Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

(3+1)-dimensional scalar field model analysis of beam spin asymmetry in the electroproduction of a scalar meson off a scalar target

Andrew Lundeen* and Chueng-Ryong Ji†

Yongwoo Choi‡

Ho-Meoyng Choi§

  • *Contact author: ajlundee@ncsu.edu
  • †Contact author: crji@ncsu.edu
  • ‡Contact author: sunctchoi@gmail.com
  • §Contact author: homyoung@knu.ac.kr

Phys. Rev. D 113, 016003 – Published 6 January, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/jjhl-h4dj

Abstract

We explore exclusive scalar meson electroproduction off a scalar target in the (3+1)-dimensional scalar field model. This model analysis is a straightforward extension of the previous (1+1)-dimensional model analysis presented in Choi et al. [Phys. Rev. D 105, 096014 (2022)]. In contrast to the (1+1)-dimensional model, the (3+1)-dimensional model allows us to compute the beam spin asymmetry (BSA), which is proportional to the imaginary part of the product of the two Compton form factors (CFFs) that appear in the hadronic current of the present scalar meson electroproduction process. We compute both real and imaginary parts of the CFFs and note that the BSA is detectable for −t/Q2≳0.1, although it gets quite small in the kinematic region −t/Q2≪0.1, where the factorization of the generalized parton distribution (GPD) is attainable. We find the analytic forms of the leading-twist GPD for the Dokshitzer-Gribov-Lipatov-Altarelli-Parisi (DGLAP) and Efremov-Radyushkin-Brodsky-Lepage (ERBL) regions in the (3+1)-dimensional scalar field model, confirming its uniqueness independent of the hadronic current component. While we verify that the GPD sum rule for the total result of summing the DGLAP and ERBL regions holds for all components of the hadronic current, we note that the respective correspondence of the DGLAP and ERBL regions to the valence and nonvalence parts of the electromagnetic form factor holds only for the light-front plus component of the hadronic current but not for any other components of the hadronic current. We discuss the polynomiality of the GPD up to the second moments and remark on accessible ranges of kinematics to measure the BSA and CFFs with respect to the future experimental efforts of extracting the leading-twist GPDs.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (39)

  1. V. D. Burkert et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 959, 163419 (2020).
  2. K. Kumerički, S. Liuti, and H. Moutarde, Eur. Phys. J. A 52, 157 (2016).
  3. M. Hattawy et al. (CLAS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 202004 (2017).
  4. R. Abdul Khalek et al., Nucl. Phys. A1026, 122447 (2022).
  5. B. L. G. Bakker and C.-R. Ji, Few-Body Syst. 60, 41 (2019).
  6. X. Ji, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 610 (1997).
  7. X. Ji, W. Melnitchouk, and X. Song, Phys. Rev. D 56, 5511 (1997).
  8. X. Ji, J. Phys. G 24, 1181 (1998).
  9. A. V. Radyushkin, Phys. Lett. B 380, 417 (1996).
  10. A. V. Radyushkin, Phys. Rev. D 56, 5524 (1997).
  11. A. Radyushkin, Phys. Lett. B 449, 81 (1999).
  12. D. Müller, D. Robaschik, B. Geyer, F.-M. Dittes, and J. Hořejši, Fortschr. Phys. 42, 101 (1994).
  13. M. V. Polyakov and C. Weiss, Phys. Rev. D 60, 114017 (1999).
  14. M. Diehl, Phys. Rep. 388, 41 (2003).
  15. A. Belitsky and A. Radyushkin, Phys. Rep. 418, 1 (2005).
  16. H.-M. Choi, C.-R. Ji, and L. S. Kisslinger, Phys. Rev. D 64, 093006 (2001).
  17. H.-M. Choi, C.-R. Ji, and L. S. Kisslinger, Phys. Rev. D 66, 053011 (2002).
  18. W. Broniowski and E. R. Arriola, Phys. Rev. D 78, 094011 (2008).
  19. M. V. Polyakov and P. Schweitzer, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 33, 1830025 (2018).
  20. J. Hudson and P. Schweitzer, Phys. Rev. D 96, 114013 (2017).
  21. Y. Choi, H.-D. Son, and H.-M. Choi, Phys. Rev. D 112, 014043 (2025).
  22. J. C. Collins, L. Frankfurt, and M. Strikman, Phys. Rev. D 56, 2982 (1997).
  23. C.-R. Ji, H.-M. Choi, A. Lundeen, and B. L. G. Bakker, Phys. Rev. D 99, 116008 (2019).
  24. Y. Choi, H.-M. Choi, C.-R. Ji, and Y. Oh, Phys. Rev. D 105, 096014 (2022).
  25. L. Favart, M. Guidal, T. Horn, and H. Moutarde, Eur. Phys. J. A 52, 158 (2016).
  26. R. Tarrach, Nuovo Cimento Soc. Ital. Fis. 28A, 409 (1975).
  27. A. V. Belitsky and D. Müller, Phys. Rev. D 79, 014017 (2009).
  28. K. KumeriÄki and D. MãŒller, Nucl. Phys. B841, 1 (2010).
  29. B. L. G. Bakker and C.-R. Ji, Few-Body Syst. 55, 395 (2014).
  30. V. Gribov and L. Lipatov, Phys. Lett. 37B, 78 (1971).
  31. Y. L. Dokshitzer, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 46, 641 (1977).
  32. G. Altarelli and G. Parisi, Nucl. Phys. 126B, 298 (1977).
  33. A. Efremov and A. Radyushkin, Phys. Lett. 94B, 245 (1980).
  34. G. Peter Lepage and S. J. Brodsky, Phys. Lett. 87B, 359 (1979).
  35. G. P. Lepage and S. J. Brodsky, Phys. Rev. D 22, 2157 (1980).
  36. R. A. Williams, C.-R. Ji, and S. R. Cotanch, Phys. Rev. C 46, 1617 (1992).
  37. M. Sawicki, Phys. Rev. D 44, 433 (1991).
  38. M. Sawicki, Phys. Rev. D 46, 474 (1992).
  39. H.-D. Son and P. T. P. Hutauruk, Phys. Rev. D 111, 054007 (2025).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation