pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.26015 · v1 · pith:4W2ZSN2Dnew · submitted 2026-05-25 · ✦ hep-ph

A possible Sigma^* or Λ^* resonance with J^P=3/2^- in K^-pto KXi scattering

Zheng-Li Luo , Jia-Jun Wu , Bing-Song Zou This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 21:29 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph
keywords hyperon resonanceK p scatteringXi productioneffective Lagrangian3/2- resonancethreshold behaviorpentaquark candidate
0
0 comments X

The pith

A 3/2^- hyperon resonance near 1.9 GeV is required to fit the structure at 2.0 GeV in K^-p to K Ξ cross sections.

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

The paper analyzes K^-p to K^+ Ξ^- and K^0 Ξ^0 scattering from 1.8 to 2.8 GeV using an effective Lagrangian model that already incorporates Λ(1800), Σ(2250), and ground-state Σ and Λ. An additional J^P=3/2^- resonance with mass around 1.9 GeV and width of about 200 MeV is introduced because the prior terms fail to reproduce both the observed cross-section structure near 2.0 GeV and the threshold behavior. Two solutions—one treating the new state as Σ* and one as Λ*—fit the total cross sections equally well, but the polarization of the outgoing Ξ favors the Λ* assignment. The authors note that the new state could be interpreted as a pentaquark or an S-wave K Ξ(1530) molecule and call for more data to distinguish the possibilities.

Core claim

Within an effective Lagrangian approach to the K^-p → K Ξ processes, the inclusion of a J^P=3/2^- resonance with mass around 1.9 GeV and width approximately 200 MeV is required to reproduce the structure at 2.0 GeV in the total cross section and the threshold behavior; the two possible assignments (Σ* or Λ*) cannot be distinguished by existing cross-section data, although polarization observables favor the Λ* solution.

What carries the argument

The added J^P=3/2^- resonance pole in the effective Lagrangian amplitude that supplies the missing contribution to the 2.0 GeV structure.

If this is right

  • Polarization of the final-state Ξ is better described by the Λ* solution than by the Σ* solution.
  • Predictions for the K^-n → K^0 Ξ^- cross section can be compared directly with data.
  • The introduced resonance admits a possible interpretation as an S-wave K Ξ(1530) hadronic molecule or pentaquark state.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Higher-statistics polarization data from facilities such as J-PARC or JLab could cleanly separate the Σ* and Λ* assignments.
  • If the resonance exists, analogous structures may appear in other hyperon-production channels not yet measured with comparable precision.
  • Confirmation would increase the number of candidate exotic states in the 1.9 GeV region and motivate coupled-channel analyses that include additional final states.

Load-bearing premise

The resonances already included plus non-resonant background cannot be adjusted to fit the 2.0 GeV structure and threshold behavior without adding a new resonance pole.

What would settle it

A high-precision measurement of Ξ polarization in K^-p → K Ξ that shows no preference for the Λ* solution or that rules out both solutions would falsify the need for or the assignment of the added resonance.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.26015 by Bing-Song Zou, Jia-Jun Wu, Zheng-Li Luo.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Tree-level Feynman diagrams for the reaction [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Total cross sections of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Total cross sections of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Differential cross sections of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Differential cross sections of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Polarizations of Ξ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Total (top row) and differential (bottom row) cross sections of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We analyze the $K^-p\to K^+\Xi^-$ and $K^-p\to K^0\Xi^0$ processes in the energy region $1.8<\sqrt{s}<2.8$ GeV within an effective Lagrangian approach. The $\Lambda(1800)$ and $\Sigma(2250)$ resonances, along with the ground states $\Sigma$ and $\Lambda$, are included. Additionally, a possible $J^P=3/2^-$ $\Sigma^*$ or $\Lambda^*$ resonance with a mass around 1.9 GeV and a width of approximately 200 MeV is introduced to describe the structure at 2.0 GeV in the total cross section and reproducing the threshold behavior. The two possible solutions corresponding to $\Sigma^*(3/2^-)$ and $\Lambda^*(3/2^-)$ cannot be distinguished by the existing data. Predictions for the polarization of the final-state $\Xi$ and the cross section of $K^-n \to K^0\Xi^-$ are compared with the experimental data, we find that the results of solution-II with $\Lambda^*(3/2^-)$ are much better. We also discuss the possible interpretations of the introduced $3/2^-$ hyperon as a pentaquark candidate, e.g. an $S$-wave $K\Xi(1530)$ hadronic molecule. However, since the polarization data suffer from rather large uncertainties, more data inputs are needed in future experiments, for example, J-PARC, HIAF and JLab.

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 / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes K^-p → K^+ Ξ^- and K^-p → K^0 Ξ^0 scattering for 1.8 < √s < 2.8 GeV in an effective Lagrangian framework. It includes the Λ(1800), Σ(2250), and ground-state Σ/Λ resonances plus non-resonant background, then introduces an additional J^P=3/2^- Σ* or Λ* pole (mass ≈1.9 GeV, width ≈200 MeV) to reproduce the cross-section structure near 2.0 GeV and threshold behavior. Two solutions are obtained; polarization observables are said to favor the Λ* assignment. Predictions for Ξ polarization and the K^-n → K^0 Ξ^- channel are compared with data, and a possible pentaquark or KΞ(1530) molecular interpretation is discussed.

Significance. If the necessity of the new resonance were demonstrated by quantitative comparison, the result would add a concrete candidate to the sparse hyperon spectrum above 1.8 GeV and motivate targeted searches at J-PARC or JLab. The paper supplies explicit predictions for polarization and an isospin-related channel that could be tested experimentally.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3] §3 (numerical results): No χ² value, residual plot, or explicit fit without the additional 3/2^- pole is shown. The central claim that the listed resonances plus background are insufficient therefore rests on an untested assumption; it remains possible that re-optimization of the existing couplings or background parameters could absorb the 2.0 GeV feature without introducing three new parameters.
  2. [§4] §4 (polarization observables): The Ξ polarization predictions are generated from the same effective-Lagrangian amplitude whose resonance parameters were adjusted to the total cross sections. Consequently they do not constitute independent tests of the resonance hypothesis, especially given the large experimental uncertainties already noted in the abstract.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address the two major comments point by point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3] §3 (numerical results): No χ² value, residual plot, or explicit fit without the additional 3/2^- pole is shown. The central claim that the listed resonances plus background are insufficient therefore rests on an untested assumption; it remains possible that re-optimization of the existing couplings or background parameters could absorb the 2.0 GeV feature without introducing three new parameters.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit quantitative comparison would strengthen the manuscript. In the revised version we will report the χ² per degree of freedom for the fit that excludes the additional 3/2^- resonance (with all other parameters re-optimized) together with a brief residual discussion. The figures already show that the structure near 2.0 GeV is not reproduced by the listed resonances and background alone, but the requested numbers will make this explicit. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4] §4 (polarization observables): The Ξ polarization predictions are generated from the same effective-Lagrangian amplitude whose resonance parameters were adjusted to the total cross sections. Consequently they do not constitute independent tests of the resonance hypothesis, especially given the large experimental uncertainties already noted in the abstract.

    Authors: While the resonance parameters are fixed by the total cross sections, the polarization observables depend on interference terms and relative phases that are not directly constrained by the unpolarized cross sections. The comparison with existing polarization data therefore still discriminates between the two solutions, even though the uncertainties are large (as already stated in the abstract). We will add a short clarifying sentence in the revised text to emphasize this point. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; standard effective-Lagrangian fit with external validation

full rationale

The paper introduces a new 3/2^- resonance pole by adjusting its mass, width, and couplings within an effective Lagrangian to reproduce the 2.0 GeV structure and threshold behavior in K^-p → KΞ total cross sections. Polarization observables and the K^-n channel are then computed from the same parameters and compared to data, but these are distinct observables not used to determine the pole parameters. No self-citation chain, self-definitional loop, or renaming of a fitted quantity as a prediction is present. The derivation remains self-contained: the model equations plus explicit resonance terms generate outputs that can be tested against independent measurements.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

Based solely on the abstract; the work introduces a new resonance whose mass, width and couplings are adjusted to data, assumes the validity of the effective Lagrangian framework, and treats the observed structure as resonant rather than background-driven.

free parameters (3)
  • resonance mass = ~1.9 GeV
    Adjusted to place the pole near the observed 2.0 GeV structure
  • resonance width = ~200 MeV
    Adjusted to reproduce the width of the structure
  • coupling strengths
    Multiple couplings in the effective Lagrangian are varied to fit the cross sections
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The effective Lagrangian approach with s-channel resonance exchanges is adequate to describe the reaction in the 1.8-2.8 GeV region
    Basis of the entire amplitude construction
invented entities (1)
  • new J^P=3/2- hyperon resonance no independent evidence
    purpose: To generate the 2.0 GeV structure and threshold behavior
    Postulated to fit the data; no independent experimental confirmation supplied

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5839 in / 1552 out tokens · 40911 ms · 2026-06-29T21:29:16.902473+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages · 10 internal anchors

  1. [1]

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

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

    1964

  2. [2]

    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 1 10.17181/CERN- TH-401 (1964)

    work page doi:10.17181/cern- 1964

  3. [3]

    Navas, C

    S. Navas, C. Amsler, T. Gutsche,et al.(Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024)

    2024

  4. [4]

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  5. [5]

    Capstick and N

    S. Capstick and N. Isgur, Baryons in a relativized quark model with chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 34, 2809 (1986)

    1986

  6. [6]

    W. A. Cooperet al., Interactions of 1.47 GeV/cnegativeK −-mesons in hydrogen, in11th International Conference on High-energy Physics(1962) pp. 298–302

    1962

  7. [7]

    Carmony, G

    D. Carmony, G. Pjerrou, P. Schlein, W. Slater, and D. Stork, Properties of Ξ hyperons, Phys. Rev. Lett.12, 482 (1964)

    1964

  8. [8]

    Badier, M

    J. Badier, M. Demoulin, J. Goldberg, B. P. Gregory, C. Pelletier, A. Rouge, M. Ville, R. Barloutaud, A. Leveque, C. Louedec, J. Meyer, P. Schlein, A. Verglas, D. Holthuizen, W. Hoogland, and A. Tenner, Baryonic states of strangeness−2 produced inK −pinteractions at 3.0 GeV/c, Phys. Lett.16, 171 (1965)

    1965

  9. [9]

    Berge, P

    J. Berge, P. Eberhard, J. Hubbard, D. W. Merrill, J. Button-Shafer, F. T. Solmitz, and M. Stevenson, Some properties of Ξ − and Ξ0 hyperons produced inK −pinteractions between 1.05 and 1.7 BeV/c, Phys. Rev.147, 945 (1966)

    1966

  10. [10]

    Haque, B

    M. Haque, B. Musgrave, W. Blair,et al.(Birmingham-Glasgow-London(I.C.)-Oxford-Rutherford), Re- actions K−p→Hyperon + Meson at 3.5 GeV/c, Phys. Rev.152, 1148 (1966)

    1966

  11. [11]

    London, R

    G. London, R. Rau, N. Samios, S. Yamamoto, M. Goldberg, S. Lichtman, M. Prime, and J. Leitner, K−p Interaction at 2.24 BeV/c, Phys. Rev.143, 1034 (1966). 19

    1966

  12. [12]

    T. G. Trippe and P. E. Schlein, Partial-Wave Analysis of K −p→Ξ −K+ at 2 GeV/c, Phys. Rev.158, 1334 (1967)

    1967

  13. [13]

    Burgun, J

    G. Burgun, J. Meyer, E. Pauli,et al., Resonance formation in the reactions K −p→K +Ξ− and K −p →K 0Ξ0 in the mass region from 1915 to 2168 MeV, Nucl. Phys. B8, 447 (1968)

    1915

  14. [14]

    Trower, J

    W. Trower, J. Ficenec, R. Hulsizer, J. Lathrop, J. Snyder, and W. Swanson, Some two-body final states of K−p interactions at 1.33 GeV/c, Phys. Rev.170, 1207 (1968)

    1968

  15. [15]

    Dauber, J

    P. Dauber, J. Berge, J. Hubbard, D. Merrill, and R. Muller, Production and decay of cascade hyperons, Phys. Rev.179, 1262 (1969)

    1969

  16. [16]

    Griselin, A

    J. Griselin, A. Givernaud, R. Barloutaud,et al., K −p cross sections between 1.1 and 1.4 GeV/c, Nucl. Phys. B93, 189 (1975)

    1975

  17. [17]

    Briefel, S

    E. Briefel, S. Gourevitch, L. Kirsch,et al., Search for Ξ* production in K −p interactions at 2.87 GeV/c, Phys. Rev. D16, 2706 (1977)

    1977

  18. [18]

    de Bellefon, A

    A. de Bellefon, A. Berthon, P. Billoir, J. Brunet, G. Tristram, J. Vrana, B. Baccari, G. Poulard, D. Revel, and B. Tallini, Channel Cross-Sections of K −p Reactions from 1.934 to 2.516 GeV/c, Nuovo Cim. A41, 451 (1977)

    1977

  19. [19]

    Carlson, H

    J. Carlson, H. Davis, D. Jauch, N. Sossong, and R. Ellsworth, Measurement of Neutral Cascade Pro- duction from Negative-Kaon-Hydrogen at 1.8 GeV/c, K −p→K 0Ξ0, Phys. Rev. D7, 2533 (1973)

    1973

  20. [20]

    Phenomenological model for the Kbar N --> K Xi reaction

    D. Sharov, V. Korotkikh, and D. Lanskoy, Phenomenological model for the ¯KN→KΞ reaction, Eur. Phys. J. A47, 109 (2011), arXiv:1105.0764 [nucl-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  21. [21]

    Production of a cascade hyperon in the K^- - proton interaction

    R. Shyam, O. Scholten, and A. Thomas, Production of a cascade hyperon in the K −p interaction, Phys. Rev. C84, 042201 (2011), arXiv:1108.2318 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  22. [22]

    B. C. Jackson, Y. Oh, H. Haberzettl, and K. Nakayama, ¯K+ N→K + Ξ reaction and S=-1 hyperon resonances, Phys. Rev. C91, 065208 (2015), arXiv:1503.00845 [nucl-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  23. [23]

    The $\bar{K} N \rightarrow K \Xi$ reaction in coupled channel chiral models up to next-to-leading order

    A. Feijoo, V. Magas, and A. Ramos, The ¯KN→KΞ reaction in coupled channel chiral models up to next-to-leading order, Phys. Rev. C92, 015206 (2015), arXiv:1502.07956 [nucl-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  24. [24]

    Model-independent aspects of the reaction $\bar{K} + N \to K + \Xi$

    B. Jackson, Y. Oh, H. Haberzettl, and K. Nakayama, Model-independent aspects of the reaction ¯K+ N→K + Ξ, Phys. Rev. C89, 025206 (2014), arXiv:1311.2836 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  25. [25]

    Dynamical coupled-channels model of $K^- p$ reactions (I): Determination of partial-wave amplitudes

    H. Kamano, S. X. Nakamura, T.-S. H. Lee, and T. Sato, Dynamical coupled-channels model of K − p re- actions (I): Determination of partial-wave amplitudes, Phys. Rev. C90, 065204 (2014), arXiv:1407.6839 [nucl-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  26. [26]

    Matveev, A

    M. Matveev, A. Sarantsev, V. Nikonov, A. Anisovich, U. Thoma, and E. Klempt, Hyperon I: Partial- wave amplitudes for K −p scattering, Eur. Phys. J. A55, 179 (2019), arXiv:1907.03645 [nucl-ex]

    work page arXiv 2019

  27. [27]

    Towards the Minimal Spectrum of Excited Baryons

    J. Landay, M. Mai, M. D¨ oring, H. Haberzettl, and K. Nakayama, Towards the Minimal Spectrum of Excited Baryons, Phys. Rev. D99, 016001 (2019), arXiv:1810.00075 [nucl-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  28. [28]

    S.-H. Kim, J. K. Ahn, S. H. Kim, S.-i. Nam, and M.-K. Cheoun, Double-strangeness exchange reactions in a hybrid Regge-plus-resonance approach, Phys. Rev. C107, 065202 (2023), arXiv:2304.07725 [nucl- th]. 20

    work page arXiv 2023

  29. [29]

    Aokiet al., Extension of the J-PARC Hadron Experimental Facility: Third White Paper, (2021), arXiv:2110.04462 [nucl-ex]

    K. Aokiet al., Extension of the J-PARC Hadron Experimental Facility: Third White Paper, (2021), arXiv:2110.04462 [nucl-ex]

    work page arXiv 2021

  30. [30]

    Chenet al., Huizhou Hadron Spectrometer – a Proposed High-rate Experimental Setup at the High Intensity Heavy-ion Accelerator Facility, (2025), arXiv:2511.22864 [hep-ex]

    X. Chenet al., Huizhou Hadron Spectrometer – a Proposed High-rate Experimental Setup at the High Intensity Heavy-ion Accelerator Facility, (2025), arXiv:2511.22864 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2025

  31. [31]

    Dobbs (KLF), Strange hadron spectroscopy with the KLong facility at Jefferson lab, Rev

    S. Dobbs (KLF), Strange hadron spectroscopy with the KLong facility at Jefferson lab, Rev. Mex. Fis. Suppl.3, 0308032 (2022), arXiv:2207.10779 [nucl-ex]

    work page arXiv 2022

  32. [32]

    Johnson and E

    K. Johnson and E. Sudarshan, Inconsistency of the local field theory of charged spin 3/2 particles, Annals Phys.13, 126 (1961)

    1961

  33. [33]

    Velo and D

    G. Velo and D. Zwanziger, Propagation and Quantization of Rarita-Schwinger Waves in an External Electromagnetic Potential, Phys. Rev.186, 1337 (1969)

    1969

  34. [34]

    Velo and D

    G. Velo and D. Zwanzinger, Noncausality and Other Defects of Interaction Lagrangians for Particles with Spin One and Higher, Phys. Rev.188, 2218 (1969)

    1969

  35. [35]

    Hasumi, R

    A. Hasumi, R. Endo, and T. Kimura, Dirac quantisation of a massive spin-3/2 particle coupled with a magnetic field, J. Phys. A12, L217 (1979)

    1979

  36. [36]

    Cox, On the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian constraint algorithms for the Rarita-Schwinger field coupled to an external electromagnetic field, J

    W. Cox, On the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian constraint algorithms for the Rarita-Schwinger field coupled to an external electromagnetic field, J. Phys. A22, 1599 (1989)

    1989

  37. [37]

    Quantization of an interacting spin-3/2 field and the Delta isobar

    V. Pascalutsa, Quantization of an interacting spin-3/2 field and the Delta isobar, Phys. Rev. D58, 096002 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9802288

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  38. [38]

    Rarita and J

    W. Rarita and J. Schwinger, On a Theory of Particles with Half-Integral Spin, Phys. Rev.60, 61 (1941)

    1941

  39. [39]

    Adelseck, C

    R. Adelseck, C. Bennhold, and L. Wright, Kaon Photoproduction Operator for Use in Nuclear Physics, Phys. Rev. C32, 1681 (1985)

    1985

  40. [40]

    Benmerrouche, R

    M. Benmerrouche, R. M. Davidson, and N. C. Mukhopadhyay, Problems of describing spin-3/2 baryon resonances in the effective Lagrangian theory, Phys. Rev. C39, 2339 (1989)

    1989

  41. [41]

    de Bellefon, A

    A. de Bellefon, A. Berthon, P. Billoir, J. Brunet, G. Tristram, J. Vrana, B. Baccari, G. Poulard, D. Revel, and B. Tallini, New Data on the Reactions K −p→ ¯K0n and K −p→K −p between 1.934 GeV/c and 2.516 GeV/c, Partial-Wave Analysis of These Channels and SU(3) Classification of the New Y* States Observed, Nuovo Cim. A42, 403 (1977)

    1977

  42. [42]

    Coupled-channel dynamics in the reactions piN --> piN, etaN, KLambda, KSigma

    D. Ronchen, M. Doring, F. Huang, H. Haberzettl, J. Haidenbauer, C. Hanhart, S. Krewald, U.-G. Meissner, and K. Nakayama, Coupled-channel dynamics in the reactionsπN→πN,ηN, KΛ, KΣ, Eur. Phys. J. A49, 44 (2013), arXiv:1211.6998 [nucl-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  43. [43]

    Scheuer, R

    J. Scheuer, R. Barloutaud, D. Merrill,et al.(SABRE), Experimental study of two-body and quasi-two- body reactions in K −n intereaction at 3 GeV/c, Nucl. Phys. B33, 61 (1971)

    1971

  44. [44]

    Briefel, S

    E. Briefel, S. Gourevitch, L. Kirsch,et al., Search for Ξ* Resonances in 2.87 GeV/c K −n Interactions, Phys. Rev. D12, 1859 (1975)

    1975

  45. [45]

    Dong, F.-K

    X.-K. Dong, F.-K. Guo, and B.-S. Zou, A survey of heavy–heavy hadronic molecules, Commun. Theor. Phys.73, 125201 (2021), arXiv:2108.02673 [hep-ph]. 21

    work page arXiv 2021

  46. [46]

    Dong, F.-K

    X.-K. Dong, F.-K. Guo, and B.-S. Zou, A survey of heavy-antiheavy hadronic molecules, Progr. Phys. 41, 65 (2021), arXiv:2101.01021 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021