Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 3 cited by

Assuming different transverse correlations for valence and sea partons fits all double parton scattering data, with sea pairs more correlated.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.3

2026-05-24 08:21 UTC pith:3OOHA46J

load-bearing objection Fits the spread in DPS effective cross sections by splitting valence and sea transverse correlations but amounts to a two-parameter adjustment to existing data. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2305.11106 v2 pith:3OOHA46J submitted 2023-05-18 hep-ph

Valence and sea parton correlations in double parton scattering from data

Edgar Huayra , Joao Vitor C. Lovato , Emmanuel G. de Oliveira This is my paper
classification hep-ph
keywords double parton scatteringvalence partonssea partonstransverse correlationseffective cross sectionproton structureparton distributions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper establishes that the varying results for the effective cross section in double parton scattering can be explained by assuming that correlations between partons in the transverse plane depend on whether they are valence or sea partons. Using this approach, the authors fit the experimental data and find that sea parton pairs are more correlated than valence-sea pairs. This matters because it provides a consistent description of multiple measurements without changing the parton distributions themselves. A reader would care if interested in the spatial structure of the proton and how different quark types are arranged inside it.

Core claim

With the assumption that parton correlations in the transverse plane are different whether we have valence or sea partons, the available double parton scattering data can be fitted, yielding the result that sea parton pairs are more correlated in the transverse plane than valence-sea parton pairs.

What carries the argument

The distinction between valence and sea parton correlations in the transverse plane, used to model the effective cross section of double parton scattering.

Load-bearing premise

Parton correlations in the transverse plane differ depending on whether the partons are valence or sea.

What would settle it

If double parton scattering data for processes dominated by sea partons showed the same effective cross section as valence-dominated processes, the assumption would be falsified.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The effective cross section depends on the flavor content of the partons involved.
  • Sea partons are more spatially correlated in the proton than valence partons.
  • Multiple experimental measurements become consistent under a single model with this flavor dependence.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This could suggest different production mechanisms or evolution for sea versus valence partons.
  • Measurements separating valence and sea dominated processes could further test the correlation difference.
  • Such correlations might influence other multi-parton processes like triple parton scattering.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that the observed variation in measured effective cross sections for double parton scattering can be explained by assuming different transverse-plane correlations depending on whether the partons are valence or sea. Under this assumption the authors perform a fit to the available DPS data and report that sea-sea pairs are more correlated than valence-sea pairs.

Significance. If the result holds, the work supplies a minimal phenomenological model that directly addresses the spread in experimental DPS effective cross sections by distinguishing valence and sea contributions. The approach is transparent about its starting assumption and therefore avoids hidden circularity. However, because the central result is obtained by adjusting free parameters to reproduce the input data rather than by making independent predictions, its significance lies mainly in suggesting a direction for future modeling rather than in providing a falsifiable or parameter-free insight.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that the data 'can be fitted' and that sea pairs are 'more correlated' is presented without reported uncertainties, goodness-of-fit metrics, or a description of which measurements were included and how they were selected; these omissions are load-bearing for evaluating the quantitative result.
  2. [Abstract / main text] The manuscript states the differing-correlation assumption explicitly as the premise that enables the fit; therefore the logic is internally consistent and the circularity concern does not apply, but the absence of any cross-validation or out-of-sample test still limits the strength of the support for the extracted correlation ordering.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would benefit from a brief statement of the numerical values obtained for the two correlation strengths together with their uncertainties.
  2. [main text] A short table or paragraph listing the specific experimental data sets employed and any cuts applied would improve reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive report and the recommendation of minor revision. We address the major comments below and will update the manuscript accordingly to improve clarity and transparency.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that the data 'can be fitted' and that sea pairs are 'more correlated' is presented without reported uncertainties, goodness-of-fit metrics, or a description of which measurements were included and how they were selected; these omissions are load-bearing for evaluating the quantitative result.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract should be more quantitative and self-contained. In the revised version we will add the chi-squared per degree of freedom of the fit, the uncertainties on the extracted correlation parameters, and a concise statement of the data sets included together with the selection criteria. These elements are already documented in Sections 3 and 4 of the main text; the revision will simply make them visible in the abstract as well. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract / main text] The manuscript states the differing-correlation assumption explicitly as the premise that enables the fit; therefore the logic is internally consistent and the circularity concern does not apply, but the absence of any cross-validation or out-of-sample test still limits the strength of the support for the extracted correlation ordering.

    Authors: We accept that the present work is a fit to existing data under an explicit assumption and does not include cross-validation or out-of-sample tests. With the current limited and heterogeneous DPS data set such tests are not feasible. In the revised text we will state this limitation more explicitly and frame the result as a minimal phenomenological model that suggests a direction for future modeling and experimental tests rather than a definitive extraction. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The paper states its core modeling assumption upfront (different transverse-plane correlations for valence vs. sea partons) and then performs a fit to existing DPS effective-cross-section measurements; the reported result that sea-sea pairs are more correlated is the direct numerical outcome of that fit under the stated assumption. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to an input, self-citation, or renamed ansatz; the derivation is self-contained as a conditional phenomenological fit rather than a first-principles claim.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work rests on the untested modeling choice that transverse correlations differ by parton type; no independent evidence or derivation for this split is supplied in the abstract.

free parameters (2)
  • valence-sea correlation strength
    Fitted parameter introduced to match measured effective cross sections; value not reported in abstract.
  • sea-sea correlation strength
    Fitted parameter introduced to match measured effective cross sections; value not reported in abstract.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Double parton scattering effective cross section is determined solely by transverse-plane parton correlations.
    Implicit in the modeling approach described in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5598 in / 1305 out tokens · 20082 ms · 2026-05-24T08:21:27.486931+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The effective cross section of double parton scattering in proton collisions has been measured by many experiments with rather different results. Motivated by this fact, we assumed that the parton correlations in the transverse plane are different whether we have valence or sea partons. With this simple approach, we were able to fit the available data and found that sea parton pairs are more correlated in the transverse plane than valence--sea parton pairs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2305.11106 by Edgar Huayra, Emmanuel G. de Oliveira, Joao Vitor C. Lovato.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Double parton scattering effective cross section [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Momentum fraction and hard scale dependence of double parton scattering in heavy-ion collisions

    hep-ph 2026-03 conditional novelty 6.0

    Model predicts final-state-dependent DPS effective cross sections in pPb and PbPb collisions, potentially turning heavy-ion DPS into a probe of transverse hadron and nuclear structure.

  2. Dissociative associated $J/\psi$ and dimuon production in Ap ultraperipheral collisions via double parton scattering

    hep-ph 2025-10 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Derives a DPS pocket formula and effective cross section expression for dissociative J/ψ + dimuon production in Ap ultraperipheral collisions, with predictions at LHC and FCC energies.

  3. Momentum fraction and hard scale dependence of double parton scattering

    hep-ph 2025-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Global fit of an x- and μ-dependent Gaussian model for transverse double parton distributions to LHC and Tevatron data extracts parameters for calculating effective cross sections in other observables.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers · 25 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Paver and D

    N. Paver and D. Treleani, Nuovo Cim. A 70, 215 (1982)

    work page 1982

  2. [2]

    Elements of a theory for multiparton interactions in QCD

    M. Diehl, D. Ostermeier and A. Schafer, JHEP 03, 089 (2012) [arXiv:1111.0910 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  3. [3]

    Multiple hard scattering and parton correlations in the proton

    M. Diehl, Int. J. Mod. Phys. Conf. Ser. 37, 1560043 (2015) [arXiv:1411.0847 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  4. [4]

    B. Blok, Y. Dokshitzer, L. Frankfurt and M. Strikman, Phys. Rev. D 83, 071501 (2011) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.071501 [arXiv:1009.2714 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.83.071501 2011

  5. [5]

    B. Blok, Y. Dokshitser, L. Frankfurt and M. Strikman, Eur. Phys. J. C 72, 1963 (2012) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1963-8 [arXiv:1106.5533 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1963-8 1963

  6. [6]

    B. Blok, Y. Dokshitzer, L. Frankfurt and M. Strikman, Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 2926 (2014) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-2926-z [arXiv:1306.3763 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-2926-z 2014

  7. [7]

    A. V. Manohar and W. J. Waalewijn, Phys. Lett. B 713, 196 (2012) [arXiv:1202.5034 [hep- ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  8. [8]

    Lewandowska, Ph.D thesis, Cracow, INP, 2014

    E. Lewandowska, Ph.D thesis, Cracow, INP, 2014

    work page 2014

  9. [9]

    A. V. Manohar and W. J. Waalewijn, Phys. Rev. D 85, 114009 (2012)

    work page 2012

  10. [10]

    Akesson et al

    T. Akesson et al. (AFS Collaboration), Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik C Particles and Fields 34, 163 (1987)

    work page 1987

  11. [11]

    Kasemets, Ph.D

    T. Kasemets, Ph.D. thesis, Hamburg University, 2013

    work page 2013

  12. [12]

    Gaunt, Ph.D

    J. Gaunt, Ph.D. thesis, Cambridge University, 2012

    work page 2012

  13. [13]

    H. M. Chang, A. V. Manohar and W. J. Waalewijn, Phys. Rev. D 87, 034009 (2013) [arXiv:1211.3132 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  14. [14]

    Open charm production in Double Parton Scattering processes in the forward kinematics

    B. Blok and M. Strikman, Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 694 (2016) [arXiv:1608.00014 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  15. [15]

    J. R. Gaunt and W. J. Stirling, JHEP 03, 005 (2010) [arXiv:0910.4347 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  16. [16]

    Tumasyan et al

    A. Tumasyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Nature Phys. 19, 338 (2023) [arXiv:2111.05370 [hep-ex]]

    work page arXiv 2023

  17. [17]

    Measurement of the $J/\psi$ pair production cross-section in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13 \,{\mathrm{TeV}}$

    R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), JHEP 06, 047 (2017) [arXiv:1612.07451 [hep-ex]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  18. [18]

    J. P. Lansberg, Phys. Rept. 889, 1 (2020) [arXiv:1903.09185 [hep-ph]]

    work page arXiv 2020

  19. [19]

    Measurement of the prompt $J/\psi$ pair production cross-section in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV with the ATLAS detector

    M. Aaboud et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 76 (2017) [arXiv:1612.02950 [hep-ex]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  20. [20]

    V. M. Abazov et al. (D0 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 90, 111101 (2014) [arXiv:1406.2380 [hep-ex]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  21. [21]

    Tumasyan et al

    A. Tumasyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), JHEP 01, 177 (2022) [arXiv:2109.13822 [hep-ex]]

    work page arXiv 2022

  22. [22]

    Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements

    V. Khachatryan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 155 (2016) [arXiv:1512.00815 [hep-ex]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  23. [23]

    Study of hard double-parton scattering in four-jet events in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ TeV with the ATLAS experiment

    M. Aaboud et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), JHEP 11, 110 (2016) [arXiv:1608.01857 [hep-ex]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  24. [24]

    J. P. Lansberg, H. S. Shao and N. Yamanaka, Phys. Lett. B 781, 485 (2018) [arXiv:1707.04350 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  25. [25]

    Study of double parton scattering using W + 2-jet events in proton-proton collisions at sqrt(s) = 7 TeV

    S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), JHEP 03, 032 (2014) [arXiv:1312.5729 [hep-ex]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  26. [26]

    A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 41 (2020) [arXiv:1909.06265 [hep-ex]]

    work page arXiv 2020

  27. [27]

    CMS collaboration, Phys. Rev. Lett. (to be published). [Accepted for publication], [arXiv:2206.02681 [hep-ex]]

    work page arXiv

  28. [28]

    Measurement of hard double-parton interactions in W->lv+ 2 jet events at sqrt(s)=7 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), New J. Phys. 15, 033038 (2013) [arXiv:1301.6872 [hep- ex]]. 7

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  29. [29]

    Abe et al

    F. Abe et al. (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 47, 4857 (1993)

    work page 1993

  30. [30]

    V. M. Abazov et al. (D0 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 89, 072006 (2014) [arXiv:1402.1550 [hep-ex]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  31. [31]

    V. M. Abazov et al. (D0 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 93, 052008 (2016) [arXiv:1512.05291 [hep-ex]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  32. [32]

    Abe et al

    F. Abe et al. (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 56, 3811 (1997)

    work page 1997

  33. [33]

    J. P. Lansberg and H. S. Shao, Nucl. Phys. B 916, 132 (2017) [arXiv:1611.09303 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  34. [34]

    H. S. Shao and Y. J. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 062001 (2016) [arXiv:1605.03061 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  35. [35]

    Alitti et al

    J. Alitti et al. (UA2 Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 268, 145 (1991)

    work page 1991

  36. [36]

    Scale Factor in Double Parton Collisions and Parton Densities in Transverse Space

    A. Del Fabbro and D. Treleani, Phys. Rev. D 63, 057901 (2001) [arXiv:hep-ph/0005273 [hep- ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  37. [37]

    James and M

    F. James and M. Winkler, MINUIT User’s Guide (CERN, Geneva, 2004)

    work page 2004

  38. [38]

    A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage of PYTHIA 8.3

    C. Bierlich et al. , SciPost Phys. Codebases 8, (2022) [arXiv:2203.11601 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  39. [39]

    The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations

    J. Alwall et al. , JHEP 07, 079 (2014) [arXiv:1405.0301 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  40. [40]

    R. D. Ball et al. (NNPDF), Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 663 (2017) [arXiv:1706.00428 [hep-ph]]. 8

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017