| $\bf{
93 {}^{+11}_{-5}}$
|
OUR EVALUATION
|
| $92.47$ $\pm0.69$ |
1 |
|
LATT |
| $93.85$ $\pm0.75$ |
2 |
|
LATT |
| $87.6$ $\pm6.0$ |
3 |
|
THEO |
| $99.6$ $\pm4.3$ |
4 |
|
LATT |
| $94.4$ $\pm2.3$ |
5 |
|
LATT |
| $94$ $\pm9$ |
6 |
|
THEO |
| $102$ $\pm3$ $\pm1$ |
7 |
|
LATT |
| $95.5$ $\pm1.1$ $\pm1.5$ |
8 |
|
LATT |
| • • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • • |
| $93.6$ $\pm0.8$ |
9 |
|
LATT |
| $96.2$ $\pm2.7$ |
10 |
|
LATT |
| $95$ $\pm6$ |
11 |
|
LATT |
| $97.6$ $\pm2.9$ $\pm5.5$ |
12 |
|
LATT |
| $92.4$ $\pm1.5$ |
13 |
|
LATT |
| $92.2$ $\pm1.3$ |
13 |
|
LATT |
| $107.3$ $\pm11.7$ |
14 |
|
LATT |
| $105$ $\pm3$ $\pm9$ |
15 |
|
LATT |
| $102$ $\pm8$ |
16 |
|
THEO |
| $90.1$ ${}^{+17.2}_{-6.1}$ |
17 |
|
LATT |
| $105.6$ $\pm1.2$ |
18 |
|
LATT |
| $119.5$ $\pm9.3$ |
19 |
|
LATT |
| $105$ $\pm6$ $\pm7$ |
20 |
|
THEO |
| $111$ $\pm6$ $\pm10$ |
21 |
|
LATT |
| $119$ $\pm5$ $\pm8$ |
22 |
|
LATT |
| $92$ $\pm9$ |
23 |
|
THEO |
| $87$ $\pm6$ |
24 |
|
LATT |
| $104$ $\pm15$ |
25 |
|
THEO |
| ${}\geq{}\text{ 71 }\pm4, {}\leq{}\text{ 151 }\pm14$ |
26 |
|
THEO |
| $96$ ${}^{+5}_{-3}$ ${}^{+16}_{-18}$ |
27 |
|
THEO |
| $81$ $\pm22$ |
28 |
|
THEO |
| $125$ $\pm28$ |
29 |
|
THEO |
| $93$ $\pm32$ |
30 |
|
THEO |
| $76$ $\pm8$ |
31 |
|
LATT |
| $116$ $\pm6$ $\pm0.65$ |
32 |
|
LATT |
| $84.5$ ${}^{+12}_{-1.7}$ |
33 |
|
LATT |
| $106$ $\pm2$ $\pm8$ |
34 |
|
LATT |
| $92$ $\pm9$ $\pm16$ |
35 |
|
LATT |
| $117$ $\pm17$ |
36 |
|
THEO |
| $103$ $\pm17$ |
37 |
|
THEO |
|
1
BAZAVOV 2018 determine the quark masses using a lattice computation with staggered fermions and four active quark flavors.
|
|
2
LYTLE 2018 combined with CHAKRABORTY 2015 determine ${{\overline{\mathit m}}_{{s}}}$(3 GeV) = $84.78$ $\pm0.65$ MeV from a lattice simulation with ${{\mathit n}_{{f}}}$ = 2+1+1 flavors. They also determine the quoted value ${{\overline{\mathit m}}_{{s}}}$(2 GeV) for ${{\mathit n}_{{f}}}$ = 4 dynamical flavors.
|
|
3
ANANTHANARAYAN 2016 determine ${{\overline{\mathit m}}_{{s}}}$(2 GeV) = $106.70$ $\pm9.36$ MeV and $74.47$ $\pm7.77$ MeV from fits to ALEPH and OPAL ${{\mathit \tau}}$ decay data, respectively. We have used the weighted average of the two.
|
|
4
CARRASCO 2014 is a lattice QCD computation of light quark masses using 2 + 1 + 1 dynamical quarks, with ${{\mathit m}_{{u}}}$ = ${{\mathit m}_{{d}}}{}\not=$ ${{\mathit m}_{{s}}}{}\not=$ ${{\mathit m}_{{c}}}$. The ${\mathit {\mathit u}}$ and ${\mathit {\mathit d}}$ quark masses are obtained separately by using the ${{\mathit K}}$ meson mass splittings and lattice results for the electromagnetic contributions.
|
|
5
ARTHUR 2013 is a lattice computation using 2+1 dynamical domain wall fermions. Masses at ${{\mathit \mu}}$ = 3 GeV have been converted to ${{\mathit \mu}}$ = 2 GeV using conversion factors given in their paper.
|
|
6
BODENSTEIN 2013 determines ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit s}}}$ from QCD finite energy sum rules, and the perturbative computation of the pseudoscalar correlator to five-loop order.
|
|
7
FRITZSCH 2012 determine ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit s}}}$ using a lattice computation with ${{\mathit N}_{{f}}}$ = 2 dynamical flavors.
|
|
8
DURR 2011 determine quark mass from a lattice computation of the meson spectrum using ${{\mathit N}_{{f}}}$ = 2 + 1 dynamical flavors. The lattice simulations were done at the physical quark mass, so that extrapolation in the quark mass was not needed.
|
|
9
CHAKRABORTY 2015 is a lattice QCD computation that determines ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit c}}}$ and ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit c}}}/{\mathit m}_{{{\mathit s}}}$ using pseudoscalar mesons masses tuned on gluon field configurations with 2+1+1 dynamical flavors of HISQ quarks with ${{\mathit u}}/{{\mathit d}}$ masses down to the physical value.
|
|
10
AOKI 2011A determine quark masses from a lattice computation of the hadron spectrum using ${{\mathit N}_{{f}}}$ = 2 + 1 dynamical flavors of domain wall fermions.
|
|
11
BLOSSIER 2010 determines quark masses from a computation of the hadron spectrum using ${{\mathit N}_{{f}}}$=2 dynamical twisted-mass Wilson fermions.
|
|
12
BLUM 2010 determines light quark masses using a QCD plus QED lattice computation of the electromagnetic mass splittings of the low-lying hadrons. The lattice simulations use 2+1 dynamical quark flavors.
|
|
13
DAVIES 2010 and MCNEILE 2010 determine ${{\overline{\mathit m}}_{{c}}}({{\mathit \mu}})/{{\overline{\mathit m}}_{{s}}}({{\mathit \mu}}$) = $11.85$ $\pm0.16$ using a lattice computation with ${{\mathit N}_{{f}}}$ = 2 + 1 dynamical fermions of the pseudoscalar meson masses. Mass ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit s}}}$ is obtained from this using the value of ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit c}}}$ from ALLISON 2008 or MCNEILE 2010 .
|
|
14
ALLTON 2008 use a lattice computation of the ${{\mathit \pi}}$, ${{\mathit K}}$, and ${{\mathit \Omega}}$ masses with 2+1 dynamical flavors of domain wall quarks, and non-perturbative renormalization.
|
|
15
BLOSSIER 2008 use a lattice computation of pseudoscalar meson masses and decay constants with 2 dynamical flavors and non-perturbative renormalization.
|
|
16
DOMINGUEZ 2008A make determination from QCD finite energy sum rules for the pseudoscalar two-point function computed to order $\alpha {}^{4}_{s}$.
|
|
17
ISHIKAWA 2008 use a lattice computation of the light meson spectrum with 2+1 dynamical flavors of $\cal O(\mathit a$) improved Wilson quarks, and one-loop perturbative renormalization.
|
|
18
NAKAMURA 2008 do a lattice computation using quenched domain wall fermions and non-perturbative renormalization.
|
|
19
BLUM 2007 determine quark masses from the pseudoscalar meson masses using a QED plus QCD lattice computation with two dynamical quark flavors.
|
|
20
CHETYRKIN 2006 use QCD sum rules in the pseudoscalar channel to order ${{\mathit \alpha}_{{s}}^{4}}$.
|
|
21
GOCKELER 2006 use an unquenched lattice computation of the axial Ward Identity with ${{\mathit N}_{{f}}}$ = 2 dynamical light quark flavors, and non-perturbative renormalization, to obtain ${{\overline{\mathit m}}_{{s}}}$(2 GeV) = $111$ $\pm6$ $\pm4$ $\pm6$ MeV, where the first error is statistical, the second and third are systematic due to the fit range and force scale uncertainties, respectively. We have combined the systematic errors linearly.
|
|
22
GOCKELER 2006A use an unquenched lattice computation of the pseudoscalar meson masses with ${{\mathit N}_{{f}}}$ = 2 dynamical light quark flavors, and non-perturbative renormalization.
|
|
23
JAMIN 2006 determine ${{\overline{\mathit m}}_{{s}}}$(2 GeV) from the spectral function for the scalar ${{\mathit K}}{{\mathit \pi}}$ form factor.
|
|
24
MASON 2006 extract light quark masses from a lattice simulation using staggered fermions with an improved action, and three dynamical light quark flavors with degenerate ${\mathit {\mathit u}}$ and ${\mathit {\mathit d}}$ quarks. Perturbative corrections were included at NNLO order.
|
|
25
NARISON 2006 uses sum rules for ${{\mathit e}^{+}}$ ${{\mathit e}^{-}}$ $\rightarrow$ hadrons to order ${{\mathit \alpha}_{{s}}^{3}}$.
|
|
26
NARISON 2006 obtains the quoted range from positivity of the spectral functions.
|
|
27
BAIKOV 2005 determines ${{\overline{\mathit m}}_{{s}}}({{\mathit M}_{{\tau}}}$) = $100$ ${}^{+5}_{-3}{}^{+17}_{-19}$ from sum rules using the strange spectral function in ${{\mathit \tau}}$ decay. The computations were done to order ${{\mathit \alpha}_{{s}}^{3}}$, with an estimate of the ${{\mathit \alpha}_{{s}}^{4}}$ terms. We have converted the result to ${{\mathit \mu}}$ = 2 GeV.
|
|
28
GAMIZ 2005 determines ${{\overline{\mathit m}}_{{s}}}$(2 GeV) from sum rules using the strange spectral function in ${{\mathit \tau}}$ decay. The computations were done to order ${{\mathit \alpha}_{{s}}^{2}}$, with an estimate of the ${{\mathit \alpha}_{{s}}^{3}}$ terms.
|
|
29
GORBUNOV 2005 use hadronic tau decays to N3LO, including power corrections.
|
|
30
NARISON 2005 determines ${{\overline{\mathit m}}_{{s}}}$(2 GeV) from sum rules using the strange spectral function in ${{\mathit \tau}}$ decay. The computations were done to order ${{\mathit \alpha}_{{s}}^{3}}$.
|
|
31
AUBIN 2004 perform three flavor dynamical lattice calculation of pseudoscalar meson masses, with one-loop perturbative renormalization constant.
|
|
32
AOKI 2003 uses quenched lattice simulation of the meson and baryon masses with degenerate light quarks. The extrapolations are done using quenched chiral perturbation theory. Determines m$_{s}=113.8$ $\pm2.3$ ${}^{+5.8}_{-2.9}$ using ${{\mathit K}}$ mass as input and m$_{s}=142.3$ $\pm5.8$ ${}^{+22}_{-0}$ using ${{\mathit \phi}}$ mass as input. We have performed a weighted average of these values.
|
|
33
AOKI 2003B uses lattice simulation of the meson and baryon masses with two dynamical light quarks. Simulations are performed using the $\cal O(\mathit a$) improved Wilson action.
|
|
34
BECIREVIC 2003 perform quenched lattice computation using the vector and axial Ward identities. Uses $\cal O(\mathit a$) improved Wilson action and nonperturbative renormalization. They also quote ${{\overline{\mathit m}}}$/m$_{s}=24.3$ $\pm0.2$ $\pm0.6$.
|
|
35
CHIU 2003 determines quark masses from the pion and kaon masses using a lattice simulation with a chiral fermion action in quenched approximation.
|
|
36
GAMIZ 2003 determines ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit s}}}$ from SU(3) breaking in the ${{\mathit \tau}}~$hadronic width. The value of $\mathit V_{ {{\mathit u}} {{\mathit s}} }$ is chosen to satisfy CKM unitarity.
|
|
37
GAMIZ 2003 determines ${\mathit m}_{{{\mathit s}}}$ from SU(3) breaking in the ${{\mathit \tau}}~$hadronic width. The value of $\mathit V_{ {{\mathit u}} {{\mathit s}} }$ is taken from the PDG.
|
