Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 5 cited by

This paper claims that radiative-return processes e+e− → π+π−γ and e+e− → µ+µ−γ can now be simulated with exact NLO QED corrections matched to a parton shower, an accuracy level previously missing from a single generator.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 07:32 UTC pith:6P3537YT

load-bearing objection First NLOPS generator for radiative return channels; muon channel solid, pion channel needs the Phokhara discrepancy resolved and the F×sQED caveat sharpened before the hadronic accuracy claim lands. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2601.19530 v1 pith:6P3537YT submitted 2026-01-27 hep-ph hep-ex

Radiative return at NLOPS accuracy

Ettore Budassi , Carlo M. Carloni Calame , Marco Ghilardi , Andrea Gurgone , Guido Montagna , Mauro Moretti , Oreste Nicrosini , Fulvio Piccinini
show 1 more author
Francesco P. Ucci
This is my paper
classification hep-ph hep-ex
keywords radiative returnpion form factornext-to-leading orderparton showerQED correctionsmuon g-2initial-state radiationMonte Carlo event generation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper establishes that radiative-return processes e+e− → π+π−γ and e+e− → µ+µ−γ can now be simulated with the exact next-to-leading-order (NLO) QED corrections and with exponentiated multi-photon emission in a single Monte Carlo generator, an accuracy level that was previously missing. The calculation includes initial-state radiation, final-state radiation, and their interference, and for the pion channel dresses scalar-QED amplitudes with the pion form factor at appropriate virtualities. The authors show that multi-photon effects beyond NLO reach about one percent in important phase-space regions, so including them matters for sub-percent measurements of the pion form factor via radiative return — the input that drives data-driven determinations of the hadronic contribution to the muon's anomalous magnetic moment. If correct, this closes the gap between fixed-order NLO codes and fully exclusive event generation for these channels.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that, for the first time, the complete one-loop radiative corrections to e+e− → X+X−γ with X=π or µ, including initial-state radiation, final-state radiation, and their interference, can be matched to a parton shower without spoiling the exactness of the NLO result. The matching uses a soft-virtual factor built from the exact NLO correction and a Sudakov form factor that exponentiates the leading-logarithmic soft and collinear emissions, with exact matrix elements retained for one- and two-photon final states and a leading-log approximation for three or more photons. For the pion channel, non-perturbative input enters through the factorised scalar-QED prescriptio

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the NLOPS master formula dσ_NLOPS = Σ_n Π(ε,{p}) F_SV (1/n!) |M^J_n|^2 dΦ_n, in which Π is a Sudakov form factor exponentiating soft and collinear photon radiation, F_SV carries the exact NLO soft-virtual corrections, and M^J_n is the exact matrix element for n=1,2 and a leading-logarithmic approximation for n≥3. Photon emissions are organised by a CKKW-like clustering and mapping algorithm that selects the two hardest photons and maps the remaining kinematics so that resonant form factors are evaluated at the correct virtualities. This lets the shower preserve exact NLO accuracy while also generating exclusive multi-photon events. Non-perturbative pion structure e

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the factorised scalar-QED ansatz: point-like scalar-QED amplitudes remain valid once multiplied by the pion form factor at a single scale per amplitude, with structure-dependent corrections neglected — and the paper itself notes in Sec. 4.3 that some NLO forward-backward-asymmetry contributions will be affected by such effects; if pion compositeness inside the loops changes the result beyond the per-mille level, the claimed NLOPS accuracy for e+e−

What would settle it

Perform an independent calculation of the complete one-loop corrections to e+e− → π+π−γ with a dispersive or otherwise structure-dependent treatment of the pion (as the same authors outline for the two-pion process) and compare the pion invariant-mass distribution and forward-backward asymmetry with the factorised-sQED NLOPS prediction under KLOE-like cuts; a deviation larger than the quoted few-percent NLO correction would falsify the model. Alternatively, a precision measurement of the forward-backward asymmetry at large photon angles with sub-percent uncertainty would discriminate.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Experiments can now use a single generator with both exact NLO for the hard-photon signature and all-orders leading-log multi-photon emission, replacing the 0.5%-level theoretical systematics that came from missing higher-order radiation.
  • Multi-photon corrections beyond NLO are non-negligible — of order one percent in high invariant-mass tails and around the ρ resonance — so sub-percent pion form factor extraction requires them.
  • The π+π−γ/µ+µ−γ cross-section ratio is provided at NLOPS accuracy, which can reduce normalization uncertainties in experiments that divide hadronic by leptonic yields.
  • For fully exclusive events with two or more detected photons the predictions are only leading order plus leading-log resummation; that boundary defines where the new accuracy does not apply.
  • The matching reproduces the dominant part of the NNLO initial-state corrections (soft-soft, soft-virtual, virtual-virtual), so the first uncalculated terms are of order 0.1% at flavour-factory energies.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the ad hoc scale choices in the factorised scalar-QED treatment of real initial–final interference are replaced by a full dispersive treatment of pion compositeness, the size of the difference would directly test the safety of the pion-channel NLOPS claim.
  • The same phase-space multi-channel sampling and clustering tools look readily adaptable to other radiative channels, such as e+e− → K+K−γ, where resonant structure also matters.
  • A dedicated measurement of the forward-backward asymmetry in the large-angle configuration, where the NLO interference term is visible, would give an experimental handle on the pion-photon interaction model used by all generators.
  • Because the NLOPS matching here already captures the dominant α²L² terms, the same formulation is a plausible starting point toward full NNLOPS accuracy for radiative return.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents the first implementation of exact NLO corrections matched to a parton shower (NLOPS) for the radiative return processes e+e−→X+X−γ with X=π, μ. The calculation includes ISR, FSR, and their interference, using QED for the muon channel and a factorized scalar-QED (F×sQED) prescription for the pion channel. A novel PS matching is built on the exact one- and two-photon matrix elements, with LL resummation for additional photons. The authors validate the fixed-order part against Phokhara, McMule, Recola, and Alpha, check ε-independence of the NLOPS result, and compare the LL three-photon approximation with exact calculations. Phenomenological results are given for four realistic experimental scenarios, including invariant-mass distributions and forward–backward asymmetries. The central claim is that this provides NLOPS accuracy for the radiative pion and muon pair channels, with a public generator (BabaYaga@NLO) suitable for form-factor extraction at flavour factories.

Significance. If the hadronic-channel claim is fully established, this would be a valuable step beyond Phokhara: a single Monte Carlo generator would provide exact NLO corrections plus exclusive multi-photon resummation for both π+π−γ and μ+μ−γ, directly relevant for radiative-return measurements of the pion form factor and for the data-driven HVP contribution to (g−2)_μ. The paper contains several concrete strengths: the fixed-order NLO results are compared with independent generators; the ε-independence test (Fig. 6) and the exact-3γ comparisons (Fig. 7) support the internal consistency of the matching/PS construction; and the code is publicly available. However, the hadronic NLO claim rests on the F×sQED ansatz for the pion, whose model error is not quantified, and the unresolved discrepancy with Phokhara in the pion angular distributions (Fig. 5) is a concrete symptom of that modelling uncertainty. The central construction is coherent, but the hadronic validation is incomplete.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 2.1, Eqs. (2.12)–(2.13)] The hadronic-channel NLO claim rests on the F×sQED prescription, in which point-like sQED amplitudes are multiplied by Fπ(Q^2) at 'appropriate virtualities' that differ per amplitude for real IFI with two final-state photons (Eq. (2.13)). This is an ad hoc modelling choice, not derived from QCD; pion-structure effects inside loops are replaced by an external form factor, and structure-dependent corrections are omitted. The authors themselves state in Sec. 4.3 that some NLO IFI contributions to A_FB 'will be affected by these structure-dependent corrections' and list going beyond F×sQED as future work in Sec. 5. As it stands, the claimed 'full set of NLO corrections' for e+e−→π+π−γ is not established at the level of QED; it is exact NLO in a model. Please provide a quantitative estimate of the model uncertainty (e.g., by comparing with a VMD/ChPT treatment of the pion vertex, or by studyi
  2. [Sec. 4.2, Fig. 5] The comparison with Phokhara for the π+π−γ channel shows an unexplained discrepancy in the π± angular distributions. For the symmetric KLOE-I LA setup, the θ+ ratio deviates by up to ~2%; in the asymmetric B scenario, the Mππ distribution shows deviations of several percent across the spectrum. Since these observables are controlled by IFI and FSR, where the F×sQED modelling is most vulnerable, the discrepancy is a concrete symptom of the model error rather than a mere numerical issue. The internal cross-checks with a second loop calculation and with Alpha/Recola validate the algebra of the point-like amplitudes, but they do not validate the pion-structure prescription. Please investigate and either resolve the discrepancy (e.g., by identifying an input or convention mismatch with Phokhara) or estimate its impact on the form-factor extraction; as it stands, the hadronic validation is inc
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 3.2, Eq. (3.13)] The claim that the matching 'effectively captures the dominant part of the NNLO corrections' is supported only by comparison with the ISR subset of Fadin–Lee for the infrared-sensitive structures (log ε and α^2 L^2). The first omitted terms are O(α^2 L), estimated at ~0.1%. This is a reasonable estimate, but please phrase it as an estimate rather than a proof, and specify more explicitly which logarithmic orders are reproduced by the PS.
  2. [Sec. 4.1 and Table 3] Table 3 is labelled 'without vacuum polarization effects', but the pion form factor used in Sec. 4.1 is defined as a dressed form factor including vacuum polarisation effects. Please clarify what is switched off in Table 3 and avoid the ambiguous wording.
  3. [Sec. 2] The word 'pedex' appears in the text ('the pedex n counts the number of photons'); should be 'index'.
  4. [Fig. 7 and text] In the right panel of Fig. 7 and its caption, the resonance is written as 'J/Ψ' in the caption and 'J/ψ' in the text; please use a consistent notation.
  5. [Tab. 2] The fourth scenario is labelled only 'B' (presumably BABAR). Please spell out the scenario name in the table or caption for readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circular derivation: the NLOPS result is validated against independent generators; the F×sQED pion treatment is a stated modelling ansatz, not a fitted or self-cited prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation chain is self-contained rather than circular. The NLO amplitudes are computed with standard field-theoretic tools and independently cross-checked (FeynArts/FeynCalc/Collier vs FORM/LoopTools for the pion channel, Recola for the muon channel, Alpha for the pion channel), and the NLOPS matching formula Eq. (3.10) is constructed so that its O(alpha) expansion reproduces the exact NLO result; no equation reduces to a fitted quantity or to a prior output of the same code. The F×sQED treatment of Sec. 2.1 is an explicitly admitted modelling assumption: the pion form factor is an input inserted at 'appropriate virtualities' (Eqs. 2.12-2.13), and the authors state in Sec. 4.3 that some NLO IFI contributions to AFB 'will be affected by these structure-dependent corrections' and that a more refined treatment is left to future work. This is an unquantified model limitation, not circularity. Self-citations to prior BabaYaga@NLO/PS papers are present, but the new 2->3 implementation is validated for epsilon-independence and benchmarked against external generators (McMule, Phokhara, Recola, Alpha); the unresolved Phokhara discrepancy in pion angular distributions is a physical/model systematic issue, not evidence that the claimed NLOPS accuracy is forced by construction. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' own work.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard QED soft/collinear factorization, the F×sQED model for the pion, and the algorithmic assumption that the CKKW-like merging/mapping preserves LL accuracy. No free parameters are fitted to the target observables; form-factor and vacuum-polarization inputs are external.

free parameters (1)
  • Pion form factor resonance parameters (masses, widths, couplings, phases) = M_ρ=774.56 MeV, Γ_ρ=148.32 MeV, c_ρ′=0.14104 e^{i3.7797}, ... (see Table 1)
    External fit used to define Fπ(Q^2) in Eq. (4.1); the paper's pion-channel predictions inherit it. Not fitted in this paper.
axioms (4)
  • standard math QED factorization of soft and collinear singularities (YFS exponentiation and Altarelli-Parisi splitting functions for fermions and scalars)
    Basis of the PS algorithm in Eqs. (3.1)–(3.6); standard and well-established.
  • domain assumption F×sQED ansatz: point-like scalar QED amplitudes multiplied by the pion form factor at appropriate virtualities
    Used for NLO corrections to e+e−→π+π−γ (Sec. 2.1, Eqs. 2.12–2.13); not derived from QCD, structure-dependent corrections neglected.
  • domain assumption CKKW-like clustering and mapping preserves leading-logarithmic accuracy for n≥3 emissions
    Eq. (3.7) and Appendix D; validated against exact 3γ LO in limited phase-space regions (Fig. 7) but not proven generally.
  • domain assumption Exact two-photon matrix element captures resonant and hard dynamics sufficiently for the LL shower to be built on top
    Motivated in Sec. 3.1; checked only near the muon threshold and around the J/ψ resonance.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 38769 in / 12164 out tokens · 122481 ms · 2026-08-03T07:32:59.575441+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The radiative return, together with the energy scan, is the method used at flavour factories to measure the pion form factor, which is a crucial input for the data-driven dispersive computation of the leading-order hadronic contribution to the muon anomalous magnetic moment. We consider the radiative hadronic and leptonic channels of main experimental interest, namely the processes $e^+e^-\to X^+X^-\gamma$, with $X = \{\pi \, , \mu \}$. For such processes, we compute the exact next-to-leading order (NLO) corrections matched to a Parton Shower (PS) to describe exclusive multiple photon emission. All sources of radiative corrections from initial-state and final-state radiation, as well as their interference, are considered according to QED for $e^+e^-\to\mu^+\mu^-\gamma$ and QED$\oplus$F$\times$sQED (Factorised scalar QED) for $e^+e^-\to\pi^+\pi^-\gamma$. We describe in detail the novel features of our PS approach to compute the fixed-order corrections in association with higher-order contributions to $2\to3$ processes, with a hard photon in the final state. We present validation tests and comparisons with NLO predictions available in the literature to cross-check various ingredients of our formulation. We also show numerical results at NLOPS accuracy according to realistic event selection criteria for precision measurements at flavour factories. Our calculation is implemented in an updated version of the Monte Carlo event generator BabaYaga@NLO, which can be used for fully exclusive simulations and data analysis in radiative return experiments.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

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

  1. Tensor decomposition of $e^+e^-\to\pi^+\pi^-\gamma$ to higher orders in the dimensional regulator

    hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    First beyond-NLO tensor decomposition and higher-order analytic one-loop amplitudes for e+e- to pi+pi-gamma, paired with a fast numerical five-point integral evaluator.

  2. Next-to-leading order FsQED corrections to radiative pion pair production

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    FsQED NLO structure-dependent corrections to radiative pion-pair production are at the permille (mass) to percent (angular/AFB) level, agree with GVMD, and are now in BabaYaga@NLO.

  3. First look at the evaluation of two-loop Feynman integrals for radiative return processes

    hep-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0

    Planar two-loop four-point master integrals for massive radiative-return QED, including elliptic and nested-root sectors, are reduced to polynomial-in-ε differential equations that evaluate stably in the physical region.

  4. Muon $g$$-$2: correlation-induced uncertainties in precision data combinations

    hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A general framework quantifies correlation-induced uncertainties in precision data combinations and applies it to e+e- to hadrons cross sections for muon g-2 HVP determinations.

  5. Muon lifetime and Fermi constant: an update

    hep-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 4.5

    Updated Δq = (−4 384 678 ± 34)×10^{-9} reduces theory error on the muon lifetime by an order of magnitude and gives G_F = 1.166 378 59(59)×10^{-5} GeV^{-2}.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

119 extracted references · 77 linked inside Pith · cited by 5 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Jegerlehner and A

    F. Jegerlehner and A. Nyffeler,The Muon g-2, Phys. Rept. 477 (2009) 1–110, [arXiv:0902.3360]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  2. [2]

    Jegerlehner,The Anomalous Magnetic Moment of the Muon, Springer Tracts Mod

    F. Jegerlehner,The Anomalous Magnetic Moment of the Muon, Springer Tracts Mod. Phys. 274 (2017) 1–693

    2017

  3. [3]

    Gabrielse and G

    G. Gabrielse and G. Venanzoni,Measured Lepton Magnetic Moments, arXiv:2507.11268

    arXiv

  4. [4]

    D. W. Hertzog and M. Hoferichter,The anomalous magnetic moment of the muon: status and perspectives, arXiv:2512.16980

    arXiv

  5. [5]

    Muon g-2 Collaboration, D. P. Aguillard et al.,Measurement of the Positive Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment to 127 ppb, Phys. Rev. Lett.135 (2025), no. 10 101802, [arXiv:2506.03069]

    arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    Aliberti et al.,The anomalous magnetic moment of the muon in the Standard Model: an update, Phys

    R. Aliberti et al.,The anomalous magnetic moment of the muon in the Standard Model: an update, Phys. Rept. 1143 (2025) 1–158, [arXiv:2505.21476]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    Aoyama et al.,The anomalous magnetic moment of the muon in the Standard Model, Phys

    T. Aoyama et al.,The anomalous magnetic moment of the muon in the Standard Model, Phys. Rept. 887 (2020) 1–166, [arXiv:2006.04822]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  8. [8]

    Keshavarzi, D

    A. Keshavarzi, D. Nomura, and T. Teubner,The muon g − 2 and α(M 2 Z): a new data-based analysis, Phys. Rev. D97 (2018), no. 11 114025, [arXiv:1802.02995]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  9. [9]

    Davier, A

    M. Davier, A. Hoecker, B. Malaescu, and Z. Zhang,A new evaluation of the hadronic vacuum polarisation contributions to the muon anomalous magnetic moment and toα(m2 Z), Eur. Phys. J. C80 (2020), no. 3 241, [arXiv:1908.00921]. [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.C 80, 410 (2020)]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  10. [10]

    Benayoun, L

    M. Benayoun, L. Delbuono, and F. Jegerlehner,BHLS2, a New Breaking of the HLS Model and its Phenomenology, Eur. Phys. J. C80 (2020), no. 2 81, [arXiv:1903.11034]. [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.C 80, 244 (2020)]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  11. [11]

    Keshavarzi, D

    A. Keshavarzi, D. Nomura, T. Teubner, and A. Wright,Muon g-2: Blinding for data-driven hadronic vacuum polarization, Phys. Rev. D111 (2025), no. 1 L011901, [arXiv:2409.02827]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Borsanyi et al.,Leading hadronic contribution to the muon magnetic moment from lattice QCD, Nature 593 (2021) 51–55, [arXiv:2002.12347]

    Budapest-Marseille-W uppertalCollaboration, S. Borsanyi et al.,Leading hadronic contribution to the muon magnetic moment from lattice QCD, Nature 593 (2021) 51–55, [arXiv:2002.12347]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  13. [13]

    Boccaletti et al.,High precision calculation of the hadronic vacuum polarisation contribution to the muon anomaly, arXiv:2407.10913

    A. Boccaletti et al.,High precision calculation of the hadronic vacuum polarisation contribution to the muon anomaly, arXiv:2407.10913

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  14. [14]

    Djukanovic, G

    D. Djukanovic, G. von Hippel, S. Kuberski, H. B. Meyer, N. Miller, K. Ottnad, J. Parrino, A. Risch, and H. Wittig,The hadronic vacuum polarization contribution to the muon g− 2 at long distances, JHEP 04 (2025) 098, [arXiv:2411.07969]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  15. [15]

    RBC, UKQCD Collaboration, T. Blum, P. A. Boyle, V. Gülpers, T. Izubuchi, L. Jin, C. Jung, A. Jüttner, C. Lehner, A. Portelli, and J. T. Tsang,Calculation of the hadronic vacuum polarization contribution to the muon anomalous magnetic moment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018), no. 2 022003, [arXiv:1801.07224]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  16. [16]

    Blum et al.,Update of Euclidean windows of the hadronic vacuum polarization, Phys

    RBC, UKQCD Collaboration, T. Blum et al.,Update of Euclidean windows of the hadronic vacuum polarization, Phys. Rev. D108 (2023), no. 5 054507, [arXiv:2301.08696]. – 46 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  17. [17]

    Blum et al.,The long-distance window of the hadronic vacuum polarization for the muon g-2, arXiv:2410.20590

    RBC, UKQCD Collaboration, T. Blum et al.,The long-distance window of the hadronic vacuum polarization for the muon g-2, arXiv:2410.20590

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  18. [18]

    H. B. Meyer and H. Wittig,Lattice QCD and the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.104 (2019) 46–96, [arXiv:1807.09370]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  19. [19]

    Davier, A

    M. Davier, A. Hoecker, A.-M. Lutz, B. Malaescu, and Z. Zhang,Tensions in e+e− → π+π−(γ) measurements: the new landscape of data-driven hadronic vacuum polarization predictions for the muong − 2, Eur. Phys. J. C84 (2024), no. 7 721, [arXiv:2312.02053]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  20. [20]

    Davier, A

    M. Davier, A. Hoecker, G. Lopez Castro, B. Malaescu, X. H. Mo, G. Toledo Sanchez, P. Wang, C. Z. Yuan, and Z. Zhang,The Discrepancy Betweenτ and e+e− Spectral Functions Revisited and the Consequences for the Muon Magnetic Anomaly, Eur. Phys. J. C 66 (2010) 127–136, [arXiv:0906.5443]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  21. [21]

    G. L. Castro, A. Miranda, and P. Roig,Isospin breaking corrections in 2π production in τ decays and e+e− annihilation: Consequences for the muong − 2 and conserved vector current tests, Phys. Rev. D111 (2025), no. 7 073004, [arXiv:2411.07696]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    Colangelo, M

    G. Colangelo, M. Hoferichter, B. Kubis, and P. Stoffer,Isospin-breaking effects in the two-pion contribution to hadronic vacuum polarization, JHEP 10 (2022) 032, [arXiv:2208.08993]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  23. [23]

    Hoferichter, G

    M. Hoferichter, G. Colangelo, B.-L. Hoid, B. Kubis, J. R. de Elvira, D. Schuh, D. Stamen, and P. Stoffer,Phenomenological Estimate of Isospin Breaking in Hadronic Vacuum Polarization, Phys. Rev. Lett.131 (2023), no. 16 161905, [arXiv:2307.02532]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  24. [24]

    Muon g-2 Collaboration, Aguillard, D. P. and others,Measurement of the Positive Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment to 0.20 ppm, Phys. Rev. Lett.131 (2023), no. 16 161802, [2308.06230]

    arXiv 2023

  25. [25]

    Abi et al.,Measurement of the Positive Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment to 0.46 ppm, Phys

    Muon g-2 Collaboration, B. Abi et al.,Measurement of the Positive Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment to 0.46 ppm, Phys. Rev. Lett.126 (2021), no. 14 141801, [arXiv:2104.03281]

    arXiv 2021

  26. [26]

    Budassi, C

    E. Budassi, C. M. Carloni Calame, M. Ghilardi, A. Gurgone, G. Montagna, M. Moretti, O. Nicrosini, F. Piccinini, and F. P. Ucci,Pion pair production ine+e− annihilation at next-to-leading order matched to Parton Shower, JHEP 05 (2025) 196, [arXiv:2409.03469]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    V. N. Baier and V. A. Khoze,Photon Emission in Muon-pair Production by Electron-positron Collision, Sov. Phys. JETP21 (1965) 629–632

    1965

  28. [28]

    V. N. Baier and V. A. Khoze,Radiation accompanying two particle annihilation of an electron - positron pair, Sov. Phys. JETP21 (1965) 1145–1150

    1965

  29. [29]

    V. N. Baier, V. S. Fadin, and V. A. Khoze,Photon bremsstrahlung in collisions of high-energy electrons, Sov. Phys. JETP24 (1966) 760–765

    1966

  30. [30]

    F. A. Berends, K. J. F. Gaemer, and R. Gastmans,Hard photon corrections for the process e+e− → µ±µ∓, Nucl. Phys. B57 (1973) 381–400. [Erratum: Nucl.Phys.B 75, 546–546 (1974)]

    1973

  31. [31]

    F. A. Berends, K. J. F. Gaemers, and R. Gastmans,Hard photon corrections for Bhabha scattering, Nucl. Phys. B68 (1974) 541–550

    1974

  32. [32]

    Chen and P

    M.-S. Chen and P. Zerwas,Secondary reactions in electron-positron (electron) collisions, Phys. Rev. D11 (Jan, 1975) 58–67. – 47 –

    1975

  33. [33]

    E. A. Kuraev and G. V. Meledin,QED Distributions for Hard Photon Emission in e+e− → µ+µ−γ, Nucl. Phys. B122 (1977) 485–492

    1977

  34. [34]

    S. I. Eidelman and E. A. Kuraev,e+e− Annihilation Into Two and Three Photons at High-Energy, Nucl. Phys. B143 (1978) 353–364

    1978

  35. [35]

    V. N. Baier, E. A. Kuraev, V. S. Fadin, and V. A. Khoze,Inelastic Processes in Quantum Electrodynamics at High-Energies, Phys. Rept. 78 (1981) 293–393

    1981

  36. [36]

    F. A. Berends, R. Kleiss, P. De Causmaecker, R. Gastmans, and T. T. Wu,Single Bremsstrahlung Processes in Gauge Theories, Phys. Lett. B103 (1981) 124–128

    1981

  37. [37]

    Spagnolo,The hadronic contribution to the muon g-2 from hadron production in initial state radiation events at thee+e− collider DAPHNE, Eur

    S. Spagnolo,The hadronic contribution to the muon g-2 from hadron production in initial state radiation events at thee+e− collider DAPHNE, Eur. Phys. J. C6 (1999) 637–645

    1999

  38. [38]

    A. B. Arbuzov, E. A. Kuraev, N. P. Merenkov, and L. Trentadue,Hadronic cross-sections in electron - positron annihilation with tagged photon, JHEP 12 (1998) 009, [hep-ph/9804430]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  39. [39]

    Benayoun, S

    M. Benayoun, S. I. Eidelman, V. N. Ivanchenko, and Z. K. Silagadze,Spectroscopy at B factories using hard photon emission, Mod. Phys. Lett. A14 (1999) 2605–2614, [hep-ph/9910523]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  40. [40]

    Binner, J

    S. Binner, J. H. Kuhn, and K. Melnikov,Measuring σ(e+e− → hadrons) using tagged photon, Phys. Lett. B459 (1999) 279–287, [hep-ph/9902399]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  41. [41]

    V. A. Khoze, M. I. Konchatnij, N. P. Merenkov, G. Pancheri, L. Trentadue, and O. N. Shekhovzova,Radiative corrections to the hadronic cross-section measurement at DAPHNE, Eur. Phys. J. C18 (2001) 481–490, [hep-ph/0003313]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  42. [42]

    BaBar Collaboration, J. P. Lees et al.,Precise Measurement of thee+e− → π+π−(γ) Cross Section with the Initial-State Radiation Method at BABAR, Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 032013, [arXiv:1205.2228]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  43. [43]

    Ablikim et al.,Measurement of thee+e− → π+π− cross section between 600 and 900 MeV using initial state radiation, Phys

    BESIII Collaboration, M. Ablikim et al.,Measurement of thee+e− → π+π− cross section between 600 and 900 MeV using initial state radiation, Phys. Lett. B753 (2016) 629–638, [arXiv:1507.08188]. [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 812, 135982 (2021)]

    arXiv 2016

  44. [44]

    Aloisio et al.,Measurement of σ(e+e− → π+π−γ) and extraction of σ(e+e− → π+π−) below 1-GeV with the KLOE detector, Phys

    KLOE Collaboration, A. Aloisio et al.,Measurement of σ(e+e− → π+π−γ) and extraction of σ(e+e− → π+π−) below 1-GeV with the KLOE detector, Phys. Lett. B606 (2005) 12–24, [hep-ex/0407048]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  45. [45]

    Ambrosino et al.,Measurement of σ(e+e− → π+π−γ(γ)) and the dipion contribution to the muon anomaly with the KLOE detector, Phys

    KLOE Collaboration, F. Ambrosino et al.,Measurement of σ(e+e− → π+π−γ(γ)) and the dipion contribution to the muon anomaly with the KLOE detector, Phys. Lett. B670 (2009) 285–291, [arXiv:0809.3950]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  46. [46]

    Ambrosino et al.,Measurement of σ(e+e− → π+π−) from threshold to 0.85 GeV2 using Initial State Radiation with the KLOE detector, Phys

    KLOE Collaboration, F. Ambrosino et al.,Measurement of σ(e+e− → π+π−) from threshold to 0.85 GeV2 using Initial State Radiation with the KLOE detector, Phys. Lett. B 700 (2011) 102–110, [arXiv:1006.5313]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  47. [47]

    Babusci et al.,Precision measurement of σ(e+e− → π+π−γ)/σ(e+e− → µ+µ−γ) and determination of theπ+π− contribution to the muon anomaly with the KLOE detector, Phys

    KLOE Collaboration, D. Babusci et al.,Precision measurement of σ(e+e− → π+π−γ)/σ(e+e− → µ+µ−γ) and determination of theπ+π− contribution to the muon anomaly with the KLOE detector, Phys. Lett. B720 (2013) 336–343, [arXiv:1212.4524]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  48. [48]

    Anastasi et al.,Combination of KLOEσ e+e− → π+π−γ(γ) measurements and determination ofaπ+π− µ in the energy range0.10 < s <0.95 GeV2, JHEP 03 (2018) 173, [arXiv:1711.03085]

    KLOE-2 Collaboration, A. Anastasi et al.,Combination of KLOEσ e+e− → π+π−γ(γ) measurements and determination ofaπ+π− µ in the energy range0.10 < s <0.95 GeV2, JHEP 03 (2018) 173, [arXiv:1711.03085]. – 48 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  49. [49]

    T. Xiao, S. Dobbs, A. Tomaradze, K. K. Seth, and G. Bonvicini,Precision Measurement of the Hadronic Contribution to the Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment, Phys. Rev. D97 (2018), no. 3 032012, [arXiv:1712.04530]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  50. [50]

    Status of e+e→π+π− analysis with SND at VEPP-2000

    A. Kupich, “Status of e+e→π+π− analysis with SND at VEPP-2000.” Talk at the Muon g − 2 Theory Initiative workshop, Sept., 2025. Slides available online

    2000

  51. [51]

    CMD-3 Collaboration, F. V. Ignatov et al.,Measurement of thee+e− → π+π− cross section from threshold to 1.2 GeV with the CMD-3 detector, Phys. Rev. D109 (2024), no. 11 112002, [arXiv:2302.08834]

    arXiv 2024

  52. [52]

    CMD-3 Collaboration, F. V. Ignatov et al.,Measurement of the Pion Form Factor with CMD-3 Detector and its Implication to the Hadronic Contribution to Muon (g-2), Phys. Rev. Lett.132 (2024), no. 23 231903, [arXiv:2309.12910]

    arXiv 2024

  53. [53]

    Zhang,Review of hadronic vacuum polarization calculations viae+e− measurements, in LP2025 Proceedings, Jan, 2026

    Z. Zhang,Review of hadronic vacuum polarization calculations viae+e− measurements, in LP2025 Proceedings, Jan, 2026. arXiv:2601.11966

    arXiv 2026

  54. [54]

    Polat,New precise measurement of thee+e− → π+π−(γ) cross section with BABAR, Jan, 2026

    L. Polat,New precise measurement of thee+e− → π+π−(γ) cross section with BABAR, Jan, 2026. arXiv:2601.16587

    arXiv 2026

  55. [55]

    Rodrigo, A

    G. Rodrigo, A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, M. Guilleaume, and J. H. Kuhn,NLO QED corrections to ISR ine+e− annihilation and the measurement ofσ(e+e− → hadrons) using tagged photons, Eur. Phys. J. C22 (2001) 81–88, [hep-ph/0106132]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  56. [56]

    Rodrigo, H

    G. Rodrigo, H. Czyz, J. H. Kuhn, and M. Szopa,Radiative return at NLO and the measurement of the hadronic cross-section in electron positron annihilation, Eur. Phys. J. C 24 (2002) 71–82, [hep-ph/0112184]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  57. [57]

    J. H. Kuhn and G. Rodrigo,The Radiative return at small angles: Virtual corrections, Eur. Phys. J. C25 (2002) 215–222, [hep-ph/0204283]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  58. [58]

    H. Czyz, A. Grzelinska, J. H. Kuhn, and G. Rodrigo,The radiative return atϕ and B factories: small angle photon emission at next-to-leading order, Eur. Phys. J. C27 (2003) 563–575, [hep-ph/0212225]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  59. [59]

    H. Czyz, A. Grzelinska, J. H. Kuhn, and G. Rodrigo,The Radiative return atϕ and B factories: FSR at next-to-leading order, Eur. Phys. J. C33 (2004) 333–347, [hep-ph/0308312]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  60. [60]

    E. A. Kuraev and V. S. Fadin,On Radiative Corrections toe+e− Single Photon Annihilation at High-Energy, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.41 (1985) 466–472

    1985

  61. [61]

    Altarelli and G

    G. Altarelli and G. Martinelli,Radiative corrections to theZ 0 line shape at LEP, inPhysics at LEP, Vol. 1(J. Ellis and R. Peccei, eds.), pp. 47–57, 1986

    1986

  62. [62]

    Nicrosini and L

    O. Nicrosini and L. Trentadue,Soft Photons and Second Order Radiative Corrections to e+e− → Z 0, Phys. Lett. B196 (1987) 551

    1987

  63. [63]

    Skrzypek and S

    M. Skrzypek and S. Jadach,Exact and approximate solutions for the electron nonsinglet structure function in QED, Z. Phys. C49 (1991) 577–584

    1991

  64. [64]

    Skrzypek,Leading logarithmic calculations of QED corrections at LEP, Acta Phys

    M. Skrzypek,Leading logarithmic calculations of QED corrections at LEP, Acta Phys. Polon. B 23 (1992) 135–172

    1992

  65. [65]

    Cacciari, A

    M. Cacciari, A. Deandrea, G. Montagna, and O. Nicrosini,QED structure functions: a systematic approach, EPL 17 (1992) 123–128. – 49 –

    1992

  66. [66]

    A. B. Arbuzov, V. V. Bytev, E. A. Kuraev, E. Tomasi-Gustafsson, and Y. M. Bystritskiy, Structure function approach in QED for high energy processes, Physics of Particles and Nuclei 41 (2010), no. 3 394–424

    2010

  67. [67]

    Campanario, H

    F. Campanario, H. Czyż, J. Gluza, M. Gunia, T. Riemann, G. Rodrigo, and V. Yundin, Complete QED NLO contributions to the reactione+e− → µ+µ−γ and their implementation in the event generator PHOKHARA, JHEP 02 (2014) 114, [arXiv:1312.3610]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  68. [68]

    Campanario, H

    F. Campanario, H. Czyż, J. Gluza, T. Jeliński, G. Rodrigo, S. Tracz, and D. Zhuridov, Standard model radiative corrections in the pion form factor measurements do not explain the aµ anomaly, Phys. Rev. D100 (2019), no. 7 076004, [arXiv:1903.10197]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  69. [69]

    Actis et al.,Quest for precision in hadronic cross sections at low energy: Monte Carlo tools vs

    W orking Group on Radiative Corrections, Monte Carlo Generators for Low Energies Collaboration, S. Actis et al.,Quest for precision in hadronic cross sections at low energy: Monte Carlo tools vs. experimental data, Eur. Phys. J. C66 (2010) 585–686, [arXiv:0912.0749]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  70. [70]

    Barberio, B

    E. Barberio, B. van Eijk, and Z. Was,PHOTOS: A Universal Monte Carlo for QED radiative corrections in decays, Comput. Phys. Commun.66 (1991) 115–128

    1991

  71. [71]

    Barberio and Z

    E. Barberio and Z. Was,PHOTOS: A Universal Monte Carlo for QED radiative corrections. Version 2.0, Comput. Phys. Commun.79 (1994) 291–308

    1994

  72. [72]

    C. M. Carloni Calame, C. Lunardini, G. Montagna, O. Nicrosini, and F. Piccinini,Large angle Bhabha scattering and luminosity at flavor factories, Nucl. Phys. B584 (2000) 459–479, [hep-ph/0003268]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  73. [73]

    C. M. Carloni Calame,An improved parton shower algorithm in QED, Phys. Lett. B520 (2001) 16–24, [hep-ph/0103117]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  74. [74]

    Balossini, C

    G. Balossini, C. M. Carloni Calame, G. Montagna, O. Nicrosini, and F. Piccinini,Matching perturbative and parton shower corrections to Bhabha process at flavour factories, Nucl. Phys. B758 (2006) 227–253, [hep-ph/0607181]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  75. [75]

    Balossini, C

    G. Balossini, C. Bignamini, C. M. C. Calame, G. Montagna, O. Nicrosini, and F. Piccinini, Photon pair production at flavour factories with per mille accuracy, Phys. Lett. B663 (2008) 209–213, [arXiv:0801.3360]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  76. [76]

    Jadach, W

    S. Jadach, W. Placzek, and B. F. L. Ward,BHWIDE 1.00: O(α) YFS exponentiated Monte Carlo for Bhabha scattering at wide angles for LEP-1 / SLC and LEP-2, Phys. Lett. B390 (1997) 298–308, [hep-ph/9608412]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  77. [77]

    Jadach, B

    S. Jadach, B. Ward, and Z. Was,Coherent exclusive exponentiation for precision Monte Carlo calculations, Phys. Rev. D63 (2001) 113009, [hep-ph/0006359]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  78. [78]

    Jadach, B

    S. Jadach, B. F. L. Ward, Z. Was, S. A. Yost, and A. Siodmok,Multi-photon Monte Carlo event generator KKMCee for lepton and quark pair production in lepton colliders, Comput. Phys. Commun. 283 (2023) 108556, [arXiv:2204.11949]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  79. [79]

    Bothmann et al.,Event generation with Sherpa 3, JHEP 12 (2024) 156, [arXiv:2410.22148]

    Sherpa Collaboration, E. Bothmann et al.,Event generation with Sherpa 3, JHEP 12 (2024) 156, [arXiv:2410.22148]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  80. [80]

    Price and F

    A. Price and F. Krauss,Towards a Fully Automated Differential NNLOEW Generator for Lepton Colliders, arXiv:2512.04959

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

Showing first 80 references.