text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Recent observations suggest that the Universe at present is dominated by Dark Energy  and undergoes accelerated expansion . This can be attributed to the presence of a non-vanishing cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, which, however, has to be extremely fine-tuned $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^210^{120}M_P^4`$, where $`M_P=1.22\times 10^{19}`$GeV is the Planck mass. Therefore, the existence of a cosmological constant is not favoured by theorists, who prefer to account for the presence of Dark Energy by different means. One novel idea is to consider a dynamical, time-varying $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Lambda }(t)`$ . The most straightforward realization of this idea is to suppose that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(t)`$ is due to the potential energy of a scalar field, called quintessence , which comes to dominate the energy density of the Universe at present and drive the latter into a late-time accelerated expansion. However, quintessence too suffers from fine-tuning problems , so it is not clear that it is a better alternative to the cosmological constant.

A compelling way to minimize the fine-tunings of quintessence is to link it with inflation. This seems natural since both quintessence and inflation are based on the same idea; namely that the Universe undergoes accelerated expansion when dominated by the potential energy density of a scalar field, which slowly rolls-down its almost flat potential. Unification of inflation and quintessence is achieved by using a single scalar field $`\varphi `$ to drive both. There are many merits to quintessential inflation. Firstly, one avoids the introduction of yet again another unobserved scalar field, whose nature and origin are unaccounted for. Furthermore, a single theoretical framework may be used to construct the scalar potential $`V(\varphi )`$. Moreover, it is possible to minimize the fine-tunings of quintessence by linking them with the ones of inflation and by introducing only few mass scales and parameters in $`V(\varphi )`$. Finally, certain fine-tunings are automatically dispensed with, such as, for example, the tuning of initial conditions for quintessence.

Apart from satisfying the requirements of inflation and quintessence, quintessential inflation needs to incorporate an additional number of features. One such requirement is that the scalar field should not be coupled to any of the standard model fields. This is so because it is necessary for $`\varphi `$ to avoid decay and survive until today. The additional advantage of such a “sterile” inflaton is that one dispenses with the fine-tuning of the couplings between $`\varphi `$ and the standard model fields, otherwise unavoidable in order to preserve the flatness of the inflationary potential and also because the ultra-light quintessence field would correspond to a long-range force that could violate the equivalence principle at present. Natural candidates for a sterile inflaton are hidden sector fields, moduli fields, the radion and so on. Another requirement of quintessential inflation is that the minimum of the potential (taken to be zero, i.e. there is no residual cosmological constant) should not have been reached until today, so that $`V(\varphi )`$ may dominate the Universe at present. In order to achieve this, the minimum is typically placed at infinity. Thus, the potential features two flat regions, the inflationary plateau and the quintessential “tail”.

It is not easy to construct successful quintessential inflationary models and this is why only few such models exist in the literature. Most of the existing models, however, manage to satisfy the requirements of inflation and quintessence by considering multi-branch potentials that change form when the field moves from the inflationary to the quintessential phase of its evolution. This is achieved either “by hand”  or by a phase transition . In these models information is not communicated between the inflationary and the quintessential part of the field’s evolution. Another option, is constructing complicated models involving a large number of parameters, usually due to the theoretical framework used, which have to be tuned correctly to achieve the desired results .

We adopt a different approach and attempt to formulate a single-branch potential with minimal parameter content . Such a minimalistic approach avoids the large number of fine-tunings inherent in other models, and renders our quintessential inflationary models preferable compared to the cosmological constant alternative.

## 2 Requirements of inflation and quintessence

Recent CMB observations  suggest that we live in a spatially-flat FRW Universe. We model the Universe content as a collection of perfect fluids, the background fluid with density $`\rho _B`$ comprised by matter (including baryons and CDM) and radiation (including relativistic particles) and the scalar field $`\varphi `$ with density $`\rho _\varphi \rho _{\mathrm{kin}}+V`$ and pressure $`p_\varphi \rho _{\mathrm{kin}}V`$, where $`\rho _{\mathrm{kin}}\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2`$. The evolution of $`\varphi `$ is determined by the equation,

$$\ddot{\varphi }+3H\dot{\varphi }+V^{}=0$$
(1)
where $`H\dot{a}/a`$ is the Hubble parameter with $`a(t)`$ being the scale factor of the Universe and the prime {dot} denotes derivative with respect to $`\varphi `$ {the cosmic time $`t`$}.

### 2.1 Inflationary requirements

During inflation $`V(\varphi )`$ dominates the Universe and the above equation becomes,

$$3H\dot{\varphi }V^{}(\varphi )$$
(2)
Inflation occurs when $`|\epsilon |,|\eta |<1`$, where, $`\epsilon \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}m_P(V^{}/V)`$ and $`\eta \frac{1}{3}m_P^2(V^{\prime \prime }/V)`$.

#### 2.1.1 Horizon and flatness problems

The horizon and flatness problems are solved if the scale that corresponds to the observable Universe at present did exit the horizon during inflation. The number of e-foldings before the end of inflation when this happened is estimated as $`N_H\mathrm{ln}(t_0T_{_{\mathrm{CMB}}})N_{\mathrm{reh}}`$, where $`t_0`$ is the age of the Universe according to the Hot Big Bang, $`T_{_{\mathrm{CMB}}}`$ is the temperature of the CMB at present and $`N_{\mathrm{reh}}\mathrm{ln}(T_{\mathrm{reh}}/H_{\mathrm{end}})`$ with $`T_{\mathrm{reh}}`$ being the reheating temperature and $`H_{\mathrm{end}}`$ the Hubble parameter at the time $`t_{\mathrm{end}}`$ when inflation ends.

To solve the horizon and flatness problems the total number of inflationary e-foldings has to be larger than $`N_H`$, which translates into a constraint on the initial value of $`\varphi `$.

#### 2.1.2 COBE normalization

This constraint corresponds to the amplitude of the density perturbations as deduced by the CMB temperature anisotropies observed by COBE. The constraint reeds,

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }T}{T}|_{\mathrm{dec}}\frac{\delta \rho }{\rho }(N_{_{\mathrm{CMB}}})2\times 10^5$$
(3)
where

$$\frac{\delta \rho }{\rho }\frac{H^2}{\pi \dot{\varphi }}|_{\mathrm{exit}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}\pi }\frac{V^{3/2}}{m_P^3V^{}}$$
(4)
and $`N_{_{\mathrm{CMB}}}\mathrm{ln}(t_{\mathrm{dec}}T_{\mathrm{dec}})N_{\mathrm{reh}}`$, with $`T_{\mathrm{dec}}T(t_{\mathrm{dec}})`$ being the temperature of the last scattering surface and $`t_{\mathrm{dec}}`$ being the time of decoupling between matter and radiation. Typically, the COBE normalization constraint determines the inflationary energy scale.

#### 2.1.3 Spectral index

It can be shown that the spectral index $`n_s`$ of the density perturbations is given by,

$$n_s16(\eta 3\epsilon ^2)$$
(5)
Large scale structure and CMB observations provide the following constraint for $`n_s`$,

$$|n(N_{_{\mathrm{CMB}}})1|0.1$$
(6)
which constraints the slope and curvature of the potential $`|V^{}|`$ and $`|V^{\prime \prime }|`$ respectively.

### 2.2 Quintessential requirements

#### 2.2.1 Coincidence

The scalar field should account for the required Dark Energy at present. Thus, $`\rho _\varphi `$ needs to be comparable with $`\rho _B`$ today, but subdominant during the Hot Big Bang. The constraint reeds, $`V(\varphi _0)=\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi \rho _0`$, where $`\varphi _0\varphi (t_0)`$, $`\rho _0`$ is the overall energy density of the Universe at present and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi 2/3`$ is the currently observed abundance of Dark Energy .

#### 2.2.2 Acceleration

The SN Ia observations suggest that the Universe at present is undergoing accelerated expansion . In order to achieve this we need $`\rho _\varphi (t_0)>\rho _B(t_0)`$ and also $`1w_\varphi (t_0)<\frac{1}{3}`$, where $`w_\varphi p_\varphi /\rho _\varphi `$. String theory considerations disfavor eternal acceleration because it results in the existence of a future event horizons . If we take this constraint into account we can allow only for a brief acceleration period occurring today.

## 3 Evolution

The particular characteristics of quintessential inflationary potentials result in a particular scenario for the Universe evolution, which imposes a few additional constraints.

### 3.1 After the end of inflation

Reheating, in quintessential inflation, is due to the gravitational production of non-conformally invariant, effectively massless fields, facilitated by the change of the vacuum at the end of inflation . The reheating temperature is, $`T_{\mathrm{reh}}=\alpha (H_{\mathrm{end}}/2\pi )`$, where $`\alpha 0.01`$ is an (in)efficiency factor . Therefore, $`N_{\mathrm{reh}}=\mathrm{ln}(\alpha /2\pi )6`$ regardless of the inflationary energy scale, so that, $`N_H74`$ and $`N_{_{\mathrm{CMB}}}69`$.

#### 3.1.1 Kination

Because, at the end of inflation, $`\rho _B(t_{\mathrm{end}})T_{\mathrm{reh}}^4V_{\mathrm{end}}`$ the Universe remains $`\varphi `$–dominated. However, after the end of slow roll we have kination with $`\rho _{\mathrm{kin}}V`$  and (1) becomes,

$$\ddot{\varphi }+(\dot{\varphi }/t)0$$
(7)
Thus, the evolution of $`\varphi `$ is independent of $`V(\varphi )`$. Because $`\rho _{\mathrm{kin}}a^6`$ soon $`\rho _B`$ comes to dominate and the Hot Big Bang begins. The temperature at the end of kination is,

$$T_{}=\pi \sqrt{\frac{g_{}}{30}}\frac{T_{\mathrm{reh}}^3}{V_{\mathrm{end}}^{1/2}}=\frac{\alpha ^3}{72\pi ^2}\sqrt{\frac{g_{}}{30}}\frac{V_{\mathrm{end}}}{m_P^3}$$
(8)
where $`V_{\mathrm{end}}V(t_{\mathrm{end}})`$ and $`g_{}`$ is the number of relativistic degrees of freedom, which, for the standard model in the early Universe, is $`g_{}=106.75`$. Kination has to be over before Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN). Therefore, $`T_{_{\mathrm{BBN}}}<T_{}`$, where $`T_{_{\mathrm{BBN}}}0.5`$ MeV is the temperature at the onset of BBN. The BBN constraint provides a lower bound on $`V_{\mathrm{end}}`$.

#### 3.1.2 Hot Big Bang

After the end of kination $`\rho _{\mathrm{kin}}t^3`$ so that $`\dot{\varphi }0`$ rapidly. Consequently, the scalar field freezes at some value $`\varphi _F`$, estimated as,

$$\varphi _F\varphi _{\mathrm{end}}+2\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\left[1+\frac{3}{2}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{12\pi }{\alpha ^2}\sqrt{\frac{30}{g_{}}}\right)+3\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{m_P}{V_{\mathrm{end}}^{1/4}}\right)\right]m_Pm_P$$
(9)
where $`m_PM_P/8\pi `$ and $`\varphi _{\mathrm{end}}\varphi (t_{\mathrm{end}})`$.

### 3.2 Attractors and trackers

During the quintessential part of its evolution the scalar field is again dominated by its potential energy density so that (2) is still applicable. However, during the Hot Big Bang, $`Ht^1`$ and the roll of the field is not as much restrained as in inflation.

#### 3.2.1 Attractor solution

The solution of (2) is of the form, $`f(\varphi \left(t\right))f(\varphi _F)=F(t)`$, where $`F(t)\frac{1}{4}(1+w_B)t^2`$ and $`f(\varphi )^{}𝑑\varphi /V^{}`$ and the prime on the integral means that one should not consider constants of integration. The above suggests

$$\varphi (t)\{\begin{array}{ccc}\varphi _F\hfill & \hfill \text{when}f(\varphi _F)F(t)& \text{ Frozen Quintessence}\hfill \\ & & \\ \varphi _{\mathrm{atr}}(t)\hfill & \hfill \text{when}f(\varphi _F)F(t)& \text{ Attractor Quintessence}\hfill \end{array}$$
(10)
where $`\varphi _{\mathrm{atr}}(t)`$ is the solution of

$$f(\varphi )F(t)\frac{1}{4}(1+w_B)t^2=^{}\frac{d\varphi }{V^{}(\varphi )}$$
(11)
referred to as attractor solution . Because $`F(t)`$ is a growing function of time, even though initially the field remains frozen at $`\varphi _F`$, later on it unfreezes and starts following the attractor. This occurs when $`V_{\mathrm{atr}}V(\varphi _{\mathrm{atr}})V_FV(\varphi _F)`$ so that, at all times, $`V(\varphi )=`$min{$`V_F,V_{\mathrm{atr}}`$}. Note that the attractor solution is independent of initial conditions.

#### 3.2.2 The choice of the quintessential tail

Depending on the slope of the quintessential tail $`V_{\mathrm{atr}}`$ may fall more {less} rapidly than $`\rho _B`$. We will call such an attractor steep {mild}. If the attractor is steep, only frozen-quintessence may achieve coincidence. However, steep attractors begin soon after the end of inflation. Hence, potentials with steep quintessential tails are ruled out. Mild attractors are different. Such attractors assist $`\varphi `$ to eventually dominate $`\rho _B`$ and, hence, they are called “trackers” . Mild quintessential tails and all cases of frozen-quintessence result in eternal acceleration, disfavored by string theory , and are, therefore, also ruled out.***Quintessential tails, which change slope from mild to steep , may be constructed only at the expense of additional mass-scales and parameters, which contrasts our minimalistic approach.

Therefore, the only acceptable case is to consider attractors according to which $`V_{\mathrm{atr}}`$ falls as rapidly as $`\rho _B`$ (see Fig. 1), so that $`V_{\mathrm{atr}}/\rho _B=`$ constant. This corresponds to exponential quintessential tails , for which the attractor (11) in the matter era is,

$$\frac{\rho _B}{V_{\mathrm{atr}}}=4\epsilon ^2=\mathrm{constant}$$
(12)
Although it may explain the missing Dark Energy, the exponential attractor is seemingly unable to result in accelerated expansion, because it mimics $`\rho _B`$ and, hence, $`w_\varphi (t_0)0`$. However, a brief period of acceleration is indeed possible to achieve if the field unfreezes at present . This is because, when unfreezing, the field oscillates briefly around the attractor. Thus, at first crossing of $`V_F`$ and $`V_{\mathrm{atr}}`$ the field remains “super-frozen” and dominates the Universe, causing accelerated expansion. Soon, however, it settles onto the attractor and acceleration is terminated (Fig. 2). Thus, coincidence requires $`\varphi _{\mathrm{atr}}(t_0)\varphi _F`$. Moreover, “super-freezing” results in $`w_\varphi (t_0)1`$ which guarantees acceleration.

Therefore, we are led to try a quintessential tail of the form, $`V(\varphi \varphi _{\mathrm{end}})V_{\mathrm{end}}e^{\lambda \varphi /m_P}`$ where $`\lambda >0`$ is a parameter for which $`\epsilon =\lambda /\sqrt{6}`$. In order to avoid frozen quintessence we require $`V_{\mathrm{atr}}\text{ }\stackrel{<}{}\text{ }\rho _B`$, which means that $`\lambda `$ should be close but not smaller than $`\sqrt{3/2}`$. However, it turns out that the corresponding value for $`V_{\mathrm{end}}`$ cannot satisfy the BBN constraint. Fortunately, one can overcome this difficulty by modifying the the quintessential tail in a way that preserves the exponential attractor. This is achieved by introducing an Inverse Power-Law (IPL) factor so that, $`V(\varphi \varphi _{\mathrm{end}})V_{\mathrm{end}}e^{\lambda \varphi /m_P}(m/\varphi )^k`$, where $`k1`$ is an integer and $`mm_P`$. The attractor for this quasi-exponential tail is identical with the pure exponential case because $`\varphi _Fm_P`$ suggests,

$$V^{}(\varphi _F)=\frac{V}{m_P}\left[\lambda +k\left(\frac{m_P}{\varphi _F}\right)\right]\frac{\lambda V}{m_P}$$
(13)
The quasi-exponential behaviour cannot carry over to the inflationary era because of the steepness it results to. Thus, both the exponential and the IPL features have to be modified in inflation. This modification is not trivial because of the huge difference $`V_{\mathrm{end}}V_F\rho _0`$ as required by BBN and coincidence. A steep inflationary plateau results either in too brief inflation or in strongly super-Planckian inflationary energy scale. A flat inflationary plateau, however, because it has to “prepare” for the deep dive towards $`V_F`$, typically features a large value of $`|V^{\prime \prime }|`$, which results in too large $`n_s`$ \[c.f. (5)\].

## 4 A concrete example

Designing a quintessential inflationary potential is not easy, let alone using few mass scales and parameters. Nevertheless, it is indeed possible. For example, consider the potential,

$$V(\varphi )=M^4[1\mathrm{tanh}(\varphi /m_P)]\left[1\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{\pi \varphi /2}{\sqrt{\varphi ^2+m^2}}\right)\right]^k$$
(14)
where $`\mathrm{}<\varphi <+\mathrm{}`$, $`M,m<m_P`$ and $`k>0`$ is an integer (Fig. 3). The asymptotic forms of the above far from the origin are,

$$V(\varphi 0)2^{k+1}M^4\left[1e^{2\varphi /m_P}\frac{k\pi ^2}{64}(\frac{m}{\varphi })^4\right]2^{k+1}M^4$$
(15)
and

$$V(\varphi 0)2^{1k}(\frac{\pi }{4})^{2k}e^{2\varphi /m_P}M^4\left(\frac{m}{\varphi }\right)^{4k}e^{2\varphi /m_P}(m/\varphi )^{4k}$$
(16)
Thus, for negative values of $`\varphi `$ the potential approaches a constant, non-zero, false vacuum energy density responsible for inflation, whereas for positive values of $`\varphi `$ the potential attains the desired quasi-exponential form with $`\lambda =2`$. Enforcing the constraint (3) gives,

$$\frac{2^{\frac{k+1}{2}}}{\sqrt{3}\pi }\left(\frac{M}{m_P}\right)^2(N_{_{\mathrm{CMB}}}+1/3)=10^5M10^{15}\text{GeV}$$
(17)
Thus, we see that $`M`$ is of the scale of grand unification. Now, employing (5) we obtain,

$`n_s(N)1{\displaystyle \frac{6}{3N+1}}\left[1+{\displaystyle \frac{9}{8(3N+1)}}\right]n_s(N_{_{\mathrm{CMB}}})0.97`$
which is in excellent agreement with the observations . Also, $`V_{\mathrm{end}}2^{k1}M^4`$ gives,

$$T_{\mathrm{reh}}\frac{\alpha }{4}\frac{10^5m_P}{\sqrt{N_{_{\mathrm{CMB}}}+1/3}}10^9\text{GeV}$$
(18)
which saturates but does not violate the gravitino constraint. Using the above, (8) gives,

$$T_{}\frac{\alpha ^3\pi ^2}{96}\sqrt{\frac{g_{}}{30}}\frac{10^{10}m_P}{(N_{_{\mathrm{CMB}}}+1/3)^2}10\text{MeV}>T_{_{\mathrm{BBN}}}$$
(19)
Thus, the BBN constraint is satisfied. Finally, solving the horizon and flatness problems requires the initial condition for the inflaton, $`\varphi _i\varphi (N_H)3m_P`$, which does not require fine-tuning since we expect $`\varphi _i|M_P|`$. Note that, $`n_s,T_{\mathrm{reh}},T_{}`$ are all $`k`$-independent.

Moving on to quintessential requirements, from (11), the attractor for the matter era is, $`V_{\mathrm{atr}}/\rho _B=3/8`$. Super–freezing is expected to boost this fraction up to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi 2/3`$ and also to give $`w_\varphi 1`$. The freezing value of $`\varphi `$ is found using (9),

$$\varphi _F=\sqrt{6}\left\{\frac{2}{3}\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\mathrm{ln}(2/\sqrt{3})+\mathrm{ln}\left[\frac{24}{\alpha ^2}\sqrt{\frac{10}{g_{}}}\left(N_{_{\mathrm{CMB}}}+\frac{1}{3}\right)\times 10^5\right]\right\}m_P67m_P$$
(20)
Using the coincidence constraint $`\varphi _0\varphi _F`$ and after some algebra one finds,

$$m4\times 10^2(4\times 10^{70})^{1/4k}10^{30/k}m_P$$
(21)
which gives,

| $`k`$ | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`m`$ | $`10^8`$GeV | $`10^{15}`$GeV | $`10^{17}`$GeV | $`10^{18}`$GeV |

Thus, we can identify $`m`$ with $`M,m_P`$ for $`k=2,4`$ respectively, and obtain the models,

* Model 1:

$$V(\varphi )=M^4[1\mathrm{tanh}(\varphi /m_P)]\left[1\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{\pi \varphi /2}{\sqrt{\varphi ^2+M^2}}\right)\right]^2$$
(22)
* Model 2:

$`V(\varphi )=M^4(\varphi )[1\mathrm{tanh}(\varphi /m_P)]`$ $`\mathrm{and}`$ $`M(\varphi )M\left[1\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi \varphi /2}{\sqrt{\varphi ^2+m_P^2}}}\right)\right]`$ (23)

## 5 Conclusions

We have shown that it is indeed possible to unify inflation and quintessence using a single scalar field without incorporating too many mass scales and parameters. The best approach suggests a quasi-exponential tail, which manages to meet BBN requirements, while retaining the pure-exponential attractor solution. The quasi-exponential tail achieves a brief acceleration period if the scalar field is about to unfreeze today and lies, at present, in a super-frozen state. Both the exponential and inverse-power law features of the tail have to be suppressed at the inflationary plateau.

Two successful models are presented, which satisfy all requirements of inflation and quintessence with the use of only two natural mass-scales: the Planck and the grand unification scale, and no other parameters. Moreover, no fine tuning of initial conditions is required. In these models the inflationary scale is that of grand unification, which is low enough to ensure safety from radiative corrections. Also, $`T_{\mathrm{reh}}10^9`$GeV, which saturates the gravitino constraint and $`n_s0.97`$, in excellent agreement with observations. Finally, we expect $`w_\varphi 1`$ because of super-freezing. Due to the plethora of constraints and requirements we believe that any successful model should not differ much from the toy-models presented.

In summary, successful quintessential inflationary models without additional fine-tuning for quintessence are possible to construct. Such models outshine the cosmological constant alternative.


format: text

text:
# Hadronization mechanisms and spin effects in high energy fragmentation processes

## 1 Introduction

Spin effect is a powerful tool to study the properties of the hadronic interactions and hadron structures. Since the deep understanding of different aspects in spin physics of strong interaction almost always involves hadron production, spin effects in high energy fragmentation processes have attracted much attention recently, both experimentally and theoretically (see e.g.\[References-References\] and the references given there). There are two main aspects in this connection, i.e., the dependence of the polarization and the momentum distribution of the produced hadron on the spin of the fragmenting quark. The former is usually referred as the spin transfer in the fragmentation process. For the latter, if the fragmenting quark is transversely polarized, we study the azimuthal angle dependence of the produced hadrons, and if the fragmenting quark is longitudinally polarized, we study a quantity which is called “jet handedness”. I will concentrate on the first two problems in my talk.

The motivations for these studies are clear: They are important to understand the puzzling spin effects observed in high energy hadron-hadron collisions; they provide new tests to hadronization models and also a promising tool to detect the polarization of the quark before fragmentation.

## 2 Spin transfer in high energy fragmentation processes

Spin transfer in high energy fragmentation process is defined as the probability for the polarization of the fragmenting quark to be transferred to the produced hadron. Here, we consider $`q_0h(q_0\mathrm{})+X`$. We suppose that the $`q_0`$ was polarized before the fragmentation, and ask the following questions: (1) Will the $`q_0`$ keep its polarization? (2) How is the relation between the polarization of $`q_0`$ and that of the produced $`h`$ which contains the $`q_0`$? Clearly, the answers to these questions depend on the hadronization mechanism and on the spin structure of hadrons. The study can provide useful information for both aspects. In particular, there exist now two distinctively different pictures for the spin contents of the baryons: the static quark model using the SU(6) symmetric wave function \[referred as the SU(6) picture\], and the picture drawn from the data for polarized deeply inelastic lepton-nucleon scattering (DIS) and SU(3) flavor symmetry in hyperon decay \[referred as the DIS picture\]. It is natural to ask which picture is suitable to describe the question (2) mentioned above. Obviously, the answers to these questions are also essential in the description of the puzzling hyperon transverse polarization observed already in the 1970s in unpolarized hadron-hadron reactions.

### 2.1 Hyperon polarization in high energy reactions as a tool to study the spin transfer in fragmentation processes

It has been pointed out that measurements of the longitudinal $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ polarization in $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilations at the $`Z^0`$ pole provide a very special check to the validity of the SU(6) picture in connecting the spin of the constituent to the polarization of the hadron produced in the fragmentation processes. This is because the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ polarization in this reaction obtained from the SU(6) picture should be the maximum among different models. Data are now available from both ALEPH and OPAL Collaborations. The results show that the SU(6) picture seems to agree better with the data compared with the DIS picture. (See Fig.1). This is rather surprising: the energy at LEP is very high hence the initial quarks and anti-quarks produced at the $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation vertices are certainly current quarks and current anti-quarks. They cannot be the constituent quarks used in describing the static properties of hadrons using SU(6) symmetric wave functions. It is thus interesting and instructive to have further checks by making complementary measurements.

We note that, to study the spin transfer in fragmentation, we need to know the polarization of the $`q_0`$ before fragmentation and to measure the polarization of the produced $`h`$. Hence, hyperon productions in lepton-induced reactions are ideal to study this problem. Here, the polarization of quark can easily be calculated using the standard model for electroweak interaction and the hyperon polarization can easily be determined by measuring the angular distribution of its decay products. We have thus made a systematic study \[References-References\] of hyperon polarizations in different lepton-induced reactions. The obtained results can be used as further checks of the different pictures. Now we give a brief summary of the calculation method and the obtained results.

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Fig.1: $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ polarization in XXX $`e^+e^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }X`$ at Z-pole. | Fig.2: $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^+`$ polarization in XX $`\nu p\mathrm{\Sigma }^+X`$ at high energies. |

We consider $`q_f^0H_i+X`$ and divide the produced $`H_i`$’s into the following groups: (a) directly produced and contain the $`q_f^0`$’s; (b) decay products of heavier hyperons which were polarized before their decays; (c) directly produced but do not contain the $`q_f^0`$; (d) decay products of heavier hyperons which were unpolarized before their decays. Obviously, hyperons from (a) and (b) can be polarized while those from (c) and (d) are not. We obtain,

$$P_{H_i}=\frac{\underset{f}{}t_{H_i,f}^FP_fn_{H_i,f}^a+\underset{j}{}t_{H_i,H_j}^DP_{H_j}n_{H_i,H_j}^b}{n_{H_i}^a+n_{H_i}^b+n_{H_i}^c+n_{H_i}^d}.$$
(1)
Here $`P_f`$ is the polarization of $`q_f^0`$ which is determined by the electroweak vertex; $`n_{H_i,f}^a`$ is the average number of $`H_i`$’s which are directly produced and contain $`q_f^0`$ of flavor $`f`$, and $`n_{H_i,H_j}^b`$ is that from the decay of $`H_j`$’s which were polarized; $`P_{H_j}`$ is the polarization of $`H_j`$; $`n_{H_i}^a`$, $`n_{H_i}^b`$, $`n_{H_i}^c`$ and $`n_{H_i}^d`$ are average numbers of $`H_i`$’s in group (a), (b), (c) and (d) respectively; $`t_{H_i,f}^F`$ is the probability for the polarization of $`q_f^0`$ to be transferred to $`H_i`$ in group (a) and is called the polarization transfer factor, where the superscript $`F`$ stands for fragmentation; $`t_{H_i,H_j}^D`$ is the probability for the polarization of $`H_j`$ to be transferred to $`H_i`$ in the decay process $`H_jH_i+X`$ and is called decay polarization transfer factor, where the superscript $`D`$ stands for decay. $`t_{H_i,f}^F`$ is equal to the fraction of spin carried by the $`f`$-flavor-quark divided by the average number of quark of flavor $`f`$ in $`H_i`$. This fractional contribution is different in the SU(6) or the DIS picture, and can be found in e.g. \[References\] or \[References\]. $`t_{H_i,H_j}^D`$ is determined by the decay process and is independent of the process in which $`H_j`$ is produced. For octet hyperon decays, they are extracted from the materials in Review of Particle Properties, but for decuplet hyperons, we have to use an estimation based on the static quark model.

The average numbers of the hyperons of different origins mentioned above are determined by the hadronization mechanisms and should be independent of the polarization of the initial quarks. Hence, we can calculate them using a hadronization model which give a good description of the unpolarized data. We used Lund model implemented by JETSET or LEPTO in our calculations.

We applied the method to $`e^+e^{}H_iX`$, $`\mu ^{}p\mu ^{}H_iX`$ and $`\nu _\mu p\mu ^{}H_iX`$ at high energies and calculated the polarization of different octet hyperons in these reactions. We now summarize the main results as follows.

For $`e^+e^{}H_iX`$, we made the calculations at LEP I and LEP II energies. The results show that, all the octet hyperons should be significantly polarized and the polarizations are different in the SU(6) or the DIS picture. Measuring them can give further test to the pictures. We also tried to make flavor separation. We found that it is impossible to separate only contribution from $`u`$ or $`d`$ to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. But we can enhance the contribution from $`s`$ fragmentation by giving some criteria to the selected events. For details, see \[References\].

In deeply inelastic lepton-nucleon scatterings, at sufficiently high $`Q^2`$ and hadronic energy $`W`$, hadrons in the current fragmentation region can be considered as the pure results of the fragmentation of the struck quarks. There are two advantages to study hyperon polarization in $`\mu ^{}p\mu ^{}H_iX`$: Here, flavor separation can be achieved by selecting events in certain kinematic regions; and we can study the spin transfer both in longitudinally and in transversely polarized cases. We made the calculations for different combinations of beam and target polarizations. The results show the following characteristics: (A), hyperons are polarized quite significantly if the beam is polarized but $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ polarization is quite small in the case of unpolarized beam and polarized target. (B), there is significant contribution from heavier hyperon decay to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, it is even higher than the directly produced in most kinematic regions. (C), for $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^+`$, the decay contribution is very small and the polarization is higher than that for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and the differences from the different pictures are also larger. (D), the transverse polarization of the outgoing struck quark is achieved only in the case of using transversely polarized target. But the obtained $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ transverse polarization is very small and the decay influence is large. In contrast, the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^+`$ polarization is larger and there is almost no decay contribution.

We made similar calculations for $`\nu _\mu p\mu ^{}H_iX`$. We found that there is a complete flavor separation for $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^+`$ production. It comes almost completely from $`u`$ quark fragmentation. This leads to a quite high $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^+`$ polarization. (See Fig.2, where the solid and dashed lines are the results obatined using the SU(6) and the DIS pictures). However, for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ production, contribution from charmed baryon decay is very significant. It can completely destroy even the qualitative feature of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ polarization. We thus reached the conclusion that, in deeply inelastic lepton-nucleon scattering, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^+`$ production is much more suitable to study the spin transfer in fragmentation processes.

Last but not least, we note that the method can also be applied to hyperon polarization in high $`p_{}`$ jets in polarized $`pp`$ collisions such as those at RHIC. They can also be used to study the spin transfer in fragmentation processes. Such calculations have also been done and the results can be found in \[References\].

### 2.2 Spin alignment of vector mesons in high energy reactions

Another aspect which is related to the problem of spin transfer in fragmentation is the spin alignment of vector meson in high energy reactions. It is clear that the polarization of the fragmenting quark can also be transferred to the vector meson $`V`$. This effect can be studied by measuring $`\rho _{00}^V`$, the $`00`$ component of the helicity density matrix of $`V`$ which is just the probability for $`V`$ to be in the helicity zero state. Data are available for $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation at the $`Z^0`$-pole at LEP. It shows that $`\rho _{00}^V`$ is much larger than $`1/3`$, the result expected in the unpolarized case, for vector mesons with high momentum fraction.

After the calculations, we found out that these data imply a significant polarization of the anti-quark that is created in the fragmentation and combines with the polarized $`q_f^0`$ to form the vector meson. The polarization has a simple relation to that of the $`q_f^0`$. It can be given by $`P(\overline{q})=\alpha P(q_f^0)`$, where $`\alpha 0.5`$ is a positive constant. Using this we get a good fit to the available data. (See Fig.3). It should be interesting to see whether this relation is also true in other processes where polarized $`q_f^0`$ is produced. We thus apply it to other reactions and made predictions for the spin alignments of vector mesons in these processes. They can be checked by future experiments.

## 3 Azimuthal asymmetry in the fragmentation of a transversely polarized quark

In the fragmentation of a transversely polarized quark, the products can have an azimuthal asymmetry. HERMES has published the first measurement in this connection. Their results show that such an effect indeed exists at the HERMES energies. What we would like to point out here is the following: The existence of such an azimuthal asymmetry in fragmentation is a direct consequence of Lund string fragmentation model due to conservation of energy-momentum and angular momentum. The picture was first used to polarization effects in by Andersson, Gustafson and Ingelman in 1979 to explain the unexpected $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ polarization in unpolarzed pp collisions. By applying it to the fragmentation of a transversely polarized quark, we obtain a significant azimuthal asymmetry. We are now working on the numerical calculations along this line in collaboration with the Lund group. Predictions for semi-inclusive deeply inelastic lepton-nucleon scattering and hadrons in high $`p_{}`$ jets in transversely polarized pp collisions will be available soon.

|  | Fig.3: Spin alignment of $`K^0`$ in $`e^+e^{}K^0X`$ at $`Z^0`$-pole. The data are taken from . |
| --- | --- |


text:
# Chandra Grating Observations of Seyfert 1 Galaxies

## 1. HETG Observation of NGC 5548

Our preliminary HETG spectra of NGC 5548 (exposure time $`80`$ ks) taken in 2000, February, are shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2(a) (see also George, Turner, Yaqoob 2001). The strongest features (apart from Fe K$`\alpha `$ – see Yaqoob et al. 2001) – are the Ovii He-like triplet and absorption features due to Ne and O $`Ly\alpha `$, and Ovii $`1s^23p^1P_1`$. See Table 1 for a comparison with Kaastra et al. (2000). Ovii (f) is particularly strong compared to (i) and (r), indicating a photoionization-dominated plasma. It is consistent with being at the systemic velocity but we measure a range of blueshifts for the absorption lines. These, and detailed analysis will be reported in McKernan et al. (in preparation).

## 2. Comparison of Soft X-ray Absorption and Emission Features

Detailed Chandra grating spectroscopy has now been published for five Seyfert 1 galaxies, as summarized in Table 1. Kaspi et al. (2001a) present the highest S/N grating data available for any AGN ($`900`$ ks on NGC 3783; Table 1 refers only to the shorter 53 ks observation). NGC 3227 was too weak for searching for narrow absorption/emission features; 3C 273 is bright but no absorption/emission features were detected (see George et al. 2001). Ton S 180 (Turner et al. 2001) and PG 1404 (Nandra et al. in preparation), both NLS1, show smooth soft X-ray continua with no narrow absorption/emission features. Our own analysis of archival data for Akn 564, another NLS1, shows a prominent, broad absorption feature at $`0.7`$ keV, resolved by the MEG.

In addition to NGC 5548, at least two other sources show multiple-velocity absorber systems (NGC 4051, Collinge et al. 2001; NGC 3783, Kaspi et al. 2001b, George et al. 2001). In all cases when absorption lines are detected they appear to be in outflow, except in MCG $``$6$``$30$``$15 (in which the lines are consistent with the galaxy systemic velocity). In all cases where emission lines are detected they appear to be consistent with the galaxy systemic velocity, except for NGC 4151, in which the emission is consistent with the small outflow velocity of the optical NLR. See Table 1 for details.

## 3. Soft X-ray Absorption Edges

Fig. 2(b) compares the Chandra MEG soft X-ray spectra, (binned at approximately ASCA resolution), of four AGN (NGC 3783, Mkn 509, NGC 5548, NGC 4051), with historical ASCA data. Given that these sources are time-variable, the AGN show similar features with Chandra and ASCA. Deep absorption edges are seen in NGC 3783 and Mkn 509. These could be due to Ovii and Oviii, but the lower energy edge could also be due to FeI (locked up in dust?) as suggested by Lee et al. (2001) for MCG $``$6$``$30$``$15. However, NGC 5548 and NGC 4051 have prominent soft excesses. If soft excess is from a larger region than the warm absorber, it could mask underlying absorption features. However, the depth of the edges depends on the physical conditions of the asborber, so the apparent absence of an edge should not be alarming.

## 4. Narrow Fe-K Line Components Resolved by Chandra (HETG)

As has been suspected for a long time the Fe-K lines in AGN are generally complex, being composed of a narrow component (originating far from the putative central black hole) and a broad component, originating from closer to the black hole (e.g. see Weaver et al. 1997; Yaqoob et al. 2001; Reeves et al. 2001). In a given observation of a given AGN only one of these may dominate, or they may both be comparable. Therefore it is important to account for when modeling the broad, relativistic disk lines. Some preliminary results for HETG measurements of the narrow line are given in Table 2. Four of these HETG narrow Fe-K lines are shown in Fig. 3, along with the overall, total Fe-K lines measured with non-contemporaneous ASCA observations. These are single-Gaussian fits and may be misleading if the overall line profile is complex. In fact the large EW for NGC 4151 may be due to inadequate modeling of the broad-line component and/or the continuum being particularly weak in this observation. Errors are 90% for one interesting parameter. We are extending this census of the Fe-K region using Chandra HETG (simultaneous with other missions whenever possible) to many other sources. Full results for NGC 3516, Mkn 509, NGC 4593, F 9, 3C 120, NGC 7314, and more, will be reported in the near future.

Table 1: Soft X-ray Grating Spectroscopy: Principal Features

Note: Fe K$`\alpha `$ line is not discussed in this table.

NGC 5548
LETG/HRC
Kaastra et al.
(2000)

NGC 5548

HETG/ACIS

George et al.

(in prep.)

NGC 3783

HETG/ACIS

Kaspi et al.

(2001)

NGC 4051

HETG/ACIS

Collinge et al.

(2001)

MCG

$``$6$``$30$``$15

HETG/ACIS

Lee et al.

(2001)

NGC 4151

HETG/ACIS

Ogle et al.

(2001)

Strongest absorption features: $`Ly\alpha `$ lines of N, O, Ne, Mg. Resonance lines of He-like O, Ne.

Strongest emission features: OVII triplet; forbidden line strongest.

Mean absorption-line velocity: $`280\pm 70`$ km/s.

Mean emission-line velocity: $`200\pm 130`$.

Strongest absorption features: Ne $`Ly\alpha `$, O $`Ly\alpha `$, OVII $`1s^23p^1P_1`$ (see Figs. 1 and 2(a)).

Strongest emission features: OVII triplet; forbidden line strongest.

Mean absorption-line velocity: difficult to measure but consistent with LETG/HRC results.

Mean emission-line velocity: consistent with galaxy systemic velocity.

Strongest absorption features: Many He and H-like states of O, Ne, Mg (Si weaker). Many states of Fe.

Strongest emission features: Several transitions of He and H-like states of O, Ne, Mg (Si very weak). The OVII triplet is the strongest emission feature (of which $`f`$ is strongest).

Mean absorption-line velocity: $`610\pm 130`$ km/s.

Mean emission-line velocity: consistent with galaxy systemic velocity.

Strongest absorption features: $`Ly\alpha `$ lines of Ne, Mg, Si.

Strongest emission features: He-like triplets of O, Ne. $`f`$ strongest in both cases.

Mean absorption-line velocity: Two systems; $`2340\pm 130`$ km/s and $`600\pm 130`$ km/s. Mean emission-line velocity: consistent with galaxy systemic velocity.

Strongest absorption features: $`Ly\alpha `$ lines of N, O; NeIX $`1s^21s2p`$; Fe L edge.

Strongest emission features: No strong lines.

Mean absorption-line velocity: $`\left|v\right|<200`$ km/s, consistent with galaxy systemic velocity.

Strongest absorption features: No obvious absorption features.

Strongest emission features: Spectrum dominated by NLR emission. Many lines; those with S/N $`>5`$ are $`Ly\alpha `$ of O, Ne, Mg; $`K\alpha `$ of Si. $`r`$ and $`f`$ of He-like Mg. $`f`$ of He-like O, Ne.

Mean emission-line velocity: $`120\pm 50`$ km/s, consistent with velocity of optical NLR.

Fig. 4 shows the true shape of the underlying broad Fe-K line in NGC 4151 (from the ASCA AO8 SIS data) when the narrow line is modeled using the Chandra HETG parameters. This would explain the puzzling result that, if the narrow line is not taken into account, the total line profile modeled with a relativistic disk implies a near face-on disk, yet all other indications are that the disk is viewed at much larger inclination angles in this source.

Acknowledgments We wish to thank B. McKernan, U. Padmanabhan, K. Weaver, Nandra, K., for their help with parts of this work. We acknowledge support from the following grants: NCC5-447, NAS8-39073 (TY), NAG5-7067, NAG5-7385 (TJT).

## References

Collinge, M. J., et al. 2001, ApJ, 557, 1

George, I., Turner, T. J., & Yaqoob, T. 2001, in proc. Mass Outflow in Active Galactic Nuclei, PASP, eds. D. S. Crenshaw, S. B. Kraemer, and I. M. George.

Kaastra, J. S., et al. 2000, A&A, 354, L83

Kaspi, S., et al. 2001a, in proc. JHU/LHEA Workshop on X-ray Emission from Accretion onto Black Holes, 20–23 June, 2001, Baltimore, MD, eds. T. Yaqoob, and J. Krolik (astro-ph/0109401).

Kaspi, S., et al. 2001b, ApJ, 554, 216

Lee, J., et al. 2001, ApJL, 554, L13

Ogle, P., et al. 2001, ApJL, 545, L81

Reeves, J. N., et al. 2001, ApJ, 559, 181

Turner, T. J., et al. 2001, ApJL, 548, L13

Weaver, K. A., et al. 1997, ApJ, 474, 675

Yaqoob, T., et al. 2001, ApJ, 546, 749


text:
# Soft interactions

## 1 Introduction

The description of soft hadronic multiparticle production within QCD is one of the long-standing, unsolved problems. In recent years progress has been made in understanding soft QCD processes in lattice calculations and also the modified leading-log approximation proved to be a remarkable powerful tool. In this article we focus on another method which is the investigation of predictions implied by unitarity and analyticity of scattering amplitudes and general features of gauge field theories. We will discuss basic concepts and predictions of general nature rather than one or several models in detail, emphasizing a pedagogical presentation of the underlying ideas. The aim is to supply the reader with a basic theoretical framework to understand the more specific contributions to this conference. More detailed discussions of soft interactions and related topics can be found in other reviews .

## 2 Regge amplitude

Cross sections and amplitudes at low energy are fairly well understood in terms of production and decay of a single or a few resonances, as shown in Fig. 1a. With increasing collision energy more and more resonances (with increasing mass and decay width) contribute to the total cross section. This seems to render any approach, which is based on summing all resonance contributions to extrapolate to high energy, infeasible. However, under certain conditions this summation can be carried out and the Reggeon amplitude is obtained .

Because of angular momentum conservation it is convenient to expand the scattering amplitude $`A(s,t)`$ in terms of partial waves $`a_l(s)`$ for fixed angular momentum $`l`$

$$A(s,t)=16\pi \underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(2l+1)a_l(s)P_l(\mathrm{cos}\theta ),$$
(1)
with $`\theta `$ being the scattering angle in c.m. frame and $`P_l`$ the Legendre functions of the first kind111For sake of clarity we omit here all spin-related complications.. For resonance exchange the amplitude is of the well known Breit-Wigner form $`a_l1/(sm_l^2+im_l\mathrm{\Gamma }_l)`$.

One of the important assumptions in Regge theory is that of maximum analyticity of the scattering amplitude, which holds in gauge field theories. The amplitude is an analytic function and has only physics-implied singularities. Thus, if the amplitude is completely known for a given scattering process, then the amplitudes for all other channels, which are related to the former one by crossing, can be obtained by analytic continuation of this amplitude. An example for this is given in Fig. 1b. After crossing from the $`s`$-channel to the $`t`$-channel Eq. (1) reads

$$A(s,t)=16\pi \underset{l}{}(2l+1)a_l(t)P_l(z_t),z_t=\mathrm{cos}\theta _t=\frac{2s}{ts_0}+1.$$
(2)
The scale $`s_0`$ is related to the masses of the particles ($`s_01`$GeV2). The partial wave amplitude describes now the exchange of a particle with angular momentum $`l`$ in the $`t`$-channel $`a_l(t)1/(tm_l^2+im_l\mathrm{\Gamma }_l)`$.

Using Cauchy’s theorem the sum (2) is re-written as integral (Sommerfeld-Watson transformation)

$$A(s,t)=\underset{\tau =\pm 1}{}\frac{16\pi }{2i}_{C_1}𝑑l(2l+1)\left(\frac{1+\tau e^{i\pi l}}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi l)}\right)a_l(t)P_l(z_t),\tau =\pm 1,$$
(3)
where the signature $`\tau =\pm 1`$ separates the sum into even and odd integer angular momenta. The splitting of the partial sum into positive and negative signature contributions is needed to ensure convergence of the integral. The integration contour runs along both sides of the positive $`\mathrm{}e\{l\}`$ axis in the complex $`l`$ plane (see Fig. 2a).

In (3) the partial wave amplitude has to be extended to continuous values of $`l`$. This is done by employing the experimentally established, approximate relation between resonance mass and total angular momentum $`m_l^2=al+m_0^2`$ with $`a`$ and $`m_0`$ being constants specific to the group of resonances. Fig. 2 shows an example for meson resonances. From the structure of the partial wave amplitude

$$a_l\frac{1}{t^2m_l^2}=\frac{1}{tm_0^2al}\frac{1}{lt/a+m_0^2/a}=\frac{1}{l\alpha (t)}$$
(4)
follows that there is a singularity for $`l=\alpha (t)`$ with $`\alpha (t)=(tm_0^2)/a`$. The function $`\alpha (t)`$, called Regge trajectory, is in general a nonlinear complex function of $`t`$ and related to the quantum numbers of the hadrons whose mass-angular momentum relation it describes.

Assuming that $`l=\alpha (t)`$ is the only singularity due to $`a_l(t)`$ we can displace the integration contour in Fig. 2a from $`C_1`$ to $`C_2`$. The behaviour of the integrand leads to a vanishing contribution from the semi-circle at infinity. Neglecting the contribution from $`\mathrm{}m\{l\}=1/2`$ all that is left is the contribution of the pole at $`l=\alpha (t)`$. Thus the final amplitude can be written as

$$A(s,t)=\frac{1+\tau e^{i\pi \alpha (t)}}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi \alpha (t))}\beta (t)P_{\alpha (t)}(z_t),$$
(5)
with $`\beta (t)`$ standing for the residue and other unimportant factors.

Finally, the Regge amplitude is obtained by going to the high-energy limit $`ss_0`$

$$P_{\alpha _k(t)}\left(\frac{2s}{ts_0}1\right)\stackrel{s\mathrm{}}{}\left(\frac{s}{s_0}\right)^{\alpha _k(t)}$$
(6)
and reads

$$A(s,t)=\underset{k}{}\eta (\alpha _k(t))\beta _k(t)\left(\frac{s}{s_0}\right)^{\alpha _k(t)}.$$
(7)
The index $`k`$ represents the sum over all contributing Regge trajectories and $`\eta `$ is the signature factor of the Regge trajectory $`k`$

$$\eta (\alpha _k(t))=\frac{1+\tau e^{i\pi \alpha _k(t)}}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi \alpha _k(t))}.$$
(8)
A single term in the sum (7) describes the contribution of an infinite number of particles exchanged in the $`t`$-channel. Each of these groups of particles is represented in the amplitude by a quasi-particle, called reggeon, with the same quantum numbers.

## 3 Cross section phenomenology

### 3.1 Regge-based fits

Knowing the Regge trajectories from the measured masses of mesons and baryons, Eq. (7) can be used to predict the energy-dependence of elastic and total cross sections

$$\frac{d\sigma _{\mathrm{ela}}}{dt}=\frac{1}{16\pi s^2}\left|A(s,t)\right|^2,\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}=\frac{1}{s}\mathrm{}m\left(A(s,t=0)\right).$$
(9)
The last relation employs the optical theorem and follows from unitarity222The masses of the scattering particles are neglected.. Using furthermore the parametrization $`\beta ^2(t)=g^2\mathrm{exp}\{B_0t\}`$ and considering only the highest Regge trajectory, one gets with $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\alpha (0)1`$

$`\sigma _{\mathrm{ela}}`$ $`=`$ $`(1+\rho ^2){\displaystyle \frac{g^2}{16\pi }}\left({\displaystyle \frac{s}{s_0}}\right)^{2\mathrm{\Delta }}\mathrm{exp}\left\{B_{\mathrm{ela}}t\right\},\rho ={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}eA(s,t)}{\mathrm{}mA(s,t)}}|_{t=0}`$
$`\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}`$ $`=`$ $`g\left({\displaystyle \frac{s}{s_0}}\right)^\mathrm{\Delta },B_{\mathrm{ela}}=B_0+2\alpha ^{}(0)\mathrm{ln}s`$ (10)
There are several shortcomings of the amplitude (7). The total cross section is predicted to have the energy dependence $`\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}s^\mathrm{\Delta }`$. The intercept of the highest known Regge trajectory is about $`\alpha (0)0.5`$. The experimentally observed rise of the cross sections at high energy has lead Pomeranchuk to propose the existence of a pole with $`\alpha (0)\stackrel{>}{}1`$ which corresponds to the exchange of objects with vacuum quantum numbers. The corresponding quasi-particle is called the pomeron. Its trajectory should be related to glueballs instead of mesons or baryons. So far the existence of glueballs could not be confirmed experimentally.

Another problem of Eq. (7) is the violation of unitarity at high energy. This is most obvious by noting that the elastic cross section is predicted to finally exceed the total one or that the Froissart-Martin bound $`\sigma ^{\mathrm{tot}}<c\mathrm{ln}^2s`$ is violated.

Despite of these shortcomings, Regge pole motivated parametrizations are rather successful in predicting high-energy cross sections in the currently accessible energy range .

For example, Fig. 3a shows the prediction by Donnachie and Landshoff  together with $`pp`$ and $`p\overline{p}`$ data. In Fig. 3b we show the energy dependence of the elastic slope parameter, $`B_{\mathrm{ela}}`$, which is also in agreement with the simple Regge pole expectation of a logarithmic energy dependence (see Eq. (10)).

### 3.2 Multi-pomeron models

As already mentioned, the pomeron exchange amplitude violates unitarity. Although this doesn’t seem to be a serious problem at current collider energies, it indicates an inconsistency of this model.

The simplest way of overcoming this problem without abandoning Regge theory altogether is the introduction of multiple pomeron exchanges in a single scattering process. Assuming that large momentum transfers are suppressed by the dynamics of the strong interaction, as it is the case in QCD, multi-pomeron exchange can be described on the basis of Gribov’s Reggeon field theory (RFT) . Then the total amplitude can be written as the sum of $`n`$-pomeron exchange amplitudes $`A^{(n)}(s,t)`$. For each $`n`$-pomeron graph one can define a theoretical “total” cross section applying the optical theorem to the corresponding $`n`$-pomeron amplitude

$$\sigma ^{(n)}=(1)^{n+1}\frac{1}{s}\mathrm{}m\left(A^{(n)}\right),\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}=\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1)^{n+1}\sigma ^{(n)}.$$
(11)
Here the alternating sign has been introduced by definition to keep all partial cross sections $`\sigma ^{(n)}`$ positive.

As a simplified model we consider only the first two graphs shown in Fig. 4, assuming $`\sigma ^{(n)}4\sigma ^{(2)}<\sigma ^{(1)}`$ with $`n>2`$.

Then, the total cross section reads $`\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}=\sigma ^{(1)}\sigma ^{(2)}`$, where $`\sigma ^{(1)}`$ and $`\sigma ^{(2)}`$ are the cross sections of the one- and two-pomeron exchange graphs, respectively. The energy-dependence of the two-pomeron cross section is directly linked to that of $`\sigma ^{(1)}s^\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and turns out to be $`\sigma ^{(2)}s^{2\mathrm{\Delta }}`$. The two-pomeron cross section grows faster with energy than the one-pomeron cross section. This leads to a weaker energy-dependence of the total cross section than in the single-pomeron exchange model.

One particular realization of the multi-pomeron exchange is the eikonal model using the pomeron amplitude as eikonal function. In general, predictions of such models are in good agreement with cross section data and are nearly indistinguishable from the single-pomeron exchange model in the energy range up to several TeV c.m.s. energy.

### 3.3 Photon-induced hadronic interactions

The generalization to photon-induced interactions is straight-forward in terms of the generalized vector dominance model (GVDM) . The photon is considered as a superposition of two types of states, a bare photon and hadronic fluctuations. With the probability of the order of the fine structure constant $`\alpha _{\mathrm{em}}`$ the photon can be found in a fluctuation which interacts like a hadron. Since the cross section of the bare photon is small it can be neglected in most applications. In the proton rest frame, the life time $`t_f`$ of the hadronic fluctuation with momentum $`k`$ and mass $`M`$ is much larger than the typical interaction time $`t_i`$

$$t_f\frac{1}{\sqrt{M^2+k^2}\sqrt{Q^2+k^2}}\frac{2k}{M^2+Q^2},$$
(12)
where $`Q^2`$ denotes the photon virtuality. The hadronic amplitudes for the scattering of longitudinally ($`L`$) and transversely ($`T`$) polarized photons are written as

$`A_{\gamma hX}^{(T)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{V}{}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{e}{f_V}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{m_V^2}{m_V^2q^2i\mathrm{\Gamma }_Vm_V}}A_{VhX}^{(T)}(s,t)`$ (13)
$`A_{\gamma hX}^{(L)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{V}{}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{e}{f_V}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{q^2\xi _V}{m_V^2}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_V^2}{m_V^2q^2i\mathrm{\Gamma }_Vm_V}}A_{VhX}^{(T)}(s,t),`$ (14)
with $`q`$, $`m_V`$, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_V`$ being the four-momentum of the incoming photon and the mass and the decay width of the vector meson $`V`$, respectively. $`A_{VhX}^{(T)}`$ is the amplitude for the scattering of the transversely polarized vector meson $`V`$ off the hadron $`h`$. The parameter $`\xi _V`$ is introduced to allow for different cross sections of transversely and longitudinally polarized vector mesons.

The GVDM is very successful in predicting the total and and quasi-elastic vector meson photoproduction cross sections . However, the $`s`$-dependence of the $`\gamma p`$ and $`\gamma \gamma `$ cross sections changes considerably from real to virtual photons. This cannot be understood on the basis of GVDM alone. Many alternative models have been published. The most promising calculations combine within the color-dipole framework ideas of GVDM with perturbative QCD calculations, obtaining a reasonable description of the measurements .

### 3.4 Impact parameter picture of high-energy scattering

The impact parameter picture of high-energy scattering is very useful for discussing effects related to the wave character of the scattering particles. Its meaning becomes most transparent by considering again the partial wave expansion of the scattering amplitude

$$A(s,t)=16\pi \underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(2l+1)a_l(s)P_l(\mathrm{cos}\theta ).$$
(15)
In the classical (geometrical) description, the $`l`$th term on the r.h.s. of Eq. (15) with angular momentum $`l`$ is assumed to correspond to the interaction of two particles with an impact parameter $`\stackrel{}{b}`$ satisfying $`l=|\stackrel{}{b}|k`$. The impact parameter vector $`\stackrel{}{b}`$ is by definition perpendicular to the momentum $`\stackrel{}{k}`$ of the incoming particle. At high energy the sum can be approximated by the integral

$$A(s,t)=16\pi _0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑l(2l+1)a_l(s)P_l(\mathrm{cos}\theta ),$$
(16)
using for $`a_l(s)`$ the analytic continuation in $`l`$. Taking the limit $`P_l(\mathrm{cos}\theta )\stackrel{l\mathrm{}}{}J_0\left[(2l+1)\mathrm{sin}(\theta /2)\right]`$ and substituting

$$J_0(z)=\frac{1}{2\pi }_0^{2\pi }𝑑\phi e^{iz\mathrm{cos}\phi },\stackrel{}{b}\stackrel{}{q}=\stackrel{}{b}\stackrel{}{q}_{}=bq_{}\mathrm{cos}\phi ,$$
(17)
Eq. (16) becomes

$$A(s,t)=4sd^2\stackrel{}{b}a(s,\stackrel{}{b})e^{i\stackrel{}{q}_{}\stackrel{}{b}},\mathrm{with}a(s,\stackrel{}{b})=a_l(s)|_{l=kB}.$$
(18)
The impact parameter amplitude $`a(s,\stackrel{}{b})`$ is the Fourier transform of the elastic scattering amplitude. Furthermore, in analogy to geometrical optics, the function $`a(s,\stackrel{}{b})`$ can be interpreted as the density function of sources of scattered waves producing interference patterns. The total and elastic cross sections are given by

$$\sigma _{\mathrm{ela}}(s)=4d^2\stackrel{}{b}|a(s,\stackrel{}{b})|^2,\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}(s)=4d^2\stackrel{}{b}\mathrm{}m(a(s,\stackrel{}{b})).$$
(19)
For an amplitude with exponential $`t`$-dependence $`A(s,t)is\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}\mathrm{exp}\{\frac{1}{2}B_{\mathrm{ela}}t\}`$ the corresponding impact parameter amplitude reads

$$a(s,\stackrel{}{b})=i\frac{\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}}{8\pi B_{\mathrm{ela}}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\stackrel{}{b}^2}{2B_{\mathrm{ela}}}\right).$$
(20)
The width of the amplitude in $`\stackrel{}{b}`$-space (i.e. the “gray” area) is given by the $`t`$-slope of the elastic cross section and, according to Eq. (10), grows logarithmically with $`s`$. This can also be understood in terms of partons in a hadron as shown in Fig. 5. Each parton splitting involves a transverse momentum transfer which corresponds to a small displacement in impact parameter. The total displacement of a parton follows from the number of steps $`N`$ of its random walk, $`R^2\mathrm{\Delta }bN(\mathrm{\Delta }p_{})^1\mathrm{ln}s`$. This picture also readily explains why the elastic slope of hard processes has a much weaker energy dependence: the displacement in $`\stackrel{}{b}`$ is much smaller because of the larger $`\mathrm{\Delta }p_{}`$.

From the unitarity constraint $`|a(s,\stackrel{}{b})|<1`$ one gets as high-energy limit $`\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}<c\mathrm{ln}^2s`$ with $`c`$ being a constant. The special case of the black disk limit (e.g. maximum absorption) corresponds to $`a(s,\stackrel{}{b})=i/2`$ for $`b<R`$ and $`a(s,\stackrel{}{b})=0`$ otherwise. Then the inelastic cross section (cross section for absorption) is given by the geometrical size of the disk $`\sigma _{\mathrm{ine}}=\pi R^2`$ whereas the total cross section is twice the disk size, $`\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}=2\pi R^2`$. This is a result of unitarity: absorption gives rise to elastic scattering $`\sigma _{\mathrm{ela}}=\pi R^2=\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}/2`$.

## 4 Multiparticle production

### 4.1 Unitarity and cuts

To link particle production to elastic scattering amplitudes one can use the optical theorem. In terms of Feynman diagrams a particle propagator collapses to an external on-shell particle line if its imaginary part is taken

$$\mathrm{}m\left(\frac{1}{p^2m^2iϵ}\right)=\pi \delta (p^2m^2).$$
(21)
Therefore taking the discontinuity (i.e. the imaginary part) of a propagator is commonly referred to as “cutting”. This is also the reason why, up to kinematical factors, the discontinuity of elastic amplitude is equal to the squared matrix element describing particle production, as sketched in Fig. 6.

One particular application is the discussion of the topologies of cut pomeron and reggeon amplitudes in the limit of large numbers of colors and flavours in QCD . As depicted in Fig. 7 the dominant final state contributions are a two- and one-string configurations.

### 4.2 Abramovski-Gribov-Kancheli cutting rules

In general, there are many possibilities of cutting diagrams involving multiple pomerons. The dominant contribution of the different cut configurations to the total discontinuity can be calculated with the Abramovski-Gribov-Kancheli (AGK) cutting rules :
(i) The dominant contributions are given by cut configurations where the cut involves all intermediate particle states of a pomeron (a contribution due to a partially cut pomeron is sub-leading).
(ii) For an $`n`$-pomeron exchange graph, the contribution to the discontinuity with $`\nu `$ cut pomeron propagators is $`B_\nu ^n2\mathrm{}m\left(A^{(n)}\right)`$. Here, $`A^{(n)}`$ denotes the $`n`$-pomeron amplitude and $`\nu `$ is restricted to $`0\nu n`$. The combinatorial factors (AGK weights) $`B_\nu ^n`$ are

$$B_\nu ^n=\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill (1)^{\nu 1}\frac{n!}{\nu !\left(n\nu \right)!}2^{n1}& :& \nu 1\hfill \\ & & \\ \hfill 12^{n1}& :& \nu =0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(22)
(iii) The coefficients $`B_\nu ^n`$ satisfy $`_{\nu =0}^nB_\nu ^n=1`$, which means that all leading contributions to the total discontinuity are included.

For example, there are three leading cuts of the two-pomeron graph (Fig. 4b): the diffractive cut with the weight -1 (Fig. 8a), the one-pomeron cut with the weight 4 (Fig. 8b), and the two-pomeron cut with the weight -2 (Fig. 8c).

The cross sections for the different final states of the two-pomeron exchange graph are (a) diffractive cut: $`\sigma _{\mathrm{diff}}=\sigma ^{(2)}`$, (b) one-pomeron cut: $`\sigma _1=4\sigma ^{(2)}`$, and (c) two-pomeron cut: $`\sigma _2=2\sigma ^{(2)}`$, see Fig. 9. Note that the diffractive cut of the two-pomeron graph gets a negative AGK weight, hence giving in total a positive, experimentally observable cross section. However, the cross section for the one-pomeron cut of the two-pomeron graph is negative. Since the one-pomeron cut of the one-pomeron graph has the same inelastic final state as the one-pomeron cut of the two-pomeron graph (Fig. 9b), one can sum both contributions to obtain a positive cross section.

Let’s consider again the example of the one- and and two-pomeron graphs. Concerning the topologies of the final state particles, the total cross section is built up of the sum of the partial cross sections of the one- and two-pomeron exchange graphs:

(i) one-pomeron cut $`\sigma _1=\sigma ^{(1)}4\sigma ^{(2)}`$, (ii) two-pomeron cut $`\sigma _2=2\sigma ^{(2)}`$, and (iii) diffractive cut of the two-pomeron graph $`\sigma _{\mathrm{diff}}=\sigma ^{(2)}`$.

The particle density in pseudorapidity due to a one-pomeron cut is assumed to be almost energy independent (which is true for longitudinal phase space models) and is denoted by $`dN_1/d\eta `$. Provided the two-pomeron cut gives two times the particle yield as compared to the one-pomeron cut (in central pseudorapidity region, see Fig. 9), the inclusive inelastic charged particle cross section is given by

$$\frac{d\sigma _{\mathrm{ch}}}{d\eta }|_{\eta 0}=1\times \sigma _1\frac{dN_1}{d\eta }+2\times \sigma _2\frac{dN_1}{d\eta }+0\times \sigma _{\mathrm{diff}}\frac{dN_1}{d\eta }=\sigma ^{(1)}\frac{dN_1}{d\eta }.$$
(23)
Due to the topology of diffractive final states, almost no particles are produced in the central region in the case of a diffractive cut. Note that only the one-pomeron graph determines the inclusive particle cross section in the central region (AGK cancellation).

On the other hand, the inclusive charged particle density follows from

$$\frac{dn_{\mathrm{ch}}}{d\eta }|_{\eta 0}=\frac{\sigma ^{(1)}}{\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}}\frac{dN_1}{d\eta }|_{\eta 0}\frac{\sigma ^{(1)}}{\sigma ^{(1)}\sigma ^{(2)}}\frac{dN_1}{d\eta }|_{\eta 0}.$$
(24)
Eq. (24) allows us to understand the observed behaviour of $`\rho (0)=dn_{\mathrm{ch}}/d\eta `$ in $`pp`$ and $`p\overline{p}`$ collisions. With $`\sigma ^{(1)}s^\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}s^{0.08}`$, one gets a power-law increase of the central particle density. This is confirmed by experiment: $`\rho (0)0.74s^{0.105}`$.

Since the two-pomeron graph has a cross section which increases faster with energy than the cross section of one-pomeron graph, the model predicts also an increase of the multiplicity fluctuations with increasing collision energy. In a model without geometric scaling this leads to violation of KNO scaling at high energies. Furthermore, due to the characteristic structure of the one- and two-pomeron cuts, strong long-range correlations in pseudorapidity are naturally explained. For a detailed discussion, see for example  and Refs. therein.

Finally, as a representative example, model predictions for the multiplicity distribution and the pseudorapidity distribution (calculated with the Phojet event generator) are compared with collider data in Fig. 10.

## 5 Summary

Regge theory, AGK cutting rules, QCD in the limit of large numbers of colors and flavours, and the geometrical interpretation of high-energy scattering prove very useful in understanding the basic properties of cross sections and multiparticle production. They are some of the tools available today to study soft processes theoretically. Many models combine them to obtain a detailed description of soft processes .

However we are far from being able to reliably calculate predictions for most soft production processes. All approaches or models discussed here have severe shortcomings. For example, Regge theory does not predict transverse momentum-related quantities, and most models implement AGK cutting rules without energy-momentum conservation, to name but a few. Furthermore the rather large number of free parameters limits the predictive power of calculations.

Acknowledgements: This work is supported by U.S. Department of Energy grant DE-FG02 91ER 40626. The author is grateful to L. Frankfurt, T.K. Gaisser, J. Ranft, S. Roesler, T. Stanev, and M. Strikman for many interesting discussions.