MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769316251 · doi:10.1007/jhep03(2018)098

Infrared singularities of QCD scattering amplitudes in the Regge limit to all orders

2018· article· en· W2769316251 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersDanmarks GrundforskningsfondHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNational Research FoundationScience and Technology Facilities CouncilMunich Institute for Astro- and Particle PhysicsEuropean CommissionCERN
KeywordsQuantum chromodynamicsScattering amplitudeGravitational singularityPerturbation theory (quantum mechanics)ResummationAmplitudeLimit (mathematics)PartonLogarithmInfrared

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Scattering amplitudes of partons in QCD contain infrared divergences which can be resummed to all orders in terms of an anomalous dimension. Independently, in the limit of high-energy forward scattering, large logarithms of the energy can be resummed using Balitsky-Fadin-Kuraev-Lipatov theory. We use the latter to analyse the infraredsingular part of amplitudes to all orders in perturbation theory and to next-to-leading-logarithm accuracy in the high-energy limit, resumming the two-Reggeon contribution. Remarkably, we find a closed form for the infrared-singular part, predicting the Regge limit of the soft anomalous dimension to any loop order.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy PhysicsSame topicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions ResearchFrench-language works237,207