MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410485098 · doi:10.1103/dv7n-qvyp

Thrust Distribution in Electron-Positron Annihilation at Full Next-to-Next-to-Next-to-Leading-Logarithmic Accuracy Including Next-to-Next-to-Leading-Order Terms in QCD

2025· article· en· W4410485098 on OpenAlexaff
Giancarlo Ferrera, Wan-Li Ju

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAnnihilationQuantum chromodynamicsLogarithmParticle physicsElectron–positron annihilationElectronPositronOrder (exchange)Distribution (mathematics)Nuclear physicsThrustPositron annihilationStatistical physicsHadronMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the thrust (T) distribution in electron-positron (e^{+}e^{-}) annihilation into hadrons and we perform the all-order resummation of the large logarithms of 1-T up to full next-to-next-to-next-to-leading logarithmic (N^{3}LL) accuracy in QCD, also including the impact of next-order logarithmic corrections (N^{4}LL). We consistently combine resummation with the known fixed-order results up to next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO). All perturbative terms up to O(α_{S}^{3}) are included in our calculation, which, thanks to a unitarity constraint, exactly reproduces, after integration over T, the next-to-next-to-next-to-leading order (N^{3}LO) result for the total cross section of e^{+}e^{-} into hadrons. We perform resummation in the Laplace-conjugated space, which ensures the factorization of the kinematic momentum conservation constraint, and compare our results with those obtained using the resummation formalism in the physical (T) space. We find that the differences in the spectra obtained with the two different formalisms are sizable. Nonperturbative corrections are included using an analytic hadronization model, depending on two free parameters. Finally, we present a comparison of our spectra with experimental data at the Z-boson mass (m_{Z}) energy, which enables us to extract the value of the QCD coupling α_{S}(m_{Z}^{2})=0.1181±0.0018, fully consistent with the world average. We explicitly show that resumming Sudakov logarithms in Laplace-conjugated space and evaluating the inverse Laplace transform exactly is crucial in order to obtain an accurate determination of the QCD coupling.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review Letters→Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies→French-language works237,207→