arxiv: 2604.16025 · v2 · submitted 2026-04-17 · ✦ hep-lat

Recognition: unknown

Scalar and Tensor Form Factors for Λ rightarrow pell bar{ν}_ell from Lattice QCD

Constantia Alexandrou , Simone Bacchio , Andreas Konstantinou , Eleni Vakana

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 07:13 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-lat

keywords Lattice QCDHyperon decaysScalar form factorsTensor form factorsSemileptonic decaysBeyond Standard ModelCharged current

0 comments

The pith

Lattice QCD determines the scalar and tensor form factors for the Lambda to proton transition.

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

The paper calculates the scalar and tensor form factors governing the semileptonic transition from the Lambda hyperon to the proton in lattice QCD. It uses an ensemble of twisted-mass fermions at the physical pion mass and parametrizes the q² dependence in a model-independent way. These form factors modify the predicted ratio of muon to electron decay rates in the presence of new scalar or tensor forces, which are enhanced for the muon channel. The resulting first-principles prediction for the ratio is compared to experimental data to set limits on physics beyond the Standard Model.

Core claim

We present a determination of the scalar and tensor Λ→p transition form factors using lattice QCD on a twisted mass ensemble at the physical pion mass. Employing a model-independent parametrization, we obtain the form factors over the full range of q². Insertion of these form factors into the expression for the decay-rate ratio R^{μe} yields a prediction that can be compared with recent measurements to improve constraints on non-standard charged-current interactions.

What carries the argument

The twisted-mass lattice QCD ensemble at the physical pion mass together with the model-independent parametrization of the form factors.

If this is right

Scalar and tensor contributions enter the ratio R^{μe} linearly and receive helicity enhancement in the muon channel.
The lattice results allow direct use in BSM searches without additional large systematic corrections.
Comparison with experiment provides improved bounds on the Wilson coefficients of scalar and tensor operators.
The calculation follows the same strategy as the prior vector and axial form factor study for consistency.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The same computational framework could be extended to other baryon transitions to test consistency of BSM constraints across different processes.
Refinements with additional ensembles would quantify the remaining finite-volume and discretization effects more precisely.
These form factors might inform analyses of related processes such as neutrino scattering or beta decays involving hyperons.

Load-bearing premise

The single physical-pion-mass gauge ensemble and model-independent parametrization are sufficient to control all systematic uncertainties so that the extracted form factors can be used directly for constraining non-standard interactions.

What would settle it

An experimental value for the ratio R^{μe} that significantly disagrees with the lattice prediction within the combined uncertainties would indicate that the form factors or the control of lattice artifacts need revision.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.16025 by Andreas Konstantinou, Constantia Alexandrou, Eleni Vakana, Simone Bacchio.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: FIG. 1. Results for the ratios of three- to two-point correlation functions, as defined in Eq. (27), are shown at the kinematic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. Results for the ratios of three- to two-point correlation functions, similar to Fig. 1, with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Momentum-transfer dependence of the scalar and tensor form factors. Blue markers denote results obtained from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Differential decay rates for the electron and muon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. Results on the branching fractions in the electron [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7. 90% C.L. constraints on the scalar and tensor co [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

We present a determination of the scalar and tensor $\Lambda\to p$ transition form factors using lattice QCD. These form factors are relevant for semileptonic hyperon decays in the presence of extensions of the Standard Model that include scalar and tensor interactions. The calculation is carried out using a gauge ensemble of twisted mass fermions at the physical pion mass, following the same strategy as our recent study on vector and axial form factors for the same transition. We provide the complete set of form factors as functions of $q^2$ employing a model-independent parametrization. We examine their impact on searches for non-standard charged-current interactions via the muon-to-electron decay-rate ratio $R^{\mu e}=\Gamma(\Lambda\to p\mu\bar\nu_\mu)/\Gamma(\Lambda\to pe\bar\nu_e)$, where scalar and tensor contributions enter linearly and are helicity-enhanced relative to the electron channel. We compare this first-principles prediction for the decay-rate ratio with recent experimental measurements, thereby enabling improved constraints on non-standard charged-current interactions.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

First lattice results for the scalar and tensor form factors in Lambda to proton decay at physical pion mass, extending prior vector/axial work but resting on a single ensemble.

read the letter

The paper supplies the first lattice QCD values for the scalar and tensor form factors in the Lambda to proton transition, computed at the physical pion mass on a twisted-mass ensemble. It completes the full set of form factors by following the same setup and extraction strategy as the authors' earlier vector and axial calculation, then folds everything into a prediction for the muon-to-electron ratio R^{μe} to constrain possible scalar and tensor new-physics contributions. The comparison to existing experimental measurements on that ratio is a direct way to illustrate the impact. The model-independent parametrization of the q² dependence is a reasonable choice given the small kinematic range of the decay. This is useful for flavor physicists who need lattice inputs to interpret precision hyperon data in terms of charged-current extensions of the Standard Model. The main soft spot is the single-ensemble setup. Without additional lattices at different spacings or volumes, discretization effects, finite-volume corrections, and residual excited-state contamination in the scalar and tensor matrix elements are not explicitly bounded by variation. If the full paper demonstrates control through other checks, such as multiple source-sink separations or consistency with known quantities, that would strengthen the case for using the numbers directly in BSM fits; otherwise the quoted uncertainties may understate the total error. This work is aimed at lattice groups doing baryon form factors and at phenomenologists searching for new physics in hyperon decays. It deserves a serious referee because the result is genuinely new and the physics goal is clear, even if the error analysis will need close scrutiny.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a lattice QCD determination of the scalar and tensor form factors for the Λ→p transition on a single twisted-mass ensemble at the physical pion mass. The form factors are parametrized via the model-independent z-expansion over the small kinematic range of the decay. These are then used to compute the ratio R^{μe} = Γ(Λ→pμν̄μ)/Γ(Λ→peν̄e), where scalar and tensor contributions enter linearly and are helicity-enhanced, and the result is compared to experimental data to constrain non-standard charged-current interactions.

Significance. If the systematics are shown to be under control, this provides the first lattice-QCD input for these form factors and a first-principles prediction of R^{μe} that can tighten BSM bounds. The use of a model-independent parametrization and the direct comparison to independent experimental measurements are strengths that would make the result useful for the community.

major comments (1)

[Lattice setup and results sections] Lattice setup and simulation parameters: the calculation uses only a single gauge ensemble at the physical pion mass. No additional ensembles at different lattice spacings or volumes are employed to quantify discretization effects, finite-volume corrections, or residual excited-state contamination in the scalar and tensor matrix elements. Because the central claim is that the extracted form factors (and the derived R^{μe}) can be inserted directly into BSM analyses without large additional shifts, the absence of explicit bounds on these O(a²) and O(e^{-m_π L}) contributions is load-bearing and must be addressed, either by multi-ensemble analysis or by rigorous justification that the effects are negligible at the quoted precision.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] The abstract and introduction would benefit from a concise statement of the quantitative error budget (statistical plus systematic) assigned to the form factors and to R^{μe}.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and positive assessment of the significance of our work. We address the major comment regarding the lattice setup below.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: Lattice setup and simulation parameters: the calculation uses only a single gauge ensemble at the physical pion mass. No additional ensembles at different lattice spacings or volumes are employed to quantify discretization effects, finite-volume corrections, or residual excited-state contamination in the scalar and tensor matrix elements. Because the central claim is that the extracted form factors (and the derived R^{μe}) can be inserted directly into BSM analyses without large additional shifts, the absence of explicit bounds on these O(a²) and O(e^{-m_π L}) contributions is load-bearing and must be addressed, either by multi-ensemble analysis or by rigorous justification that the effects are negligible at the quoted precision.

Authors: We agree that a multi-ensemble study would provide the most robust control over systematic uncertainties. However, this calculation is performed on a single physical-pion-mass ensemble using the same methodology as our prior work on the vector and axial form factors for the Λ→p transition, where discretization and finite-volume effects were estimated to be subdominant to the statistical uncertainties. For the scalar and tensor matrix elements, we employ the same three-point function analysis with sufficient source-sink separations to suppress excited-state contributions, as validated in the vector/axial study. In the revised manuscript, we will add an explicit discussion in the results section providing power-counting estimates for the expected size of O(a²) discretization effects and finite-volume corrections, showing that they are expected to be smaller than the current statistical precision of the form factors. We will also include a brief justification for the control of residual excited-state effects. While we cannot perform additional simulations at this time, these estimates will allow the form factors to be used in BSM analyses with the quoted uncertainties. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: first-principles lattice computation with independent prediction

full rationale

The derivation computes scalar and tensor form factors directly from lattice QCD matrix elements on an external gauge ensemble at physical pion mass, using a model-independent z-expansion to parametrize q² dependence. The R^{μe} ratio is then obtained by inserting these form factors into the decay-rate formula and compared to separate experimental data, rather than fitted to it. References to prior work on vector/axial form factors describe methodological consistency but do not reduce the scalar/tensor results or the BSM constraint to self-definition, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or a self-citation chain. The chain remains externally falsifiable against lattice benchmarks and experiment.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract supplies insufficient detail to enumerate all free parameters or axioms; the calculation necessarily relies on standard lattice QCD assumptions plus a parametrization whose coefficients are fitted to the lattice data.

free parameters (1)

z-expansion or similar parametrization coefficients
Model-independent parametrization of q² dependence requires fitted coefficients whose values are determined from the lattice correlators.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Twisted-mass fermion ensemble at physical pion mass reproduces continuum QCD for the relevant matrix elements
The paper states the calculation is performed on such an ensemble following the prior vector/axial strategy.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5491 in / 1392 out tokens · 82258 ms · 2026-05-10T07:13:04.594798+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

+O δ2 i .(A1) For the scalar–vector interference contribution, we begin from the decay rate defined as integral of its differential 13 form in Eq. (14), ΓLS = Z q2 max m2 ℓ G2 F |Vus|2√s+s− 64π3m3 Λ 1− m2 ℓ q2 2 mℓ s+ FS(q2) " (mΛ −m p)F1(q2) + q2 mΛ F3(q2) # dq2,(A2) wheres ± = (mΛ ±m p)2 −q 2.F 3(q2) is a second-class form factor, i.e. it is suppressed ...
[2]

Bacchio and A

S. Bacchio and A. Konstantinou, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 231901 (2025), arXiv:2507.09970 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2025
[3]

Cabibbo, E

N. Cabibbo, E. C. Swallow, and R. Winston, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.53, 39 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0307298

work page arXiv 2003
[4]

Kobayashi and T

M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, Prog. Theor. Phys.49, 652 (1973)

1973
[5]

Ademollo and R

M. Ademollo and R. Gatto, Phys. Rev. Lett.13, 264 (1964)

1964
[6]

Cirigliano, S

V. Cirigliano, S. Gardner, and B. Holstein, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.71, 93 (2013), arXiv:1303.6953 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2013
[7]

Chang, M

H.-M. Chang, M. Gonz´ alez-Alonso, and J. Mar- tin Camalich, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 161802 (2015), arXiv:1412.8484 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2015
[8]

Hadronic tau decays as New Physics probes in the LHC era

V. Cirigliano, A. Falkowski, M. Gonz´ alez-Alonso, and A. Rodr´ ıguez-S´ anchez, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 221801 (2019), arXiv:1809.01161 [hep-ph]. 14

work page Pith review arXiv 2019
[9]

Semileptonic decays of light quarks beyond the Standard Model,

V. Cirigliano, J. Jenkins, and M. Gonzalez-Alonso, Nucl. Phys. B830, 95 (2010), arXiv:0908.1754 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2010
[10]

González-Alonso and J

M. Gonz´ alez-Alonso and J. Martin Camalich, JHEP12, 052 (2016), arXiv:1605.07114 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2016
[11]

Beˇ cirevi´ c, M

D. Beˇ cirevi´ c, M. Martines, S. Rosauro-Alcaraz, and O. Sumensari, (2026), arXiv:2603.25837 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2026
[12]

Bhattacharya, V

T. Bhattacharya, V. Cirigliano, S. D. Cohen, A. Fil- ipuzzi, M. Gonzalez-Alonso, M. L. Graesser, R. Gupta, and H.-W. Lin, Phys. Rev. D85, 054512 (2012), arXiv:1110.6448 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2012
[13]

González-Alonso, O

M. Gonz´ alez-Alonso, O. Naviliat-Cuncic, and N. Sev- erijns, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.104, 165 (2019), arXiv:1803.08732 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2019
[14]

Walker-Loudet al., Lattice QCD Determination ofg A, PoSCD2018, 020 (2020), arXiv:1912.08321 [hep-lat]

A. Walker-Loudet al., PoSCD2018, 020 (2020), arXiv:1912.08321 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2020
[15]

G. S. Bali, S. Collins, S. Heybrock, M. L¨ offler, R. R¨ odl, W. S¨ oldner, and S. Weish¨ aupl (RQCD), Phys. Rev. D 108, 034512 (2023), arXiv:2305.04717 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2023
[16]

Djukanovic, G

D. Djukanovic, G. von Hippel, H. B. Meyer, K. Ot- tnad, and H. Wittig, Phys. Rev. D109, 074507 (2024), arXiv:2402.03024 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2024
[17]

Alexandrou, S

C. Alexandrou, S. Bacchio, J. Finkenrath, C. Iona, G. Koutsou, Y. Li, and G. Spanoudes, Phys. Rev. D 111, 054505 (2025), arXiv:2412.01535 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2025
[18]

Aoki et al., FLAG review 2024, Phys

Y. Aokiet al.(Flavour Lattice Averaging Group (FLAG)), Phys. Rev. D113, 014508 (2026), arXiv:2411.04268 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2026
[19]

Y.-C. Jang, R. Gupta, T. Bhattacharya, B. Yoon, and H.-W. Lin (Precision Neutron Decay Matrix Ele- ments (PNDME)), Phys. Rev. D109, 014503 (2024), arXiv:2305.11330 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2024
[20]

Djukanovic, G

D. Djukanovic, G. von Hippel, J. Koponen, H. B. Meyer, K. Ottnad, T. Schulz, and H. Wittig, Phys. Rev. D106, 074503 (2022), arXiv:2207.03440 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2022
[21]

Alexandrou, S

C. Alexandrou, S. Bacchio, M. Constantinou, J. Finken- rath, R. Frezzotti, B. Kostrzewa, G. Koutsou, G. Spanoudes, and C. Urbach (Extended Twisted Mass), Phys. Rev. D109, 034503 (2024), arXiv:2309.05774 [hep- lat]

work page arXiv 2024
[22]

Djukanovic, G

D. Djukanovic, G. von Hippel, H. B. Meyer, K. Ottnad, M. Salg, and H. Wittig, Phys. Rev. D109, 094510 (2024), arXiv:2309.06590 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2024
[23]

Tsuji, Y

R. Tsuji, Y. Aoki, K.-I. Ishikawa, Y. Kuramashi, S. Sasaki, K. Sato, E. Shintani, H. Watanabe, and T. Yamazaki (PACS), Phys. Rev. D109, 094505 (2024), arXiv:2311.10345 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2024
[24]

Alexandrou, S

C. Alexandrou, S. Bacchio, G. Koutsou, B. Prasad, and G. Spanoudes, (2025), arXiv:2507.20910 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2025
[25]

Λb→pℓ−¯νℓand Λb→Λcℓ−¯νℓform factors from lattice QCD with rela- tivistic heavy quarks,

W. Detmold, C. Lehner, and S. Meinel, Phys. Rev. D 92, 034503 (2015), arXiv:1503.01421 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2015
[26]

Λc →Λℓ+νℓform factors and decay rates from lattice QCD with physical quark masses,

S. Meinel, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 082001 (2017), arXiv:1611.09696 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2017
[27]

Meinel, Phys

S. Meinel, Phys. Rev. D97, 034511 (2018), arXiv:1712.05783 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2018
[28]

Meinel and G

S. Meinel and G. Rendon, Phys. Rev. D105, 054511 (2022), arXiv:2107.13140 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2022
[29]

Meinel and G

S. Meinel and G. Rendon, Phys. Rev. D103, 094516 (2021), arXiv:2103.08775 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2021
[30]

Farrell and S

C. Farrell and S. Meinel, Phys. Rev. D111, 114521 (2025), arXiv:2504.07302 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2025
[31]

P. E. Shanahan, A. N. Cooke, R. Horsley, Y. Nakamura, P. E. L. Rakow, G. Schierholz, A. W. Thomas, R. D. Young, and J. M. Zanotti, Phys. Rev. D92, 074029 (2015), arXiv:1508.06923 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2015
[32]

Sasaki, Phys

S. Sasaki, Phys. Rev. D96, 074509 (2017), arXiv:1708.04008 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2017
[33]

Sasaki and T

S. Sasaki and T. Yamazaki, Phys. Rev. D79, 074508 (2009), arXiv:0811.1406 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2009
[34]

H. Liu, W. Wang, and Z.-P. Xing, Phys. Rev. D108, 035008 (2023), arXiv:2305.01168 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023
[35]

Frezzotti, P

R. Frezzotti, P. A. Grassi, S. Sint, and P. Weisz (Alpha), JHEP08, 058 (2001), arXiv:hep-lat/0101001

work page arXiv 2001
[36]

Frezzotti and G.C

R. Frezzotti and G. C. Rossi, JHEP08, 007 (2004), arXiv:hep-lat/0306014

work page arXiv 2004
[37]

Sheikholeslami and R

B. Sheikholeslami and R. Wohlert, Nucl. Phys. B259, 572 (1985)

1985
[38]

Alexandrouet al., Phys

C. Alexandrouet al., Phys. Rev. D98, 054518 (2018), arXiv:1807.00495 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2018
[39]

Finkenrathet al., PoSLATTICE2021, 284 (2022), arXiv:2201.02551 [hep-lat]

J. Finkenrathet al., PoSLATTICE2021, 284 (2022), arXiv:2201.02551 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2022
[40]

Alexandrouet al.(ETM), Phys

C. Alexandrouet al.(Extended Twisted Mass), Phys. Rev. D107, 074506 (2023), arXiv:2206.15084 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2023
[41]

Alexandrouet al.(ETM), Phys

C. Alexandrouet al.(Extended Twisted Mass), Phys. Rev. D111, 054502 (2025), arXiv:2411.08852 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2025
[42]

Alexandrouet al.(Extended Twisted Mass), Phys

C. Alexandrouet al.(Extended Twisted Mass), Phys. Rev. D104, 074515 (2021), arXiv:2104.13408 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2021
[43]

Alexandrou, S

C. Alexandrou, S. Bacchio, G. Christou, and J. Finken- rath, Phys. Rev. D108, 094510 (2023), arXiv:2309.04401 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2023
[44]

Martinelli, C

G. Martinelli, C. Pittori, C. T. Sachrajda, M. Testa, and A. Vladikas, Nucl. Phys. B445, 81 (1995), arXiv:hep- lat/9411010

work page arXiv 1995
[45]

Gusken, U

S. Gusken, U. Low, K. H. Mutter, R. Sommer, A. Patel, and K. Schilling, Phys. Lett. B227, 266 (1989)

1989
[46]

Alexandrou, S

C. Alexandrou, S. Gusken, F. Jegerlehner, K. Schilling, and R. Sommer, Nucl. Phys. B414, 815 (1994), arXiv:hep-lat/9211042

work page arXiv 1994
[47]

Albaneseet al.(APE), Phys

M. Albaneseet al.(APE), Phys. Lett. B192, 163 (1987)

1987
[48]

Alexandrou, M

C. Alexandrou, M. Constantinou, S. Dinter, V. Drach, K. Jansen, C. Kallidonis, and G. Koutsou, Phys. Rev. D88, 014509 (2013), arXiv:1303.5979 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2013
[49]

Alexandrou, M

C. Alexandrou, M. Brinet, J. Carbonell, M. Constanti- nou, P. A. Harraud, P. Guichon, K. Jansen, T. Ko- rzec, and M. Papinutto, Phys. Rev. D83, 094502 (2011), arXiv:1102.2208 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2011
[50]

Alexandrou, G

C. Alexandrou, G. Koutsou, J. W. Negele, and A. Tsapalis, Phys. Rev. D74, 034508 (2006), arXiv:hep- lat/0605017

work page arXiv 2006
[51]

Maiani, G

L. Maiani, G. Martinelli, M. L. Paciello, and B. Taglienti, Nucl. Phys. B293, 420 (1987)

1987
[52]

Capitani, M

S. Capitani, M. Della Morte, G. von Hippel, B. Jager, A. Juttner, B. Knippschild, H. B. Meyer, and H. Wittig, Phys. Rev. D86, 074502 (2012), arXiv:1205.0180 [hep- lat]

work page arXiv 2012
[53]

W. I. Jay and E. T. Neil, Phys. Rev. D103, 114502 (2021), arXiv:2008.01069 [stat.ME]

work page arXiv 2021
[54]

E. T. Neil and J. W. Sitison, Phys. Rev. D109, 014510 (2024), arXiv:2208.14983 [stat.ME]

work page arXiv 2024
[55]

R. J. Hill and G. Paz, Phys. Rev. D82, 113005 (2010), arXiv:1008.4619 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2010
[56]

Gonz´ alez-Alonso and J

M. Gonz´ alez-Alonso and J. Martin Camalich, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 042501 (2014), arXiv:1309.4434 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2014
[57]

Ledwig, A

T. Ledwig, A. Silva, and H.-C. Kim, Phys. Rev. D82, 034022 (2010), arXiv:1004.3612 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2010
[58]

Zhang, X.-H

S.-Q. Zhang, X.-H. Zhang, and C.-F. Qiao, JHEP06, 122 (2024), arXiv:2402.15088 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[59]

Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys

S. Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024). 15

2024
[60]

Garcia and P

A. Garcia and P. Kielanowski,THE BETA DECAY OF HYPERONS, edited by A. Bohm, Vol. 222 (1985)

1985
[61]

Ablikimet al.(BESIII), (2025), arXiv:2509.09266 [hep-ex]

M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII), (2025), arXiv:2509.09266 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2025
[62]

Branching fraction measurement of the $\mathit{\Lambda} \to p \mu^- \overline{\nu}_{\mu}$ decay

R. Aaijet al.(LHCb), (2025), arXiv:2511.15681 [hep-ex]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[63]

Zhang and C.-F

S.-Q. Zhang and C.-F. Qiao, (2025), arXiv:2512.24706 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[64]

Cirigliano, M

V. Cirigliano, M. Gonzalez-Alonso, and M. L. Graesser, JHEP02, 046 (2013), arXiv:1210.4553 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2013
[65]

Jansen and C

K. Jansen and C. Urbach, Comput. Phys. Commun.180, 2717 (2009), arXiv:0905.3331 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2009
[66]

Abdel-Rehim, F

A. Abdel-Rehim, F. Burger, A. Deuzeman, K. Jansen, B. Kostrzewa, L. Scorzato, and C. Urbach, PoSLAT- TICE2013, 414 (2014), arXiv:1311.5495 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2014
[67]

Deuzeman, K

A. Deuzeman, K. Jansen, B. Kostrzewa, and C. Urbach, PoSLATTICE2013, 416 (2014), arXiv:1311.4521 [hep- lat]

work page arXiv 2014
[68]

Kostrzewa, S

B. Kostrzewa, S. Bacchio, J. Finkenrath, M. Garofalo, F. Pittler, S. Romiti, and C. Urbach (ETM), PoSLAT- TICE2022, 340 (2023), arXiv:2212.06635 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2023
[69]

Frommer et al

A. Frommer, K. Kahl, S. Krieg, B. Leder, and M. Rottmann, SIAM J. Sci. Comput.36, A1581 (2014), arXiv:1303.1377 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2014
[70]

Alexandrou, S

C. Alexandrou, S. Bacchio, J. Finkenrath, A. Frommer, K. Kahl, and M. Rottmann, Phys. Rev. D94, 114509 (2016), arXiv:1610.02370 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2016
[71]

Bacchio, C

S. Bacchio, C. Alexandrou, and J. Finkerath, EPJ Web Conf.175, 02002 (2018), arXiv:1710.06198 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2018
[72]

Alexandrou, S

C. Alexandrou, S. Bacchio, and J. Finkenrath, Comput. Phys. Commun.236, 51 (2019), arXiv:1805.09584 [hep- lat]

work page arXiv 2019
[73]

M. A. Clark, R. Babich, K. Barros, R. C. Brower, and C. Rebbi (QUDA), Comput. Phys. Commun.181, 1517 (2010), arXiv:0911.3191 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2010
[74]

Scaling lattice QCD beyond 100 GPUs,

R. Babich, M. A. Clark, B. Joo, G. Shi, R. C. Brower, and S. Gottlieb (QUDA), inInternational Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis(2011) arXiv:1109.2935 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2011
[75]

M. A. Clark, B. Jo´ o, A. Strelchenko, M. Cheng, A. Gamb- hir, and R. C. Brower (QUDA), inInternational Con- ference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis(2016) arXiv:1612.07873 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2016