On the mistake in the implementation of the minimal model of the dual parametrization and resulting inability to describe the high-energy deeply virtual Compton data

Guzey, V.; Teckentrup, T.

doi:10.1103/physrevd.79.017501

Cited by 29 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[60]. Note that a mistake has been found in this GPD model [61]; however, the model described previously reported HERMES beam-charge [22] and preliminary (singlecharge) beam-helicity asymmetries well [62] and thus is considered to be adequate for systematic studies. In each bin, the systematic uncertainty is taken as the difference between the model prediction at the mean kinematic value of that bin and the respective amplitude extracted from the reconstructed Monte Carlo data.…”

Section: Background Corrections and Systematic Uncertaintiesmentioning

confidence: 93%

Measurement of azimuthal asymmetries associated with deeply virtual Compton scattering on an unpolarized deuterium target

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Azimuthal asymmetries in exclusive electroproduction of a real photon from an unpolarized deuterium target are measured with respect to beam helicity and charge. They appear in the distribution of these photons in the azimuthal angle φ around the virtual-photon direction, relative to the lepton scattering plane. The extracted asymmetries are attributed to either the deeply virtual Compton scattering process or its interference with the Bethe-Heitler process. They are compared with earlier results on the proton target. In the measured kinematic region, the beam-charge asymmetry amplitudes and the leading amplitudes of the beam-helicity asymmetries on an unpolarized deuteron target are compatible with the results from unpolarized protons.

show abstract

Section: Background Corrections and Systematic Uncertaintiesmentioning

confidence: 93%

Measurement of azimuthal asymmetries associated with deeply virtual Compton scattering on an unpolarized deuterium target

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The corresponding data analysis was much less consecutive and only partially consistent [44,45]. This is, however, not related to any fundamental drawback of the dual parametrization formalism.…”

Section: Jhep03(2015)052mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dual parametrization of generalized parton distributions in two equivalent representations

Müller

Polyakov

Semenov-Tian-Shansky

2015

J. High Energ. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The dual parametrization and the Mellin-Barnes integral approach represent two frameworks for handling the double partial wave expansion of generalized parton distributions (GPDs) in the conformal partial waves and in the t-channel SO(3) partial waves. Within the dual parametrization framework, GPDs are represented as integral convolutions of forward-like functions whose Mellin moments generate the conformal moments of GPDs. The Mellin-Barnes integral approach is based on the analytic continuation of the GPD conformal moments to the complex values of the conformal spin. GPDs are then represented as the Mellin-Barnes-type integrals in the complex conformal spin plane. In this paper we explicitly show the equivalence of these two independently developed GPD representations. Furthermore, we clarify the notions of the J = 0 fixed pole and the D-form factor. We also provide some insight into GPD modeling and map the phenomenologically successful Kumerički-Müller GPD model to the dual parametrization framework by presenting the set of the corresponding forward-like functions. We also build up the reparametrization procedure allowing to recast the double distribution representation of GPDs in the Mellin-Barnes integral framework and present the explicit formula for mapping double distributions into the space of double partial wave amplitudes with complex conformal spin.

show abstract

“…In either case 1000 hours of beam time is used for the rate projections. For quantitative estimates of the cross sections the dual model [21,22] is used. It incorporates parameterizations of the GPDs H and E. As shown in Fig.…”

Section: Estimates Of Charge Asymmetries For Different Lepton Chargesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Positrons at JLab advancing nuclear science in Hall B

Burkert¹

2018

AIP Conference Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this talk I address two high impact physics programs that require the use of polarized and unpolarized positron beams in addition to using electron beams of the same energy. First, I address what will be gained from using positron beams in addition to electron beams in the extraction of the Compton Form Factors (CFFs) and generalized parton distributions (GPDs) from Deeply Virtual Compton Scattering (DVCS) on a proton target. As a second high impact science program I discuss an experimental scenario using unpolarized positrons to measure elastic scattering on protons in an effort to determine definitively the 2-photon exchange contributions in order to resolve a longstanding discrepancy in the determination of the proton's electric and magnetic form factors.

show abstract

On the mistake in the implementation of the minimal model of the dual parametrization and resulting inability to describe the high-energy deeply virtual Compton data

Cited by 29 publications

References 13 publications

Measurement of azimuthal asymmetries associated with deeply virtual Compton scattering on an unpolarized deuterium target

Measurement of azimuthal asymmetries associated with deeply virtual Compton scattering on an unpolarized deuterium target

Dual parametrization of generalized parton distributions in two equivalent representations

Positrons at JLab advancing nuclear science in Hall B

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About