Recognition: unknown
Observation of the Exotic State π₁(1600) in psi(2S)rightarrowγchi_{c1},chi_{c1}rightarrowπ⁺π⁻η'
Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 14:34 UTC · model grok-4.3
The pith
An exotic meson with quantum numbers forbidden for ordinary quark pairs is observed for the first time in χ_c1 decays.
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
Core claim
A partial wave analysis of ψ(2S)→γ χ_c1, χ_c1→π+π-η' finds a resonant structure in the π±η' invariant mass with J^{PC}=1^{-+} at mass 1828±8(stat)+11-33(syst) MeV/c² and width 638±26(stat)+35-86(syst) MeV. The state is produced via χ_c1→π₁±(1600)π∓ and decays to π±η', with the product branching fraction measured as 4.30±0.14(stat)+1.04-1.03(syst)×10^{-4}. The observation reaches over 21σ significance using a relativistic Breit-Wigner lineshape with mass-dependent width.
What carries the argument
Partial wave analysis that decomposes the five-body final-state amplitudes to isolate the exotic 1^{-+} component in the π±η' system.
If this is right
- The π₁(1600) can be produced in radiative charmonium transitions, opening a new experimental channel for studying its decay modes.
- The measured mass and width serve as benchmarks for theoretical calculations of exotic meson properties.
- The extracted product branching fraction quantifies the coupling strength through the observed final state.
- The high significance in this clean environment supports inclusion of the state in future compilations of exotic hadrons.
Where Pith is reading between the lines
- Confirmation in independent data sets would strengthen the case that the 1^{-+} family includes states that are not conventional mesons.
- Similar analyses of other χ_cJ or ψ(2S) transitions could reveal whether the same resonance appears with comparable strength.
- The relatively large width implies substantial coupling to additional channels such as ρπ or 3π that could be searched for in dedicated amplitude analyses.
Load-bearing premise
The fit correctly identifies the resonance as having exotic 1^{-+} quantum numbers rather than it arising from background fluctuations or misassigned conventional states.
What would settle it
Repeating the partial wave analysis without the 1^{-+} amplitude or with altered background parametrizations that eliminates the need for the resonance and yields no significant fit improvement would falsify the claim.
Figures
read the original abstract
A partial wave analysis of the process $\psi(2S)\rightarrow\gamma\chi_{c1}, \chi_{c1}\rightarrow\pi^+\pi^-\eta^{\prime}$ is performed using $(2712.4\pm14.3)\times10^{6}$ $\psi(2S)$ events collected with the BESIII detector. An isovector state with exotic quantum numbers $J^{PC}=1^{-+}$, denoted as $\pi_{1}(1600)$, is observed for the first time in the charmonium decay of $\chi_{c1}\rightarrow\pi_{1}^{\pm}(1600)\pi^{\mp}$, $\pi_{1}^{\pm}(1600)\rightarrow\pi^{\pm}\eta^{\prime}$ with a statistical significance over $21\sigma$. Its mass and width are determined to be $1828 \pm 8 ({\rm stat})^{+11}_{-33}({\rm syst})~\mathrm{MeV}/c^2$ and $638 \pm 26 ({\rm stat})^{+35}_{-86}({\rm syst})~\mathrm{MeV}$, respectively, using a relativistic Breit-Wigner function with a mass-dependent width. The corresponding product of branching fractions is determined to be $\mathcal{B}\left[\chi_{c1}\rightarrow\pi_{1}(1600)^{\pm}\pi^{\mp} \right] \times \mathcal{B}\left[\pi_{1}(1600)^{\pm}\rightarrow\pi^{\pm}\eta^{\prime}\right] = \left( 4.30 \pm 0.14 ({\rm stat})^{+1.04}_{-1.03}({\rm syst})~ \right) \times 10^{-4}$.
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The manuscript presents a partial wave analysis of the process ψ(2S) → γ χ_c1, χ_c1 → π⁺π⁻η' using (2712.4 ± 14.3) × 10^6 ψ(2S) events collected with BESIII. It claims the first observation of an isovector exotic state π₁(1600) with J^{PC}=1^{-+} produced via χ_c1 → π₁^±(1600) π^∓ and decaying to π^±η', with statistical significance >21σ. Resonance parameters are extracted via a relativistic Breit-Wigner fit (mass 1828 ± 8 (stat) +11/-33 (syst) MeV/c², width 638 ± 26 (stat) +35/-86 (syst) MeV) and the product branching fraction is reported as (4.30 ± 0.14 (stat) +1.04/-1.03 (syst)) × 10^{-4}.
Significance. If the partial wave analysis robustly isolates the exotic quantum numbers, this would constitute an important new production channel for the π₁(1600) and strengthen evidence for exotic mesons in charmonium decays. The large event sample, data-driven approach, and explicit reporting of both statistical and systematic uncertainties are clear strengths. However, the fitted mass lies well above the world-average value, which could affect interpretation of the state identity.
major comments (3)
- [Partial wave analysis] The >21σ significance for the 1^{-+} wave in the π±η' subsystem (abstract and PWA results) requires explicit validation that the amplitude basis is complete. All relevant S-, P-, and D-waves with correct isospin and Bose symmetry must be included, and the manuscript should demonstrate that non-resonant terms or other resonances cannot absorb the exotic amplitude.
- [Results] The relativistic Breit-Wigner parametrization with mass-dependent width yields a mass of 1828 MeV/c² (results section), substantially higher than the PDG average for π₁(1600). The stability of both the mass/width and the J^{PC} assignment against changes in the width functional form or inclusion of an additional broad component should be quantified.
- [Background and fit model] Background modeling in χ_c1 → π⁺π⁻η' must be shown to be exhaustive. The paper should report goodness-of-fit metrics and alternative fits (with and without the exotic wave) to confirm that the 1^{-+} signal is not mimicked by unmodeled non-resonant contributions or interference phases.
minor comments (2)
- [Abstract] The abstract states the use of a 'relativistic Breit-Wigner function with a mass-dependent width' but does not give the explicit functional form; this should be stated in the text or an equation for reproducibility.
- [Systematic uncertainties] The systematic uncertainty on the width is strongly asymmetric; a table listing the individual contributions (model variations, detector effects, etc.) would improve transparency.
Simulated Author's Rebuttal
We thank the referee for the careful and constructive review of our manuscript. We appreciate the recognition of the analysis strengths, including the large event sample and explicit uncertainty reporting. We address each major comment point by point below, providing the strongest honest defense based on our analysis while indicating revisions to the manuscript.
read point-by-point responses
-
Referee: The >21σ significance for the 1^{-+} wave in the π±η' subsystem (abstract and PWA results) requires explicit validation that the amplitude basis is complete. All relevant S-, P-, and D-waves with correct isospin and Bose symmetry must be included, and the manuscript should demonstrate that non-resonant terms or other resonances cannot absorb the exotic amplitude.
Authors: The partial wave analysis incorporates all relevant S-, P-, and D-waves in the π±η' subsystem, constructed to respect isospin conservation and Bose symmetry for the identical pions. The amplitude basis was selected based on established models for similar decays and tested for completeness by adding extra non-resonant terms and alternative resonances (e.g., additional P-wave contributions); these yield no statistically significant improvement in the fit likelihood, while the 1^{-+} component remains essential. The >21σ significance is obtained from the likelihood ratio between the nominal fit and the fit without the exotic wave. We will revise the PWA section to explicitly list the included waves, describe the completeness tests, and present the results of the alternative fits. revision: yes
-
Referee: The relativistic Breit-Wigner parametrization with mass-dependent width yields a mass of 1828 MeV/c², substantially higher than the PDG average for π₁(1600). The stability of both the mass/width and the J^{PC} assignment against changes in the width functional form or inclusion of an additional broad component should be quantified.
Authors: We note that the extracted mass is higher than the current PDG average, but the resonance is very broad (~638 MeV), making the mass parameter sensitive to the specific form of the width and the limited phase space in this decay. Stability tests were performed using alternative width parametrizations (constant width and modified barrier factors) and by adding a broad non-resonant 1^{-+} background term; the mass and width vary within the reported systematic uncertainties, and the J^{PC}=1^{-+} assignment is robust because it is fixed by the angular distributions in the PWA rather than the lineshape alone. We will add a new paragraph and summary table in the results section to quantify these variations explicitly. revision: partial
-
Referee: Background modeling in χ_c1 → π⁺π⁻η' must be shown to be exhaustive. The paper should report goodness-of-fit metrics and alternative fits (with and without the exotic wave) to confirm that the 1^{-+} signal is not mimicked by unmodeled non-resonant contributions or interference phases.
Authors: Background contributions to χ_c1 → π⁺π⁻η' are modeled via data sidebands for combinatorial background combined with inclusive Monte Carlo for known resonant channels, with data-driven efficiency corrections. Alternative fits without the 1^{-+} wave produce a substantially worse likelihood (consistent with the quoted significance) and fail to describe the angular distributions. Goodness-of-fit is assessed via χ²/ndf on invariant-mass and Dalitz-plot projections. We will expand the background and fit-model sections to include these χ² values, the explicit alternative-fit comparisons, and further validation plots to demonstrate that no unmodeled terms mimic the exotic signal. revision: yes
Circularity Check
No circularity: data-driven PWA fit to new experimental events
full rationale
The paper reports a partial-wave analysis performed directly on a large sample of ψ(2S) → γ χ_c1, χ_c1 → π⁺π⁻η' events collected by BESIII. Resonance parameters (mass, width, product branching fraction) and the 21σ significance are obtained by fitting an isobar amplitude model to the observed invariant-mass and angular distributions. No step equates a fitted quantity to itself by construction, renames a prior result as a new prediction, or relies on a self-citation chain whose validity is presupposed by the present work. The Breit-Wigner parametrization and wave-basis choices are standard modeling assumptions whose validity can be tested against the same data set; they do not render the reported observation tautological.
Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger
free parameters (2)
- Resonance mass
- Resonance width
axioms (2)
- domain assumption The partial wave analysis can unambiguously determine the J^{PC} quantum numbers of the intermediate state
- domain assumption The detector response and event reconstruction accurately capture the final state particles without significant bias
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[1]
The simulation models the beam energy spread and initial state radiation in thee +e− annihilations with the gen- eratorKKMC[31, 32]
Monte Carlo (MC) software, which includes the ge- ometric description of the BESIII detector and the de- tector response, are used to determine detection effi- ciencies and to estimate background contributions. The simulation models the beam energy spread and initial state radiation in thee +e− annihilations with the gen- eratorKKMC[31, 32]. An inclusive ...
-
[2]
in the process ofη ′ →γπ +π−. Charged tracks reconstructed from the multilayer drift chamber (MDC) are required to be within the polar angle range|cosθ|<0.93, whereθis defined with respect to thezaxis, which is the symmetry axis of the MDC. The distance of closest approach to the interaction point for charged tracks must be less than 10 cm along thezaxis ...
-
[3]
To suppress miscombination, an event is retained only if it contains exactly one combination that simul- taneously satisfies|M γπ +π− −m η′|<45 MeV/c 2 and Mγπ +π−π+π− >3.4 GeV/c 2 , wherem η′ is the nominal mass of theη ′ meson from the PDG [35]. Theη ′ and χc1 candidates are required to satisfy|M γπ +π− −m η′|< 15 MeV/c 2 and|M γπ +π−π+π− −m χc1 |<15 Me...
-
[4]
R. L. Jaffe and K. Johnson, Phys. Lett. B60, 201 (1976)
1976
-
[5]
Amsler and N
C. Amsler and N. A. Tornqvist, Phys. Rept.389, 61 (2004)
2004
-
[6]
Klempt and A
E. Klempt and A. Zaitsev, Phys. Rept.454, 1 (2007)
2007
-
[7]
Lacock, C
P. Lacock, C. Michael, P. Boyle, and P. Rowland (UKQCD Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B401, 308 (1997)
1997
-
[8]
C. W. Bernardet al.(MILC Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D56, 7039 (1997)
1997
-
[9]
Mei and X
Z. Mei and X. Luo, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A18, 5713 (2003)
2003
- [10]
-
[11]
Andreo and F
R. Andreo and F. Rohrlich, Nucl. Phys. B115, 521 (1976)
1976
-
[12]
Horn and J
D. Horn and J. Mandula, Phys. Rev. D17, 898 (1978)
1978
-
[13]
Barnes, Nucl
T. Barnes, Nucl. Phys. B158, 171 (1979)
1979
-
[14]
Andreev, Phys
O. Andreev, Phys. Rev. D86, 065013 (2012)
2012
-
[15]
C. J. Burden and M. A. Pichowsky, Few Body Syst.32, 119 (2002)
2002
-
[16]
C. J. Burden, L. Qian, C. D. Roberts, P. C. Tandy, and M. J. Thomson, Phys. Rev. C55, 2649 (1997)
1997
-
[17]
C. A. Meyer and E. S. Swanson, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 82, 21 (2015)
2015
-
[18]
Rodaset al.(JPAC Collaboration), Phys
A. Rodaset al.(JPAC Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 042002 (2019)
2019
-
[19]
B. Kopf, M. Albrecht, H. Koch, M. K¨ ußner, J. Pychy, X. Qin, and U. Wiedner, Eur. Phys. J. C81, 1056 (2021)
2021
-
[20]
G. S. Adamset al.(E852 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5760 (1998)
1998
-
[21]
M. G. Alexeevet al.(COMPASS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D105, 012005 (2022)
2022
-
[22]
Kuhnet al.(E852 Collaboration), Phys
J. Kuhnet al.(E852 Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B595, 109 (2004)
2004
-
[23]
Zaitsevet al.(VES Collaboration), Nucl
A. Zaitsevet al.(VES Collaboration), Nucl. Phys. A675, 155C (2000)
2000
-
[24]
D. V. Amelinet al., Phys. Atom. Nucl.68, 359 (2005)
2005
-
[25]
Luet al.(E852 Collaboration), Phys
M. Luet al.(E852 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 032002 (2005)
2005
-
[26]
C. A. Bakeret al., Phys. Lett. B563, 140 (2003)
2003
-
[27]
Y. A. Khokhlovet al.(VES Collaboration), Nucl. Phys. A663, 596 (2000)
2000
-
[28]
E. I. Ivanovet al.(E852 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 3977 (2001)
2001
-
[29]
G. S. Adamset al.(CLEO Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 84, 112009 (2011)
2011
-
[30]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 95, 032002 (2017)
2017
-
[31]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Chin
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Chin. Phys. C 48, 093001 (2024)
2024
-
[32]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Nucl
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A614, 345 (2010)
2010
-
[33]
Agostinelliet al., Nucl
S. Agostinelliet al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A506, 250 (2003)
2003
-
[34]
Jadach, B
S. Jadach, B. F. L. Ward, and Z. Wa ¸ s, Phys. Rev. D63, 113009 (2001)
2001
-
[35]
Jadach, B
S. Jadach, B. F. L. Ward, and Z. Wa ¸ s, Comput Phys Commun130, 260 (2000)
2000
-
[36]
D. J. Lange, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 462, 152 (2001)
2001
-
[37]
R. G. Ping, Chin. Phys. C32, 599 (2008)
2008
-
[38]
Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys
S. Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024)
2024
-
[39]
J. C. Chen, G. S. Huang, X. R. Qi, D. H. Zhang, and Y. S. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D62, 034003 (2000)
2000
-
[40]
R. L. Yang, R. G. Ping, and H. Chen, Chin. Phys. Lett. 31, 061301 (2014)
2014
-
[41]
Barberio and Z
E. Barberio and Z. Was, Comput. Phys. Commun.79, 291 (1994)
1994
-
[42]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 242003 (2018)
2018
-
[43]
See supplemental material for the invariant mass distri- butions ofη ′ andχ c1, the fit fractions for each compo- nent
-
[44]
Berger, B
N. Berger, B. Liu, and J. Wang, J. Phys. Conf. Ser.219, 042031 (2010)
2010
-
[45]
B. S. Zou and D. Bugg, Eur. Phys. J. A16, 537 (2003)
2003
-
[46]
V. V. Anisovich and A. V. Sarantsev, Eur. Phys. J. A 16, 229 (2003)
2003
-
[47]
Aubertet al.(BABAR Collaboration), Phys
B. Aubertet al.(BABAR Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 78, 034023 (2008)
2008
-
[48]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Chin
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Chin. Phys. C 48, 083001 (2024)
2024
-
[49]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 104, 052006 (2021)
2021
-
[50]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 192002 (2022), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 130, 159901 (2023)]
2022
-
[51]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 85, 092012 (2012)
2012
-
[52]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 81, 052005 (2010)
2010
-
[53]
Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 87, 012002 (2013)
2013
-
[54]
Ablikimet al.(BES Collaboration), Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BES Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 598, 149 (2004)
2004
-
[55]
Ablikimet al.(BES Collaboration), Phys
M. Ablikimet al.(BES Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 607, 243 (2005)
2005
-
[56]
Aghasyanet al.(COMPASS Collaboration), Phys
M. Aghasyanet al.(COMPASS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D98, 092003 (2018). 11 SUPPLEMENT AL MA TERIAL Figs. 3(a)–3(d) shows the selectedη ′ andχ c1 candidates from the twoη ′ decay channels. )2c (GeV/-π+πγM 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.97 0.98 )2 c Events / (1 MeV/ 0 500 1000 1500 2000 -π+πγ→'η Data MC Background (a) )2c (GeV/'η-π+πM 3.49 3.5 3.51 3.52 3.53 3.54 )2 c E...
2018
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.