Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 5 cited by

Higgs boson production in association with massive bottom quarks at NNLO+PS

T0 review · 3 major / 4 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 This paper presents the first NNLO QCD computation of the bottom-Yukawa contribution to $b\bar b H$ production in the four-flavour scheme, matched to a parton shower, and claims these NNLO+PS corrections resolve the long-standing…

desk verdict A genuine first—4FS NNLO and NNLO+PS for b bbar H—with a plausible scheme-tension resolution, though the massification approximation deserves a more explicit uncertainty estimate before this becomes the default reference. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.09510 v2 pith:6YNTZLPT submitted 2024-12-12 hep-ph hep-ex

Christian Biello , Javier Mazzitelli , Aparna Sankar , Marius Wiesemann , Giulia Zanderighi This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-ex
keywords perturbativeQCDHiggsphysicsheavy-flavourphenomenologybottom-quarkassociatedproductionfour-flavourschemeNNLO+PSparton-showermatchingdi-Higgsbackground
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

The paper presents the first next-to-next-to-leading-order (NNLO) QCD calculation of Higgs-boson production in association with a bottom-quark pair, in the four-flavour scheme where the bottom quark is treated as massive, and matches it to a parton shower (NNLO+PS). The $y_b^2$ contribution is computed exactly except for the two-loop amplitude, which is approximated through a small bottom-mass expansion. The authors' central claim is that these NNLO corrections increase the four-flavour rate by about 30% and bring the four-flavour and five-flavour predictions into agreement within scale uncertainties at the inclusive and bottom-jet level, resolving a long-standing discrepancy between the two schemes. They further show that the corrected $y_b^2$ background to double-Higgs production in the $b\bar b\gamma\gamma$ channel rises by 30\textendash 50% relative to NLO+PS.

What carries the argument

The calculation is carried by two ingredients. First, the MiNNLOPS method, a method for matching NNLO QCD to parton showers, is extended to heavy-quark pair plus colour-singlet production and adapted to a Yukawa-induced process with a scale-dependent MS-renormalized bottom-Yukawa coupling; this supplies the NNLO+PS master formula that distributes the NNLO singular contributions over the full phase space. Second, the two-loop amplitude is handled by massification: the finite remainder for massive bottom quarks is related, up to $O(m_b/\mu_Q)$ power corrections, to the massless two-loop finite remainder through a product of massification factors for each external leg and a soft operator, $\bar F \bar S |R_0\rangle$. The logarithmically enhanced and constant terms in $m_b$ are therefore kept while the power corrections are dropped, and the massless two-loop remainders are evaluated from analytic leading-colour amplitudes for $c\bar c\to b\bar b H$, with subleading-colour corrections added in Appendix B.

What would settle it

Evaluate the exact two-loop amplitude with full bottom-mass dependence at representative phase-space points relevant for bottom jets and the $H\to b\bar b,\gamma\gamma$ signal region, and compare it with the massified approximation; if the difference exceeds the quoted scale uncertainties in those regions, the central claim that the NNLO corrections resolve the scheme discrepancy would be called into question.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery claimed is that the first NNLO+PS generator for $b\bar b H$ production in the four-flavour scheme exists and changes the picture of scheme compatibility. At NLO+PS the four-flavour and five-flavour predictions differ by roughly a factor of two in the Higgs rapidity distribution and are incompatible, whereas at NNLO+PS the two schemes agree within uncertainties for inclusive Higgs observables and for final states with at least one identified bottom jet. The NNLO corrections consistently raise the four-flavour cross section by about 30% and can reach 100% in exclusive bottom-jet distributions, so the previous NLO+PS four-flavour predictions are not reliable. Applied to the $2b2\gamma$ channel of double-Higgs searches, the $y_b^2$ background grows by 30\textendash 50% relative to NLO+PS, directly affecting the modelling of the dominant irreducible background.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes that replacing the two-loop amplitude for massive bottom quarks by a massless two-loop calculation plus logarithmic bottom-mass terms, and dropping power-suppressed terms of order $m_b/\mu_Q$, is accurate enough; the approximation is tested at NLO but not at NNLO.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The NNLO+PS four-flavour generator provides event-level predictions for $b\bar b H$ that are NNLO accurate for inclusive and bottom-jet observables, whereas previous four-flavour generators were NLO accurate.
  • The long-standing four-flavour versus five-flavour discrepancy is resolved at NNLO+PS for inclusive Higgs observables and for final states with at least one identified bottom jet, within scale uncertainties.
  • The $y_b^2$ contribution to the $b\bar b H$ background in the $2b2\gamma$ channel of double-Higgs searches increases by about 30\textendash 50% relative to NLO+PS, with strongly reduced scale uncertainties.
  • NLO+PS four-flavour scale bands do not cover the NNLO central predictions, so NLO accuracy is insufficient for reliable $b\bar b H$ predictions.
  • The method provides a route to NNLO+PS generators for other heavy-quark plus colour-singlet processes and for lighter-quark Yukawa processes such as charm-associated Higgs production.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The resolution of the scheme tension is demonstrated within the quoted scale-uncertainty envelopes; a reader who assigns correlated or missing higher-order uncertainties beyond the 7-point scale variation could see a residual gap, especially in the two-bottom-jet distributions where differences up to 30% persist below an invariant mass of 150 GeV.
  • Because the massification approximation is validated at NLO only, the size of the dropped $O(m_b/\mu_Q)$ terms at NNLO is the main unquantified risk; a direct or indirect NNLO test, for example through a second scale choice or an approximate massive two-loop calculation, would strengthen the claim.
  • If these predictions are correct, earlier NLO+PS based estimates of the $y_b^2$ background in Higgs-pair searches are systematically low by tens of percent, so updated sensitivity studies using these NNLO+PS events may shift projected limits.
  • The same generator structure could be extended to combined four-flavour and five-flavour matching or to charm-associated Higgs production, directions the authors flag as future work.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper presents the first NNLO QCD calculation of Higgs boson production in association with a massive bottom-quark pair (pp → b bbar H) in the four-flavour scheme, matched to a parton shower through an extension of the MiNNLOPS method. The calculation is exact except for the two-loop virtual contribution, which is evaluated in the small bottom-mass (massification) limit, and for the default implementation of the two-loop amplitude in the leading-colour approximation. The paper provides an extensive phenomenological study: inclusive and differential cross sections, b-jet observables, a detailed four-flavour versus five-flavour scheme comparison at NNLO+PS, and an application to the b bbar H background in di-Higgs searches in the 2b2γ channel. The central conclusions are that NNLO corrections in the four-flavour scheme are large (about 30% inclusive, up to 100% in some jet-observable tails) and that, together with the five-flavour NNLO+PS results of ref. [42], they resolve the long-standing 4FS/5FS tension for inclusive and one-b-jet observables.

Significance. If the result holds, this is a major step for b bbar H phenomenology: it provides the first NNLO+PS event generator in the four-flavour scheme with massive bottom quarks, and it demonstrates that the MiNNLOPS method can handle a heavy-quark pair plus a colour singlet with a scale-dependent Yukawa coupling. The paper also gives a useful treatment of IR-safe flavour-tagging definitions in the five-flavour scheme and an estimate of the b bbar H background in HH searches. Important strengths are the cross-checks of the two-loop implementation against independent libraries, the inclusion of subleading-colour terms in Appendix B, and the explicit NLO-level validation of the massification procedure. The calculation has no free parameters fitted to the target cross section, which supports the credibility of the central claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 4.1, Eq. (4.1)] The massification approximation drops power corrections O(mb/mu_Q) in the two-loop amplitude and is validated only at NLO (Secs. 5.3.3 and 8), not at NNLO where it is first used. The MiNLO' behaviour discussed in Sec. 5.2 shows that the double-virtual logarithms are numerically large at O(alpha_s^2), so the two-loop contribution is not subleading. Since the central 4FS/5FS agreement used to claim resolution of the scheme tension is at the 8-13% level (Table 2) and the NNLO corrections reach 100% in the 2-b-jet tails, a several-percent power correction from the massified two-loop term could shift the conclusion. I ask the authors to provide a direct estimate of the neglected power corrections in the relevant phase-space regions, for example by comparing alternative momentum mappings in the massification setup or by assessing the O(mb/mu_Q) terms against the logarithmic terms at representative phase-space points.
  2. [Sec. 4.2 and Appendix B] The default differential predictions use the leading-colour two-loop amplitude, while Appendix B shows that subleading-colour contributions change integrated cross sections by -3% to -5% and are not included in the main differential results for more exclusive regions. The abstract describes the calculation as exact except for the small-mass expansion, which is incomplete in this respect. This is not a fatal issue for the broad qualitative conclusions, but it means that the 'first NNLO' claim and the scheme-comparison plots should either include subleading-colour terms in the default setup or present the central results with a corresponding additional uncertainty band.
  3. [Sec. 6.3, Fig. 12, and Sec. 8] The paper states that the long-standing 4FS/5FS tension is resolved, but the authors themselves show in Sec. 6.3 that for observables with at least two b-jets (e.g., m_bj1bj2 below 150 GeV and the subleading b-jet pT spectrum) differences of up to 20-30% remain outside the scale uncertainties. The abstract and the conclusion in Sec. 8 should qualify the resolution claim to inclusive Higgs observables and one-b-jet final states, where the agreement is indeed good, or discuss the residual 2-b-jet discrepancy as a known limitation of the five-flavour description at effectively LO+PS accuracy.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 5.3.1] The text contains a typo: 'In what fallows' should be 'In what follows'.
  2. [Table 4] The fiducial-region labels 'H+≤1 b jets' and 'H+≤2 b jets' appear inconsistent with the integrated values and with the notation used in Table 2; they should presumably read 'H+≥1 b jets' and 'H+≥2 b jets'.
  3. [Sec. 5.1 and Table 1] The statement that K_Q = 0.25 leads to similar results is not shown; including a short comparison or a reference to a figure would help the reader assess the resummation-scale uncertainty.
  4. [Sec. 7, Table 3] In Table 3, the uncertainty on the fiducial MiNNLOPS cross section is quoted as +2.1%/-9.5%, which is unusually asymmetric; a short explanation of which scale variation drives this pattern would be useful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the NNLO 4FS b-bbar-H prediction is a first-principles calculation with stated approximations, cross-checked against independent fixed-order results and external amplitude libraries.

full rationale

The central claim of the paper is a new NNLO QCD calculation for b-bbar-H production in the four-flavour scheme with massive bottom quarks, matched to a parton shower. The derivation chain is self-contained in the sense that no parameter is fitted to the target cross section or to the scheme-tension conclusion. Tree-level and one-loop contributions are evaluated exactly, while the two-loop amplitude uses an explicitly stated small-mass expansion, eq. (4.1), with logarithmic and constant terms retained and power corrections O(mb/mu_Q) neglected. This is an approximation with a quantified error, not a circular construction: the massless two-loop amplitude entering the massification is an independent external result (ref. [38]) and the massification procedure is justified from factorisation properties (refs. [58,59]), with the implemented library cross-checked against an independent implementation and the public full-colour library (Sec. 4.2 and Appendix B). The approximation is validated at NLO where exact massive results are available; the absence of a direct NNLO validation is a limitation of the accuracy assessment, not a circular step. The comparison between four- and five-flavour schemes uses the 5FS MiNNLOPS generator from the authors' previous work (ref. [42]), but that generator is benchmarked in this paper against independent NNLO+NNLL and NNLO fixed-order predictions (refs. [28,32]) and the central scheme-agreement conclusion also holds at the level of external 5FS fixed-order results shown in Fig. 9. Self-citations to MiNNLOPS methodology (refs. [57,60-64]) are standard method citations; the method is not redefined in terms of the present target process and was established in prior independent applications. The statements about MiNLO' failing and the double-virtual logarithmic cancellation are internal consistency checks, not circular predictions. No step in the claimed derivation reduces by construction to its inputs, and no fitted input is renamed as a prediction. The paper is therefore assessed as having no significant circularity, with residual concerns about the massification power corrections at NNLO being a correctness/robustness issue rather than a circularity issue.

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

No new particles, forces, or entities are introduced. The free parameters are standard scale choices that affect the numerical results but are not fitted to the target observable. The axioms are standard QCD factorization, the massification approximation, and the leading-colour truncation, all stated explicitly in the paper.

free parameters (2)
  • Resummation scale factor KQ = 0.5
    Chosen by hand for the MiNNLOPS resummation scale; the authors checked KQ=0.25 gives similar results. Not fitted to the target cross section, but affects the resummed prediction.
  • Central renormalisation scale for the bottom Yukawa coupling mu_R^(0,y) = mH = 125 GeV
    Default choice; the alternative HT/4 changes the inclusive cross section by about 6%. A conventional scale choice, not fitted to data.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Small-mass expansion (massification) of the two-loop amplitude is accurate for mb << m_bbH
    Used in Section 4.1 (eq. 4.1) to replace the massive two-loop amplitude with a massless amplitude plus logarithmic mass terms, dropping power corrections O(mb/mu_Q). Validated only at NLO.
  • domain assumption Leading-colour approximation for the massless two-loop amplitude is sufficient for default predictions
    Appendix B shows subleading-colour contributions change inclusive rates by 3-5%; the main differential predictions use leading-colour two-loop amplitudes for numerical efficiency.
  • domain assumption MiNNLOPS factorization theorem for heavy-quark pair plus colour-singlet production applies to b-bbar-H
    Section 3.2 relies on the resummation framework of refs. [83-86] and its extension to QQbar-F in ref. [57], two of whose authors are co-authors of this paper.
  • domain assumption The y_b^2 contribution is a gauge-invariant subset of the full b-bbar-H cross section and can be treated separately from y_t terms
    Section 2 defines the process as the y_b^2 subset, excluding loop-induced ggF contributions proportional to y_t. This is standard but a restriction on the claim.
  • domain assumption NNPDF4.0 with four active flavours and the on-shell bottom mass m_b^OS = 4.92 GeV are appropriate inputs
    Section 5.1 sets the PDF set, bottom mass, and MS Yukawa coupling; these are external inputs from prior literature, not derived in the paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Higgs boson production in association with massive bottom quarks at NNLO+PS." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6YNTZLPT

@misc{pith2026241209510,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Higgs boson production in association with massive bottom quarks at NNLO+PS},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6YNTZLPT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.09510}
}
abstract

We study the production of a Higgs boson in association with a bottom-quark pair ($b \bar b H$) at hadron colliders. Our calculation is performed in the four-flavour scheme with massive bottom quarks. This work presents the first computation of next-to-next-to-leading-order (NNLO) QCD corrections to this process, and we combine them with all-order radiative corrections from a parton shower simulation (NNLO+PS). The calculation is exact, except for the two-loop amplitude, which is evaluated in the small quark mass expansion, which is an excellent approximation for bottom quarks at LHC energies. For the NNLO+PS matching, we employ the MiNNLO$_{\rm PS}$ method for heavy-quark plus colour-singlet production within the POWHEG framework. We present an extensive phenomenological analysis both at the inclusive level and considering bottom jets using flavour-tagging algorithms. By comparing four-flavour and five-flavour scheme predictions at NNLO+PS, we find that the NNLO corrections in the four-flavour scheme resolve the long-standing tension between the two schemes. Finally, we show that our NNLO+PS predictions also have important implications on modelling the $b\bar b H$ background in Higgs-pair measurements.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

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

  1. Numerical evaluation of two-loop QCD helicity amplitudes for $gg\to t \bar{t} g$ at leading colour

    hep-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

    The two-loop finite remainders for gg to ttbar g at leading colour are evaluated numerically at one benchmark point, with elliptic functions confined to the finite part.

  2. Full-colour double-virtual amplitudes for associated production of a Higgs boson with a bottom-quark pair at the LHC

    hep-ph 2024-12 accept novelty 8.0 of 10

    First analytic full-color two-loop five-particle amplitudes for associated Higgs-plus-bottom-quark-pair production at the LHC, with public C++ implementation.

  3. Top-Yukawa contributions to $pp\to b\bar{b}H$: two-loop leading-colour amplitudes

    hep-ph 2026-03 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    First analytic two-loop leading-colour amplitudes for top-Yukawa-induced b bbar H production in the heavy-top limit, with Mathematica and C++ code.

  4. An Optimal Transportation Approach for Improved Confidence Intervals

    stat.ME 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Optimal-transport couplings are used to construct confidence intervals that reduce coverage error relative to classical quantile-based intervals, with consistency theory and data-driven hyperparameters.

  5. Next-to-next-to-leading order event generation for $t\bar{t}H$ production with approximate two-loop amplitude

    hep-ph 2026-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    First NNLO+PS (MiNNLOPS) generator for ttH production, combining soft-Higgs and high-energy approximate two-loop amplitudes pointwise, with one-loop-level validation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

120 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages · cited by 5 Pith papers

  1. [42]

    Biello, A

    C. Biello, A. Sankar, M. Wiesemann and G. Zanderighi,NNLO+PS predictions for Higgs production through bottom-quark annihilation with MINNLOPS, Eur. Phys. J. C84 (2024) 479, [2402.04025]

    arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    ATLAS Collaboration,The ATLAS experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, JINST 3 (2008) S08003. – 46 –

    2008

  3. [2]

    CMS Collaboration, The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC, JINST 3 (2008) S08004

    2008

  4. [3]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Observation of a new particle in the search for the standard model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B716 (2012) 1, [1207.7214]

    arXiv 2012

  5. [4]

    CMS Collaboration, Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B716 (2012) 30, [1207.7235]

    arXiv 2012

  6. [5]

    CMS Collaboration,Observation of a new boson with mass near 125 GeV inpp collisions at√s = 7 and 8 TeV, JHEP 06 (2013) 081, [1303.4571]

    arXiv 2013

  7. [8]

    ATLAScollaboration, A detailed map of Higgs boson interactions by the ATLAS experiment ten years after the discovery, Nature 607 (2022) 52–59, [2207.00092]

    arXiv 2022

  8. [9]

    Tumasyan et al.,A portrait of the Higgs boson by the CMS experiment ten years after the discovery, Nature 607 (2022) 60–68, [2207.00043]

    CMS collaboration, A. Tumasyan et al.,A portrait of the Higgs boson by the CMS experiment ten years after the discovery, Nature 607 (2022) 60–68, [2207.00043]

    arXiv 2022

Show all 120 references
  1. [10]

    de Florian et al., Handbook of LHC Higgs Cross Sections: 4

    LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group collaboration, D. de Florian et al., Handbook of LHC Higgs Cross Sections: 4. Deciphering the Nature of the Higgs Sector, 1610.07922

    arXiv

  2. [11]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Observation of Higgs boson production in association with a top quark pair at the LHC with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B784 (2018) 173, [1806.00425]

    2018 arXiv

  3. [12]

    CMS Collaboration, Observation of ttH production, Phys. Rev. Lett.120 (2018) 231801, [1804.02610]

    2018 arXiv

  4. [13]

    Pagani, H.-S

    D. Pagani, H.-S. Shao and M. Zaro,RIP Hbb: how other Higgs production modes conspire to kill a rare signal at the LHC, JHEP 11 (2020) 036, [2005.10277]

    2020 arXiv

  5. [14]

    Bishara, U

    F. Bishara, U. Haisch, P. F. Monni and E. Re,Constraining light-quark Yukawa couplings from Higgs distributions, Phys. Rev. Lett.118 (2017) 121801, [1606.09253]

    2017 arXiv

  6. [15]

    Alison et al.,Higgs boson potential at colliders: Status and perspectives, Rev

    J. Alison et al.,Higgs boson potential at colliders: Status and perspectives, Rev. Phys. 5 (2020) 100045, [1910.00012]

    2020 arXiv

  7. [16]

    Manzoni, E

    S. Manzoni, E. Mazzeo, J. Mazzitelli, M. Wiesemann and M. Zaro,Taming a leading theoretical uncertainty in HH measurements via accurate simulations for bbH production, JHEP 09 (2023) 179, [2307.09992]

    2023 arXiv

  8. [17]

    ATLAScollaboration, HL-LHC prospects for the measurement of Higgs boson pair production in theb¯bb¯b final state and combination with theb¯bγγ and b¯bτ +τ − final states at the ATLAS experiment,

  9. [18]

    Das,Higgs boson rapidity distribution in bottom annihilation at NNLL and beyond, Phys

    G. Das,Higgs boson rapidity distribution in bottom annihilation at NNLL and beyond, Phys. Rev. D108 (2023) 094028, [2306.04561]

    2023 arXiv

  10. [19]

    Dicus, T

    D. Dicus, T. Stelzer, Z. Sullivan and S. Willenbrock,Higgs boson production in association with bottom quarks at next-to-leading order, Phys.Rev. D59 (1999) 094016, [hep-ph/9811492]

    1999 arXiv

  11. [20]

    Balazs, H.-J

    C. Balazs, H.-J. He and C. Yuan,QCD corrections to scalar production via heavy quark fusion at hadron colliders, Phys.Rev. D60 (1999) 114001, [hep-ph/9812263]. – 47 –

    1999 arXiv

  12. [21]

    R. V. Harlander and W. B. Kilgore,Higgs boson production in bottom quark fusion at next-to-next-to leading order, Phys.Rev. D68 (2003) 013001, [hep-ph/0304035]

    2003 arXiv

  13. [22]

    J. M. Campbell, R. K. Ellis, F. Maltoni and S. Willenbrock,Higgs-Boson production in association with a single bottom quark, Phys.Rev. D67 (2003) 095002, [hep-ph/0204093]

    2003 arXiv

  14. [23]

    R. V. Harlander, K. J. Ozeren and M. Wiesemann,Higgs plus jet production in bottom quark annihilation at next-to-leading order, Phys. Lett. B693 (2010) 269–273, [1007.5411]

    2010 arXiv

  15. [24]

    K. J. Ozeren,Analytic Results for Higgs Production in Bottom Fusion, JHEP 1011 (2010) 084, [1010.2977]

    2010 arXiv

  16. [25]

    Harlander and M

    R. Harlander and M. Wiesemann,Jet-veto in bottom-quark induced Higgs production at next-to-next-to-leading order, JHEP 1204 (2012) 066, [1111.2182]

    2012 arXiv

  17. [26]

    Buhler, F

    S. Buhler, F. Herzog, A. Lazopoulos and R. Muller,The fully differential hadronic production of a Higgs boson via bottom quark fusion at NNLO, JHEP 1207 (2012) 115, [1204.4415]

    2012 arXiv

  18. [27]

    Belyaev, P

    A. Belyaev, P. M. Nadolsky and C.-P. Yuan,Transverse momentum resummation for Higgs boson produced via b anti-b fusion at hadron colliders, JHEP 0604 (2006) 004, [hep-ph/0509100]

    2006 arXiv

  19. [28]

    R. V. Harlander, A. Tripathi and M. Wiesemann,Higgs production in bottom quark annihilation: Transverse momentum distribution at NNLO+NNLL, Phys. Rev. D90 (2014) 015017, [1403.7196]

    2014 arXiv

  20. [29]

    Ahmed, M

    T. Ahmed, M. Mahakhud, P. Mathews, N. Rana and V. Ravindran,Two-loop QCD corrections to Higgs→ b + b + g amplitude, JHEP 1408 (2014) 075, [1405.2324]

    2014 arXiv

  21. [30]

    Gehrmann and D

    T. Gehrmann and D. Kara,The Hb¯b form factor to three loops in QCD, JHEP 09 (2014) 174, [1407.8114]

    2014 arXiv

  22. [31]

    C. Duhr, F. Dulat and B. Mistlberger,Higgs Boson Production in Bottom-Quark Fusion to Third Order in the Strong Coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett.125 (2020) 051804, [1904.09990]

    2020 arXiv

  23. [32]

    Mondini and C

    R. Mondini and C. Williams,Bottom-induced contributions to Higgs plus jet at next-to-next-to-leading order, JHEP 05 (2021) 045, [2102.05487]

    2021 arXiv

  24. [33]

    Wiesemann, R

    M. Wiesemann, R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, F. Maltoni and P. Torrielli,Higgs production in association with bottom quarks, JHEP 02 (2015) 132, [1409.5301]

    2015 arXiv

  25. [34]

    Krauss, D

    F. Krauss, D. Napoletano and S. Schumann,Simulating b-associated production ofZ and Higgs bosons with the SHERPA event generator, Phys. Rev. D95 (2017) 036012, [1612.04640]

    2017 arXiv

  26. [36]

    A. H. Ajjath, A. Chakraborty, G. Das, P. Mukherjee and V. Ravindran,Resummed prediction for Higgs boson production through bb annihilation at N3LL, JHEP 11 (2019) 006, [1905.03771]

    2019 arXiv

  27. [37]

    Forte, T

    S. Forte, T. Giani and D. Napoletano,Fitting the b-quark PDF as a massive-b scheme: Higgs production in bottom fusion, Eur. Phys. J. C79 (2019) 609, [1905.02207]

    2019 arXiv

  28. [38]

    Badger, H

    S. Badger, H. B. Hartanto, J. Kryś and S. Zoia,Two-loop leading-colour QCD helicity – 48 – amplitudes for Higgs boson production in association with a bottom-quark pair at the LHC, JHEP 11 (2021) 012, [2107.14733]

    2021 arXiv

  29. [39]

    Das and A

    G. Das and A. Sankar,Next-to-soft threshold effects on Higgs boson production via bottom quark annihilation, 2409.01553

    arXiv

  30. [40]

    P. Cal, R. von Kuk, M. A. Lim and F. J. Tackmann,qT spectrum for Higgs boson production via heavy quark annihilation at N3LL’+aN3LO, Phys. Rev. D110 (2024) 076005, [2306.16458]

    2024 arXiv

  31. [41]

    A. A H, P. Banerjee, A. Chakraborty, P. K. Dhani, P. Mukherjee, N. Rana and V. Ravindran,NNLO QCD⊕QED corrections to Higgs production in bottom quark annihilation, Phys. Rev. D100 (2019) 114016, [1906.09028]

    2019 arXiv

  32. [43]

    Dittmaier, M

    S. Dittmaier, M. Krämer and M. Spira,Higgs radiation off bottom quarks at the Tevatron and the CERN LHC, Phys.Rev. D70 (2004) 074010, [hep-ph/0309204]

    2004 arXiv

  33. [44]

    Dawson, C

    S. Dawson, C. Jackson, L. Reina and D. Wackeroth,Exclusive Higgs boson production with bottom quarks at hadron colliders, Phys.Rev. D69 (2004) 074027, [hep-ph/0311067]

    2004 arXiv

  34. [45]

    Deutschmann, F

    N. Deutschmann, F. Maltoni, M. Wiesemann and M. Zaro,Top-Yukawa contributions to bbH production at the LHC, JHEP 07 (2019) 054, [1808.01660]

    2019 arXiv

  35. [46]

    Aivazis, J

    M. Aivazis, J. C. Collins, F. I. Olness and W.-K. Tung,Leptoproduction of heavy quarks. 2. A Unified QCD formulation of charged and neutral current processes from fixed target to collider energies, Phys.Rev. D50 (1994) 3102–3118, [hep-ph/9312319]

    1994 arXiv

  36. [47]

    Cacciari, M

    M. Cacciari, M. Greco and P. Nason,The P(T) spectrum in heavy flavor hadroproduction, JHEP 9805 (1998) 007, [hep-ph/9803400]

    1998 arXiv

  37. [48]

    Forte, E

    S. Forte, E. Laenen, P. Nason and J. Rojo,Heavy quarks in deep-inelastic scattering, Nucl. Phys. B834 (2010) 116–162, [1001.2312]

    2010 arXiv

  38. [49]

    Harlander, M

    R. Harlander, M. Krämer and M. Schumacher,Bottom-quark associated Higgs-boson production: reconciling the four- and five-flavour scheme approach, 1112.3478

    arXiv

  39. [50]

    Maltoni, G

    F. Maltoni, G. Ridolfi and M. Ubiali,b-initiated processes at the LHC: a reappraisal, JHEP 1207 (2012) 022, [1203.6393]

    2012 arXiv

  40. [51]

    Bonvini, A

    M. Bonvini, A. S. Papanastasiou and F. J. Tackmann,Resummation and matching of b-quark mass effects inbbH production, JHEP 11 (2015) 196, [1508.03288]

    2015 arXiv

  41. [52]

    Forte, D

    S. Forte, D. Napoletano and M. Ubiali,Higgs production in bottom-quark fusion in a matched scheme, Phys. Lett. B751 (2015) 331–337, [1508.01529]

    2015 arXiv

  42. [53]

    Bonvini, A

    M. Bonvini, A. S. Papanastasiou and F. J. Tackmann,Matched predictions for thebbH cross section at the 13 TeV LHC, JHEP 10 (2016) 053, [1605.01733]

    2016 arXiv

  43. [54]

    Forte, D

    S. Forte, D. Napoletano and M. Ubiali,Higgs production in bottom-quark fusion: matching beyond leading order, Phys. Lett. B763 (2016) 190–196, [1607.00389]

    2016 arXiv

  44. [55]

    M. Lim, F. Maltoni, G. Ridolfi and M. Ubiali,Anatomy of double heavy-quark initiated processes, JHEP 09 (2016) 132, [1605.09411]. – 49 –

    2016 arXiv

  45. [56]

    C. Duhr, F. Dulat, V. Hirschi and B. Mistlberger,Higgs production in bottom quark fusion: matching the 4- and 5-flavour schemes to third order in the strong coupling, JHEP 08 (2020) 017, [2004.04752]

    2020 arXiv

  46. [57]

    Mazzitelli, V

    J. Mazzitelli, V. Sotnikov and M. Wiesemann,Next-to-next-to-leading order event generation for Z-boson production in association with a bottom-quark pair, 2404.08598

    arXiv

  47. [58]

    Mitov and S

    A. Mitov and S. Moch,The Singular behavior of massive QCD amplitudes, JHEP 05 (2007) 001, [hep-ph/0612149]

    2007 arXiv

  48. [59]

    G. Wang, T. Xia, L. L. Yang and X. Ye,On the high-energy behavior of massive QCD amplitudes, JHEP 05 (2024) 082, [2312.12242]

    2024 arXiv

  49. [60]

    P. F. Monni, P. Nason, E. Re, M. Wiesemann and G. Zanderighi,MiNNLOP S: a new method to match NNLO QCD to parton showers, JHEP 05 (2020) 143, [1908.06987]

    2020 arXiv

  50. [61]

    P. F. Monni, E. Re and M. Wiesemann,MiNNLOPS: optimizing 2 → 1 hadronic processes, Eur. Phys. J. C80 (2020) 1075, [2006.04133]

    2020 arXiv

  51. [62]

    Mazzitelli, P

    J. Mazzitelli, P. F. Monni, P. Nason, E. Re, M. Wiesemann and G. Zanderighi, Next-to-Next-to-Leading Order Event Generation for Top-Quark Pair Production, Phys. Rev. Lett.127 (2021) 062001, [2012.14267]

    2021 arXiv

  52. [63]

    Mazzitelli, P

    J. Mazzitelli, P. F. Monni, P. Nason, E. Re, M. Wiesemann and G. Zanderighi,Top-pair production at the LHC with MiNNLOP S, JHEP 04 (2022) 079, [2112.12135]

    2022 arXiv

  53. [64]

    Mazzitelli, A

    J. Mazzitelli, A. Ratti, M. Wiesemann and G. Zanderighi,B-hadron production at the LHC from bottom-quark pair production at NNLO+PS, Phys. Lett. B843 (2023) 137991, [2302.01645]

    2023 arXiv

  54. [65]

    Ježo and P

    T. Ježo and P. Nason,On the Treatment of Resonances in Next-to-Leading Order Calculations Matched to a Parton Shower, JHEP 12 (2015) 065, [1509.09071]

    2015 arXiv

  55. [66]

    Nason,A New method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms, JHEP 11 (2004) 040, [hep-ph/0409146]

    P. Nason,A New method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms, JHEP 11 (2004) 040, [hep-ph/0409146]

    2004 arXiv

  56. [67]

    Alioli, P

    S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari and E. Re,A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: the POWHEG BOX, JHEP 06 (2010) 043, [1002.2581]

    2010 arXiv

  57. [68]

    Frixione, P

    S. Frixione, P. Nason and C. Oleari,Matching NLO QCD computations with Parton Shower simulations: the POWHEG method, JHEP 11 (2007) 070, [0709.2092]

    2007 arXiv

  58. [69]

    Cascioli, P

    F. Cascioli, P. Maierhöfer and S. Pozzorini,Scattering Amplitudes with Open Loops, Phys. Rev. Lett.108 (2012) 111601, [1111.5206]

    2012 arXiv

  59. [70]

    Buccioni, S

    F. Buccioni, S. Pozzorini and M. Zoller,On-the-fly reduction of open loops, Eur. Phys. J. C78 (2018) 70, [1710.11452]

    2018 arXiv

  60. [71]

    Buccioni, J.-N

    F. Buccioni, J.-N. Lang, J. M. Lindert, P. Maierhöfer, S. Pozzorini, H. Zhang and M. F. Zoller, OpenLoops 2, Eur. Phys. J.C79 (2019) 866, [1907.13071]

    2019 arXiv

  61. [72]

    T. Ježo, J. M. Lindert, N. Moretti and S. Pozzorini,New NLOPS predictions fort¯t + b -jet production at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J.C78 (2018) 502, [1802.00426]

    2018 arXiv

  62. [73]

    Lombardi, M

    D. Lombardi, M. Wiesemann and G. Zanderighi,Advancing MıNNLOP Sto diboson processes: Zγ production at NNLO+PS, JHEP 06 (2021) 095, [2010.10478]

    2021 arXiv

  63. [74]

    Lombardi, M

    D. Lombardi, M. Wiesemann and G. Zanderighi,WW production at NNLO+PS with MiNNLOP S, JHEP 11 (2021) 230, [2103.12077]. – 50 –

    2021 arXiv

  64. [75]

    Buonocore, G

    L. Buonocore, G. Koole, D. Lombardi, L. Rottoli, M. Wiesemann and G. Zanderighi,ZZ production at nNNLO+PS with MiNNLOP S, JHEP 01 (2022) 072, [2108.05337]

    2022 arXiv

  65. [76]

    Lombardi, M

    D. Lombardi, M. Wiesemann and G. Zanderighi,Anomalous couplings in Zγ events at NNLO+PS and improvingν ¯νγ backgrounds in dark-matter searches, Phys. Lett. B824 (2022) 136846, [2108.11315]

    2022 arXiv

  66. [77]

    Zanoli, M

    S. Zanoli, M. Chiesa, E. Re, M. Wiesemann and G. Zanderighi,Next-to-next-to-leading order event generation forV Hproduction with H → b¯b decay, 2112.04168

    arXiv

  67. [78]

    Gavardi, C

    A. Gavardi, C. Oleari and E. Re,NNLO+PS Monte Carlo simulation of photon pair production with MiNNLOP S, JHEP 09 (2022) 061, [2204.12602]

    2022 arXiv

  68. [79]

    Haisch, D

    U. Haisch, D. J. Scott, M. Wiesemann, G. Zanderighi and S. Zanoli,NNLO event generation for pp → Zh → ℓ+ℓ−bb production in the SM effective field theory, JHEP 07 (2022) 054, [2204.00663]

    2022 arXiv

  69. [80]

    J. M. Lindert, D. Lombardi, M. Wiesemann, G. Zanderighi and S. Zanoli,W±Z production at NNLO QCD and NLO EW matched to parton showers with MiNNLOP S, JHEP 11 (2022) 036, [2208.12660]

    2022 arXiv

  70. [81]

    Ebert, L

    M. Ebert, L. Rottoli, M. Wiesemann, G. Zanderighi and S. Zanoli,Jettiness formulation of the MiNNLOP Smethod, JHEP 07 (2024) 085, [2402.00596]

    2024 arXiv

  71. [82]

    Catani, I

    S. Catani, I. Fabre, M. Grazzini and S. Kallweit,t¯tH production at NNLO: the flavour off-diagonal channels, Eur. Phys. J. C81 (2021) 491, [2102.03256]

    2021 arXiv

  72. [83]

    H. X. Zhu, C. S. Li, H. T. Li, D. Y. Shao and L. L. Yang,Transverse-momentum resummation for top-quark pairs at hadron colliders, Phys. Rev. Lett.110 (2013) 082001, [1208.5774]

    2013 arXiv

  73. [84]

    H. T. Li, C. S. Li, D. Y. Shao, L. L. Yang and H. X. Zhu,Top quark pair production at small transverse momentum in hadronic collisions, Phys. Rev. D88 (2013) 074004, [1307.2464]

    2013 arXiv

  74. [85]

    Catani, M

    S. Catani, M. Grazzini and A. Torre,Transverse-momentum resummation for heavy-quark hadroproduction, Nucl. Phys. B 890 (2014) 518–538, [1408.4564]

    2014 arXiv

  75. [86]

    Catani, M

    S. Catani, M. Grazzini and H. Sargsyan,Transverse-momentum resummation for top-quark pair production at the LHC, JHEP 11 (2018) 061, [1806.01601]

    2018 arXiv

  76. [87]

    Becher and M

    T. Becher and M. Neubert,Infrared singularities of scattering amplitudes in perturbative QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett.102 (2009) 162001, [0901.0722]

    2009 arXiv

  77. [88]

    Becher and M

    T. Becher and M. Neubert,On the Structure of Infrared Singularities of Gauge-Theory Amplitudes, JHEP 06 (2009) 081, [0903.1126]

    2009 arXiv

  78. [89]

    Catani, S

    S. Catani, S. Devoto, M. Grazzini and J. Mazzitelli,Soft-parton contributions to heavy-quark production at low transverse momentum, JHEP 04 (2023) 144, [2301.11786]

    2023 arXiv

  79. [90]

    Devoto and J

    S. Devoto and J. Mazzitelli,In preparation,

  80. [91]

    Czakon and P

    M. Czakon and P. Fiedler,The soft function for color octet production at threshold, Nucl. Phys. B 879 (2014) 236–255, [1311.2541]

    2014 arXiv

  81. [92]

    Catani and M

    S. Catani and M. Grazzini,QCD transverse-momentum resummation in gluon fusion processes, Nucl. Phys. B 845 (2011) 297–323, [1011.3918]

    2011 arXiv

  82. [93]

    A. A. Penin,Two-loop corrections to Bhabha scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett.95 (2005) 010408, [hep-ph/0501120]. – 51 –

    2005 arXiv

  83. [94]

    Becher and K

    T. Becher and K. Melnikov,Two-loop QED corrections to Bhabha scattering, JHEP 06 (2007) 084, [0704.3582]

    2007 arXiv

  84. [95]

    Buonocore, S

    L. Buonocore, S. Devoto, S. Kallweit, J. Mazzitelli, L. Rottoli and C. Savoini,Associated production of a W boson and massive bottom quarks at next-to-next-to-leading order in QCD, Phys. Rev. D107 (2023) 074032, [2212.04954]

    2023 arXiv

  85. [96]

    Devoto, M

    S. Devoto, M. Grazzini, S. Kallweit, J. Mazzitelli and C. Savoini,Precise predictions fort¯tH production at the LHC: inclusive cross section and differential distributions, 2411.15340

    arXiv

  86. [97]

    Badger, H

    S. Badger, H. B. Hartanto, R. Poncelet, Z. Wu, Y. Zhang and S. Zoia,Full-colour double-virtual amplitudes for associated production of a Higgs boson with a bottom-quark pair at the LHC, 2412.06519

    arXiv

  87. [98]

    Catani,The Singular behavior of QCD amplitudes at two loop order, Phys

    S. Catani,The Singular behavior of QCD amplitudes at two loop order, Phys. Lett. B427 (1998) 161–171, [hep-ph/9802439]

    1998 arXiv

  88. [99]

    Chicherin, V

    D. Chicherin, V. Sotnikov and S. Zoia,Pentagon functions for one-mass planar scattering amplitudes, JHEP 01 (2022) 096, [2110.10111]

    2022 arXiv

  89. [100]

    P. A. Baikov, K. G. Chetyrkin and J. H. Kühn,Quark mass and field anomalous dimensions to O α5 s , Journal of High Energy Physics2014 (Oct., 2014)

    2014

  90. [101]

    Vogt,Efficient evolution of unpolarized and polarized parton distributions with QCD-PEGASUS, Comput

    A. Vogt,Efficient evolution of unpolarized and polarized parton distributions with QCD-PEGASUS, Comput. Phys. Commun.170 (2005) 65–92, [hep-ph/0408244]

    2005 arXiv

  91. [102]

    NNPDF collaboration, R. D. Ball et al.,The path to proton structure at 1% accuracy, Eur. Phys. J. C 82 (2022) 428, [2109.02653]

    2022 arXiv

  92. [103]

    Buckley, J

    A. Buckley, J. Ferrando, S. Lloyd, K. Nordström, B. Page, M. Rüfenacht, M. Schönherr and G. Watt,LHAPDF6: parton density access in the LHC precision era, Eur. Phys. J.C75 (2015) 132, [1412.7420]

    2015 arXiv

  93. [104]

    Bierlich et al.,A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage of PYTHIA 8.3, 2203.11601

    C. Bierlich et al.,A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage of PYTHIA 8.3, 2203.11601

    arXiv

  94. [105]

    Cacciari, G

    M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam and G. Soyez,The anti-kt jet clustering algorithm, JHEP 04 (2008) 063, [0802.1189]

    2008 arXiv

  95. [106]

    Cacciari, G

    M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam and G. Soyez,FastJet User Manual, Eur. Phys. J. C72 (2012) 1896, [1111.6097]

    2012 arXiv

  96. [107]

    Jager, L

    B. Jager, L. Reina and D. Wackeroth,Higgs boson production in association with b jets in the POWHEG BOX, Phys. Rev. D93 (2016) 014030, [1509.05843]

    2016 arXiv

  97. [108]

    Kinoshita,Mass singularities of Feynman amplitudes, J

    T. Kinoshita,Mass singularities of Feynman amplitudes, J. Math. Phys.3 (1962) 650–677

    1962

  98. [109]

    T. D. Lee and M. Nauenberg,Degenerate Systems and Mass Singularities, Phys. Rev. 133 (1964) B1549–B1562

    1964

  99. [110]

    Cabouat and T

    B. Cabouat and T. Sjöstrand,Some Dipole Shower Studies, Eur. Phys. J. C78 (2018) 226, [1710.00391]

    2018 arXiv

  100. [111]

    Czakon, A

    M. Czakon, A. Mitov and R. Poncelet,Infrared-safe flavoured anti-kT jets, JHEP 04 (2023) 138, [2205.11879]

    2023 arXiv

  101. [112]

    Gauld, A

    R. Gauld, A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, E. W. N. Glover, A. Huss, A. R. Garcia and G. Stagnitto,NNLO QCD predictions for Z-boson production in association with a charm jet within the LHCb fiducial region, Eur. Phys. J. C83 (2023) 336, [2302.12844]. – 52 –

    2023 arXiv

  102. [113]

    Caola, R

    F. Caola, R. Grabarczyk, M. L. Hutt, G. P. Salam, L. Scyboz and J. Thaler,Flavored jets with exact anti-kt kinematics and tests of infrared and collinear safety, Phys. Rev. D108 (2023) 094010, [2306.07314]

    2023 arXiv

  103. [114]

    Buckley and C

    A. Buckley and C. Pollard,QCD-aware partonic jet clustering for truth-jet flavour labelling, Eur. Phys. J. C76 (2016) 71, [1507.00508]

    2016 arXiv

  104. [115]

    Caletti, A

    S. Caletti, A. J. Larkoski, S. Marzani and D. Reichelt,Practical jet flavour through NNLO, Eur. Phys. J. C82 (2022) 632, [2205.01109]

    2022 arXiv

  105. [116]

    Caletti, A

    S. Caletti, A. J. Larkoski, S. Marzani and D. Reichelt,A fragmentation approach to jet flavor, JHEP 10 (2022) 158, [2205.01117]

    2022 arXiv

  106. [117]

    Gauld, J

    R. Gauld, J. Mazzitelli, A. Ratti, M. Wiesemann and G. Zanderighi,In preparation,

  107. [118]

    Dulat, T.-J

    S. Dulat, T.-J. Hou, J. Gao, M. Guzzi, J. Huston, P. Nadolsky, J. Pumplin, C. Schmidt, D. Stump and C. P. Yuan,New parton distribution functions from a global analysis of quantum chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. D93 (2016) 033006, [1506.07443]

    2016 arXiv

  108. [119]

    Alwall, R

    J. Alwall, R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer, H. S. Shao, T. Stelzer, P. Torrielli and M. Zaro,The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations, JHEP 07 (...

    2014 arXiv

  109. [120]

    Heinrich, S

    G. Heinrich, S. P. Jones, M. Kerner, G. Luisoni and E. Vryonidou,NLO predictions for Higgs boson pair production with full top quark mass dependence matched to parton showers, JHEP 08 (2017) 088, [1703.09252]

    2017 arXiv

  110. [121]

    Aad et al.,Search for Higgs boson pair production in the two bottom quarks plus two photons final state inpp collisions at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys

    ATLAScollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Search for Higgs boson pair production in the two bottom quarks plus two photons final state inpp collisions at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D106 (2022) 052001, [2112.11876]

    2022 arXiv

  111. [122]

    Gauld,A massive variable flavour number scheme for the Drell-Yan process, SciPost Phys

    R. Gauld,A massive variable flavour number scheme for the Drell-Yan process, SciPost Phys. 12 (2022) 024, [2107.01226]

    2022 arXiv

  112. [123]

    Guzzi, P

    M. Guzzi, P. Nadolsky, L. Reina, D. Wackeroth and K. Xie,A general mass variable flavor number scheme forZ boson production in association with a heavy quark at hadron colliders, 2410.03876. – 53 –

    arXiv

Pith tools

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