REVIEW 3 cited by
Fully heavy pentaquark states in constituent quark model
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
Signed reviews
abstract
The LHCb collaboration reported a fully charmed tetraquark state X(6900) in the invariant mass spectrum of $J/\psi$ pairs in 2020. This discovery inspires us to further study the fully heavy pentaquark system. In this work, we investigate systematically all possible configurations for ground fully heavy pentaquark system via the variational method in the constituent quark model. According to our calculations, we further analyze the relative lengths between quarks and the contributions to the pentaquark masses from different terms of the Hamiltonian. We think no stable states exist in fully heavy pentaquark system. We hope that our study will be helpful to explore for fully heavy pentaquark states.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Searching for compact pentaquark state within the bag model framework
A bag-model analysis identifies a compact radius limit of 5.615 GeV^-1 and predicts that nnccbar c pentaquarks fall below it, making them candidates for tightly bound compact states.
-
$\lambda$, $\rho$, and $\sigma$ Regge trajectories for the quadruply heavy pentaquark $bb\bar{u}cc$ in the diquark-triquark picture
Regge relations for bbūcc in the diquark-triquark picture give four trajectory series with M∼x^{2/3} or √x behavior plus spin-averaged mass estimates for λ, ρ1, ρ2 and σ excitations.
-
Investigation of full heavy $ QQQQ'\bar{Q}$ pentaquark candidates
QCD sum rules predict a pentaquark with three charm quarks, one bottom quark, and an anti-charm quark near 11.38 GeV, and a pentaquark with three bottom quarks, one charm quark, and an anti-bottom quark near 21.0 GeV,...
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.