Next-to-Leading-logarithm threshold resummation for exclusive meson decays
Abstract
We extend the threshold resummation of the large logarithms which appear in factorization formulas for exclusive meson decays, 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 stronger than the leading-logarithm (LL) one, and thus improves perturbative analyses of the above processes. We revisit the 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 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, meson transition form factors, is the end-point singularity, which appears as a spectator parton carries a vanishing momentum fraction SHB ; ASY ; BF . Because of this end-point singularity, a 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 meson transition form factor becomes factorizable in the collinear factorization. It was argued that a parton transverse momentum is not negligible, when the end-point region is important. The perturbative QCD approach based on the factorization theorem was then proposed LY1 ; KLS ; LUY , in which the end-point singularity is regularized by a parton , and a 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 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 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 , and suppresses the end-point singularities in the form factors. The threshold resummation effect on more complicated two-body hadronic 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 space. It will be demonstrated that the NLL jet function exhibits suppression at the end point 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 meson distribution amplitude, should be adjusted accordingly to maintain 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 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 direct CP asymmetries, an effect which needs to be taken into account for precision calculations of 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 decays are then examined and compared. Section IV contains the conclusion and outlook.
II THRESHOLD RESUMMATION
II.1 One-loop Quark Diagrams

The definition of the jet function in terms of a quark field and its associated Wilson link, which is constructed from the factorization of the radiative decay , is referred to Li:2001ay . The Wilson link runs in the direction , that contains the arbitrary components and . The quark momentum has been parametrized as , where the photon momentum is in the minus direction and the momentum of the light quark in the meson is in the plus direction. That is, this quark is slightly off-shell by . The leading-order (LO) jet function has been chosen as . The one-loop vertex correction in Fig. 1 is written as
(1) |
where is a color factor, and is the renormalization scale. The projector , with the light-like vectors and , arises from the factorization of the jet function Li:2001ay . A straightforward evaluation gives
(2) |
for , with the -dependent factor and the Euler constant . Note that the jet function depends on the Lorentz invariants in the small limit and , and that the Feynman rules associated with the Wilson link shows a scale invariance in . These facts explain why the two vectors and appear via the ratio in Eq. (2).
The self-energy correction in Fig. 1 is expressed as
(3) | |||||
We then have the jet function
(4) |
which is independent of , ie., ultraviolet finite.
We apply the Mellin transformation from the momentum fraction space to the moment space
(5) |
It implies that the transformed jet function at large collects the contribution mainly from the small region. The Mellin transformation of the LO jet function, , is trivial. The Mellin transformation of Eq. (4) yields, in terms of the variable ,
(6) |
in the large limit up to corrections down by powers of .
II.2 Evolution Equation for
As indicated by the above one-loop calculation, the important logarithms in the jet function depend on the factor . To resum these logarithms, we construct the evolution equation for the jet function Li:1996gi ; Li:2013ela
(7) |
The derivative respect to applies to the Feynman rules of the Wilson link, generating
(8) |
with the special vertex
(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 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 and the hard function from the derivative of the jet function Li:1996gi ; Li:2013ela
(10) |

Figure 2 depicts the factorization of the soft function at , which contains two pieces and . The former is written as
(11) |
with the momentum , where the gluon mass , serving as an infrared regulator, will approach to zero eventually. Choosing the additive counterterm
(12) |
we have
(13) |
The loop momentum flows through the jet function for , so they appear in a convolution
(14) |
Performing the contour integration over for followed by the integration over the transverse momentum , and employing the variable change , we arrive at
(15) |
with the infrared regulator .
The Mellin transformation of the first integral in Eq. (15) gives
(16) | |||||
where the order of the integrations over and has been exchanged in the first term, the variable change has been applied, and the upper bound of the integration variable 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 , which holds in the dominant small region, brings Eq. (16) into
(17) |
The above result is subject to corrections down by a power of .
We also apply the Mellin transformation to the second integral in Eq. (15):
(18) |
The sum of Eqs. (17) and (18) yields the Mellin transformation of Eq. (15),
(19) |
which is then combined with Eq. (13) into
(20) |
It is seen that the infrared regulator has disappeared in the above combination.

The first diagram for the hard function in Fig. 3 contributes
(21) | |||||
We have dropped the small momentum , to which the hard function is not sensitive. Instead, the infrared regulator 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 in Fig. 3 is
(22) |
with the additive counterterm , where the subtraction avoids double counting of the soft contribution.
II.3 Solution to Evolution Equation
The functions and involve only single soft and ultraviolet logarithms, respectively, so they can be treated by renormalization-group (RG) methods:
(23) |
where the anomalous dimension is given up to two loops by Kodaira:1981nh
(24) |
with being a color factor and the number of quark flavors. We allow the scale to evolve to in and to in , obtaining the RG solution of ,
(25) | |||||
Substituting the above evolution kernel into Eq. (10), we solve for the jet function
(26) | |||||
with the variable changes and . The initial condition for the jet function is determined via matching: we expand Eq. (26) to for a fixed coupling constant, and compare it with Eq. (6) to get
(27) |
If an order-unity constant is introduced into the exponent, the initial condition will be modified accordingly:
(28) | |||||
For a heavy-to-light transition at maximal recoil, we have , being the meson mass. Choosing the factor , ie., , and neglecting the running of the coupling constant, we derive the jet function in the Mellin space
(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,
(30) | |||||
with the coefficient
(31) |
In the above formula is an arbitrary real constant larger than the real parts of all the poles of the integrand, the variable change () has been adopted for the piece of contour above (below) the branch cut in Fig. 3 of Li:2001ay , and the further variable change 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 and , and it is normalized to unity up to corrections of .
III NUMERICAL RESULTS
In this section we examine the NLL threshold resummation effect on various CP asymmetries in the 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 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 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 region.

We parametrize the jet function in the momentum fraction space as
(33) |
which is motivated by the feature of Eq. (30), ie., vanishing as and . The prefactor has been introduced to obey the normalization . It implies that we have chosen the initial condition at LO, , since we intend to focus on effects from the resummaton. To be consistent, the 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 even with the LO . The equality can be made exact by choosing , quite close to taken in this work. The Mellin transformation of Eq. (33) is then fit to Eq. (32) in the intermediate region, and its deviation from Eq. (32) at large is regarded as an extrapolation to avoid the Landau singularity.
The best fits to Eq. (32) for in the ranges from to 3, to 4, and to 5 produce the curves displayed in Fig. 4, which exhibit good agreement with Eq. (32) at intermediate , and start to deviate from Eq. (32) as . We take the jet function from the -4 fit with the parameters and to generate our results, and those from the -3 fit ( and ) and from the -5 fit ( and ) 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 TLS , the NLL one provides stronger suppression at the end points of , with which particles involved in the hard decay kernels tend to be more off-shell, and the perturbative analysis of the decays is expected to be more reliable.
Data | LL | NLL (-3) | NLL (-4) | NLL (-5) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
For the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix elements, we take the Wolfenstein parametrization with the values , , and Tanabashi:2018oca . The hadronic inputs, including meson masses and decay constants, meson distribution amplitudes, chiral scales associated with the pion and kaon twist-3 distribution amplitudes, and the QCD scale are the same as in Li:2005kt . The factorization formulas for the relevant 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 by 25%, and decreases the other three direct CP asymmetries by 20-25% relative to the LL results. The mixing-induced CP asymmetry , 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 , being the weak phase, in penguin-dominated modes like . The comparison of the column labelled by NLL (-4) with those labelled by NLL (-3) and NLL (-5) indicates that the theoretical uncertainty is under control: except , 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 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 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 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 direct CP asymmetries, which is not negligible for precision analyses for 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 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 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).