034015 (2009)
0.8 0.8 0.8
World pion data World pion data
World pion data
(a) ΛQCD = 0.2 GeV (b) Λan = 0.4 GeV
Q2 Fπ (Q2) [GeV2]
Q2 Fπ (Q2) [GeV2]
0.6 0.6
(a) ΛQCD = 0.2 GeV
0.6
Q Fπ (Q ) [GeV ]
0.4 0.4
2
0.2 0.2
0.4
2
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
2 2
Q2 (GeV2)
2
Q (GeV )
0.2
FIG. 6 (color online). Scaled total electromagnetic form factor
for the pion with (a) the usual QCD running coupling and (b) the
0 analytical running coupling over a wider range of intermediate
0 2 4 6 8 10 energies. The solid line represents the full twist-3 result (soft þ
2 2
Q (GeV ) twist-2 þ twist-3), the long dashed lines represent the full twist-
0.8
2 result (soft þ twist-2), and the soft corrections are indicated by
World pion data the short dashed lines. The world pion data are taken from
Refs. [1–8].
(b) Λan = 0.4 GeV
0.6 both schemes not only show a striking similarity even at
Q2 Fπ (Q ) [GeV2]
034015-12
ELECTROMAGNETIC PION AND KAON FORM FACTORS IN . . . PHYSICAL REVIEW D 79, 034015 (2009)
TABLE II. Various determined hadronic parameters for twist-2 and twist-3 light-cone wave functions at 0 ¼ 1 GeV. The numbers
in the parentheses correspond to values for the asymptotic wave functions.
B. The kaon form factor decay constant fK 1:22f [25]. Here, we also take
We conclude the section on the numerical analysis by QCD ¼ 0:2 GeV and an ¼ 0:4 GeV for the respective
displaying our predictions for the kaon form factor, apply- running couplings in the MS scheme. The results are
ing the same techniques as for the case of the pion form
factor. The twist-2 and twist-3 light-cone wave functions 0.8
G-odd
for the kaon have the general form in the transverse b space G-(even+odd)
given by
0.6
Q 2 FK (Q2) [GeV2]
~ K ðx; b; 1=b; Mu;d;s Þ ¼ AK K ðx; 1=bÞ
P
(a) ΛQCD = 0.2 GeV
b2 xð1 xÞ
exp 0.4
4
2K
2
Ms M2u;d
exp
2K þ ;
x 1x 0.2
(66)
where we used the twist-3 chiral-enhancement parameter 0
3K ¼ 1:3 GeV and the experimental estimate for the kaon 0 10 20 30 40 50
Q2 (GeV2)
0.6
0.8
G-odd
G-(even+odd)
0.6
Q2 FK (Q2) [GeV2]
0.4
Q Fπ(Q ) [GeV ]
0.4
2
2
0.2 0.2
World pion data
1σ-Error (αs)
1σ-Error (αsan,approx) 0
0 10 20 30 40 50
2 2
0 Q (GeV )
0 2 4 6 8 10
2 2
Q (GeV ) FIG. 8 (color online). Scaled total electromagnetic form factor
for the kaon with the usual QCD running coupling (upper plot)
FIG. 7 (color online). Theoretical 1 error for the scaled total and the analytical running coupling (lower plot) for intermediate
pion form factor due to the variation of the input parameters for energies. The solid lines represents the full twist-3 result (soft þ
the DAs (3 , f3 , !3 , and a 2 ) and QCD;an . The lines twist-2 þ twist-3), the long dashed lines represent the twist-2
correspond to the mean values of the parameters using the usual result (soft þ twist-2), and the soft corrections are indicated by
(dotted line) and the analytic (broken line) QCD coupling the short dashed lines. For the full twist-3 case, both the results,
schemes, respectively. The error bars for the experimental data i.e., with and without the G-parity-breaking terms in the DAs,
points [1–8] are also shown. are shown.
034015-13
UDIT RAHA AND ANDREAS ASTE PHYSICAL REVIEW D 79, 034015 (2009)
summarized in Fig. 8 for intermediate energies. The solid contributions dominate, being larger than the hard (twist-2)
line represents the total scaled form factor in each case. contributions at least by a factor of 2. In fact, below
Here, our results for the kaon form factor must be consid- 4 GeV2 , 60%–70% of the available data are already ac-
ered preliminary. Because of the complete absence of counted for by the soft contributions. In addition, we also
experimental data at intermediate energies, we are unable needed the twist-3 power corrections to explain the remain-
to make any meaningful phenomenological comparison. ing discrepancy. However, at larger energies (say, Q2 >
The presently available kaon data have very poor statistics 50–100 GeV2 ), both the soft and the twist-3 contributions
and have hardly been measured above 0:2 GeV2 . Hence, rapidly fall off, and eventually the twist-2 form factor
we do not show the experimental data points in the form- dominates asymptotically. Similar conclusions, albeit
factor plots. With the availability of better quality data in being preliminary, are drawn for the kaon form factor,
the future, there could be plenty of room for further im- although it seems that the onset of the perturbative behav-
provements, for instance, the extension of the above results ior occurs at slightly larger momentum transfers than for
to include a full NLO calculation for subleading twists or the case of the pion. Of course, as we mentioned earlier, we
higher helicity and Fock state contributions. still need to investigate the nature of the contributions that
may arise from a full systematic NLO calculation with
subleading twists and intrinsic transverse momenta, or
V. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
from the inclusion of higher helicity and Fock states.
For the past two decades the electromagnetic meson With the availability of better quality data in the future,
form factors have been the subject of intensive theoretical such analyses may be necessary to make definite
and experimental scrutiny, and yet there is still not a conclusions.
universally accepted framework for their description. In summary, although the quality of present experimen-
Presently, reliable experimental data are available only tal form-factor data does not allow a definitive conclusion,
for the pions which are entirely concentrated at very low one can expect that the nonperturbative soft contributions
energies with very poor statistics at intermediate energies. and higher-twist power corrections to the form factors play
The low-energy part of the data is best explained by the an important role at phenomenologically accessible mo-
standard VMD model, showing no apparent trace of pQCD mentum transfers. Thus, more work needs to be done on
behavior, which is expected only at very high energies. both the theoretical and experimental sides to obtain more
Very many attempts have been made to predict the onset of conclusive results and push the frontiers of our knowledge
the perturbative behavior for the pion form factor. The on confinement dynamics to the study of higher order and
modified or resummed valence pQCD with factorization nonperturbative contributions to exclusive processes.
appears to show some attractive features to enable pQCD
calculations to be valid in a self-consistent way even at ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
very moderate energies. Whether this is true will only be
confirmed when data with better statistics at higher mo- The authors would like to thank Alexander Bakulev,
mentum transfers become available in the future. At the Pankaj Jain, Alexander Lenz, Seregy Mikhailov,
same time, the onset of the perturbative behavior being Sabyasachi Mishra, Ingo Sick, Ritesh Singh, Nikolaos
very slow, it is still unclear whether the leading order Stefanis, and Xing-Gang Wu for interesting discussions
perturbative calculations could be expected to be precise and comments. One of the authors (U. R.) would like to
even at the highest accessible energies. In this paper, with convey special thanks to Professor Dirk Trautmann and
the help of (a) the double-humped-type DAs and (b) the Professor Friedel Thielemann for their hospitality and
modified transverse (kT ) factorization scheme, incorporat- financial support at the University of Basel. This work
ing both Sudakov suppression and threshold resummation, was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation
we got rid of nonperturbative endpoint enhancements. This (SNSF) under Contract No. 200020-111705.
enlarges the scope of applicability of resummed pQCD,
independent of the coupling scheme, to a much wider
range of intermediate energies, if not down to a few APPENDIX A: TWO-PARTICLE TWIST-3
GeVs, as demonstrated in this paper. By a simple adjust- DISTRIBUTION AMPLITUDES
ment of only the chiral-enhancement parameter 3 , a
good agreement with the experimental data was obtained. The twist-3 DAs are obtained by an expansion over
As for the scaled pion form factor, we found that the conformal spins. At next-to-leading order, the 2-particle
leading order pQCD contributions potentially undermine DAs p3;M and 3;M [including meson-mass corrections
the agreement with the available low-energy data and are that break chiral symmetry at Oðms þ mq Þ in the SU(3)
only trustworthy in the hard-energy regime: even from a case while preserving G-parity] are given in terms of the
very conservative point of view, Q2 should be bigger than Gegenbauer polynomials C1=2 n and C3=2
n , respectively
4 GeV2 . At low momentum transfers, the nonperturbative [35,36], as
034015-14
ELECTROMAGNETIC PION AND KAON FORM FACTORS IN . . . PHYSICAL REVIEW D 79, 034015 (2009)
fM 5
p3;M ðx; 2 Þ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi 1 þ 303M ð2 Þ 2M ð2 Þ C1=2
2 ðÞ
4 2Nc 2
27 81
þ 33M ð2 Þ!3M ð2 Þ 2M ð2 Þ 2M ð2 ÞaM 2 ð2
Þ C 1=2
4 ðÞ ;
20 10
3fM 1 7 3
3;M ðx; 2 Þ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi xð1 xÞ 1 þ 53M ð2 Þ 3M ð2 Þ!3M ð2 Þ 2M ð2 Þ 2M ð2 ÞaM
2 ð2 Þ C3=2 ðÞ (A1)
2
2 2Nc 2 20 5
with
f3M 1 mM
3M ¼ ; M ¼ ; M ¼ ; K (A2)
fM M M
where the nonperturbative parameters f3M and !3M , respectively, are defined by the following matrix elements of local
twist-3 operators:
h0jq f1 5 gs G
qf2 jMðPÞi ¼ if3M ðP P g
P P g
P
P g þ P
P g Þ;
3 (A3)
h0jq f1
5 ½iD
; gs G
qf2 ð3=7Þi@
q f1
5 gs G
qf2 jMðPÞi ¼ if P P P ! ;
14 3M
3M
where G
is the gluon field tensor. The LO scale dependence of various twist-3 parameters is given by
ð0Þ ð0Þ
M ð2 Þ ¼ L3;qq =
0 M ð20 Þ; ð0Þ
3;qq ¼ 1; M ð2 Þ ¼ L3; =
0 M ð20 Þ;
ð0Þ 4 1 ð0Þ
ð0Þ ð0Þ
3; ¼ 3;qq ¼ 1; 3M ð2 Þ ¼ L3; =
0 3M ð20 Þ; ð0Þ
3; ¼ C F þ C A ; !3M ð2 Þ ¼ L3;! =
0 !3M ð20 Þ;
3 4
7 7 ð0Þ 25
ð0Þ
3;! ¼ C þ C ; 2 ð Þ ¼ L
aM 2 2
a2 ð20 Þ;
=
0 M
2ð0Þ ¼ C ; (A4)
24 F 12 A 24 F
where L ¼ s ð2 Þ=s ð20 Þ, CF ¼ ðNc2 1Þ=2Nc , CA ¼ Nc , and 0 1 GeV.
We have also considered the 2-particle twist-3 kaon DAs p3;K and 3;K , as given in [38], which not only include a
complete set of meson-mass corrections but also G-parity-breaking terms of Oðms mq Þ:
fK K Þ 9K aK þ 27 K aK K 3 þ 27aK
p3;K ðx; 2 Þ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi 1 þ 3K þ ð1 þ 6a 1 1 ðÞ
C1=2
4 2Nc 2
2 þ 1 2 2
9 K K 1=2
þ ð303K þ 15þ a2 3 a1 ÞC2 ðÞ þ 103K
3K a2 C3 ðÞ 33K !3K C1=2
K K K K 1=2
4 ðÞ
2
3 3 K
þ ðK Þð1 3a1 þ 6a2 Þ lnx þ ðþ Þð1 þ 3a1 þ 6a2 Þ lnð1 xÞ ;
þ K K K K K K (A5)
2 þ 2
3fK 3 K aK 15 K aK þ 3K aK 15 K aK C3=2 ðÞ
3;K ðx; 2 Þ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi xð1 xÞ 1 þ K þ 15
2 2Nc 2 þ þ 2
2 1 þ 1
2 2 1
1 3 3 K
þ 53K 3K !3K þ K 3 ðÞ þ ðþ þ Þð1 3a1 þ 6a2 Þ lnx
aK C3=2 ðÞ þ 3K
3K C3=2 K K K
2 2 þ 2 2 2
3 K 1
þ ðþ Þð1 þ 3a1 þ 6a2 Þ lnð1 xÞ
K K K (A6)
2 1 þ
with
Note that the expression for 3;K ðx; 2 Þ is normalized to unity with an extra factor of 1=ð1 þ Þ, compared to that given
in [38]. The nonperturbative parameters f3K , !3K , and
3K are defined (e.g., K ) by
034015-15
UDIT RAHA AND ANDREAS ASTE PHYSICAL REVIEW D 79, 034015 (2009)
5 gs G
sjK ðPÞi ¼ if3K ðP P g
P P g
P
P g þ P
P g Þ;
h0ju
3
5 ½iD
; gs G
s ð3=7Þi@
u
h0ju
5 gs G
sjK ðPÞi ¼ if P P P ! ; (A8)
14 3K
3K
1
Q
5 gs G
s u
h0juiD
5 gs G
iD~
sjK ðPÞi ¼ if3K P P
P
3K ;
7
ð0Þ ð0Þ þ =
0
K ð2 Þ ¼ L3; =
0 K ð20 Þ; ð0Þ ð0Þ
3; ¼ 3;qq ¼ 1; þ ð Þ ¼ L
K 2 3;
þ ð0 Þ;
K 2
ð0Þ
3;þ
¼ 2ð0Þ
3;qq ¼ 2;
ð0Þ ð0Þ
ð Þ ¼ L
K 2 3; =
0 K
ð20 Þ; ð0Þ ð0Þ
3; ¼ 23;qq ¼ 2; f3K ð2 Þ ¼ L3;f =
0 f3K ð20 Þ; ð0Þ
3;f ¼ 12 CF þ 4 C A ;
7 1
ð0Þ 7 7 ð0Þ 19
!3K ð2 Þ ¼ L3;! =
0 !3K ð20 Þ; ð0Þ
3;! ¼ C þ C ;
3K ð2 Þ ¼ L3;
=
0
3K ð20 Þ; ð0Þ
3;
¼ C ;
24 F 12 A 48 F
ð0Þ 2 ð0Þ 25
1 ð Þ ¼ L
aK 2 1
a1 ð20 Þ;
=
0 K
ð0Þ
1 ¼ CF ; 2 ð Þ ¼ L
aK 2 2
a2 ð20 Þ;
=
0 K
ð0Þ
2 ¼ C : (A9)
3 24 F
But since the strange quark is massive, there is operator mixing of the ones in Eq. (A8) with that of twist-2 operators and
the resulting LO renormalization group equations give the following scale dependence of the various twist-3 parameters:
2 1=
0 6
f3K ð2 Þ ¼ L55=ð36
0 Þ f3K ð20 Þ þ ðL L55=ð36
0 Þ Þ½fK ms ð20 Þ þ ðL55=ð36
0 Þ L17=ð9
0 Þ Þ½fK ms aK
1 ð0 Þ;
2
19 65
1 1
½f3K !3K ð2 Þ ¼ L26=ð9
0 Þ ½f3K !3K ð20 Þ þ ðL1=
0 L26=ð9
0 Þ Þ½fK ms ð20 Þ þ ðL17=ð9
0 Þ L26=ð9
0 Þ Þ½fK ms aK1 ð0 Þ
2
170 10
2
þ ðL43=ð18
0 Þ L26=ð9
0 Þ Þ½fK ms aK 2 ð0 Þ;
2
15
14 14
½f3K
3K ð2 Þ ¼ L37=ð18
0 Þ ½f3K
3K ð20 Þ ðL1=
0 L37=ð18
0 Þ Þ½fK ms ð20 Þ þ ðL17=ð9
0 Þ L37=ð18
0 Þ Þ½fK ms aK 1 ð0 Þ
2
67 5
4
ðL43=ð18
0 Þ L37=ð18
0 Þ Þ½fK ms aK 2 ð0 Þ:
2
(A10)
11
Finally, we present the various Gegenbauer polynomials used in the above formulas:
1 ðÞ ¼ ;
C1=2 2 ðÞ ¼ 2ð3 1Þ;
C1=2 3 ðÞ ¼ 2ð5 3Þ;
C1=2 4 ðÞ ¼ 8ð35 30 þ 3Þ;
C1=2
1 2 1 2 1 4 2
(A11)
0 ðÞ ¼ 1;
C3=2 1 ðÞ ¼ 3;
C3=2 2 ðÞ ¼ 2ð5 1Þ;
C3=2 3 ðÞ ¼ 2ð7 3Þ:
C3=2
3 2 5 2
^ ^
1 t 1 t
Sðx; y; b1 ; b2 ; QÞ ¼ sðxQ; b1 Þ þ sðyQ; b2 Þ þ sðð1 xÞQ; b1 Þ þ sðð1 yÞQ; b2 Þ ln ln
0 b1
^
0 b^2
1 þ lnð2b^1 Þ 1 þ lnð2t^Þ
1 þ lnð2b^2 Þ 1 þ lnð2t^Þ
þ 13 þ 13 ; (B1)
0 2b^1 2t^
0 2b^2 2t^
where
034015-16
ELECTROMAGNETIC PION AND KAON FORM FACTORS IN . . . PHYSICAL REVIEW D 79, 034015 (2009)
Að1Þ q^ Að2Þ q^ Að1Þ ^ 4Að1Þ
1 2Að1Þ
1 1 2E 1
sðXQ; 1=bÞ ¼ ^
q ln þ 1 ðb þ qÞ
^ qþ
^ ln e
2
0 b^ 4
20 b^ 2
0 16
30 16
30 2
1 þ lnð2bÞ ^ 1 þ lnð2qÞ ^ Að2Þ Að1Þ 1 2E 1 q^ 4Að1Þ
1
ln e ln ln ð2bÞ ln ð2qÞ
2 ^ 2 ^
b^ q^ 4
20 4
0 2 b^ 32
30
2Að2Þ
1 1 þ lnð2bÞ ^ 1 þ lnð2qÞ^ 2Að2Þ
1 1 þ 2 lnð2bÞ ^ 1 þ 2 lnð2qÞ
^
þ q^
8
40 b^ q^ 8
40 ð2bÞ ^2 ð2qÞ
^ 2
4Að2Þ
21 1 þ 2 lnð2bÞ ^ þ 2ln2 ð2bÞ ^ 1 þ 2 lnð2qÞ ^ þ 2ln2 ð2qÞ ^
64
0 6
ð2bÞ ^ 2 ð2qÞ^ 2
2 2
4A
1 27 þ 9 lnð2bÞ þ 3 ln ð2bÞ 27 þ 9 lnð2qÞ
ð2Þ 2 ^ 1 2 ^ 2 2
^ þ 13 ln2 ð2qÞ
^
þ q^ : (B2)
8
60 ð2bÞ ^3 ð2qÞ^ 3
[1] C. N. Brown et al., Phys. Rev. D 8, 92 (1973). (1980) [JETP Lett. 25, 510 (1977)]; Nucl. Phys. B201, 492
[2] C. J. Babek et al., Phys. Rev. D 17, 1693 (1978). (1982); Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 38, 775 (1983); Nucl. Phys.
[3] H. Ackermann et al., Nucl. Phys. B137, 294 (1978). B246, 52 (1984); Phys. Rep. 112, 173 (1984).
[4] P. Brauel et al., Z. Phys. C 3, 101 (1979). [26] V. L. Chernyak, A. R. Zhitnitsky, and I. R. Zhitnitsky,
[5] S. R. Amendolia et al., Nucl. Phys. B277, 168 (1986). Nucl. Phys. B204, 477 (1982).
[6] J. Volmer, Ph.D. thesis, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, [27] V. L. Chernyak, A. R. Zhitnitsky, and V. G. Serbo, JETP
2000 (unpublished); Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 1713 (2001). Lett. 26, 594 (1977); Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 31, 552 (1980).
[7] T. Horn et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 192001 (2006). [28] B. V. Geshkenbeim and M. V. Terentyev, Phys. Lett. 117B,
[8] V. Tadevosyan et al., Phys. Rev. C 75, 055205 (2007). 243 (1982); Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 39, 554 (1984); 39, 873
[9] B. Zeidman et al., CEBAF Experiment Report No. E91- (1984).
016/1996. [29] C. S. Huang, Commun. Theor. Phys. 2, 1265 (1983).
[10] R. Mohring et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1805 (1998). [30] M. Gari and N. G. Stefanis, Phys. Lett. B 175, 462 (1986).
[11] M. Vanderhaeghen, M. Guidal, and J.-M. Laget, Phys. [31] Z. Dziembowski and L. Mankiewicz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58,
Rev. C 57, 1454 (1998). 2175 (1987).
[12] C. Bennhold and T. Mart, Phys. Rev. C 61, 012201 (1999). [32] T. Huang and Q. X. Sheng, Z. Phys. C 50, 139 (1991).
[13] R. A. Williams, Phys. Rev. C 46, 1617 (1992). [33] F.-G. Cao, T. Huang, and B. Q. Ma, Phys. Rev. D 53, 6582
[14] S. R. Amendolia et al., Phys. Lett. B 178, 435 (1986); (1996).
Nucl. Phys.B277, 168 (1986). [34] S. Brodsky and G. F. de Teramond, arXiv:hep-ph/
[15] E. B. Dally et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 45, 232 (1980). 0804.3562.
[16] K. H. Glander et al., Eur. Phys. J. A 19, 251 (2004). [35] V. M. Braun and I. E. Filyanov, Z. Phys. C 44, 157 (1989).
[17] J. W. C. McNabb et al., Phys. Rev. C 69, 042201(R) [36] P. Ball, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (1999) 010.
(2004). [37] P. Ball and M. Boglione, Phys. Rev. D 68, 094006 (2003).
[18] R. G. T. Zegers et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 092001 (2003). [38] P. Ball, V. M. Braun, and A. Lenz, J. High Energy Phys. 05
[19] B.-W. Xiao and X. Qian, Eur. Phys. J. A 15, 523 (2002). (2006) 004.
[20] F. P. Pereira et al., Phys. Part. Nucl. 36, 217 (2005). [39] A. Khodjamirian, Th. Mannel, and M. Melcher, Phys. Rev.
[21] X.-G. Wu and T. Huang, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2008) D 68, 114007 (2003); 70, 094002 (2004).
043. [40] C.-R. Ji and F. Amiri, Phys. Rev. D 42, 3764 (1990).
[22] J. Bijnens and A. Khodjamirian, Eur. Phys. J. C 26, 67 [41] J. M. Cornwall, Phys. Rev. D 26, 1453 (1982).
(2002). [42] C.-R. Ji, A. F. Sill, and R. M. Lombdar-Nelson, Phys. Rev.
[23] J. Botts and G. Sterman, Nucl. Phys. B325, 62 (1989). D 36, 165 (1987).
[24] H.-N. Li and G. Sterman, Nucl. Phys. B381, 129 (1992). [43] W. G. Holladay, Phys. Rev. 101, 1198 (1956).
[25] V. L. Chernyak and A. R. Zhitnitsky, Yad. Fiz. 31, 1053 [44] W. R. Frazer and J. R. Fulco, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2, 365
034015-17
UDIT RAHA AND ANDREAS ASTE PHYSICAL REVIEW D 79, 034015 (2009)
(1959); Phys. Rev. 117, 1609 (1960). 22, 2157 (1980); Perturbative Quantum Chromodynamics,
[45] J. Sakurai, Currents and Mesons (University of Chicago, edited by A. H. Mueller (World Scientific, Singapore
Chicago, 1969). 1989), p. 93; S. J. Brodsky, in Proceedings of the
[46] B. Ananthanarayan and S. Ramanan, Eur. Phys. J. C 54, Quantum Chromodynamics Workshop, La Jolla,
461 (2008). California, 1978.
[47] S. J. Brodsky and G. R. Farrar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 31, 1153 [72] A. V. Efremov and A. V. Radyushkin, Phys. Lett. 94B, 245
(1973); Phys. Rev. D11, 1309 (1975). (1980); Theor. Math. Phys. 42, 97 (1980).
[48] F. R. Farrar and D. R. Jackson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 43, 246 [73] A. V. Radyushkin, arXiv:hep-ph/0410276.
(1979). [74] A. Duncan and A. H. Mueller, Phys. Rev. D 21, 1636
[49] V. A. Nesterenko and A. V. Radyushkin, Phys. Lett. 115B, (1980).
410 (1982). [75] S. V. Mikhailov and A. V. Radyushkin, JETP Lett. 43, 712
[50] V. V. Anisovich, D. I. Melikhov, and V. A. Nikonov, Phys. (1986); Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 49, 494 (1989); Phys. Rev. D
Rev. D 52, 5295 (1995); 55, 2918 (1997). 45, 1754 (1992).
[51] A. P. Bakulev, A. V. Radyushkin, and N. G. Stefanis, Phys. [76] A. P. Bakulev and A. V. Radyushkin, Phys. Lett. B 271,
Rev. D 62, 113001 (2000). 223 (1991).
[52] V. Braguta, W. Lucha, and D. Melikhov, Phys. Lett. B 661, [77] A. P. Bakulev and S. V. Mikhailov, Z. Phys. C 68, 451
354 (2008). (1995).
[53] C. R. Ji and S. Cotanch, Phys. Rev. D 41, 2319 (1990). [78] B. L. Ioffe and A. V. Smilga, Phys. Lett. 114B, 353 (1982).
[54] T. Gousset and B. Pire, Phys. Rev. D 51, 15 (1995); [79] N. Isgur and C. H. Llewellyn Smith, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52,
Proceedings of the ELFE Summer School on 1080 (1984); Nucl. Phys. B317, 526 (1989); Phys. Lett. B
Confinement Physics, Cambridge, 1995, pp. 111–143. 217, 535 (1989).
[55] C.-R. Ji, A. Pang, and A. Szczepaniak, Phys. Rev. D 52, [80] A. V. Radyushkin, Acta Phys. Pol. B 15, 403 (1984); Nucl.
4038 (1995). Phys. A527, 153 (1991); A532, 141 (1991).
[56] J. P. B. C. de Melo et al., Phys. Rev. C 59, 2278 (1999); [81] O. C. Jacob and L. S. Kisslinger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 225
Nucl. Phys. A707, 399 (2002). (1986).
[57] H.-M. Choi and C.-R. Ji, Phys. Rev. D 74, 093010 (2006); [82] R. Jacob and P. Kroll, Phys. Lett. B 315, 463 (1993).
Phys. Rev. D 77, 113004 (2008). [83] J. Bolz et al., Z. Phys. C 66, 267 (1995).
[58] F.-G. Cao, Y.-B. Dai, and C.-S. Huang, Eur. Phys. J. C 11, [84] V. M. Braun and I. Halperin, Phys. Lett. B 328, 457
501 (1999). (1994).
[59] C. Coriano, H.-N. Li, and C. Savkli, J. High Energy Phys. [85] B. Chibisov and A. R. Zhitnitsky, Phys. Rev. D 52, 5273
07 (1998) 008. (1995).
[60] V. M. Braun, A. Khodjamirian, and M. Maul, Phys. Rev. D [86] D. Melikhov, Phys. Rev. D 53, 2460 (1996); Eur. Phys. J.
61, 073004 (2000). direct C 4, 1 (2002).
[61] N. G. Stefanis, W. Schroers, and H.-Ch. Kim, Eur. Phys. J. [87] S. Descotes and C. T. Sachrajda, Nucl. Phys. B625, 239
C 18, 137 (2000). (2002).
[62] A. P. Bakulev et al., Phys. Rev. D 70, 033014 (2004). [88] S. J. Brodsky, G. P. Lepage, and T. Huang, in Proceedings
[63] Z.-T. Wei and M.-Z. Yang, Phys. Rev. D 67, 094013 of the Banff Summer Institute on Particles and Fields,
(2003). 1981, edited by A. Z. Capri and A. N. Kamal (Plenum
[64] T. Huang, X.-G. Wu, and X.-H. Wu, Phys. Rev. D 70, Press, New York, 1983), p. 143.
053007 (2004). [89] M. A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein, and V. I. Zakharov, Nucl.
[65] T. Huang and X.-G. Wu, Phys. Rev. D 70, 093013 (2004). Phys. B147, 385 (1979).
[66] F. D. R. Bonnet et al. (Lattice Hadron Physics [90] D. V. Shirkov and I. L. Solovtsov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79,
Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 72, 054506 (2005). 1209 (1997); Phys. Lett. B 442, 344 (1998); Theor.
[67] S. Hashimoto et al. (JLQCD Collaboration), Proc. Sci., Math. Phys. 120, 1220 (1999).
LAT2005 (2006) 336 [arXiv:hep-lat/0510085]. [91] N. G. Stefanis, W. Schroers, and H.-Ch. Kim, Phys. Lett. B
[68] D. Brömmel et al., Proc. Sci., LAT2005 (2006) 360 449, 299 (1999).
[arXiv:hep-lat/0509133]; Eur. Phys. J. C 51, 335 (2007). [92] H.-N. Li, Phys. Rev. D 52, 3958 (1995).
[69] P.-H. J. Hsu and G. T. Fleming, Proc. Sci., LAT2007 [93] M. Beneke and Th. Feldmann, Nucl. Phys. B592, 3
(2007) 145 [arXiv:hep-lat/0710.4538]. (2001).
[70] A. P. Bakulev and A. V. Radyushkin, Phys. Lett. B 271, [94] Z. T. Wei and M. Z. Yang, Nucl. Phys. B642, 263 (2002).
223 (1991). [95] T. Kurimoto, H.-N. Li, and A. I. Sanda, Phys. Rev. D 65,
[71] G. P. Lepage and S. J. Brodsky, Phys. Lett. 87B, 359 014007 (2001).
(1979); Phys. Rev. Lett. 43, 545 (1979); Phys. Rev. D [96] H.-N. Li, Phys. Rev. D 66, 094010 (2002).
034015-18