Masses of Single, Double, and Triple Heavy Baryons in the Hyper-Central Quark Model by Using GF-AEIM

Abu-shady, M.; Fath-Allah, H. M.

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4539308

Advances in High Energy Physics

On this page

Abstract Introduction Results and Discussion Conclusion Data Availability Conflicts of Interest Acknowledgments References Copyright Related Articles

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2022 | Article ID 4539308 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4539308

Masses of Single, Double, and Triple Heavy Baryons in the Hyper-Central Quark Model by Using GF-AEIM

M. Abu-shady¹and H. M. Fath-Allah²

Academic Editor: Osvaldo Civitarese

Received01 Jul 2022

Revised22 Aug 2022

Accepted06 Sept 2022

Published29 Sept 2022

Abstract

By using the generalized fractional analytical iteration method (GF-AEIM), the single, the double, and the triple heavy baryons masses are calculated in the hyper-central model in the two cases. In the first case, the potential is a combination of Coulombic potential, the linear confining potential, and the harmonic oscillator potential. In the second case, we add the hyperfine interaction. The energy eigenvalues and the baryonic wave function are obtained in the fractional forms. The present results are a good agreement with experimental data and are improved with other recent works.

1. Introduction

The constituent quark model (CQM), which is based on a hyper-central approach, has lately become popular for describing baryon internal structure [1–5]. Although the various theories are somewhat distinct, the heavy baryon spectrum is usually well described. Understanding the dynamics of QCD at the hadronic scale necessitates research into hadrons containing heavy quarks [6–10]. Due to the experimental observation of several heavy flavor baryons, heavy baryon characteristics have become a subject of considerable attention in recent years. All single charm quark-carrying spatial-ground-state baryons have been detected, and their masses have been calculated. Many spin-b-baryons, , and, as well as spin- baryons, have been identified [11–15]. The doubly heavy baryons, which are made up of two heavy quarks and one light quark, are particularly intriguing because they offer a new platform for simultaneously exploring heavy quark symmetry and chiral dynamics [16–18]. There are a lot of theoretical models, and the mass of the doubly heavy baryon is predicted to be in the range of 3.5 GeV. The mass splitting between and is predicted to be several MeV due to the mass difference of the light quarks , . The predicted mass in lattice QCD is about 3.6 GeV, which is quite close to the LHCb observation. The lifetimes of and are predicted to be quite long, 50 and 200 fs [19–28], respectively. In Refs. [29–31], the authors calculated heavy flavor baryons containing single and double charm (beauty) quarks with light flavor combinations and considered the confinement potential as hyper-central Coulomb plus power potential with power index . In Ref. [32], the author calculated baryons using Feynman–Hellmann theorem and semi-empirical mass formula within the framework of a nonrelativistic constituent quark model. In Ref. [33], the author studied heavy flavor baryons by using the Bethe-Salpeter equation in the heavy quark limit and calculated the Isgur-Wise function. In Ref. [34], the author calculated different properties of single heavy flavor baryons using heavy quark symmetry in the nonrelativistic quark model. In Ref. [35], the author investigated charmed baryons and spin splittings in quenched lattice QCD. In Ref. [7], the author evaluated ground-state magnetic moments of heavy baryons in the relativistic quark model using heavy-hadron chiral perturbation theory. In Refs. [36, 37], the authors solved the Schrodinger equation using the iteration method to obtain masses of heavy baryons containing single, double, and triple in a hyper-central approach with confining interaction and hyperfine interaction. In Ref. [38], the authors solved the Schrodinger equation using a variational method to obtain masses of single, double, and triple in the hyper-central approach with confining interaction and hyperfine interaction. In Ref. [39], the authors use two potentials, the first potential is Cornell potential, and the second potential is the same as Ref. [36, 37], and they solved the Schrodinger equation numerically to obtain single, double, and triple baryon masses. In Ref. [40], the authors obtained the masses of heavy flavor baryon masses by using the nonrelativistic quark model with hyper-central Coulomb plus linear potential and Coulomb plus harmonic oscillator potential. In Ref. [41], the authors obtained mass spectra of the doubly heavy baryons that the two heavy quarks inside a baryon form a compact heavy “diquark core” in a color antitriplet and bind with the remaining light quark into a colorless baryon. In Ref. [42], the author calculated masses of the ground-state baryons consisting of three or two heavy and one light quarks in the framework of the relativistic quark model, and masses of the triply and doubly heavy baryons are obtained by using the perturbation theory for the spin-independent and spin-dependent parts of the three-quark Hamiltonian. In Ref. [43], the author studied heavy baryons within Isgur-Wise formalism by using the extended Cornell potential and solved the Schrodinger equation using iteration to obtain eigenvalues of energy and baryonic wave function.

In the present work, we employ the generalized fractional iteration method, and we calculate the masses of heavy flavor baryons containing single, double, and triple in the ground state in two cases: the first case, in the absence of hyperfine interaction, and the second case, in the presence of hyperfine interaction. To the best of our knowledge, the masses of heavy flavor baryons are not considered in the fractional quark models.

This paper is arranged as follows. In Section 2, we display interaction potential. In Section 3, the theoretical method is explained. In Section 4, the results and discussion are written. In Section 5, the conclusion is written.

2. Interaction Potential

The potentials could take any confining form (e.g., linear, log, power law). In many practical applications, a harmonic oscillator potential produces spectra not much different from those obtained from potentials like the Coulombic plus linear that QCD prejudice would favor. Since harmonic oscillator models have nice mathematical properties, they have often been employed as the confining potential. On the other hand, the Coulombic term alone is not sufficient because it would allow free quarks to ionize from the system. As used by QCD [44, 45], the potential being studied in this work consists of a Coulombic-like term combined with a linear confining term (), and the harmonic oscillator potential, which has the form , has been added [36]. where is the relative quark pair coordinate and , , and are constants. In Equation (1), two features the Coulomb potential (CP) and confinement potential, the short distance is described by CP, and the long distance is described by the confinement part and supported confinement force by adding harmonic potential . We consider the present potential hyperfine interaction potentials. In the second case, we have added hyperfine interaction potentials ((), (), and ()). The nonperturbative confining interaction potential is the potential as defined in Equation (1). The nonconfining potential due to the exchange interactions contains a -like term, an illegal operator term [46]. We have changed it by a Gaussian of the quark pair relative distance where the non-confining spin-spin interaction potential is proportional to a -function which is an illegal operator term. We modify it to a Gaussian function of the relative distance of the quark pair where is the spin operator of the ith quark (= /2), with being the vector of Pauli matrices) and and are constants. Another spin as well as isospin-dependent interaction potentials can arise from quark-exchange interactions. We conclude that two additional terms should be added to the Hamiltonian for quark pairs which result in hyperfine interactions similar to Equation (3). The first one depends on isospin only and has the form [36, 46]. where is the isospin operator of the ith quarks and and are constants. The second one is a spin-isospin interaction given by [36, 46] where and are the spin and isospin operators of the th quark, respectively, and and are constants. Then, from Equations (2), (3), and (4), the hyperfine interaction (a nonconfining potential) is given by

The parameters of the hyperfine interaction (5) are given in Table 1.

3. Theoretical Method

3.1. Generalized Fractional Derivative

Fractional derivative plays an important role in applied science. Riemann-Liouville and Riesz and Caputo give a good formula that allows applying boundary and initial conditions as in Ref. [48]. with where is the , the derivative of the function , and is the kernel, which is fixed for a given real number . The kernel has a singularity at . Caputo and Fabrizio [49] suggested a new formula for the fractional derivative with a smooth exponential kernel of the form to avoid the difficulties found in Equation (6) where is a normalization function with .

A new formula for a fractional derivative called generalized fractional derivative (CFD) is proposed [50]. Generalized fractional derivative has been suggested to provide more advantages than other classical Caputo and Riemann–Liouville fractional derivative definitions, which gives a new direction for simply solving fractional differential equations (see Ref. [50]). Secondly, the fractional quark model recently takes more attention to well-reproducing meson properties (Refs. [51–53]). where with 0 α, 0 .

3.2. Generalized Fractional Exact Solution Method of the Radial Schrdinger Equation for the Confining Potential

The baryon as a bound state of three constituent quarks, we define the configuration of three particles by two the Jacobi coordinates and as [29, 36, 37, 46, 54–56] where where , , and are the constituent quark masses. Instead of and , one can introduce the hyperspherical coordinates, which are given by the angles and together with the hyperradius and the hyperangle, defined, respectively, by [46]

Therefore, the Hamiltonian will be

In the hyper-central constituent quark model (hCQM), the quark potential, , is assumed to depend on the hyperradius only, which is to be hypercentral. Therefore, is in general a three-body potential, since the hyperradius depends on the coordinates of all the three quarks. Since the potential depends on only, in the three-quark wave function, one can factor out the hyperangular part, which is given by hyperspherical harmonics. The remaining hyperradial part of the wave function is determined by the hyper-central Schrdinger equation [47, 57]. where is the hyperradial wave function and is the grand angular quantum number given by =2n ++ ; and are the angular momenta associated with the and variables; and is a nonnegative integer number. ν determines the number of the nodes of the wave function, and is the reduced mass [47].

Now, we want to solve the hyperradial Schrdinger equation for the three-body potential interaction (1). The wave function is factorized similarly to the central potential case. The transformation reduces Equation (15) to the form

Assume ,

where GeV.

Then, Equation (1) becomes

We note that Equation (18) becomes to put the present model that defined Equation (20) in the fractional quark model, and we used the fractional definition defined in Equations (9) and (10) as in Ref. [50] in which we replaced the classical derivative by fractional derivative where and we assume that

By substituting Equations (9), (10), (22), and (23) into Equation (21), we obtain the following equation where

The analytical exact iteration method (AEIM) requires making the following ansatz [36] as follows where

It is clear that are equivalent to the Laguere polynomials at . From Equation (21), we obtain

Now, comparing the coefficient of both sides of Equation (29)

Let us assume and then as in Ref. [36].

Equations (30), (31), and (32) become

The energy eigenvalue for the mode and grand angular momentum from Equations (24), (30), (31), (34), and (35), (36) is then, from Equations (23), (26), and (34), (35), and (36), the normalized eigenfunctions are given as

4. Results and Discussion

We calculate the baryon masses given by three-quark masses and the energy which is a function of , , and in two cases, the first case without the hyperfine interaction masses and the second case, with the hyperfine interaction potential <> treated as a perturbation. The first-order energy correction from the nonconfining potential <> can be obtained by using the unperturbed wave function [36].

4.1. The Interaction Potential without Hyperfine Interaction

In the first case, the Baryon mass then becomes the sum of quarks mass and energy, thus [58]

We use the same potential of Refs. [36, 38, 39], but we solve the Schrodinger equation by using the generalized fractional analytical iteration method. The quark masses and potential parameters are listed in Tables 1 and 2 and the constants , , and of the potential and as in Ref. [39]. We note that the generalized fractional analytical iteration method plays an important role. In Table 3, we calculate single charm baryon masses in the ground state (masses are in GeV) at (). The present results are close with experimental data such that and are good compared with other works such that in Ref. [36] total error is 0.19%. In Ref. [38], the total error is 5.3%. In Ref. [30], the total error is 0.53%. In Ref. [39], the total error is 0.26%, and in Ref. [29], the total error is 0.46%, but the total error of the present work is 0.13%.

In Table 4, we calculate single beauty baryon masses in the ground state (masses are in GeV) at ( =0.56). The present results are close to experimental data and are a good agreement compared with other works such that in Ref. [36] the total error is 0.42%. In Ref. [39], the total error is 1.7%. In Ref. [5], the total error is 1.0275%. In Ref. [37], the total error is 0.26%, and in Ref. [29], the total error is 0.9%, but the total error of the present work is 0.0375%.

In Table 5, we calculate double charm and beauty baryon masses in the ground state at (), and we note that the present results are a good agreement with recent works such that [30, 36, 39–41]. In Table 6, we calculate charm and beauty baryon masses in the ground state (masses are in GeV) at (), and our results are a good agreement with recent works such that [39, 41, 42].

4.2. The Interaction Potential with Hyperfine Interaction

In the second case, the Baryon mass then becomes the sum of quarks mass and energy with the hyperfine interaction potential <> treated as a perturbation, thus as in Refs. [36, 37, 39]

In this case, we also get good results with experiment and theoretical works as in Table 7, and we calculate single charm and beauty baryon masses in the ground state (masses are in GeV) at () in case charm and () in case beauty. The present results are a good agreement with experimental data such as and are good compared with other works such that in Ref. [36] the total error is 0.953%. In Ref. [38], the total error is 2.765%, but the total error of the present work is 0.655%. In Table 8, we calculate double and triple charm and beauty baryon masses in the ground state (masses are in GeV) at (). The present result is good with recent works such that Refs. [36, 37, 39, 41, 42]. In Table 9, we calculate charm and beauty baryon masses in the ground state (masses are in GeV) at (). The present result is a good agreement with recent works such that Refs. [36, 39, 41, 42].

In Refs. [36, 37], the authors solved the Schrodinger equation using the iteration method, and the considered potential is a combination of Coulombic, linear confining, and harmonic oscillator terms to obtain masses of heavy baryons containing single, double, and triple in the hyper-central approach with confining interaction and hyperfine interaction in the first case, and the total error in Ref. [36] is 0.19% and 0.42% when they calculated single charm and beauty baryon masses in the ground state, respectively; in the second case, the total error is 0.953% when they calculated single charm and beauty baryon masses in the ground state. In Ref. [37], the total error is 0.9% when they calculated single beauty baryon masses in the ground state. In Ref. [38], the authors solved the Schrodinger equation using a variational method, and the considered potential is Coulomb as well as linear confining terms and the spin–isospin dependent potential to obtain masses of single, double, and triple in the hyper-central approach with confining interaction and hyperfine interaction, in the first case total error is 5.3% when they calculated single charm baryon masses in the ground state and the second case total error is 2.765%% when calculated single charm and beauty baryon masses in the ground state. In Ref. [30], the authors obtained the masses of the baryons containing a single charm, and beauty quark in the presence confinement potential is assumed in the hyper-central coordinates of the Coulomb plus power potential form; in the first case, the total error is 0.53% when they calculated single charm baryon masses in the ground state. In Ref. [39], the authors use two potentials: the second potential is the same as the hyper-central approach of Ref. [36, 37] and uses the Cornell potential and the hyper-central approach, but they solved the Schrodinger equation numerically to obtain single, double, and triple baryon masses, and in the first case, the total error is 0.26% and 1.7% when they calculated single charm and beauty baryon masses in the ground state. In Ref. [29], in the first case, the total error is 0.46% and 1.0275% when calculating single charm and beauty baryon masses in the ground state. The authors obtained the masses of heavy flavor baryon masses by using the nonrelativistic quark model with hyper-central Coulomb plus linear potential and Coulomb plus harmonic oscillator potential in Ref. [40]. In Ref. [41], the authors obtain that the mass spectra of the doubly heavy baryons are computed assuming that the two heavy quarks inside a baryon form a compact heavy “diquark core” in a color antitriplet and bind with the remaining light quark into a colorless baryon. The two reduced two-body problems are described by the relativistic Bethe-Salpeter equations (BSEs) with the relevant QCD-inspired kernels. In Ref. [42], the author calculates the masses of the ground-state baryons consisting of three or two heavy and one light quark in the framework of the relativistic quark model and the hyperspherical expansion. The masses of the triply and doubly heavy baryons are obtained by using the perturbation theory for the spin-independent and spin-dependent parts of the three-quark Hamiltonian.

5. Conclusion

In this paper, we employ the generalized fractional iteration method and calculate the masses of heavy flavor baryons containing single, double, and triple in the ground state in the two cases. In the first case, the hyperfine interaction is not included, and the second case is the presence of hyperfine interaction. We calculate the three-body analytical solution of the hyper-central Schrodinger equation using the generalized fractional analytical iteration method. The present method plays an important role in improving the results in comparison with experimental data and other works.

In the case of the interaction potential without hyperfine interaction, we calculate single charm baryon masses that are close to experimental data and are a good agreement compared with other works because in Ref. [36], the total error is 0.19%; in Ref. [38], the total error is 5.3%; in Ref. [30], the total error is 0.53%; in Ref. [39], the total error is 0.26%; and in Ref. [29], the total error is 0.46%, but the total error of present work is 0.13%.

We have calculated a single beauty baryon mass as which closes with experimental data and is improved in comparing with other works as in Refs. [29, 36, 37, 39] in which the total error is 0.42%, 1.7%, 1.0275%, and 0.26%, respectively, but the total error of the present work is 0.0375%.

In the case of the interaction potential with hyperfine interaction, we calculate single charm and beauty baryon masses that are close with experimental data such that and are a good agreement compared with other works because in Ref. [36], the total error is 0.953%. In Ref. [38], the total error is 2.765%, but the total error of the present work is 0.655%. We conclude that the interaction potential without and with hyperfine interaction in the framework of GF-AEIM gives a good description of the heavy flavor baryons in comparison with experimental data and other works.

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

This manuscript is funded by SCOAP3.

References

N. Isgur and G. Karl, “P-wave baryons in the quark model,” Physical Review D, vol. 18, p. 4187, 1978.
View at: Google Scholar
M. Abu-shady and M. Rashdan, “Effect of a logarithmic mesonic potential on nucleon properties in the coherent-pair approximation,” Physical Review C, vol. 81, no. 1, article 015203, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Abu-shady and H. M. Mansour, “Quantized linearσmodel at finite temperature, and nucleon properties,” Physical Review C, vol. 85, no. 5, article 055204, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Y. Glozman and D. O. Riska, “The spectrum of the nucleons and the strange hyperons and chiral dynamics,” Physics Reports, vol. 268, no. 4, pp. 263–303, 1996.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Rashdan, M. Abu-Shady, and T. S. T. Ali, “Nucleon properties from modified sigma model,” International Journal of Modern Physics A, vol. 22, no. 14n15, pp. 2673–2681, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Rashdan, M. Abu-Shady, and T. S. T. Ali, “Extended linear sigma model in higher order mesonic interactions,” International Journal of Modern Physics E, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 143–152, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Abu-shady and A. Ikot, “Dissociation of nucleon and heavy baryon in an anisotropic hot and dense QCD medium using Nikiforov–Uvarov method,” The European Physical Journal Plus, vol. 135, no. 5, p. 5, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Abu-shady, N. H. Gerish, and M. Ahmed, “The masses of heavy pentaquarks in non-relativistic Bethe-Salpeter quark model,” High Energy Physics, vol. 68, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Abu-shady, N. H. Gerish, and M. Ahmed, “Magnetic moments and decay rates for double heavy baryons in the non-relativistic quark model,” Physics of Particles and Nuclei Letters, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 294–301, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, and V. O. Galkin, “Relativistic description of heavy tetraquarks,” Physics of Atomic Nuclei, vol. 72, p. 1, 2009.
View at: Google Scholar
M. Abu-shady and S. Y. Ezz-Alarb, “Trigonometric Rosen–Morse potential as a quark–antiquark interaction potential for meson properties in the non-relativistic Quark model using EAIM,” Few-Body Systems, vol. 60, no. 4, p. 60, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Beringer, J. . F. Arguin, R. M. Barnett et al., “Review of Particle Physics,” Physical Review D, vol. 86, no. 1, article 010001, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Ocherashvili, M. A. Moinester, J. Russ et al., “Confirmation of the doubly charmed baryon Ξ_cc⁺(3520) via its decay to pD⁺K⁻,” Physics Letters B, vol. 628, no. 1-2, pp. 18–24, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Kushnirenko, G. Alkhazov, A. G. Atamantchouk et al., “Precision measurements of the and lifetimes,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 86, no. 23, pp. 5243–5246, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. V. Gorelov and C Collaboration, “First observation of bottom baryon states at CDF,” Journal of Physics Conference Series, vol. 69, article 012009, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. X. Chen, W. Chen, X. Liu, Y. R. Liu, and S. L. Zhu, “A review of the open charm and open bottom systems,” Rept. Prog. Phys., vol. 80, no. 7, article 076201, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. M. Richard, “The nonrelativistic three-body problem for baryons,” Reports on Progress in Physics, vol. 212, no. 1, pp. 1–76, 1992.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Klempt and J. M. Richard, “Baryon spectroscopy,” Reviews of Modern Physics, vol. 82, no. 2, pp. 1095–1153, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Chernyshev, M. A. Nowak, and I. Zahed, “Heavy hadrons and QCD instantons,” Physical Review D, vol. 53, no. 9, pp. 5176–5184, 1996.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. S. Gershtein, V. V. Kiselev, A. K. Likhoded, and A. I. Onishchenko, “Spectroscopy of doubly heavy baryons,” Physics of Atomic Nuclei, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 274–286, 2000.
View at: Google Scholar
D. Ebert, R. N. Faustov, V. O. Galkin, and A. P. Martynenko, “Mass spectra of doubly heavy baryons in the relativistic quark model,” Physical Review D, vol. 66, no. 1, article 014008, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C.-H. Chang, C.-F. Qiao, J.-X. Wang, and X. G. Wu, “Estimate of the hadronic production of the doubly charmed baryonΞccin the general-mass variable-flavor-number scheme,” Physical Review D, vol. 73, no. 9, article 094022, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. J. Brodsky, F.-K. Guo, C. Hanhart, and U. G. Meißner, “Isospin splittings of doubly heavy baryons,” Physics Letters B, vol. 698, no. 3, pp. 251–255, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K.-W. Wei, B. Chen, and X.-H. Guo, “Masses of doubly and triply charmed baryons,” Physical Review D, vol. 92, no. 7, article 076008, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z.-F. Sun and M. J. Vicente Vacas, “Masses of doubly charmed baryons in the extended on-mass-shell renormalization scheme,” Physical Review D, vol. 93, no. 9, article 094002, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. S. Brown, W. Detmold, S. Meinel, and K. Orginos, “Charmed bottom baryon spectroscopy from lattice QCD,” Physical Review D, vol. 90, no. 9, article 094507, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Karliner and J. L. Rosner, “Baryons with two heavy quarks: masses, production, decays, and detection,” Physical Review D, vol. 90, no. 9, article 094007, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. V. Berezhnoy and A. K. Likhoded, “Doubly heavy baryons,” Physics of Atomic Nuclei, vol. 79, no. 2, pp. 260–265, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Patel, A. K. Rai, and P. C. Vinodkumar, “Heavy flavor baryons in hypercentral model,” Journal de Physique, vol. 70, no. 5, pp. 797–804, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Patel, A. K. Rai, and P. C. Vinodkumar, “Masses and magnetic moments of heavy flavour baryons in the hyper central model,” Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics, vol. 35, no. 6, article 065001, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Patel, A. Majethiya, and P. C. Vinodkumar, “Masses and magnetic moments of triple heavy flavour baryons in hypercentral model,” Pramana, vol. 72, no. 4, pp. 679–688, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Roncaglia, D. B. Lichtenberg, and E. Predazzi, “Predicting the masses of baryons containing one or two heavy quarks,” Physical Review D, vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 1722–1725, 1995.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. H. Guo and T. Muta, “B-S equation analysis of heavy baryon decays,” Modern Physics Letters A, vol. 11, no. 18, pp. 1523–1528, 1996.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Albertus, J. E. Amaro, E. Hernandez, and J. Nieves, “A heavy quark symmetry approach to baryons,” Nuclear Physics A, vol. 755, pp. 439–442, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. M. Flynn, F. Mescia, and A. S. B. Tariq, “Spectroscopy of doubly-charmed baryons in lattice QCD,” Journal of High Energy Physics, vol. 2003, no. 7, p. 066, 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Ghalenovi, A. A. Rajabi, and A. Tavakolinezhad, “Masses of charm and beauty baryons in the constituent quark model,” International Journal of Modern Physics E: Nuclear Physics, vol. 21, no. 6, article 1250057, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Ghalenovi and A. Akbar Rajabi, “Single charm and beauty baryon masses in the hypercentral approach,” The European Physical Journal Plus, vol. 127, no. 11, p. 141, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Ghalenovi, A. A. Rajabi, and M. Hamzavi, “The heavy baryon masses in variational approach and spin-isospin dependence,” Acta Physica Polonica B, vol. 42, no. 8, p. 1849, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Ghalenovi, A. A. Rajabi, S. Qin, and D. H. Rischke, “Ground-state masses and magnetic moments of heavy baryons,” Modern Physics Letters A, vol. 29, no. 20, article 1450106, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. Roberts and M. Pervin, “Heavy baryons in a quark model,” International Journal of Modern Physics A: Particles and Fields; Gravitation; Cosmology; Nuclear Physics, vol. 23, no. 19, pp. 2817–2860, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Q. Li, C.-H. Chang, S.-X. Qin, and G.-L. Wang, “Mass spectra and wave functions of the doubly heavy baryons with JP=1+ heavy diquark cores,” Chinese Physics C, vol. 44, no. 1, article 013102, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. P. Martynenko, “Ground-state triply and doubly heavy baryons in a relativistic three-quark model,” Physics Letters B, vol. 663, no. 4, pp. 317–321, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Abu-Shady, M. M. A. Ahmed, and N. H. Gerish, “Decay rates and masses for some heavy baryons in the hyper-central quark model,” International Journal of Modern Physics A, vol. 35, no. 10, article 2050056, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Bali, B. Bolder, N. Eicker et al., “Static potentials and glueball masses from QCD simulations with Wilson sea quarks,” Physical Review D, vol. 62, no. 5, article 054503, 2000.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. S. Bali, “QCD forces and heavy quark bound states,” Physics Reports, vol. 343, no. 1-2, pp. 1–136, 2001.
View at: Google Scholar
M. M. Giannini, E. Santopinto, and A. Vassalo, “An overview of the hypercentral constituent quark model,” Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 263–272, 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. M. Gainnini, E. Santopinto, and A. Vassallo, “Hypercentral constituent quark model and isospin dependence,” European Physical Journal A: Hadrons and Nuclei, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 447–452, 2001.
View at: Google Scholar
I. Podlubny, Fractional Differential Equations, Academic Press, 1999.
M. Caputo and M. Fabrizio, “A new definition of fractional derivative without singular kernel,” Progress in Fractional Differentiation & Applications, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 73–85, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
M. Abu-Shady and M. K. A. Kaabar, “A generalized definition of the fractional derivative with applications,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2021, Article ID 9444803, 9 pages, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Karayer, D. Demirhan, and F. Büyükk, “Conformable fractional Nikiforov—Uvarov method,” Communications in Theoretical Physics, vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 12–18, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. Al-Jamel, “The search for fractional order in heavy quarkonia spectra,” International Journal of Modern Physics A, vol. 34, no. 10, article 1950054, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Abu-shady, A. I. Ahmadov, H. M. Fath-Allah, and V. H. Badalov, “Spectra of heavy quarkonia in a magnetized-hot medium in the framework of fractional non-relativistic quark model,” Journal of Theoretical and Applied Physics, vol. 33, p. 2, 2022.
View at: Google Scholar
H. Hassanabadi, A. A. Rajabi, and S. Zarrinkamar, “Spectrum of baryons and spin–isospin dependence,” Modern Physics Letters A, vol. 23, no. 7, pp. 527–537, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Hassanabadi and A. A. Rajabi, “Relativistic versus nonrelativistic solution of the N-fermion problem in a hyperradius-confining potential,” Few-Body Systems, vol. 41, no. 3-4, pp. 201–210, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. A. Rajabi, “Exact analytical solution of the Schrödinger equation for an N-identical body-force system,” Few-Body Systems, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 197–213, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Faber de la Ripelle, “The potential harmonic expansion method,” Annals of Physics, vol. 147, no. 2, pp. 281–320, 1983.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Hassanaabadi, S. Zarrinkamar, and S. Rahmani, “Study of heavy-baryon transitions,” Physical Review D, vol. 90, no. 7, article 074024, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. M. Yao, C. Amsler, D. Asner et al., “Review of particle physics,” Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics, vol. 33, p. 1, 2006.
View at: Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2022 M. Abu-shady and H. M. Fath-Allah. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The publication of this article was funded by SCOAP³.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

272

Downloads

465

Citations