230 likes | 372 Views
. The Hadronic Contribution to ( g – 2) . Andreas Höcker Laboratoire de l’Accélérateur Linéaire, Orsay. ICHEP 2004 August 16 - 22, 2004, Beijing, China. . . . hadrons. hoecker@lal.in2p3.fr. Magnetic Anomaly. QED. Schwinger 1948 (Nobel price 1965). QED Prediction:
E N D
The Hadronic Contribution to (g–2) Andreas Höcker Laboratoire de l’Accélérateur Linéaire, Orsay ICHEP 2004 August 16 - 22, 2004, Beijing, China hadrons hoecker@lal.in2p3.fr A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
Magnetic Anomaly QED Schwinger 1948 (Nobel price 1965) QED Prediction: Computed up to 4th order [Kinoshita et al.] (5th order estimated [Mohr, Taylor]) Kinoshita-Nio, hep-ph/0402206 corrected K’04 QED Hadronic Weak SUSY... ... or other new physics ? [see talk by A. Vainstein] A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
Why Do We Need to Know it so Precisely? Experimental progress on precision of (g–2) Outperforms theory pre-cision on hadronic contribution BNL (2004) A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
The Muonic (g–2) Contributions to the Standard Model (SM) Prediction: Dominant uncertainty from lowest order hadronic piece. Cannot be calculated from QCD (“first principles”) – but:we can use experiment (!) The Situation 1995 had ”Dispersion relation“, uses unitarity (optical theoreme) and analyticity had see backup slides ! A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
Improved Determination of the Hadronic Contribution to (g–2) and (MZ ) 2 Eidelman-Jegerlehner’95, Z.Phys. C67 (1995) 585 • Since 1995, improved determi-nation of the dispersion integral: • better data • extended use of QCD • Inclusion of precise data using SU(2) (CVC) Alemany-Davier-Höcker’97, Narison’01, Trocóniz-Ynduráin’01, + later works • Extended use of (dominantly) perturbative QCD Martin-Zeppenfeld’95, Davier-Höcker’97, Kühn-Steinhauser’98, Erler’98, + others Improvement in 4 Steps: • Theoretical constraints from QCD sum rules and use of Adler function Groote-Körner-Schilcher-Nasrallah’98, Davier-Höcker’98, Martin-Outhwaite-Ryskin’00, Cvetič-Lee-Schmidt’01, Jegerlehner et al’00, Dorokhov’04 + others See submitted abstract 6-0842 • Better data for the e+e– +– cross section (!) CMD-2’02, KLOE’04 A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
The Role of Data through CVC – SU(2) W: I=1 &V,A CVC: I=1 &V : I=0,1 &V e+ hadrons W e– hadrons Hadronic physics factorizes inSpectral Functions : fundamental ingredient relating long distance (resonances) to short distance description (QCD) Isospin symmetry connects I=1 e+e– cross section to vectorspectral functions: branching fractionsmass spectrum kinematic factor (PS) A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
SU(2) Breaking Electromagnetism does not respect isospin and hence we have to consider isospin breaking when dealing with an experimental precision of 0.5% • Corrections for SU(2) breaking applied to data for dominant +– contribution: • Electroweak radiative corrections: • dominant contribution from short distance correction SEW to effective 4-fermion coupling (1 + 3(m)/4)(1+2Q)log(MZ /m) • subleading corrections calculated and small • long distance radiative correction GEM(s) calculated [ add FSR to the bare cross section in order to obtain – + () ] • Charged/neutral mass splitting: • m– m0leads to phase space (cross sec.) and width (FF) corrections • - mixing (EM – + decay)corrected using FF model • intrinsicm– m0 and – 0 [not corrected so far – can be measured] • Electromagnetic decays, like: , , , l+l – • Quark mass difference mu md generating “second class currents” (negligible) Marciano-Sirlin’ 88 Braaten-Li’ 90 Cirigliano-Ecker-Neufeld’ 02 Alemany-Davier-Höcker’ 97, Czyż-Kühn’ 01 A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
Mass Dependence of SU(2) Breaking Multiplicative SU(2) corrections applied to – – 0 spectral function: not shown: short distance correction Only 3 and EW short-distance corrections applied to 4 spectral functions A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
e+e– Radiative Corrections Multiple radiative corrections are applied on measured e+e– cross sections • Situation often unclear: whether or not and if - which corrections were applied • Vacuum polarization (VP) in the photon propagator: • leptonic VP in general corrected for • hadronic VP correction not applied, but for CMD-2 (in principle: iterative proc.) • Initial state radiation (ISR) • corrected by experiments • Final state radiation (FSR) [we need e+e– hadrons () in dispersion integral] • usually, experiments obtain bare cross section so that FSR has to be added “by hand”; done for CMD-2, (supposedly) not done for others A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
2002/2003 Analyses of ahad • Motivation for new work: • New high precision e+e– results (0.6% sys. error) around from CMD-2 (Novosibirsk) • New results from ALEPH using full LEP1 statistics • New R results from BES between 2 and 5 GeV • New theoretical analysis of SU(2) breaking CMD-2, PL B527, 161 (2002) ALEPH, CONF 2002-19 BES, PRL 84 594 (2000); PRL 88, 101802 (2002) Cirigliano-Ecker-Neufeld, JHEP 0208 (2002) 002 • Outline of the 2002/2003 analyses: • Include all new Novisibirsk (CMD-2, SND) and ALEPH data • Apply (revisited) SU(2)-breaking corrections to data • Identify application/non-application of radiative corrections • Recompute all exclusive, inclusive and QCD contributions to dispersion integral; revisit threshold contribution and resonances • Results, comparisons, discussions... Davier-Eidelman-Höcker-Zhang Eur.Phys.J. C27 (2003) 497; C31 (2003) 503 Hagiwara-Martin-Nomura-Teubner, Phys.Rev. D69 (2004) 093003 (no data) Jegerlehner, hep-ph/0312372 (no ) Troconiz-Yndurain, hep-ph/0402285 A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
Comparing e+e– +– and –0 Correct data for missing - mixing (taken from BW fit) and all other SU(2)-breaking sources Remarkable agreement But: not good enough... ... A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
The Problem Relative difference between and e+e– data: z o o m zoom A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
New Precise e+e–+– Data from KLOE Using the „Radiative Return“ KLOE Collaboration, hep-ex/0407048 Overall: fair agreement with CMD-2 Some discrepancy on peak and above ... ... A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
The Problem (revisited) Correction for ± –0 mass (~2.3 ± 0.8 MeV) and width (~2.9 MeV) splitting applied Davier, hep-ex/0312064 Jegerlehner, hep-ph/0312372 Relative difference between and e+e– data: zoom z o o m A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
Evaluating the Dispersion Integral Agreement bet-ween Data (BES) and pQCD (within correlated systematic errors) use data Better agreement between exclusive and inclusive (2) data than in 1997-1998 analyses use QCD use QCD A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
Results: the Compilation (including KLOE) Contributions to ahad[in 10–10]from the different energy domains: A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
Discussion • The problem of the + – contribution : • Experimental situation: • new, precise KLOE results in approximate agreement with latest CMD-2 data • data without m() and () corr. in strong disagreement with both data sets • ALEPH, CLEO and OPAL spectral functions in good agreement within errors • Concerning the line shape discrepancy: • SU(2) corrections: basic contributions identified and stable since long; overall correction applied to is (– 2.2 ± 0.5)%, dominated by uncontroversial short distance piece; additional long-distance corrections found to be small • lineshape correctionsimproves, but cannot correct difference above 0.7 GeV2 The fair agreement between KLOE and CMD-2 devalidates the use of data until a better understanding of the discrepancies is achieved A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
Preliminary Results Czarnecki-Marsiano-Vainshtein + others Weak contribution : aweak = +(15.4 ± 0.3) 10–10 Hadronic contribution from higher order : ahad [(/)3]= – (10.0 ± 0.6) 10–10 Hadronic contribution from LBL scattering: ahad [LBL]= + (12.0 ± 3.5) 10–10 a SMinclu-ding: Knecht-Nyffeler,Phys.Rev.Lett. 88 (2002) 071802 Melnikov-Vainshtein, hep-ph/0312226 BNL E821 (2004): aexp = (11 659 208.0 5.8) 1010 not yet published not yet published Observed Difference with Experiment: preliminary A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
Conclusions and Perspectives • Hadronic vacuum polarization is dominant systematics for SM prediction of the muon g–2 • New data from KLOE in fair agreement with CMD-2 with a (mostly) independent technique • Discrepancy with data (ALEPH & CLEO & OPAL) confirmed • Until /e+e– puzzle is solved, we use only e+e– data in dispersion integral • We find that the SM prediction differs by 2.7 [e+e–] from experiment (BNL 2004) • Future experimental input expected from: • New CMD-2 results forthcoming, especially at low and large +–masses • BABAR ISR: +–spectral function over full mass range, multihadron channels (2+2– and +–0 already available [see talk by E. Solodov, this session]) • New proposal submitted by E821 Collaboration aiming at precision of 2.4 10–10 • Ambitious muon g–2 project at J-PARC, Japan, aiming at (0.1 – 0.2) (BNL-E821) A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
Backup Slides A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
Hadronic Vacuum Polarization Define: photon vacuum polarization function (q2) Ward identities: only vacuum polarization modifies electron charge with: Leptonic lep(s) calculable in QED. However, quark loops are modified by long-distance hadronic physics, cannot (yet) be calculated within QCD (!) Way out: Optical Theorem (unitarity) ... ... and the subtracted dispersion relation of (q2) (analyticity) Im[ ] | hadrons |2 A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2) ... and equivalently for a [had]
Testing CVC Infer branching fractions from e+e– data: Difference: BR[ ] – BR[e+e– (CVC)]: leaving out CMD-2 : B0 = (23.69 0.68) % (7.4 2.9) % relative discrepancy! A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)
––0: Comparing ALEPH, CLEO, OPAL Shape comparison only. SFs normalized to WA branching fraction (dominated by ALEPH). • Good agreement observed between ALEPH and CLEO • ALEPH more precise at low s • CLEO better at high s A. Höcker – Hadronic Contribution to (g–2)