Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

For higher-spin hadrons, the force between quark and gluon subsystems splits into monopole, quadrupole, and rank-3 pieces, and for spins 0 through 3/2 those pieces are expressed in known covariant energy-momentum form factors.

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 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

For spin-1 and spin-3/2 hadrons, the quark/gluon subsystem force acquires quadrupole and tangential components, expressed through new multipole form factors C̄_n(t).

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-05 challenge →

load-bearing objection A plausible extension of the Polyakov–Son force interpretation to spin-1 and spin-3/2, with new covariant relations, but the central formulas lack derivations and the tangential force decomposition misses the f3 terms; worth a revision, not a desk rejection. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2508.21319 v1 pith:23IRNVA2 submitted 2025-08-29 hep-ph hep-exhep-lat

Quadrupole forces between quark/gluon subsystems inside higher-spin particles

June-Young Kim , Hyun-Chul Kim This is my paper
classification hep-ph hep-exhep-lat
keywords energy-momentum tensornon-conserved form factorshigher-spin hadronsmultipole expansionquark-gluon forcesstress tensorD-termtensor polarization
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper extends the mechanical interpretation of the non-conserved c-bar(t) form factor—previously used to describe forces between quarks and gluons inside the nucleon—to particles with arbitrary spin. It does this by multipole-expanding the three-dimensional stress tensor in the Breit frame and identifying combinations of the hadronic matrix element that correspond to monopole, quadrupole, and rank-3 force distributions between quark and gluon subsystems. For J<2, these distributions are written explicitly in terms of covariant non-conserved energy-momentum tensor form factors: spin-0 and spin-1/2 reduce to the old c-bar(t), while spin-1 and spin-3/2 acquire genuine quadrupole terms and tangential force components. If correct, this completes the mechanical reading of the non-conserved c-bar form factor and gives a language for shape-dependent forces inside tensor-polarized hadrons.

Core claim

The central discovery is a decomposition of the force density f^j = ∂_i T^{ij}_Q between quark and gluon subsystems into a hierarchy of multipole terms: f^j = Y^j_1 f0 + Q^{jk}Y^k_1 f2 + Q^{kl}Y^{klj}_3 f3 + ... . Each f_n is built from the radial derivative of a Fourier-transformed non-conserved multipole form factor C-bar_n(t), and its multipole moment is fixed by C-bar_n(0). For particles with J<2, explicit formulas connect these C-bar_n to previously parameterized covariant non-conserved EMT form factors: spin-1/2 gives C-bar_0 = c-bar, while spin-1 and spin-3/2 each mix three covariant form factors. The paper visualizes the force field for a spin-1 particle and shows that transverse pol

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the 3D Breit-frame stress tensor T^{ij}_a(r, s', s) expanded in irreducible tensors of the position vector and of spin-polarization operators (monopole, dipole, quadrupole). Current conservation imposes equilibrium equations on each multipole pair of pressure p_n(r) and shear s_n(r); splitting quark and gluon contributions breaks equilibrium and yields an external force density f^j. The multipole force densities are generated by the non-conserved multipole EMT form factors C-bar_n(t), the Fourier transforms in Eq. (25), with the generalized D-term relations (19)-(21) connecting them to pressure and shear.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the 3D Breit-frame densities and the scheme-dependent quark part of the non-conserved EMT form factors can be read as physical mechanical distributions; if relativistic contamination or scheme dependence is significant, the 'force between subsystems' is not a well-defined observable.

What would settle it

Compute the non-conserved quark EMT form factors for a spin-1 hadron (say, on the lattice or in a soliton model) and check whether the force density from the covariant parameterization satisfies the multipole relations (36); a mismatch, or a measured C-bar_2(0) equal to zero despite nonzero quadrupole pressure, would falsify the proposed mechanical interpretation.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • For spin-0 and spin-1/2 particles all quadrupole terms vanish and the force reduces to the known c-bar(t) form factor, recovering the earlier nucleon result.
  • For spin-1 and spin-3/2 particles, the quark-gluon force acquires quadrupole and rank-3 terms, but the integrated total force remains fixed by the monopole C-bar_0(0) alone.
  • For spin-2 and higher, hexadecapole and higher multipole form factors enter, so five non-conserved covariant form factors are expected to organize the force.
  • The multipole moments expressed as integrals of r f_0, r f_2, and r^3 f_3 in terms of C-bar_n(0) give concrete quantities that models or lattice calculations can target.
  • Transversely polarized spin-1 targets show tangential force components, signalling that hadron shape emerges from a nonspherical balance of quark and gluon stress.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial extension: if C-bar_2(0) and C-bar_3(0) can be extracted for vector mesons from lattice or scattering data, the quadrupole force would become a new probe of tensor-polarized gluonic structure; the paper itself does not attempt such an extraction.
  • Editorial extension: the outlook's 2D light-front multipole expansion could test whether the tangential force components survive in frame-independent transverse densities, or whether they are artifacts of the 3D Breit-frame reading.
  • Editorial extension: the same multipole force language could be applied to spin-1 nuclei such as the deuteron, where tensor polarization is experimentally accessible, though the paper does not discuss nuclear targets.
  • Editorial extension: the toy model assumes all three C-bar_n(0) share the nucleon-inspired value 1.4e-2; the actual hierarchy of these constants for a spin-1 hadron is unknown and determines whether quadrupole forces are observable or negligible.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper generalizes the mechanical interpretation of forces between quark and gluon subsystems from spin-0 and spin-1/2 hadrons to arbitrary higher-spin particles. Working in the 3D Breit frame, it performs a multipole expansion of the quark/gluon stress tensor, defines an external force field f^j = ∂_i T_Q^{ij}, and identifies monopole (f0), quadrupole (f2), and rank-3 (f3) force distributions expressed through non-conserved multipole EMT form factors \bar{C}_n(t). It then gives explicit relations between these multipole form factors and the covariant non-conserved EMT form factors for J=0, 1/2, 1, and 3/2, and illustrates the force patterns for a spin-1 target with a toy tripole model. The paper explicitly acknowledges the relativistic-density ambiguities of the Breit-frame 3D interpretation and the toy nature of the numerical inputs.

Significance. If the central formulas are fully justified and the algebraic projection error is corrected, the paper provides a useful organizing framework and a dictionary between force multipoles and covariant non-conserved EMT form factors for J<2. Its strength is systematic: it shows how the conservation constraint propagates to quadrupole equilibrium equations and offers explicit multipole decompositions for the stress tensor and the force. The paper is also honest about the interpretational caveats (3D Breit-frame densities, scheme dependence of quark/gluon decompositions) and does not overclaim the numerical results. It makes no new experimental predictions; its value is primarily interpretive, which is consistent with its stated aim.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. V, Eqs. (30)-(31)] The normal/tangential projection is algebraically incomplete. Contracting the Q^{kl}Y^{klj}_3 term of Eq. (23) with \hat{\theta}_j and \hat{\phi}_j gives -(2/5)Q^{r\theta}f_3(r) and -(2/5)Q^{r\phi}f_3(r), respectively. These contributions are absent from Eqs. (31b,c). The ellipses in those equations are later identified with higher-multipole structures for J≥2, so they cannot absorb the f3 terms. This omission directly affects the transverse-polarization force displayed in Fig. 1 and any quantitative use of Eq. (31). The claim that tangential forces appear for J>1/2 survives, but the identification of which multipole generates the tangential components is incorrect as written.
  2. [Sec. V, Eq. (24); Sec. VI, Eqs. (36)-(37)] The central formulas are asserted without derivation. Eq. (24) defines the multipole force distributions f0, f2, f3 in terms of \bar{C}_n(r), and Eqs. (36a)-(37c) are the key dictionary relating \bar{C}_n(t) to the covariant form factors for spin-1 and spin-3/2. These relations are load-bearing for the paper's claim that it provides a mechanical interpretation of the non-conserved covariant EMT form factors, yet no derivation or reference to a derivation is supplied. The reader cannot verify the sign conventions, the prefactors, or the frame-dependent factors such as m/(2E) and (m+E)-terms. Please include a derivation or an appendix, or cite a published derivation that the reader can check.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. VII, Eq. (40)] The numerical expression is garbled as typeset: "F^r = 1 3 4 Λ m \bar C^Q_0(0) ≈ 1 × 5.3 × 10^{-2}" is not readable and the prefactor is inconsistent with a straightforward integration of Eq. (24a) and the tripole ansatz (38). Please correct the displayed formula and verify the numerical factor.
  2. [Sec. IV, Eq. (17)] There are stray factors "1" before δ^{ij}p_0 and Y_2^{ij}s_0. This looks like a typographical artifact; please clarify whether these coefficients are indeed unity or missing numerical factors.
  3. [Sec. VI, Eqs. (37a)-(37b)] The comma-and-plus formatting after the first line of Eq. (37a) and Eq. (37b) obscures the algebra. Please use standard line breaks or parentheses to separate the terms.
  4. [Sec. VII, Fig. 1] The figure caption does not explain the vector-field scale, the color scheme, or whether the force vectors are normalized to the local magnitude. Please add a concise caption so the visualization is interpretable.
  5. [Sec. I and Sec. II] The paper repeatedly refers to "the Wigner sense" and "large-Nc limit" as justifications for the 3D Breit-frame densities. A one-sentence explanation of why the force interpretation is expected to survive the Abel transformation would help readers outside the immediate EMT-density community.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the force interpretation is an explicit definition, the multipole-to-covariant relations are algebraic mappings, and the numerics are stated as conjectural input.

full rationale

The paper's derivation starts from the QCD EMT and defines the external force as the divergence of the quark stress tensor: 'This external force field −f can be defined as [23,36] ∂i T^ij_Q(r,s′,s)=f^j(r,s′,s)' (Eq. 22). This is an explicit interpretive definition, not a hidden equivalence between an input and a predicted output. The multipole force distributions f0,2,3 are then defined through the Fourier transform of the non-conserved multipole EMT form factors C̄_n(t) (Eqs. 24–25), and Section VI derives algebraic relations between these C̄_n and the covariant non-conserved form factors of Refs. [5,12,13,34]. These are parameter-map identities, not fitted predictions; the paper makes no empirical prediction from a fitted subset. The numerical section explicitly labels the inputs as conjectural: 'we take the multipole form factors C̄_n(t) as input... and we conjecture that this small and positive behavior persists...' (Sec. VII). The only self-citation with any load-bearing role is Ref. [13] (co-authored by J.-Y. Kim) used in the spin-3/2 relations (Eq. 37), but those relations are also anchored to Ref. [34] and do not invoke a uniqueness theorem or exclude alternatives, so the citation is not circular. The skeptical objection about omitted tangential f3 pieces in Eqs. (31b,c) is an algebraic-completeness concern, not a circularity concern. Overall, the central claim is a self-contained reformulation and interpretation rather than a derivation that reduces to its inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper contributes no new physical entities; it re-expresses known covariant form factors through multipole C̄_n. The only free inputs appear in the illustrative toy model. The key axioms are standard QCD current conservation and borrowed multipole-stress expansion results.

free parameters (3)
  • C̄^Q_0(0), C̄^Q_2(0), C̄^Q_3(0) = 1.4 × 10^-2
    Toy-model normalizations conjectured from the nucleon c̄Q(0) value (Eq. 39).
  • Λ (tripole mass) = 1 GeV
    Chosen for illustration; the tripole form (Eq. 38) is an ansatz.
  • hadron mass m = 1 GeV
    Set to 1 GeV in the toy model.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption 3D Breit-frame EMT distributions (Eq. 7) can be interpreted as physical Wigner-sense densities.
    Sec. II states the 3D distributions are contaminated by relativistic motion but are used because they are intuitive; exact in large-Nc or non-relativistic limits.
  • domain assumption The multipole expansion of the stress tensor of Eq. (17), taken from Ref. [35], is complete for arbitrary spin with positive intrinsic parity, with only even-rank spin operators contributing.
    Eq. (17) is borrowed from Ref. [35]; its completeness is not re-derived here.
  • domain assumption The quark part of the non-conserved EMT form factors is scheme-independent enough to define a mechanical force.
    Sec. V acknowledges renormalization-scheme dependence but asserts the quark C̄ is 'less ambiguous'.
  • domain assumption The covariant non-conserved form factor parameterizations of Refs. [12,13,34] are complete and correctly transcribed in Eqs. (36)-(37).
    These relations are stated without derivation.

reviewed 2026-08-05 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quadrupole forces between quark/gluon subsystems inside higher-spin particles." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/23IRNVA2

@misc{pith2026250821319,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quadrupole forces between quark/gluon subsystems inside higher-spin particles},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/23IRNVA2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.21319}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
abstract

We generalize the mechanical interpretation of the forces between quark and gluon subsystems, previously studied for the nucleon, to arbitrary higher-spin particles. For spin-0 and spin-1/2 particles, this force is characterized by the non-conserved $\bar{c}(t)$ form factor. However, such an interpretation has not yet been established for higher-spin particles due to the intricate structure of the non-conserved energy-momentum tensor (EMT) form factors. By performing a multipole expansion, we identify the physically meaningful combinations of the non-conserved covariant EMT form factors and provide them with a clear mechanical interpretation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.21319 by Hyun-Chul Kim, June-Young Kim.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Visualization of the force distribution for a spin-1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Quantum stress and torsion distributions in the deuteron

    nucl-th 2026-02 conditional novelty 7.0

    First complete non-relativistic impulse-approximation calculation of all eleven deuteron EMT form factors, including non-conserved c-bar and s-bar form factors that map to force and torsion distributions inside the nucleons.

  2. Transverse energy-momentum tensor distributions in polarized nucleons

    hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    The quantum phase-space formalism derives transverse energy-momentum tensor distributions in polarized nucleons and reproduces standard light-front distributions including bad components in the infinite-momentum frame.

  3. Transverse energy-momentum tensor distributions in polarized nucleons

    hep-ph 2026-04 accept novelty 4.5

    Transverse EMT distributions in polarized nucleons are derived in the quantum phase-space formalism; they reduce to standard light-front densities (including bad components) in the infinite-momentum frame.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    I. Y. Kobzarev and L. B. Okun’, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 43, 1904 (1962)

    work page 1904

  2. [2]

    Pagels, Phys

    H. Pagels, Phys. Rev. 144, 1250 (1966)

    1966

  3. [3]

    M. V. Polyakov, Phys. Lett. B 555, 57 (2003), arXiv:hep- ph/0210165

    arXiv 2003

  4. [4]

    Goeke, J

    K. Goeke, J. Grabis, J. Ossmann, M. V. Polyakov, P. Schweitzer, A. Silva, and D. Urbano, Phys. Rev. D 75, 094021 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0702030

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  5. [5]

    M. V. Polyakov and P. Schweitzer, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 33, 1830025 (2018), arXiv:1805.06596 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  6. [6]

    Lorc´ e, H

    C. Lorc´ e, H. Moutarde, and A. P. Trawi´ nski, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 89 (2019), arXiv:1810.09837 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  7. [7]

    J. Y. Panteleeva and M. V. Polyakov, Phys. Rev. D 104, 014008 (2021), arXiv:2102.10902 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  8. [8]

    Kim and H.-C

    J.-Y. Kim and H.-C. Kim, Phys. Rev. D 104, 074019 (2021), arXiv:2105.10279 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  9. [9]

    Freese and G

    A. Freese and G. A. Miller, Phys. Rev. D 103, 094023 (2021), arXiv:2102.01683 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  10. [10]

    V. D. Burkert, L. Elouadrhiri, F. X. Girod, C. Lorc´ e, P. Schweitzer, and P. E. Shanahan, Rev. Mod. Phys. 95, 041002 (2023), arXiv:2303.08347 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  11. [11]

    Lorc´ e and P

    C. Lorc´ e and P. Schweitzer, Acta Phys. Polon. B 56, 3 (2025), arXiv:2501.04622 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    M. V. Polyakov and B.-D. Sun, Phys. Rev. D100, 036003 (2019), arXiv:1903.02738 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  13. [13]

    Kim and B.-D

    J.-Y. Kim and B.-D. Sun, Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 85 (2021), arXiv:2011.00292 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  14. [14]

    Kim, B.-D

    J.-Y. Kim, B.-D. Sun, D. Fu, and H.-C. Kim, Phys. Rev. D 107, 054007 (2023), arXiv:2208.01240 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  15. [15]

    Freese and W

    A. Freese and W. Cosyn, Phys. Rev. D 106, 114013 (2022), arXiv:2207.10787 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  16. [16]

    Dehghan, K

    Z. Dehghan, K. Azizi, and U. ¨Ozdem, Phys. Rev. D 108, 094037 (2023), arXiv:2307.14880 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  17. [17]

    Kim, Phys

    J.-Y. Kim, Phys. Lett. B 834, 137442 (2022), arXiv:2206.10202 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  18. [18]

    QCD angular momentum in $N \rightarrow \Delta$ transitions

    J.-Y. Kim, H.-Y. Won, J. L. Goity, and C. Weiss, (2023), arXiv:2304.08575 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  19. [19]

    Kim, Phys

    J.-Y. Kim, Phys. Rev. D 108, 034024 (2023), arXiv:2305.12714 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  20. [20]

    Alharazin, B

    H. Alharazin, B. D. Sun, E. Epelbaum, J. Gegelia, and U. G. Meißner, JHEP 03, 007 (2024), arXiv:2312.05193 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  21. [21]

    Tensor-polarized parton density in the $N \rightarrow \Delta$ transition

    J.-Y. Kim and C. Weiss, (2025), arXiv:2507.18402 [hep- ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    Tensor-polarized parton density in the $N \to \Delta$ transition from the large-$N_c$ light-cone wave function

    J.-Y. Kim, (2025), arXiv:2508.11491 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    M. V. Polyakov and H.-D. Son, JHEP 09, 156 (2018), arXiv:1808.00155 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  24. [24]

    Won, H.-C

    H.-Y. Won, H.-C. Kim, and J.-Y. Kim, Phys. Lett. B 850, 138489 (2024), arXiv:2302.02974 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    Won, H.-C

    H.-Y. Won, H.-C. Kim, and J.-Y. Kim, JHEP 05, 173 (2024), arXiv:2310.04670 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  26. [26]

    Freese, Phys

    A. Freese, Phys. Rev. D 111, 034047 (2025), arXiv:2412.09664 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    Ji and C

    X. Ji and C. Yang, (2025), arXiv:2503.01991 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  28. [28]

    Lorc´ e, Phys

    C. Lorc´ e, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 232002 (2020), arXiv:2007.05318 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  29. [29]

    Won and C

    H.-Y. Won and C. Lorc´ e, Phys. Rev. D 111, 094021 (2025), arXiv:2503.07382 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    2D energy-momentum tensor distributions of nucleon in a large-$N_c$ quark model from ultra-relativistic to non-relativistic limit

    C. Lorc´ e, P. Schweitzer, and K. Tezgin, Phys. Rev. D 106, 014012 (2022), arXiv:2202.01192 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  31. [31]

    Kim and H.-C

    J.-Y. Kim and H.-C. Kim, Phys. Rev. D 104, 074003 (2021), arXiv:2106.10986 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  32. [32]

    Kim, Phys

    J.-Y. Kim, Phys. Rev. D 106, 014022 (2022), arXiv:2204.08248 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  33. [33]

    D. A. Varshalovich, A. N. Moskalev, and V. K. Kherson- skii, Quantum Theory of Angular Momentum: Irreducible Tensors, Spherical Harmonics, Vector Coupling Coeffi- cients, 3nj Symbols (World Scientific Publishing Com- pany, 1988)

    work page 1988

  34. [34]

    Cotogno, C

    S. Cotogno, C. Lorc´ e, P. Lowdon, and M. Morales, Phys. Rev. D 101, 056016 (2020), arXiv:1912.08749 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  35. [35]

    J. Y. Panteleeva and M. V. Polyakov, Phys. Lett. B 809, 135707 (2020), arXiv:2004.02912 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  36. [36]

    Landau, L

    L. Landau, L. Landau, E. Lifshits, A. Kosevich, E. Lif- shitz, and L. Pitaevskii, Theory of Elasticity: Volume 7 , Course of theoretical physics (Butterworth-Heinemann, 1986)

    work page 1986

  37. [37]

    Ji, Phys

    X.-D. Ji, Phys. Rev. D 52, 271 (1995), arXiv:hep- ph/9502213

    arXiv 1995

  38. [38]

    Liu, Phys

    K.-F. Liu, Phys. Rev. D 104, 076010 (2021), arXiv:2103.15768 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  39. [39]

    Lorc´ e, Eur

    C. Lorc´ e, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 120 (2018), arXiv:1706.05853 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  40. [40]

    Hatta, A

    Y. Hatta, A. Rajan, and K. Tanaka, JHEP 12, 008 (2018), arXiv:1810.05116 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  41. [41]

    Ji and C

    X. Ji and C. Yang, (2025), arXiv:2508.16727 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    A. Metz, B. Pasquini, and S. Rodini, Phys. Rev. D 102, 114042 (2020), arXiv:2006.11171 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  43. [43]

    Tanaka, Phys

    K. Tanaka, Phys. Rev. D 98, 034009 (2018), arXiv:1806.10591 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  44. [44]

    Cosyn, S

    W. Cosyn, S. Cotogno, A. Freese, and C. Lorc´ e, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 476 (2019), arXiv:1903.00408 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  45. [45]

    C. E. Carlson and M. Vanderhaeghen, Eur. Phys. J. A 41, 1 (2009), arXiv:0807.4537 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 5, 2026.