2016
DOI: 10.1051/epjconf/201611801016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Leading-order hadronic contribution to the electron and muong− 2

Abstract: Abstract. I present a new data driven update of the hadronic vacuum polarization effects for the muon and the electron g − 2. For the leading order contributions I find a had ( With these updates a exp μ − a the μ = (31.0 ± 8.2) × 10 −10 a 3.8 σ deviation, while a exp e − a the e = (−1.14 ± 0.82) × 10 −12 shows no significat deviation.

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
104
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 70 publications
(107 citation statements)
references
References 77 publications
3
104
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The long-standing (3)(4)σ discrepancy between the experimental value of the muon anomalous magnetic moment a μ = (g − 2)/2 and the Standard Model (SM) prediction, a μ (Exp − SM) ∼ (28 ± 8) × 10 −10 [1,2], has been considered during these years as one of the most intriguing indications of physics beyond the SM. However, the accuracy of the SM prediction, 5 × 10 −10 , is limited by strong interaction effects, which cannot be computed perturbatively at low energies.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The long-standing (3)(4)σ discrepancy between the experimental value of the muon anomalous magnetic moment a μ = (g − 2)/2 and the Standard Model (SM) prediction, a μ (Exp − SM) ∼ (28 ± 8) × 10 −10 [1,2], has been considered during these years as one of the most intriguing indications of physics beyond the SM. However, the accuracy of the SM prediction, 5 × 10 −10 , is limited by strong interaction effects, which cannot be computed perturbatively at low energies.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For an alternative up-todate analysis that leads to a larger 4.0 σ discrepancy see ref. [18]. On the theory side, there is a fairly general consensus that hadronic loop uncertainties alone cannot explain such a large discrepancy.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The BNL result differs with the theoretical calculation by about 3.5σ , which has sparked extensive research from investigating missing systematic effects to looking for new physics beyond the Standard Model to account for the discrepancy. On the theoretical side, in addition to investigating physics beyond the Standard Model, work is ongoing [8,11,12,13] to improve the uncertainty on the Standard Model calculations. On the experimental side, a new experiment is being constructed at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (FNAL) [8] to address the discrepancy, and intends to measure the anomalous magnetic moment to a precision of 140 ppb-a four-fold improvement on the BNL result.…”
Section: The Anomalous Magnetic Momentmentioning
confidence: 99%