1: %
2: \documentclass{article}
3: \usepackage{frascatiphys_R}
4: %
5: %
6: \newcommand{\etacprime}{\eta_c'}
7: \newcommand{\mev}{\,\mbox{MeV}}
8: \newcommand{\gev}{\,\mbox{GeV}}
9: \newcommand{\kev}{\,\mbox{keV}}
10: \newcommand{\nb}{\,\mbox{nb}}
11: \newcommand{\pdp}{\psi(3770)}
12: \newcommand{\pp}{\psi(2S)}
13: \newcommand{\jpsi}{J/\psi}
14: \newcommand{\bbbar}{b \bar b}
15: \newcommand{\ccbar}{c \bar c}
16: \newcommand{\ppbar}{p \bar p}
17: \newcommand{\qqbar}{q \bar q}
18: \newcommand{\DDbar}{D \bar D}
19: \newcommand{\pizero}{\pi^0}
20: \newcommand{\chicj}{\chi_{cJ}}
21: \newcommand{\invfb}{\,\mbox{fb}^{-1}}
22: \newcommand{\invpb}{\,\mbox{pb}^{-1}}
23: \newcommand{\etal}{{\it et al.} }
24: %
25: \begin{document}
26: %
27: \title{
28: \quad \hfill PUZZLE PIECES: \hfill \quad
29: \newline
30: RESULTS ON \boldmath $\bbbar$ AND $\ccbar$ SPECTROSCOPY AND DECAY
31: }
32: \author{
33: Hanna Mahlke-Kr\"uger \\
34: \em Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
35: }
36: \maketitle
37: \baselineskip=11.6pt
38: \begin{abstract}
39: Recent results in the field of Heavy Quarkonia are reviewed,
40: with results either providing new precision measurements or
41: addressing key unanswered questions.
42: \end{abstract}
43: %
44: \baselineskip=14pt
45: %
46:
47: \section{Introduction}
48: Heavy quarkonia exhibit features similar to the positronium spectrum:
49: a discrete system of states with the spacings and transition rates
50: dictated
51: by the binding force, which in this case is the strong interaction.
52: Investigating heavy quarkonia therefore enables us to study
53: important aspects of QCD.
54: While heavy quarkonia parton level decay by
55: annihilation is a perturbatively calculable process, transitions
56: among them are not
57: as they are soft due to the energy spread between the states, which is
58: below $1\gev$.
59:
60: Theory has made progress recently that indicates the need for experimental
61: results at the few percent level in precision. On the other hand, there are
62: important unanswered questions where experimental information is scant.
63: The following results have been selected so as to address one or the other.
64:
65: In view of the very limited space available for this report,
66: no figures are shown, but references
67: to publications where they can be found are given. More $\pp$~results from
68: BES were presented in a separate talk by X.H. Mo at this conference.
69:
70: \section{Spectroscopy}
71: %
72: \subsection{Measurements of the $\etacprime$ Mass\cite{etacprimeexp}}
73: After the first evidence for the $\etacprime$ more than twenty years ago,
74: which established it
75: from the direct M1 transition $\pp \to \gamma \etacprime$,
76: the experimental picture has consolidated in the past two years:
77: In $B \to \etacprime K$, $e^+e^- \to \jpsi \etacprime$, and
78: $\gamma\gamma \to \etacprime$ studies,
79: the $\etacprime$ mass is found to be around $3638\mev$, or
80: $44\mev$ higher than measured before. This means that the
81: $2^3S_1$-$2^1S_0$~mass splitting is reduced by a factor of
82: two, and is now two times smaller than the hyperfine splitting
83: at $n=1$.
84: Comparing these two is interesting because, due to the
85: difference in $\ccbar$ distance, they sample different
86: areas of the binding potential, which connects the confinement region
87: with that of asymptotic freedom.
88:
89:
90:
91:
92:
93: \subsection{$X(3872)$\cite{x3872}}
94:
95: Since the discovery of the ``$X(3872)$'' by Belle and
96: subsequent confirmation by BaBar, CDF, and D0, several attempts
97: to explain this narrow state have been made on the theory side. Among the
98: plausible ones are that it could be a charmonium state, a $D \bar D$~molecule,
99: or even an exotic state. Experimental efforts have focussed on
100: studying decay or production modes that can clarify the nature of
101: this state by virtue of establishing its quantum numbers.
102: The decay mode $X \to \pi^+\pi^- \jpsi$, which gives rise to the
103: state's characterization as ``charmonium-like'', remains the only
104: one seen so far. The dipion mass distribution is of special interest
105: as one hopes to answer the question whether or not the decay proceeds
106: through an intermediate $\rho$. In this context, searching for $X(3872)
107: \to \pizero\pizero\jpsi$ is of special importance.
108: CLEO has engaged in a search for X(3872) in two-photon fusion and
109: ISR~production, using $15\invfb$ of data at $\sqrt s = 9.46 - 11.30\gev$.
110: This allows access to $J^{PC}=1^{--}$ and $2n^{\pm +}$.
111: Preliminary upper limits have been placed:
112: $\Gamma_{ee} \times {\cal B}(X \to \pi^+\pi^- \jpsi)<6.8\,\mbox{eV}$ or
113: 1\% of the production rate of $\pp$ in ISR events (assuming
114: a similar branching fraction ${\cal B}_{\pi^+\pi^-\jpsi}$),
115: and $(2J+1)\Gamma_{\gamma \gamma} \times {\cal B}(X \to \pi^+\pi^-\jpsi)
116: <16.7\,\mbox{eV}$, or one tenth of the $\eta_c$ production rate in
117: two-photon fusion. A similar ISR study has been done of BES data, using
118: using $22.3\invpb$
119: at $\sqrt s = 4.03\gev$, which arrived at an upper limit of
120: $\Gamma_{ee} \times {\cal B}(X \to \pi^+\pi^- \jpsi)
121: <10\,\mbox{eV}$.
122:
123:
124:
125:
126: \subsection{Transitions\cite{cleo:omegatransition}}
127:
128: Transitions between states of heavy onia are by emission of
129: photons or hadrons such charged pion pairs, neutral single pions or pion pairs,
130: and etas. In bottomonium, also an $\omega$ transition
131: has recently been observed
132: as the first non-pionic hadronic transition
133: in $\Upsilon(3S) \to \gamma \chi_{b1,2}(2S)$,
134: $\chi_{b1,2} \to \omega \Upsilon(1S)$.
135: The branching fractions are found to be substantial and also in
136: compliance with a prediction for them to be
137: about equal:
138: ${\cal B}(\chi_{b1[2]} \to \omega\Upsilon(1S)=
139: (1.63^{+0.31}_{-0.32}\mbox{}^{+0.15}_{-0.11})$
140: $[(1.10^{+0.35}_{-0.28}\mbox{}^{+0.16}_{-0.10})]\%$.
141: Radiative decays to $\Upsilon$s are, to date, the only other known
142: exclusive decay mode of the $\chi_{bJ}$ states, and are only a factor
143: 5-6 more common.
144:
145: While $\eta$ and single $\pizero$ transitions have been seen in charmonium,
146: with recent BES studies showing a much increased precision over previous
147: results, a similar
148: measurement in bottomonium is yet to be made.
149:
150: Dipion transitions are the most common ones both in $\ccbar$ and $\bbbar$.
151: Naively, one would expect that the ratio of branching fractions for
152: neutral and charged modes would be, related by isospin, 1:2.
153: A direct measurement of this quantity resulted in
154: ${\cal B}(\pp \to \pi^0\pi^0\jpsi)/{\cal B}(\pp \to \pi^+\pi^-\jpsi) =
155: 0.570 \pm 0.009 \pm 0.026$;
156: taking the
157: most recent PDG values for the individual branching fractions yields
158: %(0.188 \pm 0.012)/(0.317 \pm 0.011) =
159: $0.59 \pm 0.04$.
160: An interesting new measurement has been made by BaBar, using radiative return
161: events to the $\pp$ in $90\invfb$ of $\Upsilon(4S)$ data.
162: They find ${\cal B}(\pp \to \pi^+\pi^- \jpsi) = 0.361 \pm 0.40$, which
163: decreases the ratio by over $12\%$, thereby bringing it within reach of $0.5$.
164:
165:
166:
167:
168: \section{Decays}
169: \subsection{$\pdp \to $ non-$\DDbar$?\cite{psi3770nonddbar}}
170: The experimental indication for the existence of a significant
171: $\pdp$
172: non-$\DDbar$ hadronic decay width stems from the difference between
173: early total hadronic and the $D$~pair production cross
174: section measurements: $\sigma (\pdp \to D\bar D) = 5.0 \pm 0.5\nb$,
175: $\sigma (\pdp \to hadrons) = 7.8 \pm 0.8\nb$.
176: This invites the the following set of questions: Which
177: non-$\DDbar$ channels are available to $\pdp$ decay?
178: Can the measurement of the total hadronic cross section be
179: confirmed? Can the measurement of the $D$-pair production
180: cross section be confirmed?
181:
182: As to the last question, preliminary measurements seem to
183: indicate a higher $D$-pair production cross section:
184: $\sigma(\pdp \to D\bar D)^{CLEO} = (5.78 \pm 0.11 \pm 0.38)\nb$,
185: $\sigma(\pdp \to D\bar D)^{BES} = (6.51 \pm 0.44 \pm 0.39)\nb$.
186: The experimental techniques are somewhat
187: different in that BES tags one of the $D$~mesons, thereby
188: gaining statistical advantage, while CLEO tags both $D$~mesons,
189: resulting in independence from external branching fractions.
190: While there is an indication that the gap might not be as
191: wide as previously thought, about 20\% of the total
192: width of $(23.6 \pm 2.7)\mev$\cite{pdg2004}
193: remain currently unaccounted for.
194: Convincing unanimous evidence for
195: what this gap is filled by has yet to be presented. The BES
196: collaboration measured ${\cal B}(\pdp \to \pi^+\pi^-\jpsi)
197: =(0.34\pm 0.14 \pm 0.08)\%$ or
198: $\Gamma(\pdp \to \pi^+\pi^-\jpsi)=(80 \pm 32 \pm 21)\kev$,
199: which is to be compared with an upper limit set by CLEO
200: of ${\cal B}(\pdp \to \pi^+\pi^-\jpsi)<0.26\%$ (90\% CL).
201: However, this channel, even if contributing of the order of
202: $100\kev$ to the decay width, will not be able to account for the
203: discrepancy previously observed. Radiative $\pdp$~decays
204: are estimated to amount to at most a few hundred keV.
205: In addition, the question whether or not there are hadronic
206: non-$\DDbar$ decays of
207: the $\pdp$ is interesting in the context of mixing scenarios. If
208: mixing is at work, the modes expected from $\jpsi$ that seem
209: suppressed at the $\pp$ can give rise to a partial width at the $\pdp$.
210: An improved understanding of $\pp$ decays will aid in settling this
211: question.
212:
213:
214:
215: \subsection{Decay into lepton pairs\cite{bmumu}}
216:
217: Studying bottomonium decay into lepton pairs provides access to
218: the total width, which at some $10\kev$ for the narrow
219: $\Upsilon(1,2,3S)$ resonances is below the typical beam energy
220: spread of an $e^+e^-$~collider of a few $\mev$, through
221: $\Gamma_{tot}= \Gamma_{\ell\ell}/{\cal B}_{\ell\ell}$.
222: In practice, the most precise measurement comes from
223: employing lepton universality and using $\Gamma_{ee}$
224: together with ${\cal B}_{\mu\mu}$.
225: Measurements of dilepton branching
226: fractions are interesting in their own right to confront
227: LQCD predictions (the precision of which has reached the
228: percent level now), to test lepton universality, and to
229: compare $\Gamma_{\ell\ell}$ with the hadronic widths
230: $\Gamma_{ggg, \gamma gg, \qqbar}$.
231:
232: CLEO studied $\Upsilon(1/2/3S) \to \mu^+\mu^-$ production
233: using $1.1 / 1.2 / 1.2 \invfb$ on-resonance and
234: $0.19 / 0.44 / 0.16 \invfb$ off-resonance data.
235: The CLEO results, corrected for interference
236: with continuum, are:
237: ${\cal B}(\Upsilon(1/2/3S)\to \mu^+\mu^-)^{CLEO}=
238: (2.49 \pm 0.02 \pm 0.07)
239: / (2.03 \pm 0.03 \pm 0.08) / ( 2.39 \pm 0.07 \pm 0.10) \%$,
240: to be compared with the PDG values of\cite{pdg2004}
241: $(2.48 \pm 0.06) / (1.31 \pm 0.21) / ( 1.81 \pm 0.17) \%$.
242: This illustrates that the desired precision to keep up with
243: progress in Lattice QCD has been reached.
244: Since the CLEO~${\cal B}(\Upsilon(2,3S)$ are found to be substantially
245: higher, thereby reducing the total width by the same percentage,
246: predictions for cascade decays such as $\Upsilon(3S)\to \gamma
247: \chi_{bJ} \to \gamma \gamma \Upsilon(2S)$ are bound to change.
248:
249:
250:
251:
252:
253:
254: \subsection{Baryon pair production in
255: $\jpsi$ and $\chi_{cJ}$ decays\cite{baryonpairs}}
256:
257: BES used their 58M $\jpsi$ sample to measure ${\cal B}(\jpsi \to \ppbar)
258: = (2.26 \pm 0.01 \pm 0.14)$.
259: This is the single most precise measurement of
260: this branching fraction to date.
261: The angular distribution is fit with
262: the expression $dN / d \cos \theta_p = 1 + \alpha_p \cos^2 \theta_p$,
263: where $\theta_p$ is the angle between the proton and the beam direction.
264: Neglecting baryon and quark masses one would expect $\alpha=1$ for all
265: baryons; including masses yields $\alpha_p=0.66$ and
266: $\alpha_\Lambda = 0.51$.
267: The experimental results are
268: $\alpha_p^{exp}=0.676\pm 0.036 \pm 0.042$
269: and $\alpha_\Lambda^{exp} =
270: 0.52 \pm 0.33 \pm 0.13$,
271: in agreement with the prediction.
272: Proton pairs are produced about twice as copiously
273: in $\jpsi$ decays as $\Lambda \bar \Lambda$ pairs.
274: In $\pp$ decays, their branching fractions are comparable.
275:
276: Baryon pairs from $\chicj$ decay can be observed through
277: $\pp \to \gamma \chicj \to \gamma B\bar B$ and compared with
278: the Color Octet Model prediction that one should expect half as many
279: $\Lambda \bar\Lambda$ events as $\ppbar$ events.
280: These have been made based on $\chicj\to\ppbar$
281: measurements, which they describe well,
282: and then generalized to other baryons.
283: The BES $\chi_{cJ} \to \Lambda \bar \Lambda$
284: results
285: from 14M $\pp$ decays indicated an excess over
286: this prediction by about a factor of two rather than
287: a suppression, which has been confirmed as the branching
288: fractions ${\cal B}(\chicj \to \ppbar)$ have been
289: remeasured.
290:
291:
292:
293:
294:
295: \subsection{``Heavy to Heavy'': Charmonium in $\Upsilon(1S)$ Decays\cite{cleo:bbbartoccbar}}
296: The Color Octet Mechanism (COM) $\bbbar \to g\ccbar,\ gg\ccbar$ was employed to
297: explain $\jpsi$ production rates that could not be attributed to
298: the thus far successful Color Singlet Model (CSM), which employs $\bbbar
299: \to gg\ccbar\ccbar$.
300: The two approaches predict different $\jpsi$
301: momentum spectra as well as angular distributions and branching
302: fractions for $\Upsilon(1S)\to \jpsi X$.
303: A portion of the observed
304: $\jpsi$ signal will be from $\Upsilon(1S) \to \pp, \chi_{cJ} + X_1
305: \to \jpsi + X_2$ (not observed before).
306: The magnitude of this feed-down contribution is also
307: predicted by the two models.
308:
309: A CLEO study of charmonium production in $\Upsilon(1S)$ data
310: intends to
311: shed additional light onto the question which mechanism is at work.
312: Data taken on or near the $\Upsilon(4S)$ resonance is appropriately
313: scaled and used to calculate the continuum background, which is small
314: in comparison with the signal.
315:
316: The inclusive
317: branching fraction $\Upsilon(1S) \to \jpsi + X$
318: is measured to be $(6.4 \pm 0.4 \pm 0.6)\times 10^{-4}$, in compliance
319: with both COM and CSM predictions, both at about $6\times 10^{-4}$.
320: The process $\Upsilon \to \gamma^* \to q \bar q \to \jpsi + X$ is
321: linked with the
322: continuum process $e^+e^- \to \gamma^* \to q \bar q \to \jpsi + X$
323: and can thus
324: be estimated relative to the process $\Upsilon \to ggg,
325: gg\gamma \to \jpsi + X$. The sum of the gluonic reactions
326: dominates at a ratio of about 9:1.
327: Also, the $\jpsi$ momentum spectrum, scaled according to
328: $\jpsi$ momentum $x=p_{\jpsi}/p_{max}$ to eliminate beam energy
329: dependence,
330: has been measured. The COM predicts a peak at the highest $x$~values,
331: whereas the CSM shows an accumulation around $x=0.5$.
332: The measured spectrum peaks at $x=0.3$.
333: The situation is complicated by the fact that final state
334: interactions, which could in principle soften the predicted spectra somewhat,
335: have not been taken into account in the predictions.
336:
337: Other results of this work include the first determination of
338: the branching fractions of and feed-down from $\Upsilon(1S) \to
339: \pp, \chi_{cJ} + X, J=1,2$, which is found to be a factor of two
340: above both the CSM and the COM predictions.
341: (Since ${\cal B}(\chi_{c0} \to \jpsi \gamma)$ is an order of
342: magnitude smaller than ${\cal B}(\chi_{c[1,2]} \to \jpsi \gamma)$,
343: the absence of a signal for $\chi_{c0}$ is not surprising.)
344:
345:
346:
347:
348:
349: \subsection{``Heavy To Light'' Charmonium Decays\cite{heavytolightdecays}}
350:
351: Decays of charmonia into light hadrons have often be studied in the light
352: of the ``12\% rule''. This is a scaling prescription connecting $\pp$ and
353: $\jpsi$ decays into hadronic final states.
354: It allows one to compare the branching fraction ratio with that for
355: decay into lepton pairs, which is measured to be $12\%$\cite{pdg2004}.
356: Modifications
357: to this simple picture arise from non-relativistic corrections, form factor
358: dependence on the two different center-of-mass energies, powers of
359: $\alpha_s(m_{\pp})/\alpha_s(m_{\jpsi})$, and many more.
360: Exact agreement with the prediction is therefore not to be expected.
361: However, even with a more generous view some modes exhibit a substantial
362: suppression, such as $\rho\pi$ and $K^* K$.
363: It has been
364: conjectured that the suppression is related to quantum numbers and
365: that vector pseudoscalar final states might be especially affected. Also,
366: interference with continuum could play an important role
367: as for tiny branching fractions
368: the resonant and non-resonant cross section may be of comparable magnitude.
369: Finally, it is possible that the prescription only holds for electromagnetic
370: processes ($c \bar c \to \gamma^* \to q \bar q$), but not for those
371: mediated by decay into gluons. This would imply that isospin violating
372: modes, where the otherwise dominant gluonic process is absent,
373: are of special importance to study.
374: A consistent picture has thus
375: far not emerged, partly due to lack of experimental data.
376:
377: CLEO and BES have brought forward new $\pp \to VP$ measurements.
378: The most prominent channel is $\pp \to \rho\pi$, which
379: constitutes a big branching fraction on the $\jpsi$.
380: It is not understood why
381: it is so rare in $\pp$ decays. Another interesting feature
382: is the different population of the Dalitz plane
383: from what is seen in continuum and $\jpsi$.
384: These two show clear $\rho$
385: bands over some non-resonant background, whereas $\pp$ decays appear to
386: proceed dominantly non-resonantly.
387: To determine what mechanism is at work, a partial wave analysis would be
388: helpful, which is not possible with the data at hand.
389:
390:
391:
392: \section{Summary and Acknowledgements}
393:
394: Experimental progress continues in the area of
395: heavy quarkonia, thereby adding puzzle pieces to our understanding
396: of many aspects of QCD. It is to be hoped that with future larger
397: data samples
398: more precision studies become feasible and that the remaining
399: undiscovered states disclose themselves.
400:
401: The author wishes to thank her many colleagues
402: who provided analysis results, discussion, and guidance.
403:
404: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
405:
406: \bibitem{etacprimeexp}
407: C. Edwards {\it et al.} (Crystal Ball), Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 48}, 70 (1982);
408: S.K. Choi \etal (Belle), Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 89}, 102001 (2002);
409: K. Abe \etal (Belle), Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 89}, 142001 (2002);
410: D.M. Asner \etal (CLEO), Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 92}, 142001 (2004);
411: B. Aubert \etal (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 92}, 142001 (2004).
412:
413: \bibitem{x3872} \underline{$X(3872)$ Discoveries}:
414: S.K. Choi \etal (Belle), Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 91}, 262001 (2003);
415: D. Acosta \etal (CDF), hep-ex/0312021;
416: V.M. Abazov \etal (D0), hep-ex/0405004.
417: \underline{$X(3872)$ Properties}:
418: S.K. Choi (Belle), hep-ex/0405014;
419: B. Aubert \etal (BaBar), Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 93}, 041801 (2004);
420: C.Z. Yuan, X.H. Mo, P. Wang, Phys. Lett. {\bf B579}, 74 (2004).
421:
422: % ----------------------
423:
424: \bibitem{cleo:omegatransition}
425: \underline{$\omega$ transitions in bottomonium}:
426: D. Cronin-Hennessy \etal (CLEO), hep-ex/0311043, accepted by PRL;
427: %\bibitem{voloshin:omegatrans}
428: %REMARKS ON THE DECAYS CHI(BJ)-PRIME ---> OMEGA UPSILON.
429: M.B. Voloshin, Mod. Phys. Lett. A {\bf 18}, 1067 (2003).
430: % e-Print Archive: hep-ph/0304165
431: \underline{$\eta$, $\pizero$ transitions in charmonium}:
432: %PSI(2S) DECAYS INTO J / PSI PLUS TWO PHOTONS.
433: J.Z. Bai \etal (BES), Phys. Rev. D {\bf 70}, 012006 (2004).
434: %e-Print Archive: hep-ex/0403023
435: \underline{Dipion transitions in charmonium}:
436: %STUDY OF PSI(2S) DECAYS TO X J / PSI.
437: M. Ablikim \etal (BES), Phys. Rev. D {\bf 70}, 012003 (2004);
438: %e-Print Archive: hep-ex/0404020
439: % babar isr pipijpsi
440: M. Davier, hep-ex/0312063.
441: % (to appear in the proceedings of Workshop on Hadronic Cross-Section at Low-Energy (SIGHAD03), Pisa, Italy, 8-10 Oct 2003).
442:
443:
444: % ----------------------
445:
446: \bibitem{psi3770nonddbar}
447: \underline{$\sigma(\pdp \to hadrons)$}:
448: %A STUDY OF THE PSI-PRIME-PRIME (3770) USING THE CRYSTAL BALL DETECTOR.
449: R.A. Partridge, Ph.D. thesis, CALT-68-1150 (1984);
450: R.H. Schindler, Ph.D. thesis, SLAC-219, UC-34d (T/E) (1979).
451: % CHARMED MESON PRODUCTION AND DECAY PROPERTIES AT THE PSI-PRIME-PRIME
452: % (3770).
453: \underline{$\sigma(\pdp \to \DDbar)$}:
454: % A REANALYSIS OF CHARMED D MESON BRANCHING FRACTIONS.
455: J. Adler \etal (Mark III), Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 60}, 89 (1988);
456: % RECENT BES RESULTS ON PSI(3770) AND D MESON PRODUCTION AND DECAY.
457: G. Rong (BES), hep-ex/0406027;
458: % To appear in the proceedings of 39th Rencontres de Moriond on Electroweak
459: % Interactions and Unified Theories, La Thuile, Aosta Valley, Italy,
460: % 21-28 Mar 2004.
461: %
462: B. Sanghi (CLEO), Talk presented at 2004 Spring APS meeting, Denver, CO (unpublished), update: hep-ex/0408055.
463: %
464: %\bibitem{bes:pipijpsi} %bes pipijpsi psi3770
465: \underline{$\pdp \to \pi\pi\jpsi$}:
466: J.Z. Bai \etal (BES), hep-ex/0307028;
467: %
468: T. Skwarnicki, Int. J. Mod. Phys. {\bf A 19}, 1030 (2004).
469: %
470: \underline{$\pdp \to \gamma \chi_{cJ}$}:\linebreak
471: J.L. Rosner, hep-ph/0405196 (subm. to PRD).
472:
473:
474: % ---------------
475:
476: \bibitem{pdg2004} S. Eidelman {\it et al.}, Phys. Lett. {\bf B592}, 1 (2004).
477:
478: % ---------------
479:
480: \bibitem{bmumu} G.S. Adams \etal (CLEO), hep-ex/0408010,
481: intended for PRL.
482:
483: % ---------------
484:
485:
486: \bibitem{baryonpairs}
487: \underline{$\alpha_{p,\Lambda}$}:
488: C. Carimalo, Int. J. Mod. Phys. {\bf A 2}, 249 (1987).
489: \underline{$\jpsi \to \Lambda \bar \Lambda$}:
490: % DECAYS OF THE J / PSI TO LAMBDA ANTI-LAMBDA, LAMBDA ANTI-LAMBDA GAMMA AND LAMBDA ANTI-LAMBDA PI0 FINAL STATES.
491: J.Z. Bai \etal (BES), Phys. Lett. {\bf B424}, 213 (1998), Erratum ibid.
492: {\bf B438}, 447 (1998).
493: \underline{$\chi_{cJ} \to \ppbar$}:
494: %DETERMINATION OF B(CHI(CJ) ---> P ANTI-P) IN PSI(2S) DECAYS
495: J.Z. Bai \etal (BES), Phys. Rev. D {\bf 69}, 092001 (2004).
496: \underline{COM}:
497: % COLOR OCTET CONTRIBUTION IN EXCLUSIVE P WAVE CHARMONIUM DECAY INTO OCTET AND DECUPLET BARYONS.
498: S.M.H. Wong, Eur. Phys. J. C {\bf 14}, 643 (2000).
499: % e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9903236
500: \underline{$\chi_{cJ} \to \Lambda \bar \Lambda$}:
501: % FIRST EVIDENCE OF LAMBDA ANTI-LAMBDA IN CHI(CJ) DECAYS.
502: J.Z. Bai \etal (BES), Phys. Rev. D {\bf 67}, 112001 (2003).
503: % e-Print Archive: hep-ex/0304012
504: \underline{$\jpsi \to \ppbar$}:
505: %THE MEASUREMENTS OF J / PSI ---> P ANTI-P.
506: J.Z. Bai \etal (BES), Phys. Lett. {\bf B591}, 42 (2004).
507: %e-Print Archive: hep-ex/0402034
508:
509:
510: % ---------------
511:
512: \bibitem{cleo:bbbartoccbar}
513: % NEW MEASUREMENTS OF UPSILON(1S) DECAYS TO CHARMONIUM FINAL STATES.
514: R.A. Briere \etal (CLEO), hep-ex/0407030
515: (subm. to PRD) and references therein.
516:
517: % ---------------
518:
519: \bibitem{heavytolightdecays}
520: %RATIO OF PSI(2S) TO J / PSI HADRONIC DECAY RATES AND RHO PI PUZZLE.
521: % e-Print Archive: hep-ph/9910406
522: Y.F. Gu, X.H. Li, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 63}, 114019 (2001).
523: %
524: \underline{$\jpsi \to \pi^+\pi^-\pizero$}:
525: %MEASUREMENT OF THE BRANCHING FRACTION OF J / PSI ---> PI+ PI- PI0.
526: %e-Print Archive: hep-ex/0402013
527: J.Z. Bai \etal (BES), Phys. Rev. D {\bf 70}, 012005 (2004).
528: %
529: %OBSERVATION OF 1-0- FINAL STATES FROM PSI(2S) DECAYS AND E+ E- ANNIHILATION.
530: \underline{$\pp \to 1^-0^-$}:
531: N.E. Adam \etal (CLEO), hep-ex/0407028 (subm. to PRL);
532: %OBSERVATION OF THE DECAY PSI(2S) ---> K*(892)ANTI-K + C.C.
533: M. Ablikim \etal (BES), hep-ex/0407037.
534:
535: \end{thebibliography}
536: %
537: \end{document}
538: