Heavy Baryon Chiral Perturbation Theory with Light Deltas

Barry R. Holstein; Joachim Kambor; Thomas R. Hemmert

REVIEW

Heavy Baryon Chiral Perturbation Theory with Light Deltas

Thomas R. Hemmert, Barry R. Holstein, Joachim Kambor

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · Submitted 22 Dec 1997 · 53 references

Pith's verdict: A solid, explicit formalism paper for pi-N-Delta HBChPT; the O(ε²) construction holds up, but the 'to all orders' phrasing in Section 4.4 outruns what the paper actually proves.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash) read the paper on November 11, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 2 major objections · 7 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDhep-ph/9712496 (version 2)

Pith IDYOAG4PUF, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationBarry R. Holstein, Joachim Kambor, Thomas R. Hemmert. "Heavy Baryon Chiral Perturbation Theory with Light Deltas." arXiv:hep-ph/9712496 (1997). https://pith.science/paper/YOAG4PUF

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

Worth your time if you work in baryon ChPT, less so otherwise. The real content is the explicit heavy-baryon projection of the Rarita-Schwinger Delta: the spin projection operators in Eq. (44), the separation of the two spurious spin-1/2 sectors, the path-integral shifts in Eqs. (53), (87), (88), and the inverse matrices in Appendix C. That last appendix matters — it constructs C_Δ^{-1} explicitly, which answers Bel'kov and Dillig's claim [44] that it doesn't exist. The O(ε²) Lagrangians in Eqs. (72), (91), (93), (95) and the counterterm sets in Eqs. (111)–(113) are the deliverable, and they look internally consistent. The point-invariance discussion in Section 3.1 and the Pascalutsa trick of absorbing the A-dependence into O^A are handled cleanly. Credit where due: this is careful, unglamorous work that a lot of later calculations lean on, and the authors' companion papers [26, 29–32] show it gets used. The stress-test note is right that Section 4.4's 'to all orders' claim rests on dropping functional determinants that the authors themselves say need not be unity in the delta sector (Section 3.2.3), with the study deferred to [43]. But they flag it in the text and in footnote 9, and they say the O(ε²) results are unaffected — which is true. So this is loose phrasing on an all-orders aside, not a hole in the actual construction. I'd call it minor. Two things I'd actually press on. First, the one number quoted, g_{πNΔ} = 1.05 ± 0.02, comes from [43], listed as 'in preparation.' That's the only empirical anchor in the paper and it isn't published yet; a referee should ask for it or drop the number. Second, the Δ-counting caveat is acknowledged in the Introduction ('phenomenological extension of pure (HB)ChPT'), so it's not a hidden assumption — but there's still no convergence test anywhere, and readers should not read 'systematic' as 'controlled error.' The free parameters (g2, g3, z0, and the a/b/c counterterm sets) are honestly left open. For a nuclear ChPT person building Delta-resonance calculations, this is the reference to have. Send it out.

Referee report

Significance

If the construction holds, it supplies a bookkeeping scheme in which the Δ(1232) need not be integrated out into counterterms, which matters for channels where the resonance lies only ~300 MeV above threshold. The paper's strengths are concrete: the projection-operator decomposition of Eq. (44) and the explicit inverse matrices collected in Appendix C constitute a constructive existence proof for C_Δ^{-1} at O(1/M), directly answering the claim of non-existence attributed to Ref. [44]; the point-invariance bookkeeping of Eqs. (34)–(37) and (74)–(76) is carried through consistently; and the counterterm bases of Eqs. (111)–(113) are written in a form that later fits can use. The formalism is falsifiable in the ordinary sense that its O(ε²) vertices are fixed in terms of a small set of low-energy constants, and the authors state that first applications already exist in Refs. [26, 29–32].

Major objections (2)

[§4.4, Eq. (101); Introduction] The Introduction states that §4 gives 'a consistent chiral perturbative scheme for the joint interactions of pions, nucleons, and deltas to all orders', and §4.4 presents Eq. (101) as the all-orders result obtained after the shifts of Eq. (100) and integration over h' and G''. The authors themselves state in §3.2.3 that in the delta sector 'the resulting determinant in general need not be equal to unity anymore as in standard HBChPT because it contains particle and anti-particle excitations of the spin 1/2 (off-shell) components of the relativistic delta theory', with the study deferred to Ref. [43], and footnote 9 of §4.3 repeats that determinant effects 'can again only start showing up at O(ε³)'. The O(ε²) results of §4.3 are not in question, but the all-orders reading of Eq. (101) is asserted while the factor that would validate it beyond O(ε²) is deferred to a reference listed as 'in preparation'. Either restrict the 'to all orders' language in the Introduction and §4.4 to 'to the orders considered here, with determinant contributions starting at O(ε³)', or add a short argument—even a power-counting estimate of det(C_Δ) in the ε expansion—that converts the hedge 'should remain unaffected' into a statement. As written, the strongest claim of the paper is the one place where the derivation is incomplete.
[§5.3, assumptions (a)–(f); Eqs. (112)–(113)] The completeness of the NΔ and ΔΔ counterterm bases in Eqs. (112) and (113) rests on the list of simplifications in §5.3, of which item (b) is stated as an assumption: 'we assume that all off-shell dependent structures involving relativistic spin 3/2 fields can be rewritten into the Theta-tensor form, using Dirac identities and field redefinitions. All structures that involve the dot-product of a Dirac matrix and a Rarita-Schwinger spinor (γ^μψ_μ) are therefore accounted for solely by Theta-tensors.' Since the paper's claim is that these are all possible local terms allowed by the symmetries, and since the number of independent b_i and a_i coefficients is what future fits will rely on, a short demonstration (or an explicit citation to a worked proof) that no γ·ψ structure survives outside the Θ-tensor would materially strengthen §5.3. The same applies to item (a), that all O(ε²) relativistic Lagrangians can be written free of the equations of motion via field redefinitions, which is asserted without argument.

Minor objections (7)

[Appendix C] The first line of Appendix C refers to 'matrices C^{-1}_Δ (section 2) and C^{-1}_Δ (section 3)', which repeats the same symbol; the first should presumably be C_N^{-1}. The closing paragraph likewise states that 'the matrices C^{-1}_Δ and C^{-1}_Δ will then start to look very different', where the two symbols should differ.
[§5.1] The chiral counting rules list Δ as O(ε¹) but do not state the corresponding rule for the delta propagator, which in this scheme counts as O(ε^{-1}) because of the 1/(v·k − Δ) denominator of Eq. (57). Since this is precisely what reorganizes the diagrammatic expansion relative to HBChPT, it deserves an explicit line in §5.1 alongside the building-block list.
[§4.3 and Eq. (111)] The text of §4.3 states that g^{(2a)}_{ππNN} and g^{(2b)}_{ππNN} 'are related to the O(ε²) counterterms c2, c3, c4 of ref. [16]', while Eq. (111) introduces its own c2, c3, c4 with a different normalization and origin. A sentence distinguishing the two sets of c_i, or a relabelling of one of them, would prevent confusion in later applications.
[§4.2] The value g^{HHK}_{πNΔ} = 1.05 ± 0.02 is quoted from Ref. [43], listed as 'in preparation'. Since this number will be an input to essentially all subsequent NΔ calculations in this scheme, either give the fit inputs (decay width, kinematics, order of the truncation) in a footnote here or mark the value explicitly as preliminary pending Ref. [43].
[§3.2.3, Eq. (63)] The Thomson-limit amplitude for the delta, Amp_{γγTT} ∝ (δ_{ij}(1/2)(3+τ_3) − iε_{3ij}(1+τ_3) − δ_{i3}δ_{j3}), should be checked against the expected charge-squared factors for the four physical states Δ^{++}, Δ^{+}, Δ^{0}, Δ^{−}. The presence of the term −δ_{i3}δ_{j3} makes the isospin structure non-obvious, and a one-line verification in the text would settle it.
[Title page] The date line reads 'November 26, 2024' on a manuscript otherwise dated 1997–98 and marked 'to appear in Journal of Physics G'; this appears to be a typesetting artifact and should be corrected.
[§4.3, Eqs. (94) and (96)] The text states that g_{ππΔΔ} and h_{ππNΔ} are 'in principle' determined by the O(ε) couplings but must in practice be treated as free O(ε²) parameters because g2 is unknown. This is honest, but the 'in principle determined' phrasing could be softened to make clear that, absent information on g2, the O(ε²) ΔΔ and NΔ sectors carry additional free parameters beyond those of the NN sector.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

A consistent heavy-baryon chiral Lagrangian is constructed for pions, nucleons, and the Delta(1232), with the mass splitting treated as a small expansion parameter.

The reading

Chiral perturbation theory is a way to calculate how pions and nucleons interact at low energies by writing down every term allowed by the symmetries of QCD and expanding in small momenta and the pion mass. The usual heavy-baryon version removes the large nucleon mass from the problem, but it treats the Delta(1232) as too heavy to keep in the calculation. That is awkward because the Delta sits only about 300 MeV above the nucleon and couples strongly to pions and nucleons. This paper keeps the Delta as an explicit field. It generalizes the heavy-baryon projection operators from spin one-half to spin three-halves, separates the physical spin-3/2 part of the Rarita-Schwinger field from its unwanted spin-1/2 components, and integrates out the small components. The result is a set of Lagrangians for pions, nucleons, and Deltas organized in a single expansion parameter, epsilon, which counts soft momenta, the pion mass, and the nucleon-Delta mass splitting. The paper is a formalism paper. It does not fit data or present a new measurement. It gives the interaction terms through order epsilon squared and lists the counterterms needed to absorb loop divergences. The authors are explicit that counting the 300 MeV splitting as small is a phenomenological choice, not a consequence of QCD, so the usefulness of the scheme depends on how well that expansion converges in practice.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that heavy-mass methods can be extended to a coupled pion-nucleon-Delta system in a single systematic expansion. The paper states that it gives 'a consistent chiral perturbative scheme for the joint interactions of pions, nucleons, and deltas to all orders' (Section 4.4) and constructs the Lagrangians explicitly through O(ε²). If correct, the Delta(1232) can be kept as an explicit degree of freedom rather than integrated out into counterterms, and the resulting power counting treats soft momenta, the pion mass, and the nucleon-Delta splitting on the same footing.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the expansion is controlled when Δ = MΔ - MN ≈ 300 MeV is counted as O(ε) alongside soft momenta and mπ. The authors call this 'a phenomenological extension of pure (HB)ChPT' in the Introduction because Δ does not vanish in the chiral limit. If the series in Δ/Λχ converges poorly, the formalism is still a consistent bookkeeping scheme, but the word 'systematic' does not imply a small error. The paper does not provide a convergence test or an error estimate for truncated orders.

Original abstract

We demonstrate how heavy mass methods, previously applied to chiral perturbation theory calculations involving the interactions of nucleons and pions, can be generalized to include interactions with the $\Delta(1232)$ in a systematic formalism which we call the "small scale expansion."

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 1,689 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.10 · states limitation 0.08 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.02 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.03 · compares with prior results 0.47 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v2. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

We demonstrate how heavy mass methods, previously applied to chiral perturbation theory calculations involving the interactions of nucleons and pions, can be generalized to include interactions with the $\Delta(1232)$ in a systematic formalism which we call the "small scale expansion."

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	We demonstrate how heavy mass methods, previously applied to chiral perturbation theory calculations involving the interactions of nucleons and pions, can be generalized to include interactions with the $\Delta(1232)$ in a systematic formalism which we call the "small scale expansion."	contribution 0.99	0.91	0.71	asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: method or tool 0.99 · evidence from proof or derivation 0.97.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v2

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

References

Works cited (53)

[44]

A.A. Bel’kov and M. Dillig, Report no. hep-ph/9612246 ( 1996)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996
[43]

T.R. Hemmert, B.R. Holstein and J. Kambor, “Chiral Lagr angians and ∆(1232) Interactions: Applications”, in preparation

View on Pith
[1]

See, e.g., Chiral Dynamics: Theory and Experiment , eds. A.M. Bernstein and B.R. Holstein, Springer-Verlag, New York (1995)

View on Pith 1995
[2]

S. Gasiorowicz and D.A. Geﬀen, Rev. Mod. Phys. 41 (1969) 531 ; H. Pagels, Phys. Rep. 16 (1975) 219

View on Pith 1969
[3]

S. Weinberg, Physica A96 (1979) 327

View on Pith 1979
[4]

A. Manohar and H. Georgi, Nucl. Phys. B234 (1984) 189; J.F. Donoghue, E. Golowich and B.R. Holstein, Phys. Rev. D30 (1984) 587

View on Pith 1984
[5]

J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Ann. Phys. (NY) 158 (1984) 142; Nucl. Phys. B250 (1985) 465

View on Pith 1984
[6]

see e.g. S. Bellucci, J. Gasser and M.E. Sainio, Nucl. Phys. B423 (1994) 80; ibid B431 (1994) 413 (Erratum); E. Golowich and J. Kambor, Nucl. Phys. B447 (1995) 373 and Phys. Rev. D58 (1998) 036004; U. B¨ urgi, Phys. Lett. B377 (1996) 147 and Nucl. Phys. B479 (1996) 392; K. Maltman, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 2573; J. Bijnens and P. Talavera, Nucl. Phys. B489 (...

View on Pith 1994
[7]

See, e.g. B.R. Holstein, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A7 (1992) 7873; G. Ecker, “Chiral Symmetry.” preprint no. UWThPh-1998-18; [hep-ph/9805500]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1992
[8]

ChPT97, Proc. of Workshop on Chiral Dynamics – Theory and Exper- iment, Mainz, Germany, Sept. 1-5, 1997, A. Bernstein, D. Dre chsel and T. Walcher (eds.), Springer, Heidelberg, New York

View on Pith 1997
[9]

J. Gasser, M.E. Sainio, A. Svarc, Nucl. Phys. B307 (1988) 779; see also J. Gasser, talk at chpt97 in [8], for a more recent discussion

View on Pith 1988
[10]

H. Bijnens, H. Sonoda and M. Wise, Nucl. Phys. B261 (1985) 185

View on Pith 1985
[11]

A. Krause, Helv. Phys. Acta 63 (1990) 3. 44

View on Pith 1990
[12]

V. Bernard, J. Gasser, N. Kaiser and U.-G. Meißner, Phys . Lett. B268 (1991) 291

View on Pith 1991
[13]

N. Isgur and M. Wise, Phys. Lett. B232 (1989) 113; H. Georgi, Phys. Lett. B240 (1990) 447

View on Pith 1989
[14]

E. Jenkins and A.V. Manohar, Phys. Lett. B255 (1991) 558

View on Pith 1991
[15]

V. Bernard, N. Kaiser, J. Kambor, and U.-G. Meißner, Nuc l. Phys. B388 (1992) 315

View on Pith 1992
[16]

V. Bernard, N. Kaiser and U.-G. Meißner, Int. J. Mod. Phy s. E4 (1995) 193

View on Pith 1995
[17]

G. Ecker, Phys. Lett. B336 (1994) 508

View on Pith 1994
[18]

G. Ecker and M. Mojzis, Phys. Lett. B365 (1996) 312

View on Pith 1996
[19]

G. Ecker and M. Mojzis, Phys. Lett. 410 (1997) 266

View on Pith 1997
[20]

U.-G. Meißner and G. M¨ uller, Nucl. Phys. B492 (1997) 379

View on Pith 1997
[21]

T.-S. Park, D.-P. Min and M. Rho, Nucl. Phys. A596 (1996) 515

View on Pith 1996
[22]

U. van Kolck, Nucl. Phys. A631 (1998) 56c

View on Pith 1998
[23]

U.-G. Meißner, “Status of three ﬂavour Chiral Perturba tion Theory” in [8]

View on Pith
[24]

e.g. M.N. Butler, M.J. Savage and R.P. Springer, Nucl. Phys. B399 (1993) 69 and references therein

View on Pith 1993
[25]

E. Jenkins and A.V. Manohar, Phys. Lett. B259 (1991) 353; also “Baryon Chiral Perturbation Theory”, in Eﬀective Field Theories of the Standard Model , U.-G. Meißner (ed.), World Scientiﬁc, Singapore (1992)

View on Pith 1991
[26]

T.R. Hemmert, B.R. Holstein and J. Kambor, Phys. Lett. B395 (1997) 89; J. Kambor, in Baryons ’95 , Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on the Structure of Baryons, Santa Fe, NM, 3-7 Oct . 1995, 45 B.F. Gibson et al. (eds.), World Scientiﬁc, Singapore (1996 ); T.R. Hem- mert and J. Kambor, in The Standard Model at Low Energies , Mini- Proceedin...

View on Pith 1997
[27]

R. Dashen, E. Jenkins and A.V. Manohar, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 4713; E. Jenkins, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 2625 and references therein

View on Pith 1994
[28]

T. Mannel, W. Roberts and Z. Ryzak, Nucl. Phys. B368 (1992) 204

View on Pith 1992
[29]

T.R. Hemmert, B.R. Holstein and J. Kambor, Phys. Rev. D55 (1997) 5598

View on Pith 1997
[30]

T.R. Hemmert, B.R. Holstein, J. Kambor and G. Kn¨ ochlei n, Phys. Rev. D57 (1998) 5754

View on Pith 1998
[31]

T.R. Hemmert, πN newsletter 13, 63 (1997)

View on Pith 1997
[32]

B.R. Holstein, “Chiral Perturbation Theory and Nucleo n Polarizabili- ties” in [8]; J. Kambor, “The ∆(1232) as an Eﬀective Degree in Freedom in Chiral Perturbation Theory” in [8]; D. Drechsel et al., “H adron Po- larizabilities and Form Factors” in [8]

View on Pith
[33]

M. Luke and A.V. Manohar, Phys. Lett. B286 (1992) 348; Y.-Q. Chen, Phys. Lett. B317 (1993) 421; M. Finkemeier, H. Georgi and M. McIrvin, Phys. Rev. D55 (1997) 6933

View on Pith 1992
[34]

W.E. Thirring, Phil. Mag. 41 (1950) 1193

View on Pith 1950
[35]

N.M. Kroll and M.A. Ruderman, Phys. Rev. 93 (1954) 233

View on Pith 1954
[36]

W. Rarita and J. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 60 (1941) 61

View on Pith 1941
[37]

P.A. Moldauer and K.M. Case, Phys. Rev. 102 (1956) 279

View on Pith 1956
[38]

L.M. Nath, B. Etemadi and J.D. Kimel, Phys. Rev. D3 (1971) 2153

View on Pith 1971
[39]

M. Benmerrouche, R.M. Davidson and N.C. Mukhopadhyay, Phys. Rev. C39 (1989) 2339. 46

View on Pith 1989
[40]

S. Kamefuchi, L. O’Raifeartaigh and A. Salam, Nucl. Phy s. 28 (1961) 529

View on Pith 1961
[41]

V. Pascalutsa, “On the Interactions of Spin 3/2 Particl es”, University of Utrecht preprint THU-94/21

View on Pith
[42]

A. Falk, Nucl. Phys. B378 (1992) 79

View on Pith 1992
[45]

T. Ericson and W. Weise, Pions and Nuclei , Oxford University Press (1988)

View on Pith 1988
[46]

R.D. Peccei, Phys. Rev. 176 (1968) 1812; Phys. Rev. 181 (1969) 1902

View on Pith 1968
[47]

M. Napsuciale and J.L. Lucio M., Phys. Lett. B384 (1996) 227

View on Pith 1996
[48]

T.R. Hemmert, B.R. Holstein and N.C. Mukhopadhyay, Phy s. Rev. D51 (1995) 158

View on Pith 1995
[49]

T.R. Hemmert, “Heavy Baryon Chiral Perturbation Theor y with Light Deltas”, Ph.D. thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amher st (1997)

View on Pith 1997
[50]

J. Stern, H. Sazdjian and N.H. Fuchs, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 3814

View on Pith 1993
[51]

S. Coleman, J. Wess and B. Zumino, Phys. Rev. 177 (1969) 2239; C.G. Callan, S. Coleman, J. Wess and B. Zumino, Phys. Rev. 177 (1969) 2247

View on Pith 1969
[52]

H. Georgi, Weak interactions and Modern Particle Theory , Ben- jamin/Cummings, Menlo Park (1984)

View on Pith 1984
[53]

H.-B. Tang and P.J. Ellis, Phys. Lett. B387 (1996) 9. 47

View on Pith 1996

Forward citations

Cited by 25 Pith papers

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

First determination of vector and tensor couplings from polarized $\pi\Delta$ photoproduction
hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

First extraction of complete NΔ vector and tensor couplings to ρ, b1, a2 from polarized πΔ photoproduction using a Regge model on GlueX data.
Hyperon non-leptonic decays in relativistic Chiral Perturbation Theory with resonances
hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

Relativistic ChPT at NLO with resonance saturation yields a good combined fit to hyperon non-leptonic s- and p-wave decay amplitudes.
Electromagnetic polarizabilities of the triplet hadrons in heavy hadron chiral perturbation theory
hep-ph 2026-02 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

Heavy hadron chiral perturbation theory predicts giant electric polarizabilities for D star mesons from near-degenerate pion thresholds and flavor-dependent values for doubly heavy baryons.
$\Delta$ resonance contributions to QED radiative corrections in neutron and inverse beta decay
hep-ph 2026-08 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Including the Delta resonance in heavy-baryon chiral perturbation theory shifts QED corrections to the gA/lattice comparison toward zero and increases pion-induced inverse beta decay radiative corrections by 20-30%.
Radiative corrections to neutron $\beta$ decay with explicit $\Delta (1232)$ degrees of freedom
hep-ph 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Including the Delta(1232) resonance explicitly reduces the electromagnetic radiative correction to the axial-vector ratio in neutron decay from about 1.4-2.6% to 0.7-1.6%.

Show 20 more citing papers

Extraction of the nucleon axial form factor from Lattice QCD using NNLO chiral perturbation theory
hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

NNLO ChPT with explicit Delta fits lattice data to extract g_A = 1.257 ± 0.011 and axial radius squared 0.312 ± 0.037 fm² at the physical point.
The Baryon-Baryon Interaction in the Large-$N_c$ Limit
hep-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A large-N_c analysis of the chiral baryon-baryon potential cuts the leading-order contact couplings from fifteen to three and fixes F/D=2/3 and C/D=2.
Scale setting and the light baryon spectrum in $N_f=2+1$ QCD with Wilson fermions
hep-lat 2022-11 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Continuum-limit lattice QCD with six lattice spacings reproduces the stable light baryon masses to sub-percent precision and yields pion and strange sigma terms for all octet baryons plus the Omega.
Pion-nucleon scattering in covariant baryon chiral perturbation theory with explicit Delta resonances
hep-ph 2016-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Including the Delta resonance explicitly in a third-order covariant chiral perturbation theory calculation reproduces the S- and P-wave pion-nucleon phase shifts and yields a pion-nucleon sigma term consistent with th...
Matching pion-nucleon Roy-Steiner equations to chiral perturbation theory
nucl-th 2015-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Matching Roy-Steiner subthreshold parameters to chiral perturbation theory at N3LO yields pion-nucleon low-energy constants with a full covariance matrix, though chiral-truncation error dominates the budget.
Nucleon Electromagnetic Form Factors from Lattice QCD using 2+1 Flavor Domain Wall Fermions on Fine Lattices and Chiral Perturbation Theory
hep-lat 2009-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Precision lattice data on nucleon electromagnetic form factors at pion masses down to 297 MeV show a flat pion-mass dependence that neither O(epsilon^3) SSE nor O(p^4) covariant baryon ChPT can fit.
Light hadron spectroscopy using domain wall valence quarks on an Asqtad sea
hep-lat 2008-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Across six pion masses from about 480 down to 300 MeV the nucleon mass is fit by a straight line in the pion mass, and re-plotting four other collaborations' published nucleon masses shows the same linearity.
Axial coupling constant of the nucleon for two flavours of dynamical quarks in finite and infinite volume
hep-lat 2006-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

From two-flavor lattice data and a new finite-volume small-scale-expansion formula, the authors extract g_A^0 = 1.26(8)(7) in the chiral limit and g_A at the physical pion mass consistent with experiment.
Chiral Corrections to the Hyperon Vector Form Factors
hep-ph 2006-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A complete O(p^4) heavy baryon chiral perturbation theory calculation shows the SU(3)-breaking corrections to hyperon f1(0) are large and the three-flavor chiral expansion for baryons, especially with decuplet states,...
Reconciling threshold and subthreshold expansions for pion-nucleon scattering
nucl-th 2016-10 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Including the Δ(1232) explicitly and using covariant baryon ChPT both reduce the low-energy constants of pion-nucleon scattering to natural size and bring predicted threshold parameters closer to the Roy-Steiner values.
Nucleon isovector couplings from $N_f=2$ lattice QCD
hep-lat 2014-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Lattice QCD with two light quark flavours yields the nucleon's isovector axial, scalar, tensor and pseudoscalar charges at a 150 MeV pion mass, agreeing with experiment everywhere except the isovector anomalous magnet...
The nucleon mass and pion-nucleon sigma term from a chiral analysis of lattice QCD world data
hep-ph 2013-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A global chiral fit to lattice QCD nucleon masses yields a pion-nucleon sigma term of 41(5)(4) MeV for two-flavor data and 52(3)(8) MeV for 2+1-flavor data.
Using effective field theory to analyse low-energy Compton scattering data from protons and light nuclei
nucl-th 2012-03 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

New chiral-EFT fits to proton and deuteron Compton data give alpha_p = 10.7 +/- 0.3 (stat) +/- 0.2 (Baldin) +/- 0.8 (theory) and beta_p = 3.1 -/+ 0.3 +/- 0.2 +/- 0.8, in units of 10^-4 fm^3.
Axial Nucleon form factors from lattice QCD
hep-lat 2010-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Two-flavor twisted-mass lattice QCD yields a continuum-extrapolated nucleon axial charge g_A = 1.12(8), about one sigma below experiment, with the axial form factor falling more slowly in momentum transfer than the ex...
Nucleon structure from mixed action calculations using 2+1 flavors of asqtad sea and domain wall valence fermions
hep-lat 2010-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Lattice QCD with 2+1 flavors puts the proton axial charge about 9% below experiment, the charge radii near two thirds of measured values, and the connected quark angular momentum at Ju+d = 0.238(8), with up and down o...
$|\Delta I|=3/2$ non-leptonic hyperon decays in covariant baryon chiral perturbation theory
hep-ph 2026-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

In covariant baryon chiral perturbation theory, decuplet-baryon contributions with the consistent coupling scheme, plus pion loops, most improve the fit to the |ΔI|=3/2 hyperon decay amplitudes.
Scrutiny of the new class of three-nucleon forces
nucl-th 2025-12 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

After removing renormalization-scheme-dependent short-distance parts, the scrutinized three-nucleon forces yield small contributions to neutron and symmetric nuclear matter equations of state, aligning with standard c...
Towards a theory of hadron resonances
hep-ph 2022-06 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

The review consolidates lattice-QCD and effective-field-theory methods for hadron resonances and argues that Breit-Wigner parameterizations are incompatible with chiral symmetry in strongly coupled channels.
Beta Decays and Non-Standard Interactions in the LHC Era
hep-ph 2013-03 accept novelty 2.0 of 10

Precision beta-decay and light-meson measurements probe non-standard charged-current interactions at scales of 7 to 11 TeV and remain complementary to direct LHC searches.
Recent developments in SU(3) covariant baryon chiral perturbation theory
nucl-th 2013-01 conditional novelty 2.0 of 10

The EOMS renormalization scheme for covariant baryon chiral perturbation theory preserves analyticity and power counting and, in the reviewed applications, converges faster than heavy-baryon and infrared schemes.

How later papers used it

73 later papers cite it

Evidence: substantial. 72 of the citing papers share no author with it, and 19 of those carry a confident label from Pith's citation classifier.

Pith read 23 of the 151 citing sentences, choosing only those whose citation markers point at this paper alone, and wrote the paraphrases from them. The summary, the counts, the evidence level, the links and the quotes come from code; the summary counts the papers listed below. A later paper is listed under a label when Pith's citation classifier gives one of its sentences that label at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), Pith's reading finds that the citing paper itself did it, and a second check confirms the paraphrase against the sentence. This section lists uses only. It does not list criticism or disagreement, so their absence here says nothing about how the paper has been received. Papers that share an author with this one are listed apart, under "By the same authors". A quote is the citing authors' own sentence, shown when their paper's licence is CC BY, CC BY-SA or CC0. JSON

7 later papers by other authors are listed below: 7 used its method or tool.

Uses its method or tool 7 of 16 papers with this label

Based its calculations on Weinberg's power counting utilizing the small scale expansion.

Delta-excitations and the three-nucleon force (2007) · 1.00 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
Adopted the small-scale expansion in the presence of explicit Delta degrees of freedom.

Radiative corrections to neutron $\beta$ decay with explicit $\Delta (1232)$ degrees of freedom (2026) · 0.98 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
Analyzed radiative pion photoproduction utilizing the covariant Delta-full chiral perturbation theory framework within the small scale expansion scheme.

Radiative pion photoproduction in covariant chiral perturbation theory (2020) · 0.98 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
Used the small scale expansion counting scheme in the Delta-full case.

Pion photoproduction in chiral perturbation theory with explicit treatment of the $\Delta(1232)$ resonance (2021) · 0.92 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
Employed the scheme of this paper.

Redundancy of the off-shell parameters in chiral effective field theory with explicit spin-3/2 degrees of freedom (2009) · 0.98 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
Adopted the small scale expansion scheme.

Chiral Lagrangians with $\Delta(1232)$ to one loop (2017) · 0.99 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
Used the small scale expansion to treat the octet and decuplet mass difference.

Recent developments in SU(3) covariant baryon chiral perturbation theory (2013) · 0.98 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting

How the literature uses it

62 arXiv papers cite this in 132 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 80 sentences without a confident label

Uses its method or tool 14 papers

Our calculations are based on Weinberg's power counting [ref] utilizing the small scale expansion [ref] .

Delta-excitations and the three-nucleon force · $Δ$-contributions to the three-nucleon force up to NNLO · 1.00
We use the standard power counting [ref] , extended to diagrams with $Δ$ baryons following small scale expansion (SSE) of Refs. [ref] .

Light-quark mass dependence of the nucleon axial charge and pion-nucleon scattering phenomenology · The nucleon axial charge in relativistic BChPT · 0.93
In the presence of explicit $Δ$ degrees of freedom, we adopt the small-scale expansion (SSE) [ref] , [equation] with $Λ_χ∼4πF_π∼m_N$ the chiral-symmetry-breaking scale that numerically is close to the nucleon mass.

Radiative corrections to neutron $\beta$ decay with explicit $\Delta (1232)$ degrees of freedom · Power counting and decoupling · 0.98

Uses its data or values 2 papers

Regarding the coupling constants related to baryons, the following values are utilized [ref] [equation] Other coupling constants of those type can be derived from $SU(4)$ symmetry.

Strong decays of the $\Lambda_{c}(2910)$ and $\Lambda_{c}(2940)$ in the $ND^{*}$ molecular frame · Coupling constants under SU(4) symmetry · 1.00
A fit to the decay width of $Δ$ resonance leads to $h=1.05$ [ref] .

Neutrinoless double-beta decay of the $\Delta^-$ resonance · Chiral effective field Lagrangians · 0.98

Compares with it 2 papers

For the $𝒪(p^2)$ $πNΔ$ chiral Lagrangian, we obtain three independent terms, [equation] From Ref. [ref] , a different set of relativistic terms is, [equation] We find the following correspondence between these two sets of terms: $d_1^(2)↔b_4$, $d_2^(2)↔b_5$, and $d_3^(2)↔b_1$.

Chiral Lagrangians with $\Delta(1232)$ to one loop · $𝒪(p^2)$ order · 1.00
When $k_1=1$, the relation is consistent with Refs. [ref] .

Relations for low-energy constants in baryon chiral perturbation theory with explicit $\Delta(1232)$ derived from the chiral quark model · Values of $k$'s · 0.95

Cites it as support 3 papers

This suggests that the convergence of the $Δ$-less chiral expansion could potentially be improved by treating the nearby $Δ(1232)$ resonance, with a mass only $300$ MeV larger than the nucleon, as an explicit degree of freedom, rather than integrating it out into the low-energy constants (LECs) [ref] .

Radiative corrections to neutron $\beta$ decay with explicit $\Delta (1232)$ degrees of freedom · Introduction · 0.96
These findings were confirmed in the explicit calculation by Fettes and Meißner [ref] based on the so-called small scale expansion (SSE) [ref] .

Redundancy of the off-shell parameters in chiral effective field theory with explicit spin-3/2 degrees of freedom · Introduction and Summary · 0.99
This was confirmed in the explicit calculation by Fettes and Meißner [ref] based on the so-called small scale expansion [ref] .

On-shell consistency of the Rarita-Schwinger field formulation · Dependence on off-shell parameters · 1.00

Cites it as background 19 papers

ℒ_πΔ^(1) = ψ̅^μ_i ( [i D]^i j_μν - m_μν^ij - g_1/2 g_μν u^ij γ_5 - g_2/2 ( γ_μu_ν^ij + u_μ^ij γ_ν) - g_3/2 γ_μu^ij γ_5 γ_ν) ψ^ν_j , where the $g_i$ are LECs, $u_μ^ij = u_μδ^ij$, $u_μ= i (u^†∂_μu - i ∂_μu^†)$ and the matrix $U(x) = u^2 (x)$ collects the pion fields, see [ref] for more details.

Redundancy of the off-shell parameters in chiral effective field theory with explicit spin-3/2 degrees of freedom · Redundancy of the off-shell parameters in chiral EFT · 0.81
The chiral perturbation theory with explicit $Δ$ degrees of freedom has been extensively developed over the past decades [ref] .

$\Delta$ resonance contributions to QED radiative corrections in neutron and inverse beta decay · Introduction · 0.98
A widely adopted power counting scheme is the small scale expansion (the mass difference $Δ$ and the soft momentum $p$ belong to the same order) [ref] , but the $δ=Δ/Λ_χ∼m_π/Δ$ expansion [ref] was also used.

Relations for low-energy constants in baryon chiral perturbation theory with explicit $\Delta(1232)$ derived from the chiral quark model · Introduction · 0.94

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [44]

A.A. Bel’kov and M. Dillig, Report no. hep-ph/9612246 ( 1996)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1996

[2] [43]

T.R. Hemmert, B.R. Holstein and J. Kambor, “Chiral Lagr angians and ∆(1232) Interactions: Applications”, in preparation

View on Pith

[3] [1]

See, e.g., Chiral Dynamics: Theory and Experiment , eds. A.M. Bernstein and B.R. Holstein, Springer-Verlag, New York (1995)

View on Pith 1995

[4] [2]

S. Gasiorowicz and D.A. Geﬀen, Rev. Mod. Phys. 41 (1969) 531 ; H. Pagels, Phys. Rep. 16 (1975) 219

View on Pith 1969

[5] [3]

S. Weinberg, Physica A96 (1979) 327

View on Pith 1979

[6] [4]

A. Manohar and H. Georgi, Nucl. Phys. B234 (1984) 189; J.F. Donoghue, E. Golowich and B.R. Holstein, Phys. Rev. D30 (1984) 587

View on Pith 1984

[7] [5]

J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Ann. Phys. (NY) 158 (1984) 142; Nucl. Phys. B250 (1985) 465

View on Pith 1984

[8] [6]

see e.g. S. Bellucci, J. Gasser and M.E. Sainio, Nucl. Phys. B423 (1994) 80; ibid B431 (1994) 413 (Erratum); E. Golowich and J. Kambor, Nucl. Phys. B447 (1995) 373 and Phys. Rev. D58 (1998) 036004; U. B¨ urgi, Phys. Lett. B377 (1996) 147 and Nucl. Phys. B479 (1996) 392; K. Maltman, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 2573; J. Bijnens and P. Talavera, Nucl. Phys. B489 (...

View on Pith 1994

[9] [7]

See, e.g. B.R. Holstein, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A7 (1992) 7873; G. Ecker, “Chiral Symmetry.” preprint no. UWThPh-1998-18; [hep-ph/9805500]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1992

[10] [8]

ChPT97, Proc. of Workshop on Chiral Dynamics – Theory and Exper- iment, Mainz, Germany, Sept. 1-5, 1997, A. Bernstein, D. Dre chsel and T. Walcher (eds.), Springer, Heidelberg, New York

View on Pith 1997

[11] [9]

J. Gasser, M.E. Sainio, A. Svarc, Nucl. Phys. B307 (1988) 779; see also J. Gasser, talk at chpt97 in [8], for a more recent discussion

View on Pith 1988

[12] [10]

H. Bijnens, H. Sonoda and M. Wise, Nucl. Phys. B261 (1985) 185

View on Pith 1985

[13] [11]

A. Krause, Helv. Phys. Acta 63 (1990) 3. 44

View on Pith 1990

[14] [12]

V. Bernard, J. Gasser, N. Kaiser and U.-G. Meißner, Phys . Lett. B268 (1991) 291

View on Pith 1991

[15] [13]

N. Isgur and M. Wise, Phys. Lett. B232 (1989) 113; H. Georgi, Phys. Lett. B240 (1990) 447

View on Pith 1989

[16] [14]

E. Jenkins and A.V. Manohar, Phys. Lett. B255 (1991) 558

View on Pith 1991

[17] [15]

V. Bernard, N. Kaiser, J. Kambor, and U.-G. Meißner, Nuc l. Phys. B388 (1992) 315

View on Pith 1992

[18] [16]

V. Bernard, N. Kaiser and U.-G. Meißner, Int. J. Mod. Phy s. E4 (1995) 193

View on Pith 1995

[19] [17]

G. Ecker, Phys. Lett. B336 (1994) 508

View on Pith 1994

[20] [18]

G. Ecker and M. Mojzis, Phys. Lett. B365 (1996) 312

View on Pith 1996

[21] [19]

G. Ecker and M. Mojzis, Phys. Lett. 410 (1997) 266

View on Pith 1997

[22] [20]

U.-G. Meißner and G. M¨ uller, Nucl. Phys. B492 (1997) 379

View on Pith 1997

[23] [21]

T.-S. Park, D.-P. Min and M. Rho, Nucl. Phys. A596 (1996) 515

View on Pith 1996

[24] [22]

U. van Kolck, Nucl. Phys. A631 (1998) 56c

View on Pith 1998

[25] [23]

U.-G. Meißner, “Status of three ﬂavour Chiral Perturba tion Theory” in [8]

View on Pith

[26] [24]

e.g. M.N. Butler, M.J. Savage and R.P. Springer, Nucl. Phys. B399 (1993) 69 and references therein

View on Pith 1993

[27] [25]

E. Jenkins and A.V. Manohar, Phys. Lett. B259 (1991) 353; also “Baryon Chiral Perturbation Theory”, in Eﬀective Field Theories of the Standard Model , U.-G. Meißner (ed.), World Scientiﬁc, Singapore (1992)

View on Pith 1991

[28] [26]

T.R. Hemmert, B.R. Holstein and J. Kambor, Phys. Lett. B395 (1997) 89; J. Kambor, in Baryons ’95 , Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on the Structure of Baryons, Santa Fe, NM, 3-7 Oct . 1995, 45 B.F. Gibson et al. (eds.), World Scientiﬁc, Singapore (1996 ); T.R. Hem- mert and J. Kambor, in The Standard Model at Low Energies , Mini- Proceedin...

View on Pith 1997

[29] [27]

R. Dashen, E. Jenkins and A.V. Manohar, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 4713; E. Jenkins, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 2625 and references therein

View on Pith 1994

[30] [28]

T. Mannel, W. Roberts and Z. Ryzak, Nucl. Phys. B368 (1992) 204

View on Pith 1992

[31] [29]

T.R. Hemmert, B.R. Holstein and J. Kambor, Phys. Rev. D55 (1997) 5598

View on Pith 1997

[32] [30]

T.R. Hemmert, B.R. Holstein, J. Kambor and G. Kn¨ ochlei n, Phys. Rev. D57 (1998) 5754

View on Pith 1998

[33] [31]

T.R. Hemmert, πN newsletter 13, 63 (1997)

View on Pith 1997

[34] [32]

B.R. Holstein, “Chiral Perturbation Theory and Nucleo n Polarizabili- ties” in [8]; J. Kambor, “The ∆(1232) as an Eﬀective Degree in Freedom in Chiral Perturbation Theory” in [8]; D. Drechsel et al., “H adron Po- larizabilities and Form Factors” in [8]

View on Pith

[35] [33]

M. Luke and A.V. Manohar, Phys. Lett. B286 (1992) 348; Y.-Q. Chen, Phys. Lett. B317 (1993) 421; M. Finkemeier, H. Georgi and M. McIrvin, Phys. Rev. D55 (1997) 6933

View on Pith 1992

[36] [34]

W.E. Thirring, Phil. Mag. 41 (1950) 1193

View on Pith 1950

[37] [35]

N.M. Kroll and M.A. Ruderman, Phys. Rev. 93 (1954) 233

View on Pith 1954

[38] [36]

W. Rarita and J. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 60 (1941) 61

View on Pith 1941

[39] [37]

P.A. Moldauer and K.M. Case, Phys. Rev. 102 (1956) 279

View on Pith 1956

[40] [38]

L.M. Nath, B. Etemadi and J.D. Kimel, Phys. Rev. D3 (1971) 2153

View on Pith 1971

[41] [39]

M. Benmerrouche, R.M. Davidson and N.C. Mukhopadhyay, Phys. Rev. C39 (1989) 2339. 46

View on Pith 1989

[42] [40]

S. Kamefuchi, L. O’Raifeartaigh and A. Salam, Nucl. Phy s. 28 (1961) 529

View on Pith 1961

[43] [41]

V. Pascalutsa, “On the Interactions of Spin 3/2 Particl es”, University of Utrecht preprint THU-94/21

View on Pith

[44] [42]

A. Falk, Nucl. Phys. B378 (1992) 79

View on Pith 1992

[45] [45]

T. Ericson and W. Weise, Pions and Nuclei , Oxford University Press (1988)

View on Pith 1988

[46] [46]

R.D. Peccei, Phys. Rev. 176 (1968) 1812; Phys. Rev. 181 (1969) 1902

View on Pith 1968

[47] [47]

M. Napsuciale and J.L. Lucio M., Phys. Lett. B384 (1996) 227

View on Pith 1996

[48] [48]

T.R. Hemmert, B.R. Holstein and N.C. Mukhopadhyay, Phy s. Rev. D51 (1995) 158

View on Pith 1995

[49] [49]

T.R. Hemmert, “Heavy Baryon Chiral Perturbation Theor y with Light Deltas”, Ph.D. thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amher st (1997)

View on Pith 1997

[50] [50]

J. Stern, H. Sazdjian and N.H. Fuchs, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 3814

View on Pith 1993

[51] [51]

S. Coleman, J. Wess and B. Zumino, Phys. Rev. 177 (1969) 2239; C.G. Callan, S. Coleman, J. Wess and B. Zumino, Phys. Rev. 177 (1969) 2247

View on Pith 1969

[52] [52]

H. Georgi, Weak interactions and Modern Particle Theory , Ben- jamin/Cummings, Menlo Park (1984)

View on Pith 1984

[53] [53]

H.-B. Tang and P.J. Ellis, Phys. Lett. B387 (1996) 9. 47

View on Pith 1996