$D \bar D_1(2420)$ and $D^* \bar D^*(2400)$ molecular states: Probing their electromagnetic fingerprints

U. \"Ozdem

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 115 references

$D \bar D_1(2420)$ and $D^* \bar D^*(2400)$ molecular states: Probing their electromagnetic fingerprints

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper predicts that two exotic hadronic molecules, the D D-bar_1(2420) and D* D-bar*(2400), have magnetic moments of -1.41 and 3.85 nuclear magnetons and negative (oblate) quadrupole moments, distinguishing them from compact…

desk verdict Competent, standard LCSR calculation that delivers new electromagnetic moments for two molecular tetraquark candidates; the numbers are plausible and the comparison with the compact tetraquark prediction is useful, but the missing quadrupole densities and the unquantified two-meson contamination for EM observables should be addressed by a referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.12694 v2 pith:JRR6DZ5C submitted 2025-04-17 hep-ph hep-exhep-lat

U. Özdem This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-phhep-exhep-lat

keywords hadronicmoleculestetraquarksmagneticmomentsquadrupoleQCDlight-conesumruleshidden-charmstatesexotichadronsphotondistributionamplitudes

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper tries to establish that two candidate exotic hadrons, the $D\bar D_1(2420)$ and $D^*\bar D^*(2400)$ molecular states with $J^{PC}=1^{--}$, carry distinctive electromagnetic moments. Using QCD light-cone sum rules, it predicts magnetic moments of $-1.41 \pm 0.50\,\mu_N$ and $3.85 \pm 0.95\,\mu_N$, and quadrupole moments of $-0.40 \pm 0.10 \times 10^{-2}\,\mathrm{fm}^2$ and $-0.20 \pm 0.05 \times 10^{-2}\,\mathrm{fm}^2$. The negative quadrupole moments imply oblate, disk-like charge distributions. Because these values differ sharply from earlier compact-tetraquark predictions, a measurement of these moments could decide whether such resonances are loosely bound meson pairs or tightly bound four-quark states.

What carries the argument

The central object is the correlation function $\Pi_{\alpha\beta}(p,q) = i\int d^4x\, e^{ip\cdot x} \langle 0 | T\{J_\alpha(x) J^\dagger_\beta(0)\}|0\rangle_F$, evaluated in an external electromagnetic background field. The interpolating current $J_\alpha$ is a local product of meson currents, a scalar–vector pair for $D\bar D_1$ and a vector–vector pair for $D^*\bar D^*$, so it couples to the molecular configuration. The sum rule is formed by matching the hadronic single-pole expression to the QCD side, where the photon couples either perturbatively to a quark line or non-perturbatively through photon distribution amplitudes up to twist-4. A double Borel transform, an exponential weighting that suppresses excited states and the continuum, isolates the ground state, and the magnetic and quadrupole moments are read off the coefficients of the Lorentz structures $(\varepsilon\cdot p)(q_\alpha p_\beta - p_\alpha q_\beta)$ and $(\varepsilon\cdot p)q_\alpha q_\beta$ at $Q^2=0$.

What would settle it

Measure the radiative decay $Y(4360/4390)\to\gamma\psi(2S)$ or $Y\to D^{(*)} \bar D^{(*)} \gamma$ at a high-luminosity electron-positron collider and extract the magnetic moment from the photon energy and angular distribution; if the extracted value differs from $-1.41 \pm 0.50\,\mu_N$ beyond the quoted errors, the molecular identification or the sum-rule assumptions fail. A cheaper check is to recompute the sum rule with the finite-width propagator of Eq. (25) and see whether the moments shift by more than the stated uncertainties.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the $D\bar D_1(2420)$ and $D^*\bar D^*(2400)$ states, when treated as $J^{PC}=1^{--}$ hadronic molecules, carry electromagnetic moments that are both sizable and structurally diagnostic. The predicted magnetic moments are $\mu_{D\bar D_1} = -1.41 \pm 0.50\,\mu_N$ and $\mu_{D^*\bar D^*} = 3.85 \pm 0.95\,\mu_N$, and the quadrupole moments are $D_{D\bar D_1} = -0.40 \pm 0.10 \times 10^{-2}\,\mathrm{fm}^2$ and $D_{D^*\bar D^*} = -0.20 \pm 0.05 \times 10^{-2}\,\mathrm{fm}^2$. The negative quadrupole moments are interpreted as oblate (disk-like) charge distributions, while the flavour decomposition shows the moments come almost entirely from the light quarks, with the charm-quark contribution cancelling to near zero. Because the $D\bar D_1$ magnetic moment differs sharply from the compact-tetraquark value for the $Y(4360/4390)$ resonance, the paper concludes that electromagnetic observables can serve as a direct test of internal structure.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation treats each exotic state as one isolated particle with no internal two-meson cloud, even though the estimate that such a cloud shifts results by only 5–7% comes from mass and width calculations, not from electromagnetic properties.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A measurement of the magnetic moment of the $Y(4360/4390)$ resonance, identified here with the $D\bar D_1(2420)$ molecule, would cleanly separate the molecular picture from the compact tetraquark picture, since the predicted $-1.41 \pm 0.50\,\mu_N$ is far from the compact value of $0.80^{+0.25}_{-0.21}\,\mu_N$.
The negative quadrupole moments predict oblate charge distributions for both states, so future form-factor or radiative-decay measurements can check the geometric shape directly.
The flavour decomposition shows the moments are essentially carried by the light-quark pair, making the observable a probe of the light-quark cloud rather than of the charm quark.
Radiative channels such as $Y(4360/4390)\to\gamma\psi(2S)$, $Y\to\gamma\chi_{cJ}$, and $Y\to D^{(*)} \bar D^{(*)} \gamma$ are identified as the practical route to extract these moments, since direct spin-precession measurements are not feasible for short-lived hadrons.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If two-meson intermediate-state contamination turns out to be larger for electromagnetic form factors than the 5–7% estimated for mass and width sum rules, the quoted central values would shift; a finite-width sum-rule calculation would quantify this.
The same machinery could map the moments of other $J^{PC}=1^{--}$ candidates such as the $Y(4260)$ and $Y(4660)$, turning the magnetic moment into a structural discriminator across the whole $Y$ family.
The near-total cancellation of the charm-quark contribution is a sharp structural prediction that could be cross-checked in quark-model or lattice treatments of the same molecular currents.
A radiative-transition measurement that yields a photon energy spectrum consistent with $\mu\approx -1.4\,\mu_N$ would not only support the molecular assignment but would also calibrate the light-cone sum-rule machinery for other exotic states.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Short version: this is a competent and transparent light-cone sum rule calculation of the magnetic and quadrupole moments for the D\bar D_1(2420) and D^*\bar D^*(2400) molecular states. The result is new, and the headline numbers — in particular -1.41 ± 0.50 mu_N for the D\bar D_1 moment versus +0.80 mu_N from the compact tetraquark picture — make a useful physics point: electromagnetic observables are sensitive to the assumed internal structure, and radiative decays could in principle discriminate. It deserves a serious referee.

What the paper does well: the machinery is standard for this author and for the field, but it is applied carefully. The Borel windows and continuum thresholds are chosen with pole dominance and OPE convergence checks, the error budget is explicit, and the flavor decomposition into light- and charm-quark contributions is provided. The paper also flags its own limitations, including the single-pole approximation and the negligible role of charm-quark long-distance photon emission. That is honest.

Where the soft spots are: two are worth naming. First, the explicit spectral densities for the quadrupole moments, rho2 and rho4, are not shown. We are told they have similar structure to rho1 and rho3, but for a calculation whose central claims include quadrupole moments, this is a reproducibility gap. A referee should ask for them, or at least for a reference where they can be found. Second, the defense of the single-pole hadronic representation leans on a 5–7% estimate of two-meson intermediate-state contamination that was obtained in mass and width sum rules, not in electromagnetic form factor sum rules. The stress-test note is right that Eq. (25) is introduced but not used quantitatively for the moments. This is not a fatal flaw — the same approximation is standard in the method, and a similar single-pole assumption presumably underlies the compact tetraquark comparison, so the relative discrimination may still survive — but the absolute values carry more model uncertainty than the error bars alone suggest. The paper acknowledges this, but it does not close the gap for EM observables.

It is also worth noting that the masses and residues used for normalization come from the same QCD sum rule framework, Ref. [72]. That is not circular in the strict sense, but it does mean the molecular interpretation is baked into the normalization, so the quoted moments are conditional on that picture.

Bottom line: this is a useful data point for people working on QCD sum rules for exotics and on molecular-versus-compact discrimination. It is not a breakthrough, but it is publishable work. I would send it to peer review, and the referee should request the missing quadrupole densities and a direct estimate of the two-meson contamination for the EM moment sum rules. With those addressed, or with the caveat clearly stated and kept, the paper would be acceptable.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript computes the magnetic and quadrupole moments of the D \bar D_1(2420) and D^* \bar D^*(2400) molecular tetraquark states with J^{PC}=1^{--} using QCD light-cone sum rules. After constructing hadronic and QCD representations of a two-point correlation function in an external electromagnetic field, the author extracts the static moments from the coefficients of two Lorentz structures and obtains \mu_{D \bar D_1} = -1.41 \pm 0.50 \mu_N, \mu_{D^* \bar D^*} = 3.85 \pm 0.95 \mu_N, D_{D \bar D_1} = -0.40 \pm 0.10 \times 10^{-2} \, \mathrm{fm}^2, and D_{D^* \bar D^*} = -0.20 \pm 0.05 \times 10^{-2} \, \mathrm{fm}^2. The paper also gives a flavor decomposition, argues that light-quark contributions dominate, identifies a negative quadrupole moment as evidence for an oblate charge distribution, and compares the molecular results with earlier compact-tetraquark predictions to suggest that electromagnetic moments can distinguish the two configurations.

Significance. If the calculations are reliable, the paper provides a concrete observable-based discriminant between molecular and compact tetraquark interpretations of the Y(4360/4390) states. The sign and magnitude differences from the compact-tetraquark magnetic moment (0.80 \mu_N in Ref. [43]) are striking and could motivate experimental strategies for radiative transitions. The work is a careful application of the standard LCSR machinery, with explicit pole-dominance and OPE-convergence checks, a transparent error budget, and full propagation of input uncertainties. Those are genuine strengths. The main scientific impact, however, is contingent on the validity of the single-pole hadronic approximation and on the full reproducibility of the spectral densities, both of which are only partially addressed in the manuscript.

major comments (3)

[Section II C, Eq. (25) and the two-meson contamination discussion] The paper's central numerical claim relies on treating the hadronic side as a single zero-width molecular pole. The defense, citing Refs. [90-97] for a 5-7% contamination from two-meson intermediate states, is not established for electromagnetic form factors. Those estimates were derived for mass and width sum rules, which use different Lorentz structures and different continuum subtraction. The present sum rules select structures proportional to (\epsilon\cdot p)(q_\alpha p_\beta - p_\alpha q_\beta) and (\epsilon\cdot p)q_\alpha q_\beta, and the relative two-meson contributions to these structures have not been computed. Equation (25) introduces a finite-width propagator but assigns no width and provides no quantitative bound for \rho_1,\dots,\rho_4. Since the claimed discrimination between molecular and compact configurations depends on the size of these moments, the author should either provide an estimate of two-meson contamination for the electromagnetic sum rules or substantially soften the conclusion. This is a load-bearing gap, not a presentation issue.
[Section II C, Eqs. (19)-(20) and the omitted spectral densities] The manuscript states that the quadrupole spectral densities \rho_2 and \rho_4 are not shown because they share a structure with \rho_1 and \rho_3, but no explicit expressions are given and no reference is provided where they appear. The quadrupole moments D_{D \bar D_1} and D_{D^* \bar D^*} are two of the four headline results, so omitting their sum-rule expressions prevents independent verification of the paper's central quantitative predictions. The author should include the full expressions for \rho_2 and \rho_4, or give a precise reference, in the revised version.
[Section III, inputs from Ref. [72]] The numerical evaluation uses masses and residues m_{D \bar D_1}, m_{D^* \bar D^*}, \lambda_{D \bar D_1}, and \lambda_{D^* \bar D^*} from Ref. [72], where they were extracted with the same interpolating currents and the same QCD sum-rule framework. This is not circular in the strict sense because the moments are outputs rather than fit inputs, but it means the central results inherit all model assumptions of that extraction. The manuscript does not assess how the moments would change if a different mass or residue determination (e.g., from lattice QCD or a different sum-rule variant) were used. Given the reported 22% uncertainty contribution from the residues, a short discussion of this normalization dependence is warranted.

minor comments (5)

[Eq. (21) and Eq. (22)] The displayed expressions contain typographical errors, such as "I[0, 1\!-\!648\chi I_6[\phi_\gamma] I[0, 2]" which appears to be missing a closing bracket and a multiplication symbol; the same garbled structure appears in \rho_3. Please correct these formulas.
[Table I and Fig. 1] In the D^*\bar D^* row of Table I, the magnetic moment is printed as "3 .85" with an errant space. In Fig. 1, the label "D_{DD1}" appears where "D_{D\bar D_1}" is intended.
[Eqs. (19)-(20)] The notation "\mu_{D\bar D_1} e\!-\! m^2..." is malformed; the intended exponential factor should be typeset properly as e^{-m^2/M^2}.
[Abstract and Section IV] The abstract and the opening of Section IV repeat nearly identical general sentences about the importance of hadron structure; one of the two passages should be shortened to avoid unnecessary repetition.
[Section III, uncertainty budget] The paper lists separate uncertainty contributions that sum to 100%, but it does not state whether these percentages are correlated or added in quadrature; please clarify the combination procedure.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No construction-level circularity: the magnetic and quadrupole moments are genuine sum-rule outputs, and the cited inputs, while sometimes imported from prior work, are not redefinitions of the predicted quantities.

full rationale

The magnetic and quadrupole moments are not fitted parameters or renamed inputs. They are extracted by matching the Borel-transformed coefficients of specific Lorentz structures between the hadronic and QCD representations, as in Eqs. (19)-(20); no experimental value of any moment enters the OPE side, and the masses, residues, thresholds, and Borel windows are fixed before the moments are solved for. The molecular interpolating currents and the masses and residues from Ref. [72] are external inputs defining the assumed state, not derived from the electromagnetic moments. The continuum threshold is anchored to the assumed mass, but this is a standard sum-rule auxiliary-parameter choice and does not force the moment values. The single-pole approximation and the estimate that two-meson intermediate states contribute only 5-7% are imported from Refs. [90-97], which were derived in mass/width sum-rule contexts rather than for electromagnetic form factors; however, this is a limitation on the validity or precision of the approximation, not a circular reduction of the derivation to its own output. Self-citations such as Ref. [43] provide the compact-tetraquark comparison value used to argue for sensitivity of the moments to internal structure, but the present molecular moments are computed independently of that comparison value. Therefore no step reduces, by the paper's own equations or by self-citation, to the quantity it claims to predict.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The calculation introduces no new particles or forces. Its outputs depend on auxiliary sum rule parameters (s0, M2) chosen by hand and on a chain of prior inputs: the assumed molecular masses and residues, the photon DA parametrization, and the single-pole treatment of the hadronic side. The central claim inherits these domain assumptions.

free parameters (2)

s0 continuum threshold = D \bar D_1: 23.6-25.6 GeV^2; D* \bar D*: 28.0-30.0 GeV^2
Chosen according to empirical relation (m_Y+0.5)^2 to (m_Y+0.7)^2 and constrained by pole dominance and OPE convergence; contributes ~30% of total uncertainty.
M2 Borel mass = D \bar D_1: 2.4-2.8 GeV^2; D* \bar D*: 3.2-3.8 GeV^2
Working region chosen to satisfy PC >= 30% and CVG <= 5%; contributes ~7% of uncertainty.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Quark-hadron duality equating hadronic and QCD representations after Borel transformation and continuum subtraction.
Core premise of QCD sum rule method, stated in Section II.
domain assumption Single-pole zero-width approximation for the hadronic side; two-meson intermediate states affect results by only 5-7% based on Refs [83-97].
Invoked in Section II C, Eq. (25) to justify neglecting continuum contamination; the 5-7% estimate was derived for mass/width sum rules, not EM form factors.
domain assumption Photon distribution amplitudes up to twist-4 from Ref [79] with light quarks only; charm-quark long-distance contributions are negligible (1/m_c suppressed).
Stated in Section II B; affects the size of nonperturbative contributions.
domain assumption Masses and residues of the molecular states are taken from Ref [72], which used the same interpolating currents and QCD sum rules under the molecular assumption.
Inputs from Eq. (19)-(20) and Table I; central claim depends on these normalizations.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of $D \bar D_1(2420)$ and $D^* \bar D^*(2400)$ molecular states: Probing their electromagnetic fingerprints." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JRR6DZ5C

@misc{pith2026250412694,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: $D \bar D_1(2420)$ and $D^* \bar D^*(2400)$ molecular states: Probing their electromagnetic fingerprints},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JRR6DZ5C}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.12694}
}

abstract

As in previous decades, a comprehensive understanding of the intricate internal configuration of hadrons continues to be a central objective within both experimental and theoretical hadron physics. This pursuit plays a pivotal role in advancing our knowledge of QCD and critically evaluating the robustness and accuracy of the theoretical models developed to date. Furthermore, deciphering the underlying mechanisms of exotic states, both those currently observed and those anticipated in future experiments, remains a pressing and unresolved challenge. Motivated by this, in the present study, we investigate the electromagnetic properties of the $D \bar D_1(2420)$ and $D^* \bar D^*(2400)$ molecular tetraquark states with quantum numbers $J^{PC} = 1^{--}$, using the QCD light-cone sum rule method. These states are analyzed within a hadronic molecular framework, where their magnetic and quadrupole moments are computed to probe internal structure and geometric deformation. Our results reveal distinct electromagnetic signatures, with the magnetic moments primarily dominated by light-quark contributions, and the quadrupole moments suggesting an oblate charge distribution. The findings are compared with prior studies assuming compact tetraquark configurations, emphasizing the sensitivity of electromagnetic observables to the underlying hadronic structure. This analysis provides critical insights into the nature of exotic hadrons and contributes to the broader understanding of QCD dynamics in the non-perturbative regime.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.12694 by the authors.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

115 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

[72]

Analysis of the $Y(4220)$ and $Y(4390)$ as molecular states with QCD sum rules

Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of theY (4220) andY (4390) as molecular states with QCD sum rules, Chin. Phys. C 41 (8) (2017) 083103. arXiv:1611.03250, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/41/8/083103

work page Pith review arXiv 2017
[43]

Özdem, Magnetic moments of the vector hidden-charm tetraquark states, Phys

U. Özdem, Magnetic moments of the vector hidden-charm tetraquark states, Phys. Rev. D 105 (11) (2022) 114030. arXiv:2206.05196, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.114030

arXiv 2022
[1]

S. K. Choi, et al., Observation of a narrow charmonium-like state in exclusiveB±→ K±π+π−J/ψ decays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 262001.arXiv:hep-ex/0309032, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.91.262001. 13

arXiv 2003
[2]

Esposito, A

A. Esposito, A. L. Guerrieri, F. Piccinini, A. Pilloni, A. D. Polosa, Four-Quark Hadrons: an Updated Review, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 30 (2015) 1530002.arXiv:1411.5997, doi:10.1142/S0217751X15300021

arXiv 2015
[3]

Esposito, A

A. Esposito, A. Pilloni, A. D. Polosa, Multiquark Resonances, Phys. Rept. 668 (2017) 1–97.arXiv:1611.07920, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2016.11.002

arXiv 2017
[4]

S. L. Olsen, T. Skwarnicki, D. Zieminska, Nonstandard heavy mesons and baryons: Experimental evidence, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90 (1) (2018) 015003.arXiv:1708.04012, doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.90.015003

arXiv 2018
[5]

R. F. Lebed, R. E. Mitchell, E. S. Swanson, Heavy-Quark QCD Exotica, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 93 (2017) 143–194. arXiv:1610.04528, doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2016.11.003

arXiv 2017
[6]

Nielsen, F

M. Nielsen, F. S. Navarra, S. H. Lee, New Charmonium States in QCD Sum Rules: A Concise Review, Phys. Rept. 497 (2010) 41–83. arXiv:0911.1958, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2010.07.005

arXiv 2010

Show all 115 references

[7]

Brambilla, S

N. Brambilla, S. Eidelman, C. Hanhart, A. Nefediev, C.-P. Shen, C. E. Thomas, A. Vairo, C.-Z. Yuan, TheXYZ states: experimental and theoretical status and perspectives, Phys. Rept. 873 (2020) 1–154.arXiv:1907.07583, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2020.05.001

2020 arXiv
[8]

Agaev, K

S. Agaev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, Four-quark exotic mesons, Turk. J. Phys. 44 (2) (2020) 95–173. arXiv:2004.12079, doi:10.3906/fiz-2003-15

2020 arXiv
[9]

H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, The hidden-charm pentaquark and tetraquark states, Phys. Rept. 639 (2016) 1–121. arXiv:1601.02092, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2016.05.004

2016 arXiv
[10]

A. Ali, J. S. Lange, S. Stone, Exotics: Heavy Pentaquarks and Tetraquarks, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 97 (2017) 123–198. arXiv:1706.00610, doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2017.08.003

2017 arXiv
[11]

F.-K. Guo, C. Hanhart, U.-G. Meißner, Q. Wang, Q. Zhao, B.-S. Zou, Hadronic molecules, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90 (1) (2018) 015004, [Erratum: Rev.Mod.Phys. 94, 029901 (2022)].arXiv:1705.00141, doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.90.015004

2018 arXiv
[12]

Liu, H.-X

Y.-R. Liu, H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, Pentaquark and Tetraquark states, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 107 (2019) 237–320. arXiv:1903.11976, doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2019.04.003

2019 arXiv
[13]

G. Yang, J. Ping, J. Segovia, Tetra- and penta-quark structures in the constituent quark model, Symmetry 12 (11) (2020)

2020
[14]

Dong, F.-K

X.-K. Dong, F.-K. Guo, B.-S. Zou, A survey of heavy-antiheavy hadronic molecules, Progr. Phys. 41 (2021) 65–93. arXiv:2101.01021, doi:10.13725/j.cnki.pip.2021.02.001

2021 arXiv
[15]

Dong, F.-K

X.-K. Dong, F.-K. Guo, B.-S. Zou, A survey of heavy–heavy hadronic molecules, Commun. Theor. Phys. 73 (12) (2021) 125201. arXiv:2108.02673, doi:10.1088/1572-9494/ac27a2

2021 arXiv
[16]

L. Meng, B. Wang, G.-J. Wang, S.-L. Zhu, Chiral perturbation theory for heavy hadrons and chiral effective field theory for heavy hadronic molecules, Phys. Rept. 1019 (2023) 1–149.arXiv:2204.08716, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2023.04.003

2023 arXiv
[17]

Wang, Review of the QCD sum rules for exotic states (2 2025).arXiv:2502.11351

Z.-G. Wang, Review of the QCD sum rules for exotic states (2 2025).arXiv:2502.11351

2025 arXiv
[18]

H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, Y.-R. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, An updated review of the new hadron states, Rept. Prog. Phys. 86 (2) (2023) 026201.arXiv:2204.02649, doi:10.1088/1361-6633/aca3b6

2023 arXiv
[19]

Aubert, et al., Observation of a broad structure in theπ+π−J/ψ mass spectrum around 4.26-GeV/c2, Phys

B. Aubert, et al., Observation of a broad structure in theπ+π−J/ψ mass spectrum around 4.26-GeV/c2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005) 142001. arXiv:hep-ex/0506081, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.142001

2005 arXiv
[20]

J. P. Lees, et al., Study of the reactione+e−→ ψ(2S)π−π− via initial-state radiation at BaBar, Phys. Rev. D 89 (11) (2014) 111103. arXiv:1211.6271, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.111103

2014 arXiv
[21]

C. Z. Yuan, et al., Measurement of e+ e- —> pi+ pi- J/psi cross-section via initial state radiation at Belle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (2007) 182004.arXiv:0707.2541, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.182004

2007 arXiv
[22]

X. L. Wang, et al., Observation of Two Resonant Structures in e+e- to pi+ pi- psi(2S) via Initial State Radiation at Belle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (2007) 142002.arXiv:0707.3699, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.142002

2007 arXiv
[23]

Pakhlova, et al., Observation of a near-threshold enhancement in the e+e- —> Lambda+(c) Lambda-(c) cross section using initial-state radiation, Phys

G. Pakhlova, et al., Observation of a near-threshold enhancement in the e+e- —> Lambda+(c) Lambda-(c) cross section using initial-state radiation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 (2008) 172001. arXiv:0807.4458, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.101. 172001

2008 arXiv
[24]

X. L. Wang, et al., Measurement ofe+e−→ π+π−ψ(2S) via Initial State Radiation at Belle, Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) 112007. arXiv:1410.7641, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.112007

2015 arXiv
[25]

He, et al., Confirmation of the Y(4260) resonance production in ISR, Phys

Q. He, et al., Confirmation of the Y(4260) resonance production in ISR, Phys. Rev. D 74 (2006) 091104. arXiv: hep-ex/0611021, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.091104

2006 arXiv
[26]

Ablikim, et al., Study ofe+e−→ ωχcJ at center-of-mass energies from 4.21 to 4.42 GeV, Phys

M. Ablikim, et al., Study ofe+e−→ ωχcJ at center-of-mass energies from 4.21 to 4.42 GeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (9) (2015) 092003. arXiv:1410.6538, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.092003

2015 arXiv
[27]

Ablikim, et al., Evidence of Two Resonant Structures ine+e−→ π+π−hc, Phys

M. Ablikim, et al., Evidence of Two Resonant Structures ine+e−→ π+π−hc, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (9) (2017) 092002. arXiv:1610.07044, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.092002

2017 arXiv
[28]

Ablikim, et al., Precise measurement of thee+e−→ π+π−J/ψ cross section at center-of-mass energies from 3.77 to 4.60 GeV, Phys

M. Ablikim, et al., Precise measurement of thee+e−→ π+π−J/ψ cross section at center-of-mass energies from 3.77 to 4.60 GeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (9) (2017) 092001.arXiv:1611.01317, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.092001

2017 arXiv
[29]

Ablikim, et al., Observation of the Y(4230) and a new structure in *, Chin

M. Ablikim, et al., Observation of the Y(4230) and a new structure in *, Chin. Phys. C 46 (11) (2022) 111002.arXiv: 2204.07800, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/ac945c

2022
[30]

Ablikim, et al., Observation of Three Charmoniumlike States with JPC=1– in e+e-→D*0D*-π+, Phys

M. Ablikim, et al., Observation of Three Charmoniumlike States with JPC=1– in e+e-→D*0D*-π+, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (12) (2023) 121901.arXiv:2301.07321, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.121901

2023
[31]

M.Ablikim, etal., PreciseMeasurementofthee+e- →Ds*+Ds*-CrossSectionsatCenter-of-MassEnergiesfromThreshold to 4.95 GeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (15) (2023) 151903.arXiv:2305.10789, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.151903

2023 arXiv
[32]

Ablikim, et al., Observation of a Vector Charmoniumlike State at 4.7 GeV/c2 and Search for Zcs in e+e-→K+K-J/ψ, Phys

M. Ablikim, et al., Observation of a Vector Charmoniumlike State at 4.7 GeV/c2 and Search for Zcs in e+e-→K+K-J/ψ, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (21) (2023) 211902.arXiv:2308.15362, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.211902

2023
[33]

Ablikim, et al., Observation of Structures in the Processes e+e-→ωχc1 andωχc2, Phys

M. Ablikim, et al., Observation of Structures in the Processes e+e-→ωχc1 andωχc2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132 (16) (2024) 14 161901. arXiv:2401.14720, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.161901

2024
[34]

Ablikim, et al., Study of e+e-→ωX(3872) andγX(3872) from 4.66 to 4.95 GeV, Phys

M. Ablikim, et al., Study of e+e-→ωX(3872) andγX(3872) from 4.66 to 4.95 GeV, Phys. Rev. D 110 (1) (2024) 012006. arXiv:2404.13840, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.012006

2024
[35]

Ablikim, et al., Measurement of Energy-Dependent Pair-Production Cross Section and Electromagnetic Form Factors of a Charmed Baryon, Phys

M. Ablikim, et al., Measurement of Energy-Dependent Pair-Production Cross Section and Electromagnetic Form Factors of a Charmed Baryon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (19) (2023) 191901.arXiv:2307.07316, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131. 191901

2023
[36]

Ablikim, et al., Observation of a Three-Resonance Structure in the Cross Section ofe+e− → π+π−hc (4 2025)

M. Ablikim, et al., Observation of a Three-Resonance Structure in the Cross Section ofe+e− → π+π−hc (4 2025). arXiv:2504.04096

2025
[37]

Chen, S.-L

W. Chen, S.-L. Zhu, The Vector and Axial-Vector Charmonium-like States, Phys. Rev. D 83 (2011) 034010.arXiv: 1010.3397, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.034010

2011 arXiv
[38]

Wang, Analysis of theZc(4020), Zc(4025), Y (4360) and Y (4660) as vector tetraquark states with QCD sum rules, Eur

Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of theZc(4020), Zc(4025), Y (4360) and Y (4660) as vector tetraquark states with QCD sum rules, Eur. Phys. J. C 74 (5) (2014) 2874.arXiv:1311.1046, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-2874-7

2014 arXiv
[39]

Wang, Tetraquark state candidates:Y (4260),Y (4360),Y (4660) andZc(4020/4025), Eur

Z.-G. Wang, Tetraquark state candidates:Y (4260),Y (4360),Y (4660) andZc(4020/4025), Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (7) (2016)

2016
[40]

Wang, Vector tetraquark state candidates:Y (4260/4220), Y (4360/4320), Y (4390) and Y (4660/4630), Eur

Z.-G. Wang, Vector tetraquark state candidates:Y (4260/4220), Y (4360/4320), Y (4390) and Y (4660/4630), Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (6) (2018) 518.arXiv:1803.05749, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5996-5

2018 arXiv
[41]

Sundu, S

H. Sundu, S. S. Agaev, K. Azizi, ResonanceY (4660) as a vector tetraquark and its strong decay channels, Phys. Rev. D 98 (5) (2018) 054021.arXiv:1805.04705, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.054021

2018 arXiv
[42]

Wang, Analysis of the vector hidden-charm tetraquark states without explicit P-waves via the QCD sum rules, Nucl

Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of the vector hidden-charm tetraquark states without explicit P-waves via the QCD sum rules, Nucl. Phys. B 973 (2021) 115592.arXiv:2108.05759, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2021.115592

2021 arXiv
[44]

Özdem, Investigating the underlying structure of vector hidden-charm tetraquark states via their electromagnetic characteristics, Phys

U. Özdem, Investigating the underlying structure of vector hidden-charm tetraquark states via their electromagnetic characteristics, Phys. Rev. D 111 (5) (2025) 054009.arXiv:2412.06447, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.054009

2025 arXiv
[45]

V. L. Chernyak, I. R. Zhitnitsky, B meson exclusive decays into baryons, Nucl. Phys. B 345 (1990) 137–172. doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(90)90612-H

1990 doi
[46]

V. M. Braun, I. E. Filyanov, QCD Sum Rules in Exclusive Kinematics and Pion Wave Function, Z. Phys. C 44 (1989)

1989
[47]

I. I. Balitsky, V. M. Braun, A. V. Kolesnichenko, Radiative Decay Sigma+ —> p gamma in Quantum Chromodynamics, Nucl. Phys. B 312 (1989) 509–550.doi:10.1016/0550-3213(89)90570-1

1989 doi
[48]

U. Özdem, Unveiling the underlying structure of axial-vector bottom-charm tetraquarks in the light of their magnetic moments, JHEP 05 (2024) 301.arXiv:2403.16191, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2024)301

2024 arXiv
[49]

Özdem, K

U. Özdem, K. Azizi, Electromagnetic properties of vector doubly charmed tetraquark states, Phys. Rev. D 109 (11) (2024) 114019. arXiv:2401.04798, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.114019

2024 arXiv
[50]

Mutuk, Masses and magnetic moments of doubly heavy tetraquarks via diffusion Monte Carlo method, Eur

H. Mutuk, Masses and magnetic moments of doubly heavy tetraquarks via diffusion Monte Carlo method, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (4) (2024) 395.arXiv:2312.13383, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12736-3

2024 arXiv
[51]

Wang, S.-Q

F.-L. Wang, S.-Q. Luo, X. Liu, Radiative decays and magnetic moments of the predicted Bc-like molecules, Phys. Rev. D 107 (11) (2023) 114017.arXiv:2303.04542, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.114017

2023 arXiv
[52]

Özdem, Analysis of the Zb(10650) state based on electromagnetic properties, Eur

U. Özdem, Analysis of the Zb(10650) state based on electromagnetic properties, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (1) (2024) 45. arXiv:2311.11327, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12408-2

2024 arXiv
[53]

Özdem, Magnetic and quadrupole moments of the , , and states in the diquark-antidiquark picture, Chin

U. Özdem, Magnetic and quadrupole moments of the , , and states in the diquark-antidiquark picture, Chin. Phys. C 48 (1) (2024) 013101.arXiv:2307.05028, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/ad0110

2024 arXiv
[54]

Lei, H.-S

Y.-D. Lei, H.-S. Li, Electromagnetic properties of the Tcc+ molecular states, Phys. Rev. D 109 (7) (2024) 076014. arXiv:2312.01332, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.076014

2024 arXiv
[55]

Zhang, H

W.-X. Zhang, H. Xu, D. Jia, Masses and magnetic moments of hadrons with one and two open heavy quarks: Heavy baryons and tetraquarks, Phys. Rev. D 104 (11) (2021) 114011.arXiv:2109.07040, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.114011

2021 arXiv
[56]

Azizi, U

K. Azizi, U. Özdem, Exploring the magnetic dipole moments ofTQQqs and TQQss states in the framework of QCD light-cone sum rules, JHEP 03 (2023) 166.arXiv:2301.07713, doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2023)166

2023 arXiv
[57]

Özdem, Electromagnetic form factors of the Bc-like tetraquarks: Molecular and diquark-antidiquark pictures, Phys

U. Özdem, Electromagnetic form factors of the Bc-like tetraquarks: Molecular and diquark-antidiquark pictures, Phys. Lett. B 838 (2023) 137750.arXiv:2211.10169, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.137750

2023 arXiv
[58]

Xu, Y.-L

Y.-J. Xu, Y.-L. Liu, M.-Q. Huang, The magnetic moment ofZc(3900) as an axial-vector molecular state, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (10) (2020) 953.arXiv:2007.15214, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-08515-5

2020 arXiv
[59]

Wang, The magnetic moment of theZc(3900) as an axialvector tetraquark state with QCD sum rules, Eur

Z.-G. Wang, The magnetic moment of theZc(3900) as an axialvector tetraquark state with QCD sum rules, Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (4) (2018) 297.arXiv:1712.05664, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5794-0

2018 arXiv
[60]

Özdem, Magnetic dipole moments of states, Chin

U. Özdem, Magnetic dipole moments of states, Chin. Phys. C 46 (11) (2022) 113106.arXiv:2203.07759, doi:10.1088/ 1674-1137/ac8653

2022 arXiv
[61]

Y.-H. Wang, J. Wei, C.-S. An, C.-R. Deng,Zcs(4000)+ and Zcs(4220)+ in a Multiquark Color Flux-Tube Model, Chin. Phys. Lett. 40 (2) (2023) 021201.doi:10.1088/0256-307X/40/2/021201

2023 doi
[62]

Özdem, Magnetic moments of the doubly charged axial-vector Tcc++ states, Phys

U. Özdem, Magnetic moments of the doubly charged axial-vector Tcc++ states, Phys. Rev. D 105 (5) (2022) 054019. arXiv:2112.10402, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.054019

2022 arXiv
[63]

Azizi, U

K. Azizi, U. Özdem, Magnetic dipole moments of the Tcc+ and ZV++ tetraquark states, Phys. Rev. D 104 (11) (2021) 114002. arXiv:2109.02390, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.114002

2021 arXiv
[64]

Özdem, A

U. Özdem, A. K. Yıldırım, Magnetic dipole moments of the Zc(4020)+, Zc(4200)+, Zcs(4000)+ and Zcs(4220)+ states in light-cone QCD, Phys. Rev. D 104 (5) (2021) 054017.arXiv:2104.13074, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.054017. 15

2021 arXiv
[65]

Xu, Y.-L

Y.-J. Xu, Y.-L. Liu, C.-Y. Cui, M.-Q. Huang,¯D(∗) s D(∗) molecular state withJ P= 1+, Phys. Rev. D 104 (9) (2021) 094028. arXiv:2011.14313, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.094028

2021 arXiv
[66]

Özdem, K

U. Özdem, K. Azizi, Magnetic dipole moment of theZcs(3985) state: diquark–antidiquark and molecular pictures, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 136 (9) (2021) 968.arXiv:2102.09231, doi:10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-01977-w

2021 arXiv
[67]

Ozdem, K

U. Ozdem, K. Azizi, Magnetic dipole moment ofZb(10610) in light-cone QCD, Phys. Rev. D 97 (1) (2018) 014010. arXiv:1709.09714, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.014010

2018 arXiv
[68]

Ozdem, K

U. Ozdem, K. Azizi, Magnetic and quadrupole moments of theZc(3900), Phys. Rev. D 96 (7) (2017) 074030.arXiv: 1707.09612, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.074030

2017 arXiv
[69]

Özdem, Study on the electromagnetic properties of the[sc][¯q¯b] and [sc][¯s¯b] states withJ P = 1+, Eur

U. Özdem, Study on the electromagnetic properties of the[sc][¯q¯b] and [sc][¯s¯b] states withJ P = 1+, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 140 (2) (2025) 105.arXiv:2405.11036, doi:10.1140/epjp/s13360-025-06016-6

2025 arXiv
[70]

Mutuk, Doubly-charged Tcc++ states in the dynamical diquark model, Phys

H. Mutuk, Doubly-charged Tcc++ states in the dynamical diquark model, Phys. Rev. D 110 (3) (2024) 034025.arXiv: 2401.02788, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.034025

2024 arXiv
[71]

Özdem, Elucidating the nature of axial-vector charm-antibottom tetraquark states (11 2024).arXiv:2411.15508

U. Özdem, Elucidating the nature of axial-vector charm-antibottom tetraquark states (11 2024).arXiv:2411.15508

2024
[73]

Q.-N. Wang, W. Chen, H.-X. Chen, Exotic molecular states and tetraquark states with JP =0+, 1+, 2+, Chin. Phys. C 45 (9) (2021) 093102.arXiv:2011.10495, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/ac0b3b

2021 arXiv
[74]

Chen, Y.-X

H.-X. Chen, Y.-X. Yan, W. Chen, Decay behaviors of the fully bottom and fully charm tetraquark states, Phys. Rev. D 106 (9) (2022) 094019.arXiv:2207.08593, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.094019

2022 arXiv
[75]

S. J. Brodsky, J. R. Hiller, Universal properties of the electromagnetic interactions of spin one systems, Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 2141–2149. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.46.2141

1992 doi
[76]

I. I. Balitsky, V. M. Braun, Evolution Equations for QCD String Operators, Nucl. Phys. B 311 (1989) 541–584.doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(89)90168-5

1989 doi
[77]

V. M. Belyaev, B. Y. Blok, CHARMED BARYONS IN QUANTUM CHROMODYNAMICS, Z. Phys. C 30 (1986) 151. doi:10.1007/BF01560689

1986 doi
[78]

Li, C.-D

H.-D. Li, C.-D. Lü, C. Wang, Y.-M. Wang, Y.-B. Wei, QCD calculations of radiative heavy meson decays with subleading power corrections, JHEP 04 (2020) 023.arXiv:2002.03825, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2020)023

2020 arXiv
[79]

P. Ball, V. M. Braun, N. Kivel, Photon distribution amplitudes in QCD, Nucl. Phys. B 649 (2003) 263–296.arXiv: hep-ph/0207307, doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(02)01017-9

2003 arXiv
[80]

Antonov, J

D. Antonov, J. E. F. T. Ribeiro, Quark condensate for various heavy flavors, Eur. Phys. J. C 72 (2012) 2179.arXiv: 1209.0408, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2179-7

2012 arXiv
[81]

Özdem, Electromagnetic properties of doubly heavy pentaquark states, Eur

U. Özdem, Electromagnetic properties of doubly heavy pentaquark states, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 137 (2022) 936.arXiv: 2201.00979, doi:10.1140/epjp/s13360-022-03125-4

2022 arXiv
[82]

ÖZDEM, Insight into the nature of thePc(4457) and related pentaquarks, Eur

U. ÖZDEM, Insight into the nature of thePc(4457) and related pentaquarks, Eur. Phys. J. C 85 (6) (2025) 624.arXiv: 2409.09449, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-14323-6

2025 arXiv
[83]

Weinberg, Tetraquark Mesons in LargeN Quantum Chromodynamics, Phys

S. Weinberg, Tetraquark Mesons in LargeN Quantum Chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 261601.arXiv: 1303.0342, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.261601

2013 arXiv
[84]

Lucha, D

W. Lucha, D. Melikhov, H. Sazdjian, Tetraquarks in large-Nc QCD, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 120 (2021) 103867.arXiv: 2102.02542, doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2021.103867

2021 arXiv
[85]

Kondo, O

Y. Kondo, O. Morimatsu, T. Nishikawa, Two-hadron-irreducible QCD sum rule for pentaquark baryon, Phys. Lett. B 611 (2005) 93–101. arXiv:hep-ph/0404285, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2005.01.070

2005 arXiv
[86]

Lucha, D

W. Lucha, D. Melikhov, H. Sazdjian, Tetraquark-adequate formulation of QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D 100 (1) (2019) 014010. arXiv:1901.03881, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.014010

2019 arXiv
[87]

Sarac, H

Y. Sarac, H. Kim, S. H. Lee, QCD sum rules for the anti-charmed pentaquark, Phys. Rev. D 73 (2006) 014009.arXiv: hep-ph/0510304, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.014009

2006 arXiv
[88]

Z.-G. Wang, X. Wang, Analysis of the strong decays of thePc(4312) as a pentaquark molecular state with QCD sum rules, Chin. Phys. C 44 (2020) 103102.arXiv:1907.04582, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/ababf7

2020 arXiv
[89]

S. H. Lee, H. Kim, Y. Kwon, Parity of Theta+(1540) from QCD sum rules, Phys. Lett. B 609 (2005) 252–258.arXiv: hep-ph/0411104, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2005.01.029

2005 arXiv
[90]

Wang, Analysis of theZc(4200) as axial-vector molecule-like state, Int

Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of theZc(4200) as axial-vector molecule-like state, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 30 (30) (2015) 1550168. arXiv:1502.01459, doi:10.1142/S0217751X15501687

2015 arXiv
[91]

S. S. Agaev, K. Azizi, B. Barsbay, H. Sundu, The doubly charmed pseudoscalar tetraquarksT ++ cc;¯s¯s andT ++ cc; ¯d¯s, Nucl. Phys. B 939 (2019) 130–144.arXiv:1806.04447, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2018.12.021

2019 arXiv
[92]

Sundu, S

H. Sundu, S. S. Agaev, K. Azizi, New charged resonanceZ− c (4100): the spectroscopic parameters and width, Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (3) (2019) 215.arXiv:1812.10094, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-6737-0

2019 arXiv
[93]

R. M. Albuquerque, S. Narison, D. Rabetiarivony,Zc-like spectra from QCD Laplace sum rules at NLO, Phys. Rev. D 103 (7) (2021) 074015.arXiv:2101.07281, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.074015

2021
[94]

R. M. Albuquerque, S. Narison, A. Rabemananjara, D. Rabetiarivony, G. Randriamanatrika, Doubly-hidden scalar heavy molecules and tetraquarks states from QCD at NLO, Phys. Rev. D 102 (9) (2020) 094001.arXiv:2008.01569, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.094001

2020 arXiv
[95]

Wang, Analysis of Zcs (3985) as the axialvector tetraquark state, Chin

Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of Zcs (3985) as the axialvector tetraquark state, Chin. Phys. C 45 (7) (2021) 073107.arXiv: 2011.10959, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/abfa83

2021 arXiv
[96]

Z.-G.Wang, Two-particlecontributionsandnonlocaleffectsintheQCDsumrulesfortheaxialvectortetraquarkcandidate 16 Zc(3900), Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 35 (24) (2020) 2050138.arXiv:1910.09981, doi:10.1142/S0217751X20501389

2020 arXiv
[97]

Wang, Landau equation and QCD sum rules for the tetraquark molecular states, Phys

Z.-G. Wang, Landau equation and QCD sum rules for the tetraquark molecular states, Phys. Rev. D 101 (7) (2020) 074011. arXiv:2001.04095, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.074011

2020 arXiv
[98]

R. L. Workman, et al., Review of Particle Physics, PTEP 2022 (2022) 083C01.doi:10.1093/ptep/ptac097

2022 doi
[99]

J. Rohrwild, Determination of the magnetic susceptibility of the quark condensate using radiative heavy meson decays, JHEP 09 (2007) 073.arXiv:0708.1405, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/09/073

2007 arXiv
[100]

Narison, mc,b, < αsG2 > and αs from Heavy Quarkonia, Nucl

S. Narison, mc,b, < αsG2 > and αs from Heavy Quarkonia, Nucl. Part. Phys. Proc. 300-302 (2018) 153–164. doi: 10.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2018.12.026

2018 doi
[101]

Lopez Castro, G

G. Lopez Castro, G. Toledo Sanchez, Effects of the magnetic dipole moment of charged vector mesons in their radiative decay distribution, Phys. Rev. D 56 (1997) 4408–4411.arXiv:hep-ph/9707202, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.56.4408

1997 arXiv
[102]

García Gudiño, G

D. García Gudiño, G. Toledo Sánchez, Determination of the magnetic dipole moment of the rho meson using 4 pion electro- production data, Int. J. Mod. Phys. Conf. Ser. 35 (2014) 1460463.arXiv:1305.6345, doi:10.1142/S2010194514604633

2014 arXiv
[103]

V. I. Zakharov, L. A. Kondratyuk, L. A. Ponomarev, Bremsstrahlung and determination of electromagnetic parameters of particles, Yad. Fiz. 8 (1968) 783–792

1968
[104]

Pascalutsa, M

V. Pascalutsa, M. Vanderhaeghen, Magnetic moment of the Delta(1232)-resonance in chiral effective field theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 (2005) 102003.arXiv:nucl-th/0412113, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.102003

2005 arXiv
[105]

Pascalutsa, M

V. Pascalutsa, M. Vanderhaeghen, Chiral effective-field theory in the Delta(1232) region: I. Pion electroproduction on the nucleon, Phys. Rev. D 73 (2006) 034003.arXiv:hep-ph/0512244, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.034003

2006 arXiv
[106]

Pascalutsa, M

V. Pascalutsa, M. Vanderhaeghen, Chiral effective-field theory in the Delta(1232) region. II. Radiative pion photoproduc- tion, Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 014027.arXiv:0709.4583, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.014027

2008 arXiv
[107]

Kotulla, et al., The Reaction gamma p —> pi zero gamma-prime p and the magnetic dipole moment of the delta+(1232) resonance, Phys

M. Kotulla, et al., The Reaction gamma p —> pi zero gamma-prime p and the magnetic dipole moment of the delta+(1232) resonance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 272001.arXiv:nucl-ex/0210040, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.89. 272001

2002 arXiv
[108]

Drechsel, M

D. Drechsel, M. Vanderhaeghen, Magnetic dipole moment of the Delta+ (1232) from the gamma p —> gamma pi0 pi reaction, Phys. Rev. C 64 (2001) 065202.arXiv:hep-ph/0105060, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.64.065202

2001 arXiv
[109]

A. I. Machavariani, A. Faessler, A. J. Buchmann, Field-theoretical description of electromagnetic Delta resonance pro- duction and determination of the magnetic moment of the∆+(1232) resonance by theep→e′N′π′γ′ and γp→N′π′γ′ reactions, Nucl. Phys. A 646 (1999) 231–257, [Erratu...

1999 doi
[110]

Drechsel, M

D. Drechsel, M. Vanderhaeghen, M. M. Giannini, E. Santopinto, Inelastic photon scattering and the magnetic moment of the Delta (1232) resonance, Phys. Lett. B 484 (2000) 236–242.arXiv:nucl-th/0003035, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(00) 00654-7

2000 arXiv
[111]

Chiang, M

W.-T. Chiang, M. Vanderhaeghen, S. N. Yang, D. Drechsel, Unitary model for the gamma p —> gamma pi0 p reaction and the magnetic dipole moment of the Delta+ (1232), Phys. Rev. C 71 (2005) 015204.arXiv:hep-ph/0409078, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.71.015204

2005 arXiv
[112]

A. I. Machavariani, A. Faessler, Propagator of the Delta resonance and determination of the magnetic moment of the Delta+ from the gamma p —>gamma pi0 p reaction, Phys. Rev. C 72 (2005) 024002.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.72.024002

2005 doi
[157]

doi:10.1007/BF01548594

doi
[387]

arXiv:1601.05541, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4238-y

arXiv
[1869]

arXiv:2009.00238, doi:10.3390/sym12111869

2009 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [72]

Analysis of the $Y(4220)$ and $Y(4390)$ as molecular states with QCD sum rules

Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of theY (4220) andY (4390) as molecular states with QCD sum rules, Chin. Phys. C 41 (8) (2017) 083103. arXiv:1611.03250, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/41/8/083103

work page Pith review arXiv 2017

[2] [43]

Özdem, Magnetic moments of the vector hidden-charm tetraquark states, Phys

U. Özdem, Magnetic moments of the vector hidden-charm tetraquark states, Phys. Rev. D 105 (11) (2022) 114030. arXiv:2206.05196, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.114030

arXiv 2022

[3] [1]

S. K. Choi, et al., Observation of a narrow charmonium-like state in exclusiveB±→ K±π+π−J/ψ decays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 262001.arXiv:hep-ex/0309032, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.91.262001. 13

arXiv 2003

[4] [2]

Esposito, A

A. Esposito, A. L. Guerrieri, F. Piccinini, A. Pilloni, A. D. Polosa, Four-Quark Hadrons: an Updated Review, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 30 (2015) 1530002.arXiv:1411.5997, doi:10.1142/S0217751X15300021

arXiv 2015

[5] [3]

Esposito, A

A. Esposito, A. Pilloni, A. D. Polosa, Multiquark Resonances, Phys. Rept. 668 (2017) 1–97.arXiv:1611.07920, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2016.11.002

arXiv 2017

[6] [4]

S. L. Olsen, T. Skwarnicki, D. Zieminska, Nonstandard heavy mesons and baryons: Experimental evidence, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90 (1) (2018) 015003.arXiv:1708.04012, doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.90.015003

arXiv 2018

[7] [5]

R. F. Lebed, R. E. Mitchell, E. S. Swanson, Heavy-Quark QCD Exotica, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 93 (2017) 143–194. arXiv:1610.04528, doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2016.11.003

arXiv 2017

[8] [6]

Nielsen, F

M. Nielsen, F. S. Navarra, S. H. Lee, New Charmonium States in QCD Sum Rules: A Concise Review, Phys. Rept. 497 (2010) 41–83. arXiv:0911.1958, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2010.07.005

arXiv 2010