Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 34 references

Deep-inelastic scattering with collider neutrinos at the LHC and beyond

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read LHC's forward neutrino beam, only recently observed, is projected to sharpen quark distribution measurements and enable a first 5-sigma observation of neutrino tridents.

desk verdict A clear, honest proceedings summary of three already-published projections; no new physics, and the 5-sigma trident claim inherits an idealized-detector assumption the summary doesn't caveat. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.02019 v1 pith:PA2NGNPG submitted 2024-12-02 hep-ph

Toni Mäkelä This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph
keywords neutrinodeep-inelasticscatteringLHCforwardneutrinospartondistributionfunctionstridentscosmic-raymuonpuzzlenon-standardinteractionsPhysicsFacilityemulsiondetector
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 proceedings paper argues that the high-energy, high-intensity neutrino beam produced in the forward direction at the LHC—observed for the first time only recently—can be turned into a physics tool rather than treated as a byproduct. It summarizes three studies that project what proposed forward detectors could do: simulated deep-inelastic scattering data from these detectors would substantially reduce uncertainties on strange and valence quark distributions in global fits; a correlation-aware treatment of neutrino flux predictions would allow the experiments to test the enhanced-strangeness explanation of the cosmic-ray muon excess and to tighten bounds on non-standard neutrino interactions; and a proposed emulsion detector could observe neutrino tridents with statistical significance above 5 sigma. Because this is a summary of earlier work, the strength of these projections is inherited from the underlying simulations rather than from new data.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the forward neutrino beam itself: TeV-energy neutrinos produced in weak decays of charm, kaon, and pion mesons from LHC collisions, interacting in a fixed target. Three mechanisms carry the argument. For parton distribution functions, the mechanism is Hessian profiling of simulated pseudodata, which converts projected event counts into uncertainty reductions in a global QCD fit; lepton charge identification (charm tagging) is what enables most of the improvement for valence and strange quarks. For fluxes and new-physics searches, the mechanism is a Fisher-information parametrization of the correlations between competing flux predictions in energy, radius, flavor, and parent-hadron composition, which produces an ultimate uncertainty band much smaller than the envelope of individual models. For tridents, the mechanism is an event selection in an emulsion detector that reverse-tracks both muons to a common vertex and then requires an opening angle below 0.1 rad, a parent decay length below 2 mm, and exactly two charged tracks with momentum above 300 MeV.

What would settle it

A realistic detector-simulation study of the emulsion tracker—one that uses per-track reconstruction efficiencies and angular resolutions instead of perfect reverse tracking—would settle the trident claim; if the probability of reconstructing both muon tracks is materially below the assumed value, or the charm-background rejection is worse than simulated, the projected 5-sigma significance will not survive.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the forward neutrino beam at the LHC opens three previously inaccessible windows. Charged-current neutrino deep-inelastic scattering at the proposed forward detectors would cover a kinematic region overlapping the Electron-Ion Collider, and adding projected event counts to global parton distribution fits would shrink the uncertainty on strange and valence quark distributions at high virtualities; Run 3 statistics alone would not suffice, so the larger proposed detectors are required. Parametrizing the correlations among a broad set of neutrino production predictions in forward hadron decays yields a much narrower 'ultimate uncertainty' band than the individual prediction envelope, which lets the experiments discriminate among production models: strangeness-enhancement values of $f_s$ between 0.3 and 0.8—the range that would explain the cosmic-ray muon excess—are covered by the projected constraints, and bounds on dimension-6 effective operators can improve by about an order of magnitude. For tridents, an emulsion-detector analysis using reverse tracking plus cuts on the two-muon opening angle, parent decay length, and charged-track multiplicity achieves near-perfect background rejection with little signal loss, making a first observation of neutrino tridents at more than 5 sigma plausible.

Load-bearing premise

The projections assume the proposed forward detectors perform as well as their simulations do, especially that emulsion tracking can reverse-track both muons with near-perfect efficiency and reject charmed-hadron backgrounds while keeping almost all of the trident signal.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Including projected forward-detector data in global PDF fits is expected to reduce the uncertainty on strange and valence quark distributions at $Q^2 \sim 10^4$ GeV$^2$, which would feed into precision electroweak measurements such as the W-boson mass and the weak mixing angle.
  • The flux-correlation framework implies that even a single forward experiment during LHC Run 3 can start to constrain the enhanced-strangeness parameter $f_s$, while a full forward facility could probe values below $f_s = 0.1$ and cover the $0.3$–$0.8$ range that would explain the cosmic-ray muon excess.
  • Dimension-6 effective operators that connect quarks to tau neutrinos and muons or electrons could be bounded roughly an order of magnitude more strongly with full forward-facility statistics, with 10% of the data already improving on existing constraints.
  • A detector with the assumed emulsion-tracking performance could deliver the first conclusive observation of neutrino tridents in the dimuon channel, a process whose earlier claims were complicated by diffractive charm backgrounds.
  • The kinematic overlap between forward LHC neutrino deep-inelastic scattering and the proposed Electron-Ion Collider means the two programs would provide complementary constraints on proton and nuclear structure, and similar forward experiments at a future 100 TeV collider could push nuclear PDF studies to very low x.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the trident background rejection is reproduced in a real detector, the same reverse-tracking strategy could be applied to other rare neutrino processes with dimuon or single-muon signatures, such as coherent scattering or charged-current charm production, extending the forward physics program beyond the specific projected channels.
  • The Fisher-information flux parametrization is a general tool: it could be transferred to other neutrino sources where flux-model correlations dominate the error budget, such as atmospheric or long-baseline neutrino experiments, to identify which measurements are actually limited by flux uncertainty.
  • The predicted PDF improvements are largest for the strange quark, which is among the least well-known inputs to LHC cross sections; if realized, forward neutrino data would provide an independent handle on the proton's strangeness content that complements collider measurements.
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.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This conference proceedings paper summarizes three published studies (Refs. [11-13]) on forward neutrino deep-inelastic scattering at the LHC. Section 2 reviews Hessian PDF-profiling projections with the xFitter framework, reporting that proposed FPF detectors would significantly reduce valence and strange quark PDF uncertainties and that the kinematic coverage overlaps with the EIC. Section 3 summarizes a Fisher-information approach to correlated neutrino flux uncertainties, and uses it to project constraints on the strangeness-enhancement parameter fs and on dimension-6 NSI operators. Section 4 presents the FASERnu2 neutrino trident study, claiming near-perfect background rejection and potential for a first >5-sigma observation. The paper concludes with synergies with the EIC and FCC. All quantitative claims are inherited from the cited papers rather than derived here.

Significance. If the summarized projections hold, the paper provides a useful consolidated case for expanding the forward neutrino program at the LHC and beyond, spanning QCD/PDF physics, cosmic-ray hadronization, and BSM searches. Its strengths are that it accurately represents peer-reviewed results, uses standard tools (xFitter Hessian profiling, Fisher information, Monte Carlo event selection), and clearly attributes each result to its source paper. The falsifiable predictions for fs, NSI bounds, and trident observation are valuable for community planning. However, because the paper contains no new derivation and compresses the supporting detail of the original studies, its impact is bounded by the robustness of those underlying projections.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and Sec. 4] The abstract's claim of "promise for a first measurement of neutrino tridents with a statistical significance exceeding 5 sigma" rests on the background-rejection analysis summarized in Sec. 4 and Fig. 3 (right), inherited from Ref. [13]. That analysis assumes near-perfect reverse tracking between the interface tracker and the emulsion, with charmed-hadron backgrounds suppressed by cuts on opening angle theta < 0.1 rad, parent decay length d < 2 mm, and charged-track multiplicity Nch = 2. The manuscript does not state how the projected significance responds to realistic emulsion reconstruction inefficiencies, fake-track rates, or degraded angular resolution, and such effects could reduce signal and background asymmetrically. Please add a caveat in Sec. 4 noting that the >5-sigma projection assumes idealized detector performance, and soften the abstract wording accordingly.
  2. [Sec. 3] The text states that the Fisher information approach yields "the smallest uncertainty achievable in a measurement" and presents a much smaller "ultimate uncertainty" band in Fig. 2 (left). This is an overstrong phrasing unless the parametrization of energy, radial, flavor, and parent-hadron correlations is explicitly specified: the bound is the smallest within the chosen parametric family, not an unconditional lower limit. Please rephrase to "smallest within the parametrized family" or briefly specify the family used in Ref. [12].
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 1 and Sec. 2] There are several typographical errors: "hadonic" in Sec. 1 should be "hadronic"; "motivationg" in Sec. 2 should be "motivating"; "in paricular" should be "in particular"; and "reweighed" in Sec. 3 should be "reweighted".
  2. [Sec. 2] The sentence "LHC run 3 statistics are however determined insufficient for constraining PDFs" is stated without a citation or quantitative criterion. Please add a reference to Ref. [11] and specify what "insufficient" means, e.g., no significant reduction in the Hessian PDF uncertainty bands after profiling with Run 3 pseudodata.
  3. [Sec. 3] The sentence "It should be noted that fs might also have lower values at LHC energies" is vague; please state what lower values are under discussion and whether they are motivated by existing LHC data or by the cosmic-ray comparison.
  4. [Fig. 3 caption] The source of the figure is given in the body text as "Taken from Ref. [13]", but the caption itself does not carry the citation; please add "Reproduced from Ref. [13]" directly in the caption for consistency with Fig. 1 and Fig. 2.
  5. [Sec. 5] The phrase "4-Fermi interactions" is not hyphenated consistently; use "four-fermion" or "4-fermion" throughout for clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper explicitly summarizes peer-reviewed work and does not derive its claims from its own inputs.

full rationale

This is a proceedings paper (Diffraction and Low-x 2024) whose stated purpose is to summarize three prior publications, Refs [11-13]. The PDF-impact claim is attributed to Ref [11] and is based on Hessian profiling of FPF pseudodata against the PDF4LHC21 baseline; the pseudodata and the baseline are independent inputs, so the projected reduction in uncertainties is not imposed by construction. The flux-uncertainty framework from Ref [12] parametrizes correlations among existing predictions and uses a Fisher-information estimate; the 'ultimate uncertainty band' is a statistical statement about the spread of the model envelope, not a re-statement of the conclusion. The trident projection from Ref [13] is a Monte Carlo background study with detector assumptions; the >5-sigma significance is conditional on those assumptions, but the signal and background are computed independently from the detector model, so the claim is not definitionally forced. Two of the cited papers share the author, but the self-citation is the normal way to indicate the source of summarized results and does not substitute for an argument within this paper. No equation in this manuscript is used both as input and as output, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction. The main scientific caveat is that the trident projection inherits idealized detector-performance assumptions from Ref [13], but that is a correctness or robustness concern, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new free parameters itself; the parameters and assumptions below are inherited from the models in Refs [11-13] and [28]. The most important model inputs are the strangeness-enhancement parameters fs and F, the choice of PDF set used to generate pseudodata, the assumed coverage of the flux-prediction envelope, and the detector simulation for FASERnu2.

free parameters (2)
  • fs (strangeness enhancement fraction) = 0.5 (benchmark); constrained range 0.3-0.8
    Reweights pion neutrino yields by (1-fs) and kaon yields by (1+F fs) in the enhanced-strangeness model from Ref [28]; projected constraints on fs are a key result, and the benchmark value 0.5 is chosen to match the cosmic-ray muon puzzle.
  • F (pion-to-kaon production ratio factor) = Not specified in this paper
    Appears in the same reweighting (1+F fs); its value is taken from the phenomenological model of Ref [28] and affects the projected sensitivity to fs.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Standard QCD factorization and the xFitter Hessian profiling procedure reliably estimate PDF uncertainty reduction.
    Sec. 2 uses PDF4LHC21 and EPPS21 with xFitter; if the profiling formalism or input PDF uncertainties are not accurate, the projected improvements are overstated.
  • domain assumption The selected flux predictions (SIBYLL, EPOS-LHC, QGSJET) span the relevant model space.
    Sec. 3 derives the 'prediction envelope' and Fisher-information uncertainty from this selection; a missing model would bias the claimed smallest achievable uncertainty.
  • ad hoc to paper The enhanced-strangeness reweighting (1-fs, 1+F fs) captures the physics of the cosmic-ray muon puzzle at LHC energies.
    Sec. 3 adopts this two-parameter model from Ref [28]; if the true mechanism is not a simple pion/kaon reweighting, the constraints on fs do not test the actual puzzle.
  • domain assumption PDF4LHC21 (or EPPS21) central values are a valid proxy for the true PDFs when generating pseudodata.
    Sec. 2 profiles pseudodata generated from the same PDF set, so the result measures expected uncertainty reduction, not central-value shifts.
  • domain assumption The FASERnu2 Monte Carlo simulation accurately models reverse tracking, energy loss, and background rates.
    Sec. 4's near-perfect background rejection and 5-sigma trident claim rest entirely on this simulation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Deep-inelastic scattering with collider neutrinos at the LHC and beyond." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PA2NGNPG

@misc{pith2026241202019,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Deep-inelastic scattering with collider neutrinos at the LHC and beyond},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PA2NGNPG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.02019}
}
abstract

Proton-proton collisions at the LHC generate high-intensity collimated beams of forward neutrinos up to TeV energies. Their recent observations and the initiation of a novel LHC neutrino program motivate investigations of this previously unexploited beam. The kinematic region for neutrino deep-inelastic scattering measurements at the LHC overlaps with that of the Electron-Ion Collider. The effect of the LHC $\nu$DIS data on parton distribution functions (PDFs) is assessed by generating projections for the Run 3 LHC experiments, and for select proposed detectors at the HL-LHC. Estimating their impact in global (n)PDF analyses reveals a significant reduction of PDF uncertainties, particularly for strange and valence quarks. Furthermore, the effect of neutrino flux uncertainties is examined by parametrizing the correlations between a broad selection of neutrino production predictions in forward hadron decays. This allows determination of the highest achievable precision for neutrino observations, and constraining physics within and beyond the Standard Model. This is demonstrated by setting bounds on effective theory operators, and discussing the prospects for an experimental confirmation of the enhanced strangeness scenario proposed to resolve the cosmic ray muon puzzle, using LHC data. Moreover, there is promise for a first measurement of neutrino tridents with a statistical significance exceeding 5$\sigma$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.02019 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Fractional uncertainties (68% CL) at Q2 = 104 GeV2 for the up valence (left) and strange (right) quarks in the PDF4LHC21 baseline (red), compared to the results of Hessian profiling performed with FPF pseudodata. Projections account￾ing for estimated statistical(+systematic) uncertainties are shown in blue (green). Taken from Ref. [11]. and EIC. The projected improvement in PDF uncertainties will increase the precis… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Left: The νe and νµ CC rates in the FLArE experiment to be hosted at FPF. The solid black line has no strangeness enhancement, while the dashed orange (blue, black) correspond to the 1σ exclusion bounds obtained for FASERν and FLARE with 10% or 100% of the expected data, respectively. The fs = 0.5 case, which could solve the cosmic-ray muon puzzle, is shown in green. The yellow￾shaded band indicates the broad envelo… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Left: A sample Feynman diagram for trident production of a dimuon pair in an interaction with incident muon neutrinos. Right: The trident signal including only events permitting reverse tracking of both muons is shown in red, with the dashed (solid) line corresponding to before (after) all other cuts employed to reject the background. These account for the reverse tracking requirement that both muons survive an ener… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages

  1. [13]

    Discovering neutrino tridents at the Large Hadron Collider

    Wolfgang Altmannshofer et al. “Discovering neutrino tridents at the Large Hadron Collider”. In: Phys. Rev. D 110.7 (2024), p. 072018. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.072018. arXiv: 2406.16803 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2024

  2. [12]

    Investigating the fluxes and physics potential of LHC neutrino experiments

    Felix Kling, Toni M¨ akel¨ a, and Sebastian Trojanowski. “Investigating the fluxes and physics potential of LHC neutrino experiments”. In: Phys. Rev. D108 (9 Nov. 2023), p. 095020. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD. 108.095020. url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD. 108.095020

    doi:10.1103/physrevd 2023

  3. [1]

    First Direct Observation of Collider Neutrinos with F ASER at the LHC

    Henso Abreu et al. “First Direct Observation of Collider Neutrinos with F ASER at the LHC”. In:Phys. Rev. Lett.131.3 (2023), p. 031801. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.031801. arXiv: 2303.14185 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2023

  4. [2]

    Observation of Collider Muon Neutrinos with the SND@LHC Experiment

    R. Albanese et al. “Observation of Collider Muon Neutrinos with the SND@LHC Experiment”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett.131.3 (2023), p. 031802. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.031802. arXiv: 2305.09383 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2023

  5. [3]

    First Measurement of νe and νµ Interaction Cross Sections at the LHC with F ASER’s Emulsion De- tector

    Roshan Mammen Abraham et al. “First Measurement of νe and νµ Interaction Cross Sections at the LHC with F ASER’s Emulsion De- tector”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett.133.2 (2024), p. 021802. doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevLett.133.021802. arXiv: 2403.12520 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2024

  6. [4]

    Request to run F ASER in Run 4

    J Boyd et al. Request to run F ASER in Run 4. Tech. rep. Geneva: CERN, 2023. url: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2882503

    arXiv 2023

  7. [5]

    AdvSND, The Advanced Scattering and NeutrinoDe- tector at High Lumi LHC Letter of Intent

    D Abbaneo et al. AdvSND, The Advanced Scattering and NeutrinoDe- tector at High Lumi LHC Letter of Intent. Tech. rep. Geneva: CERN,

    work page

  8. [6]

    Addendum to the AdvancedSND LoI

    D Abbaneo et al. Addendum to the AdvancedSND LoI. Tech. rep. Geneva: CERN, 2024. url: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2909524

    work page arXiv 2024

Show all 34 references
  1. [7]

    The Forward Physics Facility: Sites, ex- periments, and physics potential

    Luis A. Anchordoqui et al. “The Forward Physics Facility: Sites, ex- periments, and physics potential”. In: Phys. Rept. 968 (2022), pp. 1–

    2022

  2. [8]

    The Forward Physics Facility at the High- Luminosity LHC

    Jonathan L. Feng et al. “The Forward Physics Facility at the High- Luminosity LHC”. In: J. Phys. G 50.3 (2023), p. 030501. doi: 10. 1088/1361-6471/ac865e. arXiv: 2203.05090 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  3. [9]

    Science and Project Planning for the For- ward Physics Facility in Preparation for the 2024-2026 European Par- ticle Physics Strategy Update

    Jyotismita Adhikary et al. “Science and Project Planning for the For- ward Physics Facility in Preparation for the 2024-2026 European Par- ticle Physics Strategy Update”. In: (Nov. 2024). arXiv: 2411.04175 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  4. [10]

    FPF@FCC: Neutrino, QCD, and BSM Physics Opportunities with Far-Forward Experiments at a 100 TeV Proton Collider

    Roshan Mammen Abraham et al. “FPF@FCC: Neutrino, QCD, and BSM Physics Opportunities with Far-Forward Experiments at a 100 TeV Proton Collider”. In: (Sept. 2024). arXiv: 2409.02163 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  5. [11]

    The LHC as a Neutrino-Ion Collider

    Juan M. Cruz-Martinez et al. “The LHC as a Neutrino-Ion Collider”. In: Eur. Phys. J. C84.4 (2024), p. 369. doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052- 024-12665-1. arXiv: 2309.09581 [hep-ph]. 8 REFERENCES

    2024 arXiv

  6. [14]

    PDF reweighting in the Hes- sian matrix approach

    Hannu Paukkunen and Pia Zurita. “PDF reweighting in the Hes- sian matrix approach”. In: JHEP 12 (2014), p. 100. doi: 10.1007/ JHEP12(2014)100. arXiv: 1402.6623 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Updating and optimizing error parton distribu- tion function sets in the Hessian approach

    Carl Schmidt et al. “Updating and optimizing error parton distribu- tion function sets in the Hessian approach”. In: Phys. Rev. D 98.9 (2018), p. 094005. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.98.094005. arXiv: 1806. 07950 [hep-ph]

    2018 doi

  8. [16]

    Towards Ultimate Parton Distributions at the High-Luminosity LHC

    Rabah Abdul Khalek et al. “Towards Ultimate Parton Distributions at the High-Luminosity LHC”. In: Eur. Phys. J. C 78.11 (2018), p. 962. doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-6448-y . arXiv: 1810.03639 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  9. [17]

    QCD analysis of W - and Z-boson production at Tevatron

    S. Camarda et al. “QCD analysis of W - and Z-boson production at Tevatron”. In: Eur. Phys. J. C 75.9 (2015), p. 458. doi: 10.1140/ epjc/s10052-015-3655-7 . arXiv: 1503.05221 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  10. [18]

    HERAFitter

    S. Alekhin et al. “HERAFitter”. In: Eur. Phys. J. C 75.7 (2015), p. 304. doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3480-z . arXiv: 1410.4412 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  11. [19]

    xFitter 2.0.0: An Open Source QCD Fit Framework

    V. Bertone, M. Botje, D. Britzger, et al. “xFitter 2.0.0: An Open Source QCD Fit Framework”. In: PoS DIS2017 (2018), p. 203. doi: 10.22323/1.297.0203. arXiv: 1709.01151 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  12. [20]

    xFitter: An Open Source QCD Analysis Frame- work. A resource and reference document for the Snowmass study

    H. Abdolmaleki et al. “xFitter: An Open Source QCD Analysis Frame- work. A resource and reference document for the Snowmass study”. In: June 2022. arXiv: 2206.12465 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  13. [21]

    url: https://www.xfitter.org/xFitter/

    xFitter Developers’ Team. url: https://www.xfitter.org/xFitter/

  14. [22]

    The PDF4LHC21 combination of global PDF fits for the LHC Run III

    Richard D. Ball et al. “The PDF4LHC21 combination of global PDF fits for the LHC Run III”. In: J. Phys. G49.8 (2022), p. 080501. doi: 10.1088/1361-6471/ac7216. arXiv: 2203.05506 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  15. [23]

    EPPS21: a global QCD analysis of nuclear PDFs

    Kari J. Eskola et al. “EPPS21: a global QCD analysis of nuclear PDFs”. In: Eur. Phys. J. C82.5 (2022), p. 413. doi: 10.1140/epjc/ s10052-022-10359-0 . arXiv: 2112.12462 [hep-ph]. REFERENCES 9

    2022 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Science Requirements and Detector Concepts for the Electron-Ion Collider: EIC Yellow Report

    R. Abdul Khalek et al. “Science Requirements and Detector Concepts for the Electron-Ion Collider: EIC Yellow Report”. In: Nucl. Phys. A 1026 (2022), p. 122447. doi: 10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2022.122447 . arXiv: 2103.05419 [physics.ins-det]

    2022

  17. [25]

    Muons in Air Showers at the Pierre Auger Ob- servatory: Mean Number in Highly Inclined Events

    Alexander Aab et al. “Muons in Air Showers at the Pierre Auger Ob- servatory: Mean Number in Highly Inclined Events”. In: Phys. Rev. D 91.3 (2015). [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 91, 059901 (2015)], p. 032003. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.91.032003. arXiv: 1408.1421 [astro-ph.HE]

    2015 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Testing Hadronic Interactions at Ultrahigh Energies with Air Showers Measured by the Pierre Auger Observa- tory

    Alexander Aab et al. “Testing Hadronic Interactions at Ultrahigh Energies with Air Showers Measured by the Pierre Auger Observa- tory”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett.117.19 (2016), p. 192001. doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevLett.117.192001. arXiv: 1610.08509 [hep-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Measurement of the Fluctuations in the Number of Muons in Extensive Air Showers with the Pierre Auger Observa- tory

    Alexander Aab et al. “Measurement of the Fluctuations in the Number of Muons in Extensive Air Showers with the Pierre Auger Observa- tory”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett.126.15 (2021), p. 152002. doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevLett.126.152002. arXiv: 2102.07797 [hep-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  20. [28]

    An explanation of the muon puzzle of ultrahigh-energy cosmic rays and the role of the Forward Physics Fa- cility for model improvement

    Luis A. Anchordoqui et al. “An explanation of the muon puzzle of ultrahigh-energy cosmic rays and the role of the Forward Physics Fa- cility for model improvement”. In: JHEAp 34 (2022), pp. 19–32. doi: 10.1016/j.jheap.2022.03.004. arXiv: 2202.03095 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  21. [29]

    EFT at F ASERν

    Adam Falkowski et al. “EFT at F ASERν”. In: JHEP 10 (2021), p. 086. doi: 10.1007/JHEP10(2021)086. arXiv: 2105.12136 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  22. [30]

    First observation of neutrino trident production

    D. Geiregat et al. “First observation of neutrino trident production”. In: Phys. Lett. B 245 (1990), pp. 271–275. doi: 10 . 1016 / 0370 - 2693(90)90146-W

    1990

  23. [31]

    Neutrino Tridents and W Z Interference

    S. R. Mishra et al. “Neutrino Tridents and W Z Interference”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett.66 (1991), pp. 3117–3120. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.66. 3117

    1991 doi

  24. [32]

    Evidence for diffractive charm production in muon- neutrino Fe and anti-muon-neutrino Fe scattering at the Tevatron

    T. Adams et al. “Evidence for diffractive charm production in muon- neutrino Fe and anti-muon-neutrino Fe scattering at the Tevatron”. In: Phys. Rev. D61 (2000), p. 092001. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.61. 092001. arXiv: hep-ex/9909041

    2000 arXiv

  25. [50]

    1016 / j

    doi: 10 . 1016 / j . physrep . 2022 . 04 . 004. arXiv: 2109 . 10905 [hep-ph]

    2022

  26. [2024]

    url: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2895224

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.