Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 66 references

An NJL-model correction to a triangle-anomaly surface term, fixed by one-photon widths, brings predictions for η(′)→π+π−l+l− branching ratios into line with measured values.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 11:12 UTC pith:J3DREEOP

load-bearing objection Honest NJL extension that adds dilepton branching ratios, but the 'complete agreement' claim overreaches because the load-bearing off-shell continuation is a fitted VMD ansatz. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2601.06958 v3 pith:J3DREEOP submitted 2026-01-11 hep-ph

Chiral anomaly in the η^((prime))toπ^+π^-γ and η^((prime))toπ^+π^-l^+l^- decays

M. K. Volkov , A. A. Osipov , K. Nurlan , A. A. Pivovarov This is my paper
classification hep-ph MSC 81V0581T50 PACS 12.39.Fe13.20.-v
keywords Nambu–Jona-Lasinio modelchiral anomalyVAAA anomalysurface termsvector meson dominanceη and η′ decayssemileptonic decaysbranching ratios
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper extends the authors' Nambu–Jona-Lasinio treatment of η(′)→π+π−γ decays to the semileptonic modes η(′)→π+π−l+l− (l=e,μ). The central claim is that a flavor-symmetry-breaking correction δ(′), which arises from a surface term of the anomalous quark triangle diagram and can be pinned down by the one-photon decay widths, is sufficient to reproduce the measured branching ratios of the four dilepton channels. The authors argue that this correction, combined with vector-meson dominance for the off-shell photon, makes the model's predictions consistent with available experimental data. The paper also derives a relation between δ(′) and the slope parameter α(′) of the dipion spectrum, and shows that this relation explains the large phenomenological values of α(′).

Core claim

The paper presents the decay amplitude for η(′)→π+π−l+l−, built from the NJL model with explicit SU(3) breaking in the anomalous VAAA-type vertex. The amplitude contains a parameter δ(′), which is a finite but scheme-dependent surface-term contribution of a formally linearly divergent triangle quark diagram. Because the NJL model cannot fix δ(′), the authors set it by fitting the η(′)→π+π−γ widths at q2=0. With this input, the model yields branching ratios—η→π+π−e+e−, η→π+π−μ+μ−, η′→π+π−e+e−, and η′→π+π−μ+μ−—that agree with PDG values to within about one standard deviation (the η′→π+π−e+e− discrepancy is 1.6σ). A key structural result is the relation α(′)=1/mρ2(3/(a(1+δ(′)))−1), which ties t

What carries the argument

The central object is the parameter δ(′), a flavor-symmetry-breaking correction to the VAAA-type anomaly that arises from surface terms of the triangle quark diagram. It is finite but undetermined in the NJL model (Eq. (9) contains an arbitrary constant c). The model connects δ(′) to the observable slope parameter α(′) through Eq. (7), and the decay amplitude (32) uses δ(′) together with the VMD factor mρ2/(mρ2−q2) to describe the hadronic form factor at non-zero photon virtuality.

Load-bearing premise

The value of δ(′), which the NJL model cannot determine, is fixed from one-photon η(′)→π+π−γ widths at q2=0 and then assumed to hold unchanged at q2>0, with all q2-dependence supplied by the VMD factor.

What would settle it

A measurement of the di-lepton invariant-mass (q2) distribution in η(′)→π+π−e+e− or η(′)→π+π−μ+μ− that deviates from the simple VMD shape predicted by Eq. (32) with δ(′), δ′ fixed from the one-photon widths, would falsify the off-shell continuation. Also, a precise determination of α′ from the η′→π+π−γ spectrum that conflicts with the model's prediction α′=2.71−1.02+2.20 GeV−2 would challenge the framework.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The measured branching ratios of η(′)→π+π−l+l− can be understood without free parameters beyond δ(′), which is fixed from η(′)→π+π−γ widths.
  • The slope parameter α(′) contains direct information about explicit SU(3) breaking in the anomalous vertex, rather than being merely a kinematic effect.
  • The balance between box and triangle anomaly contributions to η(′)→π+π−γ is altered by δ(′), which changes the contact-term weight from Cohen's −1/2 to values around −0.7 to −0.9.
  • The predictions for η→π+π−μ+μ− suggest an upper bound far below the current experimental limit (less than about 4×10−7).
  • The relation between δ(′) and α(′) can be used to test η-η′ mixing schemes: in the two-angle scheme, the linear polynomial for the η′ amplitude appears insufficient, pointing to the need for a quadratic term.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the VMD off-shell continuation mρ2/(mρ2−q2) is replaced by a more realistic functional form, the δ(′) extracted at q2=0 may shift; a direct measurement of the di-lepton invariant-mass distribution in η(′)→π+π−l+l− could test this assumption and discriminate between schemes.
  • The relation α(′)=1/mρ2(3/(a(1+δ(′)))−1) suggests that high-precision measurements of α(′) from η and η′ decays can serve as a quantitative probe of the size of surface-term corrections in the NJL framework, possibly constraining the value of the arbitrary constant c.
  • Because δ(′) affects only the contact term, a future measurement that can separately extract the contact and ρ-pole contributions to the amplitude would directly isolate the surface-term effect from the vector-meson-dominated part.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper extends the authors' earlier NJL-model analysis of the anomalous decays η(η')→π+π−γ to the semileptonic modes η(η')→π+π−l+l−. The key ingredient is a low-energy constant δ(′), interpreted as an SU(3)-breaking correction to the VAAA-type anomaly and generated by surface terms of quark triangle diagrams. Since the model cannot fix δ(′), its value is extracted from the measured η(η')→π+π−γ widths with different η–η′ mixing schemes. The same fitted δ(′) then enters the semileptonic amplitude, Eq. (32), via the VMD factor m_ρ^2/(m_ρ^2−q^2). The paper reports branching ratios in Table II and claims complete agreement with PDG data, while also discussing the slope parameters α(′) and their relation to δ(′), Eq. (7).

Significance. If the derivation were fully self-contained, the paper would provide a useful NJL-model description of four exclusive anomalous decays, with an explicit link between the one-photon widths and the dilepton modes. The honest treatment of δ(′) as a fitted parameter and the comparison of the predicted slope α with the WASA/KLOE/Crystal Barrel values are positive features. The central predictive claim, however, depends on an assumed off-shell continuation for the hadronic form factor, and the η′ case is weakened by the authors' own admission that a linear polynomial is insufficient. The paper is therefore a competent phenomenological study whose strongest conclusions need qualification.

major comments (3)
  1. [§IV, Eq. (32)] The q^2 dependence of the semileptonic amplitude is introduced by simply multiplying the ρ-pole term by m_ρ^2/(m_ρ^2−q^2). No derivation is given for this continuation, and no data on q^2 distributions are used to test it. For η′→π+π−e+e−, q^2 can reach about 0.46 GeV^2, where this factor is ~4.5, so the integrated width (Table II) is strongly dominated by the assumed ansatz. Since δ(′) itself is fitted from the q^2=0 one-photon widths, the agreement in Table II tests the VMD continuation rather than the anomaly structure. The authors should either derive the q^2 dependence within the model or clearly label it as a model assumption and examine its robustness.
  2. [§III, after Eq. (28) and Table I] The text explicitly states that a first-order polynomial P_{η′}(s_{ππ}) is insufficient and that the two-angle mixing scheme fails for η′→π+π−γ. Nevertheless, Table II uses δ′ from the one-angle scheme with large errors, and the abstract claims 'complete agreement with the available experimental data.' The η′→π+π−e+e− value is in fact 1.6σ from PDG. The conclusion should be tempered: the η′ results are consistent within uncertainties only after a model-dependent choice of mixing scheme and after accepting a linear approximation that the authors themselves identify as inadequate.
  3. [Eqs. (9) and (7)] Equation (9) leaves δ(′) undetermined by an arbitrary constant c, and the paper fits δ(′) to the widths (10) and (11). Consequently, α(′) in Eq. (7) is not an independent prediction but a derived quantity that uses the fitted δ(′). The agreement between the resulting α and the spectrally measured slope is a meaningful consistency test, but the wording in the introduction and conclusions ('predicted', 'completely determined') should make this fitting structure explicit and avoid implying that the one-photon widths are independently predicted.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§IV, Eq. (33)] The phase-space formula is written in terms of σ_π, σ_l, and λ without defining the factor 1/32 in the denominator; the expression is understandable but a standard convention reference would help.
  2. [§II, Eq. (14)] The decomposition α(′)=⟨r^2⟩/12+α̃(′) is useful, but the relationship to Eq. (7) is only sketched. A short derivation or explicit intermediate step would improve transparency.
  3. [Table II] The quoted uncertainties for the NJL branching ratios appear to reflect only the width errors of Eqs. (10) and (11). The much larger errors of δ′ in Eq. (28) should be propagated into the η′ entries, or the authors should state why they are not.
  4. [General] There are minor typos and formatting issues, e.g., 'W ASA' at several places, 'p +' in Eq. (1), and inconsistent use of η(′) vs η-η′. These do not affect the physics.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: δ is fitted to one-photon widths, while the semileptonic branching ratios compared with PDG are not used in the fit, and α is a distinct shape observable.

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing comparison is the semileptonic branching ratios in Table II. These are obtained from Eq. (32) using δ^(′) values fixed from the one-photon widths (10)–(11); the dilepton data are not used in determining δ^(′), so the agreement with PDG is an external check. Eq. (7), relating α^(′) to δ^(′), is an algebraic rearrangement of the same tree-level amplitude in forms (12) and (13); using a width-fitted δ to compute α and comparing with the spectrally measured slope is a genuine prediction of the differential shape, not a re-use of the same fitted quantity. The q^2 dependence in Eq. (32), supplied by the VMD factor m_rho^2/(m_rho^2−q^2), is an assumed off-shell continuation and is not derived; the paper also flags the insufficiency of the linear polynomial for η′ and notes a 1.6σ discrepancy in η′→π+π−e+e−. These are accuracy/validity limitations, not circularity. The reliance on Ref. [1] for the input amplitude is a normal self-citation, and the present central claim is benchmarked against external PDG data, so no step reduces to its own input by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 6 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central result is not a self-contained derivation: it relies on an effective model, external mixing parameters, and a fitted delta that originates in an arbitrary surface constant. The semileptonic branching ratios are the main external testing ground.

free parameters (3)
  • delta (eta->pi+pi-gamma correction) = -0.15 +/- 0.04 (one-angle scheme); -0.22 to -0.12 in two-angle Table I
    The NJL model cannot determine delta (Eq. (9) contains an arbitrary constant c); it is fixed by normalizing to Gamma_exp(eta->pi+pi-gamma) = 56.07 +/- 3.03 eV (Eq. (10)).
  • delta-prime (eta-prime->pi+pi-gamma correction) = -0.39 +0.18/-0.20 (one-angle scheme)
    Fixed by normalizing to Gamma_exp(eta-prime->pi+pi-gamma) = 56.21 +/- 2.87 keV (Eq. (11)); large uncertainty reflects sensitivity to the eta-prime width.
  • arbitrary surface constant c in Eq. (9) = undetermined (absorbed into delta)
    The paper states c is finite but arbitrary; this is the formal reason delta cannot be calculated and must be fitted.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption The NJL model with U(3)xU(3) symmetry and explicit vector and axial-vector mesons describes the relevant low-energy meson interactions.
    The entire calculation is performed in this effective model; no derivation from QCD or independent validity test is given.
  • standard math Anomalous Ward identities and the WZW action fix the chiral-limit normalization A_eta^(prime) = e N_c/(12 pi^2 f_pi^3) c_eta^(prime).
    Used as the external benchmark; the delta correction is required to vanish in the chiral limit so that this Ward-identity result is preserved.
  • ad hoc to paper The U(1) gauge-covariant elimination of pi-a1 and eta(eta-prime)-f1 mixing yields extra triangle diagrams and a finite but arbitrary surface constant c.
    This procedure was developed in [1,31-33]; it is specific to this paper's treatment and is the source of the undetermined delta.
  • domain assumption Vector meson dominance with a rho propagator, including the energy-dependent width, governs the s_pipi and q^2 dependence.
    The form of F_V(s_pipi) in Eq. (29) and a factor m_rho^2/(m_rho^2-q^2) in Eq. (32) are model assumptions, not derived here.
  • domain assumption External eta-eta-prime mixing parameters (f8/f_pi, f0/f_pi, theta, theta8, theta0) from the literature are correct.
    Used to construct c_eta and c_eta-prime; different choices lead to materially different delta values (Table I).
  • ad hoc to paper The polynomial P_eta-prime(s_pipi) is approximately linear over the integration range.
    The calculation uses a linear form even though the paper explicitly states this is insufficient for the two-angle scheme and possibly for eta-prime; the authors postpone the quadratic/a2 treatment.
invented entities (1)
  • Low-energy constants delta and delta-prime independent evidence
    purpose: Absorb the arbitrary surface-term contribution to the VAAA anomalous vertex so the NJL model reproduces eta(eta-prime)->pi+pi-gamma widths and predicts slopes and dilepton rates.
    They are not determined by the model (Eq. (9), c arbitrary) and are fitted to data; the resulting slopes and semileptonic branching ratios are falsifiable predictions not used in the fit, providing some independent handle.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 12857 in / 16495 out tokens · 170511 ms · 2026-08-03T11:12:32.035147+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We report the presence of a flavor-violating correction to the $VAAA$-type anomaly, $\delta^{(\prime)}$, induced by the surface terms of the anomalous quark triangle diagram, previously found in the $\eta,\eta'\to\pi^+\pi^-\gamma$ decay amplitudes, and investigate its impact on the corresponding semileptonic decay modes of $\eta$ and $\eta'$. The magnitude of $\delta^{(\prime)}$ can be set from the experimental data on the $\eta^{(\prime)}\to \pi^+\pi^-\gamma$ decay width. We then estimate another low-energy constant, the slope parameter $\alpha^{(\prime)}$. The impact of different schemes for describing $\eta$-$\eta^\prime$ mixing on the value of $\delta^{(\prime)}$ and $\alpha^{(\prime)}$ is discussed. The predictions are shown to be in complete agreement with the available experimental data.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.06958 by A. A. Osipov, A. A. Pivovarov, K. Nurlan, M. K. Volkov.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A box diagram describing the direct (non-resonant) production of final states in the NJL model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Triangle quark-loop diagram in the NJL model with vector meson dominance contributing to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗

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

66 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    This new relation implies that the slope parameterα (′) appears to contain important information about the explicitSU(3)symmetry breaking at an anomalous V AAA-type vertex

    We find interesting the relationship between the parametersδ (′) andα (′), expressed by the formula (7). This new relation implies that the slope parameterα (′) appears to contain important information about the explicitSU(3)symmetry breaking at an anomalous V AAA-type vertex. Moreover, this distorts the balance between the contributions of box and triang...

  2. [2]

    A comparison showed that the slope parameter values calculated using formula (7) are in complete agreement with the spectral measurement data

    Based on the known values of theη-η ′ mixing parameters and the phenomenolog- ical values of theη (′) →π +π −γdecay widths, the values ofδ (′) (and henceα (′)) were determined and compared with the results of alternativeα (′) estimates obtained from the analysis of spectral data. A comparison showed that the slope parameter values calculated using formula...

  3. [3]

    While data on one-photonη (′) →π +π −γdecays allow us to completely record the val- ues of the low-energy constants of the NJL model, semileptonicη (′) →π +π −l−l+ decays allow us to check how true our ideas about the structural part of the hadronic amplitude are at non-zero photon virtualities. In this paper, we have demonstrated for the first time that ...

  4. [4]

    Low-energy Meson Physics in the Quark Model of Superconductivity Type

    M. K. V olkov, “Low-energy Meson Physics in the Quark Model of Superconductivity Type" (In Russian), Sov. J. Part. Nucl.17186 (1986)

    1986

  5. [5]

    Effective Chiral Hadron Lagrangian with anomalies and skyrme terms from quark flavour dynamics

    D. Ebert and H. Reinhardt, “Effective Chiral Hadron Lagrangian with anomalies and skyrme terms from quark flavour dynamics”, Nucl. Phys. B271, 188-226 (1986)

    1986

  6. [6]

    The Nambu and Jona Lasinio model: Its implications for hadrons and nuclei

    U. V ogl and W. Weise, “The Nambu and Jona Lasinio model: Its implications for hadrons and nuclei”, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.27, 195-272 (1991). 13

    1991

  7. [7]

    The Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model of quantum chromodynamics

    S. P. Klevansky, “The Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model of quantum chromodynamics”, Rev. Mod. Phys.64, 649-708 (1992)

    1992

  8. [8]

    Effective chiral Lagrangians and the Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model

    M. K. V olkov, “Effective chiral Lagrangians and the Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model”, Phys. Part. Nucl.24, 35-58 (1993)

    1993

  9. [9]

    Account for axial vector mesons in theη→ π +π −γandη ′ →π +π −γdecays

    A. A. Osipov, A. A. Pivovarov, M. K. V olkov and M. M. Khalifa, “Account for axial vector mesons in theη→ π +π −γandη ′ →π +π −γdecays”, Phys. Rev. D101, 094031 (2020)

    2020

  10. [10]

    Composite Meson Model with Vector Dominance Based onU(2)Invariant Four Quark Interactions

    D. Ebert and M. K. V olkov, “Composite Meson Model with Vector Dominance Based onU(2)Invariant Four Quark Interactions”, Z. Phys. C16, 205 (1983)

    1983

  11. [11]

    Meson Lagrangians in a Superconductor Quark Model

    M. K. V olkov, “Meson Lagrangians in a Superconductor Quark Model”, Annals Phys.157, 282-303 (1984)

    1984

  12. [12]

    Aspects ofUA(1)breaking in the Nambu and Jona-Lasinio model

    A. A. Osipov, B. Hiller, V . Bernard, A. H. Blin, "Aspects ofUA(1)breaking in the Nambu and Jona-Lasinio model", Ann. Phys.321, 2504-2534 (2006)

    2006

  13. [13]

    Effects of eight-quark interactions on the hadronic vacuum and mass spectra of light mesons

    A. A. Osipov, B. Hiller, A. H. Blin, J. da Providência, "Effects of eight-quark interactions on the hadronic vacuum and mass spectra of light mesons", Ann. Phys.322, 2021-2054 (2007)

    2021

  14. [14]

    η,η ′ →π +π −l+l− in a chiral unitary approach

    B. Borasoy, R. Nißler, "η,η ′ →π +π −l+l− in a chiral unitary approach", Eur. Phys. J. A33, 95-106 (2007)

    2007

  15. [15]

    CP violation inη (′) →π +π −µ +µ − decays

    M. Zillinger, B. Kubis, and P. Sánchez-Puertas, "CP violation inη (′) →π +π −µ +µ − decays", J. High Energ. Phys. 2022, 1 (2022)

    2022

  16. [16]

    Low-energy hadron physics from effective chiral Lagrangians with vector mesons

    U.-G. Meissner, "Low-energy hadron physics from effective chiral Lagrangians with vector mesons", Phys. Rep. 161, 213-362 (1988)

    1988

  17. [17]

    QCD phenomenology based on a chiral effective Lagrangian

    T. Hatsuda and T. Kunihiro, “QCD phenomenology based on a chiral effective Lagrangian”, Phys. Rept.247, 221- 367 (1994)

    1994

  18. [18]

    Effective hadron theory of QCD

    D. Ebert, H. Reinhardt and M. K. V olkov, “Effective hadron theory of QCD”, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.33, 1-120 (1994)

    1994

  19. [19]

    The Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model and its development

    M. K. V olkov and A. E. Radzhabov, “The Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model and its development”, Phys. Usp.49, 551-561 (2006)

    2006

  20. [20]

    Composite gauge bosons and

    M. Bando, T. Kugo, and K. Yamawaki, "Composite gauge bosons and "Low energy theorems" of hidden local symmetries", Prog. Theor. Phys.73, 1541-1559 (1985)

    1985

  21. [21]

    Chiral theory calculation ofη→π +π −e+e−

    C. Picciotto and S. Richardson, "Chiral theory calculation ofη→π +π −e+e−", Phys. Rev. D48, 3395-3396 (1993)

    1993

  22. [22]

    and references therein). Therefore, at first glance, it might seem that using the NJL ∗ volkov@theor.jinr.ru † aaosipov@theor.jinr.ru ‡ nurlan@theor.jinr.ru § pivovarov@theor.jinr.ru arXiv:2601.06958v2 [hep-ph] 4 Mar 2026 2 model would add little to this analysis. This impression is erroneous. The result [21] is based on rigorous low-energy theorems and t...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  23. [23]

    Anomalousη/η ′ decays: The triangle and box anomalies

    M. Benayoun, P. David, L. DelBuono, P. Leruste, H. B. O?Connell, "Anomalousη/η ′ decays: The triangle and box anomalies", Eur. Phys. J. C31, 525-547 (2003)

    2003

  24. [24]

    A global treatment of VMD physics up to theφ: I.e +e− annihilations, anomalies and vector meson partial widths

    M. Benayoun, P. David, L. DelBuono, O. Leitner, "A global treatment of VMD physics up to theφ: I.e +e− annihilations, anomalies and vector meson partial widths", Eur. Phys. J. C65, 211-245 (2010)

    2010

  25. [25]

    Non-Abelian anomaly and vector-meson decays

    Ö. Kaymakcalan, S. Rajeev, and J. Schechter, "Non-Abelian anomaly and vector-meson decays", Phys. Rev. D30, 594-602 (1984)

    1984

  26. [26]

    Chiral Lagrangian of pseudoscalars and vectors

    Ö. Kaymakcalan, and J. Schechter, "Chiral Lagrangian of pseudoscalars and vectors", Phys. Rev. D31, 1109-1113 (1985)

    1985

  27. [27]

    Is theρmeson a dynamical gauge boson of hidden local symmetry?

    M. Bando, T. Kugo, S. Uehara, K. Yamawaki, and T. Yanagida, "Is theρmeson a dynamical gauge boson of hidden local symmetry?", Phys. Rev. Lett.54, 1215-1218 (1985)

    1985

  28. [28]

    Consequences of anomalous Ward identities

    J. Wess, and B. Zumino, "Consequences of anomalous Ward identities", Phys. Lett. B37, 95-97 (1971)

    1971

  29. [29]

    Global aspects of current algebra

    E. Witten, "Global aspects of current algebra", Nucl. Phys. B223, 422-432 (1983)

    1983

  30. [30]

    The Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model and the chiral anomaly

    M. Wakamatsu, "The Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model and the chiral anomaly", Ann. of Phys.193, 287-325 (1989)

    1989

  31. [31]

    Electromagnetic interactions of mesons and theπa 1 diagonalization

    A. A. Osipov, "Electromagnetic interactions of mesons and theπa 1 diagonalization", JETP Letters108, 161-164 (2018)

    2018

  32. [32]

    Electromagnetic interactions of mesons induced by axial-vector?pseudoscalar mixing

    A. A. Osipov, and M. M. Khalifa, "Electromagnetic interactions of mesons induced by axial-vector?pseudoscalar mixing", Phys. Rev. D98, 036023 (2018)

    2018

  33. [33]

    Model-independent approach toη→π +π −γ andη ′ →π +π −γ

    F. Stollenwerk, C. Hanhart, A. Kupsc, U.-G. Meißner and A. Wirzba, "Model-independent approach toη→π +π −γ andη ′ →π +π −γ", Phys. Lett. B707, 184-190 (2012)

    2012

  34. [34]

    Exclusive Measurement of theη→π +π −γDecay

    P. Adlarson et al. [W ASA-at-COSY Collaboration], "Exclusive Measurement of theη→π +π −γDecay", Phys. Lett. B707, 243-249 (2012)

    2012

  35. [35]

    Measurement ofΓ(η→π +π −γ)/Γ(η→π +π −π0)with the KLOE Detector

    D. Babusci et al. [KLOE / KLOE-2 Collaboration], "Measurement ofΓ(η→π +π −γ)/Γ(η→π +π −π0)with the KLOE Detector", Phys. Lett. B718, 910-914 (2013)

    2013

  36. [36]

    Lectures on Current Algebra and its Applications

    S. B. Treiman, R. W. Jackiw and D. J. Gross, "Lectures on Current Algebra and its Applications", Princeton Series in Physics (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1972)

    1972

  37. [37]

    The review of particle physics

    S. Navas et al. [Particle Data Group], "The review of particle physics", Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024) and 2025 update

    2024

  38. [38]

    Effective Lagrangians and field algebras with chiral symmetry

    S. Gasiorowicz, and D. A. Geffen, "Effective Lagrangians and field algebras with chiral symmetry", Rev. Mod. Phys. 41, 531-573 (1969)

    1969

  39. [39]

    Partially Conserved Axial-Vector Current and the Decays of Vector Mesons

    K. Kawarabayashi and M. Suzuki, "Partially Conserved Axial-Vector Current and the Decays of Vector Mesons" Phys. Rev. Lett.16, 255-257 (1966)

    1966

  40. [40]

    Algebra of Current Components and Decay Widths ofρandK ∗ Mesons

    Riazuddin and Fayyazuddin, "Algebra of Current Components and Decay Widths ofρandK ∗ Mesons" Phys. Rev. 147, 1071-1073 (1966)

    1966

  41. [41]

    Low-energy theorem forγ→3π: Surface terms againstπa 1 mixing

    A. A. Osipov, M. M. Khalifa, and B. Hiller, "Low-energy theorem forγ→3π: Surface terms againstπa 1 mixing", Phys. Rev. D101, 034012 (2020)

    2020

  42. [42]

    Non-abelian anomaly and vector mesons as dynamical gauge bosons of hidden local symmetry

    T. Fujiwara, T. Kugo, H. Terao, S. Uehara, and K. Yamawaki, "Non-abelian anomaly and vector mesons as dynamical gauge bosons of hidden local symmetry", Prog. Theor. Phys.73, 926-941 (1985)

    1985

  43. [43]

    When radiative corrections are finite, but undetermined

    R. Jackiw, "When radiative corrections are finite, but undetermined", Int. J. Mod. Phys. B14, 2011-2021 (2000)

    2011

  44. [44]

    Chiral perturbation theory to one loop

    J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, "Chiral perturbation theory to one loop", Ann. Phys.158, 142-210 (1984)

    1984

  45. [45]

    Chiral perturbation theory: expansions in the mass of the strange quark

    J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, "Chiral perturbation theory: expansions in the mass of the strange quark", Nucl. Phys. B250, 465-516 (1985)

    1985

  46. [46]

    Precision measurement of the branching fractions ofη ′ decays

    M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII Collaboration], "Precision measurement of the branching fractions ofη ′ decays", Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 142002 (2019). 14

    2019

  47. [47]

    Towards an improved understanding ofη→γ ∗γ ∗

    S. Holz, J. Plenter, C. W. Xiao, T. Dato, C. Hanhart, B. Kubis, U.-G. Meißner, A. Wirzba, "Towards an improved understanding ofη→γ ∗γ ∗", Eur. Phys. J. C81, 1002 (2021)

    2021

  48. [48]

    The branching ratioω→π +π − revisited

    C. Hanhart, S. Holz, B. Kubis, A. Kup ´s´c, A. Wirzba, and C.-W. Xiao, "The branching ratioω→π +π − revisited", Eur. Phys. J. C77, 98 (2017)

    2017

  49. [49]

    Analysis ofη,K L →π +π −γusing chiral models

    C. Picciotto, "Analysis ofη,K L →π +π −γusing chiral models", Phys. Rev. D45, 1569-1574 (1992)

    1992

  50. [50]

    Measurement of the decay distribution ofη ′ →π +π −γand evidence for the box anomaly

    A. Abele, et al., [CRYSTAL BARREL Collaboration], "Measurement of the decay distribution ofη ′ →π +π −γand evidence for the box anomaly", Phys. Lett. B402, 195-206 (1997)

    1997

  51. [51]

    Vector Mesons, Anomalies and the KSFR Relation

    T. D. Cohen, "Vector Mesons, Anomalies and the KSFR Relation", Phys. Lett. B233, 467-473 (1989)

    1989

  52. [52]

    Effective hadron dynamics: From meson masses to the proton spin puzzle

    J. Schechter, A. Subbaraman and H. Weigel, "Effective hadron dynamics: From meson masses to the proton spin puzzle", Phys. Rev. D48, 339-355 (1993)

    1993

  53. [53]

    Quark structure of pseudoscalar mesons

    T. Feldmann, "Quark structure of pseudoscalar mesons", Int. J. Mod. Phys. A15159-207 (2000)

    2000

  54. [54]

    1.27(2)1.14(5)−21.2(1.9) ◦ −6.9(2.4)◦ −0.22±0.04 1.75 +0.19 −0.15

  55. [55]

    1.51(5)1.29(4)−23.8(1.4) ◦ −2.4(1.9)◦ −0.12±0.04 1.37 +0.15 −0.13

  56. [56]

    1.31 1.24−20.0 ◦ −1.5◦ −0.16±0.04 1.51 +0.16 −0.14

  57. [57]

    This is a more sophisticated approach to the mixing problem, taking into account, in particular, the effects associated with the violation of the OZI rule

    1.26(4)1.17(3)−21.2(1.6) ◦ −9.2(1.7)◦ −0.20±0.04 1.65 +0.17 −0.14 at next-to-leading order. This is a more sophisticated approach to the mixing problem, taking into account, in particular, the effects associated with the violation of the OZI rule. Information on the mixing parameters is usually obtained by studying two-photon decays ofπ 0,ηandη ′ mesons, ...

  58. [58]

    Chiral anomaly andη-η ′ mixing

    E. P. Venugopal and B. R. Holstein, "Chiral anomaly andη-η ′ mixing", Phys. Rev. D57, 4397-4402 (1998)

    1998

  59. [59]

    Ablikim et al

    M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 242003 (2018) [arXiv:1712.01525 [hep-ex]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  60. [60]

    Anomalous decay and scattering processes of theηmeson

    B. Kubis and J. Plenter, "Anomalous decay and scattering processes of theηmeson", Eur. Phys. J. C75, 283 (2015)

    2015

  61. [61]

    On the 1/Nexpansion in chiral perturbation theory

    H. Leutwyler, "On the 1/Nexpansion in chiral perturbation theory", Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.64223 (1998)

    1998

  62. [62]

    Theη′ transition form factor from space- and time-like experimental data

    R. Escribano, S. Gonzàlez-Solis, P. Masjuan, and P. Sanchez-Puertas, "Theη′ transition form factor from space- and time-like experimental data", Phys. Rev. D94, 054033 (2016)

    2016

  63. [63]

    Study of theη-η ′ system in the two mixing angle scheme

    R. Escribano and J.-M. Frère, "Study of theη-η ′ system in the two mixing angle scheme", JHEP 0506:029 (2005)

    2005

  64. [64]

    Decayπ 0 →γγto next to leading order in chiral perturbation theory

    J. L. Goity, A. M. Bernstein, and B. R. Holstein, "Decayπ 0 →γγto next to leading order in chiral perturbation theory", Phys. Rev. D66, 076014 (2002)

    2002

  65. [65]

    Improvedπ 0,η,η ′ transition form factors in resonance chiral theory and theira HLbLµ contribution

    E. J. Estrada, S. Gonzàlez-Solis, A. Guevara, and P. Roig, "Improvedπ 0,η,η ′ transition form factors in resonance chiral theory and theira HLbLµ contribution", J. High Energ. Phys. 2024, 203 (2025)

    2024

  66. [66]

    Study ofη→π +π −l+l−

    M. Ablikimet al.[BESIII Collaboration], “Study ofη→π +π −l+l−”, Phys. Rev. D111, 072008 (2025)

    2025