text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The Belle Experiment  at the KEK-B asymmetric $`e^+e^{}`$ collider has completed its first year of operation in July 2000 accumulating data equivalent to an integrated luminosity of 6.2 fb-1 on the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$. This corresponds to about 6.3 $`\times 10^6B\overline{B}`$’s. Apart from the early running period, the KEK-B machine operated quite well delivering a record luminosity of 94 pb-1 per day and 504 pb-1 per week respectively and has great prospects for further improvement towards its design goal of 100 fb-1 / Year. We report on some of the new measurements that have been carried out using this dataset with the emphasis on the measurement of the Standard Model CP violation parameter $`\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _1)`$. The results being reported are all preliminary.

## 2 General Features of Data Analysis

$`B`$ candidates are identified using $`M_b=\sqrt{E_{beam}^2|P_i^{cms}|^2}`$, the beam constrained mass and $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=E_{beam}E_B`$, where $`E_{beam}=E_{cms}/2`$. While $`M_b`$ expresses the momentum conservation in the decay, $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ expresses the energy conservation of the particles in the decay and is sensitive to the missing particles and $`K/\pi `$ misidentification.

In all the decay modes we consider here, the dominant source of background arises from $`e^+e^{}q\overline{q}(q=u,d,c,s)`$ transitions. We exploit the difference between jetty hadronization of continuum events and spherical decay of $`B`$’s at $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ center of mass frame. Continuum background is reduced using $`R_2`$ = $`H_2`$/$`H_0`$, where $`H_l=_{i,j}\frac{|\stackrel{}{p_i}||\stackrel{}{p_j}|}{E_{cms}^2}P_l(\mathrm{cos}\theta _{i,j})`$, the Fox-Wolfram moment , that measures the shape of an event as a whole and $`P_l(\mathrm{cos}\theta _{i,j})`$ are Legendre Polynomials. In some decay modes, the continuum background is reduced using modified Fox Wolfram moments  where the tracks and showers coming from $`B`$ and the rest of the tracks and showers in the event are separated. These modified Fox-Wolfram moments are combined in a Fisher Discriminant to form the Super Fox Wolfram (SFW). The SFW has approximately 2$`\sigma `$ separation between $`q\overline{q}`$ and $`B\overline{B}`$ events and provides a 22 % increase in the expected significance for some modes as compared to $`R_2`$. Another popular technique to remove the continuum component in the data is to cut on $`\mathrm{cos}(\theta _{thrust})`$ variable, where $`\theta _{thrust}`$ is the angle between the thrust axis of the signal $`B`$ and the thrust axis of the rest of the event. In some analyses, the continuum variables are combined with kinematic variables in a likelihood fit to determine the signal yield.

## 3 Branching Ratio Measurement

We will highlight selected branching ratio measurements that were either first observation or important new measurements. The preliminary results reported in this section are based on the first 5.3 million $`B\overline{B}`$ events recorded on the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ resonance at KEK-B.

### 3.1 $`B\varphi K`$

This is the first observation of $`B`$ decays involving a pure penguin transition, $`bss\overline{s}`$. Two charged tracks identified as kaons are combined to form a $`\varphi `$ meson candidate with an additional requirement that both tracks are from one vertex. The candidate $`\varphi `$ is then combined with a charged $`K`$ or $`K_s`$ to form a $`B`$ candidate. Continuum background is suppressed with cuts on $`\mathrm{cos}(\theta _{thrust})`$, the $`\varphi `$ meson helicity angle which is the angle between the direction of $`K^+`$ and the momentum vector of $`\varphi (1020)`$ and the $`B`$ flight direction. The final yield is obtained by fitting the $`M_b`$ distribution (Fig. 1). The binned likelihood fit yields $`9.2_{2.9}^{+3.6}`$ ($`B\varphi K`$) events with a statistical significance of 5.4$`\sigma `$ and $`(B^+\varphi (1020)K^\pm )=1.72_{0.54}^{+0.67}`$(stat.) $`\pm 0.18`$(sys.) $`\times 10^5`$. We also observed two events of the type $`B\varphi K_s`$ in the 3$`\sigma `$ signal box. These are consistent with the fluctuation in the $`q\overline{q}`$ background. A more detailed description of the analysis can be found in reference . As statistics improve, this decay mode will be used to determine the CKM angle $`\varphi _1`$.

### 3.2 $`BK\pi ,KK,\pi \pi `$

The study of charmless hadronic $`B`$ meson decays offers a variety of test of Standard Model physics and beyond. Our immediate motivation was to measure the branching fraction of those decay modes which are either not measured or are limited by statistics. We have summarized the current Belle branching fraction measurements of charmless $`Bhh`$ decays in Table 1. Thanks to the excellent performance of the high momentum particle identification system, we have seen very clear signals in some of the decay modes. A detailed account of the analysis can be found in references  and . The measurements are all consistent with similar observations in other experiments .

### 3.3 Radiative $`B`$ Meson Decays

Flavor-changing neutral decays involving $`bs`$ or $`bd`$ transition have received much attention in recent years. The inclusive decay $`BX_s\gamma `$ where $`X_s`$ is a strange hadronic state, is of particular interest to the experimentalist since the theoretical description of the decay mode is rather clean and can be related to the partonic weak decay $`bs\gamma `$. A short term motivation in this direction was to measure the branching fraction with a better particle identification device and a high resolution electro-magnetic calorimeter. Table 2 summarizes the signal yield and corresponding branching fraction measurement of radiative $`B`$ meson decays at Belle. The results are comparable to the recent CLEO results . Our current 90 % C.L. upper limit on the ratio is $`(B\rho \gamma )/(BK^{}\gamma )<`$0.28. This is an important result because it constrains $`|V_{td}/V_{ts}|`$ within the Standard Model. A detailed description of the analysis method can be found in reference .

### 3.4 $`BD^{()}K`$

We report the observation of the Cabibbo-suppressed decay modes $`\overline{B}^0D^+K^{}`$ and $`B^{}D^0K^{}`$ (Fig. 2). In addition, we also report a new measurement of $`(\overline{B}^+\overline{D}^0K^+)`$. Thanks to the excellent particle identification at Belle, one can clearly separate the signal from the background originating from the Cabibbo-favored decay modes with more than 3$`\sigma `$ significance. We measured the ratio $`R`$ of the branching fraction for the Cabibbo suppressed decay $`BD^{()}K^{}`$ normalized relative to the Cabibbo allowed decay $`BD^{()}\pi ^{}`$. The observed ratios are summarized in Table 3. The detailed description of the analysis method can be found in the reference  As statistics improve, the analysis will shift towards the extraction of the CKM angle $`\varphi _3`$.

### 3.5 $`BJ/\psi K_1`$

Inclusive $`BJ/\psi X`$ decays are not saturated by the sum of observed exclusive modes. This motivates the search for new exclusive modes that we are reporting here. $`K_1`$ candidates were reconstructed from $`K^+\pi ^+\pi ^{},K^+\pi ^{}\pi ^0`$ and $`K^0\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$. We have verified the signal is due to $`BJ/\psi K_1(1270)`$ (Fig. 3) and determine the branching fractions as summarized in Table 4.

## 4 Measurement of $`\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _1)`$

Experimentally, $`CP`$ asymmetry is observed in the distribution of the proper time difference of two $`B`$ decays produced in pairs in the decays of the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$, one to $`CP`$ eigenstate and another to any final state where the flavor is identified. For a $`B`$ decaying to a $`CP`$ eigenstate, the time dependent asymmetry a(t) can be non-zero, indicating $`CP`$ violation :

$$a(t)=\frac{N(B^0(t)f)N(\overline{B^0}(t)f)}{N(B^0(t)f)+N(\overline{B^0}(t)f)}=\frac{(1|\lambda _f|^2)\mathrm{cos}(\mathrm{\Delta }m_dt)2Im\lambda _f\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Delta }m_dt)}{(1+|\lambda _f|^2)}$$
(1)
where $`\lambda _f=\frac{q}{p}\frac{A(\overline{B^0}f)}{A(B^0f)}`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_d`$ is the $`B_d`$ mixing frequency, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ its width and $`Im\lambda _f=\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _1)`$ that arises from the interference between the decays with and without mixing.

When $`B^0f`$ = $`\overline{B^0}f`$ and assuming only one diagram dominates the decay process, $`|\lambda _f|^2`$=1. Then the time dependent asymmetry would be

$$a(t)\eta _{CP}\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _1)\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Delta }m_dt)$$
(2)
where $`\eta _{CP}`$ = -1 for $`\psi K_s`$ type modes and $`\eta _{CP}`$ = 1 for $`J/\psi K_L`$ and $`\psi \pi ^0`$ modes. One of the important and immediate goal for the Belle experiment is to measure $`\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _1)`$ to see if the CKM model is correct.

### 4.1 Event Reconstruction : $`B`$ Decaying to $`CP`$ Eigenstate

Table 5 summarizes the decay modes that are reconstructed for the CP analysis. $`J/\psi `$ and $`\psi (2S)`$ candidate events were reconstructed from dileptons ($`\mu ^+\mu ^{},e^+e^{}`$), correcting for the final state radiation in the electron channel. For $`\psi (2S)`$ candidates we also used the $`J/\psi \pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ mode. $`\chi _{c1}`$ candidates were reconstructed using only the $`J/\psi \gamma `$ decay mode. $`K_s`$ candidates were reconstructed in the $`\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`\pi ^0\pi ^0`$ modes. We reconstructed 102 $`CP`$ eigenstate candidate with 6 estimated background (Fig. 4(left)).

We also reconstructed 102 $`CP`$ even $`BJ/\psi K_L`$ candidate events (Fig. 4(right)) with 48 estimated background. Among the backgrounds which contain $`CP`$ asymmetry, major contributions come from physics events such as $`B`$ decays to $`\chi _{c1}K_L`$, $`J/\psi K_s`$, $`J/\psi K^{}`$ and $`J/\psi `$ non-resonant $`K_L\pi ^0`$.

### 4.2 Measurement of $`B`$ Life Time : A Benchmark Test

Extraction of $`CP`$ asymmetry requires the knowledge of proper time distribution of tagged and fully reconstructed $`B_{CP}`$ event. For $`CP`$ eigenstate modes, the proper time, $`\mathrm{\Delta }t=\mathrm{\Delta }z/c\beta \gamma `$ at $`\beta \gamma =0.425`$, was calculated by measuring the difference between the decay vertices of $`B_{CP}`$ decay vertex and tagging side $`B_{tag}`$ vertex. The vertex point of $`B_{CP}`$ was established by the two tracks associated with the $`J/\psi `$ decay. The vertex position in the tagging side was determined from the tracks not assigned to $`B_{CP}`$ by an algorithm that removes tracks from the secondary vertices or tracks which makes a large increase in the $`\chi ^2`$ of the vertex fit.

The proper time resolution function $`R_{sig}(\mathrm{\Delta }t)`$ was parameterized from MC simulation studies and a multi-parameter fit to $`BD^{}l\nu `$ data (Fig. 5). A double Gaussian parameterization results from various detector characteristics, error in the event by event vertex fit, error in the $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ approximation, the scale factor and charm lifetime.

We measured the $`B`$ life time in various decay modes to test the proper time resolution function that we derived from MC studies. The $`B`$ lifetime was extracted from an event by event likelihood fit with a P.D.F given by

$`P(\mathrm{\Delta }t)`$ $`=`$ $`f_{sig}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}d(\mathrm{\Delta }t^{}){\displaystyle \frac{e^{|\mathrm{\Delta }t^{}|/\tau _{sig}}}{2\tau _{sig}}}R_{sig}(\mathrm{\Delta }t\mathrm{\Delta }t^{})`$ (3)
$`+(1f_{sig}){\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}d(\mathrm{\Delta }t^{})[f_{\lambda _{bg}}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _{bg}}{2}}e^{|\mathrm{\Delta }t^{}|\lambda _{bg}}+(1f_{\lambda _{bg}})\delta (\mathrm{\Delta }t^{})]R_{bg}(\mathrm{\Delta }t\mathrm{\Delta }t^{})`$
Minimization of the likelihood gives $`\tau _B`$ which is one of the free parameters determined from the fit. It should be noted that $`R_{bg}(\mathrm{\Delta }t)`$ was parameterized in the same way as of $`R_{sig}(\mathrm{\Delta }t)`$ using background events from the sideband region of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ and $`M_b`$ scatter plot.

The superimposed solid line on the data points in the right plot of Fig. 5 is the result of the refit for $`\overline{B^0}D^+l^{}\nu `$. The measured $`\tau _B`$ agrees with the world average value proving that the parameterization of the resolution function is correct. Table 6 summarizes the measured combined results for the $`B`$ lifetime from various charged and neutral $`B`$ decays.

### 4.3 Flavor Tagging and Wrong Tag Fraction

To measure the $`CP`$ asymmetry, we need to determine the flavor of the $`B_{CP}`$ candidates from the remaining tracks of the event. We use the following algorithm in sequence to tag a certain $`B`$ in an event. (0) Require tight PID probability for lepton and kaon selection, (1) Obtain the sign of the high momentum lepton ($`p_l^{}>1.1`$ GeV) $``$ positive lepton tags $`B^0`$, (2) Obtain sum of $`K`$ charges $``$ positive sum tags $`B^0`$, (3) Look for medium momentum leptons ($`0.6<p_l^{}<1.1`$ GeV) and large missing momenta $``$ positive charged lepton tags $`B^0`$, (4) Sign of slow pions from $`D^+`$ decays $``$ charge of slow pion and hence flavor of $`D^{}`$ tags the flavor of $`B`$.

The algorithm was tested on a sample of self tagging exclusively reconstructed $`BD^{()}l\nu `$ decays. We extract the wrong tag fraction ($`w`$) and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_d`$ from a maximum likelihood fit to the $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ distribution (eqn. 4) of $`OF`$ (opposite flavor) and $`SF`$ (same flavor) events with a function that includes the effect of $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ resolution and background.

$$A_{mix}(\mathrm{\Delta }t)=\frac{N(\mathrm{\Delta }t)^{OF}N(\mathrm{\Delta }t)^{SF}}{N(\mathrm{\Delta }t)^{OF}+N(\mathrm{\Delta }t)^{SF}}=(12w)\mathrm{cos}(\mathrm{\Delta }m_dt)$$
(4)
The measured value $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_d=0.488\pm 0.026`$ (stat.) ps-1 verifies the consistency of the tagging algorithm. In an independent approach, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_d`$ was determined from the time evolution of dilepton yields in $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ decays. The proper-time difference distribution for same-sign and opposite-sign dilepton events were simultaneously fitted to an expression containing $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_d`$ as a free parameter. Using both electrons and muons, we obtain $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_d=0.463\pm 0.008`$ (stat.)$`\pm 0.016`$ (sys) ps-1 . This is the first determination of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_d`$ from time evolution measurements at the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$. Previous measurements at the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ only used time integrated distributions.

Table 7 summarizes the estimated tagging efficiency in each of the above steps. The effective tagging efficiency $`ϵ_{eff}=ϵ_{tag}(12w)^2`$ is found to be 21.2 %. We also determined the tagging efficiency from the same test sample. Depending on the tag type, we used the numbers in the table for the fit to extract $`\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _1)`$.

### 4.4 CP Fit : Extraction of $`\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _1)`$

Using the tagging method described above, from a sample of 102 $`CP`$ odd and $`J/\psi \pi ^0`$ events and 102 $`J/\psi K_L`$ events, a total of 98 events were tagged. The likelihood for each tagged event is calculated as

$`P(\mathrm{\Delta }t)`$ $`=`$ $`f_{sig}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}Sig(\mathrm{\Delta }t^{},\eta _{CP})R_{sig}(\mathrm{\Delta }t\mathrm{\Delta }t^{})d(\mathrm{\Delta }t^{})`$ (5)
$`+(1f_{sig}){\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}Bkg(\mathrm{\Delta }t^{})R_{sig}(\mathrm{\Delta }t\mathrm{\Delta }t^{})d(\mathrm{\Delta }t^{})`$
where the P.D.F expected for the signal distribution with $`CP`$ eigenvalue $`\eta _{CP}`$ is:
$`Sig(\mathrm{\Delta }t,\eta _{CP})=\frac{1}{\tau _{B^0}}\mathrm{exp}(|\mathrm{\Delta }t|/\tau _{B^0})\{1\eta _{CP}(12w)\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _1)\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Delta }m_d\mathrm{\Delta }t)\}`$
and that of background distribution is: $`Bkg(\mathrm{\Delta }t^{})=\frac{1}{2\tau _{bkg}}\mathrm{exp}(|\mathrm{\Delta }t/\tau _{bkg})`$ and $`w`$ depends on the method of flavor tagging for each event.

The values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_d`$ and $`\tau _{B^0}`$ are fixed to the ones in the P.D.G. We use an unbinned maximum likelihood fit to extract the possible $`CP`$ asymmetry. Before doing a $`CP`$ fit, we wanted to make sure that the whole fitting procedure is bias free. We performed the same analysis procedure including tagging to several non-$`CP`$ eigenstate decay modes, such as $`B^0J/\psi K^0`$, $`B^{}J/\psi K^{},D^0\pi ^{}`$ and found $`\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _1)`$ is consistent with zero within fitting errors. Our result from the likelihood fit to the fully tagged sample is : $`\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _1)=+0.45_{0.44}^{+0.43}(stat.)_{0.09}^{+0.07}(syst.)`$ (Fig. 6).Clearly the measurement is statistics limited. It should be noted that the uncertainty in determining the wrong tag fraction is the largest contribution in the systematics.

## 5 Conclusion and Prospect

Belle had a very successful and exciting first year run and is marching along a well defined road to measuring $`\mathrm{sin}(2\varphi _1)`$ with a very good precision. First preliminary results were reported. We need a lot more data to constrain the CKM triangle with small errors. We observed the first evidence of Cabibbo suppressed $`BD^{}K^{}`$ process, and made first measurements of $`(BJ/\psi K_1(1270))`$ and $`(B^+\varphi K^+`$). New results on many rare decays which will be used to search for direct $`CP`$ violation have also been reported. The physics scope at Belle is not limited to $`B`$ physics only. We have reported five different $`\tau `$ and two-photon physics related results at the ICHEP2000 conference. Please check out for more: http://www.bsunsrv1.kek.jp/conferences/ichep2000.html.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We gratefully acknowledge the effort of the KEK-B staff in providing us with excellent luminosity and running condition. We thank the rest of the Belle Collaboration for their support and help. Special thanks to the KEK computing research center for their help in many different occasion.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

During three decades high energy processes related to the Bjorken limit of scattering amplitudes are playing a major role in the investigation of the hadronic structure and the interaction of hadronic constituents. Quite a number of theoretical concepts and methods have been developed resulting by now in a standard treatment described in textbooks  and reviews .

In the last years increasing attention is devoted to topics going beyond the standard deep inelastic structure functions, among them the long standing problem of the explicite treatment of higher twist contributions and their evolution , the generalization to non-forward kinematics , interpolating between the DGLAP  and the ERBL  limiting cases. The existence of this interpolation has been pointed out early in .

The small $`x`$ behaviour of structure functions and related questions have drawn the attention also to the relations between the Bjorken and the Regge limits. The evolution in the latter asymptotics, as far as it proceeds in the perturbative region, is represented by the BFKL equation .

In view of these topics a discussion of the Bjorken asymptotics invoking concepts not aligned to the standard approach may be of interest.

We work out the effective action concept in analogy to the high energy effective action proposed to investigate the Regge asymptotics . This allows to emphasize interesting similarities. We follow also the concepts developed in . The basic idea is to formulate the factorization of short and large distance contributions in terms of amplitudes and to determine the multi-parton $`t`$-channel intermediate state. The partons represent here certain modes of the underlying gluon and quark fields. The operator product expansion is not the main tool in this formulation; however it leads to a natural and simple basis of operators, the essential part of which are the quasi-partonic operators. The scale dependence of the renormalized operators appears due to the interactions of the exchanged partons, being pair interactions in leading order represented by the so-called non-forward evolution kernels.

The effective action is obtained from the QCD action by separating modes and integrating over some modes. This action allows to obtain the parton interaction kernels by a simple calculation. We represent the interaction by hamiltonians involving (in leading order) two annihilation and two creation operators of partons. The latter depend on the parton type (gluon, quark flavour and chirality), parton helicity and on the position on the light ray. The hamiltonian form is convenient for investigating the symmetries of the exchanged multi-parton system. In particular this formulation is intended to provide a framework to analyze the integrability of the interaction.

The light ray position as the essential variable of operators in the Bjorken limit appeared explicitely first in the approaches by Geyer, Robaschik et al.  and by Balitsky and Braun .

The parton interaction operators can be obtained alternatively as external field effective vertices, where two type of external fields are introduces describing the asymptotic interaction with the currents of high virtuality and with the hadrons. This calculation can be done analyzing the space-time field configurations only without transforming to momentum space.

From the very beginning conformal symmetry was underlying the ideas about Bjorken scaling and its violation. It turned into a tool for finding multiplicatively renormalized operators  and for relating the forward to the non-forward evolutions . Combining conformal and supersymmetry leads to interesting relations between different evolution kernels . The non-forward evolution kernels have been reanalysed recently in . Their reconstruction on the two-loop level from the results for the forward case has been considered in .

Integrability of the effective interaction in high energy QCD amplitudes has been discovered by Lipatov  in the Regge limit in the case of multiple exchange of reggeized gluons and a similar symmetry property was expected in the Bjorken limit. The first examples of higher twist evolutions tractable by integrability have been studied by Braun, Korchemsky et al. . Some implications have also been considered in .

Discussing the Bjorken limit it may be convenient to have the amplitude of a definite process in mind. The non-forward deeply virtual Compton scattering off the proton , $`\gamma ^{}(q_1)+p(p_1)\gamma ^{}(q_2)+p(p_2)`$, is an appropriate example (Fig. 1a):

$`q_{1/2}=q^{}x_{1/2}p^{},q^2=0,p^2=0,p^{}p_1,s=2p^{}q^{},`$ (1.1)
$`q_{1/2}^2=Q_{1/2}^2=x_{1/2}s.`$
The Bjorken limit corresponds to $`s\mathrm{}`$ with the Bjorken variables $`x_1`$ and/or $`x_2`$ being of order $`1`$.

This process is generic in the sense that already the two-parton exchange contribution has the kinematics of non-vanishing longitudinal momentum transfer which is encountered anyway in the subchannels of multi-parton exchange (higher twist) contributions. It is generic also because one limiting case, $`x_1=x_2`$, is directly related to ordinary deep inelastic scattering and another limiting case, $`x_1=0,x_2=1`$, can be related by modifying the hadronic initial and final states to the factorized matrix elements (light-cone wave functions, distribution amplitudes) appearing in hard exclusive production.

## 2 Effective QCD action

### 2.1 Light-cone action

The Bjorken asymptotics of the amplitude is a sum over factorized terms, where one factor (A) is determined by the large momentum scale $`Q`$ and the other (B) by the hadronic momentum scale $`m`$, Fig. 1b. The $`t`$-channel intermediate states of partons should be understood and defined in such a way that the corresponding exchange contribution is the one of a (quasi) real multi-particle state to the unitarity relation continued from the physical region of the $`t`$-channel. In this case the two factors are (continued from mass shell) multi-particle amplitudes having the valuable properties of gauge invariance and analyticity.

The transverse momenta $`\kappa _i`$ of the exchanged partons are all of the same order $`\kappa ,(q\kappa m)`$. The parton intermediate states are to be specified further in such a way that the integration over $`\kappa _i`$ results in $`\mathrm{ln}\frac{Q}{m}`$, attributing the non-logarithmic remainder to other (non-leading) exchanges.

The approach to the asymptotics can be visualized as a process of iterating this factorization. The next step is shown in Fig. 1c. The Green function $`H`$ (not necesserily connected) represents the parton interaction. The effective action is to describe just this parton interaction.

In the lowest order of perturbative expansion there are only pair interactions. The partons can be identified as modes of the underlying gluon $`A`$ and quark $`f,\stackrel{~}{f}`$ fields in the gauge $`q^\mu A_\mu =0`$ after integrating over the redundant field components $`p^\mu A_\mu `$ and $`p^\mu \gamma _\mu \psi `$.

We represent 4-vectors $`x^\mu `$ by their light cone components $`x_\pm `$ and a complex number involving the transverse components $`x_{}=x_1+ix_2`$. In the case of the gradient vector we change the notation in such a way to have $`_+x_{}=_{}x_+=1,_{}x=_{}^{}x^{}=1`$. In particular the complex valued field $`A`$ represents the transverse components of the gauge field. We choose the frame where the light-like vector $`q^{}`$ has the only non-vanishish component $`q_{}^{}=\sqrt{s/2}`$ and $`p^{}`$ the only non-vanishing component $`p_+^{}=\sqrt{s/2}`$.

We decompose the Dirac fields into light cone components,

$`\psi =\psi _{}+\psi _+,\gamma _{}\psi _+=\gamma _+\psi _{}=0`$ (2.1)
$`\psi _+=fu_++\stackrel{~}{f}u_{++},\gamma ^\mu ={\displaystyle \frac{2}{s}}(\gamma _{}q^\mu +\gamma _+p^\mu )+\gamma _{}^\mu .`$ (2.2)
$`u_{a,b},a,b=\pm ,`$ is a basis of Majorana spinors,

$$\gamma _+u_{,b}=\gamma _{}u_{+,b}=0,\gamma u_{a,}=\gamma ^{}u_{a,+}=0.$$
(2.3)
In terms of component fields $`A,f,\stackrel{~}{f}`$ the QCD action can be written as

$`S={\displaystyle }d^4x\{2A^a(x)(_+_{}_{}_{}^{})A^a(x)+`$ (2.4)
$`if^\alpha (x)_+^1(_+_{}_{}_{}^{})f^\alpha (x)+\mathrm{}`$ (2.5)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{g}{2}}(_1\widehat{V}_{123}^{}[_1A^a(x_1)(A^{}(x_2)T^aA^{}(x_3))+if^\alpha (x_1)(f^{}(x_2)t^\alpha A^{}(x_3))+\mathrm{}]_{x_i=x}+\mathrm{c}.\mathrm{c}.)`$ (2.6)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{4}}\widehat{V}_{11^{},22^{}}[2(A^{}(x_1)T^cA(x_1^{})(A^{}(x_2)T^cA(x_2^{}))+`$ (2.7)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(f^{}(x_1)t^cf(x_1^{}))(f^{}(x_2)t^cf(x_2^{}))+i(f^{}(x_1)t^cf(x_1^{}))(A^{}(x_2)T^c\stackrel{}{}A(x_2^{}))`$ (2.8)
$`i(f^{}(x_1)t^\alpha A(x_1^{}))(A^{}(x_2)t^\alpha f(x_2^{}))+\mathrm{}]_{x_i=x_i^{}=x}\}.`$ (2.9)
The periods stand for terms obtained from the written ones by replacing pairs of fermion fields $`f^{},f`$ of one chirality by the ones of the other chirality $`\stackrel{~}{f}^{},\stackrel{~}{f}`$ and by the pairs of other flavour fermion fields. The elimination of redundant field components has lead to non-local vertices,

$`\widehat{V}_{123}^{}={\displaystyle \frac{i}{3_1_2_3}}[_1^{}(_2_3)+\mathrm{cycl}.],\widehat{V}_{11^{},22^{}}=(_1+_1^{})^2.`$ (2.10)
Here and in the following we omit the space index $`+`$ on derivatives, i.e. derivative operators not carrying subscripts $`,`$ are to be read as $`_+`$. Integer number subscripts refer to the space point on which the derivative acts. The definition of the inverse $`^1`$ is to be specified by the Mandelstam-Leibbrandt prescription.

The gauge group structure of the action has been written by using brackets combining two fields into the colour states of the adjoint ($`a`$) and of the two fundametal ($`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha `$) representations:

$`(A_1^{}T^aA_2)=if^{abc}A_1^bA_2^c,(f_1^{}t^af_2)=t_{\alpha \beta }^af_1^\alpha f_2^\beta ,`$ (2.11)
$`(f^{}t^\alpha A)=t_{\beta \alpha }^cf^\beta A^c,(A^{}t^\alpha f)=t_{\alpha \beta }^bA^bf^\beta .`$ (2.12)
### 2.2 Separation of momentum modes

The partons in the intermediate state between the high (low) momentum scale amplitude factor A (B) and H are the large (+) (small (-) ) transverse momentum modes of the fields $`A,f,\stackrel{~}{f}`$. We have the mode decomposition

$$A=A^{(+)}+A^{(0)}+A^{()}$$
(2.13)
(and analogously for the other fields). The medium modes $`A^{(0)}`$ are not important in the leading contribution discussed below. Medium modes have to be separated in the leading contribution to the double logarithmic approximation, compare Sect. 4.

The bare effective action of the leading parton interaction in the Bjorken asymptotics is obtained from (2.9) by substituting the mode separation and simplifying the vertices by the approximation,

$$^{}A^{()}=0,^{}f^{()}=0,^{}\stackrel{~}{f}^{()}=0.$$
(2.14)
In particular the terms involving two fields in $`(+)`$ modes are the ones important for deriving the bare $`22`$ parton interaction operators, as will be explained in an example in Sect. 3.

This effective action is the analogon of the high-energy effective action considered in  as a tool for investigating the Regge limit in QCD. Unlike the Regge case here the effective vertices are just the original QCD vertices reduced by the conditions (2.14). There is no analogon to the induced contribution to the triple vertices.

Going beyond the tree approximation one should notice that in this action the modes of virtualness essentially larger than the scale $`\kappa `$ of the (+) modes have been integrated out. In particular the coupling is the one at scale $`\kappa `$, $`\alpha _S(\kappa ^2)`$, and the the propagators of the (+) modes are the bare ones at this scale. With the running coupling one defines the evolution variable $`\xi `$,

$$\xi (\kappa ^2,m^2)=_{m^2}^{\kappa ^2}\frac{d\kappa ^2}{\kappa ^2}\frac{\alpha _S(\kappa ^2)}{2\pi }.$$
(2.15)
The propagators of the (-) modes, however, are normalized to be the bare ones at the scale $`\kappa ^{},\kappa ^{}\kappa `$, appearing in the next iteration. Therefore $`Z`$ factors of renormalization

$$Z_p=\mathrm{exp}(w_p\xi (\kappa ^2,\kappa ^2)),$$
(2.16)
where p labels the parton type, $`p=A`$ for gluon and $`p=f`$ for quark, are to be included in the Green function $`H`$ of parton interactions.

$`w_p=C_p\left({\displaystyle _0^1}{\displaystyle \frac{d\beta }{1\beta }}+w_p^{(0)}\right),C_A=N,C_f={\displaystyle \frac{N^21}{2N}},`$ (2.17)
$`w_A^{(0)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}({\displaystyle \frac{11}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{2N_f}{3N}}),w_f^{(0)}={\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}.`$ (2.18)
The $`Z`$ factors refer to a finite change of renormalization scale. The parton anomalous dimensions $`w_p`$ are infrared divergent (appearing as an artifact of the gauge chosen). The divergence is written explicitely above without specifying a regularization.

Comparing to the Regge case one understands that the $`Z`$ factors in the parton propagators are the analogon of the reggeization factors $`(\frac{s}{m^2})^{\omega _p(\kappa )}`$ in the reggeon propagators of gluons or quarks in the Regge case. The anomalous dimension $`w_p`$ is the analogon of the trajectory function $`\omega _p(\kappa )`$. Also the point about the infrared divergencies and their cancellation is analogous: In the same way as in the Regge case the infrared divergencies in the bare interactions are compensated by the ones in $`w_p`$. The infrared cancellation in the multi-parton exchange channel of overall colour singlet holds by the same arguments as in the multi reggeon exchange :

The infrared singular contribution arising from vanishing gluon (longitudinal in the Bjorken case and transverse in the Regge case) momentum from the loop in Fig. 2c is twice the one in Fig. 2b, besides of the gauge group factors. The relation of these group factors follows from the observation that the exchanged partons or reggeons are in the overall colour singlet state, i.e. a gauge group transformation is acting on the group indices $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_n`$ (at this point the notation does not distingiuish between the adjoint ($`a`$) and fundamental ($`\alpha `$) representations) of each of the factorized amplitudes as

$$\left(\mathrm{exp}[i\epsilon ^aT_i^a]\right)_{a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_n^{}}^{a_1,\mathrm{},a_n}A^{a_1^{},\mathrm{}a_n^{}}=A^{a_1,\mathrm{},a_n}$$
(2.19)
The generators $`T_i^a,a=1,\mathrm{},N^21,`$ act in the representation space of the parton or reggeon $`p_i`$. Expanding up to the second order in the group parameters $`\epsilon ^a`$ we find that in acting on the considered amplitudes one can identify

$$\underset{i}{}T_i^aT_i^a=2\underset{i<j}{}T_i^aT_j^a,$$
(2.20)
where $`T_i^aT_i^a=I_iC_{p_i}`$, with $`I_i`$ being the identity matrix and $`C_{p_i}`$ the eigenvalue of the Casimir operator in the representation corresponding to the parton $`p_i`$.

This allows to rewrite the singular contributions of Fig. 2b as decomposed in terms of the same gauge group factors as appearing in Fig. 2c and to perform the cancellation of the infrared singularities explicitely.

The leading parton interaction is calculated by writing the Green function $`H`$ according to the effective action and extracting the logarithmic contribution from the loop integrals of the (+) mode intermediate state over the transverse momenta $`\kappa `$ and the longitudinal (parallel to $`q^{}`$ momenta $`\alpha `$. These integrals are done in a standard way leaving one-dimensional (in the longitudinal momentum $`\beta `$ parallel to $`p^{}`$ ) loop integrals. In this way the parton interaction appears reduced to one dimension, in the light ray in space-time parallel to $`q^{}`$ ) or in the light cone momentum (fraction) parallel to $`p^{}`$. Again this is analogous to the Regge case with an important difference: In the Regge case the leading contribution is obtained by extracting the logarithm from the longitudinal momentum integrations ($`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$) and therefore the reggeon interaction is reduced to the two transverse dimensions.

It is well known that in the Regge case the most convenient way to deal with the trivial longitudinal dimensions is to change to the continued $`t`$-channel partial waves, i.e. to Mellin transform the amplitude factors with respect to energies. In the same way it turns out to be convenient to treat the trivial transverse momentum dependence of the Bjorken limit amplitude factors by a Laplace transform in $`\xi `$ ($`\xi (Q^2,\kappa ^2`$) in A, $`\xi (\kappa ^2,\kappa ^2)`$ in H , $`\xi (\kappa ^^2,m^2)`$ in B). We perform this transformation after changing the momentum variable $`\alpha =\frac{2(kp)}{s}`$ to $`\overline{\alpha }=\frac{\alpha s}{|\kappa |^2}`$, because the integrals in $`\overline{\alpha }`$ are standard ones depending on momentum components $`\beta =\frac{2(kq^{})}{s}`$ only.

The multi-loop convolution of the factorized parts A, H, B of the amplitude reduces to a convolution in the longitudinal momentum fractions $`\beta `$ only. The Laplace transforms of A, H, B enter at the same value of the variable $`\nu `$ Laplace conjugated to $`\xi `$. The dependence on $`\nu `$ of the leading contribution to the parton interaction $`H`$ is just through the factor $`\frac{1}{\nu }`$,

$$H(\alpha _i,\beta _i,\kappa _i;\alpha _j^{},\beta _j^{},\kappa _j^{})\frac{1}{\nu }H^{(0)}(\beta _i;\beta _j^{})$$
(2.21)
The $`Z`$ factor contribution may be included at this point by the replacement

$$\frac{1}{\nu }\frac{1}{\nu +_iw_{p_i}}$$
(2.22)
The sum is over the exchanged partons of type $`p_i`$. This is the ”energy denominator” ($`\nu `$ being the analogon of $`E`$ ) attributed to the propagation of a multi-parton intermediate state between two subsequent interactions.

The iterated factorization described above can be formulated as an evolution equation in $`\xi `$ for the lower scale amplitude factor $`B`$.

$`M_B(\beta _i)=M_B^{(0)}(\beta _i)+`$ (2.23)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\nu +w_p}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\beta ^{}\delta (\beta _i\beta _j^{})}H^{(0)}(\beta _i;\beta _j^{})M_B(\beta _j^{})`$ (2.24)
We have not written the gauge group and parton type indices carried by $`M_B`$ and $`H`$ and summed over in their contraction. The redefined kernels

$$H(\beta _i;\beta _j)=H^{(0)}(\beta _i;\beta _j^{})+\underset{i}{\overset{n1}{}}\delta (\beta _i\beta _i^{})\underset{i}{\overset{n}{}}w_{p_i}$$
(2.25)
represent infrared finite operators. The rearrangement of the gauge group factors explained above (2.20) is implicite here. The solutions of the evolution equation (2.24) is obtained in terms of a complete set of eigenfunctions of these operators and their eigenvalues. Usually one associates with the eigenfunctions composite operators, being renormalized multiplicatively, and calls the corresponding eigenvalues anomalous dimensions of these operators.

### 2.3 Space-time picture

The effective action describing the parton interactions in block H of the virtual Compton amplitude can be alternatively treated from the space-time point of view. Indeed, H describes the interaction between sources located in the vicinity of the light ray $`x_{}=0,x_{}=0,x_+=z𝐑^1`$ and other sources the distribution of which is almost constant in the variables $`x_{}^{},x_+^{}`$ depending essentially only on the coordinate along the light-ray $`x_{}^{}=z^{}`$. The small width of the first distribution near the light cone is characterized by the short distance scale $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q^1`$ and the variation of the second distribution in directions away from the light ray is determined by the large distance scale $`\delta m^1`$.

Consider now the QCD functional integral with such sources or the related vertex functional with corresponding external gluon and quark fields. Instead of separating momentum modes (2.13) from this viewpoint we divide now the fields of quarks and gluons into two types of external fields $`A^{(\pm )}`$ and a quantum fluctuation $`A_q`$,

$$AA^{(+)}+A_q+A^{()}.$$
(2.26)
$`A^{(+)}`$ has the support near the light cone and has to be substituted by the following expression in terms of (regularized) delta functions,

$$A^{(+)}(x)=A_1(z)\delta (x_+)\delta ^{(2)}(x_{})+𝒪(\mathrm{\Delta }).$$
(2.27)
The other external field $`A^{()}`$ has to be substituted as

$$A^{()}(x^{})=A_1^{}(z^{})\mathrm{const}+𝒪(m).$$
(2.28)
The vertex functional or the external field effective action is now obtained by doing the integration over the quantum fluctuations $`A_q`$. Consider in particular the resulting vertex involving two $`A^{(+)}`$ and two $`A^{()}`$ type fields on the tree level. It has the form

$`{\displaystyle d^4x_1d^4x_2d^4x_1^{}d^4x_{^{}}A^{(+)}(x_1)A^{(+)}(x_2)G(x_{11^{}})G(x_{22^{}})}`$ (2.29)
$`[\stackrel{~}{V}_{11^{}}G(x_{1^{}2^{}})\stackrel{~}{V}_{22^{}}+\delta ^{(4)}(x_{1^{}2^{}})V_{11^{},22^{}}]A^{()}(x_1^{})A^{()}(x_2^{})`$ (2.30)
$`\stackrel{~}{V}_{11^{}},\stackrel{~}{V}_{22^{}}`$ are simply related to the triple vertex in (2.9) depending on the case considered and $`G(x)`$ stands for the quark or gluon propagator. We substitute the particular asymptotic form of the external fields (2.27, 2.28) and obtain

$`{\displaystyle 𝑑z_1𝑑z_2𝑑z_1^{}𝑑z_2^{}A_1A_2A_1^{}A_2^{}c(\frac{\delta }{\mathrm{\Delta }})\left[\stackrel{~}{V}_{11^{}}\stackrel{~}{V}_{22^{}}\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}+V_{11^{},22^{}}\stackrel{~}{J}_0\right]}`$ (2.31)
We abbreviate the residual dependence of the parton fields on the light ray positions by indices $`1,2`$ for $`A_1^{(+)}(z_1)`$, $`A_1^{(+)}(z_2)`$ and by indices $`1^{},2^{}`$ for $`A_1^{()}(z_1^{})`$, $`A_1^{()}(z_2^{})`$. The integration over the transverse and $`+`$ components of $`x_1,x_2`$ is done due to the delta functions and the integrals over the transverse and $`+`$ components of $`x_1^{},x_2^{}`$ are represented by $`\stackrel{~}{J}_{111},\stackrel{~}{J}_0`$,

$`\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}=c(\delta /\mathrm{\Delta })^1{\displaystyle 𝑑x_1^{}𝑑x_2^{}d^2x_1^{}d^2x_2^{}_1^{}_1^{}(x_{11^{}}^2)^1(x_{22^{}}^2)^1(x_{1^{}2^{}}^2)^1}`$ (2.32)
$`\stackrel{~}{J}_0=c(\delta /\mathrm{\Delta })^1{\displaystyle 𝑑x_1^{}𝑑x_2^{}d^2x_1^{}d^2x_2^{}_1^{}_1^{}(x_{11^{}}^2)^1(x_{22^{}}^2)^1\delta ^{(4)}(x_{1^{}2^{}})}`$ (2.33)
The integrals are regularized by taking into account the smearing of the near light cone distribution by $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and the large scale cutoff $`\delta `$ for the other distribution. We shall do the integration in the logarithmic approximation. For this we have substituted in (2.31) already the effective triple vertices omitting terms which do not result in logarithmic integrals.

In this approximation and after correcting the normalization by a factor $`c(\delta /\mathrm{\Delta })(\mathrm{ln}(\delta /\mathrm{\Delta }))`$ these integrals coincide with the Fourier transform of the standard $`J`$ integrals to be defined below (5.13).

For going beyond the leading approximation one should specify accordingly in more detail the asymptotic space-time dependence of the external fields (2.27, 2.28), include loop corrections into the vertices and perform the integrals beyond the logarithmic approximation.

In the above equations we did not distinguish explicitely the cases of quarks and gluons and we have suppressed the colour and helicity structures. It turns out that these stuctures are the same for the $`J_{111}`$ and the $`J_0`$ contributions. In this way the effective interaction vertices factorize right from the first step of calculation into one acting on the light ray positions and one acting on the helicity, chirality, colour and flavour degrees of freedom.

The operators acting on the positions arise as a sum of singular terms. The singularities cancel partially due to a relation between the $`J`$ integrals involved. To cancel the remaining singularities and to arrive at well defined operators the disconnected contributions of one-loop self-energy corrections have to be included.

Let us point out that in this framework it is readily understood that in the approximation of leading twist and leading logarithms there are no vertices resulting in the change of the number of partons in the exchange channel. Consider for example the vertex of $`A^{(+)}A^{(+)}A^{()}`$. There is a logarithmic contribution in the integration over the coordinates besides of the light-ray ones; however in this term $`A^{()}`$ enters with a transverse derivative and this vanishes in the considered approximation (compare (2.28) ). Going beyond this approximation means introducing exchange partons of non-leading type.

We have outlined the calculation of the vertex of two-parton interaction to order $`g^2`$ in the logarithmic approximation. It is given by (2.31) up to the coefficient $`\frac{g^2}{8\pi ^2}\mathrm{ln}(\frac{\delta ^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }^2})`$. By renormalization group the result can be extended to all orders in the leading logarithmic approximation. This amounts in replacing the kernel in this vertex (2.31 ) by the Green function of the Hamiltonian operator obtained from (2.31) by converting the external fields to operators, creation operators for the fields of type $`A^{(+)}`$ at points $`1,2`$ and annihilation operators for the ones of type $`A^{()}`$ at $`1^{},2^{}`$. The role of (euclidean) time in this Hamiltonian picture is played by the evolution variable $`\xi (\delta ^2,\mathrm{\Delta }^2)`$ (2.15) , related to the logarithmic coefficient of the above vertex by $`d\xi =\frac{g^2(\kappa ^2)}{8\pi ^2}\frac{d\kappa ^2}{\kappa ^2}`$, where the coupling $`\frac{g^2}{4\pi }`$ is replaced by the (one-loop) running coupling $`\alpha _S(\kappa ^2)`$.

The spectrum of the Hamiltonian operator is actually the set of anomalous dimensions appearing in the considered channel.

## 3 Example of two-parton interaction

### 3.1 Energy-momentum representation

In order to illustrate the scheme described above we do the calculation for the lowest order interaction of two gluons of parallel helicities. The contribution of the triple vertex (2.9) reduced to the effective vertex by the condition (2.14) to the graphs Fig. 3 are

Fig. 3a : Fig. 3b:

$$gT_{a_1a_1^{}}^c\frac{\beta _1^2}{\beta _1\beta _1^{}}\frac{\kappa _1^{}}{\beta _1}gT_{a_1a_1^{}}^c\frac{\beta _1^2}{\beta _1\beta _1^{}}\frac{\kappa _1}{\beta _1}$$
(3.1)
The quartic vertex in (2.9) contributes to Fig. 3d as

$$g^2T_{a_1a_1^{}}^cT_{a_2a_2^{}}^c\frac{\beta _1\beta _2^{}\beta _2\beta _1^{}}{(\beta _1\beta _1^{})^2}$$
(3.2)
We consider the contribution of these graphs to the two-parton interaction Fig. 4a. There are three contributions as shown in Fig. 4b plus the crossing contributions obtained by interchanging $`1^{}`$ and $`2^{}`$. The first two terms differ by helicity of the gluon exchanged in $`s`$-channel.

The expression for the graph Fig. 4a is ($`k=\alpha q^{}+\beta p+\kappa `$)

$`T_{a_1a_1^{}}^cT_{a_2a_2^{}}^c{\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{(2\pi )^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k_1}{(k_1^2+iϵ)(k_2^2+iϵ)}}`$ (3.3)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1^2\beta _2^2+\beta _1^2\beta _2^2}{(\beta _1\beta _1^{})^2\beta _1\beta _2}}{\displaystyle \frac{|\kappa _1|^2}{(k_1k_1^{})^2+iϵ}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\beta _1\beta _2^{}+\beta _2\beta _1^{})}{(\beta _1\beta _1^{})^2}}\right)A^{a_1a_2}(q_1,q_2,k_1,k_2)`$
$`A^{a_1a_2}`$ is the large-scale amplitude factor redefined to be dimensionless by extracting powers of $`Q`$.

$$A^{a_1a_2}(q_1,q_2,k_1,k_2)=_i\mathrm{}^{+i\mathrm{}}\frac{d\nu }{2\pi i}A^{a_1a_2}(\nu ,x_1,\beta _1,x_2,\beta _2)e^{\nu \xi (Q^2,\kappa ^2)}$$
(3.4)
We parametrize the momenta as $`k_i=\alpha _iq^{}+\beta _ip+\kappa _i,\kappa _1+\kappa _20`$. The momenta of the (-) modes are to be substituted as $`k_i^{}=\beta _i^{}p`$. We change $`\alpha _1\alpha _2=\alpha `$ by $`\overline{\alpha }=\frac{\alpha s}{|\kappa |^2}`$ and obtain

$`{\displaystyle _{m^2}^{Q^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{g^2(\kappa ^2)d|\kappa |^2}{16\pi ^2|\kappa |^2}}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑\beta _1𝑑\beta _2\delta (\beta _1+\beta _2\beta _1^{}\beta _2^{})T_{a_1a_1^{}}^cT_{a_2a_2^{}}^c`$ (3.5)
$`\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1^2\beta _2^2+\beta _1^2\beta _2^2}{(\beta _1\beta _1^{})^2\beta _1\beta _2}}J_{111}(\beta _1,\beta _2,\beta _{11^{}}){\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1\beta _2^{}+\beta _2\beta _1^{}}{(\beta _1\beta _1^{})^2}}J_{11}(\beta _1,\beta _2)\right\}`$ (3.6)
$`A^{a_1a_2}(\nu ,x_1,\beta _1,x_2,\beta _2)e^{\nu \xi (Q^2,\kappa ^2)}.`$ (3.7)
The $`J`$-functions represent standard $`\overline{\alpha }`$ integrals as explained in detail in Appendix A. The integral over $`\kappa `$ leads to the factor $`\frac{1}{\nu }`$ and we identify the bare interaction kernel $`H^{(0)}`$ as the expression in the braces. We use the first relation in (8.9) between the $`J`$ functions to cancel the second order pole at $`\beta _1=\beta _1^{}`$. We use the abbreviation for differences by double indices like $`\beta _1^{}=\beta _1\beta _1^{}`$. The remaining first order pole is the infrared singularity being cancelled by the renormalization contribution $`w_f`$. As the result we obtain the kernel

$`H_{a_1^{}a_2^{}}^{a_1a_2}(\beta _1,\beta _2;\beta _1^{},\beta _2^{})=T_{a_1a_1^{}}^cT_{a_2a_2^{}}^c`$ (3.8)
$`\left\{\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1^2}{\beta _1^{}[\beta _{11^{}}]_+}}J_{11}(\beta _1,\beta _{11^{}})\right]+\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _2^2}{\beta _2^{}[\beta _{22^{}}]_+}}J_{11}(\beta _2,\beta _{22^{}})\right]+2w_g^{(0)}\delta (\beta _1\beta _1^{})\right\}{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1^{}\beta _2^{}}{\beta _1\beta _2}}.`$
Besides of illustrating the general scheme the example shows the great simplification of the calculation relying on the effective action. In going to higher loops the main point of effort will lie in the improvement of the effective action, again similar to the Regge case . Still there remains quite a number of two parton channels besides of the one considered here. The calculation can be optimized further and reduced to just three cases by supersymmetry.

### 3.2 Space-time representation

We outline how to treat the same example in the space-time representation following now the scheme of section 2.3. The vertex in the external field effective action $`A^{(+)}(x_1)A^{(+)}(x_2)A^{()}(x_1^{})A^{()}(x_2^{})`$ gets a contribution from the original quartic vertex (2.9) and one from contracting two triple vertices by integrating over the quantum fluctuation $`A_q`$. The triple vertices in the Bjorken limit efective action (2.9,2.14) corresponding to Fig. 3a, b are

$$ig\frac{_1^{}^2_1^{}}{(_1_1^{})_1}A_q^a(A_1^{}T^aA_1^{})|_{x_1=x_1^{}=x_q};ig\frac{_1^2_1^{}}{(_1_1^{})_1}A_q^a(A_1^{}T^aA_1^{})|_{x_1=x_1^{}=x_q}$$
(3.9)
Writing down the extenal field vertex as in (2.30), substituting the asymptotic form of the external fields and doing the interations besides of the ones in the light-ray coordinates we obtain as the particular case of (2.31)

$`{\displaystyle 𝑑z_1𝑑z_2𝑑z_1^{}𝑑z_2^{}\left[\frac{_1^2_2^{}^2+_1^{}^2_2^2}{(_1+_1^{})^2}\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}+\frac{_1_2^{}+_1^{}_2}{(_1+_1^{})^2}_1_2\stackrel{~}{J}_0\right]}`$ (3.10)
$`(A_1^{}T^aA_1^{})(A_2^{}T^aA_2^{})`$ (3.11)
The first term in the brackets is obtained by contracting the triple vertices by substituting the points $`1,1^{}`$ in the second and $`2,2^{}`$ in the first vertex in (3.9) and vice versa. The second terms emerges from the quartic vertex (2.9) for the case that $`A_1^{},A_2^{}`$ are of $`A^{(+)}`$ type and the remaining two field of the $`A^{()}`$ type.

The second relation in (8.9) Fourier transformed to light ray variables implies

$$\frac{_1^2_2^{}^2}{(_1+_1^{})^2}\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}+\frac{_1^2_2_2^{}}{(_1+_1^{})^2}\stackrel{~}{J}_0=_1^{}_2^{}\stackrel{~}{J}_{11^{}}^{(g)},$$
(3.12)
where

$$_1_2\stackrel{~}{J}_{11^{}}^{(g)}=_0^1𝑑\alpha \frac{(1\alpha )^2}{\alpha }\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}})$$
(3.13)
We use this relation and the one obtained by interchanging $`1,1^{}2,2^{}`$. The remaining divergence signalled by $`\frac{1}{\alpha }`$ in the latter integral is cancelled after including the disconnected contribution of order $`g^2`$ to the self energy in the two propagators connecting $`A_1^{}`$ with $`A_1^{}`$ and $`A_2^{}`$ with $`A_2^{}`$ separately,

$$2𝑑z_1𝑑z_2𝑑z_1^{}𝑑z_2^{}w_g\delta (z_{11^{}})\delta (z_{22^{}})(A_1^{}T^aA_1^{})(A_2^{}T^aA_2^{})$$
(3.14)
We have applied (2.20) to obtain the above form seemingly connected by colour interaction. $`w_g`$ is given by (2.18). Adding (3.14) to (3.11) the singular part of $`w_g`$ results in replacing in $`\stackrel{~}{J}_{11^{}}^{(g)}`$ (3.13) $`\frac{1}{\alpha }`$ by $`\frac{1}{[\alpha ]_+}`$, adopting the conventional ”plus prescription”. We obtain

$`{\displaystyle }dz_1dz_2dz_1^{}dz_2^{}[\stackrel{~}{J}_{11^{}}^{(g)}+w_g^{(0)}\stackrel{~}{\delta }^{(2)}+(1,1^{}2,2^{})]`$ (3.15)
$`(A_1^{}T^aA_1^{})(A_2^{}T^aA_2^{}),\mathrm{where}_1_2\stackrel{~}{\delta }^{(2)}=\delta (z_{11^{}})\delta (z_{22^{}})`$ (3.16)
We have calculated in the space-time approach the vertex of parallel helicity gluon interaction to order $`g^2`$ in the logarithmic approximation. It is given by (3.16) up to the coefficient $`\frac{g^2}{8\pi ^2}\mathrm{ln}(\frac{\delta ^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }^2})`$. As noticed above by renormalization group the result can be extended to all orders in the leading logarithmic approximation.This leads to the Hamiltonian operator obtained from (3.16) by converting the external fields to operators, creation operators for the fields of type $`A^{(+)}`$ at points $`1,2`$ and annihilation operators for the ones of type $`A^{()}`$ at the points $`1^{},2^{}`$.

## 4 Double-logartithmic gluon interaction

### 4.1 Energy-momentum representation

The scheme of factorizing the asymptotic amplitude into parts determined by large and small scales and of extracting the logarithmic contribution from the sum over intermediate states will be illustrated now in a simpler situation. The combined asymptotics of large $`Q^2`$ and $`sQ^2`$ is of interest in deep-inelastic scattering at small $`x\frac{Q^2}{s}`$. We avoid here the cases, where double logarithms appear in the Regge asymptotics . We consider the multiple gluon exchange contributing to the amplitude (e.g. of virtual Compton scattering at small $`x_{1/2}`$) behaving like $`s^1`$ on the tree level. In this case the double logarithmic asymptotics can be approached equally well from both the Regge or the Bjorken regions.

Now the loop integrations over the intermediate states in the factorized amplitude Fig. 1,2 have a leading contribution logarithmic both in longitudinal and in transverse momenta. Extracting this leading contribution (and attributing the remainder to non-leading exchange contributions) we obtain that the integrations in all dimensions are standard ones. A double Laplace transform in $`\mathrm{ln}\frac{s}{Q^2}`$ (conjugated variable $`j=1+\omega `$) and in $`\xi (Q^2,m^2)`$ (2.15) ( conjugated variable $`\nu `$) is appropriate now.

The dependence on the large scales is only via the product $`r^2=\xi \mathrm{ln}\frac{s}{Q^2}`$ and in the transformed representation we have the dependence only on the product $`\rho ^2=\nu \omega `$. Actually these products are squares of two-dimensional Lorentz vectors, in particular $`\rho ^2=\nu \omega ,\underset{¯}{\rho }=(\frac{\omega +\nu }{2},\frac{\omega \nu }{2})`$. These vectors squared are the evolution variable $`r^2`$ and its conjugate $`\rho ^2`$. The evolution proceeds independent of the ”rapidity” $`\mathrm{ln}(\xi /\mathrm{ln}\frac{s}{Q^2})`$ inside the ”light cone”.

The double logarithmic effective action is obtained from the underlying QCD action by substituting in (2.9) the mode separation (2.13) and reducing the vertices by the conditions

$$_{}A^{()}=0,(^1A^{(+)})=0.$$
(4.1)
The latter means that a term involving $`A^{(+)}`$ is to be neglected unless it is enhanced by its small longitudinal momentum in the denominator. Here also medium modes $`A^{(0)}`$ have to be separated, carrying transverse momenta $`\kappa `$ as large as the ones in the (+) mode but longitudinal momentum fractions $`\beta `$ much larger than the ones in the (+) modes and rather compatible with the ones in the (-) mode.

In momentum representation the obtained effective action implies that the quartic vertex gives no leading contribution and the triple vertex is reduced to

$$g_{}^1A^{(+)a}i(A^{(0)}T^a\stackrel{}{}A^{()})+\mathrm{c}.\mathrm{c}.$$
(4.2)
Therefore in the double logarithmic limit the triple vertex graph Fig. 5a vanishes and Fig. 5b and Fig. 5c result in the same expression

$$gf^{a_1a_1c}\frac{\beta _1^{}}{\beta _1}\kappa _1^{}.$$
(4.3)
The only non-vanishing pair interactions arise for gluons with opposite helicities, one interaction producing helicity flip and one without flip in going from $`1^{},2^{}`$ to 1, 2. Since the vertices coincide both cases lead to the same expression (compare Fig. 4a)

$`f^{a_1a_1^{}c}f^{ca_2a_2^{}}{\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{(2\pi )^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k_1}{k_1^2k_2^2(k_1k_1^{})^2}\frac{|\kappa _1|^2\beta _1^2}{\beta _1^2}}A^{a_1a_2}\left(\xi (Q^2,\kappa _1^2)\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1s}{m^2}}\right)`$ (4.4)
The calculation proceeds as in Sect. 3.1 for the first term in (3.7) involving $`|\kappa _1|^2`$. In the double logarithmic limit $`J_{111}(\beta _1,\beta _2,\beta _{11^{}})`$ reduces to $`\frac{\beta _1}{\beta _1^2}`$ and we obtain in the transformed representation $`(\rho ^2=\omega \nu )`$,

$$f^{a_1a_1^{}c}f^{ca_2a_2^{}}\frac{1}{\rho ^2}A^{a_1a_2}(\rho ^2).$$
(4.5)
The effective interaction depends on helicity and colour states only; it does not act on longitudinal or transverse momenta.

For a closed formulation of the helicity dependence we introduce the basis vectors $`\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\end{array}\right)`$ and $`\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\end{array}\right)`$ for the helicities carried by $`A^{(+)},A^{()}`$ and $`A^{()},A^{(+)}`$, respectively, and express the interaction operators in terms of Pauli matrices. The spin-flip interaction $`\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\end{array}\right)`$ is described by the permutation operator $`𝒫=\frac{1}{2}(II+\sigma _i^{(1)}\sigma _i^{(2)})`$ and the non-flip interaction $`\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\end{array}\right)`$ by $`\sigma _3^{(1)}\sigma _3^{(2)}`$. The latter is chosen such that the sum of both operators describes also correctly the vanishing of the interaction between parallel helicities $`\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\end{array}\right)`$. The leading double logarithmic gluon pair Hamiltonian is

$$f^{a_1a_1c}f^{ca_2a_2^{}}\frac{1}{2}\left(II+\sigma _1^{(1)}\sigma _1^{(2)}+\sigma _2^{(1)}\sigma _2^{(2)}\sigma _3^{(1)}\sigma _3^{(2)}\right)$$
(4.6)
We have reproduced a well known result to provide another example for the effective action scheme. The formulation (4.6) may be useful for treating the double-logarithmic multi-gluon exchange by symmetry methods of integrable systems.

### 4.2 Space-time representation

In the double logarithmic aymptotics the external fields should be specified in the following way: The fields of type $`A^{(+)}`$ (interacting with the upper blob A in Fig. 1c) are concentrated in the vicinity of the light ray and are almost constant in the light-ray direction ($`Q`$ is small compared to $`s`$, $`\delta _sQ^1`$),

$$^1A^{(+)}=(A^{(+)}+𝒪(Q))(\delta ^{(2)}(x_{})\delta (x_+)+𝒪(\mathrm{\Delta }))$$
(4.7)
The fields of type $`A^{()}`$ (interacting with blob B in Fig. 1c) are almost constant in the directions pointing away off the light ray, however the dependence on the light ray variable $`z^{}`$ is a narrow distribution of width $`\mathrm{\Delta }_ss^1`$ , approaching a delta function,

$$A^{()}(x^{})=(A^{()}\delta (z^{}z_0)+𝒪(\mathrm{\Delta }_s))(\mathrm{const}+𝒪(m))$$
(4.8)
$`A^{(\pm )}`$ on the right-hand sides of (4.7,4.8) are constants; they should not be identified with similar symbols in other sections.

Consider now the vertex $`A^{(+)}(x_1)A^{(+)}(x_2)A^{()}(x_1^{})A^{()}(x_2^{})`$. The integrations over the coordinates pointing away off the light ray are done in logarithmic approximation as above. Unlike the Bjorken asymptotics now also the dependence on the light ray coordinates is specified in the asymptotic external fields and therefore also the integration over these variables can be done. We shall do these integrations approximately extracting the second logarithm of the large scale ratio. We rely on the results of the Bjorken asymptotics for the gluon interaction of parallel helicity (3.11) and of antiparallel helicity given in Appendix B (9.3). Now we use the information about the $`z`$ dependence specified in (4.7,4.8) and notice that the derivatives $`_1,_2`$ act on (almost) constant fields. We conclude immediately that the considered external field vertex vanishes in the case of parallel helicities (3.11 ) and in the antiparallel helicity case (9.3) it reduces to

$`{\displaystyle 𝑑z_1𝑑z_2𝑑z_1^{}𝑑z_2^{}\delta (z_1^{}z_0)\delta (z_2^{}z_0)_1_2\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}}`$ (4.9)
$`[(A^{(+)}T^aA^{()})(A^{(+)}T^aA^{()})+(A^{(+)}T^aA^{()})(A^{(+)}T^aA^{()})]`$ (4.10)
We extract the logarithmic contribution in the integral over $`\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}`$ for $`z_1^{},z_2^{}z_0`$ appearing as a divergence $`\alpha _3^1`$ in the $`\alpha `$ representation (8.9, 5.13).

Up to the coefficient $`g^2(\mathrm{ln}(\delta /\mathrm{\Delta }))\mathrm{ln}(\delta _s/\mathrm{\Delta }_s)`$ the resulting vertex is given by the bracket in (4.10 ) involving the double-logarithmic ”fields”, i.e. the constats $`A^{(\pm )}`$ carrying merely the colour and helicity degrees of freedom. In order to extend the result to all orders in the double-logarithmic approximation we convert the obtained vertex into an Hamiltonian operator by defining the ”fields” $`A^{(\pm )}`$ to be creation and annihilation operators. The resulting operator is of course equivalent to the result obtained in the momentum calculation (4.6). From the latter being a matrix representation we recover the operator representation (4.10) by multiplication by the helicity state vectors composed of the creation and annihilation operators, $`(A^{(+)},A^{(+)})_1(A^{(+)},A^{(+)})_2`$ from the left and $`(A^{()},A^{()})_1^T(A^{()},A^{()})_2^T`$ from the right.

## 5 Interaction operators in the Bjorken limit

The momentum kernels or the external field vertices calculated above in the tree approximation are extended to all orders in the leading logarithmic approximation. This extension is represented in terms of the evolution in ”euclidean time” $`\xi (Q^2,m^2)`$, describing the approach to the Bjorken asymptotics, which can be formulated in Hamiltonian operator language. Let the parton fields $`A^{()},f^{()},\stackrel{~}{f}^{()}`$ act as annihilation operators and $`A^{(+)},f^{(+)},\stackrel{~}{f}^{(+)}`$ as creation operators with the contractions (longitudinal momentum representation)

$`<0|A^{a()}(\beta )A^{b(+)}(\beta ^{})|0>={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta (\beta \beta ^{})\delta ^{ab},`$ (5.1)
$`<0|A^{a()}(\beta )A^{b(+)}(\beta ^{})|0>=0,`$ (5.2)
$`<0|f^{\alpha ()}(\beta )f^{\beta (+)}(\beta ^{})|0>=\beta \delta (\beta \beta ^{})\delta ^{\alpha \beta }.`$ (5.3)
This corresponds to the following kinetic terms (light-ray position representation)

$$dz\{2(A^{a(+)}A^{a()})if^{\alpha (+)}^1f^{\alpha ()}+\mathrm{c}.\mathrm{c}.+\mathrm{}\}$$
(5.4)
The periods stand for the terms of other fermion chirality and flavours. $`\mathrm{c}.\mathrm{c}.`$ does not exchange (+) and (-) and acts as conjugation otherwise (normal ordering). The parton interaction Hamiltonian operators can be obtained from the momentum kernels and also from the external field vertices,

$`{\displaystyle }d^4\beta \delta (\beta _1+\beta _2\beta _1^{}\beta ^{})(\beta _1\beta _2)^1)(A^{(+)}(\beta _1)T^aA^{()}(\beta _1^{}))`$ (5.5)
$`(A^{(+)}(\beta _2)T^aA^{()}(\beta _2^{}))H(\beta _1,\beta _2;\beta _1^{},\beta _2^{})=`$ (5.6)
$`{\displaystyle d^4z(A^{(+)}(z_1)T^aA^{()}(z_1^{}))(A^{(+)}(z_2)T^aA^{()}(z_2^{}))\stackrel{~}{H}(z_1,z_2;z_1^{},z_2^{})}.`$ (5.7)
There is a convenient representation of the kernels in terms of Feynman parameter integrals. As shown in Appendix A, the standard $`\overline{\alpha }`$ integrals $`J(\beta ,\mathrm{})`$ can be written in Feynman parameter form allowing to do the Fourier transformation rather easily.

We list the operators of the leading parton interaction in the QCD Bjorken limit, the momentum kernels of which are well known, in the light-ray and Feynman parameter form. We restrict ourselves to the ones involving gluons ($`A`$) and/or only one flavour and one chirality of quarks ($`f`$). We use the abbreviations (compare Appendix A)

$`_1_2\stackrel{~}{J}_{11^{}}^{(p)}={\displaystyle _0^1}{\displaystyle \frac{d\alpha }{[\alpha ]_+}}\chi _1^{(p)}(\alpha )\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}}),`$ (5.8)
$`\chi _1^{(0)}=\alpha (1\alpha ),\chi _1^{(f)}=(1\alpha ),\chi _1^{(g)}=(1\alpha )^2,`$ (5.9)
$`_1_2\stackrel{~}{J}_{n_1n_2n_3}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_1+n_2+n_31)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_2)\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_3)}}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑\alpha _1𝑑\alpha _2𝑑\alpha _3\delta ({\displaystyle \alpha _i})`$ (5.10)
$`\alpha _1^{n_1}\alpha _2^{n_2}\alpha _3^{n_3}\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha _1z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}}+\alpha _2z_{12}),`$ (5.11)
$`_1_2\stackrel{~}{J}_0^{(g)}={\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑\alpha \chi _0^{(p)}(\alpha )\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}}+(1\alpha )z_{12}),`$ (5.12)
$`\chi _0^{(0)}=1,\chi _0^{(g)}=\alpha (1\alpha ),_1_2\delta ^{(2)}=\delta (z_{11^{}})\delta (z_{22^{}}).`$ (5.13)
The case of parallel helicity gluon interaction has been done as the example in section 3. In the cases of antiparallel helicity interactions some further transformations of $`J`$ kernels (8.9) are applied for presenting the result in a convenient form. In Apprendix B the case of gluons of antiparallel helicities is treated and a transformation applied in the cases of quark-gluon and annihilation type interactions is given.

The position arguments of the fields will be abbreviated as indices 1, $`1^{}`$, 2, $`2^{}`$. We suppress the label $`(\pm )`$ distinguishing creation and annihilation operators, since the fields at points $`1,2`$ act always as creation and the fields at the points $`1^{},2^{}`$ always as annihilation operators. The integration over the positions, summation over colour indices and operator normal ordering is implied.

parallel helicity interactions

$`\{4[\stackrel{~}{J}_{11^{}}^{(g)}+w_g^{(0)}\delta ^{(2)}](A_1^{}T^aA_1^{})2i[\stackrel{~}{J}_{11^{}}^{(f)}+w_f^{(0)}\delta ^{(2)}](f_1^{}t^af_1^{})\}`$ (5.14)
$`[2(A_2^{}T^aA_2^{})+i(f_2^{}t^af_2^{})]`$ (5.15)
$`4i\stackrel{~}{J}_{11^{}}^{(0)}(f_1^{}t^\alpha A_1^{})(A_2^{}t^\alpha f_2^{})+\mathrm{c}.\mathrm{c}.`$ (5.16)
anti-parallel gluon interactions

$`\{8[\stackrel{~}{J}_{11^{}}^{(g)}+w_g^{(0)}\delta ^{(2)}]+4\stackrel{~}{J}_{221}8\stackrel{~}{J}_{112}\}`$ (5.17)
$`(A_1^{}T^aA_1^{})(A_2T^aA_2^{}^{})`$ (5.18)
$`+4\stackrel{~}{J}_{221}(A_1^{}T^aA_1^{}^{})(A_2T^aA_2^{})+\mathrm{c}.\mathrm{c}.`$ (5.19)
anti-parallel helicity quark interactions (one chirality, one flavour)

$`\{2[\stackrel{~}{J}_{11^{}}^{(f)}+w_f^{(0)}\delta ^{(2)}]+\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}\}(f_1^{}t^af_1^{})(f_2t^af_2^{}^{})`$ (5.20)
$`+2\stackrel{~}{J}_0^{(g)}(f_1^{}t^af_2)(f_1^{}t^af_2^{}^{})+\mathrm{c}.\mathrm{c}.`$ (5.21)
anti parallel helicity quark - gluon interactions

$`4i[\stackrel{~}{J}_{11^{}}^{(g)}+w_g^{(0)}\delta ^{(2)}](A_1^{}T^aA_1^{})(f_2t^af_2^{}^{})`$ (5.22)
$`4i[\stackrel{~}{J}_{11^{}}^{(f)}+w_f^{(0)}\delta ^{(2)}](f_1^{}t^af_1^{})(A_2T^aA_2^{}^{})`$ (5.23)
$`4i\stackrel{~}{J}_{211}[(f_1^{}t^\alpha A_1^{}^{})(A_2t^\alpha f_2^{})(A_1^{}T^aA_1^{})(f_2t^af_2^{}^{})]`$ (5.24)
$`8i\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}(A_1^{}T^aA_1^{})(f_2t^af_2^{}^{})+\mathrm{c}.\mathrm{c}.`$ (5.25)
annihilation-type interactions

$`2i\stackrel{~}{J}_{11^{}}^{(0)}[(A_1^{}t^\alpha f_1^{})(A_2t^\alpha f_2^{}^{})+(f_1^{}t^\alpha A_1^{})(f_2t^\alpha A_2^{})]`$ (5.26)
$`+2i\stackrel{~}{J}_0^{(g)}[(A_1^{}T^a\stackrel{}{}A_2)(f_1^{}t^af_2^{}^{})+(f_1^{}t^af_2)(A_1^{}T^a\stackrel{}{}A_2^{}^{})`$ (5.27)
$`+(_1^{}+_2^{})[(f_1^{}t^\alpha A_1^{}^{})(f_2t^\alpha A_2^{})`$ (5.28)
$`(f_1^{}t^\alpha A_1^{})(f_2t^\alpha A_2^{}^{})+(A_1^{}t^\alpha f_1^{}^{})(A_2t^\alpha f_2^{})]]`$ (5.29)
$`2i\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}[(f_1^{}t^\alpha A_1^{}^{})(f_2t^\alpha A_2^{})+(A_1^{}t^\alpha f_1^{}^{})(A_2t^\alpha f_2^{})]`$ (5.30)
$`2i\stackrel{~}{J}_{211}[(f_1^{}t^\alpha A_1^{}^{})(f_2t^\alpha A_2^{})+(A_1^{}t^\alpha f_1^{}^{})(A_2t^\alpha f_2^{})`$ (5.31)
$`(f_1^{}t^\alpha A_1^{})(f_2t^\alpha A_2^{}^{})]+\mathrm{c}.\mathrm{c}.`$ (5.32)
## 6 Symmetries of the parton interactions

### 6.1 Conformal symmetry

It is well known that the leading order parton interactions are conformally symmetric. In the present light-ray formulation this symmetry is manifest. The interaction operators (5.16 \- 5.32) as well as the kinetic operators (5.4) are invariant under the transformations acting on the light-ray positions as

$$z\stackrel{~}{z}=\frac{az+b}{cz+d}$$
(6.1)
($`a,b,c,d`$ real) and on the fields as follows. The fermionic parton fields $`f^{(\pm )}`$ appear as conformal primaries of weight 1,

$$f\frac{1}{(cz+d)^2}f.$$
(6.2)
In the case of gluons the operators $`A^{()}`$ and $`^1A^{(+)}`$ appear as conformal primaries of weights $`\frac{3}{2}`$ and $`\frac{1}{2}`$.

Since translation and scale symmetries are obvious only the infinitesimal proper-conformal transformations ($`a=d=1,b=0,c`$ infinitesimal) are to be checked. Let us do the example of quarks of parallel helicity. The essential term can be written (in simplified notation disregarding colour) as

$`{\displaystyle d^4z_0^1𝑑\alpha \frac{1\alpha }{\alpha }\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}})^1f^{(+)}(z_1)^1f^{(+)}(z_2)}`$ (6.3)
$`f^{()}(z_1^{})f^{()}(z_2^{})`$ (6.4)
The transformation acts on the fields and results in

$`{\displaystyle d^4z_0^1𝑑\alpha \frac{1\alpha }{\alpha }\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}})^1\left(\frac{1}{(1+cz_1)^2}f^{(+)}(\stackrel{~}{z}_1)\right)}`$ (6.5)
$`^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1+cz_2)^2}}f^{(+)}(\stackrel{~}{z}_2)\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1+cz_1^{})^2}}f^{()}(\stackrel{~}{z}_1^{}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1+cz_2^{})^2}}f^{()}(\stackrel{~}{z}_2^{})`$ (6.6)
We have to check that the latter two expressions coincide up to $`𝒪(c^2)`$. We have $`_{\stackrel{~}{z}}=(1+cz)^2_z,d\stackrel{~}{z}=(1+cz)^2dz`$ and

$`{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{1\alpha }{\alpha }}\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}})=(1+cz_1)^2(1+cz_2)^2`$ (6.7)
$`{\displaystyle _0^1}d\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{1\alpha }{\alpha }}\delta (\stackrel{~}{z}_{11^{}}\alpha \stackrel{~}{z}_{12})\delta (\stackrel{~}{z}_{22^{}})`$ (6.8)
By substituting these relations we see that (6.6) transforms into (6.4) with the variables $`z`$ changed to $`\stackrel{~}{z}`$.

In this way we can check the conformal invariance of the remaining interaction terms. In the form given above each term in (5.5-8) is invariant separately. In the form (5.32) for the annihilation-type interaction this does not apply. This is related to the missing or extra derivatives which can be traded, however, for powers of $`z_{12}`$ as outlined in Appendix B. The annihilation type interaction terms (5.32) can be written as

$`4i\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}^{}(A_1^{}t^\alpha f_1^{}^{})(A_2t^\alpha f_2^{})+2i\stackrel{~}{\delta }^{(2)}(A_1^{}t^\alpha f_1^{})(A_2t^\alpha f_2^{}^{})`$ (6.9)
$`+12i\stackrel{~}{J}_0^{(g)}(A_1^{}T^aA_2)(f_1^{}t^af_2^{}^{})`$ (6.10)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}i\stackrel{~}{J}_{221}^+[(f_1^{}t^\alpha A_1^{})(f_2t^\alpha A_2^{}^{})(f_1^{}t^\alpha A_1^{}^{})(f_2t^\alpha A_2^{})]`$ (6.11)
$`i\stackrel{~}{J}_{112}^+[(f_1^{}t^\alpha A_1^{})(f_2t^\alpha A_2^{}^{})`$ (6.12)
Here the kernels with the additional subscript $`\pm `$ are related to the corresponding ones used so far by

$$_1_2\stackrel{~}{J}^\pm =z_{12}^\pm _1_2\stackrel{~}{J}.$$
(6.13)
Each term in this expression (6.12) is conformally symmetric.

### 6.2 Helicity symmetry

The operators (5.16 \- 5.32) are invariant also under the $`SU(1,1)`$ transformation acting on helicities, on fields of type $`A^{(+)}`$, the position argument of which we agreed to denote by $`1`$ or $`2`$,

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}A_1^{}\\ A_1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{A}_1^{}\\ \stackrel{~}{A}_1\end{array}\right)=\widehat{V}(a_1,a_2,a_3)\left(\begin{array}{c}A^{}\\ A\end{array}\right).$$
(6.14)
where

$$\widehat{V}(a_1,a_2,a_3)=\mathrm{exp}[\frac{1}{2}(a_1\sigma _1+a_2\sigma _2ia_3\sigma _3]$$
(6.15)
The fields of type $`A^{()}`$ transform analogously with $`\widehat{V}`$ replaced by $`\widehat{V}^{+1}`$. In particular the light ray kinetic terms (5.4) are left invariant.

The products of a field of type $`A^{(+)}`$ and one of type $`A^{()}`$ (say at positions 1 and $`1^{}`$ ) decompose into the scalar and vector components, where the (2+1) vectors of this group can be constructed in two ways, using $`(\sigma _r)=(\sigma _1,\sigma _2;\sigma _3)`$ or using $`(\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_r)=(\sigma _1,\sigma _2;\sigma _3)`$. The two types of vectors $`v`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{v}`$ are related to each other by a parity transformation, analogous to time reversal. In particular the vectors constructed with $`\frac{1}{2}(\sigma _r\pm \stackrel{~}{\sigma }_r)`$ are even or odd with repect to that parity. The subspaces of even or odd vectors are two- or one-dimensional.

Thus the four states in the tensor product $`\left(\begin{array}{c}A_1^{}\\ A_1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}A_1^{}^{}\\ A_1^{}\end{array}\right)`$ decompose according to

$`R=(A_1^{}A_1)\widehat{R}\left(\begin{array}{c}A_1^{}^{}\\ A_1^{}\end{array}\right),R=𝒱,𝒜,𝒯^\pm `$ (6.16)
into the scalar representation,

$$\widehat{R}=\widehat{𝒱}=\sigma _1,R=𝒱=A_1^{}A_1^{}+A_1A_1^{}^{},$$
(6.17)
the one-dimensional odd-vector representation,

$$\widehat{R}=\widehat{𝒜}=\sigma _1\sigma _3,R=𝒜=A_1^{}A_1^{}A_1A_1^{}^{},$$
(6.18)
and the two-dimensional even-vector representation,

$$\widehat{R}=\widehat{𝒯}^\pm =\sigma _1\sigma _\pm ,𝒯^+=A_1^{}A_1^{}^{},𝒯^{}=A_1A_1^{}.$$
(6.19)
If the indices 1 and $`1^{}`$ refer to out (+) and in (-) going partons, then the product representations describe transitions, where one has

$`𝒱_s`$ : no helicity flip, helicity independent ($`\delta _{\lambda \lambda ^{}}`$ ),

$`𝒜_s`$: no helicity flip, helicity dependent, ($`\lambda \delta _{\lambda \lambda ^{}}`$),

$`𝒯_s^\pm `$: helicity flip from $`\pm `$ to $``$.

If the position indices would be instead 1 and 2 referring both to outgoing states, then the product representations would describe states, where one would have

$`𝒱_t`$: opposite helicities, symmetric,

$`𝒜_t`$: opposite helicities, antisymmetric,

$`𝒯_t^\pm `$: parallel helicities of two orientations.

The invariant out of two vectors (of any types) is built as

$$g^{r,s}v_rv_s,r,s=1,2,3,(g^{r,s})=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,1)$$
(6.20)
In this way three different symmetric four-parton helicity operators

$`\left(\begin{array}{c}A_1^{}\\ A_1\end{array}\right)^T\left(\begin{array}{c}A_2^{}\\ A_2\end{array}\right)^T\widehat{O}_{11^{},22^{}}\left(\begin{array}{c}A_1^{}^{}\\ A_1^{}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}A_2^{}^{}\\ A_2^{}\end{array}\right)`$ (6.21)
can be constructed with $`\widehat{O}_{1,1^{},22^{}}`$ being replaced by the projectors

$$\widehat{𝒱}_s=\widehat{𝒱}^{11^{}}\widehat{𝒱}^{22^{}},\widehat{𝒜}_s=\widehat{𝒜}^{11^{}}\widehat{𝒜}^{22^{}},\widehat{𝒯}_s=\widehat{𝒯}^{+11^{}}\widehat{𝒯}^{22^{}}+\widehat{𝒯}^{11^{}}\widehat{𝒯}^{+22^{}}.$$
(6.22)
The latter three operators correspond to definite $`SU(1,1)`$ helicity states in $`s`$-channel ($`11^{}22^{}`$). The operators with definite helicity states in other channels can be written in the same way. We quote the crossing relations between the channels $`s`$ ($`11^{}22^{}`$), $`u`$ ($`12^{}21^{}`$) and $`t`$ ($`1^{}2^{}12`$)

$`\widehat{𝒱}_s=\widehat{𝒱}_u=\widehat{𝒯}_t+\widehat{𝒱}_t+\widehat{𝒜}_t,`$ (6.23)
$`\widehat{𝒜}_s=\widehat{𝒜}_u=\widehat{𝒯}_t\widehat{𝒱}_t\widehat{𝒜}_t,`$ (6.24)
$`\widehat{𝒯}_s=\widehat{𝒯}_u=\widehat{𝒱}_t\widehat{𝒜}_t.`$ (6.25)
Obvously, the parallel helicity operators (5.16) are of the form $`𝒯_t`$ and the antiparallel helicity operators (5.19\- 5.32) decompose into $`𝒱_t`$ and $`𝒜_t`$. In particular all pure gluonic operators can be written in the following $`s`$-channel form:

$`\left(\begin{array}{c}A_1^{}\\ A_1\end{array}\right)^T\left(\begin{array}{c}A_2^{}\\ A_2\end{array}\right)^T\widehat{O}_{11^{},22^{}}\left(\begin{array}{c}A_1^{}^{}\\ A_1^{}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}A_2^{}^{}\\ A_2^{}\end{array}\right),`$ (6.26)
$`\widehat{G}_{11^{}22^{}}=(T_{11^{}}^aT_{22^{}}^a)`$ (6.27)
$`\left\{8[\stackrel{~}{J}_{11^{}}^{(g)}+w_g^{(0)}\delta ^{(2)}]\widehat{𝒱}_s+2[\stackrel{~}{J}_{221}](\widehat{𝒱}_s\widehat{𝒜}_s+2\widehat{𝒯}_s)4[\stackrel{~}{J}_{112}](\widehat{𝒱}_s\widehat{𝒜}_s)\right\}`$ (6.28)
The operator

$$\widehat{𝒱}_s\widehat{𝒜}_s+2\widehat{𝒯}_s=\widehat{𝒱}_t=\sigma _1^{(11^{})}\sigma _1^{(22^{})}[I^{(11^{})}I^{(22^{})}+g^{rs}\sigma _r^{(11^{})}\sigma _s^{(22^{})}]$$
(6.29)
has appeared already above in the double-logarithmic asymptotics (4.6).

### 6.3 Two-parton eigenstates

Two-parton states on which the above operators act have the form

$$|\varphi _{12}>=\underset{P_i}{}𝑑z_1𝑑z_2\varphi ^{P_1P_2}(z_1,z_2)A_{P_1}^{(+)}(z_1)A_{P_2}^{(+)}(z_2)|0>.$$
(6.30)
$`P=(p,\lambda )`$ labels the parton type $`p`$ (chirality and flavour) and the helicity $`\lambda `$, i.e. $`A_P=(A^{},A,f^{},f,\stackrel{~}{f}^{}\mathrm{})`$. The action of the symmetries on the fields induces an action on $`\varphi `$. In particular the action of the one-dimensional conformal transformations (6.1, 6.2) on $`\varphi `$ is generated by $`S^a=S_1^a+S_2^a,a=\pm ,0`$

$$S_1^{}=_1,S_1^+=z_1^2_1+2s_{p1}z_1,S_1^0=z_1_1+s_{p1},$$
(6.31)
where $`s_A=\frac{1}{2},s_f=1`$.

Conformal symmetry is used to find the eigenstates and eigenvalues of the above operators. Among the states with the same eigenvalues the ones of lowest weight are distinguished,

$`(S_1^{}+S_2^{})\varphi ^{P_1P_2}(z_1,z_2)=0,`$ (6.32)
$`(S_1^0+S_2^0)\varphi ^{P_1P_2}(z_1,z_2)=(n+s_{p1}+s_{p2})\varphi ^{P_1P_2}(z_1,z_2),`$ (6.33)
$`\varphi ^{P_1P_2}(z_1,z_2)=C_n^{P_1P_2}(z_{12})^n.`$ (6.34)
Due to the helicity symmetry the eigenstates can be chosen to be definite helicity states $`𝒯^\pm ,𝒱,𝒜`$, therefore

$`C_{n,T^\pm }^{(p_1,\lambda _1)(p_2,\lambda _2)}=\stackrel{~}{C}_{n,T^\pm }^{p_1p_2}{\displaystyle \frac{1\pm \lambda _1}{2}}\delta _{\lambda _1,\lambda _2},`$ (6.35)
$`C_{n,V}^{(p_1,\lambda _1)(p_2,\lambda _2)}=\stackrel{~}{C}_{n,V}^{p_1p_2}\delta _{\lambda _1,\lambda _2},`$ (6.36)
$`C_{n,A}^{(p_1,\lambda _1)(p_2,\lambda _2)}=\stackrel{~}{C}_{n,A}^{p_1p_2}\lambda _1\delta _{\lambda _1,\lambda _2}.`$ (6.37)
Clearly, the states $`𝒯^\pm `$ have the same eigenvalue.

If flavour or chirality do not coincide, $`p_1p_2`$, then still the diagonalization in that subspace has to be performed.

Comparing to the Regge limit we see that conformal symmetry holds in the corresponding logarithmic approximation to both limits. In the Regge case the operators depend on the transverse position (impact parameter) and the conformal symmetry acts on the plane by Möbius transformations (based on $`sl(2,C)`$). The operators of reggeon interactions allow for factorization of the holomorphic and anti-holomorphic dependences on the complex position variable. The leading reggeized gluons do not carry helicity and there is no similarity regarding to the helicity symmetry.

## 7 Discussion

We have treated the high energy Bjorken asymptotics of QCD amplitudes choosing the non-standard viewpoint of the effective action concept. While this does not add new results to what is well known about scale dependence of composite operators or (ordinary and skewed) parton distributions it allows to draw interesting parallels to the Regge asymptotics and provides a compact and uniform treatment of all exchange channels. A motivation is to rely on the observed parallels in improving the understanding of the more involved Regge asymptotics.

The effective action for the Bjorken asymptotics is obtained from the QCD action (2.9) by separation of momentum modes. In the approximation (2.14,2.27,2.28) it allows to calculate the interaction of the exchanged partons in the tree approximation.

The results have been formulated in terms of Hamiltonian operators involving light-ray kernels in a convenient Feynman parameter representation. In this operator form the symmetries of the one-dimensional effective parton interaction are manifest, providing a convenient basis for treating the mutiparton exchange contributions of higher twist by symmetry methods. Contributions to the asymptotics are calculated by studying the evolution induced by these Hamiltonians.

The eigenvalues are calculated easily in the $`\alpha `$ representation (5.13) reproducing the well known results for the sets of anomalous dimensions in the exchange channels of parallel helicities $`𝒯_t`$ related to transversity asymmetry or chirality odd structure functions like $`h_1,F_3^\gamma `$, symmetric antiparallel helicity $`𝒱_t`$, related to unpolarized parton distributions, and antisymmetric antiparallel helicity $`𝒜_t`$, related to helicity asymmetry and structure functions $`g_1`$. The parton states are directly related to the conventional local light-cone operators composed out of the gluon field strength operator and the Dirac field operators with derivatives acting on them. In the leading twist case the field strength enters with one index contracted with $`q^{}`$ and one being transverse and expessing the polarization state, the chirality and polarization states of the quarks are selected by the known $`\gamma `$ matrix projectors, among them a factor $`\gamma _\mu q^\mu `$, and the derivatives are all longitudinal, $`q^\mu _\mu `$. The light-ray wave functions are directly related to the derivative structure of the operator: The number of derivatives acting on the $`i`$th operator is the power of $`z_i`$ in the polynomial $`\varphi (z_i)`$.

In the considered approximation the effective action and the resulting Hamiltonians describe the twist-two (two-parton exchange) contributions to the Bjorken asymptotics and moreover the part of higher twist (in the power counting sense) contributions which results from the exchange of a fixed number of partons equal to the twist. This corresponds to the renormalization of quasi-parton operators  composed of more then two fields disregarding their mixing with other operators not of the quasi partonic class.

There are contributions of t-channel intermediate states with a number of partons less than the twist and therefore the parton number may vary in the iteration. However, since the twist is one and the same for all intermediate states, those intermediate states with a smaller number of partons necessarily involve partons of non-leading type. Non-leading exchanged partons differ from the ones considered so far and appear from improving the condition (2.14, 2.27, 2.28 ) as mentioned in Section 2.3. They are the analogon of the non-leading reggeons. The contribution of the latter to the effective action of Regge asymptotics has been studied recently . There is an important difference: In the Regge asymptotics the exponent of $`s`$ of a definite reggeon exchange depends on the number of leading reggeized gluons only by $`𝒪(g^2)`$ corrections. Therefore in the interation one may have a variable number of those leading gluonic reggeons; a variable reggeon number may appear without involving the non-leading type of reggeons. In the Bjorken asymptotics the analogon of the generalized leading log approximation is incomplete without non-leading exchange partons.

The effective action for the Bjorken limit in the approximation presented here is to be improved by including higher order effective vertices and renormalization $`Z`$ factors and by terms describing the non-leading partons and their interactions. The first improvement is to reproduce in the next order in particular the two-loop anomalous dimensions and evolution kernels well known in the standard approach. The second improvement would be necessary for studying higher twist and deserves further study.

The multi-parton exchange (higher twist) contribution with a fixed number leads to a multi-body quantum problem in one dimension the hamiltonian of which is the sum of the above pair-interaction hamiltonians. The solution of this stationary state quantum problem allows to construct the corresponding higher twist contribution to the Bjorken limit amplitude.

This appears again in parallel to the Regge case. In both cases some of the arising multi-body quantum systems turn out to be completely integrable (without or with simplification of the gauge group factors by taking the $`N\mathrm{}`$ limit). In these cases the involved pair hamiltonians are particular operators out of complete sets of integrals of motion which can be constructed from solutions of the Yang-Baxter equation.

The pair interaction hamiltonians of the parallel helicity partons (5.16) (without the gauge group factors) correspond to integrable multi-body systems with nearest neighbour (chain) interactions constructed from $`sl(2)`$ symmetric solutions of the Yang-Baxter equation. Interesting three-parton channels have been studied in .

The parallel helicity operators altogether (disregarding the gauge group factors) appear in the integrable homogeneous closed chain constructed out of a chiral ($`\mathrm{}=b`$) representation of the superconformal group $`sl(2|1)`$ . The natural question arises whether integrable systems can be constructed the hamiltonians of which coincide with the ones of the other helicity configurations $`𝒱_t,𝒜_t`$.

The symmetries of the asymptotic effective interaction are derived from the symmetries of the underlying theory. The impact of extended symmetries (compared to QCD) on the asymptotic interactions is a question of interest, since the answer may be helpful in treating multiple exchanges. With this motivation we are going to consider the models of $`𝒩=1,2,4`$ supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory in a forthcoming paper. The present effective action formulation allows for a simple and uniform treatment of the Bjorken asymptotics of those models.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to G.P. Korchemsky, L.N. Lipatov, A.N. Manashov and D. Robaschik for useful discussions.

## 8 Appendix A

The general definition of the $`\overline{\alpha }`$ integrals appearing in the leading loop contributions are

$`J_{n_1n_2\mathrm{}n_N}(x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_N)={\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\overline{\alpha }}{2\pi i}}[\overline{\alpha }x_1+1iϵ]^{n_1}[\overline{\alpha }x_2+1iϵ]^{n_2}`$ (8.1)
$`\mathrm{}[\overline{\alpha }x_N+1iϵ]^{n_N}.`$ (8.2)
$`n_i`$ are positive integers. The Feynman parameter representation is

$`J_{n_1n_2\mathrm{}}(x_1,x_2,\mathrm{})={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_i1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_2)\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_N)}}{\displaystyle 𝒟^{(N)}\alpha \alpha _1^{n_11}\alpha _2^{n_21}}`$ (8.3)
$`\mathrm{}\alpha _N^{n_N1}\delta ({\displaystyle \alpha _ix_i})`$ (8.4)
In the latter integral the varibles $`\alpha _i`$ range from 0 to 1 and $`𝒟^{(N)}\alpha =d\alpha _1\mathrm{}d\alpha _N\delta ((1\alpha _i)`$.

By decomposition into simple fractions one can reduce the number of factors in the denominator of (8.2). In this way one derives relations like

$`J_{12}(x_1,x_2)={\displaystyle \frac{x_1}{x_1x_2}}J_{11}(x_1,x_2),`$ (8.5)
$`J_{111}(x_1,x_2,x_3)={\displaystyle \frac{x_2}{x_{23}}}J_{11}(x_1,x_2){\displaystyle \frac{x_3}{x_{23}}}J_{11}(x_1,x_3),`$ (8.6)
$`J_{112}(x_1,x_2,x_3)={\displaystyle \frac{x_1x_2}{x_{13}x_{23}}}J_{11}(x_1,x_2)+\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_2}{x_{23}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{x_1}{x_{13}}}\right)J_{111}(x_1,x_2,x_3),`$ (8.7)
$`J_{221}(x_1,x_2,x_3)={\displaystyle \frac{x_3^2}{x_{13}x_{23}}}J_{111}(x_1,x_2,x_3)`$ (8.8)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{x_1x_2}{x_{12}^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x_2}{x_{23}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{x_1}{x_{13}}}\right)J_{11}(x_1,x_2).`$ (8.9)
In the above calculations we encounter $`\overline{\alpha }`$ integrals with three arguments ($`x_1=\beta _1,x_2=\beta _2,x_3=\beta _{11^{}}`$), two cases with two arguments ($`x_1=\beta _1,x_2=\beta _{11^{}}`$ and $`x_1=\beta _1,x_2=\beta _2`$) and with one argument, which is just a $`\delta `$ function.

Under Fourier transformation

$$[\mathrm{\Phi }(\beta _1,\beta _2,\beta _1^{},\beta _2^{})]=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}(z_1,z_2,z_1^{},z_2^{})$$
(8.10)
defined by

$`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}(z_1,z_2,z_1^{},z_2^{})={\displaystyle \frac{d\beta _1d\beta _2d\beta _1^{}d\beta _2^{}}{(2\pi )^2}\delta (\beta _1+\beta _2\beta _1^{}\beta _2^{})}`$ (8.11)
$`\mathrm{exp}[i(z_1^{}\beta _1^{}+z_2^{}\beta _2^{}+z_1\beta _1z_2\beta _2)]]\mathrm{\Phi }(\beta _1,\beta _2,\beta _1^{},\beta _2^{})`$ (8.12)
the expressions involving $`J`$ appearing in the interaction kernels transform as

$`[J_{n_1n_2n_3}(\beta _1,\beta _2,\beta _{11^{}})]={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_1+n_2+n_31)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_2)\mathrm{\Gamma }(n_3)}}{\displaystyle 𝒟^{(3)}\alpha }`$ (8.13)
$`\alpha _1^{n_11}\alpha _2^{n_21}\alpha _3^{n_31}\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha _1z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}}+\alpha _2z_{12}),`$ (8.14)
$`[J_{11}(\beta _1,\beta _{11^{}})\phi _1(\beta _i)]={\displaystyle 𝑑\alpha \chi _1(\alpha )\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}})},`$ (8.15)
$`[J_{11}(\beta _1,\beta _2)\phi _0(\beta _i)]={\displaystyle 𝑑\alpha }\chi _0(\alpha )\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}}+(1\alpha )z_{12}),`$ (8.16)
$`[\delta (\beta _1,\beta _2)]=\delta (z_{11^{}})\delta (z_{22^{}}).`$ (8.17)
$`\beta `$ dependent factors multiplying the functions $`J_{11}`$ result in some additional functions in the intergrand of the Fourier transformed Feyman parameter representations:

$`\phi _1(\beta _i)=1\chi _1(\alpha )=1,`$ (8.18)
$`\phi _1(\beta _i)={\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1}{\beta _1^{}}}\chi _1(\alpha )=1\alpha ,`$ (8.19)
$`\phi _1(\beta _i)={\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1}{\beta _{11^{}}}}\chi _1(\alpha )={\displaystyle \frac{1\alpha }{\alpha }},`$ (8.20)
$`\phi _1(\beta _i)={\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1^2}{\beta _1^{}\beta _{11^{}}}}\chi _1(\alpha )={\displaystyle \frac{(1\alpha )^2}{\alpha }},`$ (8.21)
$`\phi _0(\beta _i)=1\chi _0(\alpha )=1,`$ (8.22)
$`\phi _0(\beta _i)={\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1}{\beta _1+\beta _2}}\chi _0(\alpha )=1\alpha ,`$ (8.23)
$`\phi _0(\beta _i)={\displaystyle \frac{\beta _2}{\beta _1+\beta _2}}\chi _0(\alpha )=\alpha ,`$ (8.24)
$`\phi _0(\beta _i)={\displaystyle \frac{\beta _1\beta _2}{(\beta _1+\beta _2)^2}}\chi _0(\alpha )=\alpha (1\alpha ),`$ (8.25)
## 9 Appendix B

In the case of antiparallel helicity gluons the calculation of the effective two-parton interaction results instead of (3.11 ) in

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{_1^{}^2_2^{}^2+_1^2_2^2}{(_1+_1^{})^2}}\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}+{\displaystyle \frac{(_1^{}_2^{}+_1_2)_1_2}{(_1+_1^{})^2}}\stackrel{~}{J}_0\right)(A_1^{}T^aA_1^{})(A_2T^aA_2^{}^{})`$ (9.1)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{(_1_1^{}+_2_2^{})_1_2}{(_1+_2)^2}}\stackrel{~}{J}_0(A_1^{}T^aA_2)(A_1^{}T^aA_2^{}^{})`$ (9.2)
$`+(_1+_1^{})^2\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}(A_1^{}T^aA_1^{}^{})(A_2T^aA_2^{})`$ (9.3)
Here the self-energy contributions are not included yet. We separate in the first bracket a term equal to the result for the parallel helicity case (3.11). Adding now the self-energy contribution (3.14) results in the replacement of the first bracket by

$$2_1^{}_2^{}[\stackrel{~}{J}_{11^{}}+w_g^{(0)}\delta ^{(2)}](_1^{}_1)(_2^{}_2)\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}+_1_2\stackrel{~}{J}_0,$$
(9.4)
where now each term represents a regular operator.

The last two relations given in (8.9) for the $`J`$ integrals Fourier transformed to light ray variables can be used now to substitute $`(_1^{}_1)(_2^{}_2)\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}`$ and $`(_1^{}+_1)^2\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}`$ by $`\stackrel{~}{J}_{112}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{J}_{221}`$ plus remainders involving $`\stackrel{~}{J}_0`$. This results in

$`\left(2[\stackrel{~}{J}_{11^{}}+w_g^{(0)}\delta ^{(2)}]+\stackrel{~}{J}_{221}2\stackrel{~}{J}_{112}\right)(A_1^{}T^aA_1^{})(A_2T^aA_2^{}^{})`$ (9.5)
$`+\stackrel{~}{J}_{221}(A_1^{}T^aA_1^{}^{})(A_2T^aA_2^{})`$ (9.6)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{_1_2}{(_1+_2)^2}}\stackrel{~}{J}_0\{(_1_2^{}+_2_1^{})(A_1^{}T^aA_1^{}^{})(A_2T^aA_2^{})`$ (9.7)
$`+(_1_1^{}+_2_2^{})[(A_1^{}T^aA_1^{})(A_2T^aA_2^{}^{})(A_1^{}T^aA_2)(A_1^{}T^aA_2^{}^{})]\}.`$ (9.8)
Due to the commutation relation of the generators $`T^a`$ we have for the gauge group brackets (2.12)

$$(A_1^{}T^aA_1^{})(A_2T^aA_2^{}^{})(A_1^{}T^aA_2)(A_1^{}T^aA_2^{}^{})=(A_1^{}T^aA_2^{}^{})(A_2T^aA_1^{}).$$
(9.9)
Thus the last term in the brackets multiplying $`\stackrel{~}{J}_0`$ in (9.3) is equal to the first one up to the sign and the exchange of $`1^{}`$ and $`2^{}`$. We remember that the above expressions are understood as integrated over the light ray positions $`1,2,1^{},2^{}`$. Therefore the exchange of $`1^{}`$ and $`2^{}`$ is just a substitution of integration variables. We conclude that the contribution involving $`\stackrel{~}{J}_0`$ cancels and arrive at the result (5.19) up to normalization.

The other cases of anti-parallel helicities are simpler. For the quark-gluon and the annihilation-type interactions the following relation is used to rearrange derivative operators,

$`(_2+_2^{})\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}=2_1^{}\stackrel{~}{J}_{211}+(_1^{}+_2^{}\stackrel{~}{J}_0^{(g)}`$ (9.10)
$`=2_2^{}\stackrel{~}{J}_{211}(_1^{}+_2^{}\stackrel{~}{J}_0^{(g)}.`$ (9.11)
We present typical calculation for transforming an extra derivative acting on a kernel like $`\stackrel{~}{J}_{111}`$ into a factor $`z_{12}^1`$ (transformation of (5.32) to (6.12) ),

$`_2^{}{\displaystyle 𝒟^{(3)}\alpha \phi (\alpha _1,\alpha _2)\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha _1z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}}+\alpha _2z_{12})}`$ (9.12)
$`=z_{12}^1{\displaystyle 𝒟^{(3)}\alpha \phi (\alpha _1,\alpha _2)_{\alpha _2}[\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha _1z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}}+\alpha _2z_{12})]}`$ (9.13)
$`=z_{12}^1{\displaystyle 𝒟^{(3)}\alpha _{\alpha _2}\phi (\alpha _1,\alpha _2)\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha _1z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}}+\alpha _2z_{12})}`$ (9.14)
$`z_{12}^1{\displaystyle 𝑑\alpha _1\phi (\alpha _1,0)\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha _1z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}})}`$ (9.15)
$`+z_{12}^1{\displaystyle 𝑑\alpha _1\phi (\alpha _1,1\alpha _1)\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha _1z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}}+(1\alpha _1)z_{12})}.`$ (9.16)
The simpler case with a kernel of the type $`\stackrel{~}{J}_0`$ looks as follows,

$`(_1^{}+_2^{}){\displaystyle 𝑑\alpha \alpha (1\alpha )\chi (\alpha )\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}}+(1\alpha )z_{12})}`$ (9.17)
$`=z_{12}^1{\displaystyle 𝑑\alpha _\alpha [\alpha (1\alpha )\chi (\alpha )]\delta (z_{11^{}}\alpha z_{12})\delta (z_{22^{}}+(1\alpha )z_{12})}.`$ (9.18)
In order to arrive at (6.12) a cancellation between $`s,t`$ and $`u`$ channel type terms multiplying $`\stackrel{~}{J}_0^{(g)}`$ analogous to (9.4) has to be done.