1: %% hack hd.bbl to get b -> B etc
2: \documentclass{PoS}
3:
4: \PoS{PoS(LAT2005)008}
5:
6:
7: \title{Hadronic Decays}
8:
9: \ShortTitle{Hadronic Decays}
10:
11: \author{\speaker{C. Michael}\\
12: Theoretical Physics Division, Dept of Mathematical Sciences,
13: University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK\\
14:
15: \email{c.michael@liv.ac.uk}
16: }
17:
18:
19: \abstract{ Hadronic decays and transitions are a key ingredient of
20: hadronic physics. I discuss how hadronic decays can be explored in lattice
21: gauge theory and review studies undertaken. I also discuss the impact
22: of decays on masses and how lattice studies can explore the nature of
23: a hadronic state: namely whether it is a molecular or quark-antiquark state.
24: A brief discussion of lattice exploration of pentaquark states is presented.
25: }
26:
27: \FullConference{XXIII International Symposium on Lattice Field Theory\\
28: 25th-30th July 2005\\
29: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin}
30:
31:
32: \usepackage{color}
33: \let\normalcolor\relax
34:
35: %\definecolor{darkgreen}{rgb}{0,0.5,0.5}
36:
37: %
38: \newcommand{\black}{\color{black}}
39: \newcommand{\blue}{\color{blue}}
40: \newcommand{\red}{\color{red}}
41: \newcommand{\magenta}{\color{magenta}}
42: %\newcommand{\dgre}{\color{darkgreen}}
43:
44: \usepackage{graphicx}
45:
46: \begin{document}
47:
48: \section{Introduction}
49:
50:
51:
52:
53: Relatively few hadronic states are stable to strong decays (i.e. via
54: QCD with degenerate $u$ and $d$ quarks). Among the mesons, we
55: have~\cite{Eidelman:2004wy}:
56:
57: \bigskip
58: \begin{tabular}{ll}
59: {\black Stable} &{ \blue $\pi\ K\ \eta\ D\ D_s\ B\ B_s\ B_c\ D_s^*\ B^*\ B_s^*\
60: D_s(0^+)\ B_s(0^+)$} \\
61: % {\blue $N\ \Lambda\ \Sigma\ \Xi\ \Omega\ \Lambda_c\ \Xi_c\ \Xi_c'\ \Lambda_b$} \\
62: {\black $\Gamma < 1$ MeV} &{ \red
63: $\eta'\ D^*\ \psi(1S)\ \psi(2S)\ \chi_1\ \chi_2\
64: \Upsilon(1S)\ \Upsilon(2S)\ \Upsilon(3S)$}\\ % \chi_b \\ {\mathrm expected}
65: {\black $\Gamma < 10$ MeV }&{ \magenta
66: $ \omega\ \phi\ \chi_0\ X(3872) $} \\
67: % \Xi^*\ \Sigma_c(2455)\ \Lambda_c(2593)\
68: %\Lambda_c(2625)\ \Xi_c(2645)\ \Xi_c(2790)\ \Xi_c(2815)$
69: %{\black Note NOT \red $\eta_c\ \psi(3770)\ \Upsilon(4S)$}
70: {\black $\Gamma > 10$ MeV }&{ \red $ \rho\ f_0\ a_0\ h_1\ b_1\ a_1\
71: f_2\ f_1\ a_2,$\ \black etc., inc \red $\eta_c$.}
72: \end{tabular}
73:
74: \bigskip
75:
76: The mass of an unstable state is usually defined as the energy
77: corresponding to a 90$^0$ phase shift. This definition seems to accord
78: with simple mass formulae:
79: For example
80: \begin{itemize}
81: \item $\rho(776)$ and $\omega(783)$ are close in mass despite having
82: widths of $150$ and $8 $ MeV respectively.
83: \item The baryon decuplet ($\Delta(1232)$, $\Sigma(1385)$, $\Xi(1530)$,
84: $\Omega(1672)$) is roughly equally spaced in mass despite having widths
85: of (120, 37, 9, 0) MeV respectively.
86: \end{itemize}
87: (Note that defining the mass as the real part of the pole will cause a
88: downward shift of masses for wider states, eg. 22 MeV
89: less~\cite{Michael:1966aa} for the $\Delta(1232)$ pole, and this
90: prescription will fit the equal mass rule less well.)
91:
92: \bigskip
93:
94: So, on the one hand, unstable particles seem to fit in well with
95: stable ones; on the other hand, the presence of open decay channels
96: will have an influence in lattice studies.
97:
98: \bigskip
99:
100: Some of the motivations to study hadronic decays on the lattice are:
101:
102:
103: \begin{itemize}
104: \item To determine properties of exotic states (glueball; hybrid meson;
105: multi-quark) to guide experiment.
106: \item To understand the nature of states: whether meson-meson or
107: quark-antiquark in structure.
108: \item To understand the impact of decay on the mass of a state.
109: \item Hadronic decays are now accessible in full QCD:
110: for example $\rho_0 \to \pi_1 \pi_{-1}$ at rest requires
111: $$ {m(\pi) \over m(\rho) } < {0.5 \over \sqrt{1+{4 \pi^2 \over
112: (m(\pi)L)^2}}} $$
113: so for $m(\pi) L = 5$ this implies $m(\pi)/m(\rho) < 0.32$,
114: but note that $\rho_1 \to \pi_1 \pi_0$ , where suffix labels momentum
115: in units of $2\pi/L$, only needs $m(\pi)/m(\rho) = 0.44$,
116:
117:
118: \end{itemize}
119:
120: \section {Decays in Euclidean Time}
121:
122: {\magenta NO GO.} At large spatial volume, the two-body continuum
123: {\red masks} any resonance state.
124: The extraction of the spectral function from the correlator $C(t)$ is
125: ill-posed unless a model is made~\cite{Michael:1989mf,Maiani:1990ca},
126: since the low energy continuum dominates at large $t$.
127:
128: \bigskip
129:
130: {\magenta GO}. For finite spatial volume ($L^3$), the two-body
131: continuum is {\red discrete} and L\"uscher
132: showed~\cite{Luscher:1986a,Luscher:1986b,Luscher:1990ux} how to use the
133: small energy shifts with $L$ of these two-body levels to extract the
134: elastic scattering phase shifts. The phase shifts then determine the
135: resonance mass and width, see ref.~\cite{Luscher:1991cf} for a review.
136: { Thus a relatively broad resonance such as the $\rho$
137: appears as a distortion of the $\pi_n \pi_{-n}$ energy levels
138: where pion momentum $q=2 \pi n/L $.}
139:
140: The effect can be visualised as arising from the relatively larger
141: amplitude for interaction between two hadrons in increasingly smaller
142: spatial volumes:
143:
144: \vspace{3cm}
145:
146: \special{psfile=fd_lu.ps hoffset=0 voffset=-150 vscale= 35 hscale=35}
147:
148:
149:
150:
151: \section{Lattice evaluation}
152:
153:
154: { L\"uscher's method is applicable in principle to study phase shifts below
155: inelastic thresholds. But problems arise
156: in practical implementation:
157: \begin{itemize}
158: \item Accurate measurement of a small energy difference (of order
159: $L^{-3}$ in general, though bigger at resonance) is needed.
160: \item Measurement of a matrix of correlations between two-body and
161: one-body operators will be needed to get accurate energy values and
162: these correlators are less straightforward to evaluate.
163: \item Measurements are needed at several spatial sizes ($L$) with
164: dynamical fermions, with $L$ big enough to hold two hadrons.
165: \item Higher energy levels in a given channel are particularly hard to
166: determine (eg. $\pi_1 \pi_{-1}$ compared to $\pi_0 \pi_0$) since excited
167: state energies are always difficult to extract with precision from
168: temporal correlators, since the ground state contribution dominates at
169: larger $t$.
170:
171: \end{itemize}
172:
173: \noindent Are there any short cuts?
174:
175:
176:
177: \section {Lattice evaluation: tricks}
178:
179:
180: \subsection{$\pi^+ \pi^+$}
181:
182: One of the first cases that has been explored is the $\pi^+ \pi^+$
183: interaction at low energy. This is favourable since there are fewer
184: quark diagrams to evaluate as there is no annihilation diagram, i.e no
185: $\overline{q} q $ channel and, because of this, quenched evaluation is a
186: useful approximation. This has been much studied in the last decades.
187: Indeed recently there have also been dynamical quark
188: evaluations~\cite{Yamazaki:2004qb,Beane:2005rj} of the $\pi^+ \pi^+$
189: scattering near threshold.
190:
191:
192: The trick that has been evolved to improve precision in these studies is
193: that of using an operator that creates two pions at spatial separation
194: $x$. Then the nature of the expected spatial wave function versus $x$
195: allows to determine the scattering length (phase shift $\delta_{I=2}$
196: near threshold) more accurately than from the energy determined by the
197: $t$-correlation alone~\cite{Aoki:2005uf}.
198:
199:
200: This $\pi^+ \pi^+$ case does not involve decay, of course, just an
201: evaluation of the hadronic interaction strength. To explore decays,
202: one must study the transition between two meson and one meson operators.
203:
204: \subsection{Hadronic transitions}
205:
206: Consider a lattice study of the off-diagonal correlator: from a $\rho$ meson to
207: $\pi \pi$. Diagrammatically:
208:
209:
210:
211: \ \ \ \ \ {\red $\rho$} $\to$ {\blue $\pi \pi$} \\
212: \ \ \ 0{\red ----------}X{\blue----------}0 \\
213: \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ t\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ T
214:
215: \special{psfile=fd_tri.ps hoffset=150 voffset=-100 vscale= 30 hscale=30}
216:
217:
218: Now to evaluate this contribution, since the intermediate point marked X
219: at time $t$ is not observed on a lattice, it must be summed over.
220: $$ \sum_{t=0}^T {\red e^{-m(\rho)t}} x {\blue e^{-m(\pi \pi)(T-t)}}
221: \to A e^{-m(\rho)T} - B e^{-m(\pi \pi)T}$$
222:
223:
224: The problem that arises is that excited states of either
225: the $\rho$ or of $\pi \pi$ will contribute a similar behaviour:
226:
227: $$ \sum_{t=0}^T {\red e^{-m'(\rho)t}} x {\blue e^{-m(\pi \pi)(T-t)}}
228: \to C e^{-m'(\rho)T} - D e^{-m(\pi \pi)T}$$
229:
230: $$ \sum_{t=0}^T {\red e^{-m(\rho)t}} x {\blue e^{-m'(\pi \pi)(T-t)}}
231: \to E e^{-m(\rho)T} - F e^{-m'(\pi \pi)T}$$
232:
233: Hence there is no way in principle to remove any excited state
234: contamination {\magenta unless}
235: ${\red m(\rho)} \approx {\blue m(\pi \pi)}$ when the ground state piece
236: sums to $xTe^{-mT}$ while excited states only behave as $e^{-mT}$.
237:
238: Thus for on-shell transitions on the lattice, it is possible to extract
239: the hadronic transition amplitude
240: directly~\cite{McNeile:2000xx,Pennanen:2000yk,McNeile:2002fh}. The key
241: signal is to observe a linear dependence of the lattice normalised
242: transition amplitude on the temporal extent $T$. The slope of this
243: transition then gives the lattice amplitude $x$ that can be related to
244: the transition amplitude with conventional normalisation of states.
245:
246:
247: \section {Lattice evaluation: $\rho \to \pi \pi$ }
248:
249: This transition can be evaluated directly - for {\red on
250: shell} transitions - by looking for the signal {\red extensive} in $T$.
251: This has been explored~\cite{McNeile:2002fh} for $\rho$ decay to $\pi
252: \pi$. In order to have an on-shell transition with the dynamical quark
253: lattices then available, it was optimum to study the case of decay in
254: flight: $\rho_1 \to \pi_1 \pi_0$ which is quite close to on-shell as
255: illustrated in fig.~1. The diagrams illustrated in fig.~1 were evaluated
256: using a stochastic time-plane source method. The generalisation of
257: L\"uscher's method to decay in flight is given
258: in~\cite{Rummukainen:1995vs}.
259:
260:
261:
262: \begin{figure}[htb]
263: \begin{center}
264: \vspace{7.0cm}
265:
266: \special{psfile=rpp.ps hoffset=0 voffset=0 vscale= 35 hscale=35}
267: % was -50
268: \special{psfile=fd_rpp.ps hoffset=200 voffset=-0 vscale= 35 hscale=35}
269:
270: \end{center}
271: \vspace{-2cm}
272: \caption{(a) Energy levels of $\rho$ meson and $\pi \pi$ states.
273: From UKQCD with $N_f=2$ sea quarks with NP-improved fermions,
274: $m(\pi)/m(\rho)= 0.58$, $m(\pi)L=4.6$, $a$=0.11 fm.
275: (b) Diagrams evaluated (stochastic time-plane source method)
276: }
277:
278:
279: \end{figure}
280:
281:
282: The signal obtained from the lattice study is illustrated in fig.~2 both
283: for the normalised $\rho \to \pi \pi$ transition and for the normalised
284: "box" contribution $\pi \pi \to \pi \pi$ which has a contribution from
285: $\pi \pi \to \rho \to \pi \pi$. The approximate consistency of these two
286: approaches is a useful cross-check.
287:
288:
289:
290: \begin{figure}[hbt]
291:
292:
293: \begin{center}
294: \vspace{7.0cm} % was 3.5
295:
296: \special{psfile=xt_tri.ps hoffset=0 voffset=0 vscale= 35 hscale=35}
297: \special{psfile=xt_box.ps hoffset=200 voffset=0 vscale= 35 hscale=35}
298:
299:
300: \end{center}
301: \caption{Strength of transitions measured on the lattice.
302: }
303:
304: \end{figure}
305:
306:
307:
308: Assuming two close energy levels (with mixing amplitude $x$) {\red
309: mix} to give an energy shift $\Delta m$, then $m(\rho_1)$ moves down,
310: while $E(\pi_1 \pi_0)$ moves up. The lattice results are
311: \begin{itemize}
312: \item Transition $\rho_1 \to \pi_1 \pi_0$: Signal $xT$.
313: {\red $a\Delta m=0.022^{+17}_{-7}$}
314: \item Box $\pi_1 \pi_0 \to \pi_1 \pi_0$: Signal $ (xT)^2$.
315: (consistent with above)
316: \item Shift of energy of $\rho_1$ spin parallel to momentum (which
317: {\red mixes} with $\pi_1 \pi_0$) to spin perpendicular to momentum
318: (which does not).
319: {\red $a\Delta m =0.026(7)$}
320: \item L\"uscher shift (unbinding energy of $\pi_1 \pi_0$).
321: {\red $a\Delta m =0.04(3)$}. {\magenta Note big error}
322: \end{itemize}
323:
324: So the tricks give smaller errors than the direct determination of the
325: L\"uscher mass shift. The tricks have some inherent systematic errors,
326: however, and are most useful for a qualitative study.
327:
328: These mass shifts with the assumption of $\rho$ dominance of the $\pi
329: \pi$ partial wave give a determination of the coupling $g_{\rho \pi \pi}$.
330: Thus one can determine this coupling constant from the lattice (where decay
331: does not proceed) and compare with experiment:
332:
333: \bigskip
334: \begin{tabular} {llll}
335: \hline
336: method & $m_{val}$ & $m_{sea}$ & $\overline{g}$ \\
337: \hline
338: {\red Lattice} $xT$ & $s$ & $s$ & $1.40^{+47}_{-23}$ \\
339: {\red Lattice} $\rho$ shift & $s$ & $s$ & $1.56^{+21}_{-13}$ \\
340: \hline
341: $\phi \to K \overline{K}$ & $s$ & $u,\ d$ & $1.5$ \\
342: $K^* \to K \pi$ & $u,\ d/s$ & $u,\ d$ & $1.44$ \\
343: $\rho \to \pi \pi$ & $u,\ d$ & $u,\ d$ & $1.39$ \\
344: \hline
345: \end{tabular}
346: \bigskip
347:
348: The agreement is good, indicating that there is a relatively mild
349: dependence of the coupling constant on the sea quark mass (which is
350: higher in the lattice study than in experiment). This satisfactory
351: confrontation between lattice and experiment, is encouraging for
352: lattice exploration of cases where predictions need to be made since
353: experimental data are not available.
354:
355:
356: \section {Hybrid meson decay}
357:
358:
359: One of the characteristic predictions of QCD is that there can be
360: mesons in which the gluonic degrees of freedom are non-trivially
361: excited. The simplest example is a hybrid meson with spin-exotic
362: $J^{PC}=1^{-+}$ which is a $J^{PC}$ combination not available to a
363: $\overline{q} q$ state.
364:
365: \subsection{Heavy quarks}
366:
367: \begin{figure}[htb]
368: \begin{center}
369: \vspace{7.0cm} % was 3.5
370:
371: \special{psfile=fd_hyb.ps hoffset=-150 voffset=-220 vscale= 80 hscale=80}
372: \special{psfile=xt_hyb.ps hoffset=200 voffset=0 vscale= 35 hscale=35}
373:
374: \end{center}
375: \caption{Strength of string de-excitation transitions measured on the lattice.
376: }
377:
378:
379: \end{figure}
380:
381:
382:
383: The cleanest environment in which to study such states on a lattice is
384: in the limit of very heavy quarks - $\overline{b} b$. This can be
385: approximated by using static quarks and the gluonic excitation arises
386: as an excited string state between these static quarks with non-trivial
387: gluonic angular momentum. Lattice studies have long predicted the
388: spectrum of such states.
389:
390: To guide experiment, however, it is important to know the expected decay
391: mechanism and associated width. In the static quark limit, several
392: symmetries can be used which imply~\cite{McNeile:2002az} that the
393: dominant decay will be string de-excitation (rather than string
394: breaking). Lattice study~\cite{McNeile:2002az} shows that the dominant
395: decay of $H_b$ is string de-excitation to $\chi_b f_0$. The
396: transition that is considered is shown by the diagram on the left of
397: fig.~3. The lattice data on the transition are illustrated in fig.~3:
398: the transition is closest to on-shell for
399: $R \approx 0.2$ fm. The width is predicted to be around 80 MeV.
400:
401: This estimate from first principles of the decay width is of
402: significance in guiding experimental searches for such hybrid states.
403:
404:
405: % C. McNeile, C. Michael and P. Pennanen, Phys Rev D65 (2002) 094505 1-9.
406:
407:
408:
409:
410: \subsection {Light quarks}
411:
412:
413:
414: For light quarks, evidence for contributions from two-body states
415: (such as $\pi b_1$) to the spin-exotic ($J^{PC}=1^{-+}$) channel is seen
416: in dynamical studies~\cite{Bernard:2003jd} - this complicates the
417: extraction of a spin-exotic hybrid meson.
418:
419: %C. Bernard et al Phys.Rev.D68:074505,2003
420:
421: A recent exploratory study (quenched) of $\pi a_1$ mixing with the
422: $J^{PC}=1^{-+}$ spin-exotic hybrid meson has given an estimate of the
423: width for this decay~\cite{Cook:2005aa}.
424:
425:
426:
427:
428: \section {String breaking}
429:
430: In quenched QCD, as the static quark and antiquark sources are pulled
431: apart the potential energy rises as $\sigma R$, where $\sigma$ is the
432: string tension. In full QCD, a sea quark-antiquark can be created from
433: the vacuum and it becomes energetically favourable to have a
434: meson-antimeson pair beyond some value of $R$. This is the phenomenon of
435: string breaking. It has long been realised that this can be studied as
436: a {\red mixing} phenomenon~\cite{Michael:1991nc} with channels $Q
437: \overline{Q}$ and $ Q\overline{q}\ q\overline{Q}$.
438: For static quarks at separation $R$, there will be a level crossing
439: and associated mixing of $V(R)$ and $2m(B)$. This mixing is the measure
440: of string breaking~\cite{Pennanen:2000yk}, \cite{Bernard:2001tz}. This
441: mixing energy is very hard to determine on a lattice: since the
442: crossing occurs at relatively large $R \approx 1.25$ fm where amplitudes
443: are small. At this crossing point, for static quarks, there is a mixing
444: transition which will be independent of lattice spatial size $L$ for
445: sufficiently large $L$ since each state is localised (the heavy quarks
446: are static).
447:
448: Employing "all the tricks in the book" a first estimate of this energy
449: shift (mixing amplitude) has been obtained~\cite{Bali:2005fu} of
450: 51(3) MeV. An illustration of the crossing region is in fig.~4.
451:
452: Using the adiabatic approximation, this energy gap can be used to
453: evaluate amplitudes for excited $\Upsilon$ decay to $B\overline{B}$. So it
454: does indeed have some relevance to the topic of hadronic decays.
455:
456:
457:
458:
459: % PP CM~00 hep-lat/0001015
460: % G Bali et al SESAM hep-lat/0505012
461:
462:
463:
464: \begin{figure}[htb]
465:
466: \begin{center}
467: \vspace{7.5cm} % was 3.5
468:
469:
470: \special{psfile=string2.ps hoffset=0 voffset=0 vscale= 45 hscale=45}
471:
472: \end{center}
473: \vspace{-1cm}
474: \caption{String breaking (here $a \approx 0.083$ fm).
475: }
476:
477:
478:
479: \end{figure}
480:
481:
482:
483:
484: \section {Scalar Mesons}
485:
486: \subsection{Light quarks}
487:
488: Since $u\overline{u}+d\overline{d}$, $s\overline{s}$, glueball, and meson-meson
489: components are all possible for flavour-singlet scalar mesons, this is
490: a difficult area to study both on a lattice, and in interpreting
491: experimental data. For scalar mesons the lowest mass decay channels are
492: $\pi \pi$ (flavour singlet: $f_0$) or $\eta \pi$ (flavour non-singlet:
493: $a_0$) and these decay channels are open in many dynamical lattice
494: studies. The history of attempts to study the complex mixing between
495: these different contributions is :
496:
497: \begin{itemize}
498: \item $0^{++}$ Glueball decay $\to \pi \pi$: quenched
499: study~\cite{Sexton:1995kd,Sexton:1996ed}.
500: % J Sexton A Vaccarino D Weingarten
501: %Nucl.Phys.Proc.Suppl.42:279-281,1995 Nucl.Phys.Proc.Suppl.47:128-135,1996
502: \item Glueball mixing with $q \overline{q}$ meson.
503: This is a hadronic transition which is independent of $L$ for large $L$, so
504: a mixing energy can be quoted.
505: It has been studied using quenched~\cite{Lee:1999kv} and dynamical
506: lattices~\cite{McNeile:2000xx}
507: % Weingarten~Lee 98,00(Quenched); McNeile~CM 01}
508: % W-J Lee and D Weingarten Phys.Rev.D61:014015,2000
509: % C. McNeile and C. Michael, Phys. Rev. D63, 114503-1 to -11 (2001)
510: \end{itemize}
511:
512: A full lattice study is needed which includes glueball, $\overline{q} q$ and $\pi \pi$
513: channels but the disconnected diagram for $f_0 \to \pi \pi$
514: is very noisy in practice.
515: To reduce the contribution from disconnected diagrams, one can study
516: flavour non-singlet decays.
517: The simplest case is $a_0 \to \eta \pi$ and this has been explored in
518: quenched studies which have an anomalous behaviour: since the $\eta$
519: itself is unphysical (appearing as a double pole degenerate in mass
520: with the pion). Rather than try to correct for this anomaly which gives
521: a wrong sign to the $a_0$ correlator at larger $t$, it is preferable to use
522: a ghost-free theory.
523: With two flavours of sea quark ($N_f=2$), the $a_0 \to \eta \pi$
524: transition is physical but it involves the evaluation of an additional
525: disconnected diagram - as illustrated in fig.~5. This transition is
526: then approximately on-shell and the transition strength can be
527: evaluated, as shown in fig.~5.
528:
529:
530: The results~\cite{cmcmjp} are indeed as anticipated for the transition
531: involving particles with no momentum - showing an approximately linear
532: rise. For the decay in flight the result is significantly different
533: even though, for an S-wave transition, one would expect a transition
534: amplitude independent of momentum. This is perhaps a warning that the
535: underlying dynamics is more complicated. Further study is needed in this
536: area of light-light scalar mesons.
537:
538:
539:
540: \begin{figure}[htb]
541:
542:
543:
544: \begin{center}
545: \vspace{6.5cm} % was 3.5
546:
547:
548: \special{psfile=fd_a0.ps hoffset=-20 voffset=-100 vscale= 35 hscale=35}
549: \special{psfile=xseta40.ps hoffset=200 voffset=-0 vscale= 35 hscale=35}
550:
551: \vspace{-0.5cm}
552: \end{center}
553: \caption{ Diagrams for $a_0 \to \eta \pi$ and transition strength on a
554: lattice (preliminary results from McNeile et al.~\cite{cmcmjp}).
555: }
556:
557: \end{figure}
558:
559:
560: \subsection{Heavy-light quarks}
561:
562: One of the most promising areas to study scalar mesons on lattice is
563: for heavy-light mesons. The scalar meson with $\overline{c}s$ quantum
564: number is known experimentally~\cite{Eidelman:2004wy} to be very narrow
565: (it decays only via the isospin-violating channel $D_s \pi$ or
566: electromagnetically), while the scalar meson with $\overline{b}s$
567: quantum number is predicted to be similarly narrow from a lattice study
568: of its energy~\cite{Green:2003zz}.
569:
570: The heavy-light scalar meson, which in the limit of a static heavy
571: quark, is expected to be stable~\cite{Green:2003zz} for $\overline{b} s$
572: content and to decay to $B \pi$ for $\overline{b}n$ content (where $n=u,\
573: d$, considered as degenerate).
574: Evaluating the diagram shown in fig.~6, a lattice estimate of the decay
575: rate of $B(0^+) \to B(0^-) \pi$ gives a width
576: predicted~\cite{McNeile:2004rf} as 162(30) MeV. This state has not
577: been observed experimentally yet, but the experimental results for the
578: corresponding $\overline{c}n$ state, $D(0^+)$, are that the width is
579: $270\pm50$ MeV. Although significant $1/m_Q$ effects are expected in
580: the HQET in extrapolating to charm quarks, this is indeed a similar
581: magnitude to that predicted for $B$ mesons.
582: It will be interesting so see how the lattice prediction of the mass
583: and width of the $B(0^+)$ fares when experimental results are available.
584:
585: %C. McNeile, C. Michael and G. Thompson Phys. Rev. D70, 054501, 1-5 (2004)
586:
587:
588:
589:
590: \begin{figure}[htb]
591:
592:
593: \begin{center}
594: \vspace{7.5cm} % was 3.5
595:
596:
597: \special{psfile=BsBpi.ps hoffset=0 voffset=-20 vscale= 50 hscale=50}
598: \special{psfile=xt_bs.ps hoffset=200 voffset=0 vscale= 35 hscale=35}
599:
600:
601: \end{center}
602: \vspace{-1.0cm} %was -1.5
603: \caption{ Diagrams for $B(0^+) \to B \pi$ and transition strength on a
604: lattice.
605: }
606:
607: \end{figure}
608:
609:
610:
611: \section {Do decays matter?}
612:
613:
614:
615: The previous discussion of decays on a lattice emphasises that $q
616: \overline{q}$ states do mix with two-body states with the same quantum
617: numbers. In the real world, the two-body states are a continuum and
618: nearby states have a predominant influence. Since there is a
619: suppression in the amplitude near threshold from the factor $q^L$ for
620: an $L$-wave transition, for S-wave transitions ($L=0$) the threshold
621: will turn on most abruptly and hence will have stronger mixing.
622:
623: For {\red bound} states there is an influence of nearby many-body states
624: (eg. $N \pi$ on $N$ or $\pi \pi \pi$ on $\pi$) which mix to reduce the
625: mass. The nearest such thresholds will be those with pionic channels
626: since pions are the lightest mesons. This is the province of low energy
627: effective theories, especially Chiral Perturbation Theory which is
628: discussed in other talks. This then provides a reliable guide in
629: extrapolating lattice results to the physical light quark masses.
630:
631:
632: For {\red unstable} states (resonances) the influence of the two-body
633: continuum is less clear since the two-body states are both lighter and
634: heavier. In the continuum at large volume, effective field theories
635: can again be used to explore this. On a lattice, however, the signal for
636: a particle becomes obscured as the quark mass is reduced so that it
637: becomes unstable. Techniques, such as those discussed above, are needed to
638: extract the elastic scattering phase shift and hence the mass and width.
639:
640:
641: For quenched QCD, however, where these two-body states are not coupled
642: (or have the wrong sign as in $a_0 \to \eta \pi$), then the unstable
643: states will be distorted compared to full QCD. For instance, in existing
644: quenched QCD studies, the $\rho$ will be {\em too heavy} since it is
645: not repelled by the heavier $\pi \pi$ states. Indeed an example of this
646: effect was seen above in the study of $\rho$ decay including dynamical
647: sea quarks, where the $\rho$ mass decreased~\cite{McNeile:2002fh} when
648: it could couple to $\pi \pi$ compared to when it could not.
649:
650:
651:
652: \section {Molecular states?}
653:
654:
655:
656: Can lattice QCD provide evidence about possible molecular states:
657: hadrons made predominantly of two hadrons?
658:
659: The prototype is the deuteron: $n\ p$ bound in a relative S-wave (with
660: some D-wave admixture) by $\pi$ exchange.
661:
662: There are many states close to two-body thresholds. Since S-wave
663: thresholds are the most abrupt, it is usually in this case that the
664: influence of the threshold on the state has been discussed.
665: Some of these cases are:
666:
667:
668: \begin{tabular}{rclrcl}
669: &&&&& \\
670: $f_0(980)\ a_0(980)$ &$\leftrightarrow$& $K \overline{K}$ &
671: $ D_s(0^+)$ &$\leftrightarrow$& $D(0^-) K$\\
672: $ B_s(0^+)$ &$\leftrightarrow$& $B(0^-) K$ &
673: $ X(3872)$ &$\leftrightarrow$& $D^* \overline{D}$\\
674: $ \Lambda(1405)$ &$\leftrightarrow$& $\overline{K} N$ &
675: $ N(1535)$ &$\leftrightarrow$& $\eta N$\\
676: &&&&& \\
677: \end{tabular}
678:
679: Some of these states ($ D_s(0^+)$, $B_s(0^+)$) are stable (in QCD in the
680: isospin conserving limit) whereas the rest have other channels open.
681: There is a large literature, stretching over 40 years, discussing the
682: consequences of the nearby threshold on these states. One definite
683: implication is that isospin breaking is enhanced by mass splittings in
684: thresholds (eg. $\overline{K^0} K^0$ compared to $K^+ K^-$ is 8 MeV higher
685: and this induces isospin mixing between the states at 980 MeV).
686: This level of detail is not accessible in lattice studies at present, but
687: lattice QCD should be able to address the issue of the influence of
688: thresholds on these states.
689:
690:
691: %497.648-493.667
692:
693: The observation of a state near a 2-body threshold implies that there
694: is an attractive interaction between the two bodies. But this is a
695: topic like that of whether the chicken or egg was created first: an
696: attractive interaction implies and is implied by a nearby state. What
697: can lattice QCD offer here? We are in the position of being able to
698: vary the quark masses and this is a very useful tool. A two-body
699: threshold will move in general in a different way with changing quark
700: mass than a $\overline{q}q$ state. We can also move the strange and
701: non-strange masses separately and this can be helpful too.
702:
703: Another line of investigation is that lattice studies can explore the
704: wavefunction of a state - either the Bethe-Salpeter wavefunction or the
705: charge or matter spatial distribution. One can also explore the
706: coupling of a state to a 2-body channel, as was discussed above.
707:
708: The prototype of a molecular state is the deuteron: it has a tiny
709: binding energy (2.2 MeV) and a very extended spatial wave function.
710: Pion exchange between neutron and proton gives a mechanism for this
711: long-range attraction. In general it is difficult to reproduce such
712: small binding energies in lattice studies.
713:
714: Another case where a long-range pion exchange can give binding is in the
715: $BB$ system. Here lattice results indicate~\cite{Michael:1999nq} the
716: possibility of molecular bound states in some quantum number channels
717: which have an attractive interaction from pion exchange, but also the
718: possibility of bound multi-quark states which are not described as
719: hadron-hadron but where the two heavy quarks form a colour triplet and
720: the light quarks are arranged as in a heavy-light-light baryon. This
721: $BB$ example illustrates the rich structure available to multi-quark
722: systems.
723:
724: Cases that have been studied on the lattice are the $\overline{b}s$ and
725: $\overline{c}s$ scalar mesons~\cite{Green:2003zz,Dougall:2003hv}. The
726: lattice mass values do suggest that these states, treated as $\overline{Q}q$
727: states, are bound and are not unduly influenced by the $BK,\ DK$
728: threshold. A study of the charge distribution of the $B(0^+)$
729: gives~\cite{Green:2004nm,Koponen:2005aa} confirmation since the light
730: quark spatial distribution is similar to that of other $\overline{Q}q$
731: states.
732:
733: For the $a_0$ and $f_0$ at 980 MeV, there is limited progress. Quenched
734: studies are inappropriate here for the $a_0$ since the $\eta \pi$ decay
735: is wrongly treated. In dynamical
736: studies~\cite{McNeile:2000xx,Bernard:2001av}, the two body channels are
737: of similar energy to the $a_0$ (as discussed above), so analysis is
738: unclear. A thorough study of the light-light scalar sector is still
739: awaited.
740:
741:
742: \section {Multi-quark states?}
743:
744:
745: {\red I told you so}: a narrow pentaquark above $KN$ threshold is not
746: possible in QCD. I lived through the {\red split $A_2$} and {\red
747: baryonium}, which were both narrow features that appeared significant
748: experimentally but which were evanescent~\cite{baryonium}. So I have
749: always advised lattice theorists not to rely on the experimental
750: evidence for a pentaquark. A pentaquark state around 1540 MeV has a
751: "fall-apart" decay mode to $KN$. This decay does not involve any quark
752: pair production so is expected to be unsuppressed - resulting in a very
753: wide decay width (of the order of hundreds of MeV).
754:
755: Since the flimsy experimental evidence for the pentaquark is now
756: weakening~\cite{Eidelman:2004wy,jlab,Abe:2005gy}, it is less compelling
757: to study it exhaustively on the lattice. Nevertheless, it is
758: instructive to discuss what lattice study could do to make more firm my
759: conviction that "a narrow pentaquark is not possible in QCD". The
760: essential issue is the narrowness of the claimed signal, since a broad
761: resonance state would not be unexpected.
762: In a lattice exploration of the pentaquark, an attractive phase
763: shift in some KN channel is not sufficient to resolve the issue, the
764: {\em width} needs to be evaluated. This needs, in principle,
765: \begin{itemize}
766: \item 2+1 flavours of sea quark, with light $u$,$d$.
767: \item Operators to create multi-quark states and two-body states
768: \item Vary spatial size to determine phase shift of two-body interaction.
769: \end{itemize}
770:
771: Such a comprehensive study is not yet available. Instead most studies
772: have used quenched QCD. The $KN$ decay channel {\em is} coupled in
773: quenched studies to a pentaquark state, so this suggests that a
774: quenched study can be a useful first step, although care must be taken
775: of spurious contributions arising from states such as $KN\eta$ which
776: will be relatively light and have unphysical behaviour. For realistic
777: quark masses, there will be two body states on the lattice: their
778: energy shifts then, following L\"uscher, give the phase shift. By
779: exploring this phase shift versus energy, the width of any resonance
780: can then be extracted. In practice, for a very narrow resonance, the
781: spectrum will look more like a one-body state (the resonance) and a
782: collection of two-body states except for mixing near the avoided-level
783: crossings. As the lattice volume is varied, the two body levels with
784: non-zero momentum will move (since momentum is $2 \pi n/L$ ). Thus the
785: volume dependence is a useful diagnostic. It is difficult, however, to
786: determine accurately the many energy levels expected in a relatively
787: large volume. An additional indicator is that the weight of the
788: one-body and two-body contributions can be volume dependent: basically
789: because the contribution from a two body state to a local-local
790: correlator will be dominated by the lowest {\em relative} momentum which
791: has a contribution which behaves as $1/L^3$ compared to the
792: contribution from a one-body state.
793:
794: Using these criteria, lattice groups have explored the S- and P-wave
795: $KN$ system. A summary of lattice results at LAT04~\cite{Sasaki:2004vz}
796: showed most groups reproducing a pentaquark state. Many more results
797: have been presented since and at this conference. Here I comment on
798: some of the more comprehensive studies. The Kentucky
799: group~\cite{Mathur:2004jr} use relatively light quarks and conclude no
800: evidence for any pentaquark. One group which claimed lattice evidence
801: for a pentaquark signal~\cite{Csikor:2003ng} has subsequently withdrawn
802: their claim~\cite{Csikor:2005xb}. The analysis of quenched lattices at
803: quark masses heavier than physical is still somewhat subjective and
804: lattice evidence for a pentaquark is still being claimed by some groups,
805: e.g.~\cite{Alexandrou:2005gc}.
806:
807:
808:
809:
810: \section {Conclusions}
811:
812:
813:
814: Hadronic physics involves {\red unstable} states.
815:
816: Don't put your head in the sand: study these with lattice techniques.
817:
818: We need to study interactions as well as spectra: solid gold - not just
819: gold-plated.
820:
821:
822:
823:
824: %\bibliographystyle{JHEP-2} % includes CITATION mark-up
825: %\bibliography{hd}
826: \providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}\begingroup\raggedright\begin{thebibliography}{10}
827:
828: \bibitem{Eidelman:2004wy}
829: {\bf Particle Data Group} Collaboration, S.~Eidelman {\em et.~al.}, {\it Review
830: of particle physics (see http://pdg.lbl.gov)}, {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf B592}
831: (2004) 1.
832: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B592,1;%%
833:
834: \bibitem{Michael:1966aa}
835: C.~Michael, {\it Shape of the N*(1236) resonance}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf 156}
836: (1967) 1677--1684.
837: %%CITATION = ;%%
838:
839: \bibitem{Michael:1989mf}
840: C.~Michael, {\it Particle decay in lattice gauge theory}, {\em Nucl. Phys.}
841: {\bf B327} (1989) 515.
842: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B327,515;%%
843:
844: \bibitem{Maiani:1990ca}
845: L.~Maiani and M.~Testa, {\it Final state interactions from euclidean
846: correlation functions}, {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf B245} (1990) 585--590.
847: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B245,585;%%
848:
849: \bibitem{Luscher:1986a}
850: M.~Luscher {\em Commun. Math. Phys.} {\bf 104} (1986) 177.
851:
852: \bibitem{Luscher:1986b}
853: M.~Luscher {\em Commun. Math. Phys.} {\bf 105} (1986) 153.
854:
855: \bibitem{Luscher:1990ux}
856: M.~Luscher, {\it Two particle states on a torus and their relation to the
857: scattering matrix}, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B354} (1991) 531--578.
858: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B354,531;%%
859:
860: \bibitem{Luscher:1991cf}
861: M.~Luscher, {\it Signatures of unstable particles in finite volume}, {\em
862: Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B364} (1991) 237--254.
863: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B364,237;%%
864:
865: \bibitem{Yamazaki:2004qb}
866: {\bf CP-PACS} Collaboration, T.~Yamazaki {\em et.~al.}, {\it I = 2 pi pi
867: scattering phase shift with two flavors of o(a) improved dynamical quarks},
868: {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D70} (2004) 074513
869: [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0402025}{{\tt hep-lat/0402025}}].
870: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0402025;%%
871:
872: \bibitem{Beane:2005rj}
873: {\bf NPLQCD} Collaboration, S.~R. Beane, P.~F. Bedaque, K.~Orginos and M.~J.
874: Savage, {\it I = 2 pi pi scattering from fully-dynamical mixed-action lattice
875: qcd}, \href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0506013}{{\tt hep-lat/0506013}}.
876: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0506013;%%
877:
878: \bibitem{Aoki:2005uf}
879: {\bf CP-PACS} Collaboration, S.~Aoki {\em et.~al.}, {\it I = 2 pion scattering
880: length from two-pion wave functions}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D71} (2005)
881: 094504 [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0503025}{{\tt hep-lat/0503025}}].
882: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0503025;%%
883:
884: \bibitem{McNeile:2000xx}
885: {\bf UKQCD} Collaboration, C.~McNeile and C.~Michael, {\it Mixing of scalar
886: glueballs and flavour-singlet scalar mesons}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D63}
887: (2001) 114503 [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0010019}{{\tt
888: hep-lat/0010019}}].
889: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0010019;%%
890:
891: \bibitem{Pennanen:2000yk}
892: {\bf UKQCD} Collaboration, P.~Pennanen and C.~Michael, {\it String breaking in
893: zero-temperature lattice QCD},
894: \href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0001015}{{\tt hep-lat/0001015}}.
895: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0001015;%%
896:
897: \bibitem{McNeile:2002fh}
898: {\bf UKQCD} Collaboration, C.~McNeile and C.~Michael, {\it Hadronic decay of a
899: vector meson from the lattice}, {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf B556} (2003) 177--184
900: [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0212020}{{\tt hep-lat/0212020}}].
901: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0212020;%%
902:
903: \bibitem{Rummukainen:1995vs}
904: K.~Rummukainen and S.~A. Gottlieb, {\it Resonance scattering phase shifts on a
905: nonrest frame lattice}, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B450} (1995) 397--436
906: [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/9503028}{{\tt hep-lat/9503028}}].
907: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9503028;%%
908:
909: \bibitem{McNeile:2002az}
910: {\bf UKQCD} Collaboration, C.~McNeile, C.~Michael and P.~Pennanen, {\it Hybrid
911: meson decay from the lattice}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D65} (2002) 094505
912: [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0201006}{{\tt hep-lat/0201006}}].
913: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0201006;%%
914:
915: \bibitem{Bernard:2003jd}
916: C.~Bernard {\em et.~al.}, {\it Lattice calculation of 1-+ hybrid mesons with
917: improved Kogut-Susskind fermions}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D68} (2003) 074505
918: [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0301024}{{\tt hep-lat/0301024}}].
919: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0301024;%%
920:
921: \bibitem{Cook:2005aa}
922: M.~Cook and R.~Feibig, {\it Hybrid exotic meson decay width}, {\em
923: PoS(LAT2005)062}.
924:
925: \bibitem{Michael:1991nc}
926: C.~Michael, {\it Hadronic forces from the lattice}, {\em Nucl. Phys. Proc.
927: Suppl.} {\bf 26} (1992) 417--419.
928: %%CITATION = NUPHZ,26,417;%%
929:
930: \bibitem{Bernard:2001tz}
931: C.~W. Bernard {\em et.~al.}, {\it Zero temperature string breaking in lattice
932: quantum chromodynamics}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D64} (2001) 074509
933: [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0103012}{{\tt hep-lat/0103012}}].
934: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0103012;%%
935:
936: \bibitem{Bali:2005fu}
937: {\bf SESAM} Collaboration, G.~S. Bali, H.~Neff, T.~Duessel, T.~Lippert and
938: K.~Schilling, {\it Observation of string breaking in QCD}, {\em Phys. Rev.}
939: {\bf D71} (2005) 114513 [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0505012}{{\tt
940: hep-lat/0505012}}].
941: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0505012;%%
942:
943: \bibitem{Sexton:1995kd}
944: J.~Sexton, A.~Vaccarino and D.~Weingarten, {\it Numerical evidence for the
945: observation of a scalar glueball}, {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 75} (1995)
946: 4563--4566 [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/9510022}{{\tt
947: hep-lat/9510022}}].
948: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9510022;%%
949:
950: \bibitem{Sexton:1996ed}
951: J.~Sexton, A.~Vaccarino and D.~Weingarten, {\it Coupling constants for scalar
952: glueball decay}, {\em Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl.} {\bf 47} (1996) 128--135
953: [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/9602022}{{\tt hep-lat/9602022}}].
954: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9602022;%%
955:
956: \bibitem{Lee:1999kv}
957: W.-J. Lee and D.~Weingarten, {\it Scalar quarkonium masses and mixing with the
958: lightest scalar glueball}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D61} (2000) 014015
959: [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/9910008}{{\tt hep-lat/9910008}}].
960: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9910008;%%
961:
962: \bibitem{cmcmjp}
963: C.~McNeile, C.~Michael and J.~Pickavance, {\it in preparation}, .
964:
965: \bibitem{Green:2003zz}
966: {\bf UKQCD} Collaboration, A.~M. Green, J.~Koponen, C.~McNeile, C.~Michael and
967: G.~Thompson, {\it Excited B mesons from the lattice}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf
968: D69} (2004) 094505 [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0312007}{{\tt
969: hep-lat/0312007}}].
970: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0312007;%%
971:
972: \bibitem{McNeile:2004rf}
973: {\bf UKQCD} Collaboration, C.~McNeile, C.~Michael and G.~Thompson, {\it
974: Hadronic decay of a scalar B meson from the lattice}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf
975: D70} (2004) 054501 [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0404010}{{\tt
976: hep-lat/0404010}}].
977: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0404010;%%
978:
979: \bibitem{Michael:1999nq}
980: {\bf UKQCD} Collaboration, C.~Michael and P.~Pennanen, {\it Two heavy-light
981: mesons on a lattice}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D60} (1999) 054012
982: [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/9901007}{{\tt hep-lat/9901007}}].
983: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 9901007;%%
984:
985: \bibitem{Dougall:2003hv}
986: {\bf UKQCD} Collaboration, A.~Dougall, R.~D. Kenway, C.~M. Maynard and
987: C.~McNeile, {\it The spectrum of $D_s$ mesons from lattice QCD}, {\em Phys.
988: Lett.} {\bf B569} (2003) 41--44
989: [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0307001}{{\tt hep-lat/0307001}}].
990: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0307001;%%
991:
992: \bibitem{Green:2004nm}
993: {\bf UKQCD} Collaboration, A.~M. Green, J.~Koponen and C.~Michael, {\it P-wave
994: radial distributions of a heavy-light meson on a lattice}, {\em AIP Conf.
995: Proc.} {\bf 756} (2005) 369--371
996: [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0412002}{{\tt hep-lat/0412002}}].
997: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0412002;%%
998:
999: \bibitem{Koponen:2005aa}
1000: J.~Koponen, {\it $B_s$ meson excited states from the lattice}, {\em
1001: PoS(LAT2005)205}.
1002:
1003: \bibitem{Bernard:2001av}
1004: C.~W. Bernard {\em et.~al.}, {\it The QCD spectrum with three quark flavors},
1005: {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D64} (2001) 054506
1006: [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0104002}{{\tt hep-lat/0104002}}].
1007: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0104002;%%
1008:
1009: \bibitem{baryonium}
1010: T.~Walcher, {\it Experiments at the low-energy antiproton ring(LEAR)}, {\em
1011: Ann. Rev. Nucl. Sci.} {\bf 38} (1988) 67--95.
1012:
1013: \bibitem{jlab}
1014: {\it News release 28 april 2005}, {\em JLAB}.
1015:
1016: \bibitem{Abe:2005gy}
1017: {\bf Belle} Collaboration, K.~Abe {\em et.~al.}, {\it Search for the
1018: theta(1540)+ pentaquark using kaon secondary interactions at BELLE},
1019: \href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0507014}{{\tt hep-ex/0507014}}.
1020: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0507014;%%
1021:
1022: \bibitem{Sasaki:2004vz}
1023: S.~Sasaki, {\it Pentaquarks: Status and perspectives for lattice calculations},
1024: {\em Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl.} {\bf 140} (2005) 127--133
1025: [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0410016}{{\tt hep-lat/0410016}}].
1026: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0410016;%%
1027:
1028: \bibitem{Mathur:2004jr}
1029: N.~Mathur {\em et.~al.}, {\it A study of pentaquarks on the lattice with
1030: overlap fermions}, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D70} (2004) 074508
1031: [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0406196}{{\tt hep-ph/0406196}}].
1032: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0406196;%%
1033:
1034: \bibitem{Csikor:2003ng}
1035: F.~Csikor, Z.~Fodor, S.~D. Katz and T.~G. Kovacs, {\it Pentaquark hadrons from
1036: lattice QCD}, {\em JHEP} {\bf 11} (2003) 070
1037: [\href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0309090}{{\tt hep-lat/0309090}}].
1038: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0309090;%%
1039:
1040: \bibitem{Csikor:2005xb}
1041: F.~Csikor, Z.~Fodor, S.~D. Katz, T.~G. Kovacs and B.~C. Toth, {\it A
1042: comprehensive search for the theta+ pentaquark on the lattice},
1043: \href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0503012}{{\tt hep-lat/0503012}}.
1044: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0503012;%%
1045:
1046: \bibitem{Alexandrou:2005gc}
1047: C.~Alexandrou and A.~Tsapalis, {\it A lattice study of the pentaquark state},
1048: \href{http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-lat/0503013}{{\tt hep-lat/0503013}}.
1049: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0503013;%%
1050:
1051: \end{thebibliography}\endgroup
1052:
1053:
1054: \end{document}
1055:
1056:
1057:
1058:
1059:
1060:
1061: