Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 93 references

Doubly-charmed pentaquark states in a mass splitting model

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Three doubly-charmed pentaquarks predicted stable

desk verdict A careful CMI-model study of doubly-charmed pentaquarks whose headline stability claim is undercut by the model's own internal spread of mass estimates. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.15789 v2 pith:6VN4JWKP submitted 2025-04-22 hep-ph hep-ex

Shi-Yuan Li , Yan-Rui Liu , Cheng-Rui Shu , Zong-Guo Si This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-ex
keywords doubly-charmedpentaquarkscompactmultiquarkstatescolor-magneticinteractionmasssplittingmodelPψ(4312)strongdecaysquarkrearrangementexotichadronspectroscopy
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

The paper aims to show that the lightest doubly-charmed pentaquark states with quark content $ccqq\bar{q}$ $(q=u,d,s)$ should exist as compact five-quark hadrons, provided the observed $P_\psi^N(4312)^+$ is itself a compact hidden-charm pentaquark with quantum numbers $I(J^P)=\frac{1}{2}(\frac{3}{2}^-)$. Working only with mass differences relative to that reference state removes the largest uncertainty in usual color-magnetic interaction estimates. The calculation places three ground states below every allowed $S$-wave two-body threshold: the $I(J^P)=\frac{1}{2}(\frac{1}{2}^-)$ $ccnn\bar{n}$ ($I_{nn}=0$) at about $3714$ MeV, the $0(\frac{1}{2}^-)$ $ccnn\bar{s}$ at about $4005$ MeV, and the $0(\frac{1}{2}^-)$ $ccns\bar{n}$ at about $3899$ MeV. If correct, these are stable doubly-charmed pentaquarks that experiments could search for in $\Xi_{cc}\pi$, $\Xi_{cc}K$, and $\Xi_{cc}\bar{K}$ spectra. The paper also gives a first rearrangement-decay estimate of the widths of the unstable states.

What carries the argument

The central object is the modified color-magnetic interaction mass formula $M=\tilde{m}_{\rm penta}+E_{\rm CMI}+\sum n_{ij}\Delta_{ij}$, where $\tilde{m}_{\rm penta}=M_{P_\psi^N(4312)^+}-(E_{\rm CMI})_{P_\psi^N(4312)^+}=4382.6$ MeV replaces the uncertain sum of effective quark masses and $\Delta_{ij}$ are quark-mass gaps such as $\Delta_{sn}=90.6$ MeV. The $E_{\rm CMI}$ eigenvalues come from diagonalizing the spin-color Hamiltonian in the ten base vectors built from $(cc)(qq)\bar{q}$ color couplings; the same bases feed the rearrangement-decay overlaps. This construction is what transfers the scale from a single measured pentaquark to all $ccqq\bar{q}$ systems while keeping the calculation parameter-light.

What would settle it

Measure the quantum numbers of $P_\psi^N(4312)^+$: if it is found to have $J^P=1/2^-$ or a molecular rather than compact structure, the reference scale $\tilde{m}_{\rm penta}$ would change enough to lift the predicted ground states above their thresholds. Independently, a lattice QCD calculation of the $I(J^P)=\frac{1}{2}(\frac{1}{2}^-)$ $ccnn\bar{n}$ ($I_{nn}=0$) ground state that comes out above the $\Xi_{cc}\pi$ threshold would directly falsify the stability claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, adopting $P_\psi^N(4312)^+$ as a compact reference pentaquark with $I(J^P)=\frac{1}{2}(\frac{3}{2}^-)$ fixes a single scale $\tilde{m}_{\rm penta}=4382.6$ MeV, and all doubly-charmed pentaquark masses follow from color-magnetic energy splittings plus quark-mass gaps. The three predicted stable ground states are the lowest $I(J^P)=\frac{1}{2}(\frac{1}{2}^-)$ $ccnn\bar{n}$ with $I_{nn}=0$ at $3714.2$ MeV (about $45$ MeV below $\Xi_{cc}\pi$), the lowest $0(\frac{1}{2}^-)$ $ccnn\bar{s}$ at $4004.7$ MeV (about $111$ MeV below $\Xi_{cc}K$), and the lowest $0(\frac{1}{2}^-)$ $ccns\bar{n}$ at $3898.7$ MeV (about $210$ MeV below $\Xi_{cc}\bar{K}$). In all three, the color-antitriplet $cc$ diquark component dominates and the light $qq\bar{q}$ cluster is mostly spin $1/2$, so they resemble a $\Xi_{cc}$ baryon in which the $n$ quark is replaced by a compact triquark. The decay widths computed with a constant rearrangement Hamiltonian indicate that every other $S$-wave state has at least one open channel, while the stable ones have none.

Load-bearing premise

The whole calculation stands or falls on the assumption that the observed $P_\psi^N(4312)^+$ particle is a compact five-quark state with spin-parity $3/2^-$; if that turns out wrong, every predicted mass shifts by roughly the same amount and the 10 to 210 MeV stability margins could change sign.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The lowest $ccnn\bar{n}$ state at $3714$ MeV should be a stable or very narrow pentaquark, since all $S$-wave rearrangement channels are closed by about $45$ MeV.
  • The lowest $ccnn\bar{s}$ at $4005$ MeV lies about $111$ MeV below $\Xi_{cc}K$, so it cannot decay strongly into that or any other $S$-wave two-body channel.
  • The lowest $ccns\bar{n}$ at $3899$ MeV is about $210$ MeV below $\Xi_{cc}\bar{K}$, making it the most deeply bound of the three predicted stable states.
  • The second-lowest $I_{nn}=0$ $3/2^-$ $ccnn\bar{n}$ state cannot decay in $S$-wave but may decay through $D$-wave, so it should appear as a narrow near-threshold structure.
  • For all eight flavor-isospin systems, predicted masses are tens of MeV lower than previous threshold-anchored CMI estimates, and the $ccss\bar{s}$ masses drop by about $150$ MeV.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the spin-parity of $P_\psi^N(4312)^+$ were instead $J^P=1/2^-$ (the molecule assignment), the reference eigenvalue changes and the whole doubly-charmed spectrum shifts almost rigidly; the $45$ MeV margin of the lightest state could disappear, so the stability prediction is a direct test of that quantum-number assignment.
  • The model's pattern suggests a targeted experimental search: look for a narrow peak just below the $\Xi_{cc}\pi$ threshold in prompt or $b$-hadron decays, and for analogues near $\Xi_{cc}K$ and $\Xi_{cc}\bar{K}$; any observed doubly-charmed pentaquark above these thresholds would disfavor the compact picture.
  • Because the stable states are essentially $\Xi_{cc}$-like cores with a tightly bound $\bar{q}qq$ triquark, lattice QCD calculations of the $ccqq\bar{q}$ ground state with these quantum numbers could settle whether the compact configuration is bound without relying on the CMI scale assumption.
  • The near degeneracy of $\rho$ and $\omega$ in the decay tables means isospin partners of the same state have nearly equal widths into $\Omega_{cc}^{(*)} \rho$ and $\Omega_{cc}^{(*)} \omega$; precise width ratios in future data could help confirm the underlying flavor wave functions.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript applies a color-magnetic interaction (CMI) mass-splitting model to S-wave compact ccqq\bar q (q=u,d,s) pentaquark states. It uses three mass formulae: the original effective-quark-mass formula Eq. (2), the meson-baryon threshold formula Eq. (3), and a reference-pentaquark formula Eq. (5) that fixes the overall scale by assuming P_psi(4312)^+ is a compact hidden-charm pentaquark with I(J^P)=1/2(3/2^-), giving m_tilde_penta=4382.6 MeV. The paper computes CMI matrices, eigenvalues, eigenvectors, and masses for eight flavor/isospin cases, and estimates two-body rearrangement decay widths using a constant decay Hamiltonian C extracted from the measured P_c(4312) width. The central results are three ground states predicted to be stable: the lowest I(J^P)=1/2(1/2^-) ccnn\bar n with I_nn=0 at 3714.2 MeV, the lowest 0(1/2^-) ccnn\bar s at 4004.7 MeV, and the lowest 0(1/2^-) ccns\bar n at 3898.7 MeV, each below its lowest S-wave rearrangement threshold.

Significance. If substantiated, the prediction of stable doubly-charmed pentaquarks in the compact picture is a sharp and testable outcome that would distinguish compact multiquark configurations from molecular interpretations and could motivate targeted searches at LHCb and future facilities. The paper's strengths are the explicit spin-color bases, CMI matrices, and detailed decay tables, which make the calculation reproducible, and the systematic comparison with alternative mass estimates from Eqs. (2) and (3) and with earlier literature. However, the stability claim is currently supported only at the level of central values: the model's own internal spread is comparable to the binding margins, and no uncertainties are propagated to any mass or width. The paper is therefore of interest, but the headline conclusion requires substantial qualification before it can be accepted as a prediction of stable states.

major comments (4)
  1. [Table II / Sec. III.B] The headline stable state, the lowest I(J^P)=1/2(1/2^-) ccnn\bar n with I_nn=0, is listed at 3714.2 MeV, only 44.7 MeV below the Xi_cc pi threshold (3758.9 MeV). The same quantum state is estimated within the paper's own alternative formulae at 3751.6 MeV (Eq. (3) with the Sigma_c D threshold), 3603.0 MeV (Eq. (3) with the Xi_cc pi threshold), and 3865.2 MeV (Eq. (2) upper limit). The spread among these estimates is about 262 MeV, and one of them lies 106 MeV above the threshold. Since the paper provides no quantitative criterion for preferring Eq. (5) over these alternatives and no uncertainty estimate, the central 'stable' claim is not robust to the model's internal uncertainty.
  2. [Sec. II.A, Eq. (4); Sec. IV] The scale m_tilde_penta=4382.6 MeV is obtained by subtracting the calculated CMI eigenvalue of P_psi(4312)^+ (assumed to be a compact state with I(J^P)=1/2(3/2^-)) from its measured mass. This assumption is adopted from Refs. [80,81] and is not independently established in the present paper. A shift of only +45 MeV in m_tilde_penta would move the adopted ccnn\bar n mass above the Xi_cc pi threshold, and shifts of about +112 and +210 MeV would undermine the other two stability claims. The paper should state the shift in the scale needed to destroy each prediction and discuss the evidence for the assumed quantum numbers, or it should present the predictions with an explicit caveat that they are conditional on this assignment.
  3. [Sec. III.A and Sec. IV] All input couplings C_ij, the mass gap Delta_sn=90.6 MeV, and the reference scale are quoted without propagated uncertainties, and no error bars are given for any predicted mass or width. Section IV concedes that parameters extracted from conventional hadrons 'may introduce uncertainties,' but the central conclusion concerns binding energies of 45, 111, and 210 MeV, which are exactly the quantities most sensitive to these parameter shifts. A quantitative uncertainty analysis, or at minimum a sensitivity scan over the extracted C_ij, Delta_sn, and m_tilde_penta, is needed to support the claim that these states are stable.
  4. [Sec. II.C and Sec. IV] The paper defines stability only with respect to S-wave two-body rearrangement channels, as stated in Sec. II.C ('we consider just the two-body S-wave strong decays'). The ground states may in principle decay through D-wave or three-body channels, and no calculation or argument is provided that these are negligible. The conclusion should therefore be phrased as 'stable against S-wave two-body rearrangement decays within the model,' rather than the unqualified 'stable' used in the abstract and Sec. IV.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. IV] In the paragraph discussing the wave-function compositions, 'propotions' should be 'proportions.'
  2. [Table IX] In the ccns\bar s, J^P=1/2^- block, the partial-width entry '(19,2,-)' appears to be a typo for '(19.2,-)'.
  3. [Abstract] The abstract says the paper concentrates on 'mass differences relative to P_psi^N(4312)^+', but the results are presented as absolute masses; rewording the abstract to say the scale is fixed by the assumed P_c(4312) mass would be clearer.
  4. [Fig. 1] The threshold lines in the eight panels are not all labeled with their numerical values; given that the stability margins are only 45-210 MeV, labeling the relevant thresholds directly in the figure would help the reader assess the claim.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The absolute mass scale is imported from the authors' own P_c(4312) compact-pentaquark assignment, but the mass splittings and threshold comparisons are computed independently.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section IV (Discussions and Summary); scale set in Sec. II A, Eq. (4)]
    "We assume that the P_N(4312)^+ is a compact hidden-charm pentaquark with I(J^P)=1/2(3/2^-) and treat it as a reference to estimate masses of the ccqq¯q states. This assumption is from the consistency requirement for an interpretation of the observed hidden-charm pentaquark states [80,81]."

    The entire absolute scale of the predictions is fixed by mtilde_penta = M_PN(4312) - (E_CMI)_PN(4312) = 4382.6 MeV in Eq. (4). That value is only meaningful if P_c(4312) really is a compact I(J^P)=1/2(3/2^-) pentaquark, an assignment the present paper does not derive but imports from the same authors' Refs. [80,81]. Every predicted doubly-charmed mass is M = mtilde_penta + E_CMI + nΔ, so an error in this self-imported assignment shifts all three 'stable' states by the same amount; the claimed binding margins are only 10-210 MeV, some smaller than the model's own internal spread. The central stability claim therefore rests on a load-bearing self-citation rather than on an independently established input.

full rationale

The predicted masses are not fitted to the doubly-charmed pentaquark states: the CMI eigenvalues are computed from a fixed spin-color basis, the C_ij parameters are extracted from conventional hadrons, and the thresholds (Xi_cc pi, Xi_cc K, Xi_cc anti-K) are independent experimental inputs. Thus the mass splittings relative to the reference state and the stability comparisons have independent content and are not circular by construction. The one genuine circularity concern is the reference state itself: the paper explicitly adopts the P_c(4312) compact 3/2^- assignment because of the authors' prior consistency analysis [80,81], and this assumption sets the overall mass scale. Since the binding margins are small, the headline 'three stable states' claim is sensitive to that self-imported premise. The paper also acknowledges that the extracted quark masses and couplings 'may introduce uncertainties' but provides no error bars; that is a robustness limitation rather than a further circular step. Overall, this is a calibrated CMI calculation with one load-bearing self-citation, not a derivation that reduces to its inputs by definition.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a standard CMI model, but the mass scale is anchored to an assumed interpretation of P_c(4312), and the key parameters (m_tilde_penta, Delta_sn, C, C_ij) are all fitted or calibration inputs. No new particles or forces are introduced as explanatory entities; the predicted pentaquarks are outputs, not inputs.

free parameters (4)
  • m_tilde_penta = 4382.6 MeV
    Sets the overall mass scale via Eq. (4), defined as M_Ppsi(4312) minus (E_CMI)_ref, under the assumed compact pentaquark assignment. All predicted masses shift linearly with this value.
  • Delta_sn = 90.6 MeV
    Strange-light effective quark mass gap, determined in the authors' previous studies [82,83] and used in Eq. (5) for strange-containing pentaquarks.
  • C_ij couplings = C_nn=18.4, C_ns=12.1, C_cn=4.0, C_ss=5.7, C_cs=4.3, C_nnbar=29.9, C_nsbar=18.7, C_cnbar=6.6, C_csbar=6.7, C_cbar=5.3…
    Effective color-magnetic couplings extracted from conventional hadron masses in Ref. [82,89] and used in the CMI Hamiltonian (Eq. 1).
  • C (decay constant) = 4647.9 MeV
    Extracted from the measured width Gamma(P_psi(4312))=9.8 MeV under the assumption Gamma_total=Gamma_sum; used to scale all predicted partial widths.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption CMI Hamiltonian H = sum m_i - sum C_ij lambda_i.lambda_j sigma_i.sigma_j (Eq. 1) captures the dominant mass splitting.
    The constituent quark model with only color-magnetic interaction is assumed to describe compact pentaquark masses, neglecting orbital excitations and other dynamics for S-wave states.
  • domain assumption Parameters extracted from conventional mesons and baryons apply to compact pentaquarks.
    The C_ij and quark masses are taken from fits to ordinary hadrons; the paper acknowledges this may introduce uncertainties for multiquark systems.
  • ad hoc to paper P_psi(4312)^+ is a compact hidden-charm pentaquark with I(J^P)=1/2(3/2^-).
    This assignment comes from the consistency interpretation in the authors' prior work [80,81] and is used as the reference state in Eq. (4), setting the mass scale.
  • ad hoc to paper The rearrangement decay Hamiltonian is a constant C, same for all channels and states.
    Used to compute amplitudes as M=C<final|initial>, explicitly acknowledged by the authors as a crude assumption.
  • standard math Eta-eta' mixing angle theta = -11.3 degrees.
    Taken from PDG [88] and used in Eq. (9) for pseudoscalar meson wavefunctions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Doubly-charmed pentaquark states in a mass splitting model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6VN4JWKP

@misc{pith2026250415789,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Doubly-charmed pentaquark states in a mass splitting model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6VN4JWKP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.15789}
}
abstract

Concentrating on the mass differences relative to $P_{\psi}^{N}(4312)^+$, we systematically investigate the spectra of doubly-charmed pentaquark states in the compact $ccqq\bar{q}$ ($q=u, d, s$) configuration. The assumption that the observed $P_{\psi}^{N}(4312)^+$ is a compact hidden-charm pentaquark with $I(J^P)=\frac12(\frac32^-)$ is adopted. We also study the properties of strong decays within a simple rearrangement scheme. The results indicate that the $I(J^P)=\frac12(\frac12^-)$ $ccnn\bar{n}$ with $I_{nn}=0$ where $n$ denotes $u$ or $d$ quark, $I(J^P)=0(\frac12^-)$ $ccnn\bar{s}$, and $I(J^P)=0(\frac12^-)$ $ccns\bar{n}$ ground states should be stable.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.15789 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Relative positions for the doubly-charmed pentaquark states and corresponding baryon-meson thresholds. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

93 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Observation of a narrow charmonium-like state in exclusiveB ±→K±π+π−J/ψdecays,

    S. K. Choiet al.[Belle], “Observation of a narrow charmonium-like state in exclusiveB ±→K±π+π−J/ψdecays,” Phys. Rev. Lett.91(2003), 262001 [arXiv:hep-ex/0309032 [hep-ex]]

    arXiv 2003

  2. [2]

    For the iso-doublet pentaquarks, the possibility that they mix with the excited Ξ cc baryons is not excluded

    pentaquark in theI nn = 1 iso-doublet is about 250 (330) MeV heavier than the corresponding state in theI nn = 0 iso-doublet and is not stable. For the iso-doublet pentaquarks, the possibility that they mix with the excited Ξ cc baryons is not excluded. The mixing may lead to physical states different from theoretical expectations, which can be understood...

  3. [3]

    The obtained pentaquarks range from 4042.0 to 4726.3 MeV, with the highest and lowest states possessingJ P = 1 2 −

    case. The obtained pentaquarks range from 4042.0 to 4726.3 MeV, with the highest and lowest states possessingJ P = 1 2 − . For two degenerateI= 3 2 andI= 1 2 pentaquarks, the latter state has more decay modes than the former one, but the obtained width usually smaller. One may understand this feature from the fact that the theoretical total width is deter...

    arXiv

  4. [4]

    Observation of a broad structure in theπ +π−J/ψmass spectrum around 4.26-GeV/c 2,

    B. Aubertet al.[BaBar], “Observation of a broad structure in theπ +π−J/ψmass spectrum around 4.26-GeV/c 2,” Phys. Rev. Lett.95(2005), 142001 [arXiv:hep-ex/0506081 [hep-ex]]

    arXiv 2005

  5. [5]

    Evidence of a broad structure at an invariant mass of 4.32-GeV/c 2 in the reactione +e−→ π+π−ψ2S measured at BaBar,

    B. Aubertet al.[BaBar], “Evidence of a broad structure at an invariant mass of 4.32-GeV/c 2 in the reactione +e−→ π+π−ψ2S measured at BaBar,” Phys. Rev. Lett.98(2007), 212001 [arXiv:hep-ex/0610057 [hep-ex]]

    arXiv 2007

  6. [6]

    Observation of a resonance-like structure in thepi ±ψ′ mass distribution in exclusiveB→Kπ ±ψ′ decays,

    S. K. Choiet al.[Belle], “Observation of a resonance-like structure in thepi ±ψ′ mass distribution in exclusiveB→Kπ ±ψ′ decays,” Phys. Rev. Lett.100(2008), 142001 [arXiv:0708.1790 [hep-ex]]

    arXiv 2008

  7. [7]

    Observation of two charged bottomonium-like resonances in Y(5S) decays,

    A. Bondaret al.[Belle], “Observation of two charged bottomonium-like resonances in Y(5S) decays,” Phys. Rev. Lett.108 (2012), 122001 [arXiv:1110.2251 [hep-ex]]

    arXiv 2012

  8. [8]

    Study ofe +e−ßπ+π−J/ψand Observation of a Charged Charmoniumlike State at Belle,

    Z. Q. Liuet al.[Belle], “Study ofe +e−ßπ+π−J/ψand Observation of a Charged Charmoniumlike State at Belle,” Phys. Rev. Lett.110(2013), 252002 [erratum: Phys. Rev. Lett.111(2013), 019901] [arXiv:1304.0121 [hep-ex]]

    arXiv 2013

Show all 93 references
  1. [9]

    Observation of a Charged Charmoniumlike Structure ine +e− →π +π−J/ψat √s=4.26 GeV,

    M. Ablikimet al.[BESIII], “Observation of a Charged Charmoniumlike Structure ine +e− →π +π−J/ψat √s=4.26 GeV,” Phys. Rev. Lett.110(2013), 252001 [arXiv:1303.5949 [hep-ex]]

    2013 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Evidence for a Narrow Near-Threshold Structure in theJ/ψϕMass Spectrum inB +→J/ψϕK + Decays,

    T. Aaltonenet al.[CDF], “Evidence for a Narrow Near-Threshold Structure in theJ/ψϕMass Spectrum inB +→J/ψϕK + Decays,” Phys. Rev. Lett.102(2009), 242002 [arXiv:0903.2229 [hep-ex]]

    2009 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Evidence for a new resonance and search for the Y(4140) in the gamma gamma —>phi J/psi process,

    C. P. Shenet al.[Belle], “Evidence for a new resonance and search for the Y(4140) in the gamma gamma —>phi J/psi process,” Phys. Rev. Lett.104(2010), 112004 [arXiv:0912.2383 [hep-ex]]

    2010 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Observation of theY(4140) Structure in theJ/ψϕMass Spectrum inB ±→J/ψϕK ± Decays,

    T. Aaltonenet al.[CDF], “Observation of theY(4140) Structure in theJ/ψϕMass Spectrum inB ±→J/ψϕK ± Decays,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A32(2017) no.26, 1750139 [arXiv:1101.6058 [hep-ex]]

    2017 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Observation ofJ/ψϕstructures consistent with exotic states from amplitude analysis ofB +→ J/ψϕK + decays,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Observation ofJ/ψϕstructures consistent with exotic states from amplitude analysis ofB +→ J/ψϕK + decays,” Phys. Rev. Lett.118(2017) no.2, 022003 [arXiv:1606.07895 [hep-ex]]

    2017 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Nonstandard heavy mesons and baryons: Experimental evidence,

    S. L. Olsen, T. Skwarnicki and D. Zieminska, “Nonstandard heavy mesons and baryons: Experimental evidence,” Rev. Mod. Phys.90(2018) no.1, 015003 [arXiv:1708.04012 [hep-ph]]

    2018 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Observation of New Resonances Decaying toJ/ψK ++ andJ/ψϕ,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Observation of New Resonances Decaying toJ/ψK ++ andJ/ψϕ,” Phys. Rev. Lett.127(2021) no.8, 082001 [arXiv:2103.01803 [hep-ex]]

    2021

  8. [16]

    Observation of a Resonant Structure near the Ds+Ds- Threshold in the B+→Ds+Ds-K+ Decay,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Observation of a Resonant Structure near the Ds+Ds- Threshold in the B+→Ds+Ds-K+ Decay,” Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023) no.7, 071901 [arXiv:2210.15153 [hep-ex]]. 16

    2023

  9. [17]

    A model-independent study of resonant structure inB +→D +D−K + decays,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “A model-independent study of resonant structure inB +→D +D−K + decays,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 125(2020), 242001 [arXiv:2009.00025 [hep-ex]]

    2020

  10. [18]

    Amplitude analysis of theB + →D +D−K + decay,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Amplitude analysis of theB + →D +D−K + decay,” Phys. Rev. D102(2020), 112003 [arXiv:2009.00026 [hep-ex]]

    2020

  11. [19]

    First Observation of a Doubly Charged Tetraquark and Its Neutral Partner,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “First Observation of a Doubly Charged Tetraquark and Its Neutral Partner,” Phys. Rev. Lett.131 (2023) no.4, 041902 [arXiv:2212.02716 [hep-ex]]

    2023

  12. [20]

    Amplitude analysis of B0→D¯0Ds+π- and B+→D-Ds+π+ decays,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Amplitude analysis of B0→D¯0Ds+π- and B+→D-Ds+π+ decays,” Phys. Rev. D108(2023) no.1, 012017 [arXiv:2212.02717 [hep-ex]]

    2023

  13. [21]

    Study of the doubly charmed tetraquarkT + cc,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Study of the doubly charmed tetraquarkT + cc,” Nature Commun.13(2022) no.1, 3351 [arXiv:2109.01056 [hep-ex]]

    2022

  14. [22]

    Observation of an exotic narrow doubly charmed tetraquark,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Observation of an exotic narrow doubly charmed tetraquark,” Nature Phys.18(2022) no.7, 751-754 [arXiv:2109.01038 [hep-ex]]

    2022

  15. [23]

    Observation of structure in theJ/ψ-pair mass spectrum,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Observation of structure in theJ/ψ-pair mass spectrum,” Sci. Bull.65(2020) no.23, 1983-1993 [arXiv:2006.16957 [hep-ex]]

    2020

  16. [24]

    New Structures in the J/ψJ/ψMass Spectrum in Proton-Proton Collisions at s=13 TeV,

    A. Hayrapetyanet al.[CMS], “New Structures in the J/ψJ/ψMass Spectrum in Proton-Proton Collisions at s=13 TeV,” Phys. Rev. Lett.132(2024) no.11, 111901 [arXiv:2306.07164 [hep-ex]]

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Observation of an Excess of Dicharmonium Events in the Four-Muon Final State with the ATLAS Detector,

    G. Aadet al.[ATLAS], “Observation of an Excess of Dicharmonium Events in the Four-Muon Final State with the ATLAS Detector,” Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023) no.15, 151902 [arXiv:2304.08962 [hep-ex]]

    2023 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Observation ofJ/ψpResonances Consistent with Pentaquark States in Λ 0 b→J/ψK −pDecays,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Observation ofJ/ψpResonances Consistent with Pentaquark States in Λ 0 b→J/ψK −pDecays,” Phys. Rev. Lett.115(2015), 072001 [arXiv:1507.03414 [hep-ex]]

    2015 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Observation of a narrow pentaquark state,P c(4312)+, and of two-peak structure of thePc(4450)+,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Observation of a narrow pentaquark state,P c(4312)+, and of two-peak structure of thePc(4450)+,” Phys. Rev. Lett.122(2019) no.22, 222001 [arXiv:1904.03947 [hep-ex]]

    2019 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Evidence for a new structure in theJ/ψpandJ/ψ¯psystems inB 0 s→J/ψp¯pdecays,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Evidence for a new structure in theJ/ψpandJ/ψ¯psystems inB 0 s→J/ψp¯pdecays,” Phys. Rev. Lett.128(2022) no.6, 062001 [arXiv:2108.04720 [hep-ex]]

    2022

  21. [29]

    Evidence of aJ/ψΛ structure and observation of excited Ξ − states in the Ξ− b →J/ψΛK − decay,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Evidence of aJ/ψΛ structure and observation of excited Ξ − states in the Ξ− b →J/ψΛK − decay,” Sci. Bull.66(2021), 1278-1287 [arXiv:2012.10380 [hep-ex]]

    2021

  22. [30]

    Observation of a J/ψΛ Resonance Consistent with a Strange Pentaquark Candidate in B-→J/ψΛp¯ Decays,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Observation of a J/ψΛ Resonance Consistent with a Strange Pentaquark Candidate in B-→J/ψΛp¯ Decays,” Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023) no.3, 031901 [arXiv:2210.10346 [hep-ex]]

    2023 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Search for Pcs(4459) and Pcs(4338) in Upsilon(1S,2S) inclusive decays at Belle,

    I. Adachiet al.[Belle and Belle II], “Search for Pcs(4459) and Pcs(4338) in Upsilon(1S,2S) inclusive decays at Belle,” [arXiv:2502.09951 [hep-ex]]

    arXiv

  24. [32]

    TheXYZ states: experimental and theoretical status and perspectives,

    N. Brambilla, S. Eidelman, C. Hanhart, A. Nefediev, C. P. Shen, C. E. Thomas, A. Vairo and C. Z. Yuan, “TheXYZ states: experimental and theoretical status and perspectives,” Phys. Rept.873(2020), 1-154 [arXiv:1907.07583 [hep-ex]]

    2020 arXiv

  25. [33]

    The hidden-charm pentaquark and tetraquark states,

    H. X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu and S. L. Zhu, “The hidden-charm pentaquark and tetraquark states,” Phys. Rept.639 (2016), 1-121 [arXiv:1601.02092 [hep-ph]]

    2016 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Tetraquarks and Pentaquarks from Quark Model Perspective,

    H. Huang, C. Deng, X. Liu, Y. Tan and J. Ping, “Tetraquarks and Pentaquarks from Quark Model Perspective,” Symmetry 15(2023) no.7, 1298

    2023

  27. [35]

    Pentaquark and Tetraquark states,

    Y. R. Liu, H. X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu and S. L. Zhu, “Pentaquark and Tetraquark states,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.107 (2019), 237-320 [arXiv:1903.11976 [hep-ph]]

    2019 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Heavy-Quark QCD Exotica,

    R. F. Lebed, R. E. Mitchell and E. S. Swanson, “Heavy-Quark QCD Exotica,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.93(2017), 143-194 [arXiv:1610.04528 [hep-ph]]

    2017 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Hadronic molecules,

    F. K. Guo, C. Hanhart, U. G. Meißner, Q. Wang, Q. Zhao and B. S. Zou, “Hadronic molecules,” Rev. Mod. Phys.90 (2018) no.1, 015004 [erratum: Rev. Mod. Phys.94(2022) no.2, 029901] [arXiv:1705.00141 [hep-ph]]

    2018 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Novel approaches in hadron spectroscopy,

    M. Albaladejoet al.[JPAC], “Novel approaches in hadron spectroscopy,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.127(2022), 103981 [arXiv:2112.13436 [hep-ph]]

    2022 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Exotics: Heavy Pentaquarks and Tetraquarks,

    A. Ali, J. S. Lange and S. Stone, “Exotics: Heavy Pentaquarks and Tetraquarks,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.97(2017), 123-198 [arXiv:1706.00610 [hep-ph]]

    2017 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Threshold cusps and triangle singularities in hadronic reactions,

    F. K. Guo, X. H. Liu and S. Sakai, “Threshold cusps and triangle singularities in hadronic reactions,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.112(2020), 103757 [arXiv:1912.07030 [hep-ph]]

    2020 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Chiral perturbation theory for heavy hadrons and chiral effective field theory for heavy hadronic molecules,

    L. Meng, B. Wang, G. J. Wang and S. L. Zhu, “Chiral perturbation theory for heavy hadrons and chiral effective field theory for heavy hadronic molecules,” Phys. Rept.1019(2023), 1-149 [arXiv:2204.08716 [hep-ph]]

    2023 arXiv

  34. [42]

    An updated review of the new hadron states,

    H. X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, Y. R. Liu and S. L. Zhu, “An updated review of the new hadron states,” Rept. Prog. Phys. 86(2023) no.2, 026201 [arXiv:2204.02649 [hep-ph]]

    2023 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Three ways to decipher the nature of exotic hadrons: Multiplets, three-body hadronic molecules, and correlation functions,

    M. Z. Liu, Y. W. Pan, Z. W. Liu, T. W. Wu, J. X. Lu and L. S. Geng, “Three ways to decipher the nature of exotic hadrons: Multiplets, three-body hadronic molecules, and correlation functions,” Phys. Rept.1108(2025), 1-108 [arXiv:2404.06399 [hep-ph]]

    2025 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Surveying exotic pentaquarks with the typicalQQqq¯qconfiguration,

    Q. S. Zhou, K. Chen, X. Liu, Y. R. Liu and S. L. Zhu, “Surveying exotic pentaquarks with the typicalQQqq¯qconfiguration,” Phys. Rev. C98(2018) no.4, 045204 [arXiv:1801.04557 [hep-ph]]

    2018 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Analysis of the doubly heavy baryon states and pentaquark states with QCD sum rules,

    Z. G. Wang, “Analysis of the doubly heavy baryon states and pentaquark states with QCD sum rules,” Eur. Phys. J. C 78(2018) no.10, 826 [arXiv:1808.09820 [hep-ph]]

    2018 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Where is the stable pentaquark?,

    W. Park, S. Cho and S. H. Lee, “Where is the stable pentaquark?,” Phys. Rev. D99(2019) no.9, 094023 [arXiv:1811.10911 [hep-ph]]

    2019 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Heavy pentaquark spectroscopy in the diquark model,

    F. Giannuzzi, “Heavy pentaquark spectroscopy in the diquark model,” Phys. Rev. D99(2019) no.9, 094006 [arXiv:1903.04430 [hep-ph]]

    2019 arXiv

  40. [48]

    The study of doubly charmed pentaquarkcc¯qqqwith the SU(3) symmetry,

    Y. Xing and Y. Niu, “The study of doubly charmed pentaquarkcc¯qqqwith the SU(3) symmetry,” Eur. Phys. J. C81 17 (2021) no.11, 978 [arXiv:2106.09939 [hep-ph]]

    2021 arXiv

  41. [49]

    QQqqq¯quark system, compact pentaquark, and gauge/string duality,

    O. Andreev, “QQqqq¯quark system, compact pentaquark, and gauge/string duality,” Phys. Rev. D107(2023) no.2, 026023 [arXiv:2211.12305 [hep-ph]]

    2023 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Electromagnetic properties of doubly heavy pentaquark states,

    U. ¨Ozdem, “Electromagnetic properties of doubly heavy pentaquark states,” Eur. Phys. J. Plus137(2022), 936 [arXiv:2201.00979 [hep-ph]]

    2022 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Doubly-charmed pentaquark in a quark model with a complete set of harmonic oscillator bases,

    W. Park and S. Noh, “Doubly-charmed pentaquark in a quark model with a complete set of harmonic oscillator bases,” Phys. Rev. D108(2023) no.1, 014026 [arXiv:2305.00655 [hep-ph]]

    2023 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Mass spectra of strange double charm pentaquarks with strangeness S=−1,

    Z. Y. Yang, Q. Wang and W. Chen, “Mass spectra of strange double charm pentaquarks with strangeness S=−1,” Phys. Rev. D110(2024) no.5, 056022 [arXiv:2405.09067 [hep-ph]]

    2024 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Prediction of exotic doubly charmed baryons within chiral effective field theory,

    Z. H. Guo, “Prediction of exotic doubly charmed baryons within chiral effective field theory,” Phys. Rev. D96(2017) no.7, 074004 [arXiv:1708.04145 [hep-ph]]

    2017 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Heavy molecules and one-σ/ω-exchange model,

    R. Chen, A. Hosaka and X. Liu, “Heavy molecules and one-σ/ω-exchange model,” Phys. Rev. D96(2017) no.11, 116012 [arXiv:1707.08306 [hep-ph]]

    2017 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Doubly charmed Ξcc molecular states from meson-baryon interaction,

    J. M. Dias, V. R. Debastiani, J. J. Xie and E. Oset, “Doubly charmed Ξcc molecular states from meson-baryon interaction,” Phys. Rev. D98(2018) no.9, 094017 [arXiv:1805.03286 [hep-ph]]

    2018 arXiv

  48. [56]

    New spectrum of negative-parity doubly charmed baryons: Possibility of two quasistable states,

    M. J. Yan, X. H. Liu, S. Gonz` alez-Sol´ ıs, F. K. Guo, C. Hanhart, U. G. Meißner and B. S. Zou, “New spectrum of negative-parity doubly charmed baryons: Possibility of two quasistable states,” Phys. Rev. D98(2018) no.9, 091502 [arXiv:1805.10972 [hep-ph]]

    2018 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Hidden Charm PentaquarkP c(4380) and Doubly Charmed Baryon Ξ ∗ cc(4380) as Hadronic Molecule States,

    Y. Shimizu and M. Harada, “Hidden Charm PentaquarkP c(4380) and Doubly Charmed Baryon Ξ ∗ cc(4380) as Hadronic Molecule States,” Phys. Rev. D96(2017) no.9, 094012 [arXiv:1708.04743 [hep-ph]]

    2017 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Doubly Charmed Pentaquarks,

    G. Yang, J. Ping and J. Segovia, “Doubly Charmed Pentaquarks,” Phys. Rev. D101(2020) no.7, 074030 [arXiv:2003.05253 [hep-ph]]

    2020 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Doubly charmed molecular pentaquarks,

    R. Chen, N. Li, Z. F. Sun, X. Liu and S. L. Zhu, “Doubly charmed molecular pentaquarks,” Phys. Lett. B822(2021), 136693 [arXiv:2108.12730 [hep-ph]]

    2021 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Probing the electromagnetic properties of the Σc(*)D(*)-type doubly charmed molecular pentaquarks,

    H. Y. Zhou, F. L. Wang, Z. W. Liu and X. Liu, “Probing the electromagnetic properties of the Σc(*)D(*)-type doubly charmed molecular pentaquarks,” Phys. Rev. D106(2022) no.3, 034034 [arXiv:2207.08660 [hep-ph]]

    2022 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Molecular Ωcc, Ωbb, and Ωbc states,

    W. F. Wang, A. Feijoo, J. Song and E. Oset, “Molecular Ωcc, Ωbb, and Ωbc states,” Phys. Rev. D106(2022) no.11, 116004 [arXiv:2208.14858 [hep-ph]]

    2022 arXiv

  54. [62]

    P N cc states in a unitarized coupled-channel approach,

    C. W. Shen, Y. h. Lin and U. G. Meißner, “P N cc states in a unitarized coupled-channel approach,” Eur. Phys. J. C83 (2023) no.1, 70 [arXiv:2208.10865 [hep-ph]]

    2023 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Molecular states in systems*,

    N. Yalikun, X. K. Dong and B. S. Zou, “Molecular states in systems*,” Chin. Phys. C47(2023) no.12, 123101 [arXiv:2303.03629 [hep-ph]]

    2023 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Molecular-type QQsss¯pentaquarks predicted by an extended hidden gauge symmetry approach,

    Z. Y. Wang, C. W. Xiao, Z. F. Sun and X. Liu, “Molecular-type QQsss¯pentaquarks predicted by an extended hidden gauge symmetry approach,” Phys. Rev. D109(2024) no.3, 034038 [arXiv:2311.17736 [hep-ph]]

    2024 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Spectrum of the molecular pentaquarks,

    B. Wang, K. Chen, L. Meng and S. L. Zhu, “Spectrum of the molecular pentaquarks,” Phys. Rev. D109(2024) no.7, 074035 [arXiv:2312.13591 [hep-ph]]

    2024 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Investigation of the analog of theP c states-the doubly charmed molecular pentaquarks,

    X. Liu, Y. Tan, X. Chen, D. Chen, H. Huang and J. Ping, “Investigation of the analog of theP c states-the doubly charmed molecular pentaquarks,” [arXiv:2312.04390 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv

  59. [67]

    Doubly charmed pentaquark states in QCD sum rules,

    F. B. Duan, Q. N. Wang, Z. Y. Yang, X. L. Chen and W. Chen, “Doubly charmed pentaquark states in QCD sum rules,” Phys. Rev. D109(2024) no.9, 094018 [arXiv:2401.10078 [hep-ph]]

    2024 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Doubly-charm and doubly-bottom pentaquark molecular states via the QCD sum rules,

    X. W. Wang and Z. G. Wang, “Doubly-charm and doubly-bottom pentaquark molecular states via the QCD sum rules,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A39(2024) no.17n18, 2450067 [arXiv:2405.00281 [hep-ph]]

    2024 arXiv

  61. [69]

    FOUR QUARK STATES IN ADDITIVE POTENTIALS,

    J. l. Ballot and J. M. Richard, “FOUR QUARK STATES IN ADDITIVE POTENTIALS,” Phys. Lett. B123(1983), 449-451

    1983

  62. [70]

    FOUR QUARK BOUND STATES,

    S. Zouzou, B. Silvestre-Brac, C. Gignoux and J. M. Richard, “FOUR QUARK BOUND STATES,” Z. Phys. C30(1986), 457

    1986

  63. [71]

    First Observation of the Doubly Charmed Baryon Ξ + cc,

    M. Mattsonet al.[SELEX], “First Observation of the Doubly Charmed Baryon Ξ + cc,” Phys. Rev. Lett.89(2002), 112001 [arXiv:hep-ex/0208014 [hep-ex]]

    2002 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Observation of the doubly charmed baryon Ξ ++ cc ,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Observation of the doubly charmed baryon Ξ ++ cc ,” Phys. Rev. Lett.119(2017) no.11, 112001 [arXiv:1707.01621 [hep-ex]]

    2017 arXiv

  65. [73]

    First Observation of the Doubly Charmed Baryon Decay Ξ ++ cc →Ξ + cπ+,

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “First Observation of the Doubly Charmed Baryon Decay Ξ ++ cc →Ξ + cπ+,” Phys. Rev. Lett.121 (2018) no.16, 162002 [arXiv:1807.01919 [hep-ex]]

    2018 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Possible bound state of the double heavy meson-baryon system,

    Q. Xu, G. Liu and H. Jin, “Possible bound state of the double heavy meson-baryon system,” Phys. Rev. D86(2012), 114032 [arXiv:1012.5949 [hep-ph]]

    2012 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Exploring the mass spectrum and electromagnetic property of the ΞccK(*) and ΞccK¯(*) molecules,

    L. C. Sheng, J. Y. Huo, R. Chen, F. L. Wang and X. Liu, “Exploring the mass spectrum and electromagnetic property of the ΞccK(*) and ΞccK¯(*) molecules,” Phys. Rev. D110(2024) no.5, 054044 [arXiv:2406.16115 [hep-ph]]

    2024 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Surveying the mass spectra and the electromagnetic properties of the Ξc(’,*)D(*) molecular pentaquarks,

    F. L. Wang and X. Liu, “Surveying the mass spectra and the electromagnetic properties of the Ξc(’,*)D(*) molecular pentaquarks,” Phys. Rev. D109(2024) no.1, 1 [arXiv:2311.13968 [hep-ph]]

    2024 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Investigation on the electromagnetic properties of theD (∗)Σ(∗) c molecules,

    U. ¨Ozdem, “Investigation on the electromagnetic properties of theD (∗)Σ(∗) c molecules,” Eur. Phys. J. A61(2025) no.1, 10 [arXiv:2405.07273 [hep-ph]]

    2025 arXiv

  70. [78]

    A survey of heavy–heavy hadronic molecules,

    X. K. Dong, F. K. Guo and B. S. Zou, “A survey of heavy–heavy hadronic molecules,” Commun. Theor. Phys.73(2021) no.12, 125201 [arXiv:2108.02673 [hep-ph]]

    2021 arXiv

  71. [79]

    New type of doubly charmed molecular pentaquarks containing most strange quarks: Mass 18 spectra, radiative decays, and magnetic moments,

    F. L. Wang and X. Liu, “New type of doubly charmed molecular pentaquarks containing most strange quarks: Mass 18 spectra, radiative decays, and magnetic moments,” Phys. Rev. D108(2023) no.7, 074022 [arXiv:2308.15255 [hep-ph]]

    2023 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Exploration of the doubly charmed molecular pentaquarks,

    K. Chen, B. Wang and S. L. Zhu, “Exploration of the doubly charmed molecular pentaquarks,” Phys. Rev. D103(2021) no.11, 116017 [arXiv:2102.05868 [hep-ph]]

    2021 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Hidden-charm pentaquarks and their hidden-bottom andBc-like partner states,

    J. Wu, Y. R. Liu, K. Chen, X. Liu and S. L. Zhu, “Hidden-charm pentaquarks and their hidden-bottom andBc-like partner states,” Phys. Rev. D95(2017) no.3, 034002 [arXiv:1701.03873 [hep-ph]]

    2017 arXiv

  74. [82]

    P c(4457)+,P c(4440)+, andP c(4312)+: molecules or compact pentaquarks?,

    J. B. Cheng and Y. R. Liu, “P c(4457)+,P c(4440)+, andP c(4312)+: molecules or compact pentaquarks?,” Phys. Rev. D 100(2019) no.5, 054002 [arXiv:1905.08605 [hep-ph]]

    2019 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Hidden-charm pentaquark states in a mass splitting model,

    S. Y. Li, Y. R. Liu, Z. L. Man, Z. G. Si and J. Wu, “Hidden-charm pentaquark states in a mass splitting model,” Phys. Rev. D108(2023) no.5, 056015 [arXiv:2307.00539 [hep-ph]]

    2023 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Systematic studies of charmonium-, bottomonium-, andB c-like tetraquark states,

    J. Wu, X. Liu, Y. R. Liu and S. L. Zhu, “Systematic studies of charmonium-, bottomonium-, andB c-like tetraquark states,” Phys. Rev. D99(2019) no.1, 014037 [arXiv:1810.06886 [hep-ph]]

    2019 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Spectrum and rearrangement decays of tetraquark states with four different flavors,

    J. B. Cheng, S. Y. Li, Y. R. Liu, Y. N. Liu, Z. G. Si and T. Yao, “Spectrum and rearrangement decays of tetraquark states with four different flavors,” Phys. Rev. D101(2020) no.11, 114017 [arXiv:2001.05287 [hep-ph]]

    2020 arXiv

  78. [86]

    X(3960), X 0(4140), and other compact states*,

    S. Y. Li, Y. R. Liu, Z. L. Man, Z. G. Si and J. Wu, “X(3960), X 0(4140), and other compact states*,” Chin. Phys. C48 (2024) no.6, 063109 [arXiv:2308.06768 [hep-ph]]

    2024 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Doubly heavy tetraquark states in a mass splitting model,

    S. Y. Li, Y. R. Liu, Z. L. Man, Z. G. Si and J. Wu, “Doubly heavy tetraquark states in a mass splitting model,” Phys. Rev. D110(2024) no.9, 094044 [arXiv:2401.00115 [hep-ph]]

    2024 arXiv

  80. [88]

    The Octet model and its Clebsch-Gordan coefficients,

    J. J. de Swart, “The Octet model and its Clebsch-Gordan coefficients,” Rev. Mod. Phys.35(1963), 916-939 [erratum: Rev. Mod. Phys.37(1965) no.2, 326-326]

    1963

  81. [89]

    Tables of SU(3) isoscalar factors,

    T. A. Kaeding, “Tables of SU(3) isoscalar factors,” Atom. Data Nucl. Data Tabl.61(1995), 233-288 [arXiv:nucl-th/9502037 [nucl-th]]

    1995 arXiv

  82. [90]

    Review of particle physics,

    S. Navaset al.[Particle Data Group], “Review of particle physics,” Phys. Rev. D110(2024) no.3, 030001

    2024

  83. [91]

    X(4140),X(4270),X(4500) andX(4700) and theircs¯c¯stetraquark partners,

    J. Wu, Y. R. Liu, K. Chen, X. Liu and S. L. Zhu, “X(4140),X(4270),X(4500) andX(4700) and theircs¯c¯stetraquark partners,” Phys. Rev. D94(2016) no.9, 094031 [arXiv:1608.07900 [hep-ph]]

    2016 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Double-heavy tetraquark states with heavy diquark-antiquark symmetry,

    J. B. Cheng, S. Y. Li, Y. R. Liu, Z. G. Si and T. Yao, “Double-heavy tetraquark states with heavy diquark-antiquark symmetry,” Chin. Phys. C45(2021) no.4, 043102 [arXiv:2008.00737 [hep-ph]]

    2021 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Charmed baryon spectroscopy and light flavor symmetry from lattice QCD,

    P. P´ erez-Rubio, S. Collins and G. S. Bali, “Charmed baryon spectroscopy and light flavor symmetry from lattice QCD,” Phys. Rev. D92(2015) no.3, 034504 [arXiv:1503.08440 [hep-lat]]

    2015 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.