New QCD Parameter Determinations

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The recent papers on quark mass and strong force coupling constant determinations utilize renormalization group summed perturbation theory (RGSPT). The findings include α(s)(n(f)=5)(M(Z)) = 0.1171(7), m_b(MS mass pole mass) = 4174.3(9.5) MeV, m_c(MS mass pole mass) = 1281.1(3.8) MeV, m_s(2 GeV) = 104.34-4.21+4.23 MeV, m_d(2 GeV) = 4.21-0.45+0.48 MeV, and m_u(2 GeV) = 2.00-0.40+0.33 MeV. The strange quark mass exhibits greater tension with previous estimates, potentially due to RGSPT's insufficient consideration of non-perturbative effects. The discussion highlights the need for clarity in presenting values from multiple sources.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of renormalization group summed perturbation theory (RGSPT)
  • Familiarity with quark mass definitions and measurements
  • Knowledge of Particle Data Group (PDG) and Flavor Lattice Averaging Group (FLAG) values
  • Basic comprehension of non-perturbative effects in quantum field theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of non-perturbative effects in quantum chromodynamics (QCD)
  • Study the methodologies used in renormalization group summed perturbation theory (RGSPT)
  • Examine the differences between Particle Data Group (PDG) and Flavor Lattice Averaging Group (FLAG) quark mass values
  • Explore advanced topics in quark mass determination techniques and their accuracy
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, researchers in quantum field theory, and students studying particle physics who are interested in quark mass measurements and theoretical methodologies.

ohwilleke
Gold Member
Messages
2,660
Reaction score
1,624
TL;DR
A pair of new papers make precision determinations of the quark masses and the strong force coupling constant using the renormalization group summed perturbation theory (RGSPT). The values are close to previous estimates, but there is some tension in the strange quark mass determination.
A pair of new papers (here and here) make precision determinations of the quark masses and the strong force coupling constant using the renormalization group summed perturbation theory (RGSPT). For comparison purposes, I have followed each value with the Particle Data Group (PDG) value, and then the 2021 Flavor Lattice Averaging Group (FLAG) value.

α(s)(n(f)=5)(M(Z)) = 0.1171(7)
<----> 0.1179(9) <----> 0.1184(8).

m_b(MS mass pole mass) = 4174.3(9.5) MeV
<----> 4180-20+30 MeV <----> 4203(11) MeV

m_c(MS mass pole mass) = 1281.1(3.8) MeV
<----> 1270(20) MeV <----> 1278(13) MeV

m_s(2 GeV) = 104.34-4.21+4.23 MeV
<----> 93.4-3.4+8.6 MeV <----> 93.44(68) MeV

m_d(2 GeV) = 4.21-0.45+0.48 MeV
<----> 4.67-0.17+0.48 MeV <----> 4.70(5) MeV

m_u(2 GeV) = 2.00-0.40+0.33 MeV
<----> 2.16-0.26+0.49 MeV <----> 2.14(8) MeV

Can anyone explain, at an educated layman's "intermediate" level, why the strange quark mass value in this method has more tension than the other parameters do with previously estimated values?

My gut intuition is that the tension is due to insufficient consideration of non-perturbative effects by RGSPT, which turns out to be maximal for the strange quark, but I don't have a well substantiated basis for that hypothesis.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
what does

<---->mean?
 
malawi_glenn said:
what does

<---->mean?
I'm merely using it as a way to visually distinguish between the values from each of the three sources for each parameter, while connecting all three values to the definition of the parameter described (which would ideally all appear on the same line).

If you use of comma or semi-colon, they tend to visually blend into each other to my tired middle aged bifocal wearing eyes.

If you you separate lines for each entry, it gets harder to read the post as a whole, since it has six more lines.
 
tableworksfinetoo
the<---->isgarbage

personallyIthink
thelackof
## \LaTeX ##formationis

evenmore
hurtfulto

eyes
 
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: ohwilleke and Vanadium 50

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 317 ·
11
Replies
317
Views
116K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
12K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
16K
Replies
1
Views
3K