Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 25 references

The Pattern of Exotic Hidden-Heavy Hadrons Revealed

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 Exotic hidden-heavy hadrons are bound states and resonances in QCD potentials that are repulsive at short range, cross a heavy-hadron-pair threshold at intermediate range, and approach that threshold from below at large range.

desk verdict A clear and honest illustration of the Braaten–Bruschini pattern, but the crossing assumption remains a conjecture. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.20821 v1 pith:47WWMGLC submitted 2025-07-28 hep-ph

Roberto Bruschini This is my paper
classification hep-ph
keywords exotichadronshidden-heavytetraquarksBorn-OppenheimerapproximationQCDpotentialsadjointheavy-hadron-pairthresholdsheavy-quarkspinsymmetryXYZstates
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 claims that the twenty-year puzzle of exotic hidden-heavy hadrons has a simple explanation: these states are bound states and resonances in Born-Oppenheimer potentials of QCD that are repulsive at short distances, cross below a heavy-hadron-pair threshold at intermediate distances, and approach that threshold from below at large distances. Because the potentials are repulsive at short range and flat at large range, all such states must lie close to a heavy-hadron-pair threshold; because only the lowest-lying adjoint hadrons can plausibly generate such a crossing, the number of predicted states is naturally limited. The claim matters because it turns a zoo of hundreds of phenomenological models into a single qualitative pattern rooted in QCD, and it identifies which thresholds can and cannot support exotic states.

What carries the argument

The central object is the set of Born-Oppenheimer potentials V(r) of QCD with a static triplet and antitriplet color source, labeled by quantum numbers Λεη such as Σ+g, Πu, and Σ-u. The key step is the smooth interpolation: at r → 0 these potentials approach color-Coulomb potentials offset by adjoint-hadron energies (an octet source gives a repulsive core κ8/r with κ8 = 0.037), while at large r they approach heavy-hadron-pair thresholds as the confining string breaks. The paper's core claim is that the potentials that bind exotic hadrons cross the threshold in between, and the model potential used for applications is piecewise: κ8/r + E + A r² for r < R, and B $e^{{-r/d}}$ for r > R, matched smoothly with relaxation length d = 0.5 fm and curvature parameters A taken from lattice parametrizations. This combination of a repulsive short-range core and an asymptotic plateau guarantees a finite number of bound states and resonances clustered near the threshold.

What would settle it

A lattice QCD calculation of the Σ+g and Πg potentials in the 1-- channel, or the Σ-u potential in the 0-+ channel, that shows the potential remaining above the lowest heavy-meson-pair threshold at all r with no crossing would refute the identification; equally, the discovery of a near-threshold exotic state in a channel whose adjoint hadron is not among the lowest would violate the predicted finiteness and selection rule.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper asserts that exotic hidden-heavy hadrons, including states such as χc1(3872), Zb(10610), and Zb(10650), are not arbitrary quark composites but bound states and resonances in a specific class of Born-Oppenheimer potentials of QCD. These potentials are repulsive at small r (they grow like a positive color-Coulomb potential κ8/r from an octet color source), cross below the energy of a heavy-meson pair at intermediate r, and saturate to that threshold from below at large r. This shape has three consequences: every such state must sit close to a heavy-hadron-pair threshold; only potentials starting from the lowest adjoint hadrons can plausibly cross, so the number of exotic states is finite and small; and the quantum numbers of the adjoint hadron determine which channels bind. The paper then applies the pattern with a matched model potential to compute the spin-splitting pattern of hidden-charm and hidden-bottom tetraquarks: χc1(3872) appears as the 1++ member of a heavy-quark-spin quartet, the Zb(10610) and Zb(10650) pair emerges as an equal-probability superposition of spin-singlet and spin-triplet states, and the near-threshold energies and the suppression of Zb(10650) → B* Bbar follow from first-order perturbation theory in the spin-splitting potential.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the actual QCD Born-Oppenheimer potentials for the 1-- and 0-+ adjoint meson channels really are repulsive at short distance and cross below the heavy-hadron-pair threshold before flattening; the paper infers this crossing from smoothness and the adjoint-hadron spectrum, but no lattice QCD or first-principles computation establishes it, and the short-distance region is explicitly stated to be difficult to access.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The masses of exotic hidden-heavy hadrons must lie close to a heavy-hadron-pair threshold, because their potentials are repulsive at small r and flat at large r.
  • Only the lowest-energy adjoint hadrons can generate potentials that cross below a heavy-hadron-pair threshold, so the spectrum of exotic states is finite and cannot explode with every possible channel.
  • The quantum numbers of the adjoint hadron determine which heavy-meson-pair channels can support bound states or resonances, giving a selection rule for future searches.
  • Within this pattern, χc1(3872) is the 1++ member of a heavy-quark-spin symmetry quartet, and the Zb(10610) and Zb(10650) states are equal-probability superpositions of spin-singlet and spin-triplet components, explaining the observed suppression of the Zb(10650) → B* Bbar decay.
  • The pattern motivates dedicated lattice QCD calculations of adjoint-hadron masses and of the associated Born-Oppenheimer potentials, which would turn the qualitative picture into quantitative predictions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The pattern implies a generic selection rule: near-threshold exotic states should appear only in channels whose adjoint hadron is among the lightest, so channels without a low-lying adjoint hadron should be empty; this is testable in future experimental searches for hidden-heavy pentaquarks and other exotica.
  • If the crossing is generic, the same potential shape should control near-threshold states in other sectors with a heavy quark-antiquark pair, including doubly heavy baryons and possibly exotic states with heavier light-quark content, so the pattern could unify several separate phenomenological spectra.
  • A quantitative lattice measurement of the heavy-hadron-pair potentials at intermediate r would provide a direct check: if the potential approaches the threshold monotonically from above in the 1-- or 0-+ channels, the central identification would fail, even if the low-lying energy levels happen to match.
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 proposes a Born-Oppenheimer explanation for the pattern of exotic hidden-heavy hadrons. It argues that these states arise as bound states and resonances in potentials that are repulsive at short range, cross below a heavy-hadron-pair threshold at intermediate distances, and approach that threshold from below at large distances. The author models the relevant potentials for the 1-- and 0-+ adjoint-meson channels, treats the adjoint-meson energies as adjustable parameters, and identifies chi_c1(3872) and the two Zb states with near-threshold bound states. The resulting heavy-quark spin symmetry multiplets and the suppression of the B*Bbar decay mode of T_bar b1(10650) are presented as consequences of the pattern.

Significance. If the central crossing hypothesis were established, the paper would offer an elegant and economical organizing principle for exotic hidden-heavy hadrons, with concrete heavy-quark spin symmetry multiplet predictions and a clear incentive for lattice QCD calculations of adjoint-hadron potentials. The manuscript is clearly written, candid about the absence of lattice results, and the decay-suppression argument for T_bar b1(10650) is a nice illustration of the approach. However, the central claim is at present supported only by a smoothness argument plus model potentials whose key parameters are tuned to make the states sit at threshold. The quantitative agreement with the observed masses is therefore not an independent verification, and the significance of the paper depends on future lattice input or a reframing of the proposal as a conjecture rather than a demonstrated pattern.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2.5] The central claim--that exotic hidden-heavy hadrons are bound states and resonances in potentials that cross below a heavy-hadron-pair threshold--is not established by the smoothness argument offered in this section. Smoothness of the static-source spectrum only requires that an adjoint-hadron potential connect continuously to a heavy-hadron-pair potential; the dashed curve in Figure 2, which approaches the threshold from above, is equally smooth and would produce no exotic states. The paper cites string breaking in the Sigma_g^+ channel (Ref. [20]) and adjoint-hadron spectra (Ref. [21]), but no lattice QCD result is presented showing that the relevant 1-- and 0-+ adjoint-meson potentials cross below the heavy-meson-pair thresholds. Since Sections 2.3 and 2.4 explicitly state that the small-r behavior of the heavy-hadron-pair potentials is difficult to access and that these adjoint-meson potentials have not been computed, the crossing is an assumption. Using the existence of exotics to select the crossing branch and then explaining exotics by that branch is circular as evidence for the pattern.
  2. [Sections 3.2 and 3.3] The near-threshold proximity of chi_c1(3872) and the Zb states is put in by construction. The adjoint-meson energies E_{JPC}^{(I)} are declared adjustable parameters in Eq. (2); the paper then computes the 'critical' energy at which the ground state sits exactly at threshold and identifies the physical adjoint-meson energy with that critical value. Consequently the multiplet energies in Eqs. (4) and (5) are threshold plus spin splittings with Delta taken from the experimental D*/D and B*/B splittings. The agreement with observed masses therefore provides no independent confirmation of the central claim. To make this point load-bearing rather than illustrative, the critical energies would need to be compared with an independent determination, for example from lattice QCD adjoint-hadron masses.
  3. [Section 3.1, Eq. (2)] The model transfers the A coefficients from parametrizations of pure SU(3) gauge theory potentials (Ref. [22]) to B-O potentials associated with 1-- and 0-+ adjoint mesons in QCD with light quarks. This transfer is not self-evident: at small r the relevant degrees of freedom are adjoint mesons, not gluelumps (Section 2.4), and the paper gives no argument or error estimate for neglecting the light-quark dependence of the quadratic small-r term. Because the numerical values of the critical energies and the resulting multiplet pattern depend on these coefficients, the quantitative claims rest on an unvalidated model assumption.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.2] The text says the spin splittings are calculated using 'the spin-splitting potential V_SS from Equation (2)', but V_SS is defined in Eq. (3); the cross-reference should be corrected.
  2. [References] Reference [15] is incomplete: 'JHEP 08 219' should include the year in standard form, e.g. JHEP 08 (2023) 219.
  3. [Section 2.1] There are minor typographical issues, including 'matrix matrix' and missing spaces in 'Reference[15]andreferencestherein', which should be cleaned up.
  4. [Section 2.3] The notation '3-meson' is used without definition; since it denotes a static color-triplet source with a light quark, it should be defined at first use.

Circularity Check

3 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Near-threshold positions are installed by hand: adjoint-meson energies are tuned to critical values, so the claimed explanation of proximity is built into the model rather than derived.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 3.2 (Isospin-0 Tetraquarks), after Eq. (4)]
    "We identify the 1−− adjoint-meson energy with its critical energy, so the energy of the multiplet is the spin-weighted average D(∗)D¯(∗) threshold, which we take as 0."

    In the model potential of Eq. (2), the adjoint-meson energy E_JPC is explicitly introduced as an adjustable parameter. Setting it to the critical value forces the Schrödinger ground state to lie exactly at the heavy-meson-pair threshold. The paper then presents the resulting proximity of chi_c1(3872) to the D(*)Dbar(*) threshold as part of the explanation of the pattern. That proximity is an input chosen to make the state sit at threshold, not a prediction; only the spin splittings in Eq. (4) are computed after this tuning, with Delta taken from the experimental D*-D mass splitting.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Section 3.3 (Isospin-1 Tetraquarks), after Eq. (5)]
    "We identify the 1−− and 0−+ adjoint-meson energies with their critical energies, so the two multiplets are degenerate and their energy is the spin-weighted average B(∗)B¯(∗) threshold, which we take as 0."

    The same construction is repeated for the Zb system: the 1−− and 0−+ adjoint-meson energies are set to the critical values computed earlier (−95 MeV and −107 MeV) so that the ground states sit exactly at the B(*)Bbar(*) threshold. The claimed explanation that the Zb states are near their thresholds therefore reduces to the parameter choice in Eq. (2), not to a derivation from QCD or from independently computed adjoint-meson masses. The subsequent spin-splitting pattern in Eq. (5) is nontrivial but does not establish the near-threshold placement.

1 more flagged steps
  1. self definitional [Section 2.5 (Potentials for Exotic Hidden-Heavy Hadrons)]
    "We identify the exotic hidden-heavy hadrons with bound states and resonances in potentials that are repulsive at small r, cross a heavy-hadron–pair threshold at intermediate r, and approach that threshold at large r. This identification provides a qualitative explanation of the energies and the number of exotic hidden-heavy hadrons. Since their potentials are repulsive at small r and constant at large r, the energies of the exotic hidden-heavy hadrons must necessarily lie close to a heavy-hadron–pair threshold."

    The central 'explanation' of proximity to heavy-hadron-pair thresholds is a logical consequence of the defining property assigned to the potentials: if the potentials are defined to cross below a threshold and approach it from below, then bound states in them must sit near that threshold. No independent evidence is supplied that the relevant 1−− and 0−+ adjoint-meson potentials actually cross below threshold; Sections 2.3–2.4 state that small-r behavior is difficult to access and that only the r→0 limit is constrained by adjoint hadrons. Thus the pattern is an ansatz whose main observable consequence is already contained in the ansatz.

full rationale

The paper is a proceedings contribution that explicitly says it is illustrating the solution of Braaten and Bruschini [14]; self-citation alone is therefore not a circularity, and the cited lattice and parametrization results [20,22] are external inputs rather than circular support. The Section 2.5 pattern is a qualitative conjecture based on smoothness, and the paper concedes in Sections 2.3–2.4 that the relevant small-r potentials are not yet computed; that is an evidential gap, not itself a circular reduction. The concrete circularity is in Section 3: the adjoint-meson energies E_JPC in the model potential Eq. (2) are adjustable, and for chi_c1(3872) and the Zb states they are set to the critical values that put the ground states exactly at threshold. The subsequent claim that these states are near their heavy-meson-pair thresholds is therefore an input of the calculation, not a prediction derived from QCD. The spin-splitting predictions in Eqs. (4)–(5) are non-circular once E_JPC and Delta are given, but they do not establish the central near-threshold pattern. Because the central application reduces to a tuned parameter, the score is 6.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model rests on a chain of assumptions: adiabatic separation, smoothness of the potentials, the adjoint-hadron spectrum, and the use of pure SU(3) parametrizations in full QCD. No new entities are introduced. Free parameters anchor the quantitative spectrum.

free parameters (4)
  • Adjoint-meson energies E_JPC^(I) = isospin-0 1--: -157 MeV; isospin-1 1--: -95 MeV; isospin-1 0-+: -107 MeV
    Treated as adjustable parameters in Eq. (2) and set to the critical values that place the ground state exactly at threshold, so the calculated spectrum is anchored to the experimental states rather than predicted independently.
  • A coefficients for Sigma_g^+, Pi_g, Sigma_u^- = 0.88, 9.44, 5.44 fm^-3
    Taken from the pure SU(3) parametrizations of Reference [22] and applied to QCD with light quarks; these fitted coefficients control the short-range shape of the model potentials.
  • Relaxation length d = 0.5 fm
    Chosen by hand for the large-r exponential tail in Eq. (2); no extraction from data or lattice is provided.
  • Spin-splitting parameter Delta = 141 MeV (charm), 45 MeV (bottom)
    Taken from the experimental D*/D and B*/B mass splittings and used in Eq. (3); the multiplet splittings are therefore inputs rather than predictions.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Born-Oppenheimer adiabatic separation between the heavy quark-antiquark pair and light QCD fields is valid for hidden-heavy hadrons.
    The two-step procedure in Section 2.1 assumes m_Q >> Lambda_QCD and neglects strong nonadiabatic coupling between B-O potentials.
  • domain assumption The B-O potentials are smooth functions of r and must connect adjoint-hadron potentials at small r to heavy-hadron-pair potentials at large r.
    Section 2.5 uses this smoothness to argue that only two qualitative possibilities exist; no explicit QCD calculation demonstrates the actual crossing for the relevant channels.
  • domain assumption The lowest adjoint hadrons in QCD with light quarks include adjoint mesons with J^PC = 1-- and 0-+ corresponding to repulsive Sigma_g^+, Pi_g, and Sigma_u^- potentials.
    Taken from the UKQCD lattice result [21]; the paper relies on this spectrum to select the potentials that may support exotic states.
  • ad hoc to paper The A coefficients parametrizing the pure SU(3) B-O potentials from Reference [22] can be used for QCD with light quarks.
    Section 3.1 applies pure SU(3) parametrizations to potentials that in full QCD undergo string breaking and light-quark effects, without justification.
  • domain assumption Leading-order heavy-quark spin symmetry holds, with spin splittings treated as first-order perturbations via Eq. (3).
    Section 3.1 uses HQSS to group states into multiplets and first-order perturbation theory to compute splittings; higher-order corrections are neglected.
  • domain assumption The relevant channels can be treated with diagonal model potentials without nonadiabatic couplings to decay channels.
    Equation (1) is multichannel in principle, but the model calculations use single-channel or weakly mixed potentials; no coupled-channel dynamics is included.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Pattern of Exotic Hidden-Heavy Hadrons Revealed." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/47WWMGLC

@misc{pith2026250720821,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Pattern of Exotic Hidden-Heavy Hadrons Revealed},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/47WWMGLC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.20821}
}
read the original abstract

For more than twenty years, theory has failed to explain the pattern of the exotic heavy hadrons. We illustrate a simple solution to this longstanding puzzle using the Born-Oppenheimer approximation for QCD. Exotic hidden-heavy hadrons are bound states and resonances in potentials that are repulsive at short range and cross a heavy-hadron--pair threshold before approaching it. This explains the proximity of the exotic hidden-heavy hadrons to heavy-hadron--pair thresholds, identifies the thresholds that support bound states or resonances, and prevents an explosion in the number of predicted states. We also discuss the fine tunings of QCD that are responsible for the remarkable properties of some of the exotic hidden-heavy mesons.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.20821 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Qualitative behavior of the lowest B-O potentials Σ + 𝑔 , Π𝑢, and Σ − 𝑢 in pure SU(3) gauge theory (left) and the two lowest Σ + 𝑔 B-O potentials in QCD with light quarks (right). of the two lowest Σ + 𝑔 B-O potentials in QCD with light quarks is displayed in the right panel of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. An adjoint-hadron potential can approach a heavy-hadron–pair potential either by decreasing monotonically (dashed curve) or by crossing the threshold before approaching it (solid curve). In the latter case, it may support bound states and resonances (thin horizontal lines). The simplest possibility is that the potential approaches the threshold from above, in which case it would not support bound states. Another sim… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

25 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages

  1. [14]

    Braaten and R

    E. Braaten and R. Bruschini,Exotic hidden-heavy hadrons and where to find them, Phys. Lett. B863 (2025) 139386 [2409.08002]

    arXiv 2025

  2. [20]

    SESAMcollaboration,Observation of string breaking in QCD, Phys. Rev. D71(2005) 114513 [hep-lat/0505012]

    arXiv 2005

  3. [21]

    UKQCDcollaboration, Hadrons with a heavy color adjoint particle,Phys. Rev. D59(1999) 094509 [hep-lat/9811010]

    arXiv 1999

  4. [22]

    Born-Oppenheimer Potentials for SU(3) Gauge Theory

    F. Alasiri, E. Braaten and A. Mohapatra, “Born-Oppenheimer Potentials for SU(3) Gauge Theory.” 6, 2024

    work page 2024

  5. [1]

    Ali, J.S

    A. Ali, J.S. Lange and S. Stone,Exotics: Heavy pentaquarks and tetraquarks, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.97(2017) 123 [1706.00610]

    arXiv 2017

  6. [2]

    Esposito, A

    A. Esposito, A. Pilloni and A. Polosa,Multiquark resonances, Phys. Rep.668(2017) 1 [1611.07920]

    arXiv 2017

  7. [3]

    Lebed, R.E

    R.F. Lebed, R.E. Mitchell and E.S. Swanson,Heavy-quark QCD exotica,Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 93(2017) 143 [1610.04528]

    arXiv 2017

  8. [4]

    F.-K. Guo, C. Hanhart, U.-G. Meißner, Q. Wang, Q. Zhao and B.-S. Zou,Hadronic molecules,Rev. Mod. Phys.90(2018) 015004 [1705.00141]

    arXiv 2018

Show all 25 references
  1. [5]

    Karliner, J.L

    M. Karliner, J.L. Rosner and T. Skwarnicki,Multiquark states,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.68 (2018) 17 [1711.10626]

    2018 arXiv

  2. [6]

    Olsen, T

    S.L. Olsen, T. Skwarnicki and D. Zieminska,Nonstandard heavy mesons and baryons: Experimental evidence,Rev. Mod. Phys.90(2018) 015003 [1708.04012]

    2018 arXiv

  3. [7]

    Brambilla, S

    N. Brambilla, S. Eidelman, C. Hanhart, A. Nefediev, C.-P. Shen, C.E. Thomas et al.,The 𝑋𝑌𝑍 states: Experimental and theoretical status and perspectives,Phys. Rep.873 (2020) 1 [1907.07583]

    2020 arXiv

  4. [8]

    H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, Y.-R. Liu and S.-L. Zhu,An updated review of the new hadron states, Rept. Prog. Phys.86(2023) 026201 [2204.02649]

    2023 arXiv

  5. [9]

    Berwein, N

    M. Berwein, N. Brambilla, J. Tarrús Castellà and A. Vairo,Quarkonium Hybrids with Nonrelativistic Effective Field Theories,Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 114019 [1510.04299]

    2015 arXiv

  6. [10]

    Oncala and J

    R. Oncala and J. Soto,Heavy Quarkonium Hybrids: Spectrum, Decay and Mixing, Phys. Rev. D96(2017) 014004 [1702.03900]

    2017 arXiv

  7. [11]

    Brambilla, G

    N. Brambilla, G. Krein, J. Tarrús Castellà and A. Vairo,Born-Oppenheimer approximation in an effective field theory language,Phys. Rev. D97 (2018) 016016 [1707.09647]

    2018 arXiv

  8. [12]

    Soto and J

    J. Soto and J. Tarrús Castellà,Nonrelativistic effective field theory for heavy exotic hadrons, Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 014012 [2005.00552]

    2020 arXiv

  9. [13]

    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 (2024) 094040 [2408.04719]

    2024 arXiv

  10. [15]

    Bruschini,Heavy-quark spin symmetry breaking in the Born-Oppenheimer approximation,JHEP 08 219 [2303.17533]

    R. Bruschini,Heavy-quark spin symmetry breaking in the Born-Oppenheimer approximation,JHEP 08 219 [2303.17533]. 8 The Pattern of Exotic Hidden-Heavy Hadrons Revealed Roberto Bruschini

    arXiv

  11. [16]

    Stack,The Heavy Quark Potential in SU(3) Lattice Gauge Theory, Phys

    J.D. Stack,The Heavy Quark Potential in SU(3) Lattice Gauge Theory, Phys. Rev. D29 (1984) 1213

    1984

  12. [17]

    K.J. Juge, J. Kuti and C.J. Morningstar,Ab initio study of hybrid¯𝑏𝑔𝑏 mesons,Phys. Rev. Lett. 82(1999) 4400 [hep-ph/9902336]

    1999 arXiv

  13. [18]

    K.J. Juge, J. Kuti and C. Morningstar,Fine structure of the QCD string spectrum,Phys. Rev. Lett. 90(2003) 161601 [hep-lat/0207004]

    2003 arXiv

  14. [19]

    Brambilla, A

    N. Brambilla, A. Pineda, J. Soto and A. Vairo,Potential NRQCD: An Effective theory for heavy quarkonium, Nucl. Phys. B566 (2000) 275 [hep-ph/9907240]

    2000 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Bellecollaboration, Observation of a Narrow Charmoniumlike State in Exclusive 𝐵±→𝐾±𝜋+𝜋−𝐽/𝜓 Decays, Phys. Rev. Lett.91(2003) 262001 [hep-ex/0309032]

    2003 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Bellecollaboration, Observation of two charged bottomonium-like resonances inΥ(5𝑆) decays, Phys. Rev. Lett.108 (2012) 122001 [1110.2251]

    2012 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Voloshin,Light Quark Spin Symmetry in𝑍𝑏 Resonances?,Phys

    M.B. Voloshin,Light Quark Spin Symmetry in𝑍𝑏 Resonances?,Phys. Rev. D93 (2016) 074011 [1601.02540]. 9

    2016 arXiv

Pith tools

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