Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Resonance-aware MC@NLO matching removes double counting and preserves top-antitop invariant masses when full off-shell NLO QCD predictions are showered with Pythia8.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review

2026-08-02 20:49 UTC pith:ZBK5DGR7

load-bearing objection Genuine technical advance in resonance-aware NLO+PS matching for off-shell top pairs at lepton colliders, let down mainly by self-referential validation and an untested local-subtraction assumption. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2602.22046 v2 pith:ZBK5DGR7 submitted 2026-02-25 hep-ph

Resonance-aware parton-shower matching for off-shell top-antitop production with semi-leptonic decays at electron-positron colliders

Ansgar Denner , Daniele Lombardi , Mathieu Pellen , Giovanni Pelliccioli This is my paper
classification hep-ph
keywords NLO QCDparton-shower matchingMC@NLOoff-shell top-antitop productionresonance line shapessemi-leptonic top decayselectron-positron collisionsCatani-Seymour subtraction
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Off-shell top-antitop production at a lepton collider is computed at NLO in QCD and then passed through a final-state parton shower without letting the shower distort the top and antitop line shapes. The paper shows that this can be done within the MC@NLO matching method: the shower's first emission is subtracted back with counterterms that know which particles are resonances, using new dipoles with massive emitters and spectators and probabilistic resonance-history weights. Before showering, the matched NLO sample reproduces the fixed-order cross section, 21.56 fb; after Pythia8 radiation and fiducial cuts, it gives 17.98 fb, with the reconstructed top masses still peaking at the top mass. A reader should care because it makes full off-shell NLO accuracy compatible with event generation for top-pair processes at future electron-positron colliders.

Core claim

The central claim is that the matching procedure, tuned to Catani-Seymour dipole subtraction, can be made resonance-aware for off-shell top-antitop events. The paper constructs parton-shower counterterms that use the full resonance-cascade chain of each event, with new dipoles in which a massive top quark acts as emitter or spectator and a massive W boson as recoiler. These counterterms, combined through resonance-history weight functions, cancel the shower's first emission exactly enough that the unshowered NLO sample reproduces the fixed-order result (21.56 fb), while the showered sample yields 17.98 fb with the top and antitop line shapes intact. The implication is that full off-shell NLO

What carries the argument

The machinery is the generalized resonance-aware parton-shower counterterm of Eqs. (2.137)-(2.138): a sum over dipoles—dbW and db̄W with a massive W spectator, btt/bt̄t and bbt̄/b̄bt with massive top emitters or spectators, and the usual massless bb̄ dipole—each multiplied by resonance-history weight functions f_res/f_nr (Eq. 2.136) that interpolate between doubly-resonant, singly-resonant, and non-resonant classifications. The weight functions, built from Breit-Wigner-like factors, decide how often each dipole contributes, and a damping function switches from the shower kernel to the Catani-Seymour dipole near singular limits. This construction makes the counterterms locally match the showe

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the parton shower's way of modelling radiation from the off-shell top quarks—splitting it into three independent squared currents and dropping the interference term between the two bottom-quark currents—is accurate for gluon energies of order the top width; if this approximation fails, the claimed preservation of the top line shapes and the exact cancellation of the new counterterms would only be approximate.

What would settle it

Rerun the matched simulation with the neglected J_cbb interference term included in the resonance-aware counterterms, or use an alternative shower that treats off-shell top radiation with exact matrix elements, and compare the reconstructed top invariant-mass distribution near M_t and the integrated showered cross section; a shift beyond the quoted uncertainties would show that the soft-gluon decomposition is doing the load-bearing work.

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

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • Full off-shell NLO QCD predictions for e+e- → μ+νμ jj bb can be showered with Pythia8 while preserving the top and antitop invariant masses event by event.
  • Before showering, the MC@NLO event sample reproduces the fixed-order NLO cross section, 21.56(1) fb, confirming that the new counterterms cancel.
  • After final-state radiation and fiducial cuts, the matched cross section is 17.98(6) fb, about 16% lower because jet cuts act more efficiently on showered events.
  • Resonance-line-shape observables, including the reconstructed hadronic and leptonic top masses, are stable under variations of the damping function and the shower cutoff after hadronisation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same counterterm construction should transfer to other resonance-rich processes and to NLO electroweak matching with QED showers, because only the dipole masses and the history-weight factors are process-specific; the kinematic mappings and damping mechanism are general.
  • The neglected interference term J_cbb should be testable by comparing these predictions with a shower that includes colour-coherent radiation between the two bottom quarks; observables sensitive to gluon energies of order the top width would be the first place to look.
  • The visible β_h dependence in the W-jet mass and reconstructed top mass suggests that the ambiguity in assigning a hard gluon to production versus decay could be promoted to a systematic uncertainty in future FCC-ee top-mass analyses.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a resonance-aware implementation of MC@NLO matching for NLO QCD calculations based on Catani-Seymour subtraction, applied to full off-shell e+e- -> mu+nu_mu jj bb at sqrt(s)=365 GeV and matched to the Pythia8 final-state parton shower. The main new ingredients are parton-shower counterterms for dipoles with massive emitters/spectators (top quarks and W bosons), derived from the Pythia8 Simple-Shower kinematics, and probabilistic resonance-history weight functions used to combine them. The central numerical anchors are sigma_NLO^(MC@NLO)=21.56(1) fb, which reproduces the fixed-order result before showering, and sigma_NLO^(PS)=17.98(6) fb after Pythia8 with fiducial cuts. Differential distributions are shown for variations of the damping-function power alpha, the resonance-assignment parameter beta_h, and the shower cutoff sqrt(t0), both with and without hadronisation.

Significance. If the method is correct, it is an important technical step: it extends CS-based MC@NLO matching to resonance-preserving showers for off-shell top production, aiming to avoid line-shape distortions while maintaining NLO accuracy. The analytic derivations of kinematic mappings and Jacobians for massive dipoles are detailed and self-consistent, and the integrated counterterm cancellation is explicitly checked. The paper also provides falsifiable predictions for a future lepton collider. However, the numerical validation is largely internal to the authors' own code chain, and the local correctness of the shower subtraction is not directly demonstrated. The strengths are the explicitness of the construction and the clear internal consistency test; the main weakness is the absence of a direct test against Pythia8's actual first-emission algorithm.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sections 2.3, Eq. (2.56), Eqs. (2.137)-(2.138), Eq. (4.1)] The central claim requires that the resonance-aware counterterms C_PS are exact local subtractions of Pythia8's first emission. The check sigma_NLO^(MC@NLO)=21.56(1) fb only verifies integrated cancellation between standard and hard samples; it does not establish that each C_PS locally equals the shower's emission probability. The construction inherits Pythia8's neglect of the interference current J_cbb^2 in Eq. (2.56), which is justified only for E_g >> Gamma_t. The first-emission phase space extends down to sqrt(t0) ~ 0.5 GeV, comparable to Gamma_t=1.34 GeV, where this approximation is not parametrically suppressed. Moreover, the energy-dependent prefactor E_g^2/(E_g^2+Gamma_t^2) in Eq. (2.56) is not visible in the counterterm formulas of Section 2.3. If Pythia8's actual algorithm includes these effects, the subtraction is only approximate. Please provide a direct comparison of C_PS wi
  2. [Abstract, Introduction, Section 4.1] The abstract states that distortions of resonance line shapes are avoided, but no baseline is shown. The figures for M_rec^tlep and M_rec^thad display only the matched predictions. A comparison with (a) the unshowered NLO distribution and (b) a non-resonance-aware matching, for example with the resonance history not supplied to Pythia8, is needed to demonstrate the claimed improvement. Without such a comparison, the line-shape preservation is asserted by construction rather than shown numerically.
  3. [Section 4.2, Figures 7(c)-(d)] The integrated cross section is quoted as 17.98(6) fb, but the invariant-mass distributions before hadronisation show a strong dependence on the shower cutoff sqrt(t0) near the resonance peaks (Figures 7c and 7d). The authors note that hadronisation removes this dependence, but the perturbative part of the matched prediction should be much less sensitive to t0. Please discuss whether this sensitivity signals an incomplete local cancellation of the counterterms in the soft region, or is an expected consequence of the shower cutoff. This is particularly relevant in light of the first comment.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Figure 4(b)] The legend contains a duplicated 'beta_h=0.1 S H' entry. Please correct the legend to avoid ambiguity.
  2. [Eq. (2.135) and Section 3.2.2] The ad hoc parameter c_a in Eq. (2.135) is set to 1 for all resonances, but no sensitivity study is presented. Since the beta_h dependence is explored in Figure 4, a comment on the expected or tested dependence on c_a would be helpful.
  3. [Section 4.1, Eq. (4.1)] The value of sigma_NLO^(CS) from Ref. [46] used to validate Eq. (4.1) is not quoted. Giving the explicit number and its uncertainty would make the comparison quantitative.
  4. [Section 2.1.1] The symbol Phi_R is used both for the real phase space of the fixed-order calculation and for the real kinematics generated by the shower in Eq. (2.6). Please disambiguate these two uses.
  5. [General] The paper does not state whether the extended MoCaNLO PS implementation will be made publicly available. Given the technical complexity of the method, a public release or a more detailed technical appendix would substantially aid reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the matching counterterms are constructed from the shower and CS subtraction, and the numerical comparisons are self-consistency checks rather than re-labeled inputs.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is constructive rather than circular. The PS counterterms in Eqs. (2.14) and (2.137)-(2.138) are built from the explicit Pythia8 Simple-Shower splitting kernels and CS phase-space mappings, with resonance-history weights f_res defined a priori by normalized Breit-Wigner factors and normalized to unity in Eq. (2.132). No target cross section, reconstructed line shape, or after-shower observable is used to fix these counterterms. The pre-shower relation sigma_NLO^(MC@NLO) ~ sigma_NLO^(CS) in Eq. (4.1) is, as the paper states, a recovery of the fixed-order result by construction when standard and hard counterterms are integrated over common phase space; it validates the implementation but is not a prediction from fitted data. The absence of an independent external benchmark and the reliance on the authors' own MoCaNLO/Recola codes and Ref. [46] is a validation-strength limitation, not circularity: the analytic derivation does not reduce to those citations. The neglect of the J_cbb^2 interference term at E_g ~ Gamma_t is an inherited shower-model assumption and an accuracy caveat, not an input disguised as an output. No step satisfies the criteria for a by-construction reduction, so no circular step is flagged.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. The load-bearing additions are technical: arbitrary resonance-history weight functions, a damping function, and a set of shower-specific counterterm mappings. All free parameters are hand-chosen or tuned to shower defaults, not fitted to external data.

free parameters (4)
  • α (damping-function power) = 2 (varied 1,4)
    Controls how rapidly G(p_T,PS) in Eq. (2.29) interpolates between CS subtraction and PS kernel; authors verify no visible dependence for the shown distributions, but it is a hand-chosen technical parameter of the matching.
  • √t0 (PS counterterm/shower cut-off) = 0.5 GeV (varied 0.25, 1 GeV)
    IR regulator for shower and counterterms; default from Pythia8, varied in correlated way to test stability. Before hadronisation some line-shape observables show strong √t0 dependence (Figure 7).
  • c_a (non-resonant history weight constant) = 1 for all resonances
    Sets relative probability of non-resonant vs resonant histories in Eq. (2.135); arbitrary by construction; affects which PS counterterms are activated.
  • β_h (hard-event resonance-assignment parameter) = 0.5 (varied 0.1,0.9)
    Controls attribution of a hard gluon to the antibottom vs W− decay in the hadronic top decay (Eqs. 2.143-2.144). Changing it changes M_jj and M_thad distributions by up to ±8% (Figure 4), so predictions carry a scheme dependence beyond NLO.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Catani–Seymour dipole subtraction with the modified PS counterterms in Eq. (2.14) provides a local IR-safe matching.
    The entire matching relies on standard CS factorization and on the damping-factor modification being sufficient; no formal proof beyond standard practice is given.
  • domain assumption Pythia8's Simple Shower final-state QCD is a dipole shower whose kernels and kinematics are those described in Sections 2.1.2 and 2.2.3, with no interleaved resonance decays.
    All counterterms are tuned to this specific shower algorithm; a different shower would require different C_PS.
  • domain assumption Soft-gluon radiation from off-shell ttbar factorises into three incoherent squared currents (Eq. 2.54) and the J_cbb^2 interference term can be neglected (Eq. 2.56).
    Pythia8 uses this approximation to preserve resonance virtualities; the matching adopts it without a numerical estimate of its error.
  • ad hoc to paper Resonance-history weights f_res^i built from Eq. (2.135) with c_a=1 and β_h=0.5 constitute a valid probabilistic assignment satisfying Eq. (2.132).
    The classification of events as doubly/singly/non-resonant is acknowledged as arbitrary; the specific functional form is chosen for this paper and only partially tested via β_h/α variations.
  • domain assumption Large-N_c colour flow with colour-planar Born amplitudes Eq. (2.16) is sufficient for the PS counterterms.
    Pythia8 and the counterterms operate at leading colour; subleading-colour effects are implicitly neglected.

reviewed 2026-08-02 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Resonance-aware parton-shower matching for off-shell top-antitop production with semi-leptonic decays at electron-positron colliders." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZBK5DGR7

@misc{pith2026260222046,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Resonance-aware parton-shower matching for off-shell top-antitop production with semi-leptonic decays at electron-positron colliders},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZBK5DGR7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2602.22046}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We present full off-shell NLO corrections in QCD obtained with the MoCaNLO code matched to parton shower. A resonance-aware matching procedure has been devised for the MC@NLO method tuned to the Catani-Seymour dipole subtraction. Specifically, we consider the off-shell production of a top-antitop pair in the semi-leptonic decay channel in electron-positron collisions and match it to the final-state QCD parton shower of PYTHIA8. Distortions of resonances' line shapes are avoided by providing the details of the resonance-cascade chain on an event-by-event basis to the parton shower and by adapting the matching accordingly through the introduction of dedicated counterterms.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. A resonance-aware MC@NLO QCD+EW-matched calculation of lepton-pair production

    hep-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0

    First automated MC@NLO matching of NLO QCD+EW to an interleaved QCD+QED parton shower with resonance-aware dipole subtraction, validated for Drell-Yan lepton-pair production.

  2. Resonance- and Width-aware Parton Shower Evolution and NLO Matching

    hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A resonance- and width-aware parton shower with NLO matching is developed for e+e- to W+W- bbbar, extending beyond standard Breit-Wigner approximations, with a public SHERPA-based simulator.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

117 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Baer et al., eds.,The International Linear Collider Technical Design Report - Volume 2: Physics, 2013

    H. Baer et al., eds.,The International Linear Collider Technical Design Report - Volume 2: Physics, 2013

    2013

  2. [2]

    Behnke, J.E

    T. Behnke, J.E. Brau, P.N. Burrows, J. Fuster, M. Peskin, M. Stanitzki et al., eds.,The International Linear Collider Technical Design Report - Volume 4: Detectors, 2013

    2013

  3. [3]

    Bambade et al.,The International Linear Collider: A Global Project,1903.01629

    P. Bambade et al.,The International Linear Collider: A Global Project,1903.01629. [4]FCCcollaboration,FCC-ee: The Lepton Collider: Future Circular Collider Conceptual Design Report Volume 2,Eur. Phys. J. ST228(2019) 261

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1903

  4. [5]

    Linssen, A

    L. Linssen, A. Miyamoto, M. Stanitzki and H. Weerts, eds.,Physics and Detectors at CLIC: CLIC Conceptual Design Report, 2012. 10.5170/CERN-2012-003

    work page doi:10.5170/cern-2012-003 2012

  5. [6]

    Sj¨ ostrand and P.Z

    T. Sj¨ ostrand and P.Z. Skands,Transverse-momentum-ordered showers and interleaved multiple interactions,Eur. Phys. J. C39(2005) 129 [hep-ph/0408302]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  6. [7]

    Bierlich et al.,A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage of PYTHIA 8.3,SciPost Phys

    C. Bierlich et al.,A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage of PYTHIA 8.3,SciPost Phys. Codeb.2022(2022) 8 [2203.11601]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  7. [8]

    Frixione, F

    S. Frixione, F. Stoeckli, P. Torrielli and B.R. Webber,NLO QCD corrections in Herwig++ with MC@NLO,JHEP01(2011) 053 [1010.0568]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  8. [9]

    Bellm et al.,The Physics of Herwig 7,2512.16645

    J. Bellm et al.,The Physics of Herwig 7,2512.16645. [10]Sherpacollaboration,Event Generation with Sherpa 2.2,SciPost Phys.7(2019) 034 [1905.09127]

    arXiv 2019

  9. [11]

    Gleisberg, S

    T. Gleisberg, S. H¨ oche, F. Krauss, M. Sch¨ onherr, S. Schumann, F. Siegert et al.,Event generation with SHERPA 1.1,JHEP02(2009) 007 [0811.4622]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  10. [12]

    H¨ oche and S

    S. H¨ oche and S. Prestel,The midpoint between dipole and parton showers,Eur. Phys. J. C75 (2015) 461 [1506.05057]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  11. [13]

    Giele, D.A

    W.T. Giele, D.A. Kosower and P.Z. Skands,A simple shower and matching algorithm,Phys. Rev. D 78(2008) 014026 [0707.3652]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  12. [14]

    Fischer, S

    N. Fischer, S. Prestel, M. Ritzmann and P. Skands,Vincia for Hadron Colliders,Eur. Phys. J. C 76(2016) 589 [1605.06142]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  13. [15]

    Brooks, C.T

    H. Brooks, C.T. Preuss and P. Skands,Sector Showers for Hadron Collisions,JHEP07(2020) 032 [2003.00702]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  14. [16]

    Frixione and B.R

    S. Frixione and B.R. Webber,Matching NLO QCD computations and parton shower simulations, JHEP06(2002) 029 [hep-ph/0204244]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  15. [17]

    Torrielli and S

    P. Torrielli and S. Frixione,Matching NLO QCD computations with PYTHIA using MC@NLO, JHEP04(2010) 110 [1002.4293]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  16. [18]

    Frederix, S

    R. Frederix, S. Frixione, S. Prestel and P. Torrielli,On the reduction of negative weights in MC@NLO-type matching procedures,JHEP07(2020) 238 [2002.12716]. – 50 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  17. [19]

    Farkh, R

    S.E. Farkh, R. Frederix and M. Gouighri,MC@NLO event generation by reweighting unweighted Born events,2602.18124

    arXiv

  18. [20]

    Nason,A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms,JHEP11 (2004) 040 [hep-ph/0409146]

    P. Nason,A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms,JHEP11 (2004) 040 [hep-ph/0409146]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  19. [21]

    Frixione, P

    S. Frixione, P. Nason and C. Oleari,Matching NLO QCD computations with Parton Shower simulations: the POWHEG method,JHEP11(2007) 070 [0709.2092]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  20. [22]

    Alioli, P

    S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari and E. Re,A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: the POWHEG BOX,JHEP06(2010) 043 [1002.2581]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  21. [23]

    Jadach, W

    S. Jadach, W. P laczek, S. Sapeta, A. Si´ odmok and M. Skrzypek,Matching NLO QCD with parton shower in Monte Carlo scheme — the KrkNLO method,JHEP10(2015) 052 [1503.06849]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  22. [24]

    Sarmah, A

    P. Sarmah, A. Si´ odmok and J. Whitehead,KrkNLO matching and phenomenology for vector boson processes,2511.16605

    arXiv

  23. [25]

    Nason and G.P

    P. Nason and G.P. Salam,Multiplicative-accumulative matching of NLO calculations with parton showers,JHEP01(2022) 067 [2111.03553]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  24. [26]

    Alioli, C.W

    S. Alioli, C.W. Bauer, C. Berggren, F.J. Tackmann, J.R. Walsh and S. Zuberi,Matching Fully Differential NNLO Calculations and Parton Showers,JHEP06(2014) 089 [1311.0286]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  25. [27]

    Hamilton, P

    K. Hamilton, P. Nason, E. Re and G. Zanderighi,NNLOPS simulation of Higgs boson production, JHEP10(2013) 222 [1309.0017]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  26. [28]

    H¨ oche, Y

    S. H¨ oche, Y. Li and S. Prestel,Drell-Yan lepton pair production at NNLO QCD with parton showers,Phys. Rev. D91(2015) 074015 [1405.3607]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  27. [29]

    Monni, P

    P.F. Monni, P. Nason, E. Re, M. Wiesemann and G. Zanderighi,MiNNLO P S: a new method to match NNLO QCD to parton showers,JHEP05(2020) 143 [1908.06987]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  28. [30]

    Campbell, S

    J.M. Campbell, S. H¨ oche, H.T. Li, C.T. Preuss and P. Skands,Towards NNLO+PS matching with sector showers,Phys. Lett. B836(2023) 137614 [2108.07133]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  29. [31]

    van Beekveld, S

    M. van Beekveld, S. Ferrario Ravasio, K. Hamilton, G.P. Salam, A. Soto-Ontoso, G. Soyez et al., PanScales showers for hadron collisions: all-order validation,JHEP11(2022) 020 [2207.09467]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  30. [32]

    van Beekveld, S

    M. van Beekveld, S. Ferrario Ravasio, G.P. Salam, A. Soto-Ontoso, G. Soyez and R. Verheyen, PanScales parton showers for hadron collisions: formulation and fixed-order studies,JHEP11 (2022) 019 [2205.02237]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  31. [33]

    Forshaw, J

    J.R. Forshaw, J. Holguin and S. Pl¨ atzer,Building a consistent parton shower,JHEP09(2020) 014 [2003.06400]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  32. [34]

    Nagy and D.E

    Z. Nagy and D.E. Soper,Summations of large logarithms by parton showers,Phys. Rev. D104 (2021) 054049 [2011.04773]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  33. [35]

    Herren, S

    F. Herren, S. H¨ oche, F. Krauss, D. Reichelt and M. Sch¨ onherr,A new approach to color-coherent parton evolution,JHEP10(2023) 091 [2208.06057]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  34. [36]

    Preuss,A partitioned dipole-antenna shower with improved transverse recoil,JHEP07(2024) 161 [2403.19452]

    C.T. Preuss,A partitioned dipole-antenna shower with improved transverse recoil,JHEP07(2024) 161 [2403.19452]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  35. [37]

    Denner, D

    A. Denner, D. Lombardi, S. Lopez Portillo Chavez, M. Pellen and G. Pelliccioli,MoCaNLO: a Monte Carlo integrator for NLO calculations,2602.19842

    arXiv

  36. [38]

    Berends, R

    F.A. Berends, R. Pittau and R. Kleiss,All electroweak four fermion processes in electron-positron collisions,Nucl. Phys.B424(1994) 308 [hep-ph/9404313]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  37. [39]

    Denner, S

    A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, M. Roth and D. Wackeroth,Predictions for all processes e+e− →4fermions+γ,Nucl. Phys.B560(1999) 33 [hep-ph/9904472]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  38. [40]

    Dittmaier and M

    S. Dittmaier and M. Roth,LUSIFER: A LUcid approach to six FERmion production,Nucl. Phys. B642(2002) 307 [hep-ph/0206070]. – 51 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  39. [41]

    Frixione, Z

    S. Frixione, Z. Kunszt and A. Signer,Three jet cross-sections to next-to-leading order,Nucl. Phys. B467(1996) 399 [hep-ph/9512328]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  40. [42]

    Catani and M.H

    S. Catani and M.H. Seymour,A general algorithm for calculating jet cross-sections in NLO QCD, Nucl. Phys.B485(1997) 291 [hep-ph/9605323]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  41. [43]

    Dittmaier,A general approach to photon radiation off fermions,Nucl

    S. Dittmaier,A general approach to photon radiation off fermions,Nucl. Phys.B565(2000) 69 [hep-ph/9904440]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  42. [44]

    Catani, S

    S. Catani, S. Dittmaier, M.H. Seymour and Z. Tr´ ocs´ anyi,The dipole formalism for next-to-leading order QCD calculations with massive partons,Nucl. Phys.B627(2002) 189 [hep-ph/0201036]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  43. [45]

    Alioli, P

    S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari and E. Re,NLO vector-boson production matched with shower in POWHEG,JHEP07(2008) 060 [0805.4802]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  44. [46]

    Denner, M

    A. Denner, M. Pellen and G. Pelliccioli,NLO QCD corrections to off-shell top-antitop production with semi-leptonic decays at lepton colliders,Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) 353 [2302.04188]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  45. [47]

    Jeˇ zo, J.M

    T. Jeˇ zo, J.M. Lindert, P. Nason, C. Oleari and S. Pozzorini,An NLO+PS generator fort ¯tandW t production and decay including non-resonant and interference effects,Eur. Phys. J. C76(2016) 691 [1607.04538]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  46. [48]

    Jeˇ zo, J.M

    T. Jeˇ zo, J.M. Lindert and S. Pozzorini,Resonance-aware NLOPS matching for off-shellt t+ tW production with semileptonic decays,JHEP10(2023) 008 [2307.15653]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  47. [49]

    Carloni Calame, M

    C.M. Carloni Calame, M. Chiesa, H. Martinez, G. Montagna, O. Nicrosini, F. Piccinini et al., Precision Measurement of the W-Boson Mass: Theoretical Contributions and Uncertainties,Phys. Rev. D96(2017) 093005 [1612.02841]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  48. [50]

    M¨ uck and L

    A. M¨ uck and L. Oymanns,Resonace-improved parton-shower matching for the Drell-Yan process including electroweak corrections,JHEP05(2017) 090 [1612.04292]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  49. [51]

    Chiesa, A

    M. Chiesa, A. Denner, J.-N. Lang and M. Pellen,An event generator for same-sign W-boson scattering at the LHC including electroweak corrections,Eur. Phys. J.C79(2019) 788 [1906.01863]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  50. [52]

    Chiesa, C

    M. Chiesa, C. Oleari and E. Re,NLO QCD+NLO EW corrections to diboson production matched to parton shower,Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 849 [2005.12146]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  51. [53]

    Frederix, S

    R. Frederix, S. Frixione, A.S. Papanastasiou, S. Prestel and P. Torrielli,Off-shell single-top production at NLO matched to parton showers,JHEP06(2016) 027 [1603.01178]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  52. [54]

    Denner, J.-N

    A. Denner, J.-N. Lang and M. Pellen,Full NLO QCD corrections to off-shell ttbb production,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 056018 [2008.00918]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  53. [55]

    Denner, R

    A. Denner, R. Franken, M. Pellen and T. Schmidt,Full NLO predictions for vector-boson scattering into Z bosons and its irreducible background at the LHC,JHEP10(2021) 228 [2107.10688]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  54. [56]

    Denner, D

    A. Denner, D. Lombardi and G. Pelliccioli,Complete NLO corrections to off-shell t tZ production at the LHC,JHEP09(2023) 072 [2306.13535]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  55. [57]

    Denner, M

    A. Denner, M. Pellen, M. Sch¨ onherr and S. Schumann,Tri-boson and WH production in the W+W+jjchannel: predictions at full NLO accuracy and beyond,JHEP08(2024) 043 [2406.11516]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  56. [58]

    H¨ oche, F

    S. H¨ oche, F. Krauss, M. Sch¨ onherr and F. Siegert,A critical appraisal of NLO+PS matching methods,JHEP09(2012) 049 [1111.1220]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  57. [59]

    Gribov and L.N

    V.N. Gribov and L.N. Lipatov,Deep inelastic e p scattering in perturbation theory,Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.15(1972) 438

    1972

  58. [60]

    Altarelli and G

    G. Altarelli and G. Parisi,Asymptotic Freedom in Parton Language,Nucl. Phys. B126(1977) 298

    1977

  59. [61]

    Dokshitzer,Calculation of the Structure Functions for Deep Inelastic Scattering ande +e− Annihilation by Perturbation Theory in Quantum Chromodynamics.,Sov

    Y.L. Dokshitzer,Calculation of the Structure Functions for Deep Inelastic Scattering ande +e− Annihilation by Perturbation Theory in Quantum Chromodynamics.,Sov. Phys. JETP46(1977) 641. – 52 –

    1977

  60. [62]

    Gustafson and U

    G. Gustafson and U. Pettersson,Dipole Formulation of QCD Cascades,Nucl. Phys. B306(1988) 746

    1988

  61. [63]

    Cabouat and T

    B. Cabouat and T. Sj¨ ostrand,Some Dipole Shower Studies,Eur. Phys. J. C78(2018) 226 [1710.00391]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  62. [64]

    Amati, A

    D. Amati, A. Bassetto, M. Ciafaloni, G. Marchesini and G. Veneziano,A Treatment of Hard Processes Sensitive to the Infrared Structure of QCD,Nucl. Phys. B173(1980) 429

    1980

  63. [65]

    Odagiri,Color connection structure of supersymmetric QCD (2→2) processes,JHEP10(1998) 006 [hep-ph/9806531]

    K. Odagiri,Color connection structure of supersymmetric QCD (2→2) processes,JHEP10(1998) 006 [hep-ph/9806531]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  64. [66]

    Actis, A

    S. Actis, A. Denner, L. Hofer, J.-N. Lang, A. Scharf and S. Uccirati,RECOLA: REcursive Computation of One-Loop Amplitudes,Comput. Phys. Commun.214(2017) 140 [1605.01090]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  65. [67]

    Alwall, R

    J. Alwall, R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer et al.,The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations,JHEP07(2014) 079 [1405.0301]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  66. [68]

    Dasgupta, F.A

    M. Dasgupta, F.A. Dreyer, K. Hamilton, P.F. Monni and G.P. Salam,Logarithmic accuracy of parton showers: a fixed-order study,JHEP09(2018) 033 [1805.09327]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  67. [69]

    Alioli et al.,Update of the Binoth Les Houches Accord for a standard interface between Monte Carlo tools and one-loop programs,Comput

    S. Alioli et al.,Update of the Binoth Les Houches Accord for a standard interface between Monte Carlo tools and one-loop programs,Comput. Phys. Commun.185(2014) 560 [1308.3462]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  68. [70]

    Pythia8, online html manual

    “Pythia8, online html manual.”https://pythia.org/latest-manual/Welcome.html

  69. [71]

    Brooks, P

    H. Brooks, P. Skands and R. Verheyen,Interleaved resonance decays and electroweak radiation in the Vincia parton shower,SciPost Phys.12(2022) 101 [2108.10786]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  70. [72]

    Khoze, W.J

    V.A. Khoze, W.J. Stirling and L.H. Orr,Soft gluon radiation ine +e− →t ¯t,Nucl. Phys. B378 (1992) 413

    1992

  71. [73]

    Dokshitzer, V.A

    Y.L. Dokshitzer, V.A. Khoze, L.H. Orr and W.J. Stirling,Properties of soft radiation neart ¯tand W −W − threshold,Nucl. Phys. B403(1993) 65 [hep-ph/9302250]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  72. [74]

    Norrbin and T

    E. Norrbin and T. Sj¨ ostrand,QCD radiation off heavy particles,Nucl. Phys. B603(2001) 297 [hep-ph/0010012]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  73. [75]

    Hoang, C.J

    A.H. Hoang, C.J. Reisser and P. Ruiz-Femenia,Phase Space Matching and Finite Lifetime Effects for Top-Pair Production Close to Threshold,Phys. Rev. D82(2010) 014005 [1002.3223]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  74. [76]

    Hoang and M

    A.H. Hoang and M. Stahlhofen,The Top-Antitop Threshold at the ILC: NNLL QCD Uncertainties, JHEP05(2014) 121 [1309.6323]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  75. [77]

    Beneke, Y

    M. Beneke, Y. Kiyo, P. Marquard, A. Penin, J. Piclum and M. Steinhauser, Next-to-Next-to-Next-to-Leading Order QCD Prediction for the Top AntitopS-Wave Pair Production Cross Section Near Threshold ine +e− Annihilation,Phys. Rev. Lett.115(2015) 192001 [1506.06864]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  76. [78]

    Beneke, A

    M. Beneke, A. Maier, T. Rauh and P. Ruiz-Femenia,Non-resonant and electroweak NNLO correction to thee +e− top anti-top threshold,JHEP02(2018) 125 [1711.10429]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  77. [79]

    Bach, B.C

    F. Bach, B.C. Nejad, A. Hoang, W. Kilian, J. Reuter, M. Stahlhofen et al.,Fully-differential Top-Pair Production at a Lepton Collider: From Threshold to Continuum,JHEP03(2018) 184 [1712.02220]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  78. [80]

    Hoang, V

    A.H. Hoang, V. Mateu and S. Mohammad Zebarjad,Heavy Quark Vacuum Polarization Function atO(α 2 s)andO(α 3 s),Nucl. Phys. B813(2009) 349 [0807.4173]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  79. [81]

    Y. Kiyo, A. Maier, P. Maierh¨ ofer and P. Marquard,Reconstruction of heavy quark current correlators atO(α 3 s),Nucl. Phys. B823(2009) 269 [0907.2120]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  80. [82]

    X. Chen, X. Guan, C.-Q. He, X. Liu and Y.-Q. Ma,Heavy-Quark Pair Production at Lepton Colliders at NNNLO in QCD,Phys. Rev. Lett.132(2024) 101901 [2209.14259]. – 53 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

Showing first 80 references.

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 2, 2026.