ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
Fundamental to much work in small-x QCD is a k_T-factorization formula. Normal expectations in theoretical physics are that when such a result is used, citations should be given to where the formula is justified. We demonstrate by examining the chains of citations back from current work that violations of this expectation are widespread, to the extent that following the citation chains, we do not find a proof or other justification of the formula. This shows a substantial deficit in the reproducibility of a phenomenologically important area of research. Since the published formulae differ in normalization, we test them by making a derivation in a simple model that obeys the assumptions that are stated in the literature to be the basis of k_T-factorization in the small-$x$ regime. We find that we disagree with two of the standard normalizations.
In the $k_T$-factorization for exclusive processes, the nontrivial $k_T$-dependence of perturbative coefficients, or hard parts, is obtained by taking off-shell partons. This brings up the question of whether the $k_T$-factorization is gauge invarian
We discuss the inclusive production of jets in the central region of rapidity in the context of k_T-factorization at next-to-leading order (NLO). Calculations are performed in the Regge limit making use of the NLO BFKL results. We introduce a jet con
We compare the theoretical status and the numerical predictions of two approaches for heavy quark production in the high energy hadron collisions, namely the conventional LO parton model with collinear approximation and $k_T$-factorization approach.
We analyze two consequences of the relationship between collinear factorization and $k_t$-factorization. First, we show that the $k_t$-factorization gives a fundamental justification for the choice of the hard scale $Q^2$ done in the collinear factor
It has been pointed out that the recent BaBar data on the pi gamma^* -> gamma transition form factor F_{pi gamma}(Q^2) at low (high) momentum transfer squared Q^2 indicate an asymptotic (flat) pion distribution amplitude. These seemingly contradictor