764879 (EASITrain), 730871 (ARIES), 777563 (RI-Paths), 101086276 (EAJADE), 101004730 (iFAST), 101131435 (iSAS), 101131850 (RF2.0) and from FP7 under grant number 312453 (EuCARD-2).

<figure><img src="image_154.png" /></figure>

This work has also benefited from the support of CHART (Swiss Accelerator Research and Technology), founded in 2016 as an umbrella collaboration for accelerator research and technology activities. Present partners in CHART are CERN, PSI, EPFL, ETH-Zurich and the University of Geneva.

**Trademark notice:** All trademarks appearing in this report are acknowledged as such.

This report was edited with the Overleaf.com collaborative writing and publishing system. Typesetting and final print preparation was performed using pdfTEX3.14159265-2.6-1.40.17.

Copyright CERN for the benefit of the FCC Collaboration 2025.
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.

Knowledge transfer is an integral part of CERN's mission.
CERN publishes this volume Open Access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) in order to permit its wide dissemination and use. The submission of a contribution to the CERN document server shall be deemed to constitute the contributor's agreement to this copyright and license statement. Contributors are requested to obtain any clearances that may be necessary for this purpose.

This volume is indexed in: CERN Document Server (CDS):
CERN-FCC-PHYS-2025-0002.
10.17181/CERN.9DKX.TDH9.
https://cds.cern.ch/record/2928193.

This report edition should be cited as:
Future Circular Collider Feasibility Study Report Volume 1: Physics, Experiments, Detector, preprint edition edited by M. Benedikt et al., CERN physics reports,
CERN-FCC-PHYS-2025-0002, DOI 10.17181/CERN.9DKX.TDH9, Geneva, 2025.
Available online: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2928193

**Data Availability Statement** Data will be made available on reasonable request. [Author's comment: The authors declare that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the paper and/or its supplementary information files. Some datasets may be subject to access restrictions (e.g., privacy or collaboration policies); in such cases, access may be granted upon reasonable request.]

**Code Availability Statement** This manuscript has no associated code/software in a repository. [Author's comment: The authors declare that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the paper and/or its supplementary information files. The analyses presented in this volume were mainly performed using the FCC software ecosystem, which is based on the Key4HEP software stack. A detailed description of this ecosystem and its components is provided in Chapter 8 of this volume and the references therein.]

**Open Access** This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Funded by SCOAP³.

## References

1. CMS Collaboration, Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC. Phys. Lett. B **716**, 30 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.021. arXiv:1207.7235

2. ATLAS Collaboration, Observation of a new particle in the search for the standard model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. Phys. Lett. B **716**, 1 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.020. arXiv:1207.7214

3. P.W. Graham, D.E. Kaplan, S. Rajendran, Cosmological relaxation of the electroweak scale. Phys. Rev. Lett. **115**, 221801 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.221801. arXiv:1504.07551

4. J.R. Espinosa et al., Cosmological Higgs-axion interplay for a naturally small electroweak scale. Phys. Rev. Lett. **115**, 251803 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.251803. arXiv:1506.09217

5. N. Arkani-Hamed, R.T. D'Agnolo, H.D. Kim, Weak scale as a trigger. Phys. Rev. D **104**, 095014. arXiv:2012.04652

6. European Strategy Group, 2020 Update of the European Strategy for Particle Physics (brochure) (2020). https://doi.org/10.17181/CERN.JSC6.W89E
7. J.N. Butler et al., Report of the 2021 U.S. community study on the future of particle physics (Snowmass 2021) (2023). https://doi.org/10.2172/1922503

8. P5 Collaboration, Exploring the quantum universe: pathways to innovation and discovery in particle physics. https://doi.org/10.2172/2368847. arXiv:2407.19176

9. TLEP design study working group, First look at the physics case of TLEP. JHEP 01, 164 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2014)164. arXiv:1308.6176 (Presented at the 2013 Community Summer Study on the Future of U.S. Particle Physics: Snowmass on the Mississippi (CSS2013), Minneapolis, July 2013)

10. FCC Collaboration, FCC physics opportunities: future circular collider conceptual design report. Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 474 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-6904-3

11. FCC Collaboration, FCC-ee: The lepton collider: Future Circular Collider Conceptual Design Report, Volume 2. Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. 228, 261 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjst/e2019-900045-4

12. FCC Collaboration, FCC-hh: the hadron collider: future circular collider conceptual design report. Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. 228, 755 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjst/e2019-900087-0

13. P. Janot, A. Blondel, The carbon footprint of proposed $e^{+}e^{-}$ Higgs factories. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 137, 1122 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-022-03319-w. arXiv:2208.10466

14. A. Blondel, C. Grojean, P. Janot, G. Wilkinson, Higgs factory options for CERN: a comparative study. arXiv:2412.13130

15. F. Bordry et al., Machine parameters and projected luminosity performance of proposed future colliders at CERN. arXiv:1810.13022

16. P. Janot, C. Grojean, F. Zimmermann, M. Benedikt, FCC note: integrated luminosities and sequence of events for the FCC Feasibility Study Report. https://doi.org/10.17181/8ey0h-84j86

17. A. Blondel, C. Grojean, P. Janot, G. Wilkinson, FCC note: particle physics considerations for the FCC-ee choice and sequence of running energies. https://doi.org/10.17181/224fq-qtf30

18. FCC Collaboration, M. Benedikt et al., Future Circular Collider Feasibility Study Report Volume 2: Accelerators, technical infrastructure and safety. https://doi.org/10.17181/CERN.EBAY.7W4X. arXiv:2505.00274 (CERN-FCC-ACC-2025-0004. Submitted to the 2025 Update of the European Strategy for Particle Physics)

19. A. Blondel, F. Zimmermann, A high luminosity $e^{+}e^{-}$ collider in the LHC tunnel to study the Higgs boson. arXiv:1112.2518

20. A. Blondel et al., A high luminosity $e^{+}e^{-}$ collider to study the Higgs boson. arXiv:1208.0504 (Submitted to the European Strategy for Particle Physics)

21. P. Azzi et al., Prospective studies for LEP3 with the CMS detector. arXiv:1208.1662 (Submitted to the European Strategy for Particle Physics)

22. A. Blondel et al., Polarization and centre-of-mass energy calibration at FCC-ee. arXiv:1909.12245

23. A. Blondel, E. Gianfelice, The challenges of beam polarization and keV-scale centre-of-mass energy calibration at the FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 136, 1103 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02038-y

24. J. Alcaraz Maestre, A. Blondel, M. Dam, P. Janot, The Z lineshape challenge: ppm and keV measurements. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 136, 848 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-01760-x. arXiv:2107.00616

25. P. Janot, Direct measurement of $\alpha_{QED}(m_Z^2)$ at the FCC-ee. JHEP 02, 053 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2016)053. arXiv:1512.05544. [Erratum: JHEP 11, 164 (2017)]

26. M. Riembau, Precise extraction of $\alpha_{em}(m_Z^2)$ at the Tera-Z stage of a future circular collider. Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 221802 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.221802. arXiv:2501.05508

27. L. Allwicher, M. McCullough, S. Renner, New physics at Tera-Z: precision renormalised. JHEP 02, 164 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2025)164. arXiv:2408.03992

28. J. Gargalionis, J. Quevillon, P.N.H. Vuong, T. You, Linear standard model extensions in the SMEFT at one loop and Tera-Z. JHEP 07, 136 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2025)136. arXiv:2412.01759

29. D. Ghosh, R.S. Gupta, G. Perez, Is the Higgs mechanism of fermion mass generation a fact? A Yukawa-less first-two-generation model. Phys. Lett. B 755, 504 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2016.02.059. arXiv:1508.01501

30. A. Dery, C. Frugiuele, Y. Nir, Large Higgs-electron Yukawa coupling in 2HDM. JHEP 04, 044 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2018)044. arXiv:1712.04514

31. W. Altmannshofer, J. Brod, M. Schmaltz, Experimental constraints on the coupling of the Higgs boson to electrons. JHEP 05, 125 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2015)125. arXiv:1503.04830

32. D. d'Enterria, A. Poldaru, G. Wojcik, Measuring the electron Yukawa coupling via resonant s-channel Higgs production at FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 137, 201 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02202-4. arXiv:2107.02686

33. A. Faus-Golfe, M.A. Valdivia Garcia, F. Zimmermann, The challenge of monochromatization. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 137, 31 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02151-y

34. P. Azzurri et al., A special Higgs challenge: measuring the mass and production cross section with ultimate precision at FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 137, 23 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02202-4. arXiv:2106.15438

35. Particle Data Group, S. Navas et al., Review of particle physics. Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.110.030001

36. A. Blondel, P. Janot, FCC-ee overview: new opportunities create new challenges. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 137, 92 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02154-9. arXiv:2106.13885

37. S. Heinemeyer, S. Jadach, J. Reuter, Theory requirements for SM Higgs and EW precision physics at the FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 136, 911 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-01875-1. arXiv:2106.11802

38. A. Blondel et al., Standard Model theory for the FCC-ee Tera-Z stage, CERN Yellow Reports: Monographs. CERN-2019-003 (2019). https://doi.org/10.23731/CYRM-2019-003. arXiv:1809.01830 (Presented at the Mini Workshop on Precision EW and QCD Calculations for the FCC Studies: Methods and Tools)

39. A. Blondel et al., Theory requirements and possibilities for the FCC-ee and other future high energy and precision frontier lepton colliders. arXiv:1901.02648 (Submitted to the 2019 Update of the European Strategy for Particle Physics)

40. A. Freitas et al., Theoretical uncertainties for electroweak and Higgs-boson precision measurements at FCC-ee. arXiv:1906.05379
41. M. Aleksa et al., Calorimetry at FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. Plus **136**, 1066 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02034-2. arXiv:2109.00391

42. N. Bacchetta, P. Collins, P. Riedler, Tracking and vertex detectors at FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. Plus **137**, 231 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02323-w. arXiv:2112.13019

43. S. Braibant, P. Giacomelli, Muon detection at FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. Plus **136**, 1143 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02115-2

44. M. Dam, Challenges for FCC-ee luminosity monitor design. Eur. Phys. J. Plus **137**, 81 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02265-3. arXiv:2107.12837

45. G. Wilkinson, Particle identification at FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. Plus **136**, 835 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-01810-4. arXiv:2106.01253

46. P. Azzi, L. Gouskos, M. Selvaggi, F. Simon, Higgs and top physics reconstruction challenges and opportunities at FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. Plus **137**, 39 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02223-z. arXiv:2107.05003

47. J. Bauche et al., FCC Note: Collision-energy calibration and monochromatisation studies at FCC-ee. https://doi.org/10.17181/jsyy3-2a421

48. P. Azzurri, The W mass and width measurement challenge at FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. Plus **136**, 1203 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02211-3. arXiv:2107.04444

49. G. Wilkinson, Particle identification, in Presented at the Third FCC Physics and Experiments Workshop, 13–17 January 2020 (2020). https://indico.cern.ch/event/838435/

50. R. Aleksan, Use cases for an extreme electromagnetic resolution, in Presented at the Fourth FCC Physics and Experiments Workshop, 9–13 November 2020 (2020). https://indico.cern.ch/event/932973/

51. M. Dam, The τ challenges at FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. Plus **136**, 963 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-01894-y. arXiv:2107.12832

52. M. Chrząszcz, M. Drewes, J. Hajer, HECATE: a long-lived particle detector concept for the FCC-ee or CEPC. Eur. Phys. J. C **81**, 546 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09253-y. arXiv:2011.01005

53. The FCC PED Coordination group, FCC note: a selection of benchmark studies at FCC-ee; contribution to Snowmass 2021 (2021). https://doi.org/10.17181/2gfvb-1rw11

54. P. Azzi, E. Perez, Exploring requirements and detector solutions for FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. Plus **136**, 1195 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02141-0. arXiv:2107.04509

55. M. Boscolo et al., Machine detector interface for the $e^{+}e^{-}$ future circular collider. https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-eeFACT2018-WEXBA02. arXiv:1905.03528

56. N. Arkani-Hamed, T. Han, M. Mangano, L.-T. Wang, Physics opportunities of a 100 TeV proton-proton collider. Phys. Rep. **652**, 1 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2016.07.004. arXiv:1511.06495

57. M. Mangano, Physics at the FCC-hh, a 100 TeV pp collider, CERN Yellow Reports: Monographs, CERN-2017-003 (2017). https://doi.org/10.23731/CYRM-2017-003. arXiv:1710.06353

58. A. Dainese et al., Heavy ions at the Future Circular Collider, CERN Yellow Reports: Monographs, CERN-2017-003 (2016). https://doi.org/10.23731/CYRM-2017-003.635. arXiv:1605.01389

59. G.F. Giudice, The Dawn of the Post-Naturalness Era. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789813238053_0013. arXiv:1710.07663 (Published in "From my vast repertoire...: Guido Altarelli's legacy", Eds. A. Levy, S. Forte and G. Ridolfi, World Scientific)

60. N. Craig, Naturalness: past, present, and future. Eur. Phys. J. C **83**, 825 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11928-7. arXiv:2205.05708

61. J. de Blas et al., Higgs boson studies at future particle colliders. JHEP **01**, 139 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2020)139. arXiv:1905.03764

62. J. de Blas et al., On the future of Higgs, electroweak and diboson measurements at lepton colliders. JHEP **12**, 117 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2019)117. arXiv:1907.04311

63. J. de Blas et al., Global SMEFT fits at future colliders; contribution to Snowmass 2021. arXiv:2206.08326

64. T. Barklow et al., Improved formalism for precision Higgs coupling fits. Phys. Rev. D **97**, 053003 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.97.053003. arXiv:1708.08912

65. J. Eysermans, A. Li, G. Bernardi, FCC note: Higgs boson mass and model-independent ZH cross-section at FCC-ee in the di-electron and di-muon final states (2023). https://doi.org/10.17181/jfb44-s0d81

66. A.D. Vecchio, L. Gouskos, G. Marchiori, M. Selvaggi, FCC note: measurement of Higgs boson hadronic decays with $Z(\to \nu\bar{\nu}/\ell\ell)H$ events at FCC-ee at $\sqrt{s} = 240$ GeV (2023). https://doi.org/10.17181/9pr7y-3v657

67. A. Mehta, N. Rompotis, FCC note: Higgs to invisible at FCC-ee (2023). https://doi.org/10.17181/7hbn8-3d233

68. R.S. Gupta, A. Pomarol, F. Riva, BSM primary effects. Phys. Rev. D **91**, 035001 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.91.035001. arXiv:1405.0181

69. W. Buchmuller, D. Wyler, Effective Lagrangian analysis of new interactions and flavor conservation. Nucl. Phys. B **268**, 621 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(86)90262-2

70. B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzynski, M. Misiak, J. Rosiek, Dimension-six terms in the standard model Lagrangian. JHEP **10**, 085 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2010)085. arXiv:1008.4884

71. E. Celada et al., Mapping the SMEFT at high-energy colliders: from LEP and the (HL-)LHC to the FCC-ee. JHEP **09**, 091 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2024)091. arXiv:2404.12809

72. A. Falkowski, M. Gonzalez-Alonso, A. Greljo, D. Marzocca, Global constraints on anomalous triple gauge couplings in effective field theory approach. Phys. Rev. Lett. **116**, 011801 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.011801. arXiv:1508.00581

73. R. Barbieri, A. Pomarol, R. Rattazzi, A. Strumia, Electroweak symmetry breaking after LEP-1 and LEP-2. Nucl. Phys. B **703**, 127 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2004.10.014. arXiv:hep-ph/0405040

74. V. Maura, B.A. Stefanek, T. You, Accuracy complements energy: electroweak precision tests at Tera-Z, arXiv:2412.14241

75. A. Greljo, H. Tiblom, A. Valenti, New physics through flavor tagging at FCC-ee. SciPost Phys. **18**, 152 (2025). https://doi.org/10.21468/SciPostPhys.18.5.152. arXiv:2411.02485

76. P. Janot, Top-quark electroweak couplings at the FCC-ee. JHEP **04**, 182 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2015)182. arXiv:1503.01325

77. M.M. Defranchis et al., A detailed study on the prospects for a $t\bar{t}$ threshold scan in $e^{+}e^{-}$ collisions. arXiv:2503.18713
78. M.L. Mangano et al., Measuring the top Yukawa coupling at 100 TeV. J. Phys. G 43, 035001 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/43/3/035001. arXiv:1507.08169

79. A. Azatov, R. Contino, G. Panico, M. Son, Effective field theory analysis of double Higgs boson production via gluon fusion. Phys. Rev. D 92, 035001 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.92.035001. arXiv:1502.00539

80. ATLAS and CMS Collaborations, Highlights of the HL-LHC physics projections by ATLAS and CMS. Submitted to the 2025 Update of the European Strategy for Particle Physics. ATL-PHYS-PUB-2025-018, CMS-HIG-25-002

81. M. McCullough, An indirect model-dependent probe of the Higgs self-coupling. Phys. Rev. D 90, 015001 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.90.015001. arXiv:1312.3322. [Erratum: Phys. Rev. D 92, 039903 (2015)]

82. F. Zimmermann, Towards more luminosity, in *Presented at the 7th FCC Physics Workshop, LAPP, Annecy-le-Vieux*, (2024). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1307378

83. K. Asteriadis, S. Dawson, P.P. Giardino, R. Szafron, Impact of next-to-leading-order weak standard-model-effective-field-theory corrections in $e^{+}e^{-} \to ZH$. Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 231801 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.133.231801. arXiv:2406.03557

84. K. Asteriadis, S. Dawson, P.P. Giardino, R. Szafron, $e^{+}e^{-} \to ZH$ process in the SMEFT beyond leading order. JHEP 02, 162 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2025)162. arXiv:2409.11466

85. M.L. Mangano, G. Ortona, M. Selvaggi, Measuring the Higgs self-coupling via Higgs-pair production at a 100 TeV p-p collider. Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 1030 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-08595-3. arXiv:2004.03505

86. E. Gallo et al., Higgs self-coupling at the FCC-hh. PoS DIS2024, 253 (2025). https://doi.org/10.22323/1.469.0253 (Presented at the XXXI International Workshop on Deep Inelastic Scattering and Related Subjects (DIS2024), Grenoble, France, April 2024)

87. M. Mangano et al., Prospects for physics at FCC-hh. https://doi.org/10.17181/bzhc2-mem17 (Submitted to the 2025 Update of the European Strategy for Particle Physics)

88. G.F. Giudice, Naturally Speaking: The Naturalness Criterion and Physics at the LHC. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812779762_0010. arXiv:0801.2562 (Published in "LHC Perspectives", Eds. G. Kane and A. Pierce, World Scientific)

89. N. Craig, Naturalness: A Snowmass White Paper; contribution to Snowmass (2021). arXiv:2205.05708

90. P.J. Fox et al., TF08 Snowmass Report: BSM Model Building. arXiv:2210.03075

91. P. Asadi et al., Early-Universe model building; contribution to Snowmass (2021). arXiv:2203.06680

92. L.S. Friedrich, M.J. Ramsey-Musolf, T.V.I. Tenkanen, V.Q. Tran, Addressing the Gravitational Wave—Collider Inverse Problem. arXiv:2203.05889

93. P. Huang, A.J. Long, L.-T. Wang, Probing the electroweak phase transition with Higgs factories and gravitational waves. Phys. Rev. D 94, 075008 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.94.075008. arXiv:1608.06619

94. I. Banta et al., Non-decoupling new particles. JHEP 02, 029 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2022)029. arXiv:2110.02967

95. G. Crawford, D. Sutherland, Scalars with non-decoupling phenomenology at future colliders. JHEP 04, 197 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2025)197. arXiv:2409.18177

96. G. Degrassi et al., Higgs mass and vacuum stability in the standard model at NNLO. JHEP 08, 098 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2012)098. arXiv:1205.6497

97. D. Buttazzo et al., Investigating the near-criticality of the Higgs boson. JHEP 12, 089 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2013)089. arXiv:1307.3536

98. A.V. Bednyakov, B.A. Kniehl, A.F. Pikelner, O.L. Veretin, Stability of the electroweak vacuum: gauge independence and advanced precision. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 201802 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.201802. arXiv:1507.08833

99. A. Andreassen, W. Frost, M.D. Schwartz, Scale invariant instantons and the complete lifetime of the standard model. Phys. Rev. D 97, 056006 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.97.056006. arXiv:1707.08124

100. D. d'Enterria et al., The strong coupling constant: state of the art and the decade ahead. J. Phys. G 51, 090501 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6471/ad1a78. arXiv:2203.08271

101. Z.S. Wang, K. Wang, Physics with far detectors at future lepton colliders. Phys. Rev. D 101, 075046 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.101.075046. arXiv:1911.06576

102. M. Tian, Z.S. Wang, K. Wang, Search for long-lived axions with far detectors at future lepton colliders. arXiv:2201.08960

103. Y. Lu, Y.-N. Mao, K. Wang, Z.S. Wang, LAYCAST: Layered CAvern Surface Tracker at future electron-positron colliders. arXiv:2406.05770

104. B. Bhattacharjee et al., Long-lived Light Mediators in a Higgs Portal Model at the FCC-ee. arXiv:2503.08780

105. B. Bhattacharjee et al., Proposal for a shared transverse LLP detector for FCC-ee and FCC-hh and a forward LLP detector for FCC-hh. arXiv:2503.21875

106. L. Allwicher, C. Cornella, G. Isidori, B.A. Stefanek, New physics in the third generation. A comprehensive SMEFT analysis and future prospects. JHEP 03, 049 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2024)049. arXiv:2311.00020

107. B.A. Stefanek, Non-universal probes of composite Higgs models: new bounds and prospects for FCC-ee. JHEP 09, 103 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2024)103. arXiv:2407.09593

108. S. Knapen, K. Langhoff, Z. Ligeti, Imprints of supersymmetry at a future Z factory. Phys. Rev. D 111, 115007 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/fw5y-svmh. arXiv:2407.13815

109. J. de Blas, J.C. Criado, M. Perez-Victoria, J. Santiago, Effective description of general extensions of the standard model: the complete tree-level dictionary. JHEP 03, 109 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2018)109. arXiv:1711.10391

110. J. ter Hoeve et al., The automation of SMEFT-assisted constraints on UV-complete models. JHEP 01, 179 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2024)179. arXiv:2309.04523

111. J. ter Hoeve et al., Connecting scales: RGE effects in the SMEFT at the LHC and future colliders. JHEP 06, 125 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2025)125. arXiv:2502.20453

112. H.E. Logan, V. Rentala, All the generalized Georgi-Machacek models. Phys. Rev. D 92, 075011 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.92.075011. arXiv:1502.01275

113. M. Chala, C. Krause, G. Nardini, Signals of the electroweak phase transition at colliders and gravitational wave observatories. JHEP 07, 062 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2018)062. arXiv:1802.02168
114. G. Durieux, M. McCullough, E. Salvioni, Charting the Higgs self-coupling boundaries. JHEP 12, 148 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2022)148. arXiv:2209.00666. [Erratum: JHEP 02, 165 (2023)]

115. J. Davighi, In search of an invisible Z'. arXiv:2412.07694

116. J. Fan, M. Reece, L.-T. Wang, Precision natural SUSY at CEPC, FCC-ee, and ILC. JHEP 08, 152 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2015)152. arXiv:1412.3107

117. J. Davighi, G. Isidori, Non-universal gauge interactions addressing the inescapable link between Higgs and flavour. JHEP 07, 147 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2023)147. arXiv:2303.01520

118. J. Davighi, J. Tooby-Smith, Electroweak flavour unification. JHEP 09, 193 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2022)193. arXiv:2201.07245

119. J. Fuentes-Martin et al., Flavor hierarchies, flavor anomalies, and Higgs mass from a warped extra dimension. Phys. Lett. B 834, 137382 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2022.137382. arXiv:2203.01952

120. J. Davighi, B.A. Stefanek, Deconstructed hypercharge: a natural model of flavour. JHEP 11, 100 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2023)100. arXiv:2305.16280

121. J. Davighi, A. Gosnay, D.J. Miller, S. Renner, Phenomenology of a deconstructed electroweak force. JHEP 05, 085 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2024)085. arXiv:2312.13346

122. LHCb Collaboration, Physics case for an LHCb Upgrade II—opportunities in flavour physics, and beyond, in the HL-LHC era. arXiv:1808.08865

123. B. Allanach, E. Loisa, Computation of FCC-ee sensitivity to heavy new physics with interactions of any flavor structure. arXiv:2501.08321

124. B. Kayser, F. Gibrat-Debu, F. Perrier, The Physics of Massive Neutrinos, vol. 25. World Sci. Lect. Notes Phys. (1989)

125. P. Agrawal et al., Feebly-interacting particles: FIPs 2020 workshop report. Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 1015 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09703-7. arXiv:2102.12143

126. A. Blondel, E. Graverini, N. Serra, M. Shaposhnikov, Search for heavy right handed neutrinos at the FCC-ee. Nucl. Part. Phys. Proc. 273, 1883 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2015.09.304. arXiv:1411.5230

127. D. Moulin, Probing heavy neutral leptons in the *ejj* channel et the FCC-ee: kinematic signatures and discovery potential. Master's thesis, Université de Genève (2023). http://dpnc.unige.ch/MASTERS/MASTER_MOULIN_Dimitris.pdf

128. T.M. Critchley, The hunt for heavy neutrinos: machine learning techniques to probe heavy neutral leptons in the *evjj* final state at the e⁺e⁻ Future Circular Collider. Master's thesis, Université de Genève (2024). https://dpnc.unige.ch/MASTERS/MASTER_CRITCHLEY_THOMAS.pdf

129. L. Bellagamba, G. Polesello, N. Valle, Searches for Heavy Neutral Leptons at FCC-ee in final states including a muon. arXiv:2503.19464

130. A. Blondel et al., Searches for long-lived particles at the future FCC-ee. Front. Phys. 10, 967881 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2022.967881. arXiv:2203.05502

131. S. Ajmal et al., Searching for type I seesaw mechanism in a two heavy neutral leptons scenario at FCC-ee. JHEP 05, 054 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2025)054. arXiv:2410.03615

132. S. Williams, FCC note: updated studies on the sensitivity of FCC-ee to heavy neutral leptons coupling to electrons at the Z-pole run (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/jcwpwj-nsk15

133. M. Drewes, Distinguishing Dirac and Majorana heavy neutrinos at lepton colliders. PoS ICHEP2022, 608 (2022). https://doi.org/10.22323/1.414.0608. arXiv:2210.17110 (Presented at the ICHEP 2022 conference, Bologna, 6–13 July, 2022)

134. M. Drewes, Y. Georis, J. Klarić, Mapping the viable parameter space for testable leptogenesis. Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 051801 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.051801. arXiv:2106.16226

135. C. Antel et al., Feebly-interacting particles: FIPs 2022 Workshop Report. Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 1122 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-12168-5. arXiv:2305.01715

136. G. Sadowski et al., FCC note: search for HNL at FCC-ee, and comparisons between Fast and Full Simulation (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/69wjb-k4y74

137. J.-L. Tastet, O. Ruchayskiy, I. Timiryasov, Reinterpreting the ATLAS bounds on heavy neutral leptons in a realistic neutrino oscillation model. JHEP 12, 182 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2021)182. arXiv:2107.12980

138. A.M. Abdullahi et al., The present and future status of heavy neutral leptons. J. Phys. G 50, 020501 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6471/ac98f9. arXiv:2203.08039

139. M. Shaposhnikov, A possible symmetry of the nuMSM. Nucl. Phys. B 763, 49 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.11.003. arXiv:hep-ph/0605047

140. J. Kersten, A.Y. Smirnov, Right-handed neutrinos at CERN LHC and the mechanism of neutrino mass generation. Phys. Rev. D 76, 073005 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.76.073005. arXiv:0705.3221

141. S. Antusch, E. Cazzato, O. Fischer, Sterile neutrino searches at future e⁺e⁻, pp, and e⁻p colliders. Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 32, 1750078 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X17500786. arXiv:1612.02728

142. S. Antusch, J. Hajer, J. Rosskopp, Simulating lepton number violation induced by heavy neutrino-antineutrino oscillations at colliders. JHEP 03, 110 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2023)110. arXiv:2210.10738

143. S. Antusch, J. Hajer, B.M.S. Oliveira, Heavy neutrino-antineutrino oscillations at the FCC-ee. JHEP 10, 129 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2023)129. arXiv:2308.07297

144. S. Antusch, J. Hajer, B.M.S. Oliveira, Discovering heavy neutrino-antineutrino oscillations at the Z-pole. arXiv:2408.01389

145. G. Polesello, N. Valle, FCC note: measuring the HNL model parameters at FCC-ee (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/xeec7v-h4y88

146. R.N. Mohapatra, J.W.F. Valle, Neutrino mass and baryon number nonconservation in superstring models. Phys. Rev. D 34, 1642 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.34.1642

147. E.K. Akhmedov, M. Lindner, E. Schnapka, J.W.F. Valle, Left-right symmetry breaking in NJL approach. Phys. Lett. B 368, 270 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(95)01504-3. arXiv:hep-ph/9507275

148. E.K. Akhmedov, M. Lindner, E. Schnapka, J.W.F. Valle, Dynamical left-right symmetry breaking. Phys. Rev. D 53, 2752 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.53.2752. arXiv:hep-ph/9509255

149. S. Antusch et al., Probing leptogenesis at future colliders. JHEP 09, 124 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2018)124. arXiv:1710.03744
150. M. Drewes, Y. Georis, J. Klarić, A. Wendels, On the collider-testability of the type-I seesaw model with 3 right-handed neutrinos. JHEP 03, 176 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2025)176. arXiv:2407.13620

151. M. Drewes, Y. Georis, C. Hagedorn, J. Klaric, Low-scale seesaw with flavour and CP symmetries—from colliders to leptogenesis. arXiv:2412.10254

152. A. Blondel, A. de Gouvêa, B. Kayser, Z-boson decays into Majorana or Dirac heavy neutrinos. Phys. Rev. D 104, 055027 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.055027. arXiv:2105.06576

153. S.-I. Horigome, T. Katayose, S. Matsumoto, I. Saha, Leptophilic fermion WIMP: role of future lepton colliders. Phys. Rev. D 104, 055001 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.055001. arXiv:2102.08645

154. C. Cesarotti, G. Krnjaic, Hitting the thermal target for leptophilic dark matter. arXiv:2404.02906

155. A. Roy, B. Dasgupta, M. Guchait, Constraining asymmetric dark matter using colliders and direct detection. JHEP 08, 095 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2024)095. arXiv:2402.17265

156. B. Grzadkowski, M. Iglicki, K. Mekala, A.F. Zarnnecki, Dark-matter-spin effects at future $e^{+}e^{-}$ colliders. JHEP 08, 052 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2020)052. arXiv:2003.06719

157. M. Karliner, M. Low, J.L. Rosner, L.-T. Wang, Radiative return capabilities of a high-energy, high-luminosity $e^{+}e^{-}$ collider. Phys. Rev. D 92, 035010 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.92.035010. arXiv:1503.07209

158. P. Giffin, I.M. Lewis, Y.-J. Zheng, Higgs production in association with a dark-Z at future electron positron colliders. J. Phys. G 49, 015003 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6471/ac38c1. arXiv:2012.13404

159. S.-F. Ge, K. Ma, X.-D. Ma, J. Sheng, Associated production of neutrino and dark fermion at future lepton colliders. JHEP 11, 190 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2023)190. arXiv:2306.00657

160. G. Haghighat, M. Mohammadi Najafabadi, K. Sakurai, W. Yin, Probing a light dark sector at future lepton colliders via invisible decays of the SM-like and dark Higgs bosons. Phys. Rev. D 107, 035033 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.107.035033. arXiv:2209.07565

161. M. Cobal et al., Z-boson decays into an invisible dark photon at the LHC, HL-LHC and future lepton colliders. Phys. Rev. D 102, 035027 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.102.035027. arXiv:2006.15945

162. M. Bauer, M. Heiles, M. Neubert, A. Thamm, Axion-like particles at future colliders. Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 74 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-6587-9. arXiv:1808.10323

163. D. d'Enterria, Collider constraints on axion-like particles. arXiv:2102.08971 (Contribution to the FIPs 2020 workshop report)

164. P. Rebello Teles, D. d'Enterria, V.P. Gonçalves, D.E. Martins, Searches for axionlike particles via $\gamma\gamma$ fusion at future $e^{+}e^{-}$ colliders. Phys. Rev. D 109, 055003 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.055003. arXiv:2310.17270

165. K. Cheung, C.J. Ouseph, Axionlike particle search at Higgs factories. Phys. Rev. D 108, 035003 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.108.035003. arXiv:2303.16514

166. L. Calibbi et al., Testing axion couplings to leptons in Z decays at future $e^{+}e^{-}$ colliders. Phys. Rev. D 108, 015002 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.108.015002. arXiv:2212.02818

167. J. Liu, X. Ma, L.-T. Wang, X.-P. Wang, ALP explanation to the muon (g-2) and its test at future Tera-Z and Higgs factories. Phys. Rev. D 107, 095016 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.107.095016. arXiv:2210.09335

168. H.-Y. Zhang, C.-X. Yue, Y.-C. Guo, S. Yang, Searching for axionlike particles at future electron-positron colliders. Phys. Rev. D 104, 096008 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.096008. arXiv:2103.05218

169. G. Polesello, FCC note: sensitivity of the FCC-ee to decay of an axion-like-particle into two photons (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/k89fj-6e992

170. M. Meena et al., FCC note: Search for Axion-Like Particles decaying into a pair of gluons at FCC-ee (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/2zh7p-v9a72

171. P. Rebello-Teles, D. d'Enterria, Searches for axion- and graviton-like particles via $\gamma\gamma$ fusion at the FCC-hh (2025) (in preparation)

172. D. Curtin et al., Exotic decays of the 125 GeV Higgs boson. Phys. Rev. D 90, 075004 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.90.075004. arXiv:1312.4992

173. M. Cepeda, S. Gori, V.M. Outsochoorn, J. Shelton, Exotic Higgs decays. Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 72, 119 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-nucl-102319-024147. arXiv:2111.12751

174. S. Ma, K. Wang, J. Zhu, Higgs decay to light (pseudo)scalsars in the semi-constrained NMSSM. Chin. Phys. C 45, 023113 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/abc4f. arXiv:2006.03527

175. S. Alipour-Fard, N. Craig, M. Jiang, S. Koren, Long live the Higgs factory: Higgs decays to long-lived particles at future lepton colliders. Chin. Phys. C 43, 053101 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/43/5/053101. arXiv:1812.05588

176. Z. Liu, L.-T. Wang, H. Zhang, Exotic decays of the 125 GeV Higgs boson at future $e^{+}e^{-}$ lepton colliders. Chin. Phys. C 41, 063102 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/41/6/063102. arXiv:1612.09284

177. G. Ripellino, M. Vande Voorde, A. Gallén, R. Gonzalez Suarez, Searching for long-lived dark scalars at the FCC-ee. JHEP 06, 143 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2025)143. arXiv:2412.10141

178. M. Larson, L. Skinnari, FCC note: long-lived particles from exotic Higgs decays at the FCC-ee—detector comparison and additional Z decay modes (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/0b8zq-69b06

179. Z.S. Wang, K. Wang, Long-lived light neutralinos at future Z-factories. Phys. Rev. D 101, 115018 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.101.115018. arXiv:1904.10661

180. H.-C. Cheng, L. Li, E. Salvioni, C.B. Verhaaren, Light hidden mesons through the Z portal. JHEP 11, 031 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2019)031. arXiv:1906.02198

181. R. Gonzalez Suarez, B. Pattnaik, J. Zurita, Leptophilic Z' bosons at the FCC-ee: discovery opportunities. Phys. Rev. D 111, 035029 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.111.035029. arXiv:2410.12903

182. V. Hajahmad, M.A. Ali, Phenomenological study of lepton flavor violation in Z boson decays with constrained MSSM extended by Type-II Seesaw Model. arXiv:2407.12992

183. P. Munbodh, Lepton flavor violation at FCC-ee and CEPC. arXiv:2406.01935 (Presented at the 17th International Workshop on Tau Lepton Physics)
184. W. Altmannshofer, P. Munbodh, T. Oh, Probing lepton flavor violation at circular electron-positron colliders. JHEP 08, 026 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2023)026. arXiv:2305.03869

185. T.S.M. Ho et al., Testing lepton flavor universality at future Z factories. Phys. Rev. D 109, 093004 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.093004. arXiv:2212.02433

186. L. Calibbi, X. Marcano, J. Roy, Z lepton flavour violation as a probe for new physics at future $e^{+}e^{-}$ colliders. Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 1054 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09777-3. arXiv:2107.10273

187. J.F. Kamenik et al., Flavor-violating Higgs and Z boson decays at a future circular lepton collider. Phys. Rev. D 109, L011301 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.L011301. arXiv:2306.17520

188. A. Crivellin, D. Müller, F. Saturnino, Leptoquarks in oblique corrections and Higgs signal strength: status and prospects. JHEP 11, 094 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2020)094. arXiv:2006.10758

189. E. Curtis et al., FCC note: search for pair production of additional Higgs bosons at the FCC-ee within the Inert Doublet Model in a final state with two electrons or two muons (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/hh720-6wv91

190. C. Helsens et al., Heavy resonances at energy-frontier hadron colliders. Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 569 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7062-3. arXiv:1902.11217

191. F. Abu-Ajamieh, S. Chang, M. Chen, M.A. Luty, Higgs coupling measurements and the scale of new physics. JHEP 07, 056 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2021)056. arXiv:2009.11293

192. A. Montanari, E. Moulin, N.L. Rodd, Toward the ultimate reach of current imaging atmospheric Cherenkov telescopes and their sensitivity to TeV dark matter. Phys. Rev. D 107, 043028 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.107.043028. arXiv:2210.03140

193. M. Cirelli, F. Sala, M. Taoso, Wino-like minimal dark matter and future colliders. JHEP 10, 033 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2015)041. arXiv:1407.7058. [Erratum: JHEP 01, 041 (2015)]

194. S. Monteil, G. Wilkinson, Heavy-quark opportunities and challenges at FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 136, 837 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-01814-0. arXiv:2106.01259

195. Y. Grossman, Z. Ligeti, Theoretical challenges for flavor physics. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 136, 912 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-01845-7. arXiv:2106.12168

196. M. Chrzaszcz, R.G. Suarez, S. Monteil, Hunt for rare processes and long-lived particles at FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 136, 1056 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-01961-4. arXiv:2106.15459

197. A. Lusiani, Status and progress of the HFLAV-Tau group activities. EPJ Web Conf. 218, 05002 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201921805002. arXiv:1804.08436 (Contribution to the 11th International Workshop on $e^{+}e^{-}$ collisions from from Phi to Psi, 26-29 June 2017, Mainz, Germany)

198. M. Dam, Tau-lepton physics at the FCC-ee circular $e^{+}e^{-}$ collider. SciPost Phys. Proc. 1, 041 (2019). https://doi.org/10.21468/SciPostPhysProc.1.041. arXiv:1811.09408 (Contribution to the 15th International Workshop on Tau Lepton Physics, 24-28 September 2018, Amsterdam, Netherlands)

199. A. Lusiani, FCC note: Tau physics prospects at FCC-ee (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/fscbf-jpg31

200. L. Allwicher, G. Isidori, N. Selimovic, LFU violations in leptonic $\tau$ decays and B-physics anomalies. Phys. Lett. B 826, 136903 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2022.136903. arXiv:2109.03833

201. I. Plakias, O. Sumensari, Lepton flavor violation in semileptonic observables. Phys. Rev. D 110, 035016 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.110.035016. arXiv:2312.14070

202. C. Cornella et al., Reading the footprints of the B-meson flavor anomalies. JHEP 08, 050 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2021)050. arXiv:2103.16558

203. M. Ardu, S. Davidson, What is leading order for LFV in SMEFT? JHEP 08, 002 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2021)002. arXiv:2103.07212

204. T. Li, M.A. Schmidt, Sensitivity of future lepton colliders to the search for charged lepton flavor violation. Phys. Rev. D 99, 055038 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.99.055038. arXiv:1809.07924

205. S. Banerjee et al., Snowmass 2021 White Paper: charged lepton flavor violation in the tau sector. arXiv:2203.14919 (Contribution to Snowmass 2021)

206. C. Bobeth et al., $B_{s,d} \to l^{+}l^{-}$ in the standard model with reduced theoretical uncertainty. Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 101801 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.101801. arXiv:1311.0903

207. HPQCD Collaboration, Standard Model predictions for $B \to K\ell^{+}\ell^{-}$ with form factors from Lattice QCD. Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 162002 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.162002. arXiv:1306.0434. [Erratum: Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 149902 (2014)]

208. J.F. Kamenik, S. Monteil, A. Semkiv, L.V. Silva, Lepton polarization asymmetries in rare semi-tauonic $b \to s$ exclusive decays at FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 701 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5272-0. arXiv:1705.11106

209. BB Collaboration, Search for $B^{+} \to K^{+}\tau^{+}\tau^{-}$ at the BaBar experiment. Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 031802 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.031802. arXiv:1605.09637

210. LHCb Collaboration, Search for the decays $B_{s}^{0} \to \tau^{+}\tau^{-}$ and $B^{0} \to \tau^{+}\tau^{-}$. Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 251802 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.251802. arXiv:1703.02508

211. D. Buttazzo, A. Greljo, G. Isidori, D. Marzocca, B-physics anomalies: a guide to combined explanations. JHEP 11, 044 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2017)044. arXiv:1706.07808

212. B. Capdevila et al., Searching for new physics with $b \to s\tau^{+}\tau^{-}$ processes. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 181802 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.181802. arXiv:1712.01919

213. M. Bauer et al., Flavor probes of axion-like particles. JHEP 09, 056 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2022)056. arXiv:2110.10698

214. L. Li, T. Liu, $b \to s\tau^{+}\tau^{-}$ physics at future Z factories. JHEP 06, 064 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2021)064. arXiv:2012.00665

215. T. Miralles, S. Monteil, FCC note: study of the feasibility of the observation of $B^{0} \to K^{*}(892)\tau^{+}\tau^{-}$ at FCC-ee and related vertex detector performance requirements (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/9t6w9-mmd12

216. HFLAV Collaboration, Averages of b-hadron, c-hadron, and $\tau$-lepton properties as of 2021. Phys. Rev. D 107, 052008 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.107.052008. arXiv:2206.07501
217. S. Fajfer, J.F. Kamenik, I. Nisandzic, J. Zupan, Implications of lepton flavor universality violations in B decays. Phys. Rev. Lett. **109**, 161801 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.161801. arXiv:1206.1872

218. R. Alonso, B. Grinstein, J. Martin Camalich, Lepton universality violation and lepton flavor conservation in B-meson decays. JHEP **10**, 184 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2015)184. arXiv:1505.05164

219. F.U. Bernlochner, Z. Ligeti, M. Papucci, D.J. Robinson, Combined analysis of semileptonic B decays to D and D*: $R(D^{(*)})$, $|V_{cb}|$, and new physics. Phys. Rev. D **95**, 115008 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.95.115008. arXiv:1703.05330. [Erratum: Phys. Rev. D **97**, 059902 (2018)]

220. Z. Ligeti, F.J. Tackmann, Precise predictions for B → $X_c\tau\bar{\nu}$ decay distributions. Phys. Rev. D **90**, 034021 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.90.034021. arXiv:1406.7013

221. Z. Ligeti, M. Luke, F.J. Tackmann, Theoretical predictions for inclusive B → $X_u\tau\bar{\nu}$ decay. Phys. Rev. D **105**, 073009 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.105.073009. arXiv:2112.07685

222. Y. Amhis et al., Prospects for $B_c^+ \to \tau^+\nu_\tau$ at FCC-ee. JHEP **12**, 133 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2021)133. arXiv:2105.13330

223. T. Zheng et al., Analysis of $B_c \to \tau\bar{\nu}_\tau$ at CEPC. Chin. Phys. C **45**, 023001 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/abcf1f. arXiv:2007.08234

224. J. Aebischer et al., Confronting the vector leptoquark hypothesis with new low- and high-energy data. Eur. Phys. J. C **83**, 153 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11304-5. arXiv:2210.13422

225. J. Fuentes-Martín, G. Isidori, J. Pagès, K. Yamamoto, With or without U(2)? Probing non-standard flavor and helicity structures in semileptonic B decays. Phys. Lett. B **800**, 135080 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2019.135080. arXiv:1909.02519

226. X. Zuo et al., Prospects for $B_c$ and $B^+ \to \tau^+\nu_\tau$ at FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. C **84**, 87 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12418-0. arXiv:2305.02998

227. Belle-II Collaboration, The Belle II Physics Book. PTEP **2019**, 23C01 (2019). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ptep/ptz106. arXiv:1808.10567. [Erratum: PTEP **2020**, 029201 (2020)]

228. Y. Amhis, M. Kenzie, M. Reboud, A.R. Wiederhold, Prospects for searches of $b \to s\nu\bar{\nu}$ decays at FCC-ee. JHEP **01**, 144 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2024)144. arXiv:2309.11353

229. R. Bause, H. Gisbert, M. Golz, G. Hiller, Interplay of dineutrino modes with semileptonic rare B-decays. JHEP **12**, 061 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2021)061. arXiv:2109.01675

230. Belle-II Collaboration, Evidence for $B^+ \to K^+\nu\bar{\nu}$ decays. Phys. Rev. D **109**, 112006 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.112006. arXiv:2311.14647

231. P.D. Bolton, S. Fajfer, J.F. Kamenik, M. Novoa-Brunet, Signatures of light new particles in B → $K^{(*)}E_{miss}$. Phys. Rev. D **110**, 055001 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.110.055001. arXiv:2403.13887

232. M. Artuso, B. Meadows, A.A. Petrov, Charm meson decays. Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. **58**, 249 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.nucl.58.110707.171131. arXiv:0802.2934

233. R. Bause, H. Gisbert, M. Golz, G. Hiller, Lepton universality and lepton flavor conservation tests with dineutrino modes. Eur. Phys. J. C **82**, 164 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10113-6. arXiv:2007.05001

234. R. Bause, H. Gisbert, M. Golz, G. Hiller, Rare charm c → $u\bar{\nu}\bar{\nu}$ dineutrino null tests for $e^+e^-$ machines. Phys. Rev. D **103**, 015033 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.103.015033. arXiv:2010.02225

235. S. Fajfer, J.F. Kamenik, A. Korajac, N. Košnik, Correlating new physics effects in semileptonic $\Delta C = 1$ and $\Delta S = 1$ processes. JHEP **07**, 029 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2023)029. arXiv:2305.13851

236. J.F. Kamenik, C. Smith, FCNC portals to the dark sector. JHEP **03**, 090 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2012)090. arXiv:1111.6402

237. G. Li, J. Tandean, FCNC charmed-hadron decays with invisible singlet particles in light of recent data. JHEP **11**, 205 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2023)205. arXiv:2306.05333

238. BES III Collaboration, Search for the decay $D^0 \to \pi^0\nu\bar{\nu}$. Phys. Rev. D **105**, L071102 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.105. L071102. arXiv:2112.14236

239. L. Collaboration, LHCb Collaboration, Observation of CP violation in charm decays. Phys. Rev. Lett. **122**, 211803 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.211803. arXiv:1903.08726

240. M. Chala, A. Lenz, A.V. Rusov, J. Scholtz, $\Delta A_{CP}$ within the Standard Model and beyond. JHEP **07**, 161 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2019)161. arXiv:1903.10490

241. A. Dery, Y. Nir, Implications of the LHCb discovery of CP violation in charm decays. JHEP **12**, 104 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2019)104. arXiv:1909.11242

242. Y. Grossman, A.L. Kagan, J. Zupan, Testing for new physics in singly Cabibbo suppressed D decays. Phys. Rev. D **85**, 114036 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.85.114036. arXiv:1204.3557

243. M. Gavrilova, Y. Grossman, S. Schacht, Determination of the $D \to \pi\pi$ ratio of penguin over tree diagrams. Phys. Rev. D **109**, 033011 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.033011. arXiv:2312.10140

244. Y. Grossman, S. Schacht, The emergence of the $\Delta U = 0$ rule in charm physics. JHEP **07**, 020 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2019)020. arXiv:1903.10952

245. R. Bause et al., U-spin-CP anomaly in charm. Phys. Rev. D **108**, 035005 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.108.035005. arXiv:2210.16330

246. G. Isidori, J.F. Kamenik, Shedding light on CP violation in the charm system via D to V gamma decays. Phys. Rev. Lett. **109**, 171801 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.171801. arXiv:1205.3164

247. H. Gisbert, M. Golz, D.S. Mitzel, Theoretical and experimental status of rare charm decays. Mod. Phys. Lett. A **36**, 2130002 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217732321300020. arXiv:2011.09478

248. N. Adolph, G. Hiller, Rare radiative decays of charm baryons. Phys. Rev. D **105**, 116001 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.105.116001. arXiv:2203.14982

249. G. Burdman, E. Golowich, J.L. Hewett, S. Pakvasa, Rare charm decays in the standard model and beyond. Phys. Rev. D **66**, 014009 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.66.014009. arXiv:hep-ph/0112235
250. S. Fajfer et al., New physics in CP violating and flavour changing quark dipole transitions. JHEP 10, 133 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2023)133. arXiv:2306.16471

251. A. Glioti, R. Rattazzi, L. Ricci, L. Vecchi, Exploring the flavor symmetry landscape. SciPost Phys. 18, 201 (2025). https://doi.org/10.21468/SciPostPhys.18.6.201. arXiv:2402.09503

252. M. Benzke, S.J. Lee, M. Neubert, G. Paz, Long-distance dominance of the CP asymmetry in $B \to X_s d + \gamma$ decays. Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 141801 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.141801. arXiv:1012.3167

253. A. Paul, D.M. Straub, Constraints on new physics from radiative B decays. JHEP 04, 027 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2017)027. arXiv:1608.02556

254. S. Monteil, The FCC-ee project with a focus on the EW precision and Flavour Physics opportunities. Presented at LPC Clermont (2024). https://indico.in2p3.fr/event/32284/

255. A. Gunawardana, G. Paz, Reevaluating uncertainties in $\bar{B} \to X_s \gamma$ decay. JHEP 11, 141 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2019)141. arXiv:1908.02812

256. M. Misiak, A. Rehman, M. Steinhauser, Towards $\bar{B} \to X_s \gamma$ at the NNLO in QCD without interpolation in $m_c$. JHEP 06, 175 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2020)175. arXiv:2002.01548

257. A.J. Buras, R. Fleischer, J. Girrbach, R. Knegjens, Probing new physics with the $B_s \to \mu^+\mu^-$ time-dependent rate. JHEP 07, 077 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2013)077. arXiv:1303.3820

258. R. Fleischer, D.G. Espinosa, R. Jaarsma, G. Tettlalmatzi-Xolocotzi, CP violation in leptonic rare $B_s^0$ decays as a probe of new physics. Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 1 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5488-z. arXiv:1709.04735

259. S. Descotes-Genon, M. Novoa-Brunet, K.K. Vos, The time-dependent angular analysis of $B_d \to K_S \ell \ell$, a new benchmark for new physics. JHEP 02, 129 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2021)129. arXiv:2008.08000

260. R. Fleischer, E. Malami, A. Rehult, K.K. Vos, Fingerprinting CP-violating new physics with $B \to K \mu^+ \mu^-$. JHEP 03, 113 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2023)113. arXiv:2212.09575

261. T.H. Kwok et al., FCC note: time-dependent precision measurement of $B_s^0 \to \phi \mu^+ \mu^-$ decay at FCC-ee (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/h0stw-kza37

262. S. Descotes-Genon, S. Fajfer, J.F. Kamenik, M. Novoa-Brunet, Probing CP violation in exclusive $b \to sv\bar{v}$ transitions. Phys. Rev. D 107, 013005 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.107.013005. arXiv:2208.10880

263. D. d'Enterria, V.D. Le, Rare and exclusive few-body decays of the Higgs, Z, W bosons, and the top quark. J. Phys. G 52, 053001 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6471/ad3c59. arXiv:2312.11211

264. M.-H. Schune, Bottom physics at FCC-ee, in Presented at the Third FCC Physics and Experiments Workshop (2020). https://indico.cern.ch/event/838435/

265. U. Einhaus, Ongoing analysis on CKM matrix from W decays & overview of flavour taggers. Presented at the Two-days meeting of the Flavour subWG (of ECFA WG1) (2024). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1401678/

266. G. Durieux et al., Rare Z decays and neutrino flavor universality. Phys. Rev. D 93, 093005 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.93.093005. arXiv:1512.03071

267. A. Abada et al., Indirect searches for sterile neutrinos at a high-luminosity Z-factory. JHEP 04, 051 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2015)051. arXiv:1412.6322

268. Q. Qin et al., Charged lepton flavor violating Higgs decays at future $e^+e^-$ colliders. Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 835 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-6298-7. arXiv:1711.07243

269. A. Crivellin, M. Kirk, T. Kitahara, F. Mescia, Global fit of modified quark couplings to EW gauge bosons and vector-like quarks in light of the Cabibbo angle anomaly. JHEP 03, 234 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2023)234. arXiv:2212.06862

270. R. Aleksan, L. Oliver, Remarks on the penguin decay $B_s \to \phi\phi$ with prospects for FCC-ee. arXiv:2205.07823

271. M. Gerlach, U. Nierste, V. Shtabovenko, M. Steinhauser, Width difference in the $B-\bar{B}$ system at next-to-next-to-leading order of QCD. Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 102001 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.102001. arXiv:2205.07907

272. A. Lenz, G. Tettlalmatzi-Xolocotzi, Model-independent bounds on new physics effects in non-leptonic tree-level decays of B-mesons. JHEP 07, 177 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2020)177. arXiv:1912.07621

273. J. Charles et al., New physics in B meson mixing: future sensitivity and limitations. Phys. Rev. D 102, 056023 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.102.056023. arXiv:2006.04824

274. J. Brod, J. Zupan, The ultimate theoretical error on $\gamma$ from $B \to DK$ decays. JHEP 01, 051 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2014)051. arXiv:1308.5663

275. R. Aleksan, L. Oliver, E. Perez, Study of CP violation in $B^\pm$ decays to $\bar{D}^0(D^0)K^\pm$ at FCC-ee. arXiv:2107.05311

276. R. Aleksan, L. Oliver, E. Perez, CP violation and determination of the $b\bar{b}$ flat unitarity triangle at an FCC-ee. Phys. Rev. D 105, 053008 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.105.053008. arXiv:2107.02002

277. R. Aleksan, L. Oliver, E. Perez, Measuring the angle $\alpha_{ds}$ of the flattest Unitary Triangle with $\bar{B}_d \to \phi \bar{K}^{(*)0}$, $\bar{B}_s \to \phi K^{(*)0}$ decays. arXiv:2402.09987

278. M. Artuso, G. Borissov, A. Lenz, CP violation in the $B_s^0$ system. Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 045002 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.88.045002. arXiv:1511.09466. [Addendum: Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 049901 (2019)]

279. T. Jubb, M. Kirk, A. Lenz, G. Tettlalmatzi-Xolocotzi, On the ultimate precision of meson mixing observables. Nucl. Phys. B 915, 431 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2016.12.020. arXiv:1603.07770

280. A. Lenz, M.L. Piscopo, C. Vlahos, Renormalization scale setting for D-meson mixing. Phys. Rev. D 102, 093002 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.102.093002. arXiv:2007.03022

281. F. Garosi, D. Marzocca, A.R. Sánchez, A. Stanzione, Indirect constraints on top quark operators from a global SMEFT analysis. JHEP 12, 129 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2023)129. arXiv:2310.00047

282. C. Grunwald, G. Hiller, K. Kröninger, L. Nollen, More synergies from beauty, top, Z and Drell-Yan measurements in SMEFT. JHEP 11, 110 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2023)110. arXiv:2304.12837
283. L. Allwicher, G. Isidori, M. Pesut, Flavored circular collider: cornering New Physics at FCC-ee via flavor-changing processes. Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 631 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-14359-8. arXiv:2503.17019

284. K.M. Black et al., Muon Collider forum report. arXiv:2209.01318

285. Muon Collider Collaboration, The physics case of a 3 TeV muon collider stage. arXiv:2203.07261 (Contribution to Snowmass 2021)

286. J. de Blas et al., Physics Briefing Book: Input for the 2026 update of the European Strategy for Particle Physics. https://doi.org/10.17181/CERN.35CH.202P. arXiv:2511.03883

287. H. AlAli et al., The muon Smasher's guide. Rep. Prog. Phys. 85, 084201 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6633/ac6678. arXiv:2103.14043

288. T. Golling et al., Physics at a 100 TeV pp collider: beyond the Standard Model phenomena, CERN Yellow Reports: Monographs, CERN-2017-003 (2016). https://doi.org/10.23731/CYRM-2017-003.441. arXiv:1606.00947

289. M. Saito, R. Sawada, K. Terashi, S. Asai, Discovery reach for wino and higgsino dark matter with a disappearing track signature at a 100 TeV pp collider. Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 469 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-6974-2. arXiv:1901.02987

290. G. Salam, A. Weiler, Collider Reach (2014). http://gsalam-alma9-collreach.cern.ch/

291. FASER Collaboration, Technical Proposal: FASERnu. arXiv:2001.03073

292. FASER Collaboration, The FASER detector. JINST 19, P05066 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/19/05/P05066. arXiv:2207.11427

293. FASER Collaboration, Search for dark photons with the FASER detector at the LHC. Phys. Lett. B 848, 138378 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2023.138378. arXiv:2308.05587

294. FASER Collaboration, First measurement of $\nu_e$ and $\nu_\mu$ interaction cross sections at the LHC with FASER's emulsion detector. Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 021802 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.133.021802. arXiv:2403.12520

295. SND@LHC Collaboration, SND@LHC: The scattering and neutrino detector at the LHC. arXiv:2210.02784

296. SND@LHC Collaboration, Observation of collider muon neutrinos with the SND@LHC experiment. Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 031802 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.031802. arXiv:2305.09383

297. J.L. Feng et al., The forward physics facility at the high-luminosity LHC. J. Phys. G 50, 030501 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6471/ac865e. arXiv:2203.05090

298. L.A. Anchordoqui et al., The forward physics facility: sites, experiments, and physics potential. Phys. Rep. 968, 1 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2022.04.004. arXiv:2109.10905

299. R. Mammen Abraham et al., FPF@FCC: neutrino, QCD, and BSM physics opportunities with far-forward experiments at a 100 TeV proton collider. JHEP 01, 094 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2025)094. arXiv:2409.02163

300. C. Giunti, A. Studenikin, Neutrino electromagnetic interactions: a window to new physics. Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 531 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.87.531. arXiv:1403.6344

301. A. Ismail, R. Mammen Abraham, F. Kling, Neutral current neutrino interactions at FASERν. Phys. Rev. D 103, 056014 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.103.056014. arXiv:2012.10500

302. R. Mammen Abraham, S. Foroughi-Abari, F. Kling, Y.-D. Tsai, Neutrino electromagnetic properties and the weak mixing angle at the LHC Forward Physics Facility. Phys. Rev. D 111, 015029 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.111.015029. arXiv:2301.10254

303. S. Ferrario Ravasio et al., An event generator for neutrino-induced deep inelastic scattering and applications to neutrino astronomy. Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 888 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-14539-6. arXiv:2407.03894

304. L. Buonocore, G. Limatola, P. Nason, F. Tramontano, An event generator for Lepton-Hadron Deep Inelastic Scattering at NLO+PS with POWHEG including mass effects. arXiv:2406.05115

305. M. van Beekveld et al., A phenomenological analysis of LHC neutrino scattering at NLO accuracy matched to parton showers. Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 1175 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13386-1. arXiv:2407.09611

306. F. Kling, S. Trojanowski, Forward experiment sensitivity estimator for the LHC and future hadron colliders. Phys. Rev. D 104, 035012 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.035012. arXiv:2105.07077

307. B. Batell, M. Low, E.T. Neil, C.B. Verhaaren, Review of Neutral Naturalness. arXiv:2203.05531 (Contribution to Snowmass 2021)

308. J. Li, J. Pei, L. Ran, W. Zhang, The quirk signal at FASER and FASER 2. JHEP 12, 109 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2021)109. arXiv:2108.06748

309. J. Li, X. Liao, J. Ni, J. Pei, Detection prospects of long-lived quirk pairs at the LHC far detectors. Phys. Rev. D 109, 095005 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.095005. arXiv:2311.15486

310. J.L. Feng et al., Discovering quirks through timing at FASER and future forward experiments at the LHC. JHEP 06, 197 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2024)197. arXiv:2404.13814

311. J.M. Cruz-Martinez et al., The LHC as a neutrino-ion collider. Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 369 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12665-1. arXiv:2309.09581

312. A. Candido et al., Neutrino structure functions from GeV to EeV energies. JHEP 05, 149 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2023)149. arXiv:2302.08527

313. S. Forte, M.L. Mangano, G. Ridolfi, Polarized parton distributions from charged current deep inelastic scattering and future neutrino factories. Nucl. Phys. B 602, 585 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0550-3213(01)00101-8. arXiv:hep-ph/0101192

314. M.L. Mangano et al., Physics at the front end of a neutrino factory: a quantitative appraisal. https://doi.org/10.5170/CERN-2004-002.185. arXiv:hep-ph/0105155 (Report of the nuDIS Working Group for the ECFA-CERN Neutrino-Factory study)

315. NNPDF Collaboration, A first unbiased global determination of polarized PDFs and their uncertainties. Nucl. Phys. B 887, 276 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2014.08.008. arXiv:1406.5539

316. I. Borsa et al., Next-to-next-to-leading order global analysis of polarized parton distribution functions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 151901 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.133.151901. arXiv:2407.11635

317. R. Abdul Khalek et al., Science requirements and detector concepts for the electron-ion collider: EIC yellow report. Nucl. Phys. A 1026, 122447 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2022.122447. arXiv:2103.05419

318. M. Klasen, H. Paukkunen, Nuclear PDFs after the first decade of LHC data. Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 74, 49 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-nucl-102122-022747. arXiv:2311.00450

319. K.J. Eskola, P. Paakkinen, H. Paukkunen, C.A. Salgado, EPPS21: a global QCD analysis of nuclear PDFs. Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 413 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10359-0. arXiv:2112.12462
320. R. Abdul Khalek et al., nNNPDF3.0: evidence for a modified partonic structure in heavy nuclei. Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 507 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10417-7. arXiv:2201.12363

321. Precision calculations for future $e^{+}e^{-}$ colliders: targets and tools. CERN Workshop, 7–17 June 2022 (2022). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1140580/

322. M. Fael, K. Schönwald, M. Steinhauser, Third order corrections to the semileptonic b→c and the muon decays. Phys. Rev. D 104, 016003 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.016003. arXiv:2011.13654

323. M. Czakon, A. Czarnecki, M. Dowling, Three-loop corrections to the muon and heavy quark decay rates. Phys. Rev. D 103, L111301 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.103.L111301. arXiv:2104.05804

324. J. de Blas et al., Focus topics for the ECFA study on Higgs/Top/EW factories. arXiv:2401.07564

325. S. Jadach et al., The path to 0.01% theoretical luminosity precision for the FCC-ee. Phys. Lett. B 790, 314 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2019.01.012. arXiv:1812.01004

326. Q. Song, A. Freitas, On the evaluation of two-loop electroweak box diagrams for $e^{+}e^{-} \to$ HZ production. JHEP 04, 179 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2021)179. arXiv:2101.00308

327. A. Freitas, Q. Song, Two-loop electroweak corrections with fermion loops to $e^{+}e^{-} \to$ ZH. Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 031801 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.031801. arXiv:2209.07612

328. I. Dubovyk et al., Evaluation of multiloop multiscale Feynman integrals for precision physics. Phys. Rev. D 106, L111301 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.106.L111301. arXiv:2201.02576

329. X. Liu, Y.-Q. Ma, Multiloop corrections for collider processes using auxiliary mass flow. Phys. Rev. D 105, L051503 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.105.L051503. arXiv:2107.01864

330. Z.-F. Liu, Y.-Q. Ma, Determining Feynman integrals with only input from linear algebra. Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 222001 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.222001. arXiv:2201.11637

331. X. Liu, Y.-Q. Ma, AMFlow: a mathematica package for Feynman integrals computation via auxiliary mass flow. Comput. Phys. Commun. 283, 108565 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2022.108565. arXiv:2201.11669

332. M. Hidding, J. Usovitsch, Feynman parameter integration through differential equations. Phys. Rev. D 108, 036024 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.108.036024. arXiv:2206.14790

333. T. Armadillo et al., Evaluation of Feynman integrals with arbitrary complex masses via series expansions. Comput. Phys. Commun. 282, 108545 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2022.108545. arXiv:2205.03345

334. X. Chen et al., Complete two-loop electroweak corrections to $e^{+}e^{-} \to$ HZ. arXiv:2209.14953

335. A.V. Kotikov, Differential equations method: new technique for massive Feynman diagrams calculation. Phys. Lett. B 254, 158 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(91)90413-K

336. A.V. Kotikov, Differential equations method: the calculation of vertex type Feynman diagrams. Phys. Lett. B 259, 314 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(91)90834-D

337. A.V. Kotikov, Differential equation method: the calculation of N point Feynman diagrams. Phys. Lett. B 267, 123 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(91)90536-Y. [Erratum: Phys. Lett. B 295, 409 (1992)]

338. E. Remiddi, Differential equations for Feynman graph amplitudes. Nuovo Cim. A 110, 1435 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03185566. arXiv:hep-th/9711188

339. J.M. Henn, Multiloop integrals in dimensional regularization made simple. Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 251601 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.251601. arXiv:1304.1806

340. J. Klappert, F. Lange, P. Maierhöfer, J. Usovitsch, Integral reduction with Kira 2.0 and finite field methods. Comput. Phys. Commun. 266, 108024 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2021.108024. arXiv:2008.06494

341. V. Chestnov et al., Macaulay matrix for Feynman integrals: linear relations and intersection numbers. JHEP 09, 187 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2022)187. arXiv:2204.12983

342. G. Fontana, T. Peraro, Reduction to master integrals via intersection numbers and polynomial expansions. JHEP 08, 175 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2023)175. arXiv:2304.14336

343. J.L. Bourjaily et al., Functions beyond multiple polylogarithms for precision collider physics. arXiv:2203.07088 (Contribution to Snowmass 2021)

344. S. Pögel, X. Wang, S. Weinzierl, Taming Calabi–Yau Feynman integrals: the four-loop equal-mass banana integral. Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 101601 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.101601. arXiv:2211.04292

345. P.F. Monni, G. Zanderighi, QCD at the FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 136, 1162 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02105-4

346. Parton showers for future $e^{+}e^{-}$ colliders. CERN Workshop, 24–28 April 2023. https://indico.cern.ch/event/1233329/, (2023)

347. M. Dasgupta, G.P. Salam, Event shapes in $e^{+}e^{-}$ annihilation and deep inelastic scattering. J. Phys. G 30, R143 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/30/5/R01. arXiv:hep-ph/0312283

348. S. Marzani, G. Soyez, M. Spannowsky, Looking Inside Jets: An Introduction to Jet Substructure and Boosted-object Phenomenology, Lecture Notes in Physics, vol. 958. Springer (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15709-8

349. A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, T. Gehrmann, E.W.N. Glover, G. Heinrich, NNLO corrections to event shapes in $e^{+}e^{-}$ annihilation. JHEP 12, 094 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2007/12/094. arXiv:0711.4711

350. A. Gehrmann-De Ridder, T. Gehrmann, E.W.N. Glover, G. Heinrich, Jet rates in electron-positron annihilation at $O(\alpha_s^3)$ in QCD. Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 172001 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.172001. arXiv:0802.0813

351. S. Weinzierl, NNLO corrections to 3-jet observables in electron-positron annihilation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 162001 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.162001. arXiv:0807.3241

352. S. Weinzierl, Event shapes and jet rates in electron-positron annihilation at NNLO. JHEP 06, 041 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2009/06/041. arXiv:0904.1077

353. V. Del Duca et al., Jet production in the CoLoRFuNNLO method: event shapes in electron-positron collisions. Phys. Rev. D 94, 074019 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.94.074019. arXiv:1606.03453

354. S.G. Gorishnii, A.L. Kataev, S.A. Larin, The $O(\alpha_s^3)$-corrections to $\sigma_{tot}(e^+e^- \to$ hadrons) and $\Gamma(\tau^- \to \nu_\tau + \text{hadrons})$ in QCD. Phys. Lett. B 259, 144 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(91)90149-K
355. W. Bernreuther, A. Brandenburg, P. Uwer, Next-to-leading order QCD corrections to three jet cross-sections with massive quarks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 189 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.79.189. arXiv:hep-ph/9703305

356. P. Nason, C. Oleari, Next-to-leading order corrections to momentum correlations in $Z \to b\bar{b}$. Phys. Lett. B 407, 57 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0370-2693(97)00721-1. arXiv:hep-ph/9705295

357. P. Nason, C. Oleari, Next-to-leading order corrections to the production of heavy flavor jets in $e^{+}e^{-}$ collisions. Nucl. Phys. B 521, 237 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0550-3213(98)00125-4. arXiv:hep-ph/9709360

358. K.G. Chetyrkin, R.V. Harlander, J.H. Kuhn, Quartic mass corrections to $R_{had}$ at $O(\alpha_s^3)$. Nucl. Phys. B 586, 56 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0550-3213(00)00393-X. arXiv:hep-ph/0005139. [Erratum: Nucl. Phys. B 634, 413 (2002)]

359. R. Frederix, S. Frixione, K. Melnikov, G. Zanderighi, NLO QCD corrections to five-jet production at LEP and the extraction of $\alpha_s(M_Z)$. JHEP 11, 050 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2010)050. arXiv:1008.5313

360. S. Becker et al., NLO results for five, six and seven jets in electron-positron annihilation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 032005 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.032005. arXiv:1111.1733

361. H.B. Hartanto, S. Badger, C. Brønnum-Hansen, T. Peraro, A numerical evaluation of planar two-loop helicity amplitudes for a W-boson plus four partons. JHEP 09, 119 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2019)119. arXiv:1906.11862

362. S. Badger, H.B. Hartanto, S. Zoia, Two-loop QCD corrections to $W\bar{b}$ production at hadron colliders. Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 012001 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.012001. arXiv:2102.02516

363. S. Abreu et al., Leading-color two-loop amplitudes for four partons and a W boson in QCD. JHEP 04, 042 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2022)042. arXiv:2110.07541

364. I. Bierenbaum, S. Catani, P. Draggiotis, G. Rodrigo, A tree-loop duality relation at two loops and beyond. JHEP 10, 073 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2010)073. arXiv:1007.0194

365. S. Badger, H. Frellesvig, Y. Zhang, A two-loop five-gluon helicity amplitude in QCD. JHEP 12, 045 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2013)045. arXiv:1310.1051

366. A. von Manteuffel, R.M. Schabinger, A novel approach to integration by parts reduction. Phys. Lett. B 744, 101 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2015.03.029. arXiv:1406.4513

367. H. Ita, Two-loop integrand decomposition into master integrals and surface terms. Phys. Rev. D 94, 116015 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.94.116015. arXiv:1510.05626

368. S. Buchta, G. Chachamis, P. Draggiotis, G. Rodrigo, Numerical implementation of the loop-tree duality method. Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 274 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-4833-6. arXiv:1510.00187

369. T. Peraro, Scattering amplitudes over finite fields and multivariate functional reconstruction. JHEP 12, 030 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2016)030. arXiv:1608.01902

370. X. Liu, Y.-Q. Ma, C.-Y. Wang, A systematic and efficient method to compute multi-loop master integrals. Phys. Lett. B 779, 353 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2018.02.026. arXiv:1711.09572

371. S. Abreu et al., Two-loop four-gluon amplitudes from numerical unitarity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 142001 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.142001. arXiv:1703.05273

372. Z. Capatti, V. Hirschi, D. Kermanschah, B. Ruijl, Loop-tree duality for multiloop numerical integration. Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 151602 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.151602. arXiv:1906.06138

373. Z. Capatti, V. Hirschi, A. Pelloni, B. Ruijl, Local Unitarity: a representation of differential cross-sections that is locally free of infrared singularities at any order. JHEP 04, 104 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2021)104. arXiv:2010.01068

374. W.J.T. Bobadilla, Lotty—the loop-tree duality automation. Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 514 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09235-0. arXiv:2103.09237

375. G. Heinrich, Collider physics at the precision frontier. Phys. Rep. 922, 1 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2021.03.006. arXiv:2009.00516

376. T. Becher, M.D. Schwartz, A precise determination of $\alpha_s$ from LEP thrust data using effective field theory. JHEP 07, 034 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2008/07/034. arXiv:0803.0342

377. R. Abbate et al., Thrust at $N^3LL$ with power corrections and a precision global fit for $\alpha_s(m_Z)$. Phys. Rev. D 83, 074021 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.83.074021. arXiv:1006.3080

378. Y.-T. Chien, M.D. Schwartz, Resummation of heavy jet mass and comparison to LEP data. JHEP 08, 058 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2010)058. arXiv:1005.1644

379. P.F. Monni, T. Gehrmann, G. Lui soni, Two-loop soft corrections and resummation of the thrust distribution in the dijet region. JHEP 08, 010 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2011)010. arXiv:1105.4560

380. T. Becher, G. Bell, NNLL resummation for jet broadening. JHEP 11, 126 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2012)126. arXiv:1210.0580

381. V. Mateu, G. Rodrigo, Oriented event shapes at $N^3LL + O(\alpha_s^2)$. JHEP 11, 030 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2013)030. arXiv:1307.3513

382. A.H. Hoang, D.W. Kolodrubetz, V. Mateu, I.W. Stewart, C-parameter distribution at $N^3LL'$ including power corrections. Phys. Rev. D 91, 094017 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.91.094017. arXiv:1411.6633

383. D. de Florian, M. Grazzini, The back-to-back region in $e^{+}e^{-}$ energy-energy correlation. Nucl. Phys. B 704, 387 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2004.10.051. arXiv:hep-ph/0407241

384. A. Banfi, H. McAslan, P.F. Monni, G. Zanderighi, A general method for the resummation of event-shape distributions in $e^{+}e^{-}$ annihilation. JHEP 05, 102 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2015)102. arXiv:1412.2126

385. A. Banfi, H. McAslan, P.F. Monni, G. Zanderighi, The two-jet rate in $e^{+}e^{-}$ at next-to-next-to-leading-logarithmic order. Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 172001 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.172001. arXiv:1607.03111

386. Z. Tulipánt, A. Kardos, G. Somogyi, Energy-energy correlation in electron-positron annihilation at NNLL + NNLO accuracy. Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 749 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5320-9. arXiv:1708.04093

387. I. Moult, H.X. Zhu, Simplicity from recoil: the three-loop soft function and factorization for the energy-energy correlation. JHEP 08, 160 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2018)160. arXiv:1801.02627
388. A. Banfi, B.K. El-Menoufi, P.F. Monni, The Sudakov radiator for jet observables and the soft physical coupling. JHEP 01, 083 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2019)083. arXiv:1807.11487

389. G. Bell, A. Hornig, C. Lee, J. Talbert, $e^{+}e^{-}$ angularity distributions at NNLL' accuracy. JHEP 01, 147 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2019)147. arXiv:1808.07867

390. M. Procura, W.J. Waalewijn, L. Zeune, Joint resummation of two angularities at next-to-next-to-leading logarithmic order. JHEP 10, 098 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2018)098. arXiv:1806.10622

391. M.A. Ebert, B. Mistlberger, G. Vita, The energy-energy correlation in the back-to-back limit at N$^3$LO and N$^3$LL'. JHEP 08, 022 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2021)022. arXiv:2012.07859

392. A. Bris, V. Mateu, M. Preisser, Massive event-shape distributions at N$^2$LL. JHEP 09, 132 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2020)132. arXiv:2006.06383

393. I. Moult, H.X. Zhu, Y.J. Zhu, The four loop QCD rapidity anomalous dimension. JHEP 08, 280 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2022)280. arXiv:2205.02249

394. C. Duhr, B. Mistlberger, G. Vita, Four-loop rapidity anomalous dimension and event shapes to fourth logarithmic order. Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 162001 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.162001. arXiv:2205.02242

395. S. Catani et al., New clustering algorithm for multi-jet cross-sections in $e^{+}e^{-}$ annihilation. Phys. Lett. B 269, 432 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(91)90196-W

396. A.J. Larkoski, A. Procita, New insights on an old problem: resummation of the D-parameter. JHEP 02, 104 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2019)104. arXiv:1810.06563

397. H. Chen et al., Three point energy correlators in the collinear limit: symmetries, dualities and analytic results. JHEP 08, 028 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2020)028. arXiv:1912.11050

398. L. Arpino, A. Banfi, B.K. El-Menoufi, Near-to-planar three-jet events at NNLL accuracy. JHEP 07, 171 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2020)171. arXiv:1912.09341

399. M. Dasgupta, G.P. Salam, Resummation of nonglobal QCD observables. Phys. Lett. B 512, 323 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0370-2693(01)00725-0. arXiv:hep-ph/0104277

400. A. Banfi, G. Marchesini, G. Smye, Away from jet energy flow. JHEP 08, 006 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2002/08/006. arXiv:hep-ph/0206076

401. A. Banfi, F.A. Dreyer, P.F. Monni, Next-to-leading non-global logarithms in QCD. JHEP 10, 006 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2021)006. arXiv:2104.06416

402. A. Banfi, F.A. Dreyer, P.F. Monni, Higher-order non-global logarithms from jet calculus. JHEP 03, 135 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2022)135. arXiv:2111.02413

403. S. Ferrario Ravasio et al., Parton showering with higher logarithmic accuracy for soft emissions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 161906 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.161906. arXiv:2307.11142

404. T. Becher, N. Schalch, X. Xu, Resummation of next-to-leading non-global logarithms at the LHC. Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 081602 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.081602

405. M. Dasgupta, G.P. Salam, Accounting for coherence in interjet $E_t$ flow: a case study. JHEP 03, 017 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2002/03/017. arXiv:hep-ph/0203009

406. H. Weigert, Nonglobal jet evolution at finite $N_c$. Nucl. Phys. B 685, 321 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2004.03.002. arXiv:hep-ph/0312050

407. Y. Hatta, T. Ueda, Resummation of non-global logarithms at finite $N_c$. Nucl. Phys. B 874, 808 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2013.06.021. arXiv:1304.6930

408. T. Becher, M. Neubert, L. Rothen, D.Y. Shao, Effective field theory for jet processes. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 192001 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.192001. arXiv:1508.06645

409. A.J. Larkoski, I. Moult, D. Neill, Non-global logarithms, factorization, and the soft substructure of jets. JHEP 09, 143 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2015)143. arXiv:1501.04596

410. T. Becher, M. Neubert, L. Rothen, D.Y. Shao, Factorization and resummation for jet processes. JHEP 11, 019 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2016)019. arXiv:1605.02737. [Erratum: JHEP 05, 154 (2017)]

411. M. Balsiger, T. Becher, D.Y. Shao, NLL' resummation of jet mass. JHEP 04, 020 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2019)020. arXiv:1901.09038

412. C. Frye, A.J. Larkoski, M.D. Schwartz, K. Yan, Precision physics with pile-up insensitive observables. arXiv:1603.06375

413. J. Baron, S. Marzani, V. Theeuwes, Soft-drop thrust. JHEP 08, 105 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2018)105. arXiv:1803.04719. [Erratum: JHEP 05, 056 (2019)]

414. A. Kardos, A.J. Larkoski, Z. Trócsányi, Groomed jet mass at high precision. Phys. Lett. B 809, 135704 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2020.135704. arXiv:2002.00942

415. M. Dasgupta, B.K. El-Menoufi, J. Helliwell, QCD resummation for groomed jet observables at NNLL+NLO. JHEP 01, 045 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2023)045. arXiv:2211.03820

416. A. Jain, M. Procura, W.J. Waalewijn, Parton fragmentation within an identified jet at NNLL. JHEP 05, 035 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2011)035. arXiv:1101.4953

417. H. Chen, I. Moult, H.X. Zhu, Quantum interference in jet substructure from spinning gluons. Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 112003 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.112003. arXiv:2011.02492

418. D. Neill, F. Ringer, Soft fragmentation on the celestial sphere. JHEP 06, 086 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2020)086. arXiv:2003.02275

419. A. Karlberg, G.P. Salam, L. Scyboz, R. Verheyen, Spin correlations in final-state parton showers and jet observables. Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 681 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09378-0. arXiv:2103.16526

420. H. Chen et al., Collinear parton dynamics beyond Dokshitzer–Gribov–Lipatov–Altarelli–Parisì framework. Phys. Rev. D 111, 076021 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.111.076021. arXiv:2210.10061
421. W. Chen et al., NNLL resummation for projected three-point energy correlator. JHEP 05, 043 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2024)043. arXiv:2307.07510

422. M. van Beekveld et al., Collinear fragmentation at NNLL: generating functionals, groomed correlators and angularities. JHEP 05, 093 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2024)093. arXiv:2307.15734

423. Flavour Lattice Averaging Group, FLAG review 2021. Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 869 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10536-1. arXiv:2111.09849

424. M. Dalla Brida, A. Ramos, The gradient flow coupling at high-energy and the scale of SU(3) Yang-Mills theory. Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 720 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7228-z. arXiv:1905.05147

425. L. Del Debbio, A. Ramos, Lattice determinations of the strong coupling. Phys. Rep. 920, 1 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2021.03.005. arXiv:2101.04762

426. Y.L. Dokshitzer, G. Marchesini, B.R. Webber, Dispersive approach to power behaved contributions in QCD hard processes. Nucl. Phys. B 469, 93 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(96)00155-1. arXiv:hep-ph/9512336

427. D. d'Enterria, V. Jacobsen, Improved strong coupling determinations from hadronic decays of electroweak bosons at N³LO accuracy. arXiv:2005.04545

428. P.A. Baikov, K.G. Chetyrkin, J.H. Kuhn, Order $\alpha_s^4$ QCD corrections to Z and $\tau$ decays. Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 012002 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.012002. arXiv:0801.1821

429. P.A. Baikov, K.G. Chetyrkin, J.H. Kuhn, J. Rittinger, Complete $O(\alpha_s^4)$ QCD corrections to hadronic Z decays. Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 222003 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.222003. arXiv:1201.5804

430. F. Herzog et al., On Higgs decays to hadrons and the R-ratio at N⁴LO. JHEP 08, 113 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2017)113. arXiv:1707.01044

431. I. Dubovyk et al., Complete electroweak two-loop corrections to Z boson production and decay. Phys. Lett. B 783, 86 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2018.06.037. arXiv:1804.10236

432. I. Dubovyk et al., Electroweak pseudo-observables and Z-boson form factors at two-loop accuracy. JHEP 08, 113 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2019)113. arXiv:1906.08815

433. L. Chen, A. Freitas, Mixed EW-QCD leading fermionic three-loop corrections at $O(\alpha_s\alpha^2)$ to electroweak precision observables. JHEP 03, 215 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2021)215. arXiv:2012.08605

434. A. Pich, A. Rodríguez-Sánchez, Determination of the QCD coupling from ALEPH $\tau$ decay data. Phys. Rev. D 94, 034027 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.94.034027. arXiv:1605.06830

435. D. Boito, M. Golterman, K. Maltman, S. Peris, Strong coupling from hadronic $\tau$ decays: a critical appraisal. Phys. Rev. D 95, 034024 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.95.034024. arXiv:1611.03457

436. D. d'Enterria, M. Srebre, $\alpha_s$ and $V_{cs}$ determination, and CKM unitarity test, from W decays at NNLO. Phys. Lett. B 763, 465 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/j.physletb.2016.10.012. arXiv:1603.06501

437. A. Freitas, Higher-order electroweak corrections to the partial widths and branching ratios of the Z boson. JHEP 04, 070 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2014)070. arXiv:1401.2447

438. A. Freitas, Two-loop fermionic electroweak corrections to the Z-boson width and production rate. Phys. Lett. B 730, 50 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2014.01.017. arXiv:1310.2256

439. L. Chen, A. Freitas, Leading fermionic three-loop corrections to electroweak precision observables. JHEP 07, 210 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2020)210. arXiv:2002.05845

440. A. Pich, Precision tau physics. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 75, 41 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2013.11.002. arXiv:1310.7922

441. M. Davier et al., Update of the ALEPH non-strange spectral functions from hadronic $\tau$ decays. Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 2803 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-2803-9. arXiv:1312.1501

442. D. Boito et al., Strong coupling from the revised ALEPH data for hadronic $\tau$ decays. Phys. Rev. D 91, 034003 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.91.034003. arXiv:1410.3528

443. A.A. Pivovarov, Renormalization group analysis of the tau lepton decay within QCD. Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 54, 676 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01625906. arXiv:hep-ph/0302003

444. F. Le Diberder, A. Pich, The perturbative QCD prediction to $R_\tau$ revisited. Phys. Lett. B 286, 147 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(92)90172-Z

445. A.H. Hoang, C. Regner, On the difference between FOPT and CIPT for hadronic tau decays. Eur. Phys. J. ST 230, 2625 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjs/s11734-021-00257-z. arXiv:2105.11222

446. M.A. Benitez-Rathgeb, D. Boito, A.H. Hoang, M. Jamin, Reconciling the FOPT and CIPT predictions for the hadronic tau decay rate. arXiv:2111.09614 (Presented at the 16th International workshop on tau lepton physics, 2021)

447. A.H. Hoang, C. Regner, Borel representation of $\tau$ hadronic spectral function moments in contour-improved perturbation theory. Phys. Rev. D 105, 096023 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.105.096023. arXiv:2008.00578

448. M. Golterman, K. Maltman, S. Peris, Difference between fixed-order and contour-improved perturbation theory. Phys. Rev. D 108, 014007 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.108.014007. arXiv:2305.10386

449. M.A. Benitez-Rathgeb, D. Boito, A.H. Hoang, M. Jamin, Reconciling the contour-improved and fixed-order approaches for $\tau$ hadronic spectral moments. part II. renormalon norm and application in $\alpha_s$ determinations. JHEP 09, 223 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2022)223. arXiv:2207.01116

450. M.A. Benitez-Rathgeb, D. Boito, A.H. Hoang, M. Jamin, Reconciling the contour-improved and fixed-order approaches for $\tau$ hadronic spectral moments. part I. renormalon-free gluon condensate scheme. JHEP 07, 016 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2022)016. arXiv:2202.10957

451. R.W.L. Jones et al., Theoretical uncertainties on $\alpha_s$ from event shape variables in $e^+e^-$ annihilations. JHEP 12, 007 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2003/12/007. arXiv:hep-ph/0312016

452. G. Dissertori et al., First determination of the strong coupling constant using NNLO predictions for hadronic event shapes in $e^+e^-$ annihilations. JHEP 02, 040 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2008/02/040. arXiv:0712.0327
453. JADE Collaboration, Determination of the strong coupling $\alpha_s$ from hadronic event shapes with $O(\alpha_s^2)$ and resummed QCD predictions using JADE data. Eur. Phys. J. C 64, 351 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-009-1149-1. arXiv:0810.1389

454. R.A. Davison, B.R. Webber, Non-perturbative contribution to the thrust distribution in $e^+e^-$ annihilation. Eur. Phys. J. C 59, 13 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-008-0836-7. arXiv:0809.3326

455. G. Dissertori et al., Determination of the strong coupling constant using matched NNLO+NLLA predictions for hadronic event shapes in $e^+e^-$ annihilations. JHEP 08, 036 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2009/08/036. arXiv:0906.3436

456. T. Gehrmann, M. Jaquier, G. Luisoni, Hadronization effects in event shape moments. Eur. Phys. J. C 67, 57 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-010-1288-4. arXiv:0911.2422

457. OPAL Collaboration, Determination of $\alpha_s$ using OPAL hadronic event shapes at $\sqrt{s} = 91-209$ GeV and resummed NNLO calculations. Eur. Phys. J. C 71, 1733 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1733-z. arXiv:1101.1470

458. T. Gehrmann, G. Luisoni, P.F. Monni, Power corrections in the dispersive model for a determination of the strong coupling constant from the thrust distribution. Eur. Phys. J. C 73, 2265 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2265-x. arXiv:1210.6945

459. R. Abbate et al., Precision thrust cumulant moments at N³LL. Phys. Rev. D 86, 094002 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.86.094002. arXiv:1204.5746

460. A.H. Hoang, D.W. Kolodrubetz, V. Mateu, I.W. Stewart, Precise determination of $\alpha_s$ from the C-parameter distribution. Phys. Rev. D 91, 094018 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.91.094018. arXiv:1501.0411

461. A. Kardos et al., Precise determination of $\alpha_s(M_Z)$ from a global fit of energy-energy correlation to NNLO+NNLL predictions. Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 498 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5963-1. arXiv:1804.09146

462. G. Dissertori et al., Precise determination of the strong coupling constant at NNLO in QCD from the three-jet rate in electron-positron annihilation at LEP. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 072002 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.072002. arXiv:0910.4283

463. JADE Collaboration, Measurement of the strong coupling $\alpha_s$ from the three-jet rate in $e^+e^-$ annihilation using JADE data. Eur. Phys. J. C 73, 2332 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2332-y. arXiv:1205.3714

464. A. Verbytskyi et al., High precision determination of $\alpha_s$ from a global fit of jet rates. JHEP 08, 129 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2019)129. arXiv:1902.08158

465. A. Kardos, G. Somogyi, A. Verbytskyi, Determination of $\alpha_s$ beyond NNLO using event shape averages. Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 292 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-08975-3. arXiv:2009.00281

466. G.P. Korchemsky, G.F. Sterman, Nonperturbative corrections in resummed cross-sections. Nucl. Phys. B 437, 415 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(94)00006-2. arXiv:hep-ph/9411211

467. Y.L. Dokshitzer, A. Lucenti, G. Marchesini, G.P. Salam, Universality of 1/Q corrections to jet-shape observables rescued. Nucl. Phys. B 511, 396 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0550-3213(97)00650-0. arXiv:hep-ph/9707532. [Erratum: Nucl. Phys. B 593, 729 (2001)]

468. M. Beneke, V.M. Braun, L. Magna, Phenomenology of power corrections in fragmentation processes in $e^+e^-$ annihilation. Nucl. Phys. B 497, 297 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0550-3213(97)00251-4. arXiv:hep-ph/9701309

469. Y.L. Dokshitzer, A. Lucenti, G. Marchesini, G.P. Salam, On the universality of the Milan factor for 1/Q power corrections to jet shapes. JHEP 05, 003 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/1998/05/003. arXiv:hep-ph/9802381

470. E. Gardi, G. Grunberg, Power corrections in the single dressed gluon approximation: the average thrust as a case study. JHEP 11, 016 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/1999/11/016. arXiv:hep-ph/9908458

471. G.P. Korchemsky, G.F. Sterman, Power corrections to event shapes and factorization. Nucl. Phys. B 555, 335 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0550-3213(99)00308-9. arXiv:hep-ph/9902341

472. M. Dasgupta, L. Magnea, G. Smye, Universality of 1/Q corrections revisited. JHEP 11, 025 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/1999/11/025. arXiv:hep-ph/9911316

473. G.P. Salam, D. Wicke, Hadron masses and power corrections to event shapes. JHEP 05, 061 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2001/05/061. arXiv:hep-ph/0102343

474. E. Gardi, Dressed gluon exponentiation. Nucl. Phys. B 622, 365 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0550-3213(01)00594-6. arXiv:hep-ph/0108222

475. E. Gardi, L. Magnea, The C parameter distribution in $e^+e^-$ annihilation. JHEP 08, 030 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2003/08/030. arXiv:hep-ph/0306094

476. V. Mateu, I.W. Stewart, J. Thaler, Power corrections to event shapes with mass-dependent operators. Phys. Rev. D 87, 014025 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.87.014025. arXiv:1209.3781

477. N. Agarwal, A. Mukhopadhyay, S. Pal, A. Tripathi, Power corrections to event shapes using eikonal dressed gluon exponentiation. JHEP 03, 155 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2021)155. arXiv:2012.06842

478. G. Luisoni, P.F. Monni, G.P. Salam, C-parameter hadronisation in the symmetric 3-jet limit and impact on $\alpha_s$ fits. Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 158 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-08941-z. arXiv:2012.00622

479. F. Caola et al., On linear power corrections in certain collider observables. JHEP 01, 093 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2022)093. arXiv:2108.08897

480. F. Caola et al., Linear power corrections to $e^+e^-$ shape variables in the three-jet region. JHEP 12, 062 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2022)062. arXiv:2204.02247

481. P. Nason, G. Zanderighi, Fits of $\alpha_s$ using power corrections in the three-jet region. JHEP 06, 058 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2023)058. arXiv:2301.03607

482. S. Marzani et al., Fitting the strong coupling constant with soft-drop thrust. JHEP 11, 179 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2019)179. arXiv:1906.10504

483. A.H. Hoang, S. Mantry, A. Pathak, I.W. Stewart, Nonperturbative corrections to soft drop jet mass. JHEP 12, 002 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2019)002. arXiv:1906.11843

484. P.A. Baikov, K.G. Chetyrkin, J.H. Kuhn, Scalar correlator at $O(\alpha_s^4)$, Higgs decay into b quarks and bounds on the light quark masses. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 012003 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.012003. arXiv:hep-ph/0511063

485. J. Davies, M. Steinhauser, D. Wellmann, Completing the hadronic Higgs boson decay at order $\alpha_s^4$. Nucl. Phys. B 920, 20 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2017.04.012. arXiv:1703.02988
486. J. Gao, Probing light-quark Yukawa couplings via hadronic event shapes at lepton colliders. JHEP 01, 038 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2018)038. arXiv:1608.01746

487. Q. Bi et al., Investigating bottom-quark Yukawa interaction at Higgs factory. Chin. Phys. C 45, 023105 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/abcd2c. arXiv:2009.02000

488. D.E. Kaplan, M. McEvoy, Searching for Higgs decays to four bottom quarks at LHCb. Phys. Lett. B 701, 70 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2011.05.026. arXiv:0909.1521

489. S. Liu, Y.-L. Tang, C. Zhang, S.-H. Zhu, Exotic Higgs decay $h \to \phi\phi \to 4b$ at the LHeC. Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 457 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5012-5. arXiv:1608.08458

490. J. Gao, Higgs boson decay into four bottom quarks in the SM and beyond. JHEP 08, 174 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2019)174. arXiv:1905.04865

491. F. Bedeschi, L. Gouskos, M. Selvaggi, Jet flavour tagging for future colliders with fast simulation. Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 646 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10609-1. arXiv:2202.03285

492. G. Salam, G. Soyez, Reduction of Dalitz decay contamination in Higgs decay to strange quarks, in Presented at the meeting QCD for Higgs physics at FCC-ee, 22 May 2024 (2024). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1409233/

493. C. Anastasiou, F. Herzog, A. Lazopoulos, The fully differential decay rate of a Higgs boson to bottom quarks at NNLO in QCD. JHEP 03, 035 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2012)035. arXiv:1110.2368

494. V. Del Duca et al., Higgs boson decay into b quarks at NNLO accuracy. JHEP 04, 036 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2015)036. arXiv:1501.07226

495. F. Caola, G. Luisoni, K. Melnikov, R. Röntsch, NNLO QCD corrections to associated WH production and $H \to b\bar{b}$ decay. Phys. Rev. D 97, 074022 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.97.074022. arXiv:1712.06954

496. G. Ferrera, G. Somogyi, F. Tramontano, Associated production of a Higgs boson decaying into bottom quarks at the LHC in full NNLO QCD. Phys. Lett. B 780, 346 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2018.03.021. arXiv:1705.10304

497. R. Mondini, M. Schiavi, C. Williams, N³LO predictions for the decay of the Higgs boson to bottom quarks. JHEP 06, 079 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2019)079. arXiv:1904.08960

498. R. Gauld et al., Associated production of a Higgs boson decaying into bottom quarks and a weak vector boson decaying leptonically at NNLO in QCD. JHEP 10, 002 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2019)002. arXiv:1907.05836

499. K.G. Chetyrkin, A. Kwiatkowski, Second order QCD corrections to scalar and pseudoscalar Higgs decays into massive bottom quarks. Nucl. Phys. B 461, 3 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(95)00616-8. arXiv:hep-ph/9505358

500. S.A. Larin, T. van Ritbergen, J.A.M. Vermaseren, The large top quark mass expansion for Higgs boson decays into bottom quarks and into gluons. Phys. Lett. B 362, 134 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(95)01192-S. arXiv:hep-ph/9506465

501. R. Harlander, M. Steinhauser, Higgs decay to top quarks at $O(\alpha_S^2)$. Phys. Rev. D 56, 3980 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.56.3980. arXiv:hep-ph/9704436

502. W. Bernreuther, L. Chen, Z.-G. Si, Differential decay rates of CP-even and CP-odd Higgs bosons to top and bottom quarks at NNLO QCD. JHEP 07, 159 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2018)159. arXiv:1805.06658

503. A. Primo, G. Sasso, G. Somogyi, F. Tramontano, Exact Top Yukawa corrections to Higgs boson decay into bottom quarks. Phys. Rev. D 99, 054013 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.99.054013. arXiv:1812.07811

504. A. Behring, W. Bizoń, Higgs decay into massive b quarks at NNLO QCD in the nested soft-collinear subtraction scheme. JHEP 01, 189 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2020)189. arXiv:1911.11524

505. R. Mondini, U. Schubert, C. Williams, Top-induced contributions to $H \to b\bar{b}$ and $H \to c\bar{c}$ at $O(\alpha_S^3)$. JHEP 12, 058 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2020)058. arXiv:2006.03563

506. A. Behring et al., Bottom quark mass effects in associated WH production with the $H \to b\bar{b}$ decay through NNLO QCD. Phys. Rev. D 101, 114012 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.101.114012. arXiv:2003.08321

507. X. Chen, P. Jakubčík, M. Marcoli, G. Stagnitto, The parton-level structure of Higgs decays to hadrons at N³LO. JHEP 06, 185 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2023)185. arXiv:2304.11180

508. A. Djouadi, M. Spira, P.M. Zerwas, QCD corrections to hadronic Higgs decays. Z. Phys. C 70, 427 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/s002880050120. arXiv:hep-ph/9511344

509. M. Spira, A. Djouadi, D. Graudenz, P.M. Zerwas, Higgs boson production at the LHC. Nucl. Phys. B 453, 17 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(95)00379-7. arXiv:hep-ph/9504378

510. M. Schreck, M. Steinhauser, Higgs decay to gluons at NNLO. Phys. Lett. B 655, 148 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2007.08.080. arXiv:0708.0916

511. K. Melnikov, L. Tancredi, C. Wever, Two-loop gg → Hg amplitude mediated by a nearly massless quark. JHEP 11, 104 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2016)104. arXiv:1610.03747

512. K. Melnikov, L. Tancredi, C. Wever, Two-loop amplitudes for $gg \to Hq$ and $q\bar{q} \to Hg$ mediated by a nearly massless quark. Phys. Rev. D 95, 054012 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.95.054012. arXiv:1702.00426

513. K. Kudashkin, K. Melnikov, C. Wever, Two-loop amplitudes for processes $gg \to Hg$, $qg \to Hq$ and $q\bar{q} \to Hg$ at large Higgs transverse momentum. JHEP 02, 135 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2018)135. arXiv:1712.06549

514. H. Frellesvig et al., The complete set of two-loop master integrals for Higgs + jet production in QCD. JHEP 06, 093 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2020)093. arXiv:1911.06308

515. J. Gao, Y. Gong, W.-L. Ju, L.L. Yang, Thrust distribution in Higgs decays at the next-to-leading order and beyond. JHEP 03, 030 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2019)030. arXiv:1901.02253

516. M.-X. Luo, V. Shtabovenko, T.-Z. Yang, H.X. Zhu, Analytic next-to-leading order calculation of energy-energy correlation in gluon-initiated Higgs decays. JHEP 06, 037 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2019)037. arXiv:1903.07277

517. J. Gao, V. Shtabovenko, T.-Z. Yang, Energy-energy correlation in hadronic Higgs decays: analytic results and phenomenology at NLO. JHEP 02, 210 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2021)210. arXiv:2012.14188

518. R. Mondini, C. Williams, $H \to b\bar{j}$ at next-to-next-to-leading order accuracy. JHEP 06, 120 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2019)120. arXiv:1904.08961
519. A. Banfi, P.F. Monni, G. Zanderighi, Quark masses in Higgs production with a jet veto. JHEP 01, 097 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2014)097. arXiv:1308.4634

520. M. Grazzini, H. Sargsyan, Heavy-quark mass effects in Higgs boson production at the LHC. JHEP 09, 129 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2013)129. arXiv:1306.4581

521. K. Melnikov, A. Penin, On the light quark mass effects in Higgs boson production in gluon fusion. JHEP 05, 172 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2016)172. arXiv:1602.09020

522. T. Liu, A.A. Penin, High-energy limit of QCD beyond the Sudakov approximation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 262001 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.262001. arXiv:1709.01092

523. T. Liu, A. Penin, High-energy limit of mass-suppressed amplitudes in gauge theories. JHEP 11, 158 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2018)158. arXiv:1809.04950

524. Z.L. Liu, B. Mecaj, M. Neubert, X. Wang, Factorization at subleading power, Sudakov resummation, and endpoint divergences in soft-collinear effective theory. Phys. Rev. D 104, 014004 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.014004. arXiv:2009.04456

525. C. Anastasiou, A. Penin, Light quark mediated Higgs boson threshold production in the next-to-leading logarithmic approximation. JHEP 07, 195 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2020)195. arXiv:2004.03602. [Erratum: JHEP 01, 164 (2021)]

526. T. Liu, S. Modi, A.A. Penin, Higgs boson production and quark scattering amplitudes at high energy through the next-to-next-to-leading power in quark mass. JHEP 02, 170 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2022)170. arXiv:2111.01820

527. Z.L. Liu, M. Neubert, M. Schnubel, X. Wang, Factorization at next-to-leading power and endpoint divergences in $gg \to h$ production. JHEP 06, 183 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2023)183. arXiv:2212.10447

528. W.-L. Ju, Y. Xu, L.L. Yang, B. Zhou, Thrust distribution in Higgs decays up to the fifth logarithmic order. Phys. Rev. D 107, 114034 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.107.114034. arXiv:2301.04294

529. I.I.Y. Bigi, M.A. Shifman, N. Uraltsev, Aspects of heavy quark theory. Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 47, 591 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.nucl.47.1.591. arXiv:hep-ph/9703290

530. A.H. Hoang, Z. Ligeti, A.V. Manohar, B decays in the upsilon expansion. Phys. Rev. D 59, 074017 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.59.074017. arXiv:hep-ph/9811239

531. A.H. Hoang, Z. Ligeti, A.V. Manohar, B decay and the Upsilon mass. Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 277 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.82.277. arXiv:hep-ph/9809423

532. M. Beneke, A quark mass definition adequate for threshold problems. Phys. Lett. B 434, 115 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0370-2693(98)00741-2. arXiv:hep-ph/9804241

533. A. Pineda, Determination of the bottom quark mass from the Upsilon(1S) system. JHEP 06, 022 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2001/06/022. arXiv:hep-ph/0105008

534. L. Chen et al., Top-quark pair production at next-to-next-to-leading order QCD in electron positron collisions. JHEP 12, 098 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2016)098. arXiv:1610.07897

535. X. Chen et al., Heavy-quark-pair production at lepton colliders at NNLO in QCD. Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 101901 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.101901. arXiv:2209.14259

536. B.A. Thacker, G.P. Lepage, Heavy quark bound states in lattice QCD. Phys. Rev. D 43, 196 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.43.196

537. G.P. Lepage et al., Improved nonrelativistic QCD for heavy quark physics. Phys. Rev. D 46, 4052 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.46.4052. arXiv:hep-lat/9205007

538. G.T. Bodwin, E. Braaten, G.P. Lepage, Rigorous QCD analysis of inclusive annihilation and production of heavy quarkonium. Phys. Rev. D 51, 1125 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.55.5853. arXiv:hep-ph/9407339. [Erratum: Phys. Rev. D 55, 5853 (1997)]

539. M. Beneke et al., Next-to-next-to-next-to-leading order QCD prediction for the top antitop S-wave pair production cross section near threshold in $e^+e^-$ annihilation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 192001 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.192001. arXiv:1506.06864

540. A.H. Hoang et al., Top-anti-top pair production close to threshold: synopsis of recent NNLO results. Eur. Phys. J. Direct 2, 3 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/s1010500c0003. arXiv:hep-ph/0001286

541. M. Beneke, Y. Kiyo, K. Schuller, Third-order correction to top-quark pair production near threshold. Part I. Effective theory set-up and matching coefficients. JHEP 07, 273 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2025)273. arXiv:1312.4791

542. A.H. Hoang, M. Stahlhofen, The top-antitop threshold at the ILC: NNLL QCD uncertainties. JHEP 05, 121 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2014)121. arXiv:1309.6323

543. M. Beneke, A. Maier, T. Rauh, P. Ruiz-Femenia, Non-resonant and electroweak NNLO correction to the $e^+e^-$ top anti-top threshold. JHEP 02, 125 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2018)125. arXiv:1711.10429

544. M. Beneke, A.P. Chapovsky, A. Signer, G. Zanderighi, Effective theory approach to unstable particle production. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 011602 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.011602. arXiv:hep-ph/0312331

545. M. Beneke, A.P. Chapovsky, A. Signer, G. Zanderighi, Effective theory calculation of resonant high-energy scattering. Nucl. Phys. B 686, 205 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2004.03.016. arXiv:hep-ph/0401002

546. M. Vos et al., Top physics at high-energy lepton colliders. arXiv:1604.08122

547. CLICdp Collaboration, Top-quark physics at the CLIC electron-positron linear collider. JHEP 11, 003 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2019)003. arXiv:1807.02441

548. M. Beneke, Y. Kiyo, Third-order correction to top-quark pair production near threshold II. Potential contributions. JHEP 07, 274 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2025)274. arXiv:2409.05960

549. V. Bertone, M. Cacciari, S. Frixione, G. Stagnitto, The partonic structure of the electron at the next-to-leading logarithmic accuracy in QED. JHEP 03, 135 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2020)135. arXiv:1911.12040. [Erratum: JHEP 08, 108 (2022)]

550. S. Frixione, Initial conditions for electron and photon structure and fragmentation functions. JHEP 11, 158 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2019)158. arXiv:1909.03886

551. M. Beneke, Theory aspects in top-pair production, in *Presented at the CERN Workshop Precision calculations for future $e^+e^-$ colliders: targets and tools* (2022). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1140580/
552. A.H. Hoang, T. Teubner, Top quark pair production close to threshold: top mass, width and momentum distribution. Phys. Rev. D **60**, 114027 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.60.114027. arXiv:hep-ph/9904468

553. F. Bach et al., Fully-differential top-pair production at a lepton collider: from threshold to continuum. JHEP **03**, 184 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2018)184. arXiv:1712.02220

554. K. Melnikov, O.I. Yakovlev, Final state interaction in the production of heavy unstable particles. Nucl. Phys. B **471**, 90 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(96)00151-4. arXiv:hep-ph/9501358

555. J.M. Campbell et al., Event generators for high-energy physics experiments. arXiv:2203.11110 (Contribution to Snowmass 2021)

556. M. Dasgupta et al., Logarithmic accuracy of parton showers: a fixed-order study. JHEP **09**, 033 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2018)033. arXiv:1805.09327. [Erratum: JHEP **03**, 083 (2020)]

557. G. Bewick, S. Ferrario Ravasio, P. Richardson, M.H. Seymour, Logarithmic accuracy of angular-ordered parton showers. JHEP **04**, 019 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2020)019. arXiv:1904.11866

558. M. Dasgupta et al., Parton showers beyond leading logarithmic accuracy. Phys. Rev. Lett. **125**, 052002 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.052002. arXiv:2002.11114

559. J.R. Forshaw, J. Holguin, S. Plätzer, Building a consistent parton shower. JHEP **09**, 014 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2020)014. arXiv:2003.06400

560. K. Hamilton et al., Colour and logarithmic accuracy in final-state parton showers. JHEP **03**, 041 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2021)041. arXiv:2011.10054

561. Z. Nagy, D.E. Soper, Summations of large logarithms by parton showers. Phys. Rev. D **104**, 054049 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.054049. arXiv:2011.04773

562. Z. Nagy, D.E. Soper, Summations by parton showers of large logarithms in electron-positron annihilation. arXiv:2011.04777

563. K. Hamilton et al., Soft spin correlations in final-state parton showers. JHEP **03**, 193 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2022)193. arXiv:2111.01161

564. F. Herren et al., A new approach to color-coherent parton evolution. JHEP **10**, 091 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2023)091. arXiv:2208.06057

565. M. van Beekveld et al., PanScales parton showers for hadron collisions: formulation and fixed-order studies. JHEP **11**, 019 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2022)019. arXiv:2205.02237

566. M. van Beekveld et al., PanScales showers for hadron collisions: all-order validation. JHEP **11**, 020 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2022)020. arXiv:2207.09467

567. M. van Beekveld, S. Ferrario Ravasio, Next-to-leading-logarithmic PanScales showers for deep inelastic scattering and vector boson fusion. JHEP **02**, 001 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2024)001. arXiv:2305.08645

568. B. Assi, S. Höche, New approach to QCD final-state evolution in processes with massive partons. Phys. Rev. D **109**, 114008 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.114008. arXiv:2307.00728

569. R. Ángeles Martínez et al., Soft gluon evolution and non-global logarithms. JHEP **05**, 044 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2018)044. arXiv:1802.08531

570. J.R. Forshaw, J. Holguin, S. Plätzer, Parton branching at amplitude level. JHEP **08**, 145 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2019)145. arXiv:1905.08686

571. S. Jadach, A. Kusina, M. Skrzypek, M. Slawinska, Two real parton contributions to non-singlet kernels for exclusive QCD DGLAP evolution. JHEP **08**, 012 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2011)012. arXiv:1102.5083

572. H.T. Li, P. Skands, A framework for second-order parton showers. Phys. Lett. B **771**, 59 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2017.05.011. arXiv:1611.00013

573. S. Höche, F. Krauss, S. Prestel, Implementing NLO DGLAP evolution in parton showers. JHEP **10**, 093 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2017)093. arXiv:1705.00982

574. F. Dulat, S. Höche, S. Prestel, Leading-color fully differential two-loop soft corrections to QCD dipole showers. Phys. Rev. D **98**, 074013 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.98.074013. arXiv:1805.03757

575. S. Ferrario Ravasio et al., Parton showering with higher logarithmic accuracy for soft emissions. Phys. Rev. Lett. **131**, 161906 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.161906. arXiv:2307.11142

576. M. van Beekveld et al., A collinear shower algorithm for NSL non-singlet fragmentation. arXiv:2409.08316

577. S. Catani, B.R. Webber, G. Marchesini, QCD coherent branching and semiinclusive processes at large x. Nucl. Phys. B **349**, 635 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(91)90390-J

578. S. Catani, D. De Florian, M. Grazzini, Soft-gluon effective coupling and cusp anomalous dimension. Eur. Phys. J. C **79**, 685 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7174-9. arXiv:1904.10365

579. M. Dasgupta, B.K. El-Menoufi, Dissecting the collinear structure of quark splitting at NNLL. JHEP **12**, 158 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2021)158. arXiv:2109.07496

580. K. Hamilton et al., Matching and event-shape NNDL accuracy in parton showers. JHEP **03**, 224 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2023)224. arXiv:2301.09645

581. M. van Beekveld et al., New standard for the logarithmic accuracy of parton showers. Phys. Rev. Lett. **134**, 011901 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.011901. arXiv:2406.02661

582. S. Frixione, B.R. Webber, Matching NLO QCD computations and parton shower simulations. JHEP **06**, 029 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2002/06/029. arXiv:hep-ph/0204244

583. P. Nason, A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms. JHEP **11**, 040 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2004/11/040. arXiv:hep-ph/0409146

584. S. Frixione, P. Nason, C. Oleari, Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method. JHEP **11**, 070 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2007/11/070. arXiv:0709.2092

585. K. Hamilton, P. Nason, C. Oleari, G. Zanderighi, Merging H/W/Z + 0 and 1 jet at NLO with no merging scale: a path to parton shower + NNLO matching. JHEP **05**, 082 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2013)082. arXiv:1212.4504
586. S. Jadach et al., Matching NLO QCD with parton shower in Monte Carlo scheme—the KrkNLO method. JHEP 10, 052 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2015)052. arXiv:1503.06849

587. P. Nason, G.P. Salam, Multiplicative-accumulative matching of NLO calculations with parton showers. JHEP 01, 067 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2022)067. arXiv:2111.03553

588. K. Hamilton, P. Nason, E. Re, G. Zanderighi, NNLOPS simulation of Higgs boson production. JHEP 10, 222 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2013)222. arXiv:1309.0017

589. S. Alioli et al., Matching fully differential NNLO calculations and parton showers. JHEP 06, 089 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2014)089. arXiv:1311.0286

590. S. Höche, Y. Li, S. Prestel, Drell-Yan lepton pair production at NNLO QCD with parton showers. Phys. Rev. D 91, 074015 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.91.074015. arXiv:1405.3607

591. P.F. Monni et al., MiNNLO<sub>PS</sub>: a new method to match NNLO QCD to parton showers. JHEP 05, 143 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2020)143. arXiv:1908.06987. [Erratum: JHEP 02, 031 (2022)]

592. P.F. Monni, E. Re, M. Wiesemann, MiNNLOPS: optimizing $2 \to 1$ hadronic processes. Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 1075 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-08658-5. arXiv:2006.04133

593. S. Prestel, Matching N3LO QCD calculations to parton showers. JHEP 11, 041 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP11(2021)041. arXiv:2106.03206

594. W. Bizoń, E. Re, G. Zanderighi, NNLOPS description of the $H \to b\bar{b}$ decay with MiNLO. JHEP 06, 006 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2020)006. arXiv:1912.09982

595. Y. Hu, C. Sun, X.-M. Shen, J. Gao, Hadronic decays of Higgs boson at NNLO matched with parton shower. JHEP 08, 122 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2021)122. arXiv:2101.08916

596. T. Ježo, P. Nason, On the treatment of resonances in next-to-leading order calculations matched to a parton shower. JHEP 12, 065 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2015)065. arXiv:1509.09071

597. R. Frederix et al., Off-shell single-top production at NLO matched to parton showers. JHEP 06, 027 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2016)027. arXiv:1603.01178

598. P. Ilten, T. Menzo, A. Youssef, J. Zupan, Modeling hadronization using machine learning. SciPost Phys. 14, 027 (2023). https://doi.org/10.21468/SciPostPhys.14.3.027. arXiv:2203.04983

599. A. Ghosh, X. Ju, B. Nachman, A. Siodmok, Towards a deep learning model for hadronization. Phys. Rev. D 106, 096020 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.106.096020. arXiv:2203.12660

600. J. Chan et al., Fitting a deep generative hadronization model. JHEP 09, 084 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2023)084. arXiv:2305.17169

601. A. Verbytskyi, Feasibility for low-sqrt(s) runs at FCC-ee, in *Presented at the FCC-ee QCD & photon-photon physics meeting*, 17 December 2024 (2024). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1485101/

602. A. Verbytskyi, D. d'Enterria, P.F. Monni, P. Skands, Physics case for low-$\sqrt{s}$ QCD studies at FCC-ee. SciPost Phys. (2025). arXiv:2503.23855 (to appear)

603. J.R. Christiansen, T. Sjöstrand, Color reconnection at future $e^+e^-$ colliders. Eur. Phys. J. C 75, 441 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3674-4. arXiv:1506.09085

604. D.R. Yennie, S.C. Frautschi, H. Suura, The infrared divergence phenomena and high-energy processes. Ann. Phys. 13, 379 (1961). https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(61)90151-8

605. A. Arbuzov et al., The Monte Carlo program KKMC, for the lepton or quark pair production at LEP/SLC energies—updates of electroweak calculations. Comput. Phys. Commun. 260, 107734 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2020.107734. arXiv:2007.07964

606. S. Jadach, B.F.L. Ward, Z.A. Was, Collinearly enhanced realizations of the Yennie-Frautschi-Suura (YFS) MC approach to precision resummation theory. Phys. Lett. B 848, 138361 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2023.138361. arXiv:2303.14260

607. S. Banerjee, Z. Was, FCC tau polarization, CERN Yellow Reports: Monographs, CERN-2020-003, p. 211 (2020). https://doi.org/10.23731/CYRM-2020-003-211. https://indico.cern.ch/event/766859/ (Presented at the 11th FCC-ee Workshop: Theory and Experiments, CERN, Geneva, 8–11 January 2019)

608. F. Krauss, A. Price, M. Schönherr, YFS resummation for future lepton-lepton colliders in SHERPA. SciPost Phys. 13, 026 (2022). https://doi.org/10.21468/SciPostPhys.13.2.026. arXiv:2203.10948

609. S. Actis et al., RECOLA: REcursive computation of one-loop amplitudes. Comput. Phys. Commun. 214, 140 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2017.01.004. arXiv:1605.01090

610. A. Arbuzov et al., Computer package DIZET v.6.45. Comput. Phys. Commun. 291, 108846 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2023.108846. arXiv:2301.07168

611. L. Chen, A. Freitas, GRIFFIN: a C++ library for electroweak radiative corrections in fermion scattering and decay processes. SciPost Phys. Codeb. 2023, 18 (2023). https://doi.org/10.21468/SciPostPhysCodeb.18. arXiv:2211.16272

612. S. Frixione et al., Initial state QED radiation aspects for future $e^+e^-$ colliders. arXiv:2203.12557 (Contribution to 2022 Snowmass Summer Study)

613. S. Frixione, On factorisation schemes for the electron parton distribution functions in QED. JHEP 07, 180 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2021)180. arXiv:2105.06688. [Erratum: JHEP 12, 196 (2012)]

614. S. Frixione, O. Mattelaer, M. Zaro, X. Zhao, Lepton collisions in MadGraph5_aMC@NLO. arXiv:2108.10261

615. V. Bertone et al., Improving methods and predictions at high-energy $e^+e^-$ colliders within collinear factorisation. JHEP 10, 089 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2022)089. arXiv:2207.03265

616. Frontiers in precision phenomenology: resummation, amplitudes, and subtraction. CERN Workshop, 5–30 August 2024 (2024). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1354833/

617. MCnet network. https://www.montecaronet.org/

618. N. Bacchetta et al., CLD—a detector concept for the FCC-ee. arXiv:1911.12230

619. M.T. Lucchini et al., New perspectives on segmented crystal calorimeters for future colliders. JINST 15, P11005 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/15/11/P11005. arXiv:2008.00338
620. G.K. Dolores Garcia, M. Selvaggi, FCC note: machine learning based particle flow (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/3jea0-t6m67

621. F. Zimmermann, I. Agapov, Summary talk of Work Package 2, in *Presented at the FCCIS 2022 Workshop, 5–9 December 2022* (2022). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1203316/

622. E. Perez, FCC note: the point-to-point uncertainty on the centre-of-mass energy and the Z width at FCC-ee (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/gyqhp-m0480

623. B. Francois, G. Ganis, FCC note: the FCC software for PED studies (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/8k0c4-nkr70

624. H. Abramowicz et al., The International Linear Collider Technical Design Report—Volume 4: Detectors. arXiv:1306.6329

625. L. Linssen et al., Physics and detectors at CLIC: CLIC Conceptual Design Report, CERN Yellow Reports: Monographs, CERN-2012-003 (2012). https://doi.org/10.5170/CERN-2012-003. arXiv:1202.5940

626. H. Qu, L. Gouskos, ParticleNet: jet tagging via particle clouds. Phys. Rev. D **101**, 056019 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.101.056019. arXiv:1902.08570

627. H. Abidi et al., FCC note: impact of tracker- and calorimeter-detector performance on jet flavor identification and Higgs physics analyses, and study of Higgs-to-invisible performance with CLD full simulation. https://doi.org/10.17181/09grf-4y518

628. L. Röhrig et al., Measuring $A_{FB}^b$ and $R_b$ with exclusive b-hadron decays at the FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. C **85**, 893 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-14603-1. arXiv:2502.17281

629. J. Alcaraz Maestre, Revisiting QCD corrections to the forward-backward charge asymmetry of heavy quarks in electron-positron collisions at the Z pole: really a problem? arXiv:2010.08604

630. L. Rohrig, S. Monteil, FCC note: measuring $R_c$ with exclusive c-hadron decays at FCC-ee and an outlook to $R_s$ and $A_{FB}^s$ (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/5gd08-dmd71

631. SLD Collaboration, Measurement of the branching ratio of the $Z^0$ into heavy quarks. Phys. Rev. D **71**, 112004 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.71.112004. arXiv:hep-ex/0503005

632. CLEO Collaboration, Experimental test of lepton universality in tau decay. Phys. Rev. D **55**, 2559 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.55.2559. [Erratum: Phys. Rev. D **58**, 119904 (1998)]

633. Belle Collaboration, Measurement of the $\tau$-lepton lifetime at Belle. Phys. Rev. Lett. **112**, 031801 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.031801. arXiv:1310.8503

634. DELPHI Collaboration, A precise measurement of the tau lifetime. Eur. Phys. J. C **36**, 283 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s2004-01953-7. arXiv:hep-ex/0410010

635. S.R. Wasserbaech, Review of tau lifetime measurements. Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. **76**, 107 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0920-5632(99)00434-X. arXiv:hep-ex/9811037

636. LHCb Collaboration, Design and performance of the LHCb trigger and full real-time reconstruction in Run 2 of the LHC. JINST **14**, P04013 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/14/04/P04013. arXiv:1812.10790

637. G. Dujany, B. Storaci, Real-time alignment and calibration of the LHCb Detector in Run II. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. **664**, 082010 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/664/8/082010 (Presented at the 21st International Conference on Computing in High Energy and Nuclear Physics (CHEP 2015), Okinawa, Japan, April 13–17, 2015)

638. LHCb Collaboration, Novel real-time alignment and calibration of the LHCb detector and its performance. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A **845**, 560 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2016.06.050 (Presented at the 14th Vienna Conference on Instrumentation (VCI 2016), Vienna, Austria, February 15–19, 2016)

639. A. Arena, G. Cantatore, M. Karuza, Digital holographic interferometry for particle detector diagnostic. https://doi.org/10.23919/MIPRO55190. 2022.9803636 (Presented at the 45th Jubilee International Convention on Information, Communication and Electronic Technology (MIPRO), 23–27 May 2022, Opatija, Croatia)

640. R. Cardinale et al., FCC note: simulation and performance study of the ARC concept: a compact RICH for future collider experiments (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/6g0gs-7kw30

641. R. Forty, ARC: a solution for particle-identification at FCC-ee, in *Presented at the FCC Week 2021, 28 June to 2 July 2021* (2021). https://indico.cern.ch/event/995850/

642. M. Tat, R. Forty, G. Wilkinson, ARC: a novel RICH detector for a future $e^+e^-$ collider, in *Presented at the First ECFA workshop on e$^+e^-$ Higgs, Electroweak and Top factories, 5–7 October 2022, DESY Hamburg* (2022). https://indico.desy.de/event/33640/

643. S. Glazov, Belle-II physics highlights, in *Presented at the EPS HEP 2023 Conference, 21–25 August 2023, Hamburg* (2023), https://indico.desy.de/event/34916/

644. F. Bedeschi, TrackCovariance module of the Delphes package. Code available in https://github.com/delphes/delphes

645. F. Blekman et al., Tagging more quark jet flavours at FCC-ee at 91 GeV with a transformer-based neural network. Eur. Phys. J. C **85**, 165 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-13785-y. arXiv:2406.08590

646. S. Giappichini et al., FCC note: direct measurement of $|V_{ts}|$ from $t \to Ws$ decay at FCC-ee. https://doi.org/10.17181/1hcpd-hfx74

647. R. Aleksan, S. Jadach, Precision measurement of the Z boson to electron neutrino coupling at the future circular colliders. Phys. Lett. B **799**, 135034 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2019.135034. arXiv:1908.06338

648. A. Arbuzov et al., The Monte Carlo program KKMC, for the lepton or quark pair production at LEP/SLC energies—updates of electroweak calculations. Comput. Phys. Commun. **260**, 107734 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2020.107734. arXiv:2007.07964

649. L. Rohrig, S. Monteil, FCC note: electromagnetic calorimetry requirements from flavour physics for application at FCC-ee (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/3ymyx-mj777

650. A. Blondel, M. Dam, FCC note: FCC-ee detector requirements: geometric acceptance requirements for dilepton and diphoton events at Z pole energies (2023). https://doi.org/10.17181/5m6et-4k782

651. P. Janot, In-situ determination of acceptances, in *Presented at the FCC Week 2023, 5–9 June 2023, London* (2023). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1202105/

652. ATLAS Collaboration, Search for the charged-lepton-flavor-violating decay $Z \to e\mu$ in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D **108**, 032015 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.108.032015. arXiv:2204.10783

653. E. Perez, M. Selvaggi, FCC note: recovery of bremsstrahlung photons in a FCC-ee detector (2023). https://doi.org/10.17181/y2gch-sv478
654. K. Wandall-Christensen, τ decay mode identification in a liquid Argon electromagnetic calorimeter at the FCC-ee. Master's thesis, University of Copenhagen (2021). https://nbi.ku.dk/english/theses/masters-theses/katinka-wandall-christensen/

655. LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, D. de Florian et al., Handbook of LHC Higgs cross sections: 4. Deciphering the nature of the Higgs sector, CERN Yellow Reports: Monographs, CERN-2017-002 (2017). https://doi.org/10.23731/CYRM-2017-002. arXiv:1610.07922

656. B. Patt, F. Wilczek, Higgs-field portal into hidden sectors. arXiv:hep-ph/0605188

657. S. Argyropoulos, O. Brandt, U. Haisch, Collider searches for dark matter through the Higgs lens. Symmetry **13**, 2406 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/sym13122406. arXiv:2109.13597

658. R.K. Ellis et al., Physics Briefing Book: Input for the European Strategy for Particle Physics Update 2020. arXiv:1910.11775

659. A. Blondel et al., Searches for long-lived particles at the future FCC-ee. Front. Phys. **10**, 967881 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2022.967881. arXiv:2203.05502 (Contribution to Snowmass 2021)

660. S. Bay Nielsen, Prospects of sterile neutrino search with the FCC-ee. Master's thesis, Copenhagen University (2017). https://nbi.ku.dk/english/theses/masters-theses/sissel-bay-nielsen/

661. G. Alonso-Álvarez, M. Escudero Abenza, The first limit on invisible decays of $B_s$ mesons comes from LEP. Eur. Phys. J. C **84**, 553 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12936-x. arXiv:2310.13043

662. R. Aleksan, E. Perez, G. Polesello, N. Valle, Timing-based mass measurement of exotic long-lived particles at the FCC-ee. Eur. Phys. J. C **85**, 14 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13717-2. arXiv:2406.05102

663. P. Janot, G. Wilkinson, Summary, open questions and task list for 2023, 2025 WP4, in *Presented at the 2nd FCC Energy Calibration, Polarization and Mono-chromatisation (EPOL) workshop, 19–30 September 2022* (2022). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1181966/

664. E. Perez, Role of timing measurements in EPOL studies, in *Presented at the 6th FCC Physics Workshop, 22–27 January 2023* (2023). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1176398/

665. ALEPH Collaboration, Performance of the ALEPH detector at LEP. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A **360**, 481 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-9002(95)00138-7

666. CMS Collaboration, Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector. JINST **12**, P10003 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/12/10/P10003. arXiv:1706.04965

667. B.F. Dolores Garcia, M. Selvaggi, FCC note: Geometric Graph Neural Network based track finding (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/bhv4h-wem54

668. M.A. Thomson, Particle flow calorimetry and the PandoraPFA algorithm. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A **611**, 25 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2009.09.009. arXiv:0907.3577

669. J.S. Marshall, M.A. Thomson, The Pandora software development kit for pattern recognition. Eur. Phys. J. C **75**, 439 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3659-3. arXiv:1506.05348

670. S. Aumiller, D. Garcia, M. Selvaggi, FCC note: Jet flavor tagging performance at FCC-ee (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/8g834-jv464

671. ALEPH, DELPHI, L3, OPAL, SLD, LEP Electroweak Working Group, SLD Electroweak Group, SLD Heavy Flavour Group, S. Schael et al., Precision electroweak measurements on the Z resonance. Phys. Rep. **427**, 257 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2005.12.006. arXiv:hep-ex/0509008

672. J. Alcaraz Maestre et al., Fcc note: Tau reconstruction with full simulation of the CLD detector and prospects for the measurement of the tau polarization at FCC-ee (2024). https://doi.org/10.17181/v3m6f-wm975

673. I. Nikolic, La mesure de la polarisation du lepton τ dans l'expérience ALEPH en utilisant la direction du τ. PhD thesis, Paris 11 (1996). https://inspirehep.net/literature/420916

674. P. Raimondi, D. N. Shatilov, M. Zobov, Beam-beam issues for colliding schemes with large Piwinski angle and crabbed waist. arXiv:physics/0702033

675. M. Boscolo et al., Progress in the design of the future circular collider FCC-ee interaction region. JACOW IPAC2024, TUPC67 (2024). https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2024-TUPC67. https://ipac24.org (Presented at the 15th Int. Particle Accelerator Conference, Nashville, USA, 19–24 May 2024)

676. K. Oide et al., Design of beam optics for the Future Circular Collider $e^+e^-$ collider rings. Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams **19**, 111005 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevAccelBeams.19.111005. arXiv:1610.07170. [Addendum: Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams **20**, 049901 (2017)]

677. M. Boscolo, A. Ciarma, Characterization of the beamstrahlung radiation at the future high-energy circular collider. Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams **26**, 111002 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevAccelBeams.26.111002. arXiv:2307.15597

678. A. Frasca, et al., Energy deposition and radiation level studies for the FCC-ee experimental insertions. JACOW IPAC2024, TUPC66 (2024). https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2024-TUPC66. https://ipac24.org (Presented at the 15th Int. Particle Accelerator Conference, Nashville, USA, 19–24 May 2024)

679. M. Boscolo et al., FCC note: the FCC-ee interaction region, design and integration of the machine elements and detectors, machine induced backgrounds and key performance indicators (2023). https://doi.org/10.17181/w4kws-rne05

680. M. Boscolo et al., Mechanical model for the FCC-ee interaction region. EPJ Tech. Instrum. **10**, 16 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjti/s40485-023-00103-7

681. A. Novokhatski et al., Estimated heat load and proposed cooling system in the FCC-ee interaction region. JACOW IPAC2023, MOPA092 (2023). https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2023-MOPA092 (Presented at the 14th Int. Particle Accelerator Conference, Venice, Italy, 7–12 May 2023)

682. L. Watrelot, FCC-ee machine detector interface alignment system concepts. PhD thesis, École doctorale Sciences des métiers de l'ingénieur (Paris) (2023). https://cds.cern.ch/record/2894663

683. L. Watrelot, M. Sosin, S. Durand, Frequency scanning interferometry based deformation monitoring system for the alignment of the FCC-ee machine detector interface. Measur. Sci. Tech. **34**, 075006 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6501/acc6e3

684. M. Sosin, H. Mainaud-Durand, V. Rude, J. Rutkowski, Frequency sweeping interferometry for robust and reliable distance measurements in harsh accelerator environment. Proc. SPIE Int. Soc. Opt. Eng. **11102**, 111020L (2019). https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2529157

685. H. Mainaud Durand et al., Frequency scanning interferometry as new solution for on-line monitoring inside a cryostat for the HL-LHC project. https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2018-WEPAF068 (Presented at the 9th Int. Particle Accelerator Conference, 29 April–4 May 2018, Vancouver, Canada)
686. S.M. Gibson et al., The multi-channel high precision ATLAS SCT alignment monitoring system: a progress report. eConf C06092511 (2006). https://www.slac.stanford.edu/econf/C06092511/papers/WEPO08.PDF (WEPO08. Presented at the 9th Int. Workshop on Accelerator Alignment, 25-29 September 2006, SLAC, USA)

687. K. André, B. Holzer, M. Boscolo, Status of the synchrotron radiation studies in the interaction region of the FCC-ee. JACoW IPAC2024, WEPR09 (2024). https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2024-WEPR09. https://ipac24.org (Presented at the 15th Int. Particle Accelerator Conference, Nashville, USA, 19-24 May 2024)

688. L.J. Nevay et al., BDSIM: an accelerator tracking code with particle-matter interactions. Comput. Phys. Commun. 252, 107200 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2020.107200. arXiv:1808.10745

689. J. Allison et al., Recent developments in GEANT4. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 835, 186 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2016.06.125

690. R. Bruce et al., Simulations and measurements of beam loss patterns at the CERN large hadron collider. Phys. Rev. ST Accel. Beams 17, 081004 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTAB.17.081004

691. A. Abramov et al., Collimation simulations for the FCC-ee. JINST 19, T02004 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/19/02/T02004

692. G. Broggi et al., Optimizations and updates of the FCC-ee collimation system design. JACoW IPAC2024, TUPC76 (2024). https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2024-TUPC76. https://ipac24.org (Presented at the 15th Int. Particle Accelerator Conference, Nashville, USA, 19-24 May 2024)

693. R. Kersevan, M. Ady, Recent developments of Monte-Carlo codes Molflow+ and Synrad+. JACoW IPAC2019, TUPMP037 (2019). https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2019-TUPMP037 (Presented at the 10th Int. Particle Accelerator Conference, Melbourne, Australia, 19-24 May 2019)

694. A. Ciarma, M. Boscolo, G. Ganis, E. Perez, Machine induced backgrounds in the FCC-ee MDI region and beamstrahlung radiation. JACoW eeFACT2022, 85 (2023). https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-eeFACT2022-TUZAT0203 (Presented at the 65th ICFA Advanced Beam Dynamics Workshop on High Luminosity Circular $e^{+}e^{-}$ Colliders)

695. D. Schulte, Beam-beam simulations with Guinea-Pig. eConf C980914, 127 (1998). https://cds.cern.ch/record/382453 (Presented at the 5th Int. Computational Accelerator Physics Conference, Monterey, USA, 14-18 September 1998)

696. R. Kleiss, H. Burkhardt, BBBREM: Monte Carlo simulation of radiative bhabha scattering in the very forward direction. Comput. Phys. Commun. 81, 372 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-4655(94)90085-X. arXiv:hep-ph/9401333

697. FLUKA Website. https://fluka.cern

698. G. Battistoni et al., Overview of the FLUKA code. Ann. Nucl. Energy 82, 10 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2014.11.007

699. C. Ahdida et al., New capabilities of the FLUKA multi-purpose code. Front. Phys. 9, 788253 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2021.788253

700. DRD8 Collaboration, C. Gargiulo et al., Proposal for DRD8 mechanics and cooling of future vertex and tracking systems (2024). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1424898/ (Presented at the 4th meeting of the DRDC, CERN, 13-14 November 2024)

701. B. Parker et al., BNL direct wind superconducting magnets. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 22, 4101604 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1109/TASC.2011.2175693

702. A. Ciarma, H. Burkhardt, M. Boscolo, P. Raimondi, Alternative solenoid compensation scheme for the FCC-ee interaction region. JACoW IPAC2024, TUPC68 (2024). https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2024-TUPC68. https://ipac24.org (Presented at the 15th Int. Particle Accelerator Conference, Nashville, USA, 19-24 May 2024)

703. M.L. Mangano, W. Riegler et al., Conceptual design of an experiment at the FCC-hh, a future 100 TeV hadron collider, CERN Yellow Reports: Monographs, CERN-2022-002 (2022). https://doi.org/10.23731/CYRM-2022-002

704. J.M. Carceller et al., Building the Key4hep software stack with Spack, in Presented at the 27th Conference on Computing in High Energy and Nuclear Physics, Krakow, Poland, 19-25 October 2024 (2024). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1338689/

705. CLICdp Collaboration, A detector for CLIC: main parameters and performance. arXiv:1812.07337

706. F. Sefkow et al., Experimental tests of particle flow calorimetry. Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 015003 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.88.015003. arXiv:1507.05893

707. CMS Collaboration, The Phase-2 Upgrade of the CMS Endcap Calorimeter—Technical Design Report, CERN-LHCC-2017-023, CMS-TDR-019 (2017). https://cds.cern.ch/record/2293646/

708. D. Jeans, Beamstrahlung backgrounds in ILD at linear (ILC) and circular (FCC-ee) colliders, in Presented at the 3rd ECFA workshop on $e^{+}e^{-}$ Higgs, Top, and ElectroWeak Factories, Paris, France, 9-11 October 2024 (2024). https://indico.in2p3.fr/event/32629/

709. RD-FA Collaboration, IDEA: a detector concept for future leptonic colliders. Nuovo Cim. C 43, 27 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1393/nccl/i2020-20027-2

710. G. Gaudio, The IDEA detector concept for FCC-ee. PoS ICHEP2022, 337 (2022). https://doi.org/10.22323/1.414.0337 (Presented at the 41st Int. Conference on High Energy Physics, Bologna, Italy, 6-13 July 2022)

711. IDEA Study Group, M. Abbrescia et al., The IDEA detector concept for FCC-ee. arXiv:2502.21223

712. ALICE Collaboration, Upgrade of the ALICE ITS in LS3. PoS Vertex2019, 040 (2019). https://doi.org/10.22323/1.373.0040 (Presented at the 28th Int. Workshop on Vertex Detectors, Lopud, Croatia, 13-18 October 2019)

713. L. Pancheri et al., A 110 nm CMOS process for fully-depleted pixel sensors. JINST 14, C06016 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/14/06/C06016 (Presented at the 9th Int. Workshop on Semiconductor Pixel Detectors for Particles and Imaging, Taipei, Taiwan, 10-14 December 2018)

714. Rohacell Website. https://composites.evonik.com/en/products-services/foams/rohacell

715. R. Zanzottera et al., ATLASPIX3 modules for experiments at electron-positron colliders. PoS Pixel2022, 086 (2023). https://doi.org/10.22323/1.420.0086 (Presented at the 10th Int. Workshop on Semiconductor Pixel Detectors for Particles and Imaging, Santa Fe, USA, 12-16 December 2022)

716. G. Sadowski, J. Andrea, A. Besson, Z. El Bitar, Tracking performance studies for future circular collider (FCC-ee) with CLD detector. EPJ Web Conf. 315(2024), 03003 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/202431503003 (Presented at the 2024 Int. Workshop on Future Linear Colliders (LCWS2024), Tokyo, Japan, 8-11 July)

717. G. Chiarello et al., A new construction technique of high granularity and high transparency drift chambers for modern high energy physics experiments. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 824, 512 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2015.12.021
718. M. Chiappini, The construction and commissioning of the ultra low mass MEG II drift chamber for the search of the $\mu^+ \to e^+\gamma$ decay at branching ratios below $10^{-13}$. PhD thesis, Siena University (2019). https://meg.web.psi.ch/docs/theses/chiappini_phd.pdf

719. MEG II Collaboration, Operation and performance of the MEG II detector. Eur. Phys. J. C **84**, 190 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12415-3. arXiv:2310.11902

720. R. Veenhof, GARFIELD, recent developments. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A **419**, 726 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-9002(98)00851-1 (Presented at the 8th Vienna Wire Chamber Conference: Wire Chambers: Recent Trends and Alternative Techniques, Vienna, Austria, 23-27 February 1998)

721. J. Qian, Summary of Mini-Workshop on straw tracker R&D for a future electron-positron Higgs factory, in *Presented at the FCC Detector Concepts Meeting, 21 October 2024* (2024). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1463707/

722. A. Tolosa Delgado, Particle identification with ARC, in *Presented at the 7th FCC Physics workshop* (2024). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1307378/

723. DRD4 Collaboration, S. Easo et al., Proposal for a Collaboration on the Research and Development for photon detectors and particle identification techniques. CERN-DRDC-2024-001 (2024). https://cds.cern.ch/record/2884872/

724. K. Hassouna, V. Boudry, CaloFlux: a tool to estimate fluxes in calorimeters at colliders. JINST **19**, T10009 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/19/10/T10009. arXiv:2403.03733

725. R. Aleksan, Use cases for an extreme electromagnetic resolution, in *Presented at the 4th FCC Physics and Experiments workshop* (2020). https://indico.cern.ch/event/932973/

726. M.T. Lucchini, L. Pezzotti, G. Polesello, C.G. Tully, Particle flow with a hybrid segmented crystal and fiber dual-readout calorimeter. JINST **17**, P06008 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/17/06/P06008. arXiv:2202.01474

727. W. Chung, Full detector simulation of a projective dual-readout segmented crystal electromagnetic calorimeter with precision timing, in *Presented at the 20th Int. Conference on Calorimetry in Particle Physics*. arXiv:2408.11027

728. CMS Collaboration, The CMS ECAL Phase-2 upgrade for high precision energy and timing measurements. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A **958**(2020), 162159 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2019.04.113 (Proceedings of the Vienna Conference on Instrumentation)

729. CMS Collaboration, A MIP timing detector for the CMS Phase-2 Upgrade—Technical Design Report, CERN-LHCC-2019-003, CMS-TDR-020 (2019). https://cds.cern.ch/record/2667167/

730. LO Collaboration, Neutrino physics with an opaque detector. Commun. Phys. **4**, 273 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42005-021-00763-5. arXiv:1908.02859

731. G. Hull et al., ZnWO₄ grains characterisation for GRAiNITA—a new-generation calorimeter, in *Presented at the IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference, November 2022, Milan* (2022) https://hal.science/hal-04269276/file/Poster.pdf

732. S. Barsuk et al., First characterization of a novel grain calorimeter: the GRAiNITA prototype. JINST **19**, P04008 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/19/04/p04008

733. Polytungstates Europe, LST Fastfloat heavy liquid information (2025). https://www.polytungstate.co.uk/heavyliquids/

734. ATLAS Collaboration, Operation and performance of the ATLAS tile calorimeter in LHC Run 2. Eur. Phys. J. C **84**, 1313 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13151-4. arXiv:2401.16034

735. G. Blanchot et al., The Cesium source calibration and monitoring system of the ATLAS tile calorimeter: design, construction and results. JINST **15**, P03017 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/15/03/P03017. arXiv:2002.12800

736. P. Conde Muñoz et al., Production and optical characterisation of blended polyethylene terephthalate (PET)/polyethylene naphthalate (PEN) scintillator samples. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A **1066**, 169627 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2024.169627. arXiv:2312.14790

737. J.S. Schliwinski, Light response study of FCC-hh plastic-scintillator tiles with SiPM readout. CERN Summer Student report, https://cds.cern.ch/record/2687718/, (2019)

738. CALICE Collaboration, Design, construction and commissioning of a technological prototype of a highly granular SiPM-on-tile scintillator-steel hadronic calorimeter. JINST **18**, P11018 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/18/11/P11018. arXiv:2209.15327

739. G. Baulieu et al., Construction and commissioning of a technological prototype of a high-granularity semi-digital hadronic calorimeter. JINST **10**, P10039 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/10/P10039. arXiv:1506.05316

740. C. Adams et al., Design, construction and commissioning of the digital hadron calorimeter—DHCAL. JINST **11**, P07007 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/11/07/P07007. arXiv:1603.01653

741. S. Lee et al., Hadron detection with a dual-readout fiber calorimeter. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A **866**, 76 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2017.05.025

742. L. Pezzotti, Particle detectors R&D: Dual-readout calorimetry for future colliders and MicroMegas chambers for the ATLAS New Small Wheel Upgrade. PhD thesis, Pavia University (2021). https://iris.unipv.it/handle/11571/1429275

743. N. Akchurin et al., Particle identification in the longitudinally unsegmented RD52 calorimeter. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A **735**, 120 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2013.09.024

744. A. Yamamoto et al., A thin superconducting solenoid magnet for particle astrophysics. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. **12**, 438 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1109/TASC.2002.1018438

745. G. Bencivenni, R. De Oliveira, G. Morello, M. PoliLener, The micro-resistive WELL detector: a compact spark-protected single amplification-stage MPGD. JINST **10**, P02008 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/10/02/P02008. arXiv:1411.2466

746. R. Santonico, R. Cardarelli, Development of resistive plate counters. Nucl. Instrum. Methods **187**, 377 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1016/0029-554X(81)90363-3

747. T. Alexopoulos et al., A spark-resistant bulk-micromegas chamber for high-rate applications. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A **640**, 110 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2011.03.025

748. RD-FA Collaboration, First test-beam results obtained with IDEA, a detector concept designed for future lepton colliders. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A **958**, 162088 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2019.04.042 (Presented at the 15th Vienna Conference on Instrumentation, 18-22 February 2019, Vienna, Austria)

749. G. Bencivenni et al., The μ-RWELL layouts for high particle rate. JINST **14**, P05014 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-0221/14/05/P05014. arXiv:1903.11017
750. DRD1 Collaboration, A. Colaleo et al., DRD1 Extended R&D Proposal—Development of gaseous detectors technologies. CERN-DRDC-2024-003 (2024). https://cds.cern.ch/record/2885937/

751. OPAL Collaboration, Precision luminosity for $Z^0$ line shape measurements with a silicon tungsten calorimeter. Eur. Phys. J. C **14**, 373 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/s100520000353. arXiv:hep-ex/9910066

752. D. Bederede et al., SICAL—a high precision silicon-tungsten luminosity calorimeter for ALEPH. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A **365**, 117 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-9002(95)00409-2

753. CLIC Collaboration, Updated baseline for a staged Compact Linear Collider. https://doi.org/10.5170/CERN-2016-004. arXiv:1608.07537

754. H. Abramowicz et al., Performance and Molière radius measurements using a compact prototype of LumiCal in an electron test beam. Eur. Phys. J. C **79**, 579 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7077-9. arXiv:1812.11426

755. J. Moron et al., FLAME readout ASIC for LumiCal detector, in *Presented at the 32nd FCAL Collaboration Workshop* (2019). https://indico.cern.ch/event/697164/

756. J. Moron et al., Preparation of the FLAME based readout and DAQ system for the LumiCal test beam, in *Presented at the 34th FCAL Collaboration Workshop* (2019). https://indico.cern.ch/event/763554/

757. V. Chobanova, D.M. Santos, C. Prouve, M. Romero Lamas, Fast simulation of a forward detector at 50 and 100 TeV proton-proton colliders. arXiv:2012.02692

758. C. Prouve, Flavour on a forward detector at 50 and 100 TeV, in *Presented at the Conference on Flavour Physics and CP violation, 8–12 June 2020* (2020). https://indico.cern.ch/event/838862/

759. J. Butler, S. Stone et al., Proposal for an experiment to measure mixing CP violation and rare decays in charm and beauty particle decays at the Fermilab Collider—BTeV Preliminary Technical Design Report (1999). https://doi.org/10.2172/1433321

760. R. Contino et al., Physics at a 100 TeV pp collider: Higgs and EW symmetry breaking studies, CERN Yellow Reports: Monographs, CERN-2017-003 (2016). https://doi.org/10.23731/CYRM-2017-003.255. arXiv:1606.09408

761. F. Gaede et al., iLCSoft—the software ecosystem of the linear colliders. http://ilcsoft.desy.de/portal

762. Future HEP projects community, Future Collider Software Workshop (2019). https://agenda.infn.it/event/19047

763. Future HEP projects community, Mini-workshop: Experiment/Detector—Software and physics requirements for $e^+e^-$ colliders (2020). http://iasprogram.ust.hk/hep/2020/

764. M. Clemencic, B. Hegner, C. Leggett, Gaudi evolution for future challenges. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. **898**, 042044 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/898/4/042044 (Presented at the 22nd Int. Conference on Computing in High Energy and Nuclear Physics (CHEP 2016), 10–14 October 2016, San Francisco, USA)

765. M. Frank, F. Gaede, M. Petric, A. Sailer, AIDASoft/DD4hep (2018). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.592244. http://dd4hep.cern.ch/

766. F. Gaede et al., PODIO: recent developments in the Plain Old Data EDM toolkit. EPJ Web Conf. **245**, 05024 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/202024505024 (Presented at the 24th Int. Conference on Computing in High Energy and Nuclear Physics (CHEP 2019), Adelaide, Australia, 4–8 November 2019)

767. I. Antcheva et al., ROOT: a C++ framework for petabyte data storage, statistical analysis and visualization. Comput. Phys. Commun. **180**, 2499 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2009.08.005. arXiv:1508.07749

768. J. Allison et al., GEANT4 developments and applications. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. **53**, 270 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2006.869826

769. F. Gaede, Marlin and LCCD: software tools for the ILC. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A **559**, 177 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2005.11.138

770. A. Bocci et al., Bringing heterogeneity to the CMS software framework. EPJ Web Conf. **245**, 05009 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/202024505009. arXiv:2004.04334

771. ALICE Collaboration, The O2 software framework and GPU usage in ALICE online and offline reconstruction in Run 3. EPJ Web Conf. **295**, 05022 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/202429505022. arXiv:2402.01205

772. T. Gamblin et al., The Spack package manager: bringing order to HPC software chaos, in *Presented at the Int. Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis (SC '15)*, Austin, USA, 15–20 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1145/2807591.2807623

773. S. Aplin, J. Engels, F. Gaede, N.A. Graf, T. Johnson, J. McCormick, LCIO: a persistency framework and event data model for HEP, in *Presented at the IEEE 2012 Nuclear Science Symposium, Medical Imaging Conference, Anaheim, USA, 29 October – 3 November (2012)*. https://doi.org/10.1109/NSSMIC.2012.6551478

774. D. Schlatter et al., ALEPH in numbers. ALEPH Internal Note (1996). https://gitlab.cern.ch/aleph/doc/-/raw/master/legacy/ALEPH-In-Numbers.pdf

775. J. Fanini et al., ALEPH data preservation via migration to EDM4HEP, in *Presented at the 4th DPHEP Collaboration Workshop, 2–3 October 2024* (2024). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1432766

776. J. Fanini et al., ALEPH data in EDM4HEP, in *Presented at the 2nd FCC Italy & France Workshop, 4–6 November 2024* (2024). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1457081

777. J. Reuter et al., New developments on the WHIZARD event generator, in *Presented at the Int. Workshop on Future Linear Colliders (LCWS 2023)*, 15–19 May 2023, SLAC, USA. arXiv:2307.14900

778. T. Sjöstrand et al., An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2. Comput. Phys. Commun. **191**, 159 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2015.01.024. arXiv:1410.3012

779. S. Jadach et al., Multi-photon Monte Carlo event generator KKMCEE for lepton and quark pair production in lepton colliders. Comput. Phys. Commun. **283**, 108556 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2022.108556. arXiv:2204.11949

780. S. Jadach et al., Upgrade of the Monte Carlo program BHLUMI for Bhabha scattering at low angles to version 4.04. Comput. Phys. Commun. **102**, 229 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-4655(96)00156-7

781. C.M. Carloni Calame, G. Montagna, O. Nicrosini, F. Piccinini, The BABAYAGA event generator. Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. **131**, 48 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2004.02.008. arXiv:hep-ph/0312014 (Presented at the Workshop on Hadronic Cross-Section at Low-Energy, Pisa, Italy, 8–10 October 2003)

782. L. Garren, StdHep—Monte Carlo standardization at FNAL. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?doi=c8b00605c1313984f13dfb0003560453a190458c

783. HEPEvt Website. https://hugonweb.com/hepevt/
784. A. Buckley et al., The HepMC3 event record library for Monte Carlo event generators. Comput. Phys. Commun. **260**, 107310 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2020.107310. arXiv:1912.08005

785. T. Madlener et al., key4hep/k4simdelphes (2025). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4564682

786. HEP-FCC/k4SimGeant4—GitHub repository. https://github.com/HEP-FCC/k4SimGeant4

787. Monte Carlo support tools: future-proofing the bridge between theory and experiment. Institute for Particle Physics Phenomenology Workshop, 25–28 June 2024, Durham (2024). https://conference.ippp.dur.ac.uk/event/1312/

788. A. Price, D. Zerwas, Generator Benchmarking Integration, in *Presented at the Key4hep discussion meeting, 5 March 2024* (2023). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1378796/

789. A. Price, D. Zerwas, WG2: technical benchmarks for Monte Carlo generators, in *Presented at the Third ECFA workshop on e⁺e⁻ Higgs, Electroweak and Top Factories, 9–11 October 2024* (2024). https://indico.in2p3.fr/event/32629/

790. J. de Favereau et al., DELPHES 3, a modular framework for fast simulation of a generic collider experiment. JHEP **02**, 057 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP02(2014)057. arXiv:1307.6346

791. F. Bedeschi, L. Gouskos, M. Selvaggi, Jet flavour tagging for future colliders with fast simulation. Eur. Phys. J. C **82**, 646 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10609-1. arXiv:2202.03285

792. FCC-ee IDEA detector DELPHES card—GitHub Repository. https://github.com/delphes/delphes/blob/master/cards/delphes Card_IDEA.tcl

793. key4hep/k4geo GitHub Repository. https://github.com/key4hep/k4geo

794. N. Bacchetta et al., CLD—a detector concept for the FCC-ee. arXiv:1911.12230

795. F. Cuna, N. De Filippis, F. Grancagnolo, G.F. Tassielli, Simulation of particle identification with the cluster counting technique, in *Presented at the Int. Workshop on Future Linear Colliders, 15–18 March 2021*. arXiv:2105.07064 https://indico.cern.ch/event/995633/

796. E. Proserpio, R. Santoro, SimSiPM: a library for SiPM simulation—GitHub Repository (2021). https://github.com/EdoPro98/SimSiPM

797. E. Brondolin et al., Conformal tracking for all-silicon trackers at future electron-positron colliders. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A **956**, 163304 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2019.163304. arXiv:1908.00256. https://rich2018.org (Presented at the 10th Workshop on Ring Imaging Cherenkov Detectors (RICH2018), Moscow, Russia, 29 July–4 August 2018)

798. ONNX Community, ONNX: Open Neural Network Exchange—GitHub Repository (2024). https://github.com/onnx/onnx

799. ATLAS Collaboration, Topological cell clustering in the ATLAS calorimeters and its performance in LHC Run 1. Eur. Phys. J. C **77**, 490 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5004-5. arXiv:1603.02934

800. E. Brondolin, M. Rovere, F. Pantaleo, The k4Clue package: empowering future collider experiments with the CLUE algorithm. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A **1061**, 169100 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2024.169100. arXiv:2311.03089

801. M. Cacciari, G.P. Salam, G. Soyez, FastJet user manual. Eur. Phys. J. C **72**, 1896 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1896-2. arXiv:1111.6097

802. R. Forty, RICH pattern recognition for LHCb. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A **433**, 257 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-9002(99)00310-1 (Presented at the 3rd Int. Workshop on Ring Imaging Cherenkov Detectors: Advances in Cherenkov light imaging techniques and applications (RICH 1998), 15–20 November 1998, Ein Gedi, Israel)

803. H. Qu, L. Gouskos, ParticleNet: jet tagging via particle clouds. Phys. Rev. D **101**, 056019 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.101.056019. arXiv:1902.08570

804. E. Guiraud, A. Naumann, D. Piparo, TDataFrame: functional chains for ROOT data analyses (2017). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.260230

805. FCC Central Samples Catalog. https://fcc-physics-events.web.cern.ch/index.php

806. D. Thain, T. Tannenbaum, M. Livny, Distributed computing in practice: the Condor experience. Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp. **17**, 323 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1002/cpe.938

807. A. Hocker et al., TMVA—Toolkit for Multivariate Data Analysis. arXiv:physics/0703039

808. T. Chen, C. Guestrin, XGBoost: a scalable tree boosting system. https://doi.org/10.1145/2939672.2939785. arXiv:1603.02754 (Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining)

809. CMS Collaboration, The CMS statistical analysis and combination tool: COMBINE. Comput. Softw. Big Sci. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41781-024-00121-4. arXiv:2404.06614

810. L. Gray et al., Coffea (2025). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3266454

811. J. Bezanson, A. Edelman, S. Karpinski, V.B. Shah, Julia: a fresh approach to numerical computing. SIAM Rev. **59**, 65 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1137/141000671. arXiv:1411.1607

812. JuliaHEP Website. https://www.juliahep.org/

813. Phoenix—an experiment independent web-based event display for High Energy Physics. https://hepsoftwarefoundation.org/phoenix/

814. Visualising FCC events in the browser. https://fccsw.web.cern.ch/fccsw/phoenix/

815. JSROOT Website. https://root.cern.ch/js/

816. iLCSoft C Event Display—GitHub Repository. https://github.com/iLCSoft/CED

817. eede: EDM4hep Event Data Explorer—GitHub Repository. https://github.com/key4hep/eede

818. C. Helsens, G. Ganis, Offline computing resources for FCC-ee and related challenges. Eur. Phys. J. Plus **137**, 30 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02189-y. arXiv:2111.10094

819. D. Lange et al., CMS computing resources: meeting the demands of the high-luminosity LHC physics program. EPJ Web Conf. **214**, 03055 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201921403055 (Presented at the 23rd Int. Conference on Computing in High Energy and Nuclear Physics (CHEP 2018), Sofia, Bulgaria, 9–13 July 2018)

820. CMS Collaboration, CMS Offline and Computing public results (2022). https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/CMSPublic/CMSOfflineComputingResults

821. ATLAS Collaboration, ATLAS Software and Computing HL-LHC roadmap (2022). https://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/PHYSICS/UPGRADE/CERN-LHCC-2022-005

822. D. Piparo, Private communication (2024)

823. A. Rizzi, Flash-Sim, in *Presented at the 27th Conference on Computing in High Energy and Nuclear Physics, Krakow, Poland, 19–25 October 2024* (2024). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1338689/

824. Next Generation Trigger 1st technical workshop. CERN Workshop, 25–27 November 2024 (2024). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1421629/
825. S. García-Pareja1, A.M. Lallena, F. Salvat, Variance-reduction methods for Monte Carlo simulation of radiation transport. Front. Phys. **9**, (2021). https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2021.718873

826. R. Aßmann et al., Calibration of center-of-mass energies at LEP-1 for precise measurements of Z properties. Eur. Phys. J. C **6**, 187 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/s100529801030

827. V.V. Anashin et al., Final analysis of KEDR data on J/ψ and ψ(2S) masses. Phys. Lett. B **749**, 50 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2015.07.057

828. M. Kazanecki, Impact of the uncertainty in the ISR prediction on determination of $\sqrt{s}$ energy spread using dimuon events, in *Presented at the FCC Physics Performance meeting, 16 September 2024* (2024). https://indico.cern.ch/event/1453429/

829. ATLAS Collaboration, Search for the Higgs boson decays $H \to ee$ and $H \to e\mu$ in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector. Phys. Lett. B **801**, 135148 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2019.135148. arXiv:1909.10235

830. CMS Collaboration, Search for the Higgs boson decay to a pair of electrons in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV. Phys. Lett. B **846**, 137783 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2023.137783. arXiv:2208.00265

831. D. d'Enterria, Search of resonant s-channel Higgs production at FCC-ee, in *Presented at the FCC-ee (TLEP) Physics Workshop*. https://indico.cern.ch/event/337673

832. D. d'Enterria, Higgs physics at the Future Circular Collider. PoS ICHEP2016, 434 (2017). https://doi.org/10.22323/1.282.0434. arXiv:1701.02663. http://ichep2016.uchicago.edu (Presented at the 38th Int. Conference on High Energy Physics (ICHEP 2016), 3–10 August 2016, Chicago, USA)

833. S. Jadach, R.A. Kycia, Lineshape of the Higgs boson in future lepton colliders. Phys. Lett. B **755**, 58 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2016.01.065. arXiv:1509.02406

834. M. Greco, T. Han, Z. Liu, ISR effects for resonant Higgs production at future lepton colliders. Phys. Lett. B **763**, 409 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2016.10.078. arXiv:1607.03210

835. H. Davoudiasl, P.P. Giardino, Electron g-2 foreshadowing discoveries at FCC-ee. Phys. Rev. D **109**, 075037 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.075037. arXiv:2311.12112

836. R. Boughezal, F. Petriello, K. Şimşek, Transverse spin asymmetries and the electron Yukawa coupling at an FCC-ee. Phys. Rev. D **110**, 075026 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.110.075026. arXiv:2407.12975

837. F. Zimmermann, M. Valdivia García, Optimized monochromatization for direct Higgs production in future circular $e^+e^-$ colliders. https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2017-WEPIK015. https://ipac17.org (Presented at the 8th Int. Particle Accelerator Conference (IPAC 2017), 14–19 May 2017, Copenhagen, Denmark)

838. V.I. Telnov, Monochromatization of $e^+e^-$ colliders with a large crossing angle. Mod. Phys. Lett. A **39**, 2440002 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217732324400029. arXiv:2008.13668

839. A. Faus-Golfe, M. Valdivia García, F. Zimmermann, The challenge of monochromatization: Direct s-channel Higgs production: $e^+e^- \to H$. Eur. Phys. J. Plus **137**, 31 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02151-y

840. D. d'Enterria, V.D. Le, Sensitivity to the electron Yukawa coupling of Higgs production processes in $e^+e^-$ collisions (2025) (in preparation)

841. D. d'Enterria, P. Skands et al., Parton radiation and fragmentation from LHC to FCC-ee, in *CERN Workshop, 21–22 November 2016, Geneva, Switzerland*. arXiv:1702.01329. https://indico.cern.ch/event/557400/

842. M. Valdivia García, Optimized Monochromatization under Beamstrahlung for Direct Higgs Production. PhD thesis, Guanajuato University (2022). https://cds.cern.ch/record/2886260

843. Z. Zhang et al., Monochromatization interaction region optics design for direct s-channel Higgs production at FCC-ee. Nucl. Instrum. Methods A **1073**, 170268 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2025.170268. arXiv:2411.04210

844. A. Renieri, Possibility of achieving very high-energy resolution in electron-positron storage rings (1975). https://inspirehep.net/literature/101366

845. M. Valdivia García, A. Faus-Golfe, F. Zimmermann, Towards a monochromatization scheme for direct Higgs production at FCC-ee, in *Presented at the 7th Int. Particle Accelerator Conference (IPAC 2016), 8–13 May 2016, Busan, South Korea*. https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2016-WEPMW009. http://www.ipac16.org

846. Z. Zhang, Interaction region optics design of a monochromatization scheme for direct s-channel Higgs production at FCC-ee. PhD thesis, Université Paris-Saclay (2024). https://theses.fr/2024UPASP139

847. J. Keintzel et al., FCC-ee lattice design. JACoW eeFACT2022, 52 (2023). https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-eeFACT2022-TUYAT0102. https://w3.lnf.infn.it/event/64th-icfa-advanced-beam-dynamics-workshop-on-high-luminosity-circular-ee-colliders-eefact2022/ (Presented at the 65th ICFA Advanced Beam Dynamics Workshop on High Luminosity Circular $e^+e^-$ Colliders (eeFACT2022), 12–16 September 2022, Frascati, Italy)

848. L. van Riesen-Haupt et al., The status of the FCC-ee optics tuning. JACoW IPAC2024, WEPR02 (2024). https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2024-WEPR02. https://ipac24.org (Presented at the 15th Int. Particle Accelerator Conference, Nashville, USA, 19–24 May 2024)

849. Joint Statement of Intent between The United States of America and The European Organization for Nuclear Research concerning Future Planning for Large Research Infrastructure Facilities, Advanced Scientific Computing, and Open Science (2024). https://www.state.gov/joint-statement-of-intent-between-the-united-states-of-america-and-the-european-organization-for-nuclear-research-concerning-future-planning-for-large-research-infrastructure-facilities-advanced-scie/

850. Medium-Term Plan for the period 2025–2029 and Draft Budget of the Organization for the Seventy-First Financial Year 2025. Scientific Policy Committee—Three-Hundred-and-Thirty-Ninth Meeting (2024). https://cds.cern.ch/record/2898096

851. The Future of European Competitiveness: In-depth analysis and recommendations (2024). https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/ec1409c1-d4b4-4882-8bdd-3519f86bbb92_en