A review of the open charm and open bottom systems

Hua-Xing Chen1, Wei Chen2, Xiang Liu3,4, Yan-Rui Liu5 and Shi-Lin Zhu6,7,8 1School of Physics and Beijing Key Laboratory of Advanced Nuclear Materials and Physics, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China 2Department of Physics and Engineering Physics, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, S7N 5E2, Canada 3School of Physical Science and Technology, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China 4Research Center for Hadron and CSR Physics, Lanzhou University and Institute of Modern Physics of CAS, Lanzhou 730000, China 5School of Physics and Key Laboratory of Particle Physics and Particle Irradiation (MOE), Shandong University, Jinan 250100, China 6School of Physics and State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China 7Collaborative Innovation Center of Quantum Matter, Beijing 100871, China 8Center of High Energy Physics, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] and [email protected]

September 2016

Abstract. Since the discovery of the first charmed meson in 1976, many open-charm and open-bottom hadrons were observed. In 2003 two narrow charm-strange states

Ds∗0(2317) and Ds1(2460) were discovered by the BaBar and CLEO Collaborations, respectively. After that, more excited heavy hadrons were reported. In this work, we review the experimental and theoretical progress in this field. arXiv:1609.08928v2 [hep-ph] 3 Mar 2017

PACS numbers: 14.40.Lb, 14.40.Nd, 14.20.Lq, 14.20.Mr, 14.40.Rt

Keywords: Charmed mesons, Bottom mesons, Charmed baryons, Bottom baryons, Exotic states

Submitted to: Rep. Prog. Phys.

Contents

1 Introduction4 CONTENTS 2

1.1 From QED to QCD ...... 4 1.2 Quark Model ...... 6 1.2.1 Quark potential models ...... 7 1.2.2 Coupled channel and screening effects ...... 10 1.2.3 Quark pair creation (QPC) models ...... 12 1.2.4 QCD potential ...... 13 1.3 Regge trajectories ...... 14 1.4 Heavy quark symmetry and effective Lagrangians ...... 16 1.5 QCD sum rules ...... 19 1.6 Unsettled issues ...... 22

2 Experimental progress on heavy hadrons 23 2.1 The charmed mesons ...... 24 2.1.1 D and D∗...... 24 ∗ ∗ 2.1.2 D0(2400), D1(2420), D1(2430), and D2(2460)...... 25 2.1.3 D(2550) and DJ (2580)...... 28 ∗ ∗ ∗ 0 2.1.4 D (2600), DJ (2650), and D1(2680) ...... 28 ∗ ∗ ∗ 0 2.1.5 D(2750), DJ (2740), D (2760), DJ (2760), D1(2760) , and ∗ − D3(2760) ...... 29 ∗ ∗ 0 2.1.6 DJ (3000), DJ (3000), and D2(3000) ...... 30 2.2 The charmed-strange mesons ...... 30 ∗ 2.2.1 Ds and Ds ...... 31 ∗ 2.2.2 Ds1(2536) and Ds2(2573)...... 32 ∗ 2.2.3 Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460)...... 32 ∗ 2.2.4 DsJ (2632)...... 33 ∗ 2.2.5 Ds1(2700)...... 34 ∗ ∗ ∗ 2.2.6 DsJ (2860), Ds1(2860), and Ds3(2860)...... 35 2.2.7 DsJ (3040)...... 36 2.3 The bottom mesons ...... 37 2.3.1 B and B∗...... 38 ∗ 0 ∗ 0 2.3.2 BJ (5732), B1(5721) , and B2 (5747) ...... 38 2.3.3 B(5970), BJ (5960), and BJ (5840)...... 40 2.4 The bottom-strange mesons ...... 41 ∗ 2.4.1 Bs and Bs ...... 42 ∗ 0 ∗ 0 2.4.2 BsJ (5850), Bs1(5830) , and Bs2(5840) ...... 42 2.5 The charmed baryons ...... 44 + 2.5.1 Λc ...... 46 + + 2.5.2 Λc(2595) and Λc(2625) ...... 46 + + + 2.5.3 Λc(2765) ,Λc(2880) , and Λc(2940) ...... 46 2.5.4 Σc(2455) and Σc(2520)...... 47 2.5.5 Σc(2800)...... 48 0 2.5.6 Ξc,Ξc, and Ξc(2645)...... 49 CONTENTS 3

2.5.7 Ξc(2790) and Ξc(2815)...... 49 0 2.5.8 Ξc(2930) ,Ξc(2980), Ξc(3055), Ξc(3080), and Ξc(3123)...... 49 0 0 2.5.9 Ωc and Ωc(2770) ...... 52 2.6 The bottom baryons ...... 52 0 2.6.1 Λb ...... 54 0 0 2.6.2 Λb(5912) and Λb(5920) ...... 54 ∗ 2.6.3 Σb and Σb ...... 55 0 ∗ 2.6.4 Ξb,Ξb and Ξb ...... 56 − 2.6.5 Ωb ...... 57 2.7 The doubly-charmed baryons ...... 57 2.8 The X(5568) ...... 58

3 Candidates of the conventional excited heavy mesons 59 3.1 The charmed mesons ...... 60

3.1.1 D(2550) and DJ (2580)...... 62 ∗ ∗ 3.1.2 D (2600) and DJ (2650)...... 64 3.1.3 D(2750) and DJ (2740)...... 65 ∗ ∗ ∗ 0 ∗ − 3.1.4 D (2760), DJ (2760), D1(2760) and D3(2760) ...... 67 ∗ ∗ 3.1.5 DJ (3000), DJ (3000) and D2(3000)...... 67 3.2 The charmed-strange mesons ...... 68 ∗ 3.2.1 Ds1(2700)...... 69 ∗ ∗ ∗ 3.2.2 DsJ (2860), Ds1(2860) and Ds3(2860)...... 72 3.2.3 DsJ (3040)...... 74 3.3 The bottom mesons ...... 74 ∗ 0 ∗ 0 3.3.1 BJ (5732), B1(5721) and B2 (5747) ...... 75 3.3.2 B(5970), BJ (5960) and BJ (5840)...... 77 3.4 The bottom-strange mesons ...... 79 ∗ 0 ∗ 0 3.4.1 BsJ (5850), Bs1(5830) and Bs2(5840) ...... 79

4 Candidates for the singly heavy baryons 82 4.1 The charmed baryons ...... 84

4.1.1 Λc(2595), Λc(2625), Ξc(2790) and Ξc(2815)...... 87 4.1.2 Λc(2765), Λc(2880), Λc(2940) and Σc(2800)...... 89 4.1.3 Ξc(2930), Ξc(2980), Ξc(3055), Ξc(3080) and Ξc(3123)...... 94 4.2 The bottom baryons ...... 95

4.2.1 Λb(5912) and Λb(5920)...... 96

5 The doubly and triply charmed baryons 98

6 Candidates for the exotic heavy hadrons 102 ∗ 6.1 The Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) ...... 102 6.1.1 Molecular scheme...... 102 6.1.2 Tetraquark scheme...... 106 CONTENTS 4

6.1.3 Conventional charmed-strange mesons with coupled-channel effects.107 6.1.4 Lattice QCD simulation...... 111 6.1.5 Short summary...... 112 6.2 The X(5568) ...... 113

7 Outlook and summary 117

1. Introduction

1.1. From QED to QCD

There are four fundamental interactions in nature: the electromagnetic interaction, the weak interaction, the strong interaction, and gravitation. The electromagnetic interaction occurs between electrically charged particles, which is responsible for electricity and magnetism as well as light. We encounter the electromagnetic interaction and gravity every day. Quantum Electrodynamics (QED) is the underlying theory of the electromagnetic interactions. Its Lagrangian reads

QED  µ  1 µν L = ψ¯ iγ Dµ m ψ FµνF , (1) − − 4 where the gauge covariant derivative is defined as

Dµ = ∂µ + ieAµ . (2)

Here, ψ(x) denotes the electron/positron field, Aµ is the electromagnetic field, Fµν = ∂µAν ∂νAµ, and γµ are Dirac matrices. − The electromagnetic interaction holds the electrons and protons together inside a single atom and leads to the gross, fine, and hyperfine structures of the line spectra. The electromagnetic interactions between the atoms appear as various chemical bonds, which bind the atoms to form the molecules and drive the chemical reactions. The residual electromagnetic interaction (together with some other sources) between the neutral molecules becomes the van der Waals force, which plays a fundamental role in condensed matter physics etc. The strong interaction, another fundamental interaction that occurs between quarks and gluons, is similar to the electromagnetic interaction in some aspects. In particle physics, Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) is the underlying theory of strong interactions. Its Lagrangian is similar to the QED one:

QCD  µ  1 a µν L = ψ¯i iγ (Dµ)ij mδij ψj G G (3) − − 4 µν a with the covariant derivative, which has the definition a a (Dµ)ij = ∂µδij igA T . (4) − µ ij a Here, ψi(x) is the quark/antiquark field and Aµ is the gluon field, both of which a a carry the color charge. γµ are Dirac matrices and Tij = λij/2 are the generators CONTENTS 5

of the SU(3) gauge group. The tensor of the gluon field strength is defined as a a a abc b c abc G = ∂µA ∂νA + gf A A , where f denotes the antisymmetric structure µν ν − µ µ ν constant of the group. Similar to the electromagnetic interaction, the strong interaction also has several ranges. On a larger scale about 1 to 3 fm, its residual strong interaction between the nucleons becomes the nuclear force, which binds the protons and neutrons into atomic nuclei. On the smaller scale less than 1 fm, the strong QCD interaction confines the quarks and gluons to form various color-singlet hadrons. The gross, fine and hyperfine structures also exist in the hadron spectra. An ideal platform to study these structures is the heavy hadrons containing one charm or bottom quark. In recent years there have been significant experimental developments on these heavy hadrons [1,2]. We shall review all these experimental progresses in Sec.2. We try to put them together into an integrated whole to let the readers know the current experimental status. We shall also review the experimental information on the four-quark state candidate X(5568), which was recently reported by the DØ Collaboration [3], but not confirmed by the LHCb and CMS collaborations [4,5]. However, different from QED, QCD is a non-Abelian quantum field theory. Because of the difficulty in understanding the nonperturbative nature of QCD at low energy, one has to rely on the effective theoretical approaches to study hadron properties. Various methods reflecting several aspects of QCD have been proposed, such as the relativistic quark model, the constitute quark model, the chiral quark model, the quark pair creation (QPC) model, the Regge trajectory phenomenology, the chiral unitary model, the QCD sum rule, and some effective Lagrangian theories/approaches, etc. Among these models, the most famous one is the Godfrey-Isgur (GI) relativized quark model [6,7], which we shall pay particular attention to in the present review. Besides these models, the coupled-channel effect and the screening effect are sometimes important. In this report we shall review the theoretical and experimental progresses on open- flavored heavy hadrons containing the charm and bottom quarks, and pay particular attention to their mass spectra and theoretical interpretations. In this section we first give an outline of the widely used quark level methods and hadron level methods, and the detailed results will be presented separately in the subsequent sections. In Sec.3 we review the conventional excited charmed and bottom mesons. In Sec.4 we review the conventional excited charmed and bottom baryons. In Sec.5 we review the doubly and triply heavy baryons. We also refer to Ref. [8] for the recent theoretical progresses about heavy baryons. In Sec.6 we discuss candidates of the exotic states, including the ∗ Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) as well as the recently observed X(5568). An outlook and a brief summary will be given in Sec.7. In this review we shall not discuss the top hadrons, because the top quark decays weakly before it transforms into a hadron [9, 10, 11]. For the Bc system, the readers may consult the references [12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24]. For the weak decays of the open-flavor mesons, there are semileptonic decay + ∗ + ∗ process (e.g. B D (2460)` ν`) and nonleptonic process (e.g. B D DsJ ). For → 2 → CONTENTS 6

the former weak decays, the Isgur, Scora, Grinstein and Wise (ISGW) formalism is applicable [25, 26]. One factorizes the matrix element into a leptonic and a hadronic part. The hadronic part can be expanded with some form factors which contain the nonperturbative strong interaction effects and can be evaluated with various methods (see references in [27]). For the latter weak process, one may use the factorization approximation [28]. The leptonic decay is also possible. The study procedure is very similar to that used for the charmonium decays [29]. The heavy hadrons are also closely related to the studies of the weak interaction and CP violation, which we omit. Interested readers may consult the excellent reviews by the Heavy Flavor Averaging Group (HFAG) [2, 30], which report the world averages of the measurements of their branching fractions, lifetimes, neutral meson mixing parameters, semileptonic decay parameters, CP violation parameters, and CKM matrix elements, etc. We also note that there have accumulated huge experimental data in hadron spectroscopy in the past decade, and the theoretical progress is also significant. New phenomena on the higher hadrons provide us a good opportunity to understand the strong interaction deeper. There exist nice reviews for different types of hadrons in the literature. For example, there are reviews on baryons [8, 31], hybrid states [32], heavy quark pentaquarks and tetraquarks [33, 34], exotic hadrons [35, 36], and heavy hadrons in nuclear matter [37]. See also reviews in Refs. [31, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52].

1.2. Quark Model

According to the conventional quark model (QM), the mesons are composed of the quark-antiquark pair and baryons composed of three quarks. Such a simple model has been very successful in explaining hadron properties. However, recent progress on hadron spectra is challenging the naive quark model [1, 33]. The challenges mainly come from the hadrons containing heavy quarks, i.e. charmonium-like XYZ mesons, Qq¯- type mesons, and Qqq-type baryons (Q denotes the heavy charm/bottom quark, and q denotes the light up/down/strange quark). The presence of the heavy quark degrees of freedom provides a useful handle to explore the candidates of the exotic hadrons. For the excited states, more decay channels are allowed and the coupled channel effects due to the nearby hadron-hadron thresholds affect significantly the hadron properties. For ∗ example, the low mass puzzle of the Ds0(2317) is difficult to understand if one does not consider the contributions from the DK channel [53]. Up to now, all types of the QM mesons including qq¯, Qq¯ and QQ¯ have been found.

But for the baryons, even the lowest QQq baryon (Ξcc) has not been confirmed, and no QQQ baryon is observed at all. Although there are good candidates of exotic hadrons beyond the QM assignment, e.g. the glueballs and hybrid states, their confirmation is still on the way. The study of hadron spectra helps us understand how the strong interaction binds the quarks and gluons into matter fields and find out the relation CONTENTS 7

between QM and QCD. In recent years, the development on experimental measurements makes it possible

to investigate excited hadrons. New open-flavored hadrons (HQ), especially the mesons, have been observed at ee, pp, and ep colliders. There, the produced hard heavy quark becomes a softer heavy quark by emitting gluons or massive gauge bosons and then

fragments into HQ nonperturbatively. The hadrons are usually detected in B (Bs) decays + − or inclusive productions, i.e. e e QQ¯ HQ + X, pp HQ + X, ep HQ + X. → → → → ∗ Many interesting states were observed such as the charmed-strange mesons Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460), which are lower than the QM prediction and were discussed widely in terms of the various configurations like the molecule, tetraquark, and coupled channel effect. Since the mass splittings between the higher states are smaller than those of the lower states, different assignments (orbital or radial excitation states) are possible and their nature needs detailed investigations. Before reviewing the widely used quark level methods and hadron level methods, we would also like to note that the basic scales in QCD are the ΛQCD, the quark masses 0 mqs and the scale of chiral symmetry breaking Λχ. Several symmetries of QCD are hidden behind these scales. For example, in the limit mu,d,s 0, QCD has the chiral → symmetry which is spontaneously broken below the scale Λχ 1 GeV. The c/b quark is ∼ much heavier than the u/d/s quark. Contrary to the chiral symmetry, there is another symmetry in the heavy quark sector. In the infinitely heavy limit of the heavy quark mass, the QCD Lagrangian has a heavy quark symmetry which has two meanings: (1) heavy quark flavor symmetry (HQFS) which is a symmetry for the exchange of heavy quark flavors b c; and (2) heavy quark spin symmetry (HQSS) which is a symmetry ↔ for the exchange of heavy quark spins Q Q. This spin-flavor symmetry plays a crucial ↑ ↔↓ role in understanding the properties of hadrons containing heavy quark. Both the quark level and hadron level investigations involve this important symmetry.

1.2.1. Quark potential models

The basic approach to study hadron spectra is the quark potential model. Generally speaking, the potential includes the contributions from the color Coulomb interaction, spin-orbit interaction, spin-spin interaction, and quark confinement. The first three parts result from the one-gluon-exchange force [54] between free quarks while the last part is added phenomenologically to meet the fact that the quark interaction becomes stronger and stronger with the increasing distance and thus no colored free quark exists. Since the potential is not an experimental observable, any versions of the potential model that can reproduce the hadron masses are acceptable. The confinement potential cannot be obtained analytically from QCD now. There exist various types, e.g. the linear potential [55, 56], logarithmic [57], power-law [58], or error-function [59]. When considering the electromagnetic properties, one needs the additional one-photon-exchange interaction terms. Before the observation of the exotic ∗ Ds0(2317), Ds1(2460), and X(3872), the quark model gives satisfactory descriptions for CONTENTS 8

the hadron spectra except a few exceptions, e.g. the Roper resonance and Λ(1405). The interpretation of these candidates of the exotic mesons requires the important coupled channel effects. The quark potential model has to be improved to account for the properties of the new hadrons. The most famous potential is given in the Godfrey-Isgur (GI) relativized quark model [6,7]. Its Hamiltonian includes a relativistic kinetic term and a momentum-

dependent potential Veff (p, r): 2 2
1/2 2 2
1/2 (p, r) = p + m + p + m + Veff (p, r) . (5) H 1 2 The effective potential Veff (p, r) contains two main ingredients: one is a short-distance interaction of one-gluon-exchange, and the other is a long-distance interaction of linear confining. The latter was firstly employed by the Cornell group and later suggested by

the lattice QCD. This potential Veff (p, r) can be obtained by the on-shell qq¯ scattering amplitudes in the center-of-mass frame, and can be transformed to be the standard

non-relativistic potential Veff (r):

X  conf hyp SO(cm) SO(tp)  Veff (r) Hij (r) + Hij (r) + Hij (r) + Hij (r) . (6) → i

In these expressions, b and c are constants, Si is the spin operator for i-th quark,

L = rij pi = rij pj, and the relation between Fi and the Gell-Mann matrix is × ∗ − × Fi = λi/2 ( λ /2) for quarks (antiquarks). − i This model is embedded relativistic effects mainly in two ways. First, a smearing function is introduced to incorporate the effects of an internal motion inside a hadron and non-locality of interactions between (anti)quarks. Secondly, a general formula of the potential should depend on the center-of-mass momentum of the interacting quarks, which effect can be taken into account by introducing the momentum-dependent factors CONTENTS 9

in the interactions. With the GI model, one can get the hadron spectra as well as wave functions by diagonalizing the Hamiltonian (5) with a simple harmonic oscillator (SHO) basis through a variational method. More details of the GI model can be found in Refs. [6,7], and it was recently updated in Refs. [60, 61]. When one focuses mainly on the mass splittings of the hadrons with the same quark content in the same multiplet, one may adopt the chromomagnetic interaction and the above Hamiltonian can be reduced to a simple form X eff H = mi + HCM (11) i X X Cij = meff F F S S , i m m i j i j i − iconstituent quark model [69], the one loop correction for the quark potential is considered in order to include different flavored quarks in a unified description. In Refs. [70, 71], a three-dimensional relativistic QCD-motivated potential model was developed to discuss the hadron properties. The wave function of the bound quark- antiquark state satisfies the quasipotential equation Z 3 1 2 2 d q (b (M) p )ψM (p) = 3 V (p, q; M)ψM (q), (12) 2µR − (2π) 4 2 2 3 where µR = [M (m1 m2)]/(4M ) is the relativistic reduced mass with M (m1,2) − − 2 2 2 2 2 2 being the meson (quark) mass, b (M) = [M (m1 + m2) ][M (m1 m2) ]/(4M ), − − − and the quasipotential operator is defined by

h4 µ ν V (p, q; M) =u ¯1(p)¯u2( p) αsDµν(k)γ γ (13) − 3 1 2 V µ S i + V (k)Γ Γ2;µ + V (k) u1(q)u2( q) . conf 1 conf − In the quasipotential, αs is the QCD coupling constant, Dµν(k) is the gluon propagator

in the Coulomb gauge (k = p q), γµ (Γµ(k)) are the Dirac matrices (effective long- − range vertex), u(p) denotes the quark spinor, and the vector (scalar) confining potential

in the nonrelativistic limit reduces to the linear type VV (r)(VS(r)): V V (r) = (1 )(Ar + B) , (14) conf − S Vconf (r) = (Ar + B) , CONTENTS 10 where  is the mixing coefficient, and these two equations further produce V S Vconf (r) = Vconf (r) + Vconf (r) = Ar + B. (15) The structure of the spin-dependent interaction is also in agreement with Ref. [65]. One obtains the meson spectrum by solving this quasipotential equation. This approach was applied to the heavy-light mesons, doubly heavy baryons, heavy quarkonia, and Bc mesons in the following studies [72, 73, 74, 75]. Another quasipotential model was constructed with the spectator equation in Ref. [76], where the spectator equation is one of a class of three-dimensional reductions of the Bethe-Salpeter equation. This relativistic quark model is a type of the covariant extension of the GI model. One may consult Refs. [77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102] for the other potential approaches. Because of the spontaneously broken chiral symmetry of QCD, the massless

Goldstone bosons appear below the scale Λχ. They correspond to the lowest pseudoscalar mesons. Between the confinement scale ΛQCD and the chiral symmetry scale Λχ, an effective approach, the chiral quark model, was proposed in Ref. [103]. The fundamental fields are quarks, gluons and pseudoscalar Goldstone bosons. When studying hadron spectra with this model, one usually considers the one-gluon-exchange interaction and one-pion-exchange interaction. Similar to the linear sigma model, the exchange of the scalar mesons can also be included. One may further include the vector meson exchanges to compensate part of the contributions from the gluon exchanges. From various physical considerations, different versions of the chiral quark model have been proposed [104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111].

1.2.2. Coupled channel and screening effects

The GI model has achieved a great success in describing the meson spectrum [6]. However, there still exist some discrepancies between its predictions and recent ∗ experimental observations. For example, the masses of the Ds0(2317) [112, 113, 114, 115], Ds1(2460) [113, 114, 115, 116], and X(3872) [117] deviate from those expected by the GI model. These discrepancies are partly caused by coupled channel effects [118, 119, 120, 121], which appear to be the most important for the states ∗ lying the near kinematic thresholds [60, 61, 120]. For example, the Ds0(2317) is close to the DK threshold and its properties are affected significantly by the DK channel [53, 119, 120, 122]. The coupled channel effects lower the bare mass of hadron in QM. There are actually two types of the coupled channel effects: (1) without the quark pair creation or annihilation, and (2) with the quark pair creation or annihilation. In the former case, e.g. the mixing of the two J P = 1+ Qq¯ mesons or the mixing of the S- and D-waves interactions for the deuteron, the formalism is straightforward. In the latter case, one has to consider the transitions between the 2-quark (3-quark) state and 4-quark (5-quark) or more complicated Fock components by specifying the quark pair creation CONTENTS 11

3 mechanism, e.g. P0 mechanism, and the calculation is usually more complicated. Besides the explicit inclusion of the created quark-antiquark pair in the coupled channel calculation [118, 119, 120, 121], one can also adjust the mass spectrum by screening the color charges at the distance larger than about 1 fm [123], where the light quark-antiquark pairs are spontaneously created. This vacuum polarization effect softens (or screens) the long distance linear potential. For the low-lying hadrons, the creation of the quark-antiquark pair may be neglected while its contribution affects significantly the higher mass hadrons. This is the so-called screening effect and has been confirmed by the unquenched Lattice QCD and some holographic models [124, 125, 126, 127]. Some literatures studied the meson mass spectrum by considering the screening effect. Li and Chao adopted the screened potential to compute the charmonium spectrum [128]. Li, Meng, and Chao compared the charmonium spectra predicted by the coupled-channel model and the screened potential model and found that the two models have the similar global features in describing the charmonium spectrum since they describe roughly the same effect [129]. Mezzoir and Gonzalez investigated the highly excited light mesons by flattening the linear potential br above a certain saturation distance rs [130]. Song et al. studied the charmed and charmed-strange meson systems by considering the screening effect [131, 132]. Recently, Deng et al. investigated systematically the mass spectrum of bottomonia and charmonia with a nonrelativistic screened potential model in Refs. [133, 134].

4 αs Figure 1. The r dependence of V (r) = 3 r + br (dashed line) and the screened −µr − 4 α b(1 e ) potential V (r) = s + − (solid line). The dotted line shows the asymptotic − 3 r µ limit of the latter potential. Taken from Ref. [128].

To take into account the screening effects, one replaces the linear confining potential in Eq. (5) by [135, 136, 137] b(1 e−µr) br V scr(r) = − . (16) → µ It is obvious that V scr(r) behaves like a linear potential br at short distances (r 1 ) but  µ CONTENTS 12

b 1 approaches to µ at long distances (r µ ). A schematic comparison for the potential  −µr V (r) = 4 αs + br and V (r) = 4 αs + b(1−e ) is given in Fig.1. The previous bare − 3 r − 3 r µ quark model is sometimes called the quenched quark model, where the creation of a quark-antiquark pair is not included. To a large extent, the model with the screened potential is equivalent to the unquenched quark model with the inclusion of the quark-antiquark pair. Therefore, the screened model is sometimes also denoted as the unquenched quark model. Because the potential is revised at long distance, the mass spectra for the lower hadrons are consistent with the quenched models. For the higher excitations of hadron, the coupled channel effects due to the created quark pair shift the hadron masses to a lower/higher position. It is not difficult to understand, from Fig.1, that the spectrum for higher hadrons is shrunk with the screened potential, i.e. the flattened screened potential suppresses the masses of the higher hadrons. Therefore, the screened potential effectively incorporates the coupled channel effects. A detailed explanation of how to introduce the screening effect into the GI model can be found in Ref. [131].

1.2.3. Quark pair creation (QPC) models

In studying the strong decays of the higher conventional hadrons or studying their spectra with coupled channel effects, the creation of a quark-antiquark pair is inevitable in quark models. The quantum numbers of the quark pair depend on the QCD mechanism. Because of the limitation of understanding the nonperturbative QCD, we have to adopt some quark pair creation (QPC) models to study the decay properties. The widely used one was proposed by Micu in Ref. [138]. She assumed that the quark-antiquark pair was produced with the vacuum quantum numbers (J PC = 0++). 2S+1 3 3 Since the pair is in the state LJ = P0, this model is called P0 or TPZ model. It was found that the observed partial widths were reasonably explained although no explicit quark model wavefunctions were assumed. In the following works by the Orsay group [139, 140, 141, 142], the model was developed by including explicit nonrelativistic wave functions. After the creation of the quark pair, the rearrangement with the initial quarks gives an initial mock state. When calculating the decay widths, one gets the decay amplitude through the combination of the overlap integrals in spin, flavor, color, and orbital spaces for the initial mock state and the final state. Up to now, this formalism has been widely adopted in various processes. The relation of this model to the QCD decay mechanisms was discussed for the open flavor meson decays in Ref. [143]. Another microscopic model for the strong decays was developed by the Cornell group after the discovery of the charmonium [55, 56, 144]. It was assumed that the qq¯ pair was produced from the linear confining interaction. Since this model is mainly used in the heavy quarkonium systems, we do not discuss it further. When the final states involve the soft pions, one may also use the chiral quark model to study the strong decay properties. In this model, the degrees of freedom are CONTENTS 13

quarks, gluons and pseudoscalar pions. One may also extend the model to incorporate the other scalar and vector mesons. The coupling of the light mesons with the heavy quarks is assumed to be weak. When discussing the heavy hadron decays, one treats the heavy quark(s) as a spectator(s). The decay amplitude relies on the coupling constants

in the Lagrangian which are easy to determine from the known data, e.g. gπNN . Isgur et al. used this formalism to discuss the hadron decays [6, 145]. The electromagnetic decays can also be discussed with the quark-photon interaction in the spectator method. When discussing E1 and M1 decays, one may consult Refs. [29, 55, 61] for details. In Fig.2, we show the radiative decays of the charmed and charm-strange mesons, where the results are taken from Ref. [146].

Ds∗

GeV Ds D∗

2.6 D Ds2 Ds 1

D2 Ds1 D1 D1 2.4 D0

Ds0

2.2

Ds∗

2.0 D∗

Ds

D 1.8 + + + + + + + + 0− 1− 0 1 1 2 0− 1− 0 1 1 2

Figure 2. Radiative decays of the charmed and charm-strange mesons. The solid (dashed) line indicates the E1 (M1) transition.

1.2.4. QCD potential

In the above discussions we have introduced several quark potential models, containing various potentials among quarks and gluons. However, all these potentials are “phenomenological”, and a complete derivation of the potential from QCD still seems to be difficult. The QCD potential has been studied using various methods equivalent to QCD, such as the lattice QCD and nonrelativistic QCD (NRQCD), and we refer interested readers to Refs. [22, 40, 41, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158] for more information. These two types of potentials (fox example, the potentials used in quark potential models and the static potential observed by the Wilson loops in lattice QCD) are not exactly the same. In the present view we shall pay more attention to the quark potential models, which have been successfully applied to study heavy hadron spectra, but note that the QCD potential is also important to understand properties of hadrons such as the heavy quarkonium states. Particularly, a method to calculate the quark and anti- quark potential at finite quark masses in lattice QCD was proposed in Ref. [159], which was latter applied in Refs. [160, 161, 162] to discuss the potential description of the CONTENTS 14 charmonia and charmed-strange mesons. See the Tables VI and IX of Ref. [161], where the authors compared the mass spectra of the charmonia and charmed-strange mesons derived from lattice QCD and quark potential models [163, 164].

1.3. Regge trajectories

Another widely used approach in studying the hadron spectra is the well-known Regge theory [165, 166, 167], which preceded the QCD. The Regge theory was based on Lorentz invariance, unitary and analyticity of the scattering matrix and has nothing with quarks and gluons. It is a successful fundamental theory of strong interactions at very high energies and still an indispensable tool in phenomenological studies. The widely used notation in hadron physics is the Regge trajectory. There are two types of solutions of the Schr¨odingerequation for a potential: bound state problem and scattering problem. It is well known, e.g. with the Coulomb potential, that one may derive the solution of the scattering problem (E > 0) from that of the bound state problem (E < 0) by treating the principal quantum number n as an imaginary number. In the scattering problem, the angular momentum ` is usually taken as a physically meaningful integer value. In fact, this quantum number from the quantization has little to do with the interaction forces and is simply a parameter of the Schr¨odingerequation. By considering the unphysical complex angular momentum `, Regge studied the analytical properties of the scattering amplitude in Refs. [165, 166]. He found that the singularities of the amplitude in the complex ` plane are (Regge) poles which correspond to bound states or resonances for physical angular momenta. In a 2 2 scattering process, the poles are determined by an equation like α(t) = ` → with α(t) being a Regge trajectory. The t channel Mandelstam variable is used because Regge poles generally arise in this channel. An interesting observation in Regge theory is that α(t) is approximately a linear function of t: α(t) α(0) + tα0. With the crossing ≈ symmetry, one may relate the Regge poles to the existing s channel hadrons. Therefore, each hadron can be viewed as a Regge particle or a Reggeon. Then the mass square of a hadron is linearly related to the angular momentum (` J once spin is considered). → The Regge’s original work does not involve a confining potential. Chew and Frautschi applied the theory to the case of strong interactions and found mesons and baryons lie on linear trajectories of the (J, M 2) plane [168, 169]. Hadrons having the same internal quantum numbers are on the same trajectory. Thus, the Chew-Frautschi plot of Regge trajectories provides a useful way of hadron classification. After QCD as the fundamental theory of strong interactions was established, there were lots of studies to understand the Regge trajectory and the Regge particles with the quark-gluon interactions [40, 43, 47, 170]. Among them, the most simple and straightforward explanation towards the linear Regge trajectories was probably the one proposed by Nambu in 1978 [171, 172], where the quark and antiquark are assumed to be tied by the gluon flux tube. He further assumed it to be a uniform flux tube, and the light quarks rotating at its ends move at the speed of light at radius R. The mass CONTENTS 15

originating from this flux tube can be evaluated to be Z R σdr M = 2 = πσR , (17) p 2 0 1 v (r) − where σ is the string tension, i.e., the mass density per unit length. The angular momentum of this flux tube can also be evaluated to be Z R σrv(r)dr πσR2 J = 2 = + c0 . (18) p 2 0 1 v (r) 2 − Hence, J and M 2 can be linearly related M 2 J = + c00 , (19) 2πσ where c0 and c00 are both constants. See also explanations in Refs. [40, 43, 47, 173]. If the separation between the quark and antiquark is larger than the flux tube size, an updated picture was developed in Ref. [174], assuming that a linear potential acts to confine the quarks in hadrons. Then one can arrive at more general linear Regge trajectories M 2 = αJ + βn + c with α = β , (20) where M is the mass, J is the spin, n is the principle quantum number, α and β are slopes, and c is a constant. See also discussions in Ref. [175]. This linear behaviour is also expected by the dual amplitudes [176] and the AdS/QCD model [177, 178, 179, 180]. It is supported and can be applied to study various hadron spectra, such as the light non-strange mesons [181, 182, 183, 184]. As an example, the light vector mesons ρ,

ω, f2(1270), a2(1320), ω3(1670), ρ3(1690), a4(2040), f4(2050), ρ5(2350), a6(2450), and f6(2510) altogether compose one Regge trajectory, as shown in Fig. 5 of Ref. [47]. We refer interested readers to read Refs. [43, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189] for more information. An important feature of Eq. (20) is that the slopes of orbital and radial trajectories are almost equal (α = β). However, for heavy mesons it was found in Ref. [75] that the α values are systematically smaller than the β ones. See also Refs. [173, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197] for more discussions. In reality, the linear property is just the leading order phenomenon in the Regge theory. Various studies have shown that the Regge trajectories can be nonlinear [194, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203]. Although the string-like models or semirelativistic potential models may give a linear relation between the hadron mass squared and its quantum numbers, the universal behavior for both light and heavy quark systems is difficult to obtain in a natural way [204, 205]. The study of Regge trajectories of hadron spectra is helpful to understand the strong interactions from a different viewpoint and the open flavor hadrons are good objects for such studies. We shall briefly discuss Regge trajectories for both the heavy mesons and heavy baryons in Sec.3 and Sec.4, respectively. CONTENTS 16

1.4. Heavy quark symmetry and effective Lagrangians

One may use the heavy quark symmetry to study hadron properties by constructing effective field theories (EFTs) at both the quark level and hadron level. The well known EFTs for the heavy hadrons are heavy quark effective theory (HQET), NRQCD, and heavy hadron effective theories. These effective theories are always related with some scales which constrain their application region. Contrary to the phenomenological models, the Lagrangians in effective theories are constructed according to QCD symmetries and the interaction terms are organized systematically by some expansion parameter(s). The effective theories are model-independent.

In the limit mQ , the one-gluon exchange (OGE) interaction between a heavy → ∞ quark and another light quark is independent of the heavy quark mass, which results in the heavy quark flavor symmetry and heavy quark spin symmetry. This can be easily seen from the quark model potential in Eq. (5). Now the OGE potential contains only the Coulomb part and the spin-orbit part of the light quarks. In other words, the heavy quark looks like a static color source for the light quarks. This picture is similar to the atom system and therefore the hadron properties are mainly determined by the light degree of freedom (d.o.f.). In this limit, the momentum of a heavy quark may

be written as pQµ = mQvµ + kµ, where the four-velocity vµ is fixed and the residue

momentum kµ ΛQCD. The typical momentum of the light d.o.f. is also the scale of ∼ ΛQCD. For convenience, one may revise the description for the heavy quark interaction by eliminating the large parameter mQ in order that the obtained effective field theory (HQET [206]) describes physics below the scale mQ. Its Lagrangian can be expanded in 1/mQ. In the QCD Lagrangian, one may replace the original quark field Q(x) by the −imQv·x velocity-dependent fields Hv(x) and hv(x): Q(x) = e [Hv(x) + hv(x)], where the rescaled fields Hv(x) and hv(x) satisfy 1 + v/ 1 v/ Hv = Hv, − hv = hv. (21) 2 2 Substituting these two fields into the QCD Lagrangian for the heavy quark sector (Q) = Q¯(iD/ mQ)Q, one gets LQCD − (Q) = H¯v(iv D)Hv h¯v(iv D + 2mQ)hv + H¯viD/hv + h¯viD/Hv, (22) LQCD · − · where hv corresponds obviously to an excitation with the mass 2mQ (partly related to the antiquark d.o.f.). Since 2mQ is the energy for the creation of a heavy quark-antiquark pair and is above the scale that HQET is applicable, this field can be “integrated out”.

Therefore, the field Hv annihilates a heavy quark but does not create the corresponding antiquark. Then the resulting HQET Lagrangian containing only Hv is organized like 1 1 HQET = 0 + 1 + 2 2 + , (23) L L mQ L mQ L ···

where the leading Lagrangian 0 = H¯v(iv D)Hv has the exact heavy quark spin-flavor L · symmetry. The effects of hv are encoded in the coefficients of this EFT. If one studies CONTENTS 17

the system containing heavy antiquarks, the antiquark can be treated in a similar way. Now, one projects away quarks. A more detailed discussion is given in Ref. [207]. HQET is applicable to hadrons containing only one heavy quark. For hadrons containing two or more heavy quarks, the correct EFT is NRQCD [208, 209]. In

HQET, the leading order Lagrangian does not depend on mQ while the kinetic energy 2 of the heavy quark k /2mQ is treated as a 1/mQ correction. For a heavy quarkonium system, the kinetic energy is needed to stabilize a QQ¯ meson and cannot be treated as a perturbation. Then the leading term in NRQCD expansion does not conserve both HQFS and HQSS. In this frame, the energy and three-momentum of the heavy quarks scale in a different way but their ultraviolet (UV) cutoffs are considered to be the same 2 νNR. The order relation of the scales is ΛQCD mQv mQv νNR mQ, where ∼    v c is the velocity of the heavy quark in the meson rest frame. The v αs(mQv)  ∼ and the relativistic corrections of order (v2)n is more important than the perturbation 2n corrections of order αs (mQ)[209]. In NRQCD, the Lagrangian or effective operators are formulated with the expansion parameter v/c and the contributions from the hard scale ( mQ) are integrated out. Therefore, the Lagrangian in NRQCD is a reorganized ∼ HQET Lagrangian. Now the heavy quark kinetic energy is of leading order. When applying this frame to the decay or production processes, the decay width or production cross section can be factorized into the short-range coefficients and long- range matrix elements. The former part (the coefficients of the NRQCD effective operators) can be computed perturbatively in the expansion of αs(mQ) while the latter part needs to be evaluated nonperturbatively. If one studies physics below the scale mQv, one obtains the potential NRQCD (pNRQCD) by integrating out the relevant d.o.f. further [210]. More detailed discussions about EFTs for the QQ¯ system can be found in Ref. [153]. Analogous to the NRQCD for the heavy quarkonium, one may construct effective theories for QQq and QQQ baryons [211, 212]. The NRQCD framework is applicable to the production of such baryons [213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218]. The idea of hadron EFT is based on hadron classifications according to HQSS. To be specific, we focus on the Qq¯ mesons first. Let L, sQ, sq, S, j, and J denote the orbital angular momentum, heavy quark spin, light quark spin, total spin, total angular momentum of light d.o.f., and total angular momentum, respectively. Now, the usual coupling type J~ = L~ + (~sQ + ~sq)S is reduced to the type J~ = ~sQ + (L~ + ~sq)j. In the latter coupling type, the interaction mediator is the chromo-electric gluon, similar to a photon. As a result of the heavy-quark-independent interaction, the two mesons with the same (L, j) form a degenerate doublet. The mostly mentioned doublets are the − − ∗ + + ∗ 0 + + ∗ low-lying (0 , 1 ) = (D,D ), (0 , 1 ) = (D0,D1), and (1 , 2 ) = (D1,D2). With the observation of more and more Qq¯ mesons, one may also find possible doublets with radial excitations [219]. Similar to the Qq¯ mesons, the Qqq baryons also form spin doublets (the lowest state ΛQ forms a spin singlet since sqq = 0). Now, the Pauli principle works for light quarks and the relation between flavor, spin, and orbital angular momentum must be 1 + 3 + considered. Therefore the ground state doublet (sqq = 1) is ( 2 , 2 ) in the sextet CONTENTS 18

representation of flavor SU(3). Up to now, quite a few excited charmed baryons have been observed experimentally. Cheng and Chua discussed their strong decays in Refs. [220, 221]. Contrary to the Qqq baryons, the Pauli principle works for the heavy quarks in the QQq baryons. For the QQq ground state, the spin of the heavy diquark is 1 since their color representation is the antisymmetric 3¯c. The resulting doubly heavy baryons also 1 + 3 + ¯ form a degenerate doublet ( 2 , 2 ). The QQq baryons and Qq mesons have identical configurations of the light d.o.f. Their properties are related by the doubly heavy diquark-antiquark symmetry in the heavy quark limit [212, 222, 223]. For example, one can predict the relation for the hyperfine splittings between the ground baryons 3 and ground mesons mJ= 3 mJ= 1 = (mP ∗ mP ) once symmetry breaking effects are 2 − 2 4 − considered. Similar relations for the Qqq baryons and the proposed TQQ (Q¯Qqq¯ ) mesons can also be predicted. The heavy quark symmetry controls the transformation of the heavy quark sector of the open-flavor hadrons. The transformation of the light quark sector is determined by the chiral symmetry. Both of them are very useful in the study of the properties of heavy ∗ hadrons. In studying Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460), Bardeen, Eichten, and Hill proposed to assign them into the (0+, 1+) doublet which belongs to a chiral multiplet together with the lowest (0−, 1−) doublet [224]. In their analysis, the Qq¯ system is viewed as a constituent quark which is tethered by the heavy quark. In the case without the heavy quark, the chirally symmetric phase of QCD needs the massless quark and the symmetry spontaneously breaking results in the massless pions. But now, the confinement forces the “tethered” constituent quark states in the chirally symmetric phase to become the parity-doubled bound states. They transform as the linear representations of the light quark chiral symmetry. Once the chiral phase is spontaneously broken, a mass gap between the degenerate parity partners appears. Its value is determined by the couplings with the soft pions. The situation in the QQq baryons is similar. In fact, the chiral partner structures also exist in the other systems. In Ref. [225], Jido, Oka and Hosaka explored chiral assignments for the qqq baryons, and further studies can be found in Refs. [226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235] for baryon and tetraquark fields with SUL(3) SUR(3) chiral symmetry. The chiral structure of the Qqq baryons was × discussed in Ref. [236]. When constructing effective theories at hadron level, the existence of the multiplets is helpful to reduce the number of independent interaction terms. The Lagrangians are required to be invariant with respect to the transformations of the QCD symmetries such as heavy quark symmetry and chiral symmetry. For the interactions of the pions with the ground hadrons with one heavy quark, Yan et al. have obtained the leading chiral order Lagrangians in Ref. [237]. By using the HQSS, one reduces the number of independent coupling constants, two for the meson case and six for the baryon case, to one and two, respectively. The basic procedure for the reduction to heavy hadron effective theories is similar to that to HQET (heavy baryon chiral perturbation theory has the same spirit) except for some technical details. The resulting Lagrangians may CONTENTS 19

be expressed in a compact form:

meson = tr[H(iv D)H¯ ] + g tr(Hγ5A/H¯ ) , (24) L · 1 α baryon = tr[B¯¯(iv D)B¯] tr[S¯ (iv D ∆B)Sα] L 2 3 · 3 − · − µ 3 µνλκ + [g gtr(S¯ A B¯) + h.c.] + g (iv ) tr[S¯ A S ] , 4 µ 3 2 1 κ µ ν λ where Dµ is the covariant derivative containing the chiral connection, Aµ is the axial field in chiral perturbation theory, H denotes the rescaled Qq¯ doublet mesons, H¯ = γ0H†γ0, † 0 B3¯ (Sµ) denotes the rescaled flavor-antitriplet (sextet) baryons, B¯ = B γ , and ∆B = M6 M¯ is the baryon mass difference between the two flavor multiplets in − 3 both heavy quark and chiral limit. By extending the ground state heavy mesons to the excited mesons, pions to the other light mesons, and by including an additional hidden local symmetry [238, 239, 240, 241, 242], one gets more effective Lagrangians in Refs. [236, 243]. The effective Lagrangians for the QQq baryons with pions can be found in Refs. [244, 245, 246]. The constructed effective Lagrangians may be used to study strong decays, hadron productions, and hadron-hadron interactions. One may also study radiative and (special) weak decays once transformations for relevant external sources are included appropriately [247, 248, 249]. For the semileptonic B decays, a convenient approach is to parameterize the matrix elements with Isgur-Wise functions [250, 251] by using the trace formalism [252, 253, 254, 255, 256]. When studying coupled channel effects at hadron level, the quark number conserving case, e.g. the hadron-hadron bound state problem or scattering problem, is not difficult to deal with. For those quark number changing cases, the hadron level calculation is much easier than the quark level calculation because the quark pair creation mechanism is hidden in the effective coupling terms and one does not need to consider the microscopic details. There are investigations on the hadron masses which are affected by the virtual hadron loops. The quark fluctuation effects may be partly considered in this way [257]. After the creation of a quark-antiquark pair and the formation of the new quark bound states in the decay process, the residual strong interaction between new hadrons probably plays an important role in understanding the properties of the initial hadron. The final state interaction (FSI) through the rescattering mechanism in a hadron loop plays a similar role.

The heavy quark masses mc 1270 MeV, mb 4660 MeV [1]. Compared ≈ ≈ with the strange quark mass ms 95 MeV, the charm quark is not so heavy. The ≈ recoil corrections for the charmed hadrons are sometimes important, which can be systematically included with high order Lagrangians [258, 259, 260, 261].

1.5. QCD sum rules

Based on the heavy quark effective theory (HQET) [252, 262, 263], one can use the method of QCD sum rules [264, 265, 266, 267] to study heavy hadrons. This method CONTENTS 20

has been successfully applied to study the S/P/D/F -wave heavy mesons [85, 268, 269, 270, 271, 272, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 281] and the S/P/D-wave heavy baryons [282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 295]. We note that there are also some investigations using the method of QCD sum rules in full QCD [296, 297, 298, 299]. Besides the heavy hadrons, this method has also been successfully applied to study the exotic hadrons [300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 315]. In this section we briefly introduce the method of QCD sum rules within HQET. Readers may consult Refs. [280, 281, 292, 293, 294, 295] for detailed discussions. In the QCD sum rule studies, one first constructs the interpolating fields which couple to the physical states. For example, the current

 µ aT ν b aT ν µ b  µν c JΞ = iabc [ u ]Cγ s u Cγ [ s ] σ h , (25) c Dt t − t Dt t v has the quark contents usc, the spin-parity quantum number J P = 1/2−, and one − explicit orbital excitation, so it can couple to the P -wave Ξc(1/2 ) state through − 0 JΞ (x) Ξc(1/2 ) = fΞ uΞ (x) . (26) h | c | i c c In Eq. (25): a, b and c are color indices, and abc is the totally antisymmetric tensor; µ Dµ = ∂µ igAµ is the gauge-covariant derivative; γ = γµ v/vµ, gα1α2 = gα1α2 vα1 vα2 , − t − t − and Dµ = Dµ (D v)vµ are the transverse matrices and derivative; C is the charge- t − · conjugation operator; the superscript T represents the transpose of the Dirac indices only; q(x) is the light quark field at location x, and it can be either u(x) or d(x) or s(x); hv(x) is the heavy quark field, and v is its velocity.

One can use JΞc to construct the two-point correlation function Z 1 + v/ 4 ikx ΠΞ (ω) = i d xe 0 T [JΞ (x)J¯Ξ (0)] 0 , (27) 2 c h | c c | i where ω is the external off-shell energy, ω = v k. This two-point correlation function · can be written at the hadron level as 2 fΞc ΠΞc (ω) = + higher states , (28) ΛΞ ω c − where

ΛΞc lim (mΞc mQ) , (29) ≡ mQ→∞ −

with mΞc the mass of the lowest-lying heavy baryon state to which JΞc (x) couples. The two-point correlation function (27) can also be calculated at the quark-gluon level using the method of operator product expansion (OPE). After performing the Borel transformation at both the hadron and quark-gluon levels, one can obtain the mass of

the heavy baryons at the leading order in the 1/mQ expansion ∂ ∂(−1/T ) ΠΞc (ωc,T ) ΛΞc (ωc,T ) = . (30) ΠΞc (ωc,T ) CONTENTS 21

The mass at the order (1/mQ) can be evaluated based on the HQET Lagrangian: O 1 1 eff = hviv Dhv + + , (31) L · 2mQ K 2mQ S where is the operator of the nonrelativistic kinetic energy K 2 = hv(iDt) hv , (32) K and is the Pauli term describing the chromomagnetic interaction S g µν = Cmag(mQ/µ)hvσµνG hv . (33) S 2 3/β0 Here Cmag(mQ/µ) = [αs(mQ)/αs(µ)] with β0 = 11 2nf /3. − One can rewrite Eq. (28) up to the order (1/mQ) as O (f + δf)2 Π(ω)pole = (34) (Λ + δm) ω − f 2 δmf 2 2fδf = + , Λ ω − (Λ ω)2 Λ ω − − − where δm is the correction at the order (1/mQ). It can be evaluated using the three- O point correlation functions: Z 0 2 4 4 ik·x−ik0·y δOΠΞ (ω, ω ) = i d xd ye 0 T [JΞ (x)O(0)J¯Ξ (y)] 0 , (35) c × h | c c | i where ω = v k, ω0 = v k0, and O = or . These three-point correlation functions · · K S can be written at the hadron level as 2 0 fΞc KΞc δKΠΞ (ω, ω ) = + , (36) c 0 (ΛΞc ω)(ΛΞc ω ) ··· − 2 − 0 dM fΞc ΣΞc δS ΠΞ (ω, ω ) = + , (37) c 0 (ΛΞ ω)(ΛΞ ω ) ··· c − c − where − 2 − KΞ Ξc(1/2 ) hv(iD⊥) hv Ξc(1/2 ) , c ≡ h | | i − g µν − dM ΣΞ Ξc(1/2 ) hvσµνG hv Ξc(1/2 ) , c ≡ h |2 | i dM dj,j , (38) ≡ l djl−1/2,jl = 2jl + 2 ,

dj +1/2,j = 2jl . l l − The three-point correlation functions (35) can also be calculated at the quark-gluon level using the method of operator product expansion. After performing a double Borel transformation for ω and ω0 at both the hadron and quark-gluon levels, one can evaluate

KΞ and ΣΞ and further obtain the mass of the heavy baryons at the order (1/mQ): c c O 1 δmΞc = (KΞc + dM CmagΣΞc ) . (39) −2mQ CONTENTS 22

Table 1. The mass differences between the charmed-strange and charmed mesons for the first three doublets. The masses are in units of MeV [1]. J P Meson Mass Meson Mass Difference − 0(±) ± 0 D 1864.83 (1869.58) Ds 1968.27 103.44 (98.69) − ∗0(±) ∗± 1 D 2006.85 (2010.26) Ds 2112.1 105.25 (101.84) + ∗ 0(±) ∗ ± 0 D0(2400) 2318 (2351) Ds0(2317) 2317.7 0.3 ( 33.3) + 0 ± − − 1 D1(2430) 2427 Ds1(2460) 2459.5 32.5 + 0(±) ± 1 D1(2420) 2420.8 (2423.2) Ds1(2536) 2535.10 114.3 (111.9) + ∗ 0(±) ∗ 2 D2(2460) 2460.57 (2465.4) Ds2(2573) 2569.1 108.53 (103.7)

1.6. Unsettled issues

There are two puzzles in the charm meson sector. The first one is the low mass puzzle of ∗ the Ds0(2317) and the Ds1(2460) states, both of which were observed in 2003 [112, 113]. Their masses (widths) are much lower (narrower) than the QM predictions [6, 316, 317]. Although there exist lots of discussions of these two states in the literature, there are still open questions in understanding their underlying structure. The second puzzle is related to the degeneracy of the charmed mesons and the charmed-strange mesons in the (0+, 1+) doublet. In Table1, we have collected the masses of the S-wave and P-wave charmed mesons and charmed-strange mesons in the (0−, 1−), (0+, 1+) and (1+, 2+) doublets. The mass difference between the charmed-strange and charmed mesons with the same quantum number in the (0−, 1−) and (1+, 2+) doublets is around 105 MeV, which is the mass of the strange quark. However, the charmed mesons and charmed-strange mesons in the (0+, 1+) doublet are almost degenerate. Such a feature is very puzzling. ∗ The surprisingly low masses of the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) states may arise from the coupled channel effects. The S-wave DK and D∗K scattering states couple to the bare quark model cs¯ state strongly and lower the quark model spectrum. Such a picture was supported by a recent lattice simulation [53]. However, one has to answer why the S-wave Dπ and D∗π scattering states do NOT affect the charmed mesons in the (0+, 1+) ∗ doublet. Is such an effect amplified by the small mass difference between the Ds0(2317) ∗ and Ds1(2460) mesons and the DK and D K thresholds? For comparison, the Λ(1405) may be a state with similar dynamics. Recall that the Λ(1405) is a πΣ resonance and lies slightly below the KN¯ threshold. The S-wave KN¯ scattering states couple to the bare P-wave uds baryon state in the quark model. Fifty years have passed since its observation. People are still wondering whether the Λ(1405) is a KN¯ molecule or a pentaquark state or a three-quark baryon affected by the coupled channel effects or there exist two poles around 1405 MeV [318]. CONTENTS 23

2. Experimental progress on heavy hadrons

The charm quark (or shortly denoted as the c quark) is an elementary fermion with +0.05 spin 1/2. It has an electric charge of +2/3 e and a pole mass of 1.29−0.11 GeV. The charm quark was predicted in the GIM mechanism by Glashow, Iliopoulos, and Maiani in 1970 [319]. Four years later on 11 November 1974, the J/ψ meson was discovered independently by two research groups, one at the Brooklyn National Laboratory headed by Ting [320] and the other at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center headed by Richter [321]. After that, lots of charmed particles were discovered/observed, including: (i) the charmed mesons, containing a charm quark and an up or down antiquark, which will be reviewed in Sec. 2.1; (ii) the charmed-strange mesons, containing a charm quark and a strange antiquark, which will be reviewed in Sec. 2.2; (iii) various singly charmed baryons, composed of a charm quark and two light (up, down, or strange) quarks, which will be reviewed in Sec. 2.5; (iv) the doubly charmed baryons, composed of two charm quarks and one light quark, which will be reviewed in Sec. 2.7. There were also many charmonium states observed in various experiments, which we shall not discuss in this review. Three years later in 1977, the bottom quark was discovered. The bottom quark (or shortly denoted as the b quark, also known as the beauty quark) is an elementary fermion with spin 1/2. It has an electric charge of 1/3 e and a pole mass of 4.18+0.03 GeV. − −0.03 The bottom quark was proposed by Kobayashi and Maskawa to explain CP violation in 1973 [9]. In 1977, the Υ(1S), was discovered at the Fermilab [322]. After that, lots of bottom particles were discovered/observed, including: (i) the bottom mesons, containing a bottom quark and an up or down antiquark, which will be reviewed in Sec. 2.3; (ii) the bottom-strange mesons, containing a bottom quark and a strange antiquark, which will be reviewed in Sec. 2.4; (iii) various singly bottom baryons, composed of a bottom quark and two light quarks, which will be reviewed in Sec. 2.6. Again, we shall not discuss the bottomonium states in this review. We shall neither

discuss the Bc mesons, containing a bottom quark and a charm antiquark or a bottom antiquark and a charm quark (see Refs. [13, 14, 15, 22, 323, 324, 325, 326, 327] and related references). We shall separately review experimental progresses on the heavy meson/baryon states in the following, and a short summation is given here: (i) The 1S and 1P charmed and charm-strange mesons have been well established, ∗ while the higher states starting from the D(2550) and DsJ (2632) require more efforts. CONTENTS 24

(ii) All the 1S charmed baryons have been well established, and the lowest-lying P − P − orbitally excited charmed states Λc(2595) of J = 1/2 ,Λc(2625) of J = 3/2 , P − P − Ξc(2790) of J = 1/2 , and Ξc(2815) of J = 3/2 have also been well observed and complete the two SU(3) 3¯ multiplets, while all the higher states are not well established. (iii) The 1S bottom and bottom-strange mesons have been well established, while more ∗ ∗ studies on the higher states starting from the BJ (5732) and BsJ (5850) are necessary. ∗ P + (iv) All the 1S bottom baryons have been observed, except the Ωb of J = 3/2 , but not all of them are well understood/established. Besides them, there are only two 0 − excited bottom baryons observed in experiments, the Λb(5912) of 1/2 and the 0 − P − Λb(5920) of 3/2 , which probably belong to the SU(3) 3¯F multiplet of J = 1/2 and 3/2−.

2.1. The charmed mesons

In this subsection we review the charmed mesons. Their experimental information is listed in Table2. The 1 S charmed states (D and D∗) and the 1P charmed states ∗ ∗ (D0(2400), D1(2420), D1(2430) and D2(2460)) have been well established, completing one S-wave doublet (0−, 1−) and two P -wave doublets (0+, 1+) and (1+, 2+). Hence, we only list in Table2 their averaged masses and widths from PDG [1] together with the experiments which first observed them. However, the higher states starting from the D(2550) are not well established, so we list all the relevant experiments. We note that the charmed state D∗(2640) was reported by the DELPHI Collaboration [341] but not confirmed in any other experiments, so we do not include this state in our review of this work. ∗ Sometimes we use the words “natural parity states”, labelled as DJ (Mass), to denote the states having P = ( 1)J , such as J P = 0+, 1−, 2+, etc.; we also − use “unnatural parity states”, labelled as DJ (Mass), to denote the states having P = ( 1)J+1, such as J P = 0−, 1+, 2−, etc. −

2.1.1. D and D∗. The lowest-lying charmed mesons, D0 and D± of J P = 0−, were observed in 1976 [328, 329, 342], as shown in Fig.3. Their properties are known very well [1]: the D0 meson has a mass 1864.83 0.05 MeV and a mean life (410.1 1.5) 10−15 ± ± × s; the D± meson has a mass 1869.58 0.09 MeV and a mean life (1040 7) 10−15 s; ± ± × hundreds of their decay modes have been observed in experiments, where the Cabibbo- allowed process c sW + is preferred. → One year later in 1977, the lowest-lying vector charmed mesons, D∗0 and D∗± of J P = 1−, were observed [330, 343, 344]. Their properties are also known very well [1]: the D∗0 meson has a mass 2006.85 0.05 MeV and the upper limit of its decay width ± is 2.1 MeV; the D∗± meson has a mass 2010.26 0.05 MeV and a width 83.4 1.8 ± ± keV; the D∗0 meson mainly decays into D0π0 and D0γ, with fractions (64.7 0.9)% and ± CONTENTS 25

Table 2. Experimental information of the observed charmed mesons. The 1S charmed

states (D and D∗) and the 1P charmed states (D0∗(2400), D1(2420), D1(2430), and D2∗(2460)) have been well established, so we only list their averaged masses and widths from PDG [1] together with the experiments which first observed these states. However, the higher states starting from the D(2550) are not well established, so we list all the relevant experiments together with their observed masses, widths, and decay modes therein. State JP Mass (MeV) Width (MeV) Experiments Observed Modes

D0 0− 1864.83 ± 0.05 (410.1 ± 1.5) × 10−15 s Mark I [328] Kπ and K3π D± 0− 1869.58 ± 0.09 (1040 ± 7) × 10−15 s Mark I [329] K2π D∗0 1− 2006.85 ± 0.05 < 2.1 Mark I [330] e+e− → DD∗ D∗± 1− 2010.26 ± 0.05 (83.4 ± 1.8) × 10−3 Mark I [330] e+e− → DD∗ ∗ 0 + + − D0 (2400) 0 2318 ± 29 267 ± 40 Belle [331] D π ∗ ± + 0 − D0 (2400) 0 2351 ± 7 230 ± 17 FOCUS [332] D π 0 + ∗± ∓ D1(2420) 1 2420.8 ± 0.5 31.7 ± 2.5 ARGUS [333] D π ± + ∗0 + D1(2420) 1 2423.2 ± 2.4 25 ± 6 TPS [334] D π 0 + +107 ∗+ − D1(2430) 1 2427 ± 26 ± 25 384−75 ± 75 Belle [331] D π ∗ 0 + + − D2 (2460) 2 2460.57 ± 0.15 47.7 ± 1.3 TPS [334] D π ∗ ± + 0 + D2 (2460) 2 2465.4 ± 1.3 46.7 ± 1.2 ARGUS [335] D π

D(2550)0 2539.4 ± 4.5 ± 6.8 130 ± 12 ± 13 BaBar [336] D∗π 0− 0 ∗ DJ (2580) 2579.5 ± 3.4 ± 5.5 177.5 ± 17.8 ± 46.0 LHCb [337] D π 2608.7 ± 2.4 ± 2.5 93 ± 6 ± 13 BaBar [336] D(∗)π ∗ 0 − ∗ D1 (2600) 1 2649.2 ± 3.5 ± 3.5 140.2 ± 17.1 ± 18.6 LHCb [337] D π 2681.1 ± 5.6 ± 4.9 ± 13.1 186.7 ± 8.5 ± 8.6 ± 8.2 LHCb [338] Dπ D(2750)0 ?? 2752.4 ± 1.7 ± 2.7 71 ± 6 ± 11 BaBar [336] D∗π 0 − ∗ DJ (2740) 2 2737.0 ± 3.5 ± 11.2 73.2 ± 13.4 ± 25.0 LHCb [337] D π D∗(2760)0 ?? 2763.3 ± 2.3 ± 2.3 60.9 ± 5.1 ± 3.6 BaBar [336] Dπ ∗ 0 ? DJ (2760) ? 2760.1 ± 1.1 ± 3.7 74.4 ± 3.4 ± 19.1 LHCb [337] Dπ ∗ 0 − + − D1 (2760) 1 2781 ± 18 ± 11 ± 6 177 ± 32 ± 20 ± 7 LHCb [339] D π ∗ − − ¯ 0 − D3 (2760) 3 2798 ± 7 ± 1 ± 7 105 ± 18 ± 6 ± 23 LHCb [340] D π ∗ 0 − + − D3 (2760) 3 2775.5 ± 4.5 ± 4.5 ± 4.7 95.3 ± 9.6 ± 7.9 ± 33.1 LHCb [338] D π 0 ? ∗ DJ (3000) ? 2971.8 ± 8.7 188.1 ± 44.8 LHCb [337] D π ∗ 0 ? DJ (3000) ? 3008.1 ± 4.0 110.5 ± 11.5 LHCb [337] Dπ ∗ 0 + + − D2 (3000) 2 3214 ± 29 ± 33 ± 36 186 ± 38 ± 34 ± 63 LHCb [338] D π

(35.3 0.9)%, respectively; the D∗± meson decays into D0π±, D±π0, and D±γ, with ± fractions (67.7 0.5)%, (30.7 0.5)%, and (1.6 0.4)%, respectively. ± ± ±

∗ ∗ 2.1.2. D0(2400), D1(2420), D1(2430), and D2(2460). Eight years later after the discovery of the D and D∗ mesons, the first orbitally excited charmed meson was 0 P + observed. In 1985 the P -wave charmed meson D1(2420) of J = 1 was reported in the D∗±π∓ invariant mass distribution by the ARGUS Collaboration [333], as shown ± P + 0 + in Fig.4. Its charged partner, the D1(2420) of J = 1 , was observed in the D π invariant mass distribution by the TPS Collaboration [334]. The D1(2420) has been confirmed by many experiments [331, 336, 341, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351, 352, CONTENTS 26

Figure 3. Mass distributions for the (a) Kπ and (b) K3π, where the peaks correspond to the D meson. Taken from Mark I [328].

353, 354]. Its properties are known very well, as listed in Table2. The widths of the 0 ± D1(2420) and D1(2420) are around 25 MeV. They have a partner D1(2430) with the 0 P + similar mass but much larger width. The D1(2430) of J = 1 was observed in 2003 by − − 0 ∗+ − the Belle Collaboration in the B π D1(2430) ( D π ) process [331]. In 2006, → → the BaBar Collaboration studied the D∗π invariant mass spectrum and confirmed the 0 0 D1(2430) [355]. The charged partner of the D1(2430) has not been observed yet. 0 Besides the D1(2430) , Belle announced the observation of another broad state, ∗ 0 P + the P -wave charmed meson D0(2400) of J = 0 [331], which was confirmed by the ∗ ± FOCUS, BaBar, and Belle experiments [332, 356, 357]. Its charged partner D0(2400) was also observed by the FOCUS Collaboration [332] and confirmed by the LHCb CONTENTS 27

+ + Figure 4. The mass difference distribution m(D∗ (2010)π−) m(D∗ (2010)), where 0 − the signal corresponds to the D1(2420) . Taken from ARGUS [333].

Collaboration [340]. The TPS Collaboration observed another P -wave charmed meson with either J P = 0+ or 2+ in the D+π− invariant mass distribution [334]. This observation was confirmed by many other experiments [1] and their angular momentum analysis suggests the J P = 2+ assignment to this state [345]. Now this resonance is denoted ∗ 0 P + ∗ ± as D2(2460) of J = 2 . Its charged partner D2(2460) was observed by the ARGUS Collaboration in the D0π+ channel [335] and confirmed in many other experiments [332, 336, 341, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351, 352, 353, 354, 356, 358, 359].

×10 ) ) 2

25 2 Fit B 45 Fit E 10 2 40 8 20 35 6 1 30 4 15 25 2 0 20 0 10 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8

Events / (0.005 GeV/c 15 Events / ( 0.005 GeV/c 5 10 5 0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 M(Dπ) (GeV/c2) M(D*+π-) (GeV/c2)

0 + + Figure 5. (Color online) Mass distributions for the D π (left) and D∗ π− (right). Black points are experimental data, and the red dotted curves are the signal + components: in the left panel the signals above 2.4 GeV are due to the D2∗(2460) , + + D∗(2600) , and D∗(2760) ; in the right panel the signals above 2.4 GeV are due to the 0 0 0 0 0 D1(2420) , D2∗(2460) , D(2550) , D∗(2600) , and D(2750) . Taken from BaBar [336]. CONTENTS 28

5 5

0 0 pull pull

-5 -5 6000 3000

4000 2000 60000

2000 1000 20000 0 0

40000 2500 3000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000 LHCb LHCb 10000

Candidates / (4 MeV) 20000 Candidates / (4 MeV)

0 0 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000 m(D0π+) [MeV] m(D*+π-) [MeV]

0 + + Figure 6. (Color online) Mass distributions for the D π (left) and D∗ π− (right). Black points are experimental data, and the red/blue dotted/full curves are the signal + components. In the left panel: the dotted blue line is due to the D2∗(2460) ; in the + + inset the full blue curves are due to the DJ∗ (2760) and DJ∗ (3000) . In the right panel: 0 0 the dotted lines are due to the D1(2420) (red) and D2∗(2460) (blue); in the inset the 0 0 0 full red lines are due to the DJ (2580) , DJ (2740) , and DJ (3000) , and the dotted 0 0 blue lines are due to the DJ∗ (2650) and DJ∗ (2760) . Taken from LHCb [337].

2.1.3. D(2550) and DJ (2580). In 2010, the D(2550) was observed by the BaBar Collaboration in the D∗π mass distribution in the inclusive e+e− cc¯ interactions, → as shown in the right panel of Fig.5. Its mass and width were measured to be M = 2539.4 4.5 6.8 MeV and Γ = 130 12 13 MeV, respectively [336]. The D(2550) ± ± 1 ± ± is suggested to be a candidate for D(2 S0) by the helicity distribution analysis [336]. ∗ In 2013, an unnatural parity state DJ (2580) was found in the D π invariant mass spectrum by the LHCb Collaboration through the process pp DπX, as shown in the → right panel of Fig.6. Its mass and width were measured to be M = 2579.5 3.4 5.5 ± ± MeV and Γ = 177.5 17.8 46.0 MeV, respectively [337]. ± ± Since the resonance parameters of the DJ (2580) are similar to those of the D(2550), they can be regarded as the same state. Moreover, the LHCb results [337] are consistent 1 with the BaBar assignment [336] that it is a D(2 S0) state.

∗ ∗ ∗ 0 2.1.4. D (2600), DJ (2650), and D1(2680) . The BaBar Collaboration reported another resonance D∗(2600) in the D(∗)π mass distribution [336], as shown in both the left and right panels of Fig.5. This state has the mass M = 2608.7 2.4 2.5 MeV ± ± and width Γ = 93 6 13 MeV and was regarded as a radial excitation of the D∗ by ± ± the helicity distribution analysis. They also measured the ratio [336] (D∗0(2600) D+π−) B → = 0.32 0.02 0.09 . (40) (D∗0(2600) D∗+π−) ± ± B → ∗ Later in the LHCb experiment [337], a natural parity state DJ (2650) was found in the D∗π invariant mass spectrum, as shown in the right panel of Fig.6. Its mass and width CONTENTS 29 were measured to be 2649.2 3.5 3.5 MeV and 140.2 17.1 18.6 MeV, respectively. ± ± ± ± It is also tentatively identified as a J P = 1− state, the radial excitation of the D∗. ∗ ∗ Since the resonance parameters of the D (2600) and DJ (2650) are similar to each ∗ other, they are probably the same state. We use D1(2600) to denote them together, as listed in Table2. Note: in a recent experiment reported by the LHCb Collaboration [338], a similar ∗ 0 structure D1(2680) was observed, which has parameters close to those measured for ∗ the DJ (2650):

MD∗(2680)0 = 2681.1 5.6 4.9 13.1 MeV , (41) 1 ± ± ± ΓD∗(2680)0 = 186.7 8.5 8.6 8.2 MeV . 1 ± ± ±

40 40 35 Data Isobar model LHCb 35 Data K-matrix model LHCb * * No D (2760) Spin 2 No D (2760) Spin 2 30 J (a) 30 J (b) Spin 0 Spin 3 Spin 0 Spin 3

Events / 0.1 25 Spin 1 Spin 4 Events / 0.1 25 Spin 1 Spin 4 20 20 15 15 10 10 5 5 0 0 −0.5 0 0.5 1 −0.5 0 0.5 1 0 − 0 − cosθ(D π ) cosθ(D π )

Figure 7. (Color online) Cosine of the helicity angle distributions in the range 2 2 0 2 7.4 GeV < m (D¯ π−) < 8.2 GeV for the Isobar model (left) and the K-matrix model (right). Black points are experimental data, which are fitted with different spin

hypotheses of the DJ∗ (2760)− as detailed in the legend. Taken from LHCb [340].

∗ ∗ ∗ 0 ∗ − 2.1.5. D(2750), DJ (2740), D (2760), DJ (2760), D1(2760) , and D3(2760) . The charmed mesons in the energy region around 2.75 GeV are slightly confusing. There have been five measurements performed by the BaBar and LHCb Collaborations [336, 337, 339, 340] and we review them in the following. The D∗(2760) was first observed by the BaBar Collaboration in the Dπ invariant mass spectrum [336], as shown in the left panel of Fig.5. It has the mass and width 2763.3 2.3 2.3 MeV and 60.9 5.1 3.6 MeV, respectively. It can be assigned as ± ± ± ± a D-wave charmed meson since its mass is consistent with the theoretical prediction of the GI model [6]. Later, LHCb announced the observation of a natural parity state ∗ DJ (2760) also in the Dπ invariant mass spectrum [337], as shown in the left panel of Fig.6. This state has the mass 2760 .1 1.1 3.7 MeV and width 74.4 3.4 19.1 ∗ ∗ ± ± ± ± MeV. The D (2760) and DJ (2760) can be regarded as the same state since they have similar masses and widths and were observed in the same decay modes. Besides the D∗(2760), another state D(2750) was also observed by the BaBar Collaboration but in the D∗π mass spectrum, as shown in the right panel of Fig.5, CONTENTS 30

where its mass and width were measured to be M = 2752.4 1.7 2.7 MeV and ± ± Γ = 71 6 11 MeV, respectively [336]. Although the D(2750) can be a good ± ± candidate of a D-wave charmed meson according to the mass spectrum analysis of the GI model [6], the helicity distribution analysis of the D(2750) didn’t support the 3 3 D(1 D1) and D(1 D3) assignments [336]. BaBar also gave the ratio [336] (D∗(2760)0 D+π−) B → = 0.42 0.05 0.11. (42) (D(2750)0 D∗+π−) ± ± B → Another similar unnatural parity state, the DJ (2740), was found by the LHCb Collaboration in the D∗π mass spectrum, as shown in the right panel of Fig.6. It has the mass M = 2737.0 3.5 11.2 MeV, width 73.2 13.4 25.0 MeV, and spin- ± ± ± ± parity quantum numbers J P = 2− [337]. Due to the similarity between the D(2750)

and the DJ (2740), they are possibly the same state. ∗ 0 Recently in 2015, a spin-1 state, D1(2760) , was observed in the channel of − ∗0 + + − + B D1 π D π π by the LHCb Collaboration [339]. It is a possible charmed → P→ − ∗ − meson with J = 1 . Then the D3(2760) was reported in the similar process of 0 ∗− + ¯ 0 − + B D3 π D π π also by the LHCb Collaboration [340]. Its spin-parity were → → P − ∗ − determined to be J = 3 . We show the LHCb results related to the D3(2760) in ∗ 0 Fig.7. Its neutral partner D3(2760) was confirmed in a recent LHCb experiment [338]. These new experimental results provide interesting information for the D-wave charmed mesons in the energy region around 2.75 GeV.

∗ ∗ 0 2.1.6. DJ (3000), DJ (3000), and D2(3000) . The LHCb Collaboration observed the ∗ unnatural parity state DJ (3000) in the D π invariant mass spectrum [337], as shown in the right panel of Fig.6. Its resonance parameters are M = 2971.8 8.7 MeV, Γ = 188.1 44.8 MeV. (43) ± ± ∗ Another natural parity state DJ (3000) was also reported by LHCb but in the Dπ invariant mass spectrum [337], as shown in the left panel of Fig.6, which has M = 3008.1 4.0 MeV, Γ = 110.5 11.5 MeV. (44) ± ± ∗ 0 Recently, the LHCb experiment observed another structure D2(3000) in this energy region [338]. Its mass and decay width were measured to be:

MD∗(3000)0 = 3214 29 33 36 MeV , (45) 2 ± ± ± ΓD∗(3000)0 = 186 38 34 63 MeV . 2 ± ± ± ∗ There are many possible interpretations for the DJ (3000) and DJ (3000). See Sec. 3.1 for more theoretical discussions.

2.2. The charmed-strange mesons

In this subsection we review the charmed-strange mesons. Their experimental information is listed in Table3. Similar to the charmed mesons, the 1 S charmed-strange ∗ ∗ ∗ states (Ds, Ds ) and the 1P ones (Ds0(2317), Ds1(2460), Ds1(2536), and Ds2(2573)) CONTENTS 31

Table 3. Experimental information of the observed charmed-strange mesons. the 1S

charmed-strange states (Ds, Ds∗) and the 1P ones (Ds∗0(2317), Ds1(2460), Ds1(2536), and Ds∗2(2573)) are well established, so we only list their averaged masses and widths from PDG [1] together with the experiments which first observed them. However, the

higher states starting from the DsJ∗ (2632) are not well established, so we list all the relevant experiments together with their observed masses, widths, and decay modes therein. State JP Mass (MeV) Width (MeV) Experiments Observed Modes

− −15 ± Ds 0 1968.27 ± 0.10 (500 ± 7) × 10 s DASP [360] ηπ ∗ − Ds 1 2112.1 ± 0.4 < 1.9 DASP [360] Dsγ ∗ + + 0 Ds0(2317) 0 2317.7 ± 0.6 < 3.8 BaBar [112] Ds π + ∗+ 0 Ds1(2460) 1 2459.5 ± 0.6 < 3.5 CLEO [113] Ds π + ∗+ Ds1(2536) 1 2535.10 ± 0.06 0.92 ± 0.03 ± 0.04 ITEP&SERP [361] Ds γ ∗ + 0 + Ds2(2573) 2 2569.1 ± 0.8 16.9 ± 0.8 CLEO [362] D K

∗ ? DsJ (2632) ? 2632.5 ± 1.7 ± 5.0 < 17 SELEX [363] DK 2688 ± 4 ± 3 112 ± 7 ± 36 BaBar [364] DK +11 +36 2708 ± 9−10 108 ± 23−31 Belle [365] DK ∗ − +12 +39 (∗) Ds1(2700) 1 2710 ± 2−7 149 ± 7−52 BaBar [366] D K 2709.2 ± 1.9 ± 4.5 115.8 ± 7.3 ± 12.1 LHCb [367] DK +14 +24 2699−7 127−19 BaBar [368] DK 2856.6 ± 1.5 ± 5.0 47 ± 7 ± 10 BaBar [364] DK ∗ ? +5 (∗) DsJ (2860) ? 2862 ± 2−2 48 ± 3 ± 6 BaBar [366] D K 2866.1 ± 1.0 ± 6.3 69.9 ± 3.2 ± 6.6 LHCb [367] DK ∗ − ¯ 0 − Ds3(2860) 3 2860.5 ± 2.6 ± 2.5 ± 6.0 53 ± 7 ± 4 ± 6 LHCb [369, 370] D K ∗ − ¯ 0 − Ds1(2860) 1 2859 ± 12 ± 6 ± 23 159 ± 23 ± 27 ± 72 LHCb [369, 370] D K ? +30 +46 ∗ DsJ (3040) ? 3044 ± 8−5 239 ± 35−42 BaBar [366] D K are well established, completing one S-wave doublet (0−, 1−) and two P -wave doublets (0+, 1+) and (1+, 2+). Hence, we only list in Table3 their averaged masses and widths from PDG [1] together with the experiments which first observed them. The higher ∗ states starting from the DsJ (2632) are not well established, and we list all the relevant experiments. ∗ We note that the observed masses of the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) are far lower than the corresponding results calculated using the GI model [316]. There are many different perspectives on their nature, which we shall review in Sec.6.

∗ ± P − 2.2.1. Ds and Ds . The lowest-lying charmed-strange mesons, Ds of J = 0 , was observed in 1977 by the DASP Collaboration [360]. The lowest-lying vector charmed- ∗± P − strange mesons, Ds of J = 1 , was observed in the same experiment [360]. Their ± properties are known very well [1]: the Ds has a mass 1968.27 0.10 MeV and a mean life −15 ∗± ± (500 7) 10 s; the Ds has a mass 2112.1 0.4 MeV and the upper limit of its width ± × ± ± is 1.9 MeV; hundreds of decay modes of the Ds have been observed in experiments, while the D∗± mainly decays into D±γ and D±π0, with fractions (93.5 0.7)% and s s s ± (5.8 0.7)%, respectively. ± CONTENTS 32

∗ 2.2.2. Ds1(2536) and Ds2(2573). Before 2003, there are only two good candidates P + ∗ for the 1P charmed-strange mesons, the Ds1(2536) of J = 1 and the Ds2(2573) of J P = 2+. ∗ In 1987, the Ds1(2536) was first observed by analyzing the Ds γ invariant mass spectrum in theνN ¯ scattering process [361]. There, its measured mass is 2535 28 ± MeV. Later in 1989, it was observed in the D∗+K0 mass spectrum by the ARGUS Collaboration [371], where its mass and width were measured to be M = 2536 0.6 2.0 ± ± MeV and Γ < 4.6 MeV, respectively. In 1993, the CLEO Collaboration measured the following ratio [372] ∗ Γ(Ds1(2536) Ds γ) → ∗ < 0.42. (46) Γ(Ds1(2536) D K) → The Ds1(2536) has been confirmed by many other groups in several different channels [346, 347, 352, 373, 374, 375, 376, 377, 378, 379]. Its mass value and narrow width are consistent with the theoretical expectation that it is a charmed-strange meson of J P = 1+ in the (1+, 2+) doublet [316]. ∗ In 1994, the Ds2(2573) was first observed by the CLEO Collaboration in the D0K+ invariant mass spectrum [362], where its mass and width were measured to be M = 2573+1.7 0.8 0.5 MeV and Γ = 16+5 3 MeV, respectively. In addition, the −1.6 ± ± −4 ± following upper limit was given (D∗ (2573)+ D∗0K+) B s2 → < 0.33, (47) (D∗ (2573)+ D0K+) B s2 → A similar branching ratio was recently measured by the LHCb Collaboration to be [380] (D∗ (2573)+ D∗+K0) B s2 → S = 0.044 0.005 0.011 . (48) (D∗ (2573)+ D+K0) ± ± B s2 → S ∗ The Ds2(2573) has also been confirmed by many other experiments [363, 364, 374, 381, 382].

∗ ∗ 2.2.3. Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460). In 2003, a new charmed-strange meson Ds0(2317) + 0 was observed by the BaBar Collaboration in the Ds π invariant mass distribution in the B decay process [112], as shown in Fig.8. Its mass is about 2.32 GeV. Later in confirming this state, the CLEO Collaboration observed another narrow charmed- strange state Ds1(2460) [113]. The observed masses of these two states are far lower than the corresponding predictions from the GI model [316]. These two puzzling states quickly become the two superstars in the heavy meson family. We shall review the relevant theoretical studies in Sec. 6.1 carefully. ∗ The Ds0(2317) was also confirmed in the Belle and BaBar experiments [114, 115, 116]. In addition, the following ratio was measured in the CLEO experiment [113] (D∗ (2317)+ D∗+γ) B s0 → s < 0.059 . (49) (D∗ (2317)+ D+π0) B s0 → s This upper bound was later measured by the Belle and BaBar Collaborations to be 0.18 [114] and 0.16 [115], respectively. CONTENTS 33

+ 0 + Figure 8. (Color online) The Ds π mass distribution for (a) the Ds decay into + + + + + 0 K K−π , and (b) the Ds decay into K K−π π . The signals correspond to the Ds∗0(2317). Taken from BaBar [112].

P + The Ds1(2460) of J = 1 was first observed by the CLEO Collaboration [113] ∗+ 0 in the Ds π invariant mass spectrum, as shown in Fig.9. Its mass splitting with respect to Ds was measured to be 350 1.2 1.0 MeV and its width was given to ± ± be Γ < 7 MeV at 90% C.L. Later, the Ds1(2460) was confirmed by the Belle and BaBar experiments [114, 115, 116]. Its mass, narrow width, and decay properties are + all consistent with those of the 1 charmed-strange meson. Particularly, the Ds1(2460) is above the DK threshold, but it has a narrow width and does not decay into DK, providing additional evidence that it has the spin-parity quantum numbers J P = 1+.

∗ 2.2.4. DsJ (2632). In 2004, the SELEX Collaboration reported the observation of a ∗ + 0 + narrow charmed-strange meson DsJ (2632) in two decay modes, Ds η and D K [363]. Its mass and width were measured to be 2632.5 1.7 MeV and < 17 MeV, respectively. ± They also measured the relative branching ratio Γ(D0K+)/Γ(D+η) = 0.14 0.06. s ± However, the following CLEO, BaBar, and FOCUS experiments (see Ref. [383] and

Refs. [19,21] of Ref. [363]) all reported negative results in their search of DsJ (2632). ∗ + − The BaBar experiment searched for the DsJ (2632) in the e e cc¯ collisions and they →+ 0 + +∗ found no evidence of this state in the inclusive production of Ds η, D K , or D KS. CONTENTS 34

0 0 Figure 9. (Color online) The mass difference distribution ∆M(D∗π ) = M(D γπ ) s s − M(Dsγ), where (a) the Dsγ system is consistent with Ds∗ decay, and (b) the Dsγ system further satisfies 20.8 MeV < ∆M(D γ) 143.9 MeV < 33.8 MeV with | s − | ∆M(D γ) = M(D γ) M(D ). The signal corresponds to the D (2460). Taken s s − s s1 from CLEO [113].

0 + Figure 10. (Color online) The DK invariant mass distributions for the (a) DK−π+ K , 0 + + 0 (b) DK−π+π0 K , and (c) DK−π+π+ Ks . There are three structures: a prominent + narrow signal is due to the Ds2(2573) , a broad structure peaking at a mass of approximately 2.7 GeV is identified as the Ds∗1(2700), and an enhancement around + 2.86 GeV is identified as the DsJ (2860) . Taken from BaBar [364].

∗ 2.2.5. Ds1(2700). In 2006, a broad structure was observed by the BaBar Collaboration ∗ in the DK invariant mass spectrum, which was later named as Ds1(2700) [364], as CONTENTS 35

shown in Fig. 10. Its mass and width were measured to be M = 2688 4 3 MeV and ± ± Γ = 112 7 36 MeV, respectively. This state was confirmed in the following Belle ± ± and LHCb experiments in the same channel [365, 367], where its spin and parity were determined to be J = 1 and P = by the helicity angle distribution and its decay to − two pseudoscalar mesons, respectively. ∗ ∗ The BaBar Collaboration also reported the D K decay mode of the Ds1(2700) and measured the following ratio [366] (D∗ (2700) D∗K) B s1 → = 0.91 0.13 0.12 . (50) (D∗ (2700) DK) ± ± B s1 → Later in 2014, the BaBar Collaboration further studied the D∗ (2700) in the B0 s1 → D−D0K+ and B+ D¯ 0D0K+ decays [368] and measured its mass and width to be +14 →+24 2699−7 MeV and 127−19 MeV, respectively.

∗ ∗ ∗ 2.2.6. DsJ (2860), Ds1(2860), and Ds3(2860). In 2006, an enhancement around 2.86 GeV was observed by the BaBar Collaboration in the DK invariant mass spectrum [364], ∗ as shown in Fig. 10. This is the DsJ (2860), whose mass and width were measured to be M = 2856.6 1.5 5.0 MeV and Γ = 48 7 10 MeV, respectively. It was confirmed ± ± ± ± in the D∗K mode by the BaBar Collaboration [366] as well as in the same DK mode by the LHCb Collaboration [367]. The following ratio was measured by BaBar at the same time [366] (D∗ (2860)+ D∗K) B sJ → = 1.10 0.15 0.19 . (51) (D∗ (2860)+ DK) ± ± B sJ →

Data 50 LHCb spin-1 + spin-3 40 spin-1 30 spin-3 Candidates / 0.04 20

10

0 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 − cos θ(D0K )

0 Figure 11. (Color online) Cosine of the helicity angle of the D¯ K− system, for 0 2.77 GeV < m(D¯ K−) < 2.91 GeV. Black points are experimental data, which are

fitted with different spin hypotheses of the DsJ∗ (2860) as detailed in the legend. Taken from LHCb [369].

In 2014, the LHCb Collaboration further studied the structure around 2.86 GeV in the B0 D¯ 0K−π+ decay [369, 370]. The amplitude analysis of this decay indicates s → CONTENTS 36

∗ P − that this structure actually contains two components, the Ds1(2860) of J = 1 and the ∗ P − Ds3(2860) of J = 3 , as shown in Fig. 11. Their resonance parameters were measured to be

MD∗ (2860) = 2859 12 6 23 MeV , s1 ± ± ± ΓD∗ (2860) = 159 23 27 72 MeV , (52) s1 ± ± ± MD∗ (2860) = 2860.5 2.6 2.5 6.0 MeV , s3 ± ± ± ΓD∗ (2860) = 53 7 4 6 MeV . s3 ± ± ± ∗ Comparing their widths, one finds that the Ds3(2860) and the previously observed ∗ ∗ DsJ (2860) [364, 366, 367] may be the same state and the Ds1(2860) may be a different state.

4000 800 3000 600 2000 400

1000 200

0 0 2.5 3 3.5 3 3.5

Figure 12. The D∗K invariant mass spectrum (a) with the background, and (b) + after subtraction of the fitted background. The signals correspond to the Ds∗1(2710) , + + DsJ∗ (2860) , and DsJ (3040) . Taken from BaBar [366].

2.2.7. DsJ (3040). In 2009, the BaBar experiment observed a new broad structure in the D∗K invariant mass distribution [366], as shown in Fig. 12. They also confirmed ∗ ∗ the Ds1(2700) and DsJ (2860). The mass and width of this new state DsJ (3040) were measured to be M = 3044 8+30 MeV and Γ = 239 35+46 MeV, respectively. The ± −5 ± −42 negative result of its decay into DK suggests its unnatural parity quantum numbers. CONTENTS 37

Table 4. Experimental information of the observed bottom mesons. Only the 1S bottom states (B and B∗) are well established, completing one S-wave doublet (0−, 1−). Accordingly, we only list their averaged masses and widths from PDG [1] together with the experiments which first observed them. However, the higher states

starting from the BJ∗ (5732) are not well established, so we list all the relevant experiments together with their observed masses, widths, and decay modes therein.

State JP Mass (MeV) Width (MeV) Experiments Observed Modes

B0 0− 5279.62 ± 0.15 (1520 ± 4) × 10−15 s CLEO [384] Dππ&D∗π B± 0− 5279.31 ± 0.15 (1638 ± 4) × 10−15 s CLEO [384] Dπ&D∗ππ B∗ 1− 5324.65 ± 0.25 – CUSB [385] Bγ

5681 ± 11 116 ± 24 OPAL [386] B(∗)π 5732 ± 5 ± 20 145 ± 28 DELPHI [387] B(∗)π +17 (∗) ∗ ? 5695−19 – ALEPH [388] B π BJ (5732) ? 5713 ± 2 31 ± 7 L3 [389] Bπ 5710 ± 20 – CDF [390] Bπ +5 +15+29 ∗ 5738−6 ± 7 18−13−23 OPAL [391] B π 5720.6 ± 2.4 ± 1.4 – DØ [392] B(∗)+π− +1.6+1.4 (∗)+ − 0 + 5725.3−2.2−1.5 – CDF [393] B π B1(5721) 1 +1.1 (∗)+ − 5726.6 ± 0.9−1.2 ± 0.4 – CDF [394] B π 5727.7 ± 0.7 ± 1.4 ± 0.17 ± 0.4 30.1 ± 1.5 ± 3.5 LHCb [395] B(∗)+π− +1 (∗)0 + + + 5727 ± 3−3 ± 2 – CDF [394] B π B1(5721) 1 5725.1 ± 1.8 ± 3.1 ± 0.17 ± 0.4 29.1 ± 3.6 ± 4.3 LHCb [395] B(∗)0π+ 5746.8 ± 2.4 ± 1.7 – DØ [392] B(∗)+π− 5740.2+1.7+0.9 22.7+3.8+3.2 CDF [393] B(∗)+π− B∗(5747)0 2+ −1.8−0.8 −3.2−10.2 2 +0.8 (∗)+ − 5736.7 ± 1.2−0.9 ± 0.2 – CDF [394] B π 5739.44 ± 0.37 ± 0.33 ± 0.17 24.5 ± 1.0 ± 1.5 LHCb [395] B(∗)+π− +0.3 (∗)0 + ∗ + + 5736.9 ± 1.2−0.9 ± 0.2 – CDF [394] B π B2 (5747) 2 5737.20 ± 0.72 ± 0.40 ± 0.17 23.6 ± 2.0 ± 2.1 LHCb [395] B(∗)0π+ 0 ? BJ (5840) ? 5862.9 ± 5.0 ± 6.7 ± 0.2 127.4 ± 16.7 ± 34.2 LHCb [395] Bπ + ? BJ (5840) ? 5850.3 ± 12.7 ± 13.7 ± 0.2 224.4 ± 23.9 ± 79.8 LHCb [395] Bπ B(5970)0 ?? 5978 ± 5 ± 12 – CDF [394] B+π− 0 ? + − BJ (5960) ? 5969.2 ± 2.9 ± 5.1 ± 0.2 82.3 ± 7.7 ± 9.4 LHCb [395] B π B(5970)+ ?? 5961 ± 5 ± 12 – CDF [394] B0π+ + ? 0 + BJ (5960) ? 5964.9 ± 4.1 ± 2.5 ± 0.2 63.0 ± 14.5 ± 17.2 LHCb [395] B π

2.3. The bottom mesons

In this subsection we review the bottom mesons. Their experimental information is listed in Table4. Different from the charmed and charmed-strange mesons, only the 1 S bottom states (B and B∗) are well established, completing one S-wave doublet (0−, 1−). Accordingly, we only list their averaged masses and widths from PDG [1] together with the experiments which first observed them. However, the higher states starting from ∗ the BJ (5732) are not well established, so we list all the relevant experiments together with their observed masses, widths, and decay modes therein. CONTENTS 38

Figure 13. Mass distribution of the B meson candidates. Taken from CLEO [384].

2.3.1. B and B∗. The lowest-lying bottom mesons, B0 and B± of J P = 0−, were observed in 1983 by the CLEO Collaboration [384], as shown in Fig. 13. Their properties are known very well [1]: the B0 meson has a mass 5279.62 0.15 MeV and a mean life ± (1520 4) 10−15 s; the B± meson has a mass 5279.31 0.15 MeV and a mean life ± × ± (1638 4) 10−15 s; hundreds of their decay modes have been observed in experiments, ± × where the Cabibbo-allowed process b cW − is preferred. → Two years later in 1985, the lowest-lying vector bottom meson, B∗ of J P = 1−, was observed [385]. Its existence has been confirmed by many following experiments, but its properties were not well measured. The best measured quantity is the mass ∗ difference between B and B , that is mB∗ mB = 45.18 0.23 MeV [1]. In 2012, the ∗+ − ± LHCb experiment measured the B mass to be m ∗+ = 5324.26 0.30 0.23 0.17 B ± ± ± MeV [396]. The B∗ meson mainly decays into Bγ.

∗ 0 ∗ 0 2.3.2. BJ (5732), B1(5721) , and B2 (5747) . In 1994, the first orbitally excited bottom ∗ (∗)+ − meson, the BJ (5732), was observed by the OPAL detector at LEP in the B π invariant mass distribution [386], as shown in Fig. 14. This observation was confirmed by the following DELPHI, ALEPH, L3, and CDF experiments [387, 388, 389, 390, 397]. All the experimental information is listed in Table4. In 2000, the OPAL Collaboration further studied this state in the B∗π invariant mass distribution [391]. Its mass and width were measured to be 5738+5 7 MeV and 18+15+29 MeV, respectively. They also −6 ± −13−23 measured its branching ratio decaying into B∗π(X) to be (B∗ B∗π(X)) = 0.85+0.26 0.12 , (53) B J → −0.27 ± CONTENTS 39

Figure 14. The Bπ invariant mass distribution, where the signal corresponds to the

BJ∗ (5732). Taken from OPAL [386]. where (X) refers to decay modes with or without additional accompanying decay particles. Based on the heavy quark symmetry, they determined its branching ratio decaying into B∗π to be (B∗ B∗π) = 0.74+0.12+0.21 . (54) B J → −0.10−0.15 However, all the experiments performed at LEP [386, 387, 388, 389, 391, 397] used the inclusive or semi-exclusive B decays, which made the separation of the states of 0 different spin-parity quantum numbers impossible [398] (see the following B1(5721) ∗ 0 and B2 (5747) ). In 2007, the DØ Collaboration reported the observation of two orbitally excited (L = 1) narrow bottom mesons in the B(∗)+π− invariant mass distribution [392], as 0 P + ∗ 0 P + shown in Fig. 15. They are the B1(5721) of J = 1 and the B2 (5747) of J = 2 . Using the mass of the B+ [399], their masses were determined to be 5720.6 2.4 1.4 ± ± MeV and 5746.8 2.4 1.7 MeV, respectively. ± ± This observation was confirmed in the following CDF and LHCb experiments [393, 394, 395] in the same process. All the experimental information is listed in Table4. The ∗ 0,+ LHCb experiment also measured the relative branching fractions for the B2 (5747) decays [395] (B∗(5747)0 B∗+π−) B 2 → = 0.71 0.14 0.30 , (55) (B∗(5747)0 B+π−) ± ± B 2 → (B∗(5747)+ B∗0π+) B 2 → = 1.0 0.5 0.8 . (B∗(5747)+ B0π+) ± ± B 2 → CONTENTS 40 2 D0, L=1.3 fb-1 250

200

150 → +*π- B1 B 100 * → +*π- B2 B * → +π- B2 B 50 Number of Events / 10 MeV/c

0.20 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 M(B+π-) - M(B+) (GeV/c2)

+ Figure 15. (Color online) The mass difference distribution, ∆M = M(B π−) − M(B+), for exclusive B decays. The three peaks are produced by the three decays + + + B B ∗π−, B∗ B ∗π−, and B∗ B π−. Taken from DØ [392]. 1 → 2 → 2 → CDF Run II Preliminary, 9.6 fb 2 Data Wrong charge data Fit GeV/c B πB*→ 3000 1 B2 πB*→* B2 πB→* B(5970) Cross feed 2000 Background

1000 Candidates per 0.01 Candidates

4 2 0 -2

(data- fi t)/√ data -4 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 + - πQ(B Value (GeV/c) 2)

0 Figure 16. (Color online) Distribution of Q = m(Bπ) m(B) m value of the B∗∗ − − π candidates. Black points are experimental data, which are fitted with several channels as detailed in the legend. Taken from CDF [394].

2.3.3. B(5970), BJ (5960), and BJ (5840). In 2013, an excited bottom meson, the B(5970), was observed by the CDF Collaboration simultaneously in the B+π− and B0π+ mass distributions [394], as shown in Fig. 16. The masses of the B(5970) resonances were determined to be 5978 5 12 MeV for the neutral state and 5961 5 12 MeV for ± ± ± ± the charged state. They used independent parameters for the B(5970)0 and B(5970)+ signals and found individual significance of 4.2σ and 3.7σ for the neutral and charged states, respectively.

Later in 2015, another excited bottom meson, the BJ (5960), was observed by the LHCb Collaboration in the Bπ mass distributions [395]. The results were fitted using CONTENTS 41

both the empirical model and the quark model and the results obtained using the former model are

m 0 = 5969.2 2.9 5.1 0.2 MeV , BJ (5960) ± ± ± Γ 0 = 82.3 7.7 9.4 MeV , (56) BJ (5960) ± ± m + = 5964.9 4.1 2.5 0.2 MeV , BJ (5960) ± ± ± Γ + = 63.0 14.5 17.2 MeV . BJ (5960) ± ± The properties of the BJ (5960) states [395] are consistent with those of the B(5970) [394] observed by the CDF Collaboration when assuming their decays into Bπ, so they may be the same state.

Besides the BJ (5960), the LHCb Collaboration also reported the observation of another excited bottom meson, the BJ (5840), in the Bπ mass distributions [395]. The results obtained using the empirical model are

m 0 = 5862.9 5.0 6.7 0.2 MeV , BJ (5840) ± ± ± Γ 0 = 127.4 16.7 34.2 MeV , (57) BJ (5840) ± ± m + = 5850.3 12.7 13.7 0.2 MeV , BJ (5840) ± ± ± Γ + = 224.4 23.9 79.8 MeV . BJ (5840) ± ± 2.4. The bottom-strange mesons

Table 5. Experimental information of the observed bottom-strange mesons. Only the

1S bottom-strange states (Bs and Bs∗) are well established, completing one S-wave doublet (0−, 1−). Accordingly, we only list their averaged masses and widths from PDG [1] together with the experiments first observing them. However, the higher

states starting from the BsJ∗ (5850) are not well established, so we list all the relevant experiments together with their observed masses, widths, and decay modes therein. State JP Mass (MeV) Width (MeV) Experiments Observed Modes

− −15 Bs 0 5366.82 ± 0.22 (1510 ± 5) × 10 s CUSB-II [400]– ∗ − +1.8 Bs 1 5415.4−1.5 – CUSB-II [400] Bsγ

∗ ? (∗) BsJ (5850) ? 5853 ± 15 47 ± 22 OPAL [386] B K 5829.4 ± 0.7 – CDF [401] B∗K + ∗ Bs1(5830) 1 5828.40 ± 0.04 ± 0.04 ± 0.41 – LHCb [396] B K 5828.3 ± 0.1 ± 0.2 ± 0.4 0.5 ± 0.3 ± 0.3 CDF [394] B∗K 5839.7 ± 0.7 – CDF [401] B(∗)K (∗) ∗ + 5839.6 ± 1.1 ± 0.7 – DØ [402] B K Bs2(5840) 1 5839.99 ± 0.05 ± 0.11 ± 0.17 1.56 ± 0.13 ± 0.47 LHCb [396] B(∗)K 5839.7 ± 0.1 ± 0.1 ± 0.2 1.4 ± 0.4 ± 0.2 CDF [394] B(∗)K

In this subsection we review the bottom-strange mesons. Their experimental information is listed in Table5. Similar to the bottom mesons, only the 1 S bottom- ∗ − − strange states (Bs and Bs ) are well established, completing one S-wave doublet (0 , 1 ). Accordingly, we only list their averaged masses and widths from PDG [1] together with CONTENTS 42

the experiments first observing them. However, the higher states starting from the ∗ BsJ (5850) are not well established, so we list all the relevant experiments together with their observed masses, widths, and decay modes therein.

∗ P − 2.4.1. Bs and Bs . The lowest-lying bottom-strange meson, Bs of J = 0 , was observed in 1990 by the CUSB-II Collaboration in Υ(5S) decays [400]. The lowest- ∗ P − lying vector bottom-strange mesons, Bs of J = 1 , was observed in the same 0 experiment [400]. The properties of the Bs are known very well [1]: the Bs meson has a mass 5366.82 0.22 MeV and a mean life (1510 5) 10−15 s; many of its decay ± ± × modes have been observed in experiments, where the Cabibbo-allowed process b cW − ∗ → is preferred. The existence of the Bs has been confirmed by many following experiments: +1.8 it has the mass 5415.4−1.5 MeV, and mainly decays into Bsγ.

+ Figure 17. The B K− invariant mass distribution, where the signal corresponds to

the BsJ∗ (5850). Taken from OPAL [386].

∗ 0 ∗ 0 2.4.2. BsJ (5850), Bs1(5830) , and Bs2(5840) . In 1994, the first excited bottom- ∗ strange meson, the BsJ (5850), was observed by the OPAL detector at LEP in the B(∗)+K− invariant mass distribution [386], as shown in Fig. 17. Its mass and width were measured to be 5853 15 MeV and 47 22 MeV respectively. Similar to the ∗ ± ± BJ (5732), this experiment performed at LEP [386] used inclusive (or semi-exclusive) B decays, which made impossible the separation of the states of different spin-parity 0 ∗ 0 quantum numbers [398] (see the following Bs1(5830) and Bs2(5840) ). CONTENTS 43 2 (a) 20

10

(b) 20 Candidates per 1.25 MeV/c

10

40 (c)

30

20

10

0 0 50 100 150 200 - m(B+K )-m(B+)-M [MeV/c2] K-

+ Figure 18. (Color online) The mass difference distribution, Q = m(B K−) + + + + 0 +− m(B ) MK− , for the Bs∗∗ candidates with (a) B J/ψK , (b) B D π , − → → 0 and (c) both channels combined. The red dotted line is fitted with the Bs1(5830) and 0 the Bs∗2(5840) . Taken from CDF [401].

In 2008, the CDF Collaboration reported the observation of two orbitally excited (L = 1) narrow bottom-strange mesons in the B(∗)+K− invariant mass distribution [401], 0 P + ∗ 0 as shown in Fig. 18. They are the Bs1(5830) of J = 1 and the Bs2(5840) of J P = 2+. Using the masses of the B, B∗, and K [399], their masses were determined to be 5829.4 0.7 MeV and 5839.6 0.7 MeV, respectively. The B∗ (5840)0 was also ± ± s2 observed by the DØ Collaboration in the same process [402] and its mass was measured to be 5839.6 1.1 0.7 MeV. The collaboration also measured its relative production ± ± rate with respect to the B+ meson to be (b B∗ B+K−) B → s2 → = (1.15 0.23 0.13)% . (58) (b B+) ± ± B → 0 ∗ 0 The Bs1(5830) and Bs2(5840) were confirmed in the following LHCb CONTENTS 44 experiment [396] in the B(∗)+K− invariant mass distribution. The collaboration reported ∗ 0 ∗+ − the observation of the Bs2(5840) meson decaying to B K final states and first measured the width of the B∗ (5840)0 to be 1.56 0.13 0.47 MeV. The CDF experiment s2 ± ± also confirmed their existence in 2013 [394].

2.5. The charmed baryons

To date, there are 23 singly-charmed, 1 doubly-charmed, and 10 bottom baryons collected in PDG [1]. Most of these heavy baryons were reported by the B-factories and Tevatron. In this subsection, we shall review these observed heavy baryons. Interested readers may also consult Refs. [8, 403].

Figure 19. (Color online) The SU(4) multiplets of baryons made of u, d, s, and c quarks: (a) the 20-plet, (b) the 200-plet, and (c) the 4¯-plet. Taken from PDG [1].

First we use baryons containing charm quarks as an example to show their naming scheme, and those containing bottom quarks can be similarly named (see also discussions in PDG [1]). Baryons made from u, d, s, and c quarks belong to the SU(4) multiplets: 4 4 4 = 20 200 200 4¯. (59) ⊗ ⊗ ⊕ 1 ⊕ 2 ⊕ We show the 20, 200 and 4¯ multiplets in Figs. 19(a), 19(b), and 19(c), respectively. Their bottom levels are SU(3) decuplet, octet, and singlet, respectively. One level up from the bottom levels are the baryons with one c quark, and are SU(3) 6, 6 3¯, and ⊕ 3¯ multiplets, respectively. CONTENTS 45

The singly-charmed baryons contain a charm quark and two relativistic light quarks which are often referred as a diquark. Since the charm quark is much heavier than the light quarks, it is almost static and provides the color source to the light quarks. The whole system behaves as the QCD analogue of the familiar hydrogen in QED. The charmed baryon system provides an ideal place to study diquark correlation and the dynamics of the light quarks in the environment of a heavy quark, using the heavy quark symmetry and the heavy quark effective theory (HQET). We list the observed singly-charmed baryons in Table6, including their masses, widths, dominant decay modes, and the observed channels in experiments. In the Baryon Summary Table in PDG [1], only the 3- and 4-star status baryons are included because the 1- and 2-star states are not established. However, we collect all of them in Table6 and will introduce their experimental details in the following.

Table 6. The experimental information of the singly-charmed baryons. The masses, widths and decay modes were taken from PDG [1]. The experiment column lists the discovery experiments for these states.

State Status I(JP ) Mass (MeV) Width (MeV) Experiment Decay modes

+ 1 + −15 Λc ∗ ∗ ∗∗ 0( 2 ) 2286.46 ± 0.14 (200 ± 6) × 10 s Fermilab [404] weak + 1 − Λc(2595) ∗ ∗ ∗ 0( 2 ) 2592.25 ± 0.28 2.59 ± 0.56 CLEO [405]Λcππ, Σcπ + 3 − Λc(2625) ∗ ∗ ∗ 0( 2 ) 2628.11 ± 0.19 < 0.97 ARGUS [406]Λcππ, Σcπ + ? Λc(2765) ∗ ?(? ) 2766.6 ± 2.4 50 CLEO [407]Σcπ, Λcππ + 5 + (∗) 0 Λc(2880) ∗ ∗ ∗ 0( 2 ) 2881.53 ± 0.35 5.8 ± 1.1 CLEO [407]Σc π, Λcππ, D p + ? +1.4 +8 (∗) 0 Λc(2940) ∗ ∗ ∗ 0(? ) 2939.3−1.5 17−6 BaBar [408]Σc π, Λcππ, D p

++ 1 + +0.09 Σc(2455) ∗ ∗ ∗∗ 1( 2 ) 2453.97 ± 0.14 1.89−0.18 BNL [409]Λcπ + 1 + Σc(2455) ∗ ∗ ∗∗ 1( 2 ) 2452.9 ± 0.4 < 4.6 TST [410]Λcπ 0 1 + +0.11 Σc(2455) ∗ ∗ ∗∗ 1( 2 ) 2453.75 ± 0.14 1.83−0.19 BNL [409]Λcπ ++ 3 + +0.21 +0.30 Σc(2520) ∗ ∗ ∗ 1( 2 ) 2518.41−0.19 14.78−0.40 SKAT [411]Λcπ + 3 + Σc(2520) ∗ ∗ ∗ 1( 2 ) 2517.5 ± 2.3 < 17 CLEO [412]Λcπ 0 3 + +0.4 Σc(2520) ∗ ∗ ∗ 1( 2 ) 2518.48 ± 0.20 15.3−0.5 CLEO [413]Λcπ ++ ? +4 +22 (∗) Σc(2800) ∗ ∗ ∗ 1(? ) 2801−6 75−17 Belle [414]Λcπ, Σc π, Λcππ + ? +14 +60 (∗) Σc(2800) ∗ ∗ ∗ 1(? ) 2792− 5 62−40 Belle [414]Λcπ, Σc π, Λcππ 0 ? +5 +22 (∗) Σc(2800) ∗ ∗ ∗ 1(? ) 2806−7 72−15 Belle [414]Λcπ, Σc π, Λcππ

+ 1 1 + +0.28 −15 Ξc ∗ ∗ ∗ 2 ( 2 ) 2467.93−0.40 (442 ± 26) × 10 s CERN [415] weak 0 1 1 + +0.28 +13 −15 Ξc ∗ ∗ ∗ 2 ( 2 ) 2470.85−0.40 (112−10) × 10 s CLEO [416] weak 0+ 1 1 + Ξc ∗ ∗ ∗ 2 ( 2 ) 2575.7 ± 3.0 – CLEO [417]Ξcγ 00 1 1 + Ξc ∗ ∗ ∗ 2 ( 2 ) 2577.9 ± 2.9 – CLEO [417]Ξcγ + 1 3 + Ξc(2645) ∗ ∗ ∗ 2 ( 2 ) 2645.9 ± 0.5 2.6 ± 0.5 CLEO [418]Ξcπ 0 1 3 + Ξc(2645) ∗ ∗ ∗ 2 ( 2 ) 2645.9 ± 0.5 < 5.5 CLEO [419]Ξcπ + 1 1 − 0 Ξc(2790) ∗ ∗ ∗ 2 ( 2 ) 2789.1 ± 3.2 < 15 CLEO [420]Ξcπ 0 1 1 − 0 Ξc(2790) ∗ ∗ ∗ 2 ( 2 ) 2791.9 ± 3.3 < 12 CLEO [420]Ξcπ + 1 3 − ∗ 0 Ξc(2815) ∗ ∗ ∗ 2 ( 2 ) 2816.6 ± 0.9 < 3.5 CLEO [421]Ξc π, Ξcππ, Ξcπ 0 1 3 − ∗ 0 Ξc(2815) ∗ ∗ ∗ 2 ( 2 ) 2819.6 ± 1.2 < 6.5 CLEO [421]Ξc π, Ξcππ, Ξcπ 0 ? Ξc(2930) ∗ ?(? ) 2931 ± 6 36 ± 13 BaBar [422]ΛcK + 1 ? Ξc(2980) ∗ ∗ ∗ 2 (? ) 2970.7 ± 2.2 17.9 ± 3.5 Belle [423]ΣcK, ΛcKπ, Ξcππ 0 1 ? Ξc(2980) ∗ ∗ ∗ 2 (? ) 2968.0 ± 2.6 20 ± 7 Belle [423]ΣcK, ΛcKπ, Ξcππ + ? Ξc(3055) ∗ ∗ ∗ ?(? ) 3055.1 ± 1.7 11 ± 4 BaBar [424]ΣcK, ΛcKπ, DΛ + 1 ? Ξc(3080) ∗ ∗ ∗ 2 (? ) 3076.94 ± 0.28 4.3 ± 1.5 Belle [423]ΣcK, ΛcKπ, DΛ 0 1 ? Ξc(3080) ∗ ∗ ∗ 2 (? ) 3079.9 ± 1.4 5.6 ± 2.2 Belle [423]ΣcK, ΛcKπ, DΛ + ? ∗ Ξc(3123) ∗ ?(? ) 3122.9 ± 1.3 4.4 ± 3.8 BaBar [424]Σc K, ΛcKπ

0 1 + −15 Ωc ∗ ∗ ∗ 0( 2 ) 2695.2 ± 1.7 (69 ± 12) × 10 s WA62 [425] weak 0 3 + Ωc(2770) ∗ ∗ ∗ 0( 2 ) 2765.9 ± 2.0 – Belle [426]Ωcγ CONTENTS 46

+ + 2.5.1. Λc . The lowest-lying charmed baryon is the Λc ground state. It was first reported by Fermilab in 1976 [404]. To date, there are numerous measurements for the + + 0 + + 0 0 + branching fractions of the Λc [1, 427]. Based on the Λc ΛKSK and Λc Σ KSK → + → decay modes, BaBar reported the most precise measurement of the Λc mass in 2005: m = (2286.46 0.14) MeV , (60) ± which is now the most precise mass measurement of an open-charm hadron and adopted + by PDG for the Λc mass without the other measurement for averages.

+ + + + 2.5.2. Λc(2595) and Λc(2625) . The Λc(2625) was the first Λc orbital excitation + + − observed in the Λc π π final states by the ARGUS Collaboration at DESY in 1993 [406], which was confirmed in the same channel in 1995 by the CLEO Collaboration [405]. In addition, the CLEO Collaboration also reported another orbital excitation + Λc(2595) in the same paper [405], which was soon confirmed by the E687 Collaboration [428, 429] and the ARGUS Collaboration [430]. + + The Λc(2595) and Λc(2625) lie above the Σcπ threshold, which is the predominant + + S-wave decay mode of the Λc(2595) . However, the Λc(2625) can only decay into Σcπ + + via the D-wave decay. Since both the Λc(2595) and Λc(2625) have not been seen in + 0 + the Λc π channel, they can not be the excited Σc states.

+ + + + Figure 20. The signal for the Λc(2765) shown in ∆Mππ = M(Λc π π−) M(Λc ) + + − with cuts that (a) ∆Mπ = M(Λc π) M(Λc ) is consistent with that expected for a Σc, + + − and (b) ∆M = M(Λ π) M(Λ ) is consistent with that expected for a Σ∗. Taken π c − c c from CLEO [407].

+ + + 2.5.3. Λc(2765) , Λc(2880) , and Λc(2940) . The CLEO Collaboration reported the + + + + − + + − Λc(2765) and Λc(2880) in the Λc π π channel in 2001 [407]. Since the Λc π π final + states are accessible to both the isoscalar and isovector channels, the Λc(2765) can be CONTENTS 47

+ + + either a Λc or a Σc state. As shown in Fig. 20, the Λc(2765) was a rather broad + structure, which could be due to multiple overlapping states. The Λc(2765) was also observed by the Belle Collaboration [431].

+ + 0 Figure 21. The signals for the Λc(2880) and Λc(2940) in the D p invariant mass distribution. Taken from BaBar [408].

+ For the Λc(2880) , CLEO did not determine its quantum numbers [407]. In + 2007, the BaBar Collaboration observed two narrow charmed baryons Λc(2880) and + 0 Λc(2940) in the invariant D p mass distribution [408], as shown in Fig. 21. The + − Belle Collaboration studied the Λcπ π channel and also observed these two states + 0,++ ± [431]. Belle studied the decay angular distribution of the Λc(2880) Σc π decay + → corresponding to different spin hypothesis of the Λc(2880) . The result of the fit favors + the spin 5/2. To determine the parity of the Λc(2880) , Belle also measured the ratio Γ(Σ (2520)π) R c = 0.225 0.062 0.025 , (61) ≡ Γ(Σc(2455)π) ± ± which is consistent with the prediction of the heavy quark effective theory for the 5/2+ state in Refs. [220, 432, 433]. However, there still exists controversy on its parity, which needs to be determined in future experiments.

2.5.4. Σc(2455) and Σc(2520). The Σc(2455) and Σc(2520) are the two lowest lying Σc ground states, which are well established and confirmed by several experiments [1]. ++ 0 The Σc(2455) and Σc(2455) were observed by BNL many years ago [409] while + their isospin partner Σc(2455) is much more difficult to be detected. It was first reported by the BEBC TST Neutrino Collaboration in 1980 [410] and confirmed in ++ 0 1993 by CLEO [434]. The Σc(2520) and Σc(2520) were reported in Refs. [411, 413] + while the Σc(2520) state was observed later in Ref. [412] based on its decay into + 0 ++ Λc π . In Ref. [435], CLEO measured the masses and decay widths for Σc(2520) CONTENTS 48

0 and Σc(2455) , which were much improved by the CDF Collaboration [436]. The angular momentum of Σc(2455) has been measured by the BaBar Collaboration by − + − 0 reconstructing B Λc pπ¯ decay proceeding via Σc(2455) [437], as shown in Fig. 22. → 0 The angular distribution prefers the spin-1/2 hypothesis for Σc(2455) .

450 400 350 300 Events / ( 0.4 ) 250 200 150 100 50 0 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 -0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 θ cos h

Figure 22. (Color online) The efficiency-corrected helicity angle distribution for 0 Σc(2455) candidate (points). The solid and dashed lines correspond to the spin-1/2 and 3/2 hypothesis respectively. Taken from BaBar [437].

2500 200 200 200 2000 0 0 0 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.6 1500

1000

500

0 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.4 0.6 0.8

+ + + Figure 23. (Color online) M(Λc π) M(Λc ) distributions of the selected Λc π− + 0 + + − (left), Λc π (middle), and Λc π (right) combinations. The signals correspond to the Σc(2800). Taken from Belle [414].

+ 2.5.5. Σc(2800). The Σc(2800) resonance was observed in the Λc π invariant mass distribution by the Belle Collaboration in 2005 [414], as shown in Fig. 23. As mentioned above, BaBar also reported a neutral charmed baryon state in the decay B− Λ+π−p¯ → c CONTENTS 49

[437]. Although the widths are consistent in both experiments, the fitted mass is 0 (2846 8 10) MeV by BaBar [437], about 3σ away from that of Σc(2800) reported by ± ± Belle [414]. If this mass discrepancy is genuine and the states are distinct, the neutral

state seen by BaBar would be one of the missing Σc resonances.

0 + 0 0+ 00 2.5.6. Ξc, Ξc, and Ξc(2645). The Ξc ,Ξc and Ξc ,Ξc resonances form two isospin doublets, respectively. They all contain three quarks with different flavors: csu for + the charged states while csd for the neutral states. The Ξc ground state was first observed in the reaction Σ− + Be (ΛK−π+π+) + X in an experiment at the CERN → 0 − + SPS hyperon beam [415]. Its isospin partner Ξc was discovered later in the Ξ π final states by the CLEO Collaboration in 1988 [416]. The mass splitting was measured

to be mΞ0 m + = (2.9 0.5) MeV. As shown in Table6, PDG identified their c − Ξc ± quantum numbers to be I(J P ) = 1/2(1/2+), where the J P = 1/2+ is the quark-model prediction [1]. 0+ 00 In 1998, CLEO discovered the second isospin doublet, Ξc and Ξc , in their decays + 0 into Ξc γ and Ξc γ [417], respectively. These two resonances were explained as the + 0 symmetric partners of the well-established antisymmetric Ξc and Ξc . Their mass differences were measured to be

m 0+ m + = (107.8 1.7 2.5) MeV , (62) Ξc − Ξc ± ± m 00 m 0 = (107.0 1.4 2.5) MeV , Ξc − Ξc ± ± 0 which are too small to allow the hadronic transitions Ξ Ξcπ. The only allowed decay c → modes between them are the radiative decays, which were the observed channels. 0 + − In 1995, the Ξc(2645) was reported by the CLEO Collaboration in the Ξc π final + − + states with M(Ξc π ) M(Ξc ) = 178.2 0.5 1.0 MeV and a width of Γ < 5.5 MeV [419]. − + ± ± 0 + Its charged partner Ξc(2645) was also reported later by CLEO in its decay mode Ξc π with M(Ξ0π+) M(Ξ0) = 174.3 0.5 1.0 MeV and a width of Γ < 3.1 MeV [418]. The c − c ± ± Belle Collaboration confirmed these resonances with more precise mass measurements in

Ref. [438]. Although its spin-parity has not been measured, the Ξc(2645) was identified to be a J P = 3/2+ state in PDG [1].

2.5.7. Ξc(2790) and Ξc(2815). All these two excited Ξc states were first observed by + 0 the CLEO Collaboration. The Ξc(2815) and Ξc(2815) were first observed by CLEO +(0) + − + 0 in the decays into Ξc π π via the intermediate states Ξc(2645) and Ξc(2645) [421], respectively. Belle confirmed their existence [438]. The Ξc(2815) states were P − interpreted as the charmed-strange analogues of the Λc(2625), with J = 3/2 . 0 Finally, the Ξc(2790) was observed in the decay Ξcπ by CLEO [420] and confirmed by Belle [438], which were explained as the charmed-strange partners of the Λc(2595) with J P = 1/2− [1].

0 0 2.5.8. Ξc(2930) , Ξc(2980), Ξc(3055), Ξc(3080), and Ξc(3123). The Ξc(2930) state was seen in the Λ+K− invariant mass spectrum of the B− Λ+Λ¯ −K− decay by the c → c c CONTENTS 50 ) 2 20 18 16 14 12 10 8

Events/(10 MeV/c 6 4 2 0 2.8 2.85 2.9 2.95 3 Λ+ - 2 m( c K ) (GeV/c )

+ ¯ Figure 24. Reconstructed B− Λc Λc−K− candidate in the Dalitz plot (left) and the + → Λc K− invariant mass distribution (right). The peak in the right panel corresponds to 0 the Ξc(2930) . Taken from BaBar [422].

+ − BaBar Collaboration [422]. As shown in Fig. 24, both the Dalitz plot and the Λc K projection supported the existence of a single resonance. However, a more complicated explanation, such as two narrow resonances in close proximity, cannot be excluded. 0 PDG denotes the Ξc(2930) to be a 1-star resonance [1].

40 200 35 175 a) a) 2 2 30 150 25 125 100 20

75 15 50 10 Events / 2.5 MeV/c Events / 2.5 MeV/c 25 5 0 0 2.9 2.95 3 3.05 3.1 3.15 3.2 3.25 2.9 2.95 3 3.05 3.1 3.15 3.2 3.25 M(Λ+ K-π+) (GeV/c2) Λ+ 0π- 2 c M( c KS ) (GeV/c ) 200 25 175 b) 2

2 b) 150 20 125 15 100

75 10 50 Events / 2.5 MeV/c Events / 2.5 MeV/c 5 25

0 0 2.9 2.95 3 3.05 3.1 3.15 3.2 3.25 2.9 2.95 3 3.05 3.1 3.15 3.2 3.25 + - 2 M(Λ+ K π ) (GeV/c ) Λ+ 0π+ 2 c M( c KS ) (GeV/c )

+ + + 0 Figure 25. (Color online) M(Λc K−π ) and M(Λc KSπ−) distributions together with the overlaid fitting curves. The curves are fitted with the Ξc(2980) and Ξc(3080). Taken from Belle [423].

The remaining four resonances, Ξc(2980), Ξc(3055), Ξc(3080), and Ξc(3123), were + ¯ + all seen in the Λc Kπ final states. In 2006, the Belle Collaboration reported two new + − + + 0 − charmed-strange baryons, Ξc(2980) and Ξc(3080), decaying into Λc K π and Λc KSπ CONTENTS 51

[423], as shown in Fig. 25. The Ξc(2980) was confirmed later by Belle in its decay into Ξc(2645)π [438].

+ + + + Figure 26. The M(Λc K−π ) distributions in the M(Λc π ) ranges (b) within 3.0 ++ natural widths of the Σc(2455) mass and (c) within 2.0 natural widths of the ++ Σc(2520) mass. The curves are fitted with the Ξc(2980), Ξc(3055), Ξc(3080), and Ξc(3123). Taken from BaBar [424].

These two states were also confirmed by the BaBar Collaboration [424], in which two additional charmed-strange baryons, Ξc(3055) and Ξc(3123), were reported. In Fig. 26, + − + + + the M(Λc K π ) distributions were shown in two ranges of M(Λc π ), in which the Ξc(2980) and Ξc(3080) were clearly visible. Moreover, two new signals, Ξc(3055) and

Ξc(3123), were also observed with the resonance parameters mΞ (3055) = (3054.2 1.2 c ± ± 0.5) MeV, ΓΞ (3055) = (17 6 11) MeV, mΞ (3123) = (3122.9 1.3 0.3) MeV, and c ± ± c ± ± ΓΞ (3123) = (4.4 3.4 1.7) MeV. The Ξc(3123) had a limited statistical significance c ± ± 3.6σ, which was identified as a 1-star state in PDG [1]. A recent experimental study on the Ξc(3055) and Ξc(3080) can be found in Ref. [439] where the Belle Collaboration CONTENTS 52

gave the following three branching ratios: + + (Ξc(3055) ΛD ) B + → ++ − = 5.09 1.01 0.76 , (Ξc(3055) Σc K ) ± ± B +→ + (Ξc(3080) ΛD ) B + → ++ − = 1.29 0.30 0.15 , (63) (Ξc(3080) Σc K ) ± ± B + → ∗++ − (Ξc(3080) Σc K ) B + → ++ − = 1.07 0.27 0.01 . (Ξc(3080) Σ K ) ± ± B → c As listed in Table6, the quantum numbers for all these excited Ξ c states have not been determined yet. More experimental information is required to constrain the allowed possibilities.

Very recently, the Belle Collaboration reported the excited Ξc states decaying 0 + into Ξc or Ξc ground state, via the emission of photons and/or charged pions [440]. They presented new measurements of the masses and decay widths 0 of the Ξ ,Ξc(2645), Ξc(2790), Ξc(2815), and Ξc(2980) isodoublets. These new mass measurements constitute a considerable improvement in precision compared with previous measurements [1].

0 0 0 2.5.9. Ωc and Ωc(2770) . The Ωc ground state was first reported in 1985 by the experiment WA62, which searched for the charmed-strange baryons in the Σ− interaction in the SPS charged hyperon beam at CERN [425]. Although this signal was seen in several other experiments [441, 442, 443], the statistical significance was still limited due to very few events (order of 10) before the B factory. In 2009, the 0 Belle Collaboration [426] provided a more precise mass measurement of the Ωc to be +1.8 (2693.6 0.3−1.5) MeV, which is close to the PDG value shown in Table6. In the left ± 0 − + − panel of Fig. 27, the Ωc signal was clearly visible in the M(Ω π ) M(Ω ) + mΩ− 0 − + − spectrum of the Ωc Ω π process. → 0 In the same experiment of Belle [426], the excited state Ωc(2770) was also reconstructed in the Ω0γ mode, as shown in the right panel of Fig. 27. This resonance 0 Ωc(2770) was originally discovered by BaBar in the same channel [444], as shown in

∗0 0 Fig. 28. Both BaBar and Belle measured the mass difference of mΩc mΩc and their +0.8 − results were both consistent with the PDG average value (70.7−0.9) MeV [1]. Such a mass difference is too small for any hadronic strong decay to occur. Although its J P 0 P + has not been measured, the Ωc(2770) was predicted to be the J = 3/2 partner of the Σc(2520) and Ξc(2645) [1]. To date, no other radially or orbitally excited Ωc resonances have been discovered.

2.6. The bottom baryons

In this subsection we review the bottom baryons. The number of such baryons collected in PDG [1] is 10. Their experimental information is listed in Table7. All the 1 S bottom ∗ P + baryons have been observed, except the Ωb of J = 3/2 . Hence, we only list their averaged masses and widths from PDG [1] together with the experiments first observing CONTENTS 53

450 14 400 12 350 ) ) 2 2 10 300 250 8

200 6 150

Events / (4 MeV/c Events / (2 MeV/c 4 100 50 2 0 0 2.55 2.6 2.65 2.7 2.75 2.8 2.85 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 − + − − 2 0 0 2 M(Ω π )−M(Ω )+mΩ [GeV/c ] M(Ωcγ)−M(Ωc) [GeV/c ]

+ 0 + Figure 27. Left: M(Ω−π ) M(Ω−) + mΩ− spectrum in the Ωc Ω−π process. 0 0 − 0 0 → Right: M(Ω γ) M(Ω ) spectrum in the Ωc∗ Ωc γ process. The signal in the − 0 → left panel corresponds to the Ωc while the one in the right panel corresponds to the 0 Ωc(2770) . Taken from Belle [426].

them, but we note that not all of them are well known. There are only two excited 0 − 0 bottom baryons observed in experiments, the Λb(5912) of 1/2 and the Λb(5920) of 3/2−, and we list all the relevant experiments together with their observed masses, widths, and decay modes therein. We shall separately review them in the following.

Table 7. Experimental information of the observed bottom baryons. All the 1S P + bottom baryons have been observed, except the Ωb∗ of J = 3/2 . Hence, we only list their averaged masses and widths from PDG [1] together with the experiments first observing them, but we note that not all of them are well known. There are 0 only two excited bottom baryons observed in experiments, the Λb(5912) of 1/2− and 0 the Λb(5920) of 3/2−, and we list all the relevant experiments together with their observed masses, widths, and decay modes therein.

State Status JP Mass (MeV) Width (MeV) Experiments Decay Modes

0 + −15 − + − Λb ∗ ∗ ∗ 1/2 5619.51 ± 0.23 (1466 ± 10) × 10 s CERN R415 [445] pK π π 0 − 0 + − Λb(5912) ∗ ∗ ∗ 1/2 5911.97 ± 0.12 ± 0.02 ± 0.66 < 0.66 LHCb [446]Λb π π 5919.77 ± 0.08 ± 0.02 ± 0.66 < 0.63 LHCb [446]Λ0π+π− 0 ∗ ∗ ∗ − b Λb(5920) 3/2 0 + − 5919.22 ± 0.35 ± 0.30 ± 0.60 – CDF [447]Λb π π

Σ+ 1/2+ 5811.3+0.9 ± 1.7 9.7+3.8 +1.2 CDF [448]Λ π b ∗ ∗ ∗ −0.8 −2.8−1.1 b − + +0.6 +3.1 Σb 1/2 5815.5−0.5 ± 1.7 4.9−2.1 ± 1.1 CDF [448]Λbπ Σ∗+ 3/2+ 5832.1 ± 0.7+1.7 11.5+2.7 +1.0 CDF [448]Λ π b ∗ ∗ ∗ −1.8 −2.2−1.5 b ∗− + +1.7 +2.2 +0.9 Σb 3/2 5835.1 ± 0.6−1.8 7.5−1.8−1.4 CDF [448]Λbπ

Ξ0 5791.9 ± 0.5 (1464 ± 31) × 10−15 s semileptonic b ∗ ∗ ∗ + DELPHI [449] − 1/2 −15 Ξb 5794.5 ± 1.4 (1560 ± 40) × 10 s decays 0 − + 0 − Ξb(5935) ∗ ∗ ∗ 1/2 5935.02 ± 0.02 ± 0.05 < 0.08 LHCb [450]Ξb π 0 + − + Ξb(5945) ∗ ∗ ∗ 3/2 5948.9 ± 0.8 ± 1.4 2.1 ± 1.7 CMS [451]Ξb π ∗ − + 0 − Ξb (5955) ∗ ∗ ∗ 3/2 5955.33 ± 0.12 ± 0.05 1.65 ± 0.31 ± 0.10 LHCb [450]Ξb π

− + +230 −15 − Ωb ∗ ∗ ∗ 1/2 6046.4 ± 1.9 (1570−200) × 10 s DØ [452] J/ψΩ CONTENTS 54

2 25 (a) 20

15

10

5 Candidates / 5 MeV/c

2 70 (b) 60 50 40 30 20

Candidates / 5 MeV/c 10 2 16 (c) 14 12 10 8 6 4 Candidates / 5 MeV/c 2

2 35 30 (d) 25 20 15 10

Candidates / 5 MeV/c 5 2 120 (e) 100

80

60 40 Candidates / 5 MeV/c 20

0 2.75 2.8 2.85 2.9 2.95 3 PDG 2 M 0 - M 0 + M 0 GeV/c Ωc γ Ωc Ωc

0 0 Figure 28. (Color online) The invariant mass distributions of Ωc∗ Ωc γ candidates, 0 + + 0→ + + with Ωc reconstructed in the decay modes (a) Ω−π , (b) Ω−π π , (c) Ω−π π−π , + (d) Ξ−K−π π−, and (e) for the combined decay modes. The signals correspond to 0 the Ωc(2770) . Taken from BaBar [444].

0 0 P + 2.6.1. Λb . The lowest-lying bottom baryon, the Λb of J = 1/2 , was first reported by the CERN R415 Collaboration in 1981 [445]. It has a mass 5619.51 0.23 MeV and ± the mean life (1466 10) 10−15 s. Many of its decay modes have been observed in ± × experiments, where the Cabibbo-allowed process b cW − is preferred [1]. →

0 0 0 2.6.2. Λb(5912) and Λb(5920) . The two excited bottom baryons, the Λb(5912) of − 0 − 0 + − 1/2 and the Λb(5920) of 3/2 , were first observed in the Λb π π invariant mass spectrum by the LHCb Collaboration in 2012 [446], as shown in Fig. 29. Their masses CONTENTS 55 ) 2

c 30 25 LHCb 20 15 10

Candidates / (0.5 MeV/ 5 0 5900 5910 5920 5930 5940 5950 M Λ0π+π− c2 ( b ) (MeV/ )

0 + Figure 29. (Color online) The Λb π π− invariant mass spectrum, where the signals 0 0 correspond to the Λb(5912) and Λb(5920) . Taken from LHCb [446]. were measured to be

MΛ∗0(5912) = 5911.97 0.12 0.02 0.66 MeV , (64) b ± ± ± MΛ∗0(5920) = 5919.77 0.08 0.02 0.66 MeV , b ± ± ± and the upper limits of their widths were determined to be

Γ ∗0 < 0.66 MeV , (65) Λb (5912) Γ ∗0 < 0.63 MeV , Λb (5920) at the 90% C.L. 0 Later in 2013, the Λb(5920) was confirmed by the CDF Collaboration [447]. Its mass was measured to be 5919.22 0.35 0.30 0.60 MeV, consistent with the LHCb ± ± ± experiment [446].

∗ P + ∗ 2.6.3. Σb and Σb . The two ground state Σb baryons, the Σb of J = 1/2 and the Σb P + 0 of J = 3/2 , were both first observed in the Λb π invariant mass spectrum by the CDF Collaboration [448], as shown in Fig. 30. Their masses were measured to be +2.0 MΣ+ = 5807.8−2.2 1.7 MeV , b ± MΣ− = 5815.2 1.0 1.7 MeV , (66) b ± ± +1.6+1.7 M ∗+ = 5829.0 MeV , Σb −1.8−1.8 +1.8 MΣ∗− = 5836.4 2.0−1.7 MeV . b ± Five years later, the CDF Collaboration confirmed their previous results, measured their masses and widths to be +0.9 MΣ+ = 5811.3−0.8 1.7 MeV , b ± +3.8+1.2 Γ + = 9.7 MeV , Σb −2.8−1.1 +0.6 MΣ− = 5815.5−0.5 1.7 MeV , b ± CONTENTS 56 ) 2 2 80 80 Data Total Fit 60 60 Background 40 Σ b 20 *

Σ Candidates / (10 MeV/c b 00 100 200 300 400 500 40 Σ+ b

20 Candidates per 5 MeV/c 0 ) 2 80 80 60 60 40 20 Candidates / (10 MeV/c 00 100 200 300 400 500 40 Σ- b 20

0 0 50 100 150 200 Λ0π Λ0 2 Q = m( b ) - m( b) - mπ (MeV/c )

( ) 0 + 0 Figure 30. (Color online) The Σb∗ fit to the Λb π (top) and Λb π− (bottom) subsamples, where the signals correspond to the Σb and Σb∗. Taken from CDF [448].

+3.1 ΓΣ− = 4.9−2.1 1.1 MeV , (67) b ± +1.7 MΣ∗+ = 5832.1 0.7−1.8 MeV , b ± +2.7+1.0 Γ ∗+ = 11.5 MeV , Σb −2.2−1.5 +1.7 MΣ∗− = 5835.1 0.6−1.8 MeV , b ± +2.2+0.9 Γ ∗− = 7.5 MeV . Σb −1.8−1.4

0 ∗ P + 2.6.4. Ξb, Ξb and Ξb . The Ξb ground state of J = 1/2 was first observed by the DELPHI Collaboration in 1995 in its semileptonic decay process [449]. It has been confirmed in many other experiments, and its properties are known very well [1]: the Ξ− has a mass 5794.5 1.4 MeV and a mean life (1560 40) 10−15 s; the Ξ0 has a b ± ± × b mass 5791.9 0.5 MeV and a mean life (1464 31) 10−15 s; several of their decay ± ± × modes were observed in experiments. P + 0 − Many years later in 2014, the other Ξb state of J = 1/2 , the Ξb(5935) , was 0 − observed in the Ξb π mass spectrum by the LHCb Collaboration [450]. Its mass was measured to be 5935.02 0.02 0.01 0.50 MeV, and the upper limit of its decay width ± ± ± was determined to be 0.08 MeV at 95% C.L. 0 In 2012 the Ξb(5945) was observed by the CMS Collaboration [451]. It was − + observed in the distribution of the difference between the mass of the Ξb π system − + and the sum of the masses of the Ξb and π , as shown in Fig. 31. Its mass was CONTENTS 57

16 CMS Opposite-sign data 14 pp, s = 7 TeV L = 5.3 fb-1 Signal+background fit 12 Background

10 (b)

8 candidates per 2 MeV *0 b

Ξ 6

4

2

0 0 10 20 30 40 50 M(J/ψΞ-π+) - M(J/ψΞ-) - M(π) [MeV]

+ Figure 31. (Color online) Opposite-sign Q = M(J/ψΞ−π ) M(J/ψΞ−) M(π) − − distribution in the 0 < Q < 50 MeV range. The blue solid curve is fitted with the 0 Ξb(5945) . Taken from CMS [451]. measured to be 5945.0 0.7 0.3 2.7 MeV, and its Breit-Wigner width was fitted to ± ± ± be 2.1 1.7 MeV. Given its measured mass and decay mode, this state was suggested ± ∗0 P + (0) to be the Ξb , the J = 3/2 companion of the Ξb . P + ∗ − Another Ξb state of J = 3/2 , the Ξb (5955) was observed by the LHCb 0 − Collaboration [450] together with the Ξb(5935) . Its mass and width were measured to be 5955.33 0.12 0.06 0.50 MeV and 1.65 0.31 0.10 MeV, and can also be ± P ± + ± (0) ± ± explained as the J = 3/2 companion of the Ξb . However, the mass difference between 0 ∗ − the Ξb(5945) and the Ξb (5955) seems too large, which needs to be clarified in future experiments. Besides the up and down mass difference, the Coulomb interaction among the three quarks should contribute around 5 MeV to the rather large mass splitting.

− − P + 2.6.5. Ωb . Only the ground state Ωb baryon, the Ωb of J = 1/2 , was observed by the − DØ Collaboration [452], as shown in Fig. 32. DØ reported the doubly strange Ωb state in the decay channel Ω− J/ψΩ− with J/ψ µ+µ− and Ω− ΛK− (pπ−)K− in b → → → → pp¯− collisions at √s = 1.96 TeV. It has been confirmed in many other experiments [1], and its mass and mean life were determined to be 6046.4 1.9 MeV and (1570+230) 10−15 ± −200 × s, respectively.

2.7. The doubly-charmed baryons

The lightest doubly-charmed baryon has the quark content ccu or ccd. In 2002, the + SELEX Collaboration at Fermilab discovered the first doubly-charmed baryon Ξcc in the charged decay mode Ξ+ Λ+K−π+ with a statistical significance of 6.3σ [453]. cc → c This structure was soon confirmed by SELEX in its decay mode Ξ+ pD+K− with a cc → CONTENTS 58

Figure 32. (Color online) The mass distribution of the Ωb− candidates. Taken from DØ [452].

signal significance 4.8σ [454]. The average mass value provided by PDG is [1] m = 3518.9 0.9 MeV . (68) ± + SELEX also measured the lifetime of Ξcc with τ < 33 fs [453]. This result is much smaller than the theoretical calculations [1, 455]. See also lattice QCD studies in Refs. [456, 457]. + To reproduce the structure of Ξcc in SELEX, BaBar [458], Belle [423], and the + − + FOCUS photoproduction experiment [459] studied the Λc K π decay mode along with + various other final states. None of them found any signal of the Ξcc. However, all these experiments used the π−-induced reactions while SELEX used a hyperon beam. They have very different production mechanisms. Thus it cannot be excluded that the SELEX had a higher double-charm baryon cross-section than other experiments.

2.8. The X(5568) Very recently, the DØ Collaboration reported evidence for a narrow structure X(5568) 0 ± in the Bs π invariant mass spectrum with 5.1σ significance [3], as shown in Fig. 33. The measured mass and width of the X(5568) are +0.9 mX(5568) = 5567.8 2.9(stat) (syst) MeV , (69) ± −1.9 +5.0 ΓX(5568) = 21.9 6.4(stat) (syst) MeV . ± −2.5 CONTENTS 59

0 ± Due to the Bs π decay final states, the X(5568) will be the first evidence for a hadronic state with valence quarks of four different flavors su¯bd¯ (or sd¯bu¯). Hence, the reported X(5568) state, if it exists, is a good candidate for exotic tetraquark state.

140 D0 Run II, 10.4 fb•1

2 120

100

80

) / 20 MeV/c 60 0 S

40 N (B

20

0 5.5 5.55 5.6 5.65 5.7 5.75 5.8 5.85 5.9 0 ± 2 m (B S π ) [GeV/c ]

0 Figure 33. The Bs π± invariant mass distribution, where the signal corresponds to the X(5568). Taken from DØ [3].

Later, the LHCb Collaboration presented preliminary results for their analysis of the pp collision data at energies 7 TeV and 8 TeV [4]. They didn’t find any resonance 0 ± structure in the Bs π invariant mass distribution. The CMS Collaboration also can not + confirm the peaking structure of X(5568) Bsπ [5]. → 0 ± 0 The D0 Collaboration also saw an enhancement in m(B π ) with B Dsµν at the s s → same mass and at the expected width and rate [460]. This observation is a confirmation of the X(5568) state in a new channel. However, the production mechanisms are different at Tevatron and LHC. It is possible that the X(5568) cross-section in the pp¯ collisions may be higher than that in the pp collisions. In other words, the existence of the exotic state X(5568) needs further experimental confirmation.

3. Candidates of the conventional excited heavy mesons

The heavy mesons can be categorized into the charmed mesons, charmed-strange mesons, bottom mesons and bottom-strange mesons, all of which are composed of one heavy quark (charm or bottom, usually denoted as Q) and one light quark (up, down or strange, usually denoted as q). In the heavy mesons, the light degrees of freedom circle around the nearly static heavy quark. The whole system behaves as the QCD analogue of the familiar hydrogen. The ground-state heavy mesons have no orbital excitations (L = 0). Its total angular momentum (J) is the same as its spin angular momentum (S), which is the sum of the heavy quark spin (sQ) and the light quark spin (sl):

J = S = sQ sl = 1/2 1/2 = 0 1 . (70) ⊗ ⊗ ⊕ CONTENTS 60

1 3 2S+1 Hence, there are two ground-state heavy mesons, 1 S0 and 1 S1 (the symbol n LJ is used here, where n is the principal quantum number). These two states compose a P − − spin doublet (J = 0 and 1 ). In the heavy quark limit (mQ ), their masses are → ∞ degenerate. Since the heavy quark symmetry is explicitly broken, there exists a mass splitting between them. The P -wave heavy mesons (L = 1) are a bit more complicated. We denote the total angular momentum of its light degrees of freedom as jl, which is the sum of the orbital angular momentum (L) and the light quark spin (sl):

jl = L sl = 1 1/2 = 1/2 3/2 . (71) ⊗ ⊗ ⊕ Then its total angular momentum (J) is: 0 J = jl sQ = 0 1 1 2 . (72) ⊗ ⊕ ⊕ ⊕ 3 1 3 3 Hence, there are four P -wave heavy mesons, 1 P0, 1 P1, 1 P1 and 1 P2. The two spin-1 1 3 states, 1 P1 and 1 P1, can mix with each other to form the two physical states 1P1 0 and 1P1. In the heavy quark limit, these four states further compose two spin doublets + + + + (0 , 1 ) and (1 , 2 ). The former doublet has jl = 1/2 while the latter has jl = 3/2. Again, the masses of the two states belonging to the same doublet are degenerate. Similarly, we can categorize the excited heavy mesons with higher orbital and nonzero radial excitations into: 1 3 − − S-wave : (n S0, n S1) or (0 , 1 ) with jl = 1/2 ,  + + 3 1 3 3  (0 , 1 ) with jl = 1/2 , P -wave : (n P0, n P1, n P1, n P2) or + +  (1 , 2 ) with jl = 3/2 ,  − − 3 1 3 3  (1 , 2 ) with jl = 3/2 , D-wave : (n D1, n D2, n D2, n D3) or − −  (2 , 3 ) with jl = 5/2 ,  + + 3 1 3 3  (2 , 3 ) with jl = 5/2 , F -wave : (n F2, n F3, n F3, n F4) or + +  (3 , 4 ) with jl = 7/2 ,

··· Because the heavy meson system is similar to the hydrogen, various quark potential models have been applied to evaluate their mass spectra (see reviews in Sec.1), and the results can be used to explain the heavy meson signals observed in particle experiments. Moreover, their productions and decay properties are also important to understand their inner structure, which have been studied using various models and methods. In the following subsections, we shall review the theoretical progress on the charmed, charmed-strange, bottom and bottom-strange mesons.

3.1. The charmed mesons

The mass spectrum of the charmed mesons has been calculated by many theoretical groups using various models. In this review we list three investigations: CONTENTS 61

(i) The first one is the original GI model [6] updated by Godfrey and Moats [60]. We have detailly reviewed this model in Sec. 1.2.1. Its potential is given in Eq. (5), containing two main ingredients: the short-distance one-gluon-exchange interaction and the long-distance linear confining interaction. We refer interested readers to read their old reference [6] for more information. (ii) The second one is calculated within the framework of the QCD-motivated relativistic quark model based on the quasipotential approach [75]. Again, this model has been reviewed in Sec. 1.2.1, whose quasipotential is given in Eq. (13). We refer interested readers to read Refs. [75, 72] for more information. (iii) The third one is calculated still by the GI model but taking into account the screening effect [132]. We have also reviewed this modified model in Sec. 1.2.2, whose potential is just the GI one with its linear confining interaction modified by Eq. (16). We refer interested readers to read Ref. [131] for more information. We summarize the results obtained using these three methods in Table8, and note that the results obtained by using the second and third methods are consistent with each other. The results obtained by using the third method are also shown in Fig. 34. See also studies using the constituent quark model [461, 108, 462] as well as lattice QCD studies in Refs. [463, 160, 464, 465, 161, 162, 466] and QCD sum rule studies in Refs. [467, 468, 469, 470]. More discussions using other models and methods can be found in Refs. [471, 472, 473, 474, 475, 476, 477, 398, 478, 479, 480, 481, 482, 483, 484, 485, 486, 487, 488, 489, 490]. In Table8 and Fig. 34, we further make a comparison between the experimental data and the above theoretical values, and conclude from the mass spectrum analysis, i.e.,

∗ ∗ (i) Two 1S states (D and D ) and four 1P states (D0(2400), D1(2430), D1(2420) and ∗ D2(2460)) in the charmed meson family are reproduced quite well.

(ii) The D(2750) and DJ (2740) are probably the same state, and can be a candidate 3 ∗ ∗ ∗ of D(1 D2). The D (2760) and DJ (2760) are separated into the D1(2760) and ∗ 3 D3(2760) by the LHCb experiments [339, 340], which may correspond to D(1 D1) 3 and D(1 D3), respectively.

(iii) The D(2550) and DJ (2580) are probably the same state, and usually considered as 1 ∗ ∗ a candidate of D(2 S0). The D (2600) and DJ (2650) are probably the same state, 3 and can be a candidate of D(2 S1). ∗ 1 3 (iv) The DJ (3000) and DJ (3000) can be candidates of D(3 S0) and D(3 S1), respectively. In addition, they can also be candidates of D(1F ) or D(2P ) etc. ∗ 3 The recently observed D2(3000) may be a candidate of D(3 P2). We also use the charmed mesons to construct Regge trajectories (see discussions in Sec. 1.3), as shown in Fig. 35 in the (J, M 2) plane. The results similarly suggest that ∗ ∗ ∗ the D, D , D0(2400), D1(2430), D1(2420) and D2(2460) can be well interpreted as the ∗ ∗ 1S and 1P charmed mesons, the D1(2760), D(2750)/DJ (2740) and D3(2760) may be CONTENTS 62

3200

*

D (3000)

J

D (3000)

J 3000

*

D(2750) D (2760)

2800

*

D (2650)

*

J

D (2760)

D (2740)

J

J D (2580)

J

2600

*

*

D (2600)

D (2460)

2 D (2430)

1 D(2550)

2400

D (2420)

1

*

D (2400)

0

2200 PDG

BaBar

*

D

LHCb 2000

D

1800

3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3

P S P P D D F S D F F

1 0 1 0 2 1 3 4 2 2 3

Figure 34. (Color online) Mass spectrum of the charmed mesons, in units of MeV. The blue lines are obtained by the GI model [6], while the red lines are obtained by the modified GI model where the screening effect is taken into account. The purple squares, green circles and blue lozenges denote the data from PDG [491] and the BaBar 2S+1 and LHCb experiments [336, 337], respectively. The symbol LJ is listed on the abscissa to describe quantum numbers, and another notation LL is used when there 1 3 exists a mixture between the n LL and n LL states. Taken from Ref. [132].

∗ ∗ interpreted as the 1D charmed mesons, but the D(2550)/DJ (2580), D (2600)/DJ (2650), ∗ ∗ DJ (3000), DJ (3000) and D2(3000) can not be simply explained. In the following paragraphs we start to review the theoretical progress on the excited charmed mesons.

3.1.1. D(2550) and DJ (2580). The D(2550) and DJ (2580) are probably the same 1 state, whose mass is consistent with the theoretical prediction of D(2 S0)[6]. In 1 addition, the decay width of D(2 S0) was calculated by the QPC model in Ref. [146], and the result is also close to the lower limit of the experimental width of the

D(2550)/DJ (2580). Besides these studies, the D(2550) was investigated using the Regge trajectory phenomenology [492], the relativistic quark model [493], and the improved Bethe- 1 Salpeter method [102]. Their results also suggested it to be the D(2 S0) state, the first radial excitation of the D meson. 1 However, there exist opposite opinions: the theoretical total width of D(2 S0) was CONTENTS 63

Table 8. Comparison of the experimental data and theoretical results of the charmed mesons obtained using the original GI model updated by Godfrey and Moats (GI- Original) [60], the QCD-motivated relativistic quark model based on the quasipotential approach (R. Q. M.) [75], and the modified GI model taking into account the screening 1 effect (GI-Screen) [132]. The notation LL is introduced to express mixing states of LL 3 and LL. The masses are in units of MeV. 2S+1 n LJ Experimental values [1] GI-Original [60] R. Q. M. [75] GI-Screen [132]

0 1 D 1 S0 1864.83 ± 0.05 1877 1871 1861 ∗0 3 D 1 S1 2006.85 ± 0.05 2041 2010 2020 ∗ 0 3 D0 (2400) 1 P0 2318 ± 29 2399 2406 2365 0 D1(2430) 1 P1 2427 ± 26 ± 25 2456 2426 2424 0 0 D1(2420) 1 P1 2420.8 ± 0.5 2467 2469 2434 ∗ 0 3 D2 (2460) 1 P2 2460.57 ± 0.15 2502 2460 2468 ∗ 0 3 D1 (2760) 1 D1 2781 ± 18 ± 11 ± 6 [339] 2817 2788 2762

1 D2 2816 2806 – D(2750)0/D (2740)0 2752.4 ± 1.7 ± 2.7 [336] J 0 1 D2 2845 2850 2789 ∗ 0 3 D3 (2760) 1 D3 2775.5 ± 4.5 ± 4.5 ± 4.7 [338] 2833 2863 2779 3 – 1 F2 – 3132 3090 3053

– 1 F3 – 3108 3129 – 0 – 1 F3 – 3143 3145 – 3 – 1 F4 – 3113 3187 3037 0 0 1 D(2550) /DJ (2580) 2 S0 2539.4 ± 4.5 ± 6.8 [336] 2581 2581 2534 ∗ 0 3 D1 (2600) 2 S1 2608.7 ± 2.4 ± 2.5 [336] 2643 2632 2593 3 – 2 P0 – 2931 2919 2856

– 2 P1 – 2924 2932 – 0 – 2 P1 – 2961 3021 – 3 – 2 P2 – 2957 3012 2884 3 – 2 D1 – 3231 3228 3131

– 2 D2 – 3212 3259 – 0 – 2 D2 – 3248 3307 – 3 – 2 D3 – 3226 3335 3129 0 1 DJ (3000) 3 S0 2971.8 ± 8.7 [337] 3068 3062 2976 ∗ 0 3 DJ (3000) 3 S1 3008.1 ± 4.0 [337] 3110 3096 3015 3 – 3 P0 – 3343 3346 –

– 3 P1 – 3328 3365 – 0 – 3 P1 – 3360 3461 – ∗ 3 D2 (3000) 3 P2 3214 ± 29 ± 33 ± 36 [338] 3353 3407 – 1 – 4 S0 – 3468 3452 – 3 – 4 S1 – 3497 3482 –

evaluated using the chiral quark model [317] and the constituent quark model [494, 495]. Its mass and decay properties were also studied in Ref. [496]. These studies indicated 1 that the total width of D(2 S0) is far below the experimental value of the decay width of the D(2550). In Ref. [132] Song et al. systematically studied the charmed meson family and investigated their decay properties using the QPC model. They considered the D(2550) 1 as a D(2 S0) state, and found that the main decay channels of the D(2550) are ∗ ∗ D π and D0(2400)π. This can explain why BaBar and LHCb first observed the ∗ D(2550)/DJ (2580) in the D π channel. Its total width was obtained as 71.65 MeV comparable with the lower bound of the BaBar data [336] but smaller than the LHCb value [337]. Considering this situation, a more precise measurement of the resonance CONTENTS 64

12

* D2 (3000) 10 * D J (3000) D J (3000)

8 * D1 (2760) * * D(2750) D3 (2760) D(2550) D 1 (2600)

D1 (2430)

2 2 * 6 D2 (2460) * D1 (2420) M [GeV ] D0 (2400)

4 D* D 2 0 1 2 3 4 Spin-J

Figure 35. Regge trajectories in the (J, M 2) plane for all the charmed mesons observed in experiments, where experimental data are given by solid squares (1S and 1P states and 1D candidates) and hollow circles (other excited states) with particle names.

parameters of the D(2550)/DJ (2580) will be helpful.

∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ 3.1.2. D (2600) and DJ (2650). The D (2600) and DJ (2650) are probably the same 3 3 state, which can be a candidate of D(2 S1). In 1994 the D(2 S1) state was studied via the constituent quark model, and its mass was predicted to be 2620 MeV [76], already in good agreement with the experimental value of the D∗(2600) [336]. Later in 1998, 3 0 + − 3 0 ∗+ − the ratio Γ(D(2 S1) D π )/Γ(D(2 S1) D π ) = 0.47 was predicted via the → → relativistic chiral quark model [497], which is close to the upper bound determined by the BaBar experiment [336]: (D∗0(2600) D+π−) B → = 0.32 0.02 0.09 . (73) (D∗0(2600) D∗+π−) ± ± B → In Ref. [317], Pierro and Eichten calculated the mass spectrum of the charmed mesons via a relativistic quark model and estimated their hadronic decay widths. They 3 ∗ evaluated the mass of D(2 S1) to be 2692 MeV, heavier than the D (2600). However, 3 their predicted total width of D(2 S1) is consistent with the experimental value for the D∗(2600). 3 ∗ The 2 S1 assignment of the D (2600) is also supported by the investigations using the constituent quark model [494, 495], the relativistic quark model [493], the Regge trajectory phenomenology [492], the QCD sum rule [498], and by investigating its mass and decay properties [496], etc. ∗ ∗ 3 More generally, the D (2600)/DJ (2650) can be interpreted as a mixture of the 2 S1 CONTENTS 65

3 and 1 D1 states [132]:       ∗ 3 D (2600) cos θSD sin θSD 2 S1  | i  =    | i  . (74)  ∗0 −     3  D (1 ) sin θSD cos θSD 1 D1 | i − | i The relevant mixing angle θSD was evaluated and discussed in Ref. [132]. The θSD dependence of the total width, partial decay widths, and the ratio (D+π)/ (D∗π) of ∗ ◦ B B ◦ the D (2600) is shown in Fig. 36. When taking the range 3.6 < θSD < 1.8 , the − obtained theoretical ratio is consistent with the BaBar measurement of Eq. (73), and the total width was estimated to be about 60 MeV also comparable to the experimental data Γ = 93 6 13 MeV [336]. ± ±

200

Total )

BaBar MeV (

100

*

D

D (2420)

1 Width

D

0 )

D (2430)

1

6

D MeV (

D K

s

* 3

D Width

0 )

* Ratio

1 (D )/

BaBar (D

0

-100 0 100

(degree)

SD

Figure 36. (Color online) The θSD dependence of the total width (the red curve in the top panel), partial decay widths (the other seven colored curves in the top and middle panels), and the ratio Γ(Dπ)/Γ(D∗π) (the red curve in the bottom panel) of the D∗(2600), calculated using the QPC model [132]. The two dashed curves in the top and bottom panels correspond to the data from the BaBar experiment [336] that + + Γ(D∗(2600)) = 93 6 13 MeV and Γ(D π−)/Γ(D∗ π−) = 0.32 0.02 0.09. Taken ± ± ± ± from Ref. [132].

3.1.3. D(2750) and DJ (2740). The D(2750) and DJ (2740) are two states with unnatural spin-parity. They are probably the same state due to their similarities. Their spin-parity quantum number may be J P = 2−. They may belong to either the (1−, 2−) or (2−, 3−) doublet. The D-wave charmed cq¯ meson with J P = 2− was studied in Ref. [499] in the framework of the QCD sum rule approach. The authors studied the following tensor interpolating current with J P (C) = 2−(−) ←→ ←→ 2 ←→ Jµν = Q¯1(x)(γµγ5 Dν +γνγ5 Dν ηµνγ5 D/ )Q2(x), (75) −3 CONTENTS 66

←→ 2 where ηµν = qµqν/q gµν and the covariant derivative Dν is defined as ←→ − Dν = −→Dµ ←−Dµ, (76) − a a λ a λ a −→Dµ = −→∂µ + ig A , ←−Dµ = ←−∂µ ig A . 2 µ − 2 µ By exploring the correlation functions induced by the above current, they studied the qq,¯ qs,¯ ss,¯ qc,¯ sc,¯ cc¯ qb,¯ sb¯ ,cb ¯ and ¯bb systems and obtained their masses. For theqc ¯ system, they gave the hadron mass m = 2.86 0.14 GeV, which is consistent with the masses ± P − of the D(2750) and DJ (2740) and supports them to be aqc ¯ meson with J = 2 . Γ(D∗(2760)0→D+π−) In Ref. [398] Colangelo et al. calculated the ratio Γ(D(2750)0→D∗+π−) with the effective Lagrangian approach, and their result suggested the D(2750) as the 2− state in the (2−, 3−) doublet. This assignment is supported by many other studies [492, 494, 495, 498]. 1 More generally, the D(2750)/DJ (2740) can be interpreted as a mixture of the 1 D2 3 and 1 D2 states [132]:       − 1 1D(2 ) cos θ1D sin θ1D 1 D2  | i  =    | i  . (77)      3  D(2750) sin θ1D cos θ1D 1 D2 | i − | i The relevant mixing angle θ1D was evaluated and discussed in Refs. [132], and the θ1D dependence of the corresponding partial and total decay widths is given in Fig. 37. The ◦ ◦ range of a mixing angle was obtained as 73.8 < θ1D < 35.7 so that the calculated − − total width is consistent with the experimental data.

300

Total

*

D (2460)

2 200

100 LHCb

*

D

Width (MeV) s

D

0

100

*

D

50

D

*

D

Width (MeV)

0

1.0

D (2420)

1

*

D (2400)

0

0.5

D (2430)

1 Width (MeV)

0.0

-100 0 100

(degree)

1D

Figure 37. (Color online) The θ1D dependence of the total width (the red curve in the top panel) and partial decay widths (the other nine colored curves in the top, middle and bottom panels) of the D(2750)/DJ (2740), calculated using the QPC model [132]. The blue dashed curve in the top panel corresponds to the data from the LHCb experiment [337] that Γ(D (2740)) = 73.2 13.4 25.0. Taken from Ref. [132]. J ± ± CONTENTS 67

∗ ∗ ∗ 0 ∗ − ∗ ∗ 3.1.4. D (2760), DJ (2760), D1(2760) and D3(2760) . The D (2760) and DJ (2760) are two natural states. They may be the same state. There are many possible 3 3 3 assignments in this energy region, such as the D(1 D1), D(1 D3) and D(2 S1) states, etc. Comparing the prediction of the relativistic quark model [317] and the experimental data of the D∗(2760), one notes that the D∗(2760) can be interpreted as either the 3 3 D(1 D1) or D(1 D3) states. The total widths of these two assignments were calculated in Ref. [146], which are far larger than the experimental value [491]. ∗ 3 In Ref. [496] the D (2760) was suggested to be a mixture of the 2 S1 and 3 1 D1 states by studying its mass and decay properties. This is supported by the 3 study done within the Regge trajectory phenomenology [492]. However, the D(1 D3) assignment for the D∗(2760) is still possible and supported by studies using various models [398, 494, 495, 496, 498]. Later in the LHCb experiments [339, 340], the D∗(2760) was further separated into ∗ 0 P − ∗ − − two states, the D1(2760) of J = 1 and D3(2760) of 3 . These two states were studied in Ref. [500] by performing a combined study of the 2S and 1D open-charm ∗ mesons with natural spin-parity, and the obtained results suggested that the D1(2760) 3 ∗ is predominantly the 1 D1 charmed meson, while the D3(2760) can be regarded as the 3 1 D3 charmed meson.

∗ ∗ 3.1.5. DJ (3000), DJ (3000) and D2(3000). Many theoretical groups have studied the ∗ DJ (3000) and DJ (3000) using various methods, but their nature are still unclear. In Ref. [501], Sun, Liu and Matsuki studied the DJ (3000) by analyzing its mass and decay ∗ behaviors. Their results suggested that DJ (3000) and DJ (3000) can be explained as the 2P states in the D meson family. This was partly supported by studies using the chiral quark model [502], the QPC model [503], and the heavy meson effective theory [504], ∗ etc. Different assignments to the DJ (3000)/DJ (3000) are also possible, such as the 1 + D(3 S0) state [493] and the D(3 ) state [503], etc. The semi-leptonic production of the DJ (3000) in Bs and B decays was recently studied in Ref. [505] by Li et al., and their results using the improved Bethe-Salpeter method indicated that these decays have considerable branching ratios. ∗ Recently, the D2(3000) was observed by the LHCb experiment [338], but still the situation in this energy region is not very clear because there are too many possibilities. In Ref. [506], the authors studied the decay behaviors of the 3P and 2F charmed mesons using the QPC model. Their results are summarized in Table9, suggesting that the ∗ 3 3 most possible assignment for the D2(3000) is the 3 P2, while the assignment of the 2 F2 ∗ can not be fully excluded. The decay properties of the D2(3000) were also studied in Refs. [507, 508] by Wang with the heavy meson effective theory. His result suggested ∗ + that the D2(3000) can be tentatively assigned as the 1F 2 state. CONTENTS 68

Table 9. Masses and decay behaviors of the 3P and 2F charmed mesons. The corresponding branching ratios for different assignments are also given in the brackets. Taken from Ref. [506].

Mass (MeV) Width (MeV) Main channels

Experiment 3214 29 33 36 186 38 34 63 Dπ ± ± ± ± ± ± 3 3 P2 3234 102.4 D∗π, Dρ, D∗ρ, D2∗(2460)π, Dπ(4.18%)

3 2 F2 3364 302.2 D(1D2π), D1(2420)π, D∗ρ,

Dπ(1300), Dπ(4.76%), D∗a0(980)

3 3 P0 3219 251.1 Dπ(1300), D1(2420)π, Db1(1235),

D(1D2)π, Dπ, D(2550)π

+ 3P (1 ) 3200 144 Da2(1320), D∗π

+ 3 3P 0(1 ) 3245 185 D2∗(2460)π, D(1 D3)π

+ 2F (3 ) 3335 165 D2∗(2460)ρ, D∗ρ, Dρ, D2∗(2460)π

+ 3 2F 0(3 ) 3377 248 D(1 D3)π, D2∗(2460)π, D∗π

3 2 F4 3345 155 D2∗(2460)ρ, D∗ρ, D∗a2(1320), D∗f2(1270)

3.2. The charmed-strange mesons

In the following, we present the numerical results of the mass spectrum of the charmed- strange meson family. We summarize in Table 10 three investigations [60, 75, 131], which use the same methods as those listed in Sec. 3.1 for the charmed mesons. The results obtained by using the GI model taking into account the screening effect are also shown in Fig. 38. In Table 10 and Fig. 38, the above theoretical results are also compared with the experimental data, where we conclude from the mass spectrum analysis, i.e.,

∗ (i) The experimental masses of the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) can not be reproduced by simply assuming they are the charmed-strange mesons. We shall review the relevant theoretical studies in Sec.6. ∗ (ii) The two 1S states (Ds and Ds ) and the other two 1P states (Ds1(2536) and ∗ Ds2(2573)) in the charmed-strange meson family can be reproduced well. ∗ ∗ 3 3 (iii) The Ds1(2860) and Ds3(2860) are good candidates for Ds(1 D1) and Ds(1 D3), respectively. ∗ 3 (iv) The Ds1(2700) is a good candidate for Ds(2 S1).

(v) The DsJ (3040) may be a candidate for Ds(2P1). In addition, it can also be 3 1 interpreted as 1 D2 or 1 D2 states, etc. CONTENTS 69

Figure 38. (Color online) Mass spectrum of the charmed-strange mesons, in units of MeV. The blue lines are obtained by the GI model [6], while the red lines are obtained by the modified GI model where the screening effect is taken into account. The blue 2S+1 lozenges denote the experimental data from PDG [491]. The symbol LJ is listed on the abscissa to describe quantum numbers, and another notation LL is used when 1 3 there exists a mixture between the n LL and n LL states. Taken from Ref. [131].

Again, we use the charmed-strange mesons to construct Regge trajectories, as shown in 2 ∗ ∗ Fig. 39 in the (J, M ) plane. The results similarly suggest that the Ds, Ds , Ds0(2317), ∗ Ds1(2460), Ds1(2536) and Ds2(2573) can be interpreted as the 1S and 1P charmed- ∗ ∗ strange mesons, the Ds1(2860) and Ds3(2860) may be interpreted as the 1D charmed- ∗ strange mesons. However, the Ds1(2700) and DsJ (3040) can not be simply explained. In the following paragraphs we start to review the theoretical progress on the excited charmed-strange mesons. See also Refs. [509, 510, 511, 512, 513, 514, 515, 516, 517] for more information.

∗ ∗ 3.2.1. Ds1(2700). The Ds1(2700) is a vector charmed-strange state. It was observed in the D(∗)K invariant mass spectrum by many experiments, including the BaBar, Belle and LHCb ones [364, 365, 367]. Its measured mass is close to the prediction of the 3 2 S1 charmed-strange meson [6]. Based on this assignment, its strong decay behavior 3 was investigated using the QPC model in Ref. [518]. The Ds(2 S1) assignment is also supported by the constituent quark model [519], where the mass and decay width of CONTENTS 70

Table 10. Comparison of the experimental data and theoretical results of the charmed-strange mesons obtained using the original GI model updated by Godfrey and Moats (GI-Original) [60], the QCD-motivated relativistic quark model based on the quasipotential approach (R. Q. M.) [75], and the modified GI model taking into account the screening effect (GI-Screen) [131]. The notation LL is introduced to express 1 3 mixing states of LL and LL. The masses are in units of MeV. 2S+1 n LJ Experimental values [1] GI-Original [60] R. Q. M. [75] GI-Screen [131]

1 Ds 1 S0 1968.27 ± 0.10 1979 1969 1967 ∗ 3 Ds 1 S1 2112.1 ± 0.4 2129 2111 2115 ∗ 3 Ds0(2317) 1 P0 2317.7 ± 0.6 2484 2509 2463 Ds1(2460) 1 P1 2459.5 ± 0.6 2549 2536 2529 0 Ds1(2536) 1 P1 2535.10 ± 0.06 2556 2574 2534 ∗ 3 Ds2(2573) 1 P2 2569.1 ± 0.8 2592 2571 2571 ∗ 3 Ds1(2860) 1 D1 2859 ± 12 ± 6 ± 23 [369, 370] 2899 2913 2865 – 1 D2 – 2900 2931 – 0 – 1 D2 – 2926 2961 – ∗ 3 Ds3(2860) 1 D3 2860.5 ± 2.6 ± 2.5 ± 6.0 [369, 370] 2917 2971 2883 3 – 1 F2 – 3208 3230 3159

– 1 F3 – 3186 3254 – 0 – 1 F3 – 3218 3266 – 3 – 1 F4 – 3190 3300 3143 1 – 2 S0 – 2673 2688 2646 ∗ 3 +4.0 Ds1(2700) 2 S1 2708.3−3.4 2732 2731 2704 3 – 2 P0 – 3005 3054 2960

2 P1 3018 3067 – D (3040) 3044 ± 8+30 [366] sJ 0 −5 2 P1 3038 3154 2992 3 – 2 P2 – 3048 3142 3004 3 – 2 D1 – 3306 3383 3244

– 2 D2 – 3298 3403 – 0 – 2 D2 – 3323 3456 – 3 – 2 D3 – 3311 3469 3251 1 – 3 S0 – 3154 3219 – 3 – 3 S1 – 3193 3242 – 3 – 3 P0 – 3412 3513 –

– 3 P1 – 3416 3519 – 0 – 3 P1 – 3433 3618 – 3 – 3 P2 – 3439 3580 – 1 – 4 S0 – 3547 3652 – 3 – 4 S1 – 3575 3669 –

∗ the Ds1(2700) were evaluated and are both consistent with the experimental values. In ∗ Ref. [520], Wang, Zhang, and Wang studied the production of the Ds1(2700) from the B meson decay through a naive factorization method based on the Bethe-Salpeter method. + ¯ 0 + ¯ 0 0 + They calculated the branching ratio of B D DsJ (2S) D D K , again suggesting ∗ → → ∗ that the Ds1(2700) could be explained as the first radial excitation of the Ds (2112). ∗ In Ref. [521] Colangelo et al. studied the decay modes of the Ds1(2700) using an effective lagrangian approach with heavy quark and chiral symmetries. They evaluated the ratio (D∗ (2700) D∗K)/ (D∗ (2700) DK), but their result favors the B s1 → B s1 → CONTENTS 71

12

10 DsJ (3040)

* 8 * Ds1 (2860) D * (2860) Ds1 (2700) s3

Ds1 (2536) * Ds2 (2573) 26 2 Ds1 (2460)

M [GeV ] * Ds0 (2317)

* 4 Ds Ds

2 0 1 2 3 4 Spin-J

Figure 39. Regge trajectories in the (J, M 2) plane for all the charmed-strange mesons observed in experiments, where experimental data are given by solid squares (1S and 1P states and 1D candidates) and hollow circles (other excited states) with particle names.

1 Ds(2 S0) assignment. ∗ In Ref. [522] Close, Thomas, Lakhina, and Swanson suggested the Ds1(2700) to be 3 3 a mixture of the 2 S1 and 1 D1 cs¯ states:       ∗ 3 Ds1(2700) cos θSD sin θSD 2 S1  | i  =    | i  . (78) ∗ 3 D (2860) sin θSD cos θSD 1 D1 | s1 i − | i This assignment was supported by Ref. [523], where the authors studied strong decays ∗ of the Ds1(2700) using the QPC model. They used the experimental measurement from BaBar [366] (see discussions in Sec. 2.2): (D∗ (2700) D∗K) B s1 → = 0.91 0.13 0.12 , (79) (D∗ (2700) DK) ± ± B s1 → to determined the mixing angle θSD to be in the range 1.38 rad θSD 1.12 ∗ − ≤ ≤ − rad, which was further used to study the Ds1(2860). Besides these studies, some other investigations including the Regge Phenomenology [510, 492] and the constituent quark ∗ 3 model [524] also support the assignment of the Ds1(2710) as a mixing of the 2 S1 and 3 1 D1 charmed-strange states. Especially, the mixing angle θSD was evaluated and discussed in Refs. [131, 500]. ∗ The decay properties of the Ds1(2700) do depend on this angle, as shown in Fig. 40 ∗ for the θSD dependence of its total decay widths and the ratio Γ(D K)/Γ(DK). There ◦ ◦ exists the θSD range, 6.8 -11.2 , in which both of the calculated width and this ratio overlap with the BaBar experiment [366]. This small θSD value is consistent with the estimation in Ref. [6]. ∗ Besides the interpretation of the Ds1(2700) as a charmed-strange state, a DK∗ molecule explanation was proposed in Ref. [525] within the framework of phenomenological potential models. CONTENTS 72

Figure 40. (Color online) The θSD dependence of the total width (the red curve in the top panel), partial decay widths (the other three colored curves in the top panel) and the ratio Γ(D∗K)/Γ(DK) (the red curve in the bottom panel) of the

Ds∗1(2700), calculated using the QPC model [131]. The two blue dashed curves in the top and bottom panels correspond to the data from the BaBar experiment [366] +39 that Γ(Ds∗1(2700)) = 149 7 52 and Γ(D∗K)/Γ(DK) = 0.91 0.13 0.12. Taken ± − ± ± from Ref. [131].

∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ (∗) 3.2.2. DsJ (2860), Ds1(2860) and Ds3(2860). The DsJ (2860) was observed in the D K invariant mass spectrum by the BaBar and LHCb experiments [364, 367]. In the later ∗ LHCb experiments [369, 370], it was further separated into two states, the Ds1(2860) ∗ and Ds3(2860). We shall review the relevant theoretical studies both before and after the LHCb experiments [369, 370]. Before the measurement by the LHCb Collaboration [369, 370], the properties of ∗ the DsJ (2860) have been widely discussed. Experimentally, its interpretation as the first ∗ ∗ radial excitation of the Ds0(2317) was ruled out due to its decay into D K [366], and we shall not discuss this possibility any more. 3 Theoretically, its assignment as a 1 D3 charmed strange meson is supported by various models, including the QPC model [518], the Regge phenomenology [510], the ∗ chiral quark model [526], and the flux tube model [527]. The ratio of (DsJ (2860) ∗ ∗ 3 B → D K)/ (D (2860) DK) was evaluated based on the 1 D3 assignment, which is 0.59 B sJ → in the QPC model [518], 0.43 in the chiral quark model [526] and 0.81 in the flux tube model [523]. Note that these values are smaller than the experiment data measured by BaBar [366] (see discussions in Sec. 2.2): (D∗ (2860)+ D∗K) B sJ → = 1.10 0.15 0.19 . (80) (D∗ (2860)+ DK) ± ± B sJ → 3 Besides the simple 1 D3 assignment, the 2S-1D mixing was proposed to explain ∗ ∗ ∗ the DsJ (2860) in Ref. [523], where the DsJ (2860) and Ds1(2710) were treated as a 3 3 mixture of 2 S1 and 1 D1 charmed-strange mesons, as shown in Eq. (78). With a CONTENTS 73

∗ ∗ ∗ proper mixing angle, the ratios of (DsJ (2860) D K)/ (DsJ (2860) DK) and ∗ ∗ ∗ B → B → (DsJ (2700) D K)/ (DsJ (2700) DK) can be well explained at the same time. B → B → ∗ In Ref. [524] Zhong and Zhao proposed a two-state scenario for the DsJ (2860): one 3 1 1 is likely to be the 1 D3 and the other to be the higher mixing state of 1 D2 and 1 D2. In Ref. [528], Beveren and Rupp also indicated that there exist two resonances around 2.86 GeV but with quantum numbers J P = 0+ and 2+. The structure in the DK invariant mass spectrum near 2.86 GeV contains both of these two resonances, but the structure in the D∗K invariant mass spectrum contains only one resonance of J P = 2+. ∗ In 2014, the LHCb experiments observed two separated states, Ds1(2860) and ∗ Ds3(2860), in the DK invariant mass spectrum near 2.86 GeV [369, 370]. Since there are actually two states, the ratio in Eq. (80) observed by the BaBar Collaboration can be ∗ changed according to which state is assigned as the DsJ (2860) in both the denominator and numerator. Thus, we suggest new measurement of this ratio when considering the LHCb results [369, 370]. ∗ After the LHCb experiments [369, 370], the decay behaviors of the Ds1(2860) and ∗ Ds3(2860) were evaluated by the QPC model in Refs. [529, 530], and the result suggested that these two states can be good Ds(1D) candidates. Based on these interpretations, their decay behaviors were studied using the effective Lagrangian approach [531] and the constituent quark model [519]. By using the QCD sum rule method [264, 265] based on the heavy quark effective theory [262, 263, 252], the masses of 1D charmed-strange mesons were calculated in Ref. [280], also supporting their interpretations as the 1D charmed-strange mesons. This method has also been developed in Ref. [281] to study the F heavy meson doublets (2+, 3+) and (3+, 4+). ∗ ∗ ∗ Here is a natural picture for the Ds1(2700), Ds1(2860) and Ds3(2860). The ∗ ∗ 3 3 Ds1(2700) and Ds1(2860) can be interpreted as a mixture of Ds(2 S1) and Ds(1 D1), as ∗ 3 defined in Eq. (78), and the Ds3(2860) is a good candidate of Ds(1 D3). This picture was used in Ref. [131] (see also discussions in Ref. [524]), where the following ratio is obtained: 3 ∗0 (Ds(1 D3) D K) B 3 → 0 = 0.802 . (81) (Ds(1 D3) D K) B → Later in Ref. [500], a combined study of 2S and 1D open-charm mesons with natural spin-parity was performed, where the 2S-1D mixing effect was investigated. Their ∗ ∗ 3 3 results indicate that the Ds1(2700) and Ds1(2860) are predominantly the 2 S1 and 1 D1 ∗ 3 charmed-strange mesons, respectively, while the Ds3(2860) can be regarded as the 1 D3 charmed-strange meson. ∗ Again, the decay properties of the Ds1(2860) depend on the mixing angle θSD, ◦ ◦ as shown in Fig. 41[131]. If taking 6 .8 -11.2 for the range of θSD obtained in the ∗ ∗ study of the Ds1(2700), the total decay width of the Ds1(2860) would reach up to 300 MeV comparable with the LHCb data [369, 370], and the ratio is (D∗ (2860) ∼ B s1 → D∗K)/ (D∗ (2860) DK) = 0.6 0.8 which can be tested in future experiments. B s1 → ∼ Recently in Ref. [532], the OZI allowed two-body strong decays of 3− heavy-light CONTENTS 74

Figure 41. (Color online) The θSD dependence of the total width (the red curve in the top panel), partial decay widths (the other five colored curves in the top panel) and the

ratio Γ(D∗K)/Γ(DK) (the red curve in the bottom panel) of the Ds∗1(2860), calculated using the QPC model [131]. The red vertical band corresponds to the common range

of θSD used for the Ds∗1(2700) and shown in Fig. 40. Taken from Ref. [131].

∗ mesons were systematically studied, and the total strong decay width of the Ds3(2860) was evaluated to be 47.6 MeV, which is consistent with the experiments [369, 370].

3.2.3. DsJ (3040). The observed mass of the DsJ (3040) and its unnatural parity are 3 consistent with the quark model prediction for the 2 P1 charmed strange meson [6]. 3 Hence, it can be interpreted as the Ds(2 P1) state, the first radial excitation of the Ds1(2460). + The calculations in the QPC model [533] also support the DsJ (3040) as the 1 state in the (0+, 1+) spin doublet. In addition, studies using the flux tube model [527], the constitute quark model [502, 524] and the effective approach [219] all indicated the + possible interpretation of the DsJ (3040) as a 1 charmed-strange meson. Moreover, in Refs. [69, 534] Segovia et al. calculated the decay widths of the DsJ (3040) as a n(J P ) = 3(1+) or 4(1+) state, and their results are compatible with the experimental data [491]. P + Besides the above J = 1 assignment, the DsJ (3040) was interpreted as a mixture 3 1 of the 1 D2 and 1 D2 charmed-strange meson in Ref. [219] with an effective Lagrangian approach.

3.3. The bottom mesons

In the following, we discuss the mass spectrum of the bottom meson family. We investigate the following two methods: CONTENTS 75

40

B J (5960) 35 B J (5840)

* B1 (5721) B2 (5747) 2 2

M [GeV ] 30

B* B

25 0 1 2 3 4 Spin-J

Figure 42. Regge trajectories in the (J, M 2) plane for all the bottom mesons observed in experiments, where experimental data are given by solid squares (1S and 1P states) and hollow circles (other excited states) with particle names.

(i) The alternate relativized model and the original GI model updated by Godfrey, Moats and Swanson [61], (ii) The QCD-motivated relativistic quark model based on the quasipotential approach [75]. These results are summarized in Table 11 and compared with the experimental data. We conclude from the mass spectrum analysis, i.e., (i) The two 1S states (B and B∗) in the bottom meson family can be reproduced well. 1 3 (ii) The B1(5721) can be regarded as the mixture of B(1 P1) and B(1 P1) states, and ∗ 3 the B2 (5747) can be regarded as the B(1 P2) state. 1 (iii) The BJ (5840) may be a candidate for B(2 S0). The B(5970) and BJ (5960) are 3 probably the same state, and may be a candidate for B(2 S1). Regge trajectories constructed using the bottom mesons are shown in Fig. 42 in the 2 ∗ (J, M ) plane, and similar conclusions can be obtained that the B, B , B1(5721) and ∗ B2 (5747) can be interpreted as the 1S and 1P bottom mesons, but the BJ (5840) and B(5970)/BJ (5960) can not be simply explained. In the following paragraphs we start to review the theoretical progress on the excited bottom mesons. See also Refs. [535, 536, 537, 538, 539, 540] for more information.

∗ 0 ∗ 0 ∗ 3.3.1. BJ (5732), B1(5721) and B2 (5747) . The excited bottom meson BJ (5732), first observed by the OPAL detector at LEP [386], was later separated into two states, the 0 ∗ 0 0 B1(5721) and B2 (5747) , by the D0 Collaboration [392]. The B1(5721) can be regarded 1 3 ∗ 0 as either the 1 P1 or 1 P1 state or their mixture, while the B2 (5747) can be regarded 3 as the 1 P2 state. CONTENTS 76

Table 11. Comparison of the experimental data and theoretical results of the bottom mesons obtained using the original GI model updated by Godfrey, Moats and Swanson (GI-Original) [61] and the relativistic quark model (R. Q. M.) [75]. The notation LL 1 3 is introduced to express the mixing states of LL and LL. The masses are in units of MeV. 2S+1 n LJ Experimental values [1] GI-Original [61] R. Q. M. [75]

B0 1 1S 5279.62 0.15 5312 5280 0 ± 3 B∗ 1 S 5324.65 0.25 5371 5326 1 ± 3 – 1 P0 – 5756 5749

1 P1 5777 5723 B (5721)0 5727.7 0.7 1.4 0.17 0.4 [395] 1 ± ± ± ± 1 P10 5784 5774 0 3 B∗(5747) 1 P 5739.44 0.37 0.33 0.17 [395] 5797 5741 2 2 ± ± ± 3 – 1 D1 – 6110 6119

– 1 D2 – 6095 6103

– 1 D20 – 6124 6121 3 – 1 D3 – 6106 6091 3 – 1 F2 – 6387 6412

– 1 F3 – 6358 6391

– 1 F30 – 6396 6420 3 – 1 F4 – 6364 6380 B (5840)0 2 1S 5862.9 5.0 6.7 0.2 [395] 5904 5890 J 0 ± ± ± B (5960)0 2 3S 5969.2 2.9 5.1 0.2 [395] 5933 5906 J 1 ± ± ± 3 – 2 P0 – 6213 6221

– 2 P1 – 6197 6209

– 2 P10 – 6228 6281 3 – 2 P2 – 6213 6260 3 – 2 D1 – 6475 6534

– 2 D2 – 6450 6528

– 2 D20 – 6486 6554 3 – 2 D3 – 6460 6542 1 – 3 S0 – 6335 6379 3 – 3 S1 – 6355 6387 3 – 3 P0 – 6576 6629

– 3 P1 – 6557 6650

– 3 P10 – 6585 6685 3 – 3 P2 – 6570 6678 1 – 4 S0 – 6689 6781 3 – 4 S1 – 6703 6786 CONTENTS 77

In Ref. [526] Zhong and Zhao studied the strong decays of the heavy-light mesons ∗ 0 3 in a chiral quark model. By assigning the B2 (5747) as a 1 P2 state, they obtained its total width as a sum of Γ(Bπ) and Γ(B∗π) to be about 47 MeV, consistent with the CDF measurement Γ(B∗(5747)) 22+7 MeV [393]. They also obtained the ratio 2 ≈ −6 Γ(B∗π) R = 0.47 , (82) ≡ Γ(B∗π) + Γ(Bπ) which is also in good agreement with the D0 measurement, i.e., R = 0.475 0.095 ± ± 0.069 [392]. Since the heavy-light mesons are not charge conjugation eigenstates, the state mixing between spin S = 0 and S = 1 states with the same J P can occur:       1 1P1 cos θ1P sin θ1P 1 P1  | i  =    | i  , (83) 0 3 1P sin θ1P cos θ1P 1 P1 | 1i − | i o 0 After choosing θ1P = (55 5) , the authors of Ref. [526] found that the B1(5721) − ± can be interpreted as the 1P 0 state (note that the notations here are different from | 1i those used in Ref. [526]), and its B∗π partial width was evaluated to be about 30 MeV. o This mixing angle is similar to the one in the heavy quark limit, θ1P = 54.7 . With ∗ − the above strong decay widths for the B2 (5747), the authors of Ref. [526] obtained the following ratio

Γ(B1(5721)) R ∗ = 0.34 , (84) ≡ Γ(B1(5721)) + Γ(B2 (5747)) which is also consistent with the D0 experiment, i.e., R = 0.477 0.069 0.062 [392]. 0 ± 1 ± 3 These two assignments, that the B1(5721) as a mixture of 1 P1 and 1 P1 states ∗ 0 3 and the B2 (5747) as a 1 P2 state, are supported by studies using the nonrelativistic quark model [541]. Based on these assignments, their decay properties were studied in Ref. [542] within the heavy meson effective theory. In Ref. [543] Sun et al. systematically studied the mass spectrum and strong decay patterns of the excited bottom and bottom-strange mesons using the QPC model. They

evaluated and discussed the mixing angle θ1P . The θ1P dependence of the total decay 0 widths of the B(1P1) and B(1P1) is shown in Fig. 43. Sun et al. found that the B1(5721) 0 is a good candidate for the 1P1 bottom state since it has a narrow width. Moreover, the 0 calculated width of the B(1P1) overlaps with the experimental width of the B1(5721) ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ when θ1P is in the range of 77 70 or 40 33 . This mixing angle θ1P was also − ∼ − − ∼ − studied in Ref. [544] by Chen, Yuan and Zhang, which systematically investigated the strong decays of the P -wave heavy-light mesons within the Eichten-Hill-Quigg (EHQ) formalism.

3.3.2. B(5970), BJ (5960) and BJ (5840). The B(5970) and BJ (5960) are probably the 1 3 same state, whose mass is close to the estimated masses of the 2 S0 and 2 S1 states of 1 the B meson family. Since the B(5970) decays into Bπ, we can exclude the B(2 S0) assignment. CONTENTS 78

250 (a) 200

150 B(1P ′(1+))

100 ◦ −54.7 B(1P(1+))

Width (MeV) 50

0 −100 −50 0 50 100 θ1P (degree)

40 (b) 30

20 CDF B P ′ + 10 (1 (1 )) Width (MeV)

0 −80 −75 −70 −65 −60 −55 −50 −45 −40 −35 −30 θ1P (degree)

Figure 43. (Color online) The θ1P dependence of the total decay widths of the + B(1P1) = B(1P (1 )) (the dashed curve in the top panel) and the B(1P10) = + B(1P 0(1 )) (the two solid curves in the top and bottom panels). The vertical dashed line in the top panel corresponds to the ideal mixing angle θ = 54.7◦ from the 1P − heavy quark limit, and the blue dashed curve in the bottom panel corresponds to the CDF data that Γ(B (5721)) = 20 2 5 MeV [394]. Taken from Ref. [543]. 1 ± ±

3 In Ref. [543] Sun et al. evaluated the total width of B(2 S1) using the QPC model to be 47 MeV, which is in agreement with the experimental width of the B(5970). They also calculated several partial decay widths, and their result indicated that the B(5970) 3 is very probably the B(2 S1) state. They also suggested the experimental search for the B(5970) via its πB∗ decay. Later in Ref. [542], Wang studied the two-body strong decays of the B(5970) within the heavy meson effective theory by assuming it to be the 2S 1−, 1D 1− and 1D 3− 3 states. Its decay behavior as the 2 S1 state was also investigated in Ref. [545] using the effective Lagrangian approach. There exist other possible interpretations. In Ref. [502], Xiao and Zhong investigated the strong decay properties of the B(5970) using a chiral quark model, 3 and their result suggested that the B(5970) resonance is most likely to be the 1 D3 with J P = 3−. Later in Ref. [541], the authors studied the excited bottom mesons in the nonrelativistic quark model, and their results suggested that the B(5970)/BJ (5960) can 3 3 be interpreted as either B(2 S1) or B(1 D3) states.

In Ref. [541], the authors studied the BJ (5840) in the nonrelativistic quark model, 1 and their results suggested that the BJ (5840) can be interpreted as the B(2 S0) state, which is also suggested by LHCb Collaboration [395]. CONTENTS 79

40

35 * B s1 (5830) Bs2 (5840) 2 2

M [GeV ] 30 * Bs Bs

25 0 1 2 3 4 Spin-J

Figure 44. Regge trajectories in the (J, M 2) plane for all the bottom-strange mesons observed in experiments, where experimental data are given by solid squares (1S and 1P states) with particle names.

3.4. The bottom-strange mesons

In the following, we discuss the mass spectrum of the bottom-strange meson family. We summarize in Table 12 the same investigations [61, 75] as those listed in Sec. 3.3 for the bottom mesons. Comparing these theoretical values with the experimental data, we conclude

∗ (i) The two 1S states (Bs and Bs ) in the bottom-strange meson family are reproduced well. 1 3 (ii) The Bs1(5830) can be regarded as the mixture of the Bs(1 P1) and Bs(1 P1) states, ∗ 3 and the Bs2(5840) can be regarded as the Bs(1 P2) state. More discussions can be found in Refs. [546, 547, 548, 549, 550, 551]. Again, we use the bottom-strange mesons to construct Regge trajectories, as shown in Fig. 44 in the 2 ∗ ∗ (J, M ) plane. The results similarly suggest that the Bs, Bs , Bs1(5830) and Bs2(5840) can be interpreted as the 1S and 1P bottom-strange mesons. In the following paragraphs we start to review the theoretical progress on the excited bottom-strange mesons.

∗ 0 ∗ 0 ∗ 0 3.4.1. BsJ (5850), Bs1(5830) and Bs2(5840) . The properties of BsJ (5850), Bs1(5830) ∗ 0 ∗ 0 ∗ 0 and Bs2(5840) are quite similar to those of the BJ (5732), B1(5721) and B2 (5747) . ∗ The excited bottom-strange meson BsJ (5850), first observed by the OPAL detector at 0 ∗ 0 LEP [386], was later separated into two states, the Bs1(5830) and Bs2(5840) , by the 0 1 CDF Collaboration [401]. The Bs1(5830) can be regarded as the mixture of the 1 P1 3 ∗ 0 3 and 1 P1 states, while the Bs2(5840) can be regarded as the 1 P2 state. 0 Again in Ref. [526], Zhong and Zhao studied the strong decays of the Bs1(5830) and ∗ 0 ∗ 0 3 Bs2(5840) in a chiral quark model. By assigning the Bs2(5840) as a 1 P2 state, they CONTENTS 80

Table 12. Comparison of the experimental data and theoretical results of the bottom- strange mesons obtained using the original GI model updated by Godfrey, Moats and Swanson (GI-Original) [61] and the relativistic quark model (R. Q. M.) [75]. The 1 3 notation LL is introduced to express mixing states of LL and LL. The masses are in units of MeV. 2S+1 n LJ Experimental values [1] GI-Original [61] R. Q. M. [75]

B 1 1S 5366.82 0.22 5394 5372 s 0 ± 3 +1.8 Bs∗ 1 S1 5415.4 1.5 5450 5414 − 3 – 1 P0 – 5831 5833

1 P1 5857 5831 B (5830) 5828.3 0.1 0.2 0.4 [394] s1 ± ± ± 1 P10 5861 5865 3 B∗ (5840) 1 P 5839.7 0.1 0.1 0.2 [394] 5876 5842 s2 2 ± ± ± 3 – 1 D1 – 6182 6209

– 1 D2 – 6169 6189

– 1 D20 – 6196 6218 3 – 1 D3 – 6179 6191 3 – 1 F2 – 6454 6501

– 1 F3 – 6425 6468

– 1 F30 – 6462 6515 3 – 1 F4 – 6432 6475 1 – 2 S0 – 5984 5976 3 – 2 S1 – 6012 5992 3 – 2 P0 – 6279 6318

– 2 P1 – 6279 6321

– 2 P10 – 6296 6345 3 – 2 P2 – 6295 6359 3 – 2 D1 – 6542 6629

– 2 D2 – 6526 6625

– 2 D20 – 6553 6651 3 – 2 D3 – 6535 6637 1 – 3 S0 – 6410 6467 3 – 3 S1 – 6429 6475 3 – 3 P0 – 6639 6731

– 3 P1 – 6635 6761

– 3 P10 – 6650 6768 3 – 3 P2 – 6648 6780 1 – 4 S0 – 6759 6874 3 – 4 S1 – 6773 6879 CONTENTS 81 obtained its total width as a sum of Γ(BK) and Γ(B∗K) to be about 2 MeV, consistent with the CDF measurement Γ(B∗ (5840)) 1 MeV [393]. They also obtained the ratio s2 ≈ Γ(B∗K) R 6% . (85) ≡ Γ(BK) ≈ 1 3 The Bs(1 P1) and Bs(1 P1) states mix with each other       1 1P1 cos θ1P sin θ1P 1 P1  | i  =    | i  , (86) 0 3 1P sin θ1P cos θ1P 1 P1 | 1i − | i o 0 With θ1P = (55 5) , the authors of Ref. [526] found that the Bs1(5830) can be − ± 0 0 interpreted as the 1P state. They also evaluated the decay width of the B1(5721) to | 1i be 0.4 1 MeV, and obtained the following ratio ∼ Γ(Bs1(5830)) R ∗ = 0.02 0.6 . (87) ≡ Γ(Bs1(5830)) + Γ(Bs2(5840)) ∼

120 100 (a) + 80 Bs(1P ′(1 )) 60 54.7◦ 40 − + Bs(1P(1 )) Width (MeV) 20 0 −100 −50 0 50 100 θ1P (degree) 2 + Bs(1P ′(1 )) (b) 1.5

1

0.5 CDF Width (MeV)

0 −64 −62 −60 −58 −56 −54 −52 −50 −48 −46 θ1P (degree)

Figure 45. (Color online) The θ1P dependence of the total decay widths of the + Bs(1P1) = Bs(1P (1 )) (the dashed curve in the top panel) and the Bs(1P10) = + Bs(1P 0(1 )) (the two solid curves in the top and bottom panels). The vertical dashed line in the top panel corresponds to the ideal mixing angle θ = 54.7◦ from the 1P − heavy quark limit, and the blue dashed curve in the bottom panel corresponds to the CDF data that Γ(B (5830)) = 0.7 0.3 0.3 MeV [394]. Taken from Ref. [543]. s1 ± ±

0 ∗ 0 These assignments for the Bs1(5830) and Bs2(5840) are supported by studies using the nonrelativistic quark model [541] and the QPC model [543]. Here we show the 0 mixing angle θ1P dependence of the total decay widths of the Bs(1P1) and Bs(1P1) in 0 Fig. 45, where the calculated width of the Bs(1P1) overlaps with the experimental width 0 ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ of the Bs1(5830) when θ1P is in the range of 60.5 57.5 or 52.0 49.0 [543]. − ∼ − − ∼ − Their decay properties were also studied in Ref. [101] by the improved Bethe-Salpeter method. CONTENTS 82

Lattice QCD was also applied to study the spectrum of 1P bottom-strange states in 0 ∗ 0 Ref. [552]. Their results for the Bs1(5830) and Bs2(5840) mesons are in good agreement with the experimental values. They also predict other two states: one is a J P = 0+ ∗ P + bound state B with mass mB∗ = 5.711 13 19 GeV, and the other is J = 1 s0 s0 ± ± bound state Bs1 with mass mB = 5.750 17 19 GeV. s1 ± ±

4. Candidates for the singly heavy baryons

The heavy baryons can be categorized into the singly heavy baryons (Qqq), doubly heavy baryons (QQq), and triply heavy baryons (QQQ), where Q denotes the heavy (charm and bottom) quark, and q denotes the light (up, down and strange) quark. The singly heavy baryons (Qqq) can be further categorized into the singly charmed baryons (cqq) and singly bottom baryons (bqq), which will be separately reviewed in this section. The doubly heavy baryons (QQq) and triply heavy baryons (QQQ) will be reviewed in the next section, Sec.5. We note that we shall omit the notation “singly” in this section for simplicity.

q 1 r Q 1

r3 r2 q 2

Figure 46. Jacobi coordinates ~ρ and ~λ for the three-body system.

(*)0 c

(*)+ (*)0 + 0 c c c c

(*)++ (*)+ (*)0 + c c c c

6F 3F

Figure 47. SU(3) flavor multiplets of charmed baryons. CONTENTS 83

The heavy baryons are composed of one heavy quark and two light quarks. Similar to the heavy mesons, the light diquark circles around the nearly static heavy quark. However, their internal structure is much more complicated than that of the heavy mesons. To study this three-body system, the Jacobi coordinates are sometimes used as shown in Fig. 46, where

~ρ = ~r2 ~r1 and ~λ = (~r2 + ~r1)/2 ~r3 . (88) − − Accordingly, we use lρ to denote the orbital angular momentum between the two light quarks and lλ to denote the orbital angular momentum between the heavy quark and the light diquark system. Then the total orbital angular momentum is L = lρ lλ. ⊗ The heavy baryons contain two light quarks, which compose a light diquark obeying the Pauli principle. The structure of the light diquark is simple. The two light quarks have the antisymmetric color structure 3¯C . They can have either the symmetric flavor structure 6F or the antisymmetric flavor structure 3¯F (see Fig. 47). They can have either the symmetric spin angular momentum (sl sqq = 1) or the antisymmetric spin ≡ angular momentum (sl = 0). Together with the internal orbital angular momentum (lρ), we arrive at the S-wave scalar (“good”) and axial-vector (“bad”) diquarks [553] as well as the excited diquarks with orbital excitations:   sl = 0 (A) , 3¯F (A) , jqq = 0 , (“good”) S-wave diquark (lρ = 0, S)  sl = 1 (S) , 6F (S) , jqq = 1 , (“bad”)   sl = 0 (A) , 6F (S) , jqq = 1 , P -wave diquark (lρ = 1, A)  sl = 1 (S) , 3¯F (A) , jqq = 0/1/2 ,   sl = 0 (A) , 3¯F (A) , jqq = 2 , D-wave diquark (lρ = 2, S)  sl = 1 (S) , 6F (S) , jqq = 1/2/3 ,

··· where we have denoted the total angular momentum of the light diquark as jqq. These light diquarks and the heavy quark form the heavy baryons. The total angular momentum of the light degrees of freedom of the heavy baryons (jl) is

jl = jqq lλ = sl lρ lλ , (89) ⊗ ⊗ ⊗ and their total angular momentum (J) is

J = sQ jl = sQ jqq lλ = sQ sl lρ lλ . (90) ⊗ ⊗ ⊗ ⊗ ⊗ ⊗ As an example, the S-wave heavy baryons with L = lρ = lλ = 0 (S) and 3¯C (A) can be categorized into  ¯ 1 + 1 +  sl = 0 (A) , 3F (A) , jl = 0 : Λc( 2 ) , Ξc( 2 ) , 1 + 3 + 0 1 + 3 + 1 + 3 +  sl = 1 (S) , 6F (S) , jl = 1 : Σc( 2 , 2 ) , Ξc( 2 , 2 ) , Ωc( 2 , 2 ) . P + Hence, the ground-state heavy baryons contain one flavor 3¯F multiplet of J = 1/2 , P + P + one flavor 6F multiplet of J = 1/2 , and one flavor 6F multiplet of J = 3/2 . The CONTENTS 84

P + flavor 3¯F multiplet of J = 1/2 composes a heavy baryon multiplet where the light P + + diquark spin is jl = 0, while the two flavor 6F multiplets of J = 1/2 and 3/2 compose another heavy baryon multiplet where the diquark spin is jl = 1. All the S- ∗ P + wave charmed and bottom baryons have been observed, except the Ωb of J = 3/2 [1]. This is a great success of the quark model in the classification of heavy hadrons.

6 S 1 3 1 3 1 3 s l = 0 (A) F ( ) l c12 2 c12 2 c1 2 2 F l A = 1 ( ) 1 1 l = 0 l c0 2 c0 2 F s S 1 3 1 3 l = 1 ( ) 3 F (A) l c12 2 c1 2 2 F

3 5 3 5 3C (A) l c22 2 c2 2 2 F

s 1 3 1 3 l = 0 (A) 3 F (A) l c12 2 c1 2 2 F l = 0 (S) l 1 1 1 l = 1 c0 2 c02 c0 2 F s S 1 3 1 3 1 3 l = 1 ( ) 6 F (S) l c12 2 c12 2 c1 2 2 F

3 5 3 5 3 5 l c22 2 c22 2 c2 2 2 F

Figure 48. The P -wave charmed baryons containing one orbital excitation (L = l l = 1). The two light quarks compose a light diquark with: a) the antisymmetric λ ⊗ ρ color structure 3¯C ; b) either the symmetric flavor structure 6F or the antisymmetric flavor structure 3¯F ; c) either the symmetric spin angular momentum (sl = 1) or the antisymmetric spin angular momentum (sl = 0). The two light quarks obey the Pauli principle, taking into account these structures and the orbital angular momentum between them (lρ). The total angular momentum of the light degrees of freedom is j = l l s . Taken from Ref. [293]. l ρ ⊗ λ ⊗ l

The excited heavy baryons can be similarly categorized. In Figs. 48 and 49 we show the results for the P and D-wave charmed baryons, whose internal structure is very complicated. Moreover, the present experimental data are far from complete. Similar to the heavy mesons, various methods and models have been applied to study masses and decay properties of the heavy baryons. In the following two subsections, we shall review the theoretical progress on these heavy baryons, separately for the charmed and bottom baryons.

4.1. The charmed baryons

The mass spectrum of the charmed baryons has been calculated by many theoretical groups using various models. In this review we list five investigations: (i) The first one is calculated within the framework of the QCD-motivated relativistic quark model based on the quasipotential approach [554]. Its potential is generalized from the qq¯ quasipotential [75, 72], which has been reviewed in Sec. 1.2.1. See Refs. [554, 555, 556] for more information. (ii) The second one is a non-relativistic quark model [557], whose Hamiltonian contains a spin independent confining potential, a spin independent confining potential and CONTENTS 85

C

3 + 5 + 3 + 5 + 3 F (A): L = 2 sl = 0 (A) l c22 2 c2 2 2 F

1 + 3 + 1 + 3 + 1 + 3 + l c12 2 c12 2 c1 2 2 F

3 + 5 + 3 + 5 + 3 + 5 + 6 F (S): L = 2 sl = 1 (S) l c22 2 c22 2 c2 2 2 F

5 + 7 + 5 + 7 + 5 + 7 + l c32 2 c32 2 c3 2 2 F

C

3 + 5 + 3 + 5 + 3 F (A): L = 2 sl = 0 (A) l c22 2 c2 2 2 F

1 + 3 + 1 + 3 + 1 + 3 + l c12 2 c12 2 c1 2 2 F

3 + 5 + 3 + 5 + 3 + 5 + 6 F (S): L = 2 sl = 1 (S) l c22 2 c22 2 c2 2 2 F

5 + 7 + 5 + 7 + 5 + 7 + l c32 2 c32 2 c3 2 2 F

C

3 + 5 + 3 + 5 + 3 + 5 + 6 F (S): L = 2 sl = 0 (A) l c22 2 c22 2 c2 2 2 F

1 + 3 + 1 + 3 + l c12 2 c1 2 2 F

3 + 5 + 3 + 5 + 3 F (A): L = 2 sl = 1 (S) l c22 2 c2 2 2 F

5 + 7 + 5 + 7 + l c32 2 c3 2 2 F

Figure 49. The D-wave charmed baryons containing two orbital excitations (L = l l = 2). Taken from Ref. [295]. λ ⊗ ρ

a simplified spin-orbit potential. See Refs. [145, 557, 558] for more information. (iii) The third one is the method of QCD sum rule in the framework of the heavy quark effective theory (HQET), which has been reviewed in Sec. 1.5. We refer interested readers to Refs. [292, 293, 294, 295] for detailed discussions. (iv) The fourth one is a relativistic quark model for the three-quark system, proposed in Ref. [7] by Capstick and Isgur. Its potential is the immediate and essentially unique generalization of the GI model [6] from qq¯to qqq (see discussions in Sec. 1.2.1), which contains two main ingredients: the short-distance one-gluon-exchange interaction and the long-distance linear confining interaction. See Ref. [7] for more information. (v) The fifth one is a constituent quark model incorporating the basic properties of QCD [559], which takes into account the QCD nonperturbative effects (chiral symmetry breaking and confinement) as well as QCD perturbative effects (a flavor dependent one-gluon exchange potential). See Refs. [559, 433] for more information. More discussions using various models and methods can be found in Refs. [560, 561, CONTENTS 86

562, 563, 564, 565, 566, 567, 568, 569, 570, 571, 572, 573, 574, 575, 576, 577, 578, 579, 580, 581, 582, 583, 584, 585, 559, 586, 587, 588, 589, 590]. See also lattice QCD studies in Refs. [591, 592, 593, 594, 595, 596, 597, 598, 599, 600]. The results of these five investigations are summarized in Tables 13 and 14, where we further make a comparison between the theoretical and experimental results (see also Tables 15 and 16), and conclude from the mass spectrum analysis, i.e., (i) All the 1S charmed baryons are reproduced quite well, which complete one flavor P + P + + 3¯F multiplet of J = 1/2 and two flavor 6F multiplets of J = 1/2 and 3/2 .

(ii) The Λc(2595), Λc(2625), Ξc(2790) and Ξc(2815) are good candidates for the P -wave P − − charmed baryons, which complete two flavor 3¯F multiplets of J = 1/2 and 3/2 . (iii) The mass spectrum of these higher excited states is quite complicated. There

are many possible interpretations of the Λc(2765), Λc(2880), Λc(2940), Σc(2800), Ξc(2815), Ξc(2930), Ξc(2980), Ξc(3055), Ξc(3080) and Ξc(3123). Among them, the + Λc(2880), Ξc(3055) and Ξc(3080), together with a missing Λc(3/2 ) state, may be P + the D-wave charmed baryons completing two flavor 3¯F multiplets of J = 3/2 and 5/2+. We select some of the charmed baryons to construct Regge trajectories (see discussions in Sec. 1.3). The result is shown in Fig. 50 in the (J, M 2) plane, which suggests that the

Λc,Ξc,Λc(2595), Λc(2625), Ξc(2790) and Ξc(2815) may be interpreted as the 1S and 1P charmed baryons, while the Λc(2880), Ξc(3055) and Ξc(3080) may be interpreted as the 1D charmed baryons of J P = 3/2+ and 5/2+. In the following paragraphs we review the theoretical progress on the excited charmed baryons.

12

10 c c

8 c c c

2 2 c

M [GeV ] c 6 c

c 4 0 1 2 3 4 Spin-J

Figure 50. Regge trajectories in the (J, M 2) plane for some selected charmed baryons, where experimental data are given by solid squares and hollow circles with particle names. CONTENTS 87

Table 13. Comparison of the experimental data and theoretical results of the Λc,Σc and Ωc baryons, obtained using the QCD-motivated relativistic quark model based on the quasipotential approach (R. Q. M.) [554], the non-relativistic quark model (Non- RQM) [557], the QCD sum rules within HQET (QSR) [292, 293, 294, 295], and the relativistic quark model generalized from the GI model (C. I.) [7]. See also Table 15. The masses are in units of MeV. JP (nL) Experimental values [1] R. Q. M. [554] Non-RQM [557] QSR [292, 293, 295] C. I. [7]

+ +67 Λc 1/2 (1S) 2286.46 ± 0.14 2286 2268 2271−49 2265 + + +93 Σc 1/2 (1S) 2452.9 ± 0.4 2443 2455 2411−81 2440 ∗+ + +96 Σc 3/2 (1S) 2517.5 ± 2.3 2519 2519 2534−81 2495 0 + +102 Ωc 1/2 (1S) 2695.2 ± 1.7 2698 2718 2657−99 – ∗0 + +109 Ωc 3/2 (1S) 2765.9 ± 2.0 2768 2776 2790−105 – − Λc 1/2 (1P )Λc(2595) = 2592.25 ± 0.28 2598 2625 2.60 ± 0.14 2630 − Λc 3/2 (1P )Λc(2625) = 2628.11 ± 0.19 2627 2636 2.65 ± 0.14 2640 − Σc 1/2 (1P ) 2713 2748 2.73 ± 0.18 2765 − Σc 1/2 (1P ) 2799 2768 – 2770 − +14 Σc 3/2 (1P )Σc(2800) = 2792− 5 (?) 2773 2763 2.75 ± 0.18 2770 − Σc 3/2 (1P ) 2798 2776 2.80 ± 0.15 2805 − Σc 5/2 (1P ) 2789 2790 2.89 ± 0.15 2815 − Ωc 1/2 (1P ) – 2966 2977 3.25 ± 0.20 – − Ωc 1/2 (1P ) – 3055 2990 – – − Ωc 3/2 (1P ) – 3029 2986 3.26 ± 0.19 – − Ωc 3/2 (1P ) – 3054 2994 3.27 ± 0.17 – − Ωc 5/2 (1P ) – 3051 3014 3.32 ± 0.17 – + Λc 1/2 (2S)Λc(2765) = 2766.6 ± 2.4 (?) 2769 2791 – 2775 + Σc 1/2 (2S) – 2901 2958 – 2890 + Σc 3/2 (2S) – 2936 2995 – 2985 + Ωc 1/2 (2S) – 3088 3152 – – + Ωc 3/2 (2S) – 3123 3190 – – + +0.33 Λc 3/2 (1D) – 2874 2887 2.81−0.18 2910 + +0.37 Λc 5/2 (1D)Λc(2880) = 2881.53 ± 0.35 (?) 2880 2887 2.84−0.20 2910 + Σc 1/2 (1D) – 3041 – – 3005 + Σc 3/2 (1D) – 3040 – – 3060 + Σc 3/2 (1D) – 3043 – – 3065 + Σc 5/2 (1D) – 3023 3003 – 3065 + Σc 5/2 (1D) – 3038 3010 – 3080 + Σc 7/2 (1D) – 3013 3015 – 3090 + Ωc 1/2 (1D) – 3287 – – – + Ωc 3/2 (1D) – 3282 – – – + Ωc 3/2 (1D) – 3298 – – – + Ωc 5/2 (1D) – 3286 3196 – – + Ωc 5/2 (1D) – 3297 3203 – – + Ωc 7/2 (1D) – 3283 3206 – –

4.1.1. Λc(2595), Λc(2625), Ξc(2790) and Ξc(2815). The Λc(2595), Λc(2625), Ξc(2790) and Ξc(2815) can be well interpreted in the conventional quark model as the P -wave charmed baryons with the quark content cqq. They complete two flavor 3¯F multiplets of J P = 1/2− and 3/2−. See their mass spectrum analysis at the beginning of this subsection and Refs. [601, 602, 603, 604, 605, 606, 607, 608, 609, 610, 611] for more information. The QCD sum rule formalism was also applied in Refs. [290, 291] to evaluate the masses of the P -wave excited heavy baryons up to the 1/mQ order in the heavy quark expansion. The extracted splitting between the spin 1/2 and 3/2 doublets CONTENTS 88

Table 14. Comparison of the experimental data and theoretical results of the Ξc baryons, obtained using the QCD-motivated relativistic quark model based on the quasipotential approach (R. Q. M.) [554], the non-relativistic quark model (Non- RQM) [557], the QCD sum rules within HQET (QSR) [292, 293, 294, 295], and the constituent quark model (C. Q. M.) [559]. See also Table 16. The masses are in units ¯ of MeV. Here we use Ξc and Ξc0 to denote the Ξc baryons belonging to the flavor 3F and 6F respectively, but note that the superscript 0 is often omitted. Actually, the Ξc and Ξc0 can mix with each other, which effect was taken into account in Ref. [557].

JP (nL) Experimental values [1] R. Q. M. [554] Non-RQM [557] QSR [292, 293, 295] C. Q. M. [559]

+ + +0.28 +79 Ξc 1/2 (1S) 2467.93−0.40 2476 2466 2432−68 2496 0+ + +97 Ξc 1/2 (1S) 2575.7 ± 3.0 2579 2594 2508−91 2574 0+ + ∗+ +102 Ξc 3/2 (1S)Ξc = 2645.9 ± 0.5 2649 2649 2634−94 2633 + − Ξc 1/2 (1P )Ξc(2790) = 2789.1 ± 3.2 2792 2773 2.79 ± 0.15 2749 + − Ξc 3/2 (1P )Ξc(2815) = 2816.6 ± 0.9 2819 2783 2.83 ± 0.15 2749 0 − Ξc 1/2 (1P ) 2854 2855 2.96 ± 0.15 2829 0 − Ξc 1/2 (1P ) 2936 – – – 0 − Ξ (2930) = 2931 ± 6 (?) Ξc 3/2 (1P )c 2912 2866 2.98 ± 0.15 2829 0 − Ξc 3/2 (1P ) 2935 – 2.98 ± 0.21 – 0 − Ξc 5/2 (1P ) 2929 2895 3.05 ± 0.21 – + + Ξc 1/2 (2S) – 2959 – – – 0+ + Ξc 1/2 (2S) – 2983 – – – 0+ + Ξc 3/2 (2S) – 3026 – – – + Ξc 3/2 (1D)Ξc(3055) = 3055.1 ± 1.7 (?) 3059 3012 3.04 ± 0.15 2951 + +0.15 Ξc 5/2 (1D)Ξc(3080) = 3076.94 ± 0.28 (?) 3076 3004 3.05−0.16 – 0 + Ξc 1/2 (1D) – 3163 – – – 0 + Ξc 3/2 (1D) – 3160 – – – 0 + Ξc 3/2 (1D) – 3167 – – – 0 + Ξc 5/2 (1D) – 3153 3080 – – 0 + Ξc 5/2 (1D) – 3166 – – – 0 + Ξc 7/2 (1D) – 3147 3094 – –

is consistent with the experiment measurement. The productions and decay properties of the heavy baryons are also important to understand their nature, which were investigated in Refs. [248, 612, 613, 614, 615, 616,

617, 618, 619]. Particularly, the Λc(2595) is very close to the πΣc threshold. Its strong decays are sensitive to the finite width effects, which were studied in Ref. [620]. In Ref. [621] the authors studied one-pion transitions between the charmed baryon states in the framework of a relativistic three-quark model. They evaluated two 2 coupling constants, fΛc(2595)Σcπ = 0.52 (S-wave transition) and fΛc(2625)Σcπ = 21.5 GeV (D-wave transition), and their derived partial decay widths are consistent with the experiments [622]. The same method was used in Ref. [623] to study the one-photon transitions between heavy baryon states. They evaluated the one-photon transition rates of some specific excited states, and obtained Γ(Λc(2595) Λcγ) = 104.3 1.3 → ± keV. The methods of QCD sum rules and light-cone sum rules were also applied to study the productions and decay properties of the P -wave heavy baryons. In Ref. [288], Zhu calculated the pionic and electromagnetic coupling constants of the lowest-lying P -wave heavy baryon doublet in the leading order of the heavy quark expansion. He CONTENTS 89

∗ obtained Γ(Λc(2595) Σcπ, Σcγ, Σc γ) = 2.7 , 0.011 , 0.001 MeV and Γ(Λc(2625) ∗ → → Σcπ, Σcγ, Σc γ, Λc(2595)γ) = 33 , 5 , 6 , 0.014 keV, respectively. In Ref. [624] the authors studied the semileptonic transitions Λb Λc(2595)lν¯ and Λb Λc(2625)lν¯ using → → the method of QCD sum rules in the framework of heavy quark effective theory, and evaluated the branching ratios (Λb Λc(2595)eν¯e) and (Λb Λc(2625)eν¯e) to be B → B → around 0.21-0.28%. Decays of the charmed baryons were recently systematically investigated in Ref. [625] based on the quark model together with the heavy quark symmetry. Their results indicated that the low-lying Λc(2595) and Λc(2625) can be well described as the

P -wave charmed baryons with one λ-mode orbital excitation (lλ = 1 and lρ = 0). There exist some other interpretations for the excited charmed baryon picture. The Skyrme model was applied to study the heavy baryons in Refs. [626, 627] where the soliton moves around the fixed heavy meson. Bound states were obtained, which could be naively compared with the Λc(2595) and Λc(2625). A model of the DN interaction is proposed in Ref. [628] where the main ingredients of the interaction are provided by the vector meson exchange and higher-order box diagrams involving D∗N, D∆, and D∗∆

intermediate states. Their results suggested that the Λc(2595) resonance is dynamically generated as a DN quasi-bound state. Recently in Ref. [629] the πΣc scattering around

its threshold was studied to investigate the nature of the Λc(2595). They developed a general framework to properly handle the CDD pole accompanied by the nearby 0 + thresholds, and their results suggested that the π Σc component is subdominant inside the Λc(2595). The non-linear chiral SU(3) Lagrangians were used in Ref. [630] to study the charmed baryons of J P = 1/2−. Through the scattering of the ground-state pseudoscalar

mesons and heavy baryons, the Λc(2595), Λc(2880) and Ξc(2790) were dynamically generated. A similar method was used in Refs. [631, 632, 633], where the charmed and strange baryon resonances were dynamically generated with a unitary baryon- meson coupled-channel model incorporating heavy-quark spin symmetry. Their model produced resonances with negative parity from the S-wave interaction of the ground-

state pseudoscalar and vector mesons with baryons. The authors identified the Ξc(2790) and Ξc(2815) as possible candidates forming a heavy-quark spin doublet. As a dynamically generated state, the radiative decays of the Λc(2595) were evaluated in + Ref. [634] to be Γ(Λc(2595) Λcγ) = 278 keV and Γ(Λc(2595) Σ γ) = 2 keV. → → c

4.1.2. Λc(2765), Λc(2880), Λc(2940) and Σc(2800). There are many possible interpretations for the Λc(2765), Λc(2880), Λc(2940) and Σc(2800), which are summarized in Table 15. We shall briefly review the theoretical interpretations of these states. See also Refs. [648, 649, 650, 651] for more discussions. In Ref. [559] the authors employed a constituent quark model to study heavy baryon spectroscopy by solving exactly the three-quark problem using the Faddeev method in

momentum space. Their results suggested that the Λc(2765) may be an excited Λc state P + P − − of J = 1/2 or an excited Σc state of J = 1/2 or 3/2 , the Λc(2880) is an excited CONTENTS 90

Table 15. Possible interpretations for the Λc(2765), Λc(2880), Λc(2940) and Σc(2800). Many studies use the conventional excited charmed baryon picture (cqq) to study their mass spectrum and decay properties, for such studies we show the possible spin-parity quantum numbers. See also Ref. [8] for more information.

References Λc(2765) Λc(2880) Λc(2940) Σc(2800)

+ + 1 1 − 3 − 3 1 − 3 − Ref. [559] 2 2 2 2 2 2 + + + 1 1 − 5 3 3 − Ref. [433] 2 2 2 2 2 5 + Ref. [558]– 2 –– + 1 3 − 5 − Ref. [635] 2 (2S)–– 2 2

5 − 1 − 5 − Ref. [636] 2 2 – 2 + + 1 5 1 − 1 − 3 − Ref. [554] 2 (2S) 2 (1D) 2 (2P ) 2 2 (1P ) + + 1 3 1 − Ref. [637] 2 (2S) 2 (1D) 2 (2P )– 5 + Ref. [638]– 2 –– + 3 5 − Ref. [639] 2 – 2 – + + 1 5 1 − 3 − Ref. [640] 2 (2S) 2 (1D) 2 2 (2P )– + 5 1 − 3 − Refs. [293, 295]– 2 (1D)– 2 2 (1P ) + + 5 5 − 3 Refs. [220]– 2 2 2 – + 5 3 − Ref. [221]– 2 – 2 + + 1 − 3 5 1 − 5 − Ref. [641] 2 2 2 2 2 5 + 7 + Ref. [625]– 2 2 – + 5 3 − 5 − Ref. [642]– 2 – 2 2

Ref. [630] – dynamically generated – – Refs. [643, 644] – – – dynamically generated

0 Ref. [645]–– D∗ p molecule –

Ref. [646]–– D∗N molecule –

Ref. [647]–– D∗N molecule DN molecule

P − − P + Λc state of J = 1/2 or 3/2 , the Λc(2940) is an excited Λc state of J = 3/2 , and P − − the Σc(2800) is an excited Σc state of J = 1/2 or 3/2 . In Ref. [433] the authors also adopted the Faddeev method and noticed that the Λc(2765) can be interpreted as an P + P − excited Λc state of J = 1/2 or an excited Σc state of J = 1/2 ; the Λc(2880) can P − P + be interpreted as an excited Λc state of J = 1/2 or J = 5/2 ; the Λc(2940) and P + − Σc(2800) can be interpreted as excited Σc states of J = 3/2 and 3/2 , respectively. Later in Ref. [558] the authors also used the constituent quark model to study the heavy baryon spectrum, and found that the Λc(2880) is a good Λc(1D) candidate with J P = 5/2+. Recently in Ref. [635] the authors systematically studied the mass spectra and strong decays of 1P and 2S charmed baryons using the nonrelativistic constituent CONTENTS 91

quark model, and pointed out that the Λc(2765) could be explained as the Λc(2S) state P + P − of J = 1/2 or the excited Σc state of J = 1/2 , and the Σc(2800) can be assigned P − − as an excited Σc state of J = 3/2 or 5/2 . Besides the constituent quark model, the relativistic quark model was also applied to study the heavy baryon spectrum. In Ref. [636] the authors calculated the masses of the negative parity charmed baryons in the relativistic quark model, and their results P − suggested that the Σc(2800) is an excited Σc state of J = 5/2 , and the Λc(2765) and P − − Λc(2880) are excited Λc states of J = 5/2 and 1/2 , respectively. Later in Ref. [554] the authors calculated the mass spectra of heavy baryons in the heavy-quark-light- diquark picture in the framework of the QCD-motivated relativistic quark model. Some of their results have been reviewed in Tables 13 and 14, suggesting that the Λc(2765), + + − Λc(2880) and Λc(2940) can be interpreted as the 1/2 (2S), 5/2 (1D) and 1/2 (2P ) excited Λc states, respectively. The Λc(2765) and Λc(2940) may also be interpreted − + as the 3/2 (1P ) and 3/2 (2S) excited Σc states, respectively. The Σc(2800) can be − − interpreted as the 1/2 (1P ) or 3/2 (1P ) excited Σc state. Recently in Ref. [637] the authors adopted the interactions proposed by the relativized GI model to calculate

baryon masses. Their results suggested that the Λc(2880) can be interpreted as a D- P + wave Λc state with J = 3/2 , and the Λc(2765) and Λc(2940) can be interpreted as + − the 1/2 (2S) and 1/2 (2P ) excited Λc states, respectively. A semi-classical model of the color flux tubes was proposed in Ref. [638] where P + the Λc(2880) can be well interpreted as an excited Λc state of J = 5/2 . Later in Ref. [639] the authors employed the “good” diquark to study the Λc baryons within a mass loaded flux tube model. Their results suggested that the Λc(2765) can be an P + excited Λc state of J = 3/2 , and the Λc(2940) is possibly an orbitally excited Λc state of J P = 5/2−. A mass formula derived analytically from the relativistic flux tube model was used in Ref. [640] to investigate the mass spectra of the charmed baryons, and the

results suggested that the Λc(2765) can be assigned as the first radial excitation of the P + P + Λc with J = 1/2 , the Λc(2880) is a good Λc(1D) candidate with J = 5/2 , and the Λc(2940) might be the 2P excitation of the Λc. The method of QCD sum rules in the framework of the heavy quark effective theory was also applied in Refs. [293, 295] to systematically investigate the P and D-

wave charmed baryons, where the Λc(2880) was interpreted as a D-wave Λc state of P + P − J = 5/2 , and the Σc(2800) was interpreted as a P -wave Σc state of J = 1/2 or 3/2−. Besides the mass spectrum analysis, there are also many studies investigating the decay properties of the excited charmed baryons in order to understand their nature. In Refs. [220, 652, 653] the authors studied strong decays of the charmed baryons in the framework of heavy hadron chiral perturbation theory which synthesizes both the

heavy quark symmetry and chiral symmetry. Their results suggested that the Λc(2880) P + is a D-wave excited Λc state of J = 5/2 , while the possible spin-parity quantum − + numbers of the Λc(2940) are 5/2 and 3/2 . Later in Ref. [221], the Λc(2880) was still P + interpreted as a D-wave Λc state of J = 5/2 and the Σc(2800) was interpreted as a CONTENTS 92

P − P -wave Σc state of J = 3/2 . Strong decays of the charmed baryons were also systematically investigated using other methods. In Ref. [641] the authors used a chiral quark model, and their results P − suggested that the Λc(2765) may be a ρ-mode (lρ = 1) P -wave Λc state of J = 1/2 ; P + the Λc(2880) and Λc(2940) could be the D-wave excited Λc states of J = 3/2 and + 5/2 , respectively; the Σc(2800) can be interpreted as a λ-mode (lλ = 1) P -wave Σc P − − 3 state of J = 1/2 or 5/2 . In Ref. [642] the authors used the P0 model, and obtained P + that the Λc(2880) can be interpreted as a D-wave excited Λc state of J = 5/2 , and P − − the Σc(2800) can be interpreted as a P -wave excited Σc state of J = 3/2 or 5/2 . In Ref. [625], the authors used the quark model together with the heavy quark symmetry, and their results suggested that the Λc(2880) can be interpreted as a D-wave excited Λc P + state of J = 5/2 , and the Λc(2940) can be its partner belonging to the same heavy quark spin doublet having J P = 7/2+. Besides the conventional quark model cqq picture, there also exist other interpretations of the Λc(2765), Λc(2880), Λc(2940) and Σc(2800). In Ref. [630] the authors studied the scattering of the pseudoscalar mesons and ground state charmed baryons in terms of the non-linear chiral SU(3) Lagrangian and found that the Λc(2880) can be dynamically generated in the J P = 1/2− channel. Later in Ref. [654] they proposed that the Σc(2800) can be interpreted as a chiral molecule. See also Refs. [655, 656, 657] which discuss the D and D∗ mesons in the nuclear and hyperonic medium. The interaction of the pseudoscalar mesons and ground state baryons was also studied in Refs. [643, 644] within a coupled channel approach, where the authors used a t-channel vector-exchange driving force and concluded that the Σc(2800) can be interpreted as a dynamically generated resonance with a dominant ND configuration and J P = 1/2−. + ∗0 In Ref. [645] the authors proposed that the Λc(2940) is a D p molecular state, which can naturally explain why its mass is a few MeV below the threshold and why its 0 + + − observed channels are D p and Λc π π . They also proposed the experimental search + 0 0 0 + 0 0 of the channels such as D n, D π p, D γp and Λc π π to further test this molecular interpretation. In Refs. [646, 658] the authors studied the Λc(2940) in a constituent quark model. They suggested that the Λc(2940) may be interpreted as a molecular state composed of nucleons and D∗. They could obtain the right binding energy in P − the J = 3/2 channel, and their calculated partial widths for the Λc(2940) ND → and Λc(2940) Σcπ decays are consistent with the experimental data. Moreover, they → predicted its bottom partner, a B¯∗N molecular state around 6248 MeV. The quark delocalization color screening model was recently applied in Ref. [647] to study the ND system, and their results suggested that the Σc(2800) could be explained as the DN bound state with J P = 1/2− but its coupling to the ND∗ channel should ∗ be taken into account, and the Λc(2940) could be explained as the D N bound state with J P = 3/2−. They further proposed a possible ∆D∗ resonance state around 3210.1 MeV with I = 1 and J P = 5/2−. The method of QCD sum rules was also applied in Ref. [659] to test these interpretations. See discussions in Refs. [660, 661, 662] for more CONTENTS 93 information. ∗ As a D N hadronic molecule, the two-body strong decays of the Λc(2940) were studied in Ref. [663], where they excluded the spin-parity J P = 1/2− assignment, and ++ − 0 + P + calculated the dominant decay channels Σc π and Σc π for the choice of J = 1/2 . + Later in Refs. [664, 665], the authors investigated the radiative decay Λc(2940) + + + + − → Λc(2286) γ and the strong three-body decays Λc(2940) Λc(2286) π π and + + 0 0 ∗→ Λc(2940) Λc(2286) π π , assuming the Λc(2940) as a D N hadronic molecule of P + → 0 J = 1/2 . They also studied the annihilation process pp¯ pD Λ¯ c(2286) in Ref. [666], → and found that the contribution from the intermediate state Λc(2940) is sizeable near the threshold of pp¯ Λc(2286)Λ¯ c(2286) and can be observed at the PANDA experiment. → Its role in the π−p D−D0p reaction near threshold was investigated in Ref. [667] → within an effective Lagrangian approach. The Σc(2800) can also be interpreted as a DN bound state, under which assumption its strong two-body decay Σc(2800) Λcπ → was investigated in Ref. [668], and the evaluated width with the J P = 1/2+ and 3/2− assignments is consistent with the experimental data. ∗0 As a D p molecular state, the photoproduction of the Λc(2940) in the γn − + → D Λc(2940) process was investigated in Ref. [669] with an effective Lagrangian approach, where the authors estimated the total cross section of this process, and proposed to search for the Λc(2940) at the COMPASS experiment. A similar method was applied in Ref. [670] to study the production of the Λc(2940) by the kaon-induced − − 0 reaction on a proton target, through the K p D Λc(2940)( D p) reaction, and → s → their results suggested that the Λc(2940) can be studied in the experiment with high- energy kaon beam on a proton target.

Table 16. Possible interpretations of the Ξc(2930), Ξc(2980), Ξc(3055), Ξc(3080) and Ξc(3123). We show the possible spin-parity quantum numbers for the conventional quark model picture. We use Ξc and Ξc0 to denote the Ξc baryons belonging to the flavor 3¯F and 6F respectively, but note that the superscript 0 is often omitted. See also Ref. [8] for more information.

References Ξc(2930) Ξc(2980) Ξc(3055) Ξc(3080) Ξc(3123)           1 − 5 + 3 + 1 + 0 5 + Ref. [433]–Ξc 2 Ξc 2 Ξc 2 Ξc 2 Ξc 2       5 + 5 + 0 5 + Ref. [189]––Ξc 2 Ξc 2 Ξc 2   1 − 3 − 5 − 0 1 + 0 3 + 5 + 7 + 0 Ref. [554] 2 2 2 Ξc(1P ) 2 Ξc(2S) 2 Ξc(1D) 2 Ξc(1D) 2 Ξc(1D)   1 − 3 − 0 3 + 5 − 0 5 + Refs. [293, 295]– 2 2 Ξc(1P ) 2 Ξc(1D) 2 Ξc(1P ) 2 Ξc(1D)–  1 + 3 + 5 + 1 − 3 − Ref. [640]– 2 Ξc(2S) 2 Ξc(1D) 2 Ξc(1D) 2 2 Ξc(2P )  3 − 5 − 0 1 + Ref. [635] 2 2 Ξc(1P ) 2 Ξc(2S)–––     0 1 + 5 + Refs. [220, 221]–Ξc 2 –Ξc 2 –   1 − 0 1 − 3 − 0 3 + 1 + 3 + 5 + Ref. [671] 2 Ξc(1P ) 2 2 Ξc(1P ) 2 Ξc(1D) 2 Ξc(2S) 2 2  5 + 7 + Ref. [672]–– 2 2 ––

Ref. [643] – dynamically generated – – – CONTENTS 94

4.1.3. Ξc(2930), Ξc(2980), Ξc(3055), Ξc(3080) and Ξc(3123). There are also many possible interpretations for the Ξc(2930), Ξc(2980), Ξc(3055), Ξc(3080) and Ξc(3123). Actually, these states are even more complicated than the excited Λc and Σc baryons, because they can belong to both the flavor 3¯F and 6F representations. We summarize them in Table 16, and briefly review these efforts here. See also Refs. [673, 674, 675, 676, 677, 678] for more discussions. In Ref. [433] the authors studied the heavy baryon spectroscopy within the Faddeev

method, and found that the Ξc(2980) can be interpreted as an excited Ξc state of P − J = 1/2 ; the Ξc(3055) and Ξc(3080) can be interpreted as excited Ξc states of P + + J = 5/2 and 3/2 , respectively; the Ξc(3123) can be interpreted as an excited Ξc P + 0 P + state of J = 1/2 or an excited Ξc state of J = 5/2 . In Ref. [189] the authors studied the Regge phenomenology, and their results suggested that both the Ξc(3055) P + and Ξc(3080) can be assigned as the excited Ξc state with J = 5/2 , and the Ξc(3123) 0 P + may be the D-wave excited state of the Ξc with J = 5/2 . The QCD-motivated relativistic quark model was applied in Ref. [554] to study the heavy baryon spectrum, and their results suggested that the Ξc(2930) can be interpreted 0 P − − − as the excited Ξc state with J = 1/2 , 3/2 or 5/2 ; the Ξc(2980) can be interpreted + 0 as the 1/2 (2S) excited Ξc state; the Ξc(3055) and Ξc(3080) can be interpreted as the + + 3/2 (1D) and 5/2 (1D) excited Ξc states, respectively; the Ξc(3123) can be interpreted + 0 as the 7/2 (1D) excited Ξc state. The method of QCD sum rules within HQET was applied in Refs. [293, 295] to systematically investigate the heavy baryon spectrum, and 0 their results suggested that the Ξc(2980) can be interpreted as the P -wave excited Ξc P − − state of J = 1/2 or 3/2 , and the Ξc(3080) can be interpreted as the P -wave excited 0 P − Ξc state of J = 5/2 ; while the Ξc(3080) can also be interpreted as the D-wave excited P + Ξc state of J = 5/2 , and the Ξc(3055) can be its partner belonging to the same heavy quark spin doublet with J P = 3/2+. In Ref. [640] the authors investigated the mass spectra of the charmed baryons using the relativistic flux tube model, and obtained that the Ξc(2980) can be interpreted as P + the first radial excitation of the Ξc with J = 1/2 , and the Ξc(3123) might be the 2P excitation of the Ξc. They also obtained that the Ξc(3080) is a good Ξc(1D) candidate P + P + with J = 5/2 , and the Ξc(3055) could be its doublet partner with J = 3/2 . Recently in Ref. [635] the authors systematically studied the excited charmed baryons using the nonrelativistic constituent quark model. Their results suggested that the P + Ξc(2980) can be interpreted as the first radial excited state of the Ξc with J = 1/2 , 0 P − and the Ξc(2930) can be assigned to the 1P excited state of the Ξc with J = 3/2 or 5/2−.

Besides the mass spectrum, the decay properties of the Ξc(2930), Ξc(2980), Ξc(3055), Ξc(3080) and Ξc(3123) are also interesting. In Ref. [220] the authors studied the strong decays of the charmed baryons using the heavy hadron chiral perturbation theory, and concluded that the spin-parity quantum numbers of the Ξc(2980) and Ξ(3080) are 1/2+ and 5/2+, respectively. Later in Ref. [221], the authors further 0 P + identified the Ξc(2980) and Ξ(3080) as the excited Ξc state J = 1/2 and the excited CONTENTS 95

P + Ξc state of J = 5/2 , respectively. The strong decays of the charmed baryons were also systematically investigated in

Ref. [671] using a chiral quark model. Their results suggested that the Ξc(2930) might 0 P − be the first P -wave excited Ξc state with J = 1/2 ; the Ξc(2980) might be the P -wave 0 P − − excited Ξc state with J = 1/2 or 3/2 ; the Ξc(3055) is most likely to be the first P + D-wave excitation of the Ξc with J = 3/2 , and the Ξc(3080) can be interpreted as the P + first radial excitation of the Ξc with J = 1/2 ; the Ξc(3123) might be assigned as the 0 P + + D-wave excitation of the Ξc with J = 3/2 or 5/2 or the D-wave excitation of the P + Ξc with J = 5/2 . Recently in Ref. [672] the authors systematically studied the decay 3 properties of the Ξc(3055) and Ξc(3080) using the P0 model. Their results suggested P + that the Ξc(3055) can be interpreted as the D-wave excite Ξc state of J = 5/2 or 7/2+, and its total decay width was evaluated to be around 10 MeV. This state can 0 P + + also be interpreted as the D-wave excite Ξc state of J = 5/2 or 7/2 , and its total decay width was evaluated to be around 7 MeV. Their results also suggested that the

Ξc(3080) seems impossible to be identified as a D-wave charmed strange baryon. Besides the conventional excited charmed baryon picture (cqq), there also exist

other interpretations of the Ξc(2930), Ξc(2980), Ξc(3055), Ξc(3080) and Ξc(3123). In Ref. [643] the authors studied the interaction of the pseudoscalar mesons and ground

state baryons within a coupled channel approach, and noticed that the Ξc(2980) can be a dynamically generated resonance with J P = 1/2−.

4.2. The bottom baryons

In this subsection we discuss the mass spectrum of the bottom baryon family. Here we investigate five theoretical approaches as listed in Sec. 4.1 and summarize the results in Tables 17 and 18. More discussions can be found in Refs. [297, 298, 299, 679, 680, 681, 682, 683]. Particularly, the dipion decays of the P -wave and D-wave excited bottom baryons were systematically investigated in Ref. [651] in the framework of the QPC model. See also the lattice QCD studies in Refs. [684, 685]. In Tables 17 and 18, we also compare the theoretical results with the experimental data, and conclude that

∗ P + (i) The Ωb of J = 3/2 has not been observed yet. Various theoretical calculations of all the other 1S bottom baryon massed agree with the data quite well. The states P + nearly complete the flavor 3¯F multiplet of J = 1/2 and two flavor 6F multiplets of J P = 1/2+ and 3/2+.

(ii) The Λb(5912) and Λb(5920) are good candidates for the P -wave bottom baryons, P − − which belong to the flavor 3¯F multiplets of J = 1/2 and 3/2 . (iii) Many bottom baryons remain to be discovered experimentally, probably at LHCb. In the following we review the theoretical progress on the excited bottom baryons, i.e.,

the Λb(5912) and Λb(5920). CONTENTS 96

Table 17. Comparison of the experimental data and theoretical results of the Λb,Σb and Ωb baryons, obtained using the QCD-motivated relativistic quark model based on the quasipotential approach (R. Q. M.) [554], the non-relativistic quark model (Non- RQM) [557], the QCD sum rules within HQET (QSR) [292, 293, 294, 295], and the relativistic quark model generalized from the GI model (C. I.) [7]. The masses are in unit of MeV. JP (nL) Experimental values [1] R. Q. M. [554] Non-RQM [557] QSR [292, 294, 295] C. I. [7]

+ +68 Λb 1/2 (1S) 5619.51 ± 0.23 5620 5612 5637−56 5585 + + +0.9 +82 Σb 1/2 (1S) 5811.3−0.8 ± 1.7 5808 5833 5809−76 5795 ∗+ + +1.7 +82 Σb 3/2 (1S) 5832.1 ± 0.7−1.8 5834 5858 5835−77 5805 0 + Ωb 1/2 (1S) 6046.4 ± 1.9 6064 6081 6036 ± 81 – ∗0 + +83 Ωb 3/2 (1S) – 6088 6102 6063−82 – − Λb 1/2 (1P )Λb(5912) = 5911.97 ± 0.67 5930 5939 5.87 ± 0.12 5912 − Λb 3/2 (1P )Λb(5920) = 5919.77 ± 0.67 5942 5941 5.88 ± 0.11 5920 − Σb 1/2 (1P ) – 6095 6099 5.91 ± 0.14 6070 − Σb 1/2 (1P ) – 6101 6106 6.02 ± 0.12 6070 − Σb 3/2 (1P ) – 6087 6101 5.92 ± 0.14 6070 − Σb 3/2 (1P ) – 6096 6105 5.96 ± 0.18 6085 − Σb 5/2 (1P ) – 6084 6172 5.98 ± 0.18 6090 − Ωb 1/2 (1P ) – 6330 6301 6.34 ± 0.13 – − Ωb 1/2 (1P ) – 6339 6312 6.50 ± 0.11 – − Ωb 3/2 (1P ) – 6331 6304 6.34 ± 0.13 – − Ωb 3/2 (1P ) – 6340 6311 6.43 ± 0.13 – − Ωb 5/2 (1P ) – 6334 6311 6.43 ± 0.13 – + Λb 1/2 (2S) – 6089 6107 – 6045 + Σb 1/2 (2S) – 6213 6294 – 6200 + Σb 3/2 (2S) – 6226 6308 – 6250 + Ωb 1/2 (2S) – 6450 6472 – – + Ωb 3/2 (2S) – 6461 6478 – – + +0.20 Λb 3/2 (1D) – 6190 6181 6.01−0.12 6145 + +0.20 Λb 5/2 (1D) – 6196 6183 6.01−0.13 6165 + Σb 1/2 (1D) – 6311 – – 6200 + Σb 3/2 (1D) – 6285 – – 6250 + Σb 3/2 (1D) – 6326 – – 6320 + Σb 5/2 (1D) – 6270 6325 – 6325 + Σb 5/2 (1D) – 6284 6328 – 6335 + Σb 7/2 (1D) – 6260 6333 – 6340 + Ωb 1/2 (1D) – 6540 – – – + Ωb 3/2 (1D) – 6530 – – – + Ωb 3/2 (1D) – 6549 – – – + Ωb 5/2 (1D) – 6520 6492 – – + Ωb 5/2 (1D) – 6529 6494 – – + Ωb 7/2 (1D) – 6517 6497 – –

4.2.1. Λb(5912) and Λb(5920). The Λb(5912) and Λb(5920) were both observed by the LHCb Collaboration in 2012 [446]. In 1986, Capstick and Isgur studied the P - wave bottom baryons using the relativistic quark model [7], and their predicted masses are exactly the same as the experimental values (see Table 17). This agreement is a big success of the relativistic quark model. Besides this work, many other models and methods were applied to study the Λb(5912) and Λb(5920). See discussions at the beginning of this subsection and Refs. [686, 687] for more information. In Ref. [688] the authors used the color hyperfine interaction to study the CONTENTS 97

Table 18. Comparison of the experimental data and theoretical results of the Ξb baryons, obtained using the QCD-motivated relativistic quark model based on the quasipotential approach (R. Q. M.) [554], the non-relativistic quark model (Non- RQM) [557], the QCD sum rules within HQET (QSR) [292, 293, 294, 295], and the constituent quark model (C. Q. M.) [559]. The masses are in unit of MeV. Here we use ¯ Ξb and Ξb0 to denote the Ξb baryons belonging to the flavor 3F and 6F respectively, but note that the superscript 0 is often omitted. Actually, the Ξb and Ξb0 can mix with each other, which effect was taken into account in Ref. [557].

JP (nL) Experimental values [1] R. Q. M. [554] Non-RQM [557] QSR [292, 294, 295] C. Q. M. [559]

− + +73 Ξb 1/2 (1S) 5794.5 ± 1.4 5803 5806 5780−68 5825 0− + +81 Ξb 1/2 (1S) 5935.02 ± 0.02 ± 0.05 5936 5970 5903−79 5913 0− + ∗− +83 Ξb 3/2 (1S)Ξb = 5955.33 ± 0.12 ± 0.05 5963 5980 5929−79 5967 − Ξb 1/2 (1P ) – 6120 6090 6.06 ± 0.13 6076 − Ξb 3/2 (1P ) – 6130 6093 6.07 ± 0.13 6076 0 − Ξb 1/2 (1P ) – 6227 6188 6.11 ± 0.13 6157 0 − Ξb 1/2 (1P ) – 6233 – 6.24 ± 0.11 – 0 − Ξb 3/2 (1P ) – 6224 6190 6.11 ± 0.13 6157 0 − Ξb 3/2 (1P ) – 6234 – 6.17 ± 0.17 – 0 − Ξb 5/2 (1P ) – 6226 6201 6.18 ± 0.16 – + + Ξb 1/2 (2S) – 6266 – – – 0+ + Ξb 1/2 (2S) – 6329 – – – 0+ + Ξb 3/2 (2S) – 6342 – – – + +0.10 Ξb 3/2 (1D) – 6366 6311 6.19−0.12 6275 + +0.10 Ξb 5/2 (1D) – 6373 6300 6.19−0.12 – 0 + Ξb 1/2 (1D) – 6447 – – – 0 + Ξb 3/2 (1D) – 6431 – – – 0 + Ξb 3/2 (1D) – 6459 – – – 0 + Ξb 5/2 (1D) – 6420 6393 – – 0 + Ξb 5/2 (1D) – 6432 – – – 0 + Ξb 7/2 (1D) – 6414 6395 – –

bottom baryons, and predicted the masses of the baryons with lλ = 1 to be − − M(Λb(1/2 )) = 5929 2 MeV and M(Λb(3/2 )) = 5940 2 MeV. They also predicted − ± − ± that M(Ξb(1/2 )) = 6106 4 MeV and M(Ξb(1/2 )) = 6115 4 MeV. See also studies ± ± in Refs. [689]. Later in Ref. [690], the authors further explored the Σb baryons with P − − lλ = 1. Their results suggested that the Σb states of J = 3/2 and 5/2 with jl = 2 lie around 6100 MeV. In Ref. [640] the authors applied a mass formula derived from the relativistic flux tube model to investigate the heavy baryons. With the heavy-quark-light-diquark

picture, the Λb(5912) and Λb(5920) were assigned as the 1P bottom baryons of J P = 1/2− and 3/2−, respectively.

Different from the conventional bqq picture, the Λb(5912) and Λb(5920) are explained as the dynamically generated states in Refs. [691, 692, 693, 694, 695]. A unitarized

meson-baryon coupled-channel dynamical model was used to investigate the Λb(5912)

and Λb(5920) in Refs. [691, 693], where these two states were identified as the dynamically generated meson-baryon molecular states. With the heavy quark spin P − symmetry, the authors predicted two bsq baryons, the Ξb(6035.4) of J = 1/2 and P − the Ξb(6043.3) of J = 3/2 . CONTENTS 98

In Ref. [694] the authors studied the bottom baryons in the extended local hidden gauge approach. Under the assumption that the heavy quarks act as spectators, they found two states with nearly zero width. These two states couple mostly to B¯∗N, and were identified as the Λb(5912) and Λb(5920). In Ref. [695] the authors investigated the interaction of the B¯ mesons with N and ∆ within a unitarized approach based on effective models compatible with chiral and heavy-quark symmetries. They identified several Λb and Σb doublets, two of which can be associated with the Λb(5912) and ∗ Λb(5920). They also identified another bottom baryon, the Σb (5904) of J = 3/2, as the ∗ ∗ bottom counterpart of the Σ (1670) and Σc (2549).

5. The doubly and triply charmed baryons

The only experimental evidence for baryons containing two or more heavy quarks + is the doubly charmed baryon Ξcc reported by the SELEX Collaboration in the + + − + Ξcc Λc K π process [453], as mentioned in Sec. 2.7. Up to now, no other → + experiments confirmed the existence of the Ξcc [458, 423, 459]. However, the doubly charmed baryon systems with the quark contents ccu, ccd, ccs have been studied extensively using various theoretical methods, such as the various quark models, the bag model, QCD sum rules, heavy quark effective theory, lattice QCD simulation, etc. [696, 697, 698, 699, 700, 701, 702]. In this section, we briefly review these investigations for the doubly and triply charmed/bottom baryon systems. Forty years ago, De Rujula, Georgi and Glashow investigated the doubly charmed baryons and estimated their masses in a renormalizable gauge field theory [54]. Jaffe and Khakis calculated the mass spectra of the doubly and triply charmed baryons in the bag model [703]. The similar investigations were extended to the bottom sector to study the masses of the doubly and triply bottom baryons in Ref. [704]. Using the hyper- spherical formalism, Hasenfratz et al. solved the Schr¨odingerequation and obtained the masses of the triply charmed baryons [560]. Later, Fleck and Richard calculated the mass spectra of the doubly charmed baryons in potential models and several versions of the bag model [705]. Bagan et al. discussed the masses of the bcq, ccq, bbq baryons by combining the potential model and the QCD sum rules [706, 707]. The hadron spectroscopy of the baryons containing two or more heavy quarks were also studied in the heavy quark effective theory [566], mass sum rules [708], quark models [71, 709, 710], relativistic quark-diquark model [73] and some other approaches [711, 712, 713, 714]. Lewis, Mathur and Woloshyn calculated the masses of the doubly charmed baryons and the mass differences between the spin 3/2 and spin 1/2 baryons states in quenched P 1 + Lattice QCD [578]. The masses of the ccu and ccd states with J = 2 were often + predicted above 3.6 GeV, which are higher than the mass of the Ξcc(3520) [453]. + After the announcement of the Ξcc(3520) by SELEX collaboration, there are more theoretical efforts to study the spectroscopy of the doubly and triply charmed baryons. In Ref. [715], the authors evaluated the mass spectra of baryons consisting of two heavy and one light quarks in the MIT bag model. They considered both the scalar and axial- CONTENTS 99

vector diquark formalisms for the two heavy quarks. Accordingly, the mass spectra of 0 0 P 1 + 3 + the QQ q (Q, Q = b, c and q = u, d, s) states with J = 2 , 2 were obtained. In the framework of the potential models, Richard and Stancu revisited the doubly charmed baryons and calculated the mass of the ccd(1/2+) state to be around 3.6 GeV [716]. In Ref. [585], the authors investigated the mass spectra of the doubly and triply charmed baryons in the framework of a relativistically covariant constituent quark model. They considered the Bethe-Salpeter equation with the instantaneous approximation and used a linearly rising three-body confinement potential and a flavor dependent two-body force derived from QCD instanton effects. A simple quark model was also applied to calculate the spectrum of baryons containing two and three heavy quarks QQ0q, QQQ0 in Ref. [557]. The phenomenological Hamiltonian was considered by including the kinetic energy term, the spin independent confining potential, the spin- dependent hyperfine potential and a simplified spin-orbit potential, in which the spin independent confining potential consists of the linear and Coulomb components. In a nonrelativistic quark model [717], many static properties of the doubly heavy baryons were evaluated including the masses, charge radii and magnetic moments. They used five different quark-quark potentials and solved the three-body problem with a simple variational approach and Jastrow type orbital wave functions. All the theoretical P 1 + approaches predicted the mass of the Ξcc with J = 2 to be around 3.6-3.7 GeV. In Ref. [718], the authors derived the Bethe-Salpeter equations for the heavy

diquarks and the doubly heavy baryons in leading order in the 1/mQ expansion. They solved the Bethe-Salpeter equations numerically under the covariant instantaneous approximation with the kernels containing the scalar confinement and one-gluon- exchange terms and calculated the masses and non-leptonic decay widths of the doubly heavy baryons. In the chiral perturbation theory, Sun et al. constructed the chiral effective Lagrangians describing the interactions of the light mesons and doubly charmed baryons [719]. They further made the non-relativistic reduction and obtained the chiral Lagrangians up to O(p4) in the heavy baryon limit. They derived the chiral corrections 3 to the mass of the doubly heavy baryons up to N LO and predicted the mass of the Ξcc +.093 to be mΞcc = 3.665−.097 GeV. Karliner and Rosner estimated the masses of the doubly heavy J = 1/2 and 3/2

baryons using the hyperfine interaction [720]. For the J = 1/2 Ξcc state, they predicted its mass to be about 3627 12 GeV. They also discussed the P-wave excitations, ± production mechanisms, decay modes, lifetimes and prospects for the detection of the doubly heavy baryons. In Ref. [455], the authors studied the masses of the doubly and triply charmed baryons in the Regge phenomenology. They first expressed the mass of the ground state ∗+ Ωcc as a function of the masses of the well established light baryons and singly charmed baryons. Then they calculated the masses of the ground state triply charmed baryon and the doubly charmed baryons with the quadratic mass relations. The extracted mass P + of the Ξcc with J = 1/2 was about 3.52 GeV, which was in good agreement with the CONTENTS 100

SELEX’s value. The QCD sum rules have also been used to study the mass spectra of the doubly and triply heavy baryons [721, 722, 678, 723, 724]. In Ref. [721], Zhang and Huang proposed the doubly heavy baryonic interpolating currents with J P = 1/2+ and 3/2+ in a tentative heavy-diquark-light-quark configuration. They calculated the two-point correlation functions up to the dimension six nonperturbative contributions in the operator product expansion. They found the mass of the ccq with J P = 1/2+ to be about 4.3 GeV, which is much higher than the predictions from other methods. Using the same interpolating current, Wang also performed QCD sum rule analyses for the + 1/2 QQq baryons [724] and obtained the mass of Ξcc to be around 3.57 GeV. Later, Wang studied the J P = 3/2+ [723] and 1/2−, 3/2− [678] doubly heavy baryon states. In Ref. [722], Zhang and Huang also studied the triply heavy baryons with one or two heavy quark flavors. There are also various lattice simulations on the mass spectra for the doubly and triply charmed baryons. In Ref. [593], the UKQCD Collaboration presented results for the masses of the spin-1/2 and spin-3/2 doubly charmed baryons in quenched lattice QCD with non-perturbatively improved clover action at β = 6.2. The mass of the

Ξcc was m = 3549(13)(19)(92) MeV. Liu et al. computed the masses of the J = 1/2 doubly charmed baryons in full lattice QCD [594]. They used the low-lying charmonium spectrum to tune the heavy-quark action and as a guide to understand the discretization errors associated with the heavy quark. Their result for the mass of the Ξcc was a bit higher. In Ref. [725], the PACS-CS Collaboration investigated the doubly and triply charmed baryon mass spectra using the relativistic heavy quark action on 2 + 1 flavor lattice QCD at the physical point with the inverse lattice spacing a−1 = 2.194(10)

GeV. The mass of the Ξcc was calculated to be approximately 85 MeV higher than the SELEX’s result. Alexandrou et al. calculated the masses of the doubly and triply charmed baryons with the pion mass in the range of about 260 MeV to 450 MeV. They used three values of the lattice spacing to check the dependence of the baryon masses on the lattice spacing and the charm quark mass [597]. Later, they also evaluated these mass spectra using a total of ten ensembles of dynamical twisted mass fermion gauge configurations [726]. Their results for the doubly charmed Ξcc mass were in good agreement with the SELEX’s measurement. In Ref. [598], the authors calculated the mass spectra of the positive-parity doubly and triply charmed baryons from lattice QCD with Nf = 2 + 1 + 1 flavors of dynamical quarks. They used a relativistic heavy-quark action for the valence charm quark, clover-Wilson fermions for the valence light and strange quarks and HISQ sea quarks. They used three lattice spacings a = 0.12 fm, 0.09 fm, and 0.06 fm to extrapolate to the continuum with a lightest pion mass around 220 MeV. For the doubly charmed P + Ξcc with J = 1/2 , they obtained the isospin-averaged value M = 3595(39)(20)(6) MeV, which was in good agreement with the SELEX’s result. In Ref. [727], the authors determined the ground state and first excited state masses of the spin-1/2 and spin-3/2 doubly charmed baryons with positive and negative parities from lattice CONTENTS 101

P + Table 19. Masses of the doubly charmed baryon Ξcc(ccq) with J = 1/2 in various models.

Method Reference Mass (MeV) [54] 3550–3760 [71] 3660 [73] 3620 Quark models [710] 3646 12 ± [557] 3678 [720] 3627 12 ± [705] 3613 [706] 3630 Potential models [713] 3480 50 ± [716] 3643 [705] 3516 Bag models [715] 3520 Feynman-Hellmann theorem [711] 3660 70 ± Heavy quark effective theory [566] 3610 +93 Chiral perturbation theory [719] 3665 97 − +41 Regge phenomenology [455] 3520 40 − Nonperturbative string [714] 3690 [712] 3607 Faddeev equations [709] 3527 [585] 3642 Bethe-Salpeter equations [718] 3540 20 ± [721] 4260 190 QCD sum rules ± [724] 3570 140 ± 13 [578] 3608(15)(35) [593] 3549(13)(19)(92) +0 [594] 3665 17 14 78 ± ± − [725] 3603(15)(16) Lattice QCD [598] 3595(39)(20)(6) [726] 3568(14)(19)(1) [727] 3610(90)(120) [600] 3610(23)(22) CONTENTS 102

QCD simulation with Nf = 2 + 1 non-perturbatively improved Wilson-clover fermions configurations. Their pion mass on the lattice lies in the range 259-460 MeV with a lattice spacing a 0.075 fm. Many other lattice QCD calculations can be found in ∼ Refs. [728, 600, 729, 730, 731, 732]. + As mentioned above, only one doubly charmed baryon state Ξcc(3520) was reported, + whose existence has not been confirmed yet. For the Ξcc(3520), we collect some model predictions in Table 19. Most of the theoretical calculations of the mass for this state lie above the SELEX’s value. There also lacks experimental evidence of the triply heavy baryons although they must exist. However, a large number of Bc mesons has been observed at Tevatron [733, 734] and LHCb experiments [735, 736, 737, 738, 739, 740, 741]. Hopefully the doubly and triply charmed/bottomed baryons will be produced at LHC in the near future. The various theoretical predictions reviewed above will be useful for the future experimental search of these states.

6. Candidates for the exotic heavy hadrons

As reviewed in Sec. 3.2, the theoretical predictions of the masses of the charmed- strange mesons in the P -wave (0+, 1+) doublet are around 2.48 GeV and 2.55 GeV [6, 60, 75, 131, 316]. These two values are significantly larger than the experimental ∗ P + P + masses of the Ds0(2317) of J = 0 and the Ds1(2460) of J = 1 . This puzzle has stimulated theorists’ extensive interests in exploring their inner structures. Various exotic assignments were proposed. In this section we review these efforts. We shall also review the theoretical studies on the X(5568) [3], which consists of four different quarks su¯bd¯ (or sd¯bu¯).

∗ 6.1. The Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460)

∗ 6.1.1. Molecular scheme. The low mass puzzle of the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) inspired various exotic explanations. Among them, the D(∗)K molecule interpretation is quite popular. We note that both the molecular interpretation and the D(∗)K couple channel effect arise from the strong S-wave D(∗)K interaction. The D(∗)K molecular interpretation was first proposed in Ref. [742], where Barnes, Close and Lipkin found that a dominantly I = 0 DK molecular state with some I = 1 ∗ admixture could explain both the narrow total width of the Ds0(2317) as well as its + 0 observed decay to Ds π . Later in Ref. [743], Chen and Li proposed a simple unitive ∗ ∗ picture that the Ds0(2317) is a DK molecular state, and the Ds1(2460) is a D K molecular state. Based on the heavy chiral unitary approach, the S-wave interaction between the pseudoscalar heavy meson and the Goldstone boson was studied in Ref. [744] by Guo et al.. They found a pole in the charmed sector about 2.312 0.041 GeV, which was + ∗ ± interpreted as a 0 DK bound state and regarded as the Ds0(2317). Besides this, they also predicted a BK¯ bound state B∗ at about 5.725 0.039 GeV. Later in Ref. [745], Guo s0 ± CONTENTS 103

¯0 + Table 20. Branching fraction of the process Bs Ds∗0(2317) ν¯ll− (to the total decay ¯0 → width of the Bs ) in percentage. Taken from Ref. [746]. 0 ∗ + − Approach [B¯ D (2317) ν¯ll ] B s → s0 CUM [746] 0.13 QCDSR + HQET [747] 0.09 0.20 − QCDSR (SVZ) [748] 0.10 LCSR [749] 0.23 0.11 ± CQM [750] 0.49 0.57 − CQM [111] 0.44 CQM [751] 0.39

Ds− c¯

s b c 0 + + D , D , Ds ¯0 uu¯ + dd¯ +¯ss +¯cc Bs s¯ K+, K0,η s¯

¯0 + Figure 51. (Color online) Mechanism for the Bs decay into Ds−(DK) . Taken from Ref. [752].

et al. used the same approach to study the S-wave interactions between heavy vector meson and light pseudoscalar meson. They found a D∗K bound state with a mass of

2.462 0.010 GeV, which was associated with the Ds1(2460). They also predicted a ∗ ± B K¯ bound state (Bs1) with the mass of 5.778 0.007 GeV in the bottom sector. ± Similar results were obtained in Ref. [759] by Gamermann et al., where they investigated dynamical generation of the open and hidden charm mesons in a unitarized ∗ coupled channel framework. Their results suggested the Ds0(2317) to be mainly a DK bound state with no decay modes, except for a tiny one when allowing isospin violation. More discussions can be found in Refs. [760, 761, 634]. Later in Ref. [746] the ∗ semileptonic Bs and B decays into the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) were studied using a chiral unitarity model in coupled channels, and their results are shown in Table 20. The ¯0 − + Bs Ds (DK) and Bc J/ψDK weak decays, etc. were similarly investigated in → → ∗ Refs. [752, 762, 763], where the Ds0(2317) contributes. We show one of the mechanisms ∗ in Fig. 51. In Ref. [758] Lutz and Soyeur investigated masses and decays of the Ds0(2317) ∗ and Ds1(2460). In their studies the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) are also generated by coupled-channel dynamics, and their radiative decay width are listed in Table 21. CONTENTS 104

Table 21. Numerical results for the radiative decay widths of the Ds∗0(2317) and Ds1(2460) in keV. The first [753] and fifth [754, 755, 756] columns are obtained in the molecule picture. The second [224] and third [757] columns are obtained when the

Ds∗0(2317) and Ds1(2460) are regarded as the conventional charmed-strange mesons. The fourth column [758] is obtained when the Ds∗0(2317) and Ds1(2460) are generated by coupled-channel dynamics. Taken from Ref. [753].

Decay Channel Cleven [753] Bardeen [224] Colangelo [757] Lutz [758] Faessler [754, 755, 756]

∗ ∗ Ds0 → Ds γ (9.4 ± 3.8) 1.74 4 − 6 1.94(6.47) 0.55-1.41

Ds1 → Dsγ (24.2 ± 10.7) 5.08 19 − 29 44.50(45.14) 2.37-3.73 ∗ Ds1 → Ds γ (25.2 ± 9.7) 4.66 0.6 − 1.1 21.8(12.47) – ∗ Ds1 → Ds0γ (1.3 ± 1.3) 2.74 0.5 − 0.8 0.13(0.59) –

∗ Bs0 → Bs γ (32.6 ± 20.8) 58.3 – – 3.07-4.06

Bs1 → Bsγ (4.1 ± 10.9) 39.1 – – 2.01-2.67 ∗ Bs1 → Bs γ (46.9 ± 33.6) 56.9 – – –

Bs1 → Bs0γ (0.02 ± 0.02) 0.0061 – – –

The S-wave scattering lengths of the Goldstone boson and heavy pseudoscalar meson were also systematically studied in Ref. [121]. They found that the DK scattering length is positive, so their interaction is attractive. However, they also suggested that further exploration of the phase shifts of the elastic DK scattering was still required in order to answer whether the DK interaction is strong enough to form a bound DK molecular state. The scattering of light-pseudoscalar mesons off charmed and charm- strange mesons was also studied in Ref. [764] by Guo, Meissner and Yao, where they ∗ investigated the Ds0(2317) in a unitarized chiral effective field theory approach. They analyzed the light-quark mass and NC dependence of its pole positions, and found that ∗ the Ds0(2317) pole does not tend to fall down to the real axis for large enough values of NC , indicating that it does not behave like a standard quark-antiquark meson at large NC . The opening of a new S-wave threshold is frequently accompanied by an abrupt dip in the magnitude of an amplitude for an already-open channel. Based on this fact, Rosner sought a unified description of the underlying dynamics [765], and suggested ∗ ∗ that the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) can be viewed as the bound states of DK and D K, or as cs¯ states with masses lowered by the coupling to the DK and D∗K channels, respectively. ∗ (∗) The Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) have been studied as the D K molecules in many other models. In Ref. [766] Xie, Feng and Guo used the Bethe-Salpeter approach and ∗ found a bound state of DK which was identified as the Ds0(2317). A similar approach ∗ was used in Ref. [767] where the bound state of D K was identified as the Ds1(2460). The scattering amplitude of the Goldstone bosons off the pseudoscalar D-mesons was studied in Ref. [768] in the unitarized heavy meson chiral approach, where Wang and ∗ Wang obtained the Ds0(2317) as a DK bound state in (S,I) = (1, 0) channel. CONTENTS 105

Recently in Ref. [769], Ortega et al. performed a coupled-channel computation ∗ taking into account the Ds0(2317), Ds1(2460) and Ds1(2536) mesons and the DK and D∗K thresholds within the framework of a constituent quark model. They obtained a ∗ probability of 34% for the DK component in the Ds0(2317) wave function, and observed that the meson-meson component is around 50% for both the Ds1(2460) and Ds1(2536) mesons. This method was recently extended to study the P -wave bottom-strange mesons in Ref. [770]. ∗ ∗ However, the interpretations of the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) as the DK and D K molecular states are not supported in Ref. [771], where the chiral SU(3) quark model ∗ was used. The molecular proposal for the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) was also tested in the heavy-hadron chiral perturbation theory in Ref. [772]. Their leading order predictions for the electromagnetic branching ratios are in very poor agreement with the available ∗ data, which disfavored the molecular interpretations for the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) mesons. ∗ + + ∗ Assuming the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) as the 0 DK and 1 D K molecular states respectively, their productions and decay behaviors have been investigated in many papers [753, 754, 755, 756, 773, 774, 775, 776, 777]. In Refs. [754], Faessler ∗ + et al. considered the Ds0(2317) as a 0 DK bound state and calculated the strong ∗ 0 ∗ ∗ Ds0 Dsπ and radiative Ds0 Ds γ decays using an effective Lagrangian approach. → →∗ ∗ ∗ −2 They evaluated the ratio R = Γ(D D γ)/Γ(D Dsπ) 10 , which is consistent s0 → s s0 → ∼ with the experimental upper limit of R < 0.059 [113]. Using the same method, they ∗ 0 also studied the strong Ds1 D π and radiative Ds1 Dsγ decays for the Ds1(2460) → s → meson [755]. In Ref. [773], the same authors further analyzed the branching ratios (∗) ∗ of B D D (Ds1) decays and calculated the leptonic decay constants fD∗ and → s0 s0 fDs1 using the factorization hypothesis. Their results are collected in Table 21 for ∗ comparisons. More discussions for the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) decay properties as the hadron molecules can be found in Refs. [146].

Table 22. Integrated normalized cross sections for the inclusive processes pp → Ds∗0(2317),Ds1(2460),DsJ (2860) and Ds2(2910) at LHC, in units of µb. The results inside and outside brackets are obtained using Pythia and Herwig, respectively. Taken from Ref. [776].

∗ Ds0(2317) Ds1(2460) DsJ (2860) Ds2(2910) LHC 7 2.5(0.83) 2.1(0.91) 0.21(-) 0.27(-) LHCb 7 0.61(0.15) 0.5(0.17) 0.05(-) 0.06(-) LHC 8 2.9(0.94) 2.4(1.0) 0.24(-) 0.32(-) LHCb 8 0.74(0.18) 0.61(0.2) 0.06(-) 0.08(-) LHC 14 5.5(1.6) 4.7(1.7) 0.5(-) 0.65(-) LHCb 14 1.6(0.35) 1.3(0.38) 0.13(-) 0.17(-) CONTENTS 106

∗ ∗ Considering the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) as DK and D K hadronic molecules, the ∗ 0 partial widths for the radiative and pionic transitions for the Ds1(2460) Ds0(2317)π ∗ → and Ds1(2460) D (2317)γ were evaluated to be about 0.19–0.22 keV and 3.0–3.1 → s0 keV respectively in Ref. [777]. In addition, they also estimated the partial width ratio ∗ 0 between the Ds1(2460) Ds0(2317)γ and Ds1(2460) D π decay modes to be about → → s (6.6–10.6) 10−2. × In Ref. [775], Guo et al. constructed the effective chiral Lagrangian involving the charmed mesons and Goldstone bosons at the next-to-leading order taking into account the strong as well as electromagnetic interactions. They evaluated the decay ∗ 0 width Γ(Ds0(2317) Dsπ ) to be 180 110 keV, consistent with the experimental → ± ∗ results. A more systematical study on hadronic and radiative decays of the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) can be found in Ref. [753], whose results were in fair agreement with available data, as shown in Table 21. In Ref. [776] Guo et al. studied the inclusive ∗ hadroproduction of the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) at the Large Hadron Collider using effective field theory. Their results are shown in Table 22. ∗ The Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) may have many molecular partner states. For example, its analog for the bc system is a BD molecule, which was discussed in ∗ Ref. [778]. The analogous states of the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) with a bottom quark were predicted in Ref. [779] to be MB∗ = 5696 40 MeV and MB = 5742 40 MeV, s0 ± s1 ± respectively.

∗ 6.1.2. Tetraquark scheme. The Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) were also interpreted as the cqs¯q¯ tetraquark states. This scheme was first investigated in Ref. [780], where Cheng and Hou discussed the masses and decay modes of the cqq¯q¯ (q = u, d, s) tetraquark ∗ states, and found that the isosinglet Ds0(2317) is the only narrow one. Its decay was dominated by the observed isospin violating decay mode and its width was less than ∗ 100 keV. Later in Ref. [781] Browder et al. suggested that the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) + can be explained by the mixing of the conventional P -wave excited Ds mesons with the four-quark states. The influence of the 0t Hooft interaction on the cqq¯q¯ tetraquark mass spectrum ∗ was discussed in Ref. [782] by Dmitrasinovic, where the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) were identified as the tetraquark candidates. Similar results and conclusions were obtained in Ref. [783] using a relativistic effective chiral model. In Ref. [784] Dmitrasinovic ∗ further argued that the anomalously small mass difference between the Ds0(2317) and ∗ the D0(2400) (with the mass 2318 MeV [331]) suggests that they both have a tetraquark structure. In Ref. [785] Maiani et al. proposed their diquark-antidiquark model and calculated the mass spectrum of [cq][¯sq¯] states. They used both “good” diquark of spin S = 0 and “bad” diquark of spin S = 1 [553] to construct tetraquark states, and found that there are two states with J P = 0+, three states with J P = 1+ and one state with J P = 2+: + 0 Scq,Ss¯q¯0 ; J[cq][¯sq¯0] = 0cq, 0s¯q¯0 ; J = 0 , | i ≡ | i | i CONTENTS 107

+0 0 = 1cq, 1s¯q¯0 ; J = 0 , | i | i + 1 1 = ( 0cq, 1s¯q¯0 ; J = 1 + 1cq, 0s¯q¯0 ; J = 1 ) , (91) | i √2 | i | i +0 1 1 = ( 0cq, 1s¯q¯0 ; J = 1 1cq, 0s¯q¯0 ; J = 1 ) , | i √2 | i − | i +00 1 = 1cq, 1s¯q¯0 ; J = 1 , | i | i + 2 = 1cq, 1s¯q¯0 ; J = 2 . | i | i They further evaluated the masses of the two states with J P = 0+ to be 2371 MeV and 2424 MeV, the masses of the three states with J P = 1+ to be 2410 MeV, 2462 MeV and 2571 MeV, and the masses of the one state with J P = 2+ to be 2648 MeV. Accordingly, ∗ + they associated the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) with the lowest-lying 0 state and one of the 1+ states, respectively, and at the same time predicted more [cq][¯sq¯] states. ∗ The Ds0(2317) was also investigated by Bracco et al. using the QCD sum rule approach [786]. They found that its mass can be reproduced by the four-quark states (cq)(¯qs¯). Similar results were obtained in Refs. [787, 788] using the same approach. ∗ However, the interpretations of the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) as the pure four-quark states are not supported in Ref. [789] where the chiral SU(3) quark model was used. ∗ P + Assuming the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) to be the cqs¯q¯ tetraquark states of J = 0 and 1+, their decay behaviors were studied in various models [790]. In Ref. [774], ∗ Chen and Li investigated the Ds0(2317) in B meson decays, and found the ratio ∗ (∗) (B Ds0(2317)M)/ (B Ds M)(M = D, π and K) to be around either 1 or B → ∗ B → 0.1, supporting the Ds0(2317) to be either a cs¯ state or a tetraquark state, respectively. + 0 ∗+ In Ref. [791] Hayashigaki and Terasaki calculated the Ds π and Ds γ decays of the ∗ Ds0(2317) to be around 0.6 keV and 35 keV, respectively. Their results suggested that its assignment as an iso-triplet four-quark meson is favored by the severest experimental constraint on the ratio of the rates for these decays, while assigning it as an I = 0 state (a four-quark or a conventional cs¯) is inconsistent with this constraint. The partial decay width of D∗ (2317) D+π0 was also calculated in Ref. [792] to be in the range s0 → s of 0.2 40 keV. All these results can be useful for further studies on the D∗ (2317). ∼ s0 As a cqs¯q¯ tetraquark state, the production of the neutral and doubly charged ∗ partners of the Ds0(2317) were studied by Terasaki in Refs. [793, 794], which can also be useful to verify the tetraquark scheme.

6.1.3. Conventional charmed-strange mesons with coupled-channel effects. Because the ∗ ∗ Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) are close to the thresholds of the DK and D K, respectively, the coupled-channel effects should be important. In fact, this mechanism is very probably responsible for their low mass puzzle. These states can still be categorized into the conventional charmed-strange meson family, which has been discussed by many theoretical groups. ∗ In Ref. [119] Beveren and Rupp described the Ds0(2317) as a quasi-bound scalar cs¯ state in a unitarized meson model, and demonstrated how a low-mass scalar charmed- CONTENTS 108

Figure 52. The S-matrix poles for the DKS-wave scattering as a function of the coupling constant λ. The virtual bound states are displaced slightly downwards, and the real bound states upwards. Notice that for λ = 0.75 (physical value) one has a real bound state. Taken from Ref. [119]. strange meson can be easily obtained by including its coupling to the OZI-allowed DK channel. Their obtained S-matrix poles for the S-wave DK scattering are shown in Fig. 52 as a function of the coupling constant λ. Similarly in Ref. [795], the same P + authors continued to describe the Ds1(2460) to be a J = 1 cs¯ state, by considering the coupling to the S-wave D∗K channel. In Ref. [796], the authors further calculated the mass and width of the Ds1(2460) meson in the Resonance-Spectrum-Expansion model through the coupling of the D∗K channel to the bare 1+ cs¯ state. 3 Later in Ref. [797, 798], Hwang and Kim calculated the mass shift of the Ds(1 P0) state by using the coupled channel effect, and their result suggested that the coupled ∗ channel effect naturally explains the observed mass of the Ds0(2317). The same result was obtained using the chiral Lagrangian [799], by considering the one loop chiral corrections [800], and by including hadronic loops under the assumption that these corrections vanish for the ground state heavy-light mesons [801]. See also discussions in Ref. [802]. The mass shifts of the P -wave charmed-strange mesons due to their coupling to the DK and D∗K channels were also studied in Refs. [803, 804] by Badalian, Simonov and Trusov using the chiral quark-pion Lagrangian. They found strong mass shifts downward ∗ + + about 140 MeV and 100 MeV for the Ds (0 ) and Ds(1 ). The two essential factors for these large mass shifts are: strong coupling of the 0+ and 1+ states to the S-wave decay channel containing a Nambu-Goldstone meson, and the chiral flip transitions due to the bi-spinor structure of both heavy-light mesons. They also predicted masses of CONTENTS 109

∗ + + the Bs (0 ) and Bs(1 ) to be 5695 10 MeV and 5730 15 MeV, respectively. ± ∗ ± Besides the couple-channel effect, the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) were sometimes investigated together with the spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry, which is another possible reason for its low mass. In Ref. [224] Bardeen, Eichten and Hill pointed out that the (0+, 1+) spin multiplet was required in the implementation of

SU(3)L SU(3)R chiral symmetry in heavy-light meson systems. In Ref. [805] Nowak, × ∗ Rho and Zahed pointed out that the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) are consistent with the general pattern of spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry in hadrons built of heavy and light quarks. In Ref. [806], Kolomeitsev and Lutz studied heavy-light meson resonances with quantum numbers J P = 0+ and 1+ in terms of the non-linear chiral SU(3) ∗ Lagrangian where the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) can be reproduced. More discussions can be found in Refs. [807, 808, 809, 810, 811] especially for the mass splitting of the (0+, 1+) doublet. ∗ The Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) have been studied as conventional charmed-strange mesons of J P = 0+ and 1+ in many other models. In Ref. [278] Dai et al. calculated masses of the (0+, 1+) and (1+, 2+) excited charmed-strange states using QCD sum rules in the framework of heavy quark effective theory. Their results suggested that ∗ + + + + the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) can be interpreted as the 0 and 1 states in the (0 , 1 ) doublet. This work was developed in Ref. [120], where Dai et al. further considered the contribution of the DK continuum in the formalism of QCD sum rule, which was found to be significant and largely the reason for the unexpected low mass of ∗ ∗ the Ds0(2317). In Ref. [812], Sadzikowski calculated the masses of the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) as the charmed-strange mesons in the MIT bag model, and his results were in a reasonable agreement with the experimental values. In Ref. [63] Lakhina and Swanson studied the quark mass dependence induced by one loop corrections to the Breit-Fermi spin-dependent one-gluon-exchange potential and determined the masses of heavy-light ∗ mesons. Their results also suggested that the Ds0(2317) is a canonical charmed-strange ∗ meson. The Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) were also studied as charmed-strange mesons using a potential model [78, 813, 814], within a covariant light-front approach [815] and with Regge trajectories [196], etc. ∗ Assuming the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) to be the conventional charmed-strange mesons of J P = 0+ and 1+, their decay behaviors were studied in Refs. [131, 224, 780, 813, 816, 817, 818, 819, 820, 821, 822, 823, 824, 825, 826, 827, 828] using various ∗ 0 ∗ methods. The obtained partial widths of D (2317) Dsπ and Γ(Ds1(2460) D π) s0 → → s are listed in Table 23, which are useful to distinguish various models and understand their underlying structures. ∗ The radiative decays of the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) as the scalar charmed-strange mesons were studied in Refs. [772, 829]. Especially in Ref. [757], Colangelo, Fazio and Ozpineci studied these decays using the light-cone QCD sum rules. They obtained Γ(D∗ (2317) D∗γ) = 4 6 keV , s0 → s ∼ Γ(Ds1(2460) Dsγ) = 19 29 keV , (92) → ∼ CONTENTS 110

0 0 Table 23. Partial widths of D∗ (2317) D π and D (2460) D∗π , in unit of s0 → s s1 → s keV. Taken from Ref. [131].

Reference Γ(D∗ (2317) D π) Γ(D (2460) D∗π) s0 → s s1 → s Ref. [131] 11.7 11.9 Ref. [816] 32 35 Ref.[224] 21.5 21.5 Ref. [813] 16 32 Ref. [817] 10 10 ∼ ∼ Ref. [818] 34-44 35-51 Ref. [819] 6 6 ' ' Ref. [780] 10-100 – Ref. [820] 155 70 155 70 ± ± Ref. [821] 3.8 3.9

∗ Γ(Ds1(2460) D γ) = 0.6 1.1 keV , → s ∼ ∗ Γ(Ds1(2460) D (2317)γ) = 0.5 0.8 keV , → s0 ∼ which are consistent with the experimental values and favor the interpretation of the ∗ Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) as the ordinary charmed-strange mesons. These results are shown in Table 21 for comparisons. Later in Ref. [818], Wei, Huang and Zhu calculated their pionic decay widths in the same framework, and obtained ∗ 0 Γ(D (2317) Dsπ ) = 34 44 keV , (93) s0 → ∼ ∗ 0 Γ(Ds1(2460) D π ) = 35 51 keV , → s ∼ which are also consistent with the experimental values and support their interpretation as the ordinary charmed-strange mesons. More discussions can be found in Refs. [758, 830]. 1 3 More generally, the Ds1(2460) can be regarded as a mixture of the 1 P1 and 1 P1 charmed-strange mesons:       1 Ds1(2460) cos θ1P sin θ1P 1 P1  | i  =    | i  . (94) 3 Ds1(2536) sin θ1P cos θ1P 1 P1 | i − | i In Ref. [131], Song et al. studied the decay behaviors of the Ds1(2460) systematically ∗ using the QPC model. The single-pion decay Γ(Ds1(2460) D π) depends on the → s mixing angle θ1P . When the mixing angle takes the value in the heavy quark limit, i.e., ◦ ∗ 0 θ1P = 54.7 [316, 831, 163], the partial width of Ds1(2460) D π was calculated in − → s Ref. [131] using the QPC model and is listed in Table 23, together with predictions by several other theoretical groups [224, 780, 813, 816, 817, 818, 819, 820, 821]. Such a mixing mechanism was also studied via the S-wave intermediate meson loops in Ref. [832], where the propagator matrix was established for this two-state system. CONTENTS 111

The masses and decay widths of the Ds1(2460) and Ds1(2536) were pinned down by searching for the pole structures in the propagator matrix. For the Ds1(2460), the pole ◦ was identified at √s = 2454.5 MeV and the mixing angle was θ1P = 42.5 . ∗ − The productions of the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) are also interesting, which were discussed in the B meson decays [111, 747, 748, 751, 773, 833, 834, 835, 836, 837], in

the Bs decays [749, 750], in the Bc decays [838], in the Λb decays [839], in the ψ(4415) decays [840], and in the relativistic heavy ion collisions (at RHIC) [841], etc. Some of these results are listed in Table 20. In Ref. [835], the branching fractions of decays B D(∗)D(∗) have been → sJ investigated within the framework of the constituent quark model and in the factorization approximation. After introducing the finite c-quark mass effects, the ∗ authors found that the Ds0(2317) meson could be described as a pure cs¯ state while the Ds1(2460) meson may have a sizable non-qq¯ component. P + Considering the Ds1(2460) meson as a J = 1 charmed-strange state, the + − semileptonic Bc Ds1(2460)l l (l = τ, µ, e) and Bc Ds1(2460)νν¯ transitions → → [842] and the form factors relevant to the semileptonic Bs DsJ (2460)`ν [843] were → investigated using the three-point QCD sum rule formalism.

6.1.4. Lattice QCD simulation. Starting from 2003, there are many lattice QCD ∗ studies on the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) [53, 122, 844, 845, 846, 847, 848, 849, 850, 851, 852, 853]. Bali presented the lattice results on the scalar Ds meson in the static limit for the heavy quark in Ref. [844]. He calculated the scalar-pseudoscalar 0+ 0− − mass splitting of ∆M = 468(43)(24) MeV in this limit for nf = 2 sea quarks, which was larger than the value of 338 MeV suggested by a heavy quark constituent quark model [808]. A finite charm quark mass correction was also reported, which seems to further enlarge this discrepancy to support the non-cs¯ interpretation of the Ds1(2460). In Ref. [845], the UKQCD Collaboration computed the spectrum of the orbitally excited Ds mesons in the continuum limit. Their quenched simulations supported the ∗ P + interpretation of the Ds0(2317) resonance as a J = 0 cs¯ meson. However, they can’t exclude the exotic state possibility due to the large errors in their calculations. Later, the same collaboration has also computed the decay constants of 0+ P-wave heavy- light mesons from unquenched lattice QCD at a single lattice spacing [846]. For the charm-strange meson, they obtained the decay constant fDs0+ = 340(110) MeV and the static static-strange P-wave decay constant fPs = 302(39) MeV, respectively. In Ref. [847], the authors analyzed the elastic S-wave Bπ, Dπ, DK and Kπ scattering from lattice calculations of the scalar form factors in the semileptonic decays.

They extracted the scattering lengths mπa = 0.179(17)(14), 0.26(26) and 0.29(4) for the elastic S-wave isospin-1/2 Kπ, Bπ and Dπ channels respectively. For the DK channel, they found some hints that there is a bound state which could be identified with the ∗ Ds0(2317) meson. Liu et al. studied the low-energy interactions between light pseudoscalar mesons and charmed pseudoscalar mesons in Ref. [848]. They calculated the S-wave scattering CONTENTS 112

lengths of DK¯ (I = 0),DK¯ (I = 1),DsK, Dπ(I = 3/2) and Dsπ using L¨uscher’s finite volume technique in full lattice QCD. Among these channels, the interaction of the iso- scalar DK¯ is attractive while those of the others are repulsive. This result supported ∗ the interpretation of the Ds0(2317) as a DK molecule. They also updated a prediction ∗ for the isospin breaking hadronic decay width Γ(D (2317) Dsπ) = 133 22 keV. s0 → ± In Refs. [53, 122], the authors considered the DK, D∗K andsc ¯ interpolating operators in the lattice QCD simulations. They used two different ensembles of gauge configurations with Nf = 2 or 2 + 1 dynamical fermions and mπ = 266 or 156 MeV. A J P = 0+ below threshold state was established with a binding energy 37 (17) MeV, ∗ which was compatible with the experiment value of 45 MeV for the Ds0(2317) meson. P + For the Ds1(2460), the Nf = 2 + 1 simulation obtained a J = 1 strong interaction bound state 44 (10) MeV below the D∗K threshold, which was in agreement with

the experiment and thus identified with the Ds1(2460). These obtained energy levels were later reanalyzed in terms of an auxiliary potential, employing a single-channel (∗) (∗) (∗) basis KD and a two-channel basis KD , ηDs in Ref. [851]. They obtained similar binding energies of about 40 MeV with respect to the KD and KD∗ thresholds, which ∗ were identified with the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) resonances.

6.1.5. Short summary. Various exotic schemes including the molecular states and ∗ tetraquark states have been proposed to explain the low mass puzzle of the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460). Up to now, several experiments scanned the charm-strange meson spectrum below 2.8 GeV in the D(∗)K(∗) channels carefully. So far, only four P-wave states were found. None of the exotic schemes is able to answer where the traditional + + ∗ (0 , 1 ) charm-strange mesons in the quark model are if the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) are exotic states. ∗ The confinement force is flavor independent to a large extent. If the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) are tetraquark candidates, they should be accompanied by many partner states in the SU(3)F multiplets 3¯ 3¯ 3 = 3¯ 3¯ 6 15. In other words, one would ⊗ ⊗ ⊕ ⊕ ⊕ expect 25 additional tetraquark states below 2.8 GeV. Moreover, one would expect 27 bottomed tetraquark states if we replace the charm by the bottom. But none of these states has been observed experimentally up to now. ∗ In short summary, the Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) are the P-wave charm-strange mesons in the (0+, 1+). The S-wave D(∗)K continuum couples strongly to the P-wave bare quark model states. As a result, the quark model spectrum is strongly distorted. The couple channel effects play a very important role in lowering the quark model energy level. Such a feature is quite common when the resonances lie around the threshold. For example, the S-wave D¯ 0D∗0 continuum couples strongly with the P-wave axial vector 0 0 ¯ ∗ charmonium χc1. The famous narrow resonance X(3872) is a mixture of χc1 and DD . The channel coupling between the S-wave NK¯ continuum and P-wave uds quark model state may lead to the low-lying Λ(1405). CONTENTS 113

6.2. The X(5568)

0 ± The narrow structure X(5568) was reported by the DØ Collaboration in the Bs π invariant mass spectrum [3]. This charged bottom meson, if it really exists, will be the first candidate for the fully open-flavor tetraquark state consisting of four different quarks su¯bd¯ (or sd¯bu¯). The D0 Collaboration reported that the spin-parity of X(5568) could be either J P = 0+ or 1+. To date, the X(5568) resonance has trigged lots of theoretical studies, most of which speculated it to be a compact diquark-antidiquark tetraquark state. In Ref. [854], Chen et. al. studied the X(5568) meson as an exotic open-flavor tetraquark state with J P = 0+/1+ in the framework of QCD sum rules. They used the interpolating currents T T T J + = s Cγ5ub(¯baγ5Cd¯ ¯bbγ5Cd¯ ) (95) 0 a b − a with J P = 0+ and T T T J + = s Cγ5ub(¯baγµCd¯ ¯bbγµCd¯ ) (96) 1 a b − a with J P = 1+ to calculate the two-point correlation functions. Both these two currents have antisymmetric color structure [3¯c]su [3c]¯ ¯. After performing numerical analysis, ⊗ bd the authors derived stable mass sum rules in suitable parameter spaces, as shown in Fig. 53 for the scalar and axial-vector channels. They reproduced the mass of the X(5568) meson in both scalar and axial-vector channels with

m + = 5.58 0.14 GeV , (97) Xb, 0 ± m + = 5.59 0.15 GeV . Xb, 1 ± They also discussed the possible decay patterns of the X(5568) state. If the X(5568) meson is interpreted to be a scalar tetraquark state, its kinematically allowed decay 0 + ∗ channel would be the S-wave Bs π and the Bs γ for its neutral partner. On the other ∗ + hand, the X(5568) state can decay into Bs π . In this case, the quantum number of this resonance would be J P = 1+. Besides this, its neutral partner may decay into 0 Bs γ. Thus, the authors of Ref. [854] suggested to search for the neutral partner of ∗ 0 the X(5568) in the radiative decay into Bs γ and Bs γ, which can be used to determine its spin-parity quantum numbers. Moreover, they predicted the charmed partner states with quark content suc¯d¯ and J P = 0+/1+:

m + = 2.55 0.09 GeV , (98) Xc, 0 ± m + = 2.55 0.10 GeV . Xc, 1 ± In the framework of QCD sum rules, the mass of X(5568) was also studied in Refs. [855, 856, 857, 858] by considering it as a su¯bd¯ tetraquark state with J P = 0+. The values of the mass obtained in these works agree with Eq. (98) and thus are consistent with the experimental result [3]. However, the mass calculation disfavors the molecule interpretation of the resonance [859]. In Refs. [860, 861, 862], the hadronic decay width CONTENTS 114

6.4 6.0

6.2 5.8

6.0 5.6

2 2 5.8 M B =6.5 GeV 5.4 2 X

X 2 2 s 0 =32 GeV M B =6.8 GeV m [GeV] m [GeV] 5.6 2 2 5.2 s =34 GeV 2 M B =7.1 GeV 0 2 2 2 M B =7.4 GeV s =36 GeV 5.4 5.0 0

5.2 4.8 26 30 34 38 42 46 50 6.0 6.2 6.4 6.6 6.8 7.0 7.2 7.4 2 2 2 s0 [GeV ] M B [GeV ] 6.4 6.0

6.2 5.8

6.0 5.6

2 2 5.8 M B =6.5 GeV 5.4 2 X X 2 2 s 0 =32 GeV M B =6.8 GeV m [GeV] m [GeV] 5.6 2 2 5.2 2 M B =7.1 GeV s 0 =34 GeV 2 2 2 M B =7.4 GeV s =36 GeV 5.4 5.0 0

5.2 4.8 26 30 34 38 42 46 50 6.3 6.5 6.7 6.9 7.1 7.3 7.5 2 2 2 s0 [GeV ] M B [GeV ]

2 Figure 53. Variations of the Xb mass with s0 and MB in the scalar and axial-vector channels. Taken from Ref. [854].

0 ± of X(5568) was investigated through its strong decay into Bs π . They obtained similar results for the decay width of the X(5568), which are in good agreement with the experimental value. Moreover, the strong vertices XbXbρ, XcXcρ and the properties for the charmed partner state of X(5568) were studied in Refs. [863] and [864], respectively. In Ref. [865] the authors investigated the X(5568) and its partners as tetraquark states in the framework of the color-magnetic interaction. The tetraquark system was treated as a triquark plus a heavy antiquark. Adopting a simple chromomagnetic interaction model, they calculated the color-magnetic interaction matrix elements for four kinds of tetraquark structures according to the symmetry of the two light quarks. They found that the X(5568) can be interpreted as a tetraquark candidate and the other possible bottom tetraquarks should also exist stably. Very similar investigations were also performed within a simple quark model with chromomagnetic interactions in Ref.

[866], in which a hyperfine interaction parameter Cud¯ was also considered to improve the calculations. Their result agrees quite well with the experimental mass of the X(5568). The spectroscopy of the tetraquarks with one heavy quark and three light quarks was investigated in a simple quark model by considering the spin-spin interactions between quarks in Ref. [867]. The orbital angular momenta are vanishing for the lowest- lying tetraquark states. Using the results for diquark masses and spin-spin couplings, they obtained the masses of the tetraquarks with J P = 0+, 1+, 2+. They found that CONTENTS 115

lowest-lying S-wave tetraquark state su¯bd¯ with J P = 0+ lies about 150 MeV above the X(5568). In Ref. [868], a similar investigation was performed in the diquark-antidiquark picture to give predictions about the mass spectrum of the lowest S-wave bottomed su¯bd¯ and charmed suc¯d¯with J P = 0+, 1+. They estimated the lightest scalar su¯bd¯tetraquark at a mass of about 5770 MeV, approximately 200 MeV above the X(5568), and just 7 MeV below the BK¯ threshold. An S-wave axial-vector su¯bd¯ tetraquark was predicted around 5820 MeV, which was 250 MeV above the X(5568). The authors proposed to search for the tetraquark states in the decays of the B± mesons, B± X0 π± and c c → b0 B± X±π0 [868]. c → b0 Some non-resonant schemes have also been proposed to explain the X(5568) signal.

In Ref. [869], Liu and Li investigated the invariant mass distributions of the Bsπ via different rescattering processes, such as the triangle rescattering, the long range interaction process and the weak interaction process. They found that some bumps arise around the position of the X(5568) in the triangle rescattering process, which provided a possibility that the X(5568) signal may be due to some kind of accumulative effects of the rescattering amplitudes at different incident energies. If so, the quantum numbers of the X(5568) would be J P = 1− because of the P-wave scattering characteristic of the ∗ process B π Bsπ [869]. However, no such P-wave scattering pole for the X(5568) s → was dynamically generated in the unitarized effective field theory [870]. In Ref. [871], the authors studied the production rate of the X(5568) measured by the D0 Collaboration and found that it is quite large and difficult to be understood by various general hadronization mechanisms, such as the string fragmentation model, cluster model and combination model. They then proposed the inclusive production formulation for the cross section, and predicted the distributions and production rates of X(5568) at LHC energies.

He and Ko classified the symmetry properties of the beauty tetraquark states Xb (¯bq0q00q¯) using light quark SU(3) flavor symmetry [872]. These states containing three light quarks should be in either the 6¯ or 15 SU(3) flavor representation. They constructed the leading order chiral Lagrangian to study the possible decays of Xb into a B meson and a light pseudoscalar octet meson, and provided search strategies to distinguish

whether Xb belongs to 6¯ or 15. They predicted a new doubly charged four quark state if Xb belongs to 15. However, the existence of the X(5568) was not confirmed by the preliminary results of the LHCb [4] and CMS [5] collaborations. There are also many theoretical works discussing the difficulties to accommodate such an exotic structure. In Ref. [873], Burns and Swanson examined a variety of explanations for the X(5568) state. They found that the threshold effect, cusp, molecular and tetraquark are all unable to give a satisfactory description of the observed state. In their argument, the threshold model cannot fit the experimental data well. In the cusp scenario, they were able to fit the data well. However, this scenario requires the P-wave rescattering with a flavor-blind interaction, thus predicts the spin-parity of the X(5568) to be J P = 1−. These unnatural properties are not preferred in conventional phenomenology. The mass CONTENTS 116 of X(5568) is several hundreds MeV below the relevant two-body thresholds. However, the coupling of the Bsπ or a coupled Bsπ BK¯ system are not strong enough to form − the desired states. In the tetraquark model, they made simple estimates and found that the X(5568) is too light to be a plausible tetraquark candidate. In Ref. [874], Chen and Liu performed a dynamical study of the interactions of and B(∗)K¯ (∗) systems using the one-boson-exchange model. Their study suggested that the X(5568) can not be assigned to be an isovector BK¯ or B∗K¯ molecular state, but the isoscalar BK¯ and B∗K¯ as well as the isoscalar B∗K¯ ∗ molecular states may exist, whose decay behaviors were also discussed in the present study. Based on the chiral symmetry and heavy quark symmetry, Guo et. al. also proposed several types of models to explain the structure of the X(5568) [875]. Their analyses supported the conclusions in Ref. [873] that none of the tetraquark model, hadronic molecule, or threshold-effect model provides a satisfactory description of the signal. They suggested to search for the X(5568) in the dipion decays of the excited bottom- ∗ strange mesons, e.g., B (5840) Bsππ. s2 → In Ref. [876], the authors studied the mass spectra of open-charm/bottom tetraquark states within the diquark-antidiquark scenario in the relativized quark model. They calculated the masses of the scalar and axial-vector diquark and antidiquark by solving the Hamiltonian with the relativized potential. The masses of the tetraquark states were then obtained by solving the Schr¨odinger-type equation. They found the mass of the sq¯bq¯ state is much higher than that of the X(5568), which disfavors the tetraquark configuration of the resonance.

By analyzing a Bsπ BK¯ coupled channel system, Albaladejo et. al. [877] − reproduced the spectrum structure of the X(5568). With the interaction matrix elements derived from the heavy meson chiral perturbation theory, they found a pole with the mass and decay width in agreement with the experimental values. However, if the T-matrix regularization is employed, a big momentum cutoff Λ 2.8 GeV will ∼ be required to obtain the same spectrum, which is much larger than a “natural value” Λ 1 GeV. The authors thus concluded that the X(5568) state would not qualify as a ∼ resonance dynamically generated by the unitarity loops. In the framework of the chiral quark model, Chen and Ping studied the four-quark system us¯bd¯ with the quantum numbers J P = 0+ in both the diquark-antidiquark and meson-meson formalisms under the SU(3) and SU(4) flavor symmetry [878]. To compute the mass of tetraquark state, they constructed the tetraquark wave function and hamiltonian in the Gaussian Expansion Method (GEM) and chiral quark model. The potential energy is composed of the color confinement, one-gluon-exchange and one-Goldstone boson exchange. They solved the Schr¨odingerequation to obtain the masses of the four-quark systems us¯bd¯, including the tetraquark system and molecule system. They found that the masses of the tetraquark states are much higher than that of X(5568) state while no molecular structure can be formed in their calculation. P + + If the X(5568) with J = 0 exists, it can decay strongly into Bsπ only and lies significantly below all the other thresholds. Such a low mass allows for a more reliable, CONTENTS 117

cleaner and easier search in lattice QCD. In Ref. [879], the authors investigated the S- + wave Bsπ scattering on the lattice to search for X(5568) as a scalar exotic resonance. For completeness, they also considered the X(5568) as a very deeply bound B+K¯ 0 state, which has a threshold 210 MeV above the X(5568). However, they didn’t find an eigenstate in their lattice QCD simulation, which does not support the existence of the X(5568) with J P = 0+. In the framework of QCD sum rule, Albuquerque et. al. investigated the X(5568) ∗ ∗ state using the molecular interpolating currents BK,Bsπ, B K,Bs π and tetraquark currents with J P = 0+, 1+ [880]. Their numerical results did not support the X(5568) as a pure molecule or a tetraquark state. However, they suggested it to be a mixture of BK molecule and scalar ds¯bu¯ tetraquark state with a mixing angle sin 2θ 0.15. There ' are also some other theoretical approaches to investigate the X(5568) state [881, 882], which supported the negative results in LHCb [4]. However, the production mechanism of the X(5568) is very different at the pp¯ and pp colliders. Future experimental efforts are desirable in the clarification of the situation on the X(5568) state.

7. Outlook and summary

In 1976, the first charmed meson was discovered by the Mark I Collaboration [328,

329, 342] and the first charmed baryon Λc was discovered at the Fermilab [404]. After these observations, many open charm and open bottom hadrons were observed by the ALEPH, ARGUS, BNL, CERN R415, CUSB, CUSB-II, DASP, DELPHI, ITEP&SERP, L3, OPAL, TPS, TST Collaborations/experiements, etc. ∗ In 2003, two narrow charm-strange states Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) were discovered by the BaBar and CLEO Collaborations, respectively [112, 113], which attracted lots of attentions. After that, many open charm and open bottom hadrons were observed by the Belle, FOCUS, SELEX, DØ, CDF, LHCb and CMS collaborations in the past decade. We brief summarize their statuses here: (i) All the 1S heavy mesons (charmed, charm-strange, bottom and bottom-strange mesons) are well established. All the 1P charmed and charm-strange mesons were observed experimentally. There are many other observed excited heavy mesons, which can be accommodated in the quark model spectrum, although theoretical interpretations are not unique. More experimental measurements are needed to pin down their classification. (ii) All the 1S singly heavy baryons (singly charmed and bottom baryons) are well ∗ P + established, except the Ωb of J = 3/2 . The singly heavy baryon system is more complicated than the heavy meson system, and more theoretical and experimental efforts are needed to understand the excited singly heavy baryons. + (iii) Only one doubly charmed baryon Ξcc(3520) was reported by the SELEX Collaboration. However, its existence has not been confirmed by any other CONTENTS 118

experiments. Most of the theoretical predictions for the mass of the doubly charmed ccq with J P = 1/2+ lie above the SELEX’s value. (iv) There were several candidates for exotic mesons in the open-charm and open-

bottom meson sector. Unfortunately, DsJ (2632) was not confirmed by subsequent experiments. The existence of the recently observed X(5568) awaits further ∗ confirmation. It is highly probable that both Ds0(2317) and Ds1(2460) are the conventional P-wave charm-strange mesons which are strongly affected by the couple channel effects. The open-charm and open-bottom mesons provide a wonderful platform to explore the non-perturbative QCD dynamics in the low-energy regime and test various theoretical tools and phenomenological models. In the coming years, more and more excited heavy mesons will be produced at LHCb, CMS and BelleII. We may expect important progress in this field in the near future.

Acknowledgments

We would like to express our gratitude to all the collaborators and colleagues who contributed to the investigations presented here, in particular to Dian-Yong Chen, Xiao- Lin Chen, Wei-Zhen Deng, Li-Sheng Geng, Qi Huang, Atsushi Hosaka, Hong-Wei Ke, Takayuki Matsuki, Qiang Mao, Ning Li, Zhi-Gang Luo, Cheng-Ping Shen, T. G. Steele, Qing-Tao Song, Yuan Sun, Zhi-Feng Sun, Jun-Zhang Wang, Hao Xu, Jie-Sheng Yu, Bo Zhang, and Dan Zhou. We appreciate Bing Chen from Anyang Normal University for the careful reading of the manuscript and valuable suggestions. We thank Er-Liang Cui for helping prepare some relevant documents. This project is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grants No. 11175073, No. 11222547, No. 11275115, No. 11475015, No. 11575008, No. 11261130311, the 973 program, the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, the National Program for Support of Top-notch Young Professionals, and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).

Author Contributions:

S.L.Z. conceptualized this review and wrote the outline. Y.R.L. wrote Sec. 1. H.X.C. wrote Sec. 2, 3 and 4. W.C. wrote Sec. 5 and 6. X.L. and S.L.Z. wrote Sec. 7, systematically revised and finalized the manuscript.

References

[1] C. Patrignani, et al., [Particle Data Group Collaboration], Review of Particle Physics, Chin. Phys. C40 (10) (2016) 100001. doi:10.1088/1674-1137/40/10/100001. [2] Y. Amhis, et al., Averages of b-hadron, c-hadron, and τ-lepton properties as of summer 2016. arXiv:1612.07233. CONTENTS 119

0 [3] V. M. Abazov, et al., [D0 Collaboration], Evidence for a Bs π± state, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2) (2016) 022003. arXiv:1602.07588, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.022003. 0 [4] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], Search for structure in the Bs π± invariant mass spectrum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (15) (2016) 152003. arXiv:1608.00435, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett. 117.152003. [5] The CMS Collaboration, b-hadron production at ATLAS and CMS, http://indico.cern.ch/event/ 432527/contributions/1072027/. [6] S. Godfrey, N. Isgur, Mesons in a relativized quark model with Chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. D32 (1985) 189–231. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.32.189. [7] S. Capstick, N. Isgur, Baryons in a relativized quark model with Chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. D34 (1986) 2809, [AIP Conf. Proc. 132, 267 (1985)]. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.34.2809,10. 1063/1.35361. [8] H.-Y. Cheng, Charmed baryons circa 2015, Front. Phys.(Beijing) 10 (6) (2015) 101406. doi: 10.1007/s11467-015-0483-z. [9] M. Kobayashi, T. Maskawa, CP violation in the renormalizable theory of weak interaction, Prog. Theor. Phys. 49 (1973) 652–657. doi:10.1143/PTP.49.652. [10] F. Abe, et al., [CDF Collaboration], Observation of top quark production inpp ¯ collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 2626–2631. arXiv:hep-ex/9503002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.74. 2626. [11] S. Abachi, et al., [D0 Collaboration], Search for high mass top quark production in pp¯ collisions at √s = 1.8 TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 2422–2426. arXiv:hep-ex/9411001, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.2422. 0 [12] C.-H. Chang, Y.-Q. Chen, The Bc and B¯c mesons accessible to experiments through Z bosons decay, Phys. Lett. B284 (1992) 127–132. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(92)91937-5. [13] C.-H. Chang, Y.-Q. Chen, The production of Bc or B¯c meson associated with two heavy quark jets in Z0 boson decay, Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 3845. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.46.3845. [14] C.-H. Chang, Y.-Q. Chen, The hadronic production of the Bc meson at Tevatron, CERN LHC and SSC, Phys. Rev. D48 (1993) 4086–4091. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.48.4086. [15] C.-H. Chang, Y.-Q. Chen, The decays of Bc meson, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 3399–3411. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.49.3399. [16] C.-H. Chang, Y.-Q. Chen, G.-P. Han, H.-T. Jiang, On hadronic production of the Bc meson, Phys. Lett. B364 (1995) 78–86. arXiv:hep-ph/9408242, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(95)01235-4. [17] C.-H. Chang, C.-F. Qiao, J.-X. Wang, X.-G. Wu, The color-octet contributions to P-wave Bc meson hadroproduction, Phys. Rev. D71 (2005) 074012. arXiv:hep-ph/0502155, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.71.074012.

[18] C.-H. Chang, C.-F. Qiao, J.-X. Wang, X.-G. Wu, Hadronic production of Bc(Bc∗) meson induced by the heavy quarks inside the collision hadrons, Phys. Rev. D72 (2005) 114009. arXiv:hep-ph/0509040, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.72.114009. [19] C.-H. Chang, J.-X. Wang, X.-G. Wu, An upgraded version of the generator BCVEGPY2.0 for hadronic production of Bc meson and its excited states, Comput. Phys. Commun. 175 (2006) 624–627. arXiv:hep-ph/0604238, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2006.07.014. [20] C.-H. Chang, J.-X. Wang, X.-G. Wu, Production of Bc or B¯c meson and its excited states via t¯ quark or t quark decays, Phys. Rev. D77 (2008) 014022. arXiv:0711.1898, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.77.014022. [21] H.-W. Ke, G.-L. Wang, X.-Q. Li, C.-H. Chang, The magnetic dipole transitions in the (c¯b) binding system, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 53 (2010) 2025–2030. arXiv:1002.4051, doi:10.1007/s11433-010-4151-6. [22] N. Brambilla, et al., Heavy quarkonium: Progress, puzzles, and opportunities, Eur. Phys. J. C71 (2011) 1534. arXiv:1010.5827, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-010-1534-9. [23] Z.-H. Wang, G.-L. Wang, C.-H. Chang, The Bc decays to P -wave charmonium by improved Bethe- Salpeter approach, J. Phys. G39 (2012) 015009. arXiv:1107.0474, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/ CONTENTS 120

39/1/015009. [24] C.-H. Chang, H.-F. Fu, G.-L. Wang, J.-M. Zhang, Some of semileptonic and nonleptonic decays of Bc meson in a Bethe-Salpeter relativistic quark model, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 58 (7) (2015) 071001. arXiv:1411.3428, doi:10.1007/s11433-015-5671-x. [25] N. Isgur, D. Scora, B. Grinstein, M. B. Wise, Semileptonic B and D decays in the quark model, Phys. Rev. D39 (1989) 799–818. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.39.799. [26] C. E. Thomas, Non-leptonic weak decays of B to Ds and D mesons, Phys. Rev. D73 (2006) 054016. arXiv:hep-ph/0511169, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.054016. [27] E. Hernandez, J. Nieves, J. M. Verde-Velasco, Study of exclusive semileptonic and non-leptonic decays of Bc¯ in a nonrelativistic quark model, Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 074008. arXiv: hep-ph/0607150, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.074008. [28] M. A. Ivanov, J. G. Korner, P. Santorelli, Exclusive semileptonic and nonleptonic decays of the Bc meson, Phys. Rev. D73 (2006) 054024. arXiv:hep-ph/0602050, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 73.054024. [29] V. A. Novikov, L. B. Okun, M. A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein, M. B. Voloshin, V. I. Zakharov, Charmonium and gluons: Basic experimental facts and theoretical introduction, Phys. Rept. 41 (1978) 1–133. doi:10.1016/0370-1573(78)90120-5. [30] Y. Amhis, et al., [Heavy Flavor Averaging Group (HFAG) Collaboration], Averages of b-hadron, c-hadron, and τ-lepton properties as of summer 2014. arXiv:1412.7515. [31] V. Crede, W. Roberts, Progress towards understanding baryon resonances, Rept. Prog. Phys. 76 (2013) 076301. arXiv:1302.7299, doi:10.1088/0034-4885/76/7/076301. [32] C. A. Meyer, E. S. Swanson, Hybrid mesons, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 82 (2015) 21–58. arXiv: 1502.07276, doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2015.03.001. [33] H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, The hidden-charm pentaquark and tetraquark states, Phys. Rept. 639 (2016) 1–121. arXiv:1601.02092, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2016.05.004. [34] R. Chen, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, Hidden-charm molecular pentaquarks and their charm-strange partners, Nucl. Phys. A954 (2016) 406–421. arXiv:1601.03233, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa. 2016.04.012. [35] A. Hosaka, T. Iijima, K. Miyabayashi, Y. Sakai, S. Yasui, Exotic hadrons with heavy flavors: X, Y, Z, and related states, PTEP 2016 (6) (2016) 062C01. arXiv:1603.09229, doi: 10.1093/ptep/ptw045. [36] J.-M. Richard, Exotic hadrons: Review and perspectives, Few Body Syst. 57 (12) (2016) 1185– 1212. arXiv:1606.08593, doi:10.1007/s00601-016-1159-0. [37] A. Hosaka, T. Hyodo, K. Sudoh, Y. Yamaguchi, S. Yasui, Heavy hadrons in nuclear matter. arXiv:1606.08685. [38] M. A. Ivanov, Yu. L. Kalinovsky, C. D. Roberts, Survey of heavy meson observables, Phys. Rev. D60 (1999) 034018. arXiv:nucl-th/9812063, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.60.034018. [39] S. Capstick, W. Roberts, Quark models of baryon masses and decays, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 45 (2000) S241–S331. arXiv:nucl-th/0008028, doi:10.1016/S0146-6410(00)00109-5. [40] G. S. Bali, QCD forces and heavy quark bound states, Phys. Rept. 343 (2001) 1–136. arXiv: hep-ph/0001312, doi:10.1016/S0370-1573(00)00079-X. [41] S. Aoki, Y. Kuramashi, S.-i. Tominaga, Relativistic heavy quarks on the lattice, Prog. Theor. Phys. 109 (2003) 383–413. arXiv:hep-lat/0107009, doi:10.1143/PTP.109.383. [42] P. Colangelo, F. De Fazio, R. Ferrandes, Excited charmed mesons: Observations, analyses and puzzles, Mod. Phys. Lett. A19 (2004) 2083–2102. arXiv:hep-ph/0407137, doi:10.1142/ S0217732304015269. [43] D. V. Bugg, Four sorts of meson, Phys. Rept. 397 (2004) 257–358. arXiv:hep-ex/0412045, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2004.03.008. [44] E. S. Swanson, The new heavy mesons: A status report, Phys. Rept. 429 (2006) 243–305. arXiv:hep-ph/0601110, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2006.04.003. [45] J. L. Rosner, Hadron spectroscopy: Theory and experiment, J. Phys. G34 (2007) S127–S148. CONTENTS 121

arXiv:hep-ph/0609195, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/34/7/S07. [46] S.-L. Zhu, New hadron states, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E17 (2008) 283–322. arXiv:hep-ph/0703225, doi:10.1142/S0218301308009446. [47] E. Klempt, A. Zaitsev, Glueballs, hybrids, multiquarks: Experimental facts versus QCD inspired concepts, Phys. Rept. 454 (2007) 1–202. arXiv:0708.4016, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2007. 07.006. [48] X.-Q. Li, X. Liu, Z.-T. Wei, Charm physics: A field full with challenges and opportunities, Front. Phys. China 4 (2009) 49–74. arXiv:0808.2587, doi:10.1007/s11467-009-0003-0. [49] E. Klempt, J.-M. Richard, Baryon spectroscopy, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82 (2010) 1095–1153. arXiv: 0901.2055, doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.82.1095. [50] N. Drenska, R. Faccini, F. Piccinini, A. Polosa, F. Renga, C. Sabelli, New hadronic spectroscopy, Riv. Nuovo Cim. 33 (2010) 633–712. arXiv:1006.2741, doi:10.1393/ncr/i2010-10059-8. [51] E. Oset, et al., Weak decays of heavy hadrons into dynamically generated resonances, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E25 (2016) 1630001. arXiv:1601.03972, doi:10.1142/S0218301316300010. [52] E. Oset, et al., Study of reactions disclosing hidden charm pentaquarks with or without strangeness, Nucl. Phys. A954 (2016) 371–392. doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2016.04.038. [53] C. B. Lang, L. Leskovec, D. Mohler, S. Prelovsek, R. M. Woloshyn, Ds mesons with DK and D∗K scattering near threshold, Phys. Rev. D90 (3) (2014) 034510. arXiv:1403.8103, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.034510. [54] A. De Rujula, H. Georgi, S. L. Glashow, Hadron masses in a gauge theory, Phys. Rev. D12 (1975) 147–162. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.12.147. [55] E. Eichten, K. Gottfried, T. Kinoshita, K. D. Lane, T.-M. Yan, Charmonium: The model, Phys. Rev. D17 (1978) 3090. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.17.3090. [56] E. Eichten, K. Gottfried, T. Kinoshita, K. D. Lane, T.-M. Yan, Charmonium: Comparison with experiment, Phys. Rev. D21 (1980) 203. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.21.203. [57] C. Quigg, J. L. Rosner, Quarkonium level spacings, Phys. Lett. B71 (1977) 153–157. doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(77)90765-1. [58] A. Martin, A fit of Upsilon and charmonium spectra, Phys. Lett. B93 (1980) 338–342. doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(80)90527-4. [59] Z.-Y. Zhang, Y.-W. Yu, P.-N. Shen, X.-Y. Shen, Y.-B. Dong, Color screening effect in quark potential model, Nucl. Phys. A561 (1993) 595–606. doi:10.1016/0375-9474(93)90067-8. [60] S. Godfrey, K. Moats, Properties of excited charm and charm-strange mesons, Phys. Rev. D93 (3) (2016) 034035. arXiv:1510.08305, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.034035. [61] S. Godfrey, K. Moats, E. S. Swanson, B and Bs meson spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. D94 (5) (2016) 054025. arXiv:1607.02169, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.054025. [62] O. Lakhina, E. S. Swanson, Dynamic properties of charmonium, Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 014012. arXiv:hep-ph/0603164, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.014012. [63] O. Lakhina, E. S. Swanson, A canonical Ds(2317)?, Phys. Lett. B650 (2007) 159–165. arXiv: hep-ph/0608011, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.01.075. [64] L. S. Brown, W. I. Weisberger, Remarks on the static potential in Quantum Chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. D20 (1979) 3239. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.20.3239. [65] E. Eichten, F. Feinberg, Spin dependent forces in QCD, Phys. Rev. D23 (1981) 2724. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.23.2724. [66] S. N. Gupta, S. F. Radford, Quark-quark and quark-antiquark potentials, Phys. Rev. D24 (1981) 2309–2323. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.24.2309. [67] S. N. Gupta, S. F. Radford, W. W. Repko, Quantum Chromodynamic potential model for light and heavy quarkonia, Phys. Rev. D28 (1983) 1716. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.28.1716. [68] J. T. Pantaleone, S. H. H. Tye, Y. J. Ng, Spin splittings in heavy quarkonia, Phys. Rev. D33 (1986) 777. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.33.777. [69] J. Segovia, D. R. Entem, F. Fernandez, E. Hernandez, Constituent quark model description of charmonium phenomenology, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E22 (2013) 1330026. arXiv:1309.6926, CONTENTS 122

doi:10.1142/S0218301313300269. [70] V. O. Galkin, A. Yu. Mishurov, R. N. Faustov, Meson masses in the relativistic quark model, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 55 (1992) 1207–1213, [Yad. Fiz. 55, 2175 (1992)]. [71] D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, V. O. Galkin, A. P. Martynenko, V. A. Saleev, Heavy baryons in the relativistic quark model, Z. Phys. C76 (1997) 111–115. arXiv:hep-ph/9607314, doi:10.1007/s002880050534. [72] D. Ebert, V. O. Galkin, R. N. Faustov, Mass spectrum of orbitally and radially excited heavy- light mesons in the relativistic quark model, Phys. Rev. D57 (1998) 5663–5669, [Erratum: Phys. Rev. D59, 019902 (1999)]. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.59.019902. [73] D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, V. O. Galkin, A. P. Martynenko, Mass spectra of doubly heavy baryons in the relativistic quark model, Phys. Rev. D66 (2002) 014008. arXiv:hep-ph/0201217, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.66.014008. [74] D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, V. O. Galkin, Properties of heavy quarkonia and Bc mesons in the relativistic quark model, Phys. Rev. D67 (2003) 014027. arXiv:hep-ph/0210381, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.67.014027. [75] D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, V. O. Galkin, Heavy-light meson spectroscopy and Regge trajectories in the relativistic quark model, Eur. Phys. J. C66 (2010) 197–206. arXiv:0910.5612, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-010-1233-6. [76] J. Zeng, J. W. Van Orden, W. Roberts, Heavy mesons in a relativistic model, Phys. Rev. D52 (1995) 5229–5241. arXiv:hep-ph/9412269, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.52.5229. [77] S. F. Radford, W. W. Repko, Potential model calculations and predictions for heavy quarkonium, Phys. Rev. D75 (2007) 074031. arXiv:hep-ph/0701117, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.75.074031. [78] S. F. Radford, W. W. Repko, M. J. Saelim, Potential model calculations and predictions for cs¯ quarkonia, Phys. Rev. D80 (2009) 034012. arXiv:0903.0551, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.80. 034012. [79] S. N. Mukherjee, R. Nag, S. Sanyal, T. Morii, J. Morishita, M. Tsuge, Quark potential approach to baryons and mesons, Phys. Rept. 231 (1993) 201–292. doi:10.1016/0370-1573(93)90010-B. [80] C.-H. Chang, Y.-Q. Chen, The instantaneous approximation to the transition matrix elements between two bound states, Commun. Theor. Phys. 23 (1995) 451–464. arXiv:hep-ph/9401225. [81] C.-H. Chang, J. Y. Cui, J. M. Yang, The spectrum of a binding system for a heavy quark with an anti-sbottom or for a sbottom and anti-sbottom pair, Commun. Theor. Phys. 39 (2003) 197–204. arXiv:hep-ph/0211164. [82] C.-H. Chang, J.-K. Chen, G.-L. Wang, The instantaneous formulations for Bethe-Salpeter equation and radiative transitions between two bound states. arXiv:hep-th/0312250. [83] C.-H. Chang, J.-K. Chen, X.-Q. Li, G.-L. Wang, Instantaneous Bethe-Salpeter equation and its exact solution, Commun. Theor. Phys. 43 (2005) 113–118. arXiv:hep-ph/0406050, doi:10.1088/0253-6102/43/1/023. [84] C.-H. Chang, J.-K. Chen, The instantaneous Bethe-Salpeter equation and its analog: The Breit-like equation, Commun. Theor. Phys. 44 (2005) 646–650. arXiv:nucl-th/0409077, doi:10.1088/6102/44/4/646. [85] Y.-B. Dai, C.-S. Huang, H.-Y. Jin, Bethe-Salpeter wave functions and transition amplitudes for heavy mesons, Z. Phys. C60 (1993) 527–534. doi:10.1007/BF01560051. [86] Y.-B. Dai, C.-S. Huang, H.-Y. Jin, Bethe-Salpeter wave functions for mesons of arbitrary spin and the covariant instantaneous approximation, Phys. Rev. D51 (1995) 2347–2352. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.51.2347. [87] Y.-B. Dai, C.-S. Huang, H.-Y. Jin, Heavy mesons spectra from relativistic B-S equations to the order 1/M, Phys. Lett. B331 (1994) 174–178. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(94)90960-1. [88] Y.-B. Dai, C.-S. Huang, H.-Y. Jin, The 1/M expansion in the B-S formalism and the decay of 1− and 0+ heavy mesons to the order 1/M, Z. Phys. C65 (1995) 87–92. doi:10.1007/BF01571307.

[89] Y.-Q. Chen, Y.-P. Kuang, Improved QCD motivated heavy quark potentials with explicit ΛMS dependence, Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 1165. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.47.350. CONTENTS 123

[90] Y.-Q. Chen, Y.-P. Kuang, General relations of heavy quark-anti-quark potentials induced by reparametrization invariance, Z. Phys. C67 (1995) 627–632. arXiv:hep-ph/9312209, doi: 10.1007/BF01553989. [91] K.-T. Chao, C.-S. Huang, Z.-J. Lin, Hadronic widths of p wave heavy quarkonium states with massive gluons, Commun. Theor. Phys. 2 (1983) 1051. [92] D.-H. Qin, H.-A. Peng, K.-T. Chao, Investigations on the full and reduced salpeter equation for the quark anti-quark bound states, Commun. Theor. Phys. 7 (1987) 339–350. [93] Y.-B. Ding, K.-T. Chao, D.-H. Qin, Possible effects of color screening and large string tension in heavy quarkonium spectra, Phys. Rev. D51 (1995) 5064–5068. arXiv:hep-ph/9502409, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.51.5064. [94] Y.-B. Dai, Y.-B. Ding, C.-S. Huang, C.-L. Wang, The effect of bare quark mass on the pion properties in B-S formalism containing a confining term, Commun. Theor. Phys. 18 (1992) 313–320. [95] Y.-B. Dai, Y.-B. Ding, C.-S. Huang, C.-L. Wang, Y.-L. Zhu, Physical quantities of the pion in covariant Bethe-Salpeter formalism, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 1256–1259. doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.47.1256. [96] Y.-B. Ding, G.-D. Zhao, Meson spectroscopy in the heavy straton model, Sci. Sin. 26 (1983) 512–522. [97] Y.-B. Ding, G.-D. Zhao, D.-H. Qin, Colored states in quasiconfinement models, Chin. Phys. Lett. 4 (1987) 13–16. doi:10.1088/0256-307X/4/1/004. [98] G.-L. Wang, Decay constants of heavy vector mesons in relativistic Bethe-Salpeter method, Phys. Lett. B633 (2006) 492–496. arXiv:math-ph/0512009, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2005.12. 005.

[99] J.-M. Zhang, G.-L. Wang, Bs semileptonic decays to Ds and Ds∗ in Bethe-Salpeter method, Chin. Phys. Lett. 27 (2010) 051301. arXiv:1003.5576, doi:10.1088/0256-307X/27/5/051301. [100] H.-F. Fu, G.-L. Wang, Z.-H. Wang, X.-J. Chen, Semi-leptonic and non-leptonic B meson decays to charmed mesons, Chin. Phys. Lett. 28 (2011) 121301. arXiv:1202.1221, doi: 10.1088/0256-307X/28/12/121301.

[101] Z.-H. Wang, G.-L. Wang, H.-F. Fu, Y. Jiang, The strong decays of orbitally excited BsJ∗ mesons by improved Bethe-Salpeter method, Phys. Lett. B706 (2012) 389–397. arXiv:1202.1224, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2011.11.051. [102] Z.-H. Wang, G.-L. Wang, J.-M. Zhang, T.-H. Wang, The productions and strong decays of Dq(2S) and Bq(2S), J. Phys. G39 (2012) 085006. arXiv:1207.2528, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/39/8/ 085006. [103] A. Manohar, H. Georgi, Chiral quarks and the nonrelativistic quark model, Nucl. Phys. B234 (1984) 189–212. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(84)90231-1. [104] Z.-Y. Zhang, A. Faessler, U. Straub, L. Ya. Glozman, The baryon-baryon interaction in a modified quark model, Nucl. Phys. A578 (1994) 573–585. doi:10.1016/0375-9474(94)90761-7. [105] Z. Y. Zhang, Y. W. Yu, P. N. Shen, L. R. Dai, A. Faessler, U. Straub, Hyperon nucleon interactions in a chiral SU(3) quark model, Nucl. Phys. A625 (1997) 59–70. doi:10.1016/S0375-9474(97) 00033-X. [106] L. R. Dai, Z. Y. Zhang, Y. W. Yu, P. Wang, NN interactions in the extended chiral SU(3) quark model, Nucl. Phys. A727 (2003) 321–332. arXiv:nucl-th/0404004, doi:10.1016/j. nuclphysa.2003.08.006. [107] A. Valcarce, F. Fernandez, P. Gonzalez, V. Vento, Chiral quark cluster model study of the low-energy baryon spectrum, Phys. Lett. B367 (1996) 35–39. arXiv:nucl-th/9509009, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(95)01413-6. [108] J. Vijande, F. Fernandez, A. Valcarce, Constituent quark model study of the meson spectra, J. Phys. G31 (2005) 481. arXiv:hep-ph/0411299, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/31/5/017. [109] Z. Dziembowski, M. Fabre de la Ripelle, G. A. Miller, Nonperturbative gluons and pseudoscalar mesons in baryon spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. C53 (1996) R2038–R2042. arXiv:nucl-th/ CONTENTS 124

9601022, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.53.R2038. [110] K. Glantschnig, R. Kainhofer, W. Plessas, B. Sengl, R. F. Wagenbrunn, Extended goldstone- boson-exchange constituent quark model, Eur. Phys. J. A23 (2005) 507–515. arXiv:nucl-th/ 0408068, doi:10.1140/epja/i2004-10106-9. [111] J. Segovia, C. Albertus, D. R. Entem, F. Fernandez, E. Hernandez, M. A. Perez-Garcia, Semileptonic B and Bs decays into orbitally excited charmed mesons, Phys. Rev. D84 (2011) 094029. arXiv:1107.4248, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84.094029. + 0 [112] B. Aubert, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], Observation of a narrow meson decaying to Ds π at a mass of 2.32 GeV/c2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90 (2003) 242001. arXiv:hep-ex/0304021, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.242001. [113] D. Besson, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], Observation of a narrow resonance of mass 2.46 GeV/c2 + 0 decaying to Ds∗ π and confirmation of the DsJ∗ (2317) state, Phys. Rev. D68 (2003) 032002, [Erratum: Phys. Rev. D75, 119908 (2007)]. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.68.032002. [114] K. Abe, et al., [Belle Collaboration], Measurements of the DsJ resonance properties, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 (2004) 012002. arXiv:hep-ex/0307052, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.012002.

[115] B. Aubert, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], A study of the DsJ∗ (2317) and DsJ (2460) mesons in inclusive cc¯ production near √s = 10.6 GeV, Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 032007. arXiv: hep-ex/0604030, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.032007. + 0 [116] B. Aubert, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], Observation of a narrow meson decaying to Ds π γ at a mass of 2.458 GeV/c2, Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 031101. arXiv:hep-ex/0310050, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.69.031101. [117] S. K. Choi, et al., [Belle Collaboration], Observation of a narrow charmonium-like state in + exclusive B± K±π π−J/ψ decays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 262001. arXiv:hep-ex/ → 0309032, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.91.262001. [118] E. J. Eichten, K. Lane, C. Quigg, Charmonium levels near threshold and the narrow state + X(3872) π π−J/ψ, Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 094019. arXiv:hep-ph/0401210, doi:10. → 1103/PhysRevD.69.094019. [119] E. van Beveren, G. Rupp, Observed Ds(2317) and tentative D(2030) as the charmed cousins of the light scalar nonet, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 012003. arXiv:hep-ph/0305035, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.91.012003. [120] Y.-B. Dai, X.-Q. Li, S.-L. Zhu, Y.-B. Zuo, Contribution of DK continuum in the QCD sum rule for DsJ (2317), Eur. Phys. J. C55 (2008) 249–258. arXiv:hep-ph/0610327, doi:10.1140/ epjc/s10052-008-0591-9. [121] Y.-R. Liu, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, Light pseudoscalar meson and heavy meson scattering lengths, Phys. Rev. D79 (2009) 094026. arXiv:0904.1770, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.094026.

[122] D. Mohler, C. B. Lang, L. Leskovec, S. Prelovsek, R. M. Woloshyn, Ds∗0(2317) meson and D- meson-Kaon scattering from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 (22) (2013) 222001. arXiv: 1308.3175, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.222001. [123] K. D. Born, E. Laermann, N. Pirch, T. F. Walsh, P. M. Zerwas, Hadron properties in lattice QCD with dynamical fermions, Phys. Rev. D40 (1989) 1653–1663. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 40.1653. [124] G. S. Bali, H. Neff, T. Duessel, T. Lippert, K. Schilling, [SESAM Collaboration], Observation of string breaking in QCD, Phys. Rev. D71 (2005) 114513. arXiv:hep-lat/0505012, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.71.114513. [125] A. Armoni, Beyond the quenched (or probe brane) approximation in lattice (or holographic) QCD, Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 065017. arXiv:0805.1339, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.065017. [126] F. Bigazzi, A. L. Cotrone, C. Nunez, A. Paredes, Heavy quark potential with dynamical flavors: A first order transition, Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 114012. arXiv:0806.1741, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.78.114012. [127] Y. Namekawa, et al., [PACS-CS Collaboration], Charm quark system at the physical point of 2+1 flavor lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D84 (2011) 074505. arXiv:1104.4600, doi:10.1103/ CONTENTS 125

PhysRevD.84.074505. [128] B.-Q. Li, K.-T. Chao, Higher charmonia and X,Y,Z states with screened potential, Phys. Rev. D79 (2009) 094004. arXiv:0903.5506, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.094004. [129] B.-Q. Li, C. Meng, K.-T. Chao, Coupled-channel and screening effects in charmonium spectrum, Phys. Rev. D80 (2009) 014012. arXiv:0904.4068, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.80.014012. [130] E. H. Mezoir, P. Gonzalez, Is the spectrum of highly excited mesons purely coulombian?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 (2008) 232001. arXiv:0810.5651, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.232001. [131] Q.-T. Song, D.-Y. Chen, X. Liu, T. Matsuki, Charmed-strange mesons revisited: mass spectra and strong decays, Phys. Rev. D91 (2015) 054031. arXiv:1501.03575, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 91.054031. [132] Q.-T. Song, D.-Y. Chen, X. Liu, T. Matsuki, Higher radial and orbital excitations in the charmed meson family, Phys. Rev. D92 (7) (2015) 074011. arXiv:1503.05728, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.92.074011. [133] W.-J. Deng, H. Liu, L.-C. Gui, X.-H. Zhong, Spectrum and electromagnetic transitions of bottomonium. arXiv:1607.04696. [134] W.-J. Deng, H. Liu, L.-C. Gui, X.-H. Zhong, Spectrum and electromagnetic transitions of charmonium. arXiv:1608.00287. [135] E. Laermann, F. Langhammer, I. Schmitt, P. M. Zerwas, The interquark potential: SU(2) color gauge theory with fermions, Phys. Lett. B173 (1986) 437–442. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(86) 90411-9. [136] K.-T. Chao, Y.-B. Ding, D.-H. Qin, Possible phenomenological indication for the string Coulomb term and the color screening effects in the quark-anti-quark potential, Commun. Theor. Phys. 18 (1992) 321–326. [137] Y.-B. Ding, K.-T. Chao, D.-H. Qin, Screened QQ¯ potential and spectrum of heavy quarkonium, Chin. Phys. Lett. 10 (1993) 460–463. doi:10.1088/0256-307X/10/8/004. [138] L. Micu, Decay rates of meson resonances in a quark model, Nucl. Phys. B10 (1969) 521–526. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(69)90039-X. [139] A. Le Yaouanc, L. Oliver, O. Pene, J. C. Raynal, Naive quark pair creation model of strong interaction vertices, Phys. Rev. D8 (1973) 2223–2234. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.8.2223. [140] A. Le Yaouanc, L. Oliver, O. Pene, J. C. Raynal, Naive quark pair creation model and baryon decays, Phys. Rev. D9 (1974) 1415–1419. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.9.1415. [141] A. Le Yaouanc, L. Oliver, O. Pene, J. C. Raynal, Resonant partial wave amplitudes in π + n → π + π + n according to the naive quark pair creation model, Phys. Rev. D11 (1975) 1272. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.11.1272. [142] A. Le Yaouanc, L. Oliver, O. Pene, J.-C. Raynal, Strong decays of ψ(4.028) as a radial excitation of charmonium, Phys. Lett. B71 (1977) 397–399. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(77)90250-7. [143] E. S. Ackleh, T. Barnes, E. S. Swanson, On the mechanism of open flavor strong decays, Phys. Rev. D54 (1996) 6811–6829. arXiv:hep-ph/9604355, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.54.6811. [144] E. Eichten, K. Gottfried, T. Kinoshita, K. D. Lane, T.-M. Yan, The interplay of confinement and decay in the spectrum of charmonium, Phys. Rev. Lett. 36 (1976) 500. doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.36.500. [145] L. A. Copley, N. Isgur, G. Karl, Charmed baryons in a quark model with hyperfine interactions, Phys. Rev. D20 (1979) 768. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.23.817.3. [146] F. E. Close, E. S. Swanson, Dynamics and decay of heavy-light hadrons, Phys. Rev. D72 (2005) 094004. arXiv:hep-ph/0505206, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.72.094004. [147] Y. Schroder, The static potential in QCD to two loops, Phys. Lett. B447 (1999) 321–326. arXiv:hep-ph/9812205, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(99)00010-6. [148] M. Peter, The static potential in QCD: A full two loop calculation, Nucl. Phys. B501 (1997) 471–494. arXiv:hep-ph/9702245, doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(97)00373-8. [149] N. Brambilla, A. Pineda, J. Soto, A. Vairo, The QCD potential at O(1/m), Phys. Rev. D63 (2001) 014023. arXiv:hep-ph/0002250, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.63.014023. CONTENTS 126

[150] A. Pineda, A. Vairo, The QCD potential at O(1/m2): Complete spin dependent and spin independent result, Phys. Rev. D63 (2001) 054007. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.64.039902. [151] N. Brambilla, J. Ghiglieri, A. Vairo, The three-quark static potential in perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 054031. arXiv:0911.3541, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.054031. [152] N. Brambilla, A. Pineda, J. Soto, A. Vairo, Potential NRQCD: An Effective theory for heavy quarkonium, Nucl. Phys. B566 (2000) 275. arXiv:hep-ph/9907240, doi:10.1016/ S0550-3213(99)00693-8. [153] N. Brambilla, A. Pineda, J. Soto, A. Vairo, Effective field theories for heavy quarkonium, Rev. Mod. Phys. 77 (2005) 1423. arXiv:hep-ph/0410047, doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.77.1423. [154] M. B. Voloshin, Charmonium, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 61 (2008) 455–511. arXiv:0711.4556, doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2008.02.001. [155] J. Lucker, C. S. Fischer, Two-flavor QCD at finite temperature and chemical potential in a functional approach, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 67 (2012) 200–205. arXiv:1111.0180, doi: 10.1016/j.ppnp.2011.12.018. [156] K. Murano, N. Ishii, S. Aoki, T. Hatsuda, Nucleon-nucleon potential and its non-locality in lattice QCD, Prog. Theor. Phys. 125 (2011) 1225–1240. arXiv:1103.0619, doi:10.1143/PTP.125. 1225. [157] A. Pineda, Review of heavy quarkonium at weak coupling, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 67 (2012) 735–785. arXiv:1111.0165, doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2012.01.038. [158] N. Brambilla, et al., QCD and strongly coupled gauge theories: Challenges and perspectives, Eur. Phys. J. C74 (10) (2014) 2981. arXiv:1404.3723, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-2981-5. [159] T. Kawanai, S. Sasaki, Interquark potential with finite quark mass from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 (2011) 091601. arXiv:1102.3246, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.091601. [160] T. Kawanai, S. Sasaki, Charmonium potential from full lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D85 (2012) 091503. arXiv:1110.0888, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.091503. [161] T. Kawanai, S. Sasaki, Potential description of charmonium and charmed-strange mesons from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D92 (9) (2015) 094503. arXiv:1508.02178, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 92.094503. [162] K. Nochi, T. Kawanai, S. Sasaki, Bethe-Salpeter wave functions of ηc(2S) and ψ(2S) states from full lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D94 (11) (2016) 114514. arXiv:1608.02340, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.94.114514. [163] T. Barnes, S. Godfrey, E. S. Swanson, Higher charmonia, Phys. Rev. D72 (2005) 054026. arXiv:hep-ph/0505002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.72.054026. [164] W. Lucha, F. F. Schoberl, The charmed strange meson system, Mod. Phys. Lett. A18 (2003) 2837–2847. arXiv:hep-ph/0309341, doi:10.1142/S0217732303012453. [165] T. Regge, Introduction to complex orbital momenta, Nuovo Cim. 14 (1959) 951. doi:10.1007/ BF02728177. [166] T. Regge, Bound states, shadow states and mandelstam representation, Nuovo Cim. 18 (1960) 947–956. doi:10.1007/BF02733035. [167] P. D. B. Collins, Regge theory and particle physics, Phys. Rept. 1 (1971) 103–234. doi: 10.1016/0370-1573(71)90007-X. [168] G. F. Chew, S. C. Frautschi, Principle of equivalence for all strongly interacting particles within the S matrix framework, Phys. Rev. Lett. 7 (1961) 394–397. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.7. 394. [169] G. F. Chew, S. C. Frautschi, Regge trajectories and the principle of maximum strength for strong interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 8 (1962) 41–44. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.8.41. [170] W. Lucha, F. F. Schoberl, D. Gromes, Bound states of quarks, Phys. Rept. 200 (1991) 127–240. doi:10.1016/0370-1573(91)90001-3. [171] Y. Nambu, Strings, monopoles and gauge fields, Phys. Rev. D10 (1974) 4262. doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.10.4262. [172] Y. Nambu, QCD and the string model, Phys. Lett. B80 (1979) 372–376. doi:10.1016/ CONTENTS 127

0370-2693(79)91193-6. [173] S. S. Afonin, Towards understanding spectral degeneracies in nonstrange hadrons. Part I. Mesons as hadron strings versus phenomenology, Mod. Phys. Lett. A22 (2007) 1359–1372. arXiv:hep-ph/0701089, doi:10.1142/S0217732307024024. [174] M. Baker, R. Steinke, Semiclassical quantization of effective string theory and Regge trajectories, Phys. Rev. D65 (2002) 094042. arXiv:hep-th/0201169, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.65.094042. [175] B. Zwiebach, A first course in string theory, Cambridge University Press, 2006. URL http://www.cambridge.org/uk/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=0521831431 [176] M. Ademollo, G. Veneziano, S. Weinberg, Quantization conditions for regge intercepts and hadron masses, Phys. Rev. Lett. 22 (1969) 83–85. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.22.83. [177] J. Polchinski, M. J. Strassler, Hard scattering and gauge/string duality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 031601. arXiv:hep-th/0109174, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.031601. [178] S. J. Brodsky, Hadron spectroscopy and structure from AdS/CFT, Eur. Phys. J. A31 (2007) 638–644. arXiv:hep-ph/0610115, doi:10.1140/epja/i2006-10221-7. [179] A. Karch, E. Katz, D. T. Son, M. A. Stephanov, Linear confinement and AdS/QCD, Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 015005. arXiv:hep-ph/0602229, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.015005. [180] H. Forkel, M. Beyer, T. Frederico, Linear square-mass trajectories of radially and orbitally excited hadrons in holographic QCD, JHEP 07 (2007) 077. arXiv:0705.1857, doi:10.1088/ 1126-6708/2007/07/077. [181] A. V. Anisovich, V. V. Anisovich, A. V. Sarantsev, Systematics of qq¯ states in the (n, M 2) and (J, M 2) planes, Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 051502. arXiv:hep-ph/0003113, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.62.051502. [182] S. S. Afonin, Experimental indication on chiral symmetry restoration in meson spectrum, Phys. Lett. B639 (2006) 258–262. arXiv:hep-ph/0603166, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2006.06. 057. [183] S. S. Afonin, Properties of new unflavored mesons below 2.4 GeV, Phys. Rev. C76 (2007) 015202. arXiv:0707.0824, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.76.015202. [184] M. Shifman, A. Vainshtein, Highly excited mesons, linear Regge trajectories and the pattern of the chiral symmetry realization, Phys. Rev. D77 (2008) 034002. arXiv:0710.0863, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.77.034002. [185] M. M. Brisudova, L. Burakovsky, J. T. Goldman, A. Szczepaniak, Nonlinear Regge trajectories and glueballs, Phys. Rev. D67 (2003) 094016. arXiv:nucl-th/0303012, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.67.094016. [186] G. F. de Teramond, S. J. Brodsky, Hadronic spectrum of a holographic dual of QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 (2005) 201601. arXiv:hep-th/0501022, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.201601. [187] F. Bigazzi, A. L. Cotrone, L. Martucci, L. A. Pando Zayas, Wilson loop, Regge trajectory and hadron masses in a Yang-Mills theory from semiclassical strings, Phys. Rev. D71 (2005) 066002. arXiv:hep-th/0409205, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.71.066002. [188] L. Ya. Glozman, Restoration of chiral and U(1)A symmetries in excited hadrons, Phys. Rept. 444 (2007) 1–49. arXiv:hep-ph/0701081, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2007.04.001. [189] X.-H. Guo, K.-W. Wei, X.-H. Wu, Some mass relations for mesons and baryons in Regge phenomenology, Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 056005. arXiv:0809.1702, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 78.056005. [190] H.-M. Chan, C. S. Hsue, C. Quigg, J.-M. Wang, New regge phenomenology of inclusive reactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 26 (1971) 672–674. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.26.672. + [191] K. Kawarabayashi, S. Kitakado, H. Yabuki, Veneziano’s model and nonet scheme for 1− and 2 mesons, Phys. Lett. B28 (1969) 432–435. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(69)90344-X. [192] A. B. Kaidalov, Hadronic mass relations from topological expansion and string model, Z. Phys. C12 (1982) 63. doi:10.1007/BF01475732. [193] L. Burakovsky, J. T. Goldman, L. P. Horwitz, New quadratic baryon mass relations, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) 7124–7132. arXiv:hep-ph/9706464, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.56.7124. CONTENTS 128

[194] M. M. Brisudova, L. Burakovsky, J. T. Goldman, Effective functional form of Regge trajectories, Phys. Rev. D61 (2000) 054013. arXiv:hep-ph/9906293, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.61.054013. [195] D.-M. Li, B. Ma, Y.-X. Li, Q.-K. Yao, H. Yu, Meson spectrum in Regge phenomenology, Eur. Phys. J. C37 (2004) 323–333. arXiv:hep-ph/0408214, doi:10.1140/epjc/s2004-02002-5. + [196] A. Zhang, Regge trajectories analysis to DsJ∗ (2317)±, DsJ (2460)± and DsJ (2632) mesons, Phys. Rev. D72 (2005) 017902. arXiv:hep-ph/0408124, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.72.017902. [197] Q. Zhen, X.-P. Dong, K.-W. Wei, Masses of heavy-light mesons in Regge phenomenology, Chin. Phys. C37 (5) (2013) 053102. doi:10.1088/1674-1137/37/5/053102. [198] W.-K. Tang, High-energy quark-antiquark elastic scattering with mesonic exchange, Phys. Rev. D48 (1993) 2019–2026. arXiv:hep-ph/9304297, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.48.2019. [199] M. M. Brisudova, L. Burakovsky, J. T. Goldman, Effect of color screening on heavy quarkonia Regge trajectories, Phys. Lett. B460 (1999) 1–7. arXiv:hep-ph/9810296, doi:10.1016/ S0370-2693(99)00732-7. [200] A. Tang, J. W. Norbury, Properties of Regge trajectories, Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 016006. arXiv:hep-ph/0004078, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.62.016006. [201] L. A. Pando Zayas, J. Sonnenschein, D. Vaman, Regge trajectories revisited in the gauge/string correspondence, Nucl. Phys. B682 (2004) 3–44. arXiv:hep-th/0311190, doi:10.1016/j. nuclphysb.2003.12.006. [202] S. S. Afonin, A. A. Andrianov, V. A. Andrianov, D. Espriu, Matching Regge theory to the OPE, JHEP 04 (2004) 039. arXiv:hep-ph/0403268, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2004/04/039. [203] Z. Li, K.-W. Wei, Is the Regge trajectory quasi-linear or square-root form?arXiv:1610.04075. [204] S. S. Afonin, I. V. Pusenkov, Note on universal description of heavy and light mesons, Mod. Phys. Lett. A29 (35) (2014) 1450193. arXiv:1308.6540, doi:10.1142/S0217732314501934. [205] S. S. Afonin, I. V. Pusenkov, Universal description of radially excited heavy and light vector mesons, Phys. Rev. D90 (9) (2014) 094020. arXiv:1411.2390, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90. 094020. [206] H. Georgi, An effective field theory for heavy quarks at low-energies, Phys. Lett. B240 (1990) 447–450. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(90)91128-X. [207] H. Georgi, Heavy quark effective field theory, in: Theoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics (TASI 91): Perspectives in the Standard Model Boulder, Colorado, June 2-28, 1991, 1991, pp. 0589–630. [208] W. E. Caswell, G. P. Lepage, Effective Lagrangians for bound state problems in QED, QCD, and other field theories, Phys. Lett. B167 (1986) 437–442. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(86)91297-9. [209] G. T. Bodwin, E. Braaten, G. P. Lepage, Rigorous QCD analysis of inclusive annihilation and production of heavy quarkonium, Phys. Rev. D51 (1995) 1125–1171. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 55.5853. [210] A. Pineda, J. Soto, Effective field theory for ultrasoft momenta in NRQCD and NRQED, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 64 (1998) 428–432. arXiv:hep-ph/9707481, doi:10.1016/ S0920-5632(97)01102-X. [211] N. Brambilla, A. Vairo, T. Rosch, Effective field theory Lagrangians for baryons with two and three heavy quarks, Phys. Rev. D72 (2005) 034021. arXiv:hep-ph/0506065, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.72.034021. [212] S. Fleming, T. Mehen, Doubly heavy baryons, heavy quark-diquark symmetry and NRQCD, Phys. Rev. D73 (2006) 034502. arXiv:hep-ph/0509313, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.034502. [213] J. P. Ma, Z. G. Si, Factorization approach for inclusive production of doubly heavy baryon, Phys. Lett. B568 (2003) 135–145. arXiv:hep-ph/0305079, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003. 06.064. [214] S.-Y. Li, Z.-G. Si, Z.-J. Yang, Doubly heavy baryon production at γγ collider, Phys. Lett. B648 (2007) 284–288. arXiv:hep-ph/0701212, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.03.029. [215] Z.-J. Yang, T. Yao, Doubly heavy baryon production at polarized photon collider, Chin. Phys. Lett. 24 (2007) 3378–3380. arXiv:0710.0051, doi:10.1088/0256-307X/24/12/025. CONTENTS 129

[216] Y.-Q. Chen, S.-Z. Wu, Production of triply heavy baryons at LHC, JHEP 08 (2011) 144. doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2011)144. [217] J. Jiang, X.-G. Wu, S.-M. Wang, J.-W. Zhang, Z.-Y. Fang, A further study on the doubly heavy 0 + baryon production around the Z peak at a high luminosity e e− collider, Phys. Rev. D87 (5) (2013) 054027. arXiv:1302.0601, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.054027. + [218] Z.-J. Yang, P.-F. Zhang, Y.-J. Zheng, Doubly heavy baryon production in e e− annihilation, Chin. Phys. Lett. 31 (2014) 051301. doi:10.1088/0256-307X/31/5/051301. [219] P. Colangelo, F. De Fazio, Open charm meson spectroscopy: Where to place the latest piece of the puzzle, Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 094001. arXiv:1001.1089, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81. 094001. [220] H.-Y. Cheng, C.-K. Chua, Strong decays of charmed baryons in heavy hadron chiral perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. D75 (2007) 014006. arXiv:hep-ph/0610283, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.75. 014006. [221] H.-Y. Cheng, C.-K. Chua, Strong decays of charmed baryons in heavy hadron chiral perturbation theory: An update, Phys. Rev. D92 (7) (2015) 074014. arXiv:1508.05653, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.92.074014. [222] M. J. Savage, M. B. Wise, Spectrum of baryons with two heavy quarks, Phys. Lett. B248 (1990) 177–180. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(90)90035-5. [223] T. D. Cohen, P. M. Hohler, Doubly heavy hadrons and the domain of validity of doubly heavy diquark-anti-quark symmetry, Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 094003. arXiv:hep-ph/0606084, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.094003. [224] W. A. Bardeen, E. J. Eichten, C. T. Hill, Chiral multiplets of heavy-light mesons, Phys. Rev. D68 (2003) 054024. arXiv:hep-ph/0305049, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.68.054024. [225] D. Jido, M. Oka, A. Hosaka, Chiral symmetry of baryons, Prog. Theor. Phys. 106 (2001) 873–908. arXiv:hep-ph/0110005, doi:10.1143/PTP.106.873. [226] H.-X. Chen, V. Dmitrasinovic, A. Hosaka, K. Nagata, S.-L. Zhu, Chiral properties of baryon fields with flavor SU(3) symmetry, Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 054021. arXiv:0806.1997, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.78.054021. [227] H.-X. Chen, V. Dmitrasinovic, A. Hosaka, Baryon fields with U (3) U (3) chiral symmetry II: L × R Axial currents of nucleons and hyperons, Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 054002. arXiv:0912.4338, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.054002. [228] H.-X. Chen, V. Dmitrasinovic, A. Hosaka, Baryon fields with U (3) U (3) chiral symmetry L × R III: Interactions with chiral (3, 3)¯ + (3¯, 3) spinless mesons, Phys. Rev. D83 (2011) 014015. arXiv:1009.2422, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.014015. [229] H.-X. Chen, V. Dmitrasinovic, A. Hosaka, Baryons with U (3) U (3) chiral symmetry IV: L × R Interactions with chiral (8, 1) + (1, 8) vector and axial-vector mesons and anomalous magnetic moments, Phys. Rev. C85 (2012) 055205. arXiv:1109.3130, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.85. 055205. [230] V. Dmitrasinovic, H.-X. Chen, A. Hosaka, Baryon fields with U (3) U (3) chiral symmetry V: L × R Pion-nucleon and kaon-nucleon Σ terms, Phys. Rev. C93 (6) (2016) 065208. doi:10.1103/ PhysRevC.93.065208. [231] H.-X. Chen, Baryon tri-local interpolating fields, Eur. Phys. J. C72 (2012) 2129. arXiv: 1205.5328, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2129-4. [232] H.-X. Chen, Chiral baryon fields in the QCD sum rule, Eur. Phys. J. C72 (2012) 2180. arXiv:1203.3260, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2180-1. [233] H.-X. Chen, The “closed” chiral symmetry and its application to tetraquark, Eur. Phys. J. C72 (2012) 2204. arXiv:1210.3399, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2204-x. [234] H.-X. Chen, Chiral structure of vector and axial-vector tetraquark currents, Eur. Phys. J. C73 (2013) 2628. arXiv:1311.4992, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2628-y. [235] H.-X. Chen, Chiral structure of scalar and pseudoscalar mesons, Adv. High Energy Phys. 2013 (2013) 750591. arXiv:1311.4434, doi:10.1155/2013/750591. CONTENTS 130

[236] Y.-R. Liu, M. Oka, ΛcN bound states revisited, Phys. Rev. D85 (2012) 014015. arXiv: 1103.4624, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.014015. [237] T.-M. Yan, H.-Y. Cheng, C.-Y. Cheung, G.-L. Lin, Y. C. Lin, H.-L. Yu, Heavy quark symmetry and chiral dynamics, Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 1148–1164. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.46.1148. [238] M. Bando, T. Kugo, S. Uehara, K. Yamawaki, T. Yanagida, Is the ρ meson a dynamical gauge boson of hidden local symmetry?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54 (1985) 1215. doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.54.1215. [239] M. Bando, T. Kugo, K. Yamawaki, On the vector mesons as dynamical gauge bosons of hidden local symmetries, Nucl. Phys. B259 (1985) 493. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(85)90647-9. [240] R. Casalbuoni, A. Deandrea, N. Di Bartolomeo, R. Gatto, F. Feruglio, G. Nardulli, Light vector resonances in the effective chiral Lagrangian for heavy mesons, Phys. Lett. B292 (1992) 371– 376. arXiv:hep-ph/9209248, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(92)91189-G. [241] U. G. Meissner, N. Kaiser, A. Wirzba, W. Weise, Skyrmions with ρ and ω mesons as dynamical gauge bosons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57 (1986) 1676. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.57.1676. [242] M. Bando, T. Kugo, K. Yamawaki, Nonlinear realization and hidden local symmetries, Phys. Rept. 164 (1988) 217–314. doi:10.1016/0370-1573(88)90019-1. [243] R. Casalbuoni, A. Deandrea, N. Di Bartolomeo, R. Gatto, F. Feruglio, G. Nardulli, Phenomenology of heavy meson chiral Lagrangians, Phys. Rept. 281 (1997) 145–238. arXiv: hep-ph/9605342, doi:10.1016/S0370-1573(96)00027-0. [244] J. Hu, T. Mehen, Chiral Lagrangian with heavy quark-diquark symmetry, Phys. Rev. D73 (2006) 054003. arXiv:hep-ph/0511321, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.054003. [245] Y.-L. Ma, M. Harada, Doubly heavy baryons with chiral partner structure, Phys. Lett. B748 (2015) 463–466. arXiv:1503.05373, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2015.07.046. [246] Y.-L. Ma, M. Harada, Degeneracy of doubly heavy baryons from heavy quark symmetry, Phys. Lett. B754 (2016) 125–128. arXiv:1510.07481, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2016.01.011. [247] H.-Y. Cheng, C.-Y. Cheung, G.-L. Lin, Y. C. Lin, T.-M. Yan, H.-L. Yu, Chiral Lagrangians for radiative decays of heavy hadrons, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 1030–1042. arXiv:hep-ph/9209262, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.47.1030.

[248] P. L. Cho, Strong and electromagnetic decays of two new Λc∗ baryons, Phys. Rev. D50 (1994) 3295–3302. arXiv:hep-ph/9401276, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.50.3295. [249] H.-Y. Cheng, C.-Y. Cheung, G.-L. Lin, Y. C. Lin, T.-M. Yan, H.-L. Yu, Heavy flavor conserving nonleptonic weak decays of heavy baryons, Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 5060–5068. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.46.5060. [250] N. Isgur, M. B. Wise, Weak decays of heavy mesons in the static quark approximation, Phys. Lett. B232 (1989) 113–117. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(89)90566-2. [251] N. Isgur, M. B. Wise, Weak transition form-factors between heavy mesons, Phys. Lett. B237 (1990) 527–530. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(90)91219-2. [252] A. F. Falk, H. Georgi, B. Grinstein, M. B. Wise, Heavy meson form factors from QCD, Nucl. Phys. B343 (1990) 1–13. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(90)90591-Z. [253] A. F. Falk, Hadrons of arbitrary spin in the heavy quark effective theory, Nucl. Phys. B378 (1992) 79–94. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(92)90004-U. [254] A. K. Leibovich, Z. Ligeti, I. W. Stewart, M. B. Wise, Model independent results for B → D (2420)lν¯ and B D∗(2460)lν¯ at order Λ /m , Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 3995–3998. 1 → 2 QCD c,b arXiv:hep-ph/9703213, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.78.3995. [255] A. K. Leibovich, Z. Ligeti, I. W. Stewart, M. B. Wise, Semileptonic B decays to excited charmed mesons, Phys. Rev. D57 (1998) 308–330. arXiv:hep-ph/9705467, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 57.308. [256] H.-Y. Cheng, C.-Y. Cheung, W. Dimm, G.-L. Lin, Y. C. Lin, T.-M. Yan, H.-L. Yu, Heavy quark and chiral symmetry predictions for semileptonic decays B¯ D(D∗)πlν¯, Phys. Rev. D48 → (1993) 3204–3220. arXiv:hep-ph/9305340, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.48.3204. [257] T. Barnes, E. S. Swanson, Hadron loops: General theorems and application to charmonium, CONTENTS 131

Phys. Rev. C77 (2008) 055206. arXiv:0711.2080, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.77.055206. [258] H.-Y. Cheng, C.-Y. Cheung, G.-L. Lin, Y. C. Lin, T.-M. Yan, H.-L. Yu, Corrections to chiral dynamics of heavy hadrons. (I) 1/M correction, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 2490–2507. arXiv:hep-ph/9308283, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.49.2490. [259] N. Kitazawa, T. Kurimoto, Heavy meson effective theory with 1/MQ correction, Phys. Lett. B323 (1994) 65–70. arXiv:hep-ph/9312225, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(94)00047-6. [260] C. G. Boyd, B. Grinstein, Chiral and heavy quark symmetry violation in B decays, Nucl. Phys. B442 (1995) 205–227. arXiv:hep-ph/9402340, doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(95)00005-4. [261] A. V. Manohar, The HQET/NRQCD Lagrangian to order α/m3, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) 230–237. arXiv:hep-ph/9701294, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.56.230. [262] B. Grinstein, The static quark effective theory, Nucl. Phys. B339 (1990) 253–268. doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(90)90349-I. [263] E. Eichten, B. R. Hill, An effective field theory for the calculation of matrix elements involving heavy quarks, Phys. Lett. B234 (1990) 511–516. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(90)92049-O. [264] M. A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein, V. I. Zakharov, QCD and resonance physics: Theoretical foundations, Nucl. Phys. B147 (1979) 385–447. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(79)90022-1. [265] L. J. Reinders, H. Rubinstein, S. Yazaki, Hadron properties from QCD sum rules, Phys. Rept. 127 (1985) 1. doi:10.1016/0370-1573(85)90065-1. [266] M. Nielsen, F. S. Navarra, S. H. Lee, New charmonium states in QCD sum rules: A concise review, Phys. Rept. 497 (2010) 41–83. arXiv:0911.1958, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2010.07.005. [267] P. Colangelo, A. Khodjamirian, QCD sum rules, a modern perspectivearXiv:hep-ph/0010175, doi:10.1142/9789812810458_0033. [268] E. Bagan, P. Ball, V. M. Braun, H. G. Dosch, QCD sum rules in the effective heavy quark theory, Phys. Lett. B278 (1992) 457–464. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(92)90585-R. [269] M. Neubert, Heavy meson form-factors from QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D45 (1992) 2451–2466. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.45.2451. [270] M. Neubert, Heavy quark symmetry, Phys. Rept. 245 (1994) 259–396. arXiv:hep-ph/9306320, doi:10.1016/0370-1573(94)90091-4. [271] D. J. Broadhurst, A. G. Grozin, Operator product expansion in static quark effective field theory: Large perturbative correction, Phys. Lett. B274 (1992) 421–427. arXiv:hep-ph/9908363, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(92)92009-6. [272] P. Ball, V. M. Braun, Next-to-leading order corrections to meson masses in the heavy quark effective theory, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 2472–2489. arXiv:hep-ph/9307291, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.49.2472. [273] T. Huang, C.-W. Luo, Light quark dependence of the Isgur-Wise function from QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D50 (1994) 5775–5780. arXiv:hep-ph/9408303, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 50.5775. [274] P. Colangelo, G. Nardulli, A. A. Ovchinnikov, N. Paver, Semileptonic B decays into positive parity charmed mesons, Phys. Lett. B269 (1991) 201–207. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(91)91475-B. [275] P. Colangelo, G. Nardulli, N. Paver, Semileptonic B decays into charmed p-wave mesons and the heavy quark symmetry, Phys. Lett. B293 (1992) 207–215. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(92) 91503-2. [276] Y.-B. Dai, C.-S. Huang, M.-Q. Huang, C. Liu, QCD sum rules for masses of excited heavy mesons, Phys. Lett. B390 (1997) 350–358. arXiv:hep-ph/9609436, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(96) 01412-8. [277] Y.-B. Dai, C.-S. Huang, M.-Q. Huang, O(1/mQ) order corrections to masses of excited heavy mesons from QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D55 (1997) 5719–5726. arXiv:hep-ph/9702384, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.55.5719. + + [278] Y.-B. Dai, C.-S. Huang, C. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, Understanding the DsJ (2317) and DsJ (2460) with sum rules in HQET, Phys. Rev. D68 (2003) 114011. arXiv:hep-ph/0306274, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.68.114011. CONTENTS 132

[279] P. Colangelo, F. De Fazio, N. Paver, Universal τ1/2(y) Isgur-Wise function at the next-to- leading order in QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D58 (1998) 116005. arXiv:hep-ph/9804377, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.58.116005. [280] D. Zhou, E.-L. Cui, H.-X. Chen, L.-S. Geng, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, D-wave heavy-light mesons from QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D90 (11) (2014) 114035. arXiv:1410.1727, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.90.114035. [281] D. Zhou, H.-X. Chen, L.-S. Geng, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, F-wave heavy-light meson spectroscopy in QCD sum rules and heavy quark effective theory, Phys. Rev. D92 (11) (2015) 114015. arXiv:1506.00766, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.114015. [282] E. V. Shuryak, Hadrons containing a heavy quark and QCD sum rules, Nucl. Phys. B198 (1982) 83–101. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90546-6. [283] A. G. Grozin, O. I. Yakovlev, Baryonic currents and their correlators in the heavy quark effective theory, Phys. Lett. B285 (1992) 254–262. arXiv:hep-ph/9908364, doi:10.1016/ 0370-2693(92)91462-I. [284] E. Bagan, M. Chabab, H. G. Dosch, S. Narison, Baryon sum rules in the heavy quark effective theory, Phys. Lett. B301 (1993) 243–248. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(93)90696-F. [285] Y.-B. Dai, C.-S. Huang, C. Liu, C.-D. Lu, 1/m corrections to heavy baryon masses in the heavy quark effective theory sum rules, Phys. Lett. B371 (1996) 99–104. arXiv:hep-ph/9602242, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(95)01602-3. [286] Y.-B. Dai, C.-S. Huang, M.-Q. Huang, C. Liu, QCD sum rule analysis for the Λ Λ b → c semileptonic decay, Phys. Lett. B387 (1996) 379–385. arXiv:hep-ph/9608277, doi:10.1016/ 0370-2693(96)01029-5. [287] S. Groote, J. G. Korner, O. I. Yakovlev, QCD sum rules for heavy baryons at next-to-leading order in αs, Phys. Rev. D55 (1997) 3016–3026. arXiv:hep-ph/9609469, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 55.3016.

[288] S.-L. Zhu, Strong and electromagnetic decays of p-wave heavy baryons Λc1,Λc∗1, Phys. Rev. D61 (2000) 114019. arXiv:hep-ph/0002023, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.61.114019. [289] J.-P. Lee, C. Liu, H. S. Song, QCD sum rule analysis of excited Λc mass parameter, Phys. Lett. B476 (2000) 303–308. arXiv:hep-ph/0002034, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(00)00144-1. [290] C.-S. Huang, A.-L. Zhang, S.-L. Zhu, Excited heavy baryon masses in HQET QCD sum rules, Phys. Lett. B492 (2000) 288–296. arXiv:hep-ph/0007330, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(00) 01088-1. [291] D.-W. Wang, M.-Q. Huang, Excited heavy baryon masses to order ΛQCD/mQ from QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D68 (2003) 034019. arXiv:hep-ph/0306207, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.68. 034019. [292] X. Liu, H.-X. Chen, Y.-R. Liu, A. Hosaka, S.-L. Zhu, Bottom baryons, Phys. Rev. D77 (2008) 014031. arXiv:0710.0123, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.014031. [293] H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, Q. Mao, A. Hosaka, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, P-wave charmed baryons from QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D91 (5) (2015) 054034. arXiv:1502.01103, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 91.054034. [294] Q. Mao, H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, A. Hosaka, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, QCD sum rule calculation for P-wave bottom baryons, Phys. Rev. D92 (11) (2015) 114007. arXiv:1510.05267, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.92.114007. [295] H.-X. Chen, Q. Mao, A. Hosaka, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, D-wave charmed and bottomed baryons from QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D94 (2016) 114016. arXiv:1611.02677, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 94.114016. [296] E. Bagan, M. Chabab, H. G. Dosch, S. Narison, Spectra of heavy baryons from QCD spectral sum rules, Phys. Lett. B287 (1992) 176–178. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(92)91896-H. [297] E. Bagan, M. Chabab, H. G. Dosch, S. Narison, The heavy baryons Σc Σb from QCD spectral sum rules, Phys. Lett. B278 (1992) 367–370. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(92)90208-L. [298] F. O. Duraes, M. Nielsen, QCD sum rules study of Ξc and Ξb baryons, Phys. Lett. B658 (2007) CONTENTS 133

40–44. arXiv:0708.3030, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.10.054.

[299] Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of Ωc∗(css) and Ωb∗(bss) with QCD sum rules, Eur. Phys. J. C54 (2008) 231–237. arXiv:0704.1106, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-008-0521-x. [300] H.-X. Chen, A. Hosaka, S.-L. Zhu, Exotic tetraquark uds¯s¯ of J P = 0+ in the QCD sum rule, Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 054001. arXiv:hep-ph/0604049, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.054001. [301] H.-X. Chen, A. Hosaka, S.-L. Zhu, QCD sum rule study of the masses of light tetraquark scalar mesons, Phys. Lett. B650 (2007) 369–372. arXiv:hep-ph/0609163, doi:10.1016/j. physletb.2007.05.031. [302] H.-X. Chen, A. Hosaka, S.-L. Zhu, Light scalar tetraquark mesons in the QCD sum rule, Phys. Rev. D76 (2007) 094025. arXiv:0707.4586, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.76.094025. [303] H.-X. Chen, X. Liu, A. Hosaka, S.-L. Zhu, The Y(2175) state in the QCD sum rule, Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 034012. arXiv:0801.4603, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.034012. G PC + [304] H.-X. Chen, A. Hosaka, S.-L. Zhu, The I J = 1−1− tetraquark states, Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 054017. arXiv:0806.1998, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.054017. [305] H.-X. Chen, A. Hosaka, H. Toki, S.-L. Zhu, Light scalar meson σ(600) in QCD sum rule with continuum, Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 114034. arXiv:0912.5138, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81. 114034. PC [306] W. Chen, S.-L. Zhu, The possible J = 0−− charmonium-like state, Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 105018. arXiv:1003.3721, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.105018. [307] W. Chen, S.-L. Zhu, The vector and axial-vector charmonium-like states, Phys. Rev. D83 (2011) 034010. arXiv:1010.3397, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.034010. [308] W. Chen, R. T. Kleiv, T. G. Steele, B. Bulthuis, D. Harnett, J. Ho, T. Richards, S.-L. Zhu, Mass spectrum of heavy quarkonium hybrids, JHEP 09 (2013) 019. arXiv:1304.4522, doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2013)019. [309] H.-X. Chen, E.-L. Cui, W. Chen, T. G. Steele, S.-L. Zhu, QCD sum rule study of the d∗(2380), Phys. Rev. C91 (2) (2015) 025204. arXiv:1410.0394, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.91.025204. [310] H.-X. Chen, E.-L. Cui, W. Chen, T. G. Steele, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, a1(1420) resonance as a tetraquark state and its isospin partner, Phys. Rev. D91 (2015) 094022. arXiv:1503.02597, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.094022. + [311] W. Chen, T. G. Steele, H.-X. Chen, S.-L. Zhu, Zc(4200) decay width as a charmonium-like tetraquark state, Eur. Phys. J. C75 (8) (2015) 358. arXiv:1501.03863, doi:10.1140/epjc/ s10052-015-3578-3. [312] W. Chen, T. G. Steele, H.-X. Chen, S.-L. Zhu, Mass spectra of Zc and Zb exotic states as hadron molecules, Phys. Rev. D92 (5) (2015) 054002. arXiv:1505.05619, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 92.054002. [313] H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, T. G. Steele, S.-L. Zhu, Towards exotic hidden-charm pentaquarks in QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (17) (2015) 172001. arXiv:1507.03717, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.115.172001. [314] H.-X. Chen, E.-L. Cui, W. Chen, X. Liu, T. G. Steele, S.-L. Zhu, QCD sum rule study of hidden-charm pentaquarks, Eur. Phys. J. C76 (10) (2016) 572. arXiv:1602.02433, doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4438-5. [315] H.-X. Chen, D. Zhou, W. Chen, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, Searching for hidden-charm baryonium signals in QCD sum rules, Eur. Phys. J. C76 (11) (2016) 602. arXiv:1605.07453, doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4459-0. [316] S. Godfrey, R. Kokoski, The properties of p wave mesons with one heavy quark, Phys. Rev. D43 (1991) 1679–1687. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.43.1679. [317] M. Di Pierro, E. Eichten, Excited heavy-light systems and hadronic transitions, Phys. Rev. D64 (2001) 114004. arXiv:hep-ph/0104208, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.64.114004. [318] T. Hyodo, What we know about the Λ(1405), AIP Conf. Proc. 1735 (2016) 020012. arXiv: 1512.04708, doi:10.1063/1.4949380. [319] S. L. Glashow, J. Iliopoulos, L. Maiani, Weak interactions with lepton-hadron symmetry, Phys. CONTENTS 134

Rev. D2 (1970) 1285–1292. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.2.1285. [320] J. J. Aubert, et al., [E598 Collaboration], Experimental observation of a heavy particle J, Phys. Rev. Lett. 33 (1974) 1404–1406. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.33.1404. [321] J. E. Augustin, et al., [SLAC-SP-017 Collaboration], Discovery of a narrow resonance in + e e− annihilation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 33 (1974) 1406–1408, [Adv. Exp. Phys. 5, 141 (1976)]. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.33.1406. [322] S. W. Herb, et al., Observation of a dimuon resonance at 9.5 GeV in 400 GeV proton-nucleus collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 39 (1977) 252–255. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.39.252. 0 [323] K. Ackerstaff, et al., [OPAL Collaboration], Search for the Bc meson in hadronic Z decays, Phys. Lett. B420 (1998) 157–168. arXiv:hep-ex/9801026, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(97)01569-4. [324] F. Abe, et al., [CDF Collaboration], Observation of the Bc meson in pp¯ collisions at √s = 1.8 TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81 (1998) 2432–2437. arXiv:hep-ex/9805034, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett. 81.2432.

[325] G. Aad, et al., [ATLAS Collaboration], Observation of an excited Bc± meson state with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (21) (2014) 212004. arXiv:1407.1032, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.113.212004. [326] S. Godfrey, Spectroscopy of Bc mesons in the relativized quark model, Phys. Rev. D70 (2004) 054017. arXiv:hep-ph/0406228, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.70.054017. [327] N. Brambilla, et al., [Quarkonium Working Group Collaboration], Heavy quarkonium physics. arXiv:hep-ph/0412158. + 2 [328] G. Goldhaber, et al., Observation in e e− annihilation of a narrow state at 1865 MeV/c decaying to Kπ and Kπππ, Phys. Rev. Lett. 37 (1976) 255–259. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.37.255. [329] I. Peruzzi, et al., Observation of a narrow charged state at 1876 MeV/c2 decaying to an exotic combination of Kππ, Phys. Rev. Lett. 37 (1976) 569–571. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.37.569. + [330] G. Goldhaber, et al., D and D∗ meson production near 4 GeV in e e− annihilation, Phys. Lett. B69 (1977) 503–507. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(77)90855-3. 0 0 ( )+ [331] K. Abe, et al., [Belle Collaboration], Study of B− D∗∗ π−(D∗∗ D ∗ π−) decays, Phys. → → Rev. D69 (2004) 112002. arXiv:hep-ex/0307021, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.69.112002. [332] J. M. Link, et al., [FOCUS Collaboration], Measurement of masses and widths of excited

charm mesons D2∗ and evidence for broad states, Phys. Lett. B586 (2004) 11–20. arXiv: hep-ex/0312060, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2004.02.017. [333] H. Albrecht, et al., [ARGUS Collaboration], Observation of a new charmed meson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56 (1986) 549. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.56.549. [334] J. C. Anjos, et al., [Tagged Photon Spectrometer Collaboration], Observation of excited charmed mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62 (1989) 1717. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.62.1717. [335] H. Albrecht, et al., [ARGUS Collaboration], Observation of the charged isospin partner of the 0 D∗ (2459), Phys. Lett. B231 (1989) 208–212. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(89)90141-X. [336] P. del Amo Sanchez, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], Observation of new resonances decaying to + Dπ and D∗π in inclusive e e− collisions near √s =10.58 GeV, Phys. Rev. D82 (2010) 111101. arXiv:1009.2076, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82.111101. + 0 + + [337] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], Study of DJ meson decays to D π−, D π and D∗ π− final states in pp collision, JHEP 09 (2013) 145. arXiv:1307.4556, doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2013) 145. + [338] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], Amplitude analysis of B− D π−π− decays, Phys. Rev. → D94 (7) (2016) 072001. arXiv:1608.01289, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.072001. [339] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], First observation and amplitude analysis of the B− + → D K−π− decay, Phys. Rev. D91 (9) (2015) 092002, [Erratum: Phys. Rev. D93, 119901 (2016)]. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.092002. 0 0 + [340] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], Dalitz plot analysis of B D π π− decays, Phys. Rev. → D92 (3) (2015) 032002. arXiv:1505.01710, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.032002. [341] P. Abreu, et al., [DELPHI Collaboration], First evidence for a charm radial excitation, D∗0, Phys. CONTENTS 135

Lett. B426 (1998) 231–242. doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(98)00346-3. [342] J. Wiss, et al., Evidence for parity violation in the decays of the narrow states near 1.87 GeV/c2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 37 (1976) 1531–1534. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.37.1531. + [343] H. K. Nguyen, et al., Spin analysis of charmed mesons produced in e e− annihilation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 39 (1977) 262–265. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.39.262. [344] I. Peruzzi, et al., Study of D mesons produced in the decay of the ψ(3772), Phys. Rev. Lett. 39 (1977) 1301. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.39.1301. 0 + [345] H. Albrecht, et al., [ARGUS Collaboration], Observation of the D∗ (2459) in e e− annihilation, Phys. Lett. B221 (1989) 422–426. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(89)91737-1. + [346] P. Avery, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], P wave charmed mesons in e e− annihilation, Phys. Rev. D41 (1990) 774. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.41.774. [347] P. L. Frabetti, et al., [E687 Collaboration], Measurement of the masses and widths of L = 1 charm mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72 (1994) 324–327. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.72.324. 0 0 [348] P. Avery, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], Production and decay of D1(2420) and D2∗(2460) , Phys. Lett. B331 (1994) 236–244, [Erratum: Phys. Lett. B342, 453 (1995)]. doi:10.1016/ 0370-2693(94)01498-2. [349] K. Ackerstaff, et al., [OPAL Collaboration], Production of P wave charm and charm-strange mesons in hadronic Z0 decays, Z. Phys. C76 (1997) 425–440. doi:10.1007/s002880050566. + [350] K. Abe, et al., [Belle Collaboration], Observation of the D (2420) Dπ π− decays, Phys. Rev. 1 → Lett. 94 (2005) 221805. arXiv:hep-ex/0410091, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.221805. [351] A. Abulencia, et al., [CDF Collaboration], Measurement of mass and width of the excited charmed 0 0 meson states D1 and D2∗ at CDF, Phys. Rev. D73 (2006) 051104. arXiv:hep-ex/0512069, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.051104. [352] S. Chekanov, et al., [ZEUS Collaboration], Production of excited charm and charm-strange mesons at HERA, Eur. Phys. J. C60 (2009) 25–45. arXiv:0807.1290, doi:10.1140/epjc/ s10052-009-0881-x. [353] B. Aubert, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], Measurement of semileptonic B decays into orbitally- excited charmed mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103 (2009) 051803. arXiv:0808.0333, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.051803.

[354] H. Abramowicz, et al., [ZEUS Collaboration], Production of the excited charm mesons D1 and D2∗ at HERA, Nucl. Phys. B866 (2013) 229–254. arXiv:1208.4468, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb. 2012.09.007. 0 + [355] B. Aubert, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], Study of the decay B¯ D∗ ωπ−, Phys. Rev. D74 → (2006) 012001. arXiv:hep-ex/0604009, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.012001. + [356] B. Aubert, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], Dalitz plot analysis of B− D π−π−, Phys. Rev. D79 → (2009) 112004. arXiv:0901.1291, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.112004. [357] D. Matvienko, et al., [Belle Collaboration], Study of D∗∗ production and light hadronic states 0 + in the B¯ D∗ ωπ− decay, Phys. Rev. D92 (1) (2015) 012013. arXiv:1505.03362, → doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.012013. + [358] A. E. Asratian, et al., [Big Bubble Chamber Neutrino Collaboration], Study of D∗ and search for 0 D∗∗ production by neutrinos in BEBC, Z. Phys. C68 (1995) 43–46. doi:10.1007/BF01579803. 0 [359] H. Albrecht, et al., [ARGUS Collaboration], Resonance decomposition of the D∗ (2420) through a decay angular analysis, Phys. Lett. B232 (1989) 398–404. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(89) 90764-8. [360] R. Brandelik, et al., [DASP Collaboration], Evidence for the F meson, Phys. Lett. B70 (1977) 132. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(77)90361-6. [361] A. E. Asratian, et al., Studying (¯cs) spectroscopy inνN ¯ collisions, Z. Phys. C40 (1988) 483. doi:10.1007/BF01560218. [362] Y. Kubota, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], Observation of a new charmed strange meson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72 (1994) 1972–1976. arXiv:hep-ph/9403325, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.72. 1972. CONTENTS 136

[363] A. V. Evdokimov, et al., [SELEX Collaboration], First observation of a narrow charm-strange meson D+ (2632) D+η and D0K+, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 242001. arXiv:hep-ex/ sJ → s 0406045, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.242001. [364] B. Aubert, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], Observation of a new Ds meson decaying to DK at a mass of 2.86 GeV/c2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 222001. arXiv:hep-ex/0607082, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.222001. [365] J. Brodzicka, et al., [Belle Collaboration], Observation of a new D meson in B+ D¯ 0D0K+ sJ → decays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 (2008) 092001. arXiv:0707.3491, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett. 100.092001. + [366] B. Aubert, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], Study of DsJ decays to D∗K in inclusive e e− interactions, Phys. Rev. D80 (2009) 092003. arXiv:0908.0806, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.80. 092003. + 0 0 + [367] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], Study of DsJ decays to D KS and D K final states in pp collisions, JHEP 10 (2012) 151. arXiv:1207.6016, doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2012)151. 0 0 + [368] J. P. Lees, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], Dalitz plot analyses of B D−D K and 0 → B+ D D0K+ decays, Phys. Rev. D91 (5) (2015) 052002. arXiv:1412.6751, doi: → 10.1103/PhysRevD.91.052002. 0 [369] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], Observation of overlapping spin-1 and spin-3 D¯ K− resonances at mass 2.86 GeV/c2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 162001. arXiv:1407.7574, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.162001. 0 0 + [370] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], Dalitz plot analysis of B D¯ K−π decays, Phys. Rev. s → D90 (7) (2014) 072003. arXiv:1407.7712, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.072003. [371] H. Albrecht, et al., [ARGUS Collaboration], Observation of a new charmed-strange meson, Phys. Lett. B230 (1989) 162. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(89)91672-9. + [372] J. P. Alexander, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], Production and decay of the Ds1(2536), Phys. Lett. B303 (1993) 377–384. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(93)91448-V.

[373] A. E. Asratian, et al., [Big Bubble Chamber Neutrino Collaboration], Observation of Ds∗∗(2536) meson production by neutrinos in BEBC, Z. Phys. C61 (1994) 563–566. doi:10.1007/ BF01552622.

[374] A. Heister, et al., [ALEPH Collaboration], Production of Ds∗∗ mesons in hadronic Z decays, Phys. Lett. B526 (2002) 34–49. arXiv:hep-ex/0112010, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(01)01465-4. ( ) ( ) [375] B. Aubert, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], Study of resonances in exclusive B decays to D¯ ∗ D ∗ K, Phys. Rev. D77 (2008) 011102. arXiv:0708.1565, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.011102. 0 [376] V. M. Abazov, et al., [D0 Collaboration], Measurement of the Bs semileptonic branching ratio to 0 + an orbitally excited D state, Br(B D− (2536)µ νX), Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 (2009) 051801. s s → s1 arXiv:0712.3789, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.051801. + [377] J. P. Lees, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], Measurement of the mass and width of the Ds1(2536) meson, Phys. Rev. D83 (2011) 072003. arXiv:1103.2675, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83. 072003. + ( ) [378] T. Aushev, et al., [Belle Collaboration], Study of the decays B D (2536) D¯ ∗ , Phys. Rev. D83 → s1 (2011) 051102. arXiv:1102.0935, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.059902,10.1103/PhysRevD. 83.051102. ¯0 + + [379] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], First observation of the decays B(s) Ds K−π π− 0 + → and B¯ D (2536) π−, Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 112005. arXiv:1211.1541, doi:10.1103/ s → s1 PhysRevD.86.112005. ( )+ + 0 0 + [380] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], Study of DsJ∗ mesons decaying to D∗ KS and D∗ K final states, JHEP 02 (2016) 133. arXiv:1601.01495, doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2016)133. 0 + [381] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], First observation of B¯ D∗ Xµ−ν¯ decays, Phys. Lett. s → s2 B698 (2011) 14–20. arXiv:1102.0348, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2011.02.039. + 0 + [382] H. Albrecht, et al., [ARGUS Collaboration], Measurement of the decay D∗ D K , Z. Phys. s2 → C69 (1996) 405–408. doi:10.1007/s002880050040. CONTENTS 137

+ [383] B. Aubert, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], Search for the DsJ∗ (2632) at BABARarXiv: hep-ex/0408087. URL https://oraweb.slac.stanford.edu/pls/slacquery/BABAR_DOCUMENTS.Search?P_ SLAC_PUB=SLAC-PUB-10633 [384] S. Behrends, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], Observation of exclusive decay modes of B flavored mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50 (1983) 881–884. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.50.881. + [385] K. Han, et al., Observation of B∗ production in e e− interactions above the b flavor threshold, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55 (1985) 36. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.55.36. [386] R. Akers, et al., [OPAL Collaboration], Observations of π-B charge-flavor correlations and resonant Bπ and BK production, Z. Phys. C66 (1995) 19–30. doi:10.1007/BF01496577. [387] P. Abreu, et al., [DELPHI Collaboration], Observation of orbitally excited B mesons, Phys. Lett. B345 (1995) 598–608. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(94)01696-A. [388] R. Barate, et al., [ALEPH Collaboration], Resonant structure and flavor tagging in the Bπ± system using fully reconstructed B decays, Phys. Lett. B425 (1998) 215–226. doi:10.1016/ S0370-2693(98)00180-4. [389] M. Acciarri, et al., [L3 Collaboration], Measurement of the spectroscopy of orbitally excited B mesons at LEP, Phys. Lett. B465 (1999) 323–334. arXiv:hep-ex/9909018, doi:10.1016/ S0370-2693(99)01067-9. [390] T. Affolder, et al., [CDF Collaboration], Observation of orbitally excited B mesons in pp¯ collisions at √s = 1.8 TeV, Phys. Rev. D64 (2001) 072002. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.64.072002. [391] G. Abbiendi, et al., [OPAL Collaboration], Investigation of the decay of orbitally excited B mesons and first measurement of the branching ratio BR(B∗ B∗π(X)), Eur. Phys. J. C23 (2002) J → 437–454. arXiv:hep-ex/0010031, doi:10.1007/s100520200892.

[392] V. M. Abazov, et al., [D0 Collaboration], Observation and properties of L = 1 B1 and B2∗ mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (2007) 172001. arXiv:0705.3229, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett. 99.172001. [393] T. Aaltonen, et al., [CDF Collaboration], Measurement of resonance parameters of orbitally excited narrow B0 mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 (2009) 102003. arXiv:0809.5007, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.102003. [394] T. A. Aaltonen, et al., [CDF Collaboration], Study of orbitally excited B mesons and evidence for a new Bπ resonance, Phys. Rev. D90 (1) (2014) 012013. arXiv:1309.5961, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.90.012013. 0,+ [395] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], Precise measurements of the properties of the B1(5721) 0,+ +,0 ,+ and B2∗(5747) states and observation of B π− mass structures, JHEP 04 (2015) 024. arXiv:1502.02638, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2015)024. 0 + [396] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], First observation of the decay Bs∗2(5840) B∗ K− and 0 → studies of excited Bs mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (15) (2013) 151803. arXiv:1211.5994, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.151803. [397] D. Buskulic, et al., [ALEPH Collaboration], Production of excited beauty states in Z decays, Z. Phys. C69 (1996) 393–404. doi:10.1007/BF02907419. [398] P. Colangelo, F. De Fazio, F. Giannuzzi, S. Nicotri, New meson spectroscopy with open charm and beauty, Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 054024. arXiv:1207.6940, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86. 054024. [399] W. M. Yao, et al., [Particle Data Group Collaboration], Review of Particle Physics, J. Phys. G33 (2006) 1–1232. doi:10.1088/0954-3899/33/1/001. [400] J. Lee-Franzini, U. Heintz, D. M. J. Lovelock, M. Narain, R. D. Schamberger, J. Willins, C. Yanagisawa, P. Franzini, P. M. Tuts, Hyperfine splitting of B mesons and Bs production at the Υ(5S), Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 (1990) 2947–2950. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.65.2947. [401] T. Aaltonen, et al., [CDF Collaboration], Observation of orbitally excited Bs mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 (2008) 082001. arXiv:0710.4199, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.082001.

[402] V. M. Abazov, et al., [D0 Collaboration], Observation and properties of the orbitally excited Bs∗2 CONTENTS 138

meson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 (2008) 082002. arXiv:0711.0319, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett. 100.082002. [403] D. M. Asner, et al., Physics at BES-III, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A24 (2009) S1–794. arXiv:0809.1869. [404] B. Knapp, et al., Observation of a narrow anti-baryon state at 2.26 GeV/c2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 37 (1976) 882. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.37.882. [405] K. W. Edwards, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], Observation of excited baryon states decaying to + + Λc π π−, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 3331–3335. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.3331. [406] H. Albrecht, et al., [ARGUS Collaboration], Observation of a new charmed baryon, Phys. Lett. B317 (1993) 227–232. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(93)91598-H. + + [407] M. Artuso, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], Observation of new states decaying into Λc π−π , Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 4479–4482. arXiv:hep-ex/0010080, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett. 86.4479. [408] B. Aubert, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], Observation of a charmed baryon decaying to D0p at a mass near 2.94 GeV/c2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 (2007) 012001. arXiv:hep-ex/0603052, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.012001. [409] E. G. Cazzoli, A. M. Cnops, P. L. Connolly, R. I. Louttit, M. J. Murtagh, R. B. Palmer, N. P. Samios, T. T. Tso, H. H. Williams, Evidence for ∆S = ∆Q currents or charmed baryon − production by neutrinos, Phys. Rev. Lett. 34 (1975) 1125–1128. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett. 34.1125. [410] M. Calicchio, et al., [BEBC TST Neutrino Collaboration], First observation of the production + and decay of the Σc , Phys. Lett. B93 (1980) 521–524. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(80)90379-2. ++ [411] V. V. Ammosov, et al., Observation of the production of charmed Σc∗ baryons in neutrino interactions at the SKAT bubble chamber, JETP Lett. 58 (1993) 247–251, [Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 58, 241 (1993)]. + [412] R. Ammar, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], First observation of the Σc∗ baryon and a new + measurement of the Σc mass, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 1167–1170. arXiv:hep-ex/0007041, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.1167. [413] G. Brandenburg, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], Observation of two excited charmed baryons + decaying into Λc π±, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 2304–2308. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.78. 2304. [414] R. Mizuk, et al., [Belle Collaboration], Observation of an isotriplet of excited charmed baryons + decaying to Λc π, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 (2005) 122002. arXiv:hep-ex/0412069, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.94.122002. [415] S. F. Biagi, et al., Observation of a narrow state at 2.46 GeV/c2: A candidate for the charmed strange baryon A+, Phys. Lett. B122 (1983) 455. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)91601-5. 0 [416] P. Avery, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], Observation of the charmed strange baryon Ξc , Phys. Rev. Lett. 62 (1989) 863. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.62.863. [417] C. P. Jessop, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], Observation of two narrow states decaying into + 0 Ξc γ and Ξc γ, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 492–496. arXiv:hep-ex/9810036, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.82.492. [418] L. Gibbons, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], Observation of an excited charmed baryon decaying 0 + into Ξc π , Phys. Rev. Lett. 77 (1996) 810–813. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.810. + [419] P. Avery, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], Observation of a narrow state decaying into Ξc π−, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75 (1995) 4364–4368. arXiv:hep-ex/9508010, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.75. 4364.

[420] S. E. Csorna, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], Evidence of new states decaying into Ξc0 π, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 4243–4246. arXiv:hep-ex/0012020, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.4243.

[421] J. P. Alexander, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], Evidence of new states decaying into Ξc∗π, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 3390–3393. arXiv:hep-ex/9906013, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.83. 3390. + [422] B. Aubert, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], A study of B¯ Ξ Λ¯ − and B¯ Λ Λ¯ −K¯ decays → c c → c c CONTENTS 139

at BABAR, Phys. Rev. D77 (2008) 031101. arXiv:0710.5775, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77. 031101. + + [423] R. Chistov, et al., [Belle Collaboration], Observation of new states decaying into Λc K−π + 0 and Λc KSπ−, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 162001. arXiv:hep-ex/0606051, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.97.162001. [424] B. Aubert, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], A study of excited charm-strange baryons with evidence + + for new baryons Ξc(3055) and Ξc(3123) , Phys. Rev. D77 (2008) 012002. arXiv:0710.5763, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.012002. [425] S. F. Biagi, et al., Properties of the charmed strange baryon A+ and evidence for the charmed doubly strange baryon T0 at 2.74 GeV/c2, Z. Phys. C28 (1985) 175. doi:10.1007/BF01575721. 0 0 [426] E. Solovieva, et al., Study of Ωc and Ωc∗ baryons at Belle, Phys. Lett. B672 (2009) 1–5. arXiv:0808.3677, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2008.12.062. [427] M. Ablikim, et al., [BESIII Collaboration], Measurement of singly cabibbo suppressed decays + + + + Λ pπ π− and Λ pK K−, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (23) (2016) 232002. arXiv: c → c → 1608.00407, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.232002. + [428] P. L. Frabetti, et al., [E687 Collaboration], An observation of an excited state of the Λc baryon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72 (1994) 961–964. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.72.961. + [429] P. L. Frabetti, et al., [E687 Collaboration], Study of higher mass charm baryons decaying to Λc , Phys. Lett. B365 (1996) 461–469. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(95)01458-6. + [430] H. Albrecht, et al., [ARGUS Collaboration], Evidence for Λc (2593) production, Phys. Lett. B402 (1997) 207–212. doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(97)00503-0. [431] K. Abe, et al., [Belle Collaboration], Experimental constraints on the possible J P quantum + numbers of the Λc(2880) , Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 (2007) 262001. arXiv:hep-ex/0608043, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.262001. [432] N. Isgur, M. B. Wise, Spectroscopy with heavy quark symmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66 (1991) 1130–1133. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.66.1130. [433] A. Valcarce, H. Garcilazo, J. Vijande, Towards an understanding of heavy baryon spectroscopy, Eur. Phys. J. A37 (2008) 217–225. arXiv:0807.2973, doi:10.1140/epja/i2008-10616-4. + [434] G. D. Crawford, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], Observation of the charmed Baryon Σc and measurement of the isospin mass splittings of the Σc, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 (1993) 3259–3262. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.71.3259. [435] S. B. Athar, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], A New measurement of the masses and widths of ++ 0 the Σc∗ and Σc∗ charmed baryons, Phys. Rev. D71 (2005) 051101. arXiv:hep-ex/0410088, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.71.051101. [436] T. Aaltonen, et al., [CDF Collaboration], Measurements of the properties of Λc(2595), Λc(2625), Σc(2455), and Σc(2520) baryons, Phys. Rev. D84 (2011) 012003. arXiv:1105.5995, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.84.012003. ¯0 + + [437] B. Aubert, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], Measurements of (B Λc p¯) and (B− Λc pπ¯ −) + B → B → and studies of Λc π− resonances, Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 112003. arXiv:0807.4974, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.78.112003. [438] T. Lesiak, et al., [Belle Collaboration], Measurement of masses of the Ξc(2645) and Ξc(2815) baryons and observation of Ξ (2980) Ξ (2645)π, Phys. Lett. B665 (2008) 9–15. arXiv: c → c 0802.3968, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2008.05.055. [439] Y. Kato, et al., [Belle Collaboration], Studies of charmed strange baryons in the ΛD final state at Belle, Phys. Rev. D94 (3) (2016) 032002. arXiv:1605.09103, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94. 032002. 0 + [440] J. Yelton, et al., [Belle Collaboration], Study of Excited Ξc States Decaying into Ξc and Ξc Baryons, Phys. Rev. D94 (5) (2016) 052011. arXiv:1607.07123, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 94.052011. 0 [441] P. L. Frabetti, et al., [E687 Collaboration], Observation and mass measurement of Ωc + + → Σ K−K−π , Phys. Lett. B338 (1994) 106–110. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(94)91351-X. CONTENTS 140

0 [442] M. I. Adamovich, et al., [WA89 Collaboration], Measurement of the Ωc lifetime, Phys. Lett. B358 (1995) 151–161. arXiv:hep-ex/9507004, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(95)00979-U. 0 [443] D. Cronin-Hennessy, et al., [CLEO Collaboration], Observation of the Ωc charmed baryon at CLEO, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 3730–3734. arXiv:hep-ex/0010035, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.86.3730.

[444] B. Aubert, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], Observation of an excited charm baryon Ωc∗ decaying to 0 Ωc γ, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 232001. arXiv:hep-ex/0608055, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett. 97.232001. [445] M. Basile, et al., Evidence for a new particle with naked ’beauty’ and for its associated production in high-energy (pp) interactions, Lett. Nuovo Cim. 31 (1981) 97. doi:10.1007/BF02822406. 0 [446] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], Observation of excited Λb baryons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (2012) 172003. arXiv:1205.3452, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.172003. 0 [447] T. A. Aaltonen, et al., [CDF Collaboration], Evidence for a bottom baryon resonance Λb∗ in CDF data, Phys. Rev. D88 (7) (2013) 071101. arXiv:1308.1760, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 88.071101.

[448] T. Aaltonen, et al., [CDF Collaboration], First observation of heavy baryons Σb and Σb∗, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (2007) 202001. arXiv:0706.3868, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.202001. [449] P. Abreu, et al., [DELPHI Collaboration], Production of strange B baryons decaying into Ξ∓-l∓ pairs at LEP, Z. Phys. C68 (1995) 541–554.

[450] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], Observation of two new Ξb− baryon resonances, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 062004. arXiv:1411.4849, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.062004. [451] S. Chatrchyan, et al., [CMS Collaboration], Observation of a new Ξb baryon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 252002. arXiv:1204.5955, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.252002.

[452] V. M. Abazov, et al., [D0 Collaboration], Observation of the doubly strange b baryon Ωb−, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 (2008) 232002. arXiv:0808.4142, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.232002. + [453] M. Mattson, et al., [SELEX Collaboration], First observation of the doubly charmed baryon Ξcc, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 112001. arXiv:hep-ex/0208014, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.89. 112001. [454] A. Ocherashvili, et al., [SELEX Collaboration], Confirmation of the double charm baryon + + Ξcc(3520) via its decay to pD K−, Phys. Lett. B628 (2005) 18–24. arXiv:hep-ex/0406033, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2005.09.043. [455] K.-W. Wei, B. Chen, X.-H. Guo, Masses of doubly and triply charmed baryons, Phys. Rev. D92 (7) (2015) 076008. arXiv:1503.05184, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.076008. [456] J. Vijande, A. Valcarce, H. Garcilazo, Constituent-quark model description of triply heavy baryon nonperturbative lattice QCD data, Phys. Rev. D91 (5) (2015) 054011. arXiv:1507.03735, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.054011. [457] H. Garcilazo, A. Valcarce, J. Vijande, Doubly heavy baryon spectra guided by lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D94 (7) (2016) 074003. arXiv:1609.06886, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.074003. + ++ [458] B. Aubert, et al., [BaBar Collaboration], Search for doubly charmed baryons Ξcc and Ξcc in BABAR, Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 011103. arXiv:hep-ex/0605075, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 74.011103. [459] S. P. Ratti, New results on c-baryons and a search for cc-baryons in FOCUS, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 115 (2003) 33–36. doi:10.1016/S0920-5632(02)01948-5. [460] The D0 Collaboration, Exotic states at D0, http://indico.cern.ch/event/432527/ contributions/1072024/. [461] J. Vijande, F. Fernandez, A. Valcarce, B. Silvestre-Brac, Tetraquarks in a chiral constituent quark model, Eur. Phys. J. A19 (2004) 383. arXiv:hep-ph/0310007, doi:10.1140/epja/ i2003-10128-9. [462] J. Vijande, F. Fernandez, A. Valcarce, Open-charm meson spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. D73 (2006) 034002, [Erratum: Phys. Rev. D74, 059903 (2006)]. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.034002. [463] A. Ali Khan, C. T. H. Davies, S. Collins, J. H. Sloan, J. Shigemitsu, The heavy-light spectrum CONTENTS 141

from lattice NRQCD, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 6433–6442. arXiv:hep-lat/9512025, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.53.6433. [464] D. Mohler, R. M. Woloshyn, D and Ds meson spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. D84 (2011) 054505. arXiv:1103.5506, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84.054505. [465] M. Atoui, B. Blossier, V. Mornas, O. Pne, K. Petrov, Semileptonic B D∗∗ decays in Lattice → QCD : A feasibility study and first results, Eur. Phys. J. C75 (8) (2015) 376. arXiv:1312.2914, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3585-4. [466] G. K. C. Cheung, C. O’Hara, G. Moir, M. Peardon, S. M. Ryan, C. E. Thomas, D. Tims, Excited and exotic charmonium, Ds and D meson spectra for two light quark masses from lattice QCD, JHEP 12 (2016) 089. arXiv:1610.01073, doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2016)089. [467] K. Azizi, H. Sundu, S. Sahin, Investigation of the semileptonic transition of the B into the orbitally excited charmed tensor meson, Phys. Rev. D88 (3) (2013) 036004. arXiv:1306.4098, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.036004. [468] A. Martinez Torres, K. P. Khemchandani, M. Nielsen, F. S. Navarra, E. Oset, Exploring the D∗ρ system within QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D88 (7) (2013) 074033. arXiv:1307.1724, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.074033. [469] P. Gelhausen, A. Khodjamirian, A. A. Pivovarov, D. Rosenthal, Radial excitations of heavy- light mesons from QCD sum rules, Eur. Phys. J. C74 (8) (2014) 2979. arXiv:1404.5891, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-2979-z. [470] H. A. Alhendi, T. M. Aliev, M. Savci, Strong decay constants of heavy tensor mesons in light cone QCD sum rules, JHEP 04 (2016) 050. arXiv:1509.06044, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2016)050. [471] A. F. Falk, T. Mehen, Excited heavy mesons beyond leading order in the heavy quark expansion, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 231–240. arXiv:hep-ph/9507311, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.53.231. [472] P. V. Chliapnikov, Relating production and masses of the vector and P wave mesons for light and heavy flavors at LEP, Phys. Lett. B525 (2002) 1–8. arXiv:hep-ph/0112087, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(01)01442-3. [473] T. Matsuki, T. Morii, K. Sudoh, New heavy-light mesons Qq¯, Prog. Theor. Phys. 117 (2007) 1077–1098. arXiv:hep-ph/0605019, doi:10.1143/PTP.117.1077. [474] F. Becattini, P. Castorina, J. Manninen, H. Satz, The thermal production of strange and non- + strange hadrons in e e− collisions, Eur. Phys. J. C56 (2008) 493–510. arXiv:0805.0964, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-008-0671-x. [475] E. van Beveren, G. Rupp, Evidence for further charmonium vector resonances, Chin. Phys. C35 (2011) 319–324. arXiv:1004.4368, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/35/4/001. [476] D.-X. Wang, B. Chen, A.-L. Zhang, Study of heavy-light hadrons within a flux tube model, Chin. Phys. C35 (2011) 525–529. doi:10.1088/1674-1137/35/6/002. [477] A. M. Badalian, B. L. G. Bakker, Higher excitations of the D and Ds mesons, Phys. Rev. D84 (2011) 034006. arXiv:1104.1918, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84.034006. [478] J. Segovia, E. Hernndez, F. Fernandez, D. R. Entem, B decays into radially excited charmed mesons, Phys. Rev. D87 (11) (2013) 114009. arXiv:1304.4970, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87. 114009. [479] J.-B. Liu, M.-Z. Yang, Spectrum of the charmed and b-flavored mesons in the relativistic potential model, JHEP 07 (2014) 106. arXiv:1307.4636, doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2014)106. [480] J.-B. Liu, M.-Z. Yang, Spectrum of Higher excitations of B and D mesons in the relativistic potential model, Phys. Rev. D91 (9) (2015) 094004. arXiv:1501.04266, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.91.094004. [481] R. Klein, T. Mannel, F. Shahriaran, D. van Dyk, 1/m corrections for orbitally excited heavy mesons and the 1/2 - 3/2 puzzle, Phys. Rev. D91 (9) (2015) 094034. arXiv:1503.00569, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.094034. [482] M. Batra, A. Upadhayay, Strong decay widths and coupling constants of recent charm meson states, Eur. Phys. J. C75 (7) (2015) 319. arXiv:1505.00549, doi:10.1140/epjc/ s10052-015-3516-4. CONTENTS 142

[483] C.-Q. Geng, C.-C. Lih, C. Xia, Some heavy vector and tensor meson decay constants in light- front quark model, Eur. Phys. J. C76 (6) (2016) 313. arXiv:1604.07601, doi:10.1140/epjc/ s10052-016-4172-z.

[484] Z. Zhao, Y. Tian, A. Zhang, Hadronic production of D(2550), D∗(2600), D(2750), D1∗(2760) and D3∗(2760), Phys. Rev. D94 (11) (2016) 114035. arXiv:1610.08202, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 94.114035. [485] J.-B. Liu, C.-D. Lu, Spectra of heavy-light mesons in a relativistic model. arXiv:1605.05550. [486] C. W. Xiao, Investigations of the D-multi-ρ interactions. arXiv:1611.00543. [487] S.-C. Zhang, T. Wang, Y. Jiang, Q. Li, G.-L. Wang, Strong decays of 2+ charm and charm-strange mesons. arXiv:1611.03610. [488] T. Matsuki, Q.-F. Lu, Y. Dong, T. Morii, Approximate degeneracy of heavy-light mesons with the same L, Phys. Lett. B758 (2016) 274–277. arXiv:1602.06545, doi:10.1016/j.physletb. 2016.05.016. [489] M. Albaladejo, P. Fernandez-Soler, F.-K. Guo, J. Nieves, Two-pole structure of the

D0∗(2400). arXiv:1610.06727. [490] Yu. S. Kalashnikova, A. V. Nefediev, QCD string in excited heavy-light mesons and heavy-quark hybrids, Phys. Rev. D94 (11) (2016) 114007. arXiv:1611.10066, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 94.114007. [491] J. Beringer, et al., [Particle Data Group Collaboration], Review of Particle Physics, Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 010001. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.010001. [492] B. Chen, L. Yuan, A. Zhang, Possible 2S and 1D charmed and charmed-strange mesons, Phys. Rev. D83 (2011) 114025. arXiv:1102.4142, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.114025. [493] Q.-F. Lu, D.-M. Li, Understanding the charmed states recently observed by the LHCb and BaBar Collaborations in the quark model, Phys. Rev. D90 (5) (2014) 054024. arXiv:1407.3092, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.054024. [494] X.-H. Zhong, Strong decays of the newly observed D(2550), D(2600), D(2750), and D(2760), Phys. Rev. D82 (2010) 114014. arXiv:1009.0359, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82.114014. [495] D.-M. Li, P.-F. Ji, B. Ma, The newly observed open-charm states in quark model, Eur. Phys. J. C71 (2011) 1582. arXiv:1011.1548, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1582-9. [496] Z.-F. Sun, J.-S. Yu, X. Liu, T. Matsuki, Newly observed D(2550), D(2610), and D(2760) as 2S and 1D charmed mesons, Phys. Rev. D82 (2010) 111501. arXiv:1008.3120, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.82.111501. [497] J. L. Goity, W. Roberts, A relativistic chiral quark model for pseudoscalar emission from heavy mesons, Phys. Rev. D60 (1999) 034001. arXiv:hep-ph/9809312, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 60.034001. [498] Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of strong decays of the charmed mesons D(2550), D(2600), D(2750) and D(2760), Phys. Rev. D83 (2011) 014009. arXiv:1009.3605, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83. 014009. P [499] W. Chen, Z.-X. Cai, S.-L. Zhu, Masses of the tensor mesons with J = 2−, Nucl. Phys. B887 (2014) 201–215. arXiv:1107.4949, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2014.08.006. [500] B. Chen, X. Liu, A. Zhang, Combined study of 2S and 1D open-charm mesons with natural spin-parity, Phys. Rev. D92 (3) (2015) 034005. arXiv:1507.02339, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 92.034005. +,0 0 [501] Y. Sun, X. Liu, T. Matsuki, Newly observed DJ (3000) and DJ∗ (3000) as 2P states in D meson family, Phys. Rev. D88 (9) (2013) 094020. arXiv:1309.2203, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88. 094020. [502] L.-Y. Xiao, X.-H. Zhong, Strong decays of higher excited heavy-light mesons in a chiral quark model, Phys. Rev. D90 (7) (2014) 074029. arXiv:1407.7408, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90. 074029.

[503] G.-L. Yu, Z.-G. Wang, Z.-Y. Li, G.-Q. Meng, Systematic analysis of the DJ (2580), DJ∗ (2650), DJ (2740), DJ∗ (2760), DJ (3000) and DJ∗ (3000) in D meson family, Chin. Phys. C39 (6) (2015) CONTENTS 143

063101. arXiv:1402.5955, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/39/6/063101.

[504] Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of strong decays of the charmed mesons DJ (2580), DJ∗ (2650), DJ (2740), DJ∗ (2760), DJ (3000), DJ∗ (3000), Phys. Rev. D88 (11) (2013) 114003. arXiv:1308.0533, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.114003. [505] S.-C. Li, Y. Jiang, T.-H. Wang, Q. Li, G.-L. Wang, Semi-leptonic production of DsJ (3040) and DJ (3000) in Bs and B decays. arXiv:1608.07145. [506] J.-Z. Wang, D.-Y. Chen, Q.-T. Song, X. Liu, T. Matsuki, Revealing the inner structure

of the newly observed D2∗(3000), Phys. Rev. D94 (9) (2016) 094044. arXiv:1608.04186, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.094044.

[507] Z.-G. Wang, Strong decays of the charmed mesons D1∗(2680), D3∗(2760), D2∗(3000), Commun. Theor. Phys. 66 (2016) 671. arXiv:1608.02176.

[508] G. L. Yu, Z. G. Wang, Z. Y. Li, Analysis of the charmed mesons D1∗(2680), D3∗(2760) and D2∗(3000), Phys. Rev. D94 (7) (2016) 074024. arXiv:1609.00613, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 94.074024. [509] E. van Beveren, G. Rupp, New BABAR state DsJ (2860) as the first radial excitation of the Ds∗0(2317), Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 202001. arXiv:hep-ph/0606110, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.97.202001. [510] D.-M. Li, B. Ma, Y.-H. Liu, Understanding masses of cs¯ states in Regge phenomenol- ogy, Eur. Phys. J. C51 (2007) 359–365. arXiv:hep-ph/0703278, doi:10.1140/epjc/ s10052-007-0286-7. [511] J. Vijande, A. Valcarce, F. Fernandez, A multiquark description of the DsJ (2860) and DsJ (2700), Phys. Rev. D79 (2009) 037501. arXiv:0810.4988, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.037501. [512] G. Li, F.-l. Shao, W. Wang, B D (3040) form factors and B decays into D (3040), Phys. s → s s s Rev. D82 (2010) 094031. arXiv:1008.3696, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82.094031. [513] F.-K. Guo, U.-G. Meissner, More kaonic bound states and a comprehensive interpretation of the DsJ states, Phys. Rev. D84 (2011) 014013. arXiv:1102.3536, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84. 014013. [514] L.-F. Gan, J.-R. Zhang, M.-Q. Huang, H.-B. Zhuo, Y.-Y. Ma, Q.-J. Zhu, J.-X. Liu, G.-B. Zhang, DsJ (2860) From The Semileptonic Decays Of Bs Mesons, Eur. Phys. J. C75 (5) (2015) 232. arXiv:1412.7969, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3449-y.

[515] H.-W. Ke, J.-H. Zhou, X.-Q. Li, Study on radiative decays of DsJ∗ (2860) and Ds∗1(2710) into Ds by means of LFQM, Eur. Phys. J. C75 (1) (2015) 28. arXiv:1411.0376, doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3264-5. [516] J. Ge, D.-D. Ye, A. Zhang, Hadronic decays of the highly excited 2DDs resonances, Eur. Phys. J. C75 (5) (2015) 178. arXiv:1503.01845, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3400-2. [517] Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of the strong decays D∗ (2860) DK, D∗K with QCD sum rules, Eur. s3 → Phys. J. A52 (10) (2016) 303. arXiv:1606.02855, doi:10.1140/epja/i2016-16303-y. [518] B. Zhang, X. Liu, W.-Z. Deng, S.-L. Zhu, DsJ (2860) and DsJ (2715), Eur. Phys. J. C50 (2007) 617–628. arXiv:hep-ph/0609013, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-007-0221-y. [519] J. Segovia, D. R. Entem, F. Fernandez, Charmed-strange meson spectrum: Old and new problems, Phys. Rev. D91 (9) (2015) 094020. arXiv:1502.03827, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.094020. + ¯ 0 + + ¯ 0 [520] G.-L. Wang, J.-M. Zhang, Z.-H. Wang, The decays of B D + DsJ (2S) and B D + + → → DsJ (1D), Phys. Lett. B681 (2009) 326–329. arXiv:1001.2035, doi:10.1016/j.physletb. 2009.10.045. [521] P. Colangelo, F. De Fazio, S. Nicotri, M. Rizzi, Identifying DsJ (2700) through its decay modes, Phys. Rev. D77 (2008) 014012. arXiv:0710.3068, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.014012. [522] F. E. Close, C. E. Thomas, O. Lakhina, E. S. Swanson, Canonical interpretation of the DsJ (2860) and DsJ (2690), Phys. Lett. B647 (2007) 159–163. arXiv:hep-ph/0608139, doi: 10.1016/j.physletb.2007.01.052. [523] D.-M. Li, B. Ma, Implication of BaBar’s new data on the Ds1(2710) and DsJ (2860), Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 014021. arXiv:0911.2906, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.014021. CONTENTS 144

[524] X.-H. Zhong, Q. Zhao, Strong decays of newly observed DsJ states in a constituent quark model with effective Lagrangians, Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 014031. arXiv:0911.1856, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.81.014031. [525] P. C. Vinodkumar, A. K. Rai, B. Patel, J. Pandya, Open flavour charmed mesons, Frascati Phys. Ser. 46 (2007) 929–936. arXiv:0808.1776. [526] X.-H. Zhong, Q. Zhao, Strong decays of heavy-light mesons in a chiral quark model, Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 014029. arXiv:0803.2102, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.014029. + + [527] B. Chen, D.-X. Wang, A. Zhang, Interpretation of DsJ (2632) , Ds1(2700)±, DsJ∗ (2860) and + DsJ (3040) , Phys. Rev. D80 (2009) 071502. arXiv:0908.3261, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.80. 071502. + [528] E. van Beveren, G. Rupp, Comment on “Study of DsJ decays to D∗K in inclusive e e− interactions”, Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 118101. arXiv:0908.1142, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 81.118101.

[529] Q.-T. Song, D.-Y. Chen, X. Liu, T. Matsuki, Ds∗1(2860) and Ds∗3(2860): candidates for 1D charmed-strange mesons, Eur. Phys. J. C75 (1) (2015) 30. arXiv:1408.0471, doi:10.1140/ epjc/s10052-015-3265-4.

[530] S. Godfrey, K. Moats, The DsJ∗ (2860) mesons as excited D-wave cs¯ states, Phys. Rev. D90 (11) (2014) 117501. arXiv:1409.0874, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.117501.

[531] Z.-G. Wang, Ds∗3(2860) and Ds∗1(2860) as the 1D cs¯ states, Eur. Phys. J. C75 (1) (2015) 25. arXiv:1408.6465, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3246-z.

[532] T. Wang, Z.-H. Wang, Y. Jiang, L. Jiang, G.-L. Wang, Strong decays of D3∗(2760), Ds∗3(2860), B3∗, and Bs∗3. arXiv:1610.04991. [533] Z.-F. Sun, X. Liu, Newly observed DsJ (3040) and the radial excitations of P-wave charmed- strange mesons, Phys. Rev. D80 (2009) 074037. arXiv:0909.1658, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 80.074037. 3 [534] J. Segovia, D. R. Entem, F. Fernandez, Scaling of the P0 strength in heavy meson strong decays, Phys. Lett. B715 (2012) 322–327. arXiv:1205.2215, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08. 005. [535] J. Vijande, A. Valcarce, F. Fernandez, B meson spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. D77 (2008) 017501. arXiv:0711.2359, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.017501. [536] S. Collins, U. M. Heller, J. H. Sloan, J. Shigemitsu, A. Ali Khan, C. T. H. Davies, B spectroscopy from NRQCD with dynamical fermions, Phys. Rev. D54 (1996) 5777–5794. arXiv:hep-lat/9602028, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.54.5777. [537] M. Wurtz, R. Lewis, R. M. Woloshyn, Free-form smearing for bottomonium and B meson spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. D92 (5) (2015) 054504. arXiv:1505.04410, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 92.054504. [538] P. Fernandez-Soler, Z.-F. Sun, J. Nieves, E. Oset, The ρ(ω)B∗(B) interaction and states of J = 0, 1, 2, Eur. Phys. J. C76 (2) (2016) 82. arXiv:1507.06787, doi:10.1140/epjc/ s10052-016-3918-y. [539] B. Grinstein, J. Martin Camalich, Weak Decays of Excited B Mesons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (14) (2016) 141801. arXiv:1509.05049, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.141801. + [540] A. E. Bondar, M. B. Voloshin, Υ(6S) and triangle singularity in e e− B (5721)B¯ → 1 → Zb(10610) π, Phys. Rev. D93 (9) (2016) 094008. arXiv:1603.08436, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 93.094008. [541] Q.-F. Lu, T.-T. Pan, Y.-Y. Wang, E. Wang, D.-M. Li, Excited bottom and bottom-strange mesons in the quark model, Phys. Rev. D94 (7) (2016) 074012. arXiv:1607.02812, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.94.074012. [542] Z.-G. Wang, Strong decays of the bottom mesons B1(5721), B2(5747), Bs1(5830), Bs2(5840) and B(5970), Eur. Phys. J. Plus 129 (2014) 186. arXiv:1401.7580, doi:10.1140/epjp/ i2014-14186-y. [543] Y. Sun, Q.-T. Song, D.-Y. Chen, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, Higher bottom and bottom-strange mesons, CONTENTS 145

Phys. Rev. D89 (5) (2014) 054026. arXiv:1401.1595, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.054026. [544] B. Chen, L. Yuan, A. Zhang, Heavy quark symmetry in strong decays of P-wave heavy-light mesons. arXiv:1210.6151. [545] H. Xu, X. Liu, T. Matsuki, Newly observed B(5970) and the predictions of its spin and strange partners, Phys. Rev. D89 (9) (2014) 097502. arXiv:1402.0384, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89. 097502. [546] J. Koponen, [UKQCD Collaboration], Energies of Bs meson excited states: A lattice study, Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 074509. arXiv:0708.2807, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.074509.

[547] Z.-G. Luo, X.-L. Chen, X. Liu, Bs1(5830) and Bs∗2(5840), Phys. Rev. D79 (2009) 074020. arXiv:0901.0505, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.074020. [548] J.-W. Zhang, Z.-Y. Fang, C.-H. Chang, X.-G. Wu, T. Zhong, Y. Yu, Hadronic production

of Bs∗ at TEVATRON and LHC, Phys. Rev. D79 (2009) 114012. arXiv:0905.4696, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.79.114012. ( ) [549] J.-W. Zhang, Z.-Y. Fang, X.-G. Wu, T. Zhong, Y. Yu, J. Jiang, Production of Bs∗ Meson induced by the heavy quarks inside the collision hadrons, Eur. Phys. J. C73 (6) (2013) 2464. arXiv:1006.2454, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2464-0.

[550] L.-F. Gan, M.-Q. Huang, QCD sum rule analysis of semileptonic Bs1, Bs∗2, Bs∗0, and Bs0 1 decays in HQET, Phys. Rev. D82 (2010) 054035. arXiv:1009.0980, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82. 054035. [551] M. Albaladejo, P. Fernandez-Soler, J. Nieves, P. G. Ortega, Lowest lying even-parity B¯s mesons: Heavy quark spin-flavor symmetry, chiral dynamics, and constituent quark model bare masses. arXiv:1612.07782. [552] C. B. Lang, D. Mohler, S. Prelovsek, R. M. Woloshyn, Predicting positive parity Bs mesons from lattice QCD, Phys. Lett. B750 (2015) 17–21. arXiv:1501.01646, doi:10.1016/j.physletb. 2015.08.038. [553] R. L. Jaffe, Exotica, Phys. Rept. 409 (2005) 1–45. arXiv:hep-ph/0409065, doi:10.1016/j. physrep.2004.11.005. [554] D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, V. O. Galkin, Spectroscopy and Regge trajectories of heavy baryons in the relativistic quark-diquark picture, Phys. Rev. D84 (2011) 014025. arXiv:1105.0583, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84.014025. [555] D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, V. O. Galkin, Masses of excited heavy baryons in the relativistic quark model, Phys. Lett. B659 (2008) 612–620. arXiv:0705.2957, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007. 11.037. [556] D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, V. O. Galkin, Masses of heavy baryons in the relativistic quark model, Phys. Rev. D72 (2005) 034026. arXiv:hep-ph/0504112, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.72.034026. [557] W. Roberts, M. Pervin, Heavy baryons in a quark model, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A23 (2008) 2817– 2860. arXiv:0711.2492, doi:10.1142/S0217751X08041219. [558] T. Yoshida, E. Hiyama, A. Hosaka, M. Oka, K. Sadato, Spectrum of heavy baryons in the quark model, Phys. Rev. D92 (11) (2015) 114029. arXiv:1510.01067, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92. 114029. [559] H. Garcilazo, J. Vijande, A. Valcarce, Faddeev study of heavy baryon spectroscopy, J. Phys. G34 (2007) 961–976. arXiv:hep-ph/0703257, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/34/5/014. [560] P. Hasenfratz, R. R. Horgan, J. Kuti, J. M. Richard, Heavy baryon spectroscopy in the QCD bag model, Phys. Lett. B94 (1980) 401–404. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(80)90906-5. [561] D. P. Stanley, D. Robson, Do quarks interact pairwise and satisfy the color hypothesis?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 45 (1980) 235–238. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.45.235. [562] D. Izatt, C. E. Detar, M. Stephenson, Spectroscopy of hadrons containing one heavy quark, Nucl. Phys. B199 (1982) 269–289. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90347-9. [563] J. M. Richard, P. Taxil, Baryons with charm and strangeness in potential models, Phys. Lett. B128 (1983) 453–456. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)90938-3. [564] W. Y. P. Hwang, D. B. Lichtenberg, Mass splitting of heavy baryon isospin multiplets, Phys. CONTENTS 146

Rev. D35 (1987) 3526. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.35.3526. [565] C. Itoh, T. Minamikawa, K. Miura, T. Watanabe, Ξ(c) and baryon spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. D40 (1989) 3660–3665. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.40.3660. [566] J. G. Korner, M. Kramer, D. Pirjol, Heavy baryons, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 33 (1994) 787–868. arXiv:hep-ph/9406359, doi:10.1016/0146-6410(94)90053-1. [567] M. J. Savage, Charmed baryon masses in chiral perturbation theory, Phys. Lett. B359 (1995) 189–193. arXiv:hep-ph/9508268, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(95)01060-4. [568] S. Chernyshev, M. A. Nowak, I. Zahed, Heavy hadrons and QCD instantons, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 5176–5184. arXiv:hep-ph/9510326, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.53.5176. 0 0 [569] M. Lu, M. J. Savage, J. Walden, The Radiative charmed baryon decay Ξ ∗ Ξ γ, Phys. Lett. c2 → c1 B369 (1996) 337–340. arXiv:hep-ph/9510448, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(96)00032-9. [570] F. Hussain, J. G. Korner, J. Landgraf, S. Tawfiq, SU O light diquark symmetry and 2Nf × 3 current induced heavy baryon transition form-factors, Z. Phys. C69 (1996) 655–662. arXiv: hep-ph/9505335, doi:10.1007/s002880050069.

[571] T. Ito, Y. Matsui, The ΞQ-ΞQ0 mixing and heavy baryon masses, Prog. Theor. Phys. 96 (1996) 659–664. arXiv:hep-ph/9605289, doi:10.1143/PTP.96.659. [572] A. F. Falk, A new interpretation of the observed heavy baryons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77 (1996) 223–226. arXiv:hep-ph/9603389, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.223. [573] E. E. Jenkins, Update of heavy baryon mass predictions, Phys. Rev. D55 (1997) 10–12. arXiv: hep-ph/9609404, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.55.10. [574] B. Silvestre-Brac, Spectrum and static properties of heavy baryons, Few Body Syst. 20 (1996) 1–25. doi:10.1007/s006010050028. [575] E. E. Jenkins, Heavy baryon masses in the 1/mQ and 1/Nc expansions, Phys. Rev. D54 (1996) 4515–4531. arXiv:hep-ph/9603449, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.54.4515. [576] F. Coester, K. Dannbom, D. O. Riska, Covariant quark model for the baryons, Nucl. Phys. A634 (1998) 335–367. arXiv:hep-ph/9711458, doi:10.1016/S0375-9474(98)00142-0. [577] H. Y. Jin, J. G. Korner, QCD sum rule for heavy baryons, Phys. Rev. D64 (2001) 114006. arXiv:hep-ph/0105023, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.64.114006. [578] R. Lewis, N. Mathur, R. M. Woloshyn, Charmed baryons in lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D64 (2001) 094509. arXiv:hep-ph/0107037, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.64.094509. [579] I. M. Narodetskii, M. A. Trusov, The heavy baryons in the nonperturbative string approach, Phys. Atom. Nucl. 65 (2002) 917–924, [Yad. Fiz.65,949(2002)]. arXiv:hep-ph/0104019, doi:10.1134/1.1481486. [580] D.-W. Wang, M.-Q. Huang, Choice of heavy baryon currents in QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D67 (2003) 074025. arXiv:hep-ph/0302193, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.67.074025. [581] C. Albertus, J. E. Amaro, E. Hernandez, J. Nieves, Charmed and bottom baryons: A variational approach based on heavy quark symmetry, Nucl. Phys. A740 (2004) 333–361. arXiv:nucl-th/0311100, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2004.04.114. [582] M. Pervin, W. Roberts, S. Capstick, Semileptonic decays of heavy lambda baryons in a quark model, Phys. Rev. C72 (2005) 035201. arXiv:nucl-th/0503030, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC. 72.035201. [583] C. Albertus, E. Hernandez, J. Nieves, J. M. Verde-Velasco, Study of the strong Σ Λ π, c → c Σ∗ Λ π and Ξ∗ Ξ π decays in a nonrelativistic quark model, Phys. Rev. D72 (2005) c → c c → c 094022. arXiv:hep-ph/0507256, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.72.094022. [584] A. Faessler, T. Gutsche, M. A. Ivanov, J. G. Korner, V. E. Lyubovitskij, D. Nicmorus, K. Pumsa- ard, Magnetic moments of heavy baryons in the relativistic three-quark model, Phys. Rev. D73 (2006) 094013. arXiv:hep-ph/0602193, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.094013. [585] S. Migura, D. Merten, B. Metsch, H.-R. Petry, Charmed baryons in a relativistic quark model, Eur. Phys. J. A28 (2006) 41. arXiv:hep-ph/0602153, doi:10.1140/epja/i2006-10017-9. [586] R. Dhir, R. C. Verma, Magnetic moments of J P = 3/2+ heavy baryons using effective mass scheme, Eur. Phys. J. A42 (2009) 243–249. arXiv:0904.2124, doi:10.1140/epja/ CONTENTS 147

i2009-10872-8. [587] P.-Z. Huang, H.-X. Chen, S.-L. Zhu, Light vector meson and heavy baryon strong interaction, Phys. Rev. D80 (2009) 094007. arXiv:0909.5551, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.80.094007. [588] A. Majethiya, B. Patel, P. C. Vinodkumar, Single heavy flavour baryons using coulomb plus power law interquark potential, Eur. Phys. J. A38 (2008) 307–315. arXiv:0805.3439, doi:10.1140/epja/i2008-10674-6. [589] T. M. Aliev, K. Azizi, M. Savci, Spin-3/2 to spin-1/2 heavy baryons and pseudoscalar mesons transitions in QCD, Eur. Phys. J. C71 (2011) 1675. arXiv:1012.5935, doi:10.1140/epjc/ s10052-011-1675-5. [590] J. Vijande, A. Valcarce, H. Garcilazo, Heavy-baryon quark model picture from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D90 (9) (2014) 094004. arXiv:1507.03736, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.094004. [591] K. C. Bowler, R. D. Kenway, O. Oliveira, D. G. Richards, P. Uberholz, L. Lellouch, J. Nieves, C. T. Sachrajda, N. Stella, H. Wittig, [UKQCD Collaboration], Heavy baryon spectroscopy from the lattice, Phys. Rev. D54 (1996) 3619–3633. arXiv:hep-lat/9601022, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.54.3619. [592] A. Ali Khan, T. Bhattacharya, S. Collins, C. T. H. Davies, R. Gupta, C. Morningstar, J. Shigemitsu, J. H. Sloan, Heavy light mesons and baryons with b quarks, Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 054505. arXiv:hep-lat/9912034, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.62.054505. [593] J. M. Flynn, F. Mescia, A. S. B. Tariq, [UKQCD Collaboration], Spectroscopy of doubly charmed baryons in lattice QCD, JHEP 07 (2003) 066. arXiv:hep-lat/0307025, doi: 10.1088/1126-6708/2003/07/066. [594] L. Liu, H.-W. Lin, K. Orginos, A. Walker-Loud, Singly and doubly charmed J=1/2 baryon spectrum from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 094505. arXiv:0909.3294, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.81.094505. [595] W. Detmold, C. J. D. Lin, S. Meinel, Axial couplings and strong decay widths of heavy hadrons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 172003. arXiv:1109.2480, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.108. 172003. [596] H.-W. Lin, Review of baryon spectroscopy in lattice QCD, Chin. J. Phys. 49 (2011) 827. arXiv:1106.1608. [597] C. Alexandrou, J. Carbonell, D. Christaras, V. Drach, M. Gravina, M. Papinutto, Strange and charm baryon masses with two flavors of dynamical twisted mass fermions, Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 114501. arXiv:1205.6856, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.114501. [598] R. A. Briceno, H.-W. Lin, D. R. Bolton, Charmed-baryon spectroscopy from lattice QCD with Nf = 2 + 1 + 1 flavors, Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 094504. arXiv:1207.3536, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.86.094504. [599] W. Detmold, C. J. D. Lin, S. Meinel, Calculation of the heavy-hadron axial couplings g1, g2 and g3 using lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D85 (2012) 114508. arXiv:1203.3378, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.85.114508. [600] Z. S. Brown, W. Detmold, S. Meinel, K. Orginos, Charmed bottom baryon spectroscopy from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D90 (9) (2014) 094507. arXiv:1409.0497, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 90.094507. [601] C.-K. Chow, M. B. Wise, Excited ΛQ baryons in the large Nc limit, Phys. Rev. D50 (1994) 2135–2138. arXiv:hep-ph/9402310, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.50.2135. [602] J. Schechter, A. Subbaraman, Excited heavy baryons in the bound state picture, Phys. Rev. D51 (1995) 2311–2321. arXiv:hep-ph/9410213, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.51.2311. [603] J. Schechter, A. Subbaraman, S. Vaidya, H. Weigel, Heavy quark solitons: Towards realistic masses, Nucl. Phys. A590 (1995) 655–679. doi:10.1016/0375-9474(95)00182-Z. [604] A. D. Adamov, G. R. Goldstein, Fragmentation functions for baryons in a quark-diquark model, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) 7381–7391. arXiv:hep-ph/9706491, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.56. 7381. [605] S. Tawfiq, P. J. O’Donnell, J. G. Korner, Charmed baryon strong coupling constants in a CONTENTS 148

light front quark model, Phys. Rev. D58 (1998) 054010. arXiv:hep-ph/9803246, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.58.054010. [606] M. A. Ivanov, J. G. Korner, V. E. Lyubovitskij, A. G. Rusetsky, Strong and radiative decays of heavy flavored baryons, Phys. Rev. D60 (1999) 094002. arXiv:hep-ph/9904421, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.60.094002. [607] S. Tawfiq, J. G. Korner, P. J. O’Donnell, Electromagnetic transitions of heavy baryons in the SU O symmetry, Phys. Rev. D63 (2001) 034005. arXiv:hep-ph/9909444, doi: 2Nf × 3 10.1103/PhysRevD.63.034005. [608] F. Hussain, J. G. Korner, S. Tawfiq, One pion transitions between heavy baryons in the constituent quark model, Phys. Rev. D61 (2000) 114003. arXiv:hep-ph/9909278, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.61.114003. [609] J.-P. Lee, C. Liu, H. S. Song, 1/mQ and 1/Nc expansions for excited heavy baryons with light quarks in the spin flavor symmetric representation, Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 096001. arXiv:hep-ph/0006267, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.62.096001. [610] J.-P. Lee, G. T. Park, Subleading Isgur-Wise function of Λ Λ using QCD sum rules, Phys. b → c1 Lett. B552 (2003) 185–197. arXiv:hep-ph/0210097, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(02)03161-1. [611] Z. Shah, K. Thakkar, A. Kumar Rai, P. C. Vinodkumar, Excited state mass spectra of singly charmed baryons, Eur. Phys. J. A52 (10) (2016) 313. arXiv:1602.06384, doi:10.1140/epja/ i2016-16313-9. [612] M. A. Ivanov, N. B. Ladygina, V. E. Lyubovitskij, Semileptonic decays of heavy baryons, Phys. Part. Nucl. 26 (1995) 60–78, [Fiz. Elem. Chast. Atom. Yadra26,146(1995)]. [613] J. K. Elwood, Excited charmed baryon decays and their implications for fragmentation parameters, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 4866–4874. arXiv:hep-ph/9511241, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.53.4866. [614] J. L. Rosner, Charmed baryons with J = 3/2, Phys. Rev. D52 (1995) 6461–6465. arXiv: hep-ph/9508252, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.52.6461. [615] C.-K. Chow, Radiative decays of excited ΛQ baryons in the bound state picture, Phys. Rev. D54 (1996) 3374–3376. arXiv:hep-ph/9510421, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.54.3374. [616] D. Pirjol, T.-M. Yan, Predictions for s-wave and p-wave heavy baryons from sum rules and constituent quark model. 1. Strong interactions, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) 5483–5510. arXiv: hep-ph/9701291, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.56.5483. [617] G. Chiladze, A. F. Falk, Phenomenology of new baryons with charm and strangeness, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) R6738–R6741. arXiv:hep-ph/9707507, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.56.R6738. [618] Z. Aziza Baccouche, C.-K. Chow, T. D. Cohen, B. A. Gelman, Excited heavy baryons and their symmetries. 3. Phenomenology, Nucl. Phys. A696 (2001) 638–666. arXiv:hep-ph/0105148, doi:10.1016/S0375-9474(01)01202-7. [619] Z. Aziza Baccouche, C.-K. Chow, T. D. Cohen, B. A. Gelman, Model independent predictions for low-energy isoscalar heavy baryon observables in the combined heavy quark and large Nc expansion, Phys. Lett. B514 (2001) 346–354. arXiv:hep-ph/0106096, doi:10.1016/ S0370-2693(01)00810-3. [620] A. E. Blechman, A. F. Falk, D. Pirjol, J. M. Yelton, Threshold effects in excited charmed baryon decays, Phys. Rev. D67 (2003) 074033. arXiv:hep-ph/0302040, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.67. 074033. [621] M. A. Ivanov, J. G. Korner, V. E. Lyubovitskij, A. G. Rusetsky, One pion charm baryon transitions in a relativistic three quark model, Phys. Lett. B442 (1998) 435–442. arXiv: hep-ph/9807519, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(98)01245-3. [622] C. Caso, et al., [Particle Data Group Collaboration], Review of particle physics. Particle Data Group, Eur. Phys. J. C3 (1998) 1–794. doi:10.1007/s10052-998-0104-x. [623] M. A. Ivanov, J. G. Korner, V. E. Lyubovitskij, One photon transitions between heavy baryons in a relativistic three quark model, Phys. Lett. B448 (1999) 143–151. arXiv:hep-ph/9811370, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(99)00029-5. CONTENTS 149

[624] M.-Q. Huang, J.-P. Lee, C. Liu, H. S. Song, Leading Isgur-Wise form-factor of Λ Λ b → c1 transition using QCD sum rules, Phys. Lett. B502 (2001) 133–139. arXiv:hep-ph/0012114, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(01)00035-1. [625] H. Nagahiro, S. Yasui, A. Hosaka, M. Oka, H. Noumi, Structure of charmed baryons studied by pionic decays. arXiv:1609.01085. [626] Y.-s. Oh, B.-Y. Park, Excited states of heavy baryons in the Skyrme model, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 1605–1615. arXiv:hep-ph/9510268, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.53.1605. [627] Y. Oh, B.-Y. Park, Solitons bound to heavy mesons, Z. Phys. A359 (1997) 83–90. arXiv: hep-ph/9703219, doi:10.1007/s002180050370. [628] J. Haidenbauer, G. Krein, U.-G. Meissner, L. Tolos, DN interaction from meson exchange, Eur. Phys. J. A47 (2011) 18. arXiv:1008.3794, doi:10.1140/epja/i2011-11018-3. + [629] Z.-H. Guo, J. A. Oller, Resonance on top of thresholds: the Λc(2595) as an extremely fine- tuned state, Phys. Rev. D93 (5) (2016) 054014. arXiv:1601.00862, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 93.054014. [630] M. F. M. Lutz, E. E. Kolomeitsev, On charm baryon resonances and chiral symmetry, Nucl. Phys. A730 (2004) 110–120. arXiv:hep-ph/0307233, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2003.10.012. [631] D. Gamermann, C. Garcia-Recio, J. Nieves, L. L. Salcedo, L. Tolos, Exotic dynamically generated baryons with negative charm quantum number, Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 094016. arXiv:1002.2763, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.094016. [632] O. Romanets, L. Tolos, C. Garcia-Recio, J. Nieves, L. L. Salcedo, R. G. E. Timmermans, Charmed and strange baryon resonances with heavy-quark spin symmetry, Phys. Rev. D85 (2012) 114032. arXiv:1202.2239, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.114032. [633] C. Garcia-Recio, J. Nieves, O. Romanets, L. L. Salcedo, L. Tolos, Hidden charm N and Delta resonances with heavy-quark symmetry, Phys. Rev. D87 (2013) 074034. arXiv:1302.6938, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.074034. [634] D. Gamermann, C. E. Jimenez-Tejero, A. Ramos, Radiative decays of dynamically generated charmed baryons, Phys. Rev. D83 (2011) 074018. arXiv:1011.5381, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 83.074018. [635] B. Chen, K.-W. Wei, X. Liu, T. Matsuki, Low-excited charm and charm-strange baryons revisited in the quark-diquark picture. arXiv:1609.07967. [636] S. M. Gerasyuta, E. E. Matskevich, Charmed (70, 1−) baryon multiplet, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E17 (2008) 585–610. arXiv:0709.0397, doi:10.1142/S0218301308010027. [637] Q.-F. Lu, Y. Dong, X. Liu, T. Matsuki, Puzzle of the Λc spectrum. arXiv:1610.09605. [638] A. Selem, F. Wilczek, Hadron systematics and emergent diquarks, in: Proceedings, Ringberg Workshop on New Trends in HERA Physics 2005: Ringberg Castle, Tegernsee, Germany, October 2-7, 2005, 2006, pp. 337–356. arXiv:hep-ph/0602128. URL http://www-library.desy.de/preparch/conf/ringberg/2005/wilczek.ps.gz P + [639] B. Chen, D.-X. Wang, A. Zhang, J Assignments of Λc Baryons, Chin. Phys. C33 (2009) 1327– 1330. arXiv:0906.3934, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/33/12/047. [640] B. Chen, K.-W. Wei, A. Zhang, Assignments of ΛQ and ΞQ baryons in the heavy quark- light diquark picture, Eur. Phys. J. A51 (2015) 82. arXiv:1406.6561, doi:10.1140/epja/ i2015-15082-3. [641] X.-H. Zhong, Q. Zhao, Charmed baryon strong decays in a chiral quark model, Phys. Rev. D77 (2008) 074008. arXiv:0711.4645, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.074008. [642] C. Chen, X.-L. Chen, X. Liu, W.-Z. Deng, S.-L. Zhu, Strong decays of charmed baryons, Phys. Rev. D75 (2007) 094017. arXiv:0704.0075, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.75.094017. [643] C. E. Jimenez-Tejero, A. Ramos, I. Vidana, Dynamically generated open charmed baryons beyond the zero range approximation, Phys. Rev. C80 (2009) 055206. arXiv:0907.5316, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.80.055206. [644] C. E. Jimenez-Tejero, A. Ramos, L. Tolos, I. Vidana, Open charm meson in nuclear matter at finite temperature beyond the zero range approximation, Phys. Rev. C84 (2011) 015208. CONTENTS 150

arXiv:1102.4786, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.84.015208. + [645] X.-G. He, X.-Q. Li, X. Liu, X.-Q. Zeng, Λc (2940): A possible molecular state?, Eur. Phys. J. C51 (2007) 883–889. arXiv:hep-ph/0606015, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-007-0347-y. + [646] P. G. Ortega, D. R. Entem, F. Fernandez, Quark model description of the Λc(2940) as a molecular D∗N state and the possible existence of the Λb(6248), Phys. Lett. B718 (2013) 1381–1384. arXiv:1210.2633, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.12.025. [647] L. Zhao, H. Huang, J. Ping, ND and NB systems in quark delocalization color screening model. arXiv:1612.00350. + [648] J. He, Z. Ouyang, X. Liu, X.-Q. Li, Production of charmed baryon Λc(2940) at PANDA, Phys. Rev. D84 (2011) 114010. arXiv:1109.5566, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84.114010. 0 ( )0 [649] H.-Y. Cheng, C. Q. Geng, Y. K. Hsiao, Possibly new charmed baryon states from B¯ ppD¯ ∗ → decays, Phys. Rev. D89 (3) (2014) 034005. arXiv:1205.0117, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89. 034005. [650] Q.-Y. Lin, X. Liu, H.-S. Xu, First estimate of producing the charmed baryon Λc(2880) at PANDA, Phys. Rev. D90 (1) (2014) 014014. arXiv:1403.3264, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.014014. [651] C. Mu, X. Wang, X.-L. Chen, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, Dipion decays of heavy baryons, Chin. Phys. C38 (11) (2014) 113101. arXiv:1405.3128, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/38/11/113101. [652] H.-Y. Cheng, Remarks on the strong coupling constants in heavy hadron chiral Lagrangians, Phys. Lett. B399 (1997) 281–286. arXiv:hep-ph/9701234, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(97)00305-5. [653] H.-Y. Cheng, A phenomenological analysis of heavy hadron lifetimes, Phys. Rev. D56 (1997) 2783–2798. arXiv:hep-ph/9704260, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.56.2783. [654] M. F. M. Lutz, E. E. Kolomeitsev, Baryon resonances from chiral coupled-channel dynamics, Nucl. Phys. A755 (2005) 29–39. arXiv:hep-ph/0501224, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.03.110. [655] T. Mizutani, A. Ramos, D mesons in nuclear matter: A DN coupled-channel equations approach, Phys. Rev. C74 (2006) 065201. arXiv:hep-ph/0607257, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.74.065201. [656] L. Tolos, C. Garcia-Recio, J. Nieves, The properties of D and D∗ mesons in the nuclear medium, Phys. Rev. C80 (2009) 065202. arXiv:0905.4859, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.80.065202. [657] A. Kumar, A. Mishra, D-mesons and charmonium states in hot isospin asymmetric strange hadronic matter, Eur. Phys. J. A47 (2011) 164. arXiv:1102.4792, doi:10.1140/epja/ i2011-11164-6. [658] P. G. Ortega, D. R. Entem, F. Fernandez, Hadronic molecules in the open charm and open bottom baryon spectrum, Phys. Rev. D90 (11) (2014) 114013. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.114013. ( ) + [659] J.-R. Zhang, S-wave D ∗ N molecular states: Σc(2800) and Λc(2940) ?, Phys. Rev. D89 (9) (2014) 096006. arXiv:1212.5325, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.096006. [660] D. V. Bugg, How resonances can synchronise with thresholds, J. Phys. G35 (2008) 075005. arXiv:0802.0934, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/35/7/075005. + [661] J. He, Y.-T. Ye, Z.-F. Sun, X. Liu, The observed charmed hadron Λc(2940) and the D∗N interaction, Phys. Rev. D82 (2010) 114029. arXiv:1008.1500, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82. 114029. [662] R. Chen, Z.-F. Sun, X. Liu, S. M. Gerasyuta, Predicting exotic molecular states composed of nucleon and P-wave charmed meson, Phys. Rev. D90 (3) (2014) 034011. arXiv:1406.7481, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.034011. + [663] Y. Dong, A. Faessler, T. Gutsche, V. E. Lyubovitskij, Strong two-body decays of the Λc(2940) in a hadronic molecule picture, Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 014006. arXiv:0910.1204, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.81.014006. + [664] Y. Dong, A. Faessler, T. Gutsche, S. Kumano, V. E. Lyubovitskij, Radiative decay of Λc(2940) in a hadronic molecule picture, Phys. Rev. D82 (2010) 034035. arXiv:1006.4018, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.82.034035. [665] Y. Dong, A. Faessler, T. Gutsche, S. Kumano, V. E. Lyubovitskij, Strong three-body decays of + Λc(2940) , Phys. Rev. D83 (2011) 094005. arXiv:1103.4762, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83. 094005. CONTENTS 151

[666] Y. Dong, A. Faessler, T. Gutsche, V. E. Lyubovitskij, Role of the hadron molecule c(2940) in the pp¯ pD0Λ¯ (2286) annihilation reaction, Phys. Rev. D90 (9) (2014) 094001. arXiv: → c 1407.3949, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.094001. + 0 [667] J.-J. Xie, Y.-B. Dong, X. Cao, Role of the Λ (2940) in the π−p D−D p reaction close to c → threshold, Phys. Rev. D92 (3) (2015) 034029. arXiv:1506.01133, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 92.034029. [668] Y. Dong, A. Faessler, T. Gutsche, V. E. Lyubovitskij, Charmed baryon Σc(2800) as a ND hadronic molecule, Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 074011. arXiv:1002.0218, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81. 074011. + [669] X.-Y. Wang, A. Guskov, X.-R. Chen, Λc∗(2940) photoproduction off the neutron, Phys. Rev. D92 (9) (2015) 094032. arXiv:1509.02602, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.094032. [670] Y. Huang, J. He, J.-J. Xie, X. Chen, H.-F. Zhang, Production of charmed baryon Λc(2940) by kaon-induced reaction on a proton target. arXiv:1610.06994. [671] L.-H. Liu, L.-Y. Xiao, X.-H. Zhong, Charm-strange baryon strong decays in a chiral quark model, Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 034024. arXiv:1205.2943, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.034024. [672] Z. Zhao, D.-D. Ye, A. Zhang, Nature of charmed strange baryons Ξc(3055) and Ξc(3080), Phys. Rev. D94 (11) (2016) 114020. arXiv:1608.04856, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.114020. + + [673] X. Liu, C. Chen, W.-Z. Deng, X.-L. Chen, A note on Ξc(3055) and Ξc(3123) , Chin. Phys. C32 (2008) 424. arXiv:0710.0187, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/32/6/002. [674] J.-R. Zhang, M.-Q. Huang, Heavy baryon spectroscopy in QCD, Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 094015. arXiv:0811.3266, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.094015. [675] H.-Y. Cheng, C.-K. Chua, Y.-K. Hsiao, Study of B¯ Λ Λ¯ and B¯ Λ Λ¯ K¯ , Phys. Rev. D79 → c c → c c (2009) 114004. arXiv:0902.4295, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.114004. [676] R. M. Albuquerque, S. Narison, M. Nielsen, SU(3) mass-splittings of the heavy-baryons octet in QCD, Phys. Lett. B684 (2010) 236–245. arXiv:0904.3717, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2010. 01.011. [677] T. M. Aliev, K. Azizi, A. Ozpineci, Radiative decays of the heavy flavored baryons in light cone QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D79 (2009) 056005. arXiv:0901.0076, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 79.056005. [678] Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of the 1/2− and 3/2− heavy and doubly heavy baryon states with QCD sum rules, Eur. Phys. J. A47 (2011) 81. arXiv:1003.2838, doi:10.1140/epja/i2011-11081-8. [679] R. Dhir, C. S. Kim, R. C. Verma, Magnetic moments of bottom baryons: Effective mass and screened charge, Phys. Rev. D88 (2013) 094002. arXiv:1309.4057, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 88.094002. [680] Y. Yamaguchi, S. Ohkoda, A. Hosaka, T. Hyodo, S. Yasui, Heavy quark symmetry in multihadron systems, Phys. Rev. D91 (2015) 034034. arXiv:1402.5222, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91. 034034. [681] A. Valcarce, H. Garcilazo, J. Vijande, Heavy baryon spectroscopy with relativistic kinematics, Phys. Lett. B733 (2014) 288–295. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2014.04.055. [682] T. M. Aliev, K. Azizi, T. Barakat, M. Savci, Diagonal and transition magnetic moments of negative parity heavy baryons in QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D92 (3) (2015) 036004. arXiv:1505.07977, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.036004. [683] K. Thakkar, Z. Shah, A. K. Rai, P. C. Vinodkumar, Excited state mass spectra and regge trajectories of bottom baryons in hypercentral quark Model. arXiv:1610.00411. [684] T. Burch, C. Hagen, C. B. Lang, M. Limmer, A. Schafer, Excitations of single-beauty hadrons, Phys. Rev. D79 (2009) 014504. arXiv:0809.1103, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.014504. [685] T. Burch, Heavy hadrons on Nf = 2 and 2 + 1 improved clover-Wilson lattices. arXiv: 1502.00675. [686] C. W. Xiao, J. Nieves, E. Oset, Combining heavy quark spin and local hidden gauge symmetries in the dynamical generation of hidden charm baryons, Phys. Rev. D88 (2013) 056012. arXiv: 1304.5368, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.056012. CONTENTS 152

[687] S. Yasui, K. Sudoh, Probing gluon dynamics by charm and bottom mesons in nuclear matter in heavy-meson effective theory with 1/M corrections, Phys. Rev. C89 (1) (2014) 015201. arXiv:1308.0098, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.89.015201. [688] M. Karliner, B. Keren-Zur, H. J. Lipkin, J. L. Rosner, The quark model and b baryons, Annals Phys. 324 (2009) 2–15. arXiv:0804.1575, doi:10.1016/j.aop.2008.05.003. [689] M. Karliner, H. J. Lipkin, The new Σb multiplet and magnetic moments of Λc and Λb, Phys. Lett. B660 (2008) 539–544. arXiv:hep-ph/0611306, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2008.01.023. [690] M. Karliner, J. L. Rosner, Prospects for observing the lowest-lying odd-parity Σc and Σb baryons, Phys. Rev. D92 (7) (2015) 074026. arXiv:1506.01702, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.074026. [691] C. Garcia-Recio, J. Nieves, O. Romanets, L. L. Salcedo, L. Tolos, Odd parity bottom-flavored baryon resonances, Phys. Rev. D87 (3) (2013) 034032. arXiv:1210.4755, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.87.034032. P [692] J.-X. Lu, Y. Zhou, H.-X. Chen, J.-J. Xie, L.-S. Geng, Dynamically generated J = 1/2−(3/2−) singly charmed and bottom heavy baryons, Phys. Rev. D92 (1) (2015) 014036. arXiv: 1409.3133, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.014036. [693] C. Garcia-Recio, C. Hidalgo-Duque, J. Nieves, L. L. Salcedo, L. Tolos, Compositeness of the strange, charm, and beauty odd parity Λ states, Phys. Rev. D92 (3) (2015) 034011. arXiv:1506.04235, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.034011. [694] W. H. Liang, C. W. Xiao, E. Oset, Baryon states with open beauty in the extended local hidden gauge approach, Phys. Rev. D89 (5) (2014) 054023. arXiv:1401.1441, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.89.054023. [695] J. M. Torres-Rincon, L. Tolos, O. Romanets, Open bottom states and the B¯-meson propagation in hadronic matter, Phys. Rev. D89 (7) (2014) 074042. arXiv:1403.1371, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.89.074042. [696] F. J. Llanes-Estrada, O. I. Pavlova, R. Williams, A first estimate of triply heavy baryon masses from the pNRQCD perturbative static potential, Eur. Phys. J. C72 (2012) 2019. arXiv:1111.7087, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2019-9. [697] Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of the triply heavy baryon states with QCD sum rules, Commun. Theor. Phys. 58 (2012) 723–731. arXiv:1112.2274, doi:10.1088/0253-6102/58/5/17. [698] J. M. Flynn, E. Hernandez, J. Nieves, Triply heavy baryons and heavy quark spin symmetry, Phys. Rev. D85 (2012) 014012. arXiv:1110.2962, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.014012. [699] S. Meinel, Excited-state spectroscopy of triply-bottom baryons from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D85 (2012) 114510. arXiv:1202.1312, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.114510. [700] T. M. Aliev, K. Azizi, M. Savci, Masses and residues of the triply heavy spin-1/2 baryons, JHEP 04 (2013) 042. arXiv:1212.6065, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2013)042. [701] T. M. Aliev, K. Azizi, M. Savci, Properties of triply heavy spin-3/2 baryons, J. Phys. G41 (2014) 065003. arXiv:1404.2091, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/41/6/065003. [702] M. Padmanath, R. G. Edwards, N. Mathur, M. Peardon, Spectroscopy of triply-charmed baryons from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D90 (7) (2014) 074504. arXiv:1307.7022, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.90.074504. [703] R. L. Jaffe, J. E. Kiskis, Spectra of new hadrons, Phys. Rev. D13 (1976) 1355. doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.13.1355. [704] W. Ponce, Heavy quarks in a spherical bag, Phys. Rev. D19 (1979) 2197. doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.19.2197. [705] S. Fleck, J. M. Richard, Baryons with double charm, Prog. Theor. Phys. 82 (1989) 760–774. doi:10.1143/PTP.82.760. [706] E. Bagan, H. G. Dosch, P. Gosdzinsky, S. Narison, J. M. Richard, Hadrons with charm and beauty, Z. Phys. C64 (1994) 57–72. arXiv:hep-ph/9403208, doi:10.1007/BF01557235. [707] E. Bagan, M. Chabab, S. Narison, Baryons with two heavy quarks from QCD spectral sum rules, Phys. Lett. B306 (1993) 350–356. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(93)90090-5. [708] D. B. Lichtenberg, R. Roncaglia, E. Predazzi, Mass sum rules for singly and doubly heavy CONTENTS 153

flavored hadrons, Phys. Rev. D53 (1996) 6678–6681. arXiv:hep-ph/9511461, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.53.6678. [709] S. M. Gerasyuta, D. V. Ivanov, Charmed baryons in bootstrap quark model, Nuovo Cim. A112 (1999) 261–276. arXiv:hep-ph/0101310, doi:10.1007/BF03035848. [710] C. Itoh, T. Minamikawa, K. Miura, T. Watanabe, Doubly charmed baryon masses and quark wave functions in baryons, Phys. Rev. D61 (2000) 057502. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.61.057502. [711] R. Roncaglia, D. B. Lichtenberg, E. Predazzi, Predicting the masses of baryons containing one or two heavy quarks, Phys. Rev. D52 (1995) 1722–1725. arXiv:hep-ph/9502251, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.52.1722. [712] B. Silvestre-Brac, Spectroscopy of baryons containing heavy quarks, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 36 (1996) 263–273. doi:10.1016/0146-6410(96)00030-0. [713] V. V. Kiselev, A. K. Likhoded, Baryons with two heavy quarks, Phys. Usp. 45 (2002) 455–506, [Usp. Fiz. Nauk172,497(2002)]. arXiv:hep-ph/0103169, doi:10.1070/ PU2002v045n05ABEH000958. [714] I. M. Narodetskii, M. A. Trusov, The doubly heavy baryons in the nonperturbative QCD approach, in: The structure of baryons. Proceedings, 9th International Conference, Baryons 2002, Newport News, USA, March 3-8, 2002, 2002, pp. 639–642. arXiv:hep-ph/0204320. URL http://alice.cern.ch/format/showfull?sysnb=2306859 [715] D.-H. He, K. Qian, Y.-B. Ding, X.-Q. Li, P.-N. Shen, Evaluation of spectra of baryons containing two heavy quarks in bag model, Phys. Rev. D70 (2004) 094004. arXiv:hep-ph/0403301, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.70.094004. [716] J.-M. Richard, F. Stancu, Double charm hadrons revisited, Bled Workshops Phys. 6 (1) (2005) 25–31. arXiv:hep-ph/0511043. [717] C. Albertus, E. Hernandez, J. Nieves, J. M. Verde-Velasco, Static properties and semileptonic decays of doubly heavy baryons in a nonrelativistic quark model, Eur. Phys. J. A32 (2007) 183–199. doi:10.1140/epja/i2007-10364-y. [718] M. H. Weng, X. H. Guo, A. W. Thomas, Bethe-Salpeter equation for doubly heavy baryons in the covariant instantaneous approximation, Phys. Rev. D83 (2011) 056006. arXiv:1012.0082, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.056006. [719] Z.-F. Sun, Z.-W. Liu, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, Masses and axial currents of the doubly charmed baryons, Phys. Rev. D91 (9) (2015) 094030. arXiv:1411.2117, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.094030. [720] M. Karliner, J. L. Rosner, Baryons with two heavy quarks: Masses, production, decays, and detection, Phys. Rev. D90 (9) (2014) 094007. arXiv:1408.5877, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90. 094007. [721] J.-R. Zhang, M.-Q. Huang, Doubly heavy baryons in QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 094007. arXiv:0810.5396, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.094007. [722] J.-R. Zhang, M.-Q. Huang, Deciphering triply heavy baryons in terms of QCD sum rules, Phys. Lett. B674 (2009) 28–35. arXiv:0902.3297, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2009.02.056. 3 + [723] Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of the 2 heavy and doubly heavy baryon states with QCD sum rules, Eur. Phys. J. C68 (2010) 459–472. arXiv:1002.2471, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-010-1357-8. 1 + [724] Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of the 2 doubly heavy baryon states with QCD sum rules, Eur. Phys. J. A45 (2010) 267–274. arXiv:1001.4693, doi:10.1140/epja/i2010-11004-3. [725] Y. Namekawa, et al., [PACS-CS Collaboration], Charmed baryons at the physical point in 2+1 flavor lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D87 (9) (2013) 094512. arXiv:1301.4743, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.87.094512. [726] C. Alexandrou, V. Drach, K. Jansen, C. Kallidonis, G. Koutsou, Baryon spectrum with Nf = 2 + 1 + 1 twisted mass fermions, Phys. Rev. D90 (7) (2014) 074501. arXiv:1406.4310, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.074501. [727] P. Perez-Rubio, S. Collins, G. S. Bali, Charmed baryon spectroscopy and light flavor symmetry from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D92 (3) (2015) 034504. arXiv:1503.08440, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.92.034504. CONTENTS 154

[728] M. Padmanath, R. G. Edwards, N. Mathur, M. Peardon, Spectroscopy of doubly-charmed baryons from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D91 (9) (2015) 094502. arXiv:1502.01845, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.91.094502. [729] S. Basak, S. Datta, A. T. Lytle, M. Padmanath, P. Majumdar, N. Mathur, Hadron spectra from overlap fermions on HISQ gauge configurations, PoS LATTICE2013 (2014) 243. arXiv: 1312.3050. [730] S. Durr, G. Koutsou, T. Lippert, Meson and baryon dispersion relations with Brillouin fermions, Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 114514. arXiv:1208.6270, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.114514. [731] H. Na, S. A. Gottlieb, Charm and bottom heavy baryon mass spectrum from lattice QCD with 2+1 flavors, PoS LAT2007 (2007) 124. arXiv:0710.1422. [732] K. U. Can, G. Erkol, M. Oka, T. T. Takahashi, Look inside charmed-strange baryons from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D92 (11) (2015) 114515. arXiv:1508.03048, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92. 114515. [733] T. Aaltonen, et al., [CDF Collaboration], Observation of the decay B± J/ψπ± and c → measurement of the Bc± mass, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 (2008) 182002. arXiv:0712.1506, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.182002. [734] V. M. Abazov, et al., [D0 Collaboration], Observation of the Bc meson in the exclusive decay B J/ψπ, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 (2008) 012001. arXiv:0802.4258, doi:10.1103/ c → PhysRevLett.101.012001. + [735] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], Measurements of Bc production and mass with the B+ J/ψπ+ decay, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (2012) 232001. arXiv:1209.5634, doi:10.1103/ c → PhysRevLett.109.232001. + [736] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], First observation of a baryonic Bc decay, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (15) (2014) 152003. arXiv:1408.0971, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.152003. + [737] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], Measurement of the ratio of Bc branching fractions to + + J/ψπ and J/ψµ νµ, Phys. Rev. D90 (3) (2014) 032009. arXiv:1407.2126, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.90.032009. + + [738] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], Measurement of the Bc meson lifetime using Bc + → J/ψµ νµX decays, Eur. Phys. J. C74 (5) (2014) 2839. arXiv:1401.6932, doi:10.1140/epjc/ s10052-014-2839-x. [739] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], Observation of the decay B+ B0π+, Phys. Rev. Lett. c → s 111 (18) (2013) 181801. arXiv:1308.4544, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.181801. [740] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], First observation of the decay B+ J/ψK+, JHEP 09 c → (2013) 075. arXiv:1306.6723, doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2013)075. + + + + [741] R. Aaij, et al., [LHCb Collaboration], Observation of B J/ψD and B J/ψD∗ decays, c → s c → s Phys. Rev. D87 (11) (2013) 112012. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.112012. [742] T. Barnes, F. E. Close, H. J. Lipkin, Implications of a DK molecule at 2.32 GeV, Phys. Rev. D68 (2003) 054006. arXiv:hep-ph/0305025, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.68.054006. [743] Y.-Q. Chen, X.-Q. Li, A comprehensive four-quark interpretation of Ds(2317), Ds(2457) and Ds(2632), Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 232001. arXiv:hep-ph/0407062, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.93.232001. [744] F.-K. Guo, P.-N. Shen, H.-C. Chiang, R.-G. Ping, B.-S. Zou, Dynamically generated 0+ heavy mesons in a heavy chiral unitary approach, Phys. Lett. B641 (2006) 278–285. arXiv: hep-ph/0603072, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2006.08.064. [745] F.-K. Guo, P.-N. Shen, H.-C. Chiang, Dynamically generated 1+ heavy mesons, Phys. Lett. B647 (2007) 133–139. arXiv:hep-ph/0610008, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.01.050.

[746] F. S. Navarra, M. Nielsen, E. Oset, T. Sekihara, Testing the molecular nature of Ds∗0(2317) and D0∗(2400) in semileptonic Bs and B decays, Phys. Rev. D92 (1) (2015) 014031. arXiv: 1501.03422, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.014031. [747] M.-Q. Huang, Exclusive semileptonic Bs decays to excited Ds mesons: Search of DsJ (2317) and DsJ (2460), Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 114015. arXiv:hep-ph/0404032, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. CONTENTS 155

69.114015. [748] T. M. Aliev, M. Savci, Analysis of exclusive B D (2317)lν¯ decay in full QCD, Phys. Rev. s → s0 l D73 (2006) 114010. arXiv:hep-ph/0604002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.114010. + [749] R.-H. Li, C.-D. Lu, Y.-M. Wang, Exclusive Bs decays to the charmed mesons Ds (1968, 2317) in the standard model, Phys. Rev. D80 (2009) 014005. arXiv:0905.3259, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.80.014005. [750] S.-M. Zhao, X. Liu, S.-J. Li, Study on B D (2317, 2460)lν¯ semileptonic decays in the s → sJ CQM model, Eur. Phys. J. C51 (2007) 601–606. arXiv:hep-ph/0612008, doi:10.1140/epjc/ s10052-007-0322-7. [751] C. Albertus, Weak decays of B¯s mesons, Phys. Rev. D89 (6) (2014) 065042. arXiv:1401.1791, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.065042. 0 [752] M. Albaladejo, M. Nielsen, E. Oset, Ds∗±0 (2317) and KD scattering from Bs decay, Phys. Lett. B746 (2015) 305–310. arXiv:1501.03455, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2015.05.019. [753] M. Cleven, H. W. Griesshammer, F.-K. Guo, C. Hanhart, U.-G. Meissner, Strong and radiative

decays of the Ds∗0(2317) and Ds1(2460), Eur. Phys. J. A50 (2014) 149. arXiv:1405.2242, doi:10.1140/epja/i2014-14149-y. [754] A. Faessler, T. Gutsche, V. E. Lyubovitskij, Y.-L. Ma, Strong and radiative decays of the

Ds∗0(2317) meson in the DK-molecule picture, Phys. Rev. D76 (2007) 014005. arXiv: 0705.0254, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.76.014005. [755] A. Faessler, T. Gutsche, V. E. Lyubovitskij, Y.-L. Ma, D∗K molecular structure of the Ds1(2460) meson, Phys. Rev. D76 (2007) 114008. arXiv:0709.3946, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 76.114008.

[756] A. Faessler, T. Gutsche, V. E. Lyubovitskij, Y.-L. Ma, Molecular structure of the Bsl∗ (5725) and Bs1(5778) bottom-strange mesons, Phys. Rev. D77 (2008) 114013. arXiv:0801.2232, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.114013.

[757] P. Colangelo, F. De Fazio, A. Ozpineci, Radiative transitions of DsJ∗ (2317) and DsJ (2460), Phys. Rev. D72 (2005) 074004. arXiv:hep-ph/0505195, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.72.074004. [758] M. F. M. Lutz, M. Soyeur, Radiative and isospin-violating decays of Ds mesons in the hadrogenesis conjecture, Nucl. Phys. A813 (2008) 14–95. arXiv:0710.1545, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa. 2008.09.003. [759] D. Gamermann, E. Oset, D. Strottman, M. J. Vicente Vacas, Dynamically generated open and hidden charm meson systems, Phys. Rev. D76 (2007) 074016. arXiv:hep-ph/0612179, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.76.074016. [760] D. Gamermann, E. Oset, Axial resonances in the open and hidden charm sectors, Eur. Phys. J. A33 (2007) 119–131. arXiv:0704.2314, doi:10.1140/epja/i2007-10435-1. [761] D. Gamermann, L. R. Dai, E. Oset, Radiative decay of the dynamically generated open and

hidden charm scalar meson resonances Ds∗0(2317) and X(3700), Phys. Rev. C76 (2007) 055205. arXiv:0709.2339, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.76.055205. + [762] Z.-F. Sun, M. Bayar, P. Fernandez-Soler, E. Oset, Ds∗0(2317) in the decay of Bc into J/ψDK, Phys. Rev. D93 (5) (2016) 054028. arXiv:1510.06316, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.054028.

[763] M. Albaladejo, D. Jido, J. Nieves, E. Oset, Ds∗0(2317) and DK scattering in B decays from BaBar and LHCb data, Eur. Phys. J. C76 (6) (2016) 300. arXiv:1604.01193, doi:10.1140/epjc/ s10052-016-4144-3.

[764] Z.-H. Guo, U.-G. Meissner, D.-L. Yao, New insights into the Ds∗0(2317) and other charm scalar mesons, Phys. Rev. D92 (9) (2015) 094008. arXiv:1507.03123, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92. 094008. [765] J. L. Rosner, Effects of S-wave thresholds, Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 076006. arXiv:hep-ph/ 0608102, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.076006. + [766] Z.-X. Xie, G.-Q. Feng, X.-H. Guo, Analyzing Ds∗0(2317) in the DK molecule picture in the Beth-Salpeter approach, Phys. Rev. D81 (2010) 036014. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.036014. [767] G. Q. Feng, X. H. Guo, Z. H. Zhang, Studying the D∗K molecular structure of Ds(2460) CONTENTS 156

in the Bethe-Salpeter approach, Eur. Phys. J. C72 (2012) 2033. doi:10.1140/epjc/ s10052-012-2033-y. [768] P. Wang, X. G. Wang, Study on 0+ states with open charm in unitarized heavy meson chiral approach, Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 014030. arXiv:1204.5553, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86. 039903,10.1103/PhysRevD.86.014030. [769] P. G. Ortega, J. Segovia, D. R. Entem, F. Fernandez, Molecular components in P-wave charmed- strange mesons, Phys. Rev. D94 (7) (2016) 074037. arXiv:1603.07000, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.94.074037. [770] P. G. Ortega, J. Segovia, D. R. Entem, F. Fernandez, Threshold effects in P-wave bottom-strange mesons. arXiv:1612.04826. [771] D. Zhang, Q.-Y. Zhao, Q.-Y. Zhang, A study of S-wave DK interactions in the chiral SU(3) quark model, Chin. Phys. Lett. 26 (2009) 091201. arXiv:0905.1804, doi:10.1088/0256-307X/26/ 9/091201. [772] T. Mehen, R. P. Springer, Heavy-quark symmetry and the electromagnetic decays of excited charmed strange mesons, Phys. Rev. D70 (2004) 074014. arXiv:hep-ph/0407181, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.70.074014.

[773] A. Faessler, T. Gutsche, S. Kovalenko, V. E. Lyubovitskij, Ds∗0(2317) and Ds1(2460) mesons in two-body B-meson decays, Phys. Rev. D76 (2007) 014003. arXiv:0705.0892, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.76.014003.

[774] C.-H. Chen, H.-N. Li, Search of DsJ∗ mesons in B meson decays, Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 054002. arXiv:hep-ph/0307075, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.69.054002. [775] F.-K. Guo, C. Hanhart, S. Krewald, U.-G. Meissner, Subleading contributions to the width of the

Ds∗0(2317), Phys. Lett. B666 (2008) 251–255. arXiv:0806.3374, doi:10.1016/j.physletb. 2008.07.060. [776] F.-K. Guo, U.-G. Meissner, W. Wang, Z. Yang, Production of charm-strange hadronic molecules at the LHC, JHEP 05 (2014) 138. arXiv:1403.4032, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2014)138. [777] C.-J. Xiao, D.-Y. Chen, Y.-L. Ma, Radiative and pionic transitions from the Ds1(2460) to the Ds∗0(2317), Phys. Rev. D93 (9) (2016) 094011. arXiv:1601.06399, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 93.094011. [778] H. J. Lipkin, New predictions for multiquark hadron masses, Phys. Lett. B580 (2004) 50–53. arXiv:hep-ph/0306204, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003.10.117. [779] M. Cleven, F.-K. Guo, C. Hanhart, U.-G. Meissner, Light meson mass dependence of the positive parity heavy-strange mesons, Eur. Phys. J. A47 (2011) 19. arXiv:1009.3804, doi:10.1140/epja/i2011-11019-2. [780] H.-Y. Cheng, W.-S. Hou, B decays as spectroscope for charmed four quark states, Phys. Lett. B566 (2003) 193–200. arXiv:hep-ph/0305038, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(03)00834-7. ( )+ 0 [781] T. E. Browder, S. Pakvasa, A. A. Petrov, Comment on the new Ds∗ π resonances, Phys. Lett. B578 (2004) 365–368. arXiv:hep-ph/0307054, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003.10.067. + + [782] V. Dmitrasinovic, Ds∗ (2317) and Ds∗ (2460): Tetraquarks bound by the 0t Hooft instanton- induced interaction?, Phys. Rev. D70 (2004) 096011. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.70.096011. [783] V. Dmitrasinovic, Chiral symmetry of heavy-light scalar mesons with UA(1) symmetry breaking, Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 016006. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.016006. + 0 [784] V. Dmitrasinovic, Ds0(2317)-D (2308) mass difference as evidence for tetraquarks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 (2005) 162002. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.162002. [785] L. Maiani, F. Piccinini, A. D. Polosa, V. Riquer, Diquark-antidiquarks with hidden or open charm and the nature of X(3872), Phys. Rev. D71 (2005) 014028. arXiv:hep-ph/0412098, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.71.014028. [786] M. E. Bracco, A. Lozea, R. D. Matheus, F. S. Navarra, M. Nielsen, Disentangling two- and four-quark state pictures of the charmed scalar mesons, Phys. Lett. B624 (2005) 217–222. arXiv:hep-ph/0503137, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2005.08.037. [787] H. Kim, Y. Oh, Ds(2317) as a four-quark state in QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D72 (2005) 074012. CONTENTS 157

arXiv:hep-ph/0508251, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.72.074012. [788] Z.-G. Wang, S.-L. Wan, Ds(2317) as a tetraquark state with QCD sum rules in heavy quark limit, Nucl. Phys. A778 (2006) 22–29. arXiv:hep-ph/0602080, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2006. 07.041. [789] H. X. Zhang, W. L. Wang, Y.-B. Dai, Z. Y. Zhang, Chiral SU(3) quark model study of tetraquark states: cnn¯s¯/css¯s¯, Commun. Theor. Phys. 49 (2008) 414–420. arXiv:hep-ph/0607207, doi:10.1088/0253-6102/49/2/35. [790] K. Terasaki, BABAR resonance as a new window of hadron physics, Phys. Rev. D68 (2003) 011501. arXiv:hep-ph/0305213, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.68.011501. + [791] A. Hayashigaki, K. Terasaki, Isospin quantum number of Ds0(2317), Prog. Theor. Phys. 114 (2006) 1191–1200. arXiv:hep-ph/0410393, doi:10.1143/PTP.114.1191. [792] M. Nielsen, D+ (2317) D+π0 decay width, Phys. Lett. B634 (2006) 35–38. arXiv:hep-ph/ sJ → s 0510277, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2006.01.042. + [793] K. Terasaki, Production of neutral and doubly charged partners of Ds0(2317), Prog. Theor. Phys. 116 (2006) 435–440. arXiv:hep-ph/0604207, doi:10.1143/PTP.116.435. + [794] K. Terasaki, Production of neutral and doubly charged partners of Ds0(2317) revisited. arXiv: 1604.06161. [795] E. van Beveren, G. Rupp, Continuum bound states KL, D1(2420), Dsl(2536) and their partners

KS, D1(2400), DsJ∗ (2463), Eur. Phys. J. C32 (2004) 493–499. arXiv:hep-ph/0306051, doi:10.1140/epjc/s2003-01465-0. [796] S. Coito, G. Rupp, E. van Beveren, Quasi-bound states in the continuum: a dynamical coupled-channel calculation of axial-vector charmed mesons, Phys. Rev. D84 (2011) 094020. arXiv:1106.2760, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84.094020.

[797] D. S. Hwang, D.-W. Kim, Mass of DsJ∗ (2317) and coupled channel effect, Phys. Lett. B601 (2004) 137–143. arXiv:hep-ph/0408154, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2004.09.040. [798] D. S. Hwang, D. W. Kim, Mass shift of DsJ (2317)∗ by coupled channel effect, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 9 (2005) 63–66. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/9/1/008. [799] Yu. A. Simonov, J. A. Tjon, The coupled-channel analysis of the D and Ds mesons, Phys. Rev. D70 (2004) 114013. arXiv:hep-ph/0409361, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.70.114013. [800] I. W. Lee, T. Lee, D. P. Min, B.-Y. Park, Chiral radiative corrections and Ds(2317)/D(2308) mass puzzle, Eur. Phys. J. C49 (2007) 737–741. arXiv:hep-ph/0412210, doi:10.1140/epjc/ s10052-006-0149-7. [801] F.-K. Guo, S. Krewald, U.-G. Meissner, Hadronic-loop induced mass shifts in scalar heavy-light mesons, Phys. Lett. B665 (2008) 157–163. arXiv:0712.2953, doi:10.1016/j.physletb. 2008.06.008. [802] Z.-Y. Zhou, Z. Xiao, Hadron loops effect on mass shifts of the charmed and charmed-strange spectra, Phys. Rev. D84 (2011) 034023. arXiv:1105.6025, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84. 034023. [803] A. M. Badalian, Yu. A. Simonov, M. A. Trusov, The Chiral transitions in heavy-light mesons, Phys. Rev. D77 (2008) 074017. arXiv:0712.3943, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.074017. [804] A. M. Badalian, Yu. A. Simonov, M. A. Trusov, Orbital excitations of heavy-light mesons in the coupling channel model, PoS CONFINEMENT8 (2008) 102. [805] M. A. Nowak, M. Rho, I. Zahed, Chiral doubling of heavy light hadrons: BABAR 2317 MeV/c2 and CLEO 2463 MeV/c2 discoveries, Acta Phys. Polon. B35 (2004) 2377–2392. arXiv:hep-ph/0307102. [806] E. E. Kolomeitsev, M. F. M. Lutz, On heavy light meson resonances and chiral symmetry, Phys. Lett. B582 (2004) 39–48. arXiv:hep-ph/0307133, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003.10.118. [807] M. A. Nowak, M. Rho, I. Zahed, Chiral effective action with heavy quark symmetry, Phys. Rev. D48 (1993) 4370–4374. arXiv:hep-ph/9209272, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.48.4370. [808] W. A. Bardeen, C. T. Hill, Chiral dynamics and heavy quark symmetry in a solvable toy field theoretic model, Phys. Rev. D49 (1994) 409–425. arXiv:hep-ph/9304265, doi:10.1103/ CONTENTS 158

PhysRevD.49.409. [809] M. Harada, M. Rho, C. Sasaki, Chiral doubling of heavy light hadrons and the vector manifestation of hidden local symmetry, Phys. Rev. D70 (2004) 074002. arXiv:hep-ph/ 0312182, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.70.074002. [810] D. Becirevic, S. Fajfer, S. Prelovsek, On the mass differences between the scalar and pseudoscalar heavy-light mesons, Phys. Lett. B599 (2004) 55. arXiv:hep-ph/0406296, doi:10.1016/j. physletb.2004.08.027.

[811] J.-Y. Wu, M.-Q. Huang, Chiral symmetry-breaking corrections to strong decays of Ds∗0(2317) and Ds0 1(2460) in HHχPT. arXiv:1406.5804. [812] M. Sadzikowski, The masses of Dsj∗ (2317) and Dsj∗ (2463) in the MIT bag model, Phys. Lett. B579 (2004) 39–42. arXiv:hep-ph/0307084, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003.10.107. 2 [813] Fayyazuddin, Riazuddin, Some comments on narrow resonances Ds∗1(2.46 GeV/c ) and 2 Ds0(2.317 GeV/c ), Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 114008. arXiv:hep-ph/0309283, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.69.114008. [814] J.-B. Liu, M.-Z. Yang, Heavy-light mesons in a relativistic model, Chin. Phys. C40 (7) (2016) 073101. arXiv:1507.08372, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/40/7/073101. [815] H.-Y. Cheng, C.-K. Chua, C.-W. Hwang, Covariant light front approach for s-wave and p-wave mesons: Its application to decay constants and form-factors, Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 074025. arXiv:hep-ph/0310359, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.69.074025. [816] J. Lu, X.-L. Chen, W.-Z. Deng, S.-L. Zhu, Pionic decays of Dsj(2317), Dsj(2460) and Bsj(5718), Bsj(5765), Phys. Rev. D73 (2006) 054012. arXiv:hep-ph/0602167, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 73.054012. + + [817] S. Godfrey, Testing the nature of the DsJ∗ (2317) and DsJ (2463) states using radiative transitions, Phys. Lett. B568 (2003) 254–260. arXiv:hep-ph/0305122, doi:10.1016/j. physletb.2003.06.049. [818] W. Wei, P.-Z. Huang, S.-L. Zhu, Strong decays of DsJ (2317) and DsJ (2460), Phys. Rev. D73 (2006) 034004. arXiv:hep-ph/0510039, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.034004. [819] P. Colangelo, F. De Fazio, Understanding DsJ (2317), Phys. Lett. B570 (2003) 180–184. arXiv: hep-ph/0305140, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003.08.003. [820] S. Ishida, M. Ishida, T. Komada, T. Maeda, M. Oda, K. Yamada, I. Yamauchi, The Ds(2317) and Ds(2463) mesons as scalar and axial vector chiralons in the covariant level classification scheme, AIP Conf. Proc. 717 (2004) 716–720. arXiv:hep-ph/0310061, doi:10.1063/1.1799786. [821] T. Matsuki, K. Seo, Chiral particle decay of heavy-light mesons in a relativistic potential model, Phys. Rev. D85 (2012) 014036. arXiv:1111.0857, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.014036.

[822] F.-L. Wang, X.-L. Chen, D.-H. Lu, S.-L. Zhu, W.-Z. Deng, Decays of Dsj∗ (2317) and Dsj(2460) mesons in the quark model, HEPNP 30 (2006) 1041–1047. arXiv:hep-ph/0604090.

[823] Z. G. Wang, S. L. Wan, Structure of the Ds0(2317) and the strong coupling constant gDs0DK with the light-cone QCD sum rules, Phys. Rev. D73 (2006) 094020. arXiv:hep-ph/0603007, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.094020. [824] Z. G. Wang, Structure of the axial-vector meson Ds1(2460), J. Phys. G34 (2007) 753–765. arXiv:hep-ph/0611271, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/34/4/011. [825] Z.-G. Wang, Radiative decays of the Ds0(2317), Ds1(2460) and the related strong coupling constants, Phys. Rev. D75 (2007) 034013. arXiv:hep-ph/0612225, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 75.034013. [826] S. Fajfer, J. F. Kamenik, Chiral loop corrections to strong decays of positive and negative parity charmed mesons, Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 074023. arXiv:hep-ph/0606278, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.74.074023. ++ + [827] H.-W. Ke, X.-Q. Li, Y.-L. Shi, The radiative decays of 0 and 1 − heavy mesons, Phys. Rev. D87 (5) (2013) 054022. arXiv:1301.4014, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.054022. + [828] S. Fajfer, A. Prapotnik Brdnik, Chiral loops in the isospin violating decays of Ds1(2460) and + Ds∗0(2317) , Phys. Rev. D92 (2015) 074047. arXiv:1506.02716, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92. CONTENTS 159

074047. [829] Y. I. Azimov, K. Goeke, Decay properties of new D mesons, Eur. Phys. J. A21 (2004) 501–506. arXiv:hep-ph/0403082, doi:10.1140/epja/i2004-10010-4.

[830] X. Liu, Y.-M. Yu, S.-M. Zhao, X.-Q. Li, Study on decays of DsJ∗ (2317) and DsJ (2460) in terms of the CQM model, Eur. Phys. J. C47 (2006) 445–452. arXiv:hep-ph/0601017, doi:10.1140/epjc/s2006-02564-0. 3 1 [831] T. Matsuki, T. Morii, K. Seo, Mixing angle between P1 and P1 in HQET, Prog. Theor. Phys. 124 (2010) 285–292. arXiv:1001.4248, doi:10.1143/PTP.124.285. [832] X.-G. Wu, Q. Zhao, The mixing of Ds1(2460) and Ds1(2536), Phys. Rev. D85 (2012) 034040. arXiv:1111.4002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.034040. [833] C.-H. Chen, Study of B D∗∗π decays, Phys. Rev. D68 (2003) 114008. arXiv:hep-ph/0310290, → doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.68.114008. [834] H.-Y. Cheng, C.-K. Chua, Production of P-wave charmed mesons in hadronic B decays, Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 034020. arXiv:hep-ph/0605073, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.034020. ( ) ( ) [835] J. Segovia, C. Albertus, E. Hernandez, F. Fernandez, D. R. Entem, Nonleptonic B D ∗ D ∗ → sJ decays and the nature of the orbitally excited charmed-strange mesons, Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 014010. arXiv:1203.4362, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.014010. [836] Y.-L. Shen, Z.-J. Yang, X. Yu, Charmed scalar meson production in B decays, Phys. Rev. D90 (11) (2014) 114015. arXiv:1207.5912, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.114015.

[837] F. U. Bernlochner, Z. Ligeti, Semileptonic B(s) decays to excited charmed mesons with e, µ, τ and searching for new physics with R(D∗∗). arXiv:1606.09300. [838] R. Khosravi, Analysis of the semileptonic B D0 transition in QCD sum rules and HQET, Eur. c → 1 Phys. J. C75 (4) (2015) 170. arXiv:1502.01936, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3382-0. [839] A. Datta, H. J. Lipkin, P. J. O’Donnell, Nonleptonic Λb decays to Ds(2317), Ds(2460) and other final states in factorization, Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 094002. arXiv:hep-ph/0312160, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.69.094002. [840] X.-H. Guo, H.-W. Ke, X.-Q. Li, X. Liu, S.-M. Zhao, Study on production of exotic 0+

meson DsJ∗ (2317) in decays of ψ(4415), Commun. Theor. Phys. 48 (2007) 509–518. arXiv: hep-ph/0510146, doi:10.1088/0253-6102/48/3/025. [841] L. W. Chen, C. M. Ko, W. Liu, M. Nielsen, DsJ (2317) meson production at RHIC, Phys. Rev. C76 (2007) 014906. arXiv:0705.1697, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.76.014906. [842] R. Khosravi, K. Azizi, M. Ghanaatian, F. Falahati, Investigation of the Ds1 structure via + B D l l−/νν¯ transitions in QCD, J. Phys. G36 (2009) 095003. arXiv:0907.4773, c → s1 doi:10.1088/0954-3899/36/9/095003. [843] T. M. Aliev, K. Azizi, A. Ozpineci, Semileptonic B D (2460)lν decay in QCD, Eur. Phys. s → sJ J. C51 (2007) 593–599. arXiv:hep-ph/0608264, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-007-0315-6. + [844] G. S. Bali, The DsJ (2317): What can the lattice say?, Phys. Rev. D68 (2003) 071501. arXiv: hep-ph/0305209, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.68.071501. [845] A. Dougall, R. D. Kenway, C. M. Maynard, C. McNeile, [UKQCD Collaboration], The spectrum of Ds mesons from lattice QCD, Phys. Lett. B569 (2003) 41–44. arXiv:hep-lat/0307001, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003.07.017. [846] G. Herdoiza, C. McNeile, C. Michael, [UKQCD Collaboration], Decay constants of P-wave heavy-light mesons from unquenched lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D74 (2006) 014510. arXiv: hep-lat/0604001, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.014510. [847] J. M. Flynn, J. Nieves, Elastic s-wave Bπ, Dπ, DK and Kπ scattering from lattice calculations of scalar form-factors in semileptonic decays, Phys. Rev. D75 (2007) 074024. arXiv:hep-ph/ 0703047, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.75.074024. [848] L. Liu, K. Orginos, F.-K. Guo, C. Hanhart, U.-G. Meissner, Interactions of charmed mesons with

light pseudoscalar mesons from lattice QCD and implications on the nature of the Ds∗0(2317), Phys. Rev. D87 (1) (2013) 014508. arXiv:1208.4535, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.014508. [849] D. Mohler, S. Prelovsek, R. M. Woloshyn, Dπ scattering and D meson resonances from lattice CONTENTS 160

QCD, Phys. Rev. D87 (3) (2013) 034501. arXiv:1208.4059, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87. 034501. [850] G. Moir, M. Peardon, S. M. Ryan, C. E. Thomas, L. Liu, Excited spectroscopy of charmed mesons from lattice QCD, JHEP 05 (2013) 021. arXiv:1301.7670, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2013)021. [851] A. Martinez Torres, E. Oset, S. Prelovsek, A. Ramos, Reanalysis of lattice QCD spectra

leading to the Ds∗0(2317) and Ds∗1(2460), JHEP 05 (2015) 153. arXiv:1412.1706, doi: 10.1007/JHEP05(2015)153. [852] M. Kalinowski, M. Wagner, Masses of D mesons, Ds mesons and charmonium states from twisted mass lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D92 (9) (2015) 094508. arXiv:1509.02396, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.92.094508. [853] K. Cichy, M. Kalinowski, M. Wagner, Continuum limit of the D meson, Ds meson and charmonium spectrum from Nf = 2 + 1 + 1 twisted mass lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D94 (9) (2016) 094503. arXiv:1603.06467, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.094503. [854] W. Chen, H.-X. Chen, X. Liu, T. G. Steele, S.-L. Zhu, Decoding the X(5568) as a fully open- flavor su¯bd¯ tetraquark state, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2) (2016) 022002. arXiv:1602.08916, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.022002. [855] S. S. Agaev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, Mass and decay constant of the newly observed exotic X(5568) state, Phys. Rev. D93 (7) (2016) 074024. arXiv:1602.08642, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93. 074024. [856] C. M. Zanetti, M. Nielsen, K. P. Khemchandani, QCD sum rule study of a charged bottom- strange scalar meson, Phys. Rev. D93 (9) (2016) 096011. arXiv:1602.09041, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.93.096011. [857] Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of the X(5568) as scalar tetraquark state in the diquark-antidiquark model with QCD sum rules, Commun. Theor. Phys. 66 (3) (2016) 335–339. arXiv:1602.08711, doi:10.1088/0253-6102/66/3/335. [858] L. Tang, C.-F. Qiao, Tetraquark states with open flavors, Eur. Phys. J. C76 (10) (2016) 558. arXiv:1603.04761, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4436-7. [859] S. S. Agaev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, Exploring X(5568) as a meson molecule, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 131 (10) (2016) 351. arXiv:1603.02708, doi:10.1140/epjp/i2016-16351-8. [860] S. S. Agaev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, Width of the exotic Xb(5568) state through its strong decay to 0 + Bs π , Phys. Rev. D93 (11) (2016) 114007. arXiv:1603.00290, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93. 114007. [861] Z.-G. Wang, Analysis of the strong decay X(5568) B0π+ with QCD sum rules, Eur. Phys. J. → s C76 (5) (2016) 279. arXiv:1603.02498, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4133-6. [862] J. M. Dias, K. P. Khemchandani, A. Martinez Torres, M. Nielsen, C. M. Zanetti, A QCD sum 0 rule calculation of the X±(5568) B π± decay width, Phys. Lett. B758 (2016) 235–238. → s arXiv:1603.02249, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2016.05.015. [863] S. S. Agaev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, Application of the QCD light cone sum rule to tetraquarks: the strong vertices XbXbρ and XcXcρ, Phys. Rev. D93 (11) (2016) 114036. arXiv:1605.02496, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.114036. [864] S. S. Agaev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, Charmed partner of the exotic X(5568) state and its properties, Phys. Rev. D93 (9) (2016) 094006. arXiv:1603.01471, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.094006. [865] Y.-R. Liu, X. Liu, S.-L. Zhu, X(5568) and and its partner states, Phys. Rev. D93 (7) (2016) 074023. arXiv:1603.01131, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.074023. [866] F. Stancu, X(5568) as a sud¯¯b tetraquark in a simple quark model, J. Phys. G43 (10) (2016) 105001. arXiv:1603.03322, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/43/10/105001. [867] W. Wang, R. Zhu, Can X(5568) be a tetraquark state?, Chin. Phys. C40 (2016) 093101. arXiv:1602.08806, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/40/9/093101.

[868] A. Ali, L. Maiani, A. D. Polosa, V. Riquer, Bc± decays into tetraquarks, Phys. Rev. D94 (3) (2016) 034036. arXiv:1604.01731, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.034036. [869] X.-H. Liu, G. Li, Could the observation of X(5568) be a result of the near threshold CONTENTS 161

rescattering effects?, Eur. Phys. J. C76 (8) (2016) 455. arXiv:1603.00708, doi:10.1140/ epjc/s10052-016-4308-1.

[870] X.-W. Kang, J. A. Oller, P -wave coupled-channel scattering of Bsπ, Bs∗π, BK,B∗K and the puzzling X(5568), Phys. Rev. D94 (5) (2016) 054010. arXiv:1606.06665, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.94.054010. 0 [871] Y. Jin, S.-Y. Li, S.-Q. Li, new Bs π± and Ds±π± states in high energy multiproduction process, Phys. Rev. D94 (1) (2016) 014023. arXiv:1603.03250, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.014023. [872] X.-G. He, P. Ko, Flavor SU (3) properties of beauty tetraquark states with three different light quarks, Phys. Lett. B761 (2016) 92–97. arXiv:1603.02915, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2016. 08.005. [873] T. J. Burns, E. S. Swanson, Interpreting the X(5568), Phys. Lett. B760 (2016) 627–633. arXiv:1603.04366, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2016.07.049. [874] R. Chen, X. Liu, Is the newly reported X(5568) a BK¯ molecular state?, Phys. Rev. D94 (3) (2016) 034006. arXiv:1607.05566, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.034006. [875] F.-K. Guo, U.-G. Meissner, B.-S. Zou, How the X(5568) challenges our understanding of QCD, Commun. Theor. Phys. 65 (5) (2016) 593–595. arXiv:1603.06316, doi:10.1088/0253-6102/ 65/5/593. [876] Q.-F. Lu, Y.-B. Dong, Masses of open charm and bottom tetraquark states in a relativized quark model, Phys. Rev. D94 (9) (2016) 094041. arXiv:1603.06417, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94. 094041. [877] M. Albaladejo, J. Nieves, E. Oset, Z.-F. Sun, X. Liu, Can X(5568) be described as a Bsπ, BK¯ resonant state?, Phys. Lett. B757 (2016) 515–519. arXiv:1603.09230, doi:10.1016/j. physletb.2016.04.033. [878] X. Chen, J. Ping, Is the exotic X(5568) a bound state?, Eur. Phys. J. C76 (6) (2016) 351. arXiv:1604.05651, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4210-x. + [879] C. B. Lang, D. Mohler, S. Prelovsek, Bsπ scattering and search for X(5568) with lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D94 (2016) 074509. arXiv:1607.03185, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.074509. [880] R. Albuquerque, S. Narison, A. Rabemananjara, D. Rabetiarivony, Nature of the X(5568): a critical Laplace sum rule analysis at N2LO, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A31 (17) (2016) 1650093. arXiv:1604.05566, doi:10.1142/S0217751X16500937. [881] A. Esposito, A. Pilloni, A. D. Polosa, Hybridized tetraquarks, Phys. Lett. B758 (2016) 292–295. arXiv:1603.07667, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2016.05.028. [882] J.-X. Lu, X.-L. Ren, L.-S. Geng, Bsπ-BK¯ interaction in finite volume and the X(5568). arXiv: 1607.06327.