Four-quark hadrons: An updated review
By A. Esposito, A. Guerrieri, F. Piccinini, Alessandro Pilloni, A. Polosa. 2014
198 citations recorded by the source corpus.
The past decade witnessed a remarkable proliferation of exotic charmonium-like resonances discovered at accelerators. In particular, the recently observed charged states are clearly not interpretable as mesons. Notwithstanding the considerable advances on the experimental side, conflicting theoretical descriptions do not seem to provide a definitive picture about the nature of the so-called XYZ particles. We present here a comprehensive review about this intriguing topic, discussing both those experimental and theoretical aspects which we consider relevant to make further progress in the field. At this state of progress, XYZ phenomenology speaks in favor of the existence of compact four-quark particles (tetraquarks) and we believe that realizing this instructs us in the quest for a firm theoretical framework.
Subfields: Nuclear and High Energy Physics
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d749d1075df2e60410828fd7c39724991ad06376
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Nuclear and High Energy Physics
Citations in the corpus
- Multiquark Resonances (2016, methodology): “The ordering is relevant (see [4] for normalizations 25).”
- Hadronic molecules (2017, methodology): “The absence of a signal for Y (4260) in J/ψKK̄ (He et al., 2006; Shen et al., 2014; Yuan et al., 2008) questions the tetraquark picture of Y (4260) with a diquark-antidiquark [cs][c̄s̄] configuration (Esposito et al., 2015b).”
- Heavy-quark QCD exotica (2016, methodology): “No substantial impro ement is btained by including #4040$, #4160$, or #4415$ [11] terms in the fit.”
- The hidden-charm pentaquark and tetraquark states (2016, background): “The hyperfine splitting between the Z(3930) and X(3915) is only 6% of that between the χc2(1P) and χc0(1P) [57], which is unexpectedly smaller than the potential model prediction [813].”