qqqqq configuration - arxivsurveying exotic pentaquarks with the typical qqqqq¯ configuration...
TRANSCRIPT
Surveying exotic pentaquarks with the typical QQqqq configuration
Qin-Song Zhou1,2, Kan Chen1,2, and Xiang Liu1,2∗
1School of Physical Science and Technology, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China2Research Center for Hadron and CSR Physics, Lanzhou University and Institute of Modern Physics of CAS, Lanzhou 730000, China
Yan-Rui Liu3†
3School of Physics and Key Laboratory of Particle Physics and Particle Irradiation (MOE), Shandong University, Jinan 250100, China
Shi-Lin Zhu4,5,6‡
4School of Physics and State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China5Collaborative Innovation Center of Quantum Matter, Beijing 100871, China6Center of High Energy Physics, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
(Dated: September 28, 2018)
As a hot issue, exploring exotic pentaquarks is full of challenges and opportunities for both theorist and exper-imentalist. In this work, we focus on a type of pentaquark with the QQqqq (Q = b, c; q = u, d, s) configuration,where their mass spectrum is estimated systematically. Especially, our result indicates that there may exist somestable or narrow exotic pentaquark states. Obviously, our study may provides valuable information for furtherexperimental search for the QQqqq pentaquarks. With the running of LHCb and forthcoming Belle II, we havea reason to believe that these predictions present here can be tested.
PACS numbers:
I. INTRODUCTION
Nowadays it is still a hot topic to identify multiquark statesfrom both theoretical side and experimental side since the pro-posal of the quark model [1, 2]. More and more exotic XYZstates observed by experiments in recent years [3–15] are con-sidered as possible tetraquark candidates [16–24]. With onemore quark component, the intriguing pentaquark states werealso studied in various colliders. Although the subsequent ex-periments [25] did not confirm the light Θ+ pentaquark withcomponent uudds claimed by the LEPS Collaboration [26],the LHCb experiment brought us new findings in the heavyquark realm in 2015 [27]. Two hidden-charm pentaquark-likeresonances Pc(4380) and Pc(4450) are extracted in the J/ψpinvariant mass distribution of the Λ0
b decay into J/ΨK−p. Thisobservation stimulated further studies on pentaquark states[20, 28, 29]. In this paper, we pay attention to the QQqqqsystems, where Q = b, c and q = u, d, s, and estimate themasses of such pentaquark states roughly.
In the quark model, the doubly charmed baryon Ξcc (JP =12
+ or 32
+) is in a 20-plet representation of the flavor SU(4)classification [30]. Although its study started 40 years ago[31], its existence is confirmed very recently [32–34]. Theconfirmation from LHCb motivates further theoretical stud-ies on the possible stable TQQ (QQqq) states, which had beenpredicted in various models. Both the Ξcc baryon and the TQQmeson contain a heavy diquark. Now we would like to addone more light quark component and discuss the spectra ofthe doubly heavy pentaquarks within a simple model. The so-
∗Electronic address: [email protected]†Electronic address: [email protected]‡Electronic address: [email protected]
called heavy diquark-antiquark symmetry was used to relatethe mass splittings of QQq and QQqq in Ref. [35]. Hope-fully, the present investigation can also be helpful to furtherstudy on such a symmetry in multiquark systems.
Compared to the QQq baryon, the QQqqq pentaquark stateshould be heavier. However, the complicated interactionswithin multiquark systems may lower the mass, which proba-bly makes it difficult to distinguish experimentally a conven-tional baryon from a pentaquark baryon just from the massconsideration. One example for this feature is the five newlyobserved Ωc states [36, 37]. They can be accommodated inboth 3q configuration [38–46] and 5q configuration [47–53]and much more measurements are needed to resolve their na-ture. As a theoretical prediction, the basic features for thepentaquark spectra may be useful for us to understand possi-ble structures of heavy quark hadrons.
For the doubly heavy five-quark systems, we have a com-pact QQqqq configuration and two baryon-meson moleucleconfigurations, (QQq)(qq) and (Qqq)(Qq). As for the lattermolecule configuration, there are theoretical studies in the me-son exchange methods [54–56]. Here, we discuss the masssplittings of the compact QQqqq pentaquark states by consid-ering the color-magnetic interactions between quarks and es-timate their rough positions. It is still an open question how todistinguish the two configurations. For example, if we com-pare the prediction for the Λ-type hidden charm state in themolecule picture [57] and the estimation for the mass of thelowest ccuds compact pentaquark [58], one gets consistent re-sults. However, the numbers of possible states in these twopictures are different. The present study should be useful inlooking for genuine pentaquark states rather than molecules.
This paper is organised as follows. In Sec. II, we con-struct the f lavor⊗color⊗ spin wave functions for the QQqqqpentaquark states. In Sec. III, the relevant Hamiltonians forvarious systems are presented. In Sec. IV, we give numerical
arX
iv:1
801.
0455
7v2
[he
p-ph
] 2
7 Se
p 20
18
2
results and discuss the mass spectra of the pentaquark statesand their strong decay channels. Finally, we present a sum-mary in Sec. V.
II. COLOR-MAGNETIC INTERACTION AND WAVEFUNCTIONS
Few-body problem is difficult to deal with and there arescarce dynamical studies on pentaquark systems without sub-structure assumptions [59, 60]. To understand systematicallythe basic features for the properties of multiquark states, as thefirst step, we here adopt a color-magnetic model and mainlyfocus on the mass splittings of the S -wave pentaquark states.For the pentaquark masses, we just present some estimations.Their accurate values need further dynamical calculations.For the ground state hadrons with the same quark content,e.g. ∆ and N, their mass splitting is mainly determined bythe color-magnetic interaction (CMI). The Hamiltonian in thismodel reads
H =∑
i
mi + HCM ,
HCM = −∑i< j
Ci j~λi · ~λ j~σi · ~σ j = −∑i< j
Ci jλai λ
ajσ
bi σ
bj , (1)
where λai (a = 1, · · · , 8) are the Gell-Mann matrices for the
i-th quark and σbj (b = 1, 2, 3) are the Pauli matrices for the
j-th quark. For antiquarks, the ~λi is replaced with −~λ∗i . Theeffective mass mi for the i-th quark includes the constituentquark mass and contributions from color-electric interactionsand color confinements. The effective coupling constants Ci jdepend on the quark masses and the ground state spatial wavefunctions.
The model is an oversimplified one of the realistic quarkinteractions. We may check its relation with the leading or-der Hamiltonian in nonrelativistic approximation in Ref. [31](ignore the electromagnetic part),
H = L(~r1,~r2, ...) +∑
i
(m0i +~pi
2m0i) +
14
∑i> j
αs~λi · ~λ jS i j. (2)
Here, L is responsible for quark binding and ~ri, ~pi, and m0i arethe position, momentum, and mass of the i-th quark, respec-tively. S i j has the form
S i j =1|~r|−
12m0im0 j
( ~pi · ~p j
|~r|+~r · (~r · ~pi)~p j
|~r|3)
−π
2δ3(~r)
( 1m2
0i
+1
m20 j
+4~σi · ~σ j
3m0im0 j
)−
14|~r|3
~r × ~pi · ~σi
m20i
−~r × ~p j · ~σ j
m20 j
+1
m0im0 j
[2~r × ~pi · ~σ j
−2~r × ~p j · ~σi − ~σi · ~σ j + 3(~σi · ~r)(~σ j · ~r)
|~r|2], (3)
where ~r = ~ri − ~r j. For S -wave hadrons, the last two lines(spin-orbit and tensor parts) have vanishing contributions. By
calculating the average value with the orbital wave functionΨ0 (L = 0), one may write the Hamiltonian as
H = 〈Ψ0|H|Ψ0〉
=〈Ψ0|
[L(~r1,~r2, ...) +
∑i
(m0i +~pi
2m0i)]|Ψ0〉
+14
∑i> j
~λi · ~λ j〈Ψ0|αs
[ 1|~r|− (
1m2
0i
+1
m20 j
)π
2δ3(~r)
−1
2m0im0 j
( ~pi · ~p j
|~r|+~r · (~r · ~pi)~p j
|~r|3)]|Ψ0〉
−
∑i> j
π
6〈Ψ0|αsδ
3(~r)|Ψ0〉~λi · ~λ j~σi · ~σ j
m0im0 j
≡ M0 −∑i> j
Ci j~λi · ~λ j~σi · ~σ j. (4)
For states with the same quark content, M0 is a constant and itcan be expressed as the summation of effective quark massesM0 =
∑i mi. Then the model Hamiltonian we will use is
obtained. In principle, the values of mi and Ci j should bedifferent for various systems. However, it is difficult to ex-actly calculate these parameters for a given system withoutknowing the spatial wave function. In the present study, theywill be extracted from the masses of conventional hadrons.That is to say, we use the assumption that quark-quark inter-actions are the same for various systems. This assumptioncertainly leads to uncertainties on hadron masses. The un-certainty cause by mi does not allow us to give accurate pen-taquark masses while the uncertainty in coupling parametershas smaller effects and the mass splittings should be more re-liable. In order to reduce the uncertainties and obtain moreappropriate estimations, we will try to use an alternative formof the mass formula. Whether this manipulation gives resultsclose to realistic masses or not can be tested in future measur-ments.
Obviously, we can calculate the color-magnetic matrix ele-ments and investigate the mass spectra for the QQqqq systemsif the wave functions were constructed. Now we move on tothe construction of the flavor-color-spin wave function of asystem, which is a direct product of SU(3) f flavor wave func-tion, SU(3)c color wave function, and SU(2)s spin wave func-tion. We construct these wave functions separately and thencombine them together by noticing the possible constraintfrom the Pauli principle. We will use the diquark-diquark-antiquark bases to construct the wave function. In principle,the selection of wave function bases is irrelevant with the finalresults since we will diagonalize the Hamiltonian in this CMImodel. Here, the notation “diquark” only means two quarksand it does not mean a compact substructure.
In flavor space, the heavy quarks are treated as SU(3) f sin-glet states and the light diquark may be in the flavor antisym-metric 3 f or symmetric 6 f representation. For the case of theantisymmetric (symmetric) light diquark, the representationsof the pentaquarks are 6 f and 3 f (3 f and 15 f ). We plot theSU(3) f weight diagrams for the QQqqq systems in Fig. 1.The explicit wave functions are similar to the qqqQ tetraquarkstates presented in Ref. [61]. Because of the unequal quark
3
masses, we consider SU(3) f symmetry breaking and the flavormixing among different representations occurs. The result-ing systems we consider are: Q1Q2nnn, Q1Q2nns, Q1Q2nsn,Q1Q2nss, Q1Q2ssn, and Q1Q2sss, where n represents u or d.
QQnsn
QQnss
QQnns
QQnnn
3 f 6 f
(a) The two light quarks belong to 3 f .
QQnns
QQnssQQnnn
QQnsnQQsss
QQssn
3 f
15 f
(b) The two light quarks belong to 6 f .
FIG. 1: SU(3) f weight diagrams for the QQqqq pentaquark states.
In color space, the Young diagrams tell us that the pen-taquark systems have three color singlets. Then we have threecolor wave functions. The direct product for the representa-tions can be written as
(3c ⊗ 3c) ⊗ (3c ⊗ 3c) ⊗ 3c
= (3c ⊕ 6c) ⊗ (3c ⊕ 6c) ⊗ 3c
= (3c ⊗ 3c ⊗ 3c) ⊕ (3c ⊗ 6c ⊗ 3c) ⊕ (6c ⊗ 3c ⊗ 3c). (5)
In the last line, the representations in the parentheses are forthe heavy diquark, light diquark, and antiquark, respectively.Then the color-singlet wave functions can be constructed as
φAA = [(Q1Q2)3c (q3q4)3c q],
φAS = [(Q1Q2)3c (q3q4)6c q],
φS A = [(Q1Q2)6c (q3q4)3c q], (6)
where A (S ) means antisymmetric (symmetric) for the di-quarks. Explicitly, we have
φAA =1
2√
6
[(rbbg − rbgb + brgb − brbg + gbrb − gbbr
+bgbr − bgrb)b + (rbrg − rbgr + brgr − brrg+grrb − grbr + rgbr − rgrb)r + (gbrg − gbgr
+bggr − bgrg + grgb − grbg + rgbg − rggb)g], (7)
φAS =1
4√
3
[(2rgbb − 2grbb − rbgb − rbbg + brgb
+brbg + gbrb + gbbr − bgrb − bgbr)b + (2gbrr−2bgrr − rbrg − rbgr + brrg + brgr − grrb − grbr+rgrb + rgbr)r + (2brgg − 2rbgg + gbrg + gbgr
−bgrg − bggrg − grgb − grbg + rggb + rgbg)g], (8)
φS A =1
4√
3
[(2bbgr − 2bbrg + gbrb − gbbr + bgrb − bgbr
−rbgb + rbbg − brgb + brbg)b + (2rrbg − 2rrgb+rgrb − rgbr + grrb − grbr + rbgr − rbrg + brgr−brrg)r + (2ggrb − 2ggbr − rggb + rgbg
−grgb + grbg + gbgr − gbrg + bggr − bgrg)g]. (9)
The spin wave functions for the pentaquark states are
χS S :
χ1 = [(Q1Q2)1(q3q4)1q]522 ,
χ2 = [(Q1Q2)1(q3q4)1q]322 ,
χ3 = [(Q1Q2)1(q3q4)1q]321 ,
χ4 = [(Q1Q2)1(q3q4)1q]121 ,
χ5 = [(Q1Q2)1(q3q4)1q]120 ,
(10)
χS A :
χ6 = [(Q1Q2)1(q3q4)0q]321 ,
χ7 = [(Q1Q2)1(q3q4)0q]121 ,
(11)
χAS :
χ8 = [(Q1Q2)0(q3q4)1q]321 ,
χ9 = [(Q1Q2)0(q3q4)1q]121 ,
(12)
χAA : χ10 = [(Q1Q2)0(q3q4)0q]120 . (13)
Here in the symbol [(Q1Q2)spin(q3q4)spinq]totalspinj , j is the total
spin of the first four quarks. The superscript S A of χ meansthat the first two quarks are symmetric and the second twoquarks are antisymmetric. Other superscripts are understoodsimilarly.
Considering the Pauli principle, we obtain twelve types oftotal wave functions [φAA ⊗ χS S ]δA
34, [φAA ⊗ χS A]δS34, [φAA ⊗
χAS ]δ12δA34, [φAA⊗χAA]δ12δ
S34, [φAS ⊗χS S ]δS
34, [φAS ⊗χS A]δA34,
[φAS ⊗χAS ]δ12δS34, [φAS ⊗χAA]δ12δ
A34, [φS A⊗χS S ]δ12δ
A34, [φS A⊗
χS A]δ12δS34, [φS A ⊗ χAS ]δA
34, and [φS A ⊗ χAA]δS34. Here, δ12 =
0 when the first two quarks are identical, or else δ12 = 1.When the two light quarks are antisymmetric (symmetric) inthe flavor space, δA
34 = 0 (δS34 = 0), or else δA
34 = 1 (δS34 = 1).
Then the considered pentaquark states are categorized into sixclasses:
1.The (ccnn)I=1q, (bbnn)I=1q, (ccss)q, and (bbss)q stateswith δ12 = δS
34 = 0;
4
2.The (ccnn)I=0q and (bbnn)I=0q states with δ12 = δA34 = 0;
3.The (bcnn)I=1q and (bcss)q states with δ12 = 1 and δS34 =
0;4.The (bcnn)I=0q states with δ12 = 1 and δA
34 = 0;5.The (ccns)q and (bbns)q states with δ12 = 0 and δS
34 =
δA34 = 1;
6.The (bcns)q states with δ12 = δA34 = δS
34 = 1.In the following discussions, we also use the notation[(Q1Q2)color
spin (q3q4)colorspin q]totalspin
j to denote the total wave func-tion.
III. THE HAMILTONIAN EXPRESSIONS
With the constructed wave functions, we calculate color-magnetic matrix elements on various bases. In this section,we present the obtained Hamiltonians in the matrix form. Tosimplify the expressions, we use the variables defined in TableI.
TABLE I: Defined variables to simplify the CMI expressions.
Variable Definition Variable Definitionα C12 + C34 β C13 + C14 + C23 + C24
λ C15 + C25 γ C13 + C14 −C23 −C24
µ C15 −C25 δ C13 −C14 + C23 −C24
ν C35 + C45 η C13 −C14 −C23 + C24
ρ C35 −C45
θ C12 − 3C34
τ 3C12 −C34
A. (ccnn)I=1q, (bbnn)I=1q, (ccss)q, and (bbss)q states in the firstclass
Three types of basis vectors are involved in calculating therelevant matrix elements: [φAA ⊗ χS S ]δA
34, [φAS ⊗ χS A]δA34, and
[φS A ⊗ χAS ]δA34.
For the JP = 52− states, there is only one basis vector
[(QQ)31(q3q4)3
1q]522 . The obtained Hamiltonian is
〈HCM〉J= 52
=23
(4α + β + 2λ + 2ν). (14)
For the JP = 32− states, we have four basis vectors,
[(QQ)31(q3q4)3
1q]322 , [(QQ)3
1(q3q4)31q]
321 , [(QQ)3
1(q3q4)60q]
321 , and
[(QQ)60(q3q4)3
1q]321 . The resulting Hamiltonian is
〈HCM〉J= 32
=23
4α + β − 3(λ + ν)
√5(ν − λ) 3
√5ν 3
√5λ
√5(ν − λ) 4α − β + λ + ν 3(β − ν) 3(λ − β)3√
5ν 3(β − ν) 12 (9α − θ) − λ − 3
2 β
3√
5λ 3(λ − β) − 32 β
12 (9α + τ) − ν
.(15)
For the JP = 12− states, the basis vectors are
[(QQ)31(q3q4)3
1q]121 , [(QQ)3
1(q3q4)60q]
121 , [(QQ)6
0(q3q4)31q]
121 , and
[(QQ)31(q3q4)3
1q]120 and the Hamiltonian reads
〈HCM〉J= 12
=23
4α − β − 2(λ + ν) 3(β + 2ν) −3(β + 2λ) 2
√2(ν − λ)
3(β + 2ν) 12 (9α − θ) + 2λ − 3
2 β −3√
2ν−3(β + 2λ) − 3
2 β12 (9α + τ) + 2ν −3
√2λ
2√
2(ν − λ) −3√
2ν −3√
2λ 4α − 2β
.(16)
B. (ccnn)I=0q and (bbnn)I=0q states in the second class
In this case, we also have three types of basis vectors toconsider: [φAAχS A]δS
34, [φASχS S ]δS34, and [φS AχAA]δS
34.
For the JP = 52− states, the involved basis vector is
[(QQ)31(nn)6
1q]522 and the obtained Hamiltonian is
〈HCM〉J= 52
=13
(3τ − α + 5β − 2λ + 10ν). (17)
For the JP = 32− states, there are three basis vectors
[(QQ)31(nn)6
1q]322 , [(QQ)3
1(nn)61q]
321 , and [(QQ)3
1(nn)30q]
321 . We
can get the following Hamiltonian,
〈HCM〉J= 32
=13
3τ − α + 5β + 3λ − 15ν√
5(λ + 5ν) 6√
5ν√
5(λ + 5ν) 3τ − α − 5β − λ + 5ν 6(β − ν)6√
5ν 6(β − ν) 4(2θ + λ)
.(18)
For the JP = 12− states, we have four basis vec-
tors [(QQ)31(nn)6
1q]121 , [(QQ)3
1(nn)30q]
121 , [(QQ)6
0(nn)30q]
120 , and
[(QQ)31(nn)6
1q]120 . Then the Hamiltonian
〈HCM〉J= 12
=13
3τ − α − 5β + 2λ − 10ν 6(β + 2ν) 0 2
√2(λ + 5ν)
6(β + 2ν) 8(θ − λ) 6√
6λ −6√
2ν0 6
√6λ 3(3θ + α) 3
√3β
2√
2(λ + 5ν) −6√
2ν 3√
3β 3τ − α − 10β
(19)
can be obtained.
C. (cbnn)I=1q and (cbss)q states in the third class
5
Now, one does not need to consider the constraint for the heavy diquark from the Pauli principle and we then have six typesof basis vectors, [φAAχS S ]δA
34, [φAAχAS ]δ12δA34, [φASχS A]δA
34, [φASχAA]δ12δA34, [φS AχS S ]δ12δ
A34, and [φS AχAS ]δA
34.
For the JP = 52− states, two basis vectors, [(cb)3
1(q3q4)31q]
522 and [(cb)6
1(q3q4)31q]
522 , are involved and the obtained Hamiltonian is
〈HCM〉J= 52
=13
(2(4α + β + 2λ + 2ν) 3
√2(γ − 2µ)
3√
2(γ − 2µ) 5β + 10λ − 2ν − α − 3θ
). (20)
For the JP = 32− states, there are seven basis vectors, [(cb)3
1(q3q4)31q]
322 , [(cb)3
1(q3q4)31q]
321 , [(cb)3
0(q3q4)31q]
321 , [(cb)3
1(q3q4)60q]
321 ,
[(cb)61(q3q4)3
1q]322 , [(cb)6
1(q3q4)31q]
321 , and [(cb)6
0(q3q4)31q]
321 . One obtains the Hamiltonian as follows,
〈HCM〉J= 32
=23
(4α+β−3(λ+ν)
) √5(ν−λ) −
√10µ 3
√5ν 3
√2
(γ+3µ) 3√
102 µ 3
√5λ
√5(ν−λ)
(4α−β+λ+ν
)−√
2(γ+µ) 3(β−ν) 3√
102 µ − 3
√2
(γ+µ) 3(λ−β)
−√
10µ −√
2(γ+ν) 2(ν−2τ) 3√
2γ 3
√5λ 3(λ−β) 0
3√
5ν 3(β−ν) 3√
2γ 1
2 (9α−θ)−λ 0 − 3√
2γ − 3
2 β
3√
3(γ+3µ) 3
√10
2 µ 3√
5λ 0 12
(5β−15λ+3ν−α−3θ
)−√
52 (5λ+ν) −
5√
102 µ
√5(ν−λ) − 3
√2
(γ+µ) 3(λ−β) − 3√
2γ −
√5
2 (5λ+ν) 12
(5λ−α−3θ−5β−ν
)− 5√
2(γ+µ)
3√
5λ 3(λ−β) 0 − 32 β −
5√
102 µ − 5
√2
(γ+µ) 12 (9α+τ)−ν
. (21)
For the JP = 12− states, eight basis vectors are involved, [(cb)3
1(q3q4)31q]
121 , [(cb)3
1(q3q4)31q]
120 , [(cb)3
0(q3q4)31q]
121 , [(cb)3
1(q3q4)60q]
121 ,
[(cb)30(q3q4)6
0q]120 , [(cb)6
1(q3q4)31q]
121 , [(cb)6
1(q3q4)31q]
120 , and [(cb)6
0(q3q4)31q]
121 . The resulting Hamiltonian is
〈HCM〉J= 12
=23
(4α−β−2λ−2ν
)2√
2(ν−λ)√
2(2µ−γ) 3(β+2ν) 0 3√
2(2µ−γ) 6µ −3(β+2λ)
2√
2(ν−λ) 2(2α−β) 2µ −3√
2ν − 3√
62 γ 6µ −3
√2γ −3
√2λ
√2(2µ−γ) −3
√2ν −4(τ+ν) 3
√2γ 3
√6ν −3(β+2λ) −3
√2λ 0
3(β+2ν) − 3√
62 γ 3
√2γ 1
2 (9α−θ)+2λ√
3µ − 3√
2γ 0 − 3
2 β
0 − 3√
62 γ 3
√6ν
√3µ 3
2 (α−3τ) 0 3√
32 β 0
3√
2(2µ−γ) −3
√2γ −3(β+2λ) − 3
√2γ 0
(− 1
2 (α+3θ)−52 β−5λ+ν
)−√
2(5λ+ν) 5√
2(2µ−γ)
6µ −3√
2γ −3√
2λ 0 3√
32 β −
√2(5λ+ν) − 1
2 (α+3θ)−5β 5µ
−3(β+2λ) −3√
2λ 0 − 32 β 0 5
√2
(2µ−γ) 5µ 12 (9α+τ)+2ν
. (22)
D. (cbnn)I=0q states in the fourth class
In this case, we also have six types of basis vectors, [φAAχS A]δS34, [φAAχAA]δ12δ
S34, [φASχS S ]δS
34, [φASχAS ]δ12δS34,
[φS AχS A]δ12δS34, and [φS AχAA]δS
34.
For the JP = 52− states, there is only one basis vector [(cb)3
1(nn)61q]
522 . The obtained Hamiltonian is
〈HCM〉J= 52
=13
(3τ − α + 5β − 2λ + 10ν). (23)
For the JP = 32− states, the involved basis vectors are [(cb)3
1(nn)30q]
321 , [(cb)3
1(nn)61q]
322 , [(cb)3
1(nn)61q]
321 , [(cb)3
0(nn)61q]
321 , and
[(cb)61(nn)3
0q]321 . The Hamiltonian can be written as
〈HCM〉J= 32
=23
4θ + 2λ 3√
5ν 3(β − ν) 3√
2γ −3
√2µ
3√
5ν 12
(3τ − α + 5β+3λ − 15ν
)√
52 (λ + 5ν)
√102 µ 0
3(β − ν)√
52 (λ + 5ν) 1
2
(3τ − α − 5β−λ + 5ν
)1√
2(µ − 5γ) − 3
√2γ
3√
2γ
√102 µ 1
√2
(µ − 5γ) 5ν − 12 (9α + 5τ) − 3
2 β
−3√
2µ 0 − 3√
2γ − 3
2 β 5λ + 12 (5θ − 9α)
. (24)
For the JP = 12− states, we have seven basis vectors, [(cb)3
1(nn)30q]
121 , [(cb)3
0(nn)30q]
120 , [(cb)3
1(nn)61q]
121 , [(cb)3
1(nn)61q]
120 ,
6
[(cb)30(nn)6
1q]121 , [(cb)6
1(nn)30q]
121 , and [(cb)6
0(nn)30q]
120 . The obtained Hamiltonian reads
〈HCM〉J= 12
=23
4(θ−λ) −2√
3µ 3(β+2ν) −3√
2ν 3√
2γ 6
√2µ 3
√6λ
−2√
3µ −12α 0 − 3√
62 γ 3
√6ν 3
√6λ 0
3(β+2ν) 0 12
(3τ−α−5β+2λ−10ν
) √2(λ+5ν) − 1
√2
(5γ+2µ) − 3√
2γ 0
−3√
2ν − 3√
62 γ
√2(λ+5ν) 1
2 (3τ−α)−5β −µ 0 3√
32 β
3√
2γ 3
√6ν − 1
√2
(5γ+2µ) −µ − 12 (9α+5τ)−10ν − 3
2 β 0
6√
2µ 3√
6λ − 3√
2γ 0 − 3
2 β12 (5θ−9α)−10λ −5
√3µ
3√
6λ 0 0 3√
32 β 0 −5
√3µ 3
2 (3θ+α)
. (25)
E. (ccns)q and (bbns)q states in the fifth class
In this case, again we have six types of basis vectors, [φAAχS S ]δA34, [φAAχS A]δS
34, [φASχS S ]δS34, [φASχS A]δA
34, [φS AχAS ]δA34, and
[φS AχAA]δS34.
For the JP = 52− states, the basis vectors are [(QQ)3
1(ns)31q]
522 and [(QQ)3
1(ns)61q]
522 and the Hamiltonian is
〈HCM〉J= 52
=23
4α + β + 2λ + 2ν 3√
2(δ − 2ρ)
3√
2(δ − 2ρ) 1
2 (3τ − α + 5β − 2λ + 10ν)
. (26)
For the JP = 32− states, the involved basis vectors are [(QQ)3
1(ns)31q]
322 , [(QQ)3
1(ns)31q]
321 , [(QQ)3
1(ns)30q]
321 , [(QQ)3
1(ns)61q]
322 ,
[(QQ)31(ns)6
1q]321 , [(QQ)3
1(ns)60q]
321 , and [(QQ)6
0(ns)31q]
321 . Then one can get
〈HCM〉J= 32
=23
(4α+β−3(λ+ν)
) √5(ν−λ) −
√10ρ 3
√2
(δ+3ρ) −3√
102 ρ 3
√5ν 3
√5λ
√5(ν−λ)
(4α−β+λ+ν
) √2(δ+ρ) −
3√
102 ρ − 3
√2
(δ+ρ) 3(β−ν) 3(λ−β)
−√
10ρ√
2(δ+ρ) 4θ+2λ 3√
5ν 3(β−ν) 0 3√
2δ
3√
2(δ+3ρ) − 3
√10
2 ρ 3√
5ν 12
(3τ−α+5β+3λ−15ν
) √5
2 (λ+5ν) −5√
102 ρ 0
−3√
102 ρ − 3
√2
(δ+ρ) 3(β−ν)√
52 (λ+5ν) 1
2
(3τ−α−λ−5β+5ν
)5√
2(δ+ρ) 3
√2δ
3√
5ν 3(β−ν) 0 −5√
102 ρ 5
√2
(δ+ρ) 12 (9α−θ)−λ − 3
2 β
3√
5λ 3(λ−β) 3√
2δ 0 3
√2δ − 3
2 β12 (9α+τ)−ν
. (27)
For the JP = 12− states, the basis vectors are [(QQ)3
1(ns)31q]
121 , [(QQ)3
1(ns)31q]
120 , [(QQ)3
1(ns)30q]
121 , [(QQ)3
1(ns)61q]
121 ,
[(QQ)31(ns)6
1q]120 , [(QQ)3
1(ns)60q]
121 , [(QQ)6
0(ns)31q]
121 , and [(QQ)6
0(ns)30q]
120 . The derived Hamiltonian reads
〈HCM〉J= 12
=23
(4α−β−2λ−2ν
)2√
2(ν−λ)√
2(δ−2ρ) 3√
2(2ρ−δ) −6ρ 3(β+2ν) −3(β+2λ) 0
2√
2(ν−λ) 2(2α−β) 2ρ −6ρ −3√
2δ −3√
2ν −3√
2λ − 3√
62 δ
√2(δ−2ρ) 2ρ 4(θ−λ) 3(β+2ν) −3
√2ν 0 3
√2δ 3
√6λ
3√
2(2ρ−δ) −6ρ 3(β+2ν) 1
2
(3τ−α−5β+2λ−10ν
) √2(λ+5ν) 5
√2
(δ−2ρ) 3√
2δ 0
−6ρ −3√
2δ −3√
2ν√
2(λ+5ν) 12 (3τ−α)−5β 5ρ 0 3
√3
2 β
3(β+2ν) −3√
2ν 0 5√
2(δ−2ρ) 5ρ 1
2 (9α−θ)+2λ − 32 β 0
−3(β+2λ) −3√
2λ 3√
2δ 3
√2δ 0 − 3
2 β12 (9α+τ)+2ν
√3ρ
0 − 3√
62 δ 3
√6λ 0 3
√3
2 β 0√
3ρ 32 (3θ+α)
. (28)
7
F. (cbns)q states in the sixth class
〈HC
M〉 J
=3 2
=2 3
( 4α+β
−3λ−
3ν
) √5(ν−λ
)−√
10ρ−√
10µ
3 √2
(δ+
3ρ)−
3√
10 2ρ
3√
5ν0
3√
22
(γ+
3µ)
3√
10 2µ
03√
5λ√
5(ν−λ
)( 4α−β
+λ+ν) √
2(δ+ρ
)−√
2(γ+µ
)−
3√
10 2ρ−
3√
22
(δ+ρ
)3(β−ν)
−3η
3√
10 2µ
−3√
22
(γ+µ
)3η
3(λ−β
)
−√
10ρ
√2(δ+ρ
)4θ
+2λ
η3√
5ν3(β−ν)
03 √2γ
03η
−3√
2µ3 √2δ
−√
10µ−√
2(γ+µ
)η
2ν−
4τ0
−3η
3 √2γ
−3√
2ρ3√
5λ3(λ−β
)3 √2δ
0
3 √2
(δ+
3ρ)−
3√
10 2ρ
3√
5ν0
1 2
3τ−α
+5β
+3λ
−15ν
√5 2
(λ+
5ν)−
5√
10 2ρ
√10 2µ
−3 2η
00
0
−3√
10 2ρ−
3√
22
(δ+ρ
)3(β−ν)
−3η
√5 2
(λ+
5ν)
1 2
3τ−α
−5β−λ
+5ν
5 √2
(δ+ρ
)1 √2
(µ−
5γ)
03 2η
−3 √2γ
3 √2δ
3√
5ν3(β−ν)
03 √2γ
−5√
10 2ρ
5 √2
(δ+ρ
)9 2α−
1 2θ−λ
5 2η
0−
3 √2γ
0−
3 2β
0−
3η3 √2γ
−3√
2ρ√
10 2µ
1 √2
(µ−
5γ)
5 2η
5ν−
9 2α−
5 2τ
03 √2δ
−3 2β
0
3√
22
(γ+
3µ)
3√
10 2µ
03√
5λ−
3 2η
00
01 2
5β−α−
3θ+
3ν−
15λ
−√5 2
(5λ+ν)
√10 2ρ
−5√
10 2µ
3√
10 2µ−
3√
22
(γ+µ
)3η
3(λ−β
)0
3 2η
−3 √2γ
3 √2δ
−√
5 2(5λ+ν)
1 2
( 5λ−
3θ−α−ν
−5β
) 1 √2
(5δ−ρ
)−
5 √2
(γ+µ
)
03η
−3√
2µ3 √2δ
0−
3 √2γ
0−
3 2β
√10 2ρ
1 √2
(5δ−ρ
)5λ
+5 2θ−
9 2α
5 2η
3√
5λ3(λ−β
)3 √2δ
00
3 √2δ
−3 2β
0−
5√
10 2µ−
5 √2
(γ+µ
)5 2η
9 2α
+1 2τ−ν
.
(29)
〈HC
M〉 J
=1 2
=2 3×
( 4α−β
−2λ−
2ν
) 2√
2(ν−λ
)√
2(δ−
2ρ)√
2(2µ−γ
)0
3 √2
(2ρ−δ)
−6ρ
3(β+
2ν)
−3η
03 √2
(2µ−γ
)6µ
3η−
3(β+
2λ)
0
2√
2(ν−λ
)2(
2α−β
)2ρ
2µ−√
3η−
6ρ−
3√
2δ−
3√
2ν0
−3√
62γ
6µ−
3√
2γ0
−3√
2λ−
3√
62δ
√2(δ−
2ρ)
2ρ4(θ−λ
)η
−2√
3µ3(β+
2ν)
−3√
2ν0
3 √2γ
03η
06√
2µ3 √2δ
3√
6λ√
2(2µ−γ
)2µ
η−
4(τ+ν)−
2√
3ρ−
6η0
3 √2γ
6√
2ρ3√
6ν−
3(β+
2λ)
−3√
2λ3 √2δ
00
0−√
3η−
2√
3µ−
2√
3ρ−
12α
0−
3√
62γ
03√
6ν0
0−
3√
62δ
3√
6λ0
0
3 √2
(2ρ−δ)
−6ρ
3(β+
2ν)
−6η
01 2
( 3τ−α−
5β+
2λ−
10ν
) √2(λ+
5ν)
5 √2
(δ−
2ρ)−
1 √2
(5γ−
2µ)
0−
3 2η
0−
3 √2γ
3 √2δ
0
−6ρ
−3√
2δ−
3√
2ν0
−3√
62γ√
2(λ+
5ν)
3 2τ−
1 2α−
5β5ρ
−λ
−5√
32η
03η
00
3√
32β
3(β+
2ν)−
3√
2ν0
3 √2γ
05 √2
(δ−
2ρ)
5ρ9 2α−
1 2θ+
2λ5 2η
√3µ
−3 √2γ
00
−3 2β
0
−3η
03 √2γ
6√
2ρ3√
6ν√
2µ−
5 √2γ
−λ
5 2η
−9 2α−
5 2τ−
10ν−
5√
3ρ3 √2δ
0−
3 2β
00
0−
3√
62γ
03√
6ν0
0−
5√
32η
√3µ
−5√
3ρ3 2α−
9 2τ
03√
32β
00
0
3 √2
(2µ−γ
)6µ
3η−
3(β+
2λ)
0−
3 2η
0−
3 √2γ
3 √2δ
01 2
( −3θ−α
+ν−
5β−
10λ
) −√
2(5λ
+ν)
√2(
5 2δ+ρ
)5 √2
(2µ−γ
)0
6µ−
3√
2γ0
−3√
2λ−
3√
62δ
03η
00
3√
32β−√
2(5λ
+ν)−
3 2θ−
1 2α−
5β−ρ
5µ−
5√
32η
3η0
6√
2µ3 √2δ
3√
6λ−
3 √2γ
00
−3 2β
0√
2(5 2δ+ρ
)−ρ
5 2θ−
9 2α−
10λ
5 2η
−5√
3µ
−3(β+
2λ)−
3√
2λ3 √2δ
00
3 √2δ
0−
3 2β
00
5 √2
(2µ−γ
)5µ
5 2η
9 2α
+1 2τ+
2ν√
3ρ
0−
3√
62δ
3√
6λ0
00
3√
32β
00
00
−5√
32η
−5√
3µ√
3ρ3 2α
+9 2θ .
(30)
8
Since the Pauli principle has no effects in this case, the most basis vectors are involved. There are twelve types ofbases, [φAAχS S ]δA
34, [φAAχS A]δS34, [φAAχAS ]δ12δ
A34, [φAAχAA]δ12δ
S34, [φASχS S ]δS
34, [φASχS A]δA34, [φASχAS ]δ12δ
S34, [φASχAA]δ12δ
A34,
[φS AχS S ]δ12δA34, [φS AχS A]δ12δ
S34, [φS AχAS ]δA
34, and [φS AχAA]δS34.
For the JP = 52− states, the basis vectors are [(cb)3
1(ns)31q]
522 , [(cb)3
1(ns)61q]
522 , and [(cb)6
1(ns)31q]
522 and the Hamiltonian is
〈HCM〉J= 52
=13
2(4α + β + 2λ + 2ν) 3
√2(δ − 2ρ) 3
√2(γ − 2µ)
3√
2(δ − 2ρ) 3τ − α + 5β − 2λ + 10ν −3η3√
2(γ − 2µ) −3η 5β + 10λ − 2ν − (α + 3θ)
. (31)
For the JP = 32− states, the basis vectors are [(cb)3
1(ns)31q]
322 ,
[(cb)31(ns)3
1q]321 , [(cb)3
1(ns)30q]
321 , [(cb)3
0(ns)31q]
321 , [(cb)3
1(ns)61q]
322 ,
[(cb)31(ns)6
1q]321 , [(cb)3
1(ns)60q]
321 , [(cb)3
0(ns)61q]
321 , [(cb)6
1(ns)31q]
322 ,
[(cb)61(ns)3
1q]321 , [(cb)6
1(ns)30q]
321 , and [(cb)6
0(ns)31q]
321 . The result-
ing Hamiltonian is given in Eq. (29).For the JP = 1
2− states, the fifteen basis vectors are
[(cb)31(ns)3
1q]121 , [(cb)3
1(ns)31q]
120 , [(cb)3
1(ns)30q]
121 , [(cb)3
0(ns)31q]
121 ,
[(cb)30(ns)3
0q]120 , [(cb)3
1(ns)61q]
121 , [(cb)3
1(ns)61q]
120 , [(cb)3
1(ns)60q]
121 ,
[(cb)30(ns)6
1q]121 , [(cb)3
0(ns)60q]
120 , [(cb)6
1(ns)31q]
121 , [(cb)6
1(ns)31q]
120 ,
[(cb)61(ns)3
0q]121 , [(cb)6
0(ns)31q]
121 , and [(cb)6
0(ns)31q]
120 . We
present the obtained Hamiltonian in Eq. (30).
IV. THE QQqqq PENTAQUARK MASS SPECTRA
Now, we determine the values of the seventeen couplingparameters (Cnn, Cns, Css, Ccn, Cbn, Ccs, Cbs, Cbc, Ccc, Cbb,
Cnn, Csn = Cns, Css, Ccn, Cbn, Ccs, and Cbs) and the four ef-fective quark masses (mn, ms, mc, and mb) in order to estimatethe pentaquark masses. The procedure to extract the param-eters has been illustrated in Ref. [62]. From the calculatedCMI matrix elements for ground state hadrons and their masssplittings, we can get most values of the coupling parameterswhich are shown in Table II. To determine Css, one needs themass of a ground pseudoscalar meson having the same quarkcontent with φ. Since there is no such a state, here we adoptapproximately Css = Css. Similarly, we use the approxima-tion CQQ = CQQ (Cbb = Cbb = 2.9 MeV, Ccc = Ccc = 5.3MeV, and Cbc = Cbc = 3.3 MeV) since only one doubly heavybaryon Ξcc is observed. In Table II, the B∗c has not been ob-served yet and we take its mass from a model calculation [63].The effective quark masses can be extracted from the groundstate baryons after the determination of the coupling parame-ters, and we present them in Table III.
TABLE II: The extracted effective coupling parameters.
Hadron CMI Hadron CMI Parameter(MeV)N −8Cnn ∆ 8Cnn Cnn = 18.4Σ 8
3 Cnn −323 Cns Σ∗ 8
3 Cnn + 163 Cns Cns = 12.4
Ξ0 83 (Css − 4Cns) Ξ∗0 8
3 (Css + Cns)Ω 8Css Css = 6.5Λ −8Cnn
π0 −16Cnn ρ 163 Cnn Cnn = 30.0
K −16Cns K∗ 163 Ccs Cns = 18.7
D −16Ccn D∗ 163 Ccn Ccn = 6.7
Ds −16Ccs D∗s163 Ccs Ccs=6.7
B −16Cbn B∗ 163 Cbn Cbn=2.1
Bs −16Cbs B∗s163 Cbs Cbs=2.3
Bc −16Cbc B∗c[63] 163 Cbc Cbc = 3.3
ηc −16Ccc J/ψ 163 Ccc Ccc = 5.3
ηb −16Cbb Υ 163 Cbb Cbb = 2.9
Σc83 Cnn −
323 Ccn Σ∗c
83 Cnn + 16
3 Ccn Ccn = 4.0Ξ′c
83 Cns −
163 Ccn −
163 Ccs Ξ∗c
83 Cns + 8
3 Ccn + 83 Ccs Ccs = 4.8
Σb83 Cnn −
323 Cbn Σ∗b
83 Cnn + 16
3 Cbn Cbn = 1.3Ξ′b
83 Cns −
163 Cbn −
163 Cbs Ξ∗b
83 Cns + 8
3 Cbn + 83 Cbs Cbs = 1.2
9
TABLE III: The effective constituent quark masses extracted from conventional baryons.Mass formula Quark mass (MeV)MN = 3mn − 8Cnn mn = 361.8MΩ = 3ms + 8Css ms = 540.4MΣc = 8
3 Cnn −323 Cnc + 2mn + mc
MΣ∗c = 83 Cnn + 16
3 Cnc + 2mn + mcmc = 1724.8
MΣb = 83 Cnn −
323 Cnb + 2mn + mb
MΣ∗b= 8
3 Cnn + 163 Cnb + 2mn + mb
mb = 5052.9
With these parameters, we can estimate the pentaquark masses in two ways. In the first method, one substitutes the relevantparameters into M =
∑i mi + 〈HCM〉. In the second method, we employ the formula M = Mre f − 〈HCM〉re f + 〈HCM〉, where
Mre f = Mbaryon + Mmeson is a reference mass scale and 〈HCM〉re f = 〈HCM〉baryon + 〈HCM〉meson. The reference baryon and mesonsystem should have the same constituent quarks as the considered system [64]. Although the mass formula in the second methodis from that in the first method, one should note the difference in adopting them. When applying the first formula to conventionalhadrons, the resulting masses are usually higher than the experimental measurements, which is illustrated in table IV. Thisindicates that the simple model does not incorporate attraction sufficiently. As a result, we may treat the pentaquark massesestimated with the first method as theoretical upper limits. In the second method, we use the realistic values rather than thecalculated values for the hadron masses of the reference system. The attraction that the model does not incorporate is somehowphenomenologically compensated in this procedure. The estimated masses in the second method should be more reasonablethan those in the first method. In the following parts, we will present numerical results obtained in both methods. To understandthe decay properties in the following discussions, we will adopt some masses of the not-yet-observed doubly heavy baryons,which were obtained from several theoretical calculations. They are presented in table V.
TABLE IV: Mass differences (∆M = MTh. −MEx.) between the calculated values (Th.) and experimental values (Ex.) for conventional hadronsin units of MeV.
Hadron ∆M Hadron ∆M Hadron ∆M Hadron ∆Mπ 109.5 ρ 107.2 N 0 ∆ 0K 110.6 K∗ 105.3 Σ -12.4 Σ∗ -5.4ω 99.8 φ 96.0 Ξ 9.4 Ξ∗ -7.3D 112.2 D∗ 113.7 Λ 1.1 Ω 0Ds 189.7 D∗s 188.7 Σc 0 Σ∗c 0B 101.6 B∗ 101.2 Λc 14.7 Ξc 58.4Bs 189.6 B∗s 190.2 Ξ′c 35 Ξ∗c 37.6ηc 380.9 J/ψ 381.0 Ωc 76.5 Ω∗c 82.6ηb 660.0 Υ 661.0 Σb 0 Σ∗b 0Bc 450.0 Λb 9.7 Ξb 62.7
Ξ′b 39.8 Ξ∗b 45.0Ωb 92.1 Ξcc 161.5
A. The ccnnq, ccssq, bbnnq, and bbssq pentaquark states
For the ccnnq (q = n, s) systems, we can use two types of threshold to estimate their masses: (charmed baryon)-(charmedmeson) and (doubly charmed baryon)-(light meson). We will use MΞcc = 3621.4 MeV from the LHCb Collaboration [34] in thelatter case. For the bbnnq systems, we only use the (bottom baryon)-(bottom meson) threshold since no doubly bottom baryonhas been observed. For the ccssq and bbssq systems, only (heavy baryon)-(heavy meson) type thresholds are adopted becauseof the same reason. We present the estimated masses for the ccnnq, bbnnq, ccssq, and bbssq pentaquark states in Tables VI, VII,VIII, and IX, respectively. From these tables, it is obvious that different estimation approaches give different masses. The reasonis that the model does not involve dynamics and contributions from other terms in the potential are not elaborately considered.For the ccnnn and bbnnn systems with Inn = 1, we get the same spectra for the case of the total isospin I = 1
2 and 32 , which comes
from the fact that the color-magnetic interaction for a quark and an antiquark is irrelevant with the isospin.Table VI shows us that the pentaquark masses obtained with Ξccπ and ΞccK are lower than those with ΣcD and ΣcDs, re-
spectively. This feature is consistent with the observation that more effects contribute to the effective attractions in the formersystems, which can be seen from the inequalities ∆MΞcc + ∆Mπ > ∆MΣc + ∆MD and ∆MΞcc + ∆MK > ∆MΣc + ∆MDs accord-ing to table IV. If the adopted model could reproduce all the hadron masses accurately, all the mentioned approaches wouldgive consistent pentaquark masses. At present, we are not sure which type of threshold results in more appropriate pentaquark
10
TABLE V: The adopted masses of the not-yet-observed doubly heavy baryons from several methods: RQM (relativized quark model), ECM(extended chromomagnetic model), FH (Feynman-Hellmann mass formulas), and NRM (nonrelativistic potential model).
Baryon Mass Theoretical modelΞbb 10138 RQM [65]Ξ∗bb 10169 RQM [65]Ωcc 3715 RQM [65]Ω∗cc 3772 RQM [65]Ωbb 10230 RQM [65]Ω∗bb 10258 RQM [65]Ξcb 6922 ECM [66]Ξ′
cb 6948 ECM [66]Ξ∗cb 6973 ECM [66]Ωcb 7011 ECM [66]Ω′
cb 7047 ECM [66]Ω∗cb 7066 ECM [66]Ξbb 10340 FH [67]Ξ∗bb 10370 FH [67]Ξbb 10340 NRM [68]Ξ∗bb 10367 NRM [68]
TABLE VI: The estimated masses for the ccnnq systems in units of MeV. The values in the third column are obtained with the effective quarkmasses and are theoretical upper limits. The masses after this column are determined with relevant thresholds.
ccnnn (Inn = 1, I = 12 ,
32 ) ccnns (I = 1)
JP Eigenvalue Mass (ΣcD) Ξccπ JP Eigenvalue Mass (ΣcDs) (ΞccK)52− 171.7 4706.7 4591.3 4436.7 5
2− 141.6 4855.2 4664.6 4584.4
32−
288.6127.735.6−314.3
4823.64662.74570.64220.7
4708.24547.34455.24105.3
4553.54392.64300.53950.6
32−
205.998.854.9−176.8
4919.54812.44768.54536.8
4728.94621.84577.94346.3
4648.74541.64497.74266.0
12−
350.5197.940.1−336.1
4885.54732.94575.14198.9
4770.14617.54459.74083.5
4615.44462.84305.03928.8
12−
271.5162.712.5−194.2
4985.14876.34726.14519.4
4794.54685.74535.54328.8
4714.34605.54455.34248.6
ccnnn (Inn = 0, I = 1
2 ) ccnns (I = 0)52− 207.3 4742.3 4626.9 4472.3 5
2− 132.0 4845.6 4655.0 4574.8
32−
191.646.5−565.2
4726.64581.53969.8
4611.24466.13854.4
4456.64311.53699.7
32−
118.8−12.1−358.4
4832.44701.54355.2
4641.84510.94164.7
4561.64430.74084.4
12−
169.443.4−134.5−665.0
4704.44578.44400.63870.0
4589.04463.04285.23754.6
4434.34308.34130.53600.0
12−
96.7−11.0−134.2−462.8
4810.34702.64579.44250.8
4619.84512.04388.84060.3
4539.54431.84308.63980.0
masses. For a multiquark hadron, the effective attraction is probably not strong and maybe a higher mass is more reasonable.We plot the relative positions for the ccnnn, ccnns, bbnnn, bbnns, ccssn, ccsss, bbssn, and bbsss systems in diagrams (a)-(h)of Fig. 2, respectively. Here we select the masses obtained with the thresholds of ΣcD, ΣcDs, ΣbB, ΣbBs, ΩcD, ΩcDs, ΩbB, andΩbBs, respectively. The thresholds relevant with rearrangement decay patterns are also displayed in the figure. The followingdiscussions are based on the assumption that the obtained positions in this figure are all reasonable. For the figures in the othersystems, we will also adopt pentaquark masses estimated with higher thresholds. One should note that the figures show onlyrough positions of the pentaquarks. Their properties may be changed accordingly once the positions for states in a system aredetermined by an observed pentaquark. However, the mass splittings should not be affected.
For the ccnnn system, the Inn = 0 states are generally lowerthan the Inn = 1 states and the lowest state is around the Ξccπthreshold. This pentaquark is in the mass range of excited Ξccstates [65]. It is highly probable that an observed excited Ξcc
gets contributions from coupled channel effects. An invertedmass order that the Inn = 0 state is heavier is observed forthe J = 5
2 states. This feature exists because of the strongernn interaction in the Inn = 0 state, which can be understood
11
3854
' 1/21/2( )ccηΞ
* * 1/2,3/3,5/21/2,3/2( )cDΣ
* 1/2,3/31/2,3/2( )cDΣ
1/2,3/21/2( )ccωΞ
1/2,3/21/2,3/2( )ccρΞ
* 3/21/2,3/2( )cDΣ
1/21/2,3/2( )cDΣ * 1/2,3/2
1/2( )cDΛ
1/21/2( )cDΛ
1/21/2( )ccηΞ
1/21/2,3/2( )ccπΞ
47704708
46274618 4611 45914589454744664463
4460 4455
4285
41054084
375512− 3
2− 5
2− 5
2−3
2−1
2−
* * 1/2,3/2,5/21( )c sDΣ
* 1/2,3/21( )c sDΣ
1/21( )c sDΣ
* 3/21( )c sDΣ
* 1/2,3/20,1( )ccKΞ
1/20,1( )ccKΞ
* 1/2,3/20( )c sDΛ
1/20( )c sDΛ
47954729
4686466546554642
462246204578
45364512 4511
438943464329
4165
4060
(a)(Inn = 1, I = 3
2 &I = 12 ) (solid) and
(Inn = 0, I = 12 ) (dashed) ccnnn states (b) I = 1 (solid) and I = 0 (dashed) ccnns states
* * 1/2,3/2,5/21/2,3/2( )bBΣ
* 1/2,3/21/2,3/2( )bBΣ
* 3/21/2,3/2( )bBΣ
1/21/2,3/2( )bBΣ
* 1/2,3/21/2( )bBΛ
1/21/2( )bBΛ
1139911381
112781127011263 11246 112351122011193
1113711132
11110
10952
107721076310496
1046512− 3
2− 5
2− 5
2−3
2−1
2−
* * 1/2,3/2,5/21( )b sBΣ
* 1/2,3/21( )b sBΣ
* 3/21( )b sBΣ
1/21( )b sBΣ
1/20( )b sBΛ
* 1/2,3/20( )b sBΛ
1140611387
11308 11296 112931128711286 1128111279 11251
11216
111711116711043
1100610999
1079310761
(c)(Inn = 1, I = 3
2 &I = 12 ) (solid) and
(Inn = 0, I = 12 ) (dashed) bbnnn states (d) I = 1 (solid) and I = 0 (dashed) bbnns states
4462 4489
46764727
476448134827
* * 1/2,3/2,5/2( )cDΩ* 1/2,3/2( )cDΩ
* 3/2( )cDΩ1/2( )DΩ
49414867
12− 3
2− 5
2−
47234748
4797
48554894
4910 4919 4907
5000
52−3
2−1
2−
* * 1/2,3/2,5/2( )c sDΩ
* 1/2,3/2( )c sDΩ
* 3/2( )c sDΩ1/2( )c sDΩ
(e) I = 12 (solid) ccssn states (f) I = 0 (solid) ccsss states
1114411137
1139811359
1143811449 11425
11538 11520
* 1/2,3/2( )bBΩ1/2( )bBΩ
12− 3
2− 5
2−
11401 11405
114861147311502 1151511524 1153811559
52−3
2−1
2−
* 1/2,3/2( )b sBΩ1/2( )b sBΩ
(g) I = 12 (solid) bbssn states (h) I = 0 (solid) bbsss states
FIG. 2: Relative positions (units: MeV) for the ccnnq, bbnnq, ccssq, and bbssq pentaquark states labeled with solid and dashed lines. Thedotted lines indicate various baryon-meson thresholds. The I = 3
2 and 12 ccnnn states with Inn = 1 have the same mass spectrum and are shown
in the diagram (a) with solid lines. The doubly bottom analog is shown in the diagram (c). When the isospin (spin) of an initial pentaquark stateis equal to a number in the subscript (superscript) of a baryon-meson state, its decay into that baryon-meson channel through S - or D-wave isallowed by the isospin (angular momentum) conservation. We have adopted the masses estimated with the reference thresholds of (a) ΣcD, (b)ΣcDs, (c) ΣbB, (d) ΣbBs, (e) ΩcD, (f) ΩcDs, (g) ΩbB, and (h) ΩbBs.
12
TABLE VII: The estimated masses for the bbnnq systems in units of MeV. The values in the third column are obtained with the effective quarkmasses and are theoretical upper limits. The masses after this column are determined with relevant thresholds.
bbnnn (Inn = 1, I = 12 ,
32 ) bbnns (I = 1)
JP Eigenvalue Mass (ΣbB) JP Eigenvalue Mass (ΣbBs)52− 145.9 11337.1 11234.9 5
2− 116.3 11486.1 11296.0
32−
291.7131.121.2−316.8
11482.911322.311212.410874.4
11380.711220.111110.210772.2
32−
207.2101.236.5−173.3
11577.011471.011406.311196.5
11386.911280.911216.311006.4
12−
309.7157.3104.2−326.0
11500.911348.511295.410865.2
11398.711246.311193.210763.0
12−
226.4128.071.9−181.2
11596.211497.811441.711188.6
11406.111307.811251.610998.6
bbnnn (Inn = 0, I = 1
2 ) bbnns (I = 0)52− 189.1 11380.3 11278.1 5
2− 113.5 11483.3 11293.2
32−
180.747.5−592.9
11371.911238.710598.3
11269.711136.510496.1
32−
105.9−8.4−386.1
11475.711361.410983.7
11285.711171.410793.6
12−
174.243.2−136.4−624.1
11365.411234.411054.810567.1
11263.211132.310952.610464.9
12−
99.6−12.6−136.6−418.9
11469.411357.211233.210950.9
11279.311167.111043.110760.8
TABLE VIII: The estimated masses for the ccssq systems in units of MeV. The values in the third column are obtained with the effective quarkmasses and are theoretical upper limits. The masses after this column are determined with relevant thresholds.
ccssn (I = 12 ) ccsss (I = 0)
JP Eigenvalue Mass (ΩcD) JP Eigenvalue Mass (ΩcDs)52− 112.0 5004.2 4813.1 5
2− 79.5 5150.3 4875.5
32−
163.762.426.3−212.5
5055.94954.64918.54679.7
4864.84763.54727.44488.6
32−
85.5−82.761.324.7
5156.35132.15095.54988.1
4881.54857.34820.84713.3
12−
240.1126.6−24.7−238.8
5132.35018.94867.54653.4
4941.24827.84676.44462.3
12−
166.877.0−33.3−107.3
5237.75147.85037.54963.5
4962.94873.04762.74688.7
TABLE IX: The estimated masses for the bbssq systems in units of MeV. The values in the third column are obtained with the effective quarkmasses and are theoretical upper limits. The masses after this column are determined with relevant thresholds.
bbssn (I = 12 ) bbsss (I = 0)
JP Eigenvalue Mass (ΩbB) JP Eigenvalue Mass (ΩbBs)52− 83.7 11632.1 11438.5 5
2− 51.7 11778.7 11515.2
32−
165.669.84.6−210.4
11714.011618.211553.011338.0
11520.311424.611359.411144.4
32−
75.138.822.1−58.4
11802.111765.811749.111668.6
11538.511502.311485.611405.1
12−
183.394.643.1−217.8
11731.711643.011591.511330.6
11538.111449.411397.911136.9
12−
95.660.79.4−62.5
11822.611787.711736.411664.5
11559.111524.211472.911400.9
from the comparison between Eqs. (17) and (14). The bbnnnsystem should have similar properties. From the mass dis-tributions in diagrams (a) and (c), we may guess roughly themass of Ξbb, mΞbb ≈ 10465 − 135 = 10330 MeV, a value con-sistent with Refs. [67, 68]. Replacing the antiquark with an
s, we get the spectra of QQnns in the diagrams (b) and (d).The difference from the QQnnn case lies only in the interac-tion strengths between the antiquark and other quarks. Theremaining systems are obtained by exchanging s and n. All
13
the lowest states have the quantum numbers JP = 12−. In these
systems, the QQnns, QQssn, and I = 32 QQnnn states are
explicitly exotic.Now we move on to the possible rearrangement decays
of the pentaquarks, which may occur through S -wave or D-wave, depending on the conservation laws. The mass, totalangular momentum, isospin, and parity all together determinewhether the relevant decay channels are open or not. For con-venience, we label in Fig. 2 the spin and isospin of the baryon-meson states in the superscripts and subscripts of their sym-bols, respectively. From the quantum numbers of the decayproduct, it is possible to find pentaquark candidates. First, wetake a look at the ccnnn system. In the case of I(JP) = 1
2 ( 52−),
the possible S -wave decay channel is just Σ∗cD∗. In the case ofI(JP) = 1
2 ( 32−), the possible S -wave channels are Σ∗cD∗, ΣcD∗,
Σ∗cD, ΛcD∗, Ξccρ, and Ξccω. In the case of I(JP) = 12 ( 1
2−), the
possible S -wave channels are Σ∗cD∗, ΣcD∗, ΣcD, ΛcD∗, ΛcD,Ξccρ, Ξccω, Ξccη, and Ξccπ. More channels will open if oneincludes the D-wave decay modes. However, only the obser-vation of these decay patterns cannot prove the existence of apentaquark state consisting of ccnnn because the initial statemay also be an excited Ξcc. In this case, the mixing between3q state and 5q state is probably important. In the case ofI = 3
2 , an observed state would be a good pentaquark candi-date. The JP = 5
2− state with either isospin is probably not
a very broad pentaquark. For the bbnnn system, the situationis similar to the ccnnn system. For the ccsss and bbsss sys-tems, the identification of a pentaquark state is not so easy. On
the contrary, the pentaquark states ccnns, ccssn, bbnns, andbbssn are easier to identify since the quantum numbers are notallowed for the conventional baryons. For example, if we ob-served a state in the decay pattern ΞccK, ΞccK∗, ΛcDs, ΛcD∗s,ΣcDs, ΣcD∗s, Σ∗cDs, or Σ∗cD∗s, it would be a good candidate of accnns pentaquark state. From the diagrams in Fig. 2, the low-est ccnns pentaquark may be stable and the lowest one withJ = 3
2 is also relatively stable. Because of the difference incoupling constants, the lowest two I = 0 bbnns pentaquarks,JP = 1/2− and 3/2−, probably both have strong decay pat-terns. This can be seen with the values mΞbb = 10138 MeVand mΞbb∗ = 10169 MeV obtained in Ref. [65]. If such massesare not far from the realistic values, the decay into ΞbbK orΞ∗bbK may occur. Once the Ξbb (Ξ∗bb) state is observed, thesearch for pentaquark candidates in the ΞbbK (Ξ∗bbK) chan-nel may be performed. For the exotic ccssn and bbssn pen-taquarks, only the isospin I = 1/2 is allowed. The lowestJ = 1/2 state and the lowest J = 3/2 state in both systems arelower than the (Qss)-(Qn) type thresholds and such decay pat-terns are forbidden. However, one finds that the decay for theJ = 1/2 (3/2) ccssn pentaquark into ΩccK (Ω∗ccK) is possibleif the mass mΩcc = 3715 MeV (mΩ∗cc = 3772 MeV) obtainedin Ref. [65] is close to the realistic mass. Similarly, the de-cay for the J = 1/2 (3/2) bbssn pentaquark into ΩbbK (Ω∗bbK)is possible if one checks the threshold with mΩbb = 10230MeV (mΩ∗bb
= 10258 MeV). With the (QQs)-(sn) type chan-nels, the identification of ccssn and bbssn pentaquarks maybe performed in the future measurements.
B. The bcnnq and bcssq pentaquark states
To estimate the masses of the bcnnq and bcssq states (q = n, s), we can also use two types of thresholds: (charmed baryon)-(bottom meson) and (bottom baryon)-(charmed meson). The results and relevant reference systems are presented in Tables Xand XI. The masses obtained with the two types of thresholds are slightly different. We use results estimated with the (charmedbaryon)-(bottom meson) type threshold for further discussions. In Fig. 3, the relative positions for these pentaquark states andrelevant baryon-meson thresholds are plotted. For the bcssn and bcsss states, only one value of isospin is possible and we donot label the subscripts of the baryon-meson states into which the pentaquarks may decay.
From the diagrams (a) and (d) of Fig. 3, the bcnnn system has more than 12 possible rearrangement decay channels and thebcsss system has more than 6. However, one cannot simply distinguish a pentaquark from a conventional baryon or from a 3qand 5q mixed state just from these decay channels if the isospin is not 3/2. The discussions are similar to the previous systems.On the other hand, in the bcnns and bcssn cases, good pentaquark candidates may be searched for in their relevant decay patternsshown in the diagrams (b) and (c) of Fig. 3. If we use mΞbc = 6922 MeV, mΞ′bc
= 6948 MeV, and mΞ∗bc= 6973 MeV [66], one
finds that the lowest two bcnns pentaquarks should be stable and the lowest JP = 3/2− state is probably narrow. Since the threeI = 3/2 bcnnn states are more than 350 MeV lower than the ΛbD threshold and just above the Ξbcπ threshold, they probablyhave narrow widths and we may use the Ξbcπ channels to identify such pentaquarks. Similarly, the ΩbcK channels may be usedto identify the bcssn pentaquarks if mΩbc is around 7011 MeV [66].
C. The ccnsq and bbnsq pentaquark states
In the mass estimation for the ccnsq (q = n, s) system, we use two types of thresholds: (charmed baryon)-(charmed meson)and (doubly charmed baryon)-(light meson). For the bbnsq system, we only adopt the (bottom baryon)-(bottom meson) typethreshold. The pentaquark masses estimated with the help of the doubly charmed baryon are smaller than those with the (charmedbaryon)-(charmed meson) type threshold. We present the numerical results for the ccnsq and bbnsq systems in Tables XII and
14
TABLE X: The estimated masses for the bcnnq systems in units of MeV. The values in the third column are obtained with the effective quarkmasses and are theoretical upper limits. The masses after this column are determined with relevant thresholds.
bcnnn (Inn = 1, I = 12 ,
32 ) bcnns (I = 1)
JP Eigenvalue Mass (ΣcB) (ΣbD) JP Eigenvalue Mass (ΣcBs) (ΣbDs)
52−
(156.951.4
) (7993.07887.5
) (7917.47811.9
) (7905.17799.5
)52−
(127.267.0
) (8141.98081.7
) (7978.47918.2
) (7978.87918.6
)
32−
288.4161.1131.473.037.6−46.4−319.6
8124.57997.27967.57909.17873.77789.77516.5
8048.87921.67891.87833.57798.07714.17440.9
8036.57909.37879.57821.27785.77701.77428.6
32−
204.9131.2102.352.946.3−31.2−181.9
8219.68145.98117.08067.68061.07983.57832.8
8056.17982.47953.57904.17897.57820.07669.3
8056.47982.87953.97904.57897.87820.37669.7
12−
330.0266.9178.8117.169.6−68.4−333.8−364.2
8166.18103.08014.97953.27905.77767.87502.37471.9
8090.58027.47939.37877.67830.17692.17426.77396.3
8078.28015.07926.97865.27817.77679.87414.37384.0
12−
248.3186.5146.185.739.8−46.5−191.3−228.1
8263.08201.38160.88100.48054.57968.27823.47786.6
8099.58037.77997.37936.97891.07804.77659.97623.1
8099.98038.17997.77937.37891.47805.17660.37623.5
bcnnn (Inn = 1, I = 1
2 ) bcnns (I = 0)52− 196.1 8032.2 7956.6 7944.2 5
2− 120.6 8135.3 7971.8 7972.2
32−
183.5150.445.1−123.0−581.4
8019.67986.57881.27713.17254.7
7944.07910.97805.67637.47179.1
7931.67898.57793.37625.17166.7
32−
109.475.8−12.4−122.4−374.7
8124.18090.58002.37892.37640.0
7960.67926.97838.87728.87476.4
7961.07927.37839.27729.27476.8
12−
170.141.915.2−128.6−221.1−623.0−663.8
8006.27878.07851.37707.57615.07213.17172.3
7930.67802.47775.77631.97539.47137.57096.7
7918.27790.17763.37619.67527.07125.27084.3
12−
96.3−13.0−39.9−129.6−218.6−418.0−462.1
8111.08001.77974.87885.17796.17596.77552.6
7947.57838.17811.37721.67632.67433.27389.1
7947.97838.57811.77721.97633.07433.67389.5
TABLE XI: The estimated masses for the bcssq systems in units of MeV. The values in the third column are obtained with the effective quarkmasses and are theoretical upper limits. The masses after this column are determined with relevant thresholds.
bcssn (I = 12 ) bcsss (I = 0)
JP Eigenvalue Mass (ΩcB) (ΩbD) JP Eigenvalue Mass (ΩcBs) (ΩbDs)
52−
(95.937.2
) (8289.28230.5
) (8137.98079.2
) (8109.88051.1
)52−
(64.053.7
) (8435.98425.6
) (8196.78186.4
) (8181.38171.1
)
32−
163.8100.470.524.79.2−61.9−219.4
8357.18293.78263.88218.08202.58131.47974.0
8205.88142.48112.58066.78051.27980.17822.6
8177.78114.38084.48038.68023.17952.07794.5
32−
85.262.244.936.4−11.6−24.9−105.8
8457.18434.18416.88408.38360.38347.08266.1
8217.98194.98177.68169.18121.18107.88026.8
8202.68179.68162.28153.78105.88092.58011.5
12−
211.3148.7111.146.35.6−78.9−232.2−266.1
8404.68342.08304.48239.68198.98114.47961.17927.2
8253.38190.78153.18088.38047.67963.17809.87775.9
8225.28162.68125.08060.28019.57935.07781.77747.8
12−
129.789.849.410.3−17.5−31.5−87.8−148.4
8501.68461.78421.38382.28354.48340.48284.18223.5
8262.48222.58182.18143.08115.28101.28044.97984.3
8247.18207.18166.78127.68099.88085.98029.67968.9
15
8091 80498027 7957
7939 79447931
792279177911
78927878
783478307812
78067802 77987776
77147692
76377632
7539
74417427
739671797138
7097
1/21/2( )bDΛ
* * 1/2,3/2,5/21/2,3/2( )cBΣ
* * 1/2,3/2,5/21/2,3/2( )bDΣ
* 1/2,3/21/2,3/2( )bDΣ
* 3/21/2,3/2( )cBΣ
* 1/2,3/21/2,3/2( )cBΣ
1/21/2,3/2( )cBΣ
* 3/21/2,3/2( )bDΣ
1/21/2,3/2( )bDΣ
* 1/2,3/21/2( )bDΛ* 1/2,3/2
1/2( )cBΛ1/21/2( )cBΛ
12− 3
2− 5
2− 5
2−3
2−1
2−
* * 1/2,3/2,5/21( )b sDΣ
* 1/2,3/21( )b sDΣ
* * 1/2,3/2,5/21( )c sBΣ
* 3/21( )c sBΣ
* 1/2,3/21( )c sBΣ
1/21( )c sBΣ
* 3/21( )b sDΣ1/2
1( )b sDΣ* 1/2,3/2
0( )b sDΛ
* 1/2,3/20( )c sBΛ
1/20( )c sBΛ
1/20( )b sDΛ
81008056
80387997
7982 797879727961 79547948
79377927
79187904
78987891
78397838
782078117805
77297722
7760
7623
747674337389
7669
7633
(a)(Inn = 1, I = 3
2 &I = 12 ) (solid) and
(Inn = 0, I = 12 ) (dashed) bcnnn states (b) I = 1 (solid) and I = 0 (dashed) bcnns states
* 3/2( )cBΩ
* * 1/2,3/2,5/2( )cBΩ
* 1/2,3/2( )bDΩ* 1/2,3/2( )cBΩ
1/2( )cBΩ
1/2( )bDΩ
825382068191
8153 8142 813881138088 80798067
80518048
79807963
782378107776
12− 3
2− 5
2− 5
2−1
2− 3
2−
* * 1/2,3/2,5/2( )c sBΩ
* 1/2,3/2( )b sDΩ* 3/2( )c sBΩ
* 1/2,3/2( )c sBΩ
1/2( )c sBΩ
1/2( )b sDΩ
82628223
821881978195 81868182
81788169
81438121
811581088101
80458027
7984
(c) I = 12 (solid) bcssn states (d) I = 0 (solid) bcsss states
FIG. 3: Relative positions (units: MeV) for the bcnnq and bcssq pentaquark states labeled with solid and dashed lines. The dotted lines indicatevarious baryon-meson thresholds. The I = 3
2 and 12 bcnnn states with Inn = 1 have the same mass spectrum and are shown in the diagram (a)
with solid lines. When the isospin (spin) of an initial pentaquark state is equal to a number in the subscript (superscript) of a baryon-mesonstate, its decay into that baryon-meson channel through S - or D-wave is allowed by the isospin (angular momentum) conservation. We haveadopted the masses estimated with the reference thresholds of (a) ΣcB, (b) ΣcBs, (c) ΩcB, and (d) ΩcBs.
XIII, respectively. The relative positions for these pentaquark states and the relevant rearrangement decay states are shown inFig. 4. From the figure, we can see that both the heaviest state and the lightest state are the JP = 1
2− pentaquarks in each system.
Because all these systems contain a quark-antiquark pair, it is not easy to distinguish a pentaquark state from a 3q baryon stateif the isospin of the decay product is less than 1. Also, the widths of the lowest pentaquark states are probably not narrow ifwe take mΩcc = 3715 MeV and mΩbb = 10230 MeV [65]. In Ref. [69], a bound state with I = 0 below the ΞccK threshold ispredicted. If experiments observed one state with the quark content ccnsn, irrespective of its nature, its partner states could alsobe searched for in the Ωccπ, ΩccK, Ωbbπ, and ΩbbK channels and whether they exist or not can test the simple model we use.
16
TABLE XII: The estimated masses for the ccnsq systems in units of MeV. The values in the third column are obtained with the effective quarkmasses and are theoretical upper limits. The masses after this column are determined with relevant thresholds.
ccnsn (I = 0, 1) ccnss (I = 12 )
JP Eigenvalue Mass (Ξ′
cD) (ΞccK) JP Eigenvalue Mass (Ξ′
cDs) (Ξccφ)
52−
(200.3121.7
) (4913.94835.3
) (4764.14685.5
) (4643.14564.6
)52−
(143.269.2
) (5035.44961.4
) (4810.54736.4
) (4777.94703.9
)
32−
230.9173.688.246.529.5−231.9−473.9
4944.54887.24801.84760.14743.14481.74239.7
4794.74737.44652.04610.34593.34331.94089.9
4673.74616.44531.04489.34472.34210.93968.9
32−
151.7106.962.945.2−13.3−89.6−275.6
5043.94999.14955.14937.44878.94802.64616.6
4818.94774.24730.24712.54653.94577.64391.6
4786.44741.74697.74680.04621.44545.14359.1
12−
296.1169.8140.748.95.3−89.6−263.2−575.8
5009.74883.44854.34762.54718.94624.04450.44137.8
4859.94733.64704.54612.74569.14474.24300.63988.0
4739.04612.64583.54491.74448.14353.34179.73867.0
12−
219.1126.476.2−5.5−14.8−80.3−135.0−375.7
5111.35018.64968.44886.74877.44812.04757.34516.5
4886.34793.74743.44661.84652.54587.04532.34291.5
4853.84761.24710.94629.34620.04554.54499.84259.0
TABLE XIII: The estimated masses for the bbnsq systems in units of MeV. The values in the third column are obtained with the effective quarkmasses and are theoretical upper limits. The masses after this column are determined with relevant thresholds.
bbnsn (I = 0, 1) bbnss (I = 12 )
JP Eigenvalue Mass (Ξ′
bB) JP Eigenvalue Mass (Ξ′
bBs)
52−
(175.598.2
) (11545.311468.0
) (11400.711323.4
)52−
(116.447.9
) (11664.811596.3
) (11432.311363.8
)
32−
231.0166.885.755.212.6−233.8−502.8
11600.811536.611455.511425.011382.411136.010867.0
11456.211392.011310.911280.411237.810991.410722.4
32−
144.8105.841.228.24.9−83.3−301.6
11693.211654.211589.611576.611553.311465.111246.8
11460.711421.711357.111344.111320.811232.711014.3
12−
248.5162.7118.365.051.5−89.5−245.4−529.9
11618.311532.511488.111434.811421.311280.311124.410839.9
11473.711387.911343.511290.211276.711135.710979.810695.3
12−
163.5109.274.121.63.4−80.8−104.1−328.0
11711.911657.611622.511570.011551.811467.611444.311220.4
11479.411425.111390.011337.511319.311235.111211.810987.9
D. The bcnsq pentaquark states
For the bcnsq states, the wave functions do not get constraints from the Pauli principle and the number of wave function basesfor a given quantum number is bigger than that for other systems. After diagonalizing the Hamiltonian, one gets numbers ofpossible pentaquark states. Here we use two types of thresholds to estimate their masses: (charmed baryon)-(bottom meson) and(bottom baryon)-(charmed meson). The results are presented in Table XIV. One finds that these two types of thresholds lead tocomparable values. With the masses from the (charmed baryon)-(bottom meson) type thresholds, we plot the relative positionsfor these pentaquarks and their relevant decay patterns in Fig. 5. The quantum numbers of the heaviest state and the lighteststate are both JP = 1
2−. The mass of the lightest state for the bcnsn system is around 7313 MeV which is above the thresholds of
Ωbcπ, Ω′bcπ, and Ω∗bcπ and is much lower than other two-body baryon-meson thresholds if we adopt the masses obtained in Ref.[66]. This feature is helpful for us to identify compact I = 1 pentaquarks once the bcs type baryons can be used to spectrumreconstruction. On the other hand, the identification of a bcnss pentaquark is not easy since it may share the same decay productswith an excited Ξbc baryon.
17
4332
4764
* * 1/2,3/2,5/2( )cDΞ
' * 1/2,3/2( )cDΞ
* 3/2( )cDΞ
' 1/2( )cDΞ
1/2( )cDΞ
* 1/2,3/2( )cDΞ
* 1/2,3/2( )ccKΞ
1/2( )ccKΞ
48604795
473747344705
46864652
4613 46104593
4569
4474
4301
4090
398812− 3
2− 5
2− 5
2−3
2−1
2−
* * 1/2,3/2,5/2( )c sDΞ
' * 1/2,3/2( )c sDΞ
* 3/2( )c sDΞ
' 1/2( )c sDΞ
* 1/2,3/2( )c sDΞ
1/2( )c sDΞ
1/2,3/2( )ccφΞ
' 1/2( )ccηΞ
' 1/2( )ccηΞ
48864819 4811
47944774
47434730
47134736
46624653 4654
4587
4578
4532
4392
4292
(a) I = 0 and I = 1 (solid) ccnsn states (b) I = 12 (solid)ccnss states
* * 1/2,3/2,5/2( )bBΞ' * 1/2,3/2( )bBΞ
* 3/2( )bBΞ ' 1/2( )bBΞ
* 1/2,3/2( )bBΞ1/2( )bBΞ
1147411456
11401113921138811344
11311 1132311290
1128011277
11238
11136
1099110980
1072310695
12− 3
2− 5
2− 5
2−3
2−1
2−
* * 1/2,3/2,5/2( )b sBΞ
' * 1/2,3/2( )b sBΞ
' 1/2( )b sBΞ
* 3/2( )b sBΞ
* 1/2,3/2( )b sBΞ
1/2( )b sBΞ
114611143211425 11422
113901136411357
11344
1132111319
11235 1123311212
1101410988
11479
11338
(c) I = 0 and I = 1 (solid) bbnsn states (d) I = 12 (solid)bbnss states
FIG. 4: Relative positions (units: MeV) for the ccnsq and bbnsq pentaquark states labeled with solid lines. The dotted lines indicate variousbaryon-meson thresholds. The I = 0 and I = 1 ccnsn states have the same mass spectrum and are shown in the diagram (a). The doubly bottomanalog is shown in the diagram (c). When the spin of an initial pentaquark state is equal to a number in the superscript of a baryon-mesonstate, its decay into that baryon-meson channel through S - or D-wave is allowed by the angular momentum conservation. We have adoptedthe masses estimated with the reference thresholds of (a) Ξ
′
cD, (b) Ξ′
cDs, (c) Ξ′
bB, and (d) Ξ′
bBs.
V. DISCUSSIONS AND SUMMARY
Up to now, some candidates of the tetraquark states havebeen confirmed by different experiments. The observation ofthe Pc(4380) and Pc(4450) at LHCb gave us significant evi-dence for the existence of pentaquak states and opened a newdoor for studying hidden-charm exotic states. More possiblepentaquarks have been predicted in various theoretical calcu-lations and await further confirmation. In this paper, moti-vated by the Pc(4380) and Pc(4450) and the observation ofthe Ξcc at LHCb, we have discussed the doubly heavy QQqqq
pentaquark states in a CMI model and shown their possiblerearrangement decay patterns. Although the model we adoptis simple and is not a dynamical model, it may give us somequalitative properties with which the experimentalists may beused to search for such exotic baryons. In the early stage stud-ies on the multiquark properties, chromomagnetic effects werealso intensively considered as the primary contribution in anattempt to explain the narrow hadronic resonances [70]. In re-cent years, this model as a widely used method was adopted tostudy the multiquark states, such as the investigations in Refs.[71–78].
18
TABLE XIV: The estimated masses for the bcnsq systems in units of MeV. The values in the third column are obtained with the effective quarkmasses and are theoretical upper limits. The masses after this column are determined with relevant thresholds.
bcnsn (I = 0, 1) bcnss (I = 12 )
JP Eigenvalue Mass (Ξ′
cB) (Ξ′
bD) JP Eigenvalue Mass (Ξ′
cBs) (Ξ′
bDs)
52−
185.8108.044.2
8227.58149.78085.9
8088.38010.57946.6
8073.17995.47931.5
52−
127.861.255.8
8348.18281.58276.1
8121.08054.48049.0
8118.68051.98046.6
32−
229.0169.4144.8119.184.350.934.728.6−54.2−77.1−238.7−490.7
8270.78211.18186.58160.88126.08092.68076.48070.37987.57964.67803.07551.0
8131.58071.88047.38021.57986.87953.47937.27931.17848.37825.47663.87411.8
8116.38056.78032.18006.47971.67938.27922.07915.97833.17810.27648.67396.6
32−
147.0107.6102.966.248.033.613.1−10.0−34.5−78.2−104.6−291.3
8367.38327.98323.28286.58268.38253.98233.48210.38185.88142.18115.87929.0
8140.28100.88096.18059.48041.18026.88006.37983.27958.77915.07888.67701.9
8137.88098.48093.78057.08038.78024.48003.97980.87956.37912.67886.27699.4
12−
272.1209.2160.8132.583.950.433.422.1−73.8−83.1−171.6−258.1−287.5−530.0−574.3
8313.88251.08202.58174.28125.68092.18075.18063.87967.97958.67870.17783.67754.27511.77467.4
8174.58111.78063.38034.97986.47952.87935.87924.67828.77819.47730.97644.47615.07372.57328.2
8159.48096.68048.18019.87971.27937.77920.77909.47813.57804.37715.77629.37599.87357.47313.0
12−
189.9137.1107.771.752.13.0−3.7−13.3−51.6−79.7−110.5−144.4−186.4−330.8−375.5
8410.28357.48328.08292.08272.48223.38216.68207.08168.78140.68109.88075.98033.97889.57844.8
8183.18130.38100.98064.98045.37996.27989.57979.97941.67913.57882.77848.87806.87662.47617.7
8180.78127.98098.58062.58042.87993.87987.17977.47939.17911.17880.37846.47804.37660.07615.2
In the estimation of the rough masses, we have used two ap-proaches for comparison: one with the quark masses and theother with a reference threshold. The results obtained withthe former approach are larger and can be treated as theoreti-cal upper limits. In the estimation with the latter approach, wemainly adopt the (heavy baryon)-(heavy meson) type thresh-olds. Although no enough experimental data for the doublyheavy 3q baryons are available, we may employ the massescalculated in the quark model [65, 66]. For the investigatedsystems, we find that stable pentaquarks with I = 0 are possi-ble in the bcnns case. The lowest threshold of the rearrange-ment decay product is for the ΞbcK state while the lowest pen-taquarks can be below such thresholds. The typical examplesare the two lowest I = 0 bcnns states in Fig. 3 (b) and theI = 0 ccnns state in Fig. 2 (b). In the Q1Q2nnn and Q1Q2nsncases, the lowest threshold of the rearrangement decay prod-uct is for the ΞQ1Q2π or ΩQ1Q2π, but the lowest pentaquarkswe obtain are hard to be below such thresholds. Good news isthat the lowest pentaquark may be below the (heavy baryon)-(heavy meson) threshold and one may search for such pen-taquarks with the strong decay modes containing a pion. Inthe Q1Q2ssn and Q1Q2nss cases, the lowest pentaquarks maybe above the ΩQ1Q2 K or ΩQ1Q2 K threshold and can be discov-
eried with the decay modes containing a kaon. Contrary to theabove systems, the strong decay channel with lowest thresh-old in the Q1Q2sss case may be the (heavy baryon)-(heavymeson) type. Since the doubly heavy baryons are very diffi-cult to be used to reconstruct pentaquark spectra, maybe oneshould notice the Q1Q2sss pentaquarks experimentally. Al-ternatively, the J = 5/2 pentaquarks may be searched for firstsince they have many D-wave decay modes but one or two S -wave decay modes and probably they are not so broad. Thisfeature is similar to the hidden-charm pentaquarks [58].
In the study of multiquark states, the number of color-spinstructures may be more than ten. The mixing or channel-coupling effects could be important. The lowest pentaquarkswe obtain get contributions from such effects significantly.Whether there are substructures in multiquark states andwhether the configuration mixing effects are that importantneed more studies. In the near future, further experimentaland theoretical studies on pentaquarks are still important, es-pecially with the running of LHC at 13 TeV and the forthcom-ing BelleII.
In summary, we have studied preliminarily the mass spectraof doubly heavy pentaquark states in a color-magnetic model.We find candidates of possible narrow states. If they do exist,
19
* * 1/2,3/2,5/2( )cBΞ* * 1/2,3/2,5/2( )bDΞ
' * 1/2,3/2( )bDΞ* 3/2( )cBΞ
' * 1/2,3/2( )cBΞ' 1/2( )cBΞ
* 3/2( )bDΞ
' 1/2( )bDΞ
* 1/2,3/2( )bDΞ* 1/2,3/2( )cBΞ
1/2( )cBΞ
1/2( )bDΞ
8175 81328112
80888072806380478035
8022 801179877986
7953 7953 7947
7936 7937 79317925
78487829
78257819
77317664
76447615
741273737328
12− 3
2− 5
2− 5
2−3
2−1
2−
* * 1/2,3/2,5/2( )b sDΞ
* * 1/2,3/2,5/2( )c sBΞ
' * 1/2,3/2( )b sDΞ
' * 1/2,3/2( )c sBΞ
* 3/2( )c sBΞ
' 1/2( )c sBΞ
* 3/2( )b sDΞ
' 1/2( )b sDΞ
* 1/2,3/2( )b sDΞ
* 1/2,3/2( )c sBΞ
1/2( )c sBΞ
1/2( )b sDΞ
81838140
8130 81218101 8101 8096
8065
8059 8054 80498045 8041
8027
800679967990 79837980
7959
7942
7914 7915
78897883
7849
7807
77027662
7618
(a) I = 0 and I = 1 (solid) bcnsn states (b) I = 12 (solid) bcnss states
FIG. 5: Relative positions (units: MeV) for the bcnsq pentaquark states labeled with solid lines. The dotted lines indicate various baryon-meson thresholds. The I = 0 and I = 1 bcnsn states have the same mass spectrum and are shown in the diagram (a). When the spin of aninitial pentaquark state is equal to a number in the superscript of a baryon-meson state, its decay into that baryon-meson channel through S - orD-wave is allowed by the angular momentum conservation. We have adopted the masses estimated with the reference thresholds of (a) Ξ
′
bDand (b) Ξ
′
bDs.
the identification may be not difficult from their exotic quan-tum numbers. We hope that the present study may inspireexperimental exploration to exotic states.
Acknowledgments
YRL thanks the hospitality from Prof. M. Oka and othercolleagues at Tokyo Institute of Technology, where the draft
was completed. This project is supported by National NaturalScience Foundation of China under Grants No. 11775132,No. 11222547, No. 11175073, No. 11261130311 and 973program. XL is also the National Program for Support of Top-notch Young Professionals.
[1] M. Gell-Mann, “A Schematic Model of Baryons and Mesons,”Phys. Lett. 8, 214 (1964).
[2] G. Zweig, “An SU(3) model for strong interaction symmetryand its breaking. Version 1,” CERN-TH-401.
[3] M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII Collaboration], “Observation of aCharged Charmoniumlike Structure Zc(4020) and Search forthe Zc(3900) in e+e− → π+π−hc,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, no. 24,242001 (2013) [arXiv:1309.1896 [hep-ex]].
[4] S. K. Choi et al. [Belle Collaboration], “Observation of aresonance-like structure in the π±ψ′ mass distribution in exclu-sive B → Kπ±ψ′ decays,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 (2008) 142001
[arXiv:0708.1790 [hep-ex]].[5] R. Mizuk et al. [Belle Collaboration], “Dalitz analysis of B →
Kπ+ψ′ decays and the Z(4430)+,” Phys. Rev. D 80, 031104(2009) [arXiv:0905.2869 [hep-ex]].
[6] K. Chilikin et al. [Belle Collaboration], “Observation of a newcharged charmoniumlike state in B0 → J/ψK−π+ decays,”Phys. Rev. D 90, no. 11, 112009 (2014) [arXiv:1408.6457 [hep-ex]].
[7] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], “Observation of the reso-nant character of the Z(4430)− state,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, no.22, 222002 (2014) [arXiv:1404.1903 [hep-ex]].
20
[8] R. Mizuk et al. [Belle Collaboration], “Observation of tworesonance-like structures in the π+χc1 mass distribution in ex-clusive B0 → K−π+χc1 decays,” Phys. Rev. D 78, 072004(2008) [arXiv:0806.4098 [hep-ex]].
[9] M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII Collaboration], “Observation ofa Charged Charmoniumlike Structure in e+e− → π+π−J/ψat√
s =4.26 GeV,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 252001 (2013)[arXiv:1303.5949 [hep-ex]].
[10] Z. Q. Liu et al. [Belle Collaboration], “Study of e+e− →π+π−J/ψ and Observation of a Charged CharmoniumlikeState at Belle,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 252002 (2013)[arXiv:1304.0121 [hep-ex]].
[11] T. Xiao, S. Dobbs, A. Tomaradze and K. K. Seth, “Observationof the Charged Hadron Z±c (3900) and Evidence for the NeutralZ0
c (3900) in e+e− → ππJ/ψ at√
s = 4170 MeV,” Phys. Lett. B727, 366 (2013) [arXiv:1304.3036 [hep-ex]].
[12] M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII Collaboration], “Observation ofZc(3900)0 in e+e− → π0π0 J/ψ,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, no. 11,112003 (2015) [arXiv:1506.06018 [hep-ex]].
[13] M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII Collaboration], “Observation ofa charged (DD∗)± mass peak in e+e− → πDD∗ at
√s =
4.26 GeV,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, no. 2, 022001 (2014)[arXiv:1310.1163 [hep-ex]].
[14] M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII Collaboration], “Confirmation of acharged charmoniumlike state Zc(3885)∓ in e+e− → π±(DD∗)∓
with double D tag,” Phys. Rev. D 92, no. 9, 092006 (2015)[arXiv:1509.01398 [hep-ex]].
[15] M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII Collaboration], “Observation of aNeutral Structure near the DD∗ Mass Threshold in e+e− →(DD∗)0π0 at
√s = 4.226 and 4.257 GeV,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 115,
no. 22, 222002 (2015) [arXiv:1509.05620 [hep-ex]].[16] E. S. Swanson, “The New heavy mesons: A Status report,”
Phys. Rept. 429, 243 (2006) [hep-ph/0601110].[17] S. L. Zhu, “New hadron states,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 17, 283
(2008) [hep-ph/0703225].[18] M. B. Voloshin, “Charmonium,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 61, 455
(2008) [arXiv:0711.4556 [hep-ph]].[19] N. Drenska, R. Faccini, F. Piccinini, A. Polosa, F. Renga and
C. Sabelli, “New Hadronic Spectroscopy,” Riv. Nuovo Cim. 33,633 (2010) [arXiv:1006.2741 [hep-ph]].
[20] H. X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu and S. L. Zhu, “The hidden-charmpentaquark and tetraquark states,” Phys. Rept. 639, 1 (2016)[arXiv:1601.02092 [hep-ph]].
[21] A. Hosaka, T. Iijima, K. Miyabayashi, Y. Sakai and S. Ya-sui, “Exotic hadrons with heavy flavors: X, Y, Z, and relatedstates,” PTEP 2016, no. 6, 062C01 (2016) [arXiv:1603.09229[hep-ph]].
[22] J. M. Richard, “Exotic hadrons: review and perspectives,” FewBody Syst. 57 (2016) no.12, 1185 [arXiv:1606.08593 [hep-ph]].
[23] R. F. Lebed, R. E. Mitchell and E. S. Swanson, “Heavy-QuarkQCD Exotica,” arXiv:1610.04528 [hep-ph].
[24] A. Esposito, A. Pilloni and A. D. Polosa, “Multiquark Reso-nances,” arXiv:1611.07920 [hep-ph].
[25] K. H. Hicks, “On the conundrum of the pentaquark,” Eur. Phys.J. H 37, 1 (2012).
[26] T. Nakano et al. [LEPS Collaboration], “Evidence for a narrowS = +1 baryon resonance in photoproduction from the neu-tron,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 012002 (2003) [hep-ex/0301020].
[27] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], “Observation of J/ψpResonances Consistent with Pentaquark States in Λ0
b →
J/ψK−p Decays,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 072001 (2015)[arXiv:1507.03414 [hep-ex]].
[28] R. Chen, X. Liu and S. L. Zhu, “Hidden-charm molecular pen-
taquarks and their charm-strange partners,” Nucl. Phys. A 954(2016) 406 [arXiv:1601.03233 [hep-ph]].
[29] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], “A search for weakly de-caying b-flavored pentaquarks,” arXiv:1712.08086 [hep-ex].
[30] C. Patrignani et al. [Particle Data Group], “Review of ParticlePhysics,” Chin. Phys. C 40, no. 10, 100001 (2016).
[31] A. De Rujula, H. Georgi and S. L. Glashow, “Hadron Massesin a Gauge Theory,” Phys. Rev. D 12, 147 (1975).
[32] M. Mattson et al. [SELEX Collaboration], “First observation ofthe doubly charmed baryon Ξ+
cc,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 112001(2002) [hep-ex/0208014].
[33] A. Ocherashvili et al. [SELEX Collaboration], “Confirmationof the double charm baryon Ξ+
cc(3520) via its decay to pD+K−,”Phys. Lett. B 628, 18 (2005) [hep-ex/0406033].
[34] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], “Observation of the dou-bly charmed baryon Ξ++
cc ,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, no. 11, 112001(2017) [arXiv:1707.01621 [hep-ex]].
[35] T. D. Cohen and P. M. Hohler, “Doubly heavy hadrons and thedomain of validity of doubly heavy diquark-anti-quark symme-try,” Phys. Rev. D 74, 094003 (2006) [hep-ph/0606084].
[36] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], “Observation of five newnarrow Ω0
c states decaying to Ξ+c K−,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, no.
18, 182001 (2017) [arXiv:1703.04639 [hep-ex]].[37] J. Yelton et al. [Belle Collaboration], “Observation of Excited
Ωc Charmed Baryons in e+e− Collisions,” arXiv:1711.07927[hep-ex].
[38] H. X. Chen, Q. Mao, W. Chen, A. Hosaka, X. Liu and S. L. Zhu,“Decay properties of P-wave charmed baryons from light-coneQCD sum rules,” Phys. Rev. D 95, no. 9, 094008 (2017)[arXiv:1703.07703 [hep-ph]].
[39] M. Karliner and J. L. Rosner, “Very narrow excitedΩc baryons,” Phys. Rev. D 95, no. 11, 114012 (2017)[arXiv:1703.07774 [hep-ph]].
[40] K. L. Wang, L. Y. Xiao, X. H. Zhong and Q. Zhao, “Under-standing the newly observed Ωc states through their decays,”Phys. Rev. D 95, no. 11, 116010 (2017) [arXiv:1703.09130[hep-ph]].
[41] W. Wang and R. L. Zhu, “Interpretation of the newly ob-served Ω0
c resonances,” Phys. Rev. D 96, no. 1, 014024 (2017)[arXiv:1704.00179 [hep-ph]].
[42] M. Padmanath and N. Mathur, “Quantum Numbers of RecentlyDiscovered Ω0
c Baryons from Lattice QCD,” Phys. Rev. Lett.119, no. 4, 042001 (2017) [arXiv:1704.00259 [hep-ph]].
[43] H. Y. Cheng and C. W. Chiang, “Quantum numbers of Ωc statesand other charmed baryons,” Phys. Rev. D 95, no. 9, 094018(2017) [arXiv:1704.00396 [hep-ph]].
[44] Z. G. Wang, “Analysis of Ωc(3000) , Ωc(3050) , Ωc(3066) ,Ωc(3090) and Ωc(3119) with QCD sum rules,” Eur. Phys. J. C77, no. 5, 325 (2017) [arXiv:1704.01854 [hep-ph]].
[45] B. Chen and X. Liu, “New Ω0c baryons discovered by LHCb
as the members of 1P and 2S states,” Phys. Rev. D 96, no. 9,094015 (2017) [arXiv:1704.02583 [hep-ph]].
[46] Z. Zhao, D. D. Ye and A. Zhang, “Hadronic decay properties ofnewly observed Ωc baryons,” Phys. Rev. D 95, no. 11, 114024(2017) [arXiv:1704.02688 [hep-ph]].
[47] G. Yang and J. Ping, “The structure of pentaquarks Ω0c in the
chiral quark model,” arXiv:1703.08845 [hep-ph].[48] C. S. An and H. Chen, “Observed Ω0
c resonances as pen-taquark states,” Phys. Rev. D 96, no. 3, 034012 (2017)[arXiv:1705.08571 [hep-ph]].
[49] G. Monta?a, A. Feijoo and . Ramos, “A meson-baryonmolecular interpretation for some Ωc excited baryons,”arXiv:1709.08737 [hep-ph].
[50] V. R. Debastiani, J. M. Dias, W. H. Liang and E. Oset,
21
“Molecular Ωc states within the local hidden gauge approach,”arXiv:1710.04231 [hep-ph].
[51] C. Wang, L. L. Liu, X. W. Kang and X. H. Guo, “Possible open-charmed pentaquark molecule Ωc(3188) — the DΞ bound state— in the Bethe-Salpeter formalism,” arXiv:1710.10850 [hep-ph].
[52] J. Nieves, R. Pavao and L. Tolos, “Ωc excited states within aSU(6)lsf×HQSS model,” arXiv:1712.00327 [hep-ph].
[53] Y. Huang, C. j. Xiao, Q. F. L, R. Wang, J. He and L. Geng,“Strong and radiative decays of DΞ molecular state and newlyobserved Ωc states,” arXiv:1801.03598 [hep-ph].
[54] Q. Xu, G. Liu and H. Jin, “Possible bound state of the doubleheavy meson-baryon system,” Phys. Rev. D 86, 114032 (2012)[arXiv:1012.5949 [hep-ph]].
[55] R. Chen, X. Liu and A. Hosaka, “Heavy molecules and one-σ/ω-exchange model,” Phys. Rev. D 96, no. 11, 116012 (2017)[arXiv:1707.08306 [hep-ph]].
[56] Y. Shimizu and M. Harada, “Hidden Charm PentaquarkPc(4380) and Doubly Charmed Baryon Ξ∗cc(4380) as HadronicMolecule States,” Phys. Rev. D 96, no. 9, 094012 (2017)[arXiv:1708.04743 [hep-ph]].
[57] J. J. Wu, R. Molina, E. Oset and B. S. Zou, “Prediction of nar-row N∗ and Λ∗ resonances with hidden charm above 4 GeV,”Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 232001 (2010) [arXiv:1007.0573 [nucl-th]].
[58] J. Wu, Y. R. Liu, K. Chen, X. Liu and S. L. Zhu,“Hidden-charm pentaquarks and their hidden-bottom and Bc-like partner states,” Phys. Rev. D 95, no. 3, 034002 (2017)[arXiv:1701.03873 [hep-ph]].
[59] E. Hiyama, A. Hosaka, M. Oka and J. M. Richard, “Quarkmodel estimate of hidden-charm pentaquark resonances,”arXiv:1803.11369 [nucl-th].
[60] E. Hiyama, M. Kamimura, A. Hosaka, H. Toki and M. Yahiro,“Five-body calculation of resonance and scattering states ofpentaquark system,” Phys. Lett. B 633, 237 (2006) [hep-ph/0507105].
[61] Y. R. Liu, S. L. Zhu, Y. B. Dai and C. Liu, “D+sJ(2632): An
Excellent candidate of tetraquarks,” Phys. Rev. D 70, 094009(2004) [hep-ph/0407157].
[62] J. Wu, Y. R. Liu, K. Chen, X. Liu and S. L. Zhu,“X(4140), X(4270), X(4500) and X(4700) and their cscstetraquark partners,” Phys. Rev. D 94, no. 9, 094031 (2016)[arXiv:1608.07900 [hep-ph]].
[63] S. Godfrey and N. Isgur, “Mesons in a Relativized Quark Modelwith Chromodynamics,” Phys. Rev. D 32, 189 (1985).
[64] T. Hyodo, Y. R. Liu, M. Oka, K. Sudoh and S. Yasui, “Produc-tion of doubly charmed tetraquarks with exotic color configu-
rations in electron-positron collisions,” Phys. Lett. B 721, 56(2013) [arXiv:1209.6207 [hep-ph]].
[65] Q. F. Lv, K. L. Wang, L. Y. Xiao and X. H. Zhong, “Mass spec-tra and radiative transitions of doubly heavy baryons in a rela-tivized quark model,” Phys. Rev. D 96, no. 11, 114006 (2017)[arXiv:1708.04468 [hep-ph]].
[66] X. Z. Weng, X. L. Chen and W. Z. Deng, “Masses of doublyheavy-quark baryons in an extended chromomagnetic model,”Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) no.5, 054008 [arXiv:1801.08644 [hep-ph]].
[67] R. Roncaglia, D. B. Lichtenberg and E. Predazzi, “Predictingthe masses of baryons containing one or two heavy quarks,”Phys. Rev. D 52, 1722 (1995) [hep-ph/9502251].
[68] W. Roberts and M. Pervin, “Heavy baryons in a quark model,”Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 23, 2817 (2008) [arXiv:0711.2492 [nucl-th]].
[69] Z. H. Guo, “Prediction of exotic doubly charmed baryonswithin chiral effective field theory,” Phys. Rev. D 96, no. 7,074004 (2017) [arXiv:1708.04145 [hep-ph]].
[70] L. Montanet, G. C. Rossi and G. Veneziano, “BaryoniumPhysics,” Phys. Rept. 63, 149 (1980).
[71] H. Hogaasen, J. M. Richard and P. Sorba, “A Chromomag-netic mechanism for the X(3872) resonance,” Phys. Rev. D 73,054013 (2006) [hep-ph/0511039].
[72] S. Q. Luo, K. Chen, X. Liu, Y. R. Liu and S. L. Zhu, “Exotictetraquark states with the qqQQ configuration,” Eur. Phys. J. C77, no. 10, 709 (2017) [arXiv:1707.01180 [hep-ph]].
[73] Y. Cui, X. L. Chen, W. Z. Deng and S. L. Zhu, “The PossibleHeavy Tetraquarks qQqQ, qqQQ and qQQQ,” HEPNP 31, 7(2007) [hep-ph/0607226].
[74] F. Buccella, H. Hogaasen, J. M. Richard and P. Sorba,“Chromomagnetism, flavour symmetry breaking and S-wavetetraquarks,” Eur. Phys. J. C 49, 743 (2007) [hep-ph/0608001].
[75] L. Zhao, W. Z. Deng and S. L. Zhu, “Hidden-CharmTetraquarks and Charged Zc States,” Phys. Rev. D 90, no. 9,094031 (2014) [arXiv:1408.3924 [hep-ph]].
[76] J. Wu, Y. R. Liu, K. Chen, X. Liu and S. L. Zhu, “Heavy-flavored tetraquark states with the QQQQ configuration,”arXiv:1605.01134 [hep-ph].
[77] K. Chen, X. Liu, J. Wu, Y. R. Liu and S. L. Zhu, “Triply heavytetraquark states with the QQQq configuration,” Eur. Phys. J. A53, no. 1, 5 (2017) [arXiv:1609.06117 [hep-ph]].
[78] S. G. Yuan, K. W. Wei, J. He, H. S. Xu and B. S. Zou,“Study of qqqcc five quark system with three kinds of quark-quark hyperfine interaction,” Eur. Phys. J. A 48, 61 (2012)[arXiv:1201.0807 [nucl-th]].