text:
# Bicomplex formulation and Moyal deformation of (2+1)-dimensional Fordy-Kulish systems

## 1 Introduction

A bicomplex is an $`_0`$-graded linear space (over $``$ or $``$) $`M=_{s0}M^s`$ together with two linear maps $`\mathrm{d},\delta :M^sM^{s+1}`$ satisfying

$`\mathrm{d}^2=0,\delta ^2=0,\mathrm{d}\delta +\delta \mathrm{d}=0.`$ (1.1)
Associated with a bicomplex is the linear equation

$`\delta \chi =\lambda \mathrm{d}\chi `$ (1.2)
where $`\chi M^0`$ and $`\lambda `$ is a parameter . If it admits a (non-trivial) solution as a (formal) power series $`\chi =_{r0}\lambda ^r\chi ^{(r)}`$ in $`\lambda `$, the linear equation leads to

$`\delta \chi ^{(0)}=0,\delta \chi ^{(r)}=\mathrm{d}\chi ^{(r1)},r=1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}.`$ (1.3)
As a consequence, $`J^{(r+1)}=\mathrm{d}\chi ^{(r)}`$, $`r=0,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}`$, are $`\delta `$-exact. These elements of $`M^1`$ may be regarded as generalized conserved currents .

In section 2 we start with a trivial bicomplex. A certain “dressing” (in the sense of ) then leads to a bicomplex formulation of the Fordy-Kulish systems  of matrix nonlinear Schrödinger equations (matrix-NLS).111See also . For some other generalizations of the NLS equation see , in particular. More precisely, our approach leads to an extension of the latter systems from two to three space-time coordinates $`t,x,y`$ from which the matrix-NLS equations are obtained via the reduction $`y=x`$.222A different extension of the Fordy-Kulish systems to $`2+1`$ dimensions obtained by replacing the spectral parameter in the $`(1+1)`$-dimensional systems by a new partial derivative appeared in . See also  for some related work. Our $`(2+1)`$-dimensional systems turn out to be matrix generalizations of a system studied in  (see also the references given there).

Furthermore, in section 3 deformation quantization  is applied to the space-time coordinates. The ordinary commutative product in the algebra $`𝒜`$ of smooth functions on $`^3`$ is replaced with the $``$-product which is defined by

$`fh=𝐦e^{i𝒫/2}(fh)`$ (1.4)
where $`𝐦(fh)=fh`$ for all $`f,h𝒜`$, and $`𝒫:𝒜𝒜𝒜𝒜`$ is given by

$`𝒫=\vartheta _1(_t_x_x_t)+\vartheta _2(_t_y_y_t)+\vartheta _3(_x_y_y_x)`$ (1.5)
with real deformation parameters $`\vartheta _j`$, $`j=1,2,3`$.333Only one of these parameters is actually independent since $`𝒫`$ is antisymmetric and thus degenerate in three dimensions. Under complex conjugation, we have $`\overline{fh}=\overline{h}\overline{f}`$ for functions $`f,h`$. The partial derivatives $`_t,_x,_y`$ are derivations of the $``$-product. Space-time deformation quantization has been applied recently to various integrable models in , for example.

Section 4 deals with the conservation laws of the extended and deformed Fordy-Kulish systems. Section 5 gives corresponding generalized ferromagnet equations for the latter systems. Section 6 contains some conclusions.

## 2 Bicomplex formulation of extended Fordy-Kulish systems

We choose the bicomplex space as $`M=M^0\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ where $`M^0=C^{\mathrm{}}(^3,^N)`$ denotes the set of smooth maps $`\varphi :^3^N`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Lambda }^1\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$ is the exterior algebra of a $`2`$-dimensional complex vector space with basis $`\tau ,\xi `$ of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$ (so that $`\tau ^2=\xi ^2=\tau \xi +\xi \tau =0`$). $`M`$ becomes a bicomplex with the maps $`\mathrm{d}`$ and $`\delta `$ defined by

$`\mathrm{d}\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _t\tau +\varphi _x\xi ,`$ (2.1)
$`\delta \varphi `$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _y\tau +(AaI)\varphi \xi `$ (2.2)
where an index denotes a partial derivative with respect to one of the coordinates $`t,x,y`$ on $`^3`$, e.g., $`\varphi _t=_t\varphi `$. $`A`$ is a constant $`N\times N`$ matrix, $`I`$ the identity matrix, and $`a`$.444More precisely, $`\mathrm{d}^2`$ vanishes identically, $`\delta ^2=0`$ requires $`(AaI)_y=0`$, and $`\mathrm{d}\delta +\delta \mathrm{d}=0`$ is satisfied iff $`(AaI)_t=0`$. This still allows an $`x`$-dependence of $`AaI`$. In the following, we will be interested in the possibility of a reduction of the system to two space-time dimensions by setting $`y=x`$. Then $`AaI`$ has to be constant. By linearity and $`\mathrm{d}(\varphi \tau +\phi \xi )=(\mathrm{d}\varphi )\tau +(\mathrm{d}\phi )\xi `$ (and correspondingly for $`\delta `$) the maps $`\mathrm{d}`$ and $`\delta `$ extend to the whole of $`M`$. Now we apply a “dressing” to $`\mathrm{d}`$ as follows,

$`\mathrm{D}\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{d}\varphi +\delta (L\varphi )L\delta \varphi `$ (2.3)
$`=`$ $`(\varphi _t+L_y\varphi )\tau +(\varphi _x+[A,L]\varphi )\xi `$
with an $`N\times N`$ matrix $`L`$ and $`[A,L]=ALLA`$. Besides $`\delta ^2=0`$, also $`\delta \mathrm{D}+\mathrm{D}\delta =0`$ is identically satisfied. The only nontrivial new bicomplex equation is $`\mathrm{D}^2=0`$ which takes the form

$`L_{yx}[A,L_t][L_y,[A,L]]=0.`$ (2.4)
Let us assume that $`A`$ and $`L`$ take values in a representation of the Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ of a simple Lie group $`G`$. Let $`K`$ be a subgroup of $`G`$ with Lie algebra $`𝔨`$, and $`𝔪`$ the vector space complement of $`𝔨`$ in $`𝔤`$, so that $`𝔤=𝔨𝔪`$ and $`[𝔨,𝔨]𝔨`$. We assume that the homogeneous space $`G/K`$ is reductive and moreover symmetric, i.e.,

$`[𝔨,𝔪]𝔪,[𝔪,𝔪]𝔨.`$ (2.5)
For a Hermitian symmetric space with a complex structure $`J:𝔪𝔪`$, $`J^2=1`$, the following conditions hold (cf ). There is an element $`A𝔤`$ such that $`𝔨=\text{ker}\text{ad}A`$. For a particular scaling of $`A`$, we have $`J=\text{ad}A`$ and there is a subset $`\theta ^+`$ of the positive root system such that $`𝔪=\text{span}\{e_{\pm \alpha }|\alpha \theta ^+\}`$ and $`[A,e_{\pm \alpha }]=\pm ie_{\pm \alpha }`$ for $`\alpha \theta ^+`$. Here $`e_\alpha `$ belongs to the Cartan-Weyl basis. Moreover, $`[e_\alpha ,e_\beta ]=0=[e_\alpha ,e_\beta ]`$ for all $`\alpha ,\beta \theta ^+`$.

Now we choose $`A`$ in (2.2) with the above properties. $`A`$ is then $`𝔨`$-valued. With the decomposition

$`L=Q+P`$ (2.6)
where $`Q𝔪`$ and $`P𝔨`$, the $`𝔨`$\- and $`𝔪`$-part of (2.4) reads, respectively,

$`P_{xy}`$ $`=`$ $`[Q_y,[A,Q]],`$ (2.7)
$`Q_{xy}`$ $`=`$ $`[A,Q]_t+[P_y,[A,Q]].`$ (2.8)
According to the above assumptions, $`Q`$ has a decomposition

$`Q=Q^++Q^{},[A,Q^\pm ]=\pm iQ^\pm .`$ (2.9)
Now one finds that (2.7) can be integrated with respect to $`y`$. This yields

$`P_x=i[Q^+,Q^{}]`$ (2.10)
(up to addition of a $`𝔨`$-valued matrix which only depends on $`t`$ and $`x`$ and which we disregard in the following). (2.8) now leads to

$`iQ_t^\pm Q_{xy}^\pm +i[P_y,Q^\pm ]=0.`$ (2.11)
The system of equations (2.10), (2.11) constitutes an extension of the Fordy-Kulish systems  to which it reduces when $`y=x`$. In the latter case, (2.10) determines $`P_x`$ which can then be eliminated from (2.11). We are then left with the following equations,

$`iQ_t^\pm Q_{xx}^\pm +[[Q^+,Q^{}],Q^\pm ]=0.`$ (2.12)
Example. Let $`G=SU(2)`$ and $`y=x`$. The subalgebra of $`su(2)`$ spanned by $`A=(i/2)\sigma _3`$ with the Pauli matrix $`\sigma _3`$ is clearly annihilated by $`\text{ad}A`$ and generates a $`U(1)`$ subgroup. Let

$`Q^+=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \psi \\ 0& 0\end{array}\right),Q^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ \overline{\psi }& 0\end{array}\right)`$ (2.17)
where $`\psi `$ is a complex function with complex conjugate $`\overline{\psi }`$. Then the two equations (2.12) both reduce to the nonlinear Schrödinger equation

$`i\psi _t=\psi _{xx}2|\psi |^2\psi .`$ (2.18)
This example is easily generalized . Let us consider the Hermitian symmetric space $`SU(N)/S(U(n)\times U(Nn))`$ and choose

$`A=\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1I_n& 0\\ 0& c_2I_{Nn}\end{array}\right)`$ (2.21)
where $`I_n`$ is the $`n\times n`$ unit matrix and $`c_1,c_2`$. With

$`Q^+=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& q\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right),Q^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ q^{}& 0\end{array}\right)`$ (2.26)
where $`q`$ is an $`n\times (Nn)`$ matrix with Hermitian conjugate $`q^{}`$, we get

$`[A,Q^\pm ]=\pm (c_1c_2)Q^\pm .`$ (2.27)
The constants $`c_1,c_2`$ are thus related by $`c_1c_2=i`$. Since $`A`$ must be traceless, we also have $`nc_1+(Nn)c_2=0`$. Hence

$`c_1={\displaystyle \frac{Nn}{N}}i,c_2={\displaystyle \frac{n}{N}}i.`$ (2.28)
The matrix $`P`$ must have the form

$`P=\left(\begin{array}{cc}p& 0\\ 0& r\end{array}\right)`$ (2.31)
with an $`n\times n`$ matrix $`p`$ and an $`(Nn)\times (Nn)`$ matrix $`r`$. From (2.10) we obtain the equations

$`p_x=iqq^{},r_x=iq^{}q`$ (2.32)
which are compatible with the unitarity constraints $`p^{}=p`$ and $`r^{}=r`$, and with $`\text{tr}(p)+\text{tr}(r)=0`$. (2.11) becomes

$`iq_tq_{xy}+i(p_yqqr_y)=0`$ (2.33)
and its Hermitian conjugate. The reduction $`y=x`$ leads to the matrix nonlinear Schrödinger equation

$`iq_tq_{xx}2qq^{}q=0.`$ (2.34)
The more general systems determined by (2.32) and (2.33) on three-dimensional space-time will be called “extended matrix-NLS equations” in the following.

Other examples of Hermitian symmetric spaces lead to further matrix nonlinear Schrödinger equations  and extensions in the above sense.

## 3 Space-time deformation quantization of the extended matrix-NLS equations

In this section we apply a deformation quantization to the algebra of (smooth) functions on space-time. The bicomplex $`(M,\mathrm{D},\delta )`$ introduced in the previous section then generalizes to the deformed noncommutative algebra with the following definition,

$`\mathrm{D}\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{d}\varphi +\delta (L\varphi )L\delta \varphi `$ (3.1)
$`=`$ $`(\varphi _t+L_y\varphi )\tau +(\varphi _x+[A,L]_{}\varphi )\xi `$
with $`[A,L]_{}=ALLA`$. The only nontrivial bicomplex equation is still $`\mathrm{D}^2=0`$ which now takes the form

$`L_{yx}[A,L_t]_{}[L_y,[A,L]_{}]_{}=0.`$ (3.2)
Of course, the $``$-commutator does not preserve a Lie algebra structure, in general. As a consequence, a decomposition of the last equation like that worked out for Hermitian symmetric spaces in  and the previous section does not work, in general. However, in the case of extended matrix-NLS equations only a certain block structure of the matrices entering the bicomplex maps is important. Let $`𝔪^\pm `$ be the set of all $`N\times N`$ matrices of the form of $`Q^\pm `$ in (2.26). Let $`𝔨`$ be the set of all block diagonal matrices (like $`P`$ in (2.31)). Then we have $`𝔨𝔨𝔨`$, $`𝔨𝔪^\pm 𝔪^\pm `$ and $`𝔪^\pm 𝔨𝔪^\pm `$. Moreover, since $`A`$ given in (2.21) with (2.28) is constant, we still have $`[A,P]_{}=0`$ and $`[A,Q^\pm ]_{}=\pm iQ^\pm `$. Hence, we can proceed with the decomposition $`L=Q^++Q^{}+P`$ as in the previous section. The above deformed bicomplex equation now results in the following system,

$`p_x=iqq^{},r_x=iq^{}q`$ (3.3)
and

$`iq_tq_{xy}+i(p_yqqr_y)=0.`$ (3.4)
This is a noncommutative version of the corresponding extended matrix-NLS system. The equations (3.3) are consistent with unitarity constraints on $`p`$ and $`r`$, but not with $`\text{tr}(p)+\text{tr}(r)=0`$. In contrast to the classical case, these matrices can no longer be taken as Lie algebra valued. They have values in the corresponding enveloping algebra instead.

The reduction $`y=x`$ of the above system leads to the noncommutative matrix nonlinear Schrödinger equation

$`iq_tq_{xx}2qq^{}q=0`$ (3.5)
which is the matrix version of the noncommutative nonlinear Schrödinger equation treated in .

## 4 Conservation laws for the three-dimensional extensions and deformations of matrix-NLS equations

The linear equation associated with the bicomplex underlying the deformed extended matrix-NLS equations of the previous section is

$`\delta \chi =\lambda \mathrm{D}\chi `$ (4.1)
with a parameter $`\lambda `$. $`\chi `$ is taken to be an $`N\times n`$ matrix of functions. The linear equation is equivalent to the two equations

$`\chi _y`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda (\chi _t+L_y\chi ),`$ (4.2)
$`(Aa)\chi `$ $`=`$ $`\lambda (\chi _x+[A,L]_{}\chi ).`$ (4.3)
Let us decompose $`\chi `$ into an $`n\times n`$ matrix $`\alpha `$ and an $`(Nn)\times n`$ matrix $`\beta `$,

$`\chi =\left(\begin{array}{cc}\alpha & \\ \beta & \end{array}\right).`$ (4.6)
In order to have a nontrivial solution of $`\delta \chi ^{(0)}=0`$, we choose $`a`$ as an eigenvalue of $`A`$. To be more concrete,

$`a={\displaystyle \frac{Nn}{N}}i,AaI=i\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ 0& I_{Nn}\end{array}\right),\chi ^{(0)}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}I_n& \\ 0& \end{array}\right).`$ (4.11)
From (4.3) we get

$`\alpha _x+iq\beta =0,\beta =i\lambda (\beta _x+iq^{}\alpha ).`$ (4.12)
Assuming that $`q`$ has a left $``$-inverse, this implies

$`\beta `$ $`=`$ $`iq_{}^1\alpha _x,`$ (4.13)
$`\alpha _x`$ $`=`$ $`i\lambda (\alpha _{xx}q_xq_{}^1\alpha _x+qq^{}\alpha ).`$ (4.14)
Furthermore, (4.2) leads to

$`\alpha _y=\lambda (\alpha _t+p_y\alpha +iq_yq^1\alpha _x).`$ (4.15)
$`\alpha `$ has a right $``$-inverse at least as a formal power series in $`\lambda `$, since at $`0`$th order it equals $`I_n`$. Hence there are $`n\times n`$ matrices $`\rho `$, $`\sigma `$ and $`\zeta `$ such that

$`\alpha _x=i\lambda \rho \alpha ,\alpha _t=i\lambda \sigma \alpha ,\alpha _y=i\lambda \zeta \alpha .`$ (4.16)
Then (4.14) and (4.15) lead, respectively, to

$`\rho `$ $`=`$ $`qq^{}+i\lambda (\rho _xq_xq_{}^1\rho )\lambda ^2\rho \rho ,`$ (4.17)
$`\lambda \sigma \zeta `$ $`=`$ $`ip_yi\lambda q_yq_{}^1\rho .`$ (4.18)
The integrability conditions $`\alpha _{xt}=\alpha _{tx}`$ and $`\alpha _{xy}=\alpha _{yx}`$ together with (4.16) yield

$`\rho _t\sigma _x+i\lambda [\rho ,\sigma ]_{}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (4.19)
$`\zeta _x\rho _yi\lambda [\rho ,\zeta ]_{}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (4.20)
Differentiation of (4.18) with respect to $`x`$, using (4.20), $`ip_x=qq^{}`$ (cf (3.3)) and (4.17), leads to

$`\sigma _x=\left(i(\rho _xq_xq_{}^1\rho )\lambda \rho \rho \right)_yi\left(q_yq_{}^1\rho \right)_x+i[\rho ,\zeta ]_{}.`$ (4.21)
Inserted in (4.19), this yields

$`\rho _t+i\left(q_yq_{}^1\rho \right)_x\left(i(\rho _xq_xq_{}^1\rho )\lambda \rho \rho \right)_y+i[\rho ,\lambda \sigma \zeta ]_{}=0.`$ (4.22)
In terms of the product

$`fh=𝐦{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}(𝒫/2)}{𝒫/2}}(fh)`$ (4.23)
with $`𝒫`$ defined in (1.5), the $``$-commutator of two functions can be written as follows,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{i}}[f,h]_{}`$ $`=`$ $`2𝐦\mathrm{sin}(𝒫/2)(fh)`$ (4.24)
$`=`$ $`\left(f(\vartheta _1h_x+\vartheta _2h_y)\right)_t+\left(f(\vartheta _1h_t+\vartheta _3h_y)\right)_x\left(f(\vartheta _2h_t+\vartheta _3h_x)\right)_y.`$
Taking the trace of (4.22), using the last formula and (4.18), we obtain the conservation law

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`\text{tr}\left(\rho i\rho [(\vartheta _1_x+\vartheta _2_y)(p_y\lambda q_yq_{}^1\rho )]\right)_t`$
$`+\text{tr}\left(iq_yq_{}^1\rho +i\rho [(\vartheta _1_t\vartheta _3_y)(p_y\lambda q_yq_{}^1\rho )]\right)_x`$
$`+\text{tr}\left(\lambda \rho \rho i(\rho _xq_xq_{}^1\rho )+i\rho [(\vartheta _2_t+\vartheta _3_x)(p_y\lambda q_yq_{}^1\rho )]\right)_y.`$
Expanding $`\rho `$ in a formal power series in $`\lambda `$, i.e.,

$`\rho ={\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\lambda ^r\rho ^{(r)},`$ (4.26)
(4.17) leads to

$`\rho ^{(0)}=qq^{},\rho ^{(1)}=iqq_x^{},\rho ^{(2)}=qq^{}qq^{}qq_{xx}^{}`$ (4.27)
and

$`\rho ^{(r)}=i(\rho _x^{(r1)}q_xq_{}^1\rho ^{(r1)}){\displaystyle \underset{s=0}{\overset{r2}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{r2}{s}}\right)\rho ^{(s)}\rho ^{(r2s)}`$ (4.28)
for $`r2`$. Inserting this in the expression

$`w={\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\lambda ^rw^{(r)}=\text{tr}\left(\rho i\rho [(\vartheta _1_x+\vartheta _2_y)(p_y\lambda q_yq_{}^1\rho )]\right)`$ (4.29)
which appears in the above conservation law, an infinite set of conserved densities is obtained, starting with555These expressions do not involve the $``$-inverse of $`q`$ and also apply to solutions for which $`q`$ is not $``$-invertible.

$`w^{(0)}`$ $`=`$ $`\text{tr}\left(qq^{}i(qq^{})[(\vartheta _1_x+\vartheta _2_y)p_y]\right),`$ (4.30)
$`w^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`\text{tr}(iqq_x^{}+(qq_x^{})[(\vartheta _1_x+\vartheta _2_y)p_y]`$ (4.31)
$`+i(qq^{})[(\vartheta _1_x+\vartheta _2_y)(q_yq^{})]),`$
$`w^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`\text{tr}(qq^{}qq^{}qq_{xx}^{}+i(qq^{}qq^{}+qq_{xx}^{})[(\vartheta _1_x+\vartheta _2_y)p_y]`$ (4.32)
$`(qq_x^{})[(\vartheta _1_x+\vartheta _2_y)(q_yq^{})](qq^{})[(\vartheta _1_x+\vartheta _2_y)(q_yq_x^{})])`$
which in turn can be expanded in (formal) power series in the deformation parameters. For vanishing deformation parameters, the conserved densities $`w^{(r)}`$ are polynomials in $`q,q^{}`$ and their $`x`$-derivatives, but no $`y`$-derivatives. This means that the conserved densities of an extended matrix-NLS system are the same (as polynomials in the fields and their partial derivatives) as those of the corresponding matrix-NLS system (which is obtained from the former by setting $`y=x`$). This is no longer so after deformation.

## 5 Generalized ferromagnet equations associated with deformed extended Fordy-Kulish systems

A gauge transformation of the (deformed) bicomplex considered in section 3 is a map $`g:^3G`$ such that

$`\mathrm{D}\varphi \mathrm{D}^{}\varphi ^{}=g_{}^1\mathrm{D}(g\varphi ),\delta \varphi \delta ^{}\varphi ^{}=g_{}^1\delta (g\varphi )`$ (5.1)
for all $`\varphi M`$ with $`\varphi ^{}=g\varphi `$. Such a map leaves the bicomplex equations invariant. Let us choose $`g`$ such that $`\mathrm{D}^{}=\mathrm{d}`$. Then

$`g_{}^1g_t=g_{}^1L_yg,g_{}^1g_x=g_{}^1[A,L]_{}g`$ (5.2)
and, writing $`𝒟`$ instead of $`\delta ^{}`$, we get

$`𝒟\varphi =(\varphi _y+R\varphi )\tau +(SaI)\varphi \xi `$ (5.3)
where we introduced the abbreviations

$`R=g_{}^1g_y,S=g_{}^1Ag.`$ (5.4)
Now $`𝒟^2=0`$ reads

$`S_y=[S,R]_{}`$ (5.5)
and $`\mathrm{d}𝒟+𝒟\mathrm{d}=0`$ becomes

$`S_t=R_x.`$ (5.6)
Decomposing $`R`$ as follows,

$`R=U+W,`$ (5.7)
where $`gUg_{}^1𝔪`$ and $`gWg_{}^1𝔨`$, we find $`[S,R]_{}=[S,U]_{}`$ and thus $`[S,S_y]_{}=[S,[S,U]_{}]_{}`$. Using $`(\text{ad}A)^2=I`$ which implies $`(\text{ad}S)^2=I`$, we get $`[S,S_y]_{}=U`$ so that (5.6) can be written as follows,

$`S_t=([S,S_y]_{}W)_x.`$ (5.8)
Furthermore, (5.7) becomes

$`g_{}^1g_y=[S,S_y]_{}+W.`$ (5.9)
(5.4) leads to $`S_x=[S,g_{}^1g_x]_{}`$ (since $`A`$ is constant) which implies

$`g_{}^1g_x=[S,S_x]_{}`$ (5.10)
by use of $`(\text{ad}S)^2=I`$. Together with the identity

$`(g_{}^1g_x)_y(g_{}^1g_y)_x=[g_{}^1g_x,g_{}^1g_y]_{}`$ (5.11)
the last two equations lead to

$`W_x=[[S,S_x]_{},W]_{}+2[S_x,S_y]_{}[[S,S_x]_{},[S,S_y]_{}]_{}.`$ (5.12)
The second term on the rhs can be rewritten as follows,

$`[[S,S_x]_{},[S,S_y]_{}]_{}`$ $`=`$ $`[S,[[S,S_x]_{}]_{},S_y]_{}+[S,[[S,S_x]_{},S_y]_{}]_{}`$ (5.13)
$`=`$ $`[S_x,S_y]_{}+[S,[[S,S_x]_{},S_y]_{}]_{}`$
using again $`(\text{ad}S)^2=I`$. (5.2) implies $`g_{}^1g_xg_{}^1𝔪g`$ and thus $`[S,S_x]_{}g_{}^1𝔪g`$. It follows that $`[[S,S_x]_{},S_y]_{}g_{}^1𝔨g`$. Since $`S`$ commutes with all elements of $`g_{}^1𝔨g`$, we have $`[S,[[S,S_x]_{},S_y]_{}]_{}=0`$. Hence

$`W_x=[S_x,S_y]_{}+[[S,S_x]_{},W]_{}.`$ (5.14)
Together with (5.8) this constitutes a $`(2+1)`$-dimensional matrix generalization of the Heisenberg ferromagnet equation, as we shall explain below.

Example. For $`N=2`$ and $`n=1`$ we have $`S^2=\frac{1}{4}I`$ and $`W=uS`$ with a function $`u`$. Using

$`[[S,S_x]_{},uS]_{}=[[S,S_x]_{},u]_{}S+u[[S,S_x]_{},S]_{}=[[S,S_x]_{},u]_{}S+uS_x,`$ (5.15)
the system (5.8),(5.14) becomes

$`S_t=([S,S_y]_{}uS)_x,u_x=4[S_x,S_y]_{}S+[[S,S_x]_{},u]_{}.`$ (5.16)
In the undeformed (commutative) case, the term $`[[S,S_x]_{},u]_{}`$ disappears. Then we recover a system of equations which has been discussed in  (see also the references given there). Its nonlinear Schrödinger-type counterpart has been considered in . Our equations (5.8),(5.14) thus constitute a matrix generalization of this system. Let us choose

$`g=\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\sigma _2\phi \right)\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\sigma _3t\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}e^{it/2}\mathrm{cos}(\phi /2)& e^{it/2}\mathrm{sin}(\phi /2)\\ e^{it/2}\mathrm{sin}(\phi /2)& e^{it/2}\mathrm{cos}(\phi /2)\end{array}\right)`$ (5.19)
with a function $`\phi (x,y)`$ and the Pauli matrices $`\sigma _2`$ and $`\sigma _3`$, we get

$`S={\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\phi & e^{it}\mathrm{sin}\phi \\ e^{it}\mathrm{sin}\phi & \mathrm{cos}\phi \end{array}\right).`$ (5.22)
Then $`[S_x,S_y]=0`$ and we can choose $`W=0`$. Now (5.8) reduces to the sine-Gordon equation

$`\phi _{xy}=\mathrm{sin}\phi .`$ (5.23)
For $`y=x`$, (5.2) and the decomposition (5.7) imply $`W=0`$. Without deformation, (5.8) then reduces to $`S_t=[S,S_{xx}]`$ which is a matrix generalization  (see also ) of an equation which describes a one-dimensional continuous spin system (Heisenberg ferromagnet) . Its equivalence with the nonlinear Schrödinger equation was demonstrated in  (see also ).

With $`S=\gamma _x`$, (5.8) becomes666An arbitrary matrix $`V`$ which does not depend on $`x`$ arises as a “constant of integration”. It can be eliminated by a redefinition of $`\gamma `$.

$`\gamma _t=[\gamma _x,\gamma _{xy}]_{}W.`$ (5.24)
For $`y=x`$ we have $`W=0`$. Without deformation, the last equation is then a generalization  of the Da Rios equation which describes evolution of a thin vortex filament in a three-dimensional fluid  (see also , in particular). Its equivalence with the nonlinear Schrödinger equation was first shown in .

## 6 Conclusions

Using bicomplex formalism , we obtained an extension of the Fordy-Kulish systems of matrix-NLS equations to three space-time dimensions. Moreover, corresponding equations on a noncommutative space-time are obtained by deformation quantization. We have shown that the resulting equations still possess an infinite set of conserved densities. Moreover, there is a gauge-equivalent generalized ferromagnet equation for all of these systems.

The Fordy-Kulish systems generalize the nonlinear Schrödinger equation, respectively the Heisenberg magnet or the Da Rios equation. The latter equations are associated with the simplest Hermitian symmetric space $`SU(2)/S(U(1)\times U(1))`$ in the series $`SU(N)/S(U(n)\times U(Nn))`$. The corresponding extended Fordy-Kulish system associated with this space also reproduces the sine-Gordon equation, as shown in the previous section. There may be a way to understand the extended Fordy-Kulish systems as generalizations of the sine-Gordon equation in a similar way as they are quite obvious generalizations of the NLS equation.

Certain limits of string, D-brane and M theory generate field theories on noncommutative space-times which are obtained by a space-time deformation quantization (see  and the references given there). Among the various noncommutative models which arise in these and other ways, “integrable” models will certainly be of special interest because of their highly distinguished properties. Although a suitable notion of integrability of a noncommutative field theory is not yet at hand, we think that the existence of an infinite set of conserved densities should be taken as a partial requirement. In case of the deformations considered in this work (see also ), this requirement is satisfied.

Acknowledgment. The authors are grateful to Partha Guha for discussions and for drawing their attention to Refs. 2 and 13.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction.

## 1 Introduction.

Helicity-flip parton densities, i.e. densities of transversally polarized quarks and linearly polarized gluons, are inaccessible in conventional deep inelastic scattering experiments on polarized spin-$`\frac{1}{2}`$ targets. The transversally polarized quark density  is of odd chirality, and thus requires a helicity flip in a perturbative QCD subprocess which is forbidden for massless quarks, while the linearly polarized gluon requires the helicity to be flipped by two units which is not allowed by angular momentum conservation for spin-$`\frac{1}{2}`$ hadrons. However, it will definitely appear for spin-$`J1`$ hadrons/photon .

If one goes from the forward to off-forward kinematics, i.e. inclusive DIS to exclusive DVCS with a real final state photon , one allows for non-zero orbital momentum in the system and thus the gluons can transfer two units of helicity from photons to spin-$`\frac{1}{2}`$ hadrons . Due to specific $`\mathrm{cos}/\mathrm{sin}\left(3\varphi \right)`$ azimuthal angle dependences in the factorized  cross section of the corresponding skewed tensor gluon distribution (SPD), it can be extracted  without the usual complication due to quark contamination. A similar possibility exists for a system of hadrons due to their orbital motion, as it occurs in the $`\gamma \gamma \pi \pi `$ reaction . As to the quark sector, unfortunately, the original proposal to measure the skewed quark transversity in diffractive meson production  has been proven erroneous due to the preservation of chiral symmetry for the cross section  and thus complicates the experimental access to the function in question.

Note, however, in DVCS, since the photon helicity flip requires a change in the hadron helicity by two units, the amplitude on a proton target is suppressed (due to its spin being only $`\frac{1}{2}`$) by an extra power of the transverse momentum transfer in the $`t`$-channel $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{}`$ whereas it will not be suppressed on a deuteron target, which is available at certain facilities like HERMES. Given its current run on high density targets, it is very interesting that high statistics data will be shortly forthcoming and hence there is a need to study the helicity-flip amplitudes theoretically.

In this paper, we present an evaluation of the two-loop skewed evolution kernels for chiral odd quark and tensor gluon distributions. Since corresponding operators which define the non-perturbative content of the former belong to different representations of the Lorentz group the mixing is absent in both cases. Our presentations is structured as follows. In the second section, we discuss the general solution of the skewed evolution equations, in the third one, we present the reconstruction of the skewed evolution kernels in the Efremov-Radyushkin-Brodsky-Lepage (ER-BL) and Dokshitzer-Gribov-Lipatov-Altarelli-Parisi (DGLAP) regions, and finally, we summarize.

## 2 Evolution equation.

SPDs - appear in various exclusive processes and their extraction would provide us new, valuable, non-perturbative information on the structure of hadrons. These functions can be considered as a link between Feynman’s parton densities and exclusive quantities like form factors/distribution amplitudes, in fact they are generalizations of both. In QCD they are defined as expectation values of twist-two light-ray operators over the hadronic states,

$`\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{{}_{}{}^{Q}q_{}^{T}}{{}_{}{}^{G}q_{}^{T}}}\right\}(x,\eta ,\mathrm{\Delta }^2;Q^2)=\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{4P_+^1}}\right\}{\displaystyle \frac{d\kappa }{2\pi }\mathrm{e}^{i\kappa xP_+}P_2|\left\{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{{}_{}{}^{Q}𝒪_{}^{T}}{{}_{}{}^{G}𝒪_{}^{T}}\right\}(\kappa ,\kappa )_{|\mu ^2=Q^2}|P_1},`$ (1)
where $`P_+=n(P_1+P_2)`$ with $`n_\mu `$ being a light cone vector. These are functions of the momentum fraction $`x`$, the longitudinal momentum fraction $`\eta >0`$ in the $`t`$ channel, called the skewedness parameter, the momentum transfer square $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2=(P_2P_1)^2`$, and they vary depending on the resolution scale $`Q^2`$. The partonic interpretation of these functions depends on the kinematical region. For the ER-BL region $`|x|<\eta `$ they behave as distribution amplitudes of meson-like states, while for the DGLAP domain $`|x|>\eta `$ they mimic the conventional probability distribution of finding a parton with a corresponding momentum and spin state that is scattered from the initial to the final state.

Now we recall the general properties of the evolution equation for SPDs,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\mathrm{ln}Q^2}}{}_{}{}^{A}q_{}^{T}(x,\eta ,\mathrm{\Delta }^2;Q^2)={\displaystyle _1^1}{\displaystyle \frac{dy}{2|\eta |}}{}_{}{}^{AA}V_{}^{T}({\displaystyle \frac{\eta +x}{2\eta }},{\displaystyle \frac{\eta +y}{2\eta }};\alpha _s(Q^2)){}_{}{}^{A}q_{}^{T}(y,\eta ,\mathrm{\Delta }^2;Q^2),`$ (2)
with the kernel $`{}_{}{}^{AA}V_{}^{T}`$ defined as a series in the coupling $`\alpha _s`$. Note, that we treat both quark and gluon cases simultaneously and that there is no mixing between them, as mentioned in the introduction, since they belong to different representations of the Lorentz group.

The evolution kernel $`{}_{}{}^{AA}V_{}^{T}(x,y)`$ with $`0x,y1`$ is of the ER-BL-type and governs the evolution of meson distribution amplitudes (formally $`|\eta |1`$). The general structure of this kernel was already studied in the past  with the main result being that the evolution kernels of skewed parton distributions can be obtained from the ER-BL ones,

$`{}_{}{}^{AA}V_{}^{T}=\theta (yx)f(x,y)+\theta (y\overline{x})g(x,y)+\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{x\overline{x}}{y\overline{y}}}\right\},\overline{x}1x,0x,y1,`$ (3)
\[here $`x`$ denotes a new variable, which differs from that one used in Eq. (2)\] by replacing the $`\theta `$ structure:

$`\theta (yx)\mathrm{\Theta }({\displaystyle \frac{\eta +x}{2\eta }},{\displaystyle \frac{\eta +y}{2\eta }})\theta \left(1{\displaystyle \frac{\eta +x}{\eta +y}}\right)\theta \left({\displaystyle \frac{\eta +x}{\eta +y}}\right)\text{sign}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\eta +y}{\eta }}\right),`$ (4)
for $`x\frac{1}{2\eta }(\eta +x)`$, and analytical continuation of the prefactors $`f`$ and $`g`$. In the gluonic case the second $`\theta `$ structure can be reduced to the first one by means of Bose symmetry, namely, $`{}_{}{}^{G}q_{}^{T}(x,\eta )={}_{}{}^{G}q_{}^{T}(x,\eta )`$, while in the quark case, we should decompose the SPD in contributions111More precisely, we should speak of (anti) quark distributions only for $`x\eta `$ and ($`x\eta `$), while there are two meson-like distributions with different symmetry in the ER-BL region. coming from quarks ($`x0`$) and anti-quarks ($`x0`$).

The evolution equation (2) can be solved by means of different methods. However, most of them are plagued by either a limitation of their applicability to a leading order (LO) analysis or a lack of sufficient accuracy in handling particular regions of the phase space. Only the orthogonal polynomial reconstruction method  and the direct numerical integration methods  allow for a generalization beyond the one-loop approximation. However, the first method suffers from numerical complications in the treatment of the transition region $`|x|=\eta `$ and, therefore, one may explore the efficiency of a direct numerical integration to overcome this particular difficulty. To do so we should separate the evolution equation into DGLAP and ER-BL regions.

In the quark sector, it proves convenient to introduce (non-) singlet like combinations of SPDs that are symmetric/antisymmetric w.r.t. the momentum fraction $`x`$:

$`{}_{}{}^{Q}q_{}^{T}(x,\eta )=\frac{1}{2}\left[{}_{}{}^{+}q_{}^{T}(x,\eta ){}_{}{}^{}q_{}^{T}(x,\eta )\right],{}_{}{}^{\pm }q_{}^{T}(x,\eta )={}_{}{}^{Q}q_{}^{T}(x,\eta ){}_{}{}^{Q}q_{}^{T}(x,\eta ).`$ (5)
Here the antiquark contribution is given by $`{}_{}{}^{Q}q_{}^{T}(x,\eta )`$ and thus $`{}_{}{}^{\pm }q_{}^{T}(x,\eta )`$ for $`x>0`$ is just the sum and difference of quark and anti-quark distributions, respectively. The kernels in the corresponding evolution equations read

$`{}_{}{}^{QQ}V_{}^{T\pm }({\displaystyle \frac{\eta +x}{2\eta }},{\displaystyle \frac{\eta +y}{2\eta }})`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Theta }({\displaystyle \frac{\eta +x}{2\eta }},{\displaystyle \frac{\eta +y}{2\eta }}){}_{}{}^{QQ}F_{}^{T\pm }({\displaystyle \frac{\eta +x}{2\eta }},{\displaystyle \frac{\eta +y}{2\eta }})+\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{xx}{yy}}\right\},`$ (6)
$`{}_{}{}^{QQ}F_{}^{T\pm }(x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`{}_{}{}^{QQ}f_{}^{T}(x,y){}_{}{}^{QQ}g_{}^{T}(\overline{x},y).`$
Based on the support and symmetry properties, we discuss now the solution of this evolution equation (2). In the following $`{}_{}{}^{\pm }q(x,\eta ,Q^2)`$ is a (anti-) symmetric skewed distribution of any species, where for gluons we formally have to take the solution for $`{}_{}{}^{}q(x,\eta ,Q^2)`$. An analogous sign convention holds true for unpolarized partons, while for longitudinal polarized ones, one should replace $`+`$. In the DGLAP region we have a homogeneous integro-differential equation,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\mathrm{ln}Q^2}}{}_{}{}^{\pm }q(x,\eta ;Q^2)_{|x|>\eta }={\displaystyle _x^1}{\displaystyle \frac{dy}{2|\eta |}}\left({}_{}{}^{\pm }F{}_{}{}^{\pm }\overline{F}\right)({\displaystyle \frac{\eta +x}{2\eta }},{\displaystyle \frac{\eta +y}{2\eta }}){}_{}{}^{\pm }q(y,\eta ;Q^2),`$ (7)
while in the ER-BL region an inhomogeneous term arises,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\mathrm{ln}Q^2}}{}_{}{}^{\pm }q(x,\eta ;Q^2)_{|x|<\eta }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{|\eta |}^{|\eta |}}{\displaystyle \frac{dy}{2|\eta |}}{}_{}{}^{\pm }V({\displaystyle \frac{\eta +x}{2\eta }},{\displaystyle \frac{\eta +y}{2\eta }}){}_{}{}^{\pm }q(y,\eta ;Q^2)+{}_{}{}^{\pm }I(x,\eta ;Q^2),`$ (8)
$`{}_{}{}^{\pm }I(x,\eta ;Q^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{|\eta |}^1}{\displaystyle \frac{dy}{2|\eta |}}\left[{}_{}{}^{\pm }F({\displaystyle \frac{\eta +x}{2\eta }},{\displaystyle \frac{\eta +y}{2\eta }}){}_{}{}^{\pm }F({\displaystyle \frac{\eta x}{2\eta }},{\displaystyle \frac{\eta +y}{2\eta }})\right]{}_{}{}^{\pm }q(y,\eta ;Q^2),`$
where we used the short-hand notation $`\overline{F}(x,y)F(\overline{x},\overline{y})`$. Introducing the kernel $`P(\frac{x}{y},\frac{\eta }{y})=\frac{y}{|\eta |}\left(F\overline{F}\right)(\frac{\eta +x}{2\eta },\frac{\eta +y}{2\eta })`$, it is obvious that equation (7) is of the DGLAP type. Since, in addition, the kernel depends on the skewedness parameter $`\eta `$, there does not exist the same factorization for the Mellin moments as in the forward case. Fortunately, this equation can be efficiently integrated by brute force . We formally write the solution of this equation as a convolution of the skewed distribution given at the input scale $`Q_0^2`$ with an evolution operator

$`q(x,\eta ;Q^2)_{|x|>\eta }={\displaystyle _{|\eta |}^1}{\displaystyle \frac{dy}{y}}U_{\mathrm{DGLAP}}(x,y,\eta ;Q^2,Q_0^2)q(y,\eta ;Q_0^2),`$ (9)
that satisfies the equation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\mathrm{ln}Q^2}}U_{\mathrm{DGLAP}}(x,z,\eta ;Q^2,Q_0^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _x^1}{\displaystyle \frac{dy}{y}}P({\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}},{\displaystyle \frac{\eta }{y}})U_{\mathrm{DGLAP}}(y,z,\eta ;Q^2,Q_0^2)`$ (10)
with the initial condition $`U_{\mathrm{DGLAP}}(x,y,\eta ;Q_0^2,Q_0^2)=\delta \left(1\frac{x}{y}\right)`$. The homogeneous part of the evolution equation (8) is precisely of the ER-BL type and its solution is

$$q^{\mathrm{hom}}(x,\eta ;Q^2)_{|x|<\eta }=_1^1𝑑yU_{\mathrm{ERBL}}(\frac{x}{\eta },y;Q^2,Q_0^2)q^{\mathrm{hom}}(\eta y,\eta ;Q_0^2),$$
(11)
with $`U_{\mathrm{ERBL}}(x,y,Q_0^2,Q_0^2)=\delta (xy)`$. A particular solution for the inhomogeneous equation is easily constructed by means of the inverse evolution operator and we obtain, together with the homogeneous part,

$`q(x,\eta ;Q^2)_{|x|<\eta }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _1^1}dyU_{\mathrm{ERBL}}({\displaystyle \frac{x}{\eta }},y;Q^2,Q_0^2)\{q(\eta y,\eta ;Q_0^2)`$ (12)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle _1^1}dz{\displaystyle _{Q_0^2}^{Q^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{dQ^2}{Q^2}}U_{\mathrm{ERBL}}^1(y,z;Q^2,Q_0^2)I(\eta z,\eta ;Q^2)\},`$
where $`I(x,\eta ;Q^2)`$ is the convolution of Eq. (8) with the solution of Eq. (9) in the DGLAP region. An important issue is to study the evolution at the point $`|x|=\eta `$. Since we have the property $`F(x=0,y)=\overline{F}(x=1,y)=0`$ in both LO and next-to-leading (NLO) \[see below Eqs. (18), (3), and (3)\], the limit $`ϵ0`$ of the evolution equations for $`x=\eta +ϵ`$ and $`x=\eta ϵ`$ will be the same. Therefore, one expects that a smooth input function will remain smooth under evolution. Nevertheless, this point necessitates care as it is a delicate point in the numerical solution of the evolution equations.

The construction of the ER-BL from the DGLAP kernels is in principle possible, provided we know the eigenfunctions of the former. In LO the exclusive kernels are diagonal w.r.t. Gegenbauer polynomials

$`{\displaystyle _1^1}{\displaystyle \frac{dx}{2|\eta |}}C_{j+3/2\nu (A)}^{\nu (A)}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x}{\eta }}\right){}_{}{}^{AA}V_{}^{(0)T}({\displaystyle \frac{\eta +x}{2\eta }},{\displaystyle \frac{\eta +y}{2\eta }})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{}_{}{}^{AA}\gamma _{j}^{(0)T}C_{j+3/2\nu (A)}^{\nu (A)}\left({\displaystyle \frac{y}{\eta }}\right),`$ (13)
where $`\nu (A)=\{\frac{3}{2},\frac{5}{2}\}`$ for $`A=\{Q,G\}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{AA}\gamma _{j}^{(0)T}`$ are the forward anomalous dimensions at LO. This fact reflects the underlying conformal symmetry at tree-level. Consequently, this symmetry allows us to reconstruct the ER-BL kernel from the DGLAP kernel by an integral transformation \[for details see second article of \], $`{}_{}{}^{AA}V_{}^{(0)T}(x,y)=_0^1𝑑zG(2x1,2y1;z|\nu (A)){}_{}{}^{AA}P_{}^{(0)T}(z)`$, where the integral kernel is given in terms of a hypergeometric function

$`G(x,y;z|\nu )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\nu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(\nu +1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2(\frac{1}{2})\mathrm{\Gamma }(2\nu )}}{\displaystyle \frac{2^{2\nu }(1x^2)^{\nu 1/2}(1z^2)}{\left[12\left(xy\sqrt{(1x^2)(1y^2)}\right)z+z^2\right]^{\nu +1}}}`$
$`\times {}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\nu +1,\nu }{2\nu }}|{\displaystyle \frac{4\sqrt{(1x^2)(1y^2)}z}{12\left(xy\sqrt{(1x^2)(1y^2)}\right)z+z^2}}\right).`$
Note that, in any order of perturbation theory, the evolution operator in the ER-BL region can be represented in terms of an infinite series of Gegenbauer polynomials . Unfortunately, since in general a SPD does not vanish at the point $`x=\pm \eta `$, it is expected that, to achieve a good approximation, a large number of terms in this expansion is needed. Fortunately, we can resum the Gegenbauer expansion in the ER-BL region which provides us the integral transformation, mentioned above, of the evolution operator in the forward region

$`U_{\mathrm{ERBL}}(x,y;Q^2,Q_0^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^1}dzG(x,y,z|\nu (A))U_{\mathrm{DGLAP}}(z,z^{}=1,\eta =0;Q^2,Q_0^2),`$ (15)
where $`G(x,y;z|\nu )`$ is the kernel defined in Eq. (2). Beyond the LO approximation, one can perturbatively expand the solution with the help of this evolution operator. From the representation of this operator in terms of Gegenbauer polynomials it is obvious that the inverse operator is $`U_{\mathrm{ERBL}}^1(x,y;Q^2,Q_0^2)=U_{\mathrm{ERBL}}(x,y;Q_0^2,Q^2)`$.

Let us add that in the forward case, i.e. $`P_2|P_1|`$, Eqs. (1) define the chiral odd quark density and the tensor gluon density times the momentum fraction $`z`$, thus, we have the limit of the splitting functions:

$`\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{{}_{}{}^{QQ}P_{}^{T}}{{}_{}{}^{GG}P_{}^{T}}}\right\}(z)=\mathrm{LIM}\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{{}_{}{}^{QQ}V_{}^{T}}{{}_{}{}^{GG}V_{}^{T}}}\right\}(x,y)\underset{\eta 0}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{|\eta |}}\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{{}_{}{}^{QQ}V_{}^{T}}{\frac{1}{z}{}_{}{}^{GG}V_{}^{T}}}\right\}({\displaystyle \frac{z}{\eta }},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\eta }}),`$ (16)
which will be of relevance to the analysis in the following section.

## 3 Construction of two-loop kernels.

Since the extension of the ER-BL kernel to the whole region is unique , it is sufficient to construct the evolution kernels,

$${}_{}{}^{AA}V_{}^{T}(x,y)=\frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }{}_{}{}^{AA}V_{}^{T(0)}(x,y)+\left(\frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }\right)^2{}_{}{}^{AA}V_{}^{T(1)}(x,y)+𝒪\left(\alpha _s^3\right),$$
(17)
in the ER-BL-region. The one loop kernels have been obtained by a direct calculation . Alternatively, they can be deduced by means of conformal covariance (13) from the forward kernels via the integral transformation (2):

$$\left\{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{{}_{}{}^{QQ}V_{}^{T(0)}}{{}_{}{}^{GG}V_{}^{T(0)}}\right\}=\left\{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{C_F}{C_A}\right\}\left[\theta (yx)\left\{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{{}_{}{}^{QQ}f_{}^{T}}{{}_{}{}^{GG}f_{}^{T}}\right\}+\left\{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{x\overline{x}}{y\overline{y}}\right\}\right]_+\frac{1}{2}\left\{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{{}_{}{}^{QQ}\gamma _{0}^{T(0)}}{{}_{}{}^{GG}\gamma _{1}^{T(0)}}\right\}\delta (xy),$$
(18)
where

$${}_{}{}^{QQ}f_{}^{T}{}_{}{}^{QQ}f_{}^{b}=\frac{x}{y}\frac{1}{yx},{}_{}{}^{QQ}\gamma _{0}^{T(0)}=C_F,{}_{}{}^{GG}f_{}^{T}{}_{}{}^{GG}f_{}^{b}=\frac{x^2}{y^2}\frac{1}{yx},{}_{}{}^{GG}\gamma _{1}^{T(0)}=6C_A+\beta _0.$$
(19)
Here the +-prescription is defined for both channels in the same way, namely as $`[V(x,y)]_+=V(x,y)\delta (xy)_1^1𝑑zV(z,y)`$. As explained in great detail in , in NLO conformal covariance does not hold true anymore for the minimal subtraction (MS) scheme in the dimensional regularized theory. Besides a symmetry breaking term proportional to the QCD $`\beta `$-function, there appears an additional term which is induced by the leading order anomaly in the special conformal transformations of conformal operators. Note, that the latter anomalies are renormalization scheme dependent even in one-loop approximation. Next, the results for the local conformal operators in the MS scheme can be transformed to the kernels, which have the following structure in NLO:

$`{}_{}{}^{AA}V_{}^{T(1)}={}_{}{}^{AA}\dot{V}_{}^{T}\left({}_{}{}^{AA}V_{}^{T(0)}+{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _0}{2}}\text{1}\text{l}\right)\left[{}_{}{}^{AA}g_{}^{T}\underset{\text{}}{}{}_{}{}^{AA}V_{}^{T(0)}\right]+{}_{}{}^{AA}𝒟_{}^{T},`$ (20)
where the commutator stands for $`[A\underset{\text{}}{}B](x,y)=_0^1𝑑z\left\{A(x,z)B(z,y)B(x,z)A(z,y)\right\}`$. The off-diagonal part w.r.t. Gegenbauer polynomials is contained in the first two convolutions on the r.h.s. of this equation. The third term, i.e. $`{}_{}{}^{AA}𝒟_{}^{T}`$, is diagonal w.r.t. Gegenbauer polynomials with index $`\nu (A)=\{\frac{3}{2},\frac{5}{2}\}`$ for $`A=\{Q,G\}`$. The dotted kernel is derived from the LO ones via a logarithmic modification,

$`{}_{}{}^{QQ}\dot{V}_{}^{T(0)}`$ $`=`$ $`C_F\theta (yx){\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{yx}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}}+\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{x\overline{x}}{y\overline{y}}}\right\},`$ (21)
$`{}_{}{}^{GG}\dot{V}_{}^{T(0)}`$ $`=`$ $`C_A\theta (yx){\displaystyle \frac{x^2}{y^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{yx}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}}+\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{x\overline{x}}{y\overline{y}}}\right\}.`$ (22)
The $`g`$-kernels, meanwhile, contain new information and are defined by

$`{}_{}{}^{QQ}g_{}^{T}`$ $`=`$ $`C_F\left[\theta (yx){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}\left(1\frac{x}{y}\right)}{yx}}+\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{x\overline{x}}{y\overline{y}}}\right\}\right]_+,`$ (23)
$`{}_{}{}^{GG}g_{}^{T}`$ $`=`$ $`C_A\left[\theta (yx)\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}\left(1\frac{x}{y}\right)}{yx}}2{\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}}\right)+\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{x\overline{x}}{y\overline{y}}}\right\}\right]_+.`$ (24)
In contrast to the $`QQ`$-kernel, which is unique in all sectors , the $`GG`$-kernel differs from those in the chiral even case by the term $`2C_A\frac{x}{y}`$ .

Since it is difficult to project onto the off-diagonal part and apply the integral transformation to the NLO DGLAP kernel , we use another strategy for the construction of the remaining diagonal term, $`𝒟`$. This term is decomposed into a contribution related to the crossed-ladder diagram containing dilogarithms, $`G`$, and a remainder $`D`$ which is, for the present helicity-flip sector, given as a linear combination of one-loop kernels,

$`\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{{}_{}{}^{QQ}𝒟_{}^{T}}{{}_{}{}^{GG}𝒟_{}^{T}}}\right\}(x,y)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{C_F\left(C_F\frac{C_A}{2}\right)\left[{}_{}{}^{QQ}G_{}^{T}(x,y)\right]_+}{C_A^2\left[{}_{}{}^{GG}G_{}^{T}(x,y)\right]_+}}\right\}+\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{{}_{}{}^{QQ}D_{}^{T}}{{}_{}{}^{GG}D_{}^{T}}}\right\}(x,y).`$ (25)
In the following the $`G^T`$ kernels are defined as

$${}_{}{}^{AA}G_{}^{T}(x,y)=\theta (yx)\left({}_{}{}^{AA}h_{}^{T}+\mathrm{\Delta }{}_{}{}^{AA}h_{}^{T}\right)(x,y)+\theta (y\overline{x})\left({}_{}{}^{AA}\overline{h}_{}^{T}+\mathrm{\Delta }{}_{}{}^{AA}\overline{h}_{}^{T}\right)(x,y),$$
(26)
where

$`{}_{}{}^{AA}h_{}^{T}`$ $`=`$ $`2{}_{}{}^{AA}\overline{f}_{}^{T}\mathrm{ln}\overline{x}\mathrm{ln}y2{}_{}{}^{AA}f_{}^{T}\left[\mathrm{Li}_2(x)+\mathrm{Li}_2(\overline{y})\right],`$ (27)
$`{}_{}{}^{AA}\overline{h}_{}^{T}`$ $`=`$ $`\left({}_{}{}^{AA}f_{}^{T}{}_{}{}^{AA}\overline{f}_{}^{T}\right)\left[2\mathrm{L}\mathrm{i}_2\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}}\right)+\mathrm{ln}^2y\right]+2{}_{}{}^{AA}f_{}^{T}\left[\mathrm{Li}_2(\overline{y})\mathrm{ln}x\mathrm{ln}y\right]+2{}_{}{}^{AA}\overline{f}_{}^{T}\mathrm{Li}_2(\overline{x}).`$
Here the $`QQ`$ kernel follows from the explicit flavor non-singlet two-loop result in the chiral even sector  by replacing $`{}_{}{}^{QQ}f_{}^{\mathrm{NS}}{}_{}{}^{QQ}f_{}^{T}`$, with the addenda $`\mathrm{\Delta }{}_{}{}^{QQ}h_{}^{T}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }{}_{}{}^{QQ}\overline{h}_{}^{T}`$ being zero. Note that we rewrote the original result in such a way that both $`\theta `$-contributions are symmetric with respect to the weight function $`x\overline{x}`$, i.e. $`y\overline{y}{}_{}{}^{QQ}h_{}^{T}(x,y)=x\overline{x}{}_{}{}^{QQ}h_{}^{T}(\overline{y},\overline{x})`$ and $`y\overline{y}{}_{}{}^{QQ}\overline{h}_{}^{T}(x,y)=x\overline{x}{}_{}{}^{QQ}\overline{h}_{}^{T}(y,x)`$. Now it can be verified that both parts are separately diagonal w.r.t. Gegenbauer polynomials.

Since the two-loop crossed-ladder diagram contains only a simple pole in the dimensional regularization parameter, the $`𝒩=1`$ supersymmetric constraints on the level of local operators lead to the equality of chiral odd quark and tensor gluon anomalous dimensions $`{}_{}{}^{QQ}\gamma _{j}^{T+}={}_{}{}^{GG}\gamma _{j}^{T}`$ . From this constraint one can derive a relation between the momentum fraction kernels which reads \[for details see \]:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{y}}{}_{}{}^{QQ}G_{}^{T}(x,y)+{\displaystyle \frac{}{x}}{}_{}{}^{GG}G_{}^{T}(x,y)=0.`$ (28)
Taking the generic form (26) for $`{}_{}{}^{AA}G_{}^{T}(x,y)`$, this differential equation and the symmetry requirements imply the following form of the gluonic addenda (the remaining degree of freedom is fixed by the diagonality of the lowest moments):

$$\mathrm{\Delta }{}_{}{}^{GG}h_{}^{T}(x,y)=\frac{2x}{y^2\overline{y}}\frac{2\overline{x}}{y^2\overline{y}}\mathrm{ln}\overline{x}\frac{2x}{y\overline{y}^2}\mathrm{ln}y,\mathrm{\Delta }{}_{}{}^{GG}\overline{h}_{}^{T}(x,y)=\mathrm{\Delta }{}_{}{}^{GG}h_{}^{T}(\overline{x},y).$$
(29)
The missing diagonal $`{}_{}{}^{AA}D_{}^{T}`$ terms are easily obtained in the DGLAP representation by taking the forward limit and comparison with the two-loop results , namely,

$${}_{}{}^{AA}D_{}^{T}(z)={}_{}{}^{AA}\dot{P}_{}^{T}(z)\mathrm{LIM}\left\{{}_{}{}^{AA}\dot{V}_{}^{T}\stackrel{\mathrm{e}}{}\left({}_{}{}^{AA}V_{}^{(0)T}+\frac{\beta _0}{2}\text{1}\text{l}\right)\left[{}_{}{}^{AA}g_{}^{T}\underset{,}{\overset{\mathrm{e}}{}}{}_{}{}^{AA}V_{}^{(0)T}\right]_{}\frac{1}{2}G\text{-terms}\right\}.$$

Since the result is expressed in terms of LO splitting functions, we can easily restore the ER-BL representation from them222Note that the last term in the $`QQ`$ channel was missed in the second article of Ref. .:

$`{}_{}{}^{QQ}D_{}^{T}(x,y)=`$ $``$ $`C_F\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}C_F+{\displaystyle \frac{5}{6}}\beta _0\right){}_{}{}^{QQ}v_{}^{b}(x,y)`$ (30)
$``$ $`C_F\left(C_F{\displaystyle \frac{C_A}{2}}\right)\left\{{}_{}{}^{QQ}v_{}^{a}(x,y){}_{}{}^{QQ}v_{}^{a}(\overline{x},y)+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}{}_{}{}^{QQ}v_{}^{b}(x,y)\right\},`$
$`{}_{}{}^{GG}D_{}^{T}(x,y)=`$ $``$ $`C_FT_FN_f\{{}_{}{}^{GG}v_{}^{a}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{}_{}{}^{GG}v_{}^{c}](x,y)+\beta _0C_A\{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{8}}{}_{}{}^{GG}v_{}^{a}{\displaystyle \frac{5}{6}}{}_{}{}^{GG}v_{}^{b}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{}_{}{}^{GG}v_{}^{c}\}(x,y)`$
$`+`$ $`C_A^2\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{13}{8}}{}_{}{}^{GG}v_{}^{a}{\displaystyle \frac{11}{6}}{}_{}{}^{GG}v_{}^{b}+{\displaystyle \frac{13}{12}}{}_{}{}^{GG}v_{}^{c}\right\}(x,y),`$
where the $`b`$-kernel has been defined above in Eq. (19) and the $`a`$\- and $`c`$-kernels are given by

$`{}_{}{}^{QQ}v_{}^{a}={\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}},{}_{}{}^{GG}v_{}^{a}={\displaystyle \frac{x^2}{y^2}},{}_{}{}^{GG}v_{}^{c}={\displaystyle \frac{x^2}{y^2}}\left(2\overline{x}y+yx\right).`$ (31)
Contributions concentrated in $`x=y`$ will be restored below.

It remains to perform the exclusive convolution. For two non-regularized kernels given by their functions $`f_i(x,y)`$ with $`i=\{1,2\}`$ we have

$$\left(v_1v_2\right)(x,y)=\theta (yx)\left(f_1f_2\right)(x,y)+\left\{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{x\overline{x}}{y\overline{y}}\right\},$$
(32)
where

$$\left(f_1f_2\right)(x,y)=_x^y𝑑zf_1(x,z)f_2(z,y)+_y^1𝑑zf_1(x,z)f_2(\overline{z},\overline{y})+_0^x𝑑zf_1(\overline{x},\overline{z})f_2(z,y).$$
(33)
The convolution of two regularized kernels is slightly more involved. Here we define:

$`\left(\left[v_1\right]_+\left[v_2\right]_+\right)(x,y)=\left[\theta (yx)\left(f_1f_2\right)(x,y)+\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{x\overline{x}}{y\overline{y}}}\right\}\right]_+,`$ (34)
where the convolution on the r.h.s. can be decomposed into well-defined integrals

$`\left(f_1f_2\right)(x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _x^y}𝑑z\left\{\left[f_1(x,z)f_1(x,y)\right]\left[f_2(z,y)f_2(x,y)\right]+\left[f_1(x,z)f_1(\overline{z},\overline{x})\right]f_2(x,y)\right\}`$ (35)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle _y^1}𝑑z\left\{\left[f_1(x,z)f_1(x,y)\right]f_2(\overline{z},\overline{y})\left[f_1(\overline{z},\overline{x})f_1(x,y)\right]f_2(x,y)\right\}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^x}𝑑z\left\{\left[f_1(\overline{x},\overline{z})f_1(x,y)\right]\left[f_2(z,y)f_2(x,y)\right]+\left[f_1(\overline{x},\overline{z})f_1(z,x)\right]f_2(x,y)\right\}`$
$``$ $`f_1(x,y)f_2(x,y).`$
Performing the exclusive convolution in Eq. (20) and adding the diagonal terms given in Eqs. (25)– (27), (29), and (30), the $`QQ`$ and $`GG`$ transversity kernels in NLO are found to be:

$`{}_{}{}^{QQ}V_{}^{(1)T\pm }`$ $`=`$ $`\left[\theta (yx){}_{}{}^{QQ}_{}^{T\pm }(x,y)+C_F^2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{ln}\overline{x}\mathrm{ln}x}{y}}+\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{x\overline{x}}{y\overline{y}}}\right\}\right]_+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{}_{}{}^{QQ}\gamma _{0}^{(1)T\pm }\delta (xy),`$ (36)
$`{}_{}{}^{GG}V_{}^{(1)T}`$ $`=`$ $`\left[\theta (yx){}_{}{}^{GG}_{}^{T}(x,y)+C_A^2\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{x(\overline{y}y)}{y\overline{y}}}\mathrm{ln}x+{\displaystyle \frac{x+y}{y^2}}\mathrm{ln}x\mathrm{ln}\overline{x}\right\}+\left\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{x\overline{x}}{y\overline{y}}}\right\}\right]_+`$ (37)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{}_{}{}^{GG}\gamma _{1}^{(1)T}\delta (xy),`$
where

$`{}_{}{}^{QQ}_{}^{T\pm }(x,y)`$
$`=C_F^2\left\{2\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\zeta (2)\right){}_{}{}^{QQ}f_{}^{T}{}_{}{}^{QQ}f_{}^{T}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}}\right)\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}}({}_{}{}^{QQ}f_{}^{T}{}_{}{}^{QQ}\overline{f}_{}^{T})\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}}\mathrm{ln}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}}\right)\right\}`$
$`C_F\left(C_F{\displaystyle \frac{C_A}{2}}\right)\left\{(11){}_{}{}^{QQ}f_{}^{a}+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}{}_{}{}^{QQ}f_{}^{T}+{}_{}{}^{QQ}h_{}^{T}(x,y){}_{}{}^{QQ}\overline{h}_{}^{T}(\overline{x},y)\right\}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}C_F\beta _0\left({\displaystyle \frac{5}{3}}+\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}}\right){}_{}{}^{QQ}f_{}^{T},`$ (38)
$`{}_{}{}^{GG}_{}^{T}(x,y)`$
$`=C_A^2\{2({\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\zeta (2)){}_{}{}^{GG}f_{}^{T}+{}_{}{}^{GG}f_{}^{T}\mathrm{ln}^2{\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}}({}_{}{}^{GG}f_{}^{T}{}_{}{}^{GG}\overline{f}_{}^{T})\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}}\mathrm{ln}(1{\displaystyle \frac{x}{y}})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{13}{4}}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}{}_{}{}^{GG}f_{}^{c}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{}_{}{}^{GG}f_{}^{a}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{}_{}{}^{GG}h_{}^{T}(x,y){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{}_{}{}^{GG}\overline{h}_{}^{T}(\overline{x},y)\mathrm{\Delta }{}_{}{}^{GG}h_{}^{T}(x,y)\}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}C_A\beta _0\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}{}_{}{}^{GG}f_{}^{a}{\displaystyle \frac{5}{3}}{}_{}{}^{GG}f_{}^{T}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{}_{}{}^{GG}f_{}^{c}\right\}C_FN_fT_F\left\{{}_{}{}^{GG}f_{}^{a}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{}_{}{}^{GG}f_{}^{c}\right\}.`$ (39)
The contributions concentrated on the diagonal $`x=y`$ are fixed by the lowest conformal moment. We have in the $`QQ`$ and $`GG`$ channels:

$`{}_{}{}^{QQ}\gamma _{0}^{(1)T\pm }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{19}{12}}C_F^2{\displaystyle \frac{13}{12}}C_F\beta _0C_F\left(C_F{\displaystyle \frac{C_A}{2}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{19}{3}}+(1\pm 1)\left[78\zeta (2)+4\zeta (3)\right]\right),`$
$`{}_{}{}^{GG}\gamma _{1}^{(1)T}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{19}{4}}C_A^2{\displaystyle \frac{9}{4}}C_AN_f+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}C_FN_f.`$ (40)
Finally, we derive the NLO skewed DGLAP kernels in Radyushkin’s notation with fraction $`z=\frac{x+\eta }{1+\eta }`$ (here $`x`$ denotes the momentum fraction in the SPDs) and skewedness $`\zeta =\frac{2\eta }{1+\eta }`$. These kernels govern the evolution of SPDs in the kinematic range of $`\zeta <z<1`$ and $`1+\zeta <z<0`$. We choose this set of variables such that we have the closest resemblance to the usual DGLAP kinematics. In fact for DVCS and vector meson production $`\zeta =x_{\mathrm{Bj}}`$ up to terms $`\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }^2}{Q^2}`$! The derivation procedure follows that of the forward limit reduction of the extended ER-BL kernels. After the analytical continuation of the ER-BL kernels to the whole $`\{x,y\}`$ plane by the replacement of the $`\theta `$-function structure, we derive the kernels in the following way which is suggested by the non-zero support of the $`\theta `$-functions after the replacement $`x\frac{z}{\zeta }`$, $`\overline{x}1\frac{z}{\zeta }`$, $`y\frac{1}{\zeta }`$ and $`\overline{y}1\frac{1}{\zeta }`$ for the above mentioned kinematical regime:

$$P^T(z,\zeta )=\frac{1}{\zeta }\left\{{}_{}{}^{AA}V_{}^{T}(\frac{z}{\zeta },\frac{1}{\zeta }){}_{}{}^{AA}V_{}^{T}(1\frac{z}{\zeta },1\frac{1}{\zeta })\right\}.$$
(41)
Note again that we omitted the additional factor of $`z^1`$ in the $`GG`$ kernel so as to take into account that in the forward limit, the skewed gluon distribution turns into $`zG(z,Q^2)`$ rather than $`G(z,Q^2)`$.

The results for the chiral odd DGLAP kernels in LO, following our above prescription, are:

$${}_{}{}^{QQ}p_{}^{T}=\frac{1+z}{\overline{z}}\frac{1}{\overline{\zeta }},{}_{}{}^{GG}p_{}^{T}=\frac{(1+z)z}{\overline{z}}+\frac{1\zeta z}{\overline{\zeta }^2}\frac{1+\zeta +z}{\overline{\zeta }},$$
(42)
and in NLO:

$`{}_{}{}^{QQ}P_{}^{T(1)\pm }(z,\zeta )`$ $`=`$ $`C_F^2\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}({}_{}{}^{QQ}p_{}^{T}{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta }{\overline{\zeta }}})\mathrm{ln}(1{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }}})[\mathrm{ln}(1{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }}}){\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}]+{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\overline{z}}}\mathrm{ln}z(\mathrm{ln}z{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}})`$ (43)
$`{}_{}{}^{QQ}p_{}^{T}[\mathrm{ln}(1{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }}})\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }}}\right)+\mathrm{ln}\overline{z}\mathrm{ln}z]+({\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}2\zeta (2)){}_{}{}^{QQ}p_{}^{T}\}`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}C_F\beta _0\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{5}{3}}{}_{}{}^{QQ}p_{}^{T}+{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\overline{z}}}\mathrm{ln}z+\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{z}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{\zeta }}}\right)\mathrm{ln}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }}}\right)\right\}`$
$``$ $`C_F\left(C_F{\displaystyle \frac{C_A}{2}}\right)\left\{(11){}_{}{}^{QQ}p_{}^{a}+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}{}_{}{}^{QQ}p_{}^{T}+{}_{}{}^{QQ}h_{}^{T}{}_{}{}^{QQ}\overline{h}_{}^{T}\right\},`$
$`{}_{}{}^{GG}P_{}^{T}(z,\zeta )`$ $`=`$ $`C_A^2\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}^2(1{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }}})({}_{}{}^{GG}p_{}^{T}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}+\zeta (1+z)}{\overline{\zeta }}}z+{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }^2}})+{\displaystyle \frac{13}{4}}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}{}_{}{}^{GG}p_{}^{c}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{}_{}{}^{GG}p_{}^{a})`$ (44)
$`2{\displaystyle \frac{\zeta }{\overline{\zeta }}}\left(\zeta {\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }}}+{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\overline{\zeta }}}\mathrm{ln}z\overline{\zeta }\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }}}\right)\mathrm{ln}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }}}\right)\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{z^2}{\overline{z}}}\mathrm{ln}^2z+\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}2\zeta (2)\right){}_{}{}^{GG}p_{}^{T}`$
$`{}_{}{}^{GG}p_{}^{T}(\mathrm{ln}(1{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }}})\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }}}\right)+\mathrm{ln}\overline{z}\mathrm{ln}z){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{}_{}{}^{GG}h_{}^{T}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{}_{}{}^{GG}\overline{h}_{}^{T}\}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}C_A\beta _0\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}{}_{}{}^{GG}p_{}^{a}{\displaystyle \frac{5}{3}}{}_{}{}^{GG}p_{}^{T}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{}_{}{}^{GG}p_{}^{c}\right\}C_FN_fT_F\left\{{}_{}{}^{GG}p_{}^{a}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{}_{}{}^{GG}p_{}^{c}\right\},`$
where one has to regularize the whole kernel with the $`+`$-prescription and add the end-point contribution $`\frac{1}{2}{}_{}{}^{QQ}\gamma _{0}^{(i)T\pm }\delta (1z)`$ and $`\frac{1}{2}{}_{}{}^{GG}\gamma _{i}^{(i)T}\delta (1z)`$ specified earlier. The $`{}_{}{}^{AA}h_{}^{T}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{AA}\overline{h}_{}^{T}`$ functions are given by the equations

$`{}_{}{}^{AA}h_{}^{T}`$ $`=`$ $`2{}_{}{}^{AA}p_{}^{T}(z,\zeta )\left[\mathrm{ln}\zeta \mathrm{ln}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }}}\right)+\mathrm{Li}_2\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\zeta }}\right)\mathrm{Li}_2\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\zeta }}\right)\zeta (2)\right]`$
$`+`$ $`2{}_{}{}^{AA}k_{1}^{T}(z,\zeta )\left[\mathrm{ln}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }}}\right)\left(\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{z}{\zeta }}\right)\mathrm{ln}\zeta \right)2\left(\mathrm{Li}_2\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\zeta }}\right)\mathrm{Li}_2\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\zeta }}\right)\right)\right]`$
$`{}_{}{}^{AA}\overline{h}_{}^{T}`$ $`=`$ $`2{}_{}{}^{AA}p_{}^{T}(\zeta z,\zeta )[\mathrm{ln}\zeta \mathrm{ln}(1{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }}})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}\overline{\zeta }(\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{z}{\zeta }}\right)+\mathrm{ln}z\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\zeta }}{\zeta }}\right))+\mathrm{Li}_2(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\zeta }})`$ (45)
$`\mathrm{Li}_2(1{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\zeta }})\zeta (2)\mathrm{ln}(\overline{\zeta }+z)(\mathrm{ln}(1{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }}})+\mathrm{ln}z)\mathrm{Li}_2(\zeta z)\mathrm{Li}_2({\displaystyle \frac{z}{\overline{\zeta }}})]`$
$`+`$ $`2{}_{}{}^{AA}k_{2}^{T}(z,\zeta )\left[\mathrm{ln}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }}}\right)\left(\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{z}{\zeta }}\right)\mathrm{ln}\zeta \right)2\left(\mathrm{Li}_2\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\zeta }}\right)\mathrm{Li}_2\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\zeta }}\right)\right)\right].`$
The remaining skewed kernels appearing in the above formulae read

$${}_{}{}^{QQ}p_{}^{a}=\frac{\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }},{}_{}{}^{GG}p_{}^{a}=2\frac{z\overline{z}}{\overline{\zeta }^2}\frac{\zeta }{\overline{\zeta }^2}(1z^2),{}_{}{}^{GG}p_{}^{c}=\frac{\overline{z}^3}{\overline{\zeta }^2},$$
(46)
and the $`{}_{}{}^{AA}k_{i}^{T}`$ were found to be:

$${}_{}{}^{QQ}k_{1}^{T}=\frac{z}{\overline{z}},{}_{}{}^{QQ}k_{2}^{T}=\frac{z}{\overline{\zeta }(\overline{\zeta }+z)},{}_{}{}^{GG}k_{1}^{T}=\frac{z^2}{\overline{z}},{}_{}{}^{GG}k_{2}^{T}=\frac{z^2}{\overline{\zeta }^2(\overline{\zeta }+z)}.$$
(47)
Note, that we have included the addenda of the skewed $`G`$-functions in the single logs and the rational functions of the respective colour structures in the kernels so as to simplify the overall presentation of the results.

## 4 Conclusion.

In conclusion, we have presented a calculation of the two-loop exclusive evolution kernels for skewed chiral odd quark and tensor gluon distributions, thus allowing for NLO analysis of the cross sections where these functions contribute. Our modus operandi is based on the formalism developed previously in Refs.  for vector and axial sectors. Due to chirality conservation only the helicity flip gluon SPD shows up in the DVCS cross section. A peculiar azimuthal angle dependence of asymmetries on the nucleon target  will give an opportunity to pin down the magnitude of the gluon SPD provided high accuracy data will be available. This will shed some light on the unknown tensor gluon content of the nucleon or higher spin hadrons.

A.B. would like to thank A. Schäfer for the hospitality extended to him at the Institut für Theoretische Physik, Universität Regensburg. This work was supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, in part by the National Science Foundation, under grant PHY9722101 and Graduiertenkolleg Erlangen-Regensburg (A.B.), by the DFG and the BMBF (D.M.), and by the E.U. contract FMRX-CT98-0194 (A.F.).