Physics channels available for analysis:
Updated: 2025-Jan-24
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 my assessment of their potential physics impact. Names are
placed next to some items. However, many opportunities are still available for
leading one of the analyses and publishing the results.
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 |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| 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. |
| 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. |
Available |
| 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 also 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. |
|
Available |
| 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. |
Available. 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]
|
Muhammad Junaid & Nathan Heinrich |
| LH2 Q2=1.6, W=3.08, -tmin=0.03 |
Fπ |
[6.4 GeV]
[9.2 GeV]
[9.9 GeV] |
Muhammad Junaid |
| 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]
|
Muhammad Junaid |
| LH2 Q2=2.73, W=2.63, -tmin=0.12 |
x=0.31 scaling |
[6.4 GeV]
[10.55 GeV]
| Nathan Heinrich |
| LH2 Q2=3.85, W=2.02, -tmin=0.49 |
x=0.55 scaling and Fπ |
[6.0 GeV]
[10.55 GeV]
|
Muhammad Junaid & Nathan Heinrich |
| LH2 Q2=3.85, W=2.62, -tmin=0.21 |
x=0.39 scaling and Fπ |
[6.4 GeV]
[10.55 GeV]
|
Muhammad Junaid |
| 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]
|
Nathan Heinrich |
| 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]
|
Muhammad Junaid & Nathan Heinrich |
| LH2 Q2=6.0, W=2.40, -tmin=0.53 |
x=0.55 scaling and Fπ |
[8.0 GeV]
[10.55 GeV]
|
Nathan Heinrich |
| 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]
|
Muhammad Junaid |
| 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 |
| 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 |
Muhammad Junaid |
| 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 |
Available |
| 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 |
Fπ with higher statistics, but worse systematic uncertainties
than PionLT.
| Q2 > 2.0 |
Would mostly be a confirmation that we understand our systematic
uncertainties in the L/T/LT/TT-separation. Could also be used for
additional π-pole tests since these data will be at slightly higher
-tmin than PionLT. |
Available |
| 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 |
Nathan Heinrich |
| 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. |
Available |
| 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, 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. |
Available. It might make a good undergraduate project. |
| 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 |