1: %\documentclass[aps,prd,showpacs,showkeys,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
2: \documentclass[aps,prd,onecolumn,showpacs,showkeys,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
3: \usepackage{graphicx}
4: \usepackage{dcolumn}
5: \usepackage{bm}
6: \begin{document}
7: \title{Strong decays of $D_{sJ}(2317)$ and $D_{sJ}(2460)$}
8: \author{Wei Wei, Peng-Zhi Huang}
9: \affiliation{Department of Physics, Peking University, Beijing
10: 100871, China}
11: \author{Shi-Lin Zhu}
12: \email{zhusl@th.phy.pku.edu.cn} \affiliation{Department of
13: Physics, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China}
14:
15: \date{\today}
16:
17: \begin{abstract}
18:
19: With the identification of ($D_{sJ}(2317), D_{sJ}(2460)$) as the
20: ($0^+$, $1^+$) doublet in the heavy quark effective field theory,
21: we derive the light cone QCD sum rule for the coupling of eta
22: meson with $D_{sJ}(2317) D_s $ and $D_{sJ}(2460) D_s^{*} $.
23: Through $\eta-\pi^0$ mixing we calculate their pionic decay
24: widths, which are consistent with the experimental values (or
25: upper limits). Combining the radiative decay widths derived by
26: Colangelo, Fazio and Ozpineci in the same framework, we conclude
27: that the decay patterns of $D_{sJ}(2317, 2460)$ strongly support
28: their interpretation as ordinary $c \bar s$ mesons.
29:
30: \end{abstract}
31:
32: \pacs{13.25.Ft, 12.38.Lg, 12.39.-x}
33:
34: \keywords{Charm-strange mesons, light-cone QCD sum rule}
35:
36: \maketitle
37:
38: \pagenumbering{arabic}
39:
40: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
41: \section{Introduction}\label{sec1}
42: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
43:
44: Since the discovery of $D_{sJ}(2317)$ \cite{babar1} and
45: $D_{sJ}(2460)$ \cite{cleo}, there have been lots of experimental
46: investigations of these two narrow resonances
47: \cite{belle1,belle2,belle3,belle4,focus,babar2,babar3,babar4,babar5}.
48: They have the natural spin-parity assignment as the $0^+,1^+$
49: charm-strange mesons from the observed final states. Their masses
50: are about one hundred MeV lower than the quark model prediction
51: \cite{quark model}, which are really unexpected. Many theoretical
52: papers have been dedicated to the understanding of their
53: underlying structure
54: \cite{Bardeen,Nowak,lutz,molecule,tetra1,tetra2,tetra3,tetra4,tetra5,
55: tetra6,tetra7,tetra8,atom,deandrea,cahn,slz,lucha,hofmann,sadzi,
56: beci,lee,alz,lattice,colangelo4}. Proposed schemes include the
57: ($0^+,1^+$) chiral partners of the $D_s, D_s^{*}$ doublet in heavy
58: quark effective field theory \cite{Bardeen,Nowak,lutz}, $DK$
59: molecules \cite{molecule}, four quark states
60: \cite{tetra1,tetra2,tetra3,tetra4,tetra5,tetra6,tetra7,tetra8},
61: $D\pi$ atom \cite{atom} and conventional $c\bar s$ states
62: \cite{Bardeen,Nowak,deandrea,cahn,slz,lucha,hofmann,sadzi,beci,lee}.
63:
64: These two states are lower than the $DK$ and $D^{*}K$ thresholds
65: respectively. Their strong decays are isospin violating and occur
66: through two steps: $D_{sJ}(2317)\rightarrow D_s+\eta \rightarrow
67: D_s+\pi^0$ and $D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow D^{*}_s+\eta\rightarrow
68: D^{*}_s+\pi^0$. The second step is induced by the $\eta-\pi^0$
69: mixing due to the mass difference between $m_u$ and $m_d$
70: \cite{wise}. There have been some discussions of their strong and
71: radiative decays within the quark model
72: \cite{Bardeen,tetra1,godfrey,colangelo1,fayy,mehen,colangelo4}.
73: The strong decay widths from various approaches differ
74: significantly as can be seen from Table \ref{table1}. Their
75: radiative decay widths were calculated using light cone QCD sum
76: rule (LCQSR) not long ago \cite{colangelo2}. Very recently, the
77: branch ratios of the strong and radiative decays were measured
78: quite accurately by Belle Collaboration \cite{belle1,belle2} and
79: Babar Collaboration \cite{babar2,babar5}. In order to pin down the
80: underlying quark content of these narrow states, a reliable
81: calculation of their strong decay widths will be very helpful.
82:
83: In this work, we assume ($D_{sJ}(2317), D_{sJ}(2460)$) as the
84: $c\bar s$ states and study their strong decays in the LCQSR
85: framework, which has been used extensively in extracting low-lying
86: hadron masses and coupling constants in the past decade (see Ref.
87: \cite{Colangelo3} for a review). This paper is organized as
88: follows. We calculate the coupling constant $g_{D_{s0}D_s\eta}$
89: and the strong decay width of $D_{sJ}(2317) \to D_s \pi^0$ through
90: $\eta-\pi^0$ mixing in Section \ref{sec2}. $D_{sJ}(2460)$ decay is
91: presented in Section \ref{sec3}. We compare our results with
92: experimental data and other theoretical approaches in literature
93: and summarize our results in Section \ref{sec4} . We collect the
94: light cone wave functions of the $\eta$ meson in the appendix.
95:
96: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
97: \section{$D_{sJ}(2317)\rightarrow D_s+\eta \rightarrow D_s+\pi^0$}\label{sec2}
98: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
99:
100: The amplitude of the strong decay $D_{sJ}(2317)\rightarrow
101: D_s+\eta$ can be defined as
102: \begin{equation}
103: \langle \eta(q)D_s(p)| D_{s0}(p+q)\rangle =
104: m_{D_{s0}}g_{D_{s0}D_s\eta}\; .
105: \end{equation}
106: We calculate the coupling constant $g_{D_{s0}D_s\eta}$ through
107: the following correlation function
108: \begin{equation}
109: F(p^2,(p+q)^2)=i \int d^4x \; e^{i p \cdot x} \langle \eta(q) |
110: T[J^\dagger_5(x) J_0(0)] |0\rangle \; ,
111: \end{equation}
112: where $J_0(x)=\bar c(x) s(x)$ and $J_5(x)=\bar c(x) i\gamma_5
113: s(x)$ are the interpolating currents of ${\bar D}_{s0}$ and ${\bar
114: D}_s$ respectively.
115:
116: At the quark level, the correlation function can be expressed in
117: terms of the eta meson light cone wave functions after the
118: insertion of the charm quark propagator at the leading order
119: \begin{equation} \langle 0|T\{c(x)\bar{c}(0)\}|0\rangle =
120: i\hat{S}_c^0(x) = \int \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi)^4i}e^{-ikx}
121: \frac{\not\!k+m_c}{m_c^2-k^2-i\epsilon}\; .
122: \end{equation}
123: Now we have
124: \begin{equation}
125: F(p^2,(p+q)^2)= \int \frac{d^4 k}{(2 \pi)^4} \int d^4x \;
126: \frac{e^{i (p -k)\cdot x}}{m_c^2 -k^2} \big[m_c\langle \eta(q) |
127: \bar s(x) i\gamma_5 s(0) |0\rangle - i k^\alpha \langle \eta(q) |
128: \bar s(x) \gamma_{\alpha}s(0) |0\rangle \Big] \; .
129: \end{equation}
130:
131: In order to include the contribution from the twist-four eta meson
132: light-cone wave functions, we need the three particle piece in the
133: charm quark propagator:
134: \begin{eqnarray}
135: \langle 0 |T\{c(x)\bar{c}(0)\}|0\rangle &=& i\hat{S}_c^0(x)
136: -ig_s\int\frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}e^{-ikx} \int_0^1dv\left[ \frac
137: 12\frac{\not\!k+m_c}{(m^2_c-k^2)^2} G^{\mu\nu}(vx)\sigma_{\mu\nu}
138: +\frac {1}{m_c^2-k^2}vx_\mu G^{\mu\nu}(vx)\gamma_{\nu} \right]~,
139: \label{32}
140: \end{eqnarray}
141: where $G_{\mu\nu}=G_{\mu\nu}^c\frac{\lambda^c}2$ with $\mbox{\rm
142: tr}(\lambda^a\lambda^b)=2\delta^{ab}$, and $g_s$ is the strong
143: coupling constant. The complete expression of $F(p^2,(p+q)^2)$ up
144: to twist-four reads:
145: \begin{eqnarray}\label{q1} \nonumber
146: F(p^2,(p+q)^2)&=&\int_0^1\frac{du}{m_c^2-(p+uq)^2}\Big \{
147: -F_{\eta}\varphi_{\eta}(u)p.q+m_cF_{\eta}\mu_{\eta}\varphi_{p}(u)\\\nonumber
148: && -F_{\eta}m_{\eta}^2(1+\frac{m_c^2}{m_c^2-(p+uq)^2})G(u)+\frac14
149: F_{\eta}m_{\eta}^2\frac{A(u)p.q}{m_c^2-(p+uq)^2}[1+\frac{2m_c^2}{m_c^2-(p+uq)^2}]
150: \Big \}
151: \\
152: && +F_{\eta}m_{\eta}^2 \int_0^1 dv\int {\cal{D}}\alpha_{i}
153: \frac{p.q}{m_c^2-(p+(\alpha_1+v\alpha_3)q)^2}\Big \{2v
154: (2\varphi_{\perp}-\varphi_{\parallel})-(2\varphi_{\perp}-\varphi_{\parallel}
155: +2\tilde{\varphi}_{\perp}-\tilde{\varphi}_{\parallel})\Big \}\; ,
156: \end{eqnarray}
157: where
158: \begin{equation}
159: G(u) =-\int_0^{u} du^{'} B(u^{'})\; .
160: \end{equation}
161: $\varphi_{\eta} (u),\varphi_{p}(u), B(u)$ etc are light cone
162: amplitudes of $\eta$ meson \cite{ballA,ballB}, which are collected
163: in the Appendix. $F_\eta =-\frac{2}{\sqrt{6}}f_\eta $, with
164: $f_\eta $ defined as
165: \begin{equation}
166: \langle 0|\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\left( \bar u (0)\gamma_\mu \gamma_5
167: u(0) + \bar d (0)\gamma_\mu \gamma_5 d(0) -2\bar s (0)\gamma_\mu
168: \gamma_5 s(0) \right) | \eta (q) \rangle =i f_\eta q_\mu \; .
169: \end{equation}
170:
171: At the phenomenological level, $F(p^2,(p+q)^2)$ can be expressed
172: as
173: \begin{equation}\label{q2}
174: F(p^2,(p+q)^2)=\frac{m_{D_{s0}}^2m_{D_s}f_{D_{s0}}f_{D_s}g_{D_{s0}D_s\eta}}
175: {(m_{D_s}^2-p^2)(m_{D_{s0}}^2-(p+q)^2)} +\cdots\;.
176: \end{equation}
177: The ellipse denotes the contribution from the continuum. The decay
178: constants $f_{D_{s0}}$ and $f_{D_s}$ are defined as
179: \begin{eqnarray}
180: \langle 0 | J_5^{\dagger} | D_s\rangle&=& f_{D_s} m_{D_s} \; , \\
181: \langle D_{s0} | J_0 | 0\rangle&=& f_{D_{s0}} m_{D_{s0}}\; .
182: \end{eqnarray}
183:
184: Applying the double Borel transformation with respect to $p^2$ and
185: $(p+q)^2$ to Eqs. (\ref{q1}) and (\ref{q2}) and invoking the
186: quark-hadron duality, we get the following sum rule:
187: \begin{eqnarray}\label{sr1} \nonumber
188: f_{D_{s0}}f_{D_s}g_{D_{s0}D_s\eta}&=&\frac{1}{m_{D_{s0}}^2m_{D_s}}
189: e^{\frac{m_{D_{s0}}^2+m_{D_s}^2}{2M^2}} \Bigg\{M^2
190: [e^{-\frac{m_c^2}{M^2}} - e^{-\frac{s_0}{M^2}}]
191: \Big[\frac{1}{2}M^2F_{\eta}\varphi^{'}_{\eta}(u_0)
192: +m_cF_{\eta}\mu_{\eta}\varphi_p({u_0})\\\nonumber
193: &&-F_{\eta}m^2_{\eta}G(u_0)
194: -\frac 18 F_{\eta}m^2_{\eta}A^{'}(u_0)+\frac 12
195: F_{\eta}m^2_{\eta}(2I_1(2\varphi_{\perp}-\varphi_{\parallel})-
196: I_2(2\varphi_{\perp}-\varphi_{\parallel}
197: +2\tilde{\varphi}_{\perp}-\tilde{\varphi}_{\parallel}))\Big]\\
198: && -e^{-\frac{m_c^2}{M^2}}F_{\eta}m^2_{\eta}m^2_c\Big[G(u_0)
199: +\frac18A^{'}(u_0)\Big]\Bigg\}_{u_0=1/2}\; .
200: \end{eqnarray}
201: The functions $I_1$ and $I_2$ are defined as
202: \begin{eqnarray}
203: I_1 ({\cal F}) &=&\int_0^{u_0} d\alpha_1 \big
204: [\frac{1}{u_0-\alpha_1}{\cal
205: F}(\alpha_1,1-u_0,u_0-\alpha_1)-\int_{u_0-\alpha_1}^{1-\alpha_1}
206: d\alpha_3 \frac{{\cal F}(\alpha_1,1-\alpha_1-\alpha_3,\alpha_3)}
207: {\alpha_3^2}\big ]\; , \\
208: I_2({\cal F}) &=& -\int_0^{1-u_0} d\alpha_3 \frac{{\cal F}(u_0,
209: 1-u_0-\alpha_3, \alpha_3)}{\alpha_3} +\int_0^{u_0} d\alpha_1 \frac
210: {F(\alpha_1,1-u_0,u_0-\alpha_1)}{u_0-\alpha_1} \; ,
211: \end{eqnarray}
212: where ${\cal F}$ is one of the twist-four light cone amplitudes
213: $\varphi_{\|},~ \varphi_{\bot},~ {\tilde \varphi}_{\|}, ~{\tilde
214: \varphi}_{\bot}$.
215:
216: In Eq.(\ref{sr1}), $M^2=\frac{M_1^2M_2^2}{M_1^2+M_2^2}$,
217: $u_0=\frac{M_1^2}{M_1^2+M_2^2}$. Since there exists an overlapping
218: working window for the two Borel parameters $M_1^2, M_2^2$, it's
219: convenient to let $M_1^2=M_2^2$, i.e., $u_0=\frac 12$. The eta
220: meson light-cone wave functions are known quite well at $u_0=\frac
221: 12$. Such a choice allows the clean subtraction of the continuum
222: contribution. We can simply introduce a threshold parameter $s_0$
223: and replace $M^2 e^{-\frac{m_c^2}{M^2}}$ with $M^2\left(
224: e^{-\frac{m_c^2}{M^2}}-e^{-\frac{s_0}{M^2}}\right)$ to subtract
225: the contribution from the continuum and excited states
226: \cite{braun}.
227:
228: In the numerical analysis, the values of parameters in the above
229: sum rule are: $m_{D_{s0}}=2.317$ GeV, $m_{D_s}=1.968$ GeV, $m_c$
230: (1 GeV)=1.35 GeV, $f_{D_s}=(266\pm 32)$ MeV \cite{pdg},
231: $f_{D_{s0}}=(225\pm 25)$ MeV \cite{Colangelo3}. For $f_{D_s}$ and
232: $f_{D_{s0}}$ we use the central values. Values of the other
233: parameters are given in the Appendix. The variation of
234: $g_{D_{s0}D_s\eta}$ with $M^2$ for the different $s_0$ is shown in
235: Fig. \ref{fig1}.
236:
237: %---------figure 1
238: \begin{figure}[hbt]
239: \begin{center}
240: \scalebox{0.8}{\includegraphics{g0.eps}}
241: \end{center}
242: \caption{The variation of the coupling constant
243: $g_{D_{s0}D_s\eta}$ with $M^2$ (in unit of $\mbox{GeV}^2$). The
244: long-dashed, short-dashed and solid curves correspond to
245: $s_0=6.0,~ 6.25,~ 6.5~\mbox{GeV}^2$ respectively.}\label{fig1}
246: \end{figure}
247:
248: In the working region of the Borel parameter $5~\mbox{GeV}^2 < M^2
249: <7 ~\mbox{GeV}^2$, we get
250: \begin{equation}
251: -3.02<g_{D_{s0}D_s\eta}<-2.66 \; ,
252: \end{equation}
253: where the uncertainty arises from the variation of $M^2$ and
254: $s_0$. Numerically, the twist-three term $\varphi_p$ has the
255: largest contribution to the sum rule.
256:
257: The pionic decay of $D_{sJ}(2317)$ occurs through $\eta-\pi^0$
258: mixing, which is described by the isospin violating piece in the
259: chiral lagrangian
260: \begin{equation}
261: {\cal{L}}_m=\frac{m_{\pi}^2 f^2}{4(m_u+m_d)}\mbox{Tr}(\xi m_q
262: \xi+\xi^{\dagger} m_q \xi^{\dagger})~,
263: \end{equation}
264: where $\xi= \mbox{exp}(i\tilde{\pi}/f_\pi)$, $\tilde{\pi}$ the
265: light meson octet and $m_q$ is the light quark mass matrix. The
266: mass difference between up and down quarks induces the
267: $\eta-\pi^0$ mixing with a suppression factor around
268: $\frac{m_d-m_u}{m_s-\frac{m_u+m_d}{2}}$. Finally the strong decay
269: width reads
270: \begin{equation}
271: \Gamma(D_{sJ}(2317)\rightarrow
272: D_s\pi^0)=\frac{3}{144\pi}g_{D_{s0}D_s\eta}^2
273: (\frac{m_d-m_u}{m_s-\frac{m_u+m_d}{2}})^2|\vec{p_1}|\; .
274: \end{equation}
275: Numerically we have
276: \begin{equation}
277: \Gamma(D_{sJ}(2317)\rightarrow D_s\pi^0)=(34-44)~\mbox{keV}\;.
278: \end{equation}
279:
280:
281: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
282: \section{$D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow D^{*}_s+\eta\rightarrow
283: D^{*}_s+\pi^0$}\label{sec3}
284: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
285:
286: For $D_{sJ}(2460)$ decay, we define the following matrix element
287: \begin{equation}
288: \langle \eta(q)D_s^{*}(p)| D_{s1}^{'}(p+q)\rangle =
289: m_{D_{s1}^{'}}g_{D_{s1}^{'}D_s^{*}\eta}\eta^{\mu}\epsilon^{*}_{\mu}\;,
290: \end{equation}
291: where $\eta_{\mu}$ and $\epsilon_{\mu}$ are the polarization
292: tensors for the $1^+$ and $1^-$ states $D_{s1}^{'}, D_s^{*}$
293: respectively. We start from the correlation function
294: \begin{equation}
295: F_{\mu\nu}(p^2,(p+q)^2)=i \int d^4x \; e^{i p \cdot x} \langle
296: \eta(q) | T[J^\dagger_{\mu}(x) J^A_{\nu}(0)] |0\rangle
297: \end{equation}
298: where $J_{\mu}(x)=\bar c(x)\gamma_{\mu} s(x)$ and
299: $J^A_{\nu}(x)=\bar c(x) \gamma_{\nu}\gamma_5 s(x)$. At the hadron
300: level, we have
301: \begin{equation}
302: F_{\mu\nu}(p^2,(p+q)^2)=\frac{m_{D_{s1}^{'}}^2m_{D_s^{*}}f_{D_{s1}^{'}}f_{D_s^{*}}g_{D_{s1}^{'}D_s^{*}\eta}}
303: {(m_{D_s}^2-p^2)(m_{D_{s0}}^2-(p+q)^2)}(g_{\mu\nu}+
304: \frac{m_{D_{s1}^{'}}^2-m_{D_s^{*}}^2}{2m_{D_{s1}^{'}}^2m_{D_s^{*}}^2}q_{\mu}p_{\nu}+\ldots)\;,
305: \end{equation}
306: where we have kept the $g_{\mu\nu}$ and $q_{\mu}p_{\nu}$
307: structures. The decay constants $f_{D_{s1}^{'}}$ and $f_{D_s^{*}}$
308: are defined as
309: \begin{eqnarray}
310: \langle 0 | J_{\mu}^{+} | D_s^{*}\rangle&=& f_{D_s^{*}} m_{D_s^{*}}\epsilon_{\mu}\;,\\
311: \langle D_{s1}^{'} | J_{\nu}^A | 0\rangle&=&
312: f_{D_{s1}^{'}}m_{D_{s1}^{'}}\eta^{*}_{\nu}\; .
313: \end{eqnarray} \noindent
314:
315: Following the same procedure as in Section \ref{sec2}, we obtain a
316: sum rule from the $g_{\mu\nu}$ structure
317: \begin{eqnarray}\label{q3}\nonumber
318: f_{D_{s1}^{'}}f_{D_s^{*}}g_{D_{s1}^{'}D_s^{*}\eta}&=&\frac{1}{m_{D_{s1}^{'}}^2m_{D_s}^{*}}
319: e^{\frac{m_{D_{s1}^{'}}^2+m_{D_s^{*}}^2}{2M^2}} \Bigg\{M^2
320: [e^{-\frac{m_c^2}{M^2}} - e^{-\frac{s_0}{M^2}}]
321: \Big[-\frac{1}{2}M^2F_{\eta}\varphi^{'}_{\eta}(u_0)
322: -m_cF_{\eta}\mu_{\eta}\varphi_p({u_0})\\\nonumber
323: &&+\frac 18F_{\eta}m^2_{c}A^{'}(u_0)
324: +\frac 12 F_{\eta}m^2_{\eta}(2I_1(\varphi_{\parallel})-
325: I_2(\varphi_{\parallel}
326: +2\tilde{\varphi}_{\perp}-\tilde{\varphi}_{\|}))\big]\\
327: && +e^{-\frac{m_c^2}{M^2}}\Big[\frac 18 F_{\eta} m_c^4A^{'}[u_0]
328: +F_{\eta}m_{\eta}^2m^2_{c}G(u_0)\Big]\Bigg\}_{u_0=1/2}\; .
329: \end{eqnarray}
330:
331: Similarly we can get a second sum rule from the $q_{\mu}p_{\nu}$
332: structure
333: \begin{eqnarray}\label{q4}\nonumber
334: f_{D_{s1}^{'}}f_{D_s^{*}}g_{D_{s1}^{'}D_s^{*}\eta}&=&\frac{2m_{{D_s}^{*}}}{m_{D_{s1}^{'}}^2-m_{D_s^{*}}^2}
335: e^{\frac{m_{D_{s1}^{'}}^2+m_{D_s^{*}}^2}{2M^2}} \Bigg\{M^2
336: [e^{-\frac{m_c^2}{M^2}} - e^{-\frac{s_0}{M^2}}]
337: [-F_{\eta}\varphi_{\eta}(u_0)]
338: \\\nonumber
339: && +e^{-\frac{m_c^2}{M^2}}\Big[\frac
340: 13m_cF_{\eta}\mu_{\eta}\varphi_{\sigma}({u_0})+\frac 14 m_c^2
341: F_{\eta}(1+\frac{m_c^2}{M^2})A(u_0)-2F_{\eta}m_{\eta}^2u_0G(u_0)\\
342: && +F_{\eta}m_{\eta}^2(I_3(\varphi_{\|}
343: +2\tilde{\varphi}_{\bot}-\tilde{\varphi}_{\|})
344: -2I_4(2\varphi_{\perp}+\varphi_{\|}))\Big]\Bigg\}_{u_0=1/2}\;.
345: \end{eqnarray}
346:
347: The functions $I_3$ and $I_4$ in Eqs. (\ref{q3}) and (\ref{q4})
348: are defined as
349: \begin{eqnarray}
350: I_3 ({\cal F}) &=&\int_0^{u_0} d\alpha_1
351: \int_{u_0-\alpha_1}^{1-\alpha_1} d\alpha_3 \frac {{\cal
352: F}(\alpha_1,
353: 1-\alpha_1-\alpha_3, \alpha_3) }{\alpha_3}\; ,\\
354: I_4 ({\cal F}) &=&\int_0^{u_0} d\alpha_1
355: \int_{u_0-\alpha_1}^{1-\alpha_1} d\alpha_3 \frac {u_0-\alpha_1
356: }{\alpha^2_3}{\cal F}(\alpha_1, 1-\alpha_1-\alpha_3, \alpha_3)\; .
357: \end{eqnarray}
358:
359: Unfortunately the sum rule Eq. (\ref{q4}) is very unstable. There
360: is no working window for the Borel parameter $M^2$. In the
361: following we focus on the sum rule Eq. (\ref{q3}). We use
362: $m_{D_{s1}^{'}}=2.460 ~\mbox{GeV},~ m_{D_s^{*}}=2.112 ~\mbox{GeV}$
363: \cite{pdg}, $f_{D_{s1}^{'}}\simeq f_{D_{s0}}$, $f_{D_s^{*}}\simeq
364: f_{D_s}$ \cite{colangelo2}. The variation of
365: $g_{D_{s1}^{'}D_s^{*}\eta}$ with $M^2$ is presented in Fig. 2.
366:
367: %---------figure 2
368: \begin{figure}[hbt]
369: \begin{center}
370: \scalebox{0.8}{\includegraphics{g1.eps}}
371: \end{center}
372: \caption{The variation of the coupling constant
373: $g_{D_{s1}^{'}D_s^{*}\eta}$ with $M^2$ (in unit of
374: $\mbox{GeV}^2$). The long-dashed, short-dashed and solid curves
375: correspond to $s_0=6.25, ~6.5, ~6.75~\mbox{GeV}^2$ respectively.
376: }\label{fig2}
377: \end{figure}
378:
379: In the working window of Borel parameter $4 ~\mbox{GeV}^2 < M^2 <6
380: ~\mbox{GeV}^2$, we have
381: \begin{equation}
382: 2.61<g_{D_{s1}^{'}D_s^{*}\eta}<3.14 \; .
383: \end{equation}
384: The contribution from $\varphi_p$ term is also very important
385: numerically. The pinonic decay width reads
386: \begin{equation}
387: \Gamma(D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow
388: D^{*}_s+\pi^0)=\frac{g_{D_{s1}^{'}D_s^{*}\eta}^2}{144\pi}
389: (2+\frac{(m_{D_{s1}^{'}}^2+m_{D_s^{*}}^2)^2}{4m_{D_{s1}^{'}}^2m_{D_s^{*}}^2})
390: (\frac{m_d-m_u}{m_s-\frac{m_u+m_d}{2}})^2|\vec{p_1}|\; .
391: \end{equation}
392: Finally we have
393: \begin{equation}
394: \Gamma(D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow D^{*}_s+\pi^0)=(35-51) ~\mbox{keV}
395: \;.
396: \end{equation}
397:
398: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
399: \section{Discussion}\label{sec4}
400: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
401:
402: The strong decay widths of $D_{sJ}(2317)\rightarrow D_s+\pi^0$ and
403: $D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow D^{*}_s+\pi^0$ have been calculated by
404: several groups. Their results are collected in Table \ref{table1}
405: together with ours. The first five calculations assume $c\bar s$
406: picture while the last two use composite non-$c\bar s$ pictures.
407: The decay width of $D_{sJ}(2317)$ is roughly the same as that of
408: $D_{sJ}(2460)$ from all approaches. The $1/m_c$ correction is
409: expected to modify the small values in the second column from
410: vector dominance model in the heavy quark limit \cite{colangelo2}.
411:
412: \begin{table}[h]
413: \caption{\baselineskip 15pt Strong decay widths (in keV) of
414: $D_{sJ}(2317)$ and $D_{sJ}(2460)$ from various theoretical
415: approaches.} \label{table1}
416: \begin{center}
417: \begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c}
418: \hline & LCQSR &\cite{colangelo1} &
419: \cite{Bardeen} & \cite{godfrey} &\cite{fayy}&\cite{tetra1}&\cite{ishida}&\\
420: \hline
421: $D^*_{sJ}(2317)\rightarrow D_{s}\pi^0$& 34-44 & $7\pm 1 $& 21.5 &$\simeq 10 $& 16 & 10-100&$150\pm 70$\\
422: $D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow D_{s}^{*}\pi^0$& 35-51 & $7\pm 1 $& 21.5 &$\simeq 10 $& 32 & &$150\pm 70$\\
423: \hline
424: \end{tabular}
425: \end{center}
426: \end{table}
427:
428: \begin{table}[h]
429: \caption{\baselineskip 15pt Comparison between experimental ratio
430: of $D_{sJ}(2317, 2460)$ radiative and strong decay widths and
431: theoretical predictions from LCQSR based on Ref. \cite{colangelo2}
432: and this work.} \label{table2}
433: \begin{center}
434: \begin{tabular}{cccc|c}
435: \hline & Belle & Babar & CLEO \cite{cleo} & LCQSR\\ \hline
436: $\frac{\Gamma \left( D^*_{sJ}(2317) \rightarrow D_{s}^{\ast
437: }\gamma \right) }{ \Gamma \left( D^*_{sJ}(2317)\rightarrow
438: D_{s}\pi ^{0}\right) }$ & $<0.18$ \cite{belle2}&
439: \ \hfill --- \hfill\ & $<0.059$& 0.13 \\
440: \hline $\frac{\Gamma \left(D_{sJ}(2460) \rightarrow D_{s}\gamma
441: \right) }{ \Gamma \left( D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow D_{s}^{\ast }\pi
442: ^{0}\right) }$ &
443: \begin{tabular}{c}
444: $0.55\pm0.13\pm0.08$ \cite{belle2}\\
445: \end{tabular}&
446: \begin{tabular}{c}
447: $0.375\pm0.054\pm0.057$ \cite{babar5} \\
448: \end{tabular}
449: &$<0.49$ & 0.56\\
450: \hline $\frac{\Gamma \left( D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow
451: D_{s}^{\ast }\gamma \right) }{\Gamma \left( D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow D_{s}^{\ast }\pi ^{0}\right) }$
452: & $<0.31$ \cite{belle2}&\ \hfill --- \hfill\ &$<0.16$ & 0.02 \\
453: \hline $\frac{\Gamma \left( D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow
454: D^*_{sJ}(2317)\gamma \right) }{\Gamma \left(
455: D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow
456: D_{s}^*\pi^0 \right) }$ & \ \hfill --- \hfill\ & $ < 0.23$ \cite{babar4}& $ < 0.58$ & 0.015 \\
457: \hline
458: \end{tabular}
459: \end{center}
460: \end{table}
461:
462: The radiative decay widths of $D_{sJ}(2317, 2460)$ were calculated
463: using LCQSR in \cite{colangelo2}: $\Gamma (D_{sJ}(2317)\rightarrow
464: D^{*}_s+\gamma)=(4-6)~\mbox{keV},~
465: \Gamma(D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow D_s \gamma)=(19-29)~\mbox{keV} ,~
466: \Gamma(D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow D^{*}_s+\gamma)=(0.6-1.1) ~\mbox{keV},~
467: \Gamma(D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow D_{sJ}(2317)+\gamma)=(0.5-0.8)~
468: \mbox{keV}$. Experimentally only $D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow D_s \gamma$ has
469: been observed by Belle \cite{belle1,belle2} and Babar
470: \cite{babar2,babar5}. We have collected the experimental ratio of
471: radiative and strong decays of $D_{sJ}$ mesons together with the
472: central values of theoretical predictions from LCQSR based on Ref.
473: \cite{colangelo2} and present work in Table \ref{table2}. For
474: $D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow D_s \gamma)$, we get a range 0.37-0.83
475: for the ratio, consistent with both Belle and Babar's measurement.
476:
477: In short summary, we have calculated the coupling constants
478: $g_{D_{s0}D_s\eta}$ and $g_{D_{s1}^{'}D_s^{*}\eta}$ in the
479: framework of LCQSR. Through the $\eta-\pi^0$ mixing we obtain
480: $\Gamma(D_{sJ}(2317)\rightarrow D_s\pi^0)=(34-44)~\mbox{keV}$ and
481: $\Gamma(D_{sJ}(2460)\rightarrow D_s^{*}\pi^0)=(35-51)~\mbox{keV}$.
482: These two widths are similar in magnitude, as expected from heavy
483: quark symmetry. The ratio between the radiative widths and strong
484: decay widths obtained in the same LCQSR framework is consistent
485: with Belle and Babar's most recent data, which strongly indicates
486: $D_{sJ}(2317)$ and $D_{sJ}(2460)$ are conventional $c\bar s$
487: mesons. In the future, B decays into $D_{sJ}$ mesons may also play
488: an important role in exploring these charming states
489: \cite{suzuki,chen,cheng,datta,huang,cheng2,barnes}.
490:
491:
492: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
493: \section{Acknowledgments}
494: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
495:
496: This project was supported by the National Natural Science
497: Foundation of China under Grants 10375003 and 10421003, Ministry
498: of Education of China, FANEDD, Key Grant Project of Chinese
499: Ministry of Education (NO 305001) and SRF for ROCS, SEM. W.W.
500: thanks Jie Lu and Feng-Lin Wang for helpful discussions.
501:
502: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
503: \section*{Appendix }
504: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
505: We use ${\bar q \Gamma q}$ to denote $({\bar u \Gamma u}+ {\bar d
506: \Gamma d} -2 {\bar s \Gamma s})/ \sqrt{6}$. Up to twist four, the
507: two- and three-particle light-cone wave functions of eta meson can
508: be written as \cite{ballA,ballB}:
509: \begin{eqnarray}\label{phieta}\nonumber
510: <\eta| {\bar q} (x) \gamma_{\mu} \gamma_5 q(0) |0>&=&-i f_{\eta}
511: q_{\mu} \int_0^1 du \; e^{iuqx} [\varphi_{\eta}(u) +{1\over 16}
512: m^2_\eta x^2 A(u) ] \nonumber\\
513: && -{i\over 2}f_\eta m_\eta^2
514: {q_\mu \over q x} \int_0^1 du \; e^{-iuqx} B(u) \; ,\nonumber\\
515: <\eta| {\bar q} (x) i \gamma_5 q(0) |0>&=& f_\eta \mu_\eta
516: \int_0^1 du \; e^{iuqx} \varphi_P (u) \; ,\nonumber\\
517: <\eta| {\bar q}(x) \sigma_{\mu \nu} \gamma_5 q(0) |0>&=& {i\over
518: 6} f_\eta \mu_\eta (q_\mu x_\nu-q_\nu x_\mu) \int_0^1 du \;
519: e^{-iuqx}
520: \varphi_\sigma (u) \; ,\nonumber\\
521: <\eta | {\bar q} (x) \sigma_{\alpha \beta} \gamma_5 g_s G_{\mu
522: \nu}(ux) q(x) |0>&=& i f_\eta \mu_\eta \eta_3 [(q_\mu q_\alpha
523: g_{\nu \beta}-q_\nu q_\alpha g_{\mu \beta}) -(q_\mu q_\beta g_{\nu
524: \alpha}-q_\nu q_\beta g_{\mu \alpha})]\nonumber \\
525: &&\int {\cal D}\alpha_i \; \varphi_{3 \eta} (\alpha_i)
526: e^{-iqx(\alpha_1+v \alpha_3)} \; ,\nonumber \\
527: <\eta| {\bar q} (x) \gamma_{\mu} \gamma_5 g_s G_{\alpha \beta}(vx)
528: q(0) |0 >&=& f_{\eta}m_\eta^2 \Big[ q_{\beta} \Big( g_{\alpha
529: \mu}-{x_{\alpha}q_{\mu} \over q \cdot x} \Big) -q_{\alpha} \Big(
530: g_{\beta \mu}-{x_{\beta}q_{\mu} \over q \cdot x} \Big) \Big] \int
531: {\cal{D}} \alpha_i \varphi_{\bot}(\alpha_i)
532: e^{-iqx(\alpha_1 +v \alpha_3)}\nonumber \\
533: &&+f_{\eta} m_\eta^2 {q_{\mu} \over q \cdot x } (q_{\alpha}
534: x_{\beta}-q_{\beta} x_{\alpha}) \int {\cal{D}} \alpha_i
535: \varphi_{\|} (\alpha_i) e^{-iqx(\alpha_1 +v \alpha_3)} \; ,\nonumber\\
536: <\eta|{\bar q} (x) \gamma_{\mu} g_s \tilde G_{\alpha
537: \beta}(vx)q(x) |0>&=& i f_{\eta} m_\eta^2 \Big[ q_{\beta} \Big(
538: g_{\alpha \mu}-{x_{\alpha}q_{\mu} \over q \cdot x} \Big)
539: -q_{\alpha} \Big( g_{\beta \mu}-{x_{\beta}q_{\mu} \over q \cdot x}
540: \Big) \Big] \int {\cal{D}} \alpha_i \tilde
541: \varphi_{\bot}(\alpha_i)
542: e^{-iqx(\alpha_1 +v \alpha_3)}\nonumber \\
543: &&i f_{\eta} m_\eta^2 {q_{\mu} \over q \cdot x } (q_{\alpha}
544: x_{\beta}-q_{\beta} x_{\alpha}) \int {\cal{D}} \alpha_i \tilde
545: \varphi_{\|} (\alpha_i) e^{iqx(\alpha_1 +v \alpha_3)} \;,\nonumber
546: \end{eqnarray}
547: where the operator $\tilde G_{\alpha \beta}$ is the dual of
548: $G_{\alpha \beta}$: $\tilde G_{\alpha \beta}= {1\over 2}
549: \epsilon_{\alpha \beta \delta \rho} G^{\delta \rho} $; ${\cal{D}}
550: \alpha_i$ is defined as ${\cal{D}} \alpha_i =d \alpha_1 d \alpha_2
551: d \alpha_3 \delta(1-\alpha_1 -\alpha_2 -\alpha_3)$ and
552: $f_{\eta}\simeq 1.2f_{\pi}=0.156~\mbox{GeV},~ \eta_3=0.013
553: ,~m_s(1~\mbox{GeV})=0.125~\mbox{GeV} ,~ m_{\eta}=0.548
554: ~\mbox{GeV},~ \mu_{\eta}=\frac{m_{\eta}^2}{m_s}=2.4 ~\mbox{GeV}$
555: \cite{pdg}.
556:
557: The distribution amplitudes $\varphi_{\eta}$ etc can be
558: parameterized as
559: \begin{eqnarray}
560: \varphi_{\eta}(u) &=&
561: 6u\bar{u}(1+a_2C^{3/2}_2(\zeta)+a_4C^{3/2}_4(\zeta))\; ,\nonumber\\
562: \phi_p(u) &=& 1+(30\eta_3-\frac 52 \rho_{\eta}^2)
563: C^{1/2}_2(\zeta)+(-3\eta_3\omega_3-\frac{27}{20}\rho_{\eta}^2-\frac
564: {81}{10}\rho_{\eta}^2a_2)
565: C^{1/2}_4(\zeta) \; ,\nonumber\\
566: \phi_{\sigma}(u)&=&
567: 6u(1-u)\big\{1+(5\eta_3-\frac{1}{2}\eta_3\omega_3-\frac{27}{20}\rho_{\eta}^2-\frac
568: {3}{5}\rho_{\eta}^2a_2)\big\}
569: C^{3/2}_2(\zeta) \; ,\nonumber\\
570: g_{\eta}(u)&=& 1+\{1+\frac{18}{7}a_2+60\eta_3+\frac{20}{3}\eta_4\}
571: C^{1/2}_2(\zeta)
572: +\{-\frac{9}{28}a_2-6\eta_3\omega_3\}C^{1/2}_4(\zeta) \; ,\nonumber\\
573: {\mathbb A}(u) & = & 6u\bar u \{ \frac{16}{15} +
574: \frac{24}{35}a_2 + 20 \eta_3 + \frac{20}{9}\eta_4 \nonumber\\
575: && + (-\frac{1}{15} + \frac{1}{16}-\frac{7}{27} \eta_3 \omega_3 -
576: \frac{10}{27}\eta_4 ) C_2^{3/2}(\xi) + ( -\frac{11}{210} a_2 -
577: \frac{4}{135}\eta_3\omega_3 )C_4^{3/2}(\xi) \} \nonumber\\
578: && + (-\frac{18}{5} a_2 + 21\eta_4\omega_4 ) \{ 2
579: u^3 (10-15 u + 6 u^2)\ln u + 2\bar u^3 (10-15\bar u + 6 \bar u^2)
580: \ln\bar u \nonumber \\
581: & & + u \bar u (2 + 13u\bar u)\} \; ,\nonumber\\
582: \varphi_{3\eta}(\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\alpha_3)&=& 360 \eta_3
583: \alpha_1\alpha_2\alpha_3^2 \{1+\frac{1}{2}\omega_3(7\alpha_3-3)\}
584: \; ,\nonumber\\
585: \varphi_{\parallel}(\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\alpha_3)&=& 120
586: \alpha_2\alpha_1
587: \alpha_3(a_{10} (\alpha_1-\alpha_2) \; ,\nonumber\\
588: \varphi_{\perp}(\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\alpha_3)&=&
589: 30\alpha_3^2(\alpha_2-
590: \alpha_1)[h_{00}+ h_{01}\alpha_3
591: +\frac{1}{2}h_{10}(5\alpha_3-3) \; ,\nonumber\\
592: \tilde{\varphi}_{\parallel}(\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\alpha_3)&=& 120
593: \alpha_1\alpha_2 \alpha_3(v_{00}+
594: v_{10}(3\alpha_3-1) \; , \nonumber\\
595: \tilde{\varphi}_{\perp}(\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\alpha_3)&=&
596: -30\alpha_3^2\{h_{00} \overline{\alpha}_3+
597: h_{01}[\alpha_g\overline{\alpha}_3-6\alpha_1\alpha_2]
598: +h_{10}[\alpha_3\overline{\alpha}_3-\frac{3}{2}
599: (\alpha_1^2+\alpha_2^2)] \; ,\nonumber
600: \end{eqnarray}
601: where $\bar{u} \equiv 1-u \; , \zeta \equiv 2u-1 \; ,
602: \overline{\alpha}=1-\alpha$. $C^{3/2,1/2}_{2,4}(\zeta)$ are
603: Gegenbauer polynomials. Here $g_{\eta}(u)=B(u)+\varphi_{\eta}(u)$.
604: $\rho_{\eta}^2$ gives the mass correction and are defined as
605: $\rho_{\eta}^2=\frac {m_s^2}{m_{\eta}^2}$. $a_{ij}$, $v_{ij}$ and
606: $h_{ij}$ are related to hadronic matrix elements $\eta_4$,
607: $\omega_4$ and $a_2$ as
608: $$
609: \begin{array}{r@{~=~}l@{\,,\quad}r@{~=~}l@{\,,\quad}r@{~=~}l}
610: a_{10} & \frac{21}{8}\eta_4\omega_4-\frac{9}{20}a_2 & v_{10} &
611: \frac{21}{8}\eta_4\omega_4 &
612: v_{00} & -\frac{1}{3}\eta_4\,, \\[5pt]
613: h_{01} & \frac{7}{4}\eta_4\omega_4-\frac{3}{20}a_2 & h_{10} &
614: \frac{7}{2}\eta_4\omega_4+\frac{3}{20}a_2 & v_{00} &
615: -\frac{1}{3}\eta_4 \,.
616: \end{array}
617: $$
618: The values of $a_2$ et al are: $a_2=0.115,~ a_4=-0.015,~
619: \eta_3=0.013,~ \omega_3=-3,~ \eta_4=0.5,~ \omega_4=0.2$. All of
620: them are scaled at $\mu=1~\mbox{GeV}$.
621:
622:
623: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
624: \bibitem{babar1} Babar Collaboration, B. Aubert et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 242001 (2003).
625: \bibitem{cleo} CLEO Collaboration, D. Besson et al., Phys. Rev. D, 032002 (2003).
626: \bibitem{belle1} Belle Collaboration, P. Krokovny et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 262002 (2003).
627: \bibitem{belle2} Belle Collaboration, Y.Mikami et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 012002 (2004).
628: \bibitem{belle3} Belle Collaboration, A. Drutskoy et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 061802 (2005).
629: \bibitem{belle4} Belle Collaboration, P. Krokovny et al., hep-ex/0310053.
630: \bibitem{focus} FOCUS Collabortation, E. W. Vaandering, hep-ex/0406044.
631: \bibitem{babar2} Babar Collaboration, B. Aubert et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 181801 (2004).
632: \bibitem{babar3} Babar Collaboration, B. Aubert et al., Phys. Rev. D. 69, 031101 (2004).
633: \bibitem{babar4} Babar Collaboration, G. Calderini et al., hep-ex/0405081.
634: \bibitem{babar5} Babar Collaboration, B. Aubert et al., hep-ex/0408067.
635: \bibitem{quark model} S. Godfrey and N. Isgur, Phys. Rev. D 32, 189 (1985);
636: S. Godfrey and R. Kokoski, Phys. Rev. D 43, 1679 (1991);
637: M. Di Pierro and E. Eichten, Phys. Rev. D 64, 114004 (2001).
638: \bibitem{Bardeen} W. A. Bardeen, E. J. Eichten and C. T. Hill, Phys. Rev. D 68, 054024 (2003).
639: \bibitem{Nowak} M. A. Nowak, M. Rho and I. Zahed, Acta Phys. Polon. B 35, 2377 (2004).
640: \bibitem{lutz} E. Kolomeitsev and M. Lutz, Phys. Lett. B 582, 39 (2004).
641: \bibitem{molecule} T. Barnes, F. E. Close, H. J. Lipkin, Phys. Rev. D 68, 054006 (2003).
642: \bibitem{tetra1} H.-Y. Cheng and W.-S. Hou, Phys. Lett. B 566, 193 (2003).
643: \bibitem{tetra2}K. Terasaki, Phys. Rev. D 68, 011501 (2003).
644: \bibitem{tetra3} T. E. Browder, S. Pakvasa, and A. A. Petrov, Phys. Lett. B 578, 365 (2004).
645: \bibitem{tetra4} U. Dmitrasinovic, Phys. Rev. D 70, 096011 (2004); Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 162002 (2005).
646: \bibitem{tetra5} A. Hayashigaki and K. Terasaki, hep-ph/0411285.
647: \bibitem{tetra6} M.E. Bracco et al., hep-ph/0503137.
648: \bibitem{tetra7} H. Kim and Y. Oh, hep-ph/0508251.
649: \bibitem{tetra8} M. Nielsen et al., hep-ph/0509131.
650: \bibitem{atom} A.P. Szczepaniak, Phys. Lett. B 567, 23 (2003).
651: \bibitem{deandrea} A. Deandrea, G. Nardulli, A. D. Polosa, Phys. Rev. D 68, 097501 (2003).
652: \bibitem{cahn} R. N. Cahn and J. D. Jackson, Phys. Rev. D 68, 037502 (2003).
653: \bibitem{slz} Y. B. Dai, C. S. Huang, C. Liu and S. L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D 68, 114011 (2003).
654: \bibitem{lucha} W. Lucha and F. Schobert, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 18, 2837 (2003).
655: \bibitem{hofmann} J. Hofmann and M.F.M. Lutz, Nucl. Phys. A 733, 142 (2004).
656: \bibitem{sadzi} M. Sadzikowski, Phys. Lett. B 579, 39 (2004).
657: \bibitem{beci} D. Becirevic et al., Phys. Lett B 599, 59 (2004).
658: \bibitem{lee} I. W. Lee et al., hep-ph/0412210.
659: \bibitem{alz} A. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D 72, 017902 (2005).
660: \bibitem{lattice} UKQCD Colaboration, A. Dongall et al, Phys. Lett. B 569, 41 (2003).
661: \bibitem{colangelo4} P. Colangelo, F. De Fazio and R. Ferrandes, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 19, 2083 (2004).
662: \bibitem{wise} P. L. Cho and M. B. Wise, Phys. Rev. D 49,
663: 6228(1994).
664: \bibitem{godfrey} S. Godfrey, Phys. Lett. B 568, 254 (2003).
665: \bibitem{fayy} Fayyazuddin and Riazuddin, Phys. Rev. D 69, 114008 (2004).
666: \bibitem{mehen} T. Mehen and R. P. Springer, Phys. Rev. D 70, 074014 (2004).
667: \bibitem{colangelo1} P. Colangelo and F. De. Fazio, Phys. Lett. B 570,
668: 180(2003).
669: \bibitem{colangelo2} P. Colangelo, F. De Fazio and A. Ozpineci,
670: hep-ph/0505195.
671: \bibitem{Colangelo3} P. Colangelo and A. Khodjamirian, in 'At the Frontier of Particle
672: Physics/Handbook of QCD', ed. by M. Shifman (World Scientific,
673: Singapore, 2001), hep-ph/0010175.
674: \bibitem{ballA} P. Ball, JHEP 9901, 010 (1999)
675: \bibitem{ballB} P. Ball, R. Zwicky, Phys. Rev. D 69, 115001 (2005)
676: \bibitem{braun} V. M. Belyaev, V. M. Braun, A. Khodjamirian, R. R\"{u}ckl, Phys. Rev. D 51, 6177
677: (1995).
678: \bibitem{pdg} S. Eidelman et al. [Particle Dada Group], Phys. Lett. B 592, 1 (2004).
679: \bibitem{ishida} S. Ishida et al, hep-ph/0310061.
680: \bibitem{suzuki} M. Suzuki, hep-ph/0307118.
681: \bibitem{chen} C. H. Chen and H. N. Li, Phys. Rev. D 69, 054002 (2004).
682: \bibitem{cheng} H. Y. Cheng, Phys. Rev. D 68, 094005 (2003).
683: \bibitem{datta} A. Datta and P. J. O¡¯Donnell, Phys. Lett. B 572, 164 (2003).
684: \bibitem{huang} M. Q. Huang, Phys. Rev. D 69, 114015 (2004).
685: \bibitem{cheng2} H. Y. Cheng, C. K. Chua and C. W. Hwang, Phys. Rev. D 69, 074025 (2004).
686: \bibitem{barnes} T. Barnes, hep-ph/0406327.
687: \end{thebibliography}
688: \end{document}
689: