Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 82 references

First evidence for the Υ1(1D) and Υ3(1D) bottomonium states, with measured masses and energy-dependent production cross sections.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-11 19:42 UTC pith:4K2PX62Z

load-bearing objection First evidence for Υ1(1D) and Υ3(1D) with usable mass splittings from a clean on-peak 3D fit; energy dependence is secondary and thinner. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.04369 v1 pith:4K2PX62Z submitted 2026-07-05 hep-ex hep-ph

First measurement of the masses of the Upsilon₁(1D) and Upsilon₃(1D) states and the energy dependence of the cross sections for e^+e^-toUpsilon_J(1D)η and e^+e^-toUpsilon_J(1D)π^+π^-

Belle , Belle II Collaborations: M. Abumusabh , I. Adachi , K. Adamczyk , A. Aggarwal , H. Ahmed , Y. Ahn , M. Akdag
show 391 more authors
N. Akopov S. Alghamdi M. Alhakami N. Althubiti K. Amos M. Angelsmark N. Anh Ky C. Antonioli K. Arai H. Atmacan T. Aushev V. Aushev R. Ayad V. Babu H. Bae N. K. Baghel S. Bahinipati P. Bambade Sw. Banerjee M. Barrett M. Bartl J. Baudot A. Baur A. Beaubien F. Becherer J. Becker G. F. Benfratello J. V. Bennett F. U. Bernlochner V. Bertacchi M. Bertemes E. Bertholet M. Bessner S. Bettarini V. Bhardwaj B. Bhuyan F. Bianchi T. Bilka A. Biswas D. Biswas A. Bobrov D. Bodrov A. Bondar G. Bonvicini A. Boschetti A. Bozek M. Bra\v{c}ko P. Branchini R. A. Briere T. E. Browder A. Budano Q. Campagna M. Campajola M. Carminati G. Casarosa C. Cecchi M.-C. Chang P. Cheema L. Chen B. G. Cheon C. Cheshta H. Chetri K. Chilikin K. Chirapatpimol H.-E. Cho K. Cho S.-J. Cho S.-K. Choi S. Choudhury S. Chutia J. A. Colorado-Caicedo I. Consigny L. Corona H. Crotte Ledesma S. Cuccuini J. X. Cui E. De La Cruz-Burelo S. A. De La Motte G. De Nardo G. De Pietro R. de Sangro M. Destefanis S. Dey R. Dhayal A. Di Canto J. Dingfelder Z. Dole\v{z}al X. Dong M. Dorigo K. Dugic G. Dujany P. Ecker D. Epifanov J. Eppelt R. Farkas P. Feichtinger T. Ferber T. Fillinger C. Finck G. Finocchiaro F. Forti B. G. Fulsom A. Gabrielli A. Gale R. Garg A. Garmash G. Gaudino V. Gaur V. Gautam P. Gebeline A. Gellrich G. Ghevondyan D. Ghosh G. Giakoustidis R. Giordano A. Giri P. Gironella Gironell B. Gobbo R. Godang O. Gogota W. Gradl E. Graziani D. Greenwald K. Gudkova Y. Han K. Hayasaka H. Hayashii S. Hazra C. Hearty M. T. Hedges A. Heidelbach G. Heine I. Heredia de la Cruz T. Higuchi M. Hoek M. Hohmann R. Hoppe P. Horak C.-L. Hsu T. Humair T. Iijima K. Inami N. Ipsita A. Ishikawa R. Itoh M. Iwasaki D. Jacobi W. W. Jacobs E.-J. Jang Q. P. Ji S. Jia Y. Jin A. Johnson K. K. Joo H. Kakuno K. H. Kang G. Karyan T. Kawasaki C. Ketter C. Kiesling C. Kim D. Y. Kim H. Kim J.-Y. Kim K.-H. Kim H. Kindo K. Kinoshita P. Kody\v{s} T. Koga S. Kohani A. Korobov S. Korpar E. Kovalenko R. Kowalewski M. Krein P. Kri\v{z}an P. Krokovny T. Kuhr D. Kumar R. Kumar K. Kumara T. Kunigo Y.-J. Kwon S. Lacaprara Y.-T. Lai T. Lam J. S. Lange T. S. Lau R. Leboucher H. Lee M. J. Lee C. Lemettais P. Leo C. Li L. K. Li Q. M. Li S. X. Li W. Z. Li Y. Li Y. B. Li Y. P. Liao J. Libby J. Lin V. Lisovskyi C. Liu Q. Y. Liu Z. Q. Liu D. Liventsev S. Longo A. Lozar C. Lyu J. L. Ma Y. Ma M. Maggiora S. P. Maharana R. Maiti G. Mancinelli E. Manoni M. Mantovano D. Marcantonio S. Marcello M. Marfoli C. Marinas C. Martellini A. Martens T. Martinov L. Massaccesi M. Masuda S. K. Maurya M. Maushart J. A. McKenna Z. Mediankin Gruberov\'a R. Mehta F. Meier D. Meleshko M. Merola C. Miller M. Mirra K. Miyabayashi H. Miyake R. Mizuk S. Moneta A. L. Moreira de Carvalho H.-G. Moser A. Mubarak N. Mudgal Th. Muller H. Murakami R. Mussa M. Nakao Y. Nakazawa M. Naruki Z. Natkaniec A. Natochii M. Nayak M. Neu M. Niiyama S. Nishida R. Nomaru S. Ogawa H. Ono Y. Onuki I. Ostrowski F. Otani S. Pardi J. Park K. Park S.-H. Park A. Passeri S. Patra T. K. Pedlar R. Pestotnik M. Piccolo L. E. Piilonen P. L. M. Podesta-Lerma T. Podobnik L. Polat A. Prakash V. Prasad S. Prell E. Prencipe M. T. Prim S. Privalov P. Rados S. Raiz K. Ravindran J. U. Rehman M. Reif S. Reiter M. Remnev D. Ricalde Herrmann I. Ripp-Baudot G. Rizzo S. H. Robertson J. M. Roney A. Rostomyan N. Rout G. Russo S. Saha S. Sandilya C. Santos V. Savinov B. Scavino J. Schmitz S. Schneider G. Schnell K. Schoenning C. Schwanda Y. Seino K. Senyo J. Serrano C. Sfienti W. Shan C. P. Shen X. D. Shi T. Shillington J.-G. Shiu D. Shtol B. Shwartz A. Sibidanov F. Simon J. B. Singh J. Skorupa A. Soffer A. Sokolov E. Solovieva W. Song S. Spataro K. \v{S}penko B. Spruck M. Stari\v{c} P. Stavroulakis S. Stefkova R. Stroili M. Sumihama M. Takizawa U. Tamponi S. Tanaka K. Tanida F. Testa D. V. Thanh T. Tien Manh O. Tittel R. Tiwary E. Torassa F. F. Trantou I. Tsaklidis M. Uchida I. Ueda E. Uenlue T. Uglov K. Unger Y. Unno K. Uno S. Uno R. van Tonder K. E. Varvell M. Veronesi V. S. Vismaya L. Vitale V. Vobbilisetti R. Volk S. Wallner M.-Z. Wang A. Warburton M. Watanabe S. Watanuki C. Wessel Y. Xie X. P. Xu B. D. Yabsley S. Yamada W. Yan W. P. Yan J. Yelton K. Yi J. H. Yin K. Yoshihara C. Z. Yuan J. Yuan L. Yuan Y. Yusa L. Zani M. Zeyrek B. Zhang X. Zhao V. Zhilich J. S. Zhou Q. D. Zhou L. Zhu R. \v{Z}leb\v{c}\'ik
This is my paper
classification hep-ex hep-ph PACS 14.40.Pq13.25.Gv13.66.Bc
keywords bottomoniumUpsilon(1D)mass splittingse+e- collisionsBellehadronic transitionsUpsilon(10860)
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper reports the first experimental evidence for two long-predicted D-wave bottomonium states, Υ1(1D) and Υ3(1D), alongside a refined mass for the already-known Υ2(1D). Using 142.5 fb−1 of e+e− collision data near and above the Υ(10860) resonance, the collaboration reconstructs the states through exclusive radiative decays into χbJγ followed by χbJ o Υ(1S)γ and Υ(1S) o ℓ+ℓ−, in association with either an η or a π+π− pair. A simultaneous three-dimensional fit to the peak sample yields significances of 4.8σ, >10σ and 3.0σ (including systematics) for the three J states, a mass of 10167.0 ± 1.0 ± 0.2 MeV/c^{2} for Υ2(1D), and the first mass splittings Δm12 = 11.8 ± 1.5 ± 0.4 MeV/c^{2} and Δm23 = 7.6 ± 2.4 ± 0.6 MeV/c^{2}. Products of Born cross sections and branching fractions are extracted at the peak, and the energy dependence of the combined cross sections is mapped across 19 energy points and fitted with coherent Υ(10860) and Υ(11020) amplitudes. The results give a direct experimental handle on the fine structure of the 1D multiplet and on the hadronic transitions that produce it, quantities that quark-potential models have long predicted but that had remained unmeasured.

Core claim

The collaboration finds first evidence for the Υ1(1D) and Υ3(1D) states in exclusive e+e− o ΥJ(1D)η and e+e− o ΥJ(1D)π+π− channels, measures the Υ2(1D) mass as (10167.0 ± 1.0 ± 0.2) MeV/c^{2}, and reports the mass splittings Δm12 = (11.8 ± 1.5 ± 0.4) MeV/c^{2} and Δm23 = (7.6 ± 2.4 ± 0.6) MeV/c^{2}, together with the energy dependence of the combined production cross sections from 10.73 to 11.02 GeV.

What carries the argument

A simultaneous three-dimensional unbinned extended maximum-likelihood fit to the χb mass, the ΥJ(1D)–χb mass difference, and the η or π+π− recoil mass, performed after a five-constraint kinematic fit that enforces four-momentum conservation and the Υ(1S) mass.

Load-bearing premise

Outside the main peak sample the three ΥJ(1D) states are merged into one yield because of cross-feed, and the background at every energy is scaled from a single global fit under the assumption that it is purely non-resonant and proportional only to luminosity.

What would settle it

A higher-statistics scan that resolves the three J states separately at several energies away from the Υ(10860) peak and finds either a different mass ordering or a background shape that does not scale with luminosity would overturn the reported mass splittings and energy-dependent cross sections.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports a Belle analysis of e+e-→ΥJ(1D)η and e+e-→ΥJ(1D)π+π- using 142.5 fb-1 (122 fb-1 on the Υ(10860) peak). Exclusive reconstruction of the cascade ΥJ(1D)→χb1,2γ, χb1,2→Υ(1S)γ, Υ(1S)→ℓ+ℓ- with a 5C kinematic fit and a simultaneous 3D unbinned fit to M'(ℓ+ℓ-γH), ΔM and recoil mass yields first evidence for Υ1(1D) (4.8σ) and Υ3(1D) (3.0σ) including systematics, a precise Υ2(1D) mass of (10167.0±1.0±0.2) MeV/c2, and mass splittings Δm12=(11.8±1.5±0.4) MeV/c2 and Δm23=(7.6±2.4±0.6) MeV/c2. Products of Born cross sections and radiative branching fractions, corresponding Υ(10860) branching fractions, and the energy dependence of the combined ΥJ(1D) cross sections (fitted with coherent Υ(10860)/Υ(11020) Breit-Wigners plus phase space) are also presented.

Significance. Observation of the remaining 1D bottomonium multiplet members and a first measurement of their mass splittings constitute a clear advance for heavy-quarkonium spectroscopy. The results directly confront relativized, non-relativistic and screened-potential models (Fig. 3) and supply the first energy-dependent cross-section data near the Υ(11020). The analysis is data-driven, employs a standard 5C fit plus 3D likelihood, folds additive systematics into the quoted significances, and provides HEPData numerical results; these strengths make the central claims robust and of lasting reference value.

major comments (2)
  1. Text after Eq. (2) and Supplemental Material: for the energy-scan points the three ΥJ(1D) states are combined and Nbg is scaled from a global 3D fit under the assumption of purely non-resonant background proportional to luminosity. While this does not affect the on-peak mass and significance results, it is load-bearing for the energy-dependence fit of Fig. 2 and Table III. A quantitative check (e.g., allowing a resonant component or energy-dependent background shape, or quoting the change in ΓeeB when Nbg is varied by its full uncertainty) should be added so that residual bias can be assessed.
  2. Table III and Eq. (3): the fitted ΓeeB products for both Υ(10860) and Υ(11020) are all <3σ and the paper already quotes 90% C.L. upper limits. The text should state more explicitly that the energy-dependence results are upper limits rather than measurements, and that the coherent-sum fit is used only to parameterize the radiative-correction factors.
minor comments (5)
  1. Fig. 1 caption and body: the label “Preliminary” appears on all panels; it should be removed for the journal version.
  2. Eq. (1) and surrounding text: the vacuum-polarization factor |1-Π|2=0.93 is stated without a reference or energy dependence; a short citation or note that it is taken constant would help.
  3. Table I vs. Supplemental Tables IV–V: the notation σ(1)Born/σ(2)Born (resolved J) versus σ(3)Born/σ(4)Born (combined) is easy to confuse; a single consistent superscript scheme would improve readability.
  4. Fig. 3: the correlation coefficient ρ(Δm12,Δm23)=-0.06 is given only in the caption; it would be useful to quote it also in the text when the splittings are compared with theory.
  5. Supplemental Material: the profile-likelihood parameterizations (Eqs. (4)–(5)) and the GitHub link for fitted coefficients are valuable but should be archived with the paper (e.g., HEPData or journal supplemental) rather than left solely on an external repository.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely data-driven extraction of masses, yields and cross sections from fits and counting; theory used only for post-hoc comparison.

full rationale

The central results (Υ1(1D)/Υ3(1D) evidence, Υ2(1D) mass, mass splittings, and Born cross-section products) are obtained from a simultaneous 3D unbinned extended maximum-likelihood fit to the on-peak data (M'(ℓ+ℓ−γH), ΔM, M'rec(η)/Mrec(π+π−)) with free ΥJ(1D) masses and free yields; all other shape parameters are fixed from MC and additive systematics are taken as the envelope of peak-position/resolution/background-order/fit-range variations. Off-peak points use simple event counting with luminosity-scaled non-resonant background estimated from a global fit; the subsequent energy-dependence fit floats only ΓeeB and relative phases while fixing PDG masses/widths of Υ(10860)/Υ(11020). The sole mild self-consistency (radiative-correction factors evaluated with the measured energy dependence itself) is the standard iterative procedure of e+e− analyses and is quantified as a multiplicative systematic by varying the fitted parameters by ±1σ. No quantity is defined in terms of itself, no fitted parameter is re-labeled a prediction, and no load-bearing uniqueness claim or ansatz is imported via self-citation. Theoretical mass-splitting predictions appear only in a comparison figure after the measurements are complete. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external data and does not reduce to its inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

Experimental measurement; the central claims rest on detector response, reconstruction efficiencies from Monte Carlo, PDG branching fractions and masses of intermediate states, and the assumption that the observed peaks are the predicted 1D bottomonium states. No new dynamical entities are postulated.

free parameters (4)
  • ΥJ(1D) masses and mass splittings = m(Υ2)=10167.0±1.0±0.2 MeV/c²; Δm12=11.8±1.5±0.4; Δm23=7.6±2.4±0.6 MeV/c²
    Floated in the simultaneous 3D fit at √s=10.866 GeV; central results of the paper.
  • Signal yields Nsig for each J and decay mode = see Table I / Table IV
    Extracted from extended maximum-likelihood fit; converted to cross sections and branching-fraction products.
  • Γee B(Υ(10860/11020)→ΥJ(1D)η/ππ) Bf = 0.091±0.039±0.016 eV (η, 10860); others consistent with zero or upper limits
    Floated amplitudes in the coherent Breit-Wigner + phase-space fit to the energy dependence.
  • Non-resonant coefficient cNR and relative phase ϕ
    Free parameters of the energy-dependence fit function (Eq. 3).
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Reconstruction efficiencies and signal shapes are correctly given by GEANT3-simulated Monte Carlo (including NLO ISR via PHOKHARA).
    Used to convert yields to cross sections (Eq. 1) and to fix Crystal-Ball and double-Gaussian parameters.
  • domain assumption PDG values for intermediate branching fractions B(η→γγ), B(χbJ→Υ(1S)γ), B(Υ(1S)→ℓℓ), vacuum-polarization factor |1−Π|²=0.93, and Υ(10860/11020) masses and widths.
    Enter every Born-cross-section and branching-fraction calculation.
  • domain assumption Combinatorial background in the three fit observables is adequately described by a first-order polynomial (validated on control channels Υ(2S)η/ππ).
    Background model in the 3D unbinned fit that extracts the signal yields.
  • ad hoc to paper Off-peak background is non-resonant and scales strictly with luminosity from the global fit.
    Used for event-counting yields at the 18 energy-scan points.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 29589 in / 3028 out tokens · 36528 ms · 2026-07-11T19:42:45.755680+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We study the processes $e^+e^-\to\Upsilon_J(1D)\eta$ and $e^+e^-\to\Upsilon_J(1D)\pi^+\pi^-$ at center-of-mass energies $\sqrt{s}$=(10.73 -- 11.02) GeV using a $142.5\,\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ data sample, including 122~fb$^{-1}$ near the $\Upsilon$(10860) peak ($\sqrt{s}$ = 10.866 GeV), collected with the Belle detector at the KEKB asymmetric-energy $e^+e^-$ collider. From the peak sample, the products of Born cross section times branching fraction are obtained for $\sigma_{\rm Born}(e^+e^-\to\Upsilon_J(1D)\eta)$ or $\sigma_{\rm Born}(e^+e^-\to\Upsilon_J(1D)\pi^+\pi^-)$ and ${\cal B}(\Upsilon_J(1D)\to\chi_{b1}\gamma)$ or ${\cal B}(\Upsilon_J(1D)\to\chi_{b2}\gamma)$ for each $\Upsilon_J(1D)$ state. The corresponding branching fractions for $\Upsilon(10860)$ decays are also obtained. The significances of the $\Upsilon_1(1D)$, $\Upsilon_2(1D)$, and $\Upsilon_3(1D)$ signals are 4.8$\sigma$, ${>}10\sigma$, and 3.0$\sigma$, respectively, including systematic uncertainties. The mass for $\Upsilon_2(1D)$ is measured to be $(10167.0\pm 1.0\pm 0.2)$ MeV/$c^2$, where the first and second uncertainties are statistical and systematic. The mass splittings $\Delta m_{12}=m(\Upsilon_2(1D))-m(\Upsilon_1(1D))$ and $\Delta m_{23}=m(\Upsilon_3(1D))-m(\Upsilon_2(1D))$ are $(11.8\pm1.5\pm0.4)$ MeV/$c^2$ and $(7.6\pm2.4\pm0.6)$ MeV/$c^2$, respectively.~We determine the energy dependence of the cross sections for $e^+e^-\to\Upsilon_J(1D)\eta$ and $e^+e^-\to\Upsilon_J(1D)\pi^+\pi^-$ for the $\Upsilon_1(1D)$, $\Upsilon_2(1D)$, and $\Upsilon_3(1D)$ states, combined.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.04369 by A. Aggarwal, A. Baur, A. Beaubien, A. Biswas, A. Bobrov, A. Bondar, A. Boschetti, A. Bozek, A. Budano, A. Di Canto, A. Gabrielli, A. Gale, A. Garmash, A. Gellrich, A. Giri, A. Heidelbach, A. Ishikawa, A. Johnson, A. Korobov, A. L. Moreira de Carvalho, A. Lozar, A. Martens, A. Mubarak, A. Natochii, A. Passeri, A. Prakash, A. Rostomyan, A. Sibidanov, A. Soffer, A. Sokolov, A. Warburton, B. Bhuyan, B. D. Yabsley, Belle, Belle II Collaborations: M. Abumusabh, B. G. Cheon, B. G. Fulsom, B. Gobbo, B. Scavino, B. Shwartz, B. Spruck, B. Zhang, C. Antonioli, C. Cecchi, C. Cheshta, C. Finck, C. Hearty, C. Ketter, C. Kiesling, C. Kim, C. Lemettais, C.-L. Hsu, C. Li, C. Liu, C. Lyu, C. Marinas, C. Martellini, C. Miller, C. P. Shen, C. Santos, C. Schwanda, C. Sfienti, C. Wessel, C. Z. Yuan, D. Biswas, D. Bodrov, D. Epifanov, D. Ghosh, D. Greenwald, D. Jacobi, D. Kumar, D. Liventsev, D. Marcantonio, D. Meleshko, D. Ricalde Herrmann, D. Shtol, D. V. Thanh, D. Y. Kim, E. Bertholet, E. De La Cruz-Burelo, E. Graziani, E.-J. Jang, E. Kovalenko, E. Manoni, E. Prencipe, E. Solovieva, E. Torassa, E. Uenlue, F. Becherer, F. Bianchi, F. Forti, F. F. Trantou, F. Meier, F. Otani, F. Simon, F. Testa, F. U. Bernlochner, G. Bonvicini, G. Casarosa, G. De Nardo, G. De Pietro, G. Dujany, G. F. Benfratello, G. Finocchiaro, G. Gaudino, G. Ghevondyan, G. Giakoustidis, G. Heine, G. Karyan, G. Mancinelli, G. Rizzo, G. Russo, G. Schnell, H. Ahmed, H. Atmacan, H. Bae, H. Chetri, H. Crotte Ledesma, H.-E. Cho, H.-G. Moser, H. Hayashii, H. Kakuno, H. Kim, H. Kindo, H. Lee, H. Miyake, H. Murakami, H. Ono, I. Adachi, I. Consigny, I. Heredia de la Cruz, I. Ostrowski, I. Ripp-Baudot, I. Tsaklidis, I. Ueda, J. A. Colorado-Caicedo, J. A. McKenna, J. Baudot, J. Becker, J. B. Singh, J. Dingfelder, J. Eppelt, J.-G. Shiu, J. H. Yin, J. Libby, J. Lin, J. L. Ma, J. M. Roney, J. Park, J. Schmitz, J. Serrano, J. Skorupa, J. S. Lange, J. S. Zhou, J. U. Rehman, J. V. Bennett, J. X. Cui, J. Yelton, J.-Y. Kim, J. Yuan, K. Adamczyk, K. Amos, K. Arai, K. Chilikin, K. Chirapatpimol, K. Cho, K. Dugic, K. E. Varvell, K. Gudkova, K. Hayasaka, K. H. Kang, K.-H. Kim, K. Inami, K. Kinoshita, K. K. Joo, K. Kumara, K. Miyabayashi, K. Park, K. Ravindran, K. Schoenning, K. Senyo, K. Tanida, K. Unger, K. Uno, K. \v{S}penko, K. Yi, K. Yoshihara, L. Chen, L. Corona, L. E. Piilonen, L. K. Li, L. Massaccesi, L. Polat, L. Vitale, L. Yuan, L. Zani, L. Zhu, M. Akdag, M. Alhakami, M. Angelsmark, M. Barrett, M. Bartl, M. Bertemes, M. Bessner, M. Bra\v{c}ko, M. Campajola, M. Carminati, M.-C. Chang, M. Destefanis, M. Dorigo, M. Hoek, M. Hohmann, M. Iwasaki, M. J. Lee, M. Krein, M. Maggiora, M. Mantovano, M. Marfoli, M. Masuda, M. Maushart, M. Merola, M. Mirra, M. Nakao, M. Naruki, M. Nayak, M. Neu, M. Niiyama, M. Piccolo, M. Reif, M. Remnev, M. Stari\v{c}, M. Sumihama, M. Takizawa, M. T. Hedges, M. T. Prim, M. Uchida, M. Veronesi, M. Watanabe, M. Zeyrek, M.-Z. Wang, N. Akopov, N. Althubiti, N. Anh Ky, N. Ipsita, N. K. Baghel, N. Mudgal, N. Rout, O. Gogota, O. Tittel, P. Bambade, P. Branchini, P. Cheema, P. Ecker, P. Feichtinger, P. Gebeline, P. Gironella Gironell, P. Horak, P. Kody\v{s}, P. Kri\v{z}an, P. Krokovny, P. Leo, P. L. M. Podesta-Lerma, P. Rados, P. Stavroulakis, Q. Campagna, Q. D. Zhou, Q. M. Li, Q. P. Ji, Q. Y. Liu, R. A. Briere, R. Ayad, R. de Sangro, R. Dhayal, R. Farkas, R. Garg, R. Giordano, R. Godang, R. Hoppe, R. Itoh, R. Kowalewski, R. Kumar, R. Leboucher, R. Maiti, R. Mehta, R. Mizuk, R. Mussa, R. Nomaru, R. Pestotnik, R. Stroili, R. Tiwary, R. van Tonder, R. Volk, R. \v{Z}leb\v{c}\'ik, S. A. De La Motte, S. Alghamdi, S. Bahinipati, S. Bettarini, S. Choudhury, S. Chutia, S. Cuccuini, S. Dey, S. Hazra, S.-H. Park, S. H. Robertson, S.-J. Cho, S. Jia, S.-K. Choi, S. K. Maurya, S. Kohani, S. Korpar, S. Lacaprara, S. Longo, S. Marcello, S. Moneta, S. Nishida, S. Ogawa, S. Pardi, S. Patra, S. P. Maharana, S. Prell, S. Privalov, S. Raiz, S. Reiter, S. Saha, S. Sandilya, S. Schneider, S. Spataro, S. Stefkova, S. Tanaka, S. Uno, S. Wallner, S. Watanuki, Sw. Banerjee, S. X. Li, S. Yamada, T. Aushev, T. Bilka, T. E. Browder, T. Ferber, T. Fillinger, T. Higuchi, Th. Muller, T. Humair, T. Iijima, T. Kawasaki, T. Koga, T. K. Pedlar, T. Kuhr, T. Kunigo, T. Lam, T. Martinov, T. Podobnik, T. Shillington, T. S. Lau, T. Tien Manh, T. Uglov, U. Tamponi, V. Aushev, V. Babu, V. Bertacchi, V. Bhardwaj, V. Gaur, V. Gautam, V. Lisovskyi, V. Prasad, V. Savinov, V. S. Vismaya, V. Vobbilisetti, V. Zhilich, W. Gradl, W. P. Yan, W. Shan, W. Song, W. W. Jacobs, W. Yan, W. Z. Li, X. Dong, X. D. Shi, X. P. Xu, X. Zhao, Y. Ahn, Y. B. Li, Y. Han, Y. Jin, Y.-J. Kwon, Y. Li, Y. Ma, Y. Nakazawa, Y. Onuki, Y. P. Liao, Y. Seino, Y.-T. Lai, Y. Unno, Y. Xie, Y. Yusa, Z. Dole\v{z}al, Z. Mediankin Gruberov\'a, Z. Natkaniec, Z. Q. Liu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Distributions of (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: The comparison of mass splittings ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Energy dependences of (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: The distribution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗

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

82 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    [GeV/cHγ- l+M'(l9.75 9.8 9.85 9.9 9.95 10 ) 2 Events / (10 MeV/c 0 10 20 Data Total fit Background γ b1 χ→(1D)1ϒγ b1 χ→(1D)2ϒγ b2 χ→(1D)2ϒγ b2 χ→(1D)3ϒ-1 Belle, 122 fb = 10.8658 GeV s (a) Preliminary ] 2M [GeV/cΔ0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 ) 2 Events / (10 MeV/c 0 5 10 15 20 -1 Belle, 122 fb = 10.8658 GeV s (b) Preliminary ]

  2. [2]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 0 5 10 15 20 -1 Belle, 122 fb = 10.8658 GeV s (c) Preliminary ]

  3. [3]

    [GeV/cHγ- l+M'(l9.75 9.8 9.85 9.9 9.95 10 ) 2 Events / (10 MeV/c 0 10 20 30 -1 Belle, 122 fb = 10.8658 GeV s (d) Preliminary ] 2M [GeV/cΔ0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 ) 2 Events / (10 MeV/c 0 10 20 -1 Belle, 122 fb = 10.8658 GeV s (e) Preliminary ]

  4. [4]

    InterLeptons

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 0 5 10 15 20 -1 Belle, 122 fb = 10.8658 GeV s (f ) Preliminary FIG. 1: Distributions of (a)M ′(ℓ+ℓ−γH), (b) ∆M, and (c)M ′ rec(η) ine +e− →Υ J(1D)η; and (d)M ′(ℓ+ℓ−γH), (e) ∆M, and (f)M rec(π+π−) ine +e− →Υ J(1D)π+π− in data at √s= 10.8658 GeV with 3D fit results overlaid. σ(1) Born = Nsig |1−Π| 2 LP2 i...

    arXiv 2010

  5. [5]

    Brambillaet al., Eur

    N. Brambillaet al., Eur. Phys. J. C71, 1534 (2011)

    2011

  6. [6]

    Brambillaet al., Eur

    N. Brambillaet al., Eur. Phys. J. C74, 2981 (2014)

    2014

  7. [7]

    X. C. Dai, S. Jia, A. Nefediev, J. Nieves, C. P. Shen, and L. M. Zhang, arXiv:2603.09315

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  8. [8]

    Brambillaet al., CERN Yellow Reports: Monographs, arXiv:hep-ph/0412158

    N. Brambillaet al., CERN Yellow Reports: Monographs, arXiv:hep-ph/0412158

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  9. [9]

    Bonviciniet al.(CLEO Collaboration), Phys

    G. Bonviciniet al.(CLEO Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 70, 032001 (2004)

    2004

  10. [10]

    del Amo Sanchezet al.(BaBar Collaboration), Phys

    P. del Amo Sanchezet al.(BaBar Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D82, 111102 (2010)

    2010

  11. [11]

    Segovia, P.G

    J. Segovia, P.G. Ortega, D.R. Entem, and F. Fern´ andez, Phys. Rev. D93, 074027 (2016)

    2016

  12. [12]

    Godfrey and K

    S. Godfrey and K. Moats, Phys. Rev. D92, 054034 (2015)

    2015

  13. [13]

    J. Z. Wang, Z. F. Sun, X. Liu, and T. Matsuki, Eur. Phys. J. C78, 915 (2018)

    2018

  14. [14]

    W. J. Deng, H. Liu, L. C. Gui, and X. H. Zhong, Phys. Rev. D95, 074002 (2017)

    2017

  15. [15]

    B. Wang, X. Liu, and D. Y. Chen, Phys. Rev. D94, 094039 (2016)

    2016

  16. [16]

    Huang, H

    Q. Huang, H. Xu, X. Liu, and T. Matsuki, Phys. Rev. D 97, 094018 (2018)

    2018

  17. [17]

    Q. Wu, D. Y. Chen, and T. Matsuki, Phys. Rev. D102, 114037 (2020)

    2020

  18. [18]

    Tamponiet al.(Belle Collaboration), Eur

    U. Tamponiet al.(Belle Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 633 (2018)

    2018

  19. [19]

    Adachiet al.(Belle Collaboration), Phys

    I. Adachiet al.(Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 032001 (2012)

    2012

  20. [20]

    Abashianet al.(Belle Collaboration), Nucl

    A. Abashianet al.(Belle Collaboration), Nucl. Instr. and Methods Phys. Res. Sect. A479, 117 (2002)

    2002

  21. [21]

    Jolanta Brodzickaet al.(Belle Collaboration), Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys.2012, 04D001 (2012)

    2012

  22. [22]

    Kurokawa and E

    S. Kurokawa and E. Kikutani, Nucl. Instr. and Meth- ods Phys. Res. Sect. A499, 1 (2003), and other papers included in this volume

    2003

  23. [23]

    Abeet al., Prog

    T. Abeet al., Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys.2013, 03A001 (2013), and references therein

    2013

  24. [24]

    D. J. Lange, Nucl. Instr. and Methods Phys. Res. Sect. A462, 152 (2001)

    2001

  25. [25]

    Rodrigo, H

    G. Rodrigo, H. Czy˙ z, J. H. K¨ uhn, and M. Szopa, Eur. Phys. J. C24, 71 (2002)

    2002

  26. [26]

    Jadach, B

    S. Jadach, B. F. L. Ward, and Z. Was, Phys. Rev. D63, 113009 (2001); Comput. Phys. Commun.130, 260 (2000)

    2001

  27. [27]

    Brunet al.,GEANT, CERN Report No

    R. Brunet al.,GEANT, CERN Report No. DD/EE/84-1 (1984)

    1984

  28. [30]

    Mizuket al.(Belle and Belle II Collaborations), Phys

    R. Mizuket al.(Belle and Belle II Collaborations), Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 232002 (2012)

    2012

  29. [31]

    T. Kuhr, C. Pulvermacher, M. Ritter, T. Hauth, and N. Braun, Comput. Softw. Big Sci.3, 1 (2019)

    2019

  30. [32]

    Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys

    S. Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024) and 2025 update. 8

    2024

  31. [33]

    Skwarnicki, Ph.D

    T. Skwarnicki, Ph.D. thesis, Institute for Nuclear Physics, 1986; DESY Report No. DESY F31-86-02, 1986

    1986

  32. [34]

    S. S. Wilks, Annals Math. Statist.9, 60 (1938)

    1938

  33. [35]

    See Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher] for additional information

  34. [36]

    E. A. Kuraev and V. S. Fadin, Yad. Fiz.41, 733 (1985) [Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.41, 466 (1985)]

    1985

  35. [37]

    Benayoun, S

    M. Benayoun, S. I. Eidelman, V. N. Ivanchenko, and Z. K. Silagadze, Mod. Phys. Lett. A14, 2605 (1999)

    1999

  36. [38]

    X. K. Dong, X. H. Mo, P. Wang, and C. Z. Yuan, Chin. Phys. C44, 083001 (2020)

    2020

  37. [39]

    Actiset al.(Working Group on Radiative Corrections and Monte Carlo Generators for Low Energies Collabora- tions), Eur

    S. Actiset al.(Working Group on Radiative Corrections and Monte Carlo Generators for Low Energies Collabora- tions), Eur. Phys. J. C66, 585 (2010)

    2010

  38. [40]

    Esenet al.(Belle Collaboration), Phys

    S. Esenet al.(Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D87, 031101 (2013)

    2013

  39. [41]

    Conrad, O

    J. Conrad, O. Botner, A. Hallgren, and C. Perez de los Heros, Phys. Rev. D67, 012002 (2003)

    2003

  40. [42]

    G. J. Feldman and R. D. Cousins, Phys. Rev. D57, 3873 (1998)

    1998

  41. [43]

    Abumusabhet al.(Belle II Collaboration), arXiv:2602.19807

    M. Abumusabhet al.(Belle II Collaboration), arXiv:2602.19807. 9 Supplemental Material •For other energy points (except at √s= 10.866 GeV), theM ′ rec(η) andM rec(π+π−) distributions fore +e− → ΥJ(1D)ηande +e− →Υ J(1D)π+π− in data at Belle are shown in Figs. 4 and 5. ]

    arXiv

  42. [44]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 0.9 fb = 10.7313 GeV s Preliminary ]

  43. [45]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.7712 GeV s ]

  44. [46]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.7 fb = 10.8295 GeV s ]

  45. [47]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.8489 GeV s ]

  46. [48]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.8574 GeV s ]

  47. [49]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.8778 GeV s ]

  48. [50]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.8 fb = 10.8828 GeV s ]

  49. [51]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.8889 GeV s ]

  50. [52]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 2.4 fb = 10.8983 GeV s ]

  51. [53]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.9073 GeV s ]

  52. [54]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.1 fb = 10.9287 GeV s ]

  53. [55]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.9575 GeV s ]

  54. [56]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.9753 GeV s ]

  55. [57]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.9904 GeV s ]

  56. [58]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 11.0039 GeV s ]

  57. [59]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 0.8 fb = 11.0148 GeV s ]

  58. [60]

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 0.8 fb = 11.0185 GeV s ]

  59. [61]

    4: TheM ′ rec(η) distributions in data at each energy point at Belle

    [GeV/cη(recM'10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 11.0208 GeV s FIG. 4: TheM ′ rec(η) distributions in data at each energy point at Belle. The vertical dashed lines show the Υ J(1D) signal region. ]

  60. [62]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 0.9 fb = 10.7313 GeV s Preliminary ]

  61. [63]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.7712 GeV s ]

  62. [64]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.7 fb = 10.8295 GeV s ]

  63. [65]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.8489 GeV s ]

  64. [66]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.8574 GeV s ]

  65. [67]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.8778 GeV s ]

  66. [68]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.8 fb = 10.8828 GeV s ]

  67. [69]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.8889 GeV s ]

  68. [70]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 2.4 fb = 10.8983 GeV s ]

  69. [71]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.9073 GeV s ]

  70. [72]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.1 fb = 10.9287 GeV s ]

  71. [73]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.9575 GeV s ]

  72. [74]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.9753 GeV s ]

  73. [75]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 10.9904 GeV s ]

  74. [76]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 11.0039 GeV s ]

  75. [77]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 0.8 fb = 11.0148 GeV s ]

  76. [78]

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 0.8 fb = 11.0185 GeV s ]

  77. [79]

    5: TheM rec(π+π−) distributions in data at each energy point at Belle

    [GeV/c-π+π(recM10.1 10.15 10.2 ) 2 Events / (4 MeV/c 1 2 3 4 5 -1 Belle, 1.0 fb = 11.0208 GeV s FIG. 5: TheM rec(π+π−) distributions in data at each energy point at Belle. The vertical dashed lines show the Υ J(1D) signal region. 10 •The signal yields, Born cross sections, and upper limits on the Born cross sections fore +e− →Υ J(1D)ηat Belle are listed i...

  78. [80]

    7: The distribution ofM(π +π−) ine +e− →Υ J(1D)π+π− in data at √s= 10.8658 GeV

    [GeV/c-π+πM(0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 ) 2 Events / (10 MeV/c 0 5 10 -1 Belle, 122 fb = 10.8658 GeV s Preliminary FIG. 7: The distribution ofM(π +π−) ine +e− →Υ J(1D)π+π− in data at √s= 10.8658 GeV

  79. [81]

    Abumusabhet al.(Belle II Collaboration), JHEP06(2026) 278

    M. Abumusabhet al.(Belle II Collaboration), JHEP06(2026) 278

    2026

  80. [82]

    Mizuket al.(Belle Collaboration), JHEP10(2019) 220

    R. Mizuket al.(Belle Collaboration), JHEP10(2019) 220

    2019

Showing first 80 references.