Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 55 references

Physical interpretation of the 2s excitation of the nucleon

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that the 2s radial excitation of the nucleon, seen near 1.9 GeV in lattice QCD, is insensitive to quenching of sea-quark loops, providing evidence that it is associated with the N(1880) and N(1710) resonances rather than…

desk verdict New lattice data show the 2s nucleon excitation is stable under quenching at light quark masses, but the reported invariance is visually supported rather than statistically pinned down. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.08968 v1 pith:K2ZSSVDO submitted 2024-12-12 hep-lat

Finn M. Stokes , Waseem Kamleh , Derek B. Leinweber , Benjamin J. Owen This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-lat PACS 12.38.Gc14.20.Gk
keywords latticeQCDhadronspectroscopyvariationalmethodnucleonradialexcitationsquenchedRoperresonanceN(1710)N(1880)
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

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 tries to establish that the second radial excitation of the nucleon—a quark-model state seen in lattice QCD near 2 GeV—is a genuine, weakly dressed state tied to the N(1880) and N(1710) resonances. Its test is to compare the state's energy in full QCD and in quenched QCD, where sea-quark loops are removed and meson-baryon dressing is suppressed. For quark masses close to the physical point, the 2s energy is unchanged within uncertainty, while other excitations move. This invariance matters because it would confirm that weakly coupled quark-model states coexist with dynamically generated resonances like the Roper, and it would explain why N(1880) appears in photoproduction but not in pion-nucleon scattering.

What carries the argument

The engine of the comparison is the variational method applied to an 8×8 correlation matrix built from two local proton interpolating fields at four smearing widths. Eigenvectors of the generalised eigenvalue problem separate states by their node count: one node for the 2s excitation, two for the 3s. The theory is altered by quenching the gauge fields, which removes sea-quark loops and suppresses meson-baryon couplings, while lattice spacing and quark masses are matched to the full-QCD ensembles by the static-quark-force scale and the pion mass. A single-state ansatz with a chi-squared-per-degree-of-freedom cutoff below 1.2 is used to argue that contamination from omitted two-particle scattering states stays inside the quoted uncertainties.

What would settle it

Repeat the full-versus-quenched comparison with a correlation matrix that explicitly includes momentum-projected two-particle (pion-nucleon, pion-$\Delta$, $\sigma$-nucleon) interpolators; if the 2s eigenvalue shifts by more than the quoted uncertainty when sea quarks are removed, the claimed invariance is an artifact of the single-particle basis.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the energy of the 2s radial excitation of the nucleon is invariant, within uncertainties, when the theory is quenched at quark masses approaching the physical point. The 2s state is identified by its single-node wave function, and the same node structure appears in full 2+1 flavour QCD and in the quenched theory. Because quenching removes sea-quark loops and suppresses meson-baryon dressing, the invariance is read as evidence that the 2s excitation couples weakly to two-particle meson-baryon channels, matching the small pion-nucleon partial widths of the N(1710) and N(1880) resonances and the fact that N(1880) is seen in photoproduction but not in pion-nucleon scattering.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the variational 2s state extracted from local single-particle interpolators is the same physical state in full and quenched QCD, with any contamination from omitted two-particle scattering states contained within the quoted uncertainties.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The 2s radial excitation is not the Roper; the Roper is a dynamically generated state formed through meson-baryon rescattering.
  • The 2s excitation is associated with the N(1710) and N(1880) resonances, explaining why N(1880) appears in photoproduction but not in pion-nucleon scattering.
  • The missing-baryon-resonance problem softens: quark-model radial excitations sit near 2 GeV, not near the Roper energy.
  • At larger quark masses the 2s state mixes more strongly with pion-nucleon scattering states, so its energy moves when meson-baryon couplings are suppressed, as the effective-field-theory analysis predicts.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct test the paper leaves implicit: include explicit two-particle interpolators in the same full-versus-quenched comparison; if the level remains fixed, the weak-dressing interpretation is confirmed rather than assumed.
  • The same invariance test could be applied to other single-particle excitations, such as the 2s states of the Delta and Omega baryons, to identify which resonances are weakly coupled quark-model states.
  • One could quantify the weak coupling by fitting the finite-volume volume dependence to extract the 2s-to-pion-nucleon coupling, turning the qualitative insensitivity into a numerical bound.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a lattice QCD comparison of the positive-parity nucleon spectrum in full 2+1 flavour QCD and in quenched QCD, focusing on the 2s radial excitation. The quenched ensembles are generated with the Iwasaki gauge action at beta=2.58 with a lattice spacing of about 0.100 fm and a fat-link clover fermion action; the hopping parameters are tuned to reproduce the pion masses of the PACS-CS ensembles. Using the variational method with single-particle interpolators (an 8x8 basis in full QCD and a 4x4 basis in quenched QCD), the authors find that the 2s excitation energy is approximately invariant under quenching at the three lightest quark masses, with the states near 2 GeV agreeing at the 1-sigma level. They interpret this insensitivity as evidence that the 2s state is weakly coupled to meson-baryon channels and thus associated with the N(1710) and N(1880) resonances.

Significance. If the invariance claim is robust, the paper offers a novel and potentially important physical insight: the quark-model 2s nucleon excitation appears to be a relatively weakly coupled state near 2 GeV whose mass is insensitive to dressing from meson-baryon channels, consistent with the small piN partial widths of the N(1710) and N(1880) resonances. The study is carefully set up in several respects: the variational method and jackknife covariance analysis are described in detail, the quark masses are matched via the pion mass, and the eigenvectors show consistent node structures in both theories. However, the central claim currently rests on a small number of visual 1-sigma overlaps rather than a quantified statistical test, and several systematic asymmetries between the full and quenched calculations have not been examined. These issues make the evidence suggestive rather than conclusive.

major comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.2, Fig. 3] The central claim of approximate invariance of the 2s excitation under quenching is not quantified: no tabulated masses, statistical uncertainties, or fit ranges are provided for the points in Fig. 3, and no combined statistical test is performed (e.g., a chi-squared per degree of freedom for the differences between the full-QCD and quenched 2s energies at the three lightest masses). I request a table of the extracted 2s masses with jackknife errors for both theories at all five quark masses, together with a quantitative statement of the level of agreement at the three lightest masses, so that the "invariance" claim can be evaluated.
  2. [Sections 2 and 4.1] The full-QCD analysis uses an 8x8 variational basis (the two interpolators chi1 and chi2 with four smearing levels), while the quenched analysis uses a 4x4 basis (chi1 only) because chi2 was dropped to mitigate quenched eta-prime artifacts. Since variational truncation bias generally depends on the basis composition and size, the 1-sigma agreement between the two analyses could reflect a cancellation of basis-dependent systematic errors rather than a physical insensitivity to meson-baryon dressing. The authors should quantify this by repeating the full-QCD extraction with the same 4x4 chi1-only basis, or by otherwise estimating the systematic shift attributable to the basis difference.
  3. [Section 2, Refs [9,10,42]] The single-state ansatz with the chi-squared/dof less than 1.2 cutoff is used to control contamination from missed scattering states, with validation cited from Refs [9,10,42], all performed in full 2+1 flavour QCD. No evidence is given that the same cutoff adequately controls contamination in the quenched theory, where the two-particle spectrum, the fat-link clover action, and the quenched eta-prime behavior differ. Without such a demonstration, the observed invariance could be an artifact of different residual contamination levels in the two theories; at minimum the corresponding systematic uncertainty should be estimated.
  4. [Section 3, Table 1] The quenched simulations are performed at a fixed lattice spacing of 0.100 fm, whereas the PACS-CS ensembles used for full QCD have lattice spacings of 0.093-0.096 fm at the three lightest masses where the invariance claim is made. Consequently the physical box sizes differ by up to about 7% (for example, 3.2 fm in quenched versus 2.98 fm in full QCD at m_pi=156 MeV). Since the claim rests on 1-sigma agreement, this finite-volume mismatch should be quantified or corrected, or its expected effect on the 2s energy estimated.
  5. [Section 5, Ref [22]] The interpretative step uses HEFT compositions from Ref [22], which shares authors with this work and was constrained by earlier lattice spectra from the same group. This is a consistency argument with a model-dependent component, not an independent confirmation of the association with N(1710)/N(1880); the manuscript should state this limitation explicitly.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.1] There is a typo in "superposed with a liner combination"; "liner" should be "linear". The reference list also includes a duplicated citation "[47, 47]" in the sentence about insensitivity to the interpolator basis.
  2. [Section 2] In the sentence "Its well known that scattering states can contaminate", "Its" should be "It's". In the same section, the operator construction introduces u_j before defining u^alpha_j; consider clarifying the notation for readers.
  3. [Figure 1 caption] The right panel of Fig. 1 is labeled "State 3+" in the caption text, but the text identifies the right panel as the 3s excitation, which would be the second positive-parity excitation; please verify the panel labels.
  4. [Section 4.2] The phrase "three states with relatively small uncertainties" is vague; since the invariance claim is central, the uncertainties and the selection criterion for these three states should be stated explicitly.
  5. [Section 3] The statement "we seek the same 32^3 x 64 lattice volume" only specifies the number of lattice sites; because the lattice spacings differ, the physical volumes are not matched. Consider rewording to avoid ambiguity, in line with the finite-volume concern raised in Major Comment 4.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the quenched lattice data are new, and the invariance conclusion is not constructed from the paper's own inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is the observed 1σ invariance of the 2s excitation energy between full and quenched QCD at the three lightest quark masses. This is a newly computed lattice quantity, not a fitted parameter and not a renaming of an input: the quenched spectra were generated for this work, with hopping parameters matched to PACS-CS pion masses, while the full-QCD comparison comes from prior CSSM analyses [2]. The interpretive step—connecting insensitivity to the N1/2+(1710)/N1/2+(1880) resonances via their small πN partial widths—uses PDG experimental facts and a same-group HEFT model [22], but the HEFT composition is not the source of the quenched energies and is not fitted to them; it is a model-based expectation that the new data tests. The methodological reliance on Refs [9,10,42,47] to justify the single-state ansatz and the equivalence of the extracted 2s state despite the different (8×8 vs 4×4) operator bases is a validity assumption about the variational analysis, not a circular derivation; the paper's own Fig. 1 independently shows χ2 has negligible overlap in the full theory. No equation in the paper defines the 2s energy in terms of the quenched result, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction. Thus there is no circular step to exhibit.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles or forces are introduced. The physical input comes from standard lattice QCD parameters and prior experimental widths. The main ledger items are the quenched hopping parameters matched to pion masses, the smearing basis chosen to resolve radial nodes, and several domain assumptions about quenching, scale setting, and contamination control that are inherited from prior publications.

free parameters (2)
  • Quenched hopping parameters kappa_Q (five values) = 0.12409, 0.12453, 0.12495, 0.12522, 0.12539
    Tuned to reproduce PACS-CS pion masses (Table 1) so full and quenched ensembles are compared at matched quark masses; if the matching is imperfect, the invariance comparison is biased.
  • Gaussian smearing levels and smearing fraction = 16, 35, 100, 200 sweeps; alpha = 0.7
    Chosen from Refs [47] to create the node structure identifying the 2s state; if the basis changes which state is excited, the identification could change.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math GEVP variational method extracts energy eigenstates from the correlation matrix
    Section 2, Eqs (1)-(6).
  • domain assumption Single-state ansatz with chi2/dof < 1.2 contains contamination from missing scattering states
    Section 2, relying on Refs [9,10,42].
  • domain assumption Quenching removes sea-quark loops and suppresses meson-baryon couplings
    Section 1.4.
  • domain assumption Sommer scale setting preserves relevant physics in both full and quenched simulations
    Section 1.4 and Table 1.
  • domain assumption The eigenvector node patterns identify the same 2s state in both theories
    Section 4.1, Figures 1-2.
  • domain assumption HEFT basis-state compositions for the 2s state are reliable
    Section 4.2 and Ref [22], a same-group model built on earlier lattice spectra.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Physical interpretation of the 2s excitation of the nucleon." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/K2ZSSVDO

@misc{pith2026241208968,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Physical interpretation of the 2s excitation of the nucleon},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/K2ZSSVDO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.08968}
}
abstract

Lattice QCD calculations of the $2s$ radial excitation of the nucleon place the state at an energy of approximately 1.9 GeV, raising the possibility that it is associated with the $N1/2^+(1880)$ and $N1/2^+(1710)$ resonances through mixing with two-particle meson-baryon states. The discovery of the $N1/2^+(1880)$ resonance in pion photoproduction but not in $\pi N$ scattering and the small width of the $N1/2^+(1710)$ resonance suggest that a state associated with these resonances would be insensitive to the manner in which pions are permitted to dress it. To explore this possibility, we examine the spectrum of nucleon radial excitations in both 2+1 flavour QCD and in simulations where the coupling to meson-baryon states is significantly modified through quenching. We find the energy of the $2s$ radial excitation to be insensitive to this modification for quark masses close to the physical point. This invariance provides further evidence that the $2s$ radial excitation of the nucleon is associated with the $N1/2^+(1880)$ and $N1/2^+(1710)$ resonances.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.08968 by the authors.

Figure 3
Figure 3. 1s, 2s and 3s nucleon mass spectrum observed in lattice QCD calculations in full 2+1 flavour QCD (filled symbols) and quenched QCD (open symbols). While the energy of most excitations change more than 1σ, the three states at ∼ 2 GeV for the lightest three quark masses remain invariant at the 1σ level upon quenching. hypothesised should be insensitive if the 2s excitation is indeed associated with the N1/2 +(1710) an… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

  1. [22]

    Structure of the Roper Resonance from Lattice QCD Constraints

    Jia-jun Wu, Derek B. Leinweber, Zhan-wei Liu, and Anthony W. Thomas. Structure of the Roper Resonance from Lattice QCD Constraints. Phys. Rev. D, 97(9):094509, 2018. arXiv:1703.10715, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97. 094509

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

  2. [1]

    N* Spectroscopy from Lattice QCD: The Roper Explained

    Derek Leinweber, Waseem Kamleh, Adrian Kiratidis, Zhan-Wei Liu, Selim Mahbub, Dale Roberts, Finn Stokes, Anthony W. Thomas, and Jiajun Wu. N* Spectroscopy from Lattice QCD: The Roper Explained. JPS Conf. Proc., 10:010011, 2016. arXiv:1511.09146, doi:10.7566/JPSCP.10.010011

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  3. [2]

    Leinweber, Finn M

    Zhan-Wei Liu, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B. Leinweber, Finn M. Stokes, Anthony W. Thomas, and Jia-Jun Wu. Hamiltonian effective field theory study of the N∗(1440) resonance in lattice QCD. Phys. Rev. D, 95(3):034034,

    work page

  4. [4]

    Selim Mahbub, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B

    M. Selim Mahbub, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B. Leinweber, Peter J. Moran, and Anthony G. Williams. Roper Resonance in 2+1 Flavor QCD. Phys. Lett. B, 707:389–393, 2012. arXiv:1011.5724, doi:10.1016/j.physletb. 2011.12.048

    arXiv 2012

  5. [5]

    A novel analysis method for excited states in lattice QCD - the nucleon case

    C. Alexandrou, T. Leontiou, C. N. Papanicolas, and E. Stiliaris. Novel analysis method for excited states in lattice QCD: The nucleon case. Phys. Rev. D, 91(1):014506, 2015. arXiv:1411.6765, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 91.014506

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  6. [6]

    Selim Mahbub, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B

    M. Selim Mahbub, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B. Leinweber, Peter J. Moran, and Anthony G. Williams. Structure and Flow of the Nucleon Eigenstates in Lattice QCD. Phys. Rev. D, 87(9):094506, 2013. arXiv:1302.2987, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.094506

    arXiv 2013

  7. [7]

    Roberts, Waseem Kamleh, and Derek B

    Dale S. Roberts, Waseem Kamleh, and Derek B. Leinweber. Wave Function of the Roper from Lattice QCD. Phys. Lett. B, 725:164–169, 2013. arXiv:1304.0325, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2013.06.056

    arXiv 2013

  8. [8]

    Roberts, Waseem Kamleh, and Derek B

    Dale S. Roberts, Waseem Kamleh, and Derek B. Leinweber. Nucleon Excited State Wave Functions from Lattice QCD. Phys. Rev. D, 89(7):074501, 2014. arXiv:1311.6626, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.074501

    arXiv 2014

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    Kiratidis, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B

    Adrian L. Kiratidis, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B. Leinweber, and Benjamin J. Owen. Lattice baryon spectroscopy with multi-particle interpolators. Phys. Rev. D, 91:094509, 2015. arXiv:1501.07667, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 91.094509

    2015 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Kiratidis, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B

    Adrian L. Kiratidis, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B. Leinweber, Zhan-Wei Liu, Finn M. Stokes, and Anthony W. Thomas. Search for low-lying lattice QCD eigenstates in the Roper regime. Phys. Rev. D, 95(7):074507, 2017. arXiv:1608.03051, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.074507

    2017 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Positive-parity baryon spectrum and the role of hybrid baryons

    Tanjib Khan, David Richards, and Frank Winter. Positive-parity baryon spectrum and the role of hybrid baryons. Phys. Rev. D, 104(3):034503, 2021. arXiv:2010.03052, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.034503

    2021 arXiv

  4. [12]

    C. B. Lang, L. Leskovec, M. Padmanath, and S. Prelovsek. Pion-nucleon scattering in the Roper channel from lattice QCD. Phys. Rev. D, 95(1):014510, 2017. arXiv:1610.01422, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.014510

    2017 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Stokes, Waseem Kamleh, and Derek B

    Finn M. Stokes, Waseem Kamleh, and Derek B. Leinweber. Elastic Form Factors of Nucleon Excitations in Lattice QCD. Phys. Rev. D, 102(1):014507, 2020. arXiv:1907.00177, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.014507

    2020 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Searching for the first radial excitation of the ∆(1232) in lattice QCD

    Liam Hockley, Waseem Kamleh, Derek Leinweber, and Anthony Thomas. Searching for the first radial excitation of the ∆(1232) in lattice QCD. J. Phys. G, 51(6):065106, 2024. arXiv:2312.11574, doi:10.1088/1361-6471/ ad33e2

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    David Roper

    L. David Roper. Evidence for a P-11 Pion-Nucleon Resonance at 556 MeV. Phys. Rev. Lett., 12:340–342, 1964. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.12.340

    1964 doi

  8. [16]

    Adjoint Sources in Lattice Gauge Theory

    Christopher Michael. Adjoint Sources in Lattice Gauge Theory. Nucl. Phys. B, 259:58–76, 1985. doi:10.1016/ 0550-3213(85)90297-4

    1985

  9. [17]

    How to Calculate the Elastic Scattering Matrix in Two-dimensional Quantum Field Theories by Numerical Simulation

    Martin Luscher and Ulli Wolff. How to Calculate the Elastic Scattering Matrix in Two-dimensional Quantum Field Theories by Numerical Simulation. Nucl. Phys. B, 339:222–252, 1990. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(90)90540-T

    1990 doi

  10. [18]

    Edwards et al

    Robert G. Edwards et al. Excited state baryon spectroscopy from lattice QCD. Phys. Rev. D, 84:074508, 2011. arXiv:1104.5152, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84.074508

    2011 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Menadue, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B

    Benjamin J. Menadue, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B. Leinweber, M. Selim Mahbub, and Benjamin J. Owen. Electromagnetic Form Factors for the Λ(1405). PoS, LATTICE2013:280, 2014. arXiv:1311.5026, doi: 10.22323/1.187.0280

    2014 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Jonathan M. M. Hall, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B. Leinweber, Benjamin J. Menadue, Benjamin J. Owen, Anthony W. Thomas, and Ross D. Young. Lattice QCD Evidence that the Λ(1405) Resonance is an Antikaon-Nucleon Molecule. Phys. Rev. Lett., 114(13):132002, 2015. arXiv:1411.3402, doi:10...

    2015 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Jonathan M. M. Hall, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B. Leinweber, Benjamin J. Menadue, Benjamin J. Owen, and Anthony W. Thomas. Light-quark contributions to the magnetic form factor of the Lambda(1405). Phys. Rev. D, 95(5):054510, 2017. arXiv:1612.07477, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.054510

    2017 arXiv

  14. [23]

    Low-lying baryon resonances from lattice QCD

    John Bulava et al. Low-lying baryon resonances from lattice QCD. Nuovo Cim. C, 47(4):165, 2024. arXiv: 2310.08375, doi:10.1393/ncc/i2024-24165-1

    2024 arXiv

  15. [24]

    Hanlon, Ben H¨ orz, Daniel Mohler, Amy Nicholson, Sarah Skinner, and Andr´ e Walker-Loud

    Colin Morningstar, John Bulava, Andrew D. Hanlon, Ben H¨ orz, Daniel Mohler, Amy Nicholson, Sarah Skinner, and Andr´ e Walker-Loud. Progress on Meson-Baryon Scattering. PoS, LA TTICE, 2021:170, 2022. arXiv: 2111.07755, doi:10.22323/1.396.0170

    2021 arXiv

  16. [25]

    Hanlon, Ben H¨ orz, Colin Morningstar, Amy Nicholson, Fernando Romero-L´ opez, Sarah Skinner, Pavlos Vranas, and Andr´ e Walker-Loud

    John Bulava, Andrew D. Hanlon, Ben H¨ orz, Colin Morningstar, Amy Nicholson, Fernando Romero-L´ opez, Sarah Skinner, Pavlos Vranas, and Andr´ e Walker-Loud. Elastic nucleon-pion scattering atmπ = 200 MeV from lattice 11 QCD. Nucl. Phys. B, 987:116105, 2023. arXiv:2208.03867, d...

    2023 arXiv

  17. [26]

    Role of chiral symmetry in the nucleon excitation spectrum

    Adam Virgili, Waseem Kamleh, and Derek Leinweber. Role of chiral symmetry in the nucleon excitation spectrum. Phys. Rev. D, 101(7):074504, 2020. arXiv:1910.13782, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.074504

    2020 arXiv

  18. [27]

    Stokes, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B

    Finn M. Stokes, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B. Leinweber, M. Selim Mahbub, Benjamin J. Menadue, and Benjamin J. Owen. Parity-expanded variational analysis for nonzero momentum. Phys. Rev. D, 92(11):114506, 2015. arXiv:1302.4152, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.114506

    2015 arXiv

  19. [28]

    Stokes, Waseem Kamleh, and Derek B

    Finn M. Stokes, Waseem Kamleh, and Derek B. Leinweber. Structure and transitions of nucleon excitations via parity-expanded variational analysis. PoS, LA TTICE, 2019:182, 2019. arXiv:2001.07919, doi:10.22323/1. 363.0182

    2019 arXiv

  20. [29]

    A. V. Anisovich et al. Strong evidence for nucleon resonances near 1900 \,MeV. Phys. Rev. Lett., 119(6):062004,

    1900

  21. [30]

    Navas et al

    S. Navas et al. Review of particle physics. Phys. Rev. D, 110(3):030001, 2024. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.030001

    2024 doi

  22. [31]

    arXiv:1712.07549, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.062004

    arXiv

  23. [32]

    J. M. M. Hall and D. B. Leinweber. Flavor-singlet baryons in the graded symmetry approach to partially quenched QCD. Phys. Rev. D, 94(9):094004, 2016. arXiv:1509.08226, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.094004

    2016 arXiv

  24. [33]

    Labrenz and Stephen R

    James N. Labrenz and Stephen R. Sharpe. Quenched chiral perturbation theory for baryons. Phys. Rev. D, 54:4595–4608, 1996. arXiv:hep-lat/9605034, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.54.4595

    1996 arXiv

  25. [34]

    Leinweber and Anthony W

    Derek B. Leinweber and Anthony W. Thomas. Sea-quark loop contributions to the d ¯-u¯ asymmetry in the proton. Phys. Rev. D, 109(3):L031503, 2024. arXiv:2211.13423, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.L031503

    2024 arXiv

  26. [35]

    Leinweber

    Derek B. Leinweber. Quark contributions to baryon magnetic moments in full, quenched and partially quenched QCD. Phys. Rev. D, 69:014005, 2004. arXiv:hep-lat/0211017, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.69.014005

    2004 arXiv

  27. [36]

    Aoki et al

    S. Aoki et al. Light hadron spectrum and quark masses from quenched lattice QCD. Phys. Rev. D, 67:034503,

  28. [37]

    Aoki et al

    S. Aoki et al. Quenched light hadron spectrum. Phys. Rev. Lett., 84:238–241, 2000. arXiv:hep-lat/9904012, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.238

    2000 arXiv

  29. [38]

    R. Sommer. A New way to set the energy scale in lattice gauge theories and its applications to the static force and αs in SU(2) Yang-Mills theory. Nucl. Phys. B , 411:839–854, 1994. arXiv:hep-lat/9310022, doi:10.1016/0550-3213(94)90473-1

    1994 arXiv

  30. [39]

    S. Gusken. A Study of smearing techniques for hadron correlation functions. Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl., 17:361– 364, 1990. doi:10.1016/0920-5632(90)90273-W

    1990 doi

  31. [40]

    Light Hadron Masses from Lattice QCD

    Zoltan Fodor and Christian Hoelbling. Light Hadron Masses from Lattice QCD. Rev. Mod. Phys., 84:449, 2012. arXiv:1203.4789, doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.84.449

    2012 arXiv

  32. [41]

    Selim Mahbub, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B

    M. Selim Mahbub, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B. Leinweber, Peter J. Moran, and Anthony G. Williams. Low- lying Odd-parity States of the Nucleon in Lattice QCD. Phys. Rev. D, 87(1):011501, 2013. arXiv:1209.0240, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.011501

    2013 arXiv

  33. [42]

    Selim Mahbub, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B

    M. Selim Mahbub, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B. Leinweber, and Anthony G. Williams. Searching for low- lying multi-particle thresholds in lattice spectroscopy. Annals Phys., 342:270–282, 2014. arXiv:1310.6803, doi:10.1016/j.aop.2014.01.004

    2014 arXiv

  34. [43]

    Computers and the Theory of Statistics: Thinking the Unthinkable

    Bradley Efron. Computers and the Theory of Statistics: Thinking the Unthinkable. SIAM Review, 21(4):460–480,

  35. [44]

    Beckett, Balint Joo, Chris M

    Mark G. Beckett, Balint Joo, Chris M. Maynard, Dirk Pleiter, Osamu Tatebe, and Tomoteru Yoshie. Building the International Lattice Data Grid. Comput. Phys. Commun., 182:1208–1214, 2011. arXiv:0910.1692, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2011.01.027

    2011 arXiv

  36. [45]

    Y. Iwasaki. Renormalization group analysis of lattice theories and improved lattice action: Two-dimensional non- linear O(N) sigma model. Nucl. Phys. B, 258:141–156, 1985. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(85)90606-6

    1985 doi

  37. [46]

    Aoki et al

    S. Aoki et al. 2+1 Flavor Lattice QCD toward the Physical Point. Phys. Rev. D, 79:034503, 2009. arXiv:0807.1661, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.034503

    2009 arXiv

  38. [47]

    M. S. Mahbub, Alan O Cais, Waseem Kamleh, Ben G. Lasscock, Derek B. Leinweber, and Anthony G. Williams. Isolating the Roper Resonance in Lattice QCD. Phys. Lett. B, 679:418–422, 2009. arXiv:0906.5433, doi: 10.1016/j.physletb.2009.07.063

    2009 arXiv

  39. [48]

    ∆ Baryon Spectroscopy in Lattice QCD

    Liam Hockley, Waseem Kamleh, Derek Leinweber, and Anthony Thomas. ∆ Baryon Spectroscopy in Lattice QCD. Few Body Syst., 64(3):46, 2023. arXiv:2304.10187, doi:10.1007/s00601-023-01832-x

    2023 arXiv

  40. [49]

    Moran, Derek B

    Peter J. Moran, Derek B. Leinweber, and Jianbo Zhang. Wilson mass dependence of the overlap topological charge density. Phys. Lett. B, 695:337–342, 2011. arXiv:1007.0854, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2010.11.005

    2011 arXiv

  41. [50]

    Two-Pole Nature of the Λ(1405) resonance from Lattice QCD

    John Bulava et al. Two-Pole Nature of the Λ(1405) resonance from Lattice QCD. Phys. Rev. Lett., 132(5):051901,

  42. [51]

    Lattice QCD study of πΣ-K¯N scattering and the Λ(1405) resonance

    John Bulava et al. Lattice QCD study of πΣ-K¯N scattering and the Λ(1405) resonance. Phys. Rev. D, 109(1):014511, 2024. arXiv:2307.13471, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.014511

    2024

  43. [52]

    Exploring the Ω − spectrum in lattice QCD

    Liam Hockley, Waseem Kamleh, Derek Leinweber, and Anthony Thomas. Exploring the Ω − spectrum in lattice QCD. J. Phys. G, 8 2024. arXiv:2408.16281

    2024 arXiv

  44. [56]

    Leinweber, Curtis D

    Derek B. Leinweber, Curtis D. Abell, Liam C. Hockley, Waseem Kamleh, Zhan-Wei Liu, Finn M. Stokes, Anthony W. Thomas, and Jia-Jun Wu. Understanding the nature of baryon resonances. Nuovo Cim. C, 47(4):146, 2024. arXiv:2401.04901, doi:10.1393/ncc/i2024-24146-4

    2024 arXiv

  45. [2003]

    arXiv:hep-lat/0206009, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.67.034503

    arXiv

  46. [2017]

    arXiv:1607.04536, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.034034

    arXiv

  47. [2024]

    arXiv:2307.10413, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.051901

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.