format: text

text:
# PHYSICAL PARAMETERS OF ERUPTING LUMINOUS BLUE VARIABLES: NGC 2363-V1 CAUGHT IN THE ACTBased on observations with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, obtained at the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by AURA, Inc., under NASA contract NAS5-26555.

## 1 INTRODUCTION

Luminous Blue variables (LBVs) are evolved massive stars which display photometric and spectroscopic variability with different timescales and amplitudes. Although LBVs show micro-variations ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$mag $``$ 0.1-0.3 mag; $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$t $``$ days-months) like other supergiants, it is their moderate “excursions” ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$mag $``$ 1-2 mag at constant $`M_{bol}`$; $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$t $``$ years) and giant eruptions ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$mag $`>`$ 3 mag with an increase in $`M_{bol}`$; $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$t $``$ years - decades) that define them as a class. They are found in the upper left section of the H-R diagram, having $`M_{bol}9`$ and log ($`T_{eff}`$) $``$ 4.1 (except during an eruption when their surface temperature often drops to log ($`T_{eff}`$) $``$ 3.85). LBVs are often, but not always, surrounded by a small (1-3 pc) nebula resulting from a giant eruption. We refer the reader to Humphreys & Davidson (1994) and Nota & Lamers (1997) for comprehensive, recent reviews on the subject. Although it is now widely accepted that the LBV phenomenon represents a normal yet unstable evolutionary phase in the life of the most massive stars, the exact mechanism leading to the major eruptions is still unknown. This lack of understanding is due in part to the problems involved in the theoretical modeling of the eruption phenomenon (Stothers 1999b), but also to the rarity of such events which has until recently prevented us from determining the physical parameters of an LBV during an eruption.

In 1996, we reported the discovery of a bright variable star in the giant extragalactic H ii region NGC 2363 (Drissen, Roy & Robert 1996, 1997, hereafter DRR97). This star, known as NGC 2363-V1 (hereafter V1), was first noticed in HST/WFPC2 images. An archival search for ground-based images allowed us to determine that this star was below the detection limit in 1991 and 1992 ($`V21.5`$), but became visible in late 1993. In early 1995, it became the brightest star in its galaxy, with $`V=18.0`$ mag. The photometric behavior, absolute magnitude and the presence in its spectrum of a strong H$`\alpha `$ emission line suggested that V1 is an LBV currently experiencing a major eruption event.

The host of the current LBV event is the giant H ii region NGC 2363, located at the end of the bar in the Magellanic galaxy NGC 2366 (D = 3.44 Mpc; Tolstoy et al. 1995). The metallicity of NGC 2363 has generally been determined to be close to that of the SMC (Gonzalez-Delgado et al. 1994), but Luridiana, Peimbert & Leitherer (1999) suggest that the metallicity of this region has been underestimated, and that a value of $`Z=0.25Z_{}`$ would give a better fit to the observed line ratios. A detailed study of the stellar content of NGC 2363 (Drissen et al. 2000) reveals that two clusters of different ages are responsible for the ionization of the nebula. The main contributor is a very young (1 Myr or less), dense cluster of massive stars still embedded in their natal molecular cloud. V1 is a member of the second cluster, which is between 3 and 5 Myr old and contains 3 Wolf-Rayet stars.

Given the importance of this star in our understanding of the LBV phenomenon, we proposed a spectroscopic and photometric follow-up of V1 with the Hubble Space Telescope. This project was granted the long-term status for cycles 7 to 9 (GO- 7391, 8403 and 8781). We present in this paper an analysis of HST/STIS spectrograms obtained in 1997 November and 1999 July, covering the wavelength range 1180 Å to 1$`\mu `$m, supplemented by ground-based and HST photometry. We present our new observations in $`\mathrm{\S }`$ 2 and produce a quantitative analysis with the non-LTE line blanketed code of Hillier & Miller (1998) in $`\mathrm{\S }`$ 3. A plethora of Fe ii lines in the UV and optical spectrum of V1 permits an estimate of the heavy metal content for NGC 2363. Our results are discussed in $`\mathrm{\S }`$ 4, with conclusions reached in $`\mathrm{\S }`$ 5.

## 2 OBSERVATIONS

DRR97 published a light curve of NGC 2363-V1 between 1991–1996 revealing a dramatic increase of $``$3.5 mag in brightness, although no color information was available. In this section, we present recent HST/WFPC2 and ground-based imaging, plus HST/STIS spectroscopy.

### 2.1 Photometry

UBVRI images of V1 were obtained on the night of 1998 January 14/15 with the 4.2 m William Herschel Telescope (WHT) on La Palma, Canary Islands. The Cassegrain auxiliary port was used with a Tektronix $`1024\times 1024`$ CCD ($`0.^{\prime \prime }11`$/pixel). The exposure times were 300 s at BVRI and 600 s at $`U`$. The seeing was measured to be $`0.9`$$`1^{\prime \prime }.0`$, sufficient to resolve V1 from the nearby H ii region. Landolt (1992) standard star fields (98 624, 98 626 and 98 634) were also observed to provide the zero point calibration for the V1 images.

Accurate magnitudes for V1 are impossible to obtain using conventional aperture photometry because of severe contamination from the nearby H ii region. The following approach was therefore adopted. Magnitudes were measured using a 35 pixel aperture with DAOPHOT (Stetson 1987) for several isolated stars in the same frames as V1. The same stars and V1 were then measured using a much smaller aperture of 3.5 pixels, and sky inner and outer radii of 4 and 7 pixels. These values were chosen to minimize the H ii region contamination. The UBVRI magnitudes of V1 were then determined by assuming that the same fraction of light has been excluded from the smaller apertures for all the measured stars.

We also obtained WFPC2 photometry with the F170W, F336W, F547M and F1042M filters on 1998 March and December, 1999 November and 2000 February. The images were processed with the standard pipeline and aperture photometry of V1 was performed with DAOPHOT. The prescriptions given by Whitmore (1995) and Holtzman et al. (1995) were then followed to transform the instrumental magnitudes into the Johnson system.

Finally, near-infrared imagery of NGC 2363 were obtained in 1997 January by D. Devost and R. Doyon with the Monica Camera attached to the Canada-France-Hawaii telescope, which is described in more details in Drissen et al. (2000). From these observations, we get J=17.6 ($`\pm 0.1`$), H = 17.2 ($`\pm 0.1`$) and K = 16.9 ($`\pm 0.2`$). These values are slightly fainter than the predicted magnitudes based on the models described in the next sections (J = 17.1, H = 16.9 and K = 16.7), indicating that cold dust has not yet formed in the stellar outflow.

The results of all photometric measurements are given in Table 1. The agreement between the ground-based and HST March data (taken 6 weeks apart) is very good in the V band, but the difference in U (0.6 mag) is significant. An updated light curve with the new data (in the V band) is shown in Figure 1. After the original outburst in 1993–1995, the brightness increase has been much more modest, though constant during 1996–1997, with a rate of $`0.2`$ mag per year, as if the star had reached a state of quasi-equilibrium. The 1998-2000 photometric observations suggest a small, but comparable, faintening in the V band. The WFPC2 data also indicate that V1 brightened by $`0.3`$ mag at 170 nm between 1998 March and 2000 February; during the same period, it faded by about the same amount at 1 $`\mu `$m.

### 2.2 Spectroscopy

We obtained HST/STIS spectra of NGC 2363-V1 in 1997 November and 1999 July, using the MAMA detectors short ward of 3000Å and the CCDs at longer wavelengths. Because of the sensitivity of the MAMA detectors to high radiation levels in the South Atlantic Anomaly, the 1997 optical and UV spectrograms of V1 had to be acquired on separate occasions three weeks apart (November 2 and 21). Given the relative photometric stability of V1 between 1997 November and 1998 December, we do not expect that the spectroscopic appearance of the star has significantly changed during this short interval. In 1999, the optical and UV spectra were obtained 2 days apart. The following gratings were used: G140L (160 minutes) and G230L (90 minutes) with the MAMA detector; G430L (50 minute exposure), G750L (35 minutes) and G750M (H$`\alpha `$, medium resolution; 50 minutes) with the CCD detector. The 0.2 arcsecond-wide slit was used in all cases, which corresponds to a linear scale of 3 pc at the distance of NGC 2366.

Because the data originally processed with the standard HST pipeline showed unexplained anomalies, we have retrieved our data from the Canadian Astronomical Data Center (CADC). The CADC archives uses the best available calibration files to re-calibrate the data. Moreover, because V1 is located in the NGC 2363 nebula, extra care has been taken in subtracting the adjacent nebular spectrum from the spectrum of V1. Nebular contamination is small (V1 is in the middle of an expanding cavity) and relatively easy to subtract in the high (spatial) resolution STIS data compared with the highly contaminated ground-based spectra, but the standard pipeline calibration did not do a good job in this respect. Standard IRAF procedures were used. Despite the use of contemporary flatfield calibrations, the far red portion of the spectra is contaminated by fringing. By convolving our observed spectrophotometry with suitable synthetic filters, we obtained wide-band Johnson photometry (see Table 1) that is in excellent agreement with WFPC2 imaging.

The low-resolution flux calibrated HST datasets are presented in Figure 2. Balmer emission lines are the most prominent spectral features in the visible; weaker lines at He i $`\lambda `$4471, 5876, 6678, Na i $`\lambda `$5890 plus numerous Fe ii transitions are also observed. The apparently noisy near-UV depression results from many Fe-transitions, rather than high interstellar reddening.

Since individual features are generally unresolved with the low resolution gratings, we have also obtained higher resolution H$`\alpha `$ STIS observation with the G750M grating for each epoch. These are presented in Figure 3 and reveal a very strong H$`\alpha `$ P Cygni profile betraying the extent of V1’s envelope and its high mass-loss rate. The observed H$`\alpha `$ flux is 5.6$`\times `$10-14 and 6.3$`\times `$10-14 erg s-1 cm-2 for 1997 November and 1999 July, respectively. Correcting for interstellar reddening (see below) and the distance to NGC 2363, the intrinsic H$`\alpha `$ luminosity of V1 is 2.4–2.7$`\times 10^4L_{}`$.

While the general appearance of the spectrum is similar at both epochs, a few changes are worth noting:

(1) The UV continuum flux (1200 - 2800 Å) is stronger in 1999. However, the line fluxes in this wavelength range has not changed significantly.

(2) The strength and profile of the Balmer lines has changed (see Table 2). The flux of the H$`\alpha `$ line in the July 99 dataset is $``$20% stronger and its blue absorption component extends to higher velocities (Figure 3). On the other hand, the equivalent widths of the other Balmer lines have slightly decreased and the absorption components of their P Cygni profile are less deep in 1999.

(3) The FeII lines at 4925 and 5016 Å which were strong in the 1997 data became much weaker in 1999.

### 2.3 Morphology of the UV spectrum

The resolution of the STIS data ($``$ 300 km s-1) does not allow us to easily, and unequivocally, distinguish between the interstellar and purely stellar contribution components to the resonance lines on the basis of their width alone. But a direct comparison of the line strengths between the spectrum of V1 and those of knots NGC 2363-A and B (obtained with HST/FOS; see Drissen et al. 2000 and Figure 4 here) should allow us to identify the lines which are intrinsic to the star’s photosphere. We assume that since V1 and knot B are both located within the same expanding superbubble, the spectral contribution from their local ISM will be similar, although knot B is a cluster of OB stars and some ISM lines in its spectrum could be contaminated by a stellar contribution. On the other hand, the ISM local to knot A could be different, but contributions from OB stars are negligible. The contribution from Milky Way gas should be the same in all three objects. From Figure 4, which shows the rectified spectrum of V1 in 1999 in the range 1160 - 1700 Å along with that of knots A and B, and from Table 3, which lists the equivalent width of the most conspicuous UV lines in the three objects, we conclude that the UV lines of V1 have a strong photospheric contribution. As examples, one may compare the lines of Si ii $`\lambda `$1260, C ii $`\lambda `$1335, Si iv $`\lambda `$1400 and Si ii $`\lambda `$1527. None of these UV lines in V1 however show any evidence for an emission component, suggesting a rather low effective temperature.

The following lines are both strong in V1 and absent or very weak in the spectrum of knots A and B; they are thus likely to have a photospheric origin: C iii $`\lambda `$1175, Mg ii $`\lambda `$1240, S ii $`\lambda `$1251,54,60, Si ii $`\lambda `$1265, Ti iii+Si iii between 1286 and 1303Å, Si ii $`\lambda `$1309, and Si ii $`\lambda `$1533.

The C iii $`\lambda `$1175 line typically shows a strong P Cygni profile in late-type O to early-type B supergiants and becomes mostly photospheric in mid B supergiants (Snow & Morton 1976). It is an obvious ($`W_\lambda =2.4`$ Å) absorption feature in V1, but appears much weaker than in late-type B supergiants such as $`\eta `$ CMa (B5Ia) or $`\beta `$ Ori A (B8Ia). Also, features seen in the spectrum of V1 between 1295 and 1303 Å, are often associated to Si iii in B stars (Massa 1989). Therefore in Figure 4, we have plotted along with V1 the rectified spectrum of an average Galactic B5.5I star (based on high resolution IUE spectra of 4 B6I and B5I stars from the library of Robert 1999). The resolution of this B5.5I spectrum was degraded to mimic the STIS data. Similarities with V1 are striking. In the following discussion we compare the spectral feature of V1 with those of B stars.

The strength of the Si ii $`\lambda `$1265 line is a strong (inverse) function of the effective temperature in OB stars, but insensitive to the luminosity class (Massa 1989; Prinja 1990), increasing from 100 mÅ at $`T_{eff}=25000`$K to 1600 mÅ at $`T_{eff}=13000`$K. Si ii $`\lambda `$1265 is not seen in stars hotter than B0. The large value of $`W_\lambda `$ (Si ii $`\lambda `$1265) = 1800 mÅ in the 1999 spectrum of V1 sets a relatively stringent upper limit of $`T_{eff}13000`$K, albeit based on a Galactic supergiant calibration.

The strong line at $``$ 1303 Å is a blend of stellar and interstellar lines. The interstellar component (mostly O i $`\lambda `$ 1302 and Si ii $`\lambda `$1304) dominates in knots A and B (total $`W_\lambda `$ = 2.2 Å in both cases), but the blend is stronger in V1 ($`W_\lambda `$ = 4 Å), indicating a strong photospheric contribution from Si iii $`\lambda `$ 1301,03 and Si ii $`\lambda `$1304 typical of late to mid-B stars.

The Si ii $`\lambda `$1309 line behaves like Si ii $`\lambda `$1265 as a function of OB spectral types. The Si ii $`\lambda `$1533 is more difficult to study in hot OB stars as the broad wind profiles developing in C iv $`\lambda `$1550 engulfs it and as it is blended with Fe iv (Nemry et al. 1991) in hotter stars. Nevertheless there are indications that Si ii $`\lambda `$1533 is also a good B star signature.

Spectral features around 1317, 1345, and 1455 Å, which are associated with Ni ii, P iii, and Ti iii, are typical of B supergiants; they are not seen in giants and dwarfs B (except maybe in the earliest types B0-1).

The strength of the doublet Si iv $`\lambda `$1394,1402 is strongly temperature and luminosity dependent (Walborn et al. 1995). It is absent from all late B luminosity classes, appears in absorption in mid-early types, and in the case of the early B supergiants shows a strong P Cygni wind profile. An absorption doublet of C iv $`\lambda `$1549,51 is only seen in hot B0-2 dwarfs and giants. A wind profile appears in the hottest giant B0. In the case of supergiants, the absoption is seen for mid B and quickly becomes a strong P Cygni profile in type B4 and hotter. We do not see Si iv and C iv wind profiles in V1 but rather absorption typical of B5-6 I stars.

Around 1600 Å we see many strong lines of Fe ii and Fe iii which resemble the features of B supergiants. These lines are much weaker in B giants and dwarfs.

We therefore conclude that the UV spectrum of V1 is similar to that of a B supergiant star of type 5-6.

## 3 SPECTROSCOPIC ANALYSIS

An important consideration for the interpretation of V1’s spectral energy distribution is the determination of the extinction. Gonzalez-Delgado et al. (1994) derived E(B-V)$``$0.15 mag from a ground-based integrated nebular spectrum of the whole H ii region. Since the extinction is likely to be different in knot A, which dominates the global nebular spectrum, than in the middle of the expanding bubble where V1 and knot B lie, we have extracted the spectrum of the nebula from the pixels adjacent to V1 in the STIS long-slit spectroscopy. The nebular H$`\alpha `$/H$`\beta `$ line strengths from this region reveal a low value of E(B-V)=0.06 using Case B recombination theory (Hummer & Storey 1995); this is in perfect agreement with Drissen et al. (2000) who recently estimated E(B-V)=0.04 (Galaxy) + 0.02 (NGC 2363) based on HST/FOC UV spectra of knot B in NGC 2363. Therefore, if an associated circumstellar nebula is present, it does not add measureably to the interstellar extinction, arguing against a dense, $`\eta `$ Car-like nebula surrounding V1. We have thus reddened the theoretical continuum energy distributions by E(B-V)=0.04 using the Seaton (1979) Galactic extinction law, plus E(B-V)=0.02 using the Bouchet et al. (1985) SMC law. Assuming a distance of 3.44Mpc to NGC 2366 implies $`M_\mathrm{V}`$=$``$10.44 mag during 1997 November, and $``$10.29 in 1999 July.

For stars with extended atmospheres such as NGC 2363-V1, as evidenced from its P Cygni H$`\alpha `$ profile, the usual assumptions of plane parallel geometry and local thermodynamic equilibrium (LTE) are totally inadequate. In this section we introduce the atmospheric model that we shall use for V1 and discuss our analysis technique.

### 3.1 Atmosphere code

We utilize the iterative, line blanketed technique of Hillier & Miller (1998) which solves the transfer equation in the co-moving frame subject to statistical and radiative equilibrium in an expanding, steady-state atmosphere. Populations and ionization structure are consistent with the radiation field. Line blanketing is treated via a global Doppler line width of $`V_{\mathrm{Dop}}`$=10 km s-1.

Despite the high quality dataset available, the spectroscopic analysis of NGC 2363–V1 has proved to be difficult, principally because its low excitation state means that Fe ii is the dominant blanketing ion, which is extremely complex. In addition, as discussed by Hillier et al. (1998), mass-loss and hydrogen content are highly coupled. Since we are unable to tightly constrain the stellar temperature of V1, due to the absence of lines from adjacent ionization stages of the same element, we cannot derive a mass-loss rate without first fixing its He abundance. Consequently, we shall adopt an abundance of H/He=4 by number, which is typical of LBVs (Crowther 1997), and subsequently investigate the effect of different He abundances on the mass-loss rate. Similarly, metal abundances were fixed at 0.20$`Z_{}`$ as indicated by Gonzalez-Delgado et al. (1994) for NGC 2363, and varied once stellar parameters were derived.

A simplifying ‘super level’ approach is used for individual levels (Anderson 1989), particularly for iron-group elements. In this approach, several levels of similar energies and properties are treated as a single ‘super level’, with only the populations of the super level included in the solution of the rate equations. The population of an individual atomic level in the full model atom is determined by assuming that it has the same departure coefficient as the corresponding super level to which it belongs.

The present model include representative model atoms for H, He, N, Mg, Al, Na, Ca, Si and Fe, as indicated in Table 4, in which a total of 32,191 transitions are considered. Details of each ion are included, such that for hydrogen, $`n`$=1 to 30 full levels are considered, which are grouped into 10 super levels. Our default atomic dataset for Fe ii was taken from Nahar (1995), in which 827 atomic levels, were combined into 134 super levels, producing 21,907 transitions (22,924 weak transitions with log $`gf<4`$ were omitted). Hillier et al. (2000) have recently analyzed the UV and optical spectrum of $`\eta `$ Car based on the Nahar compilation and found improved comparisons with observation if Kurucz (1993) oscillator strengths were selected instead of those from Nahar, although negligible differences were obtained for V1.

In the outer wind of V1, and other LBVs, hydrogen becomes neutral, so it is necessary to allow for charge exchange reactions. Of particular relevance to LBVs is the charge exchange reaction: Fe2+ 3d$`{}_{}{}^{6}(_{}^{5}`$D) + H $``$ Fe+ 3d64s ($`a^6`$D) + H+ (Neufeld & Dalgarno 1987) since the ratio of charge recombination to radiative recombination for Fe2+ is $`10^3`$ H/H+ (Hillier et al. 2000). This has a major influence on the ionization structure, and significantly enhances the Fe ii line strengths. Also relevant to LBVs is the nitrogen reaction: N2+ \+ He+ $``$ N+ \+ He2+ (Herrero et al. 1995).

Finally, since it is well established that the dense winds of early-type stars are clumped (e.g. Lépine & Moffat 1999; Eversberg et al. 1998), we consider a relatively simple volume filling factor approach for V1 following Hillier & Miller (1998). Estimates of clumping factors in the optical line forming region for V1 are provided by simultaneously matching recombination emission line strengths (sensitive to the square of the density) and electron scattering wings (sensitive to density) as discussed by Hillier (1991).

### 3.2 Stellar parameters

Since we were unable to use lines from adjacent ionization stages of one particular element to derive stellar temperatures, we instead relied on the stellar continuum, de-reddened as described above. We have calculated a grid of models for V1 at each epoch in order to simultaneously match the stellar continuum distribution from which the stellar temperature and luminosity are derived, plus H$`\alpha `$ which provides an excellent tracer of mass-loss in the winds of early-type stars (Puls et al. 1996). We have adopted a typical H/He content of LBVs for NGC 2363-V1, namely H/He=4 by number (see also below).

For the 1997 November dataset, we find optimum agreement for a model in which $`T_{}`$=11kK, log($`L/L_{}`$)=6.35 and $`R(\tau _{\mathrm{Ross}}=10)`$ = $`420R_{}`$, as shown in Figure 5 (upper panels). Since the atmosphere of NGC 2363-V1 is very extended, $`R(\tau _{\mathrm{Ross}}=2/3)`$ = 590$`R_{}`$, the formal ‘effective temperature’ is $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$=9,200K. Similar properties for July 1999 are $`T_{}`$=13kK, log($`L/L_{}`$)=6.4 and $`R(\tau _{\mathrm{Ross}}=10)`$ = $`315R_{}`$, shown in Figure 5 (lower panels). Therefore, the spectroscopic differences between the two epochs represent variations in stellar radius (i.e. temperature) at fairly constant bolometric luminosity. This naturally explains the simultaneous UV brightening and optical fading during this period.

While the agreement between the model and the observations is generally very good, we wish to highlight several important discrepancies revealed in this work. The sole helium line observed at high resolution with HST/STIS is He i $`\lambda `$6678, which is observed in absorption for both epochs. It was hoped that we would have been able to determine H/He abundances from H$`\alpha `$ and He i, but the He i absorption is rather insensitive to the precise H/He abundance ratio, and more problematic, predicted absorption strengths are significantly weaker than observations.

Another important discrepancy is that the continuum fit to observations is imperfect, at both epochs; (a) Fe ii blanketing is apparently underestimated between $`\lambda \lambda `$1700-2300 using our determination of the iron content in V1 (see $`\mathrm{\S }`$ 3.4); (b) the models clearly fail to reproduce the observed continuum distribution either side of the Balmer ‘jump’, by up to $``$20%. Hillier et al. (2000) experienced similar difficulties in their analysis of $`\eta `$ Car (see $`\mathrm{\S }`$ 3.5).

### 3.3 Mass-loss properties

In addition to deriving stellar parameters, we have simultaneously modeled the H$`\alpha `$ profile for each epoch by varying the mass-loss rate, and terminal velocity.

Using volume filling factors of $``$30%, which provide a reasonable match to the electron scattering wings of H$`\alpha `$, we find an approximately constant $`\dot{M}`$=4.4$`\times 10^4M_{}`$ yr-1 for both epochs, such that the stronger H$`\alpha `$ emission in 1999 results from the increase in stellar temperature, rather than a change in mass-loss rate. Wind velocities are also very similar, $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$=325 km s-1 and $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$=290 km s-1 for 1997 November and 1999 July, respectively. Differences in H$`\alpha `$ absorption can be matched with different turbulent velocities, $`v_{\mathrm{turb}}`$=10 and 40 km s-1. Comparisons between synthetic spectra and observations are shown in Figure 6.

An important caveat which should be kept in mind is that we have relied solely on H$`\alpha `$ as a mass-loss indicator, since all other Balmer lines are unresolved. Nevertheless, low dispersion HST/STIS observations reveal that the increase in strength of H$`\alpha `$ from 1997 to 1999 is not repeated for H$`\beta `$ and higher Balmer members (Table 2). Were we instead to rely on the H$`\beta `$ flux, our modeling would reveal a $``$30% decrease in mass-loss, rather than a constant rate, between the two epochs. Such differences in behavior amongst members of the Balmer series are not repeated amongst other LBV-type supergiants (e.g. HDE 316285: Hillier et al. 1998).

One further complication is that since we have used solely H$`\alpha `$ to constrain the mass-loss rate, this is also dependent on the atmospheric H/He composition. For a solar composition the clumped mass-loss rates would decrease to $`2.5\times 10^4M_{}`$ yr-1. Conversely, if V1 is more highly enriched (e.g. H/He=1 by number), we would need to increase the mass-loss rate estimate by a factor of $``$2 to $`10^3M_{}`$ yr-1.

### 3.4 Metal Abundances

Unfortunately the low spectral resolution of our observations together with the narrow, weak emission from most metal ions means that the determination of elemental abundances is not possible. However, the presence of numerous optical Fe ii transitions, together with a forest of metal lines in the near-UV permit an estimate of the iron abundance to be determined. Neglecting the effect of charge exchange would require systematically higher abundances (at least by a factor of two) than we obtain here. Ideally, we would like to have used a similar star at known metallicity to check our modeling procedure against, but no such stars exist with parameters close enough to V1.

In Figure 7 we compare de-reddened ultraviolet observations of V1 from 1997 November with Fe ii blanketed models at 0.20$`Z_{}`$, 0.5$`Z_{}`$ and 1.0$`Z_{}`$ degraded to the resolution of the STIS spectroscopy. Each model provides a fair match to the observed continuum depression around 2500Å including the discontinuity at $`\lambda `$2630. The 0.20$`Z_{}`$ case compares very closely with observations in the $`\lambda \lambda `$2500–2900 region. The 0.10$`Z_{}`$ model, not shown in this Figure, is marginally worse than the 0.20$`Z_{}`$ case. Discrepancies remain for each case, especially at $`\lambda \lambda `$1750–2300. We attribute such discrepancies to the shear complexity of the observed UV spectrum (Hillier et al. 2000 obtained similar problems for models of $`\eta `$ Car). For example, in the case of the 1.0$`Z_{}`$ model, 2878 lines are predicted to have equivalent widths of $``$0.1Å in the 1200–3100Å region. These are dominated by 2351 lines of Fe ii and 416 lines of Fe iii. In the light of model discrepancies between $`\lambda `$1750–2300, a comparison with observations marginally favors the low metallicity cases, but is unable to provide a definitive abundance determination.

Figure 8 compares rectified observations in the 3000–5500Å region, with synthetic spectra covering the same range in metallicity. Aside from the Balmer series, the majority of features are again due to Fe ii, the strengths of which are very sensitive to metal content. As for the UV, an SMC-like iron abundance for V1 is favored by the weakness of iron lines in the $`\lambda \lambda `$3100–3500, $`\lambda \lambda `$4450–4600 and $`\lambda \lambda `$4900–5300 regions. Unfortunately, prominent P Cygni Na i emission at $`\lambda `$5890-6 is not predicted sufficiently strong in any case, while comparisons in the far-red are prevented by significant CCD fringing.

Note, however, that caution is necessary. Although we include over 700 energy levels of Fe ii in our calculations, this ion is extremely complex, with potentially imprecise atomic data. In addition, although Fe ii is certainly the most prominent heavy element, ions of other less abundant elements will make significant contributions to the line blanketing at particular wavelengths (e.g. Ni ii). Work is currently underway to include such elements in our calculations.

Further, we have based our iron abundance estimate on a comparison between models selected to match the 1997 November HST/STIS dataset. Were we instead to have used the 1999 July observation, we would have revealed a somewhat lower iron abundance, since the emission strength of optical Fe ii lines (e.g. $`\lambda `$5015) is weaker at that epoch.

Nevertheless, we conclude that the heavy metal content of NGC 2363-V1 is $``$0.2$`Z_{}`$, in reasonable agreement with the previously derived nebular oxygen abundance of 12+log(O/H)=7.9, a factor of six below the solar value. Recall that iron is produced by supernovae, whose progenitors have lifetimes of typically 1Gyr, while oxygen is created exclusively by short-lived, high mass stars. Our study represents the most distant star whose iron abundance has been derived, and compared with $`\alpha `$-elements.

### 3.5 Balmer jump – evidence for asymmetry?

The shape of the Balmer jump is notoriously difficult to reproduce in extreme OB supergiants. The case for V1 is no exception – from Figure 5 the model does not fit the continuum well on both sides of the Balmer jump. In fact, the model predicts a lower continuum level shortward of the Balmer edge while the observations clearly show an increasing flux below 3700 Å. This is best illustrated for V1 in Figure 9, and includes HST/FOS spectra of two B stars in the LMC cluster Breysacher 73 (Walborn et al. 1999). The spectral shape of V1 around the Balmer edge is quite similar to that of Brey 73-1C, an O9.5-B1pe star, classified as such because an emission component is clearly seen in the center of the Balmer absorption lines. The unusual flux increase from 3750 to 3650 Å which is seen in both stars, has been observed in a number of Be stars (Kaiser 1987) and has been interpreted as evidence for the existence of a disk-like extended envelope of low density around the stars. The mass-loss rate of V1 is much higher than that of Be stars and the two-component model may not be applicable in this case, but the peculiar shape of its continuum around the Balmer edge may indicate that its envelope is not spherically symmetric. Indeed, most nebulae around LBVs exhibit axisymmetric morphologies that could have been shaped by non-spherical mass loss (Nota et al. 1995). Spectropolarimetry of the H$`\alpha `$ line and its adjacent continuum could be used to measure the degree of asymmetry, if any, of V1’s envelope.

## 4 DISCUSSION

Our results place tight constraints on the current stellar properties of NGC 2363-V1. Major LBV eruptions are thought to coincide with an increase in the bolometric luminosity of the star and probably also its mass-loss rate. We now consider whether V1 has undergone a genuine eruption, and subsequently compare its properties with other LBVs, notably HD 5980 during its brief eruption in 1994 (Barba & Niemela 1994).

### 4.1 Is NGC 2363-V1 undergoing a genuine eruption?

Since the presence of NGC 2363-V1 was unknown prior to its recent brightening, no spectroscopic or photometric information is available to us in order to readily constrain its pre-outburst properties. Consequently, we consider three possibilities for its spectral type prior to 1993, namely an early O, late O, or early B supergiant.

For O3 and O8 supergiant cases, we adopt a temperature and bolometric correction scale from Vacca et al. (1996), together with mass-loss rate estimates following the wind momentum–luminosity relation of Puls et al. (1996) for low metallicity (mixture of LMC and SMC) stars. For the early B supergiant case, we consider the possibility that V1 was a dormant, hot LBV, equivalent to AG Car or R127 during their WN11 phase (e.g. Smith et al. 1994), whose wind properties are estimated from Crowther (1997). Properties derived in this way are presented in Table 5.

We first consider the possibility that V1 was a hot, dormant LBV immediately prior to 1993. In this case, the low bolometric correction would indicate that the luminosity of V1 would have been amongst the lowest of all known LBVs with $`\mathrm{log}(L/L_{})5.5`$, comparable with R110 (Stahl et al. 1990). In contrast, those LBVs which have been know to experience a very hot WN11 phase have luminosities in excess of $`\mathrm{log}(L/L_{})6`$. Nevertheless, for such a scenario, the increase in bolometric luminosity corresponds to a factor of approximately ten, with a mass-loss rate probably increasing by several hundred fold. We neglect the possibility that V1 was a cooler, P Cygni-type dormant LBV since its bolometric luminosity would then have been unrealistically low.

Alternatively, V1 may have advanced immediately from an O supergiant to an erupting LBV. The age of NGC 2363-B, from which V1 is thought to have originated is 3–5Myr (Drissen et al. 2000), so an O8 supergiant progenitor represents a realistic possibility. In such a case, the increase in luminosity by V1 is less severe (see Table 5), albeit a factor of four (or greater), while the increase in mass-loss rate is perhaps one thousand fold if the progenitor has wind characteristics comparable to Magellanic Cloud supergiants. The absence of cool dust around V1 favors an O supergiant progenitor rather than a dormant LBV.

The final possibility, is that V1 advanced directly from an O3 supergiant. These very young ($``$2–2.5 Myr) stars have the highest bolometric corrections of any hot massive star, prior to the Wolf-Rayet phase. We consider this possibility highly unlikely, given their youth relative to NGC 2363-B. Nevertheless, for completeness, the change in stellar and wind properties would be the least severe, with potentially only a modest increase in luminosity, together with a factor of one hundred increase in mass-loss rate.

The rapid brightening of V1 also indicates a corresponding increase in the physical size of the star. Based upon a late O supergiant progenitor, the surface of V1 expanded from a radius of $`20`$ to 420$`R_{}`$ in a little over two years (1992 October to 1995 February), corresponding to an average rate of +4 km s-1! This calculation assumes that the stellar temperature of V1 in early 1995 was comparable to that of 1997 November, which appears realistic considering the similarity in photometry (Table 1). Subsequently, between 1997 November and 1999 July, the radius of V1 decreased from 420 to 315$`R_{}`$, at an average rate of $``$1.4 km s-1. These changes support some form of pulsational or dynamical instability as the cause of the present eruption (e.g. Guzik et al. 1999; Stothers 1999a). Calculations in our group are underway to assess such possibilities.

In summary, it appears that V1 is a moderately massive star which underwent an dramatic increase in luminosity, radius and mass-loss rate between late 1992 and early 1995, with a probable late O-type supergiant or perhaps hot, dormant LBV progenitor. Estimating an initial mass for V1 is extremely difficult since this would rely on a comparison between the luminosity of the star prior to eruption with low metallicity evolutionary tracks (Meynet et al. 1994). Nevertheless, an age of 4–5 Myr suggests an initial 40–60$`M_{}`$ star, with a present luminosity of $`\mathrm{log}(L/L_{})=5.86.0`$, consistent with a late-type O supergiant precursor.

Consequently, we suggest that the initial and current mass of NGC 2363-V1 is no more extreme than many other LBVs, such as AG Car. In contrast, the initial mass of the Pistol star appears to be remarkably high ($``$200$`M_{}`$, according to Figer et al. 1998).

### 4.2 Comparison between V1 and other LBVs

We have shown that V1 is currently undergoing a giant eruption, and that its stellar and wind properties are exceptional. What distinguishes V1 from ‘dormant’ LBVs, such as AG Car? How do these compare with HD 5980 which briefly underwent an eruption in a similar low metallicity environment during 1994?

The well known Galactic LBV AG Car is currently undergoing huge variations in temperature (from 8,000–25,000K) over timescales of decades. Its stellar properties have been studied by Leitherer et al. (1994) who found a fairly (homogeneous) mass-loss rate of $``$10-5$`M_{}`$yr-1 at a constant luminosity of log ($`L/L_{})`$=6.1. Consequently, V1 is currently little more than a factor of two times more luminous than AG Car, which is surprisingly small. In contrast, the mass-loss rate of V1 is perhaps 50 times higher, and appears to be the principal defining characteristic (see below).

Are the properties of V1 during its present eruption typical of other massive stars? This question is particularly relevant to stellar evolution models of massive stars in which, brief episodes of very intensive mass-loss are predicted or assumed. To address this question, we have investigated the stellar properties of HD 5980 during its brief eruption (Barba & Niemela 1994) based on the optical spectroscopy obtained by Heydari-Malayeri et al. (1997) during the visual maximum in 1994 September when V=8.6 mag (Albert Jones, private communication). Based on an interstellar reddening of E(B-V)=0.07 mag towards HD 5980 (Crowther 2000), together with an SMC distance modulus of 18.9 mag (Westerlund 1997), the absolute visual magnitude of the erupting star was $`M_\mathrm{V}=`$10.5 mag (all other components play a negligible contribution to the continuum flux at this epoch). This is remarkably similar to the current absolute visual magnitude of V1. However, the spectral appearance of the HD 5980 eruptor was considerably different from V1 at visual maximum. Heydari-Malayeri et al. (1997) revealed a much hotter, WN11-type appearance (Fig. 10) so it was intrinsically much more luminous than V1.

We have analysed the optical spectrum of HD 5980 from Heydari-Malayeri et al. (1997), using the Hillier & Miller (1998) code. Based on the usual He i $`\lambda `$4471, He ii $`\lambda `$4686 and H$`\beta `$ diagnostics, our derived parameters are listed in Table 4, revealing that the luminosity of the HD 5980 eruptor exceeded both V1 and $`\eta `$ Car by a factor 3–6, respectively. Indeed the only other LBV whose luminosity may compare favourably with HD 5980 is the Pistol star (Figer et al. 1998), although analysis of it is severely hampered by the high reddening plus lack of definitive temperature constraints. A comparison between our new results for HD 5980 with those of Koenigsberger et al. (1998) based on observations from 1994 December (when it had visually faded by 1.6 mag) suggests that its bolometric luminosity had decreased by a factor of five over three months! Note also the discrepant H/He abundance pattern resulting from analysis of the two datasets in Table 6.

The mass-loss rate for HD 5980 during its brief eruption compares very closely with V1. It appears that ‘giant eruptions’ of LBV’s in low metallicity environments exhibit representative mass-loss rates approaching $``$10$`{}_{}{}^{3}M_{}^{}`$yr-1. These differ greatly from the sole source of mass-loss rate produced in giant LBV eruptions known to date, namely the famous Homunculus produced by $`\eta `$ Car between 1837–1960. During this eruption, $`23M_{}`$ were ejected (Davidson & Humphreys 1997) corresponding to $``$10$`{}_{}{}^{1}M_{}^{}`$yr-1. Thus far, $`\eta `$ Car appears to be unique in exhibiting such high rates of mass-loss, namely during its 1840’s eruption. Indeed, although not presently in outburst, $`\eta `$ Car remains a very extreme star, as illustrated in Figure 10, with a present luminosity and mass-loss rate somewhat higher than V1 (see also Table 6). Hence, the present V1 outburst should not be considered an equivalent to the great $`\eta `$ Car 1837–1860 eruption.

## 5 CONCLUSIONS

From our quantitative analysis of an HST/STIS spectrogram of NGC 2363-V1, and a photometric follow-up of this star since the beginning of its present eruption, we conclude as follows. V1 is a Luminous Blue Variable currently experiencing a major eruption. Its immediate progenitor star was probably an initial $``$60$`M_{}`$ late O supergiant.

Its physical parameters are exceptional: log ($`L/L_{}`$) = 6.35, T = 11kK, $`R_{}=420R_{}`$ for 1997 November; and log ($`L/L_{}`$) = 6.4, T = 13kK, $`R_{}=315R_{}`$ for 1999 July. Therefore, the bolometric luminosity of V1 is exceeded by only, in ascending order, $`\eta `$ Car (log $`L/L_{}`$ = 6.7, Hillier et al. 2000), the Pistol star (log $`L/L_{}`$ = 6.9$`\pm `$0.3, Figer et al. 1998) and HD 5980 during eruption (log $`L/L_{}`$ = 7.1).

Analysis of high resolution H$`\alpha `$ observations indicate that the wind is moderately clumped, with $`\dot{M}4.5\times `$10$`{}_{}{}^{4}M_{}^{}`$ yr-1 and $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$300 km s-1. During its brief eruption in 1994, HD 5980 possessed a similar mass-loss rate. Therefore, the mass-loss rate of $`10^1M_{}`$ yr-1 exhibited by $`\eta `$ Car during its giant eruption in 1840’s (Humphreys & Davidson 1994) is thus far unique.

The presence of many iron features in the spectrum permits an estimate of its heavy metal content. Although discrepancies remain, especially at UV wavelengths, our study reveals a SMC-like Fe content for NGC 2363-V1, which is in good agreement with previously derived oxygen abundances for NGC 2363. Consequently, the heavy metal enrichment of NGC 2363, produced by Type I Supernovae, whose progenitors are believed to have a lifetime of typically 1 Gyr, appears to mimic that of light elements, such as oxygen, which are created exclusively by short-lived (10 Myr) massive stars.

Observationally, spectroscopic and photometric monitoring of V1 and other LBVs will continue, while theoretical studies are underway to investigate the cause of the outbursts experiences by V1 and HD 5980, whether pulsationally, dynamically or rotationally driven.

###### Acknowledgements.

We would like to thank Mohammad Heydari-Malayeri for providing the outburst spectrum of HD 5980, Albert Jones for providing his photomety of HD 5980, and Kris Davidson and his HST/STIS observing team for providing the spectrum of Eta Carina in Figure 10. This investigation was funded in part by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, by the Fonds FCAR of the Government of Québec and by Université Laval (LD, JRR and CR). PAC acknowledges financial support from the Royal Society. We are especially grateful to the staff of the now defunct Royal Greenwich Observatory for obtaining service imaging of NGC 2363. The William Herschel Telescope is operated on the Island of La Palma by the Isaac Newton Group in the Spanish Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos of the Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias.


text:
# Transport Properties near the z=2 Insulator-Superconductor Transition

## A Introduction

In granular superconducting thin films and fabricated 2D Josephson junction arrays (JJA), phase coherence is destroyed at zero temperature, whenever the intergrain Josephson tunneling of Cooper pairs becomes smaller than the Coulomb interaction between grains. . The occurrence of this insulator-superconductor quantum phase transition (IST) can be best seen from conductivity measurements. At the transition point, the resistivity is observed to be temperature-independent and close in value to the quantum of resistance for charge $`2e`$ particles $`R_Q=\sigma _Q^1=h/4e^2`$. There are many theoretical works devoted to the explanation of this remarkable result . Cha et.al., for instance, calculated the zero-temperature collisionless conductivity at the transition point within the effective 3D Ginzburg-Landau (GL) action for an $`M`$-component bosonic field, that can be derived from the commensurate 2D Bose-Hubbard model. The influence of the quartic term in this approach, considered up to the first order in $`1/M`$, was shown to reduce the mean-field value of the conductivity $`(\pi /8)\sigma _Q=\pi e^2/2h`$ by 36%. Fazio and Zappala calculated this conductivity applying the dimensional regularization in $`ϵ=3d`$. However, as was shown later by Damle and Sachdev, the collisionless zero-temperature conductivity is not the conductivity that is measured experimentally at a finite temperature. This conclusion stems from the non-commutativity of the limits $`\omega 0,T=0`$ and $`\omega =0,T0`$ in the general expression for $`\sigma (\omega ,T)`$ at the transition point. The former limit describes collisionless transport, while it is the latter limit that must be taken to assess the experimentally-relevant collision-dominated conductivity. With collisions neglected, the finite temperature dc conductivity is singular on the insulating side, so the inclusion of quasiparticle damping is necessary for its regularization. Collisions are properly accounted for utilizing the quantum kinetic equation which represents, in general, a complicated non-linear integral equation for the distribution function of thermally excited quasiparticles. The kernel of this equation is determined by the quartic non-linearity in the GL action responsible for collisions between quasiparticles. The approximate methods, such as $`1/M`$ or $`ϵ=3d`$ expansion, should be used to solve the kinetic equation close to the transition point . Another way of regularization of the singular Drude conductivity is the inclusion of the phenomenological Ohmic dissipation. Experimentally, the latter plays a central role, because in combination with disorder it can lead to the temperature-independent resistivity as $`T0`$. From the theoretical point of view Ohmic dissipation is always a relevant perturbation, affecting thus the functional form of universal quantities near the IST point. The mentioned sources of dissipation lead to different temperature dependences of the conductivity, and, generally speaking, should be treated simultaneously.

Thus far, most of the approaches have used as a starting point the particle-hole symmetric GL action that is space-time isotropic at $`T=0`$ and belongs to the universality class with the mean-field dynamical exponent $`z=1`$. However, the behavior in the critical region can be considerably affected by a term that breaks the symmetry between particles and holes. The physical picture leading to the modified action is realized in a system of JJA in the presence of uniformly-distributed frustrating offset charges $`q_x2e`$ that cannot be eliminated by Cooper pair tunneling. The microscopic quantum phase model describing this situation is also known to be equivalent to the clean incommensurate Bose-Hubbard model. The IST in this case is characterized by the $`z=2`$ dynamical critical exponent. Thus, the quartic term in the GL action is marginally irrelevant, and there exists the range of parameters $`T`$ and $`\delta `$ (the deviation from the zero-temperature critical point) that permits all interesting physical quantities to be calculated in the perturbative renormalization-group (RG) treatment. . In this region the static quantities can be regarded in the leading approximation as some universal functions of $`\delta `$ and $`T`$, independent of the quartic interaction strength, $`u`$. This region persists as long as $`\delta `$ and $`T`$ are logarithmically or even double logarithmically small.

In this paper we use this approach to calculate the dc conductivity close to the point of the IST, governed by $`z=2`$, within leading logarithmic accuracy. It is shown, using the Kubo formula, that in the absence of any dissipative mechanism, the real part of finite temperature conductivity is singular and non-universal on the insulating side. Its regularization by inclusion of the coupling to the Ohmic heat bath leads to the logarithmic temperature dependence in the quantum critical (QC) regime. The conductivity increases in the leading approximation as $`\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{ln}(1/T)`$ with $`T0`$ right above the transition, and decreases monotonically in the quantum disordered (QD) regime. Consequently, we claim then that crossing over from the QD to the QC regime with decreasing temperature is accompanied by a somewhat re-entrant behavior of the dc conductivity. The regularization that results from the finite lifetime of quasiparticles, is possible only once the Umklapp scattering is included. This is a consequence of the Galilean invariance of the action, which explicitly describes the system of interacting charges of one sign. These processes ensure that the inverse lifetime of quasiparticles, $`1/\tau _Ue^{A/T}`$, leads, in the absence of other sources of dissipation, to an exponentially large fluctuation conductivity on the insulating side. We discuss the applicability of this approach to the description of the finite-$`T`$ charge transport near the 2D metal-superconductor transitions.

## B Renormalization Group Analysis

The general form of the GL functional that models the behavior near the IST point in the presence of uniformly-distributed offset charges is derived to be

$`F[\psi ]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }d^2r{\displaystyle }d\tau \{\left[(+{\displaystyle \frac{ie^{}}{\mathrm{}}}𝐀(𝐫,\tau ))\psi ^{}(𝐫,\tau )\right]`$ (4)
$`\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{ie^{}}{\mathrm{}}}𝐀(𝐫,\tau )\right)\psi (𝐫,\tau )\right]+\lambda \psi ^{}(𝐫,\tau )_\tau \psi (𝐫,\tau )`$
$`+\kappa ^2|_\tau \psi (𝐫,\tau )|^2+\delta |\psi (𝐫,\tau )|^2+{\displaystyle \frac{u}{2}}\left|\psi (𝐫,\tau )|^4\right\}`$
$`+F_{\mathrm{dis}}`$
where $`𝐀(𝐫,\tau )`$ is the vector potential, due to applied electric field, $`e^{}=2e`$, and $`\delta `$ is proportional to the inverse correlation length. In Fourier space, the dissipation term, $`F_{\mathrm{dis}}=\eta _{𝐤,\omega _n}|\omega _n||\psi (𝐤,\omega _n)|^2`$ corresponds to the Ohmic model of Caldeira and Leggett. Parameters $`\kappa `$ and $`\lambda `$ (linear in the value of offset charges) measure the strength of quantum fluctuations. We will regard $`\kappa /\lambda =O(1)`$. The term with $`\kappa `$ is clearly irrelevant in the region of interest, so we can neglect it and measure all quantities, having the dimensionality of energy, in units of $`\lambda `$. The key idea behind the calculation of the general, frequency-dependent conductivity in the critical region is that in 2D at finite temperature, the conductivity obeys the scaling

$`\sigma _{\alpha \beta }(\delta ,T,\omega ,u)=\sigma _{\alpha \beta }(T(l^{}),\omega (l^{}),u(l^{})).`$ (5)
In the momentum-shell RG, $`l^{}`$ denotes the scale at which the effective size of the Kadanoff cell is on the order of the correlation length. We assume without loss of generality that the scaling stops when $`\delta (l^{})=1`$. The frequency in the above equation scales trivially, $`\omega (l)=\omega e^{zl}`$, although we will be interested only in the dc conductivity, most commonly measured in experiments. The dissipation term with $`\eta `$, preserving the $`z=2`$ universality class, should be also incorporated in the RG equations. However, because any non-zero $`\eta `$ profoundly changes the analytic structure of a quasiparticle propagator, it is convenient to consider the cases of zero and non-zero $`\eta `$ separately.

$`\eta =0`$: The one-loop finite-$`T`$ RG equations for this problem in 2D are of the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dT(l)}{dl}}=zT(l)`$ (6)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\delta (l)}{dl}}=2\delta (l)+{\displaystyle \frac{2K_2u(l)}{\mathrm{exp}[(1+\delta (l))/T(l)]}}`$ (7)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{du(l)}{dl}}=(2z)u(l)C[\delta (l),T(l)]u(l)^2,`$ (8)
where the coefficient

$`C[\delta (l),T(l)]\{\begin{array}{cc}{\displaystyle \frac{K_2}{2(1+\delta (l))}}\hfill & T(l)1\hfill \\ {\displaystyle \frac{5K_2T(l)}{(1+\delta (l))^2}}\hfill & T(l)1\hfill \end{array}`$ (11)
Here $`K_2=(1/2\pi )`$, and in the one-loop approximation we can assume $`z=2`$. The solution of the above system is qualitatively different in the quantum disordered and quantum critical regimes.

Quantum disordered regime: We are in the QD regime, if the inequality $`\delta T`$ between the bare parameters holds. With sufficient accuracy the term with $`u(l)`$ in the righthand side of Eq. (7) can be neglected, and we obtain in this regime, that $`l^{}=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}(1/\delta )`$, giving

$`T^{}={\displaystyle \frac{T}{\delta }},u^{}{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi }{\mathrm{ln}\frac{1}{\delta }}}.`$ (12)
The asterisk denotes, that the parameters under scaling must be taken at $`l=l^{}`$. The result for $`u^{}`$ is obtained with logarithmic accuracy, i.e we consider $`l^{}`$ to be large. This condition ensures the validity of the perturbation theory.

Quantum critical regime: This region is characterized by the opposite condition, $`\delta T`$. The integration of the RG equations in this case consists of two steps. In the first step, we integrate over $`l`$ from $`0`$ to $`\stackrel{~}{l}`$, such that $`T(\stackrel{~}{l})=1`$. We have then $`\delta (\stackrel{~}{l})=(\delta /T+O(1/\mathrm{ln}T^1))1`$. So, the scaling must continue into the second step in which $`T(l)1`$. In this, classical region, the strength of interactions is measured not by $`u(l)`$, but by $`v(l)=u(l)T(l)`$, and for $`l>\stackrel{~}{l}`$ we must consider the equations

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dv(l)}{dl}}=2v(l){\displaystyle \frac{5K_2v(l)^2}{(1+\delta (l))^2}}`$ (13)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\delta (l)}{dl}}=2\delta (l)+{\displaystyle \frac{2K_2v(l)}{1+\delta (l)}}`$ (14)
Assuming, that throughout the scaling $`v(l)1`$, that is we are working in the weakly classical region, we obtain, using $`v(\stackrel{~}{l})=4\pi /\stackrel{~}{l}`$, that $`v(l)(4\pi /\stackrel{~}{l})e^{2(l\stackrel{~}{l})}`$. Substitution of this result into Eq. (14) and subsequent integration gives us with the logarithmic accuracy the equation for $`l^{}`$ in the QC regime:

$`\delta (l^{})={\displaystyle \frac{4}{\stackrel{~}{l}}}(l^{}\stackrel{~}{l})e^{2(l^{}\stackrel{~}{l})}=1.`$ (15)
Solving this within double logarithmic accuracy, we find that

$`l^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{T}}\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{ln}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{T}})\right],`$ (16)
$`T^{}=\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{T}},v^{}={\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{ln}\frac{1}{T}}}`$ (17)
The validity of the above solution requires not only the condition $`\mathrm{ln}(1/T)1`$, but also $`\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{ln}(1/T)1`$.

$`\eta 0`$: The presence of the term $`\eta |\omega _n|`$ in the RG equation for $`\delta `$ leads to the divergency in the sum over frequencies. So the momentum-shell RG with the upper frequency cutoff $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ should be used, and the obtained one-loop equations are of the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\delta (l)}{dl}}=2\delta (l)+f^{(2)}(\delta (l),T(l))u(l)`$ (18)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{du(l)}{dl}}=f^{(4)}(\delta (l),T(l))u(l)^2,`$ (19)
where $`f^{(2)}`$ and $`f^{(4)}`$ are some rather robust functions of $`\delta (l)`$, $`T(l)`$ and $`\eta `$, that we don’t write out here. It is essential, that the results for $`T^{}`$ and $`l^{}`$ remain the same in both the QC and QD regimes, if we are interested only in the leading logarithmic approximation. However, the subdominant temperature dependent corrections appear to be different. $`u^{}`$ and $`v^{}`$ are also logarithmically small, though have the cutoff dependent numerical prefactors.

## C Transport Properties

We see, that upon scaling, for small enough $`T`$ and $`\delta `$, the parameters $`u^{}`$ and $`v^{}`$ remain small, and in the first approximation one can calculate the conductivity with the help of the Kubo formula,

$`\sigma _{\alpha \beta }(i\omega _n)={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{\omega _n}}{\displaystyle d^2r𝑑\tau \frac{\delta ^2\mathrm{ln}Z}{\delta 𝐀_\alpha (\tau ,𝐫)\delta 𝐀_\beta (\mathrm{𝟎})}e^{i\omega _n\tau }},`$ (20)
applied to the Gaussian part of Eq.(4). The standard calculations for the longitudinal conductivity, which we denote simply as $`\sigma `$, lead to the result

$`\sigma (i\omega _n^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2(e^{})^2}{\mathrm{}\omega _n^{}}}T^{}{\displaystyle \underset{\omega _n^{}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2k}{(2\pi )^2}2k_x^2G(𝐤,\omega _m^{})}`$ (22)
$`\left(G(𝐤,\omega _m^{})G(𝐤,\omega _m^{}+\omega _n^{})\right),`$
where $`G(𝐤,\omega _n^{})=(i\omega _n^{}+ϵ_k^{})^1`$ is the usual Matsubara Green function. The rescaled temperature $`T^{}`$ and the energy of quasiparticles $`ϵ_k^{}=1+k^2`$ are employed in the righthand side in accordance with Eq. (5) ($`\omega _m^{}=2\pi mT^{}`$). We must perform then the analytical continuation to real frequencies after doing the summation over frequencies $`\omega _m^{}`$.

If the absence of any dissipative mechanism, we obtain:

$`\sigma (\omega ^{})=\left[{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\omega ^{}}}+\pi \delta (\omega ^{})\right]{\displaystyle \frac{(e^{})^2}{2hT^{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{k^3dk}{\mathrm{sinh}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+k^2}{2T^{}}}\right)}}.`$ (23)
Though the integral over $`k`$ is calculable exactly, we state here only the results in the limiting cases of the QD and QC regimes:

$`\sigma (\omega )=\left({\displaystyle \frac{i}{\omega }}+\pi \delta (\omega )\right){\displaystyle \frac{(e^{})^2}{h}}T\{\begin{array}{cc}e^{\delta /T}\hfill & \mathrm{QD}\hfill \\ \mathrm{ln}\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{ln}\frac{1}{T}\hfill & \mathrm{QC}\hfill \end{array}`$ (26)
The expression in the QC regime is written with triple logarithmic accuracy. We see that on the insulating side, the real part of the collisionless conductivity does not have any regular contribution, as $`\omega 0`$. The singular part disappears as well at $`T=0`$. Moreover, the form of the frequency dependence in Eq. (26) is characteristic for the conductivity of a superconducting phase. This unphysical result suggests that the finite life-time of quasiparticles should be accounted for in the correct determination of transport properties.

The inclusion of the non-zero Ohmic dissipation provided by the last term in Eq. (4), changes the analytical properties of Matsubara sums, and the analytical continuation in Eq. (22) should be performed by contour integration

$`\sigma (\omega ^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(e^{})^2}{h\omega ^{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}k^3dk{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}\mathrm{coth}{\displaystyle \frac{z}{2T^{}}}dz[(G^R(z)G^A(z))`$ (28)
$`[G^R(z)+G^A(z)G^R(z+\omega ^{})G^A(z\omega ^{})]],`$
where the retarded and advanced Green functions $`G^{R/A}(z)=(z+ϵ_k^{}i\eta z)^1`$ have been introduced. In the limit $`\omega 0`$, expansion of the corresponding Green functions and subsequent integration by parts yields the dc conductivity:

$`\sigma `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(e^{})^2}{2\pi h}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}k^3𝑑k{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dx}{\mathrm{sinh}^2x}}`$ (30)
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{8(\eta T^{}x)^2}{\left[(ϵ_k^{}+2xT^{})^2+(2\eta T^{}x)^2\right]^2}}.`$
In the QD regime $`T^{}=T/\delta 1`$, and, as long as $`\eta T/\delta `$, the integral over $`x`$ is determined by the two competing contributions: from the region near the minimum of denominator at $`x_0=ϵ_k^{}/2T^{}`$ and from the vicinity of $`x=0`$. Evaluating those contributions and integrating subsequently over momentum $`k`$, we receive the total conductivity:

$`\sigma ={\displaystyle \frac{2e^2}{h}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{T}{\delta \eta }}e^{\delta /T}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{9}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\eta T}{\delta }}\right)^2\right].`$ (31)
As can be seen, the first term is dominant for very small values of dissipation, $`\eta <(\delta /T)^{1/3}e^{\delta /3T}`$, while for larger $`\eta `$ only the second contribution should be retained. In any of that cases the conductivity monotonically decreases as $`T0`$.

In the QC regime the double logarithmic accuracy implies that $`T^{}=\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{ln}(1/T)1`$. With the same accuracy, the main contribution to the integral over $`x`$ comes from $`x1`$, allowing us to set $`x^2/\mathrm{sinh}^2x1`$. We obtain then after simple integrations, assuming $`\eta 1`$, that

$`\sigma ={\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{h}}{\displaystyle \frac{1+\eta ^2}{\eta }}\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{T}}.`$ (32)
This suggests, that the conductivity is not universal in the QC regime and increases upon lowering the temperature, albeit very slowly, as a double logarithm of $`1/T`$. One can conclude that, because of the crossover from the QC to the QD region upon lowering temperature for any non-zero $`\delta `$, it may be possible to observe a non-monotonic behavior of the resistivity as a function of temperature with a dip when $`T\delta `$. Though the derived results are strictly applicable in rather tiny regimes, where $`\delta `$ and $`T`$ are logarithmically small, the results found here may be observable beyond those boundaries.

Now consider the role of mutual scattering of quasiparticles as the other possible source of dissipation. Eq.(4) suggests that our action is Galilean invariant, describing the system of charge carries of one definite sign. In the Hamiltonian formalism, our system is identical to that of weakly-interacting Bose particles in 2D. The linearization of the corresponding collision integral in the kinetic equation in a small correction to the equilibrium distribution, proportional to ($`\mathrm{𝐤𝐄}`$),

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}+e^{}𝐄(t){\displaystyle \frac{}{𝐤}}\right)f(𝐤,t)=I[f(𝐤,t)],`$ (33)
reveals, that $`I[f(𝐤,t)]`$ turns to zero as a consequence of momentum conservation. This situation is different from the $`z=1`$ case, in which the system consists of colliding particles and holes having the same energy. This does not mean, however, that the mutual collisions of quasiparticles in the $`z=2`$ case can not lead to the finite lifetime. The appropriate way to see this is to go beyond the continuum limit and recall that the real experimental systems, such as JJA, have a lattice periodicity. This suggests that in case of a square lattice, the quasiparticle energies $`ϵ_𝐤=42(\mathrm{cos}k_x+\mathrm{cos}k_y)`$ are periodic functions of the quasimomentum $`𝐤`$, and the Umklapp processes need to be taken into account. The corresponding inverse scattering time $`1/\tau _U`$ can be estimated from

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\tau _U}}u^2{\displaystyle n(ϵ_{𝐤_1})(1+n(ϵ_{𝐤_2}))\delta (ϵ_𝐤+ϵ_{𝐤_1}ϵ_{𝐤_2}ϵ_{𝐤_3})}`$ (34)
$`(2\pi )^2\delta (𝐤+𝐤_1𝐤_2𝐤_3𝐛){\displaystyle \frac{d^2k_1}{(2\pi )^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2k_2}{(2\pi )^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2k_3}{(2\pi )^2}},`$ (35)
where the integration runs over the first Brillouin zone, and $`𝐛`$ is the reciprocal lattice vector. The non-zero $`𝐛`$ implies that the conditions imposed by $`\delta `$-functions on quasimomenta and energies of colliding quasiparticles can both be satisfied only if one of the incoming and one of the outgoing quasimomenta come from the interior of the first Brillouin zone. Because the main contribution, as can be seen from the Kubo formula, comes from small $`k`$, $`k_2`$ must be large. Physically, this means that the damping of the critical fluctuations of the order parameter arises from the collisions with the non-critical modes. One can easily estimate that $`1/\tau _Ue^{A/T}`$ where the prefactor varies slowly $`\delta `$ and $`T`$, and $`A`$ is some numerical constant determined by the concrete form of the first Brillouin zone and the quasiparticle dispersion law. This inverse scattering rate, valid in both QC and QD regimes, is very small near the quantum phase transition point. This implies that in the absence of any Ohmic dissipation $`\eta `$ the conductivity $`\sigma \tau _Ue^{A/T}`$, and hence exponentially increases with temperature. The latter conclusion can be verified by making the substitution $`\eta xT(1/2\tau _U)`$ in Eq. (30). Such behavior suggests that Ohmic dissipation plays the dominant role near the 2D IST point in the presence of charge frustration and reinstates the insulating behavior. For JJA, fabricated from s-wave superconductors, weak non-magnetic disorder is non-pair breaking. Hence, as long as the pairs remain intact, it can not lead to dissipative terms in our action. Ohmic dissipation arises if the superconducting grains are embedded in a conducting environment in which case Eqs. (31) and (32) give the conductivity due to fluctuations of the superconducting order parameter.

Conventional disorder leads, however, to dissipation in a d-wave superconductor because in this case it is a pair-breaking perturbation. The finite temperature fluctuation conductivity near this disorder-driven metal-superconductor quantum phase transition can be investigated using the same action (4), provided we are not too close to the transition point where the disorder affects the critical properties. Depending on parameters of the microscopic Hamiltonian, $`\eta `$ can be both small and large, compared to unity. If $`\eta 1`$, the conductivity in the QC regime is given by Eq. (32), and we should use the last term of Eq. (31) for the QD regime. If $`\eta 1`$, the relevant conductivity was discussed using $`N=\mathrm{}`$ approach.

This work was funded by the DMR98-12422 of the NSF research fund.


text:
# Next-to-next-to-leading logarithmic corrections at small transverse momentum in hadronic collisions*footnote **footnote *Work supported in part by the EU Fourth Framework Programme ‘Training and Mobility of Researchers’, Network ‘Quantum Chromodynamics and the Deep Structure of Elementary Particles’, contract FMRX-CT98-0194 (DG 12 - MIHT) and by the Swiss National Foundation.

## Abstract

We study the region of small transverse momenta in $`q\overline{q}`$\- and $`gg`$-initiated processes with no colored particle detected in the final state. We present the universal expression of the $`𝒪(\alpha _s^2)`$ logarithmically-enhanced contributions up to next-to-next-to-leading logarithmic accuracy. From there we extract the coefficients that allow the resummation of the large logarithmic contributions. We find that the coefficient known in the literature as $`B^{(2)}`$ is process dependent, since it receives a hard contamination from the one loop correction to the leading order subprocess. We present the general result of $`B^{(2)}`$ for both quark and gluon channels. In particular, in the case of Higgs production, this result will be relevant to improve the matching between resummed predictions and fixed order calculations.

preprint:  August 2000

The process in which a system of non strongly-interacting particles of large invariant mass $`Q^2`$ (lepton pairs, gauge boson(s), Higgs boson, and so forth) is produced in hadronic collisions is a well studied subject in perturbative QCD . At transverse momenta $`q_T^2`$ of order of $`Q^2`$ the cross section can be computed by using the standard QCD-improved parton model. When $`q_T`$ becomes small the simple perturbative picture is spoiled. This happens because large logarithmic corrections of the form $`\mathrm{log}\frac{Q^2}{q_T^2}`$ arise due to a non complete cancellation of soft and collinear singularities between real and virtual contributions. These large logarithmic corrections can be resummed to all orders by using the Collins-Soper-Sterman (CSS) formalism .

We consider the class of inclusive hard scattering processes

$$h_1h_2A_1+A_2\mathrm{}A_n+X$$
(1)
where the collision of the hadrons $`h_1`$ and $`h_2`$ produces a system of non strongly-interacting final state particles $`A_1\mathrm{}A_n`$ carrying total momentum $`Q`$ and total transverse momentum $`q_T`$. According to the CSS formula, and neglecting terms which are finite in the limit $`q_T0`$, the cross-section can be written as It is assumed that all other dimensionful invariants are of the same order $`Q^2`$. :

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma }{dq_T^2dQ^2d\varphi }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{a,b,c}{}}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑x_1{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑x_2{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑b{\displaystyle \frac{b}{2}}J_0(bq_T){\displaystyle \frac{d\sigma _{c\overline{c}}^{(LO)}}{d\varphi }}\delta (Q^2x_1x_2s)`$ (2)
$``$ $`\left(f_{a/h_1}C_{ca}\right)(x_1,{\displaystyle \frac{b_0^2}{b^2}})\left(f_{b/h_2}C_{\overline{c}b}\right)(x_2,{\displaystyle \frac{b_0^2}{b^2}})S_c(Q,b),`$ (3)
where $`d\varphi =dPS(Qq_1,q_2,\mathrm{}q_n)`$ represents the phase space of the system of non-colored particles, $`b_0=2e^{\gamma _e}`$ and $`\sigma _{c\overline{c}}^{(LO)}`$ is the leading-order cross-section (i.e., with no final state partons and therefore $`q_T=0`$) for the given process ($`c,\overline{c}`$ can be either $`q_f,\overline{q}_f^{}`$ or $`g,g`$). The function $`C_{ab}`$ in Eq. (2) is a process-dependent coefficient function, $`J_0(bq_T)`$ is the Bessel function of first kind and $`f_{i/h}`$ corresponds to the distribution of a parton $`i`$ in a hadron $`h`$. The large logarithmic corrections are exponentiated in the Sudakov form factor

$$S_c(Q,b)=\mathrm{exp}\left\{_{b_0^2/b^2}^{Q^2}\frac{dq^2}{q^2}\left[A_c(\alpha _s(q^2))\mathrm{ln}\frac{Q^2}{q^2}+B_c(\alpha _s(q^2))\right]\right\}.$$
(4)
The functions $`A_c`$, $`B_c`$ and $`C_{ab}`$ in Eqs. (2,4) have perturbative expansions in $`\alpha _s`$,

$`A_c(\alpha _s)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }}\right)^nA_c^{(n)},`$ (5)
$`B_c(\alpha _s)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }}\right)^nB_c^{(n)},`$ (6)
$`C_{ab}(\alpha _s,z)`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _{ab}\delta (1z)+{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }}\right)^nC_{ab}^{(n)}(z).`$ (7)
In order to obtain the coefficients in Eqs.(5-6) at a given order, the differential cross-section at small $`q_T`$ has to be computed at the same order. A comparison with the power expansion in $`\alpha _s`$ of the resummed result in Eq. (2) allows to extract the coefficients that control the resummation of the large logarithmic terms.

In this letter we study the behaviour of cross-sections at small transverse momenta at second order in $`\alpha _s`$ both in the quark and gluon channels. We find that the analytic form of the logarithmically-enhanced contributions can be computed perturbatively in a universal manner by using the recent knowledge on the infrared behaviour of tree-level  and one-loop  QCD amplitudes. In this way, we are able to extract the coefficients $`A_c^{(1)}`$, $`B_c^{(1)}`$, $`C_{ab}^{(1)}`$, $`A_c^{(2)}`$ and $`B_c^{(2)}`$ for any $`q\overline{q}`$ or $`gg`$ initiated process in the class (1). Details on our calculation will be given elsewhere . Here we only present and discuss our main results.

By following Ref. we multiply the differential cross-section, calculated at parton level, by $`q_T^2`$ and take moments with respect to $`z=Q^2/s`$ defining the dimensionless quantity:

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(N)=𝑑zz^N\frac{q_T^2Q^2}{d\sigma _0/d\varphi }\frac{d\sigma }{dq_T^2dQ^2d\varphi }.$$
(8)
In the quark channel, for the sake of simplicity and in order to compare our result for $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(N)`$ to the one originally obtained for Drell-Yan in Ref., we restrict our attention to the non-singlet contribution to the cross-section defined by

$$\sigma ^{NS}=\underset{ff^{}}{}\left(\sigma _{q_f\overline{q}_f^{}}\sigma _{q_fq_f^{}}\right).$$
(9)
To have $`q_T0`$ at least one gluon must be emitted, thus $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(N)`$ has the expansion:

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }(N)=\frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }\mathrm{\Sigma }^{(1)}(N)+\left(\frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }\right)^2\mathrm{\Sigma }^{(2)}(N)+\mathrm{}$$
(10)
In the following we will systematically neglect in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(N)`$ all contributions that vanish as $`q_T0`$.

In order to compute the small $`q_T`$ behaviour of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(N)`$ our strategy is as follows. The singular behaviour at small $`q_T`$ is dictated by the infrared (soft and collinear) structure of the relevant QCD matrix elements. At $`𝒪(\alpha _s)`$ this structure has been known for long time . Recently, the universal functions that control the soft and collinear singularities of tree-level and one-loop QCD amplitudes at $`𝒪(\alpha _s^2)`$ have been computed .

By using this knowledge, and exploiting the simple kinematics of the leading order subprocess, we were able to construct improved factorization formulae that allow to control all infrared singular regions avoiding any problem of double counting . We have used these improved formulae to approximate the relevant matrix elements and compute the small $`q_T`$ behaviour of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(N)`$ in a completely universal manner.

The calculation at $`𝒪(\alpha _s)`$ is straightforward and we recover the well-known results:

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_{q\overline{q}}^{(1)}(N)=2C_F\mathrm{log}\frac{Q^2}{q_T^2}3C_F+2\gamma _{qq}^{(1)}(N)$$
(11)
and

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_{gg}^{(1)}(N)=2C_A\mathrm{log}\frac{Q^2}{q_T^2}2\beta _0+2\gamma _{gg}^{(1)}(N).$$
(12)
Here $`C_F=\frac{N_c^21}{2N_c}`$, $`C_A=N_c`$ and $`T_R=1/2`$ are the $`SU(N_c)`$ QCD colour factors, $`\beta _0=\frac{11}{6}C_A\frac{2}{3}n_fT_R`$ and $`\gamma _{qq}^{(1)}(N)`$, $`\gamma _{gg}^{(1)}(N)`$ are the quark and gluon one-loop anomalous dimensions, respectively. From Eqs. (11,12) one obtains:

$$A_a^{(1)}=2C_aB_a^{(1)}=2\gamma _aa=q,g$$
(13)
where $`C_a`$ and $`\gamma _a`$ are the coefficients of the leading $`(1z)^1`$ singularity and $`\delta (1z)`$ term in the one-loop Altarelli-Parisi kernels $`P_{aa}`$, respectively,

$$C_q=C_FC_g=C_A\gamma _q=\frac{3}{2}C_F\gamma _g=\beta _0.$$
(14)
At this order it is possible to obtain also the coefficient $`C_{ab}^{(1)}`$ by considering the $`q_T`$ integrated distribution and including the renormalized virtual correction to the $`LO`$ amplitude $`c\overline{c}A_1+A_2\mathrm{}A_n`$, summed over spins and colours, which, at $`𝒪(ϵ^0)`$, can be written asAll our results are obtained using the factorization and renormalization prescriptions of the $`\overline{MS}`$ scheme and within the framework of conventional dimensional regularization.

$$_{c\overline{c}}^{(0)}(\varphi )_{c\overline{c}}^{(1)}(\varphi )+\mathrm{c}.\mathrm{c}.=\frac{\alpha _s}{2\pi }\left(\frac{4\pi \mu ^2}{Q^2}\right)^ϵ\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1ϵ)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(12ϵ)}(\frac{2C_c}{ϵ^2}\frac{2\gamma _c}{ϵ}+𝒜_c(\varphi ))|_{c\overline{c}}^{(0)}(\varphi )|^2.$$
(15)
In Eq. (15) the structure of the poles in $`ϵ=(4d)/2`$ is universal  and fixed by the flavour of the incoming partons. The finite part $`𝒜`$ (which can depend on the kinematics of the final state non-colored particles) depends instead on the particular process in the class (1) we want to consider. In the case of Drell-Yan we have :

$$𝒜_q^{DY}=C_F\left(8+\frac{2}{3}\pi ^2\right),$$
(16)
whereas for Higgs production in the $`m_{top}\mathrm{}`$ limit the finite contribution is :

$$𝒜_g^H=5C_A+\frac{2}{3}C_A\pi ^23C_F11+2\pi ^2.$$
(17)
By using the information in Eq. (15) we obtain for $`C_{ab}^{(1)}`$

$`C_{ab}^{(1)}(z)=\widehat{P}_{ab}^ϵ(z)+\delta _{ab}\delta (1z)\left(C_a{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{6}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}𝒜_a(\varphi )\right)`$ (18)
where $`\widehat{P}_{ab}^ϵ(z)`$ is the $`𝒪(ϵ)`$ term in the Altarelli-Parisi $`\widehat{P}_{ab}(z,ϵ)`$ splitting kernel, given by:

$`\widehat{P}_{qq}^ϵ(z)`$ $`=`$ $`C_F(1z)`$ (19)
$`\widehat{P}_{gq}^ϵ(z)`$ $`=`$ $`C_Fz`$ (20)
$`\widehat{P}_{qg}^ϵ(z)`$ $`=`$ $`2T_Rz(1z)`$ (21)
$`\widehat{P}_{gg}^ϵ(z)`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (22)
At order $`\alpha _s`$ the coefficients $`A_a^{(1)}`$ and $`B_a^{(1)}`$ are fully determined by the universal Altarelli-Parisi splitting functions. The function $`C_{ab}^{(1)}`$ depends instead on the process through the one-loop corrections to the $`LO`$ matrix element. The general expression in Eq. (18) reproduces correctly the coefficient $`C_{ab}^{(1)}`$ for Drell-Yan , Higgs production in the $`m_{top}\mathrm{}`$ limit  and $`\gamma \gamma `$ production §§§The actual expression of the coefficient $`C_{qq}^{(1)}`$ for $`ZZ`$ production reported in Ref.  is not fully correct..

At second order in $`\alpha _s`$, two different contributions to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{(2)}(N)`$ have to be considered: the real correction corresponding to the emission of one extra parton (i.e., two gluons or a $`q\overline{q}`$ pair) with respect to the $`𝒪(\alpha _s)`$ contribution, and its corresponding virtual correction.

The double-real emission contribution is the most difficult to compute. One has to integrate over the phase space of the two unresolved final state partons keeping $`q_T`$ fixed and finally perform the $`z`$ integration in Eq. (8). We find that, likewise $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{(1)}(N)`$, this contribution to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{(2)}(N)`$ is process independent, i.e., it does not depend on the particular process in the class (1) we want to consider.

The virtual contribution is simpler to compute and we find it to be process dependent. More importantly, its process dependence is fully determined by the function $`𝒜`$ appearing in the one-loop correction to the $`LO`$ subprocess (see Eq. (15)).

In the following, for the sake of simplicity, we present the total results for $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{(2)}(N)`$ corresponding to the choice of the factorization and renormalization scales fixed to $`Q^2`$. Since we are interested in extracting the coefficients $`A_{q,g}^{(2)}`$ and $`B_{q,g}^{(2)}`$, as in the $`𝒪(\alpha _s)`$ case we concentrate on the diagonal $`q\overline{q}`$ and $`gg`$ contributions to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{(2)}(N)`$.

In the quark (non-singlet) channel we obtain:

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{q\overline{q}}^{(2)}(N)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}^3{\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{q_T^2}}\left[2C_F^2\right]`$ (23)
$`+`$ $`\mathrm{log}^2{\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{q_T^2}}\left[9C_F^2+2C_F\beta _06C_F\gamma _{qq}^{(1)}(N)\right]`$ (24)
$`+`$ $`\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{q_T^2}}[C_F^2({\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\pi ^27)+C_FC_A({\displaystyle \frac{35}{18}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{3}}){\displaystyle \frac{2}{9}}C_Fn_fT_R+2C_F𝒜_q(\varphi )`$ (26)
$`+(2\beta _0+12C_F)\gamma _{qq}^{(1)}(N)4\left(\gamma _{qq}^{(1)}(N)\right)^2+4C_F^2({\displaystyle \frac{1}{(N+1)(N+2)}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})]`$
$`+`$ $`[C_F^2({\displaystyle \frac{15}{4}}4\zeta (3))+C_FC_A({\displaystyle \frac{13}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{11}{18}}\pi ^2+6\zeta (3))3C_F𝒜_q(\varphi )`$ (29)
$`+C_Fn_fT_R\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{9}}\pi ^2\right)+2\gamma _{()}^{(2)}(N)+2C_F\gamma _{qq}^{(1)}(N)\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{3}}+2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(N+1)(N+2)}}\right)`$
$`+2\gamma _{qq}^{(1)}(N)𝒜_q(\varphi )2C_F(\beta _0+3C_F)({\displaystyle \frac{1}{(N+1)(N+2)}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})],`$
whereas for the gluon channel the result is:

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{gg}^{(2)}(N)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}^3{\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{q_T^2}}\left[2C_A^2\right]`$ (30)
$`+`$ $`\mathrm{log}^2{\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{q_T^2}}\left[8C_A\beta _06C_A\gamma _{gg}^{(1)}(N)\right]`$ (31)
$`+`$ $`\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{q_T^2}}[C_A^2({\displaystyle \frac{67}{9}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{3}}){\displaystyle \frac{20}{9}}C_An_fT_R+2C_A𝒜_g(\varphi )`$ (33)
$`+2\beta _0(\gamma _{gg}^{(1)}(N)\beta _0)4(\gamma _{gg}^{(1)}(N)\beta _0)^24n_f\gamma _{gq}^{(1)}(N)\gamma _{qg}^{(1)}(N)]`$
$`+`$ $`[C_A^2({\displaystyle \frac{16}{3}}+2\zeta (3))+2C_Fn_fT_R+{\displaystyle \frac{8}{3}}C_An_fT_R2\beta _0(𝒜_g(\varphi )+C_A{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{6}})`$ (35)
$`+2\gamma _{gg}^{(2)}(N)+2\gamma _{gg}^{(1)}(N)(𝒜_g(\varphi )+C_A{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{3}})+4C_Fn_f\gamma _{qg}^{(1)}(N){\displaystyle \frac{1}{(N+2)}}].`$
In Eq. (23) $`\gamma _{()}^{(2)}(N)`$ is the non singlet space-like two-loop anomalous dimension , in Eq. (30) $`\gamma _{gg}^{(2)}(N)`$ is the singlet space-like two-loop anomalous dimension  , $`\zeta (n)`$ is the Riemann $`\zeta `$ function ($`\zeta (3)=1.202\mathrm{}`$) and the function $`𝒜_a(\varphi )`$ is defined through Eq. (15). The coefficients $`\frac{1}{(N+1)(N+2)}`$ and $`\frac{1}{(N+2)}`$ have origin on the $`N`$ moments of $`\widehat{P}_{qq}^ϵ(z)`$ and $`\widehat{P}_{gq}^ϵ(z)`$, respectively.

The $`N`$-dependent part of the results in Eqs. (23,30) agreesThis can also be regarded as an independent re-evaluation of the two-loop anomalous dimensions. with the one obtained from the second order expansion of Eq. (2) (see e.g. Ref. ). By comparing also the N-independent part we obtain for $`A^{(2)}`$:

$$A_a^{(2)}=KA_a^{(1)}K=C_A\left(\frac{67}{18}\frac{\pi ^2}{6}\right)n_fT_R\frac{10}{9}$$
(36)
in agreement with the results of Ref. . Moreover we find that $`B^{(2)}`$ can be expressed as:

$$B_a^{(2)}=2\delta P_{aa}^{(2)}+\beta _0\left(\frac{2}{3}C_a\pi ^2+𝒜_a(\varphi )\right)a=q,g$$
(37)
where $`\delta P_{aa}^{(2)}`$ are the coefficients of the $`\delta (1z)`$ term in the two-loop splitting functions $`P_{aa}^{(2)}(z)`$ , and are given by

$`\delta P_{qq}^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`C_F^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{8}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{2}}+6\zeta (3)\right)+C_FC_A\left({\displaystyle \frac{17}{24}}+{\displaystyle \frac{11\pi ^2}{18}}3\zeta (3)\right)C_Fn_fT_R\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi ^2}{9}}\right)`$ (38)
$`\delta P_{gg}^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`C_A^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{8}{3}}+3\zeta (3)\right)C_Fn_fT_R{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}C_An_fT_R.`$ (39)
From Eq. (37) we see that $`B^{(2)}`$, besides the $`2\delta P_{aa}^{(2)}`$ term which matches the expectation from the $`𝒪(\alpha _s)`$ result, receives a process-dependent contribution controlled by the one-loop correction to the $`LO`$ amplitude (see Eq. (15)). We conclude that the Sudakov form factor in Eq. (4) is actually process dependent beyond next-to-leading logarithmic accuracy. The interpretation of this result will be given elsewhere .

However, by using the general expression in Eq. (37) it is possible to obtain $`B^{(2)}`$ for a given process just by computing the one-loop correction to the $`LO`$ amplitude for that process. For the case of Drell-Yan, by using Eq. (16), our result for $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{q\overline{q}}^{(2)}(N)`$ agrees with the one of Ref. , and we confirm:

$$B_q^{(2)DY}=C_F^2\left(\pi ^2\frac{3}{4}12\zeta (3)\right)+C_FC_A\left(\frac{11}{9}\pi ^2\frac{193}{12}+6\zeta (3)\right)+C_Fn_fT_R\left(\frac{17}{3}\frac{4}{9}\pi ^2\right).$$
(40)
In the case of Higgs production in the $`m_{top}\mathrm{}`$ limit, by using Eq. (17) we find:

$$B_g^{(2)H}=C_A^2\left(\frac{23}{6}+\frac{22}{9}\pi ^26\zeta (3)\right)+4C_Fn_fT_RC_An_fT_R\left(\frac{2}{3}+\frac{8}{9}\pi ^2\right)\frac{11}{2}C_FC_A.$$
(41)
In particular, this result allows to improve the present accuracy of the matching between resummed predictions  and fixed order calculations .

Summarizing, we have studied the logarithmically-enhanced contributions at small transverse momentum in hadronic collisions at second order in perturbative QCD. The calculation was performed in an process-independent manner, allowing us to show that the Sudakov form factor is actually process dependent beyond next-to-leading logarithmic accuracy. We have provided a general expression for the coefficient $`B^{(2)}`$ for both quark and gluon initiated processes.

We would like to thank Stefano Catani and Zoltan Kunszt for many valuable discussions and comments, Christine Davies for providing us with a copy of her Ph.D. thesis and Luca Trentadue, James Stirling and Werner Vogelsang for discussions.