Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 67 references

Producing $\Lambda(1405)$ and $\Lambda(1520)$ in $\pi^-p$ reaction to explore their inner structures

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that pion–proton scattering can discriminate the inner structures of Λ(1405) and Λ(1520), with scaling analysis marking Λ(1405) as a likely non-ordinary three-quark baryon and Λ(1520) as a conventional one.

desk verdict Solid production-mechanism analysis with a speculative Λ(1405) structural twist that should be labeled as such — worth referee time, but the exotic claim needs real 90° data. read the letter →

arxiv 2602.11480 v2 pith:HAKX3IW6 submitted 2026-02-12 nucl-th hep-phhep-th

Yuan Gao , Xiao-Yun Wang , Xiang Liu This is my paper · ORCID
classification nucl-thhep-phhep-th
keywords Λ(1405)Λ(1520)π−pscatteringeffectiveLagrangianapproachReggetrajectoriesconstituentcountingruleDalitzprocesshyperonstructure
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 tries to learn about the inner structure of two hyperon resonances, Λ(1405) and Λ(1520), by studying how they are produced when a negative pion hits a proton. The authors build a model in which the reaction proceeds by exchange of a K* meson (forward angles) or a Σ baryon (backward angles), and fit it to existing cross-section data. They find that Λ(1520) production is dominated by the forward meson-exchange mechanism, while Λ(1405) production is dominated by the backward baryon-exchange mechanism. Using the constituent counting rule — a scaling law that says the cross section at large angles falls as s^(2−n), where n counts the number of constituent quarks in the participating particles — they extract n ≈ 10 for Λ(1520), matching a three-quark structure, but n ≈ 8 for Λ(1405), below both the three-quark value (10) and the five-quark value (12). They interpret this deviation as evidence that Λ(1405) is not an ordinary three-quark baryon. They also calculate the cascade decay π−p → KΛ* → KπΣ and conclude that it is measurable in current or near-future experiments.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is the constituent counting rule — the perturbative-QCD scaling relation dσ/dt ∼ s^(2−n) for exclusive two-body reactions, where n is the total number of valence constituents in the four participating hadrons — applied to 90° cross sections obtained from a fitted effective-Lagrangian model. The reaction model itself combines t-channel K* exchange, u-channel Σ exchange, form factors, and a Reggeized propagator for the t channel; it supplies the cross-section values from which the scaling exponent n is extracted. For π−p → KΛ(1405), the paper finds n ≈ 8, and for π−p → KΛ(1520), n ≈ 10.

What would settle it

Measure dσ/dt for π−p → KΛ(1405) at θ_cm = 90° for several center-of-mass energies between 2.3 and 3.0 GeV; fit the energy dependence to dσ/dt = C s^(2−n). If n is consistent with 10 or 12 (rather than ≈8), the paper's exotic-structure suggestion is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the production mechanisms of the two hyperons in π−p reactions are cleanly separated: the total cross section of π−p → KΛ(1405) is governed by u-channel Σ exchange, while π−p → KΛ(1520) is governed by t-channel K* exchange, each described by an effective-Lagrangian amplitude with monopole-like form factors and Reggeized propagators. Fitting to existing data gives good agreement, and the differential cross sections of the two channels have characteristically different angular shapes. From the fitted model, the authors compute dσ/dt at θ_cm = 90° for both reactions and apply the constituent counting rule dσ/dt ∼ s^(2−n) f(θ). They find n = 9.7–10.3 for Λ(1520), matchi

Load-bearing premise

The structural conclusion rests on the paper's model-generated cross sections at a 90-degree scattering angle — no data exist there — so if the model's extrapolation to large momentum transfer is distorted by the form factors or Regge treatment, the claimed deviation of n≈8 from 10 or 12 is an artifact rather than a fact about Λ(1405).

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the reaction-mechanism picture is right, future pion-beam measurements of the angular distribution of π−p → KΛ(1405) should show a dominant backward-angle (u-channel) peak, while π−p → KΛ(1520) should show a forward-angle (t-channel) peak.
  • A single decisive measurement — dσ/dt for π−p → KΛ(1405) at θ_cm ≈ 90° over the energy range √s ≈ 2.3–3.0 GeV — is sufficient to confirm or refute the n ≈ 8 scaling and the accompanying exotic-structure suggestion.
  • The Dalitz process π−p → KΛ* → KπΣ is predicted to have large invariant-mass peaks (above roughly 380 µb/GeV for Λ(1405) and 490 µb/GeV for Λ(1520)), so the Λ* can be reconstructed through its dominant πΣ decay without a fully exclusive final-state reconstruction.
  • If the scaling exponent for Λ(1520) is robust at n ≈ 10, it supports the conventional three-quark assignment and validates the same counting-rule method when applied to Λ(1405).

Reading between the lines

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

  • Our inference: because the 90° cross sections that feed the counting-rule fit are generated by the authors' model rather than measured, the n≈8 deviation should be read as a prediction for future experiments, not as an empirical measurement.
  • Our inference: the same model-plus-counting-rule pipeline could be applied to other hyperon resonances in pion- and kaon-induced reactions, providing a systematic screening tool for non-standard internal structures before dedicated high-momentum-transfer data exist.
  • Our inference: if a future 90° measurement confirms n≈8, the theoretically interesting question shifts to identifying which microscopic wave function — molecular, five-quark, or unquenched — actually yields such a scaling exponent, since the simple five-quark ansatz predicts 12, not 8.
  • Our inference: the strong contrast in the two production mechanisms itself (u-channel vs t-channel dominance) could serve as an inexpensive diagnostic: angular-distribution measurements at moderate energies can already distinguish the two reactions' mechanisms, and only the high-t scaling needs the difficult 90° data.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies π−p → KΛ(1405) and π−p → KΛ(1520) in an effective Lagrangian approach with t-channel K* exchange and u-channel Σ exchange, Reggeizing the t-channel. It fits three free parameters per channel to total and differential cross-section data, reporting χ²/d.o.f. = 2.343 and 1.259, and concludes that u-channel exchange dominates Λ(1405) production while t-channel exchange dominates Λ(1520) production. It then applies the constituent counting rule to model-generated dσ/dt values at θ_cm = 90° over √s = 2.3–3.0 GeV, extracting n ≈ 10 for Λ(1520) and n ≈ 8 for Λ(1405), and interprets the latter as evidence for a more exotic structure. Finally, it computes the Dalitz process π−p → KΛ* → KπΣ and estimates its experimental feasibility.

Significance. The work fills a genuine gap in pion-induced hyperon production phenomenology and provides a useful framework for future experiments. The global fits are reasonable, the production-mechanism picture is plausible, and the Dalitz-process predictions are concrete and testable at AMBER, J-PARC, HIKE, and HIAF. The authors are transparent about the absence of high-|t| data. However, the paper's central structural claim — that Λ(1405) shows a deviation from three-quark counting and is therefore exotic — rests on fitting a scaling exponent to model-generated points, not measured data at θ = 90°. That claim is therefore not established. The paper's main value is as a model prediction and experimental motivation, not as a determination of the Λ(1405) quark content.

major comments (3)
  1. [§III.C, Tables IV–V] The scaling exponent n for Λ(1405) is obtained by fitting dσ/dt = C s^{2−n} to the entries of Table IV, which the authors explicitly state are “the results of our theoretical calculations” (§III.C). The model was constrained by total and low-|t| differential cross sections (Figs. 2–4 and 8–10), but nothing in the fit controls θ_cm = 90°. Thus the fitted n ≈ 7.9 measures the model's energy dependence generated by the dipole form factor (Eq. 10), the squared-Lorentzian baryon form factor (Eq. 11), and the Regge trajectory (Eq. 20), rather than QCD constituent scaling. This circularity directly undercuts the abstract's statement that Λ(1405) “shows a clear deviation, suggesting a more exotic structure.” The structural claim should be downgraded to a model prediction pending actual θ = 90° data, or supported by an independent validation.
  2. [§III.C, Eqs. (10)–(11), (20)] No sensitivity analysis is given for the extracted n. The s-dependence of dσ/dt at fixed θ = 90° depends on the functional form and cutoff values of Eqs. (10) and (11) and on the slope/intercept of Eq. (20). Since the fit range is only √s = 2.3–3.0 GeV, the power-law exponent is not in an asymptotic regime and pre-asymptotic corrections are expected. I request a sensitivity study showing how n changes under (i) alternative form-factor shapes, (ii) variations of Λ_t and Λ_u within their quoted errors, and (iii) different fit ranges. Without this, the deviation of n ≈ 8 from both the three-quark value 10 and five-quark value 12 has no quantitative interpretation.
  3. [§II, Fig. 1] The amplitude includes only t-channel K* exchange and u-channel Σ exchange. At the fitted energies (W ≈ 1.9–3.1 GeV), s-channel baryon resonances can contribute to π−p → KΛ*; their neglect is not discussed. This omission weakens the uniqueness of the production-mechanism conclusion, particularly the claim of u-channel dominance for Λ(1405). The authors should either discuss the possible role of N* intermediate states and how they would affect the t/u decomposition, or restrict the mechanism claim to the energy region and observables where the model was actually tested.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (14)] The notation “p1v + p3v” should be “p1^ν + p3^ν”; the current text is inconsistent with the tensor structure of the amplitude.
  2. [Figs. 2–18] Several axis labels appear as raw symbol codes in the text version; please ensure the final PDF rendering of all figures is correct.
  3. [Eq. (22)] The Dalitz invariant-mass distribution is computed with a simple Breit-Wigner line shape and no non-resonant background. This is acceptable for a feasibility estimate, but the limitation should be stated explicitly.
  4. [§III.A] The phrase “global fits” is somewhat strong: the fitted data set is limited to Refs. [44–46], and the reduced χ² for Λ(1405) is 2.343. A brief comment on the possible source of the excess would be helpful.
  5. [After Eq. (20)] The sentence noting that no free parameters are added after Reggeization is useful and should be retained. However, the fixed Regge-trajectory parameters are model inputs and should be varied in the sensitivity analysis requested above.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Constituent-counting structural claim for Λ(1405) is circular: n≈8 is fitted to model-generated 90° cross sections whose s-dependence is already fixed by the fitted model.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section III.C, Tables IV and V]
    "Notably, there is currently no experimental data on the t-distribution cross section at cos θ = 0. The data points shown in Table IV are the results of our theoretical calculations, which is very unfavorable for us to obtain an accurate value of n."

    Table IV is model output at θ=90°, produced by the same effective-Lagrangian/Regge model whose parameters (Λt, Λu, gK*NΛ*) were fitted to total and low-|t| differential cross sections (Tables I/II; Eqs. 10, 11, 19, 20). At θ=90°, u ≈ -s + const, so the u-channel form factor Eq. (11) forces |Fu|² ∼ s^{-4}, and the Regge trajectory Eq. (20) fixes the t-channel s-dependence. Fitting dσ/dt = C s^{2-n} to these generated points therefore returns an exponent already encoded in the model, not an independent QCD constituent-scaling exponent. The interpretation of n≈8 for Λ(1405) as evidence of exotic structure is a re-description of the fitted model's high-|t| behavior, not a measurement or first-principles prediction.

  2. self citation load bearing [Section III.C, paragraph introducing the constituent-counting application]
    "In our previous work, we calculated the cross sections of π− p → K∗Σ at θc.m. = 90◦, by fitting the experimental data and the numerical results to the expression dσ/dt = (constant) × s2−n, We found that the fitted values of n are very close to 10, confirming the accuracy of the theoretical prediction for the cross section. [32]."

    Ref. [32] is the same group's prior paper (Wang, Gao, Liu) using the same procedure: fit the scaling law to model-generated 90° cross sections and read off n. The text invokes it to validate the methodology on which the Λ(1405) structural claim rests. Since this prior work is neither machine-checked nor externally benchmarked here, it is not independent confirmation. The present Λ(1520) result n≈10 provides an internal consistency check, so this self-citation is secondary to the main circularity but still load-bearing for the method's credibility.

full rationale

The production-mechanism part of the paper is a normal, data-driven effective-Lagrangian/Regge fit: amplitudes from Eqs. (14)-(17), fit parameters in Tables I and II constrained by measured total and differential cross sections, and conclusions about u-channel vs t-channel dominance follow from those fits. That portion is not circular and could stand on its own. The circularity is confined to Section III.C: the constituent-counting analysis takes the Table IV differential cross sections, which the paper explicitly admits are 'the results of our theoretical calculations,' fits dσ/dt = C s^{2-n}, and then treats the resulting n values as probes of the hadrons' quark content. Because the θ=90° points inherit their s-dependence from the fitted model—the dipole form factor Eq. (10), the squared-Lorentzian form factor Eq. (11), and the linear K* Regge trajectory Eq. (20)—the fitted exponent n measures the model's high-|t| falloff, not the independent QCD scaling behavior. The paper is commendably transparent about the lack of cosθ=0 data and calls for future measurements, which mitigates severity, but the structural conclusion for Λ(1405) is nevertheless a model self-consistency statement rather than an external prediction. A self-citation ([32]) is also used to vouch for the same methodology, adding to the concern, although the Λ(1520) n≈10 result provides some internal consistency. Overall, the central structural claim is partially circular: a 'prediction' about inner structure reduces to an exponent fitted to model-generated points, while the reaction-mechanism analysis remains empirically grounded.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on three fitted parameters per reaction plus the scaling exponent n fitted to model-generated points. No new particles or mediators are introduced; the 'unquenched effects' phrase in Section III.C is an ad hoc explanation rather than an independently evidenced entity.

free parameters (8)
  • Λ_t (t-channel cutoff) for Λ(1405) = 1.856 ± 0.051 GeV
    Fitted to π−p → KΛ(1405) data; enters form factor Eq. (10) and controls t-channel strength.
  • Λ_u (u-channel cutoff) for Λ(1405) = 1.345 ± 0.056 GeV
    Fitted; enters form factor Eq. (11), controls u-channel strength.
  • g_{K*NΛ(1405)} = 2.476 ± 0.370
    Fitted t-channel coupling for Λ(1405) production.
  • Λ_t (t-channel cutoff) for Λ(1520) = 1.488 ± 0.036 GeV
    Fitted to π−p → KΛ(1520) data; enters form factor Eq. (10).
  • Λ_u (u-channel cutoff) for Λ(1520) = 0.514 ± 0.040 GeV
    Fitted; enters form factor Eq. (11), controls u-channel strength.
  • g_{K*NΛ(1520)} = 13.200 ± 1.883
    Fitted t-channel coupling for Λ(1520) production.
  • scaling exponent n for π−p → KΛ(1405) = 7.568 ± 0.347 (2.3–2.8 GeV); 7.871 ± 0.249 (2.3–3.0 GeV)
    Fitted to model-generated dσ/dt points at θ = 90° (Table IV), not to experimental data; used to claim deviation from three-quark structure.
  • scaling exponent n for π−p → KΛ(1520) = 10.291 ± 0.363 (2.3–2.8 GeV); 9.747 ± 0.531 (2.3–3.0 GeV)
    Fitted to model-generated Table III points; used to claim consistency with three-quark structure.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Effective Lagrangian vertices and fixed couplings (gπKK* = 3.10, gKNΣ = 2.69) are taken from prior hadronic models.
    Section II, Eqs. (1)–(6); the entire amplitude construction depends on these hadronic interaction vertices.
  • domain assumption The Reggeized propagator Eq. (19) with trajectory α(t) = 1 + 0.85(t − m_K*²) replaces the Feynman t-channel propagator.
    Section II, Eq. (19); standard in Regge models but an assumption about the high-energy/high-t behavior of the amplitude.
  • domain assumption Only t-channel K* and u-channel Σ exchanges contribute; s-channel and contact terms are omitted.
    Fig. 1 and amplitudes Eqs. (12)–(17); no explicit justification is given for neglecting s-channel N* contributions.
  • domain assumption The constituent counting rule dσ/dt ∼ s^{2−n} applies at √s = 2.3–3.0 GeV and θ_cm = 90° with n = nπ + np + nK + nΛ*.
    Section III.C; pQCD scaling is assumed at moderate energies, and the paper acknowledges the absence of experimental data at cosθ = 0.
  • domain assumption The functional forms of the form factors in Eqs. (10) and (11) are physically appropriate.
    Section II; cutoff forms are chosen from phenomenology but are not derived, and they strongly affect the high-t behavior used in the counting-rule analysis.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Producing $\Lambda(1405)$ and $\Lambda(1520)$ in $\pi^-p$ reaction to explore their inner structures." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HAKX3IW6

@misc{pith2026260211480,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Producing $\Lambda(1405)$ and $\Lambda(1520)$ in $\pi^-p$ reaction to explore their inner structures},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HAKX3IW6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2602.11480}
}
abstract

In this work, the production mechanisms of the hyperon resonances $\Lambda(1405)$ and $\Lambda(1520)$ in the $\pi^- p$ scattering are investigated within an effective Lagrangian approach incorporating Regge trajectories. By including contributions from $t$-channel $K^*$ and $u$-channel $\Sigma$ exchanges, we perform global fits to the total and differential cross sections for $\pi^{-} p \rightarrow K\Lambda(1405)$ and $\pi^{-} p \rightarrow K\Lambda(1520)$. The results show good agreement with available experimental data. For the total cross section of $\Lambda(1405)$ production, the $u$-channel contribution is dominant, whereas the $t$-channel contribution plays the primary role in $\Lambda(1520)$ production. Furthermore, the differential cross sections of the two processes exhibit distinctly different shapes, reflecting their distinct underlying reaction mechanisms. An analysis based on the constituent counting rule indicates that $\Lambda(1520)$ is consistent with a conventional three-quark configuration, while $\Lambda(1405)$ shows a clear deviation, suggesting a more exotic structure. Owing to the large branching ratio of $\Lambda^* \to \pi \Sigma$, the Dalitz process $\pi^{-} p \rightarrow K \Lambda^{*} \rightarrow K \pi \Sigma$ is also calculated. Our results demonstrate that reconstructing $\Lambda^*$ via the $K\pi\Sigma$ final state is experimentally feasible. This study provides important theoretical insights into the production dynamics of these hyperon resonances, and suggests future high-precision measurements of the $t$-distribution at large momentum transfer at facilities such as AMBER, J-PARC, HIKE, and HIAF, which can further clarify their reaction mechanisms and structural properties.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.11480 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (12 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: show the t-distribution and u-distribution of the π − p → KΛ(1405) reaction at W = 3.057 GeV. It can be observed that as |t| increases and |u| decreases, the contri￾bution from the t-channel becomes less significant, while that from the u-channel grows increasingly pro…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_9.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_11.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_10.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: FIG. 17 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: FIG. 18 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_18.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Navas et al

    S. Navas et al. [Particle Data Group], Review of Particle Physics, Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

    2024

  2. [2]

    X. Y. Wang, C. Dong, and X. Liu, Analysis of Strong Coupling Constant with Machine Learning and Its Ap- plication, Chin. Phys. Lett. 41, 031201 (2024)

    2024

  3. [3]

    X. Y. Wang and X. Liu, Development Status and Future Plan of Meson Beam Experiments at Home and Abroad, Nucl. Phys. Rev. 42, 10-24 (2025)

    2025

  4. [4]

    M. H. Alston, L. W. Alvarez, P. Eberhard, M. L. Good, W. Graziano, H. K. Ticho, and S. G. Wojcicki, Study of Resonances of the Σ − π System, Phys. Rev. Lett. 6, 698-702 (1961)

    1961

  5. [5]

    R. H. Dalitz, T. C. Wong, and G. Rajasekaran, Model calculation for Y ∗ 0 (1405) resonance state, Phys. Rev. 153, 1617-1623 (1967)

    1967

  6. [6]

    Isgur and G

    N. Isgur and G. Karl, P Wave Baryons in the Quark Model, Phys. Rev. D 18, 4187 (1978)

    1978

  7. [7]

    Kaiser, T

    N. Kaiser, T. Waas, and W. Weise, SU(3) chiral dynamics with coupled channels: Eta and kaon photoproduction, Nucl. Phys. A 612, 297-320 (1997)

    1997

  8. [8]

    J. A. Oller and U. G. Meissner, Chiral dynamics in the presence of bound states: Kaon-nucleon interactions re- 10 visited, Phys. Lett. B 500, 263-272 (2001)

    2001

Show all 67 references
  1. [9]

    D. Jido, J. A. Oller, E. Oset, A. Ramos, and U. G. Meiss- ner, Chiral dynamics of the two Λ(1405) states, Nucl. Phys. A 725, 181-200 (2003)

    2003

  2. [10]

    Ikeda, T

    Y. Ikeda, T. Hyodo, and W. Weise, Chiral SU(3) theory of antikaon-nucleon interactions with improved threshold constraints, Nucl. Phys. A 881, 98-114 (2012)

    2012

  3. [11]

    J. X. Lu, L. S. Geng, M. Doering, and M. Mai, Cross- Channel Constraints on Resonant Antikaon-Nucleon Scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 071902 (2023)

    2023

  4. [12]

    Z. H. Guo and J. A. Oller, Meson-baryon reactions with strangeness -1 within a chiral framework, Phys. Rev. C 87, 035202 (2013)

    2013

  5. [13]

    J. M. Xie, J. X. Lu, L. S. Geng, and B. S. Zou, Dynami- cal origin of universal two-pole structures and their light quark mass evolution, EPJ Web Conf. 303, 01011 (2024)

    2024

  6. [14]

    U. G. Meißner, Two-pole structures in QCD: Facts, not fantasy!, Symmetry 12, 981 (2020)

    2020

  7. [15]

    Nemoto, N

    Y. Nemoto, N. Nakajima, H. Matsufuru, and H. Sug- anuma, Negative parity baryons in quenched anisotropic lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 68, 094505 (2003)

    2003

  8. [16]

    C. S. An, B. Saghai, S. G. Yuan, and J. He, Role of five- quark components in radiative and strong decays of the Λ(1405) resonance, Phys. Rev. C 81, 045203 (2010)

    2010

  9. [17]

    Moriya et al

    K. Moriya et al. [CLAS], Differential Photoproduction Cross Sections of the Σ0(1385), Λ(1405), and Λ(1520), Phys. Rev. C 88, 045201 (2013)

    2013

  10. [18]

    Boyarski, R

    A. Boyarski, R. E. Diebold, and S. D. Ecklund, et al., PHOTOPRODUCTION OF K+ HYPERON FROM HY- DROGEN AND DEUTERIUM AT 11-GeV, Phys. Lett. B 34, 547-550 (1971)

    1971

  11. [19]

    D. P. Barber, J. B. Dainton, L. C. Y. Lee et al., Strangeness Exchange in the Photoproduction of K+Λ (1520) Between 2.8-GeV and 4.8-GeV, Z. Phys. C 7, 17 (1980)

    1980

  12. [20]

    Kohri et al

    H. Kohri et al. [LEPS], Near-threshold Λ(1520) produc- tion by the ⃗γp → K+Λ(1520) reaction at forward K+ an- gles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 172001 (2010)

    2010

  13. [21]

    Muramatsu, J

    N. Muramatsu, J. Y. Chen, and W. C. Chang, et al., Near-threshold photoproduction of Λ(1520) from protons and deuterons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 012001 (2009)

    2009

  14. [22]

    F. W. Wieland, J. Barth, K. H. Glander et al., Measure- ment of the reaction γp → K+Λ(1520) at photon energies up to 2.65 GeV, Eur. Phys. J. A 47, 47 (2011)

    2011

  15. [23]

    A. I. Titov, B. Kampfer, S. Date, and Y. Ohashi, Co- herent Θ+ and Λ(1520) photoproduction off the deuteron, Phys. Rev. C 72, 035206 (2005)

    2005

  16. [24]

    Sibirtsev, J

    A. Sibirtsev, J. Haidenbauer, S. Krewald, U. G. Meissner, and A. W. Thomas, K ¯K photoproduction from protons, Eur. Phys. J. A 31, 221-232 (2007)

    2007

  17. [25]

    S. I. Nam, A. Hosaka, and H. C. Kim, Photoproduction of Θ baryon from the neutron, Phys. Lett. B 579, 43-51 (2004)

    2004

  18. [26]

    S. I. Nam, A. Hosaka, and H. C. Kim, Λ(1520, 3/2−) pho- toproduction reaction via γN → KΛ(1520), Phys. Rev. D 71, 114012 (2005)

    2005

  19. [27]

    S. I. Nam, A. Hosaka, and H. C. Kim, Suppression of Θ+(JP = 3/2+−) photoproduction from the proton, Phys. Lett. B 633, 483-487 (2006)

    2006

  20. [28]

    S. I. Nam, A. Hosaka, and H. C. Kim, Photoproduction of the pentaquark Θ+ with positive and negative parities, J. Korean Phys. Soc. 49, 1928 (2006)

    1928

  21. [29]

    J. J. Xie and J. Nieves, The role of the N∗(2080) resonance in the ⃗γp → K+Λ(1520) reaction, Phys. Rev. C 82, 045205 (2010)

  22. [30]

    S. I. Nam, J. H. Park, A. Hosaka, and H. C. Kim, Λ(1405, 1/2−) photoproduction from the γp → K+Λ(1405) reaction, J. Korean Phys. Soc. 59, 2676-2683 (2011)

    2011

  23. [31]

    N. C. Wei, Y. Zhang, F. Huang, and D. M. Li, Photo- production γp → K+Λ(1520) in an effective Lagrangian approach, Phys. Rev. D 103, 034007 (2021)

    2021

  24. [32]

    X. Y. Wang, Y. Gao, and X. Liu, Production poten- tial of hidden-strange molecular pentaquarks through the π− p → K∗Σ process, Phys. Rev. D 111, 034021 (2025)

    2025

  25. [33]

    Xiang, X

    J. Xiang, X. Y. Wang, H. Xu, and J. He, Pion-induced K∗ production with Σ∗ baryon off proton target, Commun. Theor. Phys. 72, 115303 (2020)

    2020

  26. [34]

    X. Y. Wang, H. F. Zhou, and X. Liu, Prospects for de- tecting the hidden-strange pentaquarklike state N∗(2080) in the π− p → ϕn reaction, Phys. Rev. D 110, 014026 (2024)

  27. [35]

    X. Y. Wang, J. He, X. R. Chen, Q. Wang, and X. Zhu, Pion-induced production of hidden-charm pentaquarks Pc(4312), Pc(4440), and Pc(4457), Phys. Lett. B 797, 134862 (2019)

    2019

  28. [36]

    Cheng and X

    C. Cheng and X. Y. Wang, The production of neutral N∗(11052) resonance with hidden beauty from π− p scat- tering, Adv. High Energy Phys. 2017, 9398732 (2017)

    2017

  29. [37]

    He, Nucleon resonances N(1875) and N(2100) as strange partners of LHCb pentaquarks, Phys

    J. He, Nucleon resonances N(1875) and N(2100) as strange partners of LHCb pentaquarks, Phys. Rev. D 95, 074031 (2017)

    2017

  30. [38]

    S. H. Kim, A. Hosaka, H. C. Kim, and H. Noumi, Pro- duction of strange and charmed baryons in pion induced reactions, Phys. Rev. D 92, 094021 (2015)

    2015

  31. [39]

    X. Y. Wang, J. He, and H. Haberzettl, Analysis of recent CLAS data on Σ∗(1385) photoproduction off a neutron target, Phys. Rev. C 93, 045204 (2016)

    2016

  32. [40]

    X. Y. Wang and J. He, K∗0Λ photoproduction off a neu- tron, Phys. Rev. C 93, 035202 (2016)

    2016

  33. [41]

    Ozaki, H

    S. Ozaki, H. Nagahiro, and A. Hosaka, Charged K∗ Pho- toproduction in a Regge model, Phys. Rev. C 81, 035206 (2010)

    2010

  34. [42]

    X. Y. Wang and J. He, Investigation of pion-induced f1(1285) production off a nucleon target within an inter- polating Reggeized approach, Phys. Rev. D 96, 034017 (2017)

    2017

  35. [43]

    J. K. Storrow, BARYON EXCHANGE PROCESSES, Phys. Rept. 103, 317 (1984)

    1984

  36. [44]

    O. I. Dahl, L. M. Hardy, R. I. Hess, J. Kirz, and D. H. Miller, Strange-particle production in π− p inter- actions from 1.5 to 4.2 BeV/c. 1. Three-and-more-body final states, Phys. Rev. 163, 1377-1429 (1967)

    1967

  37. [45]

    D. J. Crennell, H. A. Gordon, K. W. Lai, and J. M. Scarr, Two-body strange-particle final states in π− p interactions at 4.5 and 6 GeV/c, Phys. Rev. D 6, 1220-1254 (1972)

    1972

  38. [46]

    D. W. Thomas, A. Engler, H. E. Fisk, and R. W. Krae- mer, Strange particle production from π− p interactions at 1.69 GeV/c, Nucl. Phys. B 56, 15-45 (1973)

    1973

  39. [47]

    G. P. Lepage and S. J. Brodsky, Exclusive Processes in Perturbative Quantum Chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 22, 2157 (1980)

    1980

  40. [48]

    A. H. Mueller, Perturbative QCD at High-Energies, Phys. Rept. 73, 237 (1981)

    1981

  41. [49]

    G. P. Lepage and S. J. Brodsky, Exclusive Processes in Quantum Chromodynamics: Evolution Equations for Hadronic Wave Functions and the Form-Factors of Mesons, Phys. Lett. B 87, 359-365 (1979)

    1979

  42. [50]

    Dong and P

    Y. Dong and P. Shen, Constituent counting rule and the 11 production of at high energies, Chin. Phys. C 43, 054102 (2019)

    2019

  43. [51]

    S. J. Brodsky and G. R. Farrar, Scaling Laws at Large Transverse Momentum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 31, 1153-1156 (1973)

    1973

  44. [52]

    S. J. Brodsky and G. R. Farrar, Scaling Laws for Large Momentum Transfer Processes, Phys. Rev. D 11, 1309 (1975)

    1975

  45. [53]

    V. A. Matveev, R. M. Muradian, and A. N. Tavkhelidze, Automodellism in the large-angle elastic scattering and structure of hadrons, Lett. Nuovo Cim. 7, 719-723 (1973)

    1973

  46. [54]

    Polchinski and M

    J. Polchinski and M. J. Strassler, Hard scattering and gauge/string duality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 031601 (2002)

    2002

  47. [55]

    B. R. Baller, G. C. Blazey, H. Courant, K. J. Heller, S. Heppelmann, M. L. Marshak, E. A. Peterson, M. A. Shupe, D. S. Wahl, and D. S. Barton, et al., Com- parison of Exclusive Reactions at Large T , Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 1118-1121 (1988)

    1988

  48. [56]

    L. Y. Zhu et al. [Jefferson Lab Hall A], Cross-section mea- surement of charged pion photoproduction from hydro- gen and deuterium, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 022003 (2003)

    2003

  49. [57]

    L. Y. Zhu et al. [Jefferson Lab Hall A and Jefferson Lab E94-104], Cross section measurements of charged pion photoproduction in hydrogen and deuterium from 1.1 GeV to 5.5 GeV, Phys. Rev. C 71, 044603 (2005)

    2005

  50. [58]

    White, R

    C. White, R. Appel, D. S. Barton, G. Bunce, A. S. Car- roll, H. Courant, G. Fang, S. Gushue, K. J. Heller, and S. Heppelmann, et al., Comparison of 20 exclusive reac- tions at large t, Phys. Rev. D 49, 58-78 (1994)

    1994

  51. [59]

    M. J. Amaryan, W. J. Briscoe, M. G. Ryskin, and I. I. Strakovsky, High Energy Behaviour of Light Meson Photoproduction, Phys. Rev. C 103, 055203 (2021)

    2021

  52. [60]

    X. Y. Wang, H. F. Zhou, and X. Liu, Exploring kaon induced reactions for unraveling the nature of the scalar meson a0(1817), Phys. Rev. D 108, 034015 (2023)

    2023

  53. [61]

    S. H. Kim, S. i. Nam, D. Jido, and H. C. Kim, Photo- production of Λ(1405) with the N∗ and t-channel Regge contributions, Phys. Rev. D 96, 014003 (2017)

    2017

  54. [62]

    Goussu, M

    O. Goussu, M. Sene, B. Ghidini, S. Mongelli, A. Romano, P. Waloschek, and V. Alles-Borelli, Analysis of strange- particle production in π− p collisions at 1.59 GeV/c, Nuovo Cim. A 42, 606-618 (1966)

    1966

  55. [63]

    Adams, C

    B. Adams, C. A. Aidala, R. Akhunzyanov, G. D. Alexeev, M. G. Alexeev, A. Amoroso, V. Andrieux, N. V. Anfimov, V. Anosov, A. Antoshkin et al., Letter of Intent: A New QCD facility at the M2 beam line of the CERN SPS (COMPASS++/AMBER), [arXiv:1808.00848 [hep-ex]]

    arXiv

  56. [64]

    K. Aoki, H. Fujioka, T. Gogami, Y. Hidaka, E. Hiyama, R. Honda, A. Hosaka, Y. Ichikawa, M. Ieiri, M. Isaka et al., Extension of the J-PARC Hadron Experimental Fa- cility: Third White Paper, [arXiv:2110.04462 [nucl-ex]]

    arXiv

  57. [65]

    M. U. Ashraf et al. [HIKE], High Intensity Kaon Exper- iments (HIKE) at the CERN SPS Proposal for Phases 1 and 2, [arXiv:2311.08231 [hep-ex]]

    arXiv

  58. [66]

    G. Q. Xiao, H. S. Xu, and S. C. Wang, HIAF and CiADS national research facilities: Progress and prospect[J], Nucl. Phys. Rev. 34(3), 275 (2017)

    2017

  59. [67]

    X. Chen, Y. Fan, S. Fang, Z. Q. Feng, F. K. Guo, W. Han, J. He, Q. He, X. He, H. Huang et al., Huizhou Hadron Spectrometer – a Proposed High-rate Experi- mental Setup at the High Intensity Heavy-ion Acceler- ator Facility, [arXiv:2511.22864 [hep-ex]]

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.