pith. sign in

arxiv: 2602.12594 · v2 · pith:JUV7H2YInew · submitted 2026-02-13 · ✦ hep-ph

Probing the isospin structure and low-lying resonances in Λ_c^+ to nbar{K}⁰ π^+ decays

Meng-Yuan Li , Guan-Ying Wang , Neng-Chang Wei , De-Min Li , En Wang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 11:04 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph
keywords Lambda_c decayN(1535) resonanceLambda(1670) resonancechiral unitary approachisospin dynamicsmolecular interpretationbaryon spectroscopyKN scattering
0
0 comments X

The pith

The decay Λ_c⁺ → n K̄⁰ π⁺ produces a narrow peak from N(1535) in the π⁺ n spectrum and a dip from Λ(1670) in the K̄⁰ n spectrum.

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

The paper examines the Cabibbo-favored decay of the charmed baryon Λ_c⁺ into a neutron, antikaon, and pion to probe low-lying resonances and isospin structure in the K̄N system. Using a coupled-channel chiral unitary approach, the resonances N(1535) and Λ(1670) are treated as dynamically generated poles. Calculations predict a narrow peak in the invariant mass spectrum of π⁺ and n, and a distinct dip in the K̄⁰ n spectrum that matches features seen in scattering data. This helps resolve experimental contradictions about isospin contributions and the unexpectedly large branching fraction. It positions this decay as a key process for testing the molecular nature of these resonances.

Core claim

Within the coupled-channel chiral unitary framework, the N(1535) and Λ(1670) resonances are dynamically generated as poles in the scattering amplitudes. This leads to a narrow peak from N(1535) in the π⁺ n invariant mass spectrum and a distinct dip from Λ(1670) in the K̄⁰ n spectrum for the decay Λ_c⁺ → n K̄⁰ π⁺. The dip structure is qualitatively consistent with the manifestation of Λ(1670) in K̄N → K̄N scattering, supporting its molecular interpretation.

What carries the argument

The coupled-channel chiral unitary approach, in which the N(1535) and Λ(1670) appear as dynamically generated poles fitted to reproduce prior KN scattering data.

If this is right

  • The narrow peak and distinct dip provide testable signatures for the dynamical generation of these resonances.
  • This decay channel can help disentangle isospin 0 and 1 contributions in the n K̄⁰ system.
  • The results explain the larger-than-expected branching fraction due to resonance contributions.
  • Precise measurements by experiments like BESIII and Belle II can confirm the predicted structures.
  • The consistency with scattering data supports the molecular picture for Λ(1670).

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the dip is observed, it could strengthen evidence for molecular states in baryon spectroscopy more broadly.
  • This approach might be extended to other charmed baryon decays to study additional resonances.
  • Discrepancies in isospin dominance between different experiments could be resolved by focusing on this specific final state.

Load-bearing premise

The N(1535) and Λ(1670) are assumed to be dynamically generated poles in the coupled-channel scattering amplitudes with parameters tuned to KN data.

What would settle it

An experimental measurement of the invariant mass spectra in Λ_c⁺ → n K̄⁰ π⁺ that shows neither the predicted narrow peak in π⁺ n nor the dip in K̄⁰ n would falsify the claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.12594 by De-Min Li, En Wang, Guan-Ying Wang, Meng-Yuan Li, Neng-Chang Wei.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Quark level diagram for the process [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. The diagrams for the Tree-level (a) and the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The diagrams for the Tree-level (a) and the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Modulus squared of the transition amplitudes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Modulus squared of the transition amplitudes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Dalitz plot for the process [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_10.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The Cabibbo-favored decay $\Lambda_c^+ \to n \bar{K}^0\pi^+$ offers a unique window to explore unresolved puzzles in the low-energy baryon spectroscopy and the isospin dynamics of the $\bar{K}N$ system. Recent experimental results present a, for now, contradiction: LHCb and Belle analyses of $\Lambda_c^+ \to p K^-\pi^+$ suggest the $pK^-$ ($I=0$) component dominates, while the Beijing Spectrometer III (BESIII) hints at significant contributions from both isospin $0$ and $1$ in the $n\bar{K}^0$ system of $\Lambda_c^+ \to n K_S^0 \pi^+$. Furthermore, the measured branching fraction of $\Lambda_c^+ \to n K_S^0 \pi^+$ exceeds SU(3) symmetry predictions by a factor of 3-4, signaling strong contributions from low-lying resonances. In this work, we provide a theoretical analysis of $\Lambda_c^+ \to n \bar{K}^0\pi^+$ within the coupled-channel chiral unitary approach, where the $N(1535)$ and $\Lambda(1670)$ can be dynamically generated. Our calculations show a narrow peak from $N(1535)$ in the $\pi^+ n$ invariant mass spectrum and a distinct dip from $\Lambda(1670)$ in the $\bar{K}^0 n$ spectrum. The dip structure is qualitatively consistent with the $\Lambda(1670)$ manifestation in $\bar{K}N \to \bar{K}N$ scattering, supporting its molecular interpretation. This study not only connects the experimental observations but also highlights $\Lambda_c^+ \to n \bar{K}^0\pi^+$ as a crucial process to disentangle the nature of $N(1535)$ and $\Lambda(1670)$. Future precise measurements of this decay channel by the BESIII, Belle II, LHCb, and the proposed Super Tau-Charm Factory are strongly encouraged.

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 analyzes the Cabibbo-favored decay Λ_c⁺ → n K̄⁰ π⁺ within the coupled-channel chiral unitary approach, where the N(1535) and Λ(1670) are dynamically generated as poles in the scattering amplitude. It predicts a narrow peak from the N(1535) in the π⁺ n invariant mass spectrum and a distinct dip from the Λ(1670) in the K̄⁰ n spectrum. These features are presented as robust signatures that connect to experimental puzzles on isospin contributions (I=0 vs I=1) in related decays and support the molecular interpretation of the Λ(1670), while encouraging future measurements.

Significance. If the central assumptions hold, the work provides a concrete link between weak production in charmed baryon decays and low-energy strong dynamics in the K̄N system. It offers falsifiable predictions for invariant-mass distributions that could help resolve branching-fraction discrepancies and test resonance interpretations, with the use of a T-matrix fitted to prior KN scattering data as a strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [Formalism / production vertices] The isospin decomposition of the weak production amplitude (likely defined in the formalism section) is fixed by a single overall assumption (SU(3) or factorization) with only the regularization cutoff as free parameter. This choice is load-bearing: the skeptic correctly notes that varying the relative I=0/I=1 weights while holding the chiral unitary T-matrix fixed can suppress or shift the interference responsible for the claimed N(1535) peak and Λ(1670) dip. An explicit sensitivity study or justification against alternatives is required.
  2. [Results] Results section: the visibility of the structures is asserted to be qualitatively consistent with K̄N → K̄N scattering, but no quantitative measure (e.g., pole positions, widths, or fit quality to the decay spectra) is provided to show that the predictions survive reasonable variations in the production vertices.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that the branching fraction exceeds SU(3) predictions by a factor of 3-4 should include a brief reference to the specific experimental values or prior calculations being compared.
  2. [Throughout] Notation: ensure consistent use of K̄⁰ versus K_S⁰ when comparing to BESIII data throughout the text and figures.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and for the constructive comments, which help us improve the clarity and robustness of our analysis. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate the suggested enhancements.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The isospin decomposition of the weak production amplitude (likely defined in the formalism section) is fixed by a single overall assumption (SU(3) or factorization) with only the regularization cutoff as free parameter. This choice is load-bearing: the skeptic correctly notes that varying the relative I=0/I=1 weights while holding the chiral unitary T-matrix fixed can suppress or shift the interference responsible for the claimed N(1535) peak and Λ(1670) dip. An explicit sensitivity study or justification against alternatives is required.

    Authors: We agree that the production amplitude relies on an SU(3)-based assumption with factorization, which is standard for Cabibbo-favored charmed baryon decays and consistent with our prior works on similar processes. While the chiral unitary T-matrix is fixed by KN scattering data, we acknowledge the potential sensitivity to I=0/I=1 weights. In the revised manuscript we will add an explicit sensitivity analysis, varying the relative weights within ranges allowed by experimental constraints from related decays such as Λ_c^+ → p K^- π^+, and demonstrate that the N(1535) peak and Λ(1670) dip remain visible. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Results section: the visibility of the structures is asserted to be qualitatively consistent with K̄N → K̄N scattering, but no quantitative measure (e.g., pole positions, widths, or fit quality to the decay spectra) is provided to show that the predictions survive reasonable variations in the production vertices.

    Authors: The pole positions and widths of N(1535) and Λ(1670) are determined solely by the chiral unitary T-matrix fitted to KN scattering data, independent of the production vertices. The qualitative consistency with scattering arises because the decay distributions reflect the same final-state interactions. To address the request for quantitative measures, we will include in the revised results section the extracted peak positions, widths, and a comparison of the structures under variations of the production parameters, confirming stability within the explored range. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; external scattering T-matrix applied to decay spectra via independent production assumptions.

full rationale

The paper computes invariant-mass spectra in Λ_c⁺ → n K̄⁰ π⁺ by folding a coupled-channel chiral unitary T-matrix (with N(1535) and Λ(1670) poles) into the weak decay amplitude. The T-matrix parameters and regularization are fixed by prior KN scattering data, an external benchmark independent of the present decay. The production vertices are modeled with a single overall parameter and an isospin decomposition (implicitly SU(3)-motivated or factorized), but these are not fitted to the target spectra; the resulting peak and dip are therefore genuine consequences of the external FSI poles rather than a re-statement of fitted inputs. No equation reduces the claimed structures to a self-definition, a fit on the decay data, or a self-citation chain whose validity is presupposed inside the paper. The consistency check with K̄N scattering is a cross-validation, not a tautology.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the chiral unitary framework in which resonances emerge dynamically from meson-baryon interactions, with regularization and couplings drawn from prior fits rather than derived from first principles.

free parameters (1)
  • regularization cutoff
    Standard parameter in loop integrals of the chiral unitary approach, typically adjusted to fit scattering data.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Chiral symmetry governs the leading meson-baryon interactions at low energies
    Invoked as the basis for the effective Lagrangian in the coupled-channel calculation.
  • domain assumption Unitarity is restored by solving the Bethe-Salpeter equation in coupled channels
    Used to generate the resonance poles dynamically.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5939 in / 1396 out tokens · 62776 ms · 2026-05-22T11:04:11.881568+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.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages · 24 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    9 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 |T |2(×10−3) Mπ+n(MeV) K+Λ → π+n π+n → π+n π0p → π+n ηp → π+n FIG. 5. Modulus squared of the transition amplitudest MB →π +nin S-wave. We first examine the transition amplitudest MB→π+n and tM′ B′→ ¯K0n that dynamically generate the resonances. Figure 5 shows|t MB→π+n|2 for several initial channels....

    work page 1900

  2. [2]

    Ablikimet al.[BESIII], Phys

    M. Ablikimet al.[BESIII], Phys. Rev. D112(2025), 032006 doi:10.1103/csfm-p3h6 [arXiv:2506.02969 [hep-ex]]

    work page doi:10.1103/csfm-p3h6 2025

  3. [3]

    Adachiet al.[Belle and Belle-II], Phys

    I. Adachiet al.[Belle and Belle-II], Phys. Rev. D112(2025) no.1, 012013 doi:10.1103/4mnw-tvks [arXiv:2503.04371 [hep- ex]]

    work page doi:10.1103/4mnw-tvks 2025

  4. [4]

    E. Wang, L. S. Geng, J. J. Wu, J. J. Xie and B. S. Zou, Chin. Phys. Lett.41(2024) no.10, 101401 doi:10.1088/0256- 307X/41/10/101401 [arXiv:2406.07839 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1088/0256- 2024

  5. [5]

    X. C. Feng, L. L. Wei, M. Y . Duan, E. Wang and D. M. Li, Phys. Lett. B846(2023), 138185 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.138185 [arXiv:2009.08600 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.138185 2023

  6. [6]

    C. H. Zeng, J. X. Lu, E. Wang, J. J. Xie and L. S. Geng, Phys. Rev. D102(2020) no.7, 076009 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.076009 [arXiv:2006.15547 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.102.076009 2020

  7. [7]

    Z. Wang, Y . Y . Wang, E. Wang, D. M. Li and J. J. Xie, Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) no.9, 842 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020- 8347-2 [arXiv:2004.01438 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020- 2020

  8. [8]

    Observation of $\Lambda^+_{c}\to nK^0_S\pi^+$

    M. Ablikimet al.[BESIII], Phys. Rev. Lett.118(2017) no.11, 112001 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.112001 [arXiv:1611.02797 [hep-ex]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.118.112001 2017

  9. [9]

    Ablikimet al.[BESIII], Phys

    M. Ablikimet al.[BESIII], Phys. Rev. D109(2024) no.7, 072010 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.072010 [arXiv:2311.17131 [hep-ex]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.072010 2024

  10. [10]

    C. Q. Geng, Y . K. Hsiao, C. W. Liu and T. H. Tsai, Phys. Rev. D99(2019) no.7, 073003 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.073003 [arXiv:1810.01079 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.99.073003 2019

  11. [11]

    J. Y . Cen, C. Q. Geng, C. W. Liu and T. H. Tsai, Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019) no.11, 946 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7467-z [arXiv:1906.01848 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7467-z 2019

  12. [12]

    Aaijet al.[LHCb], Phys

    R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], Phys. Rev. D108(2023) no.1, 012023 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.012023 [arXiv:2208.03262 [hep- ex]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.108.012023 2023

  13. [13]

    S. B. Yanget al.[Belle], Phys. Rev. D108(2023) no.3, L031104 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.L031104 [arXiv:2209.00050 [hep-ex]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.108.l031104 2023

  14. [14]

    S. C. Zhang, M. Y . Duan, W. T. Lyu, G. Y . Wang, J. Y . Zhu and E. Wang, Eur. Phys. J. C84(2024) no.12, 1253 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13616-6 [arXiv:2405.14235 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13616-6 2024

  15. [15]

    M. Y . Duan, M. Bayar and E. Oset, Phys. Lett. B 857(2024), 139003 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.139003 [arXiv:2407.01410 [hep-ph]]. 9

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.139003 2024

  16. [16]

    C. D. L ¨u, W. Wang and F. S. Yu, Phys. Rev. D93(2016) no.5, 056008 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.056008 [arXiv:1601.04241 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.056008 2016

  17. [17]

    B. C. Liu and B. S. Zou, Phys. Rev. Lett.96(2006) no.4, 042002 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.042002 [arXiv:nucl- th/0503069 [nucl-th]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.96.042002 2006

  18. [18]

    L. S. Geng, E. Oset, B. S. Zou and M. Doring, Phys. Rev. C79(2009), 025203 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.79.025203 [arXiv:0807.2913 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.79.025203 2009

  19. [19]

    Strangeness Form Factors of the Proton in the Chiral Quark Model

    L. Hannelius and D. O. Riska, Phys. Rev. C62(2000), 045204 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.62.045204 [arXiv:hep-ph/0001325 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.62.045204 2000

  20. [20]

    Helminen and D

    C. Helminen and D. O. Riska, Nucl. Phys. A699(2002), 624-648 doi:10.1016/S0375-9474(01)01294-5 [arXiv:nucl- th/0011071 [nucl-th]]

    work page doi:10.1016/s0375-9474(01)01294-5 2002

  21. [21]

    Zhang, Y

    A. Zhang, Y . R. Liu, P. Z. Huang, W. Z. Deng, X. L. Chen and S. L. Zhu, HEPNP29(2005), 250

    work page 2005

  22. [22]

    B. S. Zou, Eur. Phys. J. A35(2008), 325-328 doi:10.1140/epja/i2007-10561-8 [arXiv:0711.4860 [nucl- th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epja/i2007-10561-8 2008

  23. [23]

    Non perturbative chiral approach to s-wave \bar{K}N interactions

    E. Oset and A. Ramos, Nucl. Phys. A635(1998), 99-120 doi:10.1016/S0375-9474(98)00170-5 [arXiv:nucl-th/9711022 [nucl-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0375-9474(98)00170-5 1998

  24. [24]

    D. Jido, J. A. Oller, E. Oset, A. Ramos and U. G. Meiss- ner, Nucl. Phys. A725(2003), 181-200 doi:10.1016/S0375- 9474(03)01598-7 [arXiv:nucl-th/0303062 [nucl-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0375- 2003

  25. [25]

    SU(3) Chiral Dynamics with Coupled Channels: Eta and Kaon Photoproduction

    N. Kaiser, T. Waas and W. Weise, Nucl. Phys. A 612(1997), 297-320 doi:10.1016/S0375-9474(96)00321-1 [arXiv:hep-ph/9607459 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0375-9474(96)00321-1 1997

  26. [26]

    The $S_{11}- N$(1535) and $-N$(1650) Resonances in Meson-Baryon Unitarized Coupled Channel Chiral Perturbation Theory

    J. Nieves and E. Ruiz Arriola, Phys. Rev. D64(2001), 116008 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.64.116008 [arXiv:hep-ph/0104307 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.64.116008 2001

  27. [27]

    Inoue, E

    T. Inoue, E. Oset and M. J. Vicente Vacas, Phys. Rev. C65 (2002), 035204 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.65.035204 [arXiv:hep- ph/0110333 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.65.035204 2002

  28. [28]

    The role of the N*(1535) resonance and the pi^- p --> KY amplitudes in the OZI forbidden pi N --> phi N reaction

    M. Doring, E. Oset and B. S. Zou, Phys. Rev. C78(2008), 025207 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.78.025207 [arXiv:0805.1799 [nucl-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.78.025207 2008

  29. [29]

    E. Wang, H. X. Chen, L. S. Geng, D. M. Li and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D93(2016) no.9, 094001 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.094001 [arXiv:1512.01959 [hep- ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.094001 2016

  30. [30]

    J. X. Lu, E. Wang, J. J. Xie, L. S. Geng and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D93(2016), 094009 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.094009 [arXiv:1601.00075 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.094009 2016

  31. [31]

    J. J. Xie and L. S. Geng, Phys. Rev. D96(2017) no.5, 054009 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.054009 [arXiv:1704.05714 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.96.054009 2017

  32. [32]

    Production of $N^*(1535)$ and $N^*(1650)$ in $\Lambda_c\rightarrow\bar{K}^0\eta p$ $(\pi N)$ decay

    R. Pavao, S. Sakai and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. C98(2018) no.1, 015201 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.98.015201 [arXiv:1802.07882 [nucl-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.98.015201 2018

  33. [33]

    W. T. Lyu, Y . H. Lyu, M. Y . Duan, G. Y . Wang, D. Y . Chen and E. Wang, Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) no.2, 123 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-13805-x [arXiv:2310.11139 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-13805-x 2025

  34. [34]

    Y . Li, S. W. Liu, E. Wang, D. M. Li, L. S. Geng and J. J. Xie, Phys. Rev. D110(2024) no.7, 074010 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.074010 [arXiv:2406.01209 [hep- ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.074010 2024

  35. [35]

    M. Y . Li, W. T. Lyu, L. J. Liu and E. Wang, Phys. Rev. D 111(2025) no.3, 034046 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.034046 [arXiv:2501.02859 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.034046 2025

  36. [36]

    J. Song, M. Bayar, Y . Y . Li and E. Oset, Eur. Phys. J. C 85(2025) no.10, 1114 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-14870-y [arXiv:2507.19240 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-14870-y 2025

  37. [37]

    Y . Li, E. Wang, L. S. Geng and J. J. Xie, [arXiv:2601.13668 [hep-ph]]

    work page arXiv

  38. [38]

    Z. W. Liu, W. Kamleh, D. B. Leinweber, F. M. Stokes, A. W. Thomas and J. J. Wu, Phys. Rev. Lett.116 (2016) no.8, 082004 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.082004 [arXiv:1512.00140 [hep-lat]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.116.082004 2016

  39. [39]

    Guo and Z

    D. Guo and Z. W. Liu, Phys. Rev. D105(2022) no.11, 114039 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.114039 [arXiv:2201.11555 [hep- ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.105.114039 2022

  40. [40]

    C. D. Abell, D. B. Leinweber, Z. W. Liu, A. W. Thomas and J. J. Wu, Phys. Rev. D108(2023) no.9, 094519 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.094519 [arXiv:2306.00337 [hep- lat]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.108.094519 2023

  41. [41]

    Molina, C

    R. Molina, C. W. Xiao, W. H. Liang and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D109(2024) no.5, 054002 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.054002 [arXiv:2310.12593 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.054002 2024

  42. [42]

    H. P. Li, J. Song, W. H. Liang, R. Molina and E. Oset, Eur. Phys. J. C84(2024) no.7, 656 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13015-x [arXiv:2311.14365 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13015-x 2024

  43. [43]

    J. Y . Leeet al.[Belle], Phys. Rev. D103(2021) no.5, 052005 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.052005 [arXiv:2008.11575 [hep- ex]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.103.052005 2021

  44. [44]

    G. P. Gopalet al.[Rutherford-London], Nucl. Phys. B119 (1977), 362-400 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(77)90002-5

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(77)90002-5 1977

  45. [45]

    E. Oset, A. Ramos and C. Bennhold, Phys. Lett. B527 (2002), 99-105 [erratum: Phys. Lett. B530(2002), 260-260] doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(01)01523-4 [arXiv:nucl-th/0109006 [nucl-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(01)01523-4 2002

  46. [46]

    Starostinet al.[Crystal Ball], Phys

    A. Starostinet al.[Crystal Ball], Phys. Rev. C64(2001), 055205 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.64.055205

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.64.055205 2001

  47. [47]

    X. H. Zhong and Q. Zhao, Phys. Rev. C79(2009), 045202 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.79.045202 [arXiv:0811.4212 [nucl-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.79.045202 2009

  48. [48]

    J. J. Liu, Z. W. Liu, K. Chen, D. Guo, D. B. Leinweber, X. Liu and A. W. Thomas, Phys. Rev. D109(2024) no.5, 054025 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.054025 [arXiv:2312.13072 [hep- ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.054025 2024

  49. [49]

    J. J. Xie and L. S. Geng, Eur. Phys. J. C76(2016) no.9, 496 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4342-z [arXiv:1604.02756 [nucl-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4342-z 2016

  50. [50]

    G. Y . Wang, N. C. Wei, H. M. Yang, E. Wang, L. S. Geng and J. J. Xie, Phys. Rev. D106(2022) no.5, 056001 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.056001 [arXiv:2206.01425 [hep- ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.056001 2022

  51. [51]

    Weak decay of Lambda_c^+ for the study of Lambda(1405) and Lambda(1670)

    K. Miyahara, T. Hyodo and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. C 92(2015) no.5, 055204 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.92.055204 [arXiv:1508.04882 [nucl-th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.92.055204 2015

  52. [52]

    M. Y . Duan, W. T. Lyu, C. W. Xiao, E. Wang, J. J. Xie, D. Y . Chen and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D111(2025) no.1, 016004 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.016004 [arXiv:2410.16078 [hep- ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.016004 2025

  53. [53]

    W. T. Lyu, S. C. Zhang, G. Y . Wang, J. J. Wu, E. Wang, L. S. Geng and J. J. Xie, Phys. Rev. D110(2024) no.5, 054020 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.054020 [arXiv:2405.09226 [hep- ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.054020 2024

  54. [54]

    Z. Y . Wang, S. Q. Luo, Z. F. Sun, C. W. Xiao and X. Liu, Phys. Rev. D106(2022) no.9, 096026 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.096026 [arXiv:2211.08946 [hep- ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.096026 2022

  55. [55]

    Y . Li, W. T. Lyu, G. Y . Wang, L. Li, W. C. Yan and E. Wang, Phys. Rev. D111(2025) no.5, 054011 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.054011 [arXiv:2501.14385 [hep- ph]]. 10

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.054011 2025

  56. [56]

    S. C. Zhang, W. T. Lyu, G. Y . Wang, B. Q. Ma and E. Wang, [arXiv:2601.12778 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  57. [57]

    Theoretical study of the Xi(1620) and Xi(1690) resonances in Xi_c -> pi^+ MB decays

    K. Miyahara, T. Hyodo, M. Oka, J. Nieves and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. C95(2017) no.3, 035212 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.95.035212 [arXiv:1609.00895 [nucl- th]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.95.035212 2017

  58. [58]

    R. P. Pavao, W. H. Liang, J. Nieves and E. Oset, Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) no.4, 265 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-4836-3 [arXiv:1701.06914 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-4836-3 2017

  59. [59]

    Bramon, A

    A. Bramon, A. Grau and G. Pancheri, Phys. Lett. B283(1992), 416-420 doi:10.1016/0370-2693(92)90041-2

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(92)90041-2 1992

  60. [60]

    E. Oset, W. H. Liang, M. Bayar, J. J. Xie, L. R. Dai, M. Albaladejo, M. Nielsen, T. Sekihara, F. Navarra and L. Roca,et al.Int. J. Mod. Phys. E25(2016), 1630001 doi:10.1142/S0218301316300010 [arXiv:1601.03972 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1142/s0218301316300010 2016

  61. [61]

    Doring, E

    M. Doring, E. Oset and D. Strottman, Phys. Rev. C73 (2006), 045209 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.73.045209 [arXiv:nucl- th/0510015 [nucl-th]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.73.045209 2006

  62. [62]

    Navas et al

    S. Navaset al.[Particle Data Group], Phys. Rev. D110(2024) no.3, 030001 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.030001

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.030001 2024