arxiv: v3 [hep-ph] 10 Dec 2009

Transcription

1 SU(3) mass-splittings of heavy-aryons in QCD R.M. Aluquerque a S. Narison M. Nielsen a a Instituto de Física Universidade de São Paulo C.P São Paulo SP Brazil. Laoratoire de Physique Théorique et Astroparticules CNRS-INP3 & Université de Montpellier II Case 7 Place Eugène Bataillon Montpellier Cedex 5 France. arxiv:94.377v3 hep-ph Dec 9 We extract directly (for the first time) the charmed (C = ) and ottom (B = ) heavy-aryons (spin / and 3/) masssplittings due to SU(3) reaking using doule ratios of QCD spectral sum rules (QSSR) in full QCD which are less sensitive to the exact value and definition of the heavy quark mass to the perturative radiative corrections and to the QCD continuum contriutions than the simple ratios commonly used for determining the heavy aryon masses. Noticing that most of the masssplittings are mainly controlled y the ratio κ ss / dd of the condensate we extract this ratio y allowing σ deviation from the oserved masses of the Ξ c and of the Ω c. We otain: κ =.74(3) which improves the existing estimates: κ =.7() from light hadrons. Using this value we deduce M Ω = 678.5(7.4) MeV which agrees with the recent CDF data ut disagrees y.4σ with the one from D. Predictions of the Ξ Q and of the spectra of spin 3/ aryons containing one or two strange quark are given in Tale. Predictions of the hyperfine splittings Ω Q Ω Q and Ξ Q Ξ Q are also given in Tale 3. Starting for a general choice of the interpolating currents for the spin / aryons our analysis favours the optimal value of the mixing angle ( /5 ) found from light and non-strange heavy aryons.. Introduction QSSR à la SVZ 3 has een used earlier in full QCD 456 and in HQET 7 for understanding heavy aryons charmed (cqq) ottom (qq) doule charm (ccq) doule ottom (q) and (cq) masses. Recent oservations at Tevatron of families of -aryons 89 and of the Ω c aryon y Baar and Belle have stimulated different recent theoretical activities for understanding their nature QSSR results are in quite good agreement with recent experimental findings ut with relatively large uncertainties. The inaccuracy of these results is mainly due to the value of the heavy quark mass and of its amiguous definition when working to lowest order (LO) in the radiative α s corrections in full QCD and HQET where the heavy quark mass is the main driving term in the QCD expression of the aryon two-point correlator used in the QSSR analysis. Another source of uncertainty is the effect of the QCD continuum which parametrizes the higher aryon masses contriutions to the spectral function and the ad hoc choices of interpolating aryon currents used in different literatures. In this paper we shall concentrate on the analysis of the heavy aryons mass-splittings due to SU(3) reaking using doule ratios (DR) of QCD spectral sum rules (QSSR) which are less sensitive to the exact value and definition of the heavy quark mass and to the QCD continuum contriutions than the simple ratios used in the literature to determine the asolute value of heavy aryon masses. In this letter we extend the previous analysis in 45 y including the new SU(3) reaking terms: m s and the ratio of the condensate κ ss / dd. For the spin / aryons and following Ref. 4 we addresses: rma@if.usp.r (R.M. Aluquerque) snarison@yahoo.fr (S. Narison) mnielsen@if.usp.r (M. Nielsen). Corresponding author. Radiative corrections to the heavy aryon correlators have een evaluated in 6 ut for a particular choice of the interpolating currents. work with the lowest dimension general currents: η ΞQ = ǫ ac (q T a Cγ 5 s ) + (q T a Cs )γ 5 Qc η ΛQ = η ΞQ (s q) η ΩQ = ǫ ac (s T a Cγ 5 Q ) + (s T a CQ )γ 5 sc η ΣQ = η ΩQ (s q) η Ξ Q = ǫ ac (s T a Cγ 5Q )q c + (q T a Cγ 5Q )s c + ( (s T a CQ )γ 5 q c + (q T a CQ )γ 5 s c ) () where we use standard notations; is a priori an aritrary mixing parameter. Its value has een found to e: = /5 () in the case of light aryons and in the range 456:.5.5 (3) for non-strange heavy aryons which do not favour the Ioffe choice =. The corresponding two-point correlator reads: S(q) = i d 4 x e iqx T η Q (x)η Q () ˆqF + F (4) where F and F are two invariant functions. For the spin 3/ aryons we follow Ref. 5 and work with the interpolating currents: η µ Ξ = (q T Cγ µ Q)s + (s T Cγ µ Q)q + (q T Cγ µ s)q Q 3 = η µ Ξ (q s) Q η µ Ω Q η µ Σ Q = η µ Ξ Q (s q) (5) where an anti-symmetrization over colour indices is understood. The normalization in Eq. (5) is chosen in such

2 a way that in all cases one gets the same perturative contriution. The corresponding two-point correlator reads: S µν (q) = i d 4 x e iqx T η µ Q (x)ην Q () g µν (ˆqF + F ) +... (6) In the following the contriution of the heavy quark condensate m Q QQ will not appear5 as it is cancelled y a part of the gluon condensate contriution due to the heavy quark relation m Q QQ + (/π) α s G 3. Again due to this relation the one due to m s QQ is numerically negligile ecause of the extra (/π) loop and /M Q factors compared to the one due to m s qq and due to the four-quark condensate contriutions. The same loop factor also numerically suppresses the contriutions of α s G and m s α s G compared to the other ones. These negligile SU(3) reaking contriutions will not e considered in the following.. The spin / two-point correlator in QCD T he Λ Q (Qqq) and Ξ Q (Qsq) aryons The expression for Λ Q has een (first) otained in the chiral limit m q = in 5 and the one of Ξ Q including SU(3) reaking in 4. One can notice that due to the expression of the current the m s corrections vanish to leading order in α s for the perturative term while the D = 6 condensates for the SU() case of 5 needs the following replacement in the SU(3) case: ρ qq ρ qq ss (7) where ρ = 3 indicates the violation of the four-quark vacuum saturation 3. The additional SU(3) reaking corrections for the Ξ Q are 4: - F : Im ss = ms 4 π ( x ) ( + ) ss { mix = ms 5 π m Q q } - F : qgq ( ) ( ) qq sgs ( + ) 6 + (8) Im ss = msmq ( x) ( + ) qq 3 π ( ) ss { mix = msmq 5 π m Q sgs ( ) q 6 } qgq ( + ) + (9) where x m Q /s and sgs g sσ µνλ a /G µν a s. T he Σ Q (Qqq) and Ω Q (Qss) aryons The expression for Σ Q has een (first) otained in 4. The additionnal SU(3) reaking terms for the Ω Q are: - F : Im pert = 3msm3 Q ( ) 8 π 3 x + 3 6x + x + 6ln x Im ss = 3ms ss ( + ) ( x ) 6 π mix = ms sgs 7 3π m Q ( ) q 6( + ) dα( α) ( α)q m Q D=6 = msmqρ ss ( ) 8(m Q q ). () - F : Im pert = 3msm4 Q 8 π 3 ( ) ( x 6 x x 6ln x ) Im ss = 3msmQ ss ( ) ( x) 5 π mix = msmq sgs 7 3π m Q ( ) q 3( ) dα m Q ( α)q D=6 = msρ ss ( ) 8(m Q + m Q q ) m Q q () T he Σ Q (Qqq) and Ξ Q (Qsq) aryons The expression for the Ξ Q tends to the one of the Σ Q in the chiral limit m qs and is very similar with one of the Ω Q. The SU(3) reaking corrections read: F : Im pert = 3m sm 3 Q 9 π 3 ( ) x + 3 6x + x + 6 lnx Im F ss = 3m Q( ss + qq ) 6 ( )( x) π Im ss = m s ( x ) 7 ( ) qq π +( ) ss

3 3 ( sgs + qgq ) Im F mix = m Q 8 ( ) ( 3x 6x ) π mix = m s 8 3π m Q ( ) q sgs 6( ) qgq + 3( ) qgq 3( ) sgs α dα ( α)q m Q F D=6 = ρ ss qq ( ) 4 m Q q D=6 = m sm Q ρ ss qq 6 (m Q q ) () F : Im pert = 3m sm 4 Q 9 π 3 ( ) x x 6 lnx x Im F ss = 3m Q ( ss + qq ) 6 π ( ( )x x) Im ss = m sm Q 6 π ( x) ( ) ss ( ) qq ( sgs + qgq ) Im F mix = 8 ( )(6 + x) π mix = m sm Q 8 3π m Q 5( ) sgs q 6( ) qgq + 3( ) sgs + 6( ) dα qgq ( α)q F D=6 = m Qρ ss qq 4 m Q ( ) m Q q D=6 = m sρ ss qq 6 m Q q + m Q m Q q. (3) We have checked the existing results in 4 otained in the chiral limit and all our previous results agree with these ones. 3. The spin 3/ two-point correlator in QCD The QCD expression of the two-point correlator for the Σ Q (Qqq) has een (first) otained in the chiral limit m ud = to LO in α s and up to the contriutions of the D = 6 condensates in 4. In this letter we extend the previous analysis y including the new SU(3) reaking m s correction terms and consider the SU(3) reaking of the ratio of quark condensates ss qq like we did for the spin / case. T he Σ Q (Qqq) and Ξ Q (Qsq) aryons The additionnal terms and replacement due to SU(3) reaking for the Ξ Q compared with the one of the Σ Q (Qqq) in 5 are: - F : Im pert = msm3 Q 48π 3 x + 3 6x + x + 6 lnx ImF ss = mq qq + ss ( x) 6π Im ss = ms π ImF mix = 7M 3 3 π mix = msm 44π ( x ) qq ( x 3 ) ss x qq + ss m Q qq 9 ss m Q + q m Q dα( α) ( α)q ( 3α) ss + qq F D=6 = 4 ρ ss qq 9 m Q q D=6 = 9 mqms ρ ss qq ( m Q q ). (4) - F : Im pert = msm4 Q 3 9π 3 x 6 x + + x ln x ( ImF ss = m Q ) qq + ss 8π x 3 + x Im ss = msmq π ( x) 6 qq ( + x) ss ImF mix = M 8π mix = msmqm 7π qq qq + ss ( + 3 ) 4 x (3 qq ss ) 3 m Q + q m Q F D=6 = m Qρ ss qq 3 m Q q dα ( α)q D=6 = m sm Qρ ss qq 9 (m Q (5) q ) where x m Q /s and sgs g sσ µνλ a /G µν a s M ss.

4 4 T he Ω Q (Qss) aryons Compared with the expression of the Σ Q (Qqq) in 5 the additionnal SU(3) reaking terms for the Ω Q are: - F : Im pert = msm3 Q 4π 3 x + 3 6x + x + 6ln x Im ss = ms ss ( x + x 3) 6π mix = msm ss 7π 3 m Q q + dα( α)( 3α) m Q ( α)q D=6 = 4 m Qm sρ ss ( 9 m Q q ). (6) - F : Im pert = msm4 Q 96π 3 3 x 6 x + + x ln x Im ss = 5 msmq ss 6x + x 6π mix = msmqm ss 36π m Q 6 m Q + q dα ( α)q D=6 = 4 m sm Qρ ss 9 (m Q q ). (7) We have checked the existing results in 5 otained in the chiral and SU() limits and agree with these ones. 4. Form of the sum rules and QCD inputs We parametrize the spectral function using the standard duality ansatz: one resonance + QCD continuum. The QCD continuum starts from a threshold t c and comes from the discontinuity of the QCD diagrams. Transferring its contriution to the QCD side of the sum rule one otains the finite energy Laplace/Borel sum rules: λ ( ) B M ( ) q B q e M B ( ) τ tc q = ds e sτ π ImF (s) λ B q e M B q ( ) τ tc = ds e sτ π ImF (s) (8) and M B ( ) q where τ /M is the sum rule variale and λ ( ) B q are the heavy aryon residue and mass. Notice that within our choice of the interpolating currents we may have a contamination due to the negative parity states contriution which we can quantify from the ratio of sum rules associated to (M Q F F ) and (M Q F +F ) 7. We shall check (a posteriori) that this ratio is negligile at the staility regions. On the other the oserved negative parity states are systematically heavier than the positive ones such that they can e legitimately included into the QCD continuum contriution. Consistently we also take into account the SU(3) reaking at the quark and continuum threshold: tq SU(3) ( SU() m Q ) + mq + m q tc SU(3) ( t c SU() t c ) + mq + m q (9) where q q or/and s depending on the channel. m qi are the running lighuark masses. m Q is the heavy quark mass which we shall take in the range covered y the running and on-shell mass (see Tale ) ecause of its amiguous definition when working to lowest order of perturative QCD. One can estimate the aryon masses from the following ratios: R q i = tc ds s e sτ ImF i (s) tc ds e sτ ImF i (s) i = R q = tc ds e sτ ImF (s) tc ds e sτ ImF (s) () where at the τ-staility point : M B ( ) q R q i Rq. () These quantities have een used in the literature for getting the aryon masses and lead to a typical uncertainty of 5-% 456. In order to circumvent these prolems we work with the doule ratio of sum rules (DR)3: i R s i R d i Rs R d. () which take directly into account the SU(3) reaking effects. These quantities are oviously less sensitive to the choice of the heavy quark masses to the perturative radiative corrections and to the value of the continuum threshold than the simple ratios R i and R 3. Analogous DR quantities have een used successfully (for the first time) in 3 for studying the mass ratio of the ++ / + and ++ / B-mesons in 4 for extracting f Bs /f B in 5 for estimating the D K/D π semi-leptonic form factors and in 6 for extracting the strange quark mass from the e + e I = data. For the numerical analysis whe shall introduce the RGI quantities ˆµ and ˆm q 7: ˆm q m q (τ) = ( log τλ) / β qq (τ) = ˆµ 3 ( ) / β q log τλ qgq (τ) = ˆµ 3 ( ) / 3βM q log τλ (3) More accurate results quoted in the recent QSSR literature 4 5 do not take into account the uncertainties due to the heavy quark mass definitions and to the aritrary choice of the aryonic interpolating currents. 3 One may also work with the doule ratio of moments M n ased on different derivatives a = 3. However in this case the OPE is expressed as an expansion in /m Q which for a LO expression of the QCD correlator is more affected y the definition of the heavy quark mass to e used.

5 .4 5 where β = (/)( n/3) is the first coefficient of the β function for n flavours. We have used the quark mass and condensate anomalous dimensions reviewed in. We shall use the QCD parameters in Tale. At the scale where we shall work and using the paramaters in the tale we deduce: ρ =. ±. (4) which controls the deviation from the factorization of the four-quark condensates. We shall not include the /q term discussed in 89which is consistent with the LO approximation used here as the latter has een motivated for a phenomenological parametrization of the larger order terms of the QCD series Tale QCD input parameters. For the heavy quark masses we use the range spanned y the running MS mass m Q(M Q) and the on-shell mass from QSSR compiled in page 663 of the ook in... Parameters Values Ref. Λ (353 ± 5) MeV 39 ˆm d (6. ±.5) MeV 39 ˆm s (4.5 ±.8) MeV 39 ˆµ d (63 ± 7) MeV 3 κ ss / dd (.7 ±.) 3 M (.8 ±.) GeV 3 α sg (6.8 ±.3) GeV ρα s dd (4.5 ±.3) 4 GeV 6 3 m c (.8.47) GeV 3369 m ( ) GeV κ ss / dd from the spin / aryons As a preliminary step of the analysis we check the different results otained in full QCD and in the chiral limit 45: M Σc = (.45.94) GeV M Σ = ( ) GeV M Σc M Λc 7 MeV M Σ M Λ 63 MeV (5) which we confirm. However we have not tried to improve these results for the asolute values of the masses due to the amiguity in the definition of the heavy quark mass input mentioned earlier at LO which induces large errors. Ξc(csq)/Λ c (cqq) Optimal choice of the currents: we start from the general choice of interpolating currents given in Eq. (). We study the -ehaviour of the predictions in Fig. a) y fixing τ=.35 GeV and t c = 5 GeV. The result presents -staility around = which is in the range given in Eq. (3) otained from light aryons and heavy non-strange aryons. We consider this value as the optimal choice of the interpolating currents. However this generous range does not favour the ad hoc choice around Figure. Ξ c/λ c: a) -ehaviour of the doule ratio of sum rules (DR) given τ =.35 GeV and t c = 5 GeV : r ds dashed-dotted (lue) dotted (green) continuous (red); ) τ-ehaviour for = and t c = 5 GeV ; c) t c-ehaviour of the DR given = and τ =.35 GeV ; We have used κ =.7. used in the existing literature 45. Therefore in this channel we shall work with:. (6) τ stailities: we show in Fig. ) the τ ehaviour of the different DR at fixed tc = 5 GeV and =. t c stailities and choice of the sum rules: fixing = from the previous analysis we study in Fig. c) the t c - ehaviour of predictions. Among the three sum rules we retain which is the most stale in t c and then less affected y the higher state contriutions. Results: From this sum rule we can deduce the DR: Ξ c =.8()()(6)()(.5) (7) where the value κ =.7 has een taken. We have considered the mean value of from t c = to GeV. The errors are due respectively to the values of t c τ = (.35 ±.5) GeV m c m s and the factorization of the four-quark condensate ρ. The errors due to and some other SU(3) symmetric QCD parameters are negligile. The large error due to κ compiled in Tale is not included in Eqs. (7). Using as input the data9: Λ c = (86.46 ±.4) MeV (8) and adding the different errors quadratically one can deduce: M Ξc = (469.4 ± 6.6) MeV (9)

6 6 which agrees nicely with the data 9: Ξ c = (467.9 ±.4) MeV. (3) For improving the existing value of κ we allow a σ deviation of the DR prediction from the experimental value. In this way we deduce: κ =.7(5). (3) (qq) Ξ(sq)/Λ We repeat the previous analysis in the case of the - quark. The analysis of the ratio of sum rules shows similar curves than for the charm case except the ovious change of scale. Using we illustrate the analysis using κ =.74. In this way we otain: Ξ =.3(.5)(.5)(.5)(.5)(.5) (3) where the errors come from t c from 45 to 8 GeV τ = (.8±.5) GeV m m s and the factorization of the four-quark condensate ρ. From this result and using: Λ = (56. ±.6) MeV (33) we deduce: M Ξ = (5789 ± 6) MeV (34) which agrees quite well with the data 9: Ξ = (579.4 ± 3.) MeV. (35) Allowing a σ deviation from the data we deduce: κ =.738(3). (36) Ωc(css)/Σ c (cqq) We do an analysis similar to the one in the previous section. The result for the c-quark is shown in Fig. One can notice that the optimal choice of the current is the same as in Eq. () which we fix to the value =. One can notice from Fig a) and Fig ) that only presents simultaneously τ and stailities from which we extract the optimal result. Using κ =.78 the final result from is: Ω c =.(.4)(.3)(6.4)(.). (37) The errors are due respectively to the values of τ = (..) GeV m c m s and the factorization of the four-quark condensate ρ. The one due to t c from to GeV is negligile. Using this previous result together with the experimental averaged value 9: Σ c = (453.6 ±.5) MeV (38) one can deduce: M Ωc = 76.9(4.5) MeV (39) in good agreement with the data: Ω c = (697.5 ±.6) MeV. (4) Now we study the influence of κ on the mass prediction. Allowing a σ deviation from the experimental mass we deduce the estimate: κ =.775(5). (4) Figure. Ω c/σ c: a) τ-ehaviour of DR given = and tc = 4 GeV : r ds dashed-dotted (lue) r ds dotted (green) r ds continuous (red); ) -ehaviour of the DR given τ =.6 GeV (τstaility of r ds) and tc = 4 GeV ; c) t c-ehaviour of r ds given = and τ = GeV. value of κ Final Taking the (arithmetic) mean value of κ ss / dd from the different channels Ξ c Eqs. (3) and (36) and Ω c Eq. (4) we deduce: κ =.738(9) (4) which we can consider as an improved estimate of this quantity compared with the existing one from the light mesons 3 and aryons : κ =.7(). (43) 6. The mass of the Ω (ss) We repeat the previous analysis of the Ω c (css) in the case of the -quark. The curves present the same qualitative ehaviour as in the case of the charm where only r ds survives the different tests of stailities. The optimal value is taken at the extremum τ = (.5 ±.5) GeV and in the t c staility region. Then we otain: Ω =.455()()(4)(3)(37). (44) The errors are due respectively to the values of τ m m s and the factorization of the four-quark condensate ρ. The last error is due to κ. The one due to t c in the t c staility region is negligile. Using this value together with the experimental averaged value 9: Σ = 58. MeV (45) one can deduce the result: M Ω = 675.6(37.) MeV (46)

7 Figure 3. Ω /Σ : a) τ-ehaviour of DR given = and tc = 6 GeV : r ds dashed-dotted (lue) r ds dotted (green) r ds continuous (red); ) -ehaviour of the DR given τ =.5 GeV (τstaility of r ds) and tc = 6 GeV ; c) t c-ehaviour of r ds given = and τ =.5 GeV. We have used κ =.738. which we compile in Tale. This result agrees within the errors with the one from the CDF collaoration 37: 654.4(6.9) MeV ut disagrees y aout.4 σ with the D value 38: MΩ D = 665.(3.) MeV given in the same tale. 7. The mass of the Ξ c (Qsq) We do a similar analysis for the Ξ c which we show in Fig. 4 where we have only retained the r ds which satisfies all staility tests. We otain: =.43()()(6)()(3)(7) (47) Ξ c The errors are due respectively to the values of τ = (.9 ±.) GeV m c m s ρ = (.4 ±.) and κ. Using the experimental value of M Σc we otain: M Ξ c = 559(5) MeV (48) which we compile in Tale. Our prediction is in good agreement (σ) with the data 9: Ξ c = 576(3.) MeV. (49) A similar analysis is done for Ξ which is sumarized in Fig. 5. One can notice that here the -staility occurs at in this channel and there is no sharp selection etween r ds and r ds. We otain the mean from rds and r ds: Ξ =.4(3.4)(5)(.7)(.5)()(.5)(3) (5) where the sources of the errors are τ = (.5 ±.) GeV m m s ρ = (. ±.) and κ. The last Figure 4. Ξ c /Σc: a) τ-ehaviour of DR given =.4 and tc = 4 GeV : r ds dashed-dotted (lue) r ds dotted (green) r ds continuous (red); ) -ehaviour of the DR given τ =.9 GeV and t c = 4 GeV ; c) t c-ehaviour of r ds given =.4 and τ = GeV. We have used κ =.74. error comes from the choice of the sum rules. Using the experimental value of M Σ we predict: M Ξ = 5893(4) MeV (5) which we compile in Tale. 8. The masses of the spin 3/ aryons As a preliminary step of the analysis we check the different results otained in 5: M Σ c = (.5.9) GeV M Σ M Σ = 3.3 GeV (5) c and confirm them. However like in the spin / case we have not tried to improve these (old) results. Ξ c (csq)/σ c (cqq) We repeat the previous DR analysis for the case of the Ξ c. We show in Fig. 6a) the τ-ehaviour of the mass predictions for t c = 4 GeV. From this analysis we do not retain which differs completely from r ds and r ds while we do not consider r ds which is τ-instale. We show in Fig. 6) the t c -ehaviour of r ds given τ =.9 GeV. We deduce the optimal value: rξ sd =.49()()(4)(4)(7.5)(). (53) c The errors are due respectively to the values of τ = (.9 ±.) GeV m c m s ρ (factorization of the fourquark condensate) and κ ss / dd =.74±.3. The

8 Figure 5. Ξ /Σ : a) τ-ehaviour of DR given = and tc = 6 GeV : r ds dashed-dotted (lue) r ds dotted (green) r ds continuous (red); ) -ehaviour of the DR given τ =.5 GeV and t c = 6 GeV ; c) t c-ehaviour of r ds given = and τ =.5 GeV. We have used κ =.74. ones due to some other parameters are negligile. Using the data 9: Σ c = (57.97 ±.7) MeV (54) and adding the different errors quadratically we deduce the results in Tale. Ξ (sq)/σ (qq) We extend the analysis to the case of the ottom quark. The curves are qualitatively similar to the charm case. We deduce: rξ sd =.()()(.5)()(). (55) The sources of the errors are the same as for the Ξ c where here τ = (.5 ±.5) GeV and m c replaced y m.the ones due to some other parameters are negligile. Using the averaged data 9: Σ = (583.7 ± 6.5) MeV (56) and adding the different errors quadratically we deduce: M Ξ = (596 ± ) MeV (57) which we report in Tale. Ω c (css)/σ c (cqq) We pursue the analysis to the case of the Ω c(css). We show the τ-ehaviour of the different DR in Fig. 7a). From this figure we shall not retain r ds which differs Figure 6. Ξ c/σ c: a) τ-ehaviour of the doule ratio of sum rules (DR) y giving t c = 4 GeV : r ds dashed-dotted (lue) dotted (green) and continuous (red); c) tc-ehaviour of r ds for a given optimal τ =.9 GeV. completely from r ds and r ds. Given the optimal value of τ = GeV we show the t c -ehaviour of the DR r ds and r ds from r ds and r ds : in Fig. 7). The final result is the mean rω sd =.9(3)()()(4)(.5)(8). (58) c The st error is due to the choice of i. The other ones are due to τ = (. ±.) GeV m c m s ρ and κ. The other QCD parameters give negligile errors. Using the averaged data in Eq. (56) and adding the different errors quadratically one can deduce the result in Tale. Ω (ss)/σ (qq) We repeat the previous analysis in the -channel. The curves are qualitatively analogue to the ones of the charm. We shall not consider ecause of its incompatiility with the other ones. From the mean of r ds and r ds we deduce: rω sd =.4(4)()(4.6)(.)(6) (59) where the sources of the errors are the same as for Ω c where τ = (.3±.5) GeV here and m c replaced y m. Using the averaged data in Eq. (56) and adding the different errors quadratically one can deduce: M Ω = (666 ± 49) MeV (6) which we report in Tale. 9. Hyperfine mass-spilltings Comining the results for spin / and spin 3/ given in Tale we deduce in Tale 3 the values of the hyperfine mass-spilittings. From our analysis one expects that the Ω Q can only decay electromagnetically to Ω Q + γ due to phase space while the Ξ Q can in addition decay hadronically to Ξ Q +π. On one hand our result for the

9 Tale 3 QSSR predictions of the strange heavy aryon hyperfine splittings in units of MeV from the doule ratio (DR) of sum rules with the QCD input parameters in Tale and using as input the predicted values in Tale. We have added the errors quadratically. Hyperfine Splittings Data M Ξ c M Ξc =73() 79() M Ξ c M Ξ c =8(33) 7(3) M Ω c M Ωc =95(38) 7(3) M Ξ M Ξ Ξ =68(47) M Ω MΩ =-(6) M Σ MΣ = Figure 7. Ω c/σ c: a) τ-ehaviour of the doule ratio of sum rules (DR) y giving t c = 4 GeV : r ds dashed-dotted (lue) dotted (green) and continuous (red); ) tc-ehaviour of the DR r ds and rds giving τ = GeV. Tale QSSR predictions of the strange heavy aryon masses in units of MeV from the doule ratio (DR) of sum rules with the QCD input parameters in Tale and using as input the oserved masses of the associated non-strange heavy aryons. We have used κ ss / dd =.74±.3 fixed from the experimental Ξ c and Ω c masses. Baryons I B Q J P = + Mass Data Ξ c(cqs) input ±.4 PDG Ω c(css) input ±.6 PDG Ξ (qs) input ± 3. PDG Ξ c(cqs).43() 559(5) ± 3. PDG Ξ (qs).4(7) 5893(4) Ω (ss).455(64) 676(37) 665. ± 3 D ± 6.9 CDF J P = 3 + Ξ c(cqs).49(8) 64() 646. ±.3 PDG Ω c(css).9(7) 79(38) ± 3. PDG Ξ (qs).4(8) 596() Ω (ss).4(9) 666(49) unoserved mass-differences M Ω M Ω M Ξ M Ξ agree within the errors with the ones from quark models and /N c expansion 9 and seems to ehave like /m despite the large errors. On the other hand we predict with a etter precision M Ξ M Ξ M Ξ c M Ξc. A future precise measurement of the Ξ Ξ and Ω will shed light on the quark mass ehaviour of these massdifferences which we also plan to study in a future work.. Summary and Conclusions We have directly extracted (for the first time) the heavy aryons (charmed C = and ottom B = ) masssplittings due to SU(3) reaking using doule ratios (DR) of QCD spectral sum rules(qssr) which are less sensitive to the exact value and the definition of the heavy quark mass to the perturative radiative corrections and to the QCD continuum contriutions than the simple ratios commonly used in the current literature for determining the heavy aryon masses: R emarking that the leading term controlling the masssplittings is in most of the cases the ratio κ ss / dd of the condensate rather than the running mass m s we use as input the oserved masses of the Ξ c and Ω c for extracting κ. We otain the mean value from Eqs. (3) (36) and (4): κ =.738(9) Eq. (4) (6) which we can consider as an improved estimate of this quantity compared with the existing one κ =.7 ±. compiled in Tale from the light mesons 3 and aryons. Ūsing this value of κ we give predictions of the Ξ c Ω and spin 3/ aryons masses which are summarized in Tale. These predictions are in good agreement with the experimental masses and can e considered as improvements of existing QSSR results ased on the simple ratio of moments 45. Ōur result for the Ω favours the one oserved y CDF 37 ut disagrees within.4σ with the one from D 38. ost of predictions agree with the ones from different M approaches (quark models lattice calculations 8 and large N c 9). Our predictions for the not yet oserved states Ξ Ξ and Ω given in Tale can serve in a near future as a test of the QSSR approach. e show in Tale 3 our predictions for the hyperfine W splittings. Our results agree with the oserved values while the ones for not yet oserved states can serve as a test of the QSSR approach. From our results we expect that the Ω Q can only decay electromagnetically to Ω Q + γ due to the availale phase space while the Ξ Q can in addition decay hadronically to Ξ Q + π. Ōne can also notice that if we have used a SU(3) symmetric quark condensates ss dd the predictions would e systematically lower y aout (7 ) MeV than the predictions given in Tale. In this case the agreement with the oserved masses in different channels cannot e achieved. It would e interesting to understand analogous effects of κ using some other approaches. Acknowledgements R.M.A and M.N. acknowledge the financial support from FAPESP and CNPq (Brazil). M.N. also thanks

10 S. Narison for the hospitality at the Laoratoire de Physique Théorique et Astroparticules of Montpellier. S.N. has een partially supported y the CNRS-INP3 within the project Hadron Physics in QCD and within the French-China Particle Physics Laoratory (FCPPL). We thank Jean-Marc Richard for some discussions. REFERENCES. For reviews see e.g.: S. Narison Camridge Monogr. Part. Phys. Nucl. Phys. Cosmol. 7 (4) -778 hep-ph/56; S. Narison World Sci. Lect. Notes Phys. 6 (989) ; S. Narison Acta Phys. Pol. B 6 (995) 687; S. Narison Riv. Nuovo Cim. (N) (987) ; S. Narison Phys. Rept. 84 (98) 63.. J.S. Bell and R.A. Bertlmann Nucl. Phys. B 77 (98) 8. B87 (98) 85; R.A. Bertlmann Acta Phys. Austr. 53 (98) M.A. Shifman A.I. Vainshtein and V.I. Zakharov Nucl. Phys. B (979). 4. E. Bagan M. Chaa H.G. Dosch S. Narison Phys. Lett. B 78 (99) E. Bagan M. Chaa H.G. Dosch S. Narison Phys. Lett. B 87 (99) E. Bagan M. Chaa S. Narison Phys. Lett. B 36 (993) E. Bagan M. Chaa H.G. Dosch S. Narison Phys. Lett. B 3 (993) The D collaoration: V. Aazov et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (7) 5; arxiv: hep.ex; The CDF collaoration: D. Acosta et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (6) ; T. Aaltonen et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (7) 5; iid. Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (7). 9. PDG C. Amsler et al. Phys. Lett. B 667 (8).. The Baar collaoration: B. Auert et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (6) 3; iid Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (7) ; The Belle collaoration: R. Chistov et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (6) 6.. For recent reviews see e.g.: M. Karliner B. Keren- Zur J.H. Lipkin J.L. RosnerAnnals Phys. 34 (9) ; E. Klempt J.M. Richard arxiv:9.55 hep-ph and references therein.. R.S. Marques de Carvalho et al. Phys.Rev. D 6 (999) F. Hussain J.G. Korner M. Kramer G. Thompson Z. Phys. C 5 (99) F.O. Durães M. Nielsen Phys. Lett. B 658 (7) X. Liu H-X. Chen Y-R. Liu A. Hosaka S- L. Zhu arxiv:7.3 hep-ph; Z-G. Wang arxiv: hep-ph; iid arxiv:74.6 hep-ph; J-R. Zhang M-Q. Huang arxiv:8.366 hep-ph iid arxiv: hep-ph; iid arxiv: hep-ph. 6. S. Groote J.G. Korner O.I. Yakovlev Eur. Phys. J. C 58 (8) D. Eert R.N. Faustov and V.O. Galkin Phys. Rev. D 7 (5) W. Detmold C-J. D. Lin M. Wingate arxiv:8.583 hep-lat; R. Lewis R.M. Woloshyn Phys. Rev. D 79 (9) 45; H. Na S. Gottlie arxiv:8.35 hep-lat. 9. E. Jenkins Phys. Rev. D 77 (8) 34.. Y. Chung et al.z. Phys. C 5 (984) 5; H.G. Dosch M. Jamin and S. Narison Phys. Lett. B (989) 5.. B.L. Ioffe Nucl. Phys. B 88 (98) 37 B 9 (98) 59; A.A.Ovchinnikov and A.A.Pivovarov Yad. Fiz. 48 (988) 35.. G. Launer S. Narison and R. Tarrach Z. Phys. C 6 (984) S. Narison Phys. Lett. B (988) 38; Phys. Lett. B 65 (5) S. Narison Phys. Lett. B 3 (994) S. Narison Phys. Lett. B 337 (994) 66; Phys. Lett. B 668 (8) 38; Phys. Lett. B 37 (994) S. Narison Phys. Lett. B 358 (995) 3; Phys. Lett. B 466 (999) E.G. Floratos S. Narison and E. de Rafael Nucl. Phys. B 55 (979) S. Narison and V.I. Zakharov Phys. Lett. B 679 (9) 355; K. Chetyrkin S. Narison and V.I. Zakharov Nucl. Phys. B (999); For a review see e.g. S. Narison Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 64 (7) For a review see e.g. V.A. Zakharov Nucl. Phys. (Proc. Sup.) B 74 (999) 39; V.I. Zakharov Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 64 (7) 4; V.I. Zakharov contriution at QCD 8 (Montpellier); R. Akhoury and V.I. Zakharov Phys. Lett. B 438 (998) 65; F.V. Guarev M.I. Polikarpov and V.I. Zakharov hep-th/ S. Narison Phys. Lett. B 673 (9) For reviews see e.g.: S. Narison Phys.Rev. D 74 (6) 343; arxiv:hep-ph ; Phys. Lett. B 6 (989) 9; Phys. Lett. B 358 (995) 3; Phys. Lett. B 466 (999) 345; S. Narison H.G. Dosch Phys. Lett. B 47 (998) 73; S. Narison N. Paver E. de Rafael and D. Treleani Nucl. Phys. B (983) 365; S. Narison E. de Rafael Phys. Lett. B 3 (98) 57; C. Becchi S. Narison E. de Rafael F.J. Yndurain Z. Phys. C 8 (98) S. Narison Phys. Lett. B 3 (993) 93; iid B 36 (995). 33. R.A. Bertlmann G. Launer and E. de Rafael Nucl. Phys. B 5 (985) 6; R.A. Bertlmann et al. Z. Phys. C 39 (988) F.J. Yndurain hep-ph/ S. Narison Phys. Lett. B 387 (996) S. Narison Phys. Lett. B 97 (987) 45; Phys. Lett. B 34 (994) 73; Phys. Lett. B 5 () The CDF collaoration: T. Aaltonen et al. arxiv: hep.ex. 38. The D collaoration: V.M. Aazov et al. arxiv: hep.ex