Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 77 cited by

New CTEQ global analysis of quantum chromodynamics with high-precision data from the LHC

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-05-21 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read New CT18 parton distributions incorporate LHC jet, Drell-Yan, top-pair and high-pT Z data to update gluon and strange-quark shapes at NLO and NNLO.

desk verdict CT18 updates CT14 with new LHC data on jets, DY, ttbar and high-pT Z, plus useful alternate fits for the ATLAS W/Z tension. read the letter →

arxiv 1912.10053 v3 pith:DHBTWFXU submitted 2019-12-20 hep-ph hep-exnucl-th

Tie-Jiun Hou , Jun Gao , T. J. Hobbs , Keping Xie , Sayipjamal Dulat , Marco Guzzi , Joey Huston , Pavel Nadolsky
show 5 more authors
Jon Pumplin Carl Schmidt Ibrahim Sitiwaldi Daniel Stump C.-P. Yuan
This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-exnucl-th
keywords partondistributionfunctionsglobalQCDanalysisCT18PDFsLHCdataNLONNLOgluonDrell-Yanproductionjet
checked against Cost.FunctionalEquation
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 updates the CTEQ-TEA global QCD analysis by adding high-precision LHC measurements of single-inclusive jets, Drell-Yan pairs, top-quark pairs and high-pT Z bosons to the existing HERA deep-inelastic scattering and CT14 data sets. It determines new parton distribution functions at both next-to-leading order and next-to-next-to-leading order, supplies Hessian uncertainty sets, and uses fast survey techniques to quantify how individual data sets pull on the strong coupling, the gluon, and the strange quark. The baseline CT18 fit omits the ATLAS 7 TeV precision W/Z measurements because they conflict with the rest of the data; three variant fits explore the effect of including them or changing scale choices. These distributions serve as the reference inputs for predicting standard LHC cross sections such as gluon-fusion Higgs production.

What carries the argument

Global QCD analysis at NLO and NNLO that combines Hessian error sets with Lagrange-multiplier scans to quantify each data set's pull on alpha_s, the gluon, and the strange quark.

What would settle it

A new measurement of the gluon-fusion Higgs cross section at the LHC that lies outside the CT18 uncertainty band while lying inside the CT14 band would falsify the improvement claimed for the updated distributions.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a global fit to a broad collection of high-precision LHC observables together with HERA and earlier data yields the CT18 parton distributions at NLO and NNLO; the fit employs the Hessian method for uncertainties and the Lagrange-multiplier method to map data preferences for alpha_s(m_Z), the gluon, and the strange distribution, while alternate sets (CT18A, CT18X, CT18Z) test the impact of the ATLAS W/Z tension, a revised low-x scale choice, and a higher charm mass.

Load-bearing premise

All chosen data sets remain statistically compatible inside a single perturbative QCD framework at NLO and NNLO.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Standard-candle cross sections such as gluon-fusion Higgs production can now be evaluated with reduced PDF uncertainty.
  • The gluon distribution receives tighter constraints at high momentum fraction from the new jet data.
  • Users can choose among CT18, CT18A, CT18X and CT18Z to propagate the effect of the ATLAS W/Z tension into any observable.
  • The strange-quark distribution is better determined in the region probed by W and Z production.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Future global fits will have to decide whether the observed tension requires higher-order QCD corrections or signals a need to re-examine experimental systematics.
  • The same data sets could be re-analyzed once NNLO jet calculations become available, potentially resolving part of the current tension.
  • These PDFs provide a ready baseline for testing whether any new-physics signal appears in precision LHC measurements beyond the quoted uncertainties.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents the CT18 global QCD analysis of parton distribution functions at NLO and NNLO from the CTEQ-TEA collaboration. It incorporates the combined HERA I+II DIS data, legacy CT14 sets, and new high-precision LHC measurements of single-inclusive jets (full rapidity), Drell-Yan pairs, top-quark pairs, and high-p_T Z bosons. PDFs are determined via standard Hessian error sets, with Lagrange-multiplier scans used to quantify individual data-set preferences for α_s(m_Z), the gluon, and strange-quark distributions. The baseline CT18 excludes the ATLAS 7 TeV precision W/Z data owing to tension with the rest of the global data; alternate sets CT18A (includes ATLAS W/Z), CT18X (new low-x DIS scale choice), and CT18Z (higher charm mass) are supplied. Theoretical predictions for standard-candle LHC cross sections, including gg-fusion Higgs production, are given.

Significance. If the underlying fits prove robust, CT18 and its variants would supply an important update to global PDFs with enhanced LHC constraints, directly benefiting precision phenomenology at the LHC. The explicit provision of alternate fits to bracket data tensions and the use of Lagrange-multiplier techniques for parameter preferences are methodological strengths that increase the utility of the release.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The decision to omit the ATLAS 7 TeV precision W/Z data from the baseline CT18 fit because of tension is load-bearing for the central claim that the selected data (HERA I+II, CT14 legacy, LHC jets/DY/ttbar/high-p_T Z) remain statistically compatible inside a single NLO/NNLO perturbative QCD framework. The manuscript must supply quantitative diagnostics—e.g., the Δχ² incurred by forcing inclusion of these data, or the per-observable pulls—to demonstrate that the tension is isolated rather than symptomatic of broader inconsistencies in normalization, higher-order corrections, or data treatment.
  2. [Results section] Results and fit-quality discussion (presumably §4–5): No global or per-experiment χ²/N_dof values, nor validation plots comparing data to theory for the included LHC sets, are referenced in the abstract or early summary. These standard metrics are required to substantiate that the retained data sets define a coherent solution and to allow readers to judge the impact of the omitted ATLAS W/Z measurements.
minor comments (2)
  1. A compact table summarizing the exact data sets retained from CT14 versus the new LHC measurements, together with their kinematic ranges and normalizations, would improve reproducibility and clarity.
  2. [Abstract] The acronyms CT18, CT18A, CT18X, and CT18Z should be defined explicitly on first appearance in the abstract and introduction.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful and constructive review of our manuscript. The comments highlight important points regarding the presentation of fit quality and data tensions, which we address point by point below. We will revise the manuscript to improve accessibility of the relevant quantitative information.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The decision to omit the ATLAS 7 TeV precision W/Z data from the baseline CT18 fit because of tension is load-bearing for the central claim that the selected data (HERA I+II, CT14 legacy, LHC jets/DY/ttbar/high-p_T Z) remain statistically compatible inside a single NLO/NNLO perturbative QCD framework. The manuscript must supply quantitative diagnostics—e.g., the Δχ² incurred by forcing inclusion of these data, or the per-observable pulls—to demonstrate that the tension is isolated rather than symptomatic of broader inconsistencies in normalization, higher-order corrections, or data treatment.

    Authors: We agree that explicit quantitative diagnostics strengthen the justification for excluding the ATLAS 7 TeV W/Z data from the baseline. The full manuscript already contains a detailed discussion of this tension in Section 5, including χ² comparisons when the data are forced into the fit and Lagrange-multiplier scans that isolate the effect to normalization and certain rapidity bins. We will revise the abstract to include a concise statement of the Δχ² increase and add a reference to the relevant section and figures showing per-observable pulls, making this information available at the outset without altering the central claims. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results section] Results and fit-quality discussion (presumably §4–5): No global or per-experiment χ²/N_dof values, nor validation plots comparing data to theory for the included LHC sets, are referenced in the abstract or early summary. These standard metrics are required to substantiate that the retained data sets define a coherent solution and to allow readers to judge the impact of the omitted ATLAS W/Z measurements.

    Authors: The global and per-experiment χ²/N_dof values are tabulated in Table 1 and discussed at length in Section 4, with validation plots for the LHC jet, Drell-Yan, top-pair, and high-p_T Z data sets appearing in Figures 4–8. These metrics confirm the overall coherence of the retained data. To address the referee’s concern about early visibility, we will add explicit references to Table 1 and the relevant figures in both the abstract and the opening paragraphs of the introduction in the revised manuscript. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: standard global PDF fit with transparent data handling

full rationale

The paper's derivation consists of a conventional global QCD analysis that minimizes a chi-squared objective over a combined dataset (HERA I+II, legacy CT14 sets, plus new LHC jet, Drell-Yan, ttbar, and high-pT Z measurements) to extract NLO and NNLO PDFs with Hessian uncertainties. Standard-candle cross sections such as gg-fusion Higgs production are computed directly from the resulting PDFs; this is the intended downstream application rather than an independent prediction, and the multi-experiment fit supplies external constraints that prevent reduction to a single fitted input. The explicit exclusion of ATLAS 7 TeV W/Z data due to observed tension, together with the provision of alternate sets (CT18A, CT18X, CT18Z), is documented rather than concealed. No self-definitional equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations that substitute for independent verification appear in the chain. The work is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks and receives a score of 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a global fit whose functional form contains many free parameters; the analysis assumes perturbative QCD remains valid and that the selected data sets are mutually compatible within that framework.

free parameters (3)
  • PDF parametrization coefficients
    The functional form of the PDFs at the input scale contains numerous free parameters that are adjusted to data.
  • alpha_s(m_Z)
    The strong coupling is either fitted or strongly constrained by the global data.
  • charm quark mass
    Varied between the baseline and the CT18Z variant.
assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption Perturbative QCD calculations at NLO and NNLO accurately describe the included processes.
    All cross-section predictions rely on this perturbative framework.
  • domain assumption The data sets chosen for the baseline fit are statistically compatible.
    Tension with ATLAS 7 TeV W/Z data is acknowledged and handled by exclusion and alternate sets.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of New CTEQ global analysis of quantum chromodynamics with high-precision data from the LHC." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DHBTWFXU

@misc{pith2026191210053,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: New CTEQ global analysis of quantum chromodynamics with high-precision data from the LHC},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DHBTWFXU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1912.10053}
}
abstract

We present the new parton distribution functions (PDFs) from the CTEQ-TEA collaboration, obtained using a wide variety of high-precision Large Hadron Collider (LHC) data, in addition to the combined HERA I+II deep-inelastic scattering data set, along with the data sets present in the CT14 global QCD analysis. New LHC measurements in single-inclusive jet production with the full rapidity coverage, as well as production of Drell-Yan pairs, top-quark pairs, and high-$p_T$ $Z$ bosons, are included to achieve the greatest sensitivity to the PDFs. The parton distributions are determined at NLO and NNLO, with each of these PDFs accompanied by error sets determined using the Hessian method. Fast PDF survey techniques, based on the Hessian representation and the Lagrange Multiplier method, are used to quantify the preference of each data set to quantities such as $\alpha_s(m_Z)$, and the gluon and strange quark distributions. We designate the main resulting PDF set as CT18. The ATLAS 7 TeV precision $W/Z$ data are not included in CT18, due to their tension with other data sets in the global fit. Alternate PDF sets are generated including the ATLAS precision 7 TeV $W/Z$ data (CT18A), a new scale choice for low-$x$ DIS data (CT18X), or all of the above with a slightly higher choice for the charm mass (CT18Z). Theoretical calculations of standard candle cross sections at the LHC (such as the $gg$ fusion Higgs boson cross section) are presented.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Showing 60 of 77 Pith papers that cite this

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. See all 77 Pith citations

  1. Single inclusive hadron and jet production in lepton-hadron scattering

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Single inclusive high-PT hadron and jet production in lepton-hadron scattering is factorized using a joint QCD+QED approach with universal lepton distribution functions, and predictions are given for JLab and EIC energies.

  2. Interpreting Parton Distributions with Shapley Values

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Exact Shapley values on PDF flavors treat χ² as the cooperative payoff, revealing data constraints and an unexpected intermediate-x gluon insensitivity.

  3. Pionic gluons from global QCD analysis of experimental and lattice data

    hep-ph 2025-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A global fit of pion parton distributions including lattice gluon data reduces uncertainties on the high-x gluon PDF and indicates a gluon enhancement in the pion over the proton.

  4. Extracting Essential Non-perturbative Information in Jet Invariant Mass via the Bayesian Analysis

    hep-ph 2025-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A new 3D non-perturbative jet-mass model, fitted to pp data, separates hadronization, ISR, and underlying-event effects and correctly predicts e+e- jet mass data.

  5. Factorized QED and QCD Contribution to Deeply Inelastic Scattering

    hep-ph 2025-05 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The NLO factorized QED contribution to the leading e+q->e+X subprocess of DIS is computed and shown to be infrared safe with no free parameters beyond the factorization scale.

  6. Factorisation schemes for proton PDFs

    hep-ph 2025-01 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    All common NLO factorisation schemes for proton PDFs are special cases of a single discrete family, and scheme choice can shift LHC jet predictions by up to 20-30%.

  7. Drell-Yan Transverse-Momentum Spectra at N$^3$LL$'$ and Approximate N$^4$LL with SCETlib

    hep-ph 2024-11 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    State-of-the-art LHC predictions for W/Z transverse momentum spectra at N3LL' and approximate N4LL accuracy, with a rigorous reduction of nonperturbative TMD physics to one effective function per process.

  8. The Forward Neutrino Flux and its Secondaries at a 10 TeV Muon Collider

    hep-ph 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A beam-dynamics-aware simulation of a 10 TeV muon collider finds an intense forward neutrino beam with about 10^9 neutrino interactions per year in a 3.2 tonne detector and about two rock-produced muons per bunch crossing.

  9. Hadron Structure from the Hierarchy of Quantum Correlations in Deep-Inelastic Scattering

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Quantum-information measures of the DIS final electron-quark state are shown to be sensitive to transversity PDFs and can discriminate between different tensor-charge extractions.

  10. Simultaneous extraction of top quark mass, strong coupling, effective mixing angle, and proton PDFs using inclusive DIS and proton-proton collision data

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A single xFitter global fit extracts PDFs, alpha_s(mZ), top pole mass, and sin^2 theta_eff simultaneously at NNLO, with NLO NRQCD threshold corrections, yielding m_t=172.59 GeV, alpha_s=0.1179, sin^2 theta_eff=0.23142.

  11. Spin and momentum fraction carried by partons in the nucleon

    hep-lat 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Lattice QCD at physical quark masses, extrapolated to the continuum, yields total proton momentum fraction 0.995(60)(29) and spin 0.507(43)(65), satisfying both sum rules and giving the first complete flavor decomposi...

  12. Top-Antitop Production and Decay at Threshold at the LHC in QCD Perturbation Theory

    hep-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    NLO+PS generators with resummed Coulomb threshold corrections show that N3LO already captures most of the ATLAS-bin enhancement, finite-width effects are small, and the loosely defined toponium piece is only a few picobarns.

  13. Experimental access to the gluonic origin of the proton mass

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The scalar gluonic trace form factor of the proton can be reconstructed from DVCS quark GFFs, near-threshold J/ψ gluon GFFs, and the nucleon sigma-term form factor.

  14. New Energy-Loss Constraints on Dark Sectors from Deeply Inelastic Scattering with Initial State Radiation

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    A factorization-based method is outlined to derive energy-loss constraints on dark sector particles (spin 0 to 2) from ISR-modified lepton distributions in DIS, illustrated for MeV-GeV spin-0 cases at the EIC.

  15. Observation of centrality-dependent dijet transverse momentum imbalance in O+O and Ne+Ne collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.36 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    nucl-ex 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    ATLAS observes increasing dijet imbalance with centrality in O+O and Ne+Ne collisions at 5.36 TeV, consistent with medium-induced energy loss in small systems.

  16. Hyperoptimisation algorithm for the next generation of PDF determinations: ensemble regression with an unbiased selection model

    hep-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Presents a new ensemble regression hyperoptimisation procedure for PDF fitting that combines multiple statistically equivalent methodologies into one PDF set accounting for hyperparameter variation.

  17. Mellin Moments of the Unpolarized Gluon PDF in the Proton from Nonlocal Operators in Lattice QCD

    hep-lat 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Lattice QCD extracts the ratio of the third to first Mellin moment of the gluon PDF at 2 GeV from nonlocal operators on an Nf=2+1+1 ensemble.

  18. Assessing the Impact of Fitting Methodology at aN$^3$LO with FPPDF: an Open Source Tool for Extracting Parton Distribution Functions in the Hessian Approach

    hep-ph 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    FPPDF, a new public Hessian PDF fitting code, shows that the relative impact of aN3LO corrections and missing higher-order uncertainties on PDFs is insensitive to whether a fixed polynomial or neural-network parameter...

  19. HDSense: An efficient method for ranking observable sensitivity

    hep-ph 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    HDSense ranks observable subsets by adding per-observable Fisher information and penalizing overlap, picking near-optimal sets for Pythia hadronization parameters in tested cases.

  20. Unpolarized gluon PDF of the nucleon from lattice QCD at physical point in the continuum limit

    hep-lat 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A lattice QCD extraction of the nucleon gluon PDF using three lattice spacings, hybrid renormalization and NLO matching, extrapolated to the continuum and infinite-momentum limits, agrees with global fits while remain...

  21. GUMP1.0 -- First global extraction of generalized parton distributions from experiment and lattice data with NLO accuracy

    hep-ph 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new global extraction, GUMP1.0, fits generalized parton distributions to 2,646 experimental and lattice data points at NLO accuracy and uses them to image the proton and decompose its spin.

  22. Decoding the proton's gluonic density with lattice QCD-informed machine learning

    hep-ph 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A variational autoencoder inverse mapper extracts the proton's gluon PDF from lattice QCD pseudo-Ioffe-time distributions, yielding results consistent with global fits.

  23. Measurements of differential cross-sections of $WbWb$ production in the dilepton channel in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV using the ATLAS detector

    hep-ex 2025-06 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    Measurements of WbWb differential cross sections in the dilepton channel at 13 TeV with 140 fb^-1 of ATLAS data provide new constraints on ttbar and tW interference modeling.

  24. MATRIX HAWAII: PineAPPL interpolation grids with MATRIX

    hep-ph 2025-06 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    Matrix Hawaii provides a public interface between PineAPPL and MATRIX that generates interpolation grids at NNLO QCD + NLO EW accuracy for a range of LHC processes, with sub-permille interpolation errors.

  25. A Determination of ${\alpha}_s(m_Z)$ at ${\bf aN^3LO_{QCD}}\otimes {\bf {NLO}_{QED}}$ Accuracy from a Global PDF Analysis

    hep-ph 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    From a global QCD-QED parton fit with NNPDF4.0 methodology, the authors determine alpha_s(m_Z)=0.1194^{+0.0007}_{-0.0014}, consistent with the PDG average and recent lattice results.

  26. Fant\^omas: epistemic and nuclear uncertainties for the parton distributions of the pion

    hep-ph 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Fanto10 and Fanto10_n15 are new NLO pion PDF ensembles that propagate parametrization and nuclear-target uncertainty, allowing a large gluon-sea anticorrelation and even zero gluon at low scales.

  27. Neutrino-jet correlations in charged-current SIDIS

    hep-ph 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A twist-3 calculation of charged-current SIDIS with jet detection yields a complete set of asymmetries and a charge asymmetry observable sensitive to quark flavor and strange sea.

  28. Measurement of $W^{\pm}$-boson differential cross-sections in proton-proton collisions with low pile-up data at $\sqrt{s} = 5.02$ TeV and $13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector

    hep-ex 2025-02 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    ATLAS reports new high-precision W-boson differential cross sections at 5.02 and 13 TeV, consistent with Standard Model predictions and useful for profiling proton parton distribution functions.

  29. Description of di-hadron saturation signals within a universal nuclear parton distribution function approach

    nucl-th 2025-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Modern nuclear PDF sets can explain most of the forward di-hadron and di-jet suppression in p+A collisions without invoking gluon saturation, and naturally predict an unchanged azimuthal width.

  30. Fast interpolation grids for the Drell-Yan process

    hep-ph 2025-01 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    Differential NNLO Drell-Yan interpolation grids are released, with closure tests showing sub-per-mille accuracy and a validation that PDF fits are unaffected by the K-factor approximation.

  31. Parton distributions confront LHC Run II data: a quantitative appraisal

    hep-ph 2025-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A systematic NNLO data-theory comparison shows that the main PDF sets generalise to unseen LHC and HERA data about equally well once PDF, alpha_s, and missing higher order uncertainties are included.

  32. Precise Determination of the Strong Coupling Constant from Dijet Cross Sections up to the Multi-TeV Range

    hep-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A complete NNLO QCD fit to LHC and HERA dijet data yields alpha_s(m_Z) = 0.1178 with a total uncertainty of 0.0022 and tests the running coupling from 7 GeV up to 7 TeV.

  33. Next-to-leading order evolution of structure functions without PDFs

    hep-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The authors build a complete NLO momentum-space DGLAP evolution for a six-observable physical basis of DIS structure functions and compare its numerical results with conventional PDF-based evolution.

  34. The Higgs boson through the lens of electroweak precision data

    hep-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

    Updated Gfitter EW fit with new MW average yields SM-consistent indirect observables and, via kappa_V from oblique parameters plus LHC signal strengths, determines Gamma_H to ~10% precision under leading-log assumptions.

  35. Endpoint Logarithms in the NLO Mueller-Navelet Jet Vertex: Threshold Matching and BLM/MOM Prescription Sensitivity

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    A conservative BFKL-aware threshold matching scheme is constructed for the NLO forward jet vertex that resums ordinary endpoint logs, preserves NLO accuracy, and is tested against CMS azimuthal observables, showing in...

  36. Probing Nucleon Spin Structure with a Polarized Gamma Beam from Compton Backscattering at FCC-ee

    hep-ex 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    Proposes a Compton backscattering gamma facility at FCC-ee and projects 1.8-3.0% precision on Δg/g in the medium-x region via open-charm photoproduction on a polarized NH3 target.

  37. Flavor physics at the EIC with b-jet tagging

    hep-ph 2026-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Single b-jet counting in charged-current events at the EIC could probe new flavor-changing physics up to Λ_eff ≈ 5 TeV, about 30 times the collider energy, assuming tight b-tagging and polarized beams.

  38. Cosmic-ray boosted inelastic dark matter from neutrino-emitting active galactic nuclei

    hep-ph 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A cosmic-ray boosted, inelastic dark matter flux from two neutrino-emitting AGNs gives new Super-K and XENONnT limits that reach part of the thermal freeze-out target for sub-GeV dark matter.

  39. "They Aren't Built For Me": An Exploratory Study of Strategies for Measurement of Graphical Primitives in Tactile Graphics

    cs.HC 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    An exploratory study with 11 blind and low vision participants finds visual chart encodings are only partly usable in tactile graphics, so tactile-specific strategies and design guidelines are needed.

  40. Gluon Parts of Gravitational Form Factors and Mass Distribution

    nucl-th 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A DSE rainbow-ladder calculation produces quark and gluon gravitational form factors, mass radii, and D-terms for nucleon and pion, finding gluon distributions generated purely by quark dressing.

  41. Bayesian Inferring Nucleon's Gravitation Form Factors via Near-threshold $J/\psi$ Photoproduction

    hep-ph 2025-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A Bayesian NLO analysis of near-threshold J/psi photoproduction data, combined with lattice QCD, finds compatible proton gravitational form factors and prefers negative C_q and C_g.

  42. Strange-antistrange and charm-anticharm asymmetries of pion in 't Hooft model

    hep-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    In the 't Hooft model, the first excited pion has a few-percent strange-antistrange asymmetry, and the meson cloud model reproduces it but fails for charm-anticharm asymmetry.

  43. Determination of the strong coupling and its running from measurements of inclusive jet production

    hep-ex 2024-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A NNLO QCD fit to CMS inclusive jet cross sections at 2.76, 7, 8 and 13 TeV plus HERA DIS yields alphaS(mZ) = 0.1176 (+0.0014, -0.0016) and confirms the predicted running of the strong coupling up to 1.6 TeV.

  44. Anomalous electroweak physics unraveled via evidential deep learning

    hep-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A proof-of-principle demonstration that evidential deep learning can classify and quantify uncertainty for three toy anomalous electroweak scenarios in neutrino deep-inelastic scattering.

  45. High-precision measurement of the W boson mass with the CMS experiment

    hep-ex 2024-12 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    CMS measures the W boson mass as 80360.2 ± 9.9 MeV from 2016 data, consistent with the Standard Model prediction.

  46. Simulating toponium formation signals at the LHC

    hep-ph 2024-11 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A Green's function re-weighting method implemented in MG5aMC simulates toponium formation and decay in LHC top-antitop events.

  47. Hadron production in the charged current semi-inclusive deeply inelastic scattering of $N=Z$ nuclei

    hep-ph 2024-11 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    The pion yield asymmetry in charged-current neutrino SIDIS of N=Z nuclei is predicted to be nearly independent of the nucleus type and sensitive to sea-quark and disfavored-fragmentation inputs.

  48. Prospects for early heavy-quark measurements at the EIC

    hep-ph 2026-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A leading-order MadGraph study maps the expected heavy-quark and double-charm yields and nuclear modification ratios for early EIC beam configurations.

  49. The Momentum Fraction, Helicity and Transversity Isovector Moments of Nucleons from \texorpdfstring{$2+1$}{2+1}-flavor Lattice QCD

    hep-lat 2026-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A 13-ensemble lattice QCD calculation determines the nucleon isovector momentum fraction, helicity, and transversity moments at 2 GeV, with the transversity result standing as a first-principles prediction.

  50. Misconceptions About the Physics of the QCD Trace Anomaly from Renormalization in a Reducible Basis

    hep-ph 2026-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    This paper critiques reducible-basis renormalization of the QCD trace anomaly, arguing it introduces unphysical scheme dependence and that the standard whole-anomaly decomposition is the only symmetry-allowed choice.

  51. The effect of TMD evolution on the Sivers asymmetry in back-to-back $J/\psi+\gamma$ and $J/\psi+\text{jet}$ production at the Electron-Ion-Collider

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    After including TMD evolution, the Sivers asymmetry in these J/ψ processes at EIC kinematics remains sizable and largely independent of LDME choices, providing a robust probe of the gluon Sivers function.

  52. Impact of parity-violating deep-inelastic scattering on the weak mixing angle and high-$x$ parton distributions

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    Simulations of 11 and 22 GeV PVDIS pseudodata indicate potential constraints on low-Q² sin²θ_W and high-x strange quark and d/u PDFs, with strong correlations requiring simultaneous QCD-electroweak analysis.

  53. Proton's isovector PDF with updated analysis of large-momentum lattice data

    hep-lat 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    Reanalysis of lattice data produces proton u(x)-d(x) PDF consistent with global fits within 1 sigma, supporting large-momentum expansion for PDF predictions.

  54. Charm quark production in heavy-ion collisions as a signature of pre-equilibrium

    nucl-th 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    Charm quark production from the pre-equilibrium phase contributes non-negligibly to the total yield in heavy-ion collisions and may allow inference of pre-equilibrium properties when combined with better initial-state...

  55. Scalar and spin-two energy-momentum-tensor structure in near-threshold charmonium probes of the proton

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    Near-threshold charmonium chromoelectric scattering separates into a scalar anomaly channel and a traceless spin-two channel fixed by Ag(0) forward and by a specific GFF combination off forward, without a boost-enhanc...

  56. Probing SU(2) Quark Flavor Asymmetry with W Bosons at RHIC

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    The STAR W+/W- lepton pseudorapidity ratio is nearly insensitive to QCD recoil veto effects and resummation, making it a usable probe of the proton's dbar/ubar asymmetry near x=0.1.

  57. MAcNLOPS for ZZ Pair Production at the LHC

    hep-ph 2026-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    MAcNLOPS is implemented for ZZ production at the LHC, eliminating negative H weights via a shower veto on S events while agreeing with MC@NLO except for small low-pT effects.

  58. Redetermination of proton sea distributions

    hep-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    NNLO global fits to HERA and ATLAS data yield an asymmetric proton sea with ubar exceeding dbar at moderate x and a revised Gottfried sum rule value.

  59. Energy loss baseline for light hadrons in oxygen-oxygen collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.36\,\text{TeV}$

    hep-ph 2025-09 accept novelty 4.0 of 10

    The no-quenching baseline for R_AA in OO collisions at 5.36 TeV is predicted to be under control to about 5% for hadron transverse momenta from 20 to 70 GeV.

  60. QED-enhanced PDF implications for the Higgs sector

    hep-ph 2025-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Modern LUX-based photon PDFs in CT, MSHT and NNPDF produce consistent QED corrections to Higgs production, with a residual 3-4% spread dominated by baseline QCD PDF differences.

See all 77 Pith citations

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

207 extracted references · 207 canonical work pages · cited by 77 Pith papers (see all)

  1. [1]

    original data

    (C6) For the distributions of the light-quark sea, we fit somewhat more flexible distributions relative to CT14. In these cases, we use polynomials in y ≡1−(1−√x)a3 for ¯u, ¯d, and ¯s =s, where we fix a3 =4 for all three sea distributions. We parametrize the sea-quark PDFs, ¯q(x,Q 0) as ¯q(x,Q =Q0) =a0xa1−1(1 −x)a2P ¯q a (y), (C7) P ¯q a (y) = (1 −y)5 +a45y(...

    work page

  2. [2]

    New parton distribution functions from a global analysis of quantum chromodynamics

    S. Dulat, T.-J. Hou, J. Gao, M. Guzzi, J. Huston, P. Nadolsky, J. Pumplin, C. Schmidt, D. Stump, and C.-P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D93, 033006 (2016), arXiv:1506.07443 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  3. [3]

    L. A. Harland-Lang, A. D. Martin, P. Motylinski, and R. S. Thorne, Eur. Phys. J. C75, 204 (2015), arXiv:1412.3989 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  4. [4]

    R. D. Ball et al. (NNPDF), Eur. Phys. J. C77, 663 (2017), arXiv:1706.00428 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  5. [5]

    Parton Distribution Functions, $\alpha_s$ and Heavy-Quark Masses for LHC Run II

    S. Alekhin, J. Bl¨ umlein, S. Moch, and R. Placakyte, Phys. Rev. D96, 014011 (2017), arXiv:1701.05838 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  6. [6]

    Constraints on large-$x$ parton distributions from new weak boson production and deep-inelastic scattering data

    A. Accardi, L. T. Brady, W. Melnitchouk, J. F. Owens, and N. Sato, Phys. Rev. D93, 114017 (2016), arXiv:1602.03154 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  7. [7]

    L. A. Harland-Lang, A. D. Martin, R. Nathvani, and R. S. Thorne, Eur. Phys. J. C79, 811 (2019), arXiv:1907.02750 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2019

  8. [8]

    Illuminating the photon content of the proton within a global PDF analysis

    V. Bertone, S. Carrazza, N. P. Hartland, and J. Rojo (NNPDF), SciPost Phys. 5, 008 (2018), arXiv:1712.07053 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

Show all 207 references
  1. [9]

    A. V. Manohar, P. Nason, G. P. Salam, and G. Zanderighi, JHEP20 12, 046 (2017), arXiv:1708.01256 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Aad et al

    G. Aad et al. (ATLAS), JHEP 02, 153 (2015), [Erratum: JHEP09,141(2015)], arXiv:1410.8857 [hep-ex]

    2015 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Aaboud et al

    M. Aaboud et al. (ATLAS), JHEP 09, 020 (2017), arXiv:1706.03192 [hep-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Currie, E

    J. Currie, E. W. N. Glover, and J. Pires, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 072002 (2017), arXiv:1611.01460 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Currie, E

    J. Currie, E. W. N. Glover, T. Gehrmann, A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, A. Huss, and J. Pires, Acta Phys. Polon. B48, 955 (2017), arXiv:1704.00923 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Currie, A

    J. Currie, A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, T. Gehrmann, E. W. N. Glover, A. Huss, and J. Pires, JHEP 10, 155 (2018), arXiv:1807.03692 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Britzger, K

    D. Britzger, K. Rabbertz, F. Stober, and M. Wobisch (fastNLO) (2012) pp. 217–221, arXiv:1208.3641 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Wobisch, D

    M. Wobisch, D. Britzger, T. Kluge, K. Rabbertz, and F. Stober (fastNLO), (2011), arXiv:1109.1310 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Carli, D

    T. Carli, D. Clements, A. Cooper-Sarkar, C. Gwenlan, G. P. Salam, F. Siegert, P. Starovoitov, and M. Sutton, Eur. Phys. J. C66, 503 (2010), arXiv:0911.2985 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Czakon, D

    M. Czakon, D. Heymes, and A. Mitov, (2017), arXiv:1704.08551 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  11. [19]

    http://www.precision.hep.phy.cam.ac.uk/results/ttbar-fastnlo/

  12. [20]

    R. S. Thorne, S. Bailey, T. Cridge, L. A. Harland-Lang, A. D. Martin, and R. Nathvani (2019) p. 036, arXiv:1907.08147 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  13. [21]

    B.-T. Wang, T. J. Hobbs, S. Doyle, J. Gao, T.-J. Hou, P. M. Nadolsky, and F. I. Olness, Phys. Rev. D98, 094030 (2018), arXiv:1803.02777 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  14. [22]

    T. J. Hobbs, B.-T. Wang, P. M. Nadolsky, and F. I. Olness, (2019), arXiv:1904.00022 [hep-ph]

    2019

  15. [23]

    Pumplin, D

    J. Pumplin, D. Stump, R. Brock, D. Casey, J. Huston, J. Kalk, H.-L. Lai, and W.-K. Tung, Phys. Rev. D65, 014013 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0101032 [hep-ph]

    2001 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Pumplin, D

    J. Pumplin, D. R. Stump, J. Huston, H. L. Lai, P. M. Nadolsky, and W.-K. Tung, JHEP 07, 012 (2002), arXiv:hep- ph/0201195 [hep-ph]

    2002

  17. [25]

    Schmidt, J

    C. Schmidt, J. Pumplin, and C.-P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D98, 094005 (2018), arXiv:1806.07950 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  18. [26]

    T.-J. Hou, Z. Yu, S. Dulat, C. Schmidt, and C. P. Yuan, (2019), arXiv:1907.12177 [hep-ph]

    2019

  19. [27]

    Stump, J

    D. Stump, J. Pumplin, R. Brock, D. Casey, J. Huston, J. Kalk, H.-L. Lai, and W.-K. Tung, Phys. Rev. D65, 014012 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0101051 [hep-ph]

    2001 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Tanabashi et al

    M. Tanabashi et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D98, 030001 (2018)

    2018

  21. [29]

    H.-L. Lai, J. Huston, Z. Li, P. Nadolsky, J. Pumplin, D. Stump, and C. P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D82, 054021 (2010), arXiv:1004.4624 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Abramowicz et al

    H. Abramowicz et al. (H1, ZEUS), Eur. Phys. J. C75, 580 (2015), arXiv:1506.06042 [hep-ex]

    2015 arXiv

  23. [31]

    F. D. Aaron et al. (H1, ZEUS), JHEP 01, 109 (2010), arXiv:0911.0884 [hep-ex]

    2010 arXiv

  24. [32]

    T.-J. Hou, S. Dulat, J. Gao, M. Guzzi, J. Huston, P. Nadolsky, J. Pumplin, C. Schmidt, D. Stump, and C. P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D95, 034003 (2017), arXiv:1609.07968 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  25. [33]

    F. D. Aaron et al. (H1), Eur. Phys. J. C71, 1579 (2011), arXiv:1012.4355 [hep-ex]

    2011 arXiv

  26. [34]

    R. D. Ball, V. Bertone, M. Bonvini, S. Marzani, J. Rojo, and L. Rottoli, Eur. Phys. J. C78, 321 (2018), arXiv:1710.05935 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Abdolmaleki et al

    H. Abdolmaleki et al. (xFitter Developers’ Team), Eur. Phys. J. C78, 621 (2018), arXiv:1802.00064 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Abramowicz et al

    H. Abramowicz et al. (H1, ZEUS), Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 473 (2018), arXiv:1804.01019 [hep-ex]

    2018 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Kovaˇ r´ ık, P

    K. Kovaˇ r´ ık, P. M. Nadolsky, and D. E. Soper, (2019), arXiv:1905.06957 [hep-ph]

    2019

  30. [38]

    H.-L. Lai, M. Guzzi, J. Huston, Z. Li, P. M. Nadolsky, J. Pumplin, and C. P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D82, 074024 (2010), arXiv:1007.2241 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Aaboud et al

    M. Aaboud et al. (ATLAS), Eur. Phys. J. C77, 367 (2017), arXiv:1612.03016 [hep-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Rojo et al., J

    J. Rojo et al., J. Phys. G42, 103103 (2015), arXiv:1507.00556 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Alekhin et al., Eur

    S. Alekhin et al., Eur. Phys. J. C75, 304 (2015), arXiv:1410.4412 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  34. [42]

    J. Gao, M. Guzzi, J. Huston, H.-L. Lai, Z. Li, P. Nadolsky, J. Pumplin, D. Stump, and C. P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D89, 033009 (2014), arXiv:1302.6246 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Kluge, K

    T. Kluge, K. Rabbertz, and M. Wobisch (2006) pp. 483–486, arXiv:hep-ph/0609285 [hep-ph]

    2006 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Catani and M

    S. Catani and M. Grazzini, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 222002 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0703012 [hep-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Catani, L

    S. Catani, L. Cieri, G. Ferrera, D. de Florian, and M. Grazzini, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 082001 (2009), arXiv:0903.2120 103 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  38. [46]

    J. M. Campbell and R. K. Ellis, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 205-206, 10 (2010), arXiv:1007.3492 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Boughezal, J

    R. Boughezal, J. M. Campbell, R. K. Ellis, C. Focke, W. Giele, X. Liu, F. Petriello, and C. Williams, Eur. Phys. J. C77, 7 (2017), arXiv:1605.08011 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  40. [48]

    J. M. Campbell, R. K. Ellis, and W. T. Giele, Eur. Phys. J. C75, 246 (2015), arXiv:1503.06182 [physics.comp-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Gavin, Y

    R. Gavin, Y. Li, F. Petriello, and S. Quackenbush, Comput. Phys. Commun. 182, 2388 (2011), arXiv:1011.3540 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Gavin, Y

    R. Gavin, Y. Li, F. Petriello, and S. Quackenbush, Comput. Phys. Commun. 184, 208 (2013), arXiv:1201.5896 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Li and F

    Y. Li and F. Petriello, Phys. Rev. D86, 094034 (2012), arXiv:1208.5967 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Gehrmann-De Ridder, T

    A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, T. Gehrmann, E. W. N. Glover, A. Huss, and T. A. Morgan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 022001 (2016), arXiv:1507.02850 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Gehrmann-De Ridder, T

    A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, T. Gehrmann, E. W. N. Glover, A. Huss, and D. M. Walker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 122001 (2018), arXiv:1712.07543 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  46. [54]

    G. A. Ladinsky and C.-P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D50, R4239 (1994), arXiv:hep-ph/9311341 [hep-ph]

    1994 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Balazs and C.-P

    C. Balazs and C.-P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D56, 5558 (1997), arXiv:hep-ph/9704258 [hep-ph]

    1997 arXiv

  48. [56]

    P. M. Nadolsky and Z. Sullivan, eConf C010630, P510 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0110378 [hep-ph]

    2001 arXiv

  49. [57]

    P. M. Nadolsky, H.-L. Lai, Q.-H. Cao, J. Huston, J. Pumplin, D. Stump, W.-K. Tung, and C. P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D78, 013004 (2008), arXiv:0802.0007 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  50. [58]

    W. G. Seligman, Ph.D. thesis, Nevis Labs, Columbia U. (1997)

    1997

  51. [59]

    Yang et al

    U.-K. Yang et al. (CCFR/NuTeV), J. Phys. G22, 775 (1996), arXiv:hep-ex/9605005 [hep-ex]

    1996 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Aaij et al

    R. Aaij et al. (LHCb), JHEP 06, 058 (2012), arXiv:1204.1620 [hep-ex]

    2012 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Aad et al

    G. Aad et al. (ATLAS), Phys. Rev. D86, 014022 (2012), arXiv:1112.6297 [hep-ex]

    2012 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Chatrchyan et al

    S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS), Phys. Rev. D87, 112002 (2013), [Erratum: Phys. Rev.D87,no.11,119902(2013)], arXiv:1212.6660 [hep-ex]

    2013 arXiv

  55. [63]

    A. C. Benvenuti et al. (BCDMS), Phys. Lett. B223, 485 (1989)

    1989

  56. [64]

    A. C. Benvenuti et al. (BCDMS), Phys. Lett. B237, 592 (1990)

    1990

  57. [65]

    Arneodo et al

    M. Arneodo et al. (New Muon), Nucl. Phys. B483, 3 (1997), arXiv:hep-ph/9610231 [hep-ph]

    1997 arXiv

  58. [66]

    J. P. Berge et al., Z. Phys. C49, 187 (1991)

    1991

  59. [67]

    Yang et al

    U.-K. Yang et al. (CCFR/NuTeV), Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 2742 (2001), arXiv:hep-ex/0009041 [hep-ex]

    2001 arXiv

  60. [68]

    W. G. Seligman et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 1213 (1997), arXiv:hep-ex/9701017 [hep-ex]

    1997 arXiv

  61. [69]

    D. A. Mason, Ph.D. thesis, Oregon U. (2006)

    2006

  62. [70]

    Goncharov et al

    M. Goncharov et al. (NuTeV), Phys. Rev. D64, 112006 (2001), arXiv:hep-ex/0102049 [hep-ex]

    2001 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Aktas et al

    A. Aktas et al. (H1), Eur. Phys. J. C40, 349 (2005), arXiv:hep-ex/0411046 [hep-ex]

    2005 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Abramowicz et al

    H. Abramowicz et al. (ZEUS, H1), Eur. Phys. J. C73, 2311 (2013), arXiv:1211.1182 [hep-ex]

    2013 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Moreno et al., Phys

    G. Moreno et al., Phys. Rev. D43, 2815 (1991)

    1991

  66. [74]

    R. S. Towell et al. (NuSea), Phys. Rev. D64, 052002 (2001), arXiv:hep-ex/0103030 [hep-ex]

    2001 arXiv

  67. [75]

    J. C. Webb et al. (NuSea), (2003), arXiv:hep-ex/0302019 [hep-ex]

    2003 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Abe et al

    F. Abe et al. (CDF), Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5754 (1998), arXiv:hep-ex/9809001

    1998 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Acosta et al

    D. Acosta et al. (CDF), Phys. Rev. D71, 051104 (2005), arXiv:hep-ex/0501023 [hep-ex]

    2005 arXiv

  70. [78]

    V. M. Abazov et al. (D0), Phys. Rev. D77, 011106 (2008), arXiv:0709.4254 [hep-ex]

    2008 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Abazov et al

    V. Abazov et al. (D0), Phys. Rev. D 76, 012003 (2007), arXiv:hep-ex/0702025

    2007 arXiv

  72. [80]

    T. A. Aaltonen et al. (CDF), Phys. Lett. B692, 232 (2010), arXiv:0908.3914 [hep-ex]

    2010 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Chatrchyan et al

    S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS), Phys. Rev. D90, 032004 (2014), arXiv:1312.6283 [hep-ex]

    2014 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Chatrchyan et al

    S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS), Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 111806 (2012), arXiv:1206.2598 [hep-ex]

    2012 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Aad et al

    G. Aad et al. (ATLAS), Phys. Rev. D85, 072004 (2012), arXiv:1109.5141 [hep-ex]

    2012 arXiv

  76. [84]

    V. M. Abazov et al. (D0), Phys. Rev. D91, 032007 (2015), [Erratum: Phys. Rev.D91,no.7,079901(2015)], arXiv:1412.2862 [hep-ex]

    2015 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Aaltonen et al

    T. Aaltonen et al. (CDF), Phys. Rev. D78, 052006 (2008), [Erratum: Phys. Rev.D79,119902(2009)], arXiv:0807.2204 [hep-ex]

    2008 arXiv

  78. [86]

    V. M. Abazov et al. (D0), Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 062001 (2008), arXiv:0802.2400 [hep-ex]

    2008 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Dulat, T.-J

    S. Dulat, T.-J. Hou, J. Gao, J. Huston, J. Pumplin, C. Schmidt, D. Stump, and C. P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D89, 073004 (2014), arXiv:1309.0025 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Aaij et al

    R. Aaij et al. (LHCb), JHEP 08, 039 (2015), arXiv:1505.07024 [hep-ex]

    2015 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Aaij et al

    R. Aaij et al. (LHCb), JHEP 05, 109 (2015), arXiv:1503.00963 [hep-ex]

    2015 arXiv

  82. [90]

    Khachatryan et al

    V. Khachatryan et al. (CMS), Eur. Phys. J. C76, 469 (2016), arXiv:1603.01803 [hep-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Aaij et al

    R. Aaij et al. (LHCb), JHEP 01, 155 (2016), arXiv:1511.08039 [hep-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Aad et al

    G. Aad et al. (ATLAS), Eur. Phys. J. C76, 291 (2016), arXiv:1512.02192 [hep-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Chatrchyan et al

    S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS), Phys. Rev. D90, 072006 (2014), arXiv:1406.0324 [hep-ex]

    2014 arXiv

  86. [94]

    Khachatryan et al

    V. Khachatryan et al. (CMS), JHEP 03, 156 (2017), arXiv:1609.05331 [hep-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  87. [95]

    A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS), Eur. Phys. J. C77, 459 (2017), arXiv:1703.01630 [hep-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Aad et al

    G. Aad et al. (ATLAS), Eur. Phys. J. C76, 538 (2016), arXiv:1511.04716 [hep-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Khachatryan et al

    V. Khachatryan et al. (CMS), Eur. Phys. J. C75, 288 (2015), arXiv:1410.6765 [hep-ex]

    2015 arXiv

  90. [98]

    Voutilainen, Private communication (2018)

    M. Voutilainen, Private communication (2018)

    2018

  91. [99]

    Amat et al., PoS DIS2019, 017 (2019)

    O. Amat et al., PoS DIS2019, 017 (2019)

    2019

  92. [100]

    Bailey and L

    S. Bailey and L. Harland-Lang, (2019), arXiv:1909.10541 [hep-ph]. 104

    2019

  93. [101]

    Malaescu, Private communication (2018)

    B. Malaescu, Private communication (2018)

    2018

  94. [102]

    Kadir, A

    M. Kadir, A. Ablet, S. Dulat, T.-J. Hou, I. Sitiwaldi, and A. Tursun, (2020), arXiv:2003.13740 [hep-ph]

    2020

  95. [103]

    A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS), JHEP 02, 149 (2019), arXiv:1811.06625 [hep-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  96. [104]

    Aad et al

    G. Aad et al. (ATLAS), JHEP 09, 145 (2014), arXiv:1406.3660 [hep-ex]

    2014 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Khachatryan et al

    V. Khachatryan et al. (CMS), Phys. Lett. B749, 187 (2015), arXiv:1504.03511 [hep-ex]

    2015 arXiv

  98. [106]

    Khachatryan et al

    V. Khachatryan et al. (CMS), JHEP 02, 096 (2017), arXiv:1606.05864 [hep-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  99. [108]

    Aad et al

    G. Aad et al. (ATLAS), Phys. Lett. B725, 223 (2013), arXiv:1305.4192 [hep-ex]

    2013 arXiv

  100. [109]

    Aad et al

    G. Aad et al. (ATLAS), JHEP 06, 112 (2014), arXiv:1404.1212 [hep-ex]

    2014 arXiv

  101. [110]

    Aad et al

    G. Aad et al. (ATLAS), JHEP 05, 068 (2014), arXiv:1402.6263 [hep-ex]

    2014 arXiv

  102. [111]

    Chatrchyan et al

    S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS), JHEP 02, 013 (2014), arXiv:1310.1138 [hep-ex]

    2014 arXiv

  103. [112]

    Chatrchyan et al

    S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS), JHEP 12, 030 (2013), arXiv:1310.7291 [hep-ex]

    2013 arXiv

  104. [113]

    Khachatryan et al

    V. Khachatryan et al. (CMS), Eur. Phys. J. C75, 147 (2015), arXiv:1412.1115 [hep-ex]

    2015 arXiv

  105. [114]

    K. J. Golec-Biernat and M. Wusthoff, Phys. Rev. D59, 014017 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9807513 [hep-ph]

    1998 arXiv

  106. [115]

    Caola, S

    F. Caola, S. Forte, and J. Rojo, Phys. Lett. B686, 127 (2010), arXiv:0910.3143 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  107. [116]

    Guzzi, P

    M. Guzzi, P. M. Nadolsky, H.-L. Lai, and C. P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D86, 053005 (2012), arXiv:1108.5112 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  108. [117]

    M. A. G. Aivazis, J. C. Collins, F. I. Olness, and W.-K. Tung, Phys. Rev. D50, 3102 (1994), arXiv:hep-ph/9312319 [hep-ph]

    1994 arXiv

  109. [118]

    M. A. G. Aivazis, F. I. Olness, and W.-K. Tung, Phys. Rev. D50, 3085 (1994), arXiv:hep-ph/9312318 [hep-ph]

    1994 arXiv

  110. [119]

    Kramer, 1, F

    M. Kramer, 1, F. I. Olness, and D. E. Soper, Phys. Rev. D62, 096007 (2000), arXiv:hep-ph/0003035 [hep-ph]

    2000 arXiv

  111. [120]

    W.-K. Tung, S. Kretzer, and C. Schmidt, J. Phys. G28, 983 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0110247 [hep-ph]

    2002 arXiv

  112. [121]

    J. Gao, M. Guzzi, and P. M. Nadolsky, Eur. Phys. J. C73, 2541 (2013), arXiv:1304.3494 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  113. [122]

    E. L. Berger, J. Gao, C. S. Li, Z. L. Liu, and H. X. Zhu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 212002 (2016), arXiv:1601.05430 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  114. [123]

    Nagy, Phys

    Z. Nagy, Phys. Rev. D68, 094002 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0307268 [hep-ph]

    2003 arXiv

  115. [124]

    Bertone, R

    V. Bertone, R. Frederix, S. Frixione, J. Rojo, and M. Sutton, JHEP 08, 166 (2014), arXiv:1406.7693 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  116. [125]

    Buza and W

    M. Buza and W. van Neerven, Nucl. Phys. B 500, 301 (1997), arXiv:hep-ph/9702242

    1997 arXiv

  117. [126]

    Czakon, D

    M. Czakon, D. Heymes, and A. Mitov, JHEP 04, 071 (2017), arXiv:1606.03350 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  118. [127]

    Czakon, A

    M. Czakon, A. Ferroglia, D. Heymes, A. Mitov, B. D. Pecjak, D. J. Scott, X. Wang, and L. L. Yang, JHEP 05, 149 (2018), arXiv:1803.07623 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  119. [128]

    Anastasiou, L

    C. Anastasiou, L. J. Dixon, K. Melnikov, and F. Petriello, Phys. Rev. D69, 094008 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0312266 [hep-ph]

    2004 arXiv

  120. [129]

    Anastasiou, L

    C. Anastasiou, L. J. Dixon, K. Melnikov, and F. Petriello, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 182002 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0306192 [hep-ph]

    2003 arXiv

  121. [130]

    A. V. Konychev and P. M. Nadolsky, Phys. Lett. B633, 710 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0506225 [hep-ph]

    2006 arXiv

  122. [131]

    Bellm et al., (2019), arXiv:1903.12563 [hep-ph]

    J. Bellm et al., (2019), arXiv:1903.12563 [hep-ph]

    2019

  123. [132]

    Dittmaier, A

    S. Dittmaier, A. Huss, and C. Speckner, JHEP 11, 095 (2012), arXiv:1210.0438 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  124. [133]

    Alwall, R

    J. Alwall, R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer, H. S. Shao, T. Stelzer, P. Torrielli, and M. Zaro, JHEP 07, 079 (2014), arXiv:1405.0301 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  125. [134]

    Hollik, B

    W. Hollik, B. A. Kniehl, E. S. Scherbakova, and O. L. Veretin, Nucl. Phys. B900, 576 (2015), arXiv:1504.07574 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  126. [135]

    Kallweit, J

    S. Kallweit, J. M. Lindert, S. Pozzorini, M. Sch¨ onherr, and P. Maierh¨ ofer (2015) pp. 121–124, arXiv:1505.05704 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  127. [136]

    Czakon, D

    M. Czakon, D. Heymes, A. Mitov, D. Pagani, I. Tsinikos, and M. Zaro, JHEP 10, 186 (2017), arXiv:1705.04105 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  128. [137]

    http://www.precision.hep.phy.cam.ac.uk/results/ttbar-nnloqcd-nloew/

  129. [138]

    S. Moch, J. A. M. Vermaseren, and A. Vogt, Nucl. Phys. B688, 101 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0403192 [hep-ph]

    2004 arXiv

  130. [139]

    A. Vogt, S. Moch, and J. A. M. Vermaseren, Nucl. Phys. B691, 129 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0404111 [hep-ph]

    2004 arXiv

  131. [140]

    Ablinger, A

    J. Ablinger, A. Behring, J. Bl¨ umlein, A. De Freitas, A. von Manteuffel, and C. Schneider, Nucl. Phys. B890, 48 (2014), arXiv:1409.1135 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  132. [141]

    Ablinger, A

    J. Ablinger, A. Behring, J. Bl¨ umlein, A. De Freitas, A. von Manteuffel, and C. Schneider, Nucl. Phys. B922, 1 (2017), arXiv:1705.01508 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  133. [142]

    Stump, J

    D. Stump, J. Huston, J. Pumplin, W.-K. Tung, H. Lai, S. Kuhlmann, and J. Owens, JHEP 10, 046 (2003), arXiv:hep- ph/0303013

    2003

  134. [143]

    R. D. Ball et al., JHEP 04, 125 (2013), arXiv:1211.5142 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  135. [144]

    D’Agostini, Nucl

    G. D’Agostini, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 346, 306 (1994)

    1994

  136. [145]

    Bayesian reasoning in high-energy physics: Principles and applications,

    G. D’Agostini, “Bayesian reasoning in high-energy physics: Principles and applications,” (1999)

    1999

  137. [146]

    H.-L. Lai, P. M. Nadolsky, J. Pumplin, D. Stump, W.-K. Tung, and C. P. Yuan, JHEP 04, 089 (2007), arXiv:hep- ph/0702268 [hep-ph]

    2007

  138. [147]

    Olness, J

    F. Olness, J. Pumplin, D. Stump, J. Huston, P. M. Nadolsky, H.-L. Lai, S. Kretzer, J. F. Owens, and W.-K. Tung, Eur. Phys. J. C40, 145 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0312323 [hep-ph]

    2005 arXiv

  139. [148]

    R. D. Ball, V. Bertone, L. Del Debbio, S. Forte, A. Guffanti, J. I. Latorre, S. Lionetti, J. Rojo, and M. Ubiali, Phys. Lett. B707, 66 (2012), arXiv:1110.2483 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  140. [149]

    L. A. Harland-Lang, A. D. Martin, P. Motylinski, and R. S. Thorne, Eur. Phys. J. C75, 435 (2015), arXiv:1506.05682 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  141. [150]

    T.-J. Hou, S. Dulat, J. Gao, M. Guzzi, J. Huston, P. Nadolsky, C. Schmidt, J. Winter, K. Xie, and C. P. Yuan, JHEP 02, 059 (2018), arXiv:1707.00657 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  142. [151]

    Hou et al., JHEP 03, 099 (2017), arXiv:1607.06066 [hep-ph]

    T.-J. Hou et al., JHEP 03, 099 (2017), arXiv:1607.06066 [hep-ph]. 105

    2017 arXiv

  143. [152]

    Butterworth et al., J

    J. Butterworth et al., J. Phys. G43, 023001 (2016), arXiv:1510.03865 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  144. [153]

    Lin et al., Prog

    H.-W. Lin et al., Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 100, 107 (2018), arXiv:1711.07916 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  145. [154]

    Constantinou et al., (2020), arXiv:2006.08636 [hep-ph]

    M. Constantinou et al., (2020), arXiv:2006.08636 [hep-ph]

    2020

  146. [155]

    Amaudruz et al

    P. Amaudruz et al. (New Muon), Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2712 (1991)

    1991

  147. [156]

    Arneodo et al

    M. Arneodo et al. (New Muon), Phys. Rev. D50, R1 (1994)

    1994

  148. [157]

    Gottfried, Phys

    K. Gottfried, Phys. Rev. Lett. 18, 1174 (1967)

    1967

  149. [158]

    Alexandrou, S

    C. Alexandrou, S. Bacchio, M. Constantinou, J. Finkenrath, K. Hadjiyiannakou, K. Jansen, G. Koutsou, H. Panagopoulos, and G. Spanoudes, Phys. Rev. D 101, 094513 (2020), arXiv:2003.08486 [hep-lat]

    2020

  150. [159]

    Y.-B. Yang, J. Liang, Y.-J. Bi, Y. Chen, T. Draper, K.-F. Liu, and Z. Liu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 212001 (2018), arXiv:1808.08677 [hep-lat]

    2018 arXiv

  151. [160]

    Y.-B. Yang, M. Gong, J. Liang, H.-W. Lin, K.-F. Liu, D. Pefkou, and P. Shanahan, Phys. Rev. D 98, 074506 (2018), arXiv:1805.00531 [hep-lat]

    2018 arXiv

  152. [161]

    M. Deka, T. Streuer, T. Doi, S. J. Dong, T. Draper, K. F. Liu, N. Mathur, and A. W. Thomas, Phys. Rev. D79, 094502 (2009), arXiv:0811.1779 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  153. [162]

    Liang, M

    J. Liang, M. Sun, Y.-B. Yang, T. Draper, and K.-F. Liu, (2019), arXiv:1901.07526 [hep-ph]

    2019

  154. [163]

    Gockeler, R

    M. Gockeler, R. Horsley, D. Pleiter, P. E. L. Rakow, and G. Schierholz (QCDSF), Phys. Rev. D71, 114511 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0410187 [hep-ph]

    2005 arXiv

  155. [164]

    Dolgov et al

    D. Dolgov et al. (LHPC, TXL), Phys. Rev. D66, 034506 (2002), arXiv:hep-lat/0201021 [hep-lat]

    2002 arXiv

  156. [165]

    Gockeler, R

    M. Gockeler, R. Horsley, E.-M. Ilgenfritz, H. Perlt, P. E. L. Rakow, G. Schierholz, and A. Schiller, Phys. Rev. D53, 2317 (1996), arXiv:hep-lat/9508004 [hep-lat]

    1996 arXiv

  157. [166]

    A. D. Martin, W. J. Stirling, R. S. Thorne, and G. Watt, Eur. Phys. J. C63, 189 (2009), arXiv:0901.0002 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  158. [167]

    CTEQ-TEA, https://ct.hepforge.org/PDFs/ct18/figures/L2Sensitivity/

  159. [168]

    Gehrmann-De Ridder, T

    A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, T. Gehrmann, E. W. N. Glover, A. Huss, and T. A. Morgan, JHEP 11, 094 (2016), [Erratum: JHEP10,126(2018)], arXiv:1610.01843 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  160. [169]

    Gehrmann-De Ridder, T

    A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, T. Gehrmann, E. W. N. Glover, A. Huss, and T. A. Morgan, PoS LL2016, 056 (2016), arXiv:1607.01749 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  161. [170]

    Gehrmann-De Ridder, T

    A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, T. Gehrmann, N. Glover, A. Huss, and T. A. Morgan, PoS RADCOR2015, 075 (2016), arXiv:1601.04569 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  162. [171]

    Gehrmann-De Ridder, T

    A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, T. Gehrmann, E. W. N. Glover, A. Huss, and T. A. Morgan, JHEP 07, 133 (2016), arXiv:1605.04295 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  163. [172]

    Forte and Z

    S. Forte and Z. Kassabov, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 182 (2020), arXiv:2001.04986 [hep-ph]

    2020

  164. [173]

    A study of the impact of double-differential top distributions from CMS on parton distribution functions,

    M. Czakon, S. Dulat, T.-J. Hou, J. Huston, A. Mitov, A. S. Papanastasiou, I. Sitiwaldi, Z. Yu, and C. P. Yuan, “A study of the impact of double-differential top distributions from CMS on parton distribution functions,” (2019), arXiv:1912.08801 [hep-ph]

    2019

  165. [174]

    Gottschalk, Phys

    T. Gottschalk, Phys. Rev. D23, 56 (1981)

    1981

  166. [175]

    Gluck, S

    M. Gluck, S. Kretzer, and E. Reya, Phys. Lett. B398, 381 (1997), [Erratum: Phys. Lett.B405,392(1997)], arXiv:hep- ph/9701364 [hep-ph]

    1997

  167. [176]

    Blumlein, A

    J. Blumlein, A. Hasselhuhn, P. Kovacikova, and S. Moch, Phys. Lett. B700, 294 (2011), arXiv:1104.3449 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  168. [177]

    J. C. Collins, Phys. Rev. D58, 094002 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9806259 [hep-ph]

    1998 arXiv

  169. [178]

    Gao, JHEP 02, 026 (2018), arXiv:1710.04258 [hep-ph]

    J. Gao, JHEP 02, 026 (2018), arXiv:1710.04258 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  170. [179]

    R. D. Ball, E. R. Nocera, and R. L. Pearson (NNPDF), Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 282 (2019), arXiv:1812.09074 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  171. [180]

    Arbuzov, D

    A. Arbuzov, D. Bardin, S. Bondarenko, P. Christova, L. Kalinovskaya, U. Klein, V. Kolesnikov, L. Rumyantsev, R. Sadykov, and A. Sapronov, JETP Lett. 103, 131 (2016), arXiv:1509.03052 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  172. [181]

    Aad et al

    G. Aad et al. (ATLAS), JHEP 08, 009 (2016), arXiv:1606.01736 [hep-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  173. [182]

    C. A. Aidala et al. (SeaQuest), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A930, 49 (2019), arXiv:1706.09990 [physics.ins-det]

    2019 arXiv

  174. [183]

    Czakon, P

    M. Czakon, P. Fiedler, and A. Mitov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 252004 (2013), arXiv:1303.6254 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  175. [184]

    Czakon and A

    M. Czakon and A. Mitov, Comput. Phys. Commun. 185, 2930 (2014), arXiv:1112.5675 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  176. [185]

    Anastasiou, S

    C. Anastasiou, S. Buehler, F. Herzog, and A. Lazopoulos, JHEP 12, 058 (2011), arXiv:1107.0683 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  177. [186]

    ResBos-2: Precision Resummation for the LHC Era,

    Joshua Isaacson, Bin Yan and C.-P. Yuan, “ResBos-2: Precision Resummation for the LHC Era,” in preparation

  178. [187]

    Yalkun and S

    N. Yalkun and S. Dulat, Chin. Phys. C43, 123101 (2019), arXiv:1908.00026 [hep-ph]

    2019

  179. [188]

    Accardi et al., Eur

    A. Accardi et al., Eur. Phys. J. A52, 268 (2016), arXiv:1212.1701 [nucl-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  180. [189]

    CT18PDFs, https://hep.pa.msu.edu/cteq/public/ct18.html and https://tinyurl.com/ct18pdfs-1

  181. [190]

    LHAPDF6, https://lhapdf.hepforge.org/

  182. [191]

    LHAPDF5, http://hep.pa.msu.edu/cteq/public/ct14/lhapdf/v5/

  183. [192]

    Tests of goodness of fit to multiple data sets,

    J. C. Collins and J. Pumplin, “Tests of goodness of fit to multiple data sets,” (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0105207 [hep-ph]

    2001 arXiv

  184. [193]

    Barone, C

    V. Barone, C. Pascaud, and F. Zomer, Eur. Phys. J. C12, 243 (2000), arXiv:hep-ph/9907512 [hep-ph]

    2000 arXiv

  185. [194]

    Alekhin, J

    S. Alekhin, J. Bl¨ umlein, and S. Moch, Phys. Lett. B777, 134 (2018), arXiv:1708.01067 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  186. [195]

    James and M

    F. James and M. Winkler, http://seal.web.cern.ch/seal/documents/minuit/mnusersguide.pdf (2004)

    2004

  187. [196]

    Hahn, Comput

    T. Hahn, Comput. Phys. Commun. 168, 78 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0404043 [hep-ph]

    2005 arXiv

  188. [197]

    L. A. Harland-Lang, A. D. Martin, and R. S. Thorne, Eur. Phys. J. C78, 248 (2018), arXiv:1711.05757 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  189. [198]

    Khachatryan et al

    V. Khachatryan et al. (CMS), JINST 12, P02014 (2017), arXiv:1607.03663 [hep-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  190. [199]

    Paukkunen and P

    H. Paukkunen and P. Zurita, JHEP 12, 100 (2014), arXiv:1402.6623 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  191. [200]

    Camarda et al

    S. Camarda et al. (HERAFitter developers’ Team), Eur. Phys. J. C75, 458 (2015), arXiv:1503.05221 [hep-ph]

    2015

  192. [201]

    xFitter developers, https://www.xfitter.org/xFitter/xFitter/DownloadPage?action=AttachFile&do=view&target= 106 manual.pdf (2017)

    2017

  193. [202]

    Catani and M

    S. Catani and M. H. Seymour, Phys. Lett. B378, 287 (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9602277 [hep-ph]

    1996 arXiv

  194. [203]

    Catani and M

    S. Catani and M. H. Seymour, Nucl. Phys. B485, 291 (1997), [Erratum: Nucl. Phys.B510,503(1998)], arXiv:hep- ph/9605323 [hep-ph]

    1997

  195. [204]

    Binoth and G

    T. Binoth and G. Heinrich, Nucl. Phys. B585, 741 (2000), arXiv:hep-ph/0004013 [hep-ph]

    2000 arXiv

  196. [205]

    Anastasiou, K

    C. Anastasiou, K. Melnikov, and F. Petriello, Phys. Rev. D69, 076010 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0311311 [hep-ph]

    2004 arXiv

  197. [206]

    Anastasiou, K

    C. Anastasiou, K. Melnikov, and F. Petriello, Nucl. Phys. B724, 197 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0501130 [hep-ph]. 107 Appendix G: Supplemental Material

    2005 arXiv

  198. [207]

    CT18NNLO CT18mCDHSW CT18ZNNLO 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 10-6 10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 0.2 0.5 0.9 PDF Ratio to CT18NNLO x u(x,Q) at Q =100 GeV 90%C.L

    Additional comparisons between PDF sets PDF Ratio to CT18NNLO x g(x,Q) at Q =100 GeV 90%C.L. CT18NNLO CT18mCDHSW CT18ZNNLO 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 10-6 10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 0.2 0.5 0.9 PDF Ratio to CT18NNLO x u(x,Q) at Q =100 GeV 90%C.L. CT18NNLO CT18mCDHSW CT18ZNNLO 0.8 0.9 1.0 1....

  199. [208]

    Additional histograms and comparisons to data dσ(Z→l+l-) / dpll T [pb/GeV] pll T [GeV] ATLAS, √s=8 TeV, L=20.3 [fb]-1 |yll| < 2.4 46 < Mll < 66 GeV CT18, 68% C.L. Shifted data for CT18 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.03 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Data / Theory pll T [GeV] ATLAS,...

Pith tools

Reviewed May 21, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.