This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

11institutetext: Department of Physics, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Hachioji 192-0397, Japan

Estimation of compositeness with correction terms

\firstnameTomona \lastnameKinugawa\fnsep 11 kinugawa-tomona@ed.tmu.ac.jp    \firstnameTetsuo \lastnameHyodo\fnsep 11 hyodo@tmu.ac.jp
Abstract

The compositeness XX is defined as the probability to observe the composite structure such as the hadronic molecule component in a bound state. One of the model-independent approaches to calculate XX is the weak-binding relation. However, when the scattering length a0a_{0} is larger than the radius of the bound state RR, the central value of the compositeness XX becomes larger than unity, which cannot be interpreted as a probability. For the systems with a0>Ra_{0}>R, we need to estimate the compositeness with the correction terms. For the reasonable determination of the compositeness, we first present the quantitative estimation of the correction terms. Because the exact value of the compositeness should be contained in its definition domain 0X10\leq X\leq 1, we propose the reasonable estimation method with the uncertainty band by excluding the region outside of the definition domain of the compositeness. We finally estimate the compositeness of physical systems, and obtain the result which we can interpret as the fraction of the composite component.

1 Introduction

Almost all hadrons are considered to be qqqqqq or qq¯q\bar{q} states in the constituent quark models. However, some hadrons are expected to have an extraordinary structure, and called exotic hadrons. In recent experiments in the heavy quark sector, candidates for exotic hadrons have been observed, as represented by the X(3872)X(3872) Belle:2003nnu . One possible component of the candidates for the exotic hadrons is the hadronic molecule, which is a weakly bound state of hadrons.

We can quantitatively characterize the internal structure of the state by compositeness whether it is a hadronic molecule dominant (composite dominant) state or not Hyodo:2013nka . The compositeness XX is defined as the probability to find the hadronic molecule component in the normalized wavefunction of the bound states |Ψ\ket{\Psi}, X=|molecule|Ψ|2X=|\braket{{\rm molecule}}{\Psi}|^{2}. Here |molecule\ket{\rm molecule} is the schematic notation of the hadronic molecule component. We can determine XX by using the weak-binding relation Weinberg:1965zz ; Kamiya:2016oao :

a0\displaystyle a_{0} =R{2X1+X+𝒪(RtypR)},\displaystyle=R\left\{\frac{2X}{1+X}+\mathcal{O}\left(\frac{R_{\rm typ}}{R}\right)\right\}, (1)

where a0a_{0} is the scattering length and R2μBR\equiv\sqrt{2\mu B} is the radius of the bound state, determined by the binding energy BB and the reduced mass μ\mu. Taking into account the range correction to the weak-binding relation Kinugawa:2022fzn , we define RtypR_{\rm typ} as the largest one among the length scale of the interaction RintR_{\rm int} and those in the effective range expansion except for a0a_{0}:

Rtyp=max{Rint,|re|,|Ps/R2|,},\displaystyle R_{\rm typ}=\max\{R_{\rm int},|r_{e}|,|P_{s}/R^{2}|,\cdots\}, (2)

where rer_{e} is the effective range and PsP_{s} is the shape parameter (for more details, see Sec. III in Ref. Kinugawa:2022fzn ).

When we consider sufficiently shallow bound states with RRtypR\gg R_{\rm typ}, the correction terms of the weak-binding relation 𝒪(Rtyp/R)\mathcal{O}(R_{\rm typ}/R) are negligible, and the compositeness XX is determined only from the observables a0a_{0} and RR. Thanks to this universal feature, the weak-binding relation has been utilized as a model-independent approach to calculate XX. However, naive application of Eq. (1) without the correction terms sometimes contradicts the definition domain of the compositeness, 0X10\leq X\leq 1. For example, the compositeness of the deuteron dd is given as X=1.68X=1.68 with a0=5.42a_{0}=5.42 fm (taken from CD-Bonn potential Machleidt:2000ge ) and B=2.22B=2.22 MeV (taken from PDG ParticleDataGroup:2020ssz ). This problem is discussed in Refs. Li:2021cue ; Song:2022yvz ; Albaladejo:2022sux in connection with the effective range. To avoid this contradiction, here we propose a reasonable estimation method of the compositeness with the uncertainty which arises from the correction terms 𝒪(Rtyp/R)\mathcal{O}(R_{\rm typ}/R) in Eq. (1).

2 Estimation of compositeness with correction terms

2.1 Importance of correction terms

Let us consider the relation of the scattering length a0a_{0} and the radius RR by neglecting the correction terms 𝒪(Rtyp/R)\mathcal{O}(R_{\rm typ}/R). Because XX is the probability to find the composite component in a bound state, it is defined within 0X10\leq X\leq 1. It follows from this relation that 2X/(1+X)12X/(1+X)\leq 1. Therefore, to satisfy the weak-binding relation (1) without the correction terms a0=R[2X/(1+X)]a_{0}=R[2X/(1+X)], RR should be larger than a0a_{0}. However, there are some systems with a0>Ra_{0}>R which give X>1X>1 as mentioned above. In such cases, we cannot interpret XX as the probability. This problem originates in the assumption of neglecting the correction terms. For the systems with a0>Ra_{0}>R, it is expected that the weak-binding relation holds by taking into account the correction terms 𝒪(Rtyp/R)\mathcal{O}(R_{\rm typ}/R), because 2X/(1+X)+𝒪(Rtyp/R)>12X/(1+X)+\mathcal{O}(R_{\rm typ}/R)>1 can be realized for 0X10\leq X\leq 1. Therefore, it is necessary to develop a quantitative estimation method of the correction terms to obtain X1X\leq 1 for the systems with a0>Ra_{0}>R.

2.2 Estimation of uncertainty band

From the discussion in Sec. 2.1, we propose the estimation method of the compositeness XX with introducing the contribution from the correction terms 𝒪(Rtyp/R)\mathcal{O}(R_{\rm typ}/R). As discussed in Ref. Kamiya:2016oao , the correction terms 𝒪(Rtyp/R)\mathcal{O}(R_{\rm typ}/R) can be estimated quantitatively as the dimensionless quantity ξ\xi:

ξ=RtypR.\displaystyle\xi=\frac{R_{\rm typ}}{R}. (3)

We then determine the upper and lower boundaries of the estimated compositeness XuX_{u} (XlX_{l}) as

Xu(ξ)\displaystyle X_{u}(\xi) =a0/R+ξ2a0/Rξ,\displaystyle=\frac{a_{0}/R+\xi}{2-a_{0}/R-\xi}, (4)
Xl(ξ)\displaystyle X_{l}(\xi) =a0/Rξ2a0/R+ξ,\displaystyle=\frac{a_{0}/R-\xi}{2-a_{0}/R+\xi}, (5)

for 0ξ10\leq\xi\leq 1. It is expected that the exact value of XX is contained within XlXXuX_{l}\leq X\leq X_{u}.

Numerically, XuX_{u} and XlX_{l} can go beyond the definition domain of the compositeness 0X10\leq X\leq 1, depending on the values of a0,Ra_{0},R and ξ\xi. However, the results X1X\geq 1 and X0X\leq 0 do not make sense, because the exact value of XX is not contained there. Therefore, we define

X¯u=min{Xu,1},X¯l=max{Xl,0},\displaystyle\bar{X}_{u}=\min\{X_{u},1\},\quad\bar{X}_{l}=\max\{X_{l},0\}, (6)

to restrict the uncertainty band of the compositeness within the definition domain of XX:

X¯lXX¯u,\displaystyle\bar{X}_{l}\leq X\leq\bar{X}_{u}, (7)

as illustrated in Fig. 1. We regard this uncertainty band (7) as the estimated compositeness and discuss the internal structure of the bound state with it. It is clear that the estimated compositeness with the uncertainty band (7) is restricted within 0X10\leq X\leq 1, and we can interpret XX as the probability. More details about the estimation of XX are discussed in Sec. III and IV in Ref. Kinugawa:2022fzn .

Refer to caption
Figure 1: Schematic illustration of the definition of the uncertainty band (7). The left panel shows the case for Xu>1X_{u}>1 (X¯u=1\bar{X}_{u}=1), and the right shows that for Xl<0X_{l}<0 (X¯l=0\bar{X}_{l}=0).

3 Application to physical systems

Now we estimate the compositeness XX of the actual physical systems with the uncertainty estimation discussed in Sec. 2.2. We consider the deuteron, X(3872)X(3872), Ds0(2317)D^{*}_{s0}(2317), Ds1(2460)D_{s1}(2460), NΩN\Omega dibaryon, ΩΩ\Omega\Omega dibaryon, HΛ3{}^{3}_{\Lambda}{\rm H}, and He4{}^{4}{\rm He} dimer. The deuteron dd in the pp-nn scattering is chosen as the typical observed hadron. X(3872)X(3872) in the D0D^{0}-D¯0\bar{D}^{*0} scattering, Ds0(2317)D^{*}_{s0}(2317) in the DD-KK scattering, and Ds1(2460)D_{s1}(2460) in the DD^{*}-KK scattering are the candidates for the exotic hadrons which are experimentally observed ParticleDataGroup:2020ssz . NΩN\Omega and ΩΩ\Omega\Omega dibaryons are the states obtained by the lattice QCD calculation HALQCD:2018qyu ; Gongyo:2017fjb . We can apply the weak-binding relation not only to the hadron systems but also to the nuclei and atomic systems. HΛ3{}^{3}_{\Lambda}{\rm H} in the Λ\Lambda-dd scattering is an example of nuclei, and He4{}^{4}{\rm He} dimer which is the weakly bound state of He4{}^{4}{\rm He} atoms is an example in the atomic systems.

Table 1: The physical quantities and the compositeness XX with the uncertainty band (7). u, mK and B.R. stand for the atomic mass unit, millikelvin and the Bohr radius.
bound state BB a0a_{0} rer_{e} RintR_{\rm int} Compositeness XX
dd 2.222.22 MeV 5.42 fm 1.75 fm 1.431.43 fm 0.74X10.74\leq X\leq 1
X(3872)X(3872) 0.018 MeV 28.5 fm 5.34-5.34 fm 1.431.43 fm 0.53X10.53\leq X\leq 1
Ds0(2317)D^{*}_{s0}(2317) 44.8 MeV 1.3 fm -0.1 fm 0.359 fm 0.81X10.81\leq X\leq 1
Ds1(2460)D_{s1}(2460) 45.1 MeV 1.1 fm -0.2 fm 0.359 fm 0.55X10.55\leq X\leq 1
NΩN\Omega dibaryon 1.541.54 MeV 5.30 fm 1.26 fm 0.6760.676 fm 0.80X10.80\leq X\leq 1
ΩΩ\Omega\Omega dibaryon 1.61.6 MeV 4.6 fm 1.27 fm 0.9490.949 fm 0.79X10.79\leq X\leq 1
HΛ3{}^{3}_{\Lambda}{\rm H} 0.130.13 MeV 16.8 fm 2.3 fm 4.324.32 fm 0.74X10.74\leq X\leq 1
He4{}^{4}{\rm He} dimer 1.301.30 mK 189 B.R. 13.8 B.R. 10.210.2 B.R. 0.93X10.93\leq X\leq 1

For the estimation of XX from the weak-binding relation, we need the scattering length a0a_{0}, the reduced mass μ\mu, the binding energy BB, the effective range rer_{e}, and the interaction range RintR_{\rm int}. The radius of the bound state is calculated by R=2μBR=\sqrt{2\mu B}. We tabulate relevant quantities in Tab. 1. We note that RintR_{\rm int} is not an observable, and therefore it is determined from the theoretical consideration. The procedure to determine these physical quantities is explained in Ref. Kinugawa:2022fzn .

The results of the estimated compositeness with the uncertainty band (7) are shown in the right column in Tab. 1. It is found that the range correction is important for the application to the X(3872)X(3872) and the NΩN\Omega dibaryon Kinugawa:2022fzn . We find that those bound states are dominated by the composite component because the lower boundaries X¯l\bar{X}_{l} are larger than 0.5.

4 Summary

The compositeness XX characterizes the internal structure of shallow bound states, especially for the candidates for exotic hadrons. The weak-binding relation is one of the approaches to estimate XX. When we neglect the correction terms 𝒪(Rtyp/R)\mathcal{O}(R_{\rm typ}/R), the weak-binding relation becomes completely model-independent. However, if the scattering length a0a_{0} is larger than the radius of the bound state RR, the compositeness is overestimated as X1X\geq 1 without the correction terms. To avoid this problem, we discuss the method to evaluate the correction terms 𝒪(Rtyp/R)\mathcal{O}(R_{\rm typ}/R). We propose the estimation method of XX with the uncertainty band, which includes the contribution of the correction terms 𝒪(Rtyp/R)\mathcal{O}(R_{\rm typ}/R). Our uncertainty estimation provides the compositeness in 0X10\leq X\leq 1 which can be interpreted as a probability. We finally perform reasonable estimations of XX as shown in Tab. 1, and find that all states which we consider are composite dominant (X¯l0.5\bar{X}_{l}\geq 0.5).

References

  • (1) S.K. Choi et al. (Belle), Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 262001 (2003)
  • (2) T. Hyodo, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 28, 1330045 (2013)
  • (3) S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. 137, B672 (1965)
  • (4) Y. Kamiya, T. Hyodo, PTEP 2017, 023 (2017)
  • (5) T. Kinugawa, T. Hyodo, Phys. Rev. C 106, 015205 (2022)
  • (6) R. Machleidt, Phys. Rev. C 63, 024001 (2001)
  • (7) P.A. Zyla et al. (Particle Data Group), PTEP 2020, 083C01 (2020)
  • (8) Y. Li, F.K. Guo, J.Y. Pang, J.J. Wu, Phys. Rev. D 105, L071502 (2022)
  • (9) J. Song, L.R. Dai, E. Oset, Eur. Phys. J. A 58, 133 (2022)
  • (10) M. Albaladejo, J. Nieves, Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 724 (2022)
  • (11) T. Iritani et al. (HAL QCD), Phys. Lett. B 792, 284 (2019)
  • (12) S. Gongyo et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 212001 (2018)