Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 4 cited by

Magnetic Moments of Hidden-Charm Pentaquarks in the Diquark-Diquark-Antiquark Scheme

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper computes magnetic moments for Pc(4457) and related hidden-charm pentaquarks in the diquark-diquark-antiquark scheme and argues the sign and magnitude of these moments can discriminate among molecular, diquark-diquark-antiquark…

desk verdict The tables don't follow from the model as stated: 82f rows swap u and d, and 81f mixed rows quote one component rather than the flavor average. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.16486 v2 pith:R745HWOW submitted 2024-11-25 hep-ph hep-exhep-lat

Halil Mutuk This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-exhep-lat
keywords hidden-charmpentaquarksmagneticmomentsdiquark-diquark-antiquarkschemePc(4457)exotichadronsconstituentquarkmodelS-waveapproximationstrange
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 aims to turn the magnetic moment into a structural fingerprint for exotic pentaquarks. It systematically computes S-wave magnetic moments for the observed $P_c(4457)$ and five related hidden-charm states, with and without strangeness, for $J^P = \tfrac{1}{2}^-$, $\tfrac{3}{2}^-$, and $\tfrac{5}{2}^-$, within the diquark-diquark-antiquark scheme. The central message is that the predicted values differ strongly between the two flavor-octet representations ($81_f$ and $82_f$) and between spin couplings, so a future measurement could identify the internal quark arrangement and the spin-parity assignment. The paper also checks its numbers against existing light-cone sum-rule and quark-model predictions; for example, the $J^P=\tfrac{1}{2}^-$ $(1^+\otimes 1^+)_1 \otimes \tfrac{1}{2}^-$ configuration of $P_c(4457)$ gives $1.182\,\mu_N$, and the $J^P=\tfrac{3}{2}^-$ $(1^+\otimes 1^+)_1 \otimes \tfrac{1}{2}^-$ configuration gives $1.207\,\mu_N$, both compatible with earlier results.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the constituent-quark magnetic-moment operator $\hat{\mu}_{\rm spin} = \sum_i \frac{q_i}{2m_i}\hat{\sigma}_i$, evaluated in pentaquark wave functions built by coupling the two diquark spins $s_H$ and $s_L$ to an intermediate spin $s_{HL}$, then coupling to the anti-charm spin to total $S$, with flavor content from the $81_f$ and $82_f$ octet wave functions. Its work is to turn each allowed spin-flavor coupling into a single number in units of the nuclear magneton. The decisive simplification is the assumption $\ell=0$, so the orbital part is a spectator and the whole moment comes from the spin operator.

What would settle it

Measure the magnetic moment of $P_c(4457)$ (or one of its strange partners) through radiative decays or photoproduction with an uncertainty smaller than the spread between the paper's configurations; for $J^P = \tfrac{1}{2}^-$ the $81_f$ prediction is $+1.182\,\mu_N$ while the $82_f$ prediction is $-0.244\,\mu_N$, so even the sign would decide.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In the diquark-diquark-antiquark picture used here, a hidden-charm pentaquark is composed of a $(cq_1)$ diquark, a $(q_2q_3)$ diquark, and an anti-charm antiquark, with total orbital angular momentum $\ell=0$. The magnetic moment is the expectation value of the quark-level operator $\hat{\mu}_{\rm spin} = \sum_i \frac{q_i}{2m_i}\hat{\sigma}_i$ in the coupled spin-flavor wave function. The paper's central finding is that this simple operator, fed with constituent quark masses and the flavor wave functions of the $81_f$ and $82_f$ octet representations, produces sharply different moments: the $82_f$ configurations are mostly negative and at times equal to the anti-charm contribution alone ($-0.377\,\mu_N$), while the $81_f$ configurations give a wider band of positive values up to $3.345\,\mu_N$. Because these numbers bracket predictions from molecular and diquark-triquark models, the author concludes that the magnetic moment of $P_c(4457)$ and its relatives can serve as a practical discriminator between structural schemes.

Load-bearing premise

The whole calculation assumes a pure S-wave ground state with zero orbital angular momentum ($\ell=0$), so the magnetic moment receives no orbital contribution; any orbital excitation would change every predicted value.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A measured $P_c(4457)$ moment near $+1.18\,\mu_N$ for $J^P=\tfrac{1}{2}^-$ would favor the $81_f$ $(1^+\otimes 1^+)_1 \otimes \tfrac{1}{2}^-$ diquark arrangement and match the light-cone sum-rule prediction quoted in the paper.
  • A measured value near $-0.38\,\mu_N$ would indicate the $82_f$ $0^+\otimes 0^+\otimes \tfrac{1}{2}^-$ configuration, where only the anti-charm contributes.
  • The sign of the moment alone is a strong test, since the paper's $82_f$ entries are almost uniformly negative while the $81_f$ entries are mostly positive for $P_c(4457)$.
  • The predicted zero magnetic moment for the $P_{cr1}$ $J^P=\tfrac{5}{2}^-$ $(1^+\otimes 1^+)\otimes \tfrac{1}{2}^-$ configuration is a sharp signature that a radiative or photoproduction experiment could check.
  • The computed moments feed into estimates of $J/\psi$ photoproduction cross sections, where the magnetic moment enters the electromagnetic amplitudes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If an eventual measurement lands between the $81_f$ and $82_f$ predictions, the natural reading is a mixture of configurations; the tables in this paper provide the pure-state endpoints for such a mixing analysis.
  • The repeated equal moments shared by different strangeness assignments (for example $P_c(4457)$ and $P_{cr5}$ in the $82_f$ representation) imply a degeneracy that could be tested: a measurement breaking that equality would signal mass effects or configuration mixing beyond the simple spin operator.
  • Because the $P_c$ states live only about $10^{-23}$ seconds, direct Stern-Gerlach-style measurement is impossible; however, the $\Delta(1232)$ radiative-transition precedent cited in the paper suggests the same indirect route could extract the $P_c(4457)$ moment from radiative decays.
  • The same machinery, with the charm quark mass replaced, could generate falsifiable predictions for hidden-bottom pentaquarks, where the heavy-quark contribution is smaller and the light-quark pattern should stand out more clearly.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper claims a systematic calculation of the magnetic moments of Pc(4457) and five related hidden-charm pentaquark states in the diquark-diquark-antiquark scheme for J^P = 1/2^-, 3/2^-, and 5/2^-. The calculation uses the quark-level spin operator of Eq. (18) with constituent quark masses from Eq. (19) and S-wave wave functions with zero orbital angular momentum. Results are presented in Tables V-X, compared with light-cone QCD sum rules and quark-model predictions, and are claimed to help distinguish molecular, diquark-diquark-antiquark, and diquark-triquark pictures.

Significance. If the tabulated values were correct, the paper would provide a useful set of parameter-free predictions, since no parameter is adjusted to reproduce pentaquark magnetic moments and the constituent masses come from earlier baryon fits. The comparisons with independent sum-rule results would also give a check of the diquark-diquark-antiquark assignment. However, several table entries do not follow from the stated wave functions and operator, and the missing spin-flavor algebra prevents verification. The model-discrimination claim rests entirely on the numerical tables, so the significance cannot be assessed until the discrepancies are resolved.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section II.A and II.B, Eqs. (4)-(17) and Table V header] The 82f entries do not follow from Eqs. (17)-(19) and the wave functions in Table IV. For Pc(4457) with wave function [ud](cu)cbar, the J^P = 3/2^- configuration 1+⊗0+⊗1/2^- has a unique stretched state |(cu)_{1,1}[ud]_{0,0}cbar↑>. Using μ_u = +1.861, μ_d = -0.930, μ_c = +0.377, μ_cbar = -0.377 from Eq. (19), Eq. (18) gives μ_c + μ_u + μ_cbar = +1.861 μ_N, not the quoted -0.930 μ_N. The quoted value is -μ_d and corresponds to a (cd) diquark. Similarly, Table VI for Pcr1 [ud](cd)cbar quotes +1.861 μ_N, while the same calculation gives μ_d = -0.930 μ_N. The same inversion appears in the J^P = 1/2^- rows: [ud](cu)cbar gives +1.617 μ_N and [ud](cd)cbar gives -0.244 μ_N, whereas Tables V and VI quote -0.244 and +1.617, respectively. The 82f predictions and the discrimination claim built on them are therefore not supported as written.
  2. [Section II.B] The diquark ordering is inconsistent between the flavor wave functions and the spin-coupling notation. Equations (4)-(15) and Table IV place the qq pair (braced or bracketed) in the first position, whereas Eq. (17) and the table headers define the first diquark as (cq1) with spin s_H. For example, Table IV gives Pc(4457) in the 82f representation as [ud](cu)cbar, so the first diquark is [ud] with spin 0, but Table V uses the same representation with the configuration 1+⊗0+ for this state. The reader cannot determine which diquark carries which spin. The convention must be stated explicitly and used consistently in Tables IV-X.
  3. [Section III, Tables VII and VIII] The magnetic quantum number used in the expectation value of Eq. (18) is never specified. Magnetic moments are conventionally defined as the expectation value in the stretched state M = J, and different M values give different results. Since the comparisons with sum rules in Section III depend on this choice, the paper should define μ = ⟨J,M=J|Σ_i q_i/(2m_i) σ_{i,z}|J,M=J⟩ and show at least one complete worked example connecting this definition to a table entry.
  4. [Section III, Tables VII and VIII] The 82f columns of Tables VII and VIII are identical (-0.377, -0.009, -0.579) for Pcr2 [us](cu)cbar and Pcr3 [ds](cd)cbar. If the spin-1 diquark is the (cq1) diquark as stated in Eq. (17), then these two states have (cu) and (cd) diquarks, respectively, whose magnetic contributions differ by about 2.8 μ_N under Eq. (19). The identical entries therefore indicate an internal inconsistency. The same issue affects the bullet statement that Pc(4457) and Pcr5, and Pcr1 and Pcr4, share identical 82f moments, since the stated wave functions involve different quark charges and masses. These entries must be recomputed from the stated wave functions.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section I] The text contains typos such as 'LCHb Collaboration' and 'color antriplet'; these should be corrected to 'LHCb Collaboration' and 'color antitriplet'.
  2. [Section II.A] The phrase 'Clebcsh-Gordon coefficients' should read 'Clebsch-Gordan coefficients'.
  3. [Section III] The bullet list contains ungrammatical sentences such as 'In 82f representation, all the magnetic moments are negative whereas except ...' and the repeated 'the the Pcr1' in the table captions; these should be rewritten.
  4. [Section III, Tables V-X] The numerical results are quoted without uncertainties, while the input constituent masses and the comparison values from the literature carry uncertainties; propagating the constituent-mass uncertainties would make the comparisons more meaningful.
  5. [Section IV] The summary contains the typo 'sructure' for 'structure'; the final paragraph should also avoid the near-verbatim repetition of the previous paragraph's statement about distinguishing models.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the magnetic-moment calculation is a direct expectation value from stated inputs.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained: magnetic moments are computed as expectation values of the operator in Eq. (18) using the spin-flavor wave functions of Eqs. (4)-(17) and the constituent quark masses of Eq. (19), which are taken from an external baryon fit [37]. No pentaquark magnetic moment is used as input, and no parameter is adjusted to reproduce the tabulated values in Tables V-X. The author's prior works [29,30] are cited only as related literature on hidden-bottom pentaquarks and carry no load-bearing weight in the present calculation. The asserted model-discrimination power rests on the numerical tables, and whether those numbers follow from the stated spin-flavor algebra is a correctness/consistency question, not a circularity question. An apparent mismatch between the quoted table entries and a first-principles recomputation of Eq. (18) would indicate an error or an unstated convention, but it does not make the derivation equivalent to its inputs. The calculation is therefore not circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model pulls the diquark picture, S-wave assumption, and one-body magnetic moment operator from prior phenomenological literature, and the numerical inputs are three constituent quark masses taken from Ref [37]. No new degrees of freedom are introduced. The central results therefore rest on the relevance of the diquark-diquark-antiquark assignment for the observed states and on the validity of the nonrelativistic spin-only formula.

free parameters (3)
  • Constituent quark mass m_u = m_d = 0.336 GeV
    Input from Ref [37], used in Equation (18) for the light quark spin contributions. Magnetic moment values scale inversely with this mass.
  • Constituent quark mass m_s = 0.540 GeV
    Input from Ref [37], controls strange quark contributions to the magnetic moments.
  • Constituent quark mass m_c = 1.660 GeV
    Input from Ref [37], controls charm and anticharm contributions to the magnetic moments.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption A diquark in the color antitriplet representation with a flavor-symmetric or antisymmetric wave function forms the basic building block of the pentaquark.
    Invoked in Section II.A and Equation (3); the authors choose the antitriplet diquark as dominant because it allows color-singlet formation with the antiquark, citing Refs [10,11].
  • domain assumption The pentaquark ground state is a pure S-wave with orbital angular momentum l=0, and the orbital part contributes nothing to the magnetic moment.
    Section II.B states 'In this work, we assume l=0, corresponding to S-wave pentaquark states'; all tables use l=0.
  • domain assumption The magnetic moment is given by the one-body spin operator mu = sum_i q_i / (2 m_i) sigma_i, with no orbital or exchange-current terms.
    Section II.B, Equation (18); this is the standard nonrelativistic constituent quark model formula.
  • domain assumption The experimentally observed Pc(4457) and the related Pcr states are assigned to the flavor representations 8_1f and 8_2f with the wave functions in Table IV.
    Section III states the choice follows Refs [13,18]; Table IV lists the wave functions. If the actual state has different internal structure, the computed moments do not apply.
  • standard math SU(3) flavor and SU(2) spin Clebsch-Gordan coefficients, and the Fermi antisymmetrization of the quark wave function, are used to build the spin-flavor wave functions.
    Section II.A, Equations (4)-(16); these are standard group-theoretic tools needed to construct the wave functions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Magnetic Moments of Hidden-Charm Pentaquarks in the Diquark-Diquark-Antiquark Scheme." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/R745HWOW

@misc{pith2026241116486,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Magnetic Moments of Hidden-Charm Pentaquarks in the Diquark-Diquark-Antiquark Scheme},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/R745HWOW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.16486}
}
abstract

The magnetic moment of a hadron is an important spectroscopic parameter that encodes valuable information about its internal structure. In this work, we systematically investigate the magnetic moments of hidden-charm pentaquark states, including the experimentally observed $P_c(4457)$ and related configurations with and without strangeness. The analysis is performed within the diquark-diquark-antiquark framework for spin-parity quantum numbers $J^P = \frac{1}{2}^-$, $\frac{3}{2}^-$, and $\frac{5}{2}^-$. Magnetic moment values are computed for different spin and flavor configurations, and the results are compared with existing predictions in the literature. These predictions may offer insight into the inner structure and quantum numbers of these exotic states, and potentially help distinguish between different theoretical models.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.16486 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic diagram of pentaquark in diquark-diquark-antiquark scheme. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Charting doubly strange hidden-charm pentaquarks: An electromagnetic mapping of spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ and $\frac{3}{2}$ states

    hep-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    LCSR calculations of magnetic, quadrupole and octupole moments for S=-2 hidden-charm pentaquarks yield large current-dependent ranges (-4.25 to 5.74 μ_N) dominated by the charm quark in most diquark configurations.

  2. Possibility of the antibottom-strange molecular pentaquarks near $ B\Sigma$ and $ B^*\Sigma$ thresholds

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Coupled-channel OBE dynamics with S–D mixing produce three near-threshold poles dominated by BΣ/B*Σ that should show as narrow enhancements in open Bs0N, BΛ and B*Λ channels.

  3. Electromagnetic form factors: A window into the $D\Lambda_c$, $D^*\Lambda_c$, and $D\Lambda_c^*$ molecular structure

    hep-ph 2025-11 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    Using light-cone QCD sum rules, the paper predicts negative magnetic dipole moments of roughly -1.27, -2.78, and -3.80 nuclear magnetons for the DΛc, D*Λc, and DΛc* molecular pentaquark candidates, plus small quadrupo...

  4. Probing the electromagnetic structure of the $P_c(4337)^+$ pentaquark: Insights from a diquark-diquark-antiquark picture for $J^P = \frac{1}{2}^-$ and $\frac{3}{2}^-$ states

    hep-ph 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Under the diquark-diquark-antiquark model, the magnetic moment of Pc(4337)+ is predicted to be 1.76 ± 0.44 μN for J^P = 1/2^- and -1.38 ± 0.35 μN for J^P = 3/2^-, with nonzero quadrupole and octupole moments in the 3/...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

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

    M. Gell-Mann, A Schematic Model of Baryons and Mesons, Phys. Lett. 8 (1964) 214–215.doi:10.1016/S0031-9163(64) 92001-3

    doi:10.1016/s0031-9163(64 1964

  2. [2]

    Flavor wave functions ofPc and related states in10f representation (I,I 3) Wave function-10f ( 3 2, 3

    − √1 3{ud}(cu)¯c + √2 3{uu}(cd)¯c [ud](cu)¯c ( 1 2,− 1 2) √1 3{ud}(cd)¯c− √2 3{dd}(cu)¯c [ud](cd)¯c (1, 1) √1 3{us}(cu)¯c− √2 3{uu}(cs)¯c [us](cu)¯c (1, 0) √1 6[{us}(cd)¯c +{ds}(cu)¯c]− √2 3{ud}(cs)¯c 1√ 2{[us](cd)¯c + [ds](cu)¯c} (1,−1) √1 3{ds}(cd)¯c− √2 3{dd}(cs)¯c [ds](cd)¯c (0, 0) √1 2[{ds}(cu)¯c−{us}(cd)¯c] 1√ 6{[us](cd)¯c− [ds](cu)¯c− 2[ud](cs)¯c} ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    {uu}(cu)¯c ( 3 2, 1 2) √2 3{ud}(cu)¯c + √1 3{uu}(cd)¯c ( 3 2,− 1 2) √2 3{ud}(cd)¯c + √1 3{dd}(cu)¯c ( 3 2,− 3

    work page

  4. [4]

    This pattern follows for the second diquark, whereS34 = 1 or 0 for symmetric or antisymmetric flavor wave functions, respectively

    {dd}(cd)¯c (1, 1) √2 3{us}(cu)¯c + √1 3{uu}(cs)¯c (1, 0) √1 3[{us}(cd)¯c +{ds}(cu)¯c] + √1 3{ud}(cs)¯c (1,−1) √2 3{ds}(cd)¯c + √1 3{dd}(cs)¯c ( 1 2, 1 2) √1 3{ss}(cu)¯c + √2 3{us}(cs)¯c ( 1 2,− 1 2) √1 3{ss}(cd)¯c + √2 3{ds}(cs)¯c (0, 0) {ss}(cs)¯c where S12 = 1 for symmetric flavor wave function andS12 = 0 for antisymmetic wave function for the first diq...

    work page

  5. [5]

    In addition to this,Pcs(4459) is supposed to be in82f representation [18]

    are in the81f or 82f representation in the diquark-diquark-antiquark scheme [13]. In addition to this,Pcs(4459) is supposed to be in82f representation [18]. Before presenting magnetic moments of thePc(4457) and its related states, we want to denote the labelling con- vention of the states in this work. We use a labelling convention (Pcri, wherer denotes f...

    work page

  6. [6]

    Aaij, et al., Evidence of aJ/ψΛ structure and observation of excitedΞ− states in theΞ− b →J/ψΛK− decay, Sci

    R. Aaij, et al., Evidence of aJ/ψΛ structure and observation of excitedΞ− states in theΞ− b →J/ψΛK− decay, Sci. Bull. 66 (2021) 1278–1287. arXiv:2012.10380, doi:10.1016/j.scib.2021.02.030

    arXiv 2021

  7. [7]

    Zweig, An SU(3) model for strong interaction symmetry and its breaking

    G. Zweig, An SU(3) model for strong interaction symmetry and its breaking. Version 1 (1 1964). doi:10.17181/ CERN-TH-401

    work page 1964

  8. [8]

    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

    arXiv 2003

Show all 43 references
  1. [9]

    Aaij, et al., Observation ofJ/ψp Resonances Consistent with Pentaquark States inΛ0 b→J/ψK−p Decays, Phys

    R. Aaij, et al., Observation ofJ/ψp Resonances Consistent with Pentaquark States inΛ0 b→J/ψK−p Decays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 072001.arXiv:1507.03414, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.072001

    2015 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Aaij, et al., Observation of a narrow pentaquark state,Pc(4312)+, and of two-peak structure of thePc(4450)+, Phys

    R. Aaij, et al., Observation of a narrow pentaquark state,Pc(4312)+, and of two-peak structure of thePc(4450)+, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (22) (2019) 222001.arXiv:1904.03947, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.222001

    2019 arXiv

  3. [11]

    M. Y. Barabanov, et al., Diquark correlations in hadron physics: Origin, impact and evidence, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 116 (2021) 103835. arXiv:2008.07630, doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2020.103835

    2021 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Aaij, et al., Observation of a J/ψΛ Resonance Consistent with a Strange Pentaquark Candidate in B-→J/ψΛp¯ Decays, Phys

    R. Aaij, et al., Observation of a J/ψΛ Resonance Consistent with a Strange Pentaquark Candidate in B-→J/ψΛp¯ Decays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (3) (2023) 031901.arXiv:2210.10346, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.031901

    2023 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Bijker, M

    R. Bijker, M. M. Giannini, E. Santopinto, Magnetic moments of antidecuplet pentaquarks, Phys. Lett. B 595 (2004) 260–268. arXiv:hep-ph/0403029, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2004.05.062

    2004 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Ortiz-Pacheco, R

    E. Ortiz-Pacheco, R. Bijker, C. Fernández-Ramírez, Hidden charm pentaquarks: mass spectrum, magnetic moments, and photocouplings, J. Phys. G 46 (6) (2019) 065104.arXiv:1808.10512, doi:10.1088/1361-6471/ab096d

    2019 arXiv

  7. [15]

    V. V. Anisovich, M. A. Matveev, J. Nyiri, A. N. Semenova, Narrow pentaquarks as diquark–diquark–antiquark systems, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 32 (29) (2017) 1750154.arXiv:1706.01336, doi:10.1142/S0217732317501541. 11

    2017 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Özdem, Magnetic dipole moments of the hidden-charm pentaquark states:Pc(4440), Pc(4457) and Pcs(4459), Eur

    U. Özdem, Magnetic dipole moments of the hidden-charm pentaquark states:Pc(4440), Pc(4457) and Pcs(4459), Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (4) (2021) 277.arXiv:2102.01996, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09070-3

    2021 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Aaij, et al., Probing the nature of theχc1(3872) state using radiative decays (6 2024).arXiv:2406.17006

    R. Aaij, et al., Probing the nature of theχc1(3872) state using radiative decays (6 2024).arXiv:2406.17006

    2024

  10. [18]

    G.-J. Wang, R. Chen, L. Ma, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, Magnetic moments of the hidden-charm pentaquark states, Phys. Rev. D 94 (9) (2016) 094018.arXiv:1605.01337, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.094018

    2016 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Özdem, K

    U. Özdem, K. Azizi, Electromagnetic multipole moments of theP + c (4380) pentaquark in light-cone QCD, Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (5) (2018) 379.arXiv:1803.06831, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5873-2

    2018 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Xu, Y.-L

    Y.-J. Xu, Y.-L. Liu, M.-Q. Huang, The magnetic moment ofPc(4312) as a ¯DΣc molecular state, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (5) (2021) 421. arXiv:2008.07937, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09211-8

    2021 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Wang, H.-Y

    F.-L. Wang, H.-Y. Zhou, Z.-W. Liu, X. Liu, What can we learn from the electromagnetic properties of hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks with single strangeness?, Phys. Rev. D 106 (5) (2022) 054020.arXiv:2208.10756, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.106.054020

    2022 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Li, Z.-W

    M.-W. Li, Z.-W. Liu, Z.-F. Sun, R. Chen, Magnetic moments and transition magnetic moments of Pc and Pcs states, Phys. Rev. D 104 (5) (2021) 054016.arXiv:2106.15053, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.054016

    2021 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Gao, H.-S

    F. Gao, H.-S. Li, Magnetic moments of hidden-charm strange pentaquark states*, Chin. Phys. C 46 (12) (2022) 123111. arXiv:2112.01823, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/ac8651

    2022 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Özdem, Magnetic moments of pentaquark states in light-cone sum rules, Eur

    U. Özdem, Magnetic moments of pentaquark states in light-cone sum rules, Eur. Phys. J. A 58 (3) (2022) 46.doi: 10.1140/epja/s10050-022-00700-2

    2022 doi

  17. [25]

    Wang, S.-Q

    F.-L. Wang, S.-Q. Luo, H.-Y. Zhou, Z.-W. Liu, X. Liu, Exploring the electromagnetic properties of theΞc(’,*)D¯s* and Ωc(*)D¯s* molecular states, Phys.Rev. D 108 (3) (2023)034006.arXiv:2210.02809, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.034006

    2023 arXiv

  18. [26]

    H.-S. Li, F. Guo, Y.-D. Lei, F. Gao, Magnetic moments and axial charges of the octet hidden-charm molecular pentaquark family, Phys. Rev. D 109 (9) (2024) 094027.arXiv:2401.14767, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.094027

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    F.-L. Wang, X. Liu, Higher molecular PψsΛ/Σ pentaquarks arising from theΞc(’,*)D¯1/Ξc(’,*)D¯2* interactions, Phys. Rev. D 108 (5) (2023) 054028.arXiv:2307.08276, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.054028

    2023 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Guo, H.-S

    F. Guo, H.-S. Li, Analysis of the hidden-charm pentaquark states based on magnetic moment and transition magnetic moment, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (4) (2024) 392.arXiv:2304.10981, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12699-5

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    F.-L. Wang, X. Liu, Surveying the mass spectra and the electromagnetic properties of theΞc(’,*)D(*) molecular pen- taquarks, Phys. Rev. D 109 (1) (2024) 014043.arXiv:2311.13968, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.014043

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Özdem, Analysis of the isospin eigenstate¯DΣc, ¯D∗Σc, and ¯DΣ∗ c pentaquarks by their electromagnetic properties, Eur

    U. Özdem, Analysis of the isospin eigenstate¯DΣc, ¯D∗Σc, and ¯DΣ∗ c pentaquarks by their electromagnetic properties, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (8) (2024) 769.arXiv:2401.12678, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13124-7

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Lai, F.-L

    B.-J. Lai, F.-L. Wang, X. Liu, Investigating the M1 radiative decay behaviors and the magnetic moments of the predicted triple-charm molecular-type pentaquarks, Phys. Rev. D 109 (5) (2024) 054036. arXiv:2402.07195, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.109.054036

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Li, Molecular pentaquark magnetic moments in heavy pentaquark chiral perturbation theory, Phys

    H.-S. Li, Molecular pentaquark magnetic moments in heavy pentaquark chiral perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. D 109 (11) (2024) 114039. arXiv:2401.14759, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.114039

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Özdem, Elucidating the nature of hidden-charm pentaquark states with spin-32 through their electromagnetic form factors, Phys

    U. Özdem, Elucidating the nature of hidden-charm pentaquark states with spin-32 through their electromagnetic form factors, Phys. Lett. B 851 (2024) 138551.arXiv:2402.03802, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.138551

    2024 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Mutuk, X.-W

    H. Mutuk, X.-W. Kang, Unveiling the structure of hidden-bottom strange pentaquarks via magnetic moments, Phys. Lett. B 855 (2024) 138772.arXiv:2405.07066, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.138772

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Mutuk, Magnetic moments of hidden-bottom pentaquark states, Eur

    H. Mutuk, Magnetic moments of hidden-bottom pentaquark states, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (8) (2024) 874.arXiv:2403.16616, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13263-x

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    K. U. Can, G. Erkol, B. Isildak, M. Oka, T. T. Takahashi, Electromagnetic structure of charmed baryons in Lattice QCD, JHEP 05 (2014) 125.arXiv:1310.5915, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2014)125

    2014 arXiv

  29. [37]

    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

  30. [38]

    Our result forJ P = 3 2 − (0+⊗ 1+)⊗ 1 2 − ⊗ 0+ configuration isµ =−1.535 µN which is compatible

    obtained magnetic moment asµ =−2.29+0.53 −0.39 µN for J P = 3 2 − quantum number. Our result forJ P = 3 2 − (0+⊗ 1+)⊗ 1 2 − ⊗ 0+ configuration isµ =−1.535 µN which is compatible. • Inthe Pcr5 typepentaquark, alltheresultsofmagneticmomentsarenegativeinboth 81f and 82f represent...

  31. [39]

    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

  32. [40]

    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

  33. [41]

    K. U. Can, G. Erkol, B. Isildak, M. Oka, T. T. Takahashi, Electromagnetic properties of doubly charmed baryons in Lattice QCD, Phys. Lett. B 726 (2013) 703–709.arXiv:1306.0731, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2013.09.024

    2013 arXiv

  34. [42]

    G.-J. Wang, L. Meng, H.-S. Li, Z.-W. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, Magnetic moments of the spin-1 2 singly charmed baryons in chiral perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. D 98 (5) (2018) 054026.arXiv:1803.00229, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.054026

    2018 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Özdem, Insight into the nature of thePc(4457) and related pentaquarks (9 2024).arXiv:2409.09449

    U. Özdem, Insight into the nature of thePc(4457) and related pentaquarks (9 2024).arXiv:2409.09449

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.