6 views

Uploaded by Christos Kallidonis

Talk given at the ETMC2013 meeting

- Uicker Eac
- phmsc
- Quantum UNIVERSE
- A2 Deleuze and Guattari
- Blogs on Applications of Neutrosophics and Multispace in Sciences, by Florentin Smarandache
- physics
- Direct Detection of Dark Matter With MadDM v.2.0 - Mihailo Backovic, Kyoungchul Kong, Antony Martini, Olivier Mattelaer, Gopolang Mohlabeng
- ZUOZ_2_August_2016.pdf
- Quantenoptik-Vorlesung2.pdf
- 1stCourseSheet-PHY526A
- Qft...Utrecht
- Prog Rep
- Test3 06 Solution
- List of Physics Books
- standard model and beyond
- 15 Spherical Coordinates
- EED264-01-FREE
- zeuthen
- Ee 2005 Gate Paper
- Chapter2 Analytic Functions

You are on page 1of 33

Nf =2+1+1

Christos Kallidonis

4 April 2013

ETM Collaboration Meeting

Nicosia, 3-6 April 2013

OUTLINE

o Simulation details

o Overview of calculations

o Interpolating elds

o Results

o Chiral extrapolations xing the lattice spacing

o Lattice artifacts Isospin symmetry breaking

o Comparison between mixed action and unitary setup

o Comparison with other collaborations

o Conclusions Summary

4 April 2013

203 48,

243 48,

323 64,

243 48,

323 64,

323 64,

483 96,

a

0.0040

No. of Confs

308

L = 1.9 fm

m (GeV)

0.3166

m L

2.99

a

0.0040 0.0060 0.0080

No. of Confs

523

479

449

L = 2.2 fm

m (GeV)

0.3074 0.3664 0.4216

m L

3.48

4.15

4.77

a

0.0030 0.0040 0.0050

No. of Confs

185

389

193

L = 3.0 fm

m (GeV)

0.2629 0.3000 0.3351

m L

3.97

4.53

5.05

= 1.95, a = 0.0815(11) fm, r0 /a = 5.710(41)

a

0.0085

No. of Confs 0.4689

L = 2.1 fm

m (GeV)

0.4428

m L

4.66

a

0.0025 0.0035 0.0055

No. of Confs

723

546

4644

L = 2.6 fm

m (GeV)

0.2582 0.3047 0.3752

m L

3.42

4.03

4.97

= 2.10, a = 0.0641(8) fm r0 /a = 7.538(58)

a

0.0045

No. of Confs

952

L = 2.1 fm

m (GeV)

0.3712

m L

3.87

a

0.0015 0.002

0.003

No. of Confs

606

186

113

L = 3.1 fm

m (GeV)

0.2142 0.2471 0.3004

m L

3.35

3.86

4.69

4 April 2013 3

0.0100

501

0.4729

5.35

0.0075

521

0.4357

5.77

abc

5 b

P3/2 =

1

3

1

(6 p

3p2

p + p

6 p) .

4 April 2013

Overview

of

Calculations

espondance, the spin-1/2 interpolating field J

that has overlap only with the excited spin-1/2

0

T

J

=

s

abc

b sc

a uprojector

ed by acting with the spin-1/2

X1/2

P1/2 = g

P3/2

on JX

. In this work we study the mass

Calculation of two-point correlation functions

p = ~0) and therefore the last term of Eq. (15) vanishes. In order to extra

er two-point correlation functions defined by

1

XT

T 1

p (t,

=C

abc

ub sc0 )+ shJ

sb ,utsink

sink

c ) JX (xsource , tsource )i,

aC

p

~ =2~0) s=a CTr(1

X (x

X

3

4

x

t = tsink

tsource

sink

ime reflection

symmetries

of the action

and the anti-periodic

boundary

conditions in the tempora

Anti-periodic

boundary

conditions

in t-direction

+imply

uark fields imply, for zero three-momentum correlators, that CX (t) = CX (T t). Therefore i

+

errors we average

correlators

CX

(t) =

CX (T in the

t) forward and backward direction and define

+

CX (t) = CX

(t)

CX (T

t) .

Nucleon case

timetoseparations

and better

accuracy

in the

masses

from local

are iexpected

have

theground

same

value

large

timeextraction

eive

mass

dierence

of thecorrelators

excited state

with respect

to the

mass in

m

. addition,

In

the sourceoflo

Xthe

Mass

spectrum

Ncorrelators

4mass

April

2013 9in

The sum

over excited

inatthe

eective

given

excited

state from

contaminations,

therefore

yielding

a plateau

regionstates

atboth

earlier

source-sink

f = 2+1+1 where

eses

been

extracted

from

Gaussian

smearing

is applied

the

source

correlation

among

measurem

upper

time

slice

boundary

isis

kept

fixed, and, allowin

in thelocal

extraction

of theare

mass.

Our The

fitting

procedure

to value

extract

as follows:

Xdefined

eaccuracy

masses from

correlators

expected

to have

the

same

in m

the

large

time

is

by

source

location

is chosen

randomly

the

lattice

each

configuration,

orderyields

to decrease

is whole

fitted

to

the for

form

given

in Eq.

(19).instate.

This

an es

in

the eective

mass

given in

Eq.

(18)onisyielding

truncated,

keeping

only

the

first

excited

sthe

excited

state

contaminations,

therefore

a plateau

region

at

earlier

source-sink

ong

Then,

be

extracted

from fit

eective

mass

calculations.

The

mass

a of

constant

out,

increasing

the eective

lower time

sl

ary measurements.

is kept

fixed,

and,

allowing

acan

separation

a procedure

couple

ofistime

slices

the

eective

mass

ccuracy

in the

extraction

ofmasses

the mass.

Our

fitting

tocarried

extract

m

as follows:

X is

contribution

toc1m

state is less th

n Eq.

(19). This

yields

aninestimation

the

parameters

and

= the

mexcited

mexcited

. Then

X due

1 first

X state.

the eective

mass

given

Eq. (17) isfortruncated,

keeping

only

the1to

first

X

2

Eective

mass

m

This

criterion

is

in

most

cases

in

agreement

with

/d.o.

e (t

,ryincreasing

the

lower

time

slice

boundary

(hence

decreasing

the

fitting

range)

until

the

is kept fixed, and, allowing a separation of a couple of time slices the eective mass

eective

mass isfit.made to ensu

the

excited

than50%for

of the careful

statistical

error

of mof

from

constant

P

isanless

examination

X1t the

Eq.first

(18).

This state

yields

estimation

parameters

c1 and

=m

1

1them

X . Then

i

2CX (t)

1+

ci e criterion is not satisfied a

i=1this

ses

in agreement

withtime

/d.o.f.

< 1.

InXthe

cases decreasing

in

which

increasing

the

lower

slice

boundary

(hence

the fitting range)

P

mX

(t)

=

log

=

m

+

log

!where

mXuntil the

mX(18)

is

1

i = mi

e

(t+1)

i

t!1

C

(t

+

1)

1

+

c

e

ective

mass

is

made

to

ensure

that

the

fit

range

is

in

the

plateau

region.

X

i

constant

fit.in this work ha

i=1 of mX from the All

results

2

X

s in agreement with /d.o.f. < 1. In the cases in which this criterion is and

not satisfied

ageneral,

me (t)

mX + log

sink.

In

eect

m

m

is

the

mass

dierence

of

the

excited

state

i

with

respect

to

the

ground

mass

m

.

1

i

X

X

ective mass is made to ensure

range

is

in

the

plateau

region.

that the fit

limit,

but

smearing

suppres

1t

+ c1 ecorrelators where Gaussian smearing is applied both at the source

this work

have been extracted1from

mX

(t)

m

+

log

! mX representative results

(19)

time of

separations

better

X

e

We

the eective

masses

1 (t+1)

eneral, eective

masses

from

are show

expected to have the same

value

in the and

large

timeo

t!1

+ c1 ecorrelators

1 local

The

sum

over

excited

state

1t

+ c1 e

ontherefore

the constant

fits aare

obtained

using

jackknife

analysis.

aring m

suppresses

excited

state1contaminations,

yielding

plateau

region

at (18)

earlier

source-sink

X

(t)

m

+

log

!

m

X

X

The

upper

time

slice

bound

e

1 (t+1)

ns andofbetter

accuracymasses

in the

of thet!1

mass.

to extract

mX is as follows:

esults

the eective

ofextraction

considered

in Our

this fitting

work inprocedure

Fig. 4. The

error bands

1+

cbaryons

1e

fitted

theexcited

form given

excited

states

in the eective

thetofirst

state.

ained

using

jackknife

analysis.mass given in Eq. (18) is truncated, keepingis only

a

constant

fit

is

carried

ou

ults

of

the

eective

masses

of

baryons

considered

in

this

work

in

Fig.

3.

The

error

bands

e slice boundary is kept fixed, and, allowing a separation

of a couple of time

slices the eective mass

mmXX due

to

ned

using

jackknife

analysis.

form

given

in Eq. (19).

This yields an estimation for the parameters c1contribution

and 1 = mto

. Then

1

is in until

mostthe

ca

s carried out, increasing the lower time slice boundary (hence decreasingThis

the criterion

fitting range)

examination

of the

c

mX due to the first

state is1less than 50% of the statistical error careful

of mX from

the constant

fit.

mexcited

m

X

X

2

c

/d.o.f.

mX

s in Criterion:

most cases in1 agreement

< 1. In the cases in which this criterion is not satisfied a

c + m with

2

(m

)

X

X

2 mass

ation of the eective

is made to ensure that the fit range is in the plateau region.

Overview of Calculations

mX

e (t) mX + log

1 + c1 e 1 t

! mX

1 (t+1)

t!1

1 + c1 e

(19)r

We show representative

resentative results of the eective masses of baryons considered in this work in Fig. 4. The error bands

4 April 2013

Interpolating elds

Interpolating elds are constructed such that they have the quantum

Lattice QCD

mesons

numbers

of the baryon Charmed

in interest

4 quark avours

Outline

Lattice QCD

Charmed mesons

Charmed baryons

Baryons (qqq)

U(4) representations

usc

Charmed baryons

+

c

representations

+

20 = 8 6 3 3

SU(4)

20plet of

spin-1/2

baryons

udc c

dsc

0

c

usc

+

c

udc=10 6 3 1

dsc 20

uds

+

c

0

c

uds

Summ

Sum

from

ly Mass

APEspectrum

smearing

to N

the

spatial links that enter the hopping matrix. The parameters 4April

and 2013

n

f = 2+1+1

matrix understood as a matrix in coordinate, color and spin space,

PE smearing at each value of are collected in Table VII.

in why use these parameters?

3

y; U

(t))Interpolating

=

Ui (x, t)elds

+U

ai,baryons,

t) x,y+ai depending

.

(12)

i (x

x,y aiof

spin-3/2

on structure,

can

Interpolating elds

E.

Two-point correlators

aring to the spatial links that enter the hopping matrix. The parameters and n

elds for

theheavier

spin-3/2 spin-1/2

baryons asexcited

defined in

Tables II,IV and VI have overlap with their heavier

states

g

at

each

value

of

are

collected

in

Table

s well. These overlaps can be removed withVII.

the incorporation of a spin-3/2 projector in the

epolating

theseparameters?

spin-1/2 ground states

fields

i=1

Overlaps

are removed

E. Two-point

Jcorrelators

=with

P3/2

JX .

X

3/2

(13)

JX1/2 = P1/2 JX .

ntum,

P3/2

is defined

by

spin-3/2

baryons

as defined

in Tables JII,IV

and

VI

=

P

JX . Projector to 1/2

Projector

to

3/2

X1/2

1/2 of

se overlaps can be removed with the incorporation

a spin-3/2 projector in the

1

1

1

ds

P

=

P

=

P3/2 =

(6 p p + p

6 p) . 1/2

3/2

3

3

3p2

(14)

only 1

field

J

that

has

overlap

with

the

excited

spin-1/2 state can

J

=

P

JX

=

P

J

.

X

X

X1/2

1/2 JX . (13)

3/2

1/2

P

=

P

=

3/2

1/2

3/2

RESULTS

with the spin-1/2 projector P1/2

= g P3/2

on JX

. In this3II.

workLATTICE

we study the

mass spectrum

s defined by ~

rest

frame

(~

p = 0)function

and therefore

the last term

of Eq. (14) vanishes. In order to extract masses

2-point

for spin-3/2

baryons

Isospin

breaking

correlation functions defined by

=

g

P

PA.

1/2

3/2

1 ij 1

1

1

ij

i j

i j

P3/2 =

(6 p p + p

6 p) . C 3 (t) +

(14)

1 (t)

C

(t)

=

C

2

2

2

X

The

twisted

mass

action

breaks

isospin

explicitly

to

O(a

)

and

the

size

of

O(a

3

3p

2

2

1

3 (x

3t = t

= ~0) = Tr (1

hJ

, tsink

)isJX

tsourcethe

)i, splitting

tsource

(15) lim

0)

X (xsink

source ,that

sink

breaking

would

be.

It

expected

is zero

in the continuum

II. LATTICE

RESULTS

4

interpolatingbreaking

fieldxsink

JX1/2

that has

overlap

only splitting

with the between

excited spin-1/2

state can to the same

manifests

itself

as a mass

baryons belonging

P1/2

=

P1/2 =

P3/2

= 1

P3/2 = 3

3

4 April 2013

Interpolating

m =elds

m0

4c m2

++

Projectingto 3/2 and

1/2 for

the eective mass of

1

1

3

3

i j

i j

1

C (t) + 1

C (t) + 3

3

3

32

2

i j

i j

C 1 (t)

C 122 (t)

X

1

1X

3

C 32 (t) = 1 Tr[C] + 1

C 32 (t) = 3Tr[C] + 6

3

6 i6=j

i6=j

i j Cij

i j Cij

ij

ij

t) =

t) =

++

= abc uTa

2

10 g

3

m

9 16f2

ub

uc

D15.48

II.

LATTICE RESULTS

A.

Isospin breaking

2

2

3 action breaks isospin explicitly to O(a ) and the size of O(a )

The twisted mass

X

1

1X

3

would1 be.

Iti jisCijexpected

that the splitting is zero in the continuum lim

C 12breaking

(t) = 1 Tr[C]

C 12 (t) = 3Tr[C] 3

i j Cij

breaking

splitting between baryons belonging to the same m

3 manifests

3 i6=jitself as a mass

i6=j

isospin splitting between baryons belongi

due to lattice artifacts. We begin this

II.

LATTICE of

RESULTS

++

representation

SU

(3),

namely

the

,

, + and 0 shown in Fig. 4.

II. LATTICE RESULTS

As shown in Fig. 4, the masses of the

baryons show consistency within errors

A.

Isospin

breaking

light quarks

and d are in fact degenerate. Therefore, no isospin splitting eects ar

Isospinubreaking

A.

1/2

projection

givesbaryons

a higherofmass

as expected

However, the strange

the octet

representation of SU (3) is a case wher

2

2

pin explicitly

to O(a

the=size

of O(a

determines

how

large this

2 ) and

2 ) terms

is clearly

visible

for the

1.95,

whereas

fordetermines

= 2.1 the

splitting

is decreased as ex

pin explicitly

to O(a

) and

size

of O(a

) terms

how

large this

at the splitting

is zero

inthe

the continuum

limit.

In general,

isospin

symmetry

show results

onin

for the

strange

particles

and

in Fig. 5. A more q

at the splitting

is zero

themasses

continuum

limit.

In general,

isospin

symmetry

tting between

baryons

belonging

to

the

same

multiplets.

Therefore,

it

would

be

degreebaryons

of isospin

breaking

willsame

follow.

tting between

belonging

to the

multiplets. Therefore, it would be

X1/2

1/2

1/2

1/2 =

=P

3/2

1 =

P

= 3/2

3

1

3

4 April 2013

Interpolating

m =elds

m0

4c m2

Projecting

to 3/2 and 1/2 for the eective mass of ++

1 i j

1 i j

1

i j

3

C

(t)

+

3

C (t) + 2

C 12 (t) C 12 (t)

3 2

3

3

3

3

1

1 1X 1X

(t) =

Tr[C]

C 32 (t)

= +Tr[C] + i j Cij

3

3 6

6

i6=j

i6=j

++

= abc uTa

ub

uc

II.

LATTICE RESULTS

i j Cij

ij

i j

ij

)= 1

3

2

10 g

3

m

9 16f2

A.

Isospin breaking

action breaks isospin explicitly to O(a2 ) and the size of O(a2 )

3

Cw/p (t) =

1 3 Tr[C]

1X

breaking

would

be. iItj C

isijexpected

that the splitting is zero in the continuum lim

C 12 (t) = Tr[C]

3 manifests

3

breaking

i6=j itself as a mass splitting between baryons belonging to the same m

of isospin splitting between baryons belongi

I. LATTICE RESULTS

due to lattice artifacts. We begin

this analysis by presenting the eective masses of

0

II.representation

LATTICE RESULTS

of SU (3), namely the ++

, , + and

shown

in

Fig.

4.

A. Isospin breaking

As shown in Fig. 4, the masses of the

baryons show consistency within errors

++ is

A.eective

Isospin

light

quarks

ubreaking

andofd are

in fact degenerate.

no isospin

splitting eects ar

mass

byTherefore,

including

2

licitly to O(a ) and the size of O(a2hardly

) termsaected

determines

how largethe

this3/2-projector

However, the strange baryons of the octet representation of SU (3) is a case wher

plitting is zero in the

continuum limit. In2 general, isospin symmetry

2

is

clearly

visible

forthe

=

whereas

fordetermines

= 2.1

the

pin

explicitly

tobelonging

O(a ) and

size1.95,

ofmultiplets.

O(a

) terms

howsplitting

large thisis decreased as ex

tween

baryons

to

the

same

Therefore,

it

would

be

the results

overlap

of

this

interpolating

eld

with

the excited

tspin

thesplitting

splitting

is zeroon

inthe

the masses

continuum

limit.

In

general,

isospin

symmetry

show

for the

strange

particles

spin-1/2

and

instate

Fig.is5.small

A more q

between

baryons

belonging

to

the

same

isospin

multiplets

between

belonging

to the

same

multiplets.

Therefore,

it would be

degreebaryons

of

breaking

will

follow.

sting

by presenting

theisospin

eective

masses

of the

light

baryons in

the decuplet

9 16f

JX

= P1/2

.

1/2 from

Mass spectrum

Nf J=JX

2+1+1

4 April 2013

3

JX1/2 = P1/2

X .

1

1X

1 i j

1 i j C 32 (t) = Tr[C] +

i j Cij

ij

6

++

C 32 (t) +

C 12 (t) 3

i6=j

J

= abc uTa ub uc

3

3

1

P1/2

= P3/2

= 1

3

*0

= Pto

=

1

P1/2

Projecting

3/2

and

1/2

for

the

eective

mass

of

3/2

3

3

Cw/p (t) = Tr[C]

1

1X

3

0

t) = Tr[C] +

i j Cij

J

= abc sTa ub sc

3

6

1 i j

1

i6=j

) = ij

C 32 (t) + i j C 12 (t)

2

31 i j

31 i j

g

0 1 (t)

2

3

) = ij

C 32 (t) +

C

m

=

m

4c

m

m

55.32,

200

statistics

3 1

3

16f2

1

Cw/p (t) = Tr[C]

0

T

T

3

3

J = p abc 2 sa C ub sc + sa C sb uc

1

1X

32

C 32 (t) = Tr[C] +

i j Cij

3

31

61 X m = m0 4c m2 25 g

m3

i6

=

j

2

3 (t) =

Tr[C] +

27 16f

i j Cij

. C

LATTICE

2

3 RESULTS

6

i6=j

II. LATTICE RESULTS

Interpolating elds

A.

3

Isospin

1 breaking

1X

C 12 (t) =

ij

= m0

imjC

4c m2

2

10 g

m3Isospin breaking

A.

2

9 16f

Tr[C]

3

31 2

31 X

i6

=

j

licitly

to =

O(a Tr[C]

) and the size

of O(a2 ) terms determines

how large this

C 12 (t)

i j Cij

2

2

plitting isThe

zero

In isospin

general,explicitly

isospin symmetry

i6=j action breaks

twisted mass

to

O(a

)

and

the

size

of

O(a

)t

++

TTherefore,

it would

be

tween baryons

belonging

to

the

same

multiplets.

= abcthat

ua the

ub splitting

uc

would

be. It is Jexpected

is

zero in the continuum limit.

II.breaking

LATTICE

RESULTS

spin splitting between baryons belonging to the same isospin multiplets

breaking manifests itself as a mass splitting between baryons belonging to the same mu

by presenting

the eective

the light baryons

in the decuplet

*0 is of

II. LATTICE

RESULTS

ofmasses

at

systematically

using

the 3/2-projector

tomass

examine

first

the degree ofhigher

isospinwhen

splitting

between

baryons belongin

A. eective

Isospin

breaking

+ interesting

0

,

and

shown in Fig. 4.

0

duefor

to interpolating

lattice artifacts.

thissaanalysis

= abc

eldWeJbegin

ub sc by presenting the eective masses of th

++

0

A.

Isospin

breaking

2

2the

representation

of SU

(3),

namely

,

, +how

andlarge

shown in Fig. 4.

pin explicitly

to

O(a

)

and

the

size

of

O(a

)

terms

determines

As shown

4, the masses

thegeneral,

baryons

show

consistency within errors,

t the splitting

is zeroininFig.

the continuum

limit.of In

isospin

symmetry

2

2

in explicitly

to O(a ubelonging

) and0d

the

size

) terms determines

O(a

large

ting

between

baryons

to

theof

same

multiplets.

Therefore,

itno

would

bethis

1 in

light quarks

are

fact

degenerate.

Therefore,how

isospin

splitting eects are

= m

0

m

Massijspectrum

from

N

=

2+1+1

1 i j

1 i j

f

t) =

C 32 (t) +

4c m2

C 12 (t)

g

m3

2

16f

Interpolating elds

++

= abc

4 April 2013

uTa ub uc

JX

= P1/2

JX .

1/2

25 g 2

0

2

3

m =m

4c m

m3

1

1X

0

*0

2

J

= abc sTa ub sc

3

C 2 (t)

= Tr[C] + to 3/2i and

27 16f mass of

Projecting

3

6

i6=j

1

P1/2 =

P3/2 =

3

D15.48

2

10 g 30 1

3

0

2

T

T

X

1

1m

= m

m

p

J

=

2

s

C

u

s

+

s

4c

m

abc

b

c

a

aC

2

C12 (t) = Tr[C]

i j Cij

9

16f

3

13 i j

1 i j

i6=j

ij

t) =

C 32 (t) +

C 12 (t)

3

3

++

T

=

abc ua

LATTICE RESULTS

J

3

1

1X

C 32 (t)A.= Isospin

Tr[C] +breaking

i j Cij

3

6

i6=j

II.

ub

uc

A.

Isospin breaking

2

twisted

mass

action breaks isospin explicitly to O(a ) and the siz

of O(a

pin explicitly to O(a2 ) and the size

) terms

JThe

= 2abc

sTa determines

ub sc how large this

breaking

would Inbe.general,

It is expected

that the splitting is zero in the conti

at the splitting is zero in 3the continuum

limit.

isospin symmetry

X

1baryons belonging

1

breaking

manifests

as a mass

between

to

ttingCbetween

to the same

multiplets.

Therefore,

would

itself

it splitting

be

baryons

belonging

1 (t) =

Tr[C]

C

i

j

ij

2

interesting

to examine

at first

the multiplets

degree

of isospin splitting between baryo

3

3

ee of isospin

splitting

between

baryons

belonging

to the same

isospin

i6=j

to

artifacts.

We Tbegin

analysis

by presenting the eective

analysis by presenting

the eective

of the

light baryons

in thethis

decuplet

lattice

0

1 duemasses

T

++ Introduce

+

0

++

p

J

=

2

s

C

u

s

+

s

C

s

u

abc 4.

of bSU (3),

c

the

b

c ,

,

,

and shown in Fig.

representation

namely

, + and 0 shown in Fig

a

a

II.

baryons show consistency wi

light on

quarks

u andofd

are

fact degenerate.

*0 in

consistent results

the mass

(projection

to 3/2)Therefore, no isospin splittin

LATTICE RESULTS

A.

Isospin breaking

II. the

LATTICE

RESULTS

in analogy with

case, the

1/2 projection of this eld gives an

spin-1/2

pin explicitly to excited

O(a2 ) and

the sizestate

of O(a2 ) terms determines how large this

A. Isospin

breaking

at the splitting is zero in the continuum

limit. In

general, isospin symmetry

s of f and gA are used in the fits, namely f = 0.092419(7)(25) and gA = 1.2695(29), which is common practice

Mass spectrum from N = 2+1+1

4 April 2013

ral fits to lattice data onf the nucleon mass [2527]. The left plot of Fig. 18 shows the fit to the O(p3 ) result of

20) on the nucleon mass. The error band and the errors on the fit parameters are obtained from super-jackknife

sis. As can be seen, the O(p3 ) result provides a very good fit to our lattice data, which in fact confirms that

17

and finite volume eects are small for the -values used. The results on the fit parameter m0N and the lattice

Nucleon

ngs a =1.90

, a =1.95 and a =2.10 are collected in Table XI. The physical spatial lengths of the lattices used in

3

alculation

are obtained

from the

lattice

spacings

of the

their

the pion mass

dependence

forresulting

the nucleon

mass

in HB

PTfitisand

given

byvalues are labeled in Fig. ??.

O(

p

)

HB

PT

(leading

order)

perform the same analysis with higher order chiral corrections to Eq. (20). These O(p4 ) corrections are known

2

n several expansion schemes. In the so0 called small

scale

expansion

(SSE) scheme [27], the -degress of freedom

3gA

2

3

m

=

m

4c

m

m

(20)

N

1

xplicitly included in covariant baryonN PT by introducing

splitting, m

mN , taking O( /mN ) O(m /mN ). In SSE the nucleon mass is given by

Chiral extrapolations

) SSE

Scheme

O(atpthe

nucleon mass

chiral limit and together with c1 are treated as fit parameters.

leon in HB PT was first derived

in Ref. [22] and 3successfully

lattice

data

are also

in

mdiscussed

2

2

2

2

gA

+ 3c2A fitted

3g

3gA

A + 10cA

0

2

3

4

4

4

mN This

= mNresult

4c1 m

m HB

4E1PT

( )m

mand

m log

23, 24].

isthe32f

same

with

dimensional

infra-red

regularization

as well as

2 in

64 2 f2 m0N

32 2 f2 m0N

included.

Itis also the same

Lorentz-invariant formulation

inmmanifestly

c

3

3

2 fix the lattice

2

A

gularization. Therefore

this result

as

1 + we0 will use

m2 +

mto

log

+ spacing

m2using

R (mthe

) nucleon mass (21)

2

2

3

f

2m

4

2

2

N

lso provide a non-trivial

check

of our lattice formulation. The lattice spacings a =1.90 , a =1.95 and

dered

independent

combined

fit of our data atq = 1.90,

= 1.95

fit parameters in a

as additional

p

p

2

1 fitted curve passes through the physical

2 costhe

2

fit2 so that

pointmby+fixing

the

c1 , .

e constrain

R (m

) = ourm

for m > and R (m

)=

m2 log

1 value

for mof

<

m

m2

spacings

are determined

mass

the the

physical

point asE1the

input. The

physical

ake

the cut-o

scale = 1 using

GeV, the

c1 =nucleon

1.127 [27]

andat

treat

counter-term

as only

an additional

fit parameter.

3

gAtheare

used

in the

fits,the

namely

f values

= 0.092419(7)(25)

and corresponding

gA = 1.2695(29),

which

is on

common

practice

O(p

) case

we use

physical

of gA and f . The

plot is

shown

the right

panel of

3

tticeThe

data

onband

the nucleon

[2527].

Thefitleft

plot of Fig.

18 shows

thesuper-jackknife

fit to the O(panalysis.

) result One

of

18.

error

as well asmass

the errors

on the

parameters

are obtained

using

mass.

ee that

this formulation

a good

description

of the

lattice data as

and yields

of the lattice

ucleon

The errorprovides

band and

the errors

on the

fitparameters

arewell

obtained

fromvalues

super-jackknife

0

3

ngs

and mthe

consistent

with those

obtained

in to

O(pour

) oflattice

HB PT.

Thewhich

resulting

parameters

of this

be

seen,

O(p3are

) result

provides

a very

good fit

data,

in fact

confirms

thatfit

N which

0

iven

in Table XI.

volume

-values used. The

results on the fit parameter

mN and the lattice

eects are small for the

a =1.95

and a =2.10 are collected

in Table XI. The

physical spatial lengths of

the lattices used in

re obtained

from the resulting

lattice spacings of thefit and their values are labeled

in Fig. ??.

chiral

to

e sameanalysis

with higher

order

corrections

Eq. (20).

These

O(p4 ) corrections

are known

pansion schemes. In the so

called small scale expansion (SSE) scheme [27],

the -degress of freedom

4 April 2013

f

mined that the tuning

of the bare strange quark mass in the mixed action approach

the unitary setup, we perform a similar analysis as for the nucleon mass to fix the

s as input. This could provide a cross-check of the results when using the nucleon

Omega

tuning

of the strange

quark mass is optimal. In the case of the , the leading one-loo

2

p ) HB PT (leading order)

O(form

the simple

Chiral extrapolations

m = m0

4c1 m2

limit and as in the nucleon mass case, the value of c1 is kept fi

es through the physical point. In Fig. 19 we show the fit on the result of Eq. (22) as a

parameters of this fit in Table XII. The physical spatial length

lattice spacings of the fit and their values are shown in Fig. 19.

the results from the

nucleon and the , the lattice spacings a =1.95 and a =2.10 sh

0 the value is larger in the case and its outside error bars, when compared to the

. To this end, we conclude that fixing the lattice spacing using the mass is not as

assumptions which

in principle may not be accurate. Su

kaon mass, which is used as input

mass from the simulated

ning.

4 April 2013

Nucleon results

O(p

O(p33)) HB

HB PT

PT

O(p

O(p44)) SSE

SSE

aa =1.90

=1.90

0.0929(14)

0.0929(14)

0.0967(19)

0.0967(19)

a =1.95

=1.95

0.0815(11)

0.0854(17)

E VIII.

LE

VIII. Fit

Fit parameters

parameters aa =1.90

a =1.95

=1.90,, a

=1.95, a

sing the

mass.

using

the nucleon

nucleon

mass. for Lm > 3.5

analysis

=2.10

=2.10

a =2.10

=2.10

0.0641(8)

0.0668(12)

m0N

0.8681(15)

0.8826(48)

E1 ( )

-2.5849(2530)

0

in fm, m0N

N in GeV and E1 ( ) in GeV

/d.o.f

1.4314

0.9303

2

a =1.90

a =1.95

a =2.10

m0N

E1 ( )

/d.o.f

comparing3 the results from the nucleon and the , the lattice spacings a =1.95 and a =2.10 show consiste

) HB

PT is0.0916(17)

0.0805(14)

0.0631(11)

0.8667(15)

1.8290

for =O(p

1.90

the

value

larger

in

the

case

and

its

outside

error

bars,

when

compared

to

the

value extra

4

O(p

)

SSE

0.0978(27)

0.0866(26)

0.0678(19)

0.8859(72)

-2.7476(3732)

1.2580

the nucleon. To this end, we conclude that fixing the lattice spacing using the mass is not as reliable as u

ucleon, since the case encompasses assumptions which in principle may not be accurate. Such assumpt

2

mass

as approach

a functionand

of munitary

=

1.90,deviations,

= 1.95 and

= as

2.10

in SU(2) of

HBthePT.

The physical

mass

deThe

mixed

action

setup

as well

deviations

physical

kaon mass

fromi

for

0

3

3

LE

IX.kaon

Fit

parameters

a is

, a to

, a =2.10

fm, mN quark

in GeVtuning.

and E1 ( ) in GeV from O(p ) HB PT and O

black

asterisk.

=1.90

=1.95

ated

mass, which

used

perform

theinstrange

mass.

Omega

results

a =1.95

a =2.10

, the lattice

spacings am=1.95

and a/d.o.f

=2.10 show consiste

SU(2)

HB

PT in

0.1018(5)

0.0660(4)

1.6673(16)

2.0925

for = 1.90 the

value

is larger

the case 0.0857(4)

and its outside

error bars,

when compared

to the value extra

the nucleon. To this end, we conclude that fixing the lattice spacing using the mass is not as reliable as u

ucleon, since the case encompasses assumptions which in principle may not be accurate. Such assumpt

ABLE

IX.action

Fit parameters

, a =1.95

, a =2.10

in fm and

m0 as

in deviations

GeV from SU(2)

PT using

the from

mas

de mixed

approachaand

unitary

setup

deviations,

as well

of the HB

physical

kaon mass

=1.90

4 April 2013

Twisted mass action breaks isospin symmetry explicitly to O(a 2 )

Size of O(a 2 ) terms determine how large the breaking will be

It is expected to be zero in the continuum limit

Manifests itself as mass splitting between baryons belonging to the

same isospin multiplets due to lattice artifacts

exert any degree of isospin symmetry breaking

4 April 2013

baryons

baryons

(u and d quarks are degenerate)

D15.48

B55.32

is clearly visible for = 1.95, whereas for = 2.1 the splitting is decreased as expected. To de

Massresults

spectrum

4 April 2013 de

show

onfrom

the Nmasses

for the strange particles and in Fig. 6. A more quantitative

f = 2+1+1

degree of isospin breaking will follow.

Strange baryons

splitting between baryons belonging

to same isospin multiplets

Circles: B55.32

Squares: D15.48

FIG.

6. Left: Eective mass of + , 0 and for = 1.95,al = 0.0055 (circles) and = 2.1,al = 0.00

Eective mass of 0 and for = 1.95,a = 0.0055 (circles), = 1.95,al = 0.0035 (triangles) and

Strange spin-3/2 states

(squares).

It is of interest to notice that the same behaviour is not observed for the corresponding spin-3

No isospin

splitting

states and . Here, the splitting eect is not apparent within

errors, neither

for = 1.95, no

is shown in Fig. 7, where we plot the eective masses of the strange spin-3/2 baryons of the de

need some

help for commenting on this

Circles: B55.32

Squares: D15.48

We continue

our analysis by studying the isospin breaking on the charm baryons. To this end

for

baryons,

light quarks and a charm quark as we

thecharm

c

containing

, +

and 0

= 1.95,al = 0.0055 (circles) and = 2.1,al =

c

c

c for

Mass spectrum from Lattice

QCD

4 April 2013

+

0

Right: Eective mass of c and c for = 1.95,al = 0.0055 (circles), = 1.95,al = 0.0035 (triangles)

0.0015 (squares).

Charm c resonance states

circles), D15.48

= 1.95,al = 0.0035 (triangles) and = 2.1,al =

for spin-1/2 c resonance states

00

00

FIG. 10. Left: Eective mass of 0+

= 2.1,al = 0.0015. Right: Eective mass of 0+

c and c for

c and c

(circles), = 1.95,al = 0.0035 (triangles)

0.0055

and = 1.95,al = 0.0025 (squares).

= 1.95 simulations, where we have three pion masses. As Fig. 12 suggests, the results for diere

the

same lattice spacings are consistent. Therefore, we conclude that the isospin breaking does n

pion mass within our statistical accuracy.

Circles: B55.32

Triangles: B35.32

Squares: B25.32

4 April 2013

Charm cc baryons

Circles: B55.32

Triangles: B35.32

Squares: D15.48

baryons

13

Circles: B55.32

++

+

+

B35.32

FIG. 11. Triangles:

Eective

mass of cc , cc (left) and

++

cc , cc (right) for

Squares: D15.48

(triangles)

and = 2.1,al = 0.0015 (squares).

4 April 2013

Isospin splitting eects are small and reduce for smaller values of

the lattice spacing for spin-1/2 baryons

consistent with zero for spin-3/2 baryons (as for the baryons)

same

ThisLattice

indicates

that when performing

Massparameters.

spectrum from

QCD

order to remove excited states contaminations and noise

in earlier time slices.

-0.5

4 April 2013

2

10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26

t/a

B35.32

B55.32

1.6

mixed action

unitary

1.6

1.4

unitary

1.4

B35.32

B55.32

1.2

eff

1.2

1

am

am eff

mixed action

0.8

1

0.8

0.6

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.2

0.2

10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26

t/a

0

2

10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26

t/a

A40.32

1.6

setups

RAPOLATION

1.4

1.2

am eff

n mass

0.8

mixed action

unitary

Statistics

= 1.95, a = 0.0035. Lower

left: = 1.95, a = 0.0055. Lo

plateau region

0.6

tion theory

in an infinite volume to extrapolate to the

yon chiral

0.4 perturbation theory ( PT) [21]. The leading

B35.32

B55.32

Unitary Setup

459

306

546

4464

4 April 2013

Nucleon

S. Aoki et. al. (PACS-CS), Phys. Rev. D 79, 034503 (2009), 0807.1661

S. Durr et. al., Science 322, 1224 (2008)

A. Walker-Loud, H.-W.Lin, D. Richards R. Edwards, M. Engelhardt, et. al., Phys.Rev. D 79, 054502 (2009), 0806.4549

1

Mass spectrum from Nf = 2+1+1 C

(t)

=

Tr[C]

w/p

4 April 2013

baryon

m =

m0

4c m2

2

g

3

m

16f2

=m

4c

m2

25 g 2

3

m

27 16f2

m =

m0

4c m2

2

10 g

3

m

9 16f2

II.

LATTICE RESULTS

A.

Isospin breaking

the size

determines

how large

action breaks isospinexplicitly

to O(a2 ) and

of O(a2 ) terms

It is expected that the splitting is zero in the

limit. In general, isospin symm

continuum

self as a mass splitting between baryons belonging to the same multiplets. Therefore, it would

S. Aoki

al. (PACS-CS),

Rev. Dsplitting

79, 034503between

(2009), 0807.1661

ne at

firstet.the

degree ofPhys.

isospin

baryons belonging to the same isospin multip

S. Durr et. al., Science 322, 1224 (2008)

ts. A.We

begin this analysis

by presenting

the eective masses of the light baryons in the decu

Walker-Loud, H.-W.Lin,

++ D. Richards

+ R. Edwards,

0 M. Engelhardt, et. al., Phys.Rev. D 79, 054502 (2009), 0806.4549

(3), namely the

,

,

and

shown in Fig. 4.

m =

m0

4c m2

2

g

3

m

16f2

4 April 2013

baryon

m =m

4c

m2

25 g 2

m3

2

27 16f

m =

m0

4c m2

2

10 g

3

m

9 16f2

II.

LATTICE RESULTS

A.

Isospin breaking

s action breaks isospin explicitly to O(a2 ) and the size of O(a ) terms determines how larg

It is expected

that the splitting is zero in the continuum limit.

In general, isospin sym

Therefore, it wo

ne at first the

degree of isospin splitting between baryons belonging to the same isospin mul

cts. We begin this analysis by presenting the eective masses of the light baryons in the de

, + and 0 shown

in Fig.

4.

4,S.the

of the Phys.baryons

show (2009),

consistency

Aokimasses

et. al. (PACS-CS),

Rev. D 79, 034503

0807.1661within errors, as one would expect, sin

d are

in fact

Therefore,

no isospin splitting eects are observed for the light ba

S. Durr

et. al.,degenerate.

Science 322, 1224

(2008)

A. baryons

Walker-Loud,

D. Richards

R. Edwards, M.

Phys.Rev.

D 79,

054502

(2009), of

0806.4549

ange

ofH.-W.Lin,

the octet

representation

of Engelhardt,

SU (3) iset.aal.,

case

where

some

degree

isospin sp

2+1+1

= m0

4c

m2

25 g 2

3

m

27 16f2

4 April 2013

* baryon

m =

m0

4c m2

2

10 g

3

m

9 16f2

II.

LATTICE RESULTS

A.

Isospin breaking

ass action breaks isospin explicitly to O(a2 ) and the size of O(a2 ) terms determines how larg

that the splitting is zero in the continuum

e. It is expected

limit. In general, isospin sym

s itself as a mass

same multiplets. Therefore, it wo

splitting between baryons belonging to the

mine at first the degree of isospin splitting between baryons

belonging to the same isospin mul

facts. We begin

this analysis by presenting the eective masses

of the light baryons in the de

, + and 0 shown in Fig. 4.

baryons show consistency within errors,

as one would expect, sin

d d are in fact

degenerate. Therefore, no isospin splitting eects are observed for the light ba

octet representation

some degree

of isospin sp

range baryons of the

of SU (3)

is a case where

is decreased

as expected. To demonstrate th

he masses for the strange particles and in Fig. 5. A more quantitative determination

S. Aoki et.

al. (PACS-CS),

breaking

will

follow. Phys. Rev. D 79, 034503 (2009), 0807.1661

Durr et. that

al., Science

1224

(2008)

toS.notice

the 322,

same

behaviour

is not observed for the corresponding spin-3/2 strange b

A. Walker-Loud, H.-W.Lin, D. Richards R. Edwards, M. Engelhardt, et. al., Phys.Rev. D 79, 054502 (2009), 0806.4549

Here, the splitting eect is not apparent within errors, neither for = 1.95, nor for = 2.1

4 April 2013

S. Aoki et. al. (PACS-CS), Phys. Rev. D 79, 034503 (2009), 0807.1661

S. Durr et. al., Science 322, 1224 (2008)

A. Walker-Loud, H.-W.Lin, D. Richards R. Edwards, M. Engelhardt, et. al., Phys.Rev. D 79, 054502 (2009), 0806.4549

4 April 2013

SUMMARY

o Nucleon chiral extrapolations are a reliable way of xing the lattice

spacing rather than the Omega

o Isospin breaking is present only for strange spin-1/2 baryons

o It is under control and vanishes in the continuum limit

o Mixed Action and Unitary setup results are consistent

o the tuning of the strange and charm quark masses is done correctly

o TM results have overall agreement with results from other

collaborations

spectrum

= 2+1+1

Mass

in Fig.

6. A from

moreNfquantitative

determination of the

Strange baryons

11

= 1.95,a

= 2.1,a = 0.0015

l = 0.0035 (triangles) and

within errors, neither for = 1.95, nor for = 2.1. This

he strange

spin-3/2 baryons of the decuplet. NOTE: I

ight quarksand

a charm

well

as the

charm

quark

as

c

4 April 2013

4 April 2013

baryons, which containf a light, a strange and a charm quark. As before, we plot results for = 1.9

compare

dierent lattice spacings.

between

baryons

c

++

c ,

+

0

Eective

mass of c and c for

(squares).

+

c

and

= 1.95,al = 0.0055 (circles) and = 2.1,al = 0.0015

c for

= 1.95,a

= 1.95,al = 0.0035 (triangles) and =

l = 0.0055 (circles),

the left plot of Fig. 8 suggests, no isospin splitting among the three states of the charm bar

As

c

both for = 1.95 and = 2.1, which is in contrast with the corresponding strange states as w

above.

On the other hand, this eect, although in a smaller extent, is still present on the c baryon

can be seen from the right plot of Fig. 8. As expected, one can see from Fig. 9 that neither of the t

and the two c states show this eect for both = 1.95 and = 2.1. All these results could have

conclusion

thatthe isospin

splitting

is a common cut-o eect between the strange spin-1/2 baryons

0

same multiplets. What comes

in contrast to this is the behaviour of the charm c resonance states

. As before, we plot results for = 1.95 and

Charm c states

Circles: B55.32

Triangles: B35.32

Squares: D15.48

4 April 2013

= 2.1 to

baryons

Circles: B55.32

Triangles: B35.32

0.0055 (circles)

and

Squares: D15.48

=

1.95,al = 0.0035

12

Right:

(triangles) and = 2.1,a

l = 0.0015

ng the

c

he corresponding strange states as we have discussed

extent, is still present on the c baryons for = 1.95 as

an see from Fig. 9 that neither of the three spin-3/2 c

d = 2.1. All these results could have led to a general

t between

the strange

spin-1/2

belonging

baryons

to

the

0

viour of the charm c resonance

states. Despite having

However

4 April 2013

Interpolating elds

Local interpolating elds are not optimal for suppressing excited state

contributions

entering the hopping matrix

Smearing parameters

APE

Gaussian

= 1.90

= 1.95

= 2.10

all

all

D15.48

rest

20

20

50

20

0.5

0.5

0.5

0.5

50

50

110

50

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4 April 2013

Simulation details

values at 1.90, 1.95 and 2.10

Help check lattice artifacts

Determination of lattice spacing

Volume eects at similar pion masses

Compare with corresponding mixed action setup results

- Uicker EacUploaded byLarbi Elbakkali
- phmscUploaded bylol
- Quantum UNIVERSEUploaded byvineetya
- A2 Deleuze and GuattariUploaded bysunny993
- Blogs on Applications of Neutrosophics and Multispace in Sciences, by Florentin SmarandacheUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- physicsUploaded byMahantesh Chikkadesai
- Direct Detection of Dark Matter With MadDM v.2.0 - Mihailo Backovic, Kyoungchul Kong, Antony Martini, Olivier Mattelaer, Gopolang MohlabengUploaded bymoon53
- ZUOZ_2_August_2016.pdfUploaded byManzoor ali
- Quantenoptik-Vorlesung2.pdfUploaded byErinSutton
- 1stCourseSheet-PHY526AUploaded byVinayak Raj
- Qft...UtrechtUploaded byManu Sharma
- Prog RepUploaded byCerenGüzelgün
- Test3 06 SolutionUploaded bysharath
- List of Physics BooksUploaded byIke Mal
- standard model and beyondUploaded byFarhad Hossain
- 15 Spherical CoordinatesUploaded byRaul Fraul
- EED264-01-FREEUploaded byVoichita Todor
- zeuthenUploaded byberker_yurtseven
- Ee 2005 Gate PaperUploaded bymass1984
- Chapter2 Analytic FunctionsUploaded byamolwade
- Physical Scs-II(A).pdfUploaded bySakti Prasad Barik
- 1607.00079Uploaded byYash Nora
- The Electro-Strong InteractionUploaded byGeorge Rajna
- Assign 1Uploaded byKhan Mohd Saalim
- MIT16_30F10_lec06Uploaded byMoHsin Kh
- Tristan QuestionUploaded bytrevorscheopner
- P. L. Iafelice and G. P. Vacca- Colored Spin Systems, BKP Evolution and finite Nc effectsUploaded bySteam29
- Kontrol PID ok.docxUploaded byMuhammad ihsan
- S. V. Astashkin- Rademacher Chaos in Symmetric SpacesUploaded byJutyyy
- Tutorial 1+(Pde)Uploaded byNuyu5318

- Talk Lattice2014Uploaded byChristos Kallidonis
- 1412.0925Uploaded byChristos Kallidonis
- 1104.1600Uploaded byChristos Kallidonis
- 1303.6818Uploaded byChristos Kallidonis
- talk_bonnUploaded byChristos Kallidonis
- 1201.0021Uploaded byChristos Kallidonis
- 1303.5979Uploaded byChristos Kallidonis
- 1404.6355Uploaded byChristos Kallidonis
- Master FinalUploaded byChristos Kallidonis
- 1312.2874Uploaded byChristos Kallidonis
- 1411.6842Uploaded byChristos Kallidonis
- 1411.3494Uploaded byChristos Kallidonis
- 1406.4310Uploaded byChristos Kallidonis

- PE Yellow Gas_webUploaded byGavin Kwan
- Iapg - Pinpoint Completion Technology in the Vaca Muerta Shale a Case Study (Presentation)_v3Uploaded byLuis M. Justiniano
- PuenteUploaded byIng Manolo Hernandez
- syllabusUploaded byRoxanna Levine
- UTP ETP Sample Progress ReportUploaded byAfif Izwan
- radiol.2015154026Uploaded byMusculus Popliteus
- Linear Algebra ReviewUploaded bywilltuna
- MeasurIT KTek KM26 Dual Chamber Comparison 0808Uploaded bycwiejkowska
- 4.99 SHELL99 Linear Layered Structural Shell (UP19980821Uploaded byRavi Khandelwal
- 4420_1F_que_20100616Uploaded bySakib Ex-rcc
- ICP-MSUploaded byErnesto Zapata
- Separation of Peptides Using accucore HPLC columnUploaded byjaquesbio
- BAA1312 - CIVIL ENGINEERING MATERIALS 11213.pdfUploaded byLyana Mushiwan
- A Science-based Approach to Selecting Air FiltersUploaded byMdava
- Factsheet SGT-700 EnUploaded byAzril Dahari
- Induction MotorUploaded byMalik Shahzeb Ali
- Barral Et Al. 2010Uploaded byBismoy Roy Chowdhury
- Advances in Heterogeneous Photocatalytic Degradation of PhenolUploaded byArbab Tufail
- Formation of soap foaming capacity of soapUploaded byRay Kumar
- carboard crane technical report-sohmer oliver yifru stevens-7Uploaded byapi-390536618
- Analysis and Design of Steel Framed Buildings With and Without Steel Plate Shear WallsUploaded bycjm
- M-120 Material Data Sheets for Structural Steel Edition 5Uploaded byvlong3003
- IPB 1.pdfUploaded byNikhil Mathew
- Watlow ManualUploaded byLance Sollohub
- NSTSE Class 7 Solved Paper 2010Uploaded byKrishna Jonnavithula
- Hu 2514081412Uploaded byAnonymous 7VPPkWS8O
- Scientific Notation WorksheetsUploaded byAlejandro Aguilar
- ase_1Uploaded byMarko Šimić
- MTech Computational Techniques - BrochureUploaded byapi-3751855
- blended learning lessons for 1 weekUploaded byapi-323130400