scholarly journals Reevaluation of the hadronic contribution to the muon magnetic anomaly using new e + e −→π + π − cross section data from BABAR

2010 ◽  
Vol 66 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Davier ◽  
A. Hoecker ◽  
B. Malaescu ◽  
C. Z. Yuan ◽  
Z. Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Anomaly ◽  
Cross Section ◽  
Cross Section Data ◽  
Section Data ◽  
Hadronic Contribution ◽  
Muon Magnetic Anomaly

scholarly journals Update on the hadronic vacuum polarisation contributions to muon g − 2 and α(mZ2)

2019 ◽  
Vol 218 ◽  
pp. 01002
Author(s):  
Zhiqing Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Standard Model ◽  
Magnetic Anomaly ◽  
Cross Section ◽  
Model Prediction ◽  
Standard Model Prediction ◽  
Boson Mass ◽  
Cross Section Data ◽  
Section Data ◽  
Hadronic Contribution ◽  
Vacuum Polarisation

An update of the hadronic vacuum polarisation contributions to the muon magnetic anomaly and to the running of the electromagnetic couplings constant at the Z-boson mass is presented. Newest e+e−→ hadrons cross-section data mainly from the BABAR and VEPP-2000 experiments have been included. For the muon (g−2)/2, the lowest-order hadronic contribution is evaluated to be (693.1 ± 3.4) · 10−10, improving the precision of our previous evaluation by 21%. The full Standard Model prediction differs by 3.5 σ from the experimental value. The five-quark hadronic contribution to $ \alpha (\mathop m\nolimits_z^2 ) $ is evaluated to be (276.0 ± 0.9) · 10−4.

Pooling of Time Series and Cross Section Data

Econometrica ◽  
1969 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 552
Author(s):  
V. K. Chetty
Keyword(s):  
Time Series ◽  
Cross Section ◽  
Cross Section Data ◽  
Section Data

Applications of cross section data for nuclear geochemical well logging

1986 ◽  
Vol 94 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 49-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. C. Hertzog ◽  
P. D. Soran ◽  
J. S. Schweitzer
Keyword(s):  
Cross Section ◽  
Well Logging ◽  
Cross Section Data ◽  
Section Data ◽  
Geochemical Well Logging

An Am/Be neutron source and its use in integral tests of differential neutron reaction cross-section data

2010 ◽  
Vol 68 (9) ◽  
pp. 1656-1661 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.S. Uddin ◽  
M.R. Zaman ◽  
S.M. Hossain ◽  
I. Spahn ◽  
S. Sudár ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cross Section ◽  
Neutron Source ◽  
Reaction Cross Section ◽  
Reaction Cross ◽  
Cross Section Data ◽  
Section Data ◽  
Neutron Reaction

scholarly journals Unions and Productivity in the Public Sector: A Study of Municipal Libraries

ILR Review ◽  
1983 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald G. Ehrenberg ◽  
Daniel R. Sherman ◽  
Joshua L. Schwarz
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
Collective Bargaining ◽  
Empirical Analysis ◽  
Cross Section ◽  
Cross Section Data ◽  
The Public ◽  
Section Data ◽  
The Empirical Analysis

This paper develops and illustrates the use of two methodologies to analyze the effect of unions on productivity in the public sector. Although the methodologies are applicable to a wide variety of public sector functions, the focus of the paper is on municipal libraries because of the availability of relevant data. The empirical analysis, which uses 1977 cross-section data on 260 libraries, suggests that collective bargaining coverage has not significantly affected productivity in municipal libraries.

scholarly journals Testing for Unit Roots and Cointegration in Spatial Cross-Section Data

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Beenstock ◽  
Dan Feldman ◽  
Daniel Felsenstein
Keyword(s):  
Cross Section ◽  
Unit Roots ◽  
Cross Section Data ◽  
Section Data

Time is Not A Theoretical Variable

2010 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 293-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathaniel Beck
Keyword(s):  
Time Series ◽  
Cross Section ◽  
Duration Dependence ◽  
Cross Section Data ◽  
Section Data ◽  
Data Analyst ◽  
Binary Time Series ◽  
Simple Cubic ◽  
Cubic Polynomial

Carter and Signorino (2010) (hereinafter “CS”) add another arrow, a simple cubic polynomial in time, to the quiver of the binary time series—cross-section data analyst; it is always good to have more arrows in one's quiver. Since comments are meant to be brief, I will discuss here only two important issues where I disagree: are cubic duration polynomials the best way to model duration dependence and whether we can substantively interpret duration dependence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document