text:
# Relating the Connes-Kreimer and Grossman-Larson Hopf algebras built on rooted trees

## 1 Introduction

In , Dirk Kreimer discovered the striking fact that the process of renormalization in quantum field theory may be described, in a conceptual manner, by means of certain Hopf algebras (which depend on the chosen renormalization scheme). A toy model was studied in detail by Alain Connes and Dirk Kreimer in ; the Hopf algebra which occurs, denoted by $`H_R`$, is the polynomial algebra in an infinity of indeterminates, one for each rooted tree, but with a non-cocommutative comultiplication. Some operators, denoted by $`N`$ and $`L`$, have been defined on $`H_R`$. The first one is the natural growth operator, which acts as a derivation; it defines some elements $`\delta _k`$, for $`k1`$, which provide the link between $`H_R`$ and another Hopf algebra, introduced in  by Alain Connes and Henri Moscovici in a completely different context, namely in noncommutative geometry. The operator $`L`$ is a solution of the “Hochschild equation”, and the pair $`(H_R,L)`$ is characterized as the solution of a universal problem in Hochschild cohomology. It was proved also in  that $`H_R`$ is in duality with the universal enveloping algebra of a certain Lie algebra $`^\mathcal{1}`$, which has a linear basis indexed by all (non-empty) rooted trees. Let us note that this Lie algebra $`^\mathcal{1}`$ appeared also, very recently, in , in the context of pre-Lie algebras and the operad of rooted trees.
In this note we would like to draw the attention to another Hopf algebra built on rooted trees, introduced ten years ago by Robert Grossman and Richard Larson in  (see also their survey ). This Hopf algebra (denoted by $`A`$ in what follows) has a $`linear`$ basis consisting of all (non-empty) rooted trees, a noncommutative product, and is a cocommutative graded connected Hopf algebra, hence, by the Milnor-Moore theorem, it is the universal enveloping algebra of the Lie algebra of its primitive elements, which may also be described explicitly: $`P(A)`$ has a linear basis consisting of all rooted trees whose root has exactly one child. Using these properties of $`A`$, Grossman and Larson gave a Hopf algebraic proof of the classical result of Cayley on the number of rooted trees. The construction of the Hopf algebra $`A`$ is motivated also by some ideas concerning differential operators and differential equations, in particular the Runge-Kutta method in numerical analysis (see ). Let us note also that actually the construction of Grossman and Larson is slightly more general: they associate a Hopf algebra to any family of trees which satisfy a certain list of axioms. Among these families are: the family of all rooted trees (this is the one who gives the Hopf algebra $`A`$) and the families of all ordered, heap-ordered and respectively labelled rooted trees. The construction of the Hopf algebra associated to such a family is similar to that of $`A`$.
As noted in , , the Hopf algebra $`H_R`$ may also be related to the Runge-Kutta method and the Butcher group, so it is very likely that there is a relation between $`H_R`$ and $`A`$. As we shall see, this relation is best expressed by the fact that the Hopf algebras $`A`$ and $`U(^\mathcal{1})`$ are isomorphic, which in turn is a consequence of a Lie algebra isomorphism between $`P(A)`$ and $`^\mathcal{1}`$. This isomorphism is given by sending a rooted tree $`tP(A)`$ to the rooted tree in $`^\mathcal{1}`$ obtained by deleting the root of $`t`$.
We believe that this relation between $`A`$ and $`H_R`$ may be useful for a better understading of both these Hopf algebras. On one hand, the advantage of the isomorphism between $`A`$ and $`U(^\mathcal{1})`$, which allows one to work with $`A`$ instead of $`U(^\mathcal{1})`$, is clear, since we know on $`A`$ a very explicit $`linear`$ basis, more manageable than the PBW basis of $`U(^\mathcal{1})`$. On the other hand, some known results for one of the Hopf algebras $`A`$ and $`H_R`$ may serve as a motivation and inspiration for obtaining similar results for the other. We shall make here a first step in this direction, by studying two natural operators on $`A`$. The first is the natural growth operator $`N`$ (defined exactly as the one introduced by Connes and Kreimer for $`H_R`$), which will turn out to be a $`coderivation`$ on $`A`$; the sequence $`\{x_k\}_{k0}`$ defined by $`N`$ will turn out to generate a commutative cocommutative Hopf subalgebra of $`A`$, isomorphic to the polynomial algebra in one indeterminate, with its usual Hopf algebra structure. A nice feature of $`N`$ (considered on $`A`$) is that, for any rooted tree $`t`$, $`N(t)`$ may be described as the product (in $`A`$) between the rooted tree with two vertices and $`t`$. The second one, denoted by $`M`$, is in some sense dual to the operator $`L`$ on $`H_R`$: we shall prove that $`M`$ is a derivation (the right $`A`$-module structure on $`A`$ being the one induced by $`\epsilon `$) and that the transpose of $`M`$ gives a solution of the Hochschild equation on the finite dual Hopf algebra $`A^0`$.

## 2 The relation between $`H_R`$ and $`A`$

Throughout, $`k`$ will be a fixed field of characteristic zero and all algebras, linear spaces etc. will be over $`k`$; unadorned $``$ means $`_k`$.
We start by recalling some facts from , , , to which we refer for the terminology and more details (the reader will find also in  some nice pictures of rooted trees and the operations which may be performed with them).
A $`rooted`$ $`tree`$ $`t`$ is a connected and simply-connected set of oriented edges and vertices such that there is exactly one distinguished vertex with no incoming edges, called the $`root`$ of $`t`$. Every edge connects two vertices. The $`fertility`$ $`f(v)`$ of a vertex $`v`$ is the number of edges outgoing from $`v`$, that is the number of $`children`$ of $`v`$. A $`forest`$ is a finite set of rooted trees.
We denote by $`B_{}`$ the operator which assigns to a rooted tree $`t`$ a forest, by removing the root of $`t`$, and by $`B_+`$ the operator which maps a forest consisting of $`n`$ rooted trees $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_n`$ to a new rooted tree $`t`$ which has a root $`r`$ with fertility $`f(r)=n`$ which connects to the $`n`$ roots of $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_n`$. Obviously, $`B_+(B_{}(t))=B_{}(B_+(t))=t`$ for any rooted tree $`t`$. We also set $`B_{}(e)=\mathrm{}`$, $`B_+(\mathrm{})=e`$, where $`e`$ is the rooted tree with only one vertex and $`\mathrm{}`$ is the empty tree.
If $`t`$ is a rooted tree, an $`elementary`$ $`cut`$ is a cut of $`t`$ at a single chosen edge, and an $`admissible`$ $`cut`$ is a set of elementary cuts such that any path from any vertex of $`t`$ to the root of $`t`$ contains at most one elementary cut. If $`c`$ is an admissible cut, we denote by $`|c|`$ the number of elementary cuts of $`c`$. If we perform an admissible cut $`c`$ in a rooted tree $`t`$, we obtain a forest, denoted by $`P^c(t)`$, consisting of the $`cut`$ $`branches`$ of $`t`$, and a $`trunk`$, denoted by $`R^c(t)`$, which is the branch which remains (it is the one which contains the root of $`t`$).
We can now define the Connes-Kreimer Hopf algebra over $`k`$, denoted by $`H_R`$. As an algebra, it is the polynomial algebra in an infinity of indeterminates, one for each (non-empty) rooted tree (we denote also by $`t`$ the indeterminate corresponding to the rooted tree $`t`$). The unit is denoted by 1 (it corresponds to the empty tree). The comultiplication $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is defined by:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(1)=11$$

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(t)=1t+t1+\underset{c}{}P^c(t)R^c(t)$$

for any rooted tree $`t`$, where the sum is over all admissible cuts $`c`$ of $`t`$ (with $`|c|1`$) and $`P^c(t)`$ is the monomial corresponding to the forest $`P^c(t)`$ (as a general rule, we identify any forest with its monomial). An alternative recursive description of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(t)`$ is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(t)=t1+(idB_+)(\mathrm{\Delta }(B_{}(t))$$

The counit is given by

$$\epsilon (1)=1$$

$$\epsilon (t)=0$$

for any rooted tree $`t`$. The antipode is given iteratively by

$$S(1)=1$$

$$S(t)=t\underset{c}{}S(P^c(t))R^c(t)$$

for any rooted tree $`t`$, where the sum is over all admissible cuts $`c`$ of $`t`$ (with $`|c|1`$).
Define now the operator $`N`$ on $`H_R`$ (the natural growth operator) which maps a rooted tree $`t`$ with $`n`$ vertices to a sum $`N(t)`$ of $`n`$ rooted trees $`t_i`$, each having $`n+1`$ vertices, by attaching one more outgoing edge and vertex to each vertex of $`t`$ (the root remains the same under this operation). On products of rooted trees, $`N`$ acts, by definition, as a derivation. For any $`k1`$, define elements $`\delta _kH_R`$ by $`\delta _1=e`$, $`\delta _{k+1}=N(\delta _k)`$, that is $`\delta _{k+1}=N^k(e)`$ for all $`k1`$. We recall that we have denoted by $`e`$ the tree with one vertex (in order to be consistent with ; in  by $`e`$ is denoted the unit of $`H_R`$). These elements are very important in , because they provide the link between $`H_R`$ and the Connes-Moscovici Hopf algebra introduced in . They generate a (non-cocommutative) Hopf subalgebra of $`H_R`$.
Define now the operator $`L:H_RH_R`$ as the unique linear map satisfying the condition $`L(t_1\mathrm{}t_m)=t`$ for any rooted trees $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_m`$, where $`t`$ is the rooted tree obtained by connecting a new root to the roots of $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_m`$. Obviously it agrees with the map $`B_+`$ introduced above. It was shown in  that the operator $`L`$ satisfies the so-called “Hochschild equation”

$$\mathrm{\Delta }L=L1+(idL)\mathrm{\Delta }$$

(this is a 1-cocycle condition) and the pair $`(H_R,L)`$ has the following universal property: if $`(H_1,L_1)`$ is a pair with $`H_1`$ a commutative Hopf algebra and $`L_1:H_1H_1`$ a linear map satisfying the Hochschild equation on $`H_1`$, then there exists a unique Hopf algebra map $`\rho :H_RH_1`$ such that $`L_1\rho =\rho L`$.
Let $`^\mathcal{1}`$ be the linear span of the elements $`Z_t`$, indexed by all (non-empty) rooted trees. Define an operation on $`^\mathcal{1}`$ by

$$Z_{t_1}Z_{t_2}=\underset{t}{}n(t_1,t_2;t)Z_t$$

where the integer $`n(t_1,t_2;t)`$ is the number of admissible cuts $`c`$ of $`t`$ with $`|c|=1`$ such that the cut branch is $`t_1`$ and the trunk is $`t_2`$ (note that this operation is $`not`$ associative). Define then a bracket on $`^\mathcal{1}`$ by

$$[Z_{t_1},Z_{t_2}]=Z_{t_1}Z_{t_2}Z_{t_2}Z_{t_1}$$

Then it was proved in  that $`(^\mathcal{1},[,])`$ is a Lie algebra and moreover there is a Hopf duality between $`H_R`$ and the universal enveloping algebra of $`^\mathcal{1}`$.
We recall now from ,  the structure of the Grossman-Larson Hopf algebra, which will be denoted in what follows by $`A`$. It has a linear basis consisting of all (non-empty) rooted trees. The unit is the tree $`e`$ with only one vertex. The multiplication on the basis is given as follows: let $`t_1`$ and $`t_2`$ be two rooted trees, let $`s_1,\mathrm{},s_r`$ be the children of the root of $`t_1`$, let $`n`$ be the number of vertices of $`t_2`$; then there are $`n^r`$ ways to attach the $`r`$ subtrees of $`t_1`$ which have $`s_1,\mathrm{},s_r`$ as roots to the tree $`t_2`$ by making each $`s_i`$ the child of some vertex of $`t_2`$. The product $`t_1t_2`$ is defined to be the sum of these $`n^r`$ rooted trees (note that this product is $`not`$ commutative).
The coalgebra structure of $`A`$ is given as follows. If $`t`$ is a rooted tree whose root has children $`s_1,\mathrm{},s_r`$, the coproduct $`\mathrm{\Delta }(t)`$ is the sum of the $`2^r`$ terms $`t_1t_2`$, where the children of the root of $`t_1`$ and the children of the root of $`t_2`$ range over all $`2^r`$ possible partitions of the children of the root of $`t`$ into two subsets. If $`t=e`$, then $`\mathrm{\Delta }(e)=ee`$. The counit $`\epsilon `$ is given by $`\epsilon (e)=1`$, $`\epsilon (t)=0`$ if $`te`$. Obviously $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is cocommutative. Moreover, $`A`$ is a graded connected bialgebra, the component $`A_n`$ of degree $`n`$ having as basis all trees with $`n+1`$ vertices. Being a graded connected cocommutative bialgebra, A is a Hopf algebra and by the Milnor-Moore theorem $`A`$ is the universal enveloping algebra of its primitives, $`AU(P(A))`$, where $`P(A)=\{aA/\mathrm{\Delta }(a)=ea+ae\}`$. There is an explicit description of $`P(A)`$: it has a basis consisting of all rooted trees whose root has exactly one child.
We can state now the result which expresses the relation between the Hopf algebras $`H_R`$ and $`A`$.

###### Proposition 2.1

The Lie algebras $`^\mathcal{1}`$ and $`P(A)`$ are isomorphic, hence $`A`$ is isomorphic to $`U(^\mathcal{1})`$ as Hopf algebras.

Proof: Define $`\phi :P(A)^\mathcal{1}`$ as the unique linear map which on the basis of $`P(A)`$ acts as follows: if $`tP(A)`$ is a rooted tree, then $`\phi (t)=Z_{B_{}(t)}`$. Recall that $`B_{}(t)`$ is the rooted tree obtained by deleting the root of $`t`$ (here it is a tree, since the root of $`t`$ has exactly one child). Obviously, $`\phi `$ is a linear isomorphism, its inverse being the map $`\psi :^\mathcal{1}𝒫(𝒜)`$, $`\psi (Z_t)=B_+(t)`$ for any rooted tree $`t`$.
It remains to prove that $`\phi `$ is a Lie algebra map. Let $`t_1,t_2P(A)`$ be two rooted trees. In $`P(A)`$, we have $`[t_1,t_2]=t_1t_2t_2t_1`$. By the definition of the multiplication of $`A`$, we obtain that

$$t_1t_2=B(t_1t_2)+\underset{i}{}t^i$$

$$t_2t_1=B(t_2t_1)+\underset{j}{}T^j$$

where $`B(t_1t_2)`$ is the rooted tree obtained by identifying the roots of $`t_1`$ and $`t_2`$, and each $`t^i`$ is obtained by identifying the root of $`t_1`$ with a vertex of $`t_2`$, except for the root of $`t_2`$ (and similarly for $`t_2t_1`$), so all the rooted trees $`t^i`$ and $`T^j`$ are in $`P(A)`$. Obviously $`B(t_1t_2)=B(t_2t_1)`$, hence

$$[t_1,t_2]=\underset{i}{}t^i\underset{j}{}T^j$$

We obtain that $`\phi ([t_1,t_2])=_i\phi (t^i)_j\phi (T^j)`$. From the definition of the operation $``$ on $`^\mathcal{1}`$, it is easy to see that

$$\underset{i}{}\phi (t^i)=\phi (t_1)\phi (t_2)$$

$$\underset{j}{}\phi (T^j)=\phi (t_2)\phi (t_1)$$

hence we obtain

$$\phi ([t_1,t_2])=[\phi (t_1),\phi (t_2)]$$

that is $`\phi `$ is a Lie algebra map.

Define now the natural growth operator $`N`$ on $`A`$, by the same formula as the one defined by Connes and Kreimer on $`H_R`$, that is $`N`$ is the linear map $`N:AA`$ such that, for any rooted tree $`t`$, $`N(t)`$ is the sum of the rooted trees obtained from $`t`$ by attaching one more outgoing edge and vertex to each vertex of $`t`$. The properties of $`N`$ are collected in the following

###### Proposition 2.2

$`(1)N(e)b=N(b)`$ for all $`bA`$.
$`(2)N(ab)=N(a)b`$ for all $`a,bA`$.
$`(3)N^k(e)b=N^k(b)`$ for all $`k1,bA`$.
$`(4)N^k(e)N(e)=N^{k+1}(e)=N(e)N^k(e)`$ for all $`k1`$.
$`(5)N`$ is a coderivation, that is, for all $`bA`$, we have

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(N(b))=(idN+Nid)(\mathrm{\Delta }(b))$$

Proof: $`(1)`$ obviously, for any rooted tree $`t`$, we have $`N(e)t=N(t)`$, from which we obtain $`N(e)b=N(b)`$ for all $`bA`$.
$`(2)`$ using $`(1)`$, we have $`N(ab)=N(e)ab=N(a)b`$.
$`(3)`$ follows easily by induction, and $`(4)`$ follows from $`(3)`$.
$`(5)`$ by $`(1)`$, we obtain that $`\mathrm{\Delta }(N(b))=\mathrm{\Delta }(N(e)b)=\mathrm{\Delta }(N(e))\mathrm{\Delta }(b)`$. We shall use the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$-notation, so we write $`\mathrm{\Delta }(b)=b_{(1)}b_{(2)}`$; since $`N(e)`$ is a primitive element, we have then:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(N(b))=(eN(e)+N(e)e)(b_{(1)}b_{(2)})=$$

$$b_{(1)}N(e)b_{(2)}+N(e)b_{(1)}b_{(2)}=$$

$$b_{(1)}N(b_{(2)})+N(b_{(1)})b_{(2)}=$$

$$(idN+Nid)(\mathrm{\Delta }(b))$$

Now, for any $`k0`$, define the element $`x_k=N^k(e)A`$. These elements are analogous to the elements $`\delta _k`$ of .

###### Proposition 2.3

The elements $`x_k`$ have the following properties:
$`(1)x_mx_n=x_nx_m=x_{m+n}`$
$`(2)x_0=e`$
$`(3)\epsilon (x_m)=\delta _{0,m}`$
$`(4)\mathrm{\Delta }(x_m)=_{i=0}^m\left(\begin{array}{c}m\\ i\end{array}\right)x_ix_{mi}`$
$`(5)S(x_m)=(1)^mx_m`$
for all $`m,n0`$, where $`S`$ is the antipode of $`A`$. Moreover, the elements $`\{x_k\}_{k0}`$ are linearly independent. Hence, the subspace of $`A`$ generated by the elements $`x_k`$ with $`k0`$ is a commutative cocommutative Hopf subalgebra of $`A`$, isomorphic (as a Hopf algebra) to the polynomial algebra $`k[X]`$ with its usual Hopf algebra structure.

Proof: $`(1)`$ follows easily from the previous proposition; $`(2)`$ and $`(3)`$ are obvious; $`(4)`$ and $`(5)`$ follow by induction, using the facts that $`x_{m+1}=N(e)x_m`$ and $`N(e)`$ is primitive. Since $`x_kA_k`$ for all $`k0`$ (hence $`deg(x_m)deg(x_n)`$ if $`mn`$) it follows that the elements $`\{x_k\}_{k0}`$ are linearly independent. The isomorphism between the Hopf subalgebra given by the elements $`x_k`$ and $`k[X]`$ is determined by $`x_kX^k`$ for all $`k0`$.

Define now the $`k`$-linear map $`M:AA`$, by $`M(e)=0`$ and $`M(t)=tN(e)`$ for all rooted trees $`te`$. As we shall see, this operator $`M`$ is in some sense dual to the operator $`L`$ on $`H_R`$.

###### Proposition 2.4

$`(1)M(b)=(b\epsilon (b))N(e)`$ for all $`bA`$.
$`(2)M(ab)=aM(b)+M(a)\epsilon (b)`$ for all $`a,bA`$
(that is, $`M`$ is a derivation from $`A`$ into the bimodule $`A`$, where the left $`A`$-module structure of $`A`$ is the one given by multiplication and the right $`A`$-module structure is given via $`\epsilon `$).
$`(3)\mathrm{\Delta }(M(b))=(idM+Mid)(\mathrm{\Delta }(b))+(b\epsilon (b))N(e)+N(e)(b\epsilon (b))`$
for all $`bA`$.

Proof: $`(1)`$ Let $`bA`$, written as $`b=b_0e+_{t_ie}b_it_i`$, with $`b_0,b_ik`$. Then we have:

$$M(b)=b_0M(e)+b_iM(t_i)=b_it_iN(e)=$$

$$b_it_iN(e)+b_0N(e)b_0N(e)=bN(e)b_0N(e)=(b\epsilon (b))N(e)$$

$`(2)`$ using $`(1)`$, we have $`M(ab)=(ab\epsilon (a)\epsilon (b))N(e)`$, and

$$aM(b)+M(a)\epsilon (b)=a(b\epsilon (b))N(e)+(a\epsilon (a))\epsilon (b)N(e)=$$

$$(ab\epsilon (b)a+\epsilon (b)a\epsilon (a)\epsilon (b))N(e)=(ab\epsilon (a)\epsilon (b))N(e)$$

$`(3)`$ write $`\mathrm{\Delta }(b)=b_{(1)}b_{(2)}`$; then we have:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(M(b))=\mathrm{\Delta }((b\epsilon (b))N(e))=\mathrm{\Delta }(b)\mathrm{\Delta }(N(e))\epsilon (b)\mathrm{\Delta }(N(e))=$$

$$b_{(1)}N(e)b_{(2)}+b_{(1)}b_{(2)}N(e)\epsilon (b)N(e)N(e)\epsilon (b)=$$

$$M(b_{(1)})b_{(2)}+\epsilon (b_{(1)})N(e)b_{(2)}+b_{(1)}M(b_{(2)})+$$

$$+b_{(1)}\epsilon (b_{(2)})N(e)\epsilon (b)N(e)N(e)\epsilon (b)=$$

$$(idM+Mid)(\mathrm{\Delta }(b))+(b\epsilon (b))N(e)+N(e)(b\epsilon (b))$$

Recall from ,  that we can associate to $`A`$ the so-called $`finitedual`$, which is also a Hopf algebra, and which consists of the elements $`fA^{}`$ such that $`Ker(f)`$ contains a cofinite ideal of $`A`$. If we denote by $`m`$ the multiplication of $`A`$, then an element $`fA^{}`$ belongs to $`A^0`$ if and only if $`m^{}(f)A^{}A^{}`$, which in turn is equivalent to the fact that there exist some elements $`f_i,f_i^{}A^{}`$, with $`i`$ in some finite set, such that $`f(ab)=f_i(a)f_i^{}(b)`$ for all $`a,bA`$. Moreover, we have that $`m^{}(A^0)A^0A^0`$ and the comultiplication of $`A^0`$ is $`\mathrm{\Delta }=m^{}|A^0`$.
Now, let $`fA^0`$, $`m^{}(f)=f_if_i^{}`$, with $`f_i,f_i^{}A^0`$. By using the condition $`M(ab)=aM(b)+M(a)\epsilon (b)`$ satisfied by $`M`$, we can compute:

$$f(M(ab))=f(M(a))\epsilon (b)+f(aM(b))$$

for all $`a,bA`$, which may be rewritten as

$$f(M(ab))=f(M(a))\epsilon (b)+f_i(a)f_i^{}(M(b))$$

that is

$$M^{}(f)(ab)=M^{}(f)(a)\epsilon (b)+f_i(a)M^{}(f_i^{})(b)$$

hence $`M^{}(f)A^0`$. So, we have $`M^{}(A^0)A^0`$, and we denote by $`M^0`$ the restriction of $`M^{}`$ to $`A^0`$. Also, for $`fA^0`$, since $`M^{}(f),\epsilon ,f_i,M^{}(f_i^{})A^0`$ for all $`i`$, we obtain finally that in $`A^0`$ the following relation holds:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(M^0(f))=M^0(f)\epsilon +(idM^0)(\mathrm{\Delta }(f))$$

which expresses the fact that $`M^0`$ is a solution for the Hochschild equation on $`A^0`$. Hence, since $`A^0`$ is commutative (because $`A`$ is cocommutative), by the universal property of the pair $`(H_R,L)`$ we obtain the following

###### Proposition 2.5

There exists a unique Hopf algebra map $`\rho :H_RA^0`$ such that $`M^0\rho =\rho L`$.


format: text

text:
# References

Dynamical model for Pion $``$ Nucleon Bremsstrahlung

A. Marianoa,b and G. López Castroa

a Departamento de Física, Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados del IPN

A.P. 14$``$740 México 07000 D.F.

b Departamento de Física, Facultad de Ciencias Exáctas, Universidad Nacional de La Plata

cc.67, 1900 La Plata, Argentina

Abstract

A dynamical model based on effective Lagrangians is proposed to describe the bremsstrahlung reaction $`\pi N\pi N\gamma `$ at low energies. The $`\mathrm{\Delta }(1232)`$ degrees of freedom are incorporated in a way consistent with both, electromagnetic gauge invariance and invariance under contact transformations. The model also includes the initial and final state rescattering of hadrons via a T-matrix with off-shell effects. The $`\pi N\gamma `$ differential cross sections are calculated using three different T-matrix models and the results are compared with the soft photon approximation, and with experimental data. The aim of this analysis is to test the off-shell behavior of the different T-matrices under consideration.

PACS numbers: 25.80.Ek, 13.60.-n, 13.75.-r

I. INTRODUCTION

In order to extract resonant parameters of the nucleon resonances (N) from the $`\gamma N\pi N`$ reaction, it is important to evaluate the background contribution to isolate the resonant peak. An important contribution to the background of this photo-production reaction is provided by the final state rescattering (FSI) of the $`\pi N`$ system . Consequently, we require knowledge of the T-matrix in the off-momentum-shell regime(off-shell) to describe this rescattering process. That is, we need information about the amplitude $`T(\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{},\stackrel{}{q};z(\stackrel{}{q}))`$ with $`|\stackrel{}{q}||\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{}|`$, where $`z`$ which is the total energy of the $`\pi N`$ system is a function of the relative momentum $`|\stackrel{}{q}|`$ of the initial state. This particular rescattering amplitude is more properly called the half-off-shell T-matrix. As is known, the T-matrix can be generated by solving an integral equation of the Lippman-Schwinger or Bethe-Salpeter type by iteration of a pure phenomenological  potential, or from an effective potential based on meson-exchange models . In all cases the so called ‘realistic’ interactions are fitted to reproduce the phase shifts in elastic $`\pi N`$ scattering, which only depends on the on-shell ($`|\stackrel{}{q}|=|\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{}|`$) values of the relative momenta. Thus elastic scattering is not useful to constrain the off-shell behavior of the T-matrix, i.e., interactions which yield similar results for elastic scattering may have different behavior in the off-shell regime.

Another reaction where the $`\pi N`$ off-shell T-matrix is required is $`\pi N\pi N\gamma `$ bremsstrahlung. This process has been studied  within the Soft-Photon Approximation (SPA). The soft-photon amplitude, defined by the first two terms of the soft-photon expansion, depends only on the electromagnetic constants of $`\pi `$ and $`N`$ and on the corresponding $`\pi N`$ elastic scattering amplitude (on-shell $`\pi N`$ T-matrix) . It should be pointed out that Low’s original amplitude fails to describe the $`\pi ^\pm N\gamma `$ process near the resonance region . Nevertheless the SPA for the $`\pi N\gamma `$ reaction, as implemented by Ref., describes well the experimental data near the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ resonance region and can provide a determination of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{++}`$ magnetic moment .

Because the soft-photon amplitude depends only on the on-shell T-matrix, the information on the off-shell behavior of the T-matrix can be tested by adding the contributions to the radiative $`\pi N`$ scattering within the framework of a specific dynamical model. The purpose of the present paper is to check the off-shell behavior of three different T-matrices for $`\pi N`$ rescattering in the reaction $`\pi N\pi N\gamma `$. A similar analysis of these FSI effects using different rescattering off-shell amplitudes has been done with the aim to determine the form factors of nucleons . It was found that pion photo-production reactions are very sensitive to the off-shell behavior of the $`\pi N`$ interaction, and also that there are certain inconsistencies in fixing phenomenological form factors, to match photo-production current and FSI effects.

For this purpose, we use a dynamical model to describe the $`\pi N\pi N\gamma `$ reaction. The gauge invariant electromagnetic current is constructed explicitly, with vertexes and propagators derived from the relevant hadronic and electromagnetic Lagrangians. We also include two-body meson exchange currents, and the full energy-momentum dependence of the $`\pi N`$ T-matrix which exhibits its off-shell behavior. Finally we implement this model with different T-matrices in order to compare their different off-shell dependencies.

This paper is organized as follows. In section II we will construct the gauge-invariant amplitude for radiative $`\pi N`$ scattering. In section III we give a summary of the corresponding results obtained in the SPA approximation in order to make comparisons with our dynamical model. The Lagrangians and propagators used to construct the gauge invariant current for our process are provided in section IV. Finally the results and conclusions are given in section V.

II. GAUGE INVARIANT BREMSSTRAHLUNG AMPLITUDE

In the pion-nucleon bremsstrahlung process we deal with a problem of the scattering by two potentials : the strong pion-nucleon and the electromagnetic interactions. The cross section for $`\pi N\pi N\gamma `$ process reads

$`d\sigma `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{k}}{\omega _\gamma }\frac{d\stackrel{}{q}_f}{\omega (\stackrel{}{q}_f)}\frac{d\stackrel{}{p}_f}{E(\stackrel{}{p}_f)}(2\pi )^4\delta ^4(p_i+q_ip_fq_fk)}`$ (1)
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{ϵ_\lambda ,ms_f,ms_i}{}}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{m_N^2}{2\sqrt{2}}}M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}(ϵ_\lambda ,k;q_f,p_f,ms_f;q_i,p_i,ms_i)\right|^2,`$
where $`q=(\omega ,\stackrel{}{q})`$, $`p=(E,\stackrel{}{p})`$ and $`k=(\omega _\gamma ,\stackrel{}{k})`$ denote pion, nucleon and photon four-momenta, respectively; $`ms`$ is the nucleon’s spin projection and $`ϵ_\lambda `$ indicates the polarization four-vector of the photon. The subindexes $`i,f`$ refer to initial and final state quantities.

The Lorentz invariant amplitude111Throughout this paper, $`M`$ will denote the amplitude generated by the operator $`\widehat{M}`$,ie., $`M=\overline{u}|\widehat{M}|u`$. $`M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$ explicitly reads

$`M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}=\overline{u}(\stackrel{}{p}_f,ms_f)|\widehat{M}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}(ϵ_\lambda ,k;q_f,p_f;q_i,p_i)|u(\stackrel{}{p}_i,ms_i),`$ (2)
where $`u(\stackrel{}{p},ms)`$ denote nucleon Dirac spinors, and the amplitude operator $`\widehat{M}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$ is obtained from the coupled channel Bethe-Salpeter equation for the $`\pi N\gamma `$ system as follows (we consider electromagnetic interactions at the lowest order):

$`\widehat{M}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$ (3)
$`+i{\displaystyle \frac{dq^4}{(2\pi )^4}\left[\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}(q)\widehat{G}_{\pi N}(q)\widehat{M}_{\pi N,\pi N}(q)+\widehat{M}_{\pi N,\pi N}(q)\widehat{G}_{\pi N}(q)\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}(q)\right]}`$
$`+i^2{\displaystyle \frac{dq^4}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{dq^4}{(2\pi )^4}\left[\widehat{M}_{\pi N,\pi N}(q^{})\widehat{G}_{\pi N}(q^{})\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}(q^{},q)\widehat{G}_{\pi N}(q)\widehat{M}_{\pi N,\pi N}(q)\right]}.`$
The symbol $`𝑑q^4`$ will indicate integration over intermediate four-momenta variables.

In terms of the above operator amplitude, the T-matrix, defined as

$$\widehat{T}(q_f,p_f;q_i,p_i)=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^3}\widehat{M}_{\pi N,\pi N}(q_f,p_f;q_i,p_i),$$
(4)
satisfies the integral equation

$`\widehat{T}`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{U}+i{\displaystyle \frac{dq^4}{(2\pi )^4}\widehat{U}(q)\widehat{G}(q)\widehat{T}(q)},`$ (5)
$`\widehat{U}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi )^3}}\widehat{V}_{\pi N,\pi N},`$
$`\widehat{G}`$ $`=`$ $`(2\pi )^3\widehat{G}_{\pi N}.`$
In the previous equations $`\widehat{V}_{ij}`$ denote $`\widehat{M}`$-matrix elements corresponding to the irreducible Feynman diagrams for each process, while $`\widehat{G}_i`$ is the product of Feynman propagators of intermediate particles.

Following the Thompson’s prescription , we can represent the above integrals in a three-dimensional form as follows (we set in the center of mass frame of the $`\pi N`$ system)

$$\widehat{T}(\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{},\stackrel{}{q},z)=\widehat{U}(\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{},\stackrel{}{q})+d^3\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime }\widehat{U}(\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{},\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime })\widehat{G}_{TH}(z,\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime })\widehat{T}(\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime },\stackrel{}{q},z),$$
(6)
with,

$$\widehat{G}_{TH}(z,\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime })=\frac{m_N}{2\omega (\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime })E(\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime })}\frac{\underset{ms^{\prime \prime }}{}|u(\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime },ms^{\prime \prime })\overline{u}(\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime },ms^{\prime \prime })|}{zz^{\prime \prime }+i\eta },$$
(7)
where $`z^{\prime \prime }=E(\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime })+\omega (\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime })`$. In the above expressions $`\widehat{G}_{TH}`$ denotes the Thompson propagator replacing the full $`\widehat{G}_{\pi N}`$ Feynman propagator which, as a consequence of the three-dimensional reduction, eliminates the propagation of antiparticles and puts intermediate particles on their mass-shell. The kernel function $`\widehat{U}(\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{},\stackrel{}{q})`$ contains all the $`\pi N`$-interaction irreducible diagrams to be iterated in the T-matrix calculation, but usually only second-order contributions are kept.

The electromagnetic current $`\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$ can be broken into two pieces,

$$\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{(1)}+\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{(2)},$$
(8)
where the upper indices denote one- and two-body contributions, respectively, which are obtained by coupling the photon to all the internal lines of $`\widehat{U}`$. As is known, the operator $`\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{(2)}`$ must be added to the electromagnetic current in order to satisfy the electromagnetic gauge invariance of the total amplitude , while the one-body amplitude $`V_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{(1)}`$ vanishes for free hadrons. Both contributions to the total amplitude are illustrated in Fig. 1.

Let us now discuss some problems related to gauge invariance. The bremsstrahlung amplitude can be directly computed from Eqs.(2-4), by making a reduction that replaces $`\widehat{G}_{\pi N}`$ by $`\widehat{G}_{TH}`$ in Eq.(3) . This procedure, however, introduces some inconveniences. First, $`V_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$ is not gauge invariant by itself because it involves the addition of zero and second order terms in the hadronic vertexes, and thus $`M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$ is not manifestly gauge invariant. Second, the three-dimensional reduction destroys any possibility of obtaining gauge invariance, because we loose the propagation of antiparticles222As an example let us consider the amplitude for photon emission off a charged pion. This contribution involves the product of the electromagnetic vertex $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\pi `$ and the pion propagator $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\pi `$ in the following form: $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_\pi (q\pm k,q).ϵ_\lambda ^{}\mathrm{\Delta }_\pi (q\pm k)=\pm e(2q\pm k).ϵ_\lambda ^{}\frac{1}{(q\pm k)^2m_\pi ^2}`$. When we replace $`ϵ_\lambda k`$ to verify gauge-invariance we obtain, $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_\pi (q\pm k,q).ϵ_\lambda ^{}\mathrm{\Delta }_\pi (q\pm k)=\pm e`$. The three dimensional reduction replaces the full propagator $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\pi (q)`$ by $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\pi ^+(q)=\frac{1}{2\omega (\stackrel{}{q})}\frac{1}{(q^0\omega (\stackrel{}{q}))}`$ and such a relation is no longer fulfilled..

We can follow an alternative procedure that makes the bremsstrahlung amplitude manifestly gauge invariant and where the Thompson reduction does not introduce the problems mentioned above. If we substitute Eqs. (4) and (5) into Eq.(3), only in the one-body component of the amplitude $`M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{(1)}M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}(\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{(1)})`$, we can isolate the lowest order nonzero contribution of the one-body current. After the three dimensional reduction, the total amplitude can be rewritten as

$$M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}\left[\stackrel{~}{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}+\stackrel{~}{M}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{pre}+\stackrel{~}{M}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{post}+\stackrel{~}{M}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{double}\right],$$
(9)
with

$`\stackrel{~}{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{u}(\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{}\stackrel{}{k}/2,ms_f)|\widehat{\stackrel{~}{V}}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}(ϵ_\lambda ,\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{},\stackrel{}{q})|u(\stackrel{}{q},ms_i),`$
$`\stackrel{~}{M}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{pre}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }dq^{\prime \prime 3}\overline{u}(\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{},ms_f)|\widehat{T}^{()}(\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{},\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime },z^{})\widehat{G}_{TH}(z^{},\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime })\widehat{\stackrel{~}{V}}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}(ϵ_\lambda ,\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime },\stackrel{}{q})|u(\stackrel{}{q}+\stackrel{}{k}/2),ms_i,`$
$`\stackrel{~}{M}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{post}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }dq^{\prime \prime 3}\overline{u}(\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{}\stackrel{}{k}/2,ms_f)|\widehat{\stackrel{~}{V}}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}(ϵ_\lambda ,\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{},\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime })\widehat{G}_{TH}(z,\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime })\widehat{T}(\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime },\stackrel{}{q},z)|u(\stackrel{}{q},ms_i),`$
$`\stackrel{~}{M}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{double}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }dq^{\prime \prime 3}{\displaystyle }dq^{\prime \prime \prime 3}\overline{u}(\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{}\stackrel{}{k}/2,ms_f)|\widehat{T}^{()}(\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{}\stackrel{}{k}/2,\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime },z^{})`$ (10)
$`\widehat{G}_{TH}(z^{},\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime })\widehat{\stackrel{~}{V}}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}(ϵ_\lambda ,\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime },\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime \prime })\widehat{G}_{TH}(z,\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime \prime })\widehat{T}(\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime \prime },\stackrel{}{q},z)|u(\stackrel{}{q},ms_i)`$
where the current

$`\widehat{\stackrel{~}{V}}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}=i\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{(1)}\widehat{G}\widehat{U}+i\widehat{U}^{}\widehat{G}\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{(1)}+\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{(2)},`$ (11)
generates a gauge invariant Born amplitude $`\stackrel{~}{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$, that involves all possible ways of attaching a photon to the $`\pi N`$ scattering amplitude $`U`$, and contains the full propagator $`\widehat{G}\widehat{G}_{\pi N}`$. The operator $`\widehat{T}^{()}(z^{})`$, where $`z^{}=z+\omega _\gamma `$, obeys Eq.(6) if we change $`\eta \eta `$ in Eq.(7).

The superscript pre (post) in Eq. (9) indicates that the photon is emitted before (after) the action of the T-matrix, while the superscript double refers to a double-scattering term where the photon is emitted from internal lines between two T-matrices. In the above equations, the Born, pre and double amplitudes were evaluated in the initial center of mass frame ($`\stackrel{}{q}_f=\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{}\stackrel{}{k}/2,\stackrel{}{p}_f=\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{}\stackrel{}{k}/2`$, $`\stackrel{}{q}_i=\stackrel{}{p}_i=\stackrel{}{q}`$), while the other (post) amplitude was evaluated in the corresponding final frame ($`\stackrel{}{q}_f=\stackrel{}{p}_f=\stackrel{}{q}^{}`$, $`\stackrel{}{q}_i=\stackrel{}{q}+\stackrel{}{k}/2,\stackrel{}{p}_i=\stackrel{}{q}+\stackrel{}{k}/2`$). The different terms in Eq. (9) are illustrated in Fig. 2a ($`\stackrel{~}{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$) and in Fig. 2b (remaining terms).

III.SOFT PHOTON APPROXIMATION

In this section we present a brief review of the soft-photon approximation (SPA) to the radiative $`\pi N`$ scattering process. This will be helpful for the introduction of the notation and for later comparison with our dynamical model. Within the SPA  the T-matrices can be represented as an expansion in powers of the photon energy $`\omega _\gamma `$. Using the TETA (two energy - two angle) kinematics  we can write this expansion as follows:

$`\widehat{T}(s,t,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{T}(s,t,m^2)+{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{T}}{\mathrm{\Delta }}}\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{\omega _\gamma }}\omega _\gamma +O(\omega _\gamma ^2),`$ (12)
where $`(s,t,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ indicates one of the most convenient set of variables among $`(s_i,t_p,\mathrm{\Delta }_{q_i})`$, $`(s_i,t_q,\mathrm{\Delta }_{p_i})`$, $`(s_f,t_p,\mathrm{\Delta }_{q_f})`$, and $`(s_f,t_q,\mathrm{\Delta }_{p_f})`$ to describe the process. These Lorentz-invariant variables are defined as

$`s_i=(q_i+p_i)^2,s_f=(q_f+p_f)^2,t_p=(p_ip_f)^2,t_q=(q_iq_f)^2,`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{q_i}=(q_ik)^2,\mathrm{\Delta }_{q_f}=(q_f+k)^2,\mathrm{\Delta }_{p_i}=(p_ik)^2,\mathrm{\Delta }_{p_f}=(p_f+k)^2.`$ (13)
If we set $`k=0`$ in the previous equations, we get $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{q_i}=\mathrm{\Delta }_{q_f}=m_\pi ^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{p_i}=\mathrm{\Delta }_{p_f}=m_N^2`$, i.e. they reduce to the particle’s masses in every case. Therefore, when $`k0`$, the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ variables provide a convenient set to measure the off-shell character of the intermediate particles, and the derivatives in Eq.(12) account for off-shell effects in the T-matrix.

Within the SPA, the total bremsstrahlung amplitude can be split into external ($`E`$) and internal ($`I`$) contributions:

$`M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^E+M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^I,`$ (14)
where we can identify

$`M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^E`$ $``$ $`\stackrel{~}{M}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{pre}(\widehat{\stackrel{~}{V}}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{(1)})+\stackrel{~}{M}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{post}(\widehat{\stackrel{~}{V}}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{(1)}),`$
and the internal contribution $`M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^I`$ can be obtained “by imposing” the gauge invariance condition

$$M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}(ϵ_\lambda ^\mu =k^\mu )=0.$$
(15)
In this approach, the total amplitude depends only on the static electromagnetic properties of the external particles and on the elastic $`\pi N`$ scattering amplitude (see Eq. (16) below) . Therefore, the total amplitude at this order eliminates any dependence on off-shell effects and model-dependent contributions.

Up to terms of $`O(\omega _\gamma ^0)`$, the total amplitude is given by:

$`M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$
$`\overline{u}(\stackrel{}{p}_+^{},m_{s_f})|\{\widehat{e}_\pi [{\displaystyle \frac{q_{}^{}ϵ_\lambda }{q_{}^{}k}}{\displaystyle \frac{(q_{}^{}+p_+^{})ϵ_\lambda }{k(q_{}^{}+p_+^{})}}]\widehat{T}(s_i,t_p,m_\pi ^2)`$
$`+[{\displaystyle \frac{(\widehat{e}_Np_+^{}\widehat{R}(p_+^{}))ϵ_\lambda }{p_+^{}k}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\widehat{e}_N(q_{}^{}+p_+^{})\widehat{R}(p_+^{}))ϵ_\lambda }{k(q_{}^{}+p_+^{})}}]\widehat{T}(s_i,t_q,m_N^2)\}|u(\stackrel{}{p},m_{s_i})`$
$`\overline{u}(\stackrel{}{p}^{},m_{s_f})|\{\widehat{e}_\pi \widehat{T}(s_f,t_p^{},m_\pi ^2)[{\displaystyle \frac{q_+ϵ_\lambda }{q_+k}}{\displaystyle \frac{(q_++p_{})ϵ_\lambda }{k(q_++p_{})}}]`$
$`+\widehat{T}(s_f,t_q^{},m_N^2)[{\displaystyle \frac{(\widehat{e}_Np_{}\widehat{R}(p_{}))ϵ_\lambda }{p_{}k}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\widehat{e}_N(q_++p_{})\widehat{R}(p_{}))ϵ_\lambda }{k(q_++p_{})}}]\}|u(\stackrel{}{p}_{},m_{s_i}),`$
(16)
where

$`q(\omega (\stackrel{}{q}),\stackrel{}{q}),p(E(\stackrel{}{q}),\stackrel{}{q}),q^{}(\omega (\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{}),\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{}),p^{}(E(\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{}),\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{}),`$
$`q_{}^{}(\omega (\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{}),\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{}),p_+^{}(E(\stackrel{}{q}{}_{+}{}^{}),\stackrel{}{q}{}_{+}{}^{}),q_+(\omega (\stackrel{}{q}_+),\stackrel{}{q}_+),p_{}(E(\stackrel{}{q}_{}),\stackrel{}{q}_{}),`$
$`t_p=(p_+^{}p)^2,t_q=(q_+^{}q)^2,t_p^{}=(p_{}p^{})^2,t_q^{}=(q_+q^{})^2,`$
$`\widehat{R}_\mu (x){\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\widehat{e}_N[\overline{)}k,\gamma _\mu ]+{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\kappa }_N}{8m_N}}\{[\overline{)}k,\gamma _\mu ],\overline{)}x\},\stackrel{}{q}_\pm =\stackrel{}{q}\pm \stackrel{}{k}/2,\stackrel{}{q}{}_{\pm }{}^{}=\stackrel{}{q}{}_{}{}^{}\pm \stackrel{}{k}/2,`$ (17)
and $`\widehat{e}_\pi =e𝒯_z`$, $`\widehat{e}_N=e(1+\tau _z)/2`$, and $`\widehat{\kappa }_N=\kappa _p(1+\tau _z)/2+\kappa _n(1\tau _z)/2`$ denote the charge and anomalous magnetic moment operators of pions and nucleons. As anticipated, Eq.(16) shows that within the SPA the $`M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$ amplitude depends only on the elastic T-matrix, because derivative terms of $`\widehat{T}`$ cancels in the addition of internal and external contributions. Let us emphasize that any dependence on the structure of internal contributions (in particular, the dependence of off-shell effects) are of higher order in $`\omega _\gamma `$ and must be included explicitly in the amplitude in a gauge invariant way. This is the purpose of the forthcoming section.

IV. DYNAMICAL MODEL

In this section we compute the bremsstrahlung amplitude along the lines developed in Eqs. (9-11), using a potential $`\widehat{U}`$ obtained from effective Lagrangians, and three specific models for the T-matrix to describe the $`\pi N`$ rescattering.

The three models for the T-matrix will be called OBQA, SEP and NEW, respectively. The OBQA version for the T-matrix interaction, is based on a model that includes $`\pi `$ and $`\rho `$ mesons exchange through a correlated $`2\pi `$ exchange potential. The SEP model for $`\pi N`$ rescattering is generated  by a phenomenological separable potential. Finally, the NEW model  is obtained from the exchange of $`\pi `$ and (sharp) $`\rho `$ mesons.

The operator $`\widehat{U}`$ is constructed from a Lagrangian density that includes the nucleon ($`N`$), the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-isobar, and the $`\pi `$, $`\rho `$ and $`\sigma `$ mesons in the following form

$$\widehat{}_{hadr}=\widehat{}_{\pi NN}+\widehat{}_{N\mathrm{\Delta }\pi }+\widehat{}_{\rho NN}+\widehat{}_{\rho \pi \pi }+\widehat{}_{\sigma NN}+\widehat{}_{\sigma \pi \pi }$$
(18)
where the individual terms are given by

$`\widehat{}_{\pi NN}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{f_{\pi NN}}{m_\pi }}\right)\overline{\psi }(x)\gamma _5\stackrel{}{\tau }.(\overline{)}\stackrel{}{\pi }(x))\psi (x),`$
$`\widehat{}_{N\mathrm{\Delta }\pi }(x)`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{f_{N\mathrm{\Delta }\pi }}{m_\pi }}\right)\overline{\psi }_\mathrm{\Delta }^\mu (x)\stackrel{}{T}^{}.(_\mu \stackrel{}{\pi }(x))\psi (x)+h.c.,`$
$`\widehat{}_{\rho NN}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}g_\rho \overline{\psi }(x)\left[\gamma _\mu {\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _\rho }{2m_N}}\sigma _{\mu \nu }^\nu \right]\stackrel{}{\tau }.\stackrel{}{\rho }^\mu (x)\psi (x),`$
$`\widehat{}_{\rho \pi \pi }(x)`$ $`=`$ $`g_{\rho \pi \pi }\stackrel{}{\rho }_\mu (x).(\stackrel{}{\pi }(x)^\mu \stackrel{}{\pi }(x)),`$
$`\widehat{}_{\sigma NN}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`g_\sigma \overline{\psi }(x)\psi (x)\sigma (x),`$
$`\widehat{}_{\sigma \pi \pi }(x)`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{g_{\sigma \pi \pi }}{2m_\pi }}\right)\sigma (x)(_\mu \stackrel{}{\pi }(x)).(^\mu \stackrel{}{\pi }(x)).`$ (19)
The isotopic fields $`\psi (x)`$ and $`\psi _\mathrm{\Delta }^\mu (x)`$ denote the $`N`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ baryons, respectively, while $`\stackrel{}{\pi }(x)`$, $`\stackrel{}{\rho }^\mu (x)`$ and $`\sigma (x)`$ denote the pion, $`\rho `$-meson and $`\sigma `$-meson fields. The arrow over the meson fields refers to the isospin space. $`\stackrel{}{T}^{}`$ stands for the isospin $`1/2`$ to $`3/2`$ transition operator, and $`f_{\pi NN}`$, $`g_\rho `$( $`\kappa _\rho `$), $`g_\sigma `$, $`f_{N\mathrm{\Delta }\pi }`$, $`g_{\rho \pi \pi }`$, and $`g_{\sigma \pi \pi }`$ are the corresponding coupling constants.

The electromagnetic currents can be obtained from the Lagrangian density

$$\widehat{}_{elec}=\widehat{}_{\gamma NN}+\widehat{}_{\gamma \pi NN}+\widehat{}_{\gamma \pi \pi }+\widehat{}_{\gamma \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }}+\widehat{}_{\gamma \pi N\mathrm{\Delta }}+\widehat{}_{\gamma \rho \pi \pi }+\widehat{}_{\gamma \sigma \pi \pi }$$
(20)
with

$`\widehat{}_{\gamma NN}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`e\overline{\psi }(x)\left[\widehat{e}_N\gamma _\mu {\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\kappa }}{2m_N}}\sigma _{\mu \nu }^\nu \right]A^\mu (x)\psi (x),`$
$`\widehat{}_{\gamma \pi NN}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`e\left({\displaystyle \frac{f_{\pi NN}}{m_\pi }}\right)\overline{\psi }(x)\gamma _5\gamma _\mu \left[\stackrel{}{\tau }\times \stackrel{}{\pi }(x)\right]_3\psi (x)A^\mu (x),`$
$`\widehat{}_{\gamma \pi \pi }(x)`$ $`=`$ $`e\left[\stackrel{}{\pi }(x)\times _\mu \stackrel{}{\pi }(x)\right]_3A^\mu (x),`$
$`\widehat{}_{\gamma \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`e\overline{\psi }_\mathrm{\Delta }^\nu (x)\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{\nu \mu \alpha }\psi _\mathrm{\Delta }^\mu (x)A^\alpha (x),`$
$`\widehat{}_{\gamma \pi N\mathrm{\Delta }}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`e\left({\displaystyle \frac{f_{N\mathrm{\Delta }\pi }}{m_\pi }}\right)\overline{\psi }_\mathrm{\Delta }^\mu (x)\left[\stackrel{}{\pi }(x)\times \stackrel{}{T}^{}\right]_3\psi (x)A_\mu (x)+h.c.,`$
$`\widehat{}_{\gamma \rho \pi \pi }(x)`$ $`=`$ $`eg_\rho \{[\stackrel{}{\pi }(x).\stackrel{}{\pi }(x)\pi _3(x)\pi _3(x)]\rho _3^\nu (x)`$
$`\pi _3(x)[\stackrel{}{\pi }(x).\stackrel{}{\rho }^\nu (x)\pi _3(x)\rho _3^\nu (x)]\}A_\nu (x),`$
$`\widehat{}_{\gamma \sigma \pi \pi }(x)`$ $`=`$ $`2e\left({\displaystyle \frac{g_{\sigma \pi \pi }}{2m_\pi }}\right)\sigma (x)\left[\stackrel{}{\pi }(x)\times _\mu \stackrel{}{\pi }(x)\right]_3A^\mu (x).`$ (21)
The electromagnetic vertex operator of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-isobar is given by

$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{\nu \mu \alpha }`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{e}_\mathrm{\Delta }\left[(\gamma _\alpha g_{\nu \mu }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\gamma _\alpha \gamma _\nu \gamma _\mu {\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\gamma _\nu g_{\mu \alpha }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\gamma _\mu g_{\nu \alpha }){\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\kappa }_\mathrm{\Delta }}{2m_\mathrm{\Delta }}}\sigma _{\alpha \beta }k_\beta g_{\nu \mu }\right],`$
where $`F_{\mu \nu }=_\mu A_\nu (x)_\nu A_\mu (x)`$, $`A_\nu (x)`$ being the electromagnetic four-potential. $`\widehat{\kappa }_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\widehat{e}_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are the anomalous magnetic moment333We restrict ourselves to the $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{++}`$ contribution, the only one for which we have experimental information on $`\kappa _\mathrm{\Delta }`$ . and charge operators whose action upon the Rarita-Schwinger field give as eigenvalues the corresponding values of these properties of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-isobar.

The propagators for the $`\pi (\sigma ),\rho ,N`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ hadrons obtained from the above Lagrangians are given, respectively, by

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\pi ,\sigma }(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{q^2m_{\pi ,\sigma }^2+i\eta }},`$
$`D_\rho ^{\mu \nu }(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g^{\mu \nu }q^\mu q^\nu /m_\rho ^2}{q^2m_\rho ^2+i\eta }},`$
$`S(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{)}q+m_N}{q^2m_N^2+i\eta }}`$
$`G^{\mu \nu }(q)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{)}q+m_\mathrm{\Delta }}{q^2m_\mathrm{\Delta }^2+i\eta }}\left[g^{\mu \nu }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^\nu +{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{q^\mu q^\nu }{m_\mathrm{\Delta }^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{q^\mu \gamma ^\nu q^\nu \gamma ^\mu }{m_\mathrm{\Delta }}}\right]`$ (23)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3m_\mathrm{\Delta }^2}}(q^2m_\mathrm{\Delta }^2)\left[{\displaystyle \frac{}{}}(\gamma ^\mu q^\nu \gamma ^\nu q^\mu )+(\overline{)}q+m_\mathrm{\Delta })\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^\nu \right]`$
Observe that we have kept the off-shell part of $`G^{\mu \nu }(q)`$ in Eqs. (23); without this term it is impossible to get gauge invariance consistently using simultaneously the vertex given in Eq.(LABEL:35) . As was mentioned previously, the potential operator $`\widehat{U}`$ can be computed by using these Feynman rules. The scattering amplitude $`U`$ is depicted in Fig.3, while the amplitude $`\stackrel{~}{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$ can be obtained by coupling the photon to all diagrams in $`U`$ as shown in fig.4.

Good convergence properties of the scattering equations given in Eqs. (10) can be obtained by introducing hadronic form factors, which are supposed to describe the composite nature of hadrons. It is a common practice to use different parametrizations of the form factors for different T-matrices. For example, the OBQA model uses monopole and dipole forms with cutoff parameters ranging from $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=12001600MeV`$ . In the case of the SEP interaction different form factors are introduced for each partial wave component , while in the NEW model form factors usually advocated are of monopolar form with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=13002300MeV`$ . However, the introduction of form factors replacing point vertexes in $`\stackrel{~}{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$ spoils the gauge invariance of the total amplitude. Fortunately, the gauge invariance of the amplitude can be recovered by using the method of Gross and Riska which, however, does not yield unique electromagnetic couplings to hadrons. Therefore, we follow the more simple prescription of using a common form factor of monopole type

$$f(\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime })=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2+\stackrel{}{q}^{\prime \prime 2}},$$
(24)
where the scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ can be adjusted at a given incident energy for each T-matrix model.

V. NUMERICAL RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The differential cross section $`d\sigma /d\mathrm{\Omega }_\pi d\mathrm{\Omega }_\gamma d\omega _\gamma `$ to be compared with experimental data can be obtained from Eq.(1), where the amplitude $`M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$ is calculated from Eqs.(9-11). The dynamical model approximation (DMA) advocated in the present paper contains the following steps. The current operator $`\widehat{\stackrel{~}{V}}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$ is computed from the effective Lagrangians given in Eqs.(18) and (20), with the propagators obtained in Eqs.(23), and the monopole form factor given in Eq.(24) to have good convergence of the intermediate momentum integrals.

As is known, double scattering terms have a significant contribution in the case of $`protonproton`$ bremsstrahlung, mainly in the end point region of $`\omega _\gamma `$ . In the present work we will neglect $`\stackrel{~}{M}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{double}`$ in Eq.(10), because the numerical calculation of the three-dimensional integrals requires an enormous computational effort. Nevertheless, we keep double scattering-like contributions in post and pre amplitudes coming from current components $`i\widehat{U}^{}\widehat{G}\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{(1)}`$ and $`i\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}^{(1)}\widehat{G}\widehat{U}`$, respectively. In order to compare the approaches provided by the DMA and SPA, we fix $`M_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$ to coincide quantitatively at low photon energies.

For illustration purposes, we will implement the DMA approach with the OBQA, SEP and NEW T-matrices for the specific example of $`\pi ^+p\pi ^+p\gamma `$. In this case, we have contributions coming from the diagrams depicted in Figs. 4a (with intermediate $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$), 4b (with intermediate $`N`$), and 4c. The different coupling constants and masses needed to evaluate $`\widehat{V}_{\pi N\gamma ,\pi N}`$ were taken from the model II of ref., from , and from , and are displayed in table 1. For direct pole diagrams we use bare masses and coupling constants since they get dynamically dressed in the T-matrix scattering Eq.(5). In the OBQA case, we replace the $`2\pi `$ correlated exchange potential by $`\pi `$ and $`\rho `$ sharp mass exchange terms, since they do not lead to sizable differences as shown in ref.. In the SEP case we use the same coupling constants and masses, because the scattering potential is not generated from a dynamical model.

We will compare the theoretical predictions to the experimental cross sections measured by Nefkens (EXP I) and Meyer  (EXP II), which have been reported for different kinematical configurations. In EXP I the pions were detected at fixed angles $`\theta _\pi =50.5^0,\varphi _\pi =180^0`$, for three different energies of incident pions (269, 298 and 324 MeV), and the photons were detected at various $`\theta _\gamma ,\varphi _\gamma `$ angles in the range of energies $`\omega _\gamma =0150`$ MeV. In EXP II $`\theta _\pi `$ ranges from 550 to 950, the incident energy of the pion is fixed at 299 MeV and the photons were detected at angles $`\theta _\gamma =120^0,\varphi _\gamma =0^0`$ with energies in the range $`\omega _\gamma =0140`$ MeV. In EXP II the resulting cross section measurements were averaged over $`\theta _\pi `$.

Our results for the cross sections in the DMA approach, for the respective ansatz of the T-matrix, are shown in Figs. 5 and 6. The SPA and experimental values are also plotted for comparison. The predictions of the DMA approach shown in fig. 5 using the three models of the T-matrix, are compared to the results of EXP I for photon angles given by $`G_{14}(\theta _\gamma =103^0,\varphi _\gamma =180^0)`$. Since the parameters entering T-matrices are usually quoted to reproduce the elastic phase shifts, the cutoff parameters $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ were fixed in order to have good coincidence between the predictions of the different interactions and the SPA at low $`\omega _\gamma `$ values. We get (in MeV units) $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{OBQA}=750,700,600`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{SEP}=700,600,500`$, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{NEW}=550,500,450`$, for incident pion energies $`T_{lab}=269,298,324`$ respectively. Observe that the value of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ found in the case of the SEP interaction for $`T_{lab}=298MeV`$ is consistent with the one previously found for pion photo-production at $`T_{lab}=300MeV`$, while the OBQA values are roughly consistent with the form factors used in ref., which correspond to a monopole form-factor with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }800MeV`$. On the other hand, the resulting cross sections for the conditions of EXP II are shown in Fig. 6. In this case, the differential cross section is averaged over $`\theta _\pi =55^075^0`$, and $`\theta _\pi =75^095^0`$, for $`T_{lab}=299MeV`$. However, we keep for consistency the values of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ obtained at $`T_{lab}=298MeV`$ in EXP I.

As we can observe, the SPA reproduces very well the experimental cross section for EXP I in the whole range of measured photon energies, while it gives values somewhat below those obtained in EXP II. According to ref. , the agreement with EXP II might be improved if the emission of the photon from the $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{++}`$( seventh graph in fig.3a) is included explicitly as a piece of the internal amplitude.

In almost all the cases, the predictions of the DMA lies above the experimental cross section and the SPA for energies $`\omega _\gamma >20MeV`$. One of the reasons for this may be the use of an overall form factor to cure the gauge invariance problems. The total bremsstrahlung amplitude is built up, as can be seen from Eqs. (9) and (10), by adding different components. It is not expected that the common form factor works as satisfactorily upon adding up these components as it does the one used to generate the individual T-matrices, which change their values from vertex to vertex. The comparison between the results of the SPA and DMA schemes shows that the additional off-shell effects, added coherently to the lowest order contributions, may have important contributions since they do not cancel exactly as the derivative terms of the T-matrix appearing from the soft-photon expansion.

From fig.5 we can check that the SEP interaction provides the closest results to the experimental cross section with deviations starting for $`\omega _\gamma >40MeV`$. This indicates that the dynamical model involved in the SEP interaction gives the smallest off-shell effects. On the other hand, the strongest off-shell effects appear in the OBQA model. This conclusion agrees with a previous study on observables in pion photo-production experiments. Similar conclusions can be drawn from Fig. 6. Note, however, that the SPA lies somewhat below the experimental results in this case, which seems to indicate the necessity of additional dynamical degrees of freedom.

As was discussed in section III, the off-shell contributions to the external and internal amplitudes within the SPA cancel each other, thus we cannot study these effects within this approximation. In addition since we get gauge invariance in the SPA by adjusting the internal amplitude, the gauge-invariant electromagnetic currents remain hidden. In the DMA approach, these cancellations must occur explicitly between the different components of the amplitude (the so-called Born,pre,post contributions). The departure of the different T-matrices from the SPA can be used to estimate the size of unbalanced off-shell terms and provide a test of their off-shell behaviors. Also, since the gauge-invariant electromagnetic current is constructed explicitly from effective Lagrangians, we can use the radiative $`\pi N`$ reaction to study the relevance of the degrees of freedom and the parameters involved in this dynamical model.

Finally one may wonder about the relevance of additional contributions not included in the present formulation of effective Lagrangians, for example the $`a_1`$, $`\omega `$ mesons. A preliminary estimation of these effects shows that, in the region of photon energies considered in this work $`\omega _\gamma =0150MeV`$, their contribution to the amplitude are suppressed by an order of magnitude with respect to the degrees of freedom considered here. In addition it may be required to include the double-scattering terms, in order to provide a better fit of experimental data. These considerations, together with a partial wave analysis of the studied T-matrices and a more detailed analysis of each particular contribution to the electromagnetic current are beyond the scope of the present paper.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The work of A. Mariano was supported in part by Conacyt (México) through the Fondo de Cátedras Patrimoniales de Excelencia Nivel II, and Conicet (Argentina). He is also grateful to K. Nakayama for the valuable support in making this work. G. López Castro was partially supported by Conacyt under contract 32429-E.

FIGURE CAPTIONS

Fig.1 One- and two-body contributions to the bremsstrahlung current amplitude.

Fig.2 (a) Gauge-invariant bremsstrahlung current amplitude. (b) Post-, pre- and double-scattering amplitude contributions (se Eq. (9)).

Fig.3 Born amplitude corresponding to the $`\pi N`$ potential operator $`\widehat{U}`$. The first diagram denote the nucleon-pole, and the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-pole corresponds to the third diagram. The fifth and sixth diagrams correspond to $`\rho `$ and $`\sigma `$ mesons exchange.

Fig.4 The gauge-invariant amplitude obtained by coupling a photon to the Born terms in fig.3, together with the two-meson exchange currents (fifth, sixth and seventh graphs in each line): (a) Contributions obtained from the N and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ direct-pole diagrams in fig.3; (b) Terms generated by the cross-pole diagrams in fig.3, and (c) diagrams obtained from $`\rho `$ and $`\sigma `$ exchange contributions in fig.3.

Fig.5 $`\pi N\gamma `$ cross section for $`T_{lab}=269`$, $`298`$ and $`324MeV`$ and $`G_{14}(\theta _\gamma =103^0,\varphi _\gamma =180^0)`$ in EXPI, calculated in the DMA for the different T-matrices. We also include the SPA cross section and the measured values.

Fig.6 Same as fig.5 for $`T_{lab}=299MeV`$. The cross sections are averaged over the angles $`\theta _\pi =5575^0`$ (upper plot) and $`\theta _\pi =7595^0`$(lower plot) in EXPII.