English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Based on the previous approach, we have investigated a possibility to resolvethe discrepancy between the E710, E811 and CDF at sqrt s =1.8TeV, using theexperimental data of the pp, pbar p total cross sections sigma tot(+) andrho(+)$ ratio up to the SPS experiments (sqrt s = 0.9TeV) as inputs. We predictsigma tot(pbar p) and rho(pbar p) at the Tevatron energy(sqrt s=1.8TeV) assigma tot(pbar p)=75.9+- 1.0mb, rho(pbar p)=0.136+- 0.005.  It turns out that only the data of E710 is consistent with the prediction inthe one standard deviation. So we can conclude that E710 is preferable but wecan exclude neither CDF nor E811 results.Comment: 10 pages, 3 figures, uses ptptex.st

On the Discrepancy of pp, Formulap Total Cross Sections at s = 1.8 TeV between E710, E811 and CDF