Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

Tensor-polarized parton density in the $N \rightarrow \Delta$ transition

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The N to Delta transition carries a new quark density, f_Q(x), whose total amount vanishes but whose shape is sign-changing and physically meaningful.

desk verdict The formal definition and sum rules of the N-to-Delta tensor transition PDF are solid and new; the model estimate in Fig. 1 is a rough first guess, not a benchmark. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.18402 v1 pith:P4K4PORQ submitted 2025-07-24 hep-ph

June-Young Kim , Christian Weiss This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph
keywords transitionpartondensitiesNtoDeltageneralizeddistributionstensorpolarizationspinchiralquark-solitonmodellarge-NcQCDzerosumrule
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

The paper extends the idea of parton densities from the nucleon to transitions between baryons of unequal mass by taking the forward limit of transition generalized parton distributions (GPDs), where light-front momentum transfer vanishes but energy transfer does not. It shows that the N to $\Delta$ transition contains a tensor-polarized quark density $f_Q(x)$, tied to the $1/2 \to 3/2$ spin transition tensor, which cannot appear in any diagonal nucleon density. Current conservation forces the first moment of $f_Q$ to vanish, while its second moment is fixed by a known energy-momentum tensor form factor. Using the chiral quark-soliton model, the paper estimates $f_Q(x)$ to be real, small, and sign-changing, about an order of magnitude smaller than ordinary nucleon parton densities. This matters because it is a new kind of quantum-number-forbidden object that carries information about how the nucleon's quark densities deform when it is excited to a $\Delta$.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the $1/2 \to 3/2$ spin transition tensor $Q^{ij}$, a symmetric traceless tensor built from the proton's spin-$1/2$ wave function and the $\Delta$'s spin-$3/2$ vector-bispinor. Its 33 component appears when the light-like vector $n$ is contracted with the transition GPD structure $K_X$, selecting the new PDF $f_Q(x)=H_X(x,0,0)$. The argument is carried by two identities: the zero-sum rule from $n_\mu J^\mu = 0$ and the second-moment relation to the energy-momentum tensor form factor $F_4$. In the model estimate, the angular factor $1 - 3(k^3)^2/|\mathbf{k}|^2$ in the gradient expansion encodes the quadrupole ($L=2$) structure that makes the first moment vanish after angular averaging.

What would settle it

Compute the N to $\Delta$ matrix element of the isovector light-cone bilinear on the lattice at $\xi=0$, $t=0$ and extract $H_X(x,0,0)$: if $\int dx\, f_Q(x)$ is not zero, or if $\int dx\, x\, f_Q(x)$ differs from $2F_4$, the zero-sum rule or second-moment relation would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the N to $\Delta$ transition GPD $H_X$, evaluated at $\xi=0$ and $t=0$, defines a genuine transition parton density $f_Q(x) \equiv H_X(x,\xi=0,t=0)$ proportional to the 33-component of the $1/2 \to 3/2$ spin transition tensor $Q_{ij}$. Unlike nucleon GPD structures that vanish in the forward limit or correspond to conserved currents, this tensor structure survives because the light-like vector $n$ of the partonic operator supplies a spatial direction. The paper proves that $f_Q$ obeys the zero-sum rule $\int_{-1}^{1} dx\, f_Q(x) = 0$ as a consequence of vector-current conservation, and the second-moment relation $\int_{-1}^{1} dx\, x\, f_Q(x) = 2F_4(t)$. Its large-$N_c$ chiral quark-soliton estimate produces a function that is even in $x$, changes sign near $x \sim 0.1$, and is roughly an order of magnitude smaller than standard nucleon densities; the sign change is exactly what the zero first moment requires.

Load-bearing premise

The predicted size and sign change of $f_Q$ rest on the chiral quark-soliton model's large-$N_c$ treatment, which assumes the proton and $\Delta$ are mass-degenerate and that the small 3-momentum transfer can be neglected; if the gradient expansion misses the $L=2$ tensor structure, the numerical shape is not reliable even though the formal sum rules remain intact.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The N to Delta transition can access spin/isospin quantum numbers that ordinary nucleon parton densities cannot realize.
  • Because the first moment of $f_Q$ vanishes, it does not contribute to quark number; observables sensitive to it must involve the second or higher moments, such as hard exclusive processes with momentum transfer.
  • The second-moment sum rule connects $f_Q$ to the N to Delta energy-momentum tensor form factor $F_4$, giving a concrete target for lattice QCD and model calculations.
  • In the chiral soliton picture, $f_Q$ is dynamically related to the nucleon's dipole GPD combination $E_u+E_d$, appearing as its $L=2$ angular partner.
  • The same transition-PDF construction applies to other baryon transitions, offering a general language for quark densities in excited baryons.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If $f_Q$ is as small and sign-changing as predicted, isolating it experimentally will require polarization asymmetries that select the tensor component, likely in deeply virtual Compton scattering or exclusive pion production with a recoil Delta.
  • A lattice calculation of the isovector N to Delta matrix element at $\xi=0$, $t=0$ could test the zero-sum rule and map $f_Q(x)$ without model assumptions.
  • The analogy with the deuteron tensor PDF suggests a common formalism for non-diagonal and spin-1 tensor polarization; the paper leaves open whether a similar tensor-polarized observable can be defined for the Delta itself.
  • The authors flag the $x\to 0$ rise as a rigid-rotor artifact, implying the quantitative prediction should be trusted only at moderate $x$; a more complete quantization of the chiral-field rotations could change the small-$x$ tail.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops the concept of transition parton densities (PDFs) as the forward limit of transition GPDs, defined by light-front momentum transfer Δ^+=0, Δ_T=0, and nonzero energy transfer Δ^- for baryons of unequal mass. It shows that current conservation imposes a zero-sum rule on the first moment of such densities whenever the associated spinor bilinear survives the forward limit. Applying this to the N→Δ transition, the authors define a tensor transition PDF f_Q(x)=H_X(x,ξ=0,t=0), derive the first-moment sum rule ∫f_Q=0, state a second-moment relation ∫ x f_Q = 2F_4, and estimate f_Q in the chiral quark-soliton model using a large-N_c gradient expansion. The resulting numerical distribution in Fig. 1 is small, sign-changing, and an order of magnitude smaller than ordinary nucleon PDFs.

Significance. If the formal derivation is correct, the paper identifies a genuinely new class of partonic objects—transition PDFs—with a clean derivation of the zero-sum rule from current conservation. The N→Δ tensor PDF f_Q is a concrete example with quantum numbers inaccessible in the 1/2→1/2 nucleon sector, and the chiral quark-soliton estimate provides a falsifiable numerical prediction. The formal core is internally consistent and parameter-free in the sense that no quantity is fitted to the target distribution; the model inputs are the pion decay constant, the moment of inertia fixed by the N-Δ mass splitting, and a chiral profile. The main significance risk is that the advertised numerical shape and magnitude rest on a leading-order gradient expansion whose accuracy is not demonstrated.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 5, Eq. (35)] The second-moment relation is asserted through a single 'One obtains' after Eq. (34), but the n_μ n_ν projection of the rank-2 local operator can in general mix several N→Δ energy-momentum-tensor form factors, not just F_4. The factor 2 and the absence of additional structures need to be demonstrated by showing the spinor contraction or by giving a complete reference to the parametrization of Ref. [7]. As written, Eq. (35) is a load-bearing formal claim that is not supported in the manuscript.
  2. [Sec. 6, Eq. (40) and Fig. 1] The numerical prediction for f_Q(x) uses the leading-order gradient expansion in Eq. (40) together with the degenerate-mass kinematics m_N=m_Δ and Δ_3=0, yet it is presented as a single curve with no estimate of neglected terms. Since f_Q itself is subleading in 1/N_c, corrections of relative order 1/N_c could plausibly affect both the magnitude and the sign-change position. The authors should either provide an estimate of the next-order corrections or explicitly frame Fig. 1 as an illustrative leading-order result rather than a quantitative prediction.
  3. [Sec. 6, Eq. (35) vs. Fig. 1] The model distribution is even in x, which implies ∫ x f_Q(x) dx = 0. If Eq. (35) is correct, this requires F_4(t=0)=0. This nontrivial consistency condition is neither stated nor verified in the model, and it is not discussed in the text. The omission is significant because Eq. (35) is the only formal constraint connecting the model curve to an independent form-factor property, and it provides a check that the gradient expansion has not lost a tensor contribution that would change the sign structure.
  4. [Sec. 6 and Fig. 1] The numerical estimate is not reproducible from the manuscript: the chiral profile P(r), the numerical values of f_π and I, and the regularization/cutoff used in Eq. (40) are not specified. In addition, footnote 1 disclaims the x→0 rise, so the only stable feature advertised is the sign change near x∼0.1. The authors should state the profile and all numerical inputs, and should move the x→0 caveat into the main text so that the scope of the prediction is unambiguous.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 3, terminology] Calling f_Q(x) a 'parton density' may be misleading because the distribution is sign-changing and its first moment vanishes; the authors should clarify explicitly that, as a transition matrix element, it does not admit a probability interpretation and that positivity constraints do not apply.
  2. [Sec. 5, Eqs. (28)-(29)] The bispinor matrices K^αμ_I are taken from Ref. [10] without listing them; since Eq. (29) is central to the definition of f_Q, including the explicit expression for K_X would improve readability.
  3. [Sec. 6, Eq. (40)] The step-function and sign-function arguments in Eq. (40) are written in a compressed form; a short derivation of the theta-function condition and of the evenness of f_Q(x) would help the reader verify the claimed symmetry.
  4. [Sec. 6, Eq. (45)] The comparison with the dipole GPD combination f_D is instructive, but the text should note that this is a dynamical coincidence in the mean-field picture, as it already does, and should avoid implying a group-theoretic large-N_c relation.
  5. [Fig. 1] The figure has no uncertainty band or indication of the gradient-expansion truncation; adding a band or a second curve showing the effect of varying the profile would make the estimate more honest.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the formal sum rules are derived from current conservation and local-operator identities, and the numerical estimate uses the external N-Delta mass splitting rather than fitting f_Q.

full rationale

The derivation is self-contained and does not reduce to its inputs. The zero-sum rule Eq. (32) follows from current conservation applied to the forward limit: Eq. (14) and Eq. (16) require the first moment to vanish for any transition whose spin bilinear remains nonzero (Eqs. (17)-(19)), and Eq. (30) verifies that the tensor bilinear is indeed nonzero. The second-moment relation Eq. (35) is abbreviated with "One obtains," but it is a direct spinor-algebra consequence of Eqs. (33)-(34): contracting n_mu n_nu with m_N gamma^{mu} g^{nu alpha} gamma5 gives 2 m_N n^alpha n-slash gamma5, so the coefficient H_X is related to F4 by the stated factor; no target quantity is inserted by hand. The large-Nc estimate Eq. (40) uses the standard chiral quark-soliton gradient expansion and fixes I through the independent N-Delta mass splitting Eq. (39), not through f_Q; the paper then explicitly verifies that Eq. (40) satisfies the zero-sum rule via Eq. (43) and angular averaging. Footnote 1 disclaims the x -> 0 rise as a model artifact, which is an acknowledged limitation rather than a concealed input. Citations to Refs. [10], [7], and [19]-[24] are prior independent published parametrizations and model techniques, and none is used to define away the predicted quantity. The absence of an explicit check of Eq. (35) against the even model f_Q (which would imply F4(0) = 0) is a completeness concern, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces a new observable, f_Q, but no new particles, forces, or conserved quantities. Its numerical estimate relies on standard chiral quark-soliton model inputs, chiefly the moment of inertia I fixed by the N-Delta mass splitting, and on the assumed validity of the large-Nc and gradient-expansion approximations. No parameter is fitted to the target distribution itself.

free parameters (3)
  • Collective moment of inertia I = I = 3/[2(m_Delta - m_N)] ≈ 5.1 GeV^-1, from Eq. (39)
    Sets the overall normalization of f_Q in Eqs. (38) and (40). It is fixed by the physical N-Delta mass splitting, an external input, not by fitting f_Q itself.
  • Pion decay constant f_pi = 93 MeV
    Appears in Eq. (40) and sets the scale of the mean-field parton density. Treated as a standard external constant from the literature, not fitted to f_Q.
  • Chiral field profile P(r) = Not specified numerically in the paper
    Determines the integrand of Eq. (40) through Pi(k), Eq. (42). Its numerical form is obtained from the model equations in Refs. [17,18] and is not supplied here, which affects reproducibility.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Baryons are treated as stable particles, with matrix elements involving the unstable Delta defined via complex analyticity.
    Stated in Sec. 2 with a citation to Ref. [5]. The partonic interpretation and the current-conservation sum rule depend on having well-defined initial and final states.
  • domain assumption In the large-Nc limit, N and Delta are degenerate and Delta_3 = O(N_c^-1), allowing the model calculation to use m_N = m_Delta and Delta_3 = 0 in the Breit frame.
    Introduced in Sec. 6 to justify the computation leading to Eq. (38). This is the load-bearing approximation for the numerical magnitude and shape of f_Q.
  • domain assumption The N to Delta GPD parametrization of Ref. [10], including the uniqueness of the X structure in Eq. (29), is complete and correct.
    The definition of H_X and the spin tensor projection rely entirely on this parametrization; this paper does not rederive it.
  • domain assumption The gradient expansion of the chiral quark-soliton model preserves partonic sum rules and correctly captures the L=2 angular structure of the tensor operator.
    Invoked in Sec. 6 with Refs. [19,22]. The numerical reliability of the sign change and magnitude depends on this expansion.
  • standard math QCD vector current conservation and the light-front quantization framework are assumed as background.
    Used to derive the zero-sum rule Eq. (32) and the forward-limit density interpretation in Sec. 3.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Tensor-polarized parton density in the $N \rightarrow \Delta$ transition." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/P4K4PORQ

@misc{pith2026250718402,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Tensor-polarized parton density in the $N \rightarrow \Delta$ transition},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/P4K4PORQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.18402}
}
abstract

The generalized parton distributions for transitions between baryon states with different masses have a forward limit in which they behave as parton densities (light-front momentum transfer $\Delta^+, \Delta_T = 0$, energy transfer $\Delta^- \neq 0$). These "transition parton densities'' can realize spin/isospin quantum numbers not accessible in the ground-state nucleon. The $N \rightarrow \Delta$ transition gives rise to a new parton density proportional to the $1/2 \rightarrow 3/2$ spin transition tensor. Its properties are derived, and its magnitude is estimated in the chiral quark-soliton model based on the large-$N_c$ limit of QCD.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.18402 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. shows the numerical result for the tensor transition PDF in the chiral quark-soliton model obtained from Eqs. (39) and (40). The distribution is even in x. One observes that (for x > 0) the function changes sign at x ∼ 0.1. This property fol￾lows from the angular dependence of the integrand in Eq. (40); the sign change is required for the first moment to vanish ac￾cording to the sum rule Eq. (32). The magnitude of t… view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Multipole structure of the $N \to \Delta$ Transition Generalized Parton Distributions

    hep-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    The four N oΔ transition GPDs decompose into monopole, two dipole and quadrupole multipole GPDs in one-to-one correspondence with light-front helicity amplitudes, defining impact-parameter transition densities at zero...

  2. Perception in Plan: Coupled Perception and Planning for End-to-End Autonomous Driving

    cs.CV 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    The supplied body text is an unrelated physics preprint (arXiv:2508.11491), so the advertised autonomous-driving results cannot be verified from this submission.

  3. Quadrupole forces between quark/gluon subsystems inside higher-spin particles

    hep-ph 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    For spin-1 and spin-3/2 hadrons, the quark/gluon subsystem force acquires quadrupole and tangential components, expressed through new multipole form factors C̄_n(t).

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [10]

    J.-Y . Kim, K. M. Semenov-Tian-Shansky, H.-Y . Won, S. Son, C. Weiss, Complete definition of N→ ∆ transition generalized parton distributions, Phys. Rev. D 111 (11) (2025) 114010. arXiv:2501.00185, doi:10. 1103/m4vj-bkqy

    arXiv 2025

  2. [7]

    Kim, Parametrization of transition energy-momentum tensor form factors, Phys

    J.-Y . Kim, Parametrization of transition energy-momentum tensor form factors, Phys. Lett. B 834 (2022) 137442. arXiv:2206.10202, doi: 10.1016/j.physletb.2022.137442

    arXiv 2022

  3. [1]

    Goeke, M

    K. Goeke, M. V . Polyakov, M. Vanderhaeghen, Hard exclusive reactions and the structure of hadrons, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 47 (2001) 401–515. arXiv:hep-ph/0106012, doi:10.1016/S0146-6410(01)00158-2

    arXiv 2001

  4. [2]

    Diehl, Generalized parton distributions, Phys

    M. Diehl, Generalized parton distributions, Phys. Rept. 388 (2003) 41–

    work page 2003

  5. [3]

    A. V . Belitsky, A. V . Radyushkin, Unraveling hadron structure with gen- eralized parton distributions, Phys. Rept. 418 (2005) 1–387. arXiv: hep-ph/0504030, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2005.06.002

    arXiv 2005

  6. [4]

    Bo ffi, B

    S. Bo ffi, B. Pasquini, Generalized parton distributions and the structure of the nucleon, Riv. Nuovo Cim. 30 (9) (2007) 387–448. arXiv:0711. 2625, doi:10.1393/ncr/i2007-10025-7

    doi:10.1393/ncr/i2007-10025-7 2007

  7. [5]

    Diehl, et al., Exploring baryon resonances with transition gen- eralized parton distributions: status and perspectives, Eur

    S. Diehl, et al., Exploring baryon resonances with transition gen- eralized parton distributions: status and perspectives, Eur. Phys. J. A 61 (6) (2025) 131. arXiv:2405.15386, doi:10.1140/epja/ s10050-025-01552-2

    arXiv 2025

  8. [6]

    Kim, H.-Y

    J.-Y . Kim, H.-Y . Won, J. L. Goity, C. Weiss, QCD angular momentum in N→ ∆ transitions, Phys. Lett. B 844 (2023) 138083. arXiv:2304. 08575, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.138083

    arXiv 2023

Show all 39 references
  1. [8]

    Alharazin, B

    H. Alharazin, B. D. Sun, E. Epelbaum, J. Gegelia, U. G. Meißner, Gravita- tional p→ ∆+ transition form factors in chiral perturbation theory, JHEP 03 (2024) 007. arXiv:2312.05193, doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2024) 007. 6

    2024 arXiv

  2. [9]

    S. J. Brodsky, H.-C. Pauli, S. S. Pinsky, Quantum chromodynamics and other field theories on the light cone, Phys. Rept. 301 (1998) 299–486. arXiv:hep-ph/9705477, doi:10.1016/S0370-1573(97)00089-6

    1998 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Witten, Baryons in the 1 /N Expansion, Nucl

    E. Witten, Baryons in the 1 /N Expansion, Nucl. Phys. B 160 (1979) 57–

    1979

  4. [12]

    Gervais, B

    J.-L. Gervais, B. Sakita, Large- N QCD Baryon Dynamics: Exact Results from Its Relation to the Static Strong Coupling Theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52 (1984) 87. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.52.87

    1984 doi

  5. [13]

    R. F. Dashen, E. E. Jenkins, A. V . Manohar, 1/Nc expansion for baryons, Phys. Rev. D 49 (1994) 4713, [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 51, 2489 (1995)]. arXiv:hep-ph/9310379, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.51.2489

    1994 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Diehl, et al., First Measurement of Hard Exclusive π−∆++ Electropro- duction Beam-Spin Asymmetries off the Proton, Phys

    S. Diehl, et al., First Measurement of Hard Exclusive π−∆++ Electropro- duction Beam-Spin Asymmetries off the Proton, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (2) (2023) 021901. arXiv:2303.11762, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett. 131.021901

    2023 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Kroll, K

    P. Kroll, K. Passek-Kumeri ˇcki, Transition GPDs and exclusive electropro- duction of π−∆(1232) final states, Phys. Rev. D 107 (5) (2023) 054009. arXiv:2211.09474, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.054009

    2023 arXiv

  8. [16]

    K. M. Semenov-Tian-Shansky, M. Vanderhaeghen, Deeply virtual Comp- ton process e−N → e−γπN to study nucleon to resonance transitions, Phys. Rev. D 108 (3) (2023) 034021. arXiv:2303.00119, doi:10. 1103/PhysRevD.108.034021

    2023 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Diakonov, V

    D. Diakonov, V . Y . Petrov, P. V . Pobylitsa, A Chiral Theory of Nucle- ons, Nucl. Phys. B 306 (1988) 809. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(88) 90443-9

    1988 doi

  10. [18]

    C. V . Christov, A. Blotz, H.-C. Kim, P. Pobylitsa, T. Watabe, T. Meissner, E. Ruiz Arriola, K. Goeke, Baryons as nontopological chiral solitons, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 37 (1996) 91–191. arXiv:hep-ph/9604441, doi:10.1016/0146-6410(96)00057-9

    1996 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Diakonov, V

    D. Diakonov, V . Petrov, P. Pobylitsa, M. V . Polyakov, C. Weiss, Nu- cleon parton distributions at low normalization point in the large Nc limit, Nucl. Phys. B 480 (1996) 341–380. arXiv:hep-ph/9606314, doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(96)00486-5

    1996 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Diakonov, V

    D. Diakonov, V . Y . Petrov, P. V . Pobylitsa, M. V . Polyakov, C. Weiss, Unpolarized and polarized quark distributions in the large Nc limit, Phys. Rev. D 56 (1997) 4069–4083. arXiv:hep-ph/9703420, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.56.4069

    1997 arXiv

  13. [21]

    P. V . Pobylitsa, M. V . Polyakov, K. Goeke, T. Watabe, C. Weiss, Isovector unpolarized quark distribution in the nucleon in the large N(c) limit, Phys. Rev. D 59 (1999) 034024. arXiv:hep-ph/9804436, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.59.034024

    1999 arXiv

  14. [22]

    V . Y . Petrov, P. V . Pobylitsa, M. V . Polyakov, I. Bornig, K. Goeke, C. Weiss, Off-forward quark distributions of the nucleon in the large Nc limit, Phys. Rev. D 57 (1998) 4325–4333. arXiv:hep-ph/9710270, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.57.4325

    1998 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Penttinen, M

    M. Penttinen, M. V . Polyakov, K. Goeke, Helicity skewed quark distribu- tions of the nucleon and chiral symmetry, Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 014024. arXiv:hep-ph/9909489, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.62.014024

    2000 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Ossmann, M

    J. Ossmann, M. V . Polyakov, P. Schweitzer, D. Urbano, K. Goeke, The Generalized parton distribution function (Eu + Ed)(x,ξ, t) of the nucleon in the chiral quark soliton model, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 034011.arXiv: hep-ph/0411172, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.71.034011

    2005 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Ji, Gauge-Invariant Decomposition of Nucleon Spin, Phys

    X.-D. Ji, Gauge-Invariant Decomposition of Nucleon Spin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 610–613. arXiv:hep-ph/9603249, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.78.610

    1997 arXiv

  18. [26]

    M. V . Polyakov, Generalized parton distributions and strong forces inside nucleons and nuclei, Phys. Lett. B 555 (2003) 57–62. arXiv:hep-ph/ 0210165, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(03)00036-4

    2003 doi

  19. [27]

    T. D. Cohen, Chiral and large- Nc limits of quantum chromodynamics and models of the baryon, Rev. Mod. Phys. 68 (1996) 599–608. doi:10. 1103/RevModPhys.68.599

    1996

  20. [28]

    Burkardt, Impact parameter dependent parton distributions and off for- ward parton distributions for ζ → 0, Phys

    M. Burkardt, Impact parameter dependent parton distributions and off for- ward parton distributions for ζ → 0, Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 071503, [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 66, 119903 (2002)]. arXiv:hep-ph/0005108, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.62.071503

    2000 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Burkardt, Impact parameter space interpretation for generalized parton distributions, Int

    M. Burkardt, Impact parameter space interpretation for generalized parton distributions, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 18 (2003) 173–208. arXiv:hep-ph/ 0207047, doi:10.1142/S0217751X03012370

    2003 doi

  22. [30]

    Schweitzer, C

    P. Schweitzer, C. Weiss, Spin-flavor structure of chiral-odd generalized parton distributions in the large- Nc limit, Phys. Rev. C 94 (4) (2016) 045202. arXiv:1606.08388, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.94.045202

    2016 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Tezgin, B

    K. Tezgin, B. Maynard, P. Schweitzer, Chiral-odd GPDs in the bag model, Phys. Rev. D 110 (5) (2024) 054028. arXiv:2404.11563, doi:10. 1103/PhysRevD.110.054028

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    J.-Y . Kim, C. Weiss, Chiral-odd generalized parton distributions in the large-Nc limit of QCD: Spin-flavor structure, polynomiality, and sum rules, Phys. Rev. D 111 (7) (2025) 074007. arXiv:2411.17634, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.111.074007

    2025 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Kim, Chiral-odd generalized parton distributions in the large- Nc limit of QCD: Next-to-leading-order contributionsarXiv:2506.21013

    J.-Y . Kim, Chiral-odd generalized parton distributions in the large- Nc limit of QCD: Next-to-leading-order contributionsarXiv:2506.21013

    arXiv

  26. [34]

    L. L. Frankfurt, M. I. Strikman, High momentum transfer processes with polarized deuterons, Nucl. Phys. A 405 (1983) 557–580. doi:10.1016/ 0375-9474(83)90518-3

    1983

  27. [35]

    Hoodbhoy, R

    P. Hoodbhoy, R. L. Ja ffe, A. Manohar, Novel E ffects in Deep Inelastic Scattering from Spin 1 Hadrons, Nucl. Phys. B 312 (1989) 571–588.doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(89)90572-5

    1989 doi

  28. [36]

    Poudel, A

    J. Poudel, A. Bacchetta, J.-P. Chen, N. Santiesteban, Experimental study of tensor structure function of deuteron, Eur. Phys. J. A 61 (4) (2025) 81. arXiv:2506.04506, doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-025-01558-w

    2025 arXiv

  29. [37]

    D. A. Varshalovich, A. N. Moskalev, V . K. Khersonskii, Quantum The- ory of Angular Momentum: Irreducible Tensors, Spherical Harmonics, Vector Coupling Coefficients, 3nj Symbols, World Scientific Publishing Company, 1988. doi:10.1142/0270. 7

    1988 doi

  30. [115]

    doi:10.1016/0550-3213(79)90232-3

    doi

  31. [277]

    arXiv:hep-ph/0307382, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2003.08. 002

    2003 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.