Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 54 references

Bremsstrahlung photon contributions to parton energy loss at high virtuality ($Q^2$) : a perturbative calculation at $O(\alpha_{s} \alpha_{em})$

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper derives the complete medium-induced real-photon emission kernels at O(alpha_s alpha_em) for a high-virtual quark, including photon-quark and photon-gluon final states, full phase factors, and heavy-quark mass terms.

desk verdict A serious higher-twist photon-emission calculation whose central path-length identification rests on an invalid reality argument at Eq. (38). read the letter →

arxiv 2502.02667 v4 pith:CEVS4ILN submitted 2025-02-04 hep-ph nucl-exnucl-th

Amit Kumar , Gojko Vujanovic This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phnucl-exnucl-th
keywords medium-inducedphotonemissionpartonenergylosshigher-twistformalismdeepinelasticscatteringheavy-quarkmasseffectscoherencephasetransverse-momentum-dependentPDFsquark-gluonplasma
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper aims to establish the complete single-scattering, medium-induced real-photon emission kernels for a highly virtual and energetic quark at order $\alpha_s\alpha_{em}$, within the higher-twist factorization of deep-inelastic scattering. Two kernels result, classified by the final state: a real photon with a quark (gluon exchange with the medium) and a real photon with a gluon (quark exchange, i.e., fermion-to-boson conversion). The kernels include full phase factors from all non-vanishing diagrams, complete second-order transverse-gradient terms, and heavy-quark mass effects. Such kernels matter because existing parton energy-loss treatments rely on gluon bremsstrahlung and omit these photon channels; if the derivation is right, Monte Carlo simulations of jets in nuclear matter can now predict photon emission from short-lived, high-virtuality quarks of every flavor.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the forward-scattering hadronic tensor in deep-inelastic scattering, evaluated with Cutkosky cuts, together with a reality condition on the residual phase factors. The central object is the phase factor combination $R = ( -1 + e^{iG(x^- - z_2^-)} ) ( -1 + e^{-iG(y^- - z_3^-)} )$, which is required to be real; this forces the amplitude-side distance $x^- - z_2^-$ to equal the conjugate-side distance $y^- - z_3^-$, defining the path-length variable $\zeta^-$. The phase $G$ is $(\ell_{2\perp}^2 + y^2 M^2)/(2y(1-y)q^-)$ for massive quarks and $\ell_{2\perp}^2/(2y(1-y)q^-)$ for massless ones. That coherence phase, together with the second-order transverse-gradient expansion in $k_\perp$ and $k^-$, converts the kernels into sums of perturbative coefficients times the two-point correlation functions $\hat{A}_0, \hat{A}_{T,2}, \hat{A}_{L,1}$ and $\hat{F}_0, \hat{F}_{T,2}, \hat{F}_{L,1}$.

What would settle it

Evaluate the phase factor product $R=(-1+e^{iG(x^- - z_2^-)})(-1+e^{-iG(y^- - z_3^-)})$ without imposing $x^- - z_2^- = y^- - z_3^-$ and check whether the imaginary part of the hadronic tensor vanishes; alternatively, sum the eight cut diagrams numerically without the reality constraint and compare with the closed-form kernels in Eqs. (65) and (69). If the imaginary part does not vanish, the kernels are incomplete.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that Eqs. (65) and (69) give the full effective medium-modified scattering kernels $K^{eff}_1$ and $K^{eff}_2$ at $O(\alpha_s\alpha_{em})$. Kernel-1 describes a photon and quark in the final state, with the quark exchanging a Glauber gluon with the medium; kernel-2 describes a photon and gluon, with the quark converting through exchange of a Glauber quark. The hadronic tensor is computed by summing all central, left, and right cuts of the forward-scattering diagrams, and each term carries the coherence phase $2-2\cos\{G\,\zeta^-\}$ encoding the path length $\zeta^-$ between first and second scattering. The quark-to-gluon (photon) conversion processes in kernel-2 are suppressed by a power of the quark energy scale $q^-$, as expected. After collinear expansion, the derivative terms multiply two-point in-medium correlation functions, $\hat{A}$ for gluonic and $\hat{F}$ for fermionic, which depend on the emitted photon's transverse momentum and therefore resemble transverse-momentum-dependent parton distribution functions.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the distance between the first and second scattering is the same on the amplitude side and on the complex-conjugate side, making the leftover phase factors real; if that constraint does not hold, the interference structure and the resulting kernels would be different.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The effective kernel in Eq. (65) can be used directly in parton energy-loss simulations to add medium-induced real photon emission from high-virtuality quarks, including charm and bottom.
  • The conversion kernel in Eq. (69) is suppressed by $1/q^-$ relative to kernel-1, so photon+gluon production from fermion-to-boson conversion becomes important only for lower-energy jets or for photon-tagged correlation studies.
  • The mass-dependent terms make bottom-quark transverse broadening and longitudinal drag noticeably smaller than for light quarks at photon momentum fractions $y>0.25$, giving a flavor-dependent photon signature.
  • The transport coefficients that emerge from the gradient expansion are transverse-momentum-dependent two-point functions, linking jet energy loss in hot QCD matter to TMD parton distribution measurements.
  • Because the kernels are expressed through $\hat{A}$ and $\hat{F}$ correlators, the same result applies to cold nuclear matter and to quark-gluon plasma once those non-perturbative correlators are supplied.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct check of the reality condition on the analogous gluon-emission phase factors would tell whether the path-length variable $\zeta^-$ has a universal meaning across all radiative channels, not just photons.
  • One observable test of the $1/q^-$ suppression is the ratio of associated-photon counts with an accompanying gluon versus an accompanying quark as a function of jet energy; the predicted hierarchy could be searched for in existing photon-jet data.
  • The fermionic correlation functions $\hat{F}$ suggest a route to probing flavor-dependent hydrodynamization of the quark-gluon plasma, since photons from short-lived high-virtuality quarks are emitted before the medium thermalizes and directly sample those correlators.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents a higher-twist (HT) perturbative calculation of medium-induced real-photon emission kernels for a highly virtual quark in deep-inelastic scattering off a nuclear target. Two classes of single-scattering contributions at O(alpha_s alpha_em) are considered: kernel-1 with a real photon plus quark final state, and kernel-2 with a real photon plus gluon final state. The authors include heavy-quark mass effects, retain full phase factors from all non-vanishing diagrams, perform a collinear expansion in the soft Glauber momentum, and identify the resulting jet-medium transport coefficients with transverse-momentum-dependent parton distribution functions. The central outputs are the full kernels S_eff^1 and S_eff^2 in Eqs. (65) and (69), together with the expanded coefficients R_0, R_L,1, R_T,2 for each kernel in Section V.B, and path-length-dependent numerical illustrations in Section V.C. The calculation is parameter-free in the sense that no transport coefficient is fitted; quark-mass and momentum-fraction dependences are shown explicitly.

Significance. If the derivation is correct, the paper provides a genuinely new ingredient for Monte Carlo implementations of parton energy loss: medium-induced photon bremsstrahlung kernels for high-virtuality quarks, including heavy-quark mass effects and fermion-to-boson conversion processes. The calculation is well organized, the diagram classification is careful, the overlap with Ref. [36] is explicitly acknowledged, and the final kernels are sufficiently explicit to be implemented and tested. The claimed connection between the NLO/NLT transport coefficients and TMD-PDFs is also a useful conceptual observation. However, the central derivation rests on a reality argument in Eq. (38) that, as written, is mathematically too strong and selects one of several possible branches. Because the single path-length variable zeta^- appears throughout Eqs. (65), (69), and the R_i coefficients, this issue is load-bearing rather than cosmetic.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III, Eq. (38)] The reality argument used to collapse the two phase factors into a single path-length variable is not valid as stated. Writing a = G_M^(ell2)(x^- - z_2^-) and b = G_M^(ell2)(y^- - z_3^-), the product R = [-1 + e^{ia}][-1 + e^{-ib}] has imaginary part Im R = -sin a + sin b + sin(a-b) = 4 sin(a/2) sin(b/2) sin((b-a)/2). The condition Im R = 0 is therefore satisfied not only when a = b (mod 2 pi), as claimed in Eq. (38), but also when a = 2 pi m with arbitrary b, or b = 2 pi n with arbitrary a. The manuscript gives no kinematic argument that excludes these other branches. Moreover, the reality of the hadronic tensor W^mu nu is a statement about the full integral over x^-, y^-, z_2^-, z_3^- and over the transverse momenta, not about a single factor before integration. Imposing reality on the integrand factor alone is therefore both too strong and not implied by the physical requirement that W be real. Since the subsequent replacement by 2 - 2 cos(G_M zeta^-), the definition of zeta^- in Eq. (39), and all final kernels in Eqs. (65) and (69) depend on this step, the central result is not yet uniquely justified.
  2. [Section IV, Eq. (55) and Eq. (56)] The same reality argument is applied verbatim to kernel-2 in Eq. (55), leading again to zeta^- = y^- - z_3^- = x^- - z_2^- and to the factor 2 - 2 cos(G_0^(ell2) zeta^-) in Eq. (56). Consequently, the branch-selection problem from Eq. (38) propagates directly into the second central kernel S_eff^2 in Eq. (69). Even if one accepted the a = b branch for kernel-1, the analogous issue would still need to be resolved for kernel-2, because the interference structure there involves two different phases G_0^(ell2) and G_0^(p2), and the third line of Eq. (69) contains a combination of cosines that is not simply a single path-length factor. The derivation needs either a kinematic derivation of the equal-distance condition or a reformulation that keeps the two distances separate and shows that the final physical result is real and independent of the branch choice after all integrations are performed.
  3. [Section V.C, Figs. 8-11] The numerical illustrations evaluate only the collinear-expanded coefficients R_0^(1), R_L,1^(1), R_T,2^(1), R_0^(2), R_L,1^(2), and R_T,2^(2), not the full kernels S_eff^1 and S_eff^2 in Eqs. (65) and (69). The text also does not quantify the smallness of the omitted higher-order terms in the k_perp and k^- expansion of Eq. (71). This does not invalidate the analytic derivation, but it means that the paper does not yet demonstrate numerically that the 'complete' kernels are under control away from the collinear limit, which is the regime relevant for Monte Carlo implementation. At minimum, the authors should state this limitation explicitly and, if possible, provide a comparison between the expanded and unexpanded kernels for representative kinematics.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Introduction, first paragraph] The text contains the typo 'patron energy loss'; this should read 'parton energy loss'.
  2. [Appendix C and Appendix E] The word 'hadonic' appears several times (e.g., 'hadonic tensor'); this should be corrected to 'hadronic'.
  3. [Section VI, Summary and Outlook] The phrase 'scattering kernles for photon production' contains a typo; it should read 'scattering kernels'.
  4. [Section V.C, figures] The figure captions describe the plotted quantities as 'length-integrated', while the text in Section V.C describes them as 'path length dependence' of the coefficients. The captions should be clarified to state whether the plotted curves are cumulative integrals over zeta^- or the zeta^- dependence of R_i at fixed parameters.
  5. [Notation throughout] The symbol R is used both for the phase-factor product in Eq. (38) and for the expansion coefficients R_0, R_L,i, R_T,i in Section V.B. This double use is confusing and should be resolved, for example by renaming the phase-factor product.
  6. [Section II, Eq. (6)] The decomposition of dW/dy in Eq. (6) introduces K_0 and K_i, but the explicit form of K_0 is deferred to Appendix A. A brief pointer in the main text would help the reader locate the vacuum contribution.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the O(alpha_s alpha_em) kernels are derived from the hadronic tensor by explicit perturbative calculation, and the acknowledged overlap with Ref. [36] is a cross-check, not an input.

full rationale

The paper derives the single-scattering photon-emission kernels from the DIS hadronic tensor using Cutkosky cuts, contour integrations, power counting in lambda, and a subsequent gradient expansion. No parameter is fitted to data and no final kernel is inserted as an input. The comparison with Ref. [36] is made after the derivation ('We notice similarities between our calculation and those presented in Ref. [36]'), and the matching terms are presented as checkpoints rather than as premises. The cited higher-twist framework and coherence treatment of Refs. [36,39,40] supply the factorization scheme, but the central O(alpha_s alpha_em) kernels are computed explicitly in this paper. The main technical weakness highlighted by the reader -- Eq. (38)'s inference that reality of W forces equality of amplitude and conjugate path lengths -- is a kinematic/mathematical assumption, not a circular reduction: the final kernels depend on that assumption, but the assumption is not a fitted parameter or a relabeled prediction. No step reproduces its own input by construction, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard higher-twist factorization assumptions plus one specific condition (the realness of phase factors) that is not fully justified. No free parameters are fitted to data; the quark masses are physical inputs and the numerical plots use illustrative kinematic values.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The hard quark's rescatterings in the nucleus are independent of the primary hard scattering, allowing factorization of the four-point correlator into a nucleon PDF and a two-point medium correlator.
    Invoked in Eq. (18) of Section III; underlies the definition of the jet-medium transport coefficients.
  • domain assumption The in-medium exchange is a Glauber gluon or quark with transverse momentum much larger than its light-cone components.
    Stated in Section II and Section VI; used to simplify the gluon field A^+ dominance and the power counting.
  • ad hoc to paper The remaining phase factors in the hadronic tensor must be real-valued, which forces the equality of the amplitude and conjugate scattering distances (zeta^- = y^- - z_3^- = x^- - z_2^-).
    Eq. (38) in Section III; this assumption is load-bearing for the interference phase factors in the derived kernels.
  • standard math The light-cone gauge A^- = 0 and the lambda power counting for momentum components are valid.
    Used throughout Section II to establish the perturbative hierarchy.
  • domain assumption A Taylor expansion of the scattering kernel in the medium momentum k_perp and k^- is valid up to the retained order.
    Section V.B; homogeneous and isotropic medium assumed so odd terms vanish; higher-order terms neglected.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Bremsstrahlung photon contributions to parton energy loss at high virtuality ($Q^2$) : a perturbative calculation at $O(\alpha_{s} \alpha_{em})$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CEVS4ILN

@misc{pith2026250202667,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Bremsstrahlung photon contributions to parton energy loss at high virtuality ($Q^2$) : a perturbative calculation at $O(\alpha_s \alpha_em)$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CEVS4ILN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.02667}
}
abstract

In this work, real photon production scattering kernels from jet-medium interactions in the QCD medium are perturbatively calculated using the higher-twist (HT) formalism. Focus is given towards real photon production from a highly virtual (and highly energetic) quark, taking into account heavy-quark mass scales [Phys. Rev. C 94, 054902 (2016)], fermion-boson conversion processes [Nucl. Phys. A 793, 128 (2007)], as well as coherence effects [Phys. Rev. C 105, 024908 (2022)]. A generalized factorization procedure, such as that used in e-A deep-inelastic scattering, is employed to derive an improved single-scattering medium-induced photon emission kernels that go beyond the traditional in-medium gluon exchange approximation. Diagrams with real-photon emission from the hard quark are classified based on the final-state particles, and include two types of scattering kernels at $O(\alpha_{em}\alpha_{s})$ giving the following final states: (i) real photon and real quark, (ii) real photon and real gluon. The collisional kernels, thus derived, include full phase factors from all non-vanishing diagrams and complete second-order derivative terms in the transverse momentum gradient expansion. Moreover, the calculation includes heavy-quark mass effects, thus exploring heavy-quark energy loss. The in-medium parton distribution functions and the related jet transport coefficients have a hard transverse momentum dependence (of the emitted gluon or photon) present within the phase factor. It is observed that the jet transport coefficients resemble the transverse-momentum-dependent parton distribution functions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.02667 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Single-scattering-induced photon emission processes in a DIS between a highly virtual photon and the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: A schematic diagram of deep-inelastic scattering between an electron and a nucleon inside the nucleus. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: Forward scattering diagrams of leading order photon production from the quark. The cut-line (i.e., dashed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (22 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Forward scattering diagrams for single photon emission with a single Glauber gluon scattering, giving a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: A single-scattering-induced photon emission process at next-to-leading order for kernel-1. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Diagrams in kernel-2 giving a real photon and a gluon final states. The second scattering with the nuclear [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: A forward scattering diagram in kernel-2. It consists of a fermion-to-boson conversion process, giving a real [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: Path length dependence of zeroth-order ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: Path length dependence of zeroth-order ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: Path length dependence of second order gradient term [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11: Path length dependence of first order gradient term [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12: A forward scattering diagram contributing to kernel-1 at NLO. The left-cut line corresponds to an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13: A forward scattering diagram contributing to kernel-1. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14: A forward scattering diagram contributing to kernel-1. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15: A forward scattering diagram contributing to kernel-2. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16: A forward scattering diagram contributing to kernel-2. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p038_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: FIG. 17: A forward scattering diagram contributing to kernel-2. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p040_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: FIG. 18: Diagrams for single emission and single scattering kernel (kernel-3) giving quark and antiquark final states [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p041_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: FIG. 19: A forward scattering diagram contributing to kernel-3. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p041_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: FIG. 20: A forward scattering diagram contributing to kernel-3. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p042_20.png]
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: FIG. 21: A forward scattering diagram contributing to kernel-3. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p042_21.png]
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: FIG. 22: A forward scattering diagram contributing to kernel-3. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p044_22.png]
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: FIG. 23: All diagrams with quark-quark final states contributing to kernel-4. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p044_23.png]
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: FIG. 24: A forward scattering diagram contributing to kernel-4. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p045_24.png]
Figure 25
Figure 25. Figure 25: FIG. 25: A forward scattering diagram contributing to kernel-4. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p045_25.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages

  1. [36]

    Transport coefficients in high temperature gauge theories. 1. Leading log results,

    Peter Brockway Arnold, Guy D. Moore, and Laurence G. Yaffe, “Transport coefficients in high temperature gauge theories. 1. Leading log results,” JHEP11, 001 (2000), arXiv:hep-ph/0010177

    arXiv 2000

  2. [1]

    We identify one pole for each momentum variablep + andp ′+. The contour integration forp + in the complex plane is given by C1 = I dp+ (2π) eip+(x−−z− 2 ) [(q+p) 2 −M 2 +iϵ] = I dp+ (2π) eip+(x−−z− 2 ) 2q−[q+ +p + −[M 2/(2q−)] +iϵ] = (2πi) 2π θ(x− −z − 2 ) 2q− e i −q++ M 2 2q− (x−−z− 2 ) . (104) Similarly, the contour integration for momentump ′+ is carri...

    work page

  3. [2]

    It has two simple poles for the momentum variablep + and one simple pole forp ′+. The contour integration for momentump + in the complex plane gives C1 = I dp+ (2π) eip+(x−−z− 2 ) h (q+p) 2 −M 2 +iϵ i h (q+p−ℓ 2)2 −M 2 +iϵ i = I dp+ (2π) eip+(x−−z− 2 ) 2q− h q+ +p + − M 2 2q− +iϵ i 2(q− −ℓ − 2 ) h q+ +p + −ℓ + 2 − ℓℓℓ2 2⊥+M 2 2(q−−ℓ− 2 ) +iϵ i = (2πi) 2π ...

    work page

  4. [3]

    Suppression of hadrons with large transverse momentum in central Au+Au collisions at√sN N= 130-GeV,

    K. Adcoxet al.(PHENIX), “Suppression of hadrons with large transverse momentum in central Au+Au collisions at√sN N= 130-GeV,” Phys. Rev. Lett.88, 022301 (2002), arXiv:nucl-ex/0109003

    arXiv 2002

  5. [4]

    Highp T charged hadron suppression in Au + Au collisions at √sN N= 200 GeV,

    S. S. Adleret al.(PHENIX), “Highp T charged hadron suppression in Au + Au collisions at √sN N= 200 GeV,” Phys. Rev. C69, 034910 (2004), arXiv:nucl-ex/0308006

    arXiv 2004

  6. [5]

    Suppressedπ 0 production at large transverse momentum in central Au+ Au collisions at√SN N= 200 GeV,

    S. S. Adleret al.(PHENIX), “Suppressedπ 0 production at large transverse momentum in central Au+ Au collisions at√SN N= 200 GeV,” Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 072301 (2003), arXiv:nucl-ex/0304022

    arXiv 2003

  7. [6]

    Centrality dependence of highp T hadron suppression in Au+Au collisions at √sN N= 130-GeV,

    C. Adleret al.(STAR), “Centrality dependence of highp T hadron suppression in Au+Au collisions at √sN N= 130-GeV,” Phys. Rev. Lett.89, 202301 (2002), arXiv:nucl-ex/0206011

    arXiv 2002

  8. [7]

    Transverse momentum and collision energy dependence of high p(T) hadron suppression in Au+Au collisions at ultrarelativistic energies,

    J. Adamset al.(STAR), “Transverse momentum and collision energy dependence of high p(T) hadron suppression in Au+Au collisions at ultrarelativistic energies,” Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 172302 (2003), arXiv:nucl-ex/0305015

    arXiv 2003

Show all 54 references
  1. [8]

    Measurement of the nuclear modification factor for inclusive jets in Pb+Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV with the ATLAS detector,

    Morad Aaboudet al.(ATLAS), “Measurement of the nuclear modification factor for inclusive jets in Pb+Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV with the ATLAS detector,” Phys. Lett. B790, 108–128 (2019), arXiv:1805.05635 [nucl-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Measurements of inclusive jet spectra in pp and central Pb-Pb collisions at √sNN = 5.02 TeV,

    Shreyasi Acharyaet al.(ALICE), “Measurements of inclusive jet spectra in pp and central Pb-Pb collisions at √sNN = 5.02 TeV,” Phys. Rev. C101, 034911 (2020), arXiv:1909.09718 [nucl-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Measurement of inclusive jet cross sections inppand PbPb collisions at √sN N= 2.76 TeV,

    Vardan Khachatryanet al.(CMS), “Measurement of inclusive jet cross sections inppand PbPb collisions at √sN N= 2.76 TeV,” Phys. Rev. C96, 015202 (2017), arXiv:1609.05383 [nucl-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  4. [11]

    First measurement of large area jet transverse momentum spectra in heavy-ion colli- sions,

    Albert M Sirunyanet al.(CMS), “First measurement of large area jet transverse momentum spectra in heavy-ion colli- sions,” JHEP05, 284 (2021), arXiv:2102.13080 [hep-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Measurement of photon–jet transverse momentum correlations in 5.02 TeV Pb + Pb andppcollisions with ATLAS,

    Morad Aaboudet al.(ATLAS), “Measurement of photon–jet transverse momentum correlations in 5.02 TeV Pb + Pb andppcollisions with ATLAS,” Phys. Lett. B789, 167–190 (2019), arXiv:1809.07280 [nucl-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Comparison of inclusive and photon-tagged jet suppression in 5.02 TeV Pb+Pb collisions with ATLAS,

    Georges Aadet al.(ATLAS), “Comparison of inclusive and photon-tagged jet suppression in 5.02 TeV Pb+Pb collisions with ATLAS,” Phys. Lett. B846, 138154 (2023), arXiv:2303.10090 [nucl-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Study of jet quenching with isolated-photon+jet correlations in PbPb and pp collisions at √sNN = 5.02 TeV,

    Albert M Sirunyanet al.(CMS), “Study of jet quenching with isolated-photon+jet correlations in PbPb and pp collisions at √sNN = 5.02 TeV,” Phys. Lett. B785, 14–39 (2018), arXiv:1711.09738 [nucl-ex]

    2018 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Jet-like Correlations with Direct-Photon and Neutral-Pion Triggers at √sN N= 200 GeV,

    L. Adamczyket al.(STAR), “Jet-like Correlations with Direct-Photon and Neutral-Pion Triggers at √sN N= 200 GeV,” Phys. Lett. B760, 689–696 (2016), arXiv:1604.01117 [nucl-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Measurement of jet-medium interactions via direct photon-hadron correlations in Au+Au andd+Au collisions at √sN N= 200 GeV,

    U. Acharyaet al.(PHENIX), “Measurement of jet-medium interactions via direct photon-hadron correlations in Au+Au andd+Au collisions at √sN N= 200 GeV,” Phys. Rev. C102, 054910 (2020), arXiv:2005.14270 [hep-ex]

    2020

  10. [17]

    Azimuthal anisotropy of charged particles with transverse momentum up to 100 GeV/ c in PbPb collisions at √sN N=5.02 TeV,

    A. M. Sirunyanet al.(CMS), “Azimuthal anisotropy of charged particles with transverse momentum up to 100 GeV/ c in PbPb collisions at √sN N=5.02 TeV,” Phys. Lett. B776, 195–216 (2018), arXiv:1702.00630 [hep-ex]

    2018 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Azimuthal Anisotropy of Charged Particles at High Transverse Momenta in PbPb Collisions at √sN N= 2.76 TeV,

    Serguei Chatrchyanet al.(CMS), “Azimuthal Anisotropy of Charged Particles at High Transverse Momenta in PbPb Collisions at √sN N= 2.76 TeV,” Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 022301 (2012), arXiv:1204.1850 [nucl-ex]

    2012 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Measurement of the azimuthal anisotropy of charged particles produced in √sNN = 5.02 TeV Pb+Pb collisions with the ATLAS detector,

    Morad Aaboudet al.(ATLAS), “Measurement of the azimuthal anisotropy of charged particles produced in √sNN = 5.02 TeV Pb+Pb collisions with the ATLAS detector,” Eur. Phys. J. C78, 997 (2018), arXiv:1808.03951 [nucl-ex]

    2018 arXiv

  13. [20]

    The JETSCAPE framework,

    J. H. Putschkeet al., “The JETSCAPE framework,” (2019), arXiv:1903.07706 [nucl-th]

    2019 arXiv

  14. [21]

    JETSCAPE framework:p+presults,

    A. Kumaret al.(JETSCAPE), “JETSCAPE framework:p+presults,” Phys. Rev. C102, 054906 (2020), arXiv:1910.05481 [nucl-th]

    2020 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Inclusive jet and hadron suppression in a multistage approach,

    A. Kumaret al.(JETSCAPE), “Inclusive jet and hadron suppression in a multistage approach,” Phys. Rev. C107, 034911 (2023), arXiv:2204.01163 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Multi-stage jet evolution through QGP using the JETSCAPE framework: inclusive jets, correlations and leading hadrons,

    Chanwook Park (JETSCAPE), “Multi-stage jet evolution through QGP using the JETSCAPE framework: inclusive jets, correlations and leading hadrons,” PoSHardProbes2018, 072 (2019), arXiv:1902.05934 [nucl-th]

    2019 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Simple effective Lagrangian for hard thermal loops,

    Eric Braaten and Robert D. Pisarski, “Simple effective Lagrangian for hard thermal loops,” Phys. Rev. D45, R1827 (1992)

    1992

  18. [25]

    Effective kinetic theory for high temperature gauge theories,

    Peter Brockway Arnold, Guy D. Moore, and Laurence G. Yaffe, “Effective kinetic theory for high temperature gauge theories,” JHEP01, 030 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0209353

    2003 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Photon emission from quark gluon plasma: Complete leading order results,

    Peter Brockway Arnold, Guy D. Moore, and Laurence G. Yaffe, “Photon emission from quark gluon plasma: Complete leading order results,” JHEP12, 009 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0111107

    2001 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Next-to-leading order thermal photon production in a weakly coupled quark-gluon plasma,

    Jacopo Ghiglieri, Juhee Hong, Aleksi Kurkela, Egang Lu, Guy D. Moore, and Derek Teaney, “Next-to-leading order thermal photon production in a weakly coupled quark-gluon plasma,” JHEP05, 010 (2013), arXiv:1302.5970 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  21. [28]

    O(g) plasma effects in jet quenching,

    Simon Caron-Huot, “O(g) plasma effects in jet quenching,” Phys. Rev. D79, 065039 (2009), arXiv:0811.1603 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Testing thermal photon and dilepton rates,

    G. Jackson and M. Laine, “Testing thermal photon and dilepton rates,” JHEP11, 144 (2019), arXiv:1910.09567 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Lattice QCD estimates of thermal photon production from the QGP,

    Sajid Ali, Dibyendu Bala, Anthony Francis, Greg Jackson, Olaf Kaczmarek, Jonas Turnwald, Tristan Ueding, and Nicolas Wink (HotQCD), “Lattice QCD estimates of thermal photon production from the QGP,” Phys. Rev. D110, 054518 (2024), arXiv:2403.11647 [hep-lat]

    2024 arXiv

  24. [31]

    MARTINI: An Event generator for relativistic heavy-ion collisions,

    Bjoern Schenke, Charles Gale, and Sangyong Jeon, “MARTINI: An Event generator for relativistic heavy-ion collisions,” Phys. Rev. C80, 054913 (2009), arXiv:0909.2037 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Jet-medium Photons as a Probe of Parton Dynamics,

    Rouzbeh Modarresi Yazdi, Shuzhe Shi, Charles Gale, and Sangyong Jeon, “Jet-medium Photons as a Probe of Parton Dynamics,” Acta Phys. Polon. Supp.16, 1–A129 (2023), arXiv:2207.12513 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  26. [33]

    Multimessenger heavy-ion collision physics,

    Charles Gale, Jean-Fran¸ cois Paquet, Bj¨ orn Schenke, and Chun Shen, “Multimessenger heavy-ion collision physics,” Phys. Rev. C105, 014909 (2022), arXiv:2106.11216 [nucl-th]

    2022 arXiv

  27. [34]

    Production of photons in relativistic heavy-ion collisions,

    Jean-Fran¸ cois Paquet, Chun Shen, Gabriel S. Denicol, Matthew Luzum, Bj¨ orn Schenke, Sangyong Jeon, and Charles Gale, “Production of photons in relativistic heavy-ion collisions,” Phys. Rev. C93, 044906 (2016), arXiv:1509.06738 48 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  28. [35]

    Out-of- equilibrium photon production in the late stages of relativistic heavy-ion collisions,

    Niklas G¨ otz, Anna Sch¨ afer, Oscar Garcia-Montero, Jean-Fran¸ cois Paquet, Hannah Elfner, and Charles Gale, “Out-of- equilibrium photon production in the late stages of relativistic heavy-ion collisions,” Phys. Rev. C105, 044910 (2022), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.C 109, 049901 (2024...

    2022 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Yaffe, “Transport coefficients in high temperature gauge theories

    Peter Brockway Arnold, Guy D Moore, and Laurence G. Yaffe, “Transport coefficients in high temperature gauge theories

  30. [38]

    Beyond leading log,” JHEP05, 051 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0302165

    2003 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Drag-induced radiative energy loss from semihard heavy quarks,

    Raktim Abir and Abhijit Majumder, “Drag-induced radiative energy loss from semihard heavy quarks,” Phys. Rev. C 94, 054902 (2016), arXiv:1506.08648 [nucl-th]

    2016 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Jet-Medium Interactions at NLO in a Weakly-Coupled Quark-Gluon Plasma,

    Jacopo Ghiglieri, Guy D. Moore, and Derek Teaney, “Jet-Medium Interactions at NLO in a Weakly-Coupled Quark-Gluon Plasma,” JHEP03, 095 (2016), arXiv:1509.07773 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Radiative and Collisional Energy Loss, and Photon- Tagged Jets at RHIC,

    G. Y. Qin, J. Ruppert, Charles Gale, S. Jeon, and G. D. Moore, “Radiative and Collisional Energy Loss, and Photon- Tagged Jets at RHIC,” Eur. Phys. J. C61, 819–823 (2009), arXiv:0809.2030 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Final-state gluon emission in deep-inelastic scattering at next-to-leading twist,

    Chathuranga Sirimanna, Shanshan Cao, and Abhijit Majumder, “Final-state gluon emission in deep-inelastic scattering at next-to-leading twist,” Phys. Rev. C105, 024908 (2022), arXiv:2108.05329 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Multiple Parton Scattering in Nuclei: Quark-quark Scattering,

    Andreas Schafer, Xin-Nian Wang, and Ben-Wei Zhang, “Multiple Parton Scattering in Nuclei: Quark-quark Scattering,” Nucl. Phys. A793, 128–170 (2007), arXiv:0704.0106 [hep-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  36. [44]

    32 (Cambridge University Press, 2011)

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

    2011

  37. [45]

    Singularities and discontinuities of Feynman amplitudes,

    R. E. Cutkosky, “Singularities and discontinuities of Feynman amplitudes,” J. Math. Phys.1, 429–433 (1960)

    1960

  38. [46]

    Peskin and Daniel V

    Michael E. Peskin and Daniel V. Schroeder,An Introduction to quantum field theory(Addison-Wesley, Reading, USA, 1995)

    1995

  39. [47]

    Modified Coherence and the Trans- verse Extent of Jets,

    Amit Kumar, Abhijit Majumder, Chathuranga Sirimanna, and Yasuki Tachibana, “Modified Coherence and the Trans- verse Extent of Jets,” (2025), arXiv:2501.07823 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Multiple parton scattering in nuclei: Parton energy loss,

    Xin-Nian Wang and Xiao-feng Guo, “Multiple parton scattering in nuclei: Parton energy loss,” Nucl. Phys. A696, 788–832 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0102230

    2001 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Effective kinetic description of event-by-event pre-equilibrium dynamics in high-energy heavy-ion collisions,

    Aleksi Kurkela, Aleksas Mazeliauskas, Jean-Fran¸ cois Paquet, S¨ oren Schlichting, and Derek Teaney, “Effective kinetic description of event-by-event pre-equilibrium dynamics in high-energy heavy-ion collisions,” Phys. Rev. C99, 034910 (2019), arXiv:1805.00961 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Matching the Nonequilibrium Initial Stage of Heavy Ion Collisions to Hydrodynamics with QCD Kinetic Theory,

    Aleksi Kurkela, Aleksas Mazeliauskas, Jean-Fran¸ cois Paquet, S¨ oren Schlichting, and Derek Teaney, “Matching the Nonequilibrium Initial Stage of Heavy Ion Collisions to Hydrodynamics with QCD Kinetic Theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 122302 (2019), arXiv:1805.01604 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Hydrodynamic attractors, initial state energy and particle production in relativistic nuclear collisions,

    Giuliano Giacalone, Aleksas Mazeliauskas, and S¨ oren Schlichting, “Hydrodynamic attractors, initial state energy and particle production in relativistic nuclear collisions,” Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 262301 (2019), arXiv:1908.02866 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Hydrodynamization and nonequilibrium Green’s functions in kinetic theory,

    Syo Kamata, Mauricio Martinez, Philip Plaschke, Stephan Ochsenfeld, and S¨ oren Schlichting, “Hydrodynamization and nonequilibrium Green’s functions in kinetic theory,” Phys. Rev. D102, 056003 (2020), arXiv:2004.06751 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Jet transport coefficient qˆ in lattice QCD,

    Amit Kumar, Abhijit Majumder, and Johannes Heinrich Weber, “Jet transport coefficient qˆ in lattice QCD,” Phys. Rev. D106, 034505 (2022), arXiv:2010.14463 [hep-lat]

    2022 arXiv

  46. [54]

    https://pdg.lbl.gov/2022/tables/rpp2022-sum-quarks.pdf

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.