- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review D

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Pinch technique at two loops: The case of massless Yang-Mills theories

Joannis Papavassiliou

  • Departamento de Física Teórica, Universidad de Valencia, E-46100 Burjassot (Valencia), Spain

PDF

Phys. Rev. D 62, 045006 – Published 17 July, 2000

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.62.045006

Abstract

The generalization of the pinch technique beyond one loop is presented. It is shown that the crucial physical principles of gauge invariance, unitarity, and gauge-fixing-parameter independence are instrumental for accomplishing this task, and it is explained how the aforementioned requirements single out at two loops exactly the same algorithm which has been used to define the pinch technique at one loop, without any additional assumptions. The two-loop construction of the pinch technique gluon self-energy, and quark-gluon vertex are carried out in detail for the case of massless Yang-Mills theories, such as perturbative QCD. We present two different but complementary derivations. First we carry out the construction by directly rearranging two-loop diagrams. The analysis reveals that, quite interestingly, the well-known one-loop correspondence between the pinch technique and the background field method in the Feynman gauge persists also at two loops. Since we use dimensional regularization, the entire construction does not depend on the value of the space-time dimension d. The renormalization (when d=4) is discussed in detail, and is shown to respect the aforementioned correspondence. Second, we present an absorptive derivation, exploiting the unitarity of the S matrix and the underlying Becchi-Rouet-Stora (BRS) symmetry; at this stage we deal only with tree-level and one-loop physical amplitudes. The gauge-invariant subamplitudes defined by means of this absorptive construction correspond precisely to the imaginary parts of the n-point functions defined in the full two-loop derivation, thus furnishing a highly nontrivial self-consistency check for the entire method. Various future applications are briefly discussed.

View figure in article

References (72)

  1. J. M. Cornwall, in Proceedings of the French-American Seminar on Theoretical Aspects of Quantum Chromodynamics, Marseille, France, 1981, edited by J. W. Dash (Centre de Physique Théorique, Marseille, 1982).
  2. J. M. Cornwall, Phys. Rev. D 26, 1453 (1982).
  3. J. M. Cornwall and J. Papavassiliou, Phys. Rev. D 40, 3474 (1989).
  4. J. Papavassiliou, Phys. Rev. D 41, 3179 (1990).
  5. G. Degrassi and A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. D 46, 3104 (1992).
  6. J. Papavassiliou, Phys. Rev. D 50, 5958 (1994).
  7. G. Degrassi, B. Kniehl, and A. Sirlin, Phys. Rev. D 48, R3963 (1993); ibid.J. Papavassiliou and K. Philippides, 48, 4255 (1993); ibid.J. Papavassiliou and C. Parrinello, 50, 3059 (1994); K. Hagiwara, S. Matsumoto, D. Haidt, and C. S. Kim, Z. Phys. C 64, 559 (1994); ibid.68, 352(E) (1995); J. Papavassiliou, K. Philippides, and K. Sasaki, Phys. Rev. D 53, 3942 (1996).
  8. B. S. DeWitt, Phys. Rev. 162, 1195 (1967); G. ’t Hooft, in Acta Universitatis Wratislvensis no. 38, 12th Winter School of Theoretical Physics in Kapacz, Functional and probabilistic methods in quantum field theory vol. I (1975); B. S. DeWitt, A gauge invariant effective action, in Quantum gravity II, edited by C. Isham, R. Penrose, and D. Sciama (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1981).
  9. L. F. Abbott, Nucl. Phys. B185, 189 (1981), and references therein.
  10. L. F. Abbott, M. T. Grisaru, and R. K. Schaeffer, Nucl. Phys. B229, 372 (1983).
  11. A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, and G. Weiglein, Phys. Lett. B 333, 420 (1994); S. Hashimoto, J. Kodaira, Y. Yasui, and K. Sasaki, Phys. Rev. D 50, 7066 (1994); E. de Rafael and N. J. Watson (unpublished).
  12. J. Papavassiliou and A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 3060 (1995); Phys. Rev. D 53, 2128 (1996).
  13. J. Papavassiliou and A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Rev. D 54, 5315 (1996).
  14. J. Papavassiliou, E. de Rafael, and N. J. Watson, Nucl. Phys. B503, 79 (1997).
  15. J. Papavassiliou and A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 2785 (1998); Phys. Rev. D 58, 053002 (1998).
  16. G. Alexanian and V. P. Nair, Phys. Lett. B 352, 435 (1995); K. Sasaki, Nucl. Phys. B472, 271 (1996); ibid.B490, 472 (1997).
  17. N. J. Watson, Nucl. Phys. B494, 388 (1997).
  18. S. Peris and E. de Rafael, Nucl. Phys. B500, 325 (1997).
  19. A. Pilaftsis, Nucl. Phys. B487, 467 (1997).
  20. R. Cruz, B. Grzadkowski, and J. F. Gunion, Phys. Lett. B 289, 440 (1992); D. Atwood, G. Eilam, A. Soni, R. R. Mendel, and R. Migneron, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 1364 (1993).
  21. A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 4996 (1996); Nucl. Phys. B504, 61 (1997).
  22. R. Kleiss and W. J. Stirling, Phys. Lett. B 182, 75 (1986); U. Baur and E. W. N. Glover, Nucl. Phys. B347, 12 (1990); Phys. Rev. D 44, 99 (1991).
  23. K. Philippides and W. J. Stirling, Eur. Phys. J. C 9, 181 (1999).
  24. See, also, D. C. Kennedy and B. W. Lynn, Nucl. Phys. B322, 1 (1989).
  25. J. Papavassiliou, contribution to the 1998 Corfu Summer Institute on Elementary Particle Physics hep-ph/9905328.
  26. J. Papavassiliou, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 2782 (2000).
  27. N. J. Watson, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 74, 341 (1999).
  28. A. Slavnov, Theor. Math. Phys. 10, 99 (1973); J. C. Taylor, Nucl. Phys. B33, 436 (1971).
  29. See for example, S. Weinberg, The Quantum Theory of Fields (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1996), Vol. II, p. 95.
  30. G. ’t Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B33, 173 (1971); J. M. Cornwall and G. Tiktopoulos, Phys. Rev. D 15, 2937 (1977).
  31. J. Papavassiliou, Phys. Rev. D 51, 856 (1995).
  32. M. Passera and K. Sasaki, Phys. Rev. D 54, 5763 (1996).
  33. E. de Rafael and J. L. Rosner, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 82, 369 (1973).
  34. H. D. Politzer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 30, 1346 (1973); ibid.D. Gross and F. Wilczek, 30, 1343 (1973).
  35. T. Kunimasa and T. Goto, Prog. Theor. Phys. 37, 452 (1967); A. A. Slavnov, Theor. Math. Phys. 10, 305 (1972); J. M. Cornwall, Phys. Rev. D 10, 500 (1974).
  36. J. R. Forshaw, J. Papavassiliou, and C. Parrinello, Phys. Rev. D 59, 074008 (1999).
  37. J. Papavassiliou, Phys. Rev. D 47, 4728 (1993).
  38. K. Philippides and A. Sirlin, Nucl. Phys. B477, 59 (1996).
  39. The notion of “internal” and “external” three-gluon vertex can be generalized also to include the case where the gauge-invariant physical observable is not an S-matrix element, but instead a gauge-invariant Green’s function. For example one could carry out the PT program inside the Green’s function G(x,y)=〈0|T(Tr{Φ(x)Φ(x)†}Tr{Φ(y)Φ(y)†}|0〉, where Φ(x) is a matrix describing a set of scalar test particles in an appropriate representation of the gauge group; this latter quantity was employed by Cornwall for the original PT construction [2]. In that case the “external” momentum is the momentum transfer between the two sides of the scalar loop, i.e., as explained in [2], one should count loops as if the Φ loop were opened at x and y.
  40. For an attempt to define the two-loop PT quark self-energy by modifying its internal three-gluon vertices, using as criterion the skeleton expansion, see N. J. Watson, Nucl. Phys. B552, 461 (1999).
  41. W. Buchmüller and O. Philipsen, Phys. Lett. B 397, 112 (1997); ibid.R. Jackiw and S.-Y. Pi, 403, 297 (1997); J. M. Cornwall, Phys. Rev. D 57, 3694 (1998); ibid.59, 125015 (1999).
  42. For some recent literature on this subject see P. A. Grassi, Nucl. Phys. B462, 524 (1996); ibid.B537, 527 (1999); ibid.B560, 301 (1999).
  43. W. E. Caswell, Phys. Rev. Lett. 33, 1346 (1973).
  44. D. R. T. Jones, Nucl. Phys. B75, 531 (1974).
  45. At one loop one can verify these relations explicitly by computing the divergent part of VP(1) in Eq. (2.12), together with the expressions for the various one-loop renormalization constants listed in Eqs. (5)–(7) of [44] (notice the difference in the notation, and that d=4−ε).
  46. We will not consider the case where one has quarks as intermediate states; it can be straightforwardly deduced from the gluonic case. In fact, one should be able to verify easily that the absorptive construction in this case is in full agreement with the direct two-loop PT generalization for the case where a massless quark loop is present in the two-loop diagrams, which has been presented in S. Bauberger, F. A. Berends, M. Böhm, M. Buza, and G. Weiglein, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) B37, 95 (1994).
  47. C. Becchi, A. Rouet, and R. Stora, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 98, 287 (1976).
  48. See, e.g., T.-P. Cheng and L.-F. Li, Gauge Theory of Elementary Particle Physics (Clarendon, Oxford, 1985), p. 277.
  49. For the case of a 2→2 process, the “Feynman” amplitude is in fact the PT amplitude as defined in [2][3].
  50. This type of rearrangement has been frequently employed in the literature (see, for example, the second paper in [7]), when dealing with the gauge-invariant formulation of one-loop Born-improved amplitudes [13][15], i.e., amplitudes where (by definition) the box diagrams have been omitted. These latter amplitudes have unitarity properties which are, in general, different from those of ordinary PT rearranged amplitudes.
  51. Yu. L. Dokshitzer, D. I. Dyakonov, and S. I. Troyan, Phys. Rep. 58, 269 (1980); A. Andraši and J. C. Taylor, Nucl. Phys. B192, 283 (1981); D. M. Capper and G. Leibbrandt, Phys. Rev. D 25, 1002 (1982).
  52. See, e.g., third paper of [35].
  53. N. J. Watson, Phys. Lett. B 349, 155 (1995).
  54. Notice that, strictly speaking, the effective quark-gluon vertex obtained through the PT rearrangement of the process qq→qq (see Secs. II and III B) is to be identified with ΓFμ rather then Γ^μ; the latter is to be constructed in a way similar to that used for the PT one-loop three-gluon vertex [2][3], i.e., by embedding it into a process involving the scattering of three on-shell quark-gluon pairs, q1g1,q2g2,q3g3. The corresponding three momentum transfers define the “special” momenta. The fact that the two effective quark-vertex Green’s functions defined by either way actually coincide, i.e., ΓFμ=Γ^μ, has led to the usual (rather laxed) terminology. In the case of ΓFαμν and Γ^αμν on the other hand, a sharper distinction in the terminology needs to be adopted.
  55. R. D. Pisarski (private communication).
  56. G. Grunberg, Phys. Rev. D 40, 680 (1989); ibid.46, 2228 (1992).
  57. R. Haussling, E. Kraus, and K. Sibold, Nucl. Phys. B539, 691 (1999).
  58. The corresponding PT constant at one loop was first presented in [31].
  59. I thank G. Grunberg and E. Gardi for emphasizing this point to me.
  60. P. Gambino and A. Sirlin, Phys. Lett. B 355, 295 (1995).
  61. R. Kallosh, Nucl. Phys. B78, 293 (1974).
  62. T. Kinoshita, J. Math. Phys. 3, 650 (1962); E. C. Poggio and H. R. Quinn, Phys. Rev. D 14, 578 (1976); ibid.G. Sterman, 14, 2123 (1976).
  63. Taizo Muta, Foundations of Quantum Chromodynamics (World Scientific, Singapore, 1987), Chap. 6, Vol. 5.
  64. S. Catani and E. D’Emilio, Fortschr. Phys. 41, 261 (1993).
  65. Yu. L. Dokshitzer, G. Marchesini, and B. R. Webber, Nucl. Phys. B469, 93 (1996).
  66. F. Halzen, G. Krein, and A. A. Natale, Phys. Rev. D 47, 295 (1993); ibid.M. B. Gay Ducati, F. Halzen, and A. A. Natale, 48, 2324 (1993); J. R. Cudell and B. U. Nguyen, Nucl. Phys. B420, 669 (1994); A. Donnachie and P. V. Landshoff, Phys. Lett. B 387, 637 (1996); B. Magradze, hep-ph/9911456.
  67. Y. J. Feng and C. S. Lam, Phys. Rev. D 50, 7430 (1994).
  68. Z. Bern and D. C. Dunbar, Nucl. Phys. B379, 562 (1992), and references therein.
  69. P. Di Vecchia, L. Magnea, A. Lerda, R. Russo, and R. Marotta, Nucl. Phys. B469, 235 (1996).
  70. P. Gambino and P. A. Grassi, “The Nielsen Identities of the SM and the Definition of Mass,” hep-ph/9907254.
  71. C. Schubert, An Introduction to the Worldline Technique for Quantum Field Theory Calculations, Lectures given at 36th Cracow School of Theoretical Physics, Zakopane, Poland, 1996; Acta Phys. Pol. B 27, 3965 (1996), and references therein.
  72. W. Beenakker, F. A. Berends, and A. P. Chapovsky, “An Effective Lagrangian Approach for Unstable Particles,” hep-ph/9909472.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 62, 045006– Published 17 July, 2000
  • Received 28 December 1999

© 2000 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation