Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 109 references

$X(3872)$ and hidden charmed tetraquarks

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Using a single diquark-antidiquark potential, this paper predicts a hidden-charm tetraquark spectrum from 1S to 2P excitations and assigns X(3872) as a 1++ tetraquark, with Zc(3900), X(3940), Zc(4430), and X(Y)(4660) as excited companions.

desk verdict A systematic hidden-charm tetraquark spectrum with an honest limitations section, but the X(3872) assignment is a fitted input rather than an independent prediction. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.23760 v2 pith:DQMRZCJW submitted 2025-06-30 hep-ph hep-ex

You-You Lin , Ji-Ying Wang , Ailin Zhang This is my paper
classification hep-phhep-ex
keywords hiddencharmtetraquarkdiquark-antidiquarkmodelX(3872)XYZstatesconstituentquarkSemay-Silvestre-Bracpotentialexoticquantumnumbersmassspectrum
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

This paper aims to show that the hidden-charm XYZ hadrons, including X(3872), form a single family of compact tetraquarks built from a charm-light diquark and its antidiquark. With the Semay-Silvestre-Brac potentials, the authors compute diquark masses near 2175 MeV for spin-0 and 2220 MeV for spin-1, then solve for tetraquark masses up to 2P excitations. The result is a level ordering in which unexcited states rise through 1+-, 1++, 1--, 0-+, 0--, 1-+, with radially excited states above 4300 MeV. The paper assigns X(3872) to the 1++ tetraquark and X*(3860), Zc(3900), X(3940), and several higher XYZ states to other predicted levels, and argues that Y(4008) and Y(4390) are not 1-- tetraquarks. A sympathetic reader would care because the paper turns a scattered list of exotic states into a single testable spectrum.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the diquark-antidiquark tetraquark: a compact color-antitriplet $cq$ diquark (spin 0 or 1) bound to a color-triplet $\bar c\bar q$ antidiquark, treated as a two-body system with relative orbital angular momentum $L$ and definite $J^{PC}$. The dynamics are governed by the Semay-Silvestre-Brac (AL-type) potential, with the quark-quark interaction inside each diquark set to half the quark-antiquark potential; spin-spin, spin-orbit, and tensor terms split the multiplets. The two parameters $\alpha$ and $\lambda$ of the diquark-antidiquark potential are fixed by demanding that X(3872) be the $1^{++}$ ground-state tetraquark and Tcc(3875)$^+$ the $1^+$ doubly charmed tetraquark, following the earlier treatment of doubly charmed tetraquarks. The spatial Schr\"odinger equation is solved by expanding the relative wave function in Gaussians, which turns it into a matrix eigenvalue problem; the resulting masses, computed with four parameter sets, give the ordering and splittings that carry the assignments.

What would settle it

Establish, through a full amplitude analysis of $e^+e^-\to\pi^+\pi^-J/\psi$ or $\pi^+\pi^-\psi(2S)$, that Y(4008) or Y(4390) is a genuine $1^{--}$ resonance, or compute the $1^{++}$ hidden-charm tetraquark ground state on the lattice and find it far from 3872 MeV; either result would directly contradict the predicted spectrum.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a hidden-charm tetraquark of the diquark-antidiquark type, with a compact $cq$ ($q=u,d$) diquark and a $\bar c\bar q$ antidiquark, has a mass spectrum that already contains the observed XYZ states. Calculated with the Semay-Silvestre-Brac AL potentials, the lightest tetraquark is a $0^{++}$ state near 3770 MeV, and the ground states appear in the order $1^{+-}, 1^{++}, 1^{--}, 0^{-+}, 0^{--}, 1^{-+}, \ldots$; radial excitations lie above 4300 MeV. On this spectrum X(3872) is the $1^{++}$ tetraquark made of one spin-0 and one spin-1 diquark, X*(3860) is the $0^{++}$ state, Zc(3900) and X(3940) are $1^{+-}$ states, X(4240) is a $0^{--}$ state, and X(4350), Zc(4430), X(4630), and X(Y)(4660) are assigned to radially excited levels. The paper further claims that no $1^{--}$ tetraquark is predicted below about 4200 MeV or between about 4300 and 4600 MeV, so Y(4008) and Y(4390) cannot be vector tetraquarks.

Load-bearing premise

The whole calculation assumes from the outset that X(3872) is the 1++ tetraquark it is trying to identify and uses it, together with Tcc(3875)+, to tune the two potential parameters; if either identification is wrong, every predicted mass shifts and the match to X(3872) is not independent evidence.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • X(3872) is a compact $1^{++}$ tetraquark; the measured radiative ratio $\Gamma(X(3872)\to\psi(2S)\gamma)/\Gamma(X(3872)\to\psi\gamma)\approx 1.67$ counts against a pure molecule interpretation.
  • The XYZ states X*(3860), Zc(3900), X(3940), X(4240), X(4350), Zc(4430), X(4630), and X(Y)(4660) can be placed in one predicted spectrum, so their quantum numbers and ordering become testable predictions rather than isolated measurements.
  • Y(4008) and Y(4390), if genuine resonances, must be generated by something other than a $1^{--}$ tetraquark, such as threshold or coupled-channel effects.
  • Tetraquark $1S{-}1P$ and $1S{-}2S$ splittings come out roughly 390\textendash 400 MeV and 550\textendash 570 MeV, a bit smaller than charmonium, while $1P{-}2P$ and $2S{-}2P$ splittings match charmonium; this pattern is a fingerprint for distinguishing tetraquarks from quarkonia.
  • The exotic $J^{PC}=0^{--}$ and $1^{-+}$ states are placed near 4240\textendash 4280 MeV, giving specific mass windows where genuinely exotic tetraquarks can be searched for.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the spectrum is calibrated on X(3872) itself, the paper's assignments are not a prediction of X(3872)'s mass; a true test would be a lattice QCD calculation of the $1^{++}$ hidden-charm tetraquark ground state, with agreement near 3872 MeV independently confirming the scheme and a large deviation undoing it.
  • The predicted absence of $1^{--}$ tetraquarks between 4300 and 4600 MeV suggests that Y(4008) and Y(4390), if real, should be dominated by $D^{(*)} \bar D^{(*)}$ or $\psi(2S)\pi\pi$ dynamics; a coupled-channel analysis of those lineshapes could test this without assuming a tetraquark.
  • The model's diquark masses, about 2175\textendash 2220 MeV, sit roughly 300 MeV above QCD sum-rule estimates, so the diquark here is best read as an effective cluster rather than a physical particle; measuring diquark correlations in fragmentation or in doubly charmed baryons could decide which mass is the relevant one.
  • If the assignments survive, the same potential with the same parameters should predict decay widths and radiative transitions for the assigned states, for example for Zc(3900) and X(3940), allowing the tetraquark interpretation to be tested beyond masses.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper computes masses of hidden-charmed tetraquarks in a constituent quark model where the tetraquark is a cq diquark plus an anticq antidiquark. It first calculates cq diquark masses with Semay-Silvestre-Brac (SSB) potentials, obtaining ~2175 MeV and ~2220 MeV for spin-0 and spin-1 diquarks, and then calculates tetraquark masses from 1S to 2P excitations using a diquark-antidiquark potential whose parameters α and λ are fixed, following Ref. [81], by the masses of X(3872) and Tcc(3875)+. The resulting spectrum shows a mass ordering 1+−, 1++, 1−−, 0−+, 0−−, 1−+ for the lowest states, with exotic quantum numbers at higher masses, and radial excitations above 4300 MeV. On this basis the paper tentatively assigns numerous observed XYZ states, including X(3872) as a 1++ tetraquark, and argues that Y(4008) and Y(4390) are unlikely to be 1−− tetraquarks. The paper is transparent that X(3872) is used as a calibration input, but the abstract and introduction present the X(3872) assignment as a result of the calculation, which is the main issue assessed in this report.

Significance. The systematic calculation of hidden-charmed tetraquark masses from 1S to 2P and the comparison with the observed XYZ spectrum is potentially useful for the field, especially the ordering of multiplets and the mass splittings relative to charmonium. The paper also provides reproducible tabulated results and compares with a relativized diquark model. However, the central claim that X(3872) is a 1++ tetraquark is not an independent prediction: the model parameters α and λ are fitted to X(3872) and Tcc(3875)+, so the agreement at 3871.6 MeV is guaranteed by construction. The other assignments inherit this calibration and are therefore not independent confirmations of the tetraquark picture. The paper is nevertheless honest about the calibration in Section IV, and the non-circular parts—diquark masses, the general multiplet ordering, and the exclusion of Y(4008)/Y(4390) as 1−− tetraquarks—remain of interest if the systematic uncertainties can be quantified.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III, Table IV] The 1++ tetraquark mass of 3871.6 MeV is not a prediction but a refit of the input. Section III explicitly states that α and λ are fixed through X(3872) and Tcc(3875)+, and Table IV then reproduces 3871.6 MeV for all four parameter sets. The abstract's statement that 'X(3872) is possibly a 1++ tetraquark' is therefore circular for the mass. The four parameter sets only vary the fit, not the identification. To support the central claim, the paper should either remove X(3872) from the list of assignments (presenting it strictly as calibration) or provide an independent observable—e.g., a decay pattern, a splitting that does not involve the fitted ground state, or a comparison with a state not used in the fit—that discriminates the 1++ tetraquark assignment from the χc1(2P) charmonium or molecular interpretations.
  2. [Section III, Tables III-V; Section IV] No systematic uncertainty is propagated into the predicted masses. Section IV acknowledges that mixing between normal mesons and tetraquarks is not included and that boson-exchange interactions may lower the spectra, with 'uncertainties of several tens of MeV', but the assignments in Tables VI and the text use mass agreement with experimental states without attaching any such uncertainty to the theoretical values. For example, X(4250) is assigned to a 0−+ or 1−+ state near 4240-4280 MeV and also to a 0++ radially excited state near 4390 MeV, a spread that only becomes viable because the model error bars are absent. Please estimate and quote a systematic uncertainty for each multiplet, for instance by varying the omitted mixing and boson-exchange terms within a plausible range.
  3. [Table II and Section III] The predicted cq diquark masses (~2175 and ~2220 MeV) are about 300 MeV above the QCD sum-rule and phenomenological values quoted in Refs. [31,35] (~1860-1933 MeV). Since the tetraquark mass is the sum of the diquark masses plus an interaction term, this large discrepancy directly affects the calibration of α and λ and the resulting tetraquark spectrum. The paper notes the discrepancy but does not discuss whether it signals a failure of the SSB potential for diquarks, nor how it would affect the confidence in the XYZ assignments. A quantitative discussion of this sensitivity is needed before the assignments can be considered robust.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Table VI] In the 1−− row, the n=2 entry is written as 2|[0,0]0,1⟩0, but a J=0 state cannot have JPC=1−−; this should presumably be 2|[0,0]0,1⟩1, consistent with the other entries.
  2. [Abstract and Section III] The abstract states that the 1S-1P and 1S-2S splittings are 'about 70 MeV and 50 MeV smaller' than charmonium, while Section III and Tables VII-IX give 50 MeV and 40 MeV respectively. Please make these numbers consistent.
  3. [Abstract] The word 'systemically' should be 'systematically'.
  4. [Section IV, sentence on Y(4008)/Y(4390)] The phrase 'seems impossibly to be the 1−− hidden charmed tetraquark' is ungrammatical; it should read 'seems impossible for Y(4008) or Y(4390) to be the 1−− hidden charmed tetraquark.'

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 8.0 of 10

The X(3872) identification is calibrated in, not predicted: α and λ are fit to X(3872) and Tcc(3875)+, so the returned 1++ mass of 3871.6 MeV is an input assumption recycled as an output.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. III (parameter fixing and assignment after Table VI), Table IV, Sec. IV summary]
    "the parameters of the potential between the diquark and the antidiquark are refitted with the experimental mass of X(3872) and Tcc(3875)+. ... [Table IV: 1|[1/0, 0/1]1, 0⟩1 1++/− 3871.60 3871.64 3871.50 3871.68 3872] ... X(3872) is fixed as the 1++ hidden charmed tetraquark consisting of a diquark and an antidiquark with one spin-0 and one spin-1."

    X(3872) is explicitly one of the two benchmark states used to determine α and λ, and its J^PC = 1++ tetraquark character is an assumption in that calibration. The same Hamiltonian then returns 3871.6 MeV for the 1++ ground state in Table IV, and the text 'fixes' X(3872) to exactly that state. This is the input assumption reappearing as the output: the mass is a fit target, not a prediction. The abstract's phrase 'based on our predicted masses' obscures the identity between the fitted benchmark and the claimed result.

  2. self citation load bearing [Sec. III, paragraph after Table II]
    "According to the argument in Ref. [81], the parameters α and λ in the AL quark-antiquark potential between a cq diquark and a ¯c¯q antidiquark are fixed through two ground state tetraquark candidates: X(3872) and Tcc(3875)+. ... The four sets of α and λ are employed as those in Ref. [81]."

    Ref. [81] is the authors' own previous paper, which used the same AL potentials and fixed the same α and λ from the same two benchmark states, X(3872) and Tcc(3875)+. The citation therefore supplies no independent constraint; it is a self-referential chain that ultimately reduces to the same fitted inputs. Because every tetraquark mass in Tables III-V inherits these α and λ values, this self-citation is load-bearing for the whole mass spectrum, even though the excited-state splittings are not themselves fit targets.

full rationale

The circularity is concentrated in the headline X(3872) claim. The paper's own summary states that the diquark-antidiquark potential is 'refitted with the experimental mass of X(3872) and Tcc(3875)+', and Section III explicitly assumes X(3872) to be a hidden charmed J^PC = 1++ ground-state tetraquark. Table IV then returns 3871.60-3871.68 MeV for the 1++ state, and the text says X(3872) 'is fixed' as that tetraquark. This is a fitted input called a prediction. The four parameter sets imported from the authors' Ref. [81] are not independent evidence, because that paper used the same calibration inputs. The rest of the work is not circular in the same way: the cq diquark masses are computed from the external Semay-Silvestre-Brac potentials [95, 96], and the 1P-1S, 2S-1S, 1P-2P, and 2S-2P splittings, as well as the assignments of Zc(3900), X(3940), X(4240), X(4250), X(4350), Zc(4430), X(4630), and X(Y)(4660), are genuine outputs of the fitted Hamiltonian rather than direct fit targets. The manuscript's own uncertainty paragraph admits that the fixed parameters vary with the components of the benchmark X(3872) and Tcc(3875)+, confirming the calibration dependence. Overall, the central X(3872) assignment reduces by construction to its input, while the broader spectrum retains independent content; hence score 8 rather than 10.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the diquark-antidiquark approximation, the use of a nonrelativistic potential model, and the calibration of alpha and lambda to X(3872) and Tcc. The paper does not provide an independent check of these assumptions.

free parameters (2)
  • alpha (strong coupling in AL potential between diquark and antidiquark) = Not given numerically; fitted to X(3872) and Tcc(3875)+ masses
    Used to reproduce the two calibration masses; affects all tetraquark masses.
  • lambda (linear confinement strength in AL potential between diquark and antidiquark) = Not given numerically; fitted to X(3872) and Tcc(3875)+ masses
    Together with alpha, tuned to force the 1++ mass to 3871.6 MeV.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption A hidden charmed tetraquark is a compact bound state of a cq diquark in color anti-triplet and an anti-c anti-q antidiquark in color triplet.
    This structure is assumed from the start (Sec. I, II); the paper considers no other tetraquark configurations.
  • domain assumption The quark-quark potential is one half of the quark-antiquark potential (Vqq = 1/2 Vq-bar-q).
    Standard in constituent quark models, but unproven for diquarks; used in Sec. II for the diquark Hamiltonian.
  • domain assumption The parameters alpha and lambda fitted to ground-state tetraquarks remain valid for all radial and orbital excitations.
    The paper uses the same parameters for 1S to 2P states; no scale dependence is tested.
  • domain assumption Mixing with conventional charmonium and other configurations is negligible or absorbed in the fitted parameters.
    The paper notes mixing is not explicitly included and may shift masses by tens of MeV (Summary).
  • domain assumption The Breit-Fermi spin-orbit and tensor terms (Eq. 3) correctly describe the spin-dependent forces in a tetraquark.
    Taken from the quark model literature without further justification.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of $X(3872)$ and hidden charmed tetraquarks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DQMRZCJW

@misc{pith2026250623760,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: $X(3872)$ and hidden charmed tetraquarks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DQMRZCJW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.23760}
}
abstract

In a constituent quark model, a hidden charmed tetraquark is assumed consisting of a $cq$ diquark and an $\bar c\bar q$ antidiquark or vice versa. The Semay-Silvestre-Brac potentials are employed to calculate the masses of $cq$ (q=u, d) diquarks. The mass of the $cq$ diquark or $\bar c\bar q$ antidiquark with spin-$0$ is predicted with $\sim 2175$ MeV, and the spin-$1$ one is predicted with $\sim 2220$ MeV. The masses of hidden charmed tetraquarks from $1S$ to $2P$ excitations are systemically calculated in terms of the same potentials. It is found that the mass of hidden charmed tetraquark without radial excitation grows higher in $1^{+-},~1^{++},~1^{--},~0^{-+},~0^{--},~1^{-+},~\cdots$ sequence, and the tetraquarks with exotic $J^{PC}=0^{--},~1^{-+}$ have higher masses. The hidden charmed tetraquarks with radial excitations have masses larger than $4300$ MeV. The $1S-1P$ and $1S-2S$ mass splittings of the hidden charmed tetraquarks are about $390-400$ MeV and $550-570$ MeV, respectively, which are about $70$ MeV and $50$ MeV smaller than those of normal charmonium. The $1P-2P$ and $2S-2P$ mass splittings are similar to those for conventional $c\bar c$ charmonium mesons. Based on our predicted masses for hidden charmed tetraquarks, some XYZ exotics are analyzed and tentatively assigned. $X^*(3860)$ is possibly the $0^{++}$ tetraquark. $Z_c(3900)$ and $X(3940)$ are possibly the $1^{+-}$ tetraquarks, and $X(3872)$ is possibly a $1^{++}$ tetraquark. $X(4250)$ may be a $0^{-+}$, $0^{++}$ or $1^{-+}$ tetraquark, $X(4240)$ may be a $0^{--}$ tetraquark. With radial excitations, $X(4350)$ may be a $0^{++}$ tetraquark, $Z_c(4430)$ may be a $1^{+-}$ tetraquark, $X(4630)$ may be a $0^{-+}$ or $1^{-+}$ tetraquark, and $X(Y)(4660)$ may be the $1^{--}$ tetraquark. $Y(4008)$ or $Y(4390)$ seems impossibly the $1^{--}$ tetraquark.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

109 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [38]

    Hidden-Charm Tetraquarks and Charged Zc States

    L. Zhao, W.-Z. Deng, and S.-L. Zhu, Hidden-Charm Tetraquarks and Charged Zc States, Phys. Rev. D 90, 094031 (2014), arXiv:1408.3924 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2014

  2. [81]

    Santopinto and J

    E. Santopinto and J. Ferretti, Strange and nonstrange baryon spectra in the relativistic interacting quark- diquark model with a G¨ ursey and Radicati-inspired ex- change interaction, Phys. Rev. C 92, 025202 (2015), arXiv:1412.7571 [nucl-th]

    arXiv 2015

  3. [1]

    For neutral-flavor hidden charmed tetraquarks, they may have definite C quantum numbers

    In this way, the constructed wave functions and corresponding quantum numbers of some ground state tetraquarks are listed [31, 38, 98] J P C= 0++ :χ1 = |[cq] ¯3 0[¯c¯q]3 0⟩0, χ2 = |{cq} ¯3 1{¯c¯q}3 1⟩0, J P C= 1++ :χ3 = 1√ 2 |{cq} ¯3 1[¯c¯q]3 0 + [cq] ¯3 0{¯c¯q}3 1⟩1, J P C= 1+− :χ4 = 1√ 2 |{cq} ¯3 1[¯c¯q]3 0 − [cq] ¯3 0{¯c¯q}3 1⟩1, χ5 = |{cq} ¯3 1{¯c¯q}3...

    1933

  4. [2]

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

    arXiv 2003

  5. [3]

    Aaij et al

    R. Aaij et al. (LHCb), Observation of sizeable ω contri- bution to χc1(3872) → π+π−J/ψ decays, Phys. Rev. D 108, L011103 (2023), arXiv:2204.12597 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2023

  6. [4]

    Abe et al

    K. Abe et al. (Belle), Evidence for X(3872) → γJ/ψ and the sub-threshold decay X(3872) → ωJ/ψ (22nd Inter- national Symposium on Lepton-Photon Interactions at High Energy (LP 2005), 2005) arXiv:hep-ex/0505037

    arXiv 2005

  7. [5]

    C. P. Shen et al. (Belle), Search for charmonium and charmonium-like states in Υ(1S) radiative decays, Phys. Rev. D 82, 051504 (2010), arXiv:1008.1774 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2010

  8. [6]

    X. L. Wang et al. (Belle), Search for charmonium and charmonium-like states in Υ(2S) radiative decays, Phys. Rev. D 84, 071107 (2011), arXiv:1108.4514 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2011

Show all 109 references
  1. [7]

    del Amo Sanchez et al

    P. del Amo Sanchez et al. (BaBar), Evidence for the decay X(3872) — > J/ psi omega, Phys. Rev. D 82, 011101 (2010), arXiv:1005.5190 [hep-ex]

    2010 arXiv

  2. [8]

    Ablikim et al

    M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII), Study of e+e− → γωJ/ψ and Observation of X(3872) → ωJ/ψ , Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 232002 (2019), arXiv:1903.04695 [hep-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  3. [9]

    Navas et al

    S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

    2024

  4. [10]

    Ablikim et al

    M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII), Observation of the Y (4220) and Y (4360) in the process e+e− → ηJ/ψ , Phys. Rev. D 102, 031101 (2020), arXiv:2003.03705 [hep-ex]

    2020

  5. [11]

    Acosta et al

    D. Acosta et al. (CDF), Observation of the narrow state X(3872) → J/ψπ +π− in ¯pp collisions at √s = 1 .96 9 TABLE IX. Mass splittings (in MeV) of radially and orbitally [ cq][¯c¯q] consisting of a diquark and an antidiquark both with spin-1, where the parameters are chosen as...

    2004

  6. [12]

    Aubert et al

    B. Aubert et al. (BaBar), Study of the B → J/ψK −π+π− decay and measurement of the B → X(3872)K − branching fraction, Phys. Rev. D 71, 071103 (2005), arXiv:hep-ex/0406022

    2005 arXiv

  7. [13]

    Abulencia et al

    A. Abulencia et al. (CDF), Analysis of the quantum numbers J P C of the X(3872), Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 132002 (2007), arXiv:hep-ex/0612053

    2007 arXiv

  8. [14]

    Aubert et al

    B. Aubert et al. (BaBar), Evidence for X(3872) → ψ2Sγ in B± → X(3872)K ± decays, and a study of B → c¯cγK , Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 132001 (2009), arXiv:0809.0042 [hep-ex]

    2009 arXiv

  9. [15]

    Bhardwaj et al

    V. Bhardwaj et al. (Belle), Observation of X(3872) → J/ψγ and search for X(3872) → ψ′γ in B decays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 091803 (2011), arXiv:1105.0177 [hep- ex]

    2011 arXiv

  10. [16]

    Chatrchyan et al

    S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS), Measurement of the X(3872) Production Cross Section Via Decays to J/ψπ +π− in pp collisions at √s = 7 TeV, JHEP 04, 154, arXiv:1302.3968 [hep-ex]

    arXiv

  11. [17]

    Aaij et al

    R. Aaij et al. (LHCb), Determination of the X(3872) meson quantum numbers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 222001 (2013), arXiv:1302.6269 [hep-ex]

    2013 arXiv

  12. [18]

    Ablikim et al

    M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII), Observation of e+e− → γX (3872) at BESIII, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 092001 (2014), arXiv:1310.4101 [hep-ex]

    2014 arXiv

  13. [19]

    Aaij et al

    R. Aaij et al. (LHCb), Quantum numbers of the X(3872) state and orbital angular momentum in its ρ0J ψ decay, Phys. Rev. D 92, 011102 (2015), arXiv:1504.06339 [hep-ex]

    2015 arXiv

  14. [20]

    Aaij et al

    R. Aaij et al. (LHCb), Study of the lineshape of the χc1(3872) state, Phys. Rev. D 102, 092005 (2020), arXiv:2005.13419 [hep-ex]

    2020

  15. [21]

    F. E. Close and P. R. Page, The D∗0 ¯D0 threshold resonance, Phys. Lett. B 578, 119 (2004), arXiv:hep- ph/0309253

    2004

  16. [22]

    M. B. Voloshin, Interference and binding effects in de- cays of possible molecular component of X(3872), Phys. Lett. B 579, 316 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0309307

    2004 arXiv

  17. [23]

    N. A. Tornqvist, Isospin breaking of the narrow char- monium state of Belle at 3872 MeV as a deuson, Phys. Lett. B 590, 209 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0402237

    2004 arXiv

  18. [24]

    M. B. Voloshin, Heavy quark spin selection rule and the properties of the X(3872), Phys. Lett. B 604, 69 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0408321

    2004 arXiv

  19. [25]

    Braaten and M

    E. Braaten and M. Kusunoki, Low-energy universality and the new charmonium resonance at 3870 MeV, Phys. Rev. D 69, 074005 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0311147

    2004 arXiv

  20. [26]

    Wong, Molecular states of heavy quark mesons, Phys

    C.-Y. Wong, Molecular states of heavy quark mesons, Phys. Rev. C 69, 055202 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0311088

    2004 arXiv

  21. [27]

    Hogaasen, J

    H. Hogaasen, J. M. Richard, and P. Sorba, A Chromo- magnetic mechanism for the X(3872) resonance, Phys. Rev. D 73, 054013 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0511039

    2006 arXiv

  22. [28]

    Braaten and M

    E. Braaten and M. Lu, Line shapes of the X(3872), Phys. Rev. D 76, 094028 (2007), arXiv:0709.2697 [hep- ph]

    2007 arXiv

  23. [29]

    P. G. Ortega, J. Segovia, D. R. Entem, and F. Fer- nandez, Coupled channel approach to the structure of the X(3872), Phys. Rev. D 81, 054023 (2010), arXiv:0907.3997 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  24. [30]

    Liu, T.-W

    M.-Z. Liu, T.-W. Wu, M. Pavon Valderrama, J.-J. Xie, and L.-S. Geng, Heavy-quark spin and flavor symmetry partners of the X(3872) revisited: What can we learn from the one boson exchange model?, Phys. Rev. D 99, 094018 (2019), arXiv:1902.03044 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  25. [31]

    Liu, Y.-W

    M.-Z. Liu, Y.-W. Pan, F.-Z. Peng, M. S´ anchez S´ anchez, L.-S. Geng, A. Hosaka, and M. Pavon Valderrama, Emergence of a complete heavy-quark spin symmetry multiplet: seven molecular pentaquarks in light of the latest LHCb analysis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 242001 (2019), arXiv:1...

    2019 arXiv

  26. [32]

    Maiani, F

    L. Maiani, F. Piccinini, A. D. Polosa, and V. Riquer, Diquark-antidiquarks with hidden or open charm and the nature of X(3872), Phys. Rev. D 71, 014028 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0412098

    2005 arXiv

  27. [33]

    Ebert, R

    D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, and V. O. Galkin, Masses of heavy tetraquarks in the relativistic quark model, Phys. Lett. B 634, 214 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0512230

    2006 arXiv

  28. [34]

    Terasaki, A New tetra-quark interpretation of X(3872), Prog

    K. Terasaki, A New tetra-quark interpretation of X(3872), Prog. Theor. Phys. 118, 821 (2007), arXiv:0706.3944 [hep-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  29. [35]

    Dubnicka, A

    S. Dubnicka, A. Z. Dubnickova, M. A. Ivanov, and J. G. 10 Korner, Quark model description of the tetraquark state X(3872) in a relativistic constituent quark model with infrared confinement, Phys. Rev. D 81, 114007 (2010), arXiv:1004.1291 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  30. [36]

    R. T. Kleiv, T. G. Steele, A. Zhang, and I. Blokland, Heavy-light diquark masses from QCD sum rules and constituent diquark models of tetraquarks, Phys. Rev. D 87, 125018 (2013), arXiv:1304.7816 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  31. [37]

    Maiani, F

    L. Maiani, F. Piccinini, A. D. Polosa, and V. Riquer, The Z(4430) and a New Paradigm for Spin Interac- tions in Tetraquarks, Phys. Rev. D 89, 114010 (2014), arXiv:1405.1551 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  32. [39]

    M. N. Anwar, J. Ferretti, and E. Santopinto, Spec- troscopy of the hidden-charm [ qc][¯q¯c] and [ sc][¯s¯c] tetraquarks in the relativized diquark model, Phys. Rev. D 98, 094015 (2018), arXiv:1805.06276 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  33. [40]

    Grinstein, L

    B. Grinstein, L. Maiani, and A. D. Polosa, Radiative decays of X(3872) discriminate between the molecular and compact interpretations, Phys. Rev. D 109, 074009 (2024), arXiv:2401.11623 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  34. [41]

    B. A. Li, Is X(3872) a possible candidate of hybrid meson, Phys. Lett. B 605, 306 (2005), arXiv:hep- ph/0410264

    2005

  35. [42]

    Braaten, How the Zc(3900) Reveals the Spectra of Quarkonium Hybrid and Tetraquark Mesons, Phys

    E. Braaten, How the Zc(3900) Reveals the Spectra of Quarkonium Hybrid and Tetraquark Mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 162003 (2013), arXiv:1305.6905 [hep- ph]

    2013 arXiv

  36. [43]

    Barnes and S

    T. Barnes and S. Godfrey, Charmonium options for the X(3872), Phys. Rev. D 69, 054008 (2004), arXiv:hep- ph/0311162

    2004

  37. [44]

    Suzuki, The X(3872) boson: Molecule or char- monium, Phys

    M. Suzuki, The X(3872) boson: Molecule or char- monium, Phys. Rev. D 72, 114013 (2005), arXiv:hep- ph/0508258

    2005

  38. [45]

    Y. Yang, C. Deng, J. Ping, and T. Goldman, S-wave QQ¯q ¯q state in the constituent quark model, Phys. Rev. D 80, 114023 (2009)

    2009

  39. [46]

    Y. S. Kalashnikova, Coupled-channel model for char- monium levels and an option for X(3872), Phys. Rev. D 72, 034010 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0506270

    2005 arXiv

  40. [47]

    Y. S. Kalashnikova and A. V. Nefediev, Nature of X(3872) from data, Phys. Rev. D 80, 074004 (2009), arXiv:0907.4901 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  41. [48]

    I. V. Danilkin and Y. A. Simonov, Dynamical origin and the pole structure of X(3872), Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 102002 (2010), arXiv:1006.0211 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  42. [49]

    Gell-Mann, A Schematic Model of Baryons and Mesons, Phys

    M. Gell-Mann, A Schematic Model of Baryons and Mesons, Phys. Lett. 8, 214 (1964)

    1964

  43. [50]

    Ida and R

    M. Ida and R. Kobayashi, Baryon resonances in a quark model, Prog. Theor. Phys. 36, 846 (1966)

    1966

  44. [51]

    D. B. Lichtenberg and L. J. Tassie, Baryon Mass Split- ting in a Boson-Fermion Model, Phys. Rev. 155, 1601 (1967)

    1967

  45. [52]

    Fleck, B

    S. Fleck, B. Silvestre-Brac, and J. M. Richard, Search for Diquark Clustering in Baryons, Phys. Rev. D 38, 1519 (1988)

    1988

  46. [53]

    Selem and F

    A. Selem and F. Wilczek, Hadron sys- tematics and emergent diquarks, in Ringberg Workshop on New Trends in HERA Physics 2005 (2006) pp. 337–356, arXiv:hep-ph/0602128

    2006 arXiv

  47. [54]

    Chen, D.-X

    B. Chen, D.-X. Wang, and A. Zhang, J P Assign- ments of Λ + c Baryons, Chin. Phys. C 33, 1327 (2009), arXiv:0906.3934 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  48. [55]

    Ferretti, A

    J. Ferretti, A. Vassallo, and E. Santopinto, Relativis- tic quark-diquark model of baryons, Phys. Rev. C 83, 065204 (2011)

    2011

  49. [56]

    Ebert, R

    D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, and V. O. Galkin, Spec- troscopy and Regge trajectories of heavy baryons in the relativistic quark-diquark picture, Phys. Rev. D 84, 014025 (2011), arXiv:1105.0583 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  50. [57]

    Chen, K.-W

    B. Chen, K.-W. Wei, and A. Zhang, Assignments of ΛQ and Ξ Q baryons in the heavy quark-light diquark picture, Eur. Phys. J. A 51, 82 (2015), arXiv:1406.6561 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  51. [58]

    Kumakawa and D

    K. Kumakawa and D. Jido, Excitation energy spectra of the Λc and Λb baryons in a finite-size diquark model, PTEP 2017, 123D01 (2017), arXiv:1708.02012 [nucl- th]

    2017 arXiv

  52. [59]

    Rosenzweig, Have Mesons Composed of Charmed Diquarks Been Discovered?, Phys

    C. Rosenzweig, Have Mesons Composed of Charmed Diquarks Been Discovered?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 36, 697 (1976)

    1976

  53. [60]

    Anselmino, E

    M. Anselmino, E. Predazzi, S. Ekelin, S. Fredriksson, and D. B. Lichtenberg, Diquarks, Rev. Mod. Phys. 65, 1199 (1993)

    1993

  54. [61]

    R. L. Jaffe and F. Wilczek, Diquarks and exotic spec- troscopy, Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 232003 (2003), arXiv:hep- ph/0307341

    2003

  55. [62]

    Karliner and H

    M. Karliner and H. J. Lipkin, A Diquark - triquark model for the KN pentaquark, Phys. Lett. B 575, 249 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0402260

    2003 arXiv

  56. [63]

    Maiani, F

    L. Maiani, F. Piccinini, A. D. Polosa, and V. Riquer, A New look at scalar mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 212002 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0407017

    2004 arXiv

  57. [64]

    R. L. Jaffe, Exotica, Phys. Rept. 409, 1 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0409065

    2005 arXiv

  58. [65]

    Maiani, A

    L. Maiani, A. D. Polosa, and V. Riquer, The New Pen- taquarks in the Diquark Model, Phys. Lett. B 749, 289 (2015), arXiv:1507.04980 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  59. [66]

    H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, and S.-L. Zhu, The hidden-charm pentaquark and tetraquark states, Phys. Rept. 639, 1 (2016), arXiv:1601.02092 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  60. [67]

    R. F. Lebed, R. E. Mitchell, and E. S. Swanson, Heavy- Quark QCD Exotica, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 93, 143 (2017), arXiv:1610.04528 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  61. [68]

    Maiani, A

    L. Maiani, A. D. Polosa, and V. Riquer, A Theory of X and Z Multiquark Resonances, Phys. Lett. B 778, 247 (2018), arXiv:1712.05296 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  62. [69]

    S. L. Olsen, T. Skwarnicki, and D. Zieminska, Non- standard heavy mesons and baryons: Experimen- tal evidence, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015003 (2018), arXiv:1708.04012 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  63. [70]

    M. Y. Barabanov et al., Diquark correlations in hadron physics: Origin, impact and evidence, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 116, 103835 (2021), arXiv:2008.07630 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  64. [71]

    Niiyama et al

    M. Niiyama et al. (Belle), Production cross sections of hyperons and charmed baryons from e+e− annihilation near √s = 10.52 GeV, Phys. Rev. D 97, 072005 (2018), arXiv:1706.06791 [hep-ex]

    2018 arXiv

  65. [72]

    K. S. Sateesh, An Experimental signal for diquarks in quark gluon plasma, Phys. Rev. D 45, 866 (1992)

    1992

  66. [73]

    D. B. Leinweber, Do quarks really form diquark clus- ters in the nucleon?, Phys. Rev. D 47, 5096 (1993), arXiv:hep-ph/9302266

    1993 arXiv

  67. [74]

    L. Y. Glozman and K. Varga, Is there diquark cluster- ing in the nucleon?, Phys. Rev. D 61, 074008 (2000), arXiv:hep-ph/9901439. 11

    2000 arXiv

  68. [75]

    R. T. Cahill, C. D. Roberts, and J. Praschifka, Calcula- tion of Diquark Masses in QCD, Phys. Rev. D 36, 2804 (1987)

    1987

  69. [76]

    Bender, C

    A. Bender, C. D. Roberts, and L. Von Smekal, Gold- stone theorem and diquark confinement beyond rain- bow ladder approximation, Phys. Lett. B 380, 7 (1996), arXiv:nucl-th/9602012

    1996 arXiv

  70. [77]

    Maris, Effective masses of diquarks, Few Body Syst

    P. Maris, Effective masses of diquarks, Few Body Syst. 32, 41 (2002), arXiv:nucl-th/0204020

    2002 arXiv

  71. [78]

    H. L. L. Roberts, L. Chang, I. C. Cloet, and C. D. Roberts, Masses of ground and excited-state hadrons, Few Body Syst. 51, 1 (2011), arXiv:1101.4244 [nucl-th]

    2011 arXiv

  72. [79]

    Ebert, R

    D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, V. O. Galkin, and A. P. Marty- nenko, Mass spectra of doubly heavy baryons in the rel- ativistic quark model, Phys. Rev. D 66, 014008 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0201217

    2002 arXiv

  73. [80]

    Ebert, R

    D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, and V. O. Galkin, Masses of heavy baryons in the relativistic quark model, Phys. Rev. D 72, 034026 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0504112

    2005 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Lin, J.-Y

    Y.-Y. Lin, J.-Y. Wang, and A. Zhang, Mass spectra of doubly charmed tetraquarks Tcc, Phys. Rev. D 111, 014015 (2025), arXiv:2410.16902 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  75. [83]

    M. B. Hecht, M. Oettel, C. D. Roberts, S. M. Schmidt, P. C. Tandy, and A. W. Thomas, Nucleon mass and pion loops, Phys. Rev. C 65, 055204 (2002), arXiv:nucl- th/0201084

    2002

  76. [84]

    Sch¨ afer, E

    T. Sch¨ afer, E. V. Shuryak, and J. J. M. Verbaarschot, Baryonic correlators in the random instanton vacuum, Nucl. Phys. B 412, 143 (1994), arXiv:hep-ph/9306220

    1994 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Zhang, T

    A. Zhang, T. Huang, and T. G. Steele, Diquark and light four-quark states, Phys. Rev. D 76, 036004 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0612146

    2007 arXiv

  78. [86]

    S. Esau, A. Palameta, R. T. Kleiv, D. Harnett, and T. G. Steele, Axial Vector cc and bb Diquark Masses from QCD Laplace Sum-Rules, Phys. Rev. D 100, 074025 (2019), arXiv:1905.12803 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  79. [87]

    de Oliveira, D

    T. de Oliveira, D. Harnett, R. Kleiv, A. Palameta, and T. G. Steele, Light-Quark SU (3) Flavour Splitting of Heavy-Light Constituent Diquark Masses and Doubly- Strange Diquarks from QCD Sum-Rules, Phys. Rev. D 108, 054036 (2023), arXiv:2307.15815 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Watanabe, Quark-diquark potential and diquark mass from lattice QCD, Phys

    K. Watanabe, Quark-diquark potential and diquark mass from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 105, 074510 (2022), arXiv:2111.15167 [hep-lat]

    2022 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Francis, P

    A. Francis, P. de Forcrand, R. Lewis, and K. Maltman, Diquark properties from full QCD lattice simulations, JHEP 05, 062, arXiv:2106.09080 [hep-lat]

    arXiv

  82. [90]

    Braaten and M

    E. Braaten and M. Lu, The Effects of charged charm mesons on the line shapes of the X(3872), Phys. Rev. D 77, 014029 (2008), arXiv:0710.5482 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Cleven, F.-K

    M. Cleven, F.-K. Guo, C. Hanhart, Q. Wang, and Q. Zhao, Employing spin symmetry to disentangle dif- ferent models for the XYZ states, Phys. Rev. D 92, 014005 (2015), arXiv:1505.01771 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Esposito, L

    A. Esposito, L. Maiani, A. Pilloni, A. D. Polosa, and V. Riquer, From the line shape of the X(3872) to its structure, Phys. Rev. D 105, L031503 (2022), arXiv:2108.11413 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Berwein, N

    M. Berwein, N. Brambilla, A. Mohapatra, and A. Vairo, Hybrids, tetraquarks, pentaquarks, doubly heavy baryons, and quarkonia in Born-Oppenheimer effective theory, Phys. Rev. D 110, 094040 (2024), arXiv:2408.04719 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  86. [94]

    She, A.-K

    Z.-L. She, A.-K. Lei, Y.-L. Yan, D.-M. Zhou, L. Zheng, W.-C. Zhang, H. Zheng, Y.-L. Xie, G. Chen, and B.- H. Sa, Identifying an X(3872) tetraquark state versus a molecular state by formation time, velocity, and tem- perature in relativistic nuclear collisions, Phys. Rev. C 110...

    2024 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Ebert, R

    D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, V. O. Galkin, and W. Lucha, Masses of tetraquarks with two heavy quarks in the rel- ativistic quark model, Phys. Rev. D 76, 114015 (2007), arXiv:0706.3853 [hep-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Semay and B

    C. Semay and B. Silvestre-Brac, Diquonia and potential models, Z. Phys. C 61, 271 (1994)

    1994

  89. [97]

    Silvestre-Brac, Spectrum and static properties of heavy baryons, Few Body Syst

    B. Silvestre-Brac, Spectrum and static properties of heavy baryons, Few Body Syst. 20, 1 (1996)

    1996

  90. [98]

    De Rujula, H

    A. De Rujula, H. Georgi, and S. L. Glashow, Hadron Masses in a Gauge Theory, Physical Review D 12, 147 (1975)

    1975

  91. [99]

    J. F. Giron, R. F. Lebed, and C. T. Peterson, The Dy- namical Diquark Model: Fine Structure and Isospin, JHEP 01, 124, arXiv:1907.08546 [hep-ph]

    1907 arXiv

  92. [100]

    Hiyama, Y

    E. Hiyama, Y. Kino, and M. Kamimura, Gaussian ex- pansion method for few-body systems, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 51, 223 (2003)

    2003

  93. [101]

    Chilikin et al

    K. Chilikin et al. (Belle), Observation of an alternative χc0(2P ) candidate in e+e− → J/ψD ¯D, Phys. Rev. D 95, 112003 (2017), arXiv:1704.01872 [hep-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  94. [102]

    Aaij et al

    R. Aaij et al. (LHCb), Amplitude analysis of the B+ → D+D−K + decay, Phys. Rev. D 102, 112003 (2020), arXiv:2009.00026 [hep-ex]

    2020

  95. [103]

    Aubert et al

    B. Aubert et al. (BaBar), Observation of a broad struc- ture in the π+π−J/ψ mass spectrum around 4.26- GeV/c2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 142001 (2005), arXiv:hep- ex/0506081

    2005

  96. [104]

    Ablikim et al

    M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII), Precise measurement of the e+e− → π+π−J/ψ cross section at center-of-mass en- ergies from 3.77 to 4.60 GeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 092001 (2017), arXiv:1611.01317 [hep-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Ablikim et al

    M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII), Measurement of e+e− → π+π−ψ(3686) from 4.008 to 4.600˜GeV and observation of a charged structure in the π±ψ(3686) mass spectrum, Phys. Rev. D 96, 032004 (2017), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 99, 019903 (2019)], arXiv:1703.08787 [hep-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  98. [106]

    C. Z. Yuan et al. (Belle), Measurement of e+e→π+π−J/ψ cross-section via initial state radi- ation at Belle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 182004 (2007), arXiv:0707.2541 [hep-ex]

    2007 arXiv

  99. [107]

    Piotrowska, F

    M. Piotrowska, F. Giacosa, and P. Kovacs, Can the ψ(4040) explain the peak associated with Y (4008)?, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 98 (2019), arXiv:1810.03495 [hep- ph]

    2019 arXiv

  100. [108]

    Barnes, S

    T. Barnes, S. Godfrey, and E. S. Swanson, Higher char- monia, Phys. Rev. D 72, 054026 (2005), arXiv:hep- ph/0505002

    2005

  101. [109]

    Lin, J.-Y

    Y.-Y. Lin, J.-Y. Wang, and A. Zhang, Mass spectrum of fully charmed [cc][¯c¯c] tetraquarks, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 139, 707 (2024), arXiv:2404.08971 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.