Upload
gladys-henderson
View
215
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Light scalar nonets in pole-dominated QCD sum rules
T. Kojo (Kyoto Univ.)
D. Jido (YITP)
Light scalar nonets ~ candidates of exotic hadrons
isospin: 0 1/2 1 0
mass (MeV): 600 ? 800 ? 980 980width: broad broad narrow narrow
2 - quark picture has the difficulty:
To obtain JP = 0+ state, P-wave excitation (~500MeV) is needed.
The masses exceed ~ 1 GeV.
The assignment assuming the ideal mixing:
wrong ordering
Natural explanation for mass ordering & decay mode & width
Possible strong diquark correlation (?) → mass < 1 GeV
4 -quark picture leads the favorable prescription (Jaffe, 1977)
The purpose of my talk
The purpose of my talk is:
to provide the information to consider
the relevant constituents possible mixing with 2q & 2qG
for light scalar nonets, using the QCD Sum Rules.
We already know the 2q operator analysis
fails to reproduce the lightness of light scalar nonets.
Therefore, we perform the QSR analysis
using the tetraquark operators.
2, Basics of QCD Sum Rules& typical artifacts in the application to the exotics
QCD Sum Rules (QSR)
?hard soft
OPE
small large
Borel window
OPE bad OPE good
Procedures for estimating the physical quantities
3, Select Sth to give the good stability against the variation of M.
2, Plot physical quantities as functions of M2:
effective mass:
E
Eth
1, Set the Borel window for each Sth :
Mmin < M < Mmax
constraint for OPE convergence constraint for continuum suppression
highest dim. / whole OPE < 10 % pole / whole spectral func. > 50 %
peak like structure stability against M variation
QSR for Exotics2. Good continuum suppression
3. small M2-dependence
1. Good OPE convergence
Difficulty to analyze Exotics
R.D.Matheus and S.Narison, hep-ph/0412063 M2
small
?
When quark number of operator is large, realizing the conditions 1, 2 becomes extremely difficult.
Indeed, in most of the previous works, OPE convergence is not good, and
In the M2 region where pole ratio is too small,
the artificial stability of the physical parameters emerges! ( Even in the meson and baryon cases )
To avoid the artificial stability, we must estimate the physical values in the Borel window.
pole / whole contribution in the spectral integral is less than ~20 %!
QSR artifact ~ pseudo peak artifact
: outside of the Borel window
dim 10 ~ 12 dim 0 ~ 8
E
Eth
dim 8 ~ 12
dim 0 ~ 6
E
Eth
pseudo peak ! dim 0 ~ 6
dim 8 ~ 12
Spectral function
Pseudo peak artifact ~ Impact on physical quantities
mass residue
spectral function pole dominance
These artifacts are easily rejected by Borel window. & inclusion of higher dimension (> 6) terms.
Impact of width on physical quantities
?
example: Breit-Wigner form (pole mass = 600 MeV)
effective mass:
We will estimate the physical quantities considering the error from width effects.
output: mass
width = 400 MeV
input: Breit-Wigner
3, Tetraquark operator analysis
Calculation
Linear combination:
θ will be chosen to achieve:
Set up of the operator:
up to dim12 within vacuum saturationOPE:Must be calculated to find the Borel window !
weak M – dep.
weak Eth – dep.
well-isolated peak-like structure(not strongly affected by background)
well-separated from threshold
Borel window most important for meaningful estimation
Annihilation diagrams ~ Flavor dependence
The number of annihilation diagrams strongly depends on the flavor.
2q - 4q, 2qG - 4q
& cyclicdiquark base:
pure singlet:
pure octet:
large
small
num. of annihilation
diagrams
mixing
Effective mass for pure singlet & octet( in the SU(3) chiral limit )
mass: 0.7 ~ 0.85 GeV Eth: 1.0 ~ 1.3 GeV
mass: 0.6 ~ 0.75 GeV Eth: 0.8 ~ 1.3 GeV
May be broad, or small pole to background ratio
Effective residue for pure singlet & octet
smaller than singlet residue small pole to background ratio?
σ(600)
mass: 0.6 ~ 0.75 GeV Eth: 0.9 ~ 1.3 GeV
f0(980) (preliminary)
mass: 0.75 ~ 0.90 GeV
Eth: 1.1 ~ 1.5 GeV
Effective mass plots for σ & f0
a0(980) (preliminary)
a0 - channel No stability in the Borel window in the arbitrary θ
mass residue (×107 GeV8)
Results for pure octet ~ mass & residue for a0
κ- channel shows almost same behavior.
SummaryWe perform the tetraquark op. analysis within the Borel window.
To find the Borel window, the higher dim. calculation is inevitable to include the sufficient low energy correlation.
Our analysises imply ( within our operator combinations ):
σ(600) and f0 (980) are more likely 4q rather than 2q state. ( in 2q op. case, their masses are ~ 1.0 - 1.3 GeV)
singlet channel has well-developed enhancement around E~ 0.7GeV.
octet channel may be strongly affected by low energy contaminations.
( pole to background ratio may be large. )
( pole to background ratio may be small or no pole. )
The difference between singlet and octet originates from annihilation diagrams, 4q→2q or 4q→2qG.
Back up slide
0¯ ¯(1)1¯+(1)
0++(0)0+ ¯(1)1+ ¯(1)
π(137)
0+ (1/2)
ρ(770)
a1(1230)
JPG(I)
M (
MeV
)
a2(1320)
2+ ¯(1)
vector,axial vector, tensor
Scalar meson
(L=0, S=1)
(L=1, S=0)(L=1, S=1)
singlet – octet mixing
valence: (QQ)(QQ) (QQ)-(QQ)
GGor
σ(600)
f0(980)a0(980)
K0*(800)
f0(1370)
f0(1500)a0(1450)K0
*(1430)
f0(1710)
2q?(L=1, S=1)
Pole dominance ~ importance of higher dim. terms
Pole / Whole spectral function (σ- case )
Only after dim. 8 terms contributes, Mmax becomes large.
+dim.8
2-quark Annihilation diagrams
4-quark 3-loop, α suppression
4-loop, α suppression
no suppression factor, few loopsfew loops, but equal to zero
Annihilation diagrams have more importancein 4q op. case than in 2q op. case. split singlet & octet
Annihilation diagrams increase in higher dim. terms.important especially in low energy region.
4q-2q or 4q-2qG mixing
dim 10, 12 dim 8 dim 6 dim 0 ~ 4
E~ 1 GeV
2qG mixing 2q mixing
~ 2 GeV
singlet octet
qualitative behavior of
This 2qG mixing is turned out to be essential for the large correlation in low energy ~ 1 GeV.
4q-2q or 4q-2qG mixing
essential for low energy enhancement
can be interpreted asdiquark-diquark correlation ?
contributes mainly 1~ 2 GeV enhancement
can be interpreted as2q component above 1GeV ?
OPE diagrams ( for massless limit )
Theoretical suggestions 1:
mass (MeV): 600 ? 800 ? 980 980width(MeV): ~ 400 ? 50 ~ 300 50 ~ 300~500 ?
Natural explanation for mass ordering & decay mode & width
Possible strong diquark correlation (?) → mass < 1 GeV
4 -quark picture leads the favorable prescription.
(due to strong chromo-magnetic interaction)
1, Jaffe: ( MIT bag model ) PRD15, (1976) 267
Theoretical suggestions 2 & 3:2, Weinstein & Isgur: ( 4-particle Shrodinger eq. )
PRL48, (1982) 659qqqq bound states normally do not exist.
a0(980), f0(980) → loosely KK bound states .
T. Barnes (estimate a0, f0 → 2γ width) PLB165, 434 (1985)a0 (2q) → 2γ : width ~ 1.6 keV ~ 8 ×exp. widtha0 (KK) → 2γ: width ~ 0.6 keV ~ 3 ×exp. widthf0 (KK) → 2γ: width ~ exp. width
3, Narison: ( phenomelogy with QCD sum rules cal. ) PRD73, 114024(2006)
σ, f0 → strong 2q – glueball mixing.
a0 → 2q, not 4q
κ → 2q ( strong interference with nonresonant background)
( a0 → 2γwidth is 1/1000 small in 4q case)
( σ, f0 → 2π width is too small in 4q case)
( but all cal. of width in QSR is suspicious)
Experimental results:1, Exp. at Fermi lab. ( E791 Collaboration )
PRL12, 121801(2002)PRL86, 770(2001)PRL12, 765(2001)
σ
( mass = 478±17 MeV width = 324±21 MeV )
( no evidence for σ)
κ( mass = 797±62 MeV width = 410±130 MeV )
cs s
sW+
ud
cd d
dW+
ud
M (
MeV
)
Scalar meson
σ(600)
f0(980)a0(980)
K0*(800)
f0(1370)
f0(1500)a0(1450)K0
*(1430)
f0(1710)
Kentucky group
a0(1450), K0(1430) → 2q
σ(600) → 4q
overlap fermion (χ-symmetry)volume dep.
UK QCD groupNf=2 sea quark (partially quenched)
a0(980) → reproduced within 2q?
Scalar collaborationdynamical fermion(including glueball mixing)
disconnected diagram dominate(σ case)
light σ
Lattice:
No KK, using (ud) picture
Dispersion relation, OPE, quark-hadron duality
QCD side
, …
sum of local operators
Operator Product Expansion
information of QCD vacuum
( OPE )
hard
softq q
Hadronic sidespectral function
?
simple parametrization
Constraint for MBorel trans.
Information of low energy we want to know
OPE bad OPE good
small large
Borel window
Within the Borel window, we represent mass & residue as functions of the unphysical expansion parameter M ( & physical value Sth ).
,
physical parameter
should not depend on M
QSR artifact ~ pseudo peak artifact
E
Eth
dim 8 ~ 12
dim 0 ~ 6
E
Eth
pseudo peak ! dim 0 ~ 6
dim 8 ~ 12
: outside of the Borel window
Spectral function
Procedures for estimating the physical quantities
3, Select Sth to give the best stability against the variation of M.
2, Plot the physical quantities as functions of M2.
If these quantities heavily depend on M2 in the Borel window, 1-pole + continuum approximation is bad..
We must consider another possibilities: 2 or 3 poles, smooth function for the scattering states and so on.
1, Set the Borel window for each Sth :
Mmin < M < Mmax
constraint for OPE convergence constraint for continuum suppression
highest dim. / whole OPE < 10 % pole / whole spectral func. > 50 %
750~790 770
2.3~2.5 2.36
Example when QSR is workable:
-meson case
0.8
0.6
0.4
1.0
1.2
0.4 0.6 0.8 1.21.0 1.4
1 2
3
Borel window
( up to dim. 6 )
Note for physical importance of higher dim. terms of OPE:
Only after including dim.6 terms of OPE (including low energy correlation) , stability emerges in the Borel window.
Dim.6 terms are responsible for the ρ - A1 mass splitting.(Without dim.6 terms, OPE forρand A1 give the same result.)
QSR for Exotics2. Good continuum suppression
3. small M2-dependence
1. Good OPE convergence
Difficulty to analyze Exotics
R.D.Matheus and S.Narison, hep-ph/0412063 M2
small
?
When quark number of operator is large, realizing the conditions 1, 2 becomes extremely difficult.
Indeed, in most of the previous works, OPE convergence is not good, and
In the M2 region where pole ratio is too small,
the artificial stability of the physical parameters emerges! ( Even in the meson and baryon cases )
To avoid the artificial stability, we must estimate the physical values in the Borel window.
pole / whole contribution in the spectral integral is less than ~20 %!
QSR artifact ~ pseudo peak artifact
E
Eth
E
Eth
pseudo peak ! dim 0 ~ 6
dim 8 ~ 12dim 8 ~ 12
dim 0 ~ 6
: outside of the Borel window
dim 10 ~ 12 dim 0 ~ 8
Pseudo peak artifact ~ examples
mass residue
spectral function pole dominance
Calculation
Linear combination:
θ will be chosen to give the best stability in the Borel window.
Set up of the operator:
up to dim12 within vacuum saturationOPE:
u, d-quark is treated in massless limit → x- rep. calculation
s-quark mass is kept finite → p- rep. calculation
regulate mass ×divergence termsresummation of the strange quark mass
treatment of current quark mass:
Must be calculated to find the Borel window !
diquark base:singlet octet
Classification of nonets
mass ordering:
ideal mixingassumption:
600 800 980 980
Annihilation diagrams ~ Flavor dependence
The number of annihilation diagrams strongly dependent on the flavor.
& cyclicdiquark base:
pure singlet:
pure octet:
large
small
num. of annihilation
diagrams
1, Sufficiently wide Borel window
2, Weak M dependence
3, Weak threshold dependence
4, The sufficient strength of the effective residue
Criterions on selection of operators
most important, well-satisfied for almost all θ
necessary to avoid the contaminations below Eth
necessary to avoid the contaminations from regions between “pole” and Eth
necessary to avoid the truncated OPE error
( for stong low energy correlation, pole isolation )
Singlet
Octet
Global analysis ~ θdependence
Singlet → better in Borel stability, larger residue
Except some θ region, behavior is similar.
θ
θ
residue mass
Effective mass plot ~ θ fixed to 7π/8
mass: 0.7 ~ 0.8 GeV Eth: 1.0 ~ 1.3 GeV
mass: 0.6 ~ 0.75 GeV Eth: 0.8 ~ 1.3 GeV
May be broad, or small pole to background ratio
Effective residue plot
smaller than singlet residue
σ(600)
mass: 0.6 ~ 0.75 GeV Eth: 0.9 ~ 1.3 GeV
f0(980) (preliminary)
mass: 0.75 ~ 0.90 GeV
Eth: 1.1 ~ 1.5 GeV
Effective mass plots for σ & f0
a0(980) (preliminary)
a0 - channel No stability in the Borel window in the arbitrary θ
mass residue (×107 GeV8)
Results for pure octet ~ mass & residue for a0
κ- channel shows almost same behavior.
Experimental results:1, Exp. at Fermi lab. ( E791 Collaboration )
PRL12, 121801(2002)
Dalitz decay of D meson
PRL86, 770(2001)PRL12, 765(2001)
SummaryWe perform the tetraquark operator analysis within the Borel window.
The states including the SU(3) singlet component:
σ(600): f0 (980):0.60 ~ 0.75 GeV 0.75 ~ 0.90 GeV(preliminary)
The states including only the SU(3) octet component:
a0 (980): no stabilityκ(800): no stability
Real world
SU(3) chiral symmetric world
singlet: octet:0.70 ~ 0.85 GeV (stability not good)
The difference comes from self-annihilation processes (diagrams).
Much stronger low energy correlation than 2-quark case → Borel window is easily found .
Some important effects associated with strange quark mass & hadronic threshold seem to be underestimated.
0.6 ~ 0.75 GeV
Resummation of current quark mass
E E
effective mass shifts to high energy side.
cut
Mass × divergence
cut for spectral integral
regulation for integralof Feynman parameter
example:( dim.8 )
a) b)
c) d)
= 0
a) b)
c)