Dynamical spin effects in the holographic light-front wavefunctions of light pseudoscalar mesons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We quantify the importance of dynamical spin effects in the holographic light-front wavefunctions of the pion, kaon, $\ensuremath{\eta}$ and ${\ensuremath{\eta}}^{\ensuremath{'}}$. Using a universal AdS/QCD scale and constituent quark masses, we find that such effects are maximal in the pion where they lead to an excellent simultaneous description of a wide range of data: the decay constant, charge radius, spacelike EM and transition form factors, as well as, after QCD evolution, both the parton distribution function and the parton distribution amplitude data from Fermilab. These dynamical spin effects lead up to a 30% chance of finding the valence quark and antiquark with aligned spins in the pion. The situation is very different for the kaon, where a simultaneous description of the available data (decay constant, radius and spacelike EM form factor) prefer no dynamical spin effects at all. The situation is less clear for the $\ensuremath{\eta}$ and ${\ensuremath{\eta}}^{\ensuremath{'}}$: while their radiative decay widths data are consistent with dynamical spin effects only in ${\ensuremath{\eta}}^{\ensuremath{'}}$, the data on their spacelike transition form factors clearly favor maximal dynamical spin effects in both mesons.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".