Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results
description
Transcript of Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results
![Page 1: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Experimental Review of Pentaquarks:
Positive and Null Results
Forum on Pentaquarks (DESY)February 1, 2005
Ken Hicks (Ohio University)
![Page 2: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Outline
• Preliminary Comments and Opinions
• Evidence for the +
• The Null Experiments• Some common “myths”• New Data (SPring-8)• Conclusions
![Page 3: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Preliminary RemarkCongratulations to the ESA on a MAJOR success:
![Page 4: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Opinions on Pentaquarks:
• There are valid criticisms for both positive and null experimental results.– A “scorecard” approach will not work.
We need better, higher-statistics, data.
• Science versus emotion– There have been strong statements on
both sides of the existence question.– Let’s make scientifically sound
statements.
![Page 5: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
More Opinions
• If the + exists, data suggests it likely favors certain production mechanisms.– This is an exotic baryon.– It may have an exotic production
mechanism.• To make solid scientific statements:
– Calculate the expected rate of production.– Understand the rate of the background.– Compare with acceptance-corrected data.
![Page 6: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
If it exists, what is it?• The first + search was motivated by
the chiral soliton model of DPP.– Is it is possible that there is another
interpretation of the +? We should not be biased toward a particular theory.
• Lattice QCD suggests that the + has negative parity (opposite to DPP).– But these are not “gold-plated”
calculationsDiakonov, Petrov and Polyakov, Z. Phys. A359, 305 (1997).
![Page 7: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Positive results
![Page 8: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Comparison of + Experiments
Where Reaction Mass Width ’s*LEPS C K+K- X 1540 +-
10< 25 4.6
DIANA K+Xe K0p X 1539 +- 2
< 9 4.4
CLAS d K+K-p(n) 1542 +- 5
< 21 5.2
SAPHIR p K+K0(n) 1540 +- 6
< 25 4.8
ITEP A K0p X 1533 +- 5
< 20 6.7
CLAS p +K-K+
(n)1555 +- 10
< 26 7.8
HERMES e+d K0p X 1526 +- 3
13 +- 9
~5
ZEUS e+p e’K0p X
1522 +- 3
8 +- 4 ~5
COSY pp K0p+ 1530 +- 5
< 18 4-6
*Gaussian statistical significance: estimated background fluctuation
![Page 9: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Evidence for Pentaquark StatesSpring8 SAPHIR
JLab-p
HERMES
ITEP
pp ++.
COSY-TOFDIANA
SVD/IHEP
JLab-d
ZEUSCERN/NA49
H1
Nomad
This is a lot of evidence
![Page 10: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Critical Comments
• For many experiments, the background shape is not clearly known.
• Some experiments have harsh angle cuts that could affect the mass spectra.
• In all cases, the signal is weak compared with standard resonances.– Cuts are necessary to lower background.
![Page 11: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
CLAS: deuterium result+
Mass = 1.542 GeV< 21 MeVSignificance 5.2±0.6
N= 43 events
?
Significance = ?
Two different background shapes
Events in the (1520) peak.
![Page 12: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Official CLAS statement
• “Further analysis of the deuterium data find that the significance of the observed peak may not be as large as indicated.”– We really need a calculation of the background before
the statistical significance of the peak can be known.
• Eventually the new experiment, with much higher statistics, will settle the question.– The g10 experiment (x10 statistics) is now complete,
and final results are expected at end of Feb. 2005.– “Why is it taking so long?” --> It’s only 8 months!!
![Page 13: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Results from ZEUS
NOTES:1. + peak is evident only for Q2 > 20 GeV2.--> ZEUS suggests that this condition gives the + enough transverse momentum to get into their detector acceptance.
2. There is an assumption of background shape.--> A different backgroundchanges the stat. signifig.
![Page 14: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
HERMES + spectra
signal / background 2:1 standard cuts applied + K* and veto
signal / background: 1:3
add additional
![Page 15: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Background well described by D* MC and “wrong charge D” from data
Apply mass difference technique
M(D*p)=m(K p)-m(K)+MPDG(D*)
no enhancement in D* Monte Carlo
no enhancement in wrong charge D
• Signal is visible in different data taking periods
• But no signal seen in ZEUS data (question: different D* accep.?)
narrow resonance at M=3099 3(stat.) 5 (syst.) MeV
Results from H1(From Karin Daum)
![Page 16: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Null Results
![Page 17: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Published Null Experiments
Group Reaction Limit Sensitivity?
BES e+e- J/ --> * <1.1x10-5 No?
Belle e+e- (2S) --> pK0 <0.6x10-5 ??
BaBar e+e-
(4S) -->pKs0 <1.1x10-4 ??
ALEPH e+e- ->Z -> pKs
0
<0.6x10-5 ??
HERA-B pA --> pKs0X <0.02x* No?
CDF pp* --> pKs0X <0.03x* No?
HyperCP pCu --> pKs0X <0.3%
K0pNo?
PHENIX AuAu -->n*K- not given ??
Belle K+Si -->pKs0X <0.02x* Yes?
![Page 18: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Critical Comments
• Inclusive versus Exclusive measurement– inclusive has better resolution, but more
background (especially at higher energy)• Backgrounds: combinatorial and from
other resonances. Can we estimate?• Production mechanism: projectile or
target fragmentation?– Is it calculable in some model?
![Page 19: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Titov: inclusive production (fragmentation region)
...)...)(( KNNN
A
q
p
px
q
h
p
py
23 104.210
R
...)...)(( KNNN
7.0z
fast slow
;)1( )2(4zR ;
maxh
h
p
pz
Ratio: pentaquark to baryon production
Regge exchange dominates(2 = diquarks as quasi-partons)
![Page 20: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Slope for mesons
Slope for baryons
Slope for pentaquarks??
![Page 21: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Hadron production in e+e-
Slope: Pseudoscalar mesons: ~ 10-2/GeV/c2 (need to generate one qq pair)
Baryons: ~ 10-4 /GeV/c2 (need two more pairs)
Pentaquarks: ~ 10-6 /GeV/c2 (?) (need 4 more pairs)
Slope for Pentaquark??
Slope forbaryons
Slope for p.s.mesons
we don’t know the production mechanism!!
![Page 22: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Some common “myths”
![Page 23: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Myth #1• “Kinematic reflection of the a2 and f2
tensor mesons explain the CLAS data”
Some people use a Regge trajectory (, 1, 2, etc.)
Near theshold (E<3 GeV)pion exchange dominates Regge exchange.--> For T=(a2
0 and f2), the --T vertex violates C-parity!--> calculations using diagramsthat do not violate C-parity (Y. Oh et al., hep-ph/0412363)give T far too small to explainCLAS data as a2/f2 “reflections”.
![Page 24: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Myth #2• “Ghost tracks could be responsible for the
peaks seen in the pK0 mass spectra”
This only can happen if there is an error in the tacking software.--> The same track mustbe used twice!--> All pentaquark (pK0)data analysis has been checked, and no such tracking error is found.
![Page 25: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
New Data
![Page 26: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
New data: LEPS deuterium*
MM (GeV) MM (GeV)
PreliminaryPreliminary
Minimal cuts: vertex, MMKK=MN, no , E < 2.35 GeV
*in collaboration with T. Nakano
![Page 27: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
LEPS: Fermi motion corrections
MM (GeV)
MM (GeV) MM (GeV)
•No large difference among the three Fermi motion correction methods
(1520) resonance
![Page 28: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Fermi motion corrections: +
MM (GeV)
MM (GeV) MM (GeV)
• No large differences among the three Fermi motion corrections.
![Page 29: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
LEPS: K - p detection mode(New and Preliminary results)
• Inclusive production:• Θ + is identified by K -p missing mass from deuteron. ⇒ No Fermi correction is needed.
γ
p
n
Θ +
K -
p
γ
p
n
Θ +
K -
p
(1520)
![Page 30: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Event selections in K - p mode
MMp(γ,K - p) GeV/c2
γp→K - pKππ - mis-ID as K -
K + mass
M(K - p) GeV/c2
Λ(1520)
Λ(1520) is tightly selected in 1.50–1.54 GeV/c2
Non-resonantKKp
![Page 31: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
K - p missing mass for events in the (1520) peak
MMd(γ,K - p) GeV/c2
Small enhancement at 1.53 GeV.
But the statistics is not large enough.
Hydrogentarget data
![Page 32: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
A possible reaction mechanism• + can be produced by re-scattering of K+.• K momentum spectrum is soft for forward going (1520).
γ
p/n
n/p
(1520)
K+/K0
PK GeV/c
PK obtained by missing momentum
Formation momentum
![Page 33: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
K - p missing mass for events with missing momentum > 0.35 GeV/c
MMd(γ,K - p) GeV/c2MMd(γ,K - p) GeV/c2
sideband regions
select
VERY PRELIMINARY!
![Page 34: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Summary• There is reason for caution about the
existence of the +. – Need better experiments (pos. and null).
• Experiments need to have better control over the background shape.– Can backgrounds be calculated?
• The new LEPS data for the + is interesting, but not conclusive.– CLAS data: internal review in ~1 month.
![Page 35: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Outlook
• There are several new experiments that will help settle the existence question:– SPring-8: LEPS (deuterium: higher statistics)– JLAB: CLAS (g10, g11, eg3)– COSY: TOF– DESY?
• We still need to understand the null experiments: – background? production mechanism?
![Page 36: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Model-independent Parity
p
p
At thresholdS-wave dominant
If S = 0, then Li = even, P = even ==> P() = +
If S = 1, then Li = odd, P = odd ==> P() = -
T = 1 K, or K*
Thomas, Hosaka, KH, Prog. Theor. Phys. 111, 291 (2004).See full calculation: C. Hanhart et al., hep-ph/0410293.
![Page 37: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Width: Indirect Limits
• Nussinov (hep-ph/0307357): < 6 MeV
• Arndt et al. (nucl-th/0308012): < 1 MeV
• Haidenbauer (hep-ph/0309243): < 5 MeV
• Cahn, Trilling (hep-ph/0311245): ~ 0.9 MeV
• Sibertsev et al. (hep-ph/0405099): < 1 MeV
• Gibbs (nucl-th/0405024): ~ 0.9 MeV
![Page 38: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Width: Possible Signal?Input mass
background(non-reson.)
Gibbs, nucl-th/0405024
Widths range:0.6-1.2 MeV0.9 MeV = solid
Conclude:width must be ~1 MeV
![Page 39: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
Comments: Width and Parity
• If the KN database is correct, it is likely that the + width is ~1 MeV.
• If the width is 1 MeV, the parity is almost surely positive.– negative parity width goes up by ~50.
• If the lattice results are correct, the width is almost surely negative.
This problem of width/parity is the most worrisome aspect to the existence of the +.
![Page 40: Experimental Review of Pentaquarks: Positive and Null Results](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062800/56814049550346895dabbbf4/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
February 1, 2005 K. Hicks, Ohio U.
A di-quark model for pentaquarks
ud ud sJW hep-ph/0307341
JM hep-ph/0308286
L=1
(ud)
(ud)
s
L=1, one unit of orbital angular momentum needed to get J=1/2+ as in SM
Uncorrelated quarks: JP = 1/2−
62
1suuudsududDecay Width: MeV
MeV8
62
2002
Additional width suppression may come from w.f. overlap.