# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

This note includes the most recent HERA results on exclusive vector meson (VM) production: $`e+pe+VM+p`$. The H1 and ZEUS experiments studied the production of $`\rho `$ , $`\omega `$ , $`\varphi `$ , $`J/\psi `$  and $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$  mesons, in a $`Q^2`$ domain ranging from photoproduction ($`Q^2`$ $``$ 0) to $`Q^2`$ = 60 $`\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ (where $`Q^2`$ is the virtuality of the photon exchanged in the interaction).

The note is divided in two parts. The first part presents the $`Q^2`$ and $`W`$ dependences of the total, transverse and longitudinal cross sections, for the various vector mesons. The second part is concerned only with $`\rho `$ meson production, and presents measurements of the helicity amplitude ratios $`|T_{ij}|/|T_{00}|`$.

## 2 The cross section $`𝝈\mathbf{(}𝜸^{\mathbf{(}\mathbf{}\mathbf{)}}𝒑\mathbf{}𝑽𝑴𝒑\mathbf{)}`$

### 2.1 Scale of the interaction

Recent measurements of $`𝝆`$ meson electroproduction at $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ $`\text{ }\mathbf{}\mathbf{>}`$ 10 $`\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathrm{𝟐}`$  and of $`𝑱\mathbf{/}𝝍`$ meson photo– and electroproduction  indicate a strong energy dependence of the $`𝜸^{\mathbf{(}\mathbf{}\mathbf{)}}𝒑\mathbf{}𝑽𝑴𝒑`$ cross sections (“hard” behaviour): $`𝝈\mathbf{}𝑾^𝜹`$ with $`𝜹`$ $`\mathbf{}`$ 0.8, where $`𝑾`$ is the energy in the photon–proton centre of mass. This behaviour indicates that the mass of the $`𝒄`$ quark or a high $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ value provides a “scale” $`𝑲^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ in the interaction. In this section, results are presented for all VM production in a global way as a function of the scale $`𝑲^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{=}\mathbf{(}𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{+}𝑴_𝑽^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{/}\mathrm{𝟒}`$, where $`𝑴_𝑽`$ is the VM mass. This approach is inspired e.g. by the discussions in reference .

A compilation of the HERA measurement of the $`𝜸^{\mathbf{(}\mathbf{}\mathbf{)}}𝒑\mathbf{}𝑽𝑴𝒑`$ cross sections is presented in Fig. 1 as a function of $`\mathbf{(}𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{+}𝑴_𝑽^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{/}\mathrm{𝟒}`$. The cross sections were scaled by SU(4) factors, according to the quark content of the VM : $`\mathbf{}`$9/1 for the $`𝝎`$, $`\mathbf{}`$9/2 for the $`\mathit{\varphi }`$, $`\mathbf{}`$9/8 for the $`𝑱\mathbf{/}𝝍`$ and $`\mathbf{}`$9/2 for the $`𝚼`$ mesons. In Fig. 1 and in all following plots, the errors on the data points represent the full errors (including the statistical, systematic and normalisation errors, added in quadrature).

The cross sections are measured at $`𝑾`$ = 75 GeV, or are moved to this value according to the parametrisation $`𝝈\mathbf{}𝑾^𝜹`$, using the $`𝜹`$ value measured by the relevant experiment. The ZEUS $`𝝆`$ and $`\mathit{\varphi }`$ cross sections were corrected for the $`\mathbf{|}𝒕\mathbf{|}`$ cut ($`\mathbf{|}𝒕\mathbf{|}`$ $`\mathbf{<}`$ 0.5 or 0.6 $`\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathrm{𝟐}`$), following an exponentially falling distribution d$`𝝈\mathbf{/}𝒅𝒕\mathbf{}𝒆^{𝒃𝒕}`$, with a $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ dependent $`𝒃`$ parameter according to measurements (this correction is $`\text{ }\mathbf{}\mathbf{<}`$ 7 %).

Within experimental errors, the total cross sections for VM production, including the SU(4) normalisation factors, appear to lay on a universal curve when plotted as a function of the scale $`𝑲^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{=}\mathbf{(}𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{+}𝑴_𝑽^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{/}\mathrm{𝟒}`$, except possibly for the $`𝚼`$ photoproduction <sup>2</sup><sup>2</sup>2The cross sections $`\sigma (\gamma p\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(1\mathrm{S})p)`$ measured by H1 and ZEUS at $`W`$ = 160 and 120 GeV respectively, were moved to the value $`W`$ = 75 GeV using the parametrisation $`\sigma W^\delta `$, with $`\delta `$ = 1.7. This high value of the parameter $`\delta `$ comes from the prediction of . Note that if the value $`\delta `$ = 0.8 is used (a value measured in case of $`J/\psi `$ photoproduction), the cross sections are higher by a factor 1.5 for ZEUS and 2.0 for H1..

A fit performed on the H1 and ZEUS $`𝝆`$ data using the parametrisation $`𝝈\mathbf{=}𝒂\mathbf{(}𝑲^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{+}𝒃^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{)}^𝒄`$, with $`𝒃^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ = 0.11 $`\mathbf{\pm }`$ 0.03 $`\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ and $`𝒄`$ = – 2.37 $`\mathbf{\pm }`$ 0.10 ($`𝝌^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{/}𝒏𝒅𝒇`$ = 0.67) is shown as the full curve in Fig. 1. The ratio of the $`𝝎`$, $`\mathit{\varphi }`$ and $`𝑱\mathbf{/}𝝍`$ cross sections to this parametrisation is presented in the lower plot of Fig. 1.

It is interesting to recognise that the universal $`\mathbf{(}𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{+}𝑴_𝑽^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{/}\mathrm{𝟒}`$ dependence is for the total cross section measurements.

### 2.2 Ratio of the longitudinal to transverse cross sections

The measured ratio of longitudinal to transverse cross sections $`𝑹`$ = $`𝝈_𝑳\mathbf{/}𝝈_𝑻`$ at $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ = 6 $`\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ is approximately 2.5 for $`𝝆`$ meson production but approximately 0.4 for $`𝑱\mathbf{/}𝝍`$ meson production. However, the ratio $`𝑹`$ presents a similar dependence for the $`𝝆`$, $`\mathit{\varphi }`$ and $`𝑱\mathbf{/}𝝍`$ meson production when plotted as a function of $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{/}𝑴_𝑽^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ (see Fig. 2). All data are well described by a common empirical parametrisation: $`𝑹\mathbf{=}𝒂\mathbf{(}𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{/}𝑴_𝑽^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{)}^𝒃\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝐥𝐧}𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{/}𝑴_𝑽^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}\mathbf{)}^𝒄`$ (curve in Fig. 2).

It is observed that $`𝑹`$ rises steeply at small $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$, with a weaker dependence at large $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ values. This behaviour is consistent with the fact that the $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{/}𝑴_𝑽^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ dependence expected at leading order is modified by higher order corrections. The data in Fig. 2 suggest that, within the present statistical precision, this modification preserves the ratio $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{/}𝑴_𝑽^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ as the relevant variable for $`𝝈_𝑳\mathbf{/}𝝈_𝑻`$.

### 2.3 The transverse and longitudinal cross sections

Figs. 3 (a) and (b) present the transverse $`𝝈_𝑻`$ and the longitudinal $`𝝈_𝑳`$ cross sections separately, as a function of $`\mathbf{(}𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{+}𝑴_𝑽^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{/}\mathrm{𝟒}`$. The parametrisation for $`𝑹\mathbf{=}𝝈_𝑳\mathbf{/}𝝈_𝑻`$, described above, was used to separate the longitudinal and the transverse parts of the cross sections for the different vector mesons:

$$𝝈\mathbf{=}𝝈_𝑻\mathbf{+}𝜺𝝈_𝑳\mathbf{=}𝝈_𝑻\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{+}𝜺𝑹\mathbf{)}\mathbf{,}$$

where the polarisation parameter $`\mathbf{}𝜺\mathbf{}`$ = 0.996 at HERA.

The transverse cross sections are well described by a simple power law dependence: $`𝝈_𝑻\mathbf{}\mathbf{(}𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{+}𝑴_𝑽^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{)}^𝒏`$, with $`𝒏`$ = – 2.47 $`\mathbf{\pm }`$ 0.03 for $`𝝆`$, $`𝒏`$ = – 2.4 $`\mathbf{\pm }`$ 0.1 for $`𝝎`$, $`𝒏`$ = – 2.8 $`\mathbf{\pm }`$ 0.1 for $`\mathit{\varphi }`$, and $`𝒏`$ = – 3.1 $`\mathbf{\pm }`$ 0.2 for $`𝑱\mathbf{/}𝝍`$ meson production.

In view of these values of the parameter $`𝒏`$ ($`𝒏\mathbf{}\mathrm{𝟐}`$), the parametrisation proposed in the GVDM approach of Schildknecht, Schuler and Surrow  does not provide good fits <sup>3</sup><sup>3</sup>3If the transverse and the longitudinal cross sections are fitted using the Schildknecht, Schuler and Surrow parametrisation, one obtains for the square of the transverse masses 0.29 $`\pm `$ 0.01 $`\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ ($`\chi ^2/ndf`$ = 3.6), 0.39 $`\pm `$ 0.03 $`\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ ($`\chi ^2/ndf`$ = 5.7) and 4.1 $`\pm `$ 0.4 $`\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ ($`\chi ^2/ndf`$ = 1.9) for the $`\rho `$, $`\varphi `$ and $`J/\psi `$ mesons respectively. The results for the square of the longitudinal masses are 0.38 $`\pm `$ 0.02 $`\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ ($`\chi ^2/ndf`$ = 3.1), 0.53 $`\pm `$ 0.05 $`\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ ($`\chi ^2/ndf`$ = 2.2) and 5.4 $`\pm `$ 0.7 $`\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ ($`\chi ^2/ndf`$ = 0.8) for the $`\rho `$, $`\varphi `$ and $`J/\psi `$ mesons respectively..

### 2.4 Energy dependence

The energy dependence of the cross section for VM production at HERA can be parametrised as $`𝝈\mathbf{}𝑾^𝜹`$. In a Regge context, the parameter $`𝜹`$ can be related to the exchanged trajectory $`𝜶\mathbf{(}𝒕\mathbf{)}`$, which is assumed to take a linear form $`𝜶\mathbf{(}𝒕\mathbf{)}\mathbf{=}𝜶\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{+}𝜶^{\mathbf{}}𝒕`$, where $`𝒕`$ is the square of the four–momentum exchanged at the proton vertex. The value $`𝜶^{\mathbf{}}\mathbf{=}\mathbf{0.25}\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathbf{}\mathrm{𝟐}`$ is assumed for the $`𝝆`$ and $`\mathit{\varphi }`$ mesons, as measured in hadron$`\mathbf{}`$hadron interactions . For the $`𝑱\mathbf{/}𝝍`$ meson, the value $`𝜶^{\mathbf{}}\mathbf{=}\mathbf{0.05}`$ is used .

The values obtained for the parameter ($`𝜶\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{}\mathrm{𝟏}`$) for the $`𝝆`$, $`\mathit{\varphi }`$ and $`𝑱\mathbf{/}𝝍`$ meson production are presented in Fig. 4 as a function of the scale $`𝑲^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ = ($`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ \+ $`𝑴_𝑽^\mathrm{𝟐}`$)/4. The error bars on the data represent the full errors. For the $`𝝆`$ meson production, the sensitivity to the choice of $`𝜶^{\mathbf{}}`$ is shown by the outer bars, which contain the variation due to the assumption $`𝜶^{\mathbf{}}\mathbf{=}\mathrm{𝟎}`$ (i.e. no shrinkage) added in quadrature. The points are compared to the values of the parameter $`𝝀`$ obtained from fits to the $`𝑾`$ dependence of inclusive $`𝑭_\mathrm{𝟐}`$ measurements  ($`𝝈_{𝒕𝒐𝒕}\mathbf{}𝑭_\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{(}𝒙\mathbf{,}𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{}\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{/}𝒙\mathbf{)}^𝝀\mathbf{}𝑾^{\mathrm{𝟐}𝝀}`$), plotted as a function of the scale $`𝑲^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{=}𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ (see also ).

Within experimental errors, a common rise is observed for the ($`𝜶\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{}\mathrm{𝟏}`$) and the $`𝝀`$ parameters when plotted as a function of the relevant scale $`𝑲^\mathrm{𝟐}`$. This is at variance with the values $`\mathbf{1.08}\mathbf{}\mathbf{1.10}`$ obtained from fits to the total and elastic hadron–hadron cross sections .

## 3 Helicity amplitudes

This section presents the H1 and ZEUS elastic $`𝝆`$ meson production results on the study of angular distributions of the $`𝝆`$ meson production and decay , which provides information on the photon and $`𝝆`$ polarisation.

Following the formalism of , the normalised angular decay distribution is a function of 15 combinations of spin density matrix elements, $`𝒓_{𝒊𝒋}^{𝜶𝜷}`$. Each of these $`𝒓_{𝒊𝒋}^{𝜶𝜷}`$ is a sum of bilinear combinations of the helicity amplitudes $`𝑻_{𝝀_𝝆𝝀_𝜸}`$. One can thus invert the system and extract the helicity amplitudes from the measurement of the 15 elements. The motivations for extracting the helicity amplitudes from the 15 matrix elements are the following:   
1. fundamental quantities are computed, on which $`𝒔`$-channel helicity conservation <sup>4</sup><sup>4</sup>4 In case of $`s`$-channel helicity conservation (SCHC), the helicity of the vector meson is equal to that of the photon when the spin quantisation axis is taken along the direction of the meson momentum is the $`\gamma ^{}p`$ centre of mass system. In that case, the non-flip helicity amplitudes $`T_{\lambda _\rho \lambda _\gamma }=T_{00}`$ and $`T_{11}`$ have non-zero values, the single flip ($`T_{10}`$, $`T_{01}`$, $`T_{01}`$, $`T_{10}`$) and double flip amplitudes ($`T_{11}`$, $`T_{11}`$) being zero. (SCHC) hypothesis can be checked directly,   
2. measurements of the real and imaginary parts of the helicity amplitudes can be obtained.   

Only 15 equations are available for 18 unknowns (9 complex helicity amplitudes $`𝑻_{𝝀_𝝆𝝀_𝜸}\mathbf{=}\mathbf{|}𝑻_{𝝀_𝝆𝝀_𝜸}\mathbf{|}𝒆^{𝒊𝝋_{𝝀_𝝆𝝀_𝜸}}`$). However, both H1  and ZEUS  results are compatible with natural parity exchange <sup>5</sup><sup>5</sup>5 Natural parity exchange (NPE) is defined by the following relations between the helicity amplitudes: $`T_{\lambda _\rho \lambda _\gamma }=(1)^{\lambda _\rho \lambda _\gamma }T_{\lambda _\rho \lambda _\gamma }`$. (NPE). Under this hypothesis, 5 helicity amplitudes remain independent (10 unknown): $`𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟎}}\mathbf{,}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟏}}\mathbf{,}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟏}}`$, $`𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}`$ and $`𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{}\mathrm{𝟏}}`$.

### 3.1 The ratios $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{𝒊𝒋}\mathbf{|}\mathbf{/}\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟎}}\mathbf{|}`$

Minimum $`𝝌^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ fits were performed to measurements of the combinations of the matrix element to extract the 5 independent complex helicity amplitudes. The normalisation $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟎}}\mathbf{|}`$ = 1 and $`𝝋_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟎}}`$ = 0 is used. In the full fit, the parameters $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{}\mathrm{𝟏}}\mathbf{|}`$, $`𝝋_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}`$, $`𝝋_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟏}}`$ and $`𝝋_{\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{}\mathrm{𝟏}}`$ were found compatible with zero within large errors. These parameters are then put to zero, and the remaining free parameters of the fit are $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟏}}\mathbf{|}`$, $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟏}}\mathbf{|}`$, $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}\mathbf{|}`$ and $`𝝋_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟏}}`$.

The measurement of the ratios $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟏}}\mathbf{|}`$ / $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟎}}\mathbf{|}`$, $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟏}}\mathbf{|}`$ / $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟎}}\mathbf{|}`$ and $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}\mathbf{|}`$ / $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟎}}\mathbf{|}`$ as a function of $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ is presented in Figs. 5 (a), (b) and (c) respectively (see also table 1). The H1 data cover the kinematic range 2.5 $`\mathbf{<}`$ $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ $`\mathbf{<}`$ 60 $`\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathrm{𝟐}`$, 30 $`\mathbf{<}`$ W $`\mathbf{<}`$ 140 GeV ($`\mathbf{}𝑾\mathbf{}`$ = 75 GeV) and $`\mathbf{}\mathbf{|}𝒕\mathbf{|}\mathbf{}`$ = 0.138 $`\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathrm{𝟐}`$. For the ZEUS data, the kinematic domain is 0.25 $`\mathbf{<}`$ $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ $`\mathbf{<}`$ 0.85 $`\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathrm{𝟐}`$, 20 $`\mathbf{<}`$ W $`\mathbf{<}`$ 90 GeV ($`\mathbf{}𝑾\mathbf{}`$ = 45 GeV) and $`\mathbf{}\mathbf{|}𝒕\mathbf{|}\mathbf{}`$ = 0.14 $`\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ for the low $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ data and 3 $`\mathbf{<}`$ $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ $`\mathbf{<}`$ 30 $`\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathrm{𝟐}`$, 40 $`\mathbf{<}`$ W $`\mathbf{<}`$ 120 GeV ($`\mathbf{}𝑾\mathbf{}`$ = 73 GeV) and $`\mathbf{}\mathbf{|}𝒕\mathbf{|}\mathbf{}`$ = 0.17 $`\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ for the high $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ data.

The ratio $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟏}}\mathbf{|}`$ / $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟎}}\mathbf{|}`$ decreases when $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ increases, indicating that at high $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ longitudinal polarisation dominates. The ratio $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟏}}\mathbf{|}`$ / $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟎}}\mathbf{|}`$ is observed to be around 8 % (14.0 $`𝝈`$ from zero, 5 data points), and the ratio $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}\mathbf{|}`$ / $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟎}}\mathbf{|}`$ around 3 – 4 % (4.5 $`𝝈`$ from zero), which indicate a small but significant violation of SCHC for $`𝝆`$ meson production at HERA.

The predictions of three models based on perturbative QCD are compared to the HERA measurements in Fig. 5. The dashed lines represent the predictions of the Royen and Cudell model , computed for $`\mathbf{}\mathbf{|}𝒕\mathbf{|}\mathbf{}\mathbf{=}\mathbf{0.135}`$ $`\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathrm{𝟐}`$. The dotted lines are the predictions of the Nikolaev and Akushevich model , for $`\mathbf{}\mathbf{|}𝒕\mathbf{|}\mathbf{}\mathbf{=}\mathbf{0.13}`$ $`\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ and $`\mathbf{}𝑾\mathbf{}`$ = 75 GeV. The dash-dotted and full lines present the predictions of the Ivanov and Kirschner model , computed for $`\mathbf{}\mathbf{|}𝒕\mathbf{|}\mathbf{}\mathbf{=}\mathbf{0.13}`$ $`\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ and $`\mathbf{}𝑾\mathbf{}`$ = 75 GeV, using respectively the GRV94HO and the CTEQ4lQ parametrisations for the gluon density in the proton. These three models predict a violation of SCHC, the amplitudes $`𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟏}}`$ and $`𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟎}}`$ being different from zero, in agreement with the data.

The $`𝑾`$ dependence of the ratios $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{𝒊𝒋}\mathbf{|}`$ / $`\mathbf{|}𝑻_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟎}}\mathbf{|}`$ is presented in Figs. 6 (a), (b) and (c) for $`\mathbf{}𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{}`$ = 4.8 $`\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathrm{𝟐}`$, together with predictions of the Nikolaev and Akushevich model  (dotted lines) and the Ivanov and Kirschner model  (dash-dotted and full lines) (the Royen and Cudell model gives no prediction for the $`𝑾`$ dependence).

### 3.2 The phase $`𝝋_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟏}}\mathbf{}𝝋_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟎}}`$

Figs. 7 (a) and (b) present results for the phase difference $`𝝋_{\mathrm{𝟏𝟏}}\mathbf{}𝝋_{\mathrm{𝟎𝟎}}`$, as a function of $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ and $`𝑾`$ respectively (see also table 1). The phase difference is clearly different from zero, of the order of $`\mathit{\varphi }`$ = 25 degrees. This value is in agreement with the H1 measurement  of $`\mathrm{𝐜𝐨𝐬}\mathit{\varphi }\mathbf{=}\mathbf{0.925}\mathbf{\pm }\mathbf{0.022}`$ $`{}_{\mathbf{}\mathbf{0.022}}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\mathbf{+}\mathbf{0.011}}`$ obtained from the angular distribution when supposing SCHC and NPE. The dotted lines on Figs. 7 (a) and (b) represent the predictions of the Nikolaev and Akushevich model  <sup>6</sup><sup>6</sup>6 The models of Royen and Cudell and of Ivanov and Kirschner suppose that the amplitudes are purely imaginary..

### 3.3 Fixed target experiments

The same procedure was used to extract the helicity amplitudes for the fixed target experiments for which the full set of matrix elements have been measured. The data in references  and  correspond to $`𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ values between 0.4 and 1.1 $`\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ and $`𝑾`$ values between 2.0 and 3.1 GeV, the CHIO experiment  is at higher energy ($`\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{<}𝑸^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{<}\mathrm{𝟑}`$ $`\mathrm{𝐆𝐞𝐕}^\mathrm{𝟐}`$ and $`\mathbf{12.5}\mathbf{<}𝑾\mathbf{<}\mathrm{𝟏𝟔}`$ GeV). The fitted helicity amplitudes for  are affected by large errors. Fits to the data in reference  have a very bad $`𝝌^\mathrm{𝟐}`$. Fits to the data in reference  and to the CHIO data  give helicity amplitude ratios in agreement, within the experimental errors, with the Royen and Cudell predictions. The experimental errors on the helicity ratios for these two fixed target experiments are typically a factor five greater than the errors on the HERA measurements.

## Acknowledgements

I am grateful to I. Akushevich, D. Ivanov, P. Marage, N. Nikolaev, I. Royen for numerous interesting discussions.