# New charged resonance \(Z_{c}^{-}(4100)\): the spectroscopic parameters and width

## Abstract

The mass, coupling and width of the newly observed charged resonance \( Z_{c}^{-}(4100)\) are calculated by treating it as a scalar four-quark system with a diquark–antidiquark structure. The mass and coupling of the state \( Z_{c}^{-}(4100)\) are calculated using the QCD two-point sum rules. In these calculations we take into account contributions of the quark, gluon and mixed condensates up to dimension ten. The spectroscopic parameters of \( Z_{c}^{-}(4100)\) obtained by this way are employed to study its *S*-wave decays to \(\eta _c(1S)\pi ^{-}\), \(\eta _c(2S)\pi ^{-}\), \(D^{0}D^{-}\), and \( J/\psi \rho ^{-}\) final states. To this end, we evaluate the strong coupling constants corresponding to the vertices \(Z_{c}\eta _c(1S)\pi ^{-}\), \( Z_{c}\eta _c(2S)\pi ^{-}\), \(Z_{c}D^{0}D^{-}\), and \(Z_{c}J/\psi \rho ^{-}\) respectively. The couplings \(g_{Z_c\eta _{c1} \pi }\), \(g_{Z_{c}\eta _{c2} \pi }\), and \(g_{Z_{c}DD}\) are computed by means of the QCD three-point sum rule method, whereas \(g_{Z_{c}J/\psi \rho }\) is obtained from the QCD light-cone sum rule approach and soft-meson approximation. Our results for the mass \( m=(4080 \pm 150)~\text {MeV}\) and total width \(\Gamma =(147 \pm 19)~\mathrm { MeV}\) of the resonance \(Z_{c}^{-}(4100)\) are in excellent agreement with the existing LHCb data.

## 1 Introduction

Recently, the LHCb Collaboration reported on evidence for an \(\eta _{c}(1S)\pi ^{-}\) resonance in \(B^{0}\rightarrow K^{+}\eta _{c}(1S)\pi ^{-}\) decays extracted from analysis of *pp* collisions’ data collected with LHCb detector at center-of-mass energies of \(\sqrt{s}=7,\ 8\) and \(13\ \mathrm {TeV} \) [1]. The mass and width of this new \(Z_{c}^{-}(4100)\) resonance (hereafter \(Z_{c}\)) were found equal to \(m=4096\pm 20_{-22}^{ +18}~ \text {MeV}\) and \(\Gamma =152\pm 58_{-35}^{+60}~\text {MeV}\), respectively. As it was emphasized in Ref. [1], the spin-parity assignments \(J^{P}=0^{+}\) and \(J^{P}=1^{-}\) both are consistent with the data.

From analysis of the decay channel \(Z_{c}\rightarrow \eta _{c}(1S)\pi ^{-}\) it becomes evident that \(Z_{c}\) contains four quarks \(cd{\overline{c}} {\overline{u}}\), and it is presumably another member of the family of charged exotic *Z*-resonances with the same quark content; the well-known axial-vector tetraquarks \(Z_{c}^{\pm }(4430)\) and \(Z_{c}^{\pm }(3900)\) are also built of the quarks \(cd{\overline{c}}{\overline{u}}\) or \(cu{\overline{c}} {\overline{d}}\). The \(Z_{c}^{\pm }(4430)\) were discovered and studied by the Belle Collaboration in *B* meson decays \(B\rightarrow K\psi ^{\prime }\pi ^{\pm }\) as resonances in the \(\psi ^{\prime }\pi ^{\pm }\) invariant mass distributions [2, 3, 4]. The decay of \(Z_{c}^{+}(4430)\) to the final state \(J/\psi \pi ^{+}\) also was detected in the Belle experiment [5]. The existence of the \(Z_{c}^{\pm }(4430)\) resonances was confirmed by the LHCb Collaboration as well [6, 7].

Another well-known members of this family are the axial-vector states \( Z_{c}^{\pm }(3900)\), which were detected by the BESIII Collaboration in the process \(e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow J/\psi \pi ^{+}\pi ^{-}\) as peaks in the \( J/\psi \pi ^{\pm }\) invariant mass distributions [8]. These structures were seen by the Belle and CLEO collaborations as well (see Refs. [9, 10]). The BESIII informed also on observation of the neutral \(Z_{c}^{0}(3900)\) state in the process \( e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow \pi ^{0}Z_{c}^{0}\rightarrow \pi ^{0}\pi ^{0}J/\psi \) [11].

Various theoretical models and approaches were employed to reveal the internal quark-gluon structure and determine parameters of the charged *Z*-resonances. Thus, they were considered as hadrocharmonium compounds or tightly bound diquark–antidiquark states, were treated as the four-quark systems built of conventional mesons or interpreted as threshold cusps (see Refs. [12, 13] and references therein).

The diquark model of the exotic four-quark mesons is one of the popular approaches to explain their properties. In accordance with this picture the tetraquark is a bound state of a diquark and an antidiquark. This approach implies the existence of multiplets of the diquark–antidiquarks with the same quark content, but different spin-parities. Because the resonances \( Z_{c}^{\pm }(3900)\) and \(Z_{c}^{\pm }(4430)\) are the axial-vectors, one can interpret them as the ground-state 1*S* and first radially excited 2*S* state of the same \([cu][{\overline{c}}{\overline{d}}]\) or \([cd][{\overline{c}} {\overline{u}}]\) multiplets. An idea to consider \(Z_{c}(4430)\) as a radial excitation of the \(Z_{c}(3900)\) state was proposed in Ref. [14], and explored in Refs. [15, 16] in the framework of the QCD sum rule method.

The resonances \(Z_{c}(3900)\), \(Z_{c}(4200)\), \(Z_{c}(4430)\) and \(Z_{c}\) were detected in *B* meson decays and/or electron-positron annihilations, which suggest that all of them may have the same nature. Therefore, one can consider \(Z_{c}\) as the ground-state scalar or vector tetraquark with \(c {\overline{c}}d{\overline{u}}\) content. The recent theoretical articles devoted to the \(Z_{c}\) resonance are concentrated mainly on exploration of its spin and possible decay channels [17, 18, 19, 20, 21]. Thus, sum rule computations carried out in Ref. [17] demonstrated that \(Z_{c}\) is presumably a scalar particle rather than a vector tetraquark. The conclusion about a tetraquark nature of \(Z_{c}\) with quantum numbers \( J^{PC}=0^{++}\) was drawn in Ref. [18] as well. In the hadrocharmonium framework the resonances \(Z_{c}\) and \(Z_{c}^{-}(4200)\) were treated as the scalar \(\eta _{c}\) and vector \(J/\psi \) charmonia embedded in a light-quark excitation with quantum numbers of a pion [19]. In accordance with this picture \(Z_{c}\) and \( Z_{c}^{-}(4200)\) are related by the charm quark spin symmetry which suggests certain relations between their properties and decay channels. The possible decays of a scalar and a vector tetraquark \([cd][{\overline{c}}{\overline{u}}]\) were analyzed also in Ref. [20].

In the present work we treat \(Z_{c}\) as the scalar diquark–antidiquark state \([cd][{\overline{c}}{\overline{u}}]\), since it was observed in the process \( Z_{c}\rightarrow \eta _{c}(1S)\pi ^{-}\). In fact, for the scalar \(Z_{c}\) this decay is the dominant *S*-wave channel, whereas for the vector tetraquark \(Z_{c}\) it turns *P*-wave decay. We are going to calculate the spectroscopic parameters of the tetraquark \(Z_{c}\), i.e., its mass and coupling by means of the two-point QCD sum rule method. The QCD sum rule method is the powerful nonperturbative approach to investigate the conventional hadrons and calculate their parameters [22, 23]. But it can be successfully applied for studying multiquark systems as well. To get reliable predictions for the quantities of concern, in the sum rule computations we take into account the quark, gluon, and mixed vacuum condensates up to dimension ten.

The next problem to be considered in this work is investigating decays of the resonance \(Z_{c}\) and evaluating its total width. It is known, that strong and semileptonic decays of various tetraquark candidates provide valuable information on their internal structure and dynamical features. In the framework of the QCD sum rule approach relevant problems were subject of rather intensive studies [24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37]. The dominant strong decay of the resonance \(Z_{c}\) seems is the channel \( Z_{c}\rightarrow \eta _{c}(1S)\pi ^{-}\). But its *S*-wave hidden-charm \(\eta _{c}(2S)\pi ^{-}\), \(J/\psi \rho ^{-}\) and open-charm \(D^{0}D^{-}\) and \( D^{*0}D^{*-}\)decays are also kinematically allowed modes [20].

We calculate the partial width of the dominant *S*-wave processes and use obtained results to evaluate the total width of the tetraquark \(Z_{c}\). The decays \(Z_{c}\rightarrow \eta _{c}(1S)\pi ^{-}\), \(\eta _{c}(2S)\pi ^{-}\), and \(D^{0}D^{-}\) are explored by applying the QCD three-point sum rule method. The quantities extracted from the sum rules are the strong couplings \(g_{Z_{c}\eta _{c1}\pi }\), \(g_{Z_{c}\eta _{c2}\pi }\), and \(g_{Z_{c}DD}\) that correspond to the vertices \(Z_{c}\eta _{c}(1S)\pi ^{-}\), \(Z_{c}\eta _{c}(2S)\pi ^{-}\), and \(Z_{c}D^{0}D^{-}\), respectively. The coupling \( g_{Z_{c}J/\psi \rho }\), which describes the strong vertex \(Z_{c}J/\psi \rho ^{-}\), is found by means of the QCD light-cone sum rule (LCSR) method and technical tools of the soft-meson approximation [38, 39]. For analysis of the tetraquarks this method and approximation was adapted in Ref. [26], and applied to study their numerous strong decay channels. Alongside the mass and coupling of the state \(Z_{c}\) the strong couplings provide an important information to determine the width of the decays under analysis.

This work is organized in the following manner: In Sect. 2 we calculate the mass *m* and coupling *f* of the scalar resonance \(Z_{c}\) by employing the two-point sum rule method and including into analysis the quark, gluon, and mixed condensates up to dimension ten. The obtained predictions for these parameters are applied in Sect. 3 to evaluate the partial widths of the decays \(Z_{c}\rightarrow \eta _{c}(1S)\pi ^{-}\) and \(\eta _{c}(2S)\pi ^{-}\). The decay \(Z_{c}\rightarrow D^{0}D^{-}\) is considered in Sect. 4, whereas Sect. 5 is devoted to analysis of the decay \(Z_{c}\rightarrow J/\psi \rho ^{-}\). In Sect. 5 we also give our estimate for the total width of the resonance \(Z_{c}\). The Sect. 6 contains the analysis of obtained results and our concluding notes. In the Appendix we write down explicit expressions of the heavy and light quark propagators, as well as the two-point spectral density used in the mass and coupling calculations.

## 2 Mass and coupling of the scalar tetraquark \(Z_{c}\)

The scalar resonance \(Z_{c}\) can be composed of the scalar diquark \(\epsilon ^{ijk}[c_{j}^{T}C\gamma _{5}d_{k}]\) in the color antitriplet and flavor antisymmetric state and the scalar antidiquark \(\epsilon ^{imn}[{\overline{c}} _{m}\gamma _{5}C{\overline{u}}_{n}^{T}]\) in the color triplet state. These diquarks are most attractive ones, and four-quark mesons composed of them should be lighter and more stable than bound states of diquarks with other quantum numbers [40]. The scalar diquarks were used as building blocks to construct various hidden-charm and -bottom tetraquark states and study their properties (see, for example Refs. [41, 42, 43]). In the present work for the resonance \(Z_{c}\) we choose namely this favorable structure.

*m*and coupling

*f*of the resonance \(Z_{c}\) using the QCD sum rule method, we start from the two-point correlation function

*J*(

*x*) is the interpolating current for the tetraquark \(Z_{c}\). In accordance with our assumption on the structure of \(Z_{c}\) the interpolating current

*J*(

*x*) has the following form

*i*,

*j*,

*k*,

*m*and

*n*are color indices, and

*C*is the charge-conjugation operator.

*m*and coupling

*f*of the ground-state tetraquark \(Z_{c}\) we adopt the “ground-state + continuum” approximation, and calculate the physical or phenomenological side of the sum rule. For these purposes, we insert into the correlation function a full set of relevant states and carry out in Eq. (1) the integration over

*x*, and get

*J*(

*x*) interacts with the two-meson continuum, which generates the finite width \( \Gamma (p^{2})\) of the tetraquark and results in the modification [46]

*f*, whereas the mass of the tetraquark

*m*preserves its initial value. But these effects are numerically small, therefore in the phenomenological side of the sum rule we use the zero-width single-pole approximation and check afterwards its self-consistency.

*I*, corresponding invariant amplitude \(\Pi ^{\mathrm {Phys}}(p^{2})\) is equal to the function given by Eq. (6).

*J*(

*x*), contract the relevant heavy and light quark operators in Eq. (1) to generate propagators, and obtain

*c*- and light

*u*(

*d*)-quark propagators, respectively. These propagators contain both the perturbative and nonperturbative components: their explicit expressions are presented in the Appendix. In Eq. (7) we also utilized the shorthand notation

*m*and

*f*one must equate \(\Pi ^{ \mathrm {Phys}}(p^{2})\) to the similar amplitude \(\Pi ^{\mathrm {OPE}}(p^{2})\), apply the Borel transformation to both sides of the obtained equality to suppress contributions of the higher resonances and, finally, perform the continuum subtraction in accordance with the assumption on the quark-hadron duality: These manipulations lead to the equality that can be used to get the sum rules. The second equality, which is required for these purposes, can be obtained from the first expression by applying on it by the operator \( d/d(-1/M^{2})\). Then, for the mass of the tetraquark \(Z_{c}\) we get the sum rule

*f*reads

*m*and coupling

*f*of the tetraquark \(Z_{c}\). They contain numerous parameters, some of which, such as the vacuum condensates, the mass of the

*c*-quark, are universal quantities and do not depend on the problem under discussion. In computations we utilize the following values for the quark, gluon and mixed condensates:

*c*-quark is taken equal to \(m_{c}=1.275_{-0.035}^{+0.025} \text {GeV}\).

*m*and coupling

*f*should not depend on the parameters \(M^{2}\) and \(s_{0}\). But in real calculations, these quantities are sensitive to the choice of \(M^{2}\) and \(s_{0}\). Therefore, the parameters \(M^{2}\) and \(s_{0}\) should also be determined in such a way that to minimize the dependence of

*m*and

*f*on them. The analysis allows us to fix the working windows for the parameters \(M^{2}\) and \(s_{0}\)

*R*becomes equal to \(R(4~ \text {GeV}^{2})=0.02\) which ensures the convergence of the sum rules. At \( M^{2}=4~\text {GeV}^{2}\) the perturbative contribution amounts to \(83\%\) of the full result exceeding considerably the nonperturbative terms.

As it has been noted above, there are residual dependence of *m* and *f* on the parameters \(M^{2}\) and \(s_{0}\). In Figs. 1 and 2 we plot the mass and coupling of the tetraquark \(Z_{c}\) as functions of the parameters \(M^{2}\) and \(s_{0}\). It is seen that both the *m* and *f* depend on \(M^{2}\) and \(s_{0}\) which generates essential part of the theoretical uncertainties inherent to the sum rule computations. For the mass *m* these uncertainties are small which has a simple explanation: The sum rule for the mass (9) is equal to the ratio of integrals over the functions \(s\rho ^{\mathrm {OPE}}(s)\) and \(\rho ^{\mathrm {OPE}}(s)\), which reduces effects due to variation of \(M^{2}\) and \(s_{0}\). The coupling *f* depends on the integral over the spectral density \(\rho ^{\mathrm {OPE} }(s) \), and therefore its variations are sizeable. In the case under analysis, theoretical errors for *m* and *f* generated by uncertainties of various parameters including \(M^{2}\) and \(s_{0}\) ones equal to \(\pm \, 3.7\%\) and \(\pm \, 21\%\) of the corresponding central values, respectively.

*D*refers to either \( D^{0}\) or \(D^{+}\) meson, and was considered there as a \(\chi _{c0}(2P)\) candidate. Comparing our result and that of Ref. [47], one can see the existence of an overlapping region between them, nevertheless the difference between the central values \(200\ ~\text {MeV}\) is sizable. This discrepancy is presumably connected with working regions for \(M^{2}\) and \(s_{0}\), and also with values of the vacuum condensates (fixed or evolved) used in numerical computations.

## 3 Decays \(Z_{c}\rightarrow \eta _{c}(1S)\pi ^{-}\) and \(Z_{c}\rightarrow \eta _{c}(2S)\pi ^{-}\)

The *S*-wave decays of the resonance \(Z_{c}\) can be divided into two subclasses: The decays to two pseudoscalar and two vector mesons, respectively. The processes \(Z_{c}\rightarrow \eta _{c}(1S)\pi ^{-}\) and \( Z_{c}\rightarrow \eta _{c}(2S)\pi ^{-}\) belong to the first subclass of decays. The final stages of these decays contain the ground-state and first radially excited \(\eta _{c}\) mesons, therefore in the QCD sum rule approach they should investigated in a correlated form. An appropriate way to deal with decays \(Z_{c}\rightarrow \eta _{c}(1S)\pi ^{-}\) and \(Z_{c}\rightarrow \eta _{c}(2S)\pi ^{-}\) is the QCD three-point sum rule method. Indeed, because we are going to explore the form factors \(g_{Z_{c}\eta _{ci}\pi }(q^{2})\) for the off-shell pion the double Borel transformation will be carried out in the \(Z_{c}\) and \(\eta _{c}\) channels, i.e. over momenta of these particles. This transformation applied to the phenomenological side of the relevant three-point sum rules suppresses contributions of the higher resonances in these two channels eliminating, at the same time, terms associated with the pole-continuum transitions [39, 49]. The elimination of these terms is important for joint analysis of the form factors \(g_{Z_{c}\eta _{ci}\pi }(q^{2})\), because one does not need to apply an additional operator to remove them from the phenomenological side of the sum rules. Nevertheless, there may still exist in the pion channel terms corresponding to excited states of the pion which emerge as contaminations (for the \(NN\pi \) vertex, see discussions in Refs. [50, 51]). To reduce the uncertainties in evaluation of the strong couplings at the vertices and smooth problems with extrapolation of the form factors to the mass-shell, it is possible to fix the pion on the mass-shell and treat one of the remaining heavy states (\(Z_{c}\) or \(\eta _{c}\)) as the off-shell particle. This trick was used numerously to study the conventional heavy-heavy-light mesons’ couplings [52, 53]. Form factors obtained by treating a light or one of heavy mesons off-shell may differ from each other considerably, but after extrapolating to the corresponding mass-shells lead to the same or slightly different strong couplings.

In the framework of the three-point sum rule approach a more detailed representation for the phenomenological side was used in Refs. [31, 36, 37]. This technique generates additional terms in the sum rules and introduces into analysis new free parameters, which should be chosen to obtain stable sum rules with variations of the Borel parameters. In the present work, to calculate \( g_{Z_{c}\eta _{c1}\pi }(q^{2})\) and \(g_{Z_{c}\eta _{c2}\pi }(q^{2})\) we apply the standard three-point sum rule method and choose the pion an off-shell particle. We use this method to study the decay \(Z_{c}\rightarrow D^{0}D^{-}\) as well.

The process \(Z_{c}\rightarrow \) \(J/\psi \rho ^{-}\) belongs to the second subclass of \(Z_{c}\) decays; it is a decay to two vector mesons. We investigate this mode by means of the QCD light-cone sum rule method and soft-meson approximation. The sum rule on the light-cone allows one to find the strong coupling by avoiding extrapolating procedures and express \( g_{Z_{c}J/\psi \rho }\) not only in terms of the vacuum condensates, but also using the \(\rho \)-meson local matrix elements. As for unsuppressed pole-continuum effects that after a single Borel transformation survive in this approach, they can be eliminated by means of well-known prescriptions [49].

*J*(

*x*) is the interpolating current for the resonance \(Z_{c}\) and has been introduced above in Eq. (2).

*I*therefore the invariant amplitude \(\Pi ^{\mathrm {Phys} }(p^{2},p^{\prime 2},q^{2})\) is given by the sum of two terms from Eq. (22). The double Borel transformation of \(\Pi ^{\mathrm {Phys} }(p^{2},p^{\prime 2},q^{2})\) over the variables \(p^{2}\) and \(p^{\prime 2}\) with the parameters \(M_{1}^{2}\) and \(M_{2}^{2}\) forms one of sides in the sum rule equality.

At the next step we fix the continuum threshold \(\sqrt{s_{0}^{\prime }}\) at \( m_{2}+(0.5-0.8)\ \text {GeV}\) and use the sum rule that now contains the ground and first radially excited states. The QCD side of this sum rule is given by the expression \(\Pi ({\mathbf {M}}^{2},\mathbf {\ s}_{0}^{(2)},~q^{2})\) with \({\mathbf {s}}_{0}^{(2)}=(s_{0},\ s_{0}^{\prime }\simeq [m_{2}+(0.5-0.8)]^{2})\). By substituting the obtained expression for \( g_{Z_{c}\eta _{c1}\pi }\) into this sum rule it is not difficult to evaluate the second coupling \(g_{Z_{c}\eta _{c2}\pi }\).

The couplings depend on the Borel and continuum threshold parameters and, at the same time, are functions of \(q^{2}\). In what follows we omit their dependence on the parameters, replace \(q^{2}=-Q^{2}\) and denote the obtained couplings as \(g_{Z_{c}\eta _{c1}\pi }(Q^{2})\) and \(g_{Z_{c}\eta _{c2}\pi }(Q^{2})\). For calculation of the decay width we need value of the strong couplings at the pion’s mass-shell, i.e. at \(q^{2}=m_{_{\pi }}^{2}\), which is not accessible for the sum rule calculations. The standard way to avoid this problem is to introduce a fit functions \(F_{1(2)}(Q^{2})\) that for the momenta \(Q^{2}>0\) leads to the same predictions as the sum rules, but can be readily extrapolated to the region of \(Q^{2}<0\). Let us emphasize that values of the fit functions at the mass-shell are the strong couplings \( g_{Z_{c}\eta _{c1}\pi }\) and \(g_{Z_{c}\eta _{c2}\pi }\) to be utilized in calculations.

Parameters of the mesons produced in the decays of the resonance \( Z_{c}\)

Parameters | Values (in \(\text {MeV}\) units) |
---|---|

\(m_1=m[\eta _c(1S)]\) | \(2983.9\pm 0.5\) |

\(f_1=f[\eta _c(1S)]\) | 404 |

\(m_2=m[\eta _c(2S)]\) | \(3637.6\pm 1.2\) |

\(f_2=f[\eta _c(2S)]\) | 331 |

\(m_{J/\psi }\) | \(3096.900\pm 0.006\) |

\(f_{J/\psi }\) | \(411 \pm 7\) |

\(m_{\pi }\) | \(139.57077 \pm 0.00018\) |

\(f_{\pi }\) | 131.5 |

\(m_{\rho }\) | \(775.26\pm 0.25\) |

\(f_{\rho }\) | \(216 \pm 3\) |

\(m_{D^{0}}\) | \(1864.83\pm 0.05\) |

\(m_{D}\) | \(1869.65\pm 0.05\) |

\(f_{D}=f_{D^{0}}\) | \(211.9 \pm 1.1\) |

## 4 Decay \(Z_{c}\rightarrow D^{0}D^{-}\)

*S*-wave decay to the two open-charm pseudoscalar mesons. Our starting point is the three-point correlation function

The width of the decay \(Z_{c}\rightarrow D^{0}D^{-}\) depend on the strong coupling at \(D^{0}\) meson’s mass shell. In other words, we need \( g_{Z_{c}DD}(-m_{D^{0}}^{2})\) which cannot be accessed by direct sum rule computations. Therefore,we use the fit function \({\widetilde{F}}(Q^{2})\) that for the momenta \(Q^{2}>0\) coincides with the sum rule results, and can be easily extrapolated to the region of \(Q^{2}<0\). The function (28) with the parameters \({\widetilde{F}}_{0}=0.44\ \text {GeV}^{-1}\), \(\widetilde{ c}_{1}=2.38\) and \({\widetilde{c}}_{2}=-1.61\) meets these requirements. In Fig. 4 we plot \({\widetilde{F}}(Q^{2})\) and the sum rule results for \(g_{Z_{c}DD}(Q^{2})\) demonstrating a very nice agreement between them.

## 5 Decay \(Z_{c}\rightarrow J/\psi \rho ^{-}\)

*S*-wave can also decay to the final state \( J/\psi \rho ^{-}\). In the QCD light-cone sum rule approach this decay can be explored through the correlation function

*p*and

*q*are the momenta of the \(J/\psi \) and \(\rho \) mesons, respectively.

*G*from the

*c*-quark propagators into the local operators \({\overline{d}}\Gamma ^{j}u.\) The \(\rho \)-meson three-particle local matrix element

*q*free quantity. But other matrix elements depend on the \(\rho \) -meson momentum

*p*and

*q*. This is general feature of QCD sum rules on the light-cone with a tetraquark and two conventional mesons. Indeed, because a tetraquark contains four quarks, after contracting two quark fields from its interpolating current with relevant quarks from the interpolating current of a meson one gets a local operator sandwiched between the vacuum and a second meson. The variety of such local operators gives rise to different local matrix elements of the meson rather that to its distribution amplitudes. Then the four-momentum conservation in the tetraquark-meson-meson vertex requires setting \(q=0\) ( for details, see Ref. [26]). In the standard LCSR method the choice \(q=0\) is known as the soft-meson approximation [39]. At vertices composed of conventional mesons in general \( q\ne 0\), and only in the soft-meson approximation one equates

*q*to zero, whereas the tetraquark-meson-meson vertex can be analyzed in the context of the LCSR method only if \(q=0\). An important observation made in Ref. [39] is that the soft-meson approximation and full LCSR treatment of the conventional mesons’ vertices lead to results which numerically are very close to each other. It is worth to note that the full version of the sum rules on the light-cone is applicable to tetraquark-tetraquark-meson vertices [54].

After substituting all aforementioned matrix elements into the expression of the correlation function and performing the summation over color indices we fix the local matrix elements of the \(\rho \) meson that survive the soft limit. It turns out that in the \(q\rightarrow 0\) limit only the matrix elements (54) and (56) contribute to the invariant amplitude \(\Pi ^{\mathrm {OPE}}(p^{2})\) [i.e. to \(\Pi ^{\mathrm {OPE} }(p^{2},\ 0)\)]. These matrix elements depend on the mass and decay constant of the \(\rho \)-meson \(m_{\rho }\), \(f_{\rho }\), and on \(\zeta _{4\rho }\) which normalizes the twist-4 matrix element of the \(\rho \)-meson [55]. The parameter \(\zeta _{4\rho }\) was evaluated in the context of QCD sum rule approach at the renormalization scale \(\mu =1\,\,{\mathrm {GeV }}\) in Ref. [56] and is equal to \(\zeta _{4\rho }=0.07\pm 0.03 \).

## 6 Analysis and concluding remarks

We have performed quantitative analysis of the newly observed resonance \( Z_{c}\) by calculating its spectroscopic parameters and total width. In computations we have used different QCD sum rule approaches. Thus, the mass and coupling of \(Z_{c}\) have been evaluated by means of the two-point sum rule method, whereas its decay channels have been analyzed using the three-point and light-cone sum rule techniques.

*m*and

*f*obtained in the present work. Effects of the two-meson continuum change the zero-width approximation (4) and lead to the following corrections [46]

*m*and \(\Gamma \), as well as \(M^{2}=5\ \text {GeV}^{2}\) and \(s_{0}=20\ \text {GeV}^{2}\), it is not difficult to find that

We have saturated the total width of the resonance \(Z_{c}\) by its four dominant decay modes \(Z_{c}\rightarrow \eta _{c}(1S)\pi ^{-}\), \(\eta _{c}(2S)\pi ^{-}\), \(D^{0}D^{-}\) and \(J/\psi \rho ^{-}\). To calculate partial widths of these decay channels we used two approaches in the framework of the QCD sum rule method. Thus the decays \(Z_{c}\rightarrow \eta _{c}(1S)\pi ^{-}\), \(Z_{c}\rightarrow \eta _{c}(2S)\pi ^{-}\) and \(Z_{c}\rightarrow D^{0}D^{-}\) have been studied by applying three-point sum rules, whereas the process \(Z_{c}\rightarrow J/\psi \rho ^{-}\) has been investigated using the LCSR method and soft-meson approximation. Predictions obtained for partial widths of these *S*-wave decay channels have been used to evaluate the total width of the resonance \(Z_{c}\).

Our results for the mass \(m=(4080~\pm 150)~\text {MeV}\) and total width \( \Gamma =(147\pm 19)\ \text {MeV}\) of the resonance \(Z_{c}\) are in a very nice agreement with experimental data of the LHCb Collaboration. This allows us to interpret the new charged resonance as the scalar diquark–antidiquark state with \(cd{\overline{c}}{\overline{u}}\) content and \(C\gamma _{5}\otimes \gamma _{5}C\) structure. It presumably belongs to one of the charged *Z*-resonance multiplets, axial-vector members of which are the tetraquarks \( Z_{c}^{\pm }(3900)\) and \(Z_{c}^{\pm }(4330)\), respectively. The charged resonances \(Z_{c}^{\pm }(4330)\) and \(Z_{c}^{\pm }(3900)\) were observed in the \(\psi ^{\prime }\pi ^{\pm }\) and \(J/\psi \pi ^{\pm }\) invariant mass distributions, i.e. they dominantly decay to these particles. The neutral resonance \(Z_{c}^{0}(3900)\) was discovered in the process \( e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow \pi ^{0}\pi ^{0}J/\psi \). Because \(J/\psi \) and \(\psi ^{\prime }\) are vector mesons, and \(\psi ^{\prime }\) is the radial excitation of \(J/\psi \), it is natural to suggest that \(Z_{c}(4330)\) is the excited state of \(Z_{c}(3900)\). This suggestion was originally made in Ref. [14], and confirmed later by sum rule calculations. Then the resonance \(Z_{c}^{-}(4100)\) fixed in the \(\eta _{c}(1S)\pi ^{-}\) channel can be interpreted as a scalar counterpart of these axial-vector tetraquarks. It is also reasonable to assume that the neutral member of this family \( Z_{c}^{0}(4100)\) will be seen in the processes \(e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow \pi ^{0}\pi ^{0}\eta _{c}(1S)\) with dominantly \(\pi ^{0}\pi ^{0}\) mesons rather than \(D{\overline{D}}\) ones at the final state.

## References

- 1.R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration). Eur. Phys. J. C
**78**, 1019 (2018)Google Scholar - 2.S.K. Choi et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.
**100**, 142001 (2008)Google Scholar - 3.R. Mizuk et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D
**80**, 031104 (2009)Google Scholar - 4.K. Chilikin et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D
**88**, 074026 (2013)Google Scholar - 5.K. Chilikin et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D
**90**, 112009 (2014)Google Scholar - 6.R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.
**112**, 222002 (2014)Google Scholar - 7.R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D
**92**, 112009 (2015)Google Scholar - 8.M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.
**110**, 252001 (2013)Google Scholar - 9.Z.Q. Liu et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.
**110**, 252002 (2013)Google Scholar - 10.T. Xiao, S. Dobbs, A. Tomaradze, K.K. Seth, Phys. Lett. B
**727**, 366 (2013)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 11.M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.
**115**, 112003 (2015)Google Scholar - 12.H.X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, S.L. Zhu, Phys. Rep.
**639**, 1 (2016)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 13.A. Esposito, A. Pilloni, A.D. Polosa, Phys. Rep.
**668**, 1 (2017)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 14.L. Maiani, F. Piccinini, A.D. Polosa, V. Riquer, Phys. Rev. D
**89**, 114010 (2014)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 15.Z.G. Wang, Commun. Theor. Phys.
**63**, 325 (2015)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 16.S.S. Agaev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, Phys. Rev. D
**96**, 034026 (2017)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 17.Z.G. Wang, Eur. Phys. J. C
**78**, 933 (2018)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 18.J. Wu, X. Liu, Y.R. Liu, S.L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D
**99**, 014037 (2019)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 19.M.B. Voloshin, Phys. Rev. D
**98**, 094028 (2018)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 20.Q. Zhao, arXiv:1811.05357 [hep-ph]
- 21.X. Cao, J.P. Dai, arXiv:1811.06434 [hep-ph]
- 22.M.A. Shifman, A.I. Vainshtein, V.I. Zakharov, Nucl. Phys. B
**147**, 385 (1979)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 23.M.A. Shifman, A.I. Vainshtein, V.I. Zakharov, Nucl. Phys. B
**147**, 448 (1979)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 24.F.S. Navarra, M. Nielsen, Phys. Lett. B
**639**, 272 (2006)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 25.J.M. Dias, F.S. Navarra, M. Nielsen, C.M. Zanetti, Phys. Rev. D
**88**, 016004 (2013)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 26.S.S. Agaev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, Phys. Rev. D
**93**, 074002 (2016)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 27.S.S. Agaev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, Phys. Rev. D
**93**, 114007 (2016)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 28.S.S. Agaev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, Phys. Rev. D
**95**, 034008 (2017)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 29.S.S. Agaev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, Eur. Phys. J. C
**77**, 321 (2017)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 30.S.S. Agaev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, Phys. Rev. D
**95**, 114003 (2017)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 31.Z.G. Wang, J.X. Zhang, Eur. Phys. J. C
**78**, 14 (2018)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 32.H. Sundu, B. Barsbay, S.S. Agaev, K. Azizi, Eur. Phys. J. A
**54**, 124 (2018)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 33.H. Sundu, S.S. Agaev, K. Azizi, Phys. Rev. D
**98**, 054021 (2018)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 34.S.S. Agaev, K. Azizi, B. Barsbay, H. Sundu, Nucl. Phys. B
**939**, 130 (2019)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 35.S.S. Agaev, K. Azizi, B. Barsbay, H. Sundu, Phys. Rev. D
**99**, 033002 (2019)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 36.Z.G. Wang, Z.Y. Di, Eur. Phys. J. C
**79**, 72 (2019)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 37.Z.G. Wang, Eur. Phys. J. C
**79**, 184 (2019)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 38.I.I. Balitsky, V.M. Braun, A.V. Kolesnichenko, Nucl. Phys. B
**312**, 509 (1989)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 39.V.M. Belyaev, V.M. Braun, A. Khodjamirian, R. Ruckl, Phys. Rev. D
**51**, 6177 (1995)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 40.R.L. Jaffe, Phys. Rep.
**409**, 1 (2005)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 41.H.X. Chen, A. Hosaka, S.L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D
**76**, 094025 (2007)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 42.Z.G. Wang, Phys. Rev. D
**79**, 094027 (2009)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 43.Z.G. Wang, Mod. Phys. Lett. A
**29**, 1450207 (2014)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 44.Y. Kondo, O. Morimatsu, T. Nishikawa, Phys. Lett. B
**611**, 93 (2005)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 45.S.H. Lee, H. Kim, Y. Kwon, Phys. Lett. B
**609**, 252 (2005)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 46.Z.G. Wang, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A
**30**, 1550168 (2015)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 47.Z.G. Wang, Eur. Phys. J. A
**53**, 192 (2017)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 48.K. Chilikin et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D
**95**, 112003 (2017)Google Scholar - 49.B.L. Ioffe, A.V. Smilga, Nucl. Phys. B
**232**, 109 (1984)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 50.T. Meissner, Phys. Rev. C
**52**, 3386 (1995)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 51.K. Maltman, Phys. Rev. C
**57**, 69 (1998)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 52.M.E. Bracco, A. Cerqueira Jr., M. Chiapparini, A. Lozea, M. Nielsen, Phys. Lett. B
**641**, 286 (2006)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 53.A. Cerqueira, B. Osorio Rodrigues, M.E. Bracco, M. Nielsen, Nucl. Phys. A
**936**, 45 (2015)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 54.S.S. Agaev, K. Azizi, H. Sundu, Phys. Rev. D
**93**, 114036 (2016)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 55.P. Ball, V.M. Braun, Nucl. Phys. B
**543**, 201 (1999)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 56.P. Ball, V.M. Braun, A. Lenz, JHEP
**0708**, 090 (2007)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar

## Copyright information

**Open Access**This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Funded by SCOAP^{3}