Paper detail

Application of the Principle of Maximum Conformality to Top-Pair Production

A major contribution to the uncertainty of finite-order perturbative QCD predictions is the perceived ambiguity in setting the renormalization scale $μ_r$. For example, by using the conventional way of setting $μ_r \in [m_t/2,2m_t]$, one obtains the total $t \bar{t}$ production cross-section $σ_{t \bar{t}}$ with the uncertainty $Δσ_{t \bar{t}}/σ_{t \bar{t}}\sim ({}^{+3%}_{-4%})$ at the Tevatron and LHC even for the present NNLO level. The Principle of Maximum Conformality (PMC) eliminates the renormalization scale ambiguity in precision tests of Abelian QED and non-Abelian QCD theories. In this paper we apply PMC scale-setting to predict the $t \bar t$ cross-section $σ_{t\bar{t}}$ at the Tevatron and LHC colliders. It is found that $σ_{t\bar{t}}$ remains almost unchanged by varying $μ^{\rm init}_r$ within the region of $[m_t/4,4m_t]$. The convergence of the expansion series is greatly improved. For the $(q\bar{q})$-channel, which is dominant at the Tevatron, its NLO PMC scale is much smaller than the top-quark mass in the small $x$-region, and thus its NLO cross-section is increased by about a factor of two. In the case of the $(gg)$-channel, which is dominant at the LHC, its NLO PMC scale slightly increases with the subprocess collision energy $\sqrt{s}$, but it is still smaller than $m_t$ for $\sqrt{s}\lesssim 1$ TeV, and the resulting NLO cross-section is increased by $\sim 20%$. As a result, a larger $σ_{t\bar{t}}$ is obtained in comparison to the conventional scale-setting method, which agrees well with the present Tevatron and LHC data. More explicitly, by setting $m_t=172.9\pm 1.1$ GeV, we predict $σ_{\rm Tevatron,\;1.96\,TeV} = 7.626^{+0.265}_{-0.257}$ pb, $σ_{\rm LHC,\;7\,TeV} = 171.8^{+5.8}_{-5.6}$ pb and $σ_{\rm LHC,\;14\,TeV} = 941.3^{+28.4}_{-26.5}$ pb. [full abstract can be found in the paper.]

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.