Charged pion form factor between<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0</mml:mn><mml:mo>.</mml:mo><mml:mn>60</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math>and<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn><mml:mo>.</mml:mo><mml:mn>45</mml:mn><mml:mi> </mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">GeV</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math>. II. Determination of, and results for, the pion form factor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The charged pion form factor, ${F}_{\ensuremath{\pi}}({Q}^{2})$, is an important quantity that can be used to advance our knowledge of hadronic structure. However, the extraction of ${F}_{\ensuremath{\pi}}$ from data requires a model of the ${}^{1}\mathrm{H}(e,{e}^{'}{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{+})n$ reaction and thus is inherently model dependent. Therefore, a detailed description of the extraction of the charged pion form factor from electroproduction data obtained recently at Jefferson Lab is presented, with particular focus given to the dominant uncertainties in this procedure. Results for ${F}_{\ensuremath{\pi}}$ are presented for ${Q}^{2}=0.60\text{\ensuremath{-}}2.45 {\mathrm{GeV}}^{2}$. Above ${Q}^{2}=1.5 {\mathrm{GeV}}^{2}$, the ${F}_{\ensuremath{\pi}}$ values are systematically below the monopole parametrization that describes the low ${Q}^{2}$ data used to determine the pion charge radius. The pion form factor can be calculated in a wide variety of theoretical approaches, and the experimental results are compared to a number of calculations. This comparison is helpful in understanding the role of soft versus hard contributions to hadronic structure in the intermediate ${Q}^{2}$ regime.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.447 | 0.304 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".