Erratum to: Eur. Phys. J. C (2013) 73:2534 DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2534-3
The final conclusion of this paper is not correct. It was based on our misunderstanding of the treatment of the subtraction term to the NLO ladder diagram given in column 4 of Table 1 of the original calculation of Curci, Furmanski and Petronzio [11]. Contrary to our treatment, Curci et al. do not use the ‘+’ prescription to calculate the NLO contribution in 4+2ϵ dimensions. Instead they explicitly trace the cancellation of the singularities caused by the soft gluon emissions between the real and virtual contributions. Thus, it turns out, that the non-singlet structure function and the DGLAP evolution in the physical scheme are exactly the same as in the \(\overline{\mathrm{MS}}\) scheme. Therefore the physical approach may be considered as an alternative factorisation scheme.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The online version of the original article can be found under
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
About this article
Cite this article
de Oliveira, E.G., Martin, A.D. & Ryskin, M.G. Erratum to: Treatment of the infrared contribution: NLO QED evolution as a pedagogic example. Eur. Phys. J. C 73, 2641 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2641-1
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2641-1