Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Decoding Two-Particle States in QCD with Spatial Wavefunctions

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper claims a systematic way to construct optimized two-hadron operators from inter-hadron spatial wavefunctions, using a Z3-noise quark smearing, and demonstrates on the Omega_ccc Omega_ccc system that states only about 5 MeV apart…

desk verdict Clever new Z3-noise wavefunction smearing and a plausible Omega_ccc Omega_ccc demonstration, but the validation is partly circular and needs an independent cross-check. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.09930 v2 pith:BEAFKT2Y submitted 2025-07-14 hep-lat hep-phnucl-th

Yan Lyu , Sinya Aoki , Takumi Doi , Tetsuo Hatsuda , Kotaro Murakami , Takuya Sugiura This is my paper
classification hep-lathep-phnucl-th
keywords latticeQCDtwo-hadronoperatorsNambu-Bethe-SalpeterwavefunctionZ3noisesmearingHALpotentialOmega_cccenergyresolutionhadron-hadroninteractions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper aims to show that two-hadron states in lattice QCD can be told apart far more sharply if the interpolating operators used at the source and sink are built from the actual spatial wavefunctions of the states rather than from a limited set of plane waves. Because two-particle energy levels in a box are dense — the gap between neighboring states shrinks as the box grows — ordinary operators mix many states and make identification unreliable. The authors construct optimized operators from the dual basis of Nambu-Bethe-Salpeter wavefunctions and implement them with a Z3-noise smearing that avoids computing all-to-all quark propagators. In the $\Omega_{ccc}\Omega_{ccc}$ channel they resolve a ground state and first excited state separated by only about 5 MeV near 9700 MeV, with effective energies matching the eigenvalues of the HAL QCD potential. If this works, it gives lattice QCD a practical tool for studying hadron-hadron interactions and matrix elements in dense spectra.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the optimized two-baryon operator $O_n(t) = \frac{1}{V^2}\sum_{\vec{x},\vec{r}} B(\vec{x}+\vec{r},t)B(\vec{x},t)\Psi_n^*(\vec{r})$, where $\Psi_n$ is the dual basis obtained by inverting the norm kernel $K_{nn'}=\langle\psi_n|\psi_{n'}\rangle$ of the Nambu-Bethe-Salpeter wavefunctions; this operator projects the correlation function onto a single eigenstate. To avoid all-to-all propagators, the paper introduces two source smearing functions, $G(\vec{r})=f(\vec{r})$ and $F_n(\vec{r}) = V_{\rm sub}^{-1/3}\sum_{\vec{r}_0\in\Lambda_{\rm sub}} Z_3(\vec{r}_0)\Psi_n^{1/3}(\vec{r}_0) f(\vec{r}-\vec{r}_0)$, so that products of three smeared quark fields reproduce $\sum_{\vec{r}_0}\Psi_n(\vec{r}_0)\bar{B}(\vec{r}_0)\bar{B}(0)$ after the $Z_3$ noise average kills cross terms. A sub-lattice sparsening keeps the computation affordable, with high-momentum contamination suppressed at large times as in field-sparsening arguments. The machinery is iterative: an initial potential yields wavefunctions, which yield better operators and a refined potential, until the projected correlation functions and effective energies stabilize.

What would settle it

A concrete test would be to rebuild the operators from a materially different initial potential, such as one from a different source smearing or a different time, and check whether the extracted effective energies and the ~5 MeV gap stay the same within errors; if they follow the input potential's eigenvalues, the claimed resolution is not genuine. A second decisive check is to compare against a large plane-wave variational basis on the same gauge configurations and see whether the same two eigenvalues emerge below the inelastic threshold.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's discovery is that the four-point correlation function of two baryons, when projected with wavefunction-based dual operators, reduces to $R_n(r,t) = \psi_n(r) e^{-\Delta E_n t}$, so a single optimized operator isolates one eigenstate's contribution. The authors verify this by taking the leading-order HAL QCD potential $V^{(0)}(r)$ from an unoptimized wall-source correlator, solving the finite-box Schr\"odinger equation for wavefunctions $\psi_n^{(0)}$, forming the dual basis $\Psi_n^{(0)}$, and then using those in the optimized source and sink operators. The resulting effective energies are stable over a long time window and agree with the eigenvalues of the Schr\"odinger equation, while the spatial profiles of the projected correlation functions are nearly time-independent. The conclusion is that two eigenstates whose energies differ by roughly 5 MeV around 9700 MeV can be cleanly separated, including a bound state and a scattering state, on an 8 fm box at the physical point.

Load-bearing premise

The construction assumes the leading-order HAL QCD potential, extracted from a wall-source correlator at one time slice, is accurate enough that the wavefunctions used to build the operators match the true QCD eigenstates; if that potential is wrong, the resolved energies, including the ~5 MeV gap, could be an artifact of the operator construction rather than genuine spectral information.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The same optimized operators can be applied to any two-hadron system, so spectral analyses no longer have to rely on large plane-wave operator bases to separate closely spaced levels.
  • The approach supports direct computation of two-hadron matrix elements, such as those needed for neutrinoless double beta decay, because the operator isolates a specific state.
  • It provides a route from lattice QCD to nuclear forces: two-nucleon systems, whose dense spectra have caused past misidentifications, become accessible with controlled operators.
  • The optimized operators can serve as a reliable operator basis for the conventional variational method, improving the generalized eigenvalue extraction without additional computational cost.
  • Because the gap resolved here, about 5 MeV, is set by the box size and hadron mass, the method should resolve even finer splittings on larger volumes.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the Z3-noise smearing generalizes to nonidentical or unlike-flavor hadrons, the same construction could be used for meson-baryon and meson-meson systems where the wavefunction is not symmetric; the paper only demonstrates identical baryons.
  • A natural stress test would be to compare energies extracted this way against a full variational analysis on the same ensembles, since the paper's consistency check is with the HAL QCD potential's own eigenvalues, which share the same input potential.
  • The method may also reduce the computational cost of computing two-hadron matrix elements, because the state selection happens at the source and only one optimized sink is needed.
  • For systems with coupled channels or nearby inelastic thresholds, the single-potential assumption would need extension; the paper's framework is stated for elastic states below the inelastic threshold.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a framework for constructing optimized two-hadron interpolating operators from inter-hadron spatial wavefunctions. Starting from the spectral decomposition of the four-point correlator, the authors define dual wavefunctions and use them to define operators that project onto individual eigenstates. Since the exact NBS wavefunctions are not known, they approximate them from the leading-order HAL QCD potential V^(0)(r), solve the Schrödinger equation in a finite box, and use the resulting eigenfunctions to build optimized source and sink operators. A novel Z3-noise smearing is introduced to implement these operators without all-to-all propagators. The method is applied to the Omega_ccc Omega_ccc system in the 1S0 channel, where the authors report stable spatial profiles and effective energies that are consistent with the eigenvalues of the potential, allowing them to resolve a gap of about 5 MeV near threshold. The central claim is that this demonstrates exceptional resolving power and superiority over combinations of limited plane-wave operators.

Significance. If the central claim is established, the framework would be a valuable new tool for two-hadron spectroscopy on the lattice, and the Z3-noise smearing is a technically creative solution to the all-to-all propagator problem. The formal construction in Eqs. (1)-(6) is sound, and the idea of using HAL QCD wavefunctions to build optimized operators is a natural and potentially powerful extension of existing approaches. The paper also connects to the previously reported Omega_ccc Omega_ccc bound state, and the method could be broadly applicable. However, the current evidence for the core claim is incomplete: the validation is largely self-consistent with the input potential, no quantitative comparison with plane-wave or variational operators is shown despite an abstract claim of superiority, and the statistical significance of the 5 MeV separation is not quantified. These gaps are load-bearing and need to be addressed before the result can be considered established.

major comments (4)
  1. [Application to Omega_ccc Omega_ccc, Eq. (8) and Fig. 3] The agreement between the effective energies DeltaE^eff_n(t) and the eigenvalues epsilon_n of Eq. (8) is not an independent validation, because both are derived from the same input potential V^(0)(r,t/a=25). The optimized operators are constructed from the eigenfunctions psi^(0)_n of this potential, and the sink-side projection uses the dual functions Psi^(0)_n obtained from the same set. A source built from these approximate wavefunctions will naturally produce a correlation function dominated by the same approximate eigenstates, and matching the eigenvalues of the trial Hamiltonian is a self-consistency condition. To establish that the extracted energies are not biased by V^(0), the authors should quantify the sensitivity of the result to the choice of t/a for V^(0), show the second-iteration potential V^(1)_n, or compare with an independent method such as a conventional GEVP on the same configurations. Without such a check, the claimed ~5 MeV resolution could be an artifact of the operator construction rather than a genuine QCD spectral feature.
  2. [Abstract and 'Application to Omega_ccc Omega_ccc'] The abstract states that the optimized operators 'prove superior to combinations of limited plane-wave operators,' but no quantitative comparison is presented anywhere in the manuscript. The reader cannot verify the superiority claim from Fig. 3 or Table I, and no overlap factors, effective-energy comparisons, or signal-to-noise comparisons with plane-wave or variational operators are shown. Since this superiority is part of the paper's central claim, it should be demonstrated explicitly, for example by comparing the plateaus and errors obtained with the optimized operators against those from a plane-wave GEVP basis on the same gauge configurations.
  3. [Fig. 3 and surrounding text] The statistical significance of the central result is not quantified. No numerical values for DeltaE^eff_0(t), DeltaE^eff_1(t), or the eigenvalues epsilon_0 and epsilon_1 with their errors are given; the figure shows bands but no numbers. The authors note that the ground-state effective energy has larger statistical errors than the first excited state, but the explanation is qualitative. To support the claim of resolving a ~5 MeV gap, the paper should provide the fitted single-state energies with statistical errors, the covariance or at least the errors on the difference DeltaE^eff_1 - DeltaE^eff_0, and the errors on epsilon_1 - epsilon_0. Without these, it is impossible to assess whether the two states are statistically distinct.
  4. ['Application to Omega_ccc Omega_ccc', iterative procedure] The iterative procedure described after Eq. (8) is not carried out beyond the first step. The paper declares convergence based on the small residue factors in Table I, but those residues are within their statistical errors (e.g., 3.7(1.4)% at t/a=20 for R^(1)_0), and they only test the stability of the spatial profile, not the independence of the extracted energies from the input potential. The authors should either perform the second iteration and show that the energies stabilize, or explicitly state that the first iteration is sufficient and justify this assertion with a quantitative criterion. At present, the convergence claim is weaker than the central result requires.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (10) and Fig. 2] The Z3-noise construction in Eq. (10) should state explicitly how the noise average is taken in practice (e.g., one noise vector per configuration, or multiple hits) and how the cross terms are suppressed in the final correlation function. The current text says 'vanish statistically under the Z3 noise average,' but the variance of the noise and the number of noise samples are not reported, which is relevant for interpreting the statistical errors in Fig. 3.
  2. [Eqs. (7) and (8)] The potential V^(0)(r) is computed from R^(0)(r,t) at t/a=25, but no information is given about the stability of V^(0) over t. Since the leading-order HAL QCD potential is time-dependent for finite t, a short remark or a supplementary plot showing the t-dependence would help assess the systematic uncertainty in the wavefunctions derived from it.
  3. [Text near Eq. (11)] The notation in Eq. (11) is slightly ambiguous: the product '(\bar{q}_G)^3(\bar{q}_{F_n})^3' should clarify how the color and spinor indices are contracted to form the two baryon operators, and how the Z3 noise factors combine to unity for identical supports. A brief explanatory sentence would improve readability.
  4. [References] Reference [13] (Lyu et al., Phys. Rev. D 105, 074512 (2022)) is cited as a previous study proposing optimized two-baryon operators, but the relationship between that work and the present method is not discussed in the text. A sentence clarifying the new contribution would help the reader situate the paper.
  5. [Table I] The residue factors in Table I are presented as percentages with errors, but the definition of L[R(r,t)] is given in the text only for R^(0). For R^(1)_0 and R^(1)_1, the same definition is presumably used, but this should be stated explicitly when the quantities are introduced.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 5.0 of 10

The reported 5 MeV gap is a self-consistency check of operators built from the same HAL QCD potential V^(0), not an independent spectral determination.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Application to ΩcccΩccc, around Eq. (8) and Fig. 3]
    "Using the (orthogonal) wavefunctions {ψ(0) n (r)} of Eq. (8) with the potential V (0)(r) at t/a = 25, the dual function {Ψ(0) n (r)} is constructed via Eq. (3). ... Effective energies ∆Eeff 0,1(t) exhibit stable plateau against a long period of t, which are consistent with eigen energies ε0,1 from Eq. (8). These results demonstrate that our method disentangles two states around 2mΩccc ≃ 9700 MeV, whose energy gap is as narrow as ∼ 5 MeV."

    The optimized operators used to compute ΔEeff_n are constructed from the eigenfunctions ψ_n^(0) of Eq. (8), whose potential V^(0)(r) is itself extracted from the same wall-source correlator R^(0) via Eq. (7). The observed plateau at ε_n and the ~5 MeV separation are therefore a self-consistency check of the operator construction against the input potential's eigenvalues, not an independent QCD spectral measurement. A source built from V^(0) eigenfunctions naturally projects onto those approximate eigenstates; any systematic error in V^(0) is inherited by ΔEeff_n. The paper does not compare with an independent variational/GEVP analysis on the same configurations or with the bound-state result of Ref. [17], so the resolving-power claim partially reduces to the fitted input potential.

full rationale

The paper's main methodological contribution—optimized two-hadron operators incorporating inter-hadron spatial wavefunctions, implemented with Z3-noise smearing—is substantive and not circular: Eqs. (1)–(6) and the smearing construction Eqs. (9)–(11) stand on their own. However, the demonstration of resolving a ~5 MeV gap in ΩcccΩccc rests on agreement between effective energies extracted with operators built from V^(0) and the eigenvalues of that same V^(0), where V^(0) is derived from the same lattice correlator. The stability of the spatial profiles in Table I and the consistency with ε_n are necessary self-consistency conditions, but they do not validate the gap against an independent spectral method. The paper does not report the second-iteration potential V^(1)_n, nor does it quantify sensitivity to the choice t/a = 25, nor compare with an independent variational analysis or the earlier bound-state result. Thus the central quantitative claim partially reduces to the input potential, while the operator-construction framework retains independent value; score 5 reflects this partial circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central method depends on the reliability of the HAL QCD potential (derived from the same correlator) and on properties of Z3 noise and lattice sparsening that are asserted with citations rather than demonstrated. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • B (smeared quark exponent) = 0.475 a^-1
    Fine-tuned to enhance overlap with the single Omega_ccc ground state; entered in f(r) = e^{-B|r|}, used in both G and F_n smearings.
  • potential extraction time t/a = 25
    The HAL QCD potential V^(0)(r) is evaluated at a single Euclidean time t/a=25; other choices would alter the leading-order potential and hence the wavefunctions.
  • sparsening interval l = not specified
    Lambda_sub is defined by a sparsening interval l; the paper does not state the value used, though the systematic error depends on it.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Spectral decomposition of the four-point function into exact QCD eigenstates and NBS amplitudes (Eq. (1)).
    Assumes the completeness of physical two-baryon states below the inelastic threshold, a standard field-theoretic expansion.
  • domain assumption The leading-order time-dependent HAL QCD potential (Eq. (7)) reproduces the scattering properties and its finite-box Schrödinger eigenvalues approximate the true two-baryon energies.
    This is the core physical input; the wavefunctions used for the optimized operators are eigenfunctions of this potential.
  • domain assumption Z3 noise average eliminates cross terms between different supports, leaving only identical-support contributions (Eq. (10)-(11)).
    The paper asserts this cancellation without showing the noise average derivation or specifying the number of noise vectors.
  • domain assumption High-momentum contamination from sparsening is suppressed for t >> m_B l^2 / 4 pi.
    Invoked from Refs [15,16]; the specific condition is used to justify replacing an integral over Lambda with one over Lambda_sub.
  • domain assumption The iterative procedure converges after one iteration.
    The residue factors in Table I are taken as evidence that the profiles stabilize after the first optimized iteration; this is an empirical claim, not a proven bound.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Decoding Two-Particle States in QCD with Spatial Wavefunctions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BEAFKT2Y

@misc{pith2026250709930,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Decoding Two-Particle States in QCD with Spatial Wavefunctions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BEAFKT2Y}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.09930}
}
abstract

A systematic framework for constructing optimized interpolating operators strongly coupled to QCD two-particle states is developed, which is achieved by incorporating inter-hadron spatial wavefunctions. To efficiently implement these operators in lattice QCD, a novel quark smearing technique utilizing noise vectors is proposed. Applied to the $\Omega_{ccc}\Omega_{ccc}$ system, these optimized operators prove superior to combinations of limited plane-wave operators, enabling the resolution of distinct eigenstates separated by only $\sim 5$ MeV near the threshold $2m_{\Omega_{ccc}} \simeq 9700$ MeV. This exceptional resolving power opens new possibilities for studies of a wide range of hadronic systems in QCD.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.09930 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Optimizing two-hadron operators with inter-hadron [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The novel quark smearing in Eq. (10). Each of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. The effective energies ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Recent progress on charmed hadron interactions from lattice QCD

    hep-lat 2025-09 conditional novelty 2.0 of 10

    A review of lattice QCD results on charmed hadron interactions: T_cc near threshold, an attractive N-J/psi force, and an Omega_ccc-Omega_ccc state near unitarity.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

22 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [17]

    Li, S.-C

    Y. Li, S.-C. Xia, X. Feng, L.-C. Jin, and C. Liu, Field sparsening for the construction of the correlation func- tions in lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 103, 014514 (2021), arXiv:2009.01029 [hep-lat]

    arXiv 2021

  2. [1]

    Unveiling pion-exchange interactions between hadrons from first-principles lattice QCD

    flavor quarks on a large box ( L = 96 , La ≃ 8.1 fm) at physical point ( mπ ≃ 137 MeV) by the HAL QCD Collaboration using the supercomputer Fugaku at RIKEN [18]. The relativistic heavy quark action [19, 20] is employed for charm quark ( mΩccc ≃ 4847 MeV). A local baryon operator Ω ccc(x) = cT (x)Cγkc(x)c(x) is adopted at the sink, while a similar one with...

    work page

  3. [2]

    all-to-all

    In particular, any possible bound state(s) as well as the elastic scattering states of two baryons below the inelastic threshold E∗ are labeled by discrete energies En(< E∗) with n = 0, 1, · · ·, M. These states are characterized by the equal-time Nambu-Bethe-Salpeter (NBS) amplitude, ψn(⃗ r) = 1 V X ⃗ x∈Λ ⟨0|B(⃗ x+ ⃗ r,0)B(⃗ x,0)|En⟩, (2) which represent...

    work page 2023

  4. [3]

    Aoki et al

    Y. Aoki et al. (Flavour Lattice Averaging Group (FLAG)), FLAG Review 2024, (2024), arXiv:2411.04268 [hep-lat]

    arXiv 2024

  5. [4]

    Parisi, The Strategy for Computing the Hadronic Mass Spectrum, Phys

    G. Parisi, The Strategy for Computing the Hadronic Mass Spectrum, Phys. Rept. 103, 203 (1984)

    work page 1984

  6. [5]

    G. P. Lepage, From actions to answers: Proceedings of the tasi 1989 (World Scientific, Singapore, 1990)

    work page 1989

  7. [6]

    Gusken, U

    S. Gusken, U. Low, K. H. Mutter, R. Sommer, A. Patel, and K. Schilling, Nonsinglet Axial Vector Couplings of the Baryon Octet in Lattice QCD, Phys. Lett. B 227, 266 (1989)

    work page 1989

  8. [7]

    Peardon, J

    M. Peardon, J. Bulava, J. Foley, C. Morningstar, J. Dudek, R. G. Edwards, B. Joo, H.-W. Lin, D. G. Richards, and K. J. Juge (Hadron Spectrum), A Novel quark-field creation operator construction for hadronic physics in lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 80, 054506 (2009), arXiv:0905.2160 [hep-lat]

    arXiv 2009

Show all 22 references
  1. [8]

    Drischler, W

    C. Drischler, W. Haxton, K. McElvain, E. Mereghetti, A. Nicholson, P. Vranas, and A. Walker-Loud, Towards grounding nuclear physics in QCD, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 121, 103888 (2021), arXiv:1910.07961 [nucl-th]

    2021 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Luscher, Two particle states on a torus and their re- lation to the scattering matrix, Nucl

    M. Luscher, Two particle states on a torus and their re- lation to the scattering matrix, Nucl. Phys. B 354, 531 (1991)

    1991

  3. [10]

    Luscher and U

    M. Luscher and U. Wolff, How to Calculate the Elastic Scattering Matrix in Two-dimensional Quantum Field Theories by Numerical Simulation, Nucl. Phys. B 339, 222 (1990)

    1990

  4. [11]

    Blossier, M

    B. Blossier, M. Della Morte, G. von Hippel, T. Mendes, and R. Sommer, On the generalized eigenvalue method for energies and matrix elements in lattice field theory, JHEP 04, 094, arXiv:0902.1265 [hep-lat]

    arXiv

  5. [12]

    Bulava et al

    J. Bulava et al. (BaSc), Di-nucleons do not form bound states at heavy pion mass, (2025), arXiv:2505.05547 [hep-lat]

    2025

  6. [13]

    Ishii, S

    N. Ishii, S. Aoki, and T. Hatsuda, Nuclear Force from Lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 022001 (2007)

    2007

  7. [14]

    Iritani, S

    T. Iritani, S. Aoki, T. Doi, T. Hatsuda, Y. Ikeda, T. In- oue, N. Ishii, H. Nemura, and K. Sasaki (HAL QCD Col- laboration), Consistency between L¨ uscher’s finite volume method and HAL QCD method for two-baryon systems in lattice QCD, JHEP 03, 007, arXiv:1812.08539 [hep- lat]

    arXiv

  8. [15]

    Y. Lyu, H. Tong, T. Sugiura, S. Aoki, T. Doi, T. Hatsuda, J. Meng, and T. Miyamoto, Optimized two-baryon oper- ators in lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 105, 074512 (2022)

    2022

  9. [16]

    Ishii, S

    N. Ishii, S. Aoki, T. Doi, T. Hatsuda, Y. Ikeda, T. Inoue, K. Murano, H. Nemura, and K. Sasaki (HAL QCD Col- laboration), Hadron-hadron interactions from imaginary- time Nambu-Bethe-Salpeter wave function on the lattice, Physics Letters B 712, 437 (2012)

    2012

  10. [18]

    Detmold, D

    W. Detmold, D. J. Murphy, A. V. Pochinsky, M. J. Savage, P. E. Shanahan, and M. L. Wagman, Spars- ening algorithm for multihadron lattice QCD corre- lation functions, Phys. Rev. D 104, 034502 (2021), arXiv:1908.07050 [hep-lat]

    2021 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Y. Lyu, H. Tong, T. Sugiura, S. Aoki, T. Doi, T. Hat- suda, J. Meng, and T. Miyamoto, Dibaryon with Highest Charm Number near Unitarity from Lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 072003 (2021), arXiv:2102.00181 [hep- lat]

    2021 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Aoyama, T

    T. Aoyama, T. M. Doi, T. Doi, E. Itou, Y. Lyu, K. Mu- rakami, and T. Sugiura (HAL QCD), Scale setting and hadronic properties in the light quark sector with (2+1)- flavor Wilson fermions at the physical point, Phys. Rev. D 110, 094502 (2024), arXiv:2406.16665 [hep-lat]

    2024

  13. [21]

    S. Aoki, Y. Kuramashi, and S.-i. Tominaga, Relativistic heavy quarks on the lattice, Prog. Theor. Phys. 109, 383 (2003), arXiv:hep-lat/0107009

    2003 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Namekawa (PACS Collaboration), Charm physics by Nf = 2+1 Iwasaki gauge and the six stout smearedO(a)- improved Wilson quark actions on a 964 lattice, Proc

    Y. Namekawa (PACS Collaboration), Charm physics by Nf = 2+1 Iwasaki gauge and the six stout smearedO(a)- improved Wilson quark actions on a 964 lattice, Proc. Sci. LA TTICE2016, 125 (2017)

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.