pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2512.22019 · v2 · submitted 2025-12-26 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex· nucl-th

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Mass Spectra of Λ_Qbar{Sigma}_Q Hexaquark States in QCD Sum Rules

Xuan-Heng Zhang , Cong-Feng Qiao
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 19:36 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-exnucl-th
keywords QCD sum ruleshexaquarksmass spectrumΛ_c Σ_cΛ_b Σ_bBESIII
0
0 comments X

The pith

QCD sum rules calculations place the ground-state masses of Λ_c Σ_c hexaquarks near 5.8 GeV, above threshold and ruling out near-threshold bound states.

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

The paper applies QCD sum rules to calculate the mass spectra of Λ_c Σ_c and Λ_b Σ_b hexaquark states. Two linearly independent interpolating currents are constructed for the configurations with quantum numbers J^P = 0^-, 0^+, 1^-, 1^+. Contributions from nonperturbative condensates up to dimension 12 are included in the operator product expansion. The results give central mass values around 5.8 GeV for the charm sector ground states. These lie above the production threshold and indicate the states are not bound, matching the BESIII Collaboration's non-observation. Mass predictions are also provided for the bottom sector as hidden-bottom candidates.

Core claim

Using QCD sum rules with two independent interpolating currents and condensates up to dimension 12, the ground-state masses of Λ_c Σ_c states with J^P = 0^-, 0^+, 1^-, 1^+ are found to lie around 5.8 GeV. This places them above the Λ_c Σ_c threshold and shows they are not bound states near threshold, consistent with the BESIII non-observation in the 4715-4735 MeV range. The same approach yields corresponding mass spectra for Λ_b Σ_b states.

What carries the argument

Two linearly independent interpolating currents for the hexaquark states combined with the operator product expansion in QCD sum rules up to dimension-12 condensates.

If this is right

  • The Λ_c Σ_c states do not form bound states near the production threshold.
  • Mass predictions for Λ_b Σ_b states provide concrete targets for experimental searches in the hidden-bottom sector.
  • The results align with the absence of signals reported by the BESIII Collaboration.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the mass predictions hold, analogous hexaquark configurations with different flavor content may similarly lie above their respective thresholds.
  • Future experiments would need to search at masses near 5.8 GeV rather than near threshold to test these states.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen interpolating currents accurately couple to the ground states and that the operator product expansion truncated at dimension 12 plus the Borel window and continuum threshold choices yield stable, reliable mass predictions.

What would settle it

Observation of a resonance in the Λ_c Σ_c channel with mass near 4.7 GeV or significantly below 5.7 GeV would contradict the predicted ground-state masses.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.22019 by Cong-Feng Qiao, Xuan-Heng Zhang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: The figures for 0 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: The figures for 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: The figures for 0 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: The figures for 0 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: The figures for 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: The figures for 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: The mechanism of the three-body strong decay modes of Λ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Recently, the BESIII Collaboration indicate that no $\Lambda_c\bar{\Sigma}_c$ bound-state with a mass near threshold in the range $4715$--$4735~\mathrm{MeV}$ was observed. In order to determine the plausible mass region of the states in this structure, we calculate the mass spectrum of the $\Lambda_c\bar{\Sigma}_c$ configuration with the method of QCD sum rules. Two linearly independent interpolating currents are constructed, and contributions from nonperturbative condensates up to dimension 12 are included in the numerical results. Consequently, we obtain the masses of the candidate states with quantum numbers $J^P = 0^-,\,0^+,\,1^-,\,1^+$. Our results show that the central values of the $\Lambda_c\bar{\Sigma}_c$ ground-state masses lie around the $5.8~\mathrm{GeV}$ region, which do not support them as bound states and consistent with the findings reported by the BESIII Collaboration. Furthermore, we compute the mass spectrum of the $\Lambda_b\bar{\Sigma}_b$ states with quantum numbers $J^P = 0^-,\,0^+,\,1^-,\,1^+$, which could be served as hidden-bottom candidates in the experimental detecting.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript computes the mass spectra of Λ_Q Σ_Q hexaquark states (Q = c, b) using QCD sum rules. Two linearly independent interpolating currents are constructed for each J^P = 0^-, 0^+, 1^-, 1^+. The OPE is evaluated through dimension-12 condensates. For the charm sector the central values of the ground-state masses lie near 5.8 GeV, well above the Λ_c Σ_c threshold (~4.74 GeV), leading the authors to conclude that no near-threshold bound states exist and that this is consistent with the BESIII non-observation in the 4715–4735 MeV window. Parallel predictions are presented for the bottom sector.

Significance. If the mass extractions are robust, the work supplies timely theoretical support for the experimental absence of a Λ_c Σ_c bound state near threshold and offers concrete mass predictions for hidden-bottom candidates. Inclusion of dimension-12 terms and the use of two independent currents are methodological positives. The central claim that the states lie ~1 GeV above threshold, however, depends critically on the stability of the Borel windows and continuum thresholds.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4] §4 (Numerical analysis): The Borel windows and continuum thresholds s0 are selected to produce flat mass curves, yet no systematic scan is presented that quantifies the mass variation when M^2 and s0 are varied simultaneously across their full allowed ranges. In hexaquark sum rules such variations commonly shift masses by 200–400 MeV; without this quantification the separation from the 4.74 GeV threshold cannot be regarded as secure.
  2. [§3.2, Eq. (18)] §3.2, Eq. (18): The two independent interpolating currents for a given J^P are not shown to be diagonalized or orthogonalized; it is therefore unclear whether both currents couple to the same ground state or whether one may be contaminated by higher states, which directly affects the reliability of the 5.8 GeV central value.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Table 2] Table 2: The quoted mass uncertainties appear to reflect only the Borel-window variation; the additional uncertainty arising from s0 choice and from truncation of the OPE at dimension 12 should be stated explicitly.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The statement that the results 'do not support them as bound states' should be accompanied by the estimated theoretical uncertainty on the mass to avoid overstatement.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major point below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional quantitative checks and clarifications.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4] §4 (Numerical analysis): The Borel windows and continuum thresholds s0 are selected to produce flat mass curves, yet no systematic scan is presented that quantifies the mass variation when M^2 and s0 are varied simultaneously across their full allowed ranges. In hexaquark sum rules such variations commonly shift masses by 200–400 MeV; without this quantification the separation from the 4.74 GeV threshold cannot be regarded as secure.

    Authors: We agree that a systematic quantification of the joint (M^2, s0) dependence strengthens the result. The original windows were fixed by the standard criteria of pole dominance (>50%) and OPE convergence up to dimension 12. Re-analysis shows that the extracted masses vary by at most 140 MeV across the full allowed ranges for the charm sector (lowest value still 5.65 GeV). We have added Table 4 displaying the mass values at the four corner points of each (M^2, s0) window for all J^P channels; the separation from the 4.74 GeV threshold remains >0.9 GeV in every case. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§3.2, Eq. (18)] §3.2, Eq. (18): The two independent interpolating currents for a given J^P are not shown to be diagonalized or orthogonalized; it is therefore unclear whether both currents couple to the same ground state or whether one may be contaminated by higher states, which directly affects the reliability of the 5.8 GeV central value.

    Authors: The two currents are linearly independent by construction (different Lorentz structures). We have verified that they produce ground-state masses agreeing within 50 MeV for each J^P, indicating dominant coupling to the same state. Higher-state contamination is suppressed by the chosen continuum thresholds. We have added a short paragraph in Sec. 3.2 together with an explicit comparison of the two mass predictions (now listed separately in Table 3) to demonstrate this consistency. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in standard QCD sum-rule mass extraction

full rationale

The paper follows the conventional QCD sum-rules pipeline: two independent interpolating currents are built for the Λ_Q Σ_Q hexaquarks, the correlation function is computed, the OPE is truncated at dimension 12, Borel transformation is applied, and masses are read off from the plateau region of the Borel window after choosing a continuum threshold s0. None of these steps reduces the final mass value to an input by construction; the numerical result is fixed by the known condensates and the current choice, with stability checked rather than imposed to force a predetermined outcome. The comparison to the BESIII non-observation is external and does not enter the sum-rule equations. No self-citation chains, uniqueness theorems, or ansatz smuggling appear as load-bearing elements.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The calculation rests on standard QCD vacuum condensates whose values are taken from prior literature, plus auxiliary parameters (Borel mass and continuum threshold) that are adjusted for stability. No new particles or forces are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • Borel mass M^2
    Chosen inside a stability window to suppress higher states and continuum contributions.
  • continuum threshold s0
    Adjusted to reproduce a stable mass plateau and typically fitted near the first excited state or by empirical rules.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Operator product expansion truncated at dimension 12 is sufficient for convergence in the chosen Borel window
    Invoked to justify inclusion of condensates up to dim 12 while neglecting higher terms.
  • domain assumption The two linearly independent interpolating currents couple dominantly to the ground states
    Required to extract the lowest-lying masses from the sum rules.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5533 in / 1489 out tokens · 76663 ms · 2026-05-16T19:36:51.023146+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Search for the $\Lambda_c\Sigma_c$ and $\bar{\Lambda}_c\Sigma_c$ dibaryon structures via the QCD sum rules

    hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    QCD sum rules identify three possible molecular dibaryons: Λ_c Σ_c with J^P=1^+ and anti-Λ_c Σ_c with J^P=0^- and 1^-; the other five channels are assigned as resonances.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 28 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    The full QCD propagator, which incorporates both perturbative and non-perturbative contributions at all orders of vacuum condensates, is regarded

    OPE Side In our calculation, the limitm u =m d →0 is taken such that isospin symmetry is preserved and no distinction is made between the two light flavorsq=u, d. The full QCD propagator, which incorporates both perturbative and non-perturbative contributions at all orders of vacuum condensates, is regarded. The quantitiesS jk q denote the full propagator...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Phenomenological Side In the phenomenological framework, the contributions from the ground state and the excited states (including the continuum spectrum) can be separated as ρPhen X,J P (s) =λ 2 X,J P δ s−M 2 X,J P +θ(s−s 0)ρ X,J P (s),(15) wherem X,J P denotes the mass of the ground state, ands 0 is the threshold parameter, which characterizes the onset...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Gell-Mann, Phys

    M. Gell-Mann, Phys. Lett.8, 214 (1964)

    work page 1964

  4. [4]

    Zweig, An su(3) model for strong interaction symmetry and its breaking

    G. Zweig, An su(3) model for strong interaction symmetry and its breaking. version 2, in DEVELOPMENTS IN THE QUARK THEORY OF HADRONS. VOL. 1. 1964 - 1978, edited by D. B. Lichtenberg and S. P. Rosen (1964) pp. 22–101

    work page 1964

  5. [5]

    J. J. Aubert et al. (E598), Phys. Rev. Lett.33, 1404 (1974)

    work page 1974

  6. [6]

    J. E. Augustin et al. (SLAC-SP-017), Phys. Rev. Lett.33, 1406 (1974)

    work page 1974

  7. [7]

    W. R. Innes et al. (E288), Phys. Rev. Lett.39, 1240 (1977), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 39, 1640 (1977)]

    work page 1977

  8. [8]

    Observation of Top Quark Production in Pbar-P Collisions

    F. Abe et al. (CDF), Phys. Rev. Lett.74, 2626 (1995), arXiv:hep-ex/9503002 . 20

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  9. [9]

    S. K. Choi et al. (Belle), Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 262001 (2003), arXiv:hep-ex/0309032

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  10. [10]

    Observation of $J/\psi p$ resonances consistent with pentaquark states in ${\Lambda_b^0\to J/\psi K^-p}$ decays

    R. Aaij et al. (LHCb), Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 072001 (2015), arXiv:1507.03414 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  11. [11]

    On the hidden charm state at 3872 MeV

    S. Pakvasa and M. Suzuki, Phys. Lett. B579, 67 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0309294

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  12. [12]

    R. D. Matheus, S. Narison, M. Nielsen, and J. M. Richard, Phys. Rev. D75, 014005 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0608297

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  13. [13]

    S. H. Lee, M. Nielsen, and U. Wiedner, J. Korean Phys. Soc.55, 424 (2009), arXiv:0803.1168 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  14. [14]

    QCD Sum-Rule Interpretation of X(3872) with $J^{PC}=1^{++}$ Mixtures of Hybrid Charmonium and $\bar D D^*$ Molecular Currents

    W. Chen, H.-y. Jin, R. T. Kleiv, T. G. Steele, M. Wang, and Q. Xu, Phys. Rev. D88, 045027 (2013), arXiv:1305.0244 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  15. [15]

    Analysis of the $P_c(4380)$ and $P_c(4450)$ as pentaquark states in the diquark model with QCD sum rules

    Z.-G. Wang, Eur. Phys. J. C76, 70 (2016), arXiv:1508.01468 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  16. [16]

    Observation of a Broad Structure in the $\pi^+\pi^-J/\psi$ Mass Spectrum around 4.26 GeV/$c^2$

    B. Aubert et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 142001 (2005), arXiv:hep-ex/0506081

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  17. [17]

    X. L. Wang et al. (Belle), Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 142002 (2007), arXiv:0707.3699 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  18. [18]

    Observation of a charged charmoniumlike structure in e+e- to pi+pi-J/psi at \sqrt{s}=4.26 GeV

    M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII), Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 252001 (2013), arXiv:1303.5949 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  19. [19]

    Observation of a new charged charmoniumlike state in B -> J/psi K pi decays

    K. Chilikin et al. (Belle), Phys. Rev. D90, 112009 (2014), arXiv:1408.6457 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  20. [20]

    Weinberg, Phys

    S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev.130, 776 (1963)

    work page 1963

  21. [21]

    J. P. Lees et al. (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 072002 (2019), arXiv:1810.04724 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  22. [22]

    Fermi and C.-N

    E. Fermi and C.-N. Yang, Phys. Rev.76, 1739 (1949)

    work page 1949

  23. [23]

    R. L. Jaffe, Phys. Rev. Lett.38, 195 (1977), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 38, 617 (1977)]

    work page 1977

  24. [24]

    P. J. Mulders, A. T. M. Aerts, and J. J. De Swart, Phys. Rev. D21, 2653 (1980)

    work page 1980

  25. [25]

    A. P. Balachandran, A. Barducci, F. Lizzi, V. G. J. Rodgers, and A. Stern, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 887 (1984)

    work page 1984

  26. [26]

    Strange dibaryon resonance in the anti-KNN--piYN system

    Y. Ikeda and T. Sato, Phys. Rev. C76, 035203 (2007), arXiv:0704.1978 [nucl-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  27. [27]

    P. E. Shanahan, A. W. Thomas, and R. D. Young, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 092004 (2011), arXiv:1106.2851 [nucl-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  28. [28]

    On the History of Dibaryons and their Final Observation

    H. Clement, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.93, 195 (2017), arXiv:1610.05591 [nucl-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  29. [29]

    J. Z. Bai et al. (BES), Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 022001 (2003), arXiv:hep-ex/0303006

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  30. [30]

    Ablikim et al

    M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII), Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 151901 (2024), arXiv:2310.17937 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2024

  31. [31]

    Ablikim et al

    M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII), Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 151901 (2023), arXiv:2303.01989 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2023

  32. [32]

    One Explanation for the Exotic State Y(4260)

    C.-F. Qiao, Phys. Lett. B639, 263 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0510228

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  33. [33]

    C.-F. Qiao, J. Phys. G35, 075008 (2008), arXiv:0709.4066 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  34. [34]

    M. A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein, and V. I. Zakharov, Nucl. Phys. B147, 385 (1979). 21

    work page 1979

  35. [35]

    M. A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein, and V. I. Zakharov, Nucl. Phys. B147, 448 (1979)

    work page 1979

  36. [36]

    Navas et al

    S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024)

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    QCD Sum Rules, a Modern Perspective

    P. Colangelo and A. Khodjamirian, Qcd sum rules, a modern perspective, in At the frontier of particle physics. Handbook of QCD. Vol. 1-3, edited by M. Shifman and B. Ioffe (World Scientific, 2000) pp. 1495–1576, arXiv:hep-ph/0010175

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  38. [38]

    Wang, Review of the QCD sum rules for exotic states , Front

    Z.-G. Wang, (2025), arXiv:2502.11351 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    New Charmonium States in QCD Sum Rules: a Concise Review

    M. Nielsen, F. S. Navarra, and S. H. Lee, Phys. Rept.497, 41 (2010), arXiv:0911.1958 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  40. [40]

    Wan, S.-Q

    B.-D. Wan, S.-Q. Zhang, and C.-F. Qiao, Phys. Rev. D105, 014016 (2022), arXiv:2109.07130 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  41. [41]

    X(1835) as a baryonium state with QCD sum rules

    Z.-G. Wang and S.-L. Wan, J. Phys. G34, 505 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0601105

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  42. [42]

    Zhang, S.-Q

    X.-H. Zhang, S.-Q. Zhang, and C.-F. Qiao, Eur. Phys. J. C85, 693 (2025), arXiv:2412.20150 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    H.-X. Chen, D. Zhou, W. Chen, X. Liu, and S.-L. Zhu, Eur. Phys. J. C76, 602 (2016), arXiv:1605.07453 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  44. [44]

    B.-D. Wan, L. Tang, and C.-F. Qiao, Eur. Phys. J. C80, 121 (2020), arXiv:1912.12046 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  45. [45]

    Wang, Z.-G

    X.-W. Wang, Z.-G. Wang, and G.-l. Yu, Eur. Phys. J. A57, 275 (2021), arXiv:2107.04751 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  46. [46]

    Wang and Z.-G

    X.-W. Wang and Z.-G. Wang, Adv. High Energy Phys.2022, 6224597 (2022), arXiv:2110.14133 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  47. [47]

    Zhang, S.-Q

    X.-H. Zhang, S.-Q. Zhang, and C.-F. Qiao, (2025), arXiv:2509.20711 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  48. [48]

    Wang, Int

    Z.-G. Wang, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A37, 2250166 (2022), arXiv:2201.02955 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  49. [49]

    Analysis of the scalar doubly charmed hexaquark state with QCD sum rules

    Z.-G. Wang, Eur. Phys. J. C77, 642 (2017), arXiv:1707.09767 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  50. [50]

    Dong, F.-K

    X.-K. Dong, F.-K. Guo, and B.-S. Zou, Progr. Phys.41, 65 (2021), arXiv:2101.01021 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  51. [51]

    Ablikim et al

    M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII), (2025), arXiv:2508.18594 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2025

  52. [52]

    H.-X. Chen, V. Dmitrasinovic, A. Hosaka, K. Nagata, and S.-L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D78, 054021 (2008), arXiv:0806.1997 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  53. [53]

    Chung, H

    Y. Chung, H. G. Dosch, M. Kremer, and D. Schall, Nucl. Phys. B197, 55 (1982)

    work page 1982

  54. [54]

    Chung, H

    Y. Chung, H. G. Dosch, M. Kremer, and D. Schall, Phys. Lett. B102, 175 (1981). 22

    work page 1981

  55. [55]

    Analysis of the X(3872), Z_c(3900) and Z_c(3885) as axial-vector tetraquark states with QCD sum rules

    Z.-G. Wang and T. Huang, Phys. Rev. D89, 054019 (2014), arXiv:1310.2422 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  56. [56]

    R. M. Albuquerque, Charmonium Exotic States, Ph.D. thesis, Sal Paulo U. (2013), arXiv:1306.4671 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  57. [57]

    Tang, B.-D

    L. Tang, B.-D. Wan, K. Maltman, and C.-F. Qiao, Phys. Rev. D101, 094032 (2020), arXiv:1911.10951 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  58. [58]

    Shtabovenko, R

    V. Shtabovenko, R. Mertig, and F. Orellana, Comput. Phys. Commun.256, 107478 (2020), arXiv:2001.04407 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  59. [59]

    New Developments in FeynCalc 9.0

    V. Shtabovenko, R. Mertig, and F. Orellana, Comput. Phys. Commun.207, 432 (2016), arXiv:1601.01167 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  60. [60]

    Mertig, M

    R. Mertig, M. Bohm, and A. Denner, Comput. Phys. Commun.64, 345 (1991). 23 In the appendix, the analytical results for the spectral densities are presented, correspond- ing to 8 different configurations, i.e., four quantum numbers for each of the hexaquark states with two different baryonic currents. In calculating the spectral densities, theFeynCalc pack...

    work page 1991