Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Collinear factorization violation exponentiates through the gluon Regge trajectory to all orders.

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

2026-08-02 02:36 UTC pith:6LHG3RA7

load-bearing objection Serious Glauber-SCET paper with a real two-loop cross-check, but Eq. (30) does not expand to Eq. (26) — the exponentiation claim needs a fix or a clarifying statement. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.14259 v1 pith:6LHG3RA7 submitted 2026-07-15 hep-ph

Collinear Factorization Violation and Reggeization

Damiano Barcaro , Anjie Gao , Jonathan R. Gaunt , Aditya Pathak This is my paper
classification hep-ph PACS 12.38.Bx11.15.Bt
keywords collinear factorization violationGlauber regionReggeizationrapidity divergencessoft-collinear effective theorysplitting amplitudesresummationgluon Regge trajectory
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.

The paper claims that the long-known breaking of collinear factorization in QCD amplitudes, when a gluon is trapped in the Glauber region, is not a patchwork of loop-by-loop accidents. For a single such pinched gluon, the violating contributions factor into a collinear subgraph, a soft subgraph, and a Glauber-like propagator, and their leading rapidity logarithms resum into an exponential whose exponent is the gluon Regge trajectory with nested color commutators. The authors trace the two-loop logarithmic enhancement to an interplay between forward-scattering (Regge) dynamics and hard-scattering Wilson lines, and they identify entire diagram topologies that vanish, cancel, or become scaleless to all loops. A sympathetic reader would care because it turns a known obstruction to factorization into a resummable, Reggeized structure, with implications for how such violations enter cross sections at hadron colliders.

Core claim

The central claim is that the collinear-factorization-violating contributions for a single gluon pinched in the Glauber region factor into a collinear subgraph, a soft subgraph, and a Glauber-like propagator (eq. 9). The paper shows at one loop that only a handful of pinched diagrams survive, yielding a Regge pole and hard-Wilson-line emissions in the collinear subgraph and a BFKL-ladder color structure in the soft subgraph. Combining these, the leading rapidity logarithms exponentiate into a nested-commutator series (eq. 26) governed by the gluon Regge trajectory, as confirmed explicitly at three loops.

What carries the argument

The factorization (eq. 9) built from three objects: the collinear subgraph C, defined via a contour-deformed q+ integral that keeps only genuinely pinched Glauber momenta; the soft subgraph bS, which after the new |P+/ν+|^{η/2} regulator and contour integration reduces to a BFKL-like ladder; and the leading-order gluon Regge trajectory ω_G(q⊥), which appears in both the collinear and soft anomalous dimensions. The new rapidity regulator preserves analyticity in the longitudinal momenta, allowing their multipole expansion and killing most topologies; the surviving ones exponentiate via the anomalous dimension γ_ν.

Load-bearing premise

The all-order derivation rests on the claim that, once un-pinched Glauber momenta are deformed away, the only surviving topologies are the factorized collinear-soft structure of figure 1, while all other topology classes vanish, cancel against zero bins, or are scaleless in rapidity to every loop order; this is verified only at one loop and via a Coleman-Norton argument.

What would settle it

Compute the next-to-leading rapidity pole at three loops (α_s^3/ϵ^3 y2^2 term) directly from the EFT subgraphs defined in eqs. (10) and (21) and compare with the exponentiation in eq. (26); if the coefficient differs from the nested-commutator prediction, the factorization or the assumed vanishing of a topology class fails. Alternatively, explicitly evaluate one of the 'vanishing' class-(d) topologies at two loops and find a non-zero pinched contribution.

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

If this is right

  • The known two-loop CFV logarithm (y2 − yk) is shown to arise from a Regge-pole-plus-Wilson-line mechanism, not merely from IR pole bookkeeping.
  • The leading rapidity logarithms of CFV pieces resum to all orders into a multiplicative exponential with color commutators, matching the three-loop pole structure.
  • Entire classes of Glauber subgraph topologies vanish, cancel against zero bins, or are scaleless in rapidity, drastically reducing the number of diagrams at higher loops.
  • The approach separates soft and collinear modes in rapidity, laying groundwork for treating Glauber exchanges in non-global observables like gap-between-jets and for questions of PDF factorization.
  • The same contour-deformation and regulator strategy can be turned into a systematic algorithm for isolating hidden Glauber regions at any loop order.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the all-order vanishing/cancellation claims hold, the exponentiation (26) is likely the first term of a full resummation, and extending to multiple Glauber rungs would produce BFKL-like ladder sums rather than simple exponentials; the paper hints at this but does not prove it.
  • The fact that the Regge trajectory appears with N_c coefficient inside the anomalous dimension suggests that at higher orders, the color structure might involve higher Casimirs and eventually break the simple 'reggeized gluon' picture beyond leading logarithmic accuracy; testing the two-loop rapidity anomalous dimension would clarify this.
  • A practical testable extension: compute the two-loop rapidity finite CFV pieces in the collinear subgraph using the new regulator, as promised in the companion paper, and compare with the full amplitude result of Ref. [44].

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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies collinear factorization violation (CFV) in space-like collinear limits of QCD amplitudes, using SCET Glauber operators with new rapidity regulators. It claims an all-order soft-collinear subgraph factorization for a single Glauber exchange: CFV contributions factor into a collinear subgraph, a soft subgraph, and a Glauber propagator, Eq. (9). The authors compute the one-loop collinear and soft subgraphs explicitly, reproduce the known two-loop CFV poles, identify the large rapidity logarithm with the gluon Regge trajectory, and propose a leading-logarithmic resummation in Eqs. (26) and (30).

Significance. If established, the result would provide the first EFT-based all-order understanding of collinear factorization violation and connect it to Reggeization, with potential applications to resummations in non-global observables and to multi-loop CFV computations. The paper's concrete strengths are the explicit one-loop SCET computations, the introduction of analyticity-preserving rapidity regulators, the automated SCETCalc setup, and the nontrivial check that the one-loop subgraphs reproduce the known two-loop CFV pole structure. However, the all-order factorization claim is deferred to a companion paper, and the exponentiation formula is internally inconsistent as written. The central conceptual advance is therefore not yet fully established in the manuscript.

major comments (3)
  1. [Reggeization in factorization violation, Eqs. (26) and (30)] The LL exponentiation is internally inconsistent. Eq. (26) is a series with coefficient 1/(ℓ+1)! for y2^ℓ, multiplied by (−α_s/(2πϵ))^{ℓ+1}. Eq. (30) is a literal exponential e^{γν(q⊥)y2}; its expansion has 1/n! for y2^n. For n=1, Eq. (26) has 1/2! while Eq. (30) gives 1, so the O(α_s^2 y2) LL terms differ by a factor ~2, and higher orders differ as well. Since Eq. (28) is a first-order multiplicative evolution, its solution is a plain exponential; there is no obvious source of the extra 1/(ℓ+1) shown in the text. The statement 'Combining the LL solution of Eq. (28) with Eq. (9) yields Eq. (30)' is therefore not supported. Correct Eq. (26) or Eq. (30) and re-check the α_s^3/ϵ^3 y2^2 validation.
  2. [Factorization of subgraphs and End Matter] The central factorization formula Eq. (9) and the all-loop vanishing of Fig. 2 classes (a)–(f) are asserted rather than proved. The evidence is one-loop: ~130 graphs reduce to 5 rapidity-divergent graphs; the End Matter gives a Coleman–Norton argument for class (a) and one zero-bin calculation, with the text stating 'We expect ... to hold more generally at all-loops' and deferring details to companion [48]. Because Eq. (9) underpins the exponentiation Eq. (26), this is load-bearing. Please provide the all-order proof or explicitly restrict the claims to one-loop/two-loop and state the higher-loop statements as conjectures.
  3. [Eq. (27)] The color identity ad^ℓ_{T2·T1}(T2·T_in) = (T2T1 − Nc/2)^ℓ T2·T_in is used to derive Eq. (26), but it is stated without proof. In a generic multi-leg color space, [T2·T1, T2·T_in] is not proportional to T2·T_in; Eq. (19) shows a sum over k>3. The identity must rely on a specific color projection (e.g., the t-channel singlet/adjoint basis) or on color conservation and the color structure Sp(0)∝T1. This needs to be stated and justified; otherwise the ladder/resummation formula is not established.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (16)] The factor e^{γϵ} should be e^{γ_E ϵ}; define γ_E explicitly.
  2. [Eq. (18)] The last line has unbalanced parentheses, and the meaning of the ⊗ notation is not defined.
  3. [Eq. (30)] M[0] and Sp(0) appear in denominators; clarify that these are color operators/matrix elements and not scalar prefactors.
  4. [End Matter, Eq. (35)] The zero-bin integrand I_k^{(0)} is not explicitly defined; please define it for the reader.
  5. [Fig. 2 caption] The caption lists topologies (a)–(f) but does not define the line styles or the labels. Please add a clear description so the all-loop statements can be followed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No self-definitional circularity; central one-loop factorization is computed directly, not fitted. Minor points: the IR-formula consistency at two loops and self-cited future work are non-circular as used.

full rationale

The paper derives the CFV factorization in eq. (9) by direct computation of SCET subgraphs: the collinear subgraph one-loop result in eq. (17) is computed from the diagrams in eqs. (14)-(15), and the soft subgraph in eq. (23) is computed from eq. (22), both without fitting to the known two-loop CFV results. The rapidity anomalous dimension γν in eq. (29) follows from these computations, and exponentiation in eq. (30) follows from the evolution equation (28); this is a derived resummation, not a refit. The two-loop known result (4) is reproduced after combining eq. (18) with eq. (23), which is a genuine check rather than an input: the collinear and soft pieces are computed independently and the cancellation of 1/η is shown to yield the (y2−yk) term. The IR factorization formula (24) is used as a consistency check to organize poles and to infer the all-order LL structure, but the letter's own one-loop EFT data supply γν and the color-ladder operator, so the central claim does not reduce to eq. (24). The paper's use of its own companion papers [48] and SCETCalc [64] is not load-bearing: [48] is explicitly deferred for two-loop finite pieces and systematic proofs, while the letter states the topology-vanishing arguments are 'expected' to hold all-loops, which is a stated limitation rather than circularity. The only mild self-reference is the use of Refs. [55,59,62] to justify the regulator and Regge-pole form, but those are independent external prior works. Overall the derivation chain is self-contained at one loop and plausibly all-order; no step exhibits the reduction-to-input pattern that would constitute circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 7 axioms · 0 invented entities

No numerical free parameters are fitted; the parameters η, ν±, μ are regulators/scales whose dependence drops out of physical results. The major load-bearing assumptions are the Glauber-SCET framework and, more importantly, the new deformation/analyticity and all-loop cancellation properties, which are the paper's own contribution but are only sketched here and deferred to the companion paper.

axioms (7)
  • domain assumption Glauber-SCET operator formalism: amplitudes are written with collinear Wilson-line building blocks, soft Wilson lines, and the Glauber action S_G (eqs. (6)-(8)).
    Adopted from Rothstein-Stewart [45]; it is the formal framework for all subgraph definitions and the source of the Glauber operators.
  • domain assumption Standard SCET power counting: collinear momenta scale as Q(λ²,1,λ), soft as Q(λ,λ,λ), and Glauber momenta as q⁺∼Qλ², q⊥∼Qλ.
    Defines which regions are treated as Glauber vs. soft vs. collinear; the whole classification of pinched vs. deformable momenta uses this scaling.
  • ad hoc to paper Un-pinched q⁺ can be deformed from Qλ² to Qλ and integrated independently, with single-q⁺ insertions absorbed into the reduced amplitude.
    Central enabling assumption of the new factorization; argued in the End Matter via pole and cancellation structure, not rigorously proven in this Letter.
  • ad hoc to paper The new rapidity regulators |P⁻/ν₋|^{-η} and |P⁺/ν₊|^{η/2} preserve analyticity in the longitudinal momenta and allow contour integration plus multipole expansion.
    The claimed dramatic simplification depends on these regulators; their properties are asserted and used but the systematic treatment is deferred to [48].
  • ad hoc to paper Fig. 2 topologies (a)-(d) vanish at all loops, (e) cancels against zero-bin subtractions, and (f) is scaleless in rapidity.
    One-loop examples are computed, but the all-loop statement is given as 'we expect' and is central to the survival of only the figure 1 topology.
  • domain assumption Coleman-Norton theorem justifies the same-side pole structure that makes active-parton Glauber insertions vanish.
    Used explicitly in the End Matter to argue topology (a) vanishes; the application to SCET subgraphs is assumed.
  • domain assumption The IR factorization formula (eq. (24)) correctly fixes the IR poles of the splitting amplitude.
    Used to organize and cross-check the highest-pole rapidity logarithms; it is not used to fit free parameters.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 16080 in / 10536 out tokens · 117236 ms · 2026-08-02T02:36:29.008508+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We derive an all-order soft-collinear subgraph factorization in the space-like collinear limits of amplitudes for single gluon pinched in the Glauber region. We show that these contributions exhibit Reggeization, combining aspects of both forward and hard scattering. By deforming away from the Glauber region wherever possible we demonstrate a dramatic simplification of the effective theory subgraphs and thereby drastically reducing the complexity in computing collinear factorization breaking terms in multi-point amplitudes. Our work is aided with development of new software tools initiating a systematic study of processes involving Glauber exchanges at a multi-loop level.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.14259 by Aditya Pathak, AnJie Gao, Damiano Barcaro, Jonathan R. Gaunt.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. A generic collinear and soft subgraph decomposition [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Topologies vanish either upon contour integration of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. In the graphs featuring single [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Glauber operators inserted inside solid black circles [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. geoSCET: Soft Theorems from Power Counting

    hep-th 2026-07 accept novelty 8.0

    geoSCET derives geometric soft theorems for scalar field theories directly from effective-field-theory power counting and proves they are exact to all orders in perturbation theory when no potential is present.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

76 extracted references · 56 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    G. T. Bodwin, Factorization of the Drell-Yan Cross- Section in Perturbation Theory, Phys. Rev. D31, 2616 (1985), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 34, 3932 (1986)]

    1985

  2. [2]

    J. C. Collins, D. E. Soper, and G. F. Sterman, Factor- ization for Short Distance Hadron - Hadron Scattering, Nucl. Phys. B261, 104 (1985)

    1985

  3. [3]

    J. C. Collins, D. E. Soper, and G. F. Sterman, Soft Glu- ons and Factorization, Nucl. Phys. B308, 833 (1988)

    1988

  4. [4]

    Collins,Foundations of Perturbative QCD, Vol

    J. Collins,Foundations of Perturbative QCD, Vol. 32 (Cambridge University Press, 2011)

    2011

  5. [5]

    Diehl, J

    M. Diehl, J. R. Gaunt, D. Ostermeier, P. Pl¨ oßl, and A. Sch¨ afer, Cancellation of Glauber gluon ex- change in the double Drell-Yan process, JHEP01, 076, arXiv:1510.08696 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  6. [6]

    T. C. Rogers and P. J. Mulders, No Generalized TMD- Factorization in Hadro-Production of High Transverse Momentum Hadrons, Phys. Rev. D81, 094006 (2010), arXiv:1001.2977 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  7. [7]

    Catani, D

    S. Catani, D. de Florian, and G. Rodrigo, Space-like (ver- sus time-like) collinear limits in QCD: Is factorization violated?, JHEP07, 026, arXiv:1112.4405 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  8. [8]

    J. R. Forshaw, M. H. Seymour, and A. Siodmok, On the Breaking of Collinear Factorization in QCD, JHEP11, 066, arXiv:1206.6363 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  9. [9]

    J. R. Gaunt, Glauber Gluons and Multiple Parton Inter- actions, JHEP07, 110, arXiv:1405.2080 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2080

  10. [10]

    Zeng, Drell-Yan process with jet vetoes: break- ing of generalized factorization, JHEP10, 189, arXiv:1507.01652 [hep-ph]

    M. Zeng, Drell-Yan process with jet vetoes: break- ing of generalized factorization, JHEP10, 189, arXiv:1507.01652 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  11. [11]

    M. D. Schwartz, K. Yan, and H. X. Zhu, Collinear fac- torization violation and effective field theory, Phys. Rev. D96, 056005 (2017), arXiv:1703.08572 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  12. [12]

    M. D. Schwartz, K. Yan, and H. X. Zhu, Factorization Violation and Scale Invariance, Phys. Rev. D97, 096017 (2018), arXiv:1801.01138 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  13. [13]

    Cieri, P

    L. Cieri, P. K. Dhani, and G. Rodrigo, Catani’s gen- eralization of collinear factorization breaking, (2024), 7 arXiv:2402.14749 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2024

  14. [14]

    J. Henn, R. Ma, Y. Xu, K. Yan, Y. Zhang, and H. X. Zhu, Two-loop spacelike splitting amplitude for N=4 Super- Yang-Mills theory, Phys. Rev. D112, 076003 (2025), arXiv:2406.14604 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  15. [15]

    X. Guan, F. Herzog, Y. Ma, B. Mistlberger, and A. Suresh, Splitting amplitudes at N 3LO in QCD, JHEP 01, 090, arXiv:2408.03019 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  16. [16]

    C. Duhr, A. Venkata, and C. Zhang, Double Spacelike Collinear Limits from Multi-Regge Kinematics, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 241601 (2025), arXiv:2507.05355 [hep- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  17. [17]

    Dasgupta, A

    M. Dasgupta, A. Fraley, P. F. Monni, and S. Nabee- baccus, Uncharted Logarithmic Structures in QCD Transverse-Energy Flow, (2025), arXiv:2511.14681 [hep- ph]

    arXiv 2025

  18. [18]

    Banfi, J

    A. Banfi, J. R. Forshaw, and J. Holguin, One-Jettiness Distribution Contains Super-Super-Leading Logarithms, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 221901 (2026), arXiv:2511.11799 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2026

  19. [19]

    Becher, P

    T. Becher, P. Hager, M. Neubert, and D. Schwien- bacher, Factorization Beyond Coherence, (2026), arXiv:2603.12383 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2026

  20. [20]

    Becher, P

    T. Becher, P. Hager, S. Jaskiewicz, M. Neubert, and D. Schwienbacher, Factorization Restoration through Glauber Gluons, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 061901 (2025), arXiv:2408.10308 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  21. [21]

    Becher, P

    T. Becher, P. Hager, S. Jaskiewicz, M. Neubert, and D. Schwienbacher, Low-energy theory of jet processes and PDF factorization, (2025), arXiv:2509.07082 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    M. G. Sotiropoulos and G. F. Sterman, Color exchange in near-forward hard elastic scattering, Nucl. Phys. B419, 59 (1994), arXiv:hep-ph/9310279

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  23. [23]

    G. P. Korchemsky, On near forward high-energy scatter- ing in QCD, Phys. Lett. B325, 459 (1994), arXiv:hep- ph/9311294

    arXiv 1994

  24. [24]

    I. A. Korchemskaya and G. P. Korchemsky, High-energy scattering in QCD and cross singularities of wilson loops, Nucl. Phys. B437, 127 (1995), arXiv:hep-ph/9409446

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  25. [25]

    I. A. Korchemskaya and G. P. Korchemsky, Evolution equation for gluon Regge trajectory, Phys. Lett. B387, 346 (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9607229

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  26. [26]

    Catani, The singular behaviour of QCD amplitudes at two-loop order, Phys

    S. Catani, The singular behaviour of QCD amplitudes at two-loop order, Phys. Lett. B427, 161 (1998), arXiv:hep- ph/9802439

    arXiv 1998

  27. [27]

    S. M. Aybat, L. J. Dixon, and G. F. Sterman, The two-loop anomalous dimension matrix for soft-gluon ex- change, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 072001 (2006), arXiv:hep- ph/0606254

    arXiv 2006

  28. [28]

    S. M. Aybat, L. J. Dixon, and G. F. Sterman, The two- loop soft anomalous dimension matrix and resummation at next-to-next-to-leading pole, Phys. Rev. D74, 074004 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0607309

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  29. [29]

    L. J. Dixon, L. Magnea, and G. F. Sterman, Univer- sal structure of subleading infrared poles in gauge-theory amplitudes, JHEP08, 022, arXiv:0805.3515 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  30. [30]

    Becher and M

    T. Becher and M. Neubert, Infrared singularities of scat- tering amplitudes in perturbative QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 162001 (2009), [Erratum: Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 199905 (2013)], arXiv:0901.0722 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  31. [31]

    Gardi and L

    E. Gardi and L. Magnea, Factorization constraints for soft anomalous dimensions in QCD scattering ampli- tudes, JHEP03, 079, arXiv:0901.1091 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  32. [32]

    Becher and M

    T. Becher and M. Neubert, Infrared singularities of QCD amplitudes with massive partons, Phys. Rev. D 79, 125004 (2009), [Erratum: Phys. Rev. D 80, 109901 (2009)], arXiv:0904.1021 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  33. [33]

    Gardi and L

    E. Gardi and L. Magnea, Infrared singularities in QCD amplitudes, Nuovo Cim. C32, 137 (2009), arXiv:0908.3273 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  34. [34]

    L. J. Dixon, E. Gardi, and L. Magnea, On soft sin- gularities at three loops and beyond, JHEP02, 081, arXiv:0910.3653 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  35. [35]

    Del Duca, C

    V. Del Duca, C. Duhr, E. Gardi, L. Magnea, and C. D. White, An infrared approach to Reggeization, Phys. Rev. D85, 071104 (2012), arXiv:1108.5947 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  36. [36]

    Del Duca, C

    V. Del Duca, C. Duhr, E. Gardi, L. Magnea, and C. D. White, The infrared structure of gauge-theory amplitudes in the high-energy limit, JHEP12, 021, arXiv:1109.3581 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  37. [37]

    Caron-Huot, When does the gluon reggeize?, JHEP 05, 093, arXiv:1309.6521 [hep-th]

    S. Caron-Huot, When does the gluon reggeize?, JHEP 05, 093, arXiv:1309.6521 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  38. [38]

    Del Duca, G

    V. Del Duca, G. Falcioni, L. Magnea, and L. Vernazza, High-energy QCD amplitudes at two loops and beyond, Phys. Lett. B732, 233 (2014), arXiv:1311.0304 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  39. [39]

    Del Duca, G

    V. Del Duca, G. Falcioni, L. Magnea, and L. Ver- nazza, Analyzing high-energy factorization beyond next-to-leading logarithmic accuracy, JHEP02, 029, arXiv:1409.8330 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  40. [40]

    Almelid, C

    Ø. Almelid, C. Duhr, and E. Gardi, Three-loop cor- rections to the soft anomalous dimension in multi- leg scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 172002 (2016), arXiv:1507.00047 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  41. [41]

    Caron-Huot, E

    S. Caron-Huot, E. Gardi, and L. Vernazza, Two-parton scattering in the high-energy limit, JHEP06, 016, arXiv:1701.05241 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  42. [42]

    Almelid, C

    Ø. Almelid, C. Duhr, E. Gardi, A. McLeod, and C. D. White, Bootstrapping the QCD soft anomalous dimen- sion, JHEP09, 073, arXiv:1706.10162 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  43. [43]

    Caron-Huot, E

    S. Caron-Huot, E. Gardi, J. Reichel, and L. Ver- nazza, Infrared singularities of QCD scattering ampli- tudes in the Regge limit to all orders, JHEP03, 098, arXiv:1711.04850 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  44. [44]

    Buccioni, H

    F. Buccioni, H. Fang, and K. Yan, Two-Loop Space- like Splitting Amplitudes in Full-Color QCD, (2026), arXiv:2603.27123 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2026

  45. [45]

    I. Z. Rothstein and I. W. Stewart, An Effective Field The- ory for Forward Scattering and Factorization Violation, JHEP08, 025, arXiv:1601.04695 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  46. [46]

    Becher, M

    T. Becher, M. Neubert, and D. Y. Shao, Resummation of Super-Leading Logarithms, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 212002 (2021), arXiv:2107.01212 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  47. [47]

    Becher, M

    T. Becher, M. Neubert, D. Y. Shao, and M. Still- ger, Factorization of Non-Global LHC Observables and Resummation of Super-Leading Logarithms, (2023), arXiv:2307.06359 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  48. [48]

    Barcaro, C

    D. Barcaro, C. Dlapa, and A. Pathak, Publication forth- coming, (2026)

    2026

  49. [49]

    C. W. Bauer, S. Fleming, and M. E. Luke, Summing sudakov logarithms in b –¿ x/s gamma in effective field theory, Phys. Rev. D63, 014006 (2001), hep-ph/0005275

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  50. [50]

    C. W. Bauer, S. Fleming, D. Pirjol, and I. W. Stewart, An effective field theory for collinear and soft gluons: Heavy to light decays, Phys. Rev. D63, 114020 (2001), hep- ph/0011336

    arXiv 2001

  51. [51]

    C. W. Bauer and I. W. Stewart, Invariant operators in collinear effective theory, Phys. Lett. B516, 134 (2001), hep-ph/0107001. 8

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  52. [52]

    C. W. Bauer, D. Pirjol, and I. W. Stewart, Soft-collinear factorization in effective field theory, Phys. Rev. D65, 054022 (2002), hep-ph/0109045

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  53. [53]

    C. W. Bauer, S. Fleming, D. Pirjol, I. Z. Rothstein, and I. W. Stewart, Hard scattering factorization from effective field theory, Phys. Rev. D66, 014017 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0202088

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  54. [54]

    Pathak, A new form of QCD coherence for multi- ple soft emissions using Glauber-SCET, JHEP06, 118, arXiv:2108.13440 [hep-ph]

    A. Pathak, A new form of QCD coherence for multi- ple soft emissions using Glauber-SCET, JHEP06, 118, arXiv:2108.13440 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  55. [55]

    Neill, A

    D. Neill, A. Pathak, and I. Stewart, Small-xFactorization from Effective Field Theory, (2023), arXiv:2303.13710 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  56. [56]

    K. Lee, S. T. Schindler, and I. W. Stewart, Effec- tive Field Theory Factorization for Diffraction, (2025), arXiv:2508.10231 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  57. [57]

    P. B. Aretz, K. Lee, S. T. Schindler, and I. W. Stewart, Factorization of elastic, single, and double diffractivepp scattering, (2026), arXiv:2607.07788 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  58. [58]

    I. W. Stewart and V. Vaidya, Power counting to saturation, Phys. Rev. D110, L011504 (2024), arXiv:2305.16393 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  59. [59]

    Moult, S

    I. Moult, S. Raman, G. Ridgway, and I. W. Stewart, Anomalous dimensions from soft Regge constants, JHEP 05, 025, arXiv:2207.02859 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  60. [60]

    I. Z. Rothstein and M. Saavedra, Extracting the asymp- totic behavior of S-matrix elements from their phases, JHEP11, 155, arXiv:2312.03676 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  61. [61]

    I. Z. Rothstein and M. Saavedra, Relations between anomalous dimensions in the Regge limit, JHEP07, 073, arXiv:2410.06283 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  62. [62]

    A. Gao, I. Moult, S. Raman, G. Ridgway, and I. W. Stew- art, A collinear perspective on the Regge limit, JHEP05, 328, arXiv:2401.00931 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  63. [63]

    A. Gao, I. Moult, S. Raman, G. Ridgway, and I. W. Stewart, Reggeization in Color, (2024), arXiv:2411.09692 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  64. [64]

    Barcaro, A

    D. Barcaro, A. Bhattacharya, A. Gao, A. Pathak, and G. Vita,SCETCalc: Framework for Automating SCET Feynman Diagram Computations., To be made public (2026)

    2026

  65. [65]

    Nogueira, Automatic Feynman Graph Generation, J

    P. Nogueira, Automatic Feynman Graph Generation, J. Comput. Phys.105, 279 (1993)

    1993

  66. [66]

    Mertig, M

    R. Mertig, M. Bohm, and A. Denner, FEYN CALC: Computer algebraic calculation of Feynman amplitudes, Comput. Phys. Commun.64, 345 (1991)

    1991

  67. [67]

    Shtabovenko, R

    V. Shtabovenko, R. Mertig, and F. Orellana, New Devel- opments in FeynCalc 9.0, Comput. Phys. Commun.207, 432 (2016), arXiv:1601.01167 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  68. [68]

    Shtabovenko, R

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  69. [69]

    Ruijl, T

    B. Ruijl, T. Ueda, and J. Vermaseren, FORM version 4.2, (2017), arXiv:1707.06453 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  70. [70]

    Pak, The toolbox of modern multi-loop calculations: novel analytic and semi-analytic techniques, J

    A. Pak, The toolbox of modern multi-loop calculations: novel analytic and semi-analytic techniques, J. Phys. Conf. Ser.368, 012049 (2012), arXiv:1111.0868 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  71. [71]

    J.-Y. Chiu, A. Jain, D. Neill, and I. Z. Rothstein, A Formalism for the Systematic Treatment of Rapidity Logarithms in Quantum Field Theory, JHEP05, 084, arXiv:1202.0814 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  72. [72]

    Gardi, F

    E. Gardi, F. Herzog, S. Jones, and Y. Ma, Dis- secting polytopes: Landau singularities and asymp- totic expansions in 2→2 scattering, JHEP08, 127, arXiv:2407.13738 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  73. [73]

    J. R. Forshaw, A. Kyrieleis, and M. H. Seymour, Super- leading logarithms in non-global observables in QCD, JHEP08, 059, arXiv:hep-ph/0604094

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  74. [74]

    J. R. Forshaw, A. Kyrieleis, and M. H. Seymour, Super- leading logarithms in non-global observables in QCD: Colour basis independent calculation, JHEP09, 128, arXiv:0808.1269 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  75. [75]

    W. Chen, E. Gardi, R. Ma, Y. Ma, Y. Zhang, and Z. Zhu, Spacelike-Collinear Scattering by the Method of Regions, (2026)

    2026

  76. [76]

    un-pinched

    S. Coleman and R. E. Norton, Singularities in the phys- ical region, Nuovo Cim.38, 438 (1965). 9 END MA TTER Derivation of the factorization.In this appendix, we sketch the main elements of derivation of the factor- ization presented in eq. (9). Let us begin with considera- tions of collinear loops and throw in a single insertion of the Glauber operator. ...

    1965