MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2473474931 · doi:10.1007/jhep10(2016)013

Gluon and Wilson loop TMDs for hadrons of spin ≤ 1

2016· article· en· W2473474931 on OpenAlexaff
Daniël Boer, Sabrina Cotogno, Tom van Daal, P. J. Mulders, Andrea Signori, Ya-jin Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of High Energy Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekStichting voor Fundamenteel Onderzoek der Materie
KeywordsPhysicsGluonPartonParticle physicsDrell–Yan processHadronQuantum chromodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we consider the parametrizations of gluon transverse momentum dependent (TMD) correlators in terms of TMD parton distribution functions (PDFs). These functions, referred to as TMDs, are defined as the Fourier transforms of hadronic matrix elements of nonlocal combinations of gluon fields. The nonlocality is bridged by gauge links, which have characteristic paths (future or past pointing), giving rise to a process dependence that breaks universality. For gluons, the specific correlator with one future and one past pointing gauge link is, in the limit of small x, related to a correlator of a single Wilson loop. We present the parametrization of Wilson loop correlators in terms of Wilson loop TMDs and discuss the relation between these functions and the small-x ‘dipole’ gluon TMDs. This analysis shows which gluon TMDs are leading or suppressed in the small-x limit. We discuss hadronic targets that are unpolarized, vector polarized (relevant for spin-1/2 and spin-1 hadrons), and tensor polarized (relevant for spin-1 hadrons). The latter are of interest for studies with a future Electron-Ion Collider with polarized deuterons.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations182
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of High Energy PhysicsSame topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesFrench-language works237,207