AG-2026.06-1390·hep-ph·cross-listed: hep-ex
Semi-analytical results for $e^+e^-\to J/ψ+ X_{{\rm non\,}c\bar{c}}$ up to $\mathcal{O}(α_s v^2)$ at B factories
Authors
- Cong Li
- Hao-Yang Liu
- Xu-Dong Huang
- Wen-Long Sang
Abstract
Within the NRQCD factorization framework, we investigate the color-singlet contribution to $e^+e^- \to J/ψ+ X_{{\rm non\,}c\bar{c}}$ at B factories, computing the $\mathcal{O}(α_s)$, $\mathcal{O}(v^2)$, and $\mathcal{O}(α_s v^2)$ corrections to both the unpolarized cross section and the $J/ψ$ angular distribution. The $\mathcal{O}(α_s v^2)$ correction is obtained for the first time, and the validity of NRQCD factorization at this order is explicitly verified. Using the differential equation method, the short-distance coefficients are obtained as asymptotic expansions in $r = m_c/\sqrt{s}$ up to $r^{40}$, which reproduce exact results with high precision at B factory energies, achieving relative errors around $10^{-14}$ for the cross section and around $10^{-7}$ for the angular distribution. Notably, with the same input parameters, our $\mathcal{O}(α_s)$ and $\mathcal{O}(v^2)$ corrections are consistent with those reported in the literature. Phenomenologically, the $\mathcal{O}(α_s)$ correction (with $μ_R=\sqrt{s}/2$) reaches about $50\%$ of the leading-order cross section, while the $\mathcal{O}(v^2)$ and $\mathcal{O}(α_s v^2)$ corrections are accidentally small. After including feeddown contributions from $ψ(2S)$, the predicted cross section $0.530_{-0.113}^{+0.122}$ pb agrees with the {\tt Belle} measurement within uncertainties. However, the predicted angular distribution parameter $0.120_{-0.019}^{+0.027}$ deviates from the experimental value $5.71\pm 2.51$ by more than $2σ$, calling for further experimental and theoretical investigations.
Submitted
16 June 2026yesterday
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2606.17827
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.