Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 99 references

Lattice gauge ensembles and data management

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Lattice QCD storage needs top 10 PB, survey says, with most collaborations planning public data releases after an embargo.

desk verdict A useful community survey whose >10 PB headline is real but fragile: it holds only if projected future storage is included, and the paper never flags which entries are projections. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.08303 v1 pith:3GVGDDDJ submitted 2025-02-12 hep-lat

Yasumichi Aoki , Ed Bennett , Ryan Bignell , Kadir Utku Can , Takumi Doi , Steven Gottlieb , Rajan Gupta , Georg von Hippel
show 8 more authors
Issaku Kanamori Andrey Kotov Giannis Koutsou Agostino Patella Giovanni Pederiva Christian Schmidt Takeshi Yamazaki Yi-Bo Yang
This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-lat PACS 12.38.Gc
keywords latticeQCDgaugeensemblesdatamanagementInternationalGridsharingstoragerequirementsFAIRensemblegeneration
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

These proceedings report a community survey conducted at a dedicated session of the Lattice 2024 symposium. Representatives of 16 lattice QCD collaborations described their gauge ensemble generation efforts, focusing on publication plans, data management, and storage needs. The paper's central claim is that most collaborations intend to make their ensembles publicly available after an embargo period, that there is strong interest in the International Lattice Data Grid (ILDG) as the sharing infrastructure, and that the total reported storage requirements exceed 10 PB. A sympathetic reader would care because these multi-year simulation datasets are the raw material for precision calculations in QCD, and the community is at a decision point about how to preserve and share them.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the ensemble survey table (Table 1), built from structured self-reports of public status, ILDG usage, ensemble count, configuration count, and storage in terabytes. The other central piece is the ILDG itself, a federation of regional grids that standardizes storage interfaces and a searchable metadata catalog, together with the QCDml metadata scheme for describing gauge configurations. These tools supply the shared vocabulary that turns fifteen separate collaborations' data practices into a single community-wide picture of storage demand and sharing intentions.

What would settle it

Compare the survey's per-collaboration storage figures against the actual disk and tape inventories at the computing centers that host the ensembles; if the sum of independently verified totals falls clearly short of 10 PB, or if the largest reported dataset cannot be located, the paper's headline claim fails. A second check is to revisit the same collaborations in two years and count how many have actually uploaded configurations to ILDG versus how many planned to.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that the lattice QCD community has reached a point where open data is a planned norm rather than an exception. The 15 written collaboration reports collected in Table 1 show a spread of storage footprints from roughly 15 TB to 3.5 PB per group, and the sum of the self-reported totals exceeds 10 PB. Most groups mark their sharing status as public after an embargo, and a majority express interest in, or active use of, the International Lattice Data Grid, with a handful already uploading configurations. The survey also documents a push toward physical quark masses, larger physical volumes, and finer lattice spacings down to about 0.04 fm, each of which increases the value and the cost of preserving the ensembles.

Load-bearing premise

The aggregate storage total and the sharing trends rest entirely on unverified self-reported numbers from the collaborations that chose to answer the open call, so a biased sample or a wrong estimate would change the conclusions.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the reported plans hold, most existing and future gauge ensembles become publicly available after an embargo, enabling independent checks of published results.
  • A storage requirement above 10 PB means funding agencies and regional facilities must treat persistent data preservation as a first-class resource alongside computing time.
  • The preference for ILDG implies a federated access point where a researcher can search one metadata catalog and download ensembles from multiple regional grids.
  • The trend to finer lattice spacings and larger volumes will push storage needs further, since each ensemble at 0.04 fm costs many times more bytes than coarser ones.
  • Standardized metadata with provenance tracking will make ensembles reusable for years after the generating collaboration moves on.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The 10 PB figure is likely an underestimate because it excludes collaborations that did not respond, derived datasets such as gauge-fixed copies, and analysis output; one report, for instance, counts a 320 TB gauge-fixed set separately from its 80 TB raw configurations.
  • The storage distribution is highly skewed, with one collaboration reporting 3.5 PB alone, so the overall number is fragile to a single self-report error; a systematic audit of a few of the largest figures would harden the survey.
  • If actual ILDG uploads lag the stated plans in the next two years, the gap would measure the frictions, such as embargo policies, storage space, and metadata effort, that an attitudinal survey cannot see.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This proceedings paper summarizes a dedicated parallel session at Lattice 2024, organized by the International Lattice Data Grid (ILDG), in which representatives of lattice QCD collaborations reported on their gauge ensemble generation programs, data management practices, publication and embargo plans, ILDG engagement, and storage requirements. The paper provides a short narrative for each of the 15 collaborations included in the written proceedings and collects the reported information in Table 1. Its headline conclusions are that most collaborations plan to release ensembles publicly after an embargo period, that there is strong interest in ILDG infrastructure, and that the total reported storage requirements are expected to exceed 10 PB.

Significance. As a descriptive community survey, the paper is a useful archival record: it identifies who is generating which ensembles, where the data are stored, which formats and metadata conventions are used, and what sharing policies are planned. The per-collaboration entries and the consolidated table are the kind of reference information that the lattice QCD community and funding agencies can use for storage planning. The paper does not contain new derivations, machine-checked proofs, or parameter-free predictions, so its value rests on accuracy, internal consistency, and transparency of the reported data. The central quantitative claim, however, is currently fragile because Table 1 mixes current holdings with projected requirements; with the projected ETMC entry excluded, the tabulated sum falls below the 10 PB threshold asserted in the abstract and Section 3. With a corrected and clearly labeled table, the paper would be a solid and genuinely useful community reference.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3 and Table 1; cf. Section 2.11] The headline claim that 'total storage requirements reported by the collaborations are expected to exceed 10 PB' is not supported by the table as currently defined. Summing all 15 Storage entries gives 11,595 TB, but the entries are not commensurable: Jlab/W&M (3,500 TB), HotQCD (1,500 TB), and CLS (1,400 TB) are current holdings (Sections 2.2, 2.3, and 2.14), OpenLat's 500 TB is 'expected to be required' (Section 2.9), ETMC's 3,000 TB is explicitly a future expectation ('we expect storage requirements to reach 3 PB', Section 2.11), and HAL QCD's 400 TB includes 320 TB of derived gauge-fixed rotated copies (Section 2.6). If the single projected ETMC entry is excluded, the sum is 8,595 TB, below the 10,000 TB threshold stated in both the abstract and Section 3. Please separate current stored data from projected total requirements, for example with two columns or a clear footnote, and rephrase the aggregate statement so that it does not conflate existing data with planned production.
  2. [Section 1 and Section 3] The paper moves from a self-selected set of collaborations that responded to an open call (Section 1) to the statement that the lattice QCD community 'faces a storage requirement above 10 PB' (Section 3). The table contains no information about non-responding collaborations, and no caveat or uncertainty is attached to the aggregates, which are entirely self-reported estimates. At minimum, the summary should state explicitly that the >10 PB figure applies only to the participating collaborations and that the estimates were not independently verified; otherwise the scope of the central claim exceeds the evidence presented.
  3. [Table 1, Public column] The legend defines Public as 0, 1, or 2, but the HotQCD, FASTSUM, and PACS rows contain the compound value '2,1'. An entry cannot simultaneously mean 'currently public' and 'after an embargo period', and this ambiguity makes it impossible to verify the Section 3 statement that most collaborations plan public release after an embargo. Please split the column into current status and future sharing policy, or define compound codes explicitly.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Section 1] The abstract says '16 lattice QCD collaborations', while Section 1 refers to 'the 15 collaborations that contributed to this proceedings contribution' and Table 1 has 15 rows; please reconcile these numbers, for example by noting that 16 collaborations presented and 15 contributed written summaries.
  2. [Section 2.10 and Table 1] Section 2.10 states that RC* currently has '80 Tb of data stored', but Table 1 lists 60 TB for RC*; please align the two numbers and specify whether the discrepancy is due to units, timing, or a table error.
  3. [Table 1 and Section 2.6] The Storage column would benefit from a footnote stating whether listed values are current disk/tape holdings, projected end-of-project requirements, or include derived quantities; in particular, HAL QCD's 400 TB combines ~80 TB of primary configurations with ~320 TB of gauge-fixed rotated copies, and this should be transparent.
  4. [References and text] The reference list contains numerous garbled strings and author names, for example Ref. [1] with 'zero.alt' artifacts and Ref. [7] with a corrupted ILDG working-group author name; in addition, there are typographical errors such as 'We plan to to make' in Section 2.6, 'anistropy' in Section 2.4, and 'why' for 'way' in Section 2.10. These should be cleaned before publication.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the paper is a descriptive survey; the >10 PB storage figure is a direct summation of self-reported collaboration inputs, not a derived prediction or fitted quantity.

full rationale

This paper is a proceedings summary of self-reported status updates from lattice QCD collaborations. It contains no model, no parameter fitting, no derivation chain, and no quantity that is defined in terms of its own conclusion. The central quantitative claim, that total storage requirements are expected to exceed 10 PB, is a straightforward sum of the Storage column in Table 1, which itself aggregates numbers supplied by each collaboration in their individual contributions. The claim is therefore an aggregation of inputs, not a prediction derived from an independent formalism. One could question whether the table mixes current holdings (e.g., Jlab/W&M's 3,500 TB, HotQCD's 1,500 TB, CLS's 1,400 TB) with projected requirements (e.g., ETMC's expected 3 PB, OpenLat's expected 0.5 PB), and whether removing projected entries would drop the total below 10 PB. That is a concern about data commensurability, sample representativeness, or correctness of the summary, but it is not circularity under the definitions used here: the paper never claims to derive the collaborations' storage needs from first principles, nor does it define a target in terms of its own output. The self-citations present (e.g., references to prior ILDG sessions and to the authors' own collaboration papers) are used for context, software provenance, and ensemble details, and none is load-bearing in the sense of supplying an unverified premise that forces the paper's conclusion. Accordingly, the circularity score is 0.

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

No free parameters or invented entities. The report's claims rest on self-reported data from participating collaborations and on the representativeness of the open-call sample.

assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption Self-reported ensemble counts, storage figures, and availability plans from each collaboration are accurate and current as of Lattice 2024.
    The paper does not independently verify any numbers; Table 1 and the >10 PB total rest entirely on these reports.
  • domain assumption The collaborations that responded to the open call are a representative sample of the lattice QCD community.
    The summary frames itself as a status overview; if the sample is biased, the aggregate trends may not generalize.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Lattice gauge ensembles and data management." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3GVGDDDJ

@misc{pith2026250208303,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Lattice gauge ensembles and data management},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3GVGDDDJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.08303}
}
read the original abstract

We summarize the status of lattice QCD ensemble generation efforts and their data management characteristics. Namely, these proceedings combine the contributions to a dedicated parallel session during the 41st International Symposium on Lattice Field Theory (Lattice 2024), during which representatives of 16 lattice QCD collaborations provided details on their simulation program, with focus on plans for publication, data management, and storage requirements. The parallel session was organized by the International Lattice Data Grid (ILDG), following an open call to the lattice QCD community for participation in the session.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

99 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Bali et al., Lattice gauge ensembles and data management, PoS LATTICE2022 (2022) 203 [2212.1/zero.alt3138]

    G. Bali et al., Lattice gauge ensembles and data management, PoS LATTICE2022 (2022) 203 [2212.1/zero.alt3138]

    2022

  2. [2]

    UKQCD collaboration, C. T. H. Davies, A. C. Irving, R. D. Kenway and C. M. Maynard, International lattice data grid , Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 119 (2003) 225 [hep-lat//zero.alt32/zero.alt39121]

    2003

  3. [3]

    Y oshie, Making use of the International Lattice Data Grid , PoS LATTICE2008 (2008) 019 [/zero.alt3812./zero.alt3849]

    T. Y oshie, Making use of the International Lattice Data Grid , PoS LATTICE2008 (2008) 019 [/zero.alt3812./zero.alt3849]

    2008

  4. [4]

    C. M. Maynard, International Lattice Data Grid: Turn On, Plug In,and Downl oad, PoS LAT2009 (2009) 020 [1/zero.alt3/zero.alt31.52/zero.alt37]

    2009

  5. [5]

    M. G. Beckett, B. Joo, C. M. Maynard, D. Pleiter, O. Tatebe et al., Building the International Lattice Data Grid, Comput. Phys. Commun. 182 (2011) 1208 [/zero.alt391/zero.alt3.1692]

    2011

  6. [6]

    Organization of ildg activities

    I. L. D. Grid, “Organization of ildg activities.” https://hpc.desy.de/ildg/organization/. Accessed 2024-08-06

    2024

  7. [7]

    Coddington, B

    ILDG M/e.pc/t.pc/a.pc/d.pc/a.pc/t.pc/a.pc W/o.pc/r.pc/k.pc/i.pc/n.pc/g.pc G/r.pc/o.pc/u.pc/p.pccollaboration, P. Coddington, B. Joo, C. M. Maynard, D. Pleiter and T. Y oshie,Marking up lattice QCD configurations and ensembles , PoS LATTICE2007 (2007) 048 [/zero.alt371/zero.alt3./zero.alt323/zero.alt3]

    2007

  8. [8]

    M. D. Wilkinson, M. Dumontier, I. J. Aalbersberg, G. Appl eton, M. Axton et al., The fair guiding principles for scientific data management and stewa rdship, Sci. Data 3 (2016) 160018

    2016

Show all 99 references
  1. [9]

    Matsufuru, H

    H. Matsufuru, H. Simma and C. Urbach, International Lattice Data Grid – Status and Progress, PoS LATTICE2024 (2025) 411

    2025

  2. [10]

    Lattice data session

    “Lattice data session.” https://conference.ippp.dur.ac.uk/event/1265/sessions/1744/#2/zero.alt324/zero.alt38/zero.alt32. Accessed 2024-08-02

    2024

  3. [11]

    S/c.pc/i.pcDAC, LHPC, UKQCDcollaboration, R. G. Edwards and B. Joó, The Chroma software system for lattice QCD, Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 140 (2005) 832 [hep-lat//zero.alt34/zero.alt39/zero.alt3/zero.alt33]

    2005

  4. [12]

    QUDA collaboration, M. A. Clark, R. Babich, K. Barros, R. C. Browe r and C. Rebbi, Solving Lattice QCD systems of equations using mixed precision solv ers on GPUs , Comput. Phys. Commun. 181 (2010) 1517 [/zero.alt3911.3191]

    2010

  5. [13]

    Babich, M

    R. Babich, M. A. Clark, B. Joó, G. Shi, R. C. Brower et al.,Scaling lattice qcd beyond 100 gpus, Proceedings of 2011 International Conference for High Perf ormance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis 14 Lattice gauge ensembles and data management

    2011

  6. [14]

    M. A. Clark, B. Joó, A. Strelchenko, M. Cheng, A. Gambhir et al.,Accelerating lattice qcd multigrid on gpus using fine-grained parallelization, SC ’16: Proceedings of the International Conference for Hig h Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and

  7. [15]

    Jiang, C

    X. Jiang, C. Shi, Y . Chen, M. Gong and Y .-B. Y ang, Use QUDA for lattice QCD calculation with Python, 2411./zero.alt38461

  8. [16]

    Bollweg, J

    H/o.pc/t.pcQCDcollaboration, D. Bollweg, J. Goswami, O. Kaczmarek, F. Kar sch, S. Mukherjee et al., Second order cumulants of conserved charge fluctuations rev isited: Vanishing chemical potentials, Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 074512 [21/zero.alt37.1/zero.alt3/zero.alt311]

    2021

  9. [17]

    Bollweg, D

    H/o.pc/t.pcQCDcollaboration, D. Bollweg, D. A. Clarke, J. Goswami, O. Kacz marek, F. Karsch et al., Equation of state and speed of sound of (2+1)-flavor QCD in str angeness-neutral matter at nonvanishing net baryon-number density , Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 014510 [2212./zero.alt...

    2023

  10. [18]

    Altenkort, D

    H/o.pc/t.pcQCDcollaboration, L. Altenkort, D. de la Cruz, O. Kaczmarek, R. Larsen, G. D. Moore et al., Quark Mass Dependence of Heavy Quark Diffusion Coefficient fro m Lattice QCD , Phys. Rev. Lett. 132 (2024) 051902 [2311./zero.alt31525]

    2024

  11. [19]

    Altenkort, O

    H/o.pc/t.pcQCDcollaboration, L. Altenkort, O. Kaczmarek, R. Larsen, S. Mu kherjee, P. Petreczky et al., Heavy Quark Diffusion from 2+1 Flavor Lattice QCD with 320 MeV Pion Mass, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (2023) 231902 [23/zero.alt32./zero.alt385/zero.alt31]

    2023

  12. [20]

    H. T. Ding, O. Kaczmarek, F. Karsch, P. Petreczky, M. Sar kar et al., Curvature of the chiral phase transition line from the magnetic equation of state of (2+1)-flavor QCD, Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 114516 [24/zero.alt33./zero.alt3939/zero.alt3]

    2024

  13. [21]

    H/o.pc/t.pcQCDcollaboration, H. T. Ding et al., Chiral Phase Transition Temperature in (2+1)-Flavor QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123 (2019) 062002 [19/zero.alt33./zero.alt348/zero.alt31]

    2019

  14. [22]

    L. Dini, P. Hegde, F. Karsch, A. Lahiri, C. Schmidt et al. , Chiral phase transition in three-flavor QCD from lattice QCD , Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) 034510 [2111.12599]

    2022 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Karsch, A

    F. Karsch, A. Lahiri, M. Neumann and C. Schmidt, A machine learning approach to the classification of phase transitions in many flavor QCD , PoS LATTICE2022 (2023) 027 [2211.16232]

    2023 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Mazur et al., SIMULATeQCD: A simple multi-GPU lattice code for QCD calculations, Comput

    H/o.pc/t.pcQCDcollaboration, L. Mazur et al., SIMULATeQCD: A simple multi-GPU lattice code for QCD calculations, Comput. Phys. Commun. 300 (2024) 109164 [23/zero.alt36./zero.alt31/zero.alt398]

    2024

  17. [25]

    R. G. Edwards, B. Joo and H.-W . Lin, Tuning for Three-flavors of Anisotropic Clover Fermions with Stout-link Smearing, Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 054501 [/zero.alt38/zero.alt33.396/zero.alt3]

    2008

  18. [26]

    Lin et al.,First results from 2+1 dynamical quark flavors on an anisotropic lattice: Light-hadron spectrosco py and setting the strange-quark mass, Phys

    H/a.pc/d.pc/r.pc/o.pc/n.pc S/p.pc/e.pc/c.pc/t.pc/r.pc/u.pc/m.pccollaboration, H.-W . Lin et al.,First results from 2+1 dynamical quark flavors on an anisotropic lattice: Light-hadron spectrosco py and setting the strange-quark mass, Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 034502 [/zero.alt381/z...

    2009

  19. [27]

    openqcd-fastsum

    J. R. Glesaaen and B. Jäger, “openqcd-fastsum.” https://gitlab.com/fastsum, Apr.,

  20. [28]

    Lüscher and S

    M. Lüscher and S. Schaefer, Lattice QCD with open boundary conditions and twisted-mass reweighting, Comput. Phys. Commun. 184 (2013) 519 [12/zero.alt36.28/zero.alt39]

    2013

  21. [29]

    openQCD: Simulation programs for lattice QCD

    “ openQCD: Simulation programs for lattice QCD.” https://luscher.web.cern.ch/luscher/openQCD/

  22. [30]

    Aarts, C

    G. Aarts, C. Allton, A. Amato, P. Giudice, S. Hands et al. , Electrical conductivity and charge diffusion in thermal QCD from the lattice , JHEP 02 (2015) 186 [1412.6411]

    2015 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Aarts et al., Properties of the QCD thermal transition with Nf=2+1 flavors of Wilson quark, Phys

    G. Aarts et al., Properties of the QCD thermal transition with Nf=2+1 flavors of Wilson quark, Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) 034504 [2/zero.alt3/zero.alt37./zero.alt34188]

    2022

  24. [32]

    Aarts, C

    G. Aarts, C. Allton, A. Amato, R. Bignell, T. J. Burns et a l., FASTSUM Generation 2 Anisotropic Thermal Lattice QCD Gauge Ensembles , July, 2024. 10.5281/zenodo.8403827

    2024 doi

  25. [33]

    10.25495/7GXK-RD71

    European Organization For Nuclear Research and OpenAI RE, Zenodo, 2013. 10.25495/7GXK-RD71

    2013 doi

  26. [34]

    Bennett, D

    E. Bennett, D. K. Hong, J.-W . Lee, C. J. D. Lin, B. Lucini e t al., Sp(4) gauge theories on the lattice: /u1D441/u1D453= 2 dynamical fundamental fermions, JHEP 12 (2019) 053 [19/zero.alt39.12662]

    2019

  27. [35]

    Hsiao, E

    H. Hsiao, E. Bennett, D. K. Hong, J.-W . Lee, C. J. D. Lin et al., Spectroscopy of/u1D446/u1D45D(4) lattice gauge theory with/u1D45B/u1D453= 3 antisymmetric fermions, PoS LATTICE2022 (2023) 211 [221/zero.alt3./zero.alt38154]

    2023

  28. [36]

    Bennett, D

    E. Bennett, D. K. Hong, H. Hsiao, J.-W . Lee, C. J. D. Lin et al., Lattice studies of the Sp(4) gauge theory with two fundamental and three antisymmetric D irac fermions, Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 014501 [22/zero.alt32./zero.alt35516]

    2022

  29. [37]

    Bennett, J

    E. Bennett, J. Holligan, D. K. Hong, J.-W . Lee, C. J. D. Li n et al., Spectrum of mesons in quenched Sp(2N) gauge theories, Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 094517 [2312./zero.alt38465]

    2024

  30. [38]

    Bennett, D

    E. Bennett, D. K. Hong, J.-W . Lee, C. J. D. Lin, B. Lucini e t al., Color dependence of the topological susceptibility in Yang-Mills theories, Phys. Lett. B 835 (2022) 137504 [22/zero.alt35./zero.alt39254]

    2022

  31. [39]

    Bennett, J

    E. Bennett, J. Holligan, D. K. Hong, J.-W . Lee, C. J. D. Li n et al., Glueballs and strings in /u1D446/u1D45D(2/u1D441) Yang-Mills theories, Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 054509 [2/zero.alt31/zero.alt3.15781]

    2021

  32. [40]

    Athenodorou, E

    A. Athenodorou, E. Bennett, G. Bergner, P. Butti, J. Len z et al., SU(2) gauge theory with one and two adjoint fermions towards the continuum limit , 24/zero.alt38./zero.alt3/zero.alt3171

  33. [41]

    Bennett, D

    E. Bennett, D. K. Hong, J.-W . Lee, C.-J. D. Lin, B. Lucini et al.,/u1D446/u1D45D(4) gauge theories on the lattice: quenched fundamental and antisymmetric fermions , Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 074516 [1912./zero.alt365/zero.alt35]. 16 Lattice gauge ensembles and data management

    2020

  34. [42]

    Del Debbio, A

    L. Del Debbio, A. Patella and C. Pica, Higher representations on the lattice: Numerical simulations. SU(2) with adjoint fermions , Phys. Rev. D 81 (2010) 094503 [/zero.alt38/zero.alt35.2/zero.alt358]

    2010

  35. [43]

    Bennett et al., Symplectic lattice gauge theories in the grid framework: Ap proaching the conformal window, Phys

    E. Bennett et al., Symplectic lattice gauge theories in the grid framework: Ap proaching the conformal window, Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 094508 [23/zero.alt36.11649]

    2023

  36. [44]

    Y amaguchi, P

    A. Y amaguchi, P. Boyle, G. Cossu, G. Filaci, C. Lehner et al., Grid: OneCode and FourAPIs , PoS LATTICE2021 (2022) 035 [22/zero.alt33./zero.alt36777]

    2022

  37. [45]

    Aoyama, T

    HAL QCD collaboration, T. Aoyama, T. M. Doi, T. Doi, E. Itou, Y . Lyu et al., Scale setting and hadronic properties in the light quark sector with (2+1) -flavor Wilson fermions at the physical point, Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 094502 [24/zero.alt36.16665]

    2024

  38. [46]

    PACS collaboration, K. I. Ishikawa, N. Ishizuka, Y . Kuramashi, Y. Nakamura, Y . Namekawa et al., Finite size effect on pseudoscalar meson sector in 2+1 flavor Q CD at the physical point, Phys. Rev. D99 (2019) 014504 [18/zero.alt37./zero.alt36237]

    2019

  39. [47]

    PACS collaboration, K. I. Ishikawa, N. Ishizuka, Y . Kuramashi, Y. Nakamura, Y . Namekawa et al., Finite size effect on vector meson and baryon sectors in 2+1 fla vor QCD at the physical point, Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019) 094502 [19/zero.alt37.1/zero.alt3846]

    2019

  40. [48]

    A. Y . Kotov, M. P. Lombardo and A. Trunin, QCD transition at the physical point, and its scaling window from twisted mass Wilson fermions , Phys. Lett. B 823 (2021) 136749 [21/zero.alt35./zero.alt39842]

    2021

  41. [49]

    A. Y . Kotov, A. Trunin and M. P. Lombardo, QCD topology and axion’s properties from Wilson twisted mass lattice simulations , PoS LATTICE2021 (2022) 032 [2111.15421]

    2022 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Jansen and C

    K. Jansen and C. Urbach, tmLQCD: A Program suite to simulate Wilson Twisted mass Lattice QCD, Comput. Phys. Commun. 180 (2009) 2717 [/zero.alt39/zero.alt35.3331]

    2009

  43. [51]

    Deuzeman, K

    A. Deuzeman, K. Jansen, B. Kostrzewa and C. Urbach, Experiences with OpenMP in tmLQCD, PoS LATTICE2013 (2014) 416 [1311.4521]

    2014 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Abdel-Rehim, F

    A. Abdel-Rehim, F. Burger, A. Deuzeman, K. Jansen, B. Ko strzewa et al., Recent developments in the tmLQCD software suite , PoS LATTICE2013 (2014) 414 [1311.5495]

    2014 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Alexandrou et al., Simulating twisted mass fermions at physical light, strang e and charm quark masses, Phys

    C. Alexandrou et al., Simulating twisted mass fermions at physical light, strang e and charm quark masses, Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 054518 [18/zero.alt37./zero.alt3/zero.alt3495]

    2018

  46. [54]

    Cundy, M

    N. Cundy, M. Göckeler, R. Horsley, T. Kaltenbrunner, A. D. Kennedy et al., Non-perturbative improvement of stout-smeared three flavour clover fermions, Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 094507 [/zero.alt39/zero.alt31.33/zero.alt32]

    2009

  47. [55]

    QCDSF/UKQCD/CSSM collaboration, R. E. Smail, M. Batelaan, R. Horsley, Y . Nakamura, H. Perlt et al., Constraining beyond the standard model nucleon isovector c harges, Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 094511 [23/zero.alt34./zero.alt32866]. 17 Lattice gauge ensembles and data management

    2023

  48. [56]

    Bietenholz, V

    W . Bietenholz, V . Bornyakov, M. Göckeler, R. Horsley, W. G. Lockhart et al., Flavour blindness and patterns of flavour symmetry breaking in latti ce simulations of up, down and strange quarks, Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011) 054509 [11/zero.alt32.53/zero.alt3/zero.alt3]

    2011

  49. [57]

    T. R. Haar, Y . Nakamura and H. Stuben, An update on the BQCD Hybrid Monte Carlo program, EPJ Web Conf. 175 (2018) 14011 [1711./zero.alt33836]

    2018

  50. [58]

    A. S. Francis, F. Cuteri, P. Fritzsch, G. Pederiva, A. Ra go et al., Properties, ensembles and hadron spectra with Stabilised Wilson Fermions, PoS LATTICE2021 (2022) 118 [22/zero.alt31./zero.alt33874]

    2022

  51. [59]

    Lucini, A

    B. Lucini, A. Patella, A. Ramos and N. Tantalo, Charged hadrons in local finite-volume QED+QCD with C ∗ boundary conditions, JHEP 02 (2016) 076 [15/zero.alt39./zero.alt31636]

    2016

  52. [60]

    Campos, P

    RC★ collaboration, I. Campos, P. Fritzsch, M. Hansen, M. K. Mari nkovic, A. Patella et al., openQ*D code: a versatile tool for QCD+QED simulations , Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 195 [19/zero.alt38.11673]

    2020

  53. [61]

    Campos, P

    I. Campos, P. Fritzsch, M. Hansen, M. K. Marinković, A. P atella et al., openq*d, 2018. 10.20350/digitalCSIC/8591

    2018 doi

  54. [62]

    Bushnaq, I

    RC/s.pc/t.pc/a.pc/r.pccollaboration, L. Bushnaq, I. Campos, M. Catillo, A. Cotell ucci, M. Dale et al., First results on QCD+QED with C ∗ boundary conditions, JHEP 03 (2023) 012 [22/zero.alt39.13183]

    2023

  55. [63]

    Status of the etmc ensemble generation e ffort

    B. Kostrzewa, “Status of the etmc ensemble generation e ffort.” https://conference.ippp.dur.ac.uk/event/1265/contributions/7655/

  56. [64]

    Frommer, K

    A. Frommer, K. Kahl, S. Krieg, B. Leder and M. Rottmann, Adaptive Aggregation-Based Domain Decomposition Multigrid for the Lattice Wilson–Dir ac Operator, SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 36 (2014) A1581 [13/zero.alt33.1377]

    2014

  57. [65]

    Alexandrou, S

    C. Alexandrou, S. Bacchio, J. Finkenrath, A. Frommer, K . Kahl et al., Adaptive Aggregation-based Domain Decomposition Multigrid for Twisted Mass Fermions, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 114509 [161/zero.alt3./zero.alt3237/zero.alt3]

    2016

  58. [66]

    Alexandrou, S

    C. Alexandrou, S. Bacchio and J. Finkenrath, Multigrid approach in shifted linear systems for the non-degenerated twisted mass operator, Comput. Phys. Commun. 236 (2019) 51 [18/zero.alt35./zero.alt39584]

    2019

  59. [67]

    B. Joó, D. D. Kalamkar, K. Vaidyanathan, M. Smelyanskiy , K. Pamnany et al., Lattice QCD on Intel® Xeon Phi Coprocessors, Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 7905 (2013) 40

    2013

  60. [68]

    Baron et al., Light hadrons from lattice QCD with light (u,d), strange and charm dynamical quarks, JHEP 06 (2010) 111 [1/zero.alt3/zero.alt34.5284]

    R. Baron et al., Light hadrons from lattice QCD with light (u,d), strange and charm dynamical quarks, JHEP 06 (2010) 111 [1/zero.alt3/zero.alt34.5284]

    2010

  61. [69]

    Baron et al., Computing K and D meson masses with/u1D441/u1D453= 2+1+1 twisted mass lattice QCD , Comput

    E/u.pc/r.pc/o.pc/p.pc/e.pc/a.pc/n.pc T/w.pc/i.pc/s.pc/t.pc/e.pc/d.pc M/a.pc/s.pc/s.pccollaboration, R. Baron et al., Computing K and D meson masses with/u1D441/u1D453= 2+1+1 twisted mass lattice QCD , Comput. Phys. Commun. 182 (2011) 299 [1/zero.alt3/zero.alt35.2/zero.alt342]....

    2011

  62. [70]

    Baron et al., Light Meson Physics from Maximally Twisted Mass Lattice QCD, JHEP 08 (2010) 097 [/zero.alt3911.5/zero.alt361]

    ETM collaboration, R. Baron et al., Light Meson Physics from Maximally Twisted Mass Lattice QCD, JHEP 08 (2010) 097 [/zero.alt3911.5/zero.alt361]

    2010

  63. [71]

    Colquhoun, S

    JLQCD collaboration, B. Colquhoun, S. Hashimoto, T. Kaneko and J. Koponen, Form factors of B→ /u1D70Bℓ/u1D708and a determination of |Vub| with Möbius domain-wall fermion s, Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 054502 [22/zero.alt33./zero.alt34938]

    2022

  64. [72]

    JLQCD collaboration, S. Aoki, Y . Aoki, H. Fukaya, S. Hashimoto, C. Rohrhofer et al., Role of the axial U(1) anomaly in the chiral susceptibility of QCD at high temperature, PTEP 2022 (2022) 023B05 [21/zero.alt33./zero.alt35954]

    2022

  65. [73]

    Zhang, Y

    Y . Zhang, Y . Aoki, S. Hashimoto, I. Kanamori, T. Kaneko et al., Exploring the QCD phase diagram with three flavors of Möbius domain wall fermions , PoS LATTICE2023 (2024) 203 [24/zero.alt31./zero.alt35/zero.alt366]

    2024

  66. [74]

    JLQCD collaboration, S. Aoki, Y . Aoki, H. Fukaya, S. Hashimoto, I. Kanamori et al., Axial U(1) symmetry near the pseudocritical temperature in /u1D441/u1D453= 2 + 1 lattice QCD with chiral fermions, PoS LATTICE2023 (2024) 185 [24/zero.alt31.14/zero.alt322]

    2024

  67. [75]

    P. A. Boyle, G. Cossu, A. Y amaguchi and A. Portelli, Grid: A next generation data parallel C++ QCD library, PoS LATTICE2015 (2016) 023

    2016

  68. [76]

    Bazavov et al., Nonperturbative QCD Simulations with 2+1 Flavors of Improved Staggered Quarks, Rev

    MILC collaboration, A. Bazavov et al., Nonperturbative QCD Simulations with 2+1 Flavors of Improved Staggered Quarks, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82 (2010) 1349 [/zero.alt39/zero.alt33.3598]

    2010

  69. [77]

    Follana, Q

    HPQCD collaboration, E. Follana, Q. Mason, C. Davies, K. Hornbost el, G. P. Lepage et al., Highly improved staggered quarks on the lattice, with appli cations to charm physics, Phys. Rev. D 75 (2007) 054502 [hep-lat//zero.alt361/zero.alt3/zero.alt392]

    2007

  70. [78]

    Bazavov et al., Scaling studies of QCD with the dynamical HISQ action, Phys

    MILC collaboration, A. Bazavov et al., Scaling studies of QCD with the dynamical HISQ action, Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 074501 [1/zero.alt3/zero.alt34./zero.alt3342]

    2010

  71. [79]

    Bazavov et al., Lattice QCD Ensembles with Four Flavors of Highly Improved Staggered Quarks, Phys

    MILC collaboration, A. Bazavov et al., Lattice QCD Ensembles with Four Flavors of Highly Improved Staggered Quarks, Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013) 054505 [1212.4768]

    2013 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Bazavov et al., /u1D435- and/u1D437-meson leptonic decay constants from four-flavor lattice QCD, Phys

    F/e.pc/r.pc/m.pc/i.pc/l.pc/a.pc/b.pc L/a.pc/t.pc/t.pc/i.pc/c.pc/e.pc, MILCcollaboration, A. Bazavov et al., /u1D435- and/u1D437-meson leptonic decay constants from four-flavor lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 074512 [1712./zero.alt39262]

    2018

  73. [81]

    Milc and fermilab lattice collaboration policy for sh aring lattice files

    “Milc and fermilab lattice collaboration policy for sh aring lattice files.” https://github.com/milc-qcd/sharing/wiki/LatticeSha ring

  74. [82]

    Bruno et al., Simulation of QCD with N /u1D453= 2 + 1 flavors of non-perturbatively improved Wilson fermions, JHEP 02 (2015) 043 [1411.3982]

    M. Bruno et al., Simulation of QCD with N /u1D453= 2 + 1 flavors of non-perturbatively improved Wilson fermions, JHEP 02 (2015) 043 [1411.3982]

    2015 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Mohler, S

    D. Mohler, S. Schaefer and J. Simeth, CLS 2+1 flavor simulations at physical light- and strange-quark masses, EPJ Web Conf. 175 (2018) 02010 [1712./zero.alt34884]

    2018

  76. [84]

    Schaefer, R

    ALPHA collaboration, S. Schaefer, R. Sommer and F. Virotta, Critical slowing down and error analysis in lattice QCD simulations , Nucl. Phys. B 845 (2011) 93 [1/zero.alt3/zero.alt39.5228]. 19 Lattice gauge ensembles and data management

    2011

  77. [85]

    Mohler and S

    D. Mohler and S. Schaefer, Remarks on strange-quark simulations with Wilson fermions, Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020) 074506 [2/zero.alt3/zero.alt33.13359]

    2020

  78. [86]

    Shintani and Y

    PACS collaboration, E. Shintani and Y . Kuramashi, Hadronic vacuum polarization contribution to the muon /u1D454− 2 with 2+1 flavor lattice QCD on a larger than (10 fm )4 lattice at the physical point , Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019) 034517 [19/zero.alt32./zero.alt3/zero.alt3885]

    2019

  79. [87]

    Shintani, K.-I

    E. Shintani, K.-I. Ishikawa, Y . Kuramashi, S. Sasaki an d T. Y amazaki,Nucleon form factors and root-mean-square radii on a (10.8 fm) 4 lattice at the physical point , Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019) 014510 [1811./zero.alt37292], [Erratum: Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020) 019902]

    2019

  80. [88]

    Tsuji, N

    PACS collaboration, R. Tsuji, N. Tsukamoto, Y . Aoki, K.-I. Ishikawa, Y . Kuramashi et al., Nucleon isovector couplings in Nf=2+1 lattice QCD at the phy sical point, Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 094505 [22/zero.alt37.11914]

    2022

  81. [89]

    Tsuji, Y

    PACS collaboration, R. Tsuji, Y . Aoki, K.-I. Ishikawa, Y . Kuramashi, S. Sasaki et al., Nucleon form factors in Nf=2+1 lattice QCD at the physical po int: Finite lattice spacing effect on the root-mean-square radii, Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 094505 [2311.1/zero.alt3345]

    2024

  82. [90]

    Tsuji, Y

    PACS collaboration, R. Tsuji, Y . Aoki, K.-I. Ishikawa, Y . Kuramashi, S. Sasaki et al., Discretization effects on nucleon root-mean-square radii f rom lattice QCD at the physical point, PoS LATTICE2023 (2024) 323 [24/zero.alt31./zero.alt3534/zero.alt3]

    2024

  83. [91]

    Kakazu, K.-i

    PACS collaboration, J. Kakazu, K.-i. Ishikawa, N. Ishizuka, Y . Kuramashi, Y . Nakamura et al.,/u1D43E/u1D4593 form factors at the physical point on a (10.9/u1D453/u1D45A)3 volume, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 094504 [1912.13127]

    2020 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Ishikawa, N

    PACS collaboration, K.-i. Ishikawa, N. Ishizuka, Y . Kuramashi, Y . Namekawa, Y . Taniguchi et al., Kℓ3 form factors at the physical point: Toward the continuum li mit, Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 094501 [22/zero.alt36./zero.alt38654]

    2022

  85. [93]

    Y amazaki, K.-i

    PACS collaboration, T. Y amazaki, K.-i. Ishikawa, N. Ishizuka, Y. Kuramashi, Y . Namekawa et al., |/u1D449/u1D462/u1D460| from kaon semileptonic form factor in /u1D441/u1D453= 2 + 1 QCD at the physical point on (10 fm)4, PoS LATTICE2023 (2024) 276 [2311.16755]

    2024 arXiv

  86. [94]

    Luscher, Lattice QCD and the Schwarz alternating procedure , JHEP 05 (2003) 052 [hep-lat//zero.alt33/zero.alt34/zero.alt3/zero.alt37]

    M. Luscher, Lattice QCD and the Schwarz alternating procedure , JHEP 05 (2003) 052 [hep-lat//zero.alt33/zero.alt34/zero.alt3/zero.alt37]

    2003

  87. [95]

    M. A. Clark and A. D. Kennedy, Accelerating dynamical fermion computations using the rational hybrid Monte Carlo (RHMC) algorithm with multiple pseudofermion fields, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 (2007) 051601 [hep-lat//zero.alt36/zero.alt38/zero.alt315]

    2007

  88. [96]

    Hasenbusch, Speeding up the hybrid Monte Carlo algorithm for dynamical f ermions, Phys

    M. Hasenbusch, Speeding up the hybrid Monte Carlo algorithm for dynamical f ermions, Phys. Lett. B 519 (2001) 177 [hep-lat//zero.alt31/zero.alt37/zero.alt319]

    2001

  89. [97]

    Aoki et al., 2+1 Flavor Lattice QCD toward the Physical Point , Phys

    PACS-CS collaboration, S. Aoki et al., 2+1 Flavor Lattice QCD toward the Physical Point , Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 034503 [/zero.alt38/zero.alt37.1661]

    2009

  90. [98]

    Japan lattice data grid

    “Japan lattice data grid.” https://www.jldg.org. 20

  91. [2018]

    10.5281/zenodo.2216355

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.