text:
# Stephan’s Quintet: The X-ray Anatomy of a Multiple Galaxy Collision

## 1 Introduction

Stephan’s Quintet (HCG92, Hickson 1982; hereafter SQ) is the most studied example of the compact group phenomenon. It is composed of six galaxies (Sulentic et al. 2001; S01 hereafter) including a core of three (NGC 7317, NGC 7318a and NGC 7319) with essentially zero velocity dispersion and an unrelated foreground object (NGC 7320). Multiwavelength observations of SQ give strong evidence of multiple episodes of past and recent (current) interaction, most likely caused by acquisition of new members/passage of intruders from the associated larger scale galaxy population near SQ. Both NGC 7320c and NGC 7319 show spiral morphology without detectable H i while the other two core members are ellipticals. The last and presumably ongoing event involves the collision of the gas-rich spiral NGC 7318b with the debris field produced by past interactions. About half of that galaxy’s ISM has been stripped/shocked. SQ is certainly the best local example of a compact group caught in flagrante delicto with multiple manifestations of interaction events. It is this kind of event that presumably accounts for general compact group characteristics including H i deficiency, quenched star formation and an excess of early-type members (e.g. Hickson & Rood 1988; Sulentic & de Mello Rabaca 1993; Verdes-Montenegro et al. 2001; Vilchez & Iglesias-Paramo 1998). SQ is thus an ideal laboratory for studying interactions per se, as well as, an excellent local analog to the processes thought to be much more common at high redshift.

We present CHANDRA observations of SQ where we confirm the complex nature of the X-ray emission already reported (Pietsch et al. 1997, S01). Most, if not all, of the basic types of X-ray emission observed from extragalactic sources are found in SQ (AGN, shocks, jets, “normal” galactic emission, diffuse emission), and can be studied in this context.

## 2 Basic results of the Chandra data analysis

A 19.7 ks observation of SQ was obtained with Chandra in July 2000 using the back-illuminated CCD (ACIS-S in imaging configuration). The data were reprocessed using the new calibration files as described in the CIAO documentation. Following the “CIAO Science Threads” at the CXC home page111http://asc.harvard.edu/ciao/threads/threads.html, we verified that the data obtained with standard processing had been properly cleaned (e.g. for high background events). We produced several images with $`1^{\prime \prime }\times 1^{\prime \prime }`$ pixel resolution, covering different portions of the field and in different energy bands. We applied a Gaussian filter or an adaptive smoothing filter using the csmooth routine in the CIAO package (FFT method, and using 2.5$`\sigma `$ as the minimal significance of the signal within the kernel). The left panel of Figure 1 presents an X-ray image of the entire back-illuminated CCD chip (S3) with X-ray contours superimposed. The right panel shows X-ray contours superposed on an optical B-band image from the DSS2. Considerable extended emission is concentrated within the core of the compact group. Additional sources are associated with the galaxies (members of SQ and the foreground galaxy NGC 7320) or, in some cases, may be unrelated background sources (see Table 1).

Fig. 2 presents a closer look at the X-ray emission most unambiguously associated with SQ. The soft (0.5-3.0 keV) X-ray contours are shown overlayed on an average of CFHT B-band images kindly provided by C. Mendes de Oliveira (see Plana et al. 1999; Mendes de Oliveira et al. 2001; S01 for discussion of the images). The complex X-ray emission that was detected in previous ROSAT observations (Pietsch et al. 1997; S01) is clearly resolved into two main components almost certainly associated with SQ: 1) complex clumpy and extended emission centered on a radio continuum/optical emission-line emitting shock zone and 2) emission from the Seyfert nucleus in NGC 7319. Additional sources detected do not always have obvious optical counterparts, although they appear to be associated with the galaxies in several cases (the central region of NGC 7318a, and associations in Table 1).

Fig. 3 shows Chandra images in different energy ranges. Comparison of the images shows that the extended X-ray emission is found only below $`2`$ keV, and more compact sources coincident with the Seyfert 2 nucleus of NGC 7319 and an unresolved source SW of the NGC 7318a nucleus and apparently coincident with one of the new intruder emission regions (# 14 in Fig. 7 of S01) are prominent at higher energies.

### 2.1 Distribution of Extended X-ray Emission

Diffuse emission in SQ extends from NE of the Seyfert 2 nucleus of NGC 7319 to SW of the nucleus of NGC 7318a. Elongated clumpy NS structure lies near the center of more diffuse emission. We derived azimuthally averaged radial profiles of the extended emission in several energy bands and in several ranges of position angle. The goal of the radial profile analysis was to determine the extent of diffuse emission for comparison with images at other wavelengths. We centered the radial profiles at RA=22h 35m 59.7s, $`\delta `$=33 58 14.1′′ and excluded all discrete sources (§ 2.2). Figure 4 shows the azimuthally averaged raw count profiles in two broad energy bands. Extended emission is only detected below $`1.8`$ keV and out to a radius of r$``$2.

Profiles derived for different azimuthal quadrants indicate that the extent of the emission is similar in all directions but that the intensity distribution is not. Detailed comparison of azimuthal averages is not straightforward because the extended emission is complex. The NS distribution is dominated by the shock. The E profile is similar to the NS distribution although less intense. It shows a smoother decline and a higher intensity level than towards the W. A larger and more abrupt drop in intensity is seen towards the W followed by an apparent rebound (Fig 4). The E-W difference is also evident in the EW cut taken across the middle intensity peak of the NS feature (Fig. 5). This plot indicates a sharp decrease to a very low count level in a narrow and elongated region ($`8^{\prime \prime }\times 1^{}`$) along the W edge of the NS feature. The emission increases again W of this minimum and extends outwards for an additional $`50^{\prime \prime }70^{\prime \prime }`$. The low intensity strip is not aligned with the pixels on the CCD chip which leads us to conclude that it is not an instrumental artifact.

An additional weak extended X-ray component is seen near RA=22h36m15s, $`\delta `$=+335630′′. This 15′′ radius region ($`23\sigma `$ source) coincides with structure in the older tidal tails (Arp & Lorre 1976; S01). However, since several optical condensations are found in this same region we cannot rule out a line of sight coincidence with background sources. We will explore this feature in more detail with recently obtained XMM-Newton data (Trinchieri et al. in prep).

### 2.2 Discrete X-ray Sources

A considerable number of discrete sources is found in and near SQ. Some are resolved and other are not, while several show associated (i.e. concentric) extended emission. Table 1 lists discrete sources with positions, count statistics, fluxes, X-ray luminosities and possible optical counterparts (see Fig. 1). The source list is derived from the wavdetect and celldetect programs that gave virtually identical results. The background is derived locally around each source and is negligible for sources outside the region where complex emission is detected. Count rates in the total energy band are converted into unabsorbed fluxes and luminosities assuming a constant conversion rate of 1 c $`s^1`$ = 9$`\times 10^{12}`$ erg cm-2 s-1 (corresponding to either a power law with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$=1.7, or a bremsstrahlung with kT=10 keV, and line-of-sight absorption), and a distance of 85.6 Mpc for SQ sources, and 12 Mpc for NGC 7320 (see Table 1). Only fluxes are quoted for sources outside or not unambiguously associated with SQ.

### 2.3 X-ray Spectra for the Strongest Components

Given the statistical significance of the Chandra data, we confine our spectral analysis to the extended emission and the central regions of NGC 7319. We used the psextract script in CIAO to create appropriate spectral matrixes (eg. arf and rmf files) for the analysis, which was done using XSPEC. While the script is not appropriate for extended emission, the regions we have selected are small and, consequently, the error introduced by the point-source assumption is negligible (see also discussion in Trinchieri & Goudfrooij 2002; Hicks et al. 2002). The degradation of the ACIS Quantum efficiency, recently discussed (222http://asc.harvard.edu/cal/Acis/Cal\_prods/qeDeg) was considered. However, our data are not affected significantly because the observation was done at early stages in the mission.

#### 2.3.1 The NS Extended Feature

We identified a region along the NS feature that includes the three brightest condensations. The background was obtained from adjacent regions. The data was binned to yield a S/N $``$ 3 per bin after background subtraction. This feature was only detected in the 0.35-1.75 keV energy range. We adopted a plasma code (MEKAL model in XSPEC) to describe the data which gives best fit parameters kT$``$0.53 keV (0.47-0.58 at 90% confidence for one interesting parameter), low abundance (0.12-0.30) and absorption consistent with the galactic line of sight value of NH $`8\times 10^{20}`$ cm-2 (see Fig. 6). Assuming the best fit model parameters, we derive an unabsorbed f$`{}_{X}{}^{}(0.12keV)1.7\times 10^{13}`$ erg cm-2 s-1, and L$`{}_{X}{}^{}1.5\times 10^{41}`$ erg s-1. Some residuals might be present possibly even coincident with oxygen lines that are not accounted for by the assumed single temperature model. They might be indicative of more complex gas properties (see Fig. 6). We also note that the derived best fit parameters are far from unique: a two temperature component spectrum, with a 0.5 keV MEKAL plasma and solar abundances plus $`5`$ keV bremsstrahlung component yield an equally good fit to the NS feature. Moreover, a crude examination of the X-ray colors along the NS feature indicates that the three clumps might have different energy distributions, suggesting spectral variations even within this small region.

The lower surface brightness emission around the NS feature (i.e. what we used as background) was also modeled (Fig. 6). We selected a circle of $`1\stackrel{}{.}5`$ radius, excluding discrete sources (e.g. NGC 7318a and NGC 7319) and the NS feature. Assuming a thermal plasma spectrum with low abundances we find kT=0.61 keV (0.56-0.65). The total unabsorbed flux of this component is f$`{}_{X}{}^{}(0.12keV)2.8\times 10^{13}`$ erg cm-2 s-1.

We point out that our interpretation of the NS feature and surrounding area in terms of a recent shock would likely imply different spectral characteristics (namely a multi-temperature non-equilibrium spectrum, cf. Breitschwerdt & Schmutzler 1999) than those derived above under the assumptions of equilibrium conditions. However, the relatively small number of photons in these components does not allow us to consider more sophisticated models, that might be possible with the higher statistics XMM-Newton data.

#### 2.3.2 The nuclear region of NGC 7319

We examined the spectral properties of both the central point source ($`1^{\prime \prime }`$ radius circle) and a larger region (r=10′′) inclusive of it. The nuclear X-ray spectrum is complex and requires multiple components. Comparison with the spectral distribution for the larger region indicates an increase in a soft contribution which may be related to a “galactic” component (see Fig. 7).

Since the optical spectrum indicates a Seyfert 2 nucleus, we assume a combination of absorbed and unabsorbed power law components plus a narrow 6.4 keV emission line (see e.g. Della Ceca et al. 1999; Moran et al. 2001; and references therein). The power law index should be the same for both components with the unabsorbed component representing $`110`$% of the absorbed one. Moran et al. report two different power-law indices for an average X-ray spectrum involving 29 sources although a single value is consistent with their data. Given the limited statistical significance of our data, we model the nuclear source using a single $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ for both power-law components (free) plus a Gaussian line at 6.4 keV (at the redshift of NGC 7319).

We applied the absorbed+unabsorbed power-law model to both the nuclear and larger regions. Data above $`1.52`$ keV are well described by such a model but excess residual emission is found at lower energies and becomes stronger in the spectrum of the larger region. This motivated us to exclude data below $`2`$ keV from the fit. Adopting such a “nuclear” model yields best fit $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ $``$ 1.7, N$`{}_{H}{}^{}(intrinsic)`$= 4 $`\times 10^{23}`$ cm-2. The FeK line is fit with E=6.4 keV and EW $`110`$ eV. This model gives a good $`\chi _\nu ^21`$ for 29 degrees of freedom (dof). Fig. 8 shows the spectral data and the contributions to $`\chi ^2`$ in individual energy bins relative to the combined plasma + unabsorbed and absorbed power-law model with Gaussian line. A bump is suspected at E $`5.9`$ keV. Although introducing this additional component might improve the fit (the best fit $`\chi ^2`$ value reduces by 8 for 3 additional parameters; f-test probability=99.99%), there are no known thermal emission lines in this energy range (see Wilms et al. 2001 where a similar feature is suspected in a Seyfert 1 source). The larger aperture data require an additional component at soft energies that can be modeled with either a MEKAL or a $`raymond`$ plasma code (Raymond & Smith 1997) with kT = 0.65 keV (MEKAL) or 0.75 ($`raymond`$).

The data quality does not allow us to derive meaningful confidence contours, nor does it guarantee that the model is unique. We can however describe the spectral characteristics of the emission from NGC 7319 as due to the superposition of a strong and heavily absorbed nuclear source embedded in more diffuse softer emission. The parameters for the nucleus are consistent with those of a typical Seyfert 2. The intrinsic fluxes derived from the best fit models are: f$`{}_{X}{}^{}4.7\times 10^{14}`$ erg cm-2 s-1 (0.1-2 keV) and 4$`\times 10^{14}`$ erg cm-2 s-1 (0.3-10 keV) for the extended soft emission; f$`{}_{X}{}^{}1.4\times 10^{11}`$ erg cm-2 s-1 in the entire 0.3-10 keV band and 8.2$`\times 10^{12}`$ erg cm-2 s-1 in the 2-10 keV band for the Seyfert nucleus, corresponding to an intrinsic LX (2-10 keV) = 7$`\times 10^{42}`$ erg s-1. The high energy component from NGC 7319 was already discovered by ASCA (Awaki et al. 1997). The lower spatial resolution of that observation did not allow the authors to properly separate the Sey 2 contribution from more extended emission although all hard emission was assumed to be from the nucleus. The spectral fit was similar to the one derived here except that we find a significantly smaller equivalent width.

## 3 Unraveling the complex X-ray morphology of SQ

A key element in compact group evolutionary history involves stripping events. The distribution of neutral gas in SQ is a spectacular example of these processes that must involve multiple interactions with group members and/or intruders acquired from the surroundings. Studies of the events and conditions in SQ can therefore give insights into processes that are common in such galaxy aggregates.

Moles et al. (1997) proposed a dynamical model for SQ to explain the observational evidence. Using a larger body of multiwavelength data, S01 recently evaluated and tested their “two intruder” scenario, that interprets twin tidal tails as the products of two subsequent passages of NGC 7320c, the $`old`$ intruder, through the group (cf. Fig. 9). The $`new`$ intruder, NGC 7318b, is now entering SQ with a relative line of sight velocity of $`1000`$ km s-1. Some aspects of the two intruder scenario are not shared by all investigators (e.g. Williams et al. 2002), but there is a consensus about the evidence of past and present episodes of interactions in SQ, that allow us to interpret much of the X-ray evidence in a self-consistent way.

The increased sensitivity of Chandra allows us to identify several components of extended X-ray emission. 1) The NS feature, a clumpy structure elongated in the NS direction (with possible branches towards NGC 7319 and the NW) closely coincident with the strongest radio continuum and optical line emission. 2) An irregular low surface brightness component surrounding the NS feature (radius=$`1\stackrel{}{.}5`$). 3) Smaller scale extended emission coincident with NGC 7319 and NGC 7318a. Component 1) is almost certainly shock related while component 2) could involve shock and/or underlying diffuse emission. The most straightforward interpretation for components 3) involves an association with the respective galaxies. We cannot rule out a connection with the recent/ongoing collision because both galaxies, especially NGC 7318a, may lie in the path of the new intruder. Individual galaxies are discussed in § 4.

### 3.1 The Shock Zone in SQ

The NS feature was previously interpreted as evidence for a large scale shock (Pietsch et al. 1997; S01). Chandra data reinforce this view with better evidence for (see Fig. 10): a) spatial coincidence between the NS feature and similar radio continuum, H$`\alpha `$ and \[N ii \] emission structures; b) lack of coincidence between the X-ray emission and the galaxies or extended stellar halo in SQ (Moles et al. 1998) and c) lack of X-ray coincidence with HI line emission in the velocity range of the new intruder NGC 7318b (S01). Optical spectroscopy (Xu et al. 2001) also shows that emission line ratios from gas coincident with the NS region imply shock conditions. In the simplest scenario, the shock results from the collision of NGC 7318b with previously stripped gas in SQ.

In the strong shock approximation, as expected from an impact with $`v`$ 1000 km s-1, the shock temperature

$`T_{sh}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{16}}(\mu \overline{m}/k_B)\mathrm{\Delta }v^2\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi `$ (1)
$``$ $`2.7\times 10^7\mu v_8^2\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi \mathrm{K}`$
The quantities $`\mu `$, $`\overline{m}`$, $`k_B`$, and $`v_8`$ are the mean molecular weight, mean particle mass of the gas, Boltzmann’s constant, upstream velocity in units of $`10^8`$ cm s-1, respectively. In a perpendicular shock, the angle between the incoming flow direction and the shock surface $`\varphi `$ = 90$`\mathrm{°}`$. We further assume $`\mu `$=1, which accounts for a completely neutral upstream gas and a perfect gas with ratio of specific heats, $`\gamma _c=5/3`$.

This shock temperature is significantly higher than that derived in Section 2.3 and cannot be interpreted as the result of significant cooling if the collision is ongoing (or even recent, see later). It is more likely that the shock conditions are not as simple as assumed in Eq. 1, and require either an oblique (small $`\varphi `$, cf. App. A.1) and/or weak shock (i.e. the upstream medium is hot and has a sizeable counter-pressure) in which case the strong shock assumption breaks down. The effects of a magnetic field are also considered in App. A.2, but the field strength derived appears to be rather high.

If the new intruder collides with a neutral hydrogen cloud, as suggested by the spatial “continuity” between the NS feature and H i clouds N and S of it with consistent velocities (see Fig. 11), we expect strong shock conditions to prevail. To reconcile expected and observed post-shock temperatures, the incoming flow should cross the shock at an angle of $`\varphi 30^{}`$, for an upstream H i temperature of 100 K (see App. A.2, Eq. A.1). Since the upstream Mach number, $`M_{\mathrm{}}930`$, is very high, the opening angle of the Mach cone, and thus also of the bow shock, should indeed be fairly small. Therefore we do not expect a significant amount of hotter gas to exist (e.g. in the stagnation point region, where the temperature is at most a factor of 4.5 higher). Thus the shock conditions look fairly reasonable, and although they may look somewhat specific, they are easily realized.

Due to the high Mach number, the compression ratio should be close to that for a perpendicular shock, e.g. $`n_X/n_14`$ (Eq. 4). To evaluate the gas densities $`n_X`$, we can assume the simplified spectral models derived in Section 2.3.1, that will give a good estimate of these quantities. In the NS feature, with a luminosity L$`{}_{X}{}^{}1.5\times 10^{41}`$ erg s-1 in an ellipsoidal volume with $`V=\frac{4}{3}\pi abc\frac{4}{3}\pi 11^{\prime \prime }\times 38^{\prime \prime }\times 11^{\prime \prime }`$ ($`a,b,c`$ denote the semi-major axes), the density:

$$\mathrm{n}_\mathrm{X}=\left(\frac{\mathrm{L}_\mathrm{X}}{\mathrm{V}_\mathrm{X}\mathrm{\Lambda }(\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{X})}\right)^{1/2}2.7\times 10^2\mathrm{cm}^3,$$
(2)
for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(T_X)7\times 10^{24}`$, appropriate for gas with 10% solar metallicity (e.g. Böhringer & Hensler 1989). This suggests a gas mass M$`{}_{\mathrm{gas}}{}^{}6.5\times 10^8`$ M, and a cooling time

$`t_{\mathrm{cool}}{\displaystyle \frac{3k_BT_X}{n_X\mathrm{\Lambda }(T_X)}}4.2\times 10^8\mathrm{yr}`$ (3)
The actual density is likely to be locally higher (factors of $`2`$), since the emission is obviously clumpy and more compressed towards the W. In the low surface brightness region surrounding it, the average density is a factor $`10`$ lower, and at roughly the same temperature as the NS-feature, giving a cooling time also $``$ 10 times longer. Thus the shock temperature could be explained by cooling only if the shock is $`>>`$108 year old which is inconsistent with other (all shorter) timescales (S01).

We can infer the pre-shock density $`n_{\mathrm{}}`$ $`6.5\times 10^3\mathrm{cm}^3`$ as a mean value of n$`{}_{1}{}^{}3.4\times 10^31\times 10^2`$ cm-3 derived for the H i densities in Arc-S and NW-HV clouds (from the data of Williams et al. 2002). We therefore derive a compression ratio $`n_X/n_14`$, consistent to the expected value (Eq. 4).

### 3.2 Constraints from UV, optical and radio continuum emission

The large multiwavelength database available for SQ motivates additional considerations:

$``$ The gas involved in the NS X-ray/H$`\alpha `$+\[NII\]6583/radio continuum feature, and at least some of the H i clouds, is a product of $`past`$ $`tidal`$ interactions. Ram pressure stripping is not very efficient, given the low densities involved and the low velocity dispersion in SQ. This suggest that NGC 7318b can retain a significant residual ISM after the encounter with SQ: $`n_{IGM}v_{N7381b}^22n_{N7381b}\sigma _{N7381b}^2`$ (Takeda et al. 1984) gives $`\sigma _{N7381b}100`$ km s-1, using $`n_{IGM}10^2\mathrm{cm}^3`$ for the IGM number density and $`n_{N7381b}1\mathrm{cm}^3`$ for the average galaxy’s ISM density. The derived velocity dispersion $`\sigma _{N7381b}`$ corresponds to a galaxy mass of less than $`3\times 10^{10}\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{}}`$.

$``$ The NS feature is spatially (anti)correlated with the residual H i gas N and S of it. A lot of this gas may be related to the last passage of NGC 7320c through SQ. The central part of it has recently been shocked by NGC 7318b. The transverse velocity component is unknown and the direction of motion of NGC 7318b is therefore uncertain. Striations in the HST and CFHT images (S01) suggest motion from SW to NE or vice versa. Contour lines of the X-ray emission in NS feature suggest a higher compression on the W side, favouring motion from NE to SW.

$``$ The low surface brightness emission surrounding the sharper NS feature could be interpreted as a preexisting hot IGM. The low velocity dispersion in SQ members requires it to have been heated by previous collisions (e.g. NGC 7320c?). The inferred trajectory in Fig. 9 and a projected distance of $`120`$ kpc, allow us to estimate the projected velocity $`v_{OI}\frac{120\mathrm{kpc}}{3\times 10^8\mathrm{yr}}400`$ km s-1, which is a lower limit. According to Eq. (1) this velocity corresponds to $`T6\times 10^6`$ K, in excellent agreement with the measured X-ray temperature. The long cooling time derived above relative to the inferred last passage of NGC 7320c suggests that such a hot IGM component would not have cooled significantly over this period. The rather uniform distribution of the low surface brightness emission (in contrast to e.g. the NS feature) would be due to the equilibration by shock and/or sound waves that were able to propagate through the IGM within at least the last $`3\times 10^8\mathrm{yr}`$ (sound crossing time scale). We expect that the impact of NGC 7318b will produce only a weak shock here, given the relatively high gas temperature. If this component is related to the ISM of NGC 7318b, rather than residual hot gas in SQ, we must assume that it has expanded and cooled from an expected post-shock temperature given by Eq. (1).

$``$ The X-ray/radio continuum/optical emission line extension or tail towards the NW is a puzzle if the collision is ongoing. The X-ray cooling timescale is about an order of magnitude longer than the new intruder crossing (tc(NGC 7318b)$``$ few $`\times `$107 years). If the former timescale were a better estimate for the age of the shock we could more easily account for the NW extension as a tidal feature.

$``$ The X-ray gap shown in Fig. 5 is an additional puzzle although similar features have been observed in richer environments. The prominent “cold front” observed in the cluster A3776 is interpreted as colder gas moving into a hotter ambient medium (Vikhlinin et al. 2001). Mazzotta et al. (2002) identify two additional features, one of which is an arc-like filamentary X-ray depression oriented perpendicular to the direction of motion. Large scale hydrodynamic instabilities coupled with magnetic field effects are suggested to explain these morphological peculiarities. The surface brightness discontinuity seen in SQ appears sharper and more prominent than in the other examples. A temperature discontinuity is associated with the surface brightness edges in other examples and we cannot detect such a feature in SQ. On the other hand, the temperatures of both the ambient gas and the NS shock feature in SQ are significantly lower than the gas in A3667. This could cause a more significant drop in emissivity if the temperature falls below the energies at which the instruments are sensitive. Forthcoming observations with XMM-Newton, that will give more spectral information, will hopefully provide clues to its nature.

## 4 Discrete Sources in the SQ galaxies

A few discrete sources can be identified with galaxies in the group.

NGC 7319: NGC 7319 is dominated by a strong heavily absorbed nuclear point source embedded in fainter extended emission that extends to $`10^{\prime \prime }`$ radius. Three additional sources (# 9, 10, 13) are associated with this galaxy: source #9 is near an optical point source and the other two are projected on the spiral arms but do not appear to coincide with individual sources or with specific condensations (see Fig. 12).

A connection between interactions and AGN activity has been difficult to prove conclusively although recent evidence has been advanced for an excess of Seyfert 2 nuclei in a reasonably complete sample of compact groups (Coziol et al. 2000). NGC 7319 shows both evidence for a past interaction event that stripped it of its ISM (tied to the last passage of NGC 7320c and the generation of the younger optical tidal tail) and near nuclear activity in the form of an emission line jet (Aoki et al. 1996) and triple lobed radio (Aoki et al 1999) structure on a 10′′ scale that cannot be so easily related to past interaction episodes. One can argue that the quasi-continuous nature of the tidal perturbations in compact groups might more efficiently channel gas into nuclei giving rise to phenomena of this kind. Interpretation of the extended X-ray emission around NGC 7319 is complicated by the presence of this optical jet and also by the nearby unresolved X-ray source (source #9). The most straightforward assumption is that source #9 is unrelated to the nuclear activity. That assumption may be challenged by the discovery of other AGN with nearby unresolved X-ray sources (Mrk 3, Morse et al. 1995; NGC 4258, Wilson et al. 2001a): in NGC 4151 (Yang et al, 2001) and Pictor A (Wilson et al. 2001b). Source # 9 is $`8^{\prime \prime }`$ S from the nucleus (Fig. 12) and may coincide with a compact optical object (# 54 in Gallagher et al. 2001). Its BVI colors are consistent with a late F to early G main sequence star but the observed magnitude would put it at $``$30 kpc without taking into account any possible extinction. It is therefore unlikely to be a galactic star. It is embedded in a region where CO is detected (Yun et al. 1997) which indicates that star formation may be occurring there.

Given the high X-ray luminosity of X-ray point sources assumed to belong to NGC 7319, L$`{}_{X}{}^{}5\times 10^{39}`$ erg s-1, they may be analogs of the Ultra Luminous X-ray sources (ULX), that are found in actively star forming galaxies (Zezas et al. 1999; Roberts & Warwick 2000; Fabbiano et al. 2001) and some in more normal spiral galaxies (Tennant et al. 2001, Prestwich 2002). A definite interpretation about the origin of ULX is not yet available. Both spectral characteristics and variability arguments suggest that they are binary accretion sources, although the requirement of a sizeable central collapsed object might favour beaming or anisotropy in the accretion process (King et al. 2001; Körding, Falcke & Markoff 2002). Sources 10 and 13 are in a region of NGC 7319 with colors (S01) consistent with a star formation event that ended about the time it was stripped of its ISM (a few times 108 years ago).

NGC 7318a. A relatively hard source is coincident with the nucleus, but a broad band (0.5-5.0 keV) radial profile is inconsistent with the Chandra Point Spread Function, suggesting that the emission is extended and likely related to the entire galaxy. This elliptical galaxy appears to lie directly in the path of the ongoing collision. It is the only galaxy in SQ other than NGC 7319 that shows radio emission. All H i and H ii that are found N, W and E of this galaxy belong to new intruder NGC 7318b. One can therefore infer an “inverse-Cartwheel” scenario where the disk of NGC 7318b has passed directly through this galaxy. While it is tempting to say “yes” to such an hypothesis, two arguments warrant caution: 1) the X-ray (and radio) properties of NGC 7318a are not unlike more isolated galaxies of the same type and 2) the high velocity of the new intruder leaves little time for the formation of interaction induced structure or activity, unless the collision is “old”, as discussed earlier. Of course in situ shocking of gas within the galaxy is not subject to the latter objection.

NGC 7317, NGC 7320c, NGC 7318b. None of these galaxies were formally detected with Chandra. An enhancement is visible at the position of NGC 7317. We measure 11$`\pm `$4 counts in the 0.3-10 keV band within an area with $``$4′′ radius, which corresponds to an unabsorbed flux fX $`5\times 10^{15}`$ erg cm-2 s-1. This value can be used as an upper limit for X-ray emission from the other two galaxies. This is particularly true for NGC 7318b where complex emission from the NS feature precludes a direct measure.

Isolated bright sources. X-ray sources #2, 5, and possibly 4, are detected close to and possibly associated with bright emission regions SW and N of NGC 7318ab. All such emission regions show velocities consistent with the “b” galaxy (S01). Source #5 could be associated with “putative star” #127 in Gallagher et al. (2001). An enhancement is also seen coincident with ISO detected starburst A (Xu et al. 1999) this time with an SQ velocity. The inferred luminosities are relatively high and consistent with ULX sources in starforming regions.

NGC 7320 We find two sources (#6 and 7) in the nuclear region of NGC 7320 with luminosities $``$ 6 and $`10\times 10^{37}`$ erg s-1. Source #6 appears to coincide with the nucleus (see Fig. 12) and would represent a relatively low luminosity nuclear source comparable to a bright binary system. A third source, #11 at the SE edge of NGC 7320 shows a luminosity of $`2`$$`\times 10^{38}`$ erg s-1. Both extranuclear sources are most likely bright accreting binary systems similar to the ones found in other spiral galaxies. A more speculative interpretation would relate source 11 to the old tidal tail passing behind NGC 7320, in which case LX would exceed $``$ 1039 erg s-1 at the distance of SQ.

## 5 Summary and conclusions

New high sensitivity and high resolution Chandra observations confirm the complexity of the X-ray emission in SQ. The most prominent sources are associated with a large scale shock that is strongest at low energies (E$`<`$1.5 keV) and a Seyfert 2 nucleus in NGC 7319 that dominates the emission above 2 keV. Additional sources are likely associated with members of SQ and with the foreground galaxy NGC 7320. Low surface brightness diffuse emission is also detected in the core of the system associated either with a large scale IGM or with the shocked ISM of the new intruder NGC 7318b.

The complex dynamical history of SQ offers the most plausible explanation for the large scale NS shock as a collision between a high velocity intruder and a gaseous debris field produced by earlier interacting events. Analytical evaluations of the shock conditions, taking into account the X-ray morphology and spectrum, require an oblique shock propagating into a pre-existing H i cloud. The alternative is to postulate that the collision is not ongoing and that the shock has cooled considerably.

Detailed X-ray analysis of compact groups can also provide us with further insights into the problem of IGM metal enrichment and, in particular, whether galaxy interactions rather than galactic winds are the primary process for entropy and heavy element input into the IGM. The spectral fits presented here are carried out under the assumption of collisional ionization equilibrium. They suggest a low IGM metallicity and a preponderance of tidal interactions over galactic outflows. More detailed investigations are not warranted by the statistics of the Chandra data. Analysis of new XMM-Newton data will provide more stringent constraints on spectral and dynamical properties of the collision scenario discussed here. Stephan’s Quintet continues to be an excellent laboratory for studying dynamics and evolution in compact groups and represents one of the most useful local analogs of phenomena thought to be much more common at high redshift.

###### Acknowledgements.

GT thanks G. Hasinger, J. Trümper and all colleagues at the Max-Planck-Institut für extraterrestrische Physik (MPE) for fruitful discussions and hospitality while part of this work was done. GT acknowledges support from grants from the Italian Space Agency (ASI). DB thanks G. Hasinger and the MPE for financial support. JS acknowledges financial support under NASA grant GO0-1142X.
The compressed files of the “Palomar Observatory - Space Telescope Science Institute Digital Sky Survey” of the northern sky, based on scans of the Second Palomar Sky Survey are copyright (c) 1993-2000 by the California Institute of Technology and are distributed by agreement. All Rights Reserved.

## Appendix A Shock conditions for interaction of New Intruder with IGM

General shock physics tells us that a supersonically moving body will have a bow shock at its leading edge. In the rest frame of the high velocity intruder the incoming flow will enter the shock wave at some angle $`\varphi `$, allowing the downstream material to be deflected and flow subsonically around the galaxy (e.g. the NW star forming region).

It is known from aerodynamics that the shape of the bow shock and its stand-off distance (gap between the nose of the obstacle and the bow shock) cannot be determined from hydrodynamics alone. It also depends on the geometry since the fluid equations do not exhibit any characteristic length scale (for a perfect gas). The bow shock can be viewed as a transition from a planar/perpendicular (near the stagnation point region) to an oblique shock. In the following, we will quantitatively analyze these two situations. In the planar case, in which the maximum compression occurs, a magnetic field, parallel to the shock surface for the maximum effect, will also be considered. In the next subsections we discuss simple analytic expressions that we have used for the most plausible scenarios. We will use the subscripts “sh” and “$`\mathrm{}`$” for downstream and upstream quantities, respectively, and an adiabatic gas with ratio of specific heats $`\gamma _c=5/3`$. $`M`$ denotes the Mach number, $`c`$ the speed of sound, and $`v_{A,\mathrm{}}=\sqrt{B/(4\pi \rho )}`$ the Alfvén velocity.

### A.1 Oblique shock

The compression and the temperature ratio for an oblique shock associated with a bow shock will be

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _\varphi }{\rho _{\mathrm{}}}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\gamma +1)M_{\mathrm{}}^2\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi }{(\gamma 1)M_{\mathrm{}}^2\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi +2}}4,`$ (4)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{T_\varphi }{T_{\mathrm{}}}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{[(\gamma 1)M_{\mathrm{}}^2\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi +2]}{(\gamma +1)^2M_{\mathrm{}}^2\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi }}\times `$ (5)
$`\times {\displaystyle \frac{[2\gamma M_{\mathrm{}}^2\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi (\gamma 1)]}{(\gamma +1)^2M_{\mathrm{}}^2\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi }}`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma (\gamma 1)}{(\gamma +1)^2}}M_{\mathrm{}}^2\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi `$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{5}{16}}M_{\mathrm{}}^2\mathrm{sin}^2\varphi .`$
Note that Eq. (5) is the generalization of Eq. (1) for arbitrary shock strengths. A detailed numerical calculation, which is beyond the scope of this paper, will be necessary for a more quantitative comparison, and it should include a temperature structure downstream of the bow shock.

### A.2 Perpendicular MHD shock

Using the above notation, we can write the compression ratio $`r`$ and the ratio of gas to magnetic pressure in the upstream plasma $`\beta _{\mathrm{}}`$ as

$$r=\frac{\rho _{sh}}{\rho _{\mathrm{}}}=\frac{v_{\mathrm{}}}{v_{sh}}=\frac{B_{sh}}{B_{\mathrm{}}},$$
(7)
$$\beta _{\mathrm{}}=\frac{2c_{\mathrm{}}^2}{\gamma v_{A,\mathrm{}}^2}=\frac{8\pi \rho _{\mathrm{}}k_BT_{\mathrm{}}}{B_{\mathrm{}}^2\overline{m}},$$
(8)
and from the Rankine-Hugoniot conditions we can derive the following equations:

$`2(2\gamma )r^2\gamma (1+\gamma )\beta _{\mathrm{}}M_{\mathrm{}}^2`$ (9)
$`+`$ $`\gamma r\left\{2+\beta _{\mathrm{}}\left[2+(\gamma 1)M_{\mathrm{}}^2\right]\right\}=0,`$
and

$$\frac{T_{sh}}{T_{\mathrm{}}}=\frac{1}{r}\left[1+\frac{1r^2}{\beta _{\mathrm{}}}+\gamma \left(1\frac{1}{r}\right)M_{\mathrm{}}^2\right];$$
(10)
for $`\beta _{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{}`$ we recover the ordinary gas shock relations (see Landau & Lifshitz 1959). Eq. (10) can be used to derive the magnetic field strength in the uncompressed gas due to

$$B_{\mathrm{}}=\sqrt{\frac{8\pi k_Bn_{\mathrm{}}T_{\mathrm{}}}{(1r^2)}\left[r\frac{T_{sh}}{T_{\mathrm{}}}1\gamma M_{\mathrm{}}^2\left(1\frac{1}{r}\right)\right]}.$$
(11)
For the shock propagating into the NS feature to be compressive it has to be a fast MHD shock, satisfying the condition: $`v_{N7318b}c_{\mathrm{}}^2+v_{A,\mathrm{}}^2`$.

If the pre-shock material is the “missing” part of an H i structure connecting the Arc-S and NW-HV regions in Williams et al (2002, see Fig.11), its inferred density $`n_{\mathrm{}}`$ $`6.5\times 10^3\mathrm{cm}^3`$ and upstream temperature $`T_{\mathrm{}}=100`$ K. Thus $`c_{\mathrm{}}1.1`$ km s-1 and the shock is indeed hypersonic since the Mach number is $`M_{\mathrm{}}932`$. In case of a strong shock ($`M_{\mathrm{}}1`$) Eq. (9) yields a compression ratio of $`r=4`$ for the derived X-ray quantities. This results in an unshocked magnetic field strength of $`B_{\mathrm{}}1.13\times 10^5`$ G and thus, in the strong shock approximation, of a factor $`4`$ higher in the shocked NS feature. As the Alfvén speed equals $`v_{A,\mathrm{}}280`$ km s-1, the fast MHD shock condition is easily fulfilled. Since $`B_{\mathrm{}}1/r`$ the magnetic field strength decreases with the compression ratio $`r`$; therefore very low compression ratios are disfavored in a perpendicular MHD shock case. Even the field value for $`r=4`$ seems to be on the high side.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

At HERA, the interaction of protons with quasi-real photons emitted from the electron111 In the data taking periods used for this analysis, HERA was operated with a positron beam. However, the generic name “electron” will be used here to mean both electron and positron.  beam can result in the production of jets , for which two types of process are responsible in leading order (LO) quantum chromodynamics (QCD). The photon may interact as a pointlike particle with a parton carrying a fraction $`x_p`$ of the proton momentum, in so-called direct processes (Fig. 1(a)). Alternatively, in resolved processes (Fig. 1(b)), the photon may develop a hadronic structure so that a parton carrying a fraction $`x_\gamma `$ of the photon momentum interacts with a parton in the proton. Due to confinement, the partons emerging from the interaction fragment into jets of colourless particles. The hadronic final state also includes the proton remnant and, in the case of resolved processes, the photon remnant and additional particles resulting from possible remnant-remnant interactions (the underlying event).

The main purpose of this paper is to present inclusive jet cross sections measured using the H1 detector and to compare them with fixed order parton level QCD predictions. After correcting the data and calculations to the hadron level, these comparisons offer a means of testing the validity of perturbative QCD predictions, including the description of the partonic structure of the photon and the proton in terms of parton distribution functions (PDFs). The QCD-inspired modelling of non-perturbative effects in hard hadronic photoproduction can be tested as well. The most accurate theoretical predictions have been calculated up to next-to-leading order (NLO) in perturbative QCD. In order to compare these predictions with jet cross section measurements, the jet definition must meet certain requirements, such as infrared and collinear safety and minimal sensitivity to fragmentation and underlying event effects. The $`k_{}`$ algorithm, originally proposed in , satisfies these requirements.

Inclusive jet measurements at hadron colliders  and at HERA  have often been important in the development of the understanding of QCD. In this paper, the first H1 measurement of inclusive jet cross sections in photoproduction using the inclusive $`k_{}`$ algorithm  is presented. Compared with the last H1 inclusive jet measurement , the integrated luminosity has been increased by a factor of $`80`$ and the jet transverse energy range has been extended, now reaching from $`5`$ to $`75\mathrm{GeV}`$. In order to allow cross-checks with previous HERA measurements and comparisons with data from other colliders, the measurements have also been performed using a cone algorithm.

The paper is organized as follows. In section 2, the motivations for this measurement are detailed and the phenomenology of inclusive jet photoproduction is presented. A brief description of the H1 detector and details of the analysis procedure are given in section 3. The measurements of single- and multi-differential inclusive jet cross sections as functions of jet transverse energy $`E_T^{jet}`$ and pseudorapidity222 Pseudorapidity is defined as $`\eta \mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{tan}\theta /2)`$, where $`\theta `$ is the polar angle, in the coordinate system centered at the nominal interaction point, with respect to the positive $`z`$ axis along the outgoing proton beam direction. The outgoing proton (photon) direction is also called forward (backward) and corresponds to $`\eta >0`$ ($`\eta <0`$).  $`\eta ^{jet}`$ in the laboratory frame are presented in section 4. The results are compared with LO and NLO QCD calculations and with inclusive jet measurements at $`p\overline{p}`$ colliders. The final section provides a summary of the results.

## 2 Inclusive jet photoproduction

Inclusive jet cross sections are obtained by counting the number of jets found by a jet algorithm in a given kinematic range. The inclusive $`k_{}`$ algorithm  is a modified version of the exclusive $`k_{}`$ algorithm  where all hadronic final state particles are clustered iteratively333For more details, see e.g. . into jets according to their separations in $`(\eta ,\varphi )`$ space444$`\varphi `$ is the azimuthal angle in the transverse plane.. Here, the algorithm is applied in the laboratory frame. The separation parameter between jets in $`(\eta ,\varphi )`$ space is set to $`D=1`$, as in . An $`E_T`$ weighted recombination scheme , in which the reconstructed jets are massless, is used to maintain invariance under longitudinal boosts. To allow comparisons of the results of this study with previous measurements in photoproduction and with other collider data, the complete analysis has also been performed using a cone algorithm  with a cone radius $`R=1`$. The cone algorithm has been shown to give larger hadronisation corrections than the inclusive $`k_{}`$ algorithm (section 2.4), as is the case for jets in deep inelastic scattering (DIS) .

### 2.1 Motivation

In this paper, inclusive jet cross sections are measured over a very large $`E_T^{jet}`$ range. In the high $`E_T^{jet}`$ region, the high transverse momentum of the outgoing parton provides a hard scale which allows reliable cross section calculations to be made in perturbative QCD. It also ensures a reduced influence of less-well understood soft processes (fragmentation and underlying event). Jets at high $`E_T^{jet}`$ thus provide the most direct insight into photoproduction at the parton level.

In the region of low $`E_T^{jet}`$, the NLO and higher order terms as well as corrections from the parton to the hadron level become more important, since the strong coupling $`\alpha _S`$ increases with decreasing scale. In the absence of a fundamental understanding of non-perturbative processes, the comparisons between data and theory necessarily involve phenomenological models. Matching the theoretical predictions with the experimental measurements at low $`E_T^{jet}`$ thus represents a further important test of QCD-inspired phenomenology in jet photoproduction.

Jet photoproduction cross sections are directly sensitive to the gluon as well as the quark content of the photon and the proton. The proton PDFs are precisely determined  from structure function measurements . An exception is the gluon distribution at high $`x_p`$ . There, jet photoproduction measurements  can provide complementary information. For the photon, the quark density at medium and high $`x_\gamma `$ is constrained  by $`F_2^\gamma `$ measurements at $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders , albeit with larger uncertainties than in the proton case. Since boson-gluon fusion is a higher order process compared with photon-quark scattering at $`e^+e^{}`$ colliders, the gluon density in the photon is even less well constrained. Furthermore, the photon PDFs do not obey strict momentum sum rules, so that there is no indirect constraint on the gluon density in the photon. In photoproduction at HERA, higher scales can be reached than at LEP because of the higher centre-of-mass (cms) energy and higher $`\gamma p`$ compared with $`\gamma \gamma `$ luminosity. Jet photoproduction cross section measurements  thus access a largely unexplored domain of photon structure.

The measurement presented here probes a wide range of $`E_T^{jet}`$ and $`\eta ^{jet}`$, quite similar to the range explored in a recent dijet cross section measurement . Although dijet events offer better constraints on the hard scattering kinematics, inclusive jet measurements offer the experimental advantages of greater statistics and increased kinematic range and the theoretical advantage of naturally avoiding infrared-sensitive regions of phase space .

### 2.2 QCD calculations

By considering the electron as a source of quasi-real photons of virtuality555The photon virtuality is $`Q^2(kk^{})^2`$, where $`k`$ ($`k^{}`$) is the 4-vector of the incoming (outgoing) electron. $`Q^2`$ and energy $`E_\gamma `$ and using the QCD factorisation theorem and a factorisable jet algorithm, the electron-proton cross section for producing $`N`$ jets ($`N2`$) in direct photoproduction can be expressed as:

$$\sigma _{\mathrm{dir}.}^{epe+N\mathrm{jets}+X}=_\mathrm{\Omega }d\mathrm{\Omega }f_{\gamma /e}(y,Q^2)\underset{i}{}f_{i/p}(x_p,\mu _p^2)\mathrm{d}\widehat{\sigma }(\gamma iN\mathrm{jets}).$$
(1)
Here, $`y=E_\gamma /E_e`$ is the fraction of the electron energy $`E_e`$ carried by the photon, $`f_{\gamma /e}(y,Q^2)`$ is the photon flux associated with the electron , $`f_{i/p}(x_p,\mu _p^2)`$ is the proton PDF of parton $`i`$ evaluated at the factorisation scale $`\mu _p`$ and $`\widehat{\sigma }(\gamma iN\mathrm{jets})`$ is the parton-level cross section for the direct subprocess $`\gamma iN\mathrm{jets}`$. The cross section $`\widehat{\sigma }`$ is proportional to $`\alpha _{em}(\mu _R^2)\alpha _S^{N1}(\mu _R^2)`$ at lowest order and can be expanded in powers of $`\alpha _S`$ multiplied by perturbatively calculable coefficient functions, both of which depend on the renormalisation scale $`\mu _R`$. The kinematic domain over which the cross section is integrated is denoted $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$.

Similarly, the cross section for resolved photoproduction can be written:

$$\sigma _{\mathrm{res}.}^{epe+N\mathrm{jets}+X}=_\mathrm{\Omega }d\mathrm{\Omega }f_{\gamma /e}(y,Q^2)\underset{ij}{}f_{i/p}(x_p,\mu _p^2)f_{j/\gamma }(x_\gamma ,\mu _\gamma ^2)\mathrm{d}\widehat{\sigma }(ijN\mathrm{jets}).$$
(2)
Compared with Eq. 1 for direct processes, the resolved cross section in Eq. 2 includes in addition the photon PDF of parton $`j`$, $`f_{j/\gamma }(x_\gamma ,\mu _\gamma ^2)`$, evaluated at the factorisation scale $`\mu _\gamma `$. Due to the splitting $`\gamma q\overline{q}`$, the QCD evolution equations of the resolved photon PDFs  differ from those for the proton and lead to large quark densities at high $`x_\gamma `$, which increase with $`\mu _\gamma `$. The cross section $`\widehat{\sigma }(ijN\mathrm{jets})`$ describes the resolved subprocess $`ijN\mathrm{jets}`$ and is proportional to $`\alpha _S^N(\mu _R^2)`$ at lowest order.

The distinction between the direct (Eq. 1) and the resolved (Eq. 2) components is only unambiguous at LO, whereas beyond LO their relative contributions depend on the factorisation scale $`\mu _\gamma `$. The inclusive cross section for the production of a jet in a given kinematic range $`\sigma ^{epe+\mathrm{jet}+X}`$ is obtained by summing all calculated contributions of Eqs. 1 and 2 over $`N`$, weighting by the corresponding number of jets inside this kinematic range.

The partonic cross sections $`\widehat{\sigma }`$ in Eqs. 1 and 2 have been calculated at LO and NLO in QCD by several theoretical groups . These calculations differ mainly in the treatment of infrared and collinear singularities. In this paper, measurements are compared with the LO and NLO calculations of , based on the subtraction method as implemented in a Monte Carlo program . This program generates weighted parton kinematic configurations used as input to the inclusive $`k_{}`$ algorithm. These calculations differ from those obtained with the phase space slicing method  by less than $`2\%`$ .

The CTEQ5M  parameterisation of the proton PDFs was used for the calculations. To test the dependence of the NLO cross sections on the choice of proton PDFs, MRST99  and CTEQ5HJ  were also used, where the latter has an enhanced gluon distribution at high $`x_p`$. The renormalisation group equation to $`2`$-loop accuracy was used for $`\alpha _S`$ and the value of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}`$ was chosen to match that used in the evolution of the proton PDFs (for five quark flavours, $`\alpha _S(M_Z)=0.118`$ for CTEQ5M and CTEQ5HJ, $`\alpha _S(M_Z)=0.1175`$ for MRST99). GRV-HO  was chosen as the standard parameterisation of the photon PDFs. The AFG-HO  parameterisation was also used to study the dependence of the results on the choice of photon PDFs. The renormalisation and factorisation scales were defined as the sum of the transverse energies of the outgoing partons divided by $`2`$. These scales were varied by factors $`0.5`$ and $`2`$ in order to estimate the uncertainty corresponding to the missing higher-order terms.

### 2.3 Monte Carlo models

Simulated event samples have been used to correct the data for detector effects (section 3.3) and to estimate hadronisation effects for the QCD calculations (section 2.4). Direct and resolved photoproduction events were simulated using the PYTHIA , HERWIG , and PHOJET  Monte Carlo generators. The generated events were passed through a GEANT  simulation of the H1 detector and the same reconstruction chain as the data.

All programs generate partonic interactions using the Born level QCD hard scattering matrix elements, regulated by a minimum cut-off $`\widehat{p}_T^{\text{ min}}`$ on the common transverse momentum of the two outgoing partons. For PYTHIA and PHOJET (HERWIG), the strong coupling constant $`\alpha _S`$ was calculated by solving the $`1`$ ($`2`$) loop renormalisation group equation using $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}=200\mathrm{MeV}`$ for $`4`$ ($`5`$) quark flavours. GRV-LO parameterisations of the proton  and the photon  PDFs were used. Higher order QCD radiation effects are simulated through initial and final state parton showers in the leading log approximation. The fragmentation process is performed using the Lund string model  as implemented in JETSET  in the case of PYTHIA and PHOJET and using a cluster model  in the case of HERWIG.

For resolved photon interactions, besides the primary parton-parton scattering, additional interactions are generated in order to simulate the effect of the underlying event. Within PYTHIA, these are calculated as LO QCD processes between partons from the remnants of the proton and the photon. The resulting additional final state partons are required to have transverse momenta above $`1.2\mathrm{GeV}`$, a value which gives an optimal description of the transverse energy flow outside jets for the specific photon PDFs used . Soft particles accompanying the hard subprocess are produced in HERWIG using a soft underlying event (SUE) mechanism which is based on parameterisations of experimental results on soft hadron-hadron collisions. The fraction of resolved interactions which are generated with an additional SUE can be varied within HERWIG and has been adjusted to $`35\%`$ to match the observed level of soft activity between jets. PHOJET, which is based on the two-component dual parton model  incorporates detailed simulations of multiple soft and hard parton interactions on the basis of a unitarisation scheme. Due to this scheme, small variations of the lower momentum cut-off for hard parton interactions, set here to $`\widehat{p}_T^{\text{ min}}=3\mathrm{GeV}`$, do not have an influence on the results of this generator.

### 2.4 Hadronisation corrections

Since the QCD calculations refer to jets of partons, whereas the measurements refer to jets of hadrons, the predicted cross sections have been corrected to the hadron level using LO Monte Carlo programs. The hadronisation correction factors, $`(1+\delta _{hadr.})`$, are defined as the ratio of the cross sections obtained with jets reconstructed from hadrons after the full event simulation (including parton showers, fragmentation and underlying event effects) to that from partons after parton showers but before fragmentation and underlying event simulation. These corrections were calculated by taking the results from two different Monte Carlo models chosen as described in section 3.3. The uncertainty on these corrections was taken as the quadratic sum of the statistical error and the systematic error given by half the difference between the results obtained from the two Monte Carlo models. Using the $`k_{}`$ algorithm, the corrections were found to be approximately $`30\%`$ for $`E_T^{jet}<10\mathrm{GeV}`$ falling to values typically below $`12\%`$ for $`E_T^{jet}>20\mathrm{GeV}`$. With the cone algorithm, the corrections are around $`40\%`$ for $`E_T^{jet}<15\mathrm{GeV}`$ and $`20\%`$ for $`E_T^{jet}>15\mathrm{GeV}`$. The difference between the results obtained with the two Monte Carlo models is typically very small and at most $`10\%`$.

The effects of the underlying event and of the fragmentation were also studied separately. The corresponding correction factors, $`(1+\delta _{u.e.})`$ and $`(1+\delta _{frag.})`$, were determined in the same way as the overall corrections factors $`(1+\delta _{hadr.})`$. Here, $`(1+\delta _{u.e.})`$ is defined as the ratio of the cross sections obtained with jets reconstructed from hadrons with simulation of the underlying event to that from hadrons without simulation of the underlying event, whilst $`(1+\delta _{frag.})`$ is defined as the ratio of the cross sections obtained with jets reconstructed from hadrons to that from partons after parton showers, both without simulation of the underlying event. By definition, $`(1+\delta _{hadr.})=(1+\delta _{u.e.})(1+\delta _{frag.})`$.

Low momentum hadrons from the underlying event lead to a systematic increase of $`E_T^{jet}`$ and thus of the hadron level cross section at fixed $`E_T^{jet}`$. The $`\delta _{u.e.}`$ correction is always positive and increases as $`E_T^{jet}`$ decreases or $`\eta ^{jet}`$ increases. Using the inclusive $`k_{}`$ algorithm, for $`5E_T^{jet}<12\mathrm{GeV}`$, $`\delta _{u.e.}`$ varies between $`30\%`$ at $`\eta ^{jet}=0.75`$ and $`100\%`$ at $`\eta ^{jet}=1.25`$. For $`E_T^{jet}>20\mathrm{GeV}`$, $`\delta _{u.e.}`$ is always below $`10\%`$. The effect of the underlying event is partially compensated by fragmentation, which has a tendency to lower the cross section. In general, $`\delta _{frag.}`$ is negative and becomes more important as $`E_T^{jet}`$ decreases but also as $`\eta ^{jet}`$ decreases, in contrast to $`\delta _{u.e.}`$. The $`\delta _{frag.}`$ correction is around $`30\%`$ for $`5E_T^{jet}<12\mathrm{GeV}`$ and around $`5\%`$ for $`E_T^{jet}20\mathrm{GeV}`$.

## 3 Experimental technique

### 3.1 H1 detector

A detailed description of the H1 detector can be found elsewhere . Here only the components relevant for this measurement are briefly described.

The $`ep`$ luminosity is determined with a precision of $`1.5\%`$ by comparing the event rate in the photon detector, located at $`z=103\mathrm{m}`$, with the cross section for the QED bremsstrahlung process $`epep\gamma `$. The scattered electron may be detected in the electron tagger (ETag), located at $`z=33\mathrm{m}`$. Both detectors are TlCl/TlBr crystal Čerenkov calorimeters with an energy resolution of $`22\%/\sqrt{E/\mathrm{GeV}}`$.

The central tracker (CT), which covers the range $`|\eta |1.5`$ is used to measure the trajectories of charged particles and to reconstruct the interaction vertex. It consists of inner and outer cylindrical jet chambers for precise position measurement in the transverse plane, $`z`$-drift chambers for precise $`z`$ measurement and proportional chambers for triggering purposes. The transverse momentum of charged particles is reconstructed from the curvature of tracks in the homogeneous magnetic field of $`1.15`$ Tesla along the beam direction, with a resolution $`\sigma (p_T)/p_T0.6\%p_T/\mathrm{GeV}`$.

The finely segmented Liquid Argon (LAr) calorimeter  surrounds the tracking system and covers the range $`1.5\eta 3.4`$ with full azimuthal acceptance. It consists of an electromagnetic section with lead absorbers and a hadronic section with steel absorbers. The total depth of the LAr calorimeter ranges from $`4.5`$ to $`8`$ hadronic interaction lengths. The energy resolution determined in test beam measurements is $`\sigma (E)/E50\%/\sqrt{E/\mathrm{GeV}}2\%`$ for charged pions. For jets with $`E_T^{jet}`$ above $`20\mathrm{GeV}`$, the jet energy calibration agrees at the $`2\%`$ level with the Monte Carlo simulation, as determined by the $`E_T`$ balance in neutral current (NC) DIS and jet photoproduction events. At lower $`E_T^{jet}`$, the absolute hadronic energy scale is known to $`4\%`$. The absolute resolution in $`\eta ^{jet}`$ is approximately $`0.05`$ at $`E_T^{jet}=5\mathrm{GeV}`$ and better than $`0.02`$ for $`E_T^{jet}>20\mathrm{GeV}`$.

The region $`4.0\eta 1.4`$ is covered by the SPACAL lead/scintillating-fibre calorimeter . Its absolute hadronic energy scale is known to $`7\%`$.

### 3.2 Event selection and reconstruction

The data used in this paper were collected in $`1996`$ and $`1997`$, when electrons of energy $`E_e=27.5\mathrm{GeV}`$ collided with protons of energy $`E_p=820\mathrm{GeV}`$, resulting in an $`ep`$ cms energy of $`300\mathrm{GeV}`$. For measurements in the region $`E_T^{jet}21\mathrm{GeV}`$ (“high” $`E_T^{jet}`$), the full data sample representing an integrated luminosity of $`24.1\mathrm{pb}^1`$ was used. In addition to some activity in the central region, as seen by the CT, the trigger conditions required high transverse energy deposits in the LAr calorimeter (jet triggers). In the region $`5E_T^{jet}<21\mathrm{GeV}`$ (“low” $`E_T^{jet}`$), where jet triggers suffer from proton beam-induced background, a trigger based on scattered electron signals in the ETag was used instead. This trigger was operated during a ‘minimum bias’ data taking period corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $`0.47\mathrm{pb}^1`$. The events from this subsample were required to have the scattered electron detected in the fiducial volume of the ETag, with an energy in the range $`9.6E_e^{}19.3\mathrm{GeV}`$. The ETag geometrical acceptance, which is corrected for on an event-by-event basis, is always greater than $`10\%`$ in this range. The detection of the scattered electron ensures an improved measurement of $`y`$ and hence of the photon-proton cms energy $`W_{\gamma p}=\sqrt{4yE_eE_p}`$, but reduces the available number of events by a factor of approximately ten, due to the restricted $`y`$ range and to the limited acceptance of the ETag. The ETag events were also required to have no energy deposited in the photon arm of the luminosity system. This condition suppresses background from high rate Bethe-Heitler events in random coincidence with proton beam-induced background events which give activity in the interaction region. It also reduces QED radiative corrections.

An interaction vertex, reconstructed from tracks in the CT and located within $`30\mathrm{cm}`$ of the nominal $`z`$ position of the interaction point, was demanded. Energy deposits in the calorimeters and tracks in the CT were combined, in a manner that avoids double counting, in order to optimize the reconstruction of the hadronic final state , from which $`W_{\gamma p}`$ was derived  for the “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$analysis. The inclusive jet sample was then defined by keeping all events for which at least one jet was reconstructed with the inclusive $`k_{}`$ algorithm in the kinematic domain:

$$1\eta ^{jet}2.5;E_T^{jet}21\mathrm{GeV}(\text{“high”}E_T^{jet});$$
(3)
$$1\eta ^{jet}2.5;E_T^{jet}5\mathrm{GeV}(\text{“low”}E_T^{jet}).$$
(4)
The $`\eta ^{jet}`$ range was chosen to ensure that the jets were well contained in the LAr calorimeter. For “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$ events, the kinematic region was restricted to

$$Q^21\mathrm{GeV}^2;95W_{\gamma p}285\mathrm{GeV}.$$
(5)
The $`Q^2`$ range is implied by the absence of the scattered electron in the main H1 detector. For “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$ events, the tagging of the electron already restricted the kinematic region to

$$Q^210^2\mathrm{GeV}^2;164W_{\gamma p}242\mathrm{GeV}.$$
(6)
A number of requirements were made in order to suppress the non-$`ep`$ background. For “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$, the vertex condition was sufficient to reduce the contamination from beam-induced background to a negligible level. Background originating from cosmic showers and beam halo muons was rejected using a set of topological muon finders. In addition, the total missing transverse momentum $`P/_T`$ was required to be small compared with the total transverse energy $`E_T`$ by applying the cut $`P/_T/\sqrt{E_T}2.5\mathrm{GeV}^{\frac{1}{2}}`$. The overall non-$`ep`$ background contamination in the “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$ sample was then estimated to be below $`1\%`$. For “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$ events, since $`W_{\gamma p}`$ can be measured in two independent ways (using either the energy of the scattered electron or the hadronic final state), consistency between the results of the two methods was required. By fitting the distribution of the $`z`$ position of the vertex with the sum of a Gaussian and a constant, the “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$ sample was estimated to have a non-$`ep`$ background contamination of about $`2\%`$.

Further cuts were applied to reduce backgrounds from other $`ep`$ collision processes. For the “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$ jet sample, the only significant one is the NC DIS process666 The charged current DIS background was already completely suppressed by the $`P/_T`$ cut. , where either the scattered electron or the current jet enters the inclusive jet selection. Events with a scattered electron candidate found using electron identification algorithms  were thus rejected. The remaining $`ep`$ background in the “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$ sample was estimated to be below $`1\%`$ from a study using a simulated sample of NC DIS events from the DJANGO  Monte Carlo generator. In the “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$ sample it is completely negligible.

The event samples finally consist of $`\mathrm{15\hspace{0.17em}388}`$ jets reconstructed in $`\mathrm{11\hspace{0.17em}801}`$ events for “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$and $`\mathrm{26\hspace{0.17em}848}`$ jets reconstructed in $`\mathrm{21\hspace{0.17em}001}`$ events for “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$. For both samples, the total background of around $`2\%`$ was subtracted. The inefficiency due to selection cuts is below $`3\%`$.

### 3.3 Cross section determination

To obtain the inclusive jet cross section, each of the $`N`$ jets reconstructed in a given range is assigned a weight calculated as the inverse of the event-by-event trigger efficiency $`ϵ`$. The cross section obtained at the detector level is then corrected by a factor $`𝒞`$ for inefficiencies due to the selection procedure and for migrations caused by the detector response. For instance, the double-differential cross section averaged over a range $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_T^{jet}\mathrm{\Delta }\eta ^{jet}`$, is defined as:

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}^2\sigma ^{epe+\mathrm{jet}+X}}{\mathrm{d}E_T^{jet}\mathrm{d}\eta ^{jet}}=\frac{_{i=1}^N(\frac{1}{ϵ_i})}{\mathrm{\Delta }E_T^{jet}\mathrm{\Delta }\eta ^{jet}𝒞}$$
(7)
where $``$ is the integrated luminosity.

The trigger efficiency $`ϵ`$ was determined from data by using events triggered independently. For the “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$ analysis, $`ϵ`$ was parameterised as a function of the $`E_T`$ and $`\eta `$ of the leading jet and was always greater than $`80\%`$, reaching $`100\%`$ for $`E_T35\mathrm{GeV}`$. For the “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$ analysis, $`ϵ`$ was found to depend on the multiplicity of CT tracks in the event, with a mean value of $`97\%`$.

Two Monte Carlo programs (section 2.3) were used to correct the data from each event sample for detector effects. For the “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$ sample, HERWIG and PYTHIA were chosen. A reasonable description of the observed energy flow around the jet axis was obtained with both programs, provided the underlying event or multiple interaction mechanisms were included in the Monte Carlo simulations . For the “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$ sample, PHOJET, which has been shown to give the best description of energy flow distributions  and jet profiles , was chosen together with PYTHIA. The mean correction factors $`𝒞`$ calculated for each measurement interval with the two Monte Carlo models were found to lie between $`0.9`$ and $`1.6`$ for the “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$ analysis and between $`0.5`$ and $`1.6`$ for the “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$ analysis.

The bin-to-bin migrations are important due to the steeply-falling shape of the $`E_T^{jet}`$ spectrum. The bin widths were chosen to measure cross sections in as many intervals as possible whilst ensuring that stability and purity777 The stability $`𝒮`$ (purity $`𝒫`$) is defined as the number of jets which are both generated and reconstructed in an analysis bin, divided by the total number of jets that are generated (reconstructed) in that bin. By definition, $`𝒞𝒮/𝒫`$. were greater than $`30\%`$. These criteria restrict the $`\eta ^{jet}`$ cross section measurements to different $`\eta ^{jet}`$ ranges depending on the $`E_T^{jet}`$ range considered. At “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$, the problematic region is that of negative $`\eta ^{jet}`$. Due to the Lorentz boost between the $`\gamma p`$ cms and the laboratory frame, $`\eta ^{jet}=0`$ corresponds to a cms pseudorapidity888 $`\eta ^{}=\eta \mathrm{ln}(2E_p/W_{\gamma p})`$. $`\eta ^{}`$ of about $`2`$, which is well into the photon hemisphere. The cross section thus falls most steeply with increasing $`E_T^{jet}`$ in this region. At “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$, the influence of the proton remnant compromises measurements towards higher $`\eta ^{jet}`$.

### 3.4 Systematic uncertainties

The following systematic uncertainties have been considered :

* The uncertainty in the absolute hadronic energy scale of the LAr calorimeter ($`2\%`$ for “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$ and $`4\%`$ for “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$) leads to an uncertainty of typically $`10\%`$ for “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$ and between $`10\%`$ and $`20\%`$ for “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$.
* The $`7\%`$ uncertainty in the hadronic SPACAL energy scale results in an uncertainty of $`1\%`$ at “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$ and is negligible at “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$.
* The $`3\%`$ uncertainty in the fraction of the energy of the reconstructed hadronic final state carried by tracks leads to an uncertainty of less than $`1\%`$ for “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$ and of $`2\%`$ to $`4\%`$ for “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$.
* The background subtraction leads to an uncertainty of $`1\%`$.
* The statistical uncertainty in the trigger efficiency determination leads to an uncertainty of $`1\%`$ or less.
* The uncertainty in the integrated luminosity results in an overall normalisation error of $`1.5\%`$.
* The uncertainty in the correction for detector effects was taken to be half the difference between the correction factors calculated from the two Monte Carlo programs. It is smaller than $`8\%`$ for “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$ and smaller than $`10\%`$ for “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$.

All systematic uncertainties are added in quadrature. The resulting uncertainty ranges from $`10\%`$ to $`20\%`$ for “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$ and from $`15\%`$ to $`30\%`$ for “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$ and is dominated by the normalisation uncertainty due to the LAr calorimeter energy scale.

## 4 Results

In this section, inclusive jet cross sections are presented, corrected for detector effects and measured in different kinematic regions as functions of $`E_T^{jet}`$ and $`\eta ^{jet}`$ in the laboratory frame. Good agreement with previous data  has been found when using the cone algorithm . The results are also consistent with recently published ZEUS data  using the $`k_{}`$ algorithm. The numerical results using the $`k_{}`$ algorithm (Tabs. 1 to 5) are given as differential cross sections averaged over the quoted ranges. Those obtained with the cone algorithm (Tabs. 6 and 7) are given at the average value in each analysis interval, determined according to the Monte Carlo simulation. The results are shown in Figs. 2 to 9. In the $`E_T^{jet}`$ spectra (upper part of Figs. 2 to 4), all systematic uncertainties are added in quadrature with the statistical uncertainty and are shown as error bars. The inner error bars denote the statistical and the outer the total uncertainty. In all other figures, the LAr calorimeter energy scale uncertainty is not included in the error bars, but is shown separately as a hatched band. The results are compared with LO and NLO QCD predictions first, then with similar measurements at $`p\overline{p}`$ colliders. Unless otherwise stated, the QCD prediction is calculated at NLO with the standard settings described in section 2.2 and corrected for hadronisation, as explained in section 2.4. Its uncertainty is shown as a shaded band divided into two parts. The inside (light) part is the uncertainty associated with the hadronisation corrections and the outside (dark) part is the uncertainty associated with the choice of the renormalisation and factorisation scales. These uncertainties are added linearly. When presented (Figs. 2 to 5), the relative differences are always defined with respect to this standard NLO QCD prediction. The total hadronisation correction factors $`(1+\delta _{hadr.})`$ and their errors are given in the tables, together with the correction factors associated with the effects of fragmentation, $`(1+\delta _{frag.})`$ and of the underlying event, $`(1+\delta _{u.e.})`$.

### 4.1 $`𝑬_𝑻^{𝒋𝒆𝒕}`$ cross sections

The measured differential $`e^+p`$ cross section $`\mathrm{d}\sigma /\mathrm{d}E_T^{jet}`$ for inclusive jet production integrated over $`1\eta ^{jet}2.5`$ in the kinematic region defined by $`Q^21\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ and $`95W_{\gamma p}285\mathrm{GeV}`$ is shown for $`E_T^{jet}>21\mathrm{GeV}`$ in Fig. 2 (top). The LO QCD calculation fails to reproduce the normalisation of the distribution. Both NLO predictions, with and without hadronisation corrections, reproduce the measured distribution very well. As shown in Fig. 2 (bottom), the uncertainty due to the renormalisation and factorisation scales is of the order of $`10\%`$. The calculated cross sections using the GRV photon PDFs are typically $`5\%`$ to $`10\%`$ larger than those obtained with AFG. To show the sensitivity to the proton PDFs, the predictions using GRV for the photon and MRST99 or CTEQ5HJ for the proton are also shown. Compared with CTEQ5M, MRST99 and CTEQ5HJ give almost the same prediction at relatively small $`E_T^{jet}`$, but show differences as $`E_T^{jet}`$ increases. The prediction using MRST99 decreases relative to that using CTEQ5M by $`5\%`$ over the measured $`E_T^{jet}`$ range while that using CTEQ5HJ increases by $`8\%`$. Within the errors, the NLO QCD calculations with each of the PDFs choices describe the magnitude and the shape of the measured inclusive $`E_T^{jet}`$ spectrum very well, up to the highest measured $`E_T^{jet}`$ values.

In Fig. 3 (top), $`\mathrm{d}\sigma /\mathrm{d}E_T^{jet}`$ is presented for two separate $`W_{\gamma p}`$ intervals $`95W_{\gamma p}<212\mathrm{GeV}`$ and $`212W_{\gamma p}285\mathrm{GeV}`$. At higher $`W_{\gamma p}`$, the $`E_T^{jet}`$ spectrum is harder and extends to higher $`E_T^{jet}`$ values, as expected. The predictions of the two combinations of photon and proton PDFs which give the lowest (AFG for the photon and MRST99 for the proton) and the highest (GRV for the photon and CTEQ5HJ for the proton) cross sections are also shown. As can be seen in Fig. 3 (bottom), all these NLO QCD calculations describe the magnitude and the shape of the inclusive $`E_T^{jet}`$ spectra measured in the two $`W_{\gamma p}`$ ranges.

A measurement of the inclusive jet cross section over the whole $`E_T^{jet}`$ range was performed by combining the “low” and “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$ data samples. In order to do this, the same $`W_{\gamma p}`$ cut was applied to the “high” as to the “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$ data sample, i.e. $`164W_{\gamma p}242\mathrm{GeV}`$. The “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$ cross section was also corrected to correspond to the same $`Q^2`$ range999 The “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$ cross section was multiplied by the ratio $`R_F=F(1\mathrm{GeV}^2)/F(0.01\mathrm{GeV}^2)`$, where $`F(Q_{max}^2)`$ is the integral of the photon flux $`f_{\gamma /e}(y,Q^2)`$ (see Eqs. 1 and 2) over $`Q^2<Q_{max}^2`$ in the range $`0.3y0.65`$, which corresponds to the chosen $`W_{\gamma p}`$ range. The numerical integration yields $`F(1\mathrm{GeV}^2)=0.0181`$, $`F(0.01\mathrm{GeV}^2)=0.0127`$ and $`R_F=1.43`$.  as the “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$ sample. The measured cross section is shown in Fig. 4. The analyses of the “low” and “high” $`E_T^{jet}`$ samples agree well in their domain of overlap. The measured $`\mathrm{d}\sigma /\mathrm{d}E_T^{jet}`$ cross section falls by more than 6 orders of magnitude between $`E_T^{jet}=5`$ and $`75\mathrm{GeV}`$ and is well reproduced by the theoretical prediction. The NLO contribution and the hadronisation corrections are both needed to give a good agreement of the calculation with the measured data.

Following a procedure previously applied to the inclusive charged particle photoproduction cross section , the power-law  function $`(1+E_T^{jet}/E_{T,0})^n`$ was fitted to the inclusive jet cross section $`1/E_T^{jet}\mathrm{d}\sigma /\mathrm{d}E_T^{jet}`$ obtained from the data of Fig. 4. Good fits with stable results could only be obtained in the region $`5E_T^{jet}<35\mathrm{GeV}`$. The fit gave the results $`E_{T,0}=2.4\pm 0.6(\mathrm{stat}.){}_{0.6}{}^{+0.2}(\mathrm{syst}.)\mathrm{GeV}`$ and $`n=7.5\pm 0.3(\mathrm{stat}.){}_{0.5}{}^{+0.1}(\mathrm{syst}.)`$. The value of the exponent is in agreement with that obtained in : $`n=7.03\pm 0.07(\mathrm{stat}.)\pm 0.20(\mathrm{syst}.)`$.

### 4.2 $`𝜼^{𝒋𝒆𝒕}`$ cross sections

The measured differential $`e^+p`$ cross section $`\mathrm{d}\sigma /\mathrm{d}\eta ^{jet}`$ in the range $`1\eta ^{jet}2.5`$ for inclusive jet production integrated over $`21E_T^{jet}75\mathrm{GeV}`$, $`Q^21\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ and $`95W_{\gamma p}285\mathrm{GeV}`$ is shown in Fig. 5. The calculated cross sections using different combinations of the photon and proton PDFs give a good description of the data, within the experimental and theoretical errors. The normalisation of the data can only be described when the NLO contribution is included. The description is not significantly improved by the hadronisation corrections.

In Fig. 6, $`\mathrm{d}\sigma /\mathrm{d}\eta ^{jet}`$ is presented in three different intervals of $`E_T^{jet}`$ and compared with NLO QCD predictions. The hadronisation corrections correspond to an increase (decrease) of the pure partonic prediction in the forward (backward) region. The increase in the forward region is due to the influence of the proton remnant leading to significant underlying energy, while the decrease in the backward region reflects the escape of partonic energy from the jet due to fragmentation (section 2.4). Within the errors, the data are well described by the NLO QCD predictions.

In order to study the cross section more differentially, measurements of $`\mathrm{d}\sigma /\mathrm{d}\eta ^{jet}`$ in two regions of $`W_{\gamma p}`$ and three intervals of $`E_T^{jet}`$ are presented in Fig. 7. The maximum of the cross section is shifted towards low $`\eta ^{jet}`$ values at higher $`W_{\gamma p}`$ due to the decreased forward boost of the hadronic cms relative to the laboratory frame. The NLO QCD predictions with and without (not shown in Fig. 7) hadronisation corrections are in general in good agreement with the measured cross sections. NLO QCD calculations using different combinations of photon and proton PDFs also give good agreement with the data. The precision of the measurement as well as the theoretical uncertainties do not allow any firm conclusion to be drawn on which combination of PDFs is favoured by the data.

The $`\mathrm{d}\sigma /\mathrm{d}\eta ^{jet}`$ measurement for the “low” $`E_T^{jet}`$ sample is presented in Fig. 8 for two intervals of $`E_T^{jet}`$, in the kinematic region $`Q^210^2\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ and $`164W_{\gamma p}242\mathrm{GeV}`$. The NLO predictions are in agreement with the data in the range $`12E_T^{jet}21\mathrm{GeV}`$, provided the hadronisation corrections are included. In the lowest $`E_T^{jet}`$ range $`5E_T^{jet}<12\mathrm{GeV}`$, however, the agreement with the NLO predictions including hadronisation corrections is marginal and the data seem to indicate a rise of the cross section with increasing $`\eta ^{jet}`$ which is faster than in the theoretical predictions. This may be the result of a failure of the LO Monte Carlo to accurately estimate the hadronisation corrections. Inadequacy of the photon PDFs in this kinematic range or the absence of higher order corrections beyond NLO may also be responsible.

### 4.3 Comparison with $`𝒑\overline{𝒑}`$ collider results

It is interesting to compare the present photoproduction measurements with similar $`p\overline{p}`$ data in order to see the effects arising from the different structure of the photon and the proton. The differential $`e^+p`$ cross section $`\mathrm{d}\sigma /\mathrm{d}E_T^{jet}`$ was measured in the range $`1\eta ^{jet}2.5`$, as in Fig. 4, but using the cone algorithm with cone radius $`R=1`$ to match the procedure used for the only available $`p\overline{p}`$ data  at comparable cms energy $`\sqrt{s}=200\mathrm{GeV}`$. The results are presented in Tab. 6. Up to a normalisation factor, the $`E_T^{jet}`$ dependence of the data is compatible in the region of overlap $`5E_T^{jet}22\mathrm{GeV}`$ with that of . Monte Carlo studies show that the difference in cms jet pseudorapidity ranges between the $`\gamma p`$ ($`3.0\stackrel{<}{_{}}\eta ^{}\stackrel{<}{_{}}0.5`$) and $`p\overline{p}`$ ($`|\eta ^{}|<1.5`$) data does not affect this conclusion.

To allow comparisons with $`p\overline{p}`$ measurements at different energies, the scaled $`\gamma p`$ cross section

$$S(x_T)E_T^{jet^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}}}E^{jet}\frac{\mathrm{d}^3\sigma }{\mathrm{d}p^{jet^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}}}=\frac{E_T^{jet^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}}}{2\pi }\frac{\mathrm{d}^2\sigma }{\mathrm{d}E_T^{jet}\mathrm{d}\eta ^{jet}},$$
(8)
where $`(E^{jet},p^{jet})`$ is the four-vector of the jet, was measured as a function of the dimensionless variable $`x_T=2E_T^{jet}/W_{\gamma p}`$. In the naive parton model, $`S(x_T)`$ is independent of cms energy for the same colliding particles. The differential $`e^+p`$ cross section $`\mathrm{d}\sigma /\mathrm{d}E_T^{jet}`$ was measured with the cone algorithm in the restricted range $`1.5\eta ^{jet}2.5`$ and $`E_T^{jet}>8\mathrm{GeV}`$. It was then transformed into $`S(x_T)`$ at a fixed $`W_{\gamma p}=200\mathrm{GeV}`$ averaged over the range $`|\eta ^{}|0.5`$ using the Monte Carlo models to evaluate the correction factors and their uncertainties.

The $`S(x_T)`$ distribution is presented in Tab. 7 and Fig. 9. In the figure, it is compared with data from $`p\overline{p}`$ scattering obtained by the UA1  and D0  collaborations at various energies using the cone algorithm. The $`p\overline{p}`$ data were transformed into $`S(x_T)`$ using the $`E_T^{jet}`$ value at the centre of each measurement interval and were scaled by factors of $`𝒪(\alpha _{em}/\alpha _S)`$ such that $`S(x_T)`$ approximately matches that from the photoproduction data at $`x_T0.1`$. Despite the differences in the $`\eta ^{}`$ ranges of measurement and in the details of the analysis procedure101010 UA1 measured cross sections in the range $`|\eta ^{}|1.5`$ for $`\sqrt{s}=200\mathrm{GeV}`$ and $`|\eta ^{}|0.7`$ for $`\sqrt{s}=630\mathrm{GeV}`$, using a cone radius $`R=1`$ and no jet pedestal energy subtraction. D0 measured cross sections in the range $`|\eta ^{}|0.5`$ using a cone radius $`R=0.7`$ and jet pedestal energy subtraction., all $`p\overline{p}`$ data are in approximate agreement after the scaling factors are applied. Within the experimental uncertainties, the shape of the $`S(x_T)`$ distribution for $`\gamma p`$ is compatible with those from $`p\overline{p}`$ data in the region $`x_T0.2`$, where the resolved photon leads to a similar behaviour of the scaled cross section to that for a hadron except for the overall normalisation. At larger $`x_T`$, the shape of the $`\gamma p`$ cross section begins to deviate from that for $`p\overline{p}`$. As can be inferred from the PYTHIA predictions for the full $`\gamma p`$ cross section and for the contribution from resolved photons, this is due to the enhancement of the resolved photon quark density relative to that of the proton at large momentum fractions, as well as the increasing proportion of direct photon interactions. The direct photon contribution involves the convolution of only one set of PDFs and dominates the scaled cross section at the largest $`x_T`$.

## 5 Summary

A new measurement of inclusive jet production cross sections in quasi-real photoproduction ($`Q^21\mathrm{GeV}^2`$) has been presented, based on an integrated luminosity of $`24.1\mathrm{pb}^1`$ of $`e^+p`$ data collected by the H1 experiment in the years $`1996`$ and $`1997`$. Compared with the last published H1 result  on this topic, this measurement represents an increase in luminosity by a factor of $`80`$. The jets were selected using the inclusive $`k_{}`$ algorithm in the pseudorapidity range $`1\eta ^{jet}2.5`$ in the laboratory frame. The photon-proton centre-of-mass energy range of the measurement for jets with transverse energies $`E_T^{jet}21\mathrm{GeV}`$ is $`95W_{\gamma p}285\mathrm{GeV}`$. The measurement could be extended down to $`E_T^{jet}5\mathrm{GeV}`$ by using a sample of data with integrated luminosity $`0.47\mathrm{pb}^1`$, collected in a data taking period with a dedicated trigger. There, the kinematic range of measurement was $`Q^20.01\mathrm{GeV}^2`$ and $`164W_{\gamma p}242\mathrm{GeV}`$.

The measured cross sections were corrected to the hadron level and compared with leading order (LO) and next-to-leading order (NLO) QCD calculations, with and without fragmentation and underlying event corrections. The LO QCD calculations are unable to reproduce the normalisation of the experimental data. The NLO QCD calculations, using various available photon and proton PDFs, describe the measured distributions both in normalisation and shape over the whole $`E_T^{jet}`$ and $`\eta ^{jet}`$ range within the experimental and theoretical uncertainties. For $`E_T^{jet}21\mathrm{GeV}`$, the hadronisation corrections to the NLO QCD calculations only slightly improve the agreement with the data, whereas for $`5E_T^{jet}<21\mathrm{GeV}`$, good agreement can only be obtained with the hadronisation corrections. The current precision of the experimental results as well as of the theoretical predictions does not allow one to discriminate between the different photon and proton PDFs using these data alone. However, the information obtained from these measurements could be used to constrain the photon and proton PDFs in global fits of experimental results.

To compare with previous measurements at HERA and at $`p\overline{p}`$ colliders, the inclusive $`E_T^{jet}`$ differential cross section was also measured for jets defined using the cone algorithm with $`R=1`$. The shape of the $`\gamma p`$ scaled cross section $`S(x_T)`$, as a function of the dimensionless variable $`x_T=2E_T^{jet}/W_{\gamma p}`$ at $`W_{\gamma p}=200\mathrm{GeV}`$ for $`|\eta ^{}|<0.5`$, is compatible with that of similar $`p\overline{p}`$ measurements for $`x_T0.2`$. The shapes for $`\gamma p`$ and $`p\overline{p}`$ are different at larger $`x_T`$, where resolved photon structure at large $`x_\gamma `$ and direct photon interactions become important.

## Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the HERA machine group whose outstanding efforts have made this experiment possible. We thank the engineers and technicians for their work in constructing and now maintaining the H1 detector, our funding agencies for financial support, the DESY technical staff for continual assistance and the DESY directorate for support and for the hospitality which they extend to the non DESY members of the collaboration. We wish to thank M. Fontannaz for valuable discussions and S. Frixione and G. Ridolfi for making their theoretical calculations available to us.