Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Chiral effective theory of scalar and vector diquarks revisited

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A single chiral-and-U(1)_A-symmetric term controls whether strange pseudoscalar diquarks are lighter or heavier than nonstrange ones, and it predicts how the ordering shows up in heavy-baryon decays.

desk verdict The chiral-symmetric mu0^2 term and the corrected x-dependent mass formulas are genuinely new, but the paper's central hierarchy-switch claim rests entirely on an unmeasured input mass M0: if M0 comes in below about 2890 MeV, the predicted switch does not happen. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.17803 v2 pith:GDHPVUKX submitted 2024-11-26 hep-ph hep-exnucl-exnucl-th

Yonghee Kim , Makoto Oka , Kei Suzuki This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-exnucl-exnucl-th PACS 12.39.Fe14.20.Lq14.20.Mr
keywords chiraleffectivetheorydiquarksheavybaryonssymmetryrestorationU(1)_Aanomalymasshierarchystrongdecaywidthseight-quarkinteraction
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper revisits the chiral effective theory of light diquarks, quark pairs in the color-antitriplet channel, by adding one term to the scalar/pseudoscalar diquark Lagrangian that earlier work omitted. The term is invariant under chiral SU(3)_R x SU(3)_L and under U(1)_A, and it comes from an eight-quark interaction. The authors show that this term changes the relation between strange and nonstrange diquark masses: unlike the anomaly term already known to force the pseudoscalar diquarks into an inverse mass ordering, the new term pushes both scalar and pseudoscalar mass differences in the same direction. Using four parameter sets that cover the experimentally unconstrained rho-mode excited Xi_c(1/2-) mass, they find that a sufficiently strong $mu0^{2}$ term can flip the pseudoscalar diquarks to the normal ordering, and they predict how diquark masses, heavy-baryon masses, and Sigma_Q -> Lambda_Q pi decay widths respond as chiral symmetry is restored. This matters because the restored-phase mass ordering and the condensation scale at which the decays switch off become observable diagnostics for the new interaction.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the new term in the S/P diquark Lagrangian (9): $(\mu_0^2/f_\pi^2)[d_R\{\Sigma^\dagger\Sigma - \frac13\mathrm{Tr}[\Sigma^\dagger\Sigma]\}d_R^\dagger + d_L\{\Sigma\Sigma^\dagger - \frac13\mathrm{Tr}[\Sigma\Sigma^\dagger]\}d_L^\dagger]$. This term is chiral SU(3)_R x SU(3)_L and U(1)_A symmetric, and it vanishes in the flavor-SU(3) limit $A=1$. On the mean field $\langle\Sigma\rangle = f_\pi \mathrm{diag}(1,1,A)$, it generates the $(A^2-1)\mu_0^2$ contributions that move the strange and nonstrange scalar and pseudoscalar mass differences in the same direction. Four parameters of the scalar/pseudoscalar Lagrangian are solved from four mass inputs, with the fourth input $M_{ns}(0^-)$ set by the rho-mode excited $\Xi_c(1/2^-)$ mass $M_0$; the four cases L, N, E, H are chosen inside the allowed range. The same machinery gives the $x$-dependent mass formulas (28)-(35), in which $x$ scales the chiral condensates, and these feed the two-body diquark-heavy-quark Schr\"odinger equation that produces the baryon masses, wave functions, and decay widths.

What would settle it

Compute the strange pseudoscalar diquark mass, or the rho-mode excited $\Xi_c(1/2^-)$ state, on the lattice: if $M_{ns}(0^-)$ is found to be lighter than $M_{ud}(0^-)$ at the physical point, the inverse hierarchy holds and the $\mu_0^2$ term must be small, while a heavier $M_{ns}(0^-)$ would require a $\mu_0^2$ large enough to flip the ordering.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a chiral and U(1)_A symmetric operator with coefficient \$mu_0^{2}$, originating from an eight-point quark interaction, is not just a renormalization of the chiral-invariant mass term once flavor SU(3) is broken by the strange condensate. In the mass differences $M^2_{ns}(0^\pm) - M^2_{ud}(0^\pm)$, the $\mu_0^2$ contribution has the same sign for scalar and pseudoscalar diquarks, namely $(A^2-1)\mu_0^2$, whereas the anomaly term $m_{S1}^2$ enters with opposite signs. Therefore, if $(A+1)\mu_0^2 > m_{S1}^2 - m_{S2}^2$, the inverse pseudoscalar hierarchy found in earlier work is replaced by the normal hierarchy. The paper fixes $m_{S0}^2$, $m_{S1}^2$, $m_{S2}^2$, and $\mu_0^2$ from four diquark-mass inputs, the fourth being the strange pseudoscalar mass $M_{ns}(0^-)$ tied to the unmeasured rho-mode excited $\Xi_c(1/2^-)$ mass $M_0$, which is scanned over 2623 to 3279 MeV. It then derives corrected $x$-dependent mass formulas for diquarks under chiral restoration, superseding those in Refs. [45, 49, 117], and predicts the crossing point $x_{AS}$ where the axial-vector and scalar diquark masses invert, together with the threshold $x_{\mathrm{th}}$ at which $\Sigma_Q \to \Lambda_Q \pi$ decays are forbidden.

Load-bearing premise

The whole parameter set is solved from the assumed mass of an experimentally unobserved excited Xi_c state, scanned over 2623 to 3279 MeV, and if the true value lies outside this range, the predictions for diquark ordering and decay thresholds collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For Case H, where $\mu_0^2$ is largest, the inverse pseudoscalar hierarchy disappears and $M_{ud}(0^-) < M_{ns}(0^-)$; the same ordering is carried by the rho-mode excited $\Lambda_Q$ and $\Xi_Q$ states.
  • Under chiral restoration the scalar diquarks rise in mass while pseudoscalar diquarks fall, so the S/P chiral partners approach each other; the nonstrange partners remain split by the $U(1)_A$ term $m_{S1}^2 \neq 0$ except in Case H where $m_{S1}^2 = 0$.
  • The axial-vector/scalar lowest-state inversion point lies in $0.566 < x_{AS} < 0.858$, so a moderate partial restoration of chiral symmetry makes the axial-vector diquark lighter than the scalar diquark.
  • The $\Sigma_Q \to \Lambda_Q \pi$ decay width is suppressed as $x$ decreases, with the switch-off threshold $x_{\mathrm{th}}$ between 0.811 and 0.984, and a larger input mass $M_0$ moves the threshold closer to the vacuum point $x=1$.
  • The corrected $x$-dependent formulas change the restored-phase predictions of earlier work, so heavy-baryon and doubly-heavy-tetraquark results built on the erroneous coefficients need revision.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper, the unmeasured $\Xi_c(1/2^-,\rho)$ mass is the decisive control: a single lattice determination of that state, or of $M_{ns}(0^-)$ directly, would select one of the four parameter sets and fix $\mu_0^2$.
  • Beyond the paper, a direct lattice measurement of the sign of $M_{ns}(0^-)-M_{ud}(0^-)$ would discriminate the new eight-quark interaction from the pure-anomaly mechanism without waiting for medium experiments.
  • Beyond the paper, the fact that $x_{\mathrm{th}} > x_{AS}$ in every case suggests the decay switch-off is not simply the S/A crossing; measuring both observables under the same restoration conditions could separate the role of $\mu_0^2$ from that of $m_{S1}^2$.
  • Beyond the paper, the same trace-subtracted construction could be applied to vector diquarks beyond the flavor-symmetric mean field, where the authors note it would be silent; at nonzero current-quark masses or with different condensate scalings it might leave an observable trace.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper revisits the authors' chiral effective theory of diquarks by adding to the scalar/pseudoscalar Lagrangian a term with coefficient mu0^2 that is invariant under chiral SU(3)_R x SU(3)_L and U(1)_A and vanishes for a flavor-symmetric condensate. This term contributes with the same sign to the strange/nonstrange mass differences of both the S and P diquarks, Eqs. (17) and (18), so a sufficiently large mu0^2 can convert the inverse P-diquark hierarchy generated by the U(1)_A term into the normal hierarchy. The four parameters of the S/P sector are fixed by the four vacuum diquark masses, with the strange P-diquark mass encoded in the unmeasured rho-mode Xi_c(1/2-) mass M0, scanned over 2623-3279 MeV and represented by Cases L, N, E, and H in Table I. The paper corrects the x-dependent diquark mass formulas of Refs. [45,49,117], studies the diquark and singly-heavy-baryon spectra under chiral restoration using the scaling of Eq. (27), and computes the S/A lowest-state crossing point x_AS and the thresholds x_th at which the decays Sigma_Q -> Lambda_Q + pi are kinematically forbidden (Figs. 3 and 8, Table V).

Significance. The central message is plausible and internally consistent: the sign structure of Eqs. (17) and (18) is transparent, the x-dependent formulas (28)-(33) reduce correctly to the vacuum formulas at x = 1 and give the expected x = 0 degeneracies under the assumed scaling of Eq. (27), and the parameter counting is declared honestly, with the earlier mu0 = 0 solution (Case N) remaining a valid fit. The paper also delivers a specific, checkable improvement: the corrected coefficient of the m_S1^2 term, which couples the [ud] diquark to the strange condensate and shifts x_AS from about 0.6 to 0.6747 in Case N. The falsifiable predictions (P-diquark mass ordering, x_AS, x_th, and the residual S/P splitting at x = 0) are clearly itemized in Sec. VII. The principal limitation is that the new physics, namely the hierarchy flip, is realized only for M0 >= 2890 MeV, an unmeasured input, so the predictive content is conditional rather than definitive, and the abstract's 'predict the fate' language is stronger than the scan-based results warrant.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. III, Eq. (24), Table I; abstract] The central new qualitative result, that the mu0^2 term can flip the pseudoscalar diquark ordering from inverse to normal, is realized only for M0 >= 2890 MeV (Cases E and H), while M0 = M_rho(P)(Xi_c; 1/2-) in Eq. (24) is unmeasured and the scan bounds are model-consistency conditions (M_ns(0-) > M_ns(1+) and m_S1^2 >= 0) rather than data. Because the four vacuum masses in Eqs. (13)-(16) determine the four parameters exactly, the x = 1 spectrum cannot by itself establish mu0^2 != 0, and the earlier mu0^2 = 0 solution (Case N) remains a valid fit. All x-dependent claims (x_AS in Fig. 3, x_th in Table V, the decay suppression in Fig. 8) are therefore conditional on this unconstrained input. I recommend that the abstract and the concluding section present the hierarchy flip as a possibility within the admissible range, state the required M0 threshold (about 2890 MeV) at the point of the claim, and list the lattice or quark-model determinations that could confirm or exclude it.
  2. [Sec. IV, Eqs. (28)-(33)] The correction of the x-dependent mass formulas in Refs. [45,49,117] is a central deliverable, but the text does not show the contraction that produces the new coefficient of m_S1^2, namely the combination x f_s/f_pi + m_s/(g_s f_pi) multiplying m_S1^2 for the [ud] diquark in Eq. (28). Because the paper asks readers to accept that three earlier publications contain an error, the derivation should be self-contained: please display the mean-field reduction of the m_S1 and mu0^2 terms for the d_3 = [ud] and d_1 = [us] components of the diquark field, and state precisely which piece was missing in the earlier formulas, for example the m_s/g_s contribution to the strange condensate or the A(x) factor.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. II B, footnote 4] The footnote stating that a similar term added to L_V 'will make no change to the diquark spectrum when the flavor SU(3) symmetry is broken' appears to state the opposite of the S/P logic, where the new term acts precisely because flavor SU(3) is broken; please clarify the intended phase or show the explicit candidate term and the contraction that makes it vanish.
  2. [Sec. VI, Table V] The statement that 'about 20% of partial restoration of chiral symmetry forbids these strong decays' is not representative of Table V: 1 - x_th ranges from 0.016 (Case H, Sigma_c 1/2+) to 0.189 (Case L, Sigma*_c 3/2+), with Case N giving 0.038-0.136; please quote the actual per-case range instead of a single representative value.
  3. [Sec. III, Eq. (24)] At the lower boundary (Case L, M0 = 2623 MeV) the condition M_ns(0-) > M_ns(1+) stated after Eq. (24) is saturated (1115 vs 1115.30 MeV); please phrase this prior as a non-strict inequality, M_ns(0-) >= M_ns(1+).
  4. [Sec. VI, decay formula] The assumption that M_pi is independent of x is stated but its sensitivity is not quantified; since several x_th values in Table V are close to 1, a pion mass that decreases with x would keep the decay phase space open longer, and a sentence estimating this shift or justifying the restricted range 0.8 <= x <= 1 would strengthen the threshold analysis.
  5. [Fig. 2 caption] The caption of Fig. 2 plots parameters as sgn(m^2) times |m|, but the sign convention is easy to miss when mu0^2 and m_S2^2 are negative (Cases L and N); please state the convention directly in the figure or use symbols such as m_mu = sgn(mu0^2) sqrt(|mu0^2|) in the caption.
  6. [Table I] For Case E the choice M0 = 2890 MeV numerically coincides with the quark-model value of the Lambda_c rho-mode P-diquark state quoted from Ref. [110], but it is used for the Xi_c state; a footnote explaining that this value is chosen only to enforce M_ud(0-) = M_ns(0-) and carries no independent empirical support would prevent a misreading.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the vacuum masses are explicitly treated as inputs, and the x-dependent predictions are genuine extrapolations not used in the fit.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. Section III calibrates the four S/P Lagrangian parameters from four vacuum diquark masses, and the paper does not disguise this. Footnote 5 explicitly states that under the previous three-parameter model M_{ns}(0^-) was a prediction, whereas "in the current work with four parameters, M_{ns}(0^-) is treated as an input parameter." The L/N/E/H cases are boundary and illustrative choices of the unmeasured input M0, and the statement that normal or inverse P-diquark ordering is possible follows algebraically from Eqs. (17)-(18); it is a model-possibility statement, not a claim that the true vacuum hierarchy is independently predicted. Thus the vacuum hierarchy as a function of M0 is by construction a reflection of the chosen input, but the paper explicitly labels the hierarchy as parameter-set-dependent and does not relabel the fit as a prediction. The paper's novel output is the x-dependence: the x-dependent S/P diquark masses in Eqs. (28)-(33), the crossing point x_AS, and the decay threshold x_th are computed by substituting the scaled condensate of Eq. (27), and none of that x-dependence was used to fix m_{S0}^2, m_{S1}^2, m_{S2}^2, or mu_0^2. These quantities therefore carry independent, falsifiable content even though they inherit parameters from four vacuum inputs. The A/V parameters and the couplings g_{1,2} are imported from the same authors' earlier work [45,49], but they enter as fixed inputs rather than as a uniqueness argument; no theorem or ansatz is smuggled in via citation to force the central conclusion. The genuine weakness is empirical fragility rather than circularity: the fourth input M0 = M_{rho(P)}(Xi_c;1/2^-) has no direct experimental or lattice constraint, and the normal-ordering switch at Case:E/H sits at or above about 2.89 GeV. If independent data placed M0 lower, the claimed switch would not occur and x_AS/x_th would change. That is a correctness risk associated with an unconstrained input, not a logical reduction of the output to the input. Given the paper's transparent treatment of M0 as a scanned input, I find no circular step.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central predictions rest on the fitted Lagrangian parameters and on the assumed scaling of the chiral condensate. The new mu0^2 term, the main novelty, has no independent constraint; it is solved from an unmeasured excited-baryon mass. No new particles are introduced, but the new interaction operator acts as an extra free lever in the effective theory.

free parameters (6)
  • m^2_{S0} (chiral invariant S/P diquark mass squared) = about (1062 to 1347 MeV)^2 across the four cases
    Solved from the four input masses in Table I; sets the base mass scale for S/P diquarks.
  • m^2_{S1} (U(1)_A anomaly strength) = 0 to (762 MeV)^2 across the four cases
    Solved from inputs; constrained by hand to be non-negative to keep the vacuum mass ordering stable under chiral restoration.
  • m^2_{S2} (flavor SU(3) breaking term) = -(491 MeV)^2 to (852 MeV)^2 across the four cases
    Solved from inputs; controls flavor SU(3) breaking in the diquark masses.
  • mu0^2 (new eight-quark interaction coefficient) = 0 to (690 MeV)^2 depending on case
    The paper's new parameter, determined by the unmeasured input M_ns(0-); its sign and size decide the P-diquark mass hierarchy.
  • M0 = M_rho(P)(Xi_c; 1/2-) = 2623 to 3279 MeV, with four selected cases
    Unmeasured rho-mode excited Xi_c mass that fixes the fourth Lagrangian parameter; without it the model is underdetermined.
  • g1, g2 (S-V decay couplings) = (30.56, -3.66) charm, (33.28, -6.12) bottom
    Taken from Ref. [49] where they were fitted to decay data; used unchanged in the width calculations.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Effective Lagrangian in the linear sigma model representation of SU(3)_R x SU(3)_L with diquarks as matter fields
    The entire construction assumes the chiral linear representation is the correct effective description of diquarks; Sec. II.
  • domain assumption Mean-field condensate diag(f_pi, f_pi, f_s) with f_s = 2 f_K - f_pi
    Standard assumption in chiral models; the diquark masses are read off from the mean-field Lagrangian in Sec. II.C.
  • ad hoc to paper Scaling of condensates under restoration, Eq. (27): diag(x f_pi, x f_pi, x f_s + m_s/g_s) with x from 1 to 0 and m_s fixed
    This specific x-dependence is assumed, not derived from thermodynamics; it directly sets all chiral-restoration predictions in Sec. IV.
  • domain assumption Diquark-heavy-quark two-body picture with the Y-potential of Ref. [45] for singly heavy baryons
    Adopted from previous work; the predicted spectra and decay phase space depend on these wave functions, which are not rederived here.
  • ad hoc to paper Constraint m^2_{S1} >= 0
    Imposed to avoid M_ud(0-) < M_ud(0+) in the chiral restored phase, fixing the upper end of the M0 range; Sec. III, footnote 6.
  • domain assumption Pion mass held fixed as x changes
    Stated just before Fig. 8; affects the kinematics and thresholds of the predicted decay suppression.
  • standard math Neglect of light current quark masses (m_u = m_d = 0)
    Common in three-flavor chiral perturbation theory; stated in Sec. II.B.
invented entities (1)
  • mu0^2 eight-quark interaction term
    purpose: New chiral and U(1)_A invariant operator that breaks the tie between strange and nonstrange S/P diquark mass splittings and can flip the P-diquark mass hierarchy
    The term is new to the diquark Lagrangian; its strength is fixed by the unmeasured input M_ns(0-), and the paper provides no independent falsifiable handle on mu0^2 itself, only model-internal mass relations.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Chiral effective theory of scalar and vector diquarks revisited." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GDHPVUKX

@misc{pith2026241117803,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Chiral effective theory of scalar and vector diquarks revisited},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GDHPVUKX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.17803}
}
abstract

Chiral effective theory of light diquarks is revisited. We construct an effective Lagrangian based on the linear representation of three-flavor chiral symmetry. Here, we focus on the effect of a chiral and $U(1)_A$ symmetric term originated from an eight-point quark interaction. From this model, we obtain the mass formulas of scalar, pseudoscalar, vector, and axial-vector diquarks, which also describe the dependence of diquark masses on the spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking and the $U(1)_A$ anomaly. We regard singly heavy baryons as two-body systems composed of one heavy quark and one diquark and then predict the fate of the mass spectrum and the strong decay widths under chiral symmetry restoration.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.17803 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Quark line representation of the interaction of right [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Parameters in new effective Lagrangian ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. , we can see a crossing point where the lines of the A- and S-diquark masses cross with each other. The value of x of this crossing point is estimated to be 7 Note that the input mass M0 increases in this order. One sees that both the S/P-diquark masses increase as M0 increases, since the parameter mS0 increases as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: A difference from nonstrange diquarks is that, when chiral symmetry is restored (x = 0), the masses of singly strange S and P diquarks are degenerate. This is because the coefficient of m2 S1 term in Eqs. (32) and (33) is only x, which is in contrast to the case of non…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Mass spectra of singly charmed baryons (see Fig. 2 in Ref. [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Mass spectra of singly bottom baryons (see Fig. 4 in Ref. [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Dependence of masses of singly heavy baryons, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Dependence of the decay widths of Σ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Revisit the diquark of $\Lambda_c$ in the $\Lambda_c\to \Lambda K^+$ and $\Lambda_c\to \Sigma^0 K^+$ processes

    hep-ph 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Constituent quark model fits to Λc→ΛK+ and Λc→Σ0K+ branching ratios place the charmed baryon's diquark size parameters in a narrow, non-compact region.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

121 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Nambu and G

    Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Dynamical model of elementary particles based on an analogy with super- conductivity. I., Phys. Rev. 122, 345 (1961)

    1961

  2. [2]

    = (30.56, −3.66), (gb 1, gb

  3. [3]

    (39) In Table IV, we show the comparison of our prediction at x = 1 and the corresponding experimental data

    = (33.28, −6.12). (39) In Table IV, we show the comparison of our prediction at x = 1 and the corresponding experimental data. In Fig. 8, we show the results for the x dependence of decay widths for the charm and bottom sectors. 11 Here, we have assumed that the pion mass is independent of x because we expect that the pion mass may not change much in the ...

  4. [4]

    Nambu and G

    Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Dynamical model of elementary particles based on an analogy with super- conductivity. II, Phys. Rev. 124, 246 (1961)

    1961

  5. [5]

    J. S. Bell and R. Jackiw, A PCAC puzzle: π0 → γγ in the σ model, Nuovo Cimento A 60, 47 (1969)

    1969

  6. [6]

    S. L. Adler, Axial vector vertex in spinor electrodynam- ics, Phys. Rev. 177, 2426 (1969)

    1969

  7. [7]

    ’t Hooft, Symmetry Breaking Through Bell-Jackiw Anomalies, Phys

    G. ’t Hooft, Symmetry Breaking Through Bell-Jackiw Anomalies, Phys. Rev. Lett. 37, 8 (1976)

    1976

  8. [8]

    ’t Hooft, Computation of the quantum effects due to a four-dimensional pseudoparticle, Phys

    G. ’t Hooft, Computation of the quantum effects due to a four-dimensional pseudoparticle, Phys. Rev. D 14, 3432 (1976), [Erratum: Phys. Rev. D 18, 2199 (1978)]

    1976

Show all 121 references
  1. [9]

    ’t Hooft, How Instantons Solve the U (1) Problem, Phys

    G. ’t Hooft, How Instantons Solve the U (1) Problem, Phys. Rep. 142, 357 (1986)

    1986

  2. [10]

    Isgur and M

    N. Isgur and M. B. Wise, Weak decays of heavy mesons in the static quark approximation, Phys. Lett. B 232, 113 (1989)

    1989

  3. [11]

    Gell-Mann, A schematic model of baryons and mesons, Phys

    M. Gell-Mann, A schematic model of baryons and mesons, Phys. Lett. 8, 214 (1964)

    1964

  4. [12]

    Ida and R

    M. Ida and R. Kobayashi, Baryon resonances in a quark model, Prog. Theor. Phys. 36, 846 (1966)

    1966

  5. [13]

    D. B. Lichtenberg and L. J. Tassie, Baryon mass split- ting in a boson-fermion model, Phys. Rev. 155, 1601 (1967)

    1967

  6. [14]

    D. B. Lichtenberg, Electromagnetic mass splittings of baryons in a boson-fermion model, Nuovo Cimento 49, 435 (1967)

    1967

  7. [15]

    P. D. D. Souza and D. B. Lichtenberg, Electromagnetic properties of hadrons in a triplet-sextet model, Phys. Rev. 161, 1513 (1967)

    1967

  8. [16]

    D. B. Lichtenberg, L. J. Tassie, and P. J. Keleman, Quark-diquark model of baryons and SU (6), Phys. Rev. 167, 1535 (1968)

    1968

  9. [17]

    Carroll, D

    J. Carroll, D. B. Lichtenberg, and J. Franklin, Elec- tromagnetic properties of baryons in a quark-diquark model with broken SU (6), Phys. Rev. 174, 1681 (1968)

    1968

  10. [18]

    D. B. Lichtenberg, Baryon supermultiplets of SU (6) × O(3) in a quark-diquark model, Phys. Rev. 178, 2197 (1969)

    1969

  11. [19]

    Anselmino, E

    M. Anselmino, E. Predazzi, S. Ekelin, S. Fredriksson, and D. B. Lichtenberg, Diquarks, Rev. Mod. Phys. 65, 1199 (1993)

    1993

  12. [20]

    R. L. Jaffe, Exotica, Phys. Rep. 409, 1 (2005)

    2005

  13. [21]

    M. Hess, F. Karsch, E. Laermann, and I. Wetzorke, Diquark masses from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 58, 111502 (1998), arXiv:hep-lat/9804023

    1998 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Orginos, Diquark properties from lattice QCD, PoS LA T2005, 054 (2006), arXiv:hep-lat/0510082

    K. Orginos, Diquark properties from lattice QCD, PoS LA T2005, 054 (2006), arXiv:hep-lat/0510082

    2006 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Alexandrou, P

    C. Alexandrou, P. de Forcrand, and B. Lucini, Evidence for diquarks in lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 222002 (2006), arXiv:hep-lat/0609004

    2006 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Babich, N

    R. Babich, N. Garron, C. Hoelbling, J. Howard, L. Lel- louch, and C. Rebbi, Diquark correlations in baryons on the lattice with overlap quarks, Phys. Rev. D 76, 074021 (2007), arXiv:hep-lat/0701023

    2007 arXiv

  17. [25]

    DeGrand, Z

    T. DeGrand, Z. Liu, and S. Schaefer, Diquark effects in light baryon correlators from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 77, 034505 (2008), arXiv:0712.0254 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Green, J

    J. Green, J. Negele, M. Engelhardt, and P. Varilly, Spatial diquark correlations in a hadron, PoS LA T- TICE2010, 140 (2010), arXiv:1012.2353 [hep-lat]

    2010 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Y. Bi, H. Cai, Y. Chen, M. Gong, Z. Liu, H.-X. Qiao, and Y.-B. Yang, Diquark mass differences from un- quenched lattice QCD, Chin. Phys. C40, 073106 (2016), arXiv:1510.07354 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Watanabe, Quark-diquark potential and diquark mass from lattice QCD, Phys

    K. Watanabe, Quark-diquark potential and diquark mass from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 105, 074510 (2022), arXiv:2111.15167 [hep-lat]

    2022 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Francis, P

    A. Francis, P. de Forcrand, R. Lewis, and K. Maltman, Diquark properties from full QCD lattice simulations, JHEP 05, 062, arXiv:2106.09080 [hep-lat]

    arXiv

  22. [30]

    D. B. Lichtenberg, Charmed baryons in a quark-diquark model, Nuovo Cimento A 28, 563 (1975)

    1975

  23. [31]

    D. B. Lichtenberg, W. Namgung, E. Predazzi, and J. G. Wills, Baryon Masses in a Relativistic Quark–Diquark Model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 48, 1653 (1982)

    1982

  24. [32]

    D. B. Lichtenberg, W. Namgung, J. G. Wills, and E. Predazzi, Light and Heavy Hadron Masses in a Rel- ativistic Quark Potential Model With Diquark Cluster- ing, Z. Phys. C 19, 19 (1983)

    1983

  25. [33]

    Fleck, B

    S. Fleck, B. Silvestre-Brac, and J. M. Richard, Search for Diquark Clustering in Baryons, Phys. Rev. D 38, 1519 (1988)

    1988

  26. [34]

    Ebert, T

    D. Ebert, T. Feldmann, C. Kettner, and H. Rein- hardt, A diquark model for baryons containing one heavy quark, Z. Phys. C 71, 329 (1996), arXiv:hep- ph/9506298

    1996

  27. [35]

    Ebert, R

    D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, and V. O. Galkin, Masses of excited heavy baryons in the relativistic quark–diquark picture, Phys. Lett. B 659, 612 (2008), arXiv:0705.2957 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  28. [36]

    K. Kim, D. Jido, and S. H. Lee, Diquarks: A QCD sum rule perspective, Phys. Rev. C 84, 025204 (2011), arXiv:1103.0826 [nucl-th]

    2011 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Ebert, R

    D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, and V. O. Galkin, Spec- troscopy and Regge trajectories of heavy baryons in the relativistic quark–diquark picture, Phys. Rev. D 84, 014025 (2011), arXiv:1105.0583 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Chen, K.-W

    B. Chen, K.-W. Wei, and A. Zhang, Investigation of ΛQ and Ξ Q baryons in the heavy quark-light diquark picture, Eur. Phys. J. A 51, 82 (2015), arXiv:1406.6561 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Jido and M

    D. Jido and M. Sakashita, Quark confinement potential examined by excitation energy of the Λc and Λb baryons in a quark–diquark model, PTEP 2016, 083D02 (2016), arXiv:1605.07339 [nucl-th]

    2016 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Q.-F. L¨ u, Y. Dong, X. Liu, and T. Matsuki, Puzzle of the Λ c spectrum, Nucl. Phys. Rev. 35, 1 (2018), arXiv:1610.09605 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Kumakawa and D

    K. Kumakawa and D. Jido, Excitation energy spectra of the Λc and Λb baryons in a finite-size diquark model, PTEP 2017, 123D01 (2017), arXiv:1708.02012 [nucl- th]

    2017 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Harada, Y.-R

    M. Harada, Y.-R. Liu, M. Oka, and K. Suzuki, Chiral ef- fective theory of diquarks and theUA(1) anomaly, Phys. Rev. D 101, 054038 (2020), arXiv:1912.09659 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Y. Kim, E. Hiyama, M. Oka, and K. Suzuki, Spec- trum of singly heavy baryons from a chiral effective theory of diquarks, Phys. Rev. D 102, 014004 (2020), 14 arXiv:2003.03525 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Dmitraˇ sinovi´ c and H.-X

    V. Dmitraˇ sinovi´ c and H.-X. Chen, Chiral SU L(3) ×SUR(3) symmetry of baryons with one charmed quark, Phys. Rev. D 101, 114016 (2020)

    2020

  37. [45]

    Kawakami, M

    Y. Kawakami, M. Harada, M. Oka, and K. Suzuki, Sup- pression of decay widths in singly heavy baryons in- duced by the UA(1) anomaly, Phys. Rev. D 102, 114004 (2020), arXiv:2009.06243 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Suenaga and A

    D. Suenaga and A. Hosaka, Novel pentaquark picture for singly heavy baryons from chiral symmetry, Phys. Rev. D 104, 034009 (2021), arXiv:2101.09764 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Kim, Y.-R

    Y. Kim, Y.-R. Liu, M. Oka, and K. Suzuki, Heavy baryon spectrum with chiral multiplets of scalar and vector diquarks, Phys. Rev. D 104, 054012 (2021), arXiv:2105.09087 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Suenaga and A

    D. Suenaga and A. Hosaka, Decays of Roper-like singly heavy baryons in a chiral model, Phys. Rev. D 105, 074036 (2022), arXiv:2202.07804 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Kumakawa and D

    K. Kumakawa and D. Jido, Excitation spectra of heavy baryons in diquark models, PTEP2022, 053D01 (2022), arXiv:2107.11950 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Garcia-Tecocoatzi, A

    H. Garcia-Tecocoatzi, A. Giachino, J. Li, A. Ramirez- Morales, and E. Santopinto, Strong decay widths and mass spectra of charmed baryons, Phys. Rev. D 107, 034031 (2023), arXiv:2205.07049 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Y. Kim, M. Oka, D. Suenaga, and K. Suzuki, Strong decays of singly heavy baryons from a chiral effective theory of diquarks, Phys. Rev. D 107, 074015 (2023), arXiv:2212.08338 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Suenaga and M

    D. Suenaga and M. Oka, Axial anomaly effect on the chiral-partner structure of diquarks at high temperature, Phys. Rev. D 108, 014030 (2023), arXiv:2305.09730 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Jakhad, J

    P. Jakhad, J. Oudichhya, K. Gandhi, and A. K. Rai, Identification of newly observed singly charmed baryons using the relativistic flux tube model, Phys. Rev. D108, 014011 (2023), arXiv:2306.06349 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Garc ´ ıa-Tecocoatzi, A

    H. Garc ´ ıa-Tecocoatzi, A. Giachino, A. Ramirez- Morales, A. Rivero-Acosta, E. Santopinto, and C. A. Vaquera-Araujo, Strong decay widths and mass spectra of the 1D, 2P and 2S singly bottom baryons, Phys. Rev. D 110, 114005 (2024), arXiv:2307.00505 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Takada, D

    H. Takada, D. Suenaga, M. Harada, A. Hosaka, and M. Oka, Axial anomaly effect on three-quark and five- quark singly heavy baryons, Phys. Rev. D 108, 054033 (2023), arXiv:2307.15304 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Kinutani, H

    S. Kinutani, H. Nagahiro, and D. Jido, Excitation spec- tra of heavy baryons in a quark-diquark model with rel- ativistic corrections, Phys. Rev. D 108, 094011 (2023), arXiv:2308.00970 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Pan and J

    J.-H. Pan and J. Pan, Investigation of the mass spectra of singly heavy baryons Σ Q, Ξ ′ Q, and Ω Q(Q = c, b) in the Regge trajectory model, Phys. Rev. D 109, 076010 (2024), arXiv:2308.11769 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Jakhad, J

    P. Jakhad, J. Oudichhya, and A. K. Rai, Interpreta- tion of recently discovered single bottom baryons in the relativistic flux tube model, Phys. Rev. D 110, 094005 (2024), arXiv:2407.01655 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  51. [59]

    L. X. Guti´ errez-Guerrero, A. Raya, L. Albino, and R. J. Hern´ andez-Pinto, First radial excitations of baryons in a contact interaction: Mass spectrum, Phys. Rev. D 110, 074015 (2024), arXiv:2409.06057 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Suenaga and M

    D. Suenaga and M. Oka, Fate of Σ c, Ξ ′ c and Ω c baryons at high temperature with chiral restoration, arXiv:2411.12172 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  53. [61]

    Isgur and M

    N. Isgur and M. B. Wise, Spectroscopy with heavy- quark symmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 1130 (1991)

    1991

  54. [62]

    Yan, H.-Y

    T.-M. Yan, H.-Y. Cheng, C.-Y. Cheung, G.-L. Lin, Y. C. Lin, and H.-L. Yu, Heavy-quark symmetry and chiral dynamics, Phys. Rev. D 46, 1148 (1992), [Erratum: Phys. Rev. D 55, 5851 (1997)]

    1992

  55. [63]

    P. L. Cho, Chiral perturbation theory for hadrons con- taining a heavy quark: The sequel, Phys. Lett. B 285, 145 (1992), arXiv:hep-ph/9203225

    1992 arXiv

  56. [64]

    P. L. Cho, Strong and electromagnetic decays of two new Λ∗ c baryons, Phys. Rev. D 50, 3295 (1994), arXiv:hep- ph/9401276

    1994

  57. [65]

    J. L. Rosner, Charmed baryons with J = 3 /2, Phys. Rev. D 52, 6461 (1995), arXiv:hep-ph/9508252

    1995 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Pirjol and T.-M

    D. Pirjol and T.-M. Yan, Predictions for s-wave and p- wave heavy baryons from sum rules and the constituent quark model: Strong interactions, Phys. Rev. D 56, 5483 (1997), arXiv:hep-ph/9701291

    1997 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Albertus, E

    C. Albertus, E. Hernandez, J. Nieves, and J. M. Verde- Velasco, Study of the strong Σ c → Λcπ, Σ∗ c → Λcπ and Ξ∗ c → Ξcπ decays in a nonrelativistic quark model, Phys. Rev. D 72, 094022 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0507256

    2005 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Cheng and C.-K

    H.-Y. Cheng and C.-K. Chua, Strong decays of charmed baryons in heavy hadron chiral perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. D 75, 014006 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0610283

    2007 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Zhong and Q

    X.-H. Zhong and Q. Zhao, Charmed baryon strong de- cays in a chiral quark model, Phys. Rev. D 77, 074008 (2008), arXiv:0711.4645 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Yasui, Spectroscopy of heavy baryons with heavy- quark symmetry breaking: Transition relations at next- to-leading order, Phys

    S. Yasui, Spectroscopy of heavy baryons with heavy- quark symmetry breaking: Transition relations at next- to-leading order, Phys. Rev. D 91, 014031 (2015), arXiv:1408.3703 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Cheng and C.-K

    H.-Y. Cheng and C.-K. Chua, Strong decays of charmed baryons in heavy hadron chiral perturbation the- ory: An update, Phys. Rev. D 92, 074014 (2015), arXiv:1508.05653 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Nagahiro, S

    H. Nagahiro, S. Yasui, A. Hosaka, M. Oka, and H. Noumi, Structure of charmed baryons studied by pionic decays, Phys. Rev. D 95, 014023 (2017), arXiv:1609.01085 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Chen, K.-W

    B. Chen, K.-W. Wei, X. Liu, and T. Matsuki, Low-lying charmed and charmed-strange baryon states, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 154 (2017), arXiv:1609.07967 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  66. [74]

    K. U. Can, G. Erkol, M. Oka, and T. T. Takahashi, ΛcΣcπ coupling and Σ c → Λcπ decay in lattice QCD, Phys. Lett. B 768, 309 (2017), arXiv:1610.09071 [hep- lat]

    2017 arXiv

  67. [75]

    H.-X. Chen, Q. Mao, W. Chen, A. Hosaka, X. Liu, and S.-L. Zhu, Decay properties of P -wave charmed baryons from light-cone QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D 95, 094008 (2017), arXiv:1703.07703 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Wang, L.-Y

    K.-L. Wang, L.-Y. Xiao, X.-H. Zhong, and Q. Zhao, Understanding the newly observed Ω c states through their decays, Phys. Rev. D 95, 116010 (2017), arXiv:1703.09130 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Cheng and C.-W

    H.-Y. Cheng and C.-W. Chiang, Quantum numbers of Ωc states and other charmed baryons, Phys. Rev. D 95, 094018 (2017), arXiv:1704.00396 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  70. [78]

    A. J. Arifi, H. Nagahiro, and A. Hosaka, Three-body decay of Λ ∗ c (2595) and Λ ∗ c (2625) with consideration of Σc(2455)π and Σ∗ c (2520)π in intermediate States, Phys. 15 Rev. D 95, 114018 (2017), arXiv:1704.00464 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Wang, Y.-X

    K.-L. Wang, Y.-X. Yao, X.-H. Zhong, and Q. Zhao, Strong and radiative decays of the low-lying S- and P - wave singly heavy baryons, Phys. Rev. D 96, 116016 (2017), arXiv:1709.04268 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Yao, K.-L

    Y.-X. Yao, K.-L. Wang, and X.-H. Zhong, Strong and radiative decays of the low-lying D-wave singly heavy baryons, Phys. Rev. D 98, 076015 (2018), arXiv:1803.00364 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Kawakami and M

    Y. Kawakami and M. Harada, Analysis of Λ c(2595), Λc(2625), Λ b(5912), Λ b(5920) based on a chiral part- ner structure, Phys. Rev. D 97, 114024 (2018), arXiv:1804.04872 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  74. [82]

    L¨ u, L.-Y

    Q.-F. L¨ u, L.-Y. Xiao, Z.-Y. Wang, and X.-H. Zhong, Strong decay of Λc(2940) as a 2P state in the Λc family, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 599 (2018), arXiv:1806.01076 [hep- ph]

    2018 arXiv

  75. [83]

    A. J. Arifi, H. Nagahiro, and A. Hosaka, Three-body decay of Λ ∗ c (2595) and Λ ∗ c (2625) with the inclusion of a direct two-pion coupling, Phys. Rev. D 98, 114007 (2018), arXiv:1809.10290 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Wang, Q.-F

    K.-L. Wang, Q.-F. L¨ u, and X.-H. Zhong, Interpretation of the newly observed Σ b(6097)± and Ξb(6227)− states as the P -wave bottom baryons, Phys. Rev. D99, 014011 (2019), arXiv:1810.02205 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Kawakami and M

    Y. Kawakami and M. Harada, Singly heavy baryons with chiral partner structure in a three-flavor chi- ral model, Phys. Rev. D 99, 094016 (2019), arXiv:1902.06774 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Cui, H.-M

    E.-L. Cui, H.-M. Yang, H.-X. Chen, and A. Hosaka, Identifying the Ξ b(6227) and Σ b(6097) as P -wave bot- tom baryons of J P = 3 /2−, Phys. Rev. D 99, 094021 (2019), arXiv:1903.10369 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Nieves and R

    J. Nieves and R. Pavao, Nature of the lowest- lying odd parity charmed baryon Λ c(2595) and Λc(2625) resonances, Phys. Rev. D 101, 014018 (2020), arXiv:1907.05747 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Wang, Q.-F

    K.-L. Wang, Q.-F. L¨ u, and X.-H. Zhong, Interpretation of the newly observed Λ b(6146) and Λ b(6152) states in a chiral quark model, Phys. Rev. D 100, 114035 (2019), arXiv:1908.04622 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Yang, H.-X

    H.-M. Yang, H.-X. Chen, E.-L. Cui, A. Hosaka, and Q. Mao, Decay properties of P -wave bottom baryons within light-cone sum rules, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 80 (2020), arXiv:1909.13575 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  82. [90]

    L¨ u and X.-H

    Q.-F. L¨ u and X.-H. Zhong, Strong decays of the higher excited ΛQ and ΣQ baryons, Phys. Rev. D 101, 014017 (2020), arXiv:1910.06126 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Chen, E.-L

    H.-X. Chen, E.-L. Cui, A. Hosaka, Q. Mao, and H.- M. Yang, Excited Ωb baryons and fine structure of strong interaction, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 256 (2020), arXiv:2001.02147 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Azizi, Y

    K. Azizi, Y. Sarac, and H. Sundu, Λb(6146)0 state newly observed by LHCb, Phys. Rev. D 101, 074026 (2020), arXiv:2001.04953 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Yang and H.-X

    H.-M. Yang and H.-X. Chen, P -wave bottom baryons of the SU (3) flavor 6 F , Phys. Rev. D 101, 114013 (2020), [Erratum: Phys. Rev. D 102, 079901 (2020)], arXiv:2003.07488 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  86. [94]

    A. J. Arifi, H. Nagahiro, A. Hosaka, and K. Tanida, Three-body decay of Λ ∗ c (2765) and determination of its spin-parity, Phys. Rev. D 101, 094023 (2020), arXiv:2003.08202 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Yang, H.-X

    H.-M. Yang, H.-X. Chen, and Q. Mao, Excited Ξ 0 c baryons within the QCD rum rule approach, Phys. Rev. D 102, 114009 (2020), arXiv:2004.00531 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Azizi, Y

    K. Azizi, Y. Sarac, and H. Sundu, Determination of the possible quantum numbers for the newly observed Ξb(6227)0 state, JHEP 03, 244, arXiv:2012.01086 [hep- ph]

    2012 arXiv

  89. [97]

    A. J. Arifi, D. Suenaga, and A. Hosaka, Relativistic cor- rections to decays of heavy baryons in the quark model, Phys. Rev. D 103, 094003 (2021), arXiv:2102.03754 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  90. [98]

    A. J. Arifi, H. Nagahiro, A. Hosaka, and K. Tanida, Two-pion emission decay of Roper-like heavy baryons, Few Body Syst. 62, 36 (2021)

    2021

  91. [99]

    Yang and H.-X

    H.-M. Yang and H.-X. Chen, P -wave charmed baryons of the SU (3) flavor 6 F , Phys. Rev. D 104, 034037 (2021), arXiv:2106.15488 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  92. [100]

    Gong, H.-Y

    K. Gong, H.-Y. Jing, and A. Zhang, Possible assign- ments of highly excited Λ c(2860)+, Λ c(2880)+ and Λc(2940)+, Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 467 (2021)

    2021

  93. [101]

    Kakadiya, Z

    A. Kakadiya, Z. Shah, K. Gandhi, and A. K. Rai, Spec- tra and decay properties of Λb and Σb baryons, Few Body Syst. 63, 29 (2022), arXiv:2108.11062 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  94. [102]

    Kakadiya, Z

    A. Kakadiya, Z. Shah, and A. K. Rai, Mass spectra and decay properties of singly heavy bottom-strange baryons, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 37, 2250053 (2022), arXiv:2202.12048 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  95. [103]

    Suh and H.-C

    J.-M. Suh and H.-C. Kim, Axial-vector transition form factors of the singly heavy baryons, Phys. Rev. D 106, 094028 (2022), arXiv:2204.13982 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  96. [104]

    Yang, H.-X

    H.-M. Yang, H.-X. Chen, E.-L. Cui, and Q. Mao, Iden- tifying the Ξ b(6100) as the P -wave bottom baryon of J P = 3 /2−, Phys. Rev. D 106, 036018 (2022), arXiv:2205.07224 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Yu, Z.-Y

    G.-L. Yu, Z.-Y. Li, Z.-G. Wang, J. Lu, and M. Yan, Systematic analysis of single heavy baryons Λ Q, ΣQ and Ω Q, Nucl. Phys. B 990, 116183 (2023), arXiv:2206.08128 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  98. [106]

    Wang, L.-Y

    W.-J. Wang, L.-Y. Xiao, and X.-H. Zhong, Strong decays of the low-lying ρ-mode 1 P -wave singly heavy baryons, Phys. Rev. D 106, 074020 (2022), arXiv:2208.10116 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  99. [107]

    Zhou, W.-J

    Y.-H. Zhou, W.-J. Wang, L.-Y. Xiao, and X.-H. Zhong, Strong decays of the low-lying 1 P - and 1 D- wave Σ c baryons, Phys. Rev. D 108, 014019 (2023), arXiv:2303.13774 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  100. [108]

    Ponkhuha, A

    N. Ponkhuha, A. J. Arifi, and D. Samart, Two-pion emission decays of negative parity singly heavy baryons, Phys. Rev. D 110, 114046 (2024), arXiv:2407.10063 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  101. [109]

    Jakhad, J

    P. Jakhad, J. Oudichhya, and A. K. Rai, Strong de- cays and spin-parity assignments of low-lying singly charmed baryons, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 39, 2443013 (2024), arXiv:2409.18729 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  102. [110]

    Ortiz-Pacheco and R

    E. Ortiz-Pacheco and R. Bijker, Strong decay widths of S- and P-wave singly-, doubly- and triply-heavy charm and bottom baryons, arXiv:2410.09622 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  103. [111]

    L. A. Copley, N. Isgur, and G. Karl, Charmed baryons in a quark model with hyperfine interactions, Phys. Rev. D 20, 768 (1979), [Erratum: Phys. Rev. D 23, 817 (1981)]

    1979

  104. [112]

    Yoshida, E

    T. Yoshida, E. Hiyama, A. Hosaka, M. Oka, and K. Sadato, Spectrum of heavy baryons in the quark model, Phys. Rev. D 92, 114029 (2015), arXiv:1510.01067 [hep-ph]. 16

    2015 arXiv

  105. [113]

    D. K. Hong, Y. J. Sohn, and I. Zahed, A diquark chiral effective theory and exotic baryons, Phys. Lett. B 596, 191 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0403205

    2004 arXiv

  106. [114]

    Giacosa, Mixing of scalar tetraquark and quarkonia states in a chiral approach, Phys

    F. Giacosa, Mixing of scalar tetraquark and quarkonia states in a chiral approach, Phys. Rev. D 75, 054007 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0611388

    2007 arXiv

  107. [115]

    D. K. Hong and C. Song, Light scalar decay in a diquark chiral effective theory, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A27, 1250051 (2012), arXiv:hep-ph/0407274

    2012 arXiv

  108. [116]

    Hatsuda, M

    T. Hatsuda, M. Tachibana, N. Yamamoto, and G. Baym, New critical point induced by the axial anomaly in dense QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 122001 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0605018

    2006 arXiv

  109. [117]

    Delbourgo and M

    R. Delbourgo and M. D. Scadron, Dynamical generation of the gauged SU(2) linear sigma model, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 10, 251 (1995), arXiv:hep-ph/9910242

    1995 arXiv

  110. [118]

    M. D. Scadron, G. Rupp, and R. Delbourgo, The quark- level linear σ model, Fortschr. Phys. 61, 994 (2013), arXiv:1309.5041 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  111. [119]

    Y. Kim, M. Oka, and K. Suzuki, Doubly heavy tetraquarks in a chiral-diquark picture, Phys. Rev. D 105, 074021 (2022), arXiv:2202.06520 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  112. [120]

    Navas et al

    S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group Collaboration), Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

    2024

  113. [121]

    Aaij et al

    R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), Observation of New Baryons in the Ξ − b π+π− and Ξ 0 bπ+π− Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 171901 (2023), arXiv:2307.13399 [hep-ex]

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.