Possible cause of 0.01% difference in Λ(1520)

[mmikhasenko]

The mass value in the original code has 3e-5 GeV difference to the value in model-definition.yml

See the diff:

The crosscheck.json file was produced by the modelcheck.py (the original code), hence the difference was propagated.

The crosscheck.json is to be updated! The 1e-5 difference might go away.

[redeboer]

The cross-check is only performed for the default model, which does use the value 1.518467 (instead of 1.51847).

https://github.com/ComPWA/polarimetry/blob/754a80045694c7decf64cc312e990ac706de9ded/data/model-definitions.yaml#L40

Is the screenshot by any chance taken for the model "Alternative amplitude model with K(1430) with free width"?

[mmikhasenko]

There are no alternative models in the cross check. Just some file where the masses are defined for the code. So, it is a pure bug.

[redeboer]

Ah indeed, replied too quick there, was reasoning the wrong way round!

Very nice, if you set the value in the default model to that buggy value (not the value from the supplementary tables), you get differences that are consistent with the rest:

Made me wonder how this affects the decay rates―seems not (but let's double-check with the pipeline says):

New (https://github.com/ComPWA/polarimetry/commit/46a22fb)

$$ \begin{array}{l|c|c} \textbf{Resonance} & \textbf{Decay rate} & \textbf{LHCb} \ \hline \Lambda(1405) & 7.78 \pm 0.43{-2.53}^{+3.01} & 7.7 \pm 0.2 \pm 3.0 \ \Lambda(1520) & 1.91 \pm 0.10{-0.24}^{+0.04} & 1.86 \pm 0.09 \pm 0.23 \ \Lambda(1600) & 5.16 \pm 0.28{-1.93}^{+0.50} & 5.2 \pm 0.2 \pm 1.9 \ \Lambda(1670) & 1.15 \pm 0.04{-0.29}^{+0.06} & 1.18 \pm 0.06 \pm 0.32 \ \Lambda(1690) & 1.16 \pm 0.01{-0.33}^{+0.06} & 1.19 \pm 0.09 \pm 0.34 \ \Lambda(2000) & 9.55 \pm 0.67{-2.26}^{+0.83} & 9.58 \pm 0.27 \pm 0.93 \ \Delta(1232) & 28.73 \pm 1.34{-0.79}^{+1.76} & 28.6 \pm 0.29 \pm 0.76 \ \Delta(1600) & 4.50 \pm 0.51{-1.40}^{+0.93} & 4.5 \pm 0.3 \pm 1.5 \ \Delta(1700) & 3.89 \pm 0.07{-0.48}^{+0.94} & 3.9 \pm 0.2 \pm 0.94 \ K(700) & 2.99 \pm 0.20{-0.59}^{+0.91} & 3.02 \pm 0.16 \pm 0.92 \ K(892) & 21.95 \pm 1.24{-0.58}^{+0.59} & 22.14 \pm 0.23 \pm 0.64 \ K(1430) & 14.70 \pm 0.80{-2.67}^{+2.78} & 14.7 \pm 0.6 \pm 2.7 \ \end{array} $$

Old (18f1c1c)

$$ \begin{split}\begin{array}{l|c|c} \textbf{Resonance} & \textbf{Decay rate} & \textbf{LHCb} \ \hline \Lambda(1405) & 7.78 \pm 0.43{-2.53}^{+3.01} & 7.7 \pm 0.2 \pm 3.0 \ \Lambda(1520) & 1.91 \pm 0.10{-0.24}^{+0.04} & 1.86 \pm 0.09 \pm 0.23 \ \Lambda(1600) & 5.16 \pm 0.28{-1.93}^{+0.50} & 5.2 \pm 0.2 \pm 1.9 \ \Lambda(1670) & 1.15 \pm 0.04{-0.29}^{+0.06} & 1.18 \pm 0.06 \pm 0.32 \ \Lambda(1690) & 1.16 \pm 0.01{-0.33}^{+0.06} & 1.19 \pm 0.09 \pm 0.34 \ \Lambda(2000) & 9.55 \pm 0.67{-2.26}^{+0.83} & 9.58 \pm 0.27 \pm 0.93 \ \Delta(1232) & 28.73 \pm 1.34{-0.79}^{+1.76} & 28.6 \pm 0.29 \pm 0.76 \ \Delta(1600) & 4.50 \pm 0.51{-1.40}^{+0.93} & 4.5 \pm 0.3 \pm 1.5 \ \Delta(1700) & 3.89 \pm 0.07{-0.48}^{+0.94} & 3.9 \pm 0.2 \pm 0.94 \ K(700) & 2.99 \pm 0.20{-0.59}^{+0.91} & 3.02 \pm 0.16 \pm 0.92 \ K(892) & 21.95 \pm 1.24{-0.58}^{+0.59} & 22.14 \pm 0.23 \pm 0.64 \ K(1430) & 14.70 \pm 0.80{-2.67}^{+2.78} & 14.7 \pm 0.6 \pm 2.7 \ \end{array}\end{split} $$

[mmikhasenko]

Wuh!! Nice. Thanks for checking. Once I am able to run the modelcheck.py. The check will be complete