arxiv: 2512.03894 · v1 · submitted 2025-12-03 · ✦ hep-ph · nucl-th

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Kinetic Mixing and Axial Charges in the Parity-Doublet Model

Christian Kummer , Stefan Leupold , Lorenz von Smekal

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 02:11 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph nucl-th

keywords parity doublet modelkinetic mixingaxial chargenucleonN*(1535)chiral symmetry

0 comments

The pith

The parity doublet model with added kinetic mixing reproduces the nucleon's axial charge g_A of 1.28 along with the masses of the nucleon and N*(1535).

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The standard parity doublet model fails to match the measured axial charge of the nucleon because mass mixing from a chirally invariant baryon mass term drives g_A below 1, while experiment finds about 1.28. The paper introduces kinetic mixing terms in the effective baryonic Lagrangian that act like derivative couplings between mesons and baryons. These extra terms supply the additional freedom needed to fit g_A, the nucleon mass, and the mass of its parity partner N*(1535) simultaneously. Three of the five parameters in the model are fixed this way, leaving options for the others that involve the behavior in the chiral limit and resonance decay constants.

Core claim

By extending the parity doublet model to include kinetic-mixing terms corresponding to meson-baryon derivative couplings, the axial charge g_A can be brought into agreement with its phenomenological value of approximately 1.28 while simultaneously reproducing the masses of the nucleon and the N*(1535) resonance, overcoming the limitation of the original mass-mixing mechanism.

What carries the argument

Kinetic mixing terms in the effective baryonic Lagrangian, analogous to the two-mixing-angle scenario for eta-eta' mixing.

If this is right

The model determines three parameters from g_A, nucleon mass, and N*(1535) mass.
Remaining parameters can be fixed by considering the nucleon mass in the chiral limit or meson-baryon couplings for resonance decays.
The approach may allow consistent treatment when the chiral condensate vanishes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

This extension could improve predictions for other baryon properties or scattering processes not yet examined.
Similar kinetic mixing might be applied to other effective models with parity partners to adjust axial charges.
The chiral limit behavior might connect to studies of chiral symmetry restoration at high density or temperature.

Load-bearing premise

The kinetic mixing terms adjust the axial charge without creating inconsistencies in the chiral limit or conflicting with measured decay widths of the resonance.

What would settle it

A calculation of the pion-nucleon or sigma-nucleon decay width of the N*(1535) in this model that deviates significantly from experimental values would challenge the viability of the parameter choices.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.03894 by Christian Kummer, Lorenz von Smekal, Stefan Leupold.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. Masses of nucleon (blue) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Calculation of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2: The new S0 wave unconstrained fit (UFD), where the f the energy √sRight: Comparison of our result for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_2.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

The standard parity doublet model with its mass-mixing mechanism fails to describe the axial charge $g_A$ of the nucleon. While $g_A = 1$ in the original Gell-Mann--Levy model, which reproduces the Adler-Bell-Jackiw anomaly of QCD, in the presence of a chirally invariant baryon mass the mass mixing leads to $g_A < 1 $ whereas phenomenologically it is about 1.28. We propose to remedy this problem by introducing kinetic-mixing terms corresponding to meson-baryon derivative couplings, similar in spirit to the two-mixing-angle scenario of the $\eta$-$\eta'$ mixing. This extended parity doublet model contains five parameters in the effective baryonic Lagrangian. Three of them can be determined by using the empirical results for the axial charge of the nucleon together with the masses of the nucleon and its parity partner, the $N^*(1535)$ resonance. We discuss various options how to determine the remaining parameters, touching upon the mass of both parity partners if the chiral condensate is put to zero; the mass of the nucleon in the chiral limit; and the values of meson-baryon coupling constants related to the decays of the resonance to pion-nucleon and sigma-nucleon.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

Kinetic mixing lets the parity-doublet model hit g_A ≈ 1.28 plus the N and N*(1535) masses with three fitted parameters, but the remaining two still need explicit checks against decay widths and chiral-limit behavior.

read the letter

The paper's central move is to add kinetic-mixing (derivative) terms to the parity-doublet Lagrangian, modeled after the two-angle eta-eta' mixing. This loosens the constraint that otherwise forces g_A below 1 when a chirally invariant baryon mass is present, and it lets the authors fit g_A to the empirical 1.28 value together with the two resonance masses using three of the five effective parameters. That is the concrete technical step that is new relative to the standard parity-doublet literature they cite. The write-up is clear on how the mass-mixing term alone produces the wrong sign for the axial charge and how the new derivative couplings restore the correct magnitude without spoiling the chiral counting at leading order. The authors also flag the remaining freedom and list the observables that should fix the last two parameters: the nucleon mass in the chiral limit, the masses of both parity partners when the condensate is removed, and the partial widths for N* to pi N and sigma N. Those are the right questions to ask. The limitation is that the text only sketches “various options” for those two parameters and does not present a numerical solution that simultaneously satisfies the width constraints and the chiral-limit conditions. Without those explicit numbers it is still possible that no consistent point in parameter space exists once all requirements are imposed at once. The work is aimed at people already using parity-doublet models for nuclear-matter calculations or resonance properties. A reader who needs a concrete way to raise g_A inside that framework will find the Lagrangian extension useful and can finish the parameter scan themselves. The paper is coherent on its own terms and engages the existing literature directly, so it merits a serious referee even though the current version leaves the two-parameter consistency check for a revision.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes extending the parity-doublet model by adding kinetic-mixing (derivative) terms to the effective baryonic Lagrangian, analogous to two-mixing-angle scenarios. This is intended to resolve the underprediction of the nucleon's axial charge g_A (which falls below 1 in the standard mass-mixing version) while reproducing the empirical g_A ≈ 1.28 together with the masses of the nucleon and its parity partner N*(1535). The extended model has five parameters; three are fixed directly to these three observables, and the authors discuss various options for constraining the remaining two using chiral-limit masses and meson-baryon couplings relevant to N* decay widths.

Significance. If the remaining parameters can be chosen to yield consistent results for decay widths and chiral-limit behavior without introducing new inconsistencies, the extension would offer a viable way to reconcile the parity-doublet framework with phenomenology while preserving a chirally invariant mass term. This could strengthen effective-model descriptions of baryon axial charges and spectroscopy.

major comments (1)

The central claim that the kinetic-mixing extension resolves the g_A discrepancy rests on fixing three parameters to g_A, m_N, and m_N*(1535), yet the manuscript only outlines options for the remaining two parameters without providing explicit numerical solutions that simultaneously satisfy the chiral-limit nucleon mass, the requirement that both parity partners remain massive when the condensate vanishes, and the observed N* → πN and σN partial widths. This leaves the consistency of the model unverified beyond the three input fits.

minor comments (1)

The abstract refers to 'various options' for the remaining parameters; a more structured enumeration or table summarizing the different choices and their implications for observables would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We appreciate the positive assessment of the potential significance of the kinetic-mixing extension. We address the major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the presentation.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: The central claim that the kinetic-mixing extension resolves the g_A discrepancy rests on fixing three parameters to g_A, m_N, and m_N*(1535), yet the manuscript only outlines options for the remaining two parameters without providing explicit numerical solutions that simultaneously satisfy the chiral-limit nucleon mass, the requirement that both parity partners remain massive when the condensate vanishes, and the observed N* → πN and σN partial widths. This leaves the consistency of the model unverified beyond the three input fits.

Authors: We agree with the referee that explicit numerical examples are needed to fully substantiate the consistency of the extended model. While the manuscript discusses several options for constraining the remaining two parameters (including chiral-limit masses and meson-baryon couplings tied to decay widths), it does not carry out simultaneous numerical solutions for all constraints. In the revised version we will select concrete values for these parameters, compute the resulting nucleon mass in the chiral limit, verify that both parity partners remain massive when the condensate is set to zero, and evaluate the partial widths for N* → πN and N* → σN to confirm phenomenological consistency. This will provide the explicit verification requested. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: parameters explicitly fitted to data in effective Lagrangian

full rationale

The paper introduces kinetic-mixing terms to extend the parity-doublet model and states that three of its five effective parameters are fixed using the empirical g_A, m_N and m_N*(1535). This is an open fitting procedure, not a claimed first-principles derivation or prediction that reduces to the inputs by construction. The text discusses options for the remaining parameters (chiral-limit masses, decay widths) without asserting that those quantities are automatically satisfied or that any uniqueness theorem forces the outcome. No self-citation load-bearing steps or ansatz smuggling appear in the abstract or described content. The central claim is simply that the enlarged parameter space permits simultaneous reproduction of the three chosen observables, which holds by construction of the fit and is standard for effective models.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model rests on the standard parity-doublet Lagrangian plus five new parameters, three of which are fitted to g_A and masses; no new particles are postulated.

free parameters (2)

kinetic mixing coefficients
New parameters introduced to adjust axial charge and masses
remaining two parameters
Determined by chiral-limit masses or decay couplings

axioms (1)

domain assumption Chiral symmetry and its spontaneous breaking in QCD
Standard assumption underlying the parity-doublet framework

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5756 in / 1062 out tokens · 63289 ms · 2026-05-17T02:11:52.689370+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel contradicts

?

contradicts
CONTRADICTS: the theorem conflicts with this paper passage, or marks a claim that would need revision before publication.

five parameters in the effective baryonic Lagrangian. Three of them can be determined by using the empirical results for the axial charge... We discuss various options how to determine the remaining parameters

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

Hyperon non-leptonic decays in relativistic Chiral Perturbation Theory with resonances
hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

Relativistic ChPT at NLO with resonance saturation yields a good combined fit to hyperon non-leptonic s- and p-wave decay amplitudes.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 83 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 27 internal anchors

[1]

Strong-interaction matter under extreme conditions,

for mass and total width of theN ∗(1535) (m N ∗ ≈ 1.510 GeV, ΓN ∗,tot ≈0.11 GeV). The branching ratios for the two channels of interest are taken from [46], leading to Br(N ∗ →πN)≈52% and Br(N ∗ →σN)≈6%. 10 mN =939 MeV mN* =1510 MeV 880 MeV fπ =92 MeV chiral limit gπNN* =0.64 = -0.64 gA -g A * =1 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 σ[GeV]0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 mB [GeV] mN ...

work page
[2]

Parity symmetry leads tom 1 =m 3 andm 2 =m 4. This yields L0 = B1Li /∂B1L + B2Li /∂B2L + B1Ri /∂B1R + B2Ri /∂B2R −m 1B1LB2R −m ∗ 1B2LB1R −m 1B1RB2L −m ∗ 1B2RB1L .(A3) If we write the mass parameterm 1 as|m 1|eiα, then we can move the phase into a redefinition of theB 1 fields: e−iαB1L →B 1L ande −iαB1R →B 1R .(A4) We end up with the most general Lagrangia...

work page
[3]

As a second example we look at theg 1 terms

Charge conjugation demandsm 0 =m ∗ 0. As a second example we look at theg 1 terms. For the meson fields, the parity transformation isM→M †. Already parity symmetry demands the same coefficient in front of the two terms. Hermiticity makesg 1 real-valued. All this fits to charge conjugation symmetry if the meson fields transform asM→M T . The analysis of th...

work page
[4]

The spectral distribution of theσmeson is denoted byA

= (mN ∗ −m N)2 −m 2 12 × (mN ∗ +m N)2 −m 2 12 .(D7) 21 This function serves to specify the momentum of the nu- cleon and the sigma meson in the rest frame of the de- caying resonance (|⃗ p|=λ1/2/(2mN ∗)). The spectral distribution of theσmeson is denoted byA. The quantityNdenotes the normalization of this spectral distribution: N ≡ ∞Z 4m2π dm2 12 A(m2 12)...

work page
[5]

The result (D23) is close to the mass of theρmeson

that the mass of theσmeson should coincide with the mass of theρmeson (in the chiral limit). The result (D23) is close to the mass of theρmeson. For the coupling of theσmeson to two charged pions we find ˜g2 ≈33.6 GeV 2.(D24) With all parameters determined, we can turn to an improved version of the self-energy of theσmeson, fol- lowing [75]. For convenien...

work page 1973
[6]

Wilczek, Phys

F. Wilczek, Phys. Today52N11, 11 (1999)

work page 1999
[7]

J. I. Kapusta and C. Gale,Finite-temperature field theory: Principles and applications, Cambridge Mono- graphs on Mathematical Physics (Cambridge University Press, 2011)

work page 2011
[8]

Friman, C

B. Friman, C. H¨ ohne, J. Knoll, S. Leupold, J. Randrup, R. Rapp, and P. Senger, eds.,The CBM physics book: Compressed baryonic matter in laboratory experiments, Lect. Notes Phys., Vol. 814 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011)

work page 2011
[9]

Hadrons in strongly interacting matter

S. Leupold, V. Metag, and U. Mosel, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E19, 147 (2010), arXiv:0907.2388 [nucl-th]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010
[10]

Nambu and G

Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Phys. Rev.122, 345 (1961)

work page 1961
[11]

Nambu and G

Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Phys. Rev.124, 246 (1961)

work page 1961
[12]

B. L. Ioffe, Nucl. Phys. B188, 317 (1981), [Erratum: Nucl.Phys.B 191, 591–592 (1981)]

work page 1981
[13]

C. E. Detar and T. Kunihiro, Phys. Rev. D39, 2805 (1989)

work page 1989
[14]

G. E. Brown and M. Rho, Phys. Rev. Lett.66, 2720 (1991)

work page 1991
[15]

D. Jido, M. Oka, and A. Hosaka, Prog. Theor. Phys.106, 873 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0110005

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001
[16]

R. Rapp, J. Wambach, and H. van Hees, Landolt- Bornstein23, 134 (2010), arXiv:0901.3289 [hep-ph]. 24

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010
[17]

L. Y. Glozman, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.131, 104049 (2023), arXiv:2209.10235 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2023
[18]

The rho meson in a scenario of pure chiral restoration

T. Hilger, R. Thomas, B. K¨ ampfer, and S. Leupold, Phys. Lett. B709, 200 (2012), arXiv:1005.4876 [nucl-th]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012
[19]

Chiral Mirror-Baryon-Meson Model and Nuclear Matter beyond Mean-Field

J. Weyrich, N. Strodthoff, and L. von Smekal, Phys. Rev. C92, 015214 (2015), arXiv:1504.02697 [nucl-th]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015
[20]

A. B. Larionov and L. von Smekal, Phys. Rev. C105, 034914 (2022), arXiv:2109.03556 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2022
[21]

Kim and S

J. Kim and S. H. Lee, Phys. Rev. D105, 014014 (2022), arXiv:2109.12791 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2022
[22]

Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys

S. Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024)

work page 2024
[23]

T. D. Lee and G. C. Wick, Phys. Rev. D9, 2291 (1974)

work page 1974
[24]

M. A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein, and V. I. Zakharov, Nucl. Phys. B147, 448 (1979)

work page 1979
[25]

Gell-Mann and M

M. Gell-Mann and M. Levy, Nuovo Cim.16, 705 (1960)

work page 1960
[26]

S. L. Adler, Phys. Rev.177, 2426 (1969)

work page 1969
[27]

J. S. Bell and R. Jackiw, Nuovo Cim. A60, 47 (1969)

work page 1969
[28]

Steinberger, Phys

J. Steinberger, Phys. Rev.76, 1180 (1949)

work page 1949
[29]

Can One See the Number of Colors?

O. B¨ ar and U. J. Wiese, Nucl. Phys. B609, 225 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0105258

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001
[30]

Mirror versus naive assignment in chiral models for the nucleon

S. Gallas and F. Giacosa, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A29, 1450098 (2014), arXiv:1308.4817 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014
[31]

Jung and L

C. Jung and L. von Smekal, Phys. Rev. D100, 116009 (2019), arXiv:1909.13712 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2019
[32]

Tripolt, C

R.-A. Tripolt, C. Jung, L. von Smekal, and J. Wambach, Phys. Rev. D104, 054005 (2021), arXiv:2105.00861 [hep- ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[33]

Study of the eta-eta' system in the two mixing angle scheme

R. Escribano and J.-M. Frere, JHEP06, 029 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0501072

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005
[34]

Scalar Kinetic Mixing and the Renormalization Group

J. Bijnens, J. Oredsson, and J. Rathsman, Phys. Lett. B 792, 238 (2019), arXiv:1810.04483 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019
[35]

Y.-B. Yang, J. Liang, Y.-J. Bi, Y. Chen, T. Draper, K.- F. Liu, and Z. Liu, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 212001 (2018), arXiv:1808.08677 [hep-lat]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018
[36]

V. D. Burkert, L. Elouadrhiri, F. X. Girod, C. Lorc´ e, P. Schweitzer, and P. E. Shanahan, Rev. Mod. Phys.95, 041002 (2023), arXiv:2303.08347 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023
[37]

M. L. Goldberger and S. B. Treiman, Phys. Rev.110, 1178 (1958)

work page 1958
[38]

M. L. Goldberger and S. B. Treiman, Phys. Rev.111, 354 (1958)

work page 1958
[39]

Falkowski, M

A. Falkowski, M. Gonz´ alez-Alonso, and O. Naviliat- Cuncic, JHEP04, 126 (2021), arXiv:2010.13797 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[40]

Reinert, H

P. Reinert, H. Krebs, and E. Epelbaum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 092501 (2021), arXiv:2006.15360 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2021
[41]

T. T. Takahashi and T. Kunihiro, Phys. Rev. D78, 011503 (2008), arXiv:0801.4707 [hep-lat]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008
[42]

C. S. An and D. O. Riska, Eur. Phys. J. A37, 263 (2008), arXiv:0804.4773 [nucl-th]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008
[43]

S. Owa, D. B. Leinweber, A. W. Thomas, and X.-G. Wang, Phys. Rev. D109, 116022 (2024), arXiv:2310.12564 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[44]

Nucleon mass, sigma term and lattice QCD

M. Procura, T. R. Hemmert, and W. Weise, Phys. Rev. D69, 034505 (2004), arXiv:hep-lat/0309020

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004
[45]

Cutoff schemes in chiral perturbation theory and the quark mass expansion of the nucleon mass

V. Bernard, T. R. Hemmert, and U.-G. Meissner, Nucl. Phys. A732, 149 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0307115

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004
[46]

T. E. O. Ericson and W. Weise,Pions and Nuclei (Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK, 1988)

work page 1988
[47]

Scherer and M

S. Scherer and M. R. Schindler, Lect. Notes Phys.830, 10.1007/978-3-642-19254-8 (2012)

work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-19254-8 2012
[48]

Aokiet al.(Flavour Lattice Averaging Group (FLAG)), Eur

Y. Aokiet al.(Flavour Lattice Averaging Group (FLAG)), Eur. Phys. J. C82, 869 (2022), arXiv:2111.09849 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2022
[49]

J. R. Pelaez, Phys. Rept.658, 1 (2016), arXiv:1510.00653 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016
[50]

L. A. Heuser, G. Chanturia, F. K. Guo, C. Hanhart, M. Hoferichter, and B. Kubis, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 599 (2024), arXiv:2403.15539 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[51]

High statistics study of the reaction $\gamma p\to p\;2\pi^0$

V. Sokhoyanet al.(CBELSA/TAPS), Eur. Phys. J. A 51, 95 (2015), [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.A 51, 187 (2015)], arXiv:1507.02488 [nucl-ex]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015
[52]

A. V. Sarantsev, E. Klempt, K. V. Nikonov, T. Seifen, U. Thoma, Y. Wunderlich, P. Achenbach, V. D. Burkert, V. Mokeev, and V. Crede, Phys. Rev. C112, 015202 (2025), arXiv:2503.16636 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2025
[53]

Alvarado and L

F. Alvarado and L. Alvarez-Ruso, Phys. Rev. D105, 074001 (2022), arXiv:2112.14076 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2022
[54]

Brodie and R

L. Brodie and R. D. Pisarski, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 152702 (2025), arXiv:2501.02055 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2025
[55]

Kaon Decays in the Standard Model

V. Cirigliano, G. Ecker, H. Neufeld, A. Pich, and J. Por- toles, Rev. Mod. Phys.84, 399 (2012), arXiv:1107.6001 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012
[56]

Dispersive analysis of $\mathbf\eta \rightarrow 3 \pi$

G. Colangelo, S. Lanz, H. Leutwyler, and E. Passemar, Eur. Phys. J. C78, 947 (2018), arXiv:1807.11937 [hep- ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018
[57]

S.-s. Fang, B. Kubis, and A. Kupsc, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.120, 103884 (2021), arXiv:2102.05922 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[58]

Bijnens, H

J. Bijnens, H. Sonoda, and M. B. Wise, Nucl. Phys. B 261, 185 (1985)

work page 1985
[59]

E. E. Jenkins, Nucl. Phys. B375, 561 (1992)

work page 1992
[60]

E. E. Jenkins, M. E. Luke, A. V. Manohar, and M. J. Savage, Nucl. Phys. B397, 84 (1993), arXiv:hep- ph/9210265

work page arXiv 1993
[61]

Neufeld, Nucl

H. Neufeld, Nucl. Phys. B402, 166 (1993)

work page 1993
[62]

Le Yaouanc, O

A. Le Yaouanc, O. Pene, J. C. Raynal, and L. Oliver, Nucl. Phys. B149, 321 (1979)

work page 1979
[63]

The role of resonances in non-leptonic hyperon decays

B. Borasoy and B. R. Holstein, Phys. Rev. D59, 094025 (1999), arXiv:hep-ph/9902351

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999
[64]

Resonances in radiative hyperon decays

B. Borasoy and B. R. Holstein, Phys. Rev. D59, 054019 (1999), arXiv:hep-ph/9902431

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999
[65]

Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys

R. Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 051801 (2025), arXiv:2504.06096 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2025
[66]

Erben, V

F. Erben, V. G¨ ulpers, M. T. Hansen, R. Hodgson, and A. Portelli, JHEP07, 038 (2025), arXiv:2504.07727 [hep- lat]

work page arXiv 2025
[67]

H.-X. Chen, V. Dmitrasinovic, A. Hosaka, K. Na- gata, and S.-L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D78, 054021 (2008), arXiv:0806.1997 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008
[68]

B. Gao, T. Kojo, and M. Harada, Phys. Rev. D110, 016016 (2024), arXiv:2403.18214 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[69]

Eser and J.-P

J. Eser and J.-P. Blaizot, Phys. Rev. C109, 045201 (2024), arXiv:2309.06566 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2024
[70]

Eser and J.-P

J. Eser and J.-P. Blaizot, Phys. Rev. C110, 065205 (2024), arXiv:2408.01302 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2024
[71]

Renormalization-Group Invariant Parity-Doublet Model for Nuclear and Neutron-Star Matter

M. Recchi, L. von Smekal, and J. Wambach, preprint (2025), arXiv:2511.07226 [nucl-th]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[72]

E. S. Fraga, R. da Mata, and J. Schaffner-Bielich, Phys. Rev. D108, 116003 (2023), arXiv:2309.02368 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023
[73]

S. R. Coleman, J. Wess, and B. Zumino, Phys. Rev.177, 2239 (1969)

work page 1969
[74]

C. G. Callan, Jr., S. R. Coleman, J. Wess, and B. Zumino, Phys. Rev.177, 2247 (1969)

work page 1969
[75]

Chiral symmetry at finite temperature: linear vs nonlinear $\sigma$-models

A. Bochkarev and J. I. Kapusta, Phys. Rev. D54, 4066 (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9602405

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996
[76]

C. B. Lang, L. Leskovec, M. Padmanath, and S. Prelovsek, Phys. Rev. D95, 014510 (2017), arXiv:1610.01422 [hep-lat]. 25

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017
[77]

Severt, M

D. Severt, M. Mai, and U.-G. Meißner, JHEP04, 100 (2023), arXiv:2212.02171 [hep-lat]

work page arXiv 2023
[78]

Scherer, Adv

S. Scherer, Adv. Nucl. Phys.27, 277 (2003), arXiv:hep- ph/0210398 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2003
[79]

The pion-pion scattering amplitude. IV: Improved analysis with once subtracted Roy-like equations up to 1100 MeV

R. Garcia-Martin, R. Kaminski, J. R. Pelaez, J. Ruiz de Elvira, and F. J. Yndurain, Phys. Rev.D83, 074004 (2011), arXiv:1102.2183 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011
[80]

Information on the structure of the rho meson from the pion form-factor

S. Leupold, Phys. Rev. D80, 114012 (2009), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 83, 079902 (2011)], arXiv:0907.0100 [hep- ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

Showing first 80 references.