arxiv:hepph/ v2 7 Mar 2006


 Joshua Chambers
 1 years ago
 Views:
Transcription
1 Small QCD effects in forwardjet and MuellerNavelet jet production C. Marquet Service de physique théorique, CEA/Saclay, 99 GifsurYvette cede, France URA 36, unité de recherche associée au CNRS C. Royon DAPNIA/Service de physique des particules, CEA/Saclay, 99 GifsurYvette cede, France and Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, Illinois 65, USA We investigate small QCD effects in forwardjet production in deep inelastic scattering in the kinematic regime where the virtuality of the photon and the transverse momentum of the jet are two hard scales of about the same magnitude. We show that the data from HERA published by the H and ZEUS collaborations are well described by leadinglogarithmic BFKL predictions. Parametrizations containing saturation effects epected to be relevant at higher energies also compare well to the present data. We etend our analysis to MuellerNavelet jets at the LHC and discuss to what etent this observable could test these small effects and help distinguishing between the different descriptions. arxiv:hepph/566v 7 Mar 6 I. INTRODUCTION The Regge limit of perturbative QCD comes about when the centreofmass energy in a collision is much bigger than the fied hard scales of the problem. In this limit usually called the small regime, parton densities inside the projectiles grow with increasing energy, leading to the growth of the scattering amplitudes. As long as the densities are not too high, this growth is described by the BalitskyFadinKuraevLipatov (BFKL) equation [] that resums the leading logarithms. As the parton density becomes higher and the scattering amplitudes approach the unitarity limit, one enters a regime called saturation [, 3, 4, 5] where the BFKL evolution breaks down and parton densities saturate. In the past years, as colliders started to eplore the small regime, proposals were made to test the relevance of the BFKL equation at the available energies. In this paper we concentrate on two of the proposed measurements: forward jets [6] in deep inelastic scattering (DIS) and MuellerNavelet jets [7] in hadronhadron collisions. Forwardjet production is a process in which the virtual photon interacts with the proton and a jet is detected in the forward direction of the proton. The virtuality of the photon and the squared transverse momentum of the jet are hard scales of about the same magnitude. In the case of MuellerNavelet jets, a proton interacts with another proton or antiproton and a jet is detected in each of the two forward directions; the transverse momenta of the jets are as well hard scales of about the same magnitude. If the total energy in the photonproton (for forward jets) or protonproton (for MuellerNavelet jets) collision is large enough, these processes feature the kinematics corresponding to the Regge limit. The description of forward jets with fiedorder perturbative QCD in the Bjorken limit amounts in the following. Large logarithms coming from the strong ordering between the soft proton scale and the hard forwardjet scale are resummed using the DokshitzerGribovLipatovAltarelliParisi (DGLAP) evolution equation [8] and the hard crosssection is computed at fied order in the coupling constant. In the small regime, due to the etra ordering between the total energy and the hard scales, other large logarithms arise and should be resummed within the hard crosssection itself. In other words, the inclusion of small effects aims at improving QCD predictions by replacing fiedorder hard crosssections with resummed hard crosssection, using the BFKL equation or, at even higher energies, using resummations that include saturation effects. To study different observables in this small regime, a convenient approach is to formulate the crosssections in terms of scattering amplitudes for colorless combinations of partons. The simplest of those is the q q dipole, a quarkantiquark pair in the color singlet state; it describes for instance the interaction of a virtual photon. Any colorless gg, q qg,... multiplets can a priori be involved, for instance the gluongluon (gg) dipole is what describes gluon emissions. To compute the evolution of those scattering amplitudes with energy, the QCD dipole model [9] has been developed. This formalism constructs the lightcone wavefunction of a q q dipole in the leading logarithmic approimation. As Electronic address: Electronic address:
2 the energy increases, the original dipole evolves and the wavefunction of this evolved dipole is described as a system of elementary q q dipoles. When this system of dipoles scatters on a target, the scattering amplitude has been shown to obey the BFKL equation. Interestingly enough, the dipole formalism was shown to be also wellsuited to include density effects and nonlinearities that lead to saturation and unitarization of the scattering amplitudes [, ]. This is why the dipole picture is suitable for investigating the small regime of QCD, it allows to study both BFKL and saturation effects within the same theoretical framework. The formulation of the forwardjet and MuellerNavelet jet processes in terms of dipole amplitudes has been addressed in []. In both cases the problem is similar to the one of oniumonium scattering: the growth with energy of the total crosssection due to BFKL evolution is damped by saturation effects which arise purely perturbatively. For instance in the large N c limit, that involves multiple Pomeron echanges. In our study, we consider both the BFKL energy regime and saturation effects. We shall implement saturation in a very simple way, using a phenomenological parametrization inspired by the GolecBiernat and Wüsthoff (GBW) approach [3] which gave a good description of the proton structure functions with a very few parameters. First comparisons of small predictions with forwardjet data from HERA were quite successful: the first sets of data published by the H [4] and ZEUS [5] collaborations are well described by the leadinglogarithmic (LL) BFKL predictions [6] and also show compatibility with saturation parametrizations [7, 8]. In both cases, the DGLAP resummation associated accounted for leading logarithms. Very recently, new forwardjet eperimental results have been published [9, ]. They involve a broader range of observables with several differential crosssections and go to smaller values of than the previous measurements. As QCD at nettoleading order (NLO) is not sufficient to describe the small data, we shall address the following issues: whether the BFKLLL predictions keep being in good agreement and whether saturation parametrizations still show compatibility. The first part of the present work is devoted to those questions. In the second part of the paper, we deal with MuellerNavelet jets. We display BFKLLL predictions in the LHC energy range for different differential crosssections. We compare them with saturation predictions obtained from our parametrizations of saturation effects constrained by the forwardjet data. We propose different measurements and discuss their potential for identifying BFKL and saturation behaviors. The paper will be organized as follows. In section II, we compute the forwardjet crosssection in the highenergy regime and epress it in terms of a dipoledipole crosssection. We compare the BFKLLL predictions and the saturation parametrization with the new H and ZEUS data for several differential crosssections. In section II, we compute the MuellerNavelet jet crosssection and show the BFKL and saturation predictions for LHC energies and for several differential crosssections. The final section V is devoted to conclusion and outlook. II. FORWARDJET PRODUCTION Forwardjet production in a leptonproton collision is represented in Fig. with the different kinematic variables. We denote s the total energy of the leptonproton collision and Q the virtuality of the intermediate photon that undergoes the hadronic interaction. We shall use the usual kinematic variables of deep inelastic scattering: =Q /(Q +W ) and y=q /(s) where W is the centerofmass energy of the photonproton collision. In addition, k T Λ QCD is the jet transverse momentum and J its longitudinal momentum fraction with respect to the proton. In the following, we compute the forwardjet crosssection in the highenergy limit, recall the BFKL predictions and give our formulation of the saturation model. A. Formulation The QCD crosssection for forwardjet production reads {( d (4) σ ddq d J dkt = α em dσ γ p JX T πq d J dkt + dσγ p JX L d J dkt ) ( y)+ dσγ p JX T d J dkt } y, () where dσ γ p JX T,L /d J dkt is the crosssection for forwardjet production in the collision of the transversely (T) or longitudinally (L) polarized virtual photon with the target proton. We now consider the highenergy regime. In an appropriate frame called the dipole frame, the virtual photon undergoes the hadronic interaction via a fluctuation into a dipole. The dipole then interacts with the target proton
3 s W P J f eff Jet ( k T ) Y= log( / ) J l Q γ* FIG. : Production of a forward jet in a protonlepton collision. The kinematic variables of the problem are displayed. Q is the virtuality of the photon that undergoes the hadronic interaction. s and W are the total energies squared in the leptonproton and photonproton collisions respectively. k T is the transverse momentum of the forward jet and J is its longitudinal momentum fraction with respect to the incident proton. Y is the rapidity interval between the two hard probes. and one has the following factorization dσ γ p JX T,L d J dk T = d r dz ψ γ dσ q q T,L (r,z;q) d J dkt (r). () The wavefunctions ψ γ T and ψγ L describe the splitting of the photon on the dipole and dσ q q/d J dkt is the crosssection for forwardjet production in the dipoleproton collision. ψ γ T and ψγ L are given by ψ γ T (r,z;q) = α emn c ( ) π e f (z +( z) )z( z)q K z( z)q r (3) f ψ γ L (r,z;q) = α emn c π ( ) e f 4Q z ( z) K z( z)q r f (4) for a transversely (3) and longitudinally (4) polarized photon where e f is the charge of the quark with flavor f. The integration variable r is the transverse size of the q q pair and z is the longitudinal momentum fraction of the antiquark with respect to the photon. In the leading logarithmic approimation we are interested in, the crosssection dσ q q /d J dkt does not depend on z but only on the dipole size r. This crosssection has been computed in [] where it was shown that the emission of the forward jet can be described through the interaction of an effective gluonic (gg) dipole: dσ q q d J dk T (r) = πn c 6kT f eff ( J,kT) d r J (k T r) r ( r ) r σ (q q)(gg)(r, r,y) with Y =log( J /) the rapidity assumed to be very large. σ (q q)(gg) (r, r,y) is the crosssection in the collision of a q q dipole of size r with a gg dipole of size r with total rapidity Y. f eff ( J,kT ) is the effective parton distribution (5) We consider massless quarks and sum over four flavors in (3) and (4). This is justified considering the rather high values of the photon virtuality (Q >5 GeV ) used for the measurement.
4 function and resums the leading logarithms log(kt /Λ QCD ). It has the following epression f eff ( J,k T) = g( J,k T)+ C F N c ( q(j,k T)+ q( J,k T) ), (6) where g (resp. q, q) is the gluon (resp. quark, antiquark) distribution function in the incident proton. Let us comment formula (5). Since the forward jet measurement involves perturbative values of k T and moderate values of J, it is not surprising that formula (5) features the collinear factorization of f eff ; note also that k T has been chosen as the factorization scale. The remaining hard interaction is between a gg dipole and the incident q q dipole of size r. The gg dipole emerges as the effective degree of freedom for the gluon emission at high energies []. This feature has been pointed out several times []. Formulae ()(6) epress the forwardjet observable () in terms of the crosssection σ (q q)(gg) which contains the highenergy QCD dynamics: the problem is analogous to the one of oniumonium scattering. In the net subsection (IIB), wedeal with the BFKLenergyregimeforwhich the interactionbetween the q q dipoleand gg dipoleis restricted to a Pomeron echange. In that case of course, our formulation is equivalent to the k T factorization approach. In subsection (IIC), we go beyond k T factorization and investigate the saturation regime in which σ (q q)(gg) a priori contains any number of gluon echanges. B. The BFKL energy regime The BFKL q qgg dipoledipole crosssection reads (see for instance []) dγ σ(q q)(gg) BFKL (r, r,y) = πα sr ( r/r) γ ( ) iπ γ ( γ) ep αs N c π χ(γ)y (7) with the comple integral running along the imaginary ais from / i to /+i and with the BFKL kernel given by χ(γ) = ψ() ψ( γ) ψ(γ) (8) where ψ(γ) is the logarithmic derivative of the Gamma function. It comes about when the interaction between the q q dipole and the gg dipole is restricted to a twogluon echange. Summing the leadinglogarithmic contributions of ladders with any number of real gluon emissions, one obtains the BFKL Pomeron and the resulting growth of the crosssection with rapidity. Inserting (7) in (5) and (), one obtains dσ γ p JX T,L d J dk T = π N c α s dγ 4kT f eff( J,kT) Q iπ where we have defined the following Mellintransforms which are given by ( φ γ T (γ) ) φ γ L (γ) = α emn c π φ γ T,L (γ) = q e q ( Q k T ) γ 4 γ Γ(γ) φ γ T,L (γ) ( ) ( γ) Γ( γ) ep αs N c π χ(γ)y d r(r Q ) γ dz ψ γ T,L (r,z;q) () 4 γ γ Γ (+γ)γ ( γ)γ ( ) ( γ) (+γ)( γ). () Γ( γ)γ(+γ)(3 γ) γ( γ) Inserting formula (9) into () gives the forwardjet crosssection in the BFKL energy regime. One can easily show that the result is identical to the one obtained using k T factorization [6, 3]. The only undetermined parameter is ᾱ α s N c /π (with α s the strong coupling constant kept fied) which appears in the eponential in formula (9). (9) C. The saturation regime Contrary to the BFKL case, the oniumonium crosssection in the saturation regime has not yet been computed from QCD. Studies are being carried out to identify the dominant terms in the multiple gluon echanges [, 4,
5 5, 6] but the crosssection σ(q q)(gg) sat remains unknown. To take into account saturation effects, we are led to use a phenomenological parametrization. We consider the following model introduced in [7] which is inspired by the GBW approach: ( ( σ(q q)(gg) sat (r, r,y) = 4πα s σ ep r eff (r, r) )) 4R (Y). () The dipoledipole effective radius reff (r, r) is defined through the twogluon echange: 4πα sr eff(r, r) σ BFKL (q q)(gg) (r, r,) = 4πα smin(r, r ) { +log ma(r, r) min(r, r) }. (3) For the saturation radius we use the parametrization R (Y)=e λ (Y Y) /Q with Q GeV. Let us epress the crosssection in terms of a double Mellintransform: with ( ) dγ dτ r σ(q q)(gg) sat γ ( ) r τ (r, r,y) = 4πα sσ iπ iπ 4R (Y) 4R (Y) g(γ,τ) (4) g(γ,τ) = du dū u γ 4 ū τ ( e r (u,ū)) Γ(γ τ) eff = +τ γ {Ψ(,3+τ γ,τ)+ψ(,3+τ γ, γ)} < Re(τ), Re(γ), Re(γ τ) < (5) where the confluent hypergeometric function of Tricomi Ψ(, a, b) can be epressed [7] in terms of incomplete Gamma functions. Inserting (4) in (5) and (), one obtains dσ γ p JX T,L d J dk T = π N c α sσ dγ 8Q kt R (Y)f eff( J,kT ) iπ (4Q R (Y))γ φ γ dτ T,L (γ) iπ (4k T R (Y)) τ 4τ τ Γ(τ) Γ( τ) g(γ,τ). (6) Inserting formula (6) into () gives our parametrization of the forwardjet crosssection in the saturation regime. The parameters are λ, Y and the normalization σ. D. Fiing the parameters The first sets of data published by the H [4] and ZEUS [5] collaborations regarded the measurement of dσ/d. In previous studies, we fitted the BFKLLL [6] and saturation parametrization [7] on those data with the cut <. Despite corresponding different energy regimes, in both cases we obtained good descriptions with χ values of about. The obtained values of the parameters and the χ of the fits are given in Table I. fit parameters /R (Y =) χ (/d.o.f.) BFKLLL 4ᾱ log() =.43 (/3) strong sat. λ =.4 and Y =.8.8 Gev 6.8 (/) weak sat. λ =.37 and Y = 8.3. Gev 8.3 (/) TABLE I: Results of the BFKL and saturation fits to the first HERA forwardjet data. The saturation fits shows two independent solutions showing either strong or weak saturation parameters (see tet). In the BFKLLL case, the only parameter is ᾱ and the value obtained was 4ᾱlog()=.43. For the saturation fit, the two relevant parameters are λ and Y and the fit showed two χ minima for (λ=.4,y =.8) and (λ=.37,y =8.3).We shall referto the first (resp. second) solution as astrong(resp. weak)saturationparametrization. Indeed, the first saturation minimum corresponds to strong saturation effects as, for typical values of Y, the saturation scale /R is about 5 Gev which is the value of a typical k T. The second saturation minima corresponds to small saturation effects and rather describes BFKL physics. Along with formulae (9) and (6), the values of the parameters given in Table I completely determine the BFKLLL predictions and two parametrizations for the saturation model. We are now going to compare these with the very recent data without any adjustment of the parameters. This will provide a strong test of those small effects.
6 d σ / d (nb) 8 H DATA BFKL LL weak saturation strong saturation d σ / d (nb) ZEUS DATA BFKL LL weak sat. 6 NLO QCD 5 strong sat. 4 NLO QCD FIG. : The forwardjet crosssection dσ/d. The points are measurement by the H (left plot) and ZEUS (right plot) collaborations. The lines are comparisons with BFKLLL predictions (full lines) and the two saturation parametrizations (dotted and dashed lines). In both cases, there is good agreement with the data. For comparison, fiedorder QCD predictions at NLO are also displayed. E. Comparison to the 5 HERA data d σ / dq (pb/gev ) BFKLLL weak sat. strong sat. d σ / dk T (pb/gev) ZEUS DATA BFKL LL weak sat. strong sat.  ZEUS DATA Q (GeV ) k T (GeV) FIG. 3: The forwardjet crosssections dσ/dq (left plot) and dσ/dk T (right plot). The points are measurement by the ZEUS collaboration. The lines are comparisons with BFKLLL predictions (full lines) and the two saturation parametrizations (dotted and dashed lines). For the two observables, there is good agreement with the data. We want to compare the crosssection() obtained from the BFKLLL prediction(9) and the saturation parametrization (6) with the new data coming from measurements performed at HERA [9, ]. On one side, our theoretical
7 d σ/d dk T d Q (nb/gev 4 )  H DATA 5<Q < (GeV ) <Q < (GeV ) <Q <85 (GeV ).5<k T <35. (GeV ) <k T <95. (GeV ) 95.<k T <4. (GeV ) FIG. 4: The forwardjet crosssection dσ/ddq dk T. The points are measurement by the H collaboration. The lines are comparisons with BFKLLL predictions (full lines) and the two saturation parametrizations (dotted and dashed lines for strong and weak saturation respectively). In the regime where on epects small effects to be important (r k T/Q ), there is a good description of the data. In the regime where r, the small parametrizations do not reproduce the data as epected from the hierarchy of the hard scales. results are for the crosssection () which is differential with respect to all four kinematic variables, Q, J, and k T. On the other side, HERA data concern observables which are less differential: dσ/d, dσ/dq, dσ/dkt, and dσ/ddq dkt. Therefore, on the top of the Mellin integrations in (9) and (6), one has to carry out a number of integrations over the kinematic variables which have to be done taking into account the kinematic cuts applied by the different eperiments. A detailed description of how we performed those integrations in given in Appendi A and the resulting crosssections that can be compared to the data are given in Appendi B. The method allows for a direct comparison of the data with theoretical predictions but it does not allow to control the overall normalization. In the following studies, we therefore compare only spectra and will not refer to normalizations anymore. As already mentioned, one does not adjust any of the parameters of Table I. Let us start with the observable dσ/d which has been measured by both the H and ZEUS collaborations and which now features lower values of than the first measurements. The comparison is displayed in Fig., the three small parametrizations describe very well the data. One cannot really distinguish between the three curves, ecept at small values of where one starts to see a difference: the BFKL curve is above the weaksaturation curve which is itself above the strongsaturation curve. However the main conclusion is that the data seem to feature the BFKL growth, when going to small values of. For comparison, the fiedorder QCD predictions at NLO computed in [9, ]
8 with the DISENT MonteCarloprogram [8] are reproduced in Fig.. At the lowest values of, they do not reproduce the data as they are about a factor.5 to.5 below depending on the eperiment and the error bars. Even adding a resolvedphoton component to the NLO predictions [] does not pull them within the uncertainties, contrary to what happened for the previous data [9]. This is an interesting difference with the forwardpion case [3] for which it seems that no higherorder effect other than a NLO resolvedphoton contribution is needed. In Fig.3 are represented the two other single differential crosssections that we shall briefly discuss: dσ/dq and dσ/dk T measured by the ZEUS collaboration. One can see again that the three small parametrizations agree well with the data, it is a strong result that one is able to describe the Q and k T spectra without any adjustment of the parameters as they were only fitted to describe the dependence. We shall finally compare our predictions with the triple differential crosssection dσ/ddq dkt measured by the H collaboration. The interesting part of this measurement is that it has been carried out in 9 different bins of r kt /Q from.<r<.8 to 9.5<r <8. This allows to test the limits of our parametrizations which are supposed to be valid only when r as they do not take into account any transverse momentum ordering of the gluons emitted in rapidity between the forward jet and the photon. The comparisons with the data are shown on Fig.4 and one sees the epected trend. The bins which have r are well described by the small parametrizations while the others are not: for the latter, we overshoot the data as the BFKL rise towards small values of is too steep. Interestingly enough, the trend is reversed for QCD predictions at NLO: they describe better the data which feature large values of r. These observations favor the need of the BFKL resummation to describe the r data. The large r bins also ehibit a limitation of the saturation model as one can see that the strong saturation parametrization lies above the weak saturation parametrization. Such a behavior indicates that the model should not be used when kt Q. Let us comment further on the two saturation parametrizations. While the BFKL formula (9) is a QCD prediction as it is computed from Feynman diagrams [], the saturation parametrization (6) is a phenomenological model. The fact that it describes well the data does not call for the same conclusions as in the BFKL case. It only ehibits that, as it is the case for a number of observables, data are compatible with saturation effects even at energies which do not require them. In other words, the forwardjet measurement at the present energies cannot distinguish between saturation and BFKL effects; one would start seeing a significant difference at higher energies. It is the purpose of the net section to look for such differences, by studying another process similar to forwardjets, namely MuellerNavelet jets, at LHC energies. III. TOWARDS THE LHC: MUELLERNAVELET JETS MuellerNavelet jet production in a protonproton collision is represented in Fig.5 with the different kinematic variables. We denote S the total energy of the collision, k and k the transverse momenta of the two forward jets and and their longitudinal fraction of momentum with respect to the protons as indicated on the figure. In the following, we compute the MuellerNavelet jet crosssection in the highenergy limit, recall the BFKL predictions and formulate our saturation model. We then display predictions for observables which can be measured at the LHC. A. Formulation As in the original paper [7], we consider the crosssection differential with respect to and and integrated over the transverse momenta of the jets with k >Q and k >Q. Q and Q represent then eperimental k T cuts. Considering the high energy limit, the QCD crosssection for MuellerNavelet jet production reads [, 3]: dσ pp JXJ d d = π N c 64 f eff(,q )f eff(,q ) dr d r Q J (Q r)q J (Q r) σ (gg)(gg) (r, r,y) (7) with Y =log( S/Q Q ) the rapidity assumed to be very large. σ (gg)(gg) (r, r,y) is the crosssection in the collision of two gg dipoles of size r and r with rapidity total Y. As before f eff is the effective parton distribution function (6). Let us comment formula (7). As before, each forward jet involves perturbative values of transverse momenta and moderate values for and. This eplains the collinear factorization of the two functions f eff ; here we have taken the factorization scales to be Q and Q. The remaining hard interaction is between two gg dipoles: as we have seen in the previous section, each of them describes a gluon emission at high energies. Formula (7) epresses the MuellerNavelet jet observable in terms of the crosssection σ (gg)(gg) which contains the highenergy QCD dynamics. This is the similarity with the forwardjet case: the problem is also analogous to the one of oniumonium scattering.
9 P f eff Jet ( k > Q ) S Y= log( S/Q Q ) P f eff Jet ( k > Q ) FIG. 5: MuellerNavelet jet production in a protonproton collision. The kinematic variables of the problem are displayed. S is the total energy squared, k and k are the transverse momenta of the jets and and are their longitudinal momentum fraction with respect to the incident protons. Y is the rapidity interval between the hard probes. Let us first consider the BFKL energy regime, the gggg dipoledipole crosssection reads σ(gg)(gg) BFKL (r, r,y) = πn cα s dγ r ( r/r) γ ( ) C F iπ γ ( γ) ep αs N c π χ(γ)y (8) which combined with (7) gives dσ BFKL = π3 Nc 3α s d d 8C F Q dγ f eff (,Q )f eff(,q ) (Q /Q ) γ iπ γ( γ) ( ) αs N c ep π χ(γ)y. (9) One can easily show that the result is identical to the one obtains using k T factorization [7]. As in the forwardjet case, the only undetermined parameter is ᾱ which appears in the eponential in formula (9). We shall consider in this study the same value that was used for forward jets, that is ᾱ=.6. For the saturation parametrization, we use the following gggg dipoledipole crosssection: σ(gg)(gg) sat (r, r,y) = 4πN cα ( s σ C F ep ( r eff (r, r) )) 4R (Y). () which up to the normalization is the same as (). The effective radius r eff is defined by formula (3) and the saturation radius by R (Y)=e λ (Y Y) /Q with Q GeV. Inserting () into (7), one obtains [3] dσ sat = π3 Nc 3α s σ f eff (,Q d d 6C )f eff (,Q ) { R (Y)Q Q F ) [ ( ep Q +u Q +log(u) R (Y) du +log(u) I +ep ( Q Q ur (Y) ) +log(u) )]}. () ( Q +u Q +log(u) R (Y) In the following we consider only the strong saturation parametrization to display what could be the maimal epected effects at the LHC. The parameters are λ=.4 and Y =.8. The normalization σ is a priori not determined but we have fied it so that at large momenta and small Y, one obtains the BFKL result.
10 dσ/dy dy (µb)  Q > GeV BFKL LL saturation dσ/dy dy (µb)  Q > 5 GeV y y dσ/dy dy (µb)   Q > 5 GeV dσ/dy dy (µb) Q > 35 GeV y y FIG. 6: The MuellerNavelet jet crosssection dσ/dy dy as a function of y for different values of Q. The kinematics of the other jet are fied at Q =3 GeV and y = 4.5. The full lines are BFKLLL predictions and the dashed lines are the saturation parametrization. B. Phenomenology We are going to study the dependence of the crosssections (9) and () as a function of the different kinematic variables,, Q, and Q. We want to consider large rapidities Y which implies very forward jets and therefore large values of and. The wellknown problem is that the crosssection is then damped by the parton distribution functions which at large become very small. This prevents one to see the BFKL enhancement of the hard part of the crosssection with rapidity. A way out of this problem is to consider the following observables R S/ S : / R S/ S dσpp JXJ dσ pp JXJ (Q,Q,S) (Q,Q, d d d d S), () in other words, crosssection ratios for same jet kinematics and two different values of the total energy squared (S and S). The advantage of such observables is that they are independent of the parton densities and allow to study more quantitatively the influence of small effects [6, 7, 3]. For instance the BFKLLL prediction is (via a saddle point approimation): ( ) 4ᾱlog() R S/ S. (3) S S The eperimental verification of this at the Tevatron[3] was not conclusive. The data were found above the prediction (3), howeverithasbeen argued[33] thatthe measurementwasbiasedbytheuseofupperk T cuts, the choiceofequal lowerk T cuts, and hadronization corrections. The ratios () also display in a clear way the saturation effects [7, 3]
11 sat./bfkl ratio. Q > 35. GeV Q > 5. GeV Q > 5. GeV Q >. GeV y FIG. 7: Ratio of the saturation and BFKLLL MuellerNavelet jet crosssections dσ/dy dy as a function of y for different values of Q. The kinematics of the other jet are fied at Q =7 GeV and y = 3.5. which lead to ratios that, as a function of Q and Q, go from the value (3) to as the momentum cuts decrease into the saturation region (see Fig.4 in Ref. [7] and Fig.3,4 in Ref. [3]). There is however an important eperimental limitation to carry out the measurement (): it would require to run the LHC at two different centerofmass energies. If it turns out not to be possible, then one should settle for the crosssection dσ/d d. We shall now ehibit some of its characteristics, fiing the LHC centerofmass energy at S =4 TeV. Also the absolute normalization is fied to reproduce the Tevatron data at S =.8 TeV published in [3]. These data feature somewhat large error bars which leads to a significant uncertainty on the normalization for the LHC predictions. Let us introduce the rapidities of the two jets: y = log ( S Q ), y = log ( ) S. (4) Q We first considered the case where one of the two jets has fied kinematics Q =3 GeV and y = 4.5. We looked at the dependence of the crosssection dσ/dy dy = dσ/d d as a function of the other jet kinematic variables. In Fig.6, we plotted the results for the BFKLLL prediction (9) and the saturation parametrization () where the different plots feature the y dependence for different values of Q. As epected, the crosssections decrease quickly as y gets large which corresponds to getting closer to one. For each value of Q, one cannot really see a difference between the behaviors of the BFKL and saturation curves as a function of y. However the relative normalization between the two curves is quite sensitive to the value of Q. This is better ehibited on Fig.7 where one displays the ratio of the saturation and BFKL results of Fig.6. The ratio goes down to about.3 for Q = GeV which represents a significant difference between the BFKL and saturation predictions. Note that this difference does not appear to be that large on Fig.6 where the crosssections are plotted. The second case we considered is the symmetric case Q Q =Q and y y = y which allows to go to bigger values of Y. We looked at the dependence of the crosssection dσ/dy dy as a function of Q and y. In Fig.8, we plotted the results for the BFKL prediction (9) and the saturation parametrization () where the different plots feature the Q dependence for different values of y. In this case, the crosssection falls even faster when y gets big as both and get close to. Again, because of that, one does not see on the plot the difference between the BFKL and the saturation curves, yet it is still quite big as shown on Fig.9 where we have displayed the ratio of the saturation and BFKL results of Fig.8. For y=5.5 and Q decreasing down to GeV, the ratio goes down to about.4. We did not include in this study the weak saturation parametrization, the corresponding curves would lie in between
12 dσ/dy dy (µb) y =.5 BFKL LL saturation dσ/dy dy (µb)  y = Q 3 4 Q dσ/dy dy (µb) y = 4.5 dσ/dy dy (µb) Q y = Q FIG. 8: The MuellerNavelet jet crosssection dσ/dy dy as a function of Q Q =Q for different values of y y = y. The full lines are BFKLLL predictions and the dashed lines are the saturation parametrization. the BFKL and strong saturation curves which are displayed, and even is closer to the BFKL curve. There is a number of other plots one could study showing other dependences of dσ/dy dy but they are not needed for drawing our conclusions: testing BFKL effects and saturation effects with the observable dσ/dy dy at the LHC will be a major eperimental challenge as one will have to measure crosssections with a great precision. We insist that this is due to the fact that the parton distribution functions at large really damp the crosssection. Obtaining a high accuracy is not unfeasible because of the high luminosity at the LHC but this will require a very good understanding of the systematics errors. However we would like to emphasize the fact that better tests of small effects could be realized with the measurement of the ratio R S/ S, see formula (). IV. CONCLUSIONS Let us summarize the main results of the paper. The first part of the work was devoted to the study of the forwardjet measurement. We started by computing the QCD crosssection for forwardjet production () in the highenergy (small ) limit. We recalled the BFKLLL predictions (9) and also formulated the phenomenological model (6) that takes into account saturation effects. We then compared the BFKL and saturationmodel predictions to the recent data from HERA for a number of observables: dσ/d, dσ/dq, dσ/dk T, and dσ/ddq dk T. We obtained a very good agreement with the BFKL predictions and saturation parametrizations also show compatibility with the data. Along with the fact that QCD at NLO predictions do not reproduce the small data, this observation leads us to the conclusion that the present forwardjet data display the BFKL enhancement when going to small values of. However, to make a definitive statement, one would have to make comparisons with BFKL predictions at nettoleadinglogarithmic (NLL) accuracy. The latter are under investigations and will hopefully be available soon. In the mean time, let us discuss the epected qualitative impact of these BFKLNLL corrections. Because we are describing
13 sat./bfkl ratio.. y =.5 y =.5 y = 3.5 y = 4.5 y = Q FIG. 9: Ratio of the saturation and BFKLLL MuellerNavelet jet crosssections dσ/dy dy as a function of Q Q =Q for different values of y y = y. a kinematic regime in which k T Q, one can infer that they should be small. For instance, the contribution coming from the running of the coupling between those two scales would be unimportant. By comparison, the BKFL NNL corrections seem to be very large for the proton structure function measurement [34], in which case one easily understands why: the evolution takes place in a large range, from the soft proton scale up to the hard scale Q. The situation is much different for forward jets. In the second part of the paper, we investigated small effects for MuellerNavelet jets in the LHC energy range, using the parameters that successfully describe forwardjets at HERA. We compared the BFKLLL predictions (9) with those of the saturation model () and concluded that the measurement of the simple crosssection will require a great precision to test the different scenarios. We argued that a better option to look for small effects was to measure the ratio of crosssections () which implies running the LHC at two different energies. On longer time scales, the international linear collider would give the opportunity to measure the virtual photonvirtual photon total crosssection at very high energies. This would also offer great possibilities [35, 36] for testing the BFKL enhancement and the saturation regime of QCD. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Robi Peschanski for useful comments and fruitful discussions. Appendi A: on the integration method To compare the forwardjet crosssection () obtained from the BFKLLL prediction (9) and the saturation parametrization (6) with the data for observables which are less differential (dσ/d, dσ/dq, dσ/dkt, and dσ/ddq dkt ), one has to carry out a number of integrations over the kinematic variables. They have to be done while properly taking into account the kinematic cuts applied by the different eperiments. This Appendi deals with these issues. Let us start from the quadruple differential crosssection dσ/ddq d J dkt, see formula (). First one performs the Mellin integrations of (9) and (6). Then we choose the appropriate variables for the remaining integrations: to avoid numerical problems in the integral calculations, we chose variables which lead to the weakest possible dependence of the differential crosssection. We noticed that the best choice is /Q, /kt, log(/ J), and log(/). Since the
14 eperimental measurements are not differential with respect to J, we carry out the integration d (3) σ J d (4) ( ) σ ddq dkt = ddq d J dkt dlog. J With the BFKLLL formula(9), the convergence is fast enough so that one can perform all the remaining integrations to obtain any of the four observables mentioned above. With the saturation formula (6), because of the etra Mellin integration and the time it takes to compute the functions Ψ, performing all the remaining integrations would require important numerical work. We chose to use another method to obtain the crosssections in that case. We shall describe it now with the eample of dσ/d. For a given value of, the first step is to compute the differential crosssection dσ BFKL d = Q 4 kt 4 d (3) σ BFKL ddq dk T ( ) ( ) d Q d kt for the BFKL case. The second step is to compute the bin center (ktc, Q C ) defined as follows: d (3) σ BFKL ddq dkt (Q C,k TC ) dσbfkl /d dq dkt The bin center is thus the point in the (k T,Q ) phase space where the differential crosssection in k T and Q is equal to the integral over the bin divided by the bin size (we will specify the integration limits later on). The third step is to obtain the cross section for the saturation case. We compute the crosssection at the bin center (k TC, Q C ): dσ sat d = d(3) σ sat ddq dkt (Q C,k TC ). dq dk T. This procedure is valid if the bin center does not change much between the BFKL and saturated crosssections. In other words, it means that the difference between the BFKL and saturated crosssections is small. We saw in Section IIE that this is indeed the case. The method is easily adapted to the case of dσ/dq for which one finds a bin center ( C,kTC ) for each value of Q and to the case of dσ/dkt with a bin center ( C,Q C ) for each value of k T. For the triple differential crosssection dσ/ddq dkt which is measured as a function of, integrating over J is not enough since one does not know the (Q,kT ) bincenter. Instead, for a given value of, one integrates also over Q and kt and then divide the result by the Q and kt bin sizes to obtain dσ/ddq dkt. This is done for the BFKL case and one uses again the method described above to compute the crosssection in the saturation case. The other difficulty arises when setting the integration limits as one has to take into account the correlations between the kinematic variables (for instance y=q /s<) and the cuts applied by the eperiments (for instance cuts on the forward jet phase space). There are two ways to take these into account: either appropriately set the limits of integration while computing the integrals or evaluate later the phase space correction due to the eperimental cuts. We are going to use both, since it is not possible to include all eperimental cuts while computing the integrals. Table II is a list of the different set of cuts used by the H and ZEUS eperiments to carry out their measurements. For the ZEUS cuts, we only consider what they call the forwardbfkl phase space which corresponds the most to the Regge limit kinematics. Refering to this table, let us enumerate the integration limits which are used for the different integral calculations: dσ/d for H: We integrate over /k T with the limit on k T defined by.5<k T /Q <5 (this is an etra cut that H applies to this measurement only), over /Q with Q <s, and over log(/ J ) with.35< J < dσ/d for ZEUS: We integrate over /k T with the limit on k T defined by.5<k T /Q <, over /Q with Q <s, and over log(/ J ) with <log(/ J )< 3 dσ/dq for ZEUS: We integrate over /k T with the limit on k T defined by.5<k T /Q <, over log(/) with Q /s, and over log(/ J ) between and 3 dσ/dk T for ZEUS: We integrate over log(/) with Q /s, over /Q with the limits on Q defined by.5<k T /Q <, and over log(/ J ) between and 3 dσ/ddq dk T for H: The /k T and /Q limits of the integrals are defined by the bin values measured by the H collaboration with also the kinematic constraint.<y = Q /s<.7. The log(/ J ) limits are obtained taking into account the cuts on the forwardjet angle which leads to.7354<log(/ J )<.794.
15 H ZEUS E e GeV E e GeV. y.7.4 y < Q < 85 GeV Q > 5 GeV k T > 3.5 GeV k T > 6 GeV 7 θ J degrees < η J < 3 J >.35.5 < kt/q < TABLE II: ZEUS ( forwardbfkl phase space ) [9] and H [] cuts to define the forwardjet phase space. E e is the energy of the outgoing electron and η J=log(/ J)= logtan(θ J/). The other kinematic variables have been defined in the tet. The effects of the cuts defined in Table II which are not used above need to be computed using a toy Monte Carlo. They are modeled by binperbin correction factors that multiply the crosssections obtained as described above. This is how one proceeds: we generate flat distributions in the variables /k T, /Q, log(/ J ), and log(/) using reference intervals which include the whole eperimental phasespace (the azimuthal angle of the jet is not used in the generation since all the crosssection measurements are independent of that angle). In practice, we get the correction factors by counting the numbers of events which fullfil the eperimental cuts for each bin when we compute dσ/d, each Q bin when we compute dσ/dq and so on. The correction factors are obtained by the ratio of the number of events which pass the eperimental cuts and the kinematic constraints to the number of events which fullfil only the kinematic constraints, i.e. the socalled reference bin. Of course the eperimental or kinematic cuts which have been applied already while computing the integrals are not applied in this study to avoid double counting effects. This method allows for a direct comparison of the data with theoretical predictions but it does not allow to control the overall normalization. This would require a full MonteCarlo. Note that we did not use one in order to avoid any strong model dependence of the correction factors as they are only due to kinematiccut effects. The derivation of the correction factors is independent of the theoretical input. They are given in Appendi B and they can be used to test any model suitable for the forwardjet crosssection, providing the same integration method as described above is used. Appendi B: tables with correction factors and resulting crosssections In this section, we list the corrections factors that we obtained for the observables dσ/d (H and ZEUS), dσ/dq (ZEUS), dσ/dkt (ZEUS), and dσ/ddq dkt (H). We also give the resulting crosssections for the different points that we used to draw the curves on Fig., Fig.3, and Fig.4. factor bfklll weak sat. strong sat factor bfklll weak sat. strong sat TABLE III: Correction factors due to eperimental cuts and the resulting corrected crosssections for dσ/d in nb for BFKLLL, weak saturation and strong saturation (see Fig.). Left Table: for H cuts, right Table: for ZEUS cuts.
16 Q (GeV ) factor bfklll weak sat. strong sat k T (GeV) factor bfklll weak sat. strong sat TABLE IV: Correction factors due to eperimental cuts and the resulting corrected crosssections for BFKLLL, weak saturation and strong saturation. Left Table: for dσ/dq in pb/gev, right Table: for dσ/dk T in pb/gev (see Fig.3). k T (GeV ) Q (GeV ) factor bfklll weak sat. strong sat..5 < kt < 35 5 < Q < < kt < 35 < Q < e 9.53e 9.95e e 5.7e 5.34e..65.e.e.5e.5 < kt < 35 < Q < e 4.7e 3.97e e 3.45e 3.9e e.63e.46e e.8e.76e e.7e.5e e3 7.9e3 7.9e e e3 5.5e3 TABLE V: Correction factors due to eperimental cuts and the resulting corrected crosssections for dσ/ddk TdQ in nb/gev 4 (bins with.5<k T <35 GeV ) for BFKLLL, weak saturation and strong saturation (see Fig.4). [] L. N. Lipatov, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 3 (976) 338; E. A. Kuraev, L. N. Lipatov and V. S. Fadin, Sov. Phys. JETP 45 (977) 99; I. I. Balitsky and L. N. Lipatov, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 8 (978) 8. [] L. V. Gribov, E. M. Levin and M. G. Ryskin, Phys. Rep. (983). [3] A. H. Mueller and J. Qiu, Nucl. Phys. B68 (986) 47; E. Levin and J. Bartels, Nucl. Phys. B387 (99) 67. [4] L. McLerran and R. Venugopalan, Phys. Rev. D49 (994) 33; ibid., (994) 335; Phys. Rev. D5 (994) 5; A. Kovner, L. McLerran and H. Weigert, Phys. Rev. D5 (995) 63; ibid., (995) 389; R. Venugopalan, Acta Phys. Polon. B3 (999) 373. [5] E. Iancu, A. Leonidov and L. McLerran, Nucl. Phys. A69 () 583; Phys. Lett. B5 () 33; E. Iancu and L. McLerran, Phys. Lett. B5 () 45; E. Ferreiro, E. Iancu, A. Leonidov and L. McLerran, Nucl. Phys. A73 () 489; H. Weigert, Nucl. Phys. A73 () 83. [6] A. H. Mueller, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. B8C (99) 5; J. Phys. G7 (99) 443. [7] A. H. Mueller and H. Navelet, Nucl. Phys. B8 (987) 77. [8] G. Altarelli and G. Parisi, Nucl. Phys. B6 8C (977) 98; V. N. Gribov and L. N. Lipatov, Sov. Journ. Nucl. Phys. (97) 438 and 675; Yu. L. Dokshitzer, Sov. Phys. JETP. 46 (977) 64. For a review: Yu. L. Dokshitzer, V. A. Khoze, A. H. Mueller and S. I. Troyan Basics of perturbative QCD (Editions Frontières, J.Tran Thanh Van Ed. 99). [9] A. H. Mueller, Nucl. Phys. B45 (994) 373; A. H. Mueller and B. Patel, Nucl. Phys. B45 (994) 47; A. H. Mueller, Nucl. Phys. B437 (995) 7.
17 k T (GeV ) Q (GeV ) factor bfklll weak sat. strong sat. 35 < kt < 95 5 < Q < e 6.7e 7.58e 35 < kt < 95 < Q < e 7.8e 8.79e e 4.5e 5.4e e.4e.68e...8e.e.e 35 < kt < 95 < Q < e.44e.55e e.8e.9e...4e.38e.46e e e3.e e e e e e e e3 3.4e3 3.3e3 TABLE VI: Correction factors due to eperimental cuts and the resulting corrected crosssections for dσ/ddk TdQ in nb/gev 4 (bins with 35<k T <95 GeV ) for BFKLLL, weak saturation and strong saturation (see Fig.4). [] I. Balitsky, Nucl. Phys. B463 (996) 99; Y. V. Kovchegov, Phys. Rev. D6 (999) 348; Phys. Rev. D6 () 748. [] E. Iancu and A. H. Mueller, Nucl. Phys. A73 (4) 46; ibid., (4) 494. [] C. Marquet, Nucl. Phys. B75 (5) 39; Nucl. Phys. A755 (5) 63c. [3] K. GolecBiernat and M. Wüsthoff, Phys. Rev. D59 (999) 47; Phys. Rev. D6 (999) 43. [4] H Collaboration, Phys.Lett. B356 (995) 8; H Collaboration, C. Adloff et al, Nucl. Phys. B538 (999) 3. [5] ZEUS Collaboration, J. Breitweg et al, Eur. Phys. J. C6 (999) 39; ZEUS Collaboration, Phys.Lett. B474 () 3. [6] J. G. Contreras, R. Peschanski and C. Royon, Phys. Rev. D6 () 346; R. Peschanski and C. Royon, Pomeron intercepts at colliders, Workshop on physics at LHC, hepph/57. [7] C. Marquet, R. Peschanski and C. Royon, Phys. Lett. B599 (4) 36. [8] C. Marquet, Small effects in forwardjet production at HERA, hepph/578. [9] ZEUS Collaboration, S. Chekanov et al., Forward jet production in deep inelastic ep scattering and low parton dynamics at HERA, hepe/59. [] H Collaboration, A. Aktas et al., Forward jet production in deep inelastic scattering at HERA, hepe/5855. [] B. Z. Kopeliovich, A. V. Tarasov and A. Schafer, Phys. Rev. C59 (999) 69; A. Kovner and U. Wiedemann, Phys. Rev. D64 () 4; Y. V. Kovchegov and K. Tuchin, Phys. Rev. D65 () 746. [] H. Navelet and S. Wallon, Nucl. Phys. B5 (998) 37. [3] J. Bartels, A. De Roeck and M. Loewe, Zeit. für Phys. C54 (99) 635; WK. Tang, Phys. lett. B78 (99) 363; J. Kwiecinski, A. D. Martin, P. J. Sutton, Phys. Rev. D46 (99) 9. [4] E. Iancu and D. N. Triantafyllopoulos, Nucl. Phys. A756 (5) 49; Phys. Lett. B6 (5) 53; J. P. Blaizot, E. Iancu, K. Itakura and D. N. Triantafyllopoulos, Phys. Lett. B65 (5) ; Y. Hatta, E. Iancu, L. McLerran and A. Stasto, Color dipoles from bremsstrahlung in QCD evolution at high energy, hepph/5535. [5] A. Kovner and M. Lublinsky, Phys. Rev. D7 (5) 854; JHEP 53 (5) ; Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 (5) 863; Dense  dilute duality at work: Dipoles of the target, hepph/5355. [6] A. H. Mueller, A. I. Shoshi and S. M. H. Wong, Nucl. Phys. B75 (5) 44; C. Marquet, A. H. Mueller, A. I. Shoshi and S. M. H. Wong, On the projectiletarget duality of the color glass condensate in the dipole picture, hepph/559. [7] A. Prudnikov, Y. Brychkov, and O. Marichev, Integrals and Series (Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, 986). [8] S. Catani and M. H. Seymour, Nucl. Phys. B485 (997) 9; erratumibid. B5 (997) 53. [9] H. Jung, L. Jönsson and H. Küster, Eur. Phys. J. C9 (999) 383. [3] P. Aurenche, R. Basu, M. Fontannaz and R. M. Godbole, Eur. Phys. J. C34 (4) 77; Eur. Phys. J. C4 (5) 43. [3] C. Marquet and R. Peschanski, Phys. Lett. B587 (4) ; C. Marquet, Strbske Pleso 4, Deep Inelastic Scattering 35, hepph/46. [3] D Collaboration, B. Abbott et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84 () 57.
On the singular behaviour of structure functions at low x. F GifsurYvette Cedex, FRANCE ABSTRACT
On the singular behaviour of structure functions at low by H. Navelet, R. Peschanski, S. Wallon Service de Physique Theorique, CEASaclay F99 GifsurYvette Cede, FRANCE ABSTRACT We discuss the phenomenological
More informationarxiv:hepph/ v1 15 Jul 1998
The DLLA limit of BFKL in the Dipole Picture arxiv:hepph/9807389v1 15 Jul 1998 M. B. Gay Ducati and V. P. Gonçalves Instituto de Física, Univ. Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Caixa Postal 15051, 91501970
More informationarxiv:hepph/ v1 22 Dec 1999
DTP/99/4 DAMTP99979 CavendishHEP99/9 BFKL Dynamics at Hadron Colliders arxiv:hepph/992469v 22 Dec 999 Carlo Ewerz a,b,, Lynne H. Orr c,2, W. James Stirling d,e,3 and Bryan R. Webber a,f,4 a Cavendish
More informationMatching collinear and small x factorization calculations for inclusive hadron production in pa collisions
Matching collinear and small x factorization calculations for inclusive hadron production in pa collisions The Pennsylvania State University, Physics Department, University Park, PA 16802 H. Niewodniczański
More informationarxiv:hepph/ v1 2 Oct 2001
DESY 01136 LUNFD6/(NFFL 7203) 2001 October 2001 Heavy Quark production at the TEVATRON and HERA using k t  factorization with CCFM evolution arxiv:hepph/0110034v1 2 Oct 2001 H. Jung Physics Department,
More informationInstitut fur Theoretische Teilchenphysik, Universitat Karlsruhe, D Karlsruhe, Germany
University of Wisconsin  Madison TTP9624 MADPH96946 QCD Corrections to Jet Cross Sections in DIS June 1996 Erwin Mirkes a and Dieter Zeppenfeld b a Institut fur Theoretische Teilchenphysik, Universitat
More informationCalculation of the Gluon Distribution Function Using Alternative Method for the Proton Structure Function
Commun. Theor. Phys. (Beijing, China 40 (2003 pp. 551 557 c International Academic Publishers Vol. 40, No. 5, November 15, 2003 Calculation of the Gluon Distribution Function Using Alternative Method for
More informationMuellerNavelet jets at LHC: the first complete NLL BFKL study
MuellerNavelet jets at LHC: the first complete NLL BFKL study B. Ducloué LPT, Université ParisSud, CNRS, 945, Orsay, France Email: Bertrand.Ducloue@th.upsud.fr L. Szymanowski National Center for Nuclear
More informationarxiv: v1 [hepph] 7 Jul 2015
arxiv:1507.01916v1 [hepph] 7 Jul 2015 Department of Physics and Astronomy, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, 50011, USA Email: tuchin@iastate.edu An essential part of experimental program at the future
More informationarxiv: v2 [hepph] 18 Feb 2009
Quantum chromodynamics at high energy and statistical physics S. Munier arxiv:0901.2823v2 [hepph] 18 Feb 2009 Centre de physique théorique, École Polytechnique, CNRS, Palaiseau, France Abstract When hadrons
More informationarxiv:hepph/ v2 22 Oct 2001
DESY 01136 LUNFD6/(NFFL 7203) 2001 hepph/0110034 October 2001 arxiv:hepph/0110034v2 22 Oct 2001 Heavy Quark production at the TEVATRON and HERA using k t  factorization with CCFM evolution H. Jung
More informationHigh Energy Physics. Lecture 9. Deep Inelastic Scattering Scaling Violation. HEP Lecture 9 1
High Energy Physics Lecture 9 Deep Inelastic Scattering Scaling Violation HEP Lecture 9 1 Deep Inelastic Scattering: The reaction equation of DIS is written e+ p e+ X where X is a system of outgoing hadrons
More informationarxiv:hepph/ v1 13 Nov 2003
Unintegrated parton distributions and particle production in hadronic collisions arxiv:hepph/0311175v1 13 Nov 2003 Antoni Szczurek Institute of Nuclear Physics PL31342 Cracow, Poland Rzeszów University
More informationQCD at hadron colliders Lecture 3: Parton Distribution Functions
QCD at hadron colliders Lecture : Parton Distribution Functions Gavin Salam CERN, Princeton & LPTHE/CNRS (Paris) Maria Laach Herbtschule für Hochenenergiephysik September, Germany QCD lecture (p. ) PDF
More informationMeasurement of Charged Particle Spectra in DeepInelastic ep Scattering at HERA
Measurement of Charged Particle Spectra in DeepInelastic ep Scattering at HERA Alexander BYLINKIN ( Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics (ITEP), Moscow, Russia) Email: alexander.bylinkin@gmail.com
More informationZEUS 1995 F ZEUS BPC95 ZEUS SVX95 ZEUS94 E665 H1 SVX95 ZEUSREGGE ZEUSQCD
MEASUREMENT AND PHENOMENOLOGY OF THE PROTON STRUCTURE FUNCTION F FROM ZEUS AT HERA A. Quadt Department of Physics, Particle Physics, Keble Road, Oford OX 3RH, England Email: quadt@mail.desy.de Measurements
More informationarxiv:hepex/ v1 14 Sep 1999
ANLHEPCP9999 September, 1999 ShortRange and LongRange Correlations in DIS at HERA 1 arxiv:hepex/99926v1 14 Sep 1999 S.V. Chekanov Argonne National Laboratory, 97 S.Cass Avenue, Argonne, IL 6439
More informationarxiv: v1 [nuclth] 25 Sep 2017
Nuclear Physics A (217) 1 1 Subleading correction of twogluon rapidity correlations of strong colour field YeYin Zhao, MingMei Xu, HengYing Zhang and YuanFang Wu Key Laboratory of Quark and Lepton
More informationOpportunities in low x physics at a future ElectronIon Collider (EIC) facility
1 Opportunities in low x physics at a future ElectronIon Collider (EIC) facility Motivation Quantum Chromo Dynamics Proton=uud Visible Universe Galaxies, stars, people, Silent Partners: Protons & Neutrons
More informationarxiv:hepph/ v1 25 Apr 2002
Unitarity Corrections and Structure Functions M.B. Gay Ducati, M.V.T. Machado arxiv:hepph/0204298v1 25 Apr 2002 Abstract Instituto de Física, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Caixa Postal 15051,
More informationarxiv:hepph/ v1 29 Oct 2005
1 Electroproduction of two light vector mesons in nexttoleading BFKL D.Yu. Ivanov 1 and A. Papa arxiv:hepph/0510397v1 9 Oct 005 1 Sobolev Institute of Mathematics, 630090 Novosibirsk, Russia Dipartimento
More informationThe photon PDF from highmass Drell Yan data at the LHC
The photon PDF from highmass Drell Yan data at the LHC University of Oford Email: francesco.giuli@cern.ch In this contribution, we review the results of [1], where a determination of the photon PDF from
More informationParton saturation and diffractive processes
Parton saturation and diffractive processes Krzysztof GolecBiernat Institute of Nuclear Physics PAN, Kraków Institute of Physics, University of Rzeszów Diffractive and electromagnetic processes at high
More informationEFFECTS OF QUANTUM CHROMODYNAMICS
M. Smoluchowski Institute of Physics Jagiellonian University EFFECTS OF QUANTUM CHROMODYNAMICS IN THE HIGH ENERGY LIMIT IN PARTICLE COLLISIONS Sebastian Sapeta Thesis presented for the degree of Doctor
More informationEvent Generator Physics 2
Event Generator Physics University of Cambridge 1st MCnet School, IPPP Durham 18 th 20 th April 2007 Structure of LHC Events 1. Hard process 2. Parton shower 3. Hadronization 4. Underlying event Lecture
More informationarxiv:hepph/ v1 25 Jun 1999
DESY 99 077 TTP99 29 June 1999 arxiv:hepph/9906503v1 25 Jun 1999 Azimuthal Asymmetries in Hadronic Final States at HERA M. Ahmed a,b and T. Gehrmann c a II. Institut für Theoretische Physik, Universität
More informationSaturation Physics and DiHadron Correlations
Saturation Physics and DiHadron Correlations BoWen Xiao Pennsylvania State University and Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University POETIC August 2012 1 / 24 Outline 1 Introduction
More informationMeasurement of photon production cross sections also in association with jets with the ATLAS detector
Nuclear and Particle Physics Proceedings 00 (07) 6 Nuclear and Particle Physics Proceedings Measurement of photon production cross sections also in association with jets with the detector Sebastien Prince
More informationBaryon stopping and saturation physics in relativistic collisions
PHYSICAL REVIEW C 8, 5495 (9) Baryon stopping and saturation physics in relativistic collisions Yacine MehtarTani and Georg Wolschin Institut für Theoretische Physik der Universität Heidelberg, Philosophenweg
More informationAtlas results on diffraction
Atlas results on diffraction Alessia Bruni INFN Bologna, Italy for the ATLAS collaboration Rencontres du Viet Nam 14th Workshop on Elastic and Diffractive Scattering Qui Nhon, 16/12/2011 EDS 2011 Alessia
More informationZhongBo Kang Los Alamos National Laboratory
Introduction to pqcd and Jets: lecture 1 ZhongBo Kang Los Alamos National Laboratory Jet Collaboration Summer School University of California, Davis July 19 1, 014 Selected references on QCD! QCD and
More informationis represented by a convolution of a gluon density in the collinear limit and a universal
. On the k? dependent gluon density in hadrons and in the photon J. Blumlein DESY{Zeuthen, Platanenallee 6, D{15735 Zeuthen, Germany Abstract The k? dependent gluon distribution for protons, pions and
More informationRecent Results on Jet Physics and α s
Recent Results on Jet Physics and α s XXI Physics in Collision Conference Seoul, Korea June 8, Presented by Michael Strauss The University of Oklahoma Outline Introduction and Experimental Considerations
More informationEnergyenergy and transversal energyenergy correlations in e + e and pp collisions
Energyenergy and transversal energyenergy correlations in e + e and pp collisions A. Ali, 1, E. A. Kuraev, 2, 1 DESY, Hamburg, Germany 2 JINR, BLTP, Dubna, Moscow region, Russia July 14, 2013 A. Ali,
More informationarxiv: v2 [hepph] 15 Apr 2009
APS/123QED Charm and longitudinal structure functions with the KLN model arxiv:0812.0780v2 [hepph] 15 Apr 2009 F. Carvalho 1, 3, F.O. Durães 2, F.S. Navarra 3 and S. Szpigel 2 1 Dep. de Metemática e
More informationarxiv: v1 [hepph] 5 Nov 2014
Hard probes and the event generator EPOS arxiv:1411.1336v1 [hepph] 5 Nov 2014 B Guiot and K Werner SUBATECH, University of NantesIN2P3/CNRSEMN, Nantes, France Email: guiot@subatech.in2p3.fr Abstract.
More informationViolation of a simple factorized form of QCD amplitudes and Regge cuts
Violation of a simple factorized form of QCD amplitudes and Regge cuts Author affiliation Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics of SD RAS, 630090 Novosibirsk Russia Novosibirsk State University, 630090 Novosibirsk,
More information3.2 DIS in the quark parton model (QPM)
Experimental studies of QCD 1. Elements of QCD 2. Tests of QCD in annihilation 3. Studies of QCD in DIS 4. QCD in collisions 3.2 DIS in the quark parton model (QPM) M W Elastic scattering: W = M only one
More informationUnitarity Corrections to the Proton Structure Functions at the Dipole Picture
Preprint typeset in JHEP style.  PAPER VERSION GFPAEUFRGS (2001) arxiv:hepph/0111093v1 8 Nov 2001 Unitarity Corrections to the Proton Structure Functions at the Dipole Picture M.B. Gay Ducati and M.V.T.
More informationarxiv:hepph/ v1 25 Mar 1997
MZTH/9634 hepph/9703416 March 1997 arxiv:hepph/9703416v1 25 Mar 1997 Gluon Polarization in e + e t tg S. Groote, J.G. Körner and J.A. Leyva 1 Institut für Physik, JohannesGutenbergUniversität, Staudinger
More informationarxiv:hepph/ v1 24 Dec 1997
December 1997 TAUP 2471/97 arxiv:hepph/9712517v1 24 Dec 1997 THE F 2 SLOPE AND SHADOWING CORRECTIONS IN DIS E. G O T S M A N a),1), E. L E V I N a),b),2) and U. M A O R a),3) Abstract: a) School of Physics
More informationarxiv: v3 [hepph] 14 Nov 2017
scattering in ultrarelativistic UPC arxiv:7.868v [hepph] 4 Nov 07 Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, PL4 Krakow, Poland Email: Antoni.Szczurek@ifj.edu.pl Mariola KłusekGawenda
More informationQCD and jets physics at the LHC with CMS during the first year of data taking. Pavel Demin UCL/FYNU LouvainlaNeuve
QCD and jets physics at the LHC with CMS during the first year of data taking Pavel Demin UCL/FYNU LouvainlaNeuve February 8, 2006 Bon appétit! February 8, 2006 Pavel Demin UCL/FYNU 1 Why this seminar?
More informationA Framework for High Energy Factorisation matched to Parton Showers
A Framework for High Energy Factorisation matched to Parton Showers Marcin Bury Email: marcin.bury@ifj.edu.pl Andreas van Hameren Email: hameren@ifj.edu.pl Hannes Jung DESY, Hamburg, Germany Email:
More informationInclusive Production of Single Hadrons with Finite Transverse Momenta in DeepInelastic Scattering at NexttoLeading Order
DESY 04224 ISSN 0489833 hepph/04300 November 2004 arxiv:hepph/04300 v 22 Nov 2004 Inclusive Production of Single Hadrons with Finite Transverse Momenta in DeepInelastic Scattering at NexttoLeading
More informationarxiv:hepph/ v1 20 Jul 1998
Charge asymmetry of heavy uarks at hadron colliders J.H. Kühn Institut für Theoretische Teilchenphysik, Universität Karlsruhe, D768 Karlsruhe, Germany G. Rodrigo INFNSezione di Firenze, Largo E. Fermi,
More informationSplitting diagrams in double logarithm approximation of pqcd
MPI2012, CERN December 37, 2012 Splitting diagrams in double logarithm approximation of pqcd M.G. Ryskin Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, NRC Kurchatov Institute, Gatchina, St. Petersburg, 188300,
More informationarxiv:hepph/ v3 1 Feb 2002
LUNFD6/(NFFL707) 001 December 001 Heavy Quark Production at the TEVATRON arxiv:hepph/011114v3 1 Feb 00 in the Semihard QCD Approach and the Unintegrated Gluon Distribution A.V. Lipatov 1 Department of
More informationPower corrections to jet distributions at hadron colliders
Power corrections to jet distributions at hadron colliders Lorenzo Magnea Università di Torino INFN, Sezione di Torino Work in collaboration with: M. Cacciari, M. Dasgupta, G. Salam. DIS 7 Munich 8//7
More informationMBR Monte Carlo Simulation in PYTHIA8
MBR Monte Carlo Simulation in PYTHIA8 Robert Ciesielski, Konstantin Goulianos The Rockefeller University, 130 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA Email: robert.ciesielski@rockefeller.edu, dino@rockefeller.edu
More informationarxiv: v1 [hepex] 8 Sep 2017
Quarkonium production in protonproton collisions with ALICE at the LHC arxiv:1709.02545v1 [hepex] 8 Sep 2017, on behalf of the ALICE Collaboration, Laboratoire de Physique de Clermont (LPC), Université
More informationCTEQ6.6 pdf s etc. J. Huston Michigan State University
CTEQ6.6 pdf s etc J. Huston Michigan State University 1 Parton distribution functions and global fits Calculation of production cross sections at the LHC relies upon knowledge of pdf s in the relevant
More informationarxiv:hepph/ v1 5 Jan 1996
SLAC PUB 95 763 December 1995 Renormalization Scale Setting for Evolution Equation of NonSinglet Structure Functions and Their Moments Wing Kai Wong arxiv:hepph/961215v1 5 Jan 1996 Stanford Linear Accelerator
More informationarxiv:hepph/ v1 11 May 1996
DESY 96060 ISSN 04189833 April 1996 Unified Description of Rapidity Gaps and Energy Flows in DIS Final States A. Edin 1, G. Ingelman 1,2, J. Rathsman 1 arxiv:hepph/9605281v1 11 May 1996 1 Dept. of Radiation
More informationarxiv:hepph/ v1 25 May 1999 Energy dependence of mean multiplicities in gluon and quark jets at the nexttonexttonexttoleading order
FIAN30/99 UCRHEPE255 14 May 1999 arxiv:hepph/9905477v1 25 May 1999 Energy dependence of mean multiplicities in gluon and quark jets at the nexttonexttonexttoleading order I.M. Dremin 1 and J.W.
More informationIn this paper the uncertainties in the NLO QCD inclusive jet calculations are explored using two available programs: Jetrad [4] a complete O( S3 ) eve
An Investigation of Uncertainties in the QCD NLO Predictions of the Inclusive Jet Cross Section in pp Collisions at p s =.8 TeV and 630 GeV B. Abbott, 5 I.A. Bertram, 6 M. Bhattacharjee, 7 G. Di Loreto,
More informationPhotonPhoton Diffractive Interaction at High Energies
PhotonPhoton Diffractive Interaction at High Energies CongFeng Qiao Graduate University Chinese Academy of Sciences December 17,2007 1 Contents Brief About Diffractive Interaction Leading Order Photon
More informationarxiv: v1 [physics.accph] 1 Sep 2015
based on protondriven plasma wakefield acceleration arxiv:1509.00235v1 [physics.accph] 1 Sep 2015 A. Caldwell Max Planck Institute for Physics, Munich, Germany Email: caldwell@mpp.mpg.de UCL, London,
More informationarxiv: v2 [hepph] 28 Jun 2016
Combining NNPDF3.0 and NNPDF2.3QED through the APFEL evolution code arxiv:606.0730v2 [hepph] 28 Jun 206 Rudolf Peierls Center for Theoretical Physics, Keble Road, University of Oford, OX 3NP Oford, United
More informationTop quark pair properties in the production and decays of t t events at ATLAS
ATLPHYSPROC21472 11 July 214 Top quark pair properties in the production and decays of t t events at DESY, Hamburg Universität Wuppertal Email: ralph.schaefer@cern.ch In protonproton collisions at
More informationChapter 2 Introduction to QCD and Collider Physics
Chapter 2 Introduction to QCD and Collider Physics 2.1 Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) Quantum chromodynamics (QCD) is the theory of the strong interaction, describing the interactions of the quarks and gluons,
More informationarxiv: v3 [hepph] 10 Dec 2012
Υmeson pair production at LHC A. V. Berezhnoy, 1, A. K. Likhoded, 2, and A. A. Novoselov 2, 1 SINP of Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia 2 Institute for High Energy Physics, Protvino, Russia Theoretical
More informationTransverse EnergyEnergy Correlation on Hadron Collider. Deutsches ElektronenSynchrotron
Transverse EnergyEnergy Correlation on Hadron Collider Wei Wang ( 王伟 ) Deutsches ElektronenSynchrotron Work with Ahmed Ali, Fernando Barreiro, Javier Llorente arxiv: 1205.1689, Phys.Rev. D86, 114017(2012)
More informationMBR Monte Carlo Simulation in PYTHIA8
The Rockefeller University, 10 York Avenue, New York, NY 06, USA Email: robert.ciesielski@rockefeller.edu Konstantin Goulianos The Rockefeller University, 10 York Avenue, New York, NY 06, USA Email:
More informationPrompt Photon Production in pa Collisions at LHC and the Extraction of Gluon Shadowing
Prompt Photon Production in pa Collisions at LHC and the Extraction of Gluon Shadowing F. Arleo, T. Gousset To cite this version: F. Arleo, T. Gousset. Prompt Photon Production in pa Collisions at LHC
More informationSearch for Quark Substructure in 7 TeV pp Collisions with the ATLAS Detector
Search for Quark Substructure in 7 TeV pp Collisions with the ATLAS Detector Frank Berghaus SUPERVISOR: Michel Lefebvre University of Victoria June 12, 2012 Introduction ATLAS and the LHC The LHC provides
More informationPoS(DIS2017)208. Nuclear PDF studies with protonlead measurements with the ALICE detector
Nuclear PDF studies with protonlead measurements with the ALICE detector a,b for the ALICE Collaboration a Institute for Subatomic Physics, Department for Physics and Astronomy and EMMEφ, Faculty of Science,
More informationInvestigation of Top quark spin correlations at hadron colliders
CERNPHTH/2004206 Investigation of Top quark spin correlations at hadron colliders arxiv:hepph/0410197v1 13 Oct 2004 W. Bernreuther A, A. Brandenburg B, Z. G. Si C and P. Uwer D A Institut f. Theoretische
More informationImaging the Proton via Hard Exclusive Production in Diffractive pp Scattering
Exclusive Reactions at High Momentum Transfer Jefferson Lab, Newport News, VA May 2124, 2007 Imaging the Proton via Hard Exclusive Production in Diffractive pp Scattering Charles Earl Hyde Old Dominion
More informationQCD results from LEP. new studies & puzzling results. Thorsten Wengler, CERN Moriond QCD 2004 La Thuile, Italy
QCD results from LEP new studies & puzzling results Unbiased gluon jets using the boost algorithm (OPAL) Coherence in soft particle production in 3jets events (DELPHI) Pentaquark search (DELPHI) Thorsten
More informationA proposed very high energy electron proton collider, VHEeP
A proposed very high energy electron proton collider, VHEeP UCL, London, UK Email: m.wing@ucl.ac.uk A. Caldwell Max Planck Institute for Physics, Munich, Germany Email: caldwell@mpp.mpg.de The possibility
More informationdσ/dx 1/σ tot TASSO 22 TPC/2γ 29 MKII 29 TASSO 35 CELLO 35 TASSO 43.7 AMY 55.2 DELPHI 91.2 ALEPH 91.
Department of Physics & Astronomy Experimental Particle Physics Group Kelvin Building, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8QQ, Scotland Telephone: +44 (0)141 339 8855 Fax: +44 (0)141 334 9029 GLAS{PPE/95{02
More informationNovel features of diffraction at the LHC
Novel features of diffraction at the LHC arxiv:hepph/0103257v2 14 Sep 2001 V. A. Petrov, A. V. Prokudin, S. M. Troshin, N. E. Tyurin Institute for High Energy Physics, Protvino, Moscow Region, 142280,
More informationElectroweak accuracy in Vpair production at the LHC
Electroweak accuracy in Vpair production at the LHC Anastasiya Bierweiler Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institut für Theoretische Teilchenphysik, D7628 Karlsruhe, Germany Email: nastya@particle.unikarlsruhe.de
More informationHard processes in AdS/CFT
Hard processes in AdS/CFT Yoshitaka Hatta (Tsukuba U) Based on works done in collaboration with E. Iancu, T. Matsuo, A.H. Mueller, D. Triantafyllopoulos Outline Motivation High energy CD with a virtual
More informationFERMI NATIONAL ACCELERATOR LABORATORY
FERMI NATIONAL ACCELERATOR LABORATORY arxiv:0908.1374v1 [hepex] 10 Aug 2009 TEVEWWG/WZ 2009/01 FERMILABTM2439E CDF Note 9859 D0 Note 5965 10 th August 2009 Updated Combination of CDF and D0 Results
More informationarxiv: v1 [hepph] 23 Nov 2007
Testing the RRPP vertex of effective Regge action E. A. Kuraev, V. V. Bytev, S. Bakmaev JINRBLTP, 4980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russian Federation E.N. Antonov arxiv:07.3576v [hepph] 23 Nov 2007 Petersburg
More informationTests of QCD Using Jets at CMS. Salim CERCI Adiyaman University On behalf of the CMS Collaboration IPM /10/2017
Tests of QCD Using Jets at CMS Salim CERCI Adiyaman University On behalf of the CMS Collaboration IPM2017 24/10/2017 2/25 Outline Introduction QCD at LHC QCD measurements on the LHC data Jets The strong
More informationNNLO antenna subtraction with two hadronic initial states
NNLO antenna subtraction with two hadronic initial states Institut für Theoretische Physik, Universität Zürich, Winterthurerstr. 190, 8057 Zürich, Switzerland Email: radja@physik.uzh.ch Aude GehrmannDe
More informationA. Mitov 3loop timelike splitting functions in Mellin space and NNLO fragmentation
Threeloop timelike splitting functions in Mellin space and NNLO fragmentation Alexander Mitov DESY Work in progress with: M. Cacciari; Lance Dixon; SO. Moch Also based on: hepph/0604160 (with Sven
More informationAN INTRODUCTION TO QCD
AN INTRODUCTION TO QCD Frank Petriello Northwestern U. & ANL TASI 2013: The Higgs Boson and Beyond June 37, 2013 1 Outline We ll begin with motivation for the continued study of QCD, especially in the
More information! s. and QCD tests at hadron colliders. world summary of! s newest results (selection)! s from hadron colliders remarks
! s and QCD tests at hadron colliders world summary of! s newest results (selection)! s from hadron colliders remarks S. Bethke MPI für Physik, Munich S. Bethke: a s and QCD tests at hadron colliders Collider
More informationarxiv: v1 [hepph] 28 Jul 2015
Gluon saturation and Feynman scaling in leading neutron production F. Carvalho 1, V.P. Gonçalves 2, D. Spiering 3 and F.S. Navarra 3 1 Departamento de Ciências Exatas e da Terra, Universidade Federal de
More informationQCD at the Tevatron: The Production of Jets & Photons plus Jets
QCD at the Tevatron: The Production of Jets & Photons plus Jets Mike Strauss The University of Oklahoma The Oklahoma Center for High Energy Physics for the CDF and DØD Collaborations APS 2009 Denver, Colorado
More informationZ+jet production at the LHC: Electroweak radiative corrections
Z+jet production at the LHC: Electroweak radiative corrections Ansgar Denner Universität Würzburg, Institut für Theoretische Physik und Astrophysik Am Hubland, 9774 Würzburg, Germany Email: denner@physik.uniwuerzburg.de
More informationarxiv:hepph/ v3 2 Jan 2001
Thermalization temperature in Pb+Pb collisions at SpS energy from hadron yields and midrapidity p t distributions of hadrons and direct photons D. Yu. Peressounko and Yu. E. Pokrovsky Russian Research
More informationPhysics at the Large Hadron Collider
Herbstschule Maria Laach, September 2005 Physics at the Large Hadron Collider Michael Krämer (RWTH Aachen) Lecture 1: Review of the Standard Model Lecture 2: SM physics at hadron colliders Lecture 3: Higgs
More informationProton Structure and Prediction of Elastic Scattering at LHC at CenterofMass Energy 7 TeV
Proton Structure and Prediction of Elastic Scattering at LHC at CenterofMass Energy 7 TeV M. M. Islam 1, J. Kašpar 2,3, R. J. Luddy 1 1 Department of Physics, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269
More informationNovel Measurements of Proton Structure at HERA
Introduction Combined Cross Sections & QCD Fits NC & CC Cross Section Measurements F L Summary Novel Measurements of Proton Structure at HERA Katie Oliver University of Oxford On behalf of the H1 and ZEUS
More informationHadron Collider Physics, HCP2004, June 1418
) " % "" ' & % % " ) " % '% &* ' ) * ' + " ' ) ( $#! ' "") ( * " ) +% % )( (. ' + , '+ % &* ' ) ( 021 % # / ( * *' 5 4* 3 %( '' ' " + +% Hadron Collider Physics, HCP2004, June 1418 The Run II DØ Detector
More informationInclusive spectrum of charged jets in central Au+Au collisions at s NN = 200 GeV by STAR
Inclusive spectrum of charged jets in central Au+Au collisions at s NN = 200 GeV by SAR Nuclear Physics Institute, Academy of Sciencis of Czech Republic, Na ruhlarce 39/64, 180 86 Prague, Czech Republic
More informationPrecision QCD at the Tevatron. Markus Wobisch, Fermilab for the CDF and DØ Collaborations
Precision QCD at the Tevatron Markus Wobisch, Fermilab for the CDF and DØ Collaborations Fermilab Tevatron  Run II Chicago Ecm: 1.8 1.96 TeV more Bunches 6 36 Bunch Crossing 3500 396ns CDF Booster Tevatron
More informationIntroduction to the Standard Model. 1. e+e annihilation and QCD. M. E. Peskin PiTP Summer School July 2005
Introduction to the Standard Model 1. e+e annihilation and QCD M. E. Peskin PiTP Summer School July 2005 In these lectures, I will describe the phenomenology of the Standard Model of particle physics.
More informationPhotoproduction of Events with Rapidity Gaps Between Jets with ZEUS at HERA. PhD Defense May 5, Patrick Ryan, Univ.
Photoproduction of Events with Rapidity Gaps Between Jets with ZEUS at HERA Patrick Ryan University of Wisconsin PhD Defense May 5, 2006 Rapidity Gaps Between Jets in PHP PhD Defense, May. 5 20061 Outline
More informationPoS(ICHEP2012)300. Electroweak boson production at LHCb
PhysikInstitut der Universität Zürich, Switzerland. Email: jonathan.anderson@cern.ch The electroweak boson production crosssections have been measured in the forward region using s = 7 TeV protonproton
More informationASYMPTOTIC BEHAVIOR OF NUCLEON ELECTROMAGNETIC FORM FACTORS IN SPACE AND TIMELIKE REGIONS
ASYMPTOTIC BEHAVIOR OF NUCLEON ELECTROMAGNETIC FORM FACTORS IN SPACE AND TIMELIKE REGIONS Egle TomasiGustafsson (1) and Michail P. Rekalo (2) (1) DAPNIA/SPhN, CEA/Saclay, 91191 GifsurYvette Cedex,
More informationAssociated production of J/ψ and ϒ mesons and the prospects to observe a new hypothetical tetraquark state
Associated production of J/ψ and ϒ mesons and the prospects to observe a new hypothetical tetraquark state P.N. Lebedev Institute of Physics, 53 Lenin Avenue, Moscow 119991, Russia Email: baranov@sci.lebedev.ru
More informationProperties of Protonproton Collision and. Comparing Event Generators by Multijet Events
Properties of Protonproton Collision and Comparing Event Generators by Multijet Events Author: W. H. TANG 1 (Department of Physics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong) Supervisors: Z. L. MARSHALL 2,
More informationMultipoles and Coherent Gluon Radiation Plenary session
Multipoles and Coherent Gluon Radiation Plenary session Lanny Ray, Univ. of Texas at Austin Higherorder harmonics? BFKL Pomeron diagrams and v On to the LHC Summary and Conclusions STAR Collaboration
More informationPoS(HEP2005)038. Final state QCD studies at LEP: Part I. Pedro Abreu * for the DELPHI and OPAL Collaborations
Final state QCD studies at LEP: Part I Pedro Abreu * LIP/IST Av. Elias Garcia, 14, 1 st, 1000149 Lisboa, Portugal Email: abreu@lip.pt for the DELPHI and OPAL Collaborations CERN 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland
More information