Proton and neutron electromagnetic form factors and uncertainties

Ye, Z.; Arrington, J.; Hill, Richard J.; Lee, Gabriel

doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2017.11.023

Cited by 141 publications

(218 citation statements)

References 136 publications

(181 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

206

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We use proton and neutron form factors from [20] (see also [62] for a recent re-evaluation of nucleon form factors). The form factors of the proton were obtained from fits to measurements of argon iron argon iron R 9 fm 9 fm a (9) the electron-proton elastic scattering cross section and polarization transfer measurements.…”

Section: Appendix B: Nucleon Form Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neutrino tridents at DUNE

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The DUNE near detector will collect an unprecedented large number of neutrino interactions, allowing the precise measurement of rare processes such as neutrino trident production, i.e. the generation of a lepton-antilepton pair through the scattering of a neutrino off a heavy nucleus. The event rate of this process is a powerful probe to a well-motivated parameter space of new physics beyond the Standard Model. In this paper, we perform a detailed study of the sensitivity of the DUNE near detector to neutrino tridents. We provide predictions for the Standard Model cross sections and corresponding event rates at the near detector for the ν µ → ν µ µ + µ − , ν µ → ν µ e + e − and ν µ → ν e e + µ − trident interactions (and the corresponding antineutrino modes), discussing their uncertainties. We analyze all relevant backgrounds, utilize a Geant4-based simulation of the DUNE-near detector liquid argon TPC (the official DUNE simulation at the time of writing this paper), and identify a set of selection cuts that would allow the DUNE near detector to measure the ν µ → ν µ µ + µ − cross section with a ∼ 40% accuracy after running in neutrino and anti-neutrino modes for ∼3 years each. We show that this measurement would be highly sensitive to new physics, and, in particular, we find that the parameter space of models with gauged L µ − L τ that can explain the (g − 2) µ anomaly could be covered with large significance. As a byproduct, a new Monte Carlo tool to generate neutrino trident events is made publicly available. *

show abstract

Section: Appendix B: Nucleon Form Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neutrino tridents at DUNE

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…whereas, using the parameter values given in the original Kelly fit [16] gives r p−n E | exp = 0.926(4) , r p−n M | exp = 0.872 (7) .…”

Section: Appendix C: Esc In the Extraction Of The Form Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…GeV 2 ] t 0 = 0.4 a15m310 M E = 0.934(5), r E = 0.732(4)[2.54] k = 4, r E = 0.720(7)[1.26] k = 5 + 4, r E = 0.717(8)[1.20] GeV 2 ] t 0 = 0.4 a12m310 M E = 0.913(14), r E = 0.749(11)[0.86] k = 4, r E = 0.736(16)[0.37] k = 5 + 4, r E = 0.727(18)[0.35] GeV 2 ]t 0 = 0.2 a12m220 M E = 0.885(17), r E = 0.772(15)[0.54] k = 4, r E = 0.747(27)[0.21] k = 5 + 4, r E = 0.740(30)[0.21] GeV 2 ] t 0 = 0.2 a12m220L M E = 0.901(8), r E = 0.758(7)[0.54] k = 4, r E = 0.758(22)[0.38] k = 5 + 4, r E = 0.750(23)[0.41] GeV 2 ] t 0 = 0.4 a09m310 M E = 0.980(6), r E = 0.698(4)[1.41] k = 4, r E = 0.696(6)[0.26] k = 5 + 4, r E = 0.693(7)[0.25] GeV 2 ] t 0 = 0.2 a09m220 M E = 0.897(11), r E = 0.762(9)[0.31] k = 4, r E = 0.757(18)[0.28] k = 5 + 4, r E = 0.753(18)[0.28] GeV 2 ] t 0 = 0.4 a06m310 M E = 0.924(29), r E = 0.740(23)[0.80] k = 4, r E = 0.733(22)[0.25] k = 5 + 4, r E = 0.731(23)[0.24] GeV 2 ] t 0 = 0.2 a06m220 M E = 0.932(19), r E = 0.734(15)[0.85] k = 4, r E = 0.749(27)[0.25] k = 5 + 4, r E = 0.753(29)[0.24] GeV 2 ] t 0 = 0.12 a09m130W M E = 0.892(11), r E = 0.766(10)[0.76] k = 4, r E = 0.712(47)[0.51] k = 5 + 4, r E = 0.739(48)[0.52] GeV 2 ] t 0 = 0.12 a06m135 M E = 0.883(19), r E = 0.774(16)[0.94] k = 4, r E = 0.738(56)[0.49] k = 5 + 4, r E = 0.805(63)[0.49]…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Nucleon electromagnetic form factors in the continuum limit from ( 2+1+1 )-flavor lattice QCD

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present results for the isovector (p−n) electromagnetic form factors of the nucleon using eleven ensembles of gauge configurations generated by the MILC collaboration using the highly improved staggered quark (HISQ) action with 2+1+1 dynamical flavors. These ensembles span four lattice spacings a ≈ 0.06, 0.09, 0.12 and 0.15 fm and three values of the light-quark masses corresponding to the pion masses Mπ ≈ 135, 225 and 315 MeV. High-statistics estimates using the truncated solver method method allow us to quantify various systematic uncertainties and perform a simultaneous extrapolation in the lattice spacing, lattice volume and light-quark masses. We analyze the Q 2 dependence of the form factors calculated over the range 0.05 Q 2 ∼ 1.4 GeV 2 using both the model independent z-expansion and the dipole ansatz. Our final estimates, using the z-expansion fit, for the isovector root-mean-square radius of nucleon are rE = 0.769 (27)(30) fm, rM = 0.671(48)(76) fm and µ p−n = 3.939(86)(138) Bohr magneton. The first error is the combined uncertainty from the leading-order analysis, and the second is an estimate of the additional uncertainty due to using the leading order chiral-continuum-finite-volume fits. The estimates from the dipole ansatz, rE = 0.765(11)(8) fm, rM = 0.704(21)(29) fm and µ p−n = 3.975(84)(125) Bohr magneton, are consistent with those from the z-expansion but with smaller errors. Our analysis highlights three points. First, all our data for form factors from the eleven ensembles and existing lattice data on, or close to, physical mass ensembles from other collaborations collapses more clearly onto a single curve when plotted versus Q 2 /M 2 N as compared to Q 2 with the scale set by quantities other than MN . The difference between these two ways of analyzing the data is indicative of discretization errors, some of which presumably cancel when the data are plotted versus Q 2 /M 2 N . Second, the size of the remaining deviation of this common curve from the Kelly curve is small and can be accounted for by statistical and possible systematic uncertainties. Third, to improve lattice estimates for r 2 E , r 2 M and µ, high statistics data for Q 2 < 0.1 GeV 2 are needed.

show abstract

“…Using the most recent z-expansion fit to nucleon electromagnetic form factors [91] and a new lattice-QCD calculation of strange-quark form factors [92], one can see that the strangequark contribution increases the neutral-current Pauli form factor, F NC 2 (q 2 ), by about 3.1% and 2.5% at q 2 = 0 and q 2 = −0.1 GeV 2 , respectively. Although the strange-quark contribution is small, the coefficients ( 1 2 − sin 2 θ W ) and sin 2 θ W suppress the two combinations of nucleon electromagnetic form factors in Eq.…”

Section: A Nucleon Form Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lattice QCD and neutrino-nucleus scattering

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This document is one of a series of whitepapers from the USQCD collaboration. Here, we discuss opportunities for lattice QCD in neutrino-oscillation physics, which inevitably entails nucleon and nuclear structure. In addition to discussing pertinent lattice-QCD calculations of nucleon and nuclear matrix elements, the interplay with models of nuclei is discussed. This program of lattice-QCD calculations is relevant to current and upcoming neutrino experiments, becoming increasingly important on the timescale of LBNF/DUNE and HyperK. * Editor, ask@fnal.gov † Editor, dgr@jlab.org arXiv:1904.09931v1 [hep-lat]

show abstract

Proton and neutron electromagnetic form factors and uncertainties

Cited by 141 publications

References 136 publications

Neutrino tridents at DUNE

Neutrino tridents at DUNE

Nucleon electromagnetic form factors in the continuum limit from ( 2+1+1 )-flavor lattice QCD

Lattice QCD and neutrino-nucleus scattering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About