pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.29413 · v1 · pith:QZVN7SPGnew · submitted 2026-06-28 · ✦ hep-ph

Exploring KXi^* and K^*Xi molecular states and the triangle singularity in the K^- p to K Xi(1530) reaction

Ke Wang , Fei Huang , Bing-Song Zou This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-30 02:11 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph
keywords triangle singularitymolecular statesK- p reactionXi(1530)spin density matrix elementshyperon resonanceseffective Lagrangian
0
0 comments X

The pith

A proposed K* Ξ molecular state at 2150 MeV generates a triangle singularity that produces distinct spin effects in Ξ(1530) production.

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

The paper models the K- p → K Ξ(1530) reaction using effective Lagrangians while treating the Λ(2050) as a K Ξ* molecule and introducing a K* Ξ molecule called Λ(2150). This molecular state produces a triangle singularity through K* Ξ π loop diagrams that contributes to the observed cross-section peak near 2.25 GeV alongside resonance production. The triangle singularity creates specific variations in the spin density matrix elements of the final-state Ξ* that do not appear in a pure resonance picture. These spin observables can be extracted from the three-body final state by applying a kinematic cut on the Ξπ invariant mass. The predictions offer a way to test both the triangle singularity and the existence of the K* Ξ molecule in future data.

Core claim

The Λ(2150) interpreted as a K* Ξ molecule with I(J^P)=0(3/2-) generates a triangle singularity via intermediate K*, Ξ, and π states that contributes to the reaction cross section and induces pronounced, energy-dependent spin effects in Ξ* that serve as a signature distinguishable from resonance production alone.

What carries the argument

The triangle singularity generated by the K*, Ξ, π loop diagrams attached to the K* Ξ molecular state.

If this is right

  • Spin observables of Ξ* vary significantly with energy in the 2.2–2.3 GeV region when the triangle singularity is active.
  • These variations are absent when only resonance production is considered.
  • The spin observables can be reliably obtained from the pion angular distribution in the Ξπ rest frame after a suitable kinematic cut on the Ξπ mass.
  • The same spin signatures provide a test for the existence of the K* Ξ molecular state in data from J-PARC.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Confirmation of the predicted spin patterns would strengthen the case for using triangle singularities as probes of molecular assignments in other hyperon reactions.
  • The kinematic-cut technique for extracting spin observables from three-body final states could be adapted to related processes involving Ξ* or other resonances.
  • If the molecular state is present, similar loop effects may appear in photoproduction or other initial-state channels at comparable energies.

Load-bearing premise

That the Λ(2050) is a K Ξ* molecule and that a K* Ξ molecule exists near 2150 MeV and produces the triangle singularity in this reaction.

What would settle it

A measurement of the Ξ(1530) spin density matrix elements that either shows or fails to show the predicted strong variations specifically in the √s = 2.2–2.3 GeV interval.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.29413 by Bing-Song Zou, Fei Huang, Ke Wang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Tree-level Feynman diagrams for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Triangle-loop Feynman diagrams for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (a) Triangle-loop and (b) tree-level Feynman dia [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Total cross sections for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Spin observable [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Angular distribution of the pion in the Ξ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Angular distributions of the pion in the Ξ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We investigate the $K^- p \to K \Xi(1530)$ reaction within an effective Lagrangian approach, exploring possible $K \Xi^*$ and $K^* \Xi$ hadronic molecular states and the role of the triangle singularity (TS). The $\Lambda(2050)3/2^-$ is interpreted as a $K \Xi^*$ molecule, whereas a $K^* \Xi$ molecule with $I(J^P)=0(3/2^-)$ and mass about 2150~MeV denoted as $\Lambda(2150)$ can generate a TS through triangle-loop diagrams with intermediate $K^*$, $\Xi$, and $\pi$. The peak structure observed in the cross section near $\sqrt{s}=2.25$ GeV is analyzed in terms of both the $\Sigma(2250)$ resonance production and the TS mechanism associated with $\Lambda(2150)$. We find that the TS induces pronounced spin effects in the final state $\Xi^*$, which can be probed through measurements of its spin density matrix elements. In particular, significant variations of the spin observables in the $\sqrt{s}=2.2$--$2.3$ GeV region serve as a distinct TS signature absent in a pure resonance scenario. Furthermore, for the three-body reaction $K^- p \to K^+ \pi^- \Xi^0$, we demonstrate that $\Xi^*$ spin observables can be reliably extracted from the $\pi$ angular distribution in the $\Xi \pi$ rest frame by applying an appropriate kinematic cut on the $\Xi\pi$ invariant mass to suppress background contributions. These predictions can be tested in future high-precision measurements at J-PARC, providing crucial insights into the nature of the TS and the possible existence of the $K^* \Xi$ molecular state.

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 investigates the K^- p → K Ξ(1530) reaction in an effective Lagrangian approach. It interprets the Λ(2050)3/2^- as a K Ξ* molecular state and introduces a K* Ξ molecular state with I(J^P)=0(3/2^-) and mass ~2150 MeV (denoted Λ(2150)) that generates a triangle singularity via K* Ξ π loops. The peak near √s=2.25 GeV is analyzed as arising from either Σ(2250) resonance production or this TS mechanism. The central prediction is that the TS produces pronounced variations in the Ξ* spin density matrix elements (distinct from a pure resonance scenario) in the √s=2.2–2.3 GeV region, testable at J-PARC; a method is also given to extract these observables from the three-body K^- p → K^+ π^- Ξ^0 channel via kinematic cuts on the Ξπ invariant mass.

Significance. If the effective Lagrangian amplitudes, loop integrals, and molecular assignments are correct, the work supplies a concrete, falsifiable signature (variations in spin observables) for distinguishing triangle singularities from resonant contributions in baryon reactions. This is a useful addition to the literature on TS mechanisms and possible molecular states, with the explicit comparison of TS versus resonance scenarios and the proposed experimental extraction procedure being particular strengths. The results remain exploratory due to the input assumptions but could guide future polarization measurements.

major comments (2)
  1. [Introduction and model setup] The mass of the proposed Λ(2150) is fixed at ~2150 MeV specifically to position the TS at the observed cross-section peak near √s=2.25 GeV. This choice makes the explanatory power of the TS mechanism dependent on an input parameter selected to match the data feature under study, reducing the independence of the prediction (see abstract and the discussion of the Λ(2150) state).
  2. [Results on spin observables] The central claim that TS induces distinct spin effects absent in a pure resonance scenario rests on the separation of the TS amplitude (from the K* Ξ π loop) from the resonance contribution; without explicit verification of the loop integrals and on-shell conditions in the results section, it is unclear whether interference or kinematic factors could alter the claimed distinction in the spin density matrix elements.
minor comments (2)
  1. The notation and definitions for the spin density matrix elements of Ξ* should include explicit formulas or references to standard conventions to improve clarity for readers.
  2. Figure captions describing the kinematic cuts for the three-body channel would benefit from additional detail on the precise invariant-mass window used to suppress backgrounds.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments, which help clarify the presentation of our results. We respond to each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The mass of the proposed Λ(2150) is fixed at ~2150 MeV specifically to position the TS at the observed cross-section peak near √s=2.25 GeV. This choice makes the explanatory power of the TS mechanism dependent on an input parameter selected to match the data feature under study, reducing the independence of the prediction (see abstract and the discussion of the Λ(2150) state).

    Authors: We acknowledge that the mass of the proposed Λ(2150) is chosen to align the triangle singularity with the observed peak near √s=2.25 GeV. This is a deliberate modeling choice to explore the TS as a possible explanation for the structure. The key independent prediction remains the distinct energy dependence of the Ξ* spin density matrix elements, which differs from a resonance-only scenario and can be tested at J-PARC irrespective of the precise mass value. We will revise the introduction and model section to explicitly state the rationale for the mass choice and to emphasize that the spin observables constitute the falsifiable signature. revision: partial

  2. Referee: The central claim that TS induces distinct spin effects absent in a pure resonance scenario rests on the separation of the TS amplitude (from the K* Ξ π loop) from the resonance contribution; without explicit verification of the loop integrals and on-shell conditions in the results section, it is unclear whether interference or kinematic factors could alter the claimed distinction in the spin density matrix elements.

    Authors: We agree that additional explicit verification would strengthen the manuscript. In the revised version we will add to the results section the explicit form of the K* Ξ π loop integrals, the on-shell conditions that generate the singularity, and a brief discussion showing that the separation of the TS contribution produces the reported variations in the spin density matrix elements. We will also note that interference with the Σ(2250) resonance does not erase the distinctive TS signature in the √s=2.2–2.3 GeV window. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity identified

full rationale

The paper constructs an effective Lagrangian model assuming the existence of a K* Ξ molecular state with mass ~2150 MeV chosen to align the triangle singularity with the observed cross-section peak near 2.25 GeV, then computes the resulting amplitudes, K* Ξ π loop integrals, and Ξ* spin density matrix elements as explicit functions of √s. These spin observables are shown to exhibit distinct variations in the 2.2–2.3 GeV window compared to a pure Σ(2250) resonance contribution, with the distinction arising from the structure of the TS amplitude rather than reducing to the input mass choice by construction. The molecular assignments function as exploratory inputs whose consequences (including testable spin signatures) are derived independently; no self-definitional equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the derivation chain.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 2 invented entities

Ledger constructed from abstract only; full paper likely contains additional fitted couplings and diagram normalizations not visible here.

free parameters (1)
  • mass of proposed Λ(2150) = about 2150 MeV
    Chosen near 2150 MeV to locate the triangle singularity at the observed peak
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Effective Lagrangian approach is valid for describing the reaction and the molecular states
    Framework invoked for the entire analysis
invented entities (2)
  • K Ξ* molecular state for Λ(2050)3/2- no independent evidence
    purpose: Interpret the resonance as a hadronic molecule
    Stated as an interpretation
  • K* Ξ molecular state for Λ(2150) with I(J^P)=0(3/2-) no independent evidence
    purpose: Generate the triangle singularity
    Proposed with specific quantum numbers and mass

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5882 in / 1624 out tokens · 64850 ms · 2026-06-30T02:11:42.264605+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

64 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages · 26 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Therefore, all angular distributions are normalized to unity at cosθ π =−1/ √ 3, as shown in Fig. 7. The three black dashed lines indi- cate the expectations forP Ξ∗ = +1, 0, and−1 (from top to bottom at cosθ π = 1). The blue dashed and green dash-dotted curves represent the triangle-loop and K ∗-mediated background amplitudes, respectively. The −1.00 −0....

    2050

  2. [2]

    Gell-Mann, Phys

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

    1964

  3. [3]

    Zweig, (1964), 10.17181/CERN-TH-401

    G. Zweig, (1964), 10.17181/CERN-TH-401

    work page doi:10.17181/cern-th-401 1964

  4. [4]

    H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, and S.-L. Zhu, Phys. Rept.639, 1 (2016), arXiv:1601.02092 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  5. [5]

    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)], arXiv:1705.00141 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  6. [6]

    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

  7. [7]

    L. Meng, B. Wang, G.-J. Wang, and S.-L. Zhu, Phys. Rept.1019, 1 (2023), arXiv:2204.08716 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    J.-J. Wu, R. Molina, E. Oset, and B. S. Zou, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 232001 (2010), arXiv:1007.0573 [nucl-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  9. [9]

    J.-J. Wu, R. Molina, E. Oset, and B. S. Zou, Phys. Rev. C84, 015202 (2011), arXiv:1011.2399 [nucl-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  10. [10]

    W. L. Wang, F. Huang, Z. Y. Zhang, and B. S. Zou, Phys. Rev. C84, 015203 (2011), arXiv:1101.0453 [nucl- th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  11. [11]

    J.-J. Wu, T. S. H. Lee, and B. S. Zou, Phys. Rev. C85, 044002 (2012), arXiv:1202.1036 [nucl-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  12. [12]

    S. L. Olsen, T. Skwarnicki, and D. Zieminska, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 015003 (2018), arXiv:1708.04012 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  13. [13]

    A. Ali, J. S. Lange, and S. Stone, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 97, 123 (2017), arXiv:1706.00610 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  14. [14]

    Garcilazo and A

    H. Garcilazo and A. Valcarce, Symmetry17, 1324 (2025), arXiv:2508.11483 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  15. [15]

    H¨ usken, E

    N. H¨ usken, E. S. Norella, and I. Polyakov, Mod. Phys. Lett. A40, 2530002 (2025), arXiv:2410.06923 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  16. [16]

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

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  17. [17]

    Observation of a narrow pentaquark state, $P_c(4312)^+$, and of two-peak structure of the $P_c(4450)^+$

    R. Aaijet al.(LHCb), Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 222001 (2019), arXiv:1904.03947 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  18. [18]

    Strong LHCb evidence supporting the existence of the hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks

    R. Chen, Z.-F. Sun, X. Liu, and S.-L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D100, 011502 (2019), arXiv:1903.11013 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  19. [19]

    J. He, Eur. Phys. J. C79, 393 (2019), arXiv:1903.11872 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  20. [20]

    He and D.-Y

    J. He and D.-Y. Chen, Eur. Phys. J. C79, 887 (2019), arXiv:1909.05681 [hep-ph]. 10

    work page arXiv 2019

  21. [21]

    Dong, F.-K

    X.-K. Dong, F.-K. Guo, and B.-S. Zou, Commun. Theor. Phys.73, 125201 (2021), arXiv:2108.02673 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  22. [22]

    Wang, C.-W

    Y.-F. Wang, C.-W. Shen, D. R¨ onchen, U.-G. Meißner, B.-S. Zou, and F. Huang, Phys. Rev. D112, 074010 (2025), arXiv:2506.21858 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    Looking for the hidden-charm pentaquark resonances in $J/\psi p$ scattering

    H. Huang, J. He, and J. Ping, (2019), arXiv:1904.00221 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  24. [24]

    Emergence of a complete heavy-quark spin symmetry multiplet: seven molecular pentaquarks in light of the latest LHCb analysis

    M.-Z. Liu, Y.-W. Pan, F.-Z. Peng, M. S´ anchez S´ anchez, L.-S. Geng, A. Hosaka, and M. Pavon Valderrama, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 242001 (2019), arXiv:1903.11560 [hep- ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  25. [25]

    Wang, W.-L

    D. Wang, W.-L. Wang, and F. Huang, Phys. Rev. C 109, 045204 (2024), arXiv:2403.17756 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  26. [26]

    Nucleon resonances $N(1875)$ and $N(2100)$ as strange partners of LHCb pentaquarks

    J. He, Phys. Rev. D95, 074031 (2017), arXiv:1701.03738 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  27. [27]

    Zou and J

    B. Zou and J. Dai, Nucl. Phys. Rev.35, 369 (2018)

    2018

  28. [28]

    Decay behavior of the strange and beauty partners of $P_c$ hadronic molecules

    Y.-H. Lin, C.-W. Shen, and B.-S. Zou, Nucl. Phys. A 980, 21 (2018), arXiv:1805.06843 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  29. [29]

    S.-M. Wu, F. Wang, and B.-S. Zou, Phys. Rev. C108, 045201 (2023), arXiv:2306.15385 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  30. [30]

    Ben, A.-C

    D. Ben, A.-C. Wang, F. Huang, and B.-S. Zou, Phys. Rev. C108, 065201 (2023), arXiv:2302.14308 [nucl-th]

    work page arXiv 2023

  31. [31]

    J.-C. Suo, D. Ben, and B.-S. Zou, Phys. Rev. C112, 065208 (2025), arXiv:2504.05811 [nucl-th]

    work page arXiv 2025

  32. [32]

    Tian, N.-C

    W.-Y. Tian, N.-C. Wei, Y.-F. Wang, F. Huang, and B.-S. Zou, Phys. Rev. C112, 055203 (2025), arXiv:2510.03673 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    L. D. Landau, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.37, 62 (1960)

    1960

  34. [34]

    The puzzle of anomalously large isospin violations in $\eta(1405/1475)\to 3\pi$

    J.-J. Wu, X.-H. Liu, Q. Zhao, and B.-S. Zou, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 081803 (2012), arXiv:1108.3772 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  35. [35]

    Isospin breaking and $f_0(980)$-$a_0(980)$ mixing in the $\eta(1405) \to \pi^{0} f_0(980)$ reaction

    F. Aceti, W. H. Liang, E. Oset, J. J. Wu, and B. S. Zou, Phys. Rev. D86, 114007 (2012), arXiv:1209.6507 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  36. [36]

    Understanding the property of $\eta(1405/1475)$ in the $J/\psi$ radiative decay

    X.-G. Wu, J.-J. Wu, Q. Zhao, and B.-S. Zou, Phys. Rev. D87, 014023 (2013), arXiv:1211.2148 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  37. [37]

    N. N. Achasov, A. A. Kozhevnikov, and G. N. Shestakov, Phys. Rev. D92, 036003 (2015), arXiv:1504.02844 [hep- ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  38. [38]

    Du and Q

    M.-C. Du and Q. Zhao, Phys. Rev. D100, 036005 (2019), arXiv:1905.04207 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2019

  39. [39]

    H.-J. Jing, S. Sakai, F.-K. Guo, and B.-S. Zou, Phys. Rev. D100, 114010 (2019), arXiv:1907.12719 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2019

  40. [40]

    Novel Method for Precisely Measuring the $X(3872)$ Mass

    F.-K. Guo, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 202002 (2019), arXiv:1902.11221 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  41. [41]

    Sakai, E

    S. Sakai, E. Oset, and F.-K. Guo, Phys. Rev. D101, 054030 (2020), arXiv:2002.03160 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  42. [42]

    Molina and E

    R. Molina and E. Oset, Eur. Phys. J. C80, 451 (2020), arXiv:2002.12821 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  43. [43]

    Sakai, H.-J

    S. Sakai, H.-J. Jing, and F.-K. Guo, Phys. Rev. D102, 114041 (2020), arXiv:2008.10829 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  44. [44]

    Yan, Y.-H

    M.-J. Yan, Y.-H. Ge, and X.-H. Liu, Phys. Rev. D106, 114002 (2022), arXiv:2208.03943 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  45. [45]

    Wang, S.-F

    K. Wang, S.-F. Chen, and B.-C. Liu, Phys. Rev. D106, 094032 (2022), arXiv:2206.09308 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  46. [46]

    K. Wang, R. Li, and B.-C. Liu, Phys. Rev. D108, 094027 (2023), arXiv:2307.03372 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  47. [47]

    Wang, Y.-F

    K. Wang, Y.-F. Wang, B.-C. Liu, and F. Huang, Phys. Rev. D110, 094017 (2024), arXiv:2408.12965 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  48. [48]

    Coleman and R

    S. Coleman and R. E. Norton, Nuovo Cim.38, 438 (1965)

    1965

  49. [49]

    Q.-Y. Guo, J. Liu, P. Wu, and D.-Y. Chen, Phys. Rev. C112, 065201 (2025)

    2025

  50. [50]

    Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys

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

    2024

  51. [51]

    D. A. Sharov, V. L. Korotkikh, and D. E. Lanskoy, Eur. Phys. J. A47, 109 (2011), arXiv:1105.0764 [nucl-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  52. [52]

    Photoproduction of $\Lambda (1405)$ with the $N^*$ and $t$-channel Regge contributions

    S.-H. Kim, S.-i. Nam, D. Jido, and H.-C. Kim, Phys. Rev. D96, 014003 (2017), arXiv:1702.08645 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  53. [53]

    Coupling constant for $\Lambda(1405)\bar{K}N$

    J.-J. Xie, B.-C. Liu, and C.-S. An, Phys. Rev. C88, 015203 (2013), arXiv:1307.3707 [nucl-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  54. [54]

    Jacob and G

    M. Jacob and G. C. Wick, Annals Phys.7, 404 (1959)

    1959

  55. [55]

    Schilling, P

    K. Schilling, P. Seyboth, and G. E. Wolf, Nucl. Phys. B 15, 397 (1970), [Erratum: Nucl.Phys.B 18, 332 (1970)]

    1970

  56. [56]

    D. W. Thomas, A. Engler, H. E. Fisk, and R. W. Krae- mer, Nucl. Phys. B56, 15 (1973)

    1973

  57. [57]

    S.-H. Kim, Y. Oh, and A. I. Titov, Phys. Rev. C95, 055206 (2017), arXiv:1702.05929 [nucl-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  58. [58]

    Schmid, Phys

    C. Schmid, Phys. Rev.154, 1363 (1967)

    1967

  59. [59]

    V. R. Debastiani, S. Sakai, and E. Oset, Eur. Phys. J. C79, 69 (2019), arXiv:1809.06890 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  60. [60]

    Wang and B.-C

    K. Wang and B.-C. Liu, Phys. Lett. B813, 136019 (2021), arXiv:2012.11379 [nucl-th]

    work page arXiv 2021

  61. [61]

    Wang and B.-C

    K. Wang and B.-C. Liu, Phys. Rev. C107, 025203 (2023)

    2023

  62. [62]

    J. P. Berge, P. Eberhard, J. R. Hubbard, D. W. Merrill, J. Button-Shafer, F. T. Solmitz, and M. L. Stevenson, Phys. Rev.147, 945 (1966)

    1966

  63. [63]

    P. M. Dauber, J. P. Berge, J. R. Hubbard, D. W. Merrill, and R. A. Muller, Phys. Rev.179, 1262 (1969)

    1969

  64. [64]

    Briefelet al., Phys

    E. Briefelet al., Phys. Rev. D16, 2706 (1977)

    1977