QCD Factorization for Spin-Dependent Cross Sections in DIS and Drell-Yan Processes at Low Transverse Momentum

Feng Yuan; Jian-Ping Ma; Xiangdong Ji

REVIEW

QCD Factorization for Spin-Dependent Cross Sections in DIS and Drell-Yan Processes at Low Transverse Momentum

Xiangdong Ji, Jian-Ping Ma, Feng Yuan

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · Submitted 10 May 2004 · 27 references

Pith's verdict: The spin-dependent companion to the authors' own unpolarized TMD paper: the k-even formulas are checked and solid, the five k-odd channels are flagged by the authors themselves as unverified.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash) read the paper on November 11, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 2 major objections · 10 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDhep-ph/0405085 (version 2)

Pith IDC2HIDXIF, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationFeng Yuan, Jian-Ping Ma, Xiangdong Ji. "QCD Factorization for Spin-Dependent Cross Sections in DIS and Drell-Yan Processes at Low Transverse Momentum." arXiv:hep-ph/0405085 (2004). https://pith.science/paper/C2HIDXIF

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

Short version: this is the spin-dependent companion to the authors' own unpolarized TMD factorization paper, and it is the reference most of the Sivers/transversity extraction work cites for the structure-function side. The formulas hold where they are checked, and the authors are honest about where they are not checked at all. What is actually new: the decomposition of the SIDIS hadronic tensor into leading-twist structure functions (Eq. 12), the matching of each to a TMD convolution (Eqs. 14-15), the same for polarized Drell-Yan (Eqs. 25-27), and the one-loop hard parts (Eqs. 17, 32). The eight-distribution density matrix in Eq. 4 is Mulders-Tangerman and Boer-Mulders, and they say so. The DY one-loop check is the real content: Eqs. 30-35 give virtual and real pieces explicitly and show they are reproduced by one-loop TMDs plus the soft factor. That is the right test and it passes. Soft spots, in order. The five k-odd channels in Eq. 15 are asserted, not checked; the authors state that the check needs two loops and that the Collins-Soper evolution for k-odd distributions is unstudied. Both statements are in the text, so this is a known gap, not a hidden one. The stress-test note argues that the k-odd hard parts carry no mu or rho argument while the TMDs and soft factor carry both, so Eq. 15 presupposes a rapidity cancellation that has not been established. That specific reading does not land: Eq. 15 writes all six hard parts as H(Q^2), including the k-even ones, so it is shorthand rather than a claim about scheme dependence. The substance behind the concern is already the acknowledged gap. Second: the DIS one-loop check is stated, not exhibited. Eq. 17 gives the hard part, but unlike DY there are no real-emission expressions for F_UU or F_LL; the F_UU piece presumably rests on [4] and the F_LL extension is not shown here. Minor, but it makes the DIS side of the check thinner than the DY side. Third: the all-order proof is deferred to [4], which was an arXiv preprint at the time. That is a real dependency on unpublished work, though the one-loop agreement is independent evidence. Who it is for: TMD phenomenologists, full stop. Anyone doing Sivers, transversity, or worm-gear fits needs these formulas. It is a letter, dense, with typos, and not readable outside the subfield. Recommendation: send it out. The k-even results are solid and heavily used; the k-odd ones are flagged as conjecture by the authors themselves.

Referee report

Major objections (2)

[Eq. (15)] The factorization formulas for the six k⊥-odd structure functions (F^(2)_UU, F_UL, F_LT, F^(1)_UT, F^(2)_UT, F^(3)_UT) are asserted without loop verification. The authors acknowledge both halves of this: the two-loop check is named as future work, and the Collins-Soper evolution for k⊥-odd distributions is said to be unstudied. What the acknowledgement does not cover is that these formulas presuppose a cancellation of the ρ-dependence between the TMD product and S_+(ℓ⊥,µ²,ρ) that has not been demonstrated for k⊥-odd channels; for the k⊥-even channels this cancellation is guaranteed by Eq. (8), which the paper states and says it verified at one loop. I recommend that the authors state this scheme-independence assumption explicitly in the text, so that the reader can distinguish the verified k⊥-even formulas from the conjectured k⊥-odd ones. I note that the absence of explicit µ and ρ arguments on the hard parts in Eq. (15) is a notational shorthand, not evidence of a missing cancellation: Eq. (14) writes H_LL(Q²/µ²,ρ) with both arguments, and the text states that the µ, ρ and ζ dependence of the hard factors is omitted for simplicity. The substantive concern is the unproven ρ-cancellation, not the notation.
[Eq. (17) and Eqs. (30)-(35)] The DIS one-loop check is stated rather than exhibited, in contrast to the Drell-Yan check, where the virtual corrections (Eqs. 30-31) and the real-emission expressions (Eqs. 33-35) are given explicitly. For F_LL in particular, the extension beyond the unpolarized result of [4] is not shown, so the reader cannot verify the spin-dependent DIS agreement from the manuscript alone. I recommend either exhibiting the DIS real-emission expressions for F_LL or stating explicitly how they follow from the [4] calculation plus the spin trace, in parallel with the Drell-Yan presentation.

Minor objections (10)

[§1, first paragraph] Several typographical errors should be corrected: 'Before proceeding future' should read 'Before proceeding further', 'it will be interested' should read 'it will be interesting', and 'has becoming' should read 'has become'.
[Eq. (5)] The longitudinal spin decomposition writes 'M2 nµ', which is ambiguous; please confirm whether the coefficient is M² or M/2 and typeset it unambiguously.
[Eqs. (10) and (19)] The leptonic tensors contain a repeated term 'ℓµℓ′ν + ℓµℓ′ν'; the second term should presumably be ℓνℓ′µ.
[Eq. (12)] The transverse metric is written 'gµν⊥ = gµν − pµnν − pνnν'; the final term should presumably be pνnµ.
[Eq. (21)] The tensor 'gµνT T = ⃗S1⊥ · ⃗S1⊥gµν⊥ + Sµ1Sν2 + Sν1Sµ2' appears to contain a typo in the first term, which should presumably involve S1⊥ · S2⊥ rather than S1⊥ · S1⊥.
[Eq. (6)] The fragmentation-function definition ends with '/S(b⊥,µ,ρ)'; the division notation is unusual and should be clarified as multiplication by the inverse soft factor.
[Eq. (16)] The impact-parameter expression involves a derivative ∂ib acting on the product; the meaning of this derivative and its action on the b-dependent functions should be spelled out for the reader.
[Discussion following Eq. (15)] The paper could state explicitly that the k⊥-odd distributions defined with v-links in DIS and with tilde-v-links in Drell-Yan are process-dependent objects, which is the origin of the predicted sign change of the Sivers function between the two processes. This is implicit in the ± labels of Eq. (1) and the S^± soft factors but is not stated.
[Acknowledgments] 'grand No.19925520' should read 'grant No.19925520'.
[Reference [4]] The companion paper is cited only as arXiv:hep-ph/0404183; if it has appeared in a journal, the full reference should be supplied, since the all-order proof procedure is deferred to it.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

The paper extends QCD factorization to spin-dependent semi-inclusive DIS and Drell-Yan at low transverse momentum, writing each polarized structure function as a convolution of transverse-momentum-dependent quark distributions, a soft link,

The reading

When a scattered hadron or a lepton pair emerges with transverse momentum of order $1/R$ a few hundred MeV, the strong-interaction description of the process cannot use ordinary parton distributions; it needs distributions that keep track of the parton's transverse motion. This paper asks whether that bookkeeping survives when the incoming nucleon or lepton is polarized, and answers with a set of factorization formulas: each spin-dependent structure function of semi-inclusive deep-inelastic scattering, and each of the three leading Drell-Yan tensors, is written as a convolution of two transverse-momentum-dependent quark functions, a soft factor, and a short-distance hard part. The authors define the eight leading-twist quark distributions that can appear, note that three of them (unpolarized, longitudinal, transversity) are even under $k_/perp$-reflection and obey the same Collins-Soper evolution equation, and compute the one-loop hard parts for the unpolarized and double-longitudinal channels. If the formulas hold, experimental azimuthal asymmetries at moderate energy can be read directly as measurements of these new non-perturbative functions, the way ordinary deep-inelastic data are read as measurements of the Feynman parton distributions.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the transverse-momentum-dependent quark density matrix, defined with gauge links along a quasi-light-cone vector $v$ that is slightly off the light cone so that light-cone singularities are regulated without going to a singular gauge. The same construction supplies a soft factor built from a closed rectangular link with two such vectors, and the Collins-Soper equation $/zeta /partial_{/zeta} f = (K+G) f$ governs the $/zeta$ dependence. The authors argue, and verify at one loop, that this evolution is spin-independent for the three $k_/perp$-even distributions, so a single evolution kernel serves unpolarized, longitudinal, and transversity distributions. In impact-parameter space the convolutions collapse to ordinary products, with the $k_/perp$ moments turning into derivatives on $/vec b$.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the low-transverse-momentum cross sections for polarized semi-inclusive DIS and for polarized Drell-Yan factorize at leading power in $P_/perp^2/Q^2$, in the same scheme the authors previously established for the unpolarized case. Concretely, the double-longitudinal structure function is written as a convolution of $/Delta q_L(x,k_/perp)$ with a fragmentation function, a soft factor $S_+(/ell_/perp)$, and a hard coefficient $H_{LL}$; the transverse-spin structure functions $F_{LT}$, $F_{UT}^{(1)}$, $F_{UT}^{(2)}$, $F_{UT}^{(3)}$ and the $k_/perp$-odd pieces of the unpolarized and longitudinal channels are given analogous convolutions involving $q_T$, $/delta q$, $/delta q_L$, $/delta q_T$, and $/delta q_T'$. For Drell-Yan the unpolarized, double-longitudinal, and double-transverse tensors take the same product form with two quark distributions and the Drell-Yan soft factor $S_-$, which at one loop is identical to the DIS one. The authors check the scheme at one loop: the virtual plus real corrections reproduce the factorized form, with hard parts $H_{UU}=H_{LL}$ for DIS and $H_{0}=H_{LL}=H_{TT}$ for Drell-Yan, both spin-independent at this order.

Load-bearing premise

The factorization formulas for the five transverse-momentum-odd structure functions are written down but never checked at any loop order, and the authors state that checking them requires two-loop calculations for scattering off a single quark, and that the evolution of those distributions has not been studied.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Measured azimuthal asymmetries in semi-inclusive DIS at moderate energy can be converted into the transverse-momentum-dependent distributions $q_T$, $/delta q$, $/delta q_L$, $/delta q_T$, and $/delta q_T'$, rather than only into their transverse-momentum integrals.
Double-spin asymmetries in Drell-Yan isolate $/Delta q_L(x_1,k_{1/perp}) /Delta q_L(x_2,k_{2/perp})$ and $/delta q_T /delta q_T$, giving a clean handle on the double-transverse polarization channel.
Because the Collins-Soper kernel is the same for the $k_/perp$-even distributions, a single resummation of $/alpha_s /ln^2(Q^2/P_/perp^2)$ serves all of them, extending the Collins-Soper-Sterman program to the polarized case.
The one-loop hard parts quoted here provide the matching coefficients needed to connect these low-transverse-momentum formulas to the fixed-order and integrated descriptions at large $P_/perp$.

Reading between the lines

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

The paper's own structure suggests a natural follow-up: the five $k_/perp$-odd distributions enter with different azimuthal weights, so global fits to the $/sin(/phi_h-/phi_S)$, $/sin(2/phi_h)$, and $/sin(3/phi_h-/phi_S)$ moments would test whether a single set of distributions can account for all channels at once.
Since the one-loop hard parts come out spin-independent, the spin dependence at leading order sits entirely in the non-perturbative functions; a two-loop calculation that breaks this degeneracy would be a sharp test of the scheme rather than of the model inputs.
The soft factor is common to all structure functions at this order, which means ratios of polarized to unpolarized cross sections at the same kinematics could cancel much of the soft and evolution uncertainty, an experimental handle the paper does not spell out.

Original abstract

Based on a recent work on the quantum chromodynamic (QCD) factorization for semi-inclusive deep-inelastic scattering (DIS), we present a set of factorization formulas for the spin-dependent DIS and Drell-Yan cross sections at low transverse momentum.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 1,704 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.04 · states limitation 0.11 · human participants 0.02 · controlled comparison 0.02 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.03 · compares with prior results 0.15 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v2. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

Based on a recent work on the quantum chromodynamic (QCD) factorization for semi-inclusive deep-inelastic scattering (DIS), we present a set of factorization formulas for the spin-dependent DIS and Drell-Yan cross sections at low transverse momentum.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	Based on a recent work on the quantum chromodynamic (QCD) factorization for semi-inclusive deep-inelastic scattering (DIS), we present a set of factorization formulas for the spin-dependent DIS and Drell-Yan cross sections at low transverse momentum.	contribution 1.00	0.89	0.58	asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 1.00 · evidence from proof or derivation 0.65.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v2

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 1.** FIG. 1: Transverse momentum dependent quark distributions

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2: One-loop corrections to DY processes.

Figures reproduced from arXiv:hep-ph/0405085 by the authors.

References

Works cited (27)

[4]

X. Ji, J. P. Ma and F. Yuan, arXiv:hep-ph/0404183

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[1]

B. W. Filippone and X. D. Ji, Adv. Nucl. Phys. 26, 1 (2001) [arXiv:hep-ph/0101224]. M. Anselmino, A. Efremov and E. Leader, Phys. Rept. 261, 1 (1995) [Erratum-ibid. 281, 399 (1997)] [arXiv:hep-ph/9501369]. V. Barone, A. Drago an d P. G. Ratcliﬀe, Phys. Rept. 359, 1 (2002) [arXiv:hep-ph/0104283]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[2]

G. Bunce, N. Saito, J. Soﬀer and W. Vogelsang, Ann. Rev. Nuc l. Part. Sci. 50, 525 (2000) [arXiv:hep-ph/0007218]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[3]

J. C. Collins and D. E. Soper, Nucl. Phys. B 193, 381 (1981) [Erratum-ibid. B 213, 545 (1983)]; Nucl. Phys. B 197, 446 (1982)

View on Pith 1981
[5]

Y. L. Dokshitzer, D. Diakonov and S. I. Troian, Phys. Lett . B 78, 290 (1978); Phys. Lett. B 79, 269 (1978); Phys. Rept. 58, 269 (1980). 11

View on Pith 1978
[6]

G. Parisi and R. Petronzio, Nucl. Phys. B 154, 427 (1979)

View on Pith 1979
[7]

J. C. Collins, D. E. Soper and G. Sterman, Nucl. Phys. B 250, 199 (1985)

View on Pith 1985
[8]

C. T. H. Davies and W. J. Stirling, Nucl. Phys. B 244, 337 (1984); C. T. H. Davies, B. R. Web- ber and W. J. Stirling, Nucl. Phys. B 256, 413 (1985)

View on Pith 1984
[9]

P. B. Arnold and R. P. Kauﬀman, Nucl. Phys. B 349, 381 (1991)

View on Pith 1991
[10]

G. A. Ladinsky and C. P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D 50, 4239 (1994) [arXiv:hep-ph/9311341]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994
[11]

R. Meng, F. I. Olness and D. E. Soper, Phys. Rev. D 54, 1919 (1996) [arXiv:hep-ph/9511311]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996
[12]

P. Nadolsky, D. R. Stump and C. P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D 61, 014003 (2000) [Erratum-ibid. D 64, 059903 (2001)] [arXiv:hep-ph/9906280]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000
[13]

J. W. Qiu and X. F. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 2724 (2001) [arXiv:hep-ph/0012058]; Phys. Rev. D 63, 114011 (2001) [arXiv:hep-ph/0012348]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[14]

J. C. Collins, Adv. Ser. Direct. High Energy Phys. 5, 573 (1989) [arXiv:hep-ph/0312336]; in Perturbative QCD (A.H. Mueller, ed.) (World Scientiﬁc Publ., 1989)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1989
[15]

J. C. Collins, Phys. Lett. B 536, 43 (2002) [arXiv:hep-ph/0204004]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[16]

A. V. Belitsky, X. Ji and F. Yuan, Nucl. Phys. B 656, 165 (2003) [arXiv:hep-ph/0208038]; X. Ji and F. Yuan, Phys. Lett. B 543, 66 (2002) [arXiv:hep-ph/0206057]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[17]

P. J. Mulders and R. D. Tangerman, Nucl. Phys. B 461, 197 (1996) [Erratum-ibid. B 484, 538 (1997)] [arXiv:hep-ph/9510301]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996
[18]

D. Boer and P. J. Mulders, Phys. Rev. D 57, 5780 (1998) [arXiv:hep-ph/9711485]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[19]

C. Itzykson and J. B. Zuber, Quantum Field Theory , (Mcgraw-Hill, New York, 1980)

View on Pith 1980
[20]

X. Ji, J. P. Ma and F. Yuan, Nucl. Phys. B 652, 383 (2003) [arXiv:hep-ph/0210430]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[21]

R. L. Jaﬀe and X. D. Ji, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 552 (1991); Nucl. Phys. B 375, 527 (1992)

View on Pith 1991
[22]

J. C. Collins, Nucl. Phys. B 396, 161 (1993) [arXiv:hep-ph/9208213]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1993
[23]

S. J. Brodsky, D. S. Hwang and I. Schmidt, Phys. Lett. B 530, 99 (2002) [arXiv:hep-ph/0201296]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[24]

J. w. Qiu and G. Sterman, Nucl. Phys. B 353, 105 (1991); Nucl. Phys. B 353, 137 (1991)

View on Pith 1991
[25]

Y. Koike and J. Nagashima, Nucl. Phys. B 660, 269 (2003) [arXiv:hep-ph/0302061]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[26]

A. Weber, Nucl. Phys. B 382, 63 (1992); Nucl. Phys. B 403, 545 (1993)

View on Pith 1992
[27]

P. M. Nadolsky and C. P. Yuan, Nucl. Phys. B 666, 3 (2003) [arXiv:hep-ph/0304001]. 12

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

Forward citations

Cited by 49 Pith papers

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

Energy Correlators Resolving Proton Spin
hep-ph 2025-09 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

The work establishes a correspondence between spin-dependent energy correlators and polarized TMDs/NECs using SCET, yielding N3LL/N2LL predictions for correlation patterns in current and target fragmentation regions.
Dihadron Angular Correlations in the $e^+e^-$ Collision
hep-ph 2025-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

The paper derives the first complete O(alpha_s^2) analytic QCD corrections to the dihadron angular separation distribution in e+e- annihilation, with verified cancellation of infrared poles.
Analytic Continuation and Reciprocity Relation for Collinear Splitting in QCD
hep-ph 2020-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

A new analytic continuation rule for splitting amplitudes resolves the NNLO ambiguity in the time-like quark-gluon splitting function and yields a singlet reciprocity relation verified through three loops.
Quark Transverse Parton Distribution at the Next-to-Next-to-Next-to-Leading Order
hep-ph 2019-12 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

The quark TMD beam function matching coefficients are computed analytically through N3LO in QCD, using a generalized integration-by-parts method that handles the exponential rapidity regulator inside the integrand.
TMD Soft Function from Large-Momentum Effective Theory
hep-ph 2019-10 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

The transverse-momentum-dependent soft function can be written as a form factor of a pair of nearly-lightlike color sources in heavy-quark effective theory, making it accessible to lattice QCD.

Show 44 more citing papers

Matches and mismatches in the descriptions of semi-inclusive processes at low and high transverse momentum
hep-ph 2008-03 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

The low- and high-transverse-momentum descriptions of semi-inclusive deep inelastic scattering agree for some structure functions and disagree for others; the cos(phi_h) disagreement exposes a failure of naive twist-t...
Phenomenological Estimate for the Longitudinal Unpolarized Structure Function in Semi-inclusive Deep Inelastic Scattering
hep-ph 2026-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

The longitudinal SIDIS structure function F_UU_L is estimated to be sizable, with R_SIDIS around 0.3 at low transverse momentum and a 5 to 10 percent correction to integrated observables at low Q2.
Non-global logarithms and fiducial transverse-momentum-dependent observables in deep-inelastic scattering
hep-ph 2026-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A fiducial transverse-momentum imbalance with non-global logarithms resummed via BMS evolution predicts that widening the acceptance increases Sivers and worm-gear spin asymmetries at the EIC and EicC.
Nucleon Tomography with 0-jettiness
hep-ph 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Applying a 0-jettiness veto to transverse single-spin asymmetries in W/Z production at RHIC enhances the asymmetry signal, sharpening the test of the Sivers sign change.
Six-dimensional light-front Wigner distributions of the proton
hep-ph 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

All 16 leading-twist six-dimensional light-front quark Wigner distributions for the proton are computed in a spectator-diquark model, extending earlier five-dimensional and unpolarized-only results.
First insight into transverse-momentum-dependent fragmentation physics at photon-photon colliders
hep-ph 2025-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Photon-photon scattering at future lepton colliders can access Collins and unpolarized TMD fragmentation functions through two-hadron azimuthal asymmetries around the jet thrust axis, with enhanced up-quark flavor sen...
Computing Light-Front Wave Functions Without Light-Front Quantization: A Large-Momentum Effective Theory Approach
hep-ph 2021-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A factorization formula connects equal-time quasi wave-function amplitudes at large hadron momentum to light-front wave-function amplitudes, with rapidity divergences absorbed into generalized soft functions built fro...
Extraction of the Sivers function from SIDIS, Drell-Yan, and $W^\pm/Z$ boson production data with TMD evolution
hep-ph 2021-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A simultaneous TMD-evolution fit to SIDIS, pion-induced Drell-Yan and W/Z data yields a Sivers function that, fitted to SIDIS alone, also describes the Drell-Yan asymmetries.
Unpolarized Quark and Gluon TMD PDFs and FFs at N$^3$LO
hep-ph 2020-12 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The paper completes the third-order perturbative matching coefficients for unpolarized quark and gluon transverse-momentum-dependent distribution and fragmentation functions, and resums the small-momentum-fraction dou...
Origin of single transverse-spin asymmetries in high-energy collisions
hep-ph 2020-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A simultaneous fit to spin-asymmetry data from SIDIS, Drell-Yan, electron-positron annihilation, and proton-proton collisions supports a common multi-parton origin for single transverse-spin asymmetries and yields ten...
Transverse-Momentum-Dependent Parton Distribution Functions from Large-Momentum Effective Theory
hep-ph 2019-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

The authors give a LaMET factorization relating Euclidean quasi-TMDPDFs to physical TMDPDFs, with a perturbative matching kernel whose scale dependence is fixed by known anomalous dimensions.
Transverse Parton Distribution and Fragmentation Functions at NNLO: the Gluon Case
hep-ph 2019-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Two-loop gluon transverse-momentum distributions and fragmentation functions are computed for both polarizations, and a supersymmetric momentum-conservation sum rule for the linearly polarized component is found to hold.
Transverse Parton Distribution and Fragmentation Functions at NNLO: the Quark Case
hep-ph 2019-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

The authors compute NNLO quark transverse momentum dependent PDFs and fragmentation functions with the exponential regulator, and extract the two-loop quark jet function needed for N3LL energy-energy correlator resummation.
The transverse momentum distribution of hadrons within jets
hep-ph 2017-05 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The transverse momentum of hadrons relative to the jet axis factorizes in terms of standard transverse-momentum-dependent fragmentation functions evaluated at the jet scale, giving direct access to the poorly constrai...
Jet axes and universal transverse-momentum-dependent fragmentation
hep-ph 2016-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Choosing a recoil-free jet axis makes the transverse-momentum distribution of hadrons inside a jet free of soft-recoil and rapidity divergences, yielding a universal TMD fragmentation function.
Cancellation of Glauber gluon exchange in the double Drell-Yan process
hep-ph 2015-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Glauber gluon exchange cancels at all orders in double Drell-Yan production, closing a missing step in the factorisation proof for double parton scattering with colourless final states.
Extraction of Quark Transversity Distribution and Collins Fragmentation Functions with QCD Evolution
hep-ph 2015-05 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

First extraction of quark transversity and Collins fragmentation functions including TMD evolution, from a joint fit to BELLE, BABAR, HERMES, COMPASS and JLab Collins asymmetry data.
Calculation of the transverse parton distribution functions at next-to-next-to-leading order
hep-ph 2014-03 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The authors complete the NNLO calculation of transverse parton distribution functions in all partonic channels, show that rapidity divergences cancel under an analytic regulator, and verify that the resulting matching...
Equality of Two Definitions for Transverse Momentum Dependent Parton Distribution Functions
hep-ph 2012-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

The SCET-based EIS definition and the Collins (JCC) definition of TMD parton densities are shown to be identical, with the EIS regulator ratio playing the role of the Collins-Soper rapidity parameter.
Calculation of TMD Evolution for Transverse Single Spin Asymmetry Measurements
hep-ph 2011-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Applying Collins-Soper-Sterman transverse-momentum evolution to an existing Sivers function fit reproduces preliminary COMPASS proton asymmetries from HERMES-scale input, with no refitting to COMPASS.
The QCD Evolution of the Sivers Function
hep-ph 2011-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

The scale evolution of the Sivers function is derived within TMD factorization and tabulated as Gaussian parameters for two existing fixed-scale fits, enabling predictions at new collision energies.
Bessel-Weighted Asymmetries in Semi Inclusive Deep Inelastic Scattering
hep-ph 2011-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Weighting semi-inclusive deep inelastic scattering by Bessel functions of the hadron transverse momentum yields observables in which TMD convolutions become products and soft-gluon factors cancel.
Dilepton production from polarized hadron hadron collisions
hep-ph 2008-09 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The paper derives the full 48-structure-function angular distribution for polarized Drell-Yan and evaluates 24 of those structure functions at leading twist in terms of transverse-momentum-dependent parton distributions.
Semi-inclusive deep inelastic scattering at small transverse momentum
hep-ph 2006-11 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The paper derives the complete lowest-order set of 18 semi-inclusive DIS structure functions through twist 3 in terms of transverse-momentum-dependent quark distributions and fragmentation functions, for all beam and ...
Lattice QCD Study of Transverse-Momentum Dependent Soft Function
hep-lat 2021-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Lattice QCD with twisted-mass fermions yields a nonperturbative soft function that matches one-loop perturbation theory near b_perp about 0.2 fm at the largest boost, after a scheme to cancel higher-twist contamination.
TMDlib2 and TMDplotter: a platform for 3D hadron structure studies
hep-ph 2021-03 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

TMDlib2 packages about fifty published TMD and unintegrated PDF sets behind a single C++/Fortran interface, adds library-level access to their uncertainty replicas, and ships a web plotter for comparing them with coll...
CASCADE3 A Monte Carlo event generator based on TMDs
hep-ph 2021-01 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

CASCADE3 couples a transverse-momentum-dependent parton shower to standard collinear NLO hard-process events, so the incoming parton transverse momenta come from a fitted TMD density rather than from the shower itself.
The Universal Transverse Momentum Dependent Soft Function at NNLO
hep-ph 2015-11 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

A direct two-loop calculation of the universal TMD soft function reproduces the known NNLO evolution coefficients and verifies, at that order, the rapidity splitting relation the TMD factorization theorem relies on.
Limits on TMD Evolution From Semi-Inclusive Deep Inelastic Scattering at Moderate $Q$
hep-ph 2014-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

At momentum transfers of a few GeV, the coordinate-space region dominating semi-inclusive deep inelastic scattering extends to transverse distances of several GeV^-1, so the nonperturbative part of the Collins-Soper k...
TMD Parton Distribution and Fragmentation Functions with QCD Evolution
hep-ph 2011-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Starting from existing fits and the Collins-Soper-Sterman formalism, the authors produce evolved transverse-momentum-dependent quark distributions and fragmentation functions and show that QCD evolution suppresses the...
The Boer-Mulders effect in unpolarized SIDIS: an analysis of the COMPASS and HERMES data on the $\cos 2 \phi$ asymmetry
hep-ph 2009-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A two-parameter fit to COMPASS and HERMES cos 2 phi asymmetry data supports the interpretation that the Boer-Mulders transverse-spin distribution drives the observed asymmetry.
Transverse-momentum distributions in a diquark spectator model
hep-ph 2008-07 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

All leading-twist transverse-momentum-dependent parton distributions are derived analytically in a scalar-plus-axial-vector diquark spectator model, with nine parameters fitted to low-scale unpolarized and helicity da...
Sivers Effect for Pion and Kaon Production in Semi-Inclusive Deep Inelastic Scattering
hep-ph 2008-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A global fit to HERMES and COMPASS pion and kaon Sivers asymmetries yields u, d, and sea-quark Sivers distributions, with the strange-antiquark Sivers function pinned at the positivity bound.
Relations between generalized and transverse momentum dependent parton distributions
hep-ph 2007-03 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

In scalar-diquark and quark-target models, moments of T-odd TMDs (Sivers, Boer-Mulders) come out proportional to moments of specific GPDs, but no model-independent relation is established.
Resummation for Polarized Semi-Inclusive Deep-Inelastic Scattering at Small Transverse Momentum
hep-ph 2006-02 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

The authors derive NLL-resummed cross sections for five polarized SIDIS channels and find numerically that resummation and non-perturbative effects largely cancel in the longitudinal double-spin asymmetry.
Scheme dependence and Transverse Momentum Distribution interpretation of Collins-Soper-Sterman resummation
hep-ph 2015-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Three TMD factorization schemes yield identical non-perturbative form factors when fitted to Drell-Yan data, consistent with standard CSS resummation.
TMDlib and TMDplotter: library and plotting tools for transverse-momentum-dependent parton distributions
hep-ph 2014-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

The paper releases TMDlib, a C++ library plus web plotter that place several published transverse-momentum-dependent parton distribution fits behind a single callable interface.
Sivers effect in Drell-Yan processes
hep-ph 2009-01 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Sivers asymmetries in Drell-Yan are estimated to reach up to about 15 percent at PAX and around 10 percent at RHIC, large enough to test the predicted sign change relative to SIDIS.
Large-Momentum Effective Theory
hep-ph 2020-04 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

LaMET lets lattice QCD compute x-dependent parton distributions, GPDs, and TMDs from proton matrix elements at finite boost, matched to light-front quantities through effective field theory.
Update on transversity and Collins functions from SIDIS and e+ e- data
hep-ph 2008-12 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

Refitting HERMES, COMPASS and Belle azimuthal asymmetries jointly tightens the extracted u and d transversity distributions and the favoured and unfavoured Collins fragmentation functions.
Generalized Parton Distributions: Phenomenology, Extraction, and Hadron Imaging
hep-ph 2026-09 unverdicted novelty 2.0 of 10

A comprehensive review of GPD phenomenology covering the two inverse problems (CFF extraction and GPD reconstruction), parametrizations, lattice QCD inputs, Bayesian inference, machine learning, and the prospects at J...
TMD Handbook
hep-ph 2023-04 accept novelty 2.0 of 10

A multi-author reference volume that fixes conventions, gives field-theoretic definitions of TMD parton distributions and fragmentation functions, and surveys factorization, evolution, lattice methods, models, and phe...
Azimuthal and Single Spin Asymmetries in Hard Scattering Processes
hep-ph 2007-12 conditional novelty 2.0 of 10

Large left-right asymmetries in pion production off polarized protons are best described by a transverse-momentum-dependent Sivers function, but the factorization underpinning single-inclusive hadroproduction remains ...
Transverse-Spin and Transverse-Momentum Effects in High-Energy Processes
hep-ph 2010-11 accept novelty 1.0 of 10

The review consolidates the theory and the HERMES, COMPASS, Belle and RHIC measurements of transverse-spin asymmetries, and the global fits that extract transversity and the Collins function from them.

How the literature uses it

68 arXiv papers cite this in 99 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 59 sentences without a confident label

Uses its method or tool 1 paper

We take the example of Ji-Ma-Yuan 2004 scheme (JMY) [ref] , where the unpolarized quark distribution is defined as [equation] with the gauge link $L_v(-∞;ξ) ≡exp(-ig∫^-∞_0 dλ v·A(λv +ξ))$.

Scheme dependence and Transverse Momentum Distribution interpretation of Collins-Soper-Sterman resummation · TMD Schemes · 0.93

Compares with it 1 paper

Refs. [ref] use a hadronic tensor with an extra $1/4$ relative to the above and Refs. [ref] have an extra $1/2$.

Mapping the Kinematical Regimes of Semi-Inclusive Deep Inelastic Scattering · Reference Frames · 0.81

Cites it as background 33 papers

The equations and solutions are discussed at length in Refs. [ref] .

Extraction of Quark Transversity Distribution and Collins Fragmentation Functions with QCD Evolution · Unpolarized structure function with evolution · 0.87
A natural subject of the TMD factorization is inelastic sufficiently inclusive processes with two observed scales, such as SIDIS [ref] , DY [ref] and an almost back-to-back hadron pair production in Semi-Inclusive $e^+e^-$ Annihilation (SIA) [ref] .

Extraction of the Sivers function from SIDIS, Drell-Yan, and $W^\pm/Z$ boson production data with TMD evolution · Introduction · 0.87
For such processes, transverse momentum dependent (TMD) factorization [ref] is valid, and the mechanism responsible for spin asymmetries is encoded in TMD PDFs and FFs (collectively called TMDs) [ref] .

Origin of single transverse-spin asymmetries in high-energy collisions · Introduction · 0.86

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [4]

X. Ji, J. P. Ma and F. Yuan, arXiv:hep-ph/0404183

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[2] [1]

B. W. Filippone and X. D. Ji, Adv. Nucl. Phys. 26, 1 (2001) [arXiv:hep-ph/0101224]. M. Anselmino, A. Efremov and E. Leader, Phys. Rept. 261, 1 (1995) [Erratum-ibid. 281, 399 (1997)] [arXiv:hep-ph/9501369]. V. Barone, A. Drago an d P. G. Ratcliﬀe, Phys. Rept. 359, 1 (2002) [arXiv:hep-ph/0104283]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[3] [2]

G. Bunce, N. Saito, J. Soﬀer and W. Vogelsang, Ann. Rev. Nuc l. Part. Sci. 50, 525 (2000) [arXiv:hep-ph/0007218]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[4] [3]

J. C. Collins and D. E. Soper, Nucl. Phys. B 193, 381 (1981) [Erratum-ibid. B 213, 545 (1983)]; Nucl. Phys. B 197, 446 (1982)

View on Pith 1981

[5] [5]

Y. L. Dokshitzer, D. Diakonov and S. I. Troian, Phys. Lett . B 78, 290 (1978); Phys. Lett. B 79, 269 (1978); Phys. Rept. 58, 269 (1980). 11

View on Pith 1978

[6] [6]

G. Parisi and R. Petronzio, Nucl. Phys. B 154, 427 (1979)

View on Pith 1979

[7] [7]

J. C. Collins, D. E. Soper and G. Sterman, Nucl. Phys. B 250, 199 (1985)

View on Pith 1985

[8] [8]

C. T. H. Davies and W. J. Stirling, Nucl. Phys. B 244, 337 (1984); C. T. H. Davies, B. R. Web- ber and W. J. Stirling, Nucl. Phys. B 256, 413 (1985)

View on Pith 1984

[9] [9]

P. B. Arnold and R. P. Kauﬀman, Nucl. Phys. B 349, 381 (1991)

View on Pith 1991

[10] [10]

G. A. Ladinsky and C. P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D 50, 4239 (1994) [arXiv:hep-ph/9311341]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994

[11] [11]

R. Meng, F. I. Olness and D. E. Soper, Phys. Rev. D 54, 1919 (1996) [arXiv:hep-ph/9511311]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996

[12] [12]

P. Nadolsky, D. R. Stump and C. P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D 61, 014003 (2000) [Erratum-ibid. D 64, 059903 (2001)] [arXiv:hep-ph/9906280]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2000

[13] [13]

J. W. Qiu and X. F. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 2724 (2001) [arXiv:hep-ph/0012058]; Phys. Rev. D 63, 114011 (2001) [arXiv:hep-ph/0012348]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[14] [14]

J. C. Collins, Adv. Ser. Direct. High Energy Phys. 5, 573 (1989) [arXiv:hep-ph/0312336]; in Perturbative QCD (A.H. Mueller, ed.) (World Scientiﬁc Publ., 1989)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1989

[15] [15]

J. C. Collins, Phys. Lett. B 536, 43 (2002) [arXiv:hep-ph/0204004]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[16] [16]

A. V. Belitsky, X. Ji and F. Yuan, Nucl. Phys. B 656, 165 (2003) [arXiv:hep-ph/0208038]; X. Ji and F. Yuan, Phys. Lett. B 543, 66 (2002) [arXiv:hep-ph/0206057]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[17] [17]

P. J. Mulders and R. D. Tangerman, Nucl. Phys. B 461, 197 (1996) [Erratum-ibid. B 484, 538 (1997)] [arXiv:hep-ph/9510301]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996

[18] [18]

D. Boer and P. J. Mulders, Phys. Rev. D 57, 5780 (1998) [arXiv:hep-ph/9711485]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[19] [19]

C. Itzykson and J. B. Zuber, Quantum Field Theory , (Mcgraw-Hill, New York, 1980)

View on Pith 1980

[20] [20]

X. Ji, J. P. Ma and F. Yuan, Nucl. Phys. B 652, 383 (2003) [arXiv:hep-ph/0210430]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[21] [21]

R. L. Jaﬀe and X. D. Ji, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 552 (1991); Nucl. Phys. B 375, 527 (1992)

View on Pith 1991

[22] [22]

J. C. Collins, Nucl. Phys. B 396, 161 (1993) [arXiv:hep-ph/9208213]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1993

[23] [23]

S. J. Brodsky, D. S. Hwang and I. Schmidt, Phys. Lett. B 530, 99 (2002) [arXiv:hep-ph/0201296]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[24] [24]

J. w. Qiu and G. Sterman, Nucl. Phys. B 353, 105 (1991); Nucl. Phys. B 353, 137 (1991)

View on Pith 1991

[25] [25]

Y. Koike and J. Nagashima, Nucl. Phys. B 660, 269 (2003) [arXiv:hep-ph/0302061]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[26] [26]

A. Weber, Nucl. Phys. B 382, 63 (1992); Nucl. Phys. B 403, 545 (1993)

View on Pith 1992

[27] [27]

P. M. Nadolsky and C. P. Yuan, Nucl. Phys. B 666, 3 (2003) [arXiv:hep-ph/0304001]. 12

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003