Adler sum rule
From Scholarpedia
| Stephen L. Adler (2009), Scholarpedia, 4(6):8653. | revision #63609 [link to/cite this article] | |||||||||||||||||||
Revision as of 17:22, 10 June 2009; view current revision
←Older revision | Newer revision→
Curator: Dr. Stephen L. Adler, Institute for Advanced Study, School of Natural Sciences, Princeton, USA
The Adler sum rule states that the integral over energy of a difference of neutrino-nucleon and antineutrino-nucleon structure functions is a constant, independent of the four-momentum transfer squared. This constancy is a consequence of the local commutation relations of the time components of the hadronic weak current, which follow from the underlying quark structure of the standard model.
Contents |
Statement of the Adler sum rule
Consider the inclusive neutrino-nucleon or antineutrino-nucleon scattering reactions
- (1)
with
the lepton corresponding to the incident
neutrino/antineutrino, and with
an unobserved hadronic final
state. Since the lepton in cases of greatest interest is an electron
or muon, the lepton mass can be neglected. Defining the
four-momentum transfer and energy transfer variables
and
by
- (2)
with
the nucleon mass, one finds in the laboratory frame where
the initial nucleon is at rest, using a
metric convention,
- (3)
with
the angle between
and
. Analysis of
the kinematic structure of the reaction of Eq. 1
shows that the inclusive cross section
takes
the form
- (4)
with
, with
the Fermi weak
interaction constant (assuming that
is much smaller than the
charged intermediate boson mass squared), and with
the
structure functions for deep inelastic neutrino scattering. In
terms of the
structure function, the Adler sum rule
(Adler, 1965a) takes the form
- (5)
with
a constant. (The lower integration limit can be taken as just below
the single nucleon contribution at
, instead of 0.) For a proton target
,
while for a neutron target
. When
production of heavy flavors such as charm is neglected, the
corresponding approximate expressions for
are
and
, with
the Cabibbo
angle; since the Adler sum rule was derived well before the
discovery of charm, some older texts give these incomplete expressions for
. In his original paper (Adler, 1965a), Adler used a different
notation from the one now standard, labeling
as
,
as
and
as
, multiplied by the appropriate
Cabibbo angle factors
and
in the
strangeness conserving and strangeness changing cases, respectively,
which were treated separately.
According to Eq. 3, as the neutrino energy
approaches infinity, for fixed
one has
and
. Hence in this limit the deep
inelastic cross section is dominated by the
structure
function, and so integrating over the energy transfer
,
Eq. 5 yields the limiting relation
- (6)
and similarly (with a reversal of sign) for the difference of antineutrino and neutrino differential cross sections on a neutron target.
Relation to the Adler-Weisberger and Cabibbo-Radicati sum rules, and the Bjorken electron scattering inequality
Eq. 5 is the sum of axial-vector and vector
sum rules, which can be written separately in terms of the
corresponding contributions to the structure function
, denoted
in what follows by the subscripts
respectively. Neglecting heavy flavor production and approximating
, the
axial-vector part of Eq. 5, on a proton target, is
- (7)
while the vector part of Eq. 5 is
- (8)
Here
denotes the
pion-nucleon continuum threshold, and the nucleon contributions
have been explicitly separated off in terms of the nucleon
axial-vector form factor
and the nucleon isovector
electromagnetic form factors
and
.
At
, the axial-vector sum rule of Eq. 7
becomes
- (9)
According to the Adler forward lepton theorem (Adler, 1964), neutrino reactions with a forward-going lepton, in the approximation of neglecting the lepton mass, can be expressed in terms of corresponding pion reaction cross sections for zero mass pions. Thus the integrand of Eq. 9 can be written in terms of pion proton scattering cross sections as
- (10)
with
the off-shell pion-nucleon coupling constant.
Substituting this into Eq. 9 gives (Adler, 1965b)
the off-shell version of the earlier Adler (Adler, 1965c)-Weisberger
(Weisberger, 1965) sum rule, which is a consequence of the spatially integrated axial
charge current algebra. The on-shell
Adler-Weisberger sum rule, which is obtained (Adler, 1965c; Weisberger, 1965) by extrapolating to physical mass pions using the partially
conserved axial-vector current (PCAC) hypothesis, gives a sum rule
for the axial vector coupling
that agrees well with
experiment.
Because the isovector vector charge is
conserved when the small up and down quark masses are neglected,
the continuum contribution to the vector sum rule of Eq. 8 vanishes at
, where this sum rule reduces to the trivial identity
.
However, the first derivative of this sum rule at
gives the
interesting Cabibbo-Radicati (Cabibbo, 1966) sum rule,
- (11)
With application to the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) electron scattering experiments in mind, Bjorken (Bjorken, 1966) converted the limiting relation Eq. 6 to a limiting inequality for electron scattering. This is possible because, since the neutrino scattering cross section is positive, Eq. 6 gives a lower bound for the antineutrino proton scattering cross section, which implies a factor of 2 smaller lower bound for the vector current contribution alone. Since the vector weak current is related by an isotopic spin rotation to the isovector part of the electromagnetic current, Bjorken was then able to obtain a lower bound to the sum of electron scattering cross sections on a proton and a neutron, since in this sum the isovector and isoscalar currents contribute incoherently. Keeping track of coupling constant and photon propagator factors, the resulting electron scattering limiting inequality reads
- (12)
with
the fine structure constant.
Saturation of the sum rule and Bjorken scaling
The salient feature of the sum rule of Eqs. 5,
7, 8, is that the integral over
energy of the cross sections on the right gives a constant that is
independent of the momentum transfer squared
. This is a very
different behavior from that of the nucleon contributions, which
involve form factors that decrease rapidly to zero as
is
increased. Moreover, the low lying pion-nucleon resonance
contributions to the right hand side are known to have a
large
behavior similar to that of the nucleon contributions. Thus, it was clear from
early on that a qualitatively new behavior would be needed for
saturation of the sum rule. Since structureless particles have form
factors of unity rather than rapidly decreasing form factors, early
discussions also suggested that saturation of the sum rule would
indicate the existence of elementary constituents within the
nucleon.
The precise mechanism by which the sum rules are saturated was
clarified by the proposal by Bjorken (Bjorken, 1969) of the Bjorken
scaling hypothesis, which states that in the limit of large
and
, with
fixed, the structure functions
and
become functions of a single
scaling variable
, according to
- (13)
Since
, while
at
, and
at
threshold
in the scaling limit, in this limit the sum
rule of Eq. 5 becomes
- (14)
and the
-independence becomes manifest. Thus, saturation of the
sum rule requires contributions from ever higher energies
as
is increased to large values. As discussed in the article on
Bjorken scaling, scaling is verified experimentally in deep
inelastic neutrino and electron scattering, up to small logarithmic
corrections, and was an important precursor of both the parton model
and quantum chromodynamics, in which the nucleon is a composite
constructed from point-like quark constituents. The Adler sum rule,
which is an exact relation even when scaling violations are taken
into account, has been tested and verified experimentally,
providing direct evidence for the validity of the Gell-Mann
(Gell-Mann, 1964) local current commutator algebra of the weak hadronic
currents, which is the basis for the construction of the Yang-Mills
electroweak theory.
Sketch of derivation
To derive the sum rule of Eq. 5, start from the expression
- (15)
with
the state of a nucleon with four-momentum
and spin
, and
with
denoting the spin average
.
Here
is the time component of the hadronic weak current, which is given by
- (16)
with
elements of the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) flavor mixing matrix.
The commutator in Eq. 15 contains three types of terms, containing either no factors of
, one factor of
, or two factors of
. Since
, the
terms with two factors of
make a contribution
equal to the terms with no factors of
, while the terms with one factor of
vanish after averaging over the spin
. Thus Eq. 15 simpifies to
- (17)
with
the time component of the vector part of the hadronic weak current,
given by
- (18)
Since
, Eq. 17 involves only
equal time commutators, which can be evaluated by the fermion field canonical anti-commutation relations.
Dropping flavor off-diagonal contributions, which vanish when sandwiched between nucleon states,
the only commutator needed is
- (19)
The appearance in this commutator of
eliminates the spatial integration in Eq. 17, so
what remains is
- (20)
Here
is a linear combination of quark number operators, denoted by
with the appropriate subscript,
multiplied by absolute value squared CKM matrix elements,
- (21)
Since a proton contains
up quarks and
down quark, and
a neutron contains
down quark and
up quarks, with zero
quark number for
type quarks, substituting Eq. 21
into Eq. 20 gives for
,
- (22)
and gives for
,
- (23)
Finally, substituting the unitarity relations for the CKM matrix elements,
- (24)
Eqs. 22 and 23 reduce to
and
.
The remainder of the derivation consists of relating Eq. 15 to an integral
over a difference of neutrino and antineutrino scattering structure functions. In Adler (1965a) this was done
by working in the nucleon rest frame (
) and postulating an unsubtracted dispersion
relation, which is valid for the
sum rule case. In the more recent textbook
and review article treatments referenced below, this is done by taking the limit of an infinite momentum (
) frame inside the
integral, which uniquely picks out the
structure function contribution. Both methods
give the result quoted in Eq. 5. Both Adler (1965a) and the infinite momentum frame derivations referenced
below omit heavy quark flavors and use the Gell-Mann
current algebra to evaluate the hadronic current commutators, rather than the full CKM matrix formulation used
here.
Acknowledgement
The work of S.L.A. was supported by the Department of Energy under grant no DE-FG02-90ER40542.
References
- Adler, S. L. (1964) Tests of the Conserved Vector Current and Partially Conserved Axial-Vector Current Hypotheses in High-Energy Neutrino Reactions. Phys. Rev. (135), B963-B966.
- Gell-Mann, M (1964) The Symmetry Group of Vector and Axial Vector Currents. Physics (1) 63-75.
- Adler, S. L. (1965a) Sum Rules Giving Tests of Local Current Commutation Relations in High-Energy Neutrino Reactions. Phys. Rev. (143) 1144-1155.
- Adler, S. L. (1965b) Sum Rules for the Axial-Vector Coupling-Constant Renormalization in β Decay. Phys. Rev. (140), B736-B747.
- Adler, S. L. (1965c) Calculation of the Axial-Vector Coupling Constant Renormalization in β -Decay. Phys. Rev. Lett. (14) 1051-1055.
- Weisberger, W. I. (1965) Renormalization of the Weak Axial-Vector Coupling Constant. Phys. Rev. Lett. (14) 1047-1051.
- Cabibbo, N. and Radicati, L. A. (1966) Sum Rule for the Isovector Magnetic Moment of the Nucleon. Phys. Lett. (19) 697-699.
- Bjorken, J. D. (1966) Inequality for Electron and Muon Scattering from Nucleons. Phys. Rev. Lett. (16) 408.
- Bjorken, J. D. (1969) Asymptotic Sum Rules at Infinite Momentum. Phys. Rev. (179) 1547-1553.
Further reading
- Llewellyn Smith, C. H. (1972) Neutrino Reactions at Accelerator Energies. Phys. Rep. (3) 261-379. See especially pp. 288-290 and pp. 334-335.
- Cheng, T.-P. and Li, L.-F. (1988) Gauge theory of elementary particle physics, pp. 137-141 and pp. 204-213. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
- Adler, S. L. (2006) Adventures in Theoretical Physics, Chapt. 2. World Scientific, Singapore. Unindexed commentaries also at arXiv:hep-ph/0505177.
External links
See also
Bjorken scaling, Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix
| Stephen L. Adler (2009) Adler sum rule. Scholarpedia, 4(6):8653, (go to the first approved version) Created: 23 November 2008, reviewed: 21 June 2009, accepted: 21 June 2009 |

