- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Revisit of the electromagnetic correction to τ→ππντ and its implication for muon g−2 based on τ data

Zhi-Xin Li, Ao Li, Jin Hao, Chun-Gui Duan*, and Zhi-Hui Guo†

  • Department of Physics and Hebei Key Laboratory of Photophysics Research and Application, Hebei Normal University, Shijiazhuang 050024, China

  • *Contact author: duancg@hebtu.edu.cn
  • †Contact author: zhguo@hebtu.edu.cn
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 113, 014005 – Published 7 January, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/j9wc-wgd9

Abstract

In this work we focus on the evaluation of the leading-order hadronic vacuum polarization contribution from the ππ channel to the muon anomalous magnetic moment aμ by using the experimental τ→ππντ data. The isospin breaking corrections play the decisive role in this approach of computing aμ. One of such important isospin breaking sources is the long-distance electromagnetic correction factor GEM of the τ→ππντ process from the real photon radiation. The latter effect can be calculated from the τ→ππντγ amplitude, which is revised in this work within the resonance chiral theory by simultaneously including the even-intrinsic-parity and odd-intrinsic-parity resonance operators. We update the determination of the only unknown resonance coupling through the ω→π0π0γ decay by including contributions from both the vector and scalar resonances. By taking other remaining contributions from the muon g−2 White Paper 2025, we further revise the complete value of aμ, which turns out to deviate from the newest world average result after Fermilab’s measurement at the level of 2.7σ.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (66)

  1. B. Abi et al. (Muon g-2 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 141801 (2021).
  2. D. P. Aguillard et al. (Muon g-2 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 161802 (2023).
  3. D. P. Aguillard et al. (Muon g-2 Collaboration), arXiv:2506.03069.
  4. R. Aliberti et al., arXiv:2505.21476.
  5. T. Aoyama et al., Phys. Rep. 887, 1 (2020).
  6. F. V. Ignatov et al. (CMD-3 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 231903 (2024).
  7. F. V. Ignatov et al. (CMD-3 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 109, 112002 (2024).
  8. R. Alemany, M. Davier, and A. Hocker, Eur. Phys. J. C 2, 123 (1998).
  9. V. Cirigliano, G. Ecker, and H. Neufeld, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2002) 002.
  10. V. Cirigliano, G. Ecker, and H. Neufeld, Phys. Lett. B 513, 361 (2001).
  11. G. Ecker, J. Gasser, A. Pich, and E. de Rafael, Nucl. Phys. B321, 311 (1989).
  12. A. Flores-Tlalpa, G. Lopez Castro, and G. Sanchez Toledo, Phys. Rev. D 72, 113003 (2005).
  13. F. Flores-Baez, A. Flores-Tlalpa, G. Lopez Castro, and G. Toledo Sanchez, Phys. Rev. D 74, 071301 (2006).
  14. J. A. Miranda and P. Roig, Phys. Rev. D 102, 114017 (2020).
  15. G. L. Castro, A. Miranda, and P. Roig, Phys. Rev. D 111, 073004 (2025).
  16. K. Kampf and J. Novotny, Phys. Rev. D 84, 014036 (2011).
  17. C. Chen, C.-G. Duan, and Z.-H. Guo, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2022) 144.
  18. P. D. Ruiz-Femenia, A. Pich, and J. Portoles, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2003) 003.
  19. M. Fujikawa et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 78, 072006 (2008).
  20. M. Davier, A. Höcker, B. Malaescu, C.-Z. Yuan, and Z. Zhang, Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 2803 (2014).
  21. S. Anderson et al. (CLEO Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 61, 112002 (2000).
  22. K. Ackerstaff et al. (OPAL Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 7, 571 (1999).
  23. J. Wess and B. Zumino, Phys. Lett. B 37, 95 (1971).
  24. E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B223, 422 (1983).
  25. V. Cirigliano, G. Ecker, M. Eidemuller, R. Kaiser, A. Pich, and J. Portoles, Nucl. Phys. B753, 139 (2006).
  26. Y.-H. Chen, Z.-H. Guo, and H.-Q. Zheng, Phys. Rev. D 85, 054018 (2012).
  27. Y.-H. Chen, Z.-H. Guo, and H.-Q. Zheng, Phys. Rev. D 90, 034013 (2014).
  28. Y.-H. Chen, Z.-H. Guo, and B.-S. Zou, Phys. Rev. D 91, 014010 (2015).
  29. L.-W. Yan, Y.-H. Chen, C.-G. Duan, and Z.-H. Guo, Phys. Rev. D 107, 034022 (2023).
  30. Z.-H. Guo, Phys. Rev. D 78, 033004 (2008).
  31. Z.-H. Guo and P. Roig, Phys. Rev. D 82, 113016 (2010).
  32. G. Ecker, J. Gasser, H. Leutwyler, A. Pich, and E. de Rafael, Phys. Lett. B 223, 425 (1989).
  33. P. Roig and J. J. Sanz Cillero, Phys. Lett. B 733, 158 (2014).
  34. A. Bramon, R. Escribano, J. L. Lucio Martinez, and M. Napsuciale, Phys. Lett. B 517, 345 (2001).
  35. R. Escribano, Phys. Rev. D 74, 114020 (2006).
  36. Y.-s. Oh and H.-c. Kim, Phys. Rev. D 68, 094003 (2003).
  37. A. Gokalp and O. Yilmaz, Phys. Lett. B 494, 69 (2000).
  38. S. Eidelman, S. Ivashyn, A. Korchin, G. Pancheri, and O. Shekhovtsova, Eur. Phys. J. C 69, 103 (2010).
  39. J. A. Oller, Phys. Lett. B 426, 7 (1998).
  40. J. A. Oller, Nucl. Phys. A714, 161 (2003).
  41. J. E. Palomar, S. Hirenzaki, and E. Oset, Nucl. Phys. A707, 161 (2002).
  42. F. E. Close, N. Isgur, and S. Kumano, Nucl. Phys. B389, 513 (1993).
  43. J. A. Oller and E. Oset, Nucl. Phys. A620, 438 (1997); A652, 407(E) (1999).
  44. J. A. Oller, E. Oset, and J. R. Pelaez, Phys. Rev. D 59, 074001 (1999); 60, 099906(E) (1999); 75, 099903(E) (2007).
  45. J. A. Oller and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D 60, 074023 (1999).
  46. Z.-H. Guo and J. A. Oller, Phys. Rev. D 84, 034005 (2011).
  47. Z.-H. Guo, J. A. Oller, and J. Ruiz de Elvira, Phys. Rev. D 86, 054006 (2012).
  48. R. Gao, Z.-H. Guo, and J.-Y. Pang, Phys. Rev. D 100, 114028 (2019).
  49. J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Nucl. Phys. B250, 465 (1985).
  50. J. R. Pelaez, Phys. Rep. 658, 1 (2016).
  51. S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024).
  52. F. E. Low, Phys. Rev. 110, 974 (1958).
  53. E. Byckling and K. Kajantie, Particle Kinematics: (Chapters I-VI, X) (University of Jyvaskyla, Jyvaskyla, Finland, 1971).
  54. M. Gourdin and E. De Rafael, Nucl. Phys. B10, 667 (1969).
  55. S. J. Brodsky and E. De Rafael, Phys. Rev. 168, 1620 (1968).
  56. B. E. Lautrup and E. De Rafael, Phys. Rev. 174, 1835 (1968).
  57. S. Eidelman and F. Jegerlehner, Z. Phys. C 67, 585 (1995).
  58. G. J. Gounaris and J. J. Sakurai, Phys. Rev. Lett. 21, 244 (1968).
  59. J. H. Kuhn and A. Santamaria, Z. Phys. C 48, 445 (1990).
  60. F. Guerrero and A. Pich, Phys. Lett. B 412, 382 (1997).
  61. G. Colangelo, M. Hoferichter, and P. Stoffer, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2019) 006.
  62. K. Melnikov, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 16, 4591 (2001).
  63. F. Jegerlehner, The Anomalous Magnetic Moment of the Muon (Springer, Cham, 2017), Vol. 274.
  64. S. Gonzàlez-Solís and P. Roig, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 436 (2019).
  65. M. Davier, A. Hoecker, G. Lopez Castro, B. Malaescu, X. H. Mo, G. Toledo Sanchez, P. Wang, C. Z. Yuan, and Z. Zhang, Eur. Phys. J. C 66, 127 (2010).
  66. M. Davier, A. Hoecker, B. Malaescu, and Z. Zhang, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 241 (2020); 80, 410(E) (2020).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 113, 014005– Published 7 January, 2026
  • Received 9 October 2025
  • Accepted 18 December 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation