Substructure of Multiquark Hadrons (Snowmass 2021 White Paper)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years there has been a rapidly growing body of experimental evidence for existence of exotic, multiquark hadrons, i.e. mesons which contain additional quarks, beyond the usual quark-antiquark pair and baryons which consist of more than three quarks. In all cases with robust evidence they contain at least one heavy quark Q=c or b, the majority including two heavy quarks. Two key theoretical questions have been triggered by these discoveries: (a) how are quarks organized inside these multiquark states -- as compact objects with all quarks within one confinement volume, interacting via color forces, perhaps with an important role played by diquarks, or as deuteron-like hadronic molecules, bound by light-meson exchange? (b) what other multiquark states should we expect? The two questions are tightly intertwined. Each of the interpretations provides a natural explanation of parts of the data, but neither explains all of the data. It is quite possible that both kinds of structures appear in Nature. It may also be the case that certain states are superpositions of the compact and molecular configurations. This Whitepaper brings together contributions from many leading practitioners in the field, representing a wide spectrum of theoretical interpretations. We discuss the importance of future experimental and phenomenological work, which will lead to better understandingof multiquark phenomena in QCD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".