Probing hard/soft factorization via beam-spin asymmetry in exclusive pion electroproduction from the proton
Le résumé fourni par la source
Deep exclusive meson production (DEMP) reactions, such as p(e⃗ , e'π⁺)n, provide opportunities to study the three-dimensional structure of the nucleon through differential cross section and beam-and target spin asymmetry measurements. This work aims to probe the onset of the hard/soft factorization regime through the exclusive p (e⃗, e'π⁺)n reaction, as measured in the KaonLT experiment at Jefferson Lab Hall C. A 10.6 GeV Longitudinally polarized electron beam was incident on an unpolarized liquid hydrogen target, and the scattered electron and produced meson were detected in two magnetic focusing spectrometers, enabling precision cross section measurements. The cross section ratio σLT' /σ0 was extracted from the beam-spin asymmetry ALU. The t-dependence of σLT' /σ0 was determined at fixed Q² and XB over a range of kinematics from 2 < Q² < 6 GeV² above the resonance region (W > 2 GeV). Furthermore, these data are combined with recent results from CLAS/CLAS12 to determine the Q²-dependence of σLT'/σ0 at two (ᵡB, t) settings. This was fairly flat, with Q² not having a measurable effect on the value of σLT'/σ0 in the range explored. Results are compared to predictions from the generalized parton distribution (GPD) formalism, which relies explicitly on hard/soft factorization, and Regge formalism. The Regge models better predict σLT'/σ0, which suggests that the factorization regime is not yet reached.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Probing hard/soft factorization via beam-spin asymmetry in exclusive pion electroproduction from the proton
- Date Crossref
- 01/01/2026
- Éditeur
- Elsevier BV
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.