1: \documentclass[prd,nofootinbib,aps,superscriptaddress,tightenlines,floats,floatfix]{revtex4}

2: %\documentclass[

3: %nofootinbib,

4: %prd,aps,tightenlines]{revtex4}

5: %\usepackage{graphicx}

6: %\usepackage{bm}

7: %\usepackage{amssymb}

8: \usepackage[]{youngtab}

9: \usepackage{epsfig}

10: %\usepackage{pstricks}

11: %\usepackage{showlabels}

12: 

13: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

14: %Put your definitions here

15: 

16: \def\nn{ \nonumber \\ }

17: \def\ket#1{ \left| #1 \right\rangle }

18: \def\vev#1{ \left\langle #1 \right\rangle }

19: \def\bra#1{ \left\langle #1 \right| }

20: \def\abs#1{ \left| #1 \right| }

21: \def\tr{ \text{Tr}\, }

22: 

23: 

24: \begin{document}

25: 

26: \title{Negative parity pentaquarks in large $N_c$ QCD and quark model}

27: 

28: \author{Dan Pirjol}

29: \affiliation{Center for Theoretical Physics, Massachusetts Institute of

30: Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139\vspace{4pt} }

31: 

32: 

33: \author{Carlos Schat}

34: \affiliation{CONICET and Department of Physics, Comisi\'on

35: Nacional de Energ\'{\i}a At\'omica, Avenida Libertador 8250,

36: (1429) Buenos Aires, Argentina\vspace{4pt} }

37: 

38: 

39: 

40: 

41: \date{\today}

42: \begin{abstract}

43: Recently, the $1/N_c$ expansion has been applied to the study of

44: exotic baryons containing both quarks and antiquarks. We extend

45: this approach to exotic states with mixed symmetric spin-flavor

46: symmetry, which correspond in the quark model to negative parity

47: pentaquarks, and discuss the large $N_c$ predictions for their

48: mass spectrum. The heavy exotics $\bar Q q^4$ transform as

49: $\mathbf{3}, \mathbf{\overline{6}},\mathbf{15}$ and $\mathbf{15'}$

50: under SU(3), while the light states $\bar q q^4$ include the

51: exotic  multiplets $\mathbf{\overline{10}},\mathbf{27,35}$. We

52: give mass relations among these multiplets in the $1/N_c$

53: expansion. In the quark model, the mass splittings between these

54: states are given by color-spin interactions. Using the observation

55: of an anticharmed exotic by the H1 collaboration, we give

56: predictions for the masses of other expected heavy pentaquarks.

57: \end{abstract}

58: 

59: 

60: 

61: \maketitle

62: 

63: 

64: 

65: %\tableofcontents

66: 

67: \section{Introduction}

68: 

69: The $1/N_c$ expansion of QCD~\cite{'tHooft:1973jz,witten}

70: constrains the spin-flavor properties of baryons and their

71: couplings to mesons. In the $N_c \to \infty$ limit,  baryons have

72: an exact contracted spin-flavor symmetry

73: $SU(2F)_c$~\cite{Largenspinflavor,DJM}, which can be used to

74: classify states and organize the operator expansion in $1/N_c$.

75: This spin-flavor symmetry is broken at subleading orders in

76: $1/N_c$. The $1/N_c$ expansion has been applied to the

77: ground-state $[\mathbf{56},0^+]$ baryons

78: \cite{DJM,largenrefs,largen,heavybaryons}, and to their orbital

79: and radial

80: excitations~\cite{PY1,PY2,seventyminusrefs,Goity,SU3,radial,Cohen:2003jk,PiSc}.

81: 

82: Recently, this analysis was extended in Ref.~\cite{JM1,JM3,CoLe} to a new class of

83: exotic states, some of which are identified for $N_c=3$ with the pentaquark

84: states $q^4\bar q$ (the large $N_c$ expansion has been applied in \cite{hybrids}

85: to another class of exotic hadrons, the so-called `hybrid' states).

86: More generally, these states are labelled by their exoticness $E$, which

87: has a very simple interpretation in the quark model, wherein such an exotic

88: state contains $N_c+E$ quarks and $E$ antiquarks. Assuming a symmetric spin-flavor

89: wave function, the $E=1$ sector contains

90: the exotic representations $\mathbf{\overline{10}}, \mathbf{27}$

91: and $\mathbf{35}$ with positive parity.

92: The mass spectrum, axial couplings and strong widths of these states were

93: investigated in the $1/N_c$ expansion in~\cite{JM3}. They were alternatively

94: studied using the chiral soliton model \cite{Glozman,DPP,IKOR}, the diquark

95: model \cite{JW,KaLi,nuss}, the uncorrelated quark model

96: \cite{uncorr,Carlson:2003wc} and lattice QCD \cite{Thetaclat}.

97: 

98: Experimentally, several exotic candidates exist. They include the isosinglet

99: $\Theta^+(1540)$~\cite{Thetadiscovery} and two cascades with

100: $I=3/2$ $\Xi^{--}_{3/2}(1860)$ and

101: $I=1/2$ $\Xi^-(1855)$~\cite{xiexotics}. The  $\Theta^+(1540)$ is usually

102: assigned to the $\mathbf{\overline{10}}$ representation of SU(3).

103: Recently the H1 Collaboration

104: reported evidence for a narrow charmed state with a mass of about

105: 3099 MeV \cite{H1}. The parity of these states is still undetermined, and

106: several methods have been proposed for their determination \cite{parity}.

107: However, later searches \cite{nocharm} could not confirm the H1 signal,

108: which leaves the existence of these states as an open issue for further experimental

109: work.

110: 

111: 

112: In this paper we extend the results of Ref.~\cite{JM3} by constructing a new

113: class of exotic states which correspond to different irreducible representations

114: of the contracted $SU(6)_c$ spin-flavor symmetry. The $E=1$ sector of these

115: new states contains the same exotic representations

116: $\mathbf{\overline{10}}, \mathbf{27}$ and $\mathbf{35}$, but with negative parity.

117: If the antiquark is heavy, the SU(3) representations are $\mathbf{3}$,

118: $\mathbf{\overline{6}}, \mathbf{15}$ and $\mathbf{15'}$.

119: We discuss the large $N_c$ predictions for the masses of these states.

120: 

121: The existence of these new states offers an alternative

122: interpretation of the observed pentaquark candidates, which can be

123: identified with the negative parity states. Although a negative

124: parity $\Theta^+(1540)$ would decay to $NK$ in an S-wave, which

125: would make the narrow width of this state difficult to explain,

126: such an interpretation can not be ruled out \cite{parity}. Another

127: attractive application of our results is to pentaquarks with a

128: heavy antiquark, for which negative parity states appear in a

129: natural way \cite{StWi}.

130: 

131: 

132: The paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II we construct the

133: negative parity exotic states for arbitrary $N_c$ and discuss the

134: qualitative predictions of the large $N_c$ limit following from

135: the $SU(4)_c$ contracted symmetry. In Sec. III the $1/N_c$

136: expansion is put on a quantitative basis, by deriving mass

137: operators for these states to subleading order in $1/N_c$ (for

138: heavy exotics) and to leading order in $1/N_c$ (for light

139: exotics). This is used to derive model-independent mass relations

140: among these states. In Sec. IV we present quantitative predictions

141: for the masses of the heavy states using the quark model with

142: spin-color interactions.  Finally, Sec.V discusses the

143: phenomenology of this model for the charmed pentaquarks with

144: negative parity, and presents predictions for other exotic states.

145: 

146: 

147: 

148: 

149: 

150: 

151: 

152: \section{Exotic states in the large $N_c$ limit}

153: 

154: We describe in this section the construction of the exotic states in the

155: large $N_c$ limit using the language of the constituent quark model.

156: The quark model is used simply as a bookkeeping device in order to enumerate

157: the states, and we do not make use of its usual dynamical assumptions.

158: Certain qualitative predictions of the large $N_c$ limit can be

159: obtained by counting the irreducible representations (towers) of the

160: contracted spin-isospin symmetry $SU(4)_c$ containing the states generated

161: from the

162: quark model construction. Such a tower is labelled by $K=0,1/2,1,\dots$ and

163: contains all states with spin and isospin satisfying $|I-J| \leq K \leq I+J$.

164: A more quantitative method for extracting the predictions

165: of the $1/N_c$ expansion is presented in the next section, in terms of quark

166: operators.

167: We stress that the existence of these states in the large $N_c$ limit is an

168: open question. However, assuming their existence, these methods give predictions

169: for their mass spectrum and couplings.

170: 

171: 

172: Baryons of exoticness $E$ contain $N_c+E$ quarks, and $E$ antiquarks. The wave

173: function of the $N_c+E$ ($E$) quarks (antiquarks) must be completely

174: antisymmetric. Consider for simplicity the case $E=1$. The color wave function of

175: the $N_c+1$ quarks must transform in a representation of

176: $SU(N_c)$ with two columns containing $N_c$ boxes and one box respectively,

177: since this is the only possibility which can give a color singlet after combining

178: it with the antiquark $\overline{\yng(1)}$. This implies that the

179: spin-flavor-orbital wavefunction of the $N_c+1$ quarks must transform

180: in the mixed symmetry representation of $SU(6)_q\times O(3)$. This constrains the

181: spin-flavor and orbital wave functions, which can transform in several ways,

182: corresponding to different representations of $SU(6)_q\times O(3)$

183: 

184: \begin{eqnarray}\label{spflorb}

185: \raisebox{-0.4cm}{\yng(5,1)}\quad  \to & &

186: \left[ \quad  \yng(6)\quad \otimes\quad

187: \raisebox{-0.4cm}{\yng(5,1)} \quad \right]\\

188: & & \oplus

189: \left[\quad  \raisebox{-0.4cm}{\yng(5,1)}

190: \quad \otimes\quad \yng(6)\quad \right] \quad

191: \oplus \quad \cdots\,.\nonumber

192: \end{eqnarray}

193: 

194: The first term corresponds to a completely symmetric SU(6)$_q$ spin-flavor wave function,

195: and describes the exotic baryons constructed in \cite{JM3}. Similar states are obtained in

196: the Skyrme model. The orbital wave function of these states must have one quark in an

197: excited state, with  the lowest states corresponding to a $p$-wave orbital excitation

198: $\ell=1$.  This means that the

199: system of $N_c+1$ quarks has negative parity, which yields positive parity exotics

200: after adding in the antiquark.

201: 

202: In this paper we focus on the states corresponding to the second term in

203: Eq.~(\ref{spflorb}). They have a completely symmetric orbital wave function,

204: with all $N_c+1$ quarks in an $s$-wave orbital. Note that there is only one

205: term in the sum on the right-hand side with this property. The absence of

206: orbital excitations in the orbital wave function means that these states are

207: expected to lie below\footnote{This is only true in the constituent quark model;

208: these states have no analogs in the

209: Skyrme model.} those obtained from the first term in Eq.~(\ref{spflorb}).

210: The orbital wave function of the $N_c+1$ quarks has positive parity, such that after

211: adding the antiquark, they correspond to negative parity exotics.

212: Such states were constructed in the uncorrelated quark model \cite{uncorr}

213: with light quarks (for reviews see \cite{review}), and in the diquark model

214: with one heavy antiquark \cite{StWi}.

215: 

216: 

217: We start by first reviewing the spin-flavor structure of the exotic states

218: constructed in \cite{JM3} which correspond to the first term in

219: Eq.~(\ref{spflorb}). This can be obtained from the $SU(6) \supset

220: SU(2)_{\rm spin} \times SU(3)_{\rm flavor}$ decomposition of the

221: completely symmetric state of the $q^{N_c+E}$ system.

222: In the $E=1$ sector this is given by

223: \begin{eqnarray}\label{SYM}

224: \yng(3)\cdots \yng(2) \quad \to & & [(J_q = 0) \otimes (0,\frac{N_c+1}{2}) ]

225: \oplus  [(J_q = 1) \otimes (2,\frac{N_c-1}{2})] \oplus

226: [(J_q = 2) \otimes (4,\frac{N_c-3}{2})] \oplus \cdots\\

227: \to & & [(J_q = 0) \otimes \mathbf{\overline{6}}]

228: \oplus [(J_q = 1) \otimes \mathbf{15}]

229: \oplus [(J_q = 2) \otimes \mathbf{15'}] \nonumber

230: \end{eqnarray}

231: with the last line corresponding to $N_c=3$. We denote the SU(3) representations

232: as usual by $(\lambda,\mu)$, with $\lambda$ the number of columns containing one

233: box, and $\mu$ the number of columns containing two boxes.

234: We show in  Fig.~1 the weight diagrams

235: of the SU(3) representations appearing in this decomposition.

236: Adding the antiquark and the orbital angular momentum

237: $L=1$ and keeping only representations

238: which can not annihilate into $\mathbf{8,10}$ gives the following

239: exotic states with $E=1$:

240: \begin{eqnarray}\label{exSYM}

241: \mathbf{\overline{10}}_{\frac12,\frac32}(\mathbf{\overline{6}_0})\,,\qquad

242: \mathbf{27}_{\frac12,\frac32,\frac12,\frac32,\frac52}(\mathbf{15}_1)\,,\qquad

243: \mathbf{35}_{\frac32,\frac52,\frac12,\frac32,\frac52,\frac72}(\mathbf{15}'_2)\,.

244: \end{eqnarray}

245: We show in brackets the spin-flavor quantum numbers of the $q^4$ system.

246: In the large $N_c$ limit, these states form two towers of degenerate

247: exotic baryons. This can be most easily seen by considering the states at the top

248: of the weight diagrams with quark content $\bar s q^{N_c+1}$.

249: Their spin is given by $\mathbf{J} = \mathbf{J}_q +

250: \mathbf{J}_{\bar q} + \mathbf{L} = \mathbf{I} + \mathbf{K}$ where

251: $\mathbf{K} = \mathbf{J}_{\bar q} + \mathbf{L} = 1/2, 3/2$.

252: This gives two towers with $K=1/2,3/2$, containing the $\bar s q^{N_c+1}$

253: members of the SU(3) representations

254: 

255: 

256: \begin{eqnarray}\label{towersS}

257: \begin{array}{c}

258: K=1/2 :\\

259: K=3/2 :\\

260: \end{array} & &

261: \begin{array}{c}

262: \mathbf{\overline{10}}_{\frac12}\,,\\

263:   \\

264: \end{array}

265: \begin{array}{c}

266:  \\

267: \mathbf{\overline{10}}_{\frac32}\,, \\

268: \end{array}\,\,

269: \begin{array}{c}

270: \mathbf{27}_{\frac12} \\

271: \mathbf{27}_{\frac12} \\

272: \end{array}

273: \,\,\,\,

274: \begin{array}{c}

275: \mathbf{27}_{\frac32}  \\

276: \mathbf{27}_{\frac32}  \\

277: \end{array}

278: \quad

279: \begin{array}{c}

280:  \\

281: \mathbf{27}_{\frac52} \\

282: \end{array}

283: \quad

284: \begin{array}{c}

285:  \\

286:  \mathbf{35}_\frac12 \\

287: \end{array}

288: \,\,\,

289: \begin{array}{c}

290:  \mathbf{35}_\frac32 \\

291:  \mathbf{35}_\frac32 \\

292: \end{array}

293: \quad

294: \begin{array}{c}

295:  \mathbf{35}_\frac52 \\

296:  \mathbf{35}_\frac52 \\

297: \end{array}

298: \,\,\,

299: \begin{array}{c}

300:   \\

301:  \mathbf{35}_\frac72 \\

302: \end{array}

303: \,,\cdots\\

304: \nonumber

305: (I,J) :& &(0,\frac12)\,, (0,\frac32)\,, (1,\frac12)\,,

306:  (1,\frac32)\,, (1,\frac52)\,, (2,\frac12)\,, (2,\frac32)\,,

307: (2,\frac52)\,, (2,\frac72)\,, \cdots

308: \end{eqnarray}

309: The multiplets contained in each tower are degenerate in the large $N_c$

310: limit. The first tower (with $K=1/2$) was

311: constructed in \cite{JM3} and contains all states degenerate with the

312: $\Theta^+(1540)$ (assumed to be in the spin 1/2 antidecuplet).

313: 

314: 

315: If the antiquark is heavy $\bar Q$, its spin decouples from the rest of the

316: hadron, and the spin of the light degrees of freedom $s_\ell$ becomes a good

317: quantum number. For each value

318: of $s_\ell \neq 0$ there is one heavy quark spin doublet with hadron spins

319: $J = s_\ell \pm 1/2$ (for $s_\ell \neq 0$), split by $1/m_Q$ effects.

320: The states considered here $\bar Q q^4$ have the spin of light degrees of freedom

321: $\mathbf{s}_\ell =

322: \mathbf{J}_q + \mathbf{L} = \mathbf{I} +\mathbf{K}$ with $K=1$.

323: This corresponds to a $K=1$ large $N_c$ tower, containing the SU(3)

324: representations

325: \begin{eqnarray}

326: K=1 & &:\mathbf{\overline{6}}_{1}\,,

327: \mathbf{15}_{0,1,2}\,, \mathbf{15'}_{1,2,3},

328: \end{eqnarray}

329: where the subscript denotes the spin of the light degrees of freedom

330: $s_\ell$ of the respective multiplet. This is different from the

331: heavy states considered in Ref.~\cite{JM3}, which were chosen to

332: belong to a $K=0$ tower.

333: %The nonstrange states in these multiplets consist of an isosinglet with

334: %$s_\ell = 0$ (belonging to the $\mathbf{\overline{6}}_{0}$), an isotriplet

335: %with $s_\ell = 1$ (belonging to the $\mathbf{15}_{1}$) and an isotensor

336: %with $s_\ell = 2$ (belonging to the $\mathbf{15'}_{2}$).

337: 

338: 

339: We discuss next the spin-flavor structure of the states in the

340: mixed symmetric SU(6)$_q$ representation, corresponding to the second term

341: in Eq.~(\ref{spflorb}). The spin-flavor structure for this case

342: is considerably richer, and is very similar to that of the $L=1$ orbitally

343: excited baryons. The decomposition of the SU(6) spin-flavor wave function

344: into representations of $SU(2)_{\rm spin} \times SU(3)_{\rm flavor}$ can be

345: obtained e.g. by using the method presented in \cite{PY1}.

346: In the $E=1$ sector this decomposition contains the representations

347: (we assume here that $N_c$ is odd)

348: \begin{eqnarray}\label{MSspinflavor}

349: \raisebox{-0.4cm}{\yng(3,1)}\,

350: \cdots\, \yng(2)\quad  \to & & (J_q = 0) \otimes [(1,\frac{N_c-3}{2}) \oplus (2,\frac{N_c-1}{2})]\\

351: &+& (J_q = 1) \otimes [(0,\frac{N_c+1}{2}) \oplus (1,\frac{N_c-3}{2}) \oplus

352: (2,\frac{N_c-1}{2}) \oplus (3,\frac{N_c-5}{2}) \oplus (4,\frac{N_c-3}{2}) ]\nonumber\\

353: &+& (J_q = 2) \otimes [(2,\frac{N_c-1}{2}) \oplus (3,\frac{N_c-5}{2}) \oplus

354: %(4,\frac{N_c-3}{2}) \oplus

355: (5,\frac{N_c-7}{2}) \oplus (6,\frac{N_c-5}{2}) ]\nonumber\\

356: &+& \cdots \nonumber

357: \end{eqnarray}

358: where the Young diagram on the left-hand side has $N_c+1$ boxes.

359: The ellipses correspond to unphysical representations for $N_c=3$.

360: Taking $N_c=3$ and keeping only the physical representations on the right-hand

361: side gives the possible states for the $q^4$ system

362: \begin{eqnarray}\label{q4}

363: \raisebox{-0.4cm}{\yng(3,1)}\quad  \to & & (J_q = 0) \otimes [ \mathbf{3} \oplus \mathbf{15}]

364: + (J_q = 1) \otimes [\mathbf{\overline{6}} \oplus \mathbf{3} \oplus

365: \mathbf{15}' \oplus \mathbf{15} ]

366: + (J_q = 2) \otimes [ \mathbf{15}  ]

367: \end{eqnarray}

368: The weight diagrams of these representations are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig2}.

369: The spin-flavor structure of these states is richer than that of the symmetric

370: spin-flavor states in Eq.~(\ref{SYM}).

371: 

372: 

373: In the diquark model \cite{JW}, the $q^4$ system is built from two $[qq]$

374: diquarks. Each of the diquarks transforms as $\mathbf{\overline{3}}$ under color,

375: and can be either `good' ($\mathbf{\overline{3}}_{S=0}$) or `bad' ($\mathbf{6}_{S=1}$)

376: according to their transformation under SU(3)$\times $SU(2) flavor-spin.

377: Because of their Bose statistics, the spin and flavor quantum numbers of systems

378: containing two identical diquarks are constrained in a specific way. However,

379: all states in Eq.~(\ref{q4}) are reproduced in the diquark model as well,

380: with diquark content as shown below

381: \begin{eqnarray}\label{2quark}

382: \mbox{good-good}: & & (J_q = 0) \otimes  \mathbf{3}\\

383: \mbox{good-bad}: & & (J_q = 1) \otimes  [\mathbf{3} \oplus \mathbf{15} ]\\

384: \mbox{bad-bad}: & & (J_q = 0) \otimes  \mathbf{15}\,, \quad

385: (J_q = 1) \otimes  [\mathbf{\overline{6}} \oplus \mathbf{15'} ]\,, \quad

386: (J_q = 2) \otimes \mathbf{15} \,.

387: \end{eqnarray}

388: 

389: We consider first the negative parity light pentaquarks, with

390: quark content $\bar q q^4$. These states were first constructed by

391: Strottman in Ref.~\cite{Strottman}, where their mass spectrum was

392: studied using a quark model with spin-color interactions following

393: the approach in Ref.~\cite{RLJ}. Recent work has been mainly

394: focused on the antidecuplet $\mathbf{\overline{10}}$ states, which

395: include the $\Theta(1540)$ pentaquark state \cite{CQM} (see

396: Ref.~\cite{review} for a recent review of the literature).

397: 

398: We review the construction of the complete set of states in the next section,

399: and restrict ourselves here to the exotic representations obtained from this

400: construction. Keeping only the states which can not

401: annihilate into ordinary $L=1$ negative parity states ($\mathbf{1,8,10}$) one finds the following

402: $E=1$ exotic states with negative parity

403: \begin{eqnarray}\label{E1}

404: \mathbf{\overline{10}}_{\frac12,\frac32}(\mathbf{\overline{6}}_1)\,,\qquad

405: \{ \mathbf{27}_{\frac12}(\mathbf{15}_0)\,, \mathbf{27}_{\frac12}(\mathbf{15}_1) \}\,,\qquad

406: \{ \mathbf{27}_{\frac32}(\mathbf{15}_1)\,, \mathbf{27}_{\frac32}(\mathbf{15}_2) \}\,,\qquad

407: \mathbf{27}_{\frac52}(\mathbf{15}_2)\,,\quad \mathbf{35}_{\frac12,\frac32}(\mathbf{15}'_1)\,.

408: \end{eqnarray}

409: Somewhat surprisingly, there are fewer light exotic states with negative parity

410: than with positive parity (compare with Eq.~(\ref{exSYM})). The reason for this is that, although

411: the $q^4$ system  has more states, most of them produce nonexotic states

412: ($\mathbf{1,8,10}$) after adding in the light antiquark.

413: 

414: In the combined large $N_c$ and SU(3) limit, these states form again two towers of

415: degenerate exotic baryons.  This can be seen by examining the exotics with

416: strangeness $+1$ (quark content $\bar s q^{N_c+1}$)

417: which contain the following states (denoted by the SU(3) multiplets to which

418: they belong)

419: \begin{eqnarray}\label{towersMS}

420: \begin{array}{c}

421: K=1/2 :\\

422: K=3/2 :\\

423: \end{array} & &

424: \begin{array}{c}

425: \mathbf{\overline{10}}_{\frac12}\,\,\\

426:   \\

427: \end{array}

428: \begin{array}{c}

429:  \\

430: \mathbf{\overline{10}}_{\frac32}\,\, \\

431: \end{array}\,\,

432: \begin{array}{c}

433: \mathbf{27}_{\frac12} \\

434: \mathbf{27}_{\frac12} \\

435: \end{array}

436: \,\,\,\,

437: \begin{array}{c}

438: \mathbf{27}_{\frac32}  \\

439: \mathbf{27}_{\frac32}  \\

440: \end{array}

441: \quad

442: \begin{array}{c}

443:  \\

444: \mathbf{27}_{\frac52} \\

445: \end{array}

446: \quad

447: \begin{array}{c}

448:  \\

449:  \mathbf{35}_\frac12 \\

450: \end{array}

451: \,\,\,

452: \begin{array}{c}

453:  \star \\

454:  \mathbf{35}_\frac32 \\

455: \end{array}

456: \quad

457: \begin{array}{c}

458:  \star \\

459:  \star \\

460: \end{array}

461: \qquad

462: \begin{array}{c}

463:   \\

464:  \star \\

465: \end{array}

466: \,,\cdots\\

467: \nonumber

468: (I,J) :& &(0,\frac12)\,, (0,\frac32)\,, (1,\frac12)\,,

469:  (1,\frac32)\,, (1,\frac52)\,, (2,\frac12)\,, (2,\frac32)\,,

470: (2,\frac52)\,, (2,\frac72)\,, \cdots

471: \end{eqnarray}

472: This argument appears to indicate that the light pentaquarks with

473: negative parity form two sets of degenerate states in the large

474: $N_c$ limit, corresponding to the two irreducible representations

475: of $SU(4)_c$ with $K=1/2,3/2$. In the next section we will show

476: using the quark operator method, that there is an accidental

477: degeneracy between these two irreps, which is broken only by

478: $O(1/N_c)$ effects. This mass pattern is again different from that

479: obtained for the spin-flavor symmetric states in Ref.~\cite{JM3}

480: (see Eq.~(\ref{towersS})), for which the two towers are split by a

481: $O(1)$ mass difference.

482: 

483: \begin{figure}[hhh]

484:  \begin{center}

485:  \mbox{\epsfig{file=irreps.eps,width=15cm}}\\[0.4cm]

486: $\mathbf{3}={\yng(1)}$ \hspace{2cm} $\mathbf{15}=\raisebox{-0.4cm}{\yng(3,1)}$

487: \hspace{2cm} $\mathbf{\overline{6}}=\raisebox{-0.4cm}{\yng(2,2)}$ \hspace{2cm}

488: $\mathbf{15'}={\yng(4)}$

489:  \end{center}

490:  \caption{

491: Weight diagrams for heavy pentaquarks with quark content $\bar Q q^4$.}

492: \label{fig2}

493: \end{figure}

494: In addition, there is another difference at $N_c=3$ coming from the fact that

495: in the real world the tower structure is not complete in the $I=2$ sector.

496: More precisely, four of the $I=2$ states (belonging to a $\mathbf{35}$)

497: expected to exist for $N_c\geq 5$ do not exist in the physical

498: world with $N_c=3$. The missing states are shown above as stars.

499: 

500: This situation is somewhat analogous to that

501: of the negative parity $\Delta_{1/2,3/2}$ states in the $\mathbf{70}$ of

502: SU(6). These states can not be unambiguously assigned to a $SU(4)_c$ tower for the

503: physical $N_c=3$ case \cite{PY2,PiSc}. Therefore, assuming that the $\Theta^+(1540)$

504: belongs to a negative parity $\mathbf{\overline{10}}_\frac12$ multiplet,

505: large $N_c$ QCD predicts only the existence of two $\mathbf{27}$ multiplets

506: degenerate with it, but not of $\mathbf{35}$ as in the positive parity case (see

507: Eq.~(\ref{towersS})).

508: This prediction might be difficult to test, since all these states can decay to $KN$

509: in $S-$wave and the $\mathbf{35}$ states will likely be too broad to resolve from the

510: continuum.

511: 

512: The negative parity exotics with one heavy antiquark $\bar Q q^{N_c+1}$ have a simpler

513: spin-flavor structure, which can be read off directly from that of the

514: $q^{N_c+1}$ system in Eq.~(\ref{q4}). They contain heavy quark spin doublets

515: with the spin of the light degrees of freedom $s_\ell = J_q$ and total

516: hadron spin $\mathbf{J}=\mathbf{s}_\ell \pm 1/2$. In the nonstrange

517: sector, the resulting states form one $K=1$ large $N_c$ tower containing

518: the following degenerate states:

519: an isosinglet with $s_\ell = 1$ (belonging to a $ \mathbf{\overline{6}}$),

520: three isovectors with $s_\ell = 0,1,2$ (belonging to a $ \mathbf{15}$)

521: and one isotensor with $s_\ell = 1$ (belonging to a $ \mathbf{15'}$)

522: \begin{eqnarray}\label{K1}

523: K=1& &: \mathbf{\overline{6}}_{J_q=1}\,,

524: \mathbf{15}_{J_q =0,1,2}\,, \mathbf{15'}_{J_q = 1}\,.

525: \end{eqnarray}

526: The states in the triplet $\mathbf{3}_{J_q=0,1}$ contain at least one

527: strange quark, and do not appear in this tower.

528: 

529: The heavy pentaquarks containing one strange quark $\bar Q s q^{N_c}$ contain

530: three towers of states: two towers with $K=1/2$ and one tower with $K=3/2$, as shown

531: below

532: \begin{eqnarray}\label{K1/2}

533: \begin{array}{c}

534: K=1/2 :\\

535: K'=1/2 :\\

536: K=3/2 :\\

537: \end{array} & &

538: \left(

539: \begin{array}{c}

540: \mathbf{3}_{0}  \\

541: \mathbf{15}_{0} \\

542:  \\

543: \end{array}

544: \right)\,

545:  \left(

546: \begin{array}{c}

547: \mathbf{3}_{1}\\

548: \mathbf{15}_{1} \\

549: \mathbf{\overline{6}}_{1} \\

550: \end{array}

551: \right)

552: \begin{array}{c}

553:  \\

554:  \\

555: \mathbf{15}_{2} \,  \\

556: \end{array}

557: \begin{array}{c}

558:  \\

559:  \\

560: \mathbf{15}_{0}  \\

561: \end{array}

562: \left(

563: \begin{array}{c}

564: \star \\

565: \mathbf{15}_{1} \\

566: \mathbf{15'}_{1} \\

567: \end{array}

568: \right)

569: \left(

570: \begin{array}{c}

571:  \star \\

572:  \star \\

573: \mathbf{15}_{2}  \\

574: \end{array}

575: \right)\,,\cdots\\

576: \nonumber (I,J_q) :& & \ \ \, (\frac12, 0)\,\,\,\,\, \ \ \

577: (\frac12, 1)\,\,\,\, (\frac12, 2)\,\,

578:  (\frac32, 0)\,\,\,\, (\frac32, 1)\,\,\,\,\, \ \ \, (\frac32, 2)\,, \cdots

579: \end{eqnarray}

580: To explain this equation, consider first the SU(3) symmetry limit.

581: Then the states along a horizontal line belong to the large $N_c$ K

582: towers shown and are therefore degenerate in the large $N_c$ limit.

583: When SU(3) is broken, the physical states are mixtures of the

584: SU(3) representations in each bracket. However, the eigenvalues

585: still belong to three large $N_c$ towers.

586: Some of these states are unphysical for $N_c=3$ and are absent

587: (represented by a star).

588: 

589: Inspection of Eq.~(\ref{K1/2}) gives the following general results:

590: \begin{itemize}

591: 

592: \item In the unbroken SU(3) limit, the two towers $K'=1/2$ and $K=3/2$ become

593: degenerate, since they both contain states in the $\mathbf{15}_{0}$.

594: This argument does not constrain the mass of the $K=1/2$ tower, which does not

595: contain any states in common SU(3) multiplets with the other two towers.

596: In particular, this means that in the large $N_c$ limit the

597: $\mathbf{3}$ states can have a mass different from that of the

598: other SU(3) representations in Fig.~1.

599: 

600: \item The two isospin multiplets with $(I,J_q)=(1/2,2)$ and $(3/2,0)$

601: (the $S=-1$ members of the $\mathbf{15}_{J_q=0}$ and $\mathbf{15}_{J_q=2}$)

602: are split only at $O(1/N_c)$ to all orders in SU(3) breaking.

603: 

604: \item The tower content constrains the pattern of SU(3) breaking in a very

605: specific way. For example, the three $(I,J_q)=(\frac12,1)$ states mix as an

606: effect of SU(3) breaking. However, the eigenvalues of the mass matrix are

607: constrained to coincide in the large $N_c$ limit with the masses of the

608: corresponding tower states.

609: 

610: \end{itemize}

611: 

612: To summarize this discussion, we showed that in the large $N_c$ limit the

613: heavy pentaquarks with negative parity fall into two groups of degenerate

614: states. The first group includes the five SU(3) multiplets containing the nonstrange

615: states ($\mathbf{\overline{6}_1,15_{0,1,2},15'_1}$), and the second group

616: contains the two $\mathbf{3}_{0,1}$ multiplets. This is different from the prediction of the

617: quark model with SU(6) symmetry, according to which all these states are

618: degenerate into a $\mathbf{210}$ of SU(6). The reason for this difference is

619: that in large $N_c$ QCD SU(6) is broken down to SU(6)$_c$ already at leading

620: order. The multiplets of SU(6) break down into irreducible representations of

621: the contracted symmetry (towers), which may or may not be degenerate at leading

622: order in $1/N_c$.

623: 

624: Although this phenomenon does not occur for ground state baryons,

625: where SU(6) spin-flavor symmetry is manifest in the mass spectrum in the

626: large $N_c$ limit,

627: a similar situation is encountered for the orbitally excited

628: $L=1$ baryons. For this case the $\mathbf{70}$ of SU(6) breaks

629: down in the large $N_c$ limit into three towers of nonstrange states plus

630: two additional towers containing the $\Lambda_{1/2,3/2}$ states

631: \cite{Goity,SU3,PY1,PY2,PiSc,Cohen:2003jk}.

632: 

633: In the next section we will formulate the large $N_c$ predictions in a more

634: quantitative way by writing down the mass operator of the negative parity states.

635: 

636: 

637: \section{Mass relations from the $1/N_c$ expansion}

638: 

639: 

640: The properties of exotics with mixed symmetry spin-flavor wave

641: functions can be studied quantitatively in the $1/N_c$ expansion

642: using the quark operators method \cite{DJM,largen}. The

643: spin-flavor algebra is realized in terms of operators acting on

644: the $ SU(2f) $  quark $\yng(1)$ and antiquark $\overline{\yng(1)}$

645: degrees of freedom. The hadron states are constructed by combining

646: quark and antiquark one-body states, with the proper quantum

647: numbers. Finally, the large $N_c$ expansion of any operator is

648: given by the most general combination of quark operators acting on

649: these states, to any given order in $1/N_c$.

650: 

651: We turn now to the construction of the exotic states with mixed

652: symmetry spin-flavor. This can be done in close analogy to that of

653: the orbitally excited baryons discussed in detail in

654: \cite{Goity,PY1,PY2}, so we will only give here the relevant

655: steps. The spin-flavor wave function of the $q^{N_c+1}$ states

656: transforms under $SU(2f)$ in the $MS_{N_c+1}$ representation

657: Eq.~(1). Under $SU(2f) \to SU(2)\times SU(f)$, this representation

658: contains all states with spin and isospin $S,I$ satisfying $|S-I|

659: \leq 1$ (except $S=I=0$ and $\frac12(N_c+1)$).

660: 

661: These states can be constructed explicitly as the combination of a

662: system of $N_c$ quarks with symmetric spin-flavor symmetry (core) with spin and

663: isospin $S_c=I_c$, plus an additional quark (excited)

664: \begin{eqnarray}\label{SI}

665: |SI\rangle = c_+ |S_c=I_c=I+\frac12\rangle \otimes |\frac12\rangle +

666: c_- |S_c=I_c=I-\frac12\rangle \otimes |\frac12\rangle

667: \end{eqnarray}

668: One distinguishes two situations: a) if $S\neq I$, only one term appears in

669: this sum, according to $S - I = 1$ ($c_+=1, c_-=0$) or $I-S=1$

670: ($c_+=0, c_-=1$); b) if $S=I$ then both terms appear, and the coefficients

671: $c_\pm$ are determined by requiring that the state $|SI\rangle$ transforms

672: according to the $MS_{N_c+1}$ representation of $SU(4)$. One finds

673: for both SU(2) and SU(3) flavor symmetry \cite{Goity}

674: \begin{eqnarray}

675: c_+(I=S) = \sqrt{\frac{S}{2S+1}}\sqrt{\frac{N_c+2S+3}{N_c+1}}\,,\qquad

676: c_-(I=S) = -\sqrt{\frac{S+1}{2S+1}}\sqrt{\frac{N_c-2S+1}{N_c+1}}\,.

677: \end{eqnarray}

678: We took into account the fact that for this case the core contains

679: $N_c$ quarks, instead of $N_c-1$ as for the orbitally excited

680: baryons. Finally, the exotic state is obtained by combining the

681: state (\ref{SI}) with the antiquark $\bar q$ with appropriate

682: total quantum numbers. We will consider here the negative parity

683: exotics with one heavy antiquark, for which the nontrivial

684: spin-flavor structure is carried by the $q^{N_c+1}$ system alone

685: \begin{eqnarray}

686: |\Theta; JIS; m\alpha\rangle = \sum_{m_1 m_2} |SI;m_1\alpha\rangle  |\bar Q;m_2\rangle

687: \langle Jm| S\frac12; m_1 m_2\rangle

688: \end{eqnarray}

689: In the heavy quark limit, both the total spin $J$ and the spin of the light

690: degrees of freedom $S$ are good quantum numbers and the exotic states form

691: heavy quark spin doublets with $J= S\pm\frac12$ \cite{IsWi}.

692: 

693: Physical operators such as the Hamiltonian, axial currents, etc. can be

694: represented in the $1/N_c$ expansion by operators acting on the quark

695: basis states constructed as above. We will consider here in some detail the $1/N_c$

696: expansion of the mass operator ${\cal M}$. Keeping terms up to $O(1/N_c)$, this

697: has the general form

698: \begin{eqnarray}\label{op}

699: {\cal M} = N_c c_0 {\bf 1} + \sum_i {\cal O}_i^{(0)} + \sum_i

700: {\cal O}_i^{(1)} + \cdots\,,

701: \end{eqnarray}

702: where ${\cal O}^{(j)}$ are the most general isoscalar and Lorentz

703: scalar operators whose matrix elements scale like $1/N_c^j$.

704: 

705: The rules for constructing quark operators for states containing

706: both quarks and antiquarks have been formulated in

707: Ref.~\cite{JM3}. We will consider here only exotics containing one

708: antiquark (exoticness $E=1$). The building blocks for constructing

709: the most general operator are: a) antiquark operators

710: $\Lambda_{\bar q} : T_{\bar q}^a, S_{\bar q}^i, \bar G_{\bar

711: q}^{ia}$, acting on the antiquark degrees of  freedom and b)

712: operators $\Lambda_q$ acting on the states of the $N_c+1$ quarks

713: constructed above in Eq.~(\ref{SI}).

714: 

715: The quark building blocks include operators acting on both the

716: excited quark and on the core

717: \begin{itemize}

718: 

719: \item `excited quark' operators $s^i, t^a, g^{ia}$

720: 

721: 

722: \item `core' operators $S_c^i, T^a_c, G_c^{ia}$

723: \end{itemize}

724: We denote with $T^a$ the generators of the flavor group $SU(f)$, which is left

725: at this stage unspecified.

726: 

727: At leading order $O(N_c^0)$ in the $1/N_c$ expansion there is only one operator

728: contributing to the mass operator in Eq.~(\ref{op}), describing interactions between

729: the antiquark and the $N_c+1$ quarks

730: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Nc0}

731: O(N_c^0): \qquad O_0 = \frac{1}{N_c} T^a_{\bar q} S^i_{\bar q} G^{ia}

732: \end{eqnarray}

733: The only such operator containing only quark operators $\frac{1}{N_c} g^{ia} G_c^{ia}$

734: can be rewritten in terms of the unit operator and the $O(1/N_c)$ operators

735: $t^a T_c^a$ and $s^i S_c^i$ using the operator rules given in Ref.~\cite{Goity}.

736: 

737: At subleading order in $1/N_c$ there are more operators. A complete basis containing

738: only quark operators can be chosen as

739: \begin{eqnarray}

740: O(N_c^{-1}):&&  \qquad O_1 = \frac{1}{N_c} S_c^2\,,\quad

741: O_2 = \frac{1}{N_c} S^2\,,\quad O_3 = \frac{1}{N_c} T^2\,,\quad

742: O_4 = \frac{1}{N_c^2} t^a \{S_c^i\,, G_c^{ia}\}\,,\quad

743: O_5 = \frac{1}{N_c^2} g^{ia} T_c^a S_c^{i}

744: %& & \nonumber

745: \end{eqnarray}

746: There are other  two-body operators which can be written,

747: such as $s^i S_c^i$ and $t^a T_c^a$. They can be

748: eliminated using the identities $S^2 = S_c^2+s^2 + 2s^i S_c^i$

749: and $T^a T^a = T_c^2 + t^2 + 2t^a T_c^a$.

750: The operator $T_c^2$ can be related to the core spin operator $S_c^2$.

751: For two light flavors they are equal $T_c^2 = S_c^2$, while for $f= 3$ they are

752: related as $T_c^2 = S_c^2 + N_c(N_c+6)/12$ (see Ref.~\cite{SU3}).

753: 

754: The three-body operators are linearly independent only for $f\geq 3$.

755: For two light flavors the operator $O_4$  can be reduced to two-body operators by

756: using the identities \cite{DJM,largen} (this assumes a core containing $N_c$ quarks)

757: \begin{eqnarray}\nonumber

758: 2\{S_c^i\,, G_c^{ia}\} = (N_c+2) I_c^a\,,\qquad

759: \end{eqnarray}

760: which gives

761: \begin{eqnarray}

762: O_4 = \frac{1}{N_c^2} i^a \{S_c^i\,, G_c^{ia}\} =

763: \frac{N_c+2}{2N_c^2} i^a I_c^a = \frac{N_c+2}{4N_c^2}\left( I^2 -

764: S_c^2 - \frac34\right)

765: \end{eqnarray}

766: The three-body operator $O_5$ is subleading for $f=2$

767: \begin{eqnarray}

768: \frac{1}{N_c^2} g^{ia} T_c^a S_c^{ia} =

769: \frac{1}{4N_c^2}(S^2 - \frac34 - S_c^2)(I^2 - \frac34 - S_c^2) = O(1/N_c^2)

770: \end{eqnarray}

771: 

772: In the general case of $f\geq 3$ light flavors, $O_4$ can be rewritten

773: using an $SU(2f)$ operator identity for the core operators given in

774: Ref.~\cite{DJM} as

775: \begin{eqnarray}

776: t^a \{S_c^i\,, G_c^{ia} \} = \frac12 d^{abc} t^a \{ T_c^b\,, T_c^c\} -

777: \frac{1}{2f}(f-4)(N_c+f) t^a T_c^a\,.

778: \end{eqnarray}

779: In this form, the spin-independence of this operator becomes apparent:

780: although it formally depends on the core spin degrees of freedom, its

781: matrix elements depend in fact only on the flavor of the state (unless

782: such dependence is introduced indirectly through the spin-flavor

783: wave function Eq.~(\ref{SI})). Finally, the operator $O_5$ can be written

784: as

785: \begin{eqnarray}

786: O_5 = \frac{1}{4N_c^2}( S^2 - S_c^2 - \frac34)(T^2 - \frac{f^2-1}{2f} - T_c^2)

787: \to

788: \frac{1}{4N_c^2}( S^2 - S_c^2 - \frac34)[T^2 -  \frac{N_c^2+6N_c+16}{12}-S_c^2]

789: \quad (f=3)

790: \end{eqnarray}

791: 

792: One can  consider also SU(3) breaking effects. Keeping only $O(N_c^0)$

793: operators in the $1/N_c$ counting, there are three possible operators, given

794: by

795: \begin{eqnarray}

796: O(m_s): \qquad t^8\,,\qquad T_c^8\,,\qquad \frac{1}{N_c} d^{8ab} g^{ia} G_c^{ib}\,.

797: \end{eqnarray}

798: We will discuss in the following the predictions following from these

799: mass operators for negative parity exotics.

800: 

801: 

802: \subsection{Heavy pentaquarks mass relations}

803: 

804: We start by discussing first the simpler case of the

805: exotics with one heavy quark $\bar Q q^{N_c+1}$. In the heavy

806: quark limit the interactions of the heavy quark are suppressed by

807: $1/m_Q$, so that only quark operators need to be included in the Hamiltonian.

808: Working in the limit of SU(3) flavor symmetry and to subleading order

809: in $1/N_c$, the most general Hamiltonian reads

810: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Mop}

811: {\cal M} = N_c c_0 \mathbf{1} +  \frac{1}{N_c}\left[

812: c_1 S_c^2 + c_2 S^2 + c_3 T^2 + c_4  \frac{1}{N_c} t^a \{ S_c^i\,, G_c^{ia}\}

813: + c_5 \frac{1}{N_c} g^{ia} S_c^i T_c^{a}

814: \right] + O(1/N_c^2)\,.

815: \end{eqnarray}

816: We list in Table I the matrix elements of these operators on the

817: heavy exotic states.

818: 

819: The qualitative structure of the mass spectrum can be understood

820: from this operator as follows. Although formally of $O(1/N_c)$,

821: the $SU(f)$ Casimir $ T^a T^a / N_c $ operator contains pieces of

822: $O(N_c), O(1)$ and $O(1/N_c)$ for $f > 2$. The $O(1)$ piece is

823: universal and can be absorbed into a redefinition of $c_0$, but

824: the $O(1)$ term takes different values on the nonstrange and the

825: $\mathbf{3}$ states. This introduces an $O(1)$ mass splitting

826: between these two types of states, as required by the tower

827: structure shown in Eq.~(\ref{K1/2}). The remaining operators have

828: matrix elements of $O(1/N_c)$.

829: 

830: 

831: \begin{table}

832: \begin{eqnarray}\nonumber

833: \begin{array}{c|cccccc}

834: \hline \mbox{state} &  S_c^2 & S^2 & I^2_{SU(2)} & T^2_{SU(3)} &

835:  t^a \{ S_c^i, G_c^{ia}\} &  g^{ia} S_c^i T_c^a  \\

836: \hline

837: \hline

838:  & & & & & & \\

839: \mathbf{3}_0 & \frac34 & 0   & - & \frac{1}{12}(N_c+1)^2

840: %\to \frac43

841: & -\frac14 & \frac18(N_c+6) \\

842:  & & & & & & \\

843: \mathbf{15}_0 & \frac34 & 0  & 2 & \frac{1}{12} (N_c^2+8N_c+31)

844: %\to\frac{16}{3}

845: & \frac{N_c+3}{8} & -\frac{1}{16}(N_c+3)  \\

846:  & & & & & & \\

847: \hline \\

848: \mathbf{3}_1 & \frac34 & 2  &  - & \frac{1}{12}(N_c+1)^2

849: %\to \frac43

850: &  -\frac14  & -\frac{1}{24} (N_c+6)\\

851:  & & & & & & \\

852: \mathbf{\overline{6}}_1 & \frac34 & 2  & 0 &

853: \frac{1}{12}(N_c^2+8N_c+7)

854: %\to\frac{10}{3}

855: &  -\frac{3N_c+5}{8}  & \frac{1}{48}(N_c-9)  \\

856:  & & & & & & \\

857: \mathbf{15}_1 & \frac{7N_c+23}{4(N_c+1)} & 2

858: & 2 & \frac{1}{12} (N_c^2+8N_c+31)

859: %\to\frac{16}{3}

860: & -\frac{3N_c^2+26N_c+31}{24(N_c+1)} & -\frac{(N_c^2-2N_c-27)(N_c+9)}{48(N_c+1)^2}\\

861:  & & & &  & & \\

862: \mathbf{15'}_1 & \frac{15}{4} & 2   & 6 &

863: \frac{1}{12}(N_c^2+8N_c+79)

864: %\to\frac{28}{3}

865: & \frac{3N_c+11}{8} & -\frac{5}{48}(N_c+9) \\

866:  & & & &  & & \\

867: \hline \\

868: \mathbf{15}_2 & \frac{15}{4} & 6   & 2 &

869: \frac{1}{12}(N_c^2+8N_c+31)

870: %\to\frac{16}{3}

871: &  -\frac{5(N_c+1)}{8}  & \frac{1}{16}(N_c-15) \\

872:  & & & & & & \\

873: \hline

874: \end{array}

875: \end{eqnarray}

876: {\caption{ Matrix elements for the heavy exotic states.}}

877: \end{table}

878: 

879: The mass operator in Eq.~(\ref{Mop}) leads to mass relations

880: among the heavy exotics, valid up to $1/N_c^2$ corrections.

881: When restricted to the subspace of the nonstrange states (containing 5 states),

882: this operator contains 4 independent parameters. This gives one

883: model-independent mass relation

884: \begin{eqnarray}\label{mr1}

885: \mbox{(I)}\qquad \frac12 (\mathbf{15}_{2} - \mathbf{15'}_{1}) =

886: \mathbf{\overline{6}}_{1} - \mathbf{15}_{0} + O(1/N_c^2)\,.

887: \end{eqnarray}

888: One additional mass relation can be written

889: provided that the matrix elements of the

890: operator $S_c^2$ are evaluated at $N_c\to \infty$. This connects

891: the masses of the $ \mathbf{15}$ states as

892: \begin{eqnarray}\label{mr2}

893: \mbox{(II)}\qquad\frac23 \mathbf{15}_{0} + \frac13 \mathbf{15}_{2} =

894: \mathbf{15}_{1} + O(1/N_c^2)\,.

895: \end{eqnarray}

896: Both these relations assume only isospin symmetry.

897: %Assuming SU(3) flavor symmetry, there exists a mass relation

898: %connecting the splitting of the two triplet

899: %states to the $O(1/N_c)$ splitting among the $\mathbf{15}$ states

900: %\begin{eqnarray}

901: %\mbox{(III)}\qquad \mathbf{3}_{1} - \mathbf{3}_{0} =

902: %\frac13 \mathbf{15}_{0} - \mathbf{15}_{1} + \frac23 \mathbf{15}_{2}

903: %+ O(1/N_c^2)\,.

904: %\end{eqnarray}

905: A more complete discussion of the mass spectrum including SU(3) breaking

906: effects will be given elsewhere.

907: 

908: \subsection{Light negative parity pentaquarks}

909: 

910: We consider here the complete set of the $E=1$ light exotics with negative

911: parity, and study their mass spectrum at leading order in $1/N_c$.

912: The spin-flavor wave function of the $q^{N_c+1}$ system transforms in the

913: $MS_{N_c+1}$ representation of SU(6) and its decomposition into

914: representations of $SU(2)\times SU(3)$ spin-flavor has been given in

915: Eq.~(\ref{MSspinflavor}).

916: 

917: Adding in the antiquark transforming

918: as $\mathbf{\overline{6}} = (J_{\bar q} = \frac12) \otimes \mathbf{\overline{3}}$,

919: generates many states. They can be easily enumerated at $N_c=3$ using

920: the representation content of the $q^4$ system in Eq.~(\ref{q4}). We will divide

921: them into non-exotic $(\mathbf{1,8,10})$ and exotic states

922: $(\mathbf{\overline{10}, 27, 35})$. We use a notation which makes explicit the

923: spin-flavor transformation properties of the $q^{N_c+1}$ system:

924: $R_J(R^q_{J_q})$.

925: 

926: The nonexotic states are:

927: \begin{eqnarray}\label{nonex}

928: J=\frac12: & & \{ \mathbf{1}_\frac12 (\mathbf{3}_0)\,,

929:                   \mathbf{1}_\frac12 (\mathbf{3}_1) \}\\

930: \nonumber

931: & & \{ \mathbf{8}_\frac12 (\mathbf{3}_0)\,,

932:        \mathbf{8}_\frac12 (\mathbf{15}_0)\,,

933:        \mathbf{8}_\frac12 (\mathbf{\overline{6}}_1)\,,

934:        \mathbf{8}_\frac12 (\mathbf{3}_1)\,,

935:        \mathbf{8}_\frac12 (\mathbf{15}_1)\}\\

936: \nonumber

937: & & \{ \mathbf{10}_\frac12 (\mathbf{15}_0)\,,

938:        \mathbf{10}_\frac12 (\mathbf{15'}_1)\,,

939:        \mathbf{10}_\frac12 (\mathbf{15}_1)\}\\

940: \nonumber

941: J=\frac32: & & \mathbf{1}_\frac32 (\mathbf{3}_1)\,,\qquad

942:        \{ \mathbf{8}_\frac32 (\mathbf{\overline{6}}_1)\,,

943:        \mathbf{8}_\frac32 (\mathbf{3}_1)\,,

944:        \mathbf{8}_\frac32 (\mathbf{15}_1)\,,

945:        \mathbf{8}_\frac32 (\mathbf{15}_2)\}\\

946: \nonumber

947: & & \{ \mathbf{10}_\frac32 (\mathbf{15'}_1)\,,

948:        \mathbf{10}_\frac32 (\mathbf{15}_1)\,,

949:        \mathbf{10}_\frac32 (\mathbf{15}_2)\}\\

950: \nonumber

951: J=\frac52: & & \mathbf{8}_\frac52 (\mathbf{15}_2)\,,\qquad

952: \mathbf{10}_\frac52 (\mathbf{15}_2)\,.

953: \end{eqnarray}

954: 

955: The exotic states have been enumerated in Eq.~(\ref{E1}), and the

956: large $N_c$ predictions for their masses are described in terms of

957: the two tower structure in Eq.~(\ref{towersMS}). We include them

958: here again for completeness, making explicit also the quantum

959: numbers of the $q^4$ system for each state

960: \begin{eqnarray}\label{ex}

961: J=\frac12: & & \mathbf{\overline{10}}_\frac12 (\mathbf{\overline{6}}_1)\,,\qquad

962:                \{ \mathbf{27}_\frac12 (\mathbf{15}_0)\,,

963:                   \mathbf{27}_\frac12 (\mathbf{15}_1) \}\,,\qquad

964: \mathbf{35}_\frac12 (\mathbf{15'}_1)\\

965: \nonumber

966: J=\frac32: & & \mathbf{\overline{10}}_\frac32 (\mathbf{\overline{6}}_1)\,,\qquad

967:                \{ \mathbf{27}_\frac32 (\mathbf{15}_1)\,,

968:                   \mathbf{27}_\frac32 (\mathbf{15}_2) \}\,,\qquad

969: \mathbf{35}_\frac32 (\mathbf{15'}_1)\\

970: \nonumber J=\frac52: & & \mathbf{27}_\frac52 (\mathbf{15}_2)

971: \end{eqnarray}

972: In general, states with the same quantum numbers written within braces

973: $\{\cdots \}$ will mix.

974: 

975: The transformation properties of these states under the diagonal SU(6)

976: can be obtained by combining the representation of the

977: $q^{N_c+1}$ system with that of the antiquark. This produces three representations

978: \begin{eqnarray}\label{su6prod}

979: MS_{N_c+1} \otimes \mathbf{\overline{6}} = S_{N_c} \oplus MS_{N_c} \oplus

980: Ex_{N_c}

981: \end{eqnarray}

982: with $Ex_{N_c}$ the representation of SU(6) with the Young diagram

983: $[N_c+1,2,1,1,1]$ ($[n_1,n_2,n_3,n_4,n_5]$ denote the number of

984: boxes on each row). The nonexotic representations are the

985: symmetric representation $S_{N_c}$ with Young diagram

986: $[N_c,0,0,0,0,0]$, and the mixed-symmetric representation

987: $MS_{N_c}$ with Young diagram $[N_c-1,1,0,0,0,0]$. For $N_c=3$ the

988: exotic representation $Ex_3$ is the $\mathbf{1134}$. The

989: spin-flavor content of the first two SU(6) representations on the

990: right-hand side is well known

991: \begin{eqnarray}

992: S_{N_c} &=& \mathbf{8}_\frac12\,,\quad \mathbf{10}_\frac32\,,\cdots\\

993: MS_{N_c} &=& \mathbf{1}_\frac12\,,\quad

994: \mathbf{8}_\frac12\,,\quad \mathbf{8}_\frac32\,,\quad

995: \mathbf{10}_\frac12\,,\cdots\,.

996: \end{eqnarray}

997: The corresponding decomposition of $Ex_{N_c}$ can be obtained by

998: subtracting these states from the complete set in

999: Eqs.~(\ref{nonex}), (\ref{ex}). In particular, the exotic states

1000: are all contained in $Ex_{N_c}$. For later reference, we give here

1001: the values of the quadratic Casimirs for each of these SU(6)

1002: representations

1003: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Cas}

1004: C_6(S_{N_c}) &=& \frac{5}{12}N_c(N_c+6)\\

1005: C_6(MS_{N_c}) &=& \frac{1}{12}N_c(5N_c+18) \nonumber \\

1006: C_6(Ex_{N_c}) &=& \frac{5}{12}(N_c^2 + 6 N_c + 12)\,.\nonumber

1007: \end{eqnarray}

1008: 

1009: 

1010: 

1011: We would like to compute the mass spectrum of these states at leading order

1012: in $N_c$. There are two operators which can appear in their mass operators

1013: at $O(N_c^0)$.

1014: They are the two-body $\bar q-q$ interaction introduced in

1015: Eq.~(\ref{Nc0}), and  $\frac{1}{N_c}T^a T^a$, which

1016: was seen to contain an enhanced $O(1)$ piece

1017: \begin{eqnarray}

1018: {\cal M} = N_c c_0 1 + c_1 \frac{1}{N_c} S_{\bar q}^i T^a_{\bar q} G_q^{ia}

1019: + c_2 \frac{1}{N_c} T^a T^a  + O(\frac{1}{N_c})\,.

1020: \end{eqnarray}

1021: The first operator is related to the generator of the diagonal SU(6) group

1022: $G^{ia} = G_{\bar q}^{ia} + G_q^{ia}$ as

1023: \begin{eqnarray}

1024: 2G_{\bar q}^{ia} G_q^{ia} = G^{ia} G^{ia} - G_q^{ia} G_q^{ia}

1025: - G_{\bar q}^{ia} G_{\bar q}^{ia}\,.

1026: \end{eqnarray}

1027: The matrix element of $G^{ia} G^{ia}$ can be off-diagonal on the

1028: space of the $q^{N_c+1}$ states, and in general it introduces

1029: mixing among states with the same quantum numbers $R_J$ but

1030: different $q^{N_c+1}$ quantum numbers. We will demonstrate this

1031: explicitly below on the example of the $\mathbf{1}_\frac12

1032: (\mathbf{3}_{0,1})$ states. This mixing is constrained by the

1033: $U(6)_q\times U(6)_{\bar q}$ symmetry of QCD in sectors with both

1034: quarks and antiquarks  in the large $N_c$ limit \cite{JM3}. Since

1035: the correct spin-flavor symmetry of large $N_c$ QCD is the

1036: contracted $SU(2F)_c$,  this symmetry is in fact $U(1)_{N_q}\times

1037: SU(6)_{cq}\times U(1)_{N_{\bar q}}\times SU(6)_{c\bar q}$.

1038: 

1039: We showed at the end of Sec.~II that the SU(6) irrep $MS_{N_c+1}$ breaks

1040: down into two irreps of the contracted symmetry $SU(6)_c$, containing

1041: $\mathbf{\overline{6}_1,15_{0,1,2},15'_1}$ and $\mathbf{3}_{0,1}$, respectively.

1042: This means for example, that the two sets of states in Eq.~(\ref{nonex})

1043: $\{\mathbf{8}_\frac12 (\mathbf{3}_0)\,,\mathbf{8}_\frac12 (\mathbf{3}_1)\}$

1044: and $\{       \mathbf{8}_\frac12 (\mathbf{15}_0)\,,

1045:        \mathbf{8}_\frac12 (\mathbf{\overline{6}}_1)\,,

1046:        \mathbf{8}_\frac12 (\mathbf{15}_1)\}$ do not mix in the large

1047: $N_c$ limit.

1048: 

1049: 

1050: In certain special cases such as those considered in Ref.~\cite{JM3}

1051: the $O(1)$ operator  $\frac{1}{N_c}G_{\bar q}^{ia} G_q^{ia}$ can be reduced to

1052: the $O(1/N_c)$ subleading operators $\frac{1}{N_c}J^2$ and $\frac{1}{N_c}J_q^2$.

1053: This happens for states which can

1054: be assigned to unique $SU(6) \supset SU(3) \times SU(2)$ and $SU(6)_q \supset

1055: SU(3)_q\times SU(2)_q$ spin-flavor

1056: representations for the $q^{N_c+1}$ and total system, respectively.

1057: In particular, this is true for the exotic states

1058: $R=\mathbf{\overline{10},35}$, which are obtained from $R_q =

1059: \mathbf{\overline{6},15'}$ after adding in the antiquark, including

1060: also the states constructed in \cite{JM3}. [It turns out to be true also

1061: for the $\mathbf{27}_{1/2}$ and $\mathbf{27}_{3/2}$, which are admixtures of

1062: $R^q_{J_q}=\mathbf{15}_{0}, \mathbf{15}_{1}, \mathbf{15}_{2}$.]

1063: For these cases the matrix elements

1064: of $\frac{1}{N_c}G_{\bar q}^{ia} G_q^{ia}$ can be computed in terms of the quadratic

1065: Casimirs of SU(6) (denoted $C_6$) and SU(3) (denoted as $C_3$)

1066: representations for the total and $q^{N_c+1}$ states

1067: \begin{eqnarray}\label{general}

1068: & &\langle R_J(R^q_{J'_q})|4 G_{\bar q}^{ia} G_q^{ia} |R_J(R^q_{J_q})\rangle =\\

1069: & &\qquad \big[ C_6(R_J) - \frac13 J(J+1) - \frac12 C_3(R_J) \big] -

1070: \big[ C_6(R^q_{J_q}) - \frac13 J_q(J_q+1) - \frac12 C_3(R^q_{J_q})\big] -2\nonumber

1071: \end{eqnarray}

1072: The negative parity exotic states in Eq.~(\ref{ex}) transform under SU(6) as

1073: $R \sim Ex_{N_c}$, $R_q

1074: \sim MS_{N_c+1}$ and under SU(3) as $R \sim \mathbf{\overline{10},27,35}$,

1075: $R_q \sim \mathbf{\overline{6},15,15'}$. Using the results Eqs.~(\ref{Cas})

1076: for the Casimirs of these representations for arbitrary $N_c$

1077: we find the operator identity, valid on the space of the exotic states with

1078: mixed symmetric spin-flavor wave function

1079: \begin{eqnarray}\label{id1}

1080: \left. 4 G_{\bar q}^{ia} G_q^{ia} \right|_{Ex(MS)} = \frac14 -

1081: \frac13 \mathbf{J}^2 + \frac13 \mathbf{J_q}^2

1082: \end{eqnarray}

1083: 

1084: For completeness, we give also the corresponding identity for the

1085: symmetric spin-flavor states (considered in Ref.~\cite{JM3}). For

1086: this case, the $q^{N_c+1}$ states transform under $SU(6)_q$ in the

1087: $S_{N_c+1}$,  which after adding in the antiquark as an $ {\bf

1088: \overline{6}}$ of $SU(6)$, gives the following representations of

1089: the diagonal SU(6)

1090: \begin{eqnarray}

1091: S_{N_c+1} \otimes \mathbf{\overline{6}} = S_{N_c} \oplus Ex'_{N_c}

1092: \ ,

1093: \end{eqnarray}

1094: where $Ex'_{N_c}$ corresponds to the Young diagram $[N_c +

1095: 2,1,1,1,1]$ and contains the exotic states. Its quadratic SU(6) Casimir

1096: has the value $C_6(Ex'_{N_c}) = \frac{1}{12}(5N_c^2+42N_c+72)$.

1097: Using Eq.~(\ref{general}) one finds for this case the same reduction

1098: rule

1099: \begin{eqnarray}\label{id2}

1100: \left. 4 G_{\bar q}^{ia} G_q^{ia} \right|_{Ex'(S)} = \frac14 -

1101: \frac13 \mathbf{J}^2 + \frac13 \mathbf{J_q}^2

1102: \end{eqnarray}

1103: We conclude that for both cases of mixed symmetry (\ref{id1}) and

1104: symmetric (\ref{id2}) spin-flavor exotics,  the operator

1105: $\frac{1}{N_c}G_{\bar q}^{ia} G_q^{ia}$ can be reduced to

1106: $O(1/N_c)$ operators.

1107: 

1108: We consider next a case where such a simplification does not hold.

1109: Consider the two nonexotic SU(3) singlet states with spin $J=\frac12$ in

1110: Eq.~(\ref{nonex}). Under SU(6) they can transform as the $MS_{N_c}$ and

1111: $Ex_{N_c}$,

1112: with the two sets of states connected by a unitary transformation.

1113: The quadratic Casimir of the diagonal spin-flavor SU(6) group

1114: reads in the basis of these two states

1115: \begin{eqnarray}

1116: \sum_{A=1}^{35} T^A T^A = \frac13 \mathbf{J}^2 + \frac12 \sum_{a=1}^8 T^a T^a

1117: + 2 G^{ia} G^{ia} = \frac13 J(J+1) + \frac12 C_3(R)

1118: + 2G_q^{ia} G_q^{ia} + 2 + 4G_{\bar q}^{ia} G_q^{ia}

1119: \end{eqnarray}

1120: and is  diagonal in the basis $(\mathbf{1}_\frac12^{MS}\,,

1121: \mathbf{1}_\frac12^{Ex})$, with eigenvalues given by the Casimirs of the respective

1122: SU(6) representations.

1123: 

1124: Using these results, it is straightforward to compute the matrix

1125: elements of the operator ${\cal O}_0 =

1126: \frac{1}{N_c} G_{\bar q}^{ia} G_q^{ia}$ taken between the states

1127: $(\mathbf{1}_\frac12(\mathbf{3}_0)\,, \mathbf{1}_\frac12(\mathbf{3}_1))$

1128: (up to a two-fold ambiguity). The results are given in the Appendix.

1129: Taking the large $N_c$ limit, the eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of the

1130: mass operator on the subspace of the $\mathbf{1}_\frac12$ states are

1131: \begin{eqnarray}\label{MMS}

1132: \mathbf{1}_\frac12^{MS}(\mathbf{3}) &=& \mp\frac12 \mathbf{1}_\frac12(\mathbf{3}_0) +

1133: \frac{\sqrt3}{2} \mathbf{1}_\frac12(\mathbf{3}_1)\,,\qquad

1134: M_1 = N_c c_0 - \frac{3}{16} c_1\,,\\

1135: \label{Mex}

1136: \mathbf{1}_\frac12^{Ex}(\mathbf{3}) &=&

1137: \pm \frac{\sqrt3}{2} \mathbf{1}_\frac12(\mathbf{3}_0) +

1138: \frac12 \mathbf{1}_\frac12(\mathbf{3}_1)\,,\qquad

1139: M_2 = N_c c_0 + \frac{1}{16} c_1\,.

1140: \end{eqnarray}

1141: Note that the large $N_c$ eigenstates do not have well defined

1142: transformation properties under diagonal SU(6) for any finite

1143: $N_c$ (although we labelled them with the corresponding irreps of

1144: SU(6) into which they go for finite $N_c$).

1145: 

1146: A similar computation gives for the mass of the remaining SU(3) singlet

1147: state

1148: \begin{eqnarray}

1149: \mathbf{1}_\frac32^{Ex}(\mathbf{3}_1): \qquad M = N_c c_0 + \frac{1}{16} c_1\,.

1150: \end{eqnarray}

1151: which turns out to be degenerate in the large $N_c$ limit with the

1152: spin 1/2 exotic singlet Eq.~(\ref{Mex}).

1153: 

1154: 

1155: 

1156: 

1157: 

1158: 

1159: These considerations are possibly of more than academic interest.

1160: The singlet states $\mathbf{1}_{\frac12,\frac32}$ are expected

1161: to be the lowest lying negative parity pentaquark states (assuming that such

1162: states exist at all).

1163: These states have the $q^4$ system in the $\mathbf{3}$ of flavor SU(3),

1164: which is constructed in the diquark model from two good diquarks

1165: (see Eq.~(\ref{2quark})). A similar result was also found in the quark model

1166: computation of Strottman \cite{Strottman}, who estimated their masses to

1167: lie around 1400 MeV. Two negative states are seen in this region

1168: $\Lambda_\frac12(1406)$ and $\Lambda_\frac32(1519)$, both of which are

1169: usually identified with the $L=1$ orbitally excited states. As shown

1170: above, if the negative parity $q^4 \bar q$ states are stable,

1171: three additional SU(3) singlet states are expected, two with spins $1/2$

1172: and one with spin $3/2$. In the large $N_c$ limit, two of them are

1173: degenerate in a pair with $J=1/2,3/2$.

1174: 

1175: We turn next to the light pentaquarks in exotic SU(3) representations.

1176: Using the matrix elements in Appendix (or alternatively

1177: the operator reduction rule Eq.~(\ref{id1})),

1178: all negative parity exotic states in

1179: the $\mathbf{\overline{10}}, \mathbf{27}$ and $\mathbf{35}$ turn out to be

1180: degenerate at leading order in $1/N_c$, with a mass given by

1181: \begin{eqnarray}

1182: M_{Ex} = N_c c_0 + c_2 + O(1/N_c)\,.

1183: \end{eqnarray}

1184: These states are split only by $O(1/N_c)$ terms in the Hamiltonian which

1185: were not considered here.

1186: In particular, the two antidecuplet states $\mathbf{\overline{10}}_\frac12$

1187: and $\mathbf{\overline{10}}_\frac32$ are predicted to be degenerate in the

1188: large $N_c$ limit (and all states in the two towers $K=1/2,3/2$ in Eq.~(\ref{towersMS})

1189: along with them). This follows from the absence of a $O(1)$ operator

1190: which can distinguish between these states, and stands in contrast to the

1191: situation in the symmetric spin-flavor states considered in Ref.~\cite{JM3}.

1192: The latter states have nonzero orbital momentum, and a spin-orbit interaction term

1193: $J_q^i \ell^i$ can introduce a $O(1)$ mass splitting between the

1194: $J=1/2$ and $J=3/2$ antidecuplet states. We note however that $O(1/N_c)$

1195: effects can easily produce a mass splitting of $\sim 200$ MeV, similar to the

1196: $N-\Delta$ mass splitting, such that the two cases of positive and negative

1197: parity could in fact have very similar mass spectra.

1198: 

1199: \section{Quark model predictions}

1200: 

1201: In the remainder of this paper we will study the negative parity exotic states in

1202: some

1203: detail using the constituent quark model with arbitrary number of colors $N_c$,

1204: restricting ourselves to the $E=1$ states.

1205: The color part of the wave function of the $N_c+1$ quarks must transform in the

1206: fundamental representation and can be written as

1207: \begin{eqnarray}

1208: \chi_i^a = \frac{1}{\sqrt{N_c !}} \varepsilon_{a_1 a_2 \cdots (a_i) \cdots a_{N_c+1} }

1209: |q_1^{a_1} q_2^{a_2} \cdots q_i^{a} \cdots q_{N_c+1}^{a_{N_c+1}} \rangle\,,

1210: \qquad i = 1,\cdots, N_c

1211: \end{eqnarray}

1212: where the index in brackets $(a_i)$ is to be omitted. They are normalized as

1213: %(with $p_{ij}=(-)^{i-j-1}$)

1214: \begin{eqnarray}

1215: \langle \chi_j^b | \chi_i^a \rangle = \left\{

1216: \begin{array}{ccc}

1217: \delta_{ab}\,, & i=j &  \\

1218: \frac{1}{N_c}p_{ij} \delta_{ab}\,, & i\neq j & (p_{ij}=(-)^{i-j-1})\\

1219: \end{array}

1220: \right.

1221: \end{eqnarray}

1222: The spin-flavor wave function of the $N_c+1$ quarks transforms

1223: in the mixed symmetry representation. The corresponding spin-flavor

1224: wave functions are identical to those for orbitally excited baryons, and

1225: can be found in \cite{PY1} for the case of arbitrary $N_c$. They are constructed by

1226: adding one quark $q_i$ to a symmetric state state of $N_c$ quarks with spin

1227: and isospin $I_c=S_c$

1228: \begin{eqnarray}

1229: |S,I; m\alpha \rangle = \sum_{m_3,i_3}

1230: |I_c,m_1\alpha_1\rangle \times |\frac12, m_2\alpha_2\rangle_i

1231: \langle S m|I_c\frac12; m_1 m_2\rangle

1232: \langle I\alpha|I_c\frac12; \alpha_1\alpha_2\rangle

1233: \,.

1234: \end{eqnarray}

1235: Finally, the orbital wave function is completely symmetric and can be

1236: written using a Hartree representation as the product of one-body wave functions

1237: $\Phi(\vec r_1,\cdots, \vec r_{N_c+1}) = \phi_S(\vec r_1)

1238: \cdots \phi_S(\vec r_{N_c+1})$. Putting together all factors, the complete

1239: wave function of an $E=1$ exotic baryon with mixed symmetry spin-flavor structure

1240: (negative parity) can be written as

1241: \begin{eqnarray}\label{wf}

1242: |\Theta_{\rm MS} ;JI,m\alpha \rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{N_c(N_c+1)}} \sum_{i=1}^{N_c+1}

1243: \chi_i^a |\bar Q^a, m_3\rangle |SI;m-m_3,\alpha\rangle_i

1244: \langle Jm|S\frac12;m-m_3,m_3 \rangle

1245: \Phi(\vec r_1,\cdots ,\vec r_{N_c+1})

1246: \end{eqnarray}

1247: For simplicity, we took the antiquark to be an infinitely heavy quark $\bar Q$,

1248: which does not introduce an additional orbital motion.

1249: A similar construction gives also the wave function of an exotic with

1250: strangeness $+1$ $q^{N_c}\bar s$.

1251: 

1252: The relevant Hamiltonian for the heavy exotic states $\Theta_{\bar

1253: Q}$ describes the interactions of the nonrelativistic quarks with

1254: the gluon field, plus the pure glue term

1255: \begin{eqnarray}

1256: %\delta \frac{\langle \Theta | {\cal H} | \Theta \rangle }

1257: %{\langle \Theta | \Theta \rangle} = 0\,,\qquad

1258: {\cal H} = {\cal H}_{\rm kin} + {\cal H}_{\rm glue} + {\cal H}_{\rm q-q}\,.

1259: \end{eqnarray}

1260: The Coulomb quark-quark interaction, together with the kinetic

1261: term $\sum_n {\cal H}_{\rm kin}^n = \sum_n \frac{1}{2m_n}(\vec p - g\vec A(x_n))^2$

1262: and the pure glue term, give the dominant contributions in the large $N_c$ limit

1263: \begin{eqnarray}\label{H}

1264: {\cal H}_{\rm q-q} =

1265: %\sum_n \frac{1}{2m_n} (\vec p - g \vec A^a T^a)^2 +

1266: \frac{g^2}{4\pi}\sum_{m< n} \frac{T_m^x T_n^x}{|\vec r_n - \vec r_m |}

1267: + \frac{g^2}{4\pi}\sum_{n} \frac{T_n^x \bar T^x}{|\vec r_n |}\,.

1268: \end{eqnarray}

1269: 

1270: 

1271: The Hamiltonian ${\cal H}_{q-q}$ in Eq.~(\ref{H}) is  spin-flavor blind,

1272: such that the heavy exotics with mixed-symmetric spin flavor $\Theta_{MS}$

1273: constructed above fall into irreducible representations of the SU(6) group.

1274: The lowest lying states are in the $\mathbf{210}$ of SU(6), which contains

1275: all the representations of SU(3)$\times$SU(2) shown in Eq.~(\ref{q4}).

1276: The degeneracy of these states is broken in the presence of the color

1277: spin-spin hyperfine interaction \cite{CQM}

1278: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Hhyp}

1279: {\cal H}_{\rm hyp} = -V \sum_{i< j} (\lambda_i^a \lambda_j^a)(\vec \sigma_i

1280: \cdot \vec \sigma_j)\,.

1281: \end{eqnarray}

1282: 

1283: The eigenvalues of the hyperfine interaction can be computed using

1284: SU(6) spin-color methods as explained in Ref.~\cite{RLJ}. The basic idea

1285: is to decompose the color-spin-flavor wave function of the $q^4$ system into

1286: irreducible representations of $SU(6)_{\rm sc}\times SU(3)_{\rm fl}$.

1287: The generators of the color-spin group $SU(6)_{\rm sc}$ can be written in a

1288: quark basis as

1289: \begin{eqnarray}

1290: S^i = \frac{1}{\sqrt3} \sum_{n=1}^{N_c+1} \frac{\sigma_n^i}{2}\,,\qquad

1291: T^a = \frac{1}{\sqrt2} \sum_{n=1}^{N_c+1} \frac{\lambda_n^a}{2}\,,\qquad

1292: F^{ia} = \sqrt2 \sum_{n=1}^{N_c+1} \frac{\sigma_n^i}{2}\cdot

1293: \frac{\lambda_n^a}{2}\,.

1294: \end{eqnarray}

1295: With this definition, the generators are normalized as $\mbox{Tr}(\Lambda^A

1296: \Lambda^B) = \frac12 \delta^{AB}$.

1297: The generator $F^{ia}$ is simply related to the hyperfine Hamiltonian

1298: Eq.~(\ref{Hhyp}), which is therefore diagonalized in terms of the quadratic

1299: Casimir of the $SU(6)_{\rm sc}$

1300: \begin{eqnarray}\label{C2def}

1301: C_2(R_{\rm sc}) = \frac13 \mathbf{S}^2 + \frac12 T^a T^a + 2 F^{ia} F^{ia} =

1302: \frac13 S(S+1) + \frac12 C_2(R_{\rm c}) + \frac32 C_F (N_c+1) +

1303: \frac14 \sum_{i< j} (\lambda_i^a \lambda_j^a)(\vec \sigma_i

1304: \cdot \vec \sigma_j)\,.

1305: \end{eqnarray}

1306: 

1307: The exotics with symmetric orbital wave functions considered here

1308: have a completely antisymmetric total color-spin-flavor wave

1309: function of the $q^4$ system, which transforms as the

1310: $\mathbf{3060}$ (for $f=3$) or $\mathbf{495}$ (for $f=2$) of

1311: SU(6f). Decomposing it  into representations of $SU(6)_{\rm

1312: sc}\times SU(3)_{\rm fl}$ and keeping only those $SU(6)_{\rm sc}$

1313: representations which contain a $\mathbf{3}$ of color gives the

1314: spin-color representations shown in Table II, corresponding to

1315: each allowed SU(3) flavor representation. Using the relation

1316: Eq.~(\ref{C2def}) for the quadratic Casimir of $SU(6)_{\rm sc}$

1317: one finds the eigenvalues of the color-spin hyperfine interaction

1318: \cite{RLJ}

1319: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Hhypeigenvalue}

1320: {\cal H}_{\rm hyp} = V \left[

1321: \frac43 J(J+1) + 6(N_c + 1) C_F - 4 C_2(R_{\rm sc})\right]\,.

1322: \end{eqnarray}

1323: Here $C_2(R_{\rm sc})$ is the quadratic Casimir of the SU(6)

1324: spin-color representation $R_{\rm sc}$ corresponding to a given

1325: representation of flavor SU(3). The corresponding representations

1326: and their Casimirs are given in Table II.

1327: 

1328: \begin{table}

1329: \begin{eqnarray}\nonumber

1330: \begin{array}{|c|c|c|}

1331: \hline

1332: R_{\rm fl} & R_{\rm sc} & C_2(R_{\rm sc}) \\

1333: \hline

1334: \hline

1335:  & & \\

1336: \mathbf{15'} &

1337: \raisebox{-0.6cm}{\yng(1,1,1,1)} = \mathbf{15} \supset J_q=1 & \frac{14}{3} \\

1338:  & & \\

1339: \mathbf{15} &

1340: \raisebox{-0.4cm}{\yng(2,1,1)} = \mathbf{105}\supset J_q=0,1,2 &

1341: \frac{26}{3} \\

1342:  & & \\

1343: \mathbf{\overline{6}} &

1344: \raisebox{-0.3cm}{\yng(2,2)} = \mathbf{105}\supset J_q=1 & \frac{32}{3} \\

1345:  & & \\

1346: \mathbf{3} & \raisebox{-0.2cm}{\yng(3,1)} = \mathbf{210}

1347: \supset J_q=0,1 & \frac{38}{3} \\

1348:  & & \\

1349: \hline

1350: \end{array}

1351: \end{eqnarray}

1352: {\caption{The representation of $SU(6)$ spin-color $R_{\rm sc}$

1353: corresponding to each representation $R_{\rm fl}$ of $SU(3)$

1354: flavor in Eq.~(\ref{q4}), and its quadratic Casimir $C_2(R_{\rm

1355: sc})$.  For each representation of

1356:  $SU(6)$ spin-color we show also the values of the quark spin

1357: $J_q$ allowed under the decomposition $R_{\rm sc} \to

1358: R_{SU(2)_{\rm sp}} \times  R_{SU(3)_c}$ (corresponding to a color

1359: triplet $R_{\rm col} = \mathbf{3}$). }}

1360: \end{table}

1361: 

1362: The mass formula predicts that the lowest eigenvalue is the

1363: $\mathbf{3}_{J_q=0}$, which has the largest value for the spin-color SU(6)

1364: Casimir. This result is in agreement

1365: with the diquark model \cite{StWi}, according to which this state is composed

1366: of 2 `good' scalar diquarks $\phi^{iA}$ (with $i$ a SU(3) flavor index and $A$

1367: a SU(3) color index) in a relative $S-$wave

1368: \begin{eqnarray}

1369: |\mathbf{3}^i_{J_q=0}\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{6!}}\varepsilon_{ABC}

1370: \varepsilon_{ijk}

1371: \bar Q^A \phi^{jB} \phi^{kC}

1372: \end{eqnarray}

1373: The remaining heavy exotics with negative parity lie above the triplet with

1374: spin $J_q=0$, and their

1375: mass splittings are given by one free parameter, the coupling $V$ in

1376: Eq.~(\ref{Hhyp})

1377: \begin{eqnarray}\label{hyp1}

1378: & &\mathbf{3}_{J_q=1} - \mathbf{3}_{J_q=0} = \frac83 V\qquad (51\pm 3\mbox{

1379: MeV})\\

1380: & &\mathbf{\overline{6}}_{J_q=1} - \mathbf{3}_{J_q=0} = \frac{32}{3} V

1381: \quad\,\, (203 \pm 11\mbox{ MeV})\\

1382: & &\mathbf{15}_{J_q=0} - \mathbf{3}_{J_q=0} = 16 V\quad (304\pm 16\mbox{

1383: MeV})\\

1384: & &\mathbf{15}_{J_q=1} - \mathbf{3}_{J_q=0} = \frac{56}{3} V

1385: \quad (355 \pm 19\mbox{ MeV})\\

1386: & &\mathbf{15}_{J_q=2} - \mathbf{3}_{J_q=0} = 24 V\quad\,\, (456 \pm 24\mbox{

1387: MeV})\\

1388: \label{hyp6}

1389: & &\mathbf{15'}_{J_q=1} - \mathbf{3}_{J_q=0} = \frac{104}{3} V

1390: \quad (659\pm 35\mbox{ MeV})\,.

1391: \end{eqnarray}

1392: These results agree with Ref.~\cite{LeSi}.

1393: The strength of the spin-spin coupling $V$ can be extracted from the $N-\Delta$ mass

1394: splitting

1395: \begin{eqnarray}

1396: V = \frac{1}{16}(\Delta - N) = 18.3 \mbox{ MeV}

1397: \end{eqnarray}

1398: %We used this value to compute the numerical values for the mass

1399: %splittings shown in parantheses in Eqs.~(\ref{hyp1})-(\ref{hyp6}).

1400: An alternative determination of $V$ from the $\Sigma_c -

1401: \Lambda_c$ mass splitting gives a somewhat larger value

1402: \begin{eqnarray}

1403: V = \frac{3}{32}\left[ \frac13(\Sigma_c+2\Sigma_c^*) - \Lambda_c\right] =

1404: 19.8\mbox{ MeV}\,.

1405: \end{eqnarray}

1406: The numerical values for the mass splittings shown

1407: in parantheses in Eqs.~(\ref{hyp1})-(\ref{hyp6}) used $V=19\pm 1$

1408: MeV, which covers both these determinations.

1409: 

1410: These mass splittings are formally of $O(\alpha_s) \sim O(1/N_c)$. They agree with

1411: the model independent predictions from the $1/N_c$ expansion Eq.~(\ref{Mop})

1412: with a special relation among the $O(1/N_c)$ coefficients

1413: \begin{eqnarray}

1414: c_1 = 0\,,\qquad c_2 = \frac43 V\,,\qquad c_3 = 4 V\,,\qquad

1415: c_{4,5} = 0\,.

1416: \end{eqnarray}

1417: The corresponding relation for two light flavors can be obtained

1418: by noting that the Casimir $C_2(R_{\rm sc})$ in  Table II can be

1419: written as $C_2(R_{\rm sc}) = 32/3 - I(I+1)$ for the nonstrange

1420: states in the $\mathbf{\overline{6}},\mathbf{15},\mathbf{15'}$.

1421: This summarizes the quark model mass formula on the subspace of

1422: the nonstrange states as a two-parameter relation

1423: \begin{eqnarray}

1424: M(J_q,I) = \alpha + V \left[ \frac43 J_q(J_q+1) + 4 I(I+1) \right]

1425: \end{eqnarray}

1426: We will use in the next section experimental information on one of these states

1427: to extract $\alpha$ and give predictions for all other states.

1428: 

1429: \section{Phenomenology}

1430: 

1431: The H1 Collaboration reported recently the observation of a narrow resonance in

1432: the $D^{*-} p$ and $D^{*+} \bar p$ channels with mass and width

1433: \begin{eqnarray}\label{H1}

1434: M = 3099 \pm 3\mbox{ (stat)} \pm 5\mbox{ (stat) MeV}\,,\qquad

1435: \Gamma = 12 \pm 3\mbox{ (stat) MeV}\,.

1436: \end{eqnarray}

1437: This resonance has been identified with an exotic state with quark

1438: content $udud\bar c$. Neither the spin or the parity of this state have

1439: been measured.

1440: The phenomenology of this state has been studied using the large $N_c$ expansion

1441: in Ref.~\cite{JM3} assuming that its parity is positive.

1442: 

1443: We will assume in this section that the state observed by the H1 Collaboration

1444: has negative parity and explore the phenomenological implications of this

1445: assumption following from the results of this paper.

1446: 

1447: We examine first predictions following solely from heavy quark symmetry.

1448: The lowest lying pentaquarks with one charm antiquark $\bar c q^4$ with negative

1449: parity have mixed symmetry spin-flavor wave functions and contain the

1450: SU(3) representations shown in Eq.~(\ref{q4}). We will denote the nonstrange

1451: states as $\Theta_{\bar c s_\ell}^{(R)}(J)$ with $s_\ell$ the spin of the light

1452: degrees of the freedom, $J=s_\ell \pm 1/2$ is the total spin and $R$ is the SU(3)

1453: representation of the state.

1454: 

1455: With this notation, the nonstrange states include

1456: \begin{eqnarray}\label{I05q}

1457: I = 0 &:& \Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{\overline{6}})}(\frac12,\frac32)\\

1458: I = 1 &:& \Theta_{\bar c 0}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac12)\,,\quad

1459: \Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac12,\frac32)\,,\quad

1460: \Theta_{\bar c 2}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac32,\frac52)\\

1461: \label{I25q}

1462: I = 2 &:& \Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{15'})}(\frac12,\frac32)\,.

1463: \end{eqnarray}

1464: In addition, there are also two SU(3) triplets with $s_\ell = 0$

1465: and 1, containing at least one strange quark. They each contain

1466: one isodoublet (with quark content $\{\bar c usud, \bar c udds\}$)

1467: \begin{eqnarray}

1468: T_{\bar c 0}(\frac12)\,,\qquad T_{\bar c 1}(\frac12,\frac32)

1469: \end{eqnarray}

1470: and one isosinglet (with quark content $\bar c usds$).

1471: 

1472: 

1473: Assuming that these states can decay strongly into $D^{(*)} N$ channels,

1474: heavy quark symmetry predicts ratios among the individual widths. These

1475: predictions can be read off from Ref.~\cite{PY0}, where they were computed for the

1476: corresponding strong decays of orbitally excited charmed baryons with negative parity.

1477: For states above the $[D^-p]$ (2808 MeV) and $[D^{*-}p]$ (2948 MeV) thresholds (such

1478: as the resonance at 3099 MeV observed by H1),

1479: the decay ratios for the $S-$wave partial rates are (we denote here $\{\cdot \} =

1480: \Gamma/|\vec p|$ the decay rate with the phase space factor removed)

1481: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Swave}

1482: & &\{\Theta_{\bar c 0}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac12) \to [N\bar D]_S\} \, : \,

1483: \{\Theta_{\bar c 0}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac12) \to [N\bar D^*]_S\}  = 1\, :\, 3\\

1484: & &

1485: \{\Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{\overline{6},15})}(\frac12) \to [N\bar D]_S\}  \, : \,

1486: \{\Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{\overline{6},15})}(\frac12) \to [N\bar D^*]_S\}  \, : \,

1487: \{\Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{\overline{6},15})}(\frac32) \to [N\bar D]_S\}  \, : \,

1488: \{\Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{\overline{6},15})}(\frac32) \to [N\bar D^*]_S\}  \\

1489: & &\qquad = \frac34\, :\, \frac14\, :\, 0 \, :\, 1\,.\nonumber

1490: \end{eqnarray}

1491: Heavy quark symmetry predicts also the suppression of the $S-$wave amplitude

1492: in the decay of the $s_\ell=2$ state

1493: \begin{eqnarray}\label{suppress}

1494: \Gamma\left(

1495: \Theta_{\bar c 2}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac32) \to [N\bar D^*]_S\right) \sim

1496: O(\Lambda^2/m_c^2)\,.

1497: \end{eqnarray}

1498: The corresponding predictions for the $D-$wave amplitudes can be found in

1499: Ref.~\cite{PY0}, and we do not reproduce them here.

1500: Some of the exotic states in Eq.~(\ref{I05q})-(\ref{I25q}) might lie above the

1501: $\Delta \bar D$ (3101 MeV) and $\Delta \bar D^*$ (3242 MeV) thresholds.

1502: These channels are also important for the decays of the $\mathbf{15}'$,

1503: which can not decay to $N\bar D^{(*)}$ by isospin symmetry.

1504: We give therefore

1505: also the corresponding heavy quark symmetry predictions for the ratios of $S-$wave

1506: partial widths into $\Delta \bar D^{(*)}$ channels

1507: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Swave2}

1508: & &

1509: \{\Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{\overline{6},15})}(\frac12) \to [\Delta\bar D]_S\}  \, : \,

1510: \{\Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{\overline{6},15})}(\frac12) \to [\Delta\bar D^*]_S\}  \, : \,

1511: \{\Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{\overline{6},15})}(\frac32) \to [\Delta\bar D]_S\}  \, : \,

1512: \{\Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{\overline{6},15})}(\frac32) \to [\Delta\bar D^*]_S\}  \\

1513: & &\qquad = 0\, :\, 1\, :\, \frac38 \, :\, \frac58\nonumber\\

1514: & &

1515: \{\Theta_{\bar c 2}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac32) \to [\Delta\bar D]_S\}  \, : \,

1516: \{\Theta_{\bar c 2}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac32) \to [\Delta\bar D^*]_S\}  \, : \,

1517: \{\Theta_{\bar c 2}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac52) \to [\Delta\bar D]_S\}  \, : \,

1518: \{\Theta_{\bar c 2}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac52) \to [\Delta\bar D^*]_S\}  \\

1519: & &\qquad = \frac58\, :\, \frac38\, :\, 0 \, :\, 1\nonumber\,.

1520: \end{eqnarray}

1521: 

1522: 

1523: The resonance observed by H1 is seen in the $D^* p$ channel.

1524: Assuming that future experiments see no signal in the $D N$

1525: channel, the heavy quark predictions in Eq.~(\ref{Swave}) would

1526: suggest identifying this resonance with a $J=\frac32$ state in the

1527: $\mathbf{\overline{6},15}$. Since no other nearby states are

1528: observed, the simplest assignment is the isosinglet $\Theta_{\bar

1529: c 1}^{(\mathbf{\overline{6}})}(\frac32)$, decaying with equal

1530: widths to $\bar D^{*-} p$  and  $\bar D^{*0} n$  (scenario 1).

1531: 

1532: 

1533: An attractive possibility which naturally explains the small width

1534: of the state (\ref{H1}) is to identify it with the $\Theta_{\bar c

1535: 2}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac32)$, whose S-wave decay width is

1536: suppressed by heavy quark symmetry (see Eq.~(\ref{suppress})).

1537: This state can only decay to $D^{(*)} N$ in $D-$wave. This is the

1538: $I_3=0$ member of an isotriplet, and one expects to see two

1539: similar nearby states, decaying to $\bar D^{*0} p$ (for the

1540: $I_3=+1$ state) and to $D^{*-} n$ (for the $I_3=-1$ state). We

1541: will refer to this as to the scenario 2.

1542: 

1543: Finally, we consider also the possibility that the state

1544: (\ref{H1}) is the isotriplet $\Theta_{\bar c

1545: 1}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac32)$ (scenario 3).

1546: 

1547: We present in Table III predictions for the masses of all other

1548: charmed pentaquarks following from each of the three assignments

1549: described above. We present our predictions in terms of

1550: spin-averaged masses for heavy quark doublets, defined as

1551: \begin{eqnarray}\label{spav}

1552: \langle \Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(R)} \rangle_{\rm sp-av}

1553: = \frac13 \Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(R)}(\frac12) +

1554: \frac23 \Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(R)}(\frac32) \,,\qquad

1555: \langle \Theta_{\bar c 2}^{(R)} \rangle_{\rm sp-av}

1556: \equiv \frac25 \Theta_{\bar c 2}^{(R)}(\frac32) +

1557: \frac35 \Theta_{\bar c 2}^{(R)}(\frac52) \,.

1558: \end{eqnarray}

1559: 

1560: 

1561: \begin{center}

1562: \begin{table}[ht!]

1563: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}

1564: \hline

1565: state & Scenario 1 & Scenario 2 & Scenario 3 \\

1566: \hline

1567: \hline

1568:  & & & \\

1569: $T_{\bar c 0}^{(\mathbf{3})}(\frac12)$ & $2896\pm 13\pm \delta_{1/m_c} $

1570: & $2643\pm 25\pm \delta_{1/m_c}$   & $2744 \pm 20 \pm \delta_{1/m_c}$ \\

1571:  & & & \\

1572: $\langle T_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{3})}\rangle$ & $2947$ & $2694$ & $2795$ \\

1573:  & $====$ & $----$ & $----$  \\

1574: $\langle \Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{6})}\rangle$ & $3099$ & $2846$ & $2947$ \\

1575:  & $*--*$ & & ==== \\

1576: $\Theta_{\bar c 0}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac12)$ & $3200$ & $2947$ & $3048$ \\

1577:  & *==* & ==== & \\

1578: $\langle \Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{15})}\rangle$ & $3251$ & $2998$ & $3099$ \\

1579:  & & & $*--*$ \\

1580: $\langle \Theta_{\bar c 2}^{(\mathbf{15})}\rangle$ & $3352$ & $3099$ & $3200$ \\

1581:  & & *==* & *==* \\

1582: $\langle \Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{15'})}\rangle$ & $3555$ & $3302$ & $3403$ \\

1583:  & & & \\

1584: \hline

1585: \end{tabular}

1586: {\caption{Predictions for the mass spectrum of the charmed

1587: pentaquarks (in MeV) using the quark model with spin-color

1588: hyperfine interaction. The three scenarios correspond to the

1589: possible assignments of the 3099 MeV state seen by the H1 as

1590: described in the text. The thresholds for strong two-body decays

1591: are shown as $[D N]: ---- $, $[D^* N]: ==== $, $[D \Delta]: *--*

1592: $, $[D^* \Delta]: *==* $. }}

1593: \end{table}

1594: \end{center}

1595: 

1596: We turn now to a discussion of these predictions. First, we

1597: comment on the theoretical uncertainty in these estimates, which

1598: were added in Table III only for the triplet states. These errors

1599: include the experimental error in the H1 mass measurement

1600: (\ref{H1}) and the error in the strength of the hyperfine

1601: splitting $V=19\pm 1$ MeV. To this one should add also the

1602: uncertainty $\delta_{1/m_c} \sim \Lambda^2/m_c \simeq 180$ MeV

1603: coming from the hyperfine interaction with the heavy quark spin in

1604: the state (\ref{H1}).

1605: 

1606: 

1607: The lowest-lying states $T_{\bar c 0}^{(\mathbf{3})}(\frac12)$ in

1608: the $\mathbf{3}$ of SU(3) are stable in all three scenarios

1609: against strong decays into $[\bar D_s p]$ and $[\bar D \Lambda]$

1610: (with thresholds at 2907 and 2985 MeV, respectively). Their masses

1611: are somewhat higher than the previous estimate in Ref.~\cite{StWi}

1612: of 2580 MeV. We note that the predictions in Table III assume

1613: SU(3) symmetry. As a rough estimate of the SU(3) breaking, one

1614: could add to these numbers an additional $\Delta_s = m_{\Xi_c} -

1615: m_{\Lambda_c} = 180$ MeV. If this is done, the $T_{\bar c

1616: 0}^{(\mathbf{3})}(\frac12)$ states remain stable against strong

1617: decays in scenario 2, but rise above the threshold for $[\bar D_s

1618: p]$ in the other two scenarios. A search for a signal in this mass

1619: region could help distinguish between the three scenarios.

1620: 

1621: Going to the higher mass states, in scenario 1 all

1622: nonstrange states in the $\mathbf{\overline{6}}$ and $\mathbf{15}$

1623: can decay strongly into $[\bar D^{(*)} p]_S$, and the $\mathbf{15'}$

1624: decay into $[\bar D^{(*)} \Delta]_S$, with

1625: decay widths of a typical size for a $S-$wave channel.

1626: The scenario 3 is very similar.

1627: 

1628: The scenario 2 is more interesting. It contains three nonstrange states

1629: stable under strong decays into $[\bar D^* p]_S$, which can only decay into

1630: $[\bar D p]_S$. These are the

1631: $\Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{\overline{6}})}(\frac12,\frac32)$ and

1632: the $\Theta_{\bar c 0}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac12)$.

1633: The heavy quark symmetry relations in Eq.~(\ref{Swave}) imply that two

1634: of them should be narrow:

1635: the $\Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{\overline{6}})}(\frac32)$ whose width

1636: is suppressed by $\Lambda^2/m_c^2$, and the

1637: $\Theta_{\bar c 0}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac12)$ whose width is reduced by a

1638: factor of 4 due to the absence of the $\bar D^* p$ channel.

1639: Thus, together with the

1640: narrow $\Theta_{\bar c 2}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac32)$ identified with the H1 state

1641: (\ref{H1}), this scenario contains 2 other narrow states well separated

1642: at 2850 MeV ($\Theta_{\bar c 1}^{(\mathbf{\overline{6}})}(\frac32)$),

1643: and at 2950 MeV ($\Theta_{\bar c 0}^{(\mathbf{15})}(\frac12)$).

1644: This is a

1645: distinctive experimental signature which should help distinguish this

1646: assignment of the H1 state from

1647: the other two proposed scenarios.

1648: 

1649: 

1650: \section{Conclusions}

1651: 

1652: 

1653: 

1654: If exotic baryon states exist in nature, they add a new layer of

1655: complexity to the hadronic spectrum, with a rich phenomenology.

1656: The properties of these states can be studied in a model independent way

1657: using the large $N_c$ expansion.

1658: We extend the recent analysis of the positive parity exotics performed

1659: in Ref.~\cite{JM3} to the negative parity states. In the quark model

1660: these states correspond to the ground state with all quarks in $s$-wave

1661: orbitals, and are thus expected to be lighter that their positive parity

1662: counterparts.

1663: 

1664: Their spin-flavor structure is more complicated, corresponding to

1665: a wave function transforming in the mixed symmetry representation.

1666: In this respect, these states are closely related to orbitally

1667: excited baryons, well studied in the large $N_c$ expansion

1668: \cite{Goity,PY1,PY2,SU3}, and we make use of techniques developed

1669: to deal with these states. We derive properties of the mass

1670: spectrum of the exotic states in an expansion in $1/N_c$. Similar

1671: methods can be applied to study other properties of the states,

1672: such as their magnetic moments and strong decays.

1673: 

1674: We study both heavy (quark content $q^4 \bar Q$) and light $q^4\bar q$

1675: pentaquarks, constructing the complete set of states for both SU(2)

1676: and SU(3) flavor symmetry. In the heavy sector there are more states

1677: than for the positive parity case, transforming as $\mathbf{3},

1678: \mathbf{\overline{6}},\mathbf{15}$ and $\mathbf{15'}$ under SU(3).

1679: We derive two model-independent mass relations Eqs.~(\ref{mr1}), (\ref{mr2})

1680: to $O(1/N_c^2)$ connecting the masses of these states.

1681: 

1682: The mass spectrum of the negative parity light pentaquarks is richer, and

1683: includes both exotic ($\mathbf{\overline{10},27,35}$) and non-exotic

1684: SU(3) representations $(\mathbf{1,8,10}$). Even though mixing with the

1685: orbitally excited regular baryons will likely affect the mass spectrum of

1686: the nonexotic states, we study in some detail the mass spectrum of the

1687: $\mathbf{1}$ states, which are expected to be the lightest pentaquarks.

1688: We show that their mass spectrum and mixing are constrained in a very

1689: specific way at leading order in $1/N_c$.

1690: 

1691: In contrast to the symmetric spin-flavor (positive parity) exotic

1692: states studied in Ref.~\cite{JM3}, for this case the large $N_c$

1693: expansion is somewhat less predictive, and does not connect their

1694: properties to those of the ground state baryons. More predictive

1695: power is obtained in the constituent quark model with color-spin

1696: interactions, which is used to compute the mass spectrum of heavy

1697: exotic states. We show that this approach is equivalent to the

1698: large $N_c$ expansion, with a particular relation among the

1699: coefficients of the $O(1/N_c)$ operators. Using the recent

1700: observation by H1 of an anticharmed pentaquark state, we make

1701: predictions for all other charmed pentaquarks, and point out

1702: experimental signatures for the remaining states. We suggest one

1703: natural explanation for the narrow width of the H1 state. Assuming

1704: that it is identified with the $\mathbf{15}_\frac32$ with the spin

1705: of the light degrees of freedom $s_\ell^{\pi_\ell} = 2^-$, its

1706: strong decay width to $\bar D^{(*)} N$ is suppressed by

1707: $\Lambda^2/m_c^2$ from heavy quark symmetry.

1708: %While these predictions are model dependent,

1709: %the $1/N_c$ mass relations can be used to constrain the masses of the

1710: We present heavy quark symmetry predictions for the strong decay

1711: width ratios in $\bar D^{(*)} N$ and $\bar D^{(*)} \Delta$, which

1712: should be useful in constraining the quantum numbers of these

1713: states.

1714: 

1715: 

1716: 

1717: %\acknowledgments

1718: 

1719: \begin{acknowledgements}

1720: We are grateful to Bob Jaffe, Elizabeth Jenkins and Aneesh Manohar

1721: for very useful and stimulating discussions. While this paper was

1722: being completed, we received Ref.~\cite{MW} which presents a

1723: similar treatment of the heavy pentaquarks in the $1/N_c$

1724: expansion. We thank Margaret Wessling for informing us of her work

1725: before publication. The work of D. P. has been supported by the

1726: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under the Grant No.

1727: DOE-FG03-97ER40546 and by the NSF under grant PHY-9970781. The

1728: work of C.S. was partially supported by ANPCYT (Argentina) grant

1729: PICT03-08580 and by Fundaci\'on Antorchas. We thank the organizers

1730: of the `Large $N_c$ QCD' program in ECT$^\star$ Trento, Italy,

1731: where this work has been completed, for an enjoyable workshop.

1732: \end{acknowledgements}

1733: 

1734: \newpage

1735: \appendix

1736: 

1737: \section{Matrix elements on exotic states}

1738: 

1739: We list here the matrix elements of the $O(1)$ operators $G_{\bar q}^{ia} G_{q}^{ia}$

1740: and $T^2$ appearing in the Hamiltonian of the light negative parity exotic states.

1741: 

1742: \begin{eqnarray}\nonumber

1743: \begin{array}{c|c|c}

1744: \hline \mbox{state} & \frac{1}{N_c} G_{\bar q}^{ia} G_{q}^{ia}  &

1745: \frac{1}{N_c} T^a T^a\\

1746: \hline

1747: \hline

1748:  & \\

1749: \mathbf{1}_\frac12(\mathbf{3}_0) & 0 & \frac{N_c^2-9}{12N_c}\\

1750:  &  \\

1751: \mathbf{1}_\frac12(\mathbf{3}_1) & -\frac{3N_c+11}{24N_c} & \frac{N_c^2-9}{12N_c} \\

1752:  & \\

1753: \mathbf{1}_\frac12(\mathbf{3}_0)-\mathbf{1}_\frac12(\mathbf{3}_1)

1754: &

1755: \pm \frac{\sqrt3(N_c+5)}{16 N_c} & 0 \\

1756:  & \\

1757: \hline

1758:  & \\

1759: \mathbf{\overline{10}}_\frac12(\mathbf{\overline{6}}_1) &

1760: \frac{1}{6 N_c} &

1761: \frac{(N_c+3)(N_c+9)}{12N_c}\\

1762:  & \\

1763: \mathbf{\overline{10}}_\frac32(\mathbf{\overline{6}}_1) & -\frac{1}{12 N_c} & \frac{(N_c+3)(N_c+9)}{12N_c} \\

1764:  &  \\

1765: \hline

1766:  &  \\

1767: \mathbf{27}_\frac12(\mathbf{15}_0) & 0 & \frac{N_c^2+12N_c+51}{12N_c}\\

1768:  &  \\

1769: \mathbf{27}_\frac12(\mathbf{15}_1) & \frac{1}{6N_c} & \frac{N_c^2+12N_c+51}{12N_c}\\

1770:  &  \\

1771: \mathbf{27}_\frac12(\mathbf{15}_0)-\mathbf{27}_\frac12(\mathbf{15}_1) & 0 & 0 \\

1772:  &  \\

1773: \hline

1774:  &  \\

1775: \mathbf{27}_\frac32(\mathbf{15}_1) & -\frac{1}{12N_c} & \frac{N_c^2+12N_c+51}{12N_c}\\

1776:  &  \\

1777: \mathbf{27}_\frac32(\mathbf{15}_2) & \frac{1}{4N_c} & \frac{N_c^2+12N_c+51}{12N_c}\\

1778:  &  \\

1779: \mathbf{27}_\frac32(\mathbf{15}_1)-\mathbf{27}_\frac32(\mathbf{15}_2) & 0 & 0 \\

1780:  &  \\

1781: \hline

1782:  & \\

1783: \mathbf{27}_\frac52(\mathbf{15}_2) & -\frac{1}{6 N_c} & \frac{N_c^2+12 N_c+51}{12N_c}\\

1784:  &  \\

1785: \mathbf{35}_\frac12(\mathbf{15}'_1) & \frac{1}{6 N_c} & \frac{N_c^2+12 N_c+99}{12N_c} \\

1786:  & \\

1787: \mathbf{35}_\frac32(\mathbf{15}'_1) & -\frac{1}{12 N_c} & \frac{N_c^2+12 N_c+99}{12N_c} \\

1788:  & \\

1789: \hline

1790: \end{array}

1791: \end{eqnarray}

1792: 

1793: 

1794: 

1795: 

1796: 

1797: \newpage

1798: 

1799: 

1800: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

1801: %\cite{'tHooft:1973jz}

1802: \bibitem{'tHooft:1973jz}

1803: G.~'t Hooft,

1804: %``A Planar Diagram Theory For Strong Interactions,''

1805: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 72}, 461 (1974).

1806: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B72,461;%%

1807: %

1808: \bibitem{witten}

1809: E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 160}, 57 (1979).

1810: 

1811: \bibitem{Largenspinflavor}

1812: %\cite{Dashen:1993as}

1813: %\bibitem{Dashen:1993as}

1814: R.~F.~Dashen and A.~V.~Manohar,

1815: %``Baryon - pion couplings from large N(c) QCD,''

1816: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 315}, 425 (1993),

1817: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9307241].

1818: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9307241;%%

1819: %\cite{Dashen:1993ac}

1820: %\bibitem{Dashen:1993ac}

1821: %R.~F.~Dashen and A.~V.~Manohar,

1822: %``1/N(c) corrections to the baryon axial currents in QCD,''

1823: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 315}, 438 (1993);

1824: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9307242].

1825: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9307242;%%

1826: %\cite{Jenkins:1993zu}

1827: %\bibitem{Jenkins:1993zu}

1828: E.~Jenkins,

1829: %``Baryon hyperfine mass splittings in large N QCD,''

1830: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 315}, 441 (1993).

1831: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9307244].

1832: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9307244;%%

1833: %

1834: \bibitem{DJM}

1835: %\cite{Dashen:1993jt}

1836: %\bibitem{Dashen:1993jt}

1837: R.~F.~Dashen, E.~Jenkins and A.~V.~Manohar,

1838: %``The 1/N(c) expansion for baryons,''

1839: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 49}, 4713 (1994);

1840: %[Erratum-ibid.\ D {\bf 51}, 2489 (1995)]

1841: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9310379].

1842: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9310379;%%

1843: %\bibitem{DJM2}

1844: %\cite{Dashen:1994qi}

1845: %\bibitem{Dashen:1994qi}

1846: %R.~F.~Dashen, E.~Jenkins and A.~V.~Manohar,

1847: %``Spin flavor structure of large N(c) baryons,''

1848: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 51}, 3697 (1995).

1849: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9411234].

1850: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9411234;%%

1851: \bibitem{largenrefs}

1852: %\cite{Jenkins:1994md}

1853: %\bibitem{Jenkins:1994md}

1854: E.~Jenkins and A.~V.~Manohar,

1855: %``Baryon magnetic moments in the 1 / N(c) expansion,''

1856: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 335}, 452 (1994);

1857: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9405431].

1858: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9405431;%%

1859: %\cite{Jenkins:2002rj}

1860: %\bibitem{Jenkins:2002rj}

1861: E.~Jenkins, X.~d.~Ji and A.~V.~Manohar,

1862: %``Delta $\to$ N gamma in large-N(c) QCD,''

1863: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 89}, 242001 (2002).

1864: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0207092].

1865: 

1866: \bibitem{largen}

1867: %\cite{Carone:1993dz}

1868: %\bibitem{Carone:1993dz}

1869: C.~Carone, H.~Georgi and S.~Osofsky,

1870: %``On spin independence in large N(c) baryons,''

1871: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 322}, 227 (1994);

1872: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9310365].

1873: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9310365;%%

1874: %\cite{Luty:1993fu}

1875: %\bibitem{Luty:1993fu}

1876: M.~A.~Luty and J.~March-Russell,

1877: %``Baryons from quarks in the 1/N expansion,''

1878: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 426}, 71 (1994);

1879: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9310369].

1880: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9310369;%%

1881: M.~A.~Luty, J.~March-Russell and M.~J.~White,

1882: %``Baryon magnetic moments in a simultaneous expansion in 1/N and m(s),''

1883: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 51}, 2332 (1995).

1884: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9405272].

1885: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9405272;%%

1886: %

1887: \bibitem{heavybaryons}

1888: %\cite{Jenkins:1993af}

1889: %\bibitem{Jenkins:1993af}

1890: E.~Jenkins,

1891:  %``Light quark spin - flavor symmetry for baryons containing a heavy quark in

1892: %large N QCD,''

1893: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 315}, 431 (1993),

1894: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9307243].

1895: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9307243;%%

1896: %\cite{Jenkins:1993ta}

1897: %\bibitem{Jenkins:1993ta}

1898: %E.~Jenkins,

1899:  %``Hyperfine mass splittings of baryons containing a heavy quark in large N

1900: %QCD,''

1901: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 315}, 447 (1993),

1902: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9307245].

1903: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9307245;%%

1904: %\cite{Jenkins:1996de}

1905: %\bibitem{Jenkins:1996de}

1906: %E.~Jenkins,

1907: %``Heavy Baryon Masses in the $1/m_Q$ and $1/N_c$ Expansions,''

1908: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 54}, 4515 (1996),

1909: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9603449].

1910: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9603449;%%

1911: %\cite{Jenkins:1996rr}

1912: %\bibitem{Jenkins:1996rr}

1913: %E.~Jenkins,

1914: %``Update of heavy baryon mass predictions,''

1915: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 55}, 10 (1997).

1916: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9609404].

1917: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9609404;%%

1918: 

1919: %\cite{Pirjol:1997bp}

1920: \bibitem{PY1}

1921: D.~Pirjol and T.~M.~Yan,

1922: %``1/N(c) expansion for excited baryons,''

1923: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 57}, 1449 (1998).

1924: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9707485].

1925: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9707485;%%

1926: 

1927: %\cite{Pirjol:1997sr}

1928: \bibitem{PY2}

1929: D.~Pirjol and T.~M.~Yan,

1930: %``Excited baryons phenomenology from large-N(c) QCD,''

1931: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 57}, 5434 (1998).

1932: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9711201].

1933: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9711201;%%

1934: 

1935: 

1936: \bibitem{seventyminusrefs}

1937: %\cite{Carone:6, 1tu}

1938: %\bibitem{Carone:6, 1tu}

1939: C.~D.~Carone, H.~Georgi, L.~Kaplan and D.~Morin,

1940: %``Decays of l = 1 baryons: Quark model versus large N(c),''

1941: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 50}, 5793 (1994).

1942: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9406227].

1943: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9406227;%%

1944: %\cite{Goity:1996hk}

1945: 

1946: \bibitem{Goity}

1947: J.~L.~Goity,

1948: %``N(c) limit of spin-flavor breaking in excited baryon levels,''

1949: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 414}, 140 (1997);

1950: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9612252].

1951: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9612252;%%

1952: %\cite{Carlson:1998vx}

1953: %\bibitem{Carlson:1998vx}

1954: C.~E.~Carlson, C.~D.~Carone, J.~L.~Goity and R.~F.~Lebed,

1955: %``Operator analysis of l = 1 baryon masses in large N(c) {QCD},''

1956: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59}, 114008 (1999),

1957: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9812440].

1958: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9812440;%%

1959: %\cite{Carlson:1998gw}

1960: %\bibitem{Carlson:1998gw}

1961: %C.~E.~Carlson, C.~D.~Carone, J.~L.~Goity and R.~F.~Lebed,

1962: %``Masses of orbitally excited baryons in large N(c) {QCD},''

1963: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 438}, 327 (1998).

1964: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9807334].

1965: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9807334;%%

1966: %\cite{Schat:2001xr}

1967: 

1968: \bibitem{SU3}

1969: C.~L.~Schat, J.~L.~Goity and N.~N.~Scoccola,

1970: %``Masses of the 70- baryons in large N(c) QCD,''

1971: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 88}, 102002 (2002);

1972: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0111082].

1973: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0111082;%%

1974: J.~L.~Goity, C.~L.~Schat and N.~N.~Scoccola,

1975: %``Negative parity 70-plet baryon masses in the 1/N(c) expansion,''

1976: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 114014 (2002).

1977: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0209174].

1978: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0209174;%%

1979: 

1980: 

1981: \bibitem{radial}

1982: J.~L.~Goity, C.~Schat and N.~N.~Scoccola,

1983: %``Analysis of the [56,2+] baryon masses in the 1/N(c) expansion,''

1984: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 564}, 83 (2003).

1985: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0304167].

1986: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0304167;%%

1987: 

1988: %\cite{Cohen:2003jk}

1989: \bibitem{Cohen:2003jk}

1990: T.~D.~Cohen and R.~F.~Lebed,

1991:  %``Excited baryons in large N(c) QCD revisited: The resonance picture  versus

1992: %single-quark excitations,''

1993: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 096008 (2003),

1994: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0301219].

1995: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0301219;%%

1996: %\cite{Cohen:2003tb}

1997: %\bibitem{Cohen:2003tb}

1998: %T.~D.~Cohen and R.~F.~Lebed,

1999: %``New relations for excited baryons in large N(c) QCD,''

2000: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 91}, 012001 (2003).

2001: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0301167].

2002: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0301167;%%

2003: 

2004: %\cite{Pirjol:2003ye}

2005: \bibitem{PiSc}

2006: D.~Pirjol and C.~Schat,

2007:  %``1/N(c) corrections to the SU(4) symmetry for L = 1 baryons: The three

2008: %towers,''

2009: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 096009 (2003).

2010: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0301187].

2011: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0301187;%%

2012: D.~Pirjol and C.~Schat,

2013: AIP Conf.\ Proc.\ {\bf 698}, 548 (2004)

2014: [arXiv:hep-ph/0308125].

2015: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0308125;%%

2016: 

2017: 

2018: %\cite{Jenkins:2004tm}

2019: \bibitem{JM1}

2020: E.~Jenkins and A.~V.~Manohar,

2021: %``Baryon Exotics in the Quark Model, the Skyrme Model and QCD,''

2022: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 93}, 022001 (2004).

2023: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0401190].

2024: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0401190;%%

2025: 

2026: \bibitem{JM3}

2027: E.~Jenkins and A.~V.~Manohar,

2028: %``1/N(c) expansion for Exotic Baryons''

2029: JHEP {\bf 0406}, 039 (2004).

2030: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0402024;%%

2031: 

2032: \bibitem{CoLe}

2033: T.~D.~Cohen and R.~F.~Lebed,

2034: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 578}, 150 (2004).

2035: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0309150;%%

2036: %

2037: \bibitem{hybrids}

2038: T.~D.~Cohen,

2039: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 427}, 348 (1998);

2040: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9801316;%%

2041: C.~K.~Chow, D.~Pirjol and T.~M.~Yan,

2042: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59}, 056002 (1999).

2043: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9807387;%%

2044: 

2045: 

2046: \bibitem{Glozman}

2047: %\cite{Glozman:1995fu}

2048: %\bibitem{Glozman:1995fu}

2049: L.~Y.~Glozman and D.~O.~Riska,

2050: %``The Spectrum of the nucleons and the strange hyperons and chiral dynamics,''

2051: Phys.\ Rept.\  {\bf 268}, 263 (1996);

2052: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9505422].

2053: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9505422;%%

2054: %\cite{Praszalowicz:2003tc}

2055: %\bibitem{Praszalowicz:2003tc}

2056: M.~Praszalowicz,

2057: %``The width of Theta+ for large N(c) in chiral quark soliton model,''

2058: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 583}, 96 (2004)

2059: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0311230;%%

2060: 

2061: \bibitem{DPP}

2062: D.~Diakonov, V.~Petrov and M.~V.~Polyakov,

2063: %``Exotic anti-decuplet of baryons: Prediction from chiral solitons,''

2064: Z.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 359}, 305 (1997).

2065: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9703373].

2066: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9703373;%%

2067: %

2068: %

2069: \bibitem{IKOR}

2070: %\cite{Itzhaki:2003nr}

2071: %\bibitem{Itzhaki:2003nr}

2072: N.~Itzhaki, I.~R.~Klebanov, P.~Ouyang and L.~Rastelli,

2073: %``Is Theta(1540)+ a kaon Skyrmion resonance?,''

2074: arXiv:hep-ph/0309305.

2075: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0309305;%%

2076: %\cite{Cohen:2003mc}

2077: %\bibitem{Cohen:2003mc}

2078: %\bibitem{cohen}

2079: T.~D.~Cohen,

2080:  %``The Theta+ baryon in soliton models: Large N(c) QCD and the validity of

2081: %rigid-rotor quantization,''

2082: arXiv:hep-ph/0312191.

2083: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0312191;%%

2084: J.~R.~Ellis, M.~Karliner and M.~Praszalowicz,

2085: %``Chiral-soliton predictions for exotic baryons,''

2086: arXiv:hep-ph/0401127.

2087: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0401127;%%

2088: 

2089: \bibitem{JW}

2090: R.~L.~Jaffe and F.~Wilczek,

2091: %``Diquarks and exotic spectroscopy,''

2092: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 91}, 232003 (2003).

2093: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0307341;%%

2094: 

2095: \bibitem{KaLi}

2096: M.~Karliner and H.~J.~Lipkin,

2097: %``A Diquark-Triquark Model For The Kn Pentaquark,''

2098: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 575}, 249 (2003);

2099: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0402260].

2100: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0402260;%%

2101: M.~Karliner and H.~J.~Lipkin,

2102: %``The anticharmed exotic baryon Theta/c and its relatives,''

2103: arXiv:hep-ph/0307343.

2104: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0307343;%%

2105: 

2106: \bibitem{nuss}

2107: A.~Casher and S.~Nussinov,

2108: %``The narrow Theta(1543). A QCD dilemma: Tube or not tube?,''

2109: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 578}, 124 (2004).

2110: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0309208].

2111: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0309208;%%

2112: 

2113: \bibitem{uncorr}

2114: M.~Genovese, J.~M.~Richard, F.~Stancu and S.~Pepin,

2115: %``Heavy-flavour pentaquarks in a chiral constituent quark model,''

2116: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 425}, 171 (1998);

2117: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9712452].

2118: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9712452;%%

2119: C.~E.~Carlson, C.~D.~Carone, H.~J.~Kwee and V.~Nazaryan,

2120: %``Phenomenology of the pentaquark antidecuplet,''

2121: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 573}, 101 (2003);

2122: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0307396].

2123: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0307396;%%

2124: B.~K.~Jennings and K.~Maltman,

2125: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69}, 094020 (2004).

2126: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0308286;%%

2127: 

2128: %\cite{Carlson:2003wc}

2129: \bibitem{Carlson:2003wc}

2130: C.~E.~Carlson, C.~D.~Carone, H.~J.~Kwee and V.~Nazaryan,

2131: %``Positive parity pentaquarks pragmatically predicted,''

2132: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 579}, 52 (2004),

2133: %[arXiv:hep-ph/0310038].

2134: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0310038;%%

2135: %\cite{Carlson:2003xb}

2136: %\bibitem{Carlson:2003xb}

2137: %C.~E.~Carlson, C.~D.~Carone, H.~J.~Kwee and V.~Nazaryan,

2138: %``A naturally narrow positive parity Theta+,''

2139: arXiv:hep-ph/0312325.

2140: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0312325;%%

2141: 

2142: \bibitem{Thetaclat} S.~Sasaki,

2143: %``Lattice study of exotic S = +1 baryon,''

2144: arXiv:hep-lat/0310014;

2145: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0310014;%%

2146: F.~Csikor, Z.~Fodor, S.~D.~Katz and T.~G.~Kovacs,

2147: %``The status of pentaquark spectroscopy on the lattice,''

2148: arXiv:hep-lat/0407033;

2149: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0407033;%%

2150: F.~Csikor, Z.~Fodor, S.~D.~Katz and T.~G.~Kovacs,

2151: %``Pentaquark hadrons from lattice QCD,''

2152: JHEP {\bf 0311}, 070 (2003);

2153: %[arXiv:hep-lat/0309090].

2154: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0309090;%%

2155: T.~W. Chiu and T.~H. Hsieh, hep-ph/0404007.

2156: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0404007;%%

2157: %\cite{Ishii:2004qe}

2158: %\bibitem{Ishii:2004qe}

2159: N.~Ishii, T.~Doi, H.~Iida, M.~Oka, F.~Okiharu and H.~Suganuma,

2160: %``Penta-quark baryon in anisotropic lattice QCD,'' hep-lat/0408030.

2161: %%CITATION = HEP-LAT 0408030;%%

2162: %\cite{Mathur:2004jr}

2163: %\bibitem{Mathur:2004jr}

2164: N.~Mathur {\it et al.},

2165: %``A study of pentaquarks on the lattice with overlap fermions,''

2166: hep-ph/0406196.

2167: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0406196;%%

2168: 

2169: 

2170: \bibitem{Thetadiscovery}

2171: %\cite{Nakano:2003qx}

2172: %\bibitem{Nakano:2003qx}

2173: T.~Nakano {\it et al.}  [LEPS Collaboration],

2174:  %``Evidence for a narrow $S=+1$ baryon resonance in photoproduction from the

2175: %neutron,''

2176: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 91}, 012002 (2003).

2177: %[arXiv:hep-ex/0301020].

2178: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0301020;%%

2179: %\cite{Barmin:2003vv}

2180: %\bibitem{Barmin:2003vv}

2181: V.~V.~Barmin {\it et al.}  [DIANA Collaboration],

2182:  %``Observation of a baryon resonance with positive strangeness in K+

2183: %collisions with Xe nuclei,''

2184: Phys.\ Atom.\ Nucl.\  {\bf 66}, 1715 (2003)

2185: [Yad.\ Fiz.\  {\bf 66}, 1763 (2003)].

2186: %[arXiv:hep-ex/0304040].

2187: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0304040;%%

2188: %\cite{Stepanyan:2003qr}

2189: %\bibitem{Stepanyan:2003qr}

2190: S.~Stepanyan {\it et al.}  [CLAS Collaboration],

2191:  %``Observation of an exotic S = +1 baryon in exclusive photoproduction from the

2192: %deuteron,''

2193: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\  {\bf 91}, 252001 (2003);

2194: %[arXiv:hep-ex/0307018].

2195: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0307018;%%

2196: %\cite{Barth:ja}

2197: %\bibitem{Barth:ja}

2198: J.~Barth {\it et al.}  [SAPHIR Collaboration],

2199:  %``Evidence For The Positive-Strangeness Pentaquark Theta+ In Photoproduction

2200: %With The Saphir Detector At Elsa,''

2201: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 572}, 127 (2003).

2202: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B572,127;%%

2203: %

2204: \bibitem{xiexotics}

2205: %\cite{Alt:2003vb}

2206: %\bibitem{Alt:2003vb}

2207: C.~Alt {\it et al.}  [NA49 Collaboration],

2208:  %``Observation of an exotic S = -2, Q = -2 baryon resonance in proton proton

2209: %collisions at the CERN SPS,''

2210: arXiv:hep-ex/0310014.

2211: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0310014;%%

2212: 

2213: \bibitem{H1} A. Aktas {\em et al.}, [H1 Collaboration], hep-ex/0403017.

2214: 

2215: 

2216: \bibitem{parity}

2217: T.~Mehen and C.~Schat,

2218: %``Determining pentaquark quantum numbers from strong decays,''

2219: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 588}, 67 (2004);

2220: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0401107;%%

2221: C.~Hanhart, J.~Haidenbauer, K.~Nakayama and U.~G.~Meissner,

2222: %``On the determination of the parity of the Theta+,''

2223: arXiv:hep-ph/0407107.

2224: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0407107;%%

2225: 

2226: \bibitem{nocharm}

2227: %\bibitem{Karshon:2004tf}

2228: U.~Karshon  [ZEUS Collaboration],

2229: %``Charm hadron spectroscopy with ZEUS,''

2230: arXiv:hep-ex/0407004;

2231: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0407004;%%

2232: B.~Aubert  [BABAR Collaboration],

2233: %``A search for the Theta*++ pentaquark in B+- $\to$ p anti-p K+-,''

2234: arXiv:hep-ex/0408037;

2235: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0408037;%%

2236: I.~V.~Gorelov  [the CDF Collaboration],

2237: %``Pentaquark searches at CDF,''

2238: arXiv:hep-ex/0408025.

2239: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0408025;%%

2240: 

2241: \bibitem{StWi}

2242: I.~W.~Stewart, M.~E.~Wessling and M.~B.~Wise,

2243: %``Stable heavy pentaquark states,''

2244: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 590}, 185 (2004).

2245: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0402076;%%

2246: 

2247: 

2248: 

2249: 

2250: \bibitem{review}

2251: Fl. Stancu, arXiv: hep-ph/0408042;

2252: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0408042;%%

2253: R.~L.~Jaffe, arXiv: hep-ph/0409065.

2254: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0409065;%%

2255: 

2256: 

2257: 

2258: 

2259: 

2260: 

2261: 

2262: 

2263: \bibitem{Strottman} D.~Strottman,

2264: %``Multi - Quark Baryons And The Mit Bag Model,''

2265: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 20}, 748 (1979).

2266: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D20,748;%%

2267: 

2268: 

2269: \bibitem{RLJ}

2270: R.~L.~Jaffe, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 38}, 195 (1977);

2271: %%CITATION = PHRVA,38,195;%%

2272: %R.~L.~Jaffe,

2273: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 15}, 281 (1977).

2274: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D15,281;%%

2275: 

2276: 

2277: \bibitem{CQM} A.~De Rujula, H.~Georgi and S.~L.~Glashow,

2278: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 12}, 147 (1975).

2279: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D12,146;%%

2280: 

2281: 

2282: \bibitem{IsWi} N. Isgur and M.~B. Wise, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 66}, 1130 (1991).

2283: 

2284: \bibitem{LeSi}

2285: J.~Leandri and B.~Silvestre-Brac,

2286: %``Systematics Of Anti-Q Q-4 Systems With A Pure Chromomagnetic Interaction,''

2287: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 40}, 2340 (1989).

2288: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D40,2340;%%

2289: 

2290: 

2291: \bibitem{PY0} D. Pirjol and T.~M. Yan, Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 56}, 5483 (1997).

2292: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9701291;%%

2293: 

2294: \bibitem{MW} M.~E.~ Wessling, {\em Negative-Parity Heavy Pentaquark States in

2295: $1/N_c$}, hep-ph/0408263.

2296: 

2297: \end{thebibliography}

2298: 

2299: 

2300: \end{document}

2301: