Models for the polarized parton distributions of the nucléon

Physical Review D

Volumn 63, Issue 9, 2001, Pages

  Gluck M ^a,c   Reya, E ^b   Stratmann, M ^b   Vogelsang, W ^a  

^a TU DORTMUND UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF REGENSBURG   (Germany)

^c RIKEN BNL RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATOMIC PARTICLE; DENSITY; LIGHT SCATTERING; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; POLARIZATION; PREDICTION; STATISTICAL MODEL;

EID: 0034905350     PISSN: 05562821     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.63.094005     Document Type: Article

References (89)

1. M. Glück, E. Reya, M. Stratmann, and W. Vogelsang, Phys Rev. D 53, 4775 (1996)
2. T. Gehrmann and W. J. Stirling, Phys. Rev. D 53, 6100 (1996).
3. R. D. Ball, S. Forte, and G. Ridolfi, Phys. Lett. B 378, 255 (1996);
4. G. Altarelli, R. D. Bail, S. Forte, and G. Ridolfi, Nticl Phys. B496, 337 (1997);
5. Acta Phys. Pol. B 29, 1145 (1998).
6. SLAC-E154 Collaboration, K. Abe et al, Phys. Lett. B 405 180(1997).
7. CERN-SM Collaboration, B. Adeva et al, Phys. Rev. D 58 112002(1998)
8. C. Bourrely, F. Buccella, O. Pisanti, P. Santorelli, and J. Soffer, Prog. Theor. Phys. 99, 1017 (1998).
9. D. de Florian, O. A. Sampayo, and R. Sassot, Phys. Rev. D 57 5803(1998).
10. E. A. Leader, A. V. Sidorov, and D. B. Stamenov, Int. J. Mod Phys. A 13, 5573 (1998);
11. Phys. Rev. D 58, 114028 (1998)
12. Phys. Lett. B 4-15, 232 (1998);
13. 462, 189 (1999);
14. 488, 283 (2000).
15. L. E. Gordon, M. Goshtasbpour, and G. P. Ramsey, Phys. Rev 058,094017(1998).
16. SLAC-E154/155 Collaboration, S. Incerti and F. Sabatie CEA-Saclay PCCF-RI-9901, 1999.
17. S. Tatur, J. Bartelski, and M. Kurzela, Acta Phys. Pol. B 31 647 (2000); J. Bartelski and S. Tatur, hep-ph/0004251.
18. D. K. Ghosh, S. Gupta, and D. Indumathi, Phys. Rev. D 62 094012 (2000).
19. Asymmetry Analysis Collaboration, Y. Goto et al, Phys. Rev D 62, 034017 (2000)
20. D. de Florian and R. Sassot, Phys. Rev. D 62, 094025 (2000).
21. SLAC-Yale E80 Collaboration, M. J. Alguard et al, Phys Rev. Lett. 37, 1261 (1976);
22. G. Baum et al, ibid. 45, 2000 (1980);
23. SLAC-Yale-El30 Collaboration, G. Baum et al, ibid 51, 1135 (1983).
24. CERN-EM Collaboration, J. Ashman et al, Phys. Lett. B 206 364 (1988);
25. Nucl. Phys. B328, 1 (1989).
26. CERN-SM Collaboration, B. Adeva et al, Phys. Rev. D 58 112001 (1998).
27. SLAC-E143 Collaboration, K. Abe et al, Phys. Rev. D 58 120003 (1998).
28. SLAC-E142 Collaboration, P. L. Anthony et al, Phys. Rev. 54, 6620 (1996).
29. DES Y-HERMES Collaboration, K. Ackerstaff et al, Phys Lett. B 404, 383 (1997).
30. DES Y-HERMES Collaboration, A. Airapetian et al, Phys Lett. B 442, 484 (1998).
31. SLAC-E154 Collaboration, K. Abe et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79 26 (1997).
32. SLAC-E155 Collaboration, P. L. Anthony et al, Phys. Lett. 463, 339 (1999).
33. SLAC-E155 Collaboration, P. L. Anthony et al, Phys. Lett. 493, 19 (2000)
34. M. Glück, E. Reya, and A. Vogt, Eur. Phys. J. C 5, 461 (1998).
35. A. D. Martin, R. G. Roberts, W. J. Stirling, and R. S. Thorne Eur. Phys. J. C 4, 463 (1998);
36. 14, 133 (2000).
37. CTEQ5 Collaboration, H. L. Lai et al, Eur. Phys. J. C 12, 375 (2000)
38. H. Botje, Eur. Phys. J. C 14, 285 (2000).
39. For recent reviews see, for example, S. Kumano, Phys. Rep. 303, 183 (1998);
40. J. Speth and A. W. Thomas, Adv. Nucl. Phys. 24, 83 (1998)
41. M. Glück and E. Reya, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 15, 883 (2000)
42. W. Furmanski and R. Petronzio, Z. Phys. C 11, 293 (1982)
43. M. Glück, E. Reya, and W. Vogelsang, Nucl. Phys. B351, 579 (1991)
44. Particle Data Group, C. Caso et al, EUT. Phys. J. C 3, l (1998)
45. M. Karliner and H. J. Lipkin, Phys. Lett. B 461, 280 (1999)
46. J. Ellis and R. L. Jaffe, Phys. Rev. D 9, 1444 (1974);
47. 10, 1669(E) (1974);
48. M. Gourdin, Nucl. Phys. B38, 418 (1972)
49. S. J. Brodsky and I. Schmidt, Phys. Lett. B 234, 144 (1990);
50. S. J. Brodsky, M. Burkardt, and I. Schmidt, Nucl. Phys. B441, 197 (1995);
51. F. E. Close and D. Sivers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 39, 1116(1977)
52. Note that our ansatz violates (slightly) the helicity retention concept developed in Ref.
53. by which of(x,Q2)/f(x,Q2) -> 1 for .v-> 1. Such relations follow in perturbative QCD and need not necessarily be fulfilled by our nonperturbative input at Q- = fjr. In any case, we could always appropriately modify our ansatz at very high x so as to satisfy the helicity retention conditions. Enforcing in our fits all βf to vanish in Eq. (2.6) increases the total \2 by several units, giving rise to worse fits than our optimal ones
54. We have refrained from attempting to extract information from measurements of the spin asymmetry for photoproduction of oppositely charged hadron pairs presented by the HERMES collaboration [A. Airapetian et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 2584 (2000)J. Such data could in principle constrain the spin gluon density Sg(x,Q2); however, the smallness of the hadron transverse momenta accessed in this experiment makes an interpretation of the data in terms of QCD hard scattering difficult. In fact, as stated by the HERMES Kollaboration, their published gluon asymmetry <%(.t,β2)/g(.v,β2) = 0.41±0.18 at .r-0.17 and Qi=(p\) = 1.\ GeV2, which implies .v<5s(.r,β2)=0.35 ±0.15, actually compatible with our results in Fig. 5, does not include systematic theoretical errors. These could be sizeable in the low transverse momentum region considered
55. J. D. Bjorken, Phys. Rev. 148, 1467 (1966);
56. Phys. Rev. D l, 1376 (1970)
57. H. Y. Cheng, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 11, 5109 (1996);
58. Phys. Lett. B 427, 371 (1998). The explicit transformation of the splitting functions (anomalous dimensions) and coefficient functions from the MS to the CI (JET) scheme can be found in this latter reference as well as in the third reference of Ref. [8J
59. D. Müller and O. V. Teryaev, Phys. Rev. D 56, 2607 (1997)
60. CDHSW Collaboration, H. Abramowicz et ai, Z. Phys. C 15, 19 (1982). 3
61. CCFR Collaboration, C. Foudas et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 1207 (1990);
62. S. A. Rabinowitz et al., ibid. 70, 134 (1993);
63. A. O. Bazarko et al., Z. Phys. C 65, 189 (1995)
64. H. J. Lipkin, Phys. Lett. B 256, 284 (1991);
65. 337, 157 (1994);
66. J. Lichtenstadt and H. J. Lipkin, ibid. 353, 119 (1995)
67. NA51 Collaboration, A. Baldit et al., Phys. Lett. B 332, 244 (1994);
68. E866 Collaboration, E. A. Hawker et a!., Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 3715 (1998)
69. HERMES Collaboration, C. A. Miller, Proceedings of DIS '99, Nucl. Phys. B (Free. Suppl.) 79, 146 (1999)
70. R. D. Field and R. P. Feynman, Phys. Rev. D 15, 2590 (1977).
71. S. Kumano and M. Miyama, Phys. Lett. B 479, 149 (2000); B. Dressler étal., Univ. Bochum RUB-TPII-13/99, hep-ph/9910464;
72. C. Bourrely and J. Soffer, Phys. Lett. B 314, 132 (1993);
73. Nucl. Phys. B423, 329 (1994)
74. T. Morii and T. Yamanishi, Phys. Rev. D 61, 057501 (2000)
75. B. Dressler et al, Ew. Phys. J. C 14, 147 (2000)
76. The easiest and most consistent way to implement directly (even for Mellin-« moments) the constraint (3.5) in a fit routine is to fit, for example, Su, 3d, and Su according to the ansatz (2.6) which fix Sd(x,fi2) via Eqs. (3.5) and (3.4): Sd/d=(Su/it)(Sîî/îî)/(ôd/d) where the unpolarized densities are taken from Ref. [25J. Thus Nj=NuNj/Nd, aj=au + aj -ad, andβj=βu+βs-βd
77. D. Diakonov et al., Nucl. Phys. B480, 341 (1996);
78. Phys. Rev. D 56, 4069 (1997);
79. M. Wakamatsu and T. Kubota, ibid. 60, 034020 (1999); K. Goeke et al., Univ. Bochum RUB-TPII-18 99, hep-ph/0001272.
80. R. S. Bhalerao, Phys. Lett. B 380, l (1996);
81. 387, 881 (E (1996);
82. talk given at the International Conference on QN 2000, Adelaide, 2000,
83. Nucl. Phys. A680, 62 (2000);
84. R. S Bhalerao, N. G. Kelkar, and B. Ram, Phys. Lett. B 476, 285 (2000)
85. N. N. Nikolaev et al., Phys. Rev. D 60, 014004 (1999).
86. HERMES Collaboration, K. Ackerstaff et al., Phys. Lett. 464, 123 (1999).
87. D. de Florian, C. A. Garcia Canal, and R. Sassot, Nucl. Phys B470, 195 (1996)
88. S. Kretzer, Phys. Rev. D 62, 054001 (2000).
89. B. A. Kniehl, G. Kramer, and B. Pötter, Nucl. Phys. B582, 514 (2000).