Renewable Energy 2018
DOI: 10.4324/9781315793245-14
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

History of Applications

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

5
17
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
2
2

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
5
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We have predicted that B(Λ + c → ne + ν e ) = (2.8 ± 0.4, 4.9 ± 0.4, 5.2 ± 0.4) × 10 −3 in (a), (b) and (c), which agree with the previous analysis with SU(3) f in Ref. [4] as well as that the LQCD [22,23]. This mode can be observed at the experiments by BELLE and BESIII.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We have predicted that B(Λ + c → ne + ν e ) = (2.8 ± 0.4, 4.9 ± 0.4, 5.2 ± 0.4) × 10 −3 in (a), (b) and (c), which agree with the previous analysis with SU(3) f in Ref. [4] as well as that the LQCD [22,23]. This mode can be observed at the experiments by BELLE and BESIII.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…The decay of Λ + c → Λe + ν e has been extensively studied in the literature. In particular, its decay branching ratio has been found to be (1.42, 1.63, 2.78, 2.96, 3.6, 3.8)×10 −2 by the heavy quark effective theory (HQET) along with the non-relativistic quark model (NRQM) [15], QCD light front (LF) approach [17], covariant quark model (CQM) [18,19], MIT bag model (MBM) [20], NRQM [20] and lattice QCD (LQCD) [22,23]. Clearly, the predicted values in the models except NRQM and LQCD are inconsistent with the experimental data in Eq.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We have used the Fermi statistics to determine the overall spin-flavor-momentum structures and recover the spin-flavor symmetry with the quark and baryon masses and shape parameters. We have found that B(Λ + c → Λe + ν e ) = (3.43±0.57)% and 3.48% in LFCQM and MBM, which are consistent with the experimental data of (3.6 ± 0.4) × 10 −2 [2] as well as the values predicted by SU(3) F [22], LQCD [27,28] and RQM [29], but about a factor of two larger than those in HQET [26] and LF [30]. We have also obtained that α(Λ + c → Λe + ν e ) = (−0.96 ± 0.03) and −0.83 in LFCQM and MBM, which are lower and higher than but acceptable by the experimental data of −0.86 ±0.04 [2], respectively.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…The errors in our results mainly come from the numerical fits of the MATLAB curve fitting toolbox in Appendix, in which the 95% confidence bounds are broadened and tightened in the time-like space-like regions, respectively. Our results are also consistent with those in the Lattice QCD (LQCD) [27,28] and relativistic quark model (RQM) [29].…”
Section: Baryonic Transition Form Factors In Mbmsupporting
confidence: 89%
See 1 more Smart Citation