Pith. sign in

REVIEW 64 references

A covariant NJL calculation gives the charge radii and magnetic moments of the charged and neutral K* vector mesons, matching other theory and lattice results.

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 · grok-4.5

2026-07-31 08:44 UTC pith:S3M4MI45

load-bearing objection Clean NJL extension that delivers usable charged-K* numbers; the neutral magnetic moment is a residual cancellation artifact and the lattice-consistency claim does not hold for its sign.

arxiv 2607.24661 v1 pith:S3M4MI45 submitted 2026-07-27 hep-ph nucl-th

Electromagnetic structure of charged and neutral strange vector mesons

Parada T. P. Hutauruk This is my paper
classification hep-ph nucl-th
keywords strange vector mesonselectromagnetic form factorsNambu–Jona-Lasinio modelcharge radiusmagnetic momentquadrupole momentK*(892)Schwinger proper-time regularization
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.

Strange vector mesons K*+ and K*0 are short-lived spin-1 particles built from a light quark and a strange antiquark, so their electromagnetic form factors are hard to measure and still poorly known. This paper computes those form factors—charge, magnetic, and quadrupole—inside a covariant quark model that builds the mesons as bound states and dresses the photon–quark vertex. With an infrared cutoff that stands in for confinement, it reports a charge radius of 0.67 fm for K*+ and a small negative mean-square radius for the neutral K*0, plus magnetic moments 2.67 and 0.032 nuclear magnetons. The numbers line up with earlier model work and with lattice QCD, filling a gap left by the scarcity of experimental data. A sympathetic reader cares because these static moments and Q² shapes are the cleanest available window on how flavor symmetry breaking and spin-1 structure rearrange charge and magnetization inside strange mesons.

Core claim

Within the covariant NJL model regularized by Schwinger proper time, the electromagnetic form factors of K*+(892) and K*0(896) yield charge radii ⟨r²⟩_K*+ = 0.45 fm² (r = 0.67 fm) and ⟨r²⟩_K*0 = −0.04 fm², magnetic moments μ_K*+ = 2.67 μ_N and μ_K*0 = 0.032 μ_N, and corresponding quadrupole moments, all stated to be consistent with other theoretical calculations and lattice QCD.

What carries the argument

The covariant SU(3) Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model with Schwinger proper-time cutoffs: dressed quark masses from the gap equation, K* bound states from the Bethe–Salpeter equation, and the three Sachs form factors extracted from the electromagnetic current built from two dominant quark-loop diagrams with BSE-dressed photon–quark vertices.

Load-bearing premise

That fixing an infrared cutoff by hand near the QCD scale, and omitting pion-cloud and tensor dressing of the strange quark, is enough to stand in for confinement and still give physically meaningful static moments.

What would settle it

A lattice QCD determination (or a future experimental extraction) of μ_K*0 or of the K*+ charge radius that lies well outside the reported 0.032 μ_N and 0.67 fm, or that reverses the sign of the neutral magnetic moment while keeping the same quark-mass setup.

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

If this is right

  • Charge, magnetic, and quadrupole form factors of both charged and neutral K* are now available as continuous functions of Q² for comparison with upcoming EIC, JLab, and COMPASS/AMBER data.
  • The small negative mean-square charge radius of K*0 is a concrete, model-level prediction of flavor-asymmetric charge cancellation inside a neutral strange vector meson.
  • The same framework supplies a baseline against which lattice simulations of vector-meson form factors can be checked for quark-mass and continuum systematics.
  • Zero-crossing of G_C for K*+ near 3 GeV² is a sharp, testable feature of the calculated charge distribution.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Because the model sets the strange-quark Pauli form factor to zero, any future measurement that finds a sizable anomalous magnetic moment for the strange quark inside K* would require extending the interaction kernel beyond the present contact terms.
  • The opposite signs reported here and on the lattice for μ_K*0 mark a clean target for next-generation lattice work with physical strange-quark mass.
  • Once the same proper-time NJL setup is applied to medium-modified K* form factors, the free-space radii and moments computed here become the natural vacuum baseline for in-medium studies.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Standard NJL phenomenology: spectrum-fitted parameters, then independent EMFF outputs; no load-bearing circular reduction.

specific steps
  1. self citation load bearing [Sec. IV, parameter paragraph; Refs. [2, 57, 60, 61]]
    "The NJL model parameters used in this work are G_π, G_ω, and G_ρ, as in Refs. [2, 57, 60, 61]. ... The resulting fit yields an ultraviolet cutoff Λ_UV = 645 MeV, pion coupling constant G_π = 19.04×10^{-6} MeV^{-2}, G_ρ = 11.04×10^{-6} MeV^{-2}, and strange constituent quark mass M_s = 611 MeV."

    Model couplings and cutoffs are taken from the author’s prior NJL papers rather than re-derived here. This is normal parameter inheritance, not a proof that the K* EMFFs must equal the quoted values; the triangle-diagram evaluation remains an independent computation. Minor and not load-bearing for the form-factor claims.

full rationale

The derivation is the usual effective-model pipeline. Gap equation, BSE pole condition, and meson–quark coupling fix the dressed masses and g_K*qq from the Lagrangian plus Schwinger proper-time cutoffs; EMFFs are then computed from the triangle diagrams (Eqs. 15–34) and Sachs combinations (12–14). Fitted inputs are m_π, f_π, m_K, m_ρ, m_K*, M_N (Sec. IV); outputs are G_C, G_M, G_Q and static moments. These are different observables, so the moments are not forced by the fit. Charge normalizations G_C(0)=1 (charged) and 0 (neutral) follow from current conservation and quark charges, not from refitting the radii or μ. Self-citations ([2,57,60,61]) only supply the author’s prior NJL parameter set and framework; they do not prove uniqueness of the K* form factors. The small nonzero μ_K*0=0.032 μ_N despite the text’s statement that F_jK*0(0)=0 is an internal numerical/regulator inconsistency (correctness issue), not a circular identification of output with input. No self-definitional loop, no fitted-EMFF-called-prediction, and no uniqueness theorem imported from the author. Score 1 only for ordinary parameter self-citation that is not load-bearing for the central claims.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

7 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central numbers rest on the standard NJL effective Lagrangian, Hartree gap equation, random-phase BSE, and a hand-fixed proper-time regulator that is interpreted as confinement. Roughly a dozen dimensionful parameters are fixed to the light pseudoscalar and vector spectrum before any form factor is computed. No new particles or forces are postulated; the invented content is only the specific regularization-plus-truncation package applied to K*.

free parameters (7)
  • Λ_IR = 0.24 GeV
    Infrared proper-time cutoff fixed by hand at 0.24 GeV to mimic Λ_QCD and remove quark thresholds; directly shapes all loop integrals.
  • Λ_UV = 645 MeV
    Ultraviolet proper-time cutoff fitted to m_π and f_π; controls the overall scale of dynamical mass generation and form-factor falloff.
  • G_π = 19.04×10^{-6} MeV^{-2}
    Scalar-pseudoscalar four-fermion coupling fitted to the pion sector.
  • G_ρ = 11.04×10^{-6} MeV^{-2}
    Vector-channel coupling fitted to ρ and K* masses; enters both the t-matrix pole and the dressed quark-photon vertex.
  • M_l (constituent light-quark mass) = 400 MeV
    Dynamical light-quark mass taken as 400 MeV input; sets the scale of all light-quark loops.
  • M_s (constituent strange-quark mass) = 611 MeV
    Obtained after fitting the strange sector; controls K* binding and flavor-breaking in the form factors.
  • m_u, m_s (current quark masses) = m_u=16 MeV, m_s=356 MeV
    Current masses taken from prior NJL fits of the same group; feed the gap equation.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Local SU(3) NJL four-fermion Lagrangian with only scalar-pseudoscalar and vector-axial couplings adequately encodes low-energy QCD for vector-meson EMFFs.
    Sec. II, Eq. (1); standard effective-model premise, not derived here.
  • domain assumption Schwinger proper-time regularization with a finite IR cutoff simulates quark confinement by eliminating free-quark production thresholds.
    Stated in Sec. II and used in every loop (Eqs. 2, 7, 10, 20–30).
  • domain assumption Hartree mean-field gap equation plus random-phase-approximation BSE suffice for dressed masses and meson bound states.
    Sec. II, Eqs. (2)–(10).
  • ad hoc to paper Tensor–tensor four-fermion channels and pion-cloud corrections to the strange quark can be omitted (F_2S=0, F_2ρ=F_2ω=0).
    Explicitly declared in Sec. III after Eq. (34) and in Eqs. (35)–(39); removes Pauli dressing that would shift magnetic and quadrupole moments.
  • domain assumption Two triangle diagrams of Fig. 1 dominate the electromagnetic current; higher Fock components are negligible.
    Sec. III, Eq. (15) and Fig. 1.

pith-pipeline@v1.2.0-grok45-kimik3 · 22426 in / 3994 out tokens · 66861 ms · 2026-07-31T08:44:49.887775+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We investigate the electromagnetic form factors (EMFFs) of the charged $K^{*+}(892)$ ($u\bar{s}$) and neutral $K^{0}(896)$ ($d\bar{s}$) strange vector mesons within the covariant Nambu--Jona-Lasinio (NJL) model, employing the Schwinger proper-time regularization scheme to regularize ultraviolet divergences while incorporating the QCD aspect of quark confinement. To this end, we evaluate the charge (electric) $G_C(Q^2)$, magnetic $G_M(Q^2)$, and quadrupole $G_Q(Q^2)$ form factors, as well as the charge radii, of the charged $K^{+}(892)$ and neutral $K^{0}(896)$ strange vector mesons. We find the charge radii to be $\langle r^2 \rangle_{K^{+}} = 0.45~\mathrm{fm}^2$ and $\langle r^2 \rangle_{K^{0}} = -0.04~\mathrm{fm}^2$, respectively, while the corresponding magnetic moments are $\mu_{K^{+}} = 2.67,\mu_N$ and $\mu_{K^{*0}} = 0.032,\mu_N$. These results are consistent with other theoretical calculations and lattice QCD simulations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.24661 by Parada T. P. Hutauruk.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Two dominant Feynman diagrams for the elec [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Results for the BSE dressed quark form factors. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Same as in Fig [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The BSE-dressed form factors for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Results for the charge (electric) form factors [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Results for the quadrupole moment form factors [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.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

64 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Lorc´ e, A

    C. Lorc´ e, A. Metz, B. Pasquini, P. Schweitzer, Parton Distribution Functions and their Generalizations, 2025. arXiv:2507.12664

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  2. [2]

    P. T. P. Hutauruk, I. C. Cloet, A. W. Thomas, Flavor dependence of the pion and kaon form factors and par- ton distribution functions, Phys. Rev. C 94 (3) (2016) 035201.arXiv:1604.02853,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.94. 035201

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  3. [3]

    J. C. Collins, D. E. Soper, Parton Distribution and Decay Functions, Nucl. Phys. B 194 (1982) 445–492.doi:10. 1016/0550-3213(82)90021-9

    1982

  4. [4]

    P. T. P. Hutauruk, Pseudoscalar Meson Parton Distri- butions Within Gauge-Invariant Nonlocal Chiral Quark Model, Symmetry 17 (6) (2025) 971.arXiv:2505.06726, 9 doi:10.3390/sym17060971

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    R. J. Hern´ andez-Pinto, L. X. Guti´ errez-Guerrero, M. A. Bedolla, A. Bashir, Electric, magnetic, and quadrupole form factors and charge radii of vector mesons: From light to heavy sectors in a contact interaction, Phys. Rev. D 110 (11) (2024) 114015.arXiv:2410.23813,doi:10. 1103/PhysRevD.110.114015

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    P. T. P. Hutauruk, T. Mart, K. Tsushima, Medium ef- fects on the electromagnetic form factors of theρmeson, Phys. Rev. D 112 (11) (2025) 114030.arXiv:2508.20501, doi:10.1103/95yl-nwds

    arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    E. C. Aschenauer, I. Borsa, R. Sassot, C. Van Hulse, Semi-inclusive Deep-Inelastic Scattering, Parton Dis- tributions and Fragmentation Functions at a Future Electron-Ion Collider, Phys. Rev. D 99 (9) (2019) 094004. arXiv:1902.10663,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.094004

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  8. [8]

    A. Metz, A. Vossen, Parton Fragmentation Functions, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 91 (2016) 136–202.arXiv:1607. 02521,doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2016.08.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2016.08.003 2016

  9. [9]

    M. G. Echevarria, I. Scimemi, A. Vladimirov, Unpolar- ized Transverse Momentum Dependent Parton Distri- bution and Fragmentation Functions at next-to-next-to- leading order, JHEP 09 (2016) 004.arXiv:1604.07869, doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2016)004

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  10. [10]

    B. Sun, Y. Dong, Generalized parton distribution func- tions ofρmeson, SciPost Phys. Proc. 3 (2020) 014. doi:10.21468/SciPostPhysProc.3.014

    work page doi:10.21468/scipostphysproc.3.014 2020

  11. [11]

    C. Shi, J. Li, P.-L. Yin, W. Jia, Unpolarized generalized parton distributions of light and heavy vector mesons, Phys. Rev. D 107 (7) (2023) 074009.arXiv:2302.02388, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.074009

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  12. [12]

    Diehl, Introduction to GPDs and TMDs, Eur

    M. Diehl, Introduction to GPDs and TMDs, Eur. Phys. J. A 52 (6) (2016) 149.arXiv:1512.01328,doi:10.1140/ epja/i2016-16149-3

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  13. [13]

    H.-D. Son, P. T. P. Hutauruk, Generalized parton distri- butions of the kaon and pion within the nonlocal chiral quark model, Phys. Rev. D 111 (5) (2025) 054007.arXiv: 2411.18130,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.054007

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    Ninomiya, W

    Y. Ninomiya, W. Bentz, I. C. Clo¨ et, Transverse- momentum-dependent quark distribution functions of spin-one targets: Formalism and covariant calculations, Phys. Rev. C 96 (4) (2017) 045206.arXiv:1707.03787, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.96.045206

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  15. [15]

    W.-Y. Liu, I. Zahed, Tomography of the rho meson in the QCD instanton vacuum: Transverse momentum dependent parton distribution functions, Phys. Rev. D 112 (3) (2025) 034028.arXiv:2503.11959,doi:10.1103/ 6ffp-qs8p

    arXiv 2025

  16. [16]

    Boussarie, et al., TMD Handbook (4 2023).arXiv: 2304.03302

    R. Boussarie, et al., TMD Handbook (4 2023).arXiv: 2304.03302

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  17. [17]

    Bacchetta, V

    A. Bacchetta, V. Bertone, C. Bissolotti, G. Bozzi, F. Del- carro, F. Piacenza, M. Radici, Transverse-momentum- dependent parton distributions up to N 3LL from Drell- Yan data, JHEP 07 (2020) 117.arXiv:1912.07550, doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2020)117

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  18. [18]

    Bertone, M

    V. Bertone, M. G. Echevarria, ´O. del Rio, S. Rodini, One- loop matching for leading-twist generalised transverse- momentum-dependent distributions, JHEP 05 (2025) 183.arXiv:2502.07576,doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2025) 183

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    Linek, M

    B. Linek, M. Luszczak, W. Sch¨ afer, A. Szczurek, Probing gluon GTMDs of the proton in deep inelastic diffractive dijet production at HERA, Phys. Rev. D 110 (5) (2024) 054027.arXiv:2403.15110,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 110.054027

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  20. [20]

    Hatta, F

    Y. Hatta, F. Yuan, Angular dependence in transverse momentum dependent diffractive parton distributions at small-x, Phys. Lett. B 854 (2024) 138738.arXiv:2403. 19609,doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.138738

    arXiv 2024

  21. [21]

    B. L. Ioffe, QCD at low energies, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 56 (2006) 232–277.arXiv:hep-ph/0502148,doi: 10.1016/j.ppnp.2005.05.001

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  22. [22]

    Gross, et al., 50 Years of Quantum Chromodynamics, Eur

    F. Gross, et al., 50 Years of Quantum Chromodynamics, Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023) 1125.arXiv:2212.11107,doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11949-2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    Leutwyler, On the history of the strong interaction, Mod

    H. Leutwyler, On the history of the strong interaction, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 29 (2014) 1430023.arXiv:1211. 6777,doi:10.1142/S0217732314300237

    work page doi:10.1142/s0217732314300237 2014

  24. [24]

    Epelbaum, J

    E. Epelbaum, J. Gegelia, U. G. Meißner, M. V. Polyakov, Chiral theory ofρ-meson gravitational form factors, Phys. Rev. D 105 (1) (2022) 016018.arXiv:2109.10826, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.016018

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  25. [25]

    Pagels, Energy-Momentum Structure Form Factors of Particles, Phys

    H. Pagels, Energy-Momentum Structure Form Factors of Particles, Phys. Rev. 144 (1966) 1250–1260.doi:10. 1103/PhysRev.144.1250

    1966

  26. [26]

    Cosyn, S

    W. Cosyn, S. Cotogno, A. Freese, C. Lorc´ e, The energy- momentum tensor of spin-1 hadrons: formalism, Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (6) (2019) 476.arXiv:1903.00408,doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-6981-3

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  27. [27]

    Y. Z. Xu, K. Raya, J. Rodr ´ ıguez-Quintero, J. Segovia, Charge distributions of pseudoscalar and vector mesons from Dyson-Schwinger equations, Phys. Rev. D 110 (5) (2024) 054031.arXiv:2406.13306,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.110.054031

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  28. [28]

    M. S. Bhagwat, P. Maris, Vector meson form factors and their quark-mass dependence, Phys. Rev. C 77 (2008) 025203.arXiv:nucl-th/0612069,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevC.77.025203

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  29. [29]

    Cardarelli, I

    F. Cardarelli, I. L. Grach, I. M. Narodetsky, G. Salme, S. Simula, Electromagnetic form-factors of the rho meson in a light front constituent quark model, Phys. Lett. B 349 (1995) 393–399.arXiv:hep-ph/9502360,doi:10. 1016/0370-2693(95)00230-I

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  30. [30]

    S. J. Brodsky, J. R. Hiller, Universal properties of the electromagnetic interactions of spin one systems, Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 2141–2149.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 46.2141

    doi:10.1103/physrevd 1992

  31. [31]

    Puhan, A

    Tanisha, S. Puhan, A. Yadav, H. Dahiya, Valence quark distribution of lightρand heavyJ/ψvector mesons in light-cone quark model (5 2025).arXiv:2505.09213

    arXiv 2025

  32. [32]

    J. P. B. C. De Melo, Unambiguous Extraction of the Electromagnetic Form Factors for Spin-1 Particles on the Light-Front, Phys. Lett. B 788 (2019) 152–160.arXiv: 1810.11478,doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2018.11.003

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  33. [33]

    A. F. Krutov, R. G. Polezhaev, V. E. Troitsky, Mag- netic moment of theρmeson in instant-form relativistic quantum mechanics, Phys. Rev. D 97 (3) (2018) 033007. arXiv:1801.01458,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.033007

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  34. [34]

    Choi, C.-R

    H.-M. Choi, C.-R. Ji, Electromagnetic structure of the rho meson in the light front quark model, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 053015.arXiv:hep-ph/0402114,doi:10. 1103/PhysRevD.70.053015

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  35. [35]

    M. B. Hecht, B. H. J. McKellar, Dipole moments of the rho meson, Phys. Rev. C 57 (1998) 2638–2647.arXiv: hep-ph/9704326,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.57.2638

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  36. [36]

    V. V. Braguta, A. I. Onishchenko, rho meson form- factors and QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 033001.arXiv:hep-ph/0403258,doi:10.1103/ 10 PhysRevD.70.033001

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  37. [37]

    T. M. Aliev, M. Savci, Electromagnetic form factors of the rho meson in light cone QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 094007.arXiv:hep-ph/0405235,doi:10. 1103/PhysRevD.70.094007

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  38. [38]

    Jaus, Consistent treatment of spin 1 mesons in the light front quark model, Phys

    W. Jaus, Consistent treatment of spin 1 mesons in the light front quark model, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003) 094010.arXiv:hep-ph/0212098,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.67.094010

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  39. [39]

    M. E. Carrillo-Serrano, W. Bentz, I. C. Clo¨ et, A. W. Thomas,ρmeson form factors in a confining Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model, Phys. Rev. C 92 (1) (2015) 015212.arXiv:1504.08119,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.92. 015212

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  40. [40]

    I. C. Clo¨ et, W. Bentz, A. W. Thomas, Role of diquark correlations and the pion cloud in nucleon elastic form factors, Phys. Rev. C 90 (2014) 045202.arXiv:1405. 5542,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.90.045202

    doi:10.1103/physrevc.90.045202 2014

  41. [41]

    H. L. L. Roberts, A. Bashir, L. X. Gutierrez-Guerrero, C. D. Roberts, D. J. Wilson, pi- and rho-mesons, and their diquark partners, from a contact interaction, Phys. Rev. C 83 (2011) 065206.arXiv:1102.4376,doi:10. 1103/PhysRevC.83.065206

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  42. [42]

    F. T. Hawes, M. A. Pichowsky, Electromagnetic form- factors of light vector mesons, Phys. Rev. C 59 (1999) 1743–1750.arXiv:nucl-th/9806025,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevC.59.1743

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  43. [43]

    S. R. Amendolia, et al., A Measurement of the Pion Charge Radius, Phys. Lett. B 146 (1984) 116–120.doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(84)90655-5

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(84)90655-5 1984

  44. [44]

    S. R. Amendolia, et al., A Measurement of the Space - Like Pion Electromagnetic Form-Factor, Nucl. Phys. B 277 (1986) 168.doi:10.1016/0550-3213(86)90437-2

    doi:10.1016/0550-3213(86)90437-2 1986

  45. [45]

    Horn, et al., Determination of the Charged Pion Form Factor at Q**2 = 1.60 and 2.45-(GeV/c)**2, Phys

    T. Horn, et al., Determination of the Charged Pion Form Factor at Q**2 = 1.60 and 2.45-(GeV/c)**2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 192001.arXiv:nucl-ex/0607005,doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.192001

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  46. [46]

    Adams, et al., Letter of Intent: A New QCD fa- cility at the M2 beam line of the CERN SPS (COM- PASS++/AMBER) (8 2018).arXiv:1808.00848

    B. Adams, et al., Letter of Intent: A New QCD fa- cility at the M2 beam line of the CERN SPS (COM- PASS++/AMBER) (8 2018).arXiv:1808.00848

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  47. [47]

    Accardi, et al., Strong interaction physics at the lu- minosity frontier with 22 GeV electrons at Jefferson Lab, Eur

    A. Accardi, et al., Strong interaction physics at the lu- minosity frontier with 22 GeV electrons at Jefferson Lab, Eur. Phys. J. A 60 (9) (2024) 173.arXiv:2306.09360, doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-024-01282-x

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  48. [48]

    Sawada, W.-C

    T. Sawada, W.-C. Chang, S. Kumano, J.-C. Peng, S. Sawada, K. Tanaka, Accessing proton generalized par- ton distributions and pion distribution amplitudes with the exclusive pion-induced Drell-Yan process at J-PARC, Phys. Rev. D 93 (11) (2016) 114034.arXiv:1605.00364, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.114034

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  49. [49]

    D. P. Anderle, et al., Electron-ion collider in China, Front. Phys. (Beijing) 16 (6) (2021) 64701.arXiv: 2102.09222,doi:10.1007/s11467-021-1062-0

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  50. [50]

    Arrington, et al., Revealing the structure of light pseu- doscalar mesons at the electron–ion collider, J

    J. Arrington, et al., Revealing the structure of light pseu- doscalar mesons at the electron–ion collider, J. Phys. G 48 (7) (2021) 075106.arXiv:2102.11788,doi:10.1088/ 1361-6471/abf5c3

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  51. [51]

    J. N. Hedditch, W. Kamleh, B. G. Lasscock, D. B. Leinweber, A. G. Williams, J. M. Zanotti, Pseudoscalar and vector meson form-factors from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 75 (2007) 094504.arXiv:hep-lat/0703014,doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.75.094504

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  52. [52]

    Detmold, D

    W. Detmold, D. Pefkou, P. E. Shanahan, Off-forward gluonic structure of vector mesons, Phys. Rev. D 95 (11) (2017) 114515.arXiv:1703.08220,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.95.114515

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  53. [53]

    Z. Wang, D. B. Leinweber, C. Liu, L. Liu, P. Sun, A. W. Thomas, J.-j. Wu, H. Xing, K. Yu, Spectral parameters of theρresonance from lattice QCD, JHEP 08 (2025) 064. arXiv:2502.03700,doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2025)064

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  54. [54]

    Meißner, A

    U.-G. Meißner, A. Rusetsky, A. S. Sakthivasan, G. Schierholz, J.-J. Wu, Form factors of theρmeson from effective field theory and the lattice, JHEP 06 (2026) 164. arXiv:2602.23044,doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2026)164

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  55. [55]

    E. V. Luschevskaya, O. V. Teryaev, E. A. Dorenskaya, S. Y. Alimagomedova, Z. V. Khaidukov, Magnetic Mo- ment of K* 0 Mesons in SU(3) Lattice Gauge Theory, JETP Lett. 123 (10) (2026) 653–660.doi:10.1134/ S0021364025608437

    2026

  56. [56]

    F. X. Lee, S. Moerschbacher, W. Wilcox, Magnetic mo- ments of vector, axial, and tensor mesons in lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 094502.arXiv:0807.4150, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.094502

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  57. [57]

    P. T. P. Hutauruk, W. Bentz, I. C. Clo¨ et, A. W. Thomas, Charge Symmetry Breaking Effects in Pion and Kaon Structure, Phys. Rev. C 97 (5) (2018) 055210.arXiv: 1802.05511,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.97.055210

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  58. [58]

    Bentz, A

    W. Bentz, A. W. Thomas, The Stability of nuclear matter in the Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model, Nucl. Phys. A 696 (2001) 138–172.arXiv:nucl-th/0105022,doi:10.1016/ S0375-9474(01)01119-8

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  59. [59]

    D. L. Whittenbury, H. H. Matevosyan, A. W. Thomas, Hybrid stars using the quark-meson coupling and proper-time Nambu–Jona-Lasinio models, Phys. Rev. C 93 (3) (2016) 035807.arXiv:1511.08561,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevC.93.035807

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  60. [60]

    Gifari, P

    G. Gifari, P. T. P. Hutauruk, T. Mart, Nuclear medium meson structures from the Schwinger proper- time Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model, Phys. Rev. D 110 (1) (2024) 014043.arXiv:2402.19048,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.110.014043

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  61. [61]

    P. T. P. Hutauruk, S.-i. Nam, Gluon and valence quark distributions for the pion and kaon in nuclear matter, Phys. Rev. D 105 (3) (2022) 034021.arXiv:2112.05435, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.034021

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  62. [62]

    Luan, X.-L

    Y.-L. Luan, X.-L. Chen, W.-Z. Deng, Meson electro- magnetic form factors in an extended Nambu–Jona- Lasinio model including heavy quark flavors, Chin. Phys. C 39 (11) (2015) 113103.arXiv:1504.03799,doi:10. 1088/1674-1137/39/11/113103

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  63. [63]

    L. X. Guti´ errez-Guerrero, R. J. Hern´ andez-Pinto, Symmetry- Preserving Contact Interaction Approaches: An Overview of Meson and Diquark Form Factors, Par- ticles 9 (2) (2026) 45.arXiv:2604.15122,doi:10.3390/ particles9020045

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  64. [64]

    A. M. Badalian, Y. A. Simonov, Magnetic moments of mesons, Phys. Rev. D 87 (7) (2013) 074012.arXiv:1211. 4349,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.074012

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.87.074012 2013