Complementarity of experimental and lattice QCD data on pion parton distributions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We extract pion parton distribution functions (PDFs) in a Monte Carlo global QCD analysis of experimental data together with reduced Ioffe time pseudo-distributions and matrix elements of current-current correlators generated from lattice QCD. By including both experimental and lattice QCD data, our analysis rigorously quantifies both the uncertainties of the pion PDFs and systematic effects intrinsic to the lattice QCD observables. The reduced Ioffe time pseudo-distributions significantly decrease the uncertainties on the PDFs, while the current-current correlators are limited by the systematic effects associated with the lattice. Consistent with recent phenomenological determinations, the behavior of the valence quark distribution of the pion at large momentum fraction is found to be $\ensuremath{\sim}(1\ensuremath{-}x{)}^{{\ensuremath{\beta}}_{\mathrm{eff}}}$ with ${\ensuremath{\beta}}_{\mathrm{eff}}\ensuremath{\approx}1.0--1.2$.
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".