Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

Gravitational form factors of pion in a nonlocal quark model

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In a nonlocal quark model, coupling gravity through the equivalence principle generates bubble diagrams from the nonlocal pion vertex that supply about 8% of $A(0)$ and 69% of $D(0)$, with $D(0)$ ending up near $-1$.

desk verdict Competent calculation of pion gravitational form factors in a nonlocal model, but the headline bubble-diagram percentages are not gauge-invariant and should not be taken as physical. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.06025 v1 pith:WBFR2KLI submitted 2025-07-08 hep-ph

Vladimir Voronin This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph
keywords gravitationalformfactorspionnonlocalquarkmodelenergy-momentumtensorD-termbubblediagramsequivalenceprinciplesofttheorems
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 a consistently coupled gravitational field in a nonlocal quark model generates a specific set of gravitational form factors for the pion, and that the nonlocal vertex—the piece representing gluon effects—contributes much more than the usual quark impulse diagrams for the D-term. In particular, bubble diagrams are found to give about 8% of $A(0)$ and 69% of $D(0)$, while the total D-term remains near $-1$ as required by soft-pion theorems. If this is right, any model estimate of the pion's gravitational form factors that stops at the impulse approximation misses the dominant mechanism behind the D-term. The paper also extracts a gravitational radius of 1.12 fm, larger than the pion charge radius, suggesting the mass distribution is more extended than the charge distribution.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the nonlocal quark-pion vertex $$V_a = i\gamma_5 M^a \$int_0^{1}$ dt \exp\!\left(\frac{\partial_\$leftrightarrow^{2}$}{\$Lambda^{2}$}t\right), \quad \partial_\leftrightarrow = \xi \partial_\leftarrow - \xi' \partial_\rightarrow ,$$ whose shape and scale come from the gluon propagator in a background self-dual field. Gravity is inserted by minimal substitution into this vertex and the quark kinetic term, using tetrads and spin connection; varying the effective action with respect to the tetrad gives the Hilbert energy-momentum tensor. Expansion of the nonlocal vertex in the metric fluctuation produces diagrams (b) and (c) — the "bubble" terms — alongside the usual impulse diagrams from the quark propagator. The vertex's $1/p^2$ ultraviolet behavior keeps all momentum integrals finite, and Schwinger proper-time representations turn them into Gaussian integrals that are evaluated analytically before numerical proper-time integration.

What would settle it

Recompute diagrams (b) and (c) with a different nonlocal vertex profile, for example replacing the exponential $1/p^2$ regulator by a Gaussian regulator, re-fitting $m$ and $\Lambda$ to the pion mass and $\pi\to\gamma\gamma$ width; if the bubble share of $D(0)$ moves away from 69% by more than a few percent, the result is tied to the specific vertex shape rather than to the equivalence-principle coupling.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Starting from the generating functional of a nonlocal quark model for the pion, the paper couples an external gravitational field through the equivalence principle, then defines the flat-space energy-momentum tensor by varying the effective action with respect to the tetrad. In the one-loop approximation the matrix element of $T_{\mu\nu}$ contains five diagram classes; besides the standard impulse diagrams, the expansion of the nonlocal vertex yields bubble diagrams. The paper's central numerical finding is that these bubble diagrams contribute roughly 8% of $A(0)$ and about 69% of $D(0)$, while the full $D(0)$ comes out near $-1$, consistent with soft-pion theorems. The corresponding gravitational mean-square radius of the pion is about 1.12 fm, larger than the charge radius of 0.659 fm, indicating that mass is distributed less compactly than charge in this model.

Load-bearing premise

The nonlocal vertex shape taken from the gluon propagator in a background self-dual field is assumed to stay exactly the same once that background is removed and gravity is coupled by minimal substitution, and that fixed shape and the fixed scale $\Lambda$ determine the relative weight of the bubble and impulse diagrams.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The pion's D-term in this model is controlled by bubble contributions from the nonlocal vertex, so impulse-approximation-only calculations in separable or nonlocal quark models systematically under-predict the gluonic part of $T_{\mu\nu}$.
  • The model reproduces $D(0)\approx -1$ without tuning, which supports the soft-pion theorem and suggests the bubble terms are the finite-mass corrections that bring the D-term from the chiral-limit value to the physical one.
  • The gravitational radius of the pion (1.12 fm) exceeds its charge radius (0.659 fm) in this model, so the spatial distribution of energy is predicted to be broader than the distribution of charge.
  • Because the Hilbert definition yields a symmetric, conserved energy-momentum tensor, the Ward identity $A(0)=1$ is satisfied by the full set of diagrams, which would not happen if only the quark-current part were kept.
  • Gluonic (bubble) contributions to gravitational form factors are much larger than analogous nonlocal-vertex corrections to electroweak form factors, since gravity couples directly to the gluonic content encoded in the vertex.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One could test the robustness of the 69% figure by repeating the calculation with a different nonlocal vertex profile, such as a Gaussian regulator fitted to the same pion observables; a large change would show the result is sensitive to the specific vertex shape rather than the equivalence-principle mechanism itself.
  • The same minimal-substitution construction should apply to other hadrons, where an analogous bubble contribution would modify the gluonic part of the energy-momentum tensor; lattice results for nucleon gravitational form factors would be a natural external check.
  • If the bubble contribution dominates the D-term at low $t$, then extractions of the pion D-term from generalized parton distributions will need to include gluonic and nonlocal-vertex contributions even at small momentum transfer.
  • The near equality of $D(0)$ to $-1$ at the physical pion mass suggests the model's chiral-limit corrections are small; computing $D(0)$ as a function of $M_\pi$ would give a concrete estimate of those corrections.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper computes the gravitational form factors A(t) and D(t) of the pion in a nonlocal quark model. Gravity is introduced by promoting ordinary derivatives to covariant derivatives in the nonlocal quark-meson vertex via the equivalence principle, and the energy-momentum tensor is defined as the vielbein variation of the effective action. The calculation is performed in a one-loop approximation and organized into the diagrams of Fig. 2: a volume-element diagram, two diagrams from the nonlocal vertices, and two impulse-approximation diagrams from the quark propagator. The author reports A(0) close to 1, D(0) close to -1 consistent with soft-pion theorems, a pion mass radius of 1.12 fm, and a substantial contribution from the bubble diagrams (approximately 8% of A(0) and 69% of D(0)).

Significance. If the result is robust, the paper introduces a workable method for coupling nonlocal quark models to gravity and provides an explicit model estimate of gluonic-type contributions to the pion energy-momentum tensor that are absent in the usual impulse approximation. The derivation is explicit, the momentum integrals are finite because of the vertex falloff, and the parameters are fixed from the pion mass and the pi->gamma gamma width rather than from the form factors themselves, which is a genuine strength. The prediction D(0) approximately -1 is also a nontrivial check of the model. However, the headline quantitative claim about the bubble diagram contribution is not gauge invariant and is in fact self-described in the paper as not a well-defined quantity, so the central interpretive claim needs either a scheme-independent definition or substantial reframing.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section IV, paragraph beginning 'An important observation'; Eqs. (7), (9), (15)] The headline claim that bubble diagrams contribute approximately 8% of A(0) and 69% of D(0) is not gauge invariant. The split into diagrams (b),(c) and (d),(e) depends on how the minimal substitution in Eq. (7) is distributed among the derivative operators inside the nonlocal vertex of Eq. (9), and in particular on the ordering of the exponentiated covariant derivatives before expansion. A physically equivalent reordering or integration by parts moves contributions between the vertex-expansion and propagator-expansion diagrams without changing the total energy-momentum tensor. The paper itself concedes in the same paragraph that the separate contribution 'is not a well-defined quantity.' Since these percentages are the main advertised result, the author must either supply a scheme-independent definition of the bubble contribution or remove/reframe this claim.
  2. [Section IV and Fig. 3; Eq. (6)] The Ward-identity consistency check A(0)=1 is not explicitly quantified. The figure suggests A(0) is close to 1, but no numerical value, numerical tolerance, or error estimate is given for A(0), D(0), or the derived radius sqrt(<r^2>)=1.12 fm. Because A(0)-1 is a direct measure of the numerical and truncation accuracy of the calculation, please state the computed A(0) and D(0) and the precision of the Gaussian/proper-time integrals used to obtain them.
  3. [Section II and III, Eqs. (4), (5), (9)] The relative weight of the bubble and impulse contributions is controlled by the assumption that the nonlocal vertex shape and the parameter Lambda, originally derived from the gluon propagator in a homogeneous self-dual background field, remain unchanged when the background is removed and gravity is coupled through minimal substitution. This is the central model assumption and it is not tested. A concrete test would be to compute the pion electromagnetic form factor in the same framework and compare with experiment or lattice data, or to vary the ordering/covariantization prescription and show that the bubble fraction changes; without such a test, the 69% figure should be presented as scheme-dependent.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section IV, paragraph on the separate contribution] The sentence 'only the sum of all diagrams in Fig. 3 yields conserving energy-momentum tensor' should refer to Fig. 2, because Fig. 3 shows the form factors rather than the diagrams.
  2. [Appendix B, equations for diagrams (b)-(e)] In the integrands for diagrams (b), (c), (d), and (e), the second integration variable is written as d4x in both factors; it should be d4x' to match the momentum labels exp(-ipx) and exp(ip'x').
  3. [Eq. (3)] The notation 'JaJ' in the definition of the current J_Q is unexplained and appears to involve a typographical duplication; please clarify the index structure.
  4. [Section IV, radius formula] The mean square radius formula is presented without derivation; adding a brief explanation of the terms, especially the role of the 1/(4M_pi^2) correction, would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: model parameters are fitted to unrelated observables, and the gravitational form factors, including D(0), are derived rather than imposed.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained against its inputs. The model parameters (Λ, m_q, M_0, h) are fixed by the pion mass, the π→γγ width, and prior Regge-spectrum fitting in Ref. [22]; none of these constraints target A(t), D(t), or the bubble-versus-impulse decomposition. The central results, D(0) ≈ -1 and the form-factor curves in Fig. 3, are computed from the one-loop diagrams rather than fitted. The abstract's 8%/69% bubble contribution is admittedly not a separately well-defined quantity because only the sum of all diagrams yields a conserved energy-momentum tensor (Section IV); this is a scheme-dependence caveat about the decomposition, not a circular reduction of a prediction to a fitted input. Self-citations such as [19,22] supply the model's nonlocal vertex shape and parameter Λ, but these are independent prior inputs that do not presuppose the gravitational form-factor results. No equation is defined in terms of its own conclusion, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The paper therefore exhibits no meaningful circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central result rests on model parameters fitted to unrelated observables and on several domain assumptions about the nonlocal vertex and the one-loop truncation. No new particles or forces are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • Lambda (background field strength) = 439.9 MeV
    Taken from Ref. [22] within the parent model; sets the nonlocality scale of the vertex.
  • m_u/d (current quark mass) = 238.2 MeV
    Chosen so the pion decay width to two photons is reproduced (Table I).
  • M0 (meson mass parameter) = 123.5 MeV
    Chosen to place the pion pole at the physical mass (Table I and Section II).
  • h (meson-quark coupling) = 5.5
    Determined from the residue condition d/dp^2 Pi(p^2)=1 at the pion pole, Eq. (6).
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Nonlocal vertex shape from the gluon propagator in a homogeneous Abelian self-dual field remains valid after removing the background field.
    The vertex V(partial) is taken from Eq. (3) and used in the simplified model (4), as stated in Section II.
  • domain assumption Free quark propagators are sufficient for the kinematic range of the form factors.
    Section II states confinement is lost but thresholds do not appear in the physical region; this is an assumption about the model's adequacy.
  • domain assumption The equivalence principle and minimal substitution (7) fully determine the gravitational couplings of the nonlocal vertex.
    Section III introduces gravity via Eq. (7); no additional gluon-induced gravitational vertices are considered.
  • domain assumption Only one-loop quark diagrams contribute to the energy-momentum tensor matrix element.
    The calculation in Section III uses the one-loop approximation in Eq. (12); higher-loop contributions are neglected.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Gravitational form factors of pion in a nonlocal quark model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WBFR2KLI

@misc{pith2026250706025,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Gravitational form factors of pion in a nonlocal quark model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WBFR2KLI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.06025}
}
read the original abstract

Interaction with external gravitational field is introduced into a nonlocal quark model using the equivalence principle. This allows to define the energy-momentum tensor in flat space and evaluate its hadronic matrix element with external pions. It is found that bubble diagrams give a significant contribution to the corresponding gravitational form factors.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.06025 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. One-loop diagram contributing to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. One-loop diagrams contributing to the matrix element of the energy-momentum tensor. The diagrams related by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Gravitational form factors of pion found from diagrams in Fig. 2. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Gravitational form factors of the pion in light-front holographic QCD

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    An effective light-front wave function whose five-dimensional piece comes from holographic QCD yields pion gravitational form factors A(Q^{2}) and D(Q^{2}) that match lattice results after parameter tuning.

  2. 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

36 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Propagator The propagator in curved space satisfies equation e(x) [ieµ a γa (∂µ − Ωµ) − m] Sg(x, y) = −δ(4)(x − y). One can transform the propagator as Sg = − {e(x) [ieµ a γa (∂µ − Ωµ) − m]}−1 = − i /∂ − m −1 n e(x) [ieµ a γa (∂µ − Ωµ) − m] − i /∂ − m i /∂ − m −1 + 1 o−1 = − i /∂ − m −1 + i /∂ − m −1 e(x) [ieµ a γa (∂µ − Ωµ) − m] − i /∂ − m i /∂ − m −1 + ...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Nonlocal vertex Consider the operator exp ← −D ξy Λ iγ5M a exp −− →D ξ′ y Λ that appears in Eq. (9). The exponential of an operator A can be defined as exp A = lim n→∞ nY i=1 exp A n . Consequently, the expansion in small δA can be written in the form exp (A + δA) = exp A + lim n→∞ nX j=1 exp jA n δA exp (n − j)A n + . . . (A1) Using formula (A1), propert...

    work page

  3. [3]

    M. V. Polyakov, Generalized parton distributions and strong forces inside nucleons and nuclei, Phys. Lett. B 555, 57 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0210165

    arXiv 2003

  4. [4]

    M. V. Polyakov and P. Schweitzer, Forces inside hadrons: pressure, surface tension, mechanical radius, and all that, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 33, 1830025 (2018), arXiv:1805.06596 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2018

  5. [5]

    Ji, Gauge-Invariant Decomposition of Nucleon Spin, Phys

    X.-D. Ji, Gauge-Invariant Decomposition of Nucleon Spin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 610 (1997), arXiv:hep-ph/9603249

    arXiv 1997

  6. [6]

    Ji, Deeply virtual Compton scattering, Phys

    X.-D. Ji, Deeply virtual Compton scattering, Phys. Rev. D 55, 7114 (1997), arXiv:hep-ph/9609381

    arXiv 1997

  7. [7]

    V. D. Burkert, L. Elouadrhiri, and F. X. Girod, The pressure distribution inside the proton, Nature 557, 396 (2018)

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    Duran et al., Determining the gluonic gravitational form factors of the proton, Nature615, 813 (2023), arXiv:2207.05212 [nucl-ex]

    B. Duran et al., Determining the gluonic gravitational form factors of the proton, Nature615, 813 (2023), arXiv:2207.05212 [nucl-ex]

    arXiv 2023

Show all 36 references
  1. [9]

    Brout and F

    R. Brout and F. Englert, Gravitational Ward Identity and the Principle of Equivalence, Phys. Rev. 141, 1231 (1966)

    1966

  2. [10]

    V. A. Novikov and M. A. Shifman, Comment on the ψ′ → J/ψππ Decay, Z. Phys. C 8, 43 (1981)

    1981

  3. [11]

    M. B. Voloshin and V. I. Zakharov, Measuring QCD Anomalies in Hadronic Transitions Between Onium States, Phys. Rev. Lett. 45, 688 (1980)

    1980

  4. [12]

    M. V. Polyakov, Hard exclusive electroproduction of two pions and their resonances, Nucl. Phys. B 555, 231 (1999), arXiv:hep-ph/9809483

    1999 arXiv

  5. [13]

    P. E. Shanahan and W. Detmold, Gluon gravitational form factors of the nucleon and the pion from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 99, 014511 (2019), arXiv:1810.04626 [hep-lat]

    2019 arXiv

  6. [14]

    D. A. Pefkou, D. C. Hackett, and P. E. Shanahan, Gluon gravitational structure of hadrons of different spin, Phys. Rev. D 105, 054509 (2022), arXiv:2107.10368 [hep-lat]

    2022 arXiv

  7. [15]

    D. C. Hackett, P. R. Oare, D. A. Pefkou, and P. E. Shanahan, Gravitational form factors of the pion from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 108, 114504 (2023), arXiv:2307.11707 [hep-lat]

    2023 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Y.-Z. Xu, M. Ding, K. Raya, C. D. Roberts, J. Rodr ´ ıguez-Quintero, and S. M. Schmidt, Pion and kaon electromagnetic and gravitational form factors, Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 191 (2024), arXiv:2311.14832 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Terning, Gauging nonlocal Lagrangians, Phys

    J. Terning, Gauging nonlocal Lagrangians, Phys. Rev. D 44, 887 (1991). 9

    1991

  10. [18]

    Gross and D

    F. Gross and D. O. Riska, Current Conservation and Interaction Currents in Relativistic Meson Theories, Phys. Rev. C 36, 1928 (1987)

    1987

  11. [19]

    R. M. Woloshyn, Relativistic Effects in Bound State Form-Factors, Phys. Rev. C 12, 901 (1975)

    1975

  12. [20]

    Bentz, Two-body Ward identities, Nucl

    W. Bentz, Two-body Ward identities, Nucl. Phys. A 446, 678 (1985)

    1985

  13. [21]

    G. V. Efimov and S. N. Nedelko, Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model with the homogeneous background gluon field, Phys. Rev. D51, 176 (1995)

    1995

  14. [22]

    Ja. V. Burdanov, G. V. Efimov, S. N. Nedelko, and S. A. Solunin, Meson masses within the model of induced nonlocal quark currents, Phys. Rev. D54, 4483 (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9601344 [hep-ph]

    1996 arXiv

  15. [23]

    A. C. Kalloniatis and S. N. Nedelko, Realization of chiral symmetry in the domain model of QCD, Phys. Rev. D 69, 074029 (2004), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 70, 119903 (2004)], arXiv:hep-ph/0311357

    2004 arXiv

  16. [24]

    S. N. Nedelko and V. E. Voronin, Regge spectra of excited mesons, harmonic confinement and QCD vacuum structure, Phys. Rev. D 93, 094010 (2016), arXiv:1603.01447 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Leutwyler, Vacuum fluctuations surrounding soft gluon fields, Phys

    H. Leutwyler, Vacuum fluctuations surrounding soft gluon fields, Phys. Lett. B 96, 154 (1980)

    1980

  18. [26]

    J. T. Goldman and R. W. Haymaker, Dynamically Broken Chiral Symmetry With Bag Confinement, Phys. Rev. D 24, 724 (1981)

    1981

  19. [27]

    S. N. Nedelko and V. E. Voronin, Influence of confining gluon configurations on the P → γ∗γ transition form factors, Phys. Rev. D 95, 074038 (2017), arXiv:1612.02621 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Nedelko, A

    S. Nedelko, A. Nikolskii, and V. Voronin, Soft gluon fields and anomalous magnetic moment of muon, J. Phys. G 49, 035003 (2022), arXiv:2109.00949 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Nedelko and V

    S. Nedelko and V. Voronin, Dipole polarizabilities of light pseudoscalar mesons within the domain model of the QCD vacuum, Phys. Rev. D 107, 094027 (2023), arXiv:2208.00253 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Voronin, Leptonic and semileptonic decays of mesons in the domain model of the QCD vacuum, Phys

    V. Voronin, Leptonic and semileptonic decays of mesons in the domain model of the QCD vacuum, Phys. Rev. D 110, 014040 (2024), arXiv:2404.07695 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Navas et al

    S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

    2024

  24. [32]

    I. V. Anikin, M. A. Ivanov, N. B. Kulimanova, and V. E. Lyubovitskij, The Extended Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model with separable interaction: Low-energy pion physics and pion nucleon form-factor, Z. Phys. C 65, 681 (1995)

    1995

  25. [33]

    Leader and C

    E. Leader and C. Lorc´ e, The angular momentum controversy: What’s it all about and does it matter?, Phys. Rept. 541, 163 (2014), arXiv:1309.4235 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  26. [34]

    G. A. Miller, Defining the proton radius: A unified treatment, Phys. Rev. C 99, 035202 (2019), arXiv:1812.02714 [nucl-th]

    2019 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Faessler, T

    A. Faessler, T. Gutsche, B. R. Holstein, M. A. Ivanov, J. G. K¨ orner, and V. E. Lyubovitskij, Semileptonic decays of the light J P = 1/2+ ground state baryon octet, Phys. Rev. D 78, 094005 (2008), arXiv:0809.4159 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Ruijl, T

    B. Ruijl, T. Ueda, and J. Vermaseren, FORM version 4.2 (2017), arXiv:1707.06453 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

Pith tools

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