Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

π+π− and Ds+π± mass spectra in the Ds1(2536)→Ds+π+π− decays

Jorgivan Morais Dias1,*, Yi-Yao Li2,3,4,5,†, and Eulogio Oset5,6,‡

  • *Contact author: jorgivan.dias@ufpi.edu.br
  • †Contact author: liyiyao@m.scnu.edu.cn
  • ‡Contact author: eulogio.oset@ific.uv.es

Phys. Rev. D 112, 114018 – Published 10 December, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/nr6f-cpb7

Abstract

We have carried out an evaluation of the π+π− and Ds+π+ mass distributions in the Ds1(2536) decay to Ds+π+π−, from the perspective that the Ds1(2536) is a molecular state, mostly made from K*D in I=0. We are able to obtain not only the mass distributions, but also the branching ratio of this decay. The shape of the mass distributions differs appreciably from those of the analogous reaction Ds1(2460)→Ds+π+π−, which has been measured by the LHCb Collaboration and analyzed theoretically from the perspective that the Ds1(2460) is a molecular state of D*K, showing good agreement with the data. In spite of the analogy with the Ds1(2460) decay, the dynamical differences in the decay mechanism are important, since now the f0(500) resonance is not generated, while it was the dominant mechanism in the Ds1(2460)→Ds+π+π− decay. Nonetheless, we find striking differences in the mass distributions compared with phase space as a consequence of the decay mechanism. The branching ratio obtained is an order of magnitude bigger than the one of the Ds1(2460)→Ds+π+π− reaction, mostly due to the larger available phase space. We also show that the shape of the distributions obtained from the molecular picture is quite different from those obtained based on a qq¯ picture. We conclude that measuring the shape of the mass distributions and the total strength of the decay mode should be very valuable to learn about the structure of the Ds1(2536).

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (64)

  1. H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, and S.-L. Zhu, Phys. Rep. 639, 1 (2016).
  2. R. F. Lebed, R. E. Mitchell, and E. S. Swanson, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 93, 143 (2017).
  3. A. Esposito, A. Pilloni, and A. D. Polosa, Phys. Rep. 668, 1 (2017).
  4. 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).
  5. L. Meng, B. Wang, G.-J. Wang, and S.-L. Zhu, Phys. Rep. 1019, 1 (2023).
  6. F.-K. Guo, C. Hanhart, U.-G. Meißner, Q. Wang, Q. Zhao, and B.-S. Zou, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015004 (2018); 94, 029901(E) (2022).
  7. R. M. Albuquerque, J. M. Dias, K. P. Khemchandani, A. Martínez Torres, F. S. Navarra, M. Nielsen, and C. M. Zanetti, J. Phys. G 46, 093002 (2019).
  8. H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 230, 162 (1989).
  9. J. P. Alexander et al. (CLEO Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 303, 377 (1993).
  10. B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 77, 011102 (2008).
  11. J. P. Lees et al. (BABAR Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 83, 072003 (2011).
  12. S. Jia et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 100, 111103 (2019).
  13. R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2023) 106.
  14. A. Dougall, R. D. Kenway, C. M. Maynard, and C. McNeile (UKQCD Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 569, 41 (2003).
  15. Y.-B. Dai, C.-S. Huang, C. Liu, and S.-L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D 68, 114011 (2003).
  16. D. Ebert, V. O. Galkin, and R. N. Faustov, Phys. Rev. D 57, 5663 (1998); 59, 019902(E) (1999).
  17. S. Godfrey and N. Isgur, Phys. Rev. D 32, 189 (1985).
  18. Y. S. Kalashnikova, A. V. Nefediev, and Y. A. Simonov, Phys. Rev. D 64, 014037 (2001).
  19. V. Balagura et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 77, 032001 (2008).
  20. M. Bishai et al. (CLEO Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 57, 3847 (1998).
  21. R. N. Cahn and J. D. Jackson, Phys. Rev. D 68, 037502 (2003).
  22. D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, and V. O. Galkin, Eur. Phys. J. C 66, 197 (2010).
  23. E. E. Kolomeitsev and M. F. M. Lutz, Phys. Lett. B 582, 39 (2004).
  24. D. Gamermann and E. Oset, Eur. Phys. J. A 33, 119 (2007).
  25. F.-K. Guo, P.-N. Shen, H.-C. Chiang, R.-G. Ping, and B.-S. Zou, Phys. Lett. B 641, 278 (2006).
  26. F.-K. Guo, P.-N. Shen, and H.-C. Chiang, Phys. Lett. B 647, 133 (2007).
  27. S.-Y. Kong, J.-T. Zhu, D. Song, and J. He, Phys. Rev. D 104, 094012 (2021).
  28. Z. Yang, G.-J. Wang, J.-J. Wu, M. Oka, and S.-L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 112001 (2022).
  29. F. Aceti, M. Bayar, E. Oset, A. Martinez Torres, K. P. Khemchandani, J. M. Dias, F. S. Navarra, and M. Nielsen, Phys. Rev. D 90, 016003 (2014).
  30. J. M. Dias, F. Aceti, and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D 91, 076001 (2015).
  31. F. Aceti, M. Bayar, J. M. Dias, and E. Oset, Eur. Phys. J. A 50, 103 (2014).
  32. J. A. Oller and E. Oset, Nucl. Phys. A620, 438 (1997); A652, 407(E) (1999).
  33. L. Roca, E. Oset, and J. Singh, Phys. Rev. D 72, 014002 (2005).
  34. N. Kaiser, P. B. Siegel, and W. Weise, Nucl. Phys. A594, 325 (1995).
  35. E. Oset and A. Ramos, Nucl. Phys. A635, 99 (1998).
  36. J. A. Oller and U. G. Meissner, Phys. Lett. B 500, 263 (2001).
  37. D. Jido, J. A. Oller, E. Oset, A. Ramos, and U. G. Meissner, Nucl. Phys. A725, 181 (2003).
  38. T. Hyodo, D. Jido, and A. Hosaka, Phys. Rev. C 78, 025203 (2008).
  39. T. Hyodo, D. Jido, and A. Hosaka, Phys. Rev. C 85, 015201 (2012).
  40. T. Sekihara, T. Hyodo, and D. Jido, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2015, 63D04 (2015).
  41. X.-K. Dong, F.-K. Guo, and B.-S. Zou, Commun. Theor. Phys. 73, 125201 (2021).
  42. X.-K. Dong, F.-K. Guo, and B. S. Zou, Few Body Syst. 62, 61 (2021).
  43. X.-K. Dong, F.-K. Guo, and B.-S. Zou, Progr. Phys. 41, 65 (2021).
  44. F.-K. Guo, C. Hidalgo-Duque, J. Nieves, and M. P. Valderrama, Phys. Rev. D 88, 054007 (2013).
  45. C. Garcia-Recio, M. F. M. Lutz, and J. Nieves, Phys. Lett. B 582, 49 (2004).
  46. G.-J. Wang, L.-Y. Xiao, R. Chen, X.-H. Liu, X. Liu, and S.-L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D 102, 036012 (2020).
  47. E. Oset et al., Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 25, 1630001 (2016).
  48. M.-N. Tang, Y.-H. Lin, F.-K. Guo, C. Hanhart, and U.-G. Meißner, Commun. Theor. Phys. 75, 055203 (2023).
  49. L. Roca, J. M. Dias, and E. Oset, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 808 (2025).
  50. N. Kaiser, Eur. Phys. J. A 3, 307 (1998).
  51. J. Nieves and E. Ruiz Arriola, Phys. Lett. B 455, 30 (1999).
  52. R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), Sci. Bull. 70, 1432 (2025).
  53. J.-X. Lin, H.-X. Chen, W.-H. Liang, C.-W. Xiao, and E. Oset, Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 439 (2024).
  54. M. Bando, T. Kugo, S. Uehara, K. Yamawaki, and T. Yanagida, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 1215 (1985).
  55. M. Bando, T. Kugo, and K. Yamawaki, Phys. Rep. 164, 217 (1988).
  56. U. G. Meissner, Phys. Rep. 161, 213 (1988).
  57. H. Nagahiro, L. Roca, A. Hosaka, and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D 79, 014015 (2009).
  58. A. Bramon, A. Grau, and G. Pancheri, Phys. Lett. B 283, 416 (1992).
  59. D. Gamermann, J. Nieves, E. Oset, and E. Ruiz Arriola, Phys. Rev. D 81, 014029 (2010).
  60. S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024).
  61. Z. Yang, G.-J. Wang, J.-J. Wu, and M. Oka, arXiv:2510.01564.
  62. A. Martínez Torres, E. Oset, S. Prelovsek, and A. Ramos, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2015) 153.
  63. R. Molina, D. Nicmorus, and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D 78, 114018 (2008).
  64. L. S. Geng and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D 79, 074009 (2009).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation