Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 92 references

The paper claims that two-pion exchange is repulsive in the I=0 DD* interaction, so the net force is only weakly attractive—which is why Tcc sits so close to threshold.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-04 16:51 UTC pith:WR4CHPFO

load-bearing objection A careful chiral EFT calculation with a genuinely new 2PR subtraction, but the repulsive-TPE mechanism for Tcc is only as solid as that subtraction, which the paper never shows is unique. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2509.11234 v2 pith:WR4CHPFO submitted 2025-09-14 hep-ph

Investigating the two-pion exchange of the double charm DD^* chiral interactions and T_(cc)

Hao Xu , Li-xiang Ren This is my paper
classification hep-ph MSC 81V0581U05 PACS 12.39.Fe13.75.Lb
keywords chiral effective field theoryDD* interactionTcc tetraquarktwo-pion exchangeheavy meson moleculesnear-threshold statesBethe-Salpeter equationhadron scattering
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper tries to establish why Tcc, the doubly charmed tetraquark observed just below the D0D*+ threshold, is bound by only about 300 keV. The authors compute the DD* interaction in chiral effective field theory through next-to-leading order, separating contact, one-pion-exchange, and two-pion-exchange potentials. Using a corrected subtraction of reducible loop diagrams and three different ways to regularize the strongly divergent two-pion exchange, they find that in the isospin-0 channel the two-pion exchange is repulsive. That repulsion cancels most of the attraction from the contact and one-pion terms, leaving a weak net force—exactly the kind of shallow potential that would produce a near-threshold state like Tcc. The same pattern was previously seen for X(3872).

Core claim

The central discovery is that the I=0 two-pion-exchange potential of DD*, evaluated at one loop with the extended two-particle-reducible subtraction, is repulsive. Since the contact and one-pion-exchange contributions are attractive, the three terms nearly cancel, and the net I=0 potential is only weakly attractive. Solving the Schrödinger equation with these potentials, the paper reproduces the observed Tcc binding energy at cutoffs near 0.45, 0.95, and 0.94 GeV in its three schemes, and the Bethe-Salpeter equation gives the same qualitative result. No I=1 bound state is found.

What carries the argument

The argument rests on the one-loop chiral potentials in the heavy-hadron formalism, and specifically on two technical choices: the extended two-particle-reducible (2PR) subtraction of Eq. (18), which removes the heavy-meson pole contributions from all reducible diagrams including coupled-channel D*D* intermediates, and the momentum-space taming of the two-pion exchange, which is either cut off (schemes I-II) or frozen to a constant beyond |q| = mch = 300 MeV (scheme III). These choices make the TPE well-behaved and give it the same ultraviolet behavior as the contact and OPE terms, allowing a unified regulator; under all three schemes the TPE comes out repulsive.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion that two-pion exchange is repulsive depends on the chosen way of subtracting the reducible two-particle cuts and on cutting off or freezing the TPE beyond about 300 MeV; if a different subtraction or a different high-momentum treatment flips the sign, the weak-attraction explanation for Tcc falls apart.

What would settle it

Compute the I=0 TPE with the standard heavy-meson pole subtraction (without the extended Eq. (18)) or with no momentum taming; if the resulting TPE is attractive and produces a deeply bound DD* state at the fitted LECs, the paper's explanation is refuted. Alternatively, a lattice QCD determination of the I=0 DD* scattering length that is large and positive (strong attraction) or a bound state much deeper than roughly 300 keV would contradict the claimed weak net attraction.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The near-threshold location of Tcc follows from repulsive two-pion exchange, so a deeply bound I=0 DD* state is not expected.
  • No I=1 DD* bound state exists in this framework, consistent with the absence of a charged Tcc partner.
  • The same chiral interactions, solved in the Schrödinger and Bethe-Salpeter equations, give consistent bound-state results for the I=0 channel.
  • The mechanism mirrors X(3872), suggesting that repulsive two-pion exchange may be a common cause of near-threshold molecular states.
  • The weak net attraction means Tcc is a shallow, extended object rather than a compact state.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the repulsive sign is truly scheme-independent, one expects similar cancellations in other double-heavy meson systems; the paper's framework could be used to predict which are near-threshold.
  • A lattice QCD extraction of the I=0 DD* scattering length, or the pion-mass dependence of the Tcc binding energy, would provide an independent check of the cancellation.
  • The paper's TPE regularization effectively discards the region |q| > 300 MeV; a complete next-to-next-to-leading-order calculation would show whether the repulsive sign persists when the high-momentum part is computed rather than frozen.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies S-wave DD* interactions in heavy-hadron chiral effective field theory up to next-to-leading order, including contact, one-pion-exchange (OPE), and two-pion-exchange (TPE) contributions. A new two-particle-reducible (2PR) subtraction is introduced in Eq. (18), and three regularization schemes are proposed specifically for the TPE because of its high-momentum polynomial divergence. For isospin I=0 the authors find that the TPE is repulsive while contact and OPE are attractive, and that the near-cancellation between these pieces produces the weakly bound Tcc state; for I=1 the potential is repulsive and no bound state appears. The Bethe-Salpeter equation is solved as a consistency check. The central qualitative claim is that the repulsive TPE is responsible for the extremely small binding energy of Tcc.

Significance. If the central claim is correct, the paper offers a simple chiral-EFT explanation for the near-threshold nature of Tcc, paralleling the X(3872) mechanism in the hidden-charm sector, and it would identify TPE repulsion as the key dynamical feature. The manuscript has several concrete strengths: explicit one-loop expressions for contact, OPE, and TPE potentials; three independent regularization prescriptions; a cross-check with the Bethe-Salpeter equation; and a robust I=1 no-bound-state result. However, the principal quantitative conclusion is currently entangled with the use of the Tcc itself to set parameters (LECs in scheme I, cutoffs in schemes II/III and in the BS calculation), and the sign of the TPE depends on the new 2PR subtraction, which is not shown to be unique. The significance is therefore conditional: the mechanism is plausible and interesting, but the evidence presented does not yet establish it.

major comments (4)
  1. [II C, Eq. (18)] The central claim that the I=0 TPE is repulsive is computed after replacing the heavy-meson pole factor 1/(-v·l-b+iε) with -1/(v·l+b+iε). This replacement is a choice: the paper argues that the heavy-meson pole must be removed for power counting, but it gives no argument that the resulting 2PI potential is unique, nor that a different but equally consistent subtraction (e.g., omitting the heavy-meson pole rather than flipping its sign) would preserve the sign of the low-momentum TPE. All three regularization schemes share Eq. (18), so their mutual agreement tests only the high-q treatment, not the subtraction prescription. Please compare with the covariant chiral EFT treatment of Ref. [81], where the 2PR treatment differs, or with an alternative subtraction, and show that the sign and approximate strength of the TPE remain stable.
  2. [III B, III C, III D, and Table I] The observed Tcc mass is used twice. In scheme I the LECs are rescaled by c=2.7 to reproduce the Tcc binding energy, as stated in Sec. III B: 'we fit the binding energy to the location of the observed Tcc state by justifying the LEC Da and Ea'. In schemes II and III the cutoffs Λ=0.95 GeV and 0.94 GeV are selected as the values at which the Tcc state appears, and in the BS calculation Λ=0.79 GeV is likewise chosen so that the solution corresponds to Tcc. The small binding energy is therefore partly an input rather than an output. To support the explanation, the parameters should be fixed on independent observables, or the paper should show that a broad range of Λ and LECs gives an anomalously small binding energy without fine-tuning to the Tcc mass.
  3. [II C, Eq. (20)] The 'powerful repulsing' TPE is anchored to the arbitrary scale mch=300 MeV at which the TPE is frozen (scheme III) or damped (scheme II). Because the unregulated TPE is a high-q polynomial, the frozen constant in scheme III is set by V2π(q=mch). No sensitivity study for mch is provided (e.g., mch=250-350 MeV), nor is the dependence on the functional form of F2π in Eq. (19) explored. Since the proposed explanation relies on the balance between TPE and contact+OPE, the conclusion needs a demonstration that the sign and approximate magnitude of the TPE below mch are stable under these choices.
  4. [III and IV] The paper states that all three schemes lead to the same conclusions, but they are not equivalent tests. Scheme I restricts Λ to 0.25-0.45 GeV and refits the LECs (c=2.7), while schemes II and III keep the original LECs and instead modify the TPE at high q. The BS calculation uses scheme III with a different implementation (replacing qμqν beyond mch) and produces a different cutoff (Λ=0.79 GeV vs 0.94 GeV). The agreement is therefore only qualitative, and the quantitative binding energy is scheme- and cutoff-dependent. The authors should state this limitation explicitly and quantify the spread of the resulting binding energies.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Throughout] There are numerous typos and grammatical errors ('a extremely', 'digrams', 'expecially', 'cutoff' variations). The abstract and text should be carefully edited.
  2. [Figures 4-12] The axis labels and legend text in the figures appear corrupted/unreadable in the manuscript (shown as broken glyph sequences). The figures need to be regenerated with proper labels and legible fonts.
  3. [II B] The loop functions J and the notation (d, δ, q0, ω) are not defined in the text; the reader must consult Refs. [33,34]. A brief self-contained summary would improve readability.
  4. [II B, Eq. (16)] The Fourier transform in Eq. (16) is applied to a potential that is a polynomial in p, so the integral is formally divergent. The regularization prescription should be stated at this point rather than only later in Sec. II C.
  5. [Table I] The binding energy rises steeply from 0.36 MeV at Λ=0.79 GeV to 169 MeV at Λ=1.5 GeV. The preference for the particular cutoff that reproduces Tcc needs a naturalness or convergence criterion; otherwise the agreement with experiment is a parameter selection.
  6. [Abstract, Sec. III B, Sec. V] The phrase 'powerful repulsing TPE' is used repeatedly, but after regularization the TPE is comparable to the contact and OPE contributions. Consider softening the wording to 'repulsive TPE' or quantifying the relative strength.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged

Partial circularity: the weak net attraction is fitted to Tcc before being cited as the explanation, though the repulsive-TPE sign is an independent loop result.

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. III B (Fig. 6, Eq. (6) and the fit of Da, Ea)]
    "By solving the Schr¨odinger equation with the I = 0 V(r) at Λ = 0.45 GeV , we fit the binding energy to the location of the observed Tcc state by justifying the LEC Da and Ea. ... From this diagram we can see that, the competition between the powerful repulsing TPE and the other two (contact and OPE) leads to a quite weak attraction, this explains why Tcc has a extremely small binding energy if treated as the I = 0 DD∗ bound state."

    The observed Tcc binding energy is the fit target: Da and Ea are rescaled by a common multiplier c=2.7 until the Schrödinger equation reproduces the experimental near-threshold state. The resulting 'quite weak attraction' of the total potential is therefore imposed by the fit, not derived from the dynamics. The subsequent causal claim that repulsive TPE 'explains' the small binding is a restatement of the fitted balance: given the fitted contact strength, the net attraction is small by construction. The TPE sign itself is computed independently of Da/Ea (Eq. (14) contains only g and loop functions), so this is partial, not total, circularity.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Secs. III C, III D, IV B (Table I)]
    "In this scheme, when Λ varies to 0.95 GeV , the Tcc state is produced. ... At Λ = 0.94 GeV , the potentialV(r) can produce the Tcc state ... Note that the solution atΛ = 0.79 GeV corresponds to the observed Tcc state."

    The regulator cutoff Λ is not determined from first principles; the paper scans Λ and reports the value at which the computed binding energy matches the observed Tcc. Because Table I shows the binding energy increasing monotonically with Λ, a Λ that reproduces the observed mass always exists within the scanned interval. Presenting the state at that selected Λ as 'produced' converts the observed mass into an input used to fix the regulator, so the near-threshold position is not an independent prediction. This does not affect the computed sign of the TPE, but it strengthens the fitted-input character of the paper's explanatory claim.

full rationale

The paper's genuinely derived content is the one-loop two-pion-exchange potential and its repulsive sign in the I=0 channel: Eq. (14) for V_{2π}^{(2)} contains only the axial coupling g, pion decay constant f, and loop functions, with no fitted LECs, and the sign is reported as stable across the three TPE regularization schemes. That part is not circular. The circularity enters when fitted quantities are reused as the explanation: (i) in scheme I, Da and Ea are rescaled (c=2.7) until the Schrödinger equation reproduces the observed Tcc binding energy, and the resulting weak net attraction is then presented as the mechanism 'explaining' the small binding; (ii) in schemes II/III and the BS check, the cutoff Λ is effectively selected (0.95, 0.94, 0.79 GeV) at values that produce the observed state, with Table I showing a monotonic binding-energy dependence on Λ. These are instances of using the target as an input and then reading the conclusion off the fitted curve. They do not undermine the computed TPE sign itself, so the paper is only partially circular. The self-citations to Refs. [1,34] supply the framework and starting LECs but are not used as a uniqueness theorem or as a substitute for the loop calculation; the X(3872) analogy is not load-bearing. The scheme dependence of the 2PR subtraction (Eq. (18)) is a robustness/correctness concern, not a circularity, because no specific alternative subtraction is shown to be equally justified and the paper does not define the TPE sign in terms of the conclusion. Overall score 4: the central repulsive-TPE result has independent content, but the paper's headline explanation of Tcc's small binding is partly forced by the fit.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The calculation rests on a chain of upstream inputs: the loop-function definitions and RSM LECs come from the authors' own Refs. [1,33,34]; the Weinberg 2PR subtraction scheme is assumed; and the finite O(eps^2) tree-level parts are dropped because the corresponding LECs are unknown. On top of these, four quantities are tuned in this paper (the LEC scaling c, the cutoff Lambda, the damping scale mu2pi, and the truncation scale mch), and the TPE potential itself is redefined by hand beyond |q|=300 MeV. No new physical entities (particles, mediators, dimensions) are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • LECs Da and Ea (contact interaction) = Da = 2.7 * (-6.62), Ea = 2.7 * (-5.74) in scheme I at Lambda = 0.45 GeV
    Sec. III B: "we fit the binding energy to the location of the observed Tcc state by justifying the LEC Da and Ea"; the multiplier c=2.7 is tuned to the Tcc mass.
  • Momentum cutoff Lambda = 0.45 GeV (scheme I), 0.95 GeV (scheme II), 0.94 GeV (scheme III), 0.79 GeV (BS equation)
    Lambda is scanned until a bound state at the observed Tcc mass appears (Table I); binding energy runs from 0.36 to 169 MeV over Lambda = 0.79 to 1.5 GeV.
  • mu2pi in scheme II = 1.0 GeV
    Sec. III C: adjusted so that VII_2pi(q) <= V_2pi(mch) outside the perturbative region.
  • mch truncation scale = 300 MeV
    Sec. II C and Eq. (20): hand-chosen scale, "typically around 2 pi mass", beyond which the TPE is damped or frozen in schemes II and III; it controls the strength of the repulsion.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Weinberg power counting: compute 2PI amplitudes perturbatively, then iterate in a scattering equation, removing 2PR parts
    Sec. II A: the whole framework depends on this scheme to restore correct chiral power counting for the iterated potential.
  • ad hoc to paper The 2PR subtraction replacement of Eq. (18), dropping heavy-meson poles including coupled-channel D*D* intermediates
    Sec. II C: the paper extends the previous single-channel substitution; the validity is asserted, and the TPE sign is read from the resulting potential.
  • domain assumption Finite parts of the O(eps^2) tree-level amplitudes are ignored because the corresponding LECs are unknown
    Sec. II B: "we ignore the finite parts of the O(eps^2) tree-level amplitudes here due to the lack of their LEC informations"; these finite parts would modify the attractive contact piece that balances the repulsive TPE.
  • standard math The loop functions J are those defined in Refs. [33,34]
    Sec. II B: "The loop function J is defined in Refs. [33,34]", so the central potentials inherit unstated definitions from prior papers.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 30177 in / 19705 out tokens · 205948 ms · 2026-08-04T16:51:34.238404+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Under chiral effective field theory, we study the $S$-wave $DD^*$ interactions up to second chiral order at one-loop level, which contain full contact, one-pion-exchange (OPE) and two-pion-exchange (TPE) contributions. Here, we adopt a new subtraction scheme of the two-particle-reducible contributions, and attempt different regularization schemes uniquely for the TPE contributions since they are highly divergent on the momentum transfer. Under these schemes we conclude that, in the $I=0$ channel, the TPE contribution is repulsive, then the competition between this powerful repulsing TPE and the other two (contact and OPE) results in a quite weak attraction. This explains why $T_{cc}$ has an extremely small binding energy if treated as the $I=0$ $DD^*$ bound state. This feature resembles that of hidden charm $D\bar{D}^*$ as we investigated in previous work [Phys. Rev. D 105, 034013 (2022)], which also interpreted the extremely near-threshold phenomenon of $X(3872)$. In addition, we also solve the Bethe-Salpeter equation with the chiral interactions for a consistency check.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.11234 by Hao Xu, Li-xiang Ren.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Tree-level diagrams of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. One-loop 2PI diagrams of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. One-loop 2PR diagrams of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The original [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: (b). Consistent with the V(q) in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. The obtained [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_12.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 76 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Xu, Study of the hidden charm D ¯D∗ interactions in chiral e ffective field theory, Phys

    H. Xu, Study of the hidden charm D ¯D∗ interactions in chiral e ffective field theory, Phys. Rev. D 105, 034013 (2022) , arXiv:2112.10722 [hep-ph]. 14

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  2. [2]

    The pion pole belongs to the 2PI part and satisfies the power-counting , whereas the heavy meson pole belongs to the iterated OPE contribution (i.e

    When closing the energy contour integral, we are able to collect two poles in the loop function: the pion pole and the heavy meson pole. The pion pole belongs to the 2PI part and satisfies the power-counting , whereas the heavy meson pole belongs to the iterated OPE contribution (i.e. 2PR part) and has an enhanced chiral orde r which violates the power-cou...

  3. [3]

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  4. [4]

    unregulated 2-π

    to constrain the TPE outside the per- turbation region ( |⃗q| ≳mch). Assuming V2π(⃗q) is the unmod- ified TPE contribution and VII 2π(⃗q) = V2π(⃗q)F2π(⃗q) where su- perscript “II” stands for scheme II, we let VII 2π(⃗q) ≤ V 2π(mch) in the region |⃗q| ≳ mch, and obtain the adjusted parameter µ2π = 1.0 GeV . Then we show the I = 0 potential in momentum space...

  5. [5]

    We can find that at these Λ, the TPE are indeed not very large, so in these cases the expansions show good convergences

    Here we choose three typical Λ values: 0.25 GeV , 0.35 GeV and 0.45 GeV . We can find that at these Λ, the TPE are indeed not very large, so in these cases the expansions show good convergences. As we discussed in Sec. II C this is be- cause the chosen Λ can cutoff the contribution beyond q = Λ, so the high q contribution in TPE is just suppressed with such...

  6. [6]

    Dong, F.-K

    X.-K. Dong, F.-K. Guo, and B.-S. Zou, A survey of heavy- antiheavy hadronic molecules, Progr. Phys. 41, 65 (2021) , arXiv:2101.01021 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  7. [7]

    Dong, F.-K

    X.-K. Dong, F.-K. Guo, and B.-S. Zou, A survey of heavy–heavy hadronic molecules, Commun. Theor. Phys. 73, 125201 (2021) , arXiv:2108.02673 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  8. [8]

    Y .-R. Liu, X. Liu, W.-Z. Deng, and S.-L. Zhu, Is X(3872) Really a Molecular State?, Eur. Phys. J. C56, 63 (2008) , arXiv:0801.3540 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  9. [9]

    E. S. Swanson, Short range structure in the X(3872), Phys. Lett. B 588, 189 (2004) , arXiv:hep-ph/0311229

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  10. [10]

    M. T. AlFiky, F. Gabbiani, and A. A. Petrov, X(3872): Hadronic molecules in e ffective field theory, Phys. Lett. B640, 238 (2006) , arXiv:hep-ph/0506141 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  11. [11]

    F.-K. Guo, C. Hanhart, U.-G. Meissner, Q. Wang, Q. Zhao, and B.-S. Zou, Hadronic molecules, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015004 (2018) , arXiv:1705.00141 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  12. [12]

    Huang, C

    H. Huang, C. Deng, X. Liu, Y . Tan, and J. Ping, Tetraquarks and Pentaquarks from Quark Model Perspective, Symmetry 15, 1298 (2023)

    2023

  13. [13]

    Mai, U.-G

    M. Mai, U.-G. Meißner, and C. Urbach, Towards a theory of hadron resonances, Phys. Rept. 1001, 1 (2023) , arXiv:2206.01477 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  14. [14]

    Liu, Y .-W

    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 ex- otic hadrons: Multiplets, three-body hadronic molecules, and correlation functions, Phys. Rept. 1108, 1 (2025) , arXiv:2404.06399 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  15. [15]

    Esposito, A

    A. Esposito, A. Pilloni, and A. D. Polosa, Multiquark Re so- nances, Phys. Rept. 668, 1 (2017) , arXiv:1611.07920 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  16. [16]

    G. Yang, J. Ping, and J. Segovia, Tetra- and penta- quark structures in the constituent quark model, Symmetry 12, 1869 (2020) , arXiv:2009.00238 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  17. [17]

    P . G. Ortega and D. R. Entem, Coupling hadron- hadron thresholds within a chiral quark model approach, Symmetry 13, 279 (2021) , arXiv:2012.10105 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  18. [18]

    Brambilla, S

    N. Brambilla, S. Eidelman, C. Hanhart, A. Nefediev, C.- P . Shen, C. E. Thomas, A. V airo, and C.-Z. Y uan, The XYZ states: experimental and theoretical status and perspecti ves, Phys. Rept. 873, 1 (2020) , arXiv:1907.07583 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  19. [19]

    ( 20) (scheme III)

    (scheme II) or Eq. ( 20) (scheme III). III. NUMERICAL RESULTS OF THE DD∗ POTENTIALS With the calculated expressions of V(q), the 2PR subtrac- tion scheme as well as the proposed regularization schemes in Sec. II C, we now present the numerical results and discuss the behaviors of the DD∗ potentials with di fferent schemes in detail. In this work we use the...

  20. [20]

    Bicudo, Tetraquarks and pentaquarks in lattice QCD with light and heavy quarks, Phys

    P . Bicudo, Tetraquarks and pentaquarks in lattice QCD with light and heavy quarks, Phys. Rept. 1039, 1 (2023) , arXiv:2212.07793 [hep-lat]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  21. [21]

    unregulated 2-π

    and further leads to similar Λ dependences for the three. However, comparing Fig. 7 and 9, we can find scheme II completely cuto ffs the high q contribu- tion whereas scheme III retains it to let the TPE coincide wit h the contact and OPE at high q. Due to the identical high q /s48 /s53 /s49 /s48 /s49 /s53 /s45/s48 /s46/s48 /s49 /s48 /s45/s48 /s46/s48 /s48 ...

  22. [22]

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  23. [23]

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  24. [24]

    Weinberg, E ffective chiral Lagrangians for nucleon - pion interactions and nuclear forces, Nucl

    S. Weinberg, E ffective chiral Lagrangians for nucleon - pion interactions and nuclear forces, Nucl. Phys. B363, 3 (1991)

    1991

  25. [25]

    Liu, H.-X

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  26. [26]

    We consider the JP = 1+ state only, so the BS wave function χµ(kt) can be constructed as χµ(kt) = εµ(K)ϕ(kt)

    and obtain χµ(kt) = ∫ d3lt (2π)3 [ −i(− gνµ + kν 2kµ 2/m2 2 ) ⏐ ⏐ ⏐ ⏐kℓ=−(λ1 M+ω1) (−2ω1)(M + ω1 + ω2)(M + ω1 − ω2) + i(− gνµ + kν 2kµ 2/m2 2 ) ⏐ ⏐ ⏐ ⏐kℓ=λ2 M−ω2 (M − ω2 + ω1)(M − ω2 − ω1)(2ω2) ] K I αν(pt, qt, K) × χα(lt), (28) with ωi = √ m2 i − k2 t . We consider the JP = 1+ state only, so the BS wave function χµ(kt) can be constructed as χµ(kt) = εµ(K...

  27. [27]

    Lucha, D

    W. Lucha, D. Melikhov, and H. Sazdjian, Tetraquarks in large- Nc QCD, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 120, 103867 (2021) , arXiv:2102.02542 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  28. [28]

    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, 026201 (2023) , arXiv:2204.02649 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  29. [29]

    Hosaka, T

    A. Hosaka, T. Iijima, K. Miyabayashi, Y . Sakai, and S. Ya sui, Exotic hadrons with heavy flavors: X, Y , Z, and related states , PTEP 2016, 062C01 (2016) , arXiv:1603.09229 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  30. [30]

    Weinberg, Nuclear forces from chiral Lagrangians, Phys

    S. Weinberg, Nuclear forces from chiral Lagrangians, Phys. Lett. B251, 288 (1990)

    1990

  31. [31]

    Epelbaum, H.-W

    E. Epelbaum, H.-W. Hammer, and U.-G. Meissner, Modern Theory of Nuclear Forces, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 1773 (2009) , arXiv:0811.1338 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  32. [32]

    Meißner, A new tool in nuclear physics: Nu- clear lattice simulations, Nucl

    U.-G. Meißner, A new tool in nuclear physics: Nu- clear lattice simulations, Nucl. Phys. News. 24, 11 (2014) , arXiv:1505.06997 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  33. [33]

    Machleidt and F

    R. Machleidt and F. Sammarruca, Chiral EFT based nuclear forces: Achievements and challenges, Phys. Scripta 91, 083007 (2016) , arXiv:1608.05978 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  34. [34]

    Meissner, The long and winding road from chiral e ffective Lagrangians to nuclear structure, Phys

    U.-G. Meissner, The long and winding road from chiral e ffective Lagrangians to nuclear structure, Phys. Scripta 91, 033005 (2016) , arXiv:1510.03230 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  35. [35]

    Epelbaum, H

    E. Epelbaum, H. Krebs, and P . Reinert, High-precision n uclear forces from chiral EFT: State-of-the-art, challenges and o ut- look, Front. in Phys. 8, 98 (2020) , arXiv:1911.11875 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  36. [36]

    H. W. Hammer, S. K¨ onig, and U. van Kolck, Nuclear e ffective field theory: status and per- spectives, Rev. Mod. Phys. 92, 025004 (2020) , arXiv:1906.12122 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  37. [37]

    L. Meng, B. Wang, G.-J. Wang, and S.-L. Zhu, Chiral pertu r- bation theory for heavy hadrons and chiral e ffective field the- ory for heavy hadronic molecules, Phys. Rept. 1019, 1 (2023) , arXiv:2204.08716 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  38. [38]

    Scherer and M

    S. Scherer and M. R. Schindler, A Primer for Chiral Pertu rba- tion Theory, Springer-V erlag, BerlinVol. 830, p. 1 (2012)

    2012

  39. [39]

    Z.-W. Liu, N. Li, and S.-L. Zhu, Chiral perturbation the ory and the ¯B ¯B strong interaction, Phys. Rev. D89, 074015 (2014) , arXiv:1211.3578 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  40. [40]

    H. Xu, B. Wang, Z.-W. Liu, and X. Liu, DD∗ potentials in chiral perturbation theory and possible molecular state s, Phys. Rev. D 99, 014027 (2019) , [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 104, 119903 (2021)], arXiv:1708.06918 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  41. [41]

    Z. Liu, H. Xu, and X. Liu, D(∗) ¯B(∗) dynamics in chi- ral e ffective field theory, Phys. Rev. D 112, 034007 (2025) , arXiv:2503.10299 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    Wang, Z.-W

    B. Wang, Z.-W. Liu, and X. Liu, ¯B(∗) ¯B(∗) interactions in chiral e ffective field theory, Phys. Rev. D 99, 036007 (2019) , arXiv:1812.04457 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  43. [43]

    L. Meng, B. Wang, G.-J. Wang, and S.-L. Zhu, The hidden charm pentaquark states and Σc ¯D(∗) interaction in chiral perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. D 100, 014031 (2019) , arXiv:1905.04113 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  44. [44]

    B. Wang, L. Meng, and S.-L. Zhu, Spectrum of the strange hidden charm molecular pentaquarks in chiral effective field theory, Phys. Rev. D 101, 034018 (2020) , arXiv:1912.12592 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  45. [45]

    B. Wang, L. Meng, and S.-L. Zhu, Hidden-charm and hidden - bottom molecular pentaquarks in chiral e ffective field theory, JHEP 11, 108, arXiv:1909.13054 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1909

  46. [46]

    L. Meng, B. Wang, and S.-L. Zhu, ΣcN interaction in chi- ral e ffective field theory, Phys. Rev. C 101, 064002 (2020) , arXiv:1912.09661 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  47. [47]

    B. Wang, L. Meng, and S.-L. Zhu, D(∗)N interaction and the structure of Σc(2800) and Λc(2940) in chi- ral e ffective field theory, Phys. Rev. D 101, 094035 (2020) , arXiv:2003.05688 [hep-ph]. 15

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  48. [48]

    K. Chen, B. Wang, and S.-L. Zhu, Exploration of the doubly charmed molecular pentaquarks, Phys. Rev. D 103, 116017 (2021) , arXiv:2102.05868 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  49. [49]

    Chen, B.-L

    K. Chen, B.-L. Huang, B. Wang, and S.-L. Zhu, ΣcΣc interactions in chiral e ffective field theory, (2022), arXiv:2204.13316 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  50. [50]

    Zhang, Z.-W

    Z.-L. Zhang, Z.-W. Liu, S.-Q. Luo, F.-L. Wang, B. Wang, a nd H. Xu, Λc(2910) and Λc(2940) as conventional baryons dressed with the D∗N channel, Phys. Rev. D 107, 034036 (2023) , arXiv:2210.17188 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  51. [51]

    Huang, B

    B.-L. Huang, B. Wang, and S.-L. Zhu, Octet baryon and heavy meson interactions in chiral e ffective field theory, Phys. Rev. D 110, 116007 (2024) , arXiv:2402.00460 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  52. [52]

    Aaij et al

    R. Aaij et al. (LHCb collaboration), Observation of an exotic narrow doubly charmed tetraquark, Nature Phys. 18, 751 (2022) , arXiv:2109.01038 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2022

  53. [53]

    Aaij et al

    R. Aaij et al. (LHCb collaboration), Study of the dou- bly charmed tetraquark T + cc, Nature Commun. 13, 3351 (2022) , arXiv:2109.01056 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2022

  54. [54]

    Ding, H.-Y

    Z.-M. Ding, H.-Y . Jiang, and J. He, Molecular states from D(∗) ¯D(∗)/B(∗) ¯B(∗) and D(∗)D(∗)/ ¯B(∗) ¯B(∗) interactions, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 1179 (2020) , arXiv:2011.04980 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  55. [55]

    Meng, G.-J

    L. Meng, G.-J. Wang, B. Wang, and S.-L. Zhu, Prob- ing the long-range structure of the T + cc with the strong and electromagnetic decays, Phys. Rev. D 104, 051502 (2021) , arXiv:2107.14784 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  56. [56]

    R. Chen, Q. Huang, X. Liu, and S.-L. Zhu, Predicting another doubly charmed molecular resonance T ′+ cc (3876), Phys. Rev. D 104, 114042 (2021) , arXiv:2108.01911 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  57. [57]

    Yan and M

    M.-J. Yan and M. P . V alderrama, Subleading con- tributions to the decay width of the T + cc tetraquark, Phys. Rev. D 105, 014007 (2022) , arXiv:2108.04785 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  58. [58]

    Zhao, Z.-Y

    M.-J. Zhao, Z.-Y . Wang, C. Wang, and X.-H. Guo, Investi- gation of the possible D ¯D∗/B ¯B∗ and DD∗/ ¯B ¯B∗ bound states, Phys. Rev. D 105, 096016 (2022) , arXiv:2112.12633 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  59. [59]

    Wang and X

    F.-L. Wang and X. Liu, Investigating new type of doubly charmed molecular tetraquarks composed of charmed mesons in the H and T doublets, Phys. Rev. D 104, 094030 (2021) , arXiv:2108.09925 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  60. [60]

    Cheng, Z.-Y

    J.-B. Cheng, Z.-Y . Lin, and S.-L. Zhu, Double- charm tetraquark under the complex scaling method, Phys. Rev. D 106, 016012 (2022) , arXiv:2205.13354 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  61. [61]

    Lin, J.-B

    Z.-Y . Lin, J.-B. Cheng, and S.-L. Zhu, T + cc and χc1(3872) with the complex scaling method and DD( ¯D)π three-body e ffect, Phys. Rev. D 110, 054008 (2024) , arXiv:2205.14628 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  62. [62]

    L. M. Abreu, A note on the possible bound D(∗)D(∗), ¯B(∗) ¯B(∗) and D(∗) ¯B(∗) states, Nucl. Phys. B 985, 115994 (2022) , arXiv:2206.01166 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  63. [63]

    Z.-F. Sun, N. Li, and X. Liu, Isospin violation e ffect and three- body decays of the T + cc state, Phys. Rev. D 110, 094025 (2024) , arXiv:2405.00525 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  64. [64]

    Cheng, S.-Y

    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. C 45, 043102 (2021) , arXiv:2008.00737 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  65. [65]

    Weng, W.-Z

    X.-Z. Weng, W.-Z. Deng, and S.-L. Zhu, Doubly heavy tetraquarks in an extended chromomagnetic model, Chin. Phys. C 46, 013102 (2022) , arXiv:2108.07242 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  66. [66]

    T. Guo, J. Li, J. Zhao, and L. He, Mass spectra of doubly he avy tetraquarks in an improved chromomagnetic interaction mod el, Phys. Rev. D 105, 014021 (2022) , arXiv:2108.10462 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  67. [67]

    K. Chen, R. Chen, L. Meng, B. Wang, and S.-L. Zhu, Systematics of the heavy flavor hadronic molecules, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 581 (2022) , arXiv:2109.13057 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  68. [68]

    Liu, W.-X

    X.-Y . Liu, W.-X. Zhang, and D. Jia, Doubly heavy tetraqu arks: Heavy quark bindings and chromomagnetically mixings, Phys. Rev. D 108, 054019 (2023) , arXiv:2303.03923 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  69. [69]

    Y . Ma, L. Meng, Y .-K. Chen, and S.-L. Zhu, Doubly heavy tetraquark states in the constituent quark model using di ffu- sion Monte Carlo method, Phys. Rev. D 109, 074001 (2024) , arXiv:2309.17068 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  70. [70]

    W.-L. Wu, Y . Ma, Y .-K. Chen, L. Meng, and S.-L. Zhu, Doubly heavy tetraquark bound and resonant states, Phys. Rev. D 110, 094041 (2024) , arXiv:2409.03373 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  71. [71]

    Padmanath and S

    M. Padmanath and S. Prelovsek, Signature of a Doubly Charm Tetraquark Pole in DD∗ Scattering on the Lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 032002 (2022) , arXiv:2202.10110 [hep-lat]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  72. [72]

    Y . Lyu, S. Aoki, T. Doi, T. Hatsuda, Y . Ikeda, and J. Meng, Doubly Charmed Tetraquark T + cc from Lattice QCD near Physical Point, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 161901 (2023) , arXiv:2302.04505 [hep-lat]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  73. [73]

    L. Meng, V . Baru, E. Epelbaum, A. A. Filin, and A. M. Gasparyan, Solving the left-hand cut prob- lem in lattice QCD: T + cc(3875) from finite volume energy levels, Phys. Rev. D 109, L071506 (2024) , arXiv:2312.01930 [hep-lat]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  74. [74]

    L. Meng, E. Ortiz-Pacheco, V . Baru, E. Epelbaum, M. Padmanath, and S. Prelovsek, Doubly charm tetraquark channel with isospin 1 from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 111, 034509 (2025) , arXiv:2411.06266 [hep-lat]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  75. [75]

    Collins, A

    S. Collins, A. Nefediev, M. Padmanath, and S. Prelovsek , To- ward the quark mass dependence of T + cc from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 109, 094509 (2024) , arXiv:2402.14715 [hep-lat]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  76. [76]

    Francis, Lattice perspectives on doubly heavy tetraquarks, Prog

    A. Francis, Lattice perspectives on doubly heavy tetraquarks, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 140, 104143 (2025) , arXiv:2502.04701 [hep-lat]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  77. [77]

    S. M. Dawid, F. Romero-L´ opez, and S. R. Sharpe, Finite- and infinite-volume study of DDπ scattering, JHEP 01, 060, arXiv:2409.17059 [hep-lat]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  78. [78]

    Gil-Dom´ ınguez, A

    F. Gil-Dom´ ınguez, A. Giachino, and R. Molina, Quark mass dependence of the T + cc(3875) pole, Phys. Rev. D 111, 016029 (2025) , arXiv:2409.15141 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  79. [79]

    Whyte, D

    T. Whyte, D. J. Wilson, and C. E. Thomas (Hadron Spec- trum), Near-threshold states in coupled DD∗-D∗D∗ scat- tering from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 111, 034511 (2025) , arXiv:2405.15741 [hep-lat]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  80. [80]

    Prelovsek, E

    S. Prelovsek, E. Ortiz-Pacheco, S. Collins, L. Leskove c, M. Padmanath, and I. Vujmilovic, Doubly heavy tetraquarks from lattice QCD: Incorporating diquark-antidiquark oper a- tors and the left-hand cut, Phys. Rev. D 112, 014507 (2025) , arXiv:2504.03473 [hep-lat]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

Showing first 80 references.