pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.13701 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-13 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex· hep-lat

Recognition: no theorem link

Mass of the dark antibaryon using B_drightarrow Λ psi_{DS} channel in light cone QCD

M. A. Abri , N. Hajirasouliha , K. Azizi
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-14 17:44 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-exhep-lat
keywords B-mesogenesisdark antibaryonlight cone sum rulesbranching fractionB_d decayLambda distribution amplitudesBaBarBelle
0
0 comments X

The pith

The branching fraction of B_d to Lambda plus dark antibaryon constrains the mass of the dark antibaryon in B-mesogenesis.

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

This paper calculates the branching fraction for the decay of a B_d meson into a Lambda baryon and a dark-sector antibaryon using light cone sum rules. Non-perturbative effects are included through the operator product expansion up to twist-6 of the Lambda distribution amplitudes. The branching fraction is derived explicitly as a function of the dark antibaryon mass. Comparing these theoretical predictions against the experimental upper limits reported by BaBar and Belle identifies the mass intervals for the dark antibaryon that remain consistent with the B-mesogenesis scenario.

Core claim

Using light cone sum rules for the B_d → Λ ψ_DS decay and including contributions up to twist-6 of the Λ distribution amplitudes in the operator product expansion, the branching fraction is obtained as a function of the dark antibaryon mass ψ_DS. Comparison with the experimental limits from the BaBar and Belle collaborations determines the mass ranges of ψ_DS that are consistent with the B-mesogenesis mechanism.

What carries the argument

Light cone sum rules applied to the B_d → Λ ψ_DS channel, with the operator product expansion truncated at twist-6 of the Lambda baryon distribution amplitudes.

If this is right

  • The branching fraction decreases with increasing dark antibaryon mass.
  • BaBar and Belle upper limits exclude portions of the mass parameter space for ψ_DS.
  • Only specific mass intervals for ψ_DS remain compatible with simultaneous generation of baryon asymmetry and dark matter.
  • The functional dependence on mass supplies concrete predictions for future B-factory measurements.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same light-cone method could be applied to other B-meson channels to place additional bounds on dark-sector particles.
  • Masses inside the allowed window would imply specific missing-energy signatures in collider data.
  • The result directly links a flavor-physics observable to the cosmological production of dark matter and matter asymmetry.

Load-bearing premise

The light-cone operator product expansion truncated at twist-6 captures the non-perturbative QCD effects in this decay without significant higher-twist corrections.

What would settle it

A measured branching fraction for B_d → Λ ψ_DS that lies outside the range predicted by the calculation for every value of the dark antibaryon mass would rule out the derived mass constraints.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.13701 by K. Azizi, M. A. Abri, N. Hajirasouliha.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Dependence of the form factors for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Dependence of the form factors for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Fitted form factors in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Fitted form factors in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: The branching fractions for the process [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

According to the $B$-mesogenesis framework, the baryon asymmetry of the Universe and dark matter can be simultaneously generated through CP-violating $B$-meson oscillations. In this mechanism, $B$-mesons decay into a Standard Model baryon and a dark-sector antibaryon, denoted by $\psi_{DS}$. Within this scenario, we investigate the allowed mass window for $\psi_{DS}$ using Light Cone Sum Rules (LCSR) for $B_d\rightarrow\Lambda \, \psi_{DS}$ decay. To include non-perturbative effects, we employ contributions up to twist-6 of the $\Lambda$ distribution amplitudes in the operator product expansion (OPE). We derive the branching fraction as a function of dark antibaryon mass and, by comparing with the experimental limits by the BaBar and Belle collaborations, determine the mass ranges of $\psi_{DS}$ consistent with the $B$-mesogenesis mechanism.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses light-cone sum rules (LCSR) to compute the branching fraction of the decay B_d → Λ ψ_DS, retaining contributions up to twist-6 in the Λ distribution amplitudes. It expresses this branching fraction explicitly as a function of the dark antibaryon mass m_ψDS and compares the result against BaBar and Belle experimental upper limits to extract allowed mass intervals for ψ_DS within the B-mesogenesis framework.

Significance. If the central numerical results prove robust, the work supplies concrete mass constraints on a dark-sector antibaryon from existing B-decay data, directly testing a mechanism that simultaneously addresses baryon asymmetry and dark matter. The explicit m_ψDS dependence of the branching fraction is a useful feature that permits straightforward comparison with limits, and the LCSR framework is a standard and appropriate tool for this non-perturbative channel.

major comments (2)
  1. [LCSR calculation and OPE truncation] The light-cone OPE is truncated after twist-6 contributions from the Λ distribution amplitudes (see the operator-product-expansion paragraph in the LCSR setup). No estimate, bound, or stability test is supplied for twist-7 and higher terms. Because baryon distribution amplitudes converge more slowly than mesonic ones, this truncation introduces an uncontrolled systematic uncertainty into BR(m_ψDS) that can shift the intersection points with the experimental bounds by an amount comparable to the width of the reported mass windows.
  2. [Numerical analysis and results] The numerical evaluation of the sum rules relies on the Borel parameter and continuum threshold (listed as free parameters), yet the manuscript provides neither a detailed stability analysis of the Borel window nor a quantitative assessment of how variations in these parameters propagate into the final mass ranges. This directly affects the reliability of the extracted intervals.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Introduction] The notation for the dark antibaryon (ψ_DS) and its coupling to the Λ current should be defined explicitly at first appearance to avoid ambiguity for readers unfamiliar with the B-mesogenesis literature.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions and axis labels would benefit from explicit statements of the twist truncation and the experimental limits being compared, improving readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and for the constructive comments on the LCSR setup and numerical analysis. We address each major comment below and outline the revisions we will implement to strengthen the presentation of systematic uncertainties.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The light-cone OPE is truncated after twist-6 contributions from the Λ distribution amplitudes (see the operator-product-expansion paragraph in the LCSR setup). No estimate, bound, or stability test is supplied for twist-7 and higher terms. Because baryon distribution amplitudes converge more slowly than mesonic ones, this truncation introduces an uncontrolled systematic uncertainty into BR(m_ψDS) that can shift the intersection points with the experimental bounds by an amount comparable to the width of the reported mass windows.

    Authors: We agree that a quantitative discussion of higher-twist contributions is desirable. Although the available models for twist-7 and higher Λ distribution amplitudes remain limited, we will add a dedicated paragraph in the revised manuscript that estimates their expected size using the known suppression pattern (powers of 1/M_B and the typical hierarchy observed in existing baryon LCSR literature). This estimate will be used to assign a conservative systematic uncertainty band to BR(m_ψDS) and to indicate how it may affect the extracted mass windows. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The numerical evaluation of the sum rules relies on the Borel parameter and continuum threshold (listed as free parameters), yet the manuscript provides neither a detailed stability analysis of the Borel window nor a quantitative assessment of how variations in these parameters propagate into the final mass ranges. This directly affects the reliability of the extracted intervals.

    Authors: We acknowledge that a more explicit stability analysis would improve transparency. In the revised version we will include (i) a table or figure showing the dependence of the branching fraction on the Borel parameter M^2 and continuum threshold s_0 within the chosen windows, and (ii) a quantitative propagation of these variations into the final allowed intervals for m_ψDS. The updated numerical section will therefore contain both the central values and the associated parameter-induced uncertainties. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: branching fraction derived from LCSR inputs then compared to external limits

full rationale

The paper derives BR(B_d → Λ ψ_DS) explicitly as a function of m_ψ_DS via light-cone sum rules, employing the OPE truncated at twist-6 of the Λ distribution amplitudes. This theoretical expression is evaluated numerically using standard QCD inputs (decay constants, distribution amplitudes from prior literature) and then intersected with independent experimental upper bounds from BaBar and Belle. No parameter is fitted to the target data, no self-citation supplies a load-bearing uniqueness theorem, and the mass windows emerge from the comparison rather than by construction. The truncation at twist-6 introduces a systematic uncertainty but does not create a definitional loop or rename a fitted result as a prediction. The derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the B-mesogenesis scenario, standard QCD sum-rule inputs, and the truncation of the OPE; the dark antibaryon itself is postulated by the model.

free parameters (2)
  • Borel parameter
    Standard LCSR auxiliary parameter chosen to optimize convergence and stability of the sum rule.
  • continuum threshold
    Energy cutoff parameter in the dispersion relation, typically fitted or chosen by hand.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Light-cone OPE up to twist-6 is sufficient for the decay amplitude
    Invoked to truncate the operator product expansion for the correlation function.
  • domain assumption B-mesogenesis framework correctly describes baryon asymmetry and dark matter production
    Taken as the motivating scenario without independent derivation in the paper.
invented entities (1)
  • ψ_DS dark antibaryon no independent evidence
    purpose: Particle that carries away baryon number and constitutes dark matter in the B-mesogenesis mechanism
    Postulated by the B-mesogenesis model; no independent evidence or falsifiable prediction beyond the mass window is supplied here.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5481 in / 1456 out tokens · 41007 ms · 2026-05-14T17:44:58.026463+00:00 · methodology

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

78 extracted references · 67 canonical work pages · 33 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    +m 2(1−2x 04x3 0)−s 0(1 +x 0)2 ! +M 2m2 Λx3 0 I2 3(x0) +I 3(x0)(1 +x 0) h s0(1−x 0) +m 2 Λ(−1 + 4x0 +x 2 0) i +m 2 Λx0 h s0(1 +x 0)2 +m 2 Λ(−1−2x 0 + 4x2 0 + 4x3 0) i! +M 2I1x0 −I 2 3(x0)(1 + 2x0)−I 3(x0)s0(1 +x 0)(1 + 3x0) + 4m4 Λx2 0(−1x0 + 2x2

  2. [2]

    (C2) 14 The corresponding correlation functions for model(b)enter the LCSR calculation in an analogous way

    +I 3(x0)m2 Λ h 2x0(1 +x 0)2 + 1 i!) , (C1) 13 andB M2 ˜Π(s) L is as follows: BM2 ˜Π(s) L (Q2, M2, s0) =− Z 1 x0 d ¯β Z 1 ¯β d¯α Z 1 ¯α dx2 Z 1−x2 0 dx1 m3 Λ 2 ¯βM 4 e−s(¯β)/M2 (A123456 +V 123456) h I4(β) +Q 2 i + Z 1 x0 d¯α Z 1 ¯α dx2 Z 1−x2 0 dx1 ( e−s(¯α)/M2 mΛ 4¯αM2 −I 3(¯α)(A123 +V 123) + 2mΛmb(P21 −S 12) ! +e −s0/M2 m3 Λx0 2M2(I1 +m 2 Λx2 0)3 (A12345...

  3. [3]

    P. A. R. Adeet al.(Planck), Astron. Astrophys.594, A13 (2016), arXiv:1502.01589 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  4. [4]

    Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters

    N. Aghanimet al.(Planck), Astron. Astrophys.641, A6 (2020), [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)], arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  5. [5]

    R. H. Cyburt, B. D. Fields, K. A. Olive, and T.-H. Yeh, Rev. Mod. Phys.88, 015004 (2016), arXiv:1505.01076 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  6. [6]

    Mossaet al., Nature587, 210 (2020)

    V . Mossaet al., Nature587, 210 (2020)

    2020

  7. [7]

    A. D. Sakharov, Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.5, 32 (1967)

    1967

  8. [8]

    P. B. Arnold and O. Espinosa, Phys. Rev. D47, 3546 (1993), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 50, 6662 (1994)], arXiv:hep- ph/9212235

    work page arXiv 1993

  9. [9]

    A. G. Cohen, D. B. Kaplan, and A. E. Nelson, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.43, 27 (1993), arXiv:hep-ph/9302210

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  10. [10]

    M. B. Gavela, P. Hernandez, J. Orloff, and O. Pene, Mod. Phys. Lett. A9, 795 (1994), arXiv:hep-ph/9312215

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  11. [11]

    D. P. Kirilova and M. V . Chizhov, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 314, 256 (2000), arXiv:astro-ph/9908319

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  12. [12]

    Is There a Hot Electroweak Phase Transition at $m_H\gsim m_W$?

    K. Kajantie, M. Laine, K. Rummukainen, and M. E. Shaposh- nikov, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 2887 (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9605288

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  13. [13]

    The Electroweak Phase Transition in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model

    M. Losada,The Electroweak phase transition in the minimal supersymmetric standard model, Ph.D. thesis, Rutgers U., Pis- cataway (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9612337

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  14. [14]

    Electroweak Baryogenesis: A Brief Review

    M. Trodden, in33rd Rencontres de Moriond: Electroweak Interactions and Unified Theories(1998) pp. 471–480, arXiv:hep-ph/9805252

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  15. [15]

    Recent Progress in Baryogenesis

    A. Riotto and M. Trodden, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.49, 35 (1999), arXiv:hep-ph/9901362

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  16. [16]

    The origin of the matter-antimatter asymmetry

    M. Dine and A. Kusenko, Rev. Mod. Phys.76, 1 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0303065

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  17. [17]

    D. E. Morrissey and M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, New J. Phys.14, 125003 (2012), arXiv:1206.2942 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  18. [18]

    The Standard Model cross-over on the lattice

    M. D’Onofrio and K. Rummukainen, Phys. Rev. D93, 025003 (2016), arXiv:1508.07161 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  19. [19]

    van de Vis, J

    J. van de Vis, J. de Vries, and M. Postma, (2025), arXiv:2508.09989 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    Dimopoulos and L

    S. Dimopoulos and L. Susskind, Phys. Rev. D18, 4500 (1978)

    1978

  21. [21]

    Fukugita and T

    M. Fukugita and T. Yanagida, Phys. Lett. B174, 45 (1986)

    1986

  22. [22]

    Affleck and M

    I. Affleck and M. Dine, Nucl. Phys. B249, 361 (1985)

    1985

  23. [23]

    Cosmic Microwave Background, Matter-Antimatter Asymmetry and Neutrino Masses

    W. Buchmuller, P. Di Bari, and M. Plumacher, Nucl. Phys. B643, 367 (2002), [Erratum: Nucl.Phys.B 793, 362 (2008)], arXiv:hep-ph/0205349

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  24. [24]

    Resonant Leptogenesis

    A. Pilaftsis and T. E. J. Underwood, Nucl. Phys. B692, 303 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0309342

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  25. [25]

    G. F. Giudice, A. Notari, M. Raidal, A. Riotto, and A. Strumia, Nucl. Phys. B685, 89 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0310123

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  26. [26]

    Leptogenesis as the origin of matter

    W. Buchmuller, R. D. Peccei, and T. Yanagida, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.55, 311 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0502169

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  27. [27]

    The importance of flavor in leptogenesis

    E. Nardi, Y . Nir, E. Roulet, and J. Racker, JHEP01, 164 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0601084

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  28. [28]

    Leptogenesis

    S. Davidson, E. Nardi, and Y . Nir, Phys. Rept.466, 105 (2008), arXiv:0802.2962 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  29. [29]

    Rafelski, J

    J. Rafelski, J. Birrell, A. Steinmetz, and C. T. Yang, Universe 9, 309 (2023), arXiv:2305.09055 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2023

  30. [30]

    D. S. Pereira, J. Ferraz, F. S. N. Lobo, and J. P. Mimoso, Sym- metry16, 13 (2024), arXiv:2312.14080 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2024

  31. [31]

    Heisig, Phys

    J. Heisig, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 191803 (2024), arXiv:2404.12428 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    Blazek, P

    T. Blazek, P. Matak, J. Ramaj, and M. Sabova, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 801 (2025), arXiv:2504.15164 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    Baryogenesis via Mesino Oscillations

    A. Ghalsasi, D. McKeen, and A. E. Nelson, Phys. Rev. D92, 076014 (2015), arXiv:1508.05392 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  34. [34]

    CP Violating Baryon Oscillations

    D. McKeen and A. E. Nelson, Phys. Rev. D94, 076002 (2016), arXiv:1512.05359 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  35. [35]

    G. Elor, M. Escudero, and A. Nelson, Phys. Rev. D99, 035031 (2019), arXiv:1810.00880 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  36. [36]

    A. E. Nelson and H. Xiao, Phys. Rev. D100, 075002 (2019), arXiv:1901.08141 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2019

  37. [37]

    Alonso- ´Alvarez, G

    G. Alonso- ´Alvarez, G. Elor, A. E. Nelson, and H. Xiao, JHEP 03, 046 (2020), arXiv:1907.10612 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  38. [38]

    Elor and R

    G. Elor and R. McGehee, Phys. Rev. D103, 035005 (2021), arXiv:2011.06115 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  39. [39]

    Elahi, G

    F. Elahi, G. Elor, and R. McGehee, Phys. Rev. D105, 055024 (2022), arXiv:2109.09751 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  40. [40]

    Alonso- ´Alvarez, G

    G. Alonso- ´Alvarez, G. Elor, M. Escudero, B. Fornal, B. Grin- stein, and J. Martin Camalich, Phys. Rev. D105, 115005 (2022), arXiv:2111.12712 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  41. [41]

    G. Elor, R. Houtz, S. Ipek, and M. Ulloa, Phys. Rev. D112, L011701 (2025), arXiv:2408.12647 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    Elor, (2025), arXiv:2509.18246 [hep-ph]

    G. Elor, (2025), arXiv:2509.18246 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    Mir ´o, M

    C. Mir ´o, M. Escudero, and M. Nebot, PoSDISCRETE2024, 023 (2025)

    2025

  44. [44]

    Burgos Marcos, A

    M. Burgos Marcos, A. Verheyden, and K. K. V os, (2026), arXiv:2601.19651 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  45. [45]

    Aaijet al.(LHCb), Nature643, 1223 (2025), arXiv:2503.16954 [hep-ex]

    R. Aaijet al.(LHCb), Nature643, 1223 (2025), arXiv:2503.16954 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2025

  46. [46]

    Observation of Large CP Violation in the Neutral B Meson System

    K. Abeet al.(Belle), Phys. Rev. Lett.87, 091802 (2001), arXiv:hep-ex/0107061

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  47. [47]

    Fleischer, Eur

    R. Fleischer, Eur. Phys. J. ST233, 391 (2024), arXiv:2402.00710 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  48. [48]

    Mir ´o, M

    C. Mir ´o, M. Escudero, and M. Nebot, Phys. Rev. D110, 115033 (2024), arXiv:2410.13936 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  49. [49]

    Khodjamirian and M

    A. Khodjamirian and M. Wald, Phys. Lett. B834, 137434 (2022), arXiv:2206.11601 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  50. [50]

    Boushmelev and M

    A. Boushmelev and M. Wald, Phys. Rev. D109, 055049 (2024), arXiv:2311.13482 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  51. [51]

    Biswas, A

    A. Biswas, A. Khodjamirian, and A. Mohamed, (2026), arXiv:2603.01723 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  52. [52]

    Elor and A

    G. Elor and A. W. M. Guerrera, JHEP02, 100 (2023), arXiv:2211.10553 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  53. [53]

    Y .-J. Shi, Y . Xing, and Z.-P. Xing, Eur. Phys. J. C83, 744 (2023), arXiv:2305.17622 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  54. [54]

    A. Lenz, A. Mohamed, and Z. W ¨uthrich, JHEP08, 141 (2025), arXiv:2412.14947 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  55. [55]

    Mohamed, (2025), arXiv:2511.04858 [hep-ph]

    A. Mohamed, (2025), arXiv:2511.04858 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  56. [56]

    Zheng, J.-N

    Y . Zheng, J.-N. Ding, D.-H. Li, L.-Y . Li, C.-D. L ¨u, and F.-S. Yu, Chin. Phys. C48, 083109 (2024), arXiv:2404.04337 [hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  57. [57]

    Xing, Y .-J

    Y . Xing, Y .-J. Shi, and X.-H. Hu, Phys. Rev. D112, 116018 (2025), arXiv:2508.05181 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  58. [58]

    Y .-J. Shi, Y . Xing, and Z.-P. Xing, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 306 (2024), arXiv:2401.14120 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  59. [59]

    Distribution amplitudes of $\Sigma$ and $\Lambda$ and their electromagnetic form factors

    Y .-L. Liu and M.-Q. Huang, Nucl. Phys. A821, 80 (2009), arXiv:0811.1812 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  60. [60]

    J. P. Leeset al.(BaBar), Phys. Rev. D111, L031101 (2025), 17 arXiv:2412.06950 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2025

  61. [61]

    A. B. Rodr ´ıguez, V . Chobanova, X. Cid Vidal, S. L. Soli ˜no, D. M. Santos, T. Momb ¨acher, C. Prouv ´e, E. X. R. Fern ´andez, and C. V ´azquez Sierra, Eur. Phys. J. C81, 964 (2021), arXiv:2106.12870 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  62. [62]

    Hadjivasiliouet al.(Belle), Phys

    C. Hadjivasiliouet al.(Belle), Phys. Rev. D105, L051101 (2022), arXiv:2110.14086 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2022

  63. [63]

    J. P. Leeset al.(BaBar), Phys. Rev. D107, 092001 (2023), arXiv:2302.00208 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2023

  64. [64]

    Ahmed (BaBar), PoSEPS-HEP2023, 048 (2024)

    H. Ahmed (BaBar), PoSEPS-HEP2023, 048 (2024)

    2024

  65. [65]

    Alonso- ´Alvarez, G

    G. Alonso- ´Alvarez, G. Elor, and M. Escudero, Phys. Rev. D 104, 035028 (2021), arXiv:2101.02706 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  66. [66]

    J. F. Nieves and P. B. Pal, Am. J. Phys.72, 1100 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0306087

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  67. [67]

    T. M. Aliev, K. Azizi, and M. Savci, Phys. Rev. D81, 056006 (2010), arXiv:1001.0227 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  68. [68]

    C. G. Boyd, B. Grinstein, and R. F. Lebed, Phys. Lett. B353, 306 (1995), arXiv:hep-ph/9504235

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  69. [69]

    Model-independent description of $B\to \pi l\nu$ decays and a determination of $|V_{ub}|$

    C. Bourrely, I. Caprini, and L. Lellouch, Phys. Rev. D79, 013008 (2009), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 82, 099902 (2010)], arXiv:0807.2722 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  70. [70]

    $B_{s}\to K \ell \nu_\ell$ and $B_{(s)} \to \pi (K) \ell^+\ell^-$ decays at large recoil and CKM matrix elements

    A. Khodjamirian and A. V . Rusov, JHEP08, 112 (2017), arXiv:1703.04765 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  71. [71]

    Ahmadi, Z

    M. Ahmadi, Z. R. Najjar, and K. Azizi, Phys. Rev. D112, 094035 (2025), arXiv:2509.23421 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  72. [72]

    Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys

    S. Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024)

    2024

  73. [73]

    V . M. Braun, A. Lenz, and M. Wittmann, Phys. Rev. D73, 094019 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0604050

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  74. [74]

    M. A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein, and V . I. Zakharov, Nucl. Phys. B147, 385 (1979)

    1979

  75. [75]

    Dehghan, F

    Z. Dehghan, F. Almaksusi, and K. Azizi, JHEP06, 025 (2025), arXiv:2502.16689 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  76. [76]

    Higher Twist Distribution Amplitudes of the Nucleon in QCD

    V . Braun, R. J. Fries, N. Mahnke, and E. Stein, Nucl. Phys. B 589, 381 (2000), [Erratum: Nucl.Phys.B 607, 433–433 (2001)], arXiv:hep-ph/0007279

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  77. [77]

    V . M. Braun, A. Lenz, N. Mahnke, and E. Stein, Phys. Rev. D 65, 074011 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0112085

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  78. [78]

    Form Factors and Strong Couplings of Heavy Baryons from QCD Light-Cone Sum Rules

    A. Khodjamirian, C. Klein, T. Mannel, and Y . M. Wang, JHEP 09, 106 (2011), arXiv:1108.2971 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011