RECORD
A Rederivation of the Spin-dependent Next-to-leading Order Splitting Functions
High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · Submitted 3 Dec 1995
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim We confirm the results of the recent calculation by Mertig and van Neerven.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. 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.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
We perform a new calculation of the polarized next-to-leading order splitting functions, using the method developed by Curci, Furmanski and Petronzio. We confirm the results of the recent calculation by Mertig and van Neerven.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | We perform a new calculation of the polarized next-to-leading order splitting functions, using the method developed by Curci, Furmanski and Petronzio. | contribution 0.85 | 0.96 | 0.11 | asserted 0.99 |
| s1 | We confirm the results of the recent calculation by Mertig and van Neerven. | result 0.96 | 0.70 | 0.51 | asserted 1.00 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v2
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
We perform a new calculation of the polarized next-to-leading order splitting functions, using the method developed by Curci, Furmanski and Petronzio. We confirm the results of the recent calculation by Mertig and van Neerven.
Human review
References
How the literature uses it
20 arXiv papers cite this in 26 sentences
Papers whose main result relates to this one's
States the same result 3 papers
-
In particular our findings are in agreement with the supersymmetric relation $\gamma_{qq}^{m}+\gamma_{gq}^{m}-\gamma_{qg}^{m}-\gamma_{gg}^{m}=0$ up to order $\alpha_s^2$.
The Calculation of the Two-Loop Spin Splitting Functions $P_{ij}^{(1)}(x)$ · 0.93
-
We present a brief description of the light-cone gauge calculation of the spin-dependent next-to-leading order splitting functions.
-
We present a complete description of the calculation of the spin-dependent next-to-leading order splitting functions.
Papers citing it · 16 sentences without a confident label
Uses its data or values 2 papers
-
The QCD results are taken from [ref] .
Polarized Deep Inelastic Scattering as $x \to 1$ using Soft Collinear Effective Theory · DIS Coefficients as N to Infinity · 0.96
-
[ref] we obtain ΔP_gg(z,) = 2(1/1-z-2z+1+2 (1-z)),
Automation of next-to-leading order computations in QCD: the FKS subtraction · Integration of matrix elements of given helicities · 0.81
Compares with it 1 paper
-
Note the partly different normalizations comparing the splitting functions given in Refs. [ref] .]
$O(\alpha_s^2$) Polarized Heavy Flavor Corrections}to Deep-Inelastic Scattering at $Q^2 \gg m^2$ · Heavy flavor structure functions in polarized deep–inelastic scattering · 0.94
Cites it as background 6 papers
-
The anomalous dimensions were calculated to 2–loop order [ref] and to 3–loop order in [ref] .
The Logarithmic Contributions to the Polarized and Operator Matrix Elements in Deeply Inelastic Scattering · The Formalism · 0.82
-
While the QCD splitting functions are known at LO [ref] , NLO [ref] and NNLO [ref] , the global analysis is still restricted to NLO QCD precision.
QED corrections to parton distributions and Altarelli-Parisi splitting functions in the polarized case · Introduction · 0.92
-
Out of a wide range of methods that have been applied to compute splitting functions up to three loops [ref] , only few approaches are suitable to carry on through four loops.
Renormalisation of singlet operators to four loops · Introduction · 0.92
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.