↓ Skip to main content

Measurement of the D*(2010)+ Meson Width and the D*(2010)+−D0 Mass Difference

Overview of attention for article published in Physical Review Letters, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Measurement of the D*(2010)+ Meson Width and the D*(2010)+−D0 Mass Difference
Published in
Physical Review Letters, September 2013
DOI 10.1103/physrevlett.111.111801
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. P. Lees, V. Poireau, V. Tisserand, E. Grauges, A. Palano, G. Eigen, B. Stugu, D. N. Brown, L. T. Kerth, Yu. G. Kolomensky, M. J. Lee, G. Lynch, H. Koch, T. Schroeder, C. Hearty, T. S. Mattison, J. A. McKenna, R. Y. So, A. Khan, V. E. Blinov, A. R. Buzykaev, V. P. Druzhinin, V. B. Golubev, E. A. Kravchenko, A. P. Onuchin, S. I. Serednyakov, Yu. I. Skovpen, E. P. Solodov, K. Yu. Todyshev, A. N. Yushkov, D. Kirkby, A. J. Lankford, M. Mandelkern, B. Dey, J. W. Gary, O. Long, G. M. Vitug, C. Campagnari, M. Franco Sevilla, T. M. Hong, D. Kovalskyi, J. D. Richman, C. A. West, A. M. Eisner, W. S. Lockman, A. J. Martinez, B. A. Schumm, A. Seiden, D. S. Chao, C. H. Cheng, B. Echenard, K. T. Flood, D. G. Hitlin, P. Ongmongkolkul, F. C. Porter, R. Andreassen, C. Fabby, Z. Huard, B. T. Meadows, M. D. Sokoloff, L. Sun, P. C. Bloom, W. T. Ford, A. Gaz, U. Nauenberg, J. G. Smith, S. R. Wagner, R. Ayad, W. H. Toki, B. Spaan, K. R. Schubert, R. Schwierz, D. Bernard, M. Verderi, S. Playfer, D. Bettoni, C. Bozzi, R. Calabrese, G. Cibinetto, E. Fioravanti, I. Garzia, E. Luppi, L. Piemontese, V. Santoro, R. Baldini-Ferroli, A. Calcaterra, R. de Sangro, G. Finocchiaro, S. Martellotti, P. Patteri, I. M. Peruzzi, M. Piccolo, M. Rama, A. Zallo, R. Contri, E. Guido, M. Lo Vetere, M. R. Monge, S. Passaggio, C. Patrignani, E. Robutti, B. Bhuyan, V. Prasad, M. Morii, A. Adametz, U. Uwer, H. M. Lacker, P. D. Dauncey, U. Mallik, C. Chen, J. Cochran, W. T. Meyer, S. Prell, A. E. Rubin, A. V. Gritsan, N. Arnaud, M. Davier, D. Derkach, G. Grosdidier, F. Le Diberder, A. M. Lutz, B. Malaescu, P. Roudeau, A. Stocchi, G. Wormser, D. J. Lange, D. M. Wright, J. P. Coleman, J. R. Fry, E. Gabathuler, D. E. Hutchcroft, D. J. Payne, C. Touramanis, A. J. Bevan, F. Di Lodovico, R. Sacco, G. Cowan, J. Bougher, D. N. Brown, C. L. Davis, A. G. Denig, M. Fritsch, W. Gradl, K. Griessinger, A. Hafner, E. Prencipe, R. J. Barlow, G. D. Lafferty, E. Behn, R. Cenci, B. Hamilton, A. Jawahery, D. A. Roberts, R. Cowan, D. Dujmic, G. Sciolla, R. Cheaib, P. M. Patel, S. H. Robertson, P. Biassoni, N. Neri, F. Palombo, L. Cremaldi, R. Godang, P. Sonnek, D. J. Summers, X. Nguyen, M. Simard, P. Taras, G. De Nardo, D. Monorchio, G. Onorato, C. Sciacca, M. Martinelli, G. Raven, C. P. Jessop, J. M. LoSecco, K. Honscheid, R. Kass, J. Brau, R. Frey, N. B. Sinev, D. Strom, E. Torrence, E. Feltresi, M. Margoni, M. Morandin, M. Posocco, M. Rotondo, G. Simi, F. Simonetto, R. Stroili, S. Akar, E. Ben-Haim, M. Bomben, G. R. Bonneaud, H. Briand, G. Calderini, J. Chauveau, Ph. Leruste, G. Marchiori, J. Ocariz, S. Sitt, M. Biasini, E. Manoni, S. Pacetti, A. Rossi, C. Angelini, G. Batignani, S. Bettarini, M. Carpinelli, G. Casarosa, A. Cervelli, F. Forti, M. A. Giorgi, A. Lusiani, B. Oberhof, E. Paoloni, A. Perez, G. Rizzo, J. J. Walsh, D. Lopes Pegna, J. Olsen, A. J. S. Smith, R. Faccini, F. Ferrarotto, F. Ferroni, M. Gaspero, L. Li Gioi, G. Piredda, C. Bünger, O. Grünberg, T. Hartmann, T. Leddig, C. Voß, R. Waldi, T. Adye, E. O. Olaiya, F. F. Wilson, S. Emery, G. Hamel de Monchenault, G. Vasseur, Ch. Yèche, F. Anulli, D. Aston, D. J. Bard, J. F. Benitez, C. Cartaro, M. R. Convery, J. Dorfan, G. P. Dubois-Felsmann, W. Dunwoodie, M. Ebert, R. C. Field, B. G. Fulsom, A. M. Gabareen, M. T. Graham, C. Hast, W. R. Innes, P. Kim, M. L. Kocian, D. W. G. S. Leith, P. Lewis, D. Lindemann, B. Lindquist, S. Luitz, V. Luth, H. L. Lynch, D. B. MacFarlane, D. R. Muller, H. Neal, S. Nelson, M. Perl, T. Pulliam, B. N. Ratcliff, A. Roodman, A. A. Salnikov, R. H. Schindler, A. Snyder, D. Su, M. K. Sullivan, J. Va’vra, A. P. Wagner, W. F. Wang, W. J. Wisniewski, M. Wittgen, D. H. Wright, H. W. Wulsin, V. Ziegler, W. Park, M. V. Purohit, R. M. White, J. R. Wilson, A. Randle-Conde, S. J. Sekula, M. Bellis, P. R. Burchat, T. S. Miyashita, E. M. T. Puccio, M. S. Alam, J. A. Ernst, R. Gorodeisky, N. Guttman, D. R. Peimer, A. Soffer, S. M. Spanier, J. L. Ritchie, A. M. Ruland, R. F. Schwitters, B. C. Wray, J. M. Izen, X. C. Lou, F. Bianchi, F. De Mori, A. Filippi, D. Gamba, S. Zambito, L. Lanceri, L. Vitale, F. Martinez-Vidal, A. Oyanguren, P. Villanueva-Perez, H. Ahmed, J. Albert, Sw. Banerjee, F. U. Bernlochner, H. H. F. Choi, G. J. King, R. Kowalewski, M. J. Lewczuk, T. Lueck, I. M. Nugent, J. M. Roney, R. J. Sobie, N. Tasneem, T. J. Gershon, P. F. Harrison, T. E. Latham, H. R. Band, S. Dasu, Y. Pan, R. Prepost, S. L. Wu

Abstract

We measure the mass difference Δm0 between the D*(2010)+ and the D0 and the natural linewidth Γ of the transition D*(2010)+ → D0π+. The data were recorded with the BABAR detector at center-of-mass energies at and near the Υ(4S) resonance, and correspond to an integrated luminosity of approximately 477  fb(-1). The D0 is reconstructed in the decay modes D0 → K- π+ and D0 → K- π+ π- π+. For the decay mode D0 → K- π+ we obtain Γ = (83.4±1.7±1.5)  keV and Δm0 = (145425.6±0.6±1.7)  keV, [corrected] where the quoted errors are statistical and systematic, respectively. For the D0 → K- π+ π- π+ mode we obtain Γ = (83.2±1.5±2.6)  keV and Δm0 = (145426.6±0.5±1.9)  keV. [corrected] The combined measurements yield Γ = (83.3±1.2±1.4)  keV and Δm0 = (145425.9±0.4±1.7)  keV; the width is a factor of approximately 12 times more precise than the previous value, while the mass difference is a factor of approximately 6 times more precise.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 3%
Unknown 36 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 35%
Professor 7 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 8 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 17 46%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 14%
Engineering 3 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 September 2013.
All research outputs
#9,480,378
of 12,352,410 outputs
Outputs from Physical Review Letters
#17,396
of 24,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,246
of 155,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Physical Review Letters
#195
of 334 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,352,410 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,910 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 155,127 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 334 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.