REVIEW 1 cited by
Theoretical study on $\Lambda_c^+ \to \Lambda K^+\bar{K}^0$ decay and $\Xi^*(1690)$ resonance
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
We present a theoretical study of $\Xi^*(1690)$ resonance in the $\Lambda_c^+ \to \Lambda K^+ \bar{K}^0$ decay, where the weak interaction part proceeds through the Cabibbo-favored process $c \to s + u\bar{d}$. Next, the intermediate two mesons and one baryon state can be constructed with a pair of $q\bar{q}$ with the vacuum quantum numbers. Finally, the $\Xi^*(1690)$ is mainly produced from the final state interactions of $\bar{K}\Lambda$ in coupled channels, and it is shown in the $\bar{K}\Lambda$ invariant mass distribution. Besides, the scalar meson $a_0(980)$ and nucleon excited state $N^*(1535)$ are also taken into account in the decaying channels $K^+\bar{K}^0$ and $K^+\Lambda$, respectively. Within model parameters, the $K^+ \bar{K}^0$, $\bar{K}^0 \Lambda$ and $K^+ \Lambda$ invariant mass distributions are calculated, and it is found that our theoretical results can reproduce well the experimental measurements, especially for the clear peak around $1690$ MeV in the $\bar{K}\Lambda$ spectrum. The proposed weak decay process $\Lambda_c^+ \to \Lambda K^+ \bar{K}^0$ and the interaction mechanism can provide valuable information on the nature of the $\Xi^*(1690)$ resonance.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Bridging correlation and spectroscopy measurements to access the hadron interaction behind molecular states: the case of the $\Xi$(1620) and $\Xi$(1690) in the $K^- \Lambda$ system
A model constrained by ALICE correlation data reproduces the LHCb K−Λ mass spectrum above 1680 MeV but overshoots the threshold region dominated by the Xi(1620).
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.