arxiv: 2604.10939 · v2 · submitted 2026-04-13 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex

Recognition: unknown

Study of doubly heavy baryon lifetimes

Hai-Yang Cheng , Chia-Wei Liu

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 16:35 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-ex

keywords doubly heavy baryonsbaryon lifetimesheavy quark expansionW-exchangesemileptonic decaysbag modelspectator effects

0 comments

The pith

Doubly charmed baryons show large lifetime differences from W-exchange effects in heavy quark expansion.

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

The paper calculates lifetimes and semileptonic widths for doubly charmed and bottom baryons by expanding their decay rates in powers of the inverse heavy quark mass. It includes next-to-leading order corrections to several operator dimensions plus leading dimension-seven terms, while nonperturbative matrix elements come from a bag model with improved wave functions. The analysis isolates the W-exchange diagram as the source of a pronounced lifetime hierarchy among the charmed states, with much smaller splittings among the bottom states. These results supply concrete numbers and separate nonleptonic versus semileptonic contributions that can be checked against collider data.

Core claim

Within the heavy quark expansion that incorporates NLO corrections to dimension-3, -5 and -6 operators together with leading dimension-7 contributions, and with nonperturbative matrix elements evaluated in a bag model, the lifetimes are obtained as (τ_Ξcc++ , τ_Ξcc+ , τ_Ωcc+ ) = (2.67 ± 0.94, 0.47 ± 0.08, 1.79 ± 0.62) × 10^{-13} s and (τ_Ξbb0 , τ_Ξbb- , τ_Ωbb- ) = (0.75 ± 0.11, 0.92 ± 0.15, 0.93 ± 0.15) × 10^{-12} s. The W-exchange contribution generates the large lifetime splitting in the doubly charmed sector while remaining important, though smaller, for the bottom sector, producing the hierarchies τ(Ξcc++) > τ(Ωcc+) > τ(Ξcc+) and τ(Ωbb-) ∼ τ(Ξbb-) > τ(Ξbb0). Separate nonleptonic and seme

What carries the argument

Heavy quark expansion up to dimension-7 operators with bag-model matrix elements, where the W-exchange diagram supplies the dominant spectator effect that splits the lifetimes.

If this is right

The charmed baryons obey the lifetime ordering Ξcc++ longest, Ωcc+ intermediate, Ξcc+ shortest.
Bottom baryons exhibit nearly equal lifetimes with only modest differences among the three states.
Nonleptonic and semileptonic widths can be separated to expose the size of spectator contributions in each channel.
Inclusive semileptonic decay widths and their asymmetries furnish independent tests of the same underlying operators.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

These numerical predictions can be confronted directly with future LHCb or Belle-II data on doubly heavy baryons.
Confirmation of the large charmed-sector splitting would indicate that W-exchange must be retained in any similar calculation for other multi-heavy-quark hadrons.
The extracted semileptonic widths offer a route to cross-check the same matrix elements against measured branching fractions.

Load-bearing premise

The bag model with chosen heavy-quark pole masses and hadronic scale accurately represents the nonperturbative matrix elements inside doubly heavy baryons.

What would settle it

A measured lifetime for Ξcc+ lying well outside the interval 0.39–0.55 × 10^{-13} s would contradict the central prediction.

read the original abstract

We study the lifetimes and inclusive semileptonic decay widths of doubly heavy baryons within the framework of heavy quark expansion. Our analysis includes next-to-leading-order corrections to the dimension-3, -5, and -6 operators, together with the leading dimension-7 contributions, while the nonperturbative matrix elements are evaluated in a bag model with translationally improved baryon wave functions. We obtain $( \tau_{\Xi_{cc}^{++}} , \tau_{\Xi_{cc}^{+}} , \tau_{\Omega_{cc}^{+}} ) = ( 2.67 \pm 0.94,\, 0.47 \pm 0.08,\, 1.79 \pm 0.62 ) \times 10^{-13}\,{\rm s}$ and $( \tau_{\Xi_{bb}^{0}} , \tau_{\Xi_{bb}^{-}} , \tau_{\Omega_{bb}^{-}} ) = ( 0.75 \pm 0.11,\, 0.92 \pm 0.15,\, 0.93 \pm 0.15 ) \times 10^{-12}\,{\rm s}$, where the uncertainties here arise from the heavy quark pole masses and the hadronic scale adopted in the quark model. Hence, the lifetime hierarchy patterns are $\tau(\Xi_{cc}^{++})>\tau(\Omega_{cc}^+)>\tau(\Xi_{cc}^+)$ and $\tau(\Omega_{bb}^{-})\sim\tau(\Xi_{bb}^-)>\tau(\Xi_{bb}^0)$ for doubly charmed and bottom baryons, respectively. The $W$-exchange contribution plays a crucial role in generating the large lifetime splitting in the doubly charmed sector and remains phenomenologically important for doubly bottom baryons. In addition to the total lifetimes, we calculate the separate nonleptonic and semileptonic contributions, which allow us to trace the pattern of spectator effects in each baryon channel. We also evaluate the inclusive semileptonic decay widths and the decay width asymmetries, which provide complementary probes of the underlying decay mechanisms.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This updates lifetime predictions for doubly heavy baryons with higher-order HQE terms and bag model inputs, but W-exchange matrix elements lack cross-validation so the large cc splitting may have understated errors.

read the letter

The main thing to know is that this paper computes lifetimes for doubly charmed and bottom baryons in the heavy quark expansion, adding NLO corrections to dimension-5 and -6 operators plus leading dimension-7 terms, all evaluated with a bag model. They report specific values like 2.67 ± 0.94 × 10^{-13} s for Ξcc++ and highlight how W-exchange creates a large splitting in the charmed sector, along with hierarchies for both cc and bb cases and separate nonleptonic plus semileptonic widths.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript computes lifetimes and inclusive semileptonic decay widths of doubly heavy baryons (Ξcc++, Ξcc+, Ωcc+, Ξbb0, Ξbb−, Ωbb−) in the heavy quark expansion, incorporating NLO corrections to dimension-3, -5, and -6 operators plus leading dimension-7 contributions. Nonperturbative matrix elements of four-quark operators are evaluated in a bag model with translationally improved baryon wave functions. Numerical results are reported as (τ_Ξcc++, τ_Ξcc+, τ_Ωcc+) = (2.67 ± 0.94, 0.47 ± 0.08, 1.79 ± 0.62) × 10^{-13} s and (τ_Ξbb0, τ_Ξbb−, τ_Ωbb−) = (0.75 ± 0.11, 0.92 ± 0.15, 0.93 ± 0.15) × 10^{-12} s, with uncertainties from heavy-quark pole masses and the hadronic scale; the analysis concludes that W-exchange generates the large lifetime splitting in the cc sector and remains important for bb baryons, while also providing separate nonleptonic/semileptonic contributions and decay-width asymmetries.

Significance. If the results hold, the work supplies concrete, testable predictions for doubly heavy baryon lifetimes that are directly relevant to LHCb and future experiments. The systematic inclusion of NLO corrections to the dimension-3/5/6 operators together with leading dimension-7 terms, combined with the explicit decomposition into spectator and non-spectator channels, strengthens the phenomenological utility of the heavy-quark expansion for these states and clarifies the role of W-exchange in lifetime hierarchies.

major comments (2)

[Numerical results and matrix-element evaluation] The quoted uncertainties on the central lifetime values (e.g., τ_Ξcc++ = 2.67 ± 0.94 × 10^{-13} s) are stated to arise only from variations in heavy-quark pole masses and the single hadronic scale adopted in the bag model. The dimension-6 four-quark matrix elements that enter the W-exchange contribution—which the abstract identifies as crucial for the reported splitting τ(Ξcc++) ≫ τ(Ξcc+)—are computed inside a fixed bag-model setup; no additional variation of bag radius, internal quark masses, or comparison against independent determinations (lattice QCD or QCD sum rules) is performed. Because Λ/m_c is only marginally small and the W-exchange term is numerically dominant in the cc sector, an unquantified systematic shift in these matrix elements directly affects the claimed hierarchy and the numerical splitting.
[Discussion of W-exchange and lifetime hierarchies] The lifetime hierarchy patterns and the statement that W-exchange “plays a crucial role” rest on the bag-model values of the relevant dimension-6 operators. The manuscript does not provide a sensitivity study that varies the bag-model parameters beyond the hadronic scale already included in the error budget, nor does it cross-check the matrix elements against other nonperturbative methods.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract lists the numerical results and the sources of uncertainty but does not explicitly mention the NLO corrections to dimension-3/5/6 operators or the inclusion of leading dimension-7 terms; adding this information would improve completeness.
[Theoretical framework] Notation for the translationally improved wave functions and the precise definition of the hadronic scale parameter should be given explicitly with equations in the main text rather than referenced only in passing.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We address the two major comments below, which both concern the treatment of uncertainties in the bag-model matrix elements and the robustness of the W-exchange contribution.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Numerical results and matrix-element evaluation] The quoted uncertainties on the central lifetime values (e.g., τ_Ξcc++ = 2.67 ± 0.94 × 10^{-13} s) are stated to arise only from variations in heavy-quark pole masses and the single hadronic scale adopted in the bag model. The dimension-6 four-quark matrix elements that enter the W-exchange contribution—which the abstract identifies as crucial for the reported splitting τ(Ξcc++) ≫ τ(Ξcc+)—are computed inside a fixed bag-model setup; no additional variation of bag radius, internal quark masses, or comparison against independent determinations (lattice QCD or QCD sum rules) is performed. Because Λ/m_c is only marginally small and the W-exchange term is numerically dominant in the cc sector, an unquantified systematic shift in these matrix elements directly affects the claimed hierarchy and the numerical splitting.

Authors: We agree that the present error budget does not explicitly vary the bag radius or constituent quark masses beyond the single hadronic scale parameter. These quantities are fixed by reproducing the known masses and wave-function normalizations of the doubly heavy baryons in our translationally improved bag model. To strengthen the analysis we will perform a limited sensitivity study in the revised manuscript by varying the bag radius within a physically motivated range (while readjusting the hadronic scale to maintain consistency with the baryon masses) and will report the resulting spread in the dimension-6 matrix elements and lifetimes. We will also add a brief remark that lattice or sum-rule determinations of the relevant four-quark operators for doubly heavy baryons are not yet available in the literature, so the bag-model values remain the only existing non-perturbative input. revision: partial
Referee: [Discussion of W-exchange and lifetime hierarchies] The lifetime hierarchy patterns and the statement that W-exchange “plays a crucial role” rest on the bag-model values of the relevant dimension-6 operators. The manuscript does not provide a sensitivity study that varies the bag-model parameters beyond the hadronic scale already included in the error budget, nor does it cross-check the matrix elements against other nonperturbative methods.

Authors: The central claim that W-exchange drives the large splitting in the cc sector follows directly from the relative size of the computed dimension-6 contributions once the bag-model matrix elements are inserted; this hierarchy is stable under the existing variation of the hadronic scale. We will nevertheless add an explicit sensitivity paragraph (as described in the response to the first comment) and will qualify the statement in the abstract and conclusions to note that the quantitative importance of W-exchange is tied to the bag-model evaluation, pending future lattice cross-checks. This addresses the referee’s concern without altering the numerical results or the qualitative conclusion. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation applies standard HQE with independent model inputs

full rationale

The paper applies the established heavy quark expansion framework, including NLO corrections to dimension-3/5/6 operators and leading dimension-7 terms, to compute lifetimes of doubly heavy baryons. Nonperturbative matrix elements are evaluated in a bag model with translationally improved wave functions, and uncertainties are explicitly assigned to variations in heavy quark pole masses and the hadronic scale parameter. No step reduces the reported lifetime values or the claimed role of W-exchange to the inputs by construction, nor does the central hierarchy emerge from a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The framework is not justified solely via self-citation chains, and the bag-model evaluation provides model-dependent but non-tautological inputs for the spectator effects. The derivation remains self-contained against the external HQE formalism.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The calculation rests on standard assumptions of heavy quark effective theory and a phenomenological bag model whose parameters are chosen to match the context of doubly heavy baryons.

free parameters (2)

heavy quark pole masses
Uncertainties in the final lifetimes arise directly from these masses as stated.
hadronic scale in the quark model
The scale adopted in the bag model contributes to the quoted uncertainties.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Heavy quark expansion is valid for doubly heavy baryons including NLO corrections to dimension-3, -5, -6 and leading dimension-7 operators
The entire framework is built on this expansion.
domain assumption Bag model with translationally improved wave functions accurately captures the nonperturbative matrix elements
Used to evaluate all hadronic matrix elements.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5682 in / 1584 out tokens · 96511 ms · 2026-05-10T16:35:12.042643+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

New Predictions for the Lifetimes of Doubly Heavy Baryons and the $B_c$ Meson
hep-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

Updated lifetime predictions for doubly heavy baryons and B_c meson with NNLO and NLO corrections in MS-bar, kinetic, and Upsilon mass schemes, including new hierarchies for bc states.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 2 internal anchors

[1]

Hierarchy of Lifetimes of Charmed and Beautiful Hadrons,

M. A. Shifman and M. B. Voloshin, “Hierarchy of Lifetimes of Charmed and Beautiful Hadrons,” Sov. Phys. JETP64, 698 (1986)

1986
[2]

Charmed Baryon Lifetime Differences,

B. Guberina, R. Ruckl and J. Trampetic, “Charmed Baryon Lifetime Differences,” Z. Phys. C 33, 297 (1986)

1986
[3]

Eidelmanet al.[Particle Data Group], Phys

S. Eidelmanet al.[Particle Data Group], Phys. Lett. B592, 1 (2004)

2004
[4]

Tanabashiet al.[Particle Data Group], Phys

M. Tanabashiet al.[Particle Data Group], Phys. Rev. D98, 030001 (2018)

2018
[5]

Measurement of the Ω 0 c baryon lifetime,

R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Measurement of the Ω 0 c baryon lifetime,” Phys. Rev. Lett.121(2018) no.9, 092003 [arXiv:1807.02024 [hep-ex]]. – 18 –

work page arXiv 2018
[6]

Measurement of the lifetimes of promptly produced Ω 0 c and Ξ0 c baryons,

R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Measurement of the lifetimes of promptly produced Ω 0 c and Ξ0 c baryons,” Sci. Bull.67(2022) no.5, 479-487 [arXiv:2109.01334 [hep-ex]]

work page arXiv 2022
[7]

Measurement of theΩ 0 c and Ξ0 c baryon lifetimes using hadronic b-baryon decays,

R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Measurement of theΩ 0 c and Ξ0 c baryon lifetimes using hadronic b-baryon decays,” JHEP09(2025), 157 [arXiv:2506.13334 [hep-ex]]

work page arXiv 2025
[8]

Measurement of the Ω 0 c lifetime at Belle II,

F. J. Abudinenet al.[Belle-II], “Measurement of the Ω 0 c lifetime at Belle II,” Phys. Rev. D 107, no.3, L031103 (2023) [arXiv:2208.08573 [hep-ex]]

work page arXiv 2023
[9]

Navaset al.[Particle Data Group], Phys

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

2024
[10]

2019/20 lessons fromτ(Ω 0 c) andτ(Ξ 0 c) and CP asymmetry in charm decays,

S. Bianco and I. I. Bigi, “2019/20 lessons fromτ(Ω 0 c) andτ(Ξ 0 c) and CP asymmetry in charm decays,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A35(2020) no.24, 2030013 [arXiv:2001.06908 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2019
[11]

Study of singly heavy baryon lifetimes,

H. Y. Cheng and C. W. Liu, “Study of singly heavy baryon lifetimes,” JHEP07(2023), 114 [arXiv:2305.00665 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2023
[12]

Gratrex, B

J. Gratrex, B. Meli´ c and I. Niˇ sandˇ zi´ c, “Lifetimes of singly charmed hadrons,” JHEP07 (2022), 058 [arXiv:2204.11935 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2022
[13]

Hadronic decays of charmed baryons,

H.Y. Cheng, “Hadronic decays of charmed baryons,” talk presented at the International Workshop on Physics at Future High Intensity Collider @ 2-7 GeV in China, Huairou, Beijing, China, March 19-21, 2018 (http://cicpi.ustc.edu.cn/hiepa2018)

2018
[14]

Phenomenological Study of Heavy Hadron Lifetimes,

H. Y. Cheng, “Phenomenological Study of Heavy Hadron Lifetimes,” JHEP11, 014 (2018) [arXiv:1807.00916 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2018
[15]

Precision measurement of the Ξ ++ cc mass,

R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Precision measurement of the Ξ ++ cc mass,” JHEP02(2020), 049 [arXiv:1911.08594 [hep-ex]]

work page arXiv 2020
[16]

Measurement of the Lifetime of the Doubly Charmed Baryon Ξ ++ cc ,

R. Aaijet al.[LHCb], “Measurement of the Lifetime of the Doubly Charmed Baryon Ξ ++ cc ,” Phys. Rev. Lett.121(2018) no.5, 052002 [arXiv:1806.02744 [hep-ex]]

work page arXiv 2018
[17]

Aaij et al

R. Aaij et al. [LHCb], “Observation of the doubly charmed baryon Ξ + cc with the LHCb Run 3 detector,” [arXiv:2603.28456 [hep-ex]]

work page arXiv
[18]

Kiselev, A.K

V. V. Kiselev, A. K. Likhoded and A. I. Onishchenko, “Lifetimes of doubly charmed baryons: Ξ+ cc and Ξ++ cc ,” Phys. Rev. D60, 014007 (1999) [hep-ph/9807354]

work page arXiv 1999
[19]

Guberina, B

B. Guberina, B. Meli´ c and H. ˇStefanˇ ci´ c, “Inclusive decays and lifetimes of doubly charmed baryons,” Eur. Phys. J. C9, 213 (1999) [Erratum: Eur. Phys. J. C13, 551 (2000)] [hep-ph/9901323]

work page arXiv 1999
[20]

Kiselev and A.K

V. V. Kiselev and A. K. Likhoded, “Baryons with two heavy quarks,” Phys. Usp.45, 455 (2002) [Usp. Fiz. Nauk172, 497 (2002)] [hep-ph/0103169]

work page arXiv 2002
[21]

Lifetime of doubly charmed baryons,

C. H. Chang, T. Li, X. Q. Li and Y. M. Wang, “Lifetime of doubly charmed baryons,” Commun. Theor. Phys.49, 993 (2008) [arXiv:0704.0016 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2008
[22]

Karliner and J.L

M. Karliner and J. L. Rosner, “Baryons with two heavy quarks: Masses, production, decays, and detection,” Phys. Rev. D90, 094007 (2014) [arXiv:1408.5877 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2014
[23]

Cheng and Y.-L

H. Y. Cheng and Y. L. Shi, “Lifetimes of Doubly Charmed Baryons,” Phys. Rev. D98, 113005 (2018) [arXiv:1809.08102 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2018
[24]

Berezhnoy, A.K

A. V. Berezhnoy, A. K. Likhoded and A. V. Luchinsky, “Doubly heavy baryons at the LHC,” Phys. Rev. D98, 113004 (2018) [arXiv:1809.10058 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2018
[25]

Revisiting lifetimes of doubly charmed baryons

L. Dulibi´ c, J. Gratrex, B. Meli´ c and I. Niˇ sandˇ zi´ c, “Revisiting lifetimes of doubly charmed baryons,” JHEP07(2023), 061 [arXiv:2305.02243 [hep-ph]]. – 19 –

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023
[26]

Likhoded and A.I

A. K. Likhoded and A. I. Onishchenko, “Lifetimes of doubly heavy baryons,” [arXiv:hep-ph/9912425 [hep-ph]]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv
[27]

Cheng and F

H. Y. Cheng and F. Xu, “Lifetimes of doubly heavy baryonsB bb andB bc,” Phys. Rev. D99 (2019) no.7, 073006 [arXiv:1903.08148 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2019
[28]

H. Y. Cheng and K. C. Yang, Phys. Rev. D61, 014008 (2000) [arXiv:hep-ph/9905313 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2000
[29]

Lenz and T

A. Lenz and T. Rauh, “D-meson lifetimes within the heavy quark expansion,” Phys. Rev. D 88, 034004 (2013) [arXiv:1305.3588 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2013
[30]

Charm quark mass dependence of QCD corrections to nonleptonic inclusive B decays,

E. Bagan, P. Ball, V. M. Braun and P. Gosdzinsky, “Charm quark mass dependence of QCD corrections to nonleptonic inclusive B decays,” Nucl. Phys. B432, 3-38 (1994) [arXiv:hep-ph/9408306 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 1994
[31]

Theoretical update of the semileptonic branching ratio of B mesons,

E. Bagan, P. Ball, V. M. Braun and P. Gosdzinsky, “Theoretical update of the semileptonic branching ratio of B mesons,” Phys. Lett. B342, 362-368 (1995) [erratum: Phys. Lett. B374, 363-364 (1996)] [arXiv:hep-ph/9409440 [hep-ph]]; E. Bagan, P. Ball, B. Fiol and P. Gosdzinsky, “Next-to-leading order radiative corrections to the decayb→c¯cs,” Phys. Lett. B35...

work page arXiv 1995
[32]

Krinner, A

F. Krinner, A. Lenz and T. Rauh, “The inclusive decayb→c¯csrevisited,” Nucl. Phys. B 876, 31-54 (2013) [arXiv:1305.5390 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2013
[33]

Heavy quark expansion for the inclusive decay ¯B→τ¯νX,

A. F. Falk, Z. Ligeti, M. Neubert and Y. Nir, “Heavy quark expansion for the inclusive decay ¯B→τ¯νX,” Phys. Lett. B326, 145 (1994) [hep-ph/9401226]

work page arXiv 1994
[34]

Inclusive semitauonicBdecays to order O(Λ3 QCD /m3 b),

T. Mannel, A. V. Rusov and F. Shahriaran, “Inclusive semitauonicBdecays to order O(Λ3 QCD /m3 b),” Nucl. Phys. B921, 211 (2017) [arXiv:1702.01089 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2017
[35]

Moreno,NLO QCD corrections to inclusive semitauonic weak decays of heavy hadrons up to1/m 3 b,Phys

D. Moreno, “NLO QCD corrections to inclusive semitauonic weak decays of heavy hadrons up to 1/m 3 b,” Phys. Rev. D106, 114008 (2022) [arXiv:2207.14245 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2022
[36]

Inclusive weak decays of heavy hadrons with power suppressed terms at NLO,

T. Mannel, A. A. Pivovarov and D. Rosenthal, “Inclusive weak decays of heavy hadrons with power suppressed terms at NLO,” Phys. Rev. D92, no.5, 054025 (2015) [arXiv:1506.08167 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2015
[37]

Mannel, D

T. Mannel, D. Moreno and A. A. Pivovarov, Phys. Rev. D107, no.11, 114026 (2023) [arXiv:2304.08964 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2023
[38]

Revisiting inclusive decay widths of charmed mesons,

D. King, A. Lenz, M. L. Piscopo, T. Rauh, A. V. Rusov and C. Vlahos, “Revisiting inclusive decay widths of charmed mesons,” JHEP08, 241 (2022) [arXiv:2109.13219 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2022
[39]

Heavy quark expansion for heavy hadron lifetimes: completing the 1/m 3 b corrections,

T. Mannel, D. Moreno and A. Pivovarov, “Heavy quark expansion for heavy hadron lifetimes: completing the 1/m 3 b corrections,” JHEP08, 089 (2020) [arXiv:2004.09485 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2020
[40]

Lenz, M.L

A. Lenz, M. L. Piscopo and A. V. Rusov, “Contribution of the Darwin operator to non-leptonic decays of heavy quarks,” JHEP12, 199 (2020) [arXiv:2004.09527 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2020
[41]

Franco, V

E. Franco, V. Lubicz, F. Mescia and C. Tarantino, “Lifetime ratios of beauty hadrons at the next-to-leading order in QCD,” Nucl. Phys. B633, 212-236 (2002) [arXiv:hep-ph/0203089 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2002
[42]

Λ b lifetime puzzle in heavy quark expansion,

F. Gabbiani, A. I. Onishchenko and A. A. Petrov, “Λ b lifetime puzzle in heavy quark expansion,” Phys. Rev. D68, 114006 (2003) [arXiv:hep-ph/0303235 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2003
[43]

The Background Field Method Beyond One Loop,

L. F. Abbott, “The Background Field Method Beyond One Loop,” Nucl. Phys. B185, 189-203 (1981). – 20 –

1981
[44]

Masses and magnetic moments of hadrons with one and two open heavy quarks: Heavy baryons and tetraquarks,

W. X. Zhang, H. Xu and D. Jia, “Masses and magnetic moments of hadrons with one and two open heavy quarks: Heavy baryons and tetraquarks,” Phys. Rev. D104, no.11, 114011 (2021) [arXiv:2109.07040 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2021
[45]

Version 3 of {\tt RunDec} and {\tt CRunDec}

F. Herren and M. Steinhauser, “Version 3 of RunDec and CRunDec,” Comput. Phys. Commun.224, 333-345 (2018) [arXiv:1703.03751 [hep-ph]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2018
[46]

Masses and Other Parameters of the Light Hadrons,

T. A. DeGrand, R. L. Jaffe, K. Johnson and J. E. Kiskis, “Masses and Other Parameters of the Light Hadrons,” Phys. Rev. D12, 2060 (1975)

2060
[47]

Heavy-flavor-conserving hadronic weak decays of charmed and bottom baryons: An update,

H. Y. Cheng, C. W. Liu and F. Xu, “Heavy-flavor-conserving hadronic weak decays of charmed and bottom baryons: An update,” Phys. Rev. D106, no.9, 093005 (2022) [arXiv:2209.00257 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2022
[48]

On the Motion of Heavy Quarks inside Hadrons: Universal Distributions and Inclusive Decays

I. I. Y. Bigi, M. A. Shifman, N. G. Uraltsev and A. I. Vainshtein, “On the motion of heavy quarks inside hadrons: Universal distributions and inclusive decays,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A9, 2467-2504 (1994) [arXiv:hep-ph/9312359 [hep-ph]]

work page Pith review arXiv 1994
[49]

Grozin, P

A. G. Grozin, P. Marquard, J. H. Piclum and M. Steinhauser, “Three-Loop Chromomagnetic Interaction in HQET,” Nucl. Phys. B789, 277-293 (2008) [arXiv:0707.1388 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2008
[50]

Neubert and C

M. Neubert and C. T. Sachrajda, “Spectator effects in inclusive decays of beauty hadrons,” Nucl. Phys. B483, 339-370 (1997) [arXiv:hep-ph/9603202 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 1997
[51]

Weak Decays Beyond Leading Logarithms

G. Buchalla, A. J. Buras and M. E. Lautenbacher, “Weak decays beyond leading logarithms,” Rev. Mod. Phys.68, 1125-1144 (1996) [arXiv:hep-ph/9512380 [hep-ph]]

work page Pith review arXiv 1996
[52]

D. King, A. Lenz and T. Rauh, JHEP06, 134 (2022) [arXiv:2112.03691 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv 2022
[53]

Black, R

M. Black, R. V. Harlander, J. T. Kohnen, F. Lange, A. Rago, A. Shindler and O. Witzel, [arXiv:2603.28516 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv
[54]

Renormalons

M. Beneke, Phys. Rept.317, 1-142 (1999) [arXiv:hep-ph/9807443 [hep-ph]]

work page Pith review arXiv 1999
[55]

First determination of Vcs,cd from inclusiveDmeson decays,

K. K. Shao, H. L. Feng, X. Y. Liu, Q. Qin, L. Sun and F. S. Yu, “First determination of Vcs,cd from inclusiveDmeson decays,” [arXiv:2509.11404 [hep-ph]]

work page arXiv
[56]

Ablikimet al.[BESIII], Phys

M. Ablikimet al.[BESIII], Phys. Rev. D107, no.5, 052005 (2023) [arXiv:2212.03753 [hep-ex]]

work page arXiv 2023
[57]

Semileptonic decays of doubly charmed baryons in the bag model,

C. Q. Geng, C. W. Liu, A. Zhou and X. Yu, “Semileptonic decays of doubly charmed baryons in the bag model,” Phys. Rev. D107, no.5, 053008 (2023) [arXiv:2211.04372 [hep-ph]]. – 21 –

work page arXiv 2023