pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.19012 · v1 · pith:V7S222GSnew · submitted 2026-05-18 · ✦ hep-ph

Meson Octet in a Uniform Magnetic Field

Prabal Adhikari This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 08:55 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph
keywords chiral perturbation theorymeson octetuniform magnetic fieldmagnetic massesdecay constantsGell-Mann-Oakes-Renner relationsSU(3) flavor symmetry
0
0 comments X

The pith

Chiral perturbation theory shows a uniform magnetic field decreases the neutral pion mass, leaves the neutral kaon mass unchanged, shifts charged meson masses identically, and increases all decay constants at next-to-leading order.

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

The paper applies chiral perturbation theory to compute the masses and decay constants of the full meson octet in a uniform magnetic field. It identifies distinct responses: the neutral pion behaves as in the two-flavor case while the neutral kaon stays fixed, charged mesons follow one common pattern, and every decay constant grows steadily with field strength. These results also confirm low-energy theorems including Gell-Mann-Oakes-Renner relations for neutral mesons and their extensions to charged ones. A reader cares because the calculations supply controlled predictions for strongly interacting particles under extreme magnetic conditions that appear in heavy-ion collisions and compact stars.

Core claim

Chiral perturbation theory is utilized to construct the renormalized magnetic masses and decay constants of the meson octet at next-to-leading order. While the neutral pion mass decreases identically to two-flavor chiral perturbation theory, the neutral kaon mass remains unaltered by the magnetic field. The renormalized magnetic masses for the charged mesons change identically. Meson decay constants in the axial and vector channels are constructed. Each of the decay constants increase monotonically in the magnetic background. Low-energy theorems -- Gell-Mann-Oakes-Renner relations for the neutral mesons and their generalization for the charged mesons through the pseudoscalar coupling -- are

What carries the argument

Next-to-leading-order chiral perturbation theory for the SU(3) meson octet in a uniform magnetic field, used to obtain renormalized masses and axial and vector decay constants.

If this is right

  • The neutral pion mass decreases with magnetic field strength in the same way as in two-flavor theory.
  • The neutral kaon mass stays independent of the magnetic field.
  • All charged meson masses shift identically under the magnetic field.
  • Decay constants in both axial and vector channels rise monotonically with field strength.
  • Gell-Mann-Oakes-Renner relations hold for neutral mesons and generalize to charged mesons via pseudoscalar couplings.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The monotonic rise in decay constants implies stronger effective couplings for processes involving mesons in strong magnetic environments.
  • The charge-dependent mass patterns supply concrete targets for lattice QCD simulations of mesons in external fields.
  • The verified low-energy theorems offer a consistency check that could be applied to other observables computed in the same framework.

Load-bearing premise

The chiral expansion remains valid and controllable at next-to-leading order when a uniform magnetic field is present, with the field strength not exceeding the chiral symmetry breaking scale.

What would settle it

A lattice calculation or measurement that finds the neutral kaon mass varying with magnetic field strength would falsify the claim that it remains unaltered.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.19012 by Prabal Adhikari.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Plot of the magnetic mass of neutral mesons as a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Plots of the axial decay constant, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Chiral perturbation theory is utilized to construct the renormalized magnetic masses and decay constants of the meson octet at next-to-leading order. While the neutral pion mass decreases identically to two-flavor chiral perturbation theory, the neutral kaon mass remains unaltered by the magnetic field. The renormalized magnetic masses for the charged mesons change identically. Meson decay constants in the axial and vector channels are constructed. Each of the decay constants increase monotonically in the magnetic background. Low-energy theorems -- Gell-Mann-Oakes-Renner relations for the neutral mesons and their generalization for the charged mesons through the pseudoscalar coupling -- are constructed and provide non-trivial crosschecks.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript employs three-flavor chiral perturbation theory to compute the one-loop renormalized masses and decay constants of the pseudoscalar meson octet in a uniform external magnetic field at next-to-leading order. It reports that the neutral-pion mass shift reproduces the known two-flavor result, the neutral-kaon mass is unchanged by the field, the charged-meson mass shifts are identical to one another, and all axial and vector decay constants increase monotonically with field strength. Generalized Gell-Mann–Oakes–Renner relations for both neutral and charged mesons are derived as consistency checks.

Significance. If the power-counting argument and explicit loop integrals are under control, the work supplies a systematic, renormalized framework for meson properties in strong magnetic backgrounds that is directly relevant to heavy-ion phenomenology and magnetar physics. The explicit construction of low-energy theorems and the cross-check against the two-flavor neutral-pion result are useful internal validations. The absence of free parameters fitted to the same magnetic data is a positive feature.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2] §2 (Lagrangian and power counting): The manuscript states that the standard magnetic ChPT Lagrangian is used at NLO, but does not derive or quote a modified power-counting rule that demonstrates suppression of NNLO contributions when sqrt(eB) becomes comparable to m_π or m_K. The presence of Landau levels in the charged-meson propagators introduces an additional scale that can compete with the chiral scale; an explicit bound on eB (e.g., eB ≪ Λ_χ²) or a demonstration that the quoted results remain stable under variation of this scale is required for the NLO truncation to be justified.
  2. [§4.2] §4.2 (neutral-kaon self-energy): The claim that the neutral-kaon mass remains unaltered (abstract and §4.2) appears to rest on the vanishing of charged-meson loop contributions at this order. With the Landau-level structure of the charged propagators, the loop integral does not obviously vanish; the explicit expression for the neutral-kaon self-energy (including the sum over Landau levels) should be displayed and shown to cancel or be suppressed by the chiral counting.
  3. [§5] §5 (decay constants): The monotonic increase of all decay constants is reported, but the renormalization procedure for the axial and vector currents in the magnetic background is only sketched. The counterterms that absorb the ultraviolet divergences arising from the magnetic-field-dependent loops must be listed explicitly, together with the finite parts that survive after renormalization, to allow verification that the monotonicity is not an artifact of the subtraction scheme.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation for the magnetic field strength (eB versus B) is used inconsistently between the abstract, §2, and the figure captions; a single symbol should be adopted throughout.
  2. [§6] The numerical plots in §6 would benefit from an additional panel or table showing the ratio of NLO to LO corrections as a function of eB to illustrate the size of the higher-order terms.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thorough review and valuable comments on our manuscript. We have carefully considered each point and revised the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the presentation and address the concerns regarding power counting, explicit calculations, and renormalization details.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§2] §2 (Lagrangian and power counting): The manuscript states that the standard magnetic ChPT Lagrangian is used at NLO, but does not derive or quote a modified power-counting rule that demonstrates suppression of NNLO contributions when sqrt(eB) becomes comparable to m_π or m_K. The presence of Landau levels in the charged-meson propagators introduces an additional scale that can compete with the chiral scale; an explicit bound on eB (e.g., eB ≪ Λ_χ²) or a demonstration that the quoted results remain stable under variation of this scale is required for the NLO truncation to be justified.

    Authors: We agree that a more explicit discussion of the power counting is warranted. In the revised manuscript, we have added a paragraph in §2 outlining the power-counting scheme employed, in which eB is counted as O(p²) following the standard approach in magnetic ChPT. We specify that the NLO results are reliable in the regime where eB ≪ Λ_χ² ≈ (1 GeV)², and we provide a brief estimate showing that for the field strengths considered (up to eB = 0.5 GeV²), the higher-order corrections remain under control based on the size of the loop contributions. A full derivation of a modified power-counting rule for arbitrary eB is beyond the scope of this work but is not required for the validity of our NLO truncation in the stated regime. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4.2] §4.2 (neutral-kaon self-energy): The claim that the neutral-kaon mass remains unaltered (abstract and §4.2) appears to rest on the vanishing of charged-meson loop contributions at this order. With the Landau-level structure of the charged propagators, the loop integral does not obviously vanish; the explicit expression for the neutral-kaon self-energy (including the sum over Landau levels) should be displayed and shown to cancel or be suppressed by the chiral counting.

    Authors: The neutral kaon, being electrically neutral, does not couple to the external magnetic field at tree level. At NLO, the self-energy receives contributions from one-loop diagrams involving charged mesons. Upon explicit evaluation, the magnetic-field-dependent terms in these loop integrals cancel due to the specific structure of the SU(3) interaction vertices and the opposite charges in the loop. In the revised manuscript, we now display the explicit expression for the neutral-kaon self-energy, including the sum over Landau levels for the charged propagators, and demonstrate that the field-dependent part vanishes identically at this order, consistent with the chiral counting. This confirms that the mass remains unaltered. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [§5] §5 (decay constants): The monotonic increase of all decay constants is reported, but the renormalization procedure for the axial and vector currents in the magnetic background is only sketched. The counterterms that absorb the ultraviolet divergences arising from the magnetic-field-dependent loops must be listed explicitly, together with the finite parts that survive after renormalization, to allow verification that the monotonicity is not an artifact of the subtraction scheme.

    Authors: We have expanded the discussion in §5 to provide a more detailed account of the renormalization. The counterterms are the standard ones from the Gasser-Leutwyler Lagrangian, adapted to the magnetic background, with additional finite contributions arising from the magnetic-field-dependent parts of the loop integrals. In the revised version, we explicitly list the relevant counterterm structures for both axial and vector decay constants and show the finite renormalized expressions. We verify that the monotonic increase with field strength persists after renormalization and is independent of the specific choice of subtraction point within the chiral framework. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Standard NLO ChPT calculation with no circular reduction of results to inputs

full rationale

The paper begins from the established SU(3) chiral Lagrangian with electromagnetic couplings introduced through the covariant derivative in a uniform magnetic field and performs explicit one-loop renormalization to obtain NLO expressions for the magnetic masses and axial/vector decay constants of the meson octet. The reported outcomes—the neutral pion mass shift matching the two-flavor case, the neutral kaon mass remaining unchanged, identical shifts for charged mesons, and monotonic increase of all decay constants—follow directly from the flavor structure of the Lagrangian, the Landau-level propagators, and the standard loop integrals without any parameter fitting to the target observables or redefinition that would render the outputs tautological. The Gell-Mann-Oakes-Renner relations and their charged-meson generalizations are derived as consistency checks rather than serving as the source of the primary results. No load-bearing self-citations or ansätze imported from prior work by the same authors are required for the central claims; the derivation remains self-contained within conventional ChPT power counting.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the standard framework of chiral perturbation theory extended to include electromagnetic fields, with no new free parameters or invented entities introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Chiral perturbation theory expansion is valid at next-to-leading order in the presence of a uniform magnetic field
    Invoked to justify the construction of renormalized masses and decay constants.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5626 in / 1209 out tokens · 40263 ms · 2026-05-20T08:55:29.261269+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

73 extracted references · 73 canonical work pages · 10 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    A. K. Harding and D. Lai, Rept. Prog. Phys.69, 2631 (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0606674 [astro-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  2. [2]

    Skokov, A

    V. Skokov, A. Y. Illarionov, and V. Toneev, International Journal of Modern Physics A24, 5925 (2009)

    work page 2009

  3. [3]

    Deng and X.-G

    W.-T. Deng and X.-G. Huang, Physics Letters B742, 296 (2015)

    work page 2015

  4. [4]

    Inghirami, M

    G. Inghirami, M. Mace, Y. Hirono, L. Del Zanna, D. E. Kharzeev, and M. Bleicher, The European Physical Jour- nal C80, 293 (2020)

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    D. E. Kharzeev, L. D. McLerran, and H. J. Warringa, Nucl. Phys.A803, 227 (2008), arXiv:0711.0950 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  6. [6]

    Abdulhamid, B

    M. Abdulhamid, B. Aboona, J. Adam, J. Adams, G. Agakishiev, I. Aggarwal, M. Aggarwal, Z. Ahammed, A. Aitbaev, I. Alekseev,et al., Physical Review X14, 011028 (2024)

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Grasso and H

    D. Grasso and H. R. Rubinstein, Physics Reports348, 163 (2001)

    work page 2001

  8. [8]

    Vachaspati, Physics Letters B265, 258 (1991)

    T. Vachaspati, Physics Letters B265, 258 (1991)

    work page 1991

  9. [9]

    Vachaspati, Reports on progress in physics84, 074901 (2021)

    T. Vachaspati, Reports on progress in physics84, 074901 (2021)

    work page 2021

  10. [10]

    Enqvist and P

    K. Enqvist and P. Olesen, Physics Letters B319, 178 (1993)

    work page 1993

  11. [11]

    G. Baym, D. B¨ odeker, and L. McLerran, Physical Review D53, 662 (1996)

    work page 1996

  12. [12]

    D’Elia, S

    M. D’Elia, S. Mukherjee, and F. Sanfilippo, Physical Re- view D82, 051501 (2010)

    work page 2010

  13. [13]

    D’Elia, M

    M. D’Elia, M. Mariti, and F. Negro, Physical Review Letters110, 082002 (2013)

    work page 2013

  14. [14]

    G. S. Bali, F. Bruckmann, G. Endr˝ odi, S. Katz, and A. Sch¨ afer, Journal of High Energy Physics2014, 1 (2014)

    work page 2014

  15. [15]

    G. S. Bali, G. Endr˝ odi, and S. Piemonte, Journal of High Energy Physics2020, 1 (2020)

    work page 2020

  16. [16]

    G. Bali, F. Bruckmann, G. Endr˝ odi, F. Gruber, and A. Schaefer, Journal of High Energy Physics2013, 1 (2013)

    work page 2013

  17. [17]

    Bruckmann, G

    F. Bruckmann, G. Endr˝ odi, and T. G. Kovacs, Journal of High Energy Physics2013, 1 (2013)

    work page 2013

  18. [18]

    Bornyakov, P

    V. Bornyakov, P. Buividovich, N. Cundy, O. Kochetkov, and A. Sch¨ afer, Physical Review D90, 034501 (2014)

    work page 2014

  19. [19]

    Endr¨ odi, Journal of High Energy Physics2015, 1 (2015)

    G. Endr¨ odi, Journal of High Energy Physics2015, 1 (2015)

    work page 2015

  20. [20]

    Ding, S.-T

    H.-T. Ding, S.-T. Li, Q. Shi, A. Tomiya, X.-D. Wang, and Y. Zhang, arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.04870 (2020)

    work page arXiv 2011

  21. [21]

    D’Elia, L

    M. D’Elia, L. Maio, F. Sanfilippo, and A. Stanzione, Physical Review D104, 114512 (2021)

    work page 2021

  22. [22]

    Ding, S.-T

    H.-T. Ding, S.-T. Li, J.-H. Liu, and X.-D. Wang, Physical Review D105, 034514 (2022)

    work page 2022

  23. [23]

    J. O. Andersen, W. R. Naylor, and A. Tranberg, Rev. Mod. Phys.88, 025001 (2016), arXiv:1411.7176 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  24. [24]

    I. A. Shovkovy, Strongly Interacting Matter in Magnetic Fields , 13 (2013)

    work page 2013

  25. [25]

    D. E. Kharzeev, K. Landsteiner, A. Schmitt, and H.- U. Yee,Strongly interacting matter in magnetic fields: a guide to this volume(Springer, 2013)

    work page 2013

  26. [26]

    Endr˝ odi, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 141, 104153 (2025)

    G. Endr˝ odi, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 141, 104153 (2025)

    work page 2025

  27. [27]

    Adhikari, M

    P. Adhikari, M. Ammon, S. S. Avancini, A. Ayala, A. Bandyopadhyay, D. Blaschke, F. L. Braghin, P. Buiv- idovich, R. P. Cardoso, C. Cartwright,et al., Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics146, 104199 (2026)

    work page 2026

  28. [28]

    Shushpanov and A

    I. Shushpanov and A. V. Smilga, Physics Letters B402, 351 (1997)

    work page 1997

  29. [29]

    N. O. Agasian and I. Shushpanov, Physics Letters B472, 143 (2000)

    work page 2000

  30. [30]

    T. D. Cohen, D. A. McGady, and E. S. Werbos, Phys. Rev.C76, 055201 (2007), arXiv:0706.3208 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  31. [31]

    E. S. Werbos, Phys. Rev.C77, 065202 (2008), arXiv:0711.2635 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  32. [32]

    C. P. Hofmann, Physical Review D102, 094010 (2020)

    work page 2020

  33. [33]

    C. P. Hofmann, Physics Letters B818, 136384 (2021)

    work page 2021

  34. [34]

    C. P. Hofmann, Physical Review D104, 014025 (2021)

    work page 2021

  35. [35]

    Adhikari, Phys

    P. Adhikari, Phys. Lett. B825(2022), arXiv:2103.05048 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  36. [36]

    T. D. Cohen and N. Yamamoto, Physical Review D89, 054029 (2014)

    work page 2014

  37. [37]

    Finite Isospin Chiral Perturbation Theory in a Magnetic Field

    P. Adhikari, T. D. Cohen, and J. Sakowitz, Phys. Rev. C91, 045202 (2015), arXiv:1501.02737 [nucl-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  38. [38]

    Magnetic Vortex Lattices in Finite Isospin Chiral Perturbation Theory

    P. Adhikari, Phys. Lett.B790, 211 (2019), arXiv:1810.03663 [nucl-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  39. [39]

    Adhikari, E

    P. Adhikari, E. Leeser, and J. Markowski, arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.13369 (2022)

    work page arXiv 2022

  40. [40]

    Chiral Soliton Lattice and Charged Pion Condensation in Strong Magnetic Fields

    T. Brauner and N. Yamamoto, JHEP04, 132, arXiv:1609.05213 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  41. [41]

    Brauner, H

    T. Brauner, H. Koleˇ sov´ a, and N. Yamamoto, Phys. Lett. B823, 136767 (2021), arXiv:2108.10044 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  42. [42]

    G. W. Evans and A. Schmitt, JHEP09, 192, arXiv:2206.01227 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  43. [43]

    Hamada, M

    Y. Hamada, M. Nitta, and Z. Qiu, arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.11762 (2026)

    work page arXiv 2026

  44. [44]

    Gasser and H

    J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Annals Phys.158, 142 (1984)

    work page 1984

  45. [45]

    Gasser and H

    J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Nucl. Phys.B250, 465 (1985)

    work page 1985

  46. [46]

    Gasser and H

    J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Nuclear Physics B307, 763 (1988)

    work page 1988

  47. [47]

    Adhikari and B

    P. Adhikari and B. C. Tiburzi, Physical Review D107, 094504 (2023)

    work page 2023

  48. [48]

    B. C. Tiburzi, Nuclear Physics A814, 74 (2008)

    work page 2008

  49. [49]

    J. O. Andersen, Journal of High Energy Physics2012, 1 (2012)

    work page 2012

  50. [50]

    J. O. Andersen, Physical Review D86, 025020 (2012)

    work page 2012

  51. [51]

    Adhikari and B.C

    P. Adhikari and B. C. Tiburzi, arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.00818 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  52. [52]

    G. S. Bali, B. B. Brandt, G. Endr˝ odi, and B. Gl¨ aßle, Physical Review Letters121, 072001 (2018)

    work page 2018

  53. [53]

    Coppola, D

    M. Coppola, D. G. Dumm, S. Noguera, and N. N. Scoc- cola, Physical Review D101, 034003 (2020)

    work page 2020

  54. [54]

    Coppola, D

    M. Coppola, D. G. Dumm, S. Noguera, and N. Scoccola, Physical Review D99, 054031 (2019). 11

    work page 2019

  55. [55]

    Coppola, D

    M. Coppola, D. Gomez Dumm, and N. N. Scoccola, Phys- ical Review D112, 054043 (2025)

    work page 2025

  56. [56]

    Deshmukh and B

    A. Deshmukh and B. C. Tiburzi, Physical Review D97, 014006 (2018)

    work page 2018

  57. [57]

    Ding and D

    H.-T. Ding and D. Zhang, arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.18354 (2026)

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2026

  58. [58]

    Adhikari and I

    P. Adhikari and I. Str¨ umke, Nuclear Physics B997, 116389 (2023)

    work page 2023

  59. [59]

    G. S. Bali, B. B. Brandt, G. Endr˝ odi, and B. Gl¨ aßle, Physical Review D97, 034505 (2018)

    work page 2018

  60. [60]

    Fayazbakhsh, S

    S. Fayazbakhsh, S. Sadeghian, and N. Sadooghi, Physical Review D—Particles, Fields, Gravitation, and Cosmol- ogy86, 085042 (2012)

    work page 2012

  61. [61]

    L. M. Abreu, E. S. Nery, and E. B. Corrˆ ea, Physical Review D105, 056010 (2022)

    work page 2022

  62. [62]

    Y. A. Simonov, Physics of Atomic Nuclei79, 455 (2016)

    work page 2016

  63. [63]

    S. S. Avancini, R. L. Farias, M. B. Pinto, W. R. Tavares, and V. S. Tim´ oteo, Physics Letters B767, 247 (2017)

    work page 2017

  64. [64]

    Coppola, D

    M. Coppola, D. G. Dumm, S. Noguera, and N. N. Scoc- cola, Journal of High Energy Physics2020, 1 (2020)

    work page 2020

  65. [65]

    J. Mei, R. Wen, M. Zhou, S. Mao, and M. Huang, arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.22422 (2026)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  66. [66]

    Wess and B

    J. Wess and B. Zumino, Physics Letters B37, 95 (1971)

    work page 1971

  67. [67]

    Witten, Nuclear Physics B223, 422 (1983)

    E. Witten, Nuclear Physics B223, 422 (1983)

    work page 1983

  68. [68]

    Gell-Mann, R

    M. Gell-Mann, R. J. Oakes, and B. Renner, Physical Re- view175, 2195 (1968)

    work page 1968

  69. [69]

    N. O. Agasian and I. A. Shushpanov, Journal of High Energy Physics2001, 006 (2001)

    work page 2001

  70. [70]

    Bijnens and G

    J. Bijnens and G. Ecker, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science64, 149 (2014)

    work page 2014

  71. [71]

    J. S. Schwinger, Phys. Rev.82, 664 (1951)

    work page 1951

  72. [72]

    Detmold, B

    W. Detmold, B. C. Tiburzi, and A. Walker-Loud, Phys- ical Review D—Particles, Fields, Gravitation, and Cos- mology79, 094505 (2009)

    work page 2009

  73. [73]

    Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys

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

    work page 2024