Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 50 references

The Forward Physics Facility at the HL-LHC and its Synergies with Astroparticle Physics

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that a proposed far-forward detector complex at the high-luminosity Large Hadron Collider would measure hadron production in the region that shapes cosmic-ray air showers, reducing model uncertainties in air-shower…

desk verdict A competent, honest proceedings review of the FPF-astro program; no new results, but a useful summary that deserves light referee scrutiny. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.04714 v1 pith:XOJVFTJ4 submitted 2024-12-31 astro-ph.HE hep-ex

Dennis Soldin This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HEhep-ex
keywords ForwardPhysicsFacilityHL-LHCextensiveairshowersmuonpuzzleatmosphericneutrinospromptneutrinofluxhadronicinteractionmodelssmall-xQCD
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

This paper argues that the proposed Forward Physics Facility (FPF) at the high-luminosity Large Hadron Collider would open a window on particle production in the far-forward region, at pseudorapidities above about 7, which no existing collider detector reaches but which strongly shapes cosmic-ray air showers. The central claim is that the FPF's neutrino measurements would discriminate between hadronic interaction models whose forward-flux predictions currently differ by more than a factor of two, and would pin down the ratio of kaons to pions and the rate of forward charm production. If correct, these data would help resolve the long-standing muon puzzle in air-shower experiments and would reduce uncertainties in the prompt atmospheric neutrino flux that forms the background for astrophysical neutrino telescopes. The paper presents these connections as a concrete, near-term experimental program anchored to planned detectors and simulated event rates.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the far-forward neutrino flux produced in proton-proton collisions, whose energy, flavor, and angular distributions encode the forward production of pions, kaons, hyperons, and charm hadrons. The central observable is the ratio of electron-neutrino to muon-neutrino event rates, which isolates the kaon-to-pion ratio because pions are lighter and their decay neutrinos stay closer to the beam line, whereas electron neutrinos come mainly from kaon decays; this is supplemented by the electron-to-tau neutrino ratio, which cancels many theoretical uncertainties and probes the gluon density down to $x \sim 10^{-7}$. The planned experiments FASERν2, FLArE, and FASER2 would collect on the order of a million TeV-energy neutrino interactions in the forward region, providing the statistical power to exploit these ratios.

What would settle it

If a hadronic interaction model tuned to FPF measurements of forward hadron production still fails to reproduce the muon deficit observed in air-shower experiments, the paper's central claim that FPF data would resolve the muon puzzle would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is programmatic: the far-forward region of high-luminosity proton-proton collisions, which the FPF would instrument for the first time, produces the hadronic secondaries that govern the development of extensive air showers in the atmosphere, and measuring them is essential for accurate air-shower modeling. The author shows that five currently used models predict far-forward neutrino fluxes that differ by more than a factor of two, much larger than the FPF's anticipated statistical uncertainties, so the facility's measurements would directly discriminate among them. He argues that the ratio of electron-neutrino to muon-neutrino spectra and their angular spread trace the kaon-to-pion ratio, that a modest strangeness enhancement at large pseudorapidity can reproduce the muon deficit seen in air-shower data, and that forward charm production constrains the small-$x$ gluon density and hence the prompt atmospheric neutrino flux. If these claims hold, FPF data would measurably reduce the model-driven uncertainties in air-shower interpretation and in astrophysical neutrino searches.

Load-bearing premise

The program assumes that far-forward particle production in 14 TeV proton-proton collisions can stand in for the hadronic interactions that drive cosmic-ray air showers at higher energies, including an extrapolation to proton-air collisions that nuclear and energy-dependent effects could break.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A measured K-to-π ratio at pseudorapidities above 4 would directly test the strangeness-enhancement explanation of the muon puzzle in air showers.
  • A precise νe/ντ ratio from forward charm decays would constrain the gluon distribution down to $x \approx 10^{-7}$, sharpening predictions of the prompt atmospheric neutrino flux.
  • The per-mille-level normalization of the forward muon-neutrino flux would calibrate hadronic interaction models used to simulate air showers and to model neutrino backgrounds.
  • Validating TeV-energy neutrino event generators with FPF data would improve both the facility's beyond-Standard-Model searches and neutrino-telescope analyses.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the multiplicity-driven strangeness enhancement observed at mid-rapidity in high-multiplicity proton-proton collisions grows in the forward region as this paper's example assumes, the FPF's kaon-to-pion measurement would support a system-independent, multiplicity-driven mechanism for hadron composition, with consequences beyond air showers.
  • The paper's energy-rapidity mapping ($N_\mu \propto E^{0.93}$) is a testable translation: if models tuned to FPF data still fail to reproduce the muon deficit observed in air-shower measurements, the discrepancy would point to genuine nuclear or energy-dependent effects in proton-air collisions rather than to forward production in proton-proton collisions.
  • A dedicated forward measurement in proton-nucleus runs could separate nuclear parton distribution effects from free-proton forward production, strengthening the extrapolation from the LHC's proton-proton data to the proton-air collisions that drive atmospheric showers.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This conference proceedings paper (ISVHECRI 2024) reviews the proposed Forward Physics Facility (FPF) at the HL-LHC and its synergies with astroparticle physics. It describes the facility, its four proposed experiments (FASER2, FASERν2, FLArE, FORMOSA), and argues that measurements of far-forward light-hadron and charm-hadron production will improve modeling of extensive air showers (EAS) and of the prompt atmospheric neutrino background. The central programmatic claim, stated in Sections 1 and 4, is that FPF data will explore hadron production in a phase space currently inaccessible to collider experiments and will thereby reduce uncertainties in hadronic interaction models used for EAS and neutrino astronomy.

Significance. If the central claim holds, FPF measurements would provide a genuinely new data set in the forward region, directly addressing a known gap in hadronic interaction model constraints. The paper is a clear and well-referenced synthesis, and it usefully identifies specific observables (νe/νµ ratio, K/π ratio, prompt neutrino flux, low-x gluon PDF) that connect FPF physics to air-shower and neutrino-telescope questions. As a proceedings review, it does not present new derivations or machine-checked results, but it does accurately summarize prior work, including the muon-puzzle context and the prompt-neutrino formalism. The main weakness is that the paper asserts, rather than justifies, the extrapolation from 14 TeV pp collisions to higher-energy p-air cosmic-ray interactions, which is the load-bearing assumption for the EAS-related claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.1, Figure 1] The central claim that FPF measurements will reduce air-shower model uncertainties depends on the assumption that far-forward particle production in 14 TeV pp collisions is a valid proxy for the hadronic interactions in p-air and nucleus-air collisions at cosmic-ray energies, and on the Nµ ∝ E^0.93 mapping used in Figure 1. The manuscript presents this mapping and the proxy as self-evident and does not discuss extrapolation uncertainties such as nuclear effects, energy-dependent particle production, or the difference between pp and p-air interactions. Please add a discussion of the validity and limitations of this transfer, with references to studies that quantify it, or explicitly frame the transfer as a working assumption that the FPF itself will help test.
  2. [Section 3.1, Figure 5] The strangeness-enhancement model of Refs. [37,38] is introduced by substituting pions with kaons in SIBYLL-2.3d with probability fs at pseudorapidities η>4. The FPF detectors discussed in this paper, however, accept only higher pseudorapidities (FASERν2 at η>8.4, FLArE at η>~6.4, and the facility generally at η>7). The text does not explain how a model modification at η>4 produces the FPF neutrino spectra shown in Figure 5, nor whether the detector acceptance actually covers the phase-space region that is modified. Please clarify the relationship between the parent-particle pseudorapidity distribution and the neutrino pseudorapidity accepted at the FPF, and state explicitly whether the fs-enhanced phase space is actually accessible to the detectors.
  3. [Section 3.1] The argument that FPF data will reduce EAS uncertainties is based on the observation that model-to-model flux differences in Figure 4 exceed a factor of two. However, the paper does not demonstrate that fitting FPF observables would break degeneracies between different hadronic-model modifications (for example, strangeness enhancement versus changes in inelasticity or in the pion/kaon ratio) that may produce similar neutrino fluxes at the FPF but very different muon numbers in EAS. A quantitative illustration or a clear statement that this discrimination remains an open question is needed before the muon-puzzle claim can be considered established.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.2] The references to 'Fig. 5 (left)' and 'Fig. 5 (right)' in the discussion of gluon PDF constraints and prompt neutrino flux should be to Figure 6 (left) and Figure 6 (right). In addition, the phrase 'orange curve in Fig. 5 (left)' is incorrect: Figure 5 (left) shows νe spectra for different fs values, with no orange curve; the intended plot is likely Figure 6 (left). Please correct the cross-references.
  2. [Figure 1 caption] The word 'arbritrary' in the caption of Figure 1 is a typo and should be 'arbitrary'.
  3. [Acknowledgements] The Acknowledgements contain a typo: 'Forward Physics Facilty' should read 'Forward Physics Facility'.
  4. [Introduction] The phrase 'Cosmic rays with energies exceeding 10^11 GeV' is correct for ultra-high-energy cosmic rays but could be clarified by adding the equivalent in eV (10^20 eV) to avoid reader confusion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper is a forward-looking review that summarizes external model predictions and proposes FPF measurements as independent probes, with no derivation that reduces to its own inputs.

full rationale

This is a conference-proceedings review, not a derivation-based paper. The central claim—that FPF measurements will reduce hadronic-interaction and prompt-neutrino uncertainties—rests on external references for unmeasured forward phase space, quantified by model predictions in refs [3,15,37,38] and PDF studies [41–45]. No quantity is fitted to FPF data and then renamed a prediction. The strangeness-enhancement example (fs in SIBYLL-2.3d at η>4) is explicitly attributed to refs [37,38]; although fs values in 0.4–0.6 were chosen to match EAS muon observations, the FPF neutrino spectra shown for different fs are genuine forward predictions whose measurement would provide an independent constraint, so the logic is test-and-constrain, not fit-and-recall. The Nµ∝E^0.93 assumption in Fig. 1 is openly labeled as an assumption and used only for motivation. Self-citations (refs [1,18,19,25]) support background and are not load-bearing: they do not supply a uniqueness theorem or a definition that forces the conclusion. The paper's main vulnerability—whether 14 TeV pp far-forward production transfers to higher-energy p-air showers—is an empirical extrapolation question, a correctness risk rather than a circularity. No equation is defined in terms of another, and no fitted parameter is presented as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

All content is review-level; the only quantitative inputs are from cited simulations and a toy model with a tuned parameter. The paper introduces no new entities and makes no parameter-free derivation, so the ledger reflects assumptions inherited from the cited literature and the facility proposal itself.

free parameters (2)
  • fs (strangeness enhancement probability) = 0.1, 0.2, 0.4-0.6 (toy model)
    Substitution probability of pions by kaons at eta>4 in SIBYLL-2.3d; values 0.4-0.6 are stated to partially explain the observed muon data (from refs [37,38]). Used in Fig. 5 to illustrate FPF sensitivity, not fitted in this paper.
  • muon density exponent = 0.93
    Exponent in N_mu proportional to E^0.93 used in Fig. 1 to convert secondary particle lab energies to estimated muon densities; an empirical input from prior cosmic-ray analyses, not fitted here.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Forward particle production in pp collisions at the LHC is governed by non-perturbative QCD and is modeled by event generators (EPOS-LHC, SIBYLL, DPMJET, QGSJET, Pythia).
    Section 1 and Section 3.1 rely on these generators to predict neutrino fluxes and to connect to air-shower physics; the generators themselves are phenomenological fits to data.
  • domain assumption LHC forward kinematics at sqrt(s)=14 TeV map onto cosmic-ray air-shower energies via the equivalent laboratory-frame energy of secondary particles.
    Figure 1 uses pseudorapidity to relate LHC production to EAS muon production; the paper assumes this mapping holds for p-p and p-air collisions at higher energies.
  • domain assumption The FPF cavern can be constructed and operated as described, with the stated shielding and beam-line geometry.
    Site and engineering claims (Section 2) rest on CERN civil engineering studies (refs [11-14]) not reproduced in this paper.
  • standard math Standard Model and perturbative QCD factorization for charm production, as used in the prompt neutrino flux predictions.
    Section 3.2 invokes pQCD for gluon fusion charm production (ref [41]) and PDFs; these are standard results.
  • standard math Neutrino scattering cross sections at TeV energies are known from the Standard Model.
    FPF neutrino event rate estimates use SM cross sections; not detailed in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Forward Physics Facility at the HL-LHC and its Synergies with Astroparticle Physics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XOJVFTJ4

@misc{pith2026250104714,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Forward Physics Facility at the HL-LHC and its Synergies with Astroparticle Physics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XOJVFTJ4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.04714}
}
read the original abstract

High-energy collisions at the high-luminosity Large Hadron Collider (HL-LHC) will generate a vast flux of particles along the beam collision axis, a region not accessible by current LHC experiments. The study of multi-particle production in the far-forward region is especially important for astroparticle physics. High-energy cosmic rays create extensive air showers (EAS) in the atmosphere, driven by hadron-ion collisions in the non-perturbative QCD regime. Therefore, understanding high-energy hadronic interactions in the forward region is crucial for interpreting EAS data and estimating backgrounds for searches of astrophysical neutrinos, among other applications. The Forward Physics Facility (FPF) is a proposal to construct a new underground cavern at the HL-LHC, hosting various far-forward experiments designed to detect particles outside the current LHC acceptance. We will outline the current plans for the FPF and highlight its synergies with astroparticle physics. Specifically, we will discuss how FPF measurements will enhance the modeling of high-energy interactions in the atmosphere, helping to reduce the associated uncertainties in multi-messenger astrophysics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.04714 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Simulated densities of particles [1] in arbritrary units (solid lines) in proton-proton collisions using EPOS-LHC [5]. Dashed lines show the estimated number of muons produced by these particles, assuming an equivalent energy for the fixed target collisions in the labora￾tory frame, Elab, and Nµ ∝ E 0.93 lab . 2 The Forward Physics Facility The Forward Physics Facility [2–4] is a proposed underground laboratory at C… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The FPF is located 627–702 m west of the ATLAS interaction point along the line-of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The rich physics program at the FPF spans many topics and frontiers [3]. As illustrated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Neutrino energy spectra [3, 15] for electron neutrinos (left) and muon neutrinos (right) passing through FASERν2 for an integrated luminosity of 3 ab−1 . The different pro￾duction modes are shown separately, i.e., pion decays (red), kaon decays (orange), hyperon decays…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Neutrino energy spectra [37, 38] for electron neutrinos (left) and muon neutrinos (right) passing through the FLArE detector. The vertical axis shows the number of neutrinos that pass the detector’s cross-sectional area of 1 m2 for an integrated luminosity of 3 ab−1 : …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Impact of FPF data on the small-x gluon PDF (left) [43], compared with non-linear QCD (saturation) models, and corresponding impact on the uncertainty of atmospheric muon￾neutrino flux predictions (right) [4]. and the very low-x regions of the colliding protons. These …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Albrecht et al

    J. Albrecht et al. , The Muon Puzzle in cosmic-ray induced air showers and its con- nection to the Large Hadron Collider , Astrophys. Space Sci. 367(3), 27 (2022), doi:10.1007/s10509-022-04054-5, 2105.06148

    arXiv 2022

  2. [2]

    L. A. Anchordoqui et al., The Forward Physics Facility: Sites, experiments, and physics potential, Phys. Rept. 968, 1 (2022), doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2022.04.004, 2109.10905

    arXiv 2022

  3. [3]

    J. L. Fenget al., The Forward Physics Facility at the High-Luminosity LHC, J. Phys. G50(3), 030501 (2023), doi:10.1088 /1361-6471/ac865e, 2203.05090

    arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    Adhikary et al., Science and Project Planning for the Forward Physics Facility in Prepa- ration for the 2024-2026 European Particle Physics Strategy Update(2024), 2411.04175

    J. Adhikary et al., Science and Project Planning for the Forward Physics Facility in Prepa- ration for the 2024-2026 European Particle Physics Strategy Update(2024), 2411.04175

    arXiv 2024

  5. [5]

    Pierog, I

    T . Pierog, I. Karpenko, J. M. Katzy , E. Yatsenko and K. Werner,EPOS LHC: Test of collective hadronization with data measured at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. C92(3), 034906 (2015), doi:10.1103 /PhysRevC.92.034906, 1306.0121

    arXiv 2015

  6. [6]

    Abreu et al., First Direct Observation of Collider Neutrinos with FASER at the LHC, Phys

    H. Abreu et al., First Direct Observation of Collider Neutrinos with FASER at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett.131(3), 031801 (2023), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.031801, 2303.14185

    arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    Albanese et al., Observation of Collider Muon Neutrinos with the SND@LHC Experiment, Phys

    R. Albanese et al., Observation of Collider Muon Neutrinos with the SND@LHC Experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131(3), 031802 (2023), doi:10.1103 /PhysRevLett.131.031802, 2305. 09383. 8 SciPost Physics Proceedings Submission

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Ariga et al., Letter of Intent for FASER: ForwArd Search ExpeRiment at the LHC(2018), 1811.10243

    A. Ariga et al., Letter of Intent for FASER: ForwArd Search ExpeRiment at the LHC(2018), 1811.10243

    arXiv 2018

Show all 50 references
  1. [9]

    Batell, J

    B. Batell, J. L. Feng and S. Trojanowski, Detecting Dark Matter with Far-Forward Emul- sion and Liquid Argon Detectors at the LHC , Phys. Rev. D 103(7), 075023 (2021), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.075023, 2101.10338

    2021 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Foroughi-Abari, F

    S. Foroughi-Abari, F . Kling and Y.-D. Tsai, Looking forward to millicharged dark sectors at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D 104(3), 035014 (2021), doi:10.1103 /PhysRevD.104.035014, 2010.07941

    2021 arXiv

  3. [11]

    J. Boyd, M. Andreini, G. Arduini, K. Balazs, R. A. Bozzi, F . Cerutti, F . Corsanego, J.-P . Corso, L. Elie, A. Infantino, A. Navascues Cornago, J. A. Osborne et al., Update on the FPF Facility technical studies (2023)

    2023

  4. [12]

    Boyd et al., Update on the FPF Facility technical studies , https: //cds.cern.ch/record/ 2851822 (2023)

    J. Boyd et al., Update on the FPF Facility technical studies , https: //cds.cern.ch/record/ 2851822 (2023)

    2023

  5. [13]

    Boyd et al., Update of Facility Technical Studies for the FPF, https://cds.cern.ch/record/ 2904086 (2024)

    J. Boyd et al., Update of Facility Technical Studies for the FPF, https://cds.cern.ch/record/ 2904086 (2024)

    2024

  6. [14]

    Gamba et al., Impact of Vibration to HL-LHC Performance During the FPF Facility Con- struction, https: //cds.cern.ch/record/2901520 (2024)

    D. Gamba et al., Impact of Vibration to HL-LHC Performance During the FPF Facility Con- struction, https: //cds.cern.ch/record/2901520 (2024)

    2024

  7. [15]

    Kling and L

    F . Kling and L. J. Nevay ,Forward neutrino fluxes at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D104(11), 113008 (2021), doi:10.1103 /PhysRevD.104.113008, 2105.08270

    2021 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Buonocore, F

    L. Buonocore, F . Kling, L. Rottoli and J. Sominka,Predictions for neutrinos and new physics from forward heavy hadron production at the LHC , Eur. Phys. J. C 84(4), 363 (2024), doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12726-5, 2309.12793

    2024 arXiv

  9. [17]

    J. M. Cruz-Martinez, M. Fieg, T . Giani, P . Krack, T . Mäkelä, T . R. Rabemananjara and J. Rojo, The LHC as a Neutrino-Ion Collider , Eur. Phys. J. C 84(4), 369 (2024), doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12665-1, 2309.09581

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Soldin, Astroparticle Physics with the Forward Physics Facility at the High-Luminosity LHC, PoS ICRC2023, 327 (2023), doi:10.22323 /1.444.0327, 2308.09079

    D. Soldin, Astroparticle Physics with the Forward Physics Facility at the High-Luminosity LHC, PoS ICRC2023, 327 (2023), doi:10.22323 /1.444.0327, 2308.09079

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Soldin, Astroparticle Physics at the Forward Physics Facility , In 58th Rencontres de Moriond on Very High Energy Phenomena in the Universe (2024), 2407.03427

    D. Soldin, Astroparticle Physics at the Forward Physics Facility , In 58th Rencontres de Moriond on Very High Energy Phenomena in the Universe (2024), 2407.03427

    2024 arXiv

  12. [20]

    L. A. Anchordoqui, Looking forward to forward physics at the CERN’s LHC, SciPost Phys. Proc. 13, 042 (2023), doi:10.21468 /SciPostPhysProc.13.042, 2205.12413

    2023 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Aab et al

    A. Aab et al. , Muons in Air Showers at the Pierre Auger Observatory: Mean Number in Highly Inclined Events , Phys. Rev. D 91(3), 032003 (2015), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.032003, [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 91, 059901 (2015) ], 1408. 1421

    2015 doi

  14. [22]

    Aab et al

    A. Aab et al. , Testing Hadronic Interactions at Ultrahigh Energies with Air Showers Measured by the Pierre Auger Observatory , Phys. Rev. Lett. 117(19), 192001 (2016), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.192001, 1610.08509

    2016 arXiv

  15. [23]

    A. Abdul Halim et al., Testing hadronic-model predictions of depth of maximum of air- shower profiles and ground-particle signals using hybrid data of the Pierre Auger Obser- vatory, Phys. Rev. D 109(10), 102001 (2024), doi:10.1103 /PhysRevD.109.102001, 2401.10740. 9 SciPost P...

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    H. P . Dembinski et al. , Report on Tests and Measurements of Hadronic In- teraction Properties with Air Showers , EPJ Web Conf. 210, 02004 (2019), doi:10.1051/epjconf/201921002004, 1902.08124

    2019

  17. [25]

    Soldin, Update on the Combined Analysis of Muon Measurements from Nine Air Shower Experiments, PoS ICRC2021, 349 (2021), doi:10.22323 /1.395.0349, 2108.08341

    D. Soldin, Update on the Combined Analysis of Muon Measurements from Nine Air Shower Experiments, PoS ICRC2021, 349 (2021), doi:10.22323 /1.395.0349, 2108.08341

    2021 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Cazon, Working Group Report on the Combined Analysis of Muon Density Measurements from Eight Air Shower Experiments , PoS ICRC2019, 214 (2020), doi:10.22323/1.358.0214, 2001.07508

    L. Cazon, Working Group Report on the Combined Analysis of Muon Density Measurements from Eight Air Shower Experiments , PoS ICRC2019, 214 (2020), doi:10.22323/1.358.0214, 2001.07508

    2020 arXiv

  19. [27]

    J. C. Arteaga Velazquez, A report by the WHISP working group on the combined anal- ysis of muon data at cosmic-ray energies above 1 PeV , PoS ICRC2023, 466 (2023), doi:10.22323/1.444.0466

    2023 doi

  20. [28]

    Riehn, R

    F . Riehn, R. Engel, A. Fedynitch, T . K. Gaisser and T . Stanev, Hadronic interaction model Sibyll 2.3d and extensive air showers , Phys. Rev. D 102(6), 063002 (2020), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.063002, 1912.03300

    2020 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Fedynitch, F

    A. Fedynitch, F . Riehn, R. Engel, T . K. Gaisser and T . Stanev, Hadronic interaction model sibyll 2.3c and inclusive lepton fluxes , Phys. Rev. D 100(10), 103018 (2019), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.103018, 1806.04140

    2019 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Riehn, A

    F . Riehn, A. Fedynitch and R. Engel, Sibyll⋆, Astropart. Phys. 160, 102964 (2024), doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2024.102964, 2404.02636

    2024

  23. [31]

    Roesler, R

    S. Roesler, R. Engel and J. Ranft, The Monte Carlo event generator DPMJET-III , In In- ternational Conference on Advanced Monte Carlo for Radiation Physics, Particle Transport Simulation and Applications (MC 2000), pp. 1033–1038, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-18211- 2_166 (2000), hep-...

    2000 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Ostapchenko, QGSJET-II: physics, recent improvements, and results for air showers, EPJ Web Conf

    S. Ostapchenko, QGSJET-II: physics, recent improvements, and results for air showers, EPJ Web Conf. 52, 02001 (2013), doi:http: //dx.doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/20125202001

    2013

  25. [33]

    Ostapchenko, Nonlinear screening effects in high energy hadronic interactions , Phys

    S. Ostapchenko, Nonlinear screening effects in high energy hadronic interactions , Phys. Rev. D74(1), 014026 (2006), doi:10.1103 /PhysRevD.74.014026, hep-ph /0505259

    2006

  26. [34]

    Sjöstrand, S

    T . Sjöstrand, S. Ask, J. R. Christiansen, R. Corke, N. Desai, P . Ilten, S. Mrenna, S. Pres- tel, C. O. Rasmussen and P . Z. Skands, An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2 , Comput. Phys. Commun. 191, 159 (2015), doi:10.1016 /j.cpc.2015.01.024, 1410.3012

    2015 arXiv

  27. [35]

    M. Fieg, F . Kling, H. Schulz and T . Sjöstrand, Tuning pythia for forward physics ex- periments, Phys. Rev. D 109(1), 016010 (2024), doi:10.1103 /PhysRevD.109.016010, 2309.08604

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Adam et al., Enhanced production of multi-strange hadrons in high-multiplicity proton- proton collisions, Nature Phys

    J. Adam et al., Enhanced production of multi-strange hadrons in high-multiplicity proton- proton collisions, Nature Phys. 13, 535 (2017), doi:10.1038 /nphys4111, 1606.07424

    2017 arXiv

  29. [37]

    L. A. Anchordoqui, C. G. Canal, F . Kling, S. J. Sciutto and J. F . Soriano, An explanation of the muon puzzle of ultrahigh-energy cosmic rays and the role of the Forward Physics Facility for model improvement, JHEAp 34, 19 (2022), doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2022.03.004, 2202.03095

    2022 arXiv

  30. [38]

    S. J. Sciutto, L. A. Anchordoqui, C. Garcia Canal, F . Kling and J. F . Soriano,Gauging the cosmic ray muon puzzle with the Forward Physics Facility , PoS ICRC2023, 388 (2023), doi:10.22323/1.444.0388, 2307.08634. 10 SciPost Physics Proceedings Submission

    2023 arXiv

  31. [39]

    M. G. Aartsen et al., The IceCube Neutrino Observatory: Instrumentation and Online Sys- tems, JINST 12(03), P03012 (2017), doi:10.1088 /1748-0221/12/03/P03012, [Erra- tum: JINST 19, E05001 (2024)], 1612.05093

    2017 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Coniglione, The KM3NeT neutrino telescope, J

    R. Coniglione, The KM3NeT neutrino telescope, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 632, 012002 (2015), doi:10.1088/1742-6596/632/1/012002

    2015 doi

  33. [41]

    Gauld, J

    R. Gauld, J. Rojo, L. Rottoli, S. Sarkar and J. Talbert,The prompt atmospheric neutrino flux in the light of LHCb, JHEP 02, 130 (2016), doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2016)130, 1511.06346

    2016 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Duwentäster, V

    P . Duwentäster, V . Guzey , I. Helenius and H. Paukkunen, Proton PDFs with non- linear corrections from gluon recombination , Phys. Rev. D 109(9), 094004 (2024), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.094004, 2312.12993

    2024 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Rojo, Deep-Inelastic Scattering with LHC Neutrinos, In 31st International Workshop on Deep-Inelastic Scattering and Related Subjects (2024), 2407.06731

    J. Rojo, Deep-Inelastic Scattering with LHC Neutrinos, In 31st International Workshop on Deep-Inelastic Scattering and Related Subjects (2024), 2407.06731

    2024 arXiv

  36. [44]

    W . Bai, M. Diwan, M. V . Garzelli, Y. S. Jeong, K. Kumar and M. H. Reno,Forward produc- tion of prompt neutrinos from charm in the atmosphere and at high energy colliders, JHEP 10, 142 (2023), doi:10.1007 /JHEP10(2023)142, 2212.07865

    2023 arXiv

  37. [45]

    W . Bai, M. Diwan, M. V . Garzelli, Y. S. Jeong, F . K. Kumar and M. H. Reno, Parton distribution function uncertainties in theoretical predictions for far-forward tau neutrinos at the Large Hadron Collider , JHEP 06, 148 (2022), doi:10.1007 /JHEP06(2022)148, 2112.11605

    2022 arXiv

  38. [46]

    van Beekveld, S

    M. van Beekveld, S. Ferrario Ravasio, E. Groenendijk, P . Krack, J. Rojo and V . S. Sánchez,A Phenomenological Analysis of LHC Neutrino Scattering at NLO Accuracy Matched to Parton Showers (2024), 2407.09611

    2024 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Ferrario Ravasio, R

    S. Ferrario Ravasio, R. Gauld, B. Jäger, A. Karlberg and G. Zanderighi, An event genera- tor for neutrino-induced Deep Inelastic Scattering and applications to neutrino astronomy (2024), 2407.03894

    2024 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Buonocore, G

    L. Buonocore, G. Limatola, P . Nason and F . Tramontano,An event generator for Lepton- Hadron deep inelastic scattering at NLO +PS with POWHEG including mass effects , JHEP 08, 083 (2024), doi:10.1007 /JHEP08(2024)083, 2406.05115

    2024 arXiv

  41. [49]

    F . G. Schröderet al., High-Energy Galactic Cosmic Rays (Astro2020 Science White Paper), Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. 51, 131 (2019), 1903.07713

    2019 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Coleman et al

    A. Coleman et al. , Ultra high energy cosmic rays The intersection of the Cosmic and Energy Frontiers , Astropart. Phys. 149, 102819 (2023), doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2023.102819, 2205.05845. 11

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.