MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317899397 · doi:10.22323/1.430.0258

NLO Effects in QCD Sum-Rule Analyses of $f_{0}(500)$ as a Tetraquark state

2023· article· en· W4317899397 on OpenAlexaff
Bárbara Cid-Mora, T.G. Steele

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of The 39th International Symposium on Lattice Field Theory — PoS(LATTICE2022) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTetraquarkQuantum chromodynamicsPhysicsSum rule in quantum mechanicsParticle physicsQCD sum rulesSigmaOrder (exchange)Dimension (graph theory)Coupling (piping)QuarkState (computer science)Quantum mechanicsMathematicsCombinatoricsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

QCD sum-rule studies have been useful to understand and get an insight on the structure of exotic states, such as tetraquark systems. Moreover, the majority of these studies are performed only at leading-order (LO) within the light tetraquarks systems picture, overlooking the effects of higher order corrections, thus motivating our analysis. Our study [1] focused on the effects of next-to-leading order (NLO) contributions to the mass estimates of the lightest tetraquark state ($J^{PC} = 0^{++}$), the so-called $\sigma$ or $f_{0}(500)$[2], using ratios of QCD Laplace sum-rules. A variety of different models were used, which included multiple resonances and width effects, resulting in a final mass prediction of $0.52\,\text{GeV}< m_{\sigma}< 0.77\,\text{GeV}$. Even though the ratios of sum-rules demonstrated some insesitivity under superficially large NLO contributions, they added the beneficial feature of canceling the dependence on the anomalous dimension. Our findings were in good agreement with patterns found in Chiral Lagrangian studies regarding the four-quark structure of the $\sigma$ state, including the relative coupling strengths within the multiple resonance analysis.

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)0.001
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 score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.802

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of The 39th International Symposium on Lattice Field Theory — PoS(LATTICE2022)Same topicQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle InteractionsFrench-language works237,207