Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 5 cited by

Shedding light on the nature of the $P_{cs}(4459)$ pentaquark state

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read For an assumed spin-3/2 pentaquark, Pcs(4459) gets three distinct magnetic moments that the paper argues reveal its internal quark arrangement.

desk verdict Standard LCSR calculation with new numbers for Pcs(4459) in the 3/2^- compact-diquark picture, but the claim that the spread in moments 'projects inner structure' goes beyond what the method controls. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.11442 v2 pith:QG7SB7QZ submitted 2024-11-18 hep-ph hep-exhep-lat

U. Özdem This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-exhep-lat
keywords magneticdipolemomentpentaquarkPcs(4459)light-conesumrulesdiquark-diquark-antiquarkhidden-charmexotichadronselectromagneticmultipolemoments
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper attempts to pin down the inner structure of the Pcs(4459) pentaquark, a candidate exotic state seen in J/psi-Lambda decays, by computing its magnetic dipole moment in QCD light-cone sum rules. Assuming the state has spin-parity 3/2^- and arranging its quark content into three different compact diquark-diquark-antiquark patterns, the calculation yields mu_{$J^{1}$} = -0.60 +/- 0.15 mu_N, mu_{$J^{2}$} = 1.60 +/- 0.30 mu_N, and mu_{$J^{3}$} = 0.99 +/- 0.20 mu_N. Because the three patterns give markedly different moments, the paper concludes that a measurement of the magnetic moment would project which pattern is realized, and hence reveal the state's quark-gluon organization. The results also provide a comparison point for other models, which currently disagree with one another in both sign and magnitude.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the QCD light-cone sum rule for a spin-3/2 pentaquark in an external electromagnetic field, combined with three interpolating currents built from combinations of axial-vector and scalar diquarks plus a charm antiquark. The current acts as a filter: each distinct diquark-diquark-antiquark arrangement couples to the same $P_{cs}$ with a slightly different residue, and the correlation function isolates the magnetic form factor $G_M(0)$ in the static limit, from which the moment $\mu = (e/2m_{P_{cs}})G_M(0)$ follows.

What would settle it

A measurement or lattice calculation of the Pcs(4459) magnetic moment that yields a value far outside all three predicted bands would falsify the compact 3/2^- assumption; more sharply, if the spin-parity is determined to be 1/2^-, the three numbers here cannot describe the observed state. A lattice QCD computation of the same three-current moments would also directly test the projection claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For an assumed $J^P = 3/2^-$ $P_{cs}(4459)$ built as a compact pentaquark, this paper discovers that the magnetic dipole moment is strongly sensitive to which of three diquark-diquark-antiquark interpolating currents is used: $-0.60 \pm 0.15\,\mu_N$, $1.60 \pm 0.30\,\mu_N$, and $0.99 \pm 0.20\,\mu_N$. The spread is not treated as a defect of the method; rather, the paper argues it is a projection of the internal structure, since the three currents share quark content and quantum numbers and, if the nearly degenerate states are real, a measured moment would pick out the weight of each configuration. The individual quark contributions show light quarks cancel and the charm quark dominates in all three patterns, in contrast with molecular-model results where light quarks dominate.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes the observed Pcs(4459) really has spin-parity 3/2^- and that the three interpolating currents couple to it with the masses and residues taken from an earlier sum-rule analysis.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the $3/2^-$ assignment is right and the three currents resolve nearly degenerate states, then an experimental measurement of the $P_{cs}(4459)$ magnetic moment would indicate which compact arrangement dominates.
  • The three moment predictions give a target for future radiative-decay experiments of the type $\gamma^{(*)} \Lambda \to P_{cs} \to J/\psi \Lambda \gamma$, analogous to how the $\Delta(1232)$ moment was measured.
  • Since light-quark contributions cancel in the compact picture but dominate in molecular calculations, a measured sign and magnitude can discriminate a compact diquark structure from a hadronic-molecule structure.
  • The higher multipole moments (electric quadrupole and magnetic octupole) are nonzero and vary with the current, signalling a non-spherical charge distribution that further distinguishes the configurations.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same three-current strategy could be applied to $P_{cs}(4338)$ or other hidden-charm pentaquarks; comparing the pattern across states might reveal a systematic ordering of magnetic moments with strangeness and mass.
  • Because the photon distribution amplitudes used here only cover light-quark emission, a future update including charm-quark photon couplings could shift the central values; the predicted spread among currents may therefore be a lower bound on the structural sensitivity.
  • If future experiments or lattice QCD pin down the spin-parity as $1/2^-$ instead, none of the three numbers would describe the observed $P_{cs}(4459)$; the calculation would then need to be redone with the correct interpolating currents.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. This manuscript presents a QCD light-cone sum rule (LCSR) calculation of the magnetic dipole moment of the Pcs(4459) pentaquark, assuming JP = 3/2^- and a compact diquark-diquark-antiquark configuration. Three interpolating currents, J1μ, J2μ, and J3μ, are constructed in Eqs. (2)-(4), and the corresponding sum rules are given in Eq. (24) with spectral densities quoted in the appendix. Using hadronic masses and residues from Ref. [73], the authors obtain μ_J1 = -0.60 +/- 0.15 μ_N, μ_J2 = 1.60 +/- 0.30 μ_N, and μ_J3 = 0.99 +/- 0.20 μ_N, together with electric quadrupole and magnetic octupole moments. The paper compares these values with quark-model and molecular LCSR results and concludes that the spread of values reflects the internal diquark organization of the state, i.e., that the moments are 'capable of projecting its inner structure.'

Significance. The LCSR framework is standard, and the paper reports standard internal consistency checks: pole contributions range from about 41% to 66% and OPE convergence is better than 1% in Table I. The magnetic moments are genuine sum-rule outputs rather than fitted quantities, and the comparison with existing quark-model and sum-rule predictions is potentially useful. However, the central interpretive claim goes beyond what the controlled calculation supports. The three currents have identical quantum numbers and quark content, so the large spread of values in Table I requires a careful discussion of nearly degenerate states rather than an unqualified statement about projecting internal structure. The spectral densities in the appendix are not independently checkable as presented and contain typographical errors. With a moderated interpretation and a corrected appendix, the numerical results can be a useful contribution to pentaquark phenomenology.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Section IV; Table I] The central claim that the three magnetic moments 'project the inner structure' of Pcs(4459) is not supported by the sum-rule calculation. The currents in Eqs. (2)-(4) have identical quark content and quantum numbers; if each couples to the same physical JP = 3/2^- state, the extracted GM(0) should be current-independent after the spin-1/2 and continuum subtractions. Table I instead gives -0.60 +/- 0.15, +1.60 +/- 0.30, and +0.99 +/- 0.20 μ_N, which differ in sign and by up to about 2.2 μ_N. The discussion after Eq. (15) correctly notes that in the presence of nearly degenerate states Eq. (15) is a residue-weighted average; that is a different statement from projecting a unique structure. An interpolating current is an auxiliary operator, not a model wave function, and no completeness or orthogonality of the basis (2)-(4) is demonstrated. The conclusions should be reframed: at most, the results show a strong current dependence that may signal nearly degenerate states or the need for a more elaborate treatment, not that the moments directly reveal the diquark organization.
  2. [Section II, Eqs. (11)-(12)] The removal of spin-1/2 pollution is asserted rather than demonstrated. The text after Eq. (11) instructs the reader to order Dirac matrices as γμ p̸ ε̸ q̸ γν and to delete terms with γμ at the beginning, γν at the end, or proportional to p2μ or p1ν. However, the Rarita-Schwinger projector in Eq. (10) itself contains spin-1/2 components, and the selected structure gμν p̸ ε̸ q̸ must be shown to receive no contribution from the B-term in Eq. (11). Without such a demonstration, or a numerical check of the stability of the extracted moment under alternative projections, the identification of the result with a pure spin-3/2 state is not established.
  3. [Appendix, Eqs. (29)-(37)] The spectral densities ρ1, ρ2, and ρ3 are quoted without derivation, and they contain typographical errors that prevent an independent check of the numerical results. For example, Eq. (33) contains '[0,2]' where 'I[0,2]' is intended, and Eq. (36) has an unclosed bracket and a malformed 'I[0, 2]' term. Since the numerical values in Table I follow directly from these expressions, the authors should provide corrected, complete expressions, ideally in a machine-readable ancillary file, so that the central numerical claim can be verified. The current presentation is not sufficient for reproducibility.
  4. [Section II, Eqs. (22)-(23), and Table II] Table II shows that, for all three currents, the total magnetic moment coincides with the charm-quark contribution after light-quark contributions cancel. The charm-quark contribution is computed only through the short-distance replacement in Eq. (22); long-distance photon emission from the charm quark is excluded in the paragraph below Eq. (23) on the grounds of suppression by the heavy quark mass. Given that the final numerical values are essentially determined by this charm contribution, the omission should be quantified (for example, by estimating the size of the leading charm-photon DA contribution or by a power-counting estimate) rather than stated qualitatively; otherwise the quoted uncertainties of 15-20% may not cover the systematic error.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section I] The spin-parity of Pcs(4459) is not experimentally determined, as the paper notes; the abstract and conclusions should repeat the JP = 3/2^- assumption whenever the result is attributed to Pcs(4459), rather than only in the introduction.
  2. [Table I] The pole contribution column lists numbers such as [60.83, 41.39] without units; clarify that these are percentages at the lower and upper ends of the M^2 window, and define the CVG entry more precisely.
  3. [Eq. (16) and surrounding text] The Wick contraction is given only for J1μ; the corresponding expressions for J2μ and J3μ are omitted. Please provide them or state explicitly in the text where they can be obtained.
  4. [Appendix] Various equations in the appendix have typographical issues beyond those noted above, including missing brackets in Eq. (33) and an apparent missing factor in Eq. (36); a careful proofread of the appendix is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the magnetic moments are genuine LCSR outputs, and the structure-projection conclusion is an interpretation rather than a fitted or self-referential result.

full rationale

The paper computes three magnetic dipole moments from QCD light-cone sum rules using the standard two-point correlation function in an external electromagnetic field. The OPE side (Appendix) is constructed from quark propagators, condensates, and photon distribution amplitudes; the hadronic side uses masses and residues taken from Ref. [73] (Z.-G. Wang), which is not a self-citation and which did not compute magnetic moments. The final expressions, Eq. (24), divide the OPE spectral densities ρ_i by the squared residues λ_i^2, so the moments are outputs of the sum rule rather than re-insertions of a target observable. No experimental magnetic moment is fitted, and the three values in Table I (-0.60, 1.60, 0.99 μ_N) are not made equal by construction. The paper's claim that the moments can 'project its inner structure' is an interpretive inference from the current dependence of LCSR results, not a mathematically forced identification; moreover, the text itself supplies the single-state caveat: if the Pcs states coupled by the three currents were not nearly degenerate, the moments should agree, while if they are nearly degenerate Eq. (15) is a residue-weighted average (Section II). That caveat weakens the strength of the conclusion but does not make the derivation circular. Self-citations to Refs. [35,42,87,88] merely document that other LCSR calculations with different currents also found discrepancies; this is auxiliary support, not a load-bearing uniqueness or ansatz claim. The main correctness risks (single-state assumption, JP=3/2^- assignment, current-state overlap interpretation) are model-dependence concerns rather than circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central computation is a standard LCSR exercise. Its main imported burdens are the hadronic mass and residue from Ref. [73], the photon DAs of Ref. [54], and the auxiliary Borel and continuum parameters chosen for stability. No new physical entities are introduced, and no target magnetic moment is fitted.

free parameters (4)
  • Pcs hadron mass m_Jmu = 4.51 GeV (J1, J2), 4.52 GeV (J3)
    Taken from Ref. [73], which used the same interpolating currents; enters the sum rule through Eq. (24) and contributes about 13% of the uncertainty.
  • Pole residue lambda_Jmu = 2.75, 4.64, 4.64 x 10^-3 GeV^6
    Taken from Ref. [73]; the extracted moment scales as 1/lambda^2 in Eq. (24), contributing about 30% of the uncertainty.
  • Borel mass squared M^2 = 2.5 to 3.0 GeV^2
    Auxiliary parameter; the working window is chosen where the pole contribution falls from about 60% to 41% and OPE convergence holds; contributes about 8% uncertainty.
  • Continuum threshold s0 = 26.0 to 28.0 GeV^2
    Auxiliary parameter; set by analogy with hidden-charm tetraquark radial excitations; contributes about 24% uncertainty.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Quark-hadron duality: continuum and excited states are approximated by the OPE spectral density above the threshold s0.
    Core uncontrolled approximation of the sum-rule method; standard for LCSR but not exact.
  • domain assumption The currents in Eqs. (2)-(4) couple dominantly to a JP=3/2^- Pcs(4459) with the mass and residue of Ref. [73].
    The spin-parity of Pcs(4459) is not experimentally established; if the assignment is wrong, the computed moments do not describe the observed state.
  • domain assumption Long-distance photon emission from charm quarks is negligible; only light-quark photon distribution amplitudes are needed.
    Explicitly stated in Section II; relies on heavy-quark mass suppression and is not quantified.
  • standard math Spin-1/2 contamination is fully removed by the Dirac ordering gamma_mu p/ epsilon/ q/ gamma_nu and by dropping terms with gamma_mu at the start or gamma_nu at the end.
    Standard technique for spin-3/2 sum rules, following Belyaev-Ioffe; assumed sufficient in this analysis.
  • domain assumption The photon distribution amplitudes of Ref. [54] and the quark propagator expansions of Refs. [66,67] are correct and complete.
    External non-perturbative input is borrowed from the literature without independent verification in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Shedding light on the nature of the $P_{cs}(4459)$ pentaquark state." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QG7SB7QZ

@misc{pith2026241111442,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Shedding light on the nature of the $P_cs(4459)$ pentaquark state},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QG7SB7QZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.11442}
}
abstract

To shed light on the properties of states whose nature, internal structure, and spin-parity quantum numbers are not fully elucidated, we systematically study their electromagnetic properties. In light of this concept, we present a comprehensive analysis of the magnetic dipole moment of the $P_{cs}(4459)$ pentaquark within the context of QCD light-cone sum rules, utilizing three distinct interpolating currents in the form of diquark-diquark-antiquark configurations that are likely to couple this pentaquark with $J^P =\frac{3}{2}^-$ quantum numbers. The numerical analysis yielded the following results: $\mu_{{J_\mu^1}}= -0.60 \pm 0.15~\mu_N$, $\mu_{{J_\mu^2}}=1.60 \pm 0.30~\mu_N$ , and $\mu_{{J_\mu^3}}= 0.99 \pm 0.20~\mu_N$. The numerical results obtained have led to the conclusion that the magnetic dipole moments of the $P_{cs}(4459)$ state are capable of projecting its inner structure. As is seen, the different diquark-diquark-antiquark configurations of the $P_{cs}(4459)$ pentaquark state contain important information about its internal structure. Thus, this study will provide prominent data to investigate the inner structure of the $P_{cs}(4459)$ pentaquark state. We compared our results with other theoretical predictions that could be a useful complementary tool for interpreting the nature of the $P_{cs}(4459)$ state. A thorough examination reveals that the results obtained by employing disparate theoretical approaches and different internal structure models are not consistent with each other. It is recommended that further studies be conducted using alternative non-perturbative techniques to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the observed results.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.11442 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. The magnetic dipole moments of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Charting doubly strange hidden-charm pentaquarks: An electromagnetic mapping of spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ and $\frac{3}{2}$ states

    hep-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    LCSR calculations of magnetic, quadrupole and octupole moments for S=-2 hidden-charm pentaquarks yield large current-dependent ranges (-4.25 to 5.74 μ_N) dominated by the charm quark in most diquark configurations.

  2. Magnetic dipole moments as probes of doubly-bottom molecular pentaquarks

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    For the molecular pentaquark configurations BΣ_b, BΣ_b*, and B*Σ_b, the predicted magnetic dipole moments are 2.40, −2.84, and 5.17 nuclear magnetons respectively, with a sign and magnitude pattern sensitive to spin s...

  3. Electromagnetic form factors: A window into the $D\Lambda_c$, $D^*\Lambda_c$, and $D\Lambda_c^*$ molecular structure

    hep-ph 2025-11 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    Using light-cone QCD sum rules, the paper predicts negative magnetic dipole moments of roughly -1.27, -2.78, and -3.80 nuclear magnetons for the DΛc, D*Λc, and DΛc* molecular pentaquark candidates, plus small quadrupo...

  4. Probing the electromagnetic structure of the $P_c(4337)^+$ pentaquark: Insights from a diquark-diquark-antiquark picture for $J^P = \frac{1}{2}^-$ and $\frac{3}{2}^-$ states

    hep-ph 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Under the diquark-diquark-antiquark model, the magnetic moment of Pc(4337)+ is predicted to be 1.76 ± 0.44 μN for J^P = 1/2^- and -1.38 ± 0.35 μN for J^P = 3/2^-, with nonzero quadrupole and octupole moments in the 3/...

  5. Investigating the underlying structure of vector hidden-charm tetraquark states via their electromagnetic characteristics

    hep-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    QCD light-cone sum rules give magnetic moments for vector hidden-charm tetraquarks that depend strongly on the chosen diquark-antidiquark current.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

94 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages · cited by 5 Pith papers

  1. [73]

    Wang, Analysis of the3 2 ± pentaquark states in the diquark-diquark-antiquark model with QCD sum rules, Nucl

    Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of the3 2 ± pentaquark states in the diquark-diquark-antiquark model with QCD sum rules, Nucl. Phys. B 913 (2016) 163–208.arXiv:1512.04763, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2016.09.009

    arXiv 2016

  2. [1]

    S. K. Choi, et al., Observation of a narrow charmonium-like state in exclusiveB±→ K ±π+π−J/ψ decays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 262001.arXiv:hep-ex/0309032, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.91.262001

    arXiv 2003

  3. [2]

    Esposito, A

    A. Esposito, A. L. Guerrieri, F. Piccinini, A. Pilloni, A. D. Polosa, Four-Quark Hadrons: an Updated Review, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 30 (2015) 1530002.arXiv:1411.5997, doi:10.1142/S0217751X15300021

    arXiv 2015

  4. [3]

    Esposito, A

    A. Esposito, A. Pilloni, A. D. Polosa, Multiquark Resonances, Phys. Rept. 668 (2017) 1–97.arXiv:1611.07920, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2016.11.002

    arXiv 2017

  5. [4]

    S. L. Olsen, T. Skwarnicki, D. Zieminska, Nonstandard heavy mesons and baryons: Experimental evidence, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90 (1) (2018) 015003.arXiv:1708.04012, doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.90.015003

    arXiv 2018

  6. [5]

    R. F. Lebed, R. E. Mitchell, E. S. Swanson, Heavy-Quark QCD Exotica, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 93 (2017) 143–194. arXiv:1610.04528, doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2016.11.003

    arXiv 2017

  7. [6]

    Nielsen, F

    M. Nielsen, F. S. Navarra, S. H. Lee, New Charmonium States in QCD Sum Rules: A Concise Review, Phys. Rept. 497 (2010) 41–83. arXiv:0911.1958, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2010.07.005

    arXiv 2010

  8. [7]

    Brambilla, S

    N. Brambilla, S. Eidelman, C. Hanhart, A. Nefediev, C.-P. Shen, C. E. Thomas, A. Vairo, C.-Z. Yuan, TheXYZ states: experimental and theoretical status and perspectives, Phys. Rept. 873 (2020) 1–154.arXiv:1907.07583, doi:10.1016/j. physrep.2020.05.001

    arXiv 2020

Show all 94 references
  1. [8]

    Agaev, K

    S. Agaev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, Four-quark exotic mesons, Turk. J. Phys. 44 (2) (2020) 95–173. arXiv:2004.12079, doi:10.3906/fiz-2003-15

    2020 arXiv

  2. [9]

    H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, The hidden-charm pentaquark and tetraquark states, Phys. Rept. 639 (2016) 1–121. arXiv:1601.02092, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2016.05.004

    2016 arXiv

  3. [10]

    A. Ali, J. S. Lange, S. Stone, Exotics: Heavy Pentaquarks and Tetraquarks, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 97 (2017) 123–198. arXiv:1706.00610, doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2017.08.003

    2017 arXiv

  4. [11]

    F.-K. Guo, C. Hanhart, U.-G. Meißner, Q. Wang, Q. Zhao, B.-S. Zou, Hadronic molecules, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90 (1) (2018) 015004, [Erratum: Rev.Mod.Phys. 94, 029901 (2022)].arXiv:1705.00141, doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.90.015004

    2018 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Liu, H.-X

    Y.-R. Liu, H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, Pentaquark and Tetraquark states, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 107 (2019) 237–320. arXiv:1903.11976, doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2019.04.003

    2019 arXiv

  6. [13]

    G. Yang, J. Ping, J. Segovia, Tetra- and penta-quark structures in the constituent quark model, Symmetry 12 (11) (2020)

    2020

  7. [14]

    Dong, F.-K

    X.-K. Dong, F.-K. Guo, B.-S. Zou, A survey of heavy-antiheavy hadronic molecules, Progr. Phys. 41 (2021) 65–93.arXiv: 2101.01021, doi:10.13725/j.cnki.pip.2021.02.001

    2021 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Dong, F.-K

    X.-K. Dong, F.-K. Guo, B.-S. Zou, A survey of heavy–heavy hadronic molecules, Commun. Theor. Phys. 73 (12) (2021) 125201. arXiv:2108.02673, doi:10.1088/1572-9494/ac27a2

    2021 arXiv

  9. [16]

    H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, Y.-R. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, An updated review of the new hadron states, Rept. Prog. Phys. 86 (2) (2023) 026201. arXiv:2204.02649, doi:10.1088/1361-6633/aca3b6

    2023 arXiv

  10. [17]

    L. Meng, B. Wang, G.-J. Wang, S.-L. Zhu, Chiral perturbation theory for heavy hadrons and chiral effective field theory for heavy hadronic molecules, Phys. Rept. 1019 (2023) 1–149.arXiv:2204.08716, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2023.04.003

    2023 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Aaij, et al., Observation ofJ/ψp Resonances Consistent with Pentaquark States inΛ0 b→J/ψK −p Decays, Phys

    R. Aaij, et al., Observation ofJ/ψp Resonances Consistent with Pentaquark States inΛ0 b→J/ψK −p Decays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 072001.arXiv:1507.03414, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.072001

    2015 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Aaij, et al., Observation of a narrow pentaquark state,Pc(4312)+, and of two-peak structure of thePc(4450)+, Phys

    R. Aaij, et al., Observation of a narrow pentaquark state,Pc(4312)+, and of two-peak structure of thePc(4450)+, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (22) (2019) 222001.arXiv:1904.03947, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.222001

    2019 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Aaij, et al., Evidence of aJ/ψΛ structure and observation of excitedΞ− states in theΞ− b →J/ψΛK − decay, Sci

    R. Aaij, et al., Evidence of aJ/ψΛ structure and observation of excitedΞ− states in theΞ− b →J/ψΛK − decay, Sci. Bull. 66 (2021) 1278–1287. arXiv:2012.10380, doi:10.1016/j.scib.2021.02.030

    2021

  14. [21]

    Aaij, et al., Observation of a J/ψΛ Resonance Consistent with a Strange Pentaquark Candidate in B-→J/ψΛp¯ Decays, Phys

    R. Aaij, et al., Observation of a J/ψΛ Resonance Consistent with a Strange Pentaquark Candidate in B-→J/ψΛp¯ Decays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (3) (2023) 031901.arXiv:2210.10346, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.031901

    2023 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Adachi, et al., Evidence of the P_ccbars(4459)0 in Upsilon(1S, 2S) inclusive decays at Belle (2 2025).arXiv:2502.09951

    I. Adachi, et al., Evidence of the P_ccbars(4459)0 in Upsilon(1S, 2S) inclusive decays at Belle (2 2025).arXiv:2502.09951

    2025 arXiv

  16. [23]

    G.-J. Wang, R. Chen, L. Ma, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, Magnetic moments of the hidden-charm pentaquark states, Phys. Rev. D 94 (9) (2016) 094018.arXiv:1605.01337, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.094018. 18

    2016 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Özdem, K

    U. Özdem, K. Azizi, Electromagnetic multipole moments of theP + c (4380) pentaquark in light-cone QCD, Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (5) (2018) 379.arXiv:1803.06831, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5873-2

    2018 arXiv

  18. [25]

    Ortiz-Pacheco, R

    E. Ortiz-Pacheco, R. Bijker, C. Fernández-Ramírez, Hidden charm pentaquarks: mass spectrum, magnetic moments, and photocouplings, J. Phys. G 46 (6) (2019) 065104.arXiv:1808.10512, doi:10.1088/1361-6471/ab096d

    2019 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Xu, Y.-L

    Y.-J. Xu, Y.-L. Liu, M.-Q. Huang, The magnetic moment ofPc(4312) as a ¯DΣc molecular state, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (5) (2021) 421. arXiv:2008.07937, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09211-8

    2021 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Özdem, Electromagnetic properties of thePc (4312) pentaquark state, Chin

    U. Özdem, Electromagnetic properties of thePc (4312) pentaquark state, Chin. Phys. C 45 (2) (2021) 023119. doi: 10.1088/1674-1137/abd01c

    2021 doi

  21. [28]

    0.34+0.13 −0.11 1.75+0.64 −0.58

  22. [29]

    Li, Z.-W

    M.-W. Li, Z.-W. Liu, Z.-F. Sun, R. Chen, Magnetic moments and transition magnetic moments of Pc and Pcs states, Phys. Rev. D 104 (5) (2021) 054016.arXiv:2106.15053, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.054016

    2021 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Özdem, Electromagnetic properties of D¯(∗)Ξc’, D¯(∗)Λc, D¯s(∗)Λc and D¯s(∗)Ξc pentaquarks, Phys

    U. Özdem, Electromagnetic properties of D¯(∗)Ξc’, D¯(∗)Λc, D¯s(∗)Λc and D¯s(∗)Ξc pentaquarks, Phys. Lett. B 846 (2023) 138267. arXiv:2303.10649, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.138267

    2023 arXiv

  24. [31]

    Özdem, Magnetic dipole moments of the hidden-charm pentaquark states:Pc(4440), Pc(4457) and Pcs(4459), Eur

    U. Özdem, Magnetic dipole moments of the hidden-charm pentaquark states:Pc(4440), Pc(4457) and Pcs(4459), Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (4) (2021) 277.arXiv:2102.01996, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09070-3

    2021 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Özdem, Investigation of magnetic moment of Pcs(4338) and Pcs(4459) pentaquark states, Phys

    U. Özdem, Investigation of magnetic moment of Pcs(4338) and Pcs(4459) pentaquark states, Phys. Lett. B 836 (2023) 137635. arXiv:2208.07684, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2022.137635

    2023 arXiv

  26. [33]

    The outcomes for the higher multipole moments yielded values that are inconsistent with zero, indicating that the charge distribution is not spherical

    3 2 − −0.231 −0.231 This Work [J 1 µ] −0.60± 0.15 − This Work [J 2 µ] 1.60± 0.30 − This Work [J 3 µ] 0.99± 0.20 − considerably less than that of the magnetic dipole moment. The outcomes for the higher multipole moments yielded values that are inconsistent with zero, indicating...

  27. [34]

    F.-L. Wang, X. Liu, Higher molecular PψsΛ/Σ pentaquarks arising from theΞc(’,*)D¯1/Ξc(’,*)D¯2* interactions, Phys. Rev. D 108 (5) (2023) 054028.arXiv:2307.08276, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.054028

    2023 arXiv

  28. [35]

    Özdem, Magnetic moments of pentaquark states in light-cone sum rules, Eur

    U. Özdem, Magnetic moments of pentaquark states in light-cone sum rules, Eur. Phys. J. A 58 (3) (2022) 46.doi: 10.1140/epja/s10050-022-00700-2

    2022 doi

  29. [36]

    Gao, H.-S

    F. Gao, H.-S. Li, Magnetic moments of hidden-charm strange pentaquark states*, Chin. Phys. C 46 (12) (2022) 123111. arXiv:2112.01823, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/ac8651

    2022 arXiv

  30. [37]

    Guo, H.-S

    F. Guo, H.-S. Li, Analysis of the hidden-charm pentaquark states based on magnetic moment and transition magnetic moment, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (4) (2024) 392.arXiv:2304.10981, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12699-5

    2024 arXiv

  31. [38]

    Özdem, Analysis of the isospin eigenstate¯DΣc, ¯D∗Σc, and ¯DΣ∗ c pentaquarks by their electromagnetic properties, Eur

    U. Özdem, Analysis of the isospin eigenstate¯DΣc, ¯D∗Σc, and ¯DΣ∗ c pentaquarks by their electromagnetic properties, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (8) (2024) 769.arXiv:2401.12678, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13124-7

    2024 arXiv

  32. [39]

    Wang, S.-Q

    F.-L. Wang, S.-Q. Luo, H.-Y. Zhou, Z.-W. Liu, X. Liu, Exploring the electromagnetic properties of theΞc(’,*)D¯s* and Ωc(*)D¯s* molecular states, Phys.Rev. D 108 (3) (2023)034006.arXiv:2210.02809, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.034006

    2023 arXiv

  33. [40]

    Wang, H.-Y

    F.-L. Wang, H.-Y. Zhou, Z.-W. Liu, X. Liu, What can we learn from the electromagnetic properties of hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with single strangeness?, Phys. Rev. D 106 (5) (2022) 054020.arXiv:2208.10756, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.106.054020

    2022 arXiv

  34. [41]

    Özdem, Investigation on the electromagnetic properties of theD(∗)Σ(∗) c molecules, Eur

    U. Özdem, Investigation on the electromagnetic properties of theD(∗)Σ(∗) c molecules, Eur. Phys. J. A 61 (1) (2025) 10. arXiv:2405.07273, doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-024-01477-2

    2025 arXiv

  35. [42]

    H.-S. Li, F. Guo, Y.-D. Lei, F. Gao, Magnetic moments and axial charges of the octet hidden-charm molecular pentaquark family, Phys. Rev. D 109 (9) (2024) 094027.arXiv:2401.14767, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.094027

    2024 arXiv

  36. [43]

    Li, Molecular pentaquark magnetic moments in heavy pentaquark chiral perturbation theory, Phys

    H.-S. Li, Molecular pentaquark magnetic moments in heavy pentaquark chiral perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. D 109 (11) (2024) 114039. arXiv:2401.14759, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.114039

    2024 arXiv

  37. [44]

    Mutuk, Magnetic moments of hidden-bottom pentaquark states, Eur

    H. Mutuk, Magnetic moments of hidden-bottom pentaquark states, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (8) (2024) 874.arXiv:2403.16616, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13263-x

    2024 arXiv

  38. [45]

    Özdem, Elucidating the nature of hidden-charm pentaquark states with spin-32 through their electromagnetic form factors, Phys

    U. Özdem, Elucidating the nature of hidden-charm pentaquark states with spin-32 through their electromagnetic form factors, Phys. Lett. B 851 (2024) 138551.arXiv:2402.03802, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.138551

    2024 arXiv

  39. [46]

    Mutuk, X.-W

    H. Mutuk, X.-W. Kang, Unveiling the structure of hidden-bottom strange pentaquarks via magnetic moments, Phys. Lett. B 855 (2024) 138772.arXiv:2405.07066, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.138772

    2024 arXiv

  40. [47]

    Pascalutsa, M

    V. Pascalutsa, M. Vanderhaeghen, Chiral effective-field theory in the Delta(1232) region: I. Pion electroproduction on the nucleon, Phys. Rev. D 73 (2006) 034003.arXiv:hep-ph/0512244, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.034003

    2006 arXiv

  41. [48]

    Özdem, Insight into the nature of thePc(4457) and related pentaquarks (9 2024).arXiv:2409.09449

    U. Özdem, Insight into the nature of thePc(4457) and related pentaquarks (9 2024).arXiv:2409.09449

    2024 arXiv

  42. [49]

    Pascalutsa, M

    V. Pascalutsa, M. Vanderhaeghen, Magnetic moment of the Delta(1232)-resonance in chiral effective field theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 (2005) 102003.arXiv:nucl-th/0412113, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.102003

    2005 arXiv

  43. [50]

    K. U. Can, G. Erkol, B. Isildak, M. Oka, T. T. Takahashi, Electromagnetic structure of charmed baryons in Lattice QCD, JHEP 05 (2014) 125.arXiv:1310.5915, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2014)125

    2014 arXiv

  44. [51]

    Pascalutsa, M

    V. Pascalutsa, M. Vanderhaeghen, Chiral effective-field theory in the Delta(1232) region. II. Radiative pion photoproduc- tion, Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 014027.arXiv:0709.4583, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.014027

    2008 arXiv

  45. [52]

    K. U. Can, G. Erkol, B. Isildak, M. Oka, T. T. Takahashi, Electromagnetic properties of doubly charmed baryons in Lattice QCD, Phys. Lett. B 726 (2013) 703–709.arXiv:1306.0731, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2013.09.024

    2013 arXiv

  46. [53]

    I. I. Balitsky, V. M. Braun, A. V. Kolesnichenko, Radiative Decay Sigma+ —> p gamma in Quantum Chromodynamics, Nucl. Phys. B 312 (1989) 509–550.doi:10.1016/0550-3213(89)90570-1

    1989 doi

  47. [54]

    V. L. Chernyak, I. R. Zhitnitsky, B meson exclusive decays into baryons, Nucl. Phys. B 345 (1990) 137–172. doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(90)90612-H

    1990 doi

  48. [55]

    V. M. Braun, I. E. Filyanov, QCD Sum Rules in Exclusive Kinematics and Pion Wave Function, Z. Phys. C 44 (1989) 157. doi:10.1007/BF01548594

    1989 doi

  49. [56]

    Azizi, Magnetic Dipole, Electric Quadrupole and Magnetic Octupole Moments of the Delta Baryons in Light Cone QCD Sum Rules, Eur

    K. Azizi, Magnetic Dipole, Electric Quadrupole and Magnetic Octupole Moments of the Delta Baryons in Light Cone QCD Sum Rules, Eur. Phys. J. C 61 (2009) 311–319.arXiv:0811.2670, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-009-0988-0

    2009 arXiv

  50. [57]

    P. Ball, V. M. Braun, N. Kivel, Photon distribution amplitudes in QCD, Nucl. Phys. B 649 (2003) 263–296.arXiv: hep-ph/0207307, doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(02)01017-9. 19

    2003 arXiv

  51. [58]

    T. M. Aliev, K. Azizi, A. Ozpineci, Mass and Magnetic Moments of the Heavy Flavored Baryons with J=3/2 in Light Cone QCD Sum Rules, Nucl. Phys. B 808 (2009) 137–154.arXiv:0807.3481, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.09.018

    2009 arXiv

  52. [59]

    Wang, Analysis of the scalar and axial-vector heavy diquark states with QCD sum rules, Eur

    Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of the scalar and axial-vector heavy diquark states with QCD sum rules, Eur. Phys. J. C 71 (2011)

    2011

  53. [60]

    T. M. Aliev, M. Savcı, Magnetic moments ofJP = 3 2 − baryons in QCD, Phys. Rev. D 90 (11) (2014) 116006.arXiv: 1409.5252, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.116006

    2014 arXiv

  54. [61]

    Özdem, Magnetic dipole moments of the singly-heavy baryons with spin-1 2 and spin-3 2, Eur

    U. Özdem, Magnetic dipole moments of the singly-heavy baryons with spin-1 2 and spin-3 2, Eur. Phys. J. A 61 (3) (2025)

    2025

  55. [62]

    arXiv:2411.09405, doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-025-01536-2

    arXiv

  56. [63]

    Nozawa, D

    S. Nozawa, D. B. Leinweber, Electromagnetic form-factors of spin 3/2 baryons, Phys. Rev. D 42 (1990) 3567–3571. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.42.3567

    1990 doi

  57. [64]

    Pascalutsa, M

    V. Pascalutsa, M. Vanderhaeghen, S. N. Yang, Electromagnetic excitation of the Delta(1232)-resonance, Phys. Rept. 437 (2007) 125–232. arXiv:hep-ph/0609004, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2006.09.006

    2007 arXiv

  58. [65]

    R. T. Kleiv, T. G. Steele, A. Zhang, I. Blokland, Heavy-light diquark masses from QCD sum rules and constituent diquark models of tetraquarks, Phys. Rev. D 87 (12) (2013) 125018.arXiv:1304.7816, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.125018

    2013 arXiv

  59. [66]

    V. M. Belyaev, B. L. Ioffe, Determination of the baryon mass and baryon resonances from the quantum-chromodynamics sum rule. Strange baryons, Sov. Phys. JETP 57 (1983) 716–721

    1983

  60. [67]

    H. J. Weber, H. Arenhovel, Isobar Configurations in Nuclei, Phys. Rept. 36 (1978) 277–348.doi:10.1016/0370-1573(78) 90187-4

    1978 doi

  61. [68]

    Özdem, Electromagnetic properties of doubly heavy pentaquark states, Eur

    U. Özdem, Electromagnetic properties of doubly heavy pentaquark states, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 137 (2022) 936.arXiv: 2201.00979, doi:10.1140/epjp/s13360-022-03125-4

    2022 arXiv

  62. [69]

    Özdem, Electromagnetic form factors of the Bc-like tetraquarks: Molecular and diquark-antidiquark pictures, Phys

    U. Özdem, Electromagnetic form factors of the Bc-like tetraquarks: Molecular and diquark-antidiquark pictures, Phys. Lett. B 838 (2023) 137750.arXiv:2211.10169, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.137750

    2023 arXiv

  63. [70]

    Ramalho, M

    G. Ramalho, M. T. Pena, F. Gross, Electric quadrupole and magnetic octupole moments of the Delta, Phys. Lett. B 678 (2009) 355–358. arXiv:0902.4212, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2009.06.052

    2009 arXiv

  64. [71]

    I. I. Balitsky, V. M. Braun, Evolution Equations for QCD String Operators, Nucl. Phys. B 311 (1989) 541–584.doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(89)90168-5

    1989 doi

  65. [72]

    V. M. Belyaev, B. Y. Blok, CHARMED BARYONS IN QUANTUM CHROMODYNAMICS, Z. Phys. C 30 (1986) 151. doi:10.1007/BF01560689

    1986 doi

  66. [74]

    Ligeti, The Determination of |V(cb)| and QCD sum rules in HQET, in: Advanced Study Conference on Heavy Flavors,

    Z. Ligeti, The Determination of |V(cb)| and QCD sum rules in HQET, in: Advanced Study Conference on Heavy Flavors,

  67. [75]

    R. L. Workman, et al., Review of Particle Physics, PTEP 2022 (2022) 083C01.doi:10.1093/ptep/ptac097

    2022 doi

  68. [76]

    B. L. Ioffe, QCD at low energies, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 56 (2006) 232–277.arXiv:hep-ph/0502148, doi:10.1016/j. ppnp.2005.05.001

    2006 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Narison, mc,b, < αsG2 > and αs from Heavy Quarkonia, Nucl

    S. Narison, mc,b, < αsG2 > and αs from Heavy Quarkonia, Nucl. Part. Phys. Proc. 300-302 (2018) 153–164. doi: 10.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2018.12.026

    2018 doi

  70. [78]

    R. F. Lebed, A. D. Polosa,χc0(3915) As the Lightestc¯cs¯s State, Phys. Rev. D 93 (9) (2016) 094024.arXiv:1602.08421, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.094024

    2016 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Wang, Scalar tetraquark state candidates: X(3915), X(4500) and X(4700), Eur

    Z.-G. Wang, Scalar tetraquark state candidates: X(3915), X(4500) and X(4700), Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2) (2017) 78. arXiv:1606.05872, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-4640-0

    2017 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Maiani, F

    L. Maiani, F. Piccinini, A. D. Polosa, V. Riquer, The Z(4430) and a New Paradigm for Spin Interactions in Tetraquarks, Phys. Rev. D 89 (2014) 114010.arXiv:1405.1551, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.114010

    2014 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Lucha, D

    W. Lucha, D. Melikhov, S. Simula, The effective continuum threshold in dispersive sum rules, Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 096011. arXiv:0902.4202, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.096011

    2009 arXiv

  74. [82]

    H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, T. G. Steele, S.-L. Zhu, Towards exotic hidden-charm pentaquarks in QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (17) (2015) 172001.arXiv:1507.03717, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.172001

    2015 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Chen, E.-L

    H.-X. Chen, E.-L. Cui, W. Chen, X. Liu, T. G. Steele, S.-L. Zhu, QCD sum rule study of hidden-charm pentaquarks, Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (10) (2016) 572.arXiv:1602.02433, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4438-5

    2016 arXiv

  76. [84]

    H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, Settling the Zc(4600) in the charged charmoniumlike family, Phys. Rev. D 99 (7) (2019) 074022. arXiv:1901.06946, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.074022

    2019 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Wang, Axialvector tetraquark candidates forZc(3900), Zc(4020), Zc(4430), Zc(4600), Chin

    Z.-G. Wang, Axialvector tetraquark candidates forZc(3900), Zc(4020), Zc(4430), Zc(4600), Chin. Phys. C 44 (6) (2020) 063105. arXiv:1901.10741, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/44/6/063105

    2020 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Wang, Assignments of the X4140, X4500, X4630, and X4685 Based on the QCD Sum Rules, Adv

    Z.-G. Wang, Assignments of the X4140, X4500, X4630, and X4685 Based on the QCD Sum Rules, Adv. High Energy Phys. 2021 (2021) 4426163. arXiv:2103.04236, doi:10.1155/2021/4426163. 20

    2021 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Nielsen, F

    M. Nielsen, F. S. Navarra, Charged Exotic Charmonium States, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 29 (2014) 1430005.arXiv:1401.2913, doi:10.1142/S0217732314300055

    2014 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Wang, Analysis of theZ(4430) as the first radial excitation of theZc(3900), Commun

    Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of theZ(4430) as the first radial excitation of theZc(3900), Commun. Theor. Phys. 63 (3) (2015) 325–330. arXiv:1405.3581, doi:10.1088/0253-6102/63/3/325

    2015 arXiv

  81. [89]

    S. S. Agaev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, TreatingZc(3900) andZ(4430) as the ground-state and first radially excited tetraquarks, Phys. Rev. D 96 (3) (2017) 034026.arXiv:1706.01216, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.034026

    2017 arXiv

  82. [93]

    U. Özdem, Unveiling the underlying structure of axial-vector bottom-charm tetraquarks in the light of their magnetic moments, JHEP 05 (2024) 301.arXiv:2403.16191, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2024)301

    2024 arXiv

  83. [94]

    Azizi, U

    K. Azizi, U. Özdem, Exploring the magnetic dipole moments ofTQQqs andTQQss states in the framework of QCD light-cone sum rules, JHEP 03 (2023) 166.arXiv:2301.07713, doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2023)166

    2023 arXiv

  84. [1524]

    arXiv:1008.4449, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-010-1524-y

    arXiv

  85. [1869]

    arXiv:2009.00238, doi:10.3390/sym12111869

    2009 arXiv

  86. [1993]

    arXiv:hep-ph/9310356

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.