Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Universal parameters of the $\Lambda(1380)$, the $\Lambda(1405)$ and their isospin partners from a combined analysis of Lattice QCD and experimental results

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A global fit of lattice spectra and experimental cross sections shows that the Λ(1405) and Λ(1380) form a genuine two-pole system, with the lower pole's width still scheme-dependent.

desk verdict A careful combined lattice-plus-experiment analysis that solidifies the two-pole structure, but the claimed scheme dependence of the Lambda(1380) at the lattice point is not fully earned. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.14283 v1 pith:5PSLSNH2 submitted 2025-07-18 hep-ph hep-latnucl-th

Ferenc Pittler , Maxim Mai , Ulf-G. Mei{ss}ner , Ryan F. Ferguson , Peter Hurck , David G. Ireland , Bryan McKinnon This is my paper
classification hep-phhep-latnucl-th
keywords Lambda(1405)two-polestructureunitarizedchiralperturbationtheorymeson-baryonscatteringlatticeQCDfinite-volumequantizationconditionkaonichydrogenhadronresonances
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

This paper performs a combined analysis of lattice QCD finite-volume spectra and decades of experimental meson-baryon scattering data within unitarized chiral perturbation theory, varying the interaction kernel and the regularization scheme to expose model dependence. The goal is to decide whether the $\Lambda(1405)$ and $\Lambda(1380)$ really are two separate poles of the strangeness $-1$ amplitude and to give their positions with honest statistical and systematic errors. The paper finds that the two-pole structure is confirmed by both data types: the most flexible models reproduce the established pole pattern, and extrapolation to the lattice quark masses agrees with the lattice-only determination. The main unresolved question is the lower pole: at the lattice point its width is scheme-dependent, appearing as either a resonance or a virtual bound state, with the information criteria preferring the bound-state solution. If the result holds, the paper supplies universal pole parameters for the isoscalar sector and shows that currently available lattice data alone cannot yet fix both poles.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the unitarized chiral scattering amplitude. A chiral potential $V(s)$ (Weinberg-Tomozawa term, with optional Born and next-to-leading-order terms) is iterated through the algebraic Bethe-Salpeter equation $T(s) = -V(s)\big(1 - V(s)G(s)\big)^{-1}$, with $G(s)$ the two-body meson-baryon loop function. This yields a unitary amplitude whose poles on the unphysical Riemann sheets are the resonances. The same amplitude is fed into the finite-volume quantization condition to predict the lattice energy levels, so one set of low-energy constants and subtraction constants is constrained by both experiment and lattice QCD. Three regularization schemes ($S1$, $S2$, $S3$) and three kernels ($M1$, $M2$, $M3$) generate the systematic error band; the Akaike and Bayes information criteria are used to compare models with different numbers of parameters.

What would settle it

Recompute the finite-volume spectrum with a full three-body quantization condition that includes the $\pi\pi\Lambda$ channel and refit the same experimental data; if the extracted $\Lambda(1405)$ pole moves outside the Table I systematic band, or if the $\Lambda(1380)$ stays a broad resonance in the $S2$ and $S3$ schemes, the claimed universal pole parameters are falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the $\Lambda(1405)$ and $\Lambda(1380)$ exist as a genuine two-pole structure and that a single unitarized chiral amplitude can describe, at once, the finite-volume lattice spectrum and the experimental cross sections, threshold ratios, and kaonic-hydrogen shift. Using a next-to-leading-order kernel with Born terms and varied regularizations, the combined fits reach $\chi^2_\mathrm{dof}\approx 1$, and the extracted isoscalar poles at the physical point agree with previous phenomenological values. At the lattice quark masses, the higher pole lands near the lattice determination, while the lower pole is either a broad resonance or a virtual bound state below the $\pi\Sigma$ threshold depending on the regularization; the parameter-free and one-parameter schemes favored by the information criteria place it on the real axis. The paper therefore claims that the existence of two poles is now solid, but that the width of the $\Lambda(1380)$ is not yet fixed by current data.

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on the two-body unitarized equations being reliable at the pole energies; the paper itself notes that the neglected $\pi\pi\Lambda$ three-body intermediate states have a right-hand cut starting between the two physical-point poles, so those states could shift the $\Lambda(1405)$ pole by an amount that is not included in the quoted systematic uncertainties.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Isoscalar pole positions can be quoted with separate statistical and systematic errors from a single combined analysis of lattice and experimental input.
  • Lattice QCD data alone, at current precision, support the existence of two poles but cannot pin both pole positions once model variation is included.
  • The lower $\Lambda(1380)$ pole at the lattice point is not uniquely a resonance: within the models preferred by information criteria it is a virtual bound state, so its width should not be treated as a measured number.
  • The isovector partner remains poorly constrained, with broad poles whose positions vary strongly with the model; new isovector lattice spectra are needed.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the neglected $\pi\pi\Lambda$ three-body cut shifts the physical-point $\Lambda(1405)$ pole, then the pole positions in Table I should be read as two-body-model values rather than universal parameters, and future three-body calculations may move them by more than the quoted errors.
  • The scheme dependence of the $\Lambda(1380)$ width suggests a model-selection test: use the fitted amplitudes to predict an unmeasured observable, such as the $\pi\Sigma$ line shape in photoproduction, where a bound-state pole and a resonance pole produce different near-threshold energy dependence.
  • The same methodology could be extended to the isovector sector once lattice spectra with $I=1$ are available; the paper's prediction of very broad poles implies these spectra will be needed to settle the existence of the isovector partner.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a global chiral-unitary analysis of the S=−1 meson-baryon system in which, for the first time in this framework, the BaSc lattice QCD finite-volume spectra (14 levels from the D200 ensemble) and four lattice baryon masses are fitted together with 258 experimental data points (K−p cross sections, threshold ratios, SIDDHARTA shift/width, AMADEUS amplitude). The model space includes three interaction kernels (M1, M2, M3) and three regularization schemes (S1, S2, S3), with fits judged by a weighted χ2 and AIC/BIC. The main results are Table I pole positions at physical and lattice points: the two-pole structure of the Λ(1405)/Λ(1380) is found in all M3 combined fits, the Λ(1405) pole is stable, while the Λ(1380) appears as a resonance in the M3S1 fit (F17) and as a virtual bound state in M3S2/F16 and M3S3/F12 at the lattice point. Isovector pole predictions are given with large uncertainties.

Significance. The paper's ambition—quantifying both data-related and framework-related uncertainties in a combined lattice+experimental determination—is timely and, if realized, would settle an important consistency question about the two-pole structure. Several analysis choices are exemplary: multi-start minimization, bootstrap resampling of lattice inputs, correlated χ2 for the 14 levels, explicit treatment of left-hand cuts, and public access to the digitized experimental data. The broad scan over M1/M2/M3 and S1/S2/S3 is exactly what is needed to expose model dependence. However, two admitted limitations directly affect the headline: the ππΛ three-body cut is acknowledged to generate an unknown systematic error for the physical-point Λ(1405), and the resonance-vs-virtual-state dichotomy at the lattice point is selected by an unexplained rule. These issues make the paper valuable but not yet conclusive as a 'universal parameters' extraction.

major comments (3)
  1. [§V C and Table I (M3S1/F17 row)] The dichotomy between a resonance and a virtual bound state for the lattice-point Λ(1380) is decided by fit F17, which is selected by the rule stated in §V C ('we choose the one where all subtraction constants are smaller than 0.05 in absolute value'). This rule is not derived from data or information criteria, and §VI C describes the same S1 fits as 'too volatile, depending strongly on the starting values'; Fig. 8 indeed shows several converged solutions with essentially equal χ2_dof but different subtraction constants. Since F16 and F12 place the Λ(1380) on the real axis and only F17 produces a width of ~100 MeV, the paper's central 'scheme dependence' is not a robust property of the combined data but depends on an arbitrary final-selection step. I ask the authors to either justify the rule, average over the statistically equivalent basins, or add the basin choice to the systematic error budget; otherwise the qualitative conclusion should be softened.
  2. [§IV D, Fig. 5, and Table I] The authors explicitly conclude that at the physical point the ππΛ right-hand cut lies 'just between the estimated pole positions of the Λ(1380) and the Λ(1405)' and that 'the position of the latter state determined in the literature must carry a systematic, yet unknown uncertainty related to the neglected three-body states.' This is a load-bearing limitation for the physical-point Λ(1405) pole quoted in Table I (e.g., 1.432−i0.025 GeV for M3S1), because the quoted systematic uncertainties are built from model and data variations within two-body UCHPT and do not include this cut. The manuscript should either provide a quantitative estimate of the three-body effect (e.g., through a three-body quantization condition or a perturbative estimate) or explicitly restrict the claim of 'universal parameters including systematic uncertainties' to two-body dynamics.
  3. [§V B, Eq. (5.1), and Fig. 7] Using χ2_dof from Eq. (5.1) as −2 log L in the AIC/BIC definitions of Eq. (5.2) is not a proper likelihood identification. χ2_dof is a weighted average over data sets with weights A/Na, so it is defined only up to additive/multiplicative conventions that depend on how the data are partitioned; the AIC/BIC differences reported in Fig. 7 therefore do not have the statistical meaning claimed when the text says S1 fits are 'disfavored by both information criteria.' This matters because the same S1 fit carries the resonance interpretation at the lattice point. Please either use a total χ2 statistic with a valid likelihood interpretation or present the model ranking as exploratory and check its stability under alternative weighting choices.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table I] The rows F16 and F12 at the lattice point list numbers with no imaginary part (e.g., 1.389+0.006−0.007); please explicitly annotate these as virtual bound states on the real axis, since otherwise the table is ambiguous for readers.
  2. [Abstract] The statement that systematic uncertainties 'are quantified for the first time' is stronger than what is supported by §IV D, where the ππΛ three-body uncertainty is admitted to be unknown; please qualify the claim.
  3. [Figure 7] The column header 'Ndata|exp.+lat.+m' should be expanded to clarify that the three entries count experimental, lattice finite-volume, and lattice single-baryon data points.
  4. [§VI C] The phrase 'as shown in Sect. VI C' appears in a paragraph that is meant to refer to earlier results; please update the internal cross-reference to the appropriate earlier section (likely §V C for the fit rankings).
  5. [§II B, Eqs. (2.3)–(2.5)] The symbol pcm is used both as a scalar momentum and as a diagonal matrix entry; a sentence defining the matrix convention would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: pole positions are standard fit outputs and the experiment-only lattice-point comparison is an out-of-sample check.

full rationale

The paper's central outputs are pole positions obtained by minimizing a correlated chi-square against experimental cross sections, threshold data, and BaSc finite-volume levels through an explicitly written unitarized chiral amplitude (Eqs. (4.6)-(4.17)) and the Luscher quantization condition (Eq. (2.4)). This is an extraction, not a logical circle: the data constrain the parameters, and the poles are analytic continuations of the fitted amplitude. The most important potential circularity would be the claim that the BaSc pole structure is 'confirmed' at the lattice point; for the experiment-only fits F30/F13/F11, the lattice levels were not used, so the overlap with BaSc is an out-of-sample prediction. In the combined fits, agreement with BaSc reference values is a consistency check and is described as such ('provide a very good description'), not as independent confirmation. The 'predictions' for isovector poles are also derived from a fit that includes isovector-sensitive K-p cross sections; the word 'prediction' is loose, but the quantities are not fitted parameters renamed as predictions. The S1 final-fit selection rule, 'we choose the one where all subtraction constants are smaller than 0.05 in absolute value', is arbitrary and makes the F17 resonance-versus-virtual-state dichotomy less robust, but the paper explicitly discloses this rule, reports that F17 is disfavored by AIC/BIC, and presents the resonance option only as a 'shadow of a doubt'; this is a robustness/correctness caveat, not a circular reduction. The acknowledged three-body uncertainty in Sect. IV D is a limitation on the error budget, not a circular step, and the S1 scheme's stated lack of predictive power outside fitted quark-mass regions sits uneasily with the experiment-only extrapolation in Sect. VI B, which is an unstated assumption rather than circularity. Self-citations to the UCHPT framework are numerous but none are load-bearing: the kernels, loop functions, and regularization schemes are written out in the text and validated against external data such as SIDDHARTA, AMADEUS, and BaSc. No equation is defined in terms of its own output, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles, mediators, or conserved quantities are postulated; the virtual bound-state pole near 1.33 GeV in F16 is a derived feature of the fitted amplitude, not an invented entity.

free parameters (3)
  • Subtraction constants a_{alpha} (S1 scheme) = F17: a_KbarN approx -1.55e-3 (lattice), -1.55e-3 (physical); a_piLambda approx -0.108 (lattice), 0.0852 (physical)…
    Six free constants per quark mass setup in regularization S1, fitted to the lattice or experimental data; they absorb the quark mass dependent part of the loop function and are not predicted by the theory.
  • NLO low-energy constants b0,bD,bF,d1,d2,d3,d4 = F17: b0=-0.657 GeV^-1, bD=0.0674 GeV^-1, bF=-0.326 GeV^-1, d1=-0.252 GeV^-1, d2=0.0309 GeV^-1, d3=-0.0899 GeV^-1…
    Fitted to combined data in M3 models; they parameterize the next-to-leading-order chiral interaction kernel.
  • Cutoff Lambda (S3 scheme) = F12: 0.422 GeV
    Single channel-independent cutoff in regularization S3, fitted to the data; it encodes the regularization scale.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption On-shell factorization of the Bethe-Salpeter equation: T = -V (1 - V G)^{-1}
    Eq. (4.11). Assumes the meson-baryon loop function is diagonal in channel space and the potential is evaluated on-shell, converting a coupled-channel integral equation into an algebraic one. This is standard in UCHPT but not systematically improvable within the paper.
  • domain assumption Two-body unitarity only; pi pi Lambda three-body states are excluded from the unitarization
    Sect. IV D. The paper notes the pi pi Lambda right-hand cut lies between the two poles at the physical point, so two-body unitarity is incomplete; the resulting uncertainty is acknowledged but not quantified.
  • ad hoc to paper Left-hand cut of the u-channel Born term is replaced by a constant above the critical region
    Sect. IV D. To keep the K-matrix real in the region where the short left-hand cut appears, the potential V^BORN_u is flattened; this modifies the analytic structure and is a practical fix rather than a derived prescription.
  • domain assumption Lattice scale setting and continuum extrapolation are taken as done by the BaSc collaboration
    Sect. IV A. The authors state that scale setting and continuum extrapolation can be assumed to be addressed in the D200 ensemble results [20,21]; no new lattice simulation or continuum extrapolation is performed.
  • ad hoc to paper Weighted chi-square definition of Eq. (5.1) is used as -2 log L for AIC/BIC
    Sect. V B. Each observable type is weighted by 1/N_a before summing, which changes the interpretation of the information criteria; the authors caution that AIC/BIC values should be used only as a guide.
  • domain assumption Older cross-section data are treated with standard chi-square despite known inconsistencies
    Sect. III. The authors show multi-modal log-probability surfaces for K-p to Kbar0 n and acknowledge fits may be drawn to average values of systematically wrong data; they do not model the systematic offsets between experiments.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Universal parameters of the $\Lambda(1380)$, the $\Lambda(1405)$ and their isospin partners from a combined analysis of Lattice QCD and experimental results." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5PSLSNH2

@misc{pith2026250714283,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Universal parameters of the $\Lambda(1380)$, the $\Lambda(1405)$ and their isospin partners from a combined analysis of Lattice QCD and experimental results},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5PSLSNH2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.14283}
}
read the original abstract

We perform a global analysis of lattice and experimental data on negative-strangeness meson-baryon scattering using a large set of variations of the theoretical framework based on the Chiral Unitary Approach. For the former, the L\"uscher formalism is utilized taking into account all pertinent coupled-channel effects. Through this, systematic uncertainties related to data scarcity, potential ambiguities, and possible framework dependence are quantified for the first time. The implementation of information criteria and other statistical tools is discussed. As a final result we provide pole positions for isoscalar resonances at the physical and lattice points including statistical and systematic uncertainties. Predictions for the isovector states are also provided showing large uncertainties.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.14283 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Left: Summary of energy levels used as input in this work (black dots with error bars), together with our model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Total cross sections considered in this work. Different colors distinguish between various experiments [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Log probability surfaces derived from the data illustrated in Fig. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (78 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison of subtraction constants obtained from global fits using different regularization schemes (S1, S2, S3) at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Three-body related singularities for the physical and unphysical quark-mass setups. Left: Singularities of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Fit-free prediction of the finite-volume spectrum relying on the contemporary WT (M1), LO (M2), and NLO type [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Left: Summary of the fit results minimizing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Convergence check of Fit 17 (M3S1PL) using nine different sets of initial parameters. Left: Evolution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Left: Model (M1, M2, M3) predictions for the lattice spectrum using different regularizations (S1, S2, S3). Fits were [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Isoscalar scattering amplitude on the next to the physical (light pink surface for Im [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Isoscalar scattering amplitude on the next to the physical (light pink surface for Im [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Isoscalar scattering amplitude on the next to the physical (light pink surface for Im [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Pole positions for I = 0 using best global models M3S1 (fit F17), M3S2 (fit F16), M3S3 (fit F12). Pole positions are obtained on the [+ + − − − − + + ++] Riemann sheet for physical and unphysical (c.f., Mπ ≈ 200 MeV etc.) quark masses. Circled pole positions are centr…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Pole positions for I = 1 using best global models M3S1 (fit F17), M3S2 (fit F16), M3S3 (fit F12). Pole positions are obtained on the [+ + − − − − + + ++] Riemann sheet for physical and unphysical (c.f., Mπ ≈ 200 MeV etc.) quark masses. Circled pole positions are centr…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Subtraction con￾stants at the lattice point for M1S1L (F19). χ 2 dof 1.36 aKN¯ 2.108217e-03 aπΛ -1.079700e-01 aπΣ 2.108217e-03 aηΛ 2.939451e-04 aηΣ 2.163700e-01 aKΞ 3.948000e-02 0.95 0.03 -0.00 -0.27 -0.00 0.11 0.01 -0.06 0.00 -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.15 -0.…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Total χ 2 dof for the parameter-free M1S2L (F31). χ 2 dof 2.89 0.00 0.00 -0.00 0.00 -0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.00 0.00 -0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 -0.04 -0.00 -0.03 0.05 -0.03 -0.04 -0.00 0.05 -0.01 0.01 -0.06 0.01 -0.00 -0.04 0.22 -0.02 0.00 -0.04 -0.03 -0.01 0.01 -0…
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_20.png]
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: Total χ 2 dof and the Λ parameter for M1S3L (F18). χ 2 dof 4.42 Λ[GeV] 0.6892541 0.69 -0.04 0.05 -0.46 0.00 -0.37 -0.04 -0.74 -0.01 0.19 -0.04 0.07 -0.03 -0.00 -0.04 0.39 -0.11 -0.02 -0.07 0.11 -0.05 -0.14 -0.01 0.10 -0.05 0.02 -0.13 0.01 0.05 -0.11 0.70 -0.13 0.01 -0…
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_22.png]
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_23.png]
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: Subtraction con￾stants at the lattice point for the M2S1L (F20). χ 2 dof 1.42 aKN¯ 2.249408e-03 aπΛ -1.079700e-01 aπΣ 2.249408e-03 aηΛ -5.364455e-03 aηΣ 2.163700e-01 aKΞ 3.948000e-02 0.88 0.02 0.00 -0.26 -0.00 0.08 0.00 -0.10 0.00 -0.02 -0.03 -0.02 0.00 -0.00 0.02 0.1…
Figure 25
Figure 25. Figure 25: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_25.png]
Figure 26
Figure 26. Figure 26: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_26.png]
Figure 27
Figure 27. Figure 27: Total χ 2 dof for the parameter-free M2S2L (F32). χ 2 dof 2.68 0.03 0.00 -0.01 0.01 -0.00 0.05 0.00 0.06 0.00 -0.02 0.00 -0.00 0.00 -0.00 0.00 0.07 -0.02 -0.00 -0.01 0.03 -0.01 -0.02 -0.00 0.02 -0.00 0.00 -0.03 -0.00 -0.01 -0.02 0.19 -0.01 0.00 -0.03 -0.01 -0.00 0.00 …
Figure 28
Figure 28. Figure 28: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_28.png]
Figure 29
Figure 29. Figure 29: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_29.png]
Figure 30
Figure 30. Figure 30: Total χ 2 dof and the Λ parameter for M2S3L (F18). χ 2 dof 3.54 Λ[GeV] 0.7054119 0.50 -0.03 0.04 -0.35 0.00 -0.28 -0.01 -0.60 -0.01 0.12 -0.03 0.06 -0.01 0.00 -0.03 0.34 -0.10 -0.01 -0.06 0.09 -0.02 -0.12 -0.01 0.07 -0.04 0.02 -0.08 -0.01 0.04 -0.10 0.66 -0.12 0.01 -0…
Figure 31
Figure 31. Figure 31: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p038_31.png]
Figure 32
Figure 32. Figure 32: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p038_32.png]
Figure 33
Figure 33. Figure 33: The total χ 2 dof, subtraction constants at the lattice point and LEC for M3S1L (F01). χ 2 dof 0.96 aKN¯ -4.088304e-03 aπΛ -1.079700e-01 aπΣ -4.088304e-03 aηΛ 3.560274e-03 aηΣ 2.163700e-01 aKΞ 3.948000e-02 b0[1/GeV] -4.730918e-01 bD[1/GeV] 8.116358e-02 bF [1/GeV] -3.1…
Figure 34
Figure 34. Figure 34: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p039_34.png]
Figure 35
Figure 35. Figure 35: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p039_35.png]
Figure 36
Figure 36. Figure 36: The total χ 2 dof and LECs for M3S1L (F15). χ 2 dof 0.90 b0[1/GeV] -5.349500e-01 bD[1/GeV] 9.599595e-02 bF [1/GeV] -3.256764e-01 d1[1/GeV] -8.386487e-01 d2[1/GeV] 1.518967e-01 d3[1/GeV] -4.546126e-01 d4[1/GeV] 7.207285e-03 0.66 -0.00 0.02 -0.20 0.00 -0.08 -0.02 -0.07 …
Figure 37
Figure 37. Figure 37: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p040_37.png]
Figure 38
Figure 38. Figure 38: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p040_38.png]
Figure 39
Figure 39. Figure 39: The total χ 2 dof, Λ parameter and LECs for M3S3L (F10). χ 2 dof 0.92 Λ[GeV] 0.63786229 b0[1/GeV] -5.493596e-01 bD[1/GeV] 8.601840e-02 bF [1/GeV] -3.226791e-01 d1[1/GeV] 2.079492e+00 d2[1/GeV] -6.344862e-02 d3[1/GeV] 3.538223e-01 d4[1/GeV] -2.262594e+00 0.27 -0.01 0.0…
Figure 40
Figure 40. Figure 40: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p041_40.png]
Figure 41
Figure 41. Figure 41: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p041_41.png]
Figure 42
Figure 42. Figure 42: The total χ 2 dof as defined in Eq. (5.1) and sub￾traction constants for M1S1P (F21). χ 2 dof 4.23 aKN¯ -2.348949e-03 aKN¯ -2.348949e-03 aπΛ 3.881548e-01 aπΣ 8.779599e-04 aπΣ 8.779599e-04 aπΣ 8.779599e-04 aηΛ 1.527930e-03 aηΣ -7.466124e-01 aKΞ -8.510607e-03 aKΞ -8.510…
Figure 43
Figure 43. Figure 43: Heat map of correlated χ 2 ij/14, highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p042_43.png]
Figure 44
Figure 44. Figure 44: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p042_44.png]
Figure 45
Figure 45. Figure 45: The total χ 2 dof as defined in Eq. (5.1) for the parameter-free fit M1S2P (F28). χ 2 dof 25.57 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p043_45.png]
Figure 46
Figure 46. Figure 46: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p043_46.png]
Figure 47
Figure 47. Figure 47: The total χ 2 dof as defined in Eq. (5.1) and Λ pa￾rameter for M1S3P (F27). χ 2 dof 30.28266 Λ[GeV] 0.8111258 4.40 -0.19 0.16 -2.37 0.01 -1.17 -0.15 -3.30 -0.06 0.65 -0.20 0.36 -0.09 -0.00 -0.19 1.56 -0.27 -0.07 -0.28 0.27 -0.15 -0.50 -0.05 0.28 -0.20 0.08 -0.36 0.05 …
Figure 48
Figure 48. Figure 48: Heat map of correlated χ 2 ij/14, highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p044_48.png]
Figure 49
Figure 49. Figure 49: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p044_49.png]
Figure 50
Figure 50. Figure 50: The total χ 2 dof as defined in Eq. (5.1) and sub￾traction constants for M2S1P (F22). χ 2 dof 8.86 aKN¯ -1.670707e-03 aπΛ 2.465099e-02 aπΣ -3.528238e-03 aηΛ -5.376287e-03 aηΣ -1.070200e-02 aKΞ -1.305735e-02 2.33 -0.12 0.12 -1.34 0.01 -0.81 -0.07 -1.95 -0.04 0.40 -0.12…
Figure 51
Figure 51. Figure 51: Heat map of correlated χ 2 ij/14, highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p045_51.png]
Figure 52
Figure 52. Figure 52: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p045_52.png]
Figure 53
Figure 53. Figure 53: The total χ 2 dof as defined in Eq. (5.1) for the parameter-free fit, M2S2P (F29). χ 2 dof 48.15 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p046_53.png]
Figure 54
Figure 54. Figure 54: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p046_54.png]
Figure 55
Figure 55. Figure 55: The total χ 2 dof as defined in Eq. (5.1) and the Λ parameter for M1S1P (F21). χ 2 dof 18.69 Λ[GeV] 1.087866 4.99 -0.08 -0.00 -1.81 0.00 0.18 -0.18 -1.46 -0.04 0.02 -0.15 0.17 -0.01 -0.03 -0.08 0.23 0.00 -0.02 -0.04 -0.01 -0.06 -0.08 -0.01 0.00 -0.05 0.01 -0.01 0.13 -…
Figure 56
Figure 56. Figure 56: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p047_56.png]
Figure 57
Figure 57. Figure 57: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p047_57.png]
Figure 58
Figure 58. Figure 58: The total χ 2 dof as defined in Eq. (5.1), subtrac￾tion constants and LECs for M3S1P (F30). χ 2 dof 1.51 aKN¯ 8.684939e-05 aπΛ 6.602418e-02 aπΣ -3.019298e-03 aηΛ 6.760390e-03 aηΣ -6.407026e-03 aKΞ 3.279341e-03 b0[1/GeV] -6.277105e-01 bD[1/GeV] -3.489336e-01 bF [1/GeV]…
Figure 59
Figure 59. Figure 59: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p048_59.png]
Figure 60
Figure 60. Figure 60: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p048_60.png]
Figure 61
Figure 61. Figure 61: The total χ 2 dof as defined in Eq. (5.1) and LECs for Fit 13 (M3S2P). χ 2 dof 0.90 b0[1/GeV] -5.349500e-01 bD[1/GeV] 9.599595e-02 bF [1/GeV] -3.256764e-01 d1[1/GeV] -8.386487e-01 d2[1/GeV] 1.518967e-01 d3[1/GeV] -4.546126e-01 d4[1/GeV] 7.207285e-03 12.85 0.05 0.12 -4…
Figure 62
Figure 62. Figure 62: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p049_62.png]
Figure 63
Figure 63. Figure 63: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p049_63.png]
Figure 64
Figure 64. Figure 64: The total χ 2 dof as defined in Eq. (5.1), Λ pa￾rameter and LECs for M3S3P (F11). χ 2 dof 1.46 Λ[GeV] 0.6802625 b0[1/GeV] -5.440114e-01 bD[1/GeV] -8.008565e-01 bF [1/GeV] -4.127402e-01 d1[1/GeV] -4.572182e-01 d2[1/GeV] -2.716873e-01 d3[1/GeV] -6.182698e-01 d4[1/GeV] -…
Figure 65
Figure 65. Figure 65: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p050_65.png]
Figure 66
Figure 66. Figure 66: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p050_66.png]
Figure 67
Figure 67. Figure 67: The total χ 2 dof as defined in Eq. (5.1) and the Λ parameter for M1S3PL (F24). χ 2 dof 27.56447 Λ[GeV] 0.8106917 4.37 -0.18 0.16 -2.36 0.01 -1.17 -0.15 -3.28 -0.06 0.65 -0.20 0.36 -0.09 -0.00 -0.18 1.56 -0.27 -0.07 -0.28 0.27 -0.15 -0.50 -0.05 0.28 -0.20 0.08 -0.36 0…
Figure 68
Figure 68. Figure 68: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p051_68.png]
Figure 69
Figure 69. Figure 69: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p051_69.png]
Figure 70
Figure 70. Figure 70: The total χ 2 dof as defined in Eq. (5.1) and the Λ parameter for M2S3PL (F23). χ 2 dof 17.81 Λ[GeV] 1.088185 4.97 -0.08 -0.00 -1.80 0.00 0.18 -0.18 -1.45 -0.04 0.02 -0.15 0.17 -0.01 -0.03 -0.08 0.23 0.00 -0.02 -0.04 -0.01 -0.06 -0.08 -0.01 0.00 -0.05 0.01 -0.01 0.13 …
Figure 71
Figure 71. Figure 71: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p052_71.png]
Figure 72
Figure 72. Figure 72: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p052_72.png]
Figure 73
Figure 73. Figure 73: The total χ 2 dof as defined in Eq. (5.1), subtrac￾tion constants for both the lattice and the physical point and LECs for M3S1PL (F17). χ 2 dof 1.441434 Lattice Experimental aKN¯ -1.564779e-03 -1.546676e-03 aπΛ -1.079700e-01 8.517151e-02 aπΣ +3.721385e-03 -2.728888e-…
Figure 74
Figure 74. Figure 74: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p053_74.png]
Figure 75
Figure 75. Figure 75: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p053_75.png]
Figure 76
Figure 76. Figure 76: The total χ 2 dof as defined in Eq. (5.1) and LECs for M3S2PL (F16). χ 2 dof 2.1189 b0[1/GeV] -3.414328e-01 bD[1/GeV] 6.368574e-02 bF [1/GeV] -3.021744e-01 d1[1/GeV] -2.593481e-01 d2[1/GeV] 4.433054e-02 d3[1/GeV] 3.431286e-02 d4[1/GeV] -3.704632e-01 0.00 0.00 -0.00 0.…
Figure 77
Figure 77. Figure 77: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p054_77.png]
Figure 78
Figure 78. Figure 78: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p054_78.png]
Figure 79
Figure 79. Figure 79: The total χ 2 dof as defined in Eq. (5.1), Λ parameter and LECs for M3S3PL (F12). χ 2 dof 2.236 Λ[GeV] 0.4218104 b0[1/GeV] -8.768647e-01 bD[1/GeV] 5.246210e-02 bF [1/GeV] -3.406325e-01 d1[1/GeV] 1.201660e+00 d2[1/GeV] -1.753693e-01 d3[1/GeV] -4.544383e-01 d4[1/GeV] 1.…
Figure 80
Figure 80. Figure 80: Heat map of correlated χ 2 dof,ij , highlighting the relative impact of each energy level on the total fit quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p055_80.png]
Figure 81
Figure 81. Figure 81: Isoscalar and isovector projected absolute value of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p055_81.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Combined Analysis of Lattice QCD and Experimental Data on the Pion Transition Form Factor

    hep-lat 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    Feasibility study of combined LQCD and experimental data on pion TFF via modified z-expansion fit reports up to 3x uncertainty reduction in singly-virtual limit but only 1.5x improvement for the pion-pole g-2 contribution.

  2. Finding Low Star Discrepancy 3D Kronecker Point Sets Using Algorithm Configuration Techniques

    cs.NE 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    Optimizing the two Kronecker parameters with irace yields new state-of-the-art L∞ star discrepancy for 3D point sets of size at least 500 and for ranges of sizes.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

128 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Review of particle physics,

    S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), “Review of particle physics,” Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

    2024

  2. [2]

    Light Baryon Spectroscopy,

    Annika Thiel, Farah Afzal, and Yannick Wunderlich, “Light Baryon Spectroscopy,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 125, 103949 (2022), arXiv:2202.05055 [nucl-ex]

    arXiv 2022

  3. [3]

    Baryons as relativistic three-quark bound states,

    Gernot Eichmann, Helios Sanchis-Alepuz, Richard Williams, Reinhard Alkofer, and Christian S. Fischer, “Baryons as relativistic three-quark bound states,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 91, 1–100 (2016), arXiv:1606.09602 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2016

  4. [4]

    Dynamical coupled-channel models for hadron dynamics,

    Michael D¨ oring, Johann Haidenbauer, Maxim Mai, and Toru Sato, “Dynamical coupled-channel models for hadron dynamics,” (2025), arXiv:2505.02745 [nucl-th]

    arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    Towards a theory of hadron resonances,

    Maxim Mai, Ulf-G. Meißner, and Carsten Urbach, “Towards a theory of hadron resonances,” Phys. Rept. 1001, 1–66 (2023), arXiv:2206.01477 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    The impact of γN and γ∗N interactions on our understanding of nucleon excitations,

    Volker Burkert, Gernot Eichmann, and Eberhard Klempt, “The impact of γN and γ∗N interactions on our understanding of nucleon excitations,” (2025), arXiv:2506.16482 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    Chiral dynamics in the presence of bound states: Kaon nucleon interactions revisited,

    J. A. Oller and Ulf-G. Meißner, “Chiral dynamics in the presence of bound states: Kaon nucleon interactions revisited,” Phys. Lett. B 500, 263–272 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0011146

    arXiv 2001

  8. [8]

    Two-pole structures in QCD: Facts, not fantasy!

    Ulf-G. Meißner, “Two-pole structures in QCD: Facts, not fantasy!” Symmetry 12, 981 (2020), arXiv:2005.06909 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2020

Show all 128 references
  1. [9]

    Review of the Λ(1405) A curious case of a strangeness resonance,

    Maxim Mai, “Review of the Λ(1405) A curious case of a strangeness resonance,” Eur. Phys. J. ST 230, 1593–1607 (2021), arXiv:2010.00056 [nucl-th]

    2021 arXiv

  2. [10]

    QCD and the strange baryon spectrum,

    Tetsuo Hyodo and Masayuki Niiyama, “QCD and the strange baryon spectrum,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 120, 103868 (2021), arXiv:2010.07592 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  3. [11]

    On the pole content of coupled channels chiral approaches used for the ¯KN system,

    A. Ciepl´ y, M. Mai, Ulf-G. Meißner, and J. Smejkal, “On the pole content of coupled channels chiral approaches used for the ¯KN system,” Nucl. Phys. A 954, 17–40 (2016), arXiv:1603.02531 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Chiral SU(3) theory of antikaon-nucleon interactions with improved threshold constraints,

    Yoichi Ikeda, Tetsuo Hyodo, and Wolfram Weise, “Chiral SU(3) theory of antikaon-nucleon interactions with improved threshold constraints,” Nucl. Phys. A 881, 98–114 (2012), arXiv:1201.6549 [nucl-th]

    2012 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Meson-baryon reactions with strangeness -1 within a chiral framework,

    Zhi-Hui Guo and J. A. Oller, “Meson-baryon reactions with strangeness -1 within a chiral framework,” Phys. Rev. C 87, 035202 (2013), arXiv:1210.3485 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Cross-Channel Constraints on Resonant Antikaon- Nucleon Scattering,

    Jun-Xu Lu, Li-Sheng Geng, Michael Doering, and Maxim Mai, “Cross-Channel Constraints on Resonant Antikaon- Nucleon Scattering,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 071902 (2023), arXiv:2209.02471 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Isolating the Λ(1405) in Lattice QCD,

    Benjamin J. Menadue, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B. Leinweber, and M. Selim Mahbub, “Isolating the Λ(1405) in Lattice QCD,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 112001 (2012), arXiv:1109.6716 [hep-lat]. 28

    2012 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Low-lying Λ baryons from the lattice,

    Georg P. Engel, C. B. Lang, and Andreas Sch¨ afer (BGR (Bern-Graz-Regensburg)), “Low-lying Λ baryons from the lattice,” Phys. Rev. D 87, 034502 (2013), arXiv:1212.2032 [hep-lat]

    2013 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Flavor structure of the excited baryon spectra from lattice QCD,

    Robert G. Edwards, Nilmani Mathur, David G. Richards, and Stephen J. Wallace (Hadron Spectrum), “Flavor structure of the excited baryon spectra from lattice QCD,” Phys. Rev. D 87, 054506 (2013), arXiv:1212.5236 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Lattice QCD Evidence that the Λ(1405) Resonance is an Antikaon-Nucleon Molecule,

    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, 132002 (2015), arXiv:1411.3402 [hep-lat]

    2015 arXiv

  11. [19]

    On the Structure of the Lambda 1405,

    Jonathan M. M. Hall, Waseem Kamleh, Derek B. Leinweber, Benjamin J. Menadue, Benjamin J. Owen, Anthony W. Thomas, and Ross D. Young, “On the Structure of the Lambda 1405,” PoS LA TTICE2014, 094 (2014), arXiv:1411.3781 [hep-lat]

    2014 arXiv

  12. [20]

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

    John Bulava et al. (Baryon Scattering (BaSc)), “Lattice QCD study of πΣ-K¯N scattering and the Λ(1405) resonance,” Phys. Rev. D 109, 014511 (2024), arXiv:2307.13471 [hep-lat]

    2024

  13. [21]

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

    John Bulava et al. (Baryon Scattering (BaSc)), “Two-Pole Nature of the Λ(1405) resonance from Lattice QCD,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 051901 (2024), arXiv:2307.10413 [hep-lat]

    2024

  14. [22]

    Nucleon scattering from lattice QCD,

    Colin Morningstar, “Nucleon scattering from lattice QCD,” in 11th International Workshop on Chiral Dynamics(2025) arXiv:2504.01950 [hep-lat]

    2025 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Scattering processes and resonances from lattice QCD,

    Raul A. Briceno, Jozef J. Dudek, and Ross D. Young, “Scattering processes and resonances from lattice QCD,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 025001 (2018), arXiv:1706.06223 [hep-lat]

    2018 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Two particle states on a torus and their relation to the scattering matrix,

    Martin L¨ uscher, “Two particle states on a torus and their relation to the scattering matrix,” Nucl. Phys. B354, 531–578 (1991)

    1991

  17. [25]

    Signatures of unstable particles in finite volume,

    Martin L¨ uscher, “Signatures of unstable particles in finite volume,” Nucl. Phys. B 364, 237–251 (1991)

    1991

  18. [26]

    Resonance scattering phase shifts on a nonrest frame lattice,

    K. Rummukainen and Steven A. Gottlieb, “Resonance scattering phase shifts on a nonrest frame lattice,” Nucl. Phys. B 450, 397–436 (1995), arXiv:hep-lat/9503028

    1995 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Finite-volume effects for two-hadron states in moving frames,

    C. h. Kim, C. T. Sachrajda, and Stephen R. Sharpe, “Finite-volume effects for two-hadron states in moving frames,” Nucl. Phys. B 727, 218–243 (2005), arXiv:hep-lat/0507006

    2005 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Two particle states and the S-matrix elements in multi-channel scattering,

    Song He, Xu Feng, and Chuan Liu, “Two particle states and the S-matrix elements in multi-channel scattering,” JHEP 07, 011 (2005), arXiv:hep-lat/0504019

    2005 arXiv

  21. [29]

    A Method to measure the antikaon-nucleon scattering length in lattice QCD,

    Michael Lage, Ulf-G. Meißner, and Akaki Rusetsky, “A Method to measure the antikaon-nucleon scattering length in lattice QCD,” Phys. Lett. B 681, 439–443 (2009), arXiv:0905.0069 [hep-lat]

    2009 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Two-particle multichannel systems in a finite volume with arbitrary spin,

    Raul A. Briceno, “Two-particle multichannel systems in a finite volume with arbitrary spin,” Phys. Rev. D 89, 074507 (2014), arXiv:1401.3312 [hep-lat]

    2014 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Scalar mesons in a finite volume,

    V. Bernard, M. Lage, U.-G. Meißner, and A. Rusetsky, “Scalar mesons in a finite volume,” JHEP 01, 019 (2011), arXiv:1010.6018 [hep-lat]

    2011 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Scattering phases for meson and baryon resonances on general moving-frame lattices,

    M. G¨ ockeler, R. Horsley, M. Lage, U.-G. Meißner, P. E. L. Rakow, A. Rusetsky, G. Schierholz, and J. M. Zanotti, “Scattering phases for meson and baryon resonances on general moving-frame lattices,” Phys. Rev. D 86, 094513 (2012), arXiv:1206.4141 [hep-lat]

    2012 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Chiral dynamics of the S11(1535) and S11(1650) resonances revisited,

    Peter C. Bruns, Maxim Mai, and Ulf-G. Meißner, “Chiral dynamics of the S11(1535) and S11(1650) resonances revisited,” Phys. Lett. B 697, 254–259 (2011), arXiv:1012.2233 [nucl-th]

    2011 arXiv

  26. [34]

    New insights into antikaon-nucleon scattering and the structure of the Lambda(1405),

    Maxim Mai and Ulf-G. Meißner, “New insights into antikaon-nucleon scattering and the structure of the Lambda(1405),” Nucl. Phys. A 900, 51 – 64 (2013), arXiv:1202.2030 [nucl-th]

    2013 arXiv

  27. [35]

    New insights into the pole parameters of the Λ(1380), the Λ(1405) and the Σ(1385),

    Daniel Sadasivan, Maxim Mai, Michael D¨ oring, Ulf-G. Meißner, Felipe Amorim, John Paul Klucik, Jun-Xu Lu, and Li-Sheng Geng, “New insights into the pole parameters of the Λ(1380), the Λ(1405) and the Σ(1385),” Front. Phys. 11, 1139236 (2023), arXiv:2212.10415 [nucl-th]

    2023 arXiv

  28. [36]

    H¨ ohler,Methods and Results of Phenomenological Analyses / Methoden und Ergebnisse ph¨ anomenologischer Analysen, edited by H

    G. H¨ ohler,Methods and Results of Phenomenological Analyses / Methoden und Ergebnisse ph¨ anomenologischer Analysen, edited by H. Schopper, Landolt-Boernstein - Group I Elementary Particles, Nuclei and Atoms, Vol. 9b2 (Springer, 1983)

    1983

  29. [37]

    Application of Dispersion Relations to Low-Energy Meson- Nucleon Scattering,

    G. F. Chew, M. L. Goldberger, F. E. Low, and Y. Nambu, “Application of Dispersion Relations to Low-Energy Meson- Nucleon Scattering,” Phys. Rev. 106, 1337–1344 (1957)

    1957

  30. [38]

    Estimating the two-particle K-matrix for multiple partial waves and decay channels from finite-volume energies,

    Colin Morningstar, John Bulava, Bijit Singha, Ruair ´ ı Brett, Jacob Fallica, Andrew Hanlon, and Ben H¨ orz, “Estimating the two-particle K-matrix for multiple partial waves and decay channels from finite-volume energies,” Nucl. Phys. B 924, 29 477–507 (2017), arXiv:1707.05817...

    2017 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Phase Conventions in Hadron Physics from the Perspective of the Quark Model,

    Yu Lu, Hao-Jie Jing, and Jia-Jun Wu, “Phase Conventions in Hadron Physics from the Perspective of the Quark Model,” Symmetry 16, 1061 (2024), arXiv:2407.17131 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Simulation of QCD with N f = 2 + 1 flavors of non-perturbatively improved Wilson fermions,

    Mattia Bruno et al., “Simulation of QCD with N f = 2 + 1 flavors of non-perturbatively improved Wilson fermions,” JHEP 02, 043 (2015), arXiv:1411.3982 [hep-lat]

    2015 arXiv

  33. [41]

    A Novel quark-field creation operator construction for hadronic physics in lattice QCD,

    Michael Peardon, John Bulava, Justin Foley, Colin Morningstar, Jozef Dudek, Robert G. Edwards, Balint Joo, Huey- Wen Lin, David G. Richards, and Keisuke Jimmy Juge (Hadron Spectrum), “A Novel quark-field creation operator construction for hadronic physics in lattice QCD,” Phys...

    2009 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Improved stochastic estimation of quark propagation with Laplacian Heaviside smearing in lattice QCD,

    Colin Morningstar, John Bulava, Justin Foley, Keisuke J. Juge, David Lenkner, Mike Peardon, and Chik Him Wong, “Improved stochastic estimation of quark propagation with Laplacian Heaviside smearing in lattice QCD,” Phys. Rev. D 83, 114505 (2011), arXiv:1104.3870 [hep-lat]

    2011 arXiv

  35. [43]

    The Λ(1405) from Lattice QCD: Determining the Finite-volume Spectra,

    B´ arbara Cid-Mora et al., “The Λ(1405) from Lattice QCD: Determining the Finite-volume Spectra,” PoS LA T- TICE2023, 131 (2024), arXiv:2312.05154 [hep-lat]

    2024 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Photoproduction of Σ 0(1385) and Λ(1405) on the proton near threshold,

    Masayuki Niiyama (LEPS TPC), “Photoproduction of Σ 0(1385) and Λ(1405) on the proton near threshold,” Nucl. Phys. A 827, 261C–263C (2009)

    2009

  37. [45]

    Measurement of the Σ π photoproduction line shapes near the Λ(1405),

    K. Moriya et al. (CLAS), “Measurement of the Σ π photoproduction line shapes near the Λ(1405),” Phys. Rev. C 87, 035206 (2013), arXiv:1301.5000 [nucl-ex]

    2013 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Differential Photoproduction Cross Sections of the Σ 0(1385), Λ(1405), and Λ(1520),

    K. Moriya et al. (CLAS), “Differential Photoproduction Cross Sections of the Σ 0(1385), Λ(1405), and Λ(1520),” Phys. Rev. C 88, 045201 (2013), [Addendum: Phys.Rev.C 88, 049902 (2013)], arXiv:1305.6776 [nucl-ex]

    2013 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Photoproduction of K +Λ(1405) → K +π0Σ0 extending to forward angles and low momentum transfer,

    G. Scheluchin et al. (BGOOD), “Photoproduction of K +Λ(1405) → K +π0Σ0 extending to forward angles and low momentum transfer,” Phys. Lett. B 833, 137375 (2022), arXiv:2108.12235 [nucl-ex]

    2022 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Hyperon III: K −p − πΣ coupled-channel dynamics in the Λ(1405) mass region,

    A. V. Anisovich, A. V. Sarantsev, V. A. Nikonov, V. Burkert, R. A. Schumacher, U. Thoma, and E. Klempt, “Hyperon III: K −p − πΣ coupled-channel dynamics in the Λ(1405) mass region,” Eur. Phys. J. A 56, 139 (2020)

    2020

  41. [49]

    Predictions for the Λ b → J/ψ Λ(1405) decay,

    Luis Roca, Maxim Mai, Eulogio Oset, and Ulf-G. Meißner, “Predictions for the Λ b → J/ψ Λ(1405) decay,” Eur. Phys. J. C 75, 218 (2015), arXiv:1503.02936 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Constraints on the chiral unitary ¯KN amplitude from πΣK + photoproduction data,

    Maxim Mai and Ulf-G. Meißner, “Constraints on the chiral unitary ¯KN amplitude from πΣK + photoproduction data,” Eur. Phys. J. A 51, 30 (2015), arXiv:1411.7884 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  43. [51]

    The Associated photoproduction of positive kaons and pi0 Lambda or pi Sigma pairs in the region of the Sigma(1385) and Lambda(1405) resonances,

    Matthias F. M. Lutz and Madeleine Soyeur, “The Associated photoproduction of positive kaons and pi0 Lambda or pi Sigma pairs in the region of the Sigma(1385) and Lambda(1405) resonances,” Nucl. Phys. A 748, 499–512 (2005), arXiv:nucl-th/0407115

    2005 arXiv

  44. [52]

    First simultaneous K −p → Σ0π0, Λπ0 cross section measurements at 98 MeV/c,

    Kristian Piscicchia et al., “First simultaneous K −p → Σ0π0, Λπ0 cross section measurements at 98 MeV/c,” Phys. Rev. C 108, 055201 (2023), arXiv:2210.10342 [nucl-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Data handling, reconstruction, and simulation for the KLOE experiment,

    F. Ambrosino et al., “Data handling, reconstruction, and simulation for the KLOE experiment,” Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 534, 403–433 (2004), arXiv:physics/0404100

    2004 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Kaon scattering and charged sigma hyperon production in K −p interactions below 300 MeV/c,

    J. Ciborowski et al., “Kaon scattering and charged sigma hyperon production in K −p interactions below 300 MeV/c,” J. Phys. G 8, 13–32 (1982)

    1982

  47. [55]

    Low-Energy Interactions of K − Mesons in Hydrogen,

    William E. Humphrey and Ronald R. Ross, “Low-Energy Interactions of K − Mesons in Hydrogen,” Phys. Rev. 127, 1305–1323 (1962)

    1962

  48. [56]

    Low-Energy K − Meson Interactions In Hydrogen,

    M. Sakitt, T. B. Day, R. G. Glasser, N. Seeman, J. H. Friedman, W. E. Humphrey, and R. R. Ross, “Low-Energy K − Meson Interactions In Hydrogen,” Phys. Rev. 139, B719 (1965)

    1965

  49. [57]

    Analysis of Y ∗ 0 (1520) and Determination of the Σ Parity,

    Mason B. Watson, Massimiliano Ferro-Luzzi, and Robert D. Tripp, “Analysis of Y ∗ 0 (1520) and Determination of the Σ Parity,” Phys. Rev. 131, 2248–2281 (1963)

    1963

  50. [58]

    S- and p-wave structure of S = −1 meson-baryon scattering in the resonance region,

    D. Sadasivan, M. Mai, and M. D¨ oring, “S- and p-wave structure of S = −1 meson-baryon scattering in the resonance region,” Phys. Lett. B 789, 329–335 (2019), arXiv:1805.04534 [nucl-th]

    2019 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Data-driven Approach for Interpolation of Sparse Data,

    R. F. Ferguson, D. G. Ireland, and B. McKinnon, “Data-driven Approach for Interpolation of Sparse Data,” (2025), arXiv:2505.01473 [physics]

    2025 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Charged Sigma Hyperon Production by K- Meson Interactions at Rest,

    R. J. Nowak et al., “Charged Sigma Hyperon Production by K- Meson Interactions at Rest,” Nucl. Phys. B 139, 61–71 (1978)

    1978

  53. [61]

    Some properties of the charged sigma hyperons,

    D. N. Tovee et al., “Some properties of the charged sigma hyperons,” Nucl. Phys. B 33, 493–504 (1971). 30

    1971

  54. [62]

    A New Measurement of Kaonic Hydrogen X-rays,

    M. Bazzi et al. (SIDDHARTA), “A New Measurement of Kaonic Hydrogen X-rays,” Phys. Lett. B 704, 113–117 (2011), arXiv:1105.3090 [nucl-ex]

    2011 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Spectrum and decays of kaonic hydrogen,

    Ulf-G. Meißner, Udit Raha, and Akaki Rusetsky, “Spectrum and decays of kaonic hydrogen,” Eur. Phys. J. C 35, 349–357 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0402261

    2004 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Kaon-nucleon scattering lengths from kaonic deuterium experiments,

    Ulf-G. Meißner, Udit Raha, and Akaki Rusetsky, “Kaon-nucleon scattering lengths from kaonic deuterium experiments,” Eur. Phys. J. C 47, 473–480 (2006), arXiv:nucl-th/0603029

    2006 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Kaonic hydrogen versus the K −p low energy data,

    A. Cieply and J. Smejkal, “Kaonic hydrogen versus the K −p low energy data,” Eur. Phys. J. A 34, 237–241 (2007), arXiv:0711.4928 [hep-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Light Kaonic Atoms: From “Corrected

    N. V. Shevchenko, “Light Kaonic Atoms: From “Corrected” to “Summed Up” Deser Formula,” Few Body Syst. 63, 22 (2022), arXiv:2110.03505 [nucl-th]

    2022 arXiv

  59. [67]

    The SIDDHARTA-2 experiment for high precision kaonic atoms X-ray spectroscopy at DAΦNE,

    F. Sgaramella et al., “The SIDDHARTA-2 experiment for high precision kaonic atoms X-ray spectroscopy at DAΦNE,” Nuovo Cim. C 47, 285 (2024)

    2024

  60. [68]

    First measurement of the K −n → Λπ− non-resonant transition amplitude below threshold,

    K. Piscicchia et al., “First measurement of the K −n → Λπ− non-resonant transition amplitude below threshold,” Phys. Lett. B 782, 339–345 (2018)

    2018

  61. [69]

    Introduction to lattice QCD: Course,

    Rajan Gupta, “Introduction to lattice QCD: Course,” in Les Houches Summer School in Theoretical Physics, Session 68: Probing the Standard Model of Particle Interactions(1997) pp. 83–219, arXiv:hep-lat/9807028

    1997 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Relativistic, model-independent, three-particle quantization condition,

    Maxwell T. Hansen and Stephen R. Sharpe, “Relativistic, model-independent, three-particle quantization condition,” Phys. Rev. D 90, 116003 (2014), arXiv:1408.5933 [hep-lat]

    2014 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Three-body Unitarity in the Finite Volume,

    M. Mai and M. D¨ oring, “Three-body Unitarity in the Finite Volume,” Eur. Phys. J. A 53, 240 (2017), arXiv:1709.08222 [hep-lat]

    2017 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Nucleons with chiral loops,

    J. Gasser, M. E. Sainio, and A. Svarc, “Nucleons with chiral loops,” Nucl. Phys. B 307, 779–853 (1988)

    1988

  65. [73]

    Chiral structure of the nucleon,

    Veronique Bernard, Norbert Kaiser, Joachim Kambor, and Ulf-G. Meißner, “Chiral structure of the nucleon,” Nucl. Phys. B 388, 315–345 (1992)

    1992

  66. [74]

    A New approach to chiral perturbation theory for matter fields,

    Hua-Bin Tang, “A New approach to chiral perturbation theory for matter fields,” (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9607436

    1996 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Baryon chiral perturbation theory in manifestly Lorentz invariant form,

    Thomas Becher and H. Leutwyler, “Baryon chiral perturbation theory in manifestly Lorentz invariant form,” Eur. Phys. J. 9, 643–671 (1999), arXiv:hep-ph/9901384

    1999 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Pion nucleon scattering in a new approach to chiral perturbation theory,

    Paul J. Ellis and Hua-Bin Tang, “Pion nucleon scattering in a new approach to chiral perturbation theory,” Phys. Rev. C 57, 3356–3375 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9709354

    1998 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Aspects of meson-baryon scattering in three and two-flavor chiral perturbation theory,

    Maxim Mai, Peter C. Bruns, Bastian Kubis, and Ulf-G. Meißner, “Aspects of meson-baryon scattering in three and two-flavor chiral perturbation theory,” Phys. Rev. D 80, 094006 (2009), arXiv:0905.2810 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  70. [78]

    SU(3) chiral dynamics with coupled channels: Eta and kaon photoproduction,

    Norbert Kaiser, T. Waas, and W. Weise, “SU(3) chiral dynamics with coupled channels: Eta and kaon photoproduction,” Nucl. Phys. A 612, 297–320 (1997), arXiv:hep-ph/9607459

    1997 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Relativistic chiral SU(3) symmetry, large N(c) sum rules and meson baryon scattering,

    M. F. M. Lutz and E. E. Kolomeitsev, “Relativistic chiral SU(3) symmetry, large N(c) sum rules and meson baryon scattering,” Nucl. Phys. A 700, 193–308 (2002), arXiv:nucl-th/0105042

    2002 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Chiral dynamics of kaon-nucleon interactions, revisited,

    B. Borasoy, R. Nissler, and W. Weise, “Chiral dynamics of kaon-nucleon interactions, revisited,” Eur. Phys. J. A 25, 79–96 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0505239

    2005 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Baryon Matrix Elements of the Vector Current in Chiral Perturbation Theory,

    A. Krause, “Baryon Matrix Elements of the Vector Current in Chiral Perturbation Theory,” Helv. Phys. Acta 63, 3–70 (1990)

    1990

  74. [82]

    Baryon masses, chiral extrapolations, and all that,

    Matthias Frink, Ulf-G. Meißner, and Ilka Scheller, “Baryon masses, chiral extrapolations, and all that,” Eur. Phys. J. A 24, 395–409 (2005), arXiv:hep-lat/0501024

    2005 arXiv

  75. [83]

    A Gauge invariant chiral unitary framework for kaon photo- and electroproduction on the proton,

    B. Borasoy, P. C. Bruns, Ulf-G. Meißner, and R. Nissler, “A Gauge invariant chiral unitary framework for kaon photo- and electroproduction on the proton,” Eur. Phys. J. A 34, 161–183 (2007), arXiv:0709.3181 [nucl-th]

    2007 arXiv

  76. [84]

    η-Photoproduction in a gauge-invariant chiral unitary framework,

    Dino Rui´ c, Maxim Mai, and Ulf-G. Meißner, “η-Photoproduction in a gauge-invariant chiral unitary framework,” Phys. Lett. B 704, 659–662 (2011), arXiv:1108.4825 [nucl-th]

    2011 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Pion photoproduction off the proton in a gauge-invariant chiral unitary framework,

    Maxim Mai, Peter C. Bruns, and Ulf-G. Meißner, “Pion photoproduction off the proton in a gauge-invariant chiral unitary framework,” Phys. Rev. D 86, 094033 (2012), arXiv:1207.4923 [nucl-th]

    2012 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Chiral symmetry constraints on resonant amplitudes,

    Peter C. Bruns and Maxim Mai, “Chiral symmetry constraints on resonant amplitudes,” Phys. Lett. B 778, 43–47 (2018), arXiv:1707.08983 [hep-lat]

    2018 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Theory of resonances,

    Maxim Mai, “Theory of resonances,” (2025), arXiv:2502.02654 [hep-ph]. 31

    2025 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Coupled-channel approach in hadron–hadron scattering,

    J. A. Oller, “Coupled-channel approach in hadron–hadron scattering,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 110, 103728 (2020), arXiv:1909.00370 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  81. [89]

    The K ¯N Interaction in Higher Partial Waves,

    Albert Feijoo, Daniel Gazda, Volodymyr Magas, and Angels Ramos, “The K ¯N Interaction in Higher Partial Waves,” Symmetry 13, 1434 (2021), arXiv:2107.10560 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  82. [90]

    New insights into the nature of the Λ(1380) and Λ(1405) resonances away from the SU(3) limit,

    Feng-Kun Guo, Yuki Kamiya, Maxim Mai, and Ulf-G. Meißner, “New insights into the nature of the Λ(1380) and Λ(1405) resonances away from the SU(3) limit,” Phys. Lett. B 846, 138264 (2023), arXiv:2308.07658 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Origin of the resonances in the chiral unitary approach,

    Tetsuo Hyodo, Daisuke Jido, and Atsushi Hosaka, “Origin of the resonances in the chiral unitary approach,” Phys. Rev. C 78, 025203 (2008), arXiv:0803.2550 [nucl-th]

    2008 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Chirally motivated ¯KN amplitudes for in-medium applications,

    A. Cieply and J. Smejkal, “Chirally motivated ¯KN amplitudes for in-medium applications,” Nucl. Phys. A 881, 115–126 (2012), arXiv:1112.0917 [nucl-th]

    2012 arXiv

  85. [93]

    SU(3) flavor symmetry considerations for the K ¯N coupled channels system,

    P. C. Bruns and A. Ciepl´ y, “SU(3) flavor symmetry considerations for the K ¯N coupled channels system,” Nucl. Phys. A 1019, 122378 (2022), arXiv:2109.03109 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  86. [94]

    Testing chiral unitary models for the Λ(1405) in K+ πΣ photoproduction,

    P. C. Bruns, A. Ciepl´ y, and M. Mai, “Testing chiral unitary models for the Λ(1405) in K+ πΣ photoproduction,” Phys. Rev. D 106, 074017 (2022)

    2022

  87. [95]

    Multi-particle systems on the lattice and chiral extrapolations: a brief review,

    Maxim Mai, Michael D¨ oring, and Akaki Rusetsky, “Multi-particle systems on the lattice and chiral extrapolations: a brief review,” Eur. Phys. J. ST 230, 1623–1643 (2021), arXiv:2103.00577 [hep-lat]

    2021 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Particle-dimer approach for the Roper resonance in a finite volume,

    Daniel Severt, Maxim Mai, and Ulf-G. Meißner, “Particle-dimer approach for the Roper resonance in a finite volume,” JHEP 04, 100 (2023), arXiv:2212.02171 [hep-lat]

    2023 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Analytic properties of the scattering amplitude and resonances parameters in a meson exchange model,

    M. Doring, C. Hanhart, F. Huang, S. Krewald, and U.-G. Meißner, “Analytic properties of the scattering amplitude and resonances parameters in a meson exchange model,” Nucl. Phys. A 829, 170–209 (2009), arXiv:0903.4337 [nucl-th]

    2009 arXiv

  90. [98]

    Lattice study of cc¯u¯s tetraquark channel in D(∗)D(∗) s scattering,

    Tanishk Shrimal, Sara Collins, Priyajit Jana, M. Padmanath, and Sasa Prelovsek, “Lattice study of cc¯u¯s tetraquark channel in D(∗)D(∗) s scattering,” (2025), arXiv:2504.16931 [hep-lat]

    2025

  91. [99]

    T + cc via the plane wave approach and including diquark-antidiquark operators,

    Ivan Vujmilovic, Sara Collins, Luka Leskovec, Emmanuel Ortiz-Pacheco, Padmanath Madanagopalan, and Sasa Prelovsek, “T + cc via the plane wave approach and including diquark-antidiquark operators,” PoS LA TTICE2024, 112 (2025), arXiv:2411.08646 [hep-lat]

    2025 arXiv

  92. [100]

    Lattice QCD investigation of a doubly-bottom ¯b¯bud tetraquark with quantum numbers I(J P ) = 0(1+),

    Luka Leskovec, Stefan Meinel, Martin Pflaumer, and Marc Wagner, “Lattice QCD investigation of a doubly-bottom ¯b¯bud tetraquark with quantum numbers I(J P ) = 0(1+),” Phys. Rev. D 100, 014503 (2019), arXiv:1904.04197 [hep-lat]

    2019 arXiv

  93. [101]

    Search for ¯b¯bus and ¯b¯cud tetraquark bound states using lattice QCD,

    Stefan Meinel, Martin Pflaumer, and Marc Wagner, “Search for ¯b¯bus and ¯b¯cud tetraquark bound states using lattice QCD,” Phys. Rev. D 106, 034507 (2022), arXiv:2205.13982 [hep-lat]

    2022 arXiv

  94. [102]

    Toward the quark mass dependence of T + cc from lattice QCD,

    Sara Collins, Alexey Nefediev, M. Padmanath, and Sasa Prelovsek, “Toward the quark mass dependence of T + cc from lattice QCD,” Phys. Rev. D 109, 094509 (2024), arXiv:2402.14715 [hep-lat]

    2024 arXiv

  95. [103]

    Role of Left-Hand Cut Contributions on Pole Extractions from Lattice Data: Case Study for Tcc(3875)+,

    Meng-Lin Du, Arseniy Filin, Vadim Baru, Xiang-Kun Dong, Evgeny Epelbaum, Feng-Kun Guo, Christoph Hanhart, Alexey Nefediev, Juan Nieves, and Qian Wang, “Role of Left-Hand Cut Contributions on Pole Extractions from Lattice Data: Case Study for Tcc(3875)+,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, ...

    2023 arXiv

  96. [104]

    Solving the left-hand cut problem in lattice QCD: Tcc(3875)+ from finite volume energy levels,

    Lu Meng, Vadim Baru, Evgeny Epelbaum, Arseniy A. Filin, and Ashot M. Gasparyan, “Solving the left-hand cut problem in lattice QCD: Tcc(3875)+ from finite volume energy levels,” Phys. Rev. D 109, L071506 (2024), arXiv:2312.01930 [hep- lat]

    2024 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Comparison of integral equations used to study T + cc,

    Sebastian M. Dawid, Fernando Romero-L´ opez, and Stephen R. Sharpe, “Comparison of integral equations used to study T + cc,” (2025), arXiv:2505.05466 [nucl-th]

    2025

  98. [106]

    Doubly heavy tetraquarks from lattice QCD: incorporating diquark-antidiquark operators and the left-hand cut,

    S. Prelovsek, E. Ortiz-Pacheco, S. Collins, L. Leskovec, M. Padmanath, and I. Vujmilovic, “Doubly heavy tetraquarks from lattice QCD: incorporating diquark-antidiquark operators and the left-hand cut,” (2025), arXiv:2504.03473 [hep-lat]

    2025 arXiv

  99. [107]

    Finite- volume energy spectrum of the K −K −K − system,

    Andrei Alexandru, Ruair ´ ı Brett, Chris Culver, Michael D¨ oring, Dehua Guo, Frank X. Lee, and Maxim Mai, “Finite- volume energy spectrum of the K −K −K − system,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 114523 (2020), arXiv:2009.12358 [hep-lat]

    2020 arXiv

  100. [108]

    Two- and three-meson scattering amplitudes with physical quark masses from lattice QCD,

    Sebastian M. Dawid, Zachary T. Draper, Andrew D. Hanlon, Ben H¨ orz, Colin Morningstar, Fernando Romero-L´ opez, Stephen R. Sharpe, and Sarah Skinner, “Two- and three-meson scattering amplitudes with physical quark masses from lattice QCD,” (2025), arXiv:2502.17976 [hep-lat]

    2025 arXiv

  101. [109]

    QCD Predictions for Physical Multimeson Scattering Amplitudes,

    Sebastian M. Dawid, Zachary T. Draper, Andrew D. Hanlon, Ben H¨ orz, Colin Morningstar, Fernando Romero-L´ opez, Stephen R. Sharpe, and Sarah Skinner, “QCD Predictions for Physical Multimeson Scattering Amplitudes,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 021903 (2025), arXiv:2502.14348 [hep-lat]. 32

    2025 arXiv

  102. [110]

    ω Meson from Lattice QCD,

    Haobo Yan, Maxim Mai, Marco Garofalo, Ulf-G. Meißner, Chuan Liu, Liuming Liu, and Carsten Urbach, “ ω Meson from Lattice QCD,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 211906 (2024), arXiv:2407.16659 [hep-lat]

    2024 arXiv

  103. [111]

    Three-body resonances in the φ4 theory,

    Marco Garofalo, Maxim Mai, Fernando Romero-L´ opez, Akaki Rusetsky, and Carsten Urbach, “Three-body resonances in the φ4 theory,” JHEP 02, 252 (2023), arXiv:2211.05605 [hep-lat]

    2023 arXiv

  104. [112]

    Pole position of the a1(1260) resonance in a three-body unitary framework,

    Daniel Sadasivan, Andrei Alexandru, Hakan Akdag, Felipe Amorim, Ruair ´ ı Brett, Chris Culver, Michael D¨ oring, Frank X. Lee, and Maxim Mai, “Pole position of the a1(1260) resonance in a three-body unitary framework,” Phys. Rev. D 105, 054020 (2022), arXiv:2112.03355 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  105. [113]

    Three-Body Dynamics of the a1(1260) Resonance from Lattice QCD,

    Maxim Mai, Andrei Alexandru, Ruair ´ ı Brett, Chris Culver, Michael D¨ oring, Frank X. Lee, and Daniel Sadasivan (GWQCD), “Three-Body Dynamics of the a1(1260) Resonance from Lattice QCD,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 222001 (2021), arXiv:2107.03973 [hep-lat]

    2021 arXiv

  106. [114]

    Dalitz plots and lineshape of a1(1260) from a relativistic three- body unitary approach,

    D. Sadasivan, M. Mai, H. Akdag, and M. D¨ oring, “Dalitz plots and lineshape of a1(1260) from a relativistic three- body unitary approach,” Phys. Rev. D 101, 094018 (2020), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 103, 019901 (2021)], arXiv:2002.12431 [nucl-th]

    2020 arXiv

  107. [115]

    Information criteria for astrophysical model selection,

    Andrew R. Liddle, “Information criteria for astrophysical model selection,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters 377, L74–L78 (2007)

    2007

  108. [116]

    A new look at the statistical model identification,

    H. Akaike, “A new look at the statistical model identification,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 19, 716–723 (1974)

    1974

  109. [117]

    Estimating the Dimension of a Model,

    Gideon Schwarz, “Estimating the Dimension of a Model,” The Annals of Statistics 6, 461–464 (1978), publisher: Institute of Mathematical Statistics

    1978

  110. [118]

    Chiral dynamics in nucleons and nuclei,

    V. Bernard, Norbert Kaiser, and Ulf-G. Meissner, “Chiral dynamics in nucleons and nuclei,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 4, 193–346 (1995), arXiv:hep-ph/9501384

    1995 arXiv

  111. [119]

    QCD in the chiral SU(3) limit from baryon masses on lattice QCD ensembles,

    Matthias F. M. Lutz, Yonggoo Heo, and Renwick J. Hudspith, “QCD in the chiral SU(3) limit from baryon masses on lattice QCD ensembles,” Phys. Rev. D 110, 094046 (2024), arXiv:2406.07442 [hep-lat]

    2024 arXiv

  112. [120]

    Mass and width of an unstable particle,

    Scott Willenbrock, “Mass and width of an unstable particle,” Eur. Phys. J. Plus 139, 523 (2024), arXiv:2203.11056 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  113. [121]

    K − nuclear potentials from in-medium chirally motivated models,

    A. Cieply, E. Friedman, A. Gal, D. Gazda, and J. Mares, “K − nuclear potentials from in-medium chirally motivated models,” Phys. Rev. C 84, 045206 (2011), arXiv:1108.1745 [nucl-th]

    2011 arXiv

  114. [122]

    Bayesian Analysis and Analytic Continuation of Scattering Amplitudes from Lattice QCD,

    Miguel Salg, Fernando Romero-L´ opez, and William I. Jay, “Bayesian Analysis and Analytic Continuation of Scattering Amplitudes from Lattice QCD,” (2025), arXiv:2506.16161 [hep-lat]

    2025

  115. [123]

    Cross-channel study of pion scattering from lattice QCD,

    Maxim Mai, Chris Culver, Andrei Alexandru, Michael D¨ oring, and Frank X. Lee, “Cross-channel study of pion scattering from lattice QCD,” Phys. Rev. D 100, 114514 (2019), arXiv:1908.01847 [hep-lat]

    2019 arXiv

  116. [124]

    Extraction of isoscalarππ phase-shifts from lattice QCD,

    Dehua Guo, Andrei Alexandru, Raquel Molina, Maxim Mai, and Michael D¨ oring, “Extraction of isoscalarππ phase-shifts from lattice QCD,” Phys. Rev. D 98, 014507 (2018), arXiv:1803.02897 [hep-lat]

    2018 arXiv

  117. [125]

    Pole structure of the Λ(1405) in a recent QCD simulation,

    R. Molina and M. D¨ oring, “Pole structure of the Λ(1405) in a recent QCD simulation,” Phys. Rev. D 94, 056010 (2016), [Addendum: Phys.Rev.D 94, 079901 (2016)], arXiv:1512.05831 [hep-lat]

    2016 arXiv

  118. [126]

    Chiral Extrapolation of the Sigma Resonance,

    Michael D¨ oring, Bin Hu, and Maxim Mai, “Chiral Extrapolation of the Sigma Resonance,” Phys. Lett. B 782, 785–793 (2018), arXiv:1610.10070 [hep-lat]

    2018 arXiv

  119. [127]

    Chirally motivated πΣ − ¯KN model in a finite volume,

    Peter C. Bruns and Ales Cieply, “Chirally motivated πΣ − ¯KN model in a finite volume,” Eur. Phys. J. A 61, 44 (2025), arXiv:2412.12977 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  120. [128]

    Pole trajectories of the Λ(1405) help establish its dynamical nature,

    Zejian Zhuang, Raquel Molina, Jun-Xu Lu, and Li-Sheng Geng, “Pole trajectories of the Λ(1405) help establish its dynamical nature,” Sci. Bull. 70, 1953–1961 (2025), arXiv:2405.07686 [hep-ph]. 33 Appendix A: Detailed fit results. Fits to the lattice input. M1S1L (F19) Figure 15...

    2025 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.