Physics channels available for analysis:
Updated: 2025-Feb-12
We have an amazing amount of data from the Kaon-LT and Pion-LT experiments over
a wide kinematic range. Below is our list of possible physics outputs from the
acquired data, and the spokespersons' assessment of their potential physics
impact. Names are placed next to some of these items, but many opportunities in
our list are still available. And, we are of course open to hear your additional
ideas for topics and/or publications using our data.
Interested parties should contact one of the Pion-LT or Kaon-LT spokespersons:
Dave Gaskell (JLab), Tanja Horn (CUA), Garth Huber (Regina), Pete Markowitz (FIU)
Shortcuts to:
Physics from K+ Channels:
| Experiment |
Paper Topic |
Kinematics |
Importance |
Online Status |
Person Responsible |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'K+)Λ L/T/LT/TT separated cross sections |
x=0.25: Q2=2.115, 3.0;
x=0.40: Q2=3.0, 4.4, 5.5 |
Will be used for Q-n scaling test, and extraction
of K+ FF, either in same or subsequent papers. |
Link here |
Richard Trotta & Chi Kin Tam |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'K+)Λ L/T/LT/TT separated cross sections |
x=0.12: Q2=1.25;
x=0.25: Q2=1.7, 3.5
| Will be used for Q-n scaling test, and extraction
of K+ FF, either in same or subsequent papers. |
Data to be taken in 2026-27 |
Sameer Jain (tentative) |
| KaonLT |
Q-n-dependence of p(e,e'K+)Λ L/T/LT/TT cross sections at
x=0.40, and comparison to QCD-scaling predictions. |
x=0.40: Q2=3.0, 4.4, 5.5 |
Will provide first check of QCD scaling expectations for
σL, σT. |
Makes use of above L/T/LT/TT separated cross sections |
Richard Trotta, Chi Kin Tam & Tanja Horn |
| KaonLT |
Q-n-dependence of p(e,e'K+)Λ L/T/LT/TT cross sections at
x=0.25, and comparison to QCD-scaling predictions. |
x=0.25: Q2=1.7, 2.115, 3.0, 3.5 |
Second check of QCD scaling expectations for
σL, σT. |
Makes use of above L/T/LT/TT separated cross sections |
Sameer Jain & Tanja Horn (tentative) |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'K+)Λ L/T/LT/TT separated cross sections |
Q2=0.5 |
Extract K+ form factor and compare to extrapolation
of exact form factor values from CERN and Fermilab |
Link here |
Abdennacer Hamdi & Garth Huber |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'K+)Λ,Σ global cross section analysis |
Q2=0.5 to 5.5 |
Provides an empirical model for feasbility studies and comparisons with
theoretical models |
Makes use of above L/T/LT/TT separated cross sections |
Tanja Horn |
| KaonLT |
K+-pole tests of separated p(e,e'K+)
dσL/dt
and, if warranted, K+ electric form factor versus Q2. |
All Q2 >2 GeV2 data. |
Flagship analysis, likely to be our highest cited KaonLT work. |
Makes use of above L/T/LT/TT separated cross sections |
Depending on the results of Richard's L/T-separations, we will decide how
best to proceed on this (likely) high impact study. Tanja Horn & Garth
Huber. |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'K+)Σ/p(e,e'K+)Λ separated cross
section ratios |
Q2=0.5, 2.115, 3.0, 4.4, 5.5 |
gKNΛ/gKNΣ coupling constant ratio versus t.
This is listed as one of our K+-pole tests. |
Requires extraction of Σ L/T/LT/TT cross sections from calibrated
K+ data. |
Gabriel & Ioana Niculescu |
| KaonLT |
Investigation of separated σ(K+Λ) /
σ(π+n) ratios at same kinematics |
Q2=0.5, 2.115, 3.0, 4.4, 5.5 |
These data could be vital in reducing the theoretical uncertainty in the
gKNΛ coupling constant. |
Makes use of the above calibrated data, with different PID cuts and
efficiencies.
The π analysis is listed separately in the next table. |
Available |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'K+)Λ beam spin asymmetry |
10.6 GeV data at Q2=0.5, 2.115, 3.0, 4.4, 5.5 |
First ever extraction of K+ BSA.
Compare to π BSA and to GPD and Regge model predictions. |
|
Initial analysis by Ivan Zhenchuk |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'K+)Λ(1405)/p(e,e'K+)Λ(1115),
p(e,e'K+)Λ(1520)/p(e,e'K+)Λ(1115)
unseparated cross section ratios at high ε for various
kinematics. |
Provides some interesting reaction mechanism data, particularly in
comparison to Regge models. |
Likely this will be possible only for the Q2 > 2 GeV2
data. It will depend on which settings have most populated Λ* peaks. |
Will use the above calibrated data, but the rest of the analysis would be
new. No diamond cut will be applied, as we need the full statistics to
reliably extract the Λ* yields. |
Ioana & Gabriel Niculescu. This would make a good MSc project, initial
yield ratios could be an undergraduate project. |
Physics from π+ Channels:
The PionLT run plan is highly optimized, where most settings have multiple uses
in different physics studies. This is summarized in the figure at left, where the
symbols have the following meanings:
[red line] Q2 scans at fixed xB=0.1-0.6;
[green square] priority Q-n scaling study;
[yellow square] priority π+ form factor study;
[dashed vertical line] W-scans at fixed Q2, to evaluate dependence
of π+ form factor extraction on -tmin;
[black X] points instrumental in the Q2=8.5 pion form factor extraction.
The text indicates the -tmin values and target/SHMS polarities used
for each setting.
| p(e,e'π+)n L/T/LT/TT separated cross
sections |
|---|
PionLT Setting | Studies used in | Online
Status | Initial Assignment (to be reviewed) |
| LH2 Q2=1.45, W=2.02, -tmin=0.11 |
x=0.31 scaling |
[3.7 GeV]
[6.4 GeV]
|
Available |
| LH2 Q2=1.6, W=3.08, -tmin=0.03 |
Fπ |
[6.4 GeV]
[9.2 GeV]
[9.9 GeV] |
Available |
| LD2 Q2=1.6, W=3.08, -tmin=0.03 |
π-/π+ |
[6.4 GeV]
[6.4 GeV B]
[9.2 GeV]
|
Available |
| LH2 Q2=2.12, W=2.05, -tmin=0.19 |
x=0.39 scaling |
[4.6 GeV]
[8.5 GeV]
|
Nathan Heinrich |
| LH2 Q2=2.45, W=3.20, -tmin=0.05 |
Fπ |
[8.0 GeV]
[8.5 GeV]
[10.55 GeV]
|
Available |
| LH2 Q2=2.73, W=2.63, -tmin=0.12 |
x=0.31 scaling |
[6.4 GeV]
[10.55 GeV]
| Available |
| LH2 Q2=3.85, W=2.02, -tmin=0.49 |
x=0.55 scaling and Fπ |
[6.0 GeV]
[10.55 GeV]
|
Muhammad Junaid |
| LH2 Q2=3.85, W=2.62, -tmin=0.21 |
x=0.39 scaling and Fπ |
[6.4 GeV]
[10.55 GeV]
|
Muhammad Junaid & Nathan Heinrich |
| LD2 Q2=3.85, W=2.62, -tmin=0.21 |
π-/π+ |
[6.4 GeV]
[6.4 GeV B]
[10.55 GeV]
[10.55 GeV B]
|
Available |
| LH2 Q2=3.85, W=3.07, -tmin=0.12 |
x=0.31 scaling and Fπ |
[8.0 GeV]
[8.5 GeV]
[9.9 GeV]
[10.55 GeV]
|
Muhammad Junaid |
| LD2 Q2=3.85, W=3.07, -tmin=0.12 |
π-/π+ |
[8.0 GeV]
[10.55 GeV]
[10.55 GeV B]
|
Available |
| LH2 Q2=5.0, W=2.95, -tmin=0.20 |
x=0.39 scaling and Fπ |
[8.0 GeV]
[9.9 GeV]
[10.55 GeV]
|
Nathan Heinrich |
| LH2 Q2=6.0, W=2.40, -tmin=0.53 |
x=0.55 scaling and Fπ |
[8.0 GeV]
[10.55 GeV]
|
Available |
| LD2 Q2=6.0, W=2.40, -tmin=0.53 |
π-/π+ |
[8.0 GeV]
[10.55 GeV]
[10.55 GeV B]
|
Available |
| LH2 Q2=6.0, W=3.19, -tmin=0.21 |
x=0.39 scaling and Fπ |
[9.2 GeV]
[9.9 GeV]
[10.55 GeV]
|
Nathan Heinrich |
| LH2 Q2=8.5, W=2.79, -tmin=0.55 |
x=0.55 scaling and Fπ |
[9.2 GeV]
[10.55 GeV]
|
Available |
| Physics study using L/T/LT/TT separated cross sections |
|---|
| Experiment |
Paper Topic |
Kinematics |
Importance |
Person Responsible |
| PionLT |
p(e,e'π+)n L/T/LT/TT separated cross sections |
Q2=0.375, 0.425 |
Extract π+ form factor and compare to extrapolation
of exact form factor values from CERN and Ackerman (indirect) |
Vijay Kumar & Garth Huber |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'π+)n L/T/LT/TT separated cross sections |
Q2=0.50 |
In principle we can do the same comparison with exact form factor values
using the KaonLT data. Uses same data sample as Nacer's K+
analysis, but with different PID cuts and efficiencies. |
Available |
| PionLT |
Fπ test vs changing -tmin |
Q2=1.60: W=3.08, W=2.22 (Fpi-2), W=1.95 (Fpi-1) |
Form factor reliability check at Q2=1.60 |
Available |
| PionLT |
Fπ test vs changing -tmin |
Q2=2.40: W=3.20, W=2.22 (Fpi-2) |
Form factor reliability check at Q2=2.40 |
Available |
| PionLT |
Fπ test vs changing -tmin |
Q2=3.85: W=3.07, 2.62, 2.02 |
Form factor reliability check at Q2=3.85 |
Muhammad Junaid |
| PionLT |
Fπ test vs changing -tmin |
Q2=6.00: W=3.19, 2.40 |
Form factor reliability check at Q2=6.00 |
Available |
| PionLT |
Fπ over a wide Q2 range |
Q2=1.60, 2.45, 3.85, 5.00, 6.00 |
Our flagship measurement, likely to be the most cited paper from
PionLT |
Requires full set of L/T/LT/TT-separated data
and well understood systematic uncertainties. Full kinematic range means
this would be a later paper. Available |
| PionLT |
Fπ at highest Q2 |
Q2=8.50 |
Requires π-pole tests from other kinematics in Fig 1 |
Tests using other L/T/LT/TT-separated data means this is would be a later
paper. Available |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'π+)n L/T/LT/TT-separated cross sections |
x=0.25: Q2=2.115, 3.0;
x=0.40: Q2=3.0, 4.4, 5.5 |
These data can feed into the scaling and pion form factor reliability tests
listed in other parts of this table. |
Available |
| PionLT |
p(e,e'π+)n global cross section analysis |
Q2=0.375 to 8.5 |
Uses above L/T/LT/TT separated cross sections in an empirical model
useful for feasbility studies and comparisons with theoretical models. |
Tanja Horn |
| KaonLT |
Fπ with higher statistics, but worse systematic uncertainties
than PionLT
| Q2 > 2.0 |
Could be used for additional π-pole tests since these data will be at
slightly higher -tmin than PionLT. |
Available |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'π+)X unseparated cross sections at high and low ε |
x=0.25: Q2=2.115, 3.0;
x=0.40: Q2=3.0, 4.4, 5.5 |
Analysis of SIDIS channel e+p->eπ+X at high z, as a function
of ε. Constrains the high z SIDIS model and provides a check on KaonLT
unseparated exclusive π+ channel results.
Preliminary results at: |
Peter Bosted |
| KaonLT |
x=0.25 scaling test |
Q2=2.115, 3.0 |
Uses same data as Richard's K+ study above, but with different
PID cuts and efficiencies. |
Available |
| PionLT |
x=0.31 scaling test |
Q2=1.45, 2.73, 3.85 |
Check hard-soft factorization at x=0.31 |
Available |
| PionLT |
x=0.39 scaling test |
Q2=2.12, 3.85, 5.0, 6.0 |
Check hard-soft factorization at x=0.39 |
Nathan Heinrich |
| KaonLT |
x=0.40 scaling test |
Q2=3.0, 4.4, 5.5 |
Uses same GeV data as Richard's K+ study above, but with
different PID cuts and efficiencies. |
Baptiste Fraisse (tentative) |
| PionLT |
x=0.55 scaling test |
Q2=3.85, 6.0, 8.5 |
Check hard-soft factorization at x=0.55 |
Available |
| PionLT |
π-/π L/T/LT/TT-separated ratios |
Q2=1.60, 2.45 (Fpi-2), 3.85 (W=2.62, 3.07), 6.00 |
σL: π-pole dominance test;
σT: hard-soft factorization test |
Available |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'π+)Δ0/p(e,e'π+)n
ratios at low and high ε |
Q2 > 2.0
Probably statistics will only allow a normalized yield ratio at low
and high ε. |
Online results indicate these two channels have very different L/T
ratios. Would provide helpful information for transition GPD models and
studies of the Δπ reaction mechanism. |
Ali Usman |
| KaonLT and PionLT |
p(e,e'π+)n beam spin asymmetry at Low Q2 |
Q2=0.375, 0.425, 0.50 |
Someone needs to take a quick look at the data to see if the asymmetry is
large enough to be interesting. |
Q2=0.5 done by Ivan Zhenchuk |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'π+)n beam spin asymmetry |
10.6 GeV data at Q2=0.5, 2.115, 3.0, 4.4, 5.5 |
Compare to CLAS BSA and to GPD and Regge model predictions. Paper
submitted. |
Alicia Postuma |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'π+)Δ0 beam spin asymmetry |
10.6 GeV data at Q2=0.5, 2.115, 3.0, 4.4, 5.5 |
Compare to CLAS Δπ BSA and our π BSA |
Ali Usman |
| PionLT |
π+ beam spin asymmetries over a wide kinematic range |
Q2=1.60, 2.45, 3.85, 5.00, 6.00 |
An extension of the KaonLT π BSA analysis. Statistics will be lower
than KaonLT for some settings. |
Available |
Physics from p Channels:
| Experiment |
Paper Topic |
Kinematics |
Importance |
Person Responsible |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'p)ω L/T/LT/TT separated cross sections |
x=0.25: Q2=2.115, 3.0;
x=0.40: Q2=3.0, 4.4, 5.5 |
Will be used for L/T ratios versus -u, investigation of backward angle
peak, and Q-n scaling test, either in same or subsequent
papers. |
Alicia Postuma |
| KaonLT |
Q-n-dependence of p(e,e'p)ω L/T/LT/TT cross sections at
x=0.40, and comparison to QCD-scaling predictions. |
x=0.40: Q2=3.0, 4.4, 5.5 |
Makes use of above L/T/LT/TT separated cross sections.
Compare to Bill's check of QCD scaling expectations for
σL, σT. |
Alicia Postuma |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'p)ω beam spin asymmetry |
10.6 GeV data at Q2=0.5, 2.115, 3.0, 4.4, 5.5 |
Compare to π BSA and to GPD and Regge model predictions.
Requires extraction of Σ L/T/LT/TT cross sections from
π+ calibrated data. |
Alicia Postuma |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'p)ρ0/p(e,e'p)ω separated cross section
ratios |
Q2=0.5, 2.115, 3.0, 4.4, 5.5 |
TDA models have made specific predictions for these ratios versus u for our
kinematics. Requires the reliable separation of the ρ missing mass peak
from the uncorrelated 2π phase-space underneath. Statistics should be
much better than for PionLT high Q2 settings.
|
Available |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'p)φ/p(e,e'p)ω separated cross section ratios |
Q2=0.5, 2.115, 3.0, 4.4, 5.5 |
u-channel φ production is uniquely sensitive to the s-sbar content of
the proton wave function. Due to the greater statistics, this is likely our
only chance of φ data, in comparison to PionLT high Q2
settings.
|
Available |
| KaonLT |
p(e,e'p)η and p(e,e'p)η' cross sections at high and low ε |
Q2=0.5, 2.115, 3.0, 4.4, 5.5 |
See studies in Michael Hladun's UofR B.Sc. Honours thesis. |
Available |