The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Tenth-order electron anomalous magnetic moment: Contribution of diagrams without closed lepton loops
Open accessAbstract
This paper presents a detailed account of the evaluation of the electron anomalous magnetic moment ${a}_{e}$ which arises from a gauge-invariant set, called Set V, consisting of 6354 tenth-order Feynman diagrams without closed lepton loops. The latest value of the sum of Set V diagrams evaluated by the Monte Carlo integration routine VEGAS is 8.726 $(336)(\ensuremath{\alpha}/\ensuremath{\pi}{)}^{5}$, which replaces the very preliminary value reported in 2012. Combining it with 6318 previously published tenth-order diagrams, we obtain 7.795 $(336)(\ensuremath{\alpha}/\ensuremath{\pi}{)}^{5}$ as the complete mass-independent tenth-order term. Together with the improved value of the eighth-order term this leads to ${a}_{e}(\text{theory})=1\text{ }159\text{ }652\text{ }181.643\text{ }(25)(23)(16)(763)\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}1{0}^{\ensuremath{-}12}$, where the first three uncertainties are from the eighth-order, tenth-order, and hadronic and elecroweak terms. The fourth and largest uncertainty is from ${\ensuremath{\alpha}}^{\ensuremath{-}1}=137.035\text{ }999\text{ }049\text{ }(90)$, the fine-structure constant derived from the rubidium recoil measurement. Thus, ${a}_{e}(\text{experiment})\ensuremath{-}{a}_{e}(\text{theory})=\ensuremath{-}0.91\text{ }(0.82)\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}1{0}^{\ensuremath{-}12}$. Assuming the validity of the standard model, we obtain the fine-structure constant ${\ensuremath{\alpha}}^{\ensuremath{-}1}({a}_{e})=\phantom{\rule{0ex}{0ex}}137.035\text{ }999\text{ }1570\text{ }(29)(27)(18)(331)$, where uncertainties are from the eighth-order, tenth-order, and hadronic and electroweak terms, and the measurement of ${a}_{e}$. This is the most precise value of $\ensuremath{\alpha}$ available at present and provides a stringent constraint on possible theories beyond the standard model.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
CODATA recommended values of the fundamental physical constants: 2018
Tiesinga, E., Mohr, P. J., Newell, D. B., & Taylor, B. N. (2021) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.93.025010 · Cited by 908
Measurement of the fine-structure constant as a test of the Standard Model
Parker, R. H., Yu, C., Zhong, W., Estey, B., & Müller, H. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aap7706 · Cited by 917
A call for new physics: The muon anomalous magnetic moment and lepton flavor violation
Lindner, M., Platscher, M., & Queiroz, F. S. (2018) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2017.12.001 · Cited by 503
Dispersion relation for hadronic light-by-light scattering: pion pole
Hoferichter, M., Hoid, B.-L., Kubis, B., Leupold, S., & Schneider, S. P. (2018) · Journal of High Energy Physics · doi:10.1007/jhep10(2018)141 · Cited by 428
CODATA Recommended Values of the Fundamental Physical Constants: 2018
Tiesinga, E., Mohr, P. J., Newell, D. B., & Taylor, B. N. (2021) · Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data · doi:10.1063/5.0064853 · Cited by 299
Metadata
- Authors
- Aoyama, T., Hayakawa, M., Kinoshita, T., & Nio, M.
- Venue
- Physical Review D
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2015-02-24
- Volume
- 91
- Issue
- 3
- ISSN
- 0556-2821 (ISSN-L)
- 1550-7998
- 1550-2368
- OpenAlex
- W2004331016
- Cited by
- 165
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Tenth-order electron anomalous magnetic moment: Contribution of diagrams without closed lepton loops. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1103/physrevd.91.033006
- The paper
- Aoyama, T., Hayakawa, M., Kinoshita, T., & Nio, M. (2015). Tenth-order electron anomalous magnetic moment: Contribution of diagrams without closed lepton loops. Physical Review D. https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevd.91.033006
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.