Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Precise determination of the top-quark on-shell mass $M_t$ via its scale-invariant perturbative relation to the top-quark $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass ${\overline m}_t({\overline m}_t)$

Published 22 Sep 2022 in hep-ph | (2209.10777v2)

Abstract: It has been shown that the principle of maximum conformality (PMC) provides a systematic way to solve conventional renormalization scheme and scale ambiguities. The scale-fixed predictions for physical observables using the PMC are independent of the choice of renormalization scheme -- a key requirement of renormalization group invariance. In the paper, we derive new degeneracy relations based on the renormalization group equations that involve both the usual $\beta$-function and the quark mass anomalous dimension $\gamma_m$-function, respectively. These new degeneracy relations lead to an improved PMC scale-setting procedures, such that the correct magnitudes of the strong coupling constant and the $\overline{\rm MS}$-running quark mass can be fixed simultaneously. By using the improved PMC scale-setting procedures, the renormalization scale dependence of the $\overline{\rm MS}$-on-shell quark mass relation can be eliminated systematically. Consequently, the top-quark on-shell (or $\overline{\rm MS}$) mass can be determined without conventional renormalization scale ambiguity. Taking the top-quark $\overline{\rm MS}$ mass ${\overline m}t({\overline m}_t)=162.5{+2.1}{-1.5}$ GeV as the input, we obtain $M_t\simeq 172.41{+2.21}_{-1.57}$ GeV. Here the uncertainties are combined errors with those also from $\Delta \alpha_s(M_Z)$ and the approximate uncertainty stemming from the uncalculated five-loop terms predicted through the Pad\'{e} approximation approach.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (7)
  1. S. J. Brodsky, L. Di Giustino, P. G. Ratcliffe, S. Q. Wang and X. G. Wu, “Comment on P.M. Stevenson, ”‘Maximal conformality’ does not work”, Phys. Lett. B 847 (2023) 138288,” [arXiv:2311.17360 [hep-ph]].
  2. P. M. Stevenson, “Resolution of the Renormalization Scheme Ambiguity in Perturbative QCD,” Phys. Lett. B 100, 61 (1981).
  3. P. M. Stevenson, “Optimized Perturbation Theory,” Phys. Rev. D 23, 2916 (1981).
  4. Y. Ma, X. G. Wu, H. H. Ma and H. Y. Han, “General Properties on Applying the Principle of Minimum Sensitivity to High-order Perturbative QCD Predictions,” Phys. Rev. D 91, 034006 (2015).
  5. Y. Ma and X. G. Wu, “Renormalization scheme dependence of high-order perturbative QCD predictions,” Phys. Rev. D 97, 036024 (2018).
  6. L. Di Giustino, S. J. Brodsky, P. G. Ratcliffe, X. G. Wu and S. Q. Wang, “High precision tests of QCD without scale or scheme ambiguities,” [arXiv:2307.03951 [hep-ph]].
  7. H. Y. Bi, X. G. Wu, Y. Ma, H. H. Ma, S. J. Brodsky and M. Mojaza, “Degeneracy Relations in QCD and the Equivalence of Two Systematic All-Orders Methods for Setting the Renormalization Scale,” Phys. Lett. B 748, 13 (2015).
Citations (2)

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 1 tweet with 2 likes about this paper.