CHARM 2010 21 Oct 2010 Beijing Hidden charm

CHARM 2010, 21 Oct 2010, Beijing Hidden charm spectroscopy from B-factories Roman Mizuk (ITEP, Moscow)

Contents Conventional charmonium → c , c(2 S) – (1 S) → + cc 3940 family Update on B → K J/ 1– – states from ISR e+e- → Ds(*)+ Ds(*)– cross section J/ states, Z± X(3872) → talk by Alex Bondar

→ c → Ks. K+ - PRD 81, 052010 (2010) 470 fb-1 no tag mode Select using kinematics ISR rich sample c J/ from ISR c Simultaneous fit M (Me. V) 2982. 2 0. 4 1. 5 (Me. V) 31. 7 1. 2 0. 8 BF( c KK ) (ke. V) 0. 379 0. 009 0. 031 CLEO : 0. 407 0. 022 0. 028 PDG’ 08 : 0. 44 0. 04 agree

→ c → Ks. K+ - PRD 81, 052010 (2010) 470 fb-1 Included in PDG’ 10: M( c) : dominates world average. ( c)

Status of c(2 S) 2002 Observed in B → K (KSK- +) confirmed in , double cc. the only known decay channel (before summer 2010) Not seen in 4 -meson final state (4 , 2 K 2 , 4 K). World average M = 3637 4 Me. V not quite consistent = 14 ± 7 Me. V large error Motivation to study more final states. Belle EPJC 53, 1 (2008) M( c )

n Pr mi i l e ary Observation of → c(2 S) → 6 prong Presented at ICHEP 2010 no tag mode + – + – 923 fb-1 K+ K– + – KS K+ – c c 0 c 2 c(2 S) p. T* <0. 1 Ge. V p. T unbalanced Signals of c , c 0 , c 2 , c(2 S) in p. T balanced component only from formation process + sizeable non-resonant → 6 prong production.

im l e r in P ary Observation of → c(2 S) → 6 prong no tag mode + – + – c Events/5 Me. V c 0 c 2 c(2 S) c 0 c 2 c(2 S) K+ K– + – 923 fb-1 KS K+ –

im l e r in P ary Observation of → c(2 S) → 6 prong no tag mode 923 fb-1 + – + – K+ K– + – M ( c ) 3638. 9 ± 1. 6 ± 2. 3 3634. 7 ± 1. 6 ± 2. 8 3636. 5 ± 1. 8 ± 2. 4 Me. V ( c ) 10. 7 ± 4. 9 +6. 3 15. 9 ± 5. 7 Me. V BF 1. 4 – 1. 4 20. 1 ± 3. 7 ± 3. 2 10. 2 ± 2. 3 ± 3. 4 8. 5 6. 2 Significance KS K+ – 30. 7 ± 3. 9 ± 3. 7 e. V 8. 7 c. f. BF( c → KSK+ –) = 68 21 e. V estimate from CLEO PRL 92, 142001 (2004) Events/5 Me. V reference c 0 c 2 c(2 S)

im l e r in P ary Observation of → c(2 S) → 6 prong no tag mode 923 fb-1 + – + – K+ K– + – M ( c ) 3638. 9 ± 1. 6 ± 2. 3 3634. 7 ± 1. 6 ± 2. 8 3636. 5 ± 1. 8 ± 2. 4 Me. V ( c ) 10. 7 ± 4. 9 +6. 3 15. 9 ± 5. 7 Me. V BF Significance 1. 4 – 1. 4 20. 1 ± 3. 7 ± 3. 2 10. 2 ± 2. 3 ± 3. 4 8. 5 6. 2 KS K+ – 30. 7 ± 3. 9 ± 3. 7 e. V 8. 7 Belle average over 3 decay modes: M ( c ) = 3636. 9 ± 1. 1 ± 2. 5 ± 5. 0 Me. V ( c ) = 9. 9 ± 3. 2 ± 2. 6 ± 2. 0 Me. V last error from interference with continuum Observation or evidence for new decay modes: c 0 , c 2 → K+K-2( + -) , Ks. K+ - + c → Ks. K+ -

→ c(2 S) → Ks. K+ - / K+K- + - 0 li e r P n mi Presented at ICHEP 2010 no tag mode ary c 2 c(2 S) c K s. K + - 521 fb-1 M=3638. 3 1. 5 0. 5 Me. V = 14. 2 4. 4 2. 5 Me. V N( c )= 620 70 30 J/ c(2 S) K s. K + - K+K- + - 0 first observation N( c )= 1190 130 180 c 0 c 2 c J/ K + K - + - 0 c(2 S)

Summary on c(2 S) Average of PDG’ 10, Belle and Ba. Bar ( c ) = 12. 3 ± 3. 1 Me. V c. f. ( c) = 28. 6 ± 2. 2 Me. V M, – significant improvement in accuracy. ( c ) < ( c) ?

Search for (1 S) → charmonium 5. 7 fb-1 102 106 (1 S) C-parity = + PRD 82, 051504 R (2010) c. J → J/ Expectations: Gao et al. , hep-ph/0701009 bb c 0 c 1 c 2 cc J/ s. b. State BF (10 -5) Expect. UL (90%CL) c 0 3 <65 c 1 1 <2. 3 c 2 0. 6 <0. 76 c 5 <5. 7 c → K s K + - K+K- 2( + -) 2(K+K-) 3( + -) J/ c + - e e → ISR J/ c s. b. No evidence for (1 S) → charmonium, no contradiction with expectations.

Search for (1 S) → charmonium-like states C-parity = + PRD 82, 051504 R (2010) X(3872) → + - J/ State BF (10 -5) Expect. UL (90%CL) c 0 3 <65 c 1 1 <2. 3 c 2 0. 6 <0. 76 c 5 <5. 7 X(3872) → + - J/ <0. 16 X(3872) → + - 0 J/ <0. 28 X(3915) → J/ <0. 30 Y(4140) → J/ <0. 22 e+e- → ISR one event @ X(3872), X(3915) → + - 0 J/ J/ – no events No evidence for (1 S) → [X(3872), X(3915) or Y(4110)]. No evidence for excited charmonium states below 4. 8 Ge. V.

States near 3940 Me. V

X(3940) e+e- J/ DD* Y(3940) B K J/ PRL 94, 182002 Z(3930) Probably the c 2’ DD PRL 96, 082003 JPC=2++ PRL 100, 202001 M(DD*) M = 3942 +7 -6 = 37 ± 12 Me. V +26 -15 ± 6 Me. V + X(4160) see talk by Pavel Pakhlov M( J/ ) M=3940 ± 11 Me. V = 92 ± 24 Me. V Ba. Bar: PRL 101, 082001 M=3914 ± 5 Me. V = 33 ± 10 Me. V M(DD) M = 3929 ± 5 ± 2 Me. V = 29 ± 10 ± 2 Me. V Ba. Bar: PRD 81, 092003 M = 3926. 7 ± 2. 7 ± 1. 1 Me. V = 21. 3 ± 6. 8 ± 3. 6 Me. V

Update on B → K J/ 348/fb: PRL 101, 082001 Main modification: lower M( + - 0) threshold lower M(J/ ) threshold 426/fb: PRD 82, 011101 signal of X(3872) update on Y(3940) parameters +3. 8± 2. 0 Me. V M=3919. 1 -3. 5 = 31+10 -8 ± 5 Me. V M( J/ )

Peak in J/ X(3915) 7. 7 M = 3914 3 2 Me. V = 23 10 +2 -8 Me. V Mass, Me. V PRL 104, 092001 (2010) 2010 X(3940) c 2 3 Y(3940) X(3915) M( J/ ) Width, Me. V Assumption X(3915)=Y(3940) is compatible with data. If X(3915)=Z(3930)= c 2’ JY(3940) 1 Huge for charmonium above open charm threshold.

e+e– → 1–– final states via ISR

e+e– → ISR J/ ( ) + - : Y(4008, 4260, 4360, 4660) PRL 99, 182004 550/fb ar. Xiv: 0808. 1543 454/fb PRL 99, 142002 670/fb PRL 98, 212001 298/fb – Above DD threshold, decay to open charm?

Y(4660) Y(4008) ψ(4040) ψ(4160) Y(4260) Y(4360) ψ(4415) ISR e+e– → open charm without radiative corrections DD DD D+D*- DD* D*+D*- D*D* Y(4660) D 0 D- π + D 0 D*-π+ – ΛcΛc X(4630) – No peaks of Y states, except X(4630) → c c close to Y(4660). tetraquark?

Search for hybrids in their favorite decay mode PRD 80, 091101 R (2010) – – hybrid → D** D → (D*π) D 1 P-wave ψ(4415) Y(4260) ψ(4415) No signal of Y´s UL at 90% CL DD*

e+e– → ISR Ds(*)+Ds(*)– PRD 82, 052004 (2010) PRD 80, 072001 (2009) Ds* Ds* (4415) (4160) Pre lim ina (nb) ry (4160) (4040) (nb) Ds. Ds – (e+e– → Ds(*)+Ds(*)–) << (e+e– → D(*)) Ds+Ds*– channel dominates no Y signals at 95%C. L.

DD DD* D*D* DDπ DD*π Λ + c Λ –c D(*)+s D(*)–s Inclusive cross-section is now saturated by exclusive contributions. Efforts to fit are welcome.

States decaying into J/

Y(4140) J/ by CDF PRL 102, 242002 (2009) >3. 8 B+ Y(4140) K+ 14± 5 ev D*s molecule? [cscs] tetraquark? M = 4143. 0 ± 2. 9 ± 1. 2 Me. V = 11. 7+8. 3 -5. 0 ± 3. 7 Me. V Br(B+→Y(4140)K+) Br(Y→J/ ) CDF (9. 0 ± 3. 4 ± 2. 9) 10 -6 Belle <6 10 -6 at 90% CL Update from CDF is available.

Study of J/ 825 fb-1 PRL 104, 11204 (2010) X(4350) • No Y(4140) • Disfavor DS*+DS*- molecule • X(4350) 3. 2 -3. 9 M = 4350. 6 +4. 6 -5. 1 ± 0. 7 Me. V Y(4140) Γ= 13. 3 +17. 9 - 9. 1± 4. 1 Me. V JP=0+: Γγγ BF = 6. 4+3. 1 -2. 3 ± 1. 1 e. V JP=2+: Γγγ BF = 1. 5+0. 7 -0. 5 ± 0. 3 e. V Excited P-wave charmonium? Tetraquark? Fl. Stancu, JPG 37, 075017 (2010) – D*s 0 molecule? J. R. Zhang et al. , ar. Xiv: 0905. 4672

Charged states

Z(4430)± → ± peak Dalitz plot of B → K ± M 2( ± ’) Ge. V 2 Z(4430) 6. 5 M ( ) Ge. V PRL 100, 142001 (2008) M 2( ) Ge. V 2 “K* Veto” K* PRD 79, 112001 (2009) Ba. Bar: null result, significance ~2. Belle: Dalitz analysis K*(1430) PRD 80, 031104 (2009) +110 Me. V : 45 +35 → 107 - 70 -18 Significance ~6. 5 is confirmed.

Ba. Bar compared Belle and Ba. Bar data and found that they are statistically consistent Significance of Z(4430) at Ba. Bar is ~2 Significance of Z(4430) at Belle is 6. 5 a Cl ? h s

Belle and Ba. Bar data look very similar… with K* veto Belle Ba. Bar Result of Belle Dalitz plot analysis. M ( ) Ge. V The same curve divided by 1. 18 to account for smaller statistics at Ba. Bar. M ( ) Ge. V …clustering in M ( ) is present in both data samples, only interpretation is different.

Ba. Bar analysis of B → K Rectangular Dalitz plot Background shape for 1 -dimensional M( ) fit cos K* background estimation procedure M( ) Ge. V M(K ) Ge. V Ba. Bar performed cross-check: Input: Z(4430) signal with =45 Me. V background estimation procedure M( ) Ge. V Result: bump in background with ~160 Me. V N(Z) from fit is 10% lower than input N(Z) correction M( ) Ge. V My comment: this approach is safe for Z(4430)= 45 Me. V << bump~ 160 Me. V. Is it sensitive to wider Z(4430) with =107+110 - 70 Me. V ? Ba. Bar considered only Z(4430) = 45 Me. V.

Statistics at B-factories is insufficient to say “final word” about existence of Z(4430)+. Input from TEVATRON or LHC-B is needed.

2 3 4 – Dalitz plot for B 0 → K- π+ c 1 M( c 1 ) 1 PRD 79, 112001 (2009) Fit model all low-lying K* M(K ) 1 2 3 4 all low-lying K* + two (π+ c 1) resonances 1 2 3 4 No results from other experiments yet.

Conclusions Status of XYZ states remained unchanged over the last year no new states were reported at B-factories no originally reported states were negated Recent results: → c , c(2 S) : precise meas. of M and , new decay channels Update on B → K J/ Meas. of e+e- → Ds(*)+ Ds(*)– cross section B-factories completed operation, but analysis of their data is crucial for our understanding of hidden charm. Thank you!