Abstract
We perform a comparison of soft-gluon resummation in SCET vs. direct QCD (dQCD), using Higgs boson production in gluon fusion as a case study, with the goal of tracing the quantitative impact of each source of difference between the two approaches. We show that saddle-point methods enable a direct quantitative comparison despite the fact that the scale which is resummed in the two approaches is not the same. As a byproduct, we put in one-to-one analytic correspondence various features of either approach: specifically, we show how the SCET method for treating the Landau pole can be implemented in dQCD, and how the resummation of the optimal partonic scale of dQCD can be implemented in SCET. We conclude that the main quantitative difference comes from power-suppressed subleading contributions, which could in fact be freely tuned in either approach, and not really characteristic of either. This conclusion holds for Higgs production in gluon fusion, but it is in fact generic for processes with similar kinematics. For Higgs production, everything else being equal, SCET resummation at NNLL in the Becher-Neubert implementation leads to essentially no enhancement of the NNLO cross-section, unlike dQCD in the standard implementation of Catani et al.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group collaboration, S. Dittmaier et al., Handbook of LHC Higgs cross sections: 1. Inclusive observables, arXiv:1101.0593 [INSPIRE].
D. de Florian and M. Grazzini, Higgs production at the LHC: updated cross sections at \( \sqrt{s} \) = 8 TeV, Phys. Lett. B 718 (2012) 117 [arXiv:1206.4133] [INSPIRE].
R.D. Ball, M. Bonvini, S. Forte, S. Marzani and G. Ridolfi, Higgs production in gluon fusion beyond NNLO, Nucl. Phys. B 874 (2013) 746 [arXiv:1303.3590] [INSPIRE].
M. Bonvini, R.D. Ball, S. Forte, S. Marzani and G. Ridolfi, Updated Higgs cross section at approximate N 3 LO, J. Phys. G 41 (2014) 095002 [arXiv:1404.3204] [INSPIRE].
V. Ahrens, T. Becher, M. Neubert and L.L. Yang, Origin of the large perturbative corrections to Higgs production at hadron colliders, Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 033013 [arXiv:0808.3008] [INSPIRE].
V. Ahrens, T. Becher, M. Neubert and L.L. Yang, Renormalization-group improved prediction for Higgs production at hadron colliders, Eur. Phys. J. C 62 (2009) 333 [arXiv:0809.4283] [INSPIRE].
V. Ahrens, T. Becher, M. Neubert and L.L. Yang, Updated predictions for Higgs production at the Tevatron and the LHC, Phys. Lett. B 698 (2011) 271 [arXiv:1008.3162] [INSPIRE].
T. Becher, M. Neubert and B.D. Pecjak, Factorization and momentum-space resummation in deep-inelastic scattering, JHEP 01 (2007) 076 [hep-ph/0607228] [INSPIRE].
T. Becher, M. Neubert and G. Xu, Dynamical threshold enhancement and resummation in Drell-Yan production, JHEP 07 (2008) 030 [arXiv:0710.0680] [INSPIRE].
M. Bonvini, S. Forte, M. Ghezzi and G. Ridolfi, Threshold resummation in SCET vs. perturbative QCD: an analytic comparison, Nucl. Phys. B 861 (2012) 337 [arXiv:1201.6364] [INSPIRE].
M. Bonvini, S. Forte, M. Ghezzi and G. Ridolfi, The scale of soft resummation in SCET vs. perturbative QCD, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 241-242 (2013) 121 [arXiv:1301.4502] [INSPIRE].
G. Sterman and M. Zeng, Quantifying comparisons of threshold resummations, JHEP 05 (2014) 132 [arXiv:1312.5397] [INSPIRE].
L.G. Almeida et al., Comparing and counting logs in direct and effective methods of QCD resummation, JHEP 04 (2014) 174 [arXiv:1401.4460] [INSPIRE].
S. Catani and L. Trentadue, Resummation of the QCD perturbative series for hard processes, Nucl. Phys. B 327 (1989) 323 [INSPIRE].
G.F. Sterman, Summation of large corrections to short distance hadronic cross-sections, Nucl. Phys. B 281 (1987) 310 [INSPIRE].
H. Contopanagos, E. Laenen and G.F. Sterman, Sudakov factorization and resummation, Nucl. Phys. B 484 (1997) 303 [hep-ph/9604313] [INSPIRE].
S. Forte and G. Ridolfi, Renormalization group approach to soft gluon resummation, Nucl. Phys. B 650 (2003) 229 [hep-ph/0209154] [INSPIRE].
S. Catani, M.L. Mangano, P. Nason and L. Trentadue, The resummation of soft gluons in hadronic collisions, Nucl. Phys. B 478 (1996) 273 [hep-ph/9604351] [INSPIRE].
T. Becher and M. Neubert, Threshold resummation in momentum space from effective field theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 082001 [hep-ph/0605050] [INSPIRE].
C.W. Bauer, S. Fleming and M.E. Luke, Summing Sudakov logarithms in \( \overrightarrow{B}{X}_{S\gamma } \) in effective field theory, Phys. Rev. D 63 (2000) 014006 [hep-ph/0005275] [INSPIRE].
C.W. Bauer, S. Fleming, D. Pirjol and I.W. Stewart, An effective field theory for collinear and soft gluons: heavy to light decays, Phys. Rev. D 63 (2001) 114020 [hep-ph/0011336] [INSPIRE].
C.W. Bauer and I.W. Stewart, Invariant operators in collinear effective theory, Phys. Lett. B 516 (2001) 134 [hep-ph/0107001] [INSPIRE].
C.W. Bauer, D. Pirjol and I.W. Stewart, Soft collinear factorization in effective field theory, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 054022 [hep-ph/0109045] [INSPIRE].
C.W. Bauer, S. Fleming, D. Pirjol, I.Z. Rothstein and I.W. Stewart, Hard scattering factorization from effective field theory, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 014017 [hep-ph/0202088] [INSPIRE].
A.V. Manohar, Deep inelastic scattering as \( \overrightarrow{x}1 \) using soft-collinear effective theory, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 114019 [hep-ph/0309176] [INSPIRE].
B.D. Pecjak, Non-factorizable contributions to deep inelastic scattering at large x, JHEP 10 (2005) 040 [hep-ph/0506269] [INSPIRE].
J. Chay and C. Kim, Deep inelastic scattering near the endpoint in soft-collinear effective theory, Phys. Rev. D 75 (2007) 016003 [hep-ph/0511066] [INSPIRE].
A. Idilbi and X.-d. Ji, Threshold resummation for Drell-Yan process in soft-collinear effective theory, Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005) 054016 [hep-ph/0501006] [INSPIRE].
M. Bonvini, S. Forte and G. Ridolfi, Soft gluon resummation of Drell-Yan rapidity distributions: theory and phenomenology, Nucl. Phys. B 847 (2011) 93 [arXiv:1009.5691] [INSPIRE].
M. Krämer, E. Laenen and M. Spira, Soft gluon radiation in Higgs boson production at the LHC, Nucl. Phys. B 511 (1998) 523 [hep-ph/9611272] [INSPIRE].
C. Anastasiou et al., Higgs boson gluon-fusion production at threshold in N 3 LO QCD, Phys. Lett. B 737 (2014) 325 [arXiv:1403.4616] [INSPIRE].
C.F. Berger, C. Marcantonini, I.W. Stewart, F.J. Tackmann and W.J. Waalewijn, Higgs production with a central jet veto at NNLL + NNLO, JHEP 04 (2011) 092 [arXiv:1012.4480] [INSPIRE].
S. Forte, G. Ridolfi, J. Rojo and M. Ubiali, Borel resummation of soft gluon radiation and higher twists, Phys. Lett. B 635 (2006) 313 [hep-ph/0601048] [INSPIRE].
M. Beneke, P. Falgari, S. Klein and C. Schwinn, Hadronic top-quark pair production with NNLL threshold resummation, Nucl. Phys. B 855 (2012) 695 [arXiv:1109.1536] [INSPIRE].
M. Bonvini, S. Forte and G. Ridolfi, The threshold region for Higgs production in gluon fusion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (2012) 102002 [arXiv:1204.5473] [INSPIRE].
M. Bonvini and S. Marzani, Resummed Higgs cross section at N 3 LL, JHEP 09 (2014) 007 [arXiv:1405.3654] [INSPIRE].
R.D. Ball et al., Parton distributions with LHC data, Nucl. Phys. B 867 (2013) 244 [arXiv:1207.1303] [INSPIRE].
Open Access
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
ArXiv ePrint: 1409.0864
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Bonvini, M., Forte, S., Ridolfi, G. et al. Resummation prescriptions and ambiguities in SCET vs. direct QCD: Higgs production as a case study. J. High Energ. Phys. 2015, 46 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2015)046
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2015)046