pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.25925 · v2 · pith:LOOSJYZUnew · submitted 2026-05-25 · ✦ hep-ph

Spin-dependent interactions and fine structure in the negative-parity singly heavy baryons

Zhen-Yu Li , Guo-Liang Yu , Zhi-Gang Wang , Jian-Zhong Gu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 21:36 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph
keywords singly heavy baryonsnegative parityfine structurerelativized quark modelspin-dependent interactionsGaussian expansion methodthree-body problemnon-perturbative QCD
0
0 comments X

The pith

A two-step Gaussian expansion method lets the relativized quark model match negative-parity singly heavy baryon levels to under 5 MeV average deviation.

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

The paper shows that a new numerical technique makes it possible to solve the relativized quark model for three-quark systems while keeping all spin-dependent forces, including spin-orbit and tensor terms. With this treatment the calculated energy levels for negative-parity singly heavy baryons reproduce the measured spectrum with an average difference below 5 MeV. The result demonstrates that the competing non-perturbative interactions can be balanced inside the model to produce the observed fine-structure splittings and state mixing. A reader would care because the same precision now supports definite quantum-number assignments for the observed states and supplies a practical route to similar calculations in other few-body hadrons.

Core claim

The central claim is that the two-step Gaussian expansion method removes the previous obstacle to a complete treatment of spin-dependent potentials in the relativized quark model for baryons, yielding energy levels whose averaged deviation from experiment is less than 5 MeV and thereby bringing the theoretical description of negative-parity singly heavy baryons to the same precision as current measurements.

What carries the argument

The two-step Gaussian expansion method, which expands the three-body wave function in successive Gaussian bases to incorporate spin-orbit, tensor, and other spin-dependent interactions without uncontrolled approximations.

If this is right

  • The calculated spectrum supplies concrete quantum-number assignments for the observed negative-parity baryons.
  • Different spin-dependent forces compete inside each state to produce the measured splittings and mixing angles.
  • The same numerical method supplies an effective route to high-precision calculations of compact tetraquarks and pentaquarks.
  • The large set of computed levels encodes quantitative information on the relative strengths of the underlying interactions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the method succeeds for baryons it should also allow controlled inclusion of spin-dependent forces when modeling other few-body systems where the same potentials appear.
  • Direct comparison with future lattice QCD results on the same states would test whether the effective potentials reproduce the non-perturbative dynamics.
  • The assignments derived from these calculations can be used to prioritize experimental searches for still-missing resonances.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen spin-dependent potentials in the relativized quark model capture the essential non-perturbative dynamics of these baryons with enough accuracy that the remaining discrepancies stay below 5 MeV.

What would settle it

Observation of any negative-parity singly heavy baryon state whose measured mass lies more than roughly 10 MeV outside the model's predicted range would falsify the claim of 5 MeV average agreement.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.25925 by Guo-Liang Yu, Jian-Zhong Gu, Zhen-Yu Li, Zhi-Gang Wang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: The strong interaction within a baryon described by t [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: The energy level evolution of the negative-parity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Calculated baryon states of the negative-parity sin [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: There are 3 channels of the Jacobi coordinates for a th [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In order to meet the high-precision measurement of the current baryon spectroscopy, for the first time, we rigorously analyze the spin-dependent interactions and the fine structure of the negative-parity singly heavy baryons in the relativized quark model, which was previously unfeasible in the three-quark system. This gains access to the exploration of the strong interactions dominated by the non-perturbative QCD, and reveals how the various forms of strong interactions in a baryon compete with each other, affect the evolution of the energy levels, cause the energy level splitting and contribute to the mixing effect responsible for the formation of the fine structures. It is shown that the rigorous calculation can perfectly reproduce the data, the averaged deviation between the calculated and experimental energy levels is less than 5 MeV for the negative-parity singly heavy baryons. Therefore, the theoretical precision has reached the experimental high precision. This confirms the reliability of the calculation and also helps make reasonable assignments for the observed negative-parity baryons. The large amount of data obtained by the rigorous calculations contains a wealth of interaction information and is helpful for both of the theoretical and experimental studies. The key to the rigorous calculation in this work is the proposal of a new method, namely the two-step Gaussian expansion method. This new method not only overcomes the long-standing unresolved problem in the relativized quark model, but also provides an effective approach for the high-precision calculation of other few-body systems such as the compact tetraquarks and pentaquarks, especially for the treatment of spin-orbit interactions and tensor interactions which actually appear ubiquitously in all of quantum many-body systems.

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.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a two-step Gaussian expansion method to solve the relativized quark model three-body Schrödinger equation for negative-parity singly heavy baryons (including spin-orbit, tensor, and other spin-dependent terms). It claims this enables a numerically rigorous treatment previously unfeasible, yielding energy levels whose average deviation from experiment is <5 MeV, thereby confirming the model's reliability for state assignments and interaction studies.

Significance. If the numerical reproduction holds after full validation of parameters and basis convergence, the work would mark a technical advance in precision few-body calculations for baryons, providing a practical route to include spin-dependent forces without uncontrolled truncations and extending to tetraquarks/pentaquarks. The explicit handling of fine-structure mixing is a potential strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and § on numerical results: the central claim of averaged deviation <5 MeV is stated without a table listing calculated vs. experimental masses for each state, without quoted parameter values (quark masses, potential strengths, spin-dependent couplings), and without error analysis or basis-size convergence tests; this prevents verification that the precision arises from the method rather than parameter adjustment.
  2. [Method] Method section describing the two-step Gaussian expansion: the treatment of the spin-orbit and tensor operators in the three-body problem is asserted to be rigorous, but no explicit matrix-element formulas or demonstration that the two-step procedure avoids the usual center-of-mass or truncation errors for these operators is supplied, leaving open whether the fine-structure splittings are fully controlled.
minor comments (1)
  1. Notation for the relativized potential forms and the definition of the two-step basis should be collected in one place for clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive report. The comments highlight areas where additional documentation will improve clarity and verifiability. We address each point below and will incorporate the requested material in a revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and § on numerical results: the central claim of averaged deviation <5 MeV is stated without a table listing calculated vs. experimental masses for each state, without quoted parameter values (quark masses, potential strengths, spin-dependent couplings), and without error analysis or basis-size convergence tests; this prevents verification that the precision arises from the method rather than parameter adjustment.

    Authors: We agree that explicit documentation is needed to substantiate the <5 MeV claim. In the revised version we will add (i) a table comparing calculated and experimental masses for all states considered, (ii) the complete set of fitted parameters (constituent quark masses, string tension, Coulomb strength, and all spin-dependent couplings), and (iii) a dedicated subsection presenting basis-size convergence tests together with an error estimate. These additions will allow readers to confirm that the quoted precision is controlled by the numerical method rather than by parameter tuning alone. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Method] Method section describing the two-step Gaussian expansion: the treatment of the spin-orbit and tensor operators in the three-body problem is asserted to be rigorous, but no explicit matrix-element formulas or demonstration that the two-step procedure avoids the usual center-of-mass or truncation errors for these operators is supplied, leaving open whether the fine-structure splittings are fully controlled.

    Authors: The two-step procedure was constructed precisely to keep the center-of-mass motion exact while evaluating the full spin-orbit and tensor operators without truncation. To make this transparent we will insert, either in the main text or as an appendix, the explicit analytic expressions for the matrix elements of the spin-orbit and tensor terms between the two-step Gaussian basis functions, together with a short numerical test showing that the center-of-mass contribution remains zero to machine precision and that the fine-structure splittings converge with basis size. This will demonstrate that the reported splittings are free of the usual artifacts. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain centers on proposing the two-step Gaussian expansion method as a numerical technique to solve the relativized quark model three-body Schrödinger equation with spin-orbit and tensor potentials for negative-parity singly heavy baryons. The reported reproduction of experimental levels (average deviation <5 MeV) is presented as an outcome of this rigorous solution rather than a parameter fit by construction; no equations or self-citations are shown to reduce the central claim to tautological inputs, and the method is offered as an independent advance over prior approximations. The argument remains self-contained against external benchmarks without load-bearing self-definition or fitted-input renaming.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on the relativized quark model, which is a phenomenological framework whose parameters are adjusted to data; the new method is introduced to solve the resulting equations but inherits the model's assumptions.

free parameters (1)
  • Quark masses, potential strengths, and spin-dependent coupling constants
    Standard fitted parameters in relativized quark models used to match observed spectra.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The relativized quark model with effective spin-dependent potentials accurately captures the essential non-perturbative QCD dynamics in singly heavy baryons.
    The entire calculation is performed inside this framework.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5836 in / 1219 out tokens · 37196 ms · 2026-06-29T21:36:44.321033+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

87 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages · 28 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    While, pi is defined in the Cartesian coordinates and ri j ≡ri - r j rep- resents the relative position vector between the i-th and j-th quarks ({i, j}= {1, 2}, {2, 3}, or {3, 1}), which is di fferent from the Jacobi coordinates (see Fig. 1). This di fference makes the calculation extremely complicated, especially in cases of {i, j} = {2, 3}and {3, 1}. By ap...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  2. [2]

    can conveniently describe the orbital excitation modes of baryons, which are dominant in low-energy regime. In Eq. ( 1), the latter two terms are proportional to ρ ×pλ and λ ×pρ, respectively. They are the so-called three-body spin-orbit potentials ( H so−3B i j ) [ 55]. Then, the former two terms are named as the two-body inter- actions ( H so−2B i j ). ...

    2024

  3. [3]

    Gross, E

    F. Gross, E. Klempt, S. J. Brodsky, A. J. Buras, V . D. Burkert et al., 50 Years of Quantum Chromodynamics, Eur.Phys.J.C 83, 1125 (2023) , arXiv:2212.11107[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    Navas, et al., (Particle Data Group), Review of Partic le Physics, Phys

    S. Navas, et al., (Particle Data Group), Review of Partic le Physics, Phys. Rev. D 110 3, 030001,(2024) and 2025 update

    2024

  5. [5]

    Aaij, et al., (LHCb collaboration), Observation of excited Ω0 c baryons in Ω− b → Ξ+ c K−π− decays, Phys

    R. Aaij, et al., (LHCb collaboration), Observation of excited Ω0 c baryons in Ω− b → Ξ+ c K−π− decays, Phys. Rev. D 104 9 , L091102 (2021) , arXiv:2107.03419[hep- ex]

    work page arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    Aaij, et al., (LHCb collaboration), Observation of Ne w Ω0 c baryons Decay to Λ+ c K−, Phys

    R. Aaij, et al., (LHCb collaboration), Observation of Ne w Ω0 c baryons Decay to Λ+ c K−, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 222001 (2020) , arXiv:2003.13649[hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2020

  7. [7]

    Y . B. Li, et al., (Belle Collaboration), Evidence of a structure in ¯K0Λ+ c consistant with a charged Ξc(2930)+, and updated measurement of ¯B0 → ¯K0Λ+ c ¯Λ− c at Belle, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 928 (2018) , arXiv:1806.09182[hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  8. [8]

    A Study of Excited Charm-Strange Baryons with Evidence for new Baryons \Xi_c(3055)^+ and \Xi_c(3123)^+

    B. Aubert, et al., (BABAR Collaboration), A study of Ex- cited Charm-Strange Baryons with Evidence for new Baryons Ξc(3055)+ and Ξc(3123)+, Phys. Rev. D 77, 012002 (2008) , arXiv:0710.5763[hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  9. [9]

    Aaij, et al.,(LHCb collaboration), Observa- tion of New Ω0 c States Decaying to the Ξ+ c K− Fi- nal State, Phys

    R. Aaij, et al.,(LHCb collaboration), Observa- tion of New Ω0 c States Decaying to the Ξ+ c K− Fi- nal State, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 13, 131902 (2023), arXiv:2302.04733[hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2023

  10. [10]

    Aaij, et al., (LHCb collaboration), Observa- tion of New Baryons in the Ξ− bπ+π− and Ξ0 bπ+π− Systems, Phys

    R. Aaij, et al., (LHCb collaboration), Observa- tion of New Baryons in the Ξ− bπ+π− and Ξ0 bπ+π− Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 17, 171901 (2023), arXiv:2307.13399[hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2023

  11. [11]

    Y . B. Li, et al., (Belle Collaboration), Observation of Ξc(2930)0 and updated measurement of B− → K−Λ+ c ¯Λ− c at Belle, Eur. Phys. J. C 78 3, 252 (2018) , arXiv:1712.03612[hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  12. [12]

    Measurements of ${\cal B}(\bar{B}^0 \to \Lambda_{c}^{+} \bar{p})$ and ${\cal B}(B^- \to \Lambda_{c}^{+} \bar{p} \pi^-)$ and Studies of $\Lambda_{c}^{+}\pi^-$ Resonances

    B. Aubert, et al., (BABAR Collaboration), Measurement s of B( ¯B0 → Λ+ c ¯p) and B( ¯B− → Λ+ c ¯pπ−) and Stud- ies of Λ+ cπ− Resonances, Phys. Rev. D 78, 112003 (2008) , arXiv:0807.4974[hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  13. [13]

    Very narrow excited $\Omega_c$ baryons

    M. Karliner and J. L. Rosner, V ery narrow excited Ωc baryons, Phys. Rev. D 95 11, 114012 (2017), arXiv:1703.07774[hep- ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  14. [14]

    Ortiz-Pacheco, R

    E. Ortiz-Pacheco, R. Bijker, A. Giachino, and E. Santopinto, Heavy Ωc and Ωb baryons in the quark model, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1610 1, 012011 (2020), arXiv:2004.09409[nucl-th]

    work page arXiv 2020

  15. [15]

    Z. Shah, K. Thakkar, A. K. Rai, and P . C. Vinodkumar, Excited State Mass spectra of Singly Charmed Baryons, Eur. Phys. J. A 52, 313 (2016) , arXiv:1602.06384[hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  16. [16]

    Kakadiya, Z

    A. Kakadiya, Z. Shah, and A. K. Rai, Mass spectra and decay properties of singly heavy bottom-strange baryons, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 37 11n12, 2250053 (2022) , arXiv: 2202.12048 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  17. [17]

    K. L. Wang, L. Y . Xiao, X. H. Zhong, and Q. Zhao, Under- standing the newly observed Ωc states through their decays, Phys. Rev. D 95 11, 016010 (2017), arXiv:1703.09130[hep- ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  18. [18]

    K. L. Wang, Q. F. L¨ u, and X. H. Zhong, Interpretation of the newly observed Σb(6097)± and Ξb(6227)− states as the P-wave bottom baryons, Phys. Rev. D 99 1, 014011 (2019), arXiv:1810.02205[hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  19. [19]

    Z. G. Wang, Analysis of Ωc(3000), Ωc(3050), Ωc(3066), Ωc(3090) and Ωc(3119) with QCD sum rules, Eur. Phys. J. C 77 5, 325 (2017) , arXiv:1704.01854[hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  20. [20]

    S. S. Agaev, K. Azizi, and H. Sundu, Interpreta- tion of the new Ω0 c states via their mass and width, Eur. Phys. J. C 77 6, 395 (2017) , arXiv:1704.04928[hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  21. [21]

    Z. G. Wang, Analysis of Ωb(6316), Ωb(6330), Ωb(6340) and Ωb(6350) with QCD sum rules, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 35 07, 2050043 (2020), arXiv:2001.02961[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  22. [22]

    H. M. Yang and H. X Chen, P-wave charmed baryons 6 of the S U(3) flavor 6 F , Phys. Rev. D 104 3, 034037 (2021) , arXiv:2106.15488[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  23. [23]

    Heavy Baryons in a Quark Model

    W. Roberts and M. Pervin, Heavy baryons in a quark model, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 23, 2817 (2008) , arXiv:0711.2492[nucl- th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  24. [24]

    Spectroscopy and Regge trajectories of heavy baryons in the relativistic quark-diquark picture

    D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, and V . O. Galkin, Spectroscopy and Regge trajectories of heavy baryons in the relativis- tic quark-diquark picture, Phys. Rev. D 84, 014025 (2011) , arXiv:1105.0583[hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  25. [25]

    Assigning the newly reported $\Sigma_b(6097)$ as a $P$-wave excited state and predicting its partners

    B. Chen and X. Liu, Assigning the newly reported Σb(6097) as a P-wave excited state and predicting its partners, Phys. Rev. D 98, 074032 (2018) , arXiv:1810.00389[hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  26. [26]

    B. Chen, K. W. Wei, X. Liu, and T. Matsuki, Low- lying charmed and charmed-strange baryon states, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 154 (2017) , arXiv:1609.07967[hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  27. [27]

    Quantum Numbers of Recently Discovered $\Omega^{0}_{c}$ Baryons from Lattice QCD

    M. Padmanath and N. Mathur, Quantum Numbers of Recently Discovered Ω0 c Baryons from Lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 4, 042001 (2017), arXiv:1704.00259[hep- ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  28. [28]

    Z. Zhao, D. D. Ye, and A. Zhang, Hadronic de- cay properties of newly observed Ωc baryons, Phys. Rev. D 95 11, 114024 (2017), arXiv:1704.02688[hep- ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  29. [29]

    Bijker, H

    R. Bijker, H. Garc´ ıa-Tecocoatzi and A. Giachino, et al., Masses and decay widths of Ξc/ b and Ξ ′ c/ b baryons, Phys. Rev. D 105, 074029 (2022) , arXiv:2010.12437[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  30. [30]

    Q. Xin, Z. G. Wang and F. L¨ u, The Λ-type P- wave bottom baryon states via the QCD sum rules, Chin. Phys. C 47, 093106 (2023) , arXiv:2306.05626[hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  31. [31]

    Garc´ ıa-Tecocoatzi, A

    H. Garc´ ıa-Tecocoatzi, A. Giachino, and A. Ramirez-Mo rales, et al., Decay widths and mass spectra of single bottom baryon s, arXiv:2307.00505[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv

  32. [32]

    Lamb, and R

    E, Willis, J. Lamb, and R. C. Retherford, Fine structure of the hydrogen atom by a microwave method, Phys. Rev. 1947; 72: 241-3

    1947

  33. [33]

    M. G. Mayer, On Closed Shells in Nuclei. II, Phys. Rev. 75 , 1969 (1949)

    1969

  34. [34]

    Bahtiyar, K

    H. Bahtiyar, K. U. Can, G. Erkol, P . Gubler, and M. Oka, Charmed baryon spectrum from lattice QCD near the physical point, Phys. Rev. D 102 5, 054513 (2020) , arXiv:2004.08999[hep-lat]

    work page arXiv 2020

  35. [36]

    X. Luo, S. W. Zhang, H. X. Chen, and A. Hosaka, et al., A short review on QCD sum rule studies of P-wave single heavy baryons, arXiv:2502.11351[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv

  36. [37]

    T. M. Aliev, K. Azizi, Y . Sarac, and H. Sundu, Determinat ion of the quantum numbers of Σb(6097)± via their strong decays, Phys. Rev. D 99 9, 094003 (2019) , arXiv:1811.05686[hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  37. [38]

    H. Y . Cheng, and C. K. Chua, Strong Decays of Charmed Baryons in Heavy Hadron Chiral Perturbation Theory: An Update, Phys. Rev. D 92 7, 074014 (2015) , arXiv:1508.05653[hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  38. [39]

    J. X. Lu, Y . Zhou, and H. X. Chen, et al., Dynam- ically generated JP = 1/ 2− (3/ 2−)singly charmed and bottom heavy baryons, Phys. Rev. D 92 1, 014036 (2015) , arXiv:1409.3133[hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  39. [40]

    H. X. Chen, W. Chen, and X. Liu, et al., A review of the open charm and open bottom systems, Rept. Prog. Phys. 80 7, 076201 (2017) , arXiv:1609.08928[hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  40. [41]

    D. J. Jia, W. N. Liu, and A. Hosaka, Regge behaviors in orbitally excited spectroscopy of charmed and bottom baryo ns, Phys. Rev. D 101 3, 034016 (2020) , arXiv:1907.04958[hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  41. [42]

    L. A. Copley, N. Isgur and G. Karl, Charmed Baryons in a Quark Model with Hyperfine Interactions, Phys. Rev. D 20, 768 (1979) , Erratum: [Phys. Rev. D 23, 817 (1981)]

    1979

  42. [43]

    Charmed Baryon Strong Coupling Constants in a Light-Front Quark Model

    S. Tawfiq, P . J. O’Donnell, and J. G. Korner, Charmed baryon strong coupling constants in a light front quark mode l, Phys. Rev. D 58, 054010 (1998) , arXiv:hep-ph/9803246

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  43. [44]

    M. A. Ivanov, J. G. Korner, V . E. Lyubovitskij, and A. G. Ruset- sky, One pion charm baryon transitions in a relativistic thr ee quark model, Phys. Lett. B 442, 435-442 (1998) , arXiv:hep- ph/9807519

    work page arXiv 1998

  44. [45]

    C. W. Hwang, Combined Chiral Dynamics and MIT Bag Model Study of Strong Σ∗Q → ΛQπ Decay, Eur. Phys. J. C 50, 793-799 (2007) , arXiv:hep-ph/0611221

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  45. [46]

    Masses of excited heavy baryons in the relativistic quark-diquark picture

    D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, and V . O. Galkin, Masses of excited heavy baryons in the relativistic quark model, Phys. Lett. B 659, 612-620 (2008) , arXiv:0705.2957

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  46. [47]

    X. H. Zhong, and Q. Zhao, Charmed baryon strong de- cays in a chiral quark model, Phys. Rev. D 77, 074008 (2008) , arXiv:0711.4645

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  47. [48]

    Spectrum of heavy baryons in the quark model

    T. Y oshida, E. Hiyama, and A. Hosaka, et al., Spectrum of heavy baryons in the quark model, Phys. Rev. D 92, 114029 (2015) , arXiv:1510.01067[hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  48. [49]

    Q. F. L¨ u, K. L. Wang, L. Y . Xiao, and X. H. Zhong, Mass spectra and radiative transitions of doubly heavy baryons i n a relativized quark model, Phys. Rev. D 96 11, 114006 (2017), arXiv:1708.04468[hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  49. [50]

    B. Chen, S. Q. Luo, and X. Liu, Universal behavior of mass gaps existing in the single heavy baryon family, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 5, 474 (2021) , arXiv:2101.10806[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  50. [51]

    Y . X. Peng, S. Q. Luo, and X. Liu, Refining ra- diative decay studies in singly heavy baryons, Phys. Rev. D 110 7, 074034 (2024) , arXiv:2405.12812[hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  51. [52]

    X. Z. Weng, W. Z. Deng and S. L. Zhu, Heavy baryons in the relativized quark model with chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 110 5, 056052 (2024) , arXiv:2405.19039[hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  52. [53]

    The structure of pentaquarks $\Omega_c^0$ in the chiral quark model

    G. Yang and J. L. Ping, Dynamical study of Ω0 c in the chiral quark model, Phys. Rev. D 97 3, 034023 (2018), arXiv:1703.08845[hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  53. [54]

    L. Liu, Y . M. Xiao, and T. Guo, Hydrogen-like structures in the strong interaction, Phys. Rev. D 112 5, 054012 (2025), arXiv:2505.22177[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  54. [55]

    Godfrey and N

    S. Godfrey and N. Isgur, Mesons in a Relativized Quark Mo del with Chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 32, 189-231 (1985)

    1985

  55. [56]

    Capstick and N

    S. Capstick and N. Isgur, Baryons in a relativized quark model with chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 34, 2809-2835 (1986)

    1986

  56. [57]

    Karl, P Wave Baryons in the Quark Model, Phys

    N.Isgur and G. Karl, P Wave Baryons in the Quark Model, Phys. Rev. D 18, 4187 (1978)

    1978

  57. [58]

    H. H. Zhong, M. S. Liu, and R. H. Ni et al.,Unified study of nucleon and ∆ baryon spectra and their strong decays with chiral dynamics, Phys. Rev. D 110 11, 116034 (2024), arXiv:2409.07998[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  58. [59]

    G. L. Y u, Z. Y . Li, Z. G. Wang, and Z. Zhou, System- atic analysis of the mass spectra of triply heavy baryons, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 543 (2025) , arXiv:2501.01803[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  59. [60]

    H. Zhou, S. Q, Luo, and X. Liu, Triply heavy baryon spectroscopy revisited, Phys. Rev. D 112 7, 074007 (2025), arXiv:2507.10243[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  60. [61]

    N.Isgur, Meson-like baryons and the spin-orbit puzzle , 7 Phys. Rev. D 62, 014025 (2000) , arXiv: hep-ph /9910272

    2000

  61. [62]

    Anselmino, E

    M. Anselmino, E. Predazzi, and S. Ekelin, et al., Diquar ks, Rev. Mod. Phys. 65, 1199-1234 (1993)

    1993

  62. [63]

    W. L. Wu, L. Meng, S. L. Zhu, DeepQuark: A Deep-Neural-Network Approach to Multiquark Bound States Phys. Rev. Lett. 136 7, 071901 (2026), arXiv:2506.20555[hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  63. [64]

    Hiyama, Y

    E. Hiyama, Y . Kino and M. Kamimura, Gaus- sian expansion method for few-body systems, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 51, 223-307 (2003)

    2003

  64. [65]

    Z. Y . Li, G. L. Y u, Z. G. Wang and J. Z. Gu, Heavy-quark dominance and fine structure of excited heavy baryons ΣQ, Ξ′ Q and ΩQ, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 12, 1310 (2024) , arXiv:2405.16162[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  65. [66]

    G. L. Y u, Z. Y . Li, and Z. G. Wang, et al., System- atic analysis of single heavy baryons ΛQ, ΣQ and ΩQ, Nucl. Phys. B 990, 116183 (2023) , arXiv:2206.08128[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  66. [67]

    Z. Y . Li, G. L. Y u, and Z. G. Wang, et al., System- atic analysis of strange single heavy baryons Ξc and Ξb, Chin. Phys. C 47, 073105 (2023) , arXiv:2207.04167[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  67. [68]

    Z. Y . Li, G. L. Y u, Z. G. Wang and J. Z. Gu, Heavy quark domi- nance in orbital excitation of singly and doubly heavy baryo ns, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 2, 106 (2024) , arXiv:2311.08251[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  68. [69]

    Z. Y . Li, G. L. Y u, and Z. G. Wang, et al., Mass spectra of singly heavy baryons in the relativized quark model with heavy-quark dominance, Chin. Phys. C 49 11, 113107 (2025), arXiv:2503.01237[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  69. [70]

    Z. Y . Li, G. L. Y u, and Z. G. Wang, et al., Mass spectra of doubly heavy baryons in the relativized quark model with heavy-quark dominance, Eur. Phys. J. C 85 11, 1271 (2025) , arXiv:2506.19504[hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  70. [71]

    The complete calculation results are present ed, and Refs

    See the Supplemental Materials for the additional deta ils on the Hamiltonian of the RQM, wave functions, Jacobi coordi- nates, HQD mechanism, GEM, o ff-digonal matrix elements, two-step GEM. The complete calculation results are present ed, and Refs. [ 53– 56, 62– 67] are also included. 8 Supplemental Materials: Spin-dependent interactions and fine structur...

  71. [72]

    The quarks are numbered for ease of use in calculatio ns, and the 3rd quark refers specifically to the heavy quark

    is selected for defining the orbital excited states of a sin gly heavy baryon. The quarks are numbered for ease of use in calculatio ns, and the 3rd quark refers specifically to the heavy quark. In this w ork, all the calculations are based on the JC-3. C. Orbital excitation and Heavy-quark dominance For the L-wave excitation with L=lρ+lλ, there are an infi-...

    1978

  72. [73]

    Expanding it using the Gaussian base functions as Eq

    as an example, its o ff-diagonal element is written as ⟨α| ∂˜Gso(v) ii ri j∂ri j Bri jApi 2m2 i (λ ×pρ)·si]|β⟩. Expanding it using the Gaussian base functions as Eq. ( 26), we get as many as 10000 matrix elements like ⟨(˜n,α)G| ∂˜Gso(v) ii ri j∂ri j Bri jApi 2m2 i (λ ×pρ) ·si]|(˜n′,β)G⟩, when ˜nmax =100. We first deal with the right half part of the matrix ...

  73. [74]

    is the key to working out those complicated matrix elements. G. Calculation results 13 TABLE III: The Hamiltonian matrix H, the eigenvalues and the eigenvectors in the 1 2 − , 3 2 − and 5 2 − subspaces of the charmed baryons. Baryon (JP) ( lρ, lλ)nL(JP) j H (MeV) Eigenvalue (MeV) Eigenvector Σc( 1 2 − ) (0, 1)1P( 1 2 − )0         

  74. [75]

    06 −11. 33 −3. 31 −11. 33 2778 . 02 −22. 26 −3. 31 −22. 26 2828 . 13          2836.60 (0.0151428, -0.357707, 0.933711) (0, 1)1P( 1 2 − )1 2783.20 (0.757047, -0.605924, -0.244409) (1, 0)1P( 1 2 − )1 2759.41 (0.653185, 0.710564, 0.261626) Σc( 3 2 − ) (0, 1)1P( 3 2 − )1         

  75. [76]

    09 2816 . 13 −0. 64 −26. 82 −0. 64 2877 . 37          2886.91 (-0.333973, -0.041968, 0.941648) (0, 1)1P( 3 2 − )2 2818.41 (-0.31507, -0.936575, -0.153487) (1, 0)1P( 3 2 − )1 2798.58 (-0.888365, 0.347946, -0.299568) Σc( 5 2 − ) (0 , 1)1P( 5 2 − )2 (2862.97) 2862.97 (1) Ξ′ c( 1 2 − ) (0, 1)1P( 1 2 − )0         

  76. [77]

    77 2911 . 67 −13. 56

  77. [78]

    81 −13. 56 2958 . 12          2961.80 (0.0163397, -0.257791, 0.966062) (0, 1)1P( 1 2 − )1 2918.64 (0.682486, 0.708982, 0.177647) (1, 0)1P( 1 2 − )1 2895.81 (0.730716, -0.656421, -0.187523) Ξ′ c( 3 2 − ) (0, 1)1P( 3 2 − )1         

  78. [79]

    27 1 . 85 3004 . 10          3008.23 (0.239675, 0.0565135, 0.969207) (0, 1)1P( 3 2 − )2 2950.25 (-0.395649, -0.905959, 0.150666) (1, 0)1P( 3 2 − )1 2934.03 (-0.886576, 0.419576, 0.194776) Ξ′ c( 5 2 − ) (0 , 1)1P( 5 2 − )2 (2990.24) 2990.24 (1) Ωc( 1 2 − ) (0, 1)1P( 1 2 − )0         

  79. [80]

    38 −7. 95 5 . 63 −7. 95 3014 . 79 11 . 50

  80. [81]

    63 11 . 50 3058 . 84          3061.91 (0.0700441, 0.225336, 0.97176) (0, 1)1P( 1 2 − )1 3019.70 (0.648008, -0.7509, 0.127414) (1, 0)1P( 1 2 − )1 3001.40 (-0.758406, -0.620784, 0.198616) Ωc( 3 2 − ) (0, 1)1P( 3 2 − )1         

Showing first 80 references.