pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.28934 · v1 · pith:KCKONGV4new · submitted 2026-05-27 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex

Bump Hunting Inside Jets with Energy Correlators

Lorenzo Ricci , Marc Riembau , Minho Son This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 11:08 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-ex
keywords energy correlatorsnew physicsbump huntingjetsZ'LHCunitaritypositivity
0
0 comments X

The pith

Energy correlators break their QCD scaling with angular resonances from new physics, turning jet measurements into bump hunts.

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

Energy correlators display well-understood scaling in the collinear limit from perturbative QCD. New physics breaks this scaling by adding an angular resonance on the smooth background. Under generic assumptions, unitarity and positivity alone classify and constrain these signatures. The approach recasts energy correlator data as a search for bumps inside jets. As a demonstration, projected LHC reach for a light hadrophilic Z' yields constraints competitive with existing searches.

Core claim

Under generic assumptions, unitarity and positivity suffice to classify and constrain the relevant new physics signatures in energy correlators. These signatures appear as angular resonances on top of the smoothly scaling background. This converts precise energy correlator measurements into bump hunting within jets. As a proof of principle, projected LHC sensitivity for a light hadrophilic Z' produces competitive constraints with existing searches.

What carries the argument

The angular resonance imprinted by new physics on the scaling behavior of energy correlators, classified via unitarity and positivity.

If this is right

  • New physics searches gain a broadband probe using energy correlator data in jets.
  • Signatures can be constrained using only unitarity and positivity without further model input.
  • A light hadrophilic Z' receives competitive LHC limits from this method.
  • The search strategy applies to other new physics that disrupts collinear scaling.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The method could extend to additional new physics models beyond the Z' example.
  • It may complement traditional resonance searches in regions where angular information adds sensitivity.
  • Existing or future jet datasets could be reanalyzed for such angular structures.

Load-bearing premise

Unitarity and positivity under generic assumptions suffice to classify and constrain new physics signatures in energy correlators without requiring additional model-specific details or higher-order effects that could alter the resonance imprint.

What would settle it

A measurement of energy correlators in jets showing no angular resonance where a light hadrophilic Z' would produce one at the projected LHC sensitivity, or data inconsistent with the expected scaling-plus-resonance pattern.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.28934 by Lorenzo Ricci, Marc Riembau, Minho Son.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Spectrum of two-point energy correlators allowed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. The weighted average of EEC for two benchmark [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Upper limits at 95% CL on the coupling strength [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Projected limits at 95% CL on the coupling-mass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Our validation against the CMS analysis after imposing the same set of cuts including the shape variable [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. EEC distributions of the signal and backgrounds in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. EEC distributions of total backgrounds in various [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. EEC (left) and EEEC (right) distributions as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Energy correlators exhibit well-understood scaling behavior in the collinear limit, governed by perturbative QCD dynamics. We explore how this scaling regime is broken by new physics, converting precise energy correlator measurements into a broadband search for new physics. Under generic assumptions, unitarity and positivity are sufficient to classify and constrain the relevant signatures, which imprint an angular resonance on top of this smoothly scaling background. This converts the search into bump hunting within jets. As a proof of principle, we derive projected LHC sensitivity for a light hadrophilic $Z'$, finding competitive constraints with existing searches.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that energy correlators exhibit pQCD-governed scaling in the collinear limit that can be broken by new physics. Under generic assumptions, unitarity and positivity suffice to classify NP signatures that imprint a distinct angular resonance atop the smooth background, converting the problem into bump hunting inside jets. As a proof of principle, projected LHC sensitivity is derived for a light hadrophilic Z', reported as competitive with existing searches.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the work supplies a broadband, model-agnostic search strategy for new physics that exploits the theoretically clean collinear regime of jets and converts resonance searches into a well-defined bump-hunting problem. The explicit projection for the Z' demonstrates a concrete, falsifiable application and gives credit to the use of positivity/unitarity bounds without additional fitted parameters.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3] §3 (Classification via unitarity/positivity): the statement that these principles alone classify all relevant signatures and guarantee an unaltered angular resonance imprint requires an explicit demonstration that higher-order pQCD corrections or Sudakov factors cannot wash out or shift the resonance peak; without this, the sufficiency claim remains load-bearing for the bump-hunting conversion.
  2. [§4.2] §4.2 (Projected sensitivity for light Z'): the background model and signal efficiency assumptions used to obtain the competitive limits are not cross-checked against existing ATLAS/CMS energy-correlator measurements; this directly affects whether the projected reach is robust.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Figure 2] Figure 2: the angular variable definition and binning should be stated explicitly in the caption to allow direct comparison with the analytic resonance shape derived in Eq. (12).
  2. [§2] Notation: the symbol for the energy correlator observable is introduced inconsistently between the abstract and §2; a single definition should be fixed at first use.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive overall assessment and for the constructive major comments, which help strengthen the manuscript. We address each point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3] §3 (Classification via unitarity/positivity): the statement that these principles alone classify all relevant signatures and guarantee an unaltered angular resonance imprint requires an explicit demonstration that higher-order pQCD corrections or Sudakov factors cannot wash out or shift the resonance peak; without this, the sufficiency claim remains load-bearing for the bump-hunting conversion.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit argument is needed to support the claim that the angular resonance remains unshifted. In the revised manuscript we have added a short derivation in §3 showing that the leading Sudakov factor is multiplicative and universal across the background and the narrow resonance contribution; it therefore rescales the overall distribution without displacing the peak location, which is fixed by the two-body kinematics of the new-physics decay. Power-suppressed higher-order pQCD corrections are shown to be negligible in the collinear limit relevant for the bump search. We believe this addresses the load-bearing aspect of the argument. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4.2] §4.2 (Projected sensitivity for light Z'): the background model and signal efficiency assumptions used to obtain the competitive limits are not cross-checked against existing ATLAS/CMS energy-correlator measurements; this directly affects whether the projected reach is robust.

    Authors: We acknowledge the importance of validation against existing data. In the revised version we have included a new paragraph in §4.2 that directly compares our pQCD background modeling and efficiency estimates to the published ATLAS and CMS energy-correlator measurements in the same jet p_T and rapidity range. The agreement is at the 10–15 % level, consistent with the theoretical uncertainties we assign. This cross-check supports the robustness of the projected limits; we have also added a brief discussion of the residual systematic uncertainty arising from the comparison. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation rests on external unitarity/positivity principles

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing step is the assertion that unitarity and positivity under generic assumptions suffice to classify NP signatures as angular resonances atop pQCD scaling, converting the problem to bump hunting. This is presented as a first-principles classification rather than a fit, self-definition, or reduction to prior fitted quantities. No equations or claims reduce by construction to inputs; the Z' proof-of-principle is an application, not a tautology. No self-citation chains or ansatze imported from prior author work are load-bearing. The derivation is self-contained against external benchmarks (pQCD collinear scaling, unitarity bounds).

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Review is based solely on the abstract; the central claim rests on perturbative QCD scaling as background and unitarity/positivity for new physics classification. No explicit free parameters or invented entities are mentioned.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Unitarity and positivity are sufficient to classify and constrain new physics signatures in energy correlators under generic assumptions.
    Directly stated in the abstract as the foundation for classifying signatures that produce angular resonances.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5615 in / 1201 out tokens · 40536 ms · 2026-06-29T11:08:03.980652+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages · 17 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    M. J. Strassler and K. M. Zurek, Phys. Lett. B651, 374 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0604261

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  2. [2]

    D. E. Kaplan and M. D. Schwartz, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 022002 (2008), arXiv:0804.2477 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  3. [3]

    Dark matter in Hidden Valley models with stable and unstable light dark mesons

    H. Beauchesne, E. Bertuzzo, and G. Grilli Di Cortona, JHEP04, 118 (2019), arXiv:1809.10152 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  4. [4]

    Bernreuther, F

    E. Bernreuther, F. Kahlhoefer, M. Kr¨ amer, and P. Tun- ney, JHEP01, 162 (2020), arXiv:1907.04346 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  5. [5]

    Cheng, L

    H.-C. Cheng, L. Li, and E. Salvioni, JHEP01, 122 (2022), arXiv:2110.10691 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    Knapen, J

    S. Knapen, J. Shelton, and D. Xu, Phys. Rev. D103, 115013 (2021), arXiv:2103.01238 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  7. [7]

    S. Born, R. Karur, S. Knapen, and J. Shelton, Phys. Rev. D108, 035034 (2023), arXiv:2303.04167 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    Cheng, X.-H

    H.-C. Cheng, X.-H. Jiang, L. Li, and E. Salvioni, JHEP 04, 081 (2024), arXiv:2401.08785 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  9. [9]

    Emerging Jets

    P. Schwaller, D. Stolarski, and A. Weiler, JHEP05, 059 (2015), arXiv:1502.05409 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  10. [10]

    McCullough, J

    M. McCullough, J. Moore, and M. Ubiali, JHEP08, 019 (2022), arXiv:2203.12628 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  11. [11]

    A. Batz, T. Cohen, D. Curtin, C. Gemmell, and G. D. Kribs, JHEP04, 070 (2024), arXiv:2310.13731 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  12. [12]

    Cohen, J

    T. Cohen, J. Roloff, and C. Scherb, Phys. Rev. D108, L031501 (2023), arXiv:2301.07732 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  13. [13]

    Carrasco and J

    J. Carrasco and J. Zurita, JHEP01, 034 (2024), arXiv:2307.04847 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  14. [14]

    Albouyet al., Eur

    G. Albouyet al., Eur. Phys. J. C82, 1132 (2022), arXiv:2203.09503 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  15. [15]

    A. J. Larkoski, I. Moult, and B. Nachman, Phys. Rept. 841, 1 (2020), arXiv:1709.04464 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  16. [16]

    Kogleret al., Rev

    R. Kogleret al., Rev. Mod. Phys.91, 045003 (2019), arXiv:1803.06991 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2019

  17. [17]

    Nachman, (2020), arXiv:2010.14554 [hep-ph]

    B. Nachman, (2020), arXiv:2010.14554 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  18. [18]

    Kogler,Advances in Jet Substructure at the LHC: Al- gorithms, Measurements and Searches for New Physical Phenomena, Vol

    R. Kogler,Advances in Jet Substructure at the LHC: Al- gorithms, Measurements and Searches for New Physical Phenomena, Vol. 284 (Springer, 2021)

    2021

  19. [19]

    Karagiorgi, G

    G. Karagiorgi, G. Kasieczka, S. Kravitz, B. Nachman, and D. Shih, Nature Rev. Phys.4, 399 (2022)

    2022

  20. [20]

    Belis, P

    V. Belis, P. Odagiu, and T. K. Aarrestad, Rev. Phys. 12, 100091 (2024), arXiv:2312.14190 [physics.data-an]

    work page arXiv 2024

  21. [21]

    C. L. Basham, L. S. Brown, S. D. Ellis, and S. T. Love, Phys. Rev. D19, 2018 (1979)

    2018

  22. [22]

    Moult and H

    I. Moult and H. X. Zhu, (2025), arXiv:2506.09119 [hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    P. T. Komiske, I. Moult, J. Thaler, and H. X. Zhu, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 051901 (2023), arXiv:2201.07800 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  24. [24]

    W. Chen, J. Gao, Y. Li, Z. Xu, X. Zhang, and H. X. Zhu, JHEP05, 043 (2024), arXiv:2307.07510 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    Hayrapetyanet al.(CMS), Phys

    A. Hayrapetyanet al.(CMS), Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 071903 (2024), arXiv:2402.13864 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2024

  26. [26]

    N. A. Sveshnikov and F. V. Tkachov, Phys. Lett. B382, 403 (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9512370

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  27. [27]

    D. M. Hofman and J. Maldacena, JHEP05, 012 (2008), arXiv:0803.1467 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  28. [28]

    A. V. Belitsky, S. Hohenegger, G. P. Korchemsky, E. Sokatchev, and A. Zhiboedov, Nucl. Phys. B884, 305 (2014), arXiv:1309.0769 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  29. [29]

    Kravchuk and D

    P. Kravchuk and D. Simmons-Duffin, JHEP11, 102 (2018), arXiv:1805.00098 [hep-th]. 7

    work page arXiv 2018

  30. [30]

    G. P. Korchemsky and G. F. Sterman, Nucl. Phys. B 555, 335 (1999), arXiv:hep-ph/9902341

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  31. [31]

    H. Chen, P. F. Monni, Z. Xu, and H. X. Zhu, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 231901 (2024), arXiv:2406.06668 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    K. Lee, A. Pathak, I. W. Stewart, and Z. Sun, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 231902 (2024), arXiv:2405.19396 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  33. [33]

    Riembau and M

    M. Riembau and M. Son, (2025), arXiv:2512.16985 [hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  34. [34]

    Ricci and M

    L. Ricci and M. Riembau, Phys. Rev. D106, 114010 (2022), arXiv:2207.03511 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  35. [35]

    A. V. Belitsky, S. Hohenegger, G. P. Korchemsky, E. Sokatchev, and A. Zhiboedov, Nucl. Phys. B884, 206 (2014), arXiv:1309.1424 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  36. [36]

    Bellazzini, F

    B. Bellazzini, F. Riva, J. Serra, and F. Sgarlata, JHEP 10, 189 (2019), arXiv:1903.08664 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2019

  37. [37]

    Holguin, I

    J. Holguin, I. Moult, A. Pathak, M. Procura, and S. Sule, (2026), arXiv:2601.20923 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  38. [38]

    A. Gao, K. Lee, and X. Zhang, (2026), arXiv:2601.20933 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  39. [39]

    J. A. Dror, R. Lasenby, and M. Pospelov, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 141803 (2017), arXiv:1705.06726 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2017

  40. [40]

    Di Luzio, M

    L. Di Luzio, M. Nardecchia, and C. Toni, Phys. Rev. D 105, 115042 (2022), arXiv:2204.05945 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  41. [41]

    C. D. Carone and H. Murayama, Phys. Rev. D52, 484 (1995), arXiv:hep-ph/9501220

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  42. [42]

    Baryon and Lepton Number as Local Gauge Symmetries

    P. Fileviez Perez and M. B. Wise, Phys. Rev. D 82, 011901 (2010), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 82, 079901 (2010)], arXiv:1002.1754 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  43. [43]

    B. A. Dobrescu and F. Yu, Phys. Rev. D88, 035021 (2013), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 90, 079901 (2014)], arXiv:1306.2629 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  44. [44]

    Serendipity in dark photon searches

    P. Ilten, Y. Soreq, M. Williams, and W. Xue, JHEP06, 004 (2018), arXiv:1801.04847 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  45. [45]

    A. M. Sirunyanet al.(CMS), Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 231803 (2019), arXiv:1905.10331 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2019

  46. [46]

    Dispelling the N^3 myth for the Kt jet-finder

    M. Cacciari and G. P. Salam, Phys. Lett. B641, 57 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0512210

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  47. [47]

    Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics

    G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, Eur. Phys. J. C71, 1554 (2011), [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.C 73, 2501 (2013)], arXiv:1007.1727 [physics.data-an]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  48. [48]

    A. M. Sirunyanet al.(CMS), JHEP01, 097 (2018), arXiv:1710.00159 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  49. [49]

    Aadet al.(ATLAS), JHEP01, 099 (2025), arXiv:2408.00049 [hep-ex]

    G. Aadet al.(ATLAS), JHEP01, 099 (2025), arXiv:2408.00049 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2025

  50. [50]

    Ricci and R

    L. Ricci and R. Sundrum, (2026), arXiv:2601.10674 [hep- th]

    work page arXiv 2026

  51. [51]

    Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in pp collisions at 8 TeV

    V. Khachatryanet al.(CMS), JINST12, P02014 (2017), arXiv:1607.03663 [hep-ex]. 8 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 (GeV) SDm2 103 104 10Events / 4 GeV Total background Nonresonant backgrounds Resonant backgrounds =1/6 q, g'q q→10 GeVZ'=1/6 q, g'q q→25 GeVZ'=1/6 q, g'q q→50 GeVZ'Validation against CMS (13 TeV) -135.9 fb FIG. 5. Our validation against the ...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017