# Meson Particle Listings

$D^{\pm}$

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tr><td>0.125</td><td>±0.014</td><td>±0.005</td></tr><tr><td>0.284</td><td>±0.022</td><td>±0.059</td></tr><tr><td>0.248</td><td>±0.019</td><td>±0.017</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>AITALA</td><td>02</td><td>E791</td><td>See AITALA 06</td></tr><tr><td>FRABETTI</td><td>94G</td><td>E687</td><td>Dalitz fit, 8800 evts</td></tr><tr><td>ANJOS</td><td>93</td><td>E691</td><td>γ Be 90-260 GeV</td></tr></table>

$$ \Gamma(\bar{K}^*(892)^0\pi^+, \bar{K}^*(892)^0 \to K^-\pi^+) / \Gamma(K^-2\pi^+) \quad \Gamma_{56}/\Gamma_{52} $$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.111 ±0.012</strong></td><td><strong>OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td>Error includes scale factor of 3.7.</td></tr><tr><td>0.1236 ±0.0034</td><td>±0.0034</td><td>09</td><td>FOCS MIPWA fit, 53k evts</td></tr><tr><td>0.0988 ±0.0046</td><td></td><td>08A</td><td>CLEO QMIPWA fit, 141k evts</td></tr><tr><td>0.119 ±0.002</td><td>±0.020</td><td>06</td><td>E791 Dalitz fit, 15.1k events</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tr><td>0.1361 ±0.0041</td><td>±0.0030</td><td>1</td><td>LINK</td><td>07B</td><td>FOCS</td><td>See LINK 09</td></tr><tr><td>0.123 ±0.010</td><td>±0.009</td><td></td><td>AITALA</td><td>02</td><td>E791</td><td>See AITALA 06</td></tr><tr><td>0.137 ±0.006</td><td>±0.009</td><td></td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>94G</td><td>E687</td><td>Dalitz fit, 8800 evts</td></tr><tr><td>0.170 ±0.009</td><td>±0.034</td><td></td><td>ANJOS</td><td>93</td><td>E691</td><td>γ Be 90-260 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.14 ±0.04</td><td>±0.04</td><td></td><td>ALVAREZ</td><td>91B</td><td>N14</td><td>Photoproduction</td></tr><tr><td>0.13 ±0.01</td><td>±0.07</td><td></td><td>ADLER</td><td>87</td><td>MRK3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> 3.77 GeV</td></tr></table>

¹ The statistical error on this LINK 07b value is corrected in LINK 09.

$$ \Gamma(\bar{K}^*(1410)^0\pi^+, \bar{K}^*0 \to K^-\pi^+) / \Gamma(K^-2\pi^+) \quad \Gamma_{57}/\Gamma_{52} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>not seen</td><td>LINK</td><td>09</td><td>FOCS MIPWA fit, 53k evts</td></tr><tr><td>not seen</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>08A</td><td>CLEO QMIPWA fit, 141k evts</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tr><td>4.8 ±2.1 ±1.7</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>LINK</td><td>07B</td><td>FOCS</td><td>See LINK 09</td></tr></table>

$$ \Gamma(\bar{K}_2^*(1430)^0\pi^+, \bar{K}_2^*0 \to K^-\pi^+) / \Gamma(K^-2\pi^+) \quad \Gamma_{58}/\Gamma_{52} $$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.24 ±0.08</strong></td><td><strong>OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td>Error includes scale factor of 2.2. See the ideogram below.</td></tr><tr><td>0.58 ±0.10</td><td>±0.06</td><td>09</td><td>FOCS MIPWA fit, 53k evts</td></tr><tr><td>0.204 ±0.040</td><td></td><td>08A</td><td>CLEO QMIPWA fit, 141k evts</td></tr><tr><td>0.2 ±0.1</td><td>±0.1</td><td>06</td><td>E791 Dalitz fit, 15.1k events</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tr><td>0.39 ±0.09</td><td>±0.05</td><td>LINK</td><td>07B</td><td>FOCS</td><td>See LINK 09</td></tr><tr><td>0.5 ±0.1</td><td>±0.2</td><td>02</td><td>E791</td><td></td><td>See AITALA 06</td></tr></table>



WEIGHTED AVERAGE
0.24±0.08 (Error scaled by 2.2)

<figure><img src="image_536.png" /></figure>

$$ \Gamma(\bar{K}_2^*(1430)^0\pi^+, \bar{K}_2^*(1430)^0 \to K^-\pi^+) / \Gamma(K^-2\pi^+) \quad \Gamma_{58}/\Gamma_{52} $$

$$ \Gamma(\bar{K}^*(1680)^0\pi^+, \bar{K}^*(1680)^0 \to K^-\pi^+) / \Gamma(K^-2\pi^+) \quad \Gamma_{59}/\Gamma_{52} $$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.23 ±0.12</strong></td><td><strong>OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1.75 ±0.62</td><td>±0.54</td><td>09</td><td>FOCS MIPWA fit, 53k evts</td></tr><tr><td>0.196 ±0.118</td><td></td><td>08A</td><td>CLEO QMIPWA fit, 141k evts</td></tr><tr><td>1.2 ±0.6</td><td>±1.2</td><td>06</td><td>E791 Dalitz fit, 15.1k events</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tr><td>1.90 ±0.63</td><td>±0.43</td><td>LINK</td><td>07B</td><td>FOCS</td><td>See LINK 09</td></tr><tr><td>2.5 ±0.7</td><td>±0.3</td><td>02</td><td>E791</td><td></td><td>See AITALA 06</td></tr><tr><td>4.7 ±0.6</td><td>±0.7</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>94G</td><td>E687</td><td>Dalitz fit, 8800 evts</td></tr><tr><td>3.0 ±0.4</td><td>±1.3</td><td>ANJOS</td><td>93</td><td>E691</td><td>γ Be 90-260 GeV</td></tr></table>



$$ \Gamma(K^- (2\pi^+)_{1=2}) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \quad \Gamma_{60}/\Gamma_{52} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.155 ±0.028</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>08A</td><td>CLEO QMIPWA fit, 141k evts</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+ \text{ nonresonant}) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \quad \Gamma_{61}/\Gamma_{52} $$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis. Later analyses find little need for this decay mode.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0.130 ±0.058</td><td>±0.044</td><td>02</td><td>E791 See AITALA 06</td></tr><tr><td>0.998 ±0.037</td><td>±0.072</td><td>94G</td><td>E687 Dalitz fit, 8800 evts</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tr><td>0.838 ±0.088</td><td>±0.275</td></tr><tr><td>0.79 ±0.07</td><td>±0.15</td></tr></table>

<table><tr><td>ANJOS</td><td>93</td><td>E691</td><td>γ Be 90-260 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>ADLER</td><td>87</td><td>MRK3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> 3.77 GeV</td></tr></table>

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{62}/\Gamma_{62} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>6.99 ±0.09</td><td>±0.25</td><td>1</td><td>DOBBS</td><td>07 CLEO See BONVICINI 14</td></tr><tr><td>7.2 ±0.2</td><td>±0.4</td><td>5.1k</td><td>1</td><td>HE</td><td>05 CLEO See DOBBS 07</td></tr><tr><td>5.1 ±1.3</td><td>±0.8</td><td>159</td><td>ADLER</td><td>88C MRK3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> 3.77 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ DOBBS 07 and HE 05 use single- and double-tagged events in an overall fit. DOBBS 07 supersedes HE 05.

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \quad \Gamma_{62}/\Gamma_{52} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.785 ±0.007</strong></td><td><strong>±0.016</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>1</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 \rho^+) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0) \quad \Gamma_{63}/\Gamma_{62} $$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>83.4 ±2.2</strong><sup>+7.1</sup><sub>-3.6</sub></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>14E</td><td>BES3</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ Fit fraction from Dalitz plot analysis of 142k $D^+ \to K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0$ events.

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 \rho(1450)^+, \rho^+ \to \pi^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0) \quad \Gamma_{64}/\Gamma_{62} $$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>2.1 ±0.3</strong><sup>+1.6</sup><sub>-1.9</sub></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>14E</td><td>BES3</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\bar{K}^*(892)^0\pi^+, \bar{K}^*(892)^0 \to K_S^0 \pi^+) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0) \quad \Gamma_{65}/\Gamma_{62} $$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>3.58 ±0.17</strong><sup>+0.39</sup><sub>-0.38</sub></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>14E</td><td>BES3</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ Fit fraction from Dalitz plot analysis of 142k $D^+ \to K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0$ events.

$$ \Gamma(\bar{K}_0^*(1430)^0\pi^+, \bar{K}_0^0 \to K_S^0 \pi^0) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0) \quad \Gamma_{66}/\Gamma_{62} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>3.7 ±0.6</strong></td><td><strong>±1.1</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>14E</td><td>BES3</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\bar{K}_0^*(1680)^0\pi^+, \bar{K}_0^0 \to K_S^0 \pi^0) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0) \quad \Gamma_{67}/\Gamma_{62} $$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>1.3 ±0.2</strong><sup>+0.9</sup><sub>-1.3</sub></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>14E</td><td>BES3</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\bar{K}^0 \pi^+, \bar{K}^0 \to K_S^0 \pi^0) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0) \quad \Gamma_{68}/\Gamma_{62} $$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>7.7 ±1.2</strong><sup>+6.5</sup><sub>-4.8</sub></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>14E</td><td>BES3</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0 \text{ nonresonant}) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0) \quad \Gamma_{69}/\Gamma_{62} $$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>4.6 ±0.7</strong><sup>+5.4</sup><sub>-5.1</sub></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>14E</td><td>BES3</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ Fit fraction from Dalitz plot analysis of 142k $D^+ \to K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0$ events.

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0 \text{ nonresonant and } \bar{K}^0 \pi^+) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0) \quad \Gamma_{70}/\Gamma_{62} $$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>18.6 ±1.7</strong><sup>+2.3</sup><sub>-4.6</sub></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>14E</td><td>BES3</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma((K_S^0 \pi^0)_S \text{ wave } \pi^+) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0) \quad \Gamma_{71}/\Gamma_{62} $$

The numerator here is the coherent sum of the $\bar{K}_0^*(1430)^0 \pi^+$, $\bar{K}_0^0 \pi^+$, and nonresonant contributions.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>17.3 ±1.4</strong><sup>+3.4</sup><sub>-4.3</sub></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>14E</td><td>BES3</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \omega) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{72}/\Gamma_{72} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.707 ±0.041</strong></td><td><strong>±0.029</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22U</td><td>BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ ABLIKIM 22U determines the ratio $B(D^+ \to K_S^0 \pi^+ \omega)/B(D^0 \to K^- \pi^+ \omega) = 0.21 \pm 0.01$, in significant tension with statistical isospin model expectation of 0.9.

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \eta) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{73}/\Gamma_{73} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>13.09 ±0.37</strong></td><td><strong>±0.31</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1.3k</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \eta^*(958)) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{74}/\Gamma_{74} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>1.90 ±0.17</strong></td><td><strong>±0.13</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>267</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>
$$ \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{75/\Gamma} $$

See the listings under "D → Kπππ partial wave analyses" and our 2008 Review (Physics Letters B667 1 (2008)) for measurements of submodes of this mode.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

5.98±0.08±0.16 1 DOBBS 07 CLEO See BONVICINI 14

6.0 ±0.2 ±0.2 4.8k 1 HE 05 CLEO See DOBBS 07

5.8 ±1.2 ±1.2 142 COFFMAN 92B MRK3 $e^+e^-$ 3.77 GeV

6.3 $\pm$1.4 $\overline{1.3}$ ±1.2 175 BALTRUSAIT..86E MRK3 See COFFMAN 92B

¹ DOBBS 07 and HE 05 use single- and double-tagged events in an overall fit. DOBBS 07 supersedes HE 05.

$$ \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \qquad \Gamma_{75/\Gamma_{52}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

0.666±0.006±0.014

BONVICINI 14 CLEO All CLEO-c runs

$$ \Gamma(K_0^0 2\pi^+ \pi^-) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{76/\Gamma} $$

See the listings under "D → Kπππ partial wave analyses" and our 2008 Review (Physics Letters B667 1 (2008)) for measurements of submodes of this mode.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

3.122±0.046±0.096 1 DOBBS 07 CLEO See BONVICINI 14

3.2 ±0.1 ±0.2 3.2k 1 HE 05 CLEO See DOBBS 07

2.1 $\pm$1.0 $\overline{-0.9}$ 2 BARLAG 92C ACCM $\pi^-$ Cu 230 GeV

3.3 ±0.8 ±0.2 168 ADLER 88c MRK3 $e^+e^-$ 3.77 GeV

¹ DOBBS 07 and HE 05 use single- and double-tagged events in an overall fit. DOBBS 07 supersedes HE 05.

² BARLAG 92c computes the branching fraction by topological normalization.

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 2\pi^+ \pi^-) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \qquad \Gamma_{76/\Gamma_{52}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

0.331±0.004±0.006

BONVICINI 14 CLEO All CLEO-c runs

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{77/\Gamma} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

28.88±0.58±0.69

3.7k ABLIKIM 23BW BES3 $e^+e^-$ at 3.773 GeV

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

29.04±0.62±0.87 3.4k 1 ABLIKIM 22Y BES3 $e^+e^-$ at 3.773 GeV

¹ See ABLIKIM 23BW.

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 a_1(1260)^+, a_1^+ \to \rho(770)^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0) \qquad \Gamma_{78/\Gamma_{77}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

30.0±3.6±4.2

1 ABLIKIM 23BW BES3 $D^+ \to K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0$

¹ Amplitude analysis of 1.4k $D^+ \to K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0$ events.

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 a_1(1260)^+, a_1^+ \to f_0(500) \pi^+, f_0 \to \pi^0 \pi^0) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0) \qquad \Gamma_{79/\Gamma_{77}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

3.5±1.1±1.9

1 ABLIKIM 23BW BES3 $D^+ \to K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0$

¹ Amplitude analysis of 1.4k $D^+ \to K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0$ events.

$$ \Gamma(K_1(1400)^0 \pi^+, \bar{K}_1^0 \to K^*(892)^0 \pi^0, \bar{K}^* \to K_S^0 \pi^0) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0) \qquad \Gamma_{80/\Gamma_{77}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

8.0±1.2±0.4

1 ABLIKIM 23BW BES3 $D^+ \to K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0$

¹ Amplitude analysis of 1.4k $D^+ \to K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0$ events.

$$ \Gamma(K^*(892)^0 \rho^+, \bar{K}^* \to K_S^0 \pi^0) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0) \qquad \Gamma_{81/\Gamma_{77}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

33.6±2.7±1.4

1 ABLIKIM 23BW BES3 $D^+ \to K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0$

¹ Amplitude analysis of 1.4k $D^+ \to K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0$ events.

$$ \Gamma(K^*(892)^0 \pi^+ \pi^0 \text{non-resonant, } \bar{K}^* \to K_S^0 \pi^0) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0) \qquad \Gamma_{82/\Gamma_{77}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

9.1±2.0±1.0

1 ABLIKIM 23BW BES3 $D^+ \to K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0$

¹ Amplitude analysis of 1.4k $D^+ \to K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0$ events.

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 \rho^+ \pi^0 \text{non-resonant}) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0) \qquad \Gamma_{83/\Gamma_{77}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

16.5±1.6±0.3

1 ABLIKIM 23BW BES3 $D^+ \to K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0$

¹ Amplitude analysis of 1.4k $D^+ \to K_S^0 \pi^+ 2\pi^0$ events.

$$ \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+ \eta) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{84/\Gamma} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

1.35±0.11±0.04

190 ABLIKIM 20V BES3 $e^+e^-$, 3773 MeV

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^0 \eta) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{85/\Gamma} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

1.22±0.24±0.06

50 ABLIKIM 20V BES3 $e^+e^-$, 3773 MeV

$$ \Gamma(K^- 3\pi^+ \pi^-) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \qquad \Gamma_{86/\Gamma_{52}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

0.061±0.005 OUR FIT

Error includes scale factor of 1.1.

0.062±0.008 OUR AVERAGE

Error includes scale factor of 1.3.

0.058±0.002±0.006 2923 LINK 03D FOCS $\gamma A, \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 180$ GeV

0.077±0.008±0.010 239 FRABETTI 97C E687 $\gamma B, \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 200$ GeV

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

0.09 ±0.01 ±0.01 113 ANJOS 90D E691 Photoproduction

$$ \Gamma(\bar{K}^*(892)^0 2\pi^+ \pi^-, \bar{K}^*(892)^0 \to K^- \pi^+) / \Gamma(K^- 3\pi^+ \pi^-) \qquad \Gamma_{87/\Gamma_{86}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

0.21±0.04±0.06

LINK 03D FOCS $\gamma A, \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 180$ GeV

$$ \Gamma(\bar{K}^*(892)^0 \rho^0 \pi^+, \bar{K}^*(892)^0 \to K^- \pi^+) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \qquad \Gamma_{88/\Gamma_{52}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

0.016±0.007±0.004 FRABETTI 97C E687 $\gamma B, \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 200$ GeV

$$ \Gamma(\bar{K}^*(892)^0 \rho^0 \pi^+, \bar{K}^*(892)^0 \to K^- \pi^+) / \Gamma(K^- 3\pi^+ \pi^-) \qquad \Gamma_{88/\Gamma_{86}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

0.40±0.03±0.06

LINK 03D FOCS $\gamma A, \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 180$ GeV

$$ \Gamma(\bar{K}^*(892)^0 a_1(1260)^+, \bar{K}^*(892)^0 \to K^- \pi^+) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \qquad \Gamma_{89/\Gamma_{52}} $$

Unseen decay modes of the $\bar{K}^*(892)^0$ and $a_1(1260)^+$ are included.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

0.099±0.008±0.018

LINK 03D FOCS $\gamma A, \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 180$ GeV

$$ \Gamma(\bar{K}^*(892)^0 2\pi^+ \pi^- \text{no-}\rho, \bar{K}^*(892)^0 \to K^- \pi^+) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \qquad \Gamma_{90/\Gamma_{52}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

0.032±0.010±0.008 FRABETTI 97C E687 $\gamma B, \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 200$ GeV

$$ \Gamma(K^- \rho^0 2\pi^+) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \qquad \Gamma_{91/\Gamma_{52}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

0.034±0.009±0.005 FRABETTI 97C E687 $\gamma B, \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 200$ GeV

$$ \Gamma(K^- \rho^0 2\pi^+) / \Gamma(K^- 3\pi^+ \pi^-) \qquad \Gamma_{91/\Gamma_{86}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

0.30±0.04±0.01

LINK 03D FOCS $\gamma A, \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 180$ GeV

$$ \Gamma(K^- 3\pi^+ \pi^- \text{nonresonant}) / \Gamma(K^- 3\pi^+ \pi^-) \qquad \Gamma_{92/\Gamma_{86}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

0.07 ±0.05±0.01

LINK 03D FOCS $\gamma A, \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 180$ GeV

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<0.026 90 FRABETTI 97C E687 $\gamma B, \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 200$ GeV

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 2\pi^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{93/\Gamma} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

15.28±0.57±0.60

1k ABLIKIM 22Y BES3 $e^+e^-$ at 3.773 GeV

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+ 3\pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{94/\Gamma} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

5.54±0.44±0.32

285 ABLIKIM 22Y BES3 $e^+e^-$ at 3.773 GeV

$$ \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+ 2\pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{95/\Gamma} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

4.95±0.26±0.19

756 ABLIKIM 22Y BES3 $e^+e^-$ at 3.773 GeV

$$ \Gamma(K^+ 2K_S^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{96/\Gamma} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

25.4±0.5±1.2

3551 ABLIKIM 17A BES3 $e^+e^-$ → $\psi(3770)$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ 2K_S^0) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \qquad \Gamma_{96/\Gamma_{52}} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

0.035±0.010±0.005 39 ±9 ALBRECHT 94I ARG $e^+e^-$ ≈ 10 GeV

0.085±0.018 70 ±12 AMMAR 91 CLEO $e^+e^-$ ≈ 10.5 GeV

$$ \Gamma(\phi(1020)^0 K^+) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{177/\Gamma} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

<2.1 × 10<sup>-5</sup> 90

ABLIKIM 19BI BES3 $e^+e^-$ at 3773 MeV
$$ \Gamma(\rho(1700)^0\pi^+, \rho^0 \to \pi^+\pi^-)/\Gamma(2\pi^+\pi^-) \quad \Gamma_{108}/\Gamma_{99} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>5.7±0.5±1.0±1.0</td><td>572k</td><td>1 AAIJ</td><td>23H</td><td>LHCB</td><td>Dalitz plot fit</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ The last error reflects the uncertainty on the amplitude model.

$$ \Gamma(f_0(1500)\pi^+, f_0 \to \pi^+\pi^-)/\Gamma(2\pi^+\pi^-) \quad \Gamma_{109}/\Gamma_{99} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0.034±0.010±0.008</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>07</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Dalitz fit, ≈ 2240 evts</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(f_0(1710)\pi^+, f_0 \to \pi^+\pi^-)/\Gamma(2\pi^+\pi^-) \quad \Gamma_{110}/\Gamma_{99} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><0.016</td><td>95</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>07</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Dalitz fit, ≈ 2240 evts</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(f_0(1790)\pi^+, f_0 \to \pi^+\pi^-)/\Gamma(2\pi^+\pi^-) \quad \Gamma_{111}/\Gamma_{99} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><0.02</td><td>95</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>07</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Dalitz fit, ≈ 2240 evts</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma((\pi^+\pi^+)_S-\text{wave}\pi^-)/\Gamma(2\pi^+\pi^-) \quad \Gamma_{112}/\Gamma_{99} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><0.037</td><td>95</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>07</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Dalitz fit, ≈ 2240 evts</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(2\pi^+\pi^- \text{ nonresonant})/\Gamma(2\pi^+\pi^-) \quad \Gamma_{113}/\Gamma_{99} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><0.035</td><td>95</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>07</td><td>CLEO</td><td>Dalitz fit, ≈ 2240 evts</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
0.078±0.060±0.027 AITALA 01B E791 Dalitz fit, 1172 evts

$$ \Gamma(\pi^+ 2\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{114}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>46.1±1.2±0.9</td><td>2k</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BG BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\pi^+ 2\pi^0)/\Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \quad \Gamma_{114}/\Gamma_{52} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>5.0±0.3±0.3</td><td>1535 ± 89</td><td>RUBIN</td><td>06</td><td>CLEO</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at ψ(3770)</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\pi^+ 3\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{116}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>41.7±2.2±1.3</td><td>570</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BG BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(2\pi^+\pi^-\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{115}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>116.5±2.1±2.1</td><td>4.6k</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BG BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(2\pi^+\pi^-\pi^0)/\Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \quad \Gamma_{115}/\Gamma_{52} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>12.4±0.5±0.6</td><td>5701 ± 205</td><td>RUBIN</td><td>06</td><td>CLEO</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at ψ(3770)</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\pi^+ 4\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{117}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>19.5±3.6±2.3</td><td>57</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BG BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(2\pi^+\pi^- 2\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{118}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>107.4±4.0±3.0</td><td>1.2k</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BG BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(3\pi^+ 2\pi^-)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{119}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>18.2±1.1±1.0</td><td>460</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BG BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(3\pi^+ 2\pi^-)/\Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \quad \Gamma_{119}/\Gamma_{52} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1.77±0.17 OUR FIT</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1.73±0.20±0.17</td><td>732 ± 77</td><td>RUBIN</td><td>06</td><td>CLEO</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at ψ(3770)</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
2.3 ± 0.4 ± 0.2 58 FRABETTI 97C E687 γBe, $\bar{E}_{\gamma}$ ≈ 200 GeV

$$ \Gamma(3\pi^+ 2\pi^-)/\Gamma(K^- 3\pi^+\pi^-) \quad \Gamma_{119}/\Gamma_{86} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0.289±0.019 OUR FIT</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.290±0.017±0.011</td><td>835</td><td>LINK</td><td>03D</td><td>FOCS γ A, $\bar{E}_{\gamma}$ ≈ 180 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(2\pi^+\pi^- 3\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{120}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>34.2±3.1±1.6</td><td>186</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BG BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(3\pi^+ 2\pi^-\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{121}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>23.4±2.2±1.5</td><td>183</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BG BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\eta\pi^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{122}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>37.7 ± 0.9 OUR FIT</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>37.90±0.70±0.68</td><td>12k</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>18W BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>30.7 ± 2.2 ± 1.3</td><td>258</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>16D BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 MeV</td></tr><tr><td>34.3 ± 1.4 ± 1.7</td><td>1033 ± 42</td><td>ARTUSO</td><td>08</td><td>CLEO See MENDEZ 10</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\eta\pi^+)/\Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \quad \Gamma_{122}/\Gamma_{52} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>4.02±0.11 OUR FIT</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Error includes scale factor of 1.1.</td></tr><tr><td>3.87±0.09±0.19</td><td>2940 ± 68</td><td>MENDEZ</td><td>10</td><td>CLEO e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.774 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
3.81±0.26±0.21 377 ± 26 RUBIN 06 CLEO See ARTUSO 08

$$ \Gamma(\eta\pi^+\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{123}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>20.5±3.5 OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Error includes scale factor of 2.2.</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>22.3±1.5±1.0</td><td>381</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20G BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 MeV</td></tr><tr><td>13.8±3.1±1.6</td><td>149 ± 34</td><td>ARTUSO</td><td>08</td><td>CLEO e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at ψ(3770)</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
24.7±9.3±1.6 42 ABLIKIM 20AA BES3 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 MeV

$$ \Gamma(\eta 2\pi^+\pi^-)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{124}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>3.41±0.17±0.10</td><td>515</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20V BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\eta\pi^+ 2\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{125}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>3.20±0.28±0.17</td><td>190</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20V BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\eta\pi^+ 3\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{126}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>26.9±4.0±2.2</td><td>80</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BG BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\eta 2\pi^+\pi^-\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{127}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>38.8±3.2±1.2</td><td>190</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BG BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\eta\eta\pi^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{128}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>29.6±2.4±1.0</td><td>179</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20G BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\omega\pi^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{129}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>CL%</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>2.79±0.57±0.16</td><td>79</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>16d BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
<3.4 90 RUBIN 06 CLEO e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at ψ(3770)

$$ \Gamma(\omega\pi^+\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{130}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>3.87±0.83±0.25</td><td>233</td><td>1 ABLIKIM</td><td>20AA BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ ABLIKIM 20AA reports a statistical significance of 7.7 σ for this measurement.

$$ \Gamma(\eta'(958)\pi^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{131}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>49.7±1.9 OUR FIT</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>51.2±1.4±2.1</td><td>3.1k</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>18W BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
44.2±2.5±2.9 352 ± 20 ARTUSO 08 CLEO See MENDEZ 10

$$ \Gamma(\eta'(958)\pi^+)/\Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \quad \Gamma_{131}/\Gamma_{52} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>5.30±0.21 OUR FIT</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>5.12±0.17±0.25</td><td>1037 ± 35</td><td>MENDEZ</td><td>10</td><td>CLEO e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.774 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\eta'(958)\pi^+\pi^0)/\Gamma_{\text{total}} \quad \Gamma_{132}/\Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>15.7±4.3±2.5</td><td>33 ± 9</td><td>ARTUSO</td><td>08</td><td>CLEO e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at ψ(3770)</td></tr></tbody></table>
Hadronic modes with a $K^0\bar{K}^0$ pair

$$\Gamma(K_S^0 K^+) / \Gamma_{\text{total}}$$

$$\Gamma_{133}/\Gamma$$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

3.04 ±0.09 **OUR FIT** Error includes scale factor of 2.2.

3.183 ±0.029 ±0.060 18k ABLIKIM 18w BES3 $e^+e^- \to 3773$ MeV

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

3.02 ±0.09 ±0.08 780 ABLIKIM 19m BES3 See ABLIKIM 18w.

3.14 ±0.09 ±0.08 1971 ±51 BONVICINI 08 CLEO See MENDEZ 10

$$\Gamma(K_S^0 K^+) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+)$$

$$\Gamma_{133}/\Gamma_{50}$$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

0.194 ±0.006 **OUR FIT** Error includes scale factor of 2.8.

0.1901 ±0.0024 **OUR AVERAGE**

0.1899 ±0.0011 ±0.0022 101k ±561 WON 09 BELL $e^+e^- \to \gamma(4S)$

0.1892 ±0.0155 ±0.0073 278 ±21 ARMS 04 CLEO $e^+e^- \approx 10$ GeV

0.1996 ±0.0119 ±0.0096 949 LINK 02b FOCs $\gamma A, \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 180$ GeV

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

0.222 ±0.037 ±0.013 63 ±10 ABLIKIM 05f BES3 $e^+e^- \approx \psi(3770)$

0.222 ±0.041 ±0.019 70 BISHAI 97 CLEO See ARMS 04

0.25 ±0.04 ±0.02 129 FRABETTI 95 E687 $\gamma B e \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 200$ GeV

0.271 ±0.065 ±0.039 69 ANJOS 90C E691 $\gamma B e$

0.317 ±0.086 ±0.048 31 BALTRUSAITIS..85e MRK3 $e^+e^- 3.77$ GeV

0.25 ±0.15 6 SCHINDLER 81 MRK2 $e^+e^- 3.771$ GeV

$$\Gamma(K_S^0 K^+) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+)$$

$$\Gamma_{133}/\Gamma_{52}$$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

3.24 ±0.09 **OUR FIT** Error includes scale factor of 2.3.

3.35 ±0.06 ±0.07 5161 ±86 MENDEZ 10 CLEO $e^+e^- \to 3774$ MeV

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

3.02 ±0.18 ±0.15 949 1 LINK 02b FOCs $\gamma$ nucleus, $\bar{E}_\gamma \approx 180$ GeV

¹ This LINK 02b result is redundant with a result in the previous datablock.

$$\Gamma(K_L^0 K^+) / \Gamma_{\text{total}}$$

$$\Gamma_{134}/\Gamma$$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

$$\Gamma(K_S^0 K^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}}$$

$$\Gamma_{135}/\Gamma$$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

$$\Gamma(K^*(892)^0 K_S^0, K^{*+} \to K^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma(K_S^0 K^+ \pi^0)$$

$$\Gamma_{136}/\Gamma_{135}$$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

0.571 ±0.026 ±0.042 692 1 ABLIKIM 21AD BES3 $e^+e^- \to 3.773$ GeV
¹ ABLIKIM 21AD value is a fit fraction from an amplitude analysis of $D^+ \to K^+ K_S^0 \pi^0$ with four components. Reconstructs the $K^*(892)^+$ from its $K^+ \pi^0$ final state.

$$\Gamma(\bar{K}^*(892)^0 K^+, \bar{K}^{*0} \to K_S^0 \pi^0) / \Gamma(K_S^0 K^+ \pi^0)$$

$$\Gamma_{137}/\Gamma_{135}$$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

0.102 ±0.015 ±0.022 692 1 ABLIKIM 21AD BES3 $e^+e^- \to 3.773$ GeV
¹ ABLIKIM 21AD value is a fit fraction from an amplitude analysis of $D^+ \to K^+ K_S^0 \pi^0$ with four components. Reconstructs the $\bar{K}^*(892)^0$ from its $K_S^0 \pi^0$ final state.

$$\Gamma(K^*(892)^+ K_S^0) / \Gamma(K_S^0 \pi^+)$$

$$\Gamma_{138}/\Gamma_{50}$$

Unseen decay modes of the $K^*(892)^+$ are included.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

1.1 ±0.3 ±0.4 67 FRABETTI 95 E687 $\gamma B e \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 200$ GeV

$$\Gamma(K_L^0 K^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}}$$

$$\Gamma_{139}/\Gamma$$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

$$\Gamma(K^+ K^- \pi^+) / \Gamma_{\text{total}}$$

$$\Gamma_{140}/\Gamma$$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

0.935 ±0.017 ±0.024 1 DOBBS 07 CLEO See BONVICINI 14

0.97 ±0.04 ±0.04 1250 ±40 1 HE 05 CLEO See DOBBS 07

¹ DOBBS 07 and HE 05 use single- and double-tagged events in an overall fit. DOBBS 07 supersedes HE 05.

$$\Gamma(K^+ K^- \pi^+) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+)$$

$$\Gamma_{140}/\Gamma_{52}$$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

10.32 ±0.09 **OUR AVERAGE** Error includes scale factor of 1.4. See the Ideogram below.

10.282 ±0.002 ±0.068 23M AAIJ 19g LHCB $pp$ at 8 TeV

10.6 ±0.2 ±0.3 BONVICINI 14 CLEO All CLEO-c runs

11.7 ±1.3 ±0.7 181 ±20 ABLIKIM 05r BES $e^+e^- \approx \psi(3770)$

10.7 ±0.1 ±0.2 43k AUBERT 05s BABR $e^+e^- \approx \gamma(4S)$

9.3 ±1.0 $^{+0.8}_{-0.6}$

JUN 00 SELX $\Sigma^-$ nucleus, 600 GeV

9.76 ±0.42 ±0.46

FRABETTI 95b E687 $\gamma$ Be, $\bar{E}_\gamma \approx 200$ GeV

<figure><img src="image_537.png" /><figcaption>$\Gamma(K^+ K^- \pi^+) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+)$ (units $10^{-2}$)</figcaption></figure>

$$\Gamma(K^+ \bar{K}^* (892)^0, \bar{K}^* (892)^0 \to K^- \pi^+) / \Gamma(K^+ K^- \pi^+)$$

$$\Gamma_{141}/\Gamma_{140}$$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

30.1 ±2.0 ±2.5 FRABETTI 95b E687 Dalitz fit, 915 evts

$$\Gamma(K^+ \bar{K}_0^* (1430)^0, \bar{K}_0^* (1430)^0 \to K^- \pi^+) / \Gamma(K^+ K^- \pi^+)$$

$$\Gamma_{142}/\Gamma_{140}$$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

37.0 ±3.5 ±1.8 FRABETTI 95b E687 Dalitz fit, 915 evts

$$\Gamma(K^+ \bar{K}_2^* (1430)^0, \bar{K}_2^* \to K^- \pi^+) / \Gamma(K^+ K^- \pi^+)$$

$$\Gamma_{143}/\Gamma_{140}$$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

$$\Gamma(K^+ \bar{K}_0^* (700), \bar{K}_0^* \to K^- \pi^+) / \Gamma(K^+ K^- \pi^+)$$

$$\Gamma_{144}/\Gamma_{140}$$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

$$\Gamma(a_0 (1450)^0 \pi^+, a_0^0 \to K^+ K^-) / \Gamma(K^+ K^- \pi^+)$$

$$\Gamma_{145}/\Gamma_{140}$$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

$$\Gamma(\phi(1680)\pi^+, \phi \to K^+ K^-) / \Gamma(K^+ K^- \pi^+)$$

$$\Gamma_{146}/\Gamma_{140}$$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

$$\Gamma(\phi \pi^+, \phi \to K^+ K^-) / \Gamma(K^+ K^- \pi^+)$$

$$\Gamma_{147}/\Gamma_{140}$$

This is the “fit fraction” from the Dalitz-plot analysis.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

29.2 ±3.1 ±3.0 FRABETTI 95b E687 Dalitz fit, 915 evts

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

$$\Gamma_{148}/\Gamma$$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

$$\Gamma_{149}/\Gamma$$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

$$\Gamma_{149}/\Gamma_{75}$$
$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 K_S^\pi^+) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-4}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 27.0 \pm 0.5 \pm 1.2 \end{array} \qquad 4897 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{ABLIKIM} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 17A \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BES3} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- \rightarrow \psi(3770) \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 K_S^\pi^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-3}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 1.34 \pm 0.20 \pm 0.06 \end{array} \qquad 80 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{ABLIKIM} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 20AC \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BES3} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- \text{ at } 3.773 \text{ GeV} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 K^+ \eta) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-4}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 1.85 \pm 0.52 \pm 0.08 \end{array} \qquad 14 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{ABLIKIM} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 20V \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BES3} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- , 3773 \text{ MeV} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^-) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-3}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 1.89 \pm 0.12 \pm 0.05 \end{array} \qquad 277 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{ABLIKIM} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 20AC \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BES3} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- \text{ at } 3.773 \text{ GeV} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ K_S^0 \pi^+ \pi^-) / \Gamma(K_S^0 2\pi^+ \pi^-) \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-2}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 5.62 \pm 0.39 \pm 0.40 \end{array} \qquad 469 \pm 32 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{LINK} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 01C \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{FOCS} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \gamma \text{ nucleus, } \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 180 \text{ GeV} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 K^+ \pi^0 \pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-4}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 5.8 \pm 1.2 \pm 0.4 \end{array} \qquad 34 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{ABLIKIM} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 20AC \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BES3} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- \text{ at } 3.773 \text{ GeV} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 K^- 2\pi^+) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-3}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 2.27 \pm 0.12 \pm 0.06 \end{array} \qquad 467 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{ABLIKIM} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 20AC \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BES3} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- \text{ at } 3.773 \text{ GeV} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K_S^0 K^- 2\pi^+) / \Gamma(K_S^0 2\pi^+ \pi^-) \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-2}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 7.68 \pm 0.41 \pm 0.32 \end{array} \qquad 670 \pm 35 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{LINK} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 01C \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{FOCS} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \gamma \text{ nucleus, } \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 180 \text{ GeV} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ K^- 2\pi^+ \pi^-) / \Gamma(K^- 3\pi^+ \pi^-) \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 0.040 \pm 0.009 \pm 0.019 \end{array} \qquad 38 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{LINK} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 03D \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{FOCS} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \gamma A, \bar{E}_\gamma \approx 180 \text{ GeV} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(\phi^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 0.023 \pm 0.010 \end{array} \qquad 1 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BARLAG} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 92c \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{ACCM} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \pi^- \text{ Cu } 230 \text{ GeV} \end{array} $$

¹BARLAG 92C computes the branching fraction using topological normalization.

$$ \Gamma(\phi^+) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \qquad \frac{\text{CL\%}}{\text{VALUE}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} <0.16 \end{array} \qquad 90 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{DAOUDI} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 92 \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{CLEO} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- \approx 10.5 \text{ GeV} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ K^- \pi^+ \pi^0 \text{ non-}\phi) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 0.015 \pm 0.007 \pm 0.006 \end{array} \qquad 1 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BARLAG} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 92c \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{ACCM} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \pi^- \text{ Cu } 230 \text{ GeV} \end{array} $$

¹BARLAG 92C computes the branching fraction using topological normalization.

$$ \Gamma(K^+ K^- \pi^+ \pi^0 \text{ non-}\phi) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \qquad \frac{\text{CL\%}}{\text{VALUE}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} \bullet \bullet \bullet \text{ We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc.} \bullet \bullet \bullet \\ <0.25 \end{array} \qquad 90 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{ANJOS} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 89E \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{E691} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{Photoproduction} \end{array} $$

Double Cabibbo-suppressed modes

$$ \Gamma(K^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-4}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 2.06 \pm 0.21 \text{ OUR FIT} \end{array} \qquad \text{Error includes scale factor of 1.4.} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-4}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 2.32 \pm 0.21 \pm 0.06 \end{array} \qquad 1.8k \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{ABLIKIM} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 18W \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BES3} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- , 3773 \text{ MeV} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-4}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 2.52 \pm 0.47 \pm 0.26 \end{array} \qquad 189 \pm 37 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{AUBERT,B} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 06F \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BABR} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- \approx \tau(4S) \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-3}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 2.21 \pm 0.23 \text{ OUR FIT} \end{array} \qquad \text{Error includes scale factor of 1.5.} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ \eta) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-3}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 1.9 \pm 0.2 \pm 0.1 \end{array} \qquad 343 \pm 37 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{MENDEZ} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 10 \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{CLEO} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- \text{ at } 3774 \text{ MeV} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ \eta) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-3}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 0.125 \pm 0.016 \text{ OUR FIT} \end{array} \qquad \text{Error includes scale factor of 1.1.} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ \eta) / \Gamma(\eta \pi^+) \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-4}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 3.3 \pm 0.4 \text{ OUR FIT} \end{array} \qquad \text{Error includes scale factor of 1.1.} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 1.1 \pm 0.1 \pm 0.01 \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 11 \pm 0.1 \pm 0.01 \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BELL} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- \approx \tau(4S) \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ \eta'(958)) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-3}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 0.185 \pm 0.020 \text{ OUR FIT} \end{array} \qquad 87 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{ABLIKIM} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 18W \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BES3} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- , 3773 \text{ MeV} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ \eta'(958)) / \Gamma(\eta'(958) \pi^+) \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-3}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 3.7 \pm 0.4 \text{ OUR FIT} \end{array} \qquad 180 \pm 19 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{WON} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 11 \pm 0.1 \pm 0.01 \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BELL} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- \approx \tau(4S) \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ 2\pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-4}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 2.1 \pm 0.4 \pm 0.1 \end{array} \qquad 43 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{ABLIKIM} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 22Bk \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BES3} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- \text{ at } 3.773 \text{ GeV} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^*(892)^+ \pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-4}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 3.4^{+1.4}_{-1.3} \pm 0.1 \end{array} \qquad 17 \qquad \begin{array}{l} 1 \text{ ABLIKIM} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 22Bk \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BES3} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- \text{ at } 3.773 \text{ GeV} \end{array} $$

¹ABLIKIM 22Bk report a 2.7 σ significance for the observation of this decay and assign an upper limit for this branching fraction of 5.4 × 10⁻⁴ at 90% CL. In their analysis, ABLIKIM 22Bk assume negligible interference between D⁺ → K⁺π⁰ → K⁺π⁰π⁰ and the non-resonant decay to the same final state.

$$ \Gamma(K^+ \pi^+ \pi^-) / \Gamma(K^- 2\pi^+) \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-3}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 5.238 \pm 0.025 \text{ OUR AVERAGE} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 795k \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{AAIJ} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 19G \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{LHCB} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} pp \text{ at } 8 \text{ TeV} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ \eta^0) / \Gamma(K^+ \pi^+ \pi^-) \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 0.39 \pm 0.09 \text{ OUR AVERAGE} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 0.3943 \pm 0.0787 \pm 0.0815 \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{LINK} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 04F \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{FOCS} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{Dalitz fit, } 189 \text{ evts} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ \eta \pi^0) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-4}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 2.1 \pm 0.5 \pm 0.1 \end{array} \qquad 19 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{ABLIKIM} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 22Bk \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BES3} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- \text{ at } 3.773 \text{ GeV} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^*(892)^+ \eta) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-4}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 4.4^{+1.8}_{-1.5} \pm 0.2 \end{array} \qquad 11 \qquad \begin{array}{l} 1 \text{ ABLIKIM} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 22Bk \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{BES3} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} e^+ e^- \text{ at } 3.773 \text{ GeV} \end{array} $$

¹ABLIKIM 22Bk report a 3.2 σ significance for the observation of this decay mode. In their analysis, ABLIKIM 22Bk assume negligible interference between D⁺ → K⁺π⁰ → K⁺π⁰π⁰ and the non-resonant decay to the same final state.

$$ \Gamma(K^*(892)^0 \pi^+, K^*(892)^0 \rightarrow K^+ \pi^-) / \Gamma(K^+ \pi^+ \pi^-) \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 0.47 \pm 0.08 \text{ OUR AVERAGE} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 0.5220 \pm 0.0684 \pm 0.0638 \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{LINK} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 04F \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{FOCS} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{Dalitz fit, } 189 \text{ evts} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ f_0(980), f_0(980) \rightarrow \pi^+ \pi^-) / \Gamma(K^+ \pi^+ \pi^-) \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-4}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 0.35 \pm 0.14 \pm 0.01 \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{AITALA} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 97C \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{E791} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{Dalitz fit, } 59 \text{ evts} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K_2^*(1430)^0 \pi^+, K_2^*(1430)^0 \rightarrow K^+ \pi^-) / \Gamma(K^+ \pi^+ \pi^-) \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-4}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 0.0803 \pm 0.0372 \pm 0.0391 \end{array} \qquad 1 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{LINK} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 04F \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{FOCS} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{Dalitz fit, } 189 \text{ evts} \end{array} $$

$$ \Gamma(K^+ \pi^+ \pi^- \text{ nonresonant}) / \Gamma(K^+ \pi^+ \pi^-) \qquad \frac{\text{EVTS}}{\text{VALUE (units } 10^{-4}}} \qquad \frac{\text{DOCUMENT ID}}{\text{TECN}} \qquad \text{COMMENT} $$
$$ \begin{array}{l} 0.36 \pm 0.14 \pm 0.07 \end{array} \qquad 1 \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{AITALA} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} 97C \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{E791} \end{array} \qquad \begin{array}{l} \text{Dalitz fit, } 59 \text{ evts} \end{array} $$

¹LINK 04F, with three times as many events, finds no need for a nonresonant amplitude.
# Meson Particle Listings

D$^{±}$

$$ \Gamma(K^{+} \pi^{+} \pi^{-} \pi^{0}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{173} / \Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1.21 ± 0.08 ± 0.03</td><td>350</td><td>1 ABLIKIM</td><td>20z BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> at 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 ABLIKIM 20z subtracted the known branching fractions of $D^{+} \to K^{+} \eta$, $D^{+} \to K^{+} \phi$, and $D^{+} \to K^{+} \omega$ to obtain an estimate of the non-resonant component (ignoring interference effects and possible additional resonant contributions) $B(D^{+} \to K^{+} \pi^{+} \pi^{-} \pi^{0} \text{non-resonant}) = (1.13 \pm 0.08 \pm 0.03) \times 10^{-3}$.

$$ \Gamma(K^{+} \pi^{+} \pi^{-} \pi^{0}) / \Gamma(K^{-} 2\pi^{+} \pi^{0}) \qquad \Gamma_{173} / \Gamma_{75} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1.68 ± 0.11 ± 0.03</td><td>3.6k</td><td>LI</td><td>23G BELL</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> at near Υ(nS),<br>n=1,...,5</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(K^{+} \pi^{+} \pi^{-} \pi^{0} \text{nonresonant}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{174} / \Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1.10 ± 0.07 OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>1.03 ± 0.12 ± 0.06</td><td>112</td><td>1 ABLIKIM</td><td>21BB BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.13 ± 0.08 ± 0.03</td><td>350</td><td>2 ABLIKIM</td><td>20z BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 ABLIKIM 21BB result has subtracted the known branching fractions of $D^{+} \to K^{+} \eta$, $D^{+} \to K^{+} \phi$, and $D^{+} \to K^{+} \omega$ resonances (ignoring interference effects). The result including these components is measured to be $B(D^{+} \to K^{+} \pi^{+} \pi^{-} \pi^{0}) = (1.11 \pm 0.12) \times 10^{-3}$, where the uncertainty is statistical only.

2 ABLIKIM 20Z result has subtracted the known branching fractions of $D^{+} \to K^{+} \eta$, $D^{+} \to K^{+} \phi$, and $D^{+} \to K^{+} \omega$, ignoring interference effects. The result including these components is measured to be $(1.21 \pm 0.08 \pm 0.03) \times 10^{-3}$.

$$ \Gamma(K^{+} \omega) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{175} / \Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-5</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>5.7 +2.5 / 2.1 ± 0.2</td><td>9</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20z BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup>, 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(2K^{+} K^{-}) / \Gamma(K^{-} 2\pi^{+}) \qquad \Gamma_{176} / \Gamma_{52} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-4</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>6.54 ± 0.05 OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>6.541 ± 0.025 ± 0.042</td><td>134k</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>19G LHCB</td><td>p p at 8 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>9.49 ± 2.17 ± 0.22</td><td>65</td><td>1 LINK</td><td>02I FOCS</td><td>γ nucleus, ≈ 180 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 LINK 02I finds little evidence for $\phi K^{+}$ or $f_{0}(980) K^{+}$ submodes.

$$ \Gamma(K^{+} \phi(1020), \phi \to K^{+} K^{-}) / \Gamma(2K^{+} K^{-}) \qquad \Gamma_{178} / \Gamma_{176} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>7.1 ± 0.9</td><td>1 AAIJ</td><td>19H LHCB</td><td>p p at 8 TeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 Fit fraction from a Dalitz plot analysis of $D^{+} \to K^{+} K^{+} K^{-}$ decays. The last uncertainty is due to the amplitude model.

$$ \Gamma(K^{+} (K^{+} K^{-}) S-\text{wave}) / \Gamma(2K^{+} K^{-}) \qquad \Gamma_{179} / \Gamma_{176} $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0.94 ± 0.01</td><td>1 AAIJ</td><td>19H LHCB</td><td>p p at 8 TeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 Fit fraction from a Dalitz plot analysis of $D^{+} \to K^{+} K^{+} K^{-}$ decays. The last uncertainty is due to the amplitude model.

Rare or forbidden modes

$$ \Gamma(\pi^{+} e^{+} e^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{180} / \Gamma $$

A test for the $\Delta C = 1$ weak neutral current. Allowed by higher-order electroweak interactions.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.1 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>11G BABR</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> ≈ Υ(4S)</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.6 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>21T LHCB</td><td>1.6 fb<sup>-1</sup> p p</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;5.9 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 RUBIN</td><td>10 CLEO</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> at ψ(3770)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;7.4 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HE</td><td>05A CLEO</td><td>See RUBIN 10</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;5.2 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AITALA</td><td>99G E791</td><td>π<sup>-</sup> N 500 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.1 × 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97B E687</td><td>γ Be, E<sub>γ</sub> ≈ 220 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;6.6 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AITALA</td><td>96 E791</td><td>π<sup>-</sup> N 500 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.5 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>WEIR</td><td>90B MRK2</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> 29 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.6 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAAS</td><td>88 CLEO</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> 10 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 This RUBIN 10 limit is for the $e^{+} e^{-}$ mass in the continuum away from the $\phi(1020)$. See the next data block.

$$ \Gamma(\pi^{+} \pi^{0} e^{+} e^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{181} / \Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.4 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>18P BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup>, 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\pi^{+} \phi, \phi \to e^{+} e^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{182} / \Gamma $$

This is not a test for the $\Delta C = 1$ weak neutral current, but leads to the $\pi^{+} e^{+} e^{-}$ final state.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>(1.7 +1.4 / 0.9 ± 0.1) × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>4</td><td>1 RUBIN</td><td>10 CLEO</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> at ψ(3770)</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>(2.7 +3.6 / 1.8 ± 0.2) × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>2</td><td>HE</td><td>05A CLEO</td><td>See RUBIN 10</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 This RUBIN 10 result is consistent with the known $D^{+} \to \phi \pi^{+}$ and $\phi \to e^{+} e^{-}$ fractions.

$$ \Gamma(\pi^{+} \mu^{+} \mu^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{183} / \Gamma $$

A test for the $\Delta C = 1$ weak neutral current. Allowed by higher-order electroweak interactions.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;6.7 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>21T LHCB</td><td>1.6 fb<sup>-1</sup> p p</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;7.3 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>13A<sub>1</sub> LHCB</td><td>p p at 7 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;6.5 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>11G BABR</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> ≈ Υ(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.9 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 ABAZOV</td><td>08D D0</td><td>p p̄, E<sub>cm</sub> = 1.96 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;8.8 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LINK</td><td>03F FOCS</td><td>γ A, E<sub>γ</sub> ≈ 180 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.5 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AITALA</td><td>99G E791</td><td>π<sup>-</sup> N 500 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;8.9 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97B E687</td><td>γ Be, E<sub>γ</sub> ≈ 220 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.8 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AITALA</td><td>96 E791</td><td>π<sup>-</sup> N 500 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.2 × 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>KODAMA</td><td>95 E653</td><td>π<sup>-</sup> emulsion 600 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;5.9 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>WEIR</td><td>90B MRK2</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> 29 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.9 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HAAS</td><td>88 CLEO</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> 10 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 This ABAZOV 08D limit is for the $\mu^{+} \mu^{-}$ mass in the continuum away from the $\phi(1020)$. See the next data block.

$$ \Gamma(\pi^{+} \phi, \phi \to \mu^{+} \mu^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{184} / \Gamma $$

This is not a test for the $\Delta C = 1$ weak neutral current, but leads to the $\pi^{+} \mu^{+} \mu^{-}$ final state.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>(1.8 ± 0.5 ± 0.6) × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>1 ABAZOV</td><td>08D D0</td><td>p p̄, E<sub>cm</sub> = 1.96 TeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 This ABAZOV 08D value is consistent with the known $D^{+} \to \phi \pi^{+}$ and $\phi \to \mu^{+} \mu^{-}$ fractions.

$$ \Gamma(\rho^{+} \mu^{+} \mu^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{185} / \Gamma $$

A test for the $\Delta C = 1$ weak neutral current. Allowed by higher-order electroweak interactions.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;5.6 × 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>KODAMA</td><td>95 E653</td><td>π<sup>-</sup> emulsion 600 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(K^{+} e^{+} e^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{186} / \Gamma $$

Both quarks would have to change flavor for this decay to occur.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;8.5 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>21T LHCB</td><td>1.6 fb<sup>-1</sup> p p</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.0 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>11G BABR</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> ≈ Υ(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.0 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>RUBIN</td><td>10 CLEO</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> at ψ(3770)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;6.2 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HE</td><td>05A CLEO</td><td>See RUBIN 10</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.0 × 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AITALA</td><td>99G E791</td><td>π<sup>-</sup> N 500 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.0 × 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97B E687</td><td>γ Be, E<sub>γ</sub> ≈ 220 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.8 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>WEIR</td><td>90B MRK2</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> 29 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(K^{+} \pi^{0} e^{+} e^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{187} / \Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.5 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>18P BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup>, 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(K_{S}^{0} \pi^{+} e^{+} e^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{188} / \Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.6 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>18P BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup>, 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(K_{S}^{0} K^{+} e^{+} e^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{189} / \Gamma $$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.1 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>18P BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup>, 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\pi^{+} \mu^{+} \mu^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{190} / \Gamma $$

Both quarks would have to change flavor for this decay to occur.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;5.4 × 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>21T LHCB</td><td>1.6 fb<sup>-1</sup> p p</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;4.3 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>11G BABR</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> ≈ Υ(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;9.2 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LINK</td><td>03F FOCS</td><td>γ A, E<sub>γ</sub> ≈ 180 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.4 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AITALA</td><td>99G E791</td><td>π<sup>-</sup> N 500 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;9.7 × 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97B E687</td><td>γ Be, E<sub>γ</sub> ≈ 220 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.2 × 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>KODAMA</td><td>95 E653</td><td>π<sup>-</sup> emulsion 600 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;9.2 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>WEIR</td><td>90B MRK2</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> 29 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\pi^{+} e^{+} \mu^{-}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{191} / \Gamma $$

A test of lepton-family-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.1 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>21T LHCB</td><td>1.6 fb<sup>-1</sup> p p</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.9 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>11G BABR</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> ≈ Υ(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.1 × 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97B E687</td><td>γ Be, E<sub>γ</sub> ≈ 220 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.3 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>WEIR</td><td>90B MRK2</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> 29 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$$ \Gamma(\pi^{+} e^{-} \mu^{+}) / \Gamma_{\text{total}} \qquad \Gamma_{192} / \Gamma $$

A test of lepton-family-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.2 × 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>21T LHCB</td><td>1.6 fb<sup>-1</sup> p p</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.6 × 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>11G BABR</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> ≈ Υ(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.3 × 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97B E687</td><td>γ Be, E<sub>γ</sub> ≈ 220 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.3 × 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>WEIR</td><td>90B MRK2</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> 29 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>
$\Gamma(K^+e^+\mu^-)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-family-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;7.5 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>21T</td><td>LHCB 1.6 fb<sup>-1</sup> pp</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.2 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>11G</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> &asymp; T(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.3 x 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97B</td><td>E687 &gamma; Be, E<sub>&gamma;</sub> &asymp; 220 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.4 x 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>WEIR</td><td>90B</td><td>MRK2 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> 29 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(K^+e^-\mu^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-family-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.0 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>21T</td><td>LHCB 1.6 fb<sup>-1</sup> pp</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.8 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>11G</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> &asymp; T(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.2 x 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97B</td><td>E687 &gamma; Be, E<sub>&gamma;</sub> &asymp; 220 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.4 x 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>WEIR</td><td>90B</td><td>MRK2 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> 29 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(\pi^-2e^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;5.3 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>21T</td><td>LHCB 1.6 fb<sup>-1</sup> pp</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.9 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>11G</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> &asymp; T(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.1 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>RUBIN</td><td>10</td><td>CLEO e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at &psi;(3770)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.6 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HE</td><td>05A</td><td>CLEO See RUBIN 10</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;9.6 x 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AITALA</td><td>99G</td><td>E791 &pi;<sup>-</sup> N 500 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.1 x 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97B</td><td>E687 &gamma; Be, E<sub>&gamma;</sub> &asymp; 220 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.8 x 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>WEIR</td><td>90B</td><td>MRK2 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> 29 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(\pi^-2\mu^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.4 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>21T</td><td>LHCB 1.6 fb<sup>-1</sup> pp</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.2 x 10<sup>-8</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>13AF</td><td>LHCB pp at 7 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.0 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>11G</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> &asymp; T(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.8 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LINK</td><td>03F</td><td>FOCS &gamma; A, E<sub>&gamma;</sub> &asymp; 180 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.7 x 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AITALA</td><td>99G</td><td>E791 &pi;<sup>-</sup> N 500 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;8.7 x 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97B</td><td>E687 &gamma; Be, E<sub>&gamma;</sub> &asymp; 220 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.2 x 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>KODAMA</td><td>95</td><td>E653 &pi;<sup>-</sup> emulsion 600 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;6.8 x 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>WEIR</td><td>90B</td><td>MRK2 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> 29 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(\pi^-e^+\mu^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.3 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>21T</td><td>LHCB 1.6 fb<sup>-1</sup> pp</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;2.0 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>11G</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> &asymp; T(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;5.0 x 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>AITALA</td><td>99G</td><td>E791 &pi;<sup>-</sup> N 500 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.1 x 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97B</td><td>E687 &gamma; Be, E<sub>&gamma;</sub> &asymp; 220 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.7 x 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>WEIR</td><td>90B</td><td>MRK2 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> 29 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(\rho^-2\mu^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;5.6 x 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>KODAMA</td><td>95</td><td>E653 &pi;<sup>-</sup> emulsion 600 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(K^-2e^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;0.9 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>11G</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> &asymp; T(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.5 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>RUBIN</td><td>10</td><td>CLEO e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at &psi;(3770)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.5 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>HE</td><td>05A</td><td>CLEO See RUBIN 10</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.2 x 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97B</td><td>E687 &gamma; Be, E<sub>&gamma;</sub> &asymp; 220 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;9.1 x 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>WEIR</td><td>90B</td><td>MRK2 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> 29 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(K_0^S\pi^-2e^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;3.3 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>19AL</td><td>BES3 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(K^-\pi^02e^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;8.5 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>19AL</td><td>BES3 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(K^-2\mu^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;10 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>11G</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> &asymp; T(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.3 x 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LINK</td><td>03F</td><td>FOCS &gamma; A, E<sub>&gamma;</sub> &asymp; 180 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.2 x 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97B</td><td>E687 &gamma; Be, E<sub>&gamma;</sub> &asymp; 220 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;3.2 x 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>KODAMA</td><td>95</td><td>E653 &pi;<sup>-</sup> emulsion 600 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.3 x 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>WEIR</td><td>90B</td><td>MRK2 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> 29 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma_{193}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma_{194}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma_{195}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma_{196}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma_{197}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma_{198}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma_{199}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma_{200}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma_{202}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma(K^-e^+\mu^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.9 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>LEES</td><td>11G</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> &asymp; T(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;1.3 x 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97B</td><td>E687 &gamma; Be, E<sub>&gamma;</sub> &asymp; 220 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>&lt;4.0 x 10<sup>-3</sup></td><td>90</td><td>WEIR</td><td>90B</td><td>MRK2 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> 29 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(K^+(892^-2\mu^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;8.5 x 10<sup>-4</sup></td><td>90</td><td>KODAMA</td><td>95</td><td>E653 &pi;<sup>-</sup> emulsion 600 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(\Lambda e^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.1 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20D</td><td>BES3 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup>, 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(\bar{\Lambda}e^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;6.5 x 10<sup>-7</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20D</td><td>BES3 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup>, 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(\Sigma^0 e^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.7 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20D</td><td>BES3 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup>, 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(\Sigma^0 e^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.3 x 10<sup>-6</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20D</td><td>BES3 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup>, 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(\bar{\Lambda}e^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;1.43 x 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BJ</td><td>BES3 2.93fb<sup>-1</sup> e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma(n^+e^+)/\Gamma_{\text{total}}$

A test of lepton-number conservation.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>CL%</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>&lt;2.91 x 10<sup>-5</sup></td><td>90</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BJ</td><td>BES3 2.93fb<sup>-1</sup> e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma_{203}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma_{204}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma_{205}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma_{206}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma_{207}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma_{208}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma_{209}/\Gamma$

$\Gamma_{210}/\Gamma$

## D± CP-VIOLATING DECAY-RATE ASYMMETRIES

This is the difference between $D^+$ and $D^-$ partial widths for the decay to state $f$, divided by the sum of the widths:

$$A_{CP}(f) = [f(D^+ \rightarrow f) - f(D^- \rightarrow f)]/[f(D^+ \rightarrow f) + f(D^- \rightarrow f)].$$

$A_{CP}(\mu^+\nu) \rightarrow D^+ \rightarrow \mu^+\nu_\mu, D^- \rightarrow \mu^-\nu_\mu$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>+8±8</td><td>EISENSTEIN</td><td>08</td><td>CLEO e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at &psi;(3770)</td></tr></tbody></table>

$A_{CP}(K_0^L e^+\nu) \rightarrow D^+ \rightarrow K_0^L e^+\nu_e, D^- \rightarrow K_0^L e^-\nu_e$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-0.59±0.60±1.48</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>15AF</td><td>BES3 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$A_{CP}(K_0^S\pi^+) \rightarrow D^+ \rightarrow K_0^S\pi^+$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-0.41 ±0.09</td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>14</td><td>CLEO All CLEO-c runs</td></tr><tr><td>-1.1 ±0.6 ±0.2</td><td></td><td>1 KO</td><td>12A</td><td>BELL e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> &asymp; T(nS)</td></tr><tr><td>-0.363 ±0.094 ±0.067</td><td>1738k</td><td>DEL-AMO-SA..11H</td><td>12A</td><td>BELL e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> &asymp; T(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>-0.44 ±0.13 ±0.10</td><td>807k</td><td>DEL-AMO-SA..11H</td><td>12A</td><td>BELL e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> &asymp; T(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>-1.6 ±1.5 ±0.9</td><td>10.6k</td><td>2 LINK</td><td>02B</td><td>FOCS &gamma; nucleus, E<sub>&gamma;</sub> &asymp; 180 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>-0.71 ±0.19 ±0.20</td><td>KO</td><td>10</td><td>BELL</td><td>See KO 12A</td></tr><tr><td>-1.3 ±0.7 ±0.3</td><td>MENDEZ</td><td>30k</td><td>CLEO</td><td>See BONVICINI 14</td></tr><tr><td>-0.6 ±1.0 ±0.3</td><td>DOBBS</td><td>07</td><td>CLEO</td><td>See MENDEZ 10</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ KO 12A finds that after subtracting the contribution due to $K^0 - \bar{K}^0$ mixing, the CP asymmetry due to the change of charm is ($-0.024 \pm 0.094 \pm 0.067$)%, consistent with zero.

² LINK 02B measures $N(D^+ \rightarrow K_0^S\pi^+) / N(D^+ \rightarrow K^-\pi^+\pi^+)$, the ratio of numbers of events observed, and similarly for the $D^-$.

$A_{CP}(K_0^L K^+) \rightarrow D^+ \rightarrow K_0^L K^+$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-4.2±3.2±1.2</td><td>650</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>19M</td><td>BES3 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$A_{CP}(K\mp 2\pi^+) \rightarrow D^+ \rightarrow K^-\pi^+\pi^+, D^- \rightarrow K^+ 2\pi^-$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-0.18±0.16</td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td>ABAZOV</td><td>14L</td><td>D0 p&#773;, &radic;s = 1.96 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>-0.3 ±0.2 ±0.4</td><td>2.3M</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>14</td><td>CLEO All CLEO-c runs</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>-0.1 ±0.4 ±0.9</td><td>231k</td><td>MENDEZ</td><td>10</td><td>CLEO</td><td>See BONVICINI 14</td></tr><tr><td>-0.5 ±0.4 ±0.9</td><td></td><td>DOBBS</td><td>07</td><td>CLEO</td><td>See MENDEZ 10</td></tr></tbody></table>
# Meson Particle Listings

## D±

### A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>∓</sup>π<sup>±</sup>π<sup>0</sup>) in D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>−</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>0</sup>, D<sup>−</sup> → K<sup>+</sup>π<sup>−</sup>π<sup>0</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><b>−0.3±0.6±0.4</b></td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>14</td><td>All CLEO-c runs</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
1.0±0.9±0.9 DOBBS 07 CLEO See BONVICINI 14

### A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>π<sup>±</sup>π<sup>0</sup>) in D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>0</sup>, D<sup>−</sup> → K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>π<sup>−</sup>π<sup>0</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><b>−0.1±0.7±0.2</b></td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>14</td><td>All CLEO-c runs</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
0.3±0.9±0.3 DOBBS 07 CLEO See BONVICINI 14

### A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>π<sup>±</sup>η) in D<sup>±</sup> → K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>π<sup>±</sup>η

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><b>−0.9±2.9±1.0</b></td><td>1.3k</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20v</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup>, 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

### A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>π<sup>±</sup>π<sup>−</sup>) in D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>−</sup>, D<sup>−</sup> → K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>π<sup>−</sup>π<sup>−</sup>π<sup>+</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><b>0.0±1.2±0.3</b></td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>14</td><td>All CLEO-c runs</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
0.1±1.1±0.6 DOBBS 07 CLEO See BONVICINI 14

### A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>±</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>−</sup>π<sup>0</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → K<sup>±</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>−</sup>π<sup>0</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><b>−0.04±0.06±0.01</b></td><td>350</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20z</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup>, 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

### A<sub>CP</sub>(π<sup>±</sup>π<sup>0</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → π<sup>±</sup>π<sup>0</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><b>0.4±1.3</b></td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td>Error includes scale factor</td><td>of 1.7.</td><td>See the ideogram below.</td></tr><tr><td>−1.3±0.9±0.6</td><td>28.7k</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>21U</td><td>LHCB pp at 7, 8, 13 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>2.31±1.24±0.23</td><td>108k</td><td>BABU</td><td>18</td><td>BELL At/near T(45), T(55)</td></tr><tr><td>2.9±2.9±0.3</td><td>2.6k</td><td>MENDEZ</td><td>10</td><td>CLEO e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at 3774 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

WEIGHTED AVERAGE
0.4±1.3 (Error scaled by 1.7)

<figure><img src="image_538.png" /></figure>

A<sub>CP</sub>(π<sup>±</sup>π<sup>0</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → π<sup>±</sup>π<sup>0</sup> (%)

### A<sub>CP</sub>(π<sup>±</sup>η) in D<sup>±</sup> → π<sup>±</sup>η

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><b>0.3±0.5</b></td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.34±0.66±0.16±0.05</td><td>111k</td><td>1 AAIJ</td><td>23E</td><td>LHCB 6 fb<sup>-1</sup>, pp at 13 TeV,<br>η → γππ</td></tr><tr><td>−0.2±0.8±0.4</td><td>32.7k</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>21U</td><td>LHCB pp at 13 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>+1.74±1.13±0.19</td><td></td><td>WON</td><td>11</td><td>BELL e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> ≈ T(45)</td></tr><tr><td>−2.0±2.3±0.3</td><td>2.9k</td><td>MENDEZ</td><td>10</td><td>CLEO e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at 3774 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 The last uncertainty is due to the uncertainty on the CP asymmetry of the control channel, D<sup>+</sup> → φπ<sup>+</sup>.

### A<sub>CP</sub>(π<sup>±</sup>π<sup>0</sup>η) in D<sup>±</sup> → π<sup>±</sup>π<sup>0</sup>η

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><b>−5.8±6.6±1.8</b></td><td>381</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20g</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

### A<sub>CP</sub>(π<sup>±</sup>ηη) in D<sup>±</sup> → π<sup>±</sup>ηη

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><b>8.0±8.3±1.9</b></td><td>179</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20g</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

### A<sub>CP</sub>(π<sup>±</sup>η'(958)) in D<sup>±</sup> → π<sup>±</sup>η'(958)

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><b>0.41±0.23</b></td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td>Error includes scale factor</td><td>of 1.2.</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.49±0.18±0.06±0.05</td><td>555k</td><td>1 AAIJ</td><td>23E</td><td>LHCB 6 fb<sup>-1</sup>, pp at 13 TeV,<br>η → γππ</td></tr><tr><td>−0.61±0.72±0.54</td><td>63k</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>17AF</td><td>LHCB pp at 7, 8 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>−0.12±1.12±0.17</td><td></td><td>WON</td><td>11</td><td>BELL e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> ≈ T(45)</td></tr><tr><td>−4.0±3.4±0.3</td><td>1.0k</td><td>MENDEZ</td><td>10</td><td>CLEO e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at 3774 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 The last uncertainty is due to the uncertainty on the CP asymmetry of the control channel, D<sup>+</sup> → φπ<sup>+</sup>.

### A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>0</sup>/K<sup>0</sup>K<sup>±</sup>) in D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>0</sup>K<sup>+</sup>, D<sup>−</sup> → K<sup>0</sup>K<sup>−</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><b>0.11±0.17</b></td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.03±0.17±0.14</td><td>1.0M</td><td>1 AAIJ</td><td>14BD</td><td>LHCB pp at 7, 8 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.08±0.28±0.14</td><td>277k</td><td>KO</td><td>13</td><td>BELL e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at T(45)</td></tr><tr><td>0.46±0.36±0.25</td><td>159k</td><td>LEES</td><td>13E</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at T(45)</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 AAIJ 14BD reports its result as A<sub>CP</sub>(D<sup>±</sup> → K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>π<sup>±</sup>) with CP-violation effects in the K<sup>0</sup> - R<sup>0</sup> system subtracted. It also measures A<sub>CP</sub>(D<sup>±</sup> → R<sup>0</sup>/K<sup>0</sup>K<sup>±</sup>) + A<sub>CP</sub>(D<sup>±</sup><sub>S</sub> → R<sup>0</sup>/K<sup>0</sup>π<sup>±</sup>) = (0.41 ± 0.49 ± 0.26)%.

### A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>K<sup>±</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>K<sup>±</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><b>−0.01±0.07</b></td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>−0.004±0.061±0.045</td><td>6M</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>19T</td><td>LHCB pp at 7, 8, 13 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>−1.8±2.7±1.6</td><td>780</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>19M</td><td>BES3 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at 3773 MeV</td></tr><tr><td>−0.25±0.28±0.14</td><td>277k</td><td>KO</td><td>13</td><td>BELL e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at T(nS)</td></tr><tr><td>0.13±0.36±0.25</td><td>159k</td><td>LEES</td><td>13E</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at T(45)</td></tr><tr><td>−0.2±1.5±0.9</td><td>5.2k</td><td>MENDEZ</td><td>10</td><td>CLEO e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at 3774 MeV</td></tr><tr><td>7.1±6.1±1.2</td><td>949</td><td>1 LINK</td><td>02B</td><td>FOCS γ nucleus, E<sub>γ</sub> ≈ 180 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>−0.16±0.58±0.25</td><td>KO</td><td>10</td><td>BELL e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> ≈ T(45)</td></tr><tr><td>6.9±6.0±1.5</td><td>949</td><td>2 LINK</td><td>02B</td><td>FOCS γ nucleus, E<sub>γ</sub> ≈ 180 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 LINK 02B measures N(D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>K<sup>+</sup>)/N(D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>π<sup>+</sup>), the ratio of numbers of events observed, and similarly for the D<sup>−</sup>.

2 LINK 02B measures N(D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>K<sup>+</sup>)/N(D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>−</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>+</sup>), the ratio of numbers of events observed, and similarly for the D<sup>−</sup>.

### A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>K<sup>±</sup>π<sup>0</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>K<sup>±</sup>π<sup>0</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><b>1.4±3.7±2.4</b></td><td>470</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>19M</td><td>BES3 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

### A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>0</sup><sub>L</sub>K<sup>±</sup>π<sup>0</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → K<sup>0</sup><sub>L</sub>K<sup>±</sup>π<sup>0</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><b>−0.6±4.1±1.7</b></td><td>410</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>19M</td><td>BES3 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

### A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>+</sup>K<sup>−</sup>π<sup>±</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → K<sup>+</sup>K<sup>−</sup>π<sup>±</sup>

See also AAIJ 11G for a search for CP asymmetry in the D<sup>±</sup> → K<sup>+</sup>K<sup>−</sup>π<sup>±</sup> Dalitz plots using 370k decays and four different binning schemes. No evidence for CP asymmetry was found.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><b>0.37±0.29</b></td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.37±0.30±0.15</td><td>224k</td><td>1 LEES</td><td>13F</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at T(45)</td></tr><tr><td>−0.03±0.84±0.29</td><td></td><td>RUBIN</td><td>08</td><td>CLEO e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at 3774 MeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.4±1.0±0.8</td><td>43k</td><td>2 AUBERT</td><td>05S</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at T(45)</td></tr><tr><td>0.6±1.1±0.5</td><td>14k</td><td>3 LINK</td><td>00B</td><td>FOCS</td></tr><tr><td>−1.4±2.9</td><td></td><td>3 AITALA</td><td>97B</td><td>E791</td></tr><tr><td>−3.1±6.8</td><td></td><td>3 FRABETTI</td><td>94I</td><td>E687</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>−0.1±0.9±0.4</td><td>4 BONVICINI</td><td>14</td><td>CLEO</td><td>See RUBIN 08</td></tr><tr><td>−0.1±1.5±0.8</td><td>DOBBS</td><td>07</td><td>CLEO</td><td>See BONVICINI 14 and RUBIN 08</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 This is the integrated CP asymmetry. LEES 13F also searches for CP asymmetries in four regions of the Dalitz plots (two of which are listed below); in comparisons of binned D<sup>+</sup> and D<sup>−</sup> Dalitz plots; in parametrized fits to those plots, including 2-body submodes; and in comparisons of Legendre-polynomial distributions for the K<sup>+</sup>K<sup>−</sup> and K<sup>−</sup>π<sup>+</sup> systems.

2 AUBERT 05S measures N(D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>+</sup>K<sup>−</sup>π<sup>+</sup>)/N(D<sup>+</sup><sub>S</sub> → K<sup>+</sup>K<sup>−</sup>π<sup>+</sup>), the ratio of the numbers of events observed, and similarly for the D<sup>−</sup>.

3 FRABETTI 94I, AITALA 98C, and LINK 00B measure N(D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>−</sup>K<sup>+</sup>π<sup>+</sup>)/N(D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>+</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>+</sup>), the ratio of numbers of events observed, and similarly for the D<sup>−</sup>.

4 RUBIN 08 performs a dedicated analysis of this decay mode on the same dataset, with slightly better precision. We therefore take it that BONVICINI 14 does not supersede RUBIN 08's A<sub>CP</sub> result.

### A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>±</sup>K<sup>0</sup>) in D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>+</sup>K<sup>0</sup>, D<sup>−</sup> → K<sup>−</sup>K<sup>0</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><b>−0.3±0.4</b></td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>−0.3±0.4±0.2</td><td>73k</td><td>1 LEES</td><td>13F</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at T(45)</td></tr><tr><td>−0.4±2.0±0.6</td><td></td><td>RUBIN</td><td>08</td><td>CLEO Fit-fraction asymmetry</td></tr><tr><td>−0.9±1.7±0.7</td><td>11k</td><td>2 AUBERT</td><td>05S</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>−</sup> at T(45)</td></tr><tr><td>−1.0±5.0</td><td></td><td>3 AITALA</td><td>97B</td><td>E791</td></tr><tr><td>−12±13</td><td></td><td>3 FRABETTI</td><td>94I</td><td>E687</td></tr></tbody></table>

1 This LEES 13F result is for the K<sup>∓</sup>π<sup>±</sup> mass-squared between 0.4 and 1.0 GeV<sup>2</sup>, and does not actually separate out the K<sup>±</sup>.

2 AUBERT 05S measures N(D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>+</sup>K<sup>0</sup>)<sub>S</sub>/N(D<sup>+</sup><sub>S</sub> → K<sup>+</sup>K<sup>−</sup>π<sup>+</sup>), the ratio of the numbers of events observed, and similarly for the D<sup>−</sup>.

3 FRABETTI 94I and AITALA 97B measure N(D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>+</sup>K<sup>0</sup>)<sub>S</sub>/N(D<sup>+</sup><sub>S</sub> → K<sup>+</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>+</sup>), the ratio of numbers of events observed, and similarly for the D<sup>−</sup>.
A<sub>CP</sub>(φπ<sup>±</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → φπ<sup>±</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.01 ±0.09</strong></td><td><strong>OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td colspan="3">Error Includes scale factor of 1.8.</td></tr><tr><td>0.003 ±0.040 ±0.029</td><td>55M</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>19T</td><td>LHCB pp at 7, 8, 13 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>-0.3 ±0.3 ±0.5</td><td>97k</td><td>1 LEES</td><td>13F</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at T(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>+0.51 ±0.28 ±0.05</td><td>237k</td><td>STARIC</td><td>12</td><td>BELL Mainly at T(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>-1.8 ±1.6 <sup>+0.2</sup><sub>-0.4</sub></td><td></td><td>RUBIN</td><td>08</td><td>CLEO Fit-fraction asymmetry</td></tr><tr><td>+0.2 ±1.5 ±0.6</td><td>10k</td><td>2 AUBERT</td><td>05S</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at T(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>-2.8 ±3.6</td><td></td><td>3 AITALA</td><td>97B</td><td>E791 -0.087 <A<sub>CP</sub> < +0.031 (90% CL)</td></tr><tr><td>+6.6 ±8.6</td><td></td><td>3 FRABETTI</td><td>94I</td><td>E687 -0.075 <A<sub>CP</sub> < +0.21 (90% CL)</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

$$-0.04 \pm 0.14 \pm 0.14 \pm 1.58M \quad 4 \text{ AAIJ} \quad 13W \text{ LHCB} \quad \text{pp at } 7 \text{ TeV}$$

¹ This LEES 13F result is for the $K^+K^-$ mass-squared less than 1.3 GeV² and the $K^\mp\pi^\pm$ mass-squared above 1.0 GeV², and does not actually separate out the $\phi$.

² AUBERT 05s measures $N(D^+ \to \phi\pi^+)/N(D_S^+ \to K^+K^-\pi^+)$, the ratio of the numbers of events observed, and similarly for the $D^-$.

³ FRABETTI 94i and AITALA 97B measure $N(D^+ \to \phi\pi^+)/N(D^+ \to K^-\pi^+\pi^+)$, the ratio of numbers of events observed, and similarly for the $D^-$.

⁴ See AAIJ 19T.

A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>±</sup> K<sub>0</sub><sup>±</sup>(1430)<sup>0</sup>) in D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>+</sup> R<sub>0</sub><sup>±</sup>(1430)<sup>0</sup>, D<sup>−</sup> → K<sup>−</sup> K<sub>0</sub><sup>±</sup>(1430)<sup>0</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>+8 ±6<sup>+4</sup><sub>-2</sub></td><td>RUBIN</td><td>08</td><td>CLEO Fit-fraction asymmetry</td></tr></tbody></table>

A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>±</sup> K<sub>2</sub><sup>±</sup>(1430)<sup>0</sup>) in D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>+</sup> R<sub>2</sub><sup>±</sup>(1430)<sup>0</sup>, D<sup>−</sup> → K<sup>−</sup> K<sub>2</sub><sup>±</sup>(1430)<sup>0</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>+43 ±19<sup>+5</sup><sub>-18</sub></td><td>RUBIN</td><td>08</td><td>CLEO Fit-fraction asymmetry</td></tr></tbody></table>

A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>±</sup> K<sub>0</sub><sup>±</sup>(700)) in D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>+</sup> R<sub>0</sub><sup>±</sup>(700), D<sup>−</sup> → K<sup>−</sup> K<sub>0</sub><sup>±</sup>(700)

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-12 ±11<sup>+14</sup><sub>-6</sub></td><td>RUBIN</td><td>08</td><td>CLEO Fit-fraction asymmetry</td></tr></tbody></table>

A<sub>CP</sub>(a<sub>0</sub>(1450)<sup>0</sup>π<sup>±</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → a<sub>0</sub>(1450)<sup>0</sup>π<sup>±</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-19 ±12<sup>+8</sup><sub>-11</sub></td><td>RUBIN</td><td>08</td><td>CLEO Fit-fraction asymmetry</td></tr></tbody></table>

A<sub>CP</sub>(φ(1680)π<sup>±</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → φ(1680)π<sup>±</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-9 ±22 ±14</td><td>RUBIN</td><td>08</td><td>CLEO Fit-fraction asymmetry</td></tr></tbody></table>

A<sub>CP</sub>(π<sup>±</sup>2π<sup>0</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → π<sup>±</sup>2π<sup>0</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>+5.6 ±2.7 ±0.5</td><td>2k</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BG BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

A<sub>CP</sub>(π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup>π<sup>±</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup>π<sup>±</sup>

See also AAIJ 14C for a search for CP violation in $D^± \to \pi^+\pi^-\pi^-$ Dalitz plots using model-independent binned and unbinned methods. No evidence was found.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>0.5 ±2.0</strong></td><td><strong>OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>+1.2 ±2.2 ±0.6</td><td>2.6k</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BG BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>-1.7 ±4.2</td><td>1 AITALA</td><td>97B E791</td><td>-0.086 <A<sub>CP</sub> < +0.052 (90% CL)</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ AITALA 97B measure $N(D^+ \to \pi^+\pi^-\pi^+)/N(D^+ \to K^-\pi^+\pi^+)$, the ratio of numbers of events observed, and similarly for the $D^-$.

A<sub>CP</sub>(2π<sup>±</sup>π<sup>±</sup>π<sup>0</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → 2π<sup>±</sup>π<sup>±</sup>π<sup>0</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>+0.3 ±1.8 ±0.8</td><td>4.6k</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BG BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

A<sub>CP</sub>(2π<sup>±</sup>π<sup>±</sup>2π<sup>0</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → 2π<sup>±</sup>π<sup>±</sup>2π<sup>0</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-4.2 ±3.8 ±1.3</td><td>1.2k</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BG BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3.773 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

A<sub>CP</sub>(π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup>π<sup>±</sup>η) in D<sup>±</sup> → π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup>π<sup>±</sup>η

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>2.5 ±5.0 ±1.6</td><td>510</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20V BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup>, 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub> K<sup>±</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub> K<sup>±</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-4.2 ±6.4 ±2.2</td><td>523 ±32</td><td>LINK</td><td>05E FOCS</td><td>γ A, E<sub>γ</sub> ≈ 180 GeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>±</sup>π<sup>0</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → K<sup>±</sup>π<sup>0</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-3 ±5</td><td><strong>OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>-3.2 ±4.7 ±2.1</td><td>2.5k</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>21U LHCB</td><td>pp at 7, 8, 13 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>-3.5 ±10.7 ±0.9</td><td>343</td><td>MENDEZ</td><td>10 CLEO</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 3774 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

A<sub>CP</sub>(K<sup>±</sup>η) in D<sup>±</sup> → K<sup>±</sup>η

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-6 ±10 ±4</td><td>880</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>21U LHCB</td><td>pp at 13 TeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

D<sup>±</sup> χ<sup>2</sup> TESTS OF CP-VIOLATION (CPV)

We list model-independent searches for local CP violation in phase-space distributions of multi-body decays.

Most of these searches divide phase space (Dalitz plot for 3-body decays, five-dimensional equivalent for 4-body decays) into bins, and perform a χ² test comparing normalised yields $N_j, \bar{N}_j$ in CP-conjugate bin pairs i: $\chi^2 = \sum_j (N_j - \bar{N}_j)/\sigma(N_j - \bar{N}_j)$. The factor $\alpha = (\sum_j N_j)/(\sum_j \bar{N}_j)$ removes the dependence on phase-space-integrated rate asymmetries. The result is used to obtain the probability (p-value) to obtain the measured χ² or larger under the assumption of CP conservation [AUBERT 08a0, BEDIAGA 09]. Alternative methods obtain p-values from other test variables based on unbinned analyses [WILLIAMS 11, AAIJ 14c]. Results can be combined using Fisher's method [MOSTELLER 48].

Local CPV in D<sup>±</sup> → π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup>π<sup>±</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>78.1</td><td>3.1M</td><td>1 AAIJ</td><td>14C LHCB</td><td>χ<sup>2</sup></td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ AAIJ 14C uses binned and unbinned methods, and finds slightly better sensitivity with the former. We took the first value in the table of results for the binned method.

Local CPV in D<sup>±</sup> → K<sup>+</sup>K<sup>-</sup>π<sup>±</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>p-value (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>31</strong> OUR EVALUATION</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>72</td><td>224k</td><td>LEES</td><td>13F BABR</td><td>χ<sup>2</sup></td></tr><tr><td>12.7</td><td>370k</td><td>1 AAIJ</td><td>11G LHCB</td><td>χ<sup>2</sup></td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ AAIJ 11G publishes results for several binning schemes. We picked the first value in their table of results.

Local CPV in D<sup>±</sup> → K<sup>+</sup>K<sup>-</sup>K<sup>±</sup>

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>31.6</td><td>1.27M</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>23L LHCB</td><td>χ<sup>2</sup></td></tr></tbody></table>

CP VIOLATING ASYMMETRIES OF P-ODD (T-ODD) MOMENTS

A<sub>Tviol</sub>(K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub> K<sup>±</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub> K<sup>±</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup>

$C_T \equiv \bar{p}_{K^+} \cdot (\bar{p}_{\pi^+} \times \bar{p}_{\pi^-})$ is a parity-odd correlation of the $K^+$, $\pi^+$, and $\pi^-$ momenta for the $D^+$. $\bar{C}_T \equiv \bar{p}_{K^-} \cdot (\bar{p}_{\pi^-} \times \bar{p}_{\pi^+})$ is the corresponding quantity for the $D^-$.

$A_T \equiv [\Gamma(C_T > 0) - \Gamma(C_T < 0)] / [\Gamma(C_T > 0) + \Gamma(C_T < 0)]$, and
$\bar{A}_T \equiv [\Gamma(-\bar{C}_T > 0) - \Gamma(-\bar{C}_T < 0)] / [\Gamma(-\bar{C}_T > 0) + \Gamma(-\bar{C}_T < 0)]$, and

$A_T\text{viol} \equiv \frac{1}{2}(A_T - \bar{A}_T)$. $C_T$ and $\bar{C}_T$ are commonly referred to as T-odd moments, because they are odd under T reversal. However, the T-conjugate process $K_S^0 K^\pm\pi^\pm \to D^\pm$ is not accessible, while the P-conjugate process is.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-3 ±8</td><td><strong>OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td colspan="3">Error includes scale factor of 1.1.</td></tr><tr><td>3.4 ±8.7 ±3.2</td><td>19k</td><td>MOON</td><td>23 BELL</td><td>980 fb<sup>-1</sup> at ~T(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>-12.0 ±10.0 ±4.6</td><td>21k</td><td>LEES</td><td>11E BABR</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> ~ T(4S)</td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

$$23 \pm 62 \pm 22 \qquad 523 \qquad \text{LINK} \qquad 05E \text{ FOCS} \quad \gamma A, \bar{E}_{\gamma} \approx 180 \text{ GeV}$$

A<sub>Tviol</sub>(K<sup>+</sup> K<sup>-</sup> K<sub>S</sub><sup>0</sup>π<sup>±</sup>) in D<sup>±</sup> → K<sup>+</sup> K<sup>-</sup> K<sub>S</sub><sup>0</sup>π<sup>±</sup>

$C_T \equiv \bar{p}_{K^+} \cdot (\bar{p}_{\pi^+} \times \bar{p}_{K^-})$ is a parity-odd correlation of the $K^+$, $\pi^+$, and $K^-$ momenta for the $D^+$. $\bar{C}_T \equiv \bar{p}_{K^-} \cdot (\bar{p}_{\pi^-} \times \bar{p}_{K^+})$ is the corresponding quantity for the $D^-$.

$A_T \equiv [\Gamma(C_T > 0) - \Gamma(C_T < 0)] / [\Gamma(C_T > 0) + \Gamma(C_T < 0)]$, and
$\bar{A}_T \equiv [\Gamma(-\bar{C}_T > 0) - \Gamma(-\bar{C}_T < 0)] / [\Gamma(-\bar{C}_T > 0) + \Gamma(-\bar{C}_T < 0)]$, and

$A_T\text{viol} \equiv \frac{1}{2}(A_T - \bar{A}_T)$. $C_T$ and $\bar{C}_T$ are commonly referred to as T-odd moments, because they are odd under T reversal. However, the T-conjugate process $K^+K^-K_S^0\pi^\pm \to D^\pm$ is not accessible, while the P-conjugate process is.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (%)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-3.34 ±2.66 ±0.35</td><td>1.4k</td><td>MOON</td><td>23 BELL</td><td>980 fb<sup>-1</sup> at ~T(4S)</td></tr></tbody></table>

SEMILEPTONIC FORM FACTORS

f<sub>+(0)</sub>|<sub>V<sub>CS</sub></sub>| in D<sup>+</sup> → R<sup>0</sup>ℓ<sup>+</sup>ν<sub>e</sub>

VALUE (%) DOCUMENT ID TECN COMMENT

0.719 ±0.011 **OUR AVERAGE** Error includes scale factor of 1.6. See the ideogram below.

<table><tr><td>0.7053 ±0.0040 ±0.0112</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>17S BES3</td><td>K<sub>S</sub><sup>0</sup> e<sup>+</sup>ν<sub>e</sub> 2-parameter fit</td></tr><tr><td>0.737 ±0.006 ±0.009</td><td>1 ABLIKIM</td><td>15AF BES3</td><td>K<sub>L</sub> e<sup>+</sup>ν<sub>e</sub> 3-parameter fit</td></tr><tr><td>0.707 ±0.010 ±0.009</td><td>2 BESSON</td><td>09 CLEO</td><td>K<sub>S</sub> e<sup>+</sup>ν<sub>e</sub> 3-parameter fit</td></tr></table>

¹ ABLIKIM 15AF finds 0.728 ±0.006 ±0.011 for a 2-parameter fit.

² BESSON 09 finds 0.716 ±0.007 ±0.009 for a 2-parameter fit.
# Meson Particle Listings

$D^{\pm}$

WEIGHTED AVERAGE
0.719±0.011 (Error scaled by 1.6)

<figure><img src="image_539.png" /></figure>

$r_1 \equiv a_1/a_0 \text{ in } D^+ \to \overline{K^0} \ell^+ \nu_\ell$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-2.13±0.14</td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>-2.18±0.14±0.05</td><td></td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>17s BES3</td><td>K<sub>S</sub><sup>0</sup> e<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>e</sub> 2-parameter fit</td></tr><tr><td>-2.23±0.42±0.53</td><td>40k</td><td>1 ABLIKIM</td><td>15AF BES3</td><td>K<sub>L</sub><sup>0</sup> e<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>e</sub> 3-parameter fit</td></tr><tr><td>-1.66±0.44±0.10</td><td></td><td>2 BESSON</td><td>09 CLEO</td><td>K<sub>S</sub><sup>0</sup> e<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>e</sub> 3-parameter fit</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ ABLIKIM 15AF finds $r_1 = -1.91 \pm 0.33 \pm 0.28$ for a 2-parameter fit.

² BESSON 09 finds $r_1 = -2.10 \pm 0.25 \pm 0.08$ for 2-parameter fit.

$r_2 \equiv a_2/a_0 \text{ in } D^+ \to \overline{K^0} \ell^+ \nu_\ell$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-3±12</td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td>Error includes scale factor of 1.5.</td></tr><tr><td>+11±9</td><td>9±9</td><td>40k</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>K<sub>L</sub><sup>0</sup> e<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>e</sub> 3-parameter fit</td></tr><tr><td>-14±11</td><td>1±1</td><td></td><td>BESSON</td><td>K<sub>S</sub><sup>0</sup> e<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>e</sub> 3-parameter fit</td></tr></tbody></table>

$f_+(0)|V_{cd}| \text{ in } D^+ \to \pi^0 \ell^+ \nu_\ell$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0.1407±0.0025</td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.1400±0.0026±0.0007</td><td></td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>17s BES3</td><td>π<sup>0</sup> e<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>e</sub> 2-parameter fit</td></tr><tr><td>0.146±0.007±0.002</td><td></td><td>BESSON</td><td>09 CLEO</td><td>π<sup>0</sup> e<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>e</sub> 3-parameter fit</td></tr></tbody></table>

$r_1 \equiv a_1/a_0 \text{ in } D^+ \to \pi^0 \ell^+ \nu_\ell$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-2.00±0.13</td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>-2.01±0.13±0.02</td><td></td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>17s BES3</td><td>π<sup>0</sup> e<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>e</sub> 2-parameter fit</td></tr><tr><td>-1.37±0.88±0.24</td><td></td><td>BESSON</td><td>09 CLEO</td><td>π<sup>0</sup> e<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>e</sub> 3-parameter fit</td></tr></tbody></table>

$r_2 \equiv a_2/a_0 \text{ in } D^+ \to \pi^0 \ell^+ \nu_\ell$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-4±5</td><td>±1</td><td>BESSON</td><td>09 CLEO</td><td>π<sup>0</sup> e<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>e</sub> 3-parameter fit</td></tr></tbody></table>

$f_+(0)|V_{cd}| \text{ in } D^+ \to \eta \ell^+ \nu_\ell (\ell = e \text{ or } \nu)$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>8.4 ±0.4</td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>8.7 ±0.8 ±0.2</td><td>234</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20T BES3</td><td>η<sup>+</sup> μ<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>μ</sub>, z expansion</td></tr><tr><td>7.86 ±0.64±0.21</td><td>373</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>18R BES3</td><td>η<sup>+</sup> e<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>e</sub>, z expansion</td></tr><tr><td>8.6 ±0.6 ±0.1</td><td></td><td>YELTON</td><td>11 CLEO</td><td>η<sup>+</sup> e<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>e</sub>, z expansion</td></tr></tbody></table>

$r_1 \equiv a_1/a_0 \text{ in } D^+ \to \eta e^+ \nu_e$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>-5.3 ±2.7</td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>-7.33±1.69±0.40</td><td>373</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>18R BES3</td><td>z expansion</td></tr><tr><td>-1.83±2.23±0.28</td><td></td><td>YELTON</td><td>11 CLEO</td><td>z expansion</td></tr></tbody></table>

$r_\nu \equiv V(0)/A_1(0) \text{ in } D^+ \to \omega e^+ \nu_e$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1.24±0.09±0.06</td><td></td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>15W BES3</td><td>292 fb<sup>-1</sup>, 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$r_2 \equiv A_2(0)/A_1(0) \text{ in } D^+ \to \omega e^+ \nu_e$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1.06±0.15±0.05</td><td></td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>15W BES3</td><td>292 fb<sup>-1</sup>, 3773 MeV</td></tr></tbody></table>

$r_\nu \equiv V(0)/A_1(0) \text{ in } D^+, D^0 \to \rho e^+ \nu_e$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1.64 ±0.10</td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td>Error includes scale factor of 1.2.</td></tr><tr><td>1.695±0.083±0.051</td><td>2.5k</td><td>1 ABLIKIM</td><td>19c BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> at 3773 MeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.48 ±0.15 ±0.05</td><td></td><td>1.2 DOBBS</td><td>13 CLEO</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> at ψ(3770)</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ Uses both $D^+$ and $D^0$ events.

² Using PDG 10 values of $V_{cd}$ and lifetimes, DOBBS 13 gets $A_1(0) = 0.56 \pm 0.01^{+0.02}_{-0.03} A_2(0) = 0.47 \pm 0.06 \pm 0.04$, and $V(0) = 0.84 \pm 0.09^{+0.06}_{-0.06}$.

$r_2 \equiv A_2(0)/A_1(0) \text{ in } D^+, D^0 \to \overline{K^0} \ell^+ \nu_\ell$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0.84 ±0.06</td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.845±0.056±0.039</td><td></td><td>1 ABLIKIM</td><td>19c BES3</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> at 3773 MeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.83 ±0.11 ±0.04</td><td></td><td>1,2 DOBBS</td><td>13 CLEO</td><td>e<sup>+</sup> e<sup>-</sup> at ψ(3770)</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ Uses both $D^+$ and $D^0$ events.

² Using PDG 10 values of $V_{cd}$ and lifetimes, DOBBS 13 gets $A_1(0) = 0.56 \pm 0.01^{+0.02}_{-0.03} A_2(0) = 0.47 \pm 0.06 \pm 0.04$, and $V(0) = 0.84 \pm 0.09^{+0.05}_{-0.06}$.

$r_\nu \equiv V(0)/A_1(0) \text{ in } D^+ \to \overline{K^*}(892)^0 \ell^+ \nu_\ell$

See also BRIERE 10 for $\overline{K}^* \ell^+ \nu_\ell$ helicity-basis form-factor measurements.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1.49 ±0.05</td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1.411±0.058±0.007</td><td></td><td>16.2k</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>16F BES3</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> e<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>e</sub></td></tr><tr><td>1.463±0.017±0.031</td><td></td><td></td><td>1 DEL-AMO-SA..11I</td><td>BABR</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1.504±0.057±0.039</td><td></td><td>15k</td><td>2 LINK</td><td>02L FOCS</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> μ<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>μ</sub></td></tr><tr><td>1.45 ±0.23 ±0.07</td><td></td><td>763</td><td>ADAMOVICH</td><td>99 BEAT</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> μ<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>μ</sub></td></tr><tr><td>1.90 ±0.11 ±0.09</td><td></td><td>3000</td><td>3 AITALA</td><td>98B E791</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> e<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>e</sub></td></tr><tr><td>1.84 ±0.11 ±0.09</td><td></td><td>3034</td><td>AITALA</td><td>98F E791</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> μ<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>μ</sub></td></tr><tr><td>1.74 ±0.27 ±0.28</td><td></td><td>874</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>93E E687</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> μ<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>μ</sub></td></tr><tr><td>2.00 ±0.34 ±0.16</td><td></td><td>305</td><td>KODAMA</td><td>92 E653</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> μ<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>μ</sub></td></tr></tbody></table>

• • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

$2.0 \pm 0.6 \pm 0.3 \quad 183 \quad \text{ANJOS} \quad 90E \quad E691 \quad \overline{K^*}(892)^0 e^+ \nu_e$

¹ DEL-AMO-SANCHEZ 11I finds the pole mass $m_A = (2.63 \pm 0.10 \pm 0.13)$ GeV ($m_V$ is fixed at 2 GeV).

² LINK 02L includes the effects of interference with an S-wave background. This much improves the goodness of fit, but does not much shift the values of the form factors.

³ This is slightly different from the AITALA 98B value: see ref. [5] in AITALA 98F.

<figure><img src="image_540.png" /></figure>

$r_\nu \equiv V(0)/A_1(0) \text{ in } D^+ \to \overline{K}^*(892)^0 \ell^+ \nu_\ell$

$r_2 \equiv A_2(0)/A_1(0) \text{ in } D^+ \to \overline{K}^*(892)^0 \ell^+ \nu_\ell$

See also BRIERE 10 for $\overline{K}^* \ell^+ \nu_\ell$ helicity-basis form-factor measurements.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0.802±0.021</td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.788±0.042±0.008</td><td></td><td>16.2k</td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>16F BES3</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> e<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>e</sub></td></tr><tr><td>0.801±0.020±0.020</td><td></td><td></td><td>1 DEL-AMO-SA..11I</td><td>BABR</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>0.875±0.049±0.064</td><td></td><td>15k</td><td>2 LINK</td><td>02L FOCS</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> μ<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>μ</sub></td></tr><tr><td>1.00 ±0.15 ±0.03</td><td></td><td>763</td><td>ADAMOVICH</td><td>99 BEAT</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> μ<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>μ</sub></td></tr><tr><td>0.71 ±0.08 ±0.09</td><td></td><td>3000</td><td>AITALA</td><td>98B E791</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> e<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>e</sub></td></tr><tr><td>0.75 ±0.08 ±0.09</td><td></td><td>3034</td><td>AITALA</td><td>98F E791</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> μ<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>μ</sub></td></tr><tr><td>0.78 ±0.18 ±0.10</td><td></td><td>874</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>93E E687</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> μ<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>μ</sub></td></tr><tr><td>0.82 ±0.22 ±0.11</td><td></td><td>305</td><td>KODAMA</td><td>92 E653</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> μ<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>μ</sub></td></tr></tbody></table>

• • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

$0.0 \pm 0.5 \pm 0.2 \quad 183 \quad \text{ANJOS} \quad 90E \quad E691 \quad \overline{K^*}(892)^0 e^+ \nu_e$

¹ DEL-AMO-SANCHEZ 11I finds the pole mass $m_A = (2.63 \pm 0.10 \pm 0.13)$ GeV ($m_V$ is fixed at 2 GeV).

² LINK 02L includes the effects of interference with an S-wave background. This much improves the goodness of fit, but does not much shift the values of the form factors.

$r_3 \equiv A_3(0)/A_1(0) \text{ in } D^+ \to \overline{K}^*(892)^0 \ell^+ \nu_\ell$

See also BRIERE 10 for $\overline{K}^* \ell^+ \nu_\ell$ helicity-basis form-factor measurements.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0.04±0.33±0.29</td><td></td><td>3034</td><td>AITALA</td><td>98F E791</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> μ<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>μ</sub></td></tr></tbody></table>

$\Gamma_L/\Gamma_T \text{ in } D^+ \to \overline{K}^*(892)^0 \ell^+ \nu_\ell$

See also BRIERE 10 for $\overline{K}^* \ell^+ \nu_\ell$ helicity-basis form-factor measurements.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1.13±0.08</td><td>OUR AVERAGE</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1.09±0.10±0.02</td><td></td><td>763</td><td>ADAMOVICH</td><td>99 BEAT</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> μ<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>μ</sub></td></tr><tr><td>1.20±0.13±0.13</td><td></td><td>874</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>93E E687</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> μ<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>μ</sub></td></tr><tr><td>1.18±0.18±0.08</td><td></td><td>305</td><td>KODAMA</td><td>92 E653</td><td>K<sup>*</sup>(892)<sup>0</sup> μ<sup>+</sup> ν<sub>μ</sub></td></tr></tbody></table>
• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

$$1.8^{+0.6}_{-0.4} \pm 0.3 \quad 183 \quad \text{ANJOS} \quad 90E \quad E691 \quad \overline{K^*}(892)^0 \pm \nu_e$$

$$\Gamma_{+/-} \text{ in } D^{+} \rightarrow \overline{K}^{*}(892)^{0} \ell^{+} \nu_{e} \\ \text{See also BRIERE 10 for } \overline{K}^{*} \ell^{+} \nu_{e} \text{ helicity-basis form-factor measurements.}$$

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="5"><strong>0.22±0.06 OUR AVERAGE</strong> Error includes scale factor of 1.6.</td></tr><tr><td>0.28±0.05±0.02</td><td>763</td><td>ADAMOVICH</td><td>99</td><td>BEAT <span style="text-decoration: overline;">K</span>*(892)<sup>0</sup>μ<sup>+</sup>ν<sub>μ</sub></td></tr><tr><td>0.16±0.05±0.02</td><td>305</td><td>KODAMA</td><td>92</td><td>E653 <span style="text-decoration: overline;">K</span>*(892)<sup>0</sup>μ<sup>+</sup>ν<sub>μ</sub></td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

$$0.15^{+0.07}_{-0.05} \pm 0.03 \quad 183 \quad \text{ANJOS} \quad 90E \quad E691 \quad \overline{K}^*(892)^0 \pm \nu_e$$

## Amplitude analyses

### D → Kπππ partial wave analyses

Amplitude analyses of $D^+$ decays to a variety of 4-body kaon or pion final states, fitting simultaneously different partial wave components.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td></td><td></td><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>19AZ</td><td>BES3 D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup></td></tr></tbody></table>

### $D^+ \rightarrow 2\pi^+\pi^-$ partial wave analyses

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td></td><td></td><td>1 AAJ</td><td>23H</td><td>LHCB Dalitz plot fit</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>2.2k</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>07</td><td>CLEO</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>LINK</td><td>04</td><td>FOCS</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>1.5k</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>0.1k</td><td>01B</td><td>E791</td></tr></tbody></table>

¹ The amplitude model has 7 components, including a $π^+π^±$ S-wave parametrised by one complex number per bin in 50 bins of $π^+π^-$ invariant mass.

## D± REFERENCES

<table><tbody><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>23E</td><td>JHEP</td><td>2304 081</td><td>R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>23E</td><td>JHEP</td><td>2306 044</td><td>R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>23L</td><td>JHEP</td><td>2307 067</td><td>R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>23AI</td><td>PR D107 032002</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>23AO</td><td>PR D107 112005</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>23BW</td><td>JHEP</td><td>2309 077</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LI</td><td>23G</td><td>PR D107 033003</td><td>L.K. Li et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>MOON</td><td>23</td><td>PR D108 111102</td><td>H.K. Moon et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BG</td><td>PR D106 092005</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BJ</td><td>PR D106 112009</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22BK</td><td>JHEP</td><td>2209 107</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22U</td><td>PR D105 032009</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>22Y</td><td>PR D106 032002</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>21T</td><td>JHEP</td><td>2106 044</td><td>R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>21U</td><td>JHEP</td><td>2106 019</td><td>R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>21AD</td><td>PR D104 012006</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>21BA</td><td>PR D104 052008</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>21BB</td><td>PR D104 072005</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABUDINEN</td><td>21A</td><td>PR 127 211801</td><td>F. Abudinen et al. (BELLE II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20AA</td><td>PR D102 052003</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20AC</td><td>PR D102 052006</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20AF</td><td>PR D102 112005</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>20D</td><td>21R</td><td>PR D105 031102</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>20G</td><td>21B</td><td>PR D105 052009</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20H</td><td>PR D101 072005</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>20T</td><td>21R</td><td>PR D124 231801</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20V</td><td>PR L124 241803</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>20Z</td><td>PR L124 241802</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>19H</td><td>JHEP</td><td>1907 176</td><td>R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>19H</td><td>JHEP</td><td>1904 063</td><td>R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>19T</td><td>PR L122 191803</td><td>R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>19AL</td><td>PR D99 112002</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>19AD</td><td>PR D100 072006</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>19AZ</td><td>PR D97 052008</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>19BG</td><td>PR L123 112002</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>19BH</td><td>PR L123 231801</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>19BI</td><td>PL B798 135017</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>19C</td><td>PR L122 062001</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>19D</td><td>PR D99 032002</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>18AC</td><td>PR D98 092009</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABAEI</td><td>18AE</td><td>PR L178 171803</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>18F</td><td>PR L121 081802</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>18P</td><td>PR D97 072015</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>18R</td><td>PR D97 092009</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>18W</td><td>PR D97 072004</td><td>V. Babu et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BABU</td><td>18</td><td>PR D97 011101</td><td>V. Babu et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>17AF</td><td>PL B771 21</td><td>R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>17A</td><td>PL B765 231</td><td>R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>17AD</td><td>PR D96 092002</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>17M</td><td>PR D95 071102</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>17S</td><td>PR D96 012002</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>16D</td><td>PR L116 082001</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>16F</td><td>PR D94 032001</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>16G</td><td>EPJ C76 369</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>16H</td><td>PR D97 113001</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>15AF</td><td>PR D92 112008</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>15W</td><td>PR D92 071101</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>14BD</td><td>JHEP</td><td>1410 025</td><td>R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>14A</td><td>JHEP</td><td>1410 0511</td><td>R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>14C</td><td>PL B728 585</td><td>R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABAZOV</td><td>14L</td><td>PR D90 111102</td><td>V.M. Abazov et al. (D0 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>14E</td><td>PR D89 052007</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>14F</td><td>PR D89 051104</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BESIII Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BONVICINI</td><td>14</td><td>PR D89 072002</td><td>G. Bonvicini et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>13AF</td><td>PL B724 203</td><td>R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>13W</td><td>PL B306 112</td><td>R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABDDBS</td><td>13</td><td>PR D90 131802</td><td>S. Dabbs et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>KO</td><td>13</td><td>JHEP</td><td>1302 098</td><td>B.R. Ko et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LEES</td><td>13E</td><td>PR D87 052012</td><td>J.P. Lees et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LEES</td><td>13F</td><td>PR D87 052010</td><td>J.P. Lees et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>KO</td><td>12A</td><td>PR 109 119903 (errat.)</td><td>B.R. Ko et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>Also</td><td>12</td><td>PR L109 021601</td><td>B.R. Ko et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>STARIC</td><td>12</td><td>PR L108 071801</td><td>M. Staric et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AAJ</td><td>11G</td><td>PR D84 112008</td><td>R. Aaij et al. (LHCb Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>DEL-AMO-SA...</td><td>11H</td><td>PR D83 071103</td><td>P. del Amo Sanchez et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><tbody><tr><td>DEL-AMO-SA...</td><td>11I</td><td>PR D83 072001</td><td>P. del Amo Sanchez et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LEES</td><td>11E</td><td>PR D84 031103</td><td>J.P. Lees et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>11G</td><td>PR D84 072006</td><td>J.P. Lees et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>WILLIAMS</td><td>11</td><td>PR D84 054015</td><td>M. Williams (LOIC)</td></tr><tr><td>WON</td><td>11</td><td>PR L107 221801</td><td>E. Won et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>YELBON</td><td>11</td><td>PR D84 032001</td><td>J. Yelton et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ANASHIN</td><td>10A</td><td>PR B666 84</td><td>V.V. Anashin et al. (VEPP-4M KEDR Collab.) (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ASNER</td><td>10</td><td>PR D81 052007</td><td>M.D. Asner et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BRIERE</td><td>10</td><td>PR D81 112001</td><td>R.A. Briere et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>KO</td><td>10</td><td>PR L104 181602</td><td>B.R. Ko et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>MENDEZ</td><td>10</td><td>PR D81 052013</td><td>H. Mendez et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>PDG</td><td>10</td><td>PR D81 075021</td><td>K. Nakamura et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>RUBIN</td><td>10</td><td>PR D82 092007</td><td>P. Rubin et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BIEDIAGA</td><td>09</td><td>PR D80 096006</td><td>I. Bediaga et al. (CBPF, NDAM)</td></tr><tr><td>BESSON</td><td>09</td><td>PR D80 032005</td><td>D. Besson et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>Also</td><td>09</td><td>PR D79 052010</td><td>J.Y. Ge et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>KO</td><td>09</td><td>PR L02 221802</td><td>B.R. Ko et al. (BELLE Collab.) (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>09</td><td>PL B681 14</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>MITCHELL</td><td>09B</td><td>PR L102 081801</td><td>R.E. Mitchell et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>WON</td><td>09B</td><td>PR D80 111101</td><td>E. Won et al. (BELLE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABAZOV</td><td>08D</td><td>PR L100 101801</td><td>V.M. Abazov et al. (D0 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>08L</td><td>PL B665 16</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BES Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ARTUSO</td><td>08</td><td>PR D77 092003</td><td>M. Artuso et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT</td><td>08AO</td><td>PR D78 051102</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BONVICINI</td><td>08</td><td>PR D77 091106</td><td>G. Bonvicini et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BONVICINI</td><td>08A</td><td>PR D78 052001</td><td>G. Bonvicini et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>DOBBS</td><td>08B</td><td>PR D77 112005</td><td>S. Dobbs et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>DOBBS</td><td>08</td><td>PR D77 251802</td><td>D. Cronin-Hennessy et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>EISENSTEIN</td><td>08</td><td>PR D78 052003</td><td>B.I. Eisenstein et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>HE</td><td>08</td><td>PR L00 091801</td><td>Q. He et al. (PDG Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>PDG</td><td>08</td><td>PL B667 1</td><td>C. Amsler et al. (PDG Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>RUBIN</td><td>08</td><td>PR D78 072003</td><td>P. Rubin et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>07</td><td>PL B444 20</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BES Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>07G</td><td>PL B658 1</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BES Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BONVICINI</td><td>07G</td><td>PR D76 012001</td><td>G. Bonvicini et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>DOBBS</td><td>07</td><td>PR D76 112001</td><td>S. Dobbs et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>07B</td><td>PL B653 1</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>06O</td><td>EPJ C47 31</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BES Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>06U</td><td>PL B643 39</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BES Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ADAM</td><td>06A</td><td>PR L97 251801</td><td>N.E. Adam et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AITALA</td><td>06</td><td>PR D73 032004</td><td>E.M. Aitala et al. (FNAL E791 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>Also</td><td>06</td><td>PR D74 059901 (errat.)</td><td>E.M. Aitala et al. (FNAL E791 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT-B</td><td>06F</td><td>PR D74 011107</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>DYTMAN</td><td>06F</td><td>PR D74 071102</td><td>S.A. Dytmant et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>HUANG</td><td>06B</td><td>PR D74 112005</td><td>G.S. Huang et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>06B</td><td>PR L637 32</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>RUBIN</td><td>06</td><td>PR L96 081802</td><td>P. Rubin et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>RUBIN</td><td>06A</td><td>PR L637 112005</td><td>P. Rubin et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>05A</td><td>PL B608 24</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BES Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>05D</td><td>PL B610 183</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BES Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>05F</td><td>PL B622 6</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BES Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>05P</td><td>PL B625 196</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BES Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ARTUSO</td><td>05A</td><td>PR L95 251801</td><td>M. Artuso et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AUBERT</td><td>05S</td><td>PR D71 091101</td><td>B. Aubert et al. (BABAR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>HE</td><td>05</td><td>PR L95 121801</td><td>Q. He et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>Also</td><td>05</td><td>PR L96 199903 (errat.)</td><td>Q. He et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>HE</td><td>05A</td><td>PR L95 221802</td><td>Q. He et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>HUANG</td><td>05B</td><td>PR L95 181801</td><td>G.S. Huang et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>KAYIS-TOPAKU</td><td>06F</td><td>PR D74 011107</td><td>A. Kayis-Topaku et al. (CERN CHORUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>05E</td><td>PL B622 239</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>05I</td><td>PL B621 72</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>04C</td><td>PL B597 39</td><td>M. Ablikim et al. (BEPIC BES Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ARMS</td><td>04</td><td>PL D69 071102</td><td>K. Arms et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BONVICINI</td><td>04A</td><td>PL D70 112004</td><td>G. Bonvicini et al. (JLM FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LIDK</td><td>04</td><td>PL B595 200</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>04E</td><td>PL B598 33</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>04F</td><td>PL B601 10</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ANISOVICH</td><td>03</td><td>EPJ A16 229</td><td>V.V. Anisovich et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>03D</td><td>PL B561 225</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>03F</td><td>PL B572 21</td><td>E.M. Aitala et al. (FNAL E791 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AITALA</td><td>02</td><td>PL B89 121801</td><td>G. Brandenburg et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BRANDENB...</td><td>02</td><td>PL B89 222001</td><td>A. Kayis-Topaku et al. (CERN CHORUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABYIS-TOPAKU...</td><td>02</td><td>PL B549 48</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>02B</td><td>PR L88 041602</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>Also</td><td>02B</td><td>PR L88 159903 (errat.)</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>02E</td><td>PL B535 43</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>02F</td><td>PL B537 192</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>02I</td><td>PL B541 227</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>02J</td><td>PL B541 243</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>02L</td><td>PL B544 89</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AITALA</td><td>01C</td><td>PL B86 770</td><td>E.M. Aitala et al. (FNAL E791 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>01C</td><td>PR L87 162001</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABREU</td><td>00</td><td>EPJ C12 209</td><td>P. Abreu et al. (DELPHI Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ASTIER</td><td>00D</td><td>PL B486 35</td><td>P. Astier et al. (CERN NOMAD Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>JUN</td><td>00</td><td>PL B48 1857</td><td>S.Y. Jun et al. (FNAL SELEX Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>LINK</td><td>00B</td><td>PL B491 232</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>Also</td><td>00B</td><td>PL B495 443 (errat.)</td><td>J.M. Link et al. (FNAL FOCUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABBIENDI</td><td>99K</td><td>EPJ C8 573</td><td>G. Abbiendi et al. (OPAL Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ADAMOVICH</td><td>99</td><td>EPJ C6 35</td><td>M. Adamovich et al. (CERN BEATRICE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ABLIKIM</td><td>99G</td><td>PL B462 401</td><td>E.M. Aitala et al. (FNAL E791 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BONVICINI</td><td>99A</td><td>PL B82 4568</td><td>G. Bonvicini et al. (FNAL E791 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AITALA</td><td>98B</td><td>PR L80 1393</td><td>E.M. Aitala et al. (FNAL E791 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AITALA</td><td>98C</td><td>PL B421 405</td><td>E.M. Aitala et al. (FNAL E791 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AITALA</td><td>98F</td><td>PL B440 435</td><td>E.M. Aitala et al. (FNAL E791 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BAI</td><td>98B</td><td>PL B429 188</td><td>J.Z. Bai et al. (BEPIC BES Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AITALA</td><td>97</td><td>PL B397 325</td><td>E.M. Aitala et al. (FNAL E791 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AITALA</td><td>97A</td><td>PL D50 3777</td><td>E.M. Aitala et al. (FNAL E791 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AITALA</td><td>97C</td><td>PL B404 187</td><td>E.M. Aitala et al. (FNAL E791 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BISHAI</td><td>97</td><td>PL R78 3261</td><td>M. Bishai et al. (CME Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97</td><td>PL B391 235</td><td>P.L. Frabetti et al. (FNAL E687 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97B</td><td>PL B398 239</td><td>P.L. Frabetti et al. (FNAL E687 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97C</td><td>PL B401 131</td><td>P.L. Frabetti et al. (FNAL E687 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>FRABETTI</td><td>97D</td><td>PL B407 79</td><td>P.L. Frabetti et al. (FNAL E687 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AITALA</td><td>96</td><td>PR L76 364</td><td>E.M. Aitala et al. (FNAL E791 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>FRABETTI</td><td>95</td><td>PL B346 199</td><td>P.L. Frabetti et al. (FNAL E791 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>FRABETTI</td><td>95B</td><td>PL B351 591</td><td>P.L. Frabetti et al. (FNAL E687 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>FRABETTI</td><td>95C</td><td>PL B359 403</td><td>P.L. Frabetti et al. (FNAL E687 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>KODAMA</td><td>95</td><td>PL B345 85</td><td>K. Kodama et al. (FNAL E653 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>94</td><td>ZPHY C64 375</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BALEST</td><td>94I</td><td>PL R72 2328</td><td>R. Balest et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>FRABETTI</td><td>94D</td><td>PL B323 459</td><td>P.L. Frabetti et al. (FNAL E687 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>FRABETTI</td><td>94G</td><td>PL B331 217</td><td>P.L. Frabetti et al. (FNAL E687 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>FRABETTI</td><td>94I</td><td>PR D50 2953</td><td>P.L. Frabetti et al. (FNAL E687 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AKERIB</td><td>93</td><td>PR L71 3070</td><td>D.S. Akerib et al. (CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>JANOS</td><td>93</td><td>PR D48 56</td><td>J.C. Anjos et al. (FNAL E691 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>FRABETTI</td><td>93E</td><td>PL B307 262</td><td>P.L. Frabetti et al. (FNAL E687 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BARLEAG</td><td>92F</td><td>PL B278 202</td><td>H. Albrecht et al. (ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BARLEAG</td><td>92C</td><td>ZPHY C55 383</td><td>S. Barlag et al. (AGCMOR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>Also</td><td>92B</td><td>ZPHY C48 29</td><td>S. Barlag et al. (AGCMOR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>COFFMAN</td><td>92B</td><td>PR D45 2196</td><td>D.M. Coffman et al. (Mark III Collab.)</td></tr></tbody></table>
# Meson Particle Listings

$D^{\pm}, D^{0}$

<table><tbody><tr><td>DAOUDI</td><td>92</td><td>PR D45 3965</td><td>M. Daoudi et al.</td><td>(CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>KODAMA</td><td>92</td><td>PL B274 246</td><td>K. Kodama et al.</td><td>(FNAL E653 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>KODAMA</td><td>92C</td><td>PL B286 187</td><td>K. Kodama et al.</td><td>(FNAL E653 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ADAMOVICH</td><td>91</td><td>PL B268 142</td><td>M.I. Adamovich et al.</td><td>(WA82 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>91</td><td>PL B255 634</td><td>H. Albrecht et al.</td><td>(ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALVAREZ</td><td>91B</td><td>ZPHY C50 11</td><td>M.P. Alvarez et al.</td><td>(CERN NA14/2 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>AMMAR</td><td>91</td><td>PRL D44 3383</td><td>R. Ammar et al.</td><td>(CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BAI</td><td>91</td><td>PRL 66 1011</td><td>Z. Bai et al.</td><td>(Mark III Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>COFFMAN</td><td>91</td><td>PL B263 135</td><td>D.M. Coffman et al.</td><td>(Mark III Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>FRABETTI</td><td>91</td><td>PL B263 584</td><td>P.L. Frabetti et al.</td><td>(FNAL E687 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALVAREZ</td><td>90</td><td>ZPHY C47 539</td><td>M.P. Alvarez et al.</td><td>(CERN NA14/2 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ANJOS</td><td>90E</td><td>PR D41 2705</td><td>J.C. Anjos et al.</td><td>(FNAL E691 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ANJOS</td><td>90D</td><td>PR D42 2414</td><td>J.C. Anjos et al.</td><td>(FNAL E691 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ANJOS</td><td>90E</td><td>PRL 65 2630</td><td>J.C. Anjos et al.</td><td>(FNAL E691 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BARLAG</td><td>90C</td><td>ZPHY C46 563</td><td>S. Barlag et al.</td><td>(ACCMOR Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>WEIR</td><td>90B</td><td>PR D41 1384</td><td>A.J. Weir et al.</td><td>(Mark II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ANJOS</td><td>89</td><td>PRL 62 125</td><td>J.C. Anjos et al.</td><td>(FNAL E691 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ANJOS</td><td>89B</td><td>PRL 62 722</td><td>J.C. Anjos et al.</td><td>(FNAL E691 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ANJOS</td><td>89E</td><td>PL B223 267</td><td>J.C. Anjos et al.</td><td>(FNAL E691 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ADLER</td><td>88D</td><td>PRL 60 89</td><td>J. Adler et al.</td><td>(Mark III Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>88I</td><td>PL B210 267</td><td>H. Albrecht et al.</td><td>(ARGUS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>HAAS</td><td>88</td><td>PRL 60 1614</td><td>P. Haas et al.</td><td>(CLEO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ONG</td><td>88</td><td>PRL 60 2587</td><td>R.A. Ong et al.</td><td>(Mark II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>RAAB</td><td>88</td><td>PRL D37 2391</td><td>J.R. Raab et al.</td><td>(FNAL E691 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ADAMOVICH</td><td>87</td><td>EPL 4 887</td><td>M.I. Adamovich et al.</td><td>(Photon Emulsion Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ADLER</td><td>87</td><td>PL B196 107</td><td>J. Adler et al.</td><td>(Mark III Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BARTEL</td><td>87</td><td>ZPHY C33 339</td><td>W. Bartel et al.</td><td>(JADE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BALTRUSAIT...</td><td>86E</td><td>PRL 56 2140</td><td>R.M. Baltrusaitis et al.</td><td>(Mark III Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BALTRUSAIT...</td><td>85B</td><td>PRL 54 1976</td><td>R.M. Baltrusaitis et al.</td><td>(Mark III Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BALTRUSAIT...</td><td>85E</td><td>PRL 55 150</td><td>R.M. Baltrusaitis et al.</td><td>(Mark III Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>BARTEL</td><td>85J</td><td>PL 163B 277</td><td>W. Bartel et al.</td><td>(JADE Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ADAMOVICH</td><td>84</td><td>PL 140B 119</td><td>M.I. Adamovich et al.</td><td>(CERN WA58 Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>ALTHOFF</td><td>84G</td><td>ZPHY C22 219</td><td>M. Athoff et al.</td><td>(TASSO Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>DERRICK</td><td>84</td><td>PRL 53 1971</td><td>M. Derrick et al.</td><td>(THS Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>SCHINDLER</td><td>84</td><td>PRL D24 78</td><td>R.H. Schindler et al.</td><td>(Mark II Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>TRILLING</td><td>81</td><td>PRPL 75 57</td><td>G.H. Trilling</td><td>(LBC, UCB) J</td></tr><tr><td>ZHOLENTZ</td><td>80</td><td>PL 96B 214</td><td>A.A. Zholents et al.</td><td>(NOVO)</td></tr><tr><td>Also</td><td></td><td>SJNP 34 814</td><td>A.A. Zholents et al.</td><td>(NOVO)</td></tr><tr><td>GOLDHABER</td><td>77</td><td>PL 69B 503</td><td>G. Goldhaber et al.</td><td>(Mark I Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>PERUZZI</td><td>77</td><td>PRL 39 1301</td><td>I. Peruzzi et al.</td><td>(LGW Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>PICCOLO</td><td>77</td><td>PRL 70B 260</td><td>M. Piccolo et al.</td><td>(Mark I Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>PERUZZI</td><td>76</td><td>PRL 37 569</td><td>I. Peruzzi et al.</td><td>(Mark I Collab.)</td></tr><tr><td>MOSTELLER</td><td>48</td><td>Am.Stat.3 No 30</td><td>R.A. Fisher, F. Mosteller</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

## OTHER RELATED PAPERS

<table><tr><td>RICHMAN</td><td>95</td><td>RMP 67 893</td><td>J.D. Richman, P.R. Burchat</td><td>(UCSB, STAN)</td></tr><tr><td>ROSNER</td><td>95</td><td>CNPN 21 369</td><td>J. Rosner</td><td>(CHIC)</td></tr></table>

$D^0$

$I(J^P) = \frac{1}{2}(0^{-})$

$D^0$ MASS

The fit includes $D^{\pm}, D^{0}, D_{S}^{\pm}, D^{*0}, D_{S}^{*\pm}, D_{1}(2420)^{0}, D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{0}$, and $D_{S1}(2536)^{\pm}$ mass and mass difference measurements.

Given the recent addition of much more precise measurements, we have omitted all those masses published up through 1990. See any Review before 2015 for those earlier results.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (MeV)</th><th>EVENTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>1864.84 ±0.05 OUR FIT</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>1864.84 ±0.05 OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1864.845 ±0.025 ±0.057</td><td>63k</td><td>1 TOMARADZE</td><td>14</td><td>D<sup>0</sup> → K<sup>-</sup>2π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup></td></tr><tr><td>1864.75 ±0.15 ±0.11</td><td></td><td>AAIJ</td><td>13v</td><td>LHCB D<sup>0</sup> → K<sup>+</sup>2K<sup>+</sup>π<sup>+</sup></td></tr><tr><td>1864.841 ±0.048 ±0.063</td><td>4.3k</td><td>2 LEES</td><td>13s</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at T(45)</td></tr><tr><td>1865.30 ±0.33 ±0.23</td><td>0.1k</td><td>ANASHIN</td><td>10a</td><td>KEDR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at ψ(3770)</td></tr><tr><td>1864.847 ±0.150 ±0.095</td><td>0.3k</td><td>CAWLFIELD</td><td>07</td><td>CLEO D<sup>0</sup> → K<sup>0</sup><sub>S</sub>φ</td></tr></tbody></table>

$m_{D^{\pm}} - m_{D^{0}}$

The fit includes $D^{\pm}, D^{0}, D_{S}^{\pm}, D^{*0}, D_{S}^{*\pm}, D_{1}(2420)^{0}, D_{2}^{*}(2460)^{0}$, and $D_{S1}(2536)^{\pm}$ mass and mass difference measurements.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (MeV)</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>4.822 ±0.015 OUR FIT</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>4.76 ±0.12 ±0.07</strong></td><td>AAIJ</td><td>13v</td><td>LHCB D<sup>+</sup> → K<sup>+</sup>K<sup>-</sup>π<sup>+</sup></td></tr></tbody></table>

$D^0$ MEAN LIFE

Measurements with an error > 10 × 10<sup>-15</sup> s have been omitted from the average.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (10<sup>-15</sup> s)</th><th>EVENTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>410.3 ± 1.0 OUR AVERAGE</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>410.5 ± 1.1 ± 0.8</td><td>171k</td><td>1 ABUDINEN</td><td>21a</td><td>BEL2 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at T(45)</td></tr><tr><td>409.6 ± 1.1 ± 1.5</td><td>210k</td><td>LINK</td><td>02f</td><td>FOCS γ nucleus, ≈ 180 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>407.9 ± 6.0 ± 4.3</td><td>10k</td><td>KUSHNIR...</td><td>01</td><td>SELX K<sup>-</sup>π<sup>+</sup>, K<sup>-</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup></td></tr><tr><td>413 ± 3 ± 4</td><td>35k</td><td>AITALA</td><td>99e</td><td>E791 K<sup>-</sup>π<sup>+</sup></td></tr><tr><td>408.5 ± 4.1<sup>+</sup> 3.5<sup>-</sup></td><td>25k</td><td>BONVICINI</td><td>99</td><td>CLE2 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> ≈ T(45)</td></tr><tr><td>413 ± 4 ± 3</td><td>16k</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>94d</td><td>E687 K<sup>-</sup>π<sup>+</sup>, K<sup>-</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup></td></tr></tbody></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tr><td>424</td><td>±11</td><td>±7</td><td>5118</td><td>FRABETTI</td><td>91</td><td>E687 K<sup>-</sup>π<sup>+</sup>, K<sup>-</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup>π<sup>-</sup></td></tr><tr><td>417</td><td>±18</td><td>±15</td><td>890</td><td>ALVAREZ</td><td>90</td><td>NA14 K<sup>-</sup>π<sup>+</sup>, K<sup>-</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup></td></tr><tr><td>388</td><td>±23</td><td>±21</td><td>641</td><td>2 BARLAG</td><td>90c</td><td>ACCM π<sup>-</sup> Cu 230 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>480</td><td>±40</td><td>±30</td><td>776</td><td>ALBRECHT</td><td>88i</td><td>ARG e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>422</td><td>±8</td><td>±10</td><td>4212</td><td>RAAB</td><td>88</td><td>E691 Photoproduction</td></tr><tr><td>420</td><td>±50</td><td></td><td>90</td><td>BARLAG</td><td>87b</td><td>ACCM K<sup>-</sup> and π<sup>-</sup> 200 GeV</td></tr></table>

See the related review(s):

$D^0 - \bar{D}^0$ Mixing

$$|m_{D_1^0} - m_{D_2^0}| = x \Gamma$$

The $D_1^0$ and $D_2^0$ are the mass eigenstates of the $D^0$ meson, as described in the note on "$D^0-\bar{D}^0$ Mixing," above. The experiments usually present $x \equiv \Delta m/\Gamma$. Then $\Delta m = x \Gamma = x \hbar/\tau$.

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tbody><tr><td>11</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>17AO LHCB</td><td>Repl. by AAIJ 18K</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>13CE LHCB</td><td>Repl. by AAIJ 17AO</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>13N LHCB</td><td>Repl. by AAIJ 13CE</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>09AN BABR</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 10.58 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>6.4</td><td>+1.4</td><td>-1.7</td><td>±1.0</td></tr><tr><td>-2</td><td>+7</td><td>-6</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1.98</td><td>±0.73</td><td>+0.32</td><td>-0.41</td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 7</td><td></td><td>95</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>-11</td><td></td><td>to +22</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 11</td><td></td><td>90</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 30</td><td></td><td>90</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 7</td><td></td><td>95</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 22</td><td></td><td>95</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 23</td><td></td><td>95</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 11</td><td></td><td>95</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 7</td><td></td><td>95</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 32</td><td></td><td>90</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 24</td><td></td><td>90</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>&lt; 21</td><td></td><td>90</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>13AE LHCB</td><td>Repl. by AAIJ 18K</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>13CE LHCB</td><td>Repl. by AAIJ 17AO</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>AAIJ</td><td>13N LHCB</td><td>Repl. by AAIJ 13CE</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>09AN BABR</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at 10.58 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td>LOWREY</td><td>09</td><td>CLEO e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> at ψ(3770)</td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>ZHANG</td><td>07B</td><td>Repl. by PENG 14</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>ZHANG</td><td>06</td><td>BELL e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup></td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>ASNER</td><td>05</td><td>CLEO e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> ≈ 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>BITENC</td><td>05</td><td>BELL</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>CAWLFIELD</td><td>05</td><td>CLEO</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>LI</td><td>05A</td><td>BELL See ZHANG 06</td></tr><tr><td>18</td><td>LINK</td><td>05H</td><td>FOCS γ nucleus</td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>04Q</td><td>BABR</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>AUBERT</td><td>03Z</td><td>BABR e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup>, 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>GODANG</td><td>00</td><td>CLE2 e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup></td></tr><tr><td>20</td><td>21</td><td>20,21 AITALA</td><td>98 E791 π<sup>-</sup> nucleus, 500 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>22</td><td>21</td><td>20,21 AITALA</td><td>96c E791 π<sup>-</sup> nucleus, 500 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>21</td><td>20</td><td>21,23 ANJOS</td><td>88c E691 Photoproduction</td></tr></tbody></table>

<footnote n="1">1 Obtained by analyzing CLEO-c data but not authored by the CLEO Collaboration. The largest source of error in the TOMARADZE 14 value is from the uncertainties in the $K^{\pm}$ and $K^{0}_{S}$ masses. The systematic error given above is the addition in quadrature of ±0.022 ± 0.053 MeV, where the second error is from those mass uncertainties.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2 The largest source of error in the LEES 13s value is from the uncertainty of the $K^{+}$ mass. The quoted systematic error is in fact ±0.043 + 3 ($m_{K^{+}}$ - 493.677), in MeV.</footnote>

<footnote n="1">1 ABUDINEN 21A determines the lifetime ratio $\tau(D^{+})/\tau(D^{0}) = 2.510 \pm 0.013 \pm 0.007$.</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2 BARLAG 90c estimate systematic error to be negligible.</footnote>

<footnote n="1">1 AAIJ 23BC analysis of $D^{0} \rightarrow K^{0}_{S} \pi^{+} \pi^{-}$ from $B \rightarrow D^{0} \mu^{+} \nu$ events allows for CP violation (none seen).</footnote>

<footnote n="2">2 AAIJ 21AB measurement allows for CP violation (none seen).</footnote>

<footnote n="3">3 AAIJ 19X $D^{0}$ come from $D^{*+}$ and $\bar{D}^{0}$ $D^{0}$-X decays (and c.c.). Measurement allows for CP violation (none seen).</footnote>

<footnote n="4">4 The result was established with $D^{0}$ from prompt and secondary $D^{*}$. Based on 5 fb$^{-1}$ of data collected at $\sqrt{s} = 7, 13$ TeV. Assumes no CP violation. Reported $x'^{2} = (3.9 \pm 2.7) \times 10^{-5}$ and $y' = (5.28 \pm 0.52) \times 10^{-3}$, where $x' = x \cos(\delta) + y \sin(\delta)$, $y' = y \cos(\delta) - x \sin(\delta)$ and $\delta$ is the strong phase between $D^{0} \rightarrow K^{+} \pi^{-}$ and $\bar{D}^{0} \rightarrow K^{0} \pi^{-}$.</footnote>

<footnote n="5">5 Model-independent measurement of the charm mixing parameters in the decay $D^{0} \rightarrow K^{0}_{S} \pi^{+} \pi^{-}$ using 1.0 fb$^{-1}$ of LHCb data at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ TeV.</footnote>

<footnote n="6">6 Time-dependent amplitude analysis of $D^{0} \rightarrow \pi^{+} \pi^{-} \pi^{0}$.</footnote>

<footnote n="7">7 Based on 976 fb$^{-1}$ of data collected at Y(nS) resonances. Assumes no CP violation. Reported $x'^{2} = (0.09 \pm 0.22) \times 10^{-3}$ and $y' = (4.6 \pm 3.4) \times 10^{-3}$, where $x' = x \cos(\delta) + y \sin(\delta)$, $y' = y \cos(\delta) - x \sin(\delta)$ and $\delta$ is the strong phase between $D^{0} \rightarrow K^{+} \pi^{-}$ and $\bar{D}^{0} \rightarrow K^{0} \pi^{-}$.</footnote>

<footnote n="8">8 The time-dependent Dalitz-plot analysis of $D^{0} \rightarrow K^{0}_{S} \pi^{+} \pi^{-}$ is employed. Decay-time information and interference in the Dalitz plot are used to distinguish doubly Cabibbo-suppressed decays from mixing and to measure the relative phase between $D^{0} \rightarrow K^{+} \pi^{-}$ and $\bar{D}^{0} \rightarrow K^{0} \pi^{-}$. This value allows CP violation and is sensitive to the sign of $\Delta m$.</footnote>

<footnote n="9">9 Based on 9.6 fb$^{-1}$ of data collected at the Tevatron. Assumes no CP violation. Reported $x'^{2} = (0.08 \pm 0.18) \times 10^{-3}$ and $y' = (4.3 \pm 4.3) \times 10^{-3}$, where $x' = x \cos(\delta) + y \sin(\delta)$.</footnote>
sin(δ), y' = y cos(δ) - x sin(δ) and δ is the strong phase between the D⁰ → K⁺π⁻ and D⁰ → K⁺π⁻.

¹⁰DEL-AMO-SANCHEZ 10D uses 540,800±800 K⁰S π⁺π⁻ and 79,900±300 K⁰S K⁺K⁻ events in a time-dependent amplitude analysis of the D⁰ and D⁰ Dalitz plots. No evidence was found for CP violation, and the values here assume no such violation.

¹¹The result was established with D⁰ from prompt and secondary D⁺. Based on 3 fb⁻<fnref n="1" /> of data collected at √s = 7, 8 TeV. Assumes no CP violation. Reported x'² = (3.6 ± 4.3) × 10⁻⁵ and y' = (5.23 ± 0.84) × 10⁻³, where x' = x cos(δ) + y sin(δ), y' = y cos(δ) - x sin(δ) and δ is the strong phase between the D⁰ → K⁺π⁻ and D⁰ → K⁺π⁻.

¹²Based on 3 fb⁻<fnref n="1" /> of data collected at √s = 7, 8 TeV. Assumes no CP violation. Reported x'² = (5.5 ± 4.9) × 10⁻⁴ and y' = (4.8 ± 1.0) × 10⁻³, where x' = x cos(δ) + y sin(δ), y' = y cos(δ) - x sin(δ) and δ is the strong phase between the D⁰ → K⁺π⁻ and D⁰ → K⁺π⁻.

¹³Based on 1 fb⁻<fnref n="1" /> of data collected at √s = 7 TeV in 2011. Assumes no CP violation. Reported x'² = (-0.9 ± 1.3) × 10⁻⁴ and y' = (7.2 ± 2.4) × 10⁻³, where x' = x cos(δ) + y sin(δ), y' = y cos(δ) - x sin(δ) and δ is the strong phase between the D⁰ → K⁺π⁻ and D⁰ → K⁺π⁻.

¹⁴The AUBERT 09AN values are inferred from the branching ratio Γ(D⁰ → K⁺π⁻π⁰ via D⁰)/Γ(D⁰ → K⁻π⁺π⁰) given near the end of this Listings. Mixing is distinguished from DCS decays using decay-time information. Interference between mixing and DCS is allowed. The phase between D⁰ → K⁺π⁻π⁰ and D⁰ → K⁺π⁻π⁺ is assumed to be small. The width difference here is y'', which is not the same as yCP in the note on D⁰-D⁰ mixing.

¹⁵LOWREY 09 uses quantum correlations in e⁺e⁻ → D⁰D⁰ at the ψ(3770). See below for coherence factors and average relative strong phases for both D⁰ → K⁻π⁺π⁰ and D⁰ → K⁻π⁻π⁺. A fit that includes external measurements of charm mixing parameters gets Δm = (2.34 ± 0.61) × 10¹⁰ ℏ s⁻<fnref n="1" />.

¹⁶The ASNER 05 and ZHANG 07B values are from the time-dependent Dalitz-plot analysis of D⁰ → K⁰S π⁺π⁻. Decay-time information and interference on the Dalitz plot are used to distinguish doubly Cabibbo-suppressed decays from mixing and to measure the relative phase between D⁰ → K⁺π⁻ and D⁰ → K⁺π⁻. This value allows CP violation and is sensitive to the sign of Δm.

¹⁷The AUBERT 03Z, LI 05A, and ZHANG 06 limits are inferred from the D⁰-D⁰ mixing ratio Γ(K⁺π⁻) (via D⁰)/Γ(K⁻π⁺) given near the end of this D⁰ Listings. Decay-time information is used to distinguish DCS decays from D⁰-D⁰ mixing. The limit allows interference between the DCS and mixing ratios, and also allows CP violation. AUBERT 03Z assumes the strong phase between D⁰ → K⁺π⁻ and D⁰ → K⁺π⁻ amplitudes is small; if an arbitrary phase is allowed, the limit degrades by 20%. The LI 05A and ZHANG 06 limits are valid for an arbitrary strong phase.

¹⁸This LINK 05h limit is inferred from the D⁰-D⁰ mixing ratio Γ(K⁺π⁻) (via D⁰)/Γ(K⁻π⁺) given near the end of this D⁰ Listings. Decay-time information is used to distinguish DCS decays from D⁰-D⁰ mixing. The limit allows interference between the DCS and mixing ratios, and also allows CP violation. The strong phase between D⁰ → K⁺π⁻ and D⁰ → K⁺π⁻ is assumed to be small. If an arbitrary relative strong phase is allowed, the limit degrades by 25%.

¹⁹This GODANG 00 limit is inferred from the D⁰-D⁰ mixing ratio Γ(K⁺π⁻) (via D⁰)/Γ(K⁻π⁺) given near the end of this D⁰ Listings. Decay-time information is used to distinguish DCS decays from D⁰-D⁰ mixing. The limit allows interference between the DCS and mixing ratios, and also allows CP violation. The strong phase between D⁰ → K⁺π⁻ and D⁰ → K⁺π⁻ is assumed to be small. If an arbitrary relative strong phase is allowed, the limit degrades by a factor of two.

²⁰AITALA 98 allows interference between the doubly Cabibbo-suppressed and mixing amplitudes, and also allows CP violation in this term, but assumes that A_D=A_R=0. See the note on "D⁰-D⁰ Mixing," above.

²¹This limit is inferred from R_M for f = K⁺π⁻ and f = K⁺π⁻π⁺π⁻. See the note on "D⁰-D⁰ Mixing," above. Decay-time information is used to distinguish doubly Cabibbo-suppressed decays from D⁰-D⁰ mixing.

²²This limit is inferred from R_M for f = K⁺ℓ⁻ν_ℓ. See the note on "D⁰-D⁰ Mixing," above.

²³ANJOS 88c assumes that y = 0. See the note on "D⁰-D⁰ Mixing," above. Without this assumption, the limit degrades by about a factor of two.

$$ (\Gamma_{D^0} - \Gamma_{\bar{D}^0}) / \Gamma = 2y $$

The D⁰₁ and D⁰₂ are the mass eigenstates of the D⁰ meson, as described in the note on "D⁰-D⁰ Mixing," above.

Due to the strong phase difference between D⁰ → K⁺π⁻ and D⁰ → K⁺π⁻, we exclude from the average those measurements of y' that are inferred from the D⁰-D⁰ mixing ratio Γ(K⁺π⁻) via D⁰) / Γ(K⁺π⁻) given near the end of this D⁰ Listings. OUR AVERAGE assumes CP conservation, though this is disfavored by data.

In the absence of CP violation, the experimental measurement of the observable yCP corresponds to y. In the presence of CP violation, yCP is approximately equal to y up to a CP-violating weak phase cosine, that is very close to unity, and higher order CP-violating effects. Many experiments measure yCP with respect to a reference channel, such that the quoted results below are often yCP ± yCP (reference). We denote the actual observable and the reference channel below for those experiments with sufficient sensitivity such that yCP (reference) cannot be neglected.

Some early results have been omitted. See our 2006 Review (Journal of Physics G33 1 (2006)).

<table><caption>WEIGHTED AVERAGE
1.35±0.08 (Error scaled by 1.5)</caption><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-2</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="5"><strong>1.394 ± 0.056 OUR EVALUATION</strong></td></tr><tr><td colspan="5">(Produced by HFLAV)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="5"><strong>1.35 ± 0.08 OUR AVERAGE</strong></td></tr><tr><td colspan="5">Error includes scale factor of 1.5. See the ideogram below.</td></tr><tr><td>2.52 ± 0.62 ±0.17</td><td></td><td>1 AAIJ</td><td>23BC LHCB</td><td>pp at 13 TeV, D⁰ → K⁰S π⁺π⁻</td></tr><tr><td>1.392 ± 0.052 ±0.026</td><td></td><td>2 AAIJ</td><td>22O LHCB</td><td>yCP → yCP(Kπ), pp at 13 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.92 ± 0.30<br/>-0.28</td><td>30.6M</td><td>3 AAIJ</td><td>21AB LHCB</td><td>pp at 13 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.92 ± 1.82<br/>+1.29<br/>-1.24</td><td>91k</td><td>4 NAYAK</td><td>20 BELL</td><td>D⁰ → K⁰S ω</td></tr><tr><td>1.14 ± 0.26 ±0.18</td><td></td><td>5 AAIJ</td><td>19 LHCB</td><td>pp at 7, 8 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.48 ± 0.74</td><td>2.3M</td><td>6 AAIJ</td><td>19x LHCB</td><td>D⁰ → K⁰S π⁺π⁻</td></tr><tr><td>0.06 ± 0.92 ±0.26</td><td></td><td>7 AAIJ</td><td>18k LHCB</td><td>pp at 7, 8, 13 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.4 ± 1.8 ±1.0</td><td></td><td>8 AAIJ</td><td>16v LHCB</td><td>pp at 7 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>2.22 ± 0.44 ±0.18</td><td></td><td>9 LEES</td><td>16d BABR</td><td>e⁺e⁻, 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>-4.0 ± 2.6 ±1.4</td><td></td><td>10 STARIC</td><td>16 BELL</td><td>e⁺e⁻ → τ(nS)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>11 ABLIKIM</td><td>15d BES3</td><td>e⁺e⁻ → ψ(3770)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>12 KO</td><td>14 BELL</td><td>e⁺e⁻ → τ(nS)</td></tr><tr><td>0.60 ± 0.30<br/>+0.10<br/>-0.17</td><td></td><td>13 PENG</td><td>14 BELL</td><td>e⁺e⁻ → τ(nS)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>14 AALTONEN</td><td>13AE CDF</td><td>pπ⁻ at 1.96 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.44 ± 0.36 ±0.24</td><td></td><td>15 LEES</td><td>13 BABR</td><td>e⁺e⁻ → τ(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>0.55 ± 0.63 ±0.41</td><td></td><td>16 AAIJ</td><td>12k LHCB</td><td>pp at 7 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.14 ± 0.40 ±0.30</td><td></td><td>17 DEL-AMO-SA...10D</td><td>BABR</td><td>e⁺e⁻, 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.22 ± 1.22 ±1.04</td><td></td><td>18 ZUPANC</td><td>09 BELL</td><td>e⁺e⁻ ≈ τ(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>-1.0 ± 2.0 ±1.4<br/>-1.6</td><td>18k</td><td>19 ABE</td><td>02i BELL</td><td>e⁺e⁻ ≈ τ(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>-2.4 ± 5.0 ±2.8</td><td>3393</td><td>20 CSORNA</td><td>02 CLE2</td><td>e⁺e⁻ ≈ τ(4S)</td></tr><tr><td>6.84 ± 2.78 ±1.48</td><td>10k</td><td>19 LINK</td><td>00 FOCS</td><td>γ nucleus</td></tr><tr><td>+1.6 ± 5.8 ±2.1</td><td></td><td>19 AITALA</td><td>99E E791</td><td>K⁻π⁺, K⁺K⁻</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •</td></tr><tr><td>2.32 ± 0.44 ±0.36</td><td></td><td>21 AAIJ</td><td>17A0 LHCB</td><td>Repl. by AAIJ 18K</td></tr><tr><td>-0.12 ± 1.10<br/>-1.28</td><td>±0.68</td><td>22 AAIJ</td><td>13CE LHCB</td><td>Repl. by AAIJ 17A0</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>23 AAIJ</td><td>13N LHCB</td><td>Repl. by AAIJ 13CE</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>24 AUBERT</td><td>09AI BABR</td><td>See LEES 13</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>25 AUBERT</td><td>09AN BABR</td><td>e⁺e⁻ at 10.58 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.4 ± 4.8<br/>-5.4</td><td></td><td>26 LOWREY</td><td>09 CLEO</td><td>e⁺e⁻ at ψ(3770)</td></tr><tr><td>1.70 ± 1.52</td><td>13k</td><td>27 AALTONEN</td><td>08E CDF</td><td>pπ⁻, √s = 1.96 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>2.06 ± 0.66 ±0.38</td><td></td><td>28 AUBERT</td><td>08U BABR</td><td>See AUBERT 09AI</td></tr><tr><td>1.94 ± 0.88 ±0.62</td><td>4k</td><td>27 AUBERT</td><td>07W BABR</td><td>e⁺e⁻ ≈ 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>2.62 ± 0.64 ±0.50</td><td>160k</td><td>29 STARIC</td><td>07B BELL</td><td>Repl. by STARIC 16</td></tr><tr><td>0.74 ± 0.50<br/>+0.20<br/>-0.31</td><td>534k</td><td>30 ZHANG</td><td>07B BELL</td><td>Repl. by PENG 14</td></tr><tr><td>-0.7 ± 4.9</td><td>4k</td><td>27,31 ZHANG</td><td>06 BELL</td><td>e⁺e⁻</td></tr><tr><td>-3.0 ± 5.0<br/>-4.8</td><td>+1.6<br/>-0.8</td><td>30 ASNER</td><td>05 CLEO</td><td>e⁺e⁻ ≈ 10 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>-0.3 ± 5.7</td><td></td><td>27,31 LI</td><td>05A BELL</td><td>See ZHANG 06</td></tr><tr><td>-5.2 ± 18.4<br/>-16.8</td><td></td><td>27,31 LINK</td><td>05H FOCS</td><td>γ nucleus</td></tr><tr><td>1.6 ± 0.8<br/>+1.0<br/>-0.8</td><td>450k</td><td>32 AUBERT</td><td>03P BABR</td><td>See AUBERT 08U</td></tr><tr><td>1.6 ± 6.2<br/>-12.8</td><td></td><td>27,31 AUBERT</td><td>03Z BABR</td><td>e⁺e⁻, 10.6 GeV</td></tr><tr><td>-5.0 ± 2.8<br/>-3.2</td><td>±0.6</td><td>27 GODANG</td><td>00 CLE2</td><td>e⁺e⁻</td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_541.png" /></figure>

(Confidence Level = 0.030)

$$ (\Gamma_1 - \Gamma_2)/\Gamma = 2y $$

<footnote n="1">¹AAIJ 23BC analysis of D⁰ → K⁰S π⁺π⁻ from B → D⁰µνX events allows for CP violation (none seen).</footnote>
# Meson Particle Listings

## D⁰

²AAIJ 220 is the combination of the measurement in the $D^0 \to \pi^-\pi^+$ channel and the one in the $D^0 \to K^-K^+$ channel, that are (1.314 ± 0.106 ± 0.032)% and (1.416 ± 0.060 ± 0.028)% respectively, assuming fully correlated systematics except those related to peaking backgrounds.

³AAIJ 21AB analysis of $D^0 \to K_0^S\pi^+\pi^-$ events allows for CP violation (none seen).

⁴NAYAK 20 reports $(1.92 \pm 1.82 \pm 1.24)_{-0.00}^{+0.34}) \times 10^{-2}$ where the last uncertainty is due to possible presence of CP-even decays in the data sample. Extracts $\gamma_{CP^-} = (\Gamma_{CP^-} - \Gamma_{CP_+}) / (\Gamma_{CP_+} + \Gamma_{CP_-})$ in $D^0 \to K_0^S\omega$ versus $\bar{D}^0 \to K_0^S\omega$, by measuring the decay lifetime of $D^0 \to K_0^S\omega$ with $\omega \to \pi^+\pi^-\pi^0$ versus $D^0 \to K^-\pi^+$. We list $2\gamma_{CP} = 2\gamma(=\Delta\Gamma/\Gamma)$ in the absence of CP violation.

⁵Based on 3 fb⁻¹ of data collected at $\sqrt{s} = 7, 8$ TeV. Measures the lifetime difference between $D^0 \to K^-K^+$ and $D^0 \to \pi^-\pi^+$ (CP even) decays and $D^0 \to K^-\pi^+$ (CP mixed) decays, or $\gamma_{CP}=(\Gamma_{CP^-} + \Gamma_{CP_+}) / (\Gamma_{CP_+} + \Gamma_{CP_-})$. The $D^0$ mesons are required to originate from semimionic decays of B mesons. We list $2\gamma_{CP} = \Delta\Gamma/\Gamma$.

⁶AAIJ 19x $D^0$ come from $D^{*+}$ and $\bar{D}^0 \to D^0\mu^-X$ decays (and c.c.) in pp collisions at 7 and 8 TeV. Measurement allows for CP violation (none seen).

⁷The result was established with $D^0$ from prompt and secondary $D^*$. Based on 5 fb⁻¹ of data collected at $\sqrt{s} = 7, 8, 13$ TeV. Assumes no CP violation. Reported $x'^2 = (3.9 \pm 2.7) \times 10^{-5}$ and $y' = (5.28 \pm 0.52) \times 10^{-3}$, where $x' = x \cos(\delta) + y \sin(\delta)$, $y' = y \cos(\delta) - x \sin(\delta)$ and $\delta$ is the strong phase between the $D^0 \to K^+\pi^-$ and $\bar{D}^0 \to K^+\pi^-$. Using 1.0 fb⁻¹ of LHCb data at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ TeV.

⁸Model-independent measurement of the charm mixing parameters in the decay $D^0 \to K_0^S\pi^+\pi^-$ using 1.0 fb⁻¹ of LHCb data at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ TeV.

⁹Time-dependent amplitude analysis of $D^0 \to \pi^+\pi^-\pi^0$.

¹⁰An improved measurement of $\bar{D}^0 - D^0$ mixing and a search for CP violation in $D^0$ decays to CP-even final states $K^+K^-$ and $\pi^+\pi^-$ using the final Belle data sample of 976 fb⁻¹.

¹¹ABLIKIM 15d uses quantum correlations in $e^+e^- \to D^0\bar{D}^0$ at the $\psi(3770)$.

¹²Based on 976 fb⁻¹ of data collected at $\gamma(\pi^0)$ resonances. Assumes no CP violation. Reported $x'^2 = (0.09 \pm 0.22) \times 10^{-3}$ and $y' = (4.6 \pm 3.4) \times 10^{-3}$, where $x' = x \cos(\delta) + y \sin(\delta)$, $y' = y \cos(\delta) - x \sin(\delta)$ and $\delta$ is the strong phase between $D^0 \to K^+\pi^-$ and $\bar{D}^0 \to K^+\pi^-$. Using 1.0 fb⁻¹ of LHCb data at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ TeV.

¹³The time-dependent Dalitz-plot analysis of $D^0 \to K_0^S\pi^+\pi^-$ is employed. Decay-time information and interference on the Dalitz plot are used to distinguish doubly Cabibbo-suppressed decays from mixing and to measure the relative phase between $D^0 \to K^{*+}\pi^-$ and $\bar{D}^0 \to K^{*+}\pi^-$. This value allows CP violation and is sensitive to the sign of $\Delta m$.

¹⁴Based on 9.6 fb⁻¹ of data collected at the Tevatron. Assumes no CP violation. Reported $x'^2 = (0.08 \pm 0.18) \times 10^{-3}$ and $y' = (4.3 \pm 4.3) \times 10^{-3}$, where $x' = x \cos(\delta) + y \sin(\delta)$, $y' = y \cos(\delta) - x \sin(\delta)$ and $\delta$ is the strong phase between the $D^0 \to K^+\pi^-$ and $\bar{D}^0 \to K^+\pi^-$. Using 1.0 fb⁻¹ of LHCb data at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ TeV.

¹⁵Obtained $\gamma_{CP} = (0.72 \pm 0.18 \pm 0.12)\%$ based on three effective $D^0$ lifetimes measured in $K^\pm\pi^\pm$, $K^-K^+$, and $\pi^-\pi^+$. We list $2\gamma_{CP} = \Delta\Gamma/\Gamma$.

¹⁶Compared the lifetimes of $D^0$ decay to the CP eigenstate $K^+K^-$ with $D^0$ decay to $\pi^+K^-$. The values here assume no CP violation.

¹⁷DEL-AMO-SANCHEZ 10d uses 540,800±800 $K_0^S\pi^+\pi^-$ and 79,900±300 $K_0^S K^+K^-$ events in a time-dependent amplitude analyses of the $D^0$ and $\bar{D}^0$ Dalitz plots. No evidence was found for CP violation, and the values here assume no such violation.

¹⁸ZUPANC 09 uses a method based on measuring the mean decay time of $D^0 \to K_0^S K^+K^-$ events for different $K^+K^-$ mass intervals.

¹⁹LINK 00, AITALA 99e, and ABE 02i measure the lifetime difference between $D^0 \to K^-K^+$ (CP even) decays and $D^0 \to K^-\pi^+$ (CP mixed) decays, or $\gamma_{CP} = (\Gamma_{CP^-} - \Gamma_{CP_+}) / (\Gamma_{CP_+} + \Gamma_{CP_-})$. We list $2\gamma_{CP} = \Delta\Gamma/\Gamma$.

²⁰CSRNA 02 measures the lifetime difference between $D^0 \to K^-K^+$ and $\pi^-\pi^+$ (CP even) decays and $D^0 \to K^-\pi^+$ (CP mixed) decays, or $\gamma_{CP} = (\Gamma_{CP^-} - \Gamma_{CP_+}) / (\Gamma_{CP_+} + \Gamma_{CP_-})$. We list $2\gamma_{CP} = \Delta\Gamma/\Gamma$.

²¹The result was established with $D^0$ from prompt and secondary $D^*$. Based on 3 fb⁻¹ of data collected at $\sqrt{s} = 7, 8$ TeV. Assumes no CP violation. Reported $x'^2 = (3.6 \pm 4.3) \times 10^{-5}$ and $y' = (5.23 \pm 0.84) \times 10^{-3}$, where $x' = x \cos(\delta) + y \sin(\delta)$, $y' = y \cos(\delta) - x \sin(\delta)$ and $\delta$ is the strong phase between the $D^0 \to K^+\pi^-$ and $\bar{D}^0 \to K^+\pi^-$. Using 1.0 fb⁻¹ of LHCb data at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ TeV.

²²Based on 3 fb⁻¹ of data collected at $\sqrt{s} = 7, 8$ TeV. Assumes no CP violation. Reported $x'^2 = (5.5 \pm 4.9) \times 10^{-4}$ and $y' = (4.8 \pm 1.0) \times 10^{-3}$, where $x' = x \cos(\delta) + y \sin(\delta)$, $y' = y \cos(\delta) - x \sin(\delta)$ and $\delta$ is the strong phase between the $D^0 \to K^+\pi^-$ and $\bar{D}^0 \to K^+\pi^-$. Using 1.0 fb⁻¹ of LHCb data at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ TeV.

²³Based on 1 fb⁻¹ of data collected at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ TeV in 2011. Assumes no CP violation. Reported $x'^2 = (-0.9 \pm 1.3) \times 10^{-4}$ and $y' = (7.2 \pm 2.4) \times 10^{-3}$, where $x' = x \cos(\delta) + y \sin(\delta)$, $y' = y \cos(\delta) - x \sin(\delta)$ and $\delta$ is the strong phase between the $D^0 \to K^+\pi^-$ and $\bar{D}^0 \to K^+\pi^-$. Using 1.0 fb⁻¹ of LHCb data at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ TeV.

²⁴This combines the $\gamma_{CP} = (\tau_{K\pi}/\tau_{K\bar{K}}) - 1$ using untagged $K^-\pi^+$ and $K^-K^+$ events of AUBERT 09AI with the disjoint $\gamma_{CP}$ using tagged $K^-\pi^+$, $K^-K^+$, and $\pi^-\pi^+$ events of AUBERT 08U.

²⁵The AUBERT 09AN values are inferred from the branching ratio $\Gamma(D^0 \to K^+\pi^-\pi^0)$ via $\bar{D}^0/\Gamma(D^0 \to K^-\pi^+\pi^0)$ given near the end of this Listings. Mixing is distinguished from DCS decays using decay-time information. Interference between mixing and DCS is allowed. The phase between $D^0 \to K^+\pi^-\pi^0$ and $\bar{D}^0 \to K^+\pi^-\pi^0$ is assumed to be small. The width difference here is $y''$, which is not the same as $\gamma_{CP}$ in the note on $D^0 - \bar{D}^0$ mixing.

²⁶LOWREY 09 uses quantum correlations in $e^+e^- \to D^0\bar{D}^0$ at the $\psi(3770)$. See below for coherence factors and average relative strong phases for both $D^0 \to K^-\pi^+\pi^0$ and $D^0 \to K^-\pi^-\pi^+$. A fit that includes external measurements of charm mixing parameters gets $2\gamma = (1.62 \pm 0.32) \times 10^{-2}$.

²⁷The GODANG 00, AUBERT 03Z, LINK 05H, LI 05A, ZHANG 06, AUBERT 07W, and AALTONEN 08E limits are inferred from the $D^0 - \bar{D}^0$ mixing ratio $\Gamma(K^+\pi^-)$ (via $\bar{D}^0/\Gamma(K^-\pi^+) \to K^-\pi^+\pi^0$) given near the end of this $D^0$ Listings. Decay-time information is used to distinguish DCS decays from $D^0 - \bar{D}^0$ mixing. The limits allow interference between

the DCS and mixing ratios, and all except AUBERT 07W and AALTONEN 08E also allow CP violation. The phase between $D^0 \to K^+\pi^-$ and $\bar{D}^0 \to K^+\pi^-$ is assumed to be small. This is a measurement of $y'$ and is not the same as the $\gamma_{CP}$ of our note above on $D^0 - \bar{D}^0$ Mixing.

²⁸This value combines the results of AUBERT 08U and AUBERT 03P.

²⁹STARIC 07 compares the lifetimes of $D^0$ decay to the CP eigenstates $K^+K^-$ and $\pi^+\pi^-$ with $D^0$ decay to $K^-\pi^+$.

³⁰The ASNER 05 and ZHANG 07B values are from the time-dependent Dalitz-plot analysis of $D^0 \to K_0^S\pi^+\pi^-$ decay. Decay-time information and interference on the Dalitz plot are used to distinguish doubly Cabibbo-suppressed decays from mixing and to measure the relative phase between $D^0 \to K^{*+}\pi^-$ and $\bar{D}^0 \to K^{*+}\pi^-$. This limit allows CP violation.

³¹The ranges of AUBERT 03Z, LINK 05H, LI 05A, and ZHANG 06 measurements are for 95% confidence level.

³²AUBERT 03P measures $Y \equiv 2 \tau^0 / (\tau^+ + \tau^-) - 1$, where $\tau^0$ is the $D^0 \to K^-\pi^+$ (and $\bar{D}^0 \to K^+\pi^-$) lifetime, and $\tau^+$ and $\tau^-$ are the $D^0$ and $\bar{D}^0$ lifetimes to CP-even states (here $K^-K^+$ and $\pi^-\pi^+$). In the limit of CP conservation, $Y = \gamma \equiv \Delta\Gamma / 2\Gamma$ (we list $2\gamma = \Delta\Gamma/\Gamma$). AUBERT 03P also uses $\tau^+ - \tau^-$ to get $\Delta Y = -0.008 \pm 0.006 \pm 0.002$.

## |q/p|

The mass eigenstates $D^0_1$ and $D^0_2$ are related to the $C = \pm 1$ states by $|D_{1,2} \rangle = p |D^0 \rangle + q |\bar{D}^0 \rangle$. See the note on "$D^0 - \bar{D}^0$ Mixing" above.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

0.995±0.016 OUR EVALUATION (Produced by HFLAV) see the note on "$D^0 - \bar{D}^0$ Mixing."

## 0.99 ±0.05 OUR AVERAGE

<table><tr><td>0.996 ± 0.052</td><td>30.6M</td><td>1 AAIJ</td><td>21AB LHCB</td><td>pp at 13 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>1.05 ± 0.22</td><td>2.3M</td><td>2 AAIJ</td><td>19X LHCB</td><td>pp at 7, 8 TeV</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>3 AAIJ</td><td>18K LHCB</td><td>pp at 7, 8, 13 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>0.90 ± 0.16</td><td>+ 0.08</td><td>4 PENG</td><td>14 BELL</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> → T(nS)</td></tr><tr><td>- 0.15</td><td>- 0.06</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •

<table><tr><td>0.86 ± 0.30</td><td>+ 0.10</td><td>5 AAIJ</td><td>13CE LHCB</td><td>Repl. by AAIJ 18k</td></tr><tr><td>- 0.29</td><td>- 0.08</td><td>6 ZHANG</td><td>07B BELL</td><td>Repl. by PENG 14</td></tr></table>

¹AAIJ 21AB result comes from form analysis of $D^0 \to K_0^S\pi^+\pi^-$ events.

²AAIJ 19X measurement comes from form analysis of $D^0 \to K_0^S\pi^+\pi^-$ decays. $D^0$ come from $D^{*+}$ and $\bar{D}^0$ $\mu^-X$ decays (and c.c.) in pp collisions at 7 and 8 TeV.

³Based on 5 fb⁻¹ of data collected at $\sqrt{s} = 7, 8$ TeV. Allowing for CP violation, the direct CP violation in mixing is reported 1.00 < |q/p| < 1.35 at the 68.3% CL for the $D^0 \to K^+\pi^-$ and $\bar{D}^0 \to K^+\pi^-$.

⁴The time-dependent Dalitz-plot analysis of $D^0 \to K_0^S\pi^+\pi^-$ is employed. Decay-time information and interference on the Dalitz plot are used to distinguish doubly Cabibbo-suppressed decays from mixing and to measure the relative phase between $D^0 \to K^{*+}\pi^-$ and $\bar{D}^0 \to K^{*+}\pi^-$. This value allows CP violation and is sensitive to the sign of $\Delta m$.

⁵Based on 3 fb⁻¹ of data collected at $\sqrt{s} = 7, 8$ TeV. Allowing for CP violation, the direct CP violation in mixing is reported 0.75 < |q/p| < 1.24 at the 68.3% CL for the $D^0 \to K^+\pi^-$ and $\bar{D}^0 \to K^+\pi^-$. Using 1.0 fb⁻¹ of LHCb data at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ TeV.

⁶The phase of $p/q$ is $(-14^{-18} \pm 5)^0$. The ZHANG 07B value is from the time-dependent Dalitz-plot analysis of $D^0 \to K_0^S\pi^+\pi^-$ decay. Decay-time information and interference on the Dalitz plot are used to distinguish doubly Cabibbo-suppressed decays from mixing and to measure the relative phase between $D^0 \to K^{*+}\pi^-$ and $\bar{D}^0 \to K^{*+}\pi^-$. This value allows CP violation.

## AΓ

$A\Gamma$ is the decay-rate asymmetry for CP-even final states $A\Gamma = (\tau_+ - \tau_+)/(\tau_+ + \tau_+)$.
See the note on "$D^0 - \bar{D}^0$ Mixing" above.

<table><thead><tr><th>VALUE (units 10<sup>-3</sup>)</th><th>EVTS</th><th>DOCUMENT ID</th><th>TECN</th><th>COMMENT</th></tr></thead></table>

0.089±0.113 OUR EVALUATION Error includes scale factor of 1.5. See the ideogram below.

<table><tr><td>0.23 ± 0.15</td><td>± 0.03</td><td>1 AAIJ</td><td>21AI LHCB</td><td>D<sup>0</sup> → K<sup>+</sup>K<sup>-</sup></td></tr><tr><td>0.40 ± 0.28</td><td>± 0.04</td><td>1 AAIJ</td><td>21AI LHCB</td><td>D<sup>0</sup> → K<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup></td></tr><tr><td>-0.44 ± 0.23</td><td>± 0.06</td><td>21M</td><td>20 LHCB</td><td>D<sup>0</sup> → K<sup>+</sup>K<sup>-</sup></td></tr><tr><td>0.25 ± 0.43</td><td>± 0.07</td><td>7M</td><td>20 LHCB</td><td>D<sup>0</sup> → π<sup>+</sup>π<sup>-</sup></td></tr><tr><td>-0.3 ± 2.0</td><td>± 0.7</td><td></td><td>16 BELL</td><td>e<sup>+</sup>e<sup>-</sup> → T(nS)</td></tr><tr><td>-1.2 ± 1.2</td><td></td><td>1.8M</td><td>5 AALTONEN</td><td>14Q CDF</td></tr><tr><td>0.9 ± 2.6</td><td>± 0.6</td><td>0.7M</td><td>LEES</td><td>p̄p̄, √s = 1.96 TeV</td></tr><tr><td>-5.9 ± 5.9</td><td>± 2.1</td><td></td><td>12K LHCB</td><td>pp at 7 TeV, 2010 data.</td></tr></table>

¹Requires $D^0$ to originate from $D^*(2010)^+ \to D^0\pi^+$. AAIJ 21AI measures the parameter $\Delta Y_f \approx -A_f^f$ up to 1% corrections from $y'_{CP}$.