Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

The proposed STCF drift chamber could discover the 17 MeV protophobic boson at 5σ even with 10^4 background events.

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

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 17:18 UTC pith:TXMCVYJW

load-bearing objection First STCF displaced-vertex X17 feasibility study, with useful detector-specific reach maps; but the central claim is conditional on an unstated width normalization and an assumed background tolerance that no simulation backs up. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2512.10084 v3 pith:TXMCVYJW submitted 2025-12-10 hep-ph hep-ex

Potential for the discovery of the protophobic boson at the STCF

Althaf M. , Triparno Bandyopadhyay This is my paper
classification hep-ph hep-ex
keywords X17 bosonprotophobic bosonSTCFdisplaced vertexmain drift chamberdark sectore+e- collisions5σ discovery reach
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper asks whether the proposed Super tau-charm electron-positron collider can discover the 17 MeV protophobic boson, a hypothetical particle invoked to explain persistent anomalies in light-nucleus decays. Using a fast simulation of the main drift chamber's tracking efficiency, it finds that a displaced-vertex search could attain 5σ significance for couplings around 10^-5 to 10^-4, even if up to ~10^4 Standard Model background events populate the signal region. This would provide a new, independent route to confirming a particle that so far has only been hinted at in nuclear physics. The study also shows how the reach collapses if the boson decays mostly into a dark sector.

Core claim

The central claim is that the STCF main drift chamber, used alone as a displaced-vertex detector, can discover the ~17 MeV protophobic boson in the visible-decay benchmark. With the Phase-I integrated luminosities, the signal yield supports a 5σ claim for couplings g' between roughly 10^-5 and 10^-4 in a narrow mass window around 17 MeV, provided the SM background in the vertex region stays below about 10^4 events. The reach is nearly unchanged when the dark width is a tenth of the visible width, but if the dark width dominates by a factor of ten, the tolerable background drops to a few hundred events, making a displaced-vertex search impractical.

What carries the argument

The protophobic boson is a vector particle of mass ~17 MeV whose couplings are proportional to (baryon number minus electric charge), so it couples to electrons but barely to protons. It is produced in e+e- -> Xγ through t- and u-channel diagrams and detected through its displaced decay to an electron-positron pair. The analysis uses the detector geometry of the MDC (radial extent 20-83 cm, 48 layers, 1 T field) and a track-reconstruction efficiency model requiring at least 24 hits, together with the likelihood significance Z = sqrt(2[(s+b)ln(1+s/b)-s]) to derive, for each mass and coupling, the maximum number of background events compatible with a 5σ discovery.

Load-bearing premise

The simulation's decay length for the X boson (βγcτ) must be correct: the paper quotes ~49 cm for g' = 10^-5, but its own width formula implies a much larger decay length, and if the true length is several metres or more, most decays would occur outside the drift chamber and the discovery reach would not hold.

What would settle it

Compute the X -> e+e- partial width from the paper's Eq. (9) for m_X = 17 MeV and g' = 10^-5, derive βγcτ with the STCF beam energies, and compare with the 49 cm used in the simulation; a mismatch by an order of magnitude would invalidate the event rates behind Figs. 9-10. Alternatively, a full detector simulation with the same cuts and decay-length distribution would show whether hundreds of signal events survive.

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

If this is right

  • If the protophobic boson exists, the proposed collider could confirm it at 5σ with a drift-chamber-only search, independent of the original nuclear experiments.
  • The search remains viable when the boson's decays are mostly visible, with the same reach for a dark width one tenth the visible width.
  • If the boson decays predominantly to dark-sector particles, displaced-vertex searches fail and invisible-decay searches would be needed instead.
  • The result justifies a full detector-level simulation and a real background census as next steps for the collider's physics case.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The quoted decay length of ~49 cm at g' = 10^-5 appears inconsistent with the width formula in the paper, which would give a much longer decay length; if the simulation used the wrong normalization, the number of in-detector decays could be an order of magnitude smaller, shrinking the claimed 5σ region.
  • The displaced-vertex methodology is generic: the same collider could search for other light, weakly-coupled particles (dark photons, axion-like particles) with minimal changes.
  • The tolerable-background metric leaves the actual SM background as an unknown; a measurement of K_S0 and Lambda decays in the drift-chamber region will decide whether the 10^4 threshold is realistic.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a feasibility study of displaced-vertex searches for the ~17 MeV protophobic vector boson at the proposed STCF. The authors model the STCF MDC geometry in TrackEff, generate e+e- -> X gamma events in MadGraph, decay the X with a width controlled by g' and a dark-sector partial-width benchmark, and compute reconstructed displaced e+e- events. They then invert the asymptotic significance formula to report the maximum SM background that would still allow a 5 sigma discovery for the three benchmarks Gamma_DS = 0, Gamma_VS/10, and 10 Gamma_VS. The main result is that for Gamma_DS = 0 (and to a lesser extent for Gamma_DS = Gamma_VS/10), a band around m_X ~ 17 MeV and g' ~ (0.3-3) x 10^-5 tolerates up to ~10^4 background events, while the dark-dominated benchmark requires far smaller backgrounds.

Significance. If quantitatively correct, this is the first dedicated study of displaced light-boson signatures at STCF and gives a concrete target for the MDC design and for future Geant-4 validation. Strengths include the use of public, reproducible tools (TrackEff, MadGraph, DarkCast), an explicit event-count pipeline, a clear three-benchmark scan, and a well-defined background-tolerance criterion. The main limitations are the absence of an SM displaced-vertex background simulation and an inconsistency in the decay-width normalization that affects the central numbers; both must be resolved before the quantitative reach can be taken at face value.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 3, Eq. (9), and Fig. 7 caption] The width normalization is inconsistent. Eq. (9) with g'=e tan(chi) gives Gamma_e = (1/3) alpha_EM g'^2 m_X. At g'=10^-5 and m_X=17 MeV this is ~4.1 x 10^-6 eV, corresponding to c tau ~ 4.8 cm and, with beta gamma ~ 118 at sqrt(s)=4 GeV, beta gamma c tau ~ 5.6 m. The caption's 49 cm corresponds to the standard Gamma_e = (1/12 pi) g'^2 m_X. The fiducial probability between 10 and 80 cm falls from ~0.61 to ~0.12, so the accepted signal and hence the reach maps in Figs. 9 and 10 would be roughly a factor of 5 too high if Eq. (9) were used in the pipeline. Please state which normalization is implemented and, if the code uses the standard one, correct Eq. (9). This is required for reproducibility.
  2. [Sec. 5, after Eq. (16), and abstract] The paper explicitly does not simulate the SM displaced-vertex background and instead solves for the tolerable background b. This is a legitimate way to present a feasibility study, but the abstract's claim 'STCF can discover ... while tolerating ~10^4 background events' is conditional, not a discovery expectation. Without an estimate of the actual K_S -> pi+ pi-, Lambda -> p pi-, photon-conversion, and material-interaction backgrounds surviving the 10-80 cm and angular cuts, the maps give necessary conditions on the background, not a predicted 5 sigma sensitivity. Please rephrase the abstract/conclusion to make the condition explicit and, where possible, add a rough background estimate or clearly state that this is the main open item before a discovery claim can be made.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 3, around Eq. (7)] The text writes 'g' ~ 10^-3 - 10^-6 GeV'. Since g'=e tan(chi) is dimensionless, the unit 'GeV' should be removed or the definition of g' clarified.
  2. [Fig. 4, right panel] The axis label 'sigma(g'=1) (pb)' could be misread. State explicitly that the plotted quantity is sigma / g'^2 or define the reference coupling g'=1 in the caption.
  3. [Table 3 vs Sec. 5] The Table 3 caption describes a 300-point 4-7 GeV scan with 10 fb^-1 per point, while Sec. 5 says a 30-point scan with 100 fb^-1 per point is used. This is presumably an intentional replacement, but it should be stated in one place to avoid apparent inconsistency.
  4. [Footnotes 4] Footnote 4 says 'as for two body decay |p|=(s-m^2)/(2 sqrt(s))'. This is the CM momentum of the X in e+e- -> X gamma; please label it p_X and avoid implying it is a universal two-body formula.
  5. [Sec. 5, Eq. (16)] The significance formula is purely statistical and does not include systematic uncertainties on the signal efficiency or luminosity. For a feasibility study this is acceptable, but stating this explicitly would help the reader calibrate the quoted reach.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No meaningful circularity: the STCF reach projection is an independent simulation scan over externally motivated X17 parameters; self-citations are minor and not load-bearing.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain: the X17 mass and coupling scan are inputs taken from the external ATOMKI-motivated protophobic model, not outputs of the simulation. Production uses Eq. (11) and MG5; decay widths/branching ratios use Eq. (9)/DarkCast; Eq. (12) combines luminosity, cross section, BR, and TrackEff acceptance; Eq. (16) is inverted to report tolerable background at Z=5. None of these steps fits a parameter to the target quantity and then re-predicts it; no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from the authors' prior work. Refs. [23] and [65] are self-citations, but they are used only for the general displaced-vertex strategy and for the three Γ_DS benchmark ratios; the STCF-specific geometry, luminosity, and TrackEff response are computed in this paper from STCF TDR inputs and an external package. The paper itself flags that full Geant4 validation is required and that TrackEff has not been validated on real STCF data; that is a limitation on robustness, not a circularity. The apparent inconsistency between the typeset width Eq. (9) and the Fig. 7 caption value βγcτ≈49 cm (which would affect the absolute signal yield and hence the tolerated-background numbers) is a numerical-normalization/correctness issue, not a reduction of the result to its inputs. Overall: no self-definitional, fitted-input, or self-citation-circular step; score 1 only for minor non-load-bearing self-citations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 5 axioms · 1 invented entities

No genuinely new particles are introduced by this paper; the X17 boson is imported from prior work and the dark sector is an unspecified partial width. The central new inputs are detector/efficiency parameters for the STCF MDC, while the free parameters are the scan variables (mX, g', ΓDS) and the tolerated background count.

free parameters (5)
  • mX (X-boson mass) = 10-20 MeV scanned; 17 MeV benchmark
    Input from ATOMKI anomaly fits; not fitted in this paper, but the reach maps are parameterized by it.
  • g' (effective X-boson coupling) = 1e-6 to 1e-4 scanned
    Input coupling that sets production cross-section and lifetime. The quoted βγcτ at g'=1e-5 is internally ambiguous with respect to Eq. (9); see red flags.
  • ΓDS/ΓVS benchmark ratios = 0, 0.1, 10
    Chosen by hand in Section 3 (Eq. 8) to bracket dark-sector branching; directly changes branching ratios and signal yields.
  • Allowed background count b = solved as roughly 10^0 to 10^4 depending on parameter point
    The paper explicitly treats the SM background as a free parameter and reports how many background events could be tolerated for 5σ; no actual background estimate is made.
  • Analysis cuts (pT_l>0.1 GeV, 10<l<80 cm, |z|<120 cm, 20°<theta<160°) = Table 5
    Chosen by hand; they determine acceptance and the final reach. The pT-cut dependence is explored in Appendix A.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption U(1)_B protophobic model with kinetic mixing and X_f = B_f - Q_f fermion charges
    The model under test (Section 3); it is not independently established and is constrained by EW precision and MEG-II, as cited in Section 6.
  • domain assumption U(1)_B anomaly cancellation by unspecified high-scale fermions
    Section 3 notes the low-energy theory is anomalous and must be embedded in a UV completion; the paper does not construct that completion.
  • domain assumption TrackEff faithfully models STCF MDC acceptance when configured with TDR geometry
    TrackEff is validated against Belle II data to about 10%, but no STCF data exists; Section 4 relies on this for the vertex-reconstruction efficiency.
  • domain assumption STCF CDR detector geometry, luminosities, and near-100% efficiency projections
    Tables 3 and 4 come from the STCF CDR [40, 41]; the authors themselves call the efficiency estimates 'aspirational' in Section 4.
  • domain assumption Hadronic widths near QCD scale from DarkCast/VMD
    Used for branching ratios around mX ~ 17 MeV (below pion threshold, so the electron channel dominates); this is a standard data-driven approach but still a model assumption.
invented entities (1)
  • Unspecified dark sector (ΓDS) no independent evidence
    purpose: Introduces invisible/dark decay partial widths for the X boson through the benchmark ratios ΓDS=0, ΓVS/10, 10ΓVS.
    Section 3 explicitly remains agnostic about dark-sector content; it is a parameterized sector with no particle content specified and no independent observable predicted.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 3950 in / 4205 out tokens · 311669 ms · 2026-08-03T17:18:09.665828+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We study the morphology of the main drift chamber (MDC) to be built around the collision point of the proposed Super tau-charm facility (STCF), to check its suitability for discovering the 17 MeV protophobic boson (X17 boson), hypothesised as a solution to the persistent ATOMKI nuclear-transition anomalies. Using the TrackEff framework, we perform detector-level simulations of the STCF MDC, and evaluate displaced-vertex sensitivities towards the protophobic boson, across the relevant mass-coupling parameter space. We study benchmark scenarios with visible and dark decay channels to perform likelihood-based significance estimates in order to determine the 5~$\sigma$ discovery reach for the protophobic boson. We find that STCF can potentially discover the protophobic boson while tolerating $\sim 10^4$ background events for specific regions of the parameter space. Our analysis establishes the first feasibility study of displaced light-boson searches at the STCF, motivating a full Geant-4 simulation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.10084 by Althaf M., Triparno Bandyopadhyay.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A compilation of the different results in support of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: We plot the partial widths and the branching ratios of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The t- and u-channel processes contributing to the production of the X-boson. Here, Aeµ and Xeµ are the fields corresponding to the photon and the U(1)B respectively, Qf and Bf are the electric charge and the baryon number of the fermion in question, and Bϕ is the X-charge of the scalar. Finally, eϵB is the coupling strength associated with the X-boson. To go to the canonically diagonal kinetic basis, we d… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left: We plot the differential cross section as a function of the scattering angle, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Cross-sectional (right) and longitudinal (left) views of the STCF main drift chamber. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Cross-sectional (left) and Longitudinal sectional (right) view of the modelled STCF [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Heatmaps showing the distribution of the decay vertex of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: We plot the vertex reconstruction efficiency distribution as a function of the scattering [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: On the left panel we plot the number of signal events after detector simulation via [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: On the left panel we plot the number of signal events after detector simulation via [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: In the left panel we bin the leading and subleading leptons according to their transverse [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_11.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Where to find $X(17)$?

    hep-ph 2026-01 reject novelty 4.0

    Combining existing bounds with a new parity-violating Møller asymmetry constraint, the paper's body claims no surviving parameter space for scalar, pseudoscalar, vector, axial-vector, or V±A X(17)-electron couplings.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

81 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Belle II Technical Design Report

    T. Abe et al. “Belle II Technical Design Report”. In: (Nov. 2010). arXiv: 1011.0352 [physics.ins-det]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  2. [2]

    Physics at BES-III

    D. M. Asner et al. “Physics at BES-III”. In:Int. J. Mod. Phys. A24 (2009), S1–794. arXiv: 0809.1869 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  3. [3]

    The GLUEX beamline and detector

    S. Adhikari et al. “The GLUEX beamline and detector”. In:Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 987 (2021), p. 164807.doi: 10 . 1016 / j . nima . 2020 . 164807. arXiv: 2005 . 14272 [physics.ins-det]

    2021

  4. [4]

    Cosmology of the Invisible Axion

    John Preskill, Mark B. Wise, and Frank Wilczek. “Cosmology of the Invisible Axion”. In:Phys. Lett. B120 (1983). Ed. by M. A. Srednicki, pp. 127–132.doi: 10.1016/0370- 2693(83)90637-8

    doi:10.1016/0370- 1983

  5. [5]

    A Cosmological Bound on the Invisible Axion

    L. F. Abbott and P. Sikivie. “A Cosmological Bound on the Invisible Axion”. In:Phys. Lett. B120 (1983). Ed. by M. A. Srednicki, pp. 133–136.doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(83)90638-X

    doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)90638-x 1983

  6. [6]

    The Not So Harmless Axion

    Michael Dine and Willy Fischler. “The Not So Harmless Axion”. In:Phys. Lett. B120 (1983). Ed. by M. A. Srednicki, pp. 137–141.doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)90639-1

    doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)90639-1 1983

  7. [7]

    Particle dark matter: Evidence, candidates and constraints

    Gianfranco Bertone, Dan Hooper, and Joseph Silk. “Particle dark matter: Evidence, candidates and constraints”. In:Phys. Rept.405 (2005), pp. 279–390.doi: 10.1016/j. physrep.2004.08.031. arXiv:hep-ph/0404175

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  8. [8]

    Dark Matter Candidates from Particle Physics and Methods of Detection

    Jonathan L. Feng. “Dark Matter Candidates from Particle Physics and Methods of Detection”. In:Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.48 (2010), pp. 495–545.doi: 10.1146/ annurev-astro-082708-101659. arXiv:1003.0904 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  9. [9]

    Light vector dark matter with scalar mediator and muon g-2 anomaly

    Karim Ghorbani. “Light vector dark matter with scalar mediator and muon g-2 anomaly”. In:Phys. Rev. D104.11 (2021), p. 115008.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.104.115008. arXiv: 2104.13810 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  10. [10]

    Scalar dark matter candidates

    C. Boehm and Pierre Fayet. “Scalar dark matter candidates”. In:Nucl. Phys. B683 (2004), pp. 219–263.doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2004.01.015. arXiv:hep-ph/0305261

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  11. [11]

    Light spin 1/2 or spin 0 dark matter particles

    Pierre Fayet. “Light spin 1/2 or spin 0 dark matter particles”. In:Phys. Rev. D70 (2004), p. 023514.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.70.023514. arXiv:hep-ph/0403226

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  12. [12]

    Symmetry Breaking Through Bell-Jackiw Anomalies

    Gerard ’t Hooft. “Symmetry Breaking Through Bell-Jackiw Anomalies”. In:Phys. Rev. Lett.37 (1976). Ed. by Mikhail A. Shifman, pp. 8–11.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.37.8

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.37.8 1976

  13. [13]

    CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons

    R. D. Peccei and Helen R. Quinn. “CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett.38 (1977), pp. 1440–1443.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.38.1440

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.38.1440 1977

  14. [14]

    Constraints Imposed by CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons

    R. D. Peccei and Helen R. Quinn. “Constraints Imposed by CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons”. In:Phys. Rev. D16 (1977), pp. 1791–1797.doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevD.16.1791

    1977

  15. [15]

    A New Light Boson?

    Steven Weinberg. “A New Light Boson?” In:Phys. Rev. Lett.40 (1978), pp. 223–226.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.40.223

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.40.223 1978

  16. [16]

    Problem of Strong P and T Invariance in the Presence of Instantons

    Frank Wilczek. “Problem of Strong P and T Invariance in the Presence of Instantons”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett.40 (1978), pp. 279–282.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.40.279. 16

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.40.279 1978

  17. [17]

    New Fixed-Target Experiments to Search for Dark Gauge Forces

    James D. Bjorken et al. “New Fixed-Target Experiments to Search for Dark Gauge Forces”. In:Phys. Rev. D80 (2009), p. 075018.doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevD . 80 . 075018. arXiv: 0906.0580 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  18. [18]

    Serendipity in dark photon searches

    Philip Ilten et al. “Serendipity in dark photon searches”. In:JHEP06 (2018), p. 004.doi: 10.1007/JHEP06(2018)004. arXiv:1801.04847 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  19. [19]

    Hunting All the Hidden Photons

    Martin Bauer, Patrick Foldenauer, and Joerg Jaeckel. “Hunting All the Hidden Photons”. In: JHEP07 (2018), p. 094.doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2018)094. arXiv:1803.05466 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  20. [20]

    Heavy QCD axion at Belle II: Displaced and prompt signals

    Emilie Bertholet et al. “Heavy QCD axion at Belle II: Displaced and prompt signals”. In: Phys. Rev. D105.7 (2022), p. L071701.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.105.L071701 . arXiv: 2108.10331 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  21. [21]

    BelleII sensitivity to long–lived dark photons

    Torben Ferber, Camilo Garcia-Cely, and Kai Schmidt-Hoberg. “BelleII sensitivity to long–lived dark photons”. In:Phys. Lett. B833 (2022), p. 137373.doi: 10 . 1016 / j . physletb.2022.137373. arXiv:2202.03452 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2022

  22. [22]

    Dark photons and displaced vertices at the MUonE experiment

    Iftah Galon, David Shih, and Isaac R. Wang. “Dark photons and displaced vertices at the MUonE experiment”. In:Phys. Rev. D107.9 (2023), p. 095003.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD. 107.095003. arXiv:2202.08843 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    Displaced searches for light vector bosons at Belle II

    Triparno Bandyopadhyay, Sabyasachi Chakraborty, and Sokratis Trifinopoulos. “Displaced searches for light vector bosons at Belle II”. In:JHEP05 (2022), p. 141.doi: 10.1007/ JHEP05(2022)141. arXiv:2203.03280 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  24. [24]

    Searching dark photons using displaced vertices at Belle II — with backgrounds

    Joerg Jaeckel and Anh Vu Phan. “Searching dark photons using displaced vertices at Belle II — with backgrounds”. In:JHEP08 (2024), p. 062.doi: 10.1007/JHEP08(2024)062. arXiv:2312.12522 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    Filling the Gap: Hunting for Vector Bosons at the MUonE Experiment with Displaced Decay Signature

    Duncan Rocha and Isaac R. Wang. “Filling the Gap: Hunting for Vector Bosons at the MUonE Experiment with Displaced Decay Signature”. In: (Nov. 2025). arXiv: 2511.03222 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  26. [26]

    Anomalous internal pair creation in Be-8 as a signature of the decay of a new particle

    A. Vitez et al. “Anomalous internal pair creation in Be-8 as a signature of the decay of a new particle”. In:Acta Phys. Polon. B39 (2008). Ed. by Marek Pfutzner and Tomasz Matulewicz, pp. 483–488

    2008

  27. [27]

    Observation of Anomalous Internal Pair Creation in Be8 : A Possible Indication of a Light, Neutral Boson

    A. J. Krasznahorkay et al. “Observation of Anomalous Internal Pair Creation in Be8 : A Possible Indication of a Light, Neutral Boson”. In:Phys. Rev. Lett.116.4 (2016), p. 042501. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.042501. arXiv:1504.01527 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  28. [28]

    New results on the Be-8 anomaly

    A. J. Krasznahorkay et al. “New results on the Be-8 anomaly”. In:PoSBORMIO2017 (2017). Ed. by Laura Fabbietti, Concettina Sfienti, and Wolfgang K¨ uhn, p. 036.doi: 10.22323/1.302.0036

    work page doi:10.22323/1.302.0036 2017

  29. [29]

    New anomaly observed in He4 supports the existence of the hypothetical X17 particle

    A. J. Krasznahorkay et al. “New anomaly observed in He4 supports the existence of the hypothetical X17 particle”. In:Phys. Rev. C104.4 (2021), p. 044003.doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevC.104.044003. arXiv:2104.10075 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  30. [30]

    New anomaly observed in C12 supports the existence and the vector character of the hypothetical X17 boson

    A. J. Krasznahorkay et al. “New anomaly observed in C12 supports the existence and the vector character of the hypothetical X17 boson”. In:Phys. Rev. C106.6 (2022), p. L061601. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.106.L061601. arXiv:2209.10795 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  31. [31]

    An Update of the Hypothetical X17 Particle

    A. J. Krasznahorky et al. “An Update of the Hypothetical X17 Particle”. In:Universe 10.11 (2024), p. 409.doi:10.3390/universe10110409. arXiv:2409.16300 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    A deviation in internal pair conversion

    F. W. N. de Boer et al. “A deviation in internal pair conversion”. In:Phys. Lett. B388 (1996), pp. 235–240.doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(96)01311-1

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(96)01311-1 1996

  33. [33]

    Excess in e+ e- pairs near 9 MeV/cˆ2 invariant mass

    F. W. N. de Boer et al. “Excess in e+ e- pairs near 9 MeV/cˆ2 invariant mass”. In:J. Phys. G23 (1997), pp. L85–L96.doi:10.1088/0954-3899/23/11/001. 17

    work page doi:10.1088/0954-3899/23/11/001 1997

  34. [34]

    Further search for a neutral boson with a mass around 9- MeV/c**2

    F. W. N. de Boer et al. “Further search for a neutral boson with a mass around 9- MeV/c**2”. In:J. Phys. G27 (2001), p. L29.doi: 10.1088/0954-3899/27/4/102. arXiv: hep-ph/0101298

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  35. [35]

    Lepton pairs from a forbidden M0 transition: Signaling an elusive light neutral boson?

    A. Krasznahorkay et al. “Lepton pairs from a forbidden M0 transition: Signaling an elusive light neutral boson?” In:Acta Phys. Polon. B37 (2006). Ed. by T. Matulewicz and Z. Sujkowski, pp. 239–244

    2006

  36. [36]

    Particle physics models for the 17 MeV anomaly in beryllium nuclear decays

    Jonathan L. Feng et al. “Particle physics models for the 17 MeV anomaly in beryllium nuclear decays”. In:Phys. Rev. D95.3 (2017), p. 035017.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.95. 035017. arXiv:1608.03591 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  37. [37]

    Dynamical Evidence For a Fifth Force Explanation of the ATOMKI Nuclear Anomalies

    Jonathan L. Feng, Tim M. P. Tait, and Christopher B. Verhaaren. “Dynamical Evidence For a Fifth Force Explanation of the ATOMKI Nuclear Anomalies”. In:Phys. Rev. D102.3 (2020), p. 036016.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.036016. arXiv:2006.01151 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  38. [38]

    Light axial vector bosons, nuclear transitions, and the 8Be anomaly

    Jonathan Kozaczuk, David E. Morrissey, and S. R. Stroberg. “Light axial vector bosons, nuclear transitions, and the 8Be anomaly”. In:Phys. Rev. D95.11 (2017), p. 115024.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.95.115024. arXiv:1612.01525 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  39. [39]

    An updated view on the ATOMKI nuclear anomalies

    Daniele Barducci and Claudio Toni. “An updated view on the ATOMKI nuclear anomalies”. In:JHEP02 (2023). [Erratum: JHEP 07, 168 (2023)], p. 154.doi: 10.1007/JHEP02(2023)

    doi:10.1007/jhep02(2023 2023

  40. [40]

    STCF conceptual design report (Volume 1): Physics & detector

    M. Achasov et al. “STCF conceptual design report (Volume 1): Physics & detector”. In: Front. Phys. (Beijing)19.1 (2024), p. 14701.doi: 10.1007/s11467-023-1333-z . arXiv: 2303.15790 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2024

  41. [41]

    Conceptual Design Report of Super Tau-Charm Facility: The Accel- erator

    Jiancong Bao et al. “Conceptual Design Report of Super Tau-Charm Facility: The Accel- erator”. In: (Sept. 2025). arXiv:2509.11522 [physics.acc-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    Estimating the track-reconstruction efficiency in phenomenological proposals of long-lived-particle searches

    Emilie Bertholet and Abner Soffer. “Estimating the track-reconstruction efficiency in phenomenological proposals of long-lived-particle searches”. In:Int. J. Mod. Phys. A40.15 (2025), p. 2550032.doi:10.1142/S0217751X25500320. arXiv:2501.00857 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    GEANT4 - A Simulation Toolkit

    S. Agostinelli et al. “GEANT4 - A Simulation Toolkit”. In:Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A506 (2003), pp. 250–303.doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8

    doi:10.1016/s0168-9002(03)01368-8 2003

  44. [44]

    Internal Pair Formation

    M. E. Rose. “Internal Pair Formation”. In:Phys. Rev.76 (1949). [Erratum: Phys.Rev. 78, 184–184 (1950)], pp. 678–681.doi:10.1103/PhysRev.78.184

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.78.184 1949

  45. [45]

    Internal Pairs from Aligned Nuclei

    M. E. Rose. “Internal Pairs from Aligned Nuclei”. In:Phys. Rev.131 (1963), pp. 1260–1264. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.131.1260

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.131.1260 1963

  46. [46]

    Internal Pair Emission from Aligned Nuclei

    E. K. Warburton. “Internal Pair Emission from Aligned Nuclei”. In:Phys. Rev.133 (6B Mar. 1964), B1368–B1372.doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.133.B1368.url: https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.133.B1368

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.133.b1368.url: 1964

  47. [47]

    Momentum Transfer and Angle of Divergence of Pairs Produced by Photons

    A. Borsellino. “Momentum Transfer and Angle of Divergence of Pairs Produced by Photons”. In:Phys. Rev.89 (1953), pp. 1023–1025.doi:10.1103/PhysRev.89.1023

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.89.1023 1953

  48. [48]

    Electron Pair Production in the Field of the Proton and in the Field of the Electron by Photons of Energy from 10 Mev to 1 Bev

    E. L. Hart et al. “Electron Pair Production in the Field of the Proton and in the Field of the Electron by Photons of Energy from 10 Mev to 1 Bev”. In:Phys. Rev.115 (1959), pp. 678–686.doi:10.1103/PhysRev.115.678

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.115.678 1959

  49. [49]

    Opening Angles of Electron-Positron Pairs

    Haakon Olsen. “Opening Angles of Electron-Positron Pairs”. In:Phys. Rev.131 (1963), pp. 406–415.doi:10.1103/PhysRev.131.406

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.131.406 1963

  50. [50]

    Checking the 8Be Anomaly with a Two-Arm Electron Positron Pair Spectrometer

    Tran The Anh et al. “Checking the 8Be Anomaly with a Two-Arm Electron Positron Pair Spectrometer”. In:Universe10.4 (2024), p. 168.doi: 10.3390/universe10040168. arXiv: 2401.11676 [nucl-ex]. 18

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  51. [51]

    Observation of structures at ∼ 17 and ∼ 38 MeV/c2 in the γγ invariant mass spectra in pC, dC, and dCu collisions at plab of a few GeV/c per nucleon

    Kh. U. Abraamyan et al. “Observation of structures at ∼ 17 and ∼ 38 MeV/c2 in the γγ invariant mass spectra in pC, dC, and dCu collisions at plab of a few GeV/c per nucleon”. In: (Nov. 2023). arXiv:2311.18632 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  52. [52]

    A Review of µ→eee , µ→eγ and µN→eN Conversion

    Ann-Kathrin Perrevoort. “A Review of µ→eee , µ→eγ and µN→eN Conversion”. In: PoSFPCP2023 (2023), p. 015.doi: 10.22323/1.445.0015. arXiv: 2310.15713 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  53. [53]

    Status of the X17 search in Montreal

    G. Azuelos et al. “Status of the X17 search in Montreal”. In:J. Phys. Conf. Ser.2391.1 (2022), p. 012008.doi: 10 . 1088 / 1742 - 6596 / 2391 / 1 / 012008. arXiv: 2211 . 11900 [physics.ins-det]

    2022

  54. [54]

    Investigation of a light Dark Boson existence: The New JEDI project

    Bastin, Beyhan et al. “Investigation of a light Dark Boson existence: The New JEDI project”. In:EPJ Web Conf.275 (2023), p. 01012.doi: 10.1051/epjconf/202327501012. url:https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/202327501012

    arXiv 2023

  55. [55]

    Shedding light on X17: community report

    Daniele S. M. Alves et al. “Shedding light on X17: community report”. In:Eur. Phys. J. C83.3 (2023), p. 230.doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11271-x

    doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11271-x 2023

  56. [56]

    X17 search project with EAR2 neutron beam

    Gianpiero Gervino et al. “X17 search project with EAR2 neutron beam”. In:EPJ Web Conf.279 (2023), p. 13007.doi:10.1051/epjconf/202327913007

    arXiv 2023

  57. [57]

    A Time Projection Chamber to Search for Feebly Interacting Bosons via Proton Induced Nuclear Reactions

    Martin Sevior et al. “A Time Projection Chamber to Search for Feebly Interacting Bosons via Proton Induced Nuclear Reactions”. In: (Feb. 2023). arXiv:2302.13281 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  58. [58]

    Experiments to Detect the Hypothetical X17 Particle

    Attila J. Krasznahorkay. “Experiments to Detect the Hypothetical X17 Particle”. In:Acta Phys. Polon. Supp.18.4 (2025), 4–A1.doi:10.5506/APhysPolBSupp.18.4-A1

    work page doi:10.5506/aphyspolbsupp.18.4-a1 2025

  59. [59]

    Search for a new 17 MeV resonance via e+e− annihilation with the PADME Experiment

    F. Bossi et al. “Search for a new 17 MeV resonance via e+e− annihilation with the PADME Experiment”. In: (May 2025). arXiv:2505.24797 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2025

  60. [60]

    Search for the X17 particle in 7Li(p,e +e−)8Be processes with the MEG II detector

    K. Afanaciev et al. “Search for the X17 particle in 7Li(p,e +e−)8Be processes with the MEG II detector”. In:Eur. Phys. J. C85.7 (2025), p. 763.doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052- 025-14345-0. arXiv:2411.07994 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  61. [61]

    Can nuclear physics explain the anomaly observed in the internal pair production in the Beryllium-8 nucleus?

    Xilin Zhang and Gerald A. Miller. “Can nuclear physics explain the anomaly observed in the internal pair production in the Beryllium-8 nucleus?” In:Phys. Lett. B773 (2017), pp. 159–165.doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2017.08.013. arXiv:1703.04588 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  62. [62]

    Possible Explanation of the Electron Positron Anomaly at 17 MeV in 8Be Transitions Through a Light Pseudoscalar

    Ulrich Ellwanger and Stefano Moretti. “Possible Explanation of the Electron Positron Anomaly at 17 MeV in 8Be Transitions Through a Light Pseudoscalar”. In:JHEP11 (2016), p. 039.doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2016)039. arXiv:1609.01669 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  63. [63]

    Explanation of the 17 MeV Atomki anomaly in a U(1)’ -extended two Higgs doublet model

    Luigi Delle Rose, Shaaban Khalil, and Stefano Moretti. “Explanation of the 17 MeV Atomki anomaly in a U(1)’ -extended two Higgs doublet model”. In:Phys. Rev. D96.11 (2017), p. 115024.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.115024. arXiv:1704.03436 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  64. [64]

    Atomki Anomaly in Family-Dependent U (1)′ Extension of the Standard Model

    Luigi Delle Rose et al. “Atomki Anomaly in Family-Dependent U (1)′ Extension of the Standard Model”. In:Phys. Rev. D99.5 (2019), p. 055022.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.99. 055022. arXiv:1811.07953 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  65. [65]

    Dark photons from displaced vertices

    Triparno Bandyopadhyay. “Dark photons from displaced vertices”. In:EPJST233.11 (Oct. 2024), pp. 2177–2185.issn: 1951-6401.doi: 10.1140/epjs/s11734-024-01087-5 .url: https://doi.org/10.1140/epjs/s11734-024-01087-5

    work page doi:10.1140/epjs/s11734-024-01087-5 2024

  66. [66]

    Design and development of STCF offline software

    Xiaocong Ai et al. “Design and development of STCF offline software”. In:Mod. Phys. Lett. A39.40 (2024), p. 2440006.doi:10.1142/S0217732324400066

    work page doi:10.1142/s0217732324400066 2024

  67. [68]

    The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations

    J. Alwall et al. “The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations”. In:JHEP07 (2014), p. 079.doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2014)079. arXiv:1405.0301 [hep-ph]. 19

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  68. [69]

    Searching for long-lived light neutralinos from B-meson decays with baryonic R-parity violation at Belle II

    Emilie Bertholet et al. “Searching for long-lived light neutralinos from B-meson decays with baryonic R-parity violation at Belle II”. In: (July 2025). arXiv:2507.00359 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  69. [70]

    Analysis methods for results in gamma-ray astronomy

    T. -P. Li and Y. -Q. Ma. “Analysis methods for results in gamma-ray astronomy”. In: Astrophys. J.272 (1983), pp. 317–324.doi:10.1086/161295

    doi:10.1086/161295 1983

  70. [71]

    Evaluation of three methods for calculating statistical significance when incorporating a systematic uncertainty into a test of the background-only hypothesis for a Poisson process

    Robert D. Cousins, James T. Linnemann, and Jordan Tucker. “Evaluation of three methods for calculating statistical significance when incorporating a systematic uncertainty into a test of the background-only hypothesis for a Poisson process”. In:Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 595.2 (2008), pp. 480–501.doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2008.07.086. arXiv: physics/0702156

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  71. [72]

    Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics

    Glen Cowan et al. “Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics”. In:Eur. Phys. J. C71 (2011). [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.C 73, 2501 (2013)], p. 1554.doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1554-0. arXiv:1007.1727 [physics.data-an]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  72. [73]

    Vectorlike Leptons at the Large Hadron Collider

    Nilanjana Kumar and Stephen P. Martin. “Vectorlike Leptons at the Large Hadron Collider”. In:Phys. Rev. D92.11 (2015), p. 115018.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.92.115018. arXiv:1510.03456 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  73. [74]

    Hunting for a 17 MeV particle coupled to electrons

    Luca Di Luzio, Paride Paradisi, and Nudzeim Selimovic. “Hunting for a 17 MeV particle coupled to electrons”. In: (Apr. 2025). arXiv:2504.14014 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  74. [75]

    Array programming with NumPy

    Charles R. Harris et al. “Array programming with NumPy”. In:Nature585.7825 (Sept. 2020), pp. 357–362.doi: 10.1038/s41586- 020- 2649- 2.url: https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    doi:10.1038/s41586- 2020

  75. [76]

    SciPy 1.0: Fundamental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python

    Pauli Virtanen et al. “SciPy 1.0: Fundamental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python”. In:Nature Methods17 (2020), pp. 261–272.doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 2020

  76. [77]

    Matplotlib: A 2D graphics environment

    J. D. Hunter. “Matplotlib: A 2D graphics environment”. In:Computing in Science & Engineering9.3 (2007), pp. 90–95.doi:10.1109/MCSE.2007.55

    doi:10.1109/mcse.2007.55 2007

  77. [78]

    Implementation of ACTS for STCF track reconstruction

    Xiaocong Ai, Xingtao Huang, and Yi Liu. “Implementation of ACTS for STCF track reconstruction”. In:JINST18.07 (2023), P07026.doi: 10.1088/1748- 0221/18/07/ P07026. arXiv:2301.04306 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  78. [79]

    Study of low momentum track reconstruction for the BESIII main drift chamber

    Lu-Kui Jia et al. “Study of low momentum track reconstruction for the BESIII main drift chamber”. In:Chin. Phys. C34 (2010), pp. 1866–1873.doi: 10.1088/1674-1137/34/12/ 014

    work page doi:10.1088/1674-1137/34/12/ 2010

  79. [80]

    BESIII track reconstruction algorithm based on machine learning

    Xiaoqian Jia et al. “BESIII track reconstruction algorithm based on machine learning”. In:EPJ Web Conf.295 (2024), p. 09006.doi:10.1051/epjconf/202429509006

    arXiv 2024

  80. [81]

    Track Reconstruction at BESIII

    Liang-Liang Wang. “Track Reconstruction at BESIII”. In: (May 2024). Presented at the Workshop on Tracking in Particle Physics Experiments.url: https://indico.ihep. ac.cn/event/21775/contributions/155274/attachments/78219/97278/20240517_ BESIII_Track_reconstruction.pdf. 20

    2024

Showing first 80 references.