also at] University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Dehradun 248007 The Belle Collaboration
Search for tetraquark states in final states at Belle
X. Y. Gao
Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Ion-beam Application (MOE) and Institute of Modern Physics, Fudan University, Shanghai 200443
Y. Li
Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Ion-beam Application (MOE) and Institute of Modern Physics, Fudan University, Shanghai 200443
C. P. Shen
Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Ion-beam Application (MOE) and Institute of Modern Physics, Fudan University, Shanghai 200443
I. Adachi
High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), Tsukuba 305-0801
SOKENDAI (The Graduate University for Advanced Studies), Hayama 240-0193
H. Aihara
Department of Physics, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-0033
D. M. Asner
Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York 11973
H. Atmacan
University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio 45221
T. Aushev
National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow 101000
R. Ayad
Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, University of Tabuk, Tabuk 71451
P. Behera
Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036
K. Belous
Institute for High Energy Physics, Protvino 142281
M. Bessner
University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822
V. Bhardwaj
Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Mohali, SAS Nagar, 140306
B. Bhuyan
Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, Assam 781039
T. Bilka
Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, 121 16 Prague
A. Bobrov
Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS, Novosibirsk 630090
Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090
D. Bodrov
National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow 101000
P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow 119991
G. Bonvicini
Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48202
J. Borah
Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, Assam 781039
A. Bozek
H. Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Krakow 31-342
M. Bračko
Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, University of Maribor, 2000 Maribor
J. Stefan Institute, 1000 Ljubljana
T. E. Browder
University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822
A. Budano
INFN - Sezione di Roma Tre, I-00146 Roma
M. Campajola
INFN - Sezione di Napoli, I-80126 Napoli
Università di Napoli Federico II, I-80126 Napoli
D. Červenkov
Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, 121 16 Prague
M.-C. Chang
Department of Physics, Fu Jen Catholic University, Taipei 24205
P. Chang
Department of Physics, National Taiwan University, Taipei 10617
A. Chen
National Central University, Chung-li 32054
B. G. Cheon
Department of Physics and Institute of Natural Sciences, Hanyang University, Seoul 04763
K. Chilikin
P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow 119991
H. E. Cho
Department of Physics and Institute of Natural Sciences, Hanyang University, Seoul 04763
K. Cho
Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information, Daejeon 34141
S.-J. Cho
Yonsei University, Seoul 03722
S.-K. Choi
Chung-Ang University, Seoul 06974
Y. Choi
Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon 16419
S. Choudhury
Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011
D. Cinabro
Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48202
S. Cunliffe
Deutsches Elektronen–Synchrotron, 22607 Hamburg
S. Das
Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur, Jaipur 302017
G. De Pietro
INFN - Sezione di Roma Tre, I-00146 Roma
R. Dhamija
Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad, Telangana 502285
F. Di Capua
INFN - Sezione di Napoli, I-80126 Napoli
Università di Napoli Federico II, I-80126 Napoli
J. Dingfelder
University of Bonn, 53115 Bonn
Z. Doležal
Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, 121 16 Prague
T. V. Dong
Institute of Theoretical and Applied Research (ITAR), Duy Tan University, Hanoi 100000
D. Dossett
School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010
D. Epifanov
Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS, Novosibirsk 630090
Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090
T. Ferber
Deutsches Elektronen–Synchrotron, 22607 Hamburg
A. Frey
II. Physikalisches Institut, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, 37073 Göttingen
B. G. Fulsom
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington 99352
R. Garg
Panjab University, Chandigarh 160014
V. Gaur
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061
N. Gabyshev
Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS, Novosibirsk 630090
Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090
A. Giri
Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad, Telangana 502285
P. Goldenzweig
Institut für Experimentelle Teilchenphysik, Karlsruher Institut für Technologie, 76131 Karlsruhe
T. Gu
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260
Y. Guan
University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio 45221
K. Gudkova
Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS, Novosibirsk 630090
Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090
C. Hadjivasiliou
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington 99352
S. Halder
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai 400005
O. Hartbrich
University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822
K. Hayasaka
Niigata University, Niigata 950-2181
H. Hayashii
Nara Women’s University, Nara 630-8506
M. T. Hedges
University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822
W.-S. Hou
Department of Physics, National Taiwan University, Taipei 10617
C.-L. Hsu
School of Physics, University of Sydney, New South Wales 2006
T. Iijima
Kobayashi-Maskawa Institute, Nagoya University, Nagoya 464-8602
Graduate School of Science, Nagoya University, Nagoya 464-8602
K. Inami
Graduate School of Science, Nagoya University, Nagoya 464-8602
G. Inguglia
Institute of High Energy Physics, Vienna 1050
A. Ishikawa
High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), Tsukuba 305-0801
SOKENDAI (The Graduate University for Advanced Studies), Hayama 240-0193
R. Itoh
High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), Tsukuba 305-0801
SOKENDAI (The Graduate University for Advanced Studies), Hayama 240-0193
M. Iwasaki
Osaka City University, Osaka 558-8585
Y. Iwasaki
High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), Tsukuba 305-0801
W. W. Jacobs
Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47408
E.-J. Jang
Gyeongsang National University, Jinju 52828
S. Jia
Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Ion-beam Application (MOE) and Institute of Modern Physics, Fudan University, Shanghai 200443
Y. Jin
Department of Physics, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-0033
K. K. Joo
Chonnam National University, Gwangju 61186
J. Kahn
Institut für Experimentelle Teilchenphysik, Karlsruher Institut für Technologie, 76131 Karlsruhe
A. B. Kaliyar
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai 400005
K. H. Kang
Kavli Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe (WPI), University of Tokyo, Kashiwa 277-8583
G. Karyan
Deutsches Elektronen–Synchrotron, 22607 Hamburg
T. Kawasaki
Kitasato University, Sagamihara 252-0373
H. Kichimi
High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), Tsukuba 305-0801
C. Kiesling
Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, 80805 München
C. H. Kim
Department of Physics and Institute of Natural Sciences, Hanyang University, Seoul 04763
D. Y. Kim
Soongsil University, Seoul 06978
K.-H. Kim
Yonsei University, Seoul 03722
Y.-K. Kim
Yonsei University, Seoul 03722
P. Kodyš
Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, 121 16 Prague
T. Konno
Kitasato University, Sagamihara 252-0373
A. Korobov
Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS, Novosibirsk 630090
Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090
S. Korpar
Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, University of Maribor, 2000 Maribor
J. Stefan Institute, 1000 Ljubljana
E. Kovalenko
Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS, Novosibirsk 630090
Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090
P. Križan
Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana
J. Stefan Institute, 1000 Ljubljana
R. Kroeger
University of Mississippi, University, Mississippi 38677
P. Krokovny
Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS, Novosibirsk 630090
Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090
T. Kuhr
Ludwig Maximilians University, 80539 Munich
R. Kumar
Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana 141004
K. Kumara
Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48202
A. Kuzmin
Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS, Novosibirsk 630090
Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090
P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow 119991
Y.-J. Kwon
Yonsei University, Seoul 03722
Y.-T. Lai
Kavli Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe (WPI), University of Tokyo, Kashiwa 277-8583
T. Lam
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061
J. S. Lange
Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen, 35392 Gießen
M. Laurenza
INFN - Sezione di Roma Tre, I-00146 Roma
Dipartimento di Matematica e Fisica, Università di Roma Tre, I-00146 Roma
S. C. Lee
Kyungpook National University, Daegu 41566
C. H. Li
Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029
J. Li
Kyungpook National University, Daegu 41566
L. K. Li
University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio 45221
Y. B. Li
Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Ion-beam Application (MOE) and Institute of Modern Physics, Fudan University, Shanghai 200443
L. Li Gioi
Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, 80805 München
J. Libby
Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036
K. Lieret
Ludwig Maximilians University, 80539 Munich
D. Liventsev
Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48202
High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), Tsukuba 305-0801
A. Martini
Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron, 22607 Hamburg
M. Masuda
Earthquake Research Institute, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-0032
Research Center for Nuclear Physics, Osaka University, Osaka 567-0047
T. Matsuda
University of Miyazaki, Miyazaki 889-2192
D. Matvienko
Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS, Novosibirsk 630090
Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090
P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow 119991
S. K. Maurya
Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, Assam 781039
F. Meier
Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708
M. Merola
INFN - Sezione di Napoli, I-80126 Napoli
Università di Napoli Federico II, I-80126 Napoli
F. Metzner
Institut für Experimentelle Teilchenphysik, Karlsruher Institut für Technologie, 76131 Karlsruhe
K. Miyabayashi
Nara Women’s University, Nara 630-8506
R. Mizuk
P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow 119991
National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow 101000
G. B. Mohanty
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai 400005
R. Mussa
INFN - Sezione di Torino, I-10125 Torino
M. Nakao
High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), Tsukuba 305-0801
SOKENDAI (The Graduate University for Advanced Studies), Hayama 240-0193
Z. Natkaniec
H. Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Krakow 31-342
A. Natochii
University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822
L. Nayak
Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad, Telangana 502285
M. Niiyama
Kyoto Sangyo University, Kyoto 603-8555
N. K. Nisar
Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York 11973
S. Nishida
High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), Tsukuba 305-0801
SOKENDAI (The Graduate University for Advanced Studies), Hayama 240-0193
K. Ogawa
Niigata University, Niigata 950-2181
S. Ogawa
Toho University, Funabashi 274-8510
H. Ono
Nippon Dental University, Niigata 951-8580
Niigata University, Niigata 950-2181
P. Oskin
P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow 119991
P. Pakhlov
P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow 119991
Moscow Physical Engineering Institute, Moscow 115409
G. Pakhlova
National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow 101000
P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow 119991
T. Pang
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260
S. Pardi
INFN - Sezione di Napoli, I-80126 Napoli
H. Park
Kyungpook National University, Daegu 41566
S.-H. Park
High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), Tsukuba 305-0801
S. Patra
Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Mohali, SAS Nagar, 140306
S. Paul
Department of Physics, Technische Universität München, 85748 Garching
Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, 80805 München
T. K. Pedlar
Luther College, Decorah, Iowa 52101
R. Pestotnik
J. Stefan Institute, 1000 Ljubljana
L. E. Piilonen
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061
T. Podobnik
Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana
J. Stefan Institute, 1000 Ljubljana
V. Popov
National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow 101000
E. Prencipe
Forschungszentrum Jülich, 52425 Jülich
M. T. Prim
University of Bonn, 53115 Bonn
M. Röhrken
Deutsches Elektronen–Synchrotron, 22607 Hamburg
A. Rostomyan
Deutsches Elektronen–Synchrotron, 22607 Hamburg
N. Rout
Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036
G. Russo
Università di Napoli Federico II, I-80126 Napoli
D. Sahoo
Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011
S. Sandilya
Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad, Telangana 502285
A. Sangal
University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio 45221
L. Santelj
Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana
J. Stefan Institute, 1000 Ljubljana
T. Sanuki
Department of Physics, Tohoku University, Sendai 980-8578
V. Savinov
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260
G. Schnell
Department of Physics, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, 48080 Bilbao
IKERBASQUE, Basque Foundation for Science, 48013 Bilbao
Y. Seino
Niigata University, Niigata 950-2181
K. Senyo
Yamagata University, Yamagata 990-8560
M. E. Sevior
School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010
M. Shapkin
Institute for High Energy Physics, Protvino 142281
C. Sharma
Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur, Jaipur 302017
J.-G. Shiu
Department of Physics, National Taiwan University, Taipei 10617
F. Simon
Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, 80805 München
J. B. Singh
[
Panjab University, Chandigarh 160014
A. Sokolov
Institute for High Energy Physics, Protvino 142281
E. Solovieva
P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow 119991
S. Stanič
University of Nova Gorica, 5000 Nova Gorica
M. Starič
J. Stefan Institute, 1000 Ljubljana
Z. S. Stottler
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061
M. Sumihama
Gifu University, Gifu 501-1193
T. Sumiyoshi
Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo 192-0397
M. Takizawa
Showa Pharmaceutical University, Tokyo 194-8543
J-PARC Branch, KEK Theory Center, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), Tsukuba 305-0801
Meson Science Laboratory, Cluster for Pioneering Research, RIKEN, Saitama 351-0198
U. Tamponi
INFN - Sezione di Torino, I-10125 Torino
K. Tanida
Advanced Science Research Center, Japan Atomic Energy Agency, Naka 319-1195
F. Tenchini
Deutsches Elektronen–Synchrotron, 22607 Hamburg
M. Uchida
Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo 152-8550
K. Uno
Niigata University, Niigata 950-2181
S. Uno
High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), Tsukuba 305-0801
SOKENDAI (The Graduate University for Advanced Studies), Hayama 240-0193
P. Urquijo
School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010
Y. Usov
Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS, Novosibirsk 630090
Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090
R. Van Tonder
University of Bonn, 53115 Bonn
G. Varner
University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822
A. Vinokurova
Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS, Novosibirsk 630090
Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090
E. Waheed
High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), Tsukuba 305-0801
E. Wang
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260
M.-Z. Wang
Department of Physics, National Taiwan University, Taipei 10617
X. L. Wang
Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Ion-beam Application (MOE) and Institute of Modern Physics, Fudan University, Shanghai 200443
M. Watanabe
Niigata University, Niigata 950-2181
S. Watanuki
Yonsei University, Seoul 03722
E. Won
Korea University, Seoul 02841
X. Xu
Soochow University, Suzhou 215006
B. D. Yabsley
School of Physics, University of Sydney, New South Wales 2006
W. Yan
Department of Modern Physics and State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026
S. B. Yang
Korea University, Seoul 02841
H. Ye
Deutsches Elektronen–Synchrotron, 22607 Hamburg
J. H. Yin
Korea University, Seoul 02841
C. Z. Yuan
Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049
Y. Zhai
Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011
Z. P. Zhang
Department of Modern Physics and State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026
V. Zhilich
Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS, Novosibirsk 630090
Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk 630090
V. Zhukova
P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow 119991
Abstract
A search for double-heavy tetraquark state candidates decaying to and is presented for the first time using the data
samples of 102 million and 158 million events,
and the data samples at = 10.52 GeV, 10.58 GeV, and 10.867 GeV corresponding to integrated luminosities of 89.5 fb-1,
711.0 fb-1, and 121.4 fb-1, respectively, accumulated with the Belle detector at the KEKB asymmetric
energy electron-positron collider.
The invariant-mass spectra of the and
are studied to search for possible resonances.
No significant signals are observed, and the 90% confidence level upper limits on the product branching fractions
[]
in inclusive decays and the product values of Born cross section and branching fraction
[]
in collisions at = 10.52 GeV, 10.58 GeV, and 10.867 GeV under different assumptions of masses and widths are obtained.
I Introduction
The hadron spectrum was successfully categorized based on the quark model as early as the 1960s quarkmodel . For a long time, all known hadrons could be classified as mesons or baryons with components of a quark-antiquark pair () or three quarks (), respectively. However, Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) also allows the existence of more complex structures,
such as the tetraquark, pentaquark, or glueball, which possess properties that are forbidden for conventional hadrons. The states that do not fit into the ordinary or scheme in the quark model are referred to as exotic states.
The experimental discovery of exotic states began in 2003 with the observation of the 3872-1 . This new state did not fit any ordinary quarkonia in the quark model. After that, the was observed in multiple decay modes and confirmed by various experiments 3872-2 ; 3872-3 ; 3872-4 . Many different theoretical interpretations of this state have been proposed, such as meson molecule, tetraquark, and conventional bound state 3872-theory-1 ; 3872-theory-2 ; 3872-theory-3 ; 3872-theory-4 ; 3872-theory-5 .
During the past two decades, there has been considerable world-wide activity in exotic state research using various processes, such as annihilation (e.g., at -charm facilities and B-factories), hadron collisions (e.g., at the Tevatron and the LHC), or photo- and leptoproduction (e.g., at the SPS, HERA or at Jefferson Lab),
and many exotic state candidates were observed xyz-yuan ; xyz-shen .
In searches for exotic states, a clear feature that helps distinguish exotic from ordinary hadrons would be a nonzero electric charge in a state which contains a heavy quark-antiquark pair of the same flavor. Such a state must contain at least one more quark-antiquark pair, and is thus not a conventional quark-antiquark meson.
Furthermore, a state with a pair of two identical heavy flavor quarks (for example, ), has even more pronounced features as an exotic state.
Very recently, the LHCb experiment announced observation of an open-double-charm state in the mass spectrum near threshold tcc-lhcb-1 ; tcc-lhcb-2 .
It contains two charm quarks and two light quarks, thus it is a clear evidence for an exotic state. On the theoretical side, in addition to tetraquark models based on a heavy quark pair and two light quarks, the double-heavy tetraquark states are studied using QCD sum rules the_qcd , quark models the_qm1 ; the_qm2 , and lattice QCD computations the_lattqcd . Besides, a QCD-inspired chiral quark model gives a prediction on the tetraquark states denoted as with electric charge in spin-parity channels and , which are expected to be found in and final states the_qqss2 . The predicted masses and widths of those resonances are listed in Table 1. Among the three predicted resonances in final state, the narrowest one has the highest observable probability.
Table 1: Predicted masses and widths for the resonances in and final states the_qqss2 .
Mode
Mass
Width
(MeV/)
(MeV)
00+
4902
3.54
02+
4821
5.58
02+
4846
10.68
02+
4775
23.26
In this paper, we present a search for double-heavy tetraquark candidates using the and final states in inclusive decays, and processes at = 10.52, 10.58, and 10.867 GeV. The candidates are reconstructed in decays to , while the candidates are reconstructed in the and decays. Inclusion of charged-conjugate modes is implicitly assumed throughout this analysis.
II The data sample and the belle detector
The data samples used in this analysis include: a 5.74 fb-1 data sample collected
at the peak (102 million events); a 24.7 fb-1 data sample collected
at the peak (158 million events); an 89.5 fb-1 data sample collected at = 10.52 GeV; a 711 fb-1 data sample collected at = 10.58 GeV, and a
121.4 fb-1 data sample collected at = 10.867 GeV, where is the
center-of-mass energy squared.
All the data were collected with the Belle detector, which is described in detail in Ref. detector , operating at the KEKB asymmetric-energy
collider collider .
It is a large-solid-angle magnetic spectrometer consisting of a silicon vertex detector,
a 50-layer central drift chamber (CDC), an array of aerogel threshold Cherenkov counters (ACC),
a barrel-like arrangement of time-of-flight scintillation counters (TOF), and an electromagnetic
calorimeter comprising CsI(Tl) crystals (ECL) located inside a superconducting solenoid coil that
provides a magnetic field. An iron flux return comprising resistive plate chambers
placed outside the coil was instrumented to detect mesons and to identify muons.
Monte Carlo (MC) signal events are generated with EvtGenevtgen and processed through a full simulation of the Belle detector based on GEANT3geant .
Initial-state radiation (ISR) is taken into account assuming that the
cross sections follow a dependence in reactions.
The processes and at = 10.52 GeV, 10.58 GeV, and 10.867 GeV are taken into account, where the decays into using a -wave model, and the decays to final states using a Dalitz plot decay model of Ref. cleo-dalitz . The mass of is chosen in the interval from 4882 MeV/ to 4922 MeV/ (4801 MeV/ to 4841 MeV/)
in steps of 5 MeV/, with a width varying from 0.54 MeV to 6.54 MeV (2.58 MeV to 8.58 MeV) in steps of 1 MeV for ().
Inclusive MC samples of decays, , , and at = 10.52 GeV, 10.58 GeV, and 10.867 GeV corresponding to four times the integrated luminosity of data are used to study possible peaking backgrounds.
III Common Event selection criteria
For reconstructed charged tracks,
the impact parameters perpendicular to and along the beam direction with respect to the interaction point (IP)
are required to be less than 0.2 cm and 1.5 cm, respectively, and the transverse momentum in the
laboratory frame is required to be larger than 0.1 GeV/.
For the particle identification (PID) of a well-reconstructed charged track,
information from different detector subsystems, including specific ionization in the CDC,
time measurement in the TOF, and the response of the ACC, is combined to form a likelihood
pidcode for particle species , where = or .
Tracks with are identified as
pions with an efficiency of 96%, while 5% of kaons are misidentified as pions; tracks
with are identified as kaons with an efficiency of 95%, while 4% of pions are
misidentified as kaons.
An ECL cluster is taken as a photon candidate if it does not match the extrapolation of any charged tracks.
The energy of the photon candidate from the decay is required to be greater than 50 MeV.
For candidates, vertex and mass-constrained fits are performed, and then is required ( selection efficiency according to MC simulation).
For candidates, a mass-constrained fit is performed to improve its momentum resolution.
The best candidate with of mass-constrained fit for each candidate is kept to suppress the combinational background.
The signal mass windows for , , , and candidates have been optimized by maximizing the Punzi parameter fom ,
where is the number of selected events in the simulated signal process by fitting the invariant-mass spectrum.
is the number of selected events obtained from the normalized sidebands in inclusive MC samples.
The optimized mass window requirements are MeV/, MeV/, MeV/, MeV/, and MeV/, where , , , and are the nominal masses of , , , and PDG .
There are no multiple candidates after processing all selections in both and cases.
Figure 1 shows the scatter plots of versus invariant masses from the selected
candidates from data at = 10.58 GeV as an example. Here we define the two-dimensional sidebands, and the normalized contribution from and sidebands is estimated using 25% of the number of events
in the blue dashed line boxes and reduced by 6.25% of the number of events in the red dotted line boxes.
Figure 1: The top (bottom) plots show the distribution of vs from the selected candidates from data at = 10.58 GeV, where the is reconstructed from or . The central solid boxes define the signal regions, and the red dash-dotted and blue dashed boxes show the sideband regions described in the text.
IV Invariant-mass spectra
Figure 2: Distributions of from data for processes (a) , (b) , and at (c) = 10.52 GeV, (d) = 10.58 GeV, (e) = 10.867 GeV. The cyan shaded histograms are from the normalized sideband events.
Figure 3: Distributions of from data for processes (a) , (b) , and at (c) = 10.52 GeV, (d) = 10.58 GeV, (e) = 10.867 GeV. The cyan shaded histograms are from the normalized sideband events.
Figure 4: Distributions of from data for processes (a) , (b) , and at (c) = 10.52 GeV, (d) = 10.58 GeV, (e) = 10.867 GeV. The cyan shaded histograms are from the normalized sideband events.
Figure 5: Distributions of from data for processes (a) , (b) , and at (c) = 10.52 GeV, (d) = 10.58 GeV, (e) = 10.867 GeV. The cyan shaded histograms are from the normalized sideband events.
The and invariant mass distributions of selected events from data samples in the kinematically allowed region are shown in Figs. 2 and 3
together with the backgrounds estimated from the normalized sideband events.
No peaking backgrounds are found in the normalized sideband events in either and invariant mass distributions from data,
nor in the and mass spectra from inclusive MC samples topoo . Thus in the following we only focus on
the mass spectra from the theoretically predicted regions for the_qqss2
which are shown in Figs. 4 and 5.
Since no clear signals are observed in the invariant-mass spectra, the 90% confidence level (C.L.) upper limits on the numbers of signal events
are given. The upper limit is calculated by the frequentist approach pole-1 implemented in the POLE (Poissonian limit estimator) program pole-2 , where the mass window is obtained by giving 95% acceptance to the corresponding simulated signal events, the number of signal candidate events is counted directly, and the number of expected background events is estimated from the normalized mass sidebands.
The possible non-resonant contributions in the and invariant-mass spectra are not subtracted and
taken as potential signals, in order to set more conservative upper limits.
The upper limit calculation is repeated with varying from 4882 MeV/ to 4922 MeV/ in steps of 5 MeV/ and varying
from 0.54 MeV to 6.54 MeV in steps of 1.0 MeV for the distribution, and with varying from 4801 MeV/ to 4841 MeV/ in steps of 5 MeV/
and varying from 2.58 MeV to 8.58 MeV in steps of 1.0 MeV for the distribution.
V Systematic Uncertainties
There are several sources of systematic uncertainties on the branching fraction and Born cross section measurements,
which can be divided into multiplicative and additive systematic uncertainties.
The multiplicative systematic uncertainties include detection-efficiency-related (DER) sources (tracking efficiency,
PID, and photon reconstruction),
the statistical uncertainty of the MC efficiency, branching fractions of intermediate states, the total numbers of and
events, and the integrated luminosities at = 10.52 GeV, 10.58 GeV, and 10.867 GeV.
The systematic uncertainties related to detection efficiency () include the tracking efficiency (0.35% per track, estimated using partially reconstructed decays in ), PID efficiency ( per kaon and per pion, estimated using , samples), and photon reconstruction (2.0% per photon, estimated using a radiative Bhabha sample).
The statistical uncertainty in the signal MC simulation efficiency can be calculated as = , where is the reconstruction efficiency after all event selections, and is the total number of generated events.
Its relative uncertainty is at most at the 1.0% level.
Changing the dependence of the cross sections of from to , the product of efficiency and radiative correction factor changes by less than 0.3% ().
The relative uncertainties of branching fractions for , , and are 0.75%, 3.52%, and 3.45% PDG , respectively.
The total uncertainties are calculated using , where is the efficiency, is the relative uncertainty of intermediate states’ branching fractions, and
is the product of branching fractions of the intermediate states for each reconstructed mode .
The total numbers of and events are estimated to be ( and (, which are determined by counting the numbers of inclusive hadrons.
The uncertainties are mainly due to imperfect simulations of the charged multiplicity distributions from inclusive hadronic MC events ().
Belle measures luminosity with 1.4% precision using wide angle Bhabha events ().
All the multiplicative uncertainties are summarized in Table 2 for the measurements of and at = 10.52 GeV, 10.58 GeV, and 10.867 GeV, respectively. The total multiplicative uncertainty is calculated by adding all sources of multiplicative uncertainty in quadrature,
The additive uncertainty due to the number of expected background is considered by counting normalized background distributions directly, fitting the distributions with a constant, and a 1st-order polynominal.
Table 2: Summary of the multiplicative systematic uncertainties (%) on the branching fraction measurements for and on the Born cross section measurements for at = 10.52 GeV, 10.58 GeV, and 10.867 GeV.
() mode
DER
MC stat.
ISR
[]
Sum
6.1 (7.3)
1.0
—
3.0
2.0
7.2 (8.2)
6.1 (7.3)
1.0
—
3.0
2.3
7.2 (8.3)
at = 10.52 GeV
6.1 (7.3)
1.0
0.3
3.0
1.4
7.0 (8.2)
at = 10.58 GeV
6.1 (7.3)
1.0
0.3
3.0
1.4
7.0 (8.2)
at = 10.867 GeV
6.1 (7.3)
1.0
0.3
3.0
1.4
7.0 (8.2)
VI Statistical interpretation of upper limit setting
Since no signal traces are observed in the or distributions from data at all energy points,
the 90% C.L. upper limits on the numbers of signal events () are determined.
To take into account the additive and multiplicative uncertainties, we first study the additive systematic uncertainty and take the most conservative case, then use the total multiplicative systematic uncertainty as an input parameter to the POLE program.
Since there are few events observed from data sample at = 10.52 GeV, the continuum contributions are neglected for the decays.
The conservative upper limit on the product branching fractions in decays are obtained by the following formula:
where is the 90% C.L. upper limit on the number of events from the data signal yields including all systematic uncertainties that are mentioned above from other variables in this expression, is the total number of events,
is the corresponding detection efficiency, and is the product of all secondary branching fractions for each reconstructed channel.
The conservative upper limit on the product values of Born cross section and branching fraction are calculated by the following formula:
where is the 90% C.L. upper limit on the number of events in data signal yields including all systematic uncertainties that are mentioned above from other variables in this expression, is the vacuum polarization factor, is the integrated luminosity, is the corresponding detection efficiency, is the product of all secondary branching fractions for each reconstructed channel, and is the radiative correction factor.
The values of are 0.931, 0.930, and 0.929 for = 10.52 GeV, 10.58 GeV, and 10.867 GeV vacuum , and the uncertainty is calculated to be less than 0.1%, which is negligible.
The radiative correction factors are 0.686, 0.694, and 0.738, as calculated using the formula given in Ref. ISR for = 10.52 GeV, 10.58 GeV, and 10.867 GeV, respectively, where we assume that the dependence of cross sections on is .
The calculated 90% C.L. upper limits on the product branching fractions of and the product values of Born cross section and branching fraction of at = 10.52 GeV, 10.58 GeV, and 10.867 GeV for the mode ()
are displayed in Fig. 6 (7).
Numerical values for the mode can be found in Tables 3 and 4, while those for the mode are shown in Tables 5 and 6.
Figure 6: The 90% C.L. upper limits on the product branching fractions of and the Born cross sections of at = 10.52 GeV, 10.58 GeV, and 10.867 GeV with varying from 4882 MeV/ to 4922 MeV/ in steps of 5 MeV/ and varying from 0.54 MeV to 6.54 MeV in steps of 1.0 MeV.
Table 3: Summary of 90% C.L. upper limits with the systematic uncertainties included on the product branching fractions of .
()
(MeV/)
(MeV)
1.7/1.2
1.7/1.2
1.8/1.2
1.8/1.3
1.8/1.2
1.9/2.5
1.9/2.5
1.7/1.2
1.7/1.2
1.8/1.2
1.8/1.2
1.8/1.2
1.9/1.3
1.8/1.3
1.7/1.2
1.7/1.2
1.8/1.2
1.8/1.2
1.8/1.2
1.9/1.3
1.8/1.3
1.7/1.2
1.7/1.2
1.8/1.2
1.8/1.2
1.8/1.2
1.9/1.3
1.8/2.5
1.7/1.2
1.8/1.1
1.8/2.2
1.8/2.3
1.8/2.2
1.9/2.4
1.9/2.4
1.7/2.2
1.7/2.2
1.8/2.3
1.8/2.3
1.8/2.3
1.9/1.9
1.8/1.9
1.7/2.2
1.7/2.2
1.8/1.8
1.8/1.8
1.8/1.8
1.9/1.9
3.4/1.9
1.7/1.9
1.7/1.8
3.3/1.9
3.4/1.8
3.4/1.8
3.5/1.8
3.4/1.8
3.3/0.9
3.3/0.9
3.4/0.9
3.5/1.8
3.5/1.8
3.6/1.9
3.5/1.7
Table 4: Summary of 90% C.L. upper limits with the systematic uncertainties included on the cross sections of at = 10.52 GeV / 10.58 GeV / 10.867 GeV.
()
(MeV/)
(MeV)
4.8/2.5/6.0
5.0/2.6/6.6
5.1/3.2/6.7
4.1/3.2/10.3
4.1/4.1/10.9
3.9/4.8/10.4
5.7/5.1/10.6
1.9/3.4/4.0
2.0/3.5/5.4
4.2/3.6/5.5
4.1/3.8/5.6
6.2/4.3/5.9
8.0/4.6/6.8
8.0/4.5/7.6
6.4/3.1/4.0
6.5/3.4/4.2
6.7/3.4/5.1
7.0/3.9/5.0
6.1/4.0/5.1
6.2/4.3/6.1
6.1/5.1/5.9
5.9/1.9/2.7
6.1/2.6/3.8
6.0/3.3/3.9
6.2/3.7/5.0
6.1/3.7/6.3
6.2/4.2/6.0
7.2/4.8/7.3
6.0/1.9/4.0
6.1/1.8/3.8
6.1/2.3/5.1
6.3/2.9/5.0
6.1/2.9/5.1
6.2/3.7/6.1
6.2/3.8/6.2
2.6/1.8/5.1
4.9/1.8/5.3
5.1/1.8/5.1
5.2/1.9/5.0
7.1/2.3/5.1
6.2/2.8/4.7
6.1/2.9/7.5
2.6/1.6/4.0
2.6/1.6/4.1
2.7/1.6/6.6
2.8/1.6/6.7
2.9/1.9/7.8
5.4/2.5/7.3
5.4/3.0/9.6
2.6/1.2/5.2
2.6/1.6/6.6
2.7/1.6/9.0
2.8/2.2/9.1
5.4/2.2/9.0
5.4/3.2/8.6
5.4/3.2/8.9
4.9/1.1/6.2
5.0/1.2/6.5
5.2/1.8/6.6
5.4/2.3/7.9
5.4/2.7/8.3
5.5/2.9/9.0
5.5/3.1/9.2
Figure 7: The 90% C.L. upper limits on the product branching fractions of and the Born cross sections of at = 10.52 GeV, 10.58 GeV, and 10.867 GeV with varying from 4801 MeV/ to 4841 MeV/ in steps of 5 MeV/ and varying from 2.58 MeV to 8.58 MeV in steps of 1.0 MeV.Table 5: Summary of 90% C.L. upper limits with the systematic uncertainties included on the product branching fractions of /
Table 6: Summary of 90% C.L. upper limits with the systematic uncertainties included on the cross sections of at = 10.52 GeV / 10.58 GeV / 10.867 GeV.
()
(MeV/)
(MeV)
14.5/8.5/16.2
14.1/8.5/20.7
13.4/10.8/20.4
14.1/10.7/23.7
10.3/10.9/23.8
11.5/11.7/23.2
11.1/12.7/24.1
14.5/6.1/21.2
14.2/6.2/18.3
13.5/8.3/17.3
14.1/7.7/18.2
14.0/10.4/18.3
15.5/12.6/17.8
11.1/13.6/23.7
14.5/3.8/21.0
14.2/6.3/20.2
13.5/7.8/19.9
14.1/7.8/20.9
26.2/10.4/23.2
23.7/12.7/22.6
23.0/13.9/23.4
14.1/4.7/16.3
13.8/6.8/20.8
24.6/6.6/26.3
25.8/9.1/27.6
25.6/9.5/27.8
28.3/12.4/23.3
27.5/13.0/24.2
25.8/6.7/16.9
25.2/7.5/16.2
24.1/7.5/21.2
25.1/9.0/22.3
24.9/9.2/19.3
27.6/9.5/30.2
26.8/11.0/31.4
26.4/8.6/16.4
25.8/9.3/15.8
24.6/9.1/15.6
25.7/9.1/18.6
25.5/10.2/18.7
28.3/11.2/23.4
27.5/11.4/24.3
27.1/7.0/21.1
26.5/8.6/20.3
25.2/11.0/20.1
26.4/11.2/21.0
34.7/11.5/23.4
38.5/12.0/22.8
37.4/12.5/23.6
13.8/6.6/16.2
13.5/7.5/15.6
32.0/9.7/23.3
33.4/9.4/23.7
33.1/9.6/23.8
36.6/12.2/23.2
35.6/13.8/24.1
24.7/6.9/21.9
24.2/6.7/18.1
23.1/7.2/17.9
24.1/8.9/18.8
23.9/9.9/24.3
34.9/12.0/29.6
34.0/13.4/30.8
VII conclusion
Using the data samples of 102 million events, 158 million events,
and data samples at = 10.52 GeV, 10.58 GeV, and 10.867 GeV corresponding to integrated luminosities
89.5 fb-1, 711.0 fb-1, and 121.4 fb-1, respectively, we search for the double-heavy
tetraquark states in the processes of and
at = 10.52 GeV, 10.58 GeV, and 10.867 GeV.
No peaking structures are observed in the and distributions from data.
The 90% C.L. upper limits on the product branching fractions in inclusive decays
[] and
the product values of Born cross section and branching fraction for
[] at
= 10.52 GeV, 10.58 GeV, and 10.867 GeV as functions of various assumed masses and widths are determined.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank the KEKB group for the excellent operation of the
accelerator; the KEK cryogenics group for the efficient
operation of the solenoid; and the KEK computer group, and the Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory (PNNL) Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory (EMSL)
computing group for strong computing support; and the National
Institute of Informatics, and Science Information NETwork 5 (SINET5) for
valuable network support. We acknowledge support from
the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and
Technology (MEXT) of Japan, the Japan Society for the
Promotion of Science (JSPS), and the Tau-Lepton Physics
Research Center of Nagoya University;
the Australian Research Council including grants
DP180102629, DP170102389, DP170102204, DP150103061, FT130100303; Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Research (FWF) and
FWF Austrian Science Fund No. P 31361-N36;
the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Contracts
No. 11675166, No. 11705209; No. 11975076; No. 12135005; No. 12175041; No. 12161141008; Key Research Program of Frontier Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), Grant No. QYZDJ-SSW-SLH011; the Shanghai Science and Technology Committee (STCSM) under Grant No. 19ZR1403000; the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech
Republic under Contract No. LTT17020;
Horizon 2020 ERC Advanced Grant No. 884719 and ERC Starting Grant No. 947006 “InterLeptons” (European Union);
the Carl Zeiss Foundation, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, the
Excellence Cluster Universe, and the VolkswagenStiftung;
the Department of Atomic Energy (Project Identification No. RTI 4002) and the Department of Science and Technology of India;
the Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare of Italy;
National Research Foundation (NRF) of Korea Grant
Nos. 2016R1D1A1B01010135, 2016R1D1A1B02012900, 2018R1A2B3003643,
2018R1A6A1A06024970, 2019K1A3A7A09033840,
2019R1I1A3A01058933, 2021R1A6A1A03043957,
2021R1F1A1060423, 2021R1F1A1064008;
Radiation Science Research Institute, Foreign Large-size Research Facility Application Supporting project, the Global Science Experimental Data Hub Center of the Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information and KREONET/GLORIAD;
the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education and
the National Science Center;
the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation, Agreement 14.W03.31.0026, and the HSE University Basic Research Program, Moscow; University of Tabuk research grants
S-1440-0321, S-0256-1438, and S-0280-1439 (Saudi Arabia);
the Slovenian Research Agency Grant Nos. J1-9124 and P1-0135;
Ikerbasque, Basque Foundation for Science, Spain;
the Swiss National Science Foundation;
the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan;
and the United States Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation.
References
(1) M. Gell-Mann, Phys. Lett. 8, 214 (1964).
(2) S. K. Choi et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 262001 (2003).
(3) D. Acosta et al. (CDF Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 072001 (2004).
(4) V. M. Abazov et al. (D0 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 162002 (2004).
(5) B. Aubert et al. (BaBar Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 71, 071103 (2005).
(6) E. S. Swanson, Phys. Lett. B 588, 189 (2004).
(7) C. Y. Wong, Phys. Rev. C 69, 055202 (2004).
(8) N. Li and S. L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D 86, 074022 (2012).
(9) L. Maiani, F. Piccinini, A. D. Polosa, and V. Riquer, Phys. Rev. D 71, 014028 (2005).
(10) K. K. Seth, Phys. Lett. B 612, 1 (2005).
(11) C. Z. Yuan, Int. J. of Mod. Phys. A 33, 1830018 (2018).
(12) N. Brambilla, S. Eidelman, C. Hanhart, A. Nefediev, C. P. Shen, C. E. Thomas, A. Vairo, and C. Z. Yuan, Phys. Rep. 873, 1 (2020).
(13) R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), arXiv:2109.01038.
(14) R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), arXiv:2109.01056.
(15) S. S. Agaev, K. Azizi, and H. Sundu, Phys. Rev. D 99, 114016 (2019).
(16) C. E. Fontoura, G. Krein, A. Valcarce, and J. Vijande, Phys. Rev. D 99, 094037 (2019).
(17) G. Yang, J. L. Ping, and J. Segovia, Phys. Rev. D 101, 014001 (2020).
(18) L. Leskovec, S. Meinel, M. Pflaumer, and M. Wagner, Phys. Rev. D 100, 014503 (2019).
(19) G. Yang, J. L. Ping, and J. Segovia, Phys. Rev. D 102, 054023 (2020).
(20) A. Abashian et al. (Belle Collaboration), Nucl. Instrum.
Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 479, 117 (2002); also, see
detector section in J. Brodzicka et al., Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2012, 04D001 (2012).
(21) S. Kurokawa and E. Kikutani, Nucl. Instr. and Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 499, 1 (2003), and other papers included
in this volume; T. Abe et al., Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2013,
03A001 (2013), and references therein.
(22) D. J. Lange, Nucl. Instr. and Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 462, 152 (2001).
(23) R. Brun et al., GEANT 3: User’s guide Geant 3.10, Geant 3.11, CERN Report No. DD/EE/84-1, 1984.
(24) R. E. Mitchell et al. (CLEO Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 79, 072008 (2009).
(25) E. Nakano, Nucl. Instr. and Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 494, 402 (2002).
(26) G. Punzi, Proceedings, Conference, PHYSTAT 2003, p. MODT002. Stanford, USA, September (2003).
(27) P. A. Zyla et al. (Particle Data Group), Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2020, 083C01 (2020).
(28) X. Y. Zhou, S. X. Du, G. Li, and C. P. Shen, Comput. Phys. Communication. 258, 107540 (2021).
(29) G. J. Feldman and R. D. Cousins, Phys. Rev. D 57, 3873 (1998).
(30) J. Conrad, O. Botner, A. Hallgren, and C. Pérez de los Heros, Phys. Rev. D 67, 012002 (2003).
(31) S. Actis et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 66, 585 (2010).
(32) E. A. Kuraev and V. S. Fadin, Yad. Fiz. 41, 733 (1985) [Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 41, 466 (1985)].