Search for the tensor glueball
Abstract
The tensor glueball is searched for in BESIII data on radiative decays into and . The invariant mass distribution exhibits an enhancement that can be described by a pole at MeV. We speculate if the tensor glueball could be distributed among high-mass tensor mesons.
1 Introduction
Quantum chromodynamics (QCD), the fundamental theory of strong interactions, predicts the existence of a full spectrum of glueballs, of composite particles containing gluons but no valence quarks. Their existence is a direct consequence of the nonabelian nature of QCD and of confinement. The properties of glueballs have been studied in many models since their prediction in the 1970s [1, 2] but experimentally, no generally accepted view had emerged. Recent reviews of glueballs and of light-quark mesons can be found elsewhere [3, 4, 5, 6, 7]. The scalar glueball is expected in the 1500 - 2000 MeV mass range [8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18]. Based on lattice calculations, we have to expect the tensor glueball mass 600 to 800 MeV above the scalar glueball. However, a small mass gap is also possible. The authors of Ref. [15] use QCD sum rules and predict 1780 MeV for the scalar, and 1860 MeV for the tensor glueball.
The radiative decay branching ratios for producing glueballs were predicted by lattice gauge calculations [24, 25]:
(1) | |||||
(2) |
These are large numbers. The yield of in radiative decays is , about six times weaker than the predicted rate for the tensor glueball!
Little is known about the glueball width. Arguments based on the expansion (see, e.g., Ref. [19]) suggest that glueballs might be narrow, 100 MeV or less. Narison [20] gave a partial decay width of the scalar glueball of MeV, not incompatible with a large total width. Minkowski and Ochs assume a width exceeding 1 GeV [21]. The authors of Refs. [22, 23] reproduce the decay rates of assuming that this is the scalar glueball and predict the tensor glueball to be very wide.
Recently we have presented a coupled-channel analysis [26] of the -wave amplitude from BESIII data on radiative decays. The data on radiative into and were published including a bin-wise partial-wave decomposition into -wave and -wave [27, 28], the data on decays into for and were published only in an energy-dependent amplitude analysis [29, 30]. A large number of further data were included in the coupled-channel analysis, references to the additional data can be found in Ref. [26]. Ten scalar isoscalar resonances were required to fit the data. Five of them were interpreted as mainly singlet, five as mainly octet resonances in SU(3). The yield of resonances showed a striking peak at MeV called . In a subsequent paper we studied the decays of the scalar mesons into pairs of pseudoscalar mesons. We found that the decays can be understood only when these mesons contain an additional flavor singlet fraction beyond the one expected for any mixing angle.
This peak at 1865 MeV showed properties expected from a scalar glueball:
-
1.
is produced abundantly in radiative decays above a very low background. Its mass is compatible with the mass calculated in unquenched lattice QCD [10] and the yield is compatible with the yield calculated in lattice QCD.
-
2.
The decay analysis of the scalar isoscalar mesons shows that the assignment of mesons to mainly-octet and mainly-singlet states is correct. Even the production of mainly-octet scalar mesons - which should be forbidden in radiative decays - peaks at 1865 MeV.
-
3.
The decay analysis requires a small glueball content in the flavor wave function of several scalar resonances. The glueball content as a function of the mass shows a peak compatible with the peak in the yield of scalar isoscalar mesons. The sum of the fractional glueball contributions is compatible with one [31].
-
4.
In the reaction , a primary couples to mesons having a strong coupling to [32]. Two peaks in the mass spectrum are seen due to and (see Fig. 7 in Ref. [32], Fig. 2c below shows a fit to the tensor wave) but there is no sign of higher-mass scalar mesons. In particular with its prominent decay mode is not seen in . It is, however, produced very strongly in the process gluon-gluon: Obviously, is produced by two initial-state gluons but not by an pair in the initial state. must have a sizable glueball fraction!
For these reasons, we are convinced that the scalar glueball is distributed among the agglomeration of scalar isoscalar mesons in the range from 1500 to 2300 MeV. Based on lattice calculations, we have to expect the tensor glueball above 2500 MeV even though smaller masses are possible as well [15].
In this Letter we search for the tensor glueball expected to be produced in radiative decays into and . In Section 2 we compare the intensities of the and invariant masses in the scalar and tensor wave. The tensor wave reveals a wide high-mass resonance. Subsequently, in Section 3, we discuss if the high-mass enhancement is split into several states and if these contain a small fraction of the tensor glueball. The results are discussed and summarized in Section 4.
2 A high-mass tensor resonance from radiative decays
The or systems produced in radiative decays are limited to even angular momenta due to Bose symmetry. Practically, only and -waves are relevant. These two partial waves can be written in the multipole basis [34, 33]. The scalar intensity originates from the electric dipole transition . Three electromagnetic amplitudes, , and , lead to the production of tensor mesons where the amplitude is the most significant one. These three amplitudes and relative phases are discussed below.
The and squared amplitudes lead to strikingly different mass distributions (see Fig. 1). The distributions were derived in Refs. [27, 28] by exploiting the statistical precision provided by decays collected by the BESIII collaboration. The mass distribution in the scalar partial wave (Fig. 1a) is characterized by a mountainous landscape starting with a steady rise growing up to 1450 MeV and a rapid fall-off. After a minimum, the intensity increases due to the complex. After a further deep minimum, a wide and asymmetric structure due to follows. At the highest mass, at about 2300 MeV, a small dip-peak structure is seen. In the distribution (Fig. 1c), the intensity rises slightly up to 1450 MeV, followed by a very significant interference pattern and then rises steeply to an asymmetric peak at about 1700 MeV that dominates the mass distribution. After a fast drop on its right side, a second peak at about 2100 MeV appears with a high-mass shoulder.
The squared amplitudes that describe production of tensor mesons do not show such rich structures. Below 1 GeV, the -wave (Fig. 1b) shows only a tail of the and no entries in mass distribution (Fig. 1d). Above 1 GeV the intensity exhibits only one strong peak due to production and a wide enhancement that reaches a maximum at about 2200 MeV. The intensity exhibits only one peak due to . Above, only little intensity is seen.
In a first fit, we describe the high-mass region by one additional resonance. Neither the mass distribution nor the phase difference are well reproduced. The for the mass distributions and for the phase differences. The mass distribution is reasonably described, the phase differences qualitatively only. However, apparent discrepancies are often enforced by adjacent high-statistics points, and some structures are limited to a narrow mass window.
Alternatively, we allow for one further resonance , the fit improves only marginally. The fit with or without gives a narrower or wider high-mass tensor resonance. Since we do not know if participates in the reaction, we increase the errors correspondingly:
(3) |
The error does not contain the possibility that the production amplitude of tensor mesons may be reduced dynamically with decreasing photon energy. Only the phase space is taken into account. Tentatively, we call these resonances (not since it might be a cluster of resonances).
An energy-dependent partial-wave analysis of the same data on was reported by the JPAC Collaboration [34]. Four scalar and three tensor mesons were identified. The tensor amplitude was described by , , and a further state at about and a width of 700 MeV. A possible tensor glueball was not discussed. The difference in mass might be due a different choice of the ambiguous solutions of the energy-independent partial wave analysis. With our choice, the distribution shows a clear peak at about 2200 MeV.
In our fit, was parameterized by a three-channel relativistic Breit-Wigner amplitude with , , and as decay channels. The ratio of the frequencies of decays into and is
(4) |
In Table 1 the properties of and are compared with values given in the Review of Particle Physics (RPP) [37] and with other determinations using radiative decay.
The mass found here is incompatible with the RPP value. We note that in an analysis of BESII data on , the mass was determined to MeV [38], and from CLEO data on this reaction, (125944) MeV was deduced [36]. JPAC finds masses between 1262 and 1282 MeV [34].
The ratio for the could be determined with a large uncertainty from the faint peak at about 1270 MeV in the mass distribution. Here, we fix the ratio to the RPP value. Also, the small decay mode of is fixed to the RPP value. Our radiative yields of and yields are fully compatible with RPP values.
(MeV) | 12576 | 15183 | 221060 | |
12596 | 15327 | [36] | ||
1275.50.8 | 1517.42.5 | [37] | ||
12628 | [38] | |||
(MeV) | 1687 | 786 | ||
86.9 | [37] | |||
17512 | [38] | |||
0.054 (f) | 0.230.05 | |||
- | [37] | |||
- | 0.0094 (f) | [37] | ||
- | 0.00940.0018 | |||
1.690.07 | 0.610.06 | 0.350.10 | ||
(2.081.58) | [36] | |||
(1.630.12) | [37] | |||
(1.630.26) | [38] |
In the reaction plus a tensor meson, the production process couples to the mesonic flavor-singlet component only. The ratio of production is related to the mixing angle via
(5) |
from which we find a tensor mixing angle . The mixing angle identifies the tensor meson nonet as ideally mixed but is inconsistent with derived from the quadratic (linear) GMO formula.
We now need to ask: Is it plausible that just one tensor resonance above 1700 MeV is produced in radiative decays? There is at most marginal evidence for , and no evidence at all for . Both states are seen in several experiments [37]. But these states are at most very weakly produced in radiative decays. Above these two states, a tensor meson at 2210 MeV suddenly appears. Could contain a fraction of the tensor glueball? And why is the fit to the phases bad with a single-resonance fit? Are several tensor resonances hidden in ?
3 Could be the tensor glueball ?
3.1 The tensor wave in
Figure 2 shows a comparison of the contribution of the amplitude in radiative decays and a fit to LHCb data on and decays. In Fig. 2a,b the data from Fig. 1b are reproduced, in Fig. 2c the data from Fig. 1d. Superimposed is a fit to the and -wave contributions to [39] (a), [40] (b), and [32] (c). In hadrons, the quark converts into a quark radiating off a boson. The boson decays into a plus a quark. The is seen as , the forms a light-quark meson. In hadrons, the boson decays into a plus a quark, and an pair creates the final state. The phase space of the BESIII data on radiative extends up to 3.1 GeV, the phase space in the reaction hadrons is limited to 2180 MeV, and to 2270 MeV in the case of hadrons.
The main objective of the LHCb collaboration was the study of CP violation through the interference of and their decay amplitudes. But the resonant structures in the and system were studied as well. The angular distributions were presented in the form of spherical harmonic moments. We have included these spherical harmonic moments into the data set described above for a joint coupled-channel analysis. The main results are presented elsewhere [41]. The fit returns the and , and -wave amplitudes recoiling against the .
The -wave from LHCb in Fig. 2a shows a peak due to production, the -wave Fig. 2c a peak due to . The intensities were multiplied by factors given in the subfigures. The factors are chosen to match the or peak heights of the results from radiative decays. Masses and widths are well compatible. The solid curve in Fig. 2b exhibits a double-peak structure; both, and , contribute to this reaction.
First, we discuss the overall intensities of the LHCb data. The strongest reaction, , , is about 12 times stronger than . In the former reaction, the intermediate boson converts into a and an quark, in the latter reaction into a and a quark. From the ratio of the CKM matrix elements , we expect a large reduction.
There is very weak intensity only in the LHCb data above the or . If the peak at 2210 MeV in Fig. 1b were due to a regular state, we would expect an onset of the tensor intensity in the LHCb data, in particular in Fig. 2a. This is not the case. As in the case of scalar mesons, the high-mass enhancement is not produced by in the initial state but by gluon-gluon interactions. The enhancement at 2210 MeV seems to contain a significant fraction of the tensor glueball in its wave function. Due to the limited phase space, this argument is, however, suggestive only and not really enforcing.
3.2 decays of tensor mesons
The scalar glueball was distributed among several scalar isoscalar resonances. Hence we expect that also the tensor glueball might not be concentrated in a single resonance. Etkin et al. [42] at BNL observed a strikingly high intensity above 2000 MeV in the reaction . The intensity was fully ascribed to the wave and was described by three tensor resonances with masses and widths of about MeV, MeV, and MeV. The unusual production characteristics were interpreted in Ref. [42] as evidence that these states are produced by glueballs. The BESIII collaboration studied the process and found that the tensor wave of this reaction can be described well with these three tensor mesons [43]. The mean mass of the three resonances is 2215 MeV. This mass agrees perfectly well with the mass of . The BNL experiment may thus have revealed the tensor glueball and its splitting into several tensor mesons 40 years ago [44]!
3.3 Fits with as cluster of resonances
We fitted high-mass enhancement at 2210 MeV with these three resonances. Figure 3 shows for the reaction and
-
1.
the magnitudes of the three amplitudes , and , and
-
2.
the phase difference between the and , and , and amplitudes.
\begin{overpic}[width=216.81pt,height=268.84227pt]{pipi_20_paper} \put(10.0,92.0){\bf\large a} \put(10.0,62.0){\bf\large b} \put(10.0,32.0){\bf\large c} \end{overpic} | \begin{overpic}[width=216.81pt,height=268.84227pt]{pipi_20phase} \put(10.0,92.0){\bf\large d} \put(10.0,62.0){\bf\large e} \put(10.0,32.0){\bf\large f} \end{overpic} |
---|---|
\begin{overpic}[width=216.81pt,height=268.84227pt]{kk_20_paper} \put(10.0,92.0){\bf\large a} \put(10.0,62.0){\bf\large b} \put(10.0,32.0){\bf\large c} \end{overpic} | \begin{overpic}[width=216.81pt,height=268.84227pt]{kk_20phase} \put(10.0,92.0){\bf\large d} \put(10.0,62.0){\bf\large e} \put(10.0,32.0){\bf\large f} \end{overpic} |
The amplitudes - moduli and phases - are shown here in a mass region limited to GeV. The amplitudes were determined in slices of the invariant mass in a “mass-independent fit”. It was shown that at each invariant mass, two solutions exist. Assuming continuity of the amplitude, the full mass range could be described by four different solutions. One of the solutions gave the best energy-dependent fit for the scalar wave [26]. This solution also defines unambiguously the tensor waves.
The tensor intensities , , and and the phase differences of this solution are shown as histograms. The solid curve represents our fit to the and -waves. The -wave was refit; the changes of -wave parameters compared to Ref. [26] are marginal only. The of the overall fit is now for the mass distributions and 1716/677 for the phase differences. Adding further high-mass tensor resonances improves the fit only slightly.
A few regions need to be discussed. The yields for and yields above the are underestimated by our fit. Larger yields are, however, incompatible with the phase motions. The and phases have data points with very small errors and large deviations from their neighbors. The most important phase difference is described by .
4 Discussion and Summary
The total observed yield in and is
(6) |
Data on elastic -wave scattering in this mass range do not exist. The missing intensity cannot be determined from the data included in our fits. An estimate can be obtained from tensor states reported to be seen in radiative decays. The reactions and their contributions to the high-mass region are listed in Table 2. Summation yields
(7) |
This is a substantial yield even though still smaller than the observed yield of the scalar glueball. We note that the tensor contribution is rather small when compared to the and contributions. The tensor contribution is completely unknown. Hence there may still be missing intensity. Here we emphasize the importance of further studies of these channels with the much larger statistics taken by the BESIII Collaboration.
This work | ||
This work | ||
[29] | ||
, | [45] | |
[46] | ||
[47] | ||
(12443) | ||
[48] | ||
(2818) | ||
[49] | ||
(7023) | ||
, , | [43] | |
, , |
Summarizing, we have presented a coupled-channel analysis of BESIII data on decays into and . The data are dominated by -wave and -wave contributions. This fit is important since it does not only provide the tensor wave but also shows that and -waves both are consistently described.
In the tensor wave we find an enhancement at MeV,
MeV
and a yield (in and ) of
called .
There are arguments speaking in favor and against a glueball interpretation.
Pro:
is produced as a high-mass tensor resonance in radiative decays, a process in which glueballs are supposed to be produced. It is the only tensor meson seen clearly above . This suggests that could contain a contribution from the tensor glueball. The improvement of the fit with three resonances instead of one only points to the possibility that is composed of several resonances. In particular, is consistent with early results in production in scattering and supports the claim that this could be the tensor glueball.
There is no evidence for a similar enhancement in the reactions
or studied by the LHCb collaboration where resonances
in the are formed by a pair in the initial state. The absence of a structure
can serve as additional evidence for the glueball interpretation.
Contra:
In calculation on a lattice, mass and yield of the scalar glueball
are predicted which agree well with the result of a coupled-channel analysis of the
same data as discussed here. These calculations predict a tensor glueball mass
considerably above . Also the yield of the tensor glueball should be
substantially larger than the yield. The LHCb data are limited in phase
space, and the non-observation of a signal could be a phase-space effect.
Further studies of radiative decays are certainly required to support or to reject the possibility that is the tensor glueball. Possibly, is only the low-energy tail of a tensor glueball centered at a higher mass. This conjecture could be tested by analyzing data on radiative decays.
Acknowledgement
Funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) – Project-ID 196253076 – TRR 110T and the Russian Science Foundation (RSF 22-22-00722).
References
- [1] H. Fritzsch and M. Gell-Mann, “Current algebra: Quarks and what else?,” eConf C720906V2, 135 (1972).
- [2] H. Fritzsch and P. Minkowski, “Psi Resonances, Gluons and the Zweig Rule,” Nuovo Cim. A 30, 393 (1975).
- [3] E. Klempt and A. Zaitsev, “Glueballs, Hybrids, Multiquarks. Experimental facts versus QCD inspired concepts,” Phys. Rept. 454, 1 (2007).
- [4] V. Mathieu, N. Kochelev and V. Vento, “The Physics of Glueballs,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 18, 1 (2009).
- [5] V. Crede and C. A. Meyer, “The Experimental Status of Glueballs,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 63, 74 (2009).
- [6] W. Ochs, “The Status of Glueballs,” J. Phys. G 40, 043001 (2013).
- [7] F. J. Llanes-Estrada, “Glueballs as the Ithaca of meson spectroscopy,” Eur. Phys. J. ST 230, no.6, 1575-1592 (2021).
- [8] G. S. Bali et al. [UKQCD Collaboration], “A Comprehensive lattice study of SU(3) glueballs,” Phys. Lett. B 309, 378 (1993).
- [9] C. J. Morningstar and M. J. Peardon, “The Glueball spectrum from an anisotropic lattice study,” Phys. Rev. D 60, 034509 (1999).
- [10] E. Gregory, A. Irving, B. Lucini, C. McNeile, A. Rago, C. Richards and E. Rinaldi, “Towards the glueball spectrum from unquenched lattice QCD,” JHEP 1210, 170 (2012).
- [11] A. P. Szczepaniak and E. S. Swanson, “The low lying glueball spectrum,” Phys. Lett. B 577, 61-66 (2003).
- [12] M. Rinaldi and V. Vento, “Pure glueball states in a Light-Front holographic approach,” J. Phys. G 47, no.5, 055104 (2020).
- [13] A. Athenodorou and M. Teper, “The glueball spectrum of SU(3) gauge theory in 3 + 1 dimensions,” JHEP 11, 172 (2020).
- [14] M. Rinaldi and V. Vento, “Meson and glueball spectroscopy within the graviton soft wall model,” Phys. Rev. D 104, no.3, 034016 (2021).
- [15] H. X. Chen, W. Chen and S. L. Zhu, “Two- and three-gluon glueballs of ,” [arXiv:2107.05271 [hep-ph]].
- [16] D. Dudal, O. Oliveira and M. Roelfs, “Klln-Lehmann Spectral Representation of the Scalar SU(2) Glueball,” [arXiv:2103.11846 [hep-lat]].
- [17] L. Zhang, C. Chen, Y. Chen and M. Huang, “Spectra of glueballs and oddballs and the equation of state from holographic QCD,” [arXiv:2106.10748 [hep-ph]].
- [18] H. n. Li, “Dispersive analysis of glueball masses,” Phys. Rev. D 104, no.11, 114017 (2021).
- [19] J. Ruiz de Elvira, J. R. Pelaez, M. R. Pennington and D. J. Wilson, “Chiral Perturbation Theory, the expansion and Regge behaviour determine the structure of the lightest scalar meson,” Phys. Rev. D 84, 096006 (2011).
- [20] S. Narison, “Masses, decays and mixings of gluonia in QCD,” Nucl. Phys. B 509, 312-356 (1998).
- [21] P. Minkowski and W. Ochs, “Identification of the glueballs and the scalar meson nonet of lowest mass,” Eur. Phys. J. C 9, 283-312 (1999).
- [22] F. Brünner, D. Parganlija and A. Rebhan, “Glueball Decay Rates in the Witten-Sakai-Sugimoto Model,” Phys. Rev. D 91, no.10, 106002 (2015) [erratum: Phys. Rev. D 93, no.10, 109903 (2016)].
- [23] F. Brünner and A. Rebhan, “Nonchiral enhancement of scalar glueball decay in the Witten-Sakai-Sugimoto model,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, no.13, 131601 (2015).
- [24] L. C. Gui et al. [CLQCD], “Scalar Glueball in Radiative Decay on the Lattice,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 no.2, 021601 (2013).
- [25] Y. Chen et al., “Glueballs in charmonia radiative decays,” PoS LATTICE2013, 435 (2014).
- [26] A.V. Sarantsev, I. Denisenko, U. Thoma, E. Klempt, “Scalar isoscalar mesons and the scalar glueball from radiative decay,” Phys. Lett. B 816, 136227 (2021).
- [27] M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII Collaboration], “Amplitude analysis of the system produced in radiative decays,” Phys. Rev. D 92 no.5, 052003 (2015).
- [28] M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII Collaboration], “Amplitude analysis of the system produced in radiative decays,” Phys. Rev. D 98 no.7, 072003 (2018).
- [29] M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII Collaboration], “Partial wave analysis of ,” Phys. Rev. D 87, no. 9, 092009 (2013).
- [30] M. Ablikim et al. [[BESIII Collaboration], “Study of the near-threshold mass enhancement in doubly OZI-suppressed decays,” Phys. Rev. D 87 no.3, 032008 (2013).
- [31] E. Klempt and A. V. Sarantsev, “Singlet-octet-glueball mixing of scalar mesons,” Phys. Lett. B 826, 136906 (2022).
- [32] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb], “Resonances and violation in and decays in the mass region above the ,” JHEP 08, 037 (2017).
- [33] K. J. Sebastian, H. Grotch and F. L. Ridener, “Multipole amplitudes in parity changing one photon transitions of charmonium,” Phys. Rev. D 45, 3163-3172 (1992).
- [34] A. Rodas et al. [JPAC], “Scalar and tensor resonances in radiative decays,” Eur. Phys. J. C 82, no.1, 80 (2022).
- [35] P. A. Zyla et al. [Particle Data Group], “Review of Particle Physics,” PTEP 2020, no.8, 083C01 (2020).
- [36] S. Dobbs, A. Tomaradze, T. Xiao and K. K. Seth, “Comprehensive Study of the Radiative Decays of and to Pseudoscalar Meson Pairs, and Search for Glueballs,” Phys. Rev. D 91, no.5, 052006 (2015).
- [37] P. A. Zyla et al. [Particle Data Group], “Review of Particle Physics,” PTEP 2020, no.8, 083C01 (2020).
- [38] M. Ablikim et al. [BES], “Partial wave analyses of and ,” Phys. Lett. B 642, 441-448 (2006).
- [39] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb], “Measurement of the resonant and CP components in decays,” Phys. Rev. D 90, no.1, 012003 (2014).
- [40] R. Aaij et al. [LHCb], “Measurement of resonant and CP components in decays,” Phys. Rev. D 89, no.9, 092006 (2014).
- [41] A. V. Sarantsev et al., “Scalar and tensor mesons in , and ,” in preparation.
- [42] A. Etkin et al., “Increased Statistics and Observation of the ), )-prime, and )-prime-prime Resonances in the Glueball Enhanced Channel ,” Phys. Lett. B 201, 568-572 (1988).
- [43] M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII], “Observation of pseudoscalar and tensor resonances in ,” Phys. Rev. D 93, no.11, 112011 (2016).
- [44] A. Etkin et al., “The Reaction and Evidence for Glueballs,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 1620 (1982).
- [45] M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII], “Partial wave analysis of ,” [arXiv:2202.00623 [hep-ex]].
- [46] M. Ablikim et al. [BESIII], “Partial wave analysis of ,” [arXiv:2201.09710 [hep-ex]].
- [47] J. Z. Bai et al. [BES], “Partial wave analysis of ,” Phys. Lett. B 472, 207-214 (2000).
- [48] M. Ablikim et al. [BES], “Pseudoscalar production at threshold in ,” Phys. Rev. D 73, 112007 (2006).
- [49] J. Z. Bai et al. [BES], “Partial wave analysis of ,” Phys. Lett. B 472, 200-206 (2000).
- [50] M. Ablikim et al. [BES Collaboration], “Pseudoscalar production at threshold in ,” Phys. Rev. D 73, 112007 (2006).
- [51] D. Alde et al. [GAMS Collaboration], “Study of the system with the GAMS-4000 spectrometer at 100 GeV/c,” Eur. Phys. J. A 3, 361 (1998).
- [52] R. S. Longacre et al., “A Measurement of at 22 GeV/c and a Systematic Study of the Meson Spectrum,” Phys. Lett. B 177, 223 (1986).
- [53] S. J. Lindenbaum and R. S. Longacre, “Coupled channel analysis of and isoscalar mesons with masses below 2 GeV,” Phys. Lett. B 274, 492 (1992).
- [54] G. Grayer et al., “High Statistics Study of the Reaction : Apparatus, Method of Analysis, and General Features of Results at 17 GeV/c,” Nucl. Phys. B 75, 189 (1974).
- [55] J. R. Batley et al. [NA48/2 Collaboration], “Precise tests of low energy QCD from decay properties,” Eur. Phys. J. C 70 635 (2010).
- [56] C. Amsler et al. [Crystal Barrel Collaboration], “High statistics study of decay into ,” Phys. Lett. B 342, 433 (1995).
- [57] C. Amsler et al. [Crystal Barrel Collaboration], “High statistics study of decay into ,” Phys. Lett. B 353, 571 (1995).
- [58] A. Abele et al. [Crystal Barrel Collaboration], “Observation of decay into ,” Phys. Lett. B 385, 425 (1996).
- [59] C. Amsler et al. [Crystal Barrel Collaboration], “Annihilation at rest of antiprotons and protons into neutral particles,” Nucl. Phys. A 720, 357 (2003).
- [60] A. Abele et al. [Crystal Barrel Collaboration], “Evidence for a P-wave in annihilations at rest into ,” Phys. Lett. B 446, 349 (1999).
- [61] C. Amsler et al. [Crystal Barrel Collaboration], “Observation of a new resonance at 1450 MeV,” Phys. Lett. B 333, 277 (1994).
- [62] A. Abele et al. [Crystal Barrel Collaboration], “High mass meson states from annihilation at rest into spectator,” Phys. Lett. B 391, 191 (1997).
- [63] A. Abele et al. [Crystal Barrel Collaboration], “Anti-proton proton annihilation at rest into ,” Phys. Lett. B 468, 178 (1999).
- [64] K. Wittmack, “Messung der Reaktionen and ”, PhD thesis, Bonn (2001).
- [65] A. Abele et al. [Crystal Barrel Collaboration], annihilation at rest into Phys. Rev. D 57, 3860 (1998).
- [66] A. Abele et al. [Crystal Barrel Collaboration], “The mass, width and line-shape in annihilation at rest into ,” Phys. Lett. B 469, 270 (1999).