Excited scalar and pseudoscalar mesons in the extended linear sigma model

The European Physical Journal C, Jul 2017

We present an in-depth study of masses and decays of excited scalar and pseudoscalar \({\bar{q}}q\) states in the Extended Linear Sigma Model (eLSM). The model also contains ground-state scalar, pseudoscalar, vector and axial-vector mesons. The main objective is to study the consequences of the hypothesis that the \(f_0(1790)\) resonance, observed a decade ago by the BES Collaboration and recently by LHCb, represents an excited scalar quarkonium. In addition we also analyse the possibility that the new \(a_0(1950)\) resonance, observed recently by BABAR, may also be an excited scalar state. Both hypotheses receive justification in our approach although there appears to be some tension between the simultaneous interpretation of \(f_0(1790)\)/\(a_0(1950)\) and pseudoscalar mesons \(\eta (1295)\), \(\pi (1300)\), \(\eta (1440)\) and K(1460) as excited \({\bar{q}}q\) states.

A PDF file should load here. If you do not see its contents the file may be temporarily unavailable at the journal website or you do not have a PDF plug-in installed and enabled in your browser.

Alternatively, you can download the file locally and open with any standalone PDF reader:

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1140%2Fepjc%2Fs10052-017-4962-y.pdf

Excited scalar and pseudoscalar mesons in the extended linear sigma model

Eur. Phys. J. C Excited scalar and pseudoscalar mesons in the extended linear sigma model Denis Parganlija 2 Francesco Giacosa 0 1 0 Institut für Theoretische Physik, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität , Max-von-Laue-Str. 1, 60438 Frankfurt am Main , Germany 1 Institute of Physics, Jan Kochanowski University , ul. Swietokrzyska 15, 25-406 Kielce , Poland 2 Institut für Theoretische Physik, Technische Universität Wien , Wiedner Hauptstr. 8-10, 1040 Vienna , Austria We present an in-depth study of masses and decays of excited scalar and pseudoscalar q¯q states in the Extended Linear Sigma Model (eLSM). The model also contains ground-state scalar, pseudoscalar, vector and axial-vector mesons. The main objective is to study the consequences of the hypothesis that the f0(1790) resonance, observed a decade ago by the BES Collaboration and recently by LHCb, represents an excited scalar quarkonium. In addition we also analyse the possibility that the new a0(1950) resonance, observed recently by BABAR, may also be an excited scalar state. Both hypotheses receive justification in our approach although there appears to be some tension between the simultaneous interpretation of f0(1790)/a0(1950) and pseudoscalar mesons η(1295), π(1300), η(1440) and K (1460) as excited q¯q states. 1 Introduction One of the most important features of strong interaction is the existence of the hadron spectrum. It emerges from confinement of quarks and gluons – degrees of freedom of the underlying theory, Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) – in regions of sufficiently low energy where the QCD coupling is known to be large [ 1–4 ]. Although the exact mechanism of hadron formation in non-perturbartive QCD is not yet fully understood, an experimental fact is a very abundant spectrum of states possessing various quantum numbers, such as for example isospin I , total spin J , parity P and charge conjugation C . This is in particular the case for the spectrum of mesons (hadrons with integer spin) that can be found in the listings A natural expectation founded in the Quark Model (see Refs. [ 6,7 ]; for a modern and modified version see for example Refs. [ 8,9 ]) is that the mentioned states can effectively be described in terms of constituent quarks and antiquarks – ground-state q¯q resonances. In this context, we define ground states as those with the lowest mass for a given set of quantum numbers I , J , P and C . Such a description is particularly successful for the lightest pseudoscalar states π , K and η. However, this cannot be the full picture as the spectra contain more states than could be described in terms of the ground-state q¯q structure. A further natural expectation is then that the spectra may additionally contain first (radial) excitations of q¯q states, i.e., those with the same quantum numbers but with higher masses. (In the spectroscopic notation, the excited scalar and pseudoscalar states correspond, respectively, to the 2 3 P0 and 2 1 S0 configurations.) Of course, the possibility to study such states depends crucially on the identification of the ground states themselves; in the case of the scalar mesons, this is not as clear as for the pseudoscalars. Various hypotheses have been suggested for the scalar-meson structure, including meson–meson molecules, q¯q¯qq states and glueballs, bound states of gluons – see, e.g., Refs. [ 10–76 ]. Results of these studies are at times conflicting but the general conclusion is nonetheless that the scalar q¯q ground states (as well as the glueball and the low-energy fourquark states) are well defined and positioned in the spectrum of particles up to and including the f0(1710) resonance. The main objective of this work is then to ascertain which properties the excited scalar and pseudoscalar q¯q states possess and whether they can be identified in the physical spectrum. Our study of the excited mesons is based on the Linear Sigma Model [ 77–80 ]. This is an effective approach to lowenergy QCD – its degrees of freedom are not quarks and gluons of the underlying theory but rather meson fields with various values of I , J , P and C . There are several advantages that the model has to offer. Firstly, it implements the symmetries of QCD as well as their breaking (see Sect. 2 for details). Secondly, it contains degrees of freedom with quantum numbers equal to those observed experimentally and in theoretical first-principles spectra (such as those of lattice QCD). This combination of symmetry-governed dynamics and states with correct quantum numbers justifies in our view the expectation that important aspects of the strong interaction are captured by the proposed model. Note that the model employed in this article is wide-ranging in that it contains the ground-state scalar, pseudoscalar, vector and axial-vector q¯q states in three flavours (u, d, s), the scalar dilaton (glueball) and the first excitations in the three-flavour scalar and pseudoscalar channels. Considering isospin multiplets as single degrees of freedom, there are 16 q¯q ground states and 8 q¯q excited states plus the scalar glueball in the model. For this reason, it can be denoted the “Extended Linear Sigma Model” (eLSM). A further advantage of eLSM is that the inclusion of degrees of freedom with a certain structure (such as q¯q states here) allows us to test the compatibility of experimentally known resonances with such structure. This is of immediate relevance for experimental hadron searches such as those planned at PANDA@FAIR [ 81 ]. With regard to vacuum states, the model has been used in studies of two-flavour q¯q mesons [ 82 ], glueballs [ 83–87 ], K1 and other spin-1 mesons [ 88,89 ] and baryons [90]. It is, however, also suitable for studies of the QCD phase diagram [ 91–93 ]. In this article, we will build upon the results obtained in Refs. [ 94,95 ] where ground-state q¯q resonances and the glueball were considered in vacuum. Comparing experimental masses and decay widths with the theoretical predictions for excited states, we will draw conclusions on structure of the observed states; we will also predict more than 35 decays for various scalar and pseudoscalar resonances (see Sect. 3.3). Irrespective of the above advantages, we must note that the model used in this article also has drawbacks. There are two that appear to be of particular importance. Firstly, some of the states that might be of relevance in the region of interest are absent. The most important example is the scalar glueball whose mass is comparable [ 54,58,61,64,65 ] to that of the excited q¯q states discussed here. The implementation of the scalar glueball is actually straightforward in our approach (see Sect. 2) but the amount of its mixing with excited states is as yet unestablished, mainly due to the unfortunate lack of experimental data (discussed in Sect. 2.3.1). Secondly, our calculations of decay widths are performed at tree level. Consequently, unitarity corrections are not included. A systematic way to implement them is to consider mesonic loops and determine their influence on the pole positions of resonances. Substantial shift of the pole position may then improve (or spoil) the comparison to the experimental data. However, the results of Ref. [ 96 ] suggest that unitarity corrections are small for resonances whose ratio of decay width to mass is small as well. Since such resonances are present in this article (see Sect. 3.3.3), the corrections will not be considered here. Excited mesons were a subject of interest already several decades ago [ 97,98 ]; to date, they have been considered in a wide range of approaches including QCD models/chiral Lagrangians [ 99–104 ], Lattice QCD [ 105–110 ], Bethe-Salpeter equation [ 111–114 ], NJL Model and its extensions [ 115–125 ], light-cone models [ 126 ], QCD string approaches [ 127 ] and QCD domain walls [ 128 ]. Chiral symmetry has also been suggested to become effectively restored in excited mesons [ 129,130 ] rendering their understanding even more important. A study analogous to ours (including both scalar and pseudoscalar excitations and their various decay channels) was performed in extensions of the NJL model [ 117–119,121,122 ]. The conclusion was that f0(1370), f0(1710) and a0(1450) are the first radial excitations of f0(500), f0(980) and a0(980). However, this is at the expense of having very large decay widths for f0(1370), f0(1500) and f0(1710); in our case the decay widths for f0 states above 1 GeV correspond to experimental data but the resonances are identified as quarkonium ground states [94]. The outline of the article is as follows. The general structure and results obtained so far regarding ground-state q¯q resonances are briefly reviewed in Sects. 2.1 and 2.2. Building upon that basis, we present the Lagrangian for the excited states and discuss the relevant experimental data in Sect. 2.3. Two hypotheses are tested in Sect. 3: whether the f0(1790) and a0(1950) resonances can represent excited q¯q states; the first one is not (yet) listed by the PDG but has been observed by the BES II and LHCb Collaborations [ 131,132 ] and is discussed in Sect. 2.3.1. We also discuss to what extent it is possible to interpret the pseudoscalar mesons η(1295), π(1300), η(1440) and K (1460) as excited states. Conclusions are presented in Sect. 4 and all interaction Lagrangians used in the model can be found in Appendix A. Our units are h¯ = c = 1; the metric tensor is gμν = diag(+, −, −, −). 2 The model 2.1 General remarks A viable effective approach to phenomena of non-pertur bative strong interaction must implement the symmetries present in the underlying theory, QCD. The theory itself is rich in symmetries: colour symmetry SU (3)c (local); chiral U (N f )L × U (N f )R symmetry (L and R denote the ’left’ and ’right’ components and N f the number of quark flavours; global, broken in vacuum spontaneously by the nonvanishing chiral condensate q¯ q [ 133, 134 ], at the quantum level via the axial U (1) A anomaly [135] and explicitly by the non-vanishing quark masses); dilatation symmetry (broken at the quantum level [ 136, 137 ] but valid classically in QCD without quarks); C P T symmetry (discrete; valid individually for charge conjugation C , parity transformation P and time reversal T ); Z3 symmetry (discrete; pertaining to the centre elements of a special unitary matrix of dimension N f × N f ; non-trivial only at non-zero temperatures [ 138– 143 ]) – all of course in addition to the Poincaré symmetry. Terms entering the Lagrangian of an effective approach to QCD should as a matter of principle be compatible with all symmetries listed above. Our subject is QCD in vacuum. In this context, we note that the colour symmetry is automatically fulfilled since we will be working with colour-neutral degrees of freedom; the structure and number of terms entering the Lagrangian are then restricted by the chiral, CPT and dilatation symmetries. The eLSM Lagrangian has the following general structure: L = Ldil. + L0 + LE and in Sects. 2.2 and 2.3 we discuss the structure of the Lagrangians contributing to L as well as their matter content. 2.2 Ground-state Quarkonia and Dilaton: Lagrangian and the matter content This section contains a brief overview of the results obtained so far in the Extended Linear Sigma Model that contains N f = 3 scalar, pseudoscalar, vector and axial-vector quarkonia and the scalar glueball. The discussion is included for convenience of the reader and in order to set the basis for the incorporation of the excited quarkonia (Sect. 2.3). All details can be found in Refs. [ 94, 95 ]. In Eq. (1), Ldil implements, at the composite level, the dilatation symmetry of QCD and its breaking [ 144–149 ]: 1 1 m2G Ldil. = 2 (∂μG)2 − 4 2 G4 ln G2 2 − G4 4 (1) (2) where G represents the dilaton field and is the scale that explicitly breaks the dilatation symmetry. Considering fluctuations around the potential minimum G0 ≡ leads to the emergence of a particle with J PC = 0++ – the scalar glueball [ 83, 95 ]. Terms that (i) are compatible in their structure with the chiral, dilatation and CPT symmetries of QCD and (ii) contain ground-state scalar, pseudoscalar, vector and axial-vector quarkonia with N f = 3 and the dilaton are collected in the L0 contribution to Eq. (1), as in Refs. [ 82, 94, 95 ]: L0 = Tr[( Dμ )†( Dμ )] − m20 − λ1[Tr( † 1 − 4 Tr(L 2μν + Rμ2ν ) + Tr G G0 × ⎜⎜ ⎝ ωN√−K2¯ρ00++ fK1¯N√10−2a10 KωS0++ fK1S10 ⎟⎟⎠ where Ti (i = 0, . . . , 8) denote the generators of U (3), while Si represents the scalar, Pi the pseudoscalar, Viμ the vector, Aiμ the axial-vector meson fields. (Note that we are using the non-strange–strange basis defined as ϕN = √13 √2 ϕ0 + ϕ8 and ϕS = √13 ϕ0 − √2 ϕ8 with ϕ ∈ (Si , Pi , Viμ, Aiμ).) Furthermore, Dμ ≡ ∂μ − i g1(Lμ − Rμ) is the derivative of transforming covariantly with regard to the U (3)L × U (3)R symmetry group; the left-handed and right-handed field strength tensors Lμν and Rμν are, respectively, defined as Lμν ≡ ∂μ Lν − ∂ν Lμ, Rμν ≡ ∂μ Rν − ∂ν Rμ. The following symmetry-breaking mechanism is implemented: – The spontaneous breaking of the U (3)×U (3) chiral symmetry requires setting m20 < 0. – The explicit breaking of the U (3)×U (3) chiral as well as dilatation symmetries is implemented by terms describing non-vanishing quark masses: H = diag{h N , h N , h S }, = diag{0, 0, δS } and E0 = diag{0, 0, S }. – The U (1)A (chiral) anomaly is implemented by the determinant term c1(det − det †)2 [ 150,151 ]. We also note the following important points: – All states present in the Lagrangian (3), except for the dilaton, possess the q¯q structure [ 82,152 ]. The argument is essentially based on the large-Nc behaviour of the model parameters and on the model construction in terms of the underlying (constituent) quark fields. The ground-state Lagrangian (3) contains a pseudoscalar field assigned to the pion since it emerges from spontaneous breaking of the (chiral) U (3) × U (3) symmetry. Furthermore, the vector meson decaying into 2π is identified with the rho since the latter is experimentally known to decay into pions with a branching ratio of slightly less Rμ = 8 than 1. Pion and rho can be safely assumed to represent (very predominant) q¯q states and hence the large-Nc behaviour of their mass terms has to be N 0. Additionc ally, the rho-pion vertex has to scale as Nc−1/2 since the states are quarkonia. Then, as shown in Ref. [ 82 ], this is sufficient to determine the large-Nc behaviour of all ground-state model parameters and of the non-strange and strange quark condensates. As a consequence, the masses of all other ground states scale as Nc0 and their decay widths scale as 1/Nc. For this reason, we identify these degrees of freedom with q¯q states. A further reason is that all states entering the matrix in Eq. (4) can be decomposed in terms of (constituent) quark currents whose behaviour under chiral transformation is such that all terms in the Lagrangian (except for symmetry-breaking or anomalous ones) are chirally symmetric [ 152 ]. Note that our excited-state Lagrangian (16) will have exactly the same structure as the ground-state one. Considering the above discussion, we conclude that its degrees of freedom also have the q¯q structure. – The number of terms entering Eq. (3) is finite under the requirements that (i) all terms are dilatationally invariant and hence have mass dimension equal to four, except possibly for those that are explicitly symmetry breaking or anomalous, and (ii) no term leads to singularities in the potential in the limit G → 0 [ 153 ]. – Notwithstanding the above point, the glueball will not be a subject of this work – hence G ≡ G0 is set throughout this article. With regard to the ground-state mesons, we will be relying on Ref. [ 94 ] since it contains the latest results from the model without the glueball. (For the model version with three-flavour q¯q states as well as the scalar glueball; see Ref. [ 95 ].) – There are two scalar isospin-0 fields in the Lagrangian (3): σN ≡ n¯ n (n: u and d quarks, assumed to be degenerate) and σS ≡ s¯s. Spontaneous breaking of the chiral symmetry implies the existence of their respective vacuum expectation values φN and φS. As described in Ref. [ 94 ], shifting of σN,S by φN,S leads to the mixing of spin1 and spin-0 fields. These mixing terms are removed by suitable shifts of the spin-1 fields that have the following general structure: V μ → V μ + Z SwV ∂μ S, (10) where V μ and S, respectively, denote the spin-1 and spin-0 fields. The new constants Z S and wV are fielddependent and read [ 94 ] w f1N = wa1 = g1φN ma21 w f1S = √ 2g1φS m2f1S i g1(φN − where fπ and fK , respectively, denote the pion and kaon decay constants. The ground-state mass terms can be obtained from Lagrangian (3); their explicit form can be found in Ref. [ 94 ] where a comprehensive fit of the experimentally known meson masses was performed. Fit results that will be used in this article are collected in Table 1. The following is of importance here: – Table 1 contains no statement on masses and assignment of the isoscalar states σN and σS. The reason is that their identification in the meson spectrum is unclear due to both theoretical and experimental uncertainties [ 154,155 ]. In Ref. [94], the preferred assignment of σN was to f0(1370), not least due to the best-fit result mσN = 1363 MeV. The resonance σS was assigned to f0(1710). Note that a subsequent analysis in Ref. [ 95 ], which included the scalar glueball, found the assignment of σS to f0(1500) more preferable; f0(1710) was found to be compatible with the glueball. These issues will be of secondary importance here since no mixing between excited and ground states will be considered. (We also note that decays of the excited states into f0(1500) and f0(1710) would be kinematically forbidden. Excitedstate masses are discussed in Sect. 3). – Table 1 also contains no statement on the axial-vector kaon K1. Reference [ 94 ] obtained m K1 = 1282 MeV as the best-fit result. One needs to note, however, that PDG listings [ 5 ] contain two states to which our K1 resonance could be assigned: K1(1270) and K1(1400). Both have (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) a significant mutual overlap [ 156–174 ]; analysis from the Linear Sigma Model suggests that our K1 state has a larger overlap with K1(1400) [ 89 ]. Nonetheless, we will use m K1 = 1282 MeV for decays of excited states involving K1 – this makes no significant difference to our results since the decays with K1 final states are phasespace suppressed for the mass range of excited mesons. – The states η and η arise from mixing of ηN and ηS in Lagrangian (3). The mixing angle is θη = −44.6◦ [ 94 ]; see also Refs. [ 175–183 ]. 2.3 Excited scalars and pseudoscalars 2.3.1 Lagrangian With the foundations laid in the previous section, the most general Lagrangian for the excited scalar and pseudoscalar quarkonia with terms up to order four in the naive scaling can be constructed as follows: LE = Tr[(Dμ E )†(Dμ E )] + α Tr[(Dμ E )†(Dμ ) 2 G0 Tr( †E E ) + (Dμ )†(Dμ E )] − (m0∗)2 − λ0 G G0 2 Tr( †E − λ1∗ Tr( †E E ) Tr( † ) − λ2∗ Tr( †E E + † E ) − κ1 Tr( †E − κ2[Tr( †E − κ3 Tr( †E − ξ1 Tr( †E − κ4[Tr( †E E )]2 † + − ξ2 Tr( †E †E + − ξ3 Tr( † E †E E + − ξ4 Tr( †E E )2 E † + + + † † † † + † E E E ) Tr( † ) †) E )]2 E ) Tr( †E E ) † E †) † E ) †E E †E ) + Tr( †E E E1 + E †E E1) + c1∗[(det − det †E )2 + (det † − det E )2] + c1∗E (det E − det †E )2 h∗ + 21 Tr( †E + h21∗E Tr( †E E ) Tr(L2μ + Rμ2) + h2∗ Tr( †E Lμ Lμ † + Rμ E Rμ + Rμ E Rμ) + h2∗E Tr[|Lμ E |2 + | E Rμ|2] † Lμ Lμ + † + † E ) Tr(L2μ + Rμ2) E Table 1 Best-fit results for masses of ground-state mesons and pseudoscalar decay constants present in Eq. (3), obtained in Ref. [ 94 ]. The values in the third column will be used in this article in order for us to remain model-consistent. Note that the errors in the fourth column correspond either to the experimental values or to 5% of the respective central values (whichever is larger) + 2h3∗ Tr(Lμ E Rμ † + Lμ + 2h3∗E Tr(Lμ E Rμ †E ). Rμ †E ) Fit (MeV) and we also set E1 = diag{0, 0, SE }. Spontaneous symmetry breaking in the Lagrangian for the excited (pseudo)scalars will be implemented only by means of condensation of ground-state quarkonia σN and σS, i.e., as a first approximation, we assume that their excited counterparts σNE and σSE do not condense.1 As a consequence, there is no need to shift spin-1 fields or renormalise the excited pseudoscalars as described in Eqs. (10)–(11). We now turn to the assignment of the excited states. Considering isospin multiplets as single degrees of freedom, there 1 There is a subtle point pertaining to the condensation of excited states in σ -type models: as discussed in Ref. [ 184 ], it can be in agreement with QCD constraints but may also, depending on parameter choice, spontaneously break parity in vacuum. Study of a model with condensation of the excited states would go beyond the current work. (It would additionally imply that the excited pseudoscalars also represent Goldstone bosons of QCD which is disputed in, e.g., Ref. [ 111 ].) Observable Model ground state assigned to Experiment (MeV) are 8 states in Eq. (17): σNE , σSE , a0E and K0 E (scalar) and ηNE , ηE , π E and K E (pseudoscalar); the experimental informa S tion on states with these quantum numbers is at times limited or their identification is unclear: – Seven states are listed by the PDG in the scalar isosinglet (I J PC = 00++) channel in the energy region up to 2 GeV: f0(500)/σ , f0(980), f0(1370), f0(1500), f0(1710), f0(2020) and f0(2100). The last two are termed unestablished [ 5 ]; the others have been subject of various studies in the last decades [ 10,11,15–52,82,94 ]. As mentioned in the Introduction, the general conclusion is that the states up to and including f0(1710) are compatible with having ground-state q¯q or q¯q¯qq structure; the presence of the scalar glueball is also expected [ 42,53– 72,83,95 ]. However, none of these states is considered as the first radial excitation of the scalar isosinglet q¯q state. A decade ago, a new resonance named f0(1790) was observed by the BES II Collaboration in the π π final states produced in J / radiative decays [131]; there had been evidence for this state in the earlier data of MARK III [ 185 ] and BES [ 186 ]. Recently, LHCb has confirmed this finding in a study of Bs → J / π π decays [ 132 ]. Since, as indicated, the spectrum of ground-state scalar quarkonia appears to be contained in the already established resonances, we will work here with the hypothesis that f0(1790) is the first excitation of the n¯ n ground state (≡ σNE ). The assignment is further motivated by the predominant coupling of f0(1790) to pions [ 131 ]. The data of Ref. [ 131 ] will be used as follows: m f0(1790) = (1790 ± 35) MeV and f0(1790)→ππ = (270 ± 45) MeV, with both errors made symmetric and given as arithmetic means of those published by BES II. Additionally, Ref. [ 131 ] also reports the branching ratios J / → φ f0(1790) → φπ π = (6.2 ± 1.4) · 10−4 and J / → φ f0(1790) → φ K K = (1.6 ± 0.8) · 10−4. Using f0(1790)→ππ = (270 ± 45) MeV and the quotient of the mentioned branching ratios we estimate f0(1790)→K K = (70±40) MeV. These data will become necessary in Sects. 3.2 and 3.3. We note, however, already at this point that the large uncertainties in f0(1790) decays – a direct consequence of uncertainties in the J / branching ratios amounting to ∼23% and 50% – will lead to ambiguities in prediction of some decays (see Sect. 3.3.1). These are nonetheless the most comprehensive data available at the moment, and more data would obviously be of great importance. The assignment of our excited isoscalar s¯s state σSE will be discussed as a consequence of the model [particularly in the context of f0(2020) and f0(2100)]. – Two resonances are denoted as established by the PDG in the I J PC = 10++ channel: a0(980) and a0(1450) [ 5 ]. Various interpretations of these two states in terms of ground-state q¯q or q¯q¯qq structures or meson–meson molecules have been proposed [ 20,23,24,26,28,30–32, 36–41,43,49,52,73,74,76 ]. Recently, the BABAR Collaboration [ 187 ] has claimed the observation of a new resonance denoted a0(1950) in the process γ γ → ηc(1S) → K¯ K π with significance up to 4.2 σ . There was earlier evidence for this state in the Crystal Barrel data [ 188,189 ]; see also Refs. [ 190, 191 ]. We will discuss the possible interpretation of this resonance in terms of the first I J PC = 10++excitation as a result of our calculations. – Two resonances are candidates for the ground-state q¯q resonance in the scalar-kaon channel (with alternative interpretations – just as in the case of the a0 resonances – in terms of q¯q¯qq structures or meson–meson molecules): K0 (800)/κ and K0 (1430); controversy still surrounds the first of these states [ 11,20,26,28,30– 32,34,35,37,39,49,74–76 ]. A possibility is that K0 (1950), the highest-lying resonance in this channel, represents the first excitation, although the state is (currently) unestablished [ 5 ]. This will be discussed as a result of our calculations later on. – The pseudoscalar isosinglet (I J PC = 00−+) channel has six known resonances in the energy region below 2 GeV according to the PDG [ 5 ]: η, η (958), η(1295), η(1405), η(1475) and η(1760). Not all of them are without controversy: for example, the observation of η(1405) and η(1475) as two different states was reported by E769 [ 192 ], E852 [ 193 ], MARK III [ 194 ], DM2 [ 195 ] and OBELIX [ 196,197 ], while they were claimed to represent a single state named η(1440) by the Crystal Ball [198] and BES [ 199,200 ] Collaborations. It is important to note that a clear identification of pseudoscalar resonance(s) in the energy region between 1.4 GeV and 1.5 GeV depends strongly on a proper consideration, among other, of the K K threshold opening (m K + m K = 1385 MeV) and of the existence of the I J PC = 01++ state f1(1420) whose partial wave is known to influence the pseudoscalar one in experimental analyses (see, e.g., Ref. [193]). A comprehensive study of BES II data in Ref. [ 201 ], which included an energy-dependent Breit–Wigner amplitude as well as a dispersive correction to the Breit–Wigner denominator (made necessary by the proximity to the K K threshold), has observed only a marginal increase in fit quality when two pseudoscalars are considered. In line with this, our study will assume the existence of η(1440) to which our ηSE state will be assigned. We will use mη(1440) = (1432 ± 10) MeV and η(1440)→K K = (26 ± 3) MeV [ 199,200 ] in Sects. 3.2 and 3.3.2; the error in the decay width is our estimate. We emphasise, however, that our results are stable up to a 3% change when η(1475) is considered instead of η(1440).2 Our state ηNE will be assigned to η(1295) in order to test the hypothesis whether an excited pseudoscalar isosinglet at 1.3 GeV can be accommodated in eLSM (and notwithstanding the experimental concerns raised in Ref. [203]). We will use the PDG value mη(1295) = (1294±4) MeV for determination of mass parameters in Sect. 3.2. The PDG also reports total η(1295) = (55 ± 5) MeV; the relative contributions of η(1295) decay channels are uncertain. Nonetheless, we will use total η(1295) in Sect. 3.3.2. – Two states have the quantum number of a pion excitation: π(1300) and π(1800), with the latter being a candidate for a non-q¯q state [ 5 ]. The remaining π(1300) resonance may in principle be an excited q¯q isotriplet; however, due to the experimental uncertainties reported by the PDG [mπ(1300) = (1300±100) MeV but merely an interval for π(1300) = (200 − 600) MeV] this will only be discussed as a possible result of our model. – Two states are candidates for the excited kaon: K (1460) and K (1830). Since other excited states of our model have been assigned to resonances with energies 1.4 GeV, we will study the possibility that our I J P = 21 0− state corresponds to K (1460). This will, however, only be discussed as a possible result of the model since the experimental data on this state is very limited: m K (1460) ∼ 1460 MeV; K (1460) ∼ 260 MeV [ 5 ]. As indicated in the above points, with regard to the use of the above data for parameter determination we exclude as input all states for which there are only scarce/unestablished data and, additionally, those for which the PDG cites only intervals for mass/decay width (since the latter lead to weak parameter constraints). Then we are left with only three res2 The η(1405) resonance would then be a candidate for the pseudoscalar glueball [ 202 ]. onances whose experimental data shall be used: f0(1790), η(1295) and η(1440). For clarity, we collect the assignment of the model states (where possible), and also the data that we will use, in Table 2. The data are used in Sect. 3. 2.3.2 Parameters The following parameters are present in Eq. (16): g1E , α, m0∗, λ0, λ1∗,2, κ1,2,3,4, ξ1,2,3,4, SE , c1∗, c1∗E , h1∗,2,3, h1∗,E2,3. The number of parameters relevant for masses and decays of the excited states is significantly smaller as apparent once the following selection criteria are applied: – All large-Nc suppressed parameters are set to zero since their influence on the general phenomenology is expected to be small and the current experimental uncertainties do not permit their determination. Hence the parameters λ1∗, h1∗ and κ1,2,3,4 are discarded. – The parameter c1∗ is set to zero since it contains a term ∼ (det )2, which would influence ground-state mass terms after condensation of σN and σS . Such introduction of an additional parameter is not necessary since, as demonstrated in Ref. [ 94 ], the ground states are very well described by Lagrangian (3). – As a first approximation, we will discard all parameters that lead to particle mixing and study whether the assignments described in Table 2 are compatible with experiment. Hence we discard the parameters α, λ0 and ξ1; note that mixing is also induced by κ1,2 and c1∗ but these have already been discarded for reasons stated above.3 3 However, there would be no mixing of pseudoscalar isosinglets ηE N and ηSE in the model even if all discarded parameters were considered. The reason is that there is no condensation of excited scalar states in Lagrangian (16). I J P 00+ 00− 00− 00+ 10+ 10− Assignment f0(1790) η(1295) η(1440) Possible overlap with f0(2020)/ f0(2100) to be discussed as a model consequence Possible overlap with a0(1950) to be discussed as a model consequence Possible overlap with π(1300) to be discussed as a model consequence Possible overlap with K0 (1950) to be discussed as a model consequence Possible overlap with K (1460) to be discussed as a model consequence We use – Parameters that lead to decays with two or more excited final states are not of relevance for us: all states in the model have masses between ∼ 1 GeV and ∼ 2 GeV and hence such decays are kinematically forbidden. (Parameters λ2∗ and ξ2 that contribute to mass terms are obviously relevant and excepted from this criterion.) Hence we can discard ξ3,4, c1∗E and h1∗,E2,3. Note that the above criteria are not mutually exclusive: some parameters may be set to zero on several grounds, such as for example κ1. Consequently we are left with the following undetermined parameters: g1E , m0∗, λ2∗, ξ2, SE , h2∗,3. The number of parameters that we will actually use is even smaller, as we discuss in Sects. 2.3.3 and 2.3.4. This is obvious after substituting the strange condensate φS by the non-strange condensate φN via Eq. (15). The modified mass terms then read 2.3.3 Mass terms The following mass terms are obtained for the excited states present in the model: ξ2. Mass terms for all eight excited states can hence be described in terms of only three parameters from Eq. (16): C1∗, C2∗ and m2σNE = (m0∗)2 + ma20E = (m0∗)2 + λ2∗ + ξ2 2 2 φN , λ2∗ + ξ2 2 2 φN , m2π E = m2NE = (m0∗)2 + η m2ηSE = (m0∗)2 − 2 SE + λ2∗ − ξ2 φS2 m2σSE = (m0∗)2 − 2 SE + λ2∗ + ξ2 φS2, E λ2∗ φ2N m2K E = (m0∗)2 − S + 4 λ2∗ − ξ2 2 2 φN , λ2∗ φ2, − √ξ22 φN φS + 2 S m2 E λ2∗ φ2N K E = (m0∗)2 − S + 4 0 λ2∗ φ2. + √ξ22 φN φS + 2 S (20) (21) (22) (23) (24) (25) (26) (27) (28) (29) The mass terms (21)–(27) contain the same linear combination of m0∗ and λ2∗: λ2∗ φ2N , C1∗ = (m0∗)2 + 2 and the mass terms (24)–(27) contain the same linear combination of λ2∗ and SE : E C2∗ = λ2∗ Z K fK (Z K fK − φN ) − S . (30) (31) (32) (33) (34) (35) (36) (37) 2.3.4 Decay widths Our objective is to perform a tree-level calculation of all kinematically allowed two- and three-body decays for all excited states present in the model. The corresponding interaction Lagrangians are presented in Appendix A. As we will see, there are more than 35 decays that can be determined in this way but all of them can be calculated using only a few formulae. The generic formula for the decay width of particle A into particles B and C reads |k| 2 A→BC = I 8π m2A |MA→BC | , where k is the three-momentum of one of the final states in the rest frame of A and M is the decay amplitude (i.e., a transition matrix element). I is a symmetry factor emerging from the isospin symmetry – it is determined by the number of sub-channels for a given set of final states (e.g., I = 2 if B and C both correspond to kaons). Usual symmetry factors are included if the final states are identical. As we will see in Sect. 3.3, decay widths obtained in the model are generally much smaller than resonance masses; for this reason, we do not expect large unitarisation effects [ 96 ]. Depending on the final states, the interaction Lagrangians presented in Appendix A can have one of the following general structures: – For a decay of the form S → P1 P2, where S is a scalar and P1 and P2 are pseudoscalar particles, the generic structure of the interaction Lagrangian is LS P1 P2 = DS P1 P2 S P1 P2 + ES P1 P2 S∂μ P1∂μ P2 + FS P1 P2 ∂μ S∂μ P1 P2, where DS P1 P2 , ES P1 P2 and FS P1 P2 are combinations of (some of the) parameters entering Lagrangian (16). According to Eq. (37), the decay width reads in this case |k| S→P1 P2 = I 8π m2 |DS P1 P2 − ES P1 P2 K1 · K2 S + FS P1 P2 K · K1|2, where K , K1 and K2 are respectively 4-momenta of S, P1 and P2. – For a decay of the form S → V P, where V is a vector and P is a pseudoscalar particle, the generic structure of the interaction Lagrangian is LSV P = DSV P SVμ∂μ P, where DSV P is a combination of (some of the) parameters entering Lagrangian (16). The decay width reads in this case × S→V P = I 8π|km| 2 DS2V P S (m2S − m2V − m2P )2 4m2V − m2P . – For a decay of the form S → V1V2, where V1 and V2 are vector particles, the generic structure of the interaction Lagrangian is LSV1V2 = DSV1V2 SV1μV2μ, where DSV1V2 is a combination of (some of the) parameters entering Lagrangian (16). Then the decay width reads (38) (39) (40) (41) (42) |k| 2 S→V1V2 = I 4π m2 DSV1V2 S (m2S − m2V1 − m2V2 )2 × 8m2V1 m2V2 As is evident from Appendix A, the most general interaction Lagrangian for 3-body decays of the form S → S1 S2 S3 is LSS1 S2 S3 = DSS1 S2 S3 S S1 S2 S3 + ESS1 S2 S3 S(∂μ S1∂μ S2)S3 + (analogous terms with derivative couplings among final states only). (44) The ensuing formula for the decay width reads 1 S→S1 S2 S3 = I 32(2π )3m3S (mS1 +mS2 )2 (m23)max . (mS−mS3 )2 × dm212 (m23)min . dm223 MS→S1 S2 S3 2 (45) where m212 = (K S1 + K S2 )2, m223 = (K S2 + K S3 )2 and (E2∗)2 − m2S2 + (E3∗)2 − m2S3 , (46) (E2∗)2 − m2S2 − (E3∗)2 − m2S3 , (47) 2 2 (m23)min . = (E2∗ + E ∗)2 3 (m23)max . = (E2∗ + E ∗)2 3 − − with E2∗ = m212 − m2S1 + m2S2 , E3∗ = 2m12 m2S − m212 − m2S3 2m12 . (48) As is evident from Appendix A, our decay widths depend on the following parameters: g1E , λ2∗, ξ2 and h2∗,3. The first three appear only in decays with an excited final state; since such decays are experimentally unknown, it is not possible to determine these parameters (and ξ2 can be determined from the mass terms in any case; see Sect. 2.3.3). The remaining two, h2∗,3, can be calculated from decays with ground states in the outgoing channels – we will discuss this in Sect. 3.3. 3 Masses and decays of the excited states: results and consequences 3.1 Parameter determination: general remarks Combining parameter discussion at the end of Sects. 2.3.3 and 2.3.4, the final conclusion is that the following parameters need to be determined: C1∗, C2∗, ξ2, h2∗ and h∗ 3 (49) with C1∗ and C2∗ parameter combinations defined in Eqs. (28) and (29). As is evident from mass terms (30)–(36) and Appendix A, C1∗ and C2∗ influence only masses; ξ2 appears in decays with one excited final state and in mass terms. Since, as indicated at the end of Sect. 2.3.4, decays with excited final states are experimentall unknown, ξ2 can only be determined from the masses. Contrarily, h2∗ and h3∗ appear only in decay widths (with no excited final states). Hence our parameters are divided in two sets, one determined by masses (C1∗, C2∗ and ξ2) and another determined by decays (h2 and h3). Parameter determination will ensue by means of a χ 2 fit. Scarcity of experimental data compels us to have an equal number of parameters and experimental data entering the fit; although in that case the equation systems can also be solved exactly, an advantage of the χ 2 fit is that error calculation for parameters and observables is then straightforward. The general structure of the fit function χ 2 fit is as follows: χ 2( p1, . . . , pm ) = n i=1 Oith.( p1, . . . , pm ) − Oexp. 2 i Oexp. i for a set of n (theoretical) observables Oth. determined by i m ≤ n parameters p j . In our case, m = n = 3 for masses and m = n = 2 for decay widths. Central values and errors on the experimental side are, respectively, denoted Oiexp. and Oiexp.. Parameter errors pi are calculated as the square roots of the diagonal elements of the inverse Hessian matrix obtained from χ 2( p j ). Theoretical errors Oi for each observable Oi are calculated by diagonalising the Hesse matrix via a special orthogonal matrix M M H M t ≡ diag{eigenvalues of H } and rotating parameters pi such that q = M ( p − pmin .) Table 3 Masses of the excited states present in the model. Masses marked with an asterisk are used as input. There is mass degeneracy of σNE and aE 0 because we have discarded large-Nc suppressed parameters in our excited-state Lagrangian (16) – see Sect. 2.3.2. The degeneracy of ηNE and π E is a feature of the model Model state σ E N ηNE ηSE σSE aE 0 K0 E π E K E (50) (51) (52) I J P 00+ 00− 00− 00+ 10+ 21 0+ 10− where p contains all parameters and pmin . realises the minimum of χ 2( p1, . . . , pm ). Then we can determine Oi via Oi = n j=1 ∂ Oi (q1, . . . qm ) ∂q j at fit value of Oi 2 q j (53) (see also Chapter 39 of the Particle Data Book [ 5 ]). 3.2 Masses of the excited states Following the discussion of the experimental data on excited states in Sect. 2.3.1 and particle assignment in Table 2, we use the following masses for the χ 2 fit of Eq. (50): mσNE ≡ m f0(1790) = (1790±35) MeV, mηNE ≡ mη(1295) = (1294±4) MeV and mηSE ≡ mη(1440) = (1432 ± 10) MeV. Results for C1∗, C2∗ and ξ2 are With these parameters, the general discussion from Sect. 3.1 allows us to immediately predict the masses of σSE , a0E , K0 E , π E and K E . They are presented in Table 3. 3.3 Decays of the excited states 3.3.1 Hypothesis: f0(1790) is an excited q¯q state We have concluded in Sect. 3.1 that only two parameters are of relevance for all decays predictable in the model: h2∗ and h3∗. They can be determined from the data on the f0(1790) resonance discussed in Sect. 2.3.1: f0(1790)→ππ = (270 ± forming the χ 2 fif0t(1d7e9s0)c→ribKeKd i=n S(7e0ct±.34.10)wMeeoVbta[i1n31th]e. Pfoerl-45) MeV and lowing parameter values: h2∗ = 67 ± 63, h3∗ = 79 ± 63. (55) Large uncertainties for parameters are a consequence of propagation of the large errors for f0(1790)→π π and particularly for f0(1790)→K K . As described in Sect. 2.3.1, f0(1790)→K K was obtained as our estimate relying upon J / branching ratios reported by BES II [ 131 ] that themselves had uncertainties between ∼23 and 50%. We emphasise, however, that such uncertainties do not necessarily have to translate into large errors for the observables. The reason is that error calculation involves derivatives at central values of parameters [see Eq. (53)]; small values of derivatives may then compensate the large parameter uncertainties. This is indeed what we observe for most decays. There is a large number of decays that can be calculated using the interaction Lagrangians in Appendix A, parameter values in Eq. (55), formulae for decay widths in Eqs. (39), (41), (43) and (45) as well as Eq. (53) for the errors of observables. All results are presented in Table 4. 1961 ± 38 21 0− The consequences of f0(1790) input data are then as follows: • The excited states are generally rather narrow with the exception of f0(1790) and η(1440) whose full decay widths, considering the errors, are, respectively, between ∼300 and ∼500 MeV and up to ∼400 MeV. The result for f0(1790) is congruent with the data published by LHCb [ 132 ]; the large interval for the η(1440) width is a consequence of parameter uncertainties, induced by ambiguities in the experimental input data. • The excited pion and kaon states are also very susceptible to parameter uncertainties that lead to extremely large errors for the π E and K E decay widths [O(1 GeV)]. A definitive statement on these states is therefore not possible. Contrarily, in the case of η(1295), the three decay widths accessible to our model (for ηNE → ηπ π + η π π + π K K ) amount to (7 ± 3) MeV and hence contribute very little to the overall decay width total η(1295) = (55 ± 5) MeV. • Analogously to the above point, parameter uncertainties also lead to extremely large width intervals for the decays of scalars into vectors. These decays are therefore omitted from Table 4, except for the large-Nc suppressed decays σSE → ρρ and σSE → ωω. • Notwithstanding the above two points, we are able to predict more than 35 decay widths for all states in our model except π E and K E . The overall correspondence of the model states to the experimental (unconfirmed) ones is generally rather good, although we note that our scalar s¯s state appears to be too narrow to fully accommodate either of the f0(2020) and f0(2100) states. The mass of our isotriplet state a0E is also somewhat smaller than that of a0(1950) – we will come back to this point in Sect. 3.3.3. ηNE ηSE π E 10− 21 0− 3.3.2 Hypothesis: η(1295) and η(1440) are excited q¯ q states As indicated above, results presented in Table 4 do not allow us to make a definitive statement on all excited pseudoscalars. However, the situation changes if the parameters h2∗ and h∗ 3 are determined with the help of the η(1295) and η(1440) decay widths. Using ηNE →ηπ π +η π π +π K K = (55 ± 5) MeV [ 5 ] and η(1440)→K K = 26 ± 3 MeV (from Ref. [ 199 ]; our estimate for the error) we obtain h2∗ = 70 ± 2, h3∗ = 35 ± 3. (56) The parameters (56) are strongly constrained and there is a very good correspondence of the pseudoscalar decays to the Table 5 Decays and masses for the case where η(1295) and η(1440) are enforced as excited q¯q states. Widths marked with an asterisk were used as input. Pseudoscalar observables compare fine with experiment Model state I J P 00− 00− experimental data in this case (see Table 5). Nonetheless, there is a drawback: all scalar states become unobservable due to very broad decays into vectors. Thus comparison of Tables 4 and 5 suggests that there is tension between the simultaneous interpretation of η(1295), π(1300), η(1440) and K (1460) as well as the scalars as excited q¯ q states. A possible theoretical reason is that pseudoscalars above 1 GeV may have non-q¯ q admixture. Indeed sigma-model studies in Refs. [ 37, 41, 43, 204–208 ] have concluded that excited pseudoscalars with masses between 1 GeV and 1.5 GeV represent a mixture of q¯ q and q¯ q¯ qq structures. In addition, the flux-tube model of Ref. [202] and a mixing formalism based on the Ward identity in Ref. [ 209 ] lead to the conclusion that the pseudoscalar channel around 1.4 GeV is influenced by a glueball contribution. Hence a more complete description of these states would but the scalars are unobservable due to extremely broad decays into vector mesons – As in Table 3 See Appendix A Calculated via Eqs. (39), (41), (43), (45) and Eq. (53) Unobservable due to extremely large decays into vectors [O(1 GeV)] 55 ± 5* 26 ± 3* 3 ± 0 Suppressed 29 ± 3 Theory m MeV 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 IJP m MeV 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 Experiment 00 Fig. 1 Masses of excited q¯q states with isospin I , total spin J and parity P from the Extended Linear Sigma Model (left) and masses from the experimental data (right). Area thickness corresponds to mass uncertainties on both panels. The lower 00+(≡ σNE ), both 00−(≡ ηNE and ηS ) E as well as the 10+(≡ a0E ) states from the left panel were used as input. Lightly shaded areas correspond to experimentally as yet unestablished states. Table 6 contains the experimental assignment of the states on the left panel and a brief overview of their dynamics require implementation of mixing scenarios in this channel.4 Note, however, that the results of Table 5 depend on the assumption that the total decay width of η(1295) is saturated by the three decay channels accessible to our model (ηπ π , η π π and K π π ). The level of justification for this assumption is currently uncertain [ 5 ]. Consequently we will not explore this scenario further. 3.3.3 Is a0(1950) of the BABAR Collaboration an excited qq state? ¯ Encouraging results obtained in Sect. 3.3.1, where f0(1790) was assumed to be an excited q¯ q state, can be used as a motivation to explore them further. As discussed in Sect. 2.3.1, data analysis published recently by the BABAR Collaboration has found evidence of an isotriplet state a0(1950) with mass ma0(1950) = (1931 ± 26) MeV and decay width a0(1950) = (271 ± 40) MeV [ 187 ]. Assuming that f0(1790) is an excited q¯ q state (as already done in Sect. 3.3.1), we can implement ma0(1950) obtained by BABAR as a large-Nc suppressed effect in our model as follows. Mass terms for excited states σNE and σSE , Eqs. (30) and (34), can be modified by reintroduction of the large-Nc suppressed parameter κ2 and now read m2σ E = C1∗ + N ξ2 2 + 2κ2 2 φN , (57) 4 A similar mixing scenario may (as a matter of principle) also exist in the case of the scalars discussed here. However, the amount of theoretical studies is significantly smaller here: for example, a glueball contribution to f0(1790) has been discussed in Refs. [ 210,211 ] while – just as in our study – the same resonance was found to be compatible with an excited q¯q state in Ref. [102]. m2σ E = C1∗ + 2C2∗ + S ξ22 + 2κ2 (φN − 2 Z K f K )2. (58) The other mass terms [Eqs. (31)–(33), (35) and (36)] remain exactly the same; κ2 does not influence any decay widths. We can now repeat the calculations described in Sect. 3.2 with the addition that the mass of our state a0E corresponds exactly to that of a0(1950). We obtain Note that a non-vanishing value of κ2 introduces mixing of σNE and σSE in our Lagrangian (16). Its effect is, however, vanishingly small since the mixing angle is ∼ 11◦. Using the mass parameters (59) and the decay parameters (55) we can repeat the calculations of Sect. 3.3.1. Then our final results for the mass spectrum are presented in Fig. 1 and for the decays in Table 6. The values of ma E , mσ E and m K E have changed in comparison to Table 4 i0nduciSng an incr0eased phase space. For this reason, the decay widths of the corresponding resonances have changed as well. All other results from Table 4 have remained the same and are again included for clarity and convenience of the reader. The consequences are as follows: • The decay width of a0E is now a0E = (280 ± 90) MeV; it overlaps fully with a0(1950) = (271 ± 40) MeV measured by BABAR. Hence, if a0(1950) is confirmed in future measurements, it will represent a very good candidate for the excited isotriplet n¯ n state. IJP (59) Table 6 Final results: decays and masses of the excited q¯q states. Widths marked as “suppressed” depend only on large-Nc suppressed parameters that have been set to zero. Masses/widths marked with (*) are used as input; others are predictions Model state I J P Mass (MeV) Decay Width (MeV) Note σ E N a0E ηNE ηSE σSE 00+ 1790 ± 35* 10+ • The mass of σSE is between those of f0(2020) and f0(2100). Judging by the quantum numbers, either of these resonances could represent a (predominant) s¯s state; an option is also that the excited s¯s state with I J PC = 00++ has not yet been observed in this energy region. However, one must also remember the possibility that q¯q–glueball mixing (neglected here) may change masses as well as decay patterns. The decay width of σSE is rather narrow (up to 110 MeV) but this may change if mixing effects happen to be large. • The mass of K0 E is qualitatively (within ∼ 100 MeV) congruent with that of K0 (1950); the widths overlap within 1 σ . Hence, if K0 (1950) is confirmed in future measurements, it will represent a very good candidate for the excited scalar kaon. • Conclusions for all other states remain as in Sect. 3.3.1. 4 Conclusion We have studied masses and decays of excited scalar and pseudoscalar q¯q states (q = u, d, s quarks) in the Extended Linear Sigma Model (eLSM) that, in addition, contains ground-state scalar, pseudoscalar, vector and axial-vector mesons. Our main objective was to study the assumption that the f0(1790) resonance is an excited n¯ n state. This assignment was motivated by the observation in BES [ 131 ] and LHCb [ 132 ] data that the resonance couples mostly to pions and by the theoretical statement that the n¯ n ground state is contained in the physical spectrum below f0(1790). Furthermore, the assumption was also tested that the a0(1950) K0 E → K π K0 E → K1π K E 0 → a1(1260)K K0 E → ηK K E 0 → f 1(1285)K K0 E → K1η K0 E → K0 (1430)π π Total – – Candidate state: K0 (1950); m K0 (1950) = (1945 ± 22) MeV and ReKq0 u(1i9r5e0s)c=on(fi2r0m1a±tio9n0[)5M]eV. Width badly defined due to large errors of the experimental input data Width badly defined due to large errors of the experimental input data resonance, whose discovery was recently claimed by the BABAR Collaboration [ 187 ], represents the isotriplet partner of f0(1790). Using the mass, 2π and 2K decay widths of f0(1790), the mass of a0(1950) and the masses of the pseudoscalar isosinglets η(1295) and η(1440) our model predicts more than 35 decays for all excited states except for the excited pion and kaon (where extremely large uncertainties are present due to experimental ambiguities). All numbers are collected in Table 6. In essence: the f0(1790) resonance emerges as the broadest excited q¯q state in the scalar channel with f0(1790) = (405 ± 96) MeV; a0(1950), if confirmed, represents a very good candidate for the excited q¯q state; K0 (1950), if confirmed, represents a very good candidate for the excited scalar kaon. Our excited isoscalar s¯s state has a mass of (2038 ± 24) MeV, placed between the masses of the nearby f0(2020) and f0(2100) resonances; also, its width is relatively small (≤ 110 MeV). We conclude that, although any of these resonances may in principle represent a q¯q state, the introduction of mixing effects (particularly with a glueball state) may be necessary to further elucidate their structure. Our results also imply a quite small contribution of the ηπ π , η π π and π K K decays to the overall width of η(1295). For η(1440), the decay width is compatible with any value up to ∼ 400 MeV (ambiguities due to uncertainty in experimental input data). It is also possible to implement ηto(t1a2l95) ≡ η(1295)→ηππ +η ππ+π K K and η(1440)→K K exactly as in the data of PDG [ 5 ] and BES [ 199 ]. Then π(1300) and K (1460) are quite well described as excited q¯ q states – but the scalars are unobservably broad (see Table 5). Hence, in this case, there appears to be tension between the simultaneous description of η(1295), π(1300), η(1440) and K (1460) and their scalar counterparts as excited q¯ q states. This scenario is, however, marred by experimental uncertainties: for example, it is not at all clear if the width of η(1295) is indeed saturated by the ηπ π , η π π and π K K decays. It could therefore only be explored further when (very much needed) new experimental data arrives – from BABAR, BES, LHCb or PANDA [ 81 ] and NICA [ 212 ]. Acknowledgements We are grateful to D. Bugg, C. Fischer and A. Rebhan for extensive discussions. The collaboration with Stephan Hübsch within a Project Work at TU Wien is also gratefully acknowledged. The work of D. P. is supported by the Austrian Science Fund FWF, Project No. P26366. The work of F. G. is supported by the Polish National Science Centre NCN through the OPUS project nr. 2015/17/B/ST2/01625. Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecomm ons.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 SCOAP3. Appendix A: Interaction Lagrangians Here we collect all interaction Lagrangians that are used for calculations of decay widths throughout this article. Vertices for large-Nc suppressed decays are not included but briefly discussed after each Lagrangian in which they appear. Appendix A.1: Lagrangian for σ E N The Lagrangian reads LσNE = 2 (h2 − h3)wa21 Zπ2 φN σNE (∂μηN )2 + (∂μπ )2 1 + 2 1 + 2 × √ √ h2φN − 2h3φS w2K1 Z 2K σNE × ∂μ K¯ 0∂μ K 0 + ∂μ K −∂μ K + + (h2 − h3)wa1 Zπ φN σNE h2φN − 2h3φS wK1 Z K σNE K¯ 10μ∂μ K 0 + K1−μ∂μ K + + h.c. 1 μ 2 + 2 (h2 + h3)φN σNE (ωN ) + (ρμ)2 1 √ + 2 h2φN + 2h3φS σNE K¯ μ0 K μ0 + Kμ− K μ+ − ξ2 Zπ φN σNE π E · π − g1E wa1 Zπ σNE ∂μπ E · ∂μπ 1 + 2 (h2 − h3)wa21 Zπ2 σNE σN (∂μπ )2. (A.1) f1μN ∂μηN + a1μ · ∂μπ Note: the decay σ E N pressed. Appendix A.2: Lagrangian for σSE → ηS ηS (∼ κ1, h1) is large-Nc supwK1 Z K σSE σ E S K¯ μ0 K μ0 + Kμ− K μ+ . (A.2) + + × + Note: the decays σSE → π π (∼ κ1, h1), σSE → ηN ηN (∼ κ1, h1), σSE → ρρ (∼ h1), σSE → ωN ωN (∼ h1), σSE → a1π (∼ h1), σSE → f1N ηN (∼ h1), σSE → π E π (∼ κ2), σSE → ηNE ηN (∼ κ2) and σSE → σS π π (∼ κ1, h1) are largeNc suppressed. Appendix A.4: Lagrangian for K0E The Lagrangian reads (only K00E included; decays of other K0E components follow from isospin symmetry): + 2 √i2(h2 +2h3)wa1w∗K Zπ2 ZKS K00E × π+∂μK0−∂μπ0 −π0∂μK0−∂μπ+ . (A.4) × ∂μK¯0∂μηN −∂μK¯0∂μπ0 +√2∂μK−∂μπ+ LK0E = 41 h2 φN +√2φS −2h3φN wa1wK1ZπZK K00E Onlythree-bodydecaysintopseudoscalarsarekinematically allowed for this particle: Appendix A.5: Lagrangian for ηNE 1 LηNE = 2(h2 − h3)wa21Zπ3 ηNEηN(∂μπ)2 + (h2 − h3)wa21Zπ3 ηNE ∂μηN∂μπ · π 1 − 4(h2 − 2h3)wa1wK1ZπZ2K ηNE × K¯0∂μK0∂μπ0 − √2K¯0∂μK+∂μπ− − K−∂μK+∂μπ0 − √2K−∂μK0∂μπ+ + h.c. 1 − 2h2w2K1ZπZ2K ηNE × π0∂μK¯0∂μK0 − π0∂μK−∂μK+ −√2π−∂μK+∂μK¯0 + h.c. . (A.5) (A.6) ×wf1SwK1ZηS ZK K00E∂μK¯0∂μηS + 41 h2 φN +√2φS −2h3φN wK1ZK K00E × f1μN∂μK¯0 −a1μ0∂μK¯0 +√2a1μ+∂μK− + 41 h2 φN +√2φS −2h3φN wa1Zπ K00E × K¯10μ∂μηN − K¯10μ∂μπ0 +√2K1−μ∂μπ+ i + 4(h2 −2h3)wa1w∗K Zπ2 ZKS K00Eπ0∂μK¯00∂μπ0 LπE = −ih3wa1ZπφN π0E ρμ−∂μπ+ −ρμ+∂μπ− Appendix A.6: Lagrangian for ηSE The Lagrangian reads i LηSE = −√2h3wK1ZKφN ηSE ∂μK¯0K μ0 +∂μK−K μ+ + h.c. −√2K¯0∂μK+∂μπ− + (h2 −h3)wa21Zπ3 ηNE ∂μηN∂μπ ·π − 2√12h2wa1wK1ZπZ2K ηSE K¯0∂μK0∂μπ0 −K−∂μK+∂μπ0 −√2K−∂μK0∂μπ+ + h.c. 1 + √2h3w2K1ZπZ2K ηSE × π0∂μK¯0∂μK0 +π0∂μK−∂μK+ +√2π−∂μK+∂μK¯0 + h.c. . Note: the decay ηSE → ηSππ (∼ κ1, h1) is large-Nc suppressed. Appendix A.7: Lagrangian for πE The Lagrangian reads (only π0E included; decays of π±E follow from isospin symmetry): + 41 h2 −2h3 wa1wK1ZπZ2K π0E∂μπ0 × K¯0∂μK0 + K−∂μK+ + h.c. 1 + 2 h2w2K1 Zπ Z 2K π 0E π 0 ∂μ K¯ 0∂μ K 0 + ∂μ K −∂μ K + h2 + 2h3 wa1 wK1 Zπ Z 2K π 0E The Lagrangian reads (only K 0E included; decays of other K E components follow from isospin symmetry): wK1 Z K K 0E ωN μ∂ μ K¯ 0 − ρμ0∂ μ K¯ 0 + 2ρμ+∂ μ K − wa1 Zπ K 0E K¯ μ0∂ μηN − K¯ μ0∂ μπ 0 + 2Kμ−∂ μπ + × w f1S ZηS K 0E K¯ μ0∂ μηS 1 − 2 √ K¯ 0∂μηN ∂ μπ 0 2K −∂μηN ∂ μπ + (h2 − 2h3)wa1 wK1 Zπ2 Z K K 0E π 0∂μηN ∂ μ K¯ 0 2π +∂μηN ∂ μ K − + ηN ∂μπ 0∂ μ K¯ 0 2ηN ∂μπ +∂ μ K − 1 + √ h3wa1 w f1S Zπ Z K ZηS K 0E 2 1 − √ h2wK1 w f1S Zπ Z K ZηS K 0E 2 2 π 0∂μηS ∂ μ K¯ 0 − 2π +∂μηS ∂ μ K − 1 − √ h2wa1 wK1 Zπ Z K ZηS K 0E 2 2 √ √ ηS ∂μπ 0∂ μ K¯ 0 − 2ηS ∂μπ +∂ μ K − h2wa21 Zπ2 Z K K 0E K¯ 0(∂μπ )2 × wa1 wK1 Zπ2 Z K K 0E π +∂μ K¯ 0∂ μπ − 1 + √ (h2 + 2h3)wa1 wK1 Zπ2 Z K K 0E 2 2 × π +∂μ K −∂ μπ 0 − π 0∂μ K −∂ μπ + . (A.8) Page 22 of 25 Page 24 of 25 1. D.J. Gross , F. Wilczek , Ultraviolet behavior of nonabelian gauge theories . Phys. Rev. Lett . 30 , 1343 ( 1973 ) 2. D.J. Gross , F. Wilczek , Asymptotically free gauge theories. 1. Phys. Rev. D 8 , 3633 ( 1973 ) 3. H.D. Politzer , Setting the scale for predictions of asymptotic freedom . Phys. Rev. D 9 , 2174 ( 1974 ) 4. H.D. Politzer , Asymptotic freedom: an approach to strong interactions . Phys. Rept . 14 , 129 ( 1974 ) 5. C. Patrignani et al. (Particle Data Group), Chin. Phys. C 40 , 100001 ( 2016 ) 6. M. Gell-Mann , A schematic model of Baryons and Mesons . Phys. Lett . 8 , 214 ( 1964 ) 7. G. Zweig, in An SU(3) Model for Strong Interaction Symmetry and its Breaking, ed. by D.B. * Lichtenberg , S.P. Rosen , Developments In The Quark Theory Of Hadrons , Vol. 1 *, 22 - 101 and CERN Geneva - TH. 401 (REC.JAN. 64) , p. 24 8. M.D. Scadron , G. Rupp, R. Delbourgo , The quark-level linear σ model . Fortsch. Phys . 61 , 994 ( 2013 ). arXiv: 1309 .5041 [hep-ph] 9. A. Zacchi , L. Tolos , J. Schaffner-Bielich , Twin stars within the SU(3 ) Chiral Quark-Meson Model . arXiv: 1612 .06167 [astroph.HE] 10. J.L. Basdevant , C.D. Froggatt , J.L. Petersen , Pi pi phenomenology below 1100 mev . Phys. Lett. 41B , 178 ( 1972 ) 11. P. Estabrooks, Where and what are the scalar mesons? Phys. Rev. D 19 , 2678 ( 1979 ) 12. K. Kawarabayashi , N. Ohta , The problem of η in the large N limit: effective Lagrangian approach . Nucl. Phys. B 175 , 477 ( 1980 ) 13. K. Kawarabayashi , N. Ohta , On the partial conservation of the U(1) current . Prog. Theor. Phys . 66 , 1789 ( 1981 ) 14. N. Ohta , Vacuum structure and Chiral charge quantization in the large N limit . Progr. Theor. Phys . 66 , 1408 ( 1981 ). Erratum: [Progr. Theor. Phys . 67 , 993 ( 1982 )] 15. F.E. Close , Gluonic Hadrons . Rept. Prog. Phys . 51 , 833 ( 1988 ) 16. E. van Beveren, T.A. Rijken , K. Metzger , C. Dullemond , G. Rupp, J.E. Ribeiro , A low lying scalar meson nonet in a unitarized meson model . Z. Phys. C 30 , 615 ( 1986 ). arXiv: 0710 .4067 [hep-ph] 17. B.S. Zou , D.V. Bugg , Remarks on I = 0 J(PC) = 0++ states: sigma/epsilon and f0 (975) . Phys. Rev. D 50 , 591 ( 1994 ) 18. R. Kaminski , L. Lesniak , J.P. Maillet , Relativistic effects in the scalar meson dynamics . Phys. Rev. D 50 , 3145 ( 1994 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9403264 19. N.N. Achasov , G.N. Shestakov , Phenomenological sigma models . Phys. Rev. D 49 , 5779 ( 1994 ) 20. N.A. Tornqvist , Understanding the scalar meson q anti-q nonet . Z. Phys. C 68 , 647 ( 1995 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9504372 21. C.R. Munz , Two-photon decays of mesons in a relativistic quark model . Nucl. Phys. A 609 , 364 ( 1996 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9601206 22. A. Dobado , J.R. Pelaez , The inverse amplitude method in chiral perturbation theory . Phys. Rev. D 56 , 3057 ( 1997 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9604416 23. V. Elias , A.H. Fariborz , F. Shi , T.G. Steele, QCD sum rule consistency of lowest-lying q anti-q scalar resonances . Nucl. Phys. A 633 , 279 ( 1998 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9801415 24. D. Black , A.H. Fariborz , F. Sannino , J. Schechter , Putative light scalar nonet . Phys. Rev. D 59 , 074026 ( 1999 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9808415 25. P. Minkowski , W. Ochs, Identification of the glueballs and the scalar meson nonet of lowest mass . Eur. Phys. J. C 9 , 283 ( 1999 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9811518 26. J.A. Oller , E. Oset , N/ D description of two meson amplitudes and chiral symmetry . Phys. Rev. D 60 , 074023 ( 1999 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9809337 27. R. Kaminski , L. Lesniak , B. Loiseau , Scalar mesons and multichannel amplitudes . Eur. Phys. J. C 9 , 141 ( 1999 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9810386 28. M. Ishida , Possible classification of the chiral scalar sigma-nonet . Progr. Theor. Phys . 101 , 661 ( 1999 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9902260 29. Y.S. Surovtsev , D. Krupa , M. Nagy , Existence of the sigma meson below 1-GeV and f0(1500) glueball . Phys. Rev. D 63 , 054024 ( 2001 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0008317 30. D. Black , A.H. Fariborz , S. Moussa , S. Nasri , J. Schechter , Unitarized pseudoscalar meson scattering amplitudes in three flavor linear sigma models . Phys. Rev. D 64 , 014031 ( 2001 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0012278 31. T. Teshima , I. Kitamura, N. Morisita , Mixing among light scalar mesons and L = 1 q anti-q scalar mesons . J. Phys. G 28 , 1391 ( 2002 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0105107 32. F.E. Close , N.A. Tornqvist , Scalar mesons above and below 1 GeV . J. Phys . G 28, R249 ( 2002 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0204205 33. V.V. Anisovich , A.V. Sarantsev , K-matrix analysis of the (I J PC = 00 ++) -wave in the mass region below 1900 MeV . Eur. Phys. J. A 16 , 229 ( 2003 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0204328 34. J.R. Pelaez , On the nature of light scalar mesons from their large Nc behavior . Phys. Rev. Lett . 92 , 102001 ( 2004 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0309292 35. D.V. Bugg , Comments on the sigma and kappa . Phys. Lett. B 572 , 1 ( 2003 ). Erratum: [Phys. Lett. B 595 , 556 ( 2004 )] 36. M.D. Scadron , G. Rupp , F. Kleefeld , E. van Beveren , Ground-state scalar q¯q Nonet: SU(3) mass splittings and strong, electromagnetic, and weak decay rates . Phys. Rev. D 69 , 014010 ( 2004 ). [Erratum-ibid. D 69 , 059901 ( 2004 ) ] . arXiv:hep-ph/0309109 37. M. Napsuciale , S. Rodriguez , A chiral model for q¯q and q¯q¯qq mesons . Phys. Rev. D 70 , 094043 ( 2004 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0407037 38. J.R. Pelaez , Light scalars as tetraquarks or two-meson states from large N(c) and unitarized chiral perturbation theory . Mod. Phys. Lett. A 19 , 2879 ( 2004 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0411107 39. N. Mathur et al., Scalar mesons a0(1450) and sigma(600) from Lattice QCD . Phys. Rev. D 76 , 114505 ( 2007 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0607110 40. C. Bernard , C.E. DeTar , Z. Fu , S. Prelovsek , Scalar meson spectroscopy with lattice staggered fermions . Phys. Rev. D 76 , 094504 ( 2007 ). arXiv: 0707 .2402 [hep-lat] 41. A.H. Fariborz , R. Jora , J. Schechter , Two chiral nonet model with massless quarks . Phys. Rev. D 77 , 034006 ( 2008 ). arXiv: 0707 .0843 [hep-ph] 42. M. Albaladejo , J.A. Oller , Identification of a scalar glueball . Phys. Rev. Lett . 101 , 252002 ( 2008 ). arXiv: 0801 .4929 [hep-ph] 43. A.H. Fariborz , R. Jora , J. Schechter , Global aspects of the scalar meson puzzle . Phys. Rev. D 79 , 074014 ( 2009 ). arXiv: 0902 .2825 [hep-ph] 44. G. Mennessier, S. Narison , X.G. Wang, The sigma and f0(980) from Ke4 + pi-pi scatterings data . Phys. Lett. B 688 , 59 ( 2010 ). arXiv: 1002 .1402 [hep-ph] 45. T. Branz, T. Gutsche , V.E. Lyubovitskij , Two-photon decay of heavy hadron molecules . Phys. Rev. D 82 , 054010 ( 2010 ). arXiv: 1007 .4311 [hep-ph] 46. R. Garcia-Martin , R. Kaminski , J.R. Pelaez , J. Ruiz de Elvira, Precise determination of the f0(600) and f0(980) pole parameters from a dispersive data analysis . Phys. Rev. Lett . 107 , 072001 ( 2011 ). arXiv: 1107 .1635 [hep-ph] 47. T.K. Mukherjee , M. Huang , Q.S. Yan , Low-lying Scalars in an extended linear σ model . Phys. Rev. D 86 , 114022 ( 2012 ). arXiv: 1203 .5717 [hep-ph] 48. A.H. Fariborz , A. Azizi , A. Asrar , Probing the substructure of f0(1370) . Phys. Rev. D 91 ( 7 ), 073013 ( 2015 ). arXiv: 1503 .05041 [hep-ph] 49. G. Eichmann, C.S. Fischer , W. Heupel , The light scalar mesons as tetraquarks . Phys. Lett. B 753 , 282 ( 2016 ). arXiv: 1508 .07178 [hep-ph] 50. J.R. Pelaez , From controversy to precision on the sigma meson: a review on the status of the non-ordinary f0(500) resonance . Phys. Rept . 658 , 1 ( 2016 ). arXiv: 1510 .00653 [hep-ph] 51. A.H. Fariborz , A. Azizi , A. Asrar , Proximity of f0(1500) and f0(1710) to the scalar glueball . Phys. Rev. D 92 ( 11 ), 113003 ( 2015 ). arXiv: 1511 .02449 [hep-ph] 52. M. Kirchbach , C.B. Compean , Modelling duality between bound and resonant meson spectra by means of free quantum motions on the de Sitter space-time dS4 . Eur. Phys. J. A 52 ( 7 ), 210 ( 2016 ). arXiv: 1608 .05041 [hep-ph] 53. C. Amsler , F.E. Close , Is f0 (1500) a scalar glueball? Phys. Rev. D 53 , 295 ( 1996 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9507326 54. C.J. Morningstar , M.J. Peardon , The glueball spectrum from an anisotropic lattice study . Phys. Rev. D 60 , 034509 ( 1999 ). arXiv:hep-lat/9901004 55. W.J. Lee , D. Weingarten , Scalar quarkonium masses and mixing with the lightest scalar glueball . Phys. Rev. D 61 , 014015 ( 2000 ). arXiv:hep-lat/9910008 56. F.E. Close , A. Kirk , Scalar glueball q anti-q mixing above 1-GeV and implications for lattice QCD . Eur. Phys. J. C 21 , 531 ( 2001 ). arXiv: hep-ph/0103173 57. C. Amsler , N.A. Tornqvist , Mesons beyond the naive quark model . Phys. Rept . 389 , 61 ( 2004 ) 58. M. Loan , X.Q. Luo , Z.H. Luo , Monte Carlo study of glueball masses in the Hamiltonian limit of SU(3) lattice gauge theory . Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 21 , 2905 ( 2006 ). arXiv:hep-lat/0503038 59. F.E. Close , Q. Zhao , Production of f0(1710) , f0 ( 1500 ), and f0(1370) in j/psi hadronic decays . Phys. Rev. D 71 , 094022 ( 2005 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0504043 60. F. Giacosa , T. Gutsche , V.E. Lyubovitskij , A. Faessler , Scalar nonet quarkonia and the scalar glueball: mixing and decays in an effective chiral approach . Phys. Rev. D 72 , 094006 ( 2005 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0509247 61. Y. Chen et al., Glueball spectrum and matrix elements on anisotropic lattices . Phys. Rev. D 73 , 014516 ( 2006 ). arXiv:hep-lat/0510074 62. H. Forkel, Holographic glueball structure . Phys. Rev. D 78 , 025001 ( 2008 ). arXiv: 0711 .1179 [hep-ph] 63. V. Mathieu , N. Kochelev , V. Vento , The physics of glueballs. Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 18 , 1 ( 2009 ). arXiv: 0810 .4453 [hep-ph] 64. C.M. Richards et al., [UKQCD Collaboration] , Glueball mass measurements from improved staggered fermion simulations . Phys Rev. D 82 , 034501 ( 2010 ). arXiv: 1005 .2473 [hep-lat] 65. E. Gregory , A. Irving , B. Lucini , C. McNeile , A. Rago , C. Richards , E. Rinaldi, Towards the glueball spectrum from unquenched lattice QCD . JHEP 1210 , 170 ( 2012 ). arXiv:1208 . 1858 [hep-lat] 66. F. Brünner , D. Parganlija , A. Rebhan , Glueball decay rates in the Witten-Sakai-Sugimoto model . Phys. Rev. D 91 ( 10 ), 106002 ( 2015 ). Erratum: [Phys. Rev. D 93 ( 10 ), 109903 ( 2016 ) ] . arXiv: 1501 .07906 [hep-ph] 67. F. Brünner , A. Rebhan , Nonchiral enhancement of scalar glueball decay in the Witten-Sakai-Sugimoto model . Phys. Rev. Lett . 115 ( 13 ), 131601 ( 2015 ). arXiv: 1504 .05815 [hep-ph] 68. F. Brünner , A. Rebhan, Constraints on the ηη decay rate of a scalar glueball from gauge/gravity duality . Phys. Rev. D 92 ( 12 ), 121902 ( 2015 ). arXiv: 1510 .07605 [hep-ph] 69. E.F. Capossoli , H. Boschi-Filho , Glueball spectra and Regge trajectories from a modified holographic softwall model . Phys. Lett. B 753 , 419 ( 2016 ). arXiv: 1510 .03372 [hep-ph] 70. E. Folco Capossoli , D. Li , H. Boschi-Filho , Pomeron and odderon regge trajectories from a dynamical holographic model . Phys. Lett. B 760 , 101 ( 2016 ). arXiv: 1601 .05114 [hep-ph] 71. E. Folco Capossoli , D. Li , H. Boschi-Filho , Dynamical corrections to the anomalous holographic soft-wall model: the pomeron and the odderon . Eur. Phys. J. C 76 ( 6 ), 320 ( 2016 ). arXiv: 1604 .01647 [hep-ph] 72. E. Folco Capossoli, H. Boschi-Filho , Renormalised AdS5 mass for even spin glueball and pomeron regge trajectory from a modified holographic softwall model . arXiv:1611 .09817 [hep-ph] 73. S. Prelovsek , C. Dawson , T. Izubuchi , K. Orginos , A. Soni , Scalar meson in dynamical and partially quenched two-flavor QCD: lattice results and chiral loops . Phys. Rev. D 70 , 094503 ( 2004 ). arXiv:hep-lat/0407037 74. C. McNeile et al., [UKQCD Collaboration] , Properties of light scalar mesons from lattice QCD . Phys Rev. D 74 , 014508 ( 2006 ). arXiv: hep-lat/0604009 75. H. Wada , T. Kunihiro , S. Muroya , A. Nakamura , C. Nonaka , M. Sekiguchi , Lattice study of low-lying nonet scalar mesons in quenched approximation . Phys. Lett. B 652 , 250 ( 2007 ). arXiv:hep-lat/0702023 [HEP-LAT] 76. C. Alexandrou , J.O. Daldrop , M. Dalla Brida , M. Gravina , L. Scorzato , C. Urbach , M. Wagner , Lattice investigation of the scalar mesons a0(980) and κ using four-quark operators . JHEP 1304 , 137 ( 2013 ). arXiv: 1212 . 1418 77. M. Gell-Mann , M. Levy, The axial vector current in beta decay . Nuovo Cim . 16 , 705 ( 1960 ) 78. S. Gasiorowicz , D.A. Geffen , Effective Lagrangians and field algebras with chiral symmetry . Rev. Mod. Phys . 41 , 531 ( 1969 ) 79. P. Ko , S. Rudaz , Phenomenology of scalar and vector mesons in the linear sigma model . Phys. Rev. D 50 , 6877 ( 1994 ) 80. M. Urban , M. Buballa , J. Wambach , Vector and axial vector correlators in a chirally symmetric model . Nucl. Phys. A 697 , 338 - 371 ( 2002 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0102260 81. M.F.M. Lutz et al. [ PANDA Collaboration], Physics performance report for PANDA: strong interaction studies with antiprotons . arXiv:0903 .3905 [hep-ex] 82. D. Parganlija , F. Giacosa , D.H. Rischke , Vacuum properties of mesons in a linear sigma model with vector mesons and global chiral invariance . Phys. Rev. D 82 , 054024 ( 2010 ). arXiv: 1003 .4934 [hep-ph] 83. S. Janowski , D. Parganlija , F. Giacosa , D.H. Rischke , The Glueball in a chiral linear sigma model with vector mesons . Phys. Rev. D 84 , 054007 ( 2011 ). arXiv: 1103 .3238 [hep-ph] 84. W.I. Eshraim , S. Janowski , F. Giacosa , D.H. Rischke , Decay of the pseudoscalar glueball into scalar and pseudoscalar mesons . Phys. Rev. D 87 ( 5 ), 054036 ( 2013 ). arXiv: 1208 . 6474 85. W.I. Eshraim , S. Schramm, arXiv: 1606 .02207 [hep-ph] 86. F. Giacosa , J. Sammet , S. Janowski , Decays of the vector glueball . arXiv:1607 .03640 [hep-ph] 87. A. Koenigstein , F. Giacosa , Phenomenology of pseudotensor mesons and the pseudotensor glueball . Eur. Phys. J. A 52 ( 12 ), 356 ( 2016 ). arXiv: 1608 .08777 [hep-ph] 88. A. Habersetzer , F. Giacosa , T vector and axial vector spectral functions in the extended linear sigma model . J. Phys. Conf. Ser . 599 , 012011 ( 2015 ). arXiv: 1504 .04196 [hep-ph] 89. F. Divotgey , L. Olbrich , F. Giacosa , Phenomenology of axialvector and pseudovector mesons: decays and mixing in the kaonic sector . Eur. Phys. J. A 49 , 135 ( 2013 ). arXiv: 1306 .1193 [hep-ph] 90. S. Gallas , F. Giacosa , D.H. Rischke , Vacuum phenomenology of the chiral partner of the nucleon in a linear sigma model with vector mesons . Phys. Rev. D 82 , 014004 ( 2010 ). arXiv: 0907 .5084 [hep-ph] 91. J.T. Lenaghan , D.H. Rischke , J. Schaffner-Bielich , Chiral symmetry restoration at nonzero temperature in the SU(3)(r) x SU(3)(l) linear sigma model . Phys. Rev. D 62 , 085008 ( 2000 ). arXiv:nucl-th/0004006 92. S. Struber , D.H. Rischke , Vector and axialvector mesons at nonzero temperature within a gauged linear sigma model . Phys. Rev. D 77 , 085004 ( 2008 ). arXiv: 0708 .2389 [hep-th] 93. P. Kovács , Z. Szép , G. Wolf, Existence of the critical endpoint in the vector meson extended linear sigma model . Phys. Rev. D 93 ( 11 ), 114014 ( 2016 ). arXiv: 1601 . 05291 94. D. Parganlija , P. Kovacs , G. Wolf , F. Giacosa , D.H. Rischke , Meson vacuum phenomenology in a three-flavor linear sigma model with (axial-)vector mesons . Phys. Rev. D 87 ( 1 ), 014011 ( 2013 ). arXiv: 1208 . 0585 95. S. Janowski , F. Giacosa , D.H. Rischke , Is f0(1710) a glueball? Phys. Rev. D 90 ( 11 ), 114005 ( 2014 ). arXiv: 1408 .4921 [hep-ph] 96. F. Giacosa , G. Pagliara, On the spectral functions of scalar mesons . Phys. Rev. C 76 , 065204 ( 2007 ). arXiv: 0707 .3594 [hep-ph] 97. P.G.O. Freund , Radially excited mesons . Nuovo Cim. A 58 , 519 ( 1968 ) 98. C.T. Chen-Tsai, T.Y. Lee , Radially excited states of mesons . Phys. Rev. D 10 , 2960 ( 1974 ) 99. T. Ino, Decay properties of highly excited mesons in a duality scheme with the quark model hadron spectrum . Progr. Theor. Phys . 71 , 864 ( 1984 ) 100. P. Geiger, Isoscalar-isovector mass splittings in excited mesons . Phys. Rev. D 49 , 6003 ( 1994 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9311254 101. S.M. Fedorov , Y.A. Simonov , Pseudoscalar mesons and their radial excitations from the effective chiral Lagrangian . JETP Lett . 78 , 57 ( 2003 ). [Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz . 78 , 67 ( 2003 ) ] . arXiv:hep-ph/0306216 102. J. Vijande , A. Valcarce , F. Fernandez , B. Silvestre-Brac , Nature of the light scalar mesons . Phys. Rev. D 72 , 034025 ( 2005 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0508142 103. T. Gutsche , V.E. Lyubovitskij , M.C. Tichy , Strong decays of radially excited mesons in a chiral approach . Phys. Rev. D 79 , 014036 ( 2009 ). arXiv: 0811 .0668 [hep-ph] 104. G. Rupp, S. Coito , E. van Beveren , Unquenching the meson spectrum: a model study of excited ρ resonances . Acta Phys. Polon. Supp . 9 , 653 ( 2016 ). arXiv: 1605 .04260 [hep-ph] 105. P. Lacock et al., [UKQCD Collaboration] , Orbitally excited and hybrid mesons from the lattice . Phys Rev. D 54 , 6997 ( 1996 ). arXiv:hep-lat/9605025 106. T. Burch , C. Gattringer , L.Y. Glozman , C. Hagen , C.B. Lang , A. Schafer , Excited hadrons on the lattice: Mesons. Phys. Rev. D 73 , 094505 ( 2006 ). arXiv:hep-lat/0601026 107. J.J. Dudek , R.G. Edwards , M.J. Peardon , D.G. Richards , C.E. Thomas, Highly excited and exotic meson spectrum from dynamical lattice QCD . Phys. Rev. Lett . 103 , 262001 ( 2009 ). arXiv: 0909 .0200 [hep-ph] 108. J.J. Dudek , R.G. Edwards , M.J. Peardon , D.G. Richards , C.E. Thomas, Toward the excited meson spectrum of dynamical QCD . Phys. Rev. D 82 , 034508 ( 2010 ). arXiv: 1004 .4930 [hep-ph] 109. G.P. Engel , C.B. Lang , M. Limmer , D. Mohler , A. Schafer , QCD with two light dynamical chirally improved quarks: Mesons . Phys. Rev. D 85 , 034508 ( 2012 ). arXiv: 1112 .1601 [hep-lat] 110. J.J. Dudek et al. [ Hadron Spectrum Collaboration], Toward the excited isoscalar meson spectrum from lattice QCD . Phys. Rev. D 88 ( 9 ), 094505 ( 2013 ). arXiv: 1309 .2608 [hep-lat] 111. A. Holl , A. Krassnigg , C.D. Roberts , Pseudoscalar meson radial excitations . Phys. Rev. C 70 , 042203 ( 2004 ). arXiv:nucl-th/0406030 112. A. Holl , A. Krassnigg , C.D. Roberts , S.V. Wright , On the complexion of pseudoscalar mesons . Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 20 , 1778 ( 2005 ). arXiv:nucl-th/0411065 113. A. Holl , A. Krassnigg , P. Maris , C.D. Roberts , S.V. Wright , Electromagnetic properties of ground and excited state pseudoscalar mesons . Phys. Rev. C 71 , 065204 ( 2005 ). arXiv:nucl-th/0503043 114. B.L. Li , L. Chang , F. Gao , C.D. Roberts , S.M. Schmidt , H.S. Zong , Distribution amplitudes of radially-excited π and K mesons . Phys. Rev. D 93 ( 11 ), 114033 ( 2016 ). arXiv: 1604 .07415 [nucl-th] 115. M.K. Volkov , D. Ebert , M. Nagy , Excited pions, rho and omega mesons and their decays in a chiral SU(2) x SU(2) Lagrangian . Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 13 , 5443 ( 1998 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9705334 116. M.K. Volkov , V.L. Yudichev , D. Ebert , Decays of excited strange mesons in the extended NJL model . J. Phys. G 25 , 2025 ( 1999 ). [JINR Rapid Commun . 6 - 92 , 5 ( 1998 ) ] . arXiv:hep-ph/9810470 117. M.K. Volkov , V.L. Yudichev , Excited scalar mesons in a chiral quark model . Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 14 , 4621 ( 1999 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9904226 118. M.K. Volkov , V.L. Yudichev , Radially excited scalar, pseudoscalar, and vector meson nonets in a chiral quark model . Phys. Part. Nucl . 31 , 282 ( 2000 ). [Fiz. Elem. Chast. Atom. Yadra 31 , 576 ( 2000 ) ] . arXiv:hep-ph/9906371 119. M.K. Volkov , V.L. Yudichev , Radial excitations of scalar and eta, eta-prime mesons in a chiral quark model . Phys. Atom. Nucl . 63 , 1835 ( 2000 ). [Yad. Fiz. 63N10 , 1924 ( 2000 ) ] . arXiv:hep-ph/9905368 120. M.K. Volkov , V.L. Yudichev , Excited strange mesons and their decays in a chiral U(3) x U(3) Lagrangian . Phys. Atom. Nucl . 63 , 455 ( 2000 ). [Yad. Fiz. 63 , 527 ( 2000 )] 121. M.K. Volkov , V.L. Yudichev , Ground and excited scalar isoscalar meson states in a U(3) x U(3) quark model with a glueball . Eur. Phys. J. A 10 , 223 ( 2001 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0103003 122. M.K. Volkov , V.L. Yudichev , First radial excitations of scalarmeson nonet and the glueball . Phys. Atom. Nucl . 65 , 1657 ( 2002 ). [Yad. Fiz. 65 , 1701 ( 2002 )] 123. A.B. Arbuzov , E.A. Kuraev , M.K. Volkov , Radiative decays of radially excited mesons π 0 , ρ0 , ω in NJL model . Phys. Rev. C 82 , 068201 ( 2010 ). arXiv: 1007 .1057 [hep-ph] 124. A.V. Vishneva , M.K. Volkov , Radiative decays of radially excited pseudoscalar mesons in the extended Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model . Phys. Part Nucl. Lett . 11 , 352 ( 2014 ). arXiv: 1312 .1470 [hep-ph] 125. A.V. Vishneva , M.K. Volkov , Radially excited axial-vector mesons in the extended Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model . Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 29 ( 24 ), 1450125 ( 2014 ). arXiv: 1403 .1360 [hep-ph] 126. D. Arndt , C.R. Ji , Light cone quark model analysis of radially excited pseudoscalar and vector mesons . Phys. Rev. D 60 , 094020 ( 1999 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9905360 127. A.M. Badalian , B.L.G. Bakker , Light meson orbital excitations in the QCD string approach . Phys. Rev. D 66 , 034025 ( 2002 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0202246 128. S.N. Nedelko , V.E. Voronin , Regge spectra of excited mesons, harmonic confinement and QCD vacuum structure . Phys. Rev. D 93 ( 9 ), 094010 ( 2016 ). arXiv: 1603 .01447 [hep-ph] 129. R.F. Wagenbrunn , L.Y. Glozman , Effective restoration of chiral symmetry in excited mesons . Phys. Lett. B 643 , 98 ( 2006 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0605247 130. R.F. Wagenbrunn , L.Y. Glozman , Chiral symmetry patterns of excited mesons with the Coulomb-like linear confinement . Phys. Rev. D 75 , 036007 ( 2007 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0701039 131. M. Ablikim et al. [BES Collaboration], Resonances in J / psi - > phi pi+ pi- and phi K+ K- . Phys. Lett. B 607 , 243 ( 2005 ). arXiv:hep-ex/0411001 132. R. Aaij et al. [LHCb Collaboration], Measurement of resonant and CP components in B¯s0 → J /ψ π +π − decays . Phys. Rev. D 89 ( 9 ), 092006 ( 2014 ). arXiv: 1402 .6248 [hep-ex] 133. C. Vafa , E. Witten, Restrictions on symmetry breaking in vectorlike gauge theories . Nucl. Phys. B 234 , 173 ( 1984 ) 134. L. Giusti , S. Necco , Spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking in QCD: a finite-size scaling study on the lattice . JHEP 0704 , 090 ( 2007 ). arXiv:hep-lat/0702013 135. G. 't Hooft, Phys. Rept . 142 , 357 ( 1986 ) 136. W.J. Marciano , H. Pagels , Quantum chromodynamics: a review . Phys. Rept . 36 , 137 ( 1978 ) 137. R.J. Crewther , Effects of topological charge in gauge theories . Acta Phys. Aust. Suppl . 19 , 47 ( 1978 ) 138. A. Roberge , N. Weiss , Gauge theories with imaginary chemical potential and the phases of QCD . Nucl. Phys. B 275 , 734 ( 1986 ) 139. I.I. Kogan , G.W. Semenoff , N. Weiss , Induced QCD and hidden local Z(N) symmetry . Phys. Rev. Lett . 69 , 3435 ( 1992 ). arXiv:hep-th/9206095 140. C. Korthals-Altes , A. Kovner , Magnetic Z(N ) symmetry in hot QCD and the spatial Wilson loop . Phys. Rev. D 62 , 096008 ( 2000 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0004052 141. C. Gattringer , P.E.L. Rakow , A. Schafer , W. Soldner, Chiral symmetry restoration and the Z(3) sectors of QCD . Phys. Rev. D 66 , 054502 ( 2002 ). arXiv:hep-lat/0202009 142. H. Kouno , T. Makiyama , T. Sasaki , Y. Sakai , M. Yahiro , Confinement and Z3 symmetry in three-flavor QCD . J. Phys. G 40 , 095003 ( 2013 ). arXiv: 1301 .4013 [hep-ph] 143. I.I. Kogan , A. Kovner , M.A. Shifman , Phys. Rev. D 59 , 016001 ( 1999 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9807286 144. C. Rosenzweig , J. Schechter , C.G. Trahern, Is the effective lagrangian for QCD a sigma model? Phys. Rev. D 21 , 3388 ( 1980 ) 145. C. Rosenzweig , A. Salomone , J. Schechter , A pseudoscalar glueball, the axial anomaly and the mixing problem for pseudoscalar mesons . Phys. Rev. D 24 , 2545 ( 1981 ) 146. C. Rosenzweig , A. Salomone , J. Schechter , How does a pseudoscalar glueball come unglued? Nucl . Phys. B 206 , 12 ( 1982 ). Erratum: [Nucl. Phys. B 207 , 546 ( 1982 )] 147. A.A. Migdal , M.A. Shifman , Dilaton effective lagrangian in gluodynamics . Phys. Lett. 114B , 445 ( 1982 ) 148. H. Gomm , J. Schechter , Goldstone Bosons and scalar gluonium . Phys. Lett. 158B , 449 ( 1985 ) 149. R. Gomm , P. Jain , R. Johnson , J. Schechter, Scale anomaly and the scalars . Phys. Rev. D 33 , 801 ( 1986 ) 150. E. Witten, Current algebra theorems for the U(1) Goldstone boson . Nucl. Phys. B 156 , 269 ( 1979 ) 151. G. Veneziano, U(1) without instantons . Nucl. Phys. B 159 , 213 ( 1979 ) 152. D. Parganlija , Quarkonium phenomenology in vacuum . arXiv:1208 .0204 [hep-ph] 153. F. Giacosa , Dynamical generation and dynamical reconstruction . Phys. Rev. D 80 , 074028 ( 2009 ). arXiv: 0903 .4481 [hep-ph] 154. D. Parganlija , Scalar mesons and FAIR . J. Phys. Conf. Ser . 426 , 012019 ( 2013 ). arXiv: 1211 .4804 [hep-ph] 155. D. Parganlija , Mesons, PANDA and the scalar glueball . J. Phys. Conf. Ser . 503 , 012010 ( 2014 ). arXiv: 1312 .2830 [hep-ph] 156. R.K. Carnegie , R.J. Cashmore , W.M. Dunwoodie , T.A. Lasinski , D.W.G. Leith, Q1 (1290) and Q2 (1400) decay rates and their SU(3) implications . Phys. Lett. B 68 , 287 ( 1977 ) 157. J.L. Rosner , P wave mesons with one heavy quark . Comm. Nucl. Part Phys . 16 , 109 ( 1986 ) 158. N. Isgur , M.B. Wise , Weak decays of heavy mesons in the static quark approximation . Phys. Lett. B 232 , 113 ( 1989 ) 159. H.G. Blundell, S. Godfrey , B. Phelps , Properties of the strange axial mesons in the relativized quark model . Phys. Rev. D 53 , 3712 ( 1996 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9510245 160. F.E. Close , A. Kirk , Implications of the Glueball-qqbar filter on the 1++ nonet . Z. Phys . C 76 , 469 ( 1997 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9706543 161. L. Burakovsky , J.T. Goldman , Towards resolution of the enigmas of P wave meson spectroscopy . Phys. Rev. D 57 , 2879 ( 1998 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9703271 162. D.M. Li , H. Yu , Q.X. Shen , Is f1(1420) the partner of f1(1285) in the (3)P(1) q anti-q nonet? Chin . Phys. Lett . 17 , 558 ( 2000 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0001011 163. D.M. Asner et al. [ CLEO Collaboration], Resonance structure of τ − → K −π +π −ν/τ decays . Phys. Rev. D 62 , 072006 ( 2000 ). arXiv:hep-ex/0004002 164. W.S. Carvalho , A.S. de Castro , A. C.B. Antunes , SU(3) mixing for excited mesons . J. Phys. A 35 , 7585 ( 2002 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0207372 165. H.Y. Cheng, Hadronic charmed meson decays involving axial vector mesons . Phys. Rev. D 67 , 094007 ( 2003 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0301198 166. T. Barnes, N. Black , P.R. Page , Strong decays of strange quarkonia . Phys. Rev. D 68 , 054014 ( 2003 ). arXiv:nucl-th/0208072 167. D.M.B. Li , B. Ma , Y.X. Li , Q.K. Yao , H. Yu , Meson spectrum in Regge phenomenology . Eur. Phys. J. C 37 , 323 ( 2004 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0408214 168. J. Vijande , F. Fernandez , A. Valcarce , Constituent quark model study of the meson spectra . J. Phys. G 31 , 481 ( 2005 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0411299 169. D.M. Li , B. Ma , H. Yu, Regarding the axial-vector mesons . Eur. Phys. J. A 26 , 141 ( 2005 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0509215 170. D.M. Li , Z. Li , Strange axial-vector mesons mixing angle . Eur. Phys. J. A 28 , 369 ( 2006 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0606297 171. H. Hatanaka , K.C. Yang , B -> K(1) gamma decays in the lightcone QCD Sum rules . Phys. Rev. D 77 , 094023 ( 2008 ). [ Erratumibid . D 78 , 059902 ( 2008 ) ] . arXiv: 0804 .3198 [hep-ph] 172. H.Y. Cheng, C.K. Chua , B to V , A, T tensor form factors in the covariant light-front approach: implications on radiative B decays . Phys. Rev. D 81 , 114006 ( 2010 ). [Erratum-ibid. D 82 , 059904 ( 2010 ) ] . arXiv: 0909 .4627 [hep-ph] 173. K.-C. Yang , 1 ++ Nonet singlet-octet mixing angle, strange quark mass, and strange quark condensate . Phys. Rev. D 84 , 034035 ( 2011 ). arXiv: 1011 .6113 [hep-ph] 174. H.-Y. Cheng, Revisiting axial-vector meson mixing . Phys. Lett. B 707 , 116 ( 2012 ). arXiv: 1110 .2249 [hep-ph] 175. T. Feldmann, P. Kroll , B. Stech , Mixing and decay constants of pseudoscalar mesons . Phys. Rev. D 58 , 114006 ( 1998 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9802409 176. T. Feldmann, P. Kroll , B. Stech , Mixing and decay constants of pseudoscalar mesons: the sequel . Phys. Lett. B 449 , 339 ( 1999 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9812269 177. T. Feldmann, Quark structure of pseudoscalar mesons . Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 15 , 159 ( 2000 ). arXiv:hep-ph/9907491 178. T. Feldmann, P. Kroll , Mixing of pseudoscalar mesons . Phys. Scrip . T 99 , 13 ( 2002 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0201044 179. M.S. Bhagwat , L. Chang , Y.-X. Liu , C.D. Roberts , P.C. Tandy , Flavour symmetry breaking and meson masses . Phys. Rev. C 76 , 045203 ( 2007 ). arXiv: 0708 .1118 [nucl-th] 180. A. Kupsc , What is interesting in eta and eta-prime Meson Decays? AIP Conf . Proc. 950 , 165 ( 2007 ). arXiv: 0709 .0603 [nucl-ex] 181. F. Ambrosino , A. Antonelli , M. Antonelli , F. Archilli , P. Beltrame , G. Bencivenni, S. Bertolucci , C. Bini et al., A global fit to determine the pseudoscalar mixing angle and the gluonium content of the eta-prime meson . JHEP 0907 , 105 ( 2009 ). arXiv: 0906 .3819 [hep-ph] 182. G. Amelino-Camelia , F. Archilli , D. Babusci , G. Bencivenni, J. Bernabeu , R.A. Bertlmann , D.R. Boito , D.R. Boito et al., Physics with the KLOE-2 experiment at the upgraded DAφNE . Eur. Phys. J. C 68 , 619 ( 2010 ). arXiv: 1003 .3868 [hep-ex] 183. M.C. Chang , Y.C. Duh , J.Y. Lin , I. Adachi , K. Adamczyk , H. Aihara , D.M. Asner , T. Aushev et al., Measurement of B0 → J /ψ η( ) and constraint on the η − η mixing angle . Phys. Rev. D 85 , 091102 ( 2012 ). arXiv: 1203 .3399 [hep-ex] 184. F. Giacosa , Spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry, and eventually of parity, in a sigma-model with two Mexican hats . Eur. Phys. J. C 65 , 449 ( 2010 ). arXiv: 0907 .3519 [hep-ph] 185. D.V. Bugg , I. Scott , B.S. Zou , V.V. Anisovich , A.V. Sarantsev , T.H. Burnett , S. Sutlief , Further amplitude analysis of J / psi -> gamma (pi+ pi- pi+ pi-) . Phys. Lett. B 353 , 378 ( 1995 ) 186. J.Z. Bai et al. [BES Collaboration], Partial wave analysis of J / psi to gamma (pi+ pi- pi+ pi-) . Phys. Lett. B 472 , 207 ( 2000 ). arXiv:hep-ex/9909040 187. J.P. Lees et al. [BaBar Collaboration], Measurement of the I=1/2 K π S-wave amplitude from Dalitz plot analyses of ηc → K K¯ π in two-photon interactions . Phys. Rev. D 93 , 012005 ( 2016 ). arXiv: 1511 .02310 [hep-ex] 188. A.V. Anisovich et al., [Crystal Barrel Collaboration], Anti-p p -> pi0 eta and pi0 eta' from 600 -MeV/c to 1940-MeV/c. Phys. Lett. B 452 , 173 ( 1999 ) 189. D.V. Bugg , Four sorts of meson . Phys. Rept . 397 , 257 ( 2004 ). arXiv:hep-ex/0412045 190. S.S. Afonin , Towards understanding spectral degeneracies in nonstrange hadrons. Part I. Mesons as hadron strings versus phenomenology . Mod. Phys. Lett. A 22 , 1359 ( 2007 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0701089 191. S.S. Afonin , Properties of new unflavored mesons below 2.4-GeV . Phys. Rev. C 76 , 015202 ( 2007 ). arXiv: 0707 .0824 [hep-ph] 192. M.G. Rath et al., The K 0(s) K 0(s) π 0 system produced in π − p interactions at 21 .4-GeV/c. Phys. Rev. D 40 , 693 ( 1989 ) 193. G. S. Adams et al. [ E852 Collaboration], Observation of pseudoscalar and axial vector resonances in pi - p -> K+ K- pi0 n at 18-GeV. Phys. Lett. B 516 , 264 ( 2001 ). arXiv:hep-ex/0107042 194. Z. Bai et al., [MARK-III Collaboration], Partial wave analysis of J / psi -> gamma K0(s) K+- pi-+ . Phys. Rev. Lett . 65 , 2507 ( 1990 ) 195. J.E. Augustin et al., [DM2 Collaboration], Partial wave analysis of DM2 data in the eta (1430) energy range . Phys Rev. D 46 , 1951 ( 1992 ) 196. C. Cicalo et al., [OBELIX Collaboration] , Evidence for two pseudoscalar states in the 1.4-GeV to 1.5-GeV mass region . Phys. Lett. B 462 , 453 ( 1999 ) 197. F. Nichitiu et al., [OBELIX Collaboration] , Study of the K+ Kpi+ pi- pi0 final state in anti-proton annihilation at rest in gaseous hydrogen at NTP with the OBELIX spectrometer . Phys. Lett. B 545 , 261 ( 2002 ) 198. C. Edwards et al., Identification of a Pseudoscalar state at 1440 MeV IN Jpsi radiative decays. Observation of a pseudoscalar state at 1440-MeV in J/psi radiative decays . Phys. Rev. Lett . 49 , 259 ( 1982 ). Erratum: [Phys. Rev. Lett . 50 , 219 ( 1983 )] 199. J.Z. Bai et al., [BES Collaboration], Partial wave analysis of J / psi -> gamma (K+ K- pi0) . Phys Lett. B 440 , 217 ( 1998 ) 200. J.Z. Bai et al. [BES Collaboration], Partial wave analysis of J / psi -> gamma (K+- K0(S) pi-+). Phys. Lett. B 476 , 25 ( 2000 ). arXiv:hep-ex/ 0002007 201. D.V. Bugg , Data on J /Psi -> gamma(K+- K0(S) pi- +) and gamma(eta pi+ pi- ). arXiv:0907 .3015 [hep-ex] 202. L. Faddeev , A.J. Niemi , U. Wiedner, Glueballs, closed flux tubes and eta(1440) . Phys. Rev. D 70 , 114033 ( 2004 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0308240 203. E. Klempt , A. Zaitsev , Glueballs, hybrids, multiquarks. Experimental facts versus QCD inspired concepts . Phys. Rept . 454 , 1 ( 2007 ). arXiv: 0708 .4016 [hep-ph] 204. A.H. Fariborz , R. Jora , J. Schechter , Toy model for two chiral nonets . Phys. Rev. D 72 , 034001 ( 2005 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0506170 205. A.H. Fariborz , R. Jora , J. Schechter , Model for light scalars in QCD . Phys. Rev. D 76 , 014011 ( 2007 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0612200 206. A.H. Fariborz , J. Schechter , S. Zarepour , M. Zebarjad , Chiral nonet mixing in η → ηπ π decay . Phys. Rev. D 90 ( 3 ), 033009 ( 2014 ). arXiv: 1407 .3870 [hep-ph] 207. A.H. Fariborz , R. Jora , J. Schechter , M.N. Shahid , Probing pseudoscalar and scalar mesons in semileptonic decays of Ds+, D + and D0 . Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 30 ( 02 ), 1550012 ( 2015 ). arXiv: 1407 .7176 [hep-ph] 208. S.M. Zebarjad , S. Zarepour , Two-body decay widths of lowest lying and next-to-lowest lying scalar and pseudoscalar mesons in generalized linear sigma model . Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 30 ( 22 ), 1550134 ( 2015 ). arXiv: 1506 .05575 [hep-ph] 209. H.Y. Cheng, H.N. Li , K.F. Liu , Pseudoscalar glueball mass from eta - eta-prime - G mixing . Phys. Rev. D 79 , 014024 ( 2009 ). arXiv: 0811 .2577 [hep-ph] 210. D.V. Bugg , A Glueball component in f(0)(1790) . arXiv:hep-ph/0603018 211. P. Bicudo , S.R. Cotanch , F.J. Llanes-Estrada , D.G. Robertson , The BES f0( 1810 ) : a new glueball candidate . Eur. Phys. J. C 52 , 363 ( 2007 ). arXiv:hep-ph/0602172 212. D. Parganlija , Glueballs and vector mesons at NICA . Eur. Phys. J. A 52 ( 8 ), 229 ( 2016 ). arXiv: 1601 .05328 [hep-ph]


This is a preview of a remote PDF: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1140%2Fepjc%2Fs10052-017-4962-y.pdf

Denis Parganlija, Francesco Giacosa. Excited scalar and pseudoscalar mesons in the extended linear sigma model, The European Physical Journal C, 2017, 450, DOI: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-4962-y