REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 58 references
This paper reports the first measurement of the sine of the relative phase between the proton's psionic (time-like) form factors, sin ΔΦ = −0.20 ± 0.34 (stat) ± 0.11 (syst), obtained from the normal polarization of the proton in e⁺e⁻ → J/ψ
Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →
T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash
2026-08-01 11:12 UTC pith:6WWWA4EK
load-bearing objection A genuine first measurement — the proton psionic form-factor phase — but the headline number is consistent with zero, and the paper's soft spot is the analyzing-power calibration, not the statistics. the 3 major comments →
First Measurement of the Relative Phase between Proton Psionic Form Factors
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
Core claim
The central claim is that the sine of the relative phase ΔΦ between the psionic electric and magnetic form factors of the proton can be extracted from the normal polarization P_y of the proton in e⁺e⁻ → J/ψ → p p̄, and that P_y can be measured without a dedicated polarimeter by using the detector's own material: protons that scatter elastically off hydrogen in the mineral-oil layer of the beam pipe produce a spin-dependent azimuthal asymmetry proportional to P_y A_N(θ), where A_N(θ) is the empirically known analyzing power for proton-proton scattering. Fitting the azimuthal distribution of the scattering events yields sin ΔΦ = −0.20 ± 0.34 (stat) ± 0.11 (syst). This is the first direct deter
What carries the argument
The central object is the normal polarization P_y of the final-state proton, related to the relative phase by P_y = sqrt(1−α²) cosθ_p sinθ_p sinΔΦ / (1 + α cos²θ_p), where α is the J/ψ → p p̄ decay parameter. P_y is measured through the azimuthal asymmetry of elastic proton-proton scattering: dσ/dϕ ∝ 1 + P_y A_N(θ) cosϕ, where A_N(θ) is the proton-proton analyzing power. The detector itself becomes a proton polarimeter: the beam-pipe oil layer serves as a hydrogen target, and the fit extracts sinΔΦ directly from the ϕ distribution.
Load-bearing premise
The extraction assumes that the empirical proton-proton analyzing power A_N(θ) exactly describes scattering off hydrogen in the beam-pipe oil layer, and that the up-to-7.7% of quasi-free nuclear collisions contribute zero analyzing power; if either fails, the inferred sin ΔΦ shifts.
What would settle it
A measurement of the sideways polarization P_x (requiring a polarized beam) or of the antiproton polarization would resolve the two ΔΦ solutions and check the sign; a higher-statistics measurement of P_y with a known analyzing power—or a direct measurement of the asymmetry of events assigned to quasi-free collisions—would expose any bias from the assumed A_N.
If this is right
- Provides the first experimental constraint on the relative phase of proton psionic form factors, a quantity needed for a complete description of the proton's internal structure.
- Offers a test of SU(3) flavor symmetry by comparing the proton's phase with those already measured for hyperons in J/ψ decay.
- Validates the technique of using detector material as a proton polarimeter, which can be applied to other final states and other baryons.
- The result leaves a two-fold ambiguity in ΔΦ, to be resolved by measuring an additional polarization observable such as P_x with a polarized beam.
- If confirmed, the near-zero central value suggests the phase is small, providing a data point that nucleon-structure models must reproduce.
Where Pith is reading between the lines
- If the technique is sound, it could be extended to neutron final states using neutron scattering off hydrogen or carbon, enabling the neutron psionic form-factor phase to be measured at the same facility.
- The same secondary-scattering approach could be applied to ψ(2S) → p p̄ to check whether the phase is process-dependent, testing the assumption that psionic form factors are universal.
- The systematic uncertainty is dominated by the unknown analyzing power of quasi-free nuclear collisions; a dedicated measurement of that contribution would sharpen the result more than simply increasing statistics.
- A future high-luminosity measurement could turn this first glance into a precision test: if the true phase is near the current central value, models that predict large phases would be disfavored.
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. This Letter reports the first measurement of the sine of the relative phase ΔΦ between the electric and magnetic psionic (J/ψ-decay) form factors of the proton. Using 10.09×10⁹ J/ψ events at BESIII, the collaboration selects 2556 e+e−→J/ψ→p p̄ events in which the final-state proton rescatters elastically off hydrogen in the beam-pipe mineral-oil layer or the MDC inner wall, and exploits the azimuthal asymmetry dσ/dφ ∝ 1 + P_y A_N(θ)cosφ with A_N taken from the SAID database. An unbinned maximum-likelihood fit to W ∝ (1+α cos²θ_p)(1+P_y A_N cosφ), with α_J/ψ fixed to 0.595 from a previous BESIII measurement, yields sinΔΦ = −0.20 ± 0.34_stat ± 0.11_syst. The result is consistent with zero and is the first direct constraint on this observable; it is placed in the context of the baryon-octet pattern. A single pseudo-experiment (input −0.84, output −0.82±0.02) and a systematic table are provided.
Significance. If the number holds, this is the first determination of a long-sought observable and a proof of principle for a novel polarimeter concept: using the beam pipe of a general-purpose spectrometer as a proton polarimeter. The analysis is careful and transparent: unbinned likelihood with MC normalization, control-sample efficiency corrections, an explicit systematic table, and an honestly statistics-dominated uncertainty. The extraction is not circular — α_J/ψ [23] and A_N [49] are external inputs. As a first measurement, the result is genuinely useful for nucleon-structure models and for planning future facilities. The principal weakness is the absolute calibration of the polarimeter: the 2% analyzing-power uncertainty is asserted, not supported, and the validation pseudo-experiment does not test the external A_N scale. I estimate, however, that a 10% A_N scale error would shift the central value by only ~0.02–0.04 because |sinΔΦ|≈0.2, so the qualitative conclusion (consistency with zero, statistics-dominated errors) is robust; the issue affects the rigor of the quoted systematic rather than the main physics statement. The stress-test claim that a 10% miscalibration shifts the result b
major comments (3)
- [Systematic uncertainties / Table I ('Analyzing power'); Eq. (2)] The 2% uncertainty assigned to A_N is asserted without support, and no in-situ calibration of the oil-target polarimeter is shown: the pseudo-experiment (input −0.84, output −0.82±0.02) re-uses the same A_N in generation and fitting, so it validates the fitter, not the external scale of Eq. (2). Since sinΔΦ is inversely proportional to the assumed A_N, scale errors propagate directly into the central value; for the measured size, a 10% miscalibration shifts sinΔΦ by ~0.02–0.04, exceeding the assigned 0.009 and rivaling the other Table I entries. Please calibrate with protons of known polarization (e.g., Λ→pπ−) from the same dataset, or propagate the SAID uncertainty (scatter of partial-wave solutions in Ref. [49]), or quote the shift for ±5%/±10% variations and enlarge the systematic.
- [Fit (Eq. 3) and Table I] The fit fixes α_J/ψ = 0.595 from Ref. [23], but Table I lists no systematic for the uncertainty of this external input. Eq. (1) couples α to sinΔΦ through √(1−α²) and the denominator 1+α cos²θ_p; d ln sinΔΦ/dα ≈ −1.2, so δα ≈ 0.03–0.05 gives a shift ≈ 0.01, comparable to the 'Fit method' entry 0.010. Add a Table I entry from varying α within its published uncertainty, or justify neglect quantitatively.
- [Systematic uncertainties ('Quasi-free collision'); Table I] The treatment of quasi-free collisions is conservative in direction: with A_N ≥ 0 for quasi-free events, setting A_N = 0 (and using the upper-bound fraction 7.7%) brackets the dilution bias. However, the text should say so explicitly, because Table I sums this worst-case bound in quadrature with entries defined by 'most significant difference' (mass window 0.040, momentum requirement 0.049), which are not 1σ estimates. Mixing conservative bounds and 1σ estimates in a quadrature sum is nonstandard; either report the bound separately or convert all entries to a common definition. Also state how the 7.7% fraction and its uncertainty were determined.
minor comments (5)
- [Validation pseudo-experiment (text near Eq. 4)] Only a single pseudo-experiment is described ('we obtain sinΔΦ = −0.82±0.02'); the deviation from input is one standard deviation of that run. The 'Fit method' entry (0.010) should be derived from the pull distribution of an ensemble of pseudo-experiments, not a single run; specify the ensemble size and the quoted pull width.
- [Background statement, §Systematics] The text says the ~0.5% background is 'considered in the systematic uncertainty evaluation', but no Table I row corresponds to it. State which entry covers the background (mass window? fit method?) and how it enters.
- [Fig. 6 and discussion] With σ ≈ 0.34, the proton is consistent at ≲1.5σ with all octet values; the statement that the proton phase is 'close to Σ+/0 and smaller than Λ and Ξ−/0' is not supported at this precision. Soften to 'consistent with' and quote the significances of the differences.
- [Notation; abstract vs. text] Eq. (2)/Fig. 1 use θ, φ for the pp scattering (θ in the pp c.m. frame per Fig. 4 caption), while θ_p is the J/ψ-frame angle; the text switches between them, so state the frames explicitly. Also, the abstract quotes 10.09×10⁹ J/ψ events while the text uses 10×10⁹ (Ref. [38]); harmonize.
- [Spin precession paragraph] The correction is described qualitatively ('rotate the coordinate system'). Report the typical precession angle (~1–2° for the two target radii, if my estimate is right) and any residual systematic; this is a novel aspect of the technique and deserves a number.
Circularity Check
No significant circularity: sinΔΦ is a free parameter fitted to data using external inputs (α_J/ψ and A_N); no equation reduces the target to its inputs.
full rationale
The extraction chain is not circular. The target parameter sinΔΦ appears explicitly as the free parameter in the unbinned maximum-likelihood fit, Eq. (3): W ∝ (1+α_J/ψ cos²θ_p)(1+P_y A_N(θ) cosφ), with P_y related to sinΔΦ by Eq. (1). Nothing in the construction fixes sinΔΦ from the inputs: α_J/ψ = 0.595 is taken from a previous BESIII measurement (Ref. [23]) of the J/ψ→p pbar angular distribution, and A_N is taken from the external SAID database (Ref. [49]); neither is fitted to, or derived from, the azimuthal asymmetry that determines sinΔΦ. The pseudo-experiment (input −0.84, output −0.82±0.02) tests internal consistency, but the result remains a measurement, not a prediction forced by construction. The cited validation of the polarimeter technique (Ref. [37]) is an independent prior study; citing it is ordinary self-citation rather than load-bearing circularity. Concerns about the transfer of SAID analyzing powers to the oil-target protons are external-calibration or systematic-uncertainty questions, not circularity of the derivation.
Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger
free parameters (1)
- α_J/ψ (decay parameter) =
0.595 (fixed, from BESIII [23])
axioms (6)
- domain assumption Eq. (1): P_y = sqrt(1-α²) cosθ_p sinθ_p sinΔΦ / (1+α cos²θ_p)
- domain assumption Eq. (2): dσ/dφdcosθ ∝ 1 + P_y A_N(θ) cosφ
- domain assumption SAID pp analyzing power database is accurate at the relevant proton momenta
- domain assumption α_J/ψ = 0.595 from BESIII [23]
- domain assumption Geant4 simulation correctly models detector response, spin precession, and secondary scattering
- domain assumption Target protons in the oil layer are effectively free and at rest after the |p_target| < 50 MeV/c cut
read the original abstract
The relative phase between the time-like form factors of the proton is a crucial observable for a complete understanding of its internal structure, yet it has remained unmeasured due to the formidable experimental challenge of determining the final-state polarization or having available polarized beams. With a novel technique that measures polarization via secondary scattering on spectrometer material, we use $10.09\times10^{9}$ $J/\psi$ events collected at BESIII to analyze the reaction $e^+e^-\rightarrow J/\psi \rightarrow p\bar{p}$. This allows the first determination of the sine of the relative phase between the proton psionic form factors, $\sin\Delta\Phi=-0.20\pm0.34_{\textrm{stat}}\pm0.11_{\textrm{syst}}$. This result provides the first direct insight into the complex dynamics of proton formation, and offers valuable new information to constrain theoretical models of nucleon structure.
Figures
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[1]
Hofstadter and R
R. Hofstadter and R. W. McAllister, Electron scattering from the proton, Phys. Rev.98, 217 (1955)
1955
-
[2]
R. W. McAllister and R. Hofstadter, Elastic scattering of 188 Mev electrons from the proton and the alpha particle, Phys. Rev.102, 851 (1956)
1956
-
[3]
E. E. Chambers and R. Hofstadter, Structure of the pro- ton, Phys. Rev.103, 1454 (1956)
1956
-
[4]
M. N. Rosenbluth, High energy elastic scattering of elec- trons on protons, Phys. Rev.79, 615 (1950)
1950
-
[5]
A. I. Akhiezer and M. P. Rekalo, Polarization effects in the scattering of leptons by hadrons, Fiz. Elem. Chast. Atom. Yadra4, 662 (1973)
1973
-
[6]
M. V. Galynskii, V. V. Bytev, and V. M. Galynsky, Po- larization effects in the elastice → p → → e pand → e → p →ep processes in the case of parallel spins, Phys. Rev. D110, 096017 (2024)
2024
-
[7]
J. P. Leeset al.(BABARCollaboration), Study of e+e− →p pvia initial-state radiation atBABAR, Phys. Rev. D87, 092005 (2013)
2013
-
[8]
J. P. Leeset al.(BABARCollaboration), Measurement of thee +e− →p pcross section in the energy range from 3.0 to 6.5 GeV, Phys. Rev. D88, 072009 (2013)
2013
-
[9]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Measurement of the proton form factor by studyinge +e− →p p, Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Measurement of the proton form factor by studyinge +e− →p p, Phys. Rev. D91, 112004 (2015)
2015
-
[10]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Study of the processe +e− →p pvia initial state radiation at BESIII, Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Study of the processe +e− →p pvia initial state radiation at BESIII, Phys. Rev. D99, 092002 (2019)
2019
-
[11]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Measurement of proton electromagnetic form factors ine +e− →p pin the energy region 2.00–3.08 GeV, Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Measurement of proton electromagnetic form factors ine +e− →p pin the energy region 2.00–3.08 GeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 042001 (2020)
2020
-
[12]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Measurement of proton electromagnetic form factors in the time-like region using initial state radiation at BESIII, Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Measurement of proton electromagnetic form factors in the time-like region using initial state radiation at BESIII, Phys. Lett. B817, 136328 (2021)
2021
-
[13]
Akhmetshinet al.(CMD-3 Collaboration), Study of the processe +e− →p¯pin the c.m
R. Akhmetshinet al.(CMD-3 Collaboration), Study of the processe +e− →p¯pin the c.m. energy range from threshold to 2 GeV with the CMD-3 detector, Phys. Lett. B759, 634 (2016)
2016
-
[14]
A. Z. Dubnickova, S. Dubnicka, and M. P. Rekalo, Inves- tigation of the nucleon electromagnetic structure by po- larization effects ine +e− →B ¯Bprocesses, Nuovo Cim. A109, 241 (1996)
1996
-
[15]
Tomasi-Gustafssonet al., Nucleon electromagnetic form factors and polarization observables in space-like and time-like regions, Eur
E. Tomasi-Gustafssonet al., Nucleon electromagnetic form factors and polarization observables in space-like and time-like regions, Eur. Phys. J. A24, 419 (2005)
2005
-
[16]
Perottiet al., Polarization observables ine +e− anni- hilation to a baryon-antibaryon pair, Phys
E. Perottiet al., Polarization observables ine +e− anni- hilation to a baryon-antibaryon pair, Phys. Rev. D99, 056008 (2019)
2019
-
[17]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Complete mea- surement of the Λ electromagnetic form factors, Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Complete mea- surement of the Λ electromagnetic form factors, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 122003 (2019)
2019
-
[18]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Determination of the Σ + timelike electromagnetic form factors, Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Determination of the Σ + timelike electromagnetic form factors, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 081904 (2024)
2024
-
[19]
Barnes, X
T. Barnes, X. Li, and W. Roberts, Evidence for aJ/ψp p Pauli strong coupling?, Phys. Rev. D77, 056001 (2008)
2008
-
[20]
F¨ aldt and A
G. F¨ aldt and A. Kupsc, Hadronic structure functions in thee +e− →Λ ¯Λ reaction, Phys. Lett. B772, 16 (2017)
2017
-
[22]
S. J. Brodskyet al., Single-spin polarization effects and the determination of timelike proton form factors, Phys. Rev. D69, 054022 (2004)
2004
-
[23]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Study of J/ψ→p¯pandJ/ψ→n¯n, Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Study of J/ψ→p¯pandJ/ψ→n¯n, Phys. Rev. D86, 032014 (2012)
2012
-
[24]
Baueret al.(EDDA Collaboration), Measurement of spin-correlation parametersA N N,A SS , andA SL at 2.1 GeV in proton-proton elastic scattering, Phys
F. Baueret al.(EDDA Collaboration), Measurement of spin-correlation parametersA N N,A SS , andA SL at 2.1 GeV in proton-proton elastic scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 142301 (2003)
2003
-
[25]
Bystricky, F
J. Bystricky, F. Lehar, and P. Winternitz, Formalism of nucleon-nucleon elastic scattering experiments, J. Phys. (France)39, 1 (1978)
1978
-
[26]
Betzet al., Polarization parameter inp−pscattering from 328 to 736 MeV, Phys
F. Betzet al., Polarization parameter inp−pscattering from 328 to 736 MeV, Phys. Rev.148, 1289 (1966)
1966
-
[27]
Chenget al., Nucleon-nucleon polarization between 300 and 700 MeV, Phys
D. Chenget al., Nucleon-nucleon polarization between 300 and 700 MeV, Phys. Rev.163, 1470 (1967)
1967
-
[28]
Chamberlainet al., Small-anglep−pcross sections and polarization at 300 MeV, Phys
O. Chamberlainet al., Small-anglep−pcross sections and polarization at 300 MeV, Phys. Rev.95, 1348 (1954)
1954
-
[29]
Albrowet al., Polarization in elastic proton-proton scattering between 0.86 and 2.74 GeV/c, Nucl
M. Albrowet al., Polarization in elastic proton-proton scattering between 0.86 and 2.74 GeV/c, Nucl. Phys. B 11 23, 445 (1970)
1970
-
[30]
M. W. McNaughton and E. P. Chamberlin, pp elastic analyzing power from 318 to 800 MeV, Phys. Rev. C24, 1778 (1981)
1981
-
[31]
von Przewoskiet al., Proton proton analyzing power and spin correlation measurements between 250 MeV and 450 MeV at 7 ◦ < θc.m
B. von Przewoskiet al., Proton proton analyzing power and spin correlation measurements between 250 MeV and 450 MeV at 7 ◦ < θc.m. <90 ◦ with an internal target in a storage ring, Phys. Rev. C58, 1897 (1998)
1998
-
[32]
P. R. Bevingtonet al., Polarization analyzing power Ay(θ) inppelastic scattering at 643, 787, and 796 MeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.41, 384 (1978)
1978
-
[33]
Bessetet al., Measurement of the spin-dependent pa- rametersD,R,A, andPfor small-anglep−pelastic scattering between 300 and 600 MeV, Phys
D. Bessetet al., Measurement of the spin-dependent pa- rametersD,R,A, andPfor small-anglep−pelastic scattering between 300 and 600 MeV, Phys. Rev. D21, 580 (1980)
1980
-
[34]
Onelet al., Elasticp ↑p↑ scattering between 240 and 470 MeV, Phys
Y. Onelet al., Elasticp ↑p↑ scattering between 240 and 470 MeV, Phys. Rev. D40, 35 (1989)
1989
-
[35]
Chamberlainet al., Experiments with 315-Mev polar- ized protons: Proton-proton and proton-neutron scatter- ing, Phys
O. Chamberlainet al., Experiments with 315-Mev polar- ized protons: Proton-proton and proton-neutron scatter- ing, Phys. Rev.105, 288 (1957)
1957
-
[36]
Greeniauset al., Measurements ofp−pandp− 4He analyzing powers at medium energies, Nucl
L. Greeniauset al., Measurements ofp−pandp− 4He analyzing powers at medium energies, Nucl. Phys. A322, 308 (1979)
1979
-
[37]
Lianget al., How to determine nucleon polariza- tion at existing collider experiments?, Phys
Y.-T. Lianget al., How to determine nucleon polariza- tion at existing collider experiments?, Phys. Rev. D112, L031502 (2025)
2025
-
[38]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Number ofJ/ψ events at BESIII, Chin
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Number ofJ/ψ events at BESIII, Chin. Phys. C46, 074001 (2022)
2022
-
[39]
Navaset al.(Particle Data Group Collaboration), Review of particle physics, Phys
S. Navaset al.(Particle Data Group Collaboration), Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024)
2024
-
[40]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Design and construction of the BESIII detector, Nucl
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Design and construction of the BESIII detector, Nucl. Instr. Meth. A614, 345 (2010)
2010
-
[41]
Caoet al., Design and construction of the new BESIII endcap Time-of-Flight system with MRPC Technology, Nucl
P. Caoet al., Design and construction of the new BESIII endcap Time-of-Flight system with MRPC Technology, Nucl. Instr. Meth. A953, 163053 (2020)
2020
-
[42]
Dai, H.-B
J. Dai, H.-B. Li, H. Miao, and J. Zhang, Prospects to study hyperon-nucleon interactions at BESIII, Chin. Phys. C48, 073003 (2024)
2024
-
[43]
Yuan and M
C.-Z. Yuan and M. Karliner, Cornucopia of antineu- trons and hyperons from a superJ/ψfactory for next- generation nuclear and particle physics high-precision ex- periments, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 012003 (2021)
2021
-
[44]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), First study of reaction Ξ 0n→Ξ−pusing Ξ 0-nucleus scattering at an electron-positron collider, Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), First study of reaction Ξ 0n→Ξ−pusing Ξ 0-nucleus scattering at an electron-positron collider, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 251902 (2023)
2023
-
[45]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), First study of antihyperon-nucleon scattering Λp→Λpand measure- ment of Λp→Λpcross section, Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), First study of antihyperon-nucleon scattering Λp→Λpand measure- ment of Λp→Λpcross section, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 231902 (2024)
2024
-
[46]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), First measure- ment of ΛNinelastic scattering with Λ frome +e− → J/ψ→Λ Λ, Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), First measure- ment of ΛNinelastic scattering with Λ frome +e− → J/ψ→Λ Λ, Phys. Rev. C109, L052201 (2024)
2024
-
[47]
D. J. Lange, The EvtGen particle decay simulation pack- age, Nucl. Instr. Meth. A462, 152 (2001)
2001
-
[48]
Ping, Event generators at BESIII, Chin
R.-G. Ping, Event generators at BESIII, Chin. Phy. C 32, 599 (2008)
2008
-
[49]
R. A. Arndt, I. I. Strakovsky, and R. L. Workman, Nucleon-nucleon elastic scattering to 3 GeV, Phys. Rev. C62, 034005 (2000); R. A. Arndtet al., Updated anal- ysis ofnnelastic scattering to 3 GeV, Phys. Rev. C76, 025209 (2007); SAID database,https://gwdac.phys. gwu.edu
2000
-
[50]
James and M
F. James and M. Roos, Minuit: A System for Function Minimization and Analysis of the Parameter Errors and Correlations, Comput. Phys. Commun.10, 343 (1975)
1975
-
[51]
Agostinelliet al., Geant4—a simulation toolkit, Nucl
S. Agostinelliet al., Geant4—a simulation toolkit, Nucl. Instr. Meth. A506, 250 (2003)
2003
-
[52]
R. Barlow, Systematic errors: Facts and fictions, inCon- ference on Advanced Statistical Techniques in Particle Physics(2002) pp. 134–144, arXiv:hep-ex/0207026
Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002
-
[53]
Cao, Y.-T
X. Cao, Y.-T. Liang, and R.-G. Ping, Production and decay of hyperons in a transversely polarized electron- positron collider, Phys. Rev. D110, 014035 (2024)
2024
-
[54]
Achasovet al., STCF conceptual design report (Vol- ume 1): Physics & detector, Front
M. Achasovet al., STCF conceptual design report (Vol- ume 1): Physics & detector, Front. Phys. (Beijing)19, 14701 (2024)
2024
-
[55]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Precise Mea- surements of Decay Parameters andCPAsymmetry with Entangled Λ− Λ Pairs, Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Precise Mea- surements of Decay Parameters andCPAsymmetry with Entangled Λ− Λ Pairs, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 131801 (2022)
2022
-
[56]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Σ + and Σ − Polarization in theJ/ψandψ(3686) Decays, Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Σ + and Σ − Polarization in theJ/ψandψ(3686) Decays, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 052004 (2020)
2020
-
[57]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Strong and WeakCPTests in Sequential Decays of Polarized Σ 0 Hyperons, Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Strong and WeakCPTests in Sequential Decays of Polarized Σ 0 Hyperons, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 101902 (2024)
2024
-
[58]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Probing CP symmetry and weak phases with entangled double- strange baryons, Nature606, 64 (2022)
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Probing CP symmetry and weak phases with entangled double- strange baryons, Nature606, 64 (2022)
2022
-
[59]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Tests ofCP symmetry in entangled Ξ0 − Ξ 0 pairs, Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Tests ofCP symmetry in entangled Ξ0 − Ξ 0 pairs, Phys. Rev. D108, L031106 (2023)
2023
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.