INT Workshop on Hadronic Light-by-Light
Contribution to the Muon Anomaly
(Seattle: Feb. 28 – Mar 4, 2011)
David Hertzog, University of Washington
Our Challenges (see web)
1. Can agreement be reached on the individual and
combined theoretical contributions to the hadronic lightby-light (HLbL) contribution to the muon anomalous
magnetic moment, aμ, based on QCD-inspired models?
2. Can the lattice approach lead to a result having sufficient
precision to check the models or to independently
establish the HLbL value?
3. Which data that can be obtained at Frascati, and at other
facilities, are essential to constrain the theoretical
calculations and what theoretical developments are
required to connect data to model predictions?
Our Motivation
• New muon g-2 experiment aims for uncertainty
dam = 16 x 10-11
• SM contribution uncertainty must be reduced to
realize maximum impact of comparison of Expt.
to Theory
• HLbL – well, it seems complicated – is an easy
target to blame, especially by those people who
haven’t spent much time thinking about it
– EXAMPLES
Arguments made against a new g-2
• “You’ll never be able to get the HLbL uncertainty low enough to interpret the
result” Many in the community
• “Although the ultimate limit to the comparison with the SM expectation may be
uncertainties in the theory (particularly the light-by-light contribution), the
pastwork at BNL, … was limited by statistics” FNAL PAC Mar 2009
• “There have been significant advances in the theoretical understanding of g-2,
although the uncertainty on the light-by-light contribution remains a worry.”
FNAL PAC Nov 2009
• Questions to Collaboration from DOE Intensity Frontier Review Aug. 2011
– 1. Provide a basis for the claimed future evolution of the theory syst. errors (e.g., how much
improvement over current status is expected from current/future e+e‐  hadrons experiments?
From improved theory calc of light‐by‐light corrections? )
– 2. Describe how you plan to use LQCD results or additional experimental data (which specific
measurements) to improve or cross‐check the precision of your result.
What do people say to us in the hallways?
• We get “reminded” of
– the famous sign error
– the intrinsic naivety of theory uncertainties in
hadronic models
– The difficulty of ever getting a precision
calculation from the lattice
– That there is no data to support the calculations
• And mostly that,
– This is HARD stuff !!
Yes. This is Hard Stuff
• We need to know a small contribution to 10%
and then we’re done
• Do we need this tomorrow?
– NO
• Do we need to start today?
– YES
How to get there
1. Gather the best people in the world to talk
about it
– This is that meeting
2. Write down our intermediate conclusions
and our working plan
– That should be the product of this meeting
– A White Paper, suitable for publication
3. Repeat in a few years time to reassess