Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 69 references

GTMD ratios between electron-ion and electron-proton collisions deviate from unity by up to about 16 percent, giving an indirect measure of nuclear density effects on quark spin and orbital angular momentum.

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

2026-07-10 07:08 UTC pith:5FU6Y4ZI

load-bearing objection Clean model combo that invents eA/eP GTMD ratios as R_AA analogs, but the numbers rest almost entirely on swapping NJL m* into a vacuum dressed-quark wave function with a shared fixed k_perp cutoff. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.08457 v1 pith:5FU6Y4ZI submitted 2026-07-09 hep-ph

Electron-Ion Collision Environment: Distribution of Quark Spin and Orbital Angular Momentum

Sujit Jana , Ashutosh Dwibedi , Vikash Kumar Ojha , Sabyasachi Ghosh This is my paper
classification hep-ph
keywords GTMDsquark orbital angular momentumElectron-Ion ColliderNambu-Jona-Lasinio modelnuclear density effectsspin-orbit correlationlight-front dressed quark modelnuclear modification factor
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.

The paper sets out to show how quark orbital angular momentum, spin, and spin-orbit correlations change when one moves from a free proton to a nucleus. It does this by taking constituent quark masses from the Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model at zero density and at nuclear saturation density, then inserting those masses into a light-front dressed-quark calculation of three selected generalized transverse-momentum-dependent distributions. The authors form ratios of the nuclear results to the vacuum results, in the spirit of the nuclear modification factor used in heavy-ion collisions. Any departure of those ratios from one is proposed as a measurable signature of many-body nuclear density effects in non-perturbative QCD. A reader cares because the future Electron-Ion Collider can access the same partonic distributions in both eP and eA collisions, turning the predicted deviations into a concrete experimental target for the nuclear modification of the proton’s spin budget.

Core claim

When the free constituent quark mass is replaced by its value at nuclear saturation density inside an otherwise unchanged light-front dressed-quark wave function, the GTMDs linked to quark orbital angular momentum and spin-orbit correlation are suppressed by roughly 10–16 percent relative to vacuum, while the GTMD linked to quark spin is enhanced by 0–12 percent. With a common transverse-momentum cutoff the fully integrated contributions themselves rise by about 40 percent, 16 percent and 40 percent respectively, and the authors present these density-dependent ratios as the cold-matter analogue of the nuclear suppression factor.

What carries the argument

The set of GTMD ratios (F1,4, G1,4 and G1,1 evaluated at nuclear saturation density over the same quantities at zero density), which function as a nuclear-modification factor for partonic spin and orbital angular momentum.

Load-bearing premise

The whole difference between free-proton and nuclear environments is captured by changing only the constituent quark mass while leaving the light-front wave function and the transverse-momentum integration cutoff otherwise identical.

What would settle it

An Electron-Ion Collider measurement of the GTMD ratios for F1,4, G1,1 and G1,4 that shows no statistically significant deviation from unity, or a deviation whose size and sign disagree with the calculated 10–16 percent suppression and 0–12 percent enhancement.

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

If this is right

  • EIC measurements of the proposed GTMD ratios can quantify many-body nuclear density effects on the proton spin budget.
  • With a fixed transverse-momentum cutoff, the magnitudes of quark OAM, spin and spin-orbit correlation all increase with baryon density.
  • The same mass-shift procedure predicts modified magnitude and localization of the GTMDs themselves when moving from eP to eA kinematics.
  • Deviations of the ratios from unity serve as an indirect probe of non-perturbative QCD at finite nuclear density, parallel to R_AA in heavy-ion collisions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If experiment requires a density-dependent transverse-momentum cutoff, the integrated enhancements may vanish, leaving only the differential ratios as robust observables.
  • The mass-shift template can be applied to other light-front distributions (TMDs, GPDs) to generate a broader set of nuclear-modification predictions for EIC kinematics.
  • A mismatch between the predicted 10–16 percent effects and actual EIC data would indicate that genuine multi-quark correlations, beyond a simple mass change, dominate the nuclear medium modification.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper maps eP and eA environments at the future EIC onto constituent quark masses m* obtained from the two-flavor NJL gap equation at T=0, ρ_B=0 and ρ_B=ρ_0. These masses are inserted into the light-front dressed-quark (quark+gluon) model to obtain analytic leading-twist GTMDs F_{1,4}, G_{1,1} and G_{1,4} (Eqs. 15–17). Integrated moments yield quark OAM, spin and spin–orbit correlation (Eqs. 20–22); the authors report ~40 %, 16 % and 40 % enhancements at saturation density for a fixed k_⊥ cutoff Q=5 GeV. They further define GTMD ratios (analogous to R_AA) whose 0–16 % deviations from unity are proposed as indirect probes of nuclear many-body effects in non-perturbative QCD.

Significance. If the sole-medium-effect assumption is accepted, the work supplies the first concrete, falsifiable numerical predictions for GTMD ratios that could be extracted by comparing eP and eA data at the EIC, thereby linking nuclear density to the proton spin budget. The analytic GTMD expressions and the clean separation of vacuum versus in-medium m* are reproducible strengths. The result remains model-dependent and exploratory; its main value is to flag a measurable observable rather than to deliver a definitive QCD calculation.

major comments (3)
  1. Sec. II–III and Eqs. (15)–(17), (20)–(22), (25): the entire quantitative claim (Figs. 2–3) rests on replacing only the free mass m* by the NJL in-medium mass while retaining the vacuum light-front wave function and a common ultraviolet cutoff Q=5 GeV. The authors themselves note that a density-dependent cutoff can cancel the density dependence of the integrated moments. Because F_{1,4}, G_{1,1} and G_{1,4} scale with powers of m* and with kinematic denominators containing m*, any genuine medium modification of the wave-function support or of the effective cutoff alters both the ratios and the quoted percentages. This single assumption must be stress-tested (e.g., by varying Q(ρ_B) or by comparing with a medium-modified LFWF) before the ratios can be advertised as robust EIC observables.
  2. Sec. II A: the target is a free dressed quark (bare quark + one gluon), not a three-quark proton or a nucleus. Mapping its GTMDs directly onto “proton” and “nucleus” environments therefore omits confinement, multi-quark correlations and nuclear binding. The paper should either justify why the truncation is sufficient for the claimed ratios or clearly label the results as dressed-quark rather than nucleon/nuclear GTMDs.
  3. Sec. III, Fig. 2: the reported 40 %/16 %/40 % enhancements are obtained with a fixed upper limit Q. Without a systematic study of cutoff dependence (or an argument that the same Q is appropriate for both environments), the integrated percentages cannot be regarded as model-independent predictions.
minor comments (4)
  1. Throughout: several typographical inconsistencies appear (“RESUL TS”, “suppresed”, “measurments”, “Jocbi”). A careful proof-reading pass is needed.
  2. Fig. 1: the white strip at small x is attributed to a 1/x^{2} singularity in α; a short analytic remark on the domain of validity of the expressions would help the reader.
  3. Eq. (19) and surrounding text: the overall normalization N = g^{2} C_f / 2(2π)^{3} is left free; its cancellation in the ratios should be stated explicitly.
  4. References: a few recent experimental or lattice works on nuclear GTMDs/TMDs could be added for context, but this is not essential.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

No load-bearing circularity: NJL vacuum-fitted masses are inserted into independently derived light-front GTMD formulas; self-citations supply only the vacuum model framework.

specific steps
  1. self citation load bearing [Sec. II A, Eqs. (15)–(17) and citations [44,45]]
    "The analytical expressions of these 3 GTMDs in the dressed quark model are given as follows: F_{1,4}=… G_{1,1}=… G_{1,4}=… [44] Vikash Kumar Ojha, Sujit Jana, and Tanmay Maji … [45] Asmita Mukherjee, Sreeraj Nair, and Vikash Kumar Ojha …"

    The explicit GTMD formulas that are later evaluated at two densities are taken from prior papers whose author lists overlap with the present work. This is ordinary model reuse, not a circular reduction of the density ratios themselves; the ratios arise only after the independent NJL mass shift is inserted. The step is therefore minor and non-load-bearing for the central claim.

full rationale

The derivation chain is: (i) NJL gap equation with parameters fixed solely to vacuum m_π and f_π yields m*(ρ_B=0) and m*(ρ_B=ρ_0); (ii) these two numbers are substituted into the analytic GTMD expressions (15)–(17) of the light-front dressed-quark model; (iii) the resulting functions are integrated or ratioed to produce the claimed OAM/spin/L–S enhancements and GTMD ratios. Nothing in steps (ii)–(iii) is fitted to the target observables, nor is any uniqueness theorem or ansatz imported solely from overlapping-author papers to force the density dependence. The self-citations ([44], [45]) merely supply the vacuum wave-function overlap that generates (15)–(17); once those expressions exist, the medium effect is an ordinary parameter substitution. The authors themselves note that a density-dependent k_⊥ cutoff could cancel the integrated percentages, confirming that the numerical results are model outputs rather than tautologies. Hence the circularity score is at most 1 (minor self-citation of the vacuum framework).

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 4 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on two established effective models glued by a modeling choice: NJL supplies m*(ρ_B) via three vacuum-fitted parameters; the light-front dressed-quark model supplies GTMD formulas with a free coupling and an ad-hoc k_⊥ cutoff. No new particles or forces are invented, but the identification of eA physics with a single in-medium mass inside a free dressed quark is an ad-hoc domain assumption that carries most of the interpretive weight.

free parameters (5)
  • NJL current quark mass m = 0.0027 GeV
    Fitted with G and Λ to vacuum m_π and f_π; sets the scale of dynamical mass generation.
  • NJL four-fermion coupling G = 1.95 GeV^{-2}
    Vacuum fit parameter controlling the strength of chiral condensate and thus m*(ρ).
  • NJL UV cutoff Λ = 0.95 GeV
    Regularization scale of the non-renormalizable NJL gap equation; fitted with m and G.
  • Transverse-momentum integration cutoff Q = 5 GeV
    Upper limit of k_⊥ integrals for OAM, spin, and L–S; chosen by hand as 5 GeV and held fixed for both densities—authors note a density-dependent Q could cancel the reported enhancements.
  • Strong coupling / color factor combination N = g² C_f / 2(2π)³
    Overall normalization of the two-particle LFWF and thus of the GTMDs; not independently constrained in the paper for the ratios (ratios may cancel N, but absolute OAM/spin values depend on it).
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption A dressed quark (bare quark + one gluon Fock component) is a sufficient proxy for the partonic structure of a proton when computing leading-twist GTMDs F_{1,4}, G_{1,1}, G_{1,4}.
    Invoked throughout Sec. II A; truncates the Fock expansion at two particles and identifies the target with a free dressed quark rather than a three-quark nucleon.
  • ad hoc to paper The sole medium effect distinguishing eA from eP for these GTMDs is the replacement m* → m*(ρ_B) from the NJL gap equation at T=0.
    Stated as the bridging strategy in the Introduction and Sec. II B; no nuclear spectral functions, binding, or multi-nucleon correlations are included.
  • domain assumption NJL contact interaction with three-momentum cutoff correctly maps baryon density to constituent quark mass near ρ_0.
    Eq. (25) and parameter choice; standard but model-dependent effective description of chiral restoration.
  • standard math Light-front correlator decompositions (Eqs. 12–13) and the integral definitions of l_z^q, S_q, C_z^q (Eqs. 20–22) correctly extract OAM, spin, and spin–orbit correlation.
    Taken from the established GTMD literature cited in Sec. II A.
invented entities (1)
  • eA/eP GTMD ratios (R-like factors for F_{1,4}, G_{1,4}, G_{1,1}) no independent evidence
    purpose: Proposed experimental observables analogous to R_AA that would signal nuclear-density modifications of quark OAM, spin, and L–S correlation.
    Defined in Sec. III and Fig. 3; not a new particle or force, but a new composite observable constructed for this paper. Independent evidence would require actual EIC measurements; none exist yet.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 18842 in / 3876 out tokens · 37654 ms · 2026-07-10T07:08:34.952567+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The future Electron-Ion Collider (EIC) will enable measurements of the same partonic distributions inside both the proton and the nucleus through electron-proton (eP) and electron-ion (eA) collisions. This capability motivates the present theoretical study of the distributions of quark spin and orbital angular momentum within the proton and the nucleus. To map the eP and eA collision environments, we employ the Nambu--Jona-Lasinio (NJL) model at finite nuclear density to determine the constituent quark masses at zero nuclear density and near the nuclear saturation density. Using these quark mass inputs, we calculate the generalized transverse momentum-dependent parton distributions (GTMDs) associated with quark orbital angular momentum (OAM), spin, and spin-orbit correlations within the light-front dressed quark model. Furthermore, inspired by the nuclear suppression factor widely used in heavy-ion collision experiments, we introduce a set of GTMD ratios between eP and eA collisions. Any deviation of these ratios from unity provides an indirect measure of many-body nuclear density effects arising from non-perturbative quantum chromodynamics (QCD).

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.08457 by Ashutosh Dwibedi, Sabyasachi Ghosh, Sujit Jana, Vikash Kumar Ojha.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Contour plots of the GTMDs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Variation of (a) OAM, (b) spin, and (c) spin-orbit correlation as functions of normalized baryonic density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Percentage deviation of the GTMDs (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.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

69 extracted references · 69 canonical work pages · 34 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Using the dressed quark state and the quark field’s particle sectorψ(± z 2), the correlator can be expressed in terms of the overlap representation of light-front wave functions

    located at distinct spacetime points. Using the dressed quark state and the quark field’s particle sectorψ(± z 2), the correlator can be expressed in terms of the overlap representation of light-front wave functions. The quark-quark correlators corresponding to unpolarized, longitudinally polarized quark states are given by [45, 65]: W (γ+) λλ′ (x, ξ, k⊥,...

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Electron Ion Collider: The Next QCD Frontier - Understanding the glue that binds us all

    A. Accardi et al. Electron Ion Collider: The Next QCD Frontier: Understanding the glue that binds us all.Eur. Phys. J. A, 52(9):268, 2016.arXiv:1212.1701,doi:10.1140/epja/i2016-16268-9

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epja/i2016-16268-9 2016

  3. [3]

    Electron-Ion Collider in China

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/s11467-021-1062-0 2021

  4. [4]

    Parton Distribution and Decay Functions,

    John C. Collins and Davison E. Soper. Parton Distribution and Decay Functions.Nucl. Phys. B, 194:445–492, 1982. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90021-9

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90021-9 1982

  5. [5]

    Parton distributions: a new global analysis

    Alan D. Martin, R. G. Roberts, W. James Stirling, and R. S. Thorne. Parton distributions: A New global analysis.Eur. Phys. J. C, 4:463–496, 1998.arXiv:hep-ph/9803445,doi:10.1007/s100520050220

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/s100520050220 1998

  6. [6]

    Gluck, E

    M. Gluck, E. Reya, and A. Vogt. Dynamical parton distributions of the proton and small x physics.Z. Phys. C, 67:433–448, 1995.doi:10.1007/BF01624586

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01624586 1995

  7. [7]

    Dynamical Parton Distributions Revisited

    M. Gl¨ uck, E. Reya, and A. Vogt. Dynamical parton distributions revisited.Eur. Phys. J. C, 5:461–470, 1998.arXiv: hep-ph/9806404,doi:10.1007/s100520050289

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/s100520050289 1998

  8. [8]

    Deeply Virtual Compton Scattering

    Xiang-Dong Ji. Deeply virtual Compton scattering.Phys. Rev. D, 55:7114–7125, 1997.arXiv:hep-ph/9609381,doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.55.7114

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.55.7114 1997

  9. [10]

    A. V. Belitsky and A. V. Radyushkin. Unraveling hadron structure with generalized parton distributions.Phys. Rept., 418:1–387, 2005.arXiv:hep-ph/0504030,doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2005.06.002

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2005.06.002 2005

  10. [11]

    Hard Exclusive Reactions and the Structure of Hadrons

    K. Goeke, Maxim V. Polyakov, and M. Vanderhaeghen. Hard exclusive reactions and the structure of hadrons.Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys., 47:401–515, 2001.arXiv:hep-ph/0106012,doi:10.1016/S0146-6410(01)00158-2

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0146-6410(01)00158-2 2001

  11. [12]

    P. J. Mulders and R. D. Tangerman. The Complete tree level result up to order 1/Q for polarized deep inelastic lepto- production.Nucl. Phys. B, 461:197–237, 1996. [Erratum: Nucl.Phys.B 484, 538–540 (1997)].arXiv:hep-ph/9510301, doi:10.1016/0550-3213(95)00632-X

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/0550-3213(95)00632-x 1996

  12. [13]

    Transverse Polarisation of Quarks in Hadrons

    Vincenzo Barone, Alessandro Drago, and Philip G. Ratcliffe. Transverse polarisation of quarks in hadrons.Phys. Rept., 359:1–168, 2002.arXiv:hep-ph/0104283,doi:10.1016/S0370-1573(01)00051-5

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370-1573(01)00051-5 2002

  13. [14]

    Semi-inclusive deep inelastic scattering at small transverse momentum

    Alessandro Bacchetta, Markus Diehl, Klaus Goeke, Andreas Metz, Piet J. Mulders, and Marc Schlegel. Semi-inclusive deep inelastic scattering at small transverse momentum.JHEP, 02:093, 2007.arXiv:hep-ph/0611265,doi:10.1088/ 1126-6708/2007/02/093

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  14. [15]

    Final-State Interactions and Single-Spin Asymmetries in Semi-Inclusive Deep Inelastic Scattering

    Stanley J. Brodsky, Dae Sung Hwang, and Ivan Schmidt. Final state interactions and single spin asymmetries in semiin- clusive deep inelastic scattering.Phys. Lett. B, 530:99–107, 2002.arXiv:hep-ph/0201296,doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(02) 01320-5

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(02 2002

  15. [16]

    Extraction of partonic transverse momentum distributions from semi-inclusive deep-inelastic scattering, Drell-Yan and Z-boson production

    Alessandro Bacchetta, Filippo Delcarro, Cristian Pisano, Marco Radici, and Andrea Signori. Extraction of partonic transverse momentum distributions from semi-inclusive deep-inelastic scattering, Drell-Yan and Z-boson production.JHEP, 06:081, 2017. [Erratum: JHEP 06, 051 (2019)].arXiv:1703.10157,doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2017)081

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep06(2017)081 2017

  16. [17]

    Mechanical properties of proton in the momentum space

    Navpreet Kaur, Shubham Sharma, Abi Jebarson A, and Harleen Dahiya. Mechanical properties of proton in the momentum space.Phys. Lett. B, 879:140686, 2026.arXiv:2604.14625,doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2026.140686

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2026.140686 2026

  17. [18]

    Generalized parton correlation functions for a spin-0 hadron

    Stephan Meissner, Andreas Metz, Marc Schlegel, and Klaus Goeke. Generalized parton correlation functions for a spin-0 hadron.JHEP, 08:038, 2008.arXiv:0805.3165,doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/08/038

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/08/038 2008

  18. [19]

    Generalized parton correlation functions for a spin-1/2 hadron

    Stephan Meissner, Andreas Metz, and Marc Schlegel. Generalized parton correlation functions for a spin-1/2 hadron. JHEP, 08:056, 2009.arXiv:0906.5323,doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2009/08/056

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2009/08/056 2009

  19. [20]

    Structure analysis of the generalized correlator of quark and gluon for a spin-1/2 target

    C. Lorc´ e and B. Pasquini. Structure analysis of the generalized correlator of quark and gluon for a spin-1/2 target.JHEP, 09:138, 2013.arXiv:1307.4497,doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2013)138. 10

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep09(2013)138 2013

  20. [21]

    Valence Quark Distribution of the Pion Inside a Medium with Finite Baryon Density: A Nambu–Jona-Lasinio Model Approach.PTEP, 2026(6):063B04, 2026

    Ashutosh Dwibedi, Satyajit Puhan, Sabyasachi Ghosh, and Harleen Dahiya. Valence Quark Distribution of the Pion Inside a Medium with Finite Baryon Density: A Nambu–Jona-Lasinio Model Approach.PTEP, 2026(6):063B04, 2026. doi:10.1093/ptep/ptag089

    work page doi:10.1093/ptep/ptag089 2026

  21. [22]

    Mechanical distribution of the pseudoscalar charmonium and bottomonium on the light-front

    Ashutosh Dwibedi, Satyajit Puhan, and Sabyasachi Ghosh. Mechanical distribution of the pseudoscalar charmonium and bottomonium on the light-front. 6 2026.arXiv:2606.07073

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  22. [23]

    Distribution Functions of Radially Excited Pion using the Light-Front Quark Model

    Ashutosh Dwibedi, Satyajit Puhan, Sabyasachi Ghosh, and Harleen Dahiya. Distribution Functions of Radially Excited Pion using the Light-Front Quark Model. 1 2026.arXiv:2601.06628

    work page arXiv 2026

  23. [24]

    An Analysis on the Parton Distribution Functions of Heavy Mesons

    Satyajit Puhan. An Analysis on the Parton Distribution Functions of Heavy Mesons. 5 2026.arXiv:2605.17389

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  24. [25]

    Pion Parton Distribution Functions in the Light-Cone Quark Model and Experimental Constraints

    Hari Govind P, Satyajit Puhan, Abhishek K. P, Reetanshu Pandey, Harleen Dahiya, Arvind Kumar, and Suneel Dutt. Pion Parton Distribution Functions in the Light-Cone Quark Model and Experimental Constraints. 4 2026.arXiv:2604.05762

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  25. [26]

    Spectroscopy of theρmeson in a symmetric nuclear medium.Phys

    Anshu Gautam, Tanisha, Satyajit Puhan, Arvind Kumar, and Harleen Dahiya. Spectroscopy of theρmeson in a symmetric nuclear medium.Phys. Rev. D, 113(11):114043, 2026.arXiv:2601.11082,doi:10.1103/mhyf-cqzx

    work page doi:10.1103/mhyf-cqzx 2026

  26. [27]

    Valence quark distribution of the rho meson using a light-front quark model.Phys

    Satyajit Puhan, Shubham Sharma, Narinder Kumar, and Harleen Dahiya. Valence quark distribution of the rho meson using a light-front quark model.Phys. Rev. D, 113(3):036030, 2026.arXiv:2511.10981,doi:10.1103/xjkc-l5tr

    work page doi:10.1103/xjkc-l5tr 2026

  27. [28]

    Valence quark distribution of lightρand heavy J/ψvector mesons in a light-cone quark model.Phys

    Tanisha, Satyajit Puhan, Anurag Yadav, and Harleen Dahiya. Valence quark distribution of lightρand heavy J/ψvector mesons in a light-cone quark model.Phys. Rev. D, 112(5):054035, 2025.arXiv:2505.09213,doi:10.1103/cmbw-vcds

    work page doi:10.1103/cmbw-vcds 2025

  28. [29]

    Valence quark properties of charged kaons in symmetric nuclear matter

    Reetanshu Pandey, Satyajit Puhan, Navpreet Kaur, Arvind Kumar, Suneel Dutt, and Harleen Dahiya. Valence quark properties of charged kaons in symmetric nuclear matter.Eur. Phys. J. Plus, 140(10):1040, 2025.arXiv:2505.01202, doi:10.1140/epjp/s13360-025-06976-9

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjp/s13360-025-06976-9 2025

  29. [30]

    Lipiecki, K

    Tanisha, Satyajit Puhan, Navpreet Kaur, Harleen Dahiya, and Arvind Kumar. Impact of isospin asymmetric nuclear medium on pseudoscalar and vector B mesons.Nucl. Phys. A, 1068:123330, 2026.arXiv:2504.21392,doi:10.1016/j. nuclphysa.2026.123330

    work page doi:10.1016/j 2026

  30. [31]

    Radiative Transitions for the Ground and Excited Charmonia States

    Anurag Yadav, Satyajit Puhan, and Harleen Dahiya. Radiative Transitions for the Ground and Excited Charmonia States. 4 2025.arXiv:2504.14864

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  31. [32]

    Understanding the Valence Quark Structure of the Pion through GTMDs

    Satyajit Puhan, Shubham Sharma, Narinder Kumar, and Harleen Dahiya. Understanding the Valence Quark Structure of the Pion through GTMDs. 4 2025.arXiv:2504.14982,doi:10.1093/ptep/ptaf100

    work page doi:10.1093/ptep/ptaf100 2025

  32. [33]

    Effect of nuclear medium on the spatial distribution of pions

    Satyajit Puhan, Navpreet Kaur, Arvind Kumar, Suneel Dutt, and Harleen Dahiya. Effect of nuclear medium on the spatial distribution of pions.Nucl. Phys. B, 1017:116940, 2025.arXiv:2501.16706,doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2025.116940

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2025.116940 2025

  33. [34]

    Effect of Asymmetric Nuclear Medium on the Valence Quark Structure of the Kaons

    Dhananjay Singh, Satyajit Puhan, Navpreet Kaur, Manpreet Kaur, Arvind Kumar, Suneel Dutt, and Harleen Dahiya. Effect of an asymmetric nuclear medium on the valence quark structure of the kaons.Phys. Rev. D, 111(5):054001, 2025. arXiv:2410.20181,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.054001

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.054001 2025

  34. [35]

    Does nuclear medium affect the transverse momentum-dependent parton distributions of valence quark of pions?

    Navpreet Kaur, Satyajit Puhan, Reetanshu Pandey, Arvind Kumar, Suneel Dutt, and Harleen Dahiya. Does nuclear medium affect the transverse momentum-dependent parton distributions of valence quark of pions?Phys. Lett. B, 859:139114, 2024.arXiv:2409.05394,doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.139114

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.139114 2024

  35. [36]

    Spectroscopy of excited quarkonium states in the light-front quark model

    Ritwik Acharyya, Satyajit Puhan, Harleen Dahiya, and Narinder Kumar. Spectroscopy of excited quarkonium states in the light-front quark model*.Chin. Phys. C, 49(2):023104, 2025.arXiv:2408.07715,doi:10.1088/1674-1137/ad8ec3

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1674-1137/ad8ec3 2025

  36. [37]

    Generalized tmds and the exclusive double drell–yan process.Physics Letters B, 771:396–400, 2017

    Shohini Bhattacharya, Andreas Metz, and Jian Zhou. Generalized tmds and the exclusive double drell–yan process.Physics Letters B, 771:396–400, 2017

    work page 2017

  37. [38]

    Probing the small-x gluon tomography in correlated hard diffractive dijet production in deep inelastic scattering.Physical review letters, 116(20):202301, 2016

    Yoshitaka Hatta, Bo-Wen Xiao, and Feng Yuan. Probing the small-x gluon tomography in correlated hard diffractive dijet production in deep inelastic scattering.Physical review letters, 116(20):202301, 2016

    work page 2016

  38. [39]

    Hunting the gluon orbital angular momentum at the electron-ion collider

    Xiangdong Ji, Feng Yuan, and Yong Zhao. Hunting the gluon orbital angular momentum at the electron-ion collider. Physical review letters, 118(19):192004, 2017

    work page 2017

  39. [40]

    Gluon orbital angular momentum at small x

    Yoshitaka Hatta, Yuya Nakagawa, Bowen Xiao, Feng Yuan, and Yong Zhao. Gluon orbital angular momentum at small x. Physical Review D, 95(11):114032, 2017

    work page 2017

  40. [41]

    Signature of the gluon orbital angular momentum.Physical Review Letters, 128(18):182002, 2022

    Shohini Bhattacharya, Renaud Boussarie, and Yoshitaka Hatta. Signature of the gluon orbital angular momentum.Physical Review Letters, 128(18):182002, 2022

    work page 2022

  41. [42]

    Accessing the gluon wigner distribution in ultraperipheral p a collisions.Physical Review D, 96(3):034009, 2017

    Yoshikazu Hagiwara, Yoshitaka Hatta, Roman Pasechnik, Marek Tasevsky, and Oleg Teryaev. Accessing the gluon wigner distribution in ultraperipheral p a collisions.Physical Review D, 96(3):034009, 2017

    work page 2017

  42. [43]

    Elliptic gluon generalized transverse-momentum-dependent distribution inside a large nucleus.Physical Review D, 94(11):114017, 2016

    Jian Zhou. Elliptic gluon generalized transverse-momentum-dependent distribution inside a large nucleus.Physical Review D, 94(11):114017, 2016

    work page 2016

  43. [44]

    Spin–orbit correlations in the nucleon.Physics Letters B, 735:344–348, 2014

    C´ edric Lorc´ e. Spin–orbit correlations in the nucleon.Physics Letters B, 735:344–348, 2014

    work page 2014

  44. [45]

    Quark generalized tmds at skewness and wigner distributions in boost invariant longitudinal space.Physical Review D, 107(7):074040, 2023

    Vikash Kumar Ojha, Sujit Jana, and Tanmay Maji. Quark generalized tmds at skewness and wigner distributions in boost invariant longitudinal space.Physical Review D, 107(7):074040, 2023

    work page 2023

  45. [46]

    Quark wigner distributions and orbital angular momentum in light-front dressed quark model.Physical Review D, 90(1):014024, 2014

    Asmita Mukherjee, Sreeraj Nair, and Vikash Kumar Ojha. Quark wigner distributions and orbital angular momentum in light-front dressed quark model.Physical Review D, 90(1):014024, 2014

    work page 2014

  46. [47]

    Wigner Distributions and Orbital Angular Momentum of Quarks and Gluons

    Asmita Mukkherjee, Sreeraj Nair, and Vikash Kumar Ojha. Wigner Distributions and Orbital Angular Momentum of Quarks and Gluons.PoS, QCDEV2015:013, 2015.arXiv:1511.00922,doi:10.22323/1.249.0013

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.22323/1.249.0013 2015

  47. [48]

    Wigner Distributions for Gluons in Light-front Dressed Quark Model

    Asmita Mukherjee, Sreeraj Nair, and Vikash Kumar Ojha. Wigner distributions for gluons in a light-front dressed quark model.Phys. Rev. D, 91(5):054018, 2015.arXiv:1501.03728,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.054018

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.91.054018 2015

  48. [49]

    Orbital angular momentum in deep inelastic scattering.Physical Review D, 59(11):116013, 1999

    A Harindranath and Rajen Kundu. Orbital angular momentum in deep inelastic scattering.Physical Review D, 59(11):116013, 1999

    work page 1999

  49. [50]

    Nambu and G

    Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio. Dynamical model of elementary particles based on an analogy with superconduc- tivity. i.Phys. Rev., 122:345–358, Apr 1961. URL:https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.122.345,doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.122.345. 11

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.122.345 1961

  50. [51]

    Nambu and G

    Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio. Dynamical model of elementary particles based on an analogy with superconductivity. ii. Phys. Rev., 124:246–254, Oct 1961. URL:https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.124.246,doi:10.1103/PhysRev. 124.246

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.124.246 1961

  51. [52]

    Vogl and W

    U. Vogl and W. Weise. The Nambu and Jona Lasinio model: Its implications for hadrons and nuclei.Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys., 27:195–272, 1991.doi:10.1016/0146-6410(91)90005-9

    work page doi:10.1016/0146-6410(91)90005-9 1991

  52. [53]

    S. P. Klevansky. The Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model of quantum chromodynamics.Rev. Mod. Phys., 64:649–708, 1992. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.64.649

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.64.649 1992

  53. [54]

    QCD phenomenology based on a chiral effective Lagrangian.Physics Reports, 247(5):221–367, 1994

    Tetsuo Hatsuda and Teiji Kunihiro. QCD phenomenology based on a chiral effective Lagrangian.Physics Reports, 247(5):221–367, 1994. URL:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0370157394900221,doi:10.1016/ 0370-1573(94)90022-1

    work page arXiv 1994

  54. [55]

    NJL model analysis of quark matter at large density.Phys

    Michael Buballa. NJL model analysis of quark matter at large density.Phys. Rept., 407:205–376, 2005.arXiv:hep-ph/ 0402234,doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2004.11.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2004.11.004 2005

  55. [56]

    T. M. Schwarz, S. P. Klevansky, and G. Papp. The Phase diagram and bulk thermodynamical quantities in the NJL model at finite temperature and density.Phys. Rev. C, 60:055205, 1999.arXiv:nucl-th/9903048,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.60. 055205

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.60 1999

  56. [57]

    To- wards compressed baryonic matter densities: thermodynamics and transport coefficients.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.20282, 2025

    Anand Rai, Dani Rose J Marattukalam, Prasanta Murmu, Ashutosh Dwibedi, Rishabh Sharma, and Sabyasachi Ghosh. To- wards compressed baryonic matter densities: thermodynamics and transport coefficients.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.20282, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  57. [58]

    Transport coefficients from the Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model for $SU(3)_f$

    Rudy Marty, Elena Bratkovskaya, Wolfgang Cassing, J¨ org Aichelin, and Hamza Berrehrah. Transport coefficients from the Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model forSU(3) f.Phys. Rev. C, 88:045204, 2013.arXiv:1305.7180,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC. 88.045204

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc 2013

  58. [59]

    Vector interaction bounds in NJL-like models from LQCD estimated curvature of the chiral crossover line.Eur

    Mahammad Sabir Ali, Deeptak Biswas, and Chowdhury Aminul Islam. Vector interaction bounds in NJL-like models from LQCD estimated curvature of the chiral crossover line.Eur. Phys. J. A, 61(10):240, 2025.arXiv:2410.00653, doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-025-01718-y

    work page doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-025-01718-y 2025

  59. [60]

    Effects of strangeness on the chiral pseudocritical line

    Mahammad Sabir Ali, Deeptak Biswas, Amaresh Jaiswal, and Hiranmaya Mishra. Effects of strangeness on the chiral pseudocritical line.Phys. Rev. D, 109(11):114017, 2024.arXiv:2403.11965,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.114017

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.114017 2024

  60. [61]

    Phase diagrams in the three-flavor Nambu--Jona-Lasinio model with the Polyakov loop

    Kenji Fukushima. Phase diagrams in the three-flavor Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model with the Polyakov loop.Phys. Rev. D, 77:114028, 2008. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 78, 039902 (2008)].arXiv:0803.3318,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.114028

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.77.114028 2008

  61. [62]

    An Introduction to Light-Front Dynamics for Pedestrians

    Avaroth Harindranath. An introduction to light-front dynamics for pedestrians.arXiv preprint hep-ph/9612244, 1996

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  62. [63]

    Light-Front Dynamics and Light-Front QCD

    Wei-Min Zhang. Light-front dynamics and light-front qcd.arXiv preprint hep-ph/9412244, 1994

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  63. [64]

    Light-cone wavefunction representation of deeply virtual compton scattering.Nuclear Physics B, 596(1-2):99–124, 2001

    Stanley J Brodsky, Markus Diehl, and Dae Sung Hwang. Light-cone wavefunction representation of deeply virtual compton scattering.Nuclear Physics B, 596(1-2):99–124, 2001

    work page 2001

  64. [65]

    Light-front qcd

    Wei-Min Zhang and Avaroth Harindranath. Light-front qcd. ii. two-component theory.Physical Review D, 48(10):4881, 1993

    work page 1993

  65. [66]

    Quark wigner distributions using light-front wave functions.Physical Review D, 95(7):074039, 2017

    Jai More, Asmita Mukherjee, and Sreeraj Nair. Quark wigner distributions using light-front wave functions.Physical Review D, 95(7):074039, 2017

    work page 2017

  66. [67]

    Generalized parton distributions.Physics Reports, 388(2-4):41–277, 2003

    Markus Diehl. Generalized parton distributions.Physics Reports, 388(2-4):41–277, 2003

    work page 2003

  67. [68]

    Generalized parton distributions of the photon with helicity flip.Physics Letters B, 721(4-5):284–289, 2013

    Asmita Mukherjee, Sreeraj Nair, and Vikash Kumar Ojha. Generalized parton distributions of the photon with helicity flip.Physics Letters B, 721(4-5):284–289, 2013

    work page 2013

  68. [69]

    Generalized parton correlation functions for a spin-1/2 hadron

    Stephan Meißner, Andreas Metz, and Marc Schlegel. Generalized parton correlation functions for a spin-1/2 hadron. Journal of High Energy Physics, 2009(08):056, 2009

    work page 2009

  69. [70]

    Centrality dependence of charged particle production at large transverse momentum in Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 2.76$ TeV

    Betty Abelev et al. Centrality Dependence of Charged Particle Production at Large Transverse Momentum in Pb–Pb Collisions at √sNN = 2.76 TeV.Phys. Lett. B, 720:52–62, 2013.arXiv:1208.2711,doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2013.01.051

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2013.01.051 2013