Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Electromagnetic form factors of $\Omega^-$ with the meson cloud in the spacelike and timelike regions

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A quark–diquark model with a kaon cloud reproduces the Omega-minus hyperon's electromagnetic form factors in both spacelike and timelike regions.

desk verdict Solid spacelike quark-diquark calculation with a kaon cloud; the timelike bridge via asymptotic relations is overreaching and the 'all energy region' claim needs qualification. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.03363 v2 pith:JLM4GQST submitted 2025-05-06 hep-ph hep-exhep-lat

Dongyan Fu , Ju-Jun Xie , Yubing Dong This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-exhep-lat PACS 13.40.Gp14.20.Jn
keywords Omegahyperonelectromagneticformfactorsquark-diquarkmodelkaonmesoncloudspacelikeregiontimelikespin-3/2baryonse+e-annihilation
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 sets out to show that the $\Omega^-$ hyperon's four electromagnetic form factors—charge, magnetic-dipole, electric-quadrupole, and magnetic-octupole—can be described in one framework by a quark–diquark model in which the strange quark is dressed by a kaon-meson cloud. The dressing adds an anomalous magnetic term to the quark–photon vertex, and that term is what brings the magnetic moment to the measured value and enlarges the magnetic radius. The paper's central quantitative finding is that the meson-cloud correction is nearly independent of momentum transfer, remaining about 1% on the charge form factor, 2% on the electric-quadrupole, 10% on the magnetic-dipole, and 15% on the magnetic-octupole, across the spacelike range studied; the authors conclude the cloud cannot be neglected at any energy. Using an asymptotic continuation to the timelike region, the same calculation yields an effective form factor that matches electron-positron annihilation measurements within uncertainties. If correct, the work would give a single dressing prescription that covers both kinematic regions, and concrete, testable polarization patterns for the production process.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a covariant quark–diquark description of the spin-3/2 hyperon plus a dressed-quark vertex. The vertex $j_s^\mu = \gamma^\mu F_{1s}(q^2) + \frac{i\sigma^{\mu q}}{2m_q} F_{2s}(q^2)$ is generated by a kaon-loop self-energy, giving the strange quark a size and an anomalous magnetic term that a point-like quark lacks; the wave-function renormalization $Z = 0.907$ fixes the probability of hitting the bare quark. The four physical form factors are read off from the Rarita–Schwinger current matrix elements through the standard definitions of $G_{E0}$, $G_{E2}$, $G_{M1}$, and $G_{M3}$. The bridge to the timelike region is the asymptotic relation $G^{TL}(q^2) = G^{SL}(-q^2 + 2M^2)$, which follows from the Phragmén–Lindelöf theorem and is applied with $q^2$ between about 12 and 22 GeV$^2$; it converts the spacelike curves into the effective form factor and into the helicity-amplitude combinations that produce the polarization predictions.

What would settle it

A high-statistics angular-distribution measurement of $e^+e^- \to \Omega^- \bar{\Omega}^+$ that extracts $S_{LL}$, $S_{LT}$, and $S_{TT}$ would directly test the model: it predicts $\cos\theta$-even $S_{LL}$ and $S_{TT}$, a $\cos\theta$-odd $S_{LT}$ that vanishes along the beam, and a well-defined energy where longitudinal polarization takes over from transverse. If those patterns appear at the predicted $q^2$, the real continuation is supported; if the phases of the timelike form factors show up as measurable interference, the continuation is falsified. Alternatively, a lattice QCD computation of the effective timelike form factor just above $q^2 = 4M^2$ would test whether the asymptotic mirror holds at threshold.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Treating the $\Omega^-$ as a bound state of one strange quark and an axial-vector diquark, with the quark's electromagnetic vertex dressed by a kaon loop, the paper reproduces the spacelike lattice form factors after fitting three parameters, and at the physical mass point obtains a magnetic moment $\mu_{\Omega^-} = -1.97\,\mu_N$ in agreement with experiment and equal charge and magnetic radii of $0.378\,\mathrm{fm}^2$. The kaon-cloud contributions to the four form factors are approximately constant in relative size: $\delta_{E0}\approx 1\%$, $\delta_{E2}\approx 2\%$, $\delta_{M1}\approx 10\%$, and $\delta_{M3}\approx 15\%$ up to $Q^2 = 2\,\mathrm{GeV}^2$, so the cloud matters most for the magnetic-octupole and least for the charge form factor. By applying the asymptotic relation $G^{TL}(q^2) = G^{SL}(-q^2 + 2M^2)$ for $q^2 > 4M^2$, the spacelike results are shifted into the timelike region, the effective form factor $|G^{eff}_{EM}(q^2)|$ matches the available $e^+e^-$ annihilation data within uncertainties, and the resulting spin-tensor cross sections predict that longitudinal polarization of the final $\Omega^-$ dominates at high energies while transverse polarization is significant near threshold.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the asymptotic mirror relation between spacelike and timelike form factors, $G^{TL}(q^2) = G^{SL}(-q^2 + 2M^2)$, remains accurate at the moderate timelike momenta where the data sit—even though the relation is derived for very large $|q^2|$ and discards all phases; if that premise fails, the timelike comparison and the polarization predictions collapse even though the spacelike calculation may stand.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The near-constancy of $\delta_{E0}$, $\delta_{E2}$, $\delta_{M1}$, $\delta_{M3}$ means a meson-cloud correction fitted at low $Q^2$ remains valid at higher energies, so omitting the cloud would systematically misestimate magnetic-dipole and magnetic-octupole predictions by 10–15% everywhere.
  • The magnetic radius, previously underestimated without the cloud, changes substantially and now equals the charge radius ($0.378\,\mathrm{fm}^2$), while the electric radius changes little; this gives a concrete signature for future scattering experiments.
  • The timelike effective form factor built from real, phase-less continuation agrees with current $e^+e^-$ production data, which supports using the same model to predict observables in the unmeasured parts of the timelike region.
  • In $e^+e^- \to \Omega^- \bar{\Omega}^+$, the model predicts that the longitudinal spin component $S_{LL}$ grows with energy while $S_{TT}^{xx}$ falls, with transverse polarization vanishing along the beam direction; these angular patterns are directly testable at current and future facilities.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the continuation in Eq. (7) drops all phases, the polarization predictions are effectively predictions about the magnitudes of the form factors; a measurement sensitive to interference phases—for instance through polarized beams or final-state spin correlations—would test whether a complex extension is needed beyond the real approximation.
  • The same dressed-quark machinery could be applied to other decuplet baryons such as $\Xi^*$ or $\Delta$, with analogous kaon or pion clouds; if the near-constancy of the $\delta_i$ is generic, model estimates of their high-$Q^2$ form factors could be corrected by a fixed percentage shift rather than a full recalculation.
  • The paper's neglect of the pion cloud for the strange quark is justified by isospin conservation, but whether heavier strange-light fluctuations (for example $K^*$ or two-meson states) introduce energy dependence at larger $Q^2$ remains open; extending the computation beyond $Q^2 = 2\,\mathrm{GeV}^2$ would test this.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript computes the four electromagnetic form factors (charge, electric-quadrupole, magnetic-dipole, magnetic-octupole) of the Omega^- hyperon in the spacelike region within a covariant quark-diquark model, in which the strange quark is dressed by a kaon meson cloud. The model parameters c2, c3, and mR are fitted to lattice QCD form factors at three unphysical pion masses, and the physical-point results are obtained by a linear mass extrapolation. Using the asymptotic relation Eq. (7), the authors continue the form factors to the timelike region, compare the resulting effective form factor with CLEO and BESIII data, and compute double differential cross sections and final-state spin components for e+e- -> Omega^- anti-Omega^+. The central claims are that the magnetic moment at the physical point agrees with experiment, that the kaon-cloud correction is nearly Q^2-independent and should therefore be included at all energies, and that the timelike effective form factor describes the experimental data within uncertainties.

Significance. If the timelike continuation were reliable, the paper would provide useful first quark-diquark predictions for Omega^- timelike form factors and polarization observables, and it would strengthen the case for meson-cloud effects in baryon structure. The spacelike calculation is internally coherent, the physical-point magnetic moment is a genuine extrapolation after fitting at unphysical pion masses, and the polarization predictions in Eqs. (28)-(30) are concrete and falsifiable at BESIII and Belle II. The kaon-cloud dressing is a systematic improvement over a point-like quark treatment. However, the timelike claims rest on an asymptotic relation applied in a non-asymptotic kinematic window, and the spacelike agreement with the fitted lattice data is not an independent test; these limitations materially reduce the force of the experimental comparisons.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. III.C, Eq. (7)] The relation G_TL(q^2) = G_SL(-q^2 + 2M^2) is applied for q^2 between 12 and 22 GeV^2, which corresponds to spacelike Q^2 = q^2 - 2M^2 in the range 6.4 to 16.4 GeV^2. The Phragmen-Lindelof theorem invoked in Refs. [44,47] only equates the limits of the spacelike and timelike form factors as |q^2| tends to infinity, and no argument is given that this asymptotic regime has been reached at tau = q^2/(4M^2) ~ 1.1 to 2.0. Because the model was fitted to lattice data only for Q^2 <= 2 GeV^2, the timelike curves in Figs. 9 and 10 are obtained from an extrapolation of the spacelike form factors to large Q^2 combined with an assumed continuation. This is load-bearing for the central claim that "the theoretical result can describe the experimental measurements within uncertainties" (Sec. III.C): the quoted agreement is not a test of the model unless the validity of Eq. (7) in this kinematic window is assessed.
  2. [Sec. III.A and Fig. 5] The parameters c2, c3, and mR are adjusted to reproduce the lattice QCD form factors, so the statement that "the lattice QCD calculations can be well reproduced" in Sec. III.B is a measure of fit quality rather than an independent prediction. The physical magnetic moment quoted in Sec. III.B is an extrapolation of the lattice-fitted inputs, and its agreement with the PDG value is partially inherited from this calibration. The paper should explicitly separate quantities that are predicted, such as radii, multipole ratios, and polarization observables, from quantities that are constrained by the fit.
  3. [Sec. III.B, Eq. (27), Fig. 8, and Summary] The claim that the kaon cloud effect "remains almost unchanged as the energy becomes high" and "should be considered in all the energy region" is based on the relative differences delta_i(Q^2) computed for Q^2 between 0 and 2 GeV^2. The model is not constrained at larger Q^2, and a nearly constant relative difference over this narrow interval does not logically imply constancy at the high-Q^2 values used in the timelike extension, up to about 16 GeV^2. This statement should be restricted to the computed range unless a separate argument for the high-Q^2 behavior is provided.
  4. [Sec. III.C, Eqs. (29a-c) and Fig. 11] The polarization observables are computed under the assumption that the timelike form factors are real, as acknowledged in footnote 2 and in the sentence "three additional differential cross sections have been ignored because the EMFFs in the timelike region are also real in this work." Above the pair-production threshold the timelike form factors generically acquire imaginary parts from intermediate-state contributions, and the omitted phase information enters interference terms such as Re(G_E0 G_E2^*) in Eq. (29a) and Re(G_M1 G_M3^*) in Eq. (29c). The polarization predictions are therefore incomplete; they must either be derived from a model with complex timelike form factors or be presented with an explicit caveat that all phase effects are neglected.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. II.B title] The section title reads "Quark-siquark approach" and should be "Quark-diquark approach".
  2. [Sec. III.B and III.C] The word "timeklike" appears repeatedly and should be corrected to "timelike".
  3. [Figure 6] The legend of Fig. 6 is garbled, with rotated or mojibake text that makes the comparison with other models unreadable; the figure should be regenerated.
  4. [Figures 5, 7, 8, 10] The axis labels use "Gev2" instead of "GeV^2" throughout the figures.
  5. [Sec. III.C] The phrase "attracted from the total cross sections" should be "extracted from the total cross sections".
  6. [Eq. (29b)] The formula for dsigma_x_LT/dcosθ is missing parentheses around the difference of absolute values; as typeset it reads |A| - |B||C| rather than (|A| - |B|)|C|, which should be clarified.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: parameters are fitted only to lattice QCD; the timelike CLEO/BESIII comparison is an out-of-sample prediction built on an external analytic-continuation assumption.

full rationale

The central derivation chain is not circular in the sense defined by the review criteria. The model parameters c2, c3, and mR are adjusted to reproduce lattice-QCD EMFFs at non-physical pion masses (Sec. III.A); no parameter is fitted to the experimental magnetic moment or to the CLEO/BESIII timelike data. The spacelike agreement shown in Fig. 5 is an in-sample check of the fit, and the paper does not present it as an independent prediction. The physical-point magnetic moment, radii, and meson-cloud percentage shifts are outputs of the model after extrapolation to physical masses, and the magnetic moment is compared with PDG as a consistency test, not fitted. The timelike form factors (Sec. III.C) are obtained by applying the external asymptotic relation of Eq. (7), attributed to Refs. [44,47], to the spacelike results; the subsequent comparison with CLEO/BESIII data is therefore a genuine out-of-sample test, not a rearrangement of the fitting input. The polarization observables are algebraic consequences of the same timelike form factors and are explicitly derived under the paper's stated real-form-factor assumption (footnote 2). Whether Eq. (7) is quantitatively reliable at q^2 = 12-22 GeV^2, where it maps onto spacelike Q^2 values outside the fitted lattice window, is a physics-validity concern about kinematic extrapolation and should be scored as correctness risk rather than circularity: the paper never defines the timelike form factors by the data they are compared with, and no load-bearing equation reduces to its own input by construction. Self-citations to Refs. [40-42] are methodological continuity and do not carry the argument alone.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No genuinely new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are invented. The kaon-cloud dressed quark and the axial-vector diquark are inherited from earlier model literature, so the ledger contains fitted couplings, mass inputs, and modeling assumptions rather than new entities. The heaviest burden is the asymptotic continuation assumption, which the paper does not independently validate.

free parameters (6)
  • c2 = 0.13 GeV^-1
    Quark-diquark tensor coupling fitted to lattice QCD Omega^- EMFFs at unphysical pion masses (Sec. III.A).
  • c3 = 0.05 GeV^-2
    Second quark-diquark tensor coupling fitted jointly with c2 to the same lattice EMFFs.
  • mR = M - 0.1 GeV (1.572 GeV at physical M)
    Cutoff mass in the regularization function Xi, chosen as M - 0.1 GeV for every pion mass (Sec. III.A).
  • Linear mass extrapolation M = 0.56 m_pi + 1.5936 GeV = slope 0.56, intercept 1.5936 GeV
    Fitted linear relation between lattice Omega^- masses and pion masses, used to reach the physical pion mass from three lattice points (Sec. III.A, Fig. 4).
  • Proper-time cutoffs Lambda_IR, Lambda_UV = 0.240 GeV, 0.645 GeV
    Chosen from prior NJL-model studies [56]; not refit here, but the central dressed-quark vertex depends on them.
  • Mass inputs ms, mD, ml, mK = 0.600, 1.150, 0.400, 0.494 GeV
    Constituent strange quark, axial-vector diquark, light quark, and kaon masses at the physical point, taken from previous work [41] and PDG; the diquark mass especially is a model input without independent evidence.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Omega^- is represented as a bound state of one strange quark and an axial-vector diquark with JP = 1+.
    This reduction of the three-body system to a two-body quark-diquark system is the foundation of Sec. II.B and is inherited from the authors' previous works.
  • standard math The Rarita-Schwinger spin-3/2 formalism and one-photon-exchange approximation give exactly four independent electromagnetic form factors.
    Used in Sec. II.A to define the current matrix elements and the charge, electric-quadrupole, magnetic-dipole, and magnetic-octupole form factors.
  • domain assumption Only the kaon cloud dresses the strange quark; eta and other strange mesons are neglected.
    Sec. II.C states that the kaon is the lightest meson containing a strange quark and is taken as the principal cloud. The quantitative error from neglecting eta and heavier mesons is not estimated.
  • domain assumption Proper-time regularization with Lambda_IR = 0.240 GeV and Lambda_UV = 0.645 GeV yields finite loop integrals, and the vertex regulator Xi violating gauge invariance slightly is acceptable.
    Invoked in Secs. II.B and II.C; the paper explicitly concedes that the regularization 'may break the gauge invariance slightly'.
  • ad hoc to paper The lattice-mass variation is linear and the strange quark takes one third of the Omega^- mass change while the diquark takes two thirds.
    Sec. III.A uses M = 0.56 m_pi + 1.5936 GeV and assigns mass-shift fractions 1/3 and 2/3 to propagate lattice masses to physical masses; no dynamical justification is given.
  • domain assumption The asymptotic relations G_TL(q^2) = G_SL(-q^2 + 2M^2) hold in the timelike region considered, q^2 = 12 to 22 GeV^2, and the timelike form factors can be treated as real.
    Eq. (7) in Sec. II.A is the bridge from spacelike to timelike regions. The paper cites Refs. [44,47] for the relations and notes in footnote 2 that no phases are obtained, but does not justify their validity at these energies.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Electromagnetic form factors of $\Omega^-$ with the meson cloud in the spacelike and timelike regions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JLM4GQST

@misc{pith2026250503363,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Electromagnetic form factors of $\Omega^-$ with the meson cloud in the spacelike and timelike regions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JLM4GQST}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.03363}
}
abstract

We present comprehensive calculations of the electromagnetic form factors, including the charge, magnetic-dipole, electric-quadrupole and magnetic-octupole form factors, of the $\Omega^-$ in the spacelike region using the quark-diquark approach, incorporating the effect of the meson cloud. The obtained magnetic moment is in agreement with the experimental measurement and the electromagnetic radii are comparable with other model calculations. It is found that the meson cloud effect remains almost unchanged as the energy becomes high and this feature implies that the meson cloud should be considered in all the energy region. Moreover, the asymptotic relations allow us to extend the electromagnetic form factors from the spacelike region to the timelike region, and then the effective form factor is almost identical with the data from CLEO and BESIII. Finally, polarization properties of the final state $\Omega^-$ in the $e^+ e^- \rightarrow \Omega^- \bar{\Omega}^+$ process with the unpolarized initial states are also investigated.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.03363 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Feynman diagrams for the electromagnetic current [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Kaon loop contribution to the quark electromagnetic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. The non-physical masses [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The obtained EMFFs in the spacelike region for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. The magnetic moment, electric-quadrupole moment, magnetic-octupole moment, electric charge radius and magnetic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. The EMFFs comparison between the point-like quark and dressed quark under the same parameters. And the mass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. The difference of the Ω [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. The obtained Ω [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Double differential cross sections with different po [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Spin components in the single-tag Ω [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Mechanical properties of the $\Omega^-$ baryon from gravitational form factors

    hep-ph 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Using QCD sum rules, the authors extract seven gravitational form factors of the Omega baryon and derive its internal energy, angular momentum, pressure, shear, radii, and D-terms.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 59 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Brodsky and S

    Stanley J. Brodsky and S. D. Drell. The Anomalous Magnetic Moment and Limits on Fermion Substructure. Phys. Rev. D , 22:2236, 1980

    work page 1980

  2. [2]

    Roberts and Anthony G

    Craig D. Roberts and Anthony G. Williams. Dyson- Schwinger equations and their application to hadronic physics. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. , 33:477–575, 1994. 12

    work page 1994

  3. [3]

    M. A. B. Beg, B. W. Lee, and A. Pais. SU(6) and elec- tromagnetic interactions. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 13:514–517, 1964

    work page 1964

  4. [4]

    Simon Capstick and W. Roberts. Quark models of baryon masses and decays. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. , 45:S241– S331, 2000

    work page 2000

  5. [5]

    P Wave Baryons in the Quark Model

    Nathan Isgur and Gabriel Karl. P Wave Baryons in the Quark Model. Phys. Rev. D , 18:4187, 1978

    work page 1978

  6. [6]

    A systemat- ical study of the nucleon form factors with the pion cloud effect

    Jiaqi Wang, Dongyan Fu, and Yubing Dong. A systemat- ical study of the nucleon form factors with the pion cloud effect. arXiv: 2410.14953

    arXiv

  7. [7]

    M. K. Jones et al. GEp/GMp ratio by polarization trans- fer in ⃗ ep→e⃗ p. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 84:1398–1402, 2000

    work page 2000

  8. [8]

    C. F. Perdrisat, V. Punjabi, and M. Vanderhaeghen. Nu- cleon Electromagnetic Form Factors. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys., 59:694–764, 2007

    work page 2007

Show all 65 references
  1. [9]

    Arrington, W

    J. Arrington, W. Melnitchouk, and J. A. Tjon. Global analysis of proton elastic form factor data with two- photon exchange corrections. Phys. Rev. C , 76:035205, 2007

    2007

  2. [10]

    Measurement of proton electro- magnetic form factors in the time-like region using ini- tial state radiation at BESIII

    Medina Ablikim et al. Measurement of proton electro- magnetic form factors in the time-like region using ini- tial state radiation at BESIII. Phys. Lett. B , 817:136328, 2021

    2021

  3. [11]

    Nozawa and D

    S. Nozawa and D. B. Leinweber. Electromagnetic form- factors of spin 3/2 baryons. Phys. Rev. D , 42:3567–3571, 1990

    1990

  4. [12]

    Butler, Martin J

    Malcolm N. Butler, Martin J. Savage, and Roxanne P. Springer. Electromagnetic moments of the baryon decu- plet. Phys. Rev. D , 49:3459–3465, 1994

    1994

  5. [13]

    I. G. Aznauryan and V. D. Burkert. Electroexcitation of nucleon resonances. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. , 67:1–54, 2012

    2012

  6. [14]

    Afanasev et al

    A. Afanasev et al. Photoproduction of the Very Strangest Baryons on a Proton Target in CLAS12. 5 2012

    2012

  7. [15]

    Dobbs, A

    S. Dobbs, A. Tomaradze, T. Xiao, Kamal K. Seth, and G. Bonvicini. First measurements of timelike form factors of the hyperons, Λ 0, Σ 0, Σ +, Ξ 0, Ξ−, and Ω−, and evi- dence of diquark correlations. Phys. Lett. B , 739:90–94, 2014

    2014

  8. [16]

    Study of e+e−→Ω− ¯Ω+ at center- of-mass energies from 3.49 to 3.67 GeV

    Medina Ablikim et al. Study of e+e−→Ω− ¯Ω+ at center- of-mass energies from 3.49 to 3.67 GeV. Phys. Rev. D , 107(5):052003, 2023

    2023

  9. [17]

    Ablikim et al

    M. Ablikim et al. Observation of resonant contribution to the e+e− → Ω− ¯Ω+ around 4.2˜GeV and evidence of ψ(3770) → Ω− ¯Ω+. arXiv: 2505.03180

  10. [18]

    Alexandrou, T

    C. Alexandrou, T. Korzec, G. Koutsou, J. W. Negele, and Y. Proestos. The Electromagnetic form factors of the Ω− in lattice QCD. Phys. Rev. D , 82:034504, 2010

    2010

  11. [19]

    Wagner, A

    G. Wagner, A. J. Buchmann, and A. Faessler. Elec- tromagnetic properties of decuplet hyperons in a chiral quark model with exchange currents. J. Phys. G , 26:267– 293, 2000

    2000

  12. [20]

    Gravita- tional and higher-order form factors of the pion in chiral quark models

    Wojciech Broniowski and Enrique Ruiz Arriola. Gravita- tional and higher-order form factors of the pion in chiral quark models. Phys. Rev. D , 78:094011, 2008

    2008

  13. [21]

    Polyakov, and Hyeon-Dong Son

    June-Young Kim, Hyun-Chul Kim, Maxim V. Polyakov, and Hyeon-Dong Son. Strong force fields and stabilities of the nucleon and singly heavy baryon Σ c. Phys. Rev. D, 103(1):014015, 2021

    2021

  14. [22]

    Magnetic moments and electro- magnetic form factors of the decuplet baryons in chiral perturbation theory

    Hao-Song Li, Zhan-Wei Liu, Xiao-Lin Chen, Wei-Zhen Deng, and Shi-Lin Zhu. Magnetic moments and electro- magnetic form factors of the decuplet baryons in chiral perturbation theory. Phys. Rev. D , 95(7):076001, 2017

    2017

  15. [23]

    Luty, John March-Russell, and Martin J

    Markus A. Luty, John March-Russell, and Martin J. White. Baryon magnetic moments in a simultaneous ex- pansion in 1/N and m(s). Phys. Rev. D , 51:2332–2337, 1995

    1995

  16. [24]

    Buchmann

    Alfons J. Buchmann. Electromagnetic Multipole Mo- ments of Baryons. Few Body Syst. , 59(6):145, 2018

    2018

  17. [25]

    Energy-momentum tensor form factors of the nucleon in nuclear matter

    Hyun-Chul Kim, Peter Schweitzer, and Ulugbek Yakhshiev. Energy-momentum tensor form factors of the nucleon in nuclear matter. Phys. Lett. B , 718:625–631, 2012

    2012

  18. [26]

    Neubelt, Andrew Sampino, Jonathan Hudson, Kemal Tezgin, and Peter Schweitzer

    Matt J. Neubelt, Andrew Sampino, Jonathan Hudson, Kemal Tezgin, and Peter Schweitzer. Energy momentum tensor and the D-term in the bag model. Phys. Rev. D , 101(3):034013, 2020

    2020

  19. [27]

    Frank X. Lee. Determination of decuplet baryon mag- netic moments from QCD sum rules. Phys. Rev. D , 57:1801–1821, 1998

    1998

  20. [28]

    Azizi and U

    K. Azizi and U. ¨Ozdem. Nucleon’s energy–momentum tensor form factors in light-cone QCD. Eur. Phys. J. C , 80(2):104, 2020

    2020

  21. [29]

    Magnetic moments of the baryon decu- plet in a relativistic quark model

    Felix Schlumpf. Magnetic moments of the baryon decu- plet in a relativistic quark model. Phys. Rev. D , 48:4478– 4480, 1993

    1993

  22. [30]

    Ramalho, K

    G. Ramalho, K. Tsushima, and Franz Gross. A Rela- tivistic quark model for the Omega- electromagnetic form factors. Phys. Rev. D , 80:033004, 2009

    2009

  23. [31]

    D Waves in the Nucleon: A Test of Color Magnetism

    Nathan Isgur, Gabriel Karl, and Roman Koniuk. D Waves in the Nucleon: A Test of Color Magnetism. Phys. Rev. D, 25:2394, 1982

    1982

  24. [32]

    M. I. Krivoruchenko and M. M. Giannini. Quadrupole moments of the decuplet baryons. Phys. Rev. D, 43:3763– 3765, 1991

    1991

  25. [33]

    Haidenbauer and U

    J. Haidenbauer and U. G. Meißner. The electromagnetic form factors of the Λ in the timelike region. Phys. Lett. B, 761:456–461, 2016

    2016

  26. [34]

    Ling-Yun Dai, Johann Haidenbauer, and Ulf-G. Meißner. Electromagnetic form factors of hyperons in the timelike region: A short review. arXiv: 2412.07543

    arXiv

  27. [35]

    G. J. Gounaris and J. J. Sakurai. Finite width corrections to the vector meson dominance prediction for ρ →e+e−. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 21:244–247, 1968

    1968

  28. [36]

    Electro- magnetic form factors of Λ hyperon in the vector meson dominance model

    Yongliang Yang, Dian-Yong Chen, and Zhun Lu. Electro- magnetic form factors of Λ hyperon in the vector meson dominance model. Phys. Rev. D , 100(7):073007, 2019

    2019

  29. [37]

    Cross Sections and the Electromagnetic Form Factors within the Ex- tended Vector Meson Dominance Model

    Cheng Chen, Bing Yan, and Ju-Jun Xie. Cross Sections and the Electromagnetic Form Factors within the Ex- tended Vector Meson Dominance Model. Chin. Phys. Lett., 41(2):021302, 2024

    2024

  30. [38]

    Un- derstanding oscillating features of the timelike nucleon electromagnetic form factors within the extending vector meson dominance model

    Bing Yan, Cheng Chen, Xia Li, and Ju-Jun Xie. Un- derstanding oscillating features of the timelike nucleon electromagnetic form factors within the extending vector meson dominance model. Phys. Rev. D , 109(3):036033, 2024

    2024

  31. [39]

    The electro- magnetic form factors and spin polarization of Λ+ c in the process e+e− → Λ+ c ¯Λ− c *

    Cheng Chen, Bing Yan, and Ju-Jun Xie. The electro- magnetic form factors and spin polarization of Λ+ c in the process e+e− → Λ+ c ¯Λ− c *. Chin. Phys. C , 49(2):023102, 2025

    2025

  32. [40]

    Electro- magnetic and gravitational form factors of ∆ resonance in a covariant quark-diquark approach

    Dongyan Fu, Bao-Dong Sun, and Yubing Dong. Electro- magnetic and gravitational form factors of ∆ resonance in a covariant quark-diquark approach. Phys. Rev. D , 105(9):096002, 2022

    2022

  33. [41]

    Form fac- tors of Ω− in a covariant quark-diquark approach

    Dongyan Fu, JiaQi Wang, and Yubing Dong. Form fac- tors of Ω− in a covariant quark-diquark approach. Phys. Rev. D, 108(7):076023, 2023. 13

    2023

  34. [42]

    Form fac- tors of decuplet baryons in a covariant quark–diquark approach

    JiaQi Wang, Dongyan Fu, and Yubing Dong. Form fac- tors of decuplet baryons in a covariant quark–diquark approach. Eur. Phys. J. C , 84(1):79, 2024

    2024

  35. [43]

    Hadron Form Factors

    Alexander Khodjamirian. Hadron Form Factors . CRC Press, 4 2020

    2020

  36. [44]

    G. Ramalho. Electromagnetic form factors of the Ω − baryon in the spacelike and timelike regions. Phys. Rev. D, 103(7):074018, 2021

    2021

  37. [45]

    Clo¨ et, Wolfgang Bentz, and Anthony W

    Ian C. Clo¨ et, Wolfgang Bentz, and Anthony W. Thomas. Role of diquark correlations and the pion cloud in nucleon elastic form factors. Phys. Rev. C , 90:045202, 2014

    2014

  38. [46]

    J. G. Korner and M. Kuroda. e+e− Annihilation Into Baryon-anti-Baryon Pairs. Phys. Rev. D , 16:2165, 1977

    1977

  39. [47]

    Pacetti, R

    S. Pacetti, R. Baldini Ferroli, and E. Tomasi-Gustafsson. Proton electromagnetic form factors: Basic notions, present achievements and future perspectives. Phys. Rept., 550-551:1–103, 2015

    2015

  40. [48]

    Nucleon Electromag- netic Form Factors in the Timelike Region

    Achim Denig and Giovanni Salme. Nucleon Electromag- netic Form Factors in the Timelike Region. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. , 68:113–157, 2013

    2013

  41. [49]

    A Study ofe+e− →p¯p using initial state radiation with BABAR

    Bernard Aubert et al. A Study ofe+e− →p¯p using initial state radiation with BABAR. Phys. Rev. D , 73:012005, 2006

    2006

  42. [50]

    Dobbs, Kamal K

    S. Dobbs, Kamal K. Seth, A. Tomaradze, T. Xiao, and G. Bonvicini. Hyperon Form Factors & Diquark Corre- lations. Phys. Rev. D , 96(9):092004, 2017

    2017

  43. [51]

    C. Tzara. Effect of the coulomb potential on the pi- photoproduction. Nucl. Phys. B , 18:246–252, 1970

    1970

  44. [52]

    Pauli and F

    W. Pauli and F. Villars. On the Invariant regularization in relativistic quantum theory. Rev. Mod. Phys. , 21:434– 444, 1949

    1949

  45. [53]

    Extended NJL model for light and heavy mesons without q - anti-q thresholds

    Dietmar Ebert, Thorsten Feldmann, and Hugo Rein- hardt. Extended NJL model for light and heavy mesons without q - anti-q thresholds. Phys. Lett. B, 388:154–160, 1996

    1996

  46. [54]

    Hellstern, Reinhard Alkofer, and H

    G. Hellstern, Reinhard Alkofer, and H. Reinhardt. Di- quark confinement in an extended NJL model. Nucl. Phys. A , 625:697–712, 1997

    1997

  47. [55]

    The Stability of nuclear matter in the Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model

    Wolfgang Bentz and Anthony William Thomas. The Stability of nuclear matter in the Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model. Nucl. Phys. A , 696:138–172, 2001

    2001

  48. [56]

    Carrillo-Serrano, Wolfgang Bentz, Ian C

    Manuel E. Carrillo-Serrano, Wolfgang Bentz, Ian C. Clo¨ et, and Anthony W. Thomas.ρ meson form factors in a confining Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model. Phys. Rev. C, 92(1):015212, 2015

    2015

  49. [57]

    Navas et al

    S. Navas et al. Review of particle physics. Phys. Rev. D , 110(3):030001, 2024

    2024

  50. [58]

    Leinweber, Terrence Draper, and R

    Derek B. Leinweber, Terrence Draper, and R. M. Woloshyn. Decuplet baryon structure from lattice QCD. Phys. Rev. D , 46:3067–3085, 1992

    1992

  51. [59]

    Boinepalli, D

    S. Boinepalli, D. B. Leinweber, P. J. Moran, A. G. Williams, J. M. Zanotti, and J. B. Zhang. Precision elec- tromagnetic structure of decuplet baryons in the chiral regime. Phys. Rev. D , 80:054505, 2009

    2009

  52. [60]

    T. M. Aliev, K. Azizi, and M. Savci. Electric Quadrupole and Magnetic Octupole Moments of the Light Decuplet Baryons Within Light Cone QCD Sum Rules. Phys. Lett. B, 681:240–246, 2009

    2009

  53. [61]

    Electromagnetic form factors of the baryon decuplet with flavor SU(3) symmetry breaking

    June-Young Kim and Hyun-Chul Kim. Electromagnetic form factors of the baryon decuplet with flavor SU(3) symmetry breaking. Eur. Phys. J. C , 79(7):570, 2019

    2019

  54. [62]

    Structure of the Ω baryon and the kaon cloud

    Yu-Son Jun, Hyun-Chul Kim, June-Young Kim, and Jung-Min Suh. Structure of the Ω baryon and the kaon cloud. PTEP, 2022(4):49302, 2022

    2022

  55. [63]

    Refined analysis of Ω− ¯Ω+ polarization in electron-positron anni- hilation process

    Zhe Zhang, Jiao Jiao Song, and Ya-jin Zhou. Refined analysis of Ω− ¯Ω+ polarization in electron-positron anni- hilation process. Phys. Rev. D , 109(3):036005, 2024

    2024

  56. [64]

    Strange Hadron Spectroscopy with Secondary KL Beam in Hall D

    Moskov Amaryan et al. Strange Hadron Spectroscopy with Secondary KL Beam in Hall D. arXiv: 2008.08215

    2008 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Extension of the J-PARC Hadron Experimental Facility: Third White Paper

    Kazuya Aoki et al. Extension of the J-PARC Hadron Experimental Facility: Third White Paper. arXiv: 2110.04462

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.