# References

ON THE OSCILLATIONS OF THE TENSOR SPIN STRUCTURE FUNCTION   
A.V.EFREMOV, O.V.TERYAEV

Joint Institute for Nuclear Research

141980, Dubna, Russia   

The tensor polarization is known to be the specific property of the particles with spin larger than $`\frac{1}{2}`$. The deuteron is one of the most fundamental spin-$`1`$ particles, and the effects of its tensor polarization are intensively studied at low and intermediate energies. Such effects should also be manifested for deep inelastic scattering (DIS) off deuteron target, resulting in the new structure functions . The DIS off longitudinally polarized deuterons have recently been studied by the Spin Muon Collaboration in order to extract the neutron spin structure function $`g_1^n`$ . The longitudinally polarized deuteron target automatically receives the tensor polarization as well, except the very special case when the probability of zero spin projection is just $`1/3`$. It allows, in principle, the tensor polarization effects to be studied by using the same data.

In this report, the simple description of the tensor polarization in DIS is presented. We also remind and generalize a rather old result ; namely, the quark contribution to the tensor spin structure function should manifest the oscillating behavior. Its experimental study would allow one to discriminate between the deuteron components with different spins.

The inclusive differential cross section for the DIS off spin-1 target has the form:

$$\sigma =p_+\sigma _++p_{}\sigma _{}+p_0\sigma _0,$$
(1)   
where $`p`$’s are the probabilities of the corresponding projections and $`\sigma `$’s are the cross sections for pure states. Usually, one uses instead of $`p`$’s the (vector) polarization

$$P=p_+p_{}$$
(2)   
and tensor polarization (alignment)

$$T=p_++p_{}2p_0=13p_0.$$
(3)   
Using (2), (3) one can rewrite (1) in the form

$$\sigma =\overline{\sigma }(1+PA+\frac{1}{2}TA_T)$$
(4)   
with the (vector) asymmetry

$$A=\frac{\sigma _+\sigma _{}}{2\overline{\sigma }},$$
(5)   
and the tensor asymmetry

$$A_T=\frac{\sigma _++\sigma _{}2\sigma _0}{3\overline{\sigma }}.$$
(6)   
The expression for the spin-averaged cross section is obvious

$$\overline{\sigma }=\frac{1}{3}(\sigma _++\sigma _{}+\sigma _0).$$
(7)   
The usually measured asymmetry for the target with polarization ”up” (parallel to the beam direction) and ”down” is

$$A^{exp}=\frac{\sigma ^{up}\sigma ^{down}}{P(\sigma ^{up}+\sigma ^{down})}=\frac{A}{1+\frac{1}{2}TA_T},$$
(8)   
i.e. has a correction due to tensor asymmetry. The latter, however, could be measured independently by using a nonpolarized target.

$$A_T=\frac{\sigma ^{up}+\sigma ^{down}2\overline{\sigma }}{T\overline{\sigma }}.$$
(9)   
In the approximation of noninteracting proton and neutron, one easily gets

$`\sigma _+^d=\sigma _+^p+\sigma _+^n;`$ (10)   
$`\sigma _{}^d=\sigma _{}^p+\sigma _{}^n;`$ (11)   
$`\sigma _0^d={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\sigma _+^p+\sigma _{}^n)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\sigma _+^n+\sigma _{}^p)=\overline{\sigma }^p+\overline{\sigma }^n.`$ (12)   
As a result, one has

$`\overline{\sigma }^d=\overline{\sigma }^p+\overline{\sigma }^n;`$ (13)   
$`A^d=A^p{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\sigma }^p}{\overline{\sigma }^d}}+A^n{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\sigma }^n}{\overline{\sigma }^d}};`$ (14)   
$`A_T^d0,`$ (15)   
where $`\overline{\sigma }^{p,n}=\frac{1}{2}(\sigma _+^{p,n}+\sigma _{}^{p,n})`$ and $`A^{p,n}=(\sigma _+^{p,n}\sigma _{}^{p,n})/2\overline{\sigma }^{p,n}`$. This means that the tensor asymmetry plays a very important role: it measures the effect of deuteron boundness.

Note that the lepton beam polarization is inessential here. In fact, the correlation between tensor and vector polarizations is related to the antisymmetric part of the density matrix whose hermiticity results in a pure imaginary factor. It should be compensated by the imaginary phase of the scattering amplitude, absent in DIS (the only relevant momentum is spacelike).

The description of the tensor spin structure function in the parton model should naively be very different in the case of the partons with different spins – quarks and gluons. Here the sum rules for the first two moments are proposed, which are just the consequence of this difference. They also discriminate between hadronic components of the deuteron with a different spin. Their validity and violation should provide the important information about the nucleon and deuteron spin structure.

It should be mentioned that the sum rules of interest were proposed already in 1982 . Although the high-$`p_T`$ vector meson in the final state was considered, the quark contribution to the tensor spin structure function was defined just for the initial state case. Let us briefly recall this definition. The quark contribution to the part of the cross section, proportional to $`T`$ can be expressed as

$$\sigma _q=d^4ztr[E_{\mu ^2}\gamma ^\nu ]P,S|\overline{\psi }(0)\gamma _\nu \psi (z)|P,S_{\mu ^2}$$
(16)   
Here $`E`$ is the short-distance part, $`\mu ^2`$ being its IR regularization parameter, the same as the UV one for the matrix element. The Taylor expansion of the latter results in the obvious parton formula

$$\sigma _q=_0^1𝑑xtr[\widehat{P}E_{\mu ^2}(xP)]C_{\mu ^2}^T(x)s^{zz}$$
(17)   
with the moments of quark tensor spin structure distribution related to the matrix elements of the local composite operators

$$P,S|\overline{\psi }(0)\gamma ^\nu D^{\nu _1}\mathrm{}D^{\nu _n}\psi (0)|P,S_{\mu ^2}=i^nM^2S^{\nu \nu _1}P^{\nu _2}\mathrm{}P\nu _n_0^1C_q^T(x)x^n𝑑x.$$
(18)   
Here $`S^{\mu \nu }`$ is the traceless symmetric tensor providing the covariant description of the vector meson alignment. In hard processes, the single component $`S^{\mu \nu }=s^{zz}P^\mu P^\nu /M^2`$ dominates, where $`s^{ij}`$ is the Cartesian spin-tensor in the target rest frame, the latter being directly related to $`T`$. This is quite analogous to the dominance of longitudinal vector polarization and kinematical suppression of the transverse one. Only this dominant contribution was considered in the paper . The full analysis , however, also leads to the identification of the dominant structure function.

The zero sum rule for each quark flavor $`i`$ follows immediately, just because the matrix element for $`n=0`$ vanishes:

$$_0^1C_i^T(x)𝑑x=0.$$
(19)   
This ”naive” derivation is quite analogous to that of the Burkhardt-Cottingham sum rule in QCD . The problem of its possible violation is still discussed . However, there are solid arguments  against such a violation in the scaling region.

Note that the $`n=1`$ operator is just the quark contribution to the energy-momentum tensor. Taking into account the contributions of all flavors  and gluons, one should get the $`S^{\mu \nu }`$and $`\mu ^2`$independent matrix element fixed by the energy-momentum conservation:

$$\underset{q,g}{}P,S|T_i^{\mu \nu }|P,S_{\mu ^2}=2P^\mu P^\nu .$$
(20)   
However, quark and gluon contributions may, in principle, depend on $`S^{\mu \nu }`$:

$`{\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}P,S|T_i^{\mu \nu }|P,S_{\mu ^2}=2P^\mu P^\nu (1\delta (\mu ^2))+2M^2S^{\mu \nu }\delta _1(\mu ^2)`$ (21)   
$`P,S|T_g^{\mu \nu }|P,S_{\mu ^2}=2P^\mu P^\nu \delta (\mu ^2)2M^2S^{\mu \nu }\delta _1(\mu ^2)`$ (22)   
This natural parametrization results in the gluonic correction to the $`n=1`$ zero sum rule:

$$\underset{q}{}_0^1C_i^T(x)x𝑑x=\delta _1(\mu ^2).$$
(23)   
The gluons contribute to the $`n=0`$ sum rule as well. There is an additional contribution to the cross section, equal to the convolution of the gluon coefficient function with the gluon tensor distribution. The latter may have a non-zero first moment contrary to the quark one

$$P,S|O_g^{\nu \nu _1}|P,S_{\mu ^2}=M^2S^{\nu \nu _1}_0^1C_g^T(x)𝑑x.$$
(24)   
Here $`O_g^{\mu \nu }`$ is the (renormalized) local gluonic operator. It may be constructed either from the gauge-invariant field strength or the gluon field itself in the ”physical” axial gauge. This contribution, however, is suppressed by $`\alpha _s`$ entering in the coefficient function. The gluon contribution to the deuteron tensor structure function, associated with the box diagram, was calculated a few years ago . It is similar to the gluon contribution to the linear polarized photon structure function. The authors therefore claimed that the deuteron should be aligned perpendicular to the beam. This statement naively contradicts the kinematical dominance of the longitudinal alignment mentioned above. However, the tensor polarizations in the mutually orthogonal directions are not independent because the tensor $`S^{\mu \nu }`$ is traceless. The sum of $`\rho _{00}^i`$, the zero spin projection probabilities, over three orthogonal directions $`i`$ is equal to unity. If the target is aligned along the beam direction, the rotational symmetry leads to :

$$\rho _{00}^L+2\rho _{00}^T=1.$$
(25)   
The transverse alignment is absent ($`\rho _{00}^T=1/3`$) if and only if the longitudinal one is also absent.

Note that zero sum appeared to be valid, provided the unobserved long-range singularity is taken into account . Such a possibility was also considered in the case of the Burkhardt-Cottingham sum rule .

The sum rule (19) means, of course, that $`C_T`$ should change sign somewhere. If $`\delta _1`$ is numerically small, the oscillations of the singlet tensor distributions are even more dramatic. It crosses zero at least at two points. It is interesting that the model calculations of the tensor distribution  really manifest an oscillating behavior. The parton model analysis  shows that its violation is caused by the deuteron quadrupole structure.

It is possible to describe such a behavior by considering a more conservative approach to the deuteron. Formula (16) is still valid if the quarks and gluons are replaced by the hadrons (nucleons and mesons). This is a straightforward generalization of the operator product expansions using the basis consisting of hadronic local operators . One may conclude that the zero sum rule is valid, as far as nucleonic operators (analogous in this sense to the quark ones) are considered. It is also valid for the (pseudo)scalar operators constructed from pion fields. However, it is obviously violated by the operators constructed from vector meson fields ”substituting” the gluon ones in this approach.

It is very interesting to study the zero sum rule experimentally. The tensor structure function can be measured, as it has been mentioned above, by the Spin Muon Collaboration. However, as it is probably numerically small in comparison with $`g_1`$, one may expect to obtain some restrictions from above only. Nevertheless, even such a result would be important as a check of the validity of free nucleon approximation (it is used in order to extract the neutron spin structure function). Moreover, one should take into account the tensor asymmetry in order to extract the vector one in the self-consistent way. One cannot exclude the enhancement of the tensor structure function in some kinematical region, making possible its measurement by SMC. If it should happen at low $`x`$ region, the first moment of $`g_1^n`$, entering in the Bjorken sum rule, may be affected significantly.

To study the tensor spin structure more statistics is required. This probably should be done by the HERMES collaboration at HERA  and, possibly, by the European Electron Facility . It seems possible to do this also at CEBAF, simultaneously with the already proposed  study of generalized Gerasimov–Drell–Hearn sum rule.

We conclude that the experimental study of the first two moments of the deuteron tensor spin structure function can provide some information about its constituents with different spins.

It is a pleasure to thank M. Anselmino, L. Kaptari, K. Kazakov and E. Leader for useful discussions.

This work was supported in part by the Russian Foundation for Fundamental Researches Grant $`N^0`$ 93-02-3811.