Renormalization of the Next-to-Leading-Power Soft Function for the Drell-Yan Off-diagonal Channel

Erik S\"underhauf; Martin Beneke; Xing Wang; Yao Ji

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Renormalization of the Next-to-Leading-Power Soft Function for the Drell-Yan Off-diagonal Channel

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper establishes the one-loop MS renormalization of the next-to-leading-power Drell-Yan soft function in the quark-gluon (off-diagonal) channel and solves its renormalization-group equation.

desk verdict The first renormalization of an amplitude-squared NLP soft function, and the kernel looks right; the one step I would press on is the asserted UV finiteness of the real-emission diagrams. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.01973 v1 pith:NTIMJD4J submitted 2025-02-04 hep-ph hep-th

Martin Beneke , Yao Ji , Erik Sünderhauf , Xing Wang This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-phhep-th

keywords Drell-Yanprocessnext-to-leadingpowerthresholdresummationsoftfunctionanomalousdimensionrenormalizationgroupsoft-quarkoperatorWilsonlines

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

This paper establishes the one-loop MS renormalization of the next-to-leading-power (NLP) soft function that appears in the quark-gluon (off-diagonal) channel of Drell-Yan production near threshold. The soft function is an amplitude-squared vacuum matrix element of soft-quark operators dressed with semi-infinite Wilson lines, and its ultraviolet poles depend on the infrared regulator used to define those lines. The paper shows that a specific soft subtraction, dividing by a product of two Wilson-line vacuum matrix elements, removes this regulator dependence and yields a well-defined anomalous-dimension kernel. The kernel factorizes into the leading-power Drell-Yan anomalous dimension and the soft-quark kernel known from gluon-fusion Higgs production, and solving the resulting renormalization-group equation produces an explicit resummed soft function whose Mellin variables are shifted by an amount proportional to $C_A - C_F$. This is the first complete renormalization of an amplitude-squared NLP soft function for an inclusive cross section, and it is a necessary ingredient for threshold resummation at next-to-leading power in the Drell-Yan $qg$ channel.

What carries the argument

The central object is the NLP soft-quark operator $P_8 = [0,s n_-]\, T^b\, q_s(s n_-)\, Y^{ba}_{n_-}(s n_-)$, whose vacuum matrix element defines the soft function $S_{g\bar q}^{NLP}(x_0,s_1,s_2)$. Because the semi-infinite Wilson lines in $P_8$ carry $\delta$-regulators, the unsubtracted operator's UV poles depend on the regulator; the paper removes this dependence by dividing by the subtraction factors $S^+_\sqcap(x_0/2) S^-_\sqcap(x_0/2)$, the vacuum matrix elements of Wilson-line operators $W^\pm_\sqcap$. The evolution kernel is then computed from the renormalization factor in the MS scheme, and solved by Mellin transformation: the nonlocal kernel $\omega\,\Gamma(\omega,\omega')$ has power eigenfunctions $\omega^a$ with eigenvalue $-\bigl[\psi(1+a)+\psi(1-a)+2\gamma_E\bigr]$, which turns the RGE into a differential equation with translations in Mellin space.

What would settle it

A direct two-loop computation of the subtracted soft function's UV poles in the delta-regulator scheme would settle the claim: if any delta-dependent pole survives at $O(\alpha_s^2)$, the kernel (3.37) is not the true MS anomalous dimension. A cheaper check is to compare the predicted $O(\alpha_s^2)$ UV poles from the convolution (5.33) with an independent fixed-order calculation in dimensional regularization, after separating the UV part from the IR poles.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central result is the MS anomalous-dimension kernel $\gamma_{g\bar q}^{NLP}(\Omega,\{\omega\};\Omega',\{\omega'\})$ given in Eq. (3.37), together with the mixed-space RGE solution in Eq. (5.25). The kernel is a sum of two blocks: a leading-power-like term in the total soft energy $\Omega$ proportional to $C_A + C_F$, and a term in the convolution variables $\omega_1, \omega_2$ with colour factor $C_F - C_A$ that is identical in structure to the $gg\to h$ soft-quark kernel. In Mellin space the evolution equation becomes a first-order PDE with derivatives in the Mellin variables, whose solution shifts each variable by $a_{\Gamma_F} - a_{\Gamma_A}$ and multiplies the Mellin integrand by a gamma-function ratio raised to $\rho_\Gamma = (C_A-2C_F)/(2(C_A-C_F)) = 1/10$ in QCD. The paper also shows that the convolution of the kernel with collinear jet functions is endpoint-finite, computes the $O(\alpha_s^2)$ UV poles by convolution, and gives explicit large-$N_c$ and QED limits.

Load-bearing premise

The whole construction assumes that the division by the subtraction factors $S^+_\sqcap S^-_\sqcap$ removes all dependence on the infrared $\delta$-regulator from the ultraviolet poles of the soft function at every order in $\alpha_s$; the paper verifies this at one loop and relates it to parton-distribution renormalization, but does not prove it beyond one loop.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Threshold resummation for the $g\bar q$ (and $qg$) Drell-Yan channel at next-to-leading power can now be performed with a fully determined one-loop soft-function kernel, closing a missing ingredient for NLP Sudakov logarithms in this channel.
The factorized form of the kernel means the anomalous dimension is assembled from the leading-power Drell-Yan anomalous dimension and the $gg\to h$ soft-quark kernel, so no fundamentally new function is needed for this channel.
The Mellin-space shift $a_{\Gamma_F} - a_{\Gamma_A}$, proportional to $C_A - C_F$, is a concrete prediction of the solution; at large $N_c$ it vanishes and the evolution becomes local in $\omega_1, \omega_2$.
The endpoint divergence that appears when the soft function is convoluted with jet functions does not afflict its evolution: the kernel-jet convolution is finite, so endpoint rearrangement and RG evolution commute.
The $O(\alpha_s^2)$ UV poles given in Eq. (5.33) provide a specific target for future fixed-order computations to verify the renormalization.

Reading between the lines

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

If the factorized structure of the kernel is universal, the same two-block form should appear in the NLP soft functions of other inclusive processes, such as $Z$ or $W$ production, whose off-diagonal channels share the $P_8$ soft-quark building block; this can be checked by repeating the one-loop calculation with simple colour and direction substitutions.
The radiative tail that evolution generates for $\omega > \Omega$, with support concentrated on the lines $\omega_1 = \Omega$ and $\omega_2 = \Omega$, suggests that after endpoint subtraction most of the soft radiation energy is carried by the emitted soft (anti-)quark; if true, the physical convolution is concentrated near $\omega_1 \approx \omega_2 \approx \Omega$, which may simplify numerical t
The relation to the twist-3 B-meson distribution amplitude kernel in the soft-gluon limit hints that the same anomalous-dimension structure controls soft-quark operators in heavy-quark physics; extracting the constant, $x_0$-independent parts by RG consistency could constrain the two-loop kernel without a full calculation.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

This paper gives the MS anomalous-dimension kernel for the next-to-leading-power Drell-Yan soft function in the off-diagonal quark-gluon channel. As far as I can tell, it is the first time an amplitude-squared soft function beyond leading power has been renormalized, and the result is a genuinely useful ingredient for NLP threshold resummation. The kernel (3.37) factorizes into known building blocks from the leading-power DY soft function and the gg→h soft-quark function, the RGE is solved in mixed space with an explicit Mellin shift proportional to CA−CF, and the large-Nc and QED limits behave as they should. Those are not cosmetic checks; they exercise the result in very different regimes.

The calculation looks careful and internally consistent. The delta-regulator dependence cancels in the subtracted function, gauge-parameter dependence cancels as shown in Appendix A, and the O(αs^2) UV poles obtained by convoluting the renormalization factor with the tree-level function match the structure of the known fixed-order result from Broggio, Jaskiewicz, and Vernazza. Appendix B gives a coherent argument that the same subtraction that renormalizes the soft function is the one needed to render the PDF renormalization consistent in the threshold limit. That is a meaningful consistency check, not decoration.

Where I would want more before using this as a black box: Eq. (3.16), where the paper states that the real-emission diagrams in Fig. 4 contribute only at O(ε^0), with the details deferred to [1]. The kernel in (3.37) is extracted from the pole part, so a missed 1/ε pole in any of those diagrams would change the result. The geometric argument given for diagram (a) is plausible—the two correlated Wilson lines never intersect because of the time-like displacement—but it is not shown algebraically for generic s1, s2, and x0. The stress-test note flags exactly this, and I think that is the right spot to probe. It is a place where the referee should ask for the derivation to be written out or reproduced in the paper, not because I see an actual error, but because it is load-bearing.

The all-order status of the subtraction (3.20) is a softer concern. The paper proves cancellation of the regulator dependence at one loop and connects it to PDF renormalization in Appendix B, but does not prove it to all orders. That is common and acceptable for this kind of calculation; I would not treat it as a flaw beyond a note.

Who is this for? Practitioners of threshold resummation at subleading power, especially those working on DY, and to a lesser extent anyone using soft-quark functions in factorization theorems. It is a technical paper, not a sweeping conceptual claim. It deserves a serious referee: the central result is new, the calculation is substantial, and the checks give it real weight. My recommendation: send it to review, and ask the authors to make the real-emission UV-finiteness argument explicit enough for someone else to verify without redoing the whole calculation.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper computes the one-loop MS anomalous-dimension kernel of the next-to-leading-power (NLP) soft function that enters threshold factorization of the off-diagonal g+qbar -> gamma*+X Drell-Yan channel. The authors first revisit the leading-power soft function with a delta-regulator and define soft subtractions S+_box and S-_box, then construct the NLP soft-quark operator, extract its UV poles in Feynman gauge, and obtain a three-variable anomalous-dimension kernel after subtraction. They demonstrate endpoint finiteness of convolutions of the kernel with collinear functions, solve the resulting integro-differential RGE in mixed space by Mellin transformation, and provide large-Nc and QED limits as well as a numerical study of the evolved soft function.

Significance. If the one-loop kernel in Eq. (3.37) is correct, this is the first anomalous-dimension kernel for an amplitude-squared NLP soft function in an inclusive cross-section, and it is an essential ingredient for NLP threshold resummation in the off-diagonal Drell-Yan channel. The paper has several genuine strengths: the delta-regulator dependence is shown to cancel in the subtracted pole part at one loop; the leading-power gauge-parameter cancellation in Appendix A is explicit; the endpoint-finiteness analysis in Sec. 4 is concrete and checks integrability of the relevant convolutions; the Mellin-space solution in Eq. (5.25) has a transparent structure with a shift proportional to C_A - C_F; and the large-Nc and QED limits provide nontrivial consistency checks. The derivation is analytical and transparent, though it relies on the companion paper [1] for some central technical steps.

major comments (2)

[Sec. 3.2, Eq. (3.16)] The statement that all real-emission diagrams in Fig. 4 contribute only at O(epsilon^0) is load-bearing: any missed 1/epsilon pole in any of these diagrams would enter Eq. (3.19) and directly change the extracted kernel in Eq. (3.37). The text gives a geometric argument for diagram (a), but for diagrams (c)-(f) it defers to [1], and no algebraic demonstration is provided for generic s1, s2, and x0 in the delta-regulated scheme. Please include an explicit calculation or a detailed appendix showing that each real-emission diagram is UV finite, or at least give the endpoint analysis for the quark-gluon diagrams (c)-(f), which are not identical to the corresponding diagrams in [1].
[Appendix A and Sec. 3.4] The gauge-parameter independence of the NLP subtracted soft function is asserted rather than demonstrated. Appendix A computes the leading-power cancellation in general R_xi gauge, but for the NLP case it states only that the calculation is straightforward and does not present it. Since the operator (3.1) involves both fundamental and adjoint Wilson lines, the (1-xi) parts of the gluon propagator are not trivially identical to the leading-power case, and the anomalous dimension (3.37) is a central result. Please provide the explicit R_xi calculation for the NLP subtraction/cancellation, or give a precise reference where the complete NLP case appears.

minor comments (5)

[Sec. 3.3, Eq. (3.20)] The delta-regulator independence of the subtracted UV poles is demonstrated only at one loop. Since the subtraction is presented as defining the physical MS anomalous dimension, please add an explicit statement that its validity beyond one loop is an assumption that remains to be proven, and characterize the residual scheme ambiguity if any at higher orders.
[Sec. 5.1.1] There is a typo: "ant the Mellin inverse" should be "and the Mellin inverse". The same section would also benefit from a sentence explaining why the large-Nc soft function is localized on the diagonal before evolution.
[Sec. 3.4, Eq. (3.26)] The sentence "where the bare operator is defined as above in terms of the renormalized fields and strong coupling" is confusing, because bare and renormalized objects appear in the same equation. Please rephrase to clarify that the right-hand side of Eq. (3.26) expresses the action of the renormalization factor on the bare operator written in terms of renormalized fields.
[Sec. 5.2.1 and Eq. (5.37)] The discussion of the sign oscillations and the singular behavior near omega = Omega relies on the condition 0 < 1 + 2 a_Gamma^+ < 1, which is stated in a footnote. Please state this validity condition explicitly in the main text and in the caption of Fig. 7, since the evolved expression is used outside this range in the numerical plots.
[References] Reference [4] is cited only by arXiv number; please update it to the published version if one exists, and similarly for any other preprint-only references that have appeared in print.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the one-loop kernel is obtained from explicit one-loop integrals plus prior independent results; the soft subtraction is an independently computed consistency device, not the answer assumed.

full rationale

The derivation chain from the operator definition (3.1) through the unsubtracted UV poles (3.19), the subtraction (3.20), and the kernel (3.37) is an honest calculation: no parameter is fitted and no target anomalous dimension is used as an input. The subtraction factors S± in (2.21), (2.22), (3.24) are computed from Wilson-line matrix elements independently of the NLP soft function, and the claimed cancellation of δ-regulator dependence is verified explicitly; Appendix B additionally ties the same subtraction to the known x→1 DGLAP kernel, which is a nontrivial consistency check rather than a circular assumption. The RGE solution (5.25) follows from the kernel by Mellin transformation using the standard eigenvalue identity (5.1), not from assuming the result. The weakest input is Eq. (3.16), where the vanishing of all real-emission UV poles is asserted with details deferred to the self-cited [1]; this is a missing explicit verification on which (3.37) depends, but [1] is a separate published calculation of a related soft function and does not assume the present result, so the reliance is a completeness/correctness concern, not circularity. Self-citations to [1] for the subtraction framework and for diagrams (c)-(d) and (e) are load-bearing but provide independent support rather than a self-referential reduction. No circular step meeting the evidentiary bar was found.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The derivation pulls in the factorization theorem, the delta-regulator subtraction, and conformal-symmetry results from prior work. None of these are fitted to data, but the subtraction scheme is the least externally constrained ingredient.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption The factorization formula (1.1) for the NLP g-qbar Drell-Yan cross section in terms of hard, jet, and soft functions holds.
The soft function renormalization is only meaningful inside this factorization; the paper cites [2-4] and does not prove it.
ad hoc to paper The delta-regulator on semi-infinite Wilson lines, together with the subtraction operators S+ and S-, isolates the UV poles in dimensional regularization.
Used throughout Sections 2-3; Appendix B connects it to PDF renormalization, but all-order validity is assumed.
standard math The all-order leading-power soft anomalous dimension has the cusp form (2.28) with universal cusp anomalous dimensions.
Taken from [16] and used to fix the normalization of the LP-like contributions.
standard math The Mellin transform of the kernel is diagonalized by power functions with eigenvalue F(a) as in Eq. (5.1).
Verified by direct integration and used in Section 5 to solve the RGE.
domain assumption The conformal-symmetry relation between the twist-3 B-meson LCDA kernel and the NLP soft-quark kernels in Appendix C holds.
Relies on conformal-symmetry results from [20,28,29] and the construction in [1].

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Renormalization of the Next-to-Leading-Power Soft Function for the Drell-Yan Off-diagonal Channel." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NTIMJD4J

@misc{pith2026250201973,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Renormalization of the Next-to-Leading-Power Soft Function for the Drell-Yan Off-diagonal Channel},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NTIMJD4J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.01973}
}

abstract

We renormalize the soft function entering the factorization and resummation of the $qg$ parton-scattering channel of the Drell-Yan process near the kinematic threshold $\hat{s}\to Q^2$ at next-to-leading power in the expansion around $z \equiv Q^2 / \hat{s} = 1$, and solve its renormalization-group equation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.01973 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** The subtraction operator and its one-loop corrections. Diagram [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** The soft function entering the off-diagonal Drell-Yan process and its one-loop virtual [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (6 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: One-loop real-emission corrections. The dashed line denotes the cut. The mirror [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: The adjoint soft subtraction operator and its one-loop corrections. Diagram [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Integration contour for η2 at fixed η1 when Ω/ω2 > 1. The thick lines on the real axis represent the branch cuts (including branch points) of the integrand in (5.36). The thick points represent the poles from the Γ(η1 +η2) factor. and I(Ω,{ω};µs ,µ) = ω1ω2 µ 2 s a −…

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Shown is the evolution of the NLP soft function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: 3D plot of the soft function S NLP gq¯ (Ω,{ω}) for initial scale µs = 10 GeV and factorization scales µ = 10.1 GeV (left) and µ = 90 GeV (right). of the soft momentum fraction ω. The concentration of the radiatively generated support on the lines ω1 = Ω and ω2 = Ω can …

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: One-loop corrections to ⟨0|χc(0)|q(p)⟩ are given by (a) + (b)/2. The crossed dot denotes the χ field including the collinear Wilson line. Here S LP qq¯ (Ω) refers to the unsubtracted momentum-space soft function (2.2) in the present work (before introducing δ regulator…

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

Soft background fields at next-to-leading power in transverse momentum dependent SIDIS with jets
hep-ph 2025-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

New next-to-leading-power factorization for SIDIS with jets from a background-field method with explicit soft modes, including operator-level definitions of twist-3 TMDs free of rapidity and endpoint divergences.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

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]

arXiv 2024
[2]

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]

arXiv 2019
[3]

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]

arXiv 2020
[4]

Broggio, S

A. Broggio, S. Jaskiewicz and L. Vernazza, Threshold factorization of the Drell-Yan quark-gluon channel and two-loop soft function at next-to-leading power , 2306.06037

arXiv
[5]

Lange and M

B.O. Lange and M. Neubert, Renormalization group evolution of the B meson light cone distribution amplitude, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 102001 [hep-ph/0303082]

arXiv 2003
[6]

Braun, D.Y

V .M. Braun, D.Y . Ivanov and G.P. Korchemsky,The B meson distribution amplitude in QCD, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 034014 [hep-ph/0309330]

arXiv 2004
[7]

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]

arXiv 2020
[8]

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]

arXiv 2019

Show all 29 references

[9]

Beneke, P

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

2020 arXiv
[10]

Chay and C

J. Chay and C. Kim, Proper factorization theorems in high-energy scattering near the endpoint, JHEP 09 (2013) 126 [1303.1637]

2013 arXiv
[11]

Korchemsky and G

G.P. Korchemsky and G. Marchesini, Resummation of large infrared corrections using Wilson loops, Phys. Lett. B 313 (1993) 433. 40

1993
[12]

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
[13]

Korchemsky and G

G.P. Korchemsky and G. Marchesini, Structure function for large x and renormalization of Wilson loop, Nucl. Phys. B 406 (1993) 225 [hep-ph/9210281]

1993 arXiv
[14]

Becher, M

T. Becher, M. Neubert and B.D. Pecjak, Factorization and Momentum-Space Resummation in Deep-Inelastic Scattering, JHEP 01 (2007) 076 [hep-ph/0607228]

2007 arXiv
[15]

Falcioni, E

G. Falcioni, E. Gardi and C. Milloy, Relating amplitude and PDF factorisation through Wilson-line geometries, JHEP 11 (2019) 100 [1909.00697]

2019 arXiv
[16]

Korchemskaya and G.P

I.A. Korchemskaya and G.P. Korchemsky, On lightlike Wilson loops, Phys. Lett. B 287 (1992) 169

1992
[17]

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
[18]

Balitsky and V .M

I.I. Balitsky and V .M. Braun,Evolution Equations for QCD String Operators , Nucl. Phys. B 311 (1989) 541

1989
[19]

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
[20]

Braun, A.N

V .M. Braun, A.N. Manashov and N. Offen,Evolution equation for the higher-twist B-meson distribution amplitude, Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 074044 [1507.03445]

2015 arXiv
[21]

Braun, Y

V .M. Braun, Y . Ji and A.N. Manashov,Two-loop evolution equation for the B-meson distribution amplitude, Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019) 014023 [1905.04498]

2019 arXiv
[22]

Z.L. Liu, B. Mecaj, M. Neubert, X. Wang and S. Fleming, Renormalization and Scale Evolution of the Soft-Quark Soft Function , JHEP 07 (2020) 104 [2005.03013]

2020 arXiv
[23]

Becher, M

T. Becher, M. Neubert and G. Xu, Dynamical Threshold Enhancement and Resummation in Drell-Yan Production, JHEP 07 (2008) 030 [0710.0680]

2008 arXiv
[24]

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
[25]

Beneke, P

M. Beneke, P. Falgari, S. Klein and C. Schwinn, Hadronic top-quark pair production with NNLL threshold resummation, Nucl. Phys. B 855 (2012) 695 [1109.1536]

2012 arXiv
[26]

Chay and C

J. Chay and C. Kim, Threshold Factorization Redux, Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) 094024 [1710.02284]

2018 arXiv
[27]

Braun, Y

V .M. Braun, Y . Ji and A.N. Manashov,Higher-twist B-meson Distribution Amplitudes in HQET, JHEP 05 (2017) 022 [1703.02446]. 41

2017 arXiv
[28]

Braun, G.P

V .M. Braun, G.P. Korchemsky and D. Müller,The Uses of conformal symmetry in QCD , Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 51 (2003) 311 [hep-ph/0306057]

2003 arXiv
[29]

Braun, Y

V .M. Braun, Y . Ji and A.N. Manashov,Integrability in heavy quark effective theory , JHEP 06 (2018) 017 [1804.06289]. 42

2018 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

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]

arXiv 2024

[2] [2]

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]

arXiv 2019

[3] [3]

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]

arXiv 2020

[4] [4]

Broggio, S

A. Broggio, S. Jaskiewicz and L. Vernazza, Threshold factorization of the Drell-Yan quark-gluon channel and two-loop soft function at next-to-leading power , 2306.06037

arXiv

[5] [5]

Lange and M

B.O. Lange and M. Neubert, Renormalization group evolution of the B meson light cone distribution amplitude, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 102001 [hep-ph/0303082]

arXiv 2003

[6] [6]

Braun, D.Y

V .M. Braun, D.Y . Ivanov and G.P. Korchemsky,The B meson distribution amplitude in QCD, Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004) 034014 [hep-ph/0309330]

arXiv 2004

[7] [7]

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]

arXiv 2020

[8] [8]

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]

arXiv 2019