Observation of the decays B⁺ to Sigma_(c)(2455)⁺⁺ bar{Xi}_(c)^(prime-) and B⁰ to Sigma_(c)(2455)⁰ bar{Xi}_(c)^(prime0)
Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 05:30 UTC · model grok-4.3
The pith
B-meson decays to charmed baryon-antibaryon pairs from the same SU(3) sextet are observed for the first time.
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
Core claim
The paper reports the first observation of B+ → Σc(2455)++ Ξc'− and B0 → Σc(2455)0 Ξc'0 with significances of 6.4σ and 5.3σ, respectively. The branching fractions are B(B+ → Σc(2455)++ Ξc'−) = (1.68 ± 0.31 ± 0.12 +1.49−0.54) × 10−3 and B(B0 → Σc(2455)0 Ξc'0) = (1.28 ± 0.32 ± 0.10 +0.30−0.21) × 10−3, where the third uncertainty comes from external inputs on Ξc branching fractions. This constitutes the first observation of B-meson decays into a pair of charmed baryon-antibaryon states belonging to the same SU(3) flavor sextet.
What carries the argument
The SU(3) flavor sextet grouping that places Σc(2455) and Ξc' in the same multiplet, allowing the identification of these as same-sextet baryon-antibaryon pairs.
If this is right
- These channels provide a new experimental handle on the production of charmed baryons in B decays.
- The measured rates can serve as input for theoretical calculations of baryon-pair production mechanisms.
- Related decays involving other members of the same SU(3) sextet become natural targets for future searches.
- The observation supports the use of SU(3) flavor symmetry to classify allowed B to baryon-antibaryon transitions.
Where Pith is reading between the lines
- Improved precision on the Ξc branching fractions would reduce the dominant uncertainty and sharpen tests of production models.
- The result suggests that searches for decays to other same-sextet combinations could map the full pattern of allowed modes.
- If similar observations accumulate across multiple sextet members, they could constrain the role of SU(3) breaking in heavy baryon decays.
Load-bearing premise
The absolute branching fractions of the Ξc− and Ξc0 decays, taken from external measurements, are sufficiently well known to normalize the results without dominating the uncertainty.
What would settle it
An independent analysis using substantially larger data samples that finds no significant signal peaks at the expected invariant masses or measures branching fractions inconsistent with the quoted central values within combined uncertainties.
Figures
read the original abstract
We report the first observation of the decays $B^{+} \to \Sigma_{c}(2455)^{++} \bar{\Xi}_{c}^{\prime-}$ and $B^{0} \to \Sigma_{c}(2455)^{0} \bar{\Xi}_{c}^{\prime0}$, with significances of $6.4\,\sigma$ and $5.3\, \sigma$, respectively, including systematic uncertainties. This analysis is based on data samples containing $771.6 \times 10^{6}$ $\Upsilon(4S)$ decays collected with the Belle detector at the KEKB collider and $520.6 \times 10^{6}$ $\Upsilon(4S)$ decays collected with the Belle~II detector at the SuperKEKB collider. The branching fractions are measured to be $\mathcal{B}(B^+ \to \Sigma_c(2455)^{++} \bar{\Xi}_c^{\prime -}) = (1.68 \pm 0.31 \pm 0.12^{+1.49}_{-0.54}) \times 10^{-3}$ and $\mathcal{B}(B^0 \to \Sigma_c(2455)^{0} \bar{\Xi}_c^{\prime 0}) = (1.28 \pm 0.32 \pm 0.10^{+0.30}_{-0.21}) \times 10^{-3}$, where the first and second uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively, and the third arises from the uncertainties in the absolute branching fractions of $\bar{\Xi}_{c}^{-}$ and $\bar{\Xi}_{c}^{0}$ decays. This result represents the first observation of $B$-meson decays into a pair of charmed baryon-antibaryon states belonging to the same $SU(3)$ flavor sextet.
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The paper reports the first observation of the decays B⁺ → Σ_c(2455)⁺⁺ ar{Ξ}_c'⁻ and B⁰ → Σ_c(2455)⁰ ar{Ξ}_c'⁰, with significances of 6.4σ and 5.3σ (including systematics) from combined Belle (771.6 × 10^6 Υ(4S) decays) and Belle II (520.6 × 10^6 Υ(4S) decays) data. Branching fractions are measured as (1.68 ± 0.31 ± 0.12^{+1.49}_{-0.54}) × 10^{-3} and (1.28 ± 0.32 ± 0.10^{+0.30}_{-0.21}) × 10^{-3}, with the third uncertainty from external Ξ_c branching fractions; this is presented as the first B-meson decay to a charmed baryon-antibaryon pair in the same SU(3) sextet.
Significance. If the result holds, it is significant for understanding nonleptonic B decays involving baryons and for testing SU(3) flavor symmetry in heavy-quark systems. The combined dataset from two experiments, explicit inclusion of systematics in the significance, and clear separation of the dominant external normalization uncertainty are strengths of the analysis.
Simulated Author's Rebuttal
We thank the referee for the careful reading of the manuscript and for the positive recommendation to accept.
Circularity Check
No significant circularity
full rationale
This paper reports direct experimental observations of specific B-meson decay modes using collider data from Belle and Belle II, with branching fractions extracted via standard signal significance and efficiency-corrected yield measurements. The central results (6.4σ and 5.3σ significances, quoted branching fractions) are obtained from fits to invariant-mass distributions and normalization to external Ξc branching fractions; no equations, ansatzes, or self-citations reduce the reported observations or rates to fitted parameters or prior results by construction. The SU(3) classification statement is a post-hoc interpretation of the observed final states and does not enter the measurement chain. The analysis is self-contained against external benchmarks.
Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger
axioms (1)
- domain assumption The absolute branching fractions of the Ξc− and Ξc0 decays are known from previous experiments.
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[1]
H. Y. Cheng, Nucl. Phys. B, Proc. Suppl. 163, 68 (2007)
2007
-
[2]
Chistov, J
R. Chistov, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 675, 022007 (2016)
2016
-
[3]
Ed. A. J. Bevan, B. Golob, Th. Mannel, S. Prell, and B. D. Yabsley, Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 3026 (2014)
2014
-
[4]
Y. K. Hsiao, S. Y. Tsai, C. C. Lih, and E. Rodrigues, J. High Energy Phys. 04, 035 (2020)
2020
-
[5]
Y. K. Hsiao, J. High Energy Phys. 11, 117 (2023)
2023
-
[6]
Chistov et al
R. Chistov et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 74, 111105 (2006)
2006
-
[7]
Aubert et al
B. Aubert et al. (BaBar Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 77, 031101 (2008)
2008
-
[8]
Li et al
Y. Li et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 100, 112010 (2019)
2019
-
[9]
Aaij et al
R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 061802 (2026)
2026
-
[10]
Navas et al
S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024) and 2025 update
2024
-
[11]
Abumusabh et al
M. Abumusabh et al. (Belle and Belle II Collaborations), Phys. Rev. D 112, L051101 (2025)
2025
-
[12]
Abashian et al
A. Abashian et al. (Belle Collaboration), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 479, 117 (2002)
2002
- [13]
-
[14]
Brodzicka et al
J. Brodzicka et al. (Belle Collaboration), Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2012, 04D001 (2012)
2012
-
[15]
Adachi et al
I. Adachi et al. (Belle Collaboration), Chin. Phys. C 49, 013001 (2025)
2025
-
[16]
Kurokawa and E
S. Kurokawa and E. Kikutani, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 499, 1 (2003), and other papers included in this volume; T. Abe et al. , Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2013, 03A001 (2013), and references therein
2003
-
[17]
Akai et al
K. Akai et al. (SuperKEKB Accelerator Team), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 907, 188 (2018)
2018
-
[18]
D. J. Lange, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 462, 152 (2001)
2001
-
[19]
Sjöstrand, S
T. Sjöstrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Z. Skands, J. High Energy Phys. 05, 026 (2006)
2006
-
[20]
Sjöstrand et al
T. Sjöstrand et al. , Comput. Phys. Commun. 191, 159 (2015)
2015
-
[21]
Barberio, B
E. Barberio, B. van Eijk, and Z. Was, Comput. Phys. Commun. 66, 115 (1991)
1991
-
[22]
Z. J. Liptak et al., Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 1040, 167168. (2022)
2022
-
[23]
X. Y. Zhou, S. X. Du, G. Li, and C. P. Shen, Comput. Phys. Commun. 258, 107540 (2021)
2021
-
[24]
Jadach, B
S. Jadach, B. F. L. Ward, and Z. Was, Comput. Phys. Commun. 130, 260 (2000)
2000
-
[25]
Brun et al
R. Brun et al. , geant3: user’s guide Geant 3.10, Geant 3.11, CERN Report No. DD/EE/84-1, 1984
1984
-
[26]
Agostinelli et al
S. Agostinelli et al. (geant4 Collaboration), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 506, 250 (2003)
2003
-
[27]
T. Kuhr, C. Pulvermacher, M. Ritter, T. Hauth, and N. Braun (Belle II Framework Software Group), Comput. Softw. Big Sci. 3, 1 (2019)
2019
-
[28]
Gelb et al
M. Gelb et al. Comput. Softw. Big Sci. 2, 9 (2018)
2018
-
[29]
Punzi, eConf C030908, MODT002 (2003)
G. Punzi, eConf C030908, MODT002 (2003)
2003
-
[30]
Nakano, Nucl
E. Nakano, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 494, 402 (2002)
2002
-
[31]
Adachi et al
I. Adachi et al. (Belle II Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 1237 (2025)
2025
-
[32]
Nakano et al
H. Nakano et al. (Belle Collaboration) Phys. Rev. D 97, 092003 (2018)
2018
-
[33]
Abudinén et al
F. Abudinén et al. (Belle and Belle II Collaborations), J. High Energy Phys. 02, 063 (2022)
2022
-
[34]
J. Y. Lee et al. (Belle Collaboration) Phys. Rev. D 103, 052005 (2021)
2021
-
[35]
Cheema, EPJ Web Conf
P. Cheema, EPJ Web Conf. 295, 09035 (2024)
2024
-
[36]
K. S. Cranmer, Comput. Phys. Commun. 136, 198 (2001)
2001
-
[37]
S. Banerjee et al. (Heavy Flavor A veraging Group), Phys. Rev. D 113, 012008 (2026), with specific result from doi:10.5281/zenodo.19210609. 10 2.44 2.46 2.48 2.5 ]2c) [GeV/+π+ cΛM( 0 50 100 2cCandidates per 2.0 MeV/ Data 2.44 2.46 2.48 2.5 ]2c) [GeV/-π+ cΛM( 0 20 40 60 2cCandidates per 2.0 MeV/ Data ∫ Ldt = 711 fb −1 (Belle) + 492 fb −1 (Belle II) Prelimi...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.