1: \section{Comparing results from $\epsilon$- and $p$- regimes}\label{sec6}
2: After analysing the data in the two regimes, we can now compare the results obtained for the leading-order LECs $\Sigma$ and $F$.\\
3: We first compare the results for $F r_0$ for the different lattices at our disposal; the data
4: from the $\epsilon$-regime, Eq.~(\ref{Fres_eps1}), and from the $p$-regime, Eq.~(\ref{Fr0_p1}), are summarised in Fig.~\ref{fig:fr0_tot}. The agreement is rather good, within one-two standard deviations. The vertical line represents the weighted average
5: \begin{equation}
6: Fr_0=0.275(6),
7: \end{equation}
8: where the error is taken as the largest uncertainty associated to the individual measurements. We choose this rather conservative error estimate since we know from our analysis that systematic effects are below the individual statistical uncertainties.
9: Using the phenomenological value $r_0=0.5$ fm, one obtains $F=108.6(2.4)$ MeV.
10:
11: The results obtained for the quark condensate from $M_P^2/(2m)$ can be compared directly with the ones of a previous work \cite{Giusti:2007cn}, where the condensate has been computed in the $\epsilon$-regime from a finite-size scaling study.
12: The same parameters as for the lattices e1, e2, e3 have been adopted.
13: The final results quoted in \cite{Giusti:2007cn} for the renormalisation group invariant condensate at the scale
14: $L_{\rm eff}=1.5 $ fm are
15: \begin{eqnarray}
16: \Sigma_{\rm eff}(L_{\rm eff}=1.5\;{\rm fm})r_0^3 &=& 0.33(3),\;\;\; {\rm (e1)}\nonumber\\
17: \Sigma_{\rm eff}(L_{\rm eff}=1.5\;{\rm fm})r_0^3 &=& 0.31(5),\;\;\; {\rm (e2)}\label{cond_eps}\\
18: \Sigma_{\rm eff}(L_{\rm eff}=1.5\;{\rm fm})r_0^3 &=& 0.29(3).\;\;\; {\rm (e3)}\nonumber
19: \end{eqnarray}
20: In that analysis it was pointed out that, within the statistical uncertainty, no NLO volume-dependence is observed in $\Sigma_{\rm eff}$, as well as no lattice artifacts. We adopted Eq.~(\ref{sigmaeff}) in order to express all results at the scale 1.5 fm.\\
21: Using the formula in Eq.~(\ref{sigma_rel}), we can convert the p-regime results in Eq.~(\ref{sigma_preg}) in $\Sigma_{\rm eff}(L_{\rm eff})$:
22: for the case $1/\mu=L_{\rm eff}=1.5$ fm we get
23: \begin{eqnarray}
24: \Sigma_{\rm eff}(L_{\rm eff}=1.5\;{\rm fm})r_0^3 &=& 0.28(3),\;\;\;\;\; {\rm (p1)}\nonumber\\
25: \Sigma_{\rm eff}(L_{\rm eff}=1.5\;{\rm fm})r_0^3 &=& 0.285(25),\;{\rm (p2)}\label{cond_p}\\
26: \Sigma_{\rm eff}(L_{\rm eff}=1.5\;{\rm fm})r_0^3 &=& 0.27(4).\;\;\;\;\; {\rm (p3)}\nonumber
27: \end{eqnarray}
28: All these results are in good agreement, and are summarised in Fig.~\ref{fig:sigma_tot}.
29: They can be converted into the $\overline{\rm MS}$- scheme at 2 GeV by using the relation \cite{Garden:1999fg}
30: $\overline{m}_{\overline{\rm MS}}(2\;{\rm GeV})/M=0.72076$.
31: A weighted average gives
32: \begin{equation}
33: \Sigma_{\rm eff}^{\overline{\rm MS}}(2\;{\rm GeV}) = (292\pm 17\;{\rm MeV})^3\;\;(L_{\rm eff}=1.5\;{\rm fm}),
34: \end{equation}
35: which lies in the same range of previous quenched computations \cite{Giusti:1998wy,Blum:2000kn,Hernandez:1999cu,Giusti:2001pk,DeGrand:2001ie,Hasenfratz:2002rp,Giusti:2003gf,Wennekers:2005wa,Bietenholz:2006fj}. Also in this case, the error associated to the average is the largest uncertainty coming from the single values.
36: \begin{figure}
37: \begin{center}
38: \includegraphics[width=8cm,angle=-90]{fr0_tot.ps}
39: \caption{Summary of the results for $F r_0$ obtained in the $\epsilon$- and $p$- regimes. The vertical band corresponds to the weighted average, with error corresponding to the largest uncertainty of the individual measurements.}\label{fig:fr0_tot}
40: \end{center}
41: \end{figure}
42:
43: \begin{figure}
44: \begin{center}
45: \includegraphics[width=8cm,angle=-90]{sigma_tot.ps}
46: \caption{Summary of the results for $\Sigma_{\rm eff}(L_{\rm eff}=1.5\;{\rm fm}) r_0^3$ obtained in the $\epsilon$- and $p$- regimes. The vertical band corresponds to the weighted average, with error corresponding to the largest uncertainty of the individual measurements.}\label{fig:sigma_tot}
47: \end{center}
48: \end{figure}
49: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
50: