New QCD Parameter Determinations

In summary, two new papers have made precision determinations of quark masses and the strong force coupling constant using renormalization group summed perturbation theory. The strange quark mass value has more tension than the other parameters with previously estimated values, possibly due to insufficient consideration of non-perturbative effects. The <----> symbols are used to visually distinguish between values from three different sources for each parameter.
  • #1
ohwilleke
Gold Member
2,378
1,366
TL;DR Summary
A pair of new papers make precision determinations of the quark masses and the strong force coupling constant using the renormalization group summed perturbation theory (RGSPT). The values are close to previous estimates, but there is some tension in the strange quark mass determination.
A pair of new papers (here and here) make precision determinations of the quark masses and the strong force coupling constant using the renormalization group summed perturbation theory (RGSPT). For comparison purposes, I have followed each value with the Particle Data Group (PDG) value, and then the 2021 Flavor Lattice Averaging Group (FLAG) value.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

My gut intuition is that the tension is due to insufficient consideration of non-perturbative effects by RGSPT, which turns out to be maximal for the strange quark, but I don't have a well substantiated basis for that hypothesis.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
what does

<---->mean?
 
  • #3
malawi_glenn said:
what does

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

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

If you you separate lines for each entry, it gets harder to read the post as a whole, since it has six more lines.
 
  • #4
tableworksfinetoo
the<---->isgarbage

personallyIthink
thelackof
## \LaTeX ##formationis

evenmore
hurtfulto

eyes
 
  • Haha
Likes ohwilleke and Vanadium 50

Similar threads

  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
8
Replies
271
Views
99K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
11
Views
9K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
47
Views
15K
Back
Top