Arxiv:1702.08417V3 [Hep-Ph] 31 Aug 2017

Strong couplings and form factors of charmed mesons in holographic QCD

Alfonso Ballon-Bayona,∗ GastãoKrein,† and Carlisson Miller‡ Instituto de F´ısica Teórica, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Rua Dr. Bento Teobaldo Ferraz, 271 - Bloco II, 01140-070 SãoPaulo, SP, Brazil

We extend the two-flavor hard-wall holographic model of Erlich, Katz, Son and Stephanov [Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 261602 (2005)] to four flavors to incorporate strange and charm quarks. The model incorporates chiral and flavor symmetry breaking and provides a reasonable description of masses and weak decay constants of a variety of scalar, pseudoscalar, vector and axial-vector strange and charmed mesons. In particular, we examine flavor symmetry breaking in the strong couplings of the ρ meson to the charmed D and D∗ mesons. We also compute electromagnetic form factors of the π, ρ, K, K∗, D and D∗ mesons. We compare our results for the D and D∗ mesons with lattice QCD data and other nonperturbative approaches.

I. INTRODUCTION are taken from SU(4) flavor and heavy-quark symmetry relations. For instance, SU(4) symmetry relates the cou- There is considerable current theoretical and exper- plings of the ρ to the pseudoscalar mesons π, K and D, imental interest in the study of the interactions of namely gρDD = gKKρ = gρππ/2. If in addition to SU(4) charmed hadrons with light hadrons and atomic nu- flavor symmetry, heavy-quark spin symmetry is invoked, clei [1–3]. There is special interest in the properties one has gρDD = gρD∗D = gρD∗D∗ = gπD∗D to leading or- of D mesons in nuclear matter [4], mainly in connec- der in the charm quark mass [27, 28]. The coupling gρππ is constrained by experimental data; the studies of the tion with D−mesic nuclei [5–8], J/Ψ and ηc binding to nuclei [9–12], and ND molecules [13]. D−mesons are DN interaction in Refs [22–24] utilized such a SU(4) rela- also of interest in the context of the so-called X,Y,Z ex- tion, taking gρππ = 6.0, which is the value used in a large otic hadrons, which have galvanized the field of hadron body of work conducted within the Jülich model [29, 30] spectroscopy since the discovery in 2003 of the charmed for light-flavor hadrons. This value of gρππ implies hadron X(3872) by the Belle collaboration [14]. They through SU(4) symmetry gρDD = 3, which is not very are exotic because they do not fit the conventional quark- much different from predictions based on the vector me- model pattern of either quark-antiquark mesons or three- son dominance (VMD) model: gDDρ = 2.52−2.8 [31, 32]. quark baryons. Most of the X,Y,Z hadrons have masses Moreover, to maintain unitarity in calculations of scat- close to open-flavor thresholds and decay into hadrons tering phase shifts and cross sections, lowest-order Born containing charm (or bottom) quarks. Presently there is diagrams need to be iterated with the use of a scatter- no clear theoretical understanding of the new hadrons, ing equation, like the Lippmann-Schwinger equation, and despite of the huge literature that has accumulated over phenomenological form factors are required to control ul- the last decade. In the coming years, existing and forth- traviolet divergences. Form factors involve cutoff param- coming experiments will produce numerous new, and eters that also are subject to flavor dependence. Again, very likely surprising results—Ref. [15] is a very recent due to the lack of experimental information, they are also review on exotic hadrons, with an extensive list of refer- poorly constrained. ences on theory and experiment. The PANDA collaboration [16], in particular, at the forthcoming FAIR facility Flavor symmetry is strongly broken at the level of has an extensive program [17, 18] aiming at the inves- the QCD Lagrangian due to the widely different val- tigation of charmed hadrons and their interactions with ues of the quark masses; while in the light quark sec- ordinary matter. tor one has good SU(2) symmetry, mu ' md, thereby e.g. g = g (up to a phase), in the heavy-flavor arXiv:1702.08417v3 [hep-ph] 31 Aug 2017 A major difficulty in the theoretical treatment of in- ρDD ωDD medium interactions of charmed hadrons is the lack of ex- sector SU(3) and SU(4) symmetries are badly broken: perimental information on the interactions in free space. mc ms mu. Given the importance of effective For example, almost all knowledge on the DN interaction Lagrangians in the study of a great variety of phenom- comes from calculations based on effective Lagrangians ena involving D−mesons, in the present examine their that are extensions of light-flavor chiral Lagrangians us- properties in a holographic model of QCD. We extend ing SU(4) flavor symmetry [19–25] and heavy quark sym- the holographic QCD model of Refs. [33, 34] to the case metry [6, 26]. The Lagrangians involve coupling con- of Nf = 4 and investigate the implications of the widely different values of the quark masses on the effective three- stants, like gρDD, gωDD, gρD∗D and gρD∗D∗ , whose values meson couplings gρDD and gρD∗D∗ and the electromagnetic form factors of the D and D∗ mesons. The parameters of the model are the quark masses and condensates ∗ [email protected] as well as the mass gap scale. Using experimental data † [email protected] for a selected set of meson masses to fix the model param- ‡ [email protected] eters, allows us to predict not only the strong couplings 2 and electromagnetic form factors mentioned above but dences. Our results calculations are more in line with 3 also many other observables not studied before with a calculations using the P0 quark-pair creation model in holographic model. the nonrelativistic quark model [42, 43]. The works in Refs. [33, 34] pioneered in the modeling The organization of this paper is as follows. In Sec.II of low energy QCD by incorporating features of dynami- we describe how chiral and flavor symmetry breaking is cal chiral symmetry breaking in holographic QCD. They realized in our model. Then in Sec.III we describe the correctly identify the five dimensional gauge fields dual to five dimensional field equations and the AdS/CFT dic- the left and right currents associated with chiral symme- tionary for the flavor and axial currents. In Sec.IV we try as well as the five dimensional scalar field dual to the describe the formalism of Kaluza-Klein expansions and chiral condensate. The extension proposed in Ref. [35] obtain effective kinetic Lagrangians for the mesons. In incorporated the strange quark and was able to identify Sec.V we use the prescription of our previous studies the appearance of scalar modes associated with flavor in Ref. [38] for the leptonic decay constants and obtain symmetry breaking. In the present work, by extending relations describing flavor symmetry breaking and chiral the model of Refs. [33, 34] to the case Nf = 4, we are able symmetry breaking in terms of scalar and pseudoscalar to investigate the consequences of the dramatically dif- modes respectively. In Sec.VI we obtain effective La- ferent values of the quark masses on the phenomenology grangians describing three-meson interactions with the of charmed mesons. Moreover, by combining the formal- holographic prescription for the strong couplings. Fi- ism of Kaluza-Klein expansions and the AdS/CFT dic- nally, in Sec.VII we fit the model parameters and present tionary, we are able to directly extract the leptonic decay our numerical results for many observables, including the constants of mesons and find an expansion for the flavor strong couplings gρDD and gρD∗D∗ as well as the elec- currents that relate flavor symmetry breaking to the ap- tromagnetic form factors of the D and D∗ mesons. We pearance of scalar modes. That relation bears a strong compare the latter against lattice QCD data obtained in analogy with the generalized PCAC (partially conserved Ref. [44]. SectionVIII presents our conclusions. axial current relation) [36, 37] that relates dynamical chiral symmetry breaking to the appearance of the pion and its resonances [38]. II. CHIRAL SYMMETRY AND FLAVOR In the model of Refs. [33, 34], dynamical chiral symme- SYMMETRY IN HOLOGRAPHIC QCD try breaking becomes manifest when considering fluctua- tions of the five dimensional gauge fields associated with Chiral symmetry SU(Nf )L × SU(Nf )R for Nf flavors the axial and vectorial sector. While the kinetic terms holds in the massless limit of QCD and is described in of the axial sector acquire a mass, signalizing chiral sym- terms of the left and right currents metry breaking, the vector sector remains massless. In µ,a µ a our framework, it turns out that the vector sector also ac- JL/R =q ¯L/Rγ T qL/R , (1) quires a mass signalizing the breaking of flavor symmetry. a 2 The Kaluza-Klein decomposition of these fields allows us where T , a = 1,...Nf − 1 are the generators of the to obtain effective kinetic Lagrangians for the mesons SU(Nf ) group, and qL/R = 1/2 (1 ± γ5)q, with q be- from the five dimensional kinetic terms, with masses and ing the quark Dirac field. The SU(4) generators T a are decay constants obtained in terms of the wave functions normalized by the trace condition Tr(T aT b) = 1/2 δab, a b abc c representing the Kaluza-Klein modes. Moreover, expand- satisfying the Lie algebra T ,T = if T . The gen- ing the five dimensional action to cubic order in the fluc- erators T a are related to the Gell-Mann matrices λa by tuations and performing again a Kaluza-Klein decompo- T a = 1/2 λa. Chiral symmetry is broken by the presence sition allows us to obtain effective Lagrangians describing of the operatorqq ¯ =q ¯RqL +q ¯LqR. This breaking can the three-meson interactions, with strong couplings given be explicit, when it appears in the QCD Lagragian as- in terms of integrals involving the wave functions of the sociated with the nonzero quark masses, or dynamically, corresponding Kaluza-Klein modes. when it acquires a vacuum expectation value, giving rise It turns out that the symmetry breaking pattern in the to a condensate hqq¯ i in limit of zero quark masses. strong couplings differs somewhat from previous stud- In the case Nf = 2, dynamical chiral symmetry break- ies in the literature. Calculations employing QCD sum ing goes as SU(2)L × SU(2)R → SU(2)V , where SU(2)V rules found SU(4) symmetry breaking in three-hadron is an exact vector symmetry and the broken symmetry occurs in the axial sector. This is described in terms of couplings that vary within the range of 7% to 70%[39]. µ,a µ,a µ,a In Ref. [40], using a model constrained by the Dyson- the vector and axial currents JV/A = JR ± JL . The µ,a Schwinger equations of QCD, it was found that the re- symmetry associated with the vector sector JV is known lation gρDD = gρππ/2 is strongly violated at the level as isospin symmetry. When Nf > 2, both chiral and fla- of 300% or more. In a recent follow up of that study vor symmetries are broken by the quark masses. We will within the same framework, Ref. [41] finds that couplings describe how chiral and flavor symmetry breaking are ∗ between D-, D -mesons and π-, ρ-mesons can differ by implemented in a holographic model for Nf = 4. almost an order-of-magnitude, and that the correspond- In the pioneering work of Refs. [33] and [34], a sim- ing form factors also exhibit different momentum depen- ple holographic realization of chiral symmetry breaking 3

(CSB) was proposed. They considered the simplest back- is expected to arise from a small perturbation of Nf co- ground in holographic QCD, known as the hard wall incident space-filling flavor branes. Specifically, the mass model [45], consisting in a slice of anti-de-Sitter space- term M appearing in Eq. (5) acts as a small source for time: the operatorq ¯RqL, responsible for the breaking of the 1 chiral and flavor symmetries. A holographic description ds2 = η dxµdxν − dz2 , (2) of quarks with very large masses requires the inclusion z2 µν of long open strings and two sets of flavor branes dis- with 0 < z ≤ z0. The parameter z0 determines an in- tinguishing the heavy quarks from the light quarks (see frared (IR) scale at which conformal symmetry is broken. e.g. [47]). In that framework, the string length is pro- The action proposed in Ref. [33] includes Nf gauge fields portional to the quark mass and each set of flavor branes Lm and Rm, corresponding to the left and right flavor will carry a set of fields describing the dynamics of light µ,a currents JL/R, and a bifundamental field X dual to the and heavy mesons respectively. In this work we will show operatorq ¯RqL. The action can be written as that the model described by the action in equation (3) Z is still a very good approximation for the dynamics of 5 p n m † 2 S = d x |g|Tr (D X) (DmX) + 3|X| light and heavy-light charmed mesons, the reason being that the internal structure in both cases is governed by o 1 mn mn essentially the same nonperturbative physics, that oc- − 2 (L Lmn + R Rmn) , (3) 4g5 curs at the scale ΛQCD [28]. In heavy-heavy mesons, on the other hand, the internal dynamics is governed by where DmX = ∂mX − iLmX + iXRm is the covariant derivative of the bifundamental field X, and short-distance physics. For recent holographic studies of mesons involving heavy quarks see Refs. [49–52]. Lmn = ∂mLn − ∂nLm − i [Lm,Ln] , To investigate the consequences of chiral and flavor R = ∂ R − ∂ R − i [R ,R ] , (4) symmetry breaking it is convenient to rewrite the fluctu- mn m n n m m n ations of left and right gauge fields in terms of vector and are non-Abelian field strengths. The 5-d squared mass axial fields , i.e. Lm = Vm + Am and Rm = Vm − Am. of the field X is fixed to m2 = −3, to match with the The bifundamental field X can be decomposed as conformal dimension ∆ = 3 of the dual operatorq ¯RqL. X = eiπ X eiπ, (6) The model of Ref. [33] focused on Nf = 2 and worked in 0 the limit of exact flavor symmetry. In Ref. [35], Abidin where X is the classical part and π contains the fluc- and Carlson extended the model to N = 3, to incor- 0 f tuations. The fields V , A and π can be expanded as porate the strange-quark sector. In the present paper m m V a T a, Aa T a and πaT a respectively. we further extend that model to N = 4, with the aim of m m f It is important to remark that organizing the heavy- making predictions for charmed mesons. In our approach light D mesons together with the light pions and kaons we use a Kaluza-Klein expansion for the 5-d fields in or- in a 15-plet πaT a of fluctuation fields does not imply, der to find a 4-d effective action for the mesons. This automatically, that the heavy-light D mesons are being approach allows us to find directly the meson weak de- approximated by Nambu-Goldstone bosons. The reason cay constants, couplings and expansions for the vector is that the explicit breaking of chiral symmetry, driven and axial currents. We find in particular a relation for by the heavy charm quark, is large and by no means its the vector current describing flavor symmetry breaking effects are neglected in the model. In the same way, the (FSB). fact the D mesons appear in the same multiplet of the We start with the classical background that describes SU(4) flavor group does not mean that flavor symmetry is chiral symmetry breaking: exact; it is explicitly broken by the widely different values 0 0 Σ 3 of the quark masses. The main advantage of using such Lm =Rm = 0 , 2X0 = ζMz + z , (5) ζ a SU(4) representation with explicit symmetry-breaking where M is the quark-mass matrix, M = terms is that it allows us to make contact with the four diag(mu, mu, ms, mc), and Σ is the matrix of the dimensional effective field theories describing the inter- quark condensates,√ Σ = diag(σu, σu, σs, σc). The pa- actions of light and heavy-light mesons commonly used rameter ζ = Nc/2π is introduced to have consistency in phenomenological applications. This not only extends with the counting rules of large-Nc QCD—for details, the work of [20, 32] but also leads to quantitative predic- see Ref. [46]. Note that we are assuming SU(2) isospin tions for the strong couplings that can be tested against symmetry in the light-quark sector, i.e. md = mu and experiment or lattice QCD data, which is our main ob- σd = σu, which is a very good approximate symmetry in jective in the present paper. An alternative approach to QCD. describe the heavy-light mesons is to make contact with a For the strange and charm quarks we will fit their particularly interesting class of four dimensional models masses ms and mc to the physical masses for the mesons. that treat the light mesons as in the present paper, and Note, however, that the model should not be valid for treat heavy mesons by invoking heavy-quark symmetry. arbitrarily large quark masses. The reason is that, from The Lagrangian in the heavy sector is written as an ex- the string theory perspective, the action in equation (3) pansion in inverse powers of the heavy quark mass; Refs. 4

a a a [6, 26] are examples of such models. In holography the the ﬁelds Vm, Am and π , we ﬁnd heavy quarks are realized in terms of long open strings, as described above in this section. For recent progress in S = S(2) + S(3) + ..., (7) the heavy quark approach to heavy-light mesons within holographic QCD see [51, 52]. Expanding the action in Eq. (3) up to cubic order in where

Z ab (2) 5 p n 1 mn a 1 a 2 m a 1 mn a MA m a m,a o S = d x |g| − 2 va vmn + (MV ) Va Vm − 2 aa amn + (∂ π − A )(∂mπb − Am,b) (8) 4g5 2 4g5 2

Z b 2 (3) 5 p n 1 abc mn b c b c 1 abc mn b c (MV ) abc a a m,b c S = d x |g| − 2 f va VmVn + AmAn − 2 f aa VmAn − f (∂mπ − 2Am)V π 2g5 g5 2 ae ebc a a m,b co + MA f (∂mπ − Am)V π , (9)

a and we have defined the Abelian field strengths vmn = SU(4) flavor symmetry is preserved. In this paper we a a a a a ∂mVn − ∂nVm and amn = ∂mAn − ∂nAm. In the ki- consider quark masses and condensates that lead to a netic term S(2), the vector and axial symmetry break- realistic spectrum for the mesons so that we could ex- a ˜ ab ing is dictated by the mass terms MV and MA , defined plore the consequences of SU(4) flavor symmetry break- a b a 2 ab by the traces 2Tr([T ,X0][T ,X0]) = −(MV ) δ and ing. The kinetic term in Eq. (8) allows us to extract the a b ab 2Tr({T ,X0}{T ,X0}) = MA . Note, however, that the meson spectrum and decay constants whereas the action axial sector in S(2) is invariant under the gauge transfor- in Eq. (9) leads to nontrivial predictions for three-meson mation couplings, including the heavy-light charmed mesons D and D∗. a a a a a a A → A − ∂mλ , π → π − λ . (10) a 2 m m A A Note that the mass term for the vectorial sector (MV ) Using Eq. (5) we find the following nonzero values for is zero not only for a = (1, 2, 3), corresponding to the M : light SU(2) sector but also for a = (8, 15), which implies V that flavor symmetry has not been broken in the sector 1 0 (M a )2 = (v − v )2 for a = (4, 5, 6, 7) , describing the dynamics of the ω and ψ mesons. This is V 4 s u one clear example of heavy-heavy mesons (mesons com- a 2 1 2 posed by a heavy quark-antiquark pair), where we actu- (MV ) = (vc − vu) for a = (9, 10, 11, 12) , 4 ally expect some corrections to appear in (3) describing a 2 1 2 (MV ) = (vc − vs) for a = (13, 14) , (11) flavor symmetry breaking. Those terms would arise from 4 the dynamics of long open strings dual to heavy quarks, and the nonzero values for MA: as explained above in this section. a,a 2 MA = vu for a = (1, 2, 3) , a,a 1 2 III. FIELD EQUATIONS AND DUAL M = (vs + vu) for a = (4, 5, 6, 7) , A 4 CURRENTS a,a 1 2 MA = (vc + vu) for a = (9, 10, 11, 12) , 4 Writing the kinetic action in Eq. (8) as S(2) = a,a 1 2 MA = (vc + vs) for a = (13, 14) , R 5 (2) (2) (2) 4 d x L , its variation takes the form δS = δSBulk + 1 (2) M 8,8 = (v2 + 2v2) , δS where A 3 u s Bdy 1 " 15,15 2 2 2 Z ∂L(2) MA = (2vu + vs + 9vc ) , (2) 5 m` a 12 δS = d x − ∂mPV,a δV` 1 Bulk ∂V a M 8,15 = M 15,8 = √ (v2 − v2) . (12) ` A A 3 2 u s ∂L(2) + − ∂ P m` δAa ∂Aa m A,a ` In Eqs. (11) and (12) we have defined ` # ∂L(2) 1 + − ∂ P m δπa , (14) v (z) = ζm z + σ z3 , q = (u, s, c) . (13) ∂πa m π,a q q ζ q Z In the interesting case where all the masses and con- (2) 5 m` a m` a m a a 2 δSBdy = d x ∂m PV,aδV` + PA,a δA` + Pπ,a δπ , densates are equal we have that (MV ) = 0 and the 5

(M a )2 o (15) + V (V a)2 − (V a)2 , (23) 2z2 µˆ z and and ∂L(2) 1 P m` := = − p|g| vm` , Z Z V,a a 2 a (2) 4 dz n 1 a 2 a 2 ∂(∂mV ) g ` 5 SA = d x − 2 (aµˆνˆ) − 2(azµˆ) ∂L(2) 1 z 4g5 m` p m` ab PA,a := a = − 2 |g| aa , MA h µˆ a µ,aˆ b b ∂(∂mA ) g ` 5 + 2 (∂ π − A )(∂µˆπ − Aµˆ) (2) 2z m ∂L abp m m a a b b io Pπ,a := a = MA |g| (∂ πb − Ab ) , (16) − (∂zπ − Az )(∂zπ − Az) . (24) ∂(∂mπ ) a a a are conjugate momenta to the 5-d fields Vm, Am and π The vector and axial sectors admit a decomposition in respectively. The bulk term in Eq. (14) leads to the field irreducible representations of the Lorentz group. For the equations vector sector we find h i a ⊥,a ã a p mn 2 a 2p n V = V + ∂µˆ(φ − π˜ ), ∂m |g|va + g5(MV ) |g| Va = 0 , µˆ µˆ a a hp mni 2 abp n n Vz = −∂zπ˜ , (25) ∂m |g|aa − g5MA |g| (∂ πb − Ab ) = 0 , h i ⊥,a ⊥,a abp m m where ∂µˆV = 0. The 5-d field V describes an in- ∂m M |g| (∂ πb − A ) = 0 . (17) µˆ µˆ A b finite tower of 4-d massive spin 1 fields, i.e. the vector a mesons, whereas the 5-d fields φã andπ ã describe an in- Imposing the boundary conditions ∂zVµ |z=z0 = a a finite tower of massive scalar fields, i.e. scalar mesons ∂zAµ|z=z0 = 0 and ∂zπ |z=z0 = Az|z=z0 = Vz|z=z0 = 0 the boundary term (15) reduces to associated with flavor symmetry breaking (FSB). On the other hand, the gauge symmetry in Eq. (10) Z h δS(2) = − d4x hJ µˆ i δV a + hJ µˆ i δAa allows us to decompose the axial sector as Bdy V,a µˆ z= A,a µˆ z= i a ⊥,a a a a Aµˆ → Aµˆ ,Az → −∂zφ , + hJπ,ai (δπ )z= , (18) πa → πa − φa , (26) where we find the dual 4-d currents ⊥,a ⊥,a where ∂µÂµˆ = 0. This time the 5-d field Aµˆ will de- µˆ zµ 1 p zµ hJV,a(x)i = PV,a|z= = − 2 |g|va , (19) scribe an infinite tower of 4-d massive axial spin 1 fields, g5 z= i.e. the axial vector mesons. The 5-d fields φa and πa µˆ zµ 1 p zµ will describe an infinite tower of 4-d pseudoscalar fields, hJA,a(x)i = PA,a|z= = − 2 |g|aa , (20) g5 z= i.e the pions associated with chiral symmetry breaking z hp ab z z i (CSB). hJπ,a(x)i = Pπ,a|z= = |g|MA (∂ πb − Ab ) z= Using Eqs. (25), (25) and (26) the actions in Eqs. (23) µˆ = ∂µˆhJA,a(x)i. (21) and (24) take the form Note that we distinguish the vector Minkowski indicesµ ˆ Z Z dz n 1 h S(2) = d4x − (v⊥,a)2 − 2(∂ V ⊥,a)2 from the AdS indices µ. The results in Eqs. (19), (20) and V 2 µνˆ z µˆ z 4g5 (21) define the holographic prescription for expectation i (M a )2 h − 2(∂ ∂ φã)2 + V (V ⊥,a)2 + (∂ πã − ∂ φã)2 values of the 4-d vector, axial and pion current operators. z µˆ 2z2 µˆ µˆ µˆ µˆ i o Note from Eqs. (17) and (19) that ∂µˆhJ (x)i= 6 0 when a 2 V,a − (∂zπ˜ ) + ∂µˆ(... ) , (27) a 2 (MV ) 6= 0, i.e. the vector current is not conserved for those cases. Similarly, from Eqs. (17) and (20), one sees Z Z µˆ ab (2) dz 1 h ⊥,a ⊥,a that ∂µˆhJ (x)i 6= 0 for any a (because M 6= 0), i.e. 4 2 2 A,a A SA = d x − 2 (aµνˆ ) − 2(∂zAµˆ ) the axial current is never conserved. z 4g5 i M ab h − 2(∂ ∂ φa)2 + A Aµ,aˆ A⊥,b z µˆ 2z2 ⊥ µˆ IV. THE 4-D EFFECTIVE ACTION µˆ a µˆ a b b a b i + (∂ π − ∂ φ )(∂µˆπ − ∂µˆφ ) − (∂zπ )(∂zπ ) o After decomposing the vector and axial fields into their + ∂µˆ(... ) , (28) (z, µ) components and evaluating the metric in Eq. (2), the kinetic action in Eq. (8) takes the form where the terms in (... ) are surface terms that vanish after choosing periodic boundary conditions for the fields. (2) (2) (2) The actions in Eqs. (27) and (28) are in a suitable form S = SV + SA , (22) to perform a Kaluza-Klein expansion for the 5-d fields. where Before performing this expansion note that the nondiag- Z Z 8,15 (2) 4 dz n 1 a 2 a 2 onal mass term MA induces a mixing in the axial sector SV = d x − 2 (vµˆνˆ) − 2(vzµˆ) z 4g5 for meson states with flavor indices a = (8, 15). In this 6 paper we are mainly interested in the axial sector states for the vector sector and with a = (9, .., 14) and a = (1, 2, 3), corresponding to the Z dz heavy-light charmed mesons and the usual light mesons. ∆a,nm = aa,n(z)aa,m(z) , A z Then from now on we will consider for the axial sector Z a,nm dz n a,n a,m only those states where a 6= (8, 15). The axial sector MA = [∂za (z)][∂za (z)] states corresponding to a = (8, 15) have an interesting z o + βa (z)aa,n(z)aa,m(z) , physical interpretation, e.g η − η mixing for the pseu- A c Z doscalar sector, and deserve a further study that will be a,nm dz n a,n a,m ∆ = [∂zφ (z)][∂zφ (z)] pursued in a future project. π z a a,n a,n a,m a,m o The 5-d fields in the vector sector admit a Kaluza-Klein + βA(z)[π (z) − φ (z)][π (z) − φ (z)] , expansion of the form Z dz M a,nm = βa (z)[∂ πa,n][∂ πa,m], (38) π z A z z V ⊥,a(x, z) = g va,n(z)Vˆ a,n(x) , (29) µˆ 5 µˆ for the axial sector. Here we have defined a a,n a,n π˜ (x, z) = g5 π˜ (z)ˆπV (x) , (30) 2 2 a g5 a 2 a g5 aa ã ã,n a,n βV := (MV ) , βA := MA . (39) φ (x, z) = g5 φ (z)ˆπV (x) ,, (31) z2 z2 In order to obtain standard kinetic terms in Eqs. (35) where a sum from n = 0 to n = ∞ is implicit. A similar and (36) we impose the following conditions: decomposition holds for the 5-d fields in the axial sector: ∆a,nm = ∆a,nm = ∆a,nm = ∆a,nm = δnm , V πV A π a,nm 2 nm a,nm 2 nm ⊥,a a,n â,n MV = mV a,n δ ,Mπ = m a,n δ , A (x, z) = g5 a (z)A (x) , (32) V πV µˆ µˆ a,nm 2 nm a,nm 2 nm M = m a,n δ ,M = m a,n δ . πa(x, z) = g πa,n(z)ˆπa,n(x) , (33) A A π π 5 (40) a a,n a,n φ (x, z) = g5 φ (z)ˆπ (x) . (34) The Lagrangians in Eqs. (35) and (36) then reduce to

Using these expansions the actions in Eqs. (27) and (28) 1 a,n µˆνˆ 1 2 a,n µˆ L = − vˆ vˆ + m a,n Vˆ Vˆ factorize into z integrals and x integrals and we ﬁnd V 4 µˆνˆ a,n 2 V µˆ a,n (2) (2) R 4 R 4 1 a,n a,n 1 a,n a,n SV = d xLV and SA = d xLA, with the vector µˆ 2 + (∂µˆπˆV )(∂ πV ) − mπa,n πˆV πˆV , (41) and axial 4-d Lagrangians given by 2 2 V

1 a,n 1 a,n 1 a,nm a,n µˆνˆ 1 a,nm a,n µˆ µˆνˆ 2 ˆ ˆµˆ L = − ∆ vˆ vˆ + M Vˆ Vˆ LA = − aˆµˆνˆ aâ,n + mAa,n Aµˆ Aa,n V 4 V µˆνˆ a,m 2 V µˆ a,m 4 2 1 1 1 a,n µˆ a,n 1 2 a,n a,n a,nm a,n µˆ a,m a,nm a,n a,m + (∂ πˆ )(∂ πˆ ) − m a,n πˆ πˆ . (42) + ∆ (∂µˆπˆ )(∂ π ) − M πˆ πˆ , µˆ π 2 πV V V 2 πV V V 2 2 (35) The conditions for the ∆ coefficients are normalization rules for the corresponding wave functions. The conditions for the masses are equivalent to the conditions for the ∆ coefficients if we impose the following equations : 1 a,nm a,n µˆνˆ 1 a,nm a,n µˆ LA = − ∆ aˆ aˆ + M Aˆ Aˆ 4 A µˆνˆ a,m 2 A µˆ a,m 2 1 1 a a,n mV a,n a,n 1 a,nm a,n µˆ a,m 1 a,nm a,n a,m −∂z ∂z + βV (z) v (z) = v (z) , + ∆ (∂µˆπˆ )(∂ πˆ ) − M πˆ πˆ , z z z 2 π 2 π βa (z) h i 1 (36) V πã,n(z) − φã,n(z) = −∂ ∂ φã,n(z) , z z z z a a,n 2 ã,n βV (z) ∂zπ˜ (z) = m a,n ∂zφ (z) , (43) with coefficients defined by the z integrals πV for the vector sector and Z dz a,nm a,n a,m 2 ∆ = v (z)v (z), 1 1 m a,n V z −∂ ∂ + βa (z) aa,n(z) = A aa,n(z) , Z z z A a,nm dz n a,n a,m z z z M = [∂zv (z)][∂zv (z)] a V z βA(z) a,n a,n 1 a,n o [π (z) − φ (z)] = −∂z ∂zφ (z) , + βa (z)va,n(z)va,m(z) , z z V a a,n 2 a,n Z βA(z) ∂zπ (z) = mπa,n ∂zφ (z) , (44) a,nm dz n ã,n ã,m ∆ = [∂zφ (z)][∂zφ (z)] πV z for the axial sector. a a,n ã,n a,m ã,m o We finish this section writing the SU(4) pseudoscalar + βV (z)[˜π (z) − φ (z)][˜π (z) − φ (z)] , Z and vector meson matricesπ ˆ and Vˆ in terms of the a,nm dz a a,n a,m M = β (z)[∂zπ˜ ][∂zπ˜ ], (37) charged states πV z V 7

0  √π + √η + √ηc π+ K+ D¯ 0  2 6 12 0  π− − √π + √η + √ηc K0 D−  a a 1  2 6 12  πˆ =π ˆ T = √  q  , (45) 2  K− K¯ 0 − 2 η + √ηc D−   3 12 s  D0 D+ D+ − √3 η s 12 c

0 0  √ρ + √ω + √ψ ρ+ K?+ D¯ ?0  2 6 12 0 0  − √ρ √ω √ψ ?0 ?−  a a 1  ρ − + + K D  Vˆ = Vˆ T = √  2 6 12 q  , (46) 2  K?− K¯ ?0 − 2 ω0 + √ψ D?−   3 12 s  D?0 D?+ D?+ − √3 ψ s 12 where in the last equation we have omitted the index µ for simplicity.

V. DECAY CONSTANTS, CSB AND FSB where a sum from n = 0 to n = ∞ is implicit. Equa- tion (55) is a generalization of the partially conserved As observed in [38], the simplest method for extracting axial current relation (PCAC), which encodes the effect the leptonic decay constants is to replace the fields in the of chiral symmetry breaking (CSB) in the current alge- r.h.s of the dual currents prescription, Eqs. (19)-(21), by bra. Equation (54) encodes the effect of flavor symmetry their Kaluza-Klein expansions in Eqs. (29)-(34). We find: breaking (FSB) in the vector current. Interestingly, the a,n a,n scalar mesonsπ ˆV (x) of FSB and the pionsπ ˆ (x) of CSB appear in a similar way in Eqs. (54) and (55), re- µˆ 1 a,n ˆ µˆ hJV,a(x)i = ∂zv (z) Va,n(x) spectively. g5z z= 1 ã,n µˆ a,n + ∂zφ (z) ∂ πˆV (x) , (47) g5z z= VI. COUPLING CONSTANTS AND FORM µˆ 1 a,n ˆµˆ FACTORS hJA,a(x)i = ∂za (z) Aa,n(x) g5z z= 1 a,n µˆ a,n + ∂zφ (z) ∂ πˆ (x), (48) The three-point interactions are described by the 5-d g5z z= action in Eq. (9). After decomposing the fields into their µˆ (z, µ) components and evaluating the metric in Eq. (2), ∂µˆhJA,a(x)i = hJΠ,a(x)i βa (z) the action takes the form = − A ∂ πa,n(z) πâ,n(x), (49) g z z 5 z= S3 = SVVV + SV AA + SV Aπ + SV ππ , (56) where a sum from n = 0 to n = ∞ is implicit. In the ex- where ˆ µˆ µˆ a,n pansions (47)-(49) the 4-d fields Va,n(x),Aa,n(x), πˆV (x) a,n¯ Z Z andπ ˆ (x) are on-shell. From these expansions we find 1 abc 4 dz h µˆνˆ b c SVVV = − 2 f d x va Vµˆ Vνˆ the holographic prescription for leptonic decay constants: 2g5 z a b µî − 2vzµˆVz Vc , (57) 1 a,n gV a,n = ∂zv (z) , (50) g5z z= 1 Z Z ã,n 1 abc 4 dz h µˆνˆ b c a b µˆ f a,n = − ∂zφ (z) , (51) πV SV AA = 2 f d x va AµÂνˆ − 2vzµÂzAc g5z z= 2g z 5 i 1 µˆνˆ b c a b µˆ µˆ c a,n − 2aa Vµˆ Aνˆ + 2azµˆ(Vz Ac − V Az) , (58) gAa,n = ∂za (z) , (52) b g5z z= 1 a,n Z Z fπa,n = − ∂zφ (z) . (53) 1 abc 4 dz b a g5z S = f d x β (z) − β (z) z= V A π g2 z V A h 5 i Taking the divergence of Eqs. (47) and (48) we find a b a µˆ c × −Az Vz + AµˆVb π , (59)

µˆ 2 a,n ∂µˆhJ (x)i = fπa,n m a,n πˆ (x) , (54) V,a V πV V 1 Z Z dz S = f abc d4x −βb (z) + 2βa (z) and V ππ 2g2 z V A h 5 i µˆ 2 a,n a b a µˆ c a,n × −(∂zπ )V + (∂µˆπ )V π . (60) ∂µˆhJA,a(x)i = fπ mπa,n πˆ (x) , (55) z b 8

c,n a,ì Here we are interested in the following 4-d triple cou- − (∂µˆπˆ )ˆπ , (66) plings Z where 4 µˆ b,m νˆ S ˆ ˆ ˆ = g d x Vˆ vˆ V , (61) V V V Vˆ a,`Vˆ b,mVˆ c,n a,` µˆνˆ c,n g Z dz g¯ = 5 va,`(z)vb,m(z)vc,n(z), (67) Vˆ a,`Vˆ b,mVˆ c,n 2 z Z S = g d4x (∂ πâ,`)Vˆ µˆ πˆc,n, (62) and Vˆ πˆπˆ πâ,`Vˆ b,mπˆc,n µˆ b,m Z g5 dz b,mn a,` c,n g¯ = v 4(∂zφ )(∂zφ ) where a sum over a, b, c as well as `, m, n is implicit. πâ,`Vˆ b,mπˆc,n 8 z Using (25)-(26) in (57), (58) and (60) as well as the b a c + −2βV (z) + 2(βA(z) + βA(z)) KK expansions (29), (33) and (34) we find that o × (πa,` − φa,`)(πc,n − φc,n) . (68) g Z dz g = 5 f abc va,`(z)vb,m(z)vc,n(z) , Vˆ a,`Vˆ b,mVˆ c,n 2 z To arrive at Eqs. (65) and (66), we have integrated by (63) parts the actions in Eqs. (61) and (62) and also used the ˆ µˆ transversality of the vector mesons (∂µˆVa,` = 0). Note Z g5 abc dz n a,` b,m c,n that the coupling in Eq. (68) is symmetric when inter- g = f 2(∂zφ )v (∂zφ ) πâ,`Vˆ b,mπˆc,n 2 z changing the pion flavor indices a and c, as required by o crossing symmetry. + −βb (z) + 2βa (z) (πa,` − φa,`)vb,m(πc,n − φc,n) . V A We are interested in describing strong couplings in- (64) volving charmed mesons D and D∗, strange mesons K and K∗ as well as light mesons π and ρ. Then in (65) In order to compare our results with chiral theory mod- and (66) we select only a = (1, .., 7) and a = (9, .., 12) els we rewrite the 3-point interactions in Eqs. (61) and for the pseudoscalar mesons πa, whereas for the vector (62) as mesons we pick a = (1.., 7), a = (9, .., 12) and a = (8, 15). Z abc 4 µˆ b,m νˆ The other states are taken to zero. The reason we include S ˆ ˆ ˆ = 2f g¯ d x Vˆ (∂µˆVˆ ) V , V V V Vˆ a,`Vˆ b,mVˆ c,n a,` νˆ c,n a = (8, 15) in the vectorial sector is because it contributes (65) to the electromagnetic form factors of the D and D∗ as shown below in this section. Using also the results in Z h (45)-(46) and evaluating the SU(4) structure constants S = f abcg¯ d4x Vˆ µˆ (∂ πâ,`)ˆπc,n f abc we arrive at the effective Lagrangians Vˆ πˆπˆ πâ,`Vˆ b,mπˆc,n b,m µˆ

LV ππ = LπD∗D + LρDD + Lω0DD + LψDD + LπK∗K + LρKK + Lω0KK + Lρππ, (69)

LVVV = LρD∗D∗ + Lω0D∗D∗ + LψD∗D∗ + LρK∗K∗ + Lω0K∗K∗ + Lρρρ , (70) where √ ←→ ←→ ←→ ←→ h ∗+ ¯ 0 µ − ∗− + µ 0 ∗0 − µ + ¯ ∗0 − µ +i LπD∗D = i 2 gπD∗D Dµ D ∂ π + Dµ π ∂ D + Dµ D ∂ π + Dµ π ∂ D ←→ ←→ ←→ ←→ h ∗+ 0 µ − ∗− + µ 0 ∗0 ¯ 0 µ 0 ¯ ∗0 0 µ 0i + igπD∗D Dµ π ∂ D + Dµ D ∂ π + Dµ D ∂ π + Dµ π ∂ D , (71)

√ ←→ ←→ ←→ ←→ h + 0 µ − − + µ ¯ 0i h 0 − µ + 0 0 µ ¯ 0i LρDD = i 2 gρDD ρµ D ∂ D + ρµ D ∂ D + igρDD ρµ D ∂ D + ρµ D ∂ D , (72)

i h 0 +←→µ − 0 0←→µ 0i Lω0DD = √ gω0DD ω D ∂ D + ω D ∂ D¯ , (73) 3 µ µ

r8 h ←→ ←→ i L = i g ψ D+ ∂µ D− + ψ D0 ∂µ D¯ 0 , (74) ψDD 3 ψDD µ µ 9

√ ←→ ←→ ←→ ←→ h ∗+ − µ ¯ ν ∗− ∗0 µ ν ∗0 + µ ν ¯ ∗0 ∗+ µ ν LρD∗D∗ = i 2 gρD∗D∗ Dµ ρν ∂ D∗0 + Dµ Dν ∂ ρ+ + Dµ ρν ∂ D∗− + Dµ Dν ∂ ρ− ←→ ←→ ←→ ←→ + ∗− µ ν − ¯ ∗0 µ ν i h ∗+ ∗− µ ν ∗− 0 µ ν + ρµ Dν ∂ D∗0 + ρµ Dν ∂ D∗+ + igρD∗D∗ Dµ Dν ∂ ρ0 + Dµ ρν ∂ D∗+ ←→ ←→ ←→ ←→ ∗0 0 µ ¯ ν ¯ ∗0 ∗0 µ ν 0 ∗+ µ ν 0 ¯ ∗0 µ ν i + Dµ ρν ∂ D∗0 + Dµ Dν ∂ ρ0 + ρµ Dν ∂ D∗− + ρµ Dν ∂ D∗0 , (75)

i h ∗+ ∗−←→µ 0ν ∗− 0ν ←→µ ∗+ ∗0 ∗0←→µ 0ν ∗0 0ν ←→µ ∗0 Lω0D∗D∗ = −√ gω0D∗D∗ D D ∂ ω + D ω ∂ D + D D¯ ∂ ω + D¯ ω ∂ D 3 µ ν µ ν µ ν µ ν ←→ ←→ 0 ∗+ µ ν 0 ∗0 µ ¯ ν i + ωµ Dν ∂ D∗− + ωµ Dν ∂ D∗0 , (76)

r 8 h ∗+ ∗−←→µ ν ∗− ν ←→µ ∗+ ∗0 ∗0←→µ ν ∗0 ν ←→µ ∗0 L ∗ ∗ = −i g ∗ ∗ D D ∂ ψ + D ψ ∂ D + D D¯ ∂ ψ + D¯ ψ ∂ D ψD D 3 ψD D µ ν µ ν µ ν µ ν ←→ ←→ ∗+ µ ν ∗0 µ ¯ ν i + ψµ Dν ∂ D∗− + ψµ Dν ∂ D∗0 , (77)

√ ←→ ←→ ←→ ←→ h ∗+ − µ ¯ 0 ∗− 0 µ + ∗0 + µ − ¯ ∗0 + µ − i LπK∗K = i 2 gπK∗K Kµ π ∂ K + Kµ K ∂ π + Kµ π ∂ K + Kµ K ∂ π ←→ ←→ ←→ ←→ h ∗+ 0 µ − ∗− + µ 0 ∗0 ¯ 0 µ 0 ¯ ∗0 0 µ 0 i + igπK∗K Kµ π ∂ K + Kµ K ∂ π + Kµ K ∂ π + Kµ π ∂ K , (78)

√ ←→ ←→ ←→ ←→ h + − µ 0 − ¯ 0 µ + i h 0 − µ + 0 0 µ ¯ 0 i LρKK = i 2 gρKK ρµ K ∂ K + ρµ K ∂ K + igρKK ρµ K ∂ K + ρµ K ∂ K , (79)

√ ←→ ←→ h 0 − µ + 0 ¯ 0 µ 0 i Lω0KK = i 3 gω0KK ωµ K ∂ K + ωµ K ∂ K , (80)

√ ←→ ←→ ←→ ←→ h ∗+ ¯ ∗0 µ ν ∗− + µ ∗0 ∗0 ∗− µ ν ¯ ∗0 − µ ν LρK∗K∗ = i 2gρK∗K∗ Kµ Kν ∂ ρ− + Kµ ρν ∂ Kν + Kµ Kν ∂ ρ+ + Kµ ρν ∂ K∗+ ←→ ←→ ←→ ←→ + ∗0 µ ν − ∗+ µ ¯ ν i h ∗+ ∗− µ ν ∗− 0 µ ν + ρµ Kν ∂ K∗− + ρµ Kν ∂ K∗0 + igρK∗K∗ Kµ Kν ∂ ρ0 + Kµ ρν ∂ K∗+ ←→ ←→ ←→ ←→ ∗0 0 µ ¯ ν ¯ ∗0 ∗0 µ ν 0 ∗+ µ ν 0 ¯ ∗0 µ ν i + Kµ ρν ∂ K∗0 + Kµ Kν ∂ ρ0 + ρµ Kν ∂ K∗− + ρµ Kν ∂ K∗0 , (81)

√ ←→ ←→ ←→ ←→ h ∗+ ∗− µ 0ν ∗− 0 µ ν ∗0 ¯ ∗0 µ 0ν ¯ ∗0 0 µ ν Lω0K∗K∗ = i 3 gω0K∗K∗ Kµ Kν ∂ ω + Kµ ων ∂ K∗+ + Kµ Kν ∂ ω + Kµ ων ∂ K∗0 ←→ ←→ 0 ∗+ µ ν 0 ∗0 µ ¯ ν i + ωµ Kν ∂ K∗− + ωµ Kν ∂ K∗0 , (82)

h + 0←→µ − − +←→µ 0 0 −←→µ + i Lρππ = igρππ ρµ π ∂ π + ρµ π ∂ π + ρµ π ∂ π , (83)

h + −←→µ ν − 0 ←→µ ν 0 +←→µ ν i Lρρρ = igρρρ ρµ ρν ∂ ρ0 + ρµ ρν ∂ ρ+ + ρµ ρν ∂ ρ− . (84)

In the above, the couplings are given by g =g ¯ , (a, c) = (9, .., 12) , b = 15 , ψDD πâVˆ bπˆc g ∗ ∗ =g ¯ , a = (1, 2, 3) , (b, c) = (9, .., 12) , ρD D Vˆ aVˆ bVˆ c g ∗ =g ¯ , a = (1, 2, 3) , (b, c) = (9, .., 12) , g =g ¯ , a = 8 , (b, c) = (9, .., 12) , πD D πâVˆ bπˆc ω0D∗D∗ Vˆ aVˆ bVˆ c g =g ¯ , (a, c) = (9, .., 12) , b = (1, 2, 3) , g ∗ ∗ =g ¯ , a = 15 , (b, c) = (9, .., 12) , ρDD πâVˆ bπˆc ψD D Vˆ aVˆ bVˆ c g =g ¯ , (a, c) = (9, .., 12) , b = 8 , ω0DD πâVˆ bπˆc 10

M 1 2 gπK∗K =g ¯ a ˆ b c , a = (1, 2, 3) , (b, c) = (4, .., 7) , FV a = FV a + FV a , πˆ V πˆ 2 g =g ¯ , (a, c) = (4, .., 7) , b = (1, 2, 3) , Q q ρKK πâVˆ bπˆc 2 3 FV a = −FV a + 1 − 2 FV a . (90) g =g ¯ , (a, c) = (4, .., 7) , b = 8 , 4M a ω0KK πâVˆ bπˆc V g ∗ ∗ =g ¯ , a = (1, 2, 3) , (b, c) = (4, .., 7) , ρK K Vˆ aVˆ bVˆ c g =g ¯ , a = 8 , (b, c) = (4, .., 7) , In the absence of baryonic number the EM current is ω0K∗K∗ Vˆ aVˆ bVˆ c g = 2¯g , (a, b, c) = (1, 2, 3) , obtained from a linear combination of flavor currents, ρππ πâVˆ bπˆc g = 2¯g , (a, b, c) = (1, 2, 3) . (85) i.e. ρρρ Vˆ aVˆ bVˆ c ←→µ µ X µ We have used the double arrow derivative f ∂ g := JEM (x) = caJa (x) , (91) µ µ f(∂ g) − (∂ f)g and for simplicity we have omitted the a=(3,8,15) indices `, m, n that distinguish the fundamental states from the corresponding resonances. The Lagrangians in where the coefficients ca can vary depending on the Eqs. (70) and (69) are typically used in phenomenology quarks that will be considered in the EM current. When of charmed mesons—see e.g. Ref.[32]. considering the EM form factors of the heavy-light D and In the limit where the quark masses and condensates D∗ charmed mesons the strange quark does not partic- are equal, flavor symmetry is recovered and the couplings ipate in the process and we can define the EM current satisfy the relations as

gπD∗D = gρDD = gω0DD = gψDD = µ 2 µ 1 ¯ µ 2 µ 1 g JEM = uγ¯ u − dγ d + cγ¯ c. (92) g ∗ = g = g 0 = g =: , (86) 3 3 3 πK K ρKK ω KK 2 ρππ 4 Then the EM current can be decomposed as (91) with gρD∗D∗ = gω0D∗D∗ = gψD∗D∗ = √ √ 1 g˜ coeﬃcients c3 = 1, c8 = 7/(3 3) and c15 = −8/(3 6), g ∗ ∗ = g 0 ∗ ∗ = g := . (87) ρK K ω K K 2 ρρρ 4 up to the strangeness current which do not contribute In this case all the couplings can be obtained when evaluating the current at the external states. On µ the other hand, when evaluating the EM form factors for from the interaction terms igTr(∂ π[π, Vµ]) and ∗ ig˜Tr(∂µV ν [V ,V ])—see e.g. Ref. [20]. the strange K and K as well as the light mesons π and µ ν ρ we deﬁne the EM current as

2 1 1 A. Electromagnetic form factors J µ = uγ¯ µu − dγ¯ µd − sγ¯ µs, (93) EM 3 3 3

The effective Lagrangian (69) describes the interaction which admits the decomposition (91) for the coefficients between a vector meson and two pseudoscalar mesons. If √ c = 1, c = 1/ 3 and c = 0. the vector meson is off-shell and the pseudoscalar mesons 3 8 15 are on-shell we can use (69) to investigate the electromag- As explained in the previous section, each flavor cur- netic (EM) form factors of pseudoscalar mesons. Simi- rent admits a decomposition in terms of vector mesons. This implies from (91) that the photon decays into ρ0,n, larly, using the effective Lagrangian (70) and taking one 0n n of the vector mesons off-shell we can investigate the EM ω and ψ mesons. This is is a holographic realization form factors of vector mesons. The (elastic) EM form fac- of generalized vector meson dominance (GVMD) [54], in tors of pseudoscalar mesons appear in the decomposition that also the resonances are included and not only the of the EM current as fundamental states as VMD. For the pion and ρ meson only the states ρ0,n con- a µ a µ 2 hπ (p + q)|JEM (0)|π (p)i = (2p + q) Fπa (q ). (88) tribute to the EM form factors. In the case of strange Similarly, the (elastic) EM form factors of vector mesons mesons K and K∗ the states ρ0,n and ω0n contribute to appear as the Lorentz scalars in the EM current decom- the EM form factors whereas in the case of the charmed position [53] D and D∗ mesons we have contributions from ρ0,n, ω0n and ψn. In our model it turns out that the states ω0n a 0 µ a n 0,n hV (p + q), |JEM (0)|V (p), i and ψ are identical to the states ρ as well as their 0 µ 1 2 couplings to external states. Although this implies an = −( · )(2p + q) FV a (q ) 0µ µ 0 1 2 2 2 unrealistic spectrum for those mesons, its contribution to + [ ( · q) − ( · q)][FV a (q ) + FV a (q )] the EM form factors is not only required by consistency 1 0 µ 3 2 but also leads to reasonable results consistent either with + 2 (q · )(q · )(2p + q) FV a (q ) . (89) MV a experimental data or lattice QCD data, as we will show below. Linear combinations of the form factors in (89) define the Using the Feynman rules for the vector meson propa- so called electric, magnetic and quadrupole form factors: gator in (41) and the triple vertex (69) as well as the EM 2 2 E 1 q h 2 q 3 i current decomposition (91), with the appropriate coeffi- FV a = FV a + 2 FV a − 1 − 2 FV a , 6MV a 4MV a cients, we extract the (elastic) EM form factors for the 11 pion, kaon and D meson : The magnetic µ and quadrupole D moments of the vector mesons in our model take the canonical values 2 X gρn gρnππ Fπ(Q ) = 2 2 , (94) m n + Q M n ρ µ = FV a (0) = 2 , X hgρn gρnKK gω0n gω0nKK i 1 Q 1 2 D = F a (0) = − , (104) FK (Q ) = 2 2 + 2 2 2 V 2 m n + Q m 0n + Q MV a MV a n ρ ω X gρn gρnKK where we have used the relation FV a (0) = 1 which follows = 2 2 2 , (95) m n + Q n ρ from the sum rules

n n 0n 0n gρn gρnρρ gρn gρnK∗K∗ 2 X h gρ gρ DD 7 gω gω DD X X FD(Q ) = − 2 = 2 2 2 2 2 2 n n m n + Q 9 m 0n + Q mρ mρ n ρ ω n n X gρn gρnD∗D∗ 16 gψn gψnDD i X gρn gρnDD = 2 = 1 . (105) + = 2 , (96) 2 2 2 2 2 m n 9 m + Q m n + Q n ρ ψn n ρ Again these sum rules follow from the equation and com- where Q2 = −q2. The second equalities in (95) and (96) pleteness of the ρn states and the normalization of the ex- come from the identification of the states ω0n and ψn ternal states. In fact, the sum rules Eqs. (102) and (105) with the states ρ0,n. Similarly for the vector sector, we are universal in bottom up and top-down holographic use the Feynman rules associated with the triple vertex models for QCD. A discussion of these sum rules in the (70) and the vector meson propagator in (41) to extract top-down approach can be found in Ref. [55]. the (elastic) EM form factors for the ρ meson, K∗ meson In the regime of large Q2, the EM form factors of pseu- and D∗ meson : doscalar mesons can be expanded as 1 2 2 X gρn gρnρρ Fρ = Fρ = Fρ(Q ) = 2 2 , (97) ∞ 2 mρn + Q 2 1 X h mρn i n n n Fπ(Q ) = 2 gρ gρ ππ 1 − 2 + ... , 1 2 2 X gρn gρnK∗K∗ Q Q ∗ n=0 FK∗ = FK∗ = FK (Q ) = 2 2 2 , (98) ∞ m n + Q 2 n ρ 2 2 X h mρn i FK (Q ) = gρn gρnKK 1 − + ... 1 2 2 X gρn gρnD∗D∗ Q2 Q2 ∗ FD∗ = FD∗ = FD (Q ) = 2 2 2 , (99) n=0 mρn + Q ∞ 2 n 2 2 X h mρn i n n 3 3 3 FD(Q ) = 2 gρ gρ DD 1 − 2 + ... .(106) F = F ∗ = F ∗ = 0 . (100) Q Q ρ K D n=0 The electric, magnetic and quadrupole form factors are A similar expansion holds for the EM form factors of obtained using (90). vector mesons ∞ 2 2 1 X h mρn i 2 F (Q ) = g n g n 1 − + ... , B. Low and high Q ρ Q2 ρ ρ ρρ Q2 n=0 ∞ 2 2 2 2 X h mρn i At low Q the EM form factor of a pseudoscalar meson F ∗ (Q ) = g n g n ∗ ∗ 1 − + ... , K Q2 ρ ρ K K Q2 can be expanded as n=0 1 ∞ 2 2 2 2 2 2 X h mρn i Fπa (Q ) = 1 − hrπa iQ + ..., (101) F ∗ (Q ) = g n g n ∗ ∗ 1 − + ... .(107) 6 D Q2 ρ ρ D D Q2 n=0 where the second term defines the charge radius. A similar expression follows for the vector mesons. Notice that In the next section we present our predictions for the we have used the relation Fπa (0) = 1, which is due to couplings and form factors involving the pions, kaons, ρ ∗ charge conservation. In fact, the relation Fπa (0) = 1 mesons, K mesons as well as the charmed mesons D follows nicely from the sum rules and D∗. For the D and D∗ EM form factors we compare our results against data from Lattice QCD. Using (101) X gρn gρnππ X gρn gρnKK 2 = 2 2 and (103) we will also extract the charge radii of all those m n m n n ρ n ρ mesons and compare against experimental data or lattice g n g n X ρ ρ DD QCD data. Last but not least, the high-Q2 behavior of = 2 2 = 1 . (102) m n n ρ the form factors in Eqs. (106)-(107) will be checked and These sum rules can be proven using the equation and compared with perturbative QCD calculations. completeness relation of vector mesons as well as the normalization of the external states. For the vector mesons VII. RESULTS AND COMPARISON WITH the electric radius is obtained from the electric form fac- LATTICE QCD tor as E 2 2 dFV a (Q ) In this section we present our numerical results for the rV a = −6 2 . (103) dQ Q2=0 spectrum, decay constants, coupling constants and EM 12 form factors involving the charmed mesons. It is con- z0 using only the mass of the ρ meson, since that ob- venient to define unnormalized wave functions for the servable does not depend on any other parameter. We ã,n a,n a,n −1 scalar mesons (φU andπ ˜U ), pseudoscalar mesons (φU find z0 = 322.5MeV. Then we proceed with a global a,n a,n and πU ), vector mesons (vU ) and axial vector mesons fit for the quark masses and quark condensates using 10 a,n (aU ) so that the first coefficient in the near boundary observables, namely the light meson masses (mπ, ma1 ), expansion is fixed arbitrarily (due to the linearity of the the strange meson masses (m , m ∗ , m , m ∗ ) and K K K1 K0 differential equations). Eqs. (43) and (44) dictate the the charmed meson masses (m , m ∗ , m , m ∗ ). Note D D Ds Ds ∗ near boundary behavior of the unnormalized wave func- that we have included the scalar meson K0 , which is as- tions: sociated with flavor symmetry breaking. Numerically, 2 we find the best global fit for the parameters mu = 9 mπa,n ã,n 2 a,n V 2 MeV, ms = 190 MeV and mc = 1560 MeV for the φU (z) = −z + ..., π˜U (z) = − a z + ..., 3 3 βV (0) quark masses; σu = (198MeV) , σs = (205MeV) and 2 3 m a,n σ = (280MeV) for the quark condensates. In TableI φa,n(z) = −z2 + . . . , πa,n(z) = − π z2 + ..., c U U a we compare the model fit to the observables with their βA(0) a,n 2 a,n 2 experimental values. vU (z) = z + . . . , aU (z) = z + .... (108) In Eq. (108), the first coefficients were fixed to 1 or −1 to guarantee a positive sign for the decay constants in TABLE I. Global fit to masses of eleven selected mesons. The Eqs. (50)-(53) and positive normalization constants. The mass of the ρ meson was fit separately using z0. normalized wave functions take the form Mass Model (MeV) Measured (MeV) a,n a,n a,n a,n m 775.6 775.3 ± 0.3 [56] φ˜ (z) = N a,n φ˜ (z) , π˜ (z) = N a,n π˜ (z) , ρ πV U πV U a,n a,n a,n a,n mπ 142.5 139.6 [56] φ (z) = Nπa,n φU (z) , π (z) = Nπa,n πU (z) , a,n a,n n,a n,a ma 1232 1230 ± 40 [56] v (z) = NV a,n vU (z) , a (z) = NAa,n aU (z),(109) 1 mK 489.2 493.7 [56] with the normalization constants defined by the integrals mK∗ 803.7 891.7 ± 0.3 [56]

Z mK 1359 1272 ± 7 [56] −2 dz n a,n 2 1 N a,n = (∂ φ˜ (z)) π z U m ∗ 674.9 682 ± 29 [56] V z K0 o a a,n ã,n 2 mD 1831 1870 [56] + βV (z)(˜πU (z) − φU (z)) , Z mDs 1987 1968 [56] −2 dz n a,n 2 N a,n = (∂ φ (z)) m ∗ 2161 2010 [56] π z z U D m ∗ 2006 2112 [56] a a,n a,n 2o Ds + βA(z)(πU (z) − φU (z)) , Z −2 dz a,n 2 N a,n = (v (z)) , V z U Note that the fit works very well for the isospin and Z strange sectors, as already known from previous works. −2 dz a,n 2 N a,n = (a (z)) . (110) A z U The extension of the model to the charm sector also gives a reasonably good fit of properties of heavy-light mesons, The spectrum of vector mesons and scalar mesons is ob- like the D and D∗ mesons. tained by solving Eqs. (43) and imposing the Neumann Once we have fitted the parameters of the model, we boundary conditions at the hard wall z = z0. Similarly, are able to make predictions. In Table (II) we show a the spectrum of axial vector mesons and pseudoscalar set of predictions for masses and decay constants. In the mesons is obtained by solving Eqs. (44) and imposing cases where experimental or lattice data is available the Neumann boundary conditions at the hard wall. measured values are presented. Regarding the masses On the other hand, using Eqs. (108) and (109) we find m ∗ and m ∗ , the large difference between the model D0 D0s that the meson decay constants, defined in Eqs. (50)-(53), prediction and the experimental values [56] may be re- are determined by the normalization constants through lated to the not clear distinction between the ground and the relations excited states. 2 2 Now we move to the triple meson couplings defined in fπa,n = Nπa,n , fπa,n = Nπa,n , the effective Lagrangians (69) and (70). Using the dictio- V g5 V g5 2 2 nary (67, 68) and the relations (85) we find the couplings g a,n = N a,n , g a,n = N a,n . (111) V g V A g A gρnππ, gρnρρ, gρnKK , gρnK∗K∗ , gρnDD and gρnD∗D∗ . The 5 5 results are shown in TableIII where we notice an inter- Having described the procedure for finding the meson esting feature taking place. The triple coupling gρnDD, spectrum and decay constants now we describe how we involving the heavy-light pseudoscalar charmed mesons, fit the parameters of our model, namely the quark masses does not decrease with n in the same way as the triple mu, ms, mc , quark condensates σu, σs, σc and the posi- couplings gρnππ and gρnKK , involving light and strange tion of the hard wall z0. We choose to fit the parameter pseudoscalar mesons respectively. The same behavior ap- 13

Due to flavor symmetry breaking, through the different TABLE II. Set of predictions for masses and decay constants, values for the quark masses and condensates, we expect compared to experimental or lattice data. The measured a violation of SU(4) relations given in (86)-(87). We value for fD and fDs , taken from Ref. [56], are averages from lattice QCD results. The other measured values are taken compare in TableIV our results with the expectations from experimental data. from the SU(4) flavor symmetric case. We note that we find the trend gρDD < gρKK < gρππ/2 for the pseu- Observable Model (MeV) Measured (MeV) doscalar mesons, which opposite to that found with the fπ 84.41 92.07 ± 1.2 [56] QCD sum rules [39] and Dyson-Schwinger calculations in 1/2 3 gρ 329.3 345 ± 8 [57] Ref. [40], but it agrees with calculations based P0 quark- 1/2 pair creation model in the nonrelativistic quark model of ga1 440.9 420 ± 40 [58] Refs. [42]. For the vectorial mesons we find a similar fK 98.14 110 ± 0.3 [56] 1/2 trend gρD∗D∗ < gρK∗K∗ < gρρρ/2. Note, however, that gK∗ 331 - the coupling g ∗ ∗ is very close to g /2. The reason g1/2 478.3 - ρK K ρρρ K1 behind this proximity is that the vector meson spectrum, f ∗ 33.48 - K0 found from the first equation in (43), depends more on

mD1 2500 2423 ± 2 [56] the condensate diﬀerence than the mass diﬀerence ap- a m ∗ 1704 2318 ± 29 [56] pearing in β (z). Since the strange and light conden- D0 V mD∗ 1547 2318 ± 1 [56] sates σs and σu are very close to each other the masses 0s and wave functions of the ρ and K∗ are very similar. fD 186.7 149.8 ± 0.8 [56]

fDs 195 176.1 ± 0.8 [56] 1/2 gD∗ 572.7 - TABLE V. Contributions of the ﬁve ﬁrst states to the EM 1/2 2 g ∗ 546.4 - form factors of mesons at Q = 0. Ds g1/2 722 - D1 n 0 1 2 3 4 gρn fD∗ 159 - g n 0.886 0.192 -0.082 0.003 0.002 0 m2 ρ ππ ρn ∗ fD 150.5 - gρn 0s g n 1.237 -0.239 0.002 0.000 0.000 m2 ρ ρρ ρn gρn 2 g n 0.799 0.276 -0.072 -0.004 0.002 m2 ρ KK ρn gρn 2 g n ∗ ∗ 1.235 -0.235 0.000 0.000 0.000 TABLE III. Couplings for the pseudoscalars mesons with the m2 ρ K K ρn ρ meson and their excitations gρn 2 g n 0.398 0.446 0.161 0.005 -0.008 m2 ρ DD ρn n 0 1 2 3 4 gρn 2 g n ∗ ∗ 0.773 0.376 -0.083 -0.059 -0.007 m2 ρ D D ρn gρnππ 4.9144 1.6019 -0.8511 0.0325 0.0231

gρnρρ 6.8634 -1.9971 0.022 -0.0025 0.0005 Finally, we show our results for the meson (elastic) gρnKK 2.2163 1.1512 -0.377 -0.0241 0.0103 EM form factors defined in the previous section. Using g n ∗ ∗ 3.4246 -0.981 0.0013 0.0003 -0.0002 ρ K K the couplings obtained in TableIII and evaluating the gρnDD 1.103 1.8591 0.8386 0.0327 -0.0564 expressions in Eqs. (94)-(96) we obtain a series expansion gρnD∗D∗ 2.1431 1.5691 -0.4344 -0.3573 -0.0467 for the EM form factors of the pion, kaon and D meson. In a similar fashion, we take the coupling in TableIII and evaluate the expressions in Eqs. (97)-(99) to obtain a series expansion for the EM form factors of the ρ, K∗ and pears in the triple coupling gρnD∗D∗ , involving vectorial ∗ charmed mesons, when compared to the triple couplings D mesons. In both cases, a good convergence is achieved after considering 5 states (4 resonances ρn besides the g n and g n ∗ ∗ , involving vectorial light and strange ρ ρρ ρ K K fundamental ρn=0). This is explicitly shown in TableV mesons respectively. In the case of gρnDD we see that 2 actually the first resonance ρn=1 couples stronger than for the case Q = 0. the fundamental ρn=0. TableV reveals again a clear distinction between the light mesons and charmed mesons. In the former, vector meson dominance (VMD) is a good approximation, whereas in the case of the latter the EM form factors re- TABLE IV. SU(4) flavor symmetry breaking in our model ceive substantial contribution from the first ρ resonance. Ratios SU(4) symmetry Model This is a nice example of generalized vector meson dom- 2gρKK 1 0.902 inance (GVMD) in EM form factors. This is consistent gρππ 2g ∗ ∗ with Ref. [59], where the authors claimed that the radial ρK K 1 0.998 gρρρ excitations of the ρ meson are important for EM form 2gρDD 1 0.449 gρππ factors of nonzero spin hadrons, as nucleons. 2gρD∗D∗ In Figs.1,2,3 and4 we show our results for the EM g 1 0.625 ρρρ form factors of the π, ρ, K and K∗ mesons. The pion and 14

FIG. 1. Electromagnetic form factor of the pion (solid line) FIG. 3. Electromagnetic form factor of the kaon (solid line) compared to experimental data [63] (points with error bars). compared to experimental data [64] (points with error bars).

FIG. 2. The electric (blue), magnetic (red) and quadrupole FIG. 4. The electric (blue), magnetic (red) and quadrupole (green) EM form factors of the ρ meson. (green) EM form factors of the K∗ meson.

kaon EM form factors are compared against experimental TABLE VI. The charge radii of π, ρ, K, K∗, D and D∗ meson data. Previous results for the pion and kaon EM form compared to experiment and lattice QCD. factors in holographic QCD can be found in [60, 61] and 2 2 [62] respectively. Previous results for the ρ meson EM hr i (fm ) Model Experiment Lattice QCD form factor can be found in [53]. Finally we show in π+ 0.35 0.45 ± 0.01 [56]- Figs.5 and6 our results for the D meson and D∗ meson ρ+ 0.53 0.56 ± 0.04 [65]- EM form factors compared with data from lattice QCD. K+ 0.33 0.31 ± 0.03 [56]- As promised, we ﬁnd a reasonable agreement between K∗+ 0.52 - - our model and the lattice results. D+ 0.19 - 0.14 ± 0.01 [44] At low Q2, we use the relations in Eqs. (101) and (103) D∗+ 0.33 - 0.19 ± 0.02 [44] to extract the charge radii of pseudoscalar and vector mesons. In TableVI we compare our results for the light mesons against experimental data and those for the charmed mesons against lattice QCD data. tain the Q2 dependence of the EM form factors; the re- We use the expansions in Eqs. (106) and (107) to ob- sults are shown in Figs.7 and8. For the case of pseu- 15

FIG. 5. Electromagnetic form factor of the D meson (solid FIG. 7. Large Q2 behavior for the D-meson, kaon and pion line) compared to lattice QCD data [44] (points with error electromagnetic form factor bars).

FIG. 8. Large Q2 behavior for the D∗-meson, K∗-meson and FIG. 6. The electric (blue), magnetic (red) and quadrupole ρ-meson electromagnetic form factor (green) EM form factors of the D∗ meson. The electric form E 2 factor FD∗ (Q ) (solid blue line) is compared to lattice QCD data [44] (points with error bars). three condensates and the hard-wall scale z0, to eleven selected meson masses, the model provides a good de-

2 −2 scription of weak decay constants of more than a dozen doscalar mesons, we find the behavior Fπa (Q ) ∼ Q . of light and strange and charmed mesons. We have also For the vector meson EM form factors we find that 2 −4 investigated the effects of flavor symmetry breaking on FV a (Q ) ∼ Q . Both results are consistent with per- three-meson couplings and form factors. In particular, turbative QCD expectations and conformal symmetry in we have made predictions for the strong couplings g n , the UV. ρ ππ gρnρρ, gρnKK , gρnK∗K∗ , gρnDD and gρnD∗D∗ . Moreover, using our results for those couplings we have been able to evaluate the π, ρ, K, K∗, D and D∗ electromagnetic VIII. CONCLUSIONS form factors. For the D and D∗ electromagnetic form factors we found a reasonable agreement with the lattice We have extended the two-flavor hard-wall holographic QCD results of Ref. [44]. model of Ref. [33] to four flavors. By fitting the seven Our results for the couplings involving the ground- parameters of the model, which are three quark masses, state ρ meson and the charmed mesons, namely gρDD 16 and gρD∗D∗ are smaller than the SU(4) symmetry val- hq¯(x)q(x)i. This matching, however, is ambiguous, as ues, as shown in TableIV. Our result gρDD = 1.103 discussed in Ref. [46], because hq¯(x)q(x)i is actually a is also smaller than predictions based on the VMD scale-dependent quantity whereas mq and σ are obtained model [31, 32] where gρDD = 2.52 − 2.8. Moreover, we from a global fit to the meson spectrum. This issue ac- found that gρDD < gρππ/2, which is of the opposite trend tually becomes exacerbated as the quark mass increases. to the predictions based on QCD sum rules [39] and In QCD, the quantity hq¯(x)q(x)i is identified with Dyson-Schwinger equations of QCD [40], but it agrees the trace of the quark propagator S, i.e. hq¯(x)q(x)i = 3 with that obtained with the P0 pair-creation model in −Tr S(x − x) = −Tr S(0). It contains a nonperturbative, the nonrelativistic quark model of Refs.[42, 43]. A possi- low-energy contribution from a dynamical component of ble explanation for the discrepancy for the small values chiral symmetry breaking, and an essentially perturba- of the couplings is that the electromagnetic form factor tive contribution due to the explicit chiral symmetry of the D meson is a dramatic example where the VMD breaking driven by the quark mass. In the heavy quark approximation is broken and the contribution from the mass limit, the perturbative contribution dominates and resonances ρn can not be neglected. It is interesting to the nonperturbative contribution goes to zero. For that notice the relation between the breaking of the VMD ap- reason, and to make contact with the traditional defini- proximation and the breaking of the SU(4) symmetry. tion of the quark condensate in QCD sum rules [66], in In a VMD approximation we would find that lattice simulations the perturbative contribution is sub-

2 tracted; see e.g. [67]. Interestingly, the authors of Ref. mρ [67] found, after subtracting the perturbative contribu- 2gρDD = = gρππ . (112) gρ tion, that the strange quark condensate at the MS scale of 2 GeV is larger than that of the light quarks. So far The first equality comes from applying VMD to the D there are no such lattice calculations for the charm and isospin form factor; in our framework, this relation also bottom quark, but calculations within the framework of comes from the EM form factor. The second equality is Dyson-Schwinger equations [68] find that the nonpertur- the well known VMD result for the pion EM form fac- bative component of chiral symmetry breaking decreases tor. The relation in Eq. (112) can be extended to other with increasing current-quark mass, as expected. couplings and it means that a VMD approximation nec- Our results, obtained from a global fit to the meson essarily implies a universality between the couplings. In- spectrum, indicate that σ increases with m . Although, terestingly, the result in Eq. (112) for the coupling g q ρDD as discussed above, the relation between σ and the QCD matches with the SU(4) symmetry expectations. Then v.e.v. hq¯(x)q(x)i is far from clear, one could assume that it is reasonable to interpret a dramatic breaking of the relation as being strictly one-to-one and conclude that SU(4) flavor symmetry in terms of a dramatic breaking hq¯(x)q(x)i increases with the quark mass unless a pertur- of the VMD approximation, which is exactly what we bative subtraction is also implemented in the holographic have found for the charmed mesons D and D∗. model. For the case of the charm quark this means that We finish this paper by reiterating our earlier remarks a large value for σ does not necessarily imply a large on the applicability of our model. Our holographic QCD c charm quark condensate. There is an additional issue model is based on an extensions of a light-flavor chiral that requires further study. In QCD, the v.e.v. of the Lagrangian, which should be adequate to describe heavy- operatorqq ¯ , with canonical dimension ∆ = 3, is expected light mesons, as the internal structure of these mesons is to acquire a large anomalous dimension in the infrared. governed by essentially the same nonperturbative physics In our holographic model, we have made the ad hoc ap- governing the internal structure of light mesons, which proximation of keeping the same canonical dimension for occurs at the scale Λ . On the other hand, the in- QCD hqq¯ i. If we take into account anomalous dimension ef- ternal structure of heavy-heavy mesons, as the ψ and fects, corrections to m and σ are expected. We hope to η mesons, is governed by short-distance physics at the q c pursue this line of research in the near future. scale of the heavy quark mass. An appropriate holographic description of such mesons most likely requires It is also important to bear in mind that results from the inclusion of long open strings. In that scenario, it a holographic QCD approach are supposedly referring to should be possible, in particular, to describe the non- leading-order in an expansion of 1/Nc and in the large ’t Hooft coupling λ = g2 N . As such, loop corrections relativistic limit of heavy quarks where a spin-flavor sym- YM c metry emerges [28]. Although there have been some in- for the hadronic propagators and vertices are not taken teresting top-down [47–49, 51] and bottom-up [50, 52] into account. The 1/Nc and/or 1/λ corrections to the proposals, a realistic model for heavy-heavy mesons re- effective chiral-flavor Lagrangians in holographic QCD is mains a challenge in holographic QCD. a fascinating open problem and deserves further studies. In holographic QCD, it is assumed that the quark mass coefficient mq in the near boundary expansion of the ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS classical field X0(z) behaves as the source of the operatorq ¯(x)q(x). Then the holographic dictionary leads to conclude that the parameter σ is also in one to one cor- Work partially supported by Funda¸cãode Amparo à respondence with the vacuum expectation value (v.e.v.) Pesquisa do Estado de SãoPaulo (FAPESP), Grants 17

No. 2015/17609-3 (A.B.-B.) and 2013/01907-0 (G.K.), B also acknowledges partial financial support from the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cient´ıficoe Tec- grant CERN/FIS-NUC/0045/2015. The authors also nológico(CNPq), Grant No. 305894/2009-9 (G.K.) and thank K.U. Can for providing them the lattice data for Coordena¸cãode Aperfei¸cõamento de Pessoal de N´ıvel Su- the electromagnetic form factors of Ref. [44]. perior (CAPES) for a doctoral fellowship (C.M). A.B-

[1] G. Krein, AIP Conf. Proc. 1701, 020012 (2016). C 45, 931 (1992). [2] A. Hosaka, T. Hyodo, K. Sudoh, Y. Yamaguchi and [30] M. Hoffmann,J. W. Durso, K. Holinde, B. C. Pearce and S. Yasui, arXiv:1606.08685 [hep-ph]. J. Speth, Nucl. Phys. A 593, 341 (1995). [3] R. A. Briceño et al., Chin. Phys. C 40, 042001 (2016). [31] S. Matinya and, B. Müller,Phys. Rev. C 58, 2994 (1998). [4] L. Tolos, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 22, 1330027 (2013). [32] Z.w. Lin and C.M. Ko, Phys. Rev. C 62, 034903 (2000). [5] K. Tsushima, D. H. Lu, A. W. Thomas, K. Saito and [33] J. Erlich, E. Katz, D. T. Son and M. A. Stephanov, Phys. R. H. Landau, Phys. Rev. C 59, 2824 (1999) Rev. Lett. 95, 261602 (2005) [6] S. Yasui and K. Sudoh, Phys. Rev. D 80, 034008 (2009). [34] L. Da Rold and A. Pomarol, Nucl. Phys. B 721, 79 [7] C. Garcia-Recio, J. Nieves and L. Tolos, Phys. Lett. B (2005). 690, 369 (2010). [35] Z. Abidin and C. E. Carlson, Phys. Rev. D 80, 115010 [8] C. Garcia-Recio, J. Nieves, L. L. Salcedo and L. Tolos, (2009). Phys. Rev. C 85, 025203 (2012). [36] A. Holl, A. Krassnigg and C. D. Roberts, Phys. Rev. C [9] S. J. Brodsky, I. A. Schmidt and G. F. de Teramond, 70, 042203 (2004). Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 1011 (1990). [37] C. A. Dominguez, Phys. Rev. D 15, 1350 (1977). [10] S. H. Lee, C. M. Ko, Phys. Rev. C 67, 038202 (2003). [38] A. Ballon-Bayona, G. Krein and C. Miller, Phys. Rev. D [11] G. Krein, A. W. Thomas and K. Tsushima, Phys. Lett. 91, 065024 (2015). B 697, 136 (2011). [39] M. E. Bracco, M. Chiapparini, F. S. Navarra and [12] K. Tsushima, D. H. Lu, G. Krein and A. W. Thomas, M. Nielsen, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 67, 1019 (2012) Phys. Rev. C 83, 065208 (2011) [40] B. El-Bennich, G. Krein, L. Chang, C. D. Roberts and [13] T. F. Carams, C. E. Fontoura, G. Krein, K. Tsushima, D. J. Wilson, Phys. Rev. D 85, 031502 (2012). J. Vijande and A. Valcarce, Phys. Rev. D 94, 034009 [41] B. El-Bennich, M. A. Paracha, C. D. Roberts and E. Ro- (2016). jas, Phys. Rev. D 95, no. 3, 034037 (2017) [14] S. K. Choi et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 262001 (2003). [42] G. Krein, PoS ConfinementX , 144 (2012). [15] R. F. Lebed, R. E. Mitchell and E. S. Swanson, Prog. [43] C. E. Fontoura, J. Haidenbauer and G. Krein, Eur. Phys. Part. Nucl. Phys. 93, 143 (2017). J. A 53, no. 5, 92 (2017). [16] W. Erni et al. [Panda Collaboration], arXiv:0903.3905 [44] K. U. Can, G. Erkol, M. Oka, A. Ozpineci and T. T. [hep-ex]. Takahashi, Phys. Lett. B 719, 103 (2013). [17] U. Wiedner, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 66, 477 (2011). [45] J. Polchinski and M. J. Strassler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, [18] E. Prencipe et al. [PANDA Collaboration], AIP Conf. 031601 (2002). Proc. 1735, 060011 (2016). [46] A. Cherman, T. D. Cohen and E. S. Werbos, Phys. Rev. [19] T. Mizutani and A. Ramos, Phys. Rev. C 74, 065201 C 79, 045203 (2009). (2006). [47] J. Erdmenger, N. Evans and J. Grosse, JHEP 0701, 098 [20] Z. -w. Lin, C. M. Ko and B. Zhang, Phys. Rev. C 61, (2007) [hep-th/0605241]. 024904 (2000) . [48] J. Erdmenger, K. Ghoroku and I. Kirsch, JHEP 0709, [21] J. Hofmann and M.F.F Lutz, Nucl. Phys. A 763, 90 111 (2007) (2005). [49] K. Hashimoto, N. Ogawa and Y. Yamaguchi, JHEP [22] J. Haidenbauer, G. Krein, U.-G. Meiner and A. Sibirtsev, 1506, 040 (2015) Eur. Phys. J. A 33, 107 (2007). [50] N. R. F. Braga, M. A. Martin Contreras and S. Diles, [23] J. Haidenbauer, G. Krein, U.-G. Meiner and A. Sibirtsev, Europhys. Lett. 115, 31002 (2016). Eur. Phys. J. A 37, 55 (2008) . [51] Y. Liu and I. Zahed, Phys. Rev. D 95, no. 5, 056022 [24] J. Haidenbauer, G. Krein, U.-G. Meiner and L. Tolos, (2017) Eur. Phys. J. A 47, 18 (2011). [52] Y. Liu and I. Zahed, Phys. Lett. B 769, 314 (2017) [25] C. E. Fontoura, G. Krein and V. E. Vizcarra, Phys. Rev. [53] H. R. Grigoryan and A. V. Radyushkin, Phys. Lett. B C 87, 025206 (2013). 650, 421 (2007). [26] C. Garcia-Recio, V. K. Magas, T. Mizutani, J. Nieves, [54] J. J. Sakurai and D. Schildknecht, Phys. Lett. 40B, 121 A. Ramos, L. L. Salcedo and L. Tolos, Phys. Rev. D 79, (1972). 054004 (2009). [55] C. A. B. Bayona, H. Boschi-Filho, M. Ihl and [27] R. Casalbuoni, A. Deandrea, N. Di Bartolomeo, M. A. C. Torres, JHEP 1008, 122 (2010). R. Gatto, F. Feruglio and G. Nardulli, Phys. Rept. 281, [56] C. Patrignani et al. [Particle Data Group], Chin. Phys. 145 (1997). C 40, 100001 (2016). [28] A. V. Manohar and M. B. Wise, Camb. Monogr. Part. [57] J. F. Donoghue, E. Golowich and B. R. Holstein, Dynam- Phys. Nucl. Phys. Cosmol. 10, 1 (2000). ics of the standard model (Cambridge, New York, 2014). [29] J. Haidenbauer, T. Hippchen, K. Holinde, [58] N. Isgur, C. Morningstar and C. Reader, Phys. Rev. D B. Holzenkamp, V. Mull and J. Speth, Phys. Rev. 39, 1357 (1989). 18

[59] A. Bramon, E. Etim and M. Greco, Phys. Lett. B 41, [66] L. J. Reinders, H. Rubinstein and S. Yazaki, Phys. Rept. 609 (1972). 127, 1 (1985). [60] S. J. Brodsky and G. F. de Teramond, Phys. Rev. D 77, [67] C. McNeile, A. Bazavov, C. T. H. Davies, R. J. Dowdall, 056007 (2008) K. Hornbostel, G. P. Lepage and H. D. Trottier, Phys. [61] H. J. Kwee and R. F. Lebed, JHEP 0801, 027 (2008) Rev. D 87, no. 3, 034503 (2013) [62] H. Z. Sang and X. H. Wu, arXiv:1004.4392 [hep-ph]. [68] L. Chang, Y. X. Liu, M. S. Bhagwat, C. D. Roberts and [63] S. R. Amendolia et al. [NA7 Collaboration], Nucl. Phys. S. V. Wright, Phys. Rev. C 75, 015201 (2007) B 277, 168 (1986). [64] S. R. Amendolia et al., Phys. Lett. B 178, 435 (1986). [65] A. F. Krutov, R. G. Polezhaev and V. E. Troitsky, Phys. Rev. D 93, 036007 (2016).