Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 66 references

Exclusive quark and gluon dijets factorize into GPDs and form factors, giving measurable EIC rates and matching HERA data at large β′.

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 · grok-4.5

2026-07-11 18:49 UTC pith:4IQLUZJ5

load-bearing objection Solid LO extension of exclusive dijets as a GPD probe: new helicity, QED, and gluon-dijet amplitudes, honest HERA comparison, useful EIC projections with the usual LO caveats. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.04482 v1 pith:4IQLUZJ5 submitted 2026-07-05 hep-ph hep-exhep-thnucl-th

Exclusive Quark and Gluon Dijet Production as Probes of GPDs at Collider Energies

Zhuoyi Pang , Pawe{\l} Sznajder , Lech Szymanowski , Jakub Wagner This is my paper
classification hep-ph hep-exhep-thnucl-th
keywords generalized parton distributionsexclusive dijet productioncollinear factorizationElectron-Ion ColliderCompton form factorshelicity GPDsQED channelHERA data
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 shows that exclusive electroproduction of quark-antiquark and gluon-gluon dijets can be treated in collinear factorization at leading order. The amplitudes are written as hard kernels convoluted with generalized parton distributions (and, for an electromagnetic channel, elastic nucleon form factors). The authors extend earlier quark-dijet work by adding helicity GPDs and the previously neglected QED channel, and they derive the corresponding results for pure gluon dijets, which probe only C-odd (valence) quark GPDs. Numerical evaluation with a standard GPD model reproduces ZEUS HERA data for β′ ≳ 0.5 and yields concrete projections for the Electron-Ion Collider, where valence-quark and QED contributions become more visible. A sympathetic reader cares because the process offers an independent, experimentally accessible window on three-dimensional nucleon structure at collider energies, complementary to deeply virtual Compton scattering and meson production.

Core claim

At leading order in collinear factorization, the exclusive electroproduction of quark and gluon dijets is fully determined by a set of Compton form factors built from unpolarized and helicity GPDs (plus elastic form factors for the QED channel of quark dijets). The resulting differential cross sections, when evaluated with the Goloskokov-Kroll model, describe existing ZEUS data above β′ ≈ 0.5 and predict sizable, flavor- and channel-separated rates at EIC energies.

What carries the argument

The Compton form factors I (and their helicity and gluon analogues) that arise from convoluting the hard-scattering kernels with the GPD combinations Fqu, Fqh, Fgu, Fgh; these form factors enter every amplitude and cross-section formula and encode the non-perturbative input.

Load-bearing premise

The leading-order collinear calculation with a single hard scale remains quantitatively reliable once real-gluon radiation, jet reconstruction, and hadronization are included, even though the HERA data already disagree at small β′.

What would settle it

A high-statistics EIC measurement of dσ/dβ′ or dσ/dz for tagged light-quark versus gluon dijets that deviates systematically from the LO GPD-based predictions once the experimental cuts of the paper are applied.

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

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 / 0 minor

Summary. The paper derives LO collinear-factorization amplitudes and unpolarized differential cross sections for exclusive electroproduction of quark and gluon dijets, treating them as probes of GPDs (and, for the QED channel, elastic form factors). For quark dijets it extends prior work by including helicity GPDs and a leading-order electromagnetic (Bethe-Heitler-like) channel; for gluon dijets it provides new LO hard kernels that select C-odd quark GPDs. Analytic results for amplitudes (Sec. III), cross sections (Sec. IV, App. B), and continuity of first derivatives of gluon GPDs under LO evolution (App. A) are given. Phenomenology with the Goloskokov–Kroll model is compared to ZEUS HERA data and used to project EIC rates, emphasizing valence enhancement, gluon-dijet visibility, and sizable QED contributions at large β′.

Significance. If the LO framework remains a useful baseline, the work supplies the first complete set of LO hard kernels for both quark and gluon exclusive dijets (including helicity GPDs and the QED channel) and a concrete EIC phenomenology that can guide jet-tagging and flavor-separation strategies. Strengths include the explicit Feynman-diagram derivation of the hard parts, the analytic interference and pure-QED cross-section formulas in App. B, the evolution-continuity argument of App. A that underpins the double-pole gluon CFFs, and the honest HERA comparison that fails at low β′ for a physically motivated reason. The results are implemented in PARTONS and therefore reusable. The main limitation is that quantitative EIC claims rest on LO accuracy in a regime where the paper itself shows real-emission effects matter.

major comments (2)
  1. Sec. V and Fig. 7: the LO+GK prediction matches ZEUS data only for β′ ≳ 0.5 and underpredicts at lower β′, which the text attributes to missing real-gluon radiation. The same large-M, moderate-Q^{2} kinematics still enter the EIC projections (Figs. 8–13) that advertise enhanced valence and QED contributions. Without a controlled estimate (or a hard cut that demonstrably removes the problematic region) of NLO/real-emission and hadronization corrections, the claimed measurability and the size of the valence/QED enhancements remain untested. A quantitative uncertainty band or an explicit β′ ≳ 0.5 baseline for all EIC plots is needed before the projections can be taken as reliable.
  2. Sec. V (scale choice) and the free-parameter list: the hard scale is fixed to μ_R^{2} = μ_F^{2} = m_q^{2} + q_⊥^{2} + z z-bar Q^{2} with no variation shown. Because α_s and the GPD evolution enter the absolute rates and the relative QED/QCD size (especially at large q_⊥^{2}, Fig. 10), a scale-variation band is a minimal robustness check for the EIC claims. Its absence leaves the central phenomenological conclusions under-constrained.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: LO hard kernels are derived from Feynman diagrams and convolved with external GPD/FF inputs; HERA comparison is an external check, not a fit.

full rationale

The paper's central results are the LO amplitudes (Secs. III B–C) and differential cross sections (Sec. IV) for exclusive quark and gluon dijet electroproduction. These are obtained by evaluating the Feynman diagrams of Figs. 2–6, expressing the hard parts as Compton form factors (CFFs) that are convolutions of standard GPD definitions (Eqs. 15–16) or elastic form factors (Eq. 17) with the derived kernels (Eqs. 21, 24, 26, 33, 36). The CFFs are not fitted to the dijet data; they are evaluated with the external Goloskokov–Kroll model and standard elastic FFs. The HERA comparison (Fig. 7) is a genuine external benchmark that the calculation only partially describes (agreement only for β′ ≳ 0.5), and the EIC projections (Figs. 8–13) are forward predictions under the stated LO + GK assumptions. Appendix A verifies continuity of gluon GPD derivatives under LO evolution from the standard kernels, which is a consistency check rather than a circular definition. Self-references (PARTONS framework, prior DDVCS work) are infrastructural or comparative and do not force the hard kernels or the numerical results. The weakest points of the paper (scale choice, neglect of NLO/real emission/hadronization) are openly acknowledged and affect reliability, not circularity. Score 1 reflects only the minor, non-load-bearing self-citations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The calculation rests on standard collinear factorization, leading-twist GPD definitions, and a published phenomenological GPD model. No new particles or forces are introduced. Free choices are the renormalization/factorization scale, the restriction to H and H-tilde, the GK model itself, and the kinematic cuts used for HERA/EIC comparisons.

free parameters (3)
  • μ_R^{2} = μ_F^{2} = m_q^{2} + q_⊥^{2} + z z-bar Q^{2}
    Hard scale chosen by hand following the kt-factorization literature; no scale-variation band is shown.
  • Goloskokov-Kroll GPD model parameters
    All numerical curves use the published GK parameterization of H and H-tilde; model uncertainty is not propagated.
  • Kinematic cuts (y, t, q_⊥^{2}, Q^{2}, z, β′, …)
    HERA and EIC integration windows are chosen to match experiments or detector expectations; results depend on these windows.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Collinear factorization of exclusive dijet electroproduction at leading twist and LO in α_s holds in the kinematic region considered.
    Invoked throughout Secs. III–IV; validity at small β′ is questioned by the authors themselves via the HERA mismatch.
  • domain assumption Transversity GPDs and E, E-tilde GPDs can be neglected for unpolarized targets and the observables shown.
    Stated in Sec. III.A and Sec. V; no quantitative bound is given.
  • standard math First derivatives of gluon GPDs remain continuous at x = ±ξ under LO evolution, so double-pole CFFs are well-defined.
    Proved in App. A under stated smoothness assumptions; consistent with prior conformal-expansion results.
  • domain assumption Nucleon mass can be neglected in the hard kinematics except where kept for heavy-flavor thresholds.
    Used from Sec. II onward for Sudakov decompositions and ξ definitions.
  • ad hoc to paper Produced partons can be identified with reconstructed jets for the purpose of LO rate estimates (hadronization deferred).
    Explicitly postponed to future work in Sec. VI; load-bearing for the claim that the process is experimentally accessible.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 36972 in / 3341 out tokens · 27226 ms · 2026-07-11T18:49:27.521789+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We study exclusive electroproduction of dijets in the collinear factorization framework as a probe of generalized parton distributions (GPDs). For quark dijet production, we extend previous analyses by including contributions from helicity GPDs and by assessing an additional leading-order electromagnetic channel governed by elastic nucleon form factors. Furthermore, we investigate exclusive gluon dijet production. We compare our prediction to HERA data and provide projections for measurements at the future Electron-Ion Collider.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.04482 by Jakub Wagner, Lech Szymanowski, Pawe{\l} Sznajder, Zhuoyi Pang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Kinematics of exclusive dijet production. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Exclusive electroproduction of quark dijet at LO: dominant contribution from quark GPDs. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Exclusive electroproduction of quark dijet at LO: subdominant contribution from quark GPDs. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Exclusive electroproduction of quark dijet at LO: contribution from gluon GPDs. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Exclusive electroproduction of quark dijet at LO: contribution from EFFs. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Exclusive electroproduction of gluon dijet at LO. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: The cross section [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: The cross section [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: displays the differential cross section d 3σ/(dxB dt dQ2 ). For the upper panels, we fix t and Q2 while varying xBj. A common feature across all colliding energies is that the cross sections for gluon dijet production (shown in orange lines) increase with xB, since ξ increases with xB. We also investigate the effects of imposing the cut β ′ ∈ [0.5, 1]. The results indicate that the contributions from the s… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: The cross section [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11: The cross section [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12: The cross section [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13: (Quark dijet production) The cross section [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_13.png] view at source ↗

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

66 extracted references · 58 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    2: Exclusive electroproduction of quark dijet at LO: dominant contribution from quark GPDs

    Contribution from quark GPDs q q1 q2 (a) (b) (c) (d) l l′ k1 k2 FIG. 2: Exclusive electroproduction of quark dijet at LO: dominant contribution from quark GPDs. At LO, the amplitude receives contributions shown in Fig. 2 and Fig. 3. The quarks are taken to be massless in this section: µ2 = Q2z ¯z. Note that the diagrams in Fig. 3 are similar to the pure D...

  2. [2]

    4: Exclusive electroproduction of quark dijet at LO: contribution from gluon GPDs

    Contribution from gluon GPDs (a) (b) (c) k1 k2 q1 q2 k1 k2 k1 k2 k2 k1 k2 k1 (f ) k1 k2 (d) (e) ql l′ FIG. 4: Exclusive electroproduction of quark dijet at LO: contribution from gluon GPDs. At LO, the amplitude receives contributions shown in Fig. 4. Note that due to Bose symmetry, there is a double- counting when adding the crossed diagrams, we need to m...

  3. [3]

    M q ¯q,aa QCD 2

    Contribution from elastic FFs q q1 q2 ∆ l l′ l l′ q2 q1 q ∆ ∆ l l ′ q2 q1 ∆ l q1 q2 l′ (a) ( b) ( c) ( d) FIG. 5: Exclusive electroproduction of quark dijet at LO: contribution from EFFs. The amplitude for this channel can be written as: M q ¯q QED = Σ f ef H α gαβ t + iϵ J β f , (27) 8 where H α denotes the hard scattering part, ef is the charge of the q...

    2024

  4. [4]

    Gluon-in-gluon channel The gluon-in-gluon channel takes the following form [ 5]: d dlnµ Fgi(x, ξ) = Z 1 −1 dy n x1 y1 h x1 x1 − y1 ϑ0 11(x1, x1 − y1) i + + x2 y2 h x2 x2 − y2 ϑ0 11(x2, x2 − y2) i + + ∆K gg i (x1, x2 y1, y2) + 1 2 β0 CA + 2 δ(x − y) o Fgi(y, ξ), (A4) the plus distribution is defined as: h x1 x1 − y1 ϑ0 11(x1, x1 − y1) i + ≡ x1 x1 − y1 ϑ0 1...

  5. [5]

    Gluon-in-quark channel The leading-order gluon-in-quark evolution kernels in Eq. ( A1) take the following form [ 5]: K gq u (x1, x2 y1, y2) =CF (y1 − y2)ϑ0 111(x1, −x2, x1 − y1) + x1x2ϑ1 111(x1, −x2, x1 − y1) , K gq h (x1, x2 y1, y2) =CF (x1 − x2)ϑ0 111(x1, −x2, x1 − y1) + x1x2ϑ1 111(x1, −x2, x1 − y1) , (A16) the definition of ϑ1 111(x1, −x2, x1 − y1) can...

  6. [6]

    Conclusion Combining the above results, we find that the evolution of gluon GPDs won’t generate discontinuities for its first derivative at x = ξ: d(∂xFgi(ξ, ξ)) dlnµ ± = 0, (A18) for all types of GPDs ( i = u, h, T). The above analyses can be similarly performed for the point x = −ξ, with the assumption that ∂2Fgi(x, ξ)/∂2x is finite (can be discontinuou...

  7. [7]

    2Re M q ¯q QCDM q ¯q∗ QED We have 2Re M q ¯q QCDM q ¯q∗ QED = 2Re M q ¯q,u QCDM q ¯q∗ QED + 2Re M q ¯q,h QCDM q ¯q∗ QED , note that due to the existence of J α ⊥ in M q ¯q QED , Re M q ¯q,h QCDM q ¯q∗ QED is not zero for the unpolarized target. Their results read : 2Re M q ¯q,u QCDM q ¯q∗ QED = − 128π4α3 emαse2 q Q2t (µ2 + q2 ⊥)2 n Re h (2CF I q ¯q qu1 + ...

  8. [8]

    Müller, D

    D. Müller, D. Robaschik, B. Geyer, F. M. Dittes, and J. Hořejši, Wave functions, evolution equations and evolution kernels from light ray operators of QCD, Fortsch. Phys. 42, 101 (1994) , arXiv:hep-ph/9812448

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  9. [9]

    Ji, Deeply virtual Compton scattering, Phys

    X.-D. Ji, Deeply virtual Compton scattering, Phys. Rev. D 55, 7114 (1997) , arXiv:hep-ph/9609381

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  10. [10]

    A. V. Radyushkin, Nonforward parton distributions, Phys. Rev. D 56, 5524 (1997) , arXiv:hep-ph/9704207

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  11. [11]

    Diehl, Generalized parton distributions, Phys

    M. Diehl, Generalized parton distributions, Phys. Rept. 388, 41 (2003) , arXiv:hep-ph/0307382

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  12. [12]

    A. V. Belitsky and A. V. Radyushkin, Unraveling hadron structure with generalized parton distributions, Phys. Rept. 418, 1 (2005) , arXiv:hep-ph/0504030

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  13. [13]

    Ji, Gauge-Invariant Decomposition of Nucleon Spin, Phys

    X.-D. Ji, Gauge-Invariant Decomposition of Nucleon Spin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 610 (1997) , arXiv:hep-ph/9603249

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  14. [14]

    Ji, A QCD analysis of the mass structure of the nucleon, Phys

    X.-D. Ji, A QCD analysis of the mass structure of the nucleon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 1071 (1995) , arXiv:hep-ph/9410274

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  15. [15]

    M. V. Polyakov, Generalized parton distributions and strong forces inside nucleons and nuclei, Phys. Lett. B 555, 57 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0210165

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  16. [16]

    J. C. Collins, L. Frankfurt, and M. Strikman, Factorization for hard exclusive electroproduction of mesons in QCD, Phys. Rev. D 56, 2982 (1997) , arXiv:hep-ph/9611433

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  17. [17]

    J. C. Collins and A. Freund, Proof of factorization for deeply virtual Compton scattering in QCD, Phys. Rev. D 59, 074009 (1999), arXiv:hep-ph/9801262

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  18. [18]

    Dudek et al

    J. Dudek et al. , Physics Opportunities with the 12 GeV Upgrade at Jefferson Lab, Eur. Phys. J. A 48, 187 (2012) , arXiv:1208.1244 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  19. [19]

    Accardi et al

    A. Accardi et al. , Electron Ion Collider: The Next QCD Frontier: Understanding the glue that binds us all, Eur. Phys. J. A 52, 268 (2016) , arXiv:1212.1701 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  20. [20]

    Abdul Khalek et al

    R. Abdul Khalek et al. , Science Requirements and Detector Concepts for the Electron-Ion Collider: EIC Yellow Report, Nucl. Phys. A 1026, 122447 (2022) , arXiv:2103.05419 [physics.ins-det]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  21. [21]

    D. P. Anderle et al. , Electron-ion collider in China, Front. Phys. (Beijing) 16, 64701 (2021) , arXiv:2102.09222 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  22. [22]

    Kumerički and D

    K. Kumerički and D. Mueller, Deeply virtual Compton scattering at small xB and the access to the GPD H, Nucl. Phys. B 841, 1 (2010) , arXiv:0904.0458 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  23. [23]

    Kroll, H

    P. Kroll, H. Moutarde, and F. Sabatie, From hard exclusive meson electroproduction to deeply virtual Compton scattering, Eur. Phys. J. C 73, 2278 (2013) , arXiv:1210.6975 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  24. [24]

    Moutarde, P

    H. Moutarde, P. Sznajder, and J. Wagner, Border and skewness functions from a leading order fit to DVCS data, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 890 (2018) , arXiv:1807.07620 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  25. [25]

    Kumericki, S

    K. Kumericki, S. Liuti, and H. Moutarde, GPD phenomenology and DVCS fitting: Entering the high-precision era, Eur. Phys. J. A 52, 157 (2016) , arXiv:1602.02763 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  26. [26]

    Moutarde, P

    H. Moutarde, P. Sznajder, and J. Wagner, Unbiased determination of DVCS Compton Form Factors, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 614 (2019) , arXiv:1905.02089 [hep-ph] . 27

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  27. [27]

    M. Čuić, K. Kumerički, and A. Schäfer, Separation of Quark Flavors Using Deeply Virtual Compton Scattering Data, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 232005 (2020) , arXiv:2007.00029 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  28. [28]

    Ji, Parton Physics on a Euclidean Lattice, Phys

    X. Ji, Parton Physics on a Euclidean Lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 262002 (2013) , arXiv:1305.1539 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  29. [29]

    Ji, Parton Physics from Large-Momentum Effective Field Theory, Sci

    X. Ji, Parton Physics from Large-Momentum Effective Field Theory, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 57, 1407 (2014) , arXiv:1404.6680 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  30. [30]

    Ji, Y.-S

    X. Ji, Y.-S. Liu, Y. Liu, J.-H. Zhang, and Y. Zhao, Large-momentum effective theory, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 035005 (2021) , arXiv:2004.03543 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  31. [31]

    A. V. Radyushkin, Quasi-parton distribution functions, momentum distributions, and pseudo-parton distribution functions, Phys. Rev. D 96, 034025 (2017) , arXiv:1705.01488 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  32. [32]

    Alexandrou, K

    C. Alexandrou, K. Cichy, M. Constantinou, K. Hadjiyiannakou, K. Jansen, A. Scapellato, and F. Steffens, Unpolarized and helicity generalized parton distributions of the proton within lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 262001 (2020) , arXiv:2008.10573 [hep-lat]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  33. [33]

    Lin, Nucleon Tomography and Generalized Parton Distribution at Physical Pion Mass from Lattice QCD, Phys

    H.-W. Lin, Nucleon Tomography and Generalized Parton Distribution at Physical Pion Mass from Lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 182001 (2021) , arXiv:2008.12474 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  34. [34]

    Bhattacharya, K

    S. Bhattacharya, K. Cichy, M. Constantinou, J. Dodson, X. Gao, A. Metz, S. Mukherjee, A. Scapellato, F. Steffens, and Y. Zhao, Generalized parton distributions from lattice QCD with asymmetric momentum transfer: Unpolarized quarks, Phys. Rev. D 106, 114512 (2022) , arXiv:2209.05373 [hep-lat]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  35. [35]

    Cichy, M

    K. Cichy, M. Constantinou, P. Sznajder, and J. Wagner, Nucleon tomography and total angular momentum of valence quarks from synergy between lattice QCD and elastic scattering data, Phys. Rev. D 110, 114025 (2024) , arXiv:2409.17955 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  36. [36]

    M.-H. Chu, K. Cichy, M. Constantinou, P. Sznajder, and J. Wagner, A unified neural-network framework for nucleon imaging from numerical simulations of QCD, JHEP 05, 210 , arXiv:2509.15931 [hep-lat]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  37. [37]

    Y. Guo, F. P. Aslan, X. Ji, and M. G. Santiago, First Global Extraction of Generalized Parton Distributions from Ex- periment and Lattice Data with Next-to-Leading-Order Accuracy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 261903 (2025) , arXiv:2509.08037 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Abramowicz et al

    H. Abramowicz et al. (ZEUS), Production of exclusive dijets in diffractive deep inelastic scattering at HERA, Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 16 (2016) , arXiv:1505.05783 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  39. [39]

    N. N. Nikolaev and B. G. Zakharov, Splitting the pomeron into two jets: A Novel process at HERA, Phys. Lett. B 332, 177 (1994) , arXiv:hep-ph/9403281

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  40. [40]

    Bartels, C

    J. Bartels, C. Ewerz, H. Lotter, and M. Wusthoff, Azimuthal distribution of quark - anti-quark jets in DIS diffractive dissociation, Phys. Lett. B 386, 389 (1996) , arXiv:hep-ph/9605356

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  41. [41]

    Bartels, H

    J. Bartels, H. Lotter, and M. Wüsthoff, Quark-antiquark production in DIS diffractive dissociation, Phys. Lett. B 379, 239 (1996) , [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 382, 449–449 (1996)], arXiv:hep-ph/9602363

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  42. [42]

    Boussarie, A

    R. Boussarie, A. V. Grabovsky, L. Szymanowski, and S. Wallon, Towards a complete next-to-logarithmic description of forward exclusive diffractive dijet electroproduction at HERA: real corrections, Phys. Rev. D 100, 074020 (2019) , arXiv:1905.07371 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  43. [43]

    Linek, M

    B. Linek, M. Łuszczak, W. Schäfer, and A. Szczurek, Probing gluon GTMDs of the proton in deep inelastic diffractive dijet production at HERA, Phys. Rev. D 110, 054027 (2024) , arXiv:2403.15110 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  44. [44]

    Boer and C

    D. Boer and C. Setyadi, Probing gluon GTMDs through exclusive coherent diffractive processes, Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 890 (2023), arXiv:2301.07980 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  45. [45]

    Boer and C

    D. Boer and C. Setyadi, GTMD model predictions for diffractive dijet production at EIC, Phys. Rev. D 104, 074006 (2021), arXiv:2106.15148 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  46. [46]

    Hatta, B.-W

    Y. Hatta, B.-W. Xiao, and F. Yuan, Probing the Small- x Gluon Tomography in Correlated Hard Diffractive Dijet Pro- duction in Deep Inelastic Scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 202301 (2016) , arXiv:1601.01585 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  47. [47]

    X. Ji, F. Yuan, and Y. Zhao, Hunting the Gluon Orbital Angular Momentum at the Electron-Ion Collider, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 192004 (2017) , arXiv:1612.02438 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  48. [48]

    Bhattacharya, R

    S. Bhattacharya, R. Boussarie, and Y. Hatta, Signature of the Gluon Orbital Angular Momentum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 182002 (2022) , arXiv:2201.08709 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  49. [49]

    Bhattacharya, R

    S. Bhattacharya, R. Boussarie, and Y. Hatta, Exploring orbital angular momentum and spin-orbit correlations for gluons at the Electron-Ion Collider, Phys. Rev. D 111, 034019 (2025) , arXiv:2404.04209 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  50. [50]

    V. M. Braun and D. Y. Ivanov, Exclusive diffractive electroproduction of dijets in collinear factorization, Phys. Rev. D 72, 034016 (2005) , arXiv:hep-ph/0505263

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  51. [51]

    T. J. Chall, M. Łuszczak, W. Schäfer, and A. Szczurek, Probing GPDs in exclusive electroproduction of dijets, Phys. Rev. D 113, 114012 (2026) , arXiv:2603.09686 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  52. [52]

    Berthou et al., PARTONS: PARtonic Tomography Of Nucleon Software: A computing framework for the phenomenology of Generalized Parton Distributions, Eur

    B. Berthou et al., PARTONS: PARtonic Tomography Of Nucleon Software: A computing framework for the phenomenology of Generalized Parton Distributions, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 478 (2018) , arXiv:1512.06174 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  53. [53]

    K. Deja, V. Martinez-Fernandez, B. Pire, P. Sznajder, and J. Wagner, Phenomenology of double deeply virtual Compton scattering in the era of new experiments, Phys. Rev. D 107, 094035 (2023) , arXiv:2303.13668 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  54. [54]

    Mankiewicz and G

    L. Mankiewicz and G. Piller, Comments on exclusive electroproduction of transversely polarized vector mesons, Phys. Rev. D 61, 074013 (2000) , arXiv:hep-ph/9905287

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  55. [55]

    A. V. Radyushkin, Double distributions and evolution equations, Phys. Rev. D 59, 014030 (1999) , arXiv:hep-ph/9805342

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  56. [56]

    Mueller and A

    D. Mueller and A. Schafer, Complex conformal spin partial wave expansion of generalized parton distributions and distri- bution amplitudes, Nucl. Phys. B 739, 1 (2006) , arXiv:hep-ph/0509204. 28

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  57. [57]

    Grammer, Jr

    G. Grammer, Jr. and D. R. Yennie, Improved treatment for the infrared divergence problem in quantum electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 8, 4332 (1973)

    1973

  58. [58]

    Pedrak, B

    A. Pedrak, B. Pire, L. Szymanowski, and J. Wagner, Hard photoproduction of a diphoton with a large invariant mass, Phys. Rev. D 96, 074008 (2017) , [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 100, 039901 (2019)], arXiv:1708.01043 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  59. [59]

    Pedrak, B

    A. Pedrak, B. Pire, L. Szymanowski, and J. Wagner, Electroproduction of a large invariant mass photon pair, Phys. Rev. D 101, 114027 (2020) , arXiv:2003.03263 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  60. [60]

    Grocholski, B

    O. Grocholski, B. Pire, P. Sznajder, L. Szymanowski, and J. Wagner, Collinear factorization of diphoton photoproduction at next to leading order, Phys. Rev. D 104, 114006 (2021) , arXiv:2110.00048 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  61. [61]

    S. V. Goloskokov and P. Kroll, The Longitudinal cross-section of vector meson electroproduction, Eur. Phys. J. C 50, 829 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0611290

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  62. [62]

    S. V. Goloskokov and P. Kroll, The Role of the quark and gluon GPDs in hard vector-meson electroproduction, Eur. Phys. J. C 53, 367 (2008) , arXiv:0708.3569 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  63. [63]

    Bartels, H

    J. Bartels, H. Jung, and M. Wusthoff, Quark - anti-quark gluon jets in DIS diffractive dissociation, Eur. Phys. J. C 11, 111 (1999) , arXiv:hep-ph/9903265

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  64. [64]

    Qu and L

    H. Qu and L. Gouskos, ParticleNet: Jet Tagging via Particle Clouds, Phys. Rev. D 101, 056019 (2020) , arXiv:1902.08570 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  65. [65]

    Guest, J

    D. Guest, J. Collado, P. Baldi, S.-C. Hsu, G. Urban, and D. Whiteson, Jet Flavor Classification in High-Energy Physics with Deep Neural Networks, Phys. Rev. D 94, 112002 (2016) , arXiv:1607.08633 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  66. [66]

    A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS), Identification of heavy-flavour jets with the CMS detector in pp collisions at 13 TeV, JINST 13 (05), P05011, arXiv:1712.07158 [physics.ins-det]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv