Search for<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mn>3900</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo stretchy="false">→</mml:mo><mml:mi>ω</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi>π</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml

Ablikim, M.; Ачасов, М. Н.; Ai, X.; Albayrak, O.; Albrecht, M.; Ambrose, D.; Amoroso, A.; An, F. F.; An, Q.; Bai, J. Z.; Ferroli, R. Baldini; Ban, Y.; Bennett, D. W.; Bennett, J. V.; Bertani, M.; Bettoni, D.; Bian, J. M.; Bianchi, F.; Boger, E.; Boyko, I. R.; Briere, R. A.; Cai, H.; X, Cai; Çakır, O.; Calcaterra, A.; Cao, G. F.; Çetin, S. A.; Chang, J. F.; Chelkov, G.; Chen, G.; Chen, H. S.; Chen, H. Y.; Chen, J. C.; Chen, M. L.; Chen, S. J.; Chen, X.; Chen, X. R.; Chen, Y. B.; Cheng, H. P.; Chu, X. K.; Cibinetto, G.; Dai, H. L.; Dai, J. P.; Dbeyssi, A.; Dedovich, D.; Deng, Z. Y.; Denig, A.; Denysenko, I.; Destefanis, M.; Mori, F. De; Ding, Y.; Dong, C.; Dong, J.; Liu, Dong; Dong, M. Y.; Du, S. X.; Duan, Pengfei; Eren, E.; Fan, J. Z.; Fang, J.; Su, Fang; Fang, Xin; Fang, Y.; Fava, L.; Feldbauer, F.; Felici, G.; Feng, C. Q.; Fioravanti, E.; Fritsch, M.; Fu, C. D.; Gao, Q.; Gao, X. Y.; Gao, Y. S.; Gao, Z.; Garzia, I.; Geng, C.; Goetzen, K.; Gong, W. X.; Gradl, W.; Greco, M.; Gu, M. H.; Gu, Y. T.; Guan, Y. H.; Guo, A. Q.; Guo, L. B.; Guo, Y. P.; Guo, Y. P.; Haddadi, Z.; Hafner, A.; Han, S.; Han, Y. L.; Hao, X. Q.; Harris, F. A.; He, K. L.; He, Z. Y.; Held, T.; Heng, Y. K.; Hou, Z. L.; Chen, Hu; Hu, H. M.; Hu, J. F.; Hu, T.; Hu, Y.; Huang, G. M.; Huang, G. S.; Huang, Hongxia; Huang, J. S.; Huang, X. T.; Huang, Y.; Hussain, T.; Ji, Q.; Ji, X. B.; Ji, X. L.; Jiang, L. L.; Jiang, L. W.; Jiang, X. S.; Jiang, X. Y.; Jiao, J. B.; Jiao, Z.; Jin, D. P.; Jin, S.; Johansson, T.; Julin, A.; Kalantar‐Nayestanaki, N.; Kang, X. L.; Kang, X. S.; Kavatsyuk, M.; Ke, B. C.; Kiese, P.; Kliemt, R.; Kloss, B.; Kolcu, O. B.; Kopf, B.; Kornicer, M.; Kühn, W.; Kupść, A.; Lange, J. S.; Lara, M.; Larin, P.; Leng, C.; Li, C.; Li, C. H.; Li, Cheng; Li, D. M.; Li, F.; Li, G.; Li, H. B.; Li, J. C.; Li, Jin; Li, K.; Li, K.; Li, Lei; Li, P. R.; Li, T.; Li, W. D.; Li, W. G.; Li, X. L.; Li, X. M.; Li, X. N.; Li, X. Q.; Li, Z. B.; Liu, Han; Liang, Y. F.; Liang, Y. T.; Liao, G. R.; Lin, D. X.; Liu, B. J.; Liu, C. X.; Liu, F. H.; Liu, Fang; Liu, Feng; Liu, H. B.; Liu, H. H.; Liu, H. H.; Liu, H. M.; Liu, J.; Liu, J. B.; Liu, J. P.; Liu, J. Y.; Liu, K.; Liu, K. Y.; Liu, L. D.; Liu, P. L.; Liu, Q.; Liu, S. B.; Liu, X.; Liu, X. X.; Liu, Y. B.; Liu, Z. A.; Liu, Zhiqiang; Liu, Zhiqing; Loehner, H.; Lou, X.; Lü, H. J.; Lü, J. G.; Lu, R. Q.; Lu, Y.; Lu, Y. P.; Luo, C. L.; Luo, M. X.; Luo, T.; Luo, X. L.; Lv, M.; Lyu, X. R.; C., F.; L., H.; L., L.; M., Q.; Ma, Tao; N., X.; Y., X.; Maas, F. E.; Maggiora, M.; Mao, Y.; Mao, Z. P.; Marcello, S.; Messchendorp, J. G.; Jiang, Min; Min, T. J.; Mitchell, R. E.; Mo, X. H.; Mo, Y. J.; Morales, C. Morales; Moriya, K.; Muchnoi, N. Yu.; Muramatsu, H.; Nefedov, Y.; Nerling, F.; Nikolaev, I. B.; Ning, Z.; Nisar, S.; Niu, S. L.; Niu, X. Y.; Olsen, S. L.; Ouyang, Q.; Pacetti, S.; Patterí, P.; Pelizaeus, M.; Peng, H.; Peters, K.; Pettersson, J.; Ping, J. L.; Ping, R. G.; Poling, R.; Prasad, V.; Pu, Yudong; Qi, M.; Qian, S.; Qiao, C. F.; Liu, Qin; Qin, Ning; Qin, X. S.; Qin, Yao; Qin, Z. H.; Qiu, J. F.; Rashid, K. H.; Redmer, C. F.; Ren, H.; Ripka, M.; Rong, G.; Rosner, Ch.; Ruan, X. D.; Santoro, V.; Sarantsev, A.; Savrié, M.; Schoenning, K.; Schumann, S.; Shan, W.; Shao, M.; Shen, C. P.; Shen, P. X.; Shen, X. Y.; Sheng, H. Y.; Song, W. M.; Song, X. Y.; Sosio, S.; Spataro, S.; Sun, G. X.; Sun, J. F.; Sun, S. S.; Sun, Y. J.; Sun, Y. Z.; Sun, Zhi‐Wei; Sun, Z. T.; Tang, C. J.; Tang, X.; Tapan, I.; Thorndike, E. H.; Tiemens, M.; Ullrich, M.; Uman, I.; Varner, G.; Wang, B.; Wang, B. L.; Wang, D.; Wang, D. Y.; Wang, K.; Wang, L. L.; Wang, L. S.; Wang, M.; Wang, P.; Wang, P. L.; Wang, S. G.; Wang, W.; Wang, X. F.; Wang, Y. D.; Wang, Y. F.; Wang, Y. Q.; Wang, Z.; Wang, Z. G.; Wang, Z. H.; Wang, Z. Y.; Weber, T.; Wei, D. H.; Wei, J. B.; Weidenkaff, P.; Wen, S. P.; Wiedner, U.; Wolke, M.; Wu, L. H.; Wang, Zhi; Xia, L.; Xia, Y.; Xiao, D.; Xiao, Z. J.; Xie, Y.; Xiu, Q. L.; Xu, G. F.; Xu, Lei; Xu, Q. J.; Xu, Q. N.; Xu, X. P.; Liang, Yan; Yan, W. B.; Yan, W.; Yan, Y. H.; Yang, H. J.; Yang, H. X.; Yang, L.; Yang, Yifan; Yang, Yifan; Ye, H.; Ye, M.; Ye, M. H.; Yin, J. H.; Yu, B. X.; Yu, C. X.; Yu, H. W.; Yu, J. S.; Yuan, C. Z.; Yuan, W. L.; Yuan, Y.; Yuncu, A.; Zafar, A. A.; Zallo, A.; Zeng, Y.; Zhang, B. X.; Zhang, B. Y.; Zhang, C.; Zhang, C. C.; Zhang, D. H.; Zhang, H. H.; Zhang, H. Y.; Zhang, J. J.; Zhang, J. L.; Zhang, J. Q.; Zhang, J. W.; Zhang, J. Y.; Zhang, J. Z.; Zhang, K.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, S. H.; Zhang, X. Y.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Y. N.; Zhang, Y. H.; Zhang, Y. T.; Zhang, Yu; Zhang, Z. H.; Zhang, Z. P.; Zhang, Z. Y.; Zhao, G.; Zhao, Jiawei; Zhao, J. Y.; Zhao, J. Z.; Liu, Zhao; Zhao, Ling; Zhao, M. G.; Zhao, Q.; Zhao, Q.; Zhao, S. J.; Zhao, T. C.; Zhao, Y. B.; Zhao, Z.; Zhemchugov, A.; Zheng, B.; Zheng, J. P.; Zheng, W. J.; Zheng, Y.; Zhong, B.; Li, Zhou; Zhou, X. Y.; Zhou, X. K.; Zhou, X. R.; Zhou, X. Y.; Zhu, K. J.; Zhu, S. H.; Zhu, Xiaoyu; Zhu, Y.; Zhu, Y. S.; Zhu, Z. A.; Zhuang, J.; Zotti, L.; Zou, B. S.; Zou, J. H.

doi:10.1103/physrevd.92.032009

Cited by 18 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Empirically, extracted from measurements of the Dalitz decays η, η → γe + e − : r η = 0.67(3) fm [102], r η = 0.61(3) fm [103]. Our calculated value for the ratio…”

Section: Low Qmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For clarity, the η, η values are labelled and offset slightly from their true masses: our results (blue asterisks) are compared with empirical estimates (red circles), drawn from Refs. [102,103]. The π 0 , ηc, η b values (green asterisks) are taken from Refs.…”

Section: Low Qmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…by implementing features of solutions of the associated inhomogeneous Bethe-Salpeter equations or by using such solutions directly, possibly after building their perturbation theory integral representations; and also by analysing the impact of corrections induced by the non-Abelian anomaly to our approximation for the γ * γ → η, η transition current. These steps would enable reliable predictions to be made for the timelike behaviour of those transition form factors that are accessible via the related Dalitz decays, for which contemporary data exist [102,103,111].…”

Section: Epiloguementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

γ*γ→η,η′ transition form factors

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using a continuum approach to the hadron bound-state problem, we calculate γ * γ → η, η transition form factors on the entire domain of spacelike momenta, for comparison with existing experiments and in anticipation of new precision data from next-generation e + e − colliders. One novel feature is a model for the contribution to the Bethe-Salpeter kernel deriving from the non-Abelian anomaly, an element which is crucial for any computation of η, η properties. The study also delivers predictions for the amplitudes that describe the light-and strange-quark distributions within the η, η . Our results compare favourably with available data. Important to this at large-Q 2 is a sound understanding of QCD evolution, which has a visible impact on the η in particular. Our analysis also provides some insights into the properties of η, η mesons and associated observable manifestations of the non-Abelian anomaly. * leichang@nankai.edu.cn † cdroberts@anl.gov the bound-state's total momentum. The complete transition form factor is obtained as a sum over the various qq subcomponent contributions:where ψ q M is a flavour weighting factor originating in the meson's wave function.Notably [3-5] (τ 2 := Λ 2 QCD /Q 2 ):i.e. the DA acquires its asymptotic profile and henceConsequently, on τ 0 the γ * γ → M transition form factor exhibits simple scaling; and the anomalous dimension, characteristic of gauge field theories quantised in four dimensions, is "hidden" in the manner of approach to the τ = 0 limit. (N.B. As will become clear, owing to the non-Abelian axial anomaly in QCD, Eq. (5) is amended when M = η, η [6, 7].)An array of experiments have been performed with a view to testing Eqs. (1), (5) for the neutral pion [8][9][10][11]. Such measurements are difficult, typically involving the study of e + -e − collisions, in which one of the outgoing fermions is detected after a large-angle scattering whilst the other is scattered through a small angle and, hence, undetected. The detected fermion is assumed to have emitted a highly-virtual photon, the undetected fermion, a soft-photon; and these photons are supposed to fuse and produce the final-state pseudoscalar meson. There are many possible background processes and loss mechanisms in this passage of events, and thus ample room for systematic error, especially as Q 2 increases [12].

show abstract

“…Empirically, extracted from measurements of the Dalitz decays η, η → γe + e − : r η = 0.67(3) fm [102], r η = 0.61(3) fm [103]. Our calculated value for the ratio…”

Section: Low Qmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Low Qmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Epiloguementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

γ*γ→η,η′ transition form factors

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…BESIII studied the Z c (3900) ± → ωπ ± decay and found no significant Z c (3900) ± signals [167]. In Ref.…”

Section: Charged Charmonium-like Z C Statesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The hidden-charm pentaquark and tetraquark states

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the past decade many charmonium-like states were observed experimentally. Especially those charged charmoniumlike Z c states and bottomonium-like Z b states can not be accommodated within the naive quark model. These charged Z c states are good candidates of either the hidden-charm tetraquark states or molecules composed of a pair of charmed mesons. Recently, the LHCb Collaboration discovered two hidden-charm pentaquark states, which are also beyond the quark model. In this work, we review the current experimental progress and investigate various theoretical interpretations of these candidates of the multiquark states. We list the puzzles and theoretical challenges of these models when confronted with the experimental data. We also discuss possible future measurements which may distinguish the theoretical schemes on the underlying structures of the hidden-charm multiquark states.

show abstract

“…1 in ref. [67]). Interference of the f0(1500) amplitude is likely to be necessary to explain the 0 ++ spectrum of fig.…”

Section: Other F0(1370) Production Channelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decays of the f0(1370) scalar glueball candidate

Gastaldi

2018

Nuclear and Particle Physics Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For a long time doubts have existed on the existence of the f0(1370) meson as an individual object distinct and separated from the σ meson. Decays into π+πof the f0(1370) are the main source of an isolated structure localized between 1.2 and 1.5 GeV in the π+πmass spectrum measured in pp Central Exclusive Production (CEP) at √ =200 GeV at very low four momentum transfer squared ltl. These data confirm in the π+πdecay channel the existence of the f0(1370) as an isolated well identified structure that was previously observed in K + K -, KsKs, 4π 0 , 2π 0 π + πand π + ππ + πdecays measured in pbar annihilations at rest. The decay branching ratios of f0(1370) into σσ, ρρ, ππ, KKbar, ƞƞ relative to ππ decays obtained in analysis of data of pbar annihilations at rest which treat separately f0(1370) and σ are respectively 5.6, 3, 1, 1, 0.02. The decay and production properties of f0(1370) point to a large gg content. CEP interactions at very high energies favour production of 0 ++ and 2 ++ mesons. Selection of events with low ltl at both proton vertices suppresses 2 ++ structures. LHC runs dedicated to pp CEP measurements at low ltl could then provide a unique clean source of all the low energy scalars, cross check the pbar annihilation results and make it clear if and where scalar gluonium is resident and the nature (composition in terms of qqbar, qqqbarqbar, qqbar-qqbar and gg) of f0(500), f0(980), f0(1370), f0(1500) and f0(1710).

show abstract

Search forZc(3900)±→ωπ±

Cited by 18 publications

References 35 publications

γ*γ→η,η′ transition form factors

γ*γ→η,η′ transition form factors

The hidden-charm pentaquark and tetraquark states

Decays of the f0(1370) scalar glueball candidate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About