Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 181 references

Radiative corrections to neutrino–nucleon scattering are sizeable enough that strangeness extractions must include them.

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

2026-08-02 00:19 UTC pith:GO43ERZP

load-bearing objection Solid LEFT-based radiative corrections for NC elastic scattering; the light-quark loop matching is the main uncertainty to scrutinize, and the abstract oversells the data agreement. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.15050 v1 pith:GO43ERZP submitted 2026-07-16 hep-ph hep-exhep-latnucl-exnucl-th

Radiative corrections in neutral-current (anti)neutrino elastic scattering at GeV energies I: Nucleon targets

Yi Chen , Oleksandr Tomalak , Bing-Song Zou This is my paper
classification hep-ph hep-exhep-latnucl-exnucl-th PACS 13.15.+g12.15.Lk13.40.Ks14.20.Dh
keywords radiative correctionsneutral-current neutrino scatteringnucleon form factorsstrange quark contentQED soft functionflavor dependenceWeinberg angleantineutrino scattering
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 argues that radiative corrections—photon loops, soft photon emission, and electroweak/QCD loop effects—shift neutral-current neutrino and antineutrino scattering off protons and neutrons at GeV energies by a few percent, which is comparable to the contribution that strange quarks inside the nucleon make to these cross sections. Using an effective-field-theory factorization into a hard function and a universal soft function, the authors compute the corrections at the single-nucleon level, including a new nonperturbative light-quark contribution. They show the corrections are flavor-dependent, with tau-flavor beams differing from muon-flavor beams by about 0.5% for neutrinos and 1% for antineutrinos. If the paper is right, the extracted strange-quark contribution to nucleon spin shifts from −0.044 to −0.053 on protons and to −0.014 on neutrons when the corrected cross sections are used, removing an ambiguity tied to the choice of sin²θ_W.

Core claim

The paper establishes that at GeV energies the neutral-current neutrino–nucleon scattering cross section receives radiative corrections at the few-percent level, comparable to the strange-quark contribution, and provides a consistent treatment of these corrections in the low-energy effective field theory. The authors show that closed-fermion-loop corrections are flavor-dependent at the 0.5–1% level between tau and muon beams and that the light-quark hadronic contribution can be incorporated with less than 0.1% uncertainty by combining a data-driven charge–charge correlator with perturbative-QCD matching. On the nucleon side, the photon vertex and soft bremsstrahlung corrections are factorize

What carries the argument

The central machinery is the factorization of the differential cross section into a hard function H(µ), containing Born form factors and weak couplings, and a universal QED soft function S(p)(β;κ) for the charged proton that collects all soft-photon virtual and real emissions below an energy cutoff ∆E; large logarithms are resummed by evolving the hard function from the nucleon mass scale to the soft scale with exponentiation of multi-photon emission. The second key element is the set of Q²-dependent Wilson-coefficient shifts from closed fermion loops, combining perturbative lepton and charm-quark loops with the nonperturbative light-quark correction δ_QCD, built from a data-driven hadronic

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the hard-to-measure isospin part of the light-quark loop can be replaced by the measured charge–charge part over the whole momentum range up to about 1 (GeV/c)² and then matched to perturbative QCD; if that substitution is wrong at the claimed accuracy, the dominant correction—and the strangeness-extraction conclusion built on it—is miscalibrated.

What would settle it

A direct lattice-QCD computation of the isospin–charge correlator for Q² up to 2 (GeV/c)², compared with the measured charge–charge correlator used in the paper, would settle the calibration: if the two differ by more than the paper’s uncertainty anywhere in the matching region, the central light-quark correction is wrong. A second check: a measurement of electron-neutrino versus muon-neutrino elastic scattering, where lepton-loop differences are largest, would test the flavor dependence.

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

If this is right

  • Strangeness extractions from neutral-current elastic scattering must include a few-percent radiative correction; otherwise the extracted Δs is biased by roughly 20% on protons and much more on neutrons.
  • The sin²θ_W ambiguity that previously affected strange-quark determinations is removed: once the corrections are included, both common choices of sin²θ_W yield nearly the same extracted strangeness.
  • Muon- and tau-flavor beams differ by about 0.5–1% in cross section, so future flavor-tagged measurements must account for flavor-dependent closed-lepton loops.
  • Agreement with existing accelerator neutrino data for Q² ≳ 0.1 (GeV/c)² suggests nuclear effects in light nuclei such as carbon are small in that region, simplifying neutrino-nucleus analyses.
  • With nucleon form factors treated as known, the dominant remaining theory uncertainty at the single-nucleon level stays below 0.1%, enabling precision benchmarks for future neutrino experiments.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the light-quark input is the weakest link, the same δ_QCD correction shifts coherent elastic neutrino–nucleus scattering and neutrino–electron scattering; comparing those reactions at common Q² values could test the matching procedure without relying on nucleon modeling.
  • The predicted flavor difference between ν_μ and ν_τ elastic scattering is clean enough that a dedicated measurement on protons would separate lepton-loop effects from hadronic uncertainties in a way that no single-flavor measurement can.
  • The factorized soft function implies a specific dependence on the photon-energy cutoff ∆E; measuring the same neutrino–proton cross section with two different cutoff thresholds would directly test the resummation and the claimed few-percent accuracy.

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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a calculation of electroweak and QED radiative corrections to neutral-current elastic scattering of neutrinos and antineutrinos on nucleons at GeV energies, formulated in the low-energy effective field theory (LEFT). It derives tree-level cross sections, includes closed fermion loops (perturbative leptons and heavy quarks plus a nonperturbative light-quark contribution), factorizes and resums proton-line QED corrections, and compares flux-averaged cross sections with BNL E734 and MiniBooNE data. The authors find that radiative corrections are comparable in size to strange-quark contributions and report that including them shifts the extracted strange spin contribution from Δs = -0.044 to about -0.053 (proton) or -0.014 (neutron) targets.

Significance. If the results hold, this is a valuable first complete treatment of radiative corrections for NC (anti)neutrino-nucleon elastic scattering at GeV energies. Strengths include the standard LEFT machinery, explicit factorization and resummation of the soft function, a public Mathematica notebook and GitHub repository, and a cross-check against the NuWro event generator. No parameter is fitted to the E734 or MiniBooNE cross-section data, and the strange form factors are taken from independent lattice inputs, so circularity is low. The main novelty is the nonperturbative light-quark contribution δ_QCD, and that is also the main point requiring independent validation. The data comparisons are useful but the abstract overstates the agreement.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 3.2, Eqs. (3.1)-(3.4), Fig. 6] The central value of δ_QCD is obtained by identifying the charge-isospin correlator Π̂3γ with the charge-charge correlator Π̂γγ, an SU(2) ChPT relation used up to Q² ≈ 1 GeV², far above m_ρ². The quoted uncertainty is set by twice the one-loop SU(3) ChPT difference rather than by any direct determination of Π3γ. Since δ_QCD enters every vector-form-factor shift and is the dominant uncertainty at high Q², an error in this central value changes Rσ and the extracted Δs directly. The matching-scale variation Q²0 ∈ [0.6, 2] GeV² only monitors the perturbative/nonperturbative matching, not the validity of the ChPT identification. Please provide an independent lattice or tau-data estimate of Π3γ, or a quantitative model uncertainty for the identification; without it the 'paves the way' claim is not established.
  2. [Sec. 5, paragraph after Figs. 10-13] The paper states that if radiative corrections are omitted, the extracted strange spin contribution shifts from -0.044 ± 0.008 to -0.053(-0.052) for the proton and to -0.014(-0.014) for the neutron. No fitting procedure, data set, chi-square definition, or equation is shown for this extraction. This quantitative shift is load-bearing because it is the concrete consequence of 'removing the sin²θ_W ambiguity.' Please include the actual extraction procedure or clearly label the numbers as an illustrative estimate with a documented method.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract vs. Sec. 6 and Fig. 24] The abstract says 'excellent agreements' with BNL E734 and MiniBooNE data, while the summary says 'decent agreements' and Fig. 24 shows an inconsistency with the first MiniBooNE antineutrino point at Q² ≲ 0.1 GeV². Please harmonize the wording.
  2. [Fig. 25 caption] The figure caption contains a stray 'asdasd' text fragment; it should be removed.
  3. [Reference [89]] Reference [89] is cited as arXiv:2607.xxxx without a number. If results from this companion paper are used, the public preprint or a full citation should be provided; otherwise the dependence on an unpublished reference should be avoided.
  4. [Eq. (3.4) uncertainty definition] The phrase 'twice the relative difference' in the definition of the Π̂3γ uncertainty should be written explicitly (e.g., 2 × |Π̂γγ^ChPT - Π̂3γ^ChPT|/Π̂γγ^ChPT or an equivalent norm) so that the uncertainty is reproducible.
  5. [Sec. 5, comparison with Ref. [147]] The statement that 'perfect agreement' is obtained after interchanging neutrino and antineutrino predictions for the neutron target appears to indicate a convention or typographical issue in the comparison; please clarify what was interchanged and why.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: radiative corrections are parameter-free, use external inputs, and are benchmarked against E734/MiniBooNE data.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The closed-fermion-loop correction (Eq. 3.1) and the soft-function/resummation formalism (Eqs. 4.3-4.12) contain no parameter fitted to the neutral-current data they later compare with; the E734/MiniBooNE comparisons are genuine postdictions. Strange form factors enter from lattice QCD [63,99], electromagnetic and axial form factors from independent ep and MINERvA fits [101,102], and δ_QCD uses the externally data-driven Πγγ from alphaQED2025 plus an SU(2) ChPT relation. The identification Π̂3γ=Π̂γγ and the matching at Q0^2=1 GeV^2 are input assumptions with assigned uncertainties (Sec. 3.2) and are explicitly flagged in Sec. 6 as the dominant uncertainty; they are model/miscalibration risks, not equations that reduce the claimed prediction to its inputs. The paper's self-citations (e.g., [91,105,106]) supply machinery, but the cited results are independent of the target strangeness-shift claim, and no central 'prediction' is equivalent by construction to a fitted parameter.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new entities and fits no parameters to the E734/MiniBooNE data it compares against. Its dependence on hand-chosen inputs concentrates in the non-perturbative light-quark loop correction (matching scale, ChPT identity, hand-set uncertainty) and the detector cutoff ΔE. All remaining inputs (Wilson coefficients, FFs from lattice/QED fits, fluxes) come from prior literature.

free parameters (3)
  • Matching scale Q²_0 for δ_QCD = 1 GeV² (varied between m²_ρ ≈ 0.6 GeV² and 2 GeV² for uncertainty)
    The switch between the non-perturbative (data-driven/ChPT) and perturbative evaluations of the light-quark loop correction is chosen by hand, not determined by data. §3.2.
  • Photon energy cutoff ΔE = 5 MeV (default; 20 MeV and 'no FF correction' alternatives)
    Detector-specific threshold defining the exclusive cross section; the paper shows results are insensitive (R ratios identical to last digit). §4, §5.
  • Uncertainty factor for Π̂_3γ = 2 × relative SU(3) ChPT difference between Π̂_γγ^{ChPT} and Π̂_3γ^{ChPT}; conservative error set to ChPT error
    Hand-assigned error envelope for the central light-quark correction rather than a derived uncertainty. §3.2.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption SU(3) flavor symmetry for the quark-flavor decomposition of nucleon FFs (Eqs. 2.20-2.23)
    Used to build G_Z^{p,n} from EM FFs and G_A^W; isospin-breaking neglected at the permille-to-percent level.
  • ad hoc to paper Π̂_3γ = Π̂_γγ (SU(2) ChPT relation) used as central value for the isospin correlator
    Load-bearing modeling choice in §3.2; the relation is assumed to hold outside its strict ChPT validity range up to Q² ≈ 1 GeV², with uncertainty set by hand.
  • domain assumption Quark-hadron duality / matching of nonperturbative to perturbative δ_QCD at Q²_0 = 1 GeV²
    The perturbative continuation of the light-quark loop correction is matched to the data-driven value at a hand-chosen scale; no proof of convergence of the matching.
  • standard math LEFT Wilson coefficients at µ = 2 GeV from Refs. [91,107]
    External inputs for c_L,R^q and c_{νℓγ}; standard SM→LEFT matching, independently checkable.
  • standard math Soft/hard factorization of QED corrections with the soft function F_soft from Ref. [134] (Eqs. 4.1-4.7)
    SCET-style factorization; the soft function is a standard result for ep scattering, applied here to neutrino NC scattering.
  • domain assumption m_ν = 0 approximation
    Quantified bound (m_ν/M)² ≲ 2.3×10⁻¹⁹ justifies neglect in the cross section.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 43437 in / 21476 out tokens · 215503 ms · 2026-08-02T00:19:04.057998+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We introduce radiative corrections in neutral-current (anti)neutrino-nucleon elastic scattering at $\text{GeV}$ energies within the effective field theory framework. We factorize cross sections into soft and hard functions, clarify the (anti)neutrino flavor dependence at both amplitude and cross-section levels, and improve the quantum chromodynamics (QCD) contributions to low-energy neutral-current processes. The radiative corrections at the single-nucleon level reach a magnitude comparable to the contributions from strange quarks. We also compare our results with the experimental data from BNL E734 and MiniBooNE collaborations, finding excellent agreements with the experimental data.

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

181 extracted references · 117 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Gao and M

    H. Gao and M. Vanderhaeghen,The proton charge radius,Rev. Mod. Phys.94(2022) 015002 [2105.00571]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  2. [2]

    Chambers and R

    E.E. Chambers and R. Hofstadter,Structure of the Proton,Phys. Rev.103(1956) 1454

    1956

  3. [3]

    Hofstadter,Electron scattering and nuclear structure,Rev

    R. Hofstadter,Electron scattering and nuclear structure,Rev. Mod. Phys.28(1956) 214. [4]A1collaboration,High-precision determination of the electric and magnetic form factors of the proton,Phys. Rev. Lett.105(2010) 242001 [1007.5076]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1956

  4. [5]

    Mihovilovič et al.,The proton charge radius extracted from the initial-state radiation experiment at MAMI,Eur

    M. Mihovilovič et al.,The proton charge radius extracted from the initial-state radiation experiment at MAMI,Eur. Phys. J. A57(2021) 107 [1905.11182]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  5. [6]

    Xiong et al.,A small proton charge radius from an electron–proton scattering experiment,Nature575(2019) 147

    W. Xiong et al.,A small proton charge radius from an electron–proton scattering experiment,Nature575(2019) 147. [7]PRadcollaboration,PRad-II: A New Upgraded High Precision Measurement of the Proton Charge Radius,2009.10510

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  6. [8]

    H. Atac, M. Constantinou, Z.E. Meziani, M. Paolone and N. Sparveris,Charge radii of the nucleon from its flavor dependent Dirac form factors,Eur. Phys. J. A57(2021) 65 [2009.04357]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  7. [9]

    H. Atac, M. Constantinou, Z.E. Meziani, M. Paolone and N. Sparveris,Measurement of the neutron charge radius and the role of its constituents,Nature Commun.12(2021) 1759 [2103.10840]. [10]A1, MAGIXcollaboration,Low-Q2 elastic electron-proton scattering using a gas jet target, Phys. Rev. C106(2022) 044610 [2208.13689]. – 40 – [11]MUSEcollaboration,The MUon...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  8. [12]

    Yennie, M.M

    D.R. Yennie, M.M. Lévy and D.G. Ravenhall,Electromagnetic Structure of Nucleons,Rev. Mod. Phys.29(1957) 144

    1957

  9. [13]

    Ernst, R.G

    F.J. Ernst, R.G. Sachs and K.C. Wali,Electromagnetic Form Factors of the Nucleon,Phys. Rev.119(1960) 1105

    1960

  10. [14]

    Burkardt,Impact parameter space interpretation for generalized parton distributions, Int

    M. Burkardt,Impact parameter space interpretation for generalized parton distributions, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A18(2003) 173 [hep-ph/0207047]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  11. [15]

    Miller,Charge Density of the Neutron,Phys

    G.A. Miller,Charge Density of the Neutron,Phys. Rev. Lett.99(2007) 112001 [0705.2409]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  12. [16]

    Carlson and M

    C.E. Carlson and M. Vanderhaeghen,Empirical transverse charge densities in the nucleon and the nucleon-to-Delta transition,Phys. Rev. Lett.100(2008) 032004 [0710.0835]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  13. [17]

    Lorcé,Charge Distributions of Moving Nucleons,Phys

    C. Lorcé,Charge Distributions of Moving Nucleons,Phys. Rev. Lett.125(2020) 232002 [2007.05318]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  14. [18]

    Kim and H.-C

    J.-Y. Kim and H.-C. Kim,Transverse charge distributions of the nucleon and their Abel images,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 074003 [2106.10986]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  15. [19]

    Li, W.-b

    Y. Li, W.-b. Dong, Y.-l. Yin, Q. Wang and J.P. Vary,Minkowski’s lost legacy and hadron electromagnetism,Phys. Lett. B838(2023) 137676 [2206.12903]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  16. [20]

    Epelbaum, J

    E. Epelbaum, J. Gegelia, N. Lange, U.G. Meißner and M.V. Polyakov,Definition of Local Spatial Densities in Hadrons,Phys. Rev. Lett.129(2022) 012001 [2201.02565]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  17. [21]

    Panteleeva, E

    J.Y. Panteleeva, E. Epelbaum, J. Gegelia and U.G. Meißner,Definition of electromagnetic local spatial densities for composite spin-1/2 systems,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 056019 [2205.15061]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  18. [22]

    Chen and C

    Y. Chen and C. Lorcé,Pion and nucleon relativistic electromagnetic four-current distributions,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 116024 [2210.02908]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  19. [23]

    Chen and C

    Y. Chen and C. Lorcé,Nucleon relativistic polarization and magnetization distributions, Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 096003 [2302.04672]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  20. [24]

    Freese and G.A

    A. Freese and G.A. Miller,Light front synchronization and rest frame densities of the proton: Electromagnetic densities,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 074036 [2302.09171]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  21. [25]

    Lee et al.,Observation of the Reactionνµ +p→ν µ +p,Phys

    W.-Y. Lee et al.,Observation of the Reactionνµ +p→ν µ +p,Phys. Rev. Lett.37(1976) 186

    1976

  22. [26]

    Cline, A

    D. Cline, A. Entenberg, W. Kozanecki, A.K. Mann, D.D. Reeder, C. Rubbia et al., Observation of Elastic Neutrino-Proton Scattering,Phys. Rev. Lett.37(1976) 252

    1976

  23. [27]

    Cline, A

    D. Cline, A. Entenberg, W. Kozanecki, A.K. Mann, D.D. Reeder, C. Rubbia et al., Observation of Elastic Antineutrino-Proton Scattering,Phys. Rev. Lett.37(1976) 648

    1976

  24. [28]

    Horstkotte, A

    J. Horstkotte, A. Entenberg, R.S. Galik, A.K. Mann, H.H. Williams, W. Kozanecki et al., Measurement of neutrino-proton and antineutrino-proton elastic scattering,Phys. Rev. D 25(1982) 2743

    1982

  25. [29]

    Ahrens et al.,Measurement of neutrino-proton and antineutrino-proton elastic scattering,Phys

    L.A. Ahrens et al.,Measurement of neutrino-proton and antineutrino-proton elastic scattering,Phys. Rev. D35(1987) 785. [30]MiniBooNEcollaboration,Measurement of the Neutrino Neutral-Current Elastic – 41 – Differential Cross Section on Mineral Oil atEν ∼1GeV,Phys. Rev. D82(2010) 092005 [1007.4730]. [31]MiniBooNEcollaboration,Measurement of the Antineutrino...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1987

  26. [33]

    Ren,Studies of Neutral Current Neutrino-Nucleon Scattering with the MicroBooNE Detector,JPS Conf

    L. Ren,Studies of Neutral Current Neutrino-Nucleon Scattering with the MicroBooNE Detector,JPS Conf. Proc.37(2022) 020309. [34]MicroBooNEcollaboration,Measurement of Neutral Current Elastic Cross Section in MicroBooNE,PoSNuF act2021(2022) 205

    2022

  27. [35]

    Mann et al.,Study of the reactionν+n→µ − +p,Phys

    W.A. Mann et al.,Study of the reactionν+n→µ − +p,Phys. Rev. Lett.31(1973) 844

    1973

  28. [36]

    Baker, A.M

    N.J. Baker, A.M. Cnops, P.L. Connolly, S.A. Kahn, H.G. Kirk, M.J. Murtagh et al., Quasielastic neutrino scattering: A measurement of the weak nucleon axial-vector form factor,Phys. Rev. D23(1981) 2499

    1981

  29. [37]

    Belikov et al.,Quasielastic neutrino and antineutrino scattering total cross-sections, axial-vector form-factor,Z

    S.V. Belikov et al.,Quasielastic neutrino and antineutrino scattering total cross-sections, axial-vector form-factor,Z. Phys. A320(1985) 625

    1985

  30. [38]

    Ahrens et al.,A study of the axial-vector form factor and second-class currents in antineutrino quasielastic scattering,Phys

    L.A. Ahrens et al.,A study of the axial-vector form factor and second-class currents in antineutrino quasielastic scattering,Phys. Lett. B202(1988) 284. [39]MiniBooNEcollaboration,First Measurement of the Muon Neutrino Charged Current Quasielastic Double Differential Cross Section,Phys. Rev. D81(2010) 092005 [1002.2680]. [40]MINERvAcollaboration,Measureme...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1988

  31. [43]

    Llewellyn Smith,Neutrino reactions at accelerator energies,Phys

    C.H. Llewellyn Smith,Neutrino reactions at accelerator energies,Phys. Rept.3(1972) 261

    1972

  32. [44]

    Ohlsson and H

    T. Ohlsson and H. Snellman,Weak form-factors for semileptonic octet baryon decays in the chiral quark model,Eur. Phys. J. C6(1999) 285 [hep-ph/9803490]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  33. [45]

    Bernard, L

    V. Bernard, L. Elouadrhiri and U.-G. Meissner,Axial structure of the nucleon: Topical Review,J. Phys. G28(2002) R1 [hep-ph/0107088]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  34. [46]

    Singh and M.J

    S.K. Singh and M.J. Vicente Vacas,Weak quasi-elastic production of hyperons,Phys. Rev. D74(2006) 053009 [hep-ph/0606235]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  35. [47]

    Y. Chen, Y. Li, C. Lorcé and Q. Wang,Nucleon axial radius,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) L091503 [2405.12943]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  36. [49]

    Chen,Nucleon 3D intrinsic spin structure from the weak-neutral axial-vector form factors,PoSSPIN2025(2026) 099 [2512.06801]

    Y. Chen,Nucleon 3D intrinsic spin structure from the weak-neutral axial-vector form factors,PoSSPIN2025(2026) 099 [2512.06801]. – 42 –

    arXiv 2026

  37. [50]

    J.E. Kim, P. Langacker, M. Levine and H.H. Williams,A Theoretical and Experimental Review of the Weak Neutral Current: A Determination of Its Structure and Limits on Deviations from the MinimalSU(2)L ×U(1)Electroweak Theory,Rev. Mod. Phys.53 (1981) 211

    1981

  38. [51]

    Kaplan and A

    D.B. Kaplan and A. Manohar,Strange Matrix Elements in the Proton from Neutral Current Experiments,Nucl. Phys. B310(1988) 527

    1988

  39. [52]

    Mckeown,Sensitivity of polarized elastic electron-proton scattering to the anomalous baryon number magnetic moment,Phys

    R.D. Mckeown,Sensitivity of polarized elastic electron-proton scattering to the anomalous baryon number magnetic moment,Phys. Lett. B219(1989) 140

    1989

  40. [53]

    Garvey, W.C

    G.T. Garvey, W.C. Louis and D.H. White,Determination of proton strange form-factors from neutrino p elastic scattering,Phys. Rev. C48(1993) 761

    1993

  41. [54]

    Garvey, E

    G. Garvey, E. Kolbe, K. Langanke and S. Krewald,Role of strange quarks in quasielastic neutrino scattering,Phys. Rev. C48(1993) 1919

    1993

  42. [55]

    Musolf, T.W

    M.J. Musolf, T.W. Donnelly, J. Dubach, S.J. Pollock, S. Kowalski and E.J. Beise, Intermediate-energy semileptonic probes of the hadronic neutral current,Phys. Rept.239 (1994) 1 [nucl-th/9307022]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  43. [56]

    Pate,Determination of the strange form-factors of the nucleon from nu p, anti-nu p, and parity violating polarized-e p elastic scattering,Phys

    S.F. Pate,Determination of the strange form-factors of the nucleon from nu p, anti-nu p, and parity violating polarized-e p elastic scattering,Phys. Rev. Lett.92(2004) 082002 [hep-ex/0310052]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  44. [57]

    Beise, M.L

    E.J. Beise, M.L. Pitt and D.T. Spayde,The SAMPLE experiment and weak nucleon structure,Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.54(2005) 289 [nucl-ex/0412054]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  45. [58]

    Pate, D.W

    S.F. Pate, D.W. McKee and V. Papavassiliou,Strange Quark Contribution to the Vector and Axial Form Factors of the Nucleon: Combined Analysis of G0, HAPPEx, and Brookhaven E734 Data,Phys. Rev. C78(2008) 015207 [0805.2889]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  46. [59]

    Butkevich and D

    A.V. Butkevich and D. Perevalov,Neutrino neutral-current elastic scattering on 12C,Phys. Rev. C84(2011) 015501 [1106.0976]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  47. [60]

    Sufian, Y.-B

    R.S. Sufian, Y.-B. Yang, A. Alexandru, T. Draper, J. Liang and K.-F. Liu,Strange Quark Magnetic Moment of the Nucleon at the Physical Point,Phys. Rev. Lett.118(2017) 042001 [1606.07075]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  48. [61]

    Maas and K.D

    F.E. Maas and K.D. Paschke,Strange nucleon form-factors,Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.95 (2017) 209

    2017

  49. [62]

    S.F. Pate, V. Papavassiliou, J.P. Schaub, D.P. Trujillo, M.V. Ivanov, M.B. Barbaro et al., Global fit of electron and neutrino elastic scattering data to determine the strange quark contribution to the vector and axial form factors of the nucleon,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 093001 [2402.10854]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  50. [63]

    Alexandrou, S

    C. Alexandrou, S. Bacchio, M. Bode, J. Finkenrath, A. Herten, C. Iona et al.,Nucleon strange electromagnetic form factors fromNf = 2 + 1 + 1lattice QCD,2603.26591

    arXiv

  51. [64]

    Jaffe and A

    R.L. Jaffe and A. Manohar,Theg 1 Problem: Fact and Fantasy on the Spin of the Proton, Nucl. Phys. B337(1990) 509

    1990

  52. [65]

    Green, S

    J. Green, S. Meinel, M. Engelhardt, S. Krieg, J. Laeuchli, J. Negele et al.,High-precision calculation of the strange nucleon electromagnetic form factors,Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 031501 [1505.01803]. – 43 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  53. [66]

    Djukanovic, K

    D. Djukanovic, K. Ottnad, J. Wilhelm and H. Wittig,Strange electromagnetic form factors of the nucleon withNf = 2 + 1O(a)-improved Wilson fermions,Phys. Rev. Lett.123 (2019) 212001 [1903.12566]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  54. [67]

    Alexandrou, M

    C. Alexandrou, M. Constantinou, K. Hadjiyiannakou, K. Jansen, C. Kallidonis, G. Koutsou et al.,Strange nucleon electromagnetic form factors from lattice QCD,Phys. Rev. D97 (2018) 094504 [1801.09581]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  55. [68]

    Alexandrou, S

    C. Alexandrou, S. Bacchio, M. Constantinou, J. Finkenrath, K. Hadjiyiannakou, K. Jansen et al.,Nucleon strange electromagnetic form factors,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 031501 [1909.10744]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  56. [69]

    Barone, D

    A. Barone, D. Djukanovic, G. von Hippel, H.B. Meyer, K. Ottnad and H. Wittig,The strange and flavor-singlet axial form factors of the nucleon from lattice QCD,2605.06559

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  57. [70]

    Marciano and A

    W.J. Marciano and A. Sirlin,Radiative Corrections to Neutrino Induced Neutral Current Phenomena in theSU(2) L ×U(1)Theory,Phys. Rev. D22(1980) 2695

    1980

  58. [71]

    Entenberg, J

    A. Entenberg, J. Horstkotte, W. Kozanecki, A.K. Mann, C. Rubbia, J. Strait et al., Measurement of the Elastic Scattering of Neutrinos and Anti-neutrinos by Protons,Phys. Rev. Lett.42(1979) 1198. [72]MicroBooNE, LAr1-ND, ICARUS-W A104collaboration,A Proposal for a Three Detector Short-Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Program in the Fermilab Booster Neutrino B...

    arXiv 1979

  59. [84]

    Elbers et al.,Constraints on neutrino physics from DESI DR2 BAO and DR1 full shape,Phys

    W. Elbers et al.,Constraints on neutrino physics from DESI DR2 BAO and DR1 full shape,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 083513 [2503.14744]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  60. [85]

    Naredo-Tuero, M

    D. Naredo-Tuero, M. Escudero, E. Fernández-Martínez, X. Marcano and V. Poulin,Critical look at the cosmological neutrino mass bound,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 123537 [2407.13831]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  61. [86]

    Allali and A

    I.J. Allali and A. Notari,Neutrino mass bounds from DESI 2024 are relaxed by Planck PR4 and cosmological supernovae,JCAP12(2024) 020 [2406.14554]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  62. [87]

    Borah, M

    K. Borah, M. Betancourt, R.J. Hill, T. Junk and O. Tomalak,Invariant amplitudes, unpolarized cross sections, and polarization asymmetries in neutrino-nucleon and antineutrino-nucleon elastic scattering,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 013004 [2403.04687]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  63. [88]

    Chen,Nucleon relativistic weak-neutral axial-vector four-current distributions, 2411.12521v2

    Y. Chen,Nucleon relativistic weak-neutral axial-vector four-current distributions, 2411.12521v2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  64. [89]

    Y. Chen, Q. Chen, F.-K. Guo, Q. Wang and B.-S. Zou,A New Probe for Understanding the Matter-Antimatter Asymmetry of the Universe,2607.xxxx

  65. [90]

    Tomalak,Axial and pseudoscalar form factors from charged current quasielastic neutrino-nucleon scattering,Phys

    O. Tomalak,Axial and pseudoscalar form factors from charged current quasielastic neutrino-nucleon scattering,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 013006 [2008.03527]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  66. [91]

    Tomalak and R.J

    O. Tomalak and R.J. Hill,Theory of elastic neutrino-electron scattering,Phys. Rev. D101 (2020) 033006 [1907.03379]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  67. [92]

    Peskin and D.V

    M.E. Peskin and D.V. Schroeder,An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory, Addison-Wesley, Reading, USA (1995)

    1995

  68. [93]

    Behrends and A

    R.E. Behrends and A. Sirlin,Effect of mass splittings on the conserved vector current,Phys. Rev. Lett.4(1960) 186

    1960

  69. [94]

    Dmitrasinovic and S.J

    V. Dmitrasinovic and S.J. Pollock,Isospin breaking corrections to nucleon electroweak form-factors in the constituent quark model,Phys. Rev. C52(1995) 1061 [hep-ph/9504414]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  70. [95]

    Miller,Nucleon charge symmetry breaking and parity violating electron proton scattering,Phys

    G.A. Miller,Nucleon charge symmetry breaking and parity violating electron proton scattering,Phys. Rev. C57(1998) 1492 [nucl-th/9711036]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  71. [96]

    Lewis,Isospin breaking in the vector current of the nucleon,Eur

    R. Lewis,Isospin breaking in the vector current of the nucleon,Eur. Phys. J. A32(2007) 409 [nucl-th/0608079]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  72. [97]

    Kubis and R

    B. Kubis and R. Lewis,Isospin violation in the vector form factors of the nucleon,Phys. Rev. C74(2006) 015204 [nucl-th/0605006]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  73. [98]

    Alberico, S.M

    W.M. Alberico, S.M. Bilenky and C. Maieron,Strangeness in the nucleon: Neutrino-nucleon and polarized electron-nucleon scattering,Phys. Rept.358(2002) 227 [hep-ph/0102269]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  74. [99]

    Alexandrou, S

    C. Alexandrou, S. Bacchio, M. Constantinou, K. Hadjiyiannakou, K. Jansen and G. Koutsou,Quark flavor decomposition of the nucleon axial form factors,Phys. Rev. D 104(2021) 074503 [2106.13468]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  75. [100]

    Golan, K.M

    T. Golan, K.M. Graczyk, C. Juszczak and J.T. Sobczyk,Extraction of Axial Mass and Strangeness Values from the MiniBooNE Neutral Current Elastic Cross Section Measurement,Phys. Rev. C88(2013) 024612 [1302.3890]. – 45 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  76. [101]

    Borah, R.J

    K. Borah, R.J. Hill, G. Lee and O. Tomalak,Parametrization and applications of the low-Q2 nucleon vector form factors,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 074012 [2003.13640]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  77. [102]

    Tomalak, A.S

    O. Tomalak, A.S. Meyer, C. Wret, T. Cai, R.J. Hill and K.S. McFarland,Nucleon axial-vector form factor and radius from radiatively corrected antineutrino scattering data, Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 073004 [2601.21155]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  78. [103]

    Lepage and S.J

    G.P. Lepage and S.J. Brodsky,Exclusive Processes in Perturbative Quantum Chromodynamics,Phys. Rev. D22(1980) 2157

    1980

  79. [104]

    Chernyak and A.R

    V.L. Chernyak and A.R. Zhitnitsky,Asymptotic Behavior of Exclusive Processes in QCD, Phys. Rept.112(1984) 173

    1984

  80. [105]

    Tomalak, P

    O. Tomalak, P. Machado, V. Pandey and R. Plestid,Flavor-dependent radiative corrections in coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering,JHEP02(2021) 097 [2011.05960]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

Showing first 80 references.