25
1/25 Optimized Ogata quadrature and applications to the Sivers Asymmetry John Terry University of California, Los Angeles QCD Evolution Workshop Argonne National Lab May 15, 2019

Optimized Ogata quadrature and applications to the Sivers ...Optimized Ogata quadrature and applications to the Sivers Asymmetry John Terry University of California, Los Angeles QCD

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    23

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

1/25

Optimized Ogata quadrature andapplications to the Sivers Asymmetry

John Terry

University of California, Los Angeles

QCD Evolution WorkshopArgonne National Lab

May 15, 2019

2/25

Fit to Sivers asymmetry done in collaboration with

Miguel Echevarriaand Zhongbo Kang.

Optimized Ogata method is done in collaboration with

Zhongbo Kang,Alexei Prokudin,and Nobuo Sato.

3/25

Overview

1 Introduction to the Sivers Asymmetry

2 TMD Formalism for Sivers Asymmetry

3 Why we need high efficiency Fourier transforms

4 Preliminary Fit Results

5 Conclusions

4/25

Why Sivers Asymmetry

By measuring the Sivers asymmetry, one probes quark Sivers functions

Modified universality (sign change between SIDIS and DY)

f⊥q1T (x, k⊥)|SIDIS = −f⊥q1T (x, k⊥)|DY

fq1 (x,~k⊥, ~S) = fq1 (x, k⊥)−1

Mf⊥q1T (x, k⊥)~S · (p× ~k⊥)

5/25

SIDIS: e(`) + p(P,~s⊥) → e(`′) + h(Ph) + X

The differential cross section with TMD factorization

dxBdydzhd2q⊥= σDIS

0

[FUU + sin(φh − φs)F

sin(φh−φs)UT

]

Asin(φh−φs)UT =

Fsin(φh−φs)UT

FUU

FUU (q⊥, Q) = H(Q,µ)∑q

e2q

∫d2k⊥d

2p⊥fq/p(xB , k2⊥)Dh/q(zh, p

2⊥)δ(2)

(k⊥ +

p⊥zh− q⊥

)

Fsin(φh−φs)UT (q⊥, Q) = − H(Q,µ)

∑q

e2q

∫d2k⊥d

2p⊥k⊥Mf⊥q1T (xB , k

2⊥)Dh/q(zh, p

2⊥)

δ(2)

(k⊥ +

p⊥zh− q⊥

)

6/25

FUU in b⊥ space

Unpolarized structure function in the TMD formalism

FUU (Q, q⊥) =

∫ ∞0

b⊥db⊥2π

J0(b⊥q⊥) FUU (Q, b⊥)

FUU (b⊥;x, z,Q) ≡ HDIS(µ,Q)Cq←i ⊗ f iA (xB , µb) Cj←q ⊗Dih/j (zh, µb)

× exp

(∫ Q

µb∗

dµ′

µ′

[2γ(µ′)− ln

(Q2

µ′2

)γK(µ′)

]+ K(b⊥, µb∗ )ln

(Q2

µ2b∗

))

× exp

(−gf (x, b⊥)− gD(z, b⊥)− 2gK(b⊥, bmax)ln

(Q

Q0

))

7/25

F sinφh−φsUT in b⊥ space

Polarized structure function in the TMD formalism

Fsin(φh−φs)UT (Q, q⊥) =

∫ ∞0

b2⊥db⊥

4πJ1(b⊥q⊥) F

sin(φh−φs)UT (Q, b⊥)

Fsin(φh−φs)UT (b⊥;x, z,Q) ≡ HDIS(µ,Q)∆Cq←i ⊗ f

⊥(1)1T (xB , µb∗ )Cj←q ⊗Dih/j (zh, µb∗ )

× exp

(∫ Q

µb∗

dµ′

µ′

[2γ(µ′)− ln

(Q2

µ′2

)γK(µ′)

]+ K(b⊥, µb∗ )ln

(Q2

µ2b∗

))

× exp

(−gT (x, b⊥)− gD(z, b⊥)− 2gK(b⊥, bmax)ln

(Q

Q0

))

8/25

Qiu-Sterman function

f⊥(1)1T (xB , µb∗ ) = −

1

2MTq,F (xB , xB , µb∗ ).

Initial condition

Tq/F (x, x,Q0) = Nq(αq + βq)(αq+βq)

ααqq β

βqq

xαq (1− x)βqfq/A(x,Q0)

fit parameters: αu, αd, Nu, Nd are the valence fit parameters and αsea, Nu, Nd, Ns,and Ns are the sea fit paramters and βq = β is the same for all flavors.Evolve the Qiu-Sterman function according to the following approximate form

∂lnµ2Tq,F

(x, x;µ2

)=αs(µ2)

∫ 1

x

dx′

x′PQSq←q

(x′, αs

(µ2))Tq,F

( xx′,x

x′;µ2)

The splitting kernel is

PQSq←q(z) = Pq←q(z)−NCδ(1− z).

9/25

NLO and NNLL

Coefficient functions at NLO, e.g., NLO TMD PDF coefficient functions

Cq←q′ (x, µb) = δqq′

[δ(1− x) +

αs

π

CF

2(1− x)

]Cq←g(x, µb) =

αs

πTRx(1− x) .

The quark-Sivers coefficient function

∆CTq←q′ (x, µb) = δqq′

[δ(1− x)−

αs

1

4NC(1− x)

]Perturbative Sudakov to NNLL (γK to O(α3

s) and γ to O(α2s))

exp

(∫ Q

µb∗

dµ′

µ′

[2γ(µ′)− ln

(Q2

µ′2

)γK(µ′)

])

10/25

Non-perturbative Parameterization

Unpolarized SIDIS parameterization

exp

(−gf (x, b⊥)− gD(z, b⊥)− 2gK(b⊥, bmax)ln

(Q

Q0

))

gf (x, b⊥) = 0.106 b2⊥ gD(z, b⊥) = 0.042 b2⊥/z2h gK = 0.42 ln

(b⊥b∗

)Sivers function

exp

(−gT (x1, b⊥)− gK(b⊥, bmax)ln

(Q

Q0

))gT (x1, b⊥) = gSb

2⊥

gS is fit parameter.P. Sun, J. Isaacson, C. P. Yuan, and F. Yuan, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A33 , 1841006(2018), arXiv:1406.3073.Z.-B. Kang, A. Prokudin, P. Sun, and F. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D93 , 014009 (2016),arXiv:1505.05589.

11/25

A need for fast Fourier-Bessel Transforms

For global analysis, need to perform the following types of integrals many times

FUU (Q, q⊥) =1

∫ ∞0

db⊥ b⊥J0(b⊥q⊥)FUU (Q, b⊥)

FUT (Q, q⊥) =1

∫ ∞0

db⊥ b2⊥J1(b⊥q⊥)FUT (Q, b⊥)

b⊥ space functions are expensive to call.

12/25

Ogata Formalism

Original Ogata’s quadrature formula∫ ∞−∞

dx|x|2n+1f(x) = h∞∑

j=−∞,j 6=0

wnj |xnj |2n+1f(xnj) +O(e−c/h

)For an even f(x)∫ ∞

0dx|x|2n+1f(x) = h

∞∑j=0

wnj |xnj |2n+1f(xnj) +O(e−c/h

)The nodes and weights

xnj = hξnj , wnj =2

π2ξn|j|Jn+1(πξn|j|)

πξnj are zeros of the Bessel function Jn(x) : Jn (πξnj) = 0.

13/25

Double exponential transformation

Ogata makes the following change of variables

x =π

hψ(t) with ψ(t) = t tanh

(π2

sinh t)

Quadrature becomes∫ ∞0

dxf(x) Jn(x) ≈ πN∑j=1

wnj f(πhψ(xnj)

)Jn(πhψ(xnj)

)ψ′(xnj),

Asymptotic behavior

π

hψ (hξnj) ≈ πξnj

[1− 2 exp

(−π

2ehξnj

)]

Jn(πhψ(xnj)

)≈ 2πξnjJn+1(πξnj) exp

(−π

2ehξnj

).

14/25

Optimization Scheme: how to choose h

Need to optimize parameters h such that error terms are small for small N .∫ ∞0

dxf(x) Jn(x) = hN∑j=0

wnjf(hξnj) Jn(hξnj) + ...

∫ ∞0

dxf(x) Jn(x) ≈ πN∑j=1

wnj f(πhψ(hξnj)

)Jn(πhψ(hξnj)

)ψ′(hξnj) + ...

Make the first node contribute the most

∂h(hf(hξn1)) = 0 ,

Can make sure that errors in both formulas are similar

huξnN =π

hψ(hξnN ) .

15/25

Efficiency for Toy TMDsWant to test the convergence. Need a function with analytic

W (q⊥) =

∫ ∞0

db⊥b⊥ W (b⊥) J0(b⊥q⊥)

Let’s define the toy TMDs

WE(b⊥;β, σ) =1

b⊥

(βb⊥σ2

)β2/σ21

Γ(β2

σ2 )e− βb⊥

σ2 .

The function peaks at

b⊥ =1

Q=β2 − σ2

β

Take Q = 2 and σ = 1.

16/25

How well was h determined?

%error =exact−Ogata result(N = 15)

exact∗ 100

Optimization conditions

∂h(hf(hξn1)) = 0 , huξnN =

π

hψ(hξnN ) .

10−2 10−1 100 101

b⊥ (GeV−1)

−0.1

0.1

0.3

0.5

0.7

b ⊥Jn(q⊥b ⊥

)WE

(b⊥

;β,σ

)

q⊥ = 0.2 GeV

q⊥ = 2 GeV

q⊥ = 4 GeV

10−4 10−3 10−2 10−1 100

h

100

1

0.01

0.0001

%er

ror

(h)

17/25

How does this method compare with other numerical methods?

We benchmark against adaptive quadrature (quad)

10 20 30 40N

0.01

1

100

%er

ror

(N)

q⊥/Q = 0.1

quad

ogata

10 20 30 40N

q⊥/Q = 1

10 30 50 70 90N

q⊥/Q = 2

18/25

Does it work for real TMDs?

SIDIS COMPASS multiplicity given by

M(q⊥;x, z,Q) =π

z2

dxdydzd2q⊥

/dσ

dxdy,

We normalize the data so that at the first point in each bin the theory is equal tothe data

0 1 2 3

q⊥/Q

10−3

10−2

10−1

100

101

|M(q⊥

;x,z,Q

)|

Ogata

15 ≤ N ≤ 27

18 ≤ N ≤ 30

28 ≤ N ≤ 40

0 1 2 3

q⊥/Q

Quad

N = 65

N = 135

135 ≤ N ≤ 860

0 1 2 3

q⊥/Q

Vegas

231 ≤ N ≤ 263

602 ≤ N ≤ 657

3937 ≤ N ≤ 4054

Figure: Multiplicity for Ogata, quad, and Vegas Monte Carlo.

19/25

Application to Unpolarized SIDIS Continued

10−4

10−2

100

=⇒ Q2 =⇒

10−4

10−2

100

10−4

10−2

100 z =0.2

z =0.3

z =0.4

z =0.6

10−4

10−2

100

|M(q⊥

;x,z,Q

)|=⇒

x=⇒

0 2 4 610−4

10−2

100

0 1 2 3 410−4

10−2

100

0 1 2 3

q⊥/Q

10−4

10−2

100

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

Figure: Comparison of COMPASS multiplicities [?].

20/25

Back to Sivers!

Collaboration Scattering event Number of points Yeare+ P → e+ h+ 128 2017e+ P → e+ h− 128 2017e+ P → e+ h+ 23 2012e+ P → e+ h− 23 2012e+D → e+ π+ 23 2008e+D → e+ π− 23 2008e+D → e+K+ 23 2008e+D → e+K− 23 2008

π− +NH3 → γ∗ +X 15 2017e+ P → e+K− 19 2009e+ P → e+K+ 19 2009e+ P → e+ π0 19 2009e+ P → e+ π+ 19 2009e+ P → e+ π− 19 2009e+ P → e+ π+ 4 2011e+ P → e+ π− 4 2011P + P →W+ 8 2015P + P →W− 8 2015P + P → Z 1 2015

529 points in total, χ2/dof ≈ 1.4

21/25

COMPASS 2017: e− + Ps⊥ → e− + h−

128 points in total

−0.05

0.00

0.05

1 < Q2 < 4

z > 0.1

−0.05

0.00

0.05

AS

iver

sU

T

4 < Q2 < 6.25

−0.05

0.00

0.05

6.25 < Q2 < 16

0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25

p⊥

−0.05

0.00

0.05

16 < Q2 < 81

0.2 0.4 0.6

xB

0.2 0.4 0.6

zh

22/25

COMPASS P 2012 and JLab 2011

COMPASS 56 pointsJLab 8 points

−0.02

0.00

0.02

0.04

AS

iver

sU

T

h−

COMPASS Proton

0.2 0.4 0.6

p⊥

−0.02

0.00

0.02

0.04h+

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3

xB

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

zh

xB

−0.2

0.0

0.2

AS

iver

sU

T

JLAB Proton

π−

0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30

xB

−0.2

0.0

0.2 π+

23/25

HERMES 2009

95 points

−0.05

0.00

0.05

0.10

K−

HERMES

−0.05

0.00

0.05

0.10

K+

−0.05

0.00

0.05

0.10

AS

iver

sU

T

π0

−0.05

0.00

0.05

0.10

π−

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6

p⊥

−0.05

0.00

0.05

0.10

π+

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3

xB

0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

zh

24/25

Preliminary extraction for Sivers function

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8x

−0.03

−0.02

−0.01

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

xf⊥

(1)

1T(x,Q

0)

Preliminary

u

d

25/25

Conclusion

• We generated an optimized Ogata method, highly numerically efficient

• The method can be used for global analysis

• Ogata algorithm will be available open source in the future

• We can use the NLO/NNLL parameterization to describe SIDIS Sivers data

• We hope to soon describe the DY and vector boson data

Thanks!!