2015
DOI: 10.1103/physrevd.92.054511
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nucleon electromagnetic form factors in two-flavor QCD

Abstract: We present results for the nucleon electromagnetic form factors, including the momentum transfer dependence and derived quantities (charge radii and magnetic moment). The analysis is performed using O(a) improved Wilson fermions in N f = 2 QCD measured on the CLS ensembles. Particular focus is placed on a systematic evaluation of the influence of excited states in three-point correlation functions, which lead to a biased evaluation, if not accounted for correctly. We argue that the use of summed operator inser… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
90
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 76 publications
(98 citation statements)
references
References 112 publications
6
90
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Whereas the early quenched calculations are summarized in the review articles [442,450], nowadays essentially all calculations are performed using dynamical fermions. Studies of electromagnetic nucleon form factors are available from various collaborations for N f = 2 [451][452][453][454][455], N f = 2 + 1 [397,[456][457][458][459][460][461][462] and N f = 2 + 1 + 1 flavours [463,464], including calculations nearly at the physical pion mass [397] which agree reasonably well with the experimental data. However, they are so far restricted to moderately low Q 2 and still carry sizeable statistical errors; for example, the necessary precision for an unambiguous determination of the proton's charge radius is not yet within reach.…”
Section: Methodological Overviewmentioning
confidence: 65%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Whereas the early quenched calculations are summarized in the review articles [442,450], nowadays essentially all calculations are performed using dynamical fermions. Studies of electromagnetic nucleon form factors are available from various collaborations for N f = 2 [451][452][453][454][455], N f = 2 + 1 [397,[456][457][458][459][460][461][462] and N f = 2 + 1 + 1 flavours [463,464], including calculations nearly at the physical pion mass [397] which agree reasonably well with the experimental data. However, they are so far restricted to moderately low Q 2 and still carry sizeable statistical errors; for example, the necessary precision for an unambiguous determination of the proton's charge radius is not yet within reach.…”
Section: Methodological Overviewmentioning
confidence: 65%
“…For example, the three-point correlator in (4.8) singles out the ground state matrix element for asymptotically large Euclidean time separations, but in practice one has to deal with the admixture from excited states whose magnitude is encoded in the overlaps r λ . Several methods have been developed to address the problem such as the summation method or employing two-state fits; see [397,455,464] for details. For form factors involving unstable particles such as the ∆ or the Roper resonance, disentangling the physical from the scattering states becomes an additional obstacle.…”
Section: Methodological Overviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For this study, we use a Clover action on three different CLS 2-flavor lattices with β = 5.3 and c sw = 1.90952 which corresponds to a lattice spacing of a = 0.0658(7)(7) fm [16] and pion masses ranging from 437 MeV to 265 MeV [17], listed in Table 1. Table 1.…”
Section: Using the Lüscher Condition [1-3]mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The hopping parameters for the light sea quarks {κ ud , κ s } = {0.126117, 0.124812} are chosen to be near the physical point. We calculate iso-vector nucleon form factors in the vector, axial-vector and pseudo-scalar channels with a large spatial volume of (8.1 fm) 3 and a simulated pion mass reaching down to m π = 145 MeV in 2+1 flavor QCD. A brief summary of our simulation parameters are tabulated in Table 1.…”
Section: Simulation Detailsmentioning
confidence: 99%