% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Miller:894473,
author = {Miller, Nolan and Carpenter, Logan and Berkowitz, Evan and
Chang, Chia Cheng and Hörz, Ben and Howarth, Dean and
Monge-Camacho, Henry and Rinaldi, Enrico and Brantley, David
A. and Körber, Christopher and Bouchard, Chris and Clark,
M. A. and Gambhir, Arjun Singh and Monahan, Christopher J.
and Nicholson, Amy and Vranas, Pavlos and Walker-Loud,
André},
title = {{S}cale setting the {M}öbius domain wall fermion on
gradient-flowed {HISQ} action using the omega baryon mass
and the gradient-flow scales t 0 and w 0},
journal = {Physical review / D},
volume = {103},
number = {5},
issn = {2470-0010},
address = {Melville, NY},
publisher = {Inst.},
reportid = {FZJ-2021-03248},
pages = {054511},
year = {2021},
abstract = {We report on a subpercent scale determination using the
omega baryon mass and gradient-flow methods.The calculations
are performed on 22 ensembles of $N_f=2+1+1$ highly
improved, rooted staggered sea-quark configurations
generated by the MILC and CalLat Collaborations. The valence
quark action used is Möbius domain wall fermions solved on
these configurations after a gradient-flow smearing is
applied with a flowtime of $t_{\rm gf}=1$ in lattice units.
The ensembles span four lattice spacings in the range $0.06
\lesssim a \lesssim 0.15$ fm, six pion masses in the range
$130 \lesssim m_\pi \lesssim 400$ MeV and multiple lattice
volumes. On each ensemble, the gradient-flow scales
$t_0/a^2$ and $w_0/a$ and the omega baryon mass $a m_\Omega$
are computed. The dimensionless product of these quantities
is then extrapolated to the continuum and infinite volume
limits and interpolated to the physical light, strange and
charm quark mass point in the isospin limit, resulting in
the determination of $\sqrt{t_0}=0.1422(14)$ fm and $w_0 =
0.1709(11)$ fm with all sources of statistical and
systematic uncertainty accounted for. The dominant
uncertainty in both results is the stochastic uncertainty,
though for $\sqrt{t_0}$ there are comparable continuum
extrapolation uncertainties. For $w_0$, there is a clear
path for a few-per-mille uncertainty just through improved
stochastic precision, as recently obtained by the
Budapest-Marseille-Wuppertal Collaboration.},
cin = {IAS-4 / JSC},
ddc = {530},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IAS-4-20090406 / I:(DE-Juel1)JSC-20090406},
pnm = {5111 - Domain-Specific Simulation $\&$ Data Life Cycle Labs
(SDLs) and Research Groups (POF4-511)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5111},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000648544100006},
doi = {10.1103/PhysRevD.103.054511},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/894473},
}