Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 85 references

Two-loop form factors for $P$-wave quarkonium production and decay

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Analytic two-loop form factors for P-wave quarkonium are computed for the first time in three of the four channels, and the fourth is upgraded from numerical to fully analytic.

desk verdict A genuinely new two-loop calculation for P-wave quarkonium with a real structural insight; the main soft spot is an asserted but undemonstrated IBP closure that partial cross-checks mitigate. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.04188 v2 pith:O2GBUKHL submitted 2025-01-07 hep-ph nucl-th

Melih A. Ozcelik This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phnucl-th
keywords two-loopformfactorsP-wavequarkoniumNRQCDfactorisationhelicityamplitudesmasterintegralsCoulombsingularity3S1[8]factorchi_QJproductionanddecay
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 paper presents analytic two-loop form factors for the production and decay of spin-triplet P-wave quarkonium states, the $\chi_{Q,J}$ family. The author computes the helicity amplitudes for $\gamma\gamma \leftrightarrow {}^3P_J^{[1]}$, $gg \leftrightarrow {}^3P_J^{[1]}$, $\gamma g \leftrightarrow {}^3P_J^{[8]}$ and $gg \leftrightarrow {}^3P_J^{[8]}$, where $[1]$ and $[8]$ denote colour-singlet and colour-octet; the last three channels were previously unknown and the first was known only numerically. The two-loop results are expressed through the same 76 master integrals used in the S-wave companion calculation and are evaluated to 20-digit accuracy, with hard functions that can feed NNLO predictions for charmonium and bottomonium. The paper also uncovers a new NRQCD infrared pole in the $gg$ channel whose cancellation requires including the $gg \leftrightarrow {}^3S_1^{[8]}$ form factor, restoring factorisation through the higher Fock state $|{}^3S_1^{[8]} g\rangle$.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the set of 76 two-loop master integrals shared with the pseudo-scalar S-wave calculation, combined with a helicity projection onto the three Lorentz structures $T_1,T_2,T_3$ that define the P-wave amplitude. The projection is done in $d$ dimensions, which matters because the $c_1$ coefficient vanishes at tree level but carries a two-loop pole, so a four-dimensional reduction would miss finite pieces in the $A_3$ helicity amplitude. The second key element is the extended NRQCD subtraction factor $Z_{\rm NRQCD} = Z_{\rm Coul.} + Z_{{}^3S_1^{[8]}}$, a matrix in helicity space whose off-diagonal entries link the $A_2$ and $A_3$ helicity amplitudes of $gg \leftrightarrow {}^3P_J$ to the one-loop $gg \leftrightarrow {}^3S_1^{[8]}$ amplitude $A_4$. The new cross anomalous dimensions $\gamma_{{}^3P_J^{[1]} {}^3S_1^{[8]}} = -C_A/3$ and $\gamma_{{}^3P_J^{[8]} {}^3S_1^{[8]}} = -C_A/6$ encode the scale dependence $\mu_\Lambda$ of this mixing.

What would settle it

Independently IBP-reduce the P-wave two-loop integral families and check for any additional master integral at any order in $\epsilon$, or recompute one helicity amplitude, for example the two-loop $A_3$ coefficient of $\gamma\gamma \leftrightarrow {}^3P_0^{[1]}$ with value $-9.1475107737851465282$, by an independent numerical method and compare to the 20-digit value.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper claims to complete the two-loop short-distance input for $\chi_{Q,J}$ phenomenology: analytic results for all three helicity form factors of $\gamma\gamma \leftrightarrow {}^3P_J^{[1]}$, validated against the earlier numerical computation, and first-time results for $gg \leftrightarrow {}^3P_J^{[1]}$, $\gamma g \leftrightarrow {}^3P_J^{[8]}$ and $gg \leftrightarrow {}^3P_J^{[8]}$. It finds that the bare two-loop amplitudes reduce, via integration-by-parts identities, to the 76 master integrals already evaluated analytically in the companion paper, whose special functions include multiple polylogarithms and elliptic generalisations. After UV renormalisation and subtraction of standard QCD IR singularities, the remaining NRQCD pole is the expected Coulomb singularity in the $\gamma\gamma$ and $\gamma g$ channels; in the $gg$ channels, however, an additional pole appears only in the helicity configurations with $J_z = 0$ and $\lambda_1 = \lambda_2 = \pm 1$. The paper traces this pole to the transition ${}^3P_J^{[1,8]} \to {}^3S_1^{[8]} + g$ with an ultra-soft gluon, and shows that including the one-loop $gg \leftrightarrow {}^3S_1^{[8]}$ form factor, computed here with its $O(\epsilon)$ term, cancels it and restores NRQCD factorisation.

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on the claim that the P-wave two-loop integrals are spanned, after integration-by-parts reduction, by the same 76 master integrals already computed in the companion paper, a statement the paper makes as a confirmed observation rather than showing the full reduction.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The $gg \leftrightarrow {}^3P_J^{[1]}$ hard functions can now be combined with existing LDMEs and parton distributions to build the virtual NNLO contribution to inclusive $\chi_{Q,J}$ hadroproduction.
  • The $\gamma\gamma \leftrightarrow {}^3P_J^{[1]}$ analytic results upgrade the di-photon decay of $\chi_{c0,2}$ from numerical to fully analytic NNLO, with 20-digit numerics.
  • The new one-loop $gg \leftrightarrow {}^3S_1^{[8]}$ form factor supplies the other NNLO ingredient needed for $\chi_{Q,J}$ production and decay in the S-wave channel that shares the same velocity power counting.
  • The colour-octet Coulomb anomalous dimensions, obtained here for the first time, provide the infrared boundary condition for octet P-wave production, relevant for $J/\psi$ and $\Upsilon$ phenomenology at higher orders.
  • The restored factorisation via the $|{}^3S_1^{[8]} g\rangle$ Fock state gives a concrete mechanism for the previously unseen pole, so the finite remainders are scheme-consistent and scale-dependent in the expected way.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same pole-cancellation mechanism should recur in other C-even quarkonium channels with $L \ge 1$ and gluon initial states, since it only uses the derivative expansion in the relative momentum and the intermediate ${}^3S_1^{[8]}$ state; D-wave channels present a natural place to look.
  • The $d$-dimensional helicity projection is not optional: the paper's own comparison with the earlier numerical gamma-gamma computation shows that the $d$ versus four-dimensional treatment only matters for $A_3$, so future implementations of these hard functions should keep the $\epsilon$-dependent projectors.
  • The newly computed $O(\epsilon)$ term of the $gg \leftrightarrow {}^3S_1^{[8]}$ form factor, needed for the pole cancellation here, is likely needed in the same way for NNLO predictions of $J/\psi$ and $\Upsilon$ polarisation.
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 manuscript computes analytic two-loop form factors and helicity amplitudes for the P-wave NRQCD channels gamma-gamma -> 3P_J[1], g-g -> 3P_J[1], gamma-g -> 3P_J[8], and g-g -> 3P_J[8]. The calculation uses dimensional regularization, projects the heavy-quark pair onto a P-wave state via a derivative in the relative momentum q, performs IBP reduction, and expresses all bare amplitudes in terms of the 76 master integrals of the companion papers [32,41]. After on-shell and MS-bar renormalization, the authors subtract standard QCD IR singularities and an NRQCD subtraction factor Z_NRQCD. A central new claim is that the gg channels contain, in addition to the Coulomb singularity, a new NRQCD pole that is cancelled only after including the one-loop form factor gg -> 3S_1[8] through a helicity-space matrix in Z_NRQCD. The paper provides finite remainders, hard functions with scale dependence, 20-digit numerical bases, and analytic expressions in Appendix F and in electronic form.

Significance. If the results are correct, this is a substantial step for quarkonium physics: it supplies the first analytic two-loop results for the P-wave channels gg -> 3P_J[1], gamma-g -> 3P_J[8] and gg -> 3P_J[8], improves the previously numerical gamma-gamma channel, and identifies a previously unnoticed NRQCD pole structure whose cancellation requires the gg -> 3S_1[8] form factor. The paper ships no fitted parameters, agrees with the independent numerical calculation of ref. [38] for gamma-gamma, and its one-loop gg -> 3S_1[8] result agrees with refs. [82,84] up to the reported order. The new P-wave channels lack independent external checks, and the central technical assumption is the closure of the IBP reduction on the same 76 master integrals as the S-wave case; that assumption is currently asserted rather than demonstrated.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2, footnote 9; §7] The statement that all two-loop P-wave integrals reduce via IBP to the same 76 master integrals as the 1S0 case is load-bearing but is only asserted. Equation (2.6) differentiates in q before setting q=0, which produces raised propagator powers and numerator insertions; after partial-fraction decomposition and IBP those objects can, in principle, generate new master integrals at a given order in epsilon. Since every bare amplitude in Section 3 and every finite remainder in Section 6 is expressed as a linear combination of the 76 master integrals, a single missing master would invalidate all four channels, not just one helicity configuration. Please supply the reduction evidence: for example, per-topology integral counts before and after IBP, the master-integral count at each epsilon order, and a check that the reduction identities close. Uploading reduction tables to the ancillary directory would be sufficient.
  2. [§5, Eqs. (5.6)-(5.20)] The cancellation of the new NRQCD singularity is the main conceptual claim of the paper, but the demonstration is implicit. Please show explicitly that, after applying the matrix Z_NRQCD defined in Eqs. (5.17)-(5.20), the pole part of Z_IR^{-1} F_{p,A_i} in the gg channels is exactly reproduced by the Coulomb and cross anomalous dimensions of Eqs. (5.7), (5.12), (5.14) and (5.15), and that no 1/epsilon terms remain in F^fin at order alpha_s^{q+2} for each colour structure. This check is the minimal evidence that the new pole has been correctly assigned to the |3S_1[8] g> Fock-state contribution rather than subtracted by an accidental choice of Z_NRQCD.
  3. [§6.1 and §6.2] The agreement with ref. [38] is the only independent two-loop check of a P-wave channel, but it is reported only as 'overall agreement' without quantitative detail. Since the new gg and gamma-g channels have no external verification, this cross-check carries substantial weight. Please provide a side-by-side numerical table of the three helicity amplitudes with the results of ref. [38], or state exactly how many digits agree for each amplitude and, where relevant, for each colour contribution. This is necessary for readers to verify the claimed cross-check and to assess the precision statement made in Section 7.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§6, Eq. (6.3)] The term Gfin,(1) D(1)_muLambda in Eq. (6.3) is introduced after the finite remainder Ffin,(1)_{3S1[8],A4} has been defined in Appendix D; please state explicitly at which scale Ffin,(1)_{3S1[8],A4} is to be evaluated and how the one-loop scale dependence is transferred to the D(1)_muLambda term.
  2. [§6.1] The 20-digit numerical bases in Eqs. (6.18)-(6.68) would be easier to use if the inline identifications such as a(2)_1 = a(2)_{γγ,[1],A1;FF} were collected into a table that also gives the corresponding variables in the electronic file, since the reader may otherwise need to search through several paragraphs to assemble the mapping.
  3. [§2, footnote 9] The speculative sentence about D-wave states ('This may apply presumably also to C-even quarkonia with higher L states...') is not needed for the present results and should be removed or explicitly labelled as a conjecture.
  4. [§6.2] The statement that the light-by-light contribution proportional to n_h in ref. [38] 'has uncertainties in the last two digits' would be more useful if it identified which amplitude and coefficient this refers to and gave the corresponding numbers from both calculations.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the derivation is self-contained and externally cross-checked, not reduced to its own inputs.

full rationale

The central claim is the analytic computation of two-loop P-wave form factors. The inputs from prior work are the 76 master integrals of the companion paper [41] and the Z_IR subtraction factor from [32]; these are stated as independent external ingredients with their own analytic derivations and high-precision numerics, and they do not incorporate the P-wave form factors being computed. The calculation proceeds by amplitude generation, projection with eqs. (2.13)-(2.18), IBP reduction, UV renormalisation with standard Z factors, and IR/NRQCD subtraction via Z_IR and Z_NRQCD. The new cross anomalous dimensions are extracted from the computed pole structure via eqs. (5.6)-(5.16), not chosen to reproduce a known result. The gamma-gamma channel is compared with the independent numerical computation in ref. [38] and agrees; the one-loop gg -> 3S1[8] amplitude agrees with refs. [82,84]. No parameter is fitted to the quantities being predicted, and no 'prediction' is imposed by definition. The only weakness is the asserted-but-not-shown closure of the IBP reduction to the same 76 master integrals in footnote 9; that is a checkable correctness risk, not a circularity, because the master integrals themselves are external inputs and the reduction claim is not derived from the final form factors.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The calculation introduces no fitted parameters and no new physical entities. The central claim rests on the standard machinery of NRQCD factorization, IBP reduction, and the previously computed master integrals from the companion paper [41], which are treated as external inputs with their own published checks.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption NRQCD factorization separates short-distance coefficients from long-distance matrix elements.
    Invoked in Eq. (2.1); the entire paper computes short-distance coefficients under this factorization, and the factorization is assumed to hold at NNLO.
  • standard math The same 76 master integrals computed in ref. [41] form a complete basis for the P-wave two-loop integrals after IBP reduction.
    Stated in Section 2 and footnote 9; if the P-wave integrals require additional master integrals, the analytic results would be incomplete.
  • standard math The Peraro-Tancredi projection-operator formalism in d dimensions correctly extracts the form factor coefficients.
    Used in Section 2, eqs. (2.13)-(2.19); the paper argues the d-dimensional decomposition is crucial for the A3 helicity amplitude.
  • domain assumption The ultra-soft gluon transition 3P_J[1,8] to 3S1[8] plus g produces the new simple pole, cancellable by the Z_NRQCD matrix.
    Section 5, eqs. (5.12)-(5.20); this is the paper's new physical mechanism, motivated by Fig. 2a but not independently verified beyond the pole structure.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Two-loop form factors for $P$-wave quarkonium production and decay." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/O2GBUKHL

@misc{pith2026250104188,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Two-loop form factors for $P$-wave quarkonium production and decay},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/O2GBUKHL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.04188}
}
abstract

We present the analytical results for the two-loop form factors needed for $\chi_{Q,J}$ production and decay. We consider the two-loop corrections to the process $\gamma \gamma \leftrightarrow {^3 P_J^{[1]}}$, that has been known only numerically before, and the processes $gg \leftrightarrow {^3 P_J^{[1]}}$, $\gamma g \leftrightarrow {^3 P_J^{[8]}}$ and $gg \leftrightarrow {^3 P_J^{[8]}}$, which have not been computed before. We observe that the NRQCD pole structure of the two-loop amplitude in the $gg$ channel is more involved for the spin-triplet $P$-wave case than for the pseudo-scalar $S$-wave case. It involves in addition to the standard Coulomb singularity also a new singularity whose cancellation requires the inclusion of the $gg \leftrightarrow {^3S_1^{[8]}}$ form factor. We give the high precision numerical results for the hard functions that can be used to compute $\chi_{Q,J}$ production and decay up to NNLO accuracy.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

85 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [8]

    Top-quark mass measurements: review and perspectives

    G. Cortiana, Top-quark mass measurements: review and perspectives , Rev. Phys. 1 (2016) 60 [1510.04483]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  2. [38]

    W.-L. Sang, F. Feng, Y. Jia and S.-R. Liang, Next-to-next-to-leading-order QCD corrections to χc0,2 → γγ , Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 111501 [ 1511.06288]

    arXiv 2016

  3. [1]

    d’Enterria et al., The strong coupling constant: state of the art and the decade ahead , J

    D. d’Enterria et al., The strong coupling constant: state of the art and the decade ahead , J. Phys. G 51 (2024) 090501 [ 2203.08271]

    arXiv 2024

  4. [2]

    d’Enterria and P.Z

    D. d’Enterria and P.Z. Skands, eds., Proceedings, High-Precisionαs Measurements from LHC to FCC-ee: Geneva, Switzerland, October 2-13, 2015 , (Geneva), CERN, 12, 2015

    2015

  5. [3]

    Nason and G

    P. Nason and G. Zanderighi, Fits of αs using power corrections in the three-jet region , JHEP 06 (2023) 058 [ 2301.03607]

    arXiv 2023

  6. [4]

    Benitez, A.H

    M.A. Benitez, A.H. Hoang, V. Mateu, I.W. Stewart and G. Vita, On Determining αs(mZ) from Dijets in e+e− Thrust, 2412.15164. – 62 –

    arXiv

  7. [5]

    Azzi et al., Report from Working Group 1: Standard Model Physics at the HL-LHC and HE-LHC, CERN Yellow Rep

    P. Azzi et al., Report from Working Group 1: Standard Model Physics at the HL-LHC and HE-LHC, CERN Yellow Rep. Monogr. 7 (2019) 1 [ 1902.04070]

    arXiv 2019

  8. [6]

    Determination of the top quark mass from leptonic observables

    S. Frixione and A. Mitov, Determination of the top quark mass from leptonic observables , JHEP 09 (2014) 012 [ 1407.2763]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2014

Show all 85 references
  1. [7]

    Juste, S

    A. Juste, S. Mantry, A. Mitov, A. Penin, P. Skands, E. Varnes et al., Determination of the top quark mass circa 2013: methods, subtleties, perspectives , Eur. Phys. J. C 74 (2014) 3119 [1310.0799]

    2014 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Travaglini et al., The SAGEX review on scattering amplitudes , J

    G. Travaglini et al., The SAGEX review on scattering amplitudes , J. Phys. A 55 (2022) 443001 [2203.13011]

    2022 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Abreu, R

    S. Abreu, R. Britto and C. Duhr, The SAGEX review on scattering amplitudes Chapter 3: Mathematical structures in Feynman integrals , J. Phys. A 55 (2022) 443004 [ 2203.13014]

    2022 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Weinzierl, Feynman Integrals

    S. Weinzierl, Feynman Integrals. A Comprehensive Treatment for Students and Researchers , UNITEXT for Physics, Springer (2022), 10.1007/978-3-030-99558-4, [ 2201.03593]

    2022 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Halzen, F

    F. Halzen, F. Herzog, E.W.N. Glover and A.D. Martin, The J/ψ as a Trigger in ¯pp Collisions, Phys. Rev. D 30 (1984) 700

    1984

  6. [13]

    Martin, R.G

    A.D. Martin, R.G. Roberts and W.J. Stirling, Structure Function Analysis and psi, Jet, W, Z Production: Pinning Down the Gluon , Phys. Rev. D 37 (1988) 1161

    1988

  7. [14]

    Martin, C.K

    A.D. Martin, C.K. Ng and W.J. Stirling, Inelastic Leptoproduction of J/ψ as a Probe of the Small X Behavior of the Gluon Structure Function , Phys. Lett. B 191 (1987) 200

    1987

  8. [15]

    Jung, G.A

    H. Jung, G.A. Schuler and J. Terron, J / psi production mechanisms and determination of the gluon density at HERA , Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 7 (1992) 7955

    1992

  9. [16]

    Lansberg and M.A

    J.-P. Lansberg and M.A. Ozcelik, Curing the unphysical behaviour of NLO quarkonium production at the LHC and its relevance to constrain the gluon PDF at low scales , Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 497 [ 2012.00702]

    2021 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Kr¨ amer,Quarkonium production at high-energy colliders , Prog

    M. Kr¨ amer,Quarkonium production at high-energy colliders , Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 47 (2001) 141 [ hep-ph/0106120]

    2001 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Lansberg, New Observables in Inclusive Production of Quarkonia , Phys

    J.-P. Lansberg, New Observables in Inclusive Production of Quarkonia , Phys. Rept. 889 (2020) 1 [ 1903.09185]

    2020 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Quarkonium Working Groupcollaboration, Heavy quarkonium physics , hep-ph/0412158

    arXiv

  13. [20]

    Lansberg, J/ψ, ψ ’ and Υ production at hadron colliders: A Review , Int

    J.P. Lansberg, J/ψ, ψ ’ and Υ production at hadron colliders: A Review , Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 21 (2006) 3857 [ hep-ph/0602091]

    2006 arXiv

  14. [21]

    Andronic et al., Heavy-flavour and quarkonium production in the LHC era: from proton–proton to heavy-ion collisions , Eur

    A. Andronic et al., Heavy-flavour and quarkonium production in the LHC era: from proton–proton to heavy-ion collisions , Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 107 [ 1506.03981]

    2016 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Chapon et al., Prospects for quarkonium studies at the high-luminosity LHC , Prog

    E. Chapon et al., Prospects for quarkonium studies at the high-luminosity LHC , Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 122 (2022) 103906 [ 2012.14161]

    2022 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Ozcelik, Constraining gluon PDFs with quarkonium production , PoS DIS2019 (2019) 159 [1907.01400]

    M.A. Ozcelik, Constraining gluon PDFs with quarkonium production , PoS DIS2019 (2019) 159 [1907.01400]

    2019 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Schuler, Quarkonium production and decays , hep-ph/9403387

    G.A. Schuler, Quarkonium production and decays , hep-ph/9403387. – 63 –

    arXiv

  18. [25]

    Kr¨ amer,QCD corrections to inelastic J / psi photoproduction , Nucl

    M. Kr¨ amer,QCD corrections to inelastic J / psi photoproduction , Nucl. Phys. B 459 (1996) 3 [hep-ph/9508409]

    1996 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Mangano and A

    M.L. Mangano and A. Petrelli, NLO quarkonium production in hadronic collisions , Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 12 (1997) 3887 [ hep-ph/9610364]

    1997 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Colpani Serri, Y

    A. Colpani Serri, Y. Feng, C. Flore, J.-P. Lansberg, M.A. Ozcelik, H.-S. Shao et al., Revisiting NLO QCD corrections to total inclusive J/ψ and Υ photoproduction cross sections in lepton-proton collisions , Phys. Lett. B 835 (2022) 137556 [ 2112.05060]

    2022 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Lansberg, M

    J.-P. Lansberg, M. Nefedov and M.A. Ozcelik, Matching next-to-leading-order and high-energy-resummed calculations of heavy-quarkonium-hadroproduction cross sections, JHEP 05 (2022) 083 [ 2112.06789]

    2022 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Lansberg, M

    J.-P. Lansberg, M. Nefedov and M.A. Ozcelik, Curing the high-energy perturbative instability of vector-quarkonium-photoproduction cross sections at order αα3 s with high-energy factorisation, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (2024) 351 [ 2306.02425]

    2024 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Kuhn and E

    J.H. Kuhn and E. Mirkes, QCD corrections to toponium production at hadron colliders , Phys. Rev. D 48 (1993) 179 [ hep-ph/9301204]

    1993 arXiv

  24. [31]

    Petrelli, M

    A. Petrelli, M. Cacciari, M. Greco, F. Maltoni and M.L. Mangano, NLO production and decay of quarkonium , Nucl. Phys. B 514 (1998) 245 [ hep-ph/9707223]

    1998 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Abreu, M

    S. Abreu, M. Becchetti, C. Duhr and M.A. Ozcelik, Two-loop form factors for pseudo-scalar quarkonium production and decay , JHEP 02 (2023) 250 [ 2211.08838]

    2023 arXiv

  26. [33]

    Bodwin, E

    G.T. Bodwin, E. Braaten and G.P. Lepage, Rigorous QCD analysis of inclusive annihilation and production of heavy quarkonium , Phys. Rev. D 51 (1995) 1125 [ hep-ph/9407339]

    1995 arXiv

  27. [34]

    Bertulani, S.R

    C.A. Bertulani, S.R. Klein and J. Nystrand, Physics of ultra-peripheral nuclear collisions , Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 55 (2005) 271 [ nucl-ex/0502005]

    2005 arXiv

  28. [35]

    Baltz, The Physics of Ultraperipheral Collisions at the LHC , Phys

    A.J. Baltz, The Physics of Ultraperipheral Collisions at the LHC , Phys. Rept. 458 (2008) 1 [0706.3356]

    2008 arXiv

  29. [36]

    Contreras and J.D

    J.G. Contreras and J.D. Tapia Takaki, Ultra-peripheral heavy-ion collisions at the LHC , Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 30 (2015) 1542012

    2015

  30. [37]

    Shao and D

    H.-S. Shao and D. d’Enterria, gamma-UPC: automated generation of exclusive photon-photon processes in ultraperipheral proton and nuclear collisions with varying form factors , JHEP 09 (2022) 248 [ 2207.03012]

    2022 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Chetyrkin, A.L

    K.G. Chetyrkin, A.L. Kataev and F.V. Tkachov, Higher Order Corrections to Sigma-t (e+ e- —> Hadrons) in Quantum Chromodynamics , Phys. Lett. B 85 (1979) 277

    1979

  32. [40]

    Chetyrkin and F.V

    K.G. Chetyrkin and F.V. Tkachov, Integration by Parts: The Algorithm to Calculate beta Functions in 4 Loops , Nucl. Phys. B 192 (1981) 159

    1981

  33. [41]

    Abreu, M

    S. Abreu, M. Becchetti, C. Duhr and M.A. Ozcelik, Two-loop master integrals for pseudo-scalar quarkonium and leptonium production and decay , JHEP 09 (2022) 194 [2206.03848]

    2022 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Goncharov, Multiple polylogarithms and mixed Tate motives , math/0103059

    A.B. Goncharov, Multiple polylogarithms and mixed Tate motives , math/0103059

    arXiv

  35. [43]

    Brown and A

    F.C.S. Brown and A. Levin, Multiple elliptic polylogarithms , 1110.6917. – 64 –

    arXiv

  36. [44]

    Broedel, C.R

    J. Broedel, C.R. Mafra, N. Matthes and O. Schlotterer, Elliptic multiple zeta values and one-loop superstring amplitudes , JHEP 07 (2015) 112 [ 1412.5535]

    2015 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Broedel, C

    J. Broedel, C. Duhr, F. Dulat and L. Tancredi, Elliptic polylogarithms and iterated integrals on elliptic curves. Part I: general formalism , JHEP 05 (2018) 093 [ 1712.07089]

    2018 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Manin, Iterated integrals of modular forms and noncommutative modular symbols , in Algebraic geometry and number theory , vol

    Y.I. Manin, Iterated integrals of modular forms and noncommutative modular symbols , in Algebraic geometry and number theory , vol. 253 of Progr. Math., (Boston), pp. 565–597, Birkh¨ auser Boston, 2006 [math/0502576]

    2006 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Brown, Multiple modular values and the relative completion of the fundamental group of M1,1, 1407.5167v4

    F. Brown, Multiple modular values and the relative completion of the fundamental group of M1,1, 1407.5167v4

    arXiv

  40. [48]

    Hahn, Generating Feynman diagrams and amplitudes with FeynArts 3 , Comput

    T. Hahn, Generating Feynman diagrams and amplitudes with FeynArts 3 , Comput. Phys. Commun. 140 (2001) 418 [ hep-ph/0012260]

    2001 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Shtabovenko, R

    V. Shtabovenko, R. Mertig and F. Orellana, New Developments in FeynCalc 9.0 , Comput. Phys. Commun. 207 (2016) 432 [ 1601.01167]

    2016 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Shtabovenko, R

    V. Shtabovenko, R. Mertig and F. Orellana, FeynCalc 9.3: New features and improvements , Comput. Phys. Commun. 256 (2020) 107478 [ 2001.04407]

    2020 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Peraro and L

    T. Peraro and L. Tancredi, Physical projectors for multi-leg helicity amplitudes , JHEP 07 (2019) 114 [ 1906.03298]

    2019 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Peraro and L

    T. Peraro and L. Tancredi, Tensor decomposition for bosonic and fermionic scattering amplitudes, Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 054042 [ 2012.00820]

    2021 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Landau, On the angular momentum of a system of two photons , Dokl

    L.D. Landau, On the angular momentum of a system of two photons , Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 60 (1948) 207

    1948

  46. [54]

    Yang, Selection Rules for the Dematerialization of a Particle Into Two Photons , Phys

    C.-N. Yang, Selection Rules for the Dematerialization of a Particle Into Two Photons , Phys. Rev. 77 (1950) 242

    1950

  47. [55]

    Feng, Apart: A Generalized Mathematica Apart Function , Comput

    F. Feng, Apart: A Generalized Mathematica Apart Function , Comput. Phys. Commun. 183 (2012) 2158 [ 1204.2314]

    2012 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Smirnov, Algorithm FIRE – Feynman Integral REduction , JHEP 10 (2008) 107 [0807.3243]

    A.V. Smirnov, Algorithm FIRE – Feynman Integral REduction , JHEP 10 (2008) 107 [0807.3243]

    2008 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Smirnov, FIRE5: a C++ implementation of Feynman Integral REduction , Comput

    A.V. Smirnov, FIRE5: a C++ implementation of Feynman Integral REduction , Comput. Phys. Commun. 189 (2015) 182 [ 1408.2372]

    2015 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Smirnov and F.S

    A.V. Smirnov and F.S. Chuharev, FIRE6: Feynman Integral REduction with Modular Arithmetic, Comput. Phys. Commun. 247 (2020) 106877 [ 1901.07808]

    2020 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Smirnov and M

    A.V. Smirnov and M. Zeng, FIRE 6.5: Feynman integral reduction with new simplification library, Comput. Phys. Commun. 302 (2024) 109261 [ 2311.02370]

    2024 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Lee, Presenting LiteRed: a tool for the Loop InTEgrals REDuction , 1212.2685

    R.N. Lee, Presenting LiteRed: a tool for the Loop InTEgrals REDuction , 1212.2685

    arXiv

  53. [61]

    Lee, LiteRed 1.4: a powerful tool for reduction of multiloop integrals , J

    R.N. Lee, LiteRed 1.4: a powerful tool for reduction of multiloop integrals , J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 523 (2014) 012059 [ 1310.1145]

    2014 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Maierh¨ ofer, J

    P. Maierh¨ ofer, J. Usovitsch and P. Uwer,Kira—A Feynman integral reduction program, Comput. Phys. Commun. 230 (2018) 99 [ 1705.05610]

    2018 arXiv

  55. [63]

    B¨ arnreuther, M

    P. B¨ arnreuther, M. Czakon and P. Fiedler,Virtual amplitudes and threshold behaviour of hadronic top-quark pair-production cross sections , JHEP 02 (2014) 078 [ 1312.6279]. – 65 –

    2014 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Broadhurst, J

    D.J. Broadhurst, J. Fleischer and O.V. Tarasov, Two loop two point functions with masses: Asymptotic expansions and Taylor series, in any dimension , Z. Phys. C 60 (1993) 287 [hep-ph/9304303]

    1993 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Melnikov and T.v

    K. Melnikov and T.v. Ritbergen, The Three loop relation between the MS-bar and the pole quark masses , Phys. Lett. B 482 (2000) 99 [ hep-ph/9912391]

    2000 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Mitov and S

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

    2007 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Bernreuther and W

    W. Bernreuther and W. Wetzel, Decoupling of Heavy Quarks in the Minimal Subtraction Scheme, Nucl. Phys. B 197 (1982) 228

    1982

  60. [68]

    Hoang and P

    A.H. Hoang and P. Ruiz-Femenia, Heavy pair production currents with general quantum numbers in dimensionally regularized NRQCD , Phys. Rev. D 74 (2006) 114016 [hep-ph/0609151]

    2006 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Bodwin, E

    G.T. Bodwin, E. Braaten and G.P. Lepage, Rigorous QCD predictions for decays of P wave quarkonia, Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) R1914 [ hep-lat/9205006]

    1992 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Huang and K.-T

    H.-W. Huang and K.-T. Chao, QCD predictions for annihilation decays of P wave quarkonia to next-to-leading order in alpha-s , Phys. Rev. D 54 (1996) 6850 [ hep-ph/9606220]

    1996 arXiv

  63. [71]

    A H, H.-S

    A. A H, H.-S. Shao and L. Simon, FKS subtraction for quarkonium production at NLO , JHEP 07 (2024) 050 [ 2402.19221]

    2024 arXiv

  64. [72]

    J.H. Kuhn, J. Kaplan and E.G.O. Safiani, Electromagnetic Annihilation of e+ e- Into Quarkonium States with Even Charge Conjugation , Nucl. Phys. B 157 (1979) 125

    1979

  65. [73]

    Yang and S

    D. Yang and S. Zhao, χQJ → l+l− within and beyond the Standard Model , Eur. Phys. J. C 72 (2012) 1996 [ 1203.3389]

    2012 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Kivel and M

    N. Kivel and M. Vanderhaeghen, χcJ → e+e− decays revisited, JHEP 02 (2016) 032 [1509.07375]

    2016 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Jia and J

    Y. Jia and J. Pan, A tale of Bethe logarithms: leptonic widths of χcJ and Lamb shift , 2411.18560

    arXiv

  68. [76]

    Cacciari, L

    M. Cacciari, L. Del Debbio, J.R. Espinosa, A.D. Polosa and M. Testa, A note on the fate of the Landau–Yang theorem in non-Abelian gauge theories , Phys. Lett. B 753 (2016) 476 [1509.07853]

    2016 arXiv

  69. [77]

    https://gitlab.com/onium_p_wave/two_loop_amplitudes

  70. [78]

    Berko and H.N

    S. Berko and H.N. Pendleton, POSITRONIUM, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 30 (1980) 543

    1980

  71. [79]

    Kumanov, Quantum electrodynamics in configuration representation

    K.A. Kumanov, Quantum electrodynamics in configuration representation. V: two-photon annihilation of positronium , Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 25 (1953) 385

    1953

  72. [80]

    Alekseev, Two-photon annihilation of positronium in the P-state , Sov

    A.I. Alekseev, Two-photon annihilation of positronium in the P-state , Sov. Phys. JETP 34 (1958) 826

    1958

  73. [81]

    Poppe, Exclusive Hadron Production in Two Photon Reactions , Int

    M. Poppe, Exclusive Hadron Production in Two Photon Reactions , Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 1 (1986) 545

    1986

  74. [82]

    Beenakker, R

    W. Beenakker, R. Kleiss and G. Lustermans, No Landau-Yang in QCD , 1508.07115

    arXiv

  75. [83]

    Pleitez, The angular momentum of two massless fields revisited , 1508.01394

    V. Pleitez, The angular momentum of two massless fields revisited , 1508.01394

    arXiv

  76. [84]

    J.P. Ma, J.X. Wang and S. Zhao, Breakdown of QCD Factorization for P-Wave Quarkonium Production at Low Transverse Momentum , Phys. Lett. B 737 (2014) 103 [ 1405.3373]. – 66 –

    2014 arXiv

  77. [85]

    https://gitlab.com/onium_pseudo_scalar/master_integrals. – 67 –

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.