Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Exploring $ \Lambda{\text-} $ and $ \Xi{\text -}$triton correlation functions in heavy-ion collisions

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper predicts that momentum correlations between a hyperon and a triton, measured in heavy-ion collisions at small source sizes (R = 1–3 fm), can distinguish different hyperon–nucleus interaction potentials, providing a new probe of…

desk verdict First predictions for Y–triton femtoscopy are useful, but the point-like triton approximation makes the R = 1–3 fm distinguishability an open question rather than a demonstrated result. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.07295 v2 pith:WRBDBISO submitted 2024-12-10 nucl-th hep-exnucl-ex

Faisal Etminan This is my paper · ORCID
classification nucl-thhep-exnucl-ex
keywords momentumcorrelationfunctionfemtoscopyhyperon–tritoninteractionLambda–tritonXi–tritonKoonin–Prattformulasingle-foldingpotentialhypernuclearbindingenergy
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

This paper predicts that momentum correlation functions of Λ–triton and Ξ–triton pairs produced in high-energy heavy-ion collisions can serve as a discriminating probe of hyperon–nucleus potentials. The central numerical result is that, at small source sizes R = 1–3 fm, the correlation curves for different potentials are visibly different: for Λ–triton a 20% stronger potential suppresses the low-momentum correlation relative to the standard one, and for Ξ–triton the curves from three different ΞN-based potentials separate from each other and from pure Coulomb. The author argues that current and near-future measurements of such correlations, with good momentum resolution, can therefore recognize which potential governs the hyperon–triton interaction. This matters because hyperon–nucleus interactions are hard to access by scattering experiments and are relevant for hypernuclei and dense matter.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Koonin–Pratt formula, $C(q)=\int 4\pi r^2\,dr\,S(r)\,|\Psi_{Yt}^{(-)}(r,q)|^2$, which converts a Gaussian source of size R and a two-body relative wave function into the measured correlation. The wave function comes from solving the Schrödinger equation with an effective hyperon–triton potential: for Λt an isle-type two-range Gaussian potential adjusted to the ${}^4_{\Lambda}\mathrm{H}$ binding energies, and for Ξt a single-folding potential $U_{\Xi t}(r)=\int dr'\,\rho(r')\,\bar{V}_{\Xi N}(r-r')$, where $\rho$ is a harmonic-oscillator triton density and $\bar{V}_{\Xi N}$ is the spin- and isospin-averaged ΞN interaction. This machinery translates potential differences into momentum-space correlation differences, and the author's numerical exploration shows the translation is visible only for small sources.

What would settle it

Measure the Λ–triton correlation function at R ≈ 1 fm in high-statistics heavy-ion data and compare the low-momentum region ($q\lesssim 100$ MeV/c) with the two predicted curves. If the data follow neither the standard nor the strengthened-potential curve, or if the Ξ–triton correlation at R = 1 fm matches pure Coulomb within errors, the claimed ability to recognize potentials is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's claim, on its own terms, is that the Koonin–Pratt correlation function $C(q)=\int 4\pi r^2\,dr\,S(r)\,|\Psi_{Yt}^{(-)}(r,q)|^2$ computed with effective two-body hyperon–triton potentials is sensitive enough to distinguish potentials. For Λt, using a spin-averaged two-range Gaussian isle-type potential tuned to hypernuclear binding energies, the correlation at R = 1 fm and $q\lesssim 100$ MeV/c is enhanced relative to the case where the potential strength is increased by 20%, because the strengthened potential has a stronger repulsive core. For Ξt, single-folding potentials built from spin- and isospin-averaged ΞN interactions of three different origins yield correlation functions that differ markedly from one another and from the pure Coulomb result at R = 1 and 3 fm, a difference that encodes a Coulomb-assisted bound state. The conclusion is that with good measurement resolution, R = 1–3 fm correlations could identify the correct potential.

Load-bearing premise

The whole calculation treats the triton as a point-like particle in a two-body Schrödinger equation, ignoring its finite size and the simultaneous formation of triton and correlation; if those effects are significant, the predicted potential discrimination could fail.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A measured Λ–triton correlation at R ≈ 1 fm and $q<100$ MeV/c can test whether the Λt potential's repulsive core is as strong as implied by the new hypernuclear binding-energy values.
  • Ξ–triton correlation data, once available, could distinguish between lattice-QCD-based and phenomenological ΞN interactions without needing a bound Ξ hypernucleus.
  • Source-size selection is decisive: R = 1–3 fm preserves potential sensitivity, while R = 5 fm wipes out the differences.
  • The deviation of Ξt correlations from the pure-Coulomb curve at small sources is an observable signature of a Coulomb-assisted bound state.
  • These measurements give an independent handle on hyperon–nucleus forces relevant to hypernuclear structure and dense matter.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because a triton forms from three nucleons at the same time as the hyperon–triton correlation develops, a four-body treatment might change the correlation magnitude; testing this would require a dedicated many-body calculation.
  • The single-folding-plus-Koonin–Pratt recipe is transferable: applying it to other hyperon–light-nucleus pairs (for example Ω–triton) would show whether the R = 1–3 fm discrimination window is a general feature or specific to Λt and Ξt.
  • The comparison between the standard and 20%-strengthened Λt potentials can be read as a quantitative map from hypernuclear binding-energy uncertainty to a correlation-function observable.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper predicts Λ-triton and Ξ-triton momentum correlation functions using the Koonin-Pratt formula. The Λt correlation function is computed with a spin-averaged isle-type potential and a 20% strengthened variant, while the Ξt correlation function is computed with single-folding potentials built from HAL QCD, ESC08c, and NHC-D ΞN interactions. The central result is that at small source sizes R=1–3 fm the correlation functions differ visibly between the potential models, suggesting that future heavy-ion measurements could distinguish the underlying interactions.

Significance. If the predictions hold, the paper opens a new observable for hyperon–triton interactions and complements existing femtoscopy studies of Λp, Λd, Ξα, and related systems. The work is transparently exploratory: the inputs are taken from published potentials or tuned to measured 4ΛH binding energies, and all fit parameters are tabulated, making the calculation reproducible. The main weakness is the point-like treatment of the triton in the Koonin-Pratt formula, which the author acknowledges; this limits the quantitative rigor of the distinguishability claim.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. III, Eq. (14); Sec. IV] The central claim that correlation functions at R = 1–3 fm can distinguish different potentials is not fully supported because the calculation treats the triton as a point-like particle in the Koonin-Pratt formula. The author correctly notes in Sec. IV that the KP formula is accurate only for point-like particles and that a full treatment involves a four-body problem with simultaneous triton formation. This is a load-bearing issue: at R = 1 fm, the Gaussian source width is smaller than the triton rms radius of 1.61 fm quoted in Sec. II, and finite-size or formation effects may alter the low-q behavior by an amount comparable to the model separations shown in Figs. 5 and 6. To support the distinguishability claim, the paper should either provide a few-body estimate of the finite-size correction, or restrict the claim to qualitative trends and clearly state this limitation in the abstract and conclusions.
  2. [Sec. III, Figs. 5 and 6; Sec. II] The predictions are presented without uncertainty bands, even though the HAL QCD input potentials carry statistical errors that the author says are 'considered' in the calculations. Since the central claim is that different potentials can be recognized, the absence of propagated uncertainties makes it difficult to assess whether the visible differences at R = 1–3 fm are significant relative to the input-potential errors. At minimum, the author should show the spread of the correlation functions across the t/a = 11, 12, 13 HAL QCD slices or provide a qualitative statement about the expected size of the theoretical error.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. II, Eq. (1)] The term 'Isle-type potential' is not standard; please define it or use the original nomenclature from Ref. [31].
  2. [Sec. II, after Eq. (6)] The attribution to 'Shinmura's potential [29]' is unclear because Ref. [29] is by Myint and Akaishi; please clarify the original source or correct the reference.
  3. [Sec. III, after Fig. 5] The phrase 'for R=1, in the low momentum region fm' appears garbled; presumably it should read 'for R = 1 fm, in the low momentum region q ≲ 100 MeV/c'.
  4. [Abstract and Introduction] The notation 'Λ- and Ξ-triton' is confusing; please write 'Λ-triton and Ξ-triton' for clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: correlation functions are genuine predictions from externally constrained potentials.

full rationale

The derivation chain is non-circular. The Lambda-triton potential U_Lambda t is an isle-type potential tuned to reproduce the experimental ground-state energy of 4_Lambda H, an external datum, and the U+_Lambda t variant is simply a 20% rescaling for sensitivity study. The Xi-triton potentials are constructed by folding external, published Xi-N interactions (HAL QCD lattice results, ESC08c, and the literature NHC-D potential) with a triton density; no measured Y-t correlation function is used to adjust any parameter. The final correlation functions are computed from these potentials via the Koonin-Pratt formula, so the plotted curves are genuine predictions of a different observable from the inputs. The point-like triton approximation and Gaussian source assumption are acknowledged limitations that could affect quantitative results, but they do not make the derivation circular. No load-bearing self-citation, no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, and no definitional equivalence between input and output are present.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central calculations rest on standard femtoscopy assumptions (KP formula, Gaussian source), a spin-isospin averaging procedure, and the single-folding method. Three sets of free parameters appear: the hand-chosen 20 percent Lambda-triton strength scaling, and the 3G and Woods-Saxon shape parameters fitted to folding potentials. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Lambda-triton potential strength scaling factor = 1.2
    Applied to U_Lambda t to create U+_Lambda t in Eq. (2), a hand-picked 20 percent increase meant to mimic the larger Lambda separation energy reported by STAR. Not fitted to data; used as a sensitivity probe.
  • HAL QCD 3G fit parameters (ci, di) = Table II entries for t/a = 11, 12, 13
    Coefficients in Eq. (3) obtained by fitting to the single-folding potentials built from the HAL QCD Xi-N interactions. They are shape parameters of the potential, not physical constants.
  • ESC08c Woods-Saxon fit parameters (V0, rc, t) = V0 = 28.8 MeV, rc = 0.90 fm, t = 0.3 fm
    Parameters in Eq. (11) fitted to the folding potential from the ESC08c Xi-N model over the range r >= 1.6 fm. The choice of fit range is motivated by the triton rms radius.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Koonin-Pratt formula with a static, spherical Gaussian source and point-like particles
    Used in Eq. (14) to compute correlation functions. The point-like assumption is questionable for a composite triton; the author acknowledges this and calls for a four-body treatment in future work.
  • domain assumption Spin-isospin averaged Xi-N interaction weights
    Eq. (10) averages the four Xi-N channels with weights (1, 3, 3, 9)/16, assuming all spin-isospin states contribute with degeneracy weights. This is a standard approximation in hypernuclear folding models.
  • domain assumption Single-folding potential with harmonic-oscillator triton density
    Eqs. (4)-(5) construct the Xi-triton potential by folding the Xi-N potential with the triton density, with beta fixed by the measured rms radius. This assumes a simple cluster structure for the triton.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Exploring $ \Lambda{\text-} $ and $ \Xi{\text -}$triton correlation functions in heavy-ion collisions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WRBDBISO

@misc{pith2026241207295,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Exploring $ \Lambda\text- $ and $ \Xi\text -$triton correlation functions in heavy-ion collisions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WRBDBISO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.07295}
}
abstract

The $ \Lambda{\text -} $ and $ \Xi{\text -}$triton(t) momentum correlation functions, to be measured in high-energy heavy-ion collisions, are explored. Mainly, STAR detector acquired data provides an opportunity to explore the $ \Lambda t $ correlation function. The $ \Lambda t $ correlation functions are calculated using an isle-type and spin-averaged $ \Lambda t $ potential, also, its sensitivity to changes in potential strength has also been investigated. % Besides, even though there is no experimental data on the $ \Xi{\text -} $triton interaction yet, I constructed $\Xi t$ potentials based on the first principles HAL QCD and Nijmegen extended soft-core (ESC08c) model of spin- and isospin averaged $\Xi N$ interactions in single-folding potentials (SFP) approach. Then, the $\Xi t$ correlation functions are calculated for these two modern potentials as well as for Nijmegen hard-core model D (NHC-D) $\Xi N$ potential. The numerical results predict that, with good measurement resolution, it might be possible to recognize different potentials with a correlation function at relatively small source sizes, i.e., $ R = 1-3 $ fm.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.07295 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: The spin averaged Λ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: (a) ESC08c and (b) HAL QCD ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: The spin- and isospin averaged single-folding potentials [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: The normalized phase shifts as functions of the relative mom [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: The spin averaged Λ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: The spin- and isospin averaged Ξ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. From hyperon--nucleon interactions to deuteron--hyperon femtoscopy

    nucl-th 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Folded HAL-QCD potentials yield no dY bound states but a large dΛ scattering length and strong low-k correlation enhancement, with feed-down from Σ and Ξ clearly reshaping the observed dΛ signal.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    9 exp [ − ( r

    25 ) 2] − 324. 9 exp [ − ( r

    work page

  2. [2]

    41 ) 2] , this Isle potential has a two-range Gaussian form with the central repulsion and the long range attraction and it is shown in Fig. 1. Furthermore, the new Λ binding energies measurements, perform ed for the 4 Λ H (0+) state with respect to the 3H +Λ mass are, 2 . 12 (1)stat. (9)syst. MeV [ 4], 2. 157 (5)stat. (77)syst. MeV by A1 Collaboration [ ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Therefore, this is a Coulomb-assisted bound stat e

    14 MeV appears. Therefore, this is a Coulomb-assisted bound stat e. In the following, the ESC08c and the HAL QCD Ξ N potentials which are used to find the effective single-folding potential of Ξ t is described. The ESC08c Nijmegen Ξ N poten- tial function consists of local central Yukawa-type potentials wit h attractive and repulsive terms [ 28, 39], V ESC ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Moreover, the relevance Y t phase shifts ( δ/π ) as functions of the relative momentum (q = √2µE where µ is the reduced mass of Y t system) is shown in Fig

    30 MeV with respect to the Ξ + t threshold. Moreover, the relevance Y t phase shifts ( δ/π ) as functions of the relative momentum (q = √2µE where µ is the reduced mass of Y t system) is shown in Fig. 4. The obtained phase shifts shows attractive behavior for all interactions. Low- energy part of Y t phase shifts in Fig. 4 defines scattering length a0 and ...

    work page

  5. [5]

    36 (t/a = 12) , 0

    63 (t/a = 11) , 0. 36 (t/a = 12) , 0. 18 (t/a = 13) MeV with respect to the Ξ+ 3H/ 3He thresh- 9 old. Since we used the spin- and isospin averaged Ξ N interaction to build the Ξ t potential, our results are some how different with GEM methods [ 25], but the general behaviours are in agreement. 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 δ/π q [MeV/c] UΛ t...

    work page

  6. [6]

    Abdallah et al., Measurement of 4 Λ H and 4 Λ He binding energy in Au+Au collisions at sNN = 3 GeV, Phys

    M. Abdallah et al., Measurement of 4 Λ H and 4 Λ He binding energy in Au+Au collisions at sNN = 3 GeV, Phys. Lett. B 834, 137449 (2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Botta, T

    E. Botta, T. Bressani, and A. Feliciello, On the binding e nergy and the charge symmetry breaking in A ≤ 16 Λ− hypernuclei, Nucl. Phys. A 960, 165 (2017)

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    Juriˇ cet al

    M. Juriˇ cet al. , A new determination of the binding energy values of the ligh t hypernuclei (A ≤ 5), Nucl. Phys. B 52, 1 (1973)

    work page 1973

Show all 58 references
  1. [9]

    Esser et al

    A. Esser et al. (A1 Collaboration), Observation of 4 Λ H hyperhydrogen by decay-pion spec- troscopy in electron scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 232501 (2015)

    2015

  2. [10]

    Schulz et al

    F. Schulz et al. , Ground-state binding energy of 4 Λ H from high-resolution decay-pion spec- troscopy, Nucl. Phys. A 954, 149 (2016), recent Progress in Strangeness and Charm Hadronic and Nuclear Physics

    2016

  3. [11]

    Kozhevnikova and Y

    M. Kozhevnikova and Y. B. Ivanov, Light Hypernuclei Production in Au+Au Collisions at √sN N = 3 GeV within Thermodynamic Approach (2024), arXiv:2401.04991 [nucl-th]

    2024 arXiv

  4. [12]

    S. Cho, T. Hyodo, D. Jido, C. M. Ko, S. H. Lee, S. Maeda, K. Miyahara, K. Morita, M. Nielsen, A. Ohnishi, et al. , Exotic hadrons from heavy ion collisions, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 95, 279 (2017)

    2017

  5. [13]

    Garrido, A

    E. Garrido, A. Kievsky, M. Gattobigio, M. Viviani, L. E. M arcucci, R. Del Grande, L. Fab- bietti, and D. Melnichenko, pΛ and ppΛ correlation functions, Phys. Rev. C 110, 054004 (2024)

    2024

  6. [14]

    Hu, Measurements of p − Λ and d − Λ correlations in 3 GeV Au+Au collisions at STAR (2023), arXiv:2401.00319 [nucl-ex]

    Y. Hu, Measurements of p − Λ and d − Λ correlations in 3 GeV Au+Au collisions at STAR (2023), arXiv:2401.00319 [nucl-ex]. 15

    2023 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Morita et al

    K. Morita et al. , Probing multistrange dibaryons with proton-omega correl ations in high- energy heavy ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 94, 031901 (2016)

    2016

  8. [16]

    Viviani, S

    M. Viviani, S. K¨ onig, A. Kievsky, L. E. Marcucci, B. Singh, and O. V. Doce, Role of three-body dynamics in nucleon-deuteron correlation functions, Phys. Rev. C 108, 064002 (2023)

    2023

  9. [17]

    Acharya et al

    S. Acharya et al. (ALICE Collaboration), Exploring the Strong Interaction o f Three-Body Systems at the LHC, Phys. Rev. X 14, 031051 (2024)

    2024

  10. [18]

    Bazak and S

    S. Bazak and S. Mr´ owczy´ nski, Production of4Li and p−3He correlation function in relativistic heavy-ion collisions, Eur. Phys. J. A 56, 193 (2020)

    2020

  11. [19]

    Mr´ owczy´ nski and P

    S. Mr´ owczy´ nski and P. S/suppress lo´ n, Hadron-deuteron correlations and production of light nuclei in relativistic heavy-ion collisions, Acta Phys. Pol. B 51, 1739 (2020)

    2020

  12. [20]

    Haidenbauer, Exploring the Λ-deuteron interaction via correlations in heavy-ion collisions, Phys

    J. Haidenbauer, Exploring the Λ-deuteron interaction via correlations in heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 102, 034001 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    Ogata, T

    K. Ogata, T. Fukui, Y. Kamiya, and A. Ohnishi, Effect of deuteron breakup on the deuteron-Ξ correlation function, Phys. Rev. C 103, 065205 (2021)

    2021

  14. [22]

    Zhang, S

    L. Zhang, S. Zhang, and Y.-G. Ma, Production of Ω N N and ΩΩN in ultra-relativistic heavy- ion collisions, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 1 (2022)

    2022

  15. [23]

    Etminan, Z

    F. Etminan, Z. Sanchuli, and M. M. Firoozabadi, Geometr ical properties of Ω N N three-body states by realistic N N and first principles Lattice QCD Ω N potentials, Nucl. Phys. A 1033, 122639 (2023)

    2023

  16. [24]

    Jinno, Y

    A. Jinno, Y. Kamiya, T. Hyodo, and A. Ohnishi, Femtoscop ic study of the Λ α interaction, Phys. Rev. C 110, 014001 (2024)

    2024

  17. [25]

    Kamiya, A

    Y. Kamiya, A. Jinno, T. Hyodo, and A. Ohnishi, Theoretical study on Ξα correlation function (2024), arXiv:2409.13207 [nucl-th]

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Etminan, Femtoscopic study of the Ω α interaction in heavy-ion collisions, Phys

    F. Etminan, Femtoscopic study of the Ω α interaction in heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 111, 014912 (2025)

    2025

  19. [27]

    Etminan, Exploring the φ-α interaction via femtoscopic study (2024), arXiv:2410.22756 [nucl-th]

    F. Etminan, Exploring the φ-α interaction via femtoscopic study (2024), arXiv:2410.22756 [nucl-th]

    2024 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Acharya et al

    S. Acharya et al. (A Large Ion Collider Experiment Collaboration), First obs ervation of an attractive interaction between a proton and a cascade baryo n, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 112002 (2019). 16

    2019

  21. [29]

    H. Le, J. Haidenbauer, U.-G. Meißner, and A. Nogga, Impl ications of an increased Λ−separation energy of the hypertriton, Phys. Lett. B 801, 135189 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    Hiyama et al

    E. Hiyama et al. , Possible lightest Ξ hypernucleus with modern ΞN interacti ons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 092501 (2020)

    2020

  23. [31]

    Hiyama, M

    E. Hiyama, M. Isaka, T. Doi, and T. Hatsuda, Probing the Ξ n interaction through inversion of spin-doublets in Ξ nαα nuclei, Phys. Rev. C 106, 064318 (2022)

    2022

  24. [32]

    Kenji et al

    S. Kenji et al. (HAL QCD Collaboration), ΛΛ and NΞ interactions from lattice QCD near the physical point, Nucl. Phys. A 998, 121737 (2020)

    2020

  25. [33]

    M. M. Nagels, T. A. Rijken, and Y. Yamamoto, Extended-so ft-core baryon-baryon ESC08 model III. S = −2 hyperon-hyperon/nucleon interaction (2015), arXiv:1504.02634 [nucl-th]

    2015 arXiv

  26. [34]

    K. S. Myint and Y. Akaishi, Double-Strangeness Five-Bo dy System, Prog. Theor. Phys. 117, 251 (1994)

    1994

  27. [35]

    Ohnishi, K

    A. Ohnishi, K. Morita, K. Miyahara, and T. Hyodo, Hadron –hadron correlation and interac- tion from heavy–ion collisions, Nucl. Phys. A 954, 294 (2016)

    2016

  28. [36]

    Kurihara, Y

    Y. Kurihara, Y. Akaishi, and H. Tanaka, Effect of Λ-N repul sive core on pionic decay of 5 Λ He, Phys. Rev. C 31, 971 (1985)

    1985

  29. [37]

    Dalitz, R

    R. Dalitz, R. Herndon, and Y. Tang, Phenomenological st udy of s-shell hypernuclei with Λ N and ΛN N potentials, Nucl. Phys. B 47, 109 (1972)

    1972

  30. [38]

    T. O. Yamamoto et al. (J-PARC E13 Collaboration), Observation of Spin-Dependent Charge Symmetry Breaking in Λ N Interaction: Gamma-Ray Spectroscopy of 4 Λ He, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 222501 (2015)

    2015

  31. [39]

    Satchler and W

    G. Satchler and W. Love, Folding model potentials from r ealistic interactions for heavy-ion scattering, Phys. Rep. 55, 183 (1979)

    1979

  32. [40]

    Etminan and M

    F. Etminan and M. M. Firoozabadi, Simple Woods-Saxon ty pe form for Ω α and Ξα interac- tions using folding model, Chin. Phys. C 44, 054106 (2020)

    2020

  33. [41]

    Ciofi degli Atti, Electron scattering by nuclei, Prog

    C. Ciofi degli Atti, Electron scattering by nuclei, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 3, 163 (1980)

    1980

  34. [42]

    M. M. Nagels, T. A. Rijken, and J. J. de Swart, Baryon-bar yon scattering in a one-boson- exchange-potential approach. II. Hyperon-nucleon scatte ring, Phys. Rev. D 15, 2547 (1977)

    1977

  35. [43]

    P. M. M. Maessen, T. A. Rijken, and J. J. de Swart, Soft-co re baryon-baryon one-boson- exchange models. II. Hyperon-nucleon potential, Phys. Rev. C 40, 2226 (1989). 17

    1989

  36. [44]

    Garcilazo, A

    H. Garcilazo, A. Valcarce, and J. Vijande, Maximal isos pin few-body systems of nucleons and Ξ hyperons, Phys. Rev. C 94, 024002 (2016)

    2016

  37. [45]

    S. Aoki, B. Charron, T. Doi, T. Hatsuda, T. Inoue, and N. I shii, Construction of energy- independent potentials above inelastic thresholds in quan tum field theories, Phys. Rev. D 87, 034512 (2013)

    2013

  38. [46]

    Etminan, K

    F. Etminan, K. Sasaki, and T. Inoue, Coupled-channel Λ cK + − pDs interaction in the flavor SU(3) limit of lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 109, 074506 (2024)

    2024

  39. [47]

    Hiyama, Y

    E. Hiyama, Y. Yamamoto, T. Motoba, T. A. Rijken, and M. Ka mimura, Light Ξ hypernuclei in four-body cluster models, Phys. Rev. C 78, 054316 (2008)

    2008

  40. [48]

    H. Le, J. Haidenbauer, U.-G. Meißner, and A. Nogga, A = 4 − 7 Ξ hypernuclei based on interactions from chiral effective field theory, Eur. Phys. J. A 57, 1 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    Dover and A

    C. Dover and A. Gal, Ξ Hypernuclei, Ann. Phys. 146, 309 (1983)

    1983

  42. [50]

    Filikhin, R

    I. Filikhin, R. Y. Kezerashvili, and B. Vlahovic, Foldi ng Procedure for Ω- α Potential, Few– Body Syst. 66, 2 (2024)

    2024

  43. [51]

    P. A. Zyla and others (Particle Data Group), Review of Pa r- ticle Physics, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2020, 083C01 (2020) , https://academic.oup.com/ptep/article-pdf/2020/8/083C01/34673740/rpp2020-vol2-2015-2092 18.pdf

    2020

  44. [52]

    M. Wang, G. Audi, F. G. Kondev, W. J. Huang, S. Naimi, and X . Xu, The AME2016 atomic mass evaluation (II). Tables, graphs and references, Chin. Phys. C 41, 030003 (2017)

    2017

  45. [53]

    S. E. Koonin, Proton pictures of high-energy nuclear co llisions, Phys. Lett. B 70, 43 (1977)

    1977

  46. [54]

    Pratt, Pion interferometry of quark-gluon plasma, Phys

    S. Pratt, Pion interferometry of quark-gluon plasma, Phys. Rev. D 33, 1314 (1986)

    1986

  47. [55]

    Morita, T

    K. Morita, T. Furumoto, and A. Ohnishi, ΛΛ interaction f rom relativistic heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 91, 024916 (2015)

    2015

  48. [56]

    Fabbietti, V

    L. Fabbietti, V. M. Sarti, and O. V. Doce, Study of the Str ong Interaction Among Hadrons with Correlations at the LHC, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 71, 377 (2021)

    2021

  49. [57]

    Mr´ owczy´ nski and P

    S. Mr´ owczy´ nski and P. S/suppress lo´ n, Deuteron-deuteron correlation function in nucleus-nucleus colli- sions, Phys. Rev. C 104, 024909 (2021)

    2021

  50. [58]

    Mihaylov, V

    D. Mihaylov, V. Sarti, O. Arnold, L. Fabbietti, B. Hohlw eger, and A. Mathis, A femtoscopic Correlation Analysis Tool using the Schr¨ odinger equation(CATS), Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (2018)

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.