SciPost Submission Page
A model for $F_L$ structure function at low values of $Q^2$ and $x$ - revisited
by Barbara Badelek, Anna Stasto
This is not the latest submitted version.
This Submission thread is now published as
Submission summary
| Authors (as registered SciPost users): | Anna Stasto |
| Submission information | |
|---|---|
| Preprint Link: | scipost_202107_00101v1 (pdf) |
| Date submitted: | 2021-07-31 12:50 |
| Submitted by: | Stasto, Anna |
| Submitted to: | SciPost Physics Proceedings |
| Proceedings issue: | 28th Annual Workshop on Deep-Inelastic Scattering (DIS) and Related Subjects (DIS2021) |
| Ontological classification | |
|---|---|
| Academic field: | Physics |
| Specialties: |
|
| Approach: | Phenomenological |
Abstract
A reanalysis of the model for the longitudinal structure function $F_L (x,Q^2)$ at low $x$ and low $Q^2$ was undertaken, in view of the advent of the EIC. The model includes the kinematic constraint $F_L\sim Q^4$ as $Q^2\rightarrow$ 0. It is based on the photon-gluon fusion mechanism suitably extrapolated to the region of low $Q^2$. Revised model was critically updated, extended to the EIC kinematic region, and e.g. contains new parameterisations of the parton distribution functions.
Current status:
Reports on this Submission
Report #1 by Anonymous (Referee 1) on 2021-8-9 (Invited Report)
- Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:scipost_202107_00101v1, delivered 2021-08-09, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.3361
Strengths
Update of a commonly used model for DIS data correction at low x,Q^2
Weaknesses
As with any model, it has its limitations
Report
This is a short report on the updating of the original Badelek, Kwiecinski and Stasto model for FL from 1996. It is timely in the advent of the EIC. The model makes various assumptions, which result in a decent fit to HERA data but a less convincing fit to SLAC and JLAB data. It is interesting to see the update and to note that the low scale predictions are not much dependent on the PDF input. It would be good to see the further work promised, but this report is adequate for a conference proceedings, provided the inconsistency in Fig2, which I point out in 'requested changes', is addressed.
Requested changes
Fig 2 does not illustrate what it says in the caption. It shows the prediction from CT14LO broken into various contributions. It does not compare this with GRV98LO. Please resolve this.