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

Holographic open-closed exchange in double deeply virtual Compton scattering: Fixed-j structural matching to the ±-basis Wilson kernels

Kiminad A. Mamo*

  • *Contact author: ska25005@uconn.edu

Phys. Rev. D 114, 074035 – Published 13 October, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/xprh-hqqj

Abstract

We show that fixed-j holographic double deeply virtual Compton scattering (DDVCS) and its DVCS limit give a fixed-scale structural match to the singlet conformal-operator product expansion Wilson-kernel family of QCD in the leading-twist unpolarized singlet vector channel. The open-string C1(δ,ϑ) hypergeometric kernel was derived by Nishio-Watari; the new closed-string result is that the Brower-Polchinski-Strassler-Tan (BPST) upper Witten vertex gives the same family with a different near-boundary power count, because Δc(j) is fixed by the BPST trajectory rather than by open-Regge data. The Mellin exponent is therefore derived as δc(j)=j+Δc(j)−2=2j+γc(j) rather than inserted by hand. The even open branch gives the parallel unprotected counterpart in the projected singlet vector amplitude. At Q=μ=μ0=μ*, the point is not merely that equal-endpoint evolution is trivial; it is that the ultraviolet Witten vertex has already produced the fixed-j conformal kernel before the lower conformal moment is matched. In the conformal partial-wave/conformal subtraction representation, beta-proportional conformal-anomaly terms and scheme transformations are coefficient/evolution bookkeeping away from the matching point, not replacements for the projected fixed-scale hypergeometric η/ξ Wilson-kernel family. The protected/unprotected j=2 split identifies the protected closed branch with the (−) conformal partial wave and the even open branch with the unprotected (+) counterpart; these are mixed singlet eigenchannels, not literal unmixed quark/gluon operators at finite Nc. The comparison therefore gives a direct conformal-basis interpretation of the fixed-j holographic t-channel Witten diagram: the ultraviolet vertex generates the universal Wilson-kernel family, while the lower vertex supplies the channel-dependent nonperturbative conformal moment.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (36)

  1. D. Müller, D. Robaschik, B. Geyer, F. M. Dittes, and J. Hořejši, Fortschr. Phys. 42, 101 (1994).
  2. X.-D. Ji, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 610 (1997).
  3. X. Ji, Phys. Rev. D 55, 7114 (1997).
  4. A. V. Radyushkin, Phys. Lett. B 380, 417 (1996).
  5. A. V. Radyushkin, Phys. Lett. B 385, 333 (1996).
  6. A. V. Radyushkin, Phys. Rev. D 56, 5524 (1997).
  7. M. Diehl, Phys. Rep. 388, 41 (2003).
  8. A. V. Belitsky and A. V. Radyushkin, Phys. Rep. 418, 1 (2005).
  9. X. Ji and J. Osborne, Phys. Rev. D 58, 094018 (1998).
  10. J. C. Collins and A. Freund, Phys. Rev. D 59, 074009 (1999).
  11. D. Müller, Phys. Rev. D 58, 054005 (1998).
  12. A. V. Belitsky and D. Müller, Phys. Lett. B 417, 129 (1998).
  13. D. Müller and A. Schäfer, Nucl. Phys. B739, 1 (2006).
  14. M. Kirch, A. Manashov, and A. Schäfer, Phys. Rev. D 72, 114006 (2005).
  15. A. Manashov, M. Kirch, and A. Schäfer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 012002 (2005).
  16. K. Kumerički, D. Müller, K. Passek-Kumerički, and A. Schäfer, Phys. Lett. B 648, 186 (2007).
  17. K. Kumerički, D. Müller, and K. Passek-Kumerički, Nucl. Phys. B794, 244 (2008).
  18. V. M. Braun, A. N. Manashov, S. Moch, and J. Schoenleber, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2020) 117; 02 (2022) 115(E).
  19. V. M. Braun, A. N. Manashov, S. Moch, and J. Schoenleber, Phys. Rev. D 104, 094007 (2021).
  20. V. M. Braun, Y. Ji, and J. Schoenleber, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 172001 (2022).
  21. Y. Ji and J. Schoenleber, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2024) 053.
  22. V. M. Braun, H.-Y. Jiang, A. N. Manashov, and A. von Manteuffel, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2025) 069.
  23. V. M. Braun, P. Gotzler, and A. N. Manashov, Phys. Rev. D 113, 074005 (2026).
  24. J. Erlich, E. Katz, D. T. Son, and M. A. Stephanov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 261602 (2005).
  25. H. R. Grigoryan and A. V. Radyushkin, Phys. Rev. D 76, 095007 (2007).
  26. R. C. Brower, J. Polchinski, M. J. Strassler, and C.-I. Tan, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2007) 005.
  27. M. S. Costa and M. Djurić, Phys. Rev. D 86, 016009 (2012).
  28. R. C. Brower, M. S. Costa, M. Djurić, and C.-I. Tan, arXiv:1210.1511.
  29. C. Marquet, C. Roiesnel, and S. Wallon, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2010) 051.
  30. R. Nishio and T. Watari, Phys. Rev. D 90, 125001 (2014).
  31. R. Nishio and T. Watari, arXiv:1408.6365.
  32. E. Katz, A. Lewandowski, and M. D. Schwartz, Phys. Rev. D 74, 086004 (2006).
  33. J. Mager, L. Cappiello, J. Leutgeb, and A. Rebhan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 091901 (2025).
  34. Y. Hatta and D.-L. Yang, Phys. Rev. D 98, 074003 (2018).
  35. K. A. Mamo and I. Zahed, Phys. Rev. D 101, 086003 (2020).
  36. K. A. Mamo and I. Zahed, Phys. Rev. D 104, 066023 (2021).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation