Pollard, D.L.
SIG/SIG
Max results
Sort by Reverse order

Showing 5 of 35 results

Date

rivet Analysis
Production and decay of the D(s1)+ (2536)

The CLEO collaboration Alexander, James P. ; Bebek, C. ; Berkelman, Karl ; et al.
Phys.Lett.B 303 (1993) 377-384, 1993.
Inspire Record 352823 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.47264

Using the CLEO-II detector at CESR, we have observed the D s 1 (2536) + in the decay modes D s1 + →D ∗0 K + and D ∗+ K S + , and measured its fragmentation and production ratios. Using the helicity angle distribution of the daugter D ∗0 , we obtain new evidence for the assignment of 1 + for the spin and parity of the D s 1 + . We also set upper limits on the decays D s1 + →D s ∗+ λ, D 0 K + and D + K s 0 .

2 data tables
Table 1

No description provided.

Table 2

No description provided.


$\Sigma(c$)++ and $\Sigma(c$)0 Production From $e^+ e^-$ Annihilation in the $\Upsilon$ Energy Region

The CLEO collaboration Bowcock, T.J.V. ; Kinoshita, K. ; Pipkin, F.M. ; et al.
Phys.Rev.Lett. 62 (1989) 1240, 1989.
Inspire Record 25467 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.47269

We have observed Σc++ and Σc0 baryons in nonresonant e+e− interactions through their decays to Λc+π± using the CLEO detector. The mass difference M(Σc++)-M(Λc+) is measured to be 167.8±0.4±0.3 MeV; for M(Σc0)-M(Λc+) we find 167.9±0.5±0.3 MeV. Σc decay accounts for (18±3±5)% of Λc+ production.

2 data tables
Table 1

The cross section ratio is multiplied by a factor of 1.5 to account for theunobserved SIGMA/C(2455)+.

Table 2

No description provided.


rivet Analysis
Investigation of the Total Charm Pair Cross-section in Nonresonant $e^+ e^-$ Annihilations at $\sqrt{s}=10$.5-{GeV}

The CLEO collaboration Bowcock, T.J.V. ; Kinoshita, K. ; Pipkin, F.M. ; et al.
Phys.Rev.D 38 (1988) 2679, 1988.
Inspire Record 23509 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.9269

We report results from two new methods for measuring the total production of charmed particles in nonresonant e+e− annihilations at √s =10.5 GeV. The rate for detection of events containing two reconstructed charmed mesons relative to that for events containing one is used to extract information about total charm production independent of decay branching fractions. The value of ΔRcc¯, the total charm-pair cross section normalized to the pointlike μ-pair cross section, is found to be 1.13−0.13+0.17±0.09, under an assumption of limited particle correlations. In an independent analysis the inclusive cross section for e+e−→qq¯→e±X is measured to be 0.293±0.017±0.017 nb. Using measured relative production rates and semileptonic branching fractions of D0 and D+ mesons and estimates of these quantities for Ds and Λc, this is found to correspond to ΔRcc¯=2.07±0.12±0.26. These two measurements are discussed in the context of measurements made by reconstruction of exclusive hadronic decay modes and of theoretical expectations.

3 data tables
Table 1

Charm quarks production cross section (C=CQCQBQR) evaluated from tagged events.

Table 2

Results using method 1).

Table 3

Results using method 2).


Precision Comparison of Inelastic electron and Positron Scattering from Hydrogen

Fancher, D.L. ; Caldwell, David O. ; Cumalat, John P. ; et al.
Phys.Rev.Lett. 37 (1976) 1323, 1976.
Inspire Record 4108 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.21910

Using 13.5-GeV beams at Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, we have compared electron and positron inelastic scattering over the range 1.2<|q2|<3.3 (GeV/c)2, 2<ν<9.5 GeV for the four-momentum and energy transfers, respectively. We find the ratio of the cross sections to be e+e−=1.0027±0.0035 (including statistical and systematic effects), with no significant dependence on q2 or ν. This result has appreciably smaller errors than previous attempts to find two-photon-exchange effects in electron or muon scattering.

1 data table
Table 1

No description provided.


Extraction of the Structure Functions and R=Sigma-L/Sigma-T from Deep Inelastic e p and e d Cross-Sections

Riordan, E.M. ; Bodek, A. ; Breidenbach, Martin ; et al.
SLAC-PUB-1634, 1975.
Inspire Record 100687 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.591

None

103 data tables
Table 1

No description provided.

Table 2

No description provided.

Table 3

No description provided.

More…