pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.03002 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-04 · ✦ hep-ph · nucl-th

Recognition: 3 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Calculating extremely high energy bremsstrahlung in matter

Peter Arnold , Joshua Bautista , Omar Elgedawy , Shahin Iqbal
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 17:59 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph nucl-th
keywords bremsstrahlungLPM effectpair productionultra-relativistic electronselectromagnetic cascadessuppressionhigh-energy physicsmedium effects
0
0 comments X

The pith

Including electron and photon masses reveals multiple regimes where pair production overlap alters LPM bremsstrahlung suppression.

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

The paper extends calculations of bremsstrahlung from ultra-relativistic electrons in matter to include the effects of electron mass and medium-induced photon mass at energies that are high but not extremely so. This inclusion creates a complex pattern of behaviors across different combinations of photon energy and electron energy, because the long quantum duration of the process can overlap with pair production. A reader would care because electromagnetic showers depend on the rate of bremsstrahlung, and previous mass-less results do not apply in these ranges. The work shows that the suppression is no longer simply described by the standard LPM formula but requires accounting for this overlap in various regions.

Core claim

By restoring the masses, the analysis shows that the disruption of LPM suppression due to overlap with pair production now depends on the specific values of photon and electron energies, producing a rich map of different behavioral regions rather than a single regime.

What carries the argument

The LPM effect with restored mass terms and the overlap prescription between bremsstrahlung formation time and pair production.

If this is right

  • The rate of high-energy photon emission varies significantly across different energy ranges instead of following a uniform suppression.
  • Electromagnetic shower simulations must incorporate these mass-dependent corrections for accurate predictions below extreme energies.
  • Pair production by the emitted photon interferes with the bremsstrahlung process in ways that change the effective mean free paths.
  • The transition between mass-less and massive regimes occurs at specific thresholds depending on the medium.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This could lead to revised estimates of shower development lengths in cosmic ray or accelerator experiments.
  • Similar overlap effects might appear in other QED processes in dense media when masses are considered.
  • Experimental tests could involve measuring photon yields from electron beams in specific energy windows.
  • Connections to medium-induced effects in QCD or other interactions may emerge from the same duration-overlap logic.

Load-bearing premise

The standard LPM formalism remains applicable when the bremsstrahlung process overlaps in time with subsequent pair production after masses have been restored.

What would settle it

Precise measurements of the bremsstrahlung spectrum or shower profiles in a material for electron energies from tens of GeV to TeV and corresponding photon energies would show whether the predicted rich map of behaviors matches observations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.03002 by Joshua Bautista, Omar Elgedawy, Peter Arnold, Shahin Iqbal.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Our notation for energies and energy fractions ( view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. (a) Log-log-log contour plot [ view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (a) A graphical representation of the LPM bremsstrahlung rate, consisting of (i) the view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Like fig view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (a) A version of the LPM/BH plot from fig. view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Lightcone-time ordered rate diagrams contributing to the energy loss rate view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Single-bubble ( view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8 view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Like fig view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Forward Compton scattering amplitude. view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Ultra-relativistic electrons initiate electromagnetic showers in ordinary matter that evolve through bremsstrahlung and pair production. At very high energy, the quantum mechanical duration of bremsstrahlung becomes longer than the mean free time to elastically scatter from the medium, leading to a significant suppression known at the Landau-Pomeranchuk-Migdal (LPM) effect. For some ranges of bremsstrahlung photon and initial electron energies $(k_\gamma,E)$, the duration becomes so long that it will also overlap with subsequent pair production by the bremsstrahlung photon, disrupting LPM suppression and drastically changing LPM predictions. We have previously calculated this change for extremely high energies ($k_\gamma \gg 2$ TeV or more, depending on the medium), for which the electron mass and medium-induced photon mass could be ignored. In this paper, we extend that analysis to lower (but still ultra-relativistic) energy by accounting for those masses, leading to a rich map of behavior in different regions of $(k_\gamma,E)$.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper extends a prior massless calculation of the LPM-suppressed bremsstrahlung process for ultra-relativistic electrons in matter to lower (but still ultra-relativistic) energies by restoring the electron mass and the medium-induced photon mass. The central result is a map of distinct behavioral regimes in the (k_γ, E) plane arising from the overlap between the quantum formation length of bremsstrahlung and the mean free path for subsequent pair production by the emitted photon.

Significance. If the overlap prescription remains valid once masses are restored, the work supplies a more complete analytic framework for electromagnetic shower evolution at energies where standard LPM formulas begin to break down. This could improve modeling of high-energy cosmic-ray air showers and accelerator-based experiments. The manuscript is noted for its parameter-free extension of an earlier derivation and for identifying multiple kinematic regimes rather than a single correction factor.

major comments (1)
  1. [Discussion of the quantum-mechanical duration and overlap prescription] The overlap condition between bremsstrahlung formation length and pair-production mean free path is load-bearing for the entire regime map. Restoring finite masses modifies both the dispersion relation that enters the formation length and the virtuality integral that defines the LPM suppression kernel; therefore the cutoff on that integral must be re-derived rather than simply inserted into the massless formula. No cross-check against an exact finite-mass QED amplitude or an independent Monte-Carlo shower simulation is presented to confirm that the standard LPM factor with kinematic substitutions remains accurate once overlap is allowed.
minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract states that the threshold for ignoring masses is 'k_γ ≫ 2 TeV or more, depending on the medium.' An explicit expression for this threshold in terms of plasma frequency or radiation length would make the boundary between the present and prior calculations concrete.
  2. Figure captions or a table summarizing the boundaries of the identified regimes in (k_γ, E) would help readers navigate the 'rich map' without having to extract the divisions from the text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting the importance of validating the overlap prescription once masses are restored. We address the concern point by point below and outline the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Discussion of the quantum-mechanical duration and overlap prescription] The overlap condition between bremsstrahlung formation length and pair-production mean free path is load-bearing for the entire regime map. Restoring finite masses modifies both the dispersion relation that enters the formation length and the virtuality integral that defines the LPM suppression kernel; therefore the cutoff on that integral must be re-derived rather than simply inserted into the massless formula. No cross-check against an exact finite-mass QED amplitude or an independent Monte-Carlo shower simulation is presented to confirm that the standard LPM factor with kinematic substitutions remains accurate once overlap is allowed.

    Authors: We agree that the overlap condition is central and that finite masses alter both the formation length (via modified dispersion relations) and the virtuality integral in the LPM kernel. In the present work we did not simply transplant the massless cutoff; the expressions for the formation length and the suppression factor were re-derived with the electron mass m_e and the medium-induced photon mass m_γ retained from the outset, yielding the kinematic boundaries that define the regime map in the (k_γ, E) plane. Nevertheless, we acknowledge that an explicit, step-by-step re-derivation of the cutoff integral with these masses would improve clarity. We will add this derivation as a new subsection in the revised manuscript. We also agree that a direct numerical cross-check against an exact finite-mass QED amplitude or a full Monte-Carlo shower simulation would provide valuable confirmation; such a comparison lies outside the analytic scope of the present paper but is a natural direction for follow-up work. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Independent numerical validation of the mass-corrected overlap prescription against an exact finite-mass QED calculation or a Monte-Carlo shower simulation

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Extension of prior massless LPM overlap calculation is independent of its inputs

full rationale

The paper describes an explicit extension of a prior massless analysis (cited as previous work) to include electron and photon masses at lower ultra-relativistic energies. The claimed output is a map of regimes in (k_γ, E) obtained by inserting masses into kinematics and the standard LPM suppression factor while retaining the overlap prescription. No equation or step is shown to reduce by construction to a fitted parameter, a self-defined quantity, or a self-citation chain that itself lacks independent support. The overlap assumption is stated as an input rather than derived from the result. This is a normal incremental extension with no tautological reduction, consistent with a low circularity score.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; ledger populated from standard high-energy-physics assumptions referenced in the abstract. Full paper would be needed to list specific approximations or fitted scales.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard treatment of medium-induced photon mass and LPM interference in quantum field theory
    Invoked implicitly when the authors state they account for masses while extending the prior LPM-overlap analysis.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5481 in / 1196 out tokens · 65471 ms · 2026-05-08T17:59:29.251236+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Review and generalization In the massless case, then≥2 contribution to fig. 6a was found to be 20 dΓ dxγ n≥2 ≃2 Re Z ∞ 0 d(∆t0) dG dxγ d(∆t0) brem e−Gpair∆t0 −1 +G pair∆t0 (4.21) with Gpair ≡ Z 1 0 dη Z ∞ 0 d(∆tpr) dG dη d(∆tpr) pair ,(4.22) which is related to the total pair production rate by Γpair = 2 Re(Gpair).(4.23) Taking the massless form (4.12a) o...

  2. [2]

    particles

    Validity of (4.21) For later reference in section V, we should clarify that the relatively simple form of (4.21) forn≥2 bubbles in fig. 6a relied [6] on the approximation that the bremsstrahlung time scale ∆t0 dominating the integral (4.21) is parametrically large compared to the pair-production time scale ∆tpr dominating the integral (4.22). For the mass...

  3. [3]

    Regge intercept

    However, we discuss in appendix F that one may, at leading-log order, compare their estimate to our result for thesmallLPM correction we find in the deep ordinary-LPM region 2 of fig. 9b, specifically for the casek γ ≪E LPM. In that case,t brem form ∼1/|Ω 0|and 31 See, for example, section VI.A of ref. [25]. 32 tpair form ∼1/h pr m (democratic), so that t...

  4. [4]

    Background In the somewhat different context of an ionized plasma, the plasma frequency is the lowest possible frequency for propagating electromagnetic waves, given by ωpl ≃ r 4παne m ,(A1a) wheren e is the number density of ionized electrons andmis the electron mass. The disper- sion relation for transversely-polarized electromagnetic waves is approxima...

  5. [5]

    T” here) vs. (ii) transverse to thezaxis (“⊥

    Derivation The dispersion relation for photons is k2δµ ν −k µkν −Π µ ν(k) εν = 0,(A2) wherek µ = (ω,k),εis photon polarization, and Π µν is the photon self-energy. We use (+−−−) sign convention for the flat-space metricη µν, in which casek 2 =ω 2 −k 2 and the sign convention for Π µ ν in (A2) is the same as the sign convention would be for a photon mass t...

  6. [6]

    by parts

    Alternate Forms Finally, we make contact between our formula (A5) and related formulas for Π µν(k) we are familiar with from the literature on ultra-relativistic QCD plasmas (without assuming isotropy). Note that in the limits that we took, relevant to solving the dispersion relation, the (k 2)2 terms in the numerator and denominator in (A5) could be igno...

  7. [7]

    Following appendix C of ref

    bremsstrahlung The vertex factors in (3.5) come from the usual relativistic matrix element for high-energy nearly-collinear splittinge→eγ: 43 ⟨−P⊥,(1−x γ)E;P ⊥, xγE|δH|0, E⟩ rel 2 = 2e2P 2 ⊥ xγ(1−xγ) Pe→γ(xγ),(B1) written here with the conventional choice that thezaxis is chosen to be in the direction of the initial electron. Following appendix C of ref. ...

  8. [8]

    (17.92) of ref

    pair production For the case of pair productionγ→e¯e, the relativistic matrix element analogous to (B1) is44 ⟨p⊥, ηkγ;−p ⊥,(1−η)k γ|δH|0, k γ⟩rel 2 = 2e2p2 ⊥ η(1−η) Pγ→e(η) (B6) 43 For a textbook derivation, see eq. (17.92) of ref. [39]. Remember that we are implicitly summing over final-state polarizations, and whether or not one then also averages over ...

  9. [9]

    Building blocks As we will see, the difficult integrals needed in the main text can be related to the following two building blocks: Z ∞ 0 dτ τ βe−λτ cothτ= 2 −β Γ(1+β)ζ 1+β, λ 2 −λ −1−β Γ(1+β),(C1a) Z ∞ 0 dτ τ βe−λτ cschτ= 2 −β Γ(1+β)ζ 1+β, 1 2+ λ 2 ,(C1b) whereζ(s, q) is the Hurwitzζfunction P∞ k=0(k+q) −s. One can find these integrals in tables, such a...

  10. [10]

    Note that ¯¯γ1( 1 2;z) = ¯γ1( 1 2;z)

    lnz z ,(C9c) for whichz ¯¯γ1(z)→0 as|z| → ∞. Note that ¯¯γ1( 1 2;z) = ¯γ1( 1 2;z). 45 Eq. (C7) follows, for example, from eqs. (9.531) and (9.533.3) of Gradshteyn and Ryzhik [40] (withn=0 in the first). 42 We’ve introduced the subtracted notation (C9) in order to make it clearer how results behave for large argumentλ, which will be relevant when we discus...

  11. [11]

    eqs. (3.11) The integral on the left-hand side of (3.11a) is Z ∞ 0 dt Ω2 csc2(Ωt)− 1 t2 e−iht.(C10) Changing integration variable toτ≡iΩtthen gives iΩ Z ∞ 0 dτ csch2 τ− 1 τ 2 e−hτ /Ω =iΩf 0, h Ω) =−iΩ +ih ¯ψ(1; h 2Ω),(C11) which is the final result of (3.11a). Similarly, making the change of integration variableτ=iΩtturns the integral on the left-hand sid...

  12. [12]

    1 s−1 + 1 2q + ∞X k=1 Γ(2k+s−1)B 2k (2k)! Γ(s)q 2k # =q 1−s

    Large-qasymptotic expansion a. The expansion To get the large-qexpansion of the generalized Stieltjes constantγ 1(q), start from the large-qexpansion of the Hurwitz zeta functionζ(s, q): 47 ζ(s, q) =q 1−s " 1 s−1 + 1 2q + ∞X k=1 Γ(2k+s−1)B 2k (2k)! Γ(s)q 2k # =q 1−s " 1 s−1 + 1 2q + ∞X k=1 (s)2k−1 B2k (2k)!q 2k # , (E1) whereB n are Bernoulli numbers. Abo...

  13. [13]

    Small-qexpansion For completeness, we also give the expansion ofγ 1(q) aboutq=0. It will be convenient to first find the expansion aboutq=1 and then relate the two using ζ(s, q) =q −s +ζ(s,1+q),(E8) which follows from the definitionζ(q, s)≡ P∞ k=0(k+q) −s of the Hurwitzζfunction. a. Expansion aboutq=1 Differentiating the definition of the Hurwitzζfunction...

  14. [14]

    For the reasons discussed in section VI, we restrict attention to region 2 of fig

    The overall comparison In this appendix, we extract the piece of Baier and Katkov [26] (BK) that should match our (6.4), and we discuss how the argument of their logarithm differs parametrically from ours. For the reasons discussed in section VI, we restrict attention to region 2 of fig. 9b and tok γ≪ELPM for this comparison. As explained in section VI, o...

  15. [15]

    Difference: lower bound on photon virtuality Baier and Katkov express their logarithm in terms of the range of the photon virtuality q2 (which in our notation would be−k µkµ). Their logarithm in (F3) is ln q2 max q2 min .(F5) In our analysis, which uses time-ordered perturbation theory, we discuss the off-shellness ∆Ein energy of intermediate states inste...

  16. [16]

    But we note that theirq 2 min in (F12) is parametrically equal to the squared kick top ⊥ that an electron would experience over the duration of democratic pair productionγ→e¯e

    Discussion We have not fully absorbed BK’s argument for their value ofq2 min and so cannot definitely pinpoint why their analysis does not reproduce ours at leading-log order. But we note that theirq 2 min in (F12) is parametrically equal to the squared kick top ⊥ that an electron would experience over the duration of democratic pair productionγ→e¯e. That...

  17. [17]

    Limits of applicability of the theory of bremsstrahlung electrons and pair production at high-energies,

    L. D. Landau and I. Pomeranchuk, “Limits of applicability of the theory of bremsstrahlung electrons and pair production at high-energies,” Dokl. Akad. Nauk Ser. Fiz.92(1953) 535

    1953

  18. [18]

    Electron cascade process at very high energies,

    L. D. Landau and I. Pomeranchuk, “Electron cascade process at very high energies,” Dokl. Akad. Nauk Ser. Fiz.92(1953) 735

    1953

  19. [19]

    Bremsstrahlung and pair production in condensed media at high-energies,

    A. B. Migdal, “Bremsstrahlung and pair production in condensed media at high-energies,” Phys. Rev.103, 1811 (1956)

    1956

  20. [20]

    Landau,The Collected Papers of L.D

    L. Landau,The Collected Papers of L.D. Landau(Pergamon Press, New York, 1965)

    1965

  21. [21]

    Coherence effects in ultra-relativistic electron bremsstrahlung,

    V. M. Galitsky and I. I. Gurevich, “Coherence effects in ultra-relativistic electron bremsstrahlung,” Nuovo Cimento32, 396 (1964)

    1964

  22. [22]

    Revisiting extremely high energy QED bremsstrahlung in matter: large modifications to the LPM effect,

    P. Arnold, J. Bautista, O. Elgedawy and S. Iqbal, “Revisiting extremely high energy QED bremsstrahlung in matter: large modifications to the LPM effect,” JHEP03, 015 (2026) doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2026)015 [arXiv:2508.21120 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep03(2026)015 2026

  23. [23]

    Extremely high-energy bremsstrahlung in matter

    P. Arnold, J. Bautista, O. Elgedawy and S. Iqbal, “Extremely high energy QED bremsstrahlung in matter,” arXiv:2604.18685 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  24. [24]

    Suppression of bremsstrahlung and pair pro- duction due to environmental factors,

    S. Klein, “Suppression of bremsstrahlung and pair production due to environmental fac- tors,” Rev. Mod. Phys.71, 1501-1538 (1999) doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.71.1501 [arXiv:hep- ph/9802442 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.71.1501 1999

  25. [25]

    On the Stopping of fast particles and on the creation of positive electrons,

    H. Bethe and W. Heitler, “On the Stopping of fast particles and on the creation of positive electrons,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A146, 83-112 (1934) doi:10.1098/rspa.1934.0140

    work page doi:10.1098/rspa.1934.0140 1934

  26. [26]

    Review of Particle Physics,

    S. Navaset al.[Particle Data Group], “Review of particle physics,” Phys. Rev. D110, no.3, 030001 (2024) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.030001

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.030001 2024

  27. [27]

    Light cone path integral approach to the Landau-Pomeranchuk-Migdal effect,

    B. G. Zakharov, “Light cone path integral approach to the Landau-Pomeranchuk-Migdal effect,” Phys. Atom. Nucl.61, 838-854 (1998) [Yad. Fiz.61, 924-940 (1998)] [arXiv:hep- ph/9807540 [hep-ph]]

    work page arXiv 1998

  28. [28]

    Fully quantum treatment of the Landau-Pomeranchuk-Migdal effect in QED and QCD,

    B. G. Zakharov, “Fully quantum treatment of the Landau-Pomeranchuk-Migdal effect in QED and QCD,” JETP Lett.63, 952 (1996) doi:10.1134/1.567126 [Pis’ma Zh. ´Eksp. Teor. Fiz.63, 906 (1996)] [arXiv:hep-ph/9607440]

    work page doi:10.1134/1.567126 1996

  29. [29]

    Radiative energy loss of high-energy quarks in finite size nuclear matter and quark-gluon plasma,

    B. G. Zakharov, “Radiative energy loss of high-energy quarks in finite size nuclear matter and quark-gluon plasma,” JETP Lett.65, 615 (1997) doi:10.1134/1.567389 [Pis’ma Zh. ´Eksp. Teor. Fiz.65, 585 (1997)] [arXiv:hep-ph/9704255] 52 Readers might find confusing that (4.45) is the result for then=1 case of fig. 6a, which is seemingly a diagram contributing...

    work page doi:10.1134/1.567389 1997

  30. [30]

    The Landau-Pomeranchuk- Migdal effect in QED,

    R. Baier, Y. L. Dokshitzer, A. H. Mueller, S. Peigne and D. Schiff, “The Landau-Pomeranchuk- Migdal effect in QED,” Nucl. Phys. B478, 577 (1996) doi:10.1016/0550-3213(96)00426-9 [arXiv:hep-ph/9604327]

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(96)00426-9 1996

  31. [31]

    Radiative energy loss of high-energy quarks and gluons in a finite volume quark-gluon plasma,

    R. Baier, Y. L. Dokshitzer, A. H. Mueller, S. Peigne and D. Schiff, “Radiative energy loss of high-energy quarks and gluons in a finite volume quark-gluon plasma,” Nucl. Phys. B483, 291 (1997) doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(96)00553-6 [arXiv:hep-ph/9607355]

    work page doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(96)00553-6 1997

  32. [32]

    Antonelliet al.(FENICE Collaboration), Nucl

    R. Baier, Y. L. Dokshitzer, A. H. Mueller, S. Peigne and D. Schiff, “Radiative energy loss and p⊥-broadening of high energy partons in nuclei,” Nucl. Phys. B484(1997) doi:10.1016/S0550- 3213(96)00581-0 [arXiv:hep-ph/9608322]

    work page doi:10.1016/s0550- 1997

  33. [33]

    Medium induced radiative energy loss: Equivalence between the BDMPS and Zakharov formalisms,

    R. Baier, Y. L. Dokshitzer, A. H. Mueller and D. Schiff, “Medium induced radiative energy loss: Equivalence between the BDMPS and Zakharov formalisms,” Nucl. Phys. B531, 403-425 (1998) doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(98)00546-X [arXiv:hep-ph/9804212 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(98)00546-x 1998

  34. [34]

    Wolfram Research, Inc., Mathematica (various versions), Champaign, IL (2018–2021)

    2018

  35. [35]

    https://dlmf.nist.gov/, Release 1.2.5 of 2025- 12-15

    NIST Digital Library of Mathematical Functions. https://dlmf.nist.gov/, Release 1.2.5 of 2025- 12-15. F. W. J. Olver, A. B. Olde Daalhuis, D. W. Lozier, B. I. Schneider, R. F. Boisvert, C. W. Clark, B. R. Miller, B. V. Saunders, H. S. Cohl, and M. A. McClain, eds

    2025

  36. [36]

    Hu and M.-S

    S. Hu and M.-S. Kim,On the Stieltjes constants and gamma functions with re- spect to alternating Hurwitz zeta functions, J. Math. Anal. Appl.509(2022), 125930 doi:10.1016/j.jmaa.2021.125930 [arXiv:2106.14674 [math.NT]]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jmaa.2021.125930 2022

  37. [37]

    Exclusive Processes in Perturbative Quantum Chromody- namics,

    G. P. Lepage and S. J. Brodsky, “Exclusive Processes in Perturbative Quantum Chromody- namics,” Phys. Rev. D22, 2157 (1980) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.22.2157

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.22.2157 1980

  38. [38]

    Quantum chromodynamics at high energy,

    Y. V. Kovchegov and E. Levin, “Quantum chromodynamics at high energy,” Cambridge Monogr. Part. Phys. Nucl. Phys. Cosmol.33(2012); errata available, as of this writing, at ⟨https://www.asc.ohio-state.edu/kovchegov.1/typos.pdf⟩or on the publisher’s web site under the book’s resources

    2012

  39. [39]

    The LPM effect in sequential bremsstrahlung 2: fac- torization,

    P. Arnold, H. C. Chang and S. Iqbal, “The LPM effect in sequential bremsstrahlung 2: fac- torization,” JHEP09, 078 (2016) [arXiv:1605.07624 [hep-ph]]

    work page arXiv 2016

  40. [40]

    Are in-medium quark-gluon showers strongly cou- pled? results in the large-N f limit,

    P. Arnold, O. Elgedawy and S. Iqbal, “Are in-medium quark-gluon showers strongly cou- pled? results in the large-N f limit,” JHEP01, 193 (2025) doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2025)193 [arXiv:2408.07129 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep01(2025)193 2025

  41. [41]

    Electron and Pho- ton Interactions in the Regime of Strong LPM Suppression,

    L. Gerhardt and S. R. Klein, “Electron and Photon Interactions in the Regime of Strong LPM Suppression,” Phys. Rev. D82, 074017 (2010) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82.074017 [arXiv:1007.0039 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.82.074017 2010

  42. [42]

    Electroproduc- tion of electron-positron pair in a medium,

    V. N. Baier and V. M. Katkov, “Electroproduction of electron-positron pair in a medium,” JETP Lett.88, 80-84 (2008) doi:10.1134/S0021364008140026 [arXiv:0805.0456 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1134/s0021364008140026 2008

  43. [43]

    Detection of a cosmic ray with measured energy well beyond the expected spectral cutoff due to cosmic microwave radiation,

    D. J. Birdet al.[HIRES], “Detection of a cosmic ray with measured energy well beyond the expected spectral cutoff due to cosmic microwave radiation,” Astrophys. J.441, 144-150 (1995) doi:10.1086/175344 [arXiv:astro-ph/9410067 [astro-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1086/175344 1995

  44. [44]

    Evidence for the saturation of the Froissart bound,

    M. M. Block and F. Halzen, “Evidence for the saturation of the Froissart bound,” Phys. Rev. D70, 091901 (2004) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.70.091901 [arXiv:hep-ph/0405174 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.70.091901 2004

  45. [45]

    D. H. Perkins,Introduction to High Energy Physics, 2nd edition (Addison-Wesley, 1982)

    1982

  46. [46]

    Froissart bound,

    M. Froissart, “Froissart bound,”Scholarpedia5(5), 10353 (2010) doi:10.4249/scholarpedia.10353

    work page doi:10.4249/scholarpedia.10353 2010

  47. [47]

    Asymptotic behavior and subtractions in the Mandelstam representation,

    M. Froissart, “Asymptotic behavior and subtractions in the Mandelstam representation,” Phys. Rev.123, 1053-1057 (1961) doi:10.1103/PhysRev.123.1053

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.123.1053 1961

  48. [48]

    Experimental Confirmation that the Proton is Asymptotically 52 a Black Disk,

    M. M. Block and F. Halzen, “Experimental Confirmation that the Proton is Asymptotically 52 a Black Disk,” Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 212002 (2011) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.212002

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.107.212002 2011

  49. [49]

    Photoproduction off nuclei and pointlike photon in- teractions 1. Cross-sections and nuclear shadowing,

    R. Engel, J. Ranft and S. Roesler, “Photoproduction off nuclei and pointlike photon in- teractions 1. Cross-sections and nuclear shadowing,” Phys. Rev. D55, 6957-6967 (1997) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.55.6957 [arXiv:hep-ph/9610281 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.55.6957 1997

  50. [50]

    J. I. Kapusta and C. Gale,Finite-Temperature Field Theory Principles and Applications, 2nd edition (Cambridge University Press, 2006)

    2006

  51. [51]

    Le Bellac,Thermal Field Theory(Cambridge University Press, 1996)

    M. Le Bellac,Thermal Field Theory(Cambridge University Press, 1996)

    1996

  52. [52]

    Effective kinetic theory for high tempera- ture gauge theories,

    P. B. Arnold, G. D. Moore and L. G. Yaffe, “Effective kinetic theory for high tempera- ture gauge theories,” JHEP01, 030 (2003) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2003/01/030 [arXiv:hep- ph/0209353 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2003/01/030 2003

  53. [53]

    QCD plasma instabilities and bottom up thermalization,

    P. B. Arnold, J. Lenaghan and G. D. Moore, “QCD plasma instabilities and bottom up thermalization,” JHEP08, 002 (2003) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2003/08/002 [arXiv:hep- ph/0307325 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2003/08/002 2003

  54. [54]

    Hard loop approach to anisotropic systems,

    S. Mrowczynski and M. H. Thoma, “Hard loop approach to anisotropic systems,” Phys. Rev. D62, 036011 (2000) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.62.036011 [arXiv:hep-ph/0001164 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.62.036011 2000

  55. [55]

    M. E. Peskin and D. V. Schroeder,An Introduction to quantum field theory, Addison-Wesley, 1995, ISBN 978-0-201-50397-5, 978-0-429-50355-9, 978-0-429-49417-8 doi:10.1201/9780429503559

    work page doi:10.1201/9780429503559 1995

  56. [56]

    I. S. Gradshteyn and I. M. Ryzhik,Table of Integrals, Series, and Products, 4th corrected and enlarged edition (Academic Press, 1980)

    1980

  57. [57]

    The Stokes phenomenon associated with the Hurwitz zeta functionζ(s, a),

    R. B. Paris, “The Stokes phenomenon associated with the Hurwitz zeta functionζ(s, a),” Proc. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A461, 297–304 (2005)

    2005

  58. [58]

    Magnus, F

    W. Magnus, F. Oberhettinger, and R. P. Soni,Formulas and theorems for the special functions of mathematical physics, (Springer, 1966)

    1966

  59. [59]

    Abramowitz and I

    M. Abramowitz and I. Stegun,Handbook of Mathematical Functions(Dover Publications, New York, 9th printing)

  60. [60]

    In-medium loop corrections and longitudinally polarized gauge bosons in high-energy showers,

    P. Arnold and S. Iqbal, “In-medium loop corrections and longitudinally polarized gauge bosons in high-energy showers,” JHEP12, 120 (2018) doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2018)120 [errata: JHEP 12, 098 (2023); JHEP09, 169 (2024)] [arXiv:1806.08796 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep12(2018)120 2018

  61. [61]

    Strong vs. weakly coupled in-medium showers: energy stopping in large-N f QED,

    P. Arnold, O. Elgedawy and S. Iqbal, “Strong vs. weakly coupled in-medium showers: energy stopping in large-N f QED,” arXiv:2404.19008 [hep-ph] 53

    work page arXiv