This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Faddeev calculations of low-energy Λ\Lambda-deuteron scattering
and momentum correlation function

M. Kohno Research Center for Nuclear Physics, Osaka University, Ibaraki 567-0047, Japan    H. Kamada Department of Physics, Faculty of Engineering, Kyushu Institute of Technology, Kitakyushu 804-8550, Japan Research Center for Nuclear Physics, Osaka University, Ibaraki 567-0047, Japan
Abstract

Faddeev calculations of low-energy Λ\Lambda-deuteron elastic scattering are performed up to Ecm=20E_{cm}=20 MeV crossing the deuteron threshold. The phase shifts of the ss wave with J=1/2J=1/2 and J=3/2J=3/2 are calculated using strangeness S=1S=-1 hyperon-nucleon interactions in chiral effective field theory NLO13 and NLO19 parametrized by the Jülich-Bonn group. The effective range parameters, specifically the scattering length and effective range, are ascertained through the calculated phase shifts. The present study evaluates the momentum correlation functions of the Λ\Lambda-deuteron system using the Λ\Lambda-deuteron relative wave function, constructed from half-off-shell tt matrices. The results are then compared with those obtained using an approximate formula.

I Introduction

An accurate description of Λ\Lambda-nucleon interactions is essential for achieving a microscopic understanding of Λ\Lambda hypernuclei. This understanding is being sought through the collection of increasingly accurate experimental data at several facilities TAM22 . Furthermore, this knowledge is also crucial to understanding the role of Λ\Lambda hyperons in neutron-star matter. Although various theoretical descriptions of the Λ\Lambda-nucleon interaction have been developed over the past several decades, the quality of these models remains comparatively inferior to that of NNNN potentials, largely due to the scarceness of available scattering data. The absence of the ΛN\Lambda N two-body bound state is a significant disadvantage. Then, the lightest hypernucleus, 3Λ{}_{\Lambda}^{3}H, plays a crucial role in investigating the Λ\LambdaN interactions to determine the ss-wave strength, despite the difficulty in controlling the relative ratio of singlet and triplet channels. However, the shallow separation energy of 3Λ{}_{\Lambda}^{3}H to Λ\Lambda and deuteron has not been adequately determined and has a considerable error bar. The current world average is 164±43164\pm 43 keV MA2023 . There is a problem with the presence of ΛNN\Lambda NN three-body forces (3BFs) on the theoretical side. It is crucial to understand the role of the 3BFs quantitatively. We have carried out Faddeev calculations for 3Λ{}_{\Lambda}^{3}H KKM22 using next-to-leading order (NLO) hyperon-nucleon (YNYN) interactions and YNNYNN 3BFs provided by the expressions in the next-to-next-to leading order (NNLO) in chiral effective field theory (ChEFT). The net contribution of the 3BFs is not negligible but is of a similar magnitude as the present experimental uncertainty. However, the result depends on the low-energy constants which are difficult to fix without investigations of heavier hypernuclei. After observing the order of magnitude of the 3BF effect in the bound 3Λ{}_{\Lambda}^{3}H, it is worthwhile to study the role of Λ\LambdaN interactions in scattering processes.

There are several theoretical studies in the literature on the properties of the Λd\Lambda d scattering. Garcilazo et al. GAR75 ; GAR76 used bound state Faddeev calculations to estimate effective range parameters. Hammer et al. HWH02 ; HH19 carried out studies within the framework of pionless effective field theory. Schäfer et al. SCH22 discussed the J=3/2J=3/2 Λd\Lambda d phase shift in low energies based on varying effective range parameters. However, no explicit calculation of the Λd\Lambda d elastic scattering has been performed by solving Faddeev equations using modern YNYN interactions.

In this article, we consider Λ\Lambda-deuteron scattering problems in a Faddeev formulation using chiral NNNN and YNYN interactions, although 3BFs are not incorporated. While the data from direct low-energy Λd\Lambda d scattering experiments are still forthcoming, the Λ\Lambdad correlation functions observed in heavy-ion collision experiments FAB21 have already provided valuable insights into the interactions between Λ\Lambda and the deuteron as well as between Λ\Lambda and the proton. The preliminary results of the Λd\Lambda d correlation functions were reported in a report HU24 based on 3 GeV Au+Au collisions by the STAR collaboration. The correlation function depends on the Λd\Lambda d relative wave function, which is controlled by the interaction between Λ\Lambda and deuteron arising from ΛN\Lambda N interactions controls. Thus far, theoretical investigations of the Λd\Lambda d correlation function have been carried out HAID20 using an asymptotic wave function approximated by effective range parameters of the scattering amplitude LL82 . It is worthwhile to calculate the corresponding correlation function using the Λd\Lambda d wave function obtained by solving the Faddeev equation for the Λ\Lambda scattering process on the deuteron.

The deuteron is a two-body composite system, and thus the momentum correlation function is affected by the dynamics associated with its formation. The problem was studied by Mrówozyński MR20 and actual calculations for the nucleon-deuteron correlation functions were performed by Viviani et al. VIV23 . Similar calculations for the Λd\Lambda d case are possible in the present Faddeev treatment of the Λd\Lambda d scattering, which is a subject of future investigation.

The Faddeev equations for the Λ\Lambda-deuteron (Λd\Lambda d) scattering are outlined in Sec. II, based on the formulation by Glöckle et al. GL96 . The equations in a partial wave representation and the treatment of two types of singularities, a moving singularity and a deuteron pole, are outlined in Appendices A-C. The numerical results for the ss-wave phase shift up to Ecm=20E_{cm}=20 MeV are presented in Sec. III. The parameters of the effective range expansion, i.e., the scattering length and effective range, are estimated based on the obtained phase shifts. The radial Λd\Lambda d wave function is evaluated and Λd\Lambda d correlation functions corresponding to the measured ones in heavy-ion experiments are calculated. A summary is provided in Sec. IV.

II Faddeev equations for Λ\Lambda-deuteron scattering

We follow the derivation of the equations describing three-body scattering problems in Ref. GL96 . Two nucleons are denoted by labels 1 and 2. The Λ\Lambda hyperon is assigned label 3. The mass difference of the proton and neutron is discarded. In the present treatment, three-body ΣNN\Sigma NN states are not incorporated explicitly, although the ΛN\Lambda N-ΣN\Sigma N coupling is included in solving ΛN\Lambda N tt matrices. Three-body interactions are not considered.

The process of the Λ\Lambda-hyperon scattering on the bound deuteron is described by the following set of equations:

u3ϕ=\displaystyle u_{3}\phi= t1G0u1ϕ+t2G0u2ϕ,\displaystyle t_{1}G_{0}u_{1}\phi+t_{2}G_{0}u_{2}\phi, (1)
u1ϕ=\displaystyle u_{1}\phi= G01ϕ+t3G0u3ϕ+t2G0u2ϕ,\displaystyle G_{0}^{-1}\phi+t_{3}G_{0}u_{3}\phi+t_{2}G_{0}u_{2}\phi, (2)
u2ϕ=\displaystyle u_{2}\phi= G01ϕ+t3G0u3ϕ+t1G0u1ϕ,\displaystyle G_{0}^{-1}\phi+t_{3}G_{0}u_{3}\phi+t_{1}G_{0}u_{1}\phi, (3)

which correspond to Eqs. (36)-(41) of Ref. GL96 with the replacement as ϕ1ϕ\phi_{1}\rightarrow\phi, U11u3U_{11}\rightarrow u_{3}, U21u1U_{21}\rightarrow u_{1}, and U31u2U_{31}\rightarrow u_{2}. G0G_{0} is a three-body Green function and tit_{i} is a pertinent two-body tt matrix. Because the two-nucleon state is antisymmetric, Eqs. (2) and (3) are equivalent, and the above equations reduce to

u3ϕ=\displaystyle u_{3}\phi= (1P12)t2G0u2ϕ,\displaystyle(1-P_{12})t_{2}G_{0}u_{2}\phi, (4)
u2ϕ=\displaystyle u_{2}\phi= G01ϕ+t3G0u3ϕP12t2G0u2ϕ,\displaystyle G_{0}^{-1}\phi+t_{3}G_{0}u_{3}\phi-P_{12}t_{2}G_{0}u_{2}\phi, (5)

where P12P_{12} denotes the exchange operation for nucleons 1 and 2. In actual calculations, it is convenient to introduce TitiG0uiT_{i}\equiv t_{i}G_{0}u_{i}. The above equations are rewritten as follows:

T3ϕ=\displaystyle T_{3}\phi= t3G0(1P12)T2ϕ,\displaystyle t_{3}G_{0}(1-P_{12})T_{2}\phi, (6)
T2ϕ=\displaystyle T_{2}\phi= t2ϕ+t2G0T3ϕt2P12G0T2ϕ.\displaystyle t_{2}\phi+t_{2}G_{0}T_{3}\phi-t_{2}P_{12}G_{0}T_{2}\phi. (7)
Refer to caption
Figure 1: Jacobi coordinates.

These equations are solved in a partial wave representation in momentum space. Two sets of the Jacobi momenta (𝒑j,𝒒j)(\mbox{\boldmath$p$}_{j},\mbox{\boldmath$q$}_{j}) with j=2, 3j=2,\;3 are defined as in Fig. 1. The partial wave three-body state in a Jacobi momentum space is denoted as

|pjqjαj=\displaystyle|p_{j}q_{j}\alpha_{j}\rangle= |pjqj;[[pj×spj]j×[λqj×sqj]I]MJ,\displaystyle|p_{j}q_{j};[[\ell_{p_{j}}\times s_{p_{j}}]^{j}\times[\lambda_{q_{j}}\times s_{q_{j}}]^{I}]^{J}_{M},
[tpj×tqj]MTT,\displaystyle[t_{p_{j}}\times t_{q_{j}}]^{T}_{M_{T}}\rangle, (8)

where an abbreviated notation for an angular-momentum coupling with Clebsch-Gordan coefficients is used:

[×s]mjj=mms(msms|jmj)Ym(𝒑^)χsms.[\ell\times s]^{j}_{m_{j}}=\sum_{m_{\ell}m_{s}}(\ell m_{\ell}sm_{s}|j_{m_{j}})Y_{\ell m_{\ell}}(\hat{\mbox{\boldmath$p$}})\chi_{sm_{s}}. (9)

Here, YmY_{\ell m_{\ell}} is a spherical harmonic function, and χsms\chi_{sm_{s}} represents a spin state.

By solving the simultaneous equations (6) and (7), the TT matrix of the elastic Λ\Lambda-deuteron scattering is obtained GL96 by

T=ϕ|(1P12)T2|ϕ=2ϕ|T2|ϕT=\langle\phi|(1-P_{12})T_{2}|\phi\rangle=2\langle\phi|T_{2}|\phi\rangle (10)

The SS-matrix is related to the TT-matrix as

S=12πiμΛdkT,S=1-2\pi i\mu_{\Lambda d}kT, (11)

where μΛd\mu_{\Lambda d} is a reduced mass of the Λ\Lambda and deuteron, and kk is the Λ\Lambda-deuteron relative momentum.

Explicit equations in a partial wave representation are presented in Appendix A. In solving these equations numerically, there are difficulties in treating two types of singularities. One appears in the Green function G0G_{0}, which is known as a moving singularity. This singularity is treated by a standard subtraction method in evaluating the matrix elements. The other one is the deuteron pole, which has to be taken care of when T3T_{3} is substituted in Eq. (7). The way to treat the deuteron pole and the moving singularity is outlined in Appendicies A and B.

III Calculated results

Refer to caption
Figure 2: Phase shifts of Λ\Lambda-nucleon elastic scattering in 1S0 and 3S1 channels with chiral NLO13 and NLO19 interactions as a function of the incident laboratory momentum. Two interactions yield almost identical results. Results with switching off the Λ\LambdaN-Σ\SigmaN coupling are included.

In this section, we present the results of the Faddeev calculations for low-energy Λ\Lambda-deuteron elastic scattering in an ss wave up to Ecm=20E_{cm}=20 MeV using two versions of chiral NLO S=1S=-1 YNYN interactions, NLO13 NLO13 and NLO19 NLO19 . As for the NNNN interaction, the chiral N4LO+ interaction RKE18 is used. The cutoff scale is 550 MeV for both NNNN and YNYN interactions.

Before presenting the results of the Λd\Lambda d scattering, it is instructive to show 1S0 and 3S1 phase shifts of the ΛN\Lambda N scattering with NLO13 and NLO19. Figure 2 shows those results. Phase shifts obtained by switching off the ΛN\Lambda N-ΣN\Sigma N coupling are included to show the difference between the characters of two interactions.

III.1 ss-wave phase shifts of Λd\Lambda d scattering

In the Faddeev calculations of the ss-wave phase shifts of the low-energy Λ\Lambda-deuteron scattering presented below, the orbital angular momenta pj\ell_{p_{j}} and λqj\lambda_{q_{j}} are restricted to zero for both j=2j=2 and 33 to reduce the computational load, although the tensor coupling is naturally included in evaluating NNNN and ΛN\Lambda N tt matrices. We have checked that the inclusion of the states with pj=2\ell_{p_{j}}=2 and λqj=2\lambda_{q_{j}}=2 has a very small effect on the ss-wave phase shifts.

The upper panel of Fig. 3 shows the real and imaginary phase shifts of Λd\Lambda d elastic scattering in the J=1/2J=1/2 channel for both NLO13 and NLO19 YNYN interactions. The imaginary part appears at the deuteron breakup threshold Ecm=|ϵd|E_{cm}=|\epsilon_{d}|, where EcmE_{cm} is the incident center-of-mass energy and |ϵd||\epsilon_{d}| is the deuteron binding energy. Due to the presence of the bound hypertriton in this channel, the real part of the phase shift starts from 180. Because the NLO13 and NLO19 interactions are tuned to describe the binding of 3Λ{}_{\Lambda}^{3}H, the calculated results are almost indistinguishable.

Refer to caption
Figure 3: Calculated Λ\Lambda-deuteron ss-wave phase shifts as a function of EcmE_{cm}. The left (right) vertical scale is for the real (imaginary) part. The upper (lower) panel shows the phase shifts in the J=1/2J=1/2 (J=3/2J=3/2) channel. The solid (dashed) curves are for the chiral NLO19 (NLO13) YNYN interaction of the Jülich-Bonn group with the chiral N4LO+ NNNN interaction. The solid and dashed curves are almost indistinguishable in the case of J=1/2J=1/2. The cutoff scale is 550 MeV for both NNNN and YNYN interactions.

The lower panel of Fig. 3 represents the real and imaginary phase shifts in the J=3/2J=3/2 channel for both NLO13 and NLO19 YNYN interactions. Because the 1S0 Λ\LambdaN interaction is irrelevant for J=3/2J=3/2, the difference of the phase shifts between NLO13 and NLO represents different properties of the 3S1 part of these interactions, despite the almost identical phase shifts of the 3S1 phase shifts shown in Fig. 2. The behavior of the phase shifts corresponds to the absence of a bound state in this channel. The enhancement of the cross-section at low energies, however, implies the presence of a pole close to the axis. The position of the virtual state is approximated by the effective range parameters as HYO13

k=ire1re2reas1=ire(112reas),k=\frac{i}{r_{e}}-\frac{1}{r_{e}}\sqrt{\frac{2r_{e}}{a_{s}}-1}=\frac{i}{r_{e}}\left(1-\sqrt{1-\frac{2r_{e}}{a_{s}}}\right), (12)

where asa_{s} is a scattering length and rer_{e} is an effective range, respectively. The effective range parameters deduced from the calculated phase shifts are discussed in the following section. By assigning the values given in Table I in the following section, the momentum kk becomes 0.079i-0.079i for NLO13 and0.051i-0.051i for NLO19. The corresponding energy E=22μΛdk2E=\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2\mu_{\Lambda d}}k^{2}, where μΛd\mu_{\Lambda d} is a Λd\Lambda d reduced mass, is 0.17-0.17 MeV for NLO13 and 0.072-0.072 MeV for NLO19.

It is noted that the imaginary part of the calculated phase shifts is small in both J=1/2J=1/2 and J=3/2J=3/2, which relates to the fact that the S01{}^{1}S_{0} channel is not allowed in the final state.

III.2 Λd\Lambda d effective range parameters

We estimate scattering length and effective range parameters by fitting the calculated phase shifts, kcotδk\cot\delta below the deuteron breakup threshold, by a function c0+c1k2+c2k4c_{0}+c_{1}k^{2}+c_{2}k^{4}. Figure 4 depicts the fit. Table 1 tabulates the results of the scattering length as=1/c0a_{s}=-1/c_{0} and the effective range re=2c1r_{e}=2c_{1}. It is noted that these values are comparable to those of the preliminary results from the measurement in heavy-ion collisions in Ref. HU24 : asJ=1/2=203+3a_{s}^{J=1/2}=20_{-3}^{+3} fm, reJ=1/2=31+2r_{e}^{J=1/2}=3_{-1}^{+2} fm and asJ=3/2=161+2a_{s}^{J=3/2}=-16_{-1}^{+2} fm, reJ=3/2=21+1r_{e}^{J=3/2}=2_{-1}^{+1} fm.

Refer to caption
Figure 4: kcotδk\cot\delta as a function of the Λd\Lambda d relative momentum kk. The phase shift δ\delta is real below the deuteron breakup momentum, k0.28k\sim 0.28 fm-1. The solid (dashed) curve is for the chiral NLO19 NLO19 (NLO13 NLO13 ) YNYN interaction with the Jülich-Bonn group with the chiral N4LO+ NNNN interaction RKE18 . The solid and dashed curves are almost indistinguishable in the case of J=1/2J=1/2.

The effective range parameters in the channel that bears a bound state are related to the separation energy BΛB_{\Lambda} by a Bethe formula BETH49 , which gives

BΛ=2μΛdre2{1reas12reas}.B_{\Lambda}=\frac{\hbar^{2}}{\mu_{\Lambda d}r_{e}^{2}}\left\{1-\frac{r_{e}}{a_{s}}-\sqrt{1-\frac{2r_{e}}{a_{s}}}\right\}. (13)

Using the values in Table 1, the expected BΛB_{\Lambda} becomes 57.957.9 keV for NLO13 and 53.353.3 keV for NLO19. The Faddeev calculations KKM23 for the bound hypertriton with the same NNNN and YNYN interactions predict BΛ=79B_{\Lambda}=79 keV for NLO13 and BΛ=87B_{\Lambda}=87 keV for NLO19. The magnitude of the difference is small but not negligible compared to the small value of BΛB_{\Lambda}. There are several sources of the difference. The bound-state calculation in Ref. KKM23 explicitly includes a ΣNN\Sigma NN component. However, the ΣNN\Sigma NN component is disregarded in the present scattering calculation, though the ΛN\Lambda N-ΣN\Sigma N coupling is taken care of in calculating the ΛN\Lambda N tt matrix. In addition, higher partial waves are included in the Faddeev three-body calculations. It is noteworthy that the hypertriton separation energy obtained by Faddeev calculations with ignoring the Σ\Sigma and higher partial waves in Faddeev components is 73 keV for NLO13 and 76 keV for NLO19. These values are closer to the estimates derived from the Bethe formula. The remaining discrepancy may be attributed to the rearrangement effect of the deuteron wave function in forming the hypertriton bound state.

total spin YNYN int. asa_{s} (fm) rer_{e} (fm)
J=1/2J=1/2 NLO13 23.4\phantom{-}23.4 2.77
NLO19 24.3\phantom{-}24.3 2.80
J=3/2J=3/2 NLO13 11.2-11.2 3.25
NLO19 18.7-18.7 2.87
Table 1: Scattering length and effective range parameters deduced from the fit of the calculated phase shift presented in Fig. 4.

III.3 Λd\Lambda d correlation function

Explicit data from Λ\Lambda-deuteron scattering experiments are not available. An alternative way to probe the feature of the Λ\Lambdad interaction has been developed in heavy-ion collision experiments by measurement of Λ\Lambdad correlations . The Λ\Lambdad momentum correlation function measured in experiments corresponds to the following quantity FAB21 ; OMMH16 :

CΛdJ(k)=1+4π0r2𝑑rS12(r){|ψJ(k;r)|2|j0(kr)|2},C_{\Lambda d}^{J}(k)=1+4\pi\int_{0}^{\infty}r^{2}dr\;S_{12}(r)\{|\psi_{J}(k;r)|^{2}-|j_{0}(kr)|^{2}\}, (14)

where j0(kr)j_{0}(kr) is a spherical Bessel function, and ψJ(k;r)\psi_{J}(k;r) is a Λ\Lambdad scattering wave function in the channel with the total spin of JJ. S12(r)S_{12}(r) is a source function that is assumed to be a conventional Gaussian form with a range parameter RR,

S12(r)=1(2πR)3exp(14R2r2).S_{12}(r)=\frac{1}{(2\sqrt{\pi}R)^{3}}\exp(-\frac{1}{4R^{2}}r^{2}). (15)

The Λ\Lambdad wave function in coordinate space is constructed from half-off-shell TT matrices obtained by solving the Faddeev equation. The explicit expression is explained in Appendix C. Realistic calculations of the correlation function taking into account the three-body dynamics that the Faddeev wave functions yield is a future subject.

The total spin is unseparated in experiments. Therefore, the following spin-averaged quantity is relevant when a comparison with the experimental data is made.

CΛd(k)=13CΛdJ=1/2(k)+23CΛdJ=3/2(k).C_{\Lambda d}(k)=\frac{1}{3}C_{\Lambda d}^{J=1/2}(k)+\frac{2}{3}C_{\Lambda d}^{J=3/2}(k). (16)

Figure 5 displays the spin-averaged results of the NNLO13 and NNLO19 YNYN interactions with the NNNN interaction of N4LO+. The selection of the range parameter, R=1.2R=1.2, 2.5, and 5 fm, follows that of Ref. HAID20 . The difference between the results of NLO13 and NLO19 comes from CΛdJ=3/2C_{\Lambda d}^{J=3/2}.

The individual momentum correlation function for J=1/2J=1/2 and J=3/2J=3/2 are shown in Fig. 6 on a vertical logarithmic scale. The upper panel represents the correlation function for J=1/2J=1/2, in which only the results of NLO19 are depicted because NLO13 and NLO19 provide almost the same results as is expected from the indistinguishability in the phase shifts, The lower two panels show the result for J=3/2J=3/2. In this case, the correlation function of NLO19 is 232\sim 3 times larger than that of NLO13. Because the magnitude and weight of the CΛdJ=3/2C_{\Lambda d}^{J=3/2} in which only the 3S1 Λ\LambdaN interaction is relevant are larger than those of CΛdJ=1/2C_{\Lambda d}^{J=1/2}, the experimental data can provide valuable information about the relative strength of the 1S0 and 3S1 Λ\LambdaN interactions.

Refer to caption
Figure 5: Spin-averaged Λd\Lambda d correlation function as a function of the Λd\Lambda d relative momentum kk on a vertical linear scale. The results using NLO13 NLO13 and NLO19 YNYN NLO19 interactions with N4LO+ NNNN interactions RKE18 are shown for three source ranges R=1.2R=1.2, 2.5, and 5 fm. The cutoff scale is 550 MeV for both NNNN and YNYN interactions.

The theoretical correlation function CΛdJC_{\Lambda d}^{J} has been approximated by the following expression, which has been referred to as the Lednický-Lyuboshitz LL82 model formula:

CΛdJ\displaystyle C_{\Lambda d}^{J}\approx  1+|fJ(k)|22RF(re)+2RefJ(k)πRF1(x)\displaystyle\;1+\frac{|f_{J}(k)|^{2}}{2R}F(r_{e})+\frac{2\mbox{Re}f_{J}(k)}{\sqrt{\pi}R}F_{1}(x)
ImfJ(k)RF2(x),\displaystyle-\frac{\mbox{Im}f_{J}(k)}{R}F_{2}(x), (17)

where fJf_{J} is the scattering amplitude, RR is the range parameter, and x2kRx\equiv 2kR. Three functions, i.e., FF, F1F_{1}, and F2F_{2}, are given by F(re)=1re/(2πR)F(r_{e})=1-r_{e}/(2\sqrt{\pi}R), F1(x)=0x𝑑tet2x2/xF_{1}(x)=\int_{0}^{x}dt\>e^{t^{2}-x^{2}}/x, and F2(x)=(1ex2)/xF_{2}(x)=(1-e^{-x^{2}})/x. When fJf_{J} is approximated by the effective range parameters as

fJ=\displaystyle f_{J}= e2iδJ12ik=1kcotδJik\displaystyle\frac{e^{2i\delta_{J}}-1}{2ik}=\frac{1}{k\cot\delta_{J}-ik}
\displaystyle\approx 11as+12rek2ik.\displaystyle\frac{1}{-\frac{1}{a_{s}}+\frac{1}{2}r_{e}k^{2}-ik}. (18)

CΛdJC_{\Lambda d}^{J} is estimated by giving RR, asa_{s}, and rer_{e}. It is instructive to evaluate the approximated CΛdJC_{\Lambda d}^{J} using the effective range parameters tabulated in Table 1 and compare it with the correlation function obtained by the Λ\Lambdad relative wave function from the Faddeev calculation.

The thick curves in Fig. 6 are the results of the Faddeev calculations on a vertical logarithmic scale. The thin curve depicts the correlation functions obtained by the effective range parameters. Except for R=1.2R=1.2 fm, the thick and thin curves are overlapping and indistinguishable. The difference between the two curves in the case of R=1.2R=1.2 fm is also small. This result indicates that the approximation of the correlation function by Eq. (17) is dependable.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 6: Λd\Lambda d correlation function as a function of the Λd\Lambda d relative momentum kk on a vertical logarithmic scale for the three choices of the source range RR. The thick curve is the result of the Faddeev calculation. The thin curve is the result of the Lednický-Lyuboshitz formula, given by Eq. (17), using the values in Table I. The cutoff scale is 550 MeV for both NNNN and YNYN interactions. The thick and thin curves overlap except for the case of R=1.2R=1.2 fm in each panel. The upper panel is the result of the NLO19 NLO19 YNYN interaction for J=1/2J=1/2, in which the curves from NLO13 are not shown because they almost overlap with those of NLO19. The middle and lower panels show the results of NLO19 and NLO13 for J=3/2J=3/2, respectively. NNNN interactions are chiral N4LO+ RKE18 .

IV Summary

We describe Λ\Lambda-deuteron elastic scattering in a Faddeev formulation for low energies, up to 20 MeV, crossing the deuteron breakup threshold. Although direct measurements of the scattering are not currently feasible, experimental information is included in correlation functions that can be accessed through heavy-ion collision measurements. The preliminary results were recently reported in Ref. HU24 . The calculated phase shifts are a valuable feature that elucidates the properties of the underlying YNYN interactions that are employed, including the effect of the relative strength of the spin singlet and triplet parts in a few-body system. It is also meaningful to investigate the implication of different parametrizations of the YNYN interactions in the scattering process of the Λ\Lambda hyperon on the deuteron.

The numerical evaluation is more complex than that of nucleon-deuteron scattering due to the mass difference between the Λ\Lambda hyperon and the nucleon. For the sake of completeness, an outline of the treatment of a deuteron pole and a moving singularity is provided in Appendices A-C.

Based on the half-off-shell tt matrices obtained by solving the Faddeev equation, Λd\Lambda d relative wave functions are constructed, and momentum space Λd\Lambda d correlation functions are evaluated. The evaluated correlation functions demonstrate the efficiency of the approximated expression, given by Eq. (17), although a slight deviation is observed when the source radius is small. In Ref. MHS23 , the Λp\Lambda p correlation data are employed to constrain parametrizing ΛN\Lambda N interactions. The Λd\Lambda d correlation data can provide additional constraints through the use of Faddeev calculations.

Finally, it is noted that the present method can be straightforwardly applied to Ξd\Xi d scattering, which could help in studying the properties of ΞN\Xi N interactions.


Acknowledgments. We are grateful to K. Miyagawa for his valuable discussions and comments on this work. This work is supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grants No. JP19K03849 and No. JP22K03597.

Appendix A Explicit equations in partial wave expansion

Explicit equations in a partial wave expansion of Eqs. (6) and (7) are derived. We follow the notation for the partial wave project state in Ref. GL96 .

𝒑|plm=δ(pp)ppYm(𝒑^),|p(ls)jm=μ(μsmμ|jm)|plm|smμ,\displaystyle\langle\mbox{\boldmath$p$}^{\prime}|plm\rangle=\frac{\delta(p^{\prime}-p)}{p^{\prime}p}Y_{\ell m}(\hat{\mbox{\boldmath$p$}^{\prime}}),\hskip 20.00003pt|p(ls)jm\rangle=\sum_{\mu}(\ell\mu sm-\mu|jm)|plm\rangle|sm-\mu\rangle, (19)
3-body state|pqα=|pq(s)j(λ1/2)I(jI)JM(t1/2)TMT,\displaystyle\mbox{3-body state}\hskip 5.0pt|pq\alpha\rangle=|pq(\ell s)j(\lambda 1/2)I(jI)JM(t1/2)TM_{T}\rangle, (20)
pqα|pqα=δ(qq)qqδ(pp)ppδαα,α0p2𝑑p0q2𝑑q|pqαpqα|=I,\displaystyle\langle p^{\prime}q^{\prime}\alpha^{\prime}|pq\alpha\rangle=\frac{\delta(q^{\prime}-q)}{q^{\prime}q}\frac{\delta(p^{\prime}-p)}{p^{\prime}p}\delta_{\alpha^{\prime}\alpha},\hskip 20.00003pt\sum_{\alpha}\int_{0}^{\infty}p^{2}dp\int_{0}^{\infty}q^{2}dq\;|pq\alpha\rangle\langle pq\alpha|=I, (21)

where YmY_{\ell m} stands for a spherical harmonics and (μsmμ|jm)(\ell\mu sm-\mu|jm) represents a Clebsch-Gordan coefficient. Inserting the identity operator, Eqs. (6) and (7) read

p3q3α3|T3|ϕ=\displaystyle\langle p_{3}q_{3}\alpha_{3}|T_{3}|\phi\rangle= 2α30p32𝑑p30q32𝑑q3α20p22𝑑p20q22𝑑q2\displaystyle 2\sum_{\alpha_{3}^{\prime}}\int_{0}^{\infty}{p_{3}^{\prime}}^{2}dp_{3}^{\prime}\int_{0}^{\infty}{q_{3}^{\prime}}^{2}dq_{3}^{\prime}\sum_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}\int_{0}^{\infty}{p_{2}^{\prime}}^{2}dp_{2}^{\prime}\int_{0}^{\infty}{q_{2}^{\prime}}^{2}dq_{2}^{\prime}
×p3q3α3|t3G0|p3q3α3p3q3α3|p2q2α2p2q2α2|T2|ϕ,\displaystyle\times\langle p_{3}q_{3}\alpha_{3}|t_{3}G_{0}|p_{3}^{\prime}q_{3}^{\prime}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}\rangle\langle p_{3}^{\prime}q_{3}^{\prime}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}|p_{2}^{\prime}q_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\rangle\langle p_{2}^{\prime}q_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}|T_{2}|\phi\rangle, (22)
p2q2α2|T2|ϕ=\displaystyle\langle p_{2}q_{2}\alpha_{2}|T_{2}|\phi\rangle= α20p22𝑑p20q22𝑑q2α30p32𝑑p30q32𝑑q3\displaystyle\sum_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}\int_{0}^{\infty}{p_{2}^{\prime}}^{2}dp_{2}^{\prime}\int_{0}^{\infty}{q_{2}^{\prime}}^{2}dq_{2}^{\prime}\sum_{\alpha_{3}^{\prime}}\int_{0}^{\infty}{p_{3}^{\prime}}^{2}dp_{3}^{\prime}\int_{0}^{\infty}{q_{3}^{\prime}}^{2}dq_{3}^{\prime}
×{p2q2α2|t2|p2q2α2p2q2α2|p3q3α3p3q3α3|ϕ\displaystyle\times\left\{\langle p_{2}q_{2}\alpha_{2}|t_{2}|p_{2}^{\prime}q_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\rangle\langle p_{2}^{\prime}q_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}|p_{3}^{\prime}q_{3}^{\prime}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}\rangle\langle p_{3}^{\prime}q_{3}^{\prime}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}|\phi\rangle\right.
+p2q2α2|t2G0|p2q2α2p2q2α2|p3q3α3p3q3α3|T3|ϕ}\displaystyle\left.+\langle p_{2}q_{2}\alpha_{2}|t_{2}G_{0}|p_{2}^{\prime}q_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\rangle\langle p_{2}^{\prime}q_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}|p_{3}^{\prime}q_{3}^{\prime}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}\rangle\langle p_{3}^{\prime}q_{3}^{\prime}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}|T_{3}|\phi\rangle\right\}
\displaystyle- α20p22𝑑p20q22𝑑q2α2′′0p2′′2𝑑p2′′0q3′′2𝑑q2′′\displaystyle\sum_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}\int_{0}^{\infty}{p_{2}^{\prime}}^{2}dp_{2}^{\prime}\int_{0}^{\infty}{q_{2}^{\prime}}^{2}dq_{2}^{\prime}\sum_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime\prime}}\int_{0}^{\infty}{p_{2}^{\prime\prime}}^{2}dp_{2}^{\prime\prime}\int_{0}^{\infty}{q_{3}^{\prime\prime}}^{2}dq_{2}^{\prime\prime}
×p2q2α2|t2|p2q2α2p2q2α2|P12G0|p2′′q2′′α2′′p2′′q2′′α2′′|T2|ϕ,\displaystyle\times\langle p_{2}q_{2}\alpha_{2}|t_{2}|p_{2}^{\prime}q_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\rangle\langle p_{2}^{\prime}q_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}|P_{12}G_{0}|p_{2}^{\prime\prime}q_{2}^{\prime\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime\prime}\rangle\langle p_{2}^{\prime\prime}q_{2}^{\prime\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime\prime}|T_{2}|\phi\rangle, (23)

where the antisymmetric property of the state p2q2α2|\langle p_{2}^{\prime}q_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}| under the P12P_{12} operation is used.

The matrix elements of t3G0t_{3}G_{0}, t2t_{2}, and t2G0t_{2}G_{0} are explicitly wriiten as

p3q3α3|t3G0|p3q3α3=\displaystyle\langle p_{3}q_{3}\alpha_{3}|t_{3}G_{0}|p_{3}^{\prime}q_{3}^{\prime}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}\rangle= δ(q3q3)q3q3p3α3|t3(EhΛ(NN)(q3))|p3α31EhNN(p3)hΛ(NN)(q3)+iϵ,\displaystyle\frac{\delta(q_{3}-q_{3}^{\prime})}{q_{3}q_{3}^{\prime}}\langle p_{3}\alpha_{3}|t_{3}(E-h_{\Lambda(NN)}(q_{3}))|p_{3}^{\prime}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}\rangle\frac{1}{E-h_{NN}(p_{3}^{\prime})-h_{\Lambda(NN)}(q_{3})+i\epsilon}, (24)
p2q2α2|t2|p2q2α2=\displaystyle\langle p_{2}q_{2}\alpha_{2}|t_{2}|p_{2}^{\prime}q_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\rangle= δ(q2q2)q2q2p2α2|t2(EhN(ΛN)(q2))|p2α2,\displaystyle\frac{\delta(q_{2}-q_{2}^{\prime})}{q_{2}q_{2}^{\prime}}\langle p_{2}\alpha_{2}|t_{2}(E-h_{N(\Lambda N)}(q_{2}))|p_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\rangle, (25)
p2q2α3|t2G0|p2q2α2=\displaystyle\langle p_{2}q_{2}\alpha_{3}|t_{2}G_{0}|p_{2}^{\prime}q_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\rangle= δ(q2q2)q2q2p2α2|t2(EhN(ΛN)(q2))|p2α21EhΛN(p2)hN(ΛN)(q2)+iϵ,\displaystyle\frac{\delta(q_{2}-q_{2}^{\prime})}{q_{2}q_{2}^{\prime}}\langle p_{2}\alpha_{2}|t_{2}(E-h_{N(\Lambda N)}(q_{2}))|p_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\rangle\frac{1}{E-h_{\Lambda N}(p_{2}^{\prime})-h_{N(\Lambda N)}(q_{2})+i\epsilon}, (26)

where hNN(p3)=22μNNp32h_{NN}(p_{3}^{\prime})=\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2\mu_{NN}}{p_{3}^{\prime}}^{2} with μNN=12mN\mu_{NN}=\frac{1}{2}m_{N}, hΛ(NN)(q3)=22μΛ(NN)q32h_{\Lambda(NN)}(q_{3})=\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2\mu_{\Lambda(NN)}}q_{3}^{2} with μΛ(NN)=2mNmΛ2mN+mΛ\mu_{\Lambda(NN)}=\frac{2m_{N}m_{\Lambda}}{2m_{N}+m_{\Lambda}}, hΛN(p2)=22μΛNp22h_{\Lambda N}(p_{2}^{\prime})=\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2\mu_{\Lambda N}}{p_{2}^{\prime}}^{2} with μN(ΛN)=mNmΛmN+mΛ\mu_{N(\Lambda N)}=\frac{m_{N}m_{\Lambda}}{m_{N}+m_{\Lambda}}, and hN(ΛN)(q2)=22μN(ΛN)q22h_{N(\Lambda N)}(q_{2})=\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2\mu_{N(\Lambda N)}}q_{2}^{2} with μN(ΛN)=mN(mN+mΛ)2mN+mΛ\mu_{N(\Lambda N)}=\frac{m_{N}(m_{N}+m_{\Lambda})}{2m_{N}+m_{\Lambda}}. The matrix elements of the permutation of Jacobi momenta have the following form:

p3q3α3|p2q2α2=\displaystyle\langle p_{3}^{\prime}q_{3}^{\prime}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}|p_{2}^{\prime}q_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\rangle= 11dcosθGα3α2(2)(q3,q2,cosθ)1p3α3p2α2δ(p3π3)δ(p2π2)p32p22,\displaystyle\int_{-1}^{1}d\cos\theta\;G_{\alpha_{3}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}^{(2)}(q_{3}^{\prime},q_{2}^{\prime},\cos\theta)\frac{1}{{p_{3}^{\prime}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{3}^{\prime}}}{p_{2}^{\prime}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}}}\frac{\delta(p_{3}^{\prime}-\pi_{3})\delta(p_{2}^{\prime}-\pi_{2})}{{p_{3}^{\prime}}^{2}{p_{2}^{\prime}}^{2}}, (27)
p2q2α2|p3q3α3=\displaystyle\langle p_{2}^{\prime}q_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}|p_{3}^{\prime}q_{3}^{\prime}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}\rangle= 11dcosθGα2α3(1)(q2,q3,cosθ)1p2α2p3α3δ(p2π2)δ(p3π3)p22p32,\displaystyle\int_{-1}^{1}d\cos\theta\;G_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}}^{(1)}(q_{2}^{\prime},q_{3}^{\prime},\cos\theta)\frac{1}{{p_{2}^{\prime}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}}{p_{3}^{\prime}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{3}^{\prime}}}}\frac{\delta(p_{2}^{\prime}-\pi_{2}^{\prime})\delta(p_{3}^{\prime}-\pi_{3}^{\prime})}{{p_{2}^{\prime}}^{2}{p_{3}^{\prime}}^{2}}, (28)
p2q2α2|P12G0|p2′′q2′′α2′′=\displaystyle\langle p_{2}^{\prime}q_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}|P_{12}G_{0}|p_{2}^{\prime\prime}q_{2}^{\prime\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime\prime}\rangle= 11dcosθGα2α2′′(3)(q2,q2′′,cosθ)1p2α2p2′′α2′′δ(p2π2′′)δ(p2′′π2′′′)p22p2′′2,\displaystyle\int_{-1}^{1}d\cos\theta\;G_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime\prime}}^{(3)}(q_{2}^{\prime},q_{2}^{\prime\prime},\cos\theta)\frac{1}{{p_{2}^{\prime}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}}{p_{2}^{\prime\prime}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime\prime}}}}\frac{\delta(p_{2}^{\prime}-\pi_{2}^{\prime\prime})\delta(p_{2}^{\prime\prime}-\pi_{2}^{\prime\prime\prime})}{{p_{2}^{\prime}}^{2}{p_{2}^{\prime\prime}}^{2}}, (29)

where cosθ=cos𝒒3𝒒2^\cos\theta=\cos\widehat{\mbox{\boldmath$q$}_{3}^{\prime}\mbox{\boldmath$q$}_{2}^{\prime}} in Eq. (A9), cosθ=cos𝒒2𝒒3^\cos\theta=\cos\widehat{\mbox{\boldmath$q$}_{2}^{\prime}\mbox{\boldmath$q$}_{3}^{\prime}} in Eq. (A10), and cosθ=cos𝒒2𝒒2′′^\cos\theta=\cos\widehat{\mbox{\boldmath$q$}_{2}^{\prime}\mbox{\boldmath$q$}_{2}^{\prime\prime}} in Eq. (A11), respectively. Various momenta in the above equations are defined as follows:

π3=\displaystyle\pi_{3}= [q22+rNN2q32+2rNNq2q3cosθ]1/2,\displaystyle[q_{2}^{\prime 2}+r_{NN}^{2}{q_{3}}^{2}+2r_{NN}q_{2}^{\prime}q_{3}^{\prime}\cos\theta]^{1/2}, π2=[q32+rΛN2q22+2rΛNq2q3cosθ]1/2,\displaystyle\pi_{2}=[{q_{3}}^{2}+r_{\Lambda N}^{2}q_{2}^{\prime 2}+2r_{\Lambda N}q_{2}^{\prime}q_{3}^{\prime}\cos\theta]^{1/2},
π30=\displaystyle\pi_{30}= [q22+rNN2q02+2rNNq2q0cosθ]1/2,\displaystyle[q_{2}^{\prime 2}+r_{NN}^{2}q_{0}^{2}+2r_{NN}q_{2}^{\prime}q_{0}\cos\theta]^{1/2}, π20=[q02+rΛN2q22+2rΛNq2q0cosθ]1/2,\displaystyle\pi_{20}=[{q_{0}}^{2}+r_{\Lambda N}^{2}q_{2}^{\prime 2}+2r_{\Lambda N}q_{2}^{\prime}q_{0}\cos\theta]^{1/2},
π3=\displaystyle\pi_{3}^{\prime}= [q22+rNN2q32+2rNNq2q3cosθ]1/2,\displaystyle[q_{2}^{2}+r_{NN}^{2}{q_{3}^{\prime}}^{2}+2r_{NN}q_{2}q_{3}^{\prime}\cos\theta]^{1/2}, π2=[q32+rΛN2q22+2rΛNq2q3cosθ]1/2,\displaystyle\pi_{2}^{\prime}=[{q_{3}^{\prime}}^{2}+r_{\Lambda N}^{2}q_{2}^{2}+2r_{\Lambda N}q_{2}q_{3}^{\prime}\cos\theta]^{1/2},
π2′′=\displaystyle\pi_{2}^{\prime\prime}= [q2′′2+rNΛ2q22+2rNΛq2q2′′cosθ]1/2,\displaystyle[q_{2}^{\prime\prime 2}+r_{N\Lambda}^{2}q_{2}^{2}+2r_{N\Lambda}q_{2}q_{2}^{\prime\prime}\cos\theta]^{1/2}, π2′′′=[q22+rNΛ2q2′′2+2rNΛq2q2′′cosθ]1/2,\displaystyle\pi_{2}^{\prime\prime\prime}=[q_{2}^{2}+r_{N\Lambda}^{2}q_{2}^{\prime\prime 2}+2r_{N\Lambda}q_{2}q_{2}^{\prime\prime}\cos\theta]^{1/2},
π30=\displaystyle\pi_{30}^{\prime}= [q22+rNN2q02+2rNNq2q0cosθ]1/2,\displaystyle[q_{2}^{2}+r_{NN}^{2}q_{0}^{2}+2r_{NN}q_{2}q_{0}\cos\theta]^{1/2}, π20=[q02+rΛN2q22+2rΛNq2q0cosθ]1/2,\displaystyle\pi_{20}^{\prime}=[{q_{0}}^{2}+r_{\Lambda N}^{2}q_{2}^{2}+2r_{\Lambda N}q_{2}q_{0}\cos\theta]^{1/2},
π3i=\displaystyle\pi_{3i}^{\prime}= [q22+rNN2qi2+2rNNq2qicosθ]1/2,\displaystyle[{q_{2}}^{2}+r_{NN}^{2}q_{i}^{2}+2r_{NN}q_{2}q_{i}\cos\theta]^{1/2}, π2i=[qi2+rΛN2q22+2rΛNq2qicosθ]1/2,\displaystyle\pi_{2i}^{\prime}=[{q_{i}}^{2}+r_{\Lambda N}^{2}q_{2}^{2}+2r_{\Lambda N}q_{2}q_{i}\cos\theta]^{1/2}, (30)

where rNN=12r_{NN}=\frac{1}{2}, rNΛ=mNmN+mΛr_{N\Lambda}=\frac{m_{N}}{m_{N}+m_{\Lambda}}, and rΛN=mΛmN+mΛr_{\Lambda N}=\frac{m_{\Lambda}}{m_{N}+m_{\Lambda}}, respectively. Before transforming Eqs. (A4) and (A5) further, it is necessary to explain the treatment of the deuteron pole in the NNNN tt matrix.

Appendix B Treatment of deuteron pole

In the Faddeev equation, the NNNN tt matrix depends on the momentum q3q_{3} of the third particle Λ\Lambda.

t(q3)=v+v1EhΛ(NN)(q3)hNN(p3)+iϵt(q3)=v+v1EhΛ(NN)(q3)hNN(p3)v+iϵv,t(q_{3})=v+v\frac{1}{E-h_{\Lambda(NN)}(q_{3})-h_{NN}(p_{3})+i\epsilon}t(q_{3})=v+v\frac{1}{E-h_{\Lambda(NN)}(q_{3})-h_{NN}(p_{3})-v+i\epsilon}v, (31)

where EE is the total energy, and vv is a two-body NNNN interaction. It is helpful to introduce a spectral decomposition to investigate the structure of the tt matrix. Assuming that there is one bound state |d|d\rangle with its energy |ed|-|e_{d}| for the Hamiltonian H=22μNNp32+vH=\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2\mu_{NN}}p_{3}^{2}+v and denoting the eigenstate in the continuum with its momentum 𝒌k by |ψ(𝒌)|\psi(\mbox{\boldmath$k$})\rangle, the completeness relation reads

d𝒌(2π)3|ψ(𝒌)ψ(𝒌)|+|dd|.\displaystyle\int\frac{d\mbox{\boldmath$k$}}{(2\pi)^{3}}|\psi(\mbox{\boldmath$k$})\rangle\langle\psi(\mbox{\boldmath$k$})|+|d\rangle\langle d|. (32)

By inserting this relation into Eq. (31), the following expression is obtained.

t(q3)=\displaystyle t(q_{3})= v+d𝒌(2π)3v|ψ(𝒌)ψ(𝒌)|vEhΛ(NN)(q3)hNN(k)v+iϵ+v|dd|vEhΛ(NN)(q3)+|ed|+iϵ.\displaystyle v+\int\frac{d\mbox{\boldmath$k$}}{(2\pi)^{3}}\frac{v|\psi(\mbox{\boldmath$k$})\rangle\langle\psi(\mbox{\boldmath$k$})|v}{E-h_{\Lambda(NN)}(q_{3})-h_{NN}(k)-v+i\epsilon}+\frac{v|d\rangle\langle d|v}{E-h_{\Lambda(NN)}(q_{3})+|e_{d}|+i\epsilon}. (33)

The tt matrix is solved numerically. The expression of Eq. (33) is used for the prescription to treat the singularity at the deuteron pole position. The denominator of the second term has a pole for the momentum kk when EhΛ(NN)(q3)>0E-h_{\Lambda(NN)}(q_{3})>0. This feature is known as a moving pole. The third term of Eq. (33) has a pole that appears in the tt matrix of the deuteron channel when EcmE+|ed|>0E_{cm}\equiv E+|e_{d}|>0. The singularity is written as

v|dd|vEhΛ(NN)(q3)+|ed|+iϵ=Pv|dd|vEhΛ(NN)(q3)+|ed|+iϵiπδ(EhΛ(NN)(q3)+|ed|)v|dd|v.\frac{v|d\rangle\langle d|v}{E-h_{\Lambda(NN)}(q_{3})+|e_{d}|+i\epsilon}=\mbox{P}\frac{v|d\rangle\langle d|v}{E-h_{\Lambda(NN)}(q_{3})+|e_{d}|+i\epsilon}-i\pi\delta(E-h_{\Lambda(NN)}(q_{3})+|e_{d}|)v|d\rangle\langle d|v. (34)

Because the tt-matrix solved numerically does not contain the δ\delta-function part, it has to be added separately as in Ref. FF10 . The δ\delta-function part can be written as follows:

iπδ(EhΛ(NN)(q3)+|ed|)v|dd|v=iπ2q02μΛ(NN)2δ(q3q0)v|dd|v,-i\pi\delta(E-h_{\Lambda(NN)}(q_{3})+|e_{d}|)v|\;d\rangle\langle d|v=-i\frac{\pi}{2q_{0}}\frac{2\mu_{\Lambda(NN)}}{\hbar^{2}}\delta(q_{3}-q_{0})v|d\rangle\langle d|v, (35)

where q0q_{0} defined by E+|ed|22μΛ(NN)q02E+|e_{d}|\equiv\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2\mu_{\Lambda(NN)}}q_{0}^{2} is introduced.

It is convenient to treat the δ\delta-function part separately in the set of Faddeev equations. Because the bound-state wave function is known, and p3|v|d={ed22μNNp32}p3|d\langle p_{3}|v|d\rangle=\left\{e_{d}-2\frac{\hbar^{2}}{\mu_{NN}}p_{3}^{2}\right\}\langle p_{3}|d\rangle, the matrix element of the numerator of the third term is rewritten as follows:

p3|v|dd|v|p3={ed22μNNp32}{ed22μNNp32}p3|dd|p3,\displaystyle\langle p_{3}|v|d\rangle\langle d|v|p_{3}^{\prime}\rangle=\left\{e_{d}-\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2\mu_{NN}}p_{3}^{2}\right\}\left\{e_{d}-\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2\mu_{NN}}{p_{3}^{\prime}}^{2}\right\}\langle p_{3}|d\rangle\langle d|p_{3}^{\prime}\rangle, (36)

where p3|d\langle p_{3}|d\rangle is a bound-state (deuteron) wave function in momentum space.

It is convenient to separate the contribution of the δ\delta-function part of Eq. (34) and express T3T_{3} as T3=T3R+iT3IT_{3}=T_{3}^{R}+iT_{3}^{I}. It is noted that both T3RT_{3}^{R} and T3IT_{3}^{I} are complex. Then, Eqs. (A4) and (A5) are expressed as follows.

p3q3α3|T3R|ϕ=\displaystyle\langle p_{3}q_{3}\alpha_{3}|T_{3}^{R}|\phi\rangle= 2α3α2q22𝑑q211dcosθp3α3|t3(EhΛ(NN)(q3))|π3α31EhNN(π3)hΛ(NN)(q3)+iϵ\displaystyle 2\sum_{\alpha_{3}^{\prime}}\sum_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}\int q_{2}^{\prime 2}dq_{2}^{\prime}\int_{-1}^{1}d\cos\theta\langle p_{3}\alpha_{3^{\prime}}|t_{3}(E-h_{\Lambda(NN)}(q_{3}))|\pi_{3}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}\rangle\frac{1}{E-h_{NN}(\pi_{3})-h_{\Lambda(NN)}(q_{3})+i\epsilon}
×Gα3α2(2)(q3,q2,cosθ)1π3α3π2α2π2q2α2|T2|ϕ,\displaystyle\times G_{\alpha_{3}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}^{(2)}(q_{3},q_{2}^{\prime},\cos\theta)\frac{1}{{\pi_{3}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{3}^{\prime}}}{\pi_{2}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}}}\langle\pi_{2}q_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}|T_{2}|\phi\rangle, (37)
p3q0α3|T3I|ϕ=\displaystyle\langle p_{3}q_{0}\alpha_{3}|T_{3}^{I}|\phi\rangle= δα3αd(ϵdhNN(p3))2μΛ(NN)2πq0αdα2q22𝑑q211dcosθp3αd|ψdψd|π30αd\displaystyle-\delta_{\alpha_{3}\alpha_{d}}\left(\epsilon_{d}-h_{NN}(p_{3})\right)\frac{2\mu_{\Lambda(NN)}}{\hbar^{2}}\pi q_{0}\sum_{\alpha_{d}^{\prime}}\sum_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}\int q_{2}^{\prime 2}dq_{2}^{\prime}\int_{-1}^{1}d\cos\theta\;\langle p_{3}\alpha_{d}|\psi_{d}\rangle\langle\psi_{d}|\pi_{30}\alpha_{d}^{\prime}\rangle
×Gα3α2(2)(q0,q2,cosθ)1π30α3π20α2π20q2α2|T2|ϕ,\displaystyle\times G_{\alpha_{3}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}^{(2)}(q_{0},q_{2}^{\prime},\cos\theta)\frac{1}{{\pi_{30}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{3}^{\prime}}}{\pi_{20}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}}}\langle\pi_{20}{q_{2}}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}|T_{2}|\phi\rangle, (38)
p2q2α2|T2|ϕ=\displaystyle\langle p_{2}q_{2}\alpha_{2}|T_{2}|\phi\rangle= α2αd11dcosθp2α2|t2|π2iα2iGα2αd(1)(q2,qi,cosθ)1π2iα2π3iαdπ3iαd|ψd\displaystyle\sum_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}\sum_{\alpha_{d}^{\prime}}\int_{-1}^{1}d\cos\theta\langle p_{2}\alpha_{2}|t_{2}|\pi_{2i}^{\prime}\alpha_{2i}^{\prime}\rangle\;G_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{d}^{\prime}}^{(1)}(q_{2},q_{i},\cos\theta)\frac{1}{{\pi_{2i}^{\prime}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}}{\pi_{3i}^{\prime}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{d}^{\prime}}}}\langle\pi_{3i}^{\prime}\alpha_{d}^{\prime}|\psi_{d}\rangle
+\displaystyle+ α2α3q32𝑑q311dcosθp2α2|t2|π2α21EhΛN(π2)22μN(ΛN)q22+iϵ\displaystyle\sum_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}\sum_{\alpha_{3}^{\prime}}\int q_{3}^{\prime 2}dq_{3}^{\prime}\int_{-1}^{1}d\cos\theta\;\langle p_{2}\alpha_{2}|t_{2}|\pi_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\rangle\;\frac{1}{E-h_{\Lambda N}(\pi_{2}^{\prime})-\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2\mu_{N(\Lambda N)}}q_{2}^{2}+i\epsilon}
×Gα2α3(1)(q2,q3,cosθ)1π2α2π3α3π3q3α3|T3R|ϕ\displaystyle\times G_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}}^{(1)}(q_{2},q_{3}^{\prime},\cos\theta)\frac{1}{{\pi_{2}^{\prime}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}}{\pi_{3}^{\prime}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{3}^{\prime}}}}\langle\pi_{3}^{\prime}q_{3}^{\prime}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}|T_{3}^{R}|\phi\rangle
+\displaystyle+ iα2αd11dcosθp2α2|t2|π20α2Gα2α3(1)(q2,q0,cosθ)1π20α2π30α3π30q0α3|T~3I|ϕ\displaystyle i\sum_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}\sum_{\alpha_{d}}\int_{-1}^{1}d\cos\theta\;\langle p_{2}\alpha_{2}|t_{2}|\pi_{20}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\rangle G_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}}^{(1)}(q_{2},q_{0},\cos\theta)\frac{1}{{\pi_{20}^{\prime}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}}{\pi_{30}^{\prime}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{3}^{\prime}}}}\langle\pi_{30}^{\prime}q_{0}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}|\tilde{T}_{3}^{I}|\phi\rangle
\displaystyle- α2α2′′q2′′2𝑑q2′′11dcosθp2α2|t2|π2′′α2Gα2α2′′(3)(q2,q2′′,cosθ)1π2′′α2π2′′′α2′′\displaystyle\sum_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}\sum_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime\prime}}\int q_{2}^{\prime\prime 2}dq_{2}^{\prime\prime}\int_{-1}^{1}d\cos\theta\;\langle p_{2}\alpha_{2}|t_{2}|\pi_{2}^{\prime\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\rangle\;G_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime\prime}}^{(3)}(q_{2},q_{2}^{\prime\prime},\cos\theta)\frac{1}{{\pi_{2}^{\prime\prime}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime}}}{\pi_{2}^{\prime\prime\prime}}^{\ell_{\alpha_{2}^{\prime\prime}}}}
×1EhΛN(π2′′′)hN(ΛN)(q2′′)+iϵπ2′′′q2′′α2′′|T2|ϕ,\displaystyle\times\frac{1}{E-h_{\Lambda N}(\pi_{2}^{\prime\prime\prime})-h_{N(\Lambda N)}(q_{2}^{\prime\prime})+i\epsilon}\langle\pi_{2}^{\prime\prime\prime}q_{2}^{\prime\prime}\alpha_{2}^{\prime\prime}|T_{2}|\phi\rangle, (39)

In Eq. (B7), p3α3|t3(EhΛ(NN)(q3))|π3α3\langle p_{3}\alpha_{3^{\prime}}|t_{3}(E-h_{\Lambda(NN)}(q_{3}))|\pi_{3}\alpha_{3}^{\prime}\rangle in the deuteron channel is understood as

p3|t3(EhΛ(NN)(q3))|π32μΛ(NN)2p3|v|dd|v|π3q02q32+P2μΛ(NN)2p3|v|dd|v|π3q02q32.\langle p_{3}|t_{3}(E-h_{\Lambda(NN)}(q_{3}))|\pi_{3}\rangle-\frac{2\mu_{\Lambda(NN)}}{\hbar^{2}}\frac{\langle p_{3}|v|d\rangle\langle d|v|\pi_{3}\rangle}{q_{0}^{2}-q_{3}^{2}}+\mbox{P}\frac{2\mu_{\Lambda(NN)}}{\hbar^{2}}\frac{\langle p_{3}|v|d\rangle\langle d|v|\pi_{3}\rangle}{q_{0}^{2}-q_{3}^{2}}. (40)

The divergent behavior of the t3t_{3}-matrix element around the pole position is removed by the second term. When T3RT_{3}^{R} is inserted in Eq. (B9), the principal value of q3q_{3}^{\prime} integration is treated by the standard subtraction method.

When E=Ecm+ed>0E=E_{cm}+e_{d}>0, there is a notorious problem of moving singularities GL96 in which logarithmic singularities appear. We use numerical techniques in the literature FF10 ; LIU05 , but the actual calculations become intricate because of the mass difference between the Λ\Lambda hyperon and the nucleon.

Appendix C Crescent area and logarithmic singularity

Three different types of the crescent area in which the logarithmic singularity associated with the so-called moving pole of the Green function exists in the case of E=Ecm+ed>0E=E_{cm}+e_{d}>0 appear, which are depicted in Fig. 7. Various reference points shown in these figures are defined as follows:

q2,m=\displaystyle q_{2,m}^{\prime}= q2,m=2μN(ΛN)2E,q2,z=q2,az=2μNN2E,q2,t=q2,at=μN(ΛN)2ErΛN=rNN2μΛ(NN)2E,\displaystyle q_{2,m}=\sqrt{\frac{2\mu_{N(\Lambda N)}}{\hbar^{2}}E},\hskip 10.00002ptq_{2,z}^{\prime}=q_{2,az}=\sqrt{\frac{2\mu_{NN}}{\hbar^{2}}E},\hskip 10.00002ptq_{2,t}^{\prime}=q_{2,at}=\sqrt{\frac{\mu_{N(\Lambda N)}}{\hbar^{2}}Er_{\Lambda N}}=r_{NN}\sqrt{\frac{2\mu_{\Lambda(NN)}}{\hbar^{2}}E},
q3,m=\displaystyle q_{3,m}= q3,am=2μΛ(NN)2E,q3,z=q3,az=q2,bz=q2,bz=2μΛN2E,q3,t=μΛ(NN)2ErΛN,\displaystyle q_{3,am}^{\prime}=\sqrt{\frac{2\mu_{\Lambda(NN)}}{\hbar^{2}}E},\hskip 10.00002ptq_{3,z}=q_{3,az}^{\prime}=q_{2,bz}^{\prime}=q_{2,bz}=\sqrt{\frac{2\mu_{\Lambda N}}{\hbar^{2}}E},\hskip 10.00002ptq_{3,t}=\sqrt{\frac{\mu_{\Lambda(NN)}}{\hbar^{2}}Er_{\Lambda N}},
q3,at=\displaystyle q_{3,at}^{\prime}= μΛ(NN)2ErΛN=rΛN2μN(ΛN)2E,q2,bt=q2,bt=rNΛ2μN(ΛN)2E.\displaystyle\sqrt{\frac{\mu_{\Lambda(NN)}}{\hbar^{2}}Er_{\Lambda N}}=r_{\Lambda N}\sqrt{\frac{2\mu_{N(\Lambda N)}}{\hbar^{2}}E},\hskip 10.00002ptq_{2,bt}^{\prime}=q_{2,bt}=r_{N\Lambda}\sqrt{\frac{2\mu_{N(\Lambda N)}}{\hbar^{2}}E}. (41)

The mesh points for the q3q_{3} momentum are set by separating them into the following three intervals:

[0,q3,t],[q3,t,q3,z],[q3,z,q3,m].[0,q_{3,t}],[q_{3,t},q_{3,z}],[q_{3,z},q_{3,m}]. (42)

Because of q2,atq2,btq_{2,at}\neq q_{2,bt} and q2,azq2,bzq_{2,az}\neq q_{2,bz}, the mesh points for the q2q_{2} momentum are set by separating them into the following five intervals:

[0,q2,bt],[q2,bt,q2,at],[q2,at,q2,az],[q2,az,q2,bz],[q2,bz,q2,m].[0,q_{2,bt}],[q_{2,bt},q_{2,at}],[q_{2,at},q_{2,az}],[q_{2,az},q_{2,bz}],[q_{2,bz},q_{2,m}]. (43)

The mesh points near q2,mq_{2,m}, q2,azq_{2,az}, and q2,bzq_{2,bz} are prepared by changing the variable to q2,m2q22\sqrt{q_{2,m}^{2}-q_{2}^{2}} etc. The Gauss-Legendre quadrature is used in each interval. The sufficiently fine mesh points are prepared around the deuteron pole q0q_{0} that is larger q3,mq_{3,m}. In solving Eqs. (A7)-(A9), the momenta given in (30), in general, do not coincide with the prepared mesh points. This problem is circumvented by the technique of using a cubic Spline interpolation. The notorious logarithmic singularities in the crescent area are treated by the method described in detail in Refs. FF10 and LIU05 .

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 7: Three types of the so-called crescent area in which a careful treatment of the logarithmic singularities is necessary in the case of E=Ecm+ed>0E=E_{cm}+e_{d}>0.

Appendix D Λ\Lambda-deuteron wave function in rr-space

Half-off-shell T2T_{2} matrices in Eq. (7) determine the Λd\Lambda d relative wave function in rr space. A partial wave component is obtained by

ψk,+(r)=j(kr)+2μΛd20k2𝑑kj(kr)T2,(k,k)k2+iϵk2,\psi_{k,\ell}^{+}(r)=j_{\ell}(kr)+\frac{2\mu_{\Lambda d}}{\hbar^{2}}\int_{0}^{\infty}k^{\prime 2}dk^{\prime}\;\frac{j_{\ell}(k^{\prime}r)T_{2,\ell}(k^{\prime},k)}{k^{2}+i\epsilon-k^{\prime 2}}, (44)

where the tensor coupling is suppressed for simplicity. The integration is evaluated numerically by using a subtraction prescription,

0k2𝑑kj(kr)T2,(k,k)k2+iϵk2=0𝑑kk2j(kr)T2,(k,k)k2j(kr)T2,(k,k)k2k2iπk2j(kr)T2,(k,k).\int_{0}^{\infty}k^{\prime 2}dk^{\prime}\;\frac{j_{\ell}(k^{\prime}r)T_{2,\ell(k^{\prime},k)}}{k^{2}+i\epsilon-k^{\prime 2}}=\int_{0}^{\infty}dk^{\prime}\frac{k^{\prime 2}j_{\ell}(k^{\prime}r)T_{2,\ell(k^{\prime},k)}-k^{2}j_{\ell}(kr)T_{2,\ell(k,k)}}{k^{2}-k^{\prime 2}}-i\frac{\pi k}{2}j_{\ell}(kr)T_{2,\ell}(k,k). (45)

References

  • (1) H. Tamura, ”Overview of hypernuclear and strange particle physics - Experimental summary of HYP2022”, EPJ Web Conf. 271, 12001 (2022).
  • (2) P. Eckert, S. Ries, and P. Achenbach, Chart of hypernucleids - Hypernuclear Structure and Decay Data, 2023, https://hypernuclei.kph.uni-mainz.de/(unpublished).
  • (3) M. Kohno, H. Kamada, and K. Miyagawa, ”Contributions of 2π\pi exchange, 1π\pi exchange, and contact three-body forces in NNLO chiral effective field theory to 3Λ{}_{\Lambda}^{3}H”, Phys. Rev. C 106, 054004 (2022); 110, 019908(E) (2024).
  • (4) H. Garcilazo, T. Fernández-Caramés, and A. Valcarce, ”ΛNN\Lambda NN and ΣNN\Sigma NN systems at threshold”, Phys. Rev. C 75, 034002 (2007).
  • (5) H. Garcilazo, A. Valcarce, and T. Fernández-Caramés, ”ΛNN\Lambda NN and ΣNN\Sigma NN systems at threshold. II. The effect of DD waves”, Phys. Rev. C 76, 034001 (2007).
  • (6) H.-W. Hammer, ”The hypernuclei in effective field theory,” Nucl. Phys. A705, 173 (2002).
  • (7) F. Hildenbrand and H.-W. Hammer, ”Three-body hypernuclei in pionless effective field theory,” Phys. Rev. C 100, 034002 (2019).
  • (8) M. Schäfer, B. Bazak, N. Barnea, A. Gal, and J. Mareš, ”The continuum spectrum of hypernucler trios”, Phys. Rev. C 105, 015202 (2022).
  • (9) L. Fabbietti, V. Mantovani Sarti, and O. Vázquez Doce, ”Study of the Strong Interaction Among Hadrons with Correlations at the LHC”, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 71, 377 (2021).
  • (10) Y. Hu (STAR collaboration), Measurement of pp-Λ\Lambda and dd-Λ\Lambda correlations in 3GeV Au+Au collisions at STAR, EPJ WEB Conf. 296, 14010 (2024).
  • (11) J. Haidenbauer, Exploring the Λ\Lambda-deuteron interaction via correlations in heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 102, 034001 (2020).
  • (12) R. Lednický and V.L. Lyuboshitz, Final State Interaction Effect on Pairing Correlations Between Particles with Small Relative Momenta, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. (Engl. Transl.) 35, 770 (1982) [Yad. Fiz. 35, 1316 (1981)].
  • (13) S. Mrówozyński, Production of light nuclei at colliders - coalescence vs. thermal model, Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. 229, 3559 (2020).
  • (14) M. Viviani, S. König, A. Kievsky, L.E. Marcucci, B. Singh, and O.Vázquez Doce, Role of three-body dynamics in nucleon-deuteron cotrrelastion functions, Phys. Rev. C 108, 064002 (2023).
  • (15) W. Glöckle, H. Witała, D. Hüber, H. Kamada, and J. Golak, The three-nucleon continuum: Achievement, challenges and application, Phys. Rep. 274, 107 (1996).
  • (16) J. Haidenbauer, S. Petschauer, N. Kaiser, U.-G. Meißner, A. Nogga, and W. Weise, Hyperon-nucleon interaction at next-to-leading order in chiral effective field theory, Nucl. Phys. A 915, 24 (2013).
  • (17) J. Haidenbauer, U.-G. Meißner, and A. Nogga, Hyperon-nucleon interaction within chiral effective field theory revisited, Eur. Phys. J. A 56, 91 (2020).
  • (18) P. Reinert, and H. Krebs, and E. Epelbaum, Semilocal momentum-space regularized chiral two-nucleon potentials up to fifth order, Eur. Phys. J. A 54, 86 (2018).
  • (19) T. Hyodo, Structure of near-threshold ss-wave resonances, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 132002 (2013).
  • (20) H.A. Bethe, Theory of the effective range in nuclear scattering, Phys. Rev. 76, 38 (1949).
  • (21) H. Kamada, M. Kohno, and K. Miyagawa, Faddeev calculation of 3Λ{}_{\Lambda}^{3}H incorporating the 2π\pi-exchange ΛNN\Lambda NN interaction, Phys. Rev. C 108, 024004 (2023); 110, 019907(E) (2024).
  • (22) A. Ohnishi, K. Morita, K. Miyahara, and T. Hyodo, Hadron-hadron correlation and interaction from heavy-ion collision, Nucl Phys. A 954, 294 (2016).
  • (23) D.L. Mihaylov, J. Haidenbauer, and V. Mantovani Sarti, Constraining the pΛp\Lambda interaction from a combined analysis of scattering data and correlation functions, Phys. Lett. B 850, 138550 (2024).
  • (24) Y. Fujiwara and K. Fukukawa, Quark-model baryon-baryon interaction applied to neutron-deuteron scattering. I, Prog. Theor. Phys. 124. 433 (2010).
  • (25) H. Liu, Ch. Elster and W. Glöckle, Three-body scattering at intermediate energies, Phys. Rev. C 72, 054003 (2005).