Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 477

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 428 of the 428 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Nuclear effective field theory: Status and perspectives

Open access
Hammer, H.-W., König, Sebastian, van Kolck, U.·2020·Reviews of Modern Physics

Abstract

Effective field theory has revolutionized the theory of nuclear forces by providing a systematic expansion for strong interactions at low energies based on the symmetries of quantum chromodynamics. This paper reviews layers of effective field theories used in the description of nuclei and their reactions, and in broader applications to hadron structure and fundamental symmetries.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/revmodphys.92.025004

Cites

428 of 428 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 428 references

Cited by

See all 477

Metadata

Authors
Hammer, H.-W., König, S., & van Kolck, U.
Venue
Reviews of Modern Physics
Published
2020-06-23
Volume
92
Issue
2
ISSN
  • 0034-6861 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-0756
OpenAlex
W2953842147
Cited by
477
References
428
FWCI
28.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Nuclear effective field theory: Status and perspectives. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1103/revmodphys.92.025004
The paper
Hammer, H.-W., König, S., & van Kolck, U. (2020). Nuclear effective field theory: Status and perspectives. Reviews of Modern Physics. https://doi.org/10.1103/revmodphys.92.025004

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.