MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Separated Response Function Ratios in Exclusive, Forward<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi>π</mml:mi><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math>Electroproduction

2014· article· lv· W2155763512 on OpenAlexafffund
G. M. Huber, H.P. Blok, C. Butuceanu, D. Gaskell, T. Horn, D. Mack, D. Abbott, K. Aniol, H. Anklin, Christopher Armstrong, J. Arrington, K. Assamagan, S. Avery, O. K. Baker, B. Barrett, E. J. Beise, C. Bochna, W. Boeglin, E. J. Brash, H. Breuer, Chih‐Wei Chang, N. S. Chant, M. E. Christy, J. Dunne, T. Eden, R. Ent, H. Fenker, E. F. Gibson, R. Gilman, K. Gustafsson, W. Hinton, R. J. Holt, H. E. Jackson, Shan Jin, M. Jones, C. Keppel, P. H. Kim, W. Kim, P. M. King, A. Klein, D. Koltenuk, V. Kovaltchouk, M. Liang, Jianglai Liu, G. J. Lolos, A. Lung, D. J. Margaziotis, P. Markowitz, Akihiko Matsumura, D. McKee, D. Meekins, Jason W. Mitchell, T. Miyoshi, H. Mkrtchyan, B. Mueller, G. Niculescu, I. Niculescu, Y. Okayasu, L. Pentchev, C. F. Perdrisat, D. Pitz, D. H. Potterveld, V. Punjabi, L. M. Qin, P. E. Reimer, J. Reinhold, J. Roche, P. G. Roos, A. Sarty, I. K. Shin, G.R. Smith, S. Stepanyan, L. Tang, V. Tadevosyan, V. Tvaskis, R. L. J. van der Meer, K. Vansyoc, Derek van Westrum, S. Vidakovic, J. Volmer, W. Vulcan, G. Warren, S. A. Wood, Chang Xu, Chao Yan, W. Zhao, Xiaochao Zheng, B. Zihlmann

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2014
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversityUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of ReginaKorea Science and Engineering FoundationU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhysicsPionParticle physicsIsoscalarIsovectorNucleonQuarkQuantum chromodynamicsCoupling (piping)Nuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study of exclusive ${\ensuremath{\pi}}^{\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}}$ electroproduction on the nucleon, including separation of the various structure functions, is of interest for a number of reasons. The ratio ${R}_{L}={\ensuremath{\sigma}}_{L}^{{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{\ensuremath{-}}}/{\ensuremath{\sigma}}_{L}^{{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{+}}$ is sensitive to isoscalar contamination to the dominant isovector pion exchange amplitude, which is the basis for the determination of the charged pion form factor from electroproduction data. A change in the value of ${R}_{T}={\ensuremath{\sigma}}_{T}^{{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{\ensuremath{-}}}/{\ensuremath{\sigma}}_{T}^{{\ensuremath{\pi}}^{+}}$ from unity at small $\ensuremath{-}t$, to $1/4$ at large $\ensuremath{-}t$, would suggest a transition from coupling to a (virtual) pion to coupling to individual quarks. Furthermore, the mentioned ratios may show an earlier approach to perturbative QCD than the individual cross sections. We have performed the first complete separation of the four unpolarized electromagnetic structure functions above the dominant resonances in forward, exclusive ${\ensuremath{\pi}}^{\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}}$ electroproduction on the deuteron at central ${Q}^{2}$ values of 0.6, 1.0, $1.6\text{ }\text{ }{\mathrm{GeV}}^{2}$ at $W=1.95\text{ }\mathrm{GeV}$, and ${Q}^{2}=2.45\text{ }\text{ }{\mathrm{GeV}}^{2}$ at $W=2.22\text{ }\mathrm{GeV}$. Here, we present the $L$ and $T$ cross sections, with emphasis on ${R}_{L}$ and ${R}_{T}$, and compare them with theoretical calculations. Results for the separated ratio ${R}_{L}$ indicate dominance of the pion-pole diagram at low $\ensuremath{-}t$, while results for ${R}_{T}$ are consistent with a transition between pion knockout and quark knockout mechanisms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review Letters→Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies→French-language works237,207→