Bootstrapping One-loop QCD Scattering Amplitudes Lance Dixon, SLAC Fermilab Theory Seminar June 8,...

Post on 31-Dec-2015

225 views 0 download

Tags:

Transcript of Bootstrapping One-loop QCD Scattering Amplitudes Lance Dixon, SLAC Fermilab Theory Seminar June 8,...

Bootstrapping One-loop QCD Scattering Amplitudes

Lance Dixon, SLAC Fermilab Theory Seminar

June 8, 2006Z. Bern, LD, D. Kosower, hep-th/0501240, hep-ph/0505055, hep-ph/0507005; C. Berger, Z. Bern, LD, D. Forde, D. Kosower, hep-ph/0604195

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 2

What’s a bootstrap?

Perturbation theory makes a bootstrap practical in four dimensions,because it imposes a hierarchy on S-matrix elements.

Build more complicated amplitudes (more loops, more legs) directly from simpler ones, without directly using Feynman diagrams.

Very general consistency criteria:• Cuts (unitarity)• Poles (factorization)

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 3

Motivation: One-loop multi-leg amplitudes for Tevatron/LHC

• Leading-order (LO), tree-level predictions are only qualitative, due to poor convergence of

expansion in strong coupling s() ~ 0.1• NLO corrections can be 30% - 80% of LO

state of the art:

LO = |tree|2

n=8

NLO = loop x tree* + …

n=3

NNLO = 2-loop x tree* + …

n=2

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 4

LHC Example: SUSY Search

Early ATLAS TDR studies using PYTHIA overly optimistic

• ALPGEN based on LO amplitudes, much better than PYTHIA at modeling hard jets• What will disagreement between ALPGEN and data mean? • Hard to tell because of potentially large NLO corrections

Gianotti & Mangano, hep-ph/0504221Mangano et al. (2002)

• Search for missing energy + jets.• SM background from Z + jets.

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 5

• Need a flexible, efficient method to extend the range of known tree, and particularly 1-loop QCD amplitudes, for use in NLO corrections to LHC processes, etc.

• Semi-numerical methods have led to some progress recently, e.g. – Higgs + 4 parton amplitudes

Ellis, Giele, Zanderighi, hep-ph/0506196, 0508308

– 6-gluon amplitudes

Ellis, Giele, Zanderighi, hep-ph/0602185

• Here discuss a more analytical approach.• Anticipate faster evaluations this way, for processes

amenable to this method.

Motivation (cont.)

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 6

• Unitarity efficient for determining imaginary parts of loop amplitudes:

• Efficient because it recycles

simple trees into loops• Generalized unitarity (more propagators open)

for coefficients of box and triangle integrals• Cut evaluation via residue extraction (algebraic)

Bootstrapping with cuts

Bern, LD, Kosower, hep-ph/9403226, hep-ph/9708239;Britto, Cachazo, Feng, hep-th/0412103; BCF + Buchbinder, hep-ph/0503132;Britto, Feng, Mastrolia, hep-ph/0602178

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 7

• Unitarity can miss rational functions that have no cut.• However, n-point loop amplitudes also have poles where

they factorize onto lower-point amplitudes.

• At tree-level these data have been systematized into on-shell recursion relations Britto, Cachazo, Feng, hep-th/0412308; Britto, Cachazo, Feng, Witten, hep-th/0501052

• Efficient – recycles trees into trees• Can also do the same for loops

Bootstrapping with poles

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 8

The right variables

Scattering amplitudes for massless plane waves of definite 4-momentum: Lorentz vectors ki

ki2=0

Natural to use Lorentz-invariant products (invariant masses):

But for particles with spinthere is a better way

massless q,g,all have 2 helicities

Take “square root” of 4-vectors ki(spin 1)

use 2-component Dirac (Weyl) spinors u(ki) (spin ½)

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 9

The right variables (cont.)Reconstruct momenta ki

from spinors

using projector onto positive-energy solutions of Dirac eq.:

Singular 2 x 2 matrix:

also shows

even for complex momenta

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 10

Spinor products

Use antisymmetricspinor products:

Instead of Lorentz products:

These are complex square roots of Lorentz products:

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 11

Spinor Magic

Spinor products precisely capture square-root + phase behavior in collinear limit. Excellent variables for helicity amplitudes

scalars0

gauge theoryangular momentum mismatch

Accounts for denominators in helicity amplitudes, e.g. Parke-Taylor (MHV):

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 12

On-shell tree recursion

• BCFW consider a family of on-shell amplitudes An(z) depending on a complex parameter z which shifts the momenta, described using spinor variables.

• For example, the shift:

• Maintains on-shell condition,

and momentum conservation,

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 13

• Apply this shift to the Parke-Taylor (MHV) amplitudes:

• Under the shift:

• So

• Consider:

• 2 poles, opposite residues

MHV example

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 14

• MHV amplitude obeys:

• Compute residue using factorization• At

kinematics are complex collinear:

• so

MHV example (cont.)

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 15

The general case

Ak+1 and An-k+1 are on-shell tree amplitudes with fewer legs,evaluated with 2 momenta shifted by a complex amount.

Britto, Cachazo, Feng, hep-th/0412308

In kth term:

which solves

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 16

Proof of on-shell recursion relations

Same analysis as above – Cauchy’s theorem + amplitude factorization

Britto, Cachazo, Feng, Witten, hep-th/0501052

Let complex momentum shift depend on z. Use analyticity in z.

Cauchy:

poles in z: physical factorizations residue at = [kth term]

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 17

To show:

Propagators:

Britto, Cachazo, Feng, Witten, hep-th/0501052

3-point vertices:

Polarization vectors:

Total:

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 18

Initial dataParke-Taylor formula

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 19

A 6-gluon example

220 Feynman diagrams for gggggg

Helicity + color + MHV results + symmetries

3 recursive diagrams

related by symmetry

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 20

Simpler than form found in 1980s

Mangano, Parke, Xu (1988)

Simple final form

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 21

Berends, Giele, Kuijf (1990)

Relative simplicity grows with n

Bern, Del Duca, LD, Kosower (2004)

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 22

On-shell recursion at one loop Bern, LD, Kosower, hep-th/0501240, hep-ph/0505055, hep-ph/0507005;C. Berger, Z. Bern, LD, D. Forde, D. Kosower, hep-ph/0604195

• Similar techniques can be used to compute one-loop amplitudes – much harder to obtain by traditional methods than are trees.

• However, 3 new features arise, compared with tree case:

but

2) different collinear behavior of loop amplitudes leads to double poles in z, uncertainty about residues in some cases:

1) A(z) typically has cuts as well as poles

3) behavior of A(z) at large z more difficult to determine

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 23

Generic analytic behavior of shifted 1-loop amplitude,

Loop amplitudes with cuts

Cuts and poles in z-plane:

But if we know the cuts (via unitarity in D=4),we can subtract them:

full amplitude cut-containing partrational part

Shifted rational function

has no cuts, but has spurious poles in z because of how logs, etc., appear in Cn:

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 24

However, we know how to “complete the cuts” at z=0 to cancel the spurious pole terms, using Li(r) functions:

Cancelling spurious poles

So we do a modified subtraction:

full amplitude completed-cut partmodified rational part

New shifted rational function

has no cuts, and no spurious poles.But residues of physical poles are not given by naïve factorization onto rational parts of lower-point amplitudes, due to the rational parts of the completed-cut terms, called

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 25

Loop amplitudes with cuts (cont.)

We need a correction term from the residue of at each physical pole z– which we call an overlap diagram

full amplitude

completed-cut part

recursive diagrams overlap diagrams On

The final result:

• Tested method on known 5-point amplitudes, used it to compute • then all adjacent-MHV: Forde, Kosower,

hep-ph/0509358

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 26

• It is possible that does not vanish at .• It could even blow up there.• Even if it is well-behaved, might not be.• In that case, also won’t be.

Subtleties at Infinity

• As long as we know (or suspect) the behavior of we can account for it, by performing the same contour analysis on

is defined such that its large z behavior matches • Leads to modified recursive + overlap formula:

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 27

Example: NMHV Loop Amplitudes

• We have determined recursively all the “split-helicity” next-to-maximally-helicity-violating (NMHV) QCD loop amplitudes, i.e. those with three adjacent negative helicities: C. Berger, Z. Bern, LD,

D. Forde, D. Kosower, hep-ph/0604195

As input to the recursion relation, use (rational parts of) MHVamplitudes Forde, Kosower, hep-ph/0509358

• Key issue is to determine the behavior of

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 28

• The cut-containing terms for the general “split-helicity” case

have been computed recently.

Bern, Bjerrum-Bohr, Dunbar, Itahep-ph/0507019

NMHV QCD Loop Amplitude (cont.)

• and are cut-constructible,and the scalar loop contribution is:

generate (most of)

to be determined

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 29

What shift to use?• Problem: we don’t yet understand this loop 3-vertex

• But we know that it vanishes for the complex-conjugate kinematics

So the shift

will avoid these vertices

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 30

• Inspecting

Behavior at Infinityfor n=5 Bern, LD, Kosower (1993)

we find that the rational terms diverge but in a very simple way:

Behavior mimicked by:

Total reproduces

We compute recursive + overlap diagrams + corrections from ,

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 31

• For general n

Behavior at Infinity (cont.)Can use a second recursion relation, obtained by shifting to determine how the rational terms behave at large z. Find:

which can be mimicked by:

Compute recursive + overlap diagrams + corrections from , Obtain consistent amplitudes.

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 32

• 4 nonvanishing recursive diagrams Rn

n=6

where flip1 permutes:

• 2 nonvanishing overlap diagrams On

Compared with 1034 1-loop Feynman diagrams (color-ordered)

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 33

• Extra rational terms, beyond L2 terms from

Result for n=6

where flip1 permutes:

Bern, Bjerrum-Bohr, Dunbar, Itahep-ph/0507019

Result also manifestly symmetric under Plus correct factorization limits

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 34

Conclusions

• On-shell recursion relations can be extended fruitfully to determine rational parts of loop amplitudes – with a bit of guesswork, but there are lots of consistency checks.

• Method still very efficient; compact solutions found for all finite, cut-free loop amplitudes in QCD• Same technique (combined with D=4 unitarity) gives

more general loop amplitudes with cuts, MHV and NMHV, which are needed for NLO corrections to LHC processes.

• Prospects look very good for attacking a wide range of multi-parton processes in this way

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 35

Extra Slides

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 36

Example of new diagrams

recursive:

overlap:

For rational part of

Compared with 1034 1-loop Feynman diagrams (color-ordered)

7 in all

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 37

• Using

one confirms

MHV check

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 38

A one-loop pole analysis

Bern, LD, Kosower (1993)

under shift plus partial fraction

???

double pole

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 39

The double pole diagram

To account for double pole in z, we use a doubled propagator factor (s23).

For the “all-plus” loop 3-vertex, we use the symmetric function,

In the limit of real collinear momenta,

this vertex corresponds to the 1-loop splitting amplitude, BDDK (1994)

Want to produce:

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 40

“Unreal” pole underneath the double pole

Missing term should be related to double-pole diagram, but suppressed by factor S which includes s23

Want to produce:

Don’t know collinear behaviorat this level, must guess thecorrect suppression factor:

in terms of universal eikonal factors for soft gluon emission

Here, multiplying double-pole diagram bygives correct missing term! Universality??

nonsingular in real Minkowski kinematics

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 41

A one-loop all-n recursion relation

Same suppression factor works in the case of n external legs!

Know it works because results agree with Mahlon, hep-ph/9312276,though much shorter formulae are obtained from this relation

shift leads to

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 42

Solution to recursion relation

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 43

External fermions too

Can similarly write down recursion relationsfor the finite, cut-free amplitudes with 2 external fermions:

and the solutions are just as compact

Gives the complete set of finite, cut-free, QCD loop amplitudes(at 2 loops or more, all helicity amplitudes have cuts, diverge)

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 44

Fermionic solutions

and

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 45

March of the n-gluon helicity amplitudes

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 46

March of the tree amplitudes

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 47

March of the 1-loop amplitudes

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 48

Revenge of the Analytic S-matrix?

• Branch cuts

• Poles

Reconstruct scattering amplitudes directly from analytic properties

Chew, Mandelstam; Eden, Landshoff, Olive, Polkinghorne;

… (1960s)

Analyticity fell out of favor in 1970s with rise of QCD;to resurrect it for computing perturbative QCD amplitudesseems deliciously ironic!

June 8, 2006 L. Dixon Bootstrapping QCD Amplitudes 49

Why does it all work?

In mathematics you don't understand things. You just get used to them.