text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Ultrarelativistic heavy-ion-collision experiments at the BNL Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) have begun and will soon start at the CERN Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in an anticipation of producing a quark-gluon plasma (QGP) \[see, e.g., \]. The QGP to be produced is an expanding nonequilibrium system. Studies of the QGP as such have just begun.

In previous papers, a perturbative framework has been formulated from first principles for dealing with out-of-equilibrium complex-scalar field system , $`O(N)`$ linear-sigma system , and the system that includes massless fermions . In this paper, we take up the out-of-equilibrium quantum-field theories that includes gauge bosons. We deal with the gauge-boson and the FP-ghost sectors in Coulomb gauge and, following the same procedure as in , we construct the gauge-boson and FP-ghost propagators and, thereby, frame a perturbation theory. Only approximation we employ is the so-called gradient approximation (see below). We use the closed-time-path (CTP) formalism  of nonequilibrium statistical quantum-field theory. It turns out that the form of gauge-boson propagator is quite complicated.

Throughout this paper, we are interested in quasiuniform systems near equilibrium or nonequilibrium quasistationary systems. Such systems are characterized by two different spacetime scales ; microscopic or quantum-field-theoretical and macroscopic or statistical. The first scale, the microscopic correlation scale, characterizes the reactions taking place in the system, while the second scale measures the relaxation of the system. For a weak coupling theory, in which we are interested in this paper, the former scale is much smaller than the latter scale.222It should be noted, however, that, as the system approaches the critical point of the phase transition, the microscopic correlation scale diverges. Thus, the formalism developed in this paper applies to the systems away from the critical point. In a derivative expansion of some quantity $`F`$ with respect to macroscopic spacetime coordinates $`X`$, we use the gradient approximation throughout:

$$F(X,\mathrm{})F(Y,\mathrm{})+(XY)^\mu _{Y^\mu }F(Y,\mathrm{}).$$
(1)
Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }(x,y)`$ be a generic propagator. For the system of our concern, $`\mathrm{\Delta }(x,y)`$, with $`xy`$ fixed, does not change appreciably in $`(x+y)/2`$. We refer to the first term on the right-hand side (RHS) of Eq. (1) as the leading part (term) and to the second term as the gradient part (term). The self-energy part $`\mathrm{\Pi }(x,y)`$ enjoys a similar property. Thus, as usual, we choose the relative coordinates $`xy`$ as the microscopic coordinates while $`X(x+y)/2`$ as the macroscopic coordinates. A Fourier transform with respect to $`xy`$ yields

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(x,y)=\frac{d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}P}{(2\pi )^4}e^{iP(xy)}\mathrm{\Delta }(X;P)\text{ }(X(x+y)/2)$$
(2)
$`(P^\mu =(p^0,𝐩))`$ together with a similar formula for $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$. The above observation shows that $`P^\mu `$ in Eq. (2) can be regarded as the momentum of the quasiparticle participating in the microscopic reaction under consideration. We shall freely use $`\mathrm{\Delta }(x,y)`$ or $`\mathrm{\Delta }(X;P)`$ \[$`\mathrm{\Pi }(x,y)`$ or $`\mathrm{\Pi }(X;P)`$\], which we simply write $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ \[$`\mathrm{\Pi }`$\] whenever obvious from the context.

The perturbative framework to be constructed accompanies the generalized Boltzmann equation (GBE) for the number density of quasiparticles. The framework allows us to compute any reaction rate by using the reaction rate formula . Substituting the computed net production rates of quasiparticles into the GBE, one can determine the number densities as functions of macroscopic spacetime coordinates, which describes the evolution of the system.

For definiteness, we take up QCD. However, the procedure has little to do with QCD and then the framework to be constructed may be used for any theory that includes gauge boson(s) with almost no modification. The plan of the paper is as follows: In Sec. II, on the basis of CTP formalism, we construct the bare gauge-boson and FP-ghost propagators, with which the “bare-$`N`$ scheme” may be constructed. In Sec. III, we set up the basis for formulating the “physical-$`N`$ scheme.” In Sec. IV, we make up the self-energy-part resummed propagators. In Sec. V, we impose the condition that no large contribution appears in perturbative calculation, so that a “healthy” perturbative framework is constructed. It is shown that, on the energy-shell, the condition turns out to the generalized Boltzmann equation. In Sec. VI, we frame a concrete perturbative framework. Section VII is devoted to summary and outlook. Concrete derivation of various formula used in the text is made in Appendices.

## 2 Closed-time-path formalism

### 2.1 Preliminary

For definiteness, we take up QCD and adopt the Coulomb gauge. We deal only with the gluon and the FP-ghost sectors in an out of equilibrium QCD system. Singling out the free parts of the gluon and of the FP-ghosts, we write the Lagrangian (density) as

$`(A^{(a)\mu }(x),\eta ^{(a)}(x),\overline{\eta }^{(a)}(x),\mathrm{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}A^{(a)\mu }𝒟_{\mu \nu }A^{(a)\nu }+\overline{\eta }^{(a)}_𝐗^2\eta ^{(a)}+...,`$
$`𝒟^{\mu \nu }g^{\mu \nu }^2+^\mu ^\nu {\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha }}\left[(^\mu ^0n^\mu )(^\nu ^0n^\nu )\right].`$ (3)
Here $`n^\mu =(1,\mathrm{𝟎})`$, $`A^{(a)\mu }`$ (“$`a`$” the color index) is the gluon fields, and $`\eta ^{(a)}`$ and $`\overline{\eta }^{(a)}`$ are the FP-ghost fields. The CTP formalism is formulated  by introducing an oriented closed-time path $`C`$ $`(=C_1+C_2)`$ in a complex-time plane, that goes from $`\mathrm{}`$ to $`+\mathrm{}`$ $`(C_1)`$ and then returns from $`+\mathrm{}`$ to $`\mathrm{}`$ $`(C_2)`$. The real time formalism is achieved by doubling every degree of freedom: For example, for gauge fields, $`A^{(a)\mu }(A_1^{(a)\mu },A_2^{(a)\mu })`$, where $`A_1^{(a)\mu }(x_0,𝐱)=A^{(a)\mu }(x_0,𝐱)`$ with $`x_0C_1`$ and $`A_2^{(a)\mu }(x_0,𝐱)=A^{(a)\mu }(x_0,𝐱)`$ with $`x_0C_2`$. A field with suffix ‘$`i`$$`(i=1,2)`$ is called a type-$`i`$ field. One can introduce a two-dimensional space, in which every field is a “vector” whose first (second) component is the type-1 (type-2) field. In equilibrium thermal field theory, this space is called the thermal space, so that we use this terminology in the following. The classical contour action that governs the dynamics of nonequilibrium systems is written in the form

$`{\displaystyle _C}𝑑x_0{\displaystyle 𝑑𝐱(A^{(a)\mu }(x),\eta ^{(a)}(x),\overline{\eta }^{(a)}(x),\mathrm{})}={\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}𝑑x_0{\displaystyle 𝑑𝐱\widehat{}(x)},`$
$`\widehat{}(x)(A_1^{(a)\mu }(x),\eta _1^{(a)}(x),\overline{\eta }_1^{(a)}(x),\mathrm{})(A_2^{(a)\mu }(x),\overline{\eta }_2^{(a)}(x),\overline{\eta }_2^{(a)}(x),\mathrm{}),`$ (4)
where “$`\mathrm{}`$” stands for quark fields. $`\widehat{}`$ here is sometimes called a hat-Lagrangian \[cf. \]. Throughout this paper, we do not deal with initial correlations (see, e.g., ).

#### 2.1.1 Gluon sector

Following standard procedure , the four kind of gluon propagators emerges:

$`\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_{11}^{(ab)\mu \nu }(x,y)\right)`$ $``$ $`i\text{Tr}\left[T\left\{A_1^{(a)\mu }(x)A_1^{(b)\nu }(y)\right\}\rho \right],`$
$`\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_{12}^{(ab)\mu \nu }(x,y)\right)`$ $``$ $`i\text{Tr}\left[A_2^{(b)\nu }(y)A_1^{(a)\mu }(x)\rho \right],`$
$`\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_{21}^{(ab)\mu \nu }(x,y)\right)`$ $``$ $`i\text{Tr}\left[A_2^{(a)\mu }(x)A_1^{(b)\nu }(y)\rho \right],`$
$`\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_{22}^{(ab)\mu \nu }(x,y)\right)`$ $``$ $`i\text{Tr}\left[\overline{T}\left\{A_2^{(a)\mu }(x)A_2^{(b)\nu }(y)\right\}\rho \right],`$ (5)
where $`\rho `$ is the density matrix, and $`T`$ ($`\overline{T}`$) is the time-ordering (antitime-ordering) symbol. We restrict ourselves to the case where $`\rho `$ is color singlet, so that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^{(ab)\mu \nu }=\delta ^{ab}\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^{\mu \nu }`$. Throughout in the sequel, we drop the color index. At the end of calculation we set $`A_1^\mu =A_2^\mu `$ . Let us use bold-face letter $`𝚫_{ij}(x,y)`$ for denoting $`4\times 4`$ matrix, whose $`(\mu \nu )`$-component is $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^{\mu \nu }(x,y)`$. We further introduce a matrix propagator $`\widehat{𝚫}(x,y)`$, where the ‘caret’ denotes the $`2\times 2`$ matrix in thermal space, whose $`(ij)`$-component is $`𝚫_{ij}(x,y)`$. The matrix self-energy part $`\widehat{𝚷}(x,y)`$ is defined similarly.

Deduction of the gluon propagator $`\widehat{𝚫}`$ is carried out below in subsection B.

#### 2.1.2 FP-ghost sector

The FP-ghost fields are unphysical fields, so that they are absent in the system under consideration. Then, the FP-ghost propagators are the same as in vacuum theory. This means that the $`2\times 2`$ matrix propagator that act on a thermal space is diagonal, whose diagonal elements are

$`\left[\mathrm{\Delta }_g^{(ab)}(x,y)\right]_{11}`$ $``$ $`i0|T\left\{\eta _1^{(a)}(x)\overline{\eta }_1^{(b)}(y)\right\}|0,`$
$`\left[\mathrm{\Delta }_g^{(ab)}(x,y)\right]_{22}`$ $``$ $`i0|\overline{T}\left\{\eta _2^{(a)}(x)\overline{\eta }_2^{(b)}(y)\right\}|0.`$
In what follows, as in the gluon sector, we drop the color indices. Setting $`\eta _1=\eta _2`$ and $`\overline{\eta }_1=\overline{\eta }_2`$, the FP-ghost propagator may be written, in $`2\times 2`$ matrix notation, as

$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_g(x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }_g(x,y)\widehat{\tau }_3,`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_g(x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}P}{(2\pi )^4}e^{iP(xy)}\frac{1}{p^2}}.`$ (6)
As will be shown in Appendix A, the FP-ghost self-energy-part matrix $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_g`$ is also diagonal, and enjoys a property $`[\mathrm{\Pi }_g]_{11}+[\mathrm{\Pi }_g]_{22}=0`$ with $`\text{Im}[\mathrm{\Pi }_g(X;P)]_{11}=0`$. Then we may write

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_g(x,y)=\mathrm{\Pi }_g(x,y)\widehat{\tau }_3.$$

A $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_g`$-resummed FP-ghost propagator $`\widehat{G}_g`$ $`(=G_g\widehat{\tau }_3)`$ is defined through a Schwinger-Dyson equation:

$$G_g=\mathrm{\Delta }_g+\mathrm{\Delta }_g\mathrm{\Pi }_gG_g=\mathrm{\Delta }_g+G_g\mathrm{\Pi }_g\mathrm{\Delta }_g.$$

Here we have used the short-hand notation $`FG`$, which is a function whose “$`(xy)`$-component” is

$$[FG](x,y)=d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}zF(x,z)G(z,y).$$
(7)
Solving this to the gradient approximation, we obtain

$`G_g(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`G_g^{(0)}(X;P)+G_g^{(1)}(X;P),`$
$`G_g^{(0)}(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_g(X;P)}},`$
$`G_g^{(1)}(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }_g(X;P)}{P^\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }_g(X;P)}{X_\mu }}[G_g^{(0)}(X;P)]^3.`$
As will be observed in Sec. IV, to be consistent with the approximation we are taking, $`G_g^{(1)}`$ may be ignored, so that

$$\widehat{G}_g(X;P)\frac{\widehat{\tau }_3}{p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_g(X;P)}.$$

#### 2.1.3 Vertex factors

The vertex factors may be read off from Eq. (4): There is no vertex that mixes type-1 fields with type-2 fields. Every vertex factor for interactions between the type-1 fields is the same as in vacuum theory, while the every vertex factor for the type-2 fields is of opposite sign to the corresponding vertex factor for the type-1 fields.

In the next subsection, we deduce the gluon propagator, Eq. (5).

### 2.2 Gluon propagator

We compute Eq. (5) with $`A_1^\mu =A_2^\mu `$ $`(A^\mu )`$. For $`A^\mu `$, we use the plane-wave decomposition with helicity basis in vacuum theory. Straightforward but lengthy calculation yields

$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}^{\mu \nu }(x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}P}{(2\pi )^4}e^{iP(xy)}\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}^{\mu \nu }(X;P)}\left(X(x+y)/2\right),`$ (8)
where

$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}^{\mu \nu }(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_T^{\mu \nu }(X;P)+\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_L^{\mu \nu }(X;P)+\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1^{\mu \nu }(X;P)+\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_2^{\mu \nu }(X;P)+\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_3^{\mu \nu }(X;P),`$
$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_T^{\mu \nu }(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})\left[\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{RA}(P)+\left[\mathrm{\Delta }_R(P)\mathrm{\Delta }_A(P)\right]f(X;P)\widehat{M}_+\right],`$ (10)
$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_L^{\mu \nu }(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`\left[n^\mu n^\nu \alpha {\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^2}}P^\mu P^\nu \right]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^2}}\widehat{\tau }_3,`$ (11)
$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1^{\mu \nu }(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`g^{\mu i}g^{\nu j}[{\displaystyle \frac{i\left(1+(\widehat{p}^y)^2\right)}{2p\left(1(\widehat{p}^y)^2\right)}}(\widehat{p}^i_𝐗^j\widehat{p}^j_𝐗^i)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{i\widehat{p}^y}{p\left(1(\widehat{p}^y)^2\right)}}(\delta ^{iy}_{}^j\delta ^{jy}_{}^i)\left]\right[\mathrm{\Delta }_R(P)\mathrm{\Delta }_A(P)]f(X;P)\widehat{M}_+,`$
$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_2^{\mu \nu }(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`ig^{\mu i}g^{\nu j}ϵ^{ijk}\widehat{p}^kN_{}(P)\left[\mathrm{\Delta }_R(P)\mathrm{\Delta }_A(P)\right]ϵ(p^0)\widehat{M}_+,`$ (13)
$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_3^{\mu \nu }(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`g^{\mu i}g^{\nu j}\{[(12\delta ^{iy})\delta ^{ij}+\widehat{p}^i\widehat{p}^j{\displaystyle \frac{2\stackrel{~}{p}^i\stackrel{~}{p}^j}{1(\widehat{p}^y)^2}}]\text{Re}N_{LR}(P)`$ (14)
$`[{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{p}^y\left[\stackrel{~}{p}^i(\widehat{𝐩}\times 𝐞^y)^j+\stackrel{~}{p}^j(\widehat{𝐩}\times 𝐞^y)^i\right]}{1(\widehat{p}^y)^2}}`$
$`(\widehat{𝐩}\times 𝐞^y)^i\delta ^{jy}(\widehat{𝐩}\times 𝐞^y)^j\delta ^{iy}]ϵ(p^0)\text{Im}N_{LR}(P)\}`$
$`\times \left[\mathrm{\Delta }_R(P)\mathrm{\Delta }_A(P)\right]ϵ(p^0)\widehat{M}_+,`$
where the Greek letters, $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$, take $`0`$ \- $`3`$, while the Latin letters, $`i`$ and $`j`$, take $`1`$, $`2`$, and $`3`$. To avoid possible confusion, we have written $`(x,y,z)`$ for $`(1,2,3)`$. In the above equations, $`𝐞^y=(0,1,0)`$, $`_𝐗^i/X^i`$, $`ϵ^{123}=ϵ^{xyz}=1`$, and

$`𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})`$ $`=`$ $`g^{\mu i}g^{\nu j}\left(\delta ^{ij}\widehat{p}^i\widehat{p}^j\right)(\widehat{𝐩}𝐩/p),`$ (15)
$`\stackrel{~}{𝐩}`$ $``$ $`\widehat{𝐩}(\widehat{𝐩}𝐞^y)𝐞^y,`$
$`_{}^i`$ $``$ $`_𝐗^i(_𝐗\widehat{p})\widehat{p}^i,`$
$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{RA}(P)`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Delta }_R(P)& \mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}\\ \mathrm{\Delta }_R(P)\mathrm{\Delta }_A(P)& \mathrm{\Delta }_A(P)\end{array}\right),\mathrm{\Delta }_{R(A)}(P)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{P^2\pm ip_00^+}},`$ (18)
$`\widehat{M}_\pm `$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& \pm 1\\ \pm 1& 1\end{array}\right),`$ (21)
$`f(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ(p_0)N(X;P)\theta (p_0),`$ (22)
$`N(X;P)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[N_{++}(X;|p^0|,ϵ(p^0)\widehat{𝐩})+N_{}(X;|p^0|,ϵ(p^0)\widehat{𝐩})\right]`$ (23)
$``$ $`\theta (p^0)n(X;|p^0|,\widehat{𝐩})+\theta (p^0)n(X;|p^0|,\widehat{𝐩}),`$
$`N_{}(X;P)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[N_{++}(X;|p^0|,ϵ(p^0)\widehat{𝐩})N_{}(X;|p^0|,ϵ(p^0)\widehat{𝐩})\right]`$ (24)
$``$ $`N_{}(P),`$
$`N_{LR}(P)`$ $``$ $`N_+(|p_0|,ϵ(p^0)\widehat{𝐩})`$ (25)
with

$`N_{\xi \zeta }(X;|p_0|,\widehat{𝐩})`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle }d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}qe^{iQX}\text{Tr}\left[a_\xi ^{}(𝐩𝐪/2)a_\zeta (𝐩+𝐪/2)\rho \right](\xi ,\zeta =+,).`$
Here $`|p_0|=p`$, and $`Q=(q^0,𝐪)`$ with $`q_0=𝐪𝐩/p`$. $`a_+`$ ($`a_{}`$) is an annihilation operator of a gluon with $`+`$ ($``$) helicity. $`a_+^{}`$ ($`a_{}^{}`$) is a corresponding creation operator. In deriving Eqs. (LABEL:prop) - (LABEL:no), we have assumed that $`\text{Tr}[a_\rho (𝐩)a_\sigma (𝐪)\rho ]0`$. We have also assumed that $`N_{}`$, Eq. (24), and $`N_{LR}`$, Eq. (25), are small quantities, so that $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_2^{\mu \nu }`$ and $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_3^{\mu \nu }`$ are of the order of gradient term $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1^{\mu \nu }`$ that includes $`_𝐗N`$. More precisely $`N_{}`$ and $`N_{LR}(P)`$ are of order of $`\left(_𝐗N\right)/p`$, and then, to the gradient approximation, $`X`$-dependences of $`N_{}`$ and of $`N_{LR}`$ have been ignored.

We observe that the structure of $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_L^{\mu \nu }(P)`$ in Eq. (11) is rather simple, which represents the propagator between “longitudinal gluons” as well as the gauge part. This is a reflection of the fact that, in the Coulomb gauge, only transverse modes are physical modes. Then, as in the FP-ghost propagator in Eq. (6), the $`(\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}1})`$-component of $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_L^{\mu \nu }`$, $`[\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_L^{\mu \nu }(P)]_{11}`$, is the same as in vacuum theory.

From Eq. (LABEL:no), follows

$$\theta (\pm p^0)P_XN_{\xi \zeta }(X;|p^0|,\pm \widehat{𝐩})=0(|p_0|=p).$$
(27)
Using this in Eqs. (22) and (23), we have

$$P_Xf(X;P)=0(|p_0|=p).$$
(28)
As is obvious from the construction, or as can be directly shown from Eq. (28), we see that

$$\widehat{\tau }_3𝒟^{\mu \rho }\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\rho \nu }(x,y)=\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}^{\mu \rho }(x,y)𝒟_{\rho \nu }\widehat{\tau }_3=\delta _\nu ^\mu \delta ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}(xy),$$
(29)
where $`𝒟^{\mu \rho }`$ is as in Eq. (3). Two equations in Eq. (27) are “free Boltzmann equations.” One can construct a perturbation theory in a similar manner as in , where a complex-scalar field system is treated. We call the perturbation theory thus constructed the bare-$`N`$ scheme, since $`N`$ obeys the “free Boltzmann equation.” This scheme is equivalent  to the physical-$`N`$ scheme, to which we now turn.

## 3 Construction of the physical-$`N`$ scheme

We aim to construct a scheme in terms of the number density that is as close as possible to the physical number density. To this end, first of all, we abandon the “free Boltzmann equation” (28). This means that $`f`$ and $`A`$ in the present (physical-$`N`$) scheme differs from the bare-$`N`$ scheme counterparts. Specification of $`f`$ is postponed until Sec. VI.

Now, in contrast to Eq. (29), $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}^{\mu \nu }`$ is not an inverse of $`\widehat{\tau }_3𝒟_{\mu \nu }`$. Straightforward calculation within the gradient approximation yields

$`\widehat{\tau }_3𝒟_\rho ^\mu \widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}^{\rho \nu }(x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`g^{\mu \nu }\delta ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}(xy)i\widehat{\tau }_3\widehat{M}_+{\displaystyle \frac{d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}P}{(2\pi )^4}e^{iP(xy)}}`$
$`\times \left[\mathrm{\Delta }_R(P)\mathrm{\Delta }_A(P)\right]𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})\left(P_Xf(X;P)\right).`$
In obtaining this, we have used $`P^2[\mathrm{\Delta }_R(P^2)\mathrm{\Delta }_A(P^2)]P^2\delta (P^2)=0`$. Our procedure of constructing a consistent scheme is as follows: We further modify $`A^\mu `$ by adding a suitable $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{add}}^{\rho \nu }`$ to $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}^{\rho \nu }`$. The conditions for $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{add}}^{\rho \nu }`$ to be satisfied are

* $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{add}}^{\rho \nu }`$ vanishes in the bare-$`N`$ scheme.
* To the gradient approximation, the counterpart of Eq. (29) turns out to

$$\left(\widehat{\tau }_3𝒟_{\mu \rho }1\left(\widehat{L}_c\right)_{\mu \rho }\right)\left(\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}^{\rho \nu }+\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{add}}^{\rho \nu }\right)=\delta _\mu ^\nu 1,$$
(30)
where use has been made of the short-hand notation (7). ‘$`1`$’ is the matrix in spacetime whose $`(xy)`$-component is $`\delta ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}(xy)`$, and $`\widehat{L_c}`$ is some $`(4\times 4)(2\times 2)`$ matrix function.

It is a straightforward task to obtain the form of the required $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{add}}^{\mu \nu }`$:

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{add}}^{\mu \nu }(X;.P)=i\widehat{M}_+𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})[\mathrm{\Delta }_R^2(P)+\mathrm{\Delta }_A^2(P)]P_Xf(X;P),$$
(31)
from which we obtain for $`\widehat{L}_c^{\mu \nu }`$ in Eq. (30),

$`\widehat{L}_c^{\mu \nu }(x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`L_c^{\mu \nu }\widehat{M}_{}`$
$`=`$ $`2i\widehat{M}_{}{\displaystyle \frac{d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}P}{(2\pi )^4}e^{iP(xy)}𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})P_Xf(X;P)},`$
with $`\widehat{M}_{}`$ as in Eq. (21). In obtaining Eq. (30) with $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{add}}^{\mu \nu }`$ as in Eq. (31), we have used $`(\widehat{L}_c)_\nu ^\mu \widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0^{\nu \rho }(\widehat{L}_c)_\nu ^\mu (\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}^{\nu \rho }+\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{add}}^{\nu \rho })`$, since the difference can be ignored to the gradient approximation. In a similar manner, we find that $`(\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}^{\mu \rho }+\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{add}}^{\mu \rho })(\widehat{\tau }_31\underset{\rho \nu }{\overset{}{𝒟}}(\widehat{L}_c)_{\rho \nu })=\delta _\nu ^\mu 1`$. Thus we have found that the $`2\times 2`$ matrix propagator $`(\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}^{\mu \nu }+\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{add}}^{\mu \nu })`$ is an inverse of $`(\widehat{\tau }_3𝒟_{\mu \nu }1(\widehat{L}_c)_{\mu \nu })`$, so that the free action is333Note that the Lagrangian density corresponding to the term with $`L_c^{\mu \nu }(x,y)`$ in Eq. (32) is nonlocal not only in ‘space’ but also in ‘time.’ Here it is worth mentioning the so-called $`|p_0|`$-prescription. With this prescription, at an intermediate stage, we have $`\left(L_c^{}\right)^{\mu \nu }(x,y)`$, which is local in time. \[See  for details.\]

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}xd^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}y{}_{}{}^{t}\widehat{A}_{\mu }^{}(x)\left[\widehat{\tau }_3𝒟^{\mu \nu }\delta ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}(xy)+L_c^{\mu \nu }(x,y)\widehat{M}_{}\right]\widehat{A}_\nu (y)},`$
$`\text{ }\widehat{A}^\mu =(A_1^\mu ,A_2^\mu ).`$ (32)
Since the term with $`L_c(x,y)`$ in Eq. (32) is absent in the original action, we should introduce the counter action to compensate it,

$$𝒜_c=\frac{1}{2}d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}xd^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}y{}_{}{}^{t}\widehat{A}_{\mu }^{}(x)L_c^{\mu \nu }(x,y)\widehat{M}_{}\widehat{A}_\nu (y),$$
(33)
which yields a vertex

$`iL_c^{\mu \nu }(x,y)\widehat{M}_{}`$ $`=`$ $`2\widehat{M}_{}{\displaystyle \frac{d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}P}{(2\pi )^4}e^{iP(xy)}𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})P_Xf(X;P)}`$ (34)
$``$ $`i\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}^{(c)\mu \nu }(x,y).`$
For completeness, we construct a $`\widehat{L}_c`$-resummed propagator. Since $`\widehat{M}_+\widehat{M}_{}=\widehat{M}_{}\widehat{M}_+=0`$ and $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}^{(c)\mu \nu }𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }`$, only piece that changes the form under the $`\widehat{L}_c`$-resummation is $`𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{RA}`$ in $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_T^{\mu \nu }`$, Eq. (10) with Eq. (18):

$`𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{RA}^{\text{resum}}(x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})\{\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{RA}(x,y){\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\left[\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{RA}\{\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}^{(c)}\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{RA}\}^n\right](x,y)\}`$
$`=`$ $`𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})\left\{\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{RA}^{\mu \nu }(x,y)\left[\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{RA}\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}^{(c)}\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{RA}\right](x,y)\right\}`$
$``$ $`𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})[\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{RA}(x,y)+2i\widehat{M}_+{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}P}{(2\pi )^4}}e^{iP(xy)}`$
$`\times \mathrm{\Delta }_R(P)\mathrm{\Delta }_A(P)P_Xf(X;P)].`$
Here, use has been made of $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{RA}^{\mu \nu }\widehat{M}_{}\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{RA}^{\mu \nu }\widehat{M}_+`$. Then, substituting $`\left(\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{RA}^{\text{resum}}\right)^{\mu \nu }`$ for $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{RA}^{\mu \nu }`$, we obtain, with obvious notation,

$`\left(\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_T^{\text{resum}}(X;P)\right)^{\mu \nu }+\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{add}}^{\mu \nu }(X;P)`$
$`\text{ }=𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})\{[\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{RA}(X;P)+\widehat{M}_+[\mathrm{\Delta }_R(P)\mathrm{\Delta }_A(P)]f(X;P)]`$
$`\text{ }i\widehat{M}_+𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})[\mathrm{\Delta }_R(P)\mathrm{\Delta }_A(P)]^2P_Xf(X;P)\}.`$ (35)
In closing this section, we emphasize that $`f(X;P)`$ in the present scheme is an arbitrary function, provided that $`f(X_{in}^0,𝐗;P)`$ \[$`=\theta (p^0)+ϵ(p^0)N(X_{in}^0,𝐗;P)`$\], with $`X_0^{in}`$ the initial time, is a given initial data. We have introduced the counteraction $`𝒜_c`$, Eq. (33), so as to remain on the original theory. Thus, it cannot be overemphasized that the schemes with different $`f`$’s are mutually equivalent. If we choose the $`f`$ $`(=f_B)`$ that subjects to the “free Boltzmann equation” (28), the scheme reduces to the bare-$`N`$ scheme in the last section. In Sec. VI, we shall choose $`f`$, with which a well-defined perturbation theory is formulated. In any case, it is natural to choose $`f`$, so that, when interactions are switched off, $`f`$ turns out to $`f_B`$.

## 4 Resummation of the self-energy part

### 4.1 Preliminary

Throughout in the sequel, we restrict to the strict Coulomb gauge $`\alpha =0`$ \[cf. Eq. (3)\]. The bare propagator consists of six pieces, $`\widehat{𝚫}_T+\widehat{𝚫}_L+_{i=1}^3\widehat{𝚫}_i+\widehat{𝚫}_{\text{add}}`$, Eqs. (LABEL:prop) and (31). $`\widehat{𝚫}_T+\widehat{𝚫}_L`$ is the leading part and $`\widehat{𝚫}_1`$ and $`\widehat{𝚫}_{\text{add}}`$ are the gradient parts, which represents variation in the macroscopic spacetime coordinates $`X_\mu `$, through first-order derivative $`_{X_\mu }f(X;P)`$. We have assumed that $`\widehat{𝚫}_2`$ and $`\widehat{𝚫}_3`$ are of the same order of magnitude as the gradient parts. Interactions among the fields give rise to reactions taking place in a system, which, in turn, causes a nontrivial change in the number density of quasiparticles. Thus, the self-energy part $`\widehat{𝚷}`$ ties with the gradient parts. More precisely, $`\widehat{𝚷}`$ is of the same order of magnitude as $`\widehat{𝚫}_{\text{add}}\left(\widehat{𝚫}_T+\widehat{𝚫}_L\right)^2`$ and $`\widehat{𝚫}_i\left(\widehat{𝚫}_T+\widehat{𝚫}_L\right)^2`$ $`(i=13)`$. Hence, in computing $`\widehat{𝚷}`$ in the approximation under consideration, it is sufficient to keep the leading part (i.e., the part with no $`X_\mu `$-derivative). Then $`\widehat{𝚷}(X;P)`$ may be decomposed as

$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}^{\mu \nu }(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_T(X;P)+n^\mu n^\nu \widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_L(X;P)`$ (36)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{p}}\left(n^\mu \widehat{p}^{\underset{¯}{\nu }}+\widehat{p}^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}n^\nu \right)\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_C(X;P)+\widehat{p}^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}\widehat{p}^{\underset{¯}{\nu }}\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_D(X;P).`$
Here and in the following, we use such a notation as $`v^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}`$ for denoting a four-vector whose $`0`$th component is zero: $`v^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}(0,𝐯)`$. Then, $`\widehat{p}^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}=(0,\widehat{𝐩})`$.

Within the gradient approximation, it is sufficient to perform a $`\widehat{𝚷}`$-resummation for the leading part, $`\widehat{𝚫}_T+\widehat{𝚫}_L`$. This is because the corrections to other pieces due to the resummation are of higher order. Thus, for the gradient parts of $`\widehat{𝚫}`$ as well as for $`\widehat{𝚫}_{\text{add}}`$, one can use the formulae in the bare-$`N`$ scheme in Sec. II \[cf. above argument after Eq. (35)\]. In particular, for $`f`$ in the gradient parts, one can use $`f`$ ($`=f_B`$) as in Eq. (28) in the bare-$`N`$ scheme. For the purpose of performing resummation, as usual, it is convenient to introduce the “standard form”

$`\left[\widehat{B}_L\widehat{𝚫}_{\text{diag}}\widehat{B}_R\right](x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}z_1d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}z_2\widehat{B}_L(x,z_1)\widehat{𝚫}_{\text{diag}}(z_1,z_2)\widehat{B}_R(z_2,y)},`$ (37)
$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{diag}}^{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`\text{diag}(\mathrm{\Delta }_R^{\mu \nu },\mathrm{\Delta }_A^{\mu \nu }),`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{R(A)}^{\mu \nu }(P)`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{g}^{\mu \nu }(P)\mathrm{\Delta }_{R(A)}(P),`$
$`\widehat{B}_L`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& f\\ 1& \mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}1}+f\end{array}\right),\widehat{B}_R=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1+f& f\\ 1& \mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}1}\end{array}\right),`$ (42)
$`\stackrel{~}{g}^{\mu \nu }(P)`$ $`=`$ $`g^{\mu \nu }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^2}}\left(1+\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{P^2}{p^2}}\right)P^\mu P^\nu {\displaystyle \frac{p^0}{p^2}}\left(P^\mu n^\nu +P^\nu n^\mu \right)`$ (43)
$`=`$ $`𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(𝐩){\displaystyle \frac{P^2}{p^2}}n^\mu n^\nu +\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{P^2}{p^4}}P^\mu P^\nu ,`$
where $`f`$ $`(=f(x,y))`$ is the inverse Fourier transform of $`f(X;P)`$. It is to be noted that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{R(A)}^{\mu \nu }(xy)`$ is an inverse of $`𝒟_\mu ^\nu `$, Eq. (3):

$$𝒟_\rho ^\mu \mathrm{\Delta }_{R(A)}^{\rho \nu }=\mathrm{\Delta }_{R(A)}^{\mu \rho }\stackrel{}{𝒟_\rho ^\nu }=g^{\mu \nu }.$$
(44)
Computing Eq. (37) to the gradient approximation, we obtain

$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{base}}^{\mu \nu }(x,y)`$ $``$ $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_T^{\mu \nu }(x,y)+\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_L^{\mu \nu }(x,y)+\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{add}}^{\mu \nu }(x,y)`$ (45)
$`=`$ $`\left[\widehat{B}_L\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{diag}}^{\mu \nu }\widehat{B}_R\right](x,y)+\widehat{M}_+\mathrm{\Delta }_K^{\mu \nu }(x,y),`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_K^{\mu \nu }(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{p^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{𝐏}{P^2}}\left(p^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}_{}^{\underset{¯}{\nu }}+p^{\underset{¯}{\nu }}_{}^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}\right)f+2{\displaystyle \frac{n^\mu n^\nu }{p^2}}𝐩_𝐗f\right],`$ (46)
where $`𝐏/P^2`$ is the principal part of $`1/(P^2\pm i0^+)`$. As mentioned above, within the gradient approximation, it is sufficient to take $`\widehat{𝚫}_T+\widehat{𝚫}_L`$ as a “resummed part.” It is obvious from the above observation that one can freely include gradient part(s) into the “resummed part.” We include the gradient part $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{add}}^{\mu \nu }`$ and take $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{base}}^{\mu \nu }`$ as the “resummed part.”

It is to be noted that, from Eqs. (10), (11), (18), and (31), follows

$$\underset{i,j=1}{\overset{2}{}}()^{i+j}(𝚫_{\text{base}})_{ij}=0.$$
(47)
This relation holds for $`\widehat{𝚫}+\widehat{𝚫}_{\text{add}}`$ (in place of $`\widehat{𝚫}_{\text{base}}`$).

### 4.2 Self-energy-part resummed propagator

As will be shown in Appendix A \[cf. Eq. (A.7)\],

$$\underset{i,j=1}{\overset{2}{}}𝚷_{ij}=0$$
(48)
holds. A $`\widehat{𝚷}`$-resummed propagator $`\widehat{𝐆}`$ obeys the Schwinger-Dyson equation:

$$\widehat{𝐆}=\widehat{𝚫}_{\text{base}}\widehat{𝚫}_{\text{base}}\widehat{𝚷}\widehat{𝐆}=\widehat{𝚫}_{\text{base}}\widehat{𝐆}\widehat{𝚷}\widehat{𝚫}_{\text{base}}.$$
(49)
It is clear that, for solving this equation, it is convenient to introduce the “$`\widehat{B}`$-transformed” quantities

$`\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{𝐆}}`$ $``$ $`\widehat{B}_L^1\widehat{𝐆}\widehat{B}_R^1,`$ (50)
$`\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{𝚫}}_{\text{base}}`$ $``$ $`\widehat{B}_L^1\widehat{𝚫}_{\text{base}}\widehat{B}_R^1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}𝚫_R& 𝚫_K\\ 0& 𝚫_A\end{array}\right),`$ (53)
$`\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{𝚷}}`$ $``$ $`\widehat{B}_R\widehat{𝚷}\widehat{B}_L=\left(\begin{array}{cc}𝚷_R& 𝚷_K\\ 0& 𝚷_A\end{array}\right).`$ (56)
Here $`𝚫_K`$ is as in Eq. (46), and $`𝚷_{R(A)}`$ and $`𝚷_K`$ are, in respective order, the inverse Fourier transforms of

$`𝚷_{R(A)}(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`𝚷_{11}+𝚷_{12(21)}`$ (57)
$`𝚷_K(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`[1+f(X;P)]𝚷_{12}(X;P)f(X;P)𝚷_{21}(X;P)`$ (58)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\{𝚺_R+𝚺_A,f\}_{\text{P.B.}}.`$
In Eq. (58), $`\{\mathrm{},\mathrm{}\}_{\text{P.B.}}`$ is defined as

$$\{A,B\}_{\text{P.B.}}\frac{A(X;P)}{X^\mu }\frac{B(X;P)}{P_\mu }\frac{A(X;P)}{P_\mu }\frac{B(X;P)}{X^\mu }.$$
(59)
In obtaining Eq. (53) \[Eqs. (57) and (58)\], use has been made of Eq. (47) \[Eq. (48)\]. Although the last term in Eq. (58) may be dropped to the approximation under consideration, we have kept it.

Now Eq. (49) is transformed into

$$\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{𝐆}}=\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{𝚫}}_{\text{base}}\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{𝚫}}_{\text{base}}\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{𝚷}}\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{𝐆}}=\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{𝚫}}_{\text{base}}\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{𝐆}}\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{𝚷}}\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{𝚫}}_{\text{base}},$$

which can easily be solved to give

$`\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{𝐆}}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}𝐆_R& 𝐆_K\\ 0& 𝐆_A\end{array}\right),`$ (62)
$`𝐆_{R(A)}`$ $`=`$ $`\left[𝚫_{R(A)}+𝚷_{R(A)}\right]^1,`$ (63)
$`𝐆_K`$ $`=`$ $`𝐆_R\left[𝚫_R^1𝚫_K𝚫_A^1+𝚷_K\right]𝐆_A.`$ (64)
Substituting this back into Eq. (50), we obtain, after Fourier transformation,

$`\widehat{𝐆}(X;P)`$ $``$ $`\widehat{𝐆}_{RA}(X;P)+\widehat{M}_+\left[𝐆_R(X;P)𝐆_A(X;P)\right]f(X;P)`$
$`+\widehat{M}_+\left[𝐆_K(X;P){\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\{𝐆_R+𝐆_A,f\}_{\text{P.B.}}\right],`$
where

$$\widehat{𝐆}_{RA}(X;P)\left(\begin{array}{cc}𝐆_R(X;P)& \mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.17em}0}\\ 𝐆_R(X;P)𝐆_A(X;P)& 𝐆_A(X;P)\end{array}\right).$$
(66)
Here we note that $`\widehat{𝚷}`$ consists of two pieces,

$$\widehat{𝚷}=\widehat{𝚷}^{\text{loop}}+\widehat{𝚷}^{(c)},$$
(67)
where $`\widehat{𝚷}^{\text{loop}}`$ is the contribution from loop diagrams and $`\widehat{𝚷}^{(c)}`$ is as in Eq. (34), which has come from the counter action $`𝒜_c`$. It should be remarked that some $`\widehat{𝚷}^{\text{loop}}`$ contains internal vertex(es) $`i\widehat{𝚷}^{(c)}`$. \[cf. the argument at Sec VI below.\] From the above definitions of $`𝚷_{R(A)}`$, $`𝚷_K`$, and $`\widehat{𝚷}^{(c)}`$, we have

$`𝚷_R^{(c)}`$ $`=`$ $`𝚷_A^{(c)}=0,`$
$`\mathrm{\Pi }_K^{(c)\mu \nu }(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`2i𝒫^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})P_Xf(X;P).`$ (68)
From Eq. (63), we obtain, after some manipulation,

$`𝐆_{R(A)}(X;P)`$ $``$ $`𝐆_{R(A)}^{(0)}(X;P)+𝐆_{R(A)}^{(1)}(X;P),`$
$`G_{R(A)}^{(0)\mu \nu }(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})}{P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_{R(A)}^T(X;P)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{n^\mu n^\nu }{p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_{R(A)}^L(X;P)}},`$ (69)
$`G_{R(A)}^{(1)}(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2p^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_{R(A)}^T}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_{R(A)}^T}}(p^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}_{}^{\underset{¯}{\nu }}p^{\underset{¯}{\nu }}_{}^{\underset{¯}{\mu }})\mathrm{\Pi }_{R(A)}^T`$ (70)
$`\text{ }{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_{R(A)}^L}}(n^\mu _{}^{\underset{¯}{\nu }}n^\nu _{}^{\underset{¯}{\mu }})\mathrm{\Pi }_{R(A)}^C].`$
Although $`G_{R(A)}^{(1)}`$ can be ignored to the gradient approximation, we have displayed it. Straightforward calculation of the last term in Eq. (LABEL:3.111) using the definitions (63), (64), and (59) yields (cf. Appendix B)

$$𝐆_K(X;P)\frac{i}{2}\{𝐆_R+𝐆_A,f\}_{\text{P.B.}}=𝐆_K^{(1)}+𝐆_K^{(2)},$$

where

$`G_K^{(1)\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`i\left[2P_Xf+\{\text{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T,f\}_{\text{P.B.}}+i(\mathrm{\Pi }_K^T)^{\text{loop}}\right]{\displaystyle \frac{𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }}{(P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T)(P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_A^T)}}`$ (71)
$`i\left[2𝐩_𝐗f+\{\text{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L,f\}_{\text{P.B.}}+i(\mathrm{\Pi }_K^L)^{\text{loop}}\right]{\displaystyle \frac{n^\mu n^\nu }{(p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L)(p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_A^L)}},`$
$`G_K^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{p^2}}\text{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^C\left[{\displaystyle \frac{n^\nu _{}^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}f}{(P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T)(p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_A^L)}}{\displaystyle \frac{n^\mu _{}^{\underset{¯}{\nu }}f}{(P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_A^T)(p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L)}}\right]`$ (72)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2p}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T}}\text{c.c.}\right)\left(p^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}_{}^{\underset{¯}{\nu }}fp^{\underset{¯}{\nu }}_{}^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}f\right)`$
$`+i\text{Re}[{\displaystyle \frac{𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }}{(P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T)^2}}(2P_Xf+\{\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T,f\}_{\text{P.B.}})`$
$`\text{ }\text{ }+{\displaystyle \frac{n^\mu n^\nu }{(p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L)^2}}(2𝐩_𝐗f+\{\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L,f\}_{\text{P.B.}})],`$
where

$$\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_K^{T(L)}\right)^{\text{loop}}[1+f]\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_{12}^{T(L)}\right)^{\text{loop}}f\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_{21}^{T(L)}\right)^{\text{loop}}.$$
(73)
In obtaining Eqs. (71) and (72), use has been made of $`\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_A^{T(L)}\right)^{}=\mathrm{\Pi }_R^{T(L)}`$, which is proved in Appendix A.

## 5 Generalized Boltzmann equation

### 5.1 Energy-shell and physical number densities

For later use, referring to Eq. (69), we define the energy-shell for the transverse mode by

$$\text{Re}\left[P^2\text{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T(X;P)\right]_{p^0=\pm \omega _T(X;\pm 𝐩)}=0.$$
(74)
It is well known  that, in equilibrium quark-gluon plasma, “longitudinal” mode called plasmon appears for soft $`p`$ $`(=O(gT))`$ \[$`g`$ the QCD coupling constant\]. The energy-shell of such modes is defined by \[cf. Eq. (69)\]

$$\text{Re}\left[p^2+\text{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L(X;P)\right]_{p^0=\pm \omega _L(X;𝐩)}=0.$$
(75)
Useful formulae that hold on the energy-shell are displayed in Appendix C.

We restrict to the $`p_0>0`$ part. The $`p_0<0`$ part yields the same result, since a gluon and a corresponding antigluon is the same. In some of the formulae in this subsection, we shall drop the argument $`X`$.

For obtaining expressions for the number densities of the transverse and “longitudinal” modes, we compute the statistical average of the operators,

$`𝒩_T(x)`$ $`=`$ $`iA_j^{(+)}(x)\stackrel{}{{\displaystyle \frac{}{x_0}}}A_j^{()}(x),`$
$`𝒩_L(x)`$ $`=`$ $`iA_0^{(+)}(x)\stackrel{}{{\displaystyle \frac{}{x_0}}}A_0^{()}(x).`$
Here the superscript “$`(+)`$” \[“$`()`$”\] stands for the positive \[negative\] frequency part. Statistical averages of $`𝒩_T`$ and of $`𝒩_L`$ yield, in respective order,

$`\text{Tr}\left[𝒩_T(x)\rho \right]`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}P}{(2\pi )^4}\theta (p_0)p_0\left[G_{12}^{jj}(X;P)+G_{21}^{jj}(X;P)\right]},`$
$`\text{Tr}\left[𝒩_L(x)\rho \right]`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}P}{(2\pi )^4}\theta (p_0)p_0\left[G_{12}^{00}(X;P)+G_{21}^{00}(X;P)\right]}.`$ (76)
It is to be noted that “$`x`$” here is a macroscopic spacetime coordinates \[cf. Sec. I\].

We first compute the leading contributions to Eq. (76). Substituting the leading parts of $`G_{21}`$ and of $`G_{12}`$ (cf. Eq. (LABEL:3.111)) and using Eq. (69), we obtain

$`\text{Tr}\left[𝒩_T(x)\rho \right]`$ $`=`$ $`2i{\displaystyle \frac{d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}P}{(2\pi )^4}\theta (p_0)p_0\left[\frac{1}{P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T}\text{c.c.}\right][2f(X;P)+1]},`$
$`\text{Tr}\left[𝒩_L(x)\rho \right]`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}P}{(2\pi )^4}\theta (p_0)p_0\left[\frac{1}{p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L}\text{c.c.}\right][2f(X;P)+1]}.`$
The narrow-width approximation444In the case of equilibrium system, the narrow-width approximation is a good approximation for hard modes but not for soft modes. $`\text{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^{T(L)}ϵ(p_0)0^+`$ yields

$`\text{Tr}\left[𝒩_T(x)\rho \right]`$ $``$ $`2{\displaystyle \frac{d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}p}{(2\pi )^3}Z_T(\omega _T(𝐩),𝐩)n(\omega _T(𝐩),𝐩)}+\mathrm{},`$ (77)
$`\text{Tr}\left[𝒩_L(x)\rho \right]`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}p}{(2\pi )^3}Z_L(\omega _L(𝐩),𝐩)n(\omega _L(𝐩),𝐩)}+\mathrm{}.`$ (78)
Here $`n`$ is as in Eq. (23), and ‘$`\mathrm{}`$’ stands for the contribution from $`2f+1ϵ(p^0)`$ \[ cf. Eq. (22)\], which is the vacuum-theory contribution corrected by the medium effect. $`Z`$’s in Eqs. (77) and (78) are the wave-function renormalization factors, Eqs. (C.1) and (C.4) in Appendix C. If there are several modes, summation should be taken over all modes. The factor ‘$`2`$’ on the RHS of Eq. (77) is a reflection of the two independent polarizations.

Thus, we have learned that $`n`$ is the number density of gluonic quasiparticle. Undoing the narrow-width approximation yields further corrections to the number densities.

Let us turn to analyze the contributions from the other parts of $`\widehat{G}`$ in Eq. (LABEL:3.111). Inspection of Eq. (76) with Eqs. (LABEL:3.111) - (72) shows that all but $`G_K^{(1)}`$, Eq. (71), yield well-defined corrections to the physical number densities due to the medium effect. $`G_K^{(1)}`$ contains

$$\frac{1}{\left[P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T\right]\left[P^2\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T\right)^{}\right]}$$
(79)
and

$$\frac{1}{\left[p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L\right]\left[p^2+\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L\right)^{}\right]}.$$
(80)
In the narrow-width approximation $`\text{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^Tϵ(p_0)0^+`$ \[$`\text{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^Lϵ(p_0)0^+`$\], Eq. (79) \[Eq. (80)\] develops pinch singularity at $`p_0=\omega _T(𝐩)`$ \[$`p_0=\omega _L(𝐩)`$\] in a complex $`p^0`$-plane. Then the contributions of $`G_K^{(1)}`$ to Eq. (76) diverge in this approximation. In practice, $`\text{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^{T(L)}`$ $`(g^2)`$ is a small quantity (at least for hard modes), so that the contribution, although not divergent, is large. This invalidates the perturbative scheme and a sort of “renormalization” is necessary for the number densities . This observation leads us to introduce the condition $`G_K^{(1)}=0`$ on the energy-shells:

$`\left[2P_Xf+\{\text{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T,f\}_{\text{P.B.}}+i(\mathrm{\Pi }_K^T)^{\text{loop}}\right]_{p_0=\pm \omega _T(X;\pm 𝐩)}=0,`$ (81)
$`\left[2𝐩_𝐗f+\{\text{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L,f\}_{\text{P.B.}}+i(\mathrm{\Pi }_K^L)^{\text{loop}}\right]_{p_0=\pm \omega _L(X;\pm 𝐩)}=0,`$ (82)
These serve as determining equations for so far arbitrary $`f`$. (See below, for more details.) Now the above-mentioned large contributions, which turn out to the diverging contributions (due to the pinch singularities) in the narrow-width approximation, do not appear. Thus, the contributions from $`G_K^{(1)}`$ to Eq. (76) also yields well-defined corrections to the number densities.

### 5.2 Generalized Boltzmann equation

We are now in a position to disclose the physical meaning of Eqs. (81) and (82). With the help of the formulae in Appendix C, Eq. (81) with $`p_0\omega _T(X;𝐩)`$ turns out to

$`\left(Z_T(X;P)\right)^1\left[{\displaystyle \frac{}{X^0}}+𝐯_T(X;𝐩){\displaystyle \frac{}{𝐗}}\right]n(X;P)`$
$`\text{ }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\omega _T(X;𝐩)}}{\displaystyle \frac{\text{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T(X;P)}{X^\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{n(X;P)}{P_\mu }}`$
$`\text{ }={\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\omega _T(X;𝐩)}}\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_K^T\right)^{\text{loop}}(X;P).`$ (83)
Here $`𝐯_T`$ $`(\omega _T(X;𝐩)/𝐩)`$ is the group velocity of the mode \[cf. Eq. (LABEL:bui)\]. As will be shown in Appendix D, the RHS of Eq. (83) is related to the net production rate, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\text{net p}}^T`$, of the mode $`p^0=\omega _T(X;𝐩)`$. Using Eqs. (D.1) and (C.3), we obtain

$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{}{X^0}}+𝐯_T(X;𝐩){\displaystyle \frac{}{𝐗}}\right]n(X;P)`$
$`\text{ }+{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _T(X;𝐩)}{X^\mu }}{\displaystyle \frac{n(X;P)}{P_\mu }}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\text{net}p}^T(X;𝐩).`$
This can further be rewritten in the form,

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{dX^0}}+𝐯_T(X;𝐩){\displaystyle \frac{d}{d𝐗}}\right)n(X;\omega _T(X;𝐩),\widehat{𝐩})`$
$`\text{ }{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _T(X;𝐩)}{𝐗}}{\displaystyle \frac{dn}{d𝐩}}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\text{net}p}^T(X;𝐩).`$ (84)
Similarly, Eq. (82) with $`p_0=\omega _L(X;𝐩)`$ yields

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{dX^0}}+𝐯_L(X;𝐩){\displaystyle \frac{d}{d𝐗}}\right)n(X;\omega _L(X;𝐩),𝐩)`$
$`\text{ }{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _L(X;𝐩)}{𝐗}}{\displaystyle \frac{dn}{d𝐩}}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\text{net}p}^L(X;𝐩).`$ (85)
$`n`$ here is essentially (the main part of) the relativistic Wigner function, and Eqs. (84) and (85) are the generalized relativistic Boltzmann equation for gluonic quasiparticles \[cf. \].

For the sake of definiteness, we are taking QCD and have dealt with the gluon sector. The quark sector has already been dealt with in . As far as the gluon sector is concerned to the gradient approximation, one can use the “free quark” distribution function that subjects to the “free Boltzmann equation.” This can be seen as follows: In the gluon sector, the quark distribution function enters through the quark propagators involved in the gluon self-energy part $`\widehat{𝚷}`$. As observed at the beginning of Sec. IV, $`\widehat{𝚷}`$ is related to the gradient part of the gluon propagator. Thus, in calculating $`\widehat{𝚷}`$, one can use the $`0`$th-order expression (of the derivative expansion) for the propagators involved in $`\widehat{𝚷}`$.

## 6 Perturbation theory

As has been discussed in the preceding section, the propagator in the physical-$`N`$ scheme is free from the pinch singular term (in the narrow-width approximation) and then the perturbative calculation of some quantity yields “healthy” perturbative corrections. For constructing a concrete perturbative scheme, one more step is necessary.

To extend the conditions (81) and (82) to off the energy-shells, we divide $`f`$ into two pieces \[cf. Eq. (22)\]

$`f(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ(p^0)N(X;P)\theta (p^0)`$ (86)
$`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{f}(X;P)+f_0(X;P)`$
$`=`$ $`[ϵ(p^0)\stackrel{~}{N}(X;P)\theta (p^0)]+ϵ(p^0)N_0(X;P).`$
$`f_0`$ (and then also $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$) is defined as follows: Let $`_i(X;𝐩)`$ $`(i=1,2,\mathrm{})`$ be a region in a $`p^0`$-plane that includes $`i`$th energy-shell. We choose $`_i(X;𝐩)`$, such that, for $`ij`$, $`_i_j=\mathrm{}`$. On each energy-shell, $`N_0(X;P)=N(X;P)`$, and, in whole $`p^0`$-region but $`_i(X;𝐩)`$ $`(i=1,2,\mathrm{})`$, $`N_0(X;P)`$ vanishes. $`N_0(X;P)/X`$ and $`N_0(X;P)/P`$ exist and $`N_0(X;P)`$ obeys

$`2P_XN_0+\{\text{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T,N_0\}_{\text{P.B.}}=i\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_K^T\right)^{\text{loop}},`$
$`2𝐩_𝐗N_0+\{\text{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L,N_0\}_{\text{P.B.}}=i\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_K^L\right)^{\text{loop}}.`$ (87)
Then, $`G_K^{(1)\mu \nu }`$ in Eq. (71) turns out to

$`G_K^{(1)\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`i\left[2P_X\stackrel{~}{f}+\{\text{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T,\stackrel{~}{f}\}_{\text{P.B.}}+i(\mathrm{\Pi }_K^T)^{\text{loop}}\right]{\displaystyle \frac{𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }}{(P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T)(P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_A^T)}}`$ (88)
$`i\left[2𝐩_𝐗\stackrel{~}{f}+\{\text{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L,\stackrel{~}{f}\}_{\text{P.B.}}+i(\mathrm{\Pi }_K^L)^{\text{loop}}\right]{\displaystyle \frac{n^\mu n^\nu }{(p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L)(p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_A^L)}}.`$
It is obvious from the above construction that this $`G_K^{(1)\mu \nu }`$ does not possess pinch singularities in narrow-width approximation, and thus “healthy” perturbation theory is established.

It is worth mentioning that there is arbitrariness in the choice of the regions $`_i(X;𝐩)`$ $`(i=1,2,\mathrm{})`$. Furthermore, the choice of the functional forms of $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ and of $`f_0`$ is also arbitrary, provided that

$$\stackrel{~}{f}(X^0=X_{in}^0,𝐗;P)+f_0(X^0=X_{in}^0,𝐗;P)=f(X^0=X_{in}^0,𝐗;P),$$

where $`f(X^0=X_{in}^0,𝐗;P)`$ is the initial data with $`X_{in}^0`$ the initial time. As has been discussed at the end of Sec. III, these arbitrariness are not the matter.

To summarize, to the gradient approximation, the (resummed) propagator $`\widehat{𝒢}^{\mu \nu }`$ of the theory is

$$\widehat{𝒢}^{\mu \nu }=\widehat{G}^{\mu \nu }+\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1^{\mu \nu }+\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_2^{\mu \nu }+\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_3^{\mu \nu }.$$
(89)
Here $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1^{\mu \nu }`$ \- $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_3^{\mu \nu }`$ are as in Eqs. (LABEL:2.666) - (14) and $`\widehat{G}^{\mu \nu }`$ is as in Eq. (LABEL:3.111) with Eqs. (66) - (73), provided that $`G_K^{(1)\mu \nu }`$ is given by Eq. (88). $`f`$ consists of two pieces as in Eq. (86). $`f_0`$ $`(=ϵ(p^0)N_0)`$ subjects to Eq. (87), which is to be solved under a given initial data. It is to be noted that $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1^{\mu \nu }`$ \- $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_3^{\mu \nu }`$ are the gradient parts, so that, if one wants, for $`f`$ in $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1^{\mu \nu }`$ \- $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_3^{\mu \nu }`$, one can substitute the solution to the “free Boltzmann equation,” Eq. (28).

Determination of $`f`$ or $`N`$ proceeds order by order in perturbation theory to get $`f=f_0+f_1+f_2+\mathrm{}`$. Provided that perturbative computation is completed up to $`(n1)`$th order, one can proceed to $`n`$th order calculation. $`f`$ or $`N`$ enters through $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\text{base}}^{\mu \nu }`$, Eq. (45), and through $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}^{(c)\mu \nu }`$ $`(Pf)`$, Eq. (34). For $`f`$ in $`\widehat{𝚫}_{\text{base}}^{\mu \nu }`$ and in $`\widehat{𝚷}^{(c)}`$ in Eq. (67), we substitute $`_{j=0}^nf_j`$, while for $`f`$ in $`\widehat{𝚷}^{(c)}`$ involved in some $`\widehat{𝚷}^{\text{loop}}`$, Eq. (67), we use appropriate $`_{i=0}^jf_i`$ $`(jn1)`$. Then, proceeding as above, one can determine $`f_n`$, and thereby any physical quantity may be computed. Here we recall that we are taking the gradient approximation. Then, in proceeding to higher orders, one should check whether or not the consequences of the calculation of the order under consideration is consistent with the gradient approximation. One suspects that, in general, only first few orders meet this criterion.

As to the vertex, as has been mentioned at Sec. II A, the matrix vertex $`\widehat{V}`$ is diagonal and its $`(\mathrm{2\hspace{0.17em}2})`$-component is of opposite sign relative to the $`(\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}1})`$-component. It is to be noted that the two-point vertex $`iL_c^{\mu \nu }(x,y)\widehat{M}_{}`$ in Eq. (34) has already been built into $`\widehat{G}^{\mu \nu }`$ (cf. Eqs. (67) and (68)) and is absent in the perturbative framework using $`\widehat{𝒢}^{\mu \nu }`$ in Eq. (89).

## 7 Summary and outlook

In this paper we have dealt with out-of-equilibrium perturbation theory for gauge bosons and FP-ghosts in Coulomb gauge. The gauge-boson and FP-ghost propagators are constructed from first principles. Only approximation we have employed is the so-called gradient approximation, so that the perturbative framework applies to the quasiuniform systems near equilibrium or the nonequilibrium quasistationary systems. The framework allows us to compute any reaction rates.

There comes out naturally the generalized Boltzmann equation (GBE) that describes the spacetime evolution of the number densities of quasiparticles, through which the evolution of the system is described.

The GBE for a quark-gluon plasma (nonequilibrium QCD) is “directly” derived in  \[cf., also, \]. The “derivation” of the GBE in this paper is quite different from that in . What we have shown here is that the requirement of the absence of large contributions from the perturbative framework leads to the GBE. This means that the quasiparticles thus defined are the well-defined modes in the medium. Conversely, if we start with defining the quasiparticles such that their number density functions subject to the GBE, then, on the basis of them, well-defined perturbation theory may be constructed.

## Acknowledgemente

This work was supported in part by a Grant-in-Aide for Scientific Research ((C)(2) (No. 12640287)) of the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture of Japan.

## Appendix A: Properties of the self-energy parts

### A.1: Gluon self-energy part

Let us start with studying the properties of the propagator. From Eqs. (LABEL:prop) - (25) and Eq. (31), we obtain

$`\left[i\mathrm{\Delta }_{11}^{\mu \nu }(X;P)\right]^{}`$ $`=`$ $`i\mathrm{\Delta }_{22}^{\nu \mu }(X;P)=i\mathrm{\Delta }_{22}^{\mu \nu }(X;P),`$
$`\left[i\mathrm{\Delta }_{12(21)}^{\mu \nu }(X;P)\right]^{}`$ $`=`$ $`i\mathrm{\Delta }_{12(21)}^{\nu \mu }(X;P)=\mathrm{\Delta }_{21(12)}^{\mu \nu }(X;P),`$
where use has been made of $`f(X;P)=\theta (p_0)+ϵ(p_0)n(X;ϵ(p_0)𝐩)`$.

Now, we observe the properties of vertices. As has been mentioned in Sec. IIA and Sec. VI, the vertex matrix is diagonal and its $`(\mathrm{2\hspace{0.17em}2})`$-component is of opposite sign relative to the $`(\mathrm{1\hspace{0.17em}1})`$-component, $`\widehat{V}=\text{diag}(v^{(1)},v^{(2)})=\text{diag}(v,v)`$. For QCD, let $`\widehat{V}_3=(v_3(P),v_3(P))`$ be a 3-gluon-vertex factor and $`\widehat{V}_4=(v_4,v_4)`$ be a 4-gluon-vertex factor. Noting that $`v_3(P)`$ is real and linear in $`P`$, and $`v_4`$, being independent of $`P`$, is pure imaginary, we see that

$`\left(v_3^{(1)}(P)\right)^{}`$ $`=`$ $`v_3(P)=v_3(P)=v_3^{(2)}(P),`$
$`\left(v_4^{(1)}\right)^{}`$ $`=`$ $`v_4=v_4^{(2)}`$ (A.1)
holds. There is one more (two-point) vertex (34), which satisfies

$$\left[iL_c^{\mu \nu }(X;P)\widehat{M}_{}\right]^{}=iL_c^{\mu \nu }(X;P)\widehat{M}_{}.$$
(A.2)
For quark  and FP-ghost, one can write down the similar relations, which we do not display here.

From the diagrammatic analysis of $`\widehat{𝚷}(X;P)`$ using the above relations, one can straightforwardly obtain the relations,

$`\left[\mathrm{\Pi }_{11}^{\mu \nu }(X;P)\right]^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{22}^{\mu \nu }(X;P)=\mathrm{\Pi }_{22}^{\nu \mu }(X;P),`$
$`\left[\mathrm{\Pi }_{12(21)}^{\mu \nu }(X;P)\right]^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{21(12)}^{\mu \nu }(X;P)=\mathrm{\Pi }_{12(21)}^{\nu \mu }(X;P).`$
Using the decomposition (36) for the leading parts of $`\widehat{𝚷}`$, we obtain

$`\left[\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_S(X;P)\right)_{11}\right]^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_S(X;P)\right)_{22},`$
$`\left[\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_S(X;P)\right)_{12(21)}\right]^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_S(X;P)\right)_{12(21)},`$ (A.3)
$`\text{ }(S=T,L,C,D).`$
The last equation shows that $`\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_S(X;P)\right)_{12(21)}`$ are pure imaginary.

Let us turn to analyze $`\widehat{𝚷}`$ in configuration space:

$`\widehat{𝚷}(x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2},\mathrm{}}{}\left[dz_idu_idv_i\right]}`$ (A.4)
$`\text{ }\times \widehat{𝚷}(x,y;z_1,z_2,\mathrm{};(u_1,v_1),(u_2,v_2),\mathrm{}),`$
where $`x`$ and $`y`$ are the spacetime points to which the external legs are attached, $`z_i`$ $`(i=1,2,\mathrm{})`$ are the internal vertex-points, and $`(u_i,v_i)`$ \[$`i=1,2,\mathrm{}`$\] are the sets of internal vertex-points of $`iL_c(u_i,v_i)\widehat{M}_{}`$. From Eq. (5), which leads to Eqs. (8) - (25), and Eq. (31), we see that

$$𝚫_{1i}(x,y)=𝚫_{2i}(x,y)\text{for}x^0>y^0(i=1,2).$$
(A.5)
Here we use the “largest-time technique” . Using the relation (A.5) and Eq. (A.1) (in configuration space) together with their quark and FP-ghost counterparts, one can show that, in Eq. (A.4), when $`z_i^0`$ of $`(z_1^0,z_2^0,\mathrm{})`$ is the largest time, then $`\widehat{𝚷}(x,y)=0`$. As can be shown by using Eq. (A.2) in configuration space, this is also the case for the largest $`u_i^0`$ or for the largest $`v_i^0`$ of \[$`(u_1^0,v_1^0),(u_2^0,v_2^0),\mathrm{}`$\]. Then, in Eq. (A.4), the largest time is $`x^0`$ or $`y^0`$.

Similar argument as above shows that

$`𝚷_{21}(x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`𝚷_{11}(x,y),𝚷_{22}(x,y)=𝚷_{12}(x,y)\text{ }\text{for}x^0>y^0,`$
$`𝚷_{11}(x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`𝚷_{12}(x,y),𝚷_{21}(x,y)=𝚷_{22}(x,y),\text{ }\text{for}x^0<y^0.`$ (A.6)
From the first (second) relation, we get $`𝚷_A(x,y)`$ $`[=𝚷_{11}+𝚷_{21}]=0`$ for $`x^0>y^0`$, and $`𝚷_R(x,y)`$ $`[=𝚷_{11}+𝚷_{12}]=0`$ for $`x^0<y^0`$, as they should be. From Eq. (A.6), follows

$$\underset{i,j=1}{\overset{2}{}}𝚷_{ij}(x,y)=0.$$
(A.7)
Using the decomposition (36), after Fourier transformation, we obtain

$$\underset{i,j=1}{\overset{2}{}}\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_S(X;P)\right)_{ij}=0(S=T,L,C,D).$$
(A.8)
The relation (A.3) leads to

$$\left[\mathrm{\Pi }_A^S(X;P)\right]^{}=\mathrm{\Pi }_R^S(X;P)(S=T,L,C,D).$$
(A.9)
### A.2: FP-ghost self-energy part

In every diagram representing the FP-ghost self-energy part $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_g`$, two external FP-ghost lines are connected with each other. Then, the fact that the bare FP-ghost propagator is diagonal \[cf. Eq. (6)\] tells us that the matrix self-energy part $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_g`$ is also diagonal, $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_g=\text{diag}(\mathrm{\Pi }_g^{(1)},\mathrm{\Pi }_g^{(2)})`$.

In a similar manner to the above subsection, we obtain \[cf. Eqs (A.8) and (A.9)\]

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_g^{(1)}(X;P)+\mathrm{\Pi }_g^{(2)}(X;P)=0,`$
$`\left[\mathrm{\Pi }_g^{(1)}(X;P)\right]^{}=\mathrm{\Pi }_g^{(2)}(X;P).`$
Then, we see that

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_g(X;P)=\widehat{\tau }_3\mathrm{\Pi }_g(X;P),\text{Im}\mathrm{\Pi }_g(X;P)=0.$$

## Appendix B: On the derivation of $`𝐆_K`$ in Eqs. (71) and (72)

Here we deal with a part of $`𝐆_K`$ in Eq. (64),

$`\left[𝐆_R𝚫_R^1𝚫_K𝚫_A^1𝐆_A\right](x,y){\displaystyle \frac{d^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}P}{(2\pi )^4}e^{P(xy)}G_K^{^{}}(X;P)},`$
$`G_K^{^{}}(X;P)=𝐆_R(X;P)𝚫_R^1(P)𝚫_K(X;P)𝚫_A^1(P)𝐆_A(X;P),`$ (B.1)
which is valid within the approximation under consideration. We are adopting the strict Coulomb gauge $`\alpha =0`$. Since $`(\mathrm{\Delta }_R^1(P))^{\mu \nu }=(\mathrm{\Delta }_A^1(P))^{\mu \nu }=𝒟^{\mu \nu }(P)`$ \[cf. Eq. (44)\] contains a term $`g^{\mu i}g^{\nu j}p^ip^j/\alpha `$ $`(\alpha 0)`$, care should be taken for computing Eq. (B.1). We need $`O(\alpha )`$ contribution to $`𝐆_{R(A)}`$. For the present purpose, it is sufficient to obtain the leading-order expression, which is obtained from Eq. (63):

$`G_{R(A)}^{\mu \nu }(X;P)`$ $``$ $`G_{R(A)}^{(0)\mu \nu }(X;P)+\alpha G_{R(A)}^{{}_{}{}^{}\mu \nu }(X;P),`$
$`G_{R(A)}^{{}_{}{}^{}\mu \nu }(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{p_0^2}{p^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_{R(A)}^C}{p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_{R(A)}^L}}\right)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{p_0}{p}}(\widehat{p}^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}n^\nu +n^\mu \widehat{p}^{\underset{¯}{\nu }})\left({\displaystyle \frac{p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_{R(A)}^C}{p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_{R(A)}^L}}\right)+\widehat{p}^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}\widehat{p}^{\underset{¯}{\nu }}\right],`$
where $`G_{R(A)}^{(0)\mu \nu }`$ is as in Eq. (69) and $`\widehat{p}^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}(0,\widehat{𝐩})`$ as in Eq. (36).

We observe that

$`G_R^{(0)\mu \nu }p_{\underset{¯}{\nu }}`$ $`=`$ $`p_{\underset{¯}{\nu }}G_A^{(0)\nu \mu }=0,`$
$`p_{\underset{¯}{\rho }}G_A^{{}_{}{}^{}\rho \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`G_R^{{}_{}{}^{}\nu \rho }p_{\underset{¯}{\rho }}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{p^2}}\left[p^{\underset{¯}{\nu }}+{\displaystyle \frac{p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_{R(A)}^C}{p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_{R(A)}^L}}p_0n^\nu \right].`$
Substituting these and Eqs. (69) and (46) into Eq. (B.1), we obtain, after some manipulations,

$`G_K^{^{}}(X;P)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{p^2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{2p^2n^\mu n^\nu }{(p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L)(p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_A^L)}}𝐩_Xf+{\displaystyle \frac{p^{\underset{¯}{\nu }}_{}^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}f}{P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{p^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}_{}^{\underset{¯}{\nu }}f}{P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_A^T}}+p_0({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }_R^Cn^\mu _{}^{\underset{¯}{\nu }}}{(p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L)(P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_A^T)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }_A^Cn^\nu _{}^{\underset{¯}{\mu }}}{(p^2+\mathrm{\Pi }_A^L)(P^2\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T)}})].`$
## Appendix C: On the energy shell

Here we display some formulae, which hold on the energy-shells of quasiparticles \[cf. Eqs. (74) and (75) with Eq. (69)\]. In most formulae in this Appendix, the argument $`X`$ is dropped. We restrict to the positive $`p_0`$ part.

Transverse modes:

We first define the wave-function renormalization factors through taking derivative of Eq. (74) with respect to $`p^0`$:

$$\left(Z_T(\omega _T(𝐩),𝐩)\right)^1=1\frac{1}{2\omega _T}\frac{\text{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T(p^0,𝐩)}{p^0}\text{ }p^0=\omega _T\left(𝐩\right).$$
(C.1)
The group velocities of the modes are obtained from the definition (74):

$`𝐯_T(𝐩)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d\omega _T(𝐩)}{d𝐩}}={\displaystyle \frac{Z_T(\omega _T(𝐩),𝐩)}{\omega _T(𝐩)}}`$
$`\times \left[𝐩+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\text{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T(p^0,𝐩)}{𝐩}}\text{ }p^0=\omega _T\left(𝐩\right)\right].`$
Differentiation of Eq. (74) with respect to $`X`$ leads to

$$\frac{\omega _T(X;𝐩)}{X}=\frac{Z_T(\omega _T(𝐩),𝐩)}{2\omega _T}\frac{\text{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^T(X;\omega _T(X;𝐩),𝐩)}{X}.$$
(C.3)
“Longitudinal” modes:

From Eq. (75), we obtain

$`\left(Z_L(\omega _L(𝐩),𝐩)\right)^1={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\omega _L}}{\displaystyle \frac{\text{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L(p^0,𝐩)}{p^0}}\text{ }p^0=\omega _L\left(𝐩\right),`$
(C.4)
$`𝐯_L(𝐩){\displaystyle \frac{d\omega _L(𝐩)}{d𝐩}}`$
$`\text{ }={\displaystyle \frac{Z_L(\omega _L(𝐩),𝐩)}{\omega _L(𝐩)}}\left[𝐩+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\text{Re}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^L(p^0,𝐩)}{𝐩}}\text{ }p^0=\omega _L\left(𝐩\right)\right].`$
## Appendix D: Net production rates

From Eqs. (69), (74) and (75), we see that the projection operators onto $`p^0=\omega _T`$ $`(p^0=\omega _L)`$ mode is $`𝒫_T^{\mu \nu }(\widehat{𝐩})`$ $`(n^\mu n^\nu )`$. Then, the production (decay) rates of the transverse modes and of the “longitudinal” modes are written as

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{p(d)}^T(𝐩)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\omega _T(𝐩)}}Z_T(\omega _T(𝐩),𝐩){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Pi }_{12(21)}^{\mu \nu }(𝒫_T(\widehat{𝐩}))_{\mu \nu }`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\omega _T}}Z_T\mathrm{\Pi }_{12(21)}^T`$
and

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{p(d)}^L(𝐩)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\omega _L(𝐩)}}Z_L(\omega _L(𝐩),𝐩)\mathrm{\Pi }_{12(21)}^{\mu \nu }n_\mu n_\nu `$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\omega _L}}Z_L\mathrm{\Pi }_{12(21)}^L,`$
respectively. Here $`Z`$’s are the wave-function renormalization factor, Eqs. (C.1) and (C.4). Thus, the net production rate is

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\text{net}p}^{T(L)}(𝐩)`$ $`=`$ $`[1+n(\omega _{T(L)}(𝐩),\widehat{𝐩})]\mathrm{\Gamma }_p^{T(L)}(X;𝐩)n(\omega _{T(L)}(𝐩),\widehat{𝐩})\mathrm{\Gamma }_d^{T(L)}(𝐩)`$ (D.1)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\omega _{T(L)}}}Z_{T(L)}(\omega _{T(L})(𝐩),𝐩)(\mathrm{\Pi }_K^{T(L)}(\omega _{T(L)}(X;𝐩),𝐩))^{\text{loop}},`$
where $`\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_K^{T(L)}\right)^{\text{loop}}`$ is as in Eq. (73).


format: text

text:
# Next-to-leading order mass effects in QCD Compton process of polarized DIS

## 1 Introduction

A lot of articles dedicated to NLO QCD corrections to polarized DIS have been published. Calculations in most of them are performed in an assumption that the quark mass is equal to zero (see  and review ). However there are some works when authors estimate a finite quark mass effect for both unpolarized  and polarized structure functions . The main difference of these two approaches is the method of tending the quark mass to zero and the procedure of integration of the squared matrix element over the phase space of emitted gluon. In the massless approsch a fermion mass is equal to zero before  the integration while in the massive one this quantity goes to zero after the integration and survives only in LO terms.

Notice that QCD and QED radiative corrections (RC) having different origins possess some common features on the one-loop level. If our consideration is restricted to so-called QCD Compton process then both corrections should be described by the identical sets of Feynman graphs. The transition from the strong radiative effects to the electromagnetic ones could be performed by the following replacement:

$$\frac{4}{3}\alpha _se_q^2\alpha _{QED}.$$
(1)
In the present paper we investigate QCD Compton process for polarized nucleon target by the method developed for exact calculations  in QED theory for massive polarized fermions but never used for QCD. We estimate the influence of the finite quark mass effects on the value of the polarized sum rules and discuss some different interpretations of the first moment of the polarized structure function $`g_1`$.

The present paper is organized in the following way. The method of calculation is described in Section 2. The explicite expressions for the QCD-improved structure functions as well as their first moments can be found in Section 3. Then some conclusions are made in Section 4. We also discuss there different points of view how the NLO finite quark mass effects influence the first moment of $`g_1`$. Details of the integration procedure are presented in Appendix.

## 2 Method of Calculation.

The cross section of polarized lepton-nucleon DIS

$$l(k_1,\xi )+N(p,\eta )l(k_2)+X$$
(2)
on the level of the one-photon exchange can be presented as a convolution of the well-known lepton tensor:

$$L_{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}Sp\gamma _\mu (\widehat{k}_1+m)(1+\gamma _5\widehat{\xi })\gamma _\nu (\widehat{k}_2+m),$$
(3)
and the hadronic one:

$`W_{\mu \nu }=`$ $`g_{\mu \nu }F_1+{\displaystyle \frac{p_\mu p_\nu }{pq}}F_2`$ (4)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{iM}{pq}}ϵ_{\mu \nu \lambda \sigma }q^\lambda (\eta ^\sigma g_1+(\eta ^\sigma {\displaystyle \frac{\eta q}{pq}}p^\sigma )g_2).`$
Here $`p`$ and $`\eta `$ are an initial 4-momentum of the target and its polarization vector respectively and $`q`$ is a 4-momentum of the virtual photon ($`p^2=M^2`$, $`q^2=Q^2`$).

On the Born level in the frame of the naive parton model the structure functions contributed to the hadronic tensor $`W_{\mu \nu }^0`$ have the following form:

$`F_1^0(x)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}e_q^2f_q(x),`$
$`F_2^0(x)=`$ $`x{\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}e_q^2f_q(x),`$
$`g_1^0(x)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}e_q^2\mathrm{\Delta }f_q(x),`$
$`g_2^0(x)=`$ $`0.`$ (5)
Here $`f_q(x)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }f_q(x)`$ are unpolarized and polarized parton distributions respectively111Here and later the independence of the polarized parton distribution on the polarization vector is assumed. See discussion in ., and $`x=Q^2/2pq`$ is the standard Bjorken variable.

The one-loop lowest-order RC to the hadronic current consists of two parts with contributions calculated in different ways:

$$W_{\mu \nu }^{1loop}=W_{\mu \nu }^V+W_{\mu \nu }^R.$$
(6)
The first part of the one-loop RC to the hadronic current comes from the gluon exchange and it will be described later. The second one corresponds to the gluon emission and requires the integration over its phase space:

$`W_{\mu \nu }^R`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{12\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}e_q^2{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{k_0}\frac{1}{(p_{2q}p_{1q})^2}}`$ (7)
$`\times [w_{\mu \nu }^{Ru}f_q(x/z)+w_{\mu \nu }^{Rp}\mathrm{\Delta }f_q(x/z)],`$
where

$`w_{\mu \nu }^{Ru}`$ $`=`$ $`Sp\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \alpha }(\widehat{p}_{1q}+m_q)\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{\alpha \nu }(\widehat{p}_{2q}+m_q),`$
$`w_{\mu \nu }^{Rp}`$ $`=`$ $`Sp\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \alpha }(\widehat{p}_{1q}+m_q)\gamma _5\widehat{\eta }\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{\alpha \nu }(\widehat{p}_{2q}+m_q),`$ (8)
and $`p_{1q}`$ ($`p_{2q}`$) is an initial (final) 4-momentum of the quark ($`p_{1q}^2=p_{2q}^2=m_q^2`$).

Quantities $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \alpha }`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{\alpha \nu }`$ are defined as

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \alpha }=`$ $`2\mathrm{\Omega }_q^\alpha \gamma _\mu {\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _\mu \widehat{k}\gamma _\alpha }{v_q}}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _\alpha \widehat{k}\gamma _\mu }{u_q}},`$
$`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{\alpha \nu }=`$ $`2\mathrm{\Omega }_q^\alpha \gamma _\nu {\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _\alpha \widehat{k}\gamma _\nu }{v_q}}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _\nu \widehat{k}\gamma _\alpha }{u_q}},`$ (9)
where

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_q=\frac{p_{1q}}{v_q}\frac{p_{2q}}{u_q},$$
(10)
and $`v_q=2kp_{1q}`$, $`u_q=2kp_{2q}`$. A variable $`z=Q^2/(Q^2+u_q)`$ is a standard one used for the description of QCD effects.

Within the requirements of the naive parton model in (7) we assume that the quark mass depends on the variable $`z`$ as

$$m_q=x/zM$$
(11)
for bremsstrahlung process and

$$m_0=m_q(z=1)=xM$$
(12)
for non-radiative one. Notice that the factor before $`M`$ in these formulae coincides with the argument of the corresponding parton distribution.

Both contributions in right hand side in (6) include the infrared divergences to be carefully considered for canceling. Similar to QED we use an identity:

$$W_{\mu \nu }^R=W_{\mu \nu }^RW_{\mu \nu }^{IR}+W_{\mu \nu }^{IR}=W_{\mu \nu }^F+W_{\mu \nu }^{IR}.$$
(13)
Here an infrared part can be written in the following way:

$$W_{\mu \nu }^{IR}=\frac{4}{3}\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }\underset{q}{}\delta ^{IR}W_{\mu \nu }^{0q},$$
(14)
where $`W_{\mu \nu }^{0q}`$ is a contribution of $`q`$-quark to the hadronic tensor on the Born level and $`\delta ^{IR}`$ should be decomposed in a sum of a soft and hard parts:

$`\delta ^{IR}=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{k_0}F^{IR}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{k_0}F^{IR}\theta (ϵk_0)}`$ (15)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{k_0}F^{IR}\theta (k_0ϵ)}=\delta _{soft}^{IR}+\delta _{hard}^{IR}.`$
Here $`k_0`$ is the energy of the emitted gluon, $`ϵ`$ is an infinitesimal parameter of the separation and

$$F^{IR}=\frac{(Q^2+u_q)}{(Q^2+u_qv_q)}\left(\frac{Q^2+u_q}{u_qv_q}\frac{m_q^2}{u_q^2}\frac{m_q^2}{v_q^2}\right).$$
(16)
Notice that there is some arbitrariness in the definition of $`F^{IR}`$: the asymptotic expression ($`k0`$) is fixed. We choose it like (16) to write the QCD-improved structure functions (see formulae (3)) in the simplest form. Recall that the quark mass in (16) is defined by (11).

The way of calculation of typical integrals in the soft and hard parts of $`\delta ^{IR}`$ is widely discussed in . After explicit integration the sum of the soft

$$\delta _{soft}^{IR}=2(l_01)\left(P^{IR}+\mathrm{log}\frac{2ϵ}{\mu }\right)l_0^2+l_0+1\pi ^2/6$$
(17)
and the hard parts

$$\delta _{hard}^{IR}=2(l_01)\mathrm{log}\frac{m_0}{2ϵ}+\frac{3}{2}l_0^2+l_0l_v\frac{1}{2}l_v^2l_0l_v\pi ^2/6$$
(18)
gives the result independent on the parameter $`ϵ`$. Here

$$l_0=\mathrm{log}\frac{Q^2}{m_0^2},l_v=\mathrm{log}\frac{1x}{x}.$$
(19)
The pole term which corresponds to the infrared divergence is contained in

$$P^{IR}=\frac{1}{n4}+\frac{1}{2}\gamma _E+\mathrm{log}\frac{1}{2\sqrt{\pi }}.$$
(20)
The arbitrary parameter $`\mu `$ has a dimension of a mass and $`\gamma _E`$ is the Euler constant.

To extract some information about QCD contributions to the polarized structure functions $`g_1`$ and $`g_2`$ an integration in $`W_{\mu \nu }^F`$ over the gluon phase space should be performed without any assumptions about the polarization vector $`\eta `$. So the technique of tensor integration has to be applied in this case. All exact expressions for tensor, vector and scalar integrations can be found in the appendix. The ultrarelativistic limit $`m_q0`$ can be performed in a straightforward way, with the exception of two terms: $`f(x)/\tau `$, $`u_qf(x/z)/\tau ^2`$. The first one including $`1/\tau `$ appears only in the substracting parts of $`W_{\mu \nu }^F`$. Since the corresponding parton distributions do not depend on $`u_q`$ it can be integrated over $`u_q`$ analytically. The second one $`u_q/\tau ^2`$ comes from $`W_{\nu \mu }^R`$. The ultrarelativistic limit in $`W_{\nu \mu }^R`$ can be applied after the transformation

$$𝑑u_q\frac{u_q}{\tau ^2}f(x/z)=𝑑u_q\frac{f(x/z)f(x)}{u_q}+f(x)𝑑u_q\frac{u_q}{\tau ^2}$$
(21)
and the analytical integration of the last term. Here $`f`$ is any (either unpolarized or polarized) parton distribution. The first term in the right hand side of (21) gives the contribution to $`W_{\mu \nu }^F`$. The second one together with the result coming from the integration $`1/\tau `$ over $`u_q`$ gives an additional factorized correction $`\delta ^m`$:

$$\delta ^m=\frac{1}{4}(3l_0+3l_v+1).$$
(22)
An explicit expression for the gluon exchange contributions reads:

$$W_{\mu \nu }^V=\frac{4}{3}\frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }\underset{q}{}\delta ^VW_{\mu \nu }^{0q}+W_{\mu \nu }^{AMM},$$
(23)
where

$$\delta ^V=2\left(P^{IR}+\mathrm{log}\frac{m_0}{\mu }\right)(l_01)\frac{1}{2}l_0^2+\frac{3}{2}l_02+\frac{\pi ^2}{6}$$
(24)
is a vertex correction part factorizing before $`W_{\mu \nu }^{0q}`$, and

$$W_{\mu \nu }^{AMM}=\frac{\alpha _s}{6\pi }l_0\underset{q}{}\frac{iM}{pq}ϵ_{\mu \nu \lambda \sigma }q^\lambda \left[\eta ^\sigma \frac{\eta q}{pq}p^\sigma \right]\underset{q}{}\mathrm{\Delta }f_q(x)$$
(25)
is the quark anomalous magnetic moment.

The infrared terms $`P^{IR}`$, parameters $`\mu `$, $`ϵ`$ and the squared logarithms containing mass singularities are canceled in the sum

$`\delta ^{IR}+\delta ^m+\delta ^V=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(2l_0l_vl_v^2+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}l_0{\displaystyle \frac{7}{2}}l_v{\displaystyle \frac{5}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{3}}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta _q`$ (26)
that is identical to (C.17) from .

Since the result of the analytical integration has the same tensor structure as the usual hadronic tensor in polarized DIS, the coefficients before the corresponding tensor structures (like $`g_{\mu \nu }`$, $`p_\mu p_\nu `$ … ) in the sum $`W_{\mu \nu }^V+W_{\mu \nu }^R`$ can be interpreted as one-loop QCD contributions to the corresponding structure functions.

## 3 QCD-improved structure functions

In the last section we obtained one-loop correction to the hadronic tensor and structure functions. The explicit result for them is:

$`F_1(x,Q^2)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2x}}[F_2(x,Q^2)F_L(x,Q^2)],`$
$`F_2(x,Q^2)=`$ $`x{\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}e_q^2f_q(x,Q^2),`$
$`F_L(x,Q^2)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4\alpha _s}{3\pi }}x{\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}e_q^2{\displaystyle \underset{x}{\overset{1}{}}}𝑑zf_q(x/z),`$
$`g_1(x,Q^2)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}e_q^2\mathrm{\Delta }f_q(x,Q^2),`$
$`g_2(x,Q^2)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{6\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}e_q^2\{(12l_q\mathrm{log}(1x))\mathrm{\Delta }f_q(x)`$ (27)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{x}{\overset{1}{}}}dz[(4l_q4\mathrm{log}z(1z)12`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1z)}})\mathrm{\Delta }f_q(x/z)+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }f_q(x)}{(1z)}}]\}.`$
The $`Q^2`$-dependent unpolarized and polarized parton distributions are defined as

$`f_q(x,Q^2)=`$ $`(1+{\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha _s}{3\pi }}\delta _q)f_q(x)+{\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha _s}{3\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{x}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{z}}[({\displaystyle \frac{1+z^2}{1z}}`$
$`\times (l_q\mathrm{log}z(1z)){\displaystyle \frac{7}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1z}}+3z+4\left)f_q\right({\displaystyle \frac{x}{z}})`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{1z}}(l_0+\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{z}{1z}}{\displaystyle \frac{7}{4}})f_q(x)],`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }f_q(x,Q^2)=`$ $`(1+{\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha _s}{3\pi }}\delta _q)\mathrm{\Delta }f_q(x)+{\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha _s}{3\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{x}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{z}}[({\displaystyle \frac{1+z^2}{1z}}`$ (28)
$`\times (l_q\mathrm{log}z(1z)){\displaystyle \frac{7}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1z}}+4z+1\left)\mathrm{\Delta }f_q\right({\displaystyle \frac{x}{z}})`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{1z}}(l_0+\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{z}{1z}}{\displaystyle \frac{7}{4}})\mathrm{\Delta }f_q(x)],`$
where $`l_q=\mathrm{log}Q^2/m_q^2`$ and $`\delta _q`$ is defined by (26).

Notice that our formulae (3,3) are in an agreement with ones obtained earlier. The unpolarized structure functions coincide with (2.24,2.49) from , $`g_1(x,Q^2)`$ corresponds to the expression (13) in . At last $`g_2(x,Q^2)`$ can be compared with the sum (18) and (19) from .

Let us calculate the difference between QCD-improved parton distributions found in both of the discussed schemes:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{3\pi }{4\alpha _s}}(f_q^{m_q=0}(x,Q^2)f_q^{m_q0}(x,Q^2))=[(P^{IR}`$
$`+\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{m_0}{\mu }})({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}+2l_v)l_v^2l_v+1]f_q(x)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{x}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{z}}[({\displaystyle \frac{1+z^2}{1z}}(P^{IR}+\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{m_q}{\mu }}+\mathrm{log}(1z))`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1z}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}z{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left)f_q\right({\displaystyle \frac{x}{z}})`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{1z}}(P^{IR}+\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{m_0}{\mu }}+\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{1z}{z}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})f_q(x)],`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{3\pi }{4\alpha _s}}(\mathrm{\Delta }f_q^{m_q=0}(x,Q^2)\mathrm{\Delta }f_q^{m_q0}(x,Q^2))=[(P^{IR}`$
$`+\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{m_0}{\mu }})({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}+2l_v)l_v^2l_v+1]\mathrm{\Delta }f_q(x)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{x}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{z}}[({\displaystyle \frac{1+z^2}{1z}}(P^{IR}+\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{m_q}{\mu }}+\mathrm{log}(1z))`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1z}}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}z+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})\mathrm{\Delta }f_q({\displaystyle \frac{x}{z}})`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{1z}}(P^{IR}+\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{m_0}{\mu }}+\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{1z}{z}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})\mathrm{\Delta }f_q(x)].`$ (29)
It can be seen from (29) that the partonic distributions within the two schemes have the same structure and all leading logarithmic terms are canceled after the following replacement:

$$\mathrm{log}m_{q,0}\mathrm{log}\mu P^{IR}.$$
(30)
The standard QCD results include infinite terms $`P^{IR}`$ (see ref.) that corresponds to quark mass singularity terms in our formulae. These divergent and scheme dependent terms in the classical results are rejected by the additional procedure of the renormalization of the parton distributions (see ref. for details). Contrary, our formulae (3) being dependent on $`\mathrm{log}m_{q,0}`$ do not require any renormalization. The main origin of differences of the non-leading logarithmic terms in these formulae comes from the calculation procedure itself since the integration over the emission gluon phase space and tending of the quark mass to zero are not commutative with each other.

In order to find one-loop QCD contributions to the sum rules it is necessary to integrate (3) over the scaling variable $`x`$. After an identical recombination like

$$\underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}𝑑x\underset{x}{\overset{1}{}}𝑑zR(z)f_q(x/z)=\underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}𝑑zzR(z)\underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}𝑑xf_q(x)$$
(31)
an explicit integration over $`z`$ gives

$`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}𝑑xF_1(x,Q^2)=`$ $`\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}\right){\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}𝑑xF_1^0(x),`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dx}{x}}F_2(x,Q^2)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dx}{x}}F_2^0(x),`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}𝑑xg_1(x,Q^2)=`$ $`\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{5}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}\right){\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}𝑑xg_1^0(x),`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}𝑑xg_2(x,Q^2)=`$ $`0,`$ (32)
where the structure functions with index ”0” are defined by (5).

Notice that QCD RC to the first moment to the unpolarized structure functions as well as $`g_2`$ have identical values for both massive and massless quark approaches. At the same time these two methods give the different results for the QCD corrections to the first moment of $`g_1`$.

Till present time the calculations have been performed within the naive parton model when the quark mass is defined as in (11, 12). Another possibility is to consider it as a constant like it was assumed in . An additional factor can depend only on $`z`$ and $`x`$. So the result for the structure functions would differ only in an argument of logarithm containing the quark mass. An additional contribution to the sum rules can appear after integration over $`x`$ and $`z`$. However it could be shown by the explicit calculations that this contribution is equal to zero. Indeed an additional integrand has DGLAP-like structure, so this cancellation is consequence of DGLAP equations. Thus the final results for sum rules in these two cases are identical.

## 4 Discussion and Conclusion

In this paper we applied the approach traditionally used in QED and electroweak theory for calculation of QCD correction to the DIS structure functions and sum rules. Since the quark was considered massive within this approach, it allowed us to estimate the finite quark mass effects at the NLO level. LO correction contributes to the DIS structure functions but vanishes for the sum rules, so this mass effects are important just for the sum rules.

We found that there is no any additional effect for the first moment of the unpolarized structure functions as well as for $`g_2`$. However there is some non-zero correction to the first moment of $`g_1`$ and as a result to the Ellis-Jaffe and Bjorken sum rules. A value of the correction is in agreement with the results of refs., obtained by different methods. We confirm also the statement of  that the classical value of correction to the first moment of $`g_1`$ is reproduced if we take into account the leading term of the polarization vector $`\eta =p_{1q}/m_q`$. However contrary to the paper we would interpret the result with (-5/3) in eqs.(3) as physical one. In our calculation we took the proton (quark) polarization vector in a general form. Using of the exact representation of the vector  ($`k_1`$ is an initial lepton momentum and $`k_1^2=m_l^2`$):

$$\eta =\frac{1}{\sqrt{(k_1p_{1q})^2m_l^2m_q^2}}\left[\frac{k_1p_{1q}}{m_q}p_{1q}m_qk_1\right]$$
(33)
leads to exactly the same result (with -5/3) for the first moment of $`g_1`$. The second term giving the additional contribution (-2/3) cannot be neglected within the approximation under consideration. It can be easyly understood from pure calculation of QED and electroweak corrections to the lepton current in DIS process , where the lepton polarization vector looks like (33), and this additional contribution was extracted to separate non-vanishing contribution. The result with (-5/3) was obtained under similar assumptions in the report . The additional correction was discussed both within OPE (operator product expansion) and within improved quark-parton model in paper . It was shown in this paper that there is no contradiction between this result and classical correction obtained for massless QCD, if we carefully take into account the finite quark mass effects for coefficient function and matrix element. As it was reviewed in recent paper  the renormalization of the axial-vector current completely suppresses the additional contribution obtained within massive approach (see section 4 of the paper).

We note that Burkhard-Cottingham sum rule is held withing taking into account mass effects at the NLO level. The target mass correction of the next order ($`m_q^2/Q^2`$) was analysed and was found negative in the paper . However, in the case of conserved currents (see ) the polarized structure function $`g_2`$ with the target mass correction obeys not only Burkhard-Cottingham sum rule but Wandzura-Wilczek relation too.

Estimating the diagrams with one gluon radiation we have also result for QED radiative correction to hadronic current. The calculation within the quark parton model shows that QED correction is not so large, however there are at least two arguments to be taken into account. First, the DIS structure functions are defined in the one-photon exchange approximation as an objects including only strong interaction. It means that transferring from the cross section to the structure functions we neglect these QED effects, so their contributions have to be included to systematic error of corresponding measurements. Second reason is that there exist some measurements where QED correction is important. One of the examples is calculation of $`\alpha _s`$ by comparing theoretical and experimental values for the Bjorken sum rule . In this case $`\alpha _s`$ is suggested to be extracted from QCD corrections to the Bjorken sum rule, which is a series over $`\alpha _s`$, and at least five terms of the expansion are known. Simple estimation shows that QED contribution is comparable with fourth (or even third) term of the expansion.

There are several papers devoted to calculation of QED and electroweak corrections to the hadronic current . As usual methods similar to ours are used for that. Positive moment here is the keeping quark mass non-zero. From the other side there are some effects which are not considered within QED calculations: taking into account the confiment effect in integration of soft region, consideration of the quarks as non-free particles. Thus the methods (see for example ) developed for careful treatment of the QCD effects should be applied for the analysis of photon emission from the hadronic current. However, probably the best way to take into account the photon radiative correction to the hadronic current is further generalization of OPE technique to include QED effects.

## Acknowledgement

We benefitted much for discussion with A.V. Efremov, E.A.Kuraev N.N. Nikolaev and O.V.Teryaev. One of us (I. A.) thanks the US Department of Energy for support under contract DE-AC05-84ER40150.

## Appendix Appendix

The gluon emission phase space on the parton level can be written in a covariant form:

$$\frac{d^3k}{k_0}=\frac{(Q^2+u_qv_q)}{2(Q^2+u_q)}\frac{du_qdv_qdz_1}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }(k_1,k_2,p_{1q},p_{2q}})}.$$
(A.1)
Here $`v_q=2kp_{1q}`$, $`u_q=2kp_{2q}`$, $`z_1=2kk_1`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }(k_1,k_2,p_{1q},p_{2q})`$ is Gram determinant, $`\lambda _q=(Q^2+u_q)^2+4m_q^2Q^2`$ and $`p_{1q}`$ ($`p_{2q}`$) is an initial (final) quark momentum.

Since the gluon is radiated from the quark legs it is clear that the matrix element squared for this process does not depend on $`z_1`$. Therefore an analytical integration of the right part of (A.1) over $`z_1`$ can be performed

$$\underset{z_1^{min}}{\overset{z_1^{max}}{}}\frac{dz_1}{2\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }(k_1,k_2,p_{1q},p_{2q}})}=\frac{\pi }{\sqrt{\lambda _q}},$$
(A.2)
where the limits $`z_1^{max/min}`$ are defined as the solutions of the equation

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(k_1,k_2,p_{1q},p_{2q})=0.$$
(A.3)
The following expression

$$J[A]=\underset{v_q^{min}}{\overset{v_q^{max}}{}}𝑑v_qA$$
(A.4)
for the integration over $`v_q`$ will be used in this appendix. Explicit expressions for the limits of integration which can be obtained as the solution of the equation $`z_1^{max}=z_1^{min}`$ read:

$$v_q^{max/min}=\frac{u_q(Q^2+u_q+2m_q^2\pm \sqrt{\lambda _q})}{2\tau },$$
(A.5)
where $`\tau =u_q+m_q^2`$.

Tensor and vector integrals can be reduced to scalar ones using the following expressions:

$`J[k_\mu k_\nu A]=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g_{\mu \nu }}{2\lambda _q}}J[T_1A]+{\displaystyle \frac{x^2p_\mu p_\nu }{\lambda _q^2}}J\left[T_2A\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{x(p_\mu q_\nu +q_\mu p_\nu )}{\lambda _q^2}}J[T_3A]+{\displaystyle \frac{q_\mu q_\nu }{\lambda _q^2}}J[T_4A],`$
$`J[k_\mu A]=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{xp_\mu }{\lambda _q}}J[V_2A]+{\displaystyle \frac{q_\mu }{\lambda _q}}J[V_2A].`$ (A.6)
The coefficients $`T_i`$ and $`V_i`$ are defined as the solution of the systems of equations obtained by the convolutions (A.6) with $`p_{1q}`$, $`q`$ and $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ :

$`T_1=`$ $`(u_qv_q)^2m_q^2+u_qv_q(v_qu_qQ^2),`$
$`T_2=`$ $`((u_q+v_q)^2+2u_qv_q)Q^4+2(u_q+2v_q)Q^2u_q`$
$`+(u_q^22m_q^2Q^2)(u_qv_q)^2,`$
$`T_3=`$ $`(4u_qv_q)Q^2u_qv_q+(2u_q+v_q)Q^3v_q`$
$`m_q^2(u_qv_q)(3u_q(Q^2+u_qv_q)+Q^2v_q),`$
$`T_4=`$ $`(Q^2+u_q)^2v_q^2+6(u_qv_q)^2m_q^4`$
$`2m_q^2v_q[(Q^2+u_q)(3u_q2v_q)u_qv_q],`$
$`V_1=`$ $`Q^2(u_q+v_q)+u_q(u_qv_q),`$
$`V_2=`$ $`v_q(u_q+Q^2)+2m_q^2(v_qu_q).`$ (A.7)
The list of scalar integrals over variable $`v_q`$ in NLO approximation reads as

$`J[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{v_q^2}}]=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\lambda _q}}{m_q^2u_q}},`$
$`J[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{v}}_q]=`$ $`\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{(Q^2+u_q+2m_q^2+\sqrt{\lambda _q})^2}{4m_q^2\tau }},`$
$`J[1]=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{u_q\sqrt{\lambda _q}}{\tau }},`$
$`J[v_q]=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{u_q^2(Q^2+u_q+2m_q^2)\sqrt{\lambda _q}}{2\tau ^2}},`$ (A.8)