HTML conversions sometimes display errors due to content that did not convert correctly from the source. This paper uses the following packages that are not yet supported by the HTML conversion tool. Feedback on these issues are not necessary; they are known and are being worked on.

  • failed: epic

Authors: achieve the best HTML results from your LaTeX submissions by following these best practices.

License: arXiv.org perpetual non-exclusive license
arXiv:2403.04340v3 [hep-ex] 11 Mar 2024

The Belle Collaboration


Search for a pentaquark state decaying into pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays at Belle

X. Dong 0000-0001-8574-9624    H. Y. Zhang 0000-0001-6918-4029    X. L. Wang 0000-0001-5805-1255    I. Adachi 0000-0003-2287-0173    J. K. Ahn 0000-0002-5795-2243    H. Aihara 0000-0002-1907-5964    S. Al Said 0000-0002-4895-3869    D. M. Asner 0000-0002-1586-5790    H. Atmacan 0000-0003-2435-501X    R. Ayad 0000-0003-3466-9290    S. Bahinipati 0000-0002-3744-5332    Sw. Banerjee 0000-0001-8852-2409    M. Bessner 0000-0003-1776-0439    V. Bhardwaj 0000-0001-8857-8621    D. Biswas 0000-0002-7543-3471    D. Bodrov 0000-0001-5279-4787    A. Bozek 0000-0002-5915-1319    M. Bračko 0000-0002-2495-0524    P. Branchini 0000-0002-2270-9673    T. E. Browder 0000-0001-7357-9007    A. Budano 0000-0002-0856-1131    M. Campajola 0000-0003-2518-7134    D. Červenkov 0000-0002-1865-741X    M.-C. Chang 0000-0002-8650-6058    P. Chang 0000-0003-4064-388X    B. G. Cheon 0000-0002-8803-4429    H. E. Cho 0000-0002-7008-3759    K. Cho 0000-0003-1705-7399    S.-K. Choi 0000-0003-2747-8277    Y. Choi 0000-0003-3499-7948    S. Choudhury 0000-0001-9841-0216    S. Das 0000-0001-6857-966X    G. De Nardo 0000-0002-2047-9675    G. De Pietro 0000-0001-8442-107X    R. Dhamija 0000-0001-7052-3163    F. Di Capua 0000-0001-9076-5936    J. Dingfelder 0000-0001-5767-2121    Z. Doležal 0000-0002-5662-3675    T. V. Dong 0000-0003-3043-1939    P. Ecker 0000-0002-6817-6868    D. Epifanov 0000-0001-8656-2693    T. Ferber 0000-0002-6849-0427    D. Ferlewicz 0000-0002-4374-1234    B. G. Fulsom 0000-0002-5862-9739    R. Garg 0000-0002-7406-4707    V. Gaur 0000-0002-8880-6134    A. Giri 0000-0002-8895-0128    P. Goldenzweig 0000-0001-8785-847X    E. Graziani 0000-0001-8602-5652    T. Gu 0000-0002-1470-6536    Y. Guan 0000-0002-5541-2278    K. Gudkova 0000-0002-5858-3187    C. Hadjivasiliou 0000-0002-2234-0001    H. Hayashii 0000-0002-5138-5903    S. Hazra 0000-0001-6954-9593    M. T. Hedges 0000-0001-6504-1872    W.-S. Hou 0000-0002-4260-5118    C.-L. Hsu 0000-0002-1641-430X    K. Inami 0000-0003-2765-7072    N. Ipsita 0000-0002-2927-3366    A. Ishikawa 0000-0002-3561-5633    R. Itoh 0000-0003-1590-0266    M. Iwasaki 0000-0002-9402-7559    W. W. Jacobs 0000-0002-9996-6336    S. Jia 0000-0001-8176-8545    Y. ** 0000-0002-7323-0830    D. Kalita 0000-0003-3054-1222    T. Kawasaki 0000-0002-4089-5238    D. Y. Kim 0000-0001-8125-9070    K.-H. Kim 0000-0002-4659-1112    Y. J. Kim 0000-0001-9511-9634    Y.-K. Kim 0000-0002-9695-8103    K. Kinoshita 0000-0001-7175-4182    P. Kodyš 0000-0002-8644-2349    A. Korobov 0000-0001-5959-8172    S. Korpar 0000-0003-0971-0968    E. Kovalenko 0000-0001-8084-1931    P. Križan 0000-0002-4967-7675    P. Krokovny 0000-0002-1236-4667    T. Kuhr 0000-0001-6251-8049    R. Kumar 0000-0002-6277-2626    T. Kumita 0000-0001-7572-4538    A. Kuzmin 0000-0002-7011-5044    Y.-J. Kwon 0000-0001-9448-5691    Y.-T. Lai 0000-0001-9553-3421    T. Lam 0000-0001-9128-6806    J. S. Lange 0000-0003-0234-0474    D. Levit 0000-0001-5789-6205    L. K. Li 0000-0002-7366-1307    Y. Li 0000-0002-4413-6247    Y. B. Li 0000-0002-9909-2851    L. Li Gioi 0000-0003-2024-5649    J. Libby 0000-0002-1219-3247    D. Liventsev 0000-0003-3416-0056    Y. Ma 0000-0001-8412-8308    M. Masuda 0000-0002-7109-5583    T. Matsuda 0000-0003-4673-570X    S. K. Maurya 0000-0002-7764-5777    F. Meier 0000-0002-6088-0412    M. Merola 0000-0002-7082-8108    F. Metzner 0000-0002-0128-264X    K. Miyabayashi 0000-0003-4352-734X    R. Mussa 0000-0002-0294-9071    I. Nakamura 0000-0002-7640-5456    T. Nakano 0000-0003-3157-5328    M. Nakao 0000-0001-8424-7075    Z. Natkaniec 0000-0003-0486-9291    A. Natochii 0000-0002-1076-814X    L. Nayak 0000-0002-7739-914X    M. Nayak 0000-0002-2572-4692    S. Nishida 0000-0001-6373-2346    S. Ogawa 0000-0002-7310-5079    H. Ono 0000-0003-4486-0064    G. Pakhlova 0000-0001-7518-3022    S. Pardi 0000-0001-7994-0537    H. Park 0000-0001-6087-2052    J. Park 0000-0001-6520-0028    S.-H. Park 0000-0001-6019-6218    A. Passeri 0000-0003-4864-3411    S. Patra 0000-0002-4114-1091    S. Paul 0000-0002-8813-0437    R. Pestotnik 0000-0003-1804-9470    L. E. Piilonen 0000-0001-6836-0748    T. Podobnik 0000-0002-6131-819X    E. Prencipe 0000-0002-9465-2493    M. T. Prim 0000-0002-1407-7450    G. Russo 0000-0001-5823-4393    S. Sandilya 0000-0002-4199-4369    V. Savinov 0000-0002-9184-2830    G. Schnell 0000-0002-7336-3246    C. Schwanda 0000-0003-4844-5028    Y. Seino 0000-0002-8378-4255    K. Senyo 0000-0002-1615-9118    M. E. Sevior 0000-0002-4824-101X    W. Shan 0000-0003-2811-2218    C. Sharma 0000-0002-1312-0429    J.-G. Shiu 0000-0002-8478-5639    J. B. Singh 0000-0001-9029-2462    E. Solovieva 0000-0002-5735-4059    M. Starič 0000-0001-8751-5944    M. Takizawa 0000-0001-8225-3973    K. Tanida 0000-0002-8255-3746    F. Tenchini 0000-0003-3469-9377    R. Tiwary 0000-0002-5887-1883    M. Uchida 0000-0003-4904-6168    Y. Unno 0000-0003-3355-765X    S. Uno 0000-0002-3401-0480    P. Urquijo 0000-0002-0887-7953    Y. Usov 0000-0003-3144-2920    A. Vinokurova 0000-0003-4220-8056    S. Watanuki 0000-0002-5241-6628    E. Won 0000-0002-4245-7442    B. D. Yabsley 0000-0002-2680-0474    W. Yan 0000-0003-0713-0871    S. B. Yang 0000-0002-9543-7971    J. Yelton 0000-0001-8840-3346    J. H. Yin 0000-0002-1479-9349    Y. Yook 0000-0002-4912-048X    C. Z. Yuan 0000-0002-1652-6686    L. Yuan 0000-0002-6719-5397    Y. Yusa 0000-0002-4001-9748    Z. P. Zhang 0000-0001-6140-2044    V. Zhilich 0000-0002-0907-5565
(March 6, 2024)
Abstract

Using the data samples of 102 million Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) and 158 million Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) events collected by the Belle detector, we search for a pentaquark state in the pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ final state from Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays. Here, the charge-conjugate p¯J/ψ¯𝑝𝐽𝜓\bar{p}J/\psiover¯ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG italic_J / italic_ψ is included. We observe clear pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ production in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) decays and measure the branching fractions to be [Υ(1S)pJ/ψ+anything]=[4.27±0.16(stat.)±0.20(syst.)]×105{\cal B}[\Upsilon(1S)\to pJ/\psi+anything]=[4.27\pm 0.16(stat.)\pm 0.20(syst.)% ]\times 10^{-5}caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] = [ 4.27 ± 0.16 ( italic_s italic_t italic_a italic_t . ) ± 0.20 ( italic_s italic_y italic_s italic_t . ) ] × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and [Υ(2S)pJ/ψ+anything]=[3.59±0.14(stat.)±0.16(syst.)]×105{\cal B}[\Upsilon(2S)\to pJ/\psi+anything]=[3.59\pm 0.14(stat.)\pm 0.16(syst.)% ]\times 10^{-5}caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] = [ 3.59 ± 0.14 ( italic_s italic_t italic_a italic_t . ) ± 0.16 ( italic_s italic_y italic_s italic_t . ) ] × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. We also measure the cross section of inclusive pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ production in e+esuperscript𝑒superscript𝑒e^{+}e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT annihilation to be σ(e+epJ/ψ+anything)=[57.5±2.1(stat.)±2.5(syst.)]fb\sigma(e^{+}e^{-}\to pJ/\psi+anything)=[57.5\pm 2.1(stat.)\pm 2.5(syst.)]~{}$% \mathrm{fb}$italic_σ ( italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ) = [ 57.5 ± 2.1 ( italic_s italic_t italic_a italic_t . ) ± 2.5 ( italic_s italic_y italic_s italic_t . ) ] roman_fb at s=10.52GeV𝑠10.52GeV\sqrt{s}=10.52~{}\hbox{GeV}square-root start_ARG italic_s end_ARG = 10.52 GeV using an 89.5fb189.5superscriptfemtobarn189.5~{}$\mathrm{fb}$^{-1}89.5 roman_fb start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT continuum data sample. There is no significant Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT or Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT signal found in the pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ final states in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays. We determine the upper limits of [Υ(1,2S)Pc++anything](Pc+pJ/ψ)delimited-[]Υ12𝑆superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐𝑝𝐽𝜓{\cal B}[\Upsilon(1,2S)\to P_{c}^{+}+anything]\cdot{\cal B}(P_{c}^{+}\to pJ/\psi)caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) → italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] ⋅ caligraphic_B ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ) to be at the 106superscript10610^{-6}10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT level.

pacs:
14.40.Gx, 13.25.Gv, 13.66.Bc
preprint: Belle Preprint 2024-02 KEK Preprint 2023-54

I Introduction

In the conventional quark model, a hadron is either a meson containing a quark and an anti-quark or an (anti-)baryon containing three (anti-)quarks. However, the fundamental theory of strong interaction, Quantum Chromodynamics, does not forbid new structures of hadrons beyond the conventional quark model, such as glueball states containing only gluons, hybrid states containing gluons and quarks, or multi-quark states containing more than three quarks [1]. Many theoretical and experimental efforts have been devoted to predicting and searching for these exotic states [2, 3]. In 2003, the Belle experiment observed the X(3872)𝑋3872X(3872)italic_X ( 3872 ) in BK+π+πJ/ψ𝐵𝐾superscript𝜋superscript𝜋𝐽𝜓B\to K+\pi^{+}\pi^{-}J/\psiitalic_B → italic_K + italic_π start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_π start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ decay [4], which was the clearest evidence yet of the existence of exotic states. Five years later, Belle observed the Z(4430)+𝑍superscript4430Z(4430)^{+}italic_Z ( 4430 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT in the decay BK+π+ψ(2S)𝐵𝐾superscript𝜋𝜓2𝑆B\to K+\pi^{+}\psi(2S)italic_B → italic_K + italic_π start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ψ ( 2 italic_S ) [5]. The cc¯𝑐¯𝑐c\bar{c}italic_c over¯ start_ARG italic_c end_ARG component and the non-zero net charge of the final state π+ψ(2S)superscript𝜋𝜓2𝑆\pi^{+}\psi(2S)italic_π start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ψ ( 2 italic_S ) indicate that the Z(4430)+𝑍superscript4430Z(4430)^{+}italic_Z ( 4430 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is a good candidate for a tetraquark state. Since then, many candidate multi-quark states have been observed by the Belle, LHCb, and BESIII experiments [6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13]. In the pentaquark sector, the LHCb experiment discovered Pc(4380)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4380P_{c}(4380)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4380 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and Pc(4450)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4450P_{c}(4450)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4450 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT in the decay ΛbK+pJ/ψsubscriptΛ𝑏𝐾𝑝𝐽𝜓\Lambda_{b}\to K+pJ/\psiroman_Λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → italic_K + italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ [14], but an updated analysis using ten times the statistics divided the structures into three states [15], the Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. The deuteron can be considered a candidate for a hexaquark state [16]. The observations of deuterons in the Υ(nS)Υ𝑛𝑆\Upsilon(nS)roman_Υ ( italic_n italic_S ) inclusive decays by the ARGUS, CLEO, and BaBar experiments provide clues of seaching for more candidates of multi-quark states in the Υ(nS)Υ𝑛𝑆\Upsilon(nS)roman_Υ ( italic_n italic_S ) inclusive decays [17, 18, 19].

The Belle experiment collected the world’s largest Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) data samples in the last years of data taking. The Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) data sample with an integrated luminosity Υ(1S)=5.8fb1subscriptΥ1𝑆5.8superscriptfemtobarn1\mathcal{L}_{\Upsilon(1S)}=5.8~{}$\mathrm{fb}$^{-1}caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 5.8 roman_fb start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT contains (102±2)×106Υ(1S)plus-or-minus1022superscript106Υ1𝑆(102\pm 2)\times 10^{6}~{}\Upsilon(1S)( 102 ± 2 ) × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) events [20], while the Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) data sample has Υ(2S)=24.7fb1subscriptΥ2𝑆24.7superscriptfemtobarn1\mathcal{L}_{\Upsilon(2S)}=24.7~{}$\mathrm{fb}$^{-1}caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 24.7 roman_fb start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and (158±4)×106Υ(2S)plus-or-minus1584superscript106Υ2𝑆(158\pm 4)\times 10^{6}~{}\Upsilon(2S)( 158 ± 4 ) × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) events [21]. Using the two data samples, we search for a Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT state in the inclusive production of pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ final states via Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) decays. Here and hereinafter, Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, or Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. The charge-conjugated final state Pcp¯J/ψsuperscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐¯𝑝𝐽𝜓P_{c}^{-}\to\bar{p}J/\psiitalic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → over¯ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG italic_J / italic_ψ is included throughout this study. We also use a Belle continuum data sample with an integrated luminosity of cont=89.5fb1subscriptcont89.5superscriptfemtobarn1\mathcal{L}_{\rm cont}=89.5~{}$\mathrm{fb}$^{-1}caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cont end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 89.5 roman_fb start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT taken at center-of-mass (c.m.) energy s=10.52GeV𝑠10.52GeV\sqrt{s}=10.52~{}\hbox{GeV}square-root start_ARG italic_s end_ARG = 10.52 GeV [60MeV60MeV60~{}\hbox{MeV}60 MeV below the peak of the Υ(4S)Υ4𝑆\Upsilon(4S)roman_Υ ( 4 italic_S ) resonance] to investigate the pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ final state from continuum productions, which could be backgrounds in the Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) data samples for studying the Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) decays.

II The Belle Detector and Monte Carlo simulation

The Belle detector is a large-solid-angle magnetic spectrometer [22]. It consists of several subdetectors, including a silicon vertex detector, a central drift chamber with 50 layers, an array of aerogel threshold Cherenkov counters, a barrel-like arrangement of time-of-flight scintillation counters, and an electromagnetic calorimeter (ECL) comprised of CsI(Tl) crystals. All the above are located within a superconducting solenoid coil which generates a magnetic field of 1.5 T. An iron flux return outside the coil is instrumented to detect KL0superscriptsubscript𝐾𝐿0K_{L}^{0}italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT mesons and identify muons. The origin of the coordinate system is defined as the position of the nominal interaction point. The z𝑧zitalic_z axis is aligned with the direction opposite to the e+superscript𝑒e^{+}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT beam and points along the magnetic field within the solenoid. The x𝑥xitalic_x axis points horizontally outwards of the storage ring, and the y𝑦yitalic_y axis is vertically upwards. The angles of the polar (θ𝜃\thetaitalic_θ) and azimuthal (ϕitalic-ϕ\phiitalic_ϕ) are measured relative to the positive z𝑧zitalic_z axis.

To optimize the selection criteria, we use EvtGen to simulate signal Monte Carlo (MC) samples of Υ(1,2S)Pc++p¯+qq¯Υ12𝑆superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐¯𝑝𝑞¯𝑞\Upsilon(1,2S)\to P_{c}^{+}+\bar{p}+q\bar{q}roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) → italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + over¯ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG + italic_q over¯ start_ARG italic_q end_ARG with Pc+pJ/ψsuperscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐𝑝𝐽𝜓P_{c}^{+}\to pJ/\psiitalic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ according to three-body phase space [23], where qq¯(q=u,d,s,c)𝑞¯𝑞𝑞𝑢𝑑𝑠𝑐q\bar{q}~{}(q=u,d,s,c)italic_q over¯ start_ARG italic_q end_ARG ( italic_q = italic_u , italic_d , italic_s , italic_c ) is a quark-antiquark pair of random flavor whose hadronization is simulated by PYTHIA6.4 [24]. Each Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT MC sample has 2×1042superscript1042\times 10^{4}2 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT events, and we combine the three Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT signal MC samples for the selection criteria optimization. To study the efficiency and mass resolution of the pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ invariant mass (MpJ/ψsubscript𝑀𝑝𝐽𝜓M_{pJ/\psi}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT), we generate efficiency MC samples of Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, whose mass is fixed to different values from 4.1GeV/c24.1GeVsuperscript𝑐24.1~{}\hbox{GeV}/c^{2}4.1 GeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT to 5.0GeV/c25.0GeVsuperscript𝑐25.0~{}\hbox{GeV}/c^{2}5.0 GeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, and the width is set to zero. To study pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ production not due to Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT decays, we generate a no-Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT MC sample of Υ(1,2S)J/ψ+p+p¯+qq¯Υ12𝑆𝐽𝜓𝑝¯𝑝𝑞¯𝑞\Upsilon(1,2S)\to J/\psi+p+\bar{p}+q\bar{q}roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) → italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_p + over¯ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG + italic_q over¯ start_ARG italic_q end_ARG according to four-body phase space [23]. To simulate the hadronization of qq¯𝑞¯𝑞q\bar{q}italic_q over¯ start_ARG italic_q end_ARG, we define a state of Xqq¯𝑋𝑞¯𝑞X\to q\bar{q}italic_X → italic_q over¯ start_ARG italic_q end_ARG where X𝑋Xitalic_X has a mass of 2.6GeV/c22.6GeVsuperscript𝑐22.6~{}\hbox{GeV}/c^{2}2.6 GeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and a width of 2.7GeV2.7GeV2.7~{}\hbox{GeV}2.7 GeV in Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) decays; similarly a mass of 3.2GeV/c23.2GeVsuperscript𝑐23.2~{}\hbox{GeV}/c^{2}3.2 GeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and width of 3.3GeV3.3GeV3.3~{}\hbox{GeV}3.3 GeV in Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) decays. We simulate the geometry and the response of the Belle detector using a GEANT3-based MC technique [25].

III Event selection

To reconstruct the pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ final state, we select events with at least three well-measured charged tracks. Two tracks with opposite charges are chosen as candidates for J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ decaying into e+esuperscript𝑒superscript𝑒e^{+}e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (called the e+esuperscript𝑒superscript𝑒e^{+}e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT mode) or μ+μsuperscript𝜇superscript𝜇\mu^{+}\mu^{-}italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (called the μ+μsuperscript𝜇superscript𝜇\mu^{+}\mu^{-}italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT mode). A well-measured charged track has impact parameters of dr<0.5cm𝑑𝑟0.5centimeterdr<0.5~{}$\mathrm{cm}$italic_d italic_r < 0.5 roman_cm in the rϕ𝑟italic-ϕr-\phiitalic_r - italic_ϕ plane and |dz|<5cm𝑑𝑧5centimeter|dz|<5~{}$\mathrm{cm}$| italic_d italic_z | < 5 roman_cm in the rz𝑟𝑧r-zitalic_r - italic_z plane with respect to the interaction point, and a transverse momentum larger than 0.1GeV/c0.1GeV𝑐0.1~{}\hbox{GeV}/c0.1 GeV / italic_c. For each charged track, we combine information from subdetectors of Belle to form a likelihood isubscript𝑖\mathcal{L}_{i}caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for each putative particle species (i𝑖iitalic_i[26]. We form the likelihood ratios ee/(e+hadrons)subscript𝑒subscript𝑒subscript𝑒subscripthadrons\mathcal{R}_{e}\equiv\mathcal{L}_{e}/(\mathcal{L}_{e}+\mathcal{L}_{\rm hadrons})caligraphic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≡ caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ( caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_hadrons end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) and μμ/(μ+hadrons)subscript𝜇subscript𝜇subscript𝜇subscripthadrons\mathcal{R}_{\mu}\equiv\mathcal{L}_{\mu}/(\mathcal{L}_{\mu}+\mathcal{L}_{\rm hadrons})caligraphic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≡ caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ( caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_hadrons end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) for electron and muon identifications [27, 28]. For electrons from J/ψe+e𝐽𝜓superscript𝑒superscript𝑒J/\psi\to e^{+}e^{-}italic_J / italic_ψ → italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT decay, we require both tracks to have e>0.9subscript𝑒0.9\mathcal{R}_{e}>0.9caligraphic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > 0.9 and include the bremsstrahlung photons detected in the ECL within 0.05 radians of the original e+superscript𝑒e^{+}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT or esuperscript𝑒e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT direction in calculating the e+e(γ)superscript𝑒superscript𝑒𝛾e^{+}e^{-}(\gamma)italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_γ ) invariant mass. For muons from J/ψμ+μ𝐽𝜓superscript𝜇superscript𝜇J/\psi\to\mu^{+}\mu^{-}italic_J / italic_ψ → italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT decay, we require both tracks to have μ>0.9subscript𝜇0.9\mathcal{R}_{\mu}>0.9caligraphic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > 0.9. The single lepton identification efficiency is (93.9±0.2)%percentplus-or-minus93.90.2(93.9\pm 0.2)\%( 93.9 ± 0.2 ) % in the e+esuperscript𝑒superscript𝑒e^{+}e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT mode and (91.9±0.2)%percentplus-or-minus91.90.2(91.9\pm 0.2)\%( 91.9 ± 0.2 ) % in the μ+μsuperscript𝜇superscript𝜇\mu^{+}\mu^{-}italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT mode. We identify a track with p/K=pp+K>0.6subscript𝑝𝐾subscript𝑝subscript𝑝subscript𝐾0.6\mathcal{R}_{p/K}=\frac{\mathcal{L}_{p}}{\mathcal{L}_{p}+\mathcal{L}_{K}}>0.6caligraphic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p / italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG > 0.6 and p/π=pp+π>0.6subscript𝑝𝜋subscript𝑝subscript𝑝subscript𝜋0.6\mathcal{R}_{p/\pi}=\frac{\mathcal{L}_{p}}{\mathcal{L}_{p}+\mathcal{L}_{\pi}}>% 0.6caligraphic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p / italic_π end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_π end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG > 0.6 as a proton. The efficiency of proton identification is (97.3±0.1)%percentplus-or-minus97.30.1(97.3\pm 0.1)\%( 97.3 ± 0.1 ) %. To remove backgrounds from ΛpπΛ𝑝𝜋\Lambda\to p\piroman_Λ → italic_p italic_π decay in the proton selection, we reconstruct all the pion candidates with π/K=π/(π+K)>0.6subscript𝜋𝐾subscript𝜋subscript𝜋subscript𝐾0.6\mathcal{R}_{\pi/K}=\mathcal{L}_{\pi}/(\mathcal{L}_{\pi}+\mathcal{L}_{K})>0.6caligraphic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_π / italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_π end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ( caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_π end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) > 0.6 and a charge opposite to that of the proton. We remove the proton candidate if it is part of any pπ𝑝𝜋p\piitalic_p italic_π combination of mass 1.105GeV/c2<Mpπ<1.12GeV/c21.105GeVsuperscript𝑐2subscript𝑀𝑝𝜋1.12GeVsuperscript𝑐21.105~{}\hbox{GeV}/c^{2}<M_{p\pi}<1.12~{}\hbox{GeV}/c^{2}1.105 GeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT < italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_π end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < 1.12 GeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, where Mpπsubscript𝑀𝑝𝜋M_{p\pi}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_π end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the invariant mass of the pπ𝑝𝜋p\piitalic_p italic_π combination. Furthermore, to remove the proton candidates from beam backgrounds, we require the difference of the dz𝑑𝑧dzitalic_d italic_z parameter for p𝑝pitalic_p and ±superscriptplus-or-minus\ell^{\pm}roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT to be |Δdz|<0.5cmΔ𝑑𝑧0.5centimeter|\Delta dz|<0.5~{}$\mathrm{cm}$| roman_Δ italic_d italic_z | < 0.5 roman_cm.

The Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) data samples, and the continuum data sample, all show clear J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ signals in both the e+esuperscript𝑒superscript𝑒e^{+}e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT mode and the μ+μsuperscript𝜇superscript𝜇\mu^{+}\mu^{-}italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT mode. Figure 1 shows the invariant-mass distributions of the lepton pair (M+subscript𝑀superscriptsuperscriptM_{\ell^{+}\ell^{-}}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT), which is the sum of the e+esuperscript𝑒superscript𝑒e^{+}e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT mode and the μ+μsuperscript𝜇superscript𝜇\mu^{+}\mu^{-}italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT mode, in the Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) data samples. Fitting the M+subscript𝑀superscriptsuperscriptM_{\ell^{+}\ell^{-}}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT distributions using a Gaussian function for the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ signal and a second-order Chebychev function for the backgrounds, we get the mass resolution of the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ signal to be 8.7±0.6MeV/c2plus-or-minus8.70.6MeVsuperscript𝑐28.7\pm 0.6~{}\hbox{MeV}/c^{2}8.7 ± 0.6 MeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (10.1±0.5MeV/c2plus-or-minus10.10.5MeVsuperscript𝑐210.1\pm 0.5~{}\hbox{MeV}/c^{2}10.1 ± 0.5 MeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT) in the Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) [Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S )] data sample and 8.2±0.1MeV/c2plus-or-minus8.20.1MeVsuperscript𝑐28.2\pm 0.1~{}\hbox{MeV}/c^{2}8.2 ± 0.1 MeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (8.6±0.1MeV/c2plus-or-minus8.60.1MeVsuperscript𝑐28.6\pm 0.1~{}\hbox{MeV}/c^{2}8.6 ± 0.1 MeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT) in the signal MC simulation of Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) [Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S )] decays. We define the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ signal region to be |M+mJ/ψ|<3σsubscript𝑀superscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝑚𝐽𝜓3𝜎|M_{\ell^{+}\ell^{-}}-m_{J/\psi}|<3\sigma| italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | < 3 italic_σ, where mJ/ψsubscript𝑚𝐽𝜓m_{J/\psi}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the nominal mass of J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ [29] and σ=10MeV/c2𝜎10MeVsuperscript𝑐2\sigma=10~{}\hbox{MeV}/c^{2}italic_σ = 10 MeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. To estimate the backgrounds to the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ, we define the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ mass sideband regions as |M+mJ/ψ±9σ|<3σplus-or-minussubscript𝑀superscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝑚𝐽𝜓9𝜎3𝜎|M_{\ell^{+}\ell^{-}}-m_{J/\psi}\pm 9\sigma|<3\sigma| italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ± 9 italic_σ | < 3 italic_σ.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 1: The invariant-mass distributions of the lepton pair from (a) the Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) data sample and (b) the Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) data sample. The curves show the best fit results with a Gaussian function for the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ signal and a second-order Chebychev function for the backgrounds. The red arrows indicate the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ signal region and the green ones indicate the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ mass sideband regions.

Figures 2(a) and 2(b) show the distributions of the recoil mass squared against the pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ system in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) data samples and signal MC simulations. This quantity is calculated by Mrecoil2(pJ/ψ)(Pe+ePJ/ψ)2superscriptsubscript𝑀recoil2𝑝𝐽𝜓superscriptsubscript𝑃superscript𝑒superscript𝑒subscript𝑃𝐽𝜓2M_{\rm recoil}^{2}(pJ/\psi)\equiv(P_{e^{+}e^{-}}-P_{J/\psi})^{2}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_recoil end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ) ≡ ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, where Pe+esubscript𝑃superscript𝑒superscript𝑒P_{e^{+}e^{-}}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the 4-momentum of the e+esuperscript𝑒superscript𝑒e^{+}e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT collision and PpJ/ψsubscript𝑃𝑝𝐽𝜓P_{pJ/\psi}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the 4-momentum of the pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ combination. In data, there are accumulations between 5GeV2/c45superscriptGeV2superscript𝑐4-5~{}\hbox{GeV}^{2}/c^{4}- 5 GeV start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and 5GeV2/c45superscriptGeV2superscript𝑐45~{}\hbox{GeV}^{2}/c^{4}5 GeV start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for the events selected in the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ signal region and these can be described well with the backgrounds estimated from the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ mass sideband regions. These backgrounds appear in the e+esuperscript𝑒superscript𝑒e^{+}e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT mode but are scarce in the μ+μsuperscript𝜇superscript𝜇\mu^{+}\mu^{-}italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT mode. On the other hand, these events produce a large peak at zero and a wide distribution of the recoil mass squared against the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ candidate, calculated by Mrecoil2(J/ψ)(Pe+ePJ/ψ)2superscriptsubscript𝑀recoil2𝐽𝜓superscriptsubscript𝑃superscript𝑒superscript𝑒subscript𝑃𝐽𝜓2M_{\rm recoil}^{2}(J/\psi)\equiv(P_{e^{+}e^{-}}-P_{J/\psi})^{2}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_recoil end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_J / italic_ψ ) ≡ ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, where PJ/ψsubscript𝑃𝐽𝜓P_{J/\psi}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the 4-momentum of the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ candidate. They are identified as backgrounds from Bhabha events with high energy bremsstrahlung radiation photon(s) and an additional proton from beam backgrounds. As this proton is not from an e+esuperscript𝑒superscript𝑒e^{+}e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT collision, this background can produce negative accumulations in the Mrecoil2(pJ/ψ)superscriptsubscript𝑀recoil2𝑝𝐽𝜓M_{\rm recoil}^{2}(pJ/\psi)italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_recoil end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ) distributions. We require Mrecoil2(pJ/ψ)>10GeV2/c4superscriptsubscript𝑀recoil2𝑝𝐽𝜓10superscriptGeV2superscript𝑐4M_{\rm recoil}^{2}(pJ/\psi)>10~{}\hbox{GeV}^{2}/c^{4}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_recoil end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ) > 10 GeV start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT to suppress these backgrounds with a selection efficiency of about 99% in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) decays. Figures 2(c) and 2(d) show the distributions of Mrecoil2(J/ψ)superscriptsubscript𝑀recoil2𝐽𝜓M_{\rm recoil}^{2}(J/\psi)italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_recoil end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_J / italic_ψ ) after this requirement. We notice that the data have higher distributions than signal MC simulations in the region Mrecoil2(J/ψ)<30GeV2/c4superscriptsubscript𝑀recoil2𝐽𝜓30superscriptGeV2superscript𝑐4M_{\rm recoil}^{2}(J/\psi)<30~{}\hbox{GeV}^{2}/c^{4}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_recoil end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_J / italic_ψ ) < 30 GeV start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. In the range Mrecoil2(J/ψ)>30GeV2/c4superscriptsubscript𝑀recoil2𝐽𝜓30superscriptGeV2superscript𝑐4M_{\rm recoil}^{2}(J/\psi)>30~{}\hbox{GeV}^{2}/c^{4}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_recoil end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_J / italic_ψ ) > 30 GeV start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, the MC and the data are in good agreement in Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ), but the MC is slightly higher than the data in Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ). It is also interesting to see an enhancement at around 22GeV2/c422superscriptGeV2superscript𝑐422~{}\hbox{GeV}^{2}/c^{4}22 GeV start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT in the Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) decays. However, the statistics are too limited to draw any conclusions with the presently available dataset.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 2: The distributions of the recoil mass squared of pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ (upper), and J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ (lower) in Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) (left) and Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) (right) decays. The dots with error bars are data, the shaded histograms are backgrounds estimated from the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ mass sideband regions, and the solid histograms are signal MC simulations. The arrows show the requirement Mrecoil2(pJ/ψ)>10GeV2/c4superscriptsubscript𝑀recoil2𝑝𝐽𝜓10superscriptGeV2superscript𝑐4M_{\rm recoil}^{2}(pJ/\psi)>10~{}{\hbox{GeV}^{2}/c^{4}}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_recoil end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ) > 10 GeV start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT.

IV Invariant mass spectra of pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ

All the candidates satisfying the selection criteria described above are accepted, including p𝑝pitalic_p or p¯¯𝑝\bar{p}over¯ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG with the same J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ candidate or multiple candidates sharing one lepton. We show the momentum distributions of the p/p¯𝑝¯𝑝p/\bar{p}italic_p / over¯ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG after selection criteria in Fig. 3.

Refer to caption
Figure 3: The momentum distributions of p/p¯𝑝¯𝑝p/\bar{p}italic_p / over¯ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays. The first row is the momenta of p𝑝pitalic_p and the second of p¯¯𝑝\bar{p}over¯ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG. The left and right panels are Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) and Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ), respectively. The dots with error bars are data, the shaded histograms are backgrounds estimated from the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ mass sideband regions, and the solid histograms are signal MC simulations.

According to the efficiency MC simulations, we obtain an efficiency varying from 29% (26%) to 36% (33%) in the Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) [Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S )] decays, and the mass resolution increasing from 1.5MeV/c21.5MeVsuperscript𝑐21.5~{}\hbox{MeV}/c^{2}1.5 MeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT to 4.9MeV/c24.9MeVsuperscript𝑐24.9~{}\hbox{MeV}/c^{2}4.9 MeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for MpJ/ψ[4.1,5.0]GeV/c2subscript𝑀𝑝𝐽𝜓4.15.0GeVsuperscript𝑐2M_{pJ/\psi}\in[4.1,~{}5.0]~{}\hbox{GeV}/c^{2}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ [ 4.1 , 5.0 ] GeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. We notice that the width of Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT reported by LHCb is ΓPc(4457)+=6.4±2.01.9+5.7MeVsubscriptΓsubscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457plus-or-minus6.4subscriptsuperscript2.05.71.9MeV\Gamma_{P_{c}(4457)^{+}}=6.4\pm 2.0^{+5.7}_{-1.9}~{}\hbox{MeV}roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 6.4 ± 2.0 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 5.7 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 1.9 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT MeV [15] and the mass resolution near the mass of Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is about 3.0MeV/c23.0MeVsuperscript𝑐23.0~{}\hbox{MeV}/c^{2}3.0 MeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. Therefore, we need to consider the mass resolution in fitting the MpJ/ψsubscript𝑀𝑝𝐽𝜓M_{pJ/\psi}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT distributions for the possible Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT signals. Here and hereinafter, the first uncertainty quoted is statistical, while the second corresponds to the total systematic uncertainty.

We then study the MpJ/ψsubscript𝑀𝑝𝐽𝜓M_{pJ/\psi}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT distributions from the signal MC simulations of Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, and Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. In each distribution, there is a clear Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT peak and a plateau of wrong combination with particle(s) from the recoil of Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. We perform a fit to this distribution using a Breit-Wigner function convolved with a Gaussian resolution function to describe the signals and a first-order polynomial function to describe the plateau of the wrong combinations. The fit range is MPc+±200MeV/c2plus-or-minussubscript𝑀superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐200MeVsuperscript𝑐2M_{P_{c}^{+}}\pm 200~{}\hbox{MeV}/c^{2}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ± 200 MeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, where MPc+subscript𝑀superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐M_{P_{c}^{+}}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the mass of Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. The fits yield mass resolutions of around 3MeV/c23MeVsuperscript𝑐23~{}\hbox{MeV}/c^{2}3 MeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for each Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT state. The mass resolutions obtained here agree with those obtained from the efficiency MC simulations directly. We calculate the ratio NPc+/NpJ/ψsubscript𝑁superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐subscript𝑁𝑝𝐽𝜓\mathcal{R}\equiv N_{P_{c}^{+}}/N_{pJ/\psi}caligraphic_R ≡ italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to be approximately 0.6, where the NPc+subscript𝑁superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐N_{P_{c}^{+}}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and NpJ/ψsubscript𝑁𝑝𝐽𝜓N_{pJ/\psi}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are the number of Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT signals from the fit and the number of all pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ combinations being selected between 4.0GeV/c24.0GeVsuperscript𝑐24.0~{}\hbox{GeV}/c^{2}4.0 GeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and 5.0GeV/c25.0GeVsuperscript𝑐25.0~{}\hbox{GeV}/c^{2}5.0 GeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, respectively. The efficiencies of all combinations (εallcmbMCsubscriptsuperscript𝜀MCallcmb\varepsilon^{\rm MC}_{\rm allcmb}italic_ε start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_MC end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_allcmb end_POSTSUBSCRIPT) are about 60%. We list the details of the mass resolutions, the ratios \mathcal{R}caligraphic_R, and the efficiencies εallcmbMCsubscriptsuperscript𝜀MCallcmb\varepsilon^{\rm MC}_{\rm allcmb}italic_ε start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_MC end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_allcmb end_POSTSUBSCRIPT from the signal MC simulations of Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, and Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays in Table 1.

Table 1: The mass resolution, the ratio of the number of Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT signals to the number of all pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ combinations, and the efficiency of all the pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ combinations from the signal MC simulations of Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, and Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) decays.
Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) decays Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) decays
Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
mass resolution (MeV/c2MeVsuperscript𝑐2\hbox{MeV}/c^{2}MeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT) 2.9±0.1plus-or-minus2.90.12.9\pm 0.12.9 ± 0.1 3.2±0.2plus-or-minus3.20.23.2\pm 0.23.2 ± 0.2 3.4±0.1plus-or-minus3.40.13.4\pm 0.13.4 ± 0.1 2.8±0.1plus-or-minus2.80.12.8\pm 0.12.8 ± 0.1 3.0±0.2plus-or-minus3.00.23.0\pm 0.23.0 ± 0.2 3.2±0.1plus-or-minus3.20.13.2\pm 0.13.2 ± 0.1
Ratio of NPc+/NpJ/ψsubscript𝑁superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐subscript𝑁𝑝𝐽𝜓N_{P_{c}^{+}}/N_{pJ/\psi}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0.60 0.56 0.57 0.59 0.56 0.54
εallcmbMCsubscriptsuperscript𝜀MCallcmb\varepsilon^{\rm MC}_{\rm allcmb}italic_ε start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_MC end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_allcmb end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (%) 58.7±0.1plus-or-minus58.70.158.7\pm 0.158.7 ± 0.1 59.2±0.1plus-or-minus59.20.159.2\pm 0.159.2 ± 0.1 59.7±0.1plus-or-minus59.70.159.7\pm 0.159.7 ± 0.1 58.9±0.1plus-or-minus58.90.158.9\pm 0.158.9 ± 0.1 59.2±0.1plus-or-minus59.20.159.2\pm 0.159.2 ± 0.1 59.5±0.1plus-or-minus59.50.159.5\pm 0.159.5 ± 0.1
Refer to caption
Figure 4: The invariant-mass distributions of pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ in the Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ), Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ), and continuum data samples. From left to right, the four panels are p+J/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓p+J/\psiitalic_p + italic_J / italic_ψ in e+esuperscript𝑒superscript𝑒e^{+}e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT mode, p¯+J/ψ¯𝑝𝐽𝜓\bar{p}+J/\psiover¯ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG + italic_J / italic_ψ in e+esuperscript𝑒superscript𝑒e^{+}e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT mode, p+J/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓p+J/\psiitalic_p + italic_J / italic_ψ in μ+μsuperscript𝜇superscript𝜇\mu^{+}\mu^{-}italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT mode, and p¯+J/ψ¯𝑝𝐽𝜓\bar{p}+J/\psiover¯ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG + italic_J / italic_ψ in μ+μsuperscript𝜇superscript𝜇\mu^{+}\mu^{-}italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT mode. From top to bottom, the three rows are the Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) decays, the Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) decays, and the continuum productions at s=10.52GeV𝑠10.52GeV\sqrt{s}=10.52~{}\hbox{GeV}square-root start_ARG italic_s end_ARG = 10.52 GeV. The solid histograms are the pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ signals, and the shaded histograms are backgrounds estimated from the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ mass sideband regions.

We study the MpJ/ψsubscript𝑀𝑝𝐽𝜓M_{pJ/\psi}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT distributions obtained from the Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ), Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ), and continuum data samples, and show them in Figs. 4(a-d), 4(e-h), and 4(i-l), respectively. There are clear pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ signals in the three data samples. As mentioned, we use the distributions obtained from the continuum data sample to estimate the backgrounds from e+esuperscript𝑒superscript𝑒e^{+}e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT annihilation in the Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) decays. For this, we scale the luminosities and correct for the efficiencies and the c.m. energy dependence of the Quantum Electrodynamics (QED) cross section σe+e1/sproportional-tosubscript𝜎superscript𝑒superscript𝑒1𝑠\sigma_{e^{+}e^{-}}\propto 1/sitalic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∝ 1 / italic_s, resulting in scale factors fscale=(Υ(1,2S)×εΥ(1,2S)×scont)/(cont×εcont×sΥ(1,2S))=0.077subscript𝑓scalesubscriptΥ12𝑆subscript𝜀Υ12𝑆subscript𝑠contsubscriptcontsubscript𝜀contsubscript𝑠Υ12𝑆0.077f_{\rm scale}=(\mathcal{L}_{\Upsilon(1,2S)}\times\varepsilon_{\Upsilon(1,2S)}% \times s_{\rm cont})/(\mathcal{L}_{\rm cont}\times\varepsilon_{\rm cont}\times s% _{\Upsilon(1,2S)})=0.077italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_scale end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT × italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT × italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cont end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) / ( caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cont end_POSTSUBSCRIPT × italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cont end_POSTSUBSCRIPT × italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = 0.077 and 0.301 for Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) and Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ), respectively. We find no peaking component in the combined MpJ/ψsubscript𝑀𝑝𝐽𝜓M_{pJ/\psi}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT distribution from Figs 4(i-l) and obtain the number of pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ candidates to be NcontpJ/ψ=383±20subscriptsuperscript𝑁𝑝𝐽𝜓contplus-or-minus38320N^{pJ/\psi}_{\rm cont}=383\pm 20italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cont end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 383 ± 20 after subtracting the backgrounds estimated from the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ mass sideband regions. To estimate the backgrounds due to the mis-identification of proton, we replace the proton identification requirements with p/(p+K)<0.4subscript𝑝subscript𝑝subscript𝐾0.4\mathcal{L}_{p}/(\mathcal{L}_{p}+\mathcal{L}_{K})<0.4caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ( caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) < 0.4 or p/(p+π)<0.4subscript𝑝subscript𝑝subscript𝜋0.4\mathcal{L}_{p}/(\mathcal{L}_{p}+\mathcal{L}_{\pi})<0.4caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ( caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_π end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) < 0.4 in the signal selection. We obtain 1746±42plus-or-minus1746421746\pm 421746 ± 42 K±J/ψsuperscript𝐾plus-or-minus𝐽𝜓K^{\pm}J/\psiitalic_K start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ signals with kaon identification efficiency of 93.5% or 1710±41plus-or-minus1710411710\pm 411710 ± 41 π±J/ψsuperscript𝜋plus-or-minus𝐽𝜓\pi^{\pm}J/\psiitalic_π start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ signals with pion identification efficiency of 92.4%. Taking into account mis-identification rates, we expect the number of backgrounds from K±J/ψsuperscript𝐾plus-or-minus𝐽𝜓K^{\pm}J/\psiitalic_K start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ or π±J/ψsuperscript𝜋plus-or-minus𝐽𝜓\pi^{\pm}J/\psiitalic_π start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ to be 50.3±0.9±1.3plus-or-minus50.30.91.350.3\pm 0.9\pm 1.350.3 ± 0.9 ± 1.3, where the systematic uncertainty is described in Sec. V. Hence, the number of pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ events after all background subtractions is found to be NcontpJ/ψ=333±18subscriptsuperscript𝑁𝑝𝐽𝜓contplus-or-minus33318N^{pJ/\psi}_{\rm cont}=333\pm 18italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cont end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 333 ± 18. With the scale factor fscalesubscript𝑓scalef_{\rm scale}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_scale end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, we expect 26±2±1plus-or-minus262126\pm 2\pm 126 ± 2 ± 1 and 100±5±4plus-or-minus10054100\pm 5\pm 4100 ± 5 ± 4 pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ signals from e+esuperscript𝑒superscript𝑒e^{+}e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT annihilation in the Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) and Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) data samples, respectively.

We use the NcontpJ/ψsubscriptsuperscript𝑁𝑝𝐽𝜓contN^{pJ/\psi}_{\rm cont}italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cont end_POSTSUBSCRIPT obtained from the continuum data sample to calculate the cross section of the inclusive pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ production in e+esuperscript𝑒superscript𝑒e^{+}e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT annihilation via

σ(e+epJ/ψ+anything)=NcontpJ/ψLcont×εcontnoPc×(J/ψ+)×(1+δISR).𝜎superscript𝑒superscript𝑒𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔subscriptsuperscript𝑁𝑝𝐽𝜓contsubscript𝐿contsuperscriptsubscript𝜀contsubscriptnoPc𝐽𝜓superscriptsuperscript1subscript𝛿ISR\sigma(e^{+}e^{-}\to pJ/\psi+anything)=\frac{N^{pJ/\psi}_{\rm cont}}{L_{\rm cont% }\times\varepsilon_{\rm cont}^{\rm noP_{c}}\times{\cal B}(J/\psi\to\ell^{+}% \ell^{-})\times(1+\delta_{\rm ISR})}.italic_σ ( italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ) = divide start_ARG italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cont end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cont end_POSTSUBSCRIPT × italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cont end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_noP start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT × caligraphic_B ( italic_J / italic_ψ → roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) × ( 1 + italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ISR end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG . (1)

Here, εcontnoPc=66.1%superscriptsubscript𝜀contsubscriptnoPcpercent66.1\varepsilon_{\rm cont}^{\rm noP_{c}}=66.1\%italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cont end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_noP start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 66.1 % is the efficiency obtained from no-Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT MC simulation of continuum production, (1+δISR)=0.821subscript𝛿ISR0.82(1+\delta_{\rm ISR})=0.82( 1 + italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ISR end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = 0.82 is the radiative correction factor [30, 31], and (J/ψ+)=(11.93±0.07)%𝐽𝜓superscriptsuperscriptpercentplus-or-minus11.930.07{\cal B}(J/\psi\to\ell^{+}\ell^{-})=(11.93\pm 0.07)\%caligraphic_B ( italic_J / italic_ψ → roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = ( 11.93 ± 0.07 ) % is the branching fraction of J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ decaying to e+esuperscript𝑒superscript𝑒e^{+}e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT or μ+μsuperscript𝜇superscript𝜇\mu^{+}\mu^{-}italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [29]. We obtain the cross section σ(e+epJ/ψ+anything)=(57.5±2.1±2.5)fb𝜎superscript𝑒superscript𝑒𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔plus-or-minus57.52.12.5femtobarn\sigma(e^{+}e^{-}\to pJ/\psi+anything)=(57.5\pm 2.1\pm 2.5)~{}$\mathrm{fb}$italic_σ ( italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ) = ( 57.5 ± 2.1 ± 2.5 ) roman_fb at s=10.52GeV𝑠10.52GeV\sqrt{s}=10.52~{}\hbox{GeV}square-root start_ARG italic_s end_ARG = 10.52 GeV, where the systematic uncertainties are discussed in Sec. V.

Figure 5 shows the combined distributions of Figs. 4(a-d) and 4(e-h) for Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) and Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays, respectively. Since we measure the pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ production in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays, the background of continuum production in Fig. 5 is removed. We estimate the number of backgrounds from K±J/ψsuperscript𝐾plus-or-minus𝐽𝜓K^{\pm}J/\psiitalic_K start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ or π±J/ψsuperscript𝜋plus-or-minus𝐽𝜓\pi^{\pm}J/\psiitalic_π start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ to be 17.9±1.2plus-or-minus17.91.217.9\pm 1.217.9 ± 1.2 (43.9±3.0plus-or-minus43.93.043.9\pm 3.043.9 ± 3.0) in Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) [Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S )] decays. With the backgrounds estimated from the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ mass sidebands and those from mis-identification of proton being subtracted, we get the final numbers of pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ signal events to be NΥ(1S)pJ/ψ=363±19subscriptsuperscript𝑁𝑝𝐽𝜓Υ1𝑆plus-or-minus36319N^{pJ/\psi}_{\Upsilon(1S)}=363\pm 19italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 363 ± 19 in the Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) decays and NΥ(2S)pJ/ψ=541±23subscriptsuperscript𝑁𝑝𝐽𝜓Υ2𝑆plus-or-minus54123N^{pJ/\psi}_{\Upsilon(2S)}=541\pm 23italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 541 ± 23 in the Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) decays. These yields are much higher than those estimated to be due to the underlying e+esuperscript𝑒superscript𝑒e^{+}e^{-}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT continuum production. To measure the production of pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays, we use the no-Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT MC samples to estimate the efficiencies to be εΥ(1,2S)noPc=64.8%superscriptsubscript𝜀Υ12𝑆subscriptnoPcpercent64.8\varepsilon_{\Upsilon(1,2S)}^{\rm noP_{c}}=64.8\%italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_noP start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 64.8 % and 65.1% for the Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) and Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays in the region of 4.0GeV/c2<MpJ/ψ<5.5GeV/c24.0GeVsuperscript𝑐2subscript𝑀𝑝𝐽𝜓5.5GeVsuperscript𝑐24.0~{}\hbox{GeV}/c^{2}<M_{pJ/\psi}<5.5~{}\hbox{GeV}/c^{2}4.0 GeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT < italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < 5.5 GeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. We calculate the branching fractions of Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays using

[Υ(1,2S)pJ/ψ+anything]=NΥ(1,2S)pJ/ψfscale×NcontpJ/ψNΥ(1,2S)×εΥ(1,2S)noPc×(J/ψ+),delimited-[]Υ12𝑆𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔subscriptsuperscript𝑁𝑝𝐽𝜓Υ12𝑆subscript𝑓scalesubscriptsuperscript𝑁𝑝𝐽𝜓contsubscript𝑁Υ12𝑆superscriptsubscript𝜀Υ12𝑆noPc𝐽𝜓superscriptsuperscript{\cal B}[\Upsilon(1,2S)\to pJ/\psi+anything]=\frac{N^{pJ/\psi}_{\Upsilon(1,2S)% }-f_{\rm scale}\times N^{pJ/\psi}_{\rm cont}}{N_{\Upsilon(1,2S)}\times% \varepsilon_{\Upsilon(1,2S)}^{\rm noPc}\times{\cal B}(J/\psi\to\ell^{+}\ell^{-% })},caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] = divide start_ARG italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_scale end_POSTSUBSCRIPT × italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cont end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT × italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_noPc end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT × caligraphic_B ( italic_J / italic_ψ → roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_ARG , (2)

where NΥ(1,2S)subscript𝑁Υ12𝑆N_{\Upsilon(1,2S)}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are the numbers of Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) events in the Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) data samples. We obtain that [Υ(1S)pJ/ψ+anything]=(4.27±0.16±0.20)×105delimited-[]Υ1𝑆𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔plus-or-minus4.270.160.20superscript105{\cal B}[\Upsilon(1S)\to pJ/\psi+anything]=(4.27\pm 0.16\pm 0.20)\times 10^{-5}caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] = ( 4.27 ± 0.16 ± 0.20 ) × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and [Υ(2S)pJ/ψ+anything]=(3.59±0.14±0.16)×105delimited-[]Υ2𝑆𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔plus-or-minus3.590.140.16superscript105{\cal B}[\Upsilon(2S)\to pJ/\psi+anything]=(3.59\pm 0.14\pm 0.16)\times 10^{-5}caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] = ( 3.59 ± 0.14 ± 0.16 ) × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for the first time. Excluding the background of Υ(2S)Υ(1S)+anythingΥ2𝑆Υ1𝑆𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔\Upsilon(2S)\to\Upsilon(1S)+anythingroman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) → roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g transitions and Υ(1S)pJ/ψ+anythingΥ1𝑆𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔\Upsilon(1S)\to pJ/\psi+anythingroman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g with this measurement of [Υ(1S)pJ/ψ+anything]delimited-[]Υ1𝑆𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔{\cal B}[\Upsilon(1S)\to pJ/\psi+anything]caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ], we correct the [Υ(2S)pJ/ψ+anything]delimited-[]Υ2𝑆𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔{\cal B}[\Upsilon(2S)\to pJ/\psi+anything]caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] and find a value of (2.46±0.15±0.17)×105plus-or-minus2.460.150.17superscript105(2.46\pm 0.15\pm 0.17)\times 10^{-5}( 2.46 ± 0.15 ± 0.17 ) × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. Systematic uncertainties are listed in Table 3, which is described in Sec. V. The world average values of the branching fractions of J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ production in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) decays are [Υ(1S)J/ψ+anything]=(5.4±0.4)×104delimited-[]Υ1𝑆𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔plus-or-minus5.40.4superscript104{\cal B}[\Upsilon(1S)\to J/\psi+anything]=(5.4\pm 0.4)\times 10^{-4}caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) → italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] = ( 5.4 ± 0.4 ) × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and [Υ(2S)J/ψ+anything]<6×103delimited-[]Υ2𝑆𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔6superscript103{\cal B}[\Upsilon(2S)\to J/\psi+anything]<6\times 10^{-3}caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) → italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] < 6 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT at 90% credibility [29]. Thus, the ratio (ΥpJ/ψ+anything)/(ΥJ/ψ+anything)Υ𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔Υ𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔{\cal B}(\Upsilon\to pJ/\psi+anything)/{\cal B}(\Upsilon\to J/\psi+anything)caligraphic_B ( roman_Υ → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ) / caligraphic_B ( roman_Υ → italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ) is of order 101102superscript101superscript10210^{-1}-10^{-2}10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) decays.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 5: The combined distributions of the invariant masses of pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ and p¯J/ψ¯𝑝𝐽𝜓\bar{p}J/\psiover¯ start_ARG italic_p end_ARG italic_J / italic_ψ from (a) the Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) inclusive decays and (b) the Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays, and the fit results including Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. The dots with error bars are data. The shaded histograms are the backgrounds estimated from the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ mass sidebands. The blue histograms are the best fit results; the green histograms are the Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, and Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT components; the pink histograms are the no-Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT components.

To estimate the production of a possible Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT state in the Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) or Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays, we perform binned maximum likelihood fits to the distribution of MpJ/ψsubscript𝑀𝑝𝐽𝜓M_{pJ/\psi}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in Fig. 5(a) or  5(b) with

fPDF=fPc(4312)++fPc(4440)++fPc(4457)++fnoPc+fbkg,subscript𝑓PDFsubscript𝑓subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312subscript𝑓subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440subscript𝑓subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457subscript𝑓subscriptnoPcsubscript𝑓bkgf_{\rm PDF}=f_{P_{c}(4312)^{+}}+f_{P_{c}(4440)^{+}}+f_{P_{c}(4457)^{+}}+f_{\rm noP% _{c}}+f_{\rm bkg},italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_PDF end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_noP start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_bkg end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (3)

where fPc(4312)+subscript𝑓subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312f_{P_{c}(4312)^{+}}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, fPc(4440)+subscript𝑓subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440f_{P_{c}(4440)^{+}}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, fPc(4457)+subscript𝑓subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457f_{P_{c}(4457)^{+}}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, and fnoPcsubscript𝑓subscriptnoPcf_{\rm noP_{c}}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_noP start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are the histogram PDFs obtained from the signal MC simulations on Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, and the no-Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT MC simulation. We use a second-order polynomial function for the fbkgsubscript𝑓bkgf_{\rm bkg}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_bkg end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to describe the backgrounds due to J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ selection. We fit to the events from the J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ signal region with fPDFsubscript𝑓PDFf_{\rm PDF}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_PDF end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and the events from J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ mass sidebands with fbkgsubscript𝑓bkgf_{\rm bkg}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_bkg end_POSTSUBSCRIPT simultaneously. The fit yields the numbers of Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT signals [NfitA(Pc+)superscriptsubscript𝑁fitAsuperscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐N_{\rm fit}^{\rm A}(P_{c}^{+})italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_A end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )], as listed in Table 2. Since none of the Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, or Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is significant, we integrate the likelihood versus the NfitA(Pc+)superscriptsubscript𝑁fitAsuperscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐N_{\rm fit}^{\rm A}(P_{c}^{+})italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_A end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) and determine the upper limits NfitA,UL(Pc+)superscriptsubscript𝑁fitAULsuperscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐N_{\rm fit}^{\rm A,UL}(P_{c}^{+})italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_A , roman_UL end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) at 90% credibility. We also perform a fit to the MpJ/ψsubscript𝑀𝑝𝐽𝜓M_{pJ/\psi}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT distribution in Fig. 5(a) or  5(b) with individual Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT state in the fPDFsubscript𝑓PDFf_{\rm PDF}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_PDF end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, which yields the new number of Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT signal [NfitB(Pc+)superscriptsubscript𝑁fitBsuperscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐N_{\rm fit}^{\rm B}(P_{c}^{+})italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_B end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )]. Similarly, we determine the related upper limits NfitB,UL(Pc+)superscriptsubscript𝑁fitBULsuperscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐N_{\rm fit}^{\rm B,UL}(P_{c}^{+})italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_B , roman_UL end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) for Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, and Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT at 90% credibility. We also estimate the upper limits by varying the masses and widths of Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT states by 1σ1𝜎1\sigma1 italic_σ in these tests. We take the largest values of the upper limits as the conservative estimations of the upper limits of the numbers of the Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT signals [NsigUL(Pc+)subscriptsuperscript𝑁ULsigsuperscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐N^{\rm UL}_{\rm sig}(P_{c}^{+})italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_UL end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sig end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )] in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays. We then calculate the upper limit of the branching fraction of a Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT state produced in Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) [Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S )] inclusive decays at 90% credibility with

[Υ(1,2S)Pc++anything](Pc+pJ/ψ)<NsigUL(Pc+)NΥ(1,2S)εallcmbMC(J/ψ+)(1δsys),delimited-[]Υ12𝑆superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐𝑝𝐽𝜓subscriptsuperscript𝑁ULsigsuperscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐subscript𝑁Υ12𝑆subscriptsuperscript𝜀MCallcmb𝐽𝜓superscriptsuperscript1subscript𝛿sys{\cal B}[\Upsilon(1,2S)\to P_{c}^{+}+anything]\cdot{\cal B}(P_{c}^{+}\to pJ/% \psi)<\frac{N^{\rm UL}_{\rm sig}(P_{c}^{+})}{N_{\Upsilon(1,2S)}\cdot% \varepsilon^{\rm MC}_{\rm allcmb}\cdot{\cal B}(J/\psi\to\ell^{+}\ell^{-})(1-% \delta_{\rm sys})},caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) → italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] ⋅ caligraphic_B ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ) < divide start_ARG italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_UL end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sig end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋅ italic_ε start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_MC end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_allcmb end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋅ caligraphic_B ( italic_J / italic_ψ → roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ( 1 - italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sys end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG , (4)

where δsys=5.0%(4.7%)subscript𝛿syspercent5.0percent4.7\delta_{\rm sys}=5.0\%~{}(4.7\%)italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sys end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 5.0 % ( 4.7 % ) is the systematic uncertainty of Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) [Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S )] decays, which are described in Sec. V. We summarize the values of NfitA(Pc+)superscriptsubscript𝑁fitAsuperscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐N_{\rm fit}^{\rm A}(P_{c}^{+})italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_A end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ), NfitA,UL(Pc+)superscriptsubscript𝑁fitAULsuperscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐N_{\rm fit}^{\rm A,UL}(P_{c}^{+})italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_A , roman_UL end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ), NfitB(Pc+)superscriptsubscript𝑁fit𝐵superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐N_{\rm fit}^{B}(P_{c}^{+})italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ), NfitB,UL(Pc+)superscriptsubscript𝑁fitBULsuperscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐N_{\rm fit}^{\rm B,UL}(P_{c}^{+})italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_B , roman_UL end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ), NsigUL(Pc+)subscriptsuperscript𝑁ULsigsuperscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐N^{\rm UL}_{\rm sig}(P_{c}^{+})italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_UL end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sig end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ), and the upper limit of [Υ(1,2S)Pc++anything](Pc+pJ/ψ)delimited-[]Υ12𝑆superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐𝑝𝐽𝜓{\cal B}[\Upsilon(1,2S)\to P_{c}^{+}+anything]\cdot{\cal B}(P_{c}^{+}\to pJ/\psi)caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) → italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] ⋅ caligraphic_B ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ) at 90% credibility in Table 2.

Table 2: The fit results and the upper limits of Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, and Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT productions in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays. NfitAsuperscriptsubscript𝑁fitAN_{\rm fit}^{\rm A}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_A end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the number of Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT signals in the fit with the PDF function fPDFsubscript𝑓PDFf_{\rm PDF}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_PDF end_POSTSUBSCRIPT contains Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, and Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT states, and NfitA,ULsuperscriptsubscript𝑁fitAULN_{\rm fit}^{\rm A,UL}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_A , roman_UL end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the related upper limits at 90% credibility. NfitBsuperscriptsubscript𝑁fitBN_{\rm fit}^{\rm B}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_B end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the number of Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT signals in the fit with the PDF function that contains only a single Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT state, and NfitB,ULsuperscriptsubscript𝑁fitBULN_{\rm fit}^{\rm B,UL}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_B , roman_UL end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the related upper limits at 90% credibility. NsigULsubscriptsuperscript𝑁ULsigN^{\rm UL}_{\rm sig}italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_UL end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sig end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the final conservative estimation of the upper limit of the number of Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT signals in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays. ULsuperscriptUL{\cal B}^{\rm UL}caligraphic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_UL end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the upper limit of (ΥPc++anything)(Pc+pJ/ψ)Υsuperscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐𝑝𝐽𝜓{\cal B}(\Upsilon\to P_{c}^{+}+anything)\cdot{\cal B}(P_{c}^{+}\to pJ/\psi)caligraphic_B ( roman_Υ → italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ) ⋅ caligraphic_B ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ) at 90% credibility.
Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) decays Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) decays
Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
NfitAsuperscriptsubscript𝑁fitAN_{\rm fit}^{\rm A}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_A end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 10±8plus-or-minus10810\pm 810 ± 8 14±12plus-or-minus141214\pm 1214 ± 12 3±9plus-or-minus39-3\pm 9- 3 ± 9 30±16plus-or-minus301630\pm 1630 ± 16 33±15plus-or-minus331533\pm 1533 ± 15 0±3plus-or-minus030\pm 30 ± 3
NfitA,ULsuperscriptsubscript𝑁fitAULN_{\rm fit}^{\rm A,UL}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_A , roman_UL end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 26 37 14 52 60 6
NfitBsuperscriptsubscript𝑁fitBN_{\rm fit}^{\rm B}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_B end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 10±8plus-or-minus10810\pm 810 ± 8 12±11plus-or-minus121112\pm 1112 ± 11 3±9plus-or-minus393\pm 93 ± 9 29±12plus-or-minus291229\pm 1229 ± 12 31±15plus-or-minus311531\pm 1531 ± 15 0±3plus-or-minus030\pm 30 ± 3
NfitB,ULsuperscriptsubscript𝑁fitBULN_{\rm fit}^{\rm B,UL}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_fit end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_B , roman_UL end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 26 33 17 50 57 7
NsigULsubscriptsuperscript𝑁ULsigN^{\rm UL}_{\rm sig}italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_UL end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sig end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 31 47 34 56 77 26
ULsuperscriptUL{\cal B}^{\rm UL}caligraphic_B start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_UL end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (×106absentsuperscript106\times 10^{-6}× 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT) 4.5 6.8 4.9 5.3 7.2 2.4

V Systematic uncertainties

Table 3: The summary of the systematic uncertainties (%) in the measurements of [Υ(1,2S)pJ/ψ+anything]delimited-[]Υ12𝑆𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔{\cal B}[\Upsilon(1,2S)\to pJ/\psi+anything]caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] and σ(e+epJ/ψ+anything)𝜎superscript𝑒superscript𝑒𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔\sigma(e^{+}e^{-}\to pJ/\psi+anything)italic_σ ( italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ) at s=10.52GeV𝑠10.52GeV\sqrt{s}=10.52~{}\hbox{GeV}square-root start_ARG italic_s end_ARG = 10.52 GeV.
Source Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) decay Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) decay σ(e+epJ/ψ+anything)𝜎superscript𝑒superscript𝑒𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔\sigma(e^{+}e^{-}\to pJ/\psi+anything)italic_σ ( italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g )
Particle identification 2.1 2.1 2.1
Tracking 1.1 1.1 1.1
J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ signal region 0.6 0.5 0.4
Mrecoil2(pJ/ψ)superscriptsubscript𝑀recoil2𝑝𝐽𝜓M_{\rm recoil}^{2}(pJ/\psi)italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_recoil end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ) requirement 1.5 1.5 1.5
(J/ψ+)𝐽𝜓superscriptsuperscript{\cal B}(J/\psi\to\ell^{+}\ell^{-})caligraphic_B ( italic_J / italic_ψ → roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) 0.6 0.6 0.6
1+δISR1subscript𝛿ISR1+\delta_{\rm ISR}1 + italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ISR end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1.0
Modeling in MC simulation 2.8 2.3 2.6
Number of Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) events 2.2 2.3
Integrated luminosity 1.4
Statistics of MC samples 0.5 0.5 0.5
Sum in quadrature 4.6 4.4 4.3

As listed in Table 3, we consider the following systematic uncertainties in determining the branching fractions [Υ(1,2S)pJ/ψ+anything]delimited-[]Υ12𝑆𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔{\cal B}[\Upsilon(1,2S)\to pJ/\psi+anything]caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] and measuring σ(e+epJ/ψ+anything)𝜎superscript𝑒superscript𝑒𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔\sigma(e^{+}e^{-}\to pJ/\psi+anything)italic_σ ( italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ) at s=10.52GeV𝑠10.52GeV\sqrt{s}=10.52~{}\hbox{GeV}square-root start_ARG italic_s end_ARG = 10.52 GeV: particle identification, tracking efficiency, J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ signal region, Mrecoil2(pJ/ψ)superscriptsubscript𝑀recoil2𝑝𝐽𝜓M_{\rm recoil}^{2}(pJ/\psi)italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_recoil end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ) requirement, branching fraction of J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ decay, number of Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) events, integrated luminosity, modeling in MC simulation, and statistics of MC samples, etc. The uncertainties due to the lepton identification are 2.0% and 0.5% for e±superscript𝑒plus-or-minuse^{\pm}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and μ±superscript𝜇plus-or-minus\mu^{\pm}italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, respectively. For the proton identification, we have applied an efficiency correction according to the momentum and angle in the laboratory frame. Shifting the correction factor by 1σ1𝜎1\sigma1 italic_σ, we get the related efficiency difference of 0.43% and take 0.5% to be the systematic uncertainty of proton identification. Therefore, the total systematic uncertainty due to the particle identification is 2.1%. In estimating the backgrounds from KJ/ψ𝐾𝐽𝜓KJ/\psiitalic_K italic_J / italic_ψ or πJ/ψ𝜋𝐽𝜓\pi J/\psiitalic_π italic_J / italic_ψ, the mis-identification of K(π)𝐾𝜋K(\pi)italic_K ( italic_π ) to p𝑝pitalic_p is (1.98±0.07)%[(0.72±0.02)%]1.98\pm 0.07)\%~{}[(0.72\pm 0.02)\%]1.98 ± 0.07 ) % [ ( 0.72 ± 0.02 ) % ]. The uncertainties of mis-identification are not listed in Table 3 but contribute 0.4, 1.1, 1.3 in the numbers of estimated backgrounds from KJ/ψ𝐾𝐽𝜓KJ/\psiitalic_K italic_J / italic_ψ and πJ/ψ𝜋𝐽𝜓\pi J/\psiitalic_π italic_J / italic_ψ in Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) decays, Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) decays, and continuum productions. The uncertainty due to the tracking efficiency is 0.35% per track and adds linearly. Fitting the M+subscript𝑀superscriptsuperscriptM_{\ell^{+}\ell^{-}}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT distributions from data and MC simulations with a Gaussian function for J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ signal and a second-order Chebychev function for backgrounds, we obtain the efficiencies of J/ψ𝐽𝜓J/\psiitalic_J / italic_ψ mass signal window to be εJ/ψdata=(99.43±0.58)%subscriptsuperscript𝜀data𝐽𝜓percentplus-or-minus99.430.58\varepsilon^{\rm data}_{J/\psi}=(99.43\pm 0.58)\%italic_ε start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_data end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( 99.43 ± 0.58 ) %, (99.56±0.48)%percentplus-or-minus99.560.48(99.56\pm 0.48)\%( 99.56 ± 0.48 ) %, and (99.69±0.37)plus-or-minus99.690.37(99.69\pm 0.37)( 99.69 ± 0.37 )% in Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) decays, Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) decays, and continuum productions in data, and εJ/ψMC=99.9%subscriptsuperscript𝜀MC𝐽𝜓percent99.9\varepsilon^{\rm MC}_{J/\psi}=99.9\%italic_ε start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_MC end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 99.9 % in the signal MC simulations. We correct the efficiencies by the ratios εJ/ψdata/εJ/ψMCsubscriptsuperscript𝜀data𝐽𝜓subscriptsuperscript𝜀MC𝐽𝜓\varepsilon^{\rm data}_{J/\psi}/\varepsilon^{\rm MC}_{J/\psi}italic_ε start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_data end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_ε start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_MC end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_J / italic_ψ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, and take the errors of the ratios to be the systematic uncertainties, i.e., 0.6% in the Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) decays, 0.5% in the Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) decays and 0.4% in the continuum productions. The efficiencies of the requirement Mrecoil2(pJ/ψ)>10GeV2/c4superscriptsubscript𝑀recoil2𝑝𝐽𝜓10superscriptGeV2superscript𝑐4M_{\rm recoil}^{2}(pJ/\psi)>10~{}\hbox{GeV}^{2}/c^{4}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_recoil end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ) > 10 GeV start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT are 98.9%, 99.9%, and 99.9% in signal MC simulations for the Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) decays, the Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) decays, and the continuum productions. Since all the MC simulations of the Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT decay model and no-Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT process show efficiencies higher than 98.5%, we take 1.5% as the systematic uncertainty of the requirement on Mrecoil2(pJ/ψ)superscriptsubscript𝑀recoil2𝑝𝐽𝜓M_{\rm recoil}^{2}(pJ/\psi)italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_recoil end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ). According to the world average values [29], (J/ψ+)(l=e,μ)𝐽𝜓superscriptsuperscript𝑙𝑒𝜇{\cal B}(J/\psi\to\ell^{+}\ell^{-})(l=e,\mu)caligraphic_B ( italic_J / italic_ψ → roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ( italic_l = italic_e , italic_μ ) contributes a systematic uncertainty of 0.6%. By varying the photon energy cutoff by 50MeV50MeV50~{}\hbox{MeV}50 MeV in the simulation of ISR, we determine the change of 1+δISR1subscript𝛿ISR1+\delta_{\rm ISR}1 + italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ISR end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to be 0.01 and take 1.0% to be the conservative systematic uncertainty in measuring the cross section σ(e+epJ/ψ+anything)𝜎superscript𝑒superscript𝑒𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔\sigma(e^{+}e^{-}\to pJ/\psi+anything)italic_σ ( italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ) at s=10.52GeV𝑠10.52GeV\sqrt{s}=10.52~{}\hbox{GeV}square-root start_ARG italic_s end_ARG = 10.52 GeV. There are uncertainties in modeling the final states in the MC simulations. In the hadronization of qq¯𝑞¯𝑞q\bar{q}italic_q over¯ start_ARG italic_q end_ARG, we vary the mass and width of X𝑋Xitalic_X by 200MeV/c2200MeVsuperscript𝑐2200~{}\hbox{MeV}/c^{2}200 MeV / italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and 500MeV500MeV500~{}\hbox{MeV}500 MeV, which have differences in efficiency that 2.6% in the Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) decays, 1.9% in the Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) decays and 2.3% in the continuum production, respectively. Considering that the proton candidate may come from ΛΛ\Lambdaroman_Λ decay, we simulate the MC samples of Υ(1,2S)pJ/ψ+Λ¯+(sq¯)Υ12𝑆𝑝𝐽𝜓¯Λ𝑠¯𝑞\Upsilon(1,2S)\to pJ/\psi+\bar{\Lambda}+(s\bar{q})roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + over¯ start_ARG roman_Λ end_ARG + ( italic_s over¯ start_ARG italic_q end_ARG ) and find the efficiency differences, from those of Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT signal MC samples, of 1.1% in Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) decays, 1.2% in Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) decays, and 1.1% in contnuum production. We sum the two sources and obtain the systematic uncertainties in modeling the final states in MC simulations to be to be 2.8%, 2.3%, and 2.6% in Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) decays, Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) decays, and continuum productions at s=10.52GeV𝑠10.52GeV\sqrt{s}=10.52~{}\hbox{GeV}square-root start_ARG italic_s end_ARG = 10.52 GeV. The uncertainties of the total numbers of Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) events and Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) events are 2.2% and 2.3% in the Belle data samples [20, 21]. The common uncertainty in the integrated luminosities for the Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ), Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ), and continuum data samples is 1.4%, which is canceled in calculating the scale factor fscalesubscript𝑓scalef_{\rm scale}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_scale end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. The statistical uncertainties of the signal MC samples are 0.5% in common. Assuming these uncertainties are independent and sum them in quadrature, we obtain the total systematic uncertainties to be 4.6% in [Υ(1S)pJ/ψ+anything]delimited-[]Υ1𝑆𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔{\cal B}[\Upsilon(1S)\to pJ/\psi+anything]caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ], 4.4% in [Υ(2S)pJ/ψ+anything]delimited-[]Υ2𝑆𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔{\cal B}[\Upsilon(2S)\to pJ/\psi+anything]caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ], and 4.3% in σ(e+epJ/ψ+anything)𝜎superscript𝑒superscript𝑒𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔\sigma(e^{+}e^{-}\to pJ/\psi+anything)italic_σ ( italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ) at s=10.52GeV𝑠10.52GeV\sqrt{s}=10.52~{}\hbox{GeV}square-root start_ARG italic_s end_ARG = 10.52 GeV.

In determining the upper limits of Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT productions in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) decays, most of the systematic uncertainties are the same as those listed in Table 3, with the exception of the modeling of pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ in signal MC simulations and additional uncertainties in fits. To evaluate these, we do the similar studies, including varying the mass and width of Xqq¯𝑋𝑞¯𝑞X\to q\bar{q}italic_X → italic_q over¯ start_ARG italic_q end_ARG and simulating the MC sample of Υ(1,2S)Pc++Λ¯+(sq¯)Υ12𝑆superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐¯Λ𝑠¯𝑞\Upsilon(1,2S)\to P_{c}^{+}+\bar{\Lambda}+(s~{}\bar{q})roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) → italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + over¯ start_ARG roman_Λ end_ARG + ( italic_s over¯ start_ARG italic_q end_ARG ). We replace the uncertainties in modeling by 3.3% in Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) decays and 2.9% in Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) decays in Table 3. Therefore, the total systematic uncertainties of Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT productions in Υ(1S)Υ1𝑆\Upsilon(1S)roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) decays and Υ(2S)Υ2𝑆\Upsilon(2S)roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) decays are 5.0% and 4.7%, respectively. To estimate the systematic uncertainty of fnoPcsubscript𝑓subscriptnoPcf_{\rm noP_{c}}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_noP start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in the fits, we investigate the difference in the yield when using an ARGUS function to replace the histogram PDF obtained from the no-Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT MC simulation [32]. We change the masses and the widths of the Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT states by 1σ1𝜎1\sigma1 italic_σ according to LHCb measurement [15]. As before, we take the highest values of NsigUL(Pc+)subscriptsuperscript𝑁ULsigsuperscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐N^{\rm UL}_{\rm sig}(P_{c}^{+})italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_UL end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sig end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) to calculate the upper limit of Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT production in the Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays.

VI Summary

We study the pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ final states in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays and search for the Pc(4312)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312P_{c}(4312)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Pc(4440)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440P_{c}(4440)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and Pc(4457)+subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457P_{c}(4457)^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT signals. To study the production of pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ in the Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) data samples, we also investigate the pJ/ψ𝑝𝐽𝜓pJ/\psiitalic_p italic_J / italic_ψ final state in the Belle continuum data sample. We determine the branching fractions to be [Υ(1S)pJ/ψ+anything]=(4.27±0.16±0.20)×105delimited-[]Υ1𝑆𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔plus-or-minus4.270.160.20superscript105{\cal B}[\Upsilon(1S)\to pJ/\psi+anything]=(4.27\pm 0.16\pm 0.20)\times 10^{-5}caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] = ( 4.27 ± 0.16 ± 0.20 ) × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and [Υ(2S)pJ/ψ+anything]=(3.59±0.14±0.16)×105delimited-[]Υ2𝑆𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔plus-or-minus3.590.140.16superscript105{\cal B}[\Upsilon(2S)\to pJ/\psi+anything]=(3.59\pm 0.14\pm 0.16)\times 10^{-5}caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] = ( 3.59 ± 0.14 ± 0.16 ) × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, and the cross section of continuum production to be σ(e+epJ/ψ+anything)=(57.5±2.1±2.5)fb𝜎superscript𝑒superscript𝑒𝑝𝐽𝜓𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔plus-or-minus57.52.12.5femtobarn\sigma(e^{+}e^{-}\to pJ/\psi+anything)=(57.5\pm 2.1\pm 2.5)~{}$\mathrm{fb}$italic_σ ( italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ) = ( 57.5 ± 2.1 ± 2.5 ) roman_fb at s=10.52GeV𝑠10.52GeV\sqrt{s}=10.52~{}\hbox{GeV}square-root start_ARG italic_s end_ARG = 10.52 GeV. No significant Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT signals exist in the Belle Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) data samples. We determine the upper limits of Pc+superscriptsubscript𝑃𝑐P_{c}^{+}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT productions in Υ(1,2S)Υ12𝑆\Upsilon(1,2S)roman_Υ ( 1 , 2 italic_S ) inclusive decays to be

[Υ(1S)Pc(4312)++anything][Pc(4312)+pJ/ψ]delimited-[]Υ1𝑆subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔delimited-[]subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312𝑝𝐽𝜓\displaystyle{\cal B}[\Upsilon(1S)\to P_{c}(4312)^{+}+anything]\cdot{\cal B}[P% _{c}(4312)^{+}\to pJ/\psi]caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) → italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] ⋅ caligraphic_B [ italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ] <\displaystyle<< 4.5×106,4.5superscript106\displaystyle 4.5\times 10^{-6},4.5 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (5)
[Υ(1S)Pc(4440)++anything][Pc(4440)+pJ/ψ]delimited-[]Υ1𝑆subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔delimited-[]subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440𝑝𝐽𝜓\displaystyle{\cal B}[\Upsilon(1S)\to P_{c}(4440)^{+}+anything]\cdot{\cal B}[P% _{c}(4440)^{+}\to pJ/\psi]caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) → italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] ⋅ caligraphic_B [ italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ] <\displaystyle<< 6.8×106,6.8superscript106\displaystyle 6.8\times 10^{-6},6.8 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (6)
[Υ(1S)Pc(4457)++anything][Pc(4457)+pJ/ψ]delimited-[]Υ1𝑆subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔delimited-[]subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457𝑝𝐽𝜓\displaystyle{\cal B}[\Upsilon(1S)\to P_{c}(4457)^{+}+anything]\cdot{\cal B}[P% _{c}(4457)^{+}\to pJ/\psi]caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 1 italic_S ) → italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] ⋅ caligraphic_B [ italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ] <\displaystyle<< 4.9×106,4.9superscript106\displaystyle 4.9\times 10^{-6},4.9 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (7)
[Υ(2S)Pc(4312)++anything][Pc(4312)+pJ/ψ]delimited-[]Υ2𝑆subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔delimited-[]subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4312𝑝𝐽𝜓\displaystyle{\cal B}[\Upsilon(2S)\to P_{c}(4312)^{+}+anything]\cdot{\cal B}[P% _{c}(4312)^{+}\to pJ/\psi]caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) → italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] ⋅ caligraphic_B [ italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4312 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ] <\displaystyle<< 5.3×106,5.3superscript106\displaystyle 5.3\times 10^{-6},5.3 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (8)
[Υ(2S)Pc(4440)++anything][Pc(4440)+pJ/ψ]delimited-[]Υ2𝑆subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔delimited-[]subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4440𝑝𝐽𝜓\displaystyle{\cal B}[\Upsilon(2S)\to P_{c}(4440)^{+}+anything]\cdot{\cal B}[P% _{c}(4440)^{+}\to pJ/\psi]caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) → italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] ⋅ caligraphic_B [ italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4440 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ] <\displaystyle<< 7.2×106,7.2superscript106\displaystyle 7.2\times 10^{-6},7.2 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (9)
[Υ(2S)Pc(4457)++anything][Pc(4457)+pJ/ψ]delimited-[]Υ2𝑆subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457𝑎𝑛𝑦𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔delimited-[]subscript𝑃𝑐superscript4457𝑝𝐽𝜓\displaystyle{\cal B}[\Upsilon(2S)\to P_{c}(4457)^{+}+anything]\cdot{\cal B}[P% _{c}(4457)^{+}\to pJ/\psi]caligraphic_B [ roman_Υ ( 2 italic_S ) → italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_a italic_n italic_y italic_t italic_h italic_i italic_n italic_g ] ⋅ caligraphic_B [ italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 4457 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_p italic_J / italic_ψ ] <\displaystyle<< 2.4×106,2.4superscript106\displaystyle 2.4\times 10^{-6},2.4 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (10)

at 90% credibility.

Acknowledgements.
This work, based on data collected using the Belle detector, which was operated until June 2010, was supported by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT) of Japan, the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS), and the Tau-Lepton Physics Research Center of Nagoya University; the Australian Research Council including grants DP210101900, DP210102831, DE220100462, LE210100098, LE230100085; Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Research (FWF) and FWF Austrian Science Fund No. P 31361-N36; National Key R&D Program of China under Contract No. 2022YFA1601903, National Natural Science Foundation of China and research grants No. 11575017, No. 11761141009, No. 11705209, No. 11975076, No. 12135005, No. 12150004, No. 12161141008, and No. 12175041, and Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation Project ZR2022JQ02; the Czech Science Foundation Grant No. 22-18469S; Horizon 2020 ERC Advanced Grant No. 884719 and ERC Starting Grant No. 947006 “InterLeptons” (European Union); the Carl Zeiss Foundation, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, the Excellence Cluster Universe, and the VolkswagenStiftung; the Department of Atomic Energy (Project Identification No. RTI 4002), the Department of Science and Technology of India, and the UPES (India) SEED finding programs Nos. UPES/R&D-SEED-INFRA/17052023/01 and UPES/R&D-SOE/20062022/06; the Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare of Italy; National Research Foundation (NRF) of Korea Grant Nos. 2016R1D1A1B02012900, 2018R1A2B3003643, 2018R1A6A1A06024970, RS202200197659, 2019R1I1A3A01058933, 2021R1A6A1A03043957, 2021R1F1A1060423, 2021R1F1A1064008, 2022R1A2C1003993; Radiation Science Research Institute, Foreign Large-size Research Facility Application Supporting project, the Global Science Experimental Data Hub Center of the Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information and KREONET/GLORIAD; the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education and the National Science Center; the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation and the HSE University Basic Research Program, Moscow; University of Tabuk research grants S-1440-0321, S-0256-1438, and S-0280-1439 (Saudi Arabia); the Slovenian Research Agency Grant Nos. J1-9124 and P1-0135; Ikerbasque, Basque Foundation for Science, and the State Agency for Research of the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation through Grant No. PID2022-136510NB-C33 (Spain); the Swiss National Science Foundation; the Ministry of Education and the National Science and Technology Council of Taiwan; and the United States Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation. These acknowledgements are not to be interpreted as an endorsement of any statement made by any of our institutes, funding agencies, governments, or their representatives. We thank the KEKB group for the excellent operation of the accelerator; the KEK cryogenics group for the efficient operation of the solenoid; and the KEK computer group and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory (EMSL) computing group for strong computing support; and the National Institute of Informatics, and Science Information NETwork 6 (SINET6) for valuable network support.

References

  • [1] M. Gell-Mann, Phys. Lett. 8, 214 (1964).
  • [2] N. Brambilla et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 71, 1534 (2011).
  • [3] S. L. Olsen, T. Skwarnicki and D. Zieminska, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015003 (2018).
  • [4] S. K. Choi et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 262001 (2003).
  • [5] S. K. Choi et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 142001 (2008).
  • [6] R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 222002 (2014).
  • [7] R. Mizuk et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 78, 072004 (2008).
  • [8] A. Bondar et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 122001 (2012).
  • [9] M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 252001 (2013).
  • [10] Z. Q. Liu et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 252002 (2013).
  • [11] M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 242001 (2013).
  • [12] X. L. Wang et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 91, 112007 (2015).
  • [13] M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 96, 032004 (2017).
  • [14] R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 072001 (2015).
  • [15] R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 222001 (2019).
  • [16] C. E. Carlson, J. R. Hiller and R. J. Holt, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 47, 395 (1997).
  • [17] D. M. Asner et al. (CLEO Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 75, 012009 (2007).
  • [18] H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 236, 102 (1990).
  • [19] J. P. Lees et al. (BABAR Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 89, 111102(R) (2014).
  • [20] C. P. Shen et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 82, 051504 (2010).
  • [21] X. L. Wang et al. (Belle Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 84, 071107 (2011).
  • [22] A. Abashian et al. (Belle Collaboration), Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 479, 117 (2002); also see detector section in J. Brodzicka et al., Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2012, 04D001 (2012).
  • [23] D. J. Lange, Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 462, 152 (2001).
  • [24] T. Sjostrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Skands, J. High Energy Phys. 05, 026 (2006).
  • [25] R. Brun et al., GEANT 3.21, CERN DD/EE/84-1, 1984.
  • [26] E. Nakano, Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 494, 402 (2002).
  • [27] K. Hanagaki et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 485, 490 (2002).
  • [28] A. Abashian et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 491, 69 (2002).
  • [29] R. L. Workman et al. (Particle Data Group), Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2022083C012022 and 2023 update.
  • [30] S. Actis et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 66, 585 (2010).
  • [31] X. K. Dong, X. H. Mo, P. Wang, and C. Z. Yuan, Chin. Phys. C 44, 083001 (2020).
  • [32] H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 241, 278 (1990).