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


Next-to-Leading-logarithm threshold resummation for exclusive BB meson decays

Zhi-Qing Zhang 111[email protected] Department of Physics, Henan University of Technology, Zhengzhou, Henan 450052, P. R. China    Hsiang-nan Li 222[email protected] Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan 115, Republic of China
Abstract

We extend the threshold resummation of the large logarithms lnx\ln x which appear in factorization formulas for exclusive BB meson decays, xx being a spectator momentum fraction, to the next-to-leading-logarithm (NLL) accuracy. It is shown that the NLL resummation effect provides suppression in the end-point region with x0x\sim 0 stronger than the leading-logarithm (LL) one, and thus improves perturbative analyses of the above processes. We revisit the BKπB\to K\pi decays under the NLL resummation, and find that it induces 20-25% variation of the direct CP asymmetries compared to those from the LL resummation. Our way to avoid the Landau singularity in the inverse Mellin transformation causes little theoretical uncertainty.

I Introduction

Factorization theorems have been one of the major theoretical approaches to exclusive BB meson decays, in which a decay process is factorized into a convolution of a hard kernel with hadron distribution amplitudes. A crucial issue on the application of factorization theorems to a key ingredient of these decays, BB meson transition form factors, is the end-point singularity, which appears as a spectator parton carries a vanishing momentum fraction x0x\to 0 SHB ; ASY ; BF . Because of this end-point singularity, a BB meson transition form factor is treated as a nonperturbative input in the QCD-improved factorization approach BBNS based on the collinear factorization theorem. In the soft-collinear effective theory the end-point singularity can be removed by the zero-bin subtraction Manohar:2006nz , so that a BB meson transition form factor becomes factorizable in the collinear factorization. It was argued that a parton transverse momentum kTk_{T} is not negligible, when the end-point region is important. The perturbative QCD approach based on the kTk_{T} factorization theorem was then proposed LY1 ; KLS ; LUY , in which the end-point singularity is regularized by a parton kTk_{T}, and a BB meson transition form factor also becomes factorizable TLS .

An alternative removal of the end-point singularity in the framework of the collinear factorization has been suggested in Li:2001ay . When the end-point region dominates, the double logarithms αsln2x\alpha_{s}\ln^{2}x from radiative corrections ASY ; KPY should be organized to all orders to improve perturbative expansion. The first systematic study was done in Li:2001ay , where these double logarithms were factorized from exclusive BB meson decays into a universal jet function, and resummed up to the leading-logarithm (LL) accuracy. It was then shown that the resultant jet function vanishes quickly at x0x\to 0, and suppresses the end-point singularities in the BπB\to\pi form factors. The threshold resummation effect on more complicated two-body hadronic BB meson decays, which involve the annihilation and nonfactorizable amplitudes in addition to the factorizable one proportional to a transition form factor, was analysed in Li:2002mi and implemented in the PQCD approach widely afterwards.

In this paper we will extend the LL threshold resummation performed in Li:2001ay to the next-to-leading-logarithm (NLL) accuracy. To accomplish this task, we calculate the jet function stated above at one loop to identify the complete large logarithms, solve an evolution equation for the jet function in the Mellin space to get all-order summation of the logarithms, match the all-order summation to the one-loop result to determine the initial condition of the jet function, and follow the best fit method in TLS to obtain the threshold resummaiton in the momentum fraction xx space. It will be demonstrated that the NLL jet function exhibits suppression at the end point x0x\sim 0 stronger than the LL one. Because the threshold resummation modifies hard decay kernels by including partial higher order contributions, hadron distribution amplitudes, such as the uncertain BB meson distribution amplitude, should be adjusted accordingly to maintain BB meson transition form factors Li:2005kt . Therefore, we compare the LL and NLL resummation effects by investigating their impacts on the CP asymmetries in the BKπB\to K\pi decays, which are less sensitive to choices of hadron distribution amplitudes. It is found that the replacement of the LL jet function by the NLL one in the PQCD factorization formulas causes about 20-25% variation of the BKπB\to K\pi direct CP asymmetries, an effect which needs to be taken into account for precision calculations of BB meson decays.

In Sec. II we compute the one-loop jet function, derive its evolution equation and the corresponding evolution kernels in the Mellin space, and solve the evolution equation to attain the NLL threshold resummation. The best fit method is employed to transform the jet function from the Mellin space back to the momentum fraction space in Sec. III. It is verified that the Landau singularity in the inverse Mellin transformation can be avoided, and the theoretical uncertainty is under control in the above method. The impacts of the LL and NLL resummations on the CP asymmetries in the BKπB\to K\pi decays are then examined and compared. Section IV contains the conclusion and outlook.

II THRESHOLD RESUMMATION

II.1 One-loop Quark Diagrams

Refer to caption
Figure 1: One-loop diagrams for the jet function, where the double line represents the Wilson link.

The definition of the jet function J(x)J(x) in terms of a quark field and its associated Wilson link, which is constructed from the factorization of the radiative decay B(P1)γ(P2)lν¯B(P_{1})\to\gamma(P_{2})l\bar{\nu}, is referred to Li:2001ay . The Wilson link runs in the direction nn, that contains the arbitrary components n+n^{+} and nn^{-}. The quark momentum has been parametrized as P2kP_{2}-k, where the photon momentum P2P_{2} is in the minus direction and the momentum k=(xP1+,0,𝟎T)k=(xP_{1}^{+},0,{\bf 0}_{T}) of the light quark in the BB meson is in the plus direction. That is, this quark is slightly off-shell by (P2k)2=2xP1+P2xQ2(P_{2}-k)^{2}=-2xP_{1}^{+}P_{2}^{-}\equiv-xQ^{2}. The leading-order (LO) jet function has been chosen as J(0)(x)=1J^{(0)}(x)=1. The one-loop vertex correction in Fig. 1 is written as

Ja(1)(x)\displaystyle J^{(1)}_{a}(x) =\displaystyle= ig2CFμ2ϵd42ϵl(2π)42ϵtr[v/+v/4γβP/2k/+l/(P2k+l)2]nβnll2,\displaystyle-ig^{2}C_{F}\mu^{2\epsilon}\int\frac{d^{4-2\epsilon}l}{(2\pi)^{4-2\epsilon}}tr\left[\frac{v/_{+}v/_{-}}{4}\gamma_{\beta}\frac{P/_{2}-k/+l/}{(P_{2}-k+l)^{2}}\right]\frac{n^{\beta}}{n\cdot ll^{2}}, (1)

where CF=4/3C_{F}=4/3 is a color factor, and μ\mu is the renormalization scale. The projector v/+v//4v/_{+}v/_{-}/4, with the light-like vectors v+=(1,0,𝟎T)v_{+}=(1,0,{\bf 0}_{T}) and v=(0,1,𝟎T)v_{-}=(0,1,{\bf 0}_{T}), arises from the factorization of the jet function Li:2001ay . A straightforward evaluation gives

Ja(1)(x)\displaystyle J^{(1)}_{a}(x) =\displaystyle= αsCF4π(1ϵln4πμ2xQ2+ln2Q2xξ2+lnQ2xξ2+43π2+γE2),\displaystyle-\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{4\pi}\left(-\frac{1}{\epsilon}-\ln\frac{4\pi\mu^{2}}{xQ^{2}}+\ln^{2}\frac{Q^{2}x}{\xi^{2}}+\ln\frac{Q^{2}x}{\xi^{2}}+\frac{4}{3}\pi^{2}+\gamma_{E}-2\right), (2)

for n2>0n^{2}>0, with the nn-dependent factor ξ24(P2n)2/n2\xi^{2}\equiv 4(P_{2}\cdot n)^{2}/n^{2} and the Euler constant γE\gamma_{E}. Note that the jet function depends on the Lorentz invariants (P2k)nP2n(P_{2}-k)\cdot n\approx P_{2}\cdot n in the small xx limit and n2n^{2}, and that the Feynman rules associated with the Wilson link shows a scale invariance in nn. These facts explain why the two vectors P2kP_{2}-k and nn appear via the ratio ξ2\xi^{2} in Eq. (2).

The self-energy correction in Fig. 1 is expressed as

Jb(1)(x)\displaystyle J^{(1)}_{b}(x) =\displaystyle= ig2CFμ2ϵd42ϵl(2π)42ϵtr[v/+v/4γνP/2k/l/(P2kl)2γνP/2k/(P2k)2]1l2\displaystyle-ig^{2}C_{F}\mu^{2\epsilon}\int\frac{d^{4-2\epsilon}l}{(2\pi)^{4-2\epsilon}}tr\left[\frac{v/_{+}v/_{-}}{4}\gamma^{\nu}\frac{P/_{2}-k/-l/}{(P_{2}-k-l)^{2}}\gamma_{\nu}\frac{P/_{2}-k/}{(P_{2}-k)^{2}}\right]\frac{1}{l^{2}} (3)
=\displaystyle= αsCF4π(1ϵ+ln4πμ2xQ2γE+2).\displaystyle-\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{4\pi}\left(\frac{1}{\epsilon}+\ln\frac{4\pi\mu^{2}}{xQ^{2}}-\gamma_{E}+2\right).

We then have the 𝒪(αs)\mathcal{O}(\alpha_{s}) jet function

J(1)(x)=Ja(1)(x)+Jb(1)(x)=αsCF4π(ln2Q2xξ2+lnQ2xξ2+43π2),\displaystyle J^{(1)}(x)=J^{(1)}_{a}(x)+J^{(1)}_{b}(x)=-\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{4\pi}\left(\ln^{2}\frac{Q^{2}x}{\xi^{2}}+\ln\frac{Q^{2}x}{\xi^{2}}+\frac{4}{3}\pi^{2}\right), (4)

which is independent of μ\mu, ie., ultraviolet finite.

We apply the Mellin transformation from the momentum fraction xx space to the moment NN space

J~(N)01𝑑x(1x)N1J(x).\displaystyle\tilde{J}(N)\equiv\int^{1}_{0}dx(1-x)^{N-1}J(x). (5)

It implies that the transformed jet function J~(N)\tilde{J}(N) at large NN collects the contribution mainly from the small xx region. The Mellin transformation of the LO jet function, J~(0)(N)=1/N\tilde{J}^{(0)}(N)=1/N, is trivial. The Mellin transformation of Eq. (4) yields, in terms of the variable N¯Nexp(γE)\bar{N}\equiv N\exp(\gamma_{E}),

J~(1)(N)\displaystyle\tilde{J}^{(1)}(N) \displaystyle\approx αsCF4π(ln2Q2ξ2N¯+lnQ2ξ2N¯+32π2)1N,\displaystyle-\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{4\pi}\left(\ln^{2}\frac{Q^{2}}{\xi^{2}\bar{N}}+\ln\frac{Q^{2}}{\xi^{2}\bar{N}}+\frac{3}{2}\pi^{2}\right)\frac{1}{N}, (6)

in the large NN limit up to corrections down by powers of 1/N1/N.

II.2 Evolution Equation for JJ

As indicated by the above one-loop calculation, the important logarithms in the jet function depend on the factor ξ24ν2P22\xi^{2}\equiv 4\nu^{2}P_{2}^{-2}. To resum these logarithms, we construct the evolution equation for the jet function Li:1996gi ; Li:2013ela

2ν2dJdν2=n2vnvαdJdnα.\displaystyle 2\nu^{2}\frac{dJ}{d\nu^{2}}=-\frac{n^{2}}{v_{-}\cdot n}v_{-\alpha}\frac{dJ}{dn^{\alpha}}. (7)

The derivative respect to nαn^{\alpha} applies to the Feynman rules of the Wilson link, generating

n2vnvαddnαnβnl=n^βnl,\displaystyle-\frac{n^{2}}{v_{-}\cdot n}v_{-\alpha}\frac{d}{dn^{\alpha}}\frac{n^{\beta}}{n\cdot l}=\frac{\hat{n}^{\beta}}{n\cdot l}, (8)

with the special vertex

n^β=n2vn(vlnlnβvβ).\displaystyle\hat{n}^{\beta}=\frac{n^{2}}{v_{-}\cdot n}\left(\frac{v_{-}\cdot l}{n\cdot l}n^{\beta}-v_{-}^{\beta}\right). (9)

The technique of varying Wilson links has been applied to the resummation of various types of logarithms, such as the rapidity logaritms in the BB meson wave function Li:2012md , and the joint logarithms in the pion wave function Li:2013xna . The Ward identity for the summation over the special vertices leads to the factorization of the soft function KK and the hard function GG from the derivative of the jet function Li:1996gi ; Li:2013ela

2ν2dJdν2=(K+G)J.\displaystyle 2\nu^{2}\frac{dJ}{d\nu^{2}}=(K+G)\otimes J. (10)
Refer to caption
Figure 2: Convolution of the 𝒪(αs)\mathcal{O}(\alpha_{s}) soft function KK with the jet function JJ, where the symbol ×\times represents the special vertex.

Figure 2 depicts the factorization of the soft function KK at 𝒪(αs)\mathcal{O}(\alpha_{s}), which contains two pieces K1K_{1} and K2K_{2}. The former is written as

K1\displaystyle K_{1} =\displaystyle= ig2CFμ2ϵd42ϵ(2π)42ϵn^μnlgμνl2m2PJνPJlδK,\displaystyle-ig^{2}C_{F}\mu^{2\epsilon}\int\frac{d^{4-2\epsilon}}{(2\pi)^{4-2\epsilon}}\frac{\hat{n}_{\mu}}{n\cdot l}\frac{g^{\mu\nu}}{l^{2}-m^{2}}\frac{P_{J\nu}}{P_{J}\cdot l}-\delta K, (11)

with the momentum PJ=P2kP_{J}=P_{2}-k, where the gluon mass m2m^{2}, serving as an infrared regulator, will approach to zero eventually. Choosing the additive counterterm

δK=αsCF2π[ln(4πν2)+1ϵγE],\displaystyle\delta K=-\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{2\pi}\left[\ln(4\pi\nu^{2})+\frac{1}{\epsilon}-\gamma_{E}\right], (12)

we have

K1\displaystyle K_{1} =\displaystyle= αsCF2πlnμ2ν2m2.\displaystyle-\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{2\pi}\ln\frac{\mu^{2}}{\nu^{2}m^{2}}. (13)

The loop momentum ll flows through the jet function for K2K_{2}, so they appear in a convolution

K2J\displaystyle K_{2}\otimes J =\displaystyle= ig2CFd4l(2π)4n^μnlgμνl2m2PJνPJlJ(xl+P1+).\displaystyle ig^{2}C_{F}\int\frac{d^{4}l}{(2\pi)^{4}}\frac{\hat{n}_{\mu}}{n\cdot l}\frac{g^{\mu\nu}}{l^{2}-m^{2}}\frac{P_{J\nu}}{P_{J}\cdot l}J(x-\frac{l^{+}}{P^{+}_{1}}). (14)

Performing the contour integration over ll^{-} for (1x)P1+<l+<0-(1-x)P^{+}_{1}<l^{+}<0 followed by the integration over the transverse momentum lTl_{T}, and employing the variable change u=xl+/P1+u=x-l^{+}/P^{+}_{1}, we arrive at

K2J\displaystyle K_{2}\otimes J =\displaystyle= αsCFπ[x1𝑑uJ(u)J(x)ux+x1𝑑u(ux)J(x)(ux)2+M2],\displaystyle\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{\pi}\left[\int^{1}_{x}du\frac{J(u)-J(x)}{u-x}+\int^{1}_{x}du\frac{(u-x)J(x)}{(u-x)^{2}+M^{2}}\right], (15)

with the infrared regulator M2ν2m2/P1+2M^{2}\equiv\nu^{2}m^{2}/P^{+2}_{1}.

The Mellin transformation of the first integral in Eq. (15) gives

01𝑑x(1x)N1x1𝑑uJ(u)J(x)ux\displaystyle\int^{1}_{0}dx(1-x)^{N-1}\int^{1}_{x}du\frac{J(u)-J(x)}{u-x} (16)
\displaystyle\approx 01𝑑uJ(u)01𝑑t(1t)N1t(11tu)N101𝑑x(1x)N1J(x)01dtt,\displaystyle\int^{1}_{0}duJ(u)\int^{1}_{0}dt\frac{(1-t)^{N-1}}{t}\left(\frac{1}{1-t}-u\right)^{N-1}-\int^{1}_{0}dx(1-x)^{N-1}J(x)\int^{1}_{0}\frac{dt}{t},

where the order of the integrations over xx and uu has been exchanged in the first term, the variable change x=u(1t)x=u(1-t) has been applied, and the upper bound 1x1-x of the integration variable tt in the second term has been approximated by 1. This approximation holds up to an infrared finite constant, which will be compensated by matching later. The further approximation [1/(1t)u]N1(1u)N1[1/(1-t)-u]^{N-1}\approx(1-u)^{N-1}, which holds in the dominant small tt region, brings Eq. (16) into

J~(N)01𝑑t(1t)N11t\displaystyle\tilde{J}(N)\int^{1}_{0}dt\frac{(1-t)^{N-1}-1}{t} \displaystyle\approx J~(N)lnN¯.\displaystyle-\tilde{J}(N)\ln\bar{N}. (17)

The above result is subject to corrections down by a power of 1/N1/N.

We also apply the Mellin transformation to the second integral in Eq. (15):

01𝑑x(1x)N1J(x)01𝑑u(ux)(ux)2+M2J~(N)ln1M.\displaystyle\int^{1}_{0}dx(1-x)^{N-1}J(x)\int^{1}_{0}du\frac{(u-x)}{(u-x)^{2}+M^{2}}\approx\tilde{J}(N)\ln\frac{1}{M}. (18)

The sum of Eqs. (17) and (18) yields the Mellin transformation of Eq. (15),

01𝑑x(1x)N1K2J\displaystyle\int^{1}_{0}dx(1-x)^{N-1}K_{2}\otimes J =\displaystyle= αsCFπ(lnN¯lnP1+νm)J~(N),\displaystyle-\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{\pi}\left(\ln\bar{N}-\ln\frac{P^{+}_{1}}{\nu m}\right)\tilde{J}(N), (19)

which is then combined with Eq. (13) into

01𝑑x(1x)N1KJ\displaystyle\int^{1}_{0}dx(1-x)^{N-1}K\otimes J =\displaystyle= αsCFπlnμN¯P1+J~(N).\displaystyle-\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{\pi}\ln\frac{\mu\bar{N}}{P^{+}_{1}}\tilde{J}(N). (20)

It is seen that the infrared regulator m2m^{2} has disappeared in the above combination.

Refer to caption
Figure 3: 𝒪(αs)\mathcal{O}(\alpha_{s}) hard function GG.

The first diagram for the 𝒪(αs)\mathcal{O}(\alpha_{s}) hard function GG in Fig. 3 contributes

G1\displaystyle G_{1} =\displaystyle= ig2CFd4l(2π)4tr[v/+v/4γνP/2k/+l/(P2k+l)2]gμνl2m2n^μnl\displaystyle-ig^{2}C_{F}\int\frac{d^{4}l}{(2\pi)^{4}}tr\left[\frac{v/_{+}v/_{-}}{4}\gamma_{\nu}\frac{P/_{2}-k/+l/}{(P_{2}-k+l)^{2}}\right]\frac{g^{\mu\nu}}{l^{2}-m^{2}}\frac{\hat{n}_{\mu}}{n\cdot l} (21)
=\displaystyle= αsCF2πln4ν2P22m2e.\displaystyle-\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{2\pi}\ln\frac{4\nu^{2}P^{-2}_{2}}{m^{2}e}.

We have dropped the small momentum kk, to which the hard function is not sensitive. Instead, the infrared regulator m2m^{2} is introduced, whose dependence will be removed by the subtraction below. Note that the above expression is free of an ultraviolet divergence. The final result for GG in Fig. 3 is

G=G1K1δG=αsCFπln2ν2P2eμ,\displaystyle G=G_{1}-K_{1}-\delta G=-\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{\pi}\ln\frac{2\nu^{2}P^{-}_{2}}{\sqrt{e}\mu}, (22)

with the additive counterterm δG=δK\delta G=-\delta K, where the subtraction K1K_{1} avoids double counting of the soft contribution.

II.3 Solution to Evolution Equation

The functions KK and GG involve only single soft and ultraviolet logarithms, respectively, so they can be treated by renormalization-group (RG) methods:

μddμK=λK=μddμG,\displaystyle\mu\frac{d}{d\mu}K=-\lambda_{K}=-\mu\frac{d}{d\mu}G, (23)

where the anomalous dimension λK=μdδK/dμ\lambda_{K}=\mu d\delta K/d\mu is given up to two loops by Kodaira:1981nh

λK=αsπCF+(αsπ)2CF[CA(6736π212)518nf],\displaystyle\lambda_{K}=\frac{\alpha_{s}}{\pi}C_{F}+(\frac{\alpha_{s}}{\pi})^{2}C_{F}\left[C_{A}\left(\frac{67}{36}-\frac{\pi^{2}}{12}\right)-\frac{5}{18}n_{f}\right], (24)

with CA=3C_{A}=3 being a color factor and nfn_{f} the number of quark flavors. We allow the scale μ\mu to evolve to P1+/N¯P_{1}^{+}/\bar{N} in KK and to 2ν2P2/e2\nu^{2}P^{-}_{2}/\sqrt{e} in GG, obtaining the RG solution of K+GK+G,

K(P1+μN¯,αs(μ))+G(2ν2P2eμ,αs(μ))\displaystyle K\left(\frac{P^{+}_{1}}{\mu\bar{N}},\alpha_{s}(\mu)\right)+G\left(\frac{2\nu^{2}P^{-}_{2}}{\sqrt{e}\mu},\alpha_{s}(\mu)\right) (25)
=\displaystyle= K(1,αs(P1+/N¯))+G(1,αs(2ν2P2/e))P1+/N¯2ν2P2/edμμλK(αs(μ))\displaystyle K(1,\alpha_{s}(P^{+}_{1}/\bar{N}))+G(1,\alpha_{s}(2\nu^{2}P^{-}_{2}/\sqrt{e}))-\int^{2\nu^{2}P^{-}_{2}/\sqrt{e}}_{P^{+}_{1}/\bar{N}}\frac{d\mu}{\mu}\lambda_{K}(\alpha_{s}(\mu))
=\displaystyle= P1+/N¯2ν2P2/edμμλK(αs(μ)).\displaystyle-\int^{2\nu^{2}P^{-}_{2}/\sqrt{e}}_{P^{+}_{1}/\bar{N}}\frac{d\mu}{\mu}\lambda_{K}(\alpha_{s}(\mu)).

Substituting the above evolution kernel into Eq. (10), we solve for the jet function

J~(N)\displaystyle\tilde{J}(N) =\displaystyle= J~in(N)exp[eP1+/(2N¯P2)ν2dν¯22ν¯2P1+/N¯2ν¯2P2/edμμλK(αs(μ))]\displaystyle\tilde{J}_{in}(N)\exp\left[-\int^{\nu^{2}}_{\sqrt{e}P_{1}^{+}/(2\bar{N}P_{2}^{-})}\frac{d\bar{\nu}^{2}}{2\bar{\nu}^{2}}\int^{2\bar{\nu}^{2}P^{-}_{2}/\sqrt{e}}_{P^{+}_{1}/\bar{N}}\frac{d\mu}{\mu}\lambda_{K}(\alpha_{s}(\mu))\right] (26)
=\displaystyle= J~in(N)exp[121/N¯2ν2P2/(eP1+)dyy1/N¯ydwwλK(αs(wP1+))],\displaystyle\tilde{J}_{in}(N)\exp\left[-\frac{1}{2}\int^{2\nu^{2}P_{2}^{-}/(\sqrt{e}P_{1}^{+})}_{1/\bar{N}}\frac{dy}{y}\int^{y}_{1/\bar{N}}\frac{dw}{w}\lambda_{K}(\alpha_{s}(wP_{1}^{+}))\right],

with the variable changes μ=wP1+\mu=wP_{1}^{+} and ν¯2=eP1+y/(2P2)\bar{\nu}^{2}=\sqrt{e}P_{1}^{+}y/(2P_{2}^{-}). The initial condition J~in(N)\tilde{J}_{in}(N) for the jet function is determined via matching: we expand Eq. (26) to 𝒪(αs){\cal O}(\alpha_{s}) for a fixed coupling constant, and compare it with Eq. (6) to get

J~in(N)=1N[1αsCF4π(3π2214)].\displaystyle\tilde{J}_{in}(N)=\frac{1}{N}\left[1-\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{4\pi}(\frac{3\pi^{2}}{2}-\frac{1}{4})\right]. (27)

If an order-unity constant CC is introduced into the exponent, the initial condition will be modified accordingly:

J~(N)\displaystyle\tilde{J}(N) =\displaystyle= 1N[1αsCF4π(3π2214+ln2C)]\displaystyle\frac{1}{N}\left[1-\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{4\pi}(\frac{3\pi^{2}}{2}-\frac{1}{4}+\ln^{2}C)\right] (28)
×exp[12C/N¯2ν2P2/(eP1+)dyy1/N¯ydwwλK(αs(wP1+))].\displaystyle\times\exp\left[-\frac{1}{2}\int^{2\nu^{2}P_{2}^{-}/(\sqrt{e}P_{1}^{+})}_{C/\bar{N}}\frac{dy}{y}\int^{y}_{1/\bar{N}}\frac{dw}{w}\lambda_{K}(\alpha_{s}(wP_{1}^{+}))\right].

For a heavy-to-light transition at maximal recoil, we have P1+=P2=mB/2P_{1}^{+}=P_{2}^{-}=m_{B}/\sqrt{2}, mBm_{B} being the BB meson mass. Choosing the factor ν2=1/2\nu^{2}=1/2, ie., ξ2=Q2\xi^{2}=Q^{2}, and neglecting the running of the coupling constant, we derive the jet function in the Mellin space

J~(N¯)=J~in(N)exp[λK4(ln2N¯lnN¯+14)].\displaystyle\tilde{J}(\bar{N})=\tilde{J}_{in}(N)\exp\left[-\frac{\lambda_{K}}{4}\left(\ln^{2}\bar{N}-\ln\bar{N}+\frac{1}{4}\right)\right]. (29)

This is the improvement of the threshold resummation with a fixed coupling constant to the NLL accuracy. The inverse Mellin transformation brings the jet function back to the momentum fraction space,

J(x)\displaystyle J(x) =\displaystyle= cic+idN2πi(1x)NJ~(N)\displaystyle\int^{c+i\infty}_{c-i\infty}\frac{dN}{2\pi i}(1-x)^{-N}\tilde{J}(N) (30)
=\displaystyle= J0dtπ(1x)exp(tγE+1/2)sin(λKπt2)exp(λKt24),\displaystyle J_{0}\int^{\infty}_{-\infty}\frac{dt}{\pi}(1-x)^{\exp(t-\gamma_{E}+1/2)}\sin(\frac{\lambda_{K}\pi t}{2})\exp(-\frac{\lambda_{K}t^{2}}{4}),

with the coefficient

J0=[1αsCF4π(3π2214)]exp(λKπ24).\displaystyle J_{0}=-\left[1-\frac{\alpha_{s}C_{F}}{4\pi}(\frac{3\pi^{2}}{2}-\frac{1}{4})\right]\exp(\frac{\lambda_{K}\pi^{2}}{4}). (31)

In the above formula cc is an arbitrary real constant larger than the real parts of all the poles of the integrand, the variable change N=exp(t+iπ)N=\exp(t+i\pi) (N=exp(tiπ)N=\exp(t-i\pi)) has been adopted for the piece of contour above (below) the branch cut in Fig. 3 of Li:2001ay , and the further variable change t+γE1/2tt+\gamma_{E}-1/2\to t has been made. It is found that Eq. (30) exhibits the features similar to those of the LL jet fucntion Li:2001ay : it vanishes as x0x\to 0 and x1x\to 1, and it is normalized to unity up to corrections of 𝒪(αs)\mathcal{O}(\alpha_{s}).

Next we take into account the running effect of the coupling constant by inserting αs(μ)=4π/[β0ln(μ2/Λ2)]\alpha_{s}(\mu)=4\pi/[\beta_{0}\ln(\mu^{2}/\Lambda^{2})] into Eq. (26), with β0=112nf/3\beta_{0}=11-2n_{f}/3 and the QCD scale ΛΛQCD\Lambda\equiv\Lambda_{\rm QCD}, and arrive at

J~(N)\displaystyle\tilde{J}(N) =\displaystyle= J~in(N)exp[CFβ0(lnP2eΛlnlnP2eΛlnP2eP1+)]\displaystyle\tilde{J}_{in}(N)\exp\left[-\frac{C_{F}}{\beta_{0}}\left(\ln\frac{P_{2}^{-}}{\sqrt{e}\Lambda}\ln\ln\frac{P_{2}^{-}}{\sqrt{e}\Lambda}-\ln\frac{P_{2}^{-}}{\sqrt{e}P_{1}^{+}}\right)\right] (32)
×exp[CFβ0(lnP2eΛlnlnP1+ΛN¯+lnN¯)],\displaystyle\times\exp\left[\frac{C_{F}}{\beta_{0}}\left(\ln\frac{P_{2}^{-}}{\sqrt{e}\Lambda}\ln\ln\frac{P_{1}^{+}}{\Lambda\bar{N}}+\ln\bar{N}\right)\right],

for ν2=1/2\nu^{2}=1/2. Note that the above expression vanishes as N¯\bar{N} approaches to the Landau pole, N¯P1+/Λ\bar{N}\to P_{1}^{+}/\Lambda, namely, as N8.4N\approx 8.4 for mB=5.28m_{B}=5.28 GeV and Λ=0.25\Lambda=0.25 GeV Li:2005kt .

III NUMERICAL RESULTS

In this section we examine the NLL threshold resummation effect on various CP asymmetries in the BKπB\to K\pi decays. The first step is to convert the jet function in the Mellin space to the momentum fraction space, which is usually done through the inverse Mellin transformation defined by the first line of Eq. (30). Due to the existence of the Landau pole, an extrapolation of Eq. (32) in the large NN region is necessary for avoiding this singularity, which then introduces theoretical uncertainty. On the other hand, it has been observed LL2 that the threshold resummation effect is mainly governed by the behavior of Eq. (32) at intermediate NN for currently accessible energy scales. Therefore, we will employ the best fit method proposed in TLS , instead of the inverse Mellin transformation, for the aforementioned conversion: the Mellin transformation of a parametrized jet function is fit to Eq. (32) in the intermediate NN region.

Refer to caption
Figure 4: Jet functions fitted to Eq. (32) with LO J~in\tilde{J}_{in} in the ranges N=1N=1-3 (dotted line), N=1N=1-4 (solid line), and N=1N=1-5 (dash-dotted line), where the horizontal (vertical) axis is labelled by NN (J~(N)\tilde{J}(N)). The exact NN dependence of Eq. (32) (dashed line) is also displayed for comparison.

We parametrize the jet function in the momentum fraction space as

J(x)=Γ(α+β+2)Γ(α+1)Γ(β+1)xα(1x)β,\displaystyle J(x)=\frac{\Gamma(\alpha+\beta+2)}{\Gamma(\alpha+1)\Gamma(\beta+1)}x^{\alpha}(1-x)^{\beta}, (33)

which is motivated by the feature of Eq. (30), ie., vanishing as x0x\to 0 and x1x\to 1. The prefactor has been introduced to obey the normalization 𝑑xJ(x)=J~(1)=1\int dxJ(x)=\tilde{J}(1)=1. It implies that we have chosen the initial condition at LO, J~in(N)=1/N\tilde{J}_{in}(N)=1/N, since we intend to focus on effects from the resummaton. To be consistent, the BKπB\to K\pi factorization formulas with the LO hard kernels will be adopted for the numerical study below. We mention that Eq. (32) is roughly, but not exactly, equal to unity as N=1N=1 even with the LO J~in(N)\tilde{J}_{in}(N). The equality can be made exact by choosing ν2=exp(1/2γE)/20.47\nu^{2}=\exp(1/2-\gamma_{E})/2\approx 0.47, quite close to ν2=1/2\nu^{2}=1/2 taken in this work. The Mellin transformation of Eq. (33) is then fit to Eq. (32) in the intermediate NN region, and its deviation from Eq. (32) at large NN is regarded as an extrapolation to avoid the Landau singularity.

The best fits to Eq. (32) for nf=4n_{f}=4 in the ranges from N=1N=1 to 3, N=1N=1 to 4, and N=1N=1 to 5 produce the curves displayed in Fig. 4, which exhibit good agreement with Eq. (32) at intermediate NN, and start to deviate from Eq. (32) as N>6N>6. We take the jet function from the N=1N=1-4 fit with the parameters α=0.58\alpha=0.58 and β=0.47\beta=0.47 to generate our results, and those from the N=1N=1-3 fit (α=0.43\alpha=0.43 and β=0.33\beta=0.33) and from the N=1N=1-5 fit (α=0.76\alpha=0.76 and β=0.67\beta=0.67) to estimate the theoretical uncertainty. The similarity among the three fitted jet functions guarantees that the uncertainty from avoiding the Landau singularity is not severe in our best fit method. Compared to the LL jet function J(x)[x(1x)]0.3J(x)\propto[x(1-x)]^{0.3} TLS , the NLL one provides stronger suppression at the end points of xx, with which particles involved in the hard decay kernels tend to be more off-shell, and the perturbative analysis of the BKπB\to K\pi decays is expected to be more reliable.

Table 1: Direct and mixing-induced CP asymmetries in the BKπB\to K\pi decays.
Data LL NLL (N=1N=1-3) NLL (N=1N=1-4) NLL (N=1N=1-5)
ACP(K0π)A_{CP}(K^{0}\pi^{-}) 0.017±0.016-0.017\pm 0.016 0.012-0.012 0.012-0.012 0.015-0.015 0.019-0.019
ACP(Kπ0)A_{CP}(K^{-}\pi^{0}) 0.037±0.0210.037\pm 0.021 0.085-0.085 0.063-0.063 0.070-0.070 0.076-0.076
ACP(Kπ+)A_{CP}(K^{-}\pi^{+}) 0.082±0.006-0.082\pm 0.006 0.12-0.12 0.090-0.090 0.097-0.097 0.10-0.10
ACP(K0π0)A_{CP}(K^{0}\pi^{0}) 0.00±0.130.00\pm 0.13 0.024-0.024 0.019-0.019 0.018-0.018 0.018-0.018
SK0π0S_{K^{0}\pi^{0}} 0.58±0.170.58\pm 0.17 0.6830.683 0.6880.688 0.7040.704 0.7200.720

For the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix elements, we take the Wolfenstein parametrization with the values A=0.836±0.015A=0.836\pm 0.015, λ=0.22453±0.00044\lambda=0.22453\pm 0.00044, ρ¯=0.1220.017+0.018\bar{\rho}=0.122^{+0.018}_{-0.017} and η¯=0.3550.011+0.012\bar{\eta}=0.355^{+0.012}_{-0.011} Tanabashi:2018oca . The hadronic inputs, including meson masses and decay constants, meson distribution amplitudes, chiral scales m0m_{0} associated with the pion and kaon twist-3 distribution amplitudes, and the QCD scale ΛQCD\Lambda_{\rm QCD} are the same as in Li:2005kt . The factorization formulas for the relevant BKπB\to K\pi decay amplitudes with the LO hard kernels are also referred to Li:2005kt . The outcomes for the CP asymmetries under the LL and NLL threshold resummations are listed in Table 1, in which the values in the column labelled by LL well reproduce the corresponding ones in Li:2005kt . It is found that the NLL effect enhances the direct CP asymmetry ACP(K0π)A_{CP}(K^{0}\pi^{-}) by 25%, and decreases the other three direct CP asymmetries by 20-25% relative to the LL results. The mixing-induced CP asymmetry SK0π0S_{K^{0}\pi^{0}}, increasing by only 3%, is less sensitive to the replacement of the jet function. It is understandable, because this observable is supposed to be close to sin(2ϕ1)\sin(2\phi_{1}), ϕ1\phi_{1} being the weak phase, in penguin-dominated modes like BKπB\to K\pi. The comparison of the column labelled by NLL (N=1N=1-4) with those labelled by NLL (N=1N=1-3) and NLL (N=1N=1-5) indicates that the theoretical uncertainty is under control: except ACP(K0π)A_{CP}(K^{0}\pi^{-}), whose uncertainty amounts up to 20%, the other CP asymmetries change by lower than 10%.

IV CONCLUSION

In this paper we have improved the LL threshold resummation for exclusive BB meson decays to the NLL accuracy. The recipe contains the computation of the one-loop jet function factorized out of decay amplitudes, the derivation of the evolution kernels, the matching of the resummation formula to the one-loop jet function, and the inclusion of the running effect of the coupling constant. It has been observed that the NLL threshold resummation suppresses the end-point region with x0x\sim 0 more strongly than the LL one. Since we focused on the resummaton effect, we did not take into account the NLO piece in the initial condition of the jet function. For consistency, we worked on the PQCD factorization formulas for the BKπB\to K\pi decays with the LO hard kernels. It has been explained that the different LL and NLL threshold resummation effects can be compared unambiguously through the investigation of the CP asymmetries. We have shown that the replacement of the LL jet function by the NLL one causes about 20-25% variation of the BKπB\to K\pi direct CP asymmetries, which is not negligible for precision analyses for BB meson decays. On the contrary, the mixing-induced CP asymmetry almost remains untouched under the above replacement. Moreover, the theoretical uncertainty from the inverse Mellin transformation of the threshold resummation is under control.

The implementation of the NLL threshold resummation derived here in the PQCD approach to exclusive BB meson decays is nontrivial, and demands more efforts. As pointed out in the Introduction, the threshold resummation modifies hard decay kernels by including partial higher order contributions, so hadron distribution amplitudes should be adjusted accordingly. In principle, it is more appropriate to execute this task in a global study of many two-body hadronic BB meson decay modes. A global fit to available data based on the PQCD approach with the NLL threshold resummation will be attempted in near future.

Acknowledgement

We thank S. Mishima for useful discussions. This work was supported in part by MOST of R.O.C. under Grant No. MOST-107-2119-M-001-035-MY3, and by NSFC under Grant No.11347030.

References

  • (1) A. Szczepaniak, E.M. Henley, and S.J. Brodsky, Phys. Lett. B 243, 287 (1990).
  • (2) R. Ahkoury, G. Sterman, and Y.P. Yao, Phys. Rev. D 50, 358 (1994).
  • (3) M. Beneke and T. Feldmann, Nucl. Phys. B592, 3 (2000).
  • (4) M. Beneke, G. Buchalla, M. Neubert, and C.T. Sachrajda, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 1914 (1999); Nucl. Phys. B591, 313 (2000); ibid. B606, 245 (2001).
  • (5) A. V. Manohar and I. W. Stewart, Phys. Rev. D 76, 074002 (2007).
  • (6) H. n. Li and H. L. Yu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 4388 (1995); Phys. Rev. D 53, 2480 (1996).
  • (7) Y. Y. Keum, H. n. Li and A. I. Sanda, Phys. Lett. B 504, 6 (2001); Phys. Rev. D 63, 054008 (2001); Y. Y. Keum and H. n. Li, Phys. Rev. D 63, 074006 (2001).
  • (8) C. D. Lu, K. Ukai, and M. Z. Yang, Phys. Rev. D 63, 074009 (2001).
  • (9) T. Kurimoto, H. n. Li and A. I. Sanda, Phys. Rev. D 65, 014007 (2002).
  • (10) H. n. Li, Phys. Rev. D 66, 094010 (2002).
  • (11) G. P. Korchemsky, D. Pirjol, and T. M. Yan, Phys. Rev. D 61, 114510 (2000).
  • (12) H. n. Li and K. Ukai, Phys. Lett. B 555, 197 (2003).
  • (13) H. n. Li, S. Mishima and A. I. Sanda, Phys. Rev. D 72, 114005 (2005).
  • (14) H. n. Li, Phys. Rev. D 55, 105 (1997).
  • (15) H. n. Li, Phys. Part. Nucl. 45, 756 (2014).
  • (16) H. n. Li, Y. L. Shen and Y. M. Wang, JHEP 02, 008 (2013).
  • (17) H. n. Li, Y. L. Shen and Y. M. Wang, JHEP 01, 004 (2014).
  • (18) J. Kodaira and L. Trentadue, Phys. Lett. B 112, 66 (1982).
  • (19) H. L. Lai and H. n. Li, Phys. Lett. B. 471, 220 (1999).
  • (20) M. Tanabashi et al. [Particle Data Group], Phys. Rev. D 98, 030001 (2018).