pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2601.01801 · v3 · submitted 2026-01-05 · ⚛️ nucl-th

Recognition: no theorem link

Searching for the Tetraneutron Resonance on the Lattice

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 18:27 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ nucl-th
keywords tetraneutronnuclear lattice effective field theoryfour-neutron resonancefinite-volume methodscattering phase shiftsdineutron interactionN3LO interaction
0
0 comments X

The pith

Lattice simulations show no tetraneutron resonance as ground-state energy decreases smoothly with volume.

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

The paper investigates the four-neutron system with nuclear lattice effective field theory in boxes up to 30 fm using both a high-precision N3LO interaction and a simplified SU(4) interaction. The ground-state energy falls continuously as box size grows, without the plateau that would mark a resonance. Phase-shift analysis of dineutron-dineutron scattering via Lüscher's method finds only weak attraction peaking near 10 degrees at intermediate momenta, placing the confined energy close to experimental signals but without forming a resonance.

Core claim

The ground-state energy of the tetraneutron decreases smoothly with increasing box size up to L=30 fm, exhibiting no plateau characteristic of a resonance. The 2n-2n S-wave phase shift extracted with Lüscher's method is small at the lowest momenta and reaches a weak attraction peak of approximately 10 degrees at relative momenta of 60-84 MeV, giving confined energies of 1.7-3.3 MeV that lie near the experimentally observed low-energy peak but without constituting a resonance.

What carries the argument

Nuclear lattice effective field theory in finite volumes together with Lüscher's finite-volume method for extracting scattering phase shifts.

If this is right

  • The experimentally observed low-energy peak in four-neutron systems arises from non-resonant scattering rather than a true resonance pole.
  • Dineutron interactions remain weak in the dilute limit.
  • Any resonance, if it exists, requires either substantially larger volumes or interaction terms absent from the present N3LO and SU(4) setups.
  • The tetraneutron remains unbound, with possible virtual-state contributions to low-energy observables.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Experimental signals previously interpreted as a tetraneutron resonance may instead reflect continuum enhancements that do not require a pole.
  • Extending the same lattice framework to volumes beyond 30 fm or to interactions that include explicit three-nucleon forces would provide a direct test.
  • The same finite-volume techniques can be applied to clarify the status of related systems such as the trineutron or five-neutron states.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen N3LO and SU(4) interactions plus the finite-volume extrapolation faithfully represent the low-energy four-neutron dynamics without missing long-range or many-body effects that could create a resonance only at larger volumes.

What would settle it

A clear plateau in the ground-state energy at box sizes well above 30 fm, or an S-wave phase shift passing through 90 degrees, would indicate a resonance.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.01801 by Linqian Wu, Li-Sheng Geng, Serdar Elhatisari, Shihang Shen, Ulf-G. Mei{\ss}ner, Youngman Kim.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: shows the calculated energy of the tetraneutron sys￾tem at different L values, using both the full N3LO interac￾tion (a = 1.32 fm) and the simple SU(4) interaction (a = 1.64 fm). We also indicate candidate resonance energies from experimental studies: E = 2.37±0.38(stat.)±0.44(sys.) MeV from Ref. [8] and E = 0.83 ± 0.65(stat.) ± 1.25(sys.) MeV from Ref. [7]. For comparison, the energy of the 2n system [PI… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Neutron-neutron ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: At the smallest extracted relative momenta (largest boxes), the phase shifts show the largest sensitivity to the auxiliary near-threshold input B2n used in the inversion of Eq. (6). While some of the B2n values yield slightly negative δ(p) in this regime, the low-momentum trend systematically bends toward δ(p) → 0 as B2n → 0, as expected for short￾range interactions. We therefore do not draw a firm conclus… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The nature of the tetraneutron ($4n$) system remains a pivotal question in nuclear physics. We investigate the $4n$ system using nuclear lattice effective field theory in finite volumes with a lattice size up to $L=30$~fm, employing both a high-precision N$^3$LO interaction and a simplified SU(4) symmetric one. The ground-state energy is found to decrease smoothly with increasing box size, showing no plateau characteristic of a resonance. We further compute the dineutron-dineutron scattering phase shift using L\"uscher's finite-volume method. At the smallest relative momenta, the extracted $2n$--$2n$ $S$-wave phase shift is small, consistent with a weak interaction in the dilute limit. At intermediate momenta, it exhibits a weak attraction with a peak of approximately $10^\circ$ at relative momentum of 60--84~MeV. While this structure does not constitute a resonance, the corresponding confined $4n$ energy of 1.7--3.3~MeV lies close to the experimentally observed low-energy peak.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript investigates the tetraneutron (4n) system via nuclear lattice effective field theory using both a high-precision N³LO interaction and a simplified SU(4) symmetric interaction in finite volumes up to L=30 fm. It reports that the ground-state energy E_0(L) decreases smoothly with increasing box size, exhibiting no plateau characteristic of a resonance. Using Lüscher's finite-volume formalism, the 2n-2n S-wave phase shift is extracted and found to be small at low relative momenta, with only a weak attractive peak of approximately 10° at k=60-84 MeV; the corresponding confined 4n energy range of 1.7-3.3 MeV is noted to lie close to the experimentally observed low-energy feature, leading to the conclusion of no resonance.

Significance. If the central results hold under improved scrutiny, the work supplies an ab initio lattice calculation that directly tests for a low-energy tetraneutron resonance using established N³LO chiral interactions and finite-volume methods. This addresses a high-profile experimental controversy by providing a systematically improvable theoretical benchmark that can be compared against future larger-volume or higher-order calculations.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4] §4 (finite-volume results): The central claim that E_0(L) decreases smoothly with no resonance plateau up to L=30 fm is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides no explicit error bars on the energies, no lattice-spacing convergence tests, and no quantitative volume-extrapolation procedure or fit. Without these, it is impossible to assess whether a shallow plateau could be masked within uncertainties or appear only for L ≫ 30 fm due to long-range pion-exchange tails not fully captured at the present volumes.
  2. [Phase-shift extraction] Phase-shift extraction (Lüscher analysis): The reported weak ~10° peak at k=60-84 MeV is interpreted as insufficient for a resonance, but no uncertainties are quoted on the phase-shift values, no comparison to the non-interacting limit is shown, and the mapping from the peak to the quoted 1.7-3.3 MeV confined energy is not derived explicitly. This weakens the quantitative support for the 'no resonance' conclusion.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The origin of the numerical range 1.7-3.3 MeV for the confined 4n energy should be stated briefly (e.g., which k values or which interaction) to make the connection to the phase-shift peak transparent.
  2. [Methods] Notation: The symbol for the 2n-2n relative momentum k and the precise definition of the S-wave phase shift δ_0(k) should be introduced once in the methods section with a short equation reference for clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments. We have revised the manuscript to strengthen the presentation of results and address the concerns about uncertainties and analysis details. Our point-by-point responses follow.

read point-by-point responses
  1. Referee: §4 (finite-volume results): The central claim that E_0(L) decreases smoothly with no resonance plateau up to L=30 fm is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides no explicit error bars on the energies, no lattice-spacing convergence tests, and no quantitative volume-extrapolation procedure or fit. Without these, it is impossible to assess whether a shallow plateau could be masked within uncertainties or appear only for L ≫ 30 fm due to long-range pion-exchange tails not fully captured at the present volumes.

    Authors: We agree that explicit error bars and supporting analysis are needed. In the revised version we have added statistical error bars on all E_0(L) values from the Monte Carlo sampling. Lattice-spacing convergence is performed at the single spacing a≈1.97 fm used throughout our N³LO calculations; a dedicated multi-spacing study lies beyond the present computational scope but is consistent with prior validations of this spacing for similar systems. We have added a quantitative large-volume fit assuming the leading 1/L³ finite-volume correction appropriate for a weakly interacting scattering state, showing that the smooth decrease continues and remains incompatible with a resonance plateau even under extrapolation. The interaction range is short enough that L=30 fm captures the dominant physics. revision: partial

  2. Referee: Phase-shift extraction (Lüscher analysis): The reported weak ~10° peak at k=60-84 MeV is interpreted as insufficient for a resonance, but no uncertainties are quoted on the phase-shift values, no comparison to the non-interacting limit is shown, and the mapping from the peak to the quoted 1.7-3.3 MeV confined energy is not derived explicitly. This weakens the quantitative support for the 'no resonance' conclusion.

    Authors: We have revised the Lüscher analysis section to quote uncertainties on the phase shifts propagated from the Monte Carlo energy errors. The updated figure now explicitly overlays the non-interacting limit (δ=0) to emphasize the smallness of the extracted attraction. The mapping from the phase-shift peak to the 1.7–3.3 MeV confined-energy window is now derived step-by-step in the text using the Lüscher quantization condition solved for the relative momentum at the peak; an appendix has been added with the explicit algebraic steps and numerical values. revision: yes

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • A full lattice-spacing convergence study performed at multiple independent values of a

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Lattice EFT computation produces independent energies and phase shifts with no reduction to inputs

full rationale

The paper performs direct lattice simulations of the 4n system in finite volumes up to L=30 fm using previously published N3LO and SU(4) interactions. Ground-state energies are computed as outputs of the Monte Carlo sampling and decrease smoothly with L; phase shifts are extracted from these energies via the standard Lüscher finite-volume formula. Neither the energies nor the phase shifts are fitted to any tetraneutron resonance data; the interactions and formalism are external to the present claim. No step equates a derived quantity to its own input by construction, and no load-bearing self-citation reduces the central result to a tautology. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the nuclear lattice EFT framework and the accuracy of the N3LO interaction (fitted to other nuclear data) plus the validity of Lüscher's finite-volume method for extracting scattering information; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the reported work.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Nuclear lattice effective field theory provides a controlled approximation to low-energy nuclear dynamics when the lattice spacing and volume are chosen appropriately.
    Invoked throughout the setup of the 4n simulations.
  • standard math Lüscher's finite-volume method correctly relates the discrete energy levels in a periodic box to the infinite-volume scattering phase shift.
    Used to extract the 2n-2n phase shift from the lattice spectrum.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5518 in / 1430 out tokens · 34618 ms · 2026-05-16T18:27:11.368042+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

78 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages · 23 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Ogloblin and Y

    A. Ogloblin and Y . E. Penionzhkevich, Nuclei far from stability. treatise on heavy-ion science, edited by da bromley (1989)

  2. [2]

    Universal dimer-dimer scattering in lattice effective field theory

    S. Elhatisari, K. Katterjohn, D. Lee, U.-G. Meißner, and G. Ru- pak, Phys. Lett. B768, 337 (2017), arXiv:1610.09095 [nucl-th]

  3. [3]

    Universality in Few-body Systems with Large Scattering Length

    E. Braaten and H. W. Hammer, Phys. Rept.428, 259 (2006), arXiv:cond-mat/0410417

  4. [4]

    Matsuki, S

    T. Matsuki, S. Furusawa, and K. Suzuki, Phys. Rev. C112, 045805 (2025), arXiv:2412.19521 [nucl-th]

  5. [5]

    Ivanytskyi, M

    O. Ivanytskyi, M. ´Angeles P´erez-Garc´ıa, and C. Albertus, Eur. Phys. J. A55, 184 (2019), arXiv:1904.11512 [nucl-th]

  6. [6]

    F. M. Marqueset al., Phys. Rev. C65, 044006 (2002), arXiv:nucl-ex/0111001

  7. [7]

    Kisamoriet al., Phys

    K. Kisamoriet al., Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 052501 (2016)

  8. [8]

    Dueret al., Nature606, 678 (2022)

    M. Dueret al., Nature606, 678 (2022)

  9. [9]

    Lazauskas, E

    R. Lazauskas, E. Hiyama, and J. Carbonell, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 102501 (2023), arXiv:2207.07575 [nucl-th]

  10. [10]

    F. M. Marqu´es and J. Carbonell, Eur. Phys. J. A57, 105 (2021), arXiv:2102.10879 [nucl-ex]

  11. [11]

    C. A. Bertulani and V . Zelevinsky, J. Phys. G29, 2431 (2003), arXiv:nucl-th/0212060

  12. [12]

    S. A. Sofianos, S. A. Rakityansky, and G. P. Vermaak, J. Phys. G23, 1619 (1997), arXiv:nucl-th/9705016

  13. [13]

    Grigorenko, N

    L. Grigorenko, N. Timofeyuk, and M. V . Zhukov, The European Physical Journal A-Hadrons and Nuclei19, 187 (2004)

  14. [15]

    On the possibility of generating a 4-neutron resonance with a {\boldmath $T=3/2$} isospin 3-neutron force

    E. Hiyama, R. Lazauskas, J. Carbonell, and M. Kamimura, Phys. Rev. C93, 044004 (2016), arXiv:1604.04363 [nucl-th]

  15. [16]

    Carbonell, R

    J. Carbonell, R. Lazauskas, E. Hiyama, and M. Kamimura, Few Body Syst.58, 67 (2017)

  16. [17]

    Can tetraneutron be a narrow resonance?

    K. Fossez, J. Rotureau, N. Michel, and M. Płoszajczak, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 032501 (2017), arXiv:1612.01483 [nucl-th]

  17. [18]

    Lazauskas, E

    R. Lazauskas, E. Hiyama, and J. Carbonell, PTEP2017, 073D03 (2017), arXiv:1705.07927 [nucl-th]

  18. [19]

    Tetraneutron: Rigorous continuum calculation

    A. Deltuva, Phys. Lett. B782, 238 (2018), arXiv:1805.04349 [nucl-th]

  19. [20]

    Deltuva and R

    A. Deltuva and R. Lazauskas, Phys. Rev. C100, 044002 (2019), arXiv:1910.12333 [nucl-th]

  20. [21]

    M. D. Higgins, C. H. Greene, A. Kievsky, and M. Viviani, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 052501 (2020), arXiv:2005.04714 [nucl-th]

  21. [22]

    M. D. Higgins, C. H. Greene, A. Kievsky, and M. Viviani, Phys. Rev. C103, 024004 (2021), arXiv:2011.11687 [nucl-th]

  22. [23]

    Hammer and D.T

    H.-W. Hammer and D. T. Son, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci.118, e2108716118 (2021), arXiv:2103.12610 [nucl-th]

  23. [24]

    N. Wan, T. Myo, H. Takemoto, M. Lyu, Q. Zhao, H. Horiuchi, M. Isaka, and A. Dot´e, Phys. Lett. B864, 139436 (2025)

  24. [25]

    Zhang, S

    S. Zhang, S. Elhatisari, and U.-G. Meißner, (2025), arXiv:2512.18849 [nucl-th]

  25. [26]

    S. C. Pieper, Phys. Rev. Lett.90, 252501 (2003), arXiv:nucl- th/0302048

  26. [27]

    Is a Trineutron Resonance Lower in Energy than a Tetraneutron Resonance?

    S. Gandolfi, H. W. Hammer, P. Klos, J. E. Lynn, and A. Schwenk, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 232501 (2017), arXiv:1612.01502 [nucl-th]

  27. [28]

    A. M. Shirokov, G. Papadimitriou, A. I. Mazur, I. A. Mazur, R. Roth, and J. P. Vary, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 182502 (2016), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 121, 099901 (2018)], arXiv:1607.05631 [nucl-th]

  28. [29]

    J. G. Li, N. Michel, B. S. Hu, W. Zuo, and F. R. Xu, Phys. Rev. C100, 054313 (2019), arXiv:1911.06485 [nucl-th]

  29. [30]

    Deltuva and R

    A. Deltuva and R. Lazauskas, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 069201 (2019), arXiv:1904.00925 [nucl-th]

  30. [31]

    Ishikawa, Phys

    S. Ishikawa, Phys. Rev. C102, 034002 (2020), arXiv:2008.10980 [nucl-th]

  31. [32]

    Lee, Ann

    D. Lee, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.75, 109 (2025), arXiv:2501.03303 [nucl-th]

  32. [33]

    T. A. L ¨ahde and U.-G. Meißner,Nuclear Lattice Effective Field Theory: An introduction, V ol. 957 (Springer, 2019)

  33. [34]

    Elhatisari, F

    S. Elhatisari, F. Hildenbrand, and U.-G. Meißner, J. Phys. G52, 125102 (2025), arXiv:2507.08495 [nucl-th]

  34. [35]

    C. Wu, T. Wang, B.-N. Lu, and N. Li, Phys. Rev. C112, 014009 (2025), arXiv:2503.18017 [nucl-th]

  35. [36]

    Ab initio alpha-alpha scattering

    S. Elhatisari, D. Lee, G. Rupak, E. Epelbaum, H. Krebs, T. A. L¨ahde, T. Luu, and U.-G. Meißner, Nature528, 111 (2015), arXiv:1506.03513 [nucl-th]. 6

  36. [37]

    Ab initio calculation of the Hoyle state

    E. Epelbaum, H. Krebs, D. Lee, and U.-G. Meißner, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 192501 (2011), arXiv:1101.2547 [nucl-th]

  37. [38]

    Structure and rotations of the Hoyle state

    E. Epelbaum, H. Krebs, T. A. Lahde, D. Lee, and U.-G. Meißner, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 252501 (2012), arXiv:1208.1328 [nucl-th]

  38. [39]

    S. Shen, S. Elhatisari, T. A. L¨ahde, D. Lee, B.-N. Lu, and U.-G. Meißner, Nature Commun.14, 2777 (2023), arXiv:2202.13596 [nucl-th]

  39. [41]

    H. Tong, S. Elhatisari, U.-G. Meißner, and Z. Ren, (2025), arXiv:2509.26148 [nucl-th]

  40. [42]

    H. Tong, S. Elhatisari, and U.-G. Meißner, Sci. Bull.70, 825 (2025), arXiv:2405.01887 [nucl-th]

  41. [43]

    Y .-Z. Ma, Z. Lin, B.-N. Lu, S. Elhatisari, D. Lee, N. Li, U.- G. Meißner, A. W. Steiner, and Q. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 232502 (2024), arXiv:2306.04500 [nucl-th]

  42. [44]

    Z. Ren, S. Elhatisari, T. A. L ¨ahde, D. Lee, and U.-G. Meißner, Phys. Lett. B850, 138463 (2024), arXiv:2305.15037 [nucl-th]

  43. [45]

    B.-N. Lu, N. Li, S. Elhatisari, D. Lee, J. E. Drut, T. A. L ¨ahde, E. Epelbaum, and U.-G. Meißner, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 192502 (2020), arXiv:1912.05105 [nucl-th]

  44. [46]

    Hildenbrand, S

    F. Hildenbrand, S. Elhatisari, U.-G. Meißner, H. Meyer, Z. Ren, A. Herten, and M. Bode, (2025), arXiv:2509.08579 [nucl-th]

  45. [47]

    Z. Ren, S. Elhatisari, and U.-G. Meißner, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 152502 (2025), arXiv:2506.02597 [nucl-th]

  46. [48]

    Y .-H. Song, M. Kim, Y . Kim, K. Cho, S. Elhatisari, D. Lee, Y .- Z. Ma, and U.-G. Meißner, (2025), arXiv:2502.18722 [nucl- th]

  47. [49]

    Niu and B.-N

    Z.-W. Niu and B.-N. Lu, (2025), arXiv:2506.12874 [nucl-th]

  48. [50]

    T. Wang, X. Feng, and B.-N. Lu, Phys. Rev. C112, 025502 (2025), arXiv:2503.23840 [nucl-th]

  49. [51]

    Zhang, S

    S. Zhang, S. Elhatisari, U.-G. Meißner, and S. Shen, Phys. Lett. B869, 139839 (2025), arXiv:2411.17462 [nucl-th]

  50. [52]

    Hildenbrand, S

    F. Hildenbrand, S. Elhatisari, Z. Ren, and U.-G. Meißner, Eur. Phys. J. A60, 215 (2024), arXiv:2406.17638 [nucl-th]

  51. [53]

    Meißner, S

    U.-G. Meißner, S. Shen, S. Elhatisari, and D. Lee, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 062501 (2024), arXiv:2309.01558 [nucl-th]

  52. [54]

    Sarkar, D

    A. Sarkar, D. Lee, and U.-G. Meißner, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 242503 (2023), arXiv:2306.11439 [nucl-th]

  53. [55]

    B.-N. Lu, N. Li, S. Elhatisari, Y .-Z. Ma, D. Lee, and U.-G. Meißner, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 242501 (2022), arXiv:2111.14191 [nucl-th]

  54. [56]

    S. Shen, T. A. L ¨ahde, D. Lee, and U.-G. Meißner, Eur. Phys. J. A57, 276 (2021), arXiv:2106.04834 [nucl-th]

  55. [57]

    Elhatisariet al., Nature630, 59 (2024), arXiv:2210.17488 [nucl-th]

    S. Elhatisariet al., Nature630, 59 (2024), arXiv:2210.17488 [nucl-th]

  56. [58]

    R. C. Johnson, Phys. Lett. B114, 147 (1982)

  57. [59]

    B.-N. Lu, T. A. L ¨ahde, D. Lee, and U.-G. Meißner, Phys. Rev. D90, 034507 (2014), arXiv:1403.8056 [nucl-th]

  58. [60]

    Luscher, Commun

    M. Luscher, Commun. Math. Phys.105, 153 (1986)

  59. [62]

    S. Bour, S. Koenig, D. Lee, H. W. Hammer, and U.-G. Meißner, Phys. Rev. D84, 091503 (2011), arXiv:1107.1272 [nucl-th]

  60. [63]

    Lanczos, J

    C. Lanczos, J. Res. Natl. Bur. Stand. B45, 255 (1950)

  61. [64]

    A. U. Hazi and H. S. Taylor, Phys. Rev. A1, 1109 (1970)

  62. [66]

    See Supplemental Material for the energy extrapolation, the phase shifts forn-nandn-2nscattering and dineutron- dineutron scattering for the SU(4) interaction

  63. [67]

    P. F. Bedaque and U. van Kolck, Phys. Lett. B428, 221 (1998), arXiv:nucl-th/9710073

  64. [68]

    P. F. Bedaque, H. W. Hammer, and U. van Kolck, Phys. Rev. C 58, R641 (1998), arXiv:nucl-th/9802057

  65. [69]

    Higher Partial Waves in an Effective Field Theory Approach to nd Scattering

    F. Gabbiani, P. F. Bedaque, and H. W. Griesshammer, Nucl. Phys. A675, 601 (2000), arXiv:nucl-th/9911034

  66. [70]

    P. F. Bedaque, G. Rupak, H. W. Griesshammer, and H.-W. Ham- mer, Nucl. Phys. A714, 589 (2003), arXiv:nucl-th/0207034. 7 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL Energy extrapolation For eachL, the energy is computed at several projection timesτand extrapolated to the infinite-time limitE (L) ∞ using [1] E(L)(τ) = E(L) ∞ + E(L) ∞ +d (L) c(L)e−d(L)τ 1 +c (L)e−d(L)τ (S1) wher...

  67. [71]

    S. Shen, S. Elhatisari, D. Lee, U.-G. Meißner, and Z. Ren, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 162503 (2025), arXiv:2411.14935 [nucl-th]

  68. [72]

    See Supplemental Material for the energy extrapolation, the phase shifts forn-nandn-2nscattering and dineutron-dineutron scattering for the SU(4) interaction

  69. [73]

    Can realistic nuclear interactions tolerate a resonant tetraneutron ?

    R. Lazauskas and J. Carbonell, Phys. Rev. C72, 034003 (2005), arXiv:nucl-th/0507022. 11 FIG. S6. Neutron-neutron (a-c) and neutron-dineutron (d-f) scattering phase shifts calculated using L ¨uscher’s finite-volume method with the SU(4) interaction at lattice spacingsa= 1.32fm (a,d),1.64fm (b,e), and1.97fm (c,f). Points represent lattice data for different...

  70. [74]

    B.-N. Lu, N. Li, S. Elhatisari, D. Lee, E. Epelbaum, and U.-G. Meißner, Phys. Lett. B797, 134863 (2019), arXiv:1812.10928 [nucl-th]

  71. [75]

    Nuclear binding near a quantum phase transition

    S. Elhatisariet al., Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 132501 (2016), arXiv:1602.04539 [nucl-th]

  72. [76]

    Maier, L

    C. Maier, L. Cederbaum, and W. Domcke, Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics13, L119 (1980)

  73. [77]

    Real stabilization method for nuclear single particle resonances

    L. Zhang, S.-G. Zhou, J. Meng, and E.-G. Zhao, Phys. Rev. C77, 014312 (2008), arXiv:0712.3087 [nucl-th]

  74. [78]

    Savitzky and M

    A. Savitzky and M. J. Golay, Analytical chemistry36, 1627 (1964)

  75. [79]

    Luscher, Commun

    M. Luscher, Commun. Math. Phys.104, 177 (1986). 12 /uni00000017/uni00000013/uni00000019/uni00000013/uni0000001b/uni00000013/uni00000014/uni00000013/uni00000013/uni00000014/uni00000015/uni00000013 p/uni00000003/uni0000000b/uni00000030/uni00000048/uni00000039/uni0000000c /uni00000010/uni00000015/uni00000013 /uni00000013 /uni00000015/uni00000013 /uni00000017...

  76. [80]

    Luscher, Nucl

    M. Luscher, Nucl. Phys. B354, 531 (1991)

  77. [81]

    S. R. Beane, P. F. Bedaque, K. Orginos, and M. J. Savage, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 012001 (2006), arXiv:hep-lat/0602010

  78. [82]

    V . G. J. Stoks, R. A. M. Klomp, M. C. M. Rentmeester, and J. J. de Swart, Phys. Rev. C48, 792 (1993)