Coupled-Channel Analysis of the χ_{c1}(3872) Line Shape with BESIII Data

We perform a study of the χ_{c1}(3872) line shape using the data samples of e^{+}e^{-}→γχ_{c1}(3872), χ_{c1}(3872)→D^{0}D[over ¯]^{0}π^{0}, and π^{+}π^{-}J/ψ collected with the BESIII detector. The effects of the coupled channels and the off-shell D^{*0} are included in the parametrization of the line shape. The line shape mass parameter is obtained to be M_{X}=(3871.63±0.13_{-0.05}^{+0.06})  MeV. Two poles are found on the first and second Riemann sheets corresponding to the D^{*0}D[over ¯]^{0} branch cut. The pole location on the first sheet is much closer to the D^{*0}D[over ¯]^{0} threshold than the other, and is determined to be 7.04±0.15_{-0.08}^{+0.07}  MeV above the D^{0}D[over ¯]^{0}π^{0} threshold with an imaginary part -0.19±0.08_{-0.19}^{+0.14}  MeV.

Observation of the Anomalous Shape of X(1840) in J/ψ→γ3(π^{+}π^{-}) Indicating a Second Resonance Near pp[over ¯] Threshold

Using a sample of (10087±44)×10^{6}  J/ψ events, which is about 45 times larger than that was previously analyzed, a further investigation on the J/ψ→γ3(π^{+}π^{-}) decay is performed. A significant distortion at 1.84  GeV/c^{2} in the line shape of the 3(π^{+}π^{-}) invariant mass spectrum is observed for the first time, which could be resolved by two overlapping resonant structures, X(1840) and X(1880). The new state X(1880) is observed with a statistical significance larger than 10σ. The mass and width of X(1880) are determined to be 1882.1±1.7±0.7  MeV/c^{2} and 30.7±5.5±2.4  MeV, respectively, which indicates the existence of a pp[over ¯] bound state.

Study of the f_{0}(980) and f_{0}(500) Scalar Mesons through the Decay D_{s}^{+}→π^{+}π^{-}e^{+}ν_{e}

Using e^{+}e^{-} collision data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 7.33  fb^{-1} recorded by the BESIII detector at center-of-mass energies between 4.128 and 4.226 GeV, we present an analysis of the decay D_{s}^{+}→π^{+}π^{-}e^{+}ν_{e}, where the D_{s}^{+} is produced via the process e^{+}e^{-}→D_{s}^{*±}D_{s}^{∓}. We observe the f_{0}(980) in the π^{+}π^{-} system and the branching fraction of the decay D_{s}^{+}→f_{0}(980)e^{+}ν_{e} with f_{0}(980)→π^{+}π^{-} measured to be (1.72±0.13_{stat}±0.10_{syst})×10^{-3}, where the uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively. The dynamics of the D_{s}^{+}→f_{0}(980)e^{+}ν_{e} decay are studied with the simple pole parametrization of the hadronic form factor and the Flatté formula describing the f_{0}(980) in the differential decay rate, and the product of the form factor f_{+}^{f_{0}}(0) and the c→s Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix element |V_{cs}| is determined for the first time to be f_{+}^{f_{0}}(0)|V_{cs}|=0.504±0.017_{stat}±0.035_{syst}. Furthermore, the decay D_{s}^{+}→f_{0}(500)e^{+}ν_{e} is searched for the first time but no signal is found. The upper limit on the branching fraction of D_{s}^{+}→f_{0}(500)e^{+}ν_{e}, f_{0}(500)→π^{+}π^{-} decay is set to be 3.3×10^{-4} at 90% confidence level.

Observation of D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}a_{0}(980)^{+} in the Amplitude Analysis of D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}π^{+}η

We perform for the first time an amplitude analysis of the decay D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}π^{+}η and report the observation of the decay D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}a_{0}(980)^{+} using 2.93  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} collision data taken at a center-of-mass energy of 3.773 GeV with the BESIII detector. As the only W-annihilation-free decay among D to a_{0}(980) pseudoscalar, D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}a_{0}(980)^{+} is the ideal decay in extracting the contributions of the W-emission amplitudes involving a_{0}(980) and to study the final-state interactions. The absolute branching fraction of D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}π^{+}η is measured to be (1.27±0.04_{stat}±0.03_{syst})%. The branching fractions of intermediate processes D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}a_{0}(980)^{+} with a_{0}(980)^{+}→π^{+}η and D^{+}→π^{+}K[over ¯]_{0}^{*}(1430)^{0} with K[over ¯]_{0}^{*}(1430)^{0}→K_{S}^{0}η are measured to be (1.33±0.05_{stat}±0.04_{syst})% and (0.14±0.03_{stat}±0.01_{syst})%, respectively.

Observation of Significant Flavor-SU(3) Breaking in the Kaon Wave Function at 12<Q^{2}<25 GeV^{2} and Discovery of the Charmless Decay ψ(3770)→K_{S}^{0}K_{L}^{0}

We present cross sections for the reaction e^{+}e^{-}→K_{S}^{0}K_{L}^{0} at center-of-mass energies ranging from 3.51 to 4.95 GeV using data samples collected in the BESIII experiment, corresponding to a total integrated luminosity of 26.5  fb^{-1}. The ratio of neutral-to-charged kaon form factors at large momentum transfers (12 Collapse

Key Words Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

M Ablikim Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M N Achasov Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS (BINP), Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
P Adlarson Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
X C Ai Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
R Aliberti Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
A Amoroso University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
M R An Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
Q An State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Bai Southeast University, Nanjing 211100, People's Republic of China
O Bakina Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
I Balossino INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
Y Ban Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
H-R Bao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
V Batozskaya Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw 02-093, Poland
K Begzsuren Institute of Physics and Technology, Peace Avenue 54B, Ulaanbaatar 13330, Mongolia
N Berger Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
M Berlowski National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw 02-093, Poland
M Bertani INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
D Bettoni INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
F Bianchi University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
E Bianco University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
A Bortone University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
I Boyko Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
R A Briere Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, USA
A Brueggemann University of Muenster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Strasse 9, 48149 Muenster, Germany
H Cai Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
X Cai Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
A Calcaterra INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
G F Cao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
N Cao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S A Cetin Turkish Accelerator Center Particle Factory Group, Istinye University, 34010 Istanbul, Turkey
J F Chang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
T T Chang Xinyang Normal University, Xinyang 464000, People's Republic of China
W L Chang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
G R Che Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
G Chelkov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
C Chen Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Chao Chen Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
G Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H S Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M L Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S J Chen Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
S L Chen North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
S M Chen Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
T Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X R Chen Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X T Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y B Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Q Chen Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Z J Chen Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
S K Choi Chung-Ang University, Seoul, 06974, Republic of Korea
X Chu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
G Cibinetto INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
S C Coen Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
F Cossio INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
J J Cui Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
H L Dai Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J P Dai Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, People's Republic of China
A Dbeyssi Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
R E de Boer Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
D Dedovich Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
Z Y Deng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
A Denig Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
I Denysenko Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
M Destefanis University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
F De Mori University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
B Ding Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
X X Ding Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Y Ding Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
Y Ding Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
J Dong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
L Y Dong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M Y Dong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Dong Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
M C Du Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S X Du Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Z H Duan Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
P Egorov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
Y H Fan North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
J Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
S S Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W X Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Q Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
R Farinelli INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
L Fava University of Eastern Piedmont, I-15121 Alessandria, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
F Feldbauer Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
G Felici INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
C Q Feng State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J H Feng Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
K Fischer University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
M Fritsch Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
C D Fu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J L Fu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y W Fu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Gao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y N Gao Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Yang Gao State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
S Garbolino INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
I Garzia INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy University of Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
P T Ge Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
Z W Ge Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
C Geng Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
E M Gersabeck University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom
A Gilman University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
K Goetzen GSI Helmholtzcentre for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
L Gong Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
W X Gong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
W Gradl Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
S Gramigna INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy University of Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
M Greco University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
M H Gu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y T Gu Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, People's Republic of China
C Y Guan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z L Guan Henan University of Technology, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
A Q Guo Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L B Guo Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
M J Guo Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
R P Guo Shandong Normal University, Jinan 250014, People's Republic of China
Y P Guo Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
A Guskov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
J Gutierrez Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
T T Han Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W Y Han Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
X Q Hao Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
F A Harris University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822, USA
K K He Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
K L He Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
F H H Heinsius Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
C H Heinz Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
Y K Heng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C Herold Suranaree University of Technology, University Avenue 111, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand
T Holtmann Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
P C Hong Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
G Y Hou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X T Hou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y R Hou University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z L Hou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B Y Hu Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
H M Hu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J F Hu South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510006, People's Republic of China
T Hu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Hu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
G S Huang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
K X Huang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
L Q Huang Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X T Huang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y P Huang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T Hussain University of the Punjab, Lahore-54590, Pakistan
N Hüsken Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
N In der Wiesche University of Muenster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Strasse 9, 48149 Muenster, Germany
M Irshad State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J Jackson Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
S Jaeger Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
S Janchiv Institute of Physics and Technology, Peace Avenue 54B, Ulaanbaatar 13330, Mongolia
J H Jeong Chung-Ang University, Seoul, 06974, Republic of Korea
Q Ji Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q P Ji Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
X B Ji Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X L Ji Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Y Ji Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
X Q Jia Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Z K Jia State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H J Jiang Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
P C Jiang Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
S S Jiang Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
T J Jiang Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou 310036, People's Republic of China
X S Jiang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Jiang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J B Jiao Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Z Jiao Huangshan College, Huangshan 245000, People's Republic of China
S Jin Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
Y Jin University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
M Q Jing Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X M Jing University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T Johansson Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
X Kui Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Kabana Instituto de Alta Investigación, Universidad de Tarapacá, Casilla 7D, Arica 1000000, Chile
N Kalantar-Nayestanaki University of Groningen, NL-9747 AA Groningen, The Netherlands
X L Kang China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, People's Republic of China
X S Kang Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
M Kavatsyuk University of Groningen, NL-9747 AA Groningen, The Netherlands
B C Ke Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
V Khachatryan Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
A Khoukaz University of Muenster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Strasse 9, 48149 Muenster, Germany
R Kiuchi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
R Kliemt GSI Helmholtzcentre for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
O B Kolcu Turkish Accelerator Center Particle Factory Group, Istinye University, 34010 Istanbul, Turkey
B Kopf Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
M Kuessner Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
A Kupsc National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw 02-093, Poland Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
W Kühn Justus-Liebig-Universitaet Giessen, II. Physikalisches Institut, Heinrich-Buff-Ring 16, D-35392 Giessen, Germany
J J Lane University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom
P Larin Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
A Lavania Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India
L Lavezzi University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
T T Lei State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Z H Lei State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H Leithoff Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
M Lellmann Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
T Lenz Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
C Li Qufu Normal University, Qufu 273165, People's Republic of China
C Li Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
C H Li Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
Cheng Li State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
D M Li Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
F Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
G Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Li State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H B Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H J Li Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
H N Li South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510006, People's Republic of China
Hui Li Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
J R Li Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
J S Li Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
J W Li Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Ke Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L J Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L K Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Lei Li Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, People's Republic of China
M H Li Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
P R Li Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Q X Li Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
S X Li Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
T Li Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
W D Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W G Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X H Li State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X L Li Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Xiaoyu Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y G Li Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Z J Li Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
Z X Li Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, People's Republic of China
C Liang Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
H Liang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Liang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y F Liang Sichuan University, Chengdu 610064, People's Republic of China
Y T Liang Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
G R Liao Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, People's Republic of China
L Z Liao Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y P Liao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Libby Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India
A Limphirat Suranaree University of Technology, University Avenue 111, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand
D X Lin Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T Lin Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B J Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B X Liu Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
C Liu Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
C X Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
F H Liu Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, People's Republic of China
Fang Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Feng Liu Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, People's Republic of China
G M Liu South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510006, People's Republic of China
H Liu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
H B Liu Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, People's Republic of China
H M Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Huanhuan Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Huihui Liu Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang 471003, People's Republic of China
J B Liu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J Y Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
K Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
K Y Liu Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
Ke Liu Henan University of Technology, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
L Liu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
L C Liu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Lu Liu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
M H Liu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
P L Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q Liu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S B Liu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
T Liu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
W K Liu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
W M Liu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X Liu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Y Liu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Y Liu Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Y B Liu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Z A Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z Q Liu Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
X C Lou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
F X Lu Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
H J Lu Huangshan College, Huangshan 245000, People's Republic of China
J G Lu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X L Lu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Lu Central South University, Changsha 410083, People's Republic of China
Y P Lu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Z H Lu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C L Luo Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
M X Luo Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, People's Republic of China
T Luo Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
X L Luo Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X R Lyu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y F Lyu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
F C Ma Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
H Ma Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, People's Republic of China
H L Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J L Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L L Ma Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
M M Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q M Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
R Q Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Y Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Ma Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Y M Ma Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
F E Maas Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
M Maggiora University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
S Malde University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
Q A Malik University of the Punjab, Lahore-54590, Pakistan
A Mangoni INFN Sezione di Perugia, I-06100 Perugia, Italy
Y J Mao Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Z P Mao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Marcello University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
Z X Meng University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
J G Messchendorp GSI Helmholtzcentre for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany University of Groningen, NL-9747 AA Groningen, The Netherlands
G Mezzadri INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
H Miao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T J Min Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
R E Mitchell Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
X H Mo Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B Moses Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
N Yu Muchnoi Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS (BINP), Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
J Muskalla Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
Y Nefedov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
F Nerling Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
I B Nikolaev Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS (BINP), Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
Z Ning Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
S Nisar COMSATS University Islamabad, Lahore Campus, Defence Road, Off Raiwind Road, 54000 Lahore, Pakistan
Q L Niu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
W D Niu Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
Y Niu Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
S L Olsen University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q Ouyang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Pacetti INFN Sezione di Perugia, I-06100 Perugia, Italy University of Perugia, I-06100 Perugia, Italy
X Pan Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
Y Pan Southeast University, Nanjing 211100, People's Republic of China
A Pathak Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
P Patteri INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
Y P Pei State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
M Pelizaeus Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
H P Peng State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Y Peng Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
K Peters GSI Helmholtzcentre for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
J L Ping Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
R G Ping Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Plura Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
V Prasad Instituto de Alta Investigación, Universidad de Tarapacá, Casilla 7D, Arica 1000000, Chile
F Z Qi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Qi State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H R Qi Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
M Qi Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
T Y Qi Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
S Qian Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
W B Qian University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C F Qiao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J J Qin University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
L Q Qin Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, People's Republic of China
X S Qin Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Z H Qin Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J F Qiu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Q Qu Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
C F Redmer Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
K J Ren Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
A Rivetti INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
M Rolo INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
G Rong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Ch Rosner Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
S N Ruan Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
N Salone National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw 02-093, Poland
A Sarantsev Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
Y Schelhaas Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
K Schoenning Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
M Scodeggio INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy University of Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
K Y Shan Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
W Shan Hunan Normal University, Changsha 410081, People's Republic of China
X Y Shan State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J F Shangguan Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
L G Shao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M Shao State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
C P Shen Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
H F Shen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W H Shen University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Y Shen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B A Shi University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H C Shi State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J L Shi Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
J Y Shi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q Q Shi Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
R S Shi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Shi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J J Song Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
T Z Song Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
W M Song Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Y J Song Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y X Song Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
S Sosio University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
S Spataro University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
F Stieler Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
Y J Su University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
G B Sun Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
G X Sun Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Sun University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H K Sun Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J F Sun Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
K Sun Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
L Sun Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
S S Sun Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T Sun Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, People's Republic of China
W Y Sun Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Y Sun China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, People's Republic of China
Y J Sun State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Z Sun Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z T Sun Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y X Tan State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
C J Tang Sichuan University, Chengdu 610064, People's Republic of China
G Y Tang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Tang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
Y A Tang Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
L Y Tao University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
Q T Tao Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
M Tat University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
J X Teng State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
V Thoren Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
W H Tian Shanxi Normal University, Linfen 041004, People's Republic of China
W H Tian Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
Y Tian Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z F Tian Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
I Uman Near East University, Nicosia, North Cyprus, 99138, Mersin 10, Turkey
Y Wan Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
S J Wang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
B Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B L Wang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Bo Wang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
C W Wang Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
D Y Wang Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
F Wang University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
H J Wang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
J P Wang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
K Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
L L Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M Wang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Meng Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
N Y Wang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Wang Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
S Wang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
T Wang Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
T J Wang Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
W Wang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
W Wang University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
W P Wang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X Wang Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
X F Wang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
X J Wang Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
X L Wang Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y Wang Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
Y D Wang North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
Y F Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y L Wang Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
Y N Wang North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
Y Q Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Yaqian Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China Hebei University, Baoding 071002, People's Republic of China
Yi Wang Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
Z Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Z L Wang University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
Z Y Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Ziyi Wang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
D Wei University of Science and Technology Liaoning, Anshan 114051, People's Republic of China
D H Wei Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, People's Republic of China
F Weidner University of Muenster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Strasse 9, 48149 Muenster, Germany
S P Wen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C W Wenzel Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
U Wiedner Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
G Wilkinson University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
M Wolke Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
L Wollenberg Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
C Wu Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
J F Wu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China China Center of Advanced Science and Technology, Beijing 100190, People's Republic of China
L H Wu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L J Wu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Wu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
X H Wu Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Y Wu University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y H Wu Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
Y J Wu Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Z Wu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
L Xia State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X M Xian Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
T Xiang Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
D Xiao Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
G Y Xiao Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
S Y Xiao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y L Xiao Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Z J Xiao Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
C Xie Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
X H Xie Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Y Xie Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y G Xie Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y H Xie Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, People's Republic of China
Z P Xie State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
T Y Xing Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C F Xu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C J Xu Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
G F Xu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Y Xu University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
Q J Xu Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou 310036, People's Republic of China
Q N Xu Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot 010021, People's Republic of China
W Xu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W L Xu University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
X P Xu Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
Y C Xu Yantai University, Yantai 264005, People's Republic of China
Z P Xu Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
Z S Xu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
F Yan Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
L Yan Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
W B Yan State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
W C Yan Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
X Q Yan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H J Yang Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, People's Republic of China
H L Yang Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
H X Yang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Tao Yang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Yang Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y F Yang Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Y X Yang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Yifan Yang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z W Yang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Z P Yao Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
M Ye Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
M H Ye China Center of Advanced Science and Technology, Beijing 100190, People's Republic of China
J H Yin Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z Y You Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
B X Yu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C X Yu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
G Yu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J S Yu Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
T Yu University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
X D Yu Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
C Z Yuan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L Yuan Beihang University, Beijing 100191, People's Republic of China
S C Yuan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Yuan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z Y Yuan Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
C X Yue Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
A A Zafar University of the Punjab, Lahore-54590, Pakistan
F R Zeng Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
S H Zeng University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
X Zeng Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y Zeng Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
Y J Zeng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Y Zhai Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Y C Zhai Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y H Zhan Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
A Q Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B L Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B X Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
D H Zhang Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
G Y Zhang Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
H Zhang University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H C Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H H Zhang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
H H Zhang Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
H Q Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Y Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J Zhang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
J Zhang Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
J J Zhang Shanxi Normal University, Linfen 041004, People's Republic of China
J L Zhang Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, People's Republic of China
J Q Zhang Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
J W Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J X Zhang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
J Y Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Z Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Jianyu Zhang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L M Zhang Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
L Q Zhang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
Lei Zhang Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
P Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q Y Zhang Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Shuihan Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Shulei Zhang Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
X D Zhang North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
X M Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Y Zhang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y Zhang University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
Y Zhang University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
Y T Zhang Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Y H Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Yan Zhang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Yao Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z D Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z H Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z L Zhang Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Z Y Zhang Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Z Y Zhang Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
G Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Y Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Z Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Lei Zhao State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Ling Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M G Zhao Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
R P Zhao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S J Zhao Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Y B Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y X Zhao Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z G Zhao State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
A Zhemchugov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
B Zheng University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
J P Zheng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
W J Zheng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y H Zheng University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B Zhong Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
X Zhong Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
H Zhou Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
L P Zhou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Zhou Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
X K Zhou Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, People's Republic of China
X R Zhou State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X Y Zhou Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
Y Z Zhou Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
J Zhu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
K Zhu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
K J Zhu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L Zhu Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
L X Zhu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S H Zhu University of Science and Technology Liaoning, Anshan 114051, People's Republic of China
S Q Zhu Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
T J Zhu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
W J Zhu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y C Zhu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Z A Zhu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J H Zou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Zu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China

Collapse

Investigation of the ΔI=1/2 Rule and Test of CP Symmetry through the Measurement of Decay Asymmetry Parameters in Ξ^{-} Decays

Using (10087±44)×10^{6}  J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector, numerous Ξ^{-} and Λ decay asymmetry parameters are simultaneously determined from the process J/ψ→Ξ^{-}Ξ[over ¯]^{+}→Λ(pπ^{-})π^{-}Λ[over ¯](n[over ¯]π^{0})π^{+} and its charge-conjugate channel. The precisions of α_{Λ0} for Λ→nπ^{0} and α[over ¯]_{Λ0} for Λ[over ¯]→n[over ¯]π^{0} compared to world averages are improved by factors of 4 and 1.7, respectively. The ratio of decay asymmetry parameters of Λ→nπ^{0} to that of Λ→pπ^{-}, ⟨α_{Λ0}⟩/⟨α_{Λ-}⟩, is determined to be 0.873±0.012_{-0.010}^{+0.011}, where the first and the second uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively. The ratio is smaller than unity more than 5σ, which signifies the existence of the ΔI=3/2 transition in Λ for the first time. Besides, we test for CP symmetry in Ξ^{-}→Λπ^{-} and in Λ→nπ^{0} with the best precision to date.

Observation of D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}μ^{+}ν_{μ}, Precision Test of Lepton Flavor Universality with D_{s}^{+}→η^{(')}l^{+}ν_{l}, and First Measurements of D_{s}^{+}→η^{(')}μ^{+}ν_{μ} Decay Dynamics

By analyzing 7.33  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} annihilation data collected at center-of-mass energies between 4.128 and 4.226 GeV with the BESIII detector, we report the observation of the semileptonic decay D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}μ^{+}ν_{μ}, with a statistical significance larger than 10σ, and the measurements of the D_{s}^{+}→ημ^{+}ν_{μ} and D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}μ^{+}ν_{μ} decay dynamics for the first time. The branching fractions of D_{s}^{+}→ημ^{+}ν_{μ} and D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}μ^{+}ν_{μ} are determined to be (2.235±0.051_{stat}±0.052_{syst})% and (0.801±0.055_{stat}±0.028_{syst})%, respectively, with precision improved by factors of 6.0 and 6.6 compared to the previous best measurements. Combined with the results for the decays D_{s}^{+}→ηe^{+}ν_{e} and D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}e^{+}ν_{e}, the ratios of the decay widths are examined both inclusively and in several ℓ^{+}ν_{ℓ} four-momentum transfer ranges. No evidence for lepton flavor universality violation is found within the current statistics. The products of the hadronic form factors f_{+,0}^{η^{(')}}(0) and the c→s Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix element |V_{cs}| are determined. The results based on the two-parameter series expansion are f_{+,0}^{η}(0)|V_{cs}|=0.452±0.010_{stat}±0.007_{syst} and f_{+,0}^{η^{'}}(0)|V_{cs}|=0.504±0.037_{stat}±0.012_{syst}, which help to constrain present models on f_{+,0}^{η^{(')}}(0). The forward-backward asymmetries are determined to be ⟨A_{FB}^{η}⟩=-0.059±0.031_{stat}±0.005_{syst} and ⟨A_{FB}^{η^{'}}⟩=-0.064±0.079_{stat}±0.006_{syst} for the first time, which are consistent with the theoretical calculation.

Determination of the Σ^{+} Timelike Electromagnetic Form Factors

Based on data samples collected with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, the process e^{+}e^{-}→Σ^{+}Σ[over ¯]^{-} is studied at center-of-mass energies sqrt[s]=2.3960, 2.6454, and 2.9000 GeV. Using a fully differential angular description of the final state particles, both the relative magnitude and phase information of the Σ^{+} electromagnetic form factors in the timelike region are extracted. The relative phase between the electric and magnetic form factors is determined to be sinΔΦ=-0.67±0.29(stat)±0.18(syst) at sqrt[s]=2.3960  GeV, ΔΦ=55°±19°(stat)±14°(syst) at sqrt[s]=2.6454  GeV, and 78°±22°(stat)±9°(syst) at sqrt[s]=2.9000  GeV. For the first time, the phase of the hyperon electromagnetic form factors is explored in a wide range of four-momentum transfer. The evolution of the phase along with four-momentum transfer is an important input for understanding its asymptotic behavior and the dynamics of baryons.

First Measurement of the Decay Asymmetry in the Pure W-Boson-Exchange Decay Λ_{c}^{+}→Ξ^{0}K^{+}

Based on 4.4  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} annihilation data collected at the center-of-mass energies between 4.60 and 4.70 GeV with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, the pure W-boson-exchange decay Λ_{c}^{+}→Ξ^{0}K^{+} is studied with a full angular analysis. The corresponding decay asymmetry is measured for the first time to be α_{Ξ^{0}K^{+}}=0.01±0.16(stat)±0.03(syst). This result reflects the noninterference effect between the S- and P-wave amplitudes. The phase shift between S- and P-wave amplitudes has two solutions, which are δ_{p}-δ_{s}=-1.55±0.25(stat)±0.05(syst)  rad or 1.59±0.25(stat)±0.05(syst)  rad.

[Pathogenic characteristics and influence factors of bloodstream infection-induced severe sepsis in pediatric intensive care unit]

Objective: To summarize the pathogenic characteristics of bloodstream infection (BSI)-induced severe sepsis and analyze the influence factors in pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Methods: Pediatric patients who were diagnosed with severe sepsis caused by BSI in the PICU of Children's Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine from January 2016 to December 2021 were retrospectively selected and divided into survival group and death group according to their discharge outcomes. Clinical characteristics, laboratory parameters, pathogenic characteristics and drug resistance of the patients were collected. The characteristics of pathogens, clinical and laboratory indicators were summarized, and the influencing factors of death in children with severe sepsis caused by BSI were analyzed based on binary multivariate logistic regression. Results: A total of 132 patients, aged [M (Q1, Q3)] 36 (10, 119) months, with BSI-induced severe sepsis were enrolled in this study, including 81 males and 51 females. There were 38 cases aged 36 (15, 120) months in the death group, including 23 males and 15 females. There were 94 cases, aged 36 (8, 108) months, in the survival group, including 58 males and 36 females. A total of 132 strains of pathogens were isolated, including 87 strains (65.9%) of Gram-negative bacteria. The top 5 pathogens were Klebsiella pneumoniae (24 cases, 18.2%), Escherichia coli (17 cases, 12.9%), Acinetobacter baumannii (13 cases, 9.8%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (10 cases, 7.6%) and Staphylococcus aureus (10 cases, 7.6%). The proportion of multi-drug resistant bacteria in hospital-acquired BSI was higher than that in community-acquired BSI [52.9% (36/68) vs 15.6% (10/64), P=0.001]. The proportions of community-acquired infection were 58.5% (55/94) and 23.7% (9/38) in the survival and death groups, respectively, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.001). The proportion of central venous catheter insertion before bloodstream infection in the death group was higher than that in the survival group [63.2% (24/38) vs 42.6% (40/94), P=0.034]. According to the binary multivariate logistic regression analysis, hospital-acquired infection (OR=4.80, 95%CI: 1.825-12.621, P=0.001), absolute neutrophil count (ANC) (OR=0.93, 95%CI: 0.863-0.993, P=0.030) and decreased albumin (OR=0.89, 95%CI: 0.817-0.977, P=0.014) were risk factors for death. Conclusions: The common pathogen of BSI-induced severe sepsis in PICU is Gram-negative bacteria. The proportion of multi-drug resistant organisms of BSI obtained in hospitals is high. Children with severe sepsis due to BSI with nosocomial acquired infection, ANC and decreased albumin have a high risk of death.

[Outcomes and care practices of extremely preterm infants at 22-25 weeks' gestation age from the Chinese Neonatal Network]

Objective: To describe the current status and trends in the outcomes and care practices of extremely preterm infants at 22-25 weeks' gestation age from the Chinese Neonatal Network (CHNN) from 2019 to 2021. Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from the CHNN cohort of very preterm infants. All 963 extremely preterm infants with gestational age between 22-25 weeks who were admitted to neonatal intensive care units (NICU) of the CHNN from 2019 to 2021 were included. Infants admitted after 24 hours of life or transferred to non-CHNN hospitals were excluded. Perinatal care practices, survival rates, incidences of major morbidities, and NICU treatments were described according to different gestational age groups and admission years. Comparison among gestational age groups was conducted using χ2 and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Trends by year were evaluated by Cochran-Armitage and Jonckheere-Terpstra tests for trend. Results: Of the 963 extremely preterm infants enrolled, 588 extremely preterm infants (61.1%) were male. The gestational age was 25.0 (24.4, 25.6) weeks, with 29 extremely preterm infants (3.0%), 88 extremely preterm infants (9.1%), 264 extremely preterm infants (27.4%), and 582 extremely preterm infants (60.4%) at 22, 23, 24, and 25 weeks of gestation age, respectively. The birth weight was 770 (680, 840) g. From 2019 to 2021, the number of extremely preterm infants increased each year (285, 312, and 366 extremely preterm infants, respectively). Antenatal steroids and magnesium sulfate were administered to 67.7% (615/908) and 51.1% (453/886) mothers of extremely preterm infants. In the delivery room, 20.8% (200/963) and 69.5% (669/963) extremely preterm infants received noninvasive positive end-expiratory pressure support and endotracheal intubation. Delayed cord clamping and cord milking were performed in 19.0% (149/784) and 30.4% (241/794) extremely preterm infants. From 2019 to 2021, there were significant increases in the usage of antenatal steroids, antenatal magnesium sulfate, and delivery room noninvasive positive-end expiratory pressure support (all P<0.05). Overall, 349 extremely preterm infants (36.2%) did not receive complete care, 392 extremely preterm infants (40.7%) received complete care and survived to discharge, and 222 extremely preterm infants (23.1%) received complete care but died in hospital. The survival rates for extremely preterm infants at 22, 23, 24 and 25 weeks of gestation age were 10.3% (3/29), 23.9% (21/88), 33.0% (87/264) and 48.3% (281/582), respectively. From 2019 to 2021, there were no statistically significant trends in complete care, survival, and mortality rates (all P>0.05). Only 11.5% (45/392) extremely preterm infants survived without major morbidities. Moderate to severe bronchopulmonary dysplasia (67.3% (264/392)) and severe retinopathy of prematurity (61.5% (241/392)) were the most common morbidities among survivors. The incidences of severe intraventricular hemorrhage or periventricular leukomalacia, necrotizing enterocolitis, and sepsis were 15.3% (60/392), 5.9% (23/392) and 19.1% (75/392), respectively. Overall, 83.7% (328/392) survivors received invasive ventilation during hospitalization, with a duration of 22 (10, 42) days. The hospital stay for survivors was 97 (86, 116) days. Conclusions: With the increasing number of extremely preterm infants at 22-25 weeks' gestation admitted to CHNN NICU, the survival rate remained low, especially the rate of survival without major morbidities. Further quality improvement initiatives are needed to facilitate the implementation of evidence-based care practices.

[Interpretation of the Implant Dentistry Core Outcome Set and Measurement international consensus report]

Selection and measurement of clinical outcome are key components of clinical research in implant dentistry. Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine took the lead and collaborated with multiple internationally renowned colleges of stomatology to develop an international consensus on the core outcome set and measurement in implant dentistry, which took two years and was published in May, 2023 in Journal of Clinical Periodontology and Clinical Oral Implants Research simultaneously. The consensus, aiming at identifying the full spectrum of benefits and harms of interventions, provides a comprehensive, agreed, and standardized set of outcomes that should be measured and reported as a minimum in clinical trials relating with implant dentistry, bone augmentation, and soft tissue augmentation. The present review describes the methodology and key elements of the consensus to help Chinese clinical researchers fully understand and appropriately apply the core outcome set and improve the overall quality of Chinese clinical research in implant dentistry.

Test of CP Symmetry in Hyperon to Neutron Decays

The quantum entangled J/ψ→Σ^{+}Σ[over ¯]^{-} pairs from (1.0087±0.0044)×10^{10}  J/ψ events taken by the BESIII detector are used to study the nonleptonic two-body weak decays Σ^{+}→nπ^{+} and Σ[over ¯]^{-}→n[over ¯]π^{-}. The CP-odd weak decay parameters of the decays Σ^{+}→nπ^{+} (α_{+}) and Σ[over ¯]^{-}→n[over ¯]π^{-} (α[over ¯]_{-}) are determined to be 0.0481±0.0031_{stat}±0.0019_{syst} and -0.0565±0.0047_{stat}±0.0022_{syst}, respectively. The decay parameter α[over ¯]_{-} is measured for the first time, and the accuracy of α_{+} is improved by a factor of 4 compared to the previous results. The simultaneously determined decay parameters allow the first precision CP symmetry test for any hyperon decay with a neutron in the final state with the measurement of A_{CP}=(α_{+}+α[over ¯]_{-})/(α_{+}-α[over ¯]_{-})=-0.080±0.052_{stat}±0.028_{syst}. Assuming CP conservation, the average decay parameter is determined as ⟨α_{+}⟩=(α_{+}-α[over ¯]_{-})/2=-0.0506±0.0026_{stat}±0.0019_{syst}, while the ratios α_{+}/α_{0} and α[over ¯]_{-}/α[over ¯]_{0} are -0.0490±0.0032_{stat}±0.0021_{syst} and -0.0571±0.0053_{stat}±0.0032_{syst}, where α_{0} and α[over ¯]_{0} are the decay parameters of the decays Σ^{+}→pπ^{0} and Σ[over ¯]^{-}→p[over ¯]π^{0}, respectively.

Measurement of Energy-Dependent Pair-Production Cross Section and Electromagnetic Form Factors of a Charmed Baryon

We study the process e^{+}e^{-}→Λ_{c}^{+}Λ[over ¯]_{c}^{-} at twelve center-of-mass energies from 4.6119 to 4.9509 GeV using data samples collected by the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider. The Born cross sections and effective form factors (|G_{eff}|) are determined with unprecedented precision after combining the single and double-tag methods based on the decay process Λ_{c}^{+}→pK^{-}π^{+}. Flat cross sections around 4.63 GeV are obtained and no indication of the resonant structure Y(4630), as reported by Belle, is found. In addition, no oscillatory behavior is discerned in the |G_{eff}| energy dependence of Λ_{c}^{+}, in contrast to what is seen for the proton and neutron cases. Analyzing the cross section together with the polar-angle distribution of the Λ_{c}^{+} baryon at each energy point, the moduli of electric and magnetic form factors (|G_{E}| and |G_{M}|) are extracted and separated. For the first time, the energy dependence of the form factor ratio |G_{E}/G_{M}| is observed, which can be well described by an oscillatory function.

Determination of Spin-Parity Quantum Numbers for the Narrow Structure near the pΛ[over ¯] Threshold in e^{+}e^{-}→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯]+c.c

A narrow structure in the pΛ[over ¯] system near the mass threshold, named as X(2085), is observed in the process e^{+}e^{-}→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯] with a statistical significance greater than 20σ. Its spin and parity are determined for the first time to be J^{P}=1^{+} in an amplitude analysis, with a statistical significance greater than 5σ over other quantum numbers (0^{-},1^{-} and 2^{+}). The pole positions of X(2085) are measured to be M_{pole}=(2084_{-2}^{+4}±9)  MeV and Γ_{pole}=(58_{-3}^{+4}±25)  MeV, where the first uncertainties are statistical and the second ones are systematic. The analysis is based on the study of the process e^{+}e^{-}→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯] and uses the data samples collected with the BESIII detector at the center-of-mass energies sqrt[s]=4.008, 4.178, 4.226, 4.258, 4.416, and 4.682 GeV with a total integrated luminosity of 8.35  fb^{-1}.

Precise Measurement of the e^{+}e^{-}→D_{s}^{*+}D_{s}^{*-} Cross Sections at Center-of-Mass Energies from Threshold to 4.95 GeV

The process e^{+}e^{-}→D_{s}^{*+}D_{s}^{*-} is studied with a semi-inclusive method using data samples at center-of-mass energies from threshold to 4.95 GeV collected with the BESIII detector operating at the Beijing Electron Positron Collider. The Born cross sections of the process are measured for the first time with high precision in this energy region. Two resonance structures are observed in the energy-dependent cross sections around 4.2 and 4.4 GeV. By fitting the cross sections with a coherent sum of three Breit-Wigner amplitudes and one phase-space amplitude, the two significant structures are assigned masses of (4186.8±8.7±30) and (4414.6±3.4±6.1)  MeV/c^{2}, widths of (55±15±53) and (122.5±7.5±8.1)  MeV, where the first errors are statistical and the second ones are systematic. The inclusion of a third Breit-Wigner amplitude is necessary to describe a structure around 4.79 GeV.

First Experimental Study of the Purely Leptonic Decay D_{s}^{*+}→e^{+}ν_{e}

Using 7.33  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} collision data taken with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, we report the first experimental study of the purely leptonic decay D_{s}^{*+}→e^{+}ν_{e}. Our data contain a signal of this decay with a statistical significance of 2.9σ. The branching fraction of D_{s}^{*+}→e^{+}ν_{e} is measured to be (2.1_{-0.9_{stat}}^{+1.2}±0.2_{syst})×10^{-5}, corresponding to an upper limit of 4.0×10^{-5} at the 90% confidence level. Taking the total width of the D_{s}^{*+} [(0.070±0.028)  keV] predicted with the radiative D_{s}^{*+} decay from the lattice QCD calculation as input, the decay constant of the D_{s}^{*+} is determined to be f_{D_{s}^{*+}}=(214_{-46_{stat}}^{+61}±44_{syst})  MeV, corresponding to an upper limit of 354 MeV at the 90% confidence level.

First Study of Reaction Ξ^{0}n→Ξ^{-}p Using Ξ^{0}-Nucleus Scattering at an Electron-Positron Collider

Using (1.0087±0.0044)×10^{10}  J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII storage ring, the process Ξ^{0}n→Ξ^{-}p is studied, where the Ξ^{0} baryon is produced in the process J/ψ→Ξ^{0}Ξ[over ¯]^{0} and the neutron is a component of the ^{9}Be, ^{12}C, and ^{197}Au nuclei in the beam pipe. A clear signal is observed with a statistical significance of 7.1σ. The cross section of the reaction Ξ^{0}+^{9}Be→Ξ^{-}+p+^{8}Be is determined to be σ(Ξ^{0}+^{9}Be→Ξ^{-}+p+^{8}Be)=(22.1±5.3_{stat}±4.5_{sys})  mb at the Ξ^{0} momentum of 0.818  GeV/c, where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic. No significant H-dibaryon signal is observed in the Ξ^{-}p final state. This is the first study of hyperon-nucleon interactions in electron-positron collisions and opens up a new direction for such research.

Measurements of Normalized Differential Cross Sections of Inclusive π^{0} and K_{S}^{0} Production in e^{+}e^{-} Annihilation at Energies from 2.2324 to 3.6710 GeV

Based on electron positron collision data collected with the BESIII detector operating at the BEPCII storage rings, the differential cross sections of inclusive π^{0} and K_{S}^{0} production as a function of hadron momentum, normalized by the total cross section of the e^{+}e^{-}→hadrons process, are measured at six center-of-mass energies from 2.2324 to 3.6710 GeV. Our results, which cover a relative hadron energy range from 0.1 to 0.9, significantly deviate from several theoretical calculations based on existing fragmentation functions.

Precision Measurement of the Decay Σ^{+}→pγ in the Process J/ψ→Σ^{+}Σ[over ¯]^{-}

Using (10 087±44)×10^{6} J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector, the radiative hyperon decay Σ^{+}→pγ is studied at an electron-positron collider experiment for the first time. The absolute branching fraction is measured to be (0.996±0.021_{stat}±0.018_{syst})×10^{-3}, which is lower than its world average value by 4.2 standard deviations. Its decay asymmetry parameter is determined to be -0.652±0.056_{stat}±0.020_{syst}. The branching fraction and decay asymmetry parameter are the most precise to date, and the accuracies are improved by 78% and 34%, respectively.

Mass Measurement of Upper fp-Shell N=Z-2 and N=Z-1 Nuclei and the Importance of Three-Nucleon Force along the N=Z Line

Using a novel method of isochronous mass spectrometry, the masses of ^{62}Ge, ^{64}As, ^{66}Se, and ^{70}Kr are measured for the first time, and the masses of ^{58}Zn, ^{61}Ga, ^{63}Ge, ^{65}As, ^{67}Se, ^{71}Kr, and ^{75}Sr are redetermined with improved accuracy. The new masses allow us to derive residual proton-neutron interactions (δV_{pn}) in the N=Z nuclei, which are found to decrease (increase) with increasing mass A for even-even (odd-odd) nuclei beyond Z=28. This bifurcation of δV_{pn} cannot be reproduced by the available mass models, nor is it consistent with expectations of a pseudo-SU(4) symmetry restoration in the fp shell. We performed ab initio calculations with a chiral three-nucleon force (3NF) included, which indicate the enhancement of the T=1 pn pairing over the T=0 pn pairing in this mass region, leading to the opposite evolving trends of δV_{pn} in even-even and odd-odd nuclei.

Measurements of the Electric and Magnetic Form Factors of the Neutron for Timelike Momentum Transfer

We present the first measurements of the electric and magnetic form factors of the neutron in the timelike (positive q^{2}) region as function of four-momentum transfer. We explored the differential cross sections of the reaction e^{+}e^{-}→n[over ¯]n with data collected with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII accelerator, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 354.6  pb^{-1} in total at twelve center-of-mass energies between sqrt[s]=2.0-2.95  GeV. A relative uncertainty of 18% and 12% for the electric and magnetic form factors, respectively, is achieved at sqrt[s]=2.3935  GeV. Our results are comparable in accuracy to those from electron scattering in the comparable spacelike region of four-momentum transfer. The electromagnetic form factor ratio R_{em}≡|G_{E}|/|G_{M}| is within the uncertainties close to unity. We compare our result on |G_{E}| and |G_{M}| to recent model predictions, and the measurements in the spacelike region to test the analyticity of electromagnetic form factors.

Observation of a New X(3872) Production Process e^{+}e^{-}→ωX(3872)

Using 4.7  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} collision data at center-of-mass energies from 4.661 to 4.951 GeV collected by the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, we observe the X(3872) production process e^{+}e^{-}→ωX(3872) for the first time. The significance is 7.8σ, including both the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The e^{+}e^{-}→ωX(3872) Born cross section and the corresponding upper limit at 90% confidence level at each energy point are reported. The line shape of the cross section indicates that the ωX(3872) signals may be from the decays of some nontrivial structures.

Observation of Three Charmoniumlike States with J^{PC}=1^{--} in e^{+}e^{-}→D^{*0}D^{*-}π^{+}

The Born cross sections of the process e^{+}e^{-}→D^{*0}D^{*-}π^{+} at center-of-mass energies from 4.189 to 4.951 GeV are measured for the first time. The data samples used correspond to an integrated luminosity of 17.9  fb^{-1} and were collected by the BESIII detector operating at the BEPCII storage ring. Three enhancements around 4.20, 4.47, and 4.67 GeV are visible. The resonances have masses of 4209.6±4.7±5.9  MeV/c^{2}, 4469.1±26.2±3.6  MeV/c^{2}, and 4675.3±29.5±3.5  MeV/c^{2} and widths of 81.6±17.8±9.0  MeV, 246.3±36.7±9.4  MeV, and 218.3±72.9±9.3  MeV, respectively, where the first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic. The first and third resonances are consistent with the ψ(4230) and ψ(4660) states, respectively, while the second one is compatible with the ψ(4500) observed in the e^{+}e^{-}→K^{+}K^{-}J/ψ process. These three charmoniumlike ψ states are observed in the e^{+}e^{-}→D^{*0}D^{*-}π^{+} process for the first time.

Evidence for the Cusp Effect in η' Decays into ηπ^{0}π^{0}

Using a sample of 4.3×10^{5} η^{'}→ηπ^{0}π^{0} events selected from the ten billion J/ψ event dataset collected with the BESIII detector, we study the decay η^{'}→ηπ^{0}π^{0} within the framework of nonrelativistic effective field theory. Evidence for a structure at π^{+}π^{-} mass threshold is observed in the invariant mass spectrum of π^{0}π^{0} with a statistical significance of around 3.5σ, which is consistent with the cusp effect as predicted by the nonrelativistic effective field theory. After introducing the amplitude for describing the cusp effect, the ππ scattering length combination a_{0}-a_{2} is determined to be 0.226±0.060_{stat}±0.013_{syst}, which is in good agreement with theoretical calculation of 0.2644±0.0051.

[Status of fungal sepsis among preterm infants in 25 neonatal intensive care units of tertiary hospitals in China]

Objective: To analyze the prevalence and the risk factors of fungal sepsis in 25 neonatal intensive care units (NICU) among preterm infants in China, and to provide a basis for preventive strategies of fungal sepsis. Methods: This was a second-analysis of the data from the "reduction of infection in neonatal intensive care units using the evidence-based practice for improving quality" study. The current status of fungal sepsis of the 24 731 preterm infants with the gestational age of <34⁺⁰ weeks, who were admitted to 25 participating NICU within 7 days of birth between May 2015 and April 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. These preterm infants were divided into the fungal sepsis group and the without fungal sepsis group according to whether they developed fungal sepsis to analyze the incidences and the microbiology of fungal sepsis. Chi-square test was used to compare the incidences of fungal sepsis in preterm infants with different gestational ages and birth weights and in different NICU. Multivariate Logistic regression analysis was used to study the outcomes of preterm infants with fungal sepsis, which were further compared with those of preterm infants without fungal sepsis. The 144 preterm infants in the fungal sepsis group were matched with 288 preterm infants in the non-fungal sepsis group by propensity score-matched method. Univariate and multivariate Logistic regression analysis were used to analyze the risk factors of fungal sepsis. Results: In all, 166 (0.7%) of the 24 731 preterm infants developed fungal sepsis, with the gestational age of (29.7±2.0) weeks and the birth weight of (1 300±293) g. The incidence of fungal sepsis increased with decreasing gestational age and birth weight (both P<0.001). The preterm infants with gestational age of <32 weeks accounted for 87.3% (145/166). The incidence of fungal sepsis was 1.0% (117/11 438) in very preterm infants and 2.0% (28/1 401) in extremely preterm infants, and was 1.3% (103/8 060) in very low birth weight infants and 1.7% (21/1 211) in extremely low birth weight infants, respectively. There was no fungal sepsis in 3 NICU, and the incidences in the other 22 NICU ranged from 0.7% (10/1 397) to 2.9% (21/724), with significant statistical difference (P<0.001). The pathogens were mainly Candida (150/166, 90.4%), including 59 cases of Candida albicans and 91 cases of non-Candida albicans, of which Candida parapsilosis was the most common (41 cases). Fungal sepsis was independently associated with increased risk of moderate to severe bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) (adjusted OR 1.52, 95%CI 1.04-2.22, P=0.030) and severe retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) (adjusted OR 2.55, 95%CI 1.12-5.80, P=0.025). Previous broad spectrum antibiotics exposure (adjusted OR=2.50, 95%CI 1.50-4.17, P<0.001), prolonged use of central line (adjusted OR=1.05, 95%CI 1.03-1.08, P<0.001) and previous total parenteral nutrition (TPN) duration (adjusted OR=1.04, 95%CI 1.02-1.06, P<0.001) were all independently associated with increasing risk of fungal sepsis. Conclusions: Candida albicans and Candida parapsilosis are the main pathogens of fungal sepsis among preterm infants in Chinese NICU. Preterm infants with fungal sepsis are at increased risk of moderate to severe BPD and severe ROP. Previous broad spectrum antibiotics exposure, prolonged use of central line and prolonged duration of TPN will increase the risk of fungal sepsis. Ongoing initiatives are needed to reduce fungal sepsis based on these risk factors.

Constraints on Heavy Decaying Dark Matter from 570 Days of LHAASO Observations

The kilometer square array (KM2A) of the large high altitude air shower observatory (LHAASO) aims at surveying the northern γ-ray sky at energies above 10 TeV with unprecedented sensitivity. γ-ray observations have long been one of the most powerful tools for dark matter searches, as, e.g., high-energy γ rays could be produced by the decays of heavy dark matter particles. In this Letter, we present the first dark matter analysis with LHAASO-KM2A, using the first 340 days of data from 1/2-KM2A and 230 days of data from 3/4-KM2A. Several regions of interest are used to search for a signal and account for the residual cosmic-ray background after γ/hadron separation. We find no excess of dark matter signals, and thus place some of the strongest γ-ray constraints on the lifetime of heavy dark matter particles with mass between 10^{5} and 10^{9}  GeV. Our results with LHAASO are robust, and have important implications for dark matter interpretations of the diffuse astrophysical high-energy neutrino emission.

Study of the Semileptonic Decay Λ_{c}^{+}→Λe^{+}ν_{e}

The study of the Cabibbo-favored semileptonic decay Λ_{c}^{+}→Λe^{+}ν_{e} is reported using a 4.5  fb^{-1} data sample of e^{+}e^{-} annihilations collected at center-of-mass energies ranging from 4.600 GeV to 4.699 GeV with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider. The branching fraction of the decay is measured to be B(Λ_{c}^{+}→Λe^{+}ν_{e})=(3.56±0.11_{stat}±0.07_{syst})%, which is the most precise measurement to date. Furthermore, we perform an investigation of the internal dynamics in Λ_{c}^{+}→Λe^{+}ν_{e}. We provide the first direct comparisons of the differential decay rate and form factors with those predicted from lattice quantum chromodynamics (LQCD) calculations. Combining the measured branching fraction with a q^{2}-integrated rate predicted by LQCD, we determine |V_{cs}|=0.936±0.017_{B}±0.024_{LQCD}±0.007_{τ_{Λ_{c}}}.

[Related factors and prognosis analysis of esophagorespiratory fistula after esophageal cancer surgery]

Objective: To explore the factors associated with the development of esophagorespiratory fistula (ERF) after esophageal cancer surgery and its relationship with patient survival. Methods: A total of 241 patients with esophageal cancer after surgery, who received postoperative sputum suction through bronchoscope from West China Hospital of Sichuan University between January and December 2021 were included. The clinical data and airway features under bronchoscope of these patients were collected. Of the 241 patients, 203 were males (84.2%) and 38 were females (15.8%), aged (63.63±8.05) years. The related factors of ERF were analyzed by multivariate logistic regression analysis, and Kaplan-meier was used to analyze the relationship between bronchoscopic specific manifestations, treatment modality and patient survival. Results: Of the 241 postoperative patients with esophageal cancer, 21 (8.7%) developed ERF. There were 39 (16.2%) patients with bronchoscopic specific manifestations, including 16 cases (6.6%) of hyperemia, 13 cases (5.4%) of congestion, and 15 cases (6.2%) of erosion. Bronchoscopic specific manifestations of tracheal mucosa (OR=13.734, 95%CI: 3.535-29.074, P<0.001) and thoracotomy (OR=9.121, 95%CI 1.843-44.237, P=0.007) were independent risk factors for the development of ERF, and preoperative chemotherapy (OR=0.128, 95%CI: 0.052-0.607, P=0.006) was a protective factor in the occurrence of ERF. The median survival time was 224 (95%CI: 95-353)d in the stent-treated group (14 patients) after the onset of ERF, and the median survival time of patients in the supportive care group (7 patients) was 29 (95%CI: 8-50)d, and the survival difference was statistically significant (χ²=5.69, P=0.017). Conclusions: Bronchoscopic specific manifestations are independent risk factors for the development of ERF in postoperative patients with esophageal cancer and are useful in assessing the risk of developing ERF. After the occurrence of postoperative ERF, timely intervention by insertion of tracheal stents to seal the fistula may prolong the survival time of the patients.

Measurement of the Absolute Branching Fraction and Decay Asymmetry of Λ→nγ

The radiative hyperon decay Λ→nγ is studied using (10087±44)×10^{6}  J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector operating at BEPCII. The absolute branching fraction of the decay Λ→nγ is determined to be (0.832±0.038_{stat}±0.054_{syst})×10^{-3}, which is a factor of 2.1 lower and 5.6 standard deviations different than the previous measurement. By analyzing the joint angular distribution of the decay products, the first determination of the decay asymmetry α_{γ} is reported with a value of -0.16±0.10_{stat}±0.05_{syst}.

[Analysis of risk factors of central nervous system complications supported on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation]

Objective: To investigate the risk factors of central nervous system (CNS) complications in children undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support. Methods: The clinical data, ECMO parameters, laboratory examination and outcome (follow-up to 90 d after discharge) of 82 children treated with ECMO in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of Shanghai Children's Hospital from December 2015 to December 2021 were analyzed retrospectively in this study. The patients were divided into CNS complication group and non-CNS complication group. The ECMO mode, ECMO catheterization mode, clinical and laboratory indicators pre-ECMO and 24 h after ECMO initiation, in-hospital mortality and 90-day mortality were compared with Chi-square test, t test and nonparametric rank sum test. Kaplan-Meier method was used to draw survival curve, and Log-rank test was used to compare the difference in survival rate. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to evaluate the power of variables to predict CNS complications. Results: A total of 82 children were treated with ECMO, including 49 males and 33 females, aged 34 (8, 80) months. There were 18 cases suffering CNS complications, including cerebral hemorrhage in 8 cases, epilepsy in 6 cases, simple cerebral infarction in 3 cases, and cerebral hemorrhage combined with cerebral infarction in 1 case. Veno-arterial ECMO accounted for a greater proportion in CNS complication group (17/18 vs. 67% (43/64), χ²=4.02, P=0.045). A higher percentage of children with CNS complications underwent surgical cannulation compared to those in non-CNS complication group (16/18 vs. 53% (34/64), χ²=7.55, P=0.006). The laboratory results indicated that lower pre-ECMO pH value (7.24 (7.15, 7.28) vs. 7.35 (7.26, 7.45), Z=-3.65, P<0.001) and platelet count 24 h after ECMO initiation (66 (27, 135) ×10⁹/L vs. 107 (61, 157) ×10⁹/L, Z=-2.04, P=0.041) were associated with CNS complications. In the CNS complication group, 7 children died during hospitalization and 7 died during 90-day after admission, and there was no significant difference compared with those in the non-CNS complication group (7/18 vs. 31% (20/64), 7/18 vs. 34% (22/64), both P>0.05). The ROC curve analysis indicated that the area under the ROC curve for pre-ECMO pH value was 0.738 (95%CI 0.598-0.877), and the optimal cut-off value was 7.325. Conclusions: CNS complications in children undergoing ECMO support are common. Pre-ECMO pH value <7.325 is a risk factor for CNS complications. Reducing the veno-arterial ECMO and surgical cannulation can help reduce the occurrence of CNS complications.

Precise Measurements of Decay Parameters and CP Asymmetry with Entangled Λ-Λ[over ¯] Pairs

Based on 10 billion J/ψ events collected at the BESIII experiment, a search for CP violation in Λ decay is performed in the difference between CP-odd decay parameters α_{-} for Λ→pπ^{-} and α_{+} for Λ[over ¯]→p[over ¯]π^{+} by using the process e^{+}e^{-}→J/ψ→ΛΛ[over ¯]. With a five-dimensional fit to the full angular distributions of the daughter baryon, the most precise values for the decay parameters are determined to be α_{-}=0.7519±0.0036±0.0024 and α_{+}=-0.7559±0.0036±0.0030, respectively. The Λ and Λ[over ¯] averaged value of the decay parameter is extracted to be α_{avg}=0.7542±0.0010±0.0024 with unprecedented accuracy. The CP asymmetry A_{CP}=(α_{-}+α_{+})/(α_{-}-α_{+}) is determined to be -0.0025±0.0046±0.0012, which is one of the most precise measurements in the baryon sector. The reported results for the decay parameter will play an important role in the studies of the polarizations and CP violations for the strange, charmed and beauty baryons.

Evidence for a Neutral Near-Threshold Structure in the K_{S}^{0} Recoil-Mass Spectra in e^{+}e^{-}→K_{S}^{0}D_{s}^{+}D^{*-} and e^{+}e^{-}→K_{S}^{0}D_{s}^{*+}D^{-}

We study the processes e^{+}e^{-}→K_{S}^{0}D_{s}^{+}D^{*-} and e^{+}e^{-}→K_{S}^{0}D_{s}^{*+}D^{-}, as well as their charge conjugated processes, at five center-of-mass energies between 4.628 and 4.699 GeV, using data samples corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 3.8  fb^{-1} collected by the BESIII detector at the BEPCII storage ring. Based on a partial reconstruction technique, we find evidence of a structure near the thresholds for D_{s}^{+}D^{*-} and D_{s}^{*+}D^{-} production in the K_{S}^{0} recoil-mass spectrum, which we refer to as the Z_{cs}(3985)^{0}. Fitting with a Breit-Wigner line shape, we find the mass of the structure to be (3992.2±1.7±1.6)  MeV/c^{2} and the width to be (7.7_{-3.8}^{+4.1}±4.3)  MeV, where the first uncertainties are statistical and the second are systematic. The significance of the Z_{cs}(3985)^{0} signal is found to be 4.6σ including both the statistical and systematic uncertainty. We report the Born cross section multiplied by the branching fraction at different energy points. The mass of the Z_{cs}(3985)^{0} is close to that of the Z_{cs}(3985)^{+}. Assuming SU(3) symmetry, the cross section of the neutral channel is consistent with that of the charged one. Hence, we conclude that the Z_{cs}(3985)^{0} is the isospin partner of the Z_{cs}(3985)^{+}.

Distribution and density of tertiary lymphoid structures predict clinical outcome in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The prognostic value and clinical relevance of tertiary lymphoid structures (TLSs) in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) remain unclear. Thus, we aimed to investigate the prognostic value and functional involvement of TLSs in iCCA.

METHODS

We retrospectively included 962 patients from 3 cancer centers across China. The TLSs at different anatomic subregions were quantified and correlated with overall survival (OS) by Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses. Multiplex immunohistochemistry (mIHC) was applied to characterize the composition of TLSs in 39 iCCA samples.

RESULTS

A quaternary TLS scoring system was established for the intra-tumor region (T score) and peri-tumor region (P score) respectively. T scores positively correlated with favorable prognosis (p <0.001), whereas a high P score signified worse survival (p <0.001). mIHC demonstrated that both T follicular helper and regulatory T cells were significantly increased in intra-tumoral TLSs compared to peri-tumoral counterparts (p <0.05), and regulatory T cell frequencies within intra-tumoral TLSs were positively associated with P score (p <0.05) rather than T score. Collectively, the combination of T and P scores stratified iCCAs into 4 immune classes with distinct prognoses (p <0.001) that differed in the abundance and distribution pattern of TLSs. Patients displaying an immune-active pattern had the lowest risk, with 5-year OS rates of 68.8%, whereas only 3.4% of patients with an immune-excluded pattern survived at 5 years (p <0.001). The C-index of the immune class was statistically higher than the TNM staging system (0.73 vs. 0.63, p <0.001). These results were validated in an internal and 2 external cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

The spatial distribution and abundance of TLSs significantly correlated with prognosis and provided a useful immune classification for iCCA. T follicular helper and regulatory T cells may play a critical role in determining the functional orientation of spatially different TLSs.

LAY SUMMARY

Tertiary lymphoid structures (TLSs) are associated with favorable prognosis in a number of cancers. However, their role in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) remains unclear. Herein, we comprehensively evaluated the spatial distribution, abundance, and cellular composition of TLSs in iCCA, and revealed the opposite prognostic impacts of TLSs located within or outside the tumor. This difference could be mediated by the different immune cell subsets present within the spatially distinct TLSs. Based on our analysis, we were able to stratify iCCAs into 4 immune subclasses associated with varying prognoses.

[Ultrasound-guided percutaneous cannulation for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in children]

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ultrasound-guided percutaneous cannulation for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in children. Methods: In this retrospective observational study, 66 cases who underwent non-cardiac surgery ECMO in pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of Shanghai Children's Hospital from May 2016 to April 2021 were collected. The demographics, model of ECMO support, type and size of arteriovenous cannulas, way of catheterization and complications were recorded and summarized. Patients were divided into percutaneous cannulation group and surgical cannulation group according to catheterization strategies. The demographics, duration of cannulation and ECMO support, ECMO weaning rate and hospital survival rate were compared among two groups. χ² and nonparametric rank sum test were used for comparison. Results: Among the 66 patients who received ECMO, 38 were male and 28 were female, with age 44.5 (12.0, 83.5) months and weight 15.0 (10.0, 25.0) kg; 21 patients underwent percutaneous cannulation, with a success rate of 95% (20 cases). Point-of-care ultrasound was performed for all percutaneous cannulation cases. The duration of percutaneous cannulation was significantly shorter than that of surgical cannulation (26.0 (23.3, 30.3) vs. 57.0 (53.8, 64.0) min, Z=6.31, P<0.001). Successful percutaneous cannulation cases were aged 70.5 (23.8, 109.5) months, and their weight was 23.2 (13.6, 37.0) kg. Ten cases were initially given veno-venous (VV) ECMO support, and 10 cases were given veno-arterial (VA) ECMO support. ECMO arterial cannulas were sized from 8 F to 17 F, and venous cannulas sized from 10 F to 19 F. For VV-ECMO, the right internal jugular and femoral veins were used as vascular access, while VA-ECMO used right internal jugular vein-femoral artery or right femoral vein-left femoral artery approach. Only one patient suffered severe complication (superior vena cava perforation). There was no catheter-related bloodstream infection. Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided percutaneous cannulation for ECMO can be performed with a high rate of success and safety in children.

[Epidemiological characteristics of novel coronavirus pneumonia in Shijiazhuang, China]

Objective: To analyze the epidemiological characteristics of an outbreak of novel coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19) in Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province in 2021 and to provide scientific basis for developing improved strategies to prevent and control the outbreak of COVID-19. Methods: Descriptive analysis of the outbreak of COVID-19 in Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province was performed with SPSS 21.0 and Excel software. The statistical analysis of the incubation period was performed using the rstan package in R4.0.4. Results: As of February 14^th 2021, a total of 942 local confirmed cases were reported in Hebei Province, 869 cases in Shijiazhuang, of which 847 cases were available for case information. This outbreak was mainly in rural areas, with the largest number of confirmed cases in Xiaoguozhuang village, 249 (29.4%); followed by Nanqiaozhai village, 128 (15.1%); and Liujiazuo village, 85 (10.0%). The outbreak lasted from January 2^nd, 2021 to February 14^th, 2021, and was mainly transmitted among the farmers as well as the students through dining parties, public gatherings and family contacts, showing an obvious time and occupation concentration trend. An analysis of 116 local confirmed cases in this outbreak with specific exposure time and onset time indicated that the median incubation period was 6 [interquartile range(IQR): 3.3, 10.0] days; whereas another report including 264 local confirmed cases with specific exposure time window showed that a median incubation period was 8.5 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.8-18.8] days. Conclusions: This outbreak was mainly related to rural areas, and was associated with parties, public gatherings and family gatherings. Self-protection and isolation of key areas and populations at risk should be effectively implemented to avoid close contact and other measures to reduce the occurrence of COVID-19 aggregation. Based on the results of the incubation period of this outbreak, the isolation period could be recommended to be extended to three weeks.

Peta-electron volt gamma-ray emission from the Crab Nebula

The Crab Nebula is a bright source of gamma rays powered by the Crab Pulsar's rotational energy through the formation and termination of a relativistic electron-positron wind. We report the detection of gamma rays from this source with energies from 5 × 10^-4 to 1.1 peta-electron volts with a spectrum showing gradual steepening over three energy decades. The ultrahigh-energy photons imply the presence of a peta-electron volt electron accelerator (a pevatron) in the nebula, with an acceleration rate exceeding 15% of the theoretical limit. We constrain the pevatron's size between 0.025 and 0.1 parsecs and the magnetic field to ≈110 microgauss. The production rate of peta-electron volt electrons, 2.5 × 10³⁶ ergs per second, constitutes 0.5% of the pulsar spin-down luminosity, although we cannot exclude a contribution of peta-electron volt protons to the production of the highest-energy gamma rays.

[A challenge for colorectal surgeons: pathogenesis, progression and management of the secondary tumors of the ovary]

A common clinical problem encountered by colorectal surgeons is the secondary tumors of the ovary (STO), particularly in young female patients. Most STO are from the digestive tract, and the known possible metastatic mechanisms include lymphatic, hematogenous, and intraperitoneal spreading. The molecular and histopathological characteristics of STO from different sites are diverse. It is particularly important to correctly identify the origin and feature of STO, which should be clarified by combining medical history, histopathology, immunohistochemistry, molecular biology, imaging and other means. The prognosis of patients with STO is poor in general. Comprehensive therapies based on surgical resection can benefit some patients. There is no specific treatment for STO at present, but not giving up easily on these patients is the right choice that every surgeon should understand.

Exploring prognostic indicators in the pathological images of hepatocellular carcinoma based on deep learning

OBJECTIVE

Tumour pathology contains rich information, including tissue structure and cell morphology, that reflects disease progression and patient survival. However, phenotypic information is subtle and complex, making the discovery of prognostic indicators from pathological images challenging.

DESIGN

An interpretable, weakly supervised deep learning framework incorporating prior knowledge was proposed to analyse hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and explore new prognostic phenotypes on pathological whole-slide images (WSIs) from the Zhongshan cohort of 1125 HCC patients (2451 WSIs) and TCGA cohort of 320 HCC patients (320 WSIs). A 'tumour risk score (TRS)' was established to evaluate patient outcomes, and then risk activation mapping (RAM) was applied to visualise the pathological phenotypes of TRS. The multi-omics data of The Cancer Genome Atlas(TCGA) HCC were used to assess the potential pathogenesis underlying TRS.

RESULTS

Survival analysis revealed that TRS was an independent prognosticator in both the Zhongshan cohort (p<0.0001) and TCGA cohort (p=0.0003). The predictive ability of TRS was superior to and independent of clinical staging systems, and TRS could evenly stratify patients into up to five groups with significantly different prognoses. Notably, sinusoidal capillarisation, prominent nucleoli and karyotheca, the nucleus/cytoplasm ratio and infiltrating inflammatory cells were identified as the main underlying features of TRS. The multi-omics data of TCGA HCC hint at the relevance of TRS to tumour immune infiltration and genetic alterations such as the FAT3 and RYR2 mutations.

CONCLUSION

Our deep learning framework is an effective and labour-saving method for decoding pathological images, providing a valuable means for HCC risk stratification and precise patient treatment.

[Application of artificial intelligence-assisted diagnosis for cervical liquid-based thin-layer cytology]

Objective: To explore the application value of artificial intelligence-assisted diagnosis system for TBS report in cervical cancer screening. Methods: A total of 16 317 clinical samples and related data of cervical liquid-based thin-layer cell smears, which were obtained from July 2020 to September 2020, were collected from Southern Hospital, Guangzhou Huayin Medical Inspection Center, Shenzhen Bao'an People's Hospital(Group) and Changsha Yuan'an Biotechnology Co., Ltd. The TBS report artificial intelligence-assisted diagnosis system of cervical liquid-based thin-layer cytology jointly developed by Southern Medical University and Guangzhou F. Q. PATHOTECH Co., Ltd. based on deep learning convolution neural network was used to diagnose all clinical samples. The sensitivity,specificity and accuracy of both artificial intelligence-assisted diagnosis system and cytologists using artificial intelligence-assisted diagnosis system were analyzed based on the evaluation standard(2014 TBS). The time spent by the two methods was also compared. Results: The sensitivity of artificial intelligence-assisted diagnosis system in predicting cervical intraepithelial lesions and other lesions (including endometrial cells detected in women over 45 years old and infectious lesions) under different production methods, different cytoplasmic staining and different scanning instruments was 92.90% and 83.55% respectively, and the specificity of negative samples was 87.02%, while that of cytologists using artificial intelligence-assisted diagnosis system was 99.34%, 97.79% and 99.10%, respectively. Moreover, cytologists using artificial intelligence-assisted diagnosis system could save about 6 times of reading time than manual. Conclusions: Artificial intelligence-assisted diagnosis system for TBS report of cervical liquid-based thin-layer cytology has the advantages of high sensitivity, high specificity and strong generalization. Cytologists can significantly improve the accuracy and work efficiency of reading smears by using artificial intelligence-assisted diagnosis system.

[Efficacy of high flow nasal oxygen therapy in children with acute respiratory failure]

Objective: To investigate the efficacy of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in children with acute respiratory failure. Methods: A prospective study was conducted. A total of 153 patients aged from 1 to 14 years with acute respiratory failure were enrolled, who were admitted to pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of Shanghai Children's Hospital from January 2018 to December 2019. HFNC success was defined as no need for invasive mechanical ventilation and successfully withdrawn from HFNC, while HFNC failure was defined as need for invasive mechanical ventilation. HFNC at a flow rate of 2 L/(kg·min) (maximum ≤ 60 L/min) with inhaled oxygen concentration (FiO₂) between 0.30 and 1.00 was applied to maintain percutaneous oxygen saturation (SpO₂) of 0.94-0.97. Parameters including arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO₂), partial pressure of carbon dioxide in artery (PaCO₂), SpO₂ and PaO₂/FiO₂ were collected before and during the application of HFNC at 1 h, 6 h, 12 h, 24 h and 48 h, as well as over 48 h after HFNC withdrawn. Comparison between the groups was performed by student t test, Mann-Whitney U test or chi-square test. The sensitivity and specificity of the above parameters in predicting HFNC success were evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Results: A total of 153 children (70 males and 83 females) were enrolled. Among them, 131 (85.6%) cases were successfully weaned off from HFNC and 22 (14.4%) failed. The duration of HFNC was 57 (38, 95) hours in the successful group, and the PaO₂/FiO₂ before HFNC application and after HFNC was withdrawn were 187 (170, 212) mmHg (1 mmHg=0.133 kPa) and 280 (262, 292) mmHg, respectively. The duration of HFNC in the failure group was 19 (9, 49) hours, and the PaO₂/FiO₂ before HFNC application and after HFNC withdrawn were 176 (171, 189) mmHg and 159 (156, 161) mmHg, respectively. The values of PaO₂/FiO₂ were significantly higher in the successful group than those in the failed group at using HFNC initially 1 h (196 (182, 211) vs. 174 (160, 178) mmHg, Z =-5.105, P<0.01), 6 h (213 (203, 220) vs. 168 (157, 170) mmHg, Z =-6.772, P<0.01), 12 h (226 (180, 261) vs. 165 (161, 170) mmHg, Z =-4.308, P<0.01), 24 h (229 (195, 259) vs. 165 (161, 170) mmHg, Z=-4.609, P<0.01) and 48 h (249 (216, 273) vs. 163 (158, 169) mmHg, Z =-4.628, P<0.01) after the HFNC application, and over 48 h after HFNC was withdrawn (277 (268, 283) vs. 157 (154, 158) mmHg, Z=-3.512, P<0.01). Moreover, the PaO₂ levels were significantly higher in the successful group than those in the failed group using HFNC initially at 1 h (73.7 (71.0, 76.7) vs. 70.0 (66.2, 71.2) mmHg, Z=-4.587, P<0.01) and 6 h (79.0 (75.0, 82.0) vs. 71.0 (62.0, 72.0) mmHg, Z=-5.954, P<0.01) after HFNC application. Also, the SpO₂ levels showed the same differences at 1 h (0.96 (0.95, 0.96) vs. 0.94 (0.92, 0.94), Z =-4.812, P<0.01) and 6 h (0.96 (0.95, 0.97) vs. 0.94(0.91, 0.95), Z=-5.024, P<0.01) after HFNC application. Forty eight hours after HFNC was withdrawn, the PaO₂ (88.0 (81.7, 95.0) vs. 63.7 (63.3, 66.0) mmHg, Z =-3.032, P<0.01) and SpO₂ (0.96 (0.94, 0.98) vs. 0.91 (0.90, 0.92), Z=-3.957, P<0.01) were also significantly higher in the successful group. Regarding the HFNC complications, there was one case with atelectasis and one with pneumothorax in the failure group. HFNC was used as sequential oxygen therapy after extubation in 79 children, successful in all. ROC curve showed that the area under curve of PaO₂/FiO₂ in predicting HFNC success was 0.990, and the optimal cut-off value was 232 mmHg with the 95%CI of 0.970-1.000 (P<0.01). Conclusions: HFNC could be used as a respiratory support strategy for children with mild to moderate respiratory failure and as a sequential oxygen therapy after extubation. The PaO₂/FiO₂ when HFNC withdrow is the optimal index to evaluate the success of HFNC application.

The Analysis of Drug-Resistant Gene Mutations of Mycobacterium tuberculosis by GeneChip in Lianyungang, China

BACKGROUND

Tuberculosis (TB) has raised major global health concerns, especially for that caused by drug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tuberculosis). The control of TB was hampered by time-consuming and insensitive diagnostic methods. GeneChip analysis is a rapid method for screening and identifying the gene mutations of M. tuberculosis. However, there was little relevant information about GeneChip analysis of M. tuberculosis in China.

METHODS

To compare the performance of GeneChip analysis in the diagnosis of drug-resistant M. tuberculosis with traditional drug susceptibility testing (DST), 1,747 sputum specimens from 2014 to 2016 in Lianyungang of China were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

GeneChip analysis showed that the gene mutation site of M. tuberculosis to RFP resistance was 46.37% in rpoB 531 (TCG→TTG), and INH resistance was 69.89% in katG 315 (AGC→ACC). There was not significant different between GeneChip analysis and DST in detecting the resistance of M. tuberculosis to RPF or INH.

CONCLUSIONS

GeneChip analysis could be regarded as a rapid and recommended method for early screening and identifying the drug resistance of M. tuberculosis.

Properties of Neon, Magnesium, and Silicon Primary Cosmic Rays Results from the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer

We report the observation of new properties of primary cosmic rays, neon (Ne), magnesium (Mg), and silicon (Si), measured in the rigidity range 2.15 GV to 3.0 TV with 1.8×10^{6}  Ne, 2.2×10^{6}  Mg, and 1.6×10^{6}  Si nuclei collected by the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer experiment on the International Space Station. The Ne and Mg spectra have identical rigidity dependence above 3.65 GV. The three spectra have identical rigidity dependence above 86.5 GV, deviate from a single power law above 200 GV, and harden in an identical way. Unexpectedly, above 86.5 GV the rigidity dependence of primary cosmic rays Ne, Mg, and Si spectra is different from the rigidity dependence of primary cosmic rays He, C, and O. This shows that the Ne, Mg, and Si and He, C, and O are two different classes of primary cosmic rays.

[Clinical features and outcomes of pediatric acute fulminant myocarditis requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation]

Objective: To observe the clinical features and effects of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in critically ill children with acute fulminant myocarditis (AFM). Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed in pediatric patients with AFM requiring ECMO, from December 2015 to December 2018, who were admitted to the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) in Shanghai Children's Hospital. According to whether patient was alive at least 48 hours after weaning, the children were divided into successful weaning group (9 cases) and unsucessful weaning group (3 cases). The factors related to successful ECMO weaning were explored. The changes of clinical and biochemical parameters before and after ECMO treatment in successful weaning group were analyzed. Continuous variables were presented as median (inter quartile range) for abnormal distribution data, and Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the data. Results: A total of 12 pediatric patients including 4 males and 8 females were enrolled in this study. The median body weight was 20 (17, 36) kg, and the median age was 66 (48, 103) months. Nine cases were successfully weaned from ECMO, and 8 cases survived to discharge, and 4 cases died in the hospital. The median interval between symptoms onset and ECMO establishment was 3.0 (2.2, 4.0) days, the median duration of ECMO support was 120 (68, 152) hours. In the unsuccessful weaning group, patients displayed higher levels of initiallactic acid (LA), higher vasoactive-inotropic score (VIS), and longer QRS duration before ECMO establishment when compared with those in the successful weaning group (all P<0.05). After ECMO establishment, mean arterial pressure (MAP), systemic central venous oxygen saturation, LA, myocardial injury markers and left ventricular ejection fraction were all significantly improved in the successful weaning group (all P<0.05). Conclusion: In pediatric AFM patients, serum LA level, VIS and QRS duration before ECMO establishment are associated with successful ECMO weaning.

Properties of Cosmic Helium Isotopes Measured by the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer

Precision measurements by the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS) on the International Space Station of ^{3}He and ^{4}He fluxes are presented. The measurements are based on 100 million ^{4}He nuclei in the rigidity range from 2.1 to 21 GV and 18 million ^{3}He from 1.9 to 15 GV collected from May 2011 to November 2017. We observed that the ^{3}He and ^{4}He fluxes exhibit nearly identical variations with time. The relative magnitude of the variations decreases with increasing rigidity. The rigidity dependence of the ^{3}He/^{4}He flux ratio is measured for the first time. Below 4 GV, the ^{3}He/^{4}He flux ratio was found to have a significant long-term time dependence. Above 4 GV, the ^{3}He/^{4}He flux ratio was found to be time independent, and its rigidity dependence is well described by a single power law ∝R^{Δ} with Δ=-0.294±0.004. Unexpectedly, this value is in agreement with the B/O and B/C spectral indices at high energies.

[Evaluation of postoperative complications registration status of gastric cancer by medical information: A single center feasibility study]

Objective: To explore the feasibility of assessing complications registration through medical information. Methods: A descriptive case series study was performed to retrospectively collect medical information and complication registration information of gastric cancer patients at Department of Gastrointestinal Cancer Center Ward I, Peking University Cancer Hospital from November 1, 2016 to March 1, 2017 (the first period), and from November 1, 2018 to March 1, 2019 (the second period). Case inclusion criteria: (1) adenocarcinoma confirmed by gastroscopy and biopsy; (2) patients undergoing open surgery or laparoscopic radical gastrectomy; (3) complete postoperative medical information and complication information. Patients who were directly transferred to ICU after surgery and underwent emergency surgery were excluded. Because difference of the complication registration procedure at our department existed before and after 2018, so the above two periods were selected to be used for analysis on enrolled patients. The prescription information during hospitalization, including nursing, medication, laboratory examination, transference, surgical advice, etc. were compared with the current Standard Operating Procedure (SOP, including preoperative routine examinations, inspection, perioperative preventive antibiotic use, postoperative observational tests, inspection, routine nutritional support, prophylactic anticoagulation, and prophylactic inhibition of pancreatic enzymes, etc.) for gastric cancer at our department. Medical order beyond SOP was defined as medical order variation. Postoperative complication was diagnosed using the Clavien-Dindo classification criteria, which was divided into I, II, IIIa, IIIb, IVa, IVb, and V. Medical order variation and complication registration information were compared between the two periods, including consistence between medical order variation and complication registration, missing report, underestimation or overestimation of medical order variation, and registration rate of medical order variation [registration rate = (total number of patients-number of missing report patients)/total number of patients], severe complications (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥ III), medical order variation deviating from SOP and the corresponding inferred grading of complication. The data was organized using Microsoft Office Excel 2010. Results: A total of 177 gastric cancer patients were included in the analysis. The first period group and the second period group comprised 89 and 88 cases, respectively. The registrated complication rate was 23.6% (21/89) and 36.4% (32/88), and the incidence of severe complication was 2.2% (2/89) and 4.5% (4/88) in the first and the second period, respectively. The complication rate inferred from medical order variation was 74.2% (66/89) and 78.4% (69/88), and the incidence of severe complication was 7.9% (7/89) and 4.5% (4/88) in the first and second period, respectively. In the first and second period, the proportions of medical order variation in accordance with registered complication were 36.0% and 45.5% respectively; the proportion of underestimation, overestimation and missing report were 5.6% and 4.5%, 4.5% and 4.5%, 53.9% and 45.5%, respectively; the registration rate of medical order variation was 46.1% and 54.5%; the number of case with grade I complications inferred from medical order variation was 34 (38.2%) and 25 (28.4%), respectively; and the number of grade II was 12 (13.5%) and 15 cases (17.0%), respectively. The reason of the missing report of medical order variation corresponding to grade I complication was mainly the single use of analgesic drugs outside SOP, accounting for 76.5% (26/34) and 64.0% (16/25) in the first and second period respectively, and that corresponding to grade II complication was mainly the use of non-prophylactic antibiotics, accounting for 9/12 cases and 5/15 cases, respectively. Conclusions: Medical information can evaluate the morbidity of complication feasibly and effectively. Attention should be paid to routine registration to avoid specific missing report.

[Continuous renal replacement therapy combined with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for pediatric cardiopulmonary failure]

Objective: To explore the effectiveness and safety of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) combined with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) on rescuing pediatric patients with cardiopulmonary failure. Methods: The medical records of patients treated with ECMO admitted to pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) in Shanghai Children's Hospital from December 2015 to November 2017 were retrospectively extracted. There were 14 patients treated with ECMO combined with CRRT (ECMO+ CRRT group) due to acute kidney injury (AKI) or fluid overload, while 11 cases treated with ECMO only. The demographics and clinical characteristics of patients, the indications, details and complications of ECMO and CRRT support, and the survival rates were analyzed. Results: A total of 25 cases including 15 boys and 10 girls with cardiopulmonary failure treated with ECMO were enrolled in this study, whose median age and body weight were 9 (1-117) months and 10 (2-42) kg. The median duration of ECMO support was 199.2 h, and the median duration of CRRT was 78.6 h. Among the 14 cases in ECMO + CRRT group, 12 cases were treated with CRRT connected to ECMO pipeline, and 2 other cases were treated with independently operated CRRT. The serum level of creatinine was significantly higher in ECMO+ CRRT group than that in ECMO group (53 (22- 126) vs. 29 (12- 92) μmol/L, Z=-2.208, P=0.043). There was no significant difference in running time between ECMO+CRRT group and ECMO group ((257±203) vs. (122± 83) h, t=-2.062, P=0.051). And the incidence of thrombocytopenia was higher in ECMO+CRRT group than that in ECMO group (10/14 vs. 3/11 , χ(2)=4.812, P=0.028). There were no differences in the successful weaning rate and discharge survival rate between ECMO + CRRT and ECMO group (9 vs. 8, χ(2)= 0.203, P= 0.652 and 8 vs. 8, χ(2)= 0.659, P= 0.417, respectively). Conclusion: The combination of CRRT and ECMO is an effective and safe treatment to alleviate fluid overload and improve kidney function in pediatric patients with cardiopulmonary failure.

Towards Understanding the Origin of Cosmic-Ray Electrons

Precision results on cosmic-ray electrons are presented in the energy range from 0.5 GeV to 1.4 TeV based on 28.1×10^{6} electrons collected by the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer on the International Space Station. In the entire energy range the electron and positron spectra have distinctly different magnitudes and energy dependences. The electron flux exhibits a significant excess starting from 42.1_{-5.2}^{+5.4}  GeV compared to the lower energy trends, but the nature of this excess is different from the positron flux excess above 25.2±1.8  GeV. Contrary to the positron flux, which has an exponential energy cutoff of 810_{-180}^{+310}  GeV, at the 5σ level the electron flux does not have an energy cutoff below 1.9 TeV. In the entire energy range the electron flux is well described by the sum of two power law components. The different behavior of the cosmic-ray electrons and positrons measured by the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer is clear evidence that most high energy electrons originate from different sources than high energy positrons.

Activated and Exhausted MAIT Cells Foster Disease Progression and Indicate Poor Outcome in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

PURPOSE

Innate immunity is an indispensable arm of tumor immune surveillance, and the liver is an organ with a predominance of innate immunity, where mucosal-associated invariant T (MAIT) cells are enriched. However, little is known about the phenotype, functions, and immunomodulatory role of MAIT cells in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).Experimental Design: The distribution, phenotype, and function of MAIT cells in patients with HCC were evaluated by both flow cytometry (FCM) and in vitro bioassays. Transcriptomic analysis of MAIT cells was also performed. Prognostic significance of tumor-infiltrating MAIT cells was validated in four independent cohorts of patients with HCC.

RESULTS

Despite their fewer densities in HCC tumor than normal liver, MAIT cells were significantly enriched in the HCC microenvironment compared with other mucosa-associated organs. Tumor-derived MAIT cells displayed a typical CCR7^-CD45RA^-CD45RO⁺CD95⁺ effector memory phenotype with lower costimulatory and effector capabilities. Tumor-educated MAIT cells significantly upregulated inhibitory molecules like PD-1, CTLA-4, TIM-3, secreted significantly less IFNγ and IL17, and produced minimal granzyme B and perforin while shifting to produce tumor-promoting cytokines like IL8. Transcriptome sequencing confirmed that tumor-derived MAIT cells were reprogrammed toward a tumor-promoting direction by downregulating genes enriched in pathways of cytokine secretion and cytolysis effector function like NFKB1 and STAT5B and by upregulating genes like IL8, CXCL12, and HAVCR2 (TIM-3). High infiltration of MAIT cells in HCC significantly correlated with an unfavorable clinical outcome, revealed by FCM, qRT-PCR, and multiplex IHC analyses, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

HCC-infiltrating MAIT cells were functionally impaired and even reprogrammed to shift away from antitumor immunity and toward a tumor-promoting direction.See related commentary by Carbone, p. 3199.