Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 69 references

Strange mesons with one dynamical gluon: A light-front approach

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Eigenvectors of a truncated light-front Hamiltonian reproduce the kaon's spectrum, form factor, decay constant, and parton distributions, and predict a testable Drell-Yan signal.

desk verdict A real BLFQ extension to the strange sector with a broad set of kaon observables, but the PDF validation is partly circular and the gluon-driven predictions rest on an untested Fock sector. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.03476 v1 pith:37HKIQVW submitted 2025-01-07 hep-ph nucl-th

Jiangshan Lan , Jialin Chen , Zhimin Zhu , Chandan Mondal , Xingbo Zhao , James P. Vary This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phnucl-th
keywords kaonstrangemesonslight-frontHamiltonianbasisquantizationpartondistributionfunctionselectromagneticformfactorDrell-YancrosssectionQCDevolution
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 claims that one light-front Hamiltonian, cut down to the quark-antiquark and quark-antiquark-gluon Fock sectors plus a confining potential, can act as a unified description of strange mesons. After fitting only the strange quark mass parameters to the $\phi(1020)$ and $f_1(1420)$ masses, the same eigenvectors yield the kaon's mass, electromagnetic form factor, decay constant, distribution amplitude, and quark and gluon parton distributions under QCD evolution. If this holds, a few-parameter Hamiltonian accounts for both the static and the partonic structure of the kaon, and its predicted kaon-nucleus Drell-Yan cross section becomes a near-term experimental test. The computed decay constant $f_K = 156.9$ MeV sits close to the established $155.6 \pm 0.4$ MeV, and the evolved valence-quark ratio agrees with available kaon-to-pion measurements.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the basis light-front quantization method, which diagonalizes the light-front Hamiltonian $P^- = P^-_{\rm QCD} + P^-_C$ in a truncated single-particle basis. The state is expanded in Fock sectors, $|\Psi\rangle = \psi_{q\bar q}|q\bar q\rangle + \psi_{q\bar q g}|q\bar q g\rangle$, with longitudinal momentum fractions $x_i = k_i/K$ on a discretized light cone and transverse dynamics in a two-dimensional harmonic-oscillator basis with cutoffs $K$ and $N_{\max}$. The confining potential $P^-_C P^+ = \kappa^4[ x(1-x) r_\perp^2 - \partial_x x(1-x)\partial_x /(m_q+m_{\bar q})^2]$ acts in the leading sector. The eigenvectors are the light-front wave functions, and their overlaps and squares give the form factor, decay constant, distribution amplitude, and PDFs; NNLO DGLAP evolution then carries the PDFs to experimental scales.

What would settle it

A measured kaon-carbon Drell-Yan cross section at 100 GeV beam energy that falls outside the predicted $m^3d\sigma/dm$, especially the claimed $K^-$ over $K^+$ enhancement at invariant masses of a few GeV, would show that the truncated-Fock PDFs are not the actual kaon PDFs.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that eigenvectors of this truncated light-front Hamiltonian are genuine light-front wave functions that describe strange meson and strangeonium spectra and, for the kaon, simultaneously reproduce the electromagnetic form factor, decay constant, distribution amplitude, and the evolved quark and gluon PDFs. The strange quark masses $m_s$ and $m_f^s$ are the only new parameters, fixed to $\phi(1020)$ and $f_1(1420)$, while all other parameters carry over from the light unflavored meson study. At $\mu^2 = 20$ GeV$^2$ the kaon PDFs give $\langle x\rangle_u = 0.21 \pm 0.01$, $\langle x\rangle_{\bar{s}} = 0.26 \pm 0.01$, $\langle x\rangle_{\rm sea} = 0.11 \pm 0.01$, and $\langle x\rangle_{\rm gluon} = 0.42 \pm 0.02$. These moments are consistent with lattice QCD results, and the predicted Drell-Yan cross sections show a clear enhancement of $K^-$ over $K^+$ beams on a carbon target.

Load-bearing premise

The results assume that truncating the Fock expansion to quark-antiquark and quark-antiquark-gluon states, together with the fitted confining potential and basis cutoffs, captures the essential dynamics of strange mesons, so that neglected sea-quark and multi-gluon Fock states do not significantly change the spectra, form factor, or parton distributions.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The same eigenvectors can be used to compute generalized parton distributions, transverse-momentum-dependent distributions, and double-parton correlations in strange mesons without new model input.
  • The large-$x$ falloffs $(1-x)^{2.24}$ for the valence up quark and $(1-x)^{1.72}$ for the valence strange antiquark at $\mu^2 = 20$ GeV$^2$ give a clear ordering that future measurements can check.
  • The momentum fractions at $\mu^2 = 20$ GeV$^2$, with gluons at $0.42 \pm 0.02$, give a specific target for lattice QCD and for electron-ion collider measurements.
  • The predicted $K^-$-carbon Drell-Yan cross section exceeding the $K^+$-carbon one provides a direct experimental signature for a planned kaon-beam run.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because gluons carry roughly $42\%$ of the kaon momentum at $\mu^2 = 20$ GeV$^2$, a $J/\psi$ production measurement on a kaon beam would be an especially sharp test; the paper does not compute that channel.
  • The noted deviations for the $K_0(800)$ and $K_2^*(1430)$ states suggest that adding sea-quark Fock components could be the next step; the current truncation may most affect states with strong coupling to decay channels.
  • If the Drell-Yan ratio measurement favored a different strange-versus-up quark large-$x$ behavior, it would discriminate among the models the authors compare with, since those models already disagree in this region.
  • The same Hamiltonian could be applied to heavier strange mesons and excited kaons with the two fitted strange masses held fixed, which would test whether the parameter transferability extends beyond the ground state.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper solves a light-front Hamiltonian with |q qbar> and |q qbar g> Fock sectors plus a confining term in the leading sector, obtaining strange-meson and strangeonium mass spectra and kaon light-front wave functions. The same wave functions are then used to compute the kaon electromagnetic form factor, decay constant, distribution amplitudes, and quark and gluon PDFs, which are evolved with NNLO DGLAP equations to experimental scales. Using these kaon PDFs together with nCTEQ15 nuclear PDFs, the paper predicts the K+-carbon Drell-Yan cross section for COMPASS++/AMBER. The strange-sector parameters ms and mfs are fitted to phi(1020) and f1(1420), while the kaon model scale mu0K is determined by fitting the evolved uK_v/u_pi_v ratio to CERN-NA3 data.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper would provide a single light-front Hamiltonian framework that describes a broad set of strange-meson observables and yields a concrete, testable prediction for COMPASS++/AMBER. The manuscript is transparent about its model parameters and reuses the previously fitted pion setup, which is a strength, and the Drell-Yan cross-section prediction is falsifiable. However, the circular determination of the kaon model scale and the unquantified role of the |q qbar g> Fock sector currently limit the reliability of the PDF and Drell-Yan results.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4 (PDFs, after Eq. (11))] The kaon model scale mu0K^2 = 0.42 ± 0.04 GeV^2 is determined by requiring the evolved uK_v/u_pi_v ratio to fit the CERN-NA3 data, and the same ratio is then shown in Fig. 4 as agreement. This is circular for the claimed PDF validation: the upper panel of Fig. 4 is a fit to the data with which it is compared, so it cannot by itself establish that the kaon PDFs are correct. Please determine mu0K from an independent observable (for example, fK, the EMFF, or a lattice moment), or explicitly present Fig. 4 as an illustration of the fitting procedure rather than as an independent test.
  2. [§2, after Eq. (4)] The confining potential in Eq. (4) acts only in the |q qbar> sector. The statement that confinement in the |q qbar g> sector is achieved by the massive gluon and the cutoff of the BLFQ basis functions is not a description of a confining interaction: the basis cutoff Nmax is a numerical regulator, and mg is inherited from the pion fit. Because the |q qbar g> sector is the sole source of the gluon PDF at the model scale (Eq. (11)) and hence controls the Drell-Yan prediction in Sec. 5, the paper should provide the |q qbar g> Fock-sector probability, a convergence study in Nmax and K, and a sensitivity study to mg and the basis cutoffs. Without this, the evolved gluon and sea distributions are not established.
  3. [§2, Table 1 and Fig. 1] The mass-spectrum comparison in Fig. 1 highlights phi(1020) and f1(1420) in blue boxes, but these are precisely the two states used to fit ms and mfs in Table 1. Their agreement is therefore not a predictive test of the model, yet it is presented as part of the 'align well' claim. Please separate fitted from predicted states, report numerical residuals for all states, and state explicitly which agreements are genuine predictions rather than fit outcomes.
  4. [§4, DGLAP evolution] The initial scale mu0K^2 = 0.42 GeV^2 corresponds to Q ≈ 0.65 GeV, which is well below the scale where NNLO DGLAP evolution is normally considered reliable. The paper does not justify this choice or quantify the sensitivity of the evolved PDFs to the order of the evolution (LO/NLO/NNLO). Since the PDF comparisons and the Drell-Yan prediction in Sec. 5 depend on this evolution, the systematic uncertainty from the starting scale and evolution scheme should be discussed.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 1] The figure labels are partially garbled (for example, 'K1(1430) 2K*' and 'PDG 22''), which makes the comparison difficult to read; please clean up the labels and ensure the J^PC assignments are legible.
  2. [§3, Fig. 2] The error bands in the EMFF are based only on a ±10% variation in gs; no uncertainty from the basis truncation or from the fitted strange-sector parameters is propagated. A sentence stating this limitation would help the reader interpret the bands.
  3. [§4, Fig. 4] The caption for the lower panel is difficult to parse ('Thin-red: K, Thick-black: u Valence_s Valence_Gluon Sea'); please rewrite it to identify each curve and band explicitly.
  4. [§4] The text does not report the number of data points or the degrees of freedom associated with the quoted chi^2/d.o.f. of 1.74 for the uK_v/u_pi_v ratio; this information should be included so the fit quality can be assessed.
  5. [§3, around Eq. (8)] The statement that the |q qbar g> component does not contribute to the decay constant 'due to the structure of the matrix element at the leading order' would benefit from a brief explanation, since the same argument is not obvious to all readers.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Partial circularity: the kaon's evolution scale µ^2_0K is fitted to the CERN-NA3 uK_v/uπ_v ratio that is then presented as agreement in Fig. 4, and the two strange-quark masses are fitted to ϕ(1020) and f1(1420), which are then counted among the successful spectrum matches.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. 4, paragraph after Eq. (11), and Fig. 4 upper panel]
    "We determine our model scale, µ2 0K = 0.42 ± 0.04 GeV2, for the kaon by requiring the evolved result to fit the available data for uK v /uπ v from the CERN-NA3 experiment [66]. ... In the upper panel, we compare our uK v /uπ v ratio with experimental data from the CERN-NA3 experiment [66] ... Our results align well with the experimental data and theoretical predictions."

    The same CERN-NA3 ratio is used twice: first as the fitting target that fixes the model scale µ^2_0K, and then as the data displayed in Fig. 4 whose agreement is reported. The evolved uK_v/uπ_v comparison is therefore not an independent check of the LFWFs; it is a measure of the fit quality of the evolution-scale parameter. The abstract's central claim that the eigenvectors 'can simultaneously describe ... quark and gluon distribution functions under QCD scale evolution' rests partly on this fitted scale for the only existing kaon valence-quark data.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Sec. 2, Table 1 caption and Fig. 1 caption]
    "Here, we select two established strangeonium states, ϕ(1020) and f1(1420), in the Particle Data Group 2022 (PDG 22) [45] for fitting the two additional parameters. ... The two states with the blue box represent the two established strangeonium states, ϕ(1020) and f1(1420), which we select for fitting. ... Our results for the strangeonia spectrum align well with the experimental data."

    The strange quark masses ms and mfs are fixed by requiring the Hamiltonian eigenvalues to reproduce ϕ(1020) and f1(1420). Including those same two states in the statement that the strangeonia spectrum 'aligns well' with PDG data reports an enforced match as though it were supporting evidence. The independent content in Fig. 1 comes from the other strangeonia and strange-meson states, so this is a limited fitted-input effect rather than a collapse of the whole spectrum claim.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is largely self-contained: the BLFQ Hamiltonian, confinement in the |q qbar> sector, and the Fock-sector truncation are solved to produce eigenvectors, and the kaon EMFF, decay constant, distribution amplitude, gluon and sea PDFs, and the Drell-Yan cross section are computed from those vectors without fitting to the corresponding observables. The use of parameters from the previous same-group pion paper [43] is normal model inheritance, not circular evidence, since those parameters were fixed by the pion spectrum and are not the target predictions of this paper. The main circularity is the kaon evolution scale: µ^2_0K = 0.42 ± 0.04 GeV^2 is chosen by requiring the evolved uK_v/uπ_v ratio to fit CERN-NA3, and the same ratio is then advertised as agreement in Fig. 4. A second, milder fitted-input issue is that ms and mfs are fit to ϕ(1020) and f1(1420), which are then included among the states said to align with experiment. These do not destroy the paper's independent predictions — the EMFF, fK = 156.9 MeV, the gluon/sea distributions, and the COMPASS++/AMBER Drell-Yan prediction are not fits to their target data — but they lower the evidential weight of the two highlighted comparisons. Concerns that the |q qbar g> sector is effectively unconfined (confinement there is said to come from the massive gluon and the basis cutoff) are a substantive model/truncation uncertainty, not a circularity in the derivation, so they are not counted in the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 10 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The calculation rests on a Hamiltonian with ten free parameters, most inherited from a prior pion fit and three directly fitted in this work (ms, mfs, and mu0K^2). It also depends on Fock sector truncation, a phenomenological confinement term, a model gluon mass, and the choice of nuclear PDFs for the Drell-Yan prediction. No new particles or forces are introduced.

free parameters (10)
  • mq = 0.39 GeV
    Light quark mass in kinetic terms, inherited from the light meson fit in Ref. [43].
  • mfq = 5.69 GeV
    Vertex interaction light quark mass, inherited from Ref. [43].
  • mg = 0.60 GeV
    Model gluon mass, inherited from Ref. [43].
  • b = 0.29 GeV
    Harmonic oscillator basis scale, inherited from Ref. [43].
  • kapp = 0.65 GeV
    Confinement strength, inherited from Ref. [43].
  • gs = 1.92
    Strong coupling in the light-front Hamiltonian, inherited from Ref. [43].
  • ms = 0.55 GeV
    Strange quark mass in kinetic terms, fitted to phi(1020) and f1(1420) in Sec. 2.
  • mfs = 7.13 GeV
    Vertex interaction strange quark mass, fitted to the same two states.
  • mu0K^2 = 0.42 ± 0.04 GeV^2
    Initial scale for NNLO DGLAP evolution, fitted to the CERN-NA3 uK_v/u_pi_v ratio in Sec. 4.
  • mu0pi^2 = 0.34 ± 0.03 GeV^2
    Pion initial scale inherited from Ref. [43], used in the kaon-to-pion PDF comparison.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The meson state is truncated to the |q qbar> plus |q qbar g> Fock sectors, Eq. (2).
    Neglected higher Fock sectors, including sea quark pairs and multi-gluon states, are assumed to have negligible effect on the computed observables.
  • ad hoc to paper The confinement potential in the leading Fock sector, Eq. (4), is a valid phenomenological representation of confinement.
    This term is not derived from QCD; it is a model input with strength kappa fitted to light meson spectra.
  • ad hoc to paper The massive gluon mass mg and the BLFQ basis cutoff provide effective confinement in the |q qbar g> sector.
    The paper states that confinement in the |q qbar g> sector is achieved by the massive gluon and cutoff, rather than by an explicit potential.
  • domain assumption Fock-sector-dependent renormalization with mass counterterms regulates the quark self-energy.
    The Hamiltonian in Eq. (3) relies on the renormalization scheme of Refs. [48,49], which is assumed to be adequate at this truncation.
  • domain assumption NNLO DGLAP evolution from a single fitted initial scale reliably maps the model-scale PDFs to experimental scales.
    The evolution is standard, but the model scale mu0K is fitted to the NA3 ratio, so the evolved PDFs inherit the fitted normalization.
  • domain assumption The nCTEQ15 nuclear PDFs for carbon are accurate inputs for the Drell-Yan prediction.
    The Drell-Yan cross section in Eq. (12) combines the model kaon PDFs with nCTEQ15 carbon PDFs; errors in the nuclear PDFs propagate to the prediction.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Strange mesons with one dynamical gluon: A light-front approach." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/37HKIQVW

@misc{pith2026250103476,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Strange mesons with one dynamical gluon: A light-front approach},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/37HKIQVW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.03476}
}
read the original abstract

We obtain the mass spectra of strange mesons using a light-front quantized Hamiltonian with Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) input, incorporating quark-antiquark and quark-antiquark-gluon Fock components, along with a three-dimensional confinement. We work within the basis light-front quantization framework. The resulting eigenvectors can simultaneously describe the kaon's electromagnetic form factor, decay constant, distribution amplitude, and quark and gluon distribution functions under QCD scale evolution. Using the obtained kaon parton distribution functions (PDFs), supplemented by established nuclear PDFs, we also predict the kaon-nucleus-induced Drell-Yan cross section, which is expected to be measured soon by COMPASS++/AMBER at CERN.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.03476 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The mass spectra of strangeonia (upper) and strange [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. presents our BLFQ results for the kaon EMFF, depicted as F(Q2 ) and Q2F(Q2 ) as functions of Q2 , in￾cluding the bands that reflect our gs uncertainty of 10%. We compare our predictions with experimental data [6–8]. The blue dashed and red dotted curves show the contri￾butions from the |qq¯⟩ and |qqg¯ ⟩ Fock sectors, respectively, with the black curve representing the total EMFF. Note that the contributions from the… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Our results for kaon’s DAs compared with the asymptotic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The PDFs of the kaon. Upper panel: the ratio of the up [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The differential cross section for the kaon-carbon induced [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    G. D. Rochester, C. C. Butler, Evidence for the Existence of New Unstable Elementary Particles, Nature 160 (1947) 855–

    work page 1947

  2. [2]

    Gell-Mann, A Schematic Model of Baryons and Mesons, Phys

    M. Gell-Mann, A Schematic Model of Baryons and Mesons, Phys. Lett. 8 (1964) 214–215. doi:10.1016/S0031-9163(64) 92001-3

    doi:10.1016/s0031-9163(64 1964

  3. [3]

    Woods, et al., First Result on a New Measurement of ϵ′/ϵ in the Neutral Kaon System, Phys

    M. Woods, et al., First Result on a New Measurement of ϵ′/ϵ in the Neutral Kaon System, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60 (1988) 1695. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.60.1695

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.60.1695 1988

  4. [4]

    G. D. Barr, et al., A New measurement of direct CP violation in the neutral kaon system, Phys. Lett. B 317 (1993) 233–242. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(93)91599-I

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(93)91599-i 1993

  5. [5]

    L. K. Gibbons, et al., Measurement of the CP violation pa- rameter Re( ϵ′/ϵ), Phys. Rev. Lett. 70 (1993) 1203–1206. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.70.1203

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.70.1203 1993

  6. [6]

    S. R. Amendolia, et al., A Measurement of the Kaon Charge Radius, Phys. Lett. B 178 (1986) 435–440. doi:10.1016/ 0370-2693(86)91407-3

    work page 1986

  7. [7]

    E. B. Dally, et al., DIRECT MEASUREMENT OF THE NEG- ATIVE KAON FORM-F ACTOR, Phys. Rev. Lett. 45 (1980) 232–235. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.45.232

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.45.232 1980

  8. [8]

    Carmignotto, et al., Separated Kaon Electroproduction Cross Section and the Kaon Form Factor from 6 GeV JLab Data, Phys

    M. Carmignotto, et al., Separated Kaon Electroproduction Cross Section and the Kaon Form Factor from 6 GeV JLab Data, Phys. Rev. C 97 (2) (2018) 025204. arXiv:1801.01536, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.97.025204

    arXiv 2018

Show all 69 references
  1. [9]

    Arrington, et al., Revealing the structure of light pseudoscalar mesons at the electron–ion collider, J

    J. Arrington, et al., Revealing the structure of light pseudoscalar mesons at the electron–ion collider, J. Phys. G 48 (7) (2021) 075106. arXiv:2102.11788, doi:10.1088/1361-6471/abf5c3

    2021 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Chen, F.-K

    X. Chen, F.-K. Guo, C. D. Roberts, R. Wang, Selected Science Opportunities for the EicC, Few Body Syst. 61 (4) (2020) 43. arXiv:2008.00102, doi:10.1007/s00601-020-01574-0

    2020 arXiv

  3. [11]

    S. J. Brodsky, et al., Strong QCD from Hadron Structure Ex- periments: Newport News, V A, USA, November 4-8, 2019, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 29 (08) (2020) 2030006. arXiv:2006.06802, doi:10.1142/S0218301320300064

    2020 arXiv

  4. [12]

    J. S. Conway, et al., Experimental Study of Muon Pairs Pro- duced by 252-GeV Pions on Tungsten, Phys. Rev. D 39 (1989) 92–122. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.39.92

    1989 doi

  5. [13]

    Badier, et al., Experimental Determination of the pi Meson Structure Functions by the Drell-Yan Mechanism, Z

    J. Badier, et al., Experimental Determination of the pi Meson Structure Functions by the Drell-Yan Mechanism, Z. Phys. C 18 (1983) 281. doi:10.1007/BF01573728

    1983 doi

  6. [14]

    Adams, et al., Letter of Intent: A New QCD facility at the M2 beam line of the CERN SPS (COMPASS++/AMBER) (8 2018)

    B. Adams, et al., Letter of Intent: A New QCD facility at the M2 beam line of the CERN SPS (COMPASS++/AMBER) (8 2018). arXiv:1808.00848

    2018 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Accardi, et al., Electron Ion Collider: The Next QCD Fron- tier: Understanding the glue that binds us all, Eur

    A. Accardi, et al., Electron Ion Collider: The Next QCD Fron- tier: Understanding the glue that binds us all, Eur. Phys. J. A 52 (9) (2016) 268. arXiv:1212.1701, doi:10.1140/epja/ i2016-16268-9

    2016 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Abdul Khalek, et al., Science Requirements and Detec- tor Concepts for the Electron-Ion Collider: EIC Yellow Re- port, Nucl

    R. Abdul Khalek, et al., Science Requirements and Detec- tor Concepts for the Electron-Ion Collider: EIC Yellow Re- port, Nucl. Phys. A 1026 (2022) 122447. arXiv:2103.05419, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2022.122447

    2022 arXiv

  9. [17]

    D. P. Anderle, et al., Electron-ion collider in China, Front. Phys. (Beijing) 16 (6) (2021) 64701. arXiv:2102.09222, doi:10.1007/ s11467-021-1062-0

    2021 arXiv

  10. [18]

    J. T. Londergan, G. Q. Liu, A. W. Thomas, Kaon - nucleus Drell-Yan processes and kaon structure functions, Phys. Lett. B 380 (1996) 393–398. arXiv:hep-ph/9604448, doi:10.1016/ 0370-2693(96)00500-X

    1996 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Gluck, E

    M. Gluck, E. Reya, M. Stratmann, Mesonic parton densities derived from constituent quark model constraints, Eur. Phys. J. C 2 (1998) 159–163. arXiv:hep-ph/9711369, doi:10.1007/ s100520050130

    1998 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Watanabe, T

    A. Watanabe, T. Sawada, C. W. Kao, Meson cloud effects on kaon quark distribution functions and the SU(3) flavor symme- try, Nucl. Part. Phys. Proc. 300-302 (2018) 121–125. arXiv: 1810.04032, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2018.12.021

    2018 arXiv

  13. [21]

    P. T. P. Hutauruk, S.-i. Nam, Updated analyses of gluon distri- bution functions for the pion and kaon from the gauge-invariant nonlocal chiral quark model (2 2023). arXiv:2302.05566

    2023 arXiv

  14. [22]

    P. T. P. Hutauruk, S.-i. Nam, Gluon and valence quark distri- butions for the pion and kaon in nuclear matter, Phys. Rev. D 105 (3) (2022) 034021. arXiv:2112.05435, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.105.034021. 7

    2022 arXiv

  15. [23]

    C. D. Roberts, D. G. Richards, T. Horn, L. Chang, Insights into the emergence of mass from studies of pion and kaon structure, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 120 (2021) 103883. arXiv:2102.01765, doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2021.103883

    2021 arXiv

  16. [24]

    S.-S. Xu, L. Chang, C. D. Roberts, H.-S. Zong, Pion and kaon valence-quark parton quasidistributions, Phys. Rev. D 97 (9) (2018) 094014. arXiv:1802.09552, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97. 094014

    2018 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Nguyen, A

    T. Nguyen, A. Bashir, C. D. Roberts, P. C. Tandy, Pion and kaon valence-quark parton distribution functions, Phys. Rev. C 83 (2011) 062201. arXiv:1102.2448, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC. 83.062201

    2011 arXiv

  18. [26]

    K. D. Bednar, I. C. Clo¨ et, P. C. Tandy, Distinguishing Quarks and Gluons in Pion and Kaon Parton Distribution Functions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124 (4) (2020) 042002. arXiv:1811.12310, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.042002

    2020 arXiv

  19. [27]

    W.-Y. Liu, E. Shuryak, I. Zahed, Hadronic structure on the light-front VII. Pions and kaons and their partonic distributions (2 2023). arXiv:2302.03759

    2023 arXiv

  20. [28]

    S. Kaur, N. Kumar, J. Lan, C. Mondal, H. Dahiya, Tomogra- phy of light mesons in the light-cone quark model, Phys. Rev. D 102 (1) (2020) 014021. arXiv:2002.01199, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.102.014021

    2020 arXiv

  21. [29]

    J. Lan, C. Mondal, S. Jia, X. Zhao, J. P. Vary, Parton Distribu- tion Functions from a Light Front Hamiltonian and QCD Evolu- tion for Light Mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (17) (2019) 172001. arXiv:1901.11430, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.172001

    2019 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Lin, J.-W

    H.-W. Lin, J.-W. Chen, Z. Fan, J.-H. Zhang, R. Zhang, Valence- quark distribution of the kaon and pion from lattice qcd, Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 014516. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.014516. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.103. 014516

    2021 doi

  23. [31]

    Alexandrou, S

    C. Alexandrou, S. Bacchio, I. Clo¨ et, M. Constantinou, K. Had- jiyiannakou, G. Koutsou, C. Lauer, Pion and kaon ⟨x3⟩ from lattice QCD and PDF reconstruction from Mellin moments, Phys. Rev. D 104 (5) (2021) 054504. arXiv:2104.02247, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.104.054504

    2021 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Salas-Chavira, Z

    A. Salas-Chavira, Z. Fan, H.-W. Lin, First glimpse into the kaon gluon parton distribution using lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 106 (9) (2022) 094510. arXiv:2112.03124, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.106.094510

    2022 arXiv

  25. [33]

    J. P. Vary, H. Honkanen, J. Li, P. Maris, S. J. Brodsky, A. Harindranath, G. F. de Teramond, P. Sternberg, E. G. Ng, C. Yang, Hamiltonian light-front field theory in a ba- sis function approach, Physical Review C 81 (3) (Mar. 2010). doi:10.1103/physrevc.81.035205. URL http://d...

    2010 doi

  26. [34]

    Honkanen, P

    H. Honkanen, P. Maris, J. P. Vary, S. J. Brodsky, Electron in a transverse harmonic cavity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011) 061603. arXiv:1008.0068, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.061603

    2011 arXiv

  27. [35]

    X. Zhao, H. Honkanen, P. Maris, J. P. Vary, S. J. Brodsky, Elec- tron g-2 in Light-Front Quantization, Phys. Lett. B 737 (2014) 65–69. arXiv:1402.4195, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2014.08. 020

    2014 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Wiecki, Y

    P. Wiecki, Y. Li, X. Zhao, P. Maris, J. P. Vary, Basis Light-Front Quantization Approach to Positronium, Phys. Rev. D 91 (10) (2015) 105009. arXiv:1404.6234, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91. 105009

    2015 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Z. Hu, S. Xu, C. Mondal, X. Zhao, J. P. Vary, Transverse struc- ture of electron in momentum space in basis light-front quanti- zation, Phys. Rev. D 103 (3) (2021) 036005. arXiv:2010.12498, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.036005

    2021 arXiv

  30. [38]

    S. Nair, C. Mondal, X. Zhao, A. Mukherjee, J. P. Vary, Basis light-front quantization approach to photon, Phys. Lett. B 827 (2022) 137005. arXiv:2201.12770, doi:10.1016/j.physletb. 2022.137005

    2022 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Y. Li, P. Maris, J. P. Vary, Quarkonium as a relativistic bound state on the light front, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 016022. arXiv: 1704.06968, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.016022

    2017 arXiv

  32. [40]

    S. Jia, J. P. Vary, Basis light front quantization for the charged light mesons with color singlet Nambu–Jona-Lasinio interac- tions, Phys. Rev. C 99 (3) (2019) 035206. arXiv:1811.08512, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.99.035206

    2019 arXiv

  33. [41]

    J. Lan, C. Mondal, S. Jia, X. Zhao, J. P. Vary, Pion and kaon parton distribution functions from basis light front quantization and QCD evolution, Phys. Rev. D 101 (3) (2020) 034024.arXiv: 1907.01509, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.034024

    2020 arXiv

  34. [42]

    J. Lan, C. Mondal, M. Li, Y. Li, S. Tang, X. Zhao, J. P. Vary, Parton Distribution Functions of Heavy Mesons on the Light Front, Phys. Rev. D 102 (1) (2020) 014020. arXiv:1911.11676, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.014020

    2020 arXiv

  35. [43]

    J. Lan, K. Fu, C. Mondal, X. Zhao, j. P. Vary, Light mesons with one dynamical gluon on the light front, Phys. Lett. B 825 (2022) 136890. arXiv:2106.04954, doi:10.1016/j.physletb. 2022.136890

    2022 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Z. Zhu, Z. Hu, J. Lan, C. Mondal, X. Zhao, J. P. Vary, Transverse structure of the pion beyond leading twist with ba- sis light-front quantization, Phys. Lett. B 839 (2023) 137808. arXiv:2301.12994, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.137808

    2023 arXiv

  37. [45]

    R. L. Workman, et al., Review of Particle Physics, PTEP 2022 (2022) 083C01. doi:10.1093/ptep/ptac097

    2022 doi

  38. [46]

    J. B. Kogut, D. E. Soper, Quantum Electrodynamics in the Infinite Momentum Frame, Phys. Rev. D 1 (1970) 2901–2913. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.1.2901

    1970 doi

  39. [47]

    S. J. Brodsky, H.-C. Pauli, S. S. Pinsky, Quantum chromo- dynamics and other field theories on the light cone, Phys. Rept. 301 (1998) 299–486. arXiv:hep-ph/9705477, doi:10. 1016/S0370-1573(97)00089-6

    1998 arXiv

  40. [48]

    V. A. Karmanov, J. F. Mathiot, A. V. Smirnov, Systematic renormalization scheme in light-front dynamics with Fock space truncation, Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 085028. arXiv:0801.4507, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.085028

    2008 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Y. Li, V. A. Karmanov, P. Maris, J. P. Vary, Ab Initio Ap- proach to the Non-Perturbative Scalar Yukawa Model, Phys. Lett. B 748 (2015) 278–283. arXiv:1504.05233, doi:10.1016/ j.physletb.2015.07.014

    2015 arXiv

  42. [50]

    S. D. Glazek, R. J. Perry, Special example of relativistic Hamil- tonian field theory, Phys. Rev. D 45 (1992) 3740–3754. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.45.3740

    1992 doi

  43. [51]

    Y. Li, P. Maris, X. Zhao, J. P. Vary, Heavy Quarkonium in a Holographic Basis, Phys. Lett. B 758 (2016) 118–124. arXiv: 1509.07212, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2016.04.065

    2016 arXiv

  44. [52]

    S. J. Brodsky, G. F. de Teramond, H. G. Dosch, J. Erlich, Light- Front Holographic QCD and Emerging Confinement, Phys. Rept. 584 (2015) 1–105. arXiv:1407.8131, doi:10.1016/j. physrep.2015.05.001

    2015 arXiv

  45. [53]

    J. P. Vary, H. Honkanen, J. Li, P. Maris, S. J. Brodsky, A. Harindranath, G. F. de Teramond, P. Sternberg, E. G. Ng, C. Yang, Hamiltonian light-front field theory in a basis function approach, Phys. Rev. C 81 (2010) 035205. arXiv:0905.1411, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.81.035205

    2010 arXiv

  46. [54]

    X. Zhao, A. Ilderton, P. Maris, J. P. Vary, Scattering in Time- Dependent Basis Light-Front Quantization, Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) 065014. arXiv:1303.3273, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88. 065014

    2013 arXiv

  47. [55]

    S. Xu, C. Mondal, J. Lan, X. Zhao, Y. Li, J. P. Vary, Nu- cleon structure from basis light-front quantization, Phys. Rev. D 104 (9) (2021) 094036. arXiv:2108.03909, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.104.094036

    2021 arXiv

  48. [56]

    S. Kaur, J. Wu, Z. Hu, J. Lan, C. Mondal, X. Zhao, J. P. Vary, Quark and gluon distributions inρ-meson from basis light- front quantization, Phys. Lett. B 851 (2024) 138563. arXiv: 2401.03480, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.138563

    2024 arXiv

  49. [57]

    M. A. Martin Contreras, E. Folco Capossoli, D. Li, A. Vega, H. Boschi-Filho, Pion form factor from an AdS deformed back- ground, Nucl. Phys. B 977 (2022) 115726. arXiv:2104.04640, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2022.115726

    2022 arXiv

  50. [58]

    S. J. Brodsky, G. F. de Teramond, Light-Front Dynamics and AdS/QCD Correspondence: The Pion Form Factor in the Space- and Time-Like Regions, Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 056007. arXiv:0707.3859, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.056007

    2008 arXiv

  51. [59]

    G. P. Lepage, S. J. Brodsky, Exclusive Processes in Perturbative 8 Quantum Chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 22 (1980) 2157. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.22.2157

    1980 doi

  52. [60]

    G. P. Lepage, S. J. Brodsky, Exclusive Processes in Quan- tum Chromodynamics: Evolution Equations for Hadronic Wave Functions and the Form-Factors of Mesons, Phys. Lett. B 87 (1979) 359–365. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(79)90554-9

    1979 doi

  53. [61]

    A. V. Efremov, A. V. Radyushkin, Factorization and Asymp- totical Behavior of Pion Form-Factor in QCD, Phys. Lett. B 94 (1980) 245–250. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(80)90869-2

    1980 doi

  54. [62]

    Y. L. Dokshitzer, Calculation of the Structure Functions for Deep Inelastic Scattering and e+ e- Annihilation by Perturba- tion Theory in Quantum Chromodynamics., Sov. Phys. JETP 46 (1977) 641–653

    1977

  55. [63]

    V. N. Gribov, L. N. Lipatov, Deep inelastic e p scattering in perturbation theory, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 15 (1972) 438–450

    1972

  56. [64]

    Altarelli, G

    G. Altarelli, G. Parisi, Asymptotic Freedom in Parton Lan- guage, Nucl. Phys. B 126 (1977) 298–318. doi:10.1016/ 0550-3213(77)90384-4

    1977

  57. [65]

    G. P. Salam, J. Rojo, A Higher Order Perturbative Parton Evo- lution Toolkit (HOPPET), Comput. Phys. Commun. 180 (2009) 120–156. arXiv:0804.3755, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2008.08.010

    2009 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Badier, et al., Measurement of the K−/π− Structure Func- tion Ratio Using the Drell-Yan Process, Phys

    J. Badier, et al., Measurement of the K−/π− Structure Func- tion Ratio Using the Drell-Yan Process, Phys. Lett. B 93 (1980) 354–356. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(80)90530-4

    1980 doi

  59. [67]

    S. D. Drell, T.-M. Yan, Massive Lepton Pair Production in Hadron-Hadron Collisions at High-Energies, Phys. Rev. Lett. 25 (1970) 316–320, [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 25, 902 (1970)]. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.25.316

    1970 doi

  60. [68]

    Kovarik, et al., nCTEQ15 - Global analysis of nuclear parton distributions with uncertainties in the CTEQ framework, Phys

    K. Kovarik, et al., nCTEQ15 - Global analysis of nuclear parton distributions with uncertainties in the CTEQ framework, Phys. Rev. D 93 (8) (2016) 085037. arXiv:1509.00792, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.93.085037. 9

    2016 arXiv

  61. [857]

    doi:10.1038/160855a0

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.