Separated kaon electroproduction cross section and the kaon form factor from 6 GeV JLab data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The $^{1}\mathrm{H}(e,{e}^{\ensuremath{'}}{K}^{+})\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Lambda}}$ reaction was studied as a function of the Mandelstam variable $\ensuremath{-}t$ using data from the E01-004 (FPI-2) and E93-018 experiments that were carried out in Hall C at the 6 GeV Jefferson Laboratory. The cross section was fully separated into longitudinal and transverse components, and two interference terms at four-momentum transfers ${Q}^{2}$ of 1.00, 1.36, and 2.$07{\mathrm{GeV}}^{2}$. The kaon form factor was extracted from the longitudinal cross section using the Regge model by Vanderhaeghen et al. [Phys. Rev. C 57, 1454 (1998)]. The results establish the method, previously used successfully for pion analyses, for extracting the kaon form factor. Data from 12 GeV Jefferson Laboratory experiments are expected to have sufficient precision to distinguish between theoretical predictions, for example, recent perturbative QCD calculations with modern parton distribution amplitudes. The leading-twist behavior for light mesons is predicted to set in for values of ${Q}^{2}$ between 5 and $10{\mathrm{GeV}}^{2}$, which makes data in the few-GeV regime particularly interesting. The ${Q}^{2}$ dependence at fixed $x$ and $\ensuremath{-}t$ of the longitudinal cross section that we extracted seems consistent with the QCD factorization prediction within the experimental uncertainty.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".