pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.25977 · v1 · pith:ZAKCP7WQnew · submitted 2026-06-24 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex

Factorization of the Energy-Energy Correlation in the two-jet limit in the massive case

Ugo Giuseppe Aglietti , Giancarlo Ferrera , Lorenzo Rossi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-25 19:56 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-ex
keywords energy-energy correlationheavy quark mass effectstwo-jet limitfactorizationresummationcoefficient functionpartial event fractionmassless limit
0
0 comments X

The pith

A new factorization scheme makes the massive energy-energy correlation connect smoothly to its massless limit by letting the coefficient function depend on the angle χ.

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

The paper examines non-logarithmic heavy-quark mass effects in the factorization and resummation of the energy-energy correlation function in the two-jet limit. It defines a partial event fraction that excludes the forward region, so the first-order calculation uses only real-emission diagrams in four dimensions without virtual corrections or dimensional regularization. Numerical evaluation of the spectrum at order alpha_s determines the next-to-leading coefficient and remainder functions and matches prior results. To avoid discontinuities when masses approach zero, the authors introduce an improved factorization in which the coefficient function itself varies with the correlation angle χ. A reader would care because this supplies a consistent framework for including mass corrections in resummed collider observables.

Core claim

We define a new partial event fraction restricted to the two-jet region and excluding the forward region, whose calculation at first order requires only real emission diagrams in D=4 space-time dimensions. In order to determine explicitly the next-to-leading order coefficient function and the remainder function, we evaluate numerically the EEC spectrum at first-order in alpha_s. To have a smooth massless limit, a new improved factorization scheme is proposed in which the coefficient function also depends on the correlation angle χ.

What carries the argument

The improved factorization scheme in which the coefficient function depends on the correlation angle χ, applied to the partial event fraction.

If this is right

  • The partial event fraction simplifies first-order calculations by eliminating the need for virtual diagrams or D not equal to 4.
  • Numerical results for the coefficient and remainder functions agree with existing calculations at order alpha_s.
  • Resummation and matching to fixed-order results can be performed consistently within the new scheme.
  • Mass effects remain under control without introducing singularities in the massless limit.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The angle dependence might appear in other jet observables when mass corrections are included at higher orders.
  • This scheme could improve matching between resummed predictions and parton-shower simulations that retain heavy-quark masses.
  • Extending the numerical evaluation method to higher perturbative orders would test whether the χ dependence persists.

Load-bearing premise

The partial event fraction, computed with only real emissions in four dimensions, can be resummed and matched at all orders using the angle-dependent coefficient function.

What would settle it

A next-to-next-to-leading order computation of the EEC spectrum in the massive theory that shows a discontinuous massless limit when the coefficient function is forced to be independent of χ.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.25977 by Giancarlo Ferrera, Lorenzo Rossi, Ugo Giuseppe Aglietti.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Allowed region in the quark-antiquark energy plane (Dalitz plot) in the massless case (the region inside the red triangle) and in the massive case (the region below the yellow curve xmax = xmax(x, η) and above the blue curve xmin = xmin(x, η)), for η = 0.3. The dotted black vertical line, x = ˜x(η) involves the minimal antiquark energy xmin = η (see text); Roughly speaking, mass effects are substantial to … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: ˜x = ˜x(η), i.e. as a function of the mass parameter η ∈ [0, 1]. where (see fig. 2): x˜(η) ≡ 2 2 − η − η. (56) 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The region inside the continuous blue contour is the region, in the plane (χ, x), where x ∗ , eq.(99), is an actual solution of the (original) kinematic-constraint equation (95), for η = 0.5 (in other words, x ∗ is not a solution of eq.(95) inside the (top right) small rectangle with the red dashed sides). x ∗∗, eq.(100), is a solution of eq.(95) only in the (top left) small rectangle above the blue dashed… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The Q energies x ∗ and x ∗∗ are real only below the blue curve (η = 0.5). Note that the horizontal black dashed line x = ˜x(η) is tangent to the blue curve at its minimum at χ = π/2. which can become negative (for example at x = 1)‡ . Since x ∗ and x ∗∗ are (antiquark) energies, they have to be real, implying that the argument of the radical above, the expression (112), has to be positive. That turns out t… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The physical (real) domain of x ∗ , for η = 0.5, is the region contained inside the continuous blue contour. The physical domain of x ∗∗ is the (small) curvilinear triangle above the blue dashed line (having the shape of a main-sail). 6.1 QQ differential distribution Finally, the quark-antiquark contribution to the differential EEC function in the massive case reads: 1 σ (0) CC dΣ (CC) QQ d cos χ = CF αS 2… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison of the ratio between the massive and massless EEC at √ s = 34 GeV. The black dots correspond to the results of Ref. [40], while the blue solid line represents our predictions. The blue dashed line shows our results shifted downward by 2%. In [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparison of the ratio between the massive and massless EEC at √ s = 30 GeV. The black dots correspond to the results of Ref. [39], while the red solid line represents our predictions. As shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: First-order remainder functions for the EEC spectrum in the massless case η = 0 (black line) and in almost massless cases (red line: η = 0.01; blue line: η = 0.02; green line: η = 0.03). ¶The smallest value of the mass parameter we have chosen, η = 0.01, corresponds, for example, to a quark with a mass m ≃ 0.5 GeV — Let us say a strange quark with a constituent mass — at the Z 0 peak (Q = mZ = 91.2 GeV). T… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: First-order Remainder functions for the partially-integrated EEC distribution in the vector case (the axial case is similar). Black line: η = 0 (massless case); green: η = 0.1 (beauty at LEP1); blue: η = 0.2; orange: η = 0.3; magenta: η = 0.4; brown: η = 0.5. for very small masses. Furthermore, the massless limit of the massive Remainder does not vanish in the two-jet limit χ → 0 +, as one would expect. Mo… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We consider non-logarithmic heavy-quark mass effects in the factorization and resummation of the Energy-Energy-Correlation (EEC) function, in the two-jet limit. We define a new, "partial" event fraction, restricted to the two-jet region and excluding the forward region, whose calculation at first order requires to consider real emission diagrams only, in $D=4$ space-time dimensions (no need to consider virtual diagrams or take $D \ne 4$). In order to determine explicitly the next-to-leading order coefficient function and the remainder function (both entering the standard resummation formula), we evaluate numerically the EEC spectrum at first-order in $\alpha_S$, finding good agreement with previous calculations. To have a smooth massless limit, a new, improved factorization scheme is proposed, in which the coefficient function also depends on the correlation angle $\chi$.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript considers non-logarithmic heavy-quark mass effects in the factorization and resummation of the Energy-Energy-Correlation (EEC) in the two-jet limit. It defines a partial event fraction restricted to the two-jet region excluding the forward region, whose first-order calculation requires only real emission diagrams in D=4. The EEC spectrum is evaluated numerically at NLO in α_s, showing agreement with previous calculations. To achieve a smooth massless limit, an improved factorization scheme is proposed in which the coefficient function depends on the correlation angle χ.

Significance. If the all-order consistency of the proposed scheme holds, this work would provide a practical way to incorporate mass effects into EEC resummation while maintaining a smooth connection to the massless case. The NLO numerical agreement lends support at perturbative order one, but the significance is limited by the lack of explicit demonstration that the χ dependence can be consistently incorporated into the resummation at higher orders without altering the logarithmic towers.

major comments (2)
  1. [discussion of the improved factorization scheme] The proposal of a χ-dependent coefficient function to ensure a smooth m→0 limit is presented as compatible with the standard resummation formula, but no argument is given that this χ dependence preserves the structure of the Sudakov exponent or avoids introducing unmatched power corrections at orders beyond NLO. This assumption is load-bearing for the central claim of the improved scheme.
  2. [NLO numerical evaluation] The NLO numerical evaluation of the coefficient function and remainder function is reported to agree with prior calculations, yet the manuscript provides no details on the integration method, phase-space restrictions for the partial event fraction, error estimates, or quantitative comparison values. This is load-bearing for validating the partial-event-fraction approach at even the first perturbative order.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract refers to 'the standard resummation formula' without citing the specific reference or equation that defines the form used for the coefficient function and remainder function.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We address each major point below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate additional details and clarifications as indicated.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The proposal of a χ-dependent coefficient function to ensure a smooth m→0 limit is presented as compatible with the standard resummation formula, but no argument is given that this χ dependence preserves the structure of the Sudakov exponent or avoids introducing unmatched power corrections at orders beyond NLO. This assumption is load-bearing for the central claim of the improved scheme.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the manuscript does not contain an explicit all-order argument for the consistency of the χ-dependent coefficient function. The χ dependence is introduced exclusively in the perturbative coefficient function multiplying the resummed contribution; the Sudakov exponent itself is determined by the universal soft and collinear anomalous dimensions and remains independent of χ. At NLO this construction reproduces the correct massless limit without extra power corrections. We will add a concise paragraph in the revised manuscript explaining this separation of scales within the factorization theorem and noting that higher-order consistency follows from the same structure. This revision directly addresses the concern while preserving the central claim. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The NLO numerical evaluation of the coefficient function and remainder function is reported to agree with prior calculations, yet the manuscript provides no details on the integration method, phase-space restrictions for the partial event fraction, error estimates, or quantitative comparison values. This is load-bearing for validating the partial-event-fraction approach at even the first perturbative order.

    Authors: We agree that the numerical section lacks sufficient technical information. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection describing the Monte Carlo integration over three-body phase space, the precise phase-space cuts that define the partial two-jet region (restrictions on χ to exclude the forward region), the statistical error estimation procedure, and a table of quantitative comparisons to existing NLO results, including relative differences at representative χ values. These additions will allow full assessment of the validation at first order. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; NLO numerical evaluation is independent of resummation ansatz

full rationale

The derivation begins with an explicit definition of a partial event fraction (excluding forward region) whose O(α_s) evaluation is performed numerically from real-emission diagrams in D=4; this computation is presented as an independent cross-check that agrees with prior literature. The coefficient function and remainder are extracted from this external numerical input. The subsequent proposal of a χ-dependent coefficient function is introduced as an improved factorization scheme motivated by the massless limit, not as a fit to the paper's own outputs or a renaming of the NLO result. No self-citation chain, self-definitional loop, or fitted parameter relabeled as prediction appears in the load-bearing steps. The all-order consistency of the χ dependence is an open assumption rather than a circular reduction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard perturbative QCD assumptions plus the new definition of the partial event fraction; no free parameters or invented entities are explicitly introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Standard QCD factorization and resummation framework applies to the EEC in the two-jet limit
    Invoked implicitly throughout the abstract when discussing factorization, resummation, and coefficient functions.
  • domain assumption Real-emission diagrams in D=4 suffice for the first-order partial event fraction
    Stated directly in the abstract as the reason no virtual diagrams or dimensional regularization are needed.
invented entities (1)
  • Partial event fraction (restricted to two-jet region, excluding forward region) no independent evidence
    purpose: Simplifies first-order calculation to real emissions only
    New definition introduced to enable the D=4 real-emission computation; no independent evidence provided beyond the abstract claim.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5684 in / 1391 out tokens · 21810 ms · 2026-06-25T19:56:54.947704+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages · 17 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Energy Correlations in electron - Positron Annihilation: Testing QCD,

    C. L. Basham, L. S. Brown, S. D. Ellis and S. T. Love, “Energy Correlations in electron - Positron Annihilation: Testing QCD,” Phys. Rev. Lett.41(1978), 1585 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.41.1585

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.41.1585 1978

  2. [2]

    Second Order Corrections to the Energy-energy Correlation Function in Quantum Chromodynamics,

    D. G. Richards, W. J. Stirling and S. D. Ellis, “Second Order Corrections to the Energy-energy Correlation Function in Quantum Chromodynamics,” Phys. Lett. B 119(1982), 193-197 doi:10.1016/0370-2693(82)90275-1

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(82)90275-1 1982

  3. [3]

    Energy-energy Correlations to Second Order in Quantum Chromodynamics,

    D. G. Richards, W. J. Stirling and S. D. Ellis, “Energy-energy Correlations to Second Order in Quantum Chromodynamics,” Nucl. Phys. B229(1983), 317-346 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(83)90335-8. 42

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(83)90335-8 1983

  4. [4]

    The Energy-Energy Correlation at Next-to-Leading Order in QCD, Analytically

    L. J. Dixon, M. X. Luo, V. Shtabovenko, T. Z. Yang and H. X. Zhu, “Analyti- cal Computation of Energy-Energy Correlation at Next-to-Leading Order in QCD,” Phys. Rev. Lett.120(2018) no.10, 102001 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.102001 [arXiv:1801.03219 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.120.102001 2018

  5. [5]

    Three-jet production in electron-positron collisions using the CoLoRFulNNLO method

    V. Del Duca, C. Duhr, A. Kardos, G. Somogyi and Z. Tr´ ocs´ anyi, “Three-Jet Production in Electron-Positron Collisions at Next-to-Next-to-Leading Order Accu- racy,” Phys. Rev. Lett.117(2016) no.15, 152004 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.152004 [arXiv:1603.08927 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.117.152004 2016

  6. [6]

    Jet production in the CoLoRFulNNLO method: event shapes in electron-positron collisions

    V. Del Duca, C. Duhr, A. Kardos, G. Somogyi, Z. Sz˝ or, Z. Tr´ ocs´ anyi and Z. Tulip´ ant, “Jet production in the CoLoRFulNNLO method: event shapes in electron-positron collisions,” Phys. Rev. D94(2016) no.7, 074019 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.074019 [arXiv:1606.03453 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.94.074019 2016

  7. [7]

    Simplicity from Recoil: The Three-Loop Soft Function and Factorization for the Energy-Energy Correlation

    I. Moult and H. X. Zhu, “Simplicity from Recoil: The Three-Loop Soft Func- tion and Factorization for the Energy-Energy Correlation,” JHEP08(2018), 160 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2018)160 [arXiv:1801.02627 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep08(2018)160 2018

  8. [8]

    The Energy-Energy Correla- tion in the back-to-back limit at N 3LO and N 3LL’,

    M. A. Ebert, B. Mistlberger and G. Vita, “The Energy-Energy Correla- tion in the back-to-back limit at N 3LO and N 3LL’,” JHEP08(2021), 022 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2021)022 [arXiv:2012.07859 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep08(2021)022 2021

  9. [9]

    Four-Loop Rapidity Anomalous Dimension and Event Shapes to Fourth Logarithmic Order,

    C. Duhr, B. Mistlberger and G. Vita, “Four-Loop Rapidity Anomalous Dimension and Event Shapes to Fourth Logarithmic Order,” Phys. Rev. Lett.129(2022) no.16, 162001 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.162001 [arXiv:2205.02242 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.129.162001 2022

  10. [10]

    Back-To-Back Jets in QCD,

    J. C. Collins and D. E. Soper, “Back-To-Back Jets in QCD,” Nucl. Phys. B193(1981), 381 [erratum: Nucl. Phys. B213(1983), 545] doi:10.1016/0550-3213(81)90339-4

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(81)90339-4 1981

  11. [11]

    Back-To-Back Jets: Fourier Transform from B to K-Transverse,

    J. C. Collins and D. E. Soper, “Back-To-Back Jets: Fourier Transform from B to K-Transverse,” Nucl. Phys. B197(1982), 446-476 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90453-9

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90453-9 1982

  12. [12]

    The Two Particle Inclusive Cross-section ine +e− Annihilation at PETRA, PEP and LEP Energies,

    J. C. Collins and D. E. Soper, “The Two Particle Inclusive Cross-section ine +e− Annihilation at PETRA, PEP and LEP Energies,” Nucl. Phys. B284(1987), 253-270 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(87)90035-6

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(87)90035-6 1987

  13. [13]

    Summing Soft Emission in QCD,

    J. Kodaira and L. Trentadue, “Summing Soft Emission in QCD,” Phys. Lett. B112 (1982), 66 doi:10.1016/0370-2693(82)90907-8

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(82)90907-8 1982

  14. [14]

    Soft gluon effects in perturbative Quantum Chromo- dynamics,

    J. Kodaira and L. Trentadue, “Soft gluon effects in perturbative Quantum Chromo- dynamics,” SLAC-PUB-2934

  15. [15]

    Single Logarithm Effects in electron-Positron Annihi- lation,

    J. Kodaira and L. Trentadue, “Single Logarithm Effects in electron-Positron Annihi- lation,” Phys. Lett. B123(1983), 335-338 doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)91213-3. 43

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)91213-3 1983

  16. [16]

    The back-to-back region in e^+e^- energy--energy correlation

    D. de Florian and M. Grazzini, “The Back-to-back region in e+ e- energy-energy correlation,” Nucl. Phys. B704(2005), 387-403 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2004.10.051 [arXiv:hep-ph/0407241 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2004.10.051 2005

  17. [17]

    Energy-energy correlation in electron-positron annihilation at NNLL+NNLO accuracy

    Z. Tulip´ ant, A. Kardos and G. Somogyi, “Energy–energy correlation in elec- tron–positron annihilation at NNLL + NNLO accuracy,” Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) no.11, 749 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5320-9 [arXiv:1708.04093 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5320-9 2017

  18. [18]

    Precise determination of $\alpha_{S}(M_Z)$ from a global fit of energy-energy correlation to NNLO+NNLL predictions

    A. Kardos, S. Kluth, G. Somogyi, Z. Tulip´ ant and A. Verbytskyi, “Precise determi- nation ofα S(MZ) from a global fit of energy–energy correlation to NNLO+NNLL predictions,” Eur. Phys. J. C78(2018) no.6, 498 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5963-1 [arXiv:1804.09146 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5963-1 2018

  19. [19]

    The Collinear Limit of the Energy-Energy Correlator

    L. J. Dixon, I. Moult and H. X. Zhu, “Collinear limit of the energy-energy cor- relator,” Phys. Rev. D100(2019) no.1, 014009 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.014009 [arXiv:1905.01310 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.014009 2019

  20. [20]

    Energy-Energy Correlation in the back-to-back region at N3LL+NNLO in QCD,

    U. G. Aglietti and G. Ferrera, “Energy-Energy Correlation in the back-to-back region at N3LL+NNLO in QCD,” [arXiv:2403.04077 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv

  21. [21]

    Resummed Mass Distribution for Jets Initiated by Massive Quarks

    U. Aglietti, L. Di Giustino, G. Ferrera and L. Trentadue, “Resummed Mass Dis- tribution for Jets Initiated by Massive quarks,” Phys. Lett. B651(2007), 275-292 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.06.034 [arXiv:hep-ph/0612073 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.06.034 2007

  22. [22]

    Resummation and Mass Effects in b Decays,

    L. Di Giustino, U. Aglietti, G. Ferrera and L. Trentadue, “Resummation and Mass Effects in b Decays,” doi:10.1007/978-88-470-0747-5 25

    work page doi:10.1007/978-88-470-0747-5

  23. [23]

    Threshold Resummation in B --> X_c l nu_l Decays

    U. Aglietti, L. Di Giustino, G. Ferrera, A. Renzaglia, G. Ricciardi and L. Trentadue, “Threshold Resummation in B —>X(c) l nu(l) Decays,” Phys. Lett. B653(2007), 38-52 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.07.041 [arXiv:0707.2010 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.07.041 2007

  24. [24]

    Comment on Resummation of Mass Distribution for Jets Initiated by Massive Quarks

    U. Aglietti, L. Di Giustino, G. Ferrera and L. Trentadue, “Comment on Resummation of Mass Distribution for Jets Initiated by Massive quarks,” Phys. Lett. B670(2009), 367-368 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2008.11.006 [arXiv:0804.3922 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2008.11.006 2009

  25. [25]

    Improved factorization for threshold resummation in heavy quark to heavy quark decays,

    U. G. Aglietti and G. Ferrera, “Improved factorization for threshold resummation in heavy quark to heavy quark decays,” Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) no.4, 335 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11440-y [arXiv:2211.14397 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11440-y 2023

  26. [26]

    On heavy-flavour jets with Soft Drop,

    S. Caletti, A. Ghira and S. Marzani, “On heavy-flavour jets with Soft Drop,” Eur. Phys. J. C84(2024) no.2, 212 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12562-7 [arXiv:2312.11623 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12562-7 2024

  27. [27]

    A consistent resummation of mass and soft logarithms in processes with heavy flavours,

    A. Ghira, S. Marzani and G. Ridolfi, “A consistent resummation of mass and soft logarithms in processes with heavy flavours,” JHEP11(2023), 120 doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2023)120 [arXiv:2309.06139 [hep-ph]]. 44

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep11(2023)120 2023

  28. [28]

    Soft logarithms in processes with heavy quarks,

    D. Gaggero, A. Ghira, S. Marzani and G. Ridolfi, “Soft logarithms in processes with heavy quarks,” JHEP09(2022), 058 doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2022)058 [arXiv:2207.13567 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep09(2022)058 2022

  29. [29]

    Practical jet flavour through NNLO,

    S. Caletti, A. J. Larkoski, S. Marzani and D. Reichelt, “Practical jet flavour through NNLO,” Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) no.7, 632 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10568-7 [arXiv:2205.01109 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10568-7 2022

  30. [30]

    Identification of b jets using QCD-inspired observables,

    O. Fedkevych, C. K. Khosa, S. Marzani and F. Sforza, “Identification of b jets using QCD-inspired observables,” Phys. Rev. D107(2023) no.3, 034032 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.034032 [arXiv:2202.05082 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.034032 2023

  31. [31]

    One-loop Singular Behaviour of QCD and SUSY QCD Amplitudes with Massive Partons

    S. Catani, S. Dittmaier and Z. Trocsanyi, “One loop singular behavior of QCD and SUSY QCD amplitudes with massive partons,” Phys. Lett. B500(2001), 149-160 doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(01)00065-X [arXiv:hep-ph/0011222 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(01)00065-x 2001

  32. [32]

    The Dipole Formalism for Next-to-Leading Order QCD Calculations with Massive Partons

    S. Catani, S. Dittmaier, M. H. Seymour and Z. Trocsanyi, “The Dipole formalism for next-to-leading order QCD calculations with massive partons,” Nucl. Phys. B627 (2002), 189-265 doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(02)00098-6 [arXiv:hep-ph/0201036 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(02)00098-6 2002

  33. [33]

    Bridging massive and massless schemes for soft gluon resummation in heavy-flavour production ine +e− collisions,

    A. Ghira, L. Mai and S. Marzani, “Bridging massive and massless schemes for soft gluon resummation in heavy-flavour production ine +e− collisions,” Eur. Phys. J. C 85(2025) no.3, 294 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-13989-2 [arXiv:2412.13261 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-13989-2 2025

  34. [34]

    Transverse momentum-dependent heavy-quark fragmentation at next-to-leading order,

    R. von Kuk, J. K. L. Michel and Z. Sun, “Transverse momentum-dependent heavy-quark fragmentation at next-to-leading order,” JHEP07(2024), 129 doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2024)129 [arXiv:2404.08622 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep07(2024)129 2024

  35. [35]

    Transverse momentum distribu- tions of heavy hadrons and polarized heavy quarks,

    R. von Kuk, J. K. L. Michel and Z. Sun, “Transverse momentum distribu- tions of heavy hadrons and polarized heavy quarks,” JHEP09(2023), 205 doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2023)205 [arXiv:2305.15461 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep09(2023)205 2023

  36. [36]

    Soft-Gluon Resummation for Bottom Fragmentation in Top Quark Decay

    M. Cacciari, G. Corcella and A. D. Mitov, “Soft gluon resummation for bot- tom fragmentation in top quark decay,” JHEP12(2002), 015 doi:10.1088/1126- 6708/2002/12/015 [arXiv:hep-ph/0209204 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1126- 2002

  37. [37]

    Soft-Gluon Resummation for Heavy Quark Production in Charged-Current Deep Inelastic Scattering

    G. Corcella and A. D. Mitov, “Soft gluon resummation for heavy quark produc- tion in charged current deep inelastic scattering,” Nucl. Phys. B676(2004), 346-364 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2003.10.027 [arXiv:hep-ph/0308105 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2003.10.027 2004

  38. [38]

    Heavy quark mass effects in the energy–energy correlation in the back-to-back region,

    U. G. Aglietti and G. Ferrera, “Heavy quark mass effects in the energy–energy correlation in the back-to-back region,” Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) no.3, 272 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-13954-z [arXiv:2412.02629 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-13954-z 2025

  39. [39]

    quark mass effects for energy-energy correlations in high-energy e-e+ an- nihilation,

    F. Csikor, “quark mass effects for energy-energy correlations in high-energy e-e+ an- nihilation,” Phys. Rev. D30(1984), 28 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.30.28. 45

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.30.28 1984

  40. [40]

    Energy-energy Correlations ine +e− Annihilation,

    A. Ali and F. Barreiro, “Energy-energy Correlations ine +e− Annihilation,” Nucl. Phys. B236(1984), 269 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(84)90536-4

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(84)90536-4 1984

  41. [41]

    Gluon Radiation and Energy Losses in Top Quark Production

    Y. L. Dokshitzer, V. A. Khoze and W. J. Stirling, “Gluon radiation and energy losses in top quark production,” Nucl. Phys. B428(1994), 3-18 doi:10.1016/0550- 3213(94)90188-0 [arXiv:hep-ph/9405243 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/0550- 1994

  42. [42]

    Resummation of large logarithms in e+ e- event shape distributions,

    S. Catani, L. Trentadue, G. Turnock and B. R. Webber, “Resummation of large logarithms in e+ e- event shape distributions,” Nucl. Phys. B407(1993), 3-42 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(93)90271-P

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(93)90271-p 1993

  43. [43]

    Physics with the MAC detector

    M. Ritson for MAC Collaboration, “Physics with the MAC detector”, J. Phys. Colloq. 43, C3 (1982) pp.C3-52

    1982

  44. [44]

    U. G. Aglietti, G. Ferrera and L. Rossi, work in progress

  45. [45]

    Master integrals with 2 and 3 massive propagators for the 2-loop electroweak form factor - planar case

    U. Aglietti and R. Bonciani, “Master integrals with 2 and 3 massive propagators for the 2 loop electroweak form-factor - planar case,” Nucl. Phys. B698(2004), 277-318 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2004.07.018 [arXiv:hep-ph/0401193 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2004.07.018 2004

  46. [46]

    A global analysis of Energy-Energy Correlation data: determination ofα S and non-perturbative QCD parameters,

    U. G. Aglietti, G. Ferrera and L. Rossi, “A global analysis of Energy-Energy Correlation data: determination ofα S and non-perturbative QCD parameters,” [arXiv:2603.19162 [hep-ph]]. 46

    arXiv