1989
DOI: 10.1016/0370-2693(89)90707-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Study of intermittency in electron-positron annihilation into hadrons

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
22
0

Year Published

1990
1990
1996
1996

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 112 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
1
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To describe the hadronization phase, all present Monte-Carlo codes rely in last instance on a large amount of e + e − data at different energies and are carefully tuned to these. It came, therefore, as a surprise that a first (indirect) analysis [133] of HRS results, shortly followed by TASSO data [134], revealed deviations from model predictions quite similar to those observed in lh and hh collisions (Figs. 4.7a,b).…”
Section: Lepton-hadron Collisionsmentioning
confidence: 82%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…To describe the hadronization phase, all present Monte-Carlo codes rely in last instance on a large amount of e + e − data at different energies and are carefully tuned to these. It came, therefore, as a surprise that a first (indirect) analysis [133] of HRS results, shortly followed by TASSO data [134], revealed deviations from model predictions quite similar to those observed in lh and hh collisions (Figs. 4.7a,b).…”
Section: Lepton-hadron Collisionsmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…Fig. 4.10 The log-log plot for TASSO data using a) 2 dimensional y-ϕ bins, b) one-dimensional y bins, in comparison to a two-dimensional α-model [134,24]. Fig.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…with fj > 0 in the case of a fractal (self-similar) cascade -until the fractal structure ceases or is lost in the experim ental resolution. The first analysis of e+e~ annihilation d ata from petra (Braunschweig et al 1989) indicated strong fractal (interm ittent ) behaviour greatly in excess of the predictions /.i /GeV Figure 5. Evolution of the three fundamental coupling constants (a) in the minimal SU (5) model containing no new physics above the Z° mass, which is clearly excluded by the failure of the three values to coincide at a 'grand unification' mass, and ( ) in the minimal supersymmetric extension of the model assuming the supersymmetry (s u s y ) mass scale to be near the Z°, in which case the values meet within one standard deviation at a mass above 1016 GeV.…”
Section: Particle Spectra and M Ultiplicitiesmentioning
confidence: 92%