The strangeness form factors of the proton within nonrelativistic constituent quark model revisited
Alvin Kiswandhi, Hao-Chun Lee, and Shin Nan Yang

TL;DR
This paper revisits the nonrelativistic constituent quark model to analyze the proton's strangeness form factors, correcting previous assumptions and identifying the most plausible quark configuration that aligns with experimental data.
Contribution
It corrects prior claims about quark configurations and demonstrates that a symmetric uuds subsystem with a P-state ar{s} can explain empirical form factors, also highlighting the importance of center-of-mass motion removal.
Findings
The lowest-lying uudsar{s} configuration with symmetric spatial and flavor-spin symmetry fits data.
Removing center-of-mass motion significantly enhances transition current contributions.
A tiny probability (0.025%) for the uudsar{s} component can reasonably describe existing form factor data.
Abstract
We reexamine, within the nonrelativistic constituent quark model (NRCQM), a recent claim that the current data on the strangeness form factors indicates that the uuds\bar{s} component in the proton is such that the uuds subsystem has the mixed spatial symmetry [31]_X and flavor spin symmetry [4]_{FS}[22]_F[22]_S, with \bar{s} in S state (configuration I). We find this claim to be invalid if corrected expressions for the contributions of the transition current to G_A^s and G_E^s are used. We show that, instead, it is the lowest-lying uuds\bar{s} configuration with uuds subsystem of completely symmetric spatial symmetry [4]_X and flavor spin symmetry [4]_{FS}[22]_F[22]_S, with \bar{s} in P state (configuration II), which could account for the empirical signs of all form factors G_E^s, G_M^s, and G_A^s. Further, we find that removing the center-of-mass motion of the clusters will…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
