Automation of amplitude-level QED resummation with ACRAIC

Precision electroweak predictions for future e +e - colliders will require levels of precision unmatched in collider physics and the modelling of multiple-photon emissions, and the exponentiation of the associated…

By PriceOct 20, 2026

Score████░░░░░░4.3

Caveats

Preprint; not yet peer reviewed.

VerdictWorth a reader's time today.

Read the original PDF

Abstract

Precision electroweak predictions for future e⁺e⁻ colliders will require levels of precision unmatched in collider physics and the modelling of multiple-photon emissions, and the exponentiation of the associated logarithms needs to be carefully considered. The Yennie-Frautschi-Suura theorem subtracts the infrared singularities to all orders and exponentiates them, leaving infrared-finite remainders which can be calculated order-by-order. Coherent exponentiation performs this subtraction at the amplitude level, preserving the interference between emissions, but has so far been available only for fermion-pair production, with hand-coded amplitudes. We present ACRAIC, an automated, amplitude-level realization of this subtraction for general scattering processes in Sherpa. This method allows us to construct an O(α) and O(α²) amplitude level subtraction scheme, in which the infrared-finite remainders are tree-level helicity amplitudes with partition-dependent propagator shifts, computed by the Berends--Giele recursion, and the one-loop electroweak virtual enters through a per-helicity factor from the loop provider. At O(α²) two independent matchings agree on the size of the missing higher orders to ~10⁻³, and the estimated perturbative uncertainty shrinks by about an order of magnitude relative to O(α).

Alan Price

The editor's rubric

Heuristic review

Leverage3 / 5: A method or resource many groups across the field will adopt within a year.; 18% of this desk’s rubric
Magnitude3 / 5: Large gain: roughly 2x, or a clear new state of the art on a hard, unsaturated problem.; 20% of this desk’s rubric
Evidence3 / 5: Solid: multiple benchmarks or cohorts, ablations, fair baselines, released code or data.; 22% of this desk’s rubric
Novelty2 / 5: A new combination of known ideas.; 22% of this desk’s rubric
Trajectory2 / 5: Some room to improve with obvious engineering.; 10% of this desk’s rubric
Stakes2 / 5: Benefits a professional community (practitioners, clinicians, engineers).; 8% of this desk’s rubric

Dimension	Level	Weight	What that level means
Leverage	███░░ 3	18%	A method or resource many groups across the field will adopt within a year.
Magnitude	███░░ 3	20%	Large gain: roughly 2x, or a clear new state of the art on a hard, unsaturated problem.
Evidence	███░░ 3	22%	Solid: multiple benchmarks or cohorts, ablations, fair baselines, released code or data.
Novelty	██░░░ 2	22%	A new combination of known ideas.
Trajectory	██░░░ 2	10%	Some room to improve with obvious engineering.
Stakes	██░░░ 2	8%	Benefits a professional community (practitioners, clinicians, engineers).

Editor’s rationale

Heuristic triage from title and abstract text only, not a reading of the paper. Cues found: method (we propose); gains (orders of magnitude); verification (error bars, independent replication); scale (orders of magnitude); stakes (climate).

How the score was computed

rank-2026-10-18

Score████░░░░░░4.3

Score = 10 × (75% × adjusted merit / 10 + 15% × attention + 10% × freshness)

Desks place stronger verdicts first, then use this score to order work within the same verdict.

Merit: 5.2 / 10; Weighted rubric, evidence-gated.
Adjusted merit: 4.5 / 10; Shrunk toward the desk prior by editor confidence (42%).
Attention: 0%; Citations, upvotes, points, mentions.
Freshness: 93%; Half-life decay since publication.

No attention signals recorded yet.

The record

Reviewed by heuristic-v7 on Oct 21, 2026, 07:29 UTC. Paper type: theory.
Categories: hep-ph, hep-ex, hep-th
BRIEF, No.2 in the Physics edition of October 21, 2026.