Estimates of the Uncertainties Associated with Models of the Nucleon Structure Functions in theΔProduction Region

Abstract

Theoretical studies of the inclusive electron-nucleus cross section at beam energies up to few GeV show that, while the region of the quasi-elastic peak is understood at quantitative level, the data in the ∆ production region are sizably underestimated. We analize the uncertainty associated with the description of the nucleon structure functions W1 and W2 and its impact on the nuclear cross section. The results of our study suggest that the failure to reproduce the data is to be mostly ascribed to the poor knowledge of the neutron structure functions at low Q 2 .

Electron- and neutrino-nucleus scattering from the quasielastic to the resonance region

“…The data are also underestimated in the model of Ref. [105] (dash-dotted line). Our model lacks strength in the dip region but describes properly the magnitude and position of the ∆ peak.…”

“…• . The solid lines denote our full result, the dashed result is taken from Meucci et al [23], the double dashed one from Butkevich et al [25] (RDWIA), the dotted one from Nakamura et al [19] and the dashed-dotted one from Benhar et al [105]. The data are taken from [100,102].…”

“…The model of Benhar, Nakamura and collaborators [18,19,105,106] is based on non-relativistic nuclear many body theory and impulse approximation. It includes realistic spectral functions for the hole states obtained from (e, e ′ p) data combined with theoretical nuclear matter calculations using the local density approximation.…”

Spectral Functions and Nuclear Response

“…2 the results of Ref. [10], obtained using the realistic hole spectral functions of Ref. [11] and the particle spectral functions resulting from the approach of Ref.…”

Many-Body Theory of the Electroweak Nuclear Response

“…b This conclusion is supported by the analysis carried out in. 28,35 The left panel of Fig. 7 shows that the neutron structure function extracted from Jefferson Lab data at Q 2 ∼ 0.5 GeV 236 , following the procedure of Bodek and Ritchie, is significatly larger than the one resulting from the analysis of Ref.…”