Paper detail

Positivity and renormalization of parton densities

There have been recent debates about whether $\overline{\text{MS}}$ parton densities exactly obey positivity bounds (including the Soffer bound), and whether the bounds should be applied as a constraint on global fits to parton densities and on nonperturbative calculations. A recent paper (JHEP ${\bf \text{11}}$ (2020) 129) appears to provide a proof of positivity in contradiction with earlier work by other authors. We examine their derivation and find that its primary failure is in the apparently uncontroversial statement that bare pdfs are always positive. We show that under the conditions used in the derivation, that statement fails. We provide some elementary calculations in a model QFT that show how this situation can generically arise in reality. In addition, we observe that the methods used in the derivation are in common with much, but not all, other work where factorization is derived. Our examination pinpoints considerable difficulties with these methods that render them either wrong or highly problematic. The issue of positivity highlights that these methods can lead to wrong results of phenomenological importance. From our analysis we identify the restricted situations in which positivity can be violated.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.