Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Gradient flow of the Weinberg operator

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A gradient-flow lattice calculation of the Weinberg operator's CP-violating susceptibilities reports chi_Q ~ (71 MeV)^4 at physical quark masses, but the ratio chi_M/chi_Q that sets the Peccei-Quinn-induced theta remains too noisy to quote.

desk verdict First lattice results for the Weinberg and mixed susceptibilities: a genuine but explicitly preliminary calculation whose extrapolated numbers should not be used until the fit-selection and systematics are nailed down. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.00460 v1 pith:PVWT54IU submitted 2025-02-01 hep-lat hep-ph

Tanmoy Bhattacharya , Shohini Bhattacharya , Vincenzo Cirigliano , Rajan Gupta , Emanuele Mereghetti , Sungwoo Park , Jun-Sik Yoo , Boram Yoon This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-lathep-ph
keywords WeinbergoperatorgradientflowlatticeQCDCPviolationtopologicalsusceptibilityPeccei-Quinnmechanismelectricdipolemomentchiralextrapolation
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 tries to establish that the CP-violating Weinberg three-gluon operator can be studied nonperturbatively in lattice QCD using the gradient-flow scheme, where flowed composite operators need no extra renormalization. From variances and covariances of the flowed topological and Weinberg charges, the authors compute the topological, Weinberg, and mixed susceptibilities on eleven ensembles, model their flow-time dependence with cubic splines, and extrapolate to the continuum at physical quark masses. They find a topological susceptibility of about $(71\,\mathrm{MeV})^4$ at the physical point, consistent with earlier determinations, and a strong flow-time dependence for the Weinberg susceptibility. The ratio of the mixed to the topological susceptibility, which would fix the $\theta$ angle induced by the Weinberg operator in Peccei-Quinn theories, remains too imprecise for a useful estimate. These are the nonperturbative inputs needed, alongside nucleon matrix elements, to convert EDM measurements into constraints on beyond-standard-model CP violation.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is the gradient-flow scheme, which smears gauge fields to a scale $\tau_{\mathrm{gf}} = \sqrt{8t_{\mathrm{gf}}}\,a$ and lets the lattice cutoff be removed while composite operators remain finite, so the flowed charges need no extra operator renormalization. The susceptibilities are then formed as variances and covariances of the volume integrals $Q = \int d^4x\, G\cdot\tilde G$ and $W = \int d^4x\, G\cdot\tilde G\cdot G$, which defines renormalized quantities directly. The extrapolation is carried by a fitting ansatz whose coefficients are low-order polynomials in the lattice spacing and $M_\pi^2$, with each coefficient modeled as a cubic spline in flow time and the spline knots chosen by an information criterion.

What would settle it

Produce a new ensemble with lattice spacing smaller than the smallest used here ($a<0.05$ fm), pion mass within a few MeV of the physical value, a larger spatial volume, and a near-physical kaon mass, then compare $\chi_Q$ and $\chi_W$ measured at flow times $\tau_{\mathrm{gf}} \simeq 0.4$--$0.6$ fm with the error band of the paper's extrapolation; a mismatch beyond the combined uncertainties would falsify the extrapolation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the gradient-flow scheme gives a workable nonperturbative definition of the renormalized Weinberg operator: the three susceptibilities $\chi_Q$, $\chi_W$, and $\chi_M$ can be obtained as second derivatives of the effective action, equivalently as variances and covariances of the integrated topological charge and the Weinberg charge, and their combined dependence on flow time, lattice spacing, and pion mass can be extrapolated to the physical continuum. The extrapolated $\chi_Q$ is consistent with zero in the chiral-continuum limit and is approximately $(71\,\mathrm{MeV})^4$ at physical quark masses. $\chi_W$ depends strongly on flow time, and the paper reports that the statistical uncertainties in the ratio $\chi_M/\chi_Q$, which would set $\theta_{\mathrm{induced}} = -w\,\chi_M/\chi_Q$ in Peccei-Quinn theories, are still too large to yield a useful number.

Load-bearing premise

The whole extrapolation rests on the assumption that the low-order polynomial ansatz in lattice spacing and pion mass, with flow-time dependence represented by cubic splines and fitted to only seven of the eleven ensembles while taking kaon-mass and finite-volume effects to be negligible, correctly captures the approach to the physical continuum limit.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the extrapolated susceptibilities are correct, the topological susceptibility at the physical point is fixed near $(71\,\mathrm{MeV})^4$, giving a nonperturbative anchor for the QCD vacuum's response to a CP-violating theta term.
  • The chiral-continuum vanishing of $\chi_Q$ is reproduced, consistent with the expectation that the theta term's effects disappear as quark masses go to zero.
  • Once the precision of $\chi_M/\chi_Q$ improves, the Peccei-Quinn-induced theta from the Weinberg operator can be computed directly from lattice QCD rather than estimated by models.
  • Together with nucleon matrix elements of quark-bilinear operators, these susceptibilities enable first-principles estimates of the neutron and proton electric dipole moments and CP-violating pion-nucleon couplings induced by the Weinberg operator, sharpening beyond-standard-model constraints.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the gradient-flow scheme avoids hard-cutoff power-divergence subtractions, the same flowed operators could be reused for nucleon matrix elements of the Weinberg operator, giving a single consistent scheme for the full EDM calculation; the paper motivates but does not carry out that step.
  • The strong flow-time dependence of $\chi_W$ may be dominated by mixing with the topological charge and by contact terms; checking whether the ratio $\chi_M/\chi_Q$ is more flow-time stable than either susceptibility alone could reveal how much of that dependence cancels.
  • A direct test of the fitting strategy would be to compute the ratio on a single ensemble with a physical pion mass and a large volume before any extrapolation; if it does not stabilize with flow time there, the continuum limit of the induced theta may be slow to approach.
  • If the $(71\,\mathrm{MeV})^4$ value and the large uncertainty in the ratio persist with higher statistics, near-term EDM searches would remain more sensitive to the topological term than to the Weinberg-induced theta, steering lattice effort toward the nucleon-side matrix elements.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a preliminary lattice-QCD study of three CP-violating gluonic susceptibilities: the topological susceptibility chi_Q, the Weinberg-operator susceptibility chi_W, and the mixed susceptibility chi_M. The calculation uses the gradient-flow scheme on 11 ensembles of 2+1-flavor clover fermions, models the flow-time dependence with cubic splines, and extrapolates to the continuum and physical-pion limits using low-order polynomials in the lattice spacing and M_pi^2 (Eqs. 7 and 8). The main reported results are that chi_Q is approximately (71 MeV)^4 at the physical point and consistent with prior determinations, that chi_W has a strong flow-time dependence, and that the ratio chi_M/chi_Q entering the Peccei-Quinn induced theta (Eq. 9) has statistical uncertainties too large for a useful estimate. The paper explicitly labels the results as preliminary and states that M_K and finite-volume effects are neglected.

Significance. If the continuum and chiral extrapolations are controlled, this is a first nonperturbative calculation of the Weinberg and mixed susceptibilities in the gradient-flow scheme, and it would provide an important ingredient for future EDM calculations. The paper has several strengths: the susceptibilities are directly measured lattice quantities rather than fitted parameters; the topological susceptibility is checked against prior determinations; the gradient-flow renormalization framework is well motivated; and the authors are explicit that the theta-induced estimate is not yet useful. The significance is limited by the absence of final numbers for chi_W and chi_M and by the unquantified systematic uncertainties in the extrapolations.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 7.3, Table 2] The fits displayed in Figs. 1 and 2 use the three-parameter a^2 ansatz of Eq. (7). For chi_Q, the AIC strongly favors the four-parameter a ansatz of Eq. (8): AIC 106.234 with chi^2/dof 1.382, versus AIC 142.890 with chi^2/dof 2.189 for the displayed form. The choice is justified by the theoretical expectation that chi_Q vanishes in the chiral-continuum limit, not by the data. Since chi_W and chi_M are new results and the fits are the main product of the paper, it is load-bearing to show how the extrapolated values, and the ratio in Eq. (9), change under all four fit forms or under an AIC-based model average. Without that, the central claim that the continuum and chiral extrapolations are under control is not supported.
  2. [Section 7.2, Table 1] The text states that the fits exclude C13, D220, D5L, and D6 to avoid coarse lattice spacings, heavy pion masses, or small volumes. This criterion does not obviously apply to D6, which has a=0.0914 fm, M_pi=175 MeV, and L=48a ~ 4.4 fm: it is neither the coarsest nor the heaviest ensemble, and its volume is only modestly smaller than that of D7, which is included. If D6 is excluded because of finite-volume effects, the volume criterion should be quantified (e.g., M_pi L values) and the stability of the fits with and without D6 should be demonstrated. The exclusion of four of eleven ensembles, particularly a near-physical-pion ensemble, can shift the extrapolated central values by more than the quoted statistical errors.
  3. [Section 7.2, Table 1] The fit model (Eqs. 7 and 8) contains no M_K dependence, and Section 7.2 states that contributions from M_K being heavier than physical are 'assumed negligible'. However, Table 1 shows M_K varies from 476 MeV (C13) to 575 MeV (E5) across the ensembles, with several values more than 10% above the physical kaon mass. Since the included ensembles have unphysical strange-quark masses, the omission of an M_K^2 term (or an equivalent constraint to the physical kaon mass) can bias the intercept of the M_pi^2 extrapolation. The paper should provide an estimate of this systematic effect, for example by adding a term proportional to (M_K^2 - M_K^2_phys) to the fit or by showing that the seven included ensembles have sufficiently physical M_K values.
  4. [Section 8, Figs. 1 and 2] The paper reports that chi_W has a strong flow-time dependence, yet the continuum extrapolation is performed at fixed flow time with the spline coefficients s_i(t_gf). For a scheme defined by the gradient flow, the physical reference scale is set by t_gf, and the continuum limit should be taken at fixed physical flow time with t_gf/a^2 -> infinity. The paper does not specify the flow-time window over which the continuum extrapolation is stable, nor does it show the extrapolated values at a chosen reference flow time with their uncertainties. The right panel of Fig. 2 shows the ratio chi_M/chi_Q without any error band, which makes it difficult to verify the statement that the statistical uncertainties are too large for a useful estimate. This point is load-bearing for the central claim that the method produces controlled extrapolations of these susceptibilities.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 6] The definitions of chi_W and chi_M are written as products of integrals without expectation values; they should be defined as variances and covariances, for example chi_W = <Q_W^2> and chi_M = <Q Q_W>, where Q_W is the volume integral of the Weinberg operator.
  2. [Section 7.1] There is a typo in 'for both both valence and sea quarks'; the doubled word should be removed.
  3. [Section 6] The word 'vaccuum' should be 'vacuum'.
  4. [Section 8] The phrase 'an useful estimate' should be 'a useful estimate'.
  5. [Eq. (5)] The entries labeled 1/(tau_gf a)^2 appear to have inconsistent dimensions for a mixing coefficient between a dimension-four and a dimension-six operator; the notation relating tau_gf and t_gf should be checked and clarified.
  6. [Table 2] For chi_W, the AIC values of the four fit forms differ by less than 0.3; the text should state whether the differences are considered significant or treated as statistically equivalent.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the susceptibilities are direct lattice measurements with explicitly stated extrapolation ansätze, and the PQ ratio is formed from independent extrapolations rather than being a fitted input.

full rationale

The central quantities are direct lattice observables: chi_Q, chi_W, and chi_M are defined as variances and covariances of the topological charge and the volume-integrated Weinberg operator (Section 6), and no parameter is fitted to the target ratio chi_M/chi_Q. The continuum and chiral extrapolations use explicitly stated low-order polynomial ansätze in a and M_pi^2 (Eqs. 7-8) with spline coefficients; the target values are not re-inserted as inputs, and the displayed chi_Q fit does not force a zero intercept at the chiral-continuum point. Equation (9) is a physical relation for the PQ minimum, and the ratio is obtained by dividing two separately extrapolated quantities; the paper reports that its statistical uncertainty is too large for a useful estimate (Section 7.4), which is the opposite of a forced prediction. The selection of the displayed chi_Q fit is motivated by the theoretical expectation that the topological susceptibility vanishes in the chiral-continuum limit, supported by a self-citation to Ref. [31], but this expectation is an independent chiral-symmetry property rather than an input fitted from the same data, and the ansatz itself does not impose the vanishing. The self-citations to Refs. [30], [31], and [35] provide ensemble parameters and prior determinations used for context or cross-checks, not as load-bearing derivations. The stated limitations—neglecting M_K and finite-volume effects (Section 7.2) and the large uncertainties in theta_induced (Section 7.4)—are reliability concerns, not evidence that any equation reduces to its own input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The new results (chi_W, chi_M and their extrapolations) are derived from lattice data through a fit model with several free parameters (spline coefficients, AIC-selected ansatz, excluded ensembles, neglected systematics). No new particles or entities are introduced. The main physics inputs (gradient-flow finiteness, one-loop matching, the PQ formula) are external results from the literature, several from the same collaboration.

free parameters (4)
  • Cubic spline coefficients s0(tgf), s1(tgf), s2(tgf) (and s3(tgf) in the 4-parameter form) of Eqs. (7)-(8) = Fit to the lattice susceptibilities at each flow time; values not listed
    These coefficients parameterize the chiral and lattice-spacing dependence of the susceptibilities and are determined by fits to the lattice data. The extrapolated values depend directly on them.
  • Choice of power p = 1 or 2 in Eqs. (7)-(8) and the number/positions of spline knots = p = 1 or 2; knots chosen by AIC (Section 7.2)
    The fit ansatz and spline knot locations are selected by comparing AIC across models, introducing model-selection freedom that affects the extrapolated central values.
  • Exclusion of ensembles C13, D220, D5L, D6 from the fits = Excluded
    Section 7.2 removes 4 of 11 ensembles due to coarse lattice spacing, heavy pions, or small volumes. This post hoc selection changes the input data set for all three susceptibility extrapolations.
  • Neglected M_K and finite-volume corrections = Set to zero
    Section 7.2 states M_K contributions and finite-volume effects are 'assumed negligible in this preliminary analysis', an unquantified systematic that affects the stated extrapolated values.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The topological susceptibility vanishes in the chiral-continuum limit
    Used in Section 7.3 to motivate the choice of displayed fit results for chi_Q. This is a standard chiral perturbation theory expectation, but it is an input, not a measured outcome of this paper.
  • standard math Gradient flow makes composite operators finite without additional renormalization, and integrated contact terms of the susceptibilities are finite
    Relied on in Sections 4.3 and 5, citing Luscher (ref [24]) and Luscher (ref [25]). The claim that no further normalization is needed for the susceptibilities rests on these theorems.
  • standard math The one-loop matching matrix relating gradient-flow and MS operators (Eq. (5)) is correct
    Taken from Crosas et al. (ref [26]). The paper does not compute its own matching coefficients, so the connection to MS (not used for final numbers) rests on this external result.
  • domain assumption In the Peccei-Quinn mechanism with only the Weinberg operator as an additional CPV source, the induced theta is given by Eq. (9), theta_induced = -w chi_M/chi_Q
    Taken from Pospelov and Ritz (ref [17]). This formula is the reason the mixed susceptibility ratio is computed and is an external EFT input.
  • domain assumption M_K heavier than physical and finite-volume effects are negligible in the chiral-continuum extrapolation
    Explicitly assumed in Section 7.2, with no estimate of the induced error. If false, the extrapolated susceptibilities, especially chi_M and chi_W, would shift.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Gradient flow of the Weinberg operator." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PVWT54IU

@misc{pith2026250200460,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Gradient flow of the Weinberg operator},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PVWT54IU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.00460}
}
abstract

We present preliminary results on the susceptibilities involving the CP-violating (CPV) Weinberg three-gluon operator and the topological $\Theta$ term using the gradient flow scheme, and study their continuum and chiral extrapolations. These are used to provide an estimate of the $\Theta$ induced by the Weinberg operator in theories with the Peccei-Quinn (PQ) mechanism. Combined with the calculations of the matrix elements (MEs) of quark-bilinears between nucleon states, such calculations will enable estimates of the electric dipole moments (EDMs) and CPV pion-nucleon couplings due to the Weinberg operator, thereby providing robust constraints on beyond the standard model (BSM) physics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.00460 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The chiral-continuum extrapolation of the mixed susceptibility is shown on the left using the same fit forms and ensembles as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗

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. One-loop matching of the LEFT to the QCD gradient flow

    hep-ph 2026-01 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    All one-loop matching coefficients connecting the full baryon- and lepton-number-conserving low-energy effective field theory up to dimension six to the QCD gradient flow are computed.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Coppi,How do we know antimater is absent?, eConf C040802 (2004) L017

    P. Coppi,How do we know antimater is absent?, eConf C040802 (2004) L017

    work page 2004

  2. [2]

    Sakharov,Violation of CP invariance, C asymmetry, and baryon asymmetry of the universe, Pisma Zh

    A. Sakharov,Violation of CP invariance, C asymmetry, and baryon asymmetry of the universe, Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.5 (1967) 32

    work page 1967

  3. [3]

    Kobayashi and T

    M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa,CP violation in the renormalizable theory of weak interaction,Prog. Theor. Phys.49 (1973) 652

    work page 1973

  4. [4]

    Z. Maki, M. Nakagawa and S. Sakata,Remarks on the unified model of elementary particles, Prog. Theor. Phys.28 (1962) 870

    work page 1962

  5. [5]

    Nunokawa, S

    H. Nunokawa, S. J. Parke and J. W. F. Valle,CP violation and neutrino oscillations, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.60(2008) 338 [0710.0554]

    arXiv 2008

  6. [6]

    M. E. Shaposhnikov,Baryon asymmetry of the universe in standard electroweak theory, Nucl. Phys.B287(1987) 757

    work page 1987

  7. [7]

    G. R. Farrar and M. E. Shaposhnikov,Baryon asymmetry of the universe in the minimal standard model,Phys. Rev. Lett.70 (1993) 2833 [hep-ph/9305274]

    arXiv 1993

  8. [8]

    M. B. Gavela, P. Hernández, J. Orloff and O. Pène,Standard model CP violation and baryon asymmetry, Mod. Phys. Lett. A9 (1994) 795 [hep-ph/9312215]

    arXiv 1994

Show all 36 references
  1. [9]

    M. B. Gavela, P. Hernandez, J. Orloff, O. Pène and C. Quimbay,Standard model CP violation and baryon asymmetry. part 2: Finite temperature, Nucl. Phys. B430 (1994) 382 [hep-ph/9406289]

    1994 arXiv

  2. [10]

    M. B. Gavela, M. Lozano, J. Orloff and O. Pène,Standard model CP violation and baryon asymmetry. part 1: Zero temperature,Nucl. Phys. B430 (1994) 345 [hep-ph/9406288]

    1994 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Huet and E

    P. Huet and E. Sather,Electroweak baryogenesis and standard model CP violation,Phys. Rev. D51(1995) 379 [hep-ph/9404302]

    1995 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Alarcon et al.,Electric dipole moments and the search for new physics, inSnowmass 2021, 3, 2022,2203.08103

    R. Alarcon et al.,Electric dipole moments and the search for new physics, inSnowmass 2021, 3, 2022,2203.08103

    2021 arXiv

  5. [13]

    T. S. Roussy et al.,An improved bound on the electron’s electric dipole moment,Science381 (2023) adg4084 [2212.11841]

    2023 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Abel et al.,Measurement of the permanent electric dipole moment of the neutron,Phys

    C. Abel et al.,Measurement of the permanent electric dipole moment of the neutron,Phys. Rev. Lett.124 (2020) 081803 [2001.11966]

    2020 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Graner, Y

    B. Graner, Y. Chen, E. Lindahl and B. Heckel,Reduced limit on the permanent electric dipole moment of199ℎ𝑔, Physical Review Letters116 (2016) [1601.04339]

    2016 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Engel, M

    J. Engel, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf and U. van Kolck,Electric dipole moments of nucleons, nuclei, and atoms: The standard model and beyond, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.71(2013) 21 [1303.2371]. 9 Gradient flow of the Weinberg operator Bhattacharya et al

    2013 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Pospelov and A

    M. Pospelov and A. Ritz,Neutron EDM from electric and chromoelectric dipole moments of quarks, Phys. Rev.D63 (2001) 073015 [hep-ph/0010037]

    2001 arXiv

  10. [18]

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn,CP conservation in the presence of instantons,Phys. Rev. Lett. 38 (1977) 1440

    1977

  11. [19]

    Bhattacharya, V

    T. Bhattacharya, V. Cirigliano, R. Gupta, H.-W. Lin and B. Yoon,Neutron electric dipole moment and tensor charges from lattice QCD,Phys. Rev. Lett.115 (2015) 212002 [1506.04196]

    2015 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Gupta, B

    R. Gupta, B. Yoon, T. Bhattacharya, V. Cirigliano, Y.-C. Jang and H.-W. Lin,Flavor diagonal tensor charges of the nucleon from (2+1+1)-flavor lattice QCD,Phys. Rev. D98 (2018) 091501 [1808.07597]

    2018 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Bhattacharya, V

    T. Bhattacharya, V. Cirigliano, R. Gupta, E. Mereghetti, J.-S. Yoo and B. Yoon,Quark chromoelectric dipole moment operator on the lattice,Phys. Rev. D108 (2023) 074507 [2304.09929]

    2023 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Bhattacharya, V

    T. Bhattacharya, V. Cirigliano, R. Gupta, E. Mereghetti and B. Yoon,Calculation of neutron electric dipole moment due to the QCD topological term, Weinberg three-gluon operator and the quark chromoelectric moment,PoSLATTICE2021(2022) 567 [2203.03746]

    2022 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Beneke,Renormalons,Phys

    M. Beneke,Renormalons,Phys. Rept.317 (1999) 1 [hep-ph/9807443]

    1999 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Lüscher,Properties and uses of the Wilson flow in lattice QCD, JHEP08(2010) 071 [1006.4518]

    M. Lüscher,Properties and uses of the Wilson flow in lattice QCD, JHEP08(2010) 071 [1006.4518]

    2010 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Luscher,Chiral symmetry and the Yang–Mills gradient flow,JHEP04 (2013) 123 [1302.5246]

    M. Luscher,Chiral symmetry and the Yang–Mills gradient flow,JHEP04 (2013) 123 [1302.5246]

    2013 arXiv

  18. [26]

    O. L. Crosas, C. J. Monahan, M. D. Rizik, A. Shindler and P. Stoffer,One-loop matching of the CP-odd three-gluon operator to the gradient flow,Phys. Lett. B847 (2023) 138301 [2308.16221]

    2023 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Bühler and P

    J. Bühler and P. Stoffer,One-loop matching of CP-odd four-quark operators to the gradient-flow scheme, JHEP08(2023) 194 [2304.00985]

    2023 arXiv

  20. [28]

    G. P. Lepage and P. B. Mackenzie,On the viability of lattice perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. D 48(1993) 2250 [hep-lat/9209022]

    1993 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Sheikholeslami and R

    B. Sheikholeslami and R. Wohlert,Improved Continuum Limit Lattice Action for QCD with Wilson Fermions,Nucl. Phys. B259 (1985) 572

    1985

  22. [30]

    Hadron spectrum and lattice scale on 2+1-flavor lattice QCD ensembles

    J.-H. Ee et al., “Hadron spectrum and lattice scale on 2+1-flavor lattice QCD ensembles.” In preparation

  23. [31]

    Bhattacharya, V

    T. Bhattacharya, V. Cirigliano, R. Gupta, E. Mereghetti and B. Yoon,Contribution of the QCDΘ-term to the nucleon electric dipole moment,Phys. Rev.D103(2021) 114507 [2101.07230]. 10 Gradient flow of the Weinberg operator Bhattacharya et al

    2021 arXiv

  24. [32]

    J. H. Ahlberg, E. N. Nilson and J. L. Walsh, eds.,The Theory of Splines and Their Applications, vol. 38 ofMathematics in Science and Engineering. Elsevier B.V, 1967

    1967

  25. [33]

    Akaike,A new look at the statistical model identification, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control19(1974) 716

    H. Akaike,A new look at the statistical model identification, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control19(1974) 716

    1974

  26. [34]

    Stoica and Y

    P. Stoica and Y. Selen,Model-order selection: a review of information criterion rules, IEEE Signal Processing Magazine21(2004) 36

    2004

  27. [35]

    Bhattacharya, V

    T. Bhattacharya, V. Cirigliano, R. Gupta, E. Mereghetti and B. Yoon,nEDM from the theta-term and chromoedm operators,PoSLATTICE2022(2023) 304 [2301.08161]

    2023 arXiv

  28. [36]

    SciDAC, LHPC,and UKQCDcollaboration, R. G. Edwards and B. Joo,The Chroma software system for lattice QCD, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl.140 (2005) 832 [hep-lat/0409003]. 11

    2005 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.