 stick anymore to the large dijet relative rapidity region in the BFKL Pomeron manifestations hunting, since, from the one hand, we include the region of the moderate rapidity intervals into our consideration and, from the other hand, the resummation effects are quite pronounced at the moderate rapidity region.

We present also in Figs. 2,3 estimations for NLO BFKL effects using the results of Ref. [@Cor95], where conformal NLO contributions to the Lipatov’s eigenvalues were calculated. The estimations incorporate the NLO conformal corrections to the Lipatov’s eigenvalues (see Fig. 4) and the NLO CTEQ3M structure functions [@Lai94].

We should note here that the extraction of data on high-$k_{\perp}$ jets from the event samples in order to compare them with the BFKL Pomeron predictions should be different from the algorithms directed to a comparison with perturbative QCD predictions for the hard processes. These algorithms, motivated by the strong $k_{\perp}$-ordering of the hard QCD regime, employ hardest-$k_{\perp}$ jet selection (see, e.g., Ref. [@Alg94]). It is doubtful that one can reconcile these algorithms with the weak $k_{\perp}$-diffusion and the strong rapidity ordering of the semi-hard QCD regime, described by the BFKL resummation. We also note that our predictions should not be compared with the preliminary data [@Heu94] extracted by the most forward/backward jet selection criterion. Obviously, one should include for tagging all the registered pairs of jets (not only the most forward–backward pair) to compare with our predictions. In particular, to make a comparison with Figs. 2,3, one should sum up all the registered $x$-symmetric dijets ($x_1=x_2$) with transverse momenta harder than $k_{\perp min}$.

We thank E.A.Kuraev and L.N.Lipatov for stimulating discussions. We are grateful to A.J.Sommerer, J.P.Vary, and B.-L.Young for their kind hospitality at the IITAP, Ames, Iowa and support. V.T.K. is indebted to S.Ahn, C.L.Kim, T.Lee, A.Petridis, J.Qiu, C.R.Schmidt, S.I.T
stick anymore to the large dijet relative rapidity area in the BFKL Pomeron materialization hunting, since, from the one hand, we admit the region of the moderate celerity intervals into our consideration and, from the early hand, the resummation effects are quite pronounced at the moderate celerity area. 

 We present also in Figs. 2,3 estimate for NLO BFKL effects using the results of Ref. [ @Cor95 ], where conformal NLO contribution to the Lipatov ’s eigenvalues were account. The estimations incorporate the NLO conformal correction to the Lipatov ’s eigenvalues (see Fig. 4) and the NLO CTEQ3 M structure function   [ @Lai94 ]. 

 We should note here that the extraction of data on high-$k_{\perp}$ jets from the consequence samples in club to compare them with the BFKL Pomeron predictions should be different from the algorithms target to a comparison with perturbative QCD predictions for the hard processes. These algorithms, motivated by the solid $ k_{\perp}$-ordering of the intemperate QCD regime, employ hardest-$k_{\perp}$ jet selection (see, e.g., Ref. [ @Alg94 ]). It is doubtful that one can reconcile these algorithms with the watery $ k_{\perp}$-diffusion and the strong rapidity order of the semi - unvoiced quantum chromodynamics regime, described by the BFKL resummation. We also note that our predictions should not be compared with the preliminary data [ @Heu94 ] extracted by the about forward / backward jet selection criterion. Obviously, one should include for tagging all the registered pairs of jets (not only the most forward – backward couple) to compare with our predictions. In finical, to do a comparison with Figs. 2,3, one should sum up all the registered $ x$-symmetric dijets ($ x_1 = x_2 $) with transverse momentum harder than $ k_{\perp min}$. 

 We thank E.A.Kuraev and L.N.Lipatov for stimulating discussions. We are grateful to A.J.Sommerer, J.P.Vary, and B.-L.Young for their kind cordial reception at the IITAP, Ames, Iowa and support. V.T.K. is indebted to S.Ahn, C.L.Kim, T.Lee, A.Petridis, J.Qiu, C.R.Schmidt, S.I.T
 stlck anymore to the large dijet relative rapidivy regikn in thd BFKL Pomeron manifestationd yuntibg, since, from the one fand, we ijclude tye rtgion of the modeczte raplbity jktervclw into our conxideration and, from the mtfex hand, the resummation effects are qtite prpnlunced at the iodegaee rziibity region.

We present also in Fjgs. 2,3 esuimations for NLO NFKL effects using the resklts of Ref. [@Cor95], where fonformal NOO cjbtributions go the Lipatov’s eigenvzlues were calculated. The estimxtionx incorporqtw tjg NLO confornal cjrrections to the Li[atov’s rigenvalues (sec Fig. 4) abd the NLO CTEQ3M strurture functions [@Lai94].

We should nmtz here that the extraxtuon ox dada ov hieh-$k_{\ker'}$ jsts frlm vhe event szmples in oeder to compare thek rpyh the BFKL Lomerog [redictions should be different from tht algkrithms directed to a cimparison with perturhative QCQ predictions for the hard processes. These algoridhms, jutirqted ct hhe strong $k_{\perp}$-ordering of the hard QCD regiis, tmpkoy hardest-$k_{\pevp}$ jet selection (sre, e.b., Ref. [@Alg94]). It ir doubcrum that one can reclncile jhese qlgorithmf wiyh the weak $k_{\perp}$-diffusion qnd the stroug eapidity ordering lf the semi-kard QVD rebime, described by the BYKL reaummation. Wf also nofd that our prediztipnv should not be compared wyth the pcelimnnary daga [@Hgu94] extrwcted by tje most forward/backward uet sglectimn criteriln. Obviously, one should include for tagging akl thv registexed palrs of jets (not only the most forwarb–backwxrd pair) tk compace with our [redictions. It particular, vo make a compariwon witf Figs. 2,3, one shoild sum ui cll the rwgistered $x$-symmetrlc digsts ($x_1=x_2$) with traurcerse momenta hsrddr ehwn $k_{\[arp min}$.

We thdnk D.A.Kjtaev xnd L.N.Lipatix fot stimulating discusviona. We are grateful yo A.J.Sommeter, J.P.Varr, and B.-L.Young for their kind hodpitanitb at tne YITAP, Ames, Iowa and support. V.T.I. is indehteq to S.Ahn, C.L.Him, B.Lee, A.Petridis, J.Qiu, C.R.Schmidt, S.I.T
stick anymore to the large dijet relative in BFKL Pomeron hunting, since, from the of the moderate intervals into our and, from the other hand, the effects are quite pronounced at the moderate rapidity region. We present also in 2,3 estimations for NLO BFKL effects using the results of Ref. [@Cor95], where NLO to Lipatov’s were calculated. The estimations incorporate the NLO conformal corrections to the Lipatov’s eigenvalues (see Fig. 4) the NLO CTEQ3M structure functions [@Lai94]. We should here that the extraction data on high-$k_{\perp}$ jets from event in order compare with BFKL Pomeron predictions be different from the algorithms directed to a comparison with perturbative QCD predictions for the hard processes. algorithms, motivated strong $k_{\perp}$-ordering the QCD employ hardest-$k_{\perp}$ jet e.g., Ref. [@Alg94]). It is doubtful reconcile these algorithms with the weak $k_{\perp}$-diffusion and strong rapidity of the semi-hard QCD regime, described the BFKL resummation. We also note that our should not be compared with the preliminary data [@Heu94] extracted by the most forward/backward jet Obviously, one should include tagging all the pairs jets only most forward–backward to compare with our predictions. In particular, to make a comparison Figs. 2,3, one should sum up all the registered $x$-symmetric with momenta harder than min}$. We thank E.A.Kuraev L.N.Lipatov stimulating discussions. We are A.J.Sommerer, and kind at IITAP, Ames, Iowa and V.T.K. is indebted to S.Ahn, T.Lee, A.Petridis, J.Qiu, C.R.Schmidt,
 stick anymore to the large dijEt relative RapidIty RegIoN in tHe BFkL Pomeron manifEStatIons hunting, since, from thE one hAnD, We inCLuDe the Region oF ThE MOdeRaTe RapIdITy InterValS into ouR consideraTioN aNd, from the othER hAnd, the resuMmaTion effects aRe qUite prOnOunCEd at tHe mOderaTe rapiDIty regIon.

We presEnT Also in fIgs. 2,3 estiMATiOns fOr NLO BFKL effects uSInG The results of ReF. [@Cor95], whErE CoNFOrmAl NlO contribuTiOns to THe LipatOV’s EIGEnvALues were calcuLated. The estIMatIons inCoRpoRAte the nLO coNfORmaL correctionS to tHe Lipatov’S eigenVAlues (seE fig. 4) and tHe NLO CtEQ3m stRuctURe FuNctIoNS [@LaI94].

we ShoULd nOte here tHaT tHe extRactION OF datA on High-$K_{\perp}$ Jets from the evEnt SampLEs iN ordeR to coMparE tHem wiTh the BfKL PoMeRon predictions sHoulD be differEnt FrOm tHe AlgorIThms diRecTed To a compArison wITh pErTURBaTive QCD predictions FoR THe Hard procEsses. THEsE aLGorithms, MoTivAted BY The stRong $K_{\PeRp}$-orderiNg of thE HaRd qCD regiMe, Employ HaRdeSt-$k_{\Perp}$ jET selEction (See, e.g., Ref. [@alg94]). It IS doubtful that oNE can reconcile THeSE AlGOritHms With the weak $K_{\perP}$-DiffUsioN AnD thE StronG rapiDiTY oRDering of the semi-hard qCd regimE, descRibed by the BFKl resummatiON. wE also notE thaT OuR Predictions shoUld noT be compareD With the pRelimInary datA [@Heu94] extraCTEd by the mOst ForWarD/baCKWaRd jet selectioN CRiteRiOn. ObvioUslY, one shoUld IncLudE foR tAgging all The regisTeReD pAiRs oF jets (NOt only thE mOst FoRwaRd–bacKWard paIr) to cOmpaRe WiTH ouR predicTIoNS. in paRtIcUlar, To mAkE a comPariSOn wIth Figs. 2,3, One should Sum UP all ThE rEgisterEd $x$-symmetric dIjEts ($x_1=x_2$) with tRaNsvErse moMENta hardeR than $k_{\perp min}$.

We thank E.A.KURaev and l.N.LIpatoV for StimulatiNg dIscussIonS. we are gRatefuL to A.J.soMmeRER, J.P.VaRY, AnD B.-L.yoUng for theiR KInd HospiTaLity At the IItAP, Ames, Iowa and suppORt. V.t.K. is indebted tO S.AHn, C.L.kIM, T.lee, a.peTRidIs, j.qiu, c.r.schmidt, S.I.T
 stick anymore to the larg e dijet re lativ e r api di ty r egio n in the BFKLP omer on manifestations hunt ing,si n ce,f ro m the  one ha n d, w e i nc lu deth e  r egion  of  the mo derate rap idi ty  intervals i n to  our consi der ation and, f rom  the o th erh and,the  resu mmatio n  effec ts are qu it e  prono u nced at t he  mod erate rapidity re g io n .

We presentalso i nF ig s .  2, 3 e stimations  f or NL O  BFKL e f fe c t s  us i ng the result s of Ref. [ @ Cor 95], w he rec onform al NL Oc ont ributions t o th e Lipatov ’s eig e nvalues were ca lculat ed.  Th e es t im at ion si nco r po rat e  th e NLO co nf or mal c orre c t i o ns t o t he L ipato v’s eigenvalu es(see Fig . 4)and t he N LO  CTEQ 3M str uctur efunctions [@Lai 94]. 

We shou ldno tehe re th a t theext rac tion of  data o n  hi gh - $ k _{ \perp}$ jets fromth e ev ent samp les in or de r  to comp ar e t hemw i th th e BF K LPomeronpredic t io ns  should  b e diff er ent  fr om th e  alg orithm s direct ed to a comparison w i th perturbati v eQ C Dp redi cti ons for the  har d  pro cess e s.  Th e se al gorit hm s ,m otivated by the str on g $k_{ \perp }$-ordering o f the hard Q C D regime , em p lo y  hardest-$k_{\ perp} $ jet sele c tion (se e, e. g., Ref.  [@Alg94] ) .  It is d oub tfu l t hat o ne  can reconcil e thes ealgorit hms  with t hewea k $ k_{ \p erp}$-dif fusion a nd  t he  s tro ng ra p idity or de rin gofthe s e mi-har d QCD  reg im e, des cribedb yt h e BF KL  r esum mat io n. We  als o  no te that  our pred ict i onssh ou ld notbe compared w it h the prel im ina ry dat a [@Heu94]  extracted by the mostf orward/ bac kward  jet  selectio n c riteri on. Obviou sly, o ne sh ou ldi n clude f or  ta gg ing all th e reg ister ed  pai rs of j ets (not only them ost  forward–back war d pa i r )toc om p are  w i tho u r predictions.In particu la r ,to make ac omp ar ison wi th Figs . 2,3 ,  one sh ould sumup all th eregi s t ere d $x$-symm etric di jets ($x_ 1 =x_2$ )  w ith t ran sverse  m ome nta h ardert han  $k_{ \perpmi n}$.
We th an k E.A.Ku raev and L.N.Lipatov fo r stim ulati ngdiscussio ns. Weare grate fulto A.J.Som mer er,  J.P. Var y , and  B.- L .Y oun g  forthei r  kind hos p it ali t y  a t the IITAP , A mes , Iow a a n d supp ort.  V.T.K. is indebt e d to S.Ahn, C. L.Ki m ,  T. Lee ,  A.P et ridis, J.Qiu,C.R .S c h midt, S. I. T
 stick_anymore to_the large dijet relative_rapidity region_in_the BFKL_Pomeron_manifestations hunting, since,_from the one_hand, we include the_region of the_moderate_rapidity intervals into our consideration and, from the other hand, the resummation effects are_quite_pronounced at_the_moderate_rapidity region.

We present also in_Figs. 2,3 estimations for NLO_BFKL effects_using the results of Ref. [@Cor95], where conformal_NLO_contributions to the_Lipatov’s eigenvalues were calculated. The estimations incorporate the NLO_conformal corrections to the Lipatov’s eigenvalues_(see Fig. 4)_and_the_NLO CTEQ3M structure functions [@Lai94].

We_should note here that the extraction_of data on high-$k_{\perp}$ jets from_the event samples in order to compare_them with the BFKL Pomeron predictions_should be different from the_algorithms directed_to a comparison with perturbative_QCD predictions for_the hard_processes. These algorithms,_motivated by the strong $k_{\perp}$-ordering of_the hard QCD_regime, employ hardest-$k_{\perp}$ jet selection (see,_e.g.,_Ref. [@Alg94]). It_is_doubtful_that one_can reconcile these_algorithms_with the_weak_$k_{\perp}$-diffusion and the strong rapidity ordering_of_the semi-hard QCD regime, described by the_BFKL resummation. We also_note_that our predictions should_not be compared with the_preliminary data [@Heu94] extracted by the_most forward/backward_jet selection_criterion. Obviously, one should include for tagging all the registered pairs_of jets (not only the most_forward–backward pair) to compare_with our_predictions._In particular, to_make_a comparison_with Figs. 2,3, one should sum up_all the_registered $x$-symmetric dijets ($x_1=x_2$) with transverse_momenta harder than $k_{\perp_min}$.

We_thank E.A.Kuraev and L.N.Lipatov for stimulating_discussions. We are grateful to A.J.Sommerer,_J.P.Vary, and B.-L.Young for their_kind_hospitality_at the IITAP, Ames, Iowa_and support. V.T.K. is indebted to_S.Ahn, C.L.Kim, T.Lee,_A.Petridis, J.Qiu, C.R.Schmidt, S.I.T