Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 70 references

Coupled channel effects for the bottom-strange mesons

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Coupled-channel calculations identify the newly observed bottom-strange mesons BsJ(6064) and BsJ(6158) as D-wave quark-antiquark states.

desk verdict Competent coupled-channel calculation whose headline D-wave assignments rest on an unstated pole prescription in Eq. (3); worth refereeing but needs a stated regularization and a sensitivity analysis. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.04298 v1 pith:VVPMR7A3 submitted 2025-01-08 hep-ph

Wei Hao , M. Atif Sultan , En Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph
keywords bottom-strangemesonscoupledchanneleffectsnonrelativisticquarkmodel3P0D-wavestrongdecaywidthsmassshifts
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

The paper sets out to show that the known and newly observed bottom-strange mesons can be understood as ordinary quark-antiquark states once the coupling to two-meson decay channels is included. It identifies the two newest states, $B_{sJ}(6064)$ and $B_{sJ}(6158)$, with the spin-triplet D-wave states $B_s(1^3D_3)$ and $B_s(1^3D_1)$, because coupled-channel effects shift the bare quark-model masses down to within about 15 MeV of the measured values and produce strong decay widths close to the data. It also assigns $B_{s1}(5830)$ and $B_{s2}^*(5840)$ to the $1P'$ and $1^3P_2$ states, reproducing their narrow widths and measured branching ratio. If these assignments are correct, the quantum numbers of the new states are fixed and the spectroscopy of this family becomes predictive up to D wave.

What carries the argument

The central object is the coupled-channel self-energy, an integral over the momentum of each virtual two-meson pair with a denominator $M - E_{BC}$, where $E_{BC}$ is the total energy of the two mesons. The transition matrix element comes from the ${}^3P_0$ pair-creation operator, in which a quark-antiquark pair with vacuum quantum numbers is created and the pair has a Gaussian form factor of size $r_q = 0.3$ fm and strength $\gamma_0 = 0.4$. The same matrix element, evaluated on shell, gives the strong decay widths. What carries the argument is that these self-energy corrections are large, about $-100$ to $-150$ MeV, and channel-dependent, so they move the bare quark-model states to the measured positions while the realistic numerical wave functions control the decay widths.

What would settle it

Measure the spin-parity of $B_{sJ}(6064)$ through the angular distribution of its $B^+K^-$ decay: the paper's assignment requires $J^P = 3^+$, whereas the alternative $B_s(2^3S_1)$ assignment gives a different angular dependence, so the observed distribution would settle the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a nonrelativistic potential model corrected by two-meson continuum channels reproduces the bottom-strange meson spectrum, and that this resolves the quantum numbers of the newly observed states. The paper computes bare masses from a nonrelativistic Hamiltonian, then adds self-energy shifts from ten coupled channels ($BK$, $B^*K$, $BK^*$, $B^*K^*$, $B_s\eta$, $B_s\eta'$, $B_s^*\eta$, $B_s^*\eta'$, $B_s\phi$, $B_s^*\phi$). The resulting masses for $B_s(1^3D_3)$ and $B_s(1^3D_1)$ are 6079 and 6157 MeV, with ${}^3P_0$ decay widths of 24 and 62 MeV, compared with measured masses $6063.5 \pm 1.2 \pm 0.8$ and $6158 \pm 4 \pm 5$ MeV and widths $26 \pm 4 \pm 4$ and $72 \pm 18 \pm 25$ MeV. The same calculation assigns $B_{s1}(5830)$ to $B_s(1P')$ and $B_{s2}^*(5840)$ to $B_s(1^3P_2)$, gives the ground states $B_s$ and $B_s^*$ as $1^1S_0$ and $1^3S_1$, and predicts the 2S and remaining 2P and 1D states.

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative reliability of the coupled-channel mass shift formula is load-bearing: its D-wave predictions are large shifts, about $-104$ and $-135$ MeV, that depend on the pair-creation strength $\gamma_0 = 0.4$, the Gaussian regulator $r_q = 0.3$ fm, and an unspecified treatment of the pole when $M = E_{BC}$, so if any of those choices changes substantially, the match to the observed masses weakens.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The quantum numbers of $B_{sJ}(6064)$ and $B_{sJ}(6158)$ would be fixed as $3^+$ and $1^+$ if the assignments hold, removing the present ambiguity.
  • The dominant strong decay modes of both new states are predicted to be $BK$ and $B^*K$, with widths near 24 and 62 MeV, so their observation in these channels is a direct check.
  • The two unobserved $1D$ partners, $B_s(1D)$ and $B_s(1D')$, are predicted at about 6077 and 6154 MeV with widths 84 and 35 MeV, giving concrete search targets.
  • The $2S$ states $B_s(2^1S_0)$ and $B_s(2^3S_1)$ are predicted near 5949 and 5992 MeV, with the ratio $\Gamma(B_s(2^3S_1)\to B^*K)/\Gamma(B_s(2^3S_1)\to BK)$ around 2.0.
  • The assignments of $B_{s1}(5830)$ to $B_s(1P')$ and $B_{s2}^*(5840)$ to $B_s(1^3P_2)$ fix the $1P$ mixing angle at about $-55.8$ degrees.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: the mass-shift calculation could be re-run with different pair-creation strengths and regulator sizes to map how stable the D-wave assignments are; the present paper quotes a single parameter set.
  • A further consequence the authors do not spell out is that the same unquenching mechanism should shift the corresponding bottom meson states by comparable amounts, so checking the analogous $B(5970)$ region would extend the framework to a neighboring family.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper calculates the mass spectrum of bottom-strange mesons using a nonrelativistic quark model augmented with coupled-channel effects, and computes strong decay widths with the 3P0 model using numerically obtained wave functions. The authors assign the established states B_s, B_s*, B_s1(5830), and B_s2*(5840) to 1^1S0, 1^3S1, 1P', and 1^3P2, respectively, and propose that the newly observed LHCb states B_sJ(6064) and B_sJ(6158) are the 1^3D3 and 1^3D1 bottom-strange mesons, based on predicted masses and widths that agree with the experimental values within tens of MeV.

Significance. If the central assignments are correct, the paper would pin down the quantum numbers of two recently observed, as-yet-unassigned B_s states, which is a useful step for the spectroscopy program at LHCb and future facilities. The work has concrete strengths: it provides a transparent parameter set (Table II), compares with many other models (Tables III), and reproduces nontrivial decay ratios such as the B_s2*(5840) branching fraction ratio in Eq. (17). The main limitation is that the quantitative reliability of the D-wave predictions hinges on a coupled-channel self-energy integral whose definition is incomplete for the above-threshold states, so the headline agreement with the LHCb masses cannot be fully assessed as written.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section II.A, Eq. (3)] The mass-shift integral in Eq. (3) has a pole at E_BC = M for every D-wave state, since the physical masses (6157 MeV and 6079 MeV for 1^3D1 and 1^3D3) lie above the principal thresholds (e.g., BK at ~5861 MeV and B*K at ~5909 MeV). The paper never states whether the integral is a principal value, regulated by an iε prescription, or treated with some subtraction. Without that prescription, the -104 MeV and -135 MeV shifts in Table III that carry the central assignments of B_sJ(6158) and B_sJ(6064) are not defined quantities. The text must specify the prescription and demonstrate that the predictions are stable under reasonable alternative choices.
  2. [Section III, Table III and Table II] The constant C_bs = 0.169 GeV is determined by reproducing the ground-state B_s mass, as stated in the opening paragraph of Section III, so the B_s row in Table III is a fit by construction rather than a prediction; the same applies to the other absolute masses, which all shift with C_bs. More importantly, no uncertainty or sensitivity analysis is provided for the D-wave predictions. The mass shifts scale as gamma_0^2 and depend on the Gaussian regulator r_q = 0.3 fm, which is itself only a middle value of a 0.25–0.35 fm range. A 20–30% change in gamma_0 would alter the D-wave masses by tens of MeV, comparable to the differences between the predictions and data, so the robustness of the assignments needs to be quantified.
  3. [Section II.A, Eq. (3) and Section III] Equation (3) is a self-consistent equation because the physical mass M appears on both sides, but the manuscript does not state how this equation is solved or whether multiple solutions were checked. Since Table III reports large coupled-channel shifts for all states, the iteration scheme or algebraic solution method should be described, and the absence of alternative solutions should be confirmed.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section II.B] The word "botton-strange" in the sentence before Eq. (8) is a typo and should read "bottom-strange."
  2. [Introduction] In the description of LHCb results, "finial state" should be "final state."
  3. [Section II.B, above Eq. (14)] The phrase "the the Bs(nL), andBs(nL′)" contains a duplicated article and a missing space; it should read "the B_s(nL) and B_s(nL′) states."
  4. [Table III caption] The caption cites "RPP [66]" while the text and Table I use Ref. [2] for the Review of Particle Physics; consolidating to a single RPP reference would avoid confusion.
  5. [Abstract and Section I] The PACS number line is left blank; either provide relevant PACS codes or remove the line.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Ground-state B_s mass is a fit, not a prediction; D-wave assignments remain externally tested.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section III (Results and Discussions), paragraph following Table II]
    "The only one unknown parameter Cbs is determined to be Cbs = 0.169 by reproducing the mass of the ground state Bs."

    The constant C_bs enters the quenched Hamiltonian of Eq. (9) and is fixed by requiring the model to reproduce the experimental B_s mass (5366.93 MeV). Therefore the Table III entry for B_s (5367 MeV), and the text's statement that the B_s mass is in good agreement with experiment, restates the calibration condition rather than providing an independent prediction. This is a fitted input presented as a successful prediction. It is not load-bearing for the paper's central new claims: the D-wave assignments for B_sJ(6064) and B_sJ(6158) are compared with external LHCb masses and widths that were not used to determine C_bs, gamma0, or r_q.

full rationale

The derivation chain for the central D-wave assignments is not circular. C_bs is calibrated to the ground-state B_s mass only; gamma0 = 0.4 and r_q = 0.3 fm are taken from the literature as typical values; the bare quark-model masses are computed with an independent nonrelativistic potential; and the coupled-channel mass shifts are calculated from Eq. (3). The resulting D-wave masses (6079 and 6157 MeV) and widths (24 and 62 MeV) are then compared with the external LHCb measurements (6063.5 and 6158 MeV; 26 and 72 MeV), so the headline assignments rest on external data rather than on fitted inputs. The only circular element is the presentation of the ground-state B_s mass as a prediction when it is, by construction, the input used to fix C_bs. This is a minor calibration artifact and does not propagate to the paper's main claims. Other concerns, such as the lack of a stated pole prescription in Eq. (3) for above-threshold channels, are correctness/rigor issues rather than circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the standard nonrelativistic potential model plus the coupled-channel self-energy of Eq. (3) and the 3P0 transition operator of Eq. (15). One free parameter, C_bs, is fitted to the ground-state B_s mass (disclosed). The potential parameters (quark masses, alpha_s, b, sigma) and the pair-creation parameters (gamma_0, r_q) are adopted from prior literature, not derived or fit here. No new entities are introduced. The load-bearing assumptions are the completeness and quantitative reliability of the two-meson channels with the Gaussian-regulated 3P0 vertex, and an unstated regularization of the pole in Eq. (3).

free parameters (4)
  • C_bs (overall potential constant) = 0.169 GeV
    Fit to the ground-state B_s mass, 5366.93 MeV; disclosed in Section III ('determined ... by reproducing the mass of the ground state Bs'). Sets the absolute scale of all predicted masses in Table III.
  • gamma_0 (3P0 pair-creation strength) = 0.4
    Adopted as a typical value used in many works (Section II.C, Refs 59-65). All decay widths and all coupled-channel mass shifts of Table IV scale as gamma_0^2, so the D-wave agreements are sensitive to this choice.
  • r_q (Gaussian size of the created pair) = 0.3 fm
    Middle of the 0.25-0.35 fm range from Refs 55-58 (Section II.C). Acts as the ultraviolet regulator of the self-energy integrals and controls high-momentum channel weights.
  • Potential parameters m_n, m_s, m_b, alpha_s, b, sigma = 0.45, 0.55, 4.5 GeV; 0.5; 0.14 GeV^2; 1.17 GeV
    Adopted from Refs 14, 45, 46, where they were calibrated to D, D_s, and B spectra. Not fitted in this paper; listed for completeness in Table II.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The b-sbar meson is a nonrelativistic two-body system governed by H0 (Eq. 9) plus the spin-dependent Hsd (Eq. 10).
    Justified by m_b >> Lambda_QCD and standard in the cited program (Refs 14, 26, 46); the ansatz is assumed, not derived. Invoked in Section II.B.
  • domain assumption Quark-antiquark pairs are created from the vacuum with J^PC = 0^++ and the Gaussian-regulated 3P0 transition operator of Eq. (15).
    The 3P0 mechanism and the Gaussian size factor are assumed; the paper cites Refs 55-58 for r_q in 0.25-0.35 fm and asserts the factor is necessary when summing a complete set of channels. Section II.C.
  • ad hoc to paper Eq. (3) gives the mass shift with an unstated prescription for the pole at M = E_BC for states above threshold.
    All 1P, 2P, and 1D states studied are above at least one two-meson threshold; the paper never states the principal-value or i-epsilon prescription, though the computed shifts (-74 to -147 MeV) depend on it.
  • domain assumption The ten listed two-meson channels (BK, B*K, BK*, B*K*, Bs eta, Bs eta', Bs* eta, Bs* eta', Bs phi, Bs* phi) with this vertex form a converged set for the self-energy.
    Channel completeness is assumed following Ref 56; no convergence test with additional channels is shown. Section II.C and Table IV.
  • standard math Numerical solution of the Schrodinger equation by the Gaussian expansion method yields reliable wave functions for decay amplitudes.
    GEM is a standard variational technique; the paper states it uses this method (Section IV) without giving basis sizes or convergence criteria.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Coupled channel effects for the bottom-strange mesons." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VVPMR7A3

@misc{pith2026250104298,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Coupled channel effects for the bottom-strange mesons},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VVPMR7A3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.04298}
}
abstract

We have calculated the mass spectrum of $B_s$ mesons within a nonrelativistic potential model considering coupled channel effects, and the corresponding strong decay widths within the $^3P_0$ model using the numerically calculated wave functions. By comparing with the available experimental data, we find that the states $B_s$, $B_s^*$, $B_{s1}(5830)$, and $B_{s2}^*(5840)$ could be interpreted as the $B_s(1^1S_0)$, $B_s(1^3S_1)$, $B_s(1P^\prime)$, and $B_s(1^3P_2)$, respectively. Although the quantum numbers of the newly observed $B_s(6064)$ and $B_s(6158)$ states have not been determined, our results support the assignments of $B_s(1^3D_3)$ and $B_s(1^3D_1)$ for them. Our predictions are helpful in searching for the bottom-strange meson in future experiments.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

70 extracted references · 67 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Heintz, D

    Juliet Lee-Franzini, U. Heintz, D. M. J. Lovelock, M. Narain, R. Dean Schamberger, J. Willins, C. Yanagi- sawa, P. Franzini, and P. M. Tuts. Hyperfine splitting of B mesons and Bs production at the Υ(5 S). Phys. Rev. Lett., 65:2947–2950, 1990

    work page 1990

  2. [2]

    Navas et al

    S. Navas et al. Review of particle physics. Phys. Rev. D , 110(3):030001, 2024

    2024

  3. [3]

    Aaltonen et al

    T. Aaltonen et al. Observation of orbitally excited Bs mesons. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 100:082001, 2008

    work page 2008

  4. [4]

    First observation of the decay B∗ s2(5840)0 → B∗+K − and studies of excited B0 s mesons

    R Aaij et al. First observation of the decay B∗ s2(5840)0 → B∗+K − and studies of excited B0 s mesons. Phys. Rev. Lett., 110(15):151803, 2013

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    Studies of B ∗ s2(5840)0 and Bs1(5830)0 mesons including the observation of the B∗ s2(5840)0 → B0K0 S decay in proton-proton collisions at √ s = 8 TeV

    Albert M Sirunyan et al. Studies of B ∗ s2(5840)0 and Bs1(5830)0 mesons including the observation of the B∗ s2(5840)0 → B0K0 S decay in proton-proton collisions at √ s = 8 TeV. Eur. Phys. J. C , 78(11):939, 2018

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    V. M. Abazov et al. Observation and properties of the or- bitally excited B∗ s2 meson. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 100:082002, 2008

    work page 2008

  7. [7]

    Akers et al

    R. Akers et al. Observations of π - B charge - flavor correlations and resonant Bπ and BK production. Z. Phys. C , 66:19–30, 1995

    work page 1995

  8. [8]

    Observation of new excited B0 s states

    Roel Aaij et al. Observation of new excited B0 s states. Eur. Phys. J. C , 81(7):601, 2021

    work page 2021

Show all 70 references
  1. [9]

    Godfrey and Nathan Isgur

    S. Godfrey and Nathan Isgur. Mesons in a Relativized Quark Model with Chromodynamics. Phys. Rev. D , 32:189–231, 1985

    1985

  2. [10]

    J. Zeng, J. W. Van Orden, and W. Roberts. Heavy mesons in a relativistic model. Phys. Rev. D , 52:5229– 5241, 1995

    1995

  3. [11]

    Excited Heavy - Light Systems and Hadronic Transitions

    Massimo Di Pierro and Estia Eichten. Excited Heavy - Light Systems and Hadronic Transitions. Phys. Rev. D , 64:114004, 2001

    2001

  4. [12]

    Ebert, R

    D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, and V. O. Galkin. Heavy-light meson spectroscopy and Regge trajectories in the rela- tivistic quark model. Eur. Phys. J. C , 66:197–206, 2010

    2010

  5. [13]

    T. A. Lahde, C. J. Nyfalt, and D. O. Riska. Spectra and M 1 decay widths of heavy light mesons. Nucl. Phys. A , 674:141–167, 2000

    2000

  6. [14]

    Excited bottom and bottom-strange mesons in the quark model

    Qi-Fang L¨ u, Ting-Ting Pan, Yan-Yan Wang, En Wang, and De-Min Li. Excited bottom and bottom-strange mesons in the quark model. Phys. Rev. D , 94(7):074012, 9 2016

    2016

  7. [15]

    The assignments of the Bs mesons within the screened potential model and 3P0 model

    Wei Hao, Yu Lu, and En Wang. The assignments of the Bs mesons within the screened potential model and 3P0 model. Eur. Phys. J. C , 83(6):520, 2023

    2023

  8. [16]

    Mass spectra and decay properties of the higher excited ρ mesons

    Xue-Chao Feng, Zheng-Ya Li, De-Min Li, Qin-Tao Song, En Wang, and Wen-Cheng Yan. Mass spectra and decay properties of the higher excited ρ mesons. Phys. Rev. D , 106(7):076012, 2022

    2022

  9. [17]

    Assignments of the Y (2040),ρ(1900), and ρ(2150) in the quark model

    Zheng-Ya Li, De-Min Li, En Wang, Wen-Cheng Yan, and Qin-Tao Song. Assignments of the Y (2040),ρ(1900), and ρ(2150) in the quark model. Phys. Rev. D, 104(3):034013, 2021

    1900

  10. [18]

    Strong decays of heavy- light mesons in a chiral quark model

    Xian-hui Zhong and Qiang Zhao. Strong decays of heavy- light mesons in a chiral quark model. Phys. Rev. D , 78:014029, 2008

    2008

  11. [19]

    C. B. Lang, Daniel Mohler, Sasa Prelovsek, and R. M. Woloshyn. Predicting positive parity Bs mesons from lattice QCD. Phys. Lett. B , 750:17–21, 2015

    2015

  12. [20]

    Newly ob- servedB(5970) and the predictions of its spin and strange partners

    Hao Xu, Xiang Liu, and Takayuki Matsuki. Newly ob- servedB(5970) and the predictions of its spin and strange partners. Phys. Rev. D , 89(9):097502, 2014

    2014

  13. [21]

    Strong decays of the bottom mesons B1(5721), B2(5747), Bs1(5830),Bs2(5840) and B(5970)

    Zhi-Gang Wang. Strong decays of the bottom mesons B1(5721), B2(5747), Bs1(5830),Bs2(5840) and B(5970). Eur. Phys. J. Plus , 129:186, 2014

    2014

  14. [22]

    Coupled-Channel Effects for the Bottomonium with Re- alistic Wave Functions

    Yu Lu, Muhammad Naeem Anwar, and Bing-Song Zou. Coupled-Channel Effects for the Bottomonium with Re- alistic Wave Functions. Phys. Rev. D, 94(3):034021, 2016

    2016

  15. [23]

    Higher radial and orbital excitations in the charmed meson family

    Qin-Tao Song, Dian-Yong Chen, Xiang Liu, and Takayuki Matsuki. Higher radial and orbital excitations in the charmed meson family. Phys. Rev. D, 92(7):074011, 2015

    2015

  16. [24]

    Charmed-strange mesons revisited: mass spectra and strong decays

    Qin-Tao Song, Dian-Yong Chen, Xiang Liu, and Takayuki Matsuki. Charmed-strange mesons revisited: mass spectra and strong decays. Phys. Rev. D , 91:054031, 2015

    2015

  17. [25]

    Higher Charmonia and X,Y,Z states with Screened Potential

    Bai-Qing Li and Kuang-Ta Chao. Higher Charmonia and X,Y,Z states with Screened Potential. Phys. Rev. D , 79:094004, 2009

    2009

  18. [26]

    The assign- ments of the bottom mesons within the screened po- tential model and 3P0 model

    Xue-Chao Feng, Wei Hao, and li-Juan Liu. The assign- ments of the bottom mesons within the screened po- tential model and 3P0 model. Int. J. Mod. Phys. E , 31(07):2250066, 2022

    2022

  19. [27]

    Atif Sultan, Li-Juan Liu, and En Wang

    Wei Hao, M. Atif Sultan, Li-Juan Liu, and En Wang. Strangeonium spectrum with the screening effects and interpretation of h1(1911) and h1(2316) observed by BE- SIII. 12 2024

    1911

  20. [28]

    The mass spectrum and strong decay properties of the charmed-strange mesons within Godfrey–Isgur model considering the coupled-channel ef- fects

    Jing-Jing Yang, Wei Hao, Xiaoyu Wang, De-Min Li, Yu- Xiao Li, and En Wang. The mass spectrum and strong decay properties of the charmed-strange mesons within Godfrey–Isgur model considering the coupled-channel ef- fects. Eur. Phys. J. C , 83(12):1098, 2023

    2023

  21. [29]

    Ortega, Jorge Segovia, David R

    Pablo G. Ortega, Jorge Segovia, David R. Entem, and Francisco Fernandez. Molecular components in P-wave charmed-strange mesons. Phys. Rev. D , 94(7):074037, 2016

    2016

  22. [30]

    Coupled channel effects for the charmed-strange mesons

    Wei Hao, Yu Lu, and Bing-Song Zou. Coupled channel effects for the charmed-strange mesons. Phys. Rev. D , 106(7):074014, 2022

    2022

  23. [31]

    Ferretti, G

    J. Ferretti, G. Galat` a, and E. Santopinto. Interpreta - tion of the X(3872) as a charmonium state plus an extra component due to the coupling to the meson-meson con- tinuum. Phys. Rev. C , 88(1):015207, 2013

    2013

  24. [32]

    Ferretti, G

    J. Ferretti, G. Galata, E. Santopinto, and A. Vassallo. Bottomonium self-energies due to the coupling to the meson-meson continuum. Phys. Rev. C , 86:015204, 2012

    2012

  25. [33]

    Ferretti and E

    J. Ferretti and E. Santopinto. Higher mass bottomonia. Phys. Rev. D , 90(9):094022, 2014

    2014

  26. [34]

    Ferretti and E

    J. Ferretti and E. Santopinto. Open-flavor strong de- cays of open-charm and open-bottom mesons in the 3P0 model. Phys. Rev. D , 97(11):114020, 2018

    2018

  27. [35]

    Yu. S. Kalashnikova. Coupled-channel model for char- monium levels and an option for X(3872). Phys. Rev. D , 72:034010, 2005

    2005

  28. [36]

    Beauty-charm meson family with coupled channel effects and their strong decays*

    Wei Hao and Ruilin Zhu. Beauty-charm meson family with coupled channel effects and their strong decays*. Chin. Phys. C , 48(12):123101, 2024

    2024

  29. [37]

    Atif Sultan, and En Wang

    Wei Hao, M. Atif Sultan, and En Wang. Spectrum and decay properties of the charmed mesons involving the coupled channel effects. 11 2024

    2024

  30. [38]

    Strong decays of the X(2500) newly observed by the BE- SIII Collaboration

    Ting-Ting Pan, Qi-Fang L¨ u, En Wang, and De-Min Li. Strong decays of the X(2500) newly observed by the BE- SIII Collaboration. Phys. Rev. D , 94(5):054030, 2016

    2016

  31. [39]

    Eichten, Kenneth Lane, and Chris Quigg

    Estia J. Eichten, Kenneth Lane, and Chris Quigg. Char- monium levels near threshold and the narrow state X(3872) → π +π −J/ψ . Phys. Rev. D , 69:094019, 2004

    2004

  32. [40]

    Observed Ds(2317) and tentative D(2100–2300) as the charmed cousins of the light scalar nonet

    Eef van Beveren and George Rupp. Observed Ds(2317) and tentative D(2100–2300) as the charmed cousins of the light scalar nonet. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 91:012003, 2003

    2003

  33. [41]

    Contribution of DK continuum in the QCD sum rule for DsJ (2317)

    Yuan-Ben Dai, Xin-Qiang Li, Shi-Lin Zhu, and Ya-Bing Zuo. Contribution of DK continuum in the QCD sum rule for DsJ (2317). Eur. Phys. J. C , 55:249–258, 2008

    2008

  34. [42]

    Light Pseu- 10 doscalar Meson and Heavy Meson Scattering Lengths

    Yan-Rui Liu, Xiang Liu, and Shi-Lin Zhu. Light Pseu- 10 doscalar Meson and Heavy Meson Scattering Lengths. Phys. Rev. D , 79:094026, 2009

    2009

  35. [43]

    Pho- toproduction of the X(3872) beyond vector meson dom- inance: the open-charm coupled-channel mechanism

    Xiong-Hui Cao, Meng-Lin Du, and Feng-Kun Guo. Pho- toproduction of the X(3872) beyond vector meson dom- inance: the open-charm coupled-channel mechanism. J. Phys. G , 51(10):105002, 2024

    2024

  36. [44]

    Vijande, F

    J. Vijande, F. Fernandez, and A. Valcarce. Constituent quark model study of the meson spectra. J. Phys. G , 31:481, 2005

    2005

  37. [45]

    Olga Lakhina and Eric S. Swanson. A Canonical Ds(2317)? Phys. Lett. B , 650:159–165, 2007

    2007

  38. [46]

    The newly ob- served open-charm states in quark model

    De-Min Li, Peng-Fei Ji, and Bing Ma. The newly ob- served open-charm states in quark model. Eur. Phys. J. C, 71:1582, 2011

    2011

  39. [47]

    Canonical interpretation of the X(4140) state within the 3P0 model

    Wei Hao, Guan-Ying Wang, En Wang, Guan-Nan Li, and De-Min Li. Canonical interpretation of the X(4140) state within the 3P0 model. Eur. Phys. J. C , 80(7):626, 2020

    2020

  40. [48]

    The Properties ofP − Wave Mesons with One Heavy Quark

    Stephen Godfrey and Richard Kokoski. The Properties ofP − Wave Mesons with One Heavy Quark. Phys. Rev. D, 43:1679–1687, 1991

    1991

  41. [49]

    L. Micu. Decay rates of meson resonances in a quark model. Nucl. Phys. B , 10:521–526, 1969

    1969

  42. [50]

    Le Yaouanc, L

    A. Le Yaouanc, L. Oliver, O. Pene, and J. C. Raynal. Naive quark pair creation model of strong interaction vertices. Phys. Rev. D , 8:2223–2234, 1973

    1973

  43. [51]

    Le Yaouanc, L

    A. Le Yaouanc, L. Oliver, O. Pene, and J. C. Ray- nal. Naive quark pair creation model and baryon decays. Phys. Rev. D , 9:1415–1419, 1974

    1974

  44. [52]

    Possible assignments of the scalar K ∗ 0 (1950) and K ∗ 0 (2130) within the 3P0 model

    Tian-Ge Li, Zhuo Gao, Guan-Ying Wang, De-Min Li, En Wang, and Jingya Zhu. Possible assignments of the scalar K ∗ 0 (1950) and K ∗ 0 (2130) within the 3P0 model. Phys. Rev. D , 106(3):034012, 2022

    1950

  45. [53]

    The possible members of the 51S0 meson nonet

    Shi-Chen Xue, Guan-Ying Wang, Guan-Nan Li, En Wang, and De-Min Li. The possible members of the 51S0 meson nonet. Eur. Phys. J. C , 78(6):479, 2018

    2018

  46. [54]

    Strong decays of the higher isovector scalar mesons

    Guan-Ying Wang, Shi-Chen Xue, Guan-Nan Li, En Wang, and De-Min Li. Strong decays of the higher isovector scalar mesons. Phys. Rev. D , 97(3):034030, 2018

    2018

  47. [55]

    Silvestre-Brac and C

    B. Silvestre-Brac and C. Gignoux. Unitary effects in spi n orbit splitting of P wave baryons. Phys. Rev. D , 43:3699– 3708, 1991

    1991

  48. [56]

    Reconciling the OZI rule with strong pair creation

    Paul Geiger and Nathan Isgur. Reconciling the OZI rule with strong pair creation. Phys. Rev. D , 44:799–808, 1991

    1991

  49. [57]

    Geiger and Nathan Isgur

    P. Geiger and Nathan Isgur. How the Okubo-Zweig- Iizuka rule evades large loop corrections. Phys. Rev. Lett., 67:1066–1069, 1991

    1991

  50. [58]

    Strange hadronic loops of the proton: A Quark model calculation

    Paul Geiger and Nathan Isgur. Strange hadronic loops of the proton: A Quark model calculation. Phys. Rev. D , 55:299–310, 1997

    1997

  51. [59]

    E. S. Ackleh, Ted Barnes, and E. S. Swanson. On the mechanism of open flavor strong decays. Phys. Rev. D , 54:6811–6829, 1996

    1996

  52. [60]

    Barnes, N

    T. Barnes, N. Black, and P. R. Page. Strong decays of strange quarkonia. Phys. Rev. D , 68:054014, 2003

    2003

  53. [61]

    Barnes, S

    T. Barnes, S. Godfrey, and E. S. Swanson. Higher char- monia. Phys. Rev. D , 72:054026, 2005

    2005

  54. [62]

    F. E. Close and E. S. Swanson. Dynamics and decay of heavy-light hadrons. Phys. Rev. D , 72:094004, 2005

    2005

  55. [63]

    Excited bottom- charmed mesons in a nonrelativistic quark model

    Qi Li, Ming-Sheng Liu, Long-Sheng Lu, Qi-Fang L¨ u, Long-Cheng Gui, and Xian-Hui Zhong. Excited bottom- charmed mesons in a nonrelativistic quark model. Phys. Rev. D , 99(9):096020, 2019

    2019

  56. [64]

    Moats, and E

    Stephen Godfrey, K. Moats, and E. S. Swanson. B and Bs Meson Spectroscopy. Phys. Rev. D , 94(5):054025, 2016

    2016

  57. [65]

    Properties of Ex- cited Charm and Charm-Strange Mesons

    Stephen Godfrey and Kenneth Moats. Properties of Ex- cited Charm and Charm-Strange Mesons. Phys. Rev. D , 93(3):034035, 2016

    2016

  58. [66]

    R. L. Workman et al. Review of Particle Physics. PTEP, 2022:083C01, 2022

    2022

  59. [67]

    Study of B, Bs mesons using heavy quark effective theory

    Keval Gandhi and Ajay Kumar Rai. Study of B, Bs mesons using heavy quark effective theory. Eur. Phys. J. C, 82(9):777, 2022

    2022

  60. [68]

    Vikas Patel, Raghav Chaturvedi, and A. K. Rai. Spec- troscopic Properties of B and Bs meson using Screened Potential. 1 2022

    2022

  61. [69]

    Higher bottom and bottom-strange mesons

    Yuan Sun, Qin-Tao Song, Dain-Yong Chen, Xiang Liu, and Shi-Lin Zhu. Higher bottom and bottom-strange mesons. Phys. Rev. D , 89(5):054026, 2014

    2014

  62. [70]

    Towards estab- lishing an abundant B andBs spectrum up to the second orbital excitations

    Qi li, Ru-Hui Ni, and Xian-Hui Zhong. Towards estab- lishing an abundant B andBs spectrum up to the second orbital excitations. Phys. Rev. D , 103:116010, 2021

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.