Evidence for a narrow anti-charmed baryon state

Aktas, A.; Andreev, V.; Anthonis, T.; Asmone, A.; Babaev, A.; Backović, S.; Bähr, J.; Baranov, P.; Barrelet, E.; Bartel, W.; Baumgartner, S.; Becker, J.; Beckingham, M.; Behnke, O.; Behrendt, O.; Belousov, A.; Berger, Ch.; Berger, N.; Berndt, T.; Bizot, J.C.; Böhme, J.; Boenig, M.-O.; Boudry, V.; Braciník, J.; Brisson, V.; Bröker, H.-B.; Brown, D.; Bruncko, D.; Büsser, F.W.; Bunyatyan, A.; Buschhorn, G.; Bystritskaya, L.; Campbell, A. J.; Caron, S.; Cassol-Brunner, F.; C̆erný, K.; Chekelian, V.; Collard, C.; Contreras, J. G.; Coppens, Y.R.; Coughlan, J. A.; Cox, B. E.; Cozzika, G.; Cvach, J.; Dainton, J. B.; Dau, W.D.; Daum, K.; Delcourt, B.; Demirchyan, R.; Roeck, A. De; Desch, K.; Wolf, E. A. De; Diaconu, C.; Dingfelder, J.; Dodonov, V.; Dubak, A.; Duprel, C.; Eckerlin, G.; Efremenko, V.; Egli, S.; Eichler, R.; Eisele, F.; Ellerbrock, M.; Elsen, E.; Erdmann, M.; Erdmann, W.; Faulkner, Peter; Favart, L.; Fedotov, A.; Felst, R.; Ferencei, J.; Fleischer, M.; Fleischmann, P.; Fleming, Y.H.; Flucke, G.; Flügge, G.; Fomenko, A.; Foresti, I.; Formánek, J.; Franke, G.; Frising, G.; Gabathuler, E.; Gabathuler, K.; Garutti, E.; Garvey, J.; Gayler, J.; Gerhards, R.; Gerlich, C.; Ghazaryan, S.; Glazov, A.; Goerlich, L.; Gogitidze, N.; Gorbounov, S.; Grab, C.; Grässler, H.; Greenshaw, T.; Gregori, M.; Grindhammer, G.; Gwilliam, C. B.; Haidt, D.; Hajduk, L.; Haller, J.; Hansson, Magnus; Heinzelmann, G.; Henderson, R. C. W.; Henschel, H.; Henshaw, O.; Heremans, R.; Herrera, G.; Herynek, I.; Heuer, R. D.; Hildebrandt, M.; Hiller, K. H.; Höting, P.; Hoffmann, D.; Horisberger, R.; Hovhannisyan, A.; Ibbotson, M.; Ismaïl, Mohamed; Jacquet, M.; Janauschek, L.; Janssen, X.; Jemanov, V.; Jönsson, L.; Johnson, D.P.; Jung, H.; Kant, D.; Kapichine, M.; Karlsson, Martin; Katzy, J.; Keller, N.; Kennedy, J.; Kenyon, I. R.; Kiesling, C.; Klein, M.; Kleinwort, C.; Klimkovich, T.; Kluge, T.; Knies, G.; Knutsson, A.; Koblitz, B.; Korbel, V.; Kostka, P.; Koutouev, R.; Kropivnitskaya, A.; Kroseberg, J.; Kückens, J.; Kuhr, T.; Landon, M. P. J.; Lange, W.; Laštovička, T.; Laycock, P.; Lebedev, A.; Leißner, B.; Lemrani, R.; Lendermann, V.; Levonian, S.; Lindfeld, L.; Lipka, K.; List, B.; Lobodzinska, E.; Loktionova, N.; López-Fernández, R.; Lubimov, V.; Lueders, H.; Lüke, D.; Lux, T.; Lytkin, L.; Makankine, A.; Malden, N.; Malinovski, E.; Mangano, S.; Marage, P.; Marks, J.; Marshall, R.; Martišíková, M.; Martyn, H. U.; Maxfield, S. J.; Meer, D.; Mehta, A.; Meier, K.; Meyer, Andreas Bernhard; Meyer, H.; Meyer, J.; Michine, S.; Mikocki, S.; Milcewicz, I.; Milstead, D.; Mohamed, A.; Moreau, F.; Morozov, A.; Morozov, I.; Morris, J. V.; Mozer, M. U.; Müller, K.; Мурін, П.; Nagovizin, V.; Naroska, B.; Naumann, J.; Naumann, T.; Newman, P. R.; Niebuhr, C.; Nikiforov, A.; Nikitin, D.; Nowak, G.; Nožička, M.; Oganezov, R.; Olivier, B.; Olsson, J. E.; Ossoskov, G.; Ozerov, D.; Pascaud, C.; Patel, G. D.; Peez, M.; Pérez, E.; Perieanu, A.; Petrukhin, A.; Pitzl, D.; Plačakyt, R.; Pöschl, R.; Portheault, B.; Povh, Bogdan; Raičević, N.; Ratiani, Z.; Reimer, P.; Reisert, B.; Rimmer, A.; Risler, C.; Rizvi, E.; Robmann, P.; Roland, B.; Roosen, R.; Rostovtsev, A.; Rurikova, Z.; Rusakov, S. V.; Rybicki, K.; Sankey, D. P. C.; Sauvan, E.; Schätzel, S.; Scheins, J.; Schilling, F. P.; Schleper, P.; Schmidt, S.; Schmitt, S.; Schneider, M.; Schoeffel, L.; Schöning, A.; Schröder, V.; Schultz‐Coulon, H.‐C.; Schwanenberger, C.; Sedlák, Kamil; Sefkow, F.; Sheviakov, I.; Shtarkov, L. N.; Sirois, Y.; Sloan, T.; Smirnov, P.; Soloviev, Y.; South, D.; Spaskov, V.; Specka, A.; Spitzer, H.; Stamen, R.; Stella, B.; Stiewe, J.; Strauch, I.; Straumann, U.; Tchoulakov, V.; Thompson, G.; Thompson, P. D.; Tomasz, F.; Traynor, D.; Truöl, P.; Tsipolitis, G.; Tsurin, I.; Turnau, J.; Tzamariudaki, E.; Uraev, A.; Urban, M.; Usik, A.; Utkin, D.; Valkár, Š.; Valkárová, A.; Vallée, C.; Mechelen, P. Van; Remortel, N. Van; Trevino, A. Vargas; Vazdik, Y.; Veelken, C.; Vest, A.; Vinokurova, S.; Volchinski, V.; Wacker, K.; Wagner, J.; Weber, G.; Weber, R.; Wegener, D.; Werner, C.; Werner, N.; Wessels, M.; Wessling, B.; Winter, G. G.; Wissing, C.; Woehrling, E.-E.; Wolf, R.; Wünsch, E.; Xella, S.; Yan, W. G.; Yeganov, V.; Žáček, J.; Zálešâk, J.; Zhang, Z.; Zhokin, A.; Zohrabyan, H.; Zomer, F.

doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2004.03.012

Cited by 134 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The shape of the distribution is similar to that shown in ref. [8], but the above efficiency estimate of 2% implies an observed number of about 10 pairs per 50 MeV bin, which is considerably smaller than the number of about 10 pairs per 10 MeV bin found by H1. This could be due to an underestimate of the proton yield by HERWIG, a higher relative proton yield in charm production with 1 < Q 2 < 6 GeV 2 , or a large contamination of the experimentally reported distribution by non-protons.…”

Section: Dis Resultscontrasting

confidence: 53%

“…We first use HERWIG to simulate DIS in e + p collisions with beam momenta 27.6 × 920 GeV/c and integrated luminosity 75 pb −1 , which approximates the data sample used in the H1 analysis [8]. For greater efficiency, we limit the target partons to charmed quarks and antiquarks only, by setting the process code IPROC = 9004.…”

Section: Dis Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1 and 2 are for the cuts in ref. [8], while the data shown are for slightly different cuts (see ref. [17] for details), which we estimate may reduce the cross section by 30-40% without changing the shape significantly.…”

Section: Dis Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In March, H1 reported [8] observing a narrow resonance in D * − p and D * +p invariant mass combinations in inelastic ep collisions at E CM of 300 GeV and 320 GeV at HERA. The resonance has a mass of 3099 ±3 (stat.)…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Coalescence model for Θ_c pentaquark formation

Karliner

Webber

2004

J. High Energy Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a model for the formation of the charmed pentaquark Θ c in hard scattering processes such as deep inelastic scattering, e + e − annihilation, and high-energy pp collisions. The model assumes that the cross section for Θ c formation is proportional to the rate of production of pD * − (orpD * + ) pairs in close proximity both in momentum space and in coordinate space. The constant of proportionality is determined from the Θ c cross section in deep inelastic scattering as reported by the H1 experiment. The HERWIG Monte Carlo is used to generate simulated DIS events and also to model the space-time structure of the final state. Requiring the proton and the D * be within a 100 MeV mass window and separated by a spacelike distance of no more than 2 fm, we find that a large "coalescence enhancement factor" F co ∼ 10 is required to account for the H1 signal. The same approach is then applied in order to estimate the number and characteristics of Θ c events produced at LEP and the Tevatron.

show abstract

Section: Dis Resultscontrasting

confidence: 53%

Section: Dis Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Dis Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Coalescence model for Θ_c pentaquark formation

Karliner

Webber

2004

J. High Energy Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A more recent example of spurious signals is the one which appeared in 2004, when the H1 collaboration published a claim of having observed a pentaquark signal at 6σ significance [14]. Their prominent peak at 3.1 GeV was indeed suggestive; however it was not confirmed by later searches.…”

Section: Discoveries That Petered Outmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extraordinary claims: the 0.000029% solution

Dorigo

2015

EPJ Web of Conferences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The five-standard-deviation threshold is an established standard for discovery claims in experimental particle physics; however, the criterion is an ad-hoc recipe with no solid foundations. In this report I discuss its origins and the issues it was designed to address, pointing out its shortcomings and the need for a more flexible approach to decide when a new observed effect should be taken seriously.

show abstract