Refine
Document Type
- Article (5)
Language
- English (5)
Has Fulltext
- yes (5)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (5)
Keywords
- BESIII (2)
- ADHD (1)
- Brain (1)
- Branching fractions (1)
- Course (1)
- Cross section measurements (1)
- D0 and D+ mesons (1)
- Diagnosis (1)
- Elastic scattering (1)
- Genetics (1)
- Hadronic cross section (1)
- Hadronic decays (1)
- Hadrons (1)
- Initial state radiation (1)
- Muon anomaly (1)
- Outcome (1)
- Pion form factor (1)
- Polarization (1)
- Treatment (1)
- Y (4260) (1)
Institute
We report a high precision measurement of the transverse single spin asymmetry AN at the center of mass energy √s=200 GeV in elastic proton–proton scattering by the STAR experiment at RHIC. The AN was measured in the four-momentum transfer squared t range 0.003⩽|t|⩽0.035 (GeV/c)2, the region of a significant interference between the electromagnetic and hadronic scattering amplitudes. The measured values of AN and its t-dependence are consistent with a vanishing hadronic spin-flip amplitude, thus providing strong constraints on the ratio of the single spin-flip to the non-flip amplitudes. Since the hadronic amplitude is dominated by the Pomeron amplitude at this √s, we conclude that this measurement addresses the question about the presence of a hadronic spin flip due to the Pomeron exchange in polarized proton–proton elastic scattering.
Measurements of cross section of e⁺e⁻ → pp¯π⁰ at center-of-mass energies between 4.008 and 4.600 GeV
(2017)
Based on e+e− annihilation data samples collected with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider at 13 center-of-mass energies from 4.008 to 4.600 GeV, measurements of the Born cross section of e+e− → pp¯π0 are performed. No significant resonant structure is observed in the measured energy dependence of the cross section. The upper limit on the Born cross section of e+e− → Y (4260) → pp¯π0 at the 90% C.L. is determined to be 0.01 pb. The upper limit on the ratio of the branching fractions B(Y (4260)→pp¯π0) B(Y (4260)→π+π− J/ψ) at the 90% C.L. is determined to be 0.02%.
By analyzing 2.93 fb−1 of data taken at the ψ(3770) resonance peak with the BESIII detector, we measure the branching fractions for the hadronic decays D+ → K0S K0S K +, D+ → K0S K0Sπ+, D0 → K0S K0S and D0 → K0S K0S K0S . They are determined to be B(D+ → K0S K0S K +) = (2.54 ± 0.05stat. ± 0.12sys.) × 10−3, B(D+ → K0S K0Sπ+) = (2.70 ± 0.05stat. ± 0.12sys.) × 10−3, B(D0 → K0S K0S ) = (1.67 ± 0.11stat. ± 0.11sys.) × 10−4 and B(D0 → K0S K0S K0S ) = (7.21 ± 0.33stat. ± 0.44sys.) × 10−4, where the second one is measured for the first time and the others are measured with significantly improved precision over the previous measurements.
Measurement of the e+e−→π+π− cross section between 600 and 900 MeV using initial state radiation
(2016)
We extract the e+e− →π+π− cross section in the energy range between 600 and 900 MeV, exploiting the method of initial state radiation. A data set with an integrated luminosity of 2.93 fb−1 taken at a center-of-mass energy of 3.773 GeV with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider is used. The cross section is measured with a systematic uncertainty of 0.9%. We extract the pion form factor |Fπ|2 as well as the contribution of the measured cross section to the leading-order hadronic vacuum polarization contribution to (g−2)μ. We find this value to be aππ,LO μ (600–900 MeV) = (368.2 ±2.5stat±3.3sys) ·10−10, which is between the corresponding values using the BaBar or KLOE data.
Background: Misconceptions about ADHD stigmatize affected people, reduce credibility of providers, and prevent/delay treatment. To challenge misconceptions, we curated findings with strong evidence base. Methods: We reviewed studies with more than 2000 participants or meta-analyses from five or more studies or 2000 or more participants. We excluded meta-analyses that did not assess publication bias, except for meta-analyses of prevalence. For network meta-analyses we required comparison adjusted funnel plots. We excluded treatment studies with waiting-list or treatment as usual controls. From this literature, we extracted evidence-based assertions about the disorder. Results: We generated 208 empirically supported statements about ADHD. The status of the included statements as empirically supported is approved by 80 authors from 27 countries and 6 continents. The contents of the manuscript are endorsed by 366 people who have read this document and agree with its contents. Conclusions: Many findings in ADHD are supported by meta-analysis. These allow for firm statements about the nature, course, outcome causes, and treatments for disorders that are useful for reducing misconceptions and stigma.