Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 4 cited by

10-sigma signal reveals D_s0(2317)+ radiative decay

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-04 07:00 UTC pith:EHZND3TA

load-bearing objection First observation is solid at 10σ; but the quoted R may be missing the B(D*+→D_s+γ) factor, so the central number needs a clarification or a correction. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2510.27174 v2 pith:EHZND3TA submitted 2025-10-31 hep-ex

Observation of the radiative decay D_s (2317)^+ to D_s^* γ

Belle II Collaboration: M. Abumusabh , I. Adachi , L. Aggarwal , H. Ahmed , Y. Ahn , H. Aihara , N. Akopov , S. Alghamdi
show 361 more authors
M. Alhakami A. Aloisio N. Althubiti K. Amos N. Anh Ky C. Antonioli D. M. Asner H. Atmacan T. Aushev R. Ayad V. Babu N. K. Baghel S. Bahinipati P. Bambade Sw. Banerjee M. Barrett M. Bartl J. Baudot A. Beaubien J. Becker J. V. Bennett F. U. Bernlochner V. Bertacchi M. Bertemes E. Bertholet M. Bessner S. Bettarini F. Bianchi T. Bilka D. Biswas A. Bobrov D. Bodrov A. Bondar G. Bonvicini J. Borah A. Boschetti A. Bozek M. Bra\v{c}ko P. Branchini R. A. Briere T. E. Browder A. Budano S. Bussino Q. Campagna M. Campajola G. Casarosa C. Cecchi P. Chang P. Cheema L. Chen B. G. Cheon C. Cheshta H. Chetri K. Chilikin K. Chirapatpimol H.-E. Cho K. Cho S.-J. Cho S.-K. Choi S. Choudhury S. Chutia J. A. Colorado-Caicedo I. Consigny L. Corona J. X. Cui E. De La Cruz-Burelo S. A. De La Motte G. De Nardo G. De Pietro R. de Sangro M. Destefanis S. Dey A. Di Canto Z. Dole\v{z}al I. Dom\'inguez Jim\'enez T. V. Dong X. Dong M. Dorigo G. Dujany P. Ecker J. Eppelt R. Farkas P. Feichtinger T. Ferber T. Fillinger C. Finck G. Finocchiaro F. Forti B. G. Fulsom A. Gabrielli E. Ganiev M. Garcia-Hernandez R. Garg G. Gaudino V. Gaur V. Gautam A. Gaz A. Gellrich G. Ghevondyan D. Ghosh H. Ghumaryan R. Giordano A. Giri P. Gironella Gironell A. Glazov B. Gobbo R. Godang O. Gogota P. Goldenzweig W. Gradl E. Graziani D. Greenwald K. Gudkova I. Haide Y. Han H. Hayashii S. Hazra C. Hearty M. T. Hedges G. Heine I. Heredia de la Cruz T. Higuchi M. Hoek M. Hohmann R. Hoppe P. Horak X. T. Hou C.-L. Hsu A. Huang T. Humair T. Iijima N. Ipsita A. Ishikawa R. Itoh M. Iwasaki D. Jacobi W. W. Jacobs E.-J. Jang Q. P. Ji S. Jia Y. Jin A. Johnson J. Kandra K. H. Kang S. Kang G. Karyan F. Keil C. Kiesling D. Y. Kim J.-Y. Kim K.-H. Kim H. Kindo K. Kinoshita P. Kody\v{s} T. Koga S. Kohani A. Korobov S. Korpar E. Kovalenko R. Kowalewski P. Kri\v{z}an P. Krokovny T. Kuhr D. Kumar K. Kumara T. Kunigo A. Kuzmin Y.-J. Kwon S. Lacaprara T. Lam J. S. Lange T. S. Lau M. Laurenza R. Leboucher F. R. Le Diberder H. Lee M. J. Lee C. Lemettais P. Leo P. M. Lewis C. Li H.-J. Li L. K. Li Q. M. Li S. X. Li W. Z. Li Y. Li Y. B. Li Y. P. Liao J. Libby J. Lin V. Lisovskyi M. H. Liu Q. Y. Liu Z. Q. Liu D. Liventsev S. Longo A. Lozar T. Lueck C. Lyu J. L. Ma Y. Ma M. Maggiora S. P. Maharana R. Maiti G. Mancinelli R. Manfredi M. Mantovano D. Marcantonio M. Marfoli C. Marinas C. Martellini A. Martens T. Martinov L. Massaccesi M. Masuda D. Matvienko M. Maushart J. A. McKenna Z. Mediankin Gruberov\'a R. Mehta F. Meier D. Meleshko M. Merola C. Miller M. Mirra H. Miyake R. Mizuk G. B. Mohanty S. Moneta H.-G. Moser I. Nakamura M. Nakao M. Naruki Z. Natkaniec A. Natochii M. Nayak S. Nishida R. Nomaru S. Ogawa H. Ono F. Otani G. Pakhlova A. Panta S. Pardi K. Parham J. Park S.-H. Park A. Passeri S. Patra S. Paul T. K. Pedlar R. Pestotnik M. Piccolo L. E. Piilonen P. L. M. Podesta-Lerma T. Podobnik C. Praz S. Prell M. T. Prim S. Privalov H. Purwar P. Rados S. Raiz K. Ravindran J. U. Rehman M. Reif S. Reiter L. Reuter D. Ricalde Herrmann I. Ripp-Baudot G. Rizzo S. H. Robertson J. M. Roney A. Rostomyan S. Saha L. Salutari D. A. Sanders L. Santelj C. Santos V. Savinov B. Scavino S. Schneider K. Schoenning C. Schwanda Y. Seino K. Senyo J. Serrano C. Sfienti W. Shan G. Sharma C. P. Shen X. D. Shi T. Shillington J.-G. Shiu D. Shtol B. Shwartz A. Sibidanov F. Simon J. Skorupa R. J. Sobie M. Sobotzik A. Soffer A. Sokolov E. Solovieva S. Spataro K. \v{S}penko B. Spruck M. Stari\v{c} P. Stavroulakis R. Stroili M. Sumihama S. S. Tang K. Tanida F. Tenchini F. Testa A. Thaller T. Tien Manh O. Tittel R. Tiwary E. Torassa K. Trabelsi F. F. Trantou I. Ueda K. Unger Y. Unno K. Uno S. Uno P. Urquijo Y. Ushiroda S. E. Vahsen R. van Tonder K. E. Varvell M. Veronesi V. S. Vismaya L. Vitale V. Vobbilisetti R. Volpe M. Wakai S. Wallner M.-Z. Wang A. Warburton M. Watanabe S. Watanuki C. Wessel E. Won X. P. Xu B. D. Yabsley W. Yan J. Yelton K. Yi J. H. Yin K. Yoshihara J. Yuan Y. Yusa L. Zani M. Zeyrek J. S. Zhou Q. D. Zhou L. Zhu R. \v{Z}leb\v{c}\'ik
This is my paper
classification hep-ex
keywords D_s0(2317)+radiative decaybranching fraction ratiocharmed mesonsexotic hadronsmolecular statequark-antiquark statee+e− collider
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper reports the first observation of the radiative decay of the charmed-strange meson D_s0(2317)+ into a D_s*+ meson and a photon. The signal is seen in continuum e+e−→cc̄ data with a significance above 10 standard deviations. The branching-fraction ratio to the known D_s+π0 mode is measured as 7.14±0.70±0.23%. Because the D_s0(2317)+ sits below the DK threshold and its internal quark structure is debated, this ratio is a sensitive discriminator between a conventional quark-antiquark state and a loose molecule. The value is higher than molecular-model predictions and lower than some quark-model estimates, pointing toward a mixed or a specific quark-model interpretation.

Core claim

The central claim is that the radiative decay D_s0(2317)+ → D_s*+γ exists and occurs at a rate (7.14±0.70±0.23)% of the hadronic D_s+π0 decay. The paper establishes this by reconstructing D_s+ → K+K−π+, combining with a photon to form D_s*+, then adding another photon to form the D_s0(2317)+ candidate, and fitting the M(D_s*+γ) spectrum in a blind analysis of two data samples. The simultaneous fit yields signal yields of about 712 and 387 events in the two experiments, with a combined significance of 10.1σ, treating the systematic uncertainty as a Gaussian smearing. This is the first quantitative measurement of this mode, moving the field from upper limits to a non-zero branching fraction.

What carries the argument

The analysis is carried by the ratio R = B(D_s0(2317)+ → D_s*+γ)/B(D_s0(2317)+ → D_s+π0), extracted from a simultaneous unbinned extended maximum-likelihood fit to the D_s*+γ invariant-mass spectra from the two experiments. The detection efficiencies are obtained from Monte Carlo samples that are reweighted by the measured xp (reduced-momentum) distribution of the reference hadronic channel, and the small 'broken-signal' peaking background—a real D_s+ paired with a random photon—is fixed from simulation at 7.5% (9.3%) of the signal in the two samples.

Load-bearing premise

The result rests on the Monte Carlo modeling of the signal detection efficiency—specifically the reweighting of the signal simulation by the xp distribution measured in the D_s+π0 channel—and on the fixed fraction of 'broken-signal' background (a real D_s+ combined with a random photon) taken from simulation; if either is biased, the central ratio shifts, though the 10σ signal would likely persist.

What would settle it

Measure the same ratio using the alternative decay D_s*+ → D_s+π0 instead of D_s*+ → D_s+γ to reconstruct the D_s*+. Because the two D_s*+ decay modes have very different photon energies, a consistent ratio would validate the photon-efficiency corrections; a large discrepancy would indicate the reweighting or broken-signal modeling is wrong. Alternatively, a future dataset that measures the ratio with comparable precision and finds a value outside 7.14% ± systematic uncertainties would falsify the central claim.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The measured ratio of about 7% rules out the simplest molecular-only explanations, which predict 0.5–4.25%, as the sole nature of D_s0(2317)+.
  • It also disfavors the larger pure-quark-model expectation above 8.1% from some models, but agrees with light-front and chiral quark model predictions for a c̄s state.
  • The measurement gives a concrete target for mixed c̄s-molecular models to match, potentially pinning the admixture.
  • It demonstrates that rare radiative modes of the D_s0(2317)+ can be observed, opening the same technique for D_s1(2460)+ radiative decays.
  • As a first measurement, it provides a normalization point for theoretical calculations of radiative widths of exotic mesons.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the ratio is confirmed, it would imply the radiative width of D_s0(2317)+ is substantial, which could be cross-checked by measuring the absolute width once the D_s+π0 branching fraction becomes known.
  • A natural extension is to measure the same ratio using the D_s*+ → D_s+π0 decay chain instead of the photon chain; agreement would validate the efficiency corrections for low-energy photons.
  • The xp-reweighting technique could become a template for branching-fraction-ratio measurements in other charm spectra where signal Monte Carlo is limited.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports the first observation of the radiative decay D_s0(2317)+ -> D_s*+ gamma using Belle (980.4 fb^-1) and Belle II (427.9 fb^-1) data. A blinded simultaneous unbinned extended maximum-likelihood fit to the M(D_s*+ gamma) spectra yields a signal significance of 10.1 sigma and a branching-fraction ratio R = B(D_s0(2317)+ -> D_s*+ gamma)/B(D_s0(2317)+ -> D_s+ pi0) = [7.14 +/- 0.70(stat.) +/- 0.23(syst.)]%. Separate fits to each dataset are consistent, and the result is compared with theoretical predictions for molecular and quark-antiquark interpretations of the D_s0(2317)+.

Significance. If the quoted ratio is correct, this is the first quantitative measurement of this radiative transition and a new experimental constraint on the internal structure of the D_s0(2317)+. The analysis is blinded, uses MC-validated fit models, and the existence of the decay at high significance is not in doubt. However, the central branching-fraction ratio and the comparison in Fig. 3 depend on a normalization detail concerning the D_s*+ -> D_s+ gamma decay that the manuscript does not currently document unambiguously. The observation claim is robust, but the headline number needs clarification or correction.

major comments (2)
  1. [Data and simulated MC samples; simultaneous fit to M(D_s*+ gamma)] The extraction formula near Fig. 2 sets N_exp(D_s*+ gamma) = R N^fit_exp(D_s+ pi0) e_exp(D_s*+ gamma)/e_exp(D_s+ pi0), with R defined as B(D_s0->D_s*gamma)/B(D_s0->D_s pi0). The MC description says the D_s*+ -> D_s+ gamma decay is simulated as a P-wave decay, but no factor for the physical branching fraction B(D_s*+ -> D_s+ gamma) appears anywhere, including in the systematic table. If the signal MC forces this decay, then e_exp(D_s*+gamma) is conditional on that forced chain and the fitted R is actually B(D_s0->D_s*gamma)*B(D_s*->D_s gamma)/B(D_s0->D_s pi0). Using PDG B(D_s*->D_s gamma) ~93.5%, the true ratio would be 7.14%/0.935 ~7.64%, a ~6.5% shift, much larger than the quoted 3.2% total systematic. The authors must either demonstrate that their MC includes the physical D_s* branching fraction (so that e_exp is defined per generated D_s0->D_s*gamma decay including the D_s* decay prob
  2. [Fit to M(D_s+ pi0); simultaneous fit] The reference-channel yields are quoted as N^fit_exp(D_s+ pi0) = 10820 +/- 230 (Belle) and 6108 +/- 163 (Belle II). These statistical uncertainties are not propagated into the quoted statistical uncertainty on R: the simultaneous fit fixes N^fit_exp(D_s+ pi0) to their point estimates, and the pseudo-experiments in the systematic section fluctuate the reference yields only by their systematic uncertainties. The 2-3% statistical uncertainties of the reference yields should be included, e.g., as Gaussian-constrained nuisance parameters or added in quadrature to the statistical error. This raises sigma_stat(R) from 0.70 to about 0.71; the effect is numerically small but the reported error budget is formally incomplete.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract vs. body and Fig. 3] The central value is quoted as 7.13% in the abstract, 7.14% in the body, and 7.13% in the Fig. 3 caption. Please unify.
  2. [Fig. 3 caption] The extracted caption text 'Exp: 0.74+-7.13' appears to be a formatting error; it should read 'Exp: 7.13 +/- 0.74'.
  3. [General] There is a typo 'backgrond' in the paragraph following Fig. 1.
  4. [Table I] The systematic table lists 'xp reweighting' and 'MC sample size' with entries only in one column. Please clarify whether these uncertainties apply to both channels or only to the D_s* gamma channel; the quadrature sum suggests the latter.
  5. [Data and simulated MC samples] The signal MC uses a phase-space model for D_s0(2317)+ -> D_s*+ gamma. If the true radiative amplitude has a non-isotropic angular distribution, the detection efficiency could be biased. Please justify this modeling choice or assign a corresponding systematic uncertainty.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: R is a free fit parameter and the efficiencies are calibrated without imposing the target ratio.

full rationale

This is an experimental measurement paper. The central quantity R is not derived from an equation that assumes R; it is a free parameter of a simultaneous unbinned extended maximum-likelihood fit to the M(D_s*+gamma) spectra. The relation N_exp(D_s*+gamma) = R N^fit_exp(D_s+pi0) epsilon_exp(D_s*+gamma)/epsilon_exp(D_s+pi0) only converts fitted yields into a branching-fraction ratio via MC-derived efficiencies; it does not define R in terms of itself. The signal efficiencies are obtained from MC reweighted by the xp distribution measured in the reference D_s+pi0 channel, without imposing the target branching-fraction ratio. The broken-signal background fractions (7.5% for Belle, 9.3% for Belle II) are fixed from MC as background components, not as the extracted signal; they affect the fit but do not make the observation tautological. The significance is computed from the likelihood ratio with and without the signal component, so the observation itself is not forced by the assumption. No self-citation is load-bearing, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work, and no known result is merely renamed. The reviewer-flagged concern about a possible missing B(D_s*+ -> D_s+ gamma) correction would, if valid, be a normalization or correctness issue external to circularity: it concerns whether the MC efficiency properly includes the physical sub-decay branching fraction, not whether the derivation reduces to its inputs. Therefore no circular step is identified and the score is 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim is an experimental measurement, so the ledger contains no theory parameters or invented entities. The assumptions listed are the detector/MC modeling and background-shape assumptions that the extracted R depends on; they are standard in B-factory analyses and are each covered by systematic uncertainties.

axioms (4)
  • domain assumption GEANT3/GEANT4 detector simulation correctly models Belle/Belle II response, especially low-energy photon reconstruction.
    Used to define signal PDFs, efficiencies, and broken-signal fraction; if wrong, R and significance shift. See 'Data and simulated MC samples' section.
  • domain assumption The xp distribution measured in the D_s0→D_sπ0 reference channel is representative of D_s0 production kinematics for the radiative signal, so reweighting phase-space MC with it removes efficiency bias.
    Signal MC is corrected with a reweighting based on the reference-channel xp distribution; if the radiative decay kinematics differ, the efficiency ratio is biased. See 'Data and simulated MC samples'.
  • domain assumption The 'broken signal' background yield ratio fixed from MC (7.5% Belle, 9.3% Belle II) is accurate.
    This component sits under the signal peak; mis-modeling shifts R. The paper assigns a 0.7% systematic for this source.
  • domain assumption There are no unmodeled peaking backgrounds in the M(D_s*+γ) signal region beyond those explicitly considered.
    If an additional peaking background exists, the signal yield and R would be biased. The paper bases this on MC studies and D_s*+ sideband checks.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 16678 in / 13124 out tokens · 137419 ms · 2026-08-04T07:00:52.928676+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We observe the radiative decay $D^{*}_{s0}(2317)^{+} \to D_{s}^{*+} \gamma$ for the first time, with a significance exceeding $10$ standard deviations. The signal is found in the continuum $e^+ e^- \to c\bar{c}$ process with the combined data samples of 980.4~$\rm fb^{-1}$ and 427.9~$\rm fb^{-1}$ collected by the Belle and Belle~II detectors operating at the KEKB and SuperKEKB asymmetric-energy $e^+e^-$ colliders, respectively. The branching fraction ratio ${\cal B}(D^{*}_{s0}(2317)^{+} \to D_{s}^{*+} \gamma)/{\cal B}(D^{*}_{s0}(2317)^{+} \to D_{s}^{+} \pi^{0})$ is measured to be $[7.13 \pm 0.70({\rm stat.}) \pm 0.23({\rm syst.})]\%$. This result provides significant new experimental input for the determination of the quark structure of the $D^{*}_{s0}(2317)^{+}$, which remains unknown.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.27174 by A. Aloisio, A. Beaubien, A. Bobrov, A. Bondar, A. Boschetti, A. Bozek, A. Budano, A. Di Canto, A. Gabrielli, A. Gaz, A. Gellrich, A. Giri, A. Glazov, A. Huang, A. Ishikawa, A. Johnson, A. Korobov, A. Kuzmin, A. Lozar, A. Martens, A. Natochii, A. Panta, A. Passeri, A. Rostomyan, A. Sibidanov, A. Soffer, A. Sokolov, A. Thaller, A. Warburton, B. D. Yabsley, Belle II Collaboration: M. Abumusabh, B. G. Cheon, B. G. Fulsom, B. Gobbo, B. Scavino, B. Shwartz, B. Spruck, C. Antonioli, C. Cecchi, C. Cheshta, C. Finck, C. Hearty, C. Kiesling, C. Lemettais, C.-L. Hsu, C. Li, C. Lyu, C. Marinas, C. Martellini, C. Miller, C. Praz, C. P. Shen, C. Santos, C. Schwanda, C. Sfienti, C. Wessel, D. A. Sanders, D. Biswas, D. Bodrov, D. Ghosh, D. Greenwald, D. Jacobi, D. Kumar, D. Liventsev, D. Marcantonio, D. M. Asner, D. Matvienko, D. Meleshko, D. Ricalde Herrmann, D. Shtol, D. Y. Kim, E. Bertholet, E. De La Cruz-Burelo, E. Ganiev, E. Graziani, E.-J. Jang, E. Kovalenko, E. Solovieva, E. Torassa, E. Won, F. Bianchi, F. Forti, F. F. Trantou, F. Keil, F. Meier, F. Otani, F. R. Le Diberder, F. Simon, F. Tenchini, F. Testa, F. U. Bernlochner, G. B. Mohanty, G. Bonvicini, G. Casarosa, G. De Nardo, G. De Pietro, G. Dujany, G. Finocchiaro, G. Gaudino, G. Ghevondyan, G. Heine, G. Karyan, G. Mancinelli, G. Pakhlova, G. Rizzo, G. Sharma, H. Ahmed, H. Aihara, H. Atmacan, H. Chetri, H.-E. Cho, H. Ghumaryan, H.-G. Moser, H. Hayashii, H.-J. Li, H. Kindo, H. Lee, H. Miyake, H. Ono, H. Purwar, I. Adachi, I. Consigny, I. Dom\'inguez Jim\'enez, I. Haide, I. Heredia de la Cruz, I. Nakamura, I. Ripp-Baudot, I. Ueda, J. A. Colorado-Caicedo, J. A. McKenna, J. Baudot, J. Becker, J. Borah, J. Eppelt, J.-G. Shiu, J. H. Yin, J. Kandra, J. Libby, J. Lin, J. L. Ma, J. M. Roney, J. Park, J. Serrano, J. Skorupa, J. S. Lange, J. S. Zhou, J. U. Rehman, J. V. Bennett, J. X. Cui, J. Yelton, J.-Y. Kim, J. Yuan, K. Amos, K. Chilikin, K. Chirapatpimol, K. Cho, K. E. Varvell, K. Gudkova, K. H. Kang, K.-H. Kim, K. Kinoshita, K. Kumara, K. Parham, K. Ravindran, K. Schoenning, K. Senyo, K. Tanida, K. Trabelsi, K. Unger, K. Uno, K. \v{S}penko, K. Yi, K. Yoshihara, L. Aggarwal, L. Chen, L. Corona, L. E. Piilonen, L. K. Li, L. Massaccesi, L. Reuter, L. Salutari, L. Santelj, L. Vitale, L. Zani, L. Zhu, M. Alhakami, M. Barrett, M. Bartl, M. Bertemes, M. Bessner, M. Bra\v{c}ko, M. Campajola, M. Destefanis, M. Dorigo, M. Garcia-Hernandez, M. H. Liu, M. Hoek, M. Hohmann, M. Iwasaki, M. J. Lee, M. Laurenza, M. Maggiora, M. Mantovano, M. Marfoli, M. Masuda, M. Maushart, M. Merola, M. Mirra, M. Nakao, M. Naruki, M. Nayak, M. Piccolo, M. Reif, M. Sobotzik, M. Stari\v{c}, M. Sumihama, M. T. Hedges, M. T. Prim, M. Veronesi, M. Wakai, M. Watanabe, M. Zeyrek, M.-Z. Wang, N. Akopov, N. Althubiti, N. Anh Ky, N. Ipsita, N. K. Baghel, O. Gogota, O. Tittel, P. Bambade, P. Branchini, P. Chang, P. Cheema, P. Ecker, P. Feichtinger, P. Gironella Gironell, P. Goldenzweig, P. Horak, P. Kody\v{s}, P. Kri\v{z}an, P. Krokovny, P. Leo, P. L. M. Podesta-Lerma, P. M. Lewis, P. Rados, P. Stavroulakis, P. Urquijo, Q. Campagna, Q. D. Zhou, Q. M. Li, Q. P. Ji, Q. Y. Liu, R. A. Briere, R. Ayad, R. de Sangro, R. Farkas, R. Garg, R. Giordano, R. Godang, R. Hoppe, R. Itoh, R. J. Sobie, R. Kowalewski, R. Leboucher, R. Maiti, R. Manfredi, R. Mehta, R. Mizuk, R. Nomaru, R. Pestotnik, R. Stroili, R. Tiwary, R. van Tonder, R. Volpe, R. \v{Z}leb\v{c}\'ik, S. A. De La Motte, S. Alghamdi, S. Bahinipati, S. Bettarini, S. Bussino, S. Choudhury, S. Chutia, S. Dey, S. E. Vahsen, S. Hazra, S.-H. Park, S. H. Robertson, S.-J. Cho, S. Jia, S. Kang, S.-K. Choi, S. Kohani, S. Korpar, S. Lacaprara, S. Longo, S. Moneta, S. Nishida, S. Ogawa, S. Pardi, S. Patra, S. Paul, S. P. Maharana, S. Prell, S. Privalov, S. Raiz, S. Reiter, S. Saha, S. Schneider, S. Spataro, S. S. Tang, S. Uno, S. Wallner, S. Watanuki, Sw. Banerjee, S. X. Li, T. Aushev, T. Bilka, T. E. Browder, T. Ferber, T. Fillinger, T. Higuchi, T. Humair, T. Iijima, T. Koga, T. K. Pedlar, T. Kuhr, T. Kunigo, T. Lam, T. Lueck, T. Martinov, T. Podobnik, T. Shillington, T. S. Lau, T. Tien Manh, T. V. Dong, V. Babu, V. Bertacchi, V. Gaur, V. Gautam, V. Lisovskyi, V. Savinov, V. S. Vismaya, V. Vobbilisetti, W. Gradl, W. Shan, W. W. Jacobs, W. Yan, W. Z. Li, X. Dong, X. D. Shi, X. P. Xu, X. T. Hou, Y. Ahn, Y. B. Li, Y. Han, Y. Jin, Y.-J. Kwon, Y. Li, Y. Ma, Y. P. Liao, Y. Seino, Y. Unno, Y. Ushiroda, Y. Yusa, Z. Dole\v{z}al, Z. Mediankin Gruberov\'a, Z. Natkaniec, Z. Q. Liu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Fits to the M(D + s π 0 ) spectra from (a) Belle and (b) Belle II data. The data samples are represented by the dots with error bars. The blue curves, green dotted curves, and green filled areas are the fitted total pdfs, total backgrounds, and combinatorial backgrounds, respectively. The areas between total and combinatorial backgrounds are from the fitted cross-feed contributions. The distributions from … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Simultaneous fits to the M(D ∗+ s γ) distributions from (a) Belle and (b) Belle II data samples. The blue and violet curves are the best fit results and the fitted total background pdfs, respectively. The filled green areas are the fitted combinatorial backgrounds. The histograms in red slashes represent the normalized D ∗+ s sidebands. The systematic uncertainties due to D+ s and γ selection cancel in the… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Comparison between the measured B(D ∗ s0(2317)+ → D ∗+ s γ)/B(D ∗ s0(2317)+ → D + s π 0 ) in this work and the theoretical predictions. The theoretical approaches of the references are traditional quark model for Godfrey [44], light front quark model for Ke [67], effective Lagrangian with with chiral symmetry for Bardeen [20], effective Lagrangian for Faessler [41], heavy quark flavor symmetry for Fu [42],… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Charm decays and $\tau$ physics at Belle and Belle II

    hep-ex 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Belle and Belle II present first measurements of multiple charm baryon decay modes and the initial search for CP violation in τ → π K_S ν_τ.

  2. What can we learn from the radiative decays of the $D_{s1}(2460)$ meson?

    hep-ph 2025-12 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Measuring the ratio of radiative decay branching fractions from Ds1(2460) can probe the nature of Ds0*(2317) and Ds1(2460) mesons.

  3. Closing the knowledge gap in semileptonic $B\rightarrow X_c\ell\nu$ decays

    hep-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    The unmeasured fraction of inclusive semileptonic B to charm decays is dominated by final states without D mesons, likely from baryons and Ds mesons.

  4. Relativistic effects in heavy mesons

    hep-ph 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    A relativistic potential model with few parameters qualitatively reproduces heavy meson masses and radiative widths, remaining finite at zero light quark mass.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    broken signal

    The fit method is validated by the MC samples. The similar fits are performed to M (D+ s π0) spectra from different xp bins to measure the xp distribution of D∗ s0(2317)+. The obtained efficiency-corrected xp distribution is used to correct the MC simulation. The fitted yields of the hadronic decay channel N fit exp(D+ s π0) are 10820 ± 230 for Belle and 6108 ± ...

  2. [2]

    All parameters of the broken signal and signal pdf, as well as the ratios of their yields, are fixed from MC simulations, except for the mean values of the CB functions

    Each D∗ s0(2317)+ signal pdf is modeled by a CB function convolved with a triple-Gaussian function, while the corresponding broken signal contribution is described by an asymmetric Gaussian. All parameters of the broken signal and signal pdf, as well as the ratios of their yields, are fixed from MC simulations, except for the mean values of the CB function...

  3. [3]

    The fitted masses of the D∗ s0(2317)+ in the Belle and Belle II datasets differ by 3 .6 ± 1.5 MeV/c2. This difference is mainly due to the energy shift in the reconstruction of low-energy photons in Belle and consistent with the MC simulations with the input value of the nominal D∗ s0(2317)+ mass [ 57]. The fitted R value is [7 .14 ± 0.70(stat.)]%. The corres...

  4. [4]

    InterLeptons

    The branching fraction ratio B(D∗ s0(2317)+ → D∗+ s γ)/B(D∗ s0(2317)+ → D+ s π0) is measured to be [7 .14 ± 0.70(stat.) ± 0.23(syst.)]%, which is generally larger than theoretical predictions suggesting D∗ s0(2317)+ as a molecular state [ 41–43], while smaller than the c¯s state assumption under the quark model [ 44]. However, predictions based on the lig...

    arXiv 2019

  5. [5]

    Brambilla, S

    N. Brambilla, S. Eidelman, C. Hanhart, A. Nefediev, C. P. Shen, C. E. Thomas, A. Vairo, and C. Z. Yuan, Phys. Rept. 873, 1 (2020)

    2020

  6. [6]

    H. X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, Y. R. Liu, and S. L. Zhu, Rept. Prog. Phys. 80, 076201 (2017)

    2017

  7. [7]

    F. K. Guo, C. Hanhart, U. G. Meißner, Q. Wang, Q. Zhao, and B. S. Zou, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015004 (2018) [erratum: Rev. Mod. Phys. 94, 029901 (2022)]

    2018

  8. [8]

    Godfrey and N

    S. Godfrey and N. Isgur, Phys. Rev. D 32, 189 (1985)

    1985

  9. [9]

    Godfrey and R

    S. Godfrey and R. Kokoski, Phys. Rev. D 43, 1679 (1991)

    1991

  10. [10]

    Di Pierro and E

    M. Di Pierro and E. Eichten, Phys. Rev. D 64, 114004 (2001)

    2001

  11. [11]

    Y. Q. Chen and X. Q. Li, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 232001 (2004)

    2004

  12. [12]

    F. K. Guo, P. N. Shen, H. C. Chiang, R. G. Ping, and B. S. Zou, Phys. Lett. B 641, 278 (2006)

    2006

  13. [13]

    Gamermann, E

    D. Gamermann, E. Oset, D. Strottman, and M. J. Vicente Vacas, Phys. Rev. D 76, 074016 (2007)

    2007

  14. [14]

    Gamermann, L

    D. Gamermann, L. R. Dai, and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. C 76, 055205 (2007)

    2007

  15. [15]

    van Beveren and G

    E. van Beveren and G. Rupp, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 012003 (2003)

    2003

  16. [16]

    van Beveren and G

    E. van Beveren and G. Rupp, Eur. Phys. J. C 32, 493 (2004). 8

    2004

  17. [17]

    Coito, G

    S. Coito, G. Rupp, and E. van Beveren, Phys. Rev. D 84, 094020 (2011)

    2011

  18. [18]

    D. S. Hwang and D. W. Kim, Phys. Lett. B 601, 137 (2004)

    2004

  19. [19]

    D. S. Hwang and D. W. Kim, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 9, 63 (2005)

    2005

  20. [20]

    Y. A. Simonov and J. A. Tjon, Phys. Rev. D 70, 114013 (2004)

    2004

  21. [21]

    I. W. Lee, T. Lee, D. P. Min, and B. Y. Park, Eur. Phys. J. C 49, 737 (2007)

    2007

  22. [22]

    Z. Y. Zhou and Z. Xiao, Phys. Rev. D 84, 034023 (2011)

    2011

  23. [23]

    A. M. Badalian, Y. A. Simonov, and M. A. Trusov, Phys. Rev. D 77, 074017 (2008)

    2008

  24. [24]

    W. A. Bardeen, E. J. Eichten, and C. T. Hill, Phys. Rev. D 68, 054024 (2003)

    2003

  25. [25]

    M. A. Nowak, M. Rho, and I. Zahed, Acta Phys. Polon. B 35, 2377 (2004)

    2004

  26. [26]

    E. E. Kolomeitsev and M. F. M. Lutz, Phys. Lett. B 582, 39 (2004)

    2004

  27. [27]

    H. Y. Cheng and W. S. Hou, Phys. Lett. B 566, 193 (2003)

    2003

  28. [28]

    Dmitrasinovic, Phys

    V. Dmitrasinovic, Phys. Rev. D 70, 096011 (2004)

    2004

  29. [29]

    Dmitrasinovic, Phys

    V. Dmitrasinovic, Phys. Rev. D 86, 016006 (2012)

    2012

  30. [30]

    Hayashigaki and K

    A. Hayashigaki and K. Terasaki, Prog. Theor. Phys. 114, 1191 (2006)

    2006

  31. [31]

    Maiani, F

    L. Maiani, F. Piccinini, A. D. Polosa, and V. Riquer, Phys. Rev. D 71, 014028 (2005)

    2005

  32. [32]

    M. E. Bracco, A. Lozea, R. D. Matheus, F. S. Navarra, and M. Nielsen, Phys. Lett. B 624, 217 (2005)

    2005

  33. [33]

    T. E. Browder, S. Pakvasa, and A. A. Petrov, Phys. Lett. B 578, 365 (2004)

    2004

  34. [34]

    J. Lu, X. L. Chen, W. Z. Deng, and S. L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D 73, 054012 (2006)

    2006

  35. [35]

    Bicudo, Phys

    P. Bicudo, Phys. Rev. D 74, 036008 (2006)

    2006

  36. [36]

    Martinez Torres, L

    A. Martinez Torres, L. R. Dai, C. Koren, D. Jido, and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D 85, 014027 (2012)

    2012

  37. [37]

    Mohler, C

    D. Mohler, C. B. Lang, L. Leskovec, S. Prelovsek, and R. M. Woloshyn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 222001 (2013)

    2013

  38. [38]

    M. N. Tang, Y. H. Lin, F. K. Guo, C. Hanhart, and U. G. Meißner, Commun. Theor. Phys. 75, 055203 (2023)

    2023

  39. [39]

    Aubert et al

    B. Aubert et al. (BaBar Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 242001 (2003)

    2003

  40. [40]

    Besson et al

    D. Besson et al. (CLEO Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 68, 032002 (2003) [erratum: Phys. Rev. D 75, 119908 (2007)]

    2003

  41. [41]

    Mikami et al

    Y. Mikami et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 012002 (2004)

    2004

  42. [42]

    Ablikim et al

    M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 97, 051103 (2018)

    2018

  43. [43]

    H. X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, Y. R. Liu and S. L. Zhu, Rept. Prog. Phys. 86, 026201 (2023)

    2023

  44. [44]

    Aubert et al

    B. Aubert et al. (BaBar Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 74, 032007 (2006)

    2006

  45. [45]

    Faessler, T

    A. Faessler, T. Gutsche, V. E. Lyubovitskij, and Y. L. Ma, Phys. Rev. D 76, 014005 (2007)

    2007

  46. [46]

    H. L. Fu, H. W. Grießhammer, F. K. Guo, C. Hanhart, and U. G. Meißner, Eur. Phys. J. A 58, 70 (2022)

    2022

  47. [47]

    M. F. M. Lutz and M. Soyeur, Nucl. Phys. A 813, 14 (2008)

    2008

  48. [48]

    Godfrey, Phys

    S. Godfrey, Phys. Lett. B 568, 254 (2003)

    2003

  49. [49]

    Abashian et al

    A. Abashian et al. (Belle Collaboration), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 479, 117 (2002)

    2002

  50. [50]

    Brodzicka et al

    J. Brodzicka et al. , PTEP 2012, 04D001 (2012)

    2012

  51. [51]

    Kurokawa and E

    S. Kurokawa and E. Kikutani, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 499, 1 (2003)

    2003

  52. [52]

    Abe et al

    T. Abe et al. , PTEP 2013, 03A001 (2013)

    2013

  53. [53]

    Abe et al

    T. Abe et al. (Belle II Collaboration), arXiv:1011.0352

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  54. [54]

    Akai et al

    K. Akai et al. , Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 907, 188 (2018)

    2018

  55. [55]

    T. Kuhr, C. Pulvermacher, M Ritter, T. Hauth, and N. Braun (Belle II Software Framework Group), Comput. Softw. Big Sci. 3, 1 (2019)

    2019

  56. [56]

    Belle II collaboration, Belle II Analysis Software Framework (basf2), https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5574115

    doi:10.5281/zenodo.5574115

  57. [57]

    Gelb et al

    M. Gelb et al. , Comput. Softw. Big Sci. 2, 9 (2018)

    2018

  58. [58]

    Jadach, B

    S. Jadach, B. F. L. Ward and Z. Was, Comput. Phys. Commun. 130, 260 (2000)

    2000

  59. [59]

    Sj¨ ostrand et al

    T. Sj¨ ostrand et al. , Comput. Phys. Commun. 135, 238 (2001)

    2001

  60. [60]

    Sj¨ ostrand et al

    T. Sj¨ ostrand et al. , Comput. Phys. Commun. 191, 159 (2015)

    2015

  61. [61]

    Navas et al

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

    2024

  62. [62]

    Ablikim et al

    M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 104, 012016 (2021)

    2021

  63. [63]

    Brun et al., GEANT 3: user’s guide Geant 3.10, Geant 3.11, CERN Report No

    R. Brun et al., GEANT 3: user’s guide Geant 3.10, Geant 3.11, CERN Report No. DD/EE/84-1, 1984

    1984

  64. [64]

    Agostinelli et al

    S. Agostinelli et al. (GEANT4 Collaboration), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 506, 250 (2003)

    2003

  65. [65]

    Nakano, Nucl

    E. Nakano, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 494, 402 (2002)

    2002

  66. [66]

    Adachi et al

    I. Adachi et al. (Belle II Collaboration), arXiv:2506.04355

    arXiv

  67. [67]

    Punzi, eConf C030908, MODT002 (2003)

    G. Punzi, eConf C030908, MODT002 (2003)

    2003

  68. [68]

    X. Zhou, S. Du, G. Li and C. Shen, Comput. Phys. Commun. 258, 107540 (2021)

    2021

  69. [69]

    Oreglia, SLAC report SLAC-0236 (1980)

    M. Oreglia, SLAC report SLAC-0236 (1980)

    1980

  70. [70]

    S. S. Wilks, Ann. Math. Stat. 9, 60 (1938)

    1938

  71. [71]

    H. W. Ke, X. Q. Li, and Y. L. Shi, Phys. Rev. D 87, 054022 (2013)

    2013