Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userPathologies of the KMR prescriptions for unintegrated PDFs: Which prescription should be preferred?
60
0
0.0
(
0
)
Authors
Benjamin Guiot
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
We discuss the different Kimber-Martin-Ryskin (KMR) prescriptions for unintegrated parton distribution functions (uPDFs). We show that the strong-ordering (SO) and the angular-ordering (AO) cut-offs lead to strong discrepancies between the obtained cross sections. While the result obtained with the AO cut-off overestimates the heavy-flavor cross section by about a factor 3, the SO cut-off gives the correct answer. We also solve the issue of the KMR uPDFs definitions mentioned by Golec-Biernat and Stasto, and show that, in the case of the AO cut-off, the KMR uPDFs are ill-defined.
rate research
Read More
We discuss the unintegrated parton distribution functions (UPDFs) introduced by Kimber, Martin and Ryskin (KMR), which are frequently used in phenomenological analyses of hard processes with transverse momenta of partons taken into account. We demonstrate numerically that the commonly used differential definition of the UPDFs leads to erroneous results for large transverse momenta. We identify the reason for that, being the use of the ordinary PDFs instead of the cutoff dependent distribution functions. We show that in phenomenological applications, the integral definition of the UPDFs with the ordinary PDFs can be used.
In this work we present, for the first time, the non-perturbative renormalization for the unpolarized, helicity and transversity quasi-PDFs, in an RI scheme. The proposed prescription addresses simultaneously all aspects of renormalization: logarithmic divergences, finite renormalization as well as the linear divergence which is present in the matrix elements of fermion operators with Wilson lines. Furthermore, for the case of the unpolarized quasi-PDFs, we describe how to eliminate the unwanted mixing with the twist-3 scalar operator. We utilize perturbation theory for the one-loop conversion factor that brings the renormalization functions to the MS-scheme at a scale of 2 GeV. We also explain how to improve the estimates on the renormalization functions by eliminating lattice artifacts. The latter can be computed in one-loop perturbation theory and to all orders in the lattice spacing. We apply the methodology for the renormalization to an ensemble of twisted mass fermions with Nf=2+1+1 dynamical light quarks, and a pion mass of around 375 MeV.
Intuitively, obedience -- following the order that a human gives -- seems like a good property for a robot to have. But, we humans are not perfect and we may give orders that are not best aligned to our preferences. We show that when a human is not perfectly rational then a robot that tries to infer and act according to the humans underlying preferences can always perform better than a robot that simply follows the humans literal order. Thus, there is a tradeoff between the obedience of a robot and the value it can attain for its owner. We investigate how this tradeoff is impacted by the way the robot infers the humans preferences, showing that some methods err more on the side of obedience than others. We then analyze how performance degrades when the robot has a misspecified model of the features that the human cares about or the level of rationality of the human. Finally, we study how robots can start detecting such model misspecification. Overall, our work suggests that there might be a middle ground in which robots intelligently decide when to obey human orders, but err on the side of obedience.
In a recent Letter [G. Chiribella et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 120501 (2007)], four protocols were proposed to secretly transmit a reference frame. Here We point out that in these protocols an eavesdropper can change the transmitted reference frame without being detected, which means the consistency of the shared reference frames should be reexamined. The way to check the above consistency is discussed. It is shown that this problem is quite different from that in previous protocols of quantum cryptography.
What are the differences and similarities between atomic-physics studies at different peoples (Han, Kazak and Uygur perples in the same university) across Xinjiang (a far-west district in PR China which is a border for previous USSR and Kazak)? In this short report we focus on issues relating to the learning style of different-people students to pass the atomic physics course in physics department even the quantum mechanics course has not been taken before.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
