Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

An effective field theory for muon conversion and muon decay-in-orbit

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that QED corrections to muon conversion and to muon decay-in-orbit near the endpoint can be factorized scale-by-scale into single-scale functions, allowing systematic resummation of large logarithms that previously…

desk verdict A technically serious EFT tower that delivers a factorization theorem and explicit one-loop matchings, but the abstract's 'most accurate prediction' overstates a preliminary leading-power result with no uncertainty budget. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.05702 v2 pith:XEVOOXHR submitted 2024-12-07 hep-ph

Duarte Fontes , Robert Szafron This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph
keywords muonconversiondecay-in-orbitQEDradiativecorrectionseffectivefieldtheoryfactorizationtheoremsoft-collinearNRQEDresummation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Muon conversion is the most sensitive known probe of charged lepton flavor violation, and the experimental limit is expected to improve by about four orders of magnitude in the coming searches. The paper's claim is that the QED corrections to the conversion rate, and to the decay-in-orbit background near the endpoint, can be organized by a tower of five effective field theories, one per physical scale, so that every large logarithm sits inside a single-scale object and can be resummed. This replaces the previous ad hoc exponentiation of a collinear approximation with a systematically improvable factorization theorem for the electron-energy spectrum. If the paper is right, the shape of the conversion signal can be predicted with resummed NLL' QED accuracy, and the paper states this is the most accurate prediction of the signal shape available for the upcoming searches.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a five-step EFT tower matched at the hard-nuclear, hard, semi-hard, soft, and soft-collinear scales: HQET for the static nucleus, NRQED for the muon with SCET I for the energetic electron, pNRQED with the vacuum-polarization-corrected Coulomb potential, and boosted HQET for the soft-collinear electron. The object that carries the argument is the factorization identity (4.13), obtained by decoupling soft and soft-collinear Wilson lines; below the electron mass only photons survive, so the soft-collinear function exponentiates via abelian exponentiation, while the hard function evolves with the cusp anomalous dimension. With canonical scale choices $\mu_h = 2m_\mu$, $\mu_s = m_e$, $\mu_{sc} = \Delta E\, m_e/m_\mu$, the large logarithms are moved into renormalization-group evolution factors and resummed at NLL' accuracy.

What would settle it

Measure the electron-energy spectrum of muon conversion in a target such as aluminum with a resolution reaching $\Delta E \sim m_e$, and compare the $\Delta E$ dependence of the normalized cumulant with equation (4.29). A statistically significant deviation from the predicted $|\psi_{\mathrm{corr}}|^2 |C_{\mathrm{corr}}|^2$ factorized shape, or a target-isotope dependence of the shape beyond the form-factor normalization, would falsify the leading-power nuclear-structure assumption and the paper's central phenomenological promise.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central result is the normalized all-order differential rate for muon conversion, equation (4.13): $\frac{1}{\Gamma_{LO}}\frac{d\Gamma}{dE_e} = |\psi_{\mathrm{corr}}|^2 |C_{\mathrm{corr}}|^2 \int dE_s\, dE_{sc}\, \delta(\Delta E - E_s - E_{sc})\, S(E_s)\, SC(E_{sc})$. Each factor depends on a single scale: the bound-state wave function at the origin, computed with the vacuum-polarization-corrected Coulomb potential, carries the normalization; the coefficient $|C_{\mathrm{corr}}|^2$ collects hard matching and renormalization-group running; and the soft and soft-collinear functions describe real radiation below the electron mass. The paper derives this factorization from a sequence of five EFTs, gives the one-loop matching coefficients and anomalous dimensions, and reports that the resummed NLL' cumulant differs from the fixed-order result by about 1% at $\Delta E = m_e$, with the running of $\alpha$ contributing 0.18%, while the total NLO fixed-order correction reaches about -9%.

Load-bearing premise

The predicted shape of the electron spectrum rests on the assumption that, at leading power, all non-perturbative nuclear physics enters only through the matching coefficient $C^{(II)}_X(\mu_h)$ and a charge-density form factor, so nuclear finite-size and excitation effects change the total rate but not the shape of the spectrum.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The electron-energy spectrum of muon conversion near the endpoint can be predicted with systematically improvable resummed QED accuracy instead of a fixed-order collinear approximation.
  • The same factorization applies to muon decay-in-orbit near the endpoint, the only irreducible background, so signal and background shapes can eventually be treated in one framework.
  • Higher-order QED corrections can be added by improving the matching coefficients and anomalous dimensions of the single-scale functions, without redoing the multi-scale calculation.
  • At leading power, finite nuclear size enters only through the charge-density form factor and changes the total normalization, not the spectral shape, so shape comparisons isolate QED physics.
  • Numerically, QED corrections to the conversion rate are not negligible: about -9% at $\Delta E = m_e$ in fixed order, motivating the resummed treatment.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the factorization persists beyond leading power, the same soft and soft-collinear functions should reappear in other bound-decay QED observables, so the objects computed here could be reused rather than recomputed.
  • A direct experimental test would be to measure the $\Delta E$ dependence of the conversion spectrum shape; agreement with the resummed shape would validate the whole tower, while a shape distortion correlated with nuclear structure would point to the beyond-leading-power nuclear effects the paper deferred.
  • The paper leaves the detailed interplay of finite nuclear size and QED corrections to future work; a dedicated nuclear EFT treatment could reveal percent-level shape corrections from dipole or inelastic contributions that the leading-power form-factor picture misses.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper develops a multi-scale EFT tower—HQET, NRQED, pNRQED, SCET I/II, and boosted HQET—for coherent muon-to-electron conversion and, in principle, muon decay-in-orbit near the endpoint. The main explicit results are the one-loop matching coefficients for the five EFTs, the associated RGEs, a factorization theorem for the normalized differential rate (Eq. (4.13)), and numerical evaluations of the resummed cumulant distribution for conversion normalized to the LO rate. The paper argues that QED corrections to the electron-energy spectrum can be computed and resummed systematically, and the abstract claims this provides the most accurate prediction of the signal shape for upcoming Mu2e/COMET searches.

Significance. If the factorization and matching results are correct, this is a substantial methodological advance: it brings modern soft-collinear and potential-EFT techniques to a low-energy intensity-frontier process and identifies universal soft and soft-collinear functions. The paper has real strengths: the one-loop matching in Section 3 and the region analysis in Appendix A are explicit and internally consistent, the IR finiteness of the fixed-order result is checked (Section 4.2), and the normalized shape in Eqs. (4.18)–(4.19) is independent of the BSM Wilson coefficients, so the predicted shape is model-independent. The manuscript is also commendably transparent about its deferred items: DIO is not computed, rapidity RG is left to future work, and beyond-leading-power nuclear-structure effects are explicitly unquantified. However, because the headline 'most accurate prediction of the signal shape' is not accompanied by an uncertainty budget or by quantitative control of the nuclear-structure corrections, the phenomenological claim currently exceeds what is demonstrated.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract; Section 5; Eq. (4.29)] The statement that the paper provides 'the most accurate prediction of the signal shape' is not supported by any uncertainty estimate. Section 5 explicitly labels the numerics as a preliminary investigation and defers scale-dependence studies, finite-nuclear-size effects, and background studies to future work; no scale variation or estimate of missing higher-order and nuclear corrections is given for Eq. (4.29) or Figures 5–6. A quantitative uncertainty budget, or a correspondingly weakened claim in the abstract, is needed before the central phenomenological conclusion can be accepted.
  2. [Section 4.3; Eq. (4.13)] The normalized shape factorization confines all non-perturbative nuclear physics to the overall normalization at leading power, but the paper itself states in Section 4.3 that beyond LP 'dipole soft interactions become relevant and will introduce corrections that depend on the non-trivial nuclear structure' and defers that analysis to future work. For aluminum, 1/R is roughly 66 MeV, only about a factor 1.6 below m_mu, so the point-nucleus expansion is not manifestly convergent, and inelastic conversion can populate the electron-energy window unless kinematically excluded. The signal-shape claim needs at least an order-of-magnitude estimate or an explicit bound on these effects.
  3. [Abstract; Sections 1 and 6] The abstract promises precise predictions for 'the rates of the two processes' (muon conversion and muon decay-in-orbit), but the paper explicitly states that DIO near the endpoint is left for a future publication and that only muon conversion is calculated. As written, the 'two processes' claim overstates the delivered content; please either include an endpoint DIO calculation or revise the abstract to limit the claim to muon conversion.
  4. [Sections 3.5 and 4.2; Eqs. (4.23) and (4.29)] The all-order soft-collinear function is obtained by abelian exponentiation below m_e, and rapidity logarithms are neglected; the authors acknowledge in Section 3.5 that this restricts the result to NLL' accuracy and that a rapidity RG is needed beyond that. This is an admitted approximation, but it is load-bearing for the 'most accurate' claim because the resummed exponent and the canonical-scale choice directly determine the spectrum. The abstract and conclusions should state the NLL' limitation and the reliance on abelian exponentiation explicitly rather than presenting the result as the unconditional most accurate prediction.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Figure 5] The horizontal axis is not labeled in the caption; the text describes it as Ee, but the tick values suggest a logarithmic scale. Please label the axis and state the range and scale used.
  2. [Table 3] The cSC(ΔE) row shows a fixed-order correction as large as about -27.5%, while the total NLO correction is substantially smaller because of cancellations. A sentence explaining the cancellation pattern would improve readability and help the reader trust the resummed result.
  3. [Equation (3.29)] The hard function is quoted without an explicit derivation or a demonstration that the master integral is evaluated in the same scheme as the rest of the paper; a brief derivation pointer or a consistency check would be helpful.
  4. [Reference [69]] Reference [69] is cited as 'to appear' and cannot be checked; please provide an arXiv number or a preprint record.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the normalized shape in eq. (4.13) is derived in-paper from Wilson-line matrix elements with no fitted parameter, and the BSM coefficients cancel in eq. (4.18); only minor non-load-bearing self-citations ([27], [69]) keep the score at 2.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The normalized spectrum, eq. (4.13), is built from factors that are computed, not fitted: |Ccorr|2 in eq. (4.18) cancels the input coefficients C_X^(II)(mu_h), since the paper states in Sec. 3.2 that it takes 'the matching coefficients at the muon mass scale, C_X^(II)(mu_h), as input parameters of our analysis.' The shape thus does not depend on non-perturbative nuclear or BSM input. The soft function (4.22) and the soft-collinear cumulant (4.23) are computed from the Wilson-line definitions (4.12), the latter by abelian exponentiation [125]; these are precisely the factors carrying the Delta E (hence E_e) dependence that defines the signal shape. The hard coefficient H is taken from external SCET literature [47], the anomalous dimensions from [109-111], and the resummed formula (4.29) follows by RG running with no parameter fitted to data. Two self-citations are present but not load-bearing: delta_pot = 6.4 is imported from [27] (Szafron and Czarnecki), an existing published calculation entering only the E_e-independent normalization factor |psi_corr|2 of eq. (4.16), not the shape; and ref. [69] ('to appear', Fontes and Szafron) supports the standard reduction of photonic conversion to a contact interaction, which is not used in deriving eq. (4.13). The skeptical concern — Sec. 4.3 stating that beyond leading power, dipole soft interactions 'will introduce corrections that depend on the non-trivial nuclear structure' and are 'left for future work' — is an untested leading-power assumption about nuclear effects, i.e., a correctness risk for the signal-shape promise, not a circular step, because the paper's own equations do not presuppose the shape they predict.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles or forces are introduced; the EFT modes are bookkeeping constructs. The central calculation rests on standard QED plus the mode-expansion assumption, with non-perturbative nuclear physics imported as external input and assumed shape-independent. The canonical renormalization scales are the main hand-set numbers; no data are fitted.

free parameters (1)
  • Canonical renormalization scales = mu_h = 2 m_mu, mu_s = m_e, mu_sc = Delta E m_e / m_mu
    Chosen by hand to minimize large logarithms in eq. (4.29). The paper provides no scale variation, so the resummed curve has an unquantified dependence on these choices.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The coefficients C^(II)_X(mu_h) are treated as inputs, determined experimentally or by lattice, rather than computed here.
    Section 3.2 explicitly adopts this to make the hard matching coefficients the starting point of the perturbative QED analysis.
  • standard math Expansion by regions is complete for the one-loop virtual and real corrections.
    Appendix A relies on the standard method of regions; completeness is assumed rather than proved in the paper.
  • domain assumption The nucleus is a static, point-like HQET source at leading power.
    Section 2.2 treats the nucleus as a spectator and delegates non-perturbative physics to matching coefficients and form factors.
  • domain assumption Nuclear effects do not affect the shape of the spectrum at leading power.
    Section 4.3 states this and defers a detailed treatment of the nuclear-size/QED interplay; this assumption is central for the shape claim.
  • ad hoc to paper Abelian exponentiation of the soft-collinear function below m_e is valid, and rapidity logarithms can be neglected at NLL accuracy.
    Section 3.5 and eq. (4.23); the paper explicitly leaves rapidity RG to future work and chooses mu_s = m_e to bypass the soft-to-soft-collinear RG evolution.
  • domain assumption The endpoint hierarchy M_N >> m_mu >> Z alpha m_mu >> (Z alpha)^2 m_mu ~ m_e ~ Delta E holds.
    Equation (1.2) defines the power counting; the entire EFT construction is tied to Delta E ~ m_e and E_e ~ m_mu.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of An effective field theory for muon conversion and muon decay-in-orbit." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XEVOOXHR

@misc{pith2026241205702,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: An effective field theory for muon conversion and muon decay-in-orbit},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XEVOOXHR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.05702}
}
read the original abstract

Muon conversion is one of the best probes of charged lepton flavor violation. The experimental limit is soon expected to improve by four orders of magnitude, thus calling for precise predictions of the shape of the signal spectrum. Equally important are precise predictions for muon decay-in-orbit, the main background for muon conversion. While the calculation of electromagnetic corrections to the two processes above the nuclear scale does not involve significant challenges, it becomes substantially more complex below that scale due to multiple scales, bound-state effects and experimental setup. Here, we present a systematic framework that addresses these challenges by resorting to a series of effective field theories. Combining Heavy Quark Effective Theory (HQET), Non-Relativistic QED (NRQED), potential NRQED, Soft-Collinear Effective Theory I and II, and boosted HQET, we derive a factorization theorem and present the renormalization group equations. Our framework allows for the proper calculation of precise predictions for the rates of the two processes, with crucial implications for the upcoming muon conversion searches. We also provide the most accurate prediction of the signal shape for those searches.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.05702 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Kinematics for direct muon conversion. In diagram (i), the incoming muon and nucleus are bound, forming a muonic hydrogen, µH, while in diagram (ii) they are free. because the electron can also lose energy due to real radiation, we consider Ee to be a free parameter, and interpret the quantity ∆E mentioned in the Introduction as the total energy lost by the electron due to real radiation. Then, ignoring nuclear reco… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Feynman diagrams for the virtual corrections of µN → eN in the full theory. theory. This is the theory in which all the states of energy above the nuclear level were integrated out. Consequently, the full theory treats disparate scales (such as MN and me) at the same level, thus lacking both a homogeneous power counting and a scale separation. It constitutes the starting point of our analysis, from which we will eve… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Feynman diagrams for the real corrections of µN → eN in the full theory. In table 1, we show the relevant momentum regions that contribute to each of the diagrams of figures 2 and 3 (in the case of the real radiation, we consider the terms obtained after squaring the real emission amplitude); see appendix A for details. The momentum regions correspond to different possibilities of scaling for the loop momentum l, i.… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Chart of the multiple scales relevant for muon conversion and DIO. Each scale is associated with an EFT. For each EFT, we show the Lagrangian governing the relevant fields. See text for details. one correspondence with the scales identified above. Each EFT has its own …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Cumulant distribution (normalized to the LO result) against Ee, for different approaches. See text for details. NLL’ — as expected from a perturbative LL series. Given the small difference between the NLL’ and the FO curves, one might wonder if the EFT approach is real…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Cumulant distribution (normalized to the FO result) against ∆E, for different approaches. See the text for details. 6 Conclusions Muon conversion, the process of a muon decaying within an atomic nucleus into an energetic electron, is one of the most important ways to s…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Random Reshuffling-Based Distributed Nash Equilibrium Seeking

    math.OC 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Random reshuffling yields distributed Nash-seeking algorithms that, under partial decision information, converge linearly to a neighborhood (constant steps) or exactly a.s./in mean square (diminishing steps), outperfo...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

142 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Petcov, The Processes µ → e + γ, µ→ e + e, ν′ → ν + γ in the Weinberg-Salam Model with Neutrino Mixing , Sov

    S.T. Petcov, The Processes µ → e + γ, µ→ e + e, ν′ → ν + γ in the Weinberg-Salam Model with Neutrino Mixing , Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 25 (1977) 340

    1977

  2. [2]

    Kuno, Rare lepton decays, Prog

    Y. Kuno, Rare lepton decays, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 82 (2015) 1

    2015

  3. [3]

    Calibbi and G

    L. Calibbi and G. Signorelli, Charged Lepton Flavour Violation: An Experimental and Theoretical Introduction, Riv. Nuovo Cim. 41 (2018) 71 [ 1709.00294]

    arXiv 2018

  4. [4]

    Davidson, B

    S. Davidson, B. Echenard, R.H. Bernstein, J. Heeck and D.G. Hitlin, Charged Lepton Flavor Violation , 2209.00142

    arXiv

  5. [5]

    Frau and C

    G. Frau and C. Langenbruch, Charged Lepton-Flavour Violation, Symmetry 16 (2024) 359. – 46 –

    2024

  6. [6]

    Davidson and B

    S. Davidson and B. Echenard, Reach and complementarity of µ → e searches, Eur. Phys. J. C 82 (2022) 836 [ 2204.00564]

    arXiv 2022

  7. [7]

    Aslam, A

    M.J. Aslam, A. Czarnecki, G. Zhang and A. Morozova, Decay of a bound muon into a bound electron, Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020) 073001 [ 2005.07276]

    arXiv 2020

  8. [8]

    Borrel, D.G

    L. Borrel, D.G. Hitlin and S. Middleton, A New Determination of the (Z,A) Dependence of Coherent Muon-to-Electron Conversion, 2401.15025

    arXiv

Show all 142 references
  1. [9]

    SINDRUM IIcollaboration, A Search for muon to electron conversion in muonic gold , Eur. Phys. J. C 47 (2006) 337

    2006

  2. [10]

    DeeMe collaboration, DeeMe experiment - An experimental search for a mu-e conversion reaction at J-PARC MLF , Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 248-250 (2014) 52

    2014

  3. [11]

    Teshima, Status of the DeeMe Experiment, an Experimental Search for µ-e Conversion at J-PARC MLF , PoS NuF act2019(2020) 082 [ 1911.07143]

    N. Teshima, Status of the DeeMe Experiment, an Experimental Search for µ-e Conversion at J-PARC MLF , PoS NuF act2019(2020) 082 [ 1911.07143]

    2020 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Mu2e collaboration, Mu2e Technical Design Report, 1501.05241

    arXiv

  5. [13]

    Mu2e collaboration, Status and perspectives of cLFV at Mu2e , PoS WIF AI2023(2024) 017

    2024

  6. [14]

    COMET collaboration, COMET Phase-I Technical Design Report , PTEP 2020 (2020) 033C01 [1812.09018]

    2020 arXiv

  7. [15]

    COMET collaboration, A search for a muon to electron conversion in COMET , JINST 18 (2023) C10010 [ 2308.14275]

    2023 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Mu2e-II collaboration, Mu2e-II: Muon to electron conversion with PIP-II , in Snowmass 2021, 3, 2022 [ 2203.07569]

    2021

  9. [17]

    Kuno, PRISM/PRIME, Nucl

    Y. Kuno, PRISM/PRIME, Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 149 (2005) 376

    2005

  10. [18]

    Groupcollaboration, A New Charged Lepton Flavor Violation Program at Fermilab , in Snowmass 2021 , 3, 2022 [ 2203.08278]

    C. Groupcollaboration, A New Charged Lepton Flavor Violation Program at Fermilab , in Snowmass 2021 , 3, 2022 [ 2203.08278]

    2021 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Heeck, R

    J. Heeck, R. Szafron and Y. Uesaka, Isotope dependence of muon decay in orbit , Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) 053006 [ 2110.14667]

    2022 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Rule, W.C

    E. Rule, W.C. Haxton, K. McElvain and K. McElvain, Nuclear-Level Effective Theory of µ→e Conversion , Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (2023) 131901 [ 2109.13503]

    2023 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Haxton, E

    W.C. Haxton, E. Rule, K. McElvain and M.J. Ramsey-Musolf, Nuclear-level effective theory of µ→e conversion: Formalism and applications , Phys. Rev. C 107 (2023) 035504 [2208.07945]

    2023 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Cirigliano, K

    V. Cirigliano, K. Fuyuto, M.J. Ramsey-Musolf and E. Rule, Next-to-leading order scalar contributions to µ→e conversion, Phys. Rev. C 105 (2022) 055504 [ 2203.09547]

    2022 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Heeck, R

    J. Heeck, R. Szafron and Y. Uesaka, Isotope dependence of muon-to-electron conversion , Nucl. Phys. B 980 (2022) 115833 [ 2203.00702]

    2022 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Haxton, K

    W. Haxton, K. McElvain, T. Menzo, E. Rule and J. Zupan, Effective theory tower for µ → e conversion, JHEP 11 (2024) 076 [ 2406.13818]

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Haxton and E

    W.C. Haxton and E. Rule, Nuclear-level effective theory of µ → e conversion: Inelastic process, 2409.10581

    arXiv

  18. [26]

    Szafron, Radiative Corrections in Bound States , Acta Phys

    R. Szafron, Radiative Corrections in Bound States , Acta Phys. Polon. B 48 (2017) 2183. – 47 –

    2017

  19. [27]

    Szafron and A

    R. Szafron and A. Czarnecki, High-energy electrons from the muon decay in orbit: radiative corrections, Phys. Lett. B 753 (2016) 61 [ 1505.05237]

    2016 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Szafron and A

    R. Szafron and A. Czarnecki, Shape function in QED and bound muon decays , Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 053004 [ 1506.00975]

    2015 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Czarnecki, M

    A. Czarnecki, M. Dowling, X. Garcia i Tormo, W.J. Marciano and R. Szafron, Michel decay spectrum for a muon bound to a nucleus , Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 093002 [ 1406.3575]

    2014 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Manohar, Introduction to Effective Field Theories , 1804.05863

    A.V. Manohar, Introduction to Effective Field Theories , 1804.05863

    arXiv

  23. [31]

    Cohen, As Scales Become Separated: Lectures on Effective Field Theory , PoS T ASI2018(2019) 011 [ 1903.03622]

    T. Cohen, As Scales Become Separated: Lectures on Effective Field Theory , PoS T ASI2018(2019) 011 [ 1903.03622]

    2019 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Haxton and E

    W.C. Haxton and E. Rule, Distinguishing charged lepton flavor violation scenarios with inelastic µ → e conversion, 2404.17166

    arXiv

  25. [33]

    Isgur and M.B

    N. Isgur and M.B. Wise, Weak Decays of Heavy Mesons in the Static Quark Approximation, Phys. Lett. B 232 (1989) 113

    1989

  26. [34]

    Isgur and M.B

    N. Isgur and M.B. Wise, Weak transition form factors between heavy mesons , Phys. Lett. B 237 (1990) 527

    1990

  27. [35]

    Neubert, Heavy quark symmetry , Phys

    M. Neubert, Heavy quark symmetry , Phys. Rept. 245 (1994) 259 [ hep-ph/9306320]

    1994 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Manohar, The HQET / NRQCD Lagrangian to order alpha / m-3 , Phys

    A.V. Manohar, The HQET / NRQCD Lagrangian to order alpha / m-3 , Phys. Rev. D 56 (1997) 230 [ hep-ph/9701294]

    1997 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Manohar and M.B

    A.V. Manohar and M.B. Wise, Heavy quark physics , vol. 10, Cambridge University Press (2000)

    2000

  30. [38]

    Caswell and G.P

    W.E. Caswell and G.P. Lepage, Effective Lagrangians for Bound State Problems in QED, QCD, and Other Field Theories , Phys. Lett. B 167 (1986) 437

    1986

  31. [39]

    Kinoshita and M

    T. Kinoshita and M. Nio, Radiative corrections to the muonium hyperfine structure. 1. The alpha**2 (Z-alpha) correction, Phys. Rev. D 53 (1996) 4909 [ hep-ph/9512327]

    1996 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Paz, An Introduction to NRQED , Mod

    G. Paz, An Introduction to NRQED , Mod. Phys. Lett. A 30 (2015) 1550128 [ 1503.07216]

    2015 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Pineda and J

    A. Pineda and J. Soto, Effective field theory for ultrasoft momenta in NRQCD and NRQED, Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 64 (1998) 428 [ hep-ph/9707481]

    1998 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Pineda and J

    A. Pineda and J. Soto, The Lamb shift in dimensional regularization , Phys. Lett. B 420 (1998) 391 [ hep-ph/9711292]

    1998 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Brambilla, A

    N. Brambilla, A. Pineda, J. Soto and A. Vairo, Potential NRQCD: An Effective theory for heavy quarkonium, Nucl. Phys. B 566 (2000) 275 [ hep-ph/9907240]

    2000 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Beneke, A

    M. Beneke, A. Signer and V.A. Smirnov, Top quark production near threshold and the top quark mass , Phys. Lett. B 454 (1999) 137 [ hep-ph/9903260]

    1999 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Beneke, New results on heavy quarks near threshold , in 3rd Workshop on Continuous Advances in QCD (QCD 98) , pp

    M. Beneke, New results on heavy quarks near threshold , in 3rd Workshop on Continuous Advances in QCD (QCD 98) , pp. 293–309, 6, 1998 [ hep-ph/9806429]

    1998 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Bauer, S

    C.W. Bauer, S. Fleming and M.E. Luke, Summing Sudakov logarithms in B → Xsγin effective field theory. , Phys. Rev. D 63 (2000) 014006 [ hep-ph/0005275]

    2000 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Bauer, S

    C.W. Bauer, S. Fleming, D. Pirjol and I.W. Stewart, An Effective field theory for collinear and soft gluons: Heavy to light decays , Phys. Rev. D 63 (2001) 114020 [ hep-ph/0011336]. – 48 –

    2001 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Bauer and I.W

    C.W. Bauer and I.W. Stewart, Invariant operators in collinear effective theory , Phys. Lett. B 516 (2001) 134 [ hep-ph/0107001]

    2001 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Bauer, D

    C.W. Bauer, D. Pirjol and I.W. Stewart, Soft collinear factorization in effective field theory , Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 054022 [ hep-ph/0109045]

    2002 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Beneke, A.P

    M. Beneke, A.P. Chapovsky, M. Diehl and T. Feldmann, Soft collinear effective theory and heavy to light currents beyond leading power , Nucl. Phys. B 643 (2002) 431 [hep-ph/0206152]

    2002 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Beneke and T

    M. Beneke and T. Feldmann, Multipole expanded soft collinear effective theory with nonAbelian gauge symmetry , Phys. Lett. B 553 (2003) 267 [ hep-ph/0211358]

    2003 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Fleming, A.H

    S. Fleming, A.H. Hoang, S. Mantry and I.W. Stewart, Jets from massive unstable particles: Top-mass determination, Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 074010 [ hep-ph/0703207]

    2008 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Fleming, A.H

    S. Fleming, A.H. Hoang, S. Mantry and I.W. Stewart, Top Jets in the Peak Region: Factorization Analysis with NLL Resummation , Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 114003 [0711.2079]

    2008 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Hill, Effective field theory for large logarithms in radiative corrections to electron proton scattering, Phys

    R.J. Hill, Effective field theory for large logarithms in radiative corrections to electron proton scattering, Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017) 013001 [ 1605.02613]

    2017 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Tomalak, Q

    O. Tomalak, Q. Chen, R.J. Hill, K.S. McFarland and C. Wret, Theory of QED radiative corrections to neutrino scattering at accelerator energies , Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 093006 [2204.11379]

    2022 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Tomalak and I

    O. Tomalak and I. Vitev, QED medium effects in (anti)neutrino-nucleus and electron-nucleus scattering: Elastic scattering on nucleons , Phys. Lett. B 835 (2022) 137492 [2206.10637]

    2022 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Hill and R

    R.J. Hill and R. Plestid, All orders factorization and the Coulomb problem , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 056006 [ 2309.15929]

    2024 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Hill and R

    R.J. Hill and R. Plestid, Field Theory of the Fermi Function , Phys. Rev. Lett. 133 (2024) 021803 [2309.07343]

    2024 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Tomalak and I

    O. Tomalak and I. Vitev, Medium-induced photon bremsstrahlung in neutrino-nucleus, antineutrino-nucleus, and electron-nucleus scattering from multiple QED interactions , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 073010 [ 2402.16851]

    2024 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Beneke, C

    M. Beneke, C. Bobeth and R. Szafron, Enhanced electromagnetic correction to the rare B-meson decay Bs,d → µ+µ−, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (2018) 011801 [ 1708.09152]

    2018 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Beneke, C

    M. Beneke, C. Bobeth and R. Szafron, Power-enhanced leading-logarithmic QED corrections to Bq → µ+µ−, JHEP 10 (2019) 232 [ 1908.07011]

    2019 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Beneke, P

    M. Beneke, P. B¨ oer, J.-N. Toelstede and K.K. Vos,QED factorization of non-leptonic B decays, JHEP 11 (2020) 081 [ 2008.10615]

    2020 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Beneke, P

    M. Beneke, P. B¨ oer, G. Finauri and K.K. Vos, QED factorization of two-body non-leptonic and semi-leptonic B to charm decays , JHEP 10 (2021) 223 [ 2107.03819]

    2021 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Beneke, P

    M. Beneke, P. B¨ oer, J.-N. Toelstede and K.K. Vos,Light-cone distribution amplitudes of heavy mesons with QED effects , JHEP 08 (2022) 020 [ 2204.09091]

    2022 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Czarnecki and R

    A. Czarnecki and R. Szafron, Light-by-light scattering in the Lamb shift and the bound electron g factor , Phys. Rev. A 94 (2016) 060501 [ 1611.04875]. – 49 –

    2016 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Czarnecki, M

    A. Czarnecki, M. Dowling, J. Piclum and R. Szafron, Two-loop binding corrections to the electron gyromagnetic factor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (2018) 043203 [ 1711.00190]

    2018 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Szafron, E.Y

    R. Szafron, E.Y. Korzinin, V.A. Shelyuto, V.G. Ivanov and S.G. Karshenboim, Virtual Delbr¨ uck scattering and the Lamb shift in light hydrogenlike atoms, Phys. Rev. A 100 (2019) 032507 [ 1909.04116]

    2019 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Czarnecki, J

    A. Czarnecki, J. Piclum and R. Szafron, Logarithmically enhanced Euler-Heisenberg Lagrangian contribution to the electron gyromagnetic factor , Phys. Rev. A 102 (2020) 050801 [2008.07550]

    2020 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Fontes and R

    D. Fontes and R. Szafron, to appear,

  62. [70]

    Kuno and Y

    Y. Kuno and Y. Okada, Muon decay and physics beyond the standard model , Rev. Mod. Phys. 73 (2001) 151 [ hep-ph/9909265]

    2001 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Kosmas, S

    T.S. Kosmas, S. Kovalenko and I. Schmidt, Nuclear muon- e- conversion in strange quark sea, Phys. Lett. B 511 (2001) 203 [ hep-ph/0102101]

    2001 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Cirigliano, R

    V. Cirigliano, R. Kitano, Y. Okada and P. Tuzon, On the model discriminating power of mu —> e conversion in nuclei , Phys. Rev. D 80 (2009) 013002 [ 0904.0957]

    2009 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Davidson, µ → eγ and matching at mW , Eur

    S. Davidson, µ → eγ and matching at mW , Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 370 [ 1601.07166]

    2016 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Bartolotta and M.J

    A. Bartolotta and M.J. Ramsey-Musolf, Coherent µ − e conversion at next-to-leading order , Phys. Rev. C 98 (2018) 015208 [ 1710.02129]

    2018 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Crivellin, S

    A. Crivellin, S. Davidson, G.M. Pruna and A. Signer, Renormalisation-group improved analysis of µ → e processes in a systematic effective-field-theory approach , JHEP 05 (2017) 117 [1702.03020]

    2017 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Davidson, Y

    S. Davidson, Y. Kuno and M. Yamanaka, Selecting µ → e conversion targets to distinguish lepton flavour-changing operators , Phys. Lett. B 790 (2019) 380 [ 1810.01884]

    2019 arXiv

  69. [77]

    282 (2023) 01014

    COMET collaboration, Status of the COMET experiment , EPJ Web Conf. 282 (2023) 01014

    2023

  70. [78]

    Mu2e collaboration, The Mu2e Experiment , Front. in Phys. 7 (2019) 1 [ 1901.11099]

    2019 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Beneke and V.A

    M. Beneke and V.A. Smirnov, Asymptotic expansion of Feynman integrals near threshold , Nucl. Phys. B 522 (1998) 321 [ hep-ph/9711391]

    1998 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Beneke, Perturbative heavy quark - anti-quark systems , PoS hf8 (1999) 009 [hep-ph/9911490]

    M. Beneke, Perturbative heavy quark - anti-quark systems , PoS hf8 (1999) 009 [hep-ph/9911490]

    1999 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Jantzen, Foundation and generalization of the expansion by regions , JHEP 12 (2011) 076 [1111.2589]

    B. Jantzen, Foundation and generalization of the expansion by regions , JHEP 12 (2011) 076 [1111.2589]

    2011 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Beneke, Y

    M. Beneke, Y. Kiyo and K. Schuller, Third-order correction to top-quark pair production near threshold I. Effective theory set-up and matching coefficients , 1312.4791

    arXiv

  75. [83]

    Beneke, Y

    M. Beneke, Y. Kiyo and A.A. Penin, Ultrasoft contribution to quarkonium production and annihilation, Phys. Lett. B 653 (2007) 53 [ 0706.2733]

    2007 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Moult, I.W

    I. Moult, I.W. Stewart, G. Vita and H.X. Zhu, First Subleading Power Resummation for Event Shapes, JHEP 08 (2018) 013 [ 1804.04665]

    2018 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Beneke, M

    M. Beneke, M. Garny, R. Szafron and J. Wang, Violation of the Kluberg-Stern-Zuber theorem in SCET , JHEP 09 (2019) 101 [ 1907.05463]. – 50 –

    2019 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Moult, I.W

    I. Moult, I.W. Stewart and G. Vita, Subleading Power Factorization with Radiative Functions, JHEP 11 (2019) 153 [ 1905.07411]

    2019 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Moult, I.W

    I. Moult, I.W. Stewart, G. Vita and H.X. Zhu, The Soft Quark Sudakov , JHEP 05 (2020) 089 [1910.14038]

    2020 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Liu and M

    Z.L. Liu and M. Neubert, Factorization at subleading power and endpoint-divergent convolutions in h → γγ decay, JHEP 04 (2020) 033 [ 1912.08818]

    2020 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Wang, Resummation of double logarithms in loop-induced processes with effective field theory, 1912.09920

    J. Wang, Resummation of double logarithms in loop-induced processes with effective field theory, 1912.09920

    1912 arXiv

  82. [90]

    Beneke, M

    M. Beneke, M. Garny, S. Jaskiewicz, R. Szafron, L. Vernazza and J. Wang, Large-x resummation of off-diagonal deep-inelastic parton scattering from d-dimensional refactorization, JHEP 10 (2020) 196 [ 2008.04943]

    2020 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Z.L. Liu, B. Mecaj, M. Neubert and X. Wang, Factorization at subleading power, Sudakov resummation, and endpoint divergences in soft-collinear effective theory , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 014004 [ 2009.04456]

    2021 arXiv

  84. [92]

    van Beekveld, L

    M. van Beekveld, L. Vernazza and C.D. White, Threshold resummation of new partonic channels at next-to-leading power , JHEP 12 (2021) 087 [ 2109.09752]

    2021 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Inglis-Whalen, M

    M. Inglis-Whalen, M. Luke, J. Roy and A. Spourdalakis, Factorization of power corrections in the Drell-Yan process in EFT , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 076018 [ 2105.09277]

    2021 arXiv

  86. [94]

    G. Bell, P. B¨ oer and T. Feldmann,Muon-electron backward scattering: a prime example for endpoint singularities in SCET , JHEP 09 (2022) 183 [ 2205.06021]

    2022 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Beneke, M

    M. Beneke, M. Garny, S. Jaskiewicz, J. Strohm, R. Szafron, L. Vernazza et al., Next-to-leading power endpoint factorization and resummation for off-diagonal “gluon” thrust, JHEP 07 (2022) 144 [ 2205.04479]

    2022 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Z.L. Liu, M. Neubert, M. Schnubel and X. Wang, Factorization at next-to-leading power and endpoint divergences in gg → h production, JHEP 06 (2023) 183 [ 2212.10447]

    2023 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Cornella, M

    C. Cornella, M. K¨ onig and M. Neubert, Structure-dependent QED effects in exclusive B decays at subleading power , Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) L031502 [ 2212.14430]

    2023

  90. [98]

    Hurth and R

    T. Hurth and R. Szafron, Refactorisation in subleading B¯→Xsγ, Nucl. Phys. B 991 (2023) 116200 [ 2301.01739]

    2023 arXiv

  91. [99]

    Schoenleber and R

    J. Schoenleber and R. Szafron, All order factorization for virtual Compton scattering at next-to-leading power, JHEP 11 (2024) 031 [ 2407.09263]

    2024 arXiv

  92. [100]

    Czarnecki, X

    A. Czarnecki, X. Garcia i Tormo and W.J. Marciano, Muon decay in orbit: spectrum of high-energy electrons, Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011) 013006 [ 1106.4756]

    2011 arXiv

  93. [101]

    B¨ oer and T

    P. B¨ oer and T. Feldmann,Structure-dependent QED effects in exclusive B-meson decays, Eur. Phys. J. ST 233 (2024) 299 [ 2312.12885]

    2024 arXiv

  94. [102]

    Beneke and Y

    M. Beneke and Y. Kiyo, Third-order correction to top-quark pair production near threshold II. Potential contributions , 2409.05960

    arXiv

  95. [103]

    Leibovich, Z

    A.K. Leibovich, Z. Ligeti and M.B. Wise, Comment on quark masses in SCET , Phys. Lett. B 564 (2003) 231 [ hep-ph/0303099]

    2003 arXiv

  96. [104]

    Beneke, M

    M. Beneke, M. Garny, R. Szafron and J. Wang, Anomalous dimension of subleading-power N-jet operators, JHEP 03 (2018) 001 [ 1712.04416]. – 51 –

    2018 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Beneke, M

    M. Beneke, M. Garny, R. Szafron and J. Wang, Subleading-power N -jet operators and the LBK amplitude in SCET , PoS RADCOR2017 (2017) 048 [ 1712.07462]

    2017 arXiv

  98. [106]

    R.J. Hill, T. Becher, S.J. Lee and M. Neubert, Sudakov resummation for subleading SCET currents and heavy-to-light form-factors , JHEP 07 (2004) 081 [ hep-ph/0404217]

    2004 arXiv

  99. [107]

    Beneke and D

    M. Beneke and D. Yang, Heavy-to-light B meson form-factors at large recoil energy: Spectator-scattering corrections, Nucl. Phys. B 736 (2006) 34 [ hep-ph/0508250]

    2006 arXiv

  100. [108]

    Beneke, M

    M. Beneke, M. Garny, R. Szafron and J. Wang, Anomalous dimension of subleading-power N -jet operators. Part II , JHEP 11 (2018) 112 [ 1808.04742]

    2018 arXiv

  101. [109]

    Korchemsky and A.V

    G.P. Korchemsky and A.V. Radyushkin, Renormalization of the Wilson Loops Beyond the Leading Order, Nucl. Phys. B 283 (1987) 342

    1987

  102. [110]

    Frenkel and J.C

    J. Frenkel and J.C. Taylor, Nonabelian eikonal exponentiation , Nucl. Phys. B 246 (1984) 231

    1984

  103. [111]

    Henn, G.P

    J.M. Henn, G.P. Korchemsky and B. Mistlberger, The full four-loop cusp anomalous dimension in N = 4 super Yang-Mills and QCD , JHEP 04 (2020) 018 [ 1911.10174]

    2020 arXiv

  104. [112]

    Uehling, Polarization effects in the positron theory , Phys

    E.A. Uehling, Polarization effects in the positron theory , Phys. Rev. 48 (1935) 55

    1935

  105. [113]

    Beneke, R

    M. Beneke, R. Szafron and K. Urban, Wino potential and Sommerfeld effect at NLO , Phys. Lett. B 800 (2020) 135112 [ 1909.04584]

    2020 arXiv

  106. [114]

    Beneke, R

    M. Beneke, R. Szafron and K. Urban, Sommerfeld-corrected relic abundance of wino dark matter with NLO electroweak potentials , JHEP 02 (2021) 020 [ 2009.00640]

    2021 arXiv

  107. [115]

    Urban, NLO electroweak potentials for minimal dark matter and beyond , JHEP 10 (2021) 136 [ 2108.07285]

    K. Urban, NLO electroweak potentials for minimal dark matter and beyond , JHEP 10 (2021) 136 [ 2108.07285]

    2021 arXiv

  108. [116]

    Korzinin, V.A

    E.Y. Korzinin, V.A. Shelyuto, V.G. Ivanov, R. Szafron and S.G. Karshenboim, Light-by-light-scattering contributions to the Lamb shift in light muonic atoms , Phys. Rev. A 98 (2018) 062519 [ 1812.09159]

    2018 arXiv

  109. [117]

    Beneke, A

    M. Beneke, A. Broggio, M. Garny, S. Jaskiewicz, R. Szafron, L. Vernazza et al., Leading-logarithmic threshold resummation of the Drell-Yan process at next-to-leading power, JHEP 03 (2019) 043 [ 1809.10631]

    2019 arXiv

  110. [118]

    Beneke, A

    M. Beneke, A. Broggio, S. Jaskiewicz and L. Vernazza, Threshold factorization of the Drell-Yan process at next-to-leading power, JHEP 07 (2020) 078 [ 1912.01585]

    2020 arXiv

  111. [119]

    Z.L. Liu, M. Neubert, M. Schnubel and X. Wang, Radiative quark jet function with an external gluon , JHEP 02 (2022) 075 [ 2112.00018]

    2022 arXiv

  112. [120]

    Liu and M

    Z.L. Liu and M. Neubert, Two-Loop Radiative Jet Function for Exclusive B-Meson and Higgs Decays, JHEP 06 (2020) 060 [ 2003.03393]

    2020 arXiv

  113. [121]

    L. Dai, C. Kim and A.K. Leibovich, Heavy quark jet production near threshold , JHEP 09 (2021) 148 [ 2104.14707]

    2021 arXiv

  114. [122]

    Beneke, G

    M. Beneke, G. Finauri, K.K. Vos and Y. Wei, QCD light-cone distribution amplitudes of heavy mesons from boosted HQET , JHEP 09 (2023) 066 [ 2305.06401]

    2023 arXiv

  115. [123]

    Beneke, Y

    M. Beneke, Y. Ji and X. Wang, Renormalization of the next-to-leading-power γγ → h and gg → h soft quark functions , JHEP 05 (2024) 246 [ 2403.17738]

    2024 arXiv

  116. [124]

    Beneke, C

    M. Beneke, C. Hellmann and P. Ruiz-Femenia, Non-relativistic pair annihilation of nearly – 52 – mass degenerate neutralinos and charginos III. Computation of the Sommerfeld enhancements, JHEP 05 (2015) 115 [ 1411.6924]

    2015 arXiv

  117. [125]

    Yennie, S.C

    D.R. Yennie, S.C. Frautschi and H. Suura, The infrared divergence phenomena and high-energy processes, Annals Phys. 13 (1961) 379

    1961

  118. [126]

    Szafron and A

    R. Szafron and A. Czarnecki, Bound muon decay spectrum in the leading logarithmic accuracy, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 051301 [ 1608.05447]

    2016 arXiv

  119. [127]

    Frixione et al., Initial state QED radiation aspects for future e+e− colliders, in Snowmass 2021, 3, 2022 [ 2203.12557]

    S. Frixione et al., Initial state QED radiation aspects for future e+e− colliders, in Snowmass 2021, 3, 2022 [ 2203.12557]

    2021 arXiv

  120. [128]

    Feinberg, P

    G. Feinberg, P. Kabir and S. Weinberg, Transformation of muons into electrons , Phys. Rev. Lett. 3 (1959) 527

    1959

  121. [129]

    Denner and S

    A. Denner and S. Dittmaier, Electroweak Radiative Corrections for Collider Physics , Phys. Rept. 864 (2020) 1 [ 1912.06823]

    2020 arXiv

  122. [130]

    J.-Y. Chiu, A. Jain, D. Neill and I.Z. Rothstein, A Formalism for the Systematic Treatment of Rapidity Logarithms in Quantum Field Theory , JHEP 05 (2012) 084 [ 1202.0814]

    2012 arXiv

  123. [131]

    Harlander, S.Y

    R.V. Harlander, S.Y. Klein and M. Lipp, FeynGame, Comput. Phys. Commun. 256 (2020) 107465 [2003.00896]

    2020 arXiv

  124. [132]

    Harlander, S.Y

    R. Harlander, S.Y. Klein and M.C. Schaaf, FeynGame-2.1 – Feynman diagrams made easy , PoS EPS-HEP2023 (2024) 657 [ 2401.12778]

    2024 arXiv

  125. [133]

    Patel, Package-X: A Mathematica package for the analytic calculation of one-loop integrals, Comput

    H.H. Patel, Package-X: A Mathematica package for the analytic calculation of one-loop integrals, Comput. Phys. Commun. 197 (2015) 276 [ 1503.01469]

    2015 arXiv

  126. [134]

    Patel, Package-X 2.0: A Mathematica package for the analytic calculation of one-loop integrals, Comput

    H.H. Patel, Package-X 2.0: A Mathematica package for the analytic calculation of one-loop integrals, Comput. Phys. Commun. 218 (2017) 66 [ 1612.00009]

    2017 arXiv

  127. [135]

    Huber and D

    T. Huber and D. Maitre, HypExp: A Mathematica package for expanding hypergeometric functions around integer-valued parameters, Comput. Phys. Commun. 175 (2006) 122 [hep-ph/0507094]

    2006 arXiv

  128. [136]

    Huber and D

    T. Huber and D. Maitre, HypExp 2, Expanding Hypergeometric Functions about Half-Integer Parameters, Comput. Phys. Commun. 178 (2008) 755 [ 0708.2443]

    2008 arXiv

  129. [137]

    Low, Bremsstrahlung of very low-energy quanta in elementary particle collisions , Phys

    F.E. Low, Bremsstrahlung of very low-energy quanta in elementary particle collisions , Phys. Rev. 110 (1958) 974

    1958

  130. [138]

    Burnett and N.M

    T.H. Burnett and N.M. Kroll, Extension of the low soft photon theorem , Phys. Rev. Lett. 20 (1968) 86

    1968

  131. [139]

    Weinberg, Infrared photons and gravitons , Phys

    S. Weinberg, Infrared photons and gravitons , Phys. Rev. 140 (1965) B516

    1965

  132. [140]

    Jackiw, Low-Energy Theorems for Massless Bosons: Photons and Gravitons , Phys

    R. Jackiw, Low-Energy Theorems for Massless Bosons: Photons and Gravitons , Phys. Rev. 168 (1968) 1623

    1968

  133. [141]

    Larkoski, D

    A.J. Larkoski, D. Neill and I.W. Stewart, Soft Theorems from Effective Field Theory , JHEP 06 (2015) 077 [ 1412.3108]

    2015 arXiv

  134. [142]

    Beneke, P

    M. Beneke, P. Hager and R. Szafron, Gravitational soft theorem from emergent soft gauge symmetries, JHEP 03 (2022) 199 [ 2110.02969]. – 53 –

    2022 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.