pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.00087 · v1 · pith:EXRGZQD3new · submitted 2026-06-30 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex· nucl-th

Putting Jet Substructure on Track(s)

Kyle Lee , Ian Moult , Wouter J. Waalewijn This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-02 18:50 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-exnucl-th
keywords jet substructureenergy correlatorstracksfactorizationrenormalization groupcollinear logarithmsLHCQCD
0
0 comments X

The pith

Projected energy correlators up to four points are now calculated on tracks at next-to-leading collinear logarithmic accuracy.

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

The paper establishes the first complete calculations of jet substructure observables using tracking information at the LHC. It applies factorization theorems and renormalization-group techniques to compute projected energy correlators up to four points at next-to-leading collinear logarithmic accuracy. This extends the state of the art achieved for full jets specifically to track-based measurements. A sympathetic reader would care because tracking detectors offer superior angular resolution, enabling more precise studies of energy flow within jets and better theory-experiment comparisons for searches and Standard Model measurements.

Core claim

By leveraging recent progress in factorization theorems and renormalization-group techniques developed for full jets, the paper computes projected energy correlators up to four points at next-to-leading collinear logarithmic accuracy for track-based observables. This provides the first complete calculations of jet substructure observables on tracks at the LHC, made possible by performing the appropriate projection onto tracks.

What carries the argument

Projected energy correlators, which capture multi-point correlations in jet energy flow after projection onto tracks and evolved using factorization and renormalization-group methods.

If this is right

  • Precise and systematically improvable theoretical predictions become available for track-based jet substructure observables.
  • Enhanced comparisons between theory and experiment are possible due to the angular resolution of tracking detectors.
  • New ways open to search for new physics and measure Standard Model parameters using jet substructure at higher precision.
  • Subtle correlations in the dynamics of the strong nuclear force can be studied with improved resolution.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same projection technique could simplify experimental analyses by reducing dependence on calorimeter energy resolution.
  • These calculations provide a benchmark for validating Monte Carlo event generators in the track sector.
  • Extending the method to other jet observables or higher point correlators follows naturally from the factorization framework.
  • Reduced theoretical uncertainties in LHC jet analyses that rely on tracking information become feasible.

Load-bearing premise

The factorization theorems and renormalization-group techniques developed for full jets apply without modification to track-based observables once the appropriate projection is performed.

What would settle it

A comparison of the calculated four-point projected energy correlator values against LHC experimental data using tracking information at the stated accuracy would directly test whether the factorization applies to tracks.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.00087 by Ian Moult, Kyle Lee, Wouter J. Waalewijn.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Projected N-point energy correlators on tracks at NLL (solid), compared to Pythia (dashed), for LHC kinematics. The bands show the perturbative uncertainty and uncertainty from Ω¯tr i , as described in the text. Our calculation does not describe the con￾finement transition (gray). The continued success of this program relies on the ability to measure correlators with increasingly fine an￾gular resolution, … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Projected N-point energy correlator on tracks divided by the corresponding correlator on all particles, at NLL (solid) and from Pythia (dashed). Uncertainties from scale variations and Ω¯ 1 are treated as correlated in the ratio. ent scales µH ∼ pT ≫ µJ ∼ pT R ≫ µJ ∼ pT RL. (3) Using renormalization group evolution to evolve these in￾gredients from their natural scales to a common scale, re￾sums the logari… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The two-point energy correlator on tracks for different mix [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Here we show our predictions at NLL accuracy, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

One of the main advances in analysis strategies at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) has been the ability to study the detailed structure of energy flow within high transverse momentum jets, a field referred to as jet substructure. Jet substructure has provided new ways to search for new physics, measure Standard Model parameters, and study the dynamics of the strong nuclear force. To push to the next level of precision, and to make measurements of increasingly subtle correlations, requires exquisite angular resolution achieved through the use of tracking information. In this paper we leverage recent progress in our understanding of factorization theorems and renormalization group techniques to present the first complete calculations of jet substructure observables at the LHC on tracks. We compute projected energy correlators up to four points at next-to-leading collinear logarithmic accuracy, matching the state of the art for jet substructure observables, but extending to tracks. This marks a significant step in enhancing the collider physics program, enabling precise and systematically improvable comparisons between experimental measurements and theoretical calculations, made possible by the exceptional angular resolution of tracking.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims to present the first complete calculations of jet substructure observables on tracks by computing projected energy correlators up to four points at next-to-leading collinear logarithmic accuracy, achieved by applying existing factorization theorems and renormalization-group techniques to track-based projections.

Significance. If the central results hold, this work would extend the state of the art for energy correlators from full jets to track observables, enabling systematically improvable theoretical predictions that match the angular resolution of LHC tracking detectors and supporting more precise measurements of jet substructure.

major comments (2)
  1. [derivation of track projection] The section deriving the track projection (near the discussion of leveraging recent factorization progress): the assertion that existing collinear factorization theorems and RG evolution apply without modification requires an explicit demonstration that the projection operator commutes with the collinear splitting functions and does not generate additional logarithmic enhancements or alter the anomalous dimensions at NLL accuracy; the skeptic concern that track sampling of only charged particles could introduce uncontrolled power corrections or modify the effective jet function is not addressed by a concrete check against known limits.
  2. [four-point correlator calculation] The calculation of the four-point projected correlator: without an error estimate or validation step showing reduction to the known full-jet result in the limit where track and calorimeter information coincide, the claim of matching NLL accuracy for tracks remains unverified.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states the accuracy level but does not define the precise projection operator or list the relevant equations; adding a short equation reference would improve clarity.
  2. [main text] Notation for the track projection operator is introduced without a dedicated equation number in the main text; consistent labeling would aid readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for providing constructive comments that will help improve the clarity and rigor of our presentation. We address each of the major comments below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The section deriving the track projection (near the discussion of leveraging recent factorization progress): the assertion that existing collinear factorization theorems and RG evolution apply without modification requires an explicit demonstration that the projection operator commutes with the collinear splitting functions and does not generate additional logarithmic enhancements or alter the anomalous dimensions at NLL accuracy; the skeptic concern that track sampling of only charged particles could introduce uncontrolled power corrections or modify the effective jet function is not addressed by a concrete check against known limits.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit demonstration of the commutation between the track projection operator and the collinear splitting functions would strengthen the manuscript. Although the projection is a linear operator that acts on the energy flow and preserves the leading-power collinear factorization at NLL, we will add a dedicated paragraph or short appendix in the revised version that explicitly verifies this property, shows that no additional logarithmic enhancements are generated, and provides a concrete check in a known limit to address concerns about power corrections from sampling only charged particles. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The calculation of the four-point projected correlator: without an error estimate or validation step showing reduction to the known full-jet result in the limit where track and calorimeter information coincide, the claim of matching NLL accuracy for tracks remains unverified.

    Authors: The four-point correlator is obtained by applying the same track projection consistently within the existing factorization framework used for lower-point functions. To verify the NLL accuracy, we will include in the revision an explicit validation step, such as taking the limit where the track efficiency approaches one, demonstrating numerical or analytical reduction to the known full-jet result, and providing an associated error estimate. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper applies established factorization theorems and RG evolution (developed for full jets) to track projections via an operator, presenting explicit NLL calculations for up to four-point correlators as an extension. No quoted step reduces a prediction to a fitted parameter by construction, renames a known result, or relies on a load-bearing self-citation whose content is itself unverified within the paper. The derivation remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The calculation rests on standard QCD factorization theorems and renormalization-group evolution applied to track projections; no new free parameters, invented entities, or ad-hoc axioms are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Factorization theorems separate hard, collinear, and soft contributions for jet substructure observables
    Invoked to justify the calculation framework for both full jets and tracks
  • standard math Renormalization-group techniques resum collinear logarithms to NLL accuracy
    Used to achieve the stated perturbative accuracy

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5714 in / 1347 out tokens · 19047 ms · 2026-07-02T18:50:48.266912+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

89 extracted references · 84 canonical work pages · 24 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    A. J. Larkoski, I. Moult, B. Nachman, Jet Substructure at the Large Hadron Collider: A Review of Recent Advances in Theory and Machine Learning, Phys. Rept. 841 (2020) 1–63.arXiv: 1709.04464,doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2019.11.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2019.11.001 2020

  2. [2]

    Kogler, et al., Jet Substructure at the Large Hadron Collider: Experimental Review, Rev

    R. Kogler, et al., Jet Substructure at the Large Hadron Collider: Experimental Review, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91 (4) (2019) 045003. arXiv:1803.06991,doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.91.045003

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.91.045003 2019

  3. [3]

    Moult and H

    I. Moult, H. X. Zhu, Energy Correlators: A Journey From The- ory to Experiment (6 2025).arXiv:2506.09119

    work page arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    G. F. Sterman, Jet Structure in e+ e- Annihilation with Mass- less Hadrons (12 1975)

    1975

  5. [5]

    N. A. Sveshnikov, F. V. Tkachov, Jets and quantum field theory, Phys. Lett. B 382 (1996) 403–408.arXiv:hep-ph/9512370,doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(96)00558-8

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/0370-2693(96)00558-8 1996

  6. [6]

    F. V. Tkachov, Measuring multi - jet structure of hadronic energy flow or What is a jet?, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 12 (1997) 5411–5529.arXiv:hep-ph/9601308,doi:10.1142/ S0217751X97002899

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  7. [7]

    G. P. Korchemsky, G. F. Sterman, Power corrections to event shapes and factorization, Nucl. Phys. B 555 (1999) 335–351. arXiv:hep-ph/9902341,doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(99)00308-9

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(99)00308-9 1999

  8. [8]

    C. L. Basham, L. S. Brown, S. D. Ellis, S. T. Love, Energy Cor- relations in electron-Positron Annihilation in Quantum Chro- modynamics: Asymptotically Free Perturbation Theory, Phys. Rev. D 19 (1979) 2018.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.19.2018

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.19.2018 1979

  9. [9]

    C. L. Basham, L. S. Brown, S. D. Ellis, S. T. Love, Energy Correlations in Perturbative Quantum Chromodynamics: A Conjecture for All Orders, Phys. Lett. B 85 (1979) 297–299. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(79)90601-4

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(79)90601-4 1979

  10. [10]

    C. L. Basham, L. S. Brown, S. D. Ellis, S. T. Love, Electron - Positron Annihilation Energy Pattern in Quantum Chromody- namics: Asymptotically Free Perturbation Theory, Phys. Rev. D 17 (1978) 2298.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.17.2298

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.17.2298 1978

  11. [12]

    P. T. Komiske, I. Moult, J. Thaler, H. X. Zhu, Analyzing N- Point Energy Correlators inside Jets with CMS Open Data, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (5) (2023) 051901.arXiv:2201.07800, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.051901

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.130.051901 2023

  12. [13]

    Andres, F

    C. Andres, F. Dominguez, R. Kunnawalkam Elayavalli, J. Hol- guin, C. Marquet, I. Moult, Resolving the Scales of the Quark-Gluon Plasma with Energy Correlators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (26) (2023) 262301.arXiv:2209.11236,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.130.262301

    work page arXiv 2023

  13. [14]

    X. Liu, H. X. Zhu, Nucleon Energy Correlators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (9) (2023) 091901.arXiv:2209.02080,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.130.091901

    work page arXiv 2023

  14. [15]

    Hayrapetyan, et al., Measurement of Energy Correlators in- side Jets and Determination of the Strong CouplingαS(mZ), Phys

    A. Hayrapetyan, et al., Measurement of Energy Correlators in- side Jets and Determination of the Strong CouplingαS(mZ), Phys. Rev. Lett. 133 (7) (2024) 071903.arXiv:2402.13864, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.133.071903. 5

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.133.071903 2024

  15. [16]

    Energy-energy correlators in p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 5.02$ TeV

    D. Ali Hassan Abdallah, et al., Energy-energy correlators in p- Pb collisions at √sNN = 5.02 TeV (6 2026).arXiv:2606.18143

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  16. [17]

    D. A. H. Abdallah, et al., Probing jet evolution with charged energy correlators in small systems (6 2026).arXiv:2606.18093

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  17. [18]

    Chekhovsky, et al., Observation of nuclear modification of energy-energy correlators inside jets in heavy ion collisions, Phys

    V. Chekhovsky, et al., Observation of nuclear modification of energy-energy correlators inside jets in heavy ion collisions, Phys. Lett. B 866 (2025) 139556.arXiv:2503.19993,doi: 10.1016/j.physletb.2025.139556

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2025.139556 2025

  18. [19]

    Energy Correlators Within Jets in Transversely Polarized Proton-Proton Collisions at √s= 200 GeV (4 2026).arXiv: 2604.15543

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  19. [20]

    Chen, M.-X

    H. Chen, M.-X. Luo, I. Moult, T.-Z. Yang, X. Zhang, H. X. Zhu, Three point energy correlators in the collinear limit: sym- metries, dualities and analytic results, JHEP 08 (08) (2020) 028. arXiv:1912.11050,doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2020)028

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep08(2020)028 2020

  20. [21]

    H. Chen, I. Moult, J. Thaler, H. X. Zhu, Non-Gaussianities in collider energy flux, JHEP 07 (2022) 146.arXiv:2205.02857, doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2022)146

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep07(2022)146 2022

  21. [22]

    Bossi, A

    H. Bossi, A. S. Kudinoor, I. Moult, D. Pablos, A. Rai, K. Ra- jagopal, Imaging the wakes of jets with energy-energy-energy correlators, JHEP 12 (2024) 073.arXiv:2407.13818,doi: 10.1007/JHEP12(2024)073

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep12(2024)073 2024

  22. [23]

    Barata, I

    J. Barata, I. Moult, A. V. Sadofyev, J. M. Silva, Dissecting Jet Modification in the QGP with Multi-Point Energy Correlators (3 2025).arXiv:2503.13603

    work page arXiv 2025

  23. [24]

    K. Lee, I. W. Stewart, Dihadron Fragmentation and the Con- finement Transition in Energy Correlators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136 (8) (2026) 081902.arXiv:2507.11495,doi:10.1103/ m18j-xypt

    work page arXiv 2026

  24. [25]

    Chang, H

    C.-H. Chang, H. Chen, X. Liu, D. Simmons-Duffin, F. Yuan, H. X. Zhu, Quantum Scaling in Energy Correlators beyond the Confinement Transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136 (8) (2026) 081903. arXiv:2507.15923,doi:10.1103/9ml8-xkfc

    work page doi:10.1103/9ml8-xkfc 2026

  25. [26]

    Herrmann, Z.-B

    E. Herrmann, Z.-B. Kang, J. Penttala, C. Zhang, Collinear limit of the energy-energy correlator ine +e− collisions: transition from perturbative to non-perturbative regimes (7 2025).arXiv: 2507.17704

    work page arXiv 2025

  26. [27]

    Barata, P

    J. Barata, P. Caucal, A. Soto-Ontoso, R. Szafron, Advanc- ing the understanding of energy-energy correlators in heavy- ion collisions, JHEP 11 (2024) 060.arXiv:2312.12527,doi: 10.1007/JHEP11(2024)060

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep11(2024)060 2024

  27. [28]

    Andres, F

    C. Andres, F. Dominguez, J. Holguin, C. Marquet, I. Moult, Seeing beauty in the quark-gluon plasma with energy correla- tors, Phys. Rev. D 110 (3) (2024) L031503.arXiv:2307.15110, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.L031503

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.l031503 2024

  28. [29]

    Andres, F

    C. Andres, F. Dominguez, J. Holguin, C. Marquet, I. Moult, A coherent view of the quark-gluon plasma from energy corre- lators, JHEP 09 (2023) 088.arXiv:2303.03413,doi:10.1007/ JHEP09(2023)088

    work page arXiv 2023

  29. [30]

    Z. Yang, Y. He, I. Moult, X.-N. Wang, Probing the Short- Distance Structure of the Quark-Gluon Plasma with Energy Correlators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132 (1) (2024) 011901.arXiv: 2310.01500,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.011901

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.132.011901 2024

  30. [31]

    Andres, F

    C. Andres, F. Dominguez, J. Holguin, C. Marquet, I. Moult, Simple Scaling Laws for Energy Correlators in Nuclear Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136 (12) (2026) 122301.arXiv:2411.15298, doi:10.1103/sw7p-7jbp

    work page doi:10.1103/sw7p-7jbp 2026

  31. [32]

    Andres, F

    C. Andres, F. Dominguez, J. Holguin, C. Marquet, I. Moult, Towards an interpretation of the first measurements of energy correlators in the quark-gluon plasma, JHEP 03 (2025) 166. arXiv:2407.07936,doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2025)166

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep03(2025)166 2025

  32. [33]

    Holguin, I

    J. Holguin, I. Moult, A. Pathak, M. Procura, New paradigm for precision top physics: Weighing the top with energy correlators, Phys. Rev. D 107 (11) (2023) 114002.arXiv:2201.08393,doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.107.114002

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.114002 2023

  33. [34]

    Holguin, I

    J. Holguin, I. Moult, A. Pathak, M. Procura, R. Sch¨ ofbeck, D. Schwarz, Top quark mass extractions from energy correla- tors: a feasibility study, JHEP 04 (2025) 072.arXiv:2407. 12900,doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2025)072

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2025)072 2025

  34. [35]

    Holguin, I

    J. Holguin, I. Moult, A. Pathak, M. Procura, R. Sch¨ ofbeck, D. Schwarz, Using the W Boson as a Standard Candle to Reach the Top: Calibrating Energy-Correlator-Based Top Mass Mea- surements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134 (23) (2025) 231903.arXiv: 2311.02157,doi:10.1103/j4sp-fcmd

    work page doi:10.1103/j4sp-fcmd 2025

  35. [36]

    Bossi, et al., Energy Correlators from Partons to Hadrons: Unveiling the Dynamics of the Strong Interactions with Archival ALEPH Data (10 2025).arXiv:2511.00149

    H. Bossi, et al., Energy Correlators from Partons to Hadrons: Unveiling the Dynamics of the Strong Interactions with Archival ALEPH Data (10 2025).arXiv:2511.00149

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [37]

    Bossi, Y.-C

    H. Bossi, Y.-C. Chen, Y. Chen, J. Zhang, G. M. Innocenti, A. Badea, A. Baty, M. Maggi, C. McGinn, Y.-J. Lee, Anal- ysis note: measurement of energy-energy correlator ine +e− collisions at 91 GeV with archived ALEPH data (5 2025). arXiv:2505.11828

    work page arXiv 2025

  37. [38]

    Zhang, T.-A

    J. Zhang, T.-A. Sheng, Y.-C. Chen, H. Bossi, A. Badea, A. Baty, C. McGinn, Y.-J. Lee, Y. Chen, Analysis note: measurement of thrust and track energy-energy correlator ine +e− collisions at 91.2 GeV with DELPHI open data (10 2025).arXiv:2510. 18762

    2025

  38. [39]

    Acharya et al

    S. Acharya, et al., Exposing the parton-hadron transition within jets with energy-energy correlators in pp collisions at √s= 5.02 TeV (9 2024).arXiv:2409.12687

    work page arXiv 2024

  39. [40]

    Acharya, et al., Energy-energy correlators in charm-tagged jets in proton-proton collisions at√s=13TeV (4 2025).arXiv: 2504.03431

    S. Acharya, et al., Energy-energy correlators in charm-tagged jets in proton-proton collisions at√s=13TeV (4 2025).arXiv: 2504.03431

    work page arXiv 2025

  40. [41]

    B. E. Aboona, et al., Measurement of Two-Point Energy Cor- relators within Jets in p+p Collisions at s=200 GeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135 (11) (2025) 111901.arXiv:2502.15925,doi: 10.1103/wv2t-dkgn

    work page doi:10.1103/wv2t-dkgn 2025

  41. [42]

    J. C. Collins, G. F. Sterman, Soft Partons in QCD, Nucl. Phys. B 185 (1981) 172–188.doi:10.1016/0550-3213(81)90370-9

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(81)90370-9 1981

  42. [43]

    G. T. Bodwin, Factorization of the Drell-Yan Cross-Section in Perturbation Theory, Phys. Rev. D 31 (1985) 2616, [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 34, 3932 (1986)].doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.34.3932

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.34.3932 1985

  43. [44]

    J. C. Collins, D. E. Soper, G. F. Sterman, Factorization for Short Distance Hadron - Hadron Scattering, Nucl. Phys. B 261 (1985) 104–142.doi:10.1016/0550-3213(85)90565-6

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(85)90565-6 1985

  44. [45]

    J. C. Collins, D. E. Soper, G. F. Sterman, Soft Gluons and Factorization, Nucl. Phys. B 308 (1988) 833–856.doi:10.1016/ 0550-3213(88)90130-7

    1988

  45. [46]

    J. C. Collins, D. E. Soper, G. F. Sterman, Factorization of Hard Processes in QCD, Adv. Ser. Direct. High Energy Phys. 5 (1989) 1–91.arXiv:hep-ph/0409313,doi:10.1142/9789814503266_ 0001

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1142/9789814503266_ 1989

  46. [47]

    Collins, Foundations of Perturbative QCD, Vol

    J. Collins, Foundations of Perturbative QCD, Vol. 32, Cam- bridge University Press, 2011.doi:10.1017/9781009401845

    work page doi:10.1017/9781009401845 2011

  47. [48]

    G. C. Nayak, J.-W. Qiu, G. F. Sterman, Fragmentation, NRQCD and NNLO factorization analysis in heavy quarko- nium production, Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005) 114012.arXiv: hep-ph/0509021,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.72.114012

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.72.114012 2005

  48. [49]

    C. W. Bauer, S. Fleming, M. E. Luke, Summing Sudakov log- arithms inB→X sγin effective field theory., Phys. Rev. D 63 (2000) 014006.arXiv:hep-ph/0005275,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.63.014006

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  49. [50]

    C. W. Bauer, S. Fleming, D. Pirjol, I. W. Stewart, An Effective field theory for collinear and soft gluons: Heavy to light decays, Phys. Rev. D 63 (2001) 114020.arXiv:hep-ph/0011336,doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.63.114020

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.63.114020 2001

  50. [51]

    C. W. Bauer, I. W. Stewart, Invariant operators in collinear effective theory, Phys. Lett. B 516 (2001) 134–142.arXiv: hep-ph/0107001,doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(01)00902-9

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(01)00902-9 2001

  51. [52]

    C. W. Bauer, D. Pirjol, I. W. Stewart, Soft collinear factoriza- tion in effective field theory, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 054022. arXiv:hep-ph/0109045,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.65.054022

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.65.054022 2002

  52. [53]

    C. W. Bauer, S. Fleming, D. Pirjol, I. Z. Rothstein, I. W. Stewart, Hard scattering factorization from effective field the- ory, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 014017.arXiv:hep-ph/0202088, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.66.014017

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.66.014017 2002

  53. [54]

    Soft-collinear effective theory and heavy-to-light currents beyond leading power

    M. Beneke, A. P. Chapovsky, M. Diehl, T. Feldmann, Soft collinear effective theory and heavy to light currents beyond leading power, Nucl. Phys. B 643 (2002) 431–476.arXiv: hep-ph/0206152,doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(02)00687-9

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(02)00687-9 2002

  54. [55]

    I. Z. Rothstein, I. W. Stewart, An Effective Field Theory for Forward Scattering and Factorization Violation, JHEP 08 6 (2016) 025.arXiv:1601.04695,doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2016)025

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep08(2016)025 2016

  55. [56]

    Calculating Track-Based Observables for the LHC

    H.-M. Chang, M. Procura, J. Thaler, W. J. Waalewijn, Cal- culating Track-Based Observables for the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 (2013) 102002.arXiv:1303.6637,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.111.102002

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  56. [57]

    Calculating Track Thrust with Track Functions

    H.-M. Chang, M. Procura, J. Thaler, W. J. Waalewijn, Cal- culating Track Thrust with Track Functions, Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) 034030.arXiv:1306.6630,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88. 034030

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.88 2013

  57. [58]

    H. Chen, M. Jaarsma, Y. Li, I. Moult, W. J. Waalewijn, H. X. Zhu, Multi-collinear splitting kernels for track function evolu- tion, JHEP 07 (2023) 185.arXiv:2210.10058,doi:10.1007/ JHEP07(2023)185

    work page arXiv 2023

  58. [59]

    Y. Li, I. Moult, S. S. van Velzen, W. J. Waalewijn, H. X. Zhu, Extending Precision Perturbative QCD with Track Functions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128 (18) (2022) 182001.arXiv:2108.01674, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.182001

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.128.182001 2022

  59. [60]

    Jaarsma, Y

    M. Jaarsma, Y. Li, I. Moult, W. Waalewijn, H. X. Zhu, Renor- malization group flows for track function moments, JHEP 06 (2022) 139.arXiv:2201.05166,doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2022)139

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep06(2022)139 2022

  60. [61]

    H. Chen, M. Jaarsma, Y. Li, I. Moult, W. J. Waalewijn, H. X. Zhu, Collinear parton dynamics beyond Dokshitzer-Gribov- Lipatov-Altarelli-Parisi framework, Phys. Rev. D 111 (7) (2025) 076021.arXiv:2210.10061,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 111.076021

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd 2025

  61. [62]

    Jaarsma, Y

    M. Jaarsma, Y. Li, I. Moult, W. J. Waalewijn, H. X. Zhu, From DGLAP to Sudakov: Precision Predictions for Energy-Energy Correlators (12 2025).arXiv:2512.11950

    work page arXiv 2025

  62. [63]

    H. Chen, I. Moult, X. Zhang, H. X. Zhu, Rethinking jets with energy correlators: Tracks, resummation, and analytic continu- ation, Phys. Rev. D 102 (5) (2020) 054012.arXiv:2004.11381, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.054012

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.102.054012 2020

  63. [64]

    Jaarsma, Y

    M. Jaarsma, Y. Li, I. Moult, W. J. Waalewijn, H. X. Zhu, En- ergy correlators on tracks: resummation and non-perturbative effects, JHEP 12 (2023) 087.arXiv:2307.15739,doi:10.1007/ JHEP12(2023)087

    work page arXiv 2023

  64. [65]

    K. Lee, I. Moult, Energy Correlators Taking Charge (8 2023). arXiv:2308.00746

    work page arXiv 2023

  65. [66]

    K. Lee, I. Moult, Joint Track Functions: Expanding the Space of Calculable Correlations at Colliders (8 2023).arXiv:2308. 01332

    2023

  66. [67]

    S. T. Schindler, I. W. Stewart, Z. Sun, Renormalons in the energy-energy correlator, JHEP 10 (2023) 187, [Erratum: JHEP 10, 175 (2024)].arXiv:2305.19311,doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2023) 187

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep10(2023 2023

  67. [68]

    H. Chen, P. F. Monni, Z. Xu, H. X. Zhu, Scaling Violation in Power Corrections to Energy Correlators from the Light- Ray Operator Product Expansion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133 (23) (2024) 231901.arXiv:2406.06668,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett. 133.231901

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett 2024

  68. [69]

    K. Lee, A. Pathak, I. W. Stewart, Z. Sun, Nonperturba- tive Effects in Energy Correlators: From Characterizing Con- finement Transition to Improvingαs Extraction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133 (23) (2024) 231902.arXiv:2405.19396,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.133.231902

    work page arXiv 2024

  69. [70]

    Budhraja, I

    A. Budhraja, I. Pels, W. J. Waalewijn, Higher-point Energy Correlators: Factorization in the Back-to-Back Limit & Non- perturbative Effects (3 2026).arXiv:2603.16996

    work page arXiv 2026

  70. [71]

    van Beekveld, M

    M. van Beekveld, M. Dasgupta, B. K. El-Menoufi, J. Helliwell, A. Karlberg, P. F. Monni, Two-loop anomalous dimensions for small-R jet versus hadronic fragmentation functions, JHEP 07 (2024) 239.arXiv:2402.05170,doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2024)239

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep07(2024)239 2024

  71. [72]

    K. Lee, I. Moult, X. Zhang, Revisiting single inclusive jet pro- duction: timelike factorization and reciprocity, JHEP 05 (2025) 129.arXiv:2409.19045,doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2025)129

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep05(2025)129 2025

  72. [73]

    K. Lee, I. Moult, X. Zhang, Revisiting Single Inclusive Jet Pro- duction: Small-RResummation at Next-to-Leading Logarithm (10 2024).arXiv:2410.01902

    work page arXiv 2024

  73. [74]

    Generet, K

    T. Generet, K. Lee, I. Moult, R. Poncelet, X. Zhang, Small radius inclusive jet production at the LHC through NNLO+NNLL, JHEP 08 (2025) 015.arXiv:2503.21866,doi: 10.1007/JHEP08(2025)015

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep08(2025)015 2025

  74. [75]

    L. J. Dixon, I. Moult, H. X. Zhu, Collinear limit of the energy- energy correlator, Phys. Rev. D 100 (1) (2019) 014009.arXiv: 1905.01310,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.014009

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.014009 2019

  75. [76]

    K. Lee, B. Me¸ caj, I. Moult, Conformal collider physics meets LHC data, Phys. Rev. D 111 (1) (2025) L011502.arXiv:2205. 03414,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.L011502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.l011502 2025

  76. [77]

    Aversa, M

    F. Aversa, M. Greco, P. Chiappetta, J. P. Guillet, HIGHER ORDER CORRECTIONS TO QCD JETS: GLUON-GLUON PROCESSES, Phys. Lett. B 211 (1988) 465.doi:10.1016/ 0370-2693(88)91894-1

    1988

  77. [78]

    Aversa, P

    F. Aversa, P. Chiappetta, M. Greco, J. P. Guillet, Higher Order Corrections to QCD Jets, Phys. Lett. B 210 (1988) 225.doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(88)90377-2

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(88)90377-2 1988

  78. [79]

    Aversa, P

    F. Aversa, P. Chiappetta, M. Greco, J. P. Guillet, QCD Cor- rections to Parton-Parton Scattering Processes, Nucl. Phys. B 327 (1989) 105.doi:10.1016/0550-3213(89)90288-5

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(89)90288-5 1989

  79. [80]

    Aversa, M

    F. Aversa, M. Greco, P. Chiappetta, J. P. Guillet, Jet Produc- tion in Hadronic Collisions to O (α −s3), Z. Phys. C 46 (1990) 253.doi:10.1007/BF01556000

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01556000 1990

  80. [81]

    Aversa, M

    F. Aversa, M. Greco, P. Chiappetta, J. P. Guillet, Jet inclusive production to O (alpha−s 3) : Comparison with data, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 (1990) 401–403.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.65. 401

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.65 1990

Showing first 80 references.