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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Traditionally, there has been a method to extract the charge radius of ahadron based on the fits of its form factor with some model assumptions. Incontrast, a completely different method has been proposed, which does notdepend on the models. In this report, we explore several improvements to thismodel-independent method for analyzing the pion charge radius. Furthermore, wecompare the results of the pion charge radius obtained from $N_{f}=2+1$ latticeQCD data at $m_{\pi}=0.51$ GeV using the three different methods: thetraditional model-dependent method, the original model-independent method, andour improved model-independent method. In this comparison, we take into accountsystematic errors estimated in each analysis.

Comparison with model-independent and dependent analyses for pion charge radius