1. Quarkonia & XYZ at e+e– colliders
“Charmonium production & decay”, 6-8 March 2013, LAL, Orsay
Quarkonia & XYZ at e+e– colliders
Roman Mizuk
ITEP, Moscow

2. Spectroscopy  strong interactions at low energy
Ultimate theory :
Good accuracy for ground states
High excitations more difficult
Not intuitive
Lattice QCD
 Effective theories / phenomenological models
Quark Model
Collective degrees of freedom: constituent quarks
Hadrons: qq and qqq _
g valence gluons
qq di-quarks
qqq tri-quarks, …
gg glueballs
qqg hybrids
qqqq tetraquarks, … _
Exotics _ _
Theory & experiment  exotics among light mesons – no established states
Heavy quarkonia – observation of anomalous XYZ states. Unexpected.

3. Charmonium table Potential models “Old” states (observed before 1980)
Y(4660)
Z(4430)+
Y(4360)
X(4160)
Y(4260)
Z(4250)+
“Old” states (observed before 1980)
X(3872)
Y(3915)
Z(4050)+
Y(4008) DD _
X(3940)
2(1D)
New states
(last decade)
New states with unusual properties
S=1
S=1
S=0
S=0
JPC
L=0
L=1
L=2
States below DD threshold are narrow (annihilation or  other charmonia) _
States above DD threshold are broad ( DD, DD*, ...) _ 3

4. Charmonium Bottomonium
Y(4660)
Z(4430)+
(11020)
Y(4360)
11.00
(10860)
X(4160)
Y(4260)
Y(3915) Zb +
X(3872)
10.75
Y(4008) DD _
X(3940)
(4S)
2M(B)
2(1D)
hb(3P)
10.50
b(3P)
(2D)
b(3S)
(3S)
hb(2P)
b(2P)
10.25
(1D)
S=1
S=1
S=0
S=0
(2S)
b(2S)
10.00
hb(1P)
b(1P)
JPC
L=0
L=1
L=2
9.75
9.50
(1S)
b(1S) - 1 -- - --
JPC = 0 + 1+
(0,1,2)++
(0,1,2)
L=0
L=1
L=2 4

5. Charmonium Bottomonium
Y(4660)
Z(4430)+
Above thresholds
(11020)
Y(4360)
11.00
(10860)
X(4160)
Y(4260) Zb +
X(3872)
Y(3915)
10.75
Thresholds
Y(4008) DD _
X(3940)
(4S)
2M(B)
2(1D)
hb(3P)
10.50
b(3P)
(2D)
b(3S)
(3S)
hb(2P)
b(2P)
10.25
(1D)
S=1
S=1
S=0
S=0
(2S)
b(2S)
10.00
hb(1P)
b(1P)
JPC
L=0
L=1
L=2
9.75
Below threshold
9.50
(1S)
b(1S) - 1 -- - --
JPC = 0 + 1+
(0,1,2)++
(0,1,2)
L=0
L=1
L=2 5

6. Quarkonia below open flavor thresholds6

7. pNRQCD: 4114 MeV Lattice: 608 MeV
Spin-singlet states _
 Spin-spin interaction in qq potential
(11020)
11.00
(10860)
10.75
 MHF  |(0)|2
(4S)
2M(B)
hb(3P)
10.50
b(3P)
(2D)
b(1S)
b(3S)
(3S)
Mass, GeV/c2
PDG 2012
hb(2P)
b(2P)
BaBar + CLEO : MHF(1S) = 69.3  2.8 MeV
10.25
(1D)
pNRQCD: 4114 MeV Lattice: 608 MeV
(2S)
b(2S)
Kniehl et al., PRL92,242001(2004)
Meinel, PRD82,114502(2010)
10.00
some tension
hb(1P)
b(1P)
MHF(1P)
b(2S)
9.75
center
of gravity
ee[(nS)]  |(0)|2 
 0.5
ee [(2S)]
ee [(1S)]
MHF(2S)  MHF(1S)
(1S)
9.50
b(1S)
MHF(1S) - 1 -- - --
JPC = 0 + 1+
(0,1,2)++
(0,1,2)
hb(1P, 2P)
MHF(2S)  0
L=0
L=1
L=2
test of long-range spin-spin contribution 7

8. Observation of hb(1P) and hb(2P)
(11020)
PRL108,032001(2012)
Mmiss(+-)
11.00
residuals
(10860)
+-
hb(2P)
10.75
(4S)
hb(1P)
2M(B)
10.50
b(3P)
(2D)
b(3S)
(3S)
Mass, GeV/c2
hb(2P)
b(2P)
10.25
(1D)
19% 
(2S)
b(2S)
10.00
hb(1P)
b(1P)
MHF(1P) = +0.8  1.1 MeV
MHF(2P) = +0.5  1.2 MeV
13%
Belle : 
consistent with zero, as expected
9.75
41%
Godfrey & Rosner,
PRD (2002)
(1S)
N[hb(1P)] = (50.4  ) 103
9.50
b(1S)
–1.9 - 1 -- -
N[hb(2P)] = (84.4  ) 103
JPC = 0 + --
–10 1+
(0,1,2)++
(0,1,2)
hb(nP)  b(mS) 
 study b(1S)
 search for b(2S)
L=0
L=1
L=2 8

9. Method M(b) M(hb) (5S)  hb (nP) +- reconstruct  b(mS) 
Decay chain
(5S)  hb (nP) +-
reconstruct
 b(mS) 
Use missing mass to identify signals
MC simulation
M(b)
true +-
true 
M(hb)

10. Method M(b) M(hb) (5S)  hb (nP) +- reconstruct  b(mS) 
Decay chain
(5S)  hb (nP) +-
reconstruct
 b(mS) 
Use missing mass to identify signals
MC simulation
true +-
fake 
M(b)
true +-
true 
fake +-
true 
M(hb)

11. Method M(b) M(hb) (5S)  hb (nP) +- reconstruct  b(mS) 
Decay chain
(5S)  hb (nP) +-
reconstruct
 b(mS) 
Use missing mass to identify signals
MC simulation
true +-
fake 
Mmiss(+- ) 
Mmiss(+-) – Mmiss(+-) + M(hb)
M(b)
 no correlation
true +-
true 
fake +-
true 
M(hb)

12. Method Approach: M(b) M(hb) (5S)  hb (nP) +- reconstruct
Decay chain
(5S)  hb (nP) +-
reconstruct
 b(mS) 
Use missing mass to identify signals
MC simulation
Mmiss(+- ) 
Mmiss(+-) – Mmiss(+-) + M(hb)
M(b)
 no correlation
Approach:
fit Mmiss(+-) spectra in Mmiss(+-) bins
M(hb)

13. Method M(b) b M(hb) (5S)  hb (nP) +- reconstruct  b(mS) 
Decay chain
(5S)  hb (nP) +-
reconstruct
 b(mS) 
Use missing mass to identify signals
MC simulation
M(b) b
hb yield vs. Mmiss(+-)
M(hb)

14. Observation of hb(1P,2P) b(1S) 
(5S)hb(nP) +–
 b(1S) 
PRL 109, (2012)
MHF(1S)
Belle : 57.9  2.3 MeV
(11020)
hb(1P)
yield 3
11.00
PDG’12 : 69.3  2.8 MeV
(10860)
b(1S)
10.75
+-
BaBar (3S)
(4S)
2M(B)
BaBar (2S)
10.50
b(3S)
(3S)
hb(2P)
b(2P)
hb(2P)
yield
b(1S)
CLEO (3S)
10.25
b(2S)
(2S)
10.00
hb(1P)
b(1P)
pNRQCD
LQCD 
9.75
Kniehl et al, PRL92,242001(2004)
Mmiss (+-)
(n)
Meinel, PRD82,114502(2010)
(1S)
9.50
b(1S)
MHF(1S)
First measurement  = MeV (as expected)
–3.7
–2.0
JPC = 0 + - 1 --
1 + -
(0,1,2)++
Belle result eliminates tension with theory

15. Observation of hb(1P,2P) b(1S) 
PRL101, (2008)
(5S)hb(nP) +–
 b(1S) 
BaBar (3S)b(1S)
MHF(1S)
ISR
b(1S)
Belle : 57.9  2.3 MeV
hb(1P)
yield
PDG’12 : 69.3  2.8 MeV
b(1S)
b(1P)
PRL103, (2009)
BaBar (2S)b(1S)
hb(2P)
yield
b(1S)
ISR
b(1S)
pNRQCD
LQCD
Kniehl et al, PRL92,242001(2004)
PRD81, (2010)
Mmiss (+-)
(n)
Meinel, PRD82,114502(2010)
First measurement  = MeV (as expected)
–3.7
–2.0
Belle result eliminates tension with theory
CLEO (3S)

16. “look elsewhere effect”
First evidence for b(2S)
PRL 109, (2012)
(5S)hb(2P) +–
 b(2S) 
MHF(2S) = MeV
–4.5
First measurement
b(2S)
4.2 with systematics &
“look elsewhere effect”
pNRQCD
LQCD
Belle
In agreement with theory
Mmiss (+-)
(2)
(2S) = 4  8 MeV, < 90% C.L.
expect 4MeV
Branching fractions
Expectations
BF[hb(1P)  b(1S) ] = 49.2 %
BF[hb(2P)  b(1S) ] = 22.3 %
BF[hb(2P)  b(2S) ] = 47.5 %
41%
13%
19%
–3.3
Godfrey Rosner PRD66,014012(2002)
–3.3
–7.7
c.f. BESIII BF[hc(1P)  c(1S) ] = 54.38.5 %
39%

17. Charmonium table Potential models “Old” states (observed before 1980)
Y(4660)
Z(4430)+
Y(4360)
X(4160)
Y(4260)
Z(4250)+
“Old” states (observed before 1980)
X(3872)
Y(3915)
Z(4050)+
Y(4008) DD _
X(3940)
New states
(last decade)
New states w/ unusual properties
JPC
States below DD threshold are narrow (annihilation or  other charmonia) _
States above DD threshold are broad ( DD, DD*, ...) _ 17

18. Charmonium table Potential models “Old” states (observed before 1980)
Y(4660)
Z(4430)+
Y(4360)
X(4160)
Y(4260)
Z(4250)+
“Old” states (observed before 1980)
X(3872)
Y(3915)
DD* _
Z(4050)+
Y(4008) DD _
X(3940)
New states
(last decade)
c2 2
New states w/ unusual properties
JPC
D-wave states
all observed
States below DD threshold are narrow (annihilation or  other charmonia) _
States above DD threshold are broad ( DD, DD*, ...) _
Expect two more narrow states (unnatural spin-parity + below DD* threshold) _ 18

19. Evidence for 2(1D) preliminary Study B+  c1  K+ |  J/  M(c1 )
X(4160)
Y(4260)
X(3872)
Y(3915)
DD* _
4.2 w/ syst.
Y(4008) DD _
X(3940)
c2 2
M =  2.8 MeV
 = 4  6 MeV, <14 C.L.
JPC
D-wave states
Radiative decay seen  O(100keV) 19

20. Evidence for 2(1D) preliminary Study B+  c1  K+ JPC = 2– – L=2 S=1|
 J/ 
Y(4360)
M(c1 )
X(4160)
Y(4260)
X(3872)
Y(3915)
DD* _
4.2 w/ syst.
Y(4008) DD _
X(3940)
2(1D)
M =  2.8 MeV
 = 4  6 MeV, <14 C.L.
JPC
C (c1) = –
Radiative decay seen  O(100keV)
JPC = 2– – L=2 S=1
~2/3
BF(B+  2K+)  BF(2  c1) =
= ( ) 10-6
-1.0
-2.5
factorization suppression
c.f. BF(B+  (2S) K+) = 20

21. Charmonium Bottomonium
Y(4660)
(11020)
Y(4360)
11.00
(10860)
X(4160)
Y(4260)
X(3872)
Y(3915)
10.75
Y(4008) DD _
X(3940)
(4S)
2M(B)
2(1D)
hb(3P)
10.50
b(3P)
(2D)
b(3S)
(3S)
hb(2P)
b(2P)
10.25
(1D)
S=1
S=1
S=0
S=0
(2S)
b(2S)
10.00
hb(1P)
b(1P)
JPC
L=0
L=1
L=2
9.75
Recent finding: b(2S), hb(1P,2P), b(3P) 2(1D)
9.50
(1S)
b(1S)
Properties of all states
below open flavor thresholds are consistent with expectations - 1 -- - --
JPC = 0 + 1+
(0,1,2)++
(0,1,2)
L=0
L=1
L=2 21

22. Quarkonia at open flavor thresholds22

23. X(3872) 10th anniversary! 739 618 381 CP B→Xsγ Belle citation count
Phys.Rev.Lett.91, (2003)
10th anniversary!

24. production at high energy
X(3872)
PDG’12
MX(3872) – (MD0 + MD*0) = ± 0.32 MeV
Z(4430)+
Relative BF
J/ 
J/ 
J/ 
D0D*0 _ 1
0.8  0.3
0.21  0.06
10
isospin violation
Z(4250)+
X(4160)
X(3872)
Y(3915)
Z(4050)+ DD _
JPC = 1++
X(3940)
2(3820)
Most likely interpretation:
DD* molecule with admixture of c1(2P)
isospin violation
production at high energy
Fractions of admixtures? Bound or virtual? Dynamical model?
Experimental issues:
M (D0 mass uncertainty dominates)
(2S)  (Belle/BaBar controversy)
line-shape in DD* (statistics limited)
absolute BF (inelastic channels?) _ 24

25. Anomaly in hb(nP) production
(11020)
PRL108,032001(2012)
Mmiss(+-)
11.00
residuals
(10860)
+-
hb(2P)
10.75
(4S)
hb(1P)
2M(B)
10.50
b(3P)
(2D)
b(3S)
(3S)
Mass, GeV/c2
hb(2P)
b(2P)
10.25
(1D)
(2S)
b(2S)
10.00
hb(1P)
b(1P)
spin-flip
[(5S)  hb(mP) +–]
9.75
 1
[(5S) (nS) +–]
(1S)
9.50
b(1S)
expect suppression (QCD/mb)2 - 1 -- -
JPC = 0 + -- 1+
(0,1,2)++
(0,1,2)
L=0
L=1
L=2
Mechanism of (5S) decays ? 25

26. Resonant structure of (5S)  (bb) +–_
Resonant structure of (5S)  (bb) +–
Belle PRL108,122001(2012)
(5S)  hb(1P)+-
(5S)  hb(2P)+-
zero non-res.
contribution
Two peaks in all modes
phsp
Minimal quark content _
 bbud 
phsp
flavor-exotic states
M[ hb(1P) π ]
M[ hb(2P) π ]
Dalitz plot analysis
(5S) (1S)+-
(5S) (2S)+-
(5S) (3S)+-
note different scales

27. (5S) (nS) +- Dalitz plots
M2(π+π-)
M2(π+π-)
M2(π+π-)
Angular analysis favors JP=1+
S-wave
S-wave
(5S)  Zb, Zb  (nS) – no spin orientation change
Spins of (5S) and (nS) can be ignored
S(s1,s2) = A(Zb1) + A(Zb2) + A(f0(980)) + A(f2(1275)) + ANR BW
Flatte BW
C1 + C2∙m2(ππ)

28. Fit results 180o (2S) hb(1P)  = 0o
 Zb
 Zb ’
Average over 5 channels
M1 =  2.0 MeV
1 = 18.4  2.4 MeV
MZb – (MB+MB*) =  2.1 MeV
M2 =  1.5 MeV
2 =  2.2 MeV
MZb’ – 2MB* =  1.7 MeV
M(hb), GeV/c2
hb(1P) yield / 10MeV
180o
(2S)
hb(1P)
 = 0o
Phase btw Zb and Zb amplitudes is 0o for (nS) 180o for hb(mP) ’
destr.
interf.
Resonant behavior of Zb amplitudes (intensity & phase). 28

29. flip of phase in hb amplitude
Structure of Zb
JP = 1+ , IG = 1+
Bondar et al, PRD84,054010(2011) _
 B B*  =  
Proximity to thresholds
favors molecule over tetraquark
Zb  +
S-wave _
 B*B*  =   –
Zb’ 
not suppressed
(nP)
hb(mP)
flip of phase in hb amplitude
Assumption of molecular wave-function allows to explain all properties of Zb
hb(nP) is not suppressed due to mB*–mB splitting
A (hb)  1
MZb – M + i/2 –
 0
MZb’ – M + i/2
If mb    mB*  mB and mZb’  mZb

30. Search for Zb  BB* and B*B*_ _
Search for Zb  BB* and B*B* _
arXiv:
e+e-  (5S)  B(*)B(*) _
M(B)
Mmiss(B)
BB*
Full reconstruction of one B _
BB _
B*B*
BF[ (5S)  B(*)B(*) ] _
PRD81,112003(2010)
Belle fb-1
significance
Belle 23.6 fb-1 _ BB
BB* + BB*
B*B*
<0.60 % at 90% C.L.
(4.25  0.44  0.69) % (2.12  0.29  0.36) %
(0  1.2) %
(7.3  2.3) %
(1.0  1.4) % _ _ _ _
9.3
5.7 _
BFs are consistent with previous measurement

31. Observation of ZbBB* and Zb’B*B*_ _
Observation of ZbBB* and Zb’B*B*
arXiv: _
Zb’  BB* is suppressed w.r.t. B*B* despite larger PHSP _
M (BB*) Zb
Molecule  admixture of BB* in Zb’ is small _ 8
Zb’ ?
phsp
Challenging for tetraquark _
M (B*B*)
Zb’
6.8
phsp
Z b properties are consistent with molecular structure

32. Evidence for a neutral Zb
(2S)
e+e-  (5S)  (nS)00
(1S)
BF[(5S)(1S)00] = (2.250.110.20) 10-3
BF[(5S)(2S)00] = (3.790.240.49) 10-3
in agreement with isospin relations
M miss (0 0)
Dalitz plot analysis of (1S,2S)00 
w/ Zbs
w/o Zb
Zb(10610)  (4.9 w/ syst.)
Zb(10650)0  2
(2S) 00 :
(1S) 00 : Zb signals not significant
Yields agree with isospin expectations
 Confirmation that Zb is an isotriplet
M [(2S)0 ]

33. Origin of structure at threshold
1. Threshold effect  
Chen Liu PRD84,094003(2011) Zb
Zb’
B(*)
B(*)
(5S)
(2S)
B(*) _
S-wave
M [(2S)π]
Danilkin Orlovsky Simonov PRD85,034012(2012)
2. Coupled-channel resonance multiple re-scatterings  pole Zb 
B(*)  
B(*) 
B(*) 
Zb’ +
+ ...
(5S)
B(*) _
B(*) _
B(*) _
(2S)
(2S)
(2S)  
3. Deuteron-like molecule
B(*)
Ohkoda et al arxiv:
,,, exchange
(5S) 
B(*) _
(2S)
Request to theory: predictions (formulas) to fit data !

34. Quarkonia above open flavor thresholds34

35. “Conventional” states (3770) (4040) (4160) (4415) _ _ DD, DD*, ...
Y(4660)
DD, DD*, ...
Y(4360)
X(4160)
Y(4260)
X(3872)
Y(3915)
Y(4008)
X(3940)
Y(4008)
Y(4260)
Y(4360)
Y(4660)
Y(3915)
“Anomalous” states
J/ +-
(2S) +-
J/ 
from ISR
JPC = 1– –
decays to DD, DD*, ... not seen _
2(1D)
e+e-  J/ ISR
(4040)
(4160)
arxiv:
c.f. ((2S)  J/)  102keV
((3770) J/)  50keV
typical (Y   ) > 1MeV 
huge for charmonium
(  J/ )  1 MeV _
All states above DD threshold have anomalous properties? 35

36. Anomalies in (5S)  (nS) +– transitions
(11020)
Belle PRL100,112001(2008)
11.00
(10860)
[(5S)  (1S,2S,3S) +–]
>> [(4S,3S,2S) (1S) +–] Zb +
10.75
260 –
(4S)
2M(B)
10.50 2 +
(3S)
Mass, GeV/c2
hb(2P)
10.25
430
 Rescattering of on-shell B(*)B(*) ? _ 1
(2S)
b(2S)
10.00
hb(1P)
290 6
9.75
partial (keV)
Simonov JETP Lett 87,147(2008)
9.50
(1S)
b(1S)
Meng Chao PRD77,074003(2008) - 1 -- -
JPC = 0 + 1+
 More transitions ? 36

37. Observation of (5S) (1D)+-
121 fb-1
PRL108,032001(2012)
Mmiss(+-)
residuals
Seen inclusively (2.4):
hb(2P)
N (1D)  1/7 N (2S) 
[(5S)  (1D) +-]
 60 keV is anomalously large
hb(1P)
(1D)
PRELIMINARY
Mmiss(+-)
Observed using
exclusive reconstruction :
(5S)  (1D) +-
 (1S)  |
 bJ(1P) 
(1D)
(2S) 9
 +- |
BF[(5S)  (1D) +-  (1S) +- ]
= (2.0  0.4  0.3)×10−4
reflection
c.f. CLEO:
BF[(3S)  (1D)   (1S)  ]
= (2.5  0.5  0.5)×10−5
more details: LaThuile 2012 37

38. Observation of (5S)  (1S,2S) 
121 fb-1
PRELIMINARY
Mmiss(+-0)
Exclusive reconstruction
(2S)
BF[ (5S)  (1S)  ] = (0.73  0.16  0.08)×10−3
BF[ (5S)  (2S)  ] = ( 3.8   )×10−3
[ (5S)  (1S,2S)  ]  40 – 200 keV
anomalously large
(1S)
E1M2
[(5S)  (nS)  ]
[(5S)  (nS) +-]
0.16  0.04  for (1S)
0.48  0.05  for (2S)
R5n = =
E1E1
no strong suppression
c.f. Belle
R21 = (1.99  ) 10–3
–0.08
 hadron loops?
BaBar
R41 =  0.40  0.12
Simonov, Veselov arXiv:
Meng, Chao PRD78, (2008)
Voloshin MPLA26,773(2011) 38

39. – Bottomonium Charmonium c +- &  transitions +- transitions
Y(4660)
“(5S)”
+-
Y(4360) 
+- _
Y(4260) BB
(4160)
(4040)
(3S)
Y(4008)  _
hb(2P) DD
(1D)
(2S)
(2S)
hb(1P)
J/
J/
(1S) _
similar
[ “(5S)”  (bb) +- ]  1 MeV
[ /Y   hadrons ]  1 MeV _ _
One-to-many (bb) vs. Many-to-one (cc).  Hadron loops? c – π
 Hadrocharmonium? Voloshin 39

40. Z(4050) Z(4250) Also hadrocharmonium? _ DD JPC
Y(4660)
Y(4360)
Y(4260)
Y(4008)
Y(3915)
X(3872)
X(3940)
X(4160)
2(1D) DD _
JPC
Also hadrocharmonium?
Charged charmonium like states – multiquark candidates
produced in B  Z K decays
Z(4050)
Belle: Z(4430)  (2S) + and  c1 +
Within the reach of LHCb
Z(4250)
BaBar: no significant signals 40

41. Only (constituent) quarks so far (no valence gluons, di-quarks,..) !
Summary
Many new results from B-factories, hadronic machines :
Quarkonia below threshold: 2(1D), b(2S) , hb(1P) , hb(2P), b(3P)
Isotriplet molecular states seen in 6 decay modes: (1S)+, (2S)+, (3S)+, hb(1P)+, hb(2P)+, BB*(B*B*)
Ground states & ~low excitations – Potential models etc are OK
Open flavor thresholds – new types of hadrons: meson molecules
Above open flavor thresholds – anomalous transitions
Zb – very rich phenomenological objects  understanding of highly excited states
need “unquenched” Quark Model
Only (constituent) quarks so far (no valence gluons, di-quarks,..) ! 41

42. Back-up 42

43. Claim of exclusively reconstructed b(2S)
5 authors from CLEO: Dobbs, Metreveli, Seth, Tomaradze, Xiao PRL109,082001(2012)
e+e-  (2S)  b(2S) , b(2S)  26 exclusive channels
MHF(2S)
b(2S) is here
according to Belle
Dobbs et al 2.7 MeV
Belle 5σ
MeV
MeV
–4.5
–4.5
Origin of Belle signal and Dobbs et al. signal can not be the same
Dobbs et al. have no sensitivity to low values of MHF(2S)

44. Claim of exclusively reconstructed b(2S)
5 authors from CLEO: Dobbs, Metreveli, Seth, Tomaradze, Xiao PRL109,082001(2012)
exp
Dobbs et al. assumed exponential background
FSR
FSR is known to contribute power law tail
e.g. (2S)  K+K- n(+-) FSR
4.6
Background model is incomplete 
significance of 4.6 is overestimated
Properties of the Dobbs et al. signal ...
factor 30
LQCD
pNRQCD
Belle
0.6
0.9
0.8
0.7
Dobbs et al.
N[(2S)b(2S)]  0.2 N[(2S) b1(1P) ]
c.f. [’c(2S)] = [’c1]
BESIII PRL109,042003(2012)
... does not look physical
It is unlikely that the signal of Dobbs et al. is due to b(2S).

45. Branching fractions of (4040,4160)J/
preliminary
Fit: (4040) and (4160) only
(4040)
6.0 w/ syst.
6.5 w/ syst.
< 3 ~
(4160)
BF, %
1st solution:
(4040)  0.10  0.17
(4160)  0.10  0.17
2nd solution:
(4040)  0.15  0.26
(4160)  0.16  0.29
[(4040,4160)] = (80,103) MeV 
[ (4040,4160)  J/ ]  1 MeV
First time  states exhibit anomalous coupling to (J/ hadrons).
Common feature of all  states above threshold ? 45

46. Calibration tolerable Energy of  Shift in  energy Mdata–MMC
lab.system
Shift in
 energy
Mdata–MMC
2P2S
Use signals :
0

|E1–E2|
E1+E2
<0.05
M /M
1P1S E E
M /M =
2P1S
D*0  D0 
M /(MD* –MD)
Shift in  energy
Fudge-factor 0  D*
Agreement!
tolerable
Typical syst. uncertainty : M ~ 0.7–1.5 MeV,  ~ 1.5 MeV.