SciPost logo

SciPost Submission Page

On the Discrepancy between the FOPT and CIPT Approaches for Hadronic Tau Spectral Function Moments

by Andre H. Hoang and Christoph Regner

This Submission thread is now published as

Submission summary

Authors (as registered SciPost users): Andre Hoang
Submission information
Preprint Link: scipost_202111_00058v1  (pdf)
Date accepted: 2022-02-02
Date submitted: 2021-11-27 14:22
Submitted by: Hoang, Andre
Submitted to: SciPost Physics Proceedings
Proceedings issue: RADCOR 2021 (15th International Symposium on Radiative Corrections: Applications of Quantum Field Theory to Phenomenology)
Ontological classification
Academic field: Physics
  • High-Energy Physics - Phenomenology
Approach: Phenomenological


The discrepancy between the FOPT and CIPT approaches for hadronic tau spectral function moments constitutes the major theoretical uncertainty for strong coupling determinations from tau decay data. We show that the discrepancy can be analytically understood since the Borel representations -- which have been assumed to be identical for both approaches previously -- differ in the presence of IR renormalons. This implies that the OPE condensate corrections are different for both approaches and that the discrepancy may eventually be reconciled. In the talk we explain the difference and some mathematical aspects of the FOPT and CIPT Borel representations and show numerical results.

Published as SciPost Phys. Proc. 7, 005 (2022)

Submission & Refereeing History

You are currently on this page

Submission scipost_202111_00058v1 on 27 November 2021

Reports on this Submission

Anonymous Report 1 on 2021-12-28 (Invited Report)


This is a contribution to the proceedings of the RADCOR/LoopFest 2021 conference. It will be published as a SciPost Proceedings. And is supposed to report on the talk presented during the conference. In general, it does not represent unpublished work as it is not normally required for proceedings. We recommend expediting the acceptance and publication procedures if possible.

  • validity: high
  • significance: high
  • originality: good
  • clarity: high
  • formatting: excellent
  • grammar: excellent

Login to report or comment